This study used a systematic review methodology and considered peer-reviewed, full-text studies that used a quantitative design, published from 2008 to 2018. The target population was preschool children between the ages of 4 and 6 years. This study expanded on the systematic review project conducted by Munnik et al. (2015).

The present study adopted the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) model cited in Liberati et al. (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses recommends that systematic reviews comprise four levels of review which include identification, screening, eligibility (quality appraisal) and summation. Studies were retrieved from two core sources: database searches and grey literature. Based on their focus on psychology and education, the following databases were searched: Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, Education Resources Information Center (ERIC), Google Scholar, PsycARTICLES, PsycINFO, Sabinet, Sage Online and SocINDEX. Grey literature was included in the form of unpublished South African doctoral dissertations. The following search terms were used and combined in 11 Boolean phrases: ‘emotional social competency’, ‘assessment’, ‘emotional competency’, ‘social competency’, ‘school readiness instrument’, ‘preschool’, ‘emotional social intelligence’, ‘emotional social readiness’ and ‘screening instrument’ in the identification phase of filtering.

The articles that made it through the title and abstract searches were appraised by the use of the Smith Franciscus Swartbooi (SFS) Quality Appraisal Tool developed by Smith et al. (2015). Two reviewers were independently involved in the title and abstract search process with the aim of promoting and maintaining methodological rigour. A third reviewer was identified to assist with the appraisal of the extracted articles. Appraisal was done independently. After the individual appraisals, the reviewers’ scores were compared; scores that differed were discussed until consensus was reached. There were minor discrepancies noted between the scores of the reviewers initially. Most of the discrepancies were because of differences in scoring for the methodological rigour subsection of the SFS. Both reviewers read through the sections of articles related to methodological rigour, noting the reason for discrepancies. This was resolved through discussions until an agreement was reached. Finally, once the discrepancies were dealt with, only articles with a score of 80% and above, the set threshold on SFS, were accepted to proceed to the summation phase.

The systematic review considered South African and international studies that included school readiness assessment instruments with a focus on emotional and social competency as an identified area or domain of school readiness in preschool children between the ages of 4 and 6 years. In South Africa, the preschool population is defined by the South African Schools Act (Republic of South Africa, 1996), specifying that children need to enter Grade 1 in the year that they are 7 years old. Peer-reviewed, full-text studies that used a quantitative design that contained the highest level of evidence from 2008 to 2018 were included. The SFS appraisal tool was used to appraise articles. It has a total of 28 questions within three sections which include purpose of the measure, methodological rigour and general considerations. Based on the overall quality of the article, each article was appraised and scored to obtain a total score (percentage) categorised as either weak (0% – 40%), moderate (41% – 60%), strong (61% – 80%) or excellent (80% – 100%). In order to be included in the current study, each article had to achieve 80% or above to ensure that only high-quality articles were used to extract relevant information in the summation phase.

The focus of the review was descriptive, not statistical, generalisability; therefore, thematic synthesis was employed (Gough et al., 2017), which involves the integration of findings and results aiming to provide a broad description of the research phenomenon. A self-developed data-extraction table was used to extract descriptive data (type of design, methodology and outcomes) to report on the study characteristics. Thematic synthesis was employed to gather and synthesise information relating to the research aims.

Permission to conduct the study (reference number: HS19/6/7) was obtained from the Humanities and Social Science Research Ethics Committee of the University of the Western Cape. Ethical guidelines to conduct a systematic review included using systematic, explicit, unbiased, transparent, rigorous and reproducible methods to synthesise and integrate evidence. To ensure that reliable and valid sources of data were used in the systematic review, search databases endorsed by the University of the Western Cape were used. Permission to use the Smith Franciscus Swartbooi (SFS) appraisal tool was also obtained from the developer. The authors of the original work were appropriately cited, so that there was no violation of copyright or intellectual property.

The studies included (N = 4) represented various countries, two studies were conducted in South Africa (Mohamed, 2013; Munnik, 2018), one in Europe (Romania) (Ştefan et al., 2009) and one in America (Washington, DC) (Epstein et al., 2009). The studies provided an overview of the development of the instrument and proceeded with a detailed discussion of the technical qualities and psychometric characteristics of the instruments. Most studies used survey design as the primary data-collection method to establish the factor structures of the tests. Qualitative methods were used to report on content and face validity. Sample sizes ranged from 1471 preschool children (Epstein et al., 2009) to 310 preschool children (Ştefan et al., 2009). Urban samples were used in all studies, with the exception of Ştefan et al. (2009), who included urban and rural samples. Stratification of samples was employed in all studies including children from low, medium to high socio-economic groupings, with similar ratios for boys and girls. English versions of the protocols were used in all studies, except the SCS and SCE (Ştefan et al., 2004), where protocols were administered in Romanian or English.

The identified instruments measuring emotional and social skills in preschoolers include the Emotional Social Screening tool for School Readiness (E3SR) (Munnik, 2018), the School Readiness Screening Instrument for Grade 00 (pre–grade R) (Mohamed, 2013), the Emotional Competence Screening for Preschoolers (SCE) and Social Competency Screening for Preschoolers (SCS) (Ştefan et al., 2009) and the Preschool Behavioural and Emotional Rating Scale (PreBERS) (Epstein et al., 2009). All of the measures were developed in the years as specified above.

