MIAMI UNIVERSITY – THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
CERTIFICATE FOR APPROVING THE DISSERTATION
We hereby approve the Dissertation
of
Cara L. Phillips
Candidate for the Degree:
Doctor of Philosophy
______Frances Fowler, Director
______Richard Hofmann, Reader
______Judy Rogers, Reader
______Lawrence Sherman, Reader
______Lawrence Sherman, Graduate School Representative
Abstract
“Appropriate” Kindergarten Instruction: Beliefs and Practices of Early Childhood Educators
by Cara L. Phillips
This qualitative case study focused on the relationship between teachers’ beliefs and practices. Specifically, it examined how kindergarten teachers’ beliefs impacted their use of developmentally appropriate practices (DAP). Data were collected from five kindergarten teachers in a single mid-Western public school through the use of semi-structured interviews and observations. The results of the study revealed that the teachers’ beliefs were highly consistent with NAEYC’S (1987, 1997) defined developmentally appropriate practices; however, environmental factors had a greater impact on their classroom practices than their beliefs. In discussions of their beliefs, the teachers mentioned various sources of pressure, such as state standards and parents’ desires, which affected their practices. They also discussed their use of a “combination approach” rather than “pure developmentally appropriate practice.”
“APPROPRIATE” KINDERGARTEN INSTRUCTION: BELIEFS AND PRACTICES OF EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATORS
A DISSERTATION
Submitted to the Faculty of Miami University
in partial fulfillment of
the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
Department of Educational Leadership
by
Cara L. Phillips
Miami University
Oxford, Ohio
2004
Dissertation Director: Frances C. Fowler
Table of Contents
1. Chapter One: Introduction 1
Need for the Study 10 Purpose of the Study 11 Research Questions 12 Design of Study 12 Limitations of the Study 14 Definitions of Terms 15 Outline of Study 18
2. Chapter Two: Literature Review 19
History of Developmentally Appropriate Practice 19 Criticisms of Developmentally Appropriate Practice Guidelines 22 DAP Defined 23 Implementation of DAP 25 DIP Defined 27 Implementation of DIP 28 Research of DAP 29 Research on Teacher-Directed Instruction 35 The Debate Continues 37 Teachers’ Beliefs 40 Research on Beliefs 42 Concluding Observations 45
3. Chapter Three: Philosophical Stance 46
Researcher’s Perspective 48 The Research Setting 51
ii The Community 51 The School District 52 The School 53 Gaining Access to the Site and Participants 56 The Participants 57 Procedures 59 Observations 59 Interviews 60 Document Collection 62 Data Analysis 63 Confessional Tale 64
4. Chapter Four: A Glimpse Inside the Classrooms 66 Mrs. Manford’s Story 66 A Guided Tour 66 A Day in the Life of Room 1 69 Mrs. Morgan’s Story 76 A Guided Tour 76 A Day in the Life of Room 2 78 Mrs. Jones’s Story 83 A Guided Tour 83 A Day in the Life of Room 3 85 Mrs. Townsend’s Story 89 A Guided Tour 89 A Day in the Life of Room 4 92 Mrs. Dell’s Story 98 A Guided Tour 98 A Day in the Life of Room 5 101
5. Chapter Five: Teachers’ Beliefs and Practice 107 Mrs. Manford’s World 107
iii Her Views 107 Beliefs About the Role of Kindergarten 108 Beliefs About Children’s Learning and Development 108 Beliefs About DAP 109 Beliefs About Outside Influences 111 Mrs. Manford’s Practice 111 Learning Environment 111 Learning Experiences 116 Teaching Strategies 116 Motivation and Guidance 119 Curriculum 119 Assessment 121 Mrs. Morgan’s World 121 Her Views 121 Beliefs About the Role of Kindergarten 121 Beliefs About Children’s Learning and Development 123 Beliefs About DAP 123 Beliefs About Outside Influences 125 Mrs. Morgan’s Practice 126 Learning Environment 126 Learning Experiences 128 Teaching Strategies 129 Motivation and Guidance 131 Curriculum 131 Assessment 133 Mrs. Jones’s World 133 Her Views 133 Beliefs About the Role of Kindergarten 134 Beliefs About Children’s Learning and Development 135 Beliefs About DAP 135 Beliefs About Outside Influences 137
iv Mrs. Jones’s Practices 138 Learning Environment 138 Learning Experiences 140 Teaching Strategies 141 Motivation and Guidance 142 Curriculum 143 Assessment 144 Mrs. Townsend’s World 144 Her Views 144 Beliefs About the Role of Kindergarten 144 Beliefs About Children’s Learning and Development 145 Beliefs About DAP 146 Beliefs About Outside Influences 147 Mrs. Townsend’s Practice 147 Learning Environment 147 Learning Experiences 149 Teaching Strategies 150 Motivation and Guidance 151 Curriculum 152 Assessment 153 Mrs. Dell’s World 153 Her Views 153 Beliefs About the Role of Kindergarten 154 Beliefs About Children’s Learning and Development 155 Beliefs About DAP 155 Beliefs About Outside Influences 156 Mrs. Dell’s Practice 157 Learning Environment 157 Learning Experiences 159 Teaching Strategies 160 Motivation and Guidance 162
v Curriculum 163 Assessment 164
6. Chapter Six: Conclusions, Discussion, and Recommendations 165 What are Teacher-informants’ Beliefs About the Role of Kindergarten? 165 What are Teacher-informants’ Beliefs About How Kindergarten Children Develop and Learn? 166 What are Teacher-informants’ Beliefs About Developmentally Appropriate Practices? 167 What do Instructional Practices in Their Own Classrooms Look Like? 168 What do Teacher-informants’ Believe are Forces that Impact their Programs? 170 How do the Beliefs of Kindergarten Teachers Affect Their Use of DAP? 172 Interpretation of Data 173 Pressure 173 A Combination Approach 181 Dealing With Environmental Pressures 185 Locus of Control 186 Self-Efficacy 187 Special Education Emphasis 188 Experience Teaching Older Children 189 Future Research 190 Suggestions for Practice 191 Continued Training 191 Communication 191 Lessons Learned 193 Conclusion 194
vi 7. Appendices 196 Appendix A: Observation Protocol 198 Appendix B: Interview Guide 199 Appendix C: Teacher Letter 201 Appendix D: Consent Form 202
8. References 203
vii This Dissertation is dedicated to:
Michael, my heart Alyssa & Elizabeth, my joy and inspiration Mom, my strength Family, my foundation Jesus Christ, my Savior
viii Acknowledgments
A heartfelt thanks goes to Dr. Frances Fowler for being my director during this long, and often difficult, process. Her constant support and encouragement helped me accomplish this dream. She is an excellent teacher, a wonderful person, and, now, a dear friend. A special thanks also goes to my committee members, Dr. Hofmann, Dr. Rogers, and Dr. Sherman. Along with Dr. Fowler, this committee taught me the importance of qualitative research and the need to understand the stories of others. They taught me to dig deeper, to examine the culture, and to listen to what is not being said. They taught me that a researcher goes in searching for answers and comes out asking questions. They taught me that the researcher often enters a situation to help create change; however, it is often the researcher who walks away changed.
ix Chapter One Introduction
Kindergarten must be seen as a significant aspect of school life in its own unique way,stretching the minds of children but holding off on the tools for book learning, developing the broad qualities necessary for scholarship but not demanding the specific skills that will eventually enhance scholarship. (Cohen & Rudolph, 1977, p. 15)
Kindergarten used to mean brightly colored paintings, music, clay, block building, bursting curiosity, and intensive exploration. Now the kindergarten’s exuberance is being muted, its color drained, and spirit flattened, leaving us with stacks of paperwork and teacher manuals. No longer even designated “pre-school,” kindergarten is becoming an adjunct to first grade, with workbooks replacing art materials and formal instruction replacing activities that follow the children’s interests. (Martin, 1985, p. 318)
These two quotations vividly demonstrate the dilemma faced by today’s kindergarten educators. On the one hand, there are those who advocate the kindergarten of the past or its modern cousin, the developmentally appropriate kindergarten – a place for individualized attention, stories, music, games, finger painting, and a gentle introduction to the ways of the school. On the other hand, many argue that kindergarten should be more “serious” and should directly prepare young children for academic success in elementary school. This ongoing debate makes it difficult for classroom teachers to know exactly what they should do, questioning what types of learning experiences are good for young children. For more than a decade, the types of instructional practices used by some kindergarten teachers and the impact these practices may have on children has been a topic of major concern (e.g., Barbour & Seefeldt, 1993; Bredekamp, 1987; Bredekamp & Copple, 1997; Bredekamp & Rosegrant, 1992, 1995; Bredekamp & Shepard, 1989; Charlesworth, 1989, 1998; Charlesworth, Hart, Burts, & De Wolf, 1993a; Egertson, 1987; Elkind, 1986, 1996; Greenberg, 1990; Kamii, 1985; Shepard & Smith, 1988; Spodek, 1988a, 1991a, 1991b; Wolfgang & Wolfgang, 1999). Despite a well-established body of research reaffirming the value of play- oriented experiences in the development of the whole child (e.g., Athey, 1987; Fein, 1986; Fromberg, 1992; Hughes, 1999; Johnson, Christie, & Yawley, 1987; Isenberg & Quisenberry, 1988; Rogers & Sawyer, 1988; Rubin, Fein, & Vandenberg, 1983; Scarr, Weinberg, & Levine, 1986; Schrader, 1990; Smilansky, 1990; Spidell-Rusher, 1988; Vygotsky, 1976), many
1 kindergarten programs appear to have grown more academically demanding over the last 20 years. Instead of nurturing environments that focus on the concepts of social-emotional growth and play, many kindergarten classrooms tend to be more formal, more skill-based, and more performance-driven (e.g., Bryant, Clifford, & Peisner, 1991; Freeman & Hatch, 1989; Hatch & Freeman, 1988; Knapp & Shields, 1990; Oakes & Caruso, 1990; Shepard & Smith, 1988; Walsh, 1989). In many cases, kindergarten classrooms utilize practices that are more commonly found in upper grades, such as: whole-group instruction; b) predominantly basal-based reading instruction; c) ditto sheets and workbook activities; d) intensive drill and practice exercises in reading, math, and handwriting; e) ability grouping for reading and math; f) intensive phonics instruction; g) standardized testing; and f) social reinforcement (e.g., Bryant, et al., 1991; Charlesworth, Hart, Burts, & Hernandez, 1991; Charlesworth, Hart, Burts, Thommason, Mosley, & Fleege, 1993b; Davis, 1980; Dowhower & Beagle, 1998; Durkin, 1987, 1990; Freppon & McIntyre, 1999; Hatch & Freeman, 1988; Hitz & Wright, 1988; Lennon & Slesinski, 1999; Kessler, 1989; Meyer, Linn, Mayberry, & Hastings, 1984; Nall, 1982; Oakes & Caruso, 1990; Smith & Shepard, 1988). Fewer kindergarten environments appear to emphasize a child-centered approach, including, but not limited to, center-based learning activities, exploratory play experiences, and social interaction (e.g., Bryant, et al., 1991; Hatch & Freeman, 1988; Hitz & Wright, 1988; Oakes & Caruso, 1990; Smith & Shepard, 1988). Many believe that some of today’s kindergarten classrooms resemble “a serious, academic boot camp” (Roberts, 1986, p. 34). Barbour and Seefeldt (1993) complain that “(i)nstead of children learning by interacting with one another and by observing and experimenting with how things work, they are expected to learn by sitting still, listening and following directions” (p. 16).
Reasons for Change This “downward shift” of curriculum (Shepard & Smith, 1988, p. 136) has occurred for numerous reasons, including, but not limited to, the following: a) a change in kindergarten’s purpose; b) a belief in contemporary children’s exceptional capabilities; and c) a concern for our nation’s educational system. First, one of kindergarten’s original purposes focused on gently introducing the child to the academic world and on nurturing the child’s social and emotional development (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997; Spodek, 1986b, 1988a, 1991a; West, Denton, & Germino Hausken, 2000). The kindergarten experience was once viewed as an important way
2 “to ease the transition from home to school” (Spodek, 1986b, p. vii). For most children, kindergarten was the first time they spent an extended time away from their caregivers and their home environment. For most children, kindergarten functioned as their first formal “school” experience. Yet, for many, kindergarten no longer serves this role. For a generation or so, many children’s first “school” experience has been replaced by preschool, day care, nursery school, or even home school (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997; Doremus, 1986; Elkind 1996, 2001; Spodek, 1986b, 1991a; West, et al., 2000). Due to these prior early care and educational experiences, many believe that kindergarten children and even younger children are “ready for academic instruction” (Elkind, 1996, p. 11). Kindergarten programs “no longer need to function as vestibules for the school. Children have, for the most part, already been socialized into the educational system before they arrive in elementary school” (Spodek, 1991a, p. 6). In most cases, children already have an understanding of their role as “student.” Upon entering kindergarten, many children have already received instruction in social skills, such as listening to the teacher, sitting still for carpet time, raising their hand, following directions, and sharing with other children. Even curriculum concepts that used to be gently introduced in kindergarten, like colors, shapes, numbers, and letters, have been “pushed down” to the preschool level (Walsh, 1992, p. 90). Increasingly, preschool programs provide less opportunity for play, social interaction, and story time (i.e., Dunn, Beach, & Kontos, 1994; Stipek, 1991; Stipek & Byler, 1997). Therefore, kindergarten can and should become “more educationally advanced” to better meet the needs of today’s children (Spodek, 1986b, p. vii). Second, many educators also believe that children are “more verbal and more knowledgeable today than they were in the past” (Spodek, 1986b, p. viii). These “exceptional abilities” are in part due to the fact that contemporary children have access to more information than ever before (Spodek, 1986b; Elkind, 1986, 1996, 2001; Marcon, 1993). This information, in part, comes from various technological advances and various forms of media, including, but not limited to, computers, televisions, video games, digital video discs, internet access, books, commercially-produced grade level material, movies, and radio (Spodek, 1986b; Elkind, 1986, 1996, 2001; Marcon, 1993). At the touch of a button or the click of a mouse, young children can retrieve information on almost any subject, person, or historical event. Children today also have more community opportunities that make information accessible to them as well, including libraries, museums, art galleries, and theaters. For many, these types of opportunities make
3 children “more sophisticated than previous generations” and reinforce the need for more formal academic instruction in the early years of schooling (Marcon, 1993, p. 81). These educators no longer see the need for play-oriented activities and are in favor of “academic acceleration” (Hirsh-Pasek, Hyson, & Rescorla, 1990, p. 403). Play-oriented experiences, like dramatic play, blocks, and sand/water exploration, are no longer viewed as essential elements of kindergarten curriculum. In fact, many believe programs that emphasize play-oriented approaches do not adequately provide children “a valid educational experience” (Spodek, 1991a, p. 10). Many believe “that today’s children have outgrown the need to play” (Moyer, Egertson, & Isenberg, 1987, p. 238). Many believe that today’s kindergarten should take on a more structured orientation in hopes of “accelerating the development of readiness skills and academic learning” (Jipson, 1991, p. 122). Many parents are also pushing for a more demanding educational experience for their young children (e.g., Goldstein, 1997; Graue, 1993a; Haupt & Ostlund, 1997; Hyson, Hirsh-Pasek, Rescorla, Cone, & Martell-Boinske, 1991; Knudsen-Lindauer & Harris, 1989; Stipek, Milburn, Galluzo, & Daniels, 1992b; West, Hausken, & Collins, 1993; Zimiles, 1986). “Impressed with the pivotal role of early learning and with the degree to which career patterns appear to evolve from early educational achievements and placements, they are convinced that the path to success begins the moment children set foot in the school” (Zimiles, 1986, p. 5). Many are convinced that “sooner is better” (Doremus, 1986, p. 35). Despite educators’ concerns (e.g., Bredekamp & Copple, 1997; Bredekamp & Rosegrant, 1992, 1995; Bredekamp & Shepard, 1989; Charlesworth, 1998; Elkind, 1996; Freeman & Hatch, 1989), many believe that kindergarten must get children ready for future intellectual and social demands. Third, since the early 1980s many educators, parents, and policy makers have become increasingly concerned about the “relatively low achievement levels of American children in general” and the overall state of our public educational system (Stipek, Daniels, Galluzo, & Milburn, 1992a, p. 1). In 1983, the National Commission on Excellence in Education published a report entitled A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Education Reform (NCEE, 1983). After examining national and international test data, authors of this report warned that our public school systems “were being eroded by a rising tide of mediocrity” (NCEE, 1983, p. 5). This report claimed that American students demonstrated poor achievement in several academic areas, such as math, science, verbal skills, and higher-order thinking skills (NCEE, 1983). This
4 national report, and others like it, raised a great concern about our nation’s “economic competitiveness” and about our high school graduates’ ability “to enter an increasingly technologically advanced and competitive workplace” (Elkind, 2001, p. 54). Schools were basically being blamed for our nation’s economic state. This concern has impacted every grade level, including kindergarten, and has created a flurry of educational reform efforts. One of the major results of this reform movement is the increasing emphasis on accountability. This push for more accountability has led to several changes, including higher high school exit requirements, more stringent student and teacher evaluation, stricter grading systems, increased homework, and standardized assessment testing (Bredekamp & Rosegrant, 1992, 1995; Elkind, 2001; Freeman & Hatch, 1989; Goffin & Stegelin, 1992; Kamii, 1990; Walsh, 1989). This emphasis has even led to a “pushed down” standardized, traditional curriculum that concentrates heavily on isolated skills (Walsh, 1992, p. 90). Many school programs have developed extensive pupil performance objectives that all children, including kindergartners, are to master before they are promoted to the next grade level. Thus, kindergarten has become “a more integral part of the early elementary years along with a more traditional academic focus” (Goffin & Stegelin, 1992, p. 4 ). “As pressure mounts for children to become achievers at even younger ages, early education is shifting to a more didactic emphasis, thus evoking images of academic pressure and expectation, rigid classrooms, and formalized learning methods” (Kagan & Zigler, as cited in Hirsh-Pasek, et al., 1990, p. 402).