The PreBERS and E3SR were identified as strength-based measures, designed to assess preschoolers emotional social skills and competencies while the SCE, SCS and The School Readiness Screening Instrument for Grade 00 (pre–grade R) were identified as measures to identify developmental and academic risk in preschool children. All instruments were appropriate for use across the preschool age group, although two of these instruments focus on the age groups between 3–5 years (PreBERS) and 4–5.5 years (School Readiness Screening Instrument for Grade 00 (pre–grade R). The E3SR focuses on the age groups between 5–7 and the SCS and SCE on 5–7.5 years (The SCS and SCE also have scales for the younger age groups, 2.5–4 years, 4–5 years), thus targeting a broader age group. As the age requirement from Grade 1 is 7 years in South Africa, it can be assumed that the scales developed for the 5–7 age group might be the most appropriate scales to use to establish readiness on an emotional social level before entry to mainstream education, Grade 1.

In terms of administration, Likert scales were used in all the instruments as the preferred rating scale. There was variability across the instruments concerning the duration of administration, ranging from 10 minutes (SCS & SCE) to 15 – 20 minutes (E3SR). Likewise, the number of items varied across instruments, ranging from 42 to 57 items. The screening instruments require either parents or teachers who are familiar with the child’s skills and behavioural traits to complete the questionnaires. The School Readiness Screening Instrument for Grade 00 (pre–grade R) (Mohamed, 2013) is the only instrument of the four that has a shortened version. Shortened versions are usually easy to administer and more cost effective, and they assist with screening to establish if a more comprehensive assessment needs to be conducted (Kruyen et al., 2013).

The instruments operationalised emotional and social competence by covering multiple subdomains, with their respective items linked to each domain. The items included in the various domains and subdomains of each instrument were closely linked to their theoretical and operational definitions. Table 1 provides an overview of the theoretical definitions as well as the domains and subdomains as operationalised in the instruments.

Table 1 shows that Mohamed (2013), Munnik (2018) and Ştefan et al. (2009) provided theoretical definitions of emotional and social competency as separate constructs. They divided social and emotional skills into two distinct but interrelated domains. There were similarities in the definitions, as they all viewed emotional competency as inclusive of the way that a child deals with and is able to cope with emotions in different contexts. For Munnik (2018), emotional competency is inward-focused behaviour that is driven by the child’s internal sense of self that allows the child to manage with age-appropriate challenges. For Mohamed (2013), emotional competency is the ability to express and understand emotions and the ability for emotional regulation in self and others. For Ştefan et al. (2009), emotional competency is related to the child’s independence in dealing with emotion-provoking situations. The authors’ definitions of social competency also portrayed similar understandings, being inclusive of interactions and engagement with the social environment to achieve certain goals or tasks. Munnik (2018) defined social competency as focusing on relationships with the external environment and on interactional relationships with people and cooperative activities such as play. Mohamed (2013) viewed social competency as the child’s way of thinking, feeling and behaving to achieve social tasks. Ştefan et al. (2009) describe social competency as the ability to exhibit socially acceptable behaviours with positive outcomes that allow children to achieve their goals. Epstein et al. (2009) did not include theoretical or conceptual definitions in their article, as the main focus of the article was on the establishment of the scientific standards of the PreBERS and not on the construction per se.

The most comprehensive coverage was provided by Munnik (2018), who included five subdomains of emotional competency (emotional maturity, emotional management, independence, sense of self and mental well-being and alertness) and four subdomains of social competency (social skills or confidence, prosocial behaviour, compliance with rules and communication skills). Ştefan et al. (2009) covered three subdomains of emotional competency (emotional understanding, emotional expression, emotional regulation) and three subdomains of social competency (compliance with rules, interpersonal skills, prosocial behaviour). Similarly, Mohamed (2013) covered three subdomains within the emotional domain (empathy, emotional regulation and self-confidence) and three subdomains within the social domain (interpersonal competencies, social regulation behaviour and social graces). Epstein et al. (2009) viewed emotional and social competency as one construct with four subdomains (emotional regulation, school readiness, social confidence and family involvement). Emotional regulation and social or interpersonal skills were important domains identified in all of the studies.

Table 2 provides a summary of the instruments’ scientific characteristics, inclusive of validity and reliability indices.

The primary contribution of this review is that it assists in the identification of instruments that measure social and emotional skills as a domain of school readiness that might be applicable for use in the South African context. The review expands existing early childhood research by identifying the underlying constructs and their operationalisation in the assessment of emotional and social competence in preschoolers. This study highlighted the need for ongoing refinement of existing scales and argues for a focus on the development of more instruments to complement and aid in existing practices in the educational environment to assess emotional and social skills in preschool children. Future research should include the development of screening and diagnostic measures that focus on assessing emotional and social competencies and skills as a domain of school readiness, which are easily accessible, culturally appropriate and available for use by educators, parents and professionals such as psychologists in the South African context.