Educators’ Concerns Despite this strong “push” by some educators, policy makers, and parents to make kindergarten more academically demanding, many others are very disturbed by these perceived changes in kindergarten curriculum. Many educators believe that formalized instruction does not meet the developmental and individual needs of the young child, and they are concerned that environments which emphasize more rigid, skill-based approaches may be harmful to young children (e.g., Barbour & Seefeldt, 1993; Bredekamp, 1987; Bredekamp & Copple, 1997; Bredekamp & Rosegrant, 1992, 1995; Bredekamp & Shepard, 1989; Charlesworth, 1989, 1998; Doremus, 1986; Egertson, 1987; Elkind, 1986, 1996; Katz, 1988a, 1988b, 1996, 1999a, 1999b; Knapp & Shields, 1990). These activities may actually hinder academic achievement, as well as social-emotional and social-motivational development (e.g., Burts, Hart, Charlesworth, Fleege,
5 Mosley, & Thommason, 1992; Burts, Hart, Charlesworth, & Kirk, 1990; Elkind, 1986, 1989, 1990, 1996; Hirsh-Pasek, et al., 1990; Katz, 1988a, 1996, 1999b; Stipek, Feiler, Daniels, & Milburn, 1995; Walsh, 1989). Some educators have written at great length about the potential dangers of the “hurried child” (e.g., Elkind, 1981, 2001). For example, as early as 1981, Elkind lamented: [T]hese children seemed to have too much pressure to achieve, to succeed, to please. It was not the lack of pressure of earlier generations, but a new pressure to hurry and grow up. Unlike the spoiled children who remain children too long, hurried children grow up too fast, pushed in their early years toward many different types of achievement and exposed to experiences that tax their adaptive capacity. Just as, at bottom, spoiled children were stressed by the fear of their own power, hurried children are stressed by the fear of failure – of not achieving fast enough or high enough. (p. xii)
In 2001, Elkind continued his argument: Accountability and test scores are what schools are about today and children know it. They have to produce or else. This pressure may be good for many students, but it is bound to be bad for those who can’t keep up. Their failure is more public and therefore more humiliating than ever before. Worse, students who fail to achieve feel that they are letting down their peers, their teachers, the principal, the superintendent, and the community. This is a heavy burden for many children to bear and is a powerful pressure to achieve early and grow up fast. (p. 57)
Many agree that these types of experiences may place unnecessary pressure on young children. Charlesworth (1989) notes that “expectations have become increasingly high and unrealistic as the curriculum from upper grades has been pushed down to lower levels, thus dooming large numbers of young children to inevitable failure” (p. 5). Barbour and Seefeldt (1993) also express their concern about unrealistic expectations:
When curriculum is designed to teach children a set of abstract and isolated academic skills within a given time frame, young children still in the preoperational stage of thinking will have difficulty. Unable to make sense of isolated and abstract content, and denied the opportunity to learn through their own physical, mental and social activity, children often fail. (p. 16)
Doremus (1986) refers to this pressure as hothousing, stating that “(h)othouse forcing may make bright cyclamens bloom for winter holidays, but it’s not a wise move in educating children”
(p. 34). Many believe early formal academic instruction is harmful in numerous ways, including: a) increasing children’s stress levels (e.g., Burts, et al., 1990; Burts, et, al., 1992;
6 Elkind, 1986); b) interfering with children’s “self-directed impulse” (Elkind, 1986, p. 635); c) damaging children’s natural “disposition” for learning (Katz, 1999b, p. 21); d) undermining children’s “confidence in their own intellect” (Katz, 1988b, p. 15); e) making children overly reliant “on others for their sense of self worth” (Elkind, 1986, p. 636); f) making children more dependent “on adults for instructions and approval” (Stipek, 1993, p. 43); g) damaging children’s “psychological well being” (Burts, Hart, Charlesworth, DeWolf, Ray, Manuel, & Fleege, 1993, p. 30); and f) raising kindergarten retention rates (e.g., Shepard & Smith, 1988; Walsh, 1989). Elkind (1986) argues: There is really no evidence that early formal instruction has any lasting or permanent benefits for children. By contrast, the risks to the child’s motivation, intellectual growth, and self-esteem could well do serious damage to the child’s emerging personality. It is reasonable to conclude that early instruction of young children derives more from the needs and priorities of adults than from what we know of good pedagogy for young children. (p. 636)
Advocates for “Appropriate” Practices Educators who hold these views have called for more “appropriate” instructional practices to be used in the classroom (e.g., Barbour & Seefeldt, 1993; Bredekamp, 1987, 1992; Bredekamp & Copple, 1997; Bredekamp & Rosegrant, 1992, 1995; Bredekamp & Shepard, 1989; Egertson, 1987; Elkind, 1986, 1987, 1989, 1996, 2001; Charlesworth, 1989, 1998; Kamii, 1985, 1990; Katz, 1996, 1999b; Williams & Kamii, 1986; Wolfgang & Wolfgang, 1999). They believe instruction needs to be more responsive to the various developmental needs, individual needs, and learning processes of young children (e.g., Bredekamp & Copple, 1997; Bredekamp & Shepard, 1989; Bredekamp & Rosegrant, 1992, 1995; Egertson, 1987; Elkind, 1986, 1987, 1989, 1996, 2001; Gullo, 1994; Katz, 1988b, 1996, 1999b; Knapp & Shields, 1990; Spodek, 1988a). Environments need to be created that allow children to actively construct their own knowledge through direct experiences with their immediate world. Environments need to be created to promote creativity, discovery, and exploration. Environments should not be created based on the view that learning is “the transmission of knowledge that positions learners in the role of passive receivers” (Freppon & McIntyre, 1999, p. 206). “In the end, a setting in which children can fully experience all the vicissitudes of their early childhood years is the best preparation for a successful transition to the later stages of the human life cycle” (Elkind, 1996, p. 13).
7 As part of this growing number of more structured, skill-based early childhood programs, several professional associations have become advocates for practices that are considered appropriate in early childhood educational settings (e.g., ASCD, 1989; NAEYC & NAECS/SDE, 1991; SREB, 1995). These associations believe that teachers need to create emotionally and physically safe learning environments that focus on all the developmental areas of young children (Bredekamp, 1987). However, the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) is largely responsible for establishing a philosophical framework for early childhood practices in order “to secure better educational environments and experiences for all young children” (NAEYC, 2001, p. 51). This framework is referred to as developmentally appropriate practices (DAP). In 1986, NAEYC issued a position statement regarding developmentally appropriate practices for young children. In 1987, this position statement was used to create a set of guidelines addressing practices for children ranging from birth through age 8 (Bredekamp, 1987). This comprehensive document addresses “ the programmatic areas of curriculum, adult-child interaction, home-school relationships, and assessment and evaluation” (Ketner, Smith, & Parnell, 1997, p. 212) and includes examples of appropriate and inappropriate practices in all fore-mentioned areas. It has since been described as “the most influential document guiding the field of early childhood education” (Charlesworth, 1998, p. 274). These guidelines are created for “administrators, teachers, policy makers, and others who make decisions about the care and education for young children” (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997, p. 3).
Teachers’ Current Practices Despite the fact that the philosophical underpinnings of DAP are embraced by many early childhood teachers, these practices have “not consistently replaced more teacher-centered methods of teaching young children” (Smith, 1997, p. 221). Most teachers tend to use a range of instructional practices (e.g., Bredekamp & Copple, 1997; Buchanan, Burts, Bidner, White, & Charlesworth, 1998; Charlesworth, et al., 1993b; Dale & Cole, 1988; Goldstein, 1997; Marcon, 1992; McMullen, 1999; Oakes & Caruso, 1990; Sherman & Mueller, 1996; Smith & Shepard, 1988; Wien, 1995, 1996). Implementation of developmentally appropriate practices appears to be difficult for many teachers (Dunn & Kontos, 1997; Wien, 1995, 1996). According to Wien (1995), teachers struggle with deciding what is “best to do for young children” (p. 1). An ongoing controversy concerning “appropriate pedagogical practices” exists
8 for many early childhood educators (Katz, 1995, p. 98). Many educators engage in the long- standing debate about whether more teacher-directed or more child-directed practices should be used with young children (e.g., Bredekamp & Copple, 1997; Bredekamp & Rosegrant, 1992, 1995; Burman, 1994; Cannella, 1997; Delpit, 1995; Elkind, 1987, 1996, 2001; Jipson, 1991; Katz, 1995, 1996, 1999b; Lubeck, 1998; Stipek, 1993; Wien, 1995, 1996). At the classroom level, many teachers struggle every day with questions like: a) What should the kindergarten classroom look like? b) What should the content of the program include? and c) How should instruction be carried out? This controversy may exist in part because classroom practices are not “based explicitly on theories of learning and development” (French & Song, 1998, p. 411). “Practice is a struggle to prioritize cherished values, it may be rare to find in one individual a set of ideals closely matching a single ‘overarching theory’ of practice, [the phrase is Donald Schon’s (1983)], for lived life is more dynamic, conflicted, muddied” (Wien, 1995, p. 1). Practice is influenced by many other factors, including: a) values; b) attitudes; c) personal experiences; d) tradition; e) beliefs; and f) understandings (Charlesworth, et al., 1993b; French & Song, 1998; Isenberg, 1990; Nespor, 1987; Pajares, 1992; Spodek, 1988b; Vartuli, 1999; Wien, 1995, 1996). To better understand teachers’ behaviors, it is important to understand what teachers believe (Charlesworth et al., 1993b; Nespor, 1987; Pajares, 1992; Spodek, 1988b; Vartuli, 1999). Isenberg (1990) emphasizes that “teachers’ thinking and beliefs are integral to understanding the full picture of teaching” (p. 325). This “full picture” includes behaviors, decisions, practices, and classroom life (French & Song, 1998; Isenberg, 1990; Nespor, 1987; Pajares, 1992). Bowman (1989) explains that “(t)eachers filter formal theories and ideas regarding practices through their own values, beliefs, feelings, and habits, sometimes expanding and changing their personal knowledge to accommodate new ideas and new experiences, sometimes restructuring it to fit their current needs” (p. 444). To better understand the day-to- day happenings in classrooms, more attention needs to be directed towards the “ ‘implicitly held knowledge’ that undergirds teachers’ actions” (Bowman, 1989, p. 445). Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine kindergarten teachers’ ways of thinking and understanding and how their beliefs shape “vital components of their practice” (Nespor, 1987, p. 1). It explored these teachers’ feelings, ideas, personal experiences, and beliefs about their kindergarten program. It
9 also explored their own personal conflicts in regard to their practices and how they handled them.
Need for the Study Since the publication of the NAEYC guidelines (1987/1997), many researchers have begun to examine how DAP impacts the early childhood classroom and what educators’ beliefs are about these practices. Despite this interest, most research to date has relied on quantitative methods, such as self-reported beliefs, to study the relationship between teachers’, and even some administrators’, beliefs and practices (e.g., Buchanan, et al., 1998; Butterfield & Johnston, 1995; Charlesworth, et al., 1991; Hatch & Freeman, 1988; Hitz & Wright, 1988; Hyson & Lee, 1996; Jones & Gullo, 1999; Marcon, 1992, 1999; Martin & Baldwin, 1992; Rathburn, Walston, & Germino Hausken, 2000; Spidell-Rusher, McGrevin, & Lambiotti, 1992; Smith & Croom, 2000). Although these reports are valuable and do provide a better understanding of classroom behavior, they are limiting. “A major methodological problem with self-reported data, though, concerns the extent to which these methods yield reliable and valid information about teachers’ beliefs” (Fang, 1996, p. 56). These reports may actually report what the teachers feel should be done “rather than what is actually done in actual instructional settings” (Fang, 1996, p. 57). Pajares (1992) also addresses the limitations of such measures and stresses the importance of including behaviors and beliefs in data collection: It is also clear that, if reasonable inferences about beliefs require assessments of what individuals say, intend, and do, the teachers’ verbal expressions, predispositions to action, and teaching behaviors must be all included in assessments of beliefs. Traditional belief inventories provide limited information with which to make inferences and it is at this step in the measurement process that understanding the context-specific nature of beliefs becomes critical. (p. 327)
Lubeck (1998) adds to this conversation, “It should be said that, for teachers also, observation protocols and rating scales only provide a quick view from the outside – an appraisal that fails to provide access to a teacher’s own beliefs or intentions” (pp. 288-289). Most studies do not include the voices of the teachers or actual classroom observations. A number of studies have utilized multiple measures, including self-reported beliefs and observations (e.g., Bryant, et al., 1991; Charlesworth, et al., 1991; Charlesworth, et al., 1993b; Kagan & Smith, 1988; Kontos & Dunn, 1993; Oakes & Caruso, 1990; Stipek & Byler, 1997; Vartuli, 1999). Others have used
10 methods such as: a) classroom observations and interviews (e.g., Spodek, 1988b); b) classroom observations, interviews, and document collection (e.g., Smith & Shepard, 1988); and c) interviews, videotaped observations, and reflection-on-action (e.g., Wien, 1995) to gain a better understanding of teachers’ knowledge, beliefs, and practices. Still, few attempts have been made to examine “how teachers can apply their theoretical beliefs within the constraints imposed by the complications of the classroom life” (Fang, 1996, p. 59). Fang (1996) suggests more “narrative studies of the construction and reconstruction of teachers’ personal practical knowledge” need to be conducted (p. 59). Both Dunn and Kontos (1997) and Ketner, et al. (1997) recommend that further research of this type needs to be done for the field of early childhood. The purpose of my study was to further the early childhood field’s knowledge about the intricate relationship between teachers’ beliefs about developmentally appropriate practices and their actual classroom practices. More specifically, this study described the beliefs and experiences of kindergarten teachers in a small Mid-western public school district, using their own language to a great extent. This study was based on a social constructivist perspective, understanding that “beliefs and subsequent practices will vary according to the interpretative needs” of each teacher-informant (Duchein, Frazier, Konopak, & Palmer, as cited in Fang, 1996, p. 60). My goal was to describe each teacher-informant’s particular worldview to better understand certain factors that affect his or her decisions, behaviors, and actions. My goal was to “interpret their perceptions in terms of their beliefs about what is true” (Spodek, 1988b, p. 162). I hope these teachers’ stories will help other educators reflect on their own personal experiences and help them strive to create an educational environment that is “best” for their children.
Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study was to better understand and to describe several kindergarten teachers’ perceptions of how developmentally appropriate practices are working in their classrooms. This study focused on how these teachers understand developmentally appropriate practices and how they feel about the experience of using developmentally appropriate practices in their setting. Through the words of the teacher-informants, this study investigated the teachers’ personal understanding of and their attitudes toward developmentally appropriate practices, what the practices look like in their classrooms, and the personal challenges they may
11 encounter implementing these practices. Classroom activities and teaching practices were also examined. It was expected that findings from this study would provide insights into teachers’ perceptions regarding the difficulties of developing an “appropriate” learning environment for today’s kindergartners and their families.
Research Questions This qualitative study was designed to better understand the beliefs and practices of the kindergarten teachers. The following research questions were addressed in this study: Overarching Question: How do the beliefs of kindergarten teachers affect their use of developmentally appropriate practices in their classrooms? Subsidiary Questions: 1. What are the teacher-informants’ beliefs about the role of kindergarten? 2. What are the teacher-informants’ beliefs about how kindergarten children develop and learn? 3. What are the teacher-informants’ beliefs about appropriate practices? 4. What do instructional practices in their own classrooms look like? 5. What elements impact the teacher-informants’ program design?
Design of Study This qualitative study was conducted from an interpretivist perspective (LeCompte & Preissle, 1993). This perspective understands that “reality is socially constructed, complex, and ever changing” (Glesne, 1999, p. 5). This personal reality is also context dependent (Glesne, 1999). Within this perspective, I recognize that multiple interpretations of reality exist and that each teacher-informant will have her own unique construction of her social reality (Glesne, 1999). My role is to better understand and interpret the multiple perspectives of the teacher- informants. Therefore, data collection and data analysis involved several qualitative methods, including semi-structured interviews, observation, and document collection. These methods were used because they allowed me to use “a direct and personal means of collecting data” (Goodwin & Goodwin, 1996, p. 111). They also allowed me to develop a deeper understanding of how the teacher-informants give meaning to the reality of their world and how they behave naturally in it (Bogdan & Taylor, 1975). Within this study, I assumed the role of observer,
12 observing each “research setting; its participants; and the events, acts, and gestures that occur within them (Glesne & Peshkin, 1992, p. 48). Visits to the site included observations of the classrooms conducted at various times of the school day and semi-structured interviews with the teachers. During each observation, extensive notes were taken, using a semi-structured observation protocol. Observations were guided by NAEYC’s recommendations for “high-quality, developmentally appropriate” programs for young children (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997, p. 8). The NAEYC guidelines provide examples of appropriate and inappropriate practices for different age groups, including: a) birth to age 3; b) age 3 through 5; and c) age 6 through 8 (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997, pp. 72-179). It is the second age group categorization (age 3 through 5) of developmentally appropriate practices that impacted the observations for this study (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997, pp. 123-135). Observations focused on the following areas: a) learning environment; b) learning experiences; c) teaching strategies; d) curriculum; e) motivation and guidance; and f) assessment (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997, pp.123-135) (See Appendix A). Each classroom was observed several times a week for a total observation period of seventy-five hours at the site. Field notes were made during and after observation periods. A summary report was developed away from the site after each data collection session. Each teacher was interviewed two to three times with each interview ranging in duration from 45 minutes to an hour. Each interview was guided by a semi-structured interview protocol that was designed specifically for this study. Interviews were audio-recorded and then later transcribed by the researcher. Guiding interview questions focused on the following: a) the teacher’s beliefs about the role of kindergarten; b) the teacher’s beliefs about her role as a kindergarten teacher; c) the teacher’s process of program designing; d) the teacher’s beliefs about appropriate practices; e) the teacher’s beliefs about the program’s effectiveness; and f) the teacher’s beliefs about what forces impact her program (See Appendix B). A process of note taking was used in conjunction with the audio recordings. This information was then used to create a summary of comments made by the teacher-informants during each interview. These summaries were closely studied to determine if the interview protocol needed to be changed in any way. Observation and interview summaries were shared with the teacher-informants to determine if I described their world using their own language appropriately. If not, the teacher- informants were asked to make any appropriate changes. All of the interviews were conducted
13 in a quiet location free from distraction during planning periods or lunchtime to ensure that the educational process was not interrupted. Interviews and observations were continued until I achieved saturation (Creswell, 1998; Glaser & Strauss, 1967). Many procedures were taken to safeguard confidentiality for the informants. Each teacher received a letter from the researcher explaining the objectives and the relevance of the study, assuring the teachers of their confidentiality, and stressing their right to withdraw from the study at any time (See Appendix C). Each teacher was asked to read and sign a consent form before the interviews and observations were conducted (See Appendix D). Taped conversations were transcribed only by the researcher. Pseudonyms of the teachers, school, and community were used to assure this confidentiality. Once the interviews and observations were conducted, the data was analyzed, using constant comparative analysis and conceptual narrative units (Hofmann, 1995). After each interview and observation, the narratives and field notes were analyzed and compared with previously gathered data. During this continuous and reflective process, data was coded into meaningful segments or textual units, looking for similarities and differences in the teacher- informants’ responses to questions and in the observations of the classroom environments (Glesne, 1999; Hofmann, 1995). These segments were then grouped together into categories and further examined for emergent themes (Goetz & LeCompte, 1984). Direct quotes from each teacher-informant’s responses were organized according to the emergent themes. Trustworthiness was maintained by me for this research by audio recording each interview session and then by personally reading and rereading the teachers’ responses. Member checks were conducted by allowing all teacher-informants to review my summaries of the data collected from the interview and observations. As the teachers read the documents, they indicated whether or not they could see themselves in my words. Teacher-informants were asked to make any changes that they felt were necessary.
Limitations of the Study There were several limitations and delimitations associated with this study. This study was limited by the fact that the teacher-informants were all Caucasian women. There was an absence of both male and minority voices. It is also important to recognize that my presence as a university researcher and observer may have impacted the data collected about the beliefs and
14 practices of the teacher-informants (Aubrey, David, Godfrey, & Thompson, 2000; LeCompte & Preissle, 1993). Believing that I may value more developmentally appropriate practices, the teachers may have worked to demonstrate these approaches despite what they normally use in their classrooms. The teachers “may dissemble, present an ideal self, or tell the researcher what they think the researcher should, or wants to, hear” (LeCompte & Preissle, 1993, p. 344). Therefore, the effect of my presence must be viewed as a limitation.
Definition of Terms Abstract Materials – those materials that are two-dimensional, symbolic, and prescribed, such as workbooks, flashcards, and worksheets (Bredekamp, 1987). Age Appropriateness – consistency with the “typical development within a particular age group” (Burts, et al., 1993, p. 24). Assessment – the process of gathering information about “the work children do and how they do it” (Bredekamp & Rosegrant, 1992, p. 27). This process includes a variety of methods and procedures, such as observing children, developing anecdotal documentation, reviewing work samples, and, when appropriate, using standardized testing (Bredekamp & Rosegrant, 1992, p. 23). Beliefs - “the implicitly held assumptions about people and events that individuals bring to a particular knowledge domain” (Kagan, 1992, p. 75). These assumptions affect one’s values and decisions, as well as behaviors. Beliefs often “involve moods, feelings, emotions, and subjective evaluations” (Nespor, 1987, p. 323). Child-Centered Instruction – an approach to education that focuses primarily on the individual needs, abilities, strengths, and interests of each child. Ample opportunities are provided for self-selected, self-directed play experiences, allowing the children to explore stimulating, concrete materials and to interact with their peers and adults. Classroom Environment – “refers to the social and physical context of the classroom” (Shavelson & Stern, 1981, p. 465). Cognitive Domain – focus on the child’s language development and other cognitive capacities, such as reasoning skills, thinking skills, and problem-solving skills (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997). Curriculum - “an organized framework that delineates the content children are to learn,
15 the processes through which children achieve the identified curriculum goals, what teachers do to help children achieve these goals, and the context in which teaching and learning occur” (NAEYC & NAECS/SDE, 1991, p. 21). Culture - the “way of life common to a group of people” (Parkay & Stanford Hardcastle, 1998, p. 239). Cultural Appropriateness - consistency with the cultural values, traditions, expectations, and experiences of each child and his or her family (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997). Development - the “predictable changes that all human beings undergo as they progress through the life span” (Parkay & Stanford Hardcastle, 1998, p. 276). Developmentally Appropriate Practices – an approach to education that takes into account the children’s “social, emotional, aesthetic, moral, language, cognitive, and physical” development (McMullen, 1999, p. 217). The practices associated with this approach emphasize age, individual, and cultural factors (McMullen, 1999, p. 217). Early Childhood Education – the schooling of children from birth to age 8 (Bredekamp, 1987; Bredekamp & Copple, 1997). Elementary Education – the schooling of children typically in grades kindergarten through 5. Ideology - “(a)ny wide ranging system of beliefs, ways of thought, and categories” that impact one’s worldview, behaviors, and actions (Blackburn, 1996, p. 185). Individual Appropriateness – consistency with the unique developmental needs and interests of each child, including but not limited to “personality, learning style, and family backgrounds” (Bredekamp, 1987, pp. 2-3). Knowledge – from a more developmental view, knowledge is that which is “constructed as a result of dynamic interactions between the individual and physical and social environment” (NAEYC & NAECS/SDE, 1991, p. 25). From a more behaviorist view, knowledge is “something that a child acquires and that can be measured independently from the process of acquisition” (Elkind, 1989, p. 115) Maturation – refers to the “role of genetically controlled biological change in behavior and learning” (Freeman & Hatch, 1989, p. 596). Moral Domain – focus on the child’s moral judgment, emotional expression, reasoning
16 skills, interpersonal skills, sense of cause and effect, and behavior management (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997). Pedagogy – the art of teaching Physical Domain – focus on the child’s physical growth, perceptual skills, and fine and gross motor skills, as well as personal safety and health (Bredekamp, 1987; Bredekamp & Copple, 1997). Play - those experiences which are “intrinsically motivated, freely chosen, process- oriented over product-oriented, nonliteral, and enjoyable” (Johnson, Christie, & Yawkey, as cited in Stone, 1995, p. 46). Practices – refer to “actions taken…which may reflect beliefs of teachers as well as other facets of the situation such as school and district policies” (Smith & Shepard, 1988, p. 309). Primary Education – the schooling of children typically in grades first through 3. Skills – refer to “relatively small units of action” (Katz, 1988b, p. 14) Socialization - the teaching and learning “of norms and definitions of social interactions” (Apple, 1990, p. 52). Social-emotional Domain - focus on the child’s self-concept, self-esteem, interpersonal skills, and emotional expression (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997). Strategies – “refers to the various approaches teachers use to accomplish their objectives” (Lay-Dopyera & Dopyera, 1992, p. 16). Teacher-directed Instruction – an approach to education that emphasizes highly structured, academically-focused instruction which is planned and directed predominantly by the teacher. This type of instruction, which emphasizes repetition and reinforcement, includes predominantly lecturing, demonstrating, and modeling geared to the whole class. This is usually followed by seatwork. Values - refers to the “moral principles, standards that one considers important” (Coventry & Nixon, 1999, p. 574).
17 Outline of Study The first chapter will introduce the study. It will present the need for the study and the research questions, as well as the design of the study. The second chapter will review the literature, examining the current trend toward “academic” kindergarten and the strong countermovement to make kindergarten programs more developmentally “appropriate” in some depth. The third chapter will provide a detailed explanation of the qualitative methods chosen to guide this interpretive study. The chosen research site and the five teacher-informants will be introduced and the process of data collection and analysis will be described. The fourth chapter will describe the every day happenings of the five kindergarten teachers, focusing on classroom organization and various classroom practices that define the classroom environment. Using rich, thick descriptions, these stories will describe the complexity of each environment and the myriad of decisions that each teacher is faced with on a daily basis. The fifth chapter will share the voices of the five kindergarten teachers. They will share their feelings, beliefs, practical knowledge, and personal experiences associated with being a current kindergarten teacher. They will discuss the various problems they face and the factors that impact their program design. The final chapter will include a discussion and analysis of the teachers’ stories examining those elements that impacted the type of programs developed in these five kindergarten classrooms. The voice of the researcher and the voices of other educators will join this discussion. This discussion will focus on the lessons learned from the research and the implication this research has for other educators.
18 Chapter Two Literature Review
To better understand this ongoing conflict that many early childhood educators struggle with, this next chapter will explore the history of DAP guidelines, emphasizing why the guidelines were developed, the impact they have had on the field of early childhood education, and the criticisms that have led to its revision. It will explore the definition of developmentally appropriate practice that frames the guidelines, focusing on theories that impact the practices and research that supports the use of these practices. It will then explore practices that the guidelines oppose, also focusing on theories that impact these practices and research that supports the use of these practices. Lastly, it will examine the impact teachers’ implicit beliefs have on the actual practices used within their kindergarten classrooms.
History of Developmentally Appropriate Practices The 1980s were a time of great change for the field of education, particularly in the area of early childhood. State-mandated reform efforts were developed to raise the standards of our public school systems as a whole, focusing heavily on teachers and students. These reform efforts impacted areas such as “teacher education, graduation requirements, school structure, and accountability measures” (Bredekamp, Knuth, Kunesh, & Shulman, 1992, p. 1). The pressure to demonstrate achievement was felt at all educational levels. In partial response to these reform efforts, many preschool and kindergarten programs began to incorporate practices such as placement testing, standardized testing, skill-based curriculum, transitional classes, retention practices, and delayed entrance practices (Bredekamp, 1987; Bredekamp & Copple, 1997; Bredekamp, et. al, 1992; Bredekamp & Rosegrant, 1992, 1995; Elkind, 1986; Walsh, 1989). Many early childhood educators were turning away from more child-centered approaches and were utilizing more skill-based, teacher-directed methods (Bredekamp, 1987; Bredekamp & Copple, 1997; Bredekamp, et al., 1992; Bredekamp & Rosegrant, 1992, 1995; Egertson, 1987; Graue, 1993a). Many educators and educational organizations were becoming increasingly concerned about the impact these change efforts might have on young children and stood firmly against the implementation of more formalized early learning experiences (e.g., ASCD, 1989; Elkind,
19 1986; IRA, 1989; Katz, 1988a; Moyer, et al., 1987; NAESP; 1990; NCTM, 1989; SREB, 1995; Walsh, 1989). One of the most influential professional organizations at this time was the National Association of Education for Young Children (NAEYC). In 1987, NAEYC formulated a set of philosophical guidelines defining high-quality programming for young children. These guidelines were entitled Developmentally Appropriate Practice in Early Childhood Programs Serving Children from Birth Through Age 8 (Bredekamp, 1987). This document, which was a first of its kind, was based on the belief that “programs designed for young children [should] be based on what is known about young children” (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997, p. v, emphasis in original). This much-needed document was intended to serve as a directive for early childhood programs seeking to meet NAEYC’s strict accreditation criteria, helping them develop more appropriate learning experiences, curriculum, teaching strategies, and assessment for their children and their families (Bredekamp, 1987; Bredekamp & Copple, 1997; Bredekamp, et al., 1992). This document was also intended to make an official stand against the reform movement’s pressure to develop programs that are considered by many not in the best interest of young children. According to Bredekamp et al. (1992), NAEYC’s guidelines represented: a growing consensus that the traditional scope and sequence approach to curriculum with its emphasis on drill and practice of isolated, academic skills does not reflect current knowledge of human learning and fails to produce students who possess the kind of higher-order thinking and problem solving abilities that will be needed in the 21st century…Specifically, these national organizations call for schooling to place greater emphasis on: • Active, hands-on learning • Conceptual learning that leads to understanding along with acquisition of basic skills • Meaningful, relevant learning experiences • Interactive teaching and cooperative learning • A broad range of relevant content, integrated across traditional subject matter divisions At the same time, these national organizations unanimously criticize rote memorization, drill and practice on isolated academic skills, teacher lecture, and repetitive seatwork. (p. 2)
Serving as a voice for the field of early childhood, the NAEYC opposed the increasing development of highly structured academic early childhood programs (Bredekamp, 1987). Therefore, this document was also intended to create change within the field of early childhood, encouraging educators to develop high-quality, appropriate programming for young children.
20 This document encouraged administrators and teachers to make a “clear commitment regarding the rights of young children to respectful and supportive learning environments and to an education that would prepare them for participation in a free and democratic society” (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997, p. v). The original guidelines provided examples of both appropriate and inappropriate practices. Developmentally “appropriate” classrooms were described as those focusing on a relatively child-centered approach to teaching and learning (Bredekamp, 1987; Fowell & Lawton, 1992). This approach values the “overall development of the whole child, across social, emotional, aesthetic, moral, language, cognitive, physical, (which includes health, gross motor, and fine motor) domains” (McMullen, 1999, p. 217). Classrooms are designed around the belief that young children are creators of their own knowledge and need to be actively involved in the learning process (Bredekamp, 1987; Quick, 1998). These environments contain rich experimental material and activities that allow for self-selection and self-direction. These environments are “equipped and designed to meet the individual needs of a wide variety of children at various stages of development” (Conant, 2001, p. 3). Flexible grouping, including individualized experiences, small group activities, and, when necessary, whole group instruction, is used to better meet the various needs of the children. “The practices endorsed in the guidelines are those which emphasize direct experience, concrete materials, child-initiated activity, social interaction, and adult warmth” (Hyson, Hirsh-Pasek, & Rescorla, 1990, p. 474). Developmentally “inappropriate” classrooms were described as those focusing on a relatively formal approach to teaching and learning (Bredekamp, 1987; Fowell & Lawton, 1992). Classroom instruction focuses predominantly on teacher-directed experiences, including lecturing, modeling, teacher-led discussions, and repetitive drill and practice activities (Bredekamp, 1987). These types of environments focus on the “teacher’s behavior rather than the child’s own activity with material” (Smith, 1990, p. 12). Within this type of classroom, children “are much more likely to experience the world primarily though their teacher’s organization of it, rather than through their individual construction of their own experience and activity” (Smith, 1990, p. 12). Within this approach, children tend to assume a more passive role in the overall learning process. According to the guidelines, these types of “preplanned, deliberate, and teacher-determined” practices should not predominate in a classroom because
21 they are less sensitive to the many developmental and individual needs of young children (Smith, 1990, p. 13).
Criticisms of DAP Guidelines Although the original guidelines have greatly influenced the field of early childhood education, impacting both policy and individual programs, this framework has been the focus of much criticism over the last two decades (e.g., Bloch, 1992; Bowman & Stott, 1994; Cross, 1995; Delpit, 1995; Hsue & Aldridge, 1996; Jipson, 1991; Katz, 1996; Kessler, 1991b; Lubeck, 1994, 1996; Mallory & New, 1994; McGill-Franzen, 1992; O’Brien, 2000; Spodek, 1986a, 1988a, 1991c; Walsh, 1991). Some of the criticisms include: a) that DAP does not recognize the impact that social context plays in the role of a child’s growth and development (Bloch, 1991; Bowman & Stott, 1994; Cross, 1995; Delpit, 1995; Kessler, 1992; O’Loughlin, 1991; Stott & Bowman, 1996); b) that DAP focuses too heavily on child development knowledge and does not adequately recognize the impact of cultural, political, gender, economic, and historical factors (Bloch, 1991, 1992; Delpit, 1995; Erwin, 1998; Escobedo, 1993; Goffin, 1994; Graue & Walsh, 1995; Hsue & Aldridge, 1996; Jipson, 1991; Katz, 1996; Kessen, 1993; Kessler, 1991a; Lubeck, 1996; Mallory & New, 1994; O’Loughlin, 1991, 1992; Rodd, 1996; Spodek, 1986a; 1988a; Swadener & Kessler, 1991; Walsh, 1991; Zimiles, 1991); c) that DAP does not adequately support the development and learning of children and families from diverse cultural/ethnic backgrounds (Delpit, 1995; Hoffman, 2000; Hyun, 1998; Jipson, 1991; Kessler, 1991b; Lubeck, 1994; McGill-Franzen, 1992; O’Brien, 2000; Ogbu, 1994; Walsh, 1991); and d) that DAP does not adequately support the development and learning of children with disabilities or developmental delays (Carta, Schwartz, Atwater, & McConnell, 1991; Kaminski & Carey, 1993; Odom & McEvoy, 1990). O’Brien (2000) expresses concern that DAP “comes from, and supports, albeit covertly, a white middle-class perspective and works best for typically developing children from ‘advantaged,’ Anglo home environments relatively” (p. 1). O’Brien (2000) also adds that “(c)hildren from non-mainstream and ‘disadvantaged’ backgrounds may not have the requisite knowledge, skills, and dispositions that would allow them to benefit from the DAP approach” (p. 1). Hyun (1998) expresses a similar concern, stating that the “guidelines seemed more culturally relevant to children and families from Euro-American cultural backgrounds than other
22 ethnic backgrounds” (p. 5). Many, like O’Brien and Hyun, believe that teachers have an obligation to provide the necessary knowledge and skills to this particular group of children so that they are better prepared for future academic and social challenges (Delpit, 1986; Kessler, 1991a; Lubeck, 1994, 1996; Mallory, 1992). E. D. Hirsch (1997), an advocate for more academically challenging instruction, criticizes the NAEYC guidelines for “wasting minds and perpetuating social inequities” (p. 6). [T]he ultimate effect of the doctrine is to cause social harm. To withhold demanding content from young children between preschool and third grade has an effect which is quite different from the one intended. It leaves advantaged children (who get knowledge at home) with boring pabulum, and it condemns disadvantaged children to a permanent educational handicap that grows worse over time. (Hirsch, 1997, p. 6)
In response to these criticisms and others like them, the NAEYC issued a revised edition of the guidelines in 1997, entitled Developmentally Appropriate Practices in Early Childhood Education Programs (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997). Among other areas, the revised edition focused on the “significant role of the families” and the “importance of meaningful and contextually relevant curriculum” (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997, p. vi). The new document also addressed the issue of teacher-directed instruction. It described appropriate practice as a “balance of child-initiated and adult-directed activities” (Rathburn, et al., 2000, p. 1). It stressed the importance of using this more direct teaching approach when deemed necessary to better meet independent and group needs (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997). While trying to create a more comprehensive and inclusive document, the NAEYC still focused on developing a set of guidelines that represented “shared beliefs about what practices are supportive and respectful of children’s healthy development” (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997, p. vi). Despite these changes in the document, criticism continues to be voiced (e.g., Lubeck, 1998; Erwin, 1998).
Developmentally Appropriate Practices Defined Developmentally appropriate practices reflect “an approach to education that focuses on the child as a developing human being and life long learner” (Houser & Osborne, 2001, p. 1). Within this approach, the child is the focus of curriculum development, instructional approaches, and environmental design (Bredekamp, 1987; Bredekamp & Copple, 1997; Burts, et al., 1993; Fowell & Lawton, 1992). The child's intrinsic motivation and natural curiosity to learn is valued greatly, with the child being encouraged to initiate many of his or her own learning experiences
23 (Carta, 1994). Using an integrated approach, the teacher strives to create a physically active and mentally challenging environment that enhances each child’s development and meets each child’s needs, abilities, and interests. Within this approach, the focus is on the process of learning rather than on the product. Educators who value this approach “make decisions in the classroom by combining their knowledge of child development with an understanding of the individual child to achieve desired and meaningful outcomes” (Houser & Osborne, 2001, p. 1). The original guidelines for DAP were influenced by the maturational theory and the cognitive-developmental theory. The maturationist theory, which is strongly influenced by Gesell, “stresses the role of genetically controlled biological change in behavior and learning” (Freeman & Hatch, 1989, p. 596). Within this theory, development is viewed as a natural “unfolding of predetermined, hereditary characteristics” (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997, p. 14). This view focuses on “the child’s natural interests, learning patterns, and motivation” (Jipson, 1991, p. 122). The cognitive-developmental theory, derived primarily from the work of Piaget (1950), focuses on intellectual growth as children move through a series of invariant stages of cognitive development (Biber, 1988; Fowell & Lawton, 1992; Hyun, 1998; Stipek, 1993; Walsh, 1991; Weber, 1984). These universal stages of development include sensorimotor, concrete operational, and formal operational (Weber, 1984, p. 159). Within this constructivist theory, children are viewed as active seekers and creators of their own meaning and knowledge as they explore their physical environment. This theory “views the child as a knower, a thinker” (Weber, 1984, p. 12). Weber (1984) further explains this theory: Knowledge is always a structuring of the subject in living interaction with environmental circumstances and always constructed in part according to the determinants intrinsic to the learner’s already developed structures. This gives an active role to the learner while also emphasizing the part of environment as essential for the realization of potential. (p. 12)
“Through interactions with objects and events children construct an understanding of these cognitive operations that allow for the identification of objects, of relationships among objects, of the reversibility of thinking procedures, and so on” (Fowell & Lawton, 1992, p. 54). Children need supportive environments that encourage them to actively explore their surroundings, to question their world, and to apply their personally constructed knowledge (Bredekamp, 1987; Bredekamp & Copple, 1997; Bredekamp et al., 1992; Stipek, 1993). Using primarily these two theories of human development, the NAEYC developed guidelines that
24 emphasize “an approach to instruction that views the child as the primary source of the curriculum and recognizes young children’s unique characteristics” (Charlesworth, 1998, p. 275). These guidelines also focused on two aspects of development, including age appropriateness and individual appropriateness. Age appropriateness refers to the “typical development within a particular age group” (Burts, et al., 1993, p. 24). The guidelines provide teachers with developmental expectations of physical, cognitive, and social/emotional domains for each age group (Bredekamp, 1987; Bredekamp & Copple, 1997). For example, in the area of language and communication development, a typically developing 5-year-old child: • employs a vocabulary of 5,000 to 8,000 words, with frequent plays on words; pronounces words with little difficulty, except for particular sounds, such as l and th • uses fuller, more complex sentences (“His turn is over and now it’s my turn now”) • takes turns in conversation, interrupts others less frequently; listens to another speaker if information is new and of interest; shows vestiges of egocentrism in speech, for instance, in assuming listener will understand what is meant (saying “He told me to do it” without any referent for the pronouns)…. (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997, p. 109)
Descriptions of developmental characteristics, like the one above, are intended to help teachers better understand the age group they are working with and help them provide a more appropriate learning environment (Bredekamp, 1987; Bredekamp & Copple, 1997). Individual appropriateness considers the uniqueness of each child, honoring “individual personality, learning style, and family background” (Bredekamp, 1987, pp. 2-3). This recognizes that differences exist within each age range. Teachers must come “to know and appreciate each child’s uniqueness and individuality and to provide activities that are personally interesting and challenging to that child” (Hyun, 1998, p. 4). For classroom experiences to be considered developmentally appropriate, they must be both age appropriate and individually appropriate for each child (Bredekamp, 1987).
Implementation of DAP Focused on the implementation of developmentally appropriate practices, teachers must understand that children “learn best through manipulation of materials and hands-on experiences” and that children must be given ample opportunity to explore their immediate world (Gronlund, 2001, p. 42). “(I)ndependent choice, responsibility for self, finding and
25 solving self-defined problems, and growth through a significant amount of challenging interaction with peers form the basis of the child’s daily experience” (Smith, 1990, p. 13). The teacher must see her role as a facilitator, a nurturer, and an observer of the children, creating an environment that highly regards the importance of play in the learning process (Lay-Dopyera & Dopyera, 1992). The teacher must understand the impact play has on the overall development of the child, impacting his or her social, emotional, physical, and cognitive domains (Bredekamp, 1987; Bredekamp & Copple, 1997). The teacher must recognize that play impacts a child’s ability to make sense of the world, gaining understanding of such areas as interpersonal relationships, societal roles, and rules (Bredekamp, 1987; Bredekamp & Copple, 1997; Elkind, 1986; McMullen, 1999). Play also helps children “learn to deal with emotions, to interact with others, to resolve conflicts, and to gain a sense of competence – all in the safety that only play affords” (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997, p. 14). Snider and Fu (1990) further explain the role of the teacher within this exploratory environment: The teacher understands the needs and interests of the child and is able to prepare an environment that allows the child to discover new information and form new concepts through play and exploration. The teacher supports but does not control the child’s play and allows the child to assimilate new information according to his/her own interest. (p. 70)
Curriculum needs to be “learner-generated and learner-centered, yet teacher framed” (McMullen, 1999, p. 217). Within this environment, the “location of power” is shared between the teacher and the child (Wien, 1995, p. 4). Many decisions are made together, allowing the children to have a sense of ownership in the classroom. Children are valued as active partners in the learning process. Classroom rules, curriculum content, and classroom experiences are just a few areas where the children’s voices are valued. Based on the children’s developmental ages and individual needs, the teacher provides opportunities for the children to explore personally relevant materials and activities and to determine the outcomes. “Planning in the developmental classroom is also deliberate, yet more flexible, spontaneous, and individual as it reflects a variety of developmental levels among the children” (Smith, 1990, p. 13). Goldstein (1997) describes this unique experience: Teachers engaged in developmentally appropriate practice attempt to create a meaningful, challenging, responsive, and stimulating educational environment for all students, regardless of their locations on the developmental continua. Children are given opportunities to learn through direct experience and hands-on explorations, and to engage
26 in the types of problem-finding and problem-solving that leads to growth and development. (p. 4)
The revised guidelines (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997) provided a more expanded theoretical foundation. Along with cognitive-developmental theory and maturationist theory, this document also valued a more social-interactivist perspective (Bruner, 1985; Dewey, 1916; Gardner, 1991; Vygotsky, 1978). This perspective recognizes the importance of the social environment in child development. Children create meaning and knowledge through their interactions with others. This view understands that children learn by observing other children and adults and by manipulating their physical world (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997). They also learn “through their own thought processes – observing what happens, reflecting on their findings, asking questions, and formulating answers” (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997, p. 13). According to Bredekamp, et al. (1992), the revised guidelines are grounded in several “theoretical principles of child development and learning” (p. 3). These principles include: • Children learn best when their physical needs are met and they feel psychologically safe and secure • Children construct knowledge • Children learn through social interaction with other adults and other children • Children learn through play • Children’s interests and ‘need to know’ motivate learning • Human development and learning are characterized by individual variation. (Bredekamp, et al., 1992, pp. 3-4)
The revised guidelines focused on three aspects of development, including age appropriateness, individual appropriateness, and social/cultural appropriateness (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997). The third aspect recognizes the importance of the children’s various social and cultural contexts, understanding that experiences need to be “meaningful, relevant, and respectful for the participating children and their families” (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997, p. 9).
Developmentally “Inappropriate” Practices Defined The NAEYC guidelines provide examples of inappropriate practices as well as examples of appropriate practices. In current educational literature, these “inappropriate practices” are often referred to as “direct-instruction,” “teacher-directed instruction,” “teacher-centered instruction,” or even “the traditional approach.” Despite the many different labels, it is clear that many early childhood educators believe that these practices are clearly unacceptable with young
27 children when used exclusively. The NAEYC clearly supports more child-centered, child- initiated experiences and emphasizes that teacher-directed instruction should be used on a limited basis and only in response to the individual or group needs (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997). “Narrow focusing on academic skills is problematic during the years from 3 to 6, not only because it is potentially damaging to children’s social and emotional development but also because it is intellectually limiting” (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997, p. 99). Many also believe that a more teacher-directed approach does not value the “knowledge of living experience” which the children bring to school (Freire, 1997, p. 69). Developmentally inappropriate practices are based on a behavioral perspective of learning. This perspective is influenced by individuals like Watson, Skinner, and Pavlov (Weber, 1984). This theory focuses on the impact external stimuli can have on an individual’s behavior. “Behavioral theory holds that behaviors acquired and displayed by young children can be attributed almost exclusively to their environment” (Duncan, Kemple, & Smith, 2000, p. 196). Through a process of repetition and reinforcement, a desired behavior can be achieved (Duncan, et al., 2000; Kohlberg & Mayer, 1972; Weber, 1984). “It is not the interaction of learner and environment but the influence environment can exert to produce predicted behavior that is the essence of behaviorism” (Weber, 1984, p. 83).
Implementation of DIP When applying this theory to the classroom setting, teaching practices tend to emphasize highly-structured whole group instruction, drill and practice exercises, and independent seatwork (Goffin, 1994). “According to this perspective, children learn by being told and directly instructed” (Buchanan, et al., 1998, p. 460). Children are often viewed as “empty vessels” (Freire, 1997) or as “empty bottles” (Elkind, 2001) that need to be filled with knowledge provided primarily by the teacher. Little emphasis is placed on letting the children construct their own meaning and knowledge (Elkind, 1989; Freire, 1997; Greenberg, 1990). The teachers typically “convey facts and inculcate knowledge. Students are passive receptors of this knowledge” (Smerdon, Burkam, & Lee, 1999, p. 17). Little emphasis is placed on self-initiated, self-directed activities and experiences that allow for exploration and interaction. Little emphasis is placed on allowing children to question their world, test their own hypotheses, and draw their own conclusions. Within this type of environment, “knowledge is presented as fact,
28 students’ prior experiences are not seen as important, and students typically are not free to experiment with different methods to solve problems” (Smerdon, et al., 1999, p. 7). In teacher-directed classrooms, the “location of power” usually lies with the adult and not the child (Wien, 1995, p. 4). The teacher is viewed as the “controller of the environment” responsible for almost every decision made in the classroom (Krogh, 1997, p. 33). Teacher- planned curriculum is geared toward the entire class and the children are expected to complete adult-selected and adult-directed lessons at the same time and at the same pace. Subjects, like math, science, social studies, spelling, and language arts, are taught separately at designated times of the day. A rigid schedule is maintained that usually requires specific skills to be mastered before new content is introduced. Curriculum relies heavily on prescribed graded courses of study, textbooks and workbooks. Within this type of environment, the emphasis is on outcome with the teacher often searching for one correct response. Stipek (1993) further explains this approach to teaching and learning: Learning is believed to occur when children repeat appropriate responses to teacher- provided stimuli, and to be facilitated by breaking tasks and responses into discrete, carefully sequenced units. Errors must be corrected immediately to keep children from learning incorrect responses. Behavior (including effort on academic tasks) is assumed to be influenced primarily by the consequences of one’s own actions. Thus, teachers can enhance effort by effectively dispensing rewards and punishment. (p. 32)
Research on Developmentally Appropriate Practices Since the publication of NAEYC’s guidelines (1987/1997), many researchers have begun to conduct studies that are relevant to the current early childhood academic debate. Several researchers have investigated the relationship between early childhood environments and children’s developmental outcomes. In many cases, environments that emphasize a more child- centered approach have been found to have a positive influence on educational outcomes. These areas include academic achievement, cognitive development, motivational development, and social-emotional development. In regards to academic achievement, studies have revealed that children who attended preschool, kindergarten, and even elementary programs that incorporated more developmentally appropriate approaches: a) mastered more basic academic skills (Marcon, 1992, 1993, 1994; Slaughter & Powers, 1983); b) demonstrated increased performance in reading achievement (Burts, et al., 1993; Freppon & McIntyre, 1999; Rose & Medway, 1981; Sherman & Mueller,
29 1996); c) demonstrated increased performance in writing achievement (Freppon, 1995); and d) demonstrated increased performance in mathematical achievement (Pellegrini, 1992; Rose & Medway, 1981; Sherman & Mueller, 1996). Other studies revealed that children attending more child-centered programs: a) exhibited improved cognitive development (Frede, Austin, & Lindauer, 1993); b) scored higher on creativity (Hirsh-Pasek, et al., 1990; Marcon, 1992; Slaughter & Powers, 1983); c) demonstrated improved language skills (Dunn, et al., 1994; Marcon, 1992; Rose & Medway, 1981; Sherman & Mueller, 1996; Slaughter & Powers, 1983); d) exhibited better listening skills (Dunn, Beach, & Kontos, 1994; Marcon, 1994); and e) demonstrated improved problem-solving skills (Spidell-Rusher, et al., 1992). In regards to socio-emotional and motivational development, children who participated in more developmentally appropriate environments: a) rated higher in social competence skills (i.e., cooperation, sharing, and self control) (DeVries, Reese-Learned, & Morgan, 1991; Frede, Austin, & Lindauer, 1993; Freppon & McIntyre, 1999; Gottlieb & Rasher, 1995; Jones & Gullo, 1999; Pellegrini, 1992; Rose & Medway, 1981); b) demonstrated more motivational behaviors (Marcon, 1992; Rose & Medway, 1981; c) Stipek, 1993; Stipek, et al., 1995; Turner, 1995); d) demonstrated greater autonomy (Spidell-Rusher, et al., 1992; Stipek, et al., 1995); e) demonstrated more positive attitudes toward later school (Hyson, et al., 1990); f) demonstrated more curiosity and inventiveness (Miller & Bizzell, 1983); and g) demonstrated more positive attitudes towards reading (Freppon & McIntyre, 1999). In Stipek, et al. (1995), children attending more child-centered preschool and kindergarten programs were compared to children attending more academic-based programs in the areas of basic skill achievement and motivation. This study found that: children in child-centered programs rated their abilities higher, had higher expectations for success on school-like tasks, selected a more challenging math problem to do, showed less dependency on adults for permission and approval, evidenced more pride in their accomplishments, and claimed to worry less about school. (Stipek, et al., 1995, p. 220)
In addition, environments that emphasize a more academic, performance-based approach have been found to have a negative influence on educational outcomes. Areas effected include academic achievement, social-emotional development, and motivational development. In regards to academic achievement, several studies have found a negative relationship between a more developmentally inappropriate learning environment and children’s performance (i.e.,
30 Bryant, Burchinal, Lau, & Sparling, 1994; Frede & Barnett, 1992; Hirsh-Pasek, et al., 1990; Mantzicopoulos & Neuharth-Pritchett, 1995; Pellegrini, 1992). For example, in a two-year study conducted by Hirsh-Pasek, et al., (1990), researchers examined the impact “high and low academic programs” in 11 different schools had on young children as they began preschool and completed kindergarten (p. 420). One measure of the study was to look specifically at the program’s effect on academic achievement, creativity, and motivation. Researchers found that highly academic preschool programs had “virtually no positive effects” for the children (p. 420). Any advantage that was noticed had disappeared by the end of kindergarten. Highly academic preschool programs were “related to less creativity, higher levels of test anxiety, and less positive attitudes toward school” (p. 420). According to Hirsh-Pasek, et al., (1990), if a more formal approach “has no clear benefit to the child’s development and if it may hinder development, there may be no defendable reason to encourage the introduction of formal academic instruction and adult-focused learning during the preschool years” (p. 420, italics in original). Despite the initial increase in academic achievement, several studies have also found that the program effect fades over time (i.e., Cole, Mills, & Dale, 1989; DeVries, et al., 1991; Karnes, Schwedel, & Williams, 1983; Lazar & Darlington, 1982; Miller & Bizzell, 1984). Other research supports these fore-mentioned findings particularly in the area of motivation. Children who experienced a less developmentally appropriate early childhood program: a) demonstrated less positive attitudes about school (Freppon, 1995; Hirsh-Pasek, et al., 1990; Hyson, Van Trieste, & Rauch, 1989; Pellegrini, 1992; Stipek, 1993); b) experienced increased levels of test anxiety (Fleege, Charlesworth, Burts, & Hart, 1993; Hirsh-Pasek, et al., 1990); c) demonstrated lower self-esteem (Fry & Addington, 1984); d) demonstrated more passive behavior (Freppon, 1995); e) scored lower on behavioral evaluations (Mantzicopoulos & Neuharth-Pritchett, 1995; Marcon, 1994); f) demonstrated less confidence in ability (Fry & Addington, 1984); g) demonstrated less ability to problem-solve (Fry & Addington, 1984); and d) demonstrated more stress-related behaviors (Bentley & Wilson, 1989; Burts, et al., 1992; Burts, et al., 1990; DeWolf, 1992; Fleege, et al., 1993; Fry & Addington, 1984; Hart, Burts, Durland, Charlesworth, DeWolf, & Fleege, 1998; Honig, 1986; Love, Ryer, & Faddis; 1992; Ruckman, Burts, & Pierce, 1999; Stipek, et al., 1992a; Swick, 1987). Some of the observed stress-related behaviors included nail biting, yawning, clothes chewing, pencil tapping, mumbling, stuttering, fidgeting, and even crying (i.e., Burts, et al., 1990; Fleege, et al., 1993).
31 In Burts et al. (1990), many of these stress-related behaviors were observed during whole group instruction and individual seatwork experiences. In several studies that examined gender effect, boys experienced more stress than girls in more developmentally inappropriate classrooms (Burts, et al., 1992; Burts, et al., 1990; Hart, et al., 1998; Marcon, 1993). For example, Marcon (1993) conducted a comparative study that examined the effects “academically-focused versus socioemotional” kindergarten environments have on children’s academic achievement and development (p. 1). Classrooms that emphasized primarily whole-class, skill-based instruction “indicated the generally detrimental impact of an overally academic emphasis on young boys’ development” (Marcon, 1993, p. 88, emphasis in original). In this study, boys tended to respond better to “moderately academic” programs that valued all developmental domains, rather than just cognitive (Marcon, 1993, p. 88). Boys in this study made gains in several areas, including: a) communication skills; b) gross and fine motor skills; and c) reading, math, and language achievement (Marcon, 1993). Marcon (1993) expressed the view that “(m)oderately academic kindergartens that value socioemotional development may provide the most appropriate transitional experience for children as they move from developmentally appropriate preschool experiences to the reality of formal instructional public school classrooms, at least until more public schools become developmentally appropriate havens of learning” (p. 89). Several studies have also examined the socioeconomic effect of more developmentally appropriate and more developmentally inappropriate learning environments (i.e., Burts, et al., 1993; Freppon, 1995; Freppon & McIntyre, 1999; Miller & Bizzell, 1984; Stipek, et al., 1995; Schweinhart, Weikart, & Larner, 1986). For example, in a study conducted by Burts, et al. (1993), the researchers found that “lower SES first-grade children from more appropriate kindergarten had higher overall averages as well as higher averages in language, math, science, and social studies when compared with low SES first graders from less appropriate kindergarten” (p. 29). In a similar study, Freppon and McIntyre (1999) conducted a comparative study of skills-based and constructivist-based kindergarten and first grade classrooms in schools serving primarily White urban Appalachian students. Focusing on the area of reading achievement, researchers found that first grade students who attended a more constructivist-based progam “had greater breadth in knowing what being a reader encompasses and greater willingness to try” (p. 212). They demonstrated a more positive stance toward reading and better applied word attack
32 skills. Those children who attended a more skills-based program demonstrated a more passive stance to reading, lacked self-confidence in their ability, and frequently disengaged. Freppon (1995) also conducted a long-term study with low income, White Appalachian kindergarten children to determine how children respond to moving from a whole language program to a skills-based program or remaining in a whole language program. Freppon (1995) investigated the children’s academic success, as well as the children’s interpretations of instruction. This study found that all of the children made academic progress. All of the children became better readers. However, the transition group demonstrated less progress in writing and demonstrated more passive behaviors. Words like “disengagement,” “avoidance,” and “lack of motivation” were used to describe the transition group’s behavior (Freppon, 1995, p. 517). When these children returned to the whole language program, they were described as “more engaged” and “more motivated” (Freppon, 1995, p. 517). The children who remained in the whole language program remained stable in reading proficiency and writing. They were described as “highly engaged” (Freppon, 1995, p. 518). The whole language program positively impacted the children’s cognitive ability, degree of motivation, and independence. Several studies also found that low SES children in more formally academic classrooms demonstrated more stress behaviors (Burts, et al., 1993; Burts, et al., 1992; Frede, et al., 1993; Fry & Addington, 1984; Freppon & McIntyre, 1999; Hart, et al., 1998; Honig, 1986; Miller & Bizzell, 1983; Ruckman, et al., 1999; Schweinhart, et al., 1986; Stipek, et al., 1995). Several studies have examined the long-term effects of different curriculum models on young children’s overall achievement and development. For example, Schweinhart, et al. (1986) examined the long-term impact of three different preschool curriculum models, including the High/Scope Model, the Distar Model, and a Nursery School Model. High/Scope is an open framework preschool program that focuses on cognitive developmental experiences. DISTAR is a teacher-directed preschool program that focuses on pre-academic skills. Nursery School is a child-centered preschool program that values play and focuses on the needs and interests of the children. Children who attended these programs were interviewed at age 15. Results indicated that IQ and achievement differed little among the three groups. However, the group that participated in the Distar program reported engagement in twice as many delinquent acts, such as property violence, personal violence, and drug abuse, as the other two groups. This group also reported poor relations with their families, less participation in sports, and fewer employment
33 opportunities. In follow-up studies (Schweinhart & Wallgren, 1993; Schweinhart & Weikart, 1996, 1997), researchers found that these same children at age 23 reported: a) higher rates of misconduct; b) higher felony arrests; c) higher property crimes; d) lower participation in community service; e) fewer marriages; and f) lower college graduation rates. However, the researchers recognize that it would probably be a mistake to conclude that DISTAR caused these problems. As the researchers explained: [W]e are inclined to believe that the preschool DISTAR experience did not actually harm the children’s social development. After all, the program’s major goals were academic. It is reasonable, therefore, to find few if any social-behavior effects, positive or negative. The point is that the other two preschool curriculum approaches in this study did have social-behavior goals and did appear to produce favorable long-term social effects indicated by lower rates of juvenile delinquency and other social-behavior problems, as well as equivalent academic outcomes. (Schweinhart, et al., 1986, p. 42)
They further concluded:
Young children appear to learn from both their relationship to the teacher and peers and the manner in which knowledge is gained. While knowledge that young children gain for themselves in several curriculum approaches may appear to be the same as the knowledge that is dispensed to the child, the social consequences for the child may be very different. (Schweinhart, et al., 1986, p. 43)
In a similar study, Berrutta-Clement, Schweinhart, Barnett, Epstein, and Weikart (1984) found that students who attended a High/Scope Preschool Program were less likely: a) to be placed in special education programs; b) to commit crimes; c) to experience teenage pregnancy; and d) to go on welfare. In conclusion, although a few studies have shown little or no difference from attending DAP programs (e.g., Hyson, et al., 1990), most studies support the positive impact of attending a more developmentally appropriate learning environment. Despite this fore-mentioned body of evidence, there exists an equally extensive amount of research that supports the positive impact that more structured, teacher-directed learning environments have on children’s various learning domains.
34 Research on Teacher-Directed Instruction Many educators recognize the benefits of a more teacher-directed approach to education, even with children as young as kindergarten (e.g., Adams & Engelmann, 1996; Becker, 1977; Becker & Engelmann, 1978; Becker, Engelmann, Carnine, & Rhine, 1981; Becker & Gersten, 1982; Bereiter, 1986; Bereiter & Kirkland, 1984; Brown & Campione, 1990; Carnine, Carnine, Karp, & Weisburg, 1988; Dommes, Gersten, & Carnine, 1984; Gersten, 1986; Gersten & Carnine, 1984; Gersten, Carnine, Keating, & Tomsic, 1984; Gersten, Carnine, Zoref, & Cronin, 1986; Gersten, Darch, & Gleason, 1988; Gersten, True, & Moore, 1987; Hanson & Farrell, 1995; Jarousse, Mengat, & Richard, 1992; Meyer, 1984; Meyer, Gersten, & Gutkin, 1983; Palmaffy, 1998; Pearson, 1984; Roehler & Duffy, 1981; Rosenshine, 1976, 1978, 1986, 1987, 1995; Rosenshine & Stevens, 1986; Stein, Carnine, & Dixon, 1998). Many educators believe that this instructional approach helps children, particularly at-risk children, remain competitive (i.e., Engelmann, 1999; Hart & Risley, 1995; Jarousse, et al., 1992; Hanson & Farrell, 1995; Wells, 1998; Entwisle & Hayduk, 1982). For instance, Engelmann (1999) expressed this opinion: Pre-kindergarten, kindergarten, and first grade provide the only reasonable window for achieving this acceleration. If we wait until after kindergarten to try to accelerate at-risk children, the plan will fail because affluent children know more and are equipped to learn faster. (p. 77)
Some educators believe that children with higher aptitudes perform better in more teacher- directed programs (e.g., Mills, Dale, Cole, & Jenkins, 1995; Yoder, Kaiser, & Alpurt 1991). Others believe that this instructional approach is beneficial for all children. For example, according to Hoffman (2000): If done well, whole group instruction can perhaps create more enthusiasm for learning than the individualized instruction in American classrooms, for it can foster a strong sense of connectedness and responsibility to others in the class, a joyful spirit of unity and community, and an egalitarian atmosphere rather than one that is fragmented through the use of ability groups, pursuit of separate and individual activities, and differential attention to individuals and groups on the part of the teacher. (p. 198)
Many educators believe that some children require more “extensive, structured, and explicit instruction to develop not only skills, but also processes, strategies, and understandings” (Brown & Campione, 1990, p. 111). Direct instruction can be effective when the “objective is to
35 teach skilled performance or mastery of a body of knowledge” (Rosenshine, 1987, p. 34). Many believe that this type of instruction is particularly useful in areas of curriculum such as reading, math, and science (e.g., Rosenshine, 1987). The emphasis is on: a) review; b) small incremental steps; c) guided practice; d) feedback and correction; e) individual seatwork; f) review; and g) testing (Rosenshine, 1987). According to Rosenshine (1987), “These activities help the students encode and elaborate the new material so it can later be used for higher level thinking” (p. 35). In many cases, environments that favor a more structured, teacher-directed approach also have been found to have a positive influence on educational outcomes. These areas include academic achievement, motivational development, and social-emotional development. In regards to academic achievement, studies have revealed that children who attended early childhood and primary programs that were primarily academically structured: a) performed significantly better in mathematical achievement (i.e., computation, problem-solving, concepts) (Becker & Engelmann, 1978; Carnine, 1976; Carpenter, Ansell, Franke, Fennema, & Weisbeck, 1993; Darch, Carnine, & Gersten, 1983; Feiler, 1994; Gersten & Carnine, 1984; Gersten, Carnine, & Williams, 1982; Good & Beckerman, 1978; Knapp & Shields, 1990; Meyer, et al., 1983; Nagel & McLevie, 1981; Paris, Cross, & Lipson, 1984; Wrobel, 1996; b) demonstrated increased reading achievement (i.e., word study, decoding, letter and sound recognition, spelling) (Becker & Engelmann, 1978; Hanson & Farrell, 1995; Knapp & Shields, 1990; Meyer, 1984; Meyer, Gersten, & Gutkin, 1983; Mezynski, 1983; O’Connor, Jenkins, Cole, & Mills, 1992; Stipek, 1993; Wrobel, 1996); c) demonstrated a slight improvement in reading comprehension (Mezynski, 1983; Mosenthal, 1994; O’Connor, et al., 1992; Paris, et al., 1984); d) performed higher on “year end” language measures (Jones & Gullo, 1999); and e) exhibited higher science achievement (Becker & Engelmann, 1978). For example, in a study that focused on gender effect, Smith and Croom (2000) found that a traditional environment had a positive effect on boys in the areas of reading, math, general knowledge, and self-concept. Hanson and Farrell (1995) also studied the long-term effects of word study and decoding at the kindergarten level and followed their subjects until they were seniors. They found higher reading achievement, attendance, and grades among these children. In regards to socio-emotional and motivational development, children who participated in more structured, academic environments: a) rated higher in measures of self-esteem and self-
36 concept (Gersten & Carnine, 1984; Smith & Croom, 2000; Wrobel, 1996); b) demonstrated more responsibility (Gersten & Carnine, 1984); c) demonstrated better work habits (Feiler, 1994; Stipek, 1993); d) demonstrated improved social skills (Prater, Bruhl, & Serna, 1998); e) demonstrated better problem-solving and listening skills (Prater, et al., 1998); f) demonstrated higher attendance rates (Carnine, Silbert, & Kamelnui, 1990; Hanson & Farrell, 1995; Meyer, 1984); g) demonstrated higher graduation rates (Meyer, 1984); h) rated higher in applying to and attending college (Carnine, et al., 1990; Meyer, 1984); and i) exhibited lower dropout rates (Meyer, 1984; Carnine, et al., 1990). The aforementioned research indicates differential effects of early childhood programs on children’s social, emotional, and academic development. Current evidence indicates that programs which incorporate principles of developmentally appropriate practice enhance children’s achievement and development in many areas, including, but not limited to: a) reasoning skills; b) problem-solving skills; c) language skills; d) comprehension skills; e) cooperation skills; and f) self-esteem. These results are evident for children of diverse backgrounds, including gender, socioeconomic status, and race. Effects in many cases appear to be long-term. However, current evidence also indicates that programs described as less developmentally appropriate also enhance children in many areas, including, but not limited to: a) mathematical computation; b) word study skills; c) letter recognition skills; d) spelling skills; and e) science achievement. Despite these results, many believe that more teacher- directed instructional effects are short-term. One can only speculate why the findings of both program types indicate positive outcomes for young children. Limitations of the instruments used must be considered. Many instruments may not be appropriate for measuring various domains of children’s development. Another possibility, of course, is that the type of pedagogy used is less important than other, as yet unidentified, factors.
The Debate Continues For many early childhood educators, highly structured approaches are not considered “best” practice when working with young children. They believe that most five-year-olds are not ready for a formal, skills-based kindergarten (e.g., Elkind, 1989; Kamii, 1985). Elkind (1986) argues that contemporary children are not more “sophisticated” or more “intelligent” than children of the past. Elkind (1986) argues:
37 The intuition regarding human behavior and technology is equally fallacious. The intuition is that human potentials are altered by technology. With respect to children, this intuition is often expressed by saying that, thanks to such innovations as television and computers, children today are brighter and more sophisticated than children in the past. Technology, however, neither changes human potential nor accelerates human development. Technology extends and amplifies our human potentials, but it does not alter them. (p. 634)
Elkind (1996) continues his argument: We have no data indicating that children are more competent today than we knew them to be in another time in history. The perception of child competence comes directly from social changes and from our need as parents and adults to have competent children. As society has changed, we can no longer protect children in the way we once did. So now we believe we have to prepare them by exposing them to everything and anything. (p. 7)
Many believe that educators need to focus on the children instead of focusing on “disparate skills, content, and products” (Moyer, et al., 1987, p. 238). As Elkind (1996) so eloquently stated: We need to move away from the idea that the first few years of life are a time for intervention and school readiness. Early childhood is a stage of life that should be considered on its own terms, not as preparation for later stages. If we think of early childhood in this way, we will create kindergarten and first grade environments that are flexible, activity-oriented, and filled with plants and animals. Such environments liberate young children’s abilities and provide them with opportunities to experience the special pleasures – as well as the awful fears - that are unique to this stage of life. (p. 12)
Knapp and Shields (1990) express concern that the teacher-directed approach, even though it has demonstrated benefits for some children, often views children with “identifiable skill deficits” (p. 754). This approach focuses more on what children “can not do and so risks overlooking their true capabilities” (Knapp & Shields, 1990, p. 754). Taught as discrete skills, the content of such a curriculum often fails to encourage mathematical thinking, comprehension of what is read, or expression and analysis in writing. In isolation from appropriate applications, skill instruction lacks a sense of purpose or meaning. Teaching skills in a fixed sequence leaves many students behind, struggling to master the first steps so that they can progress to more complex- and usually more interesting – work. (Knapp & Shields, 1990, p. 755)
Katz (1999b) also feels that “an appropriate curriculum and appropriate teaching methods provide contexts and opportunities for children to manifest desirable dispositions such as to
38 cooperate, to resolve conflicts, to investigate, to hypothesize and make predictions, and to test their hypotheses and predictions” (p. 17). Katz (1999b) is concerned about the “potential cumulative effects” that a highly structured formal academic program that emphasizes basic skills may have on a young child’s natural “disposition” to learn (p. 20). Although research has demonstrated that young children can and do experience success with rote activities, she questions whether children should participate in them (Katz, 1988a, 1999b). Katz (1999b) suggests there is a distinct difference between acquiring concepts and skills and being “ready users” of those skills (p. 20). Forcing skills on a young child may actually damage his or her disposition to use the acquired reading or math skills. Katz (1988a, 1999b) calls this the “damaged disposition hypothesis.” Although formal, direct instruction that focuses on basic skills may be beneficial in the short term, Katz (1999b) is more concerned about the long-term effects. Stipek (1993) also has this same concern. “External reinforcement, adult imposed activities and pressure to perform – characteristics associated with didactic programs – are believed to undermine intrinsic interest in school tasks because they limit autonomy and feelings of personal control” (Stipek, 1993, p. 32). Others share their concern: A well-designed kindergarten program capitalizes on the interest some children may show in learning academic skills. At the same time, it does not have that same expectation for all children, nor does it use up precious time to inculcate skills and knowledge for which children have no immediate use or real understanding. (Moyer, et al., 1987, p. 237)
Learning narrowly defined academic skills is an inappropriate activity for most young children. Such learning ignores both their cognitive strengths and their cognitive limitations. Because the content involves an inappropriate match with children’s cognitive capabilities, children often find the content difficult to learn. This then leads teachers to try harder to ‘make’ children learn, thereby, creating a negative social climate. (French & Song, 1998, pp. 10-11)
Introducing formalized activities too early deprives children of the opportunity to learn through play, substitutes symbolic learning for manipulative learning before many of them are mature enough for this, stifles natural exploration, and detaches reading from normal language development. (Escobedo, 1993, p. 217)
Despite what experts claim are appropriate and/or inappropriate practices to use with young children, it is the teachers who work with the children on a day-to-day basis who are left to determine what is “appropriate” for their learning environment. It is the teachers who must
39 make these choices while dealing with many environmental pressures as well as their own beliefs and goals. Thus, it is important to understand what the practitioners believe. According to Connelly and Clandinin (1986): [W]e do not understand practice by beginning with theory but by studying practitioners and classrooms as they are. The heart of teaching is action, performance and the penumbra of belief, attitude, feeling tone, sense of values, personality, and background experience of the teacher that surrounds and contributes to each lived moment of practice. (as cited in Wien, 1995, p. 10)
Teachers’ Beliefs The practices a teacher uses in her classroom with her children are not based on explicit theories alone. Although explicit knowledge of how children learn and develop is important, many education researchers are beginning to recognize that beliefs greatly influence a teacher’s practice (Bowman, 1989; Fang, 1996; Nespor, 1987; Pajares, 1992; Spodek, 1987, 1988b). According to Bowman (1989), teachers generally have two knowledge systems that impact their practice. The first is a formal knowledge system which includes theories and empirical research. The second is a subjective knowledge system which includes personal experience, feelings, and beliefs. According to Bowman (1989), teachers “filter formal theories and ideas regarding practices through their own values, beliefs, feelings, and habits, sometimes expanding and changing their personal knowledge to accommodate new ideas and new experiences, sometimes restructuring it to fit their current needs” (p. 444). Bowman (1989) also stresses the importance of valuing the relationship of “personal experience and feelings to ideas and behaviors” (p. 445). Many also conclude that beliefs strongly impact classroom decisions (Fang, 1996; Isenberg, 1990; Pajares, 1992; Spodek, 1987, 1988b; Vartuli, 1999). “Interactive decisions made extemporaneously in the midst of stress, uncertainty, and tensions of the classroom are based mainly on teachers’ beliefs,” says Vartuli (1999, p. 489). Spodek (1988b) also stresses that teaching is more than just the “observable actions” (p. 161). “Teachers’ actions and classroom decisions are driven by their perceptions, understanding, and beliefs” (Spodek, 1988b, p. 162). Spodek (1988b) refers to these influences as implicit theories. Implicit theories are “the ideas about instruction that teachers develop from their personal experience based on their practical knowledge” (Charlesworth, et al., 1993b, p. 256). Spodek (1988b) argues that teachers use their practical and theoretical knowledge to construct their own understanding of development, curriculum, and method. This construct, in
40 turn, impacts judgments, decisions, and eventually classroom instruction. Theories developed from personal experience impact classroom decisions as much as formal child development and learning theories, if not more (Spodek, 1988b). Seifert (1991) also addresses the importance of understanding a teacher’s implicit theories. Seifert (1991) recognizes implicit theories to be a “coherent set of beliefs held by individuals which are theory-like because they have core ideas which resist disproof and peripheral ideas which modify readily in the face of evidence or experience” (p. 3). According to Pajares (1992), all teachers hold beliefs about the many facets of their professional world, including, but not limited to, the children, the curriculum, and the school. School environments are “deeply entangled” and beliefs help teachers better understand these complicated contexts (Nespor, 1987). Individual differences of teachers’ beliefs may result from factors like “the diversity in the preparation of early childhood teachers or the diversity in program sponsorship. It may also reflect the personal nature of teaching as well as the isolation of teachers from their colleagues” (Spodek, 1988a, p. 208). These beliefs may be difficult for teachers to articulate (Munby, 1982). Beliefs often “involve moods, feelings, emotions, and subjective evaluations” (Nespor, 1987, p. 323). Smith and Shepard (1988) describe beliefs as “emotional attitudes” (p. 309). One may hold a belief without consciously knowing it. Beliefs also range from a “vague suspicion to complete conviction” and may be “reasonable or unreasonable” (Smith & Shepard, 1988, p. 309). The fact that beliefs are tacit knowledge, however, should not minimize their importance in the field of research (Spodek, 1988b). Spodek (1988b) further emphasizes: Because it is so personally meaningful, growing out of experience and one’s interpretations of those experiences, each teacher evolves his or her own personal conceptions to be applied, along with the other foundational aspects, to an understanding of the educational context. Thus the foundation for early childhood professional practice is created. (p. 170)
Thus, it is important to study how teachers make sense out of their teaching world. An understanding of what beliefs, principles, and theories influence teacher behavior is critical to the understanding of the complexities of teaching. Teachers’ implicit theories can affect teacher behavior and ultimately student learning (Fang, 1996). “Children acquire the foundations of knowledge and the dispositions to learn during the early childhood years. Teachers’ beliefs are at the heart of this socialization process and help set the climate for learning” (Vartuli, 1999,
41 p. 490). For this study, beliefs were understood to mean “ an individual’s judgement of the truth or falsity of a proposition that can only be inferred from a collective understanding of what human beings say, intend, and do” (Pajares, 1992, p. 316). Pajares (1992) stresses the importance of exploring a teacher’s educational beliefs as opposed to her beliefs in general (p. 316). These beliefs would include, but are not limited to, the following: beliefs about confidence to affect students’ performance (teacher efficacy), about the nature of knowledge (epistemological beliefs), about causes of teachers’ or students’ performance (attributions, locus of control, motivation, writing comprehension, math anxiety), about perception of self-worth (self-concept, self- esteem), about confidence to perform certain tasks (self-efficacy)…about specific subjects or disciplines (reading instruction, the nature of reading, whole language). (Pajares, 1992, p. 316)
Research on Beliefs Many researchers have begun to recognize the importance of understanding teachers’ beliefs in relation to their classroom practices. Over the last two decades numerous studies have been conducted to address this very issue. Many studies have been conducted that examine the relationship between the beliefs and practices of early childhood teachers, including preschool, kindergarten, and primary teachers (e.g., Abbott, Shim, & Sibley, 1997; Buchanan, et al., 1998; Charlesworth, et al., 1991; Charlesworth, et al., 1993b; Goldstein, 1997; Hart, et al, 1998; Hyson, et al., 1990; Isenberg, 1990; Mangiones & Maniates, 1993; Smith, 1997; Smith & Shepard, 1988). Many studies have focused on self-reported beliefs only (i.e., Buchanan, et al., 1998; Hatch & Freeman, 1988; Hitz & Wright, 1988; Hyson & Lee, 1996; Jones & Gullo, 1999; Rathburn, et al., 2000; Smith & Croom, 2000; Smith & Shepard, 1988; Spidell-Rusher, et al., 1992). Other studies have included self-reported beliefs and observations (i.e., Bryant, et al., 1991; Burts, et. al., 1990; Burts, et al., 1992; Charlesworth, et al., 1991; Charlesworth, et al., 1993b; Hart, et al., 1998; Kagan & Smith, 1988; McMullen, 1999; Oakes & Caruso, 1990; Stipek & Byler, 1997; Stipek, et al., 1992a; Stipek et al., 1995; Vartuli, 1999; Verma & Peters, 1975). A few other studies have relied on multiple data collection approaches, such as interviews and observations (Nelson, 2000) and interviews, video observations, reflection on action (Wien, 1995). Although a few studies have revealed self-reported beliefs highly correlated with observed practices (e.g., Hart, et al., 1998; Kagan & Smith, 1988; McMullen, 1999; Stipek &
42 Byler, 1997; Smith & Shepard, 1988), most studies have found a discrepancy between the teachers’ self-reported beliefs and their actual classroom practices (e.g., Buchanan, et al., 1998; Bryant, et al., 1991; Charlesworth, et al., 1991; Charlesworth, et al., 1993b; Hatch & Freeman, 1988; Hitz & Wright, 1988; Hyson, et al., 1990; Jones & Gullo, 1999; Kagan & Smith, 1988; Kemple, 1996; Ketner, et al., 1997; Nelson, 2000; Oakes & Caruso, 1990; Spidell-Rusher, et al., 1992; Vartuli, 1999; Verma & Peters, 1975). For example, Charlesworth, et al., (1993b) examined the relationship between 204 kindergarten teachers’ self-reported beliefs and some of the teachers’ actual classroom activities. Most teachers reported “appropriate beliefs as having some degree of importance even though they may not include developmentally appropriate activities frequently and may use more inappropriate activities on a regular basis” (Charlesworth, et al., 1993b, p. 272). Inappropriate activities used included: a) basal readers; b) worksheets; c) flashcards; and d) standardized testing. Observations revealed that the kindergarten teachers’ reported beliefs were stronger than actual practices. Other studies have made similar findings (i.e., Charlesworth, et al., 1991; Bryant, et al., 1991; Oakes & Caruso, 1990). Most studies have found that teachers’ beliefs and practices fall along a continuum, ranging from more developmentally appropriate practice to more developmentally inappropriate practice (e.g., Buchanan, et al., 1999; Halpin, Halpin, & Harris, 1982; Hyson, et al., 1990; Jones & Gullo, 1999; Marcon, 1992, 1993, 1999; Spodek, 1987; Stipek, et al., 1995; Wien, 1995, 1996). Many studies have found that most teachers use a range of practices (e.g., Buchanan et al., 1998; Charlesworth, et al., 1993b; Dale & Cole, 1988; Goldstein, 1997; Gottlieb & Rasher, 1995; Hyson, et al., 1990; Ketner, et al., 1997; Meyer, et al., 1984; Nelson, 2000; Oakes & Caruso, 1990; Quick, 1998; Rathburn, et al., 2000; Sherman & Mueller, 1996; Smith & Shepard, 1988; Verma & Peters, 1975; Wien, 1995, 1996). In addition, several research studies have examined the factors that have the most impact on teachers’ classroom practices (e.g., Snider & Fu, 1990; Spodek, 1987; Wien, 1995, 1996). Although a few studies provided evidence that personal beliefs are good determinants of practice (i.e., McMullen, 1999; Nelson, 2000), many studies indicate that other environmental factors may have a greater impact on teachers’ use of developmentally appropriate practices. These factors include, but are not limited to, parental pressure (Hatch & Freeman, 1988; Haupt & Ostlund, 1997; Kean, 1980; Knudsen-Lindauer Harris, 1989; Shepard & Smith, 1988; Spidell- Rusher, et al., 1992; West, et al., 1993) and institutional pressures (including administration,
43 state standards, and achievement tests) (Charlesworth, et al., 1991; Charlesworth, et al., 1993a; Hatch & Freeman, 1988; Hitz & Wright, 1988; Kean, 1980; Knudsen-Lindauer & Harris, 1989; McMullen, 1999; Seefeldt & Barbour, 1988; Smith & Shepard, 1988; Spidell-Rusher, et al., 1992). For example, Smith and Shepard (1988) examined 40 kindergarten teachers’ beliefs and practices in regards to readiness and retention. The teachers’ beliefs about readiness fell along a continuum, ranging from “nativist” (those who believe that readiness is more of an internal process) to a “remediationist” (those who believe that readiness is a process of environmental influence). The study found that formal rules from the district in regards to curriculum and instructional time seemed to force teachers to “push” the academics and “conform to the pace of the school” (Smith & Shepard, 1988, p. 324). Informal pressures also impacted the classroom structure, including parental pressure and first grade entrance expectations. Many teachers felt pressured to prepare their children for the academic year of first grade. Most of this preparation resulted in explicit instruction of how to complete worksheets. Even in classrooms where teachers’ beliefs were more connected to “nativist” perspectives, instruction typically did not include children’s developmental needs and interests. “The needs of the school for order and efficiency seemed to predominate” (Smith & Shepard, 1988, p. 326). Beliefs were impacted by social contexts, school climate, and school structure. Further, a study conducted by Hatch and Freeman (1988) found that kindergarten programs were increasingly academic and skill-oriented. Many of the kindergarten teachers questioned whether these programs were best for their children. Their beliefs were more DAP than their practices. They too felt the pressure to prepare children for first grade. They felt the pressure from administration, peers, and curriculum. For many teachers, “the reality of what they were doing day to day was in direct conflict with their professed beliefs about what young children need in school contexts” (Hatch & Freeman, 1988, p. 159) Those teachers who were most successful at implementing developmentally appropriate practices reported: a) more control over their work (McMullen, 1999); b) more self-efficacy (McMullen, 1999); c) a supportive work environment (Rust, 1993); and d) training and workshops (Goffin & Day, 1994).
44 Concluding Observations The literature presented shows that the NAEYC’s developed concept of developmentally appropriate practice which, though frequently criticized, has remained virtually unchanged for a long time. Since a high percentage of teaching educators accept and advocate DAP, most pre- service teachers are socialized into DAP expectations and come to fully endorse this philosophical framework. However, the research on developmentally appropriate practice and teacher-directed instruction is very mixed, with studies supporting the positive effects of both. This may be why policymakers have not hesitated to develop accountability systems which are more compatible with teacher-directed instruction than with DAP. As a result, today many early childhood teachers are caught in a dilemma. Although many teachers continue to believe in DAP, their teaching environment increasingly pressures them toward teacher-directed instruction and numerous practices which are inconsistent with DAP philosophy. As a result, the teachers feel very conflicted and wonder if they are really giving their pupils an appropriate education.
45 Chapter Three Philosophical Stance
According to Aubrey, et al. (2000), “(t)he ways in which researchers carry out their work convey messages about their beliefs concerning research methodology, their theoretical pre- suppositions and also their views of ‘how the world works’” (p. 29). This study was conducted from an “interpretivist, naturalist approach” (Denzin & Lincoln, 1994, p. 2). This orientation recognizes that reality is a socially constructed phenomenon (Glesne, 1999; Graue, 1993b; Merriam, 1998). Graue (1993b) explains that this orientation proposes: that the accumulation of knowledge, rather than emerging objectively from unbiased observation, is in fact culturally and historically bound….Our interpretations of what we see and how it relates to other aspects of our experience are framed in terms of the tools we have available, the institutional supports, and the political context in which we act. (p. 21)
This orientation also recognizes that reality “is subjective and multiple, as seen by participants in the study” (Creswell, 1998, p. 75). In order to understand the participants’ multiple realities, research needs to be conducted in the participants’ natural context “where behavior occurs naturally” (LeCompte & Preissle, 1993, p. 95). The researcher’s primary role is to “understand and interpret how the various participants in a social setting construct the world around them” (Glesne, 1999, p. 5). Therefore, qualitative research methods were employed during this study in order to describe the beliefs and practices of the teacher-informants, using their own language to a large extent (Merriam, 1998). Creswell (1998) describes this research approach as: an inquiry process of understanding based on distinct methodological traditions of inquiry that explain a social or human problem. The researcher builds a complex, holistic picture, analyzes words, reports detailed views of informants and conducts the study in a natural setting. (p. 15)
For this study, “multiple data-collection methods” (Glesne, 1999, p. 31), such as nonparticipant observation, semi-structured interviews, and document collection, were chosen to better understand and describe the worldviews of the teacher-informants. Multiple methods were also used to triangulate the data collection (Denzin, 1988; Glesne, 1999). These processes allowed the researcher to be the primary research instrument, observing the teachers in their natural
46 setting and conducting flexible, in-depth personal interviews (Aubrey, et al., 2000; Creswell, 1998; Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Merriam, 1998; Wolcott, 1992). Schulz (1997) further describes the importance of these chosen methods: Teaching is a complex activity, and although abundant research has been done to examine the nature of teaching, it is still far from being fully understood. The mystery of what really happens in the classroom, why and how it happens, continues to challenge us. Teaching is a uniquely personal and intuitive activity that requires us to focus on its qualitative nature if we are to increase our understanding of it. Research that focuses on the personal and recognizes the importance of the autobiographical in the process of teaching, while at the same time chronicling the classroom actions of the teacher, provides a broad evidential base from which to draw conclusions about the practice of teaching. (p. 1)
More specifically, this study took the form of a collective case study (Gall, Borg, & Gall, 1996; Stake, 1995; Creswell, 1998). Creswell (1998) describes case study research as “an exploration of a ‘bounded system’ or a case (or multiple cases) over time through detailed, in- depth data collection involving multiple sources of information rich in content” (p. 61). Merriam (1998) describes case study research as a means of investigating complex social units consisting of multiple variables of potential importance in understanding the phenomenon. Anchored in real-life situations, the case study results in a rich and holistic account of a phenomenon. It offers insights and illuminates meanings that expand its readers’ experiences. (p. 41)
Gall, et al., (1996) further defines case study research as “the in-depth study of instances of a phenomenon in its natural context and from the perspective of the participants involved in the phenomenon” (p. 545). Therefore, one of the goals of this study was “to develop an understanding of a complex phenomenon as experienced by its participants” (Gall, et al., 1996, p. 548). In this study, the phenomenon of interest was teachers’ beliefs and practices. More specifically, the focus was kindergarten teachers’ beliefs about developmentally appropriate practices and how they impact the instructional practices used in their classrooms. This case explored the beliefs and practices of five individual kindergarten teachers in a single small public school district in the Midwest. Initially, each teacher and classroom was studied and presented as a separate “unit” (Gall, et al., 1996). A “cross-case analysis” then occurred, analyzing the categories and themes that were common to all five cases (Merriam, 1998; Stake, 1995). The purpose of this study was to better understand and to describe several
47 kindergarten teachers’ perceptions of how developmentally appropriate practices are working in their classrooms. More specifically, this study was designed to better understand the beliefs and practices of the kindergarten teachers, using qualitative methods, such as semi-structured interviews, observation, and document collection. This study was guided by the overarching question: How do the beliefs of kindergarten teachers affect their use of developmentally appropriate practices in their classrooms? I was specifically interested in exploring how practicing kindergarten teachers view early development and learning, how they view the role of kindergarten, and how what they believe impacts the instructional practices implemented into their classroom. Specifically, I wanted to learn: a) What do these kindergarten teachers believe are appropriate practices? b) Are these teachers’ beliefs consistent with their practices? c) What instructional practices do these teachers use in their classrooms? d) What do these kindergarten teachers’ classrooms look like? e) Do these teachers struggle with their practices? and f) Are there external forces that impact what they do in their classrooms?
Researcher’s Perspective It is important to address my own personal involvement with developmentally appropriate practices and the kindergarten classroom. This involvement affects the very nature of this inquiry process. During the last several years of my public school teaching career, I worked in two urban schools teaching kindergarten children. Both schools incorporated a developmentally appropriate curriculum that utilized multi-age, center-based instruction. Despite my early childhood training and my strong belief in a more child-focused, play-oriented approach to learning for young children, I often found it a struggle to fully implement developmentally appropriate practices in my classroom. First of all, I observed children struggling in this type of environment. Some children had experienced a more structured early childhood experience prior to entering my classroom. Worksheets, coloring pages, and teacher-prepared crafts were familiar to them. Blocks, dramatic play, finger-painting, and open-ended manipulatives, to a great extent, were foreign to them. Despite my continuous attempts to help these children learn to make their own choices, they would wander around aimlessly until I directed them where to go. They appeared overwhelmed in an environment that allowed so many choices. One little boy would frequently walk the perimeter of the classroom, lightly touching all the manipulatives. He would then stop and say
48 real loud, “Just tell me what to do!” Some children distanced themselves from semi-structured reading activities. They did not engage in discussions about the stories and struggled with extension activities. These children were not picking up on the reading attack skills like other children. Still other children actually brought in “workbooks” that their parents had purchased for them and asked, “Can I work on these? I really like these.” With an uneasy feeling, I pulled in more direct instructional methods, like structured, phonetic-based activities and worksheets, and these children became engaged and began to make progress. Although these practices were frowned upon by other staff members and even by some parents as not being “pure” developmental practices, they worked for these children and I continued to use them when necessary. These experiences caused me to question what “developmentally appropriate” really means. I began to question my personal understanding of the developmentally appropriate philosophy. I also began to question how well the original NAEYC guidelines (Bredekamp, 1987) considered the role of a child’s culture, background, and family expectations in the process of development and learning. Although the revised guidelines (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997) address these areas as well as direct instruction in further detail, these experiences caused me to wonder if “developmentally appropriate” practices are actually appropriate for all children. In the environments I worked in, this was never questioned outwardly. It was assumed that the guidelines established by the NAEYC (1987/1997) apply to all children. Children that were having difficulty in the overall school environment were often considered behavior problems. In the back of my mind, I have always wondered if it was the program itself and not the children. Did the program really meet the needs of the children it was serving? Was I really meeting the needs of the children I was serving? Other issues also impacted my ability to effectively implement developmentally appropriate practices. District structures, such as a graded course of study, rubric evaluations, report cards, required commercially-produced reading series, and standardized achievement tests, placed added pressure to use more structured approaches. Against my better judgment, I found myself incorporating more teacher-directed lessons into my program. I found myself covering isolated subject matter because it would be on “the test.” Parental pressure was also evident. I frequently heard comments like: a) It seems like all they do in here is play!” b) When are you going to teach my child to read?” c) When will my child do book reports?” and d) “When will I see homework coming home?” I often found myself questioning my practices. In the end,
49 my program reflected a combination of developmentally appropriate practices and structured, teacher-directed approaches. As I closed the door to my classroom for the very last time, I walked away in a state of internal conflict – wondering what is “right” for today’s kindergarten children. It was not until a professor of mine introduced me to the work of Lisa Delpit (1986, 1988, 1995) that I began to realize that I was not alone in this struggle. Delpit (1988) questions whether more child-centered approaches are best for some children, particularly poor, minority children. Delpit (1988) addresses the issue of using a more traditional approach with black and other minority children. As a teacher, she often struggled with providing all her children with a successful learning experience. Many children struggled in her center-based classroom. Many children struggled with whole language approaches to reading and writing. Delpit (1988) describes the value in using a more skills-based approach; however, she stresses that skills should not be provided in an “isolated, meaningless, drilled ‘subskills’”approach (p. 384). In order for these children to be “given voice,” skills must be taught in meaningful contexts that emphasize critical thinking and problem solving (Delpit, 1988, p. 384). Delpit (1988) also addresses the fact that many parents outside the “culture of power” may value a more direct approach to education that will provide “their children with discourse patterns, interactional styles, and spoken and written language codes that will allow them success in the larger society” (p. 285). Children need to be “allowed the resource of the teacher’s expert knowledge” (Delpit, 1988, p. 296). The realization that another teacher had, to some degree, experienced similar frustrations was “comforting.” Thus, developmentally appropriate practices soon became the focus of my doctoral studies, with each course allowing me to dig deeper and grow in my understanding of this philosophical framework. It is my belief that other kindergarten teachers struggle with their practices as well. Before conducting these interviews and observations, I had several expectations of the stories I would hear from my teacher-informants. Some of these expectations included: a) the difficulty of implementing developmentally appropriate practices in a public school setting; b) the difficulty of balancing environmental pressures with personal beliefs and goals; and c) the difficulty of reaching all children with this approach. Throughout this study, I took several steps to monitor my own personal biases and beliefs. An observer comment section was added to my field notes to distinguish my thoughts and feelings from those of my teacher-informants
50 (Aubrey, et al., 2000; Glesne, 1999). Transcribed audio-recordings and member checks were also used to ensure that my personal biases did not distort my interpretations.
The Research Setting The Community Pseudonyms for the community, school district, school, and teachers were used throughout this study to protect the confidentiality of all participants. Pseudonyms are used for all proper nouns within this study. Data were collected in a single public early childhood center located in a small rural and suburban town in the Midwest. Pinecrest is a quiet residential bedroom community located along a secondary river surrounded by rolling hills. Once a lightly populated farm community, Pinecrest is now one of the fastest growing areas in the southwestern portion of its state. Pinecrest’s population has grown 15% in the last ten years, with its current population approximately 11,677. The only obstacle impeding its continued growth is the fact that Pinecrest is landlocked between adjacent communities. This community, which is located approximately 30 miles outside a large metropolitan area, now defines suburbia. Pinecrest has quickly grown from fields and forest to upper middle class neighborhood developments complete with swimming pools and parks. With a current average household income of over $67,000, this community has been steadily transitioning from primarily middle class to upper middle class. This community’s economic base now consists of light industry, local businesses, and decreasing farms. Dichotomies exist everywhere throughout this area. While walking down the main street of the older section of town, one gets the feeling that he or she has gone back in time. There are numerous antique shops, several white-washed Baptist and Methodist churches, several bed and breakfasts, a barbershop complete with a barber pole, a newly renovated community theater, a railroad station turned art gallery, a park, an old-fashioned ice cream parlor, a town hall, and a local community center with Bingo every Monday and Saturday night. American flags hang from old-fashioned streetlights and colorful flower arrangements sit in front of local businesses. As one turns the corner heading out of the city limits, the feel is quite different. A vacant convenience store sits on the corner. Run down strip malls with crumbled parking lots exist on both sides of the road. Most windows are soaped and contain a “Space Available” or “For Lease” sign. Some businesses that used to be there include: a) a bakery; b) a florist; c) a gun
51 and rifle store; d) a grocery store; e) a beauty parlor; and f) several convenience stores. In the middle of this vacancy sit several thriving businesses, including: a) a video store; b) a Goodwill store; c) a McDonald’s restaurant; d) a post office; e) a local grocery store; f) a pizza parlor; g) a bar; and h) a bowling alley. As one enters the newer section of town, the atmosphere changes once again. Newly constructed strip malls exist complete with Blockbuster and Starbucks. Fast food restaurants, gas stations, little boutiques, pharmacies, and local banks line both sides of the road. Traveling out of town, one is given another glimpse of yesteryear - a trout fishing lake, antique stores, an ice cream shop, and a florist. Pinecrest is a diversified socioeconomic community. Approximately 25% of the area’s households make less than $30,000 a year, and only about 10% of the households earn more than $100,000. Homes throughout the area range from under $20,000 to over $200,000. Occupations are highly diversified within this community, including, but not limited to: a) approximately 10% executives; b) approximately 10% professionals; c) approximately 6% sales; d) approximately 5.5% production; and e) less than 1% agriculture. Most community members commute to nearby cities for employment. Despite the diversity that exists in income and occupation, Pinecrest is an area that has very little ethnic diversity. The population includes : a) Caucasian (94.95%); b) African American (1.54%); c) Hispanic/Latino (1.12%); d) Asian/Pacific Islander (1.05%); and e) Multiracial (1.34%).
The School District Pinecrest Early Childhood Center is part of a K-12 public school district that serves approximately 4,000 children. The school district’s student population includes: a) Caucasian (96%); b) African American (1.5%); c) Asian/Pacific Islander (1.2%); d) Hispanic/Latino (0.5%); and e) Multi-Racial (0.9%). Over the last 10 years, this district has greatly changed. With local support in the passing of levies, this district has gone from run-down, out-dated buildings with chipped paint and leaky roofs to state-of-the-art buildings equipped with computer labs, science labs, top-notch athletic facilities, auditoriums, and security systems. These levies allowed for a brand new high school, middle school, and intermediate school to be built, as well as renovations to be made to the remaining buildings. This district now takes on a campus feel, with each building sitting on well-maintained acres of grass and trees. Each campus has sidewalks, park benches, school message signs, and mascot flags hanging from light poles.
52 Several schools have gardens that have been designed, planted, and cared for by the children and the local community members. This district contains: a) an early childhood building housing preschool and kindergarten; b) a primary building housing first and second grade; c) an elementary building housing third and fourth grade; d) an intermediate building housing fifth and sixth grade; e) a middle school building housing seventh and eighth grade; and f) a high school building housing ninth through twelfth grade. For the last two years, this district has been rated by the state as an academically “Excellent” school district, meaning that it has met all 22 standards set forth by the state department of education. The standards are largely based on state proficiency test scores. Post high school placements from this district include: a) 80% go on to attend a 4 year and 2 year college; b) 1.4% join the armed forces; c) 12% seek employment; and d) 6.6% leave high school undecided.
The School Upon first glance, Pinecrest Early Childhood Center looks like a typical school building – two-story red brick building, two long adjoining corridors, a flat roof, windows that open out, and tan window shades. However, closer examination reveals that this is anything but a typical learning establishment. Pinecrest E.C.C. has recently received a “face lift.” A new entranceway adds height and dimension to the front of the school and proudly displays the school name. A newly designed parking lot, a brand new school sign, several light poles with mascot signs, and a brand new, fully equipped, age appropriate play ground now give the outside of this school an updated, more modern look. The renovations are not limited to the exterior of the facility. Inside renovations include, but are not limited to: a) a new administrative office area; b) new wiring to accommodate technology; c) telephones in every classroom; d) computers in every classroom for teachers and children; e) ceiling fans in every classroom; f) mounted dry erase boards in every classroom; g) a computer lab; h) a science lab; and i) a motor training room. The lobby sends the message that this is a safe, caring, and professional place for children and their families. Information packets about the school are made available to all visitors. Awards and recognitions presented to the school are proudly displayed on the walls, and a miniature stuffed animal school mascot greets everyone. A large family tree is painted on the entrance way wall. Pictures of every teacher and administrator with his or her family hang on
53 the tree displayed above the message “Welcome to Our Family!” Secretaries greet all visitors with a warm smile, sign parents in, provide them with a visitor badge, and buzz them through the security doors. Numerous times throughout the day, the principal will stand at the entranceway greeting visitors with a smile, a handshake, or even a hug. There are many physical indications throughout this building that children and their growth and development are greatly valued here. Many things reveal a strong sense of pride. The facility is impeccably clean. No matter what the time of day, the floors and windows shine. The custodial staff continually walk through the building, checking on classrooms, emptying garbage cans, and sweeping floors. One custodian told me, “Our job is to make sure that our children and our teachers have a clean place to come to everyday so that they can focus on the important things. What we do is very important for everyone.” Bulletin boards in the hallway recognize students from many classrooms who “Show kindness to others,” who “Help others in need,” and who “Make others smile.” Signs placed throughout the building send the message that this is a child-friendly place, including: a) Kid Zone; b) Giggles Welcome!; and c) Caution: Children at Play! The hallways are filled with parents, local community members, and high school students and children sitting at desks, around tables, and on the floor reading together, writing stories, or playing a game. Children’s artwork, stories, poems, and other creations are displayed throughout the school. Outside every teacher’s door hangs a picture of the teacher along with a short introductory letter for students and families. Teachers often step out into the hallway and invite a parent or visitor to come into the classroom and join them in a fun activity. One teacher exclaimed as she pulled me into her room, “You have just got to see this! A few of our friends have worked very hard on their own rendition of The Little Red Hen. You’re welcome at the puppet theater if you have time!” Pinecrest E.C.C. seems to be filled with people who are passionate about children and care for their well being. Pinecrest Early Childhood Center was chosen for this particular study because its philosophy is grounded in developmentally appropriate practice. This school’s mission statement reads: To make our vision a reality, we will: • Accept individual difference and utilize developmentally appropriate practices • Provide an interactive environment in which children engage in active learning, exploration, and discovery • Create time for collaboration between and among professionals
54 • Encourage a variety of forms of family and community involvement • Work as teams to design effective child-centered strategies to facilitate learning. (Pinecrest Early Childhood Center 2002-03 Student Handbook, p. 2)
A staff that consists of one principal, 17 regular classroom teachers, 3 special subject teachers, 11 teacher assistants, 1 intervention specialist, 2 therapists, 2 speech pathologists, 1 guidance counselor, 1 psychologist, 1 technology specialist, and 2 nurses work together to create a supportive and safe learning environment that is designed to meet the age and individual needs of all enrolled children. Volunteers are a valuable part of this program as well. Parents, high school students, and community members help in the classrooms, the library, the office, the playground, and the cafeteria. Volunteers work with children in small groups and on an individual basis. Volunteers also assist teachers in preparing materials for the classrooms. Pinecrest Early Childhood Center houses the entry-level grades for the school district. This school provides a preschool program for children with special needs, regular kindergarten classrooms (half-day and tuition-basis full day) and a two-year developmental kindergarten program. This developmental program is designed to provide additional support for children who meet the district’s kindergarten entry level age (age 5 by August 1) but are not developmentally ready for a regular kindergarten program. With parents’ consent, children enrolled in this program experience a half-day kindergarten program the first year and then a full day kindergarten program the second year. There are several programs that are unique to this learning environment. This school recently implemented a school-wide early literacy program entitled DIBELS, which stands for Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills. This literacy program is based on research conducted at the University of Oregon. Through a series of tests, teachers are able to monitor the children’s progress in basic early literacy skills, including, but not limited to, initial sound fluency, letter naming fluency, phonemic segmentation fluency, and oral reading fluency. This program allows teachers to determine which children will achieve benchmark goals, which children may need instructional support, and which children may need intensive instructional support. More specifically, these tests are used to determine which children are “at risk,” “some risk” and “low risk” in regards to reading skills. Teachers use the DIBELS assessment tool three times throughout the school year to determine necessary support and progress.
55 Pinecrest Early Childhood Center also provides a reading intervention tutoring program. Teachers administer a state-developed reading assessment called D.R.A. (Diagnostic Reading Assessment) several times throughout the year to determine each child’s state-determined reading level. With parents’ consent, children needing additional instructional support may receive help. These children are given weekly opportunities to work with a trained volunteer reading tutor to practice pre-reading skills needed for kindergarten and first grade. Along with the rest of the district, Pinecrest Early Childhood Center participates in approximately 12 early release days throughout the school year. Early release days provide staff members the opportunity to work together on areas such as curriculum, assessment, and technology. This year Pinecrest has focused a great deal of attention on a newly adopted commercially produced reading program. This program focuses on a guided-reading method that allows teachers to work with children in groups based on similar levels of reading skill development. Teachers have participated in several workshops to learn how to conduct guided reading groups. The staff has also focused a great deal of attention on testing requirements, progress reports, and curriculum alignment. The Federal “No Child Left Behind” legislation has brought about a whole new set of higher and more rigorous state standards and accountability. Teachers have worked diligently to make sure that their curriculum, as well as report cards, reflects these new standards.
Gaining Access to the Site and Participants The principal of Pinecrest Early Childhood Center was contacted by the researcher in mid-January, 2003 to discuss the purpose of the research and to explain the involvement of the teachers. The principal of this school was a professional acquaintance of the researcher several years ago. After permission to conduct the study was granted, ten information packets were mailed to the school for the principal to distribute to her staff. Information packets included: a) a cover letter; b) a consent form; and c) a self-addressed, stamped envelope. The cover letter briefly explained the objectives and the relevance of the study, as well as the role and responsibilities of the participants. The consent form informed the participants that their conversation would be audio-recorded and later transcribed by the researcher. The consent form also assured participants of their confidentiality and right to withdraw from the research project at any time (See Appendix D).
56 At a February staff meeting, the principal presented the study and asked for willing volunteers. She explained that criteria for participation included having a minimum of three years teaching experience and being a regular kindergarten classroom teacher. Five teachers agreed to participate in the study. When consent forms were completed and returned via the mail, the researcher made an initial visit to the school. During this visit, the principal provided information about the school program, provided a tour of the facility, and introduced me to the entire staff. During this visit, I spent approximately 15-20 minutes with each of the five willing participants, introducing myself, answering any questions the teachers had in regards to the research, and coordinating our schedules for interviews and observations. All initial interviews were scheduled to begin the next day.
Participants Participants consisted of five regular kindergarten teachers. All participants were Caucasian women. Mrs. Morgan, approximately age 48, is a half-day (AM/PM session) kindergarten teacher with 25 years of teaching experience, all at the kindergarten level. She has been a teacher in this district for the last 18 years of her career. She holds a Bachelor’s degree in Elementary Education with K-8 certification. She has 9 hours in the area of kindergarten. She also has a Master’s degree in reading. Mrs. Morgan currently serves on the district’s technology committee, which is responsible for planning and revising the technology curriculum for all grade levels. She is also actively involved in aligning the school’s curriculum and report cards with new state standards. Like Mrs. Morgan, Mrs. Townsend, approximately age 27, is also a half-day (AM/PM session) kindergarten teacher, but she has just 5 years of teaching experience. She has taught at the kindergarten level for three of those years. Previously, she taught first grade for 1 year and second grade for 1 year. She has taught all five years in this district. Mrs. Townsend holds a Bachelor’s degree in Elementary Education with K-8 certification and a Master’s degree in General Education. She also has 9 hours in the area of kindergarten and 9 hours in the area of special education. Mrs. Townsend is a visible leader among the teachers at Pinecrest. She piloted the newly adopted reading program, presented the findings to the staff, and led them through the process of change. She is currently the co-grade coordinator along with another
57 research participant, Mrs. Jones. Next year, Mrs. Townsend will hold this position alone. Mrs. Townsend helps coordinate all school-wide functions, such as Right-to Read Week and Pajamas Day. She also serves as the liaison for all school committees, including, but not limited to, Supplies, Discipline, Handbook, Material Development/Inventory, and Safety. She works directly with the principal overseeing the committees. Mrs. Townsend regularly attends workshops and conferences that focus on math, literacy, and kindergarten. Mrs. Jones, also approximately age 27, is a half-day (AM/PM session) kindergarten teacher as well. She has 5 years of teaching experience. Two of those years have been at the kindergarten level and the previous three years were at the first grade level. She has taught for two years in this district. She holds a Bachelor’s degree in Elementary Education with a K-8 certification. Her area of specialty within this degree was Special Education. She also holds 9 hours in the area of kindergarten. Mrs. Jones is also a leader among the staff, sharing the role of grade coordinator with Mrs. Townsend. She is highly involved in standards alignment and inclusion. Next year, she plans to serve on the PTA Board. Mrs. Dell, approximately age 32, is one of the full-day kindergarten teachers. She has 10 years of teaching experience, with 8 of those years at the kindergarten level. She previously taught first grade for 2 years. She has taught for 2 years in this district. She has a Bachelor’s degree in Elementary Education with a K-8 certification. She holds 9 hours in the area of kindergarten. She also has a Master’s degree in reading. Mrs. Dell is highly involved in curriculum development committees and standards alignment committees. She often conducts workshops for staff and local teachers on developmentally appropriate practices and literature- based classrooms. She is also involved in district-conducted research to explore the impact full- day kindergarten versus half-day kindergarten has on children’s academic progress. Along with Mrs. Dell, Mrs. Manford, approximately age 32, is a full-day kindergarten teacher. She has 10 years of teaching experience, all at the kindergarten level. She has taught for 8 years in this district. She holds a Bachelor’s degree in Elementary Education with K-8 certification. She has 22 additional hours in the area of kindergarten and 9 hours in the area of special education. She also holds a Master’s degree in Curriculum and Supervision. Mrs. Manford is heavily involved in the district inclusion program, standards alignment, and early literacy.
58 Procedures Observation Data were collected and analyzed using several qualitative methods, including document collection, semi-structured interviews, and nonparticipant observation. Observations began the first week of March, 2003 and ended the last week of May, 2003. A total of 75 hours was spent at the site, with approximately 15 hours of observation in each classroom. Observation sessions occurred several times a week and at various times of the day for each classroom. Observation sessions were 45 minutes to 2 ½ hours in duration. Observations lasted until saturation was achieved in each classroom (Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Goodwin & Goodwin, 1996). According to Goodwin and Goodwin (1996), saturation “is the point at which the data, information, and findings currently being assembled replicated earlier ones” (p. 131). Glesne (1999) further states that saturation occurs when “successive examination of sources yields redundancy and that the data you have seems complete and integrated” (p. 135). A semi-structured observational protocol, developed specifically for the current study, guided my observations (See Appendix A). Observations were guided by NAEYC’s recommendations for “high-quality, developmentally appropriate” programs for young children (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997, p. 8). The NAEYC guidelines provide examples of appropriate and inappropriate practices for young children. These practices are provided for three different age groups, including: a) birth to age 3; b) age 3 to age 5; and c) age 6 through 8 (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997, pp. 72-179). It is the second age group categorization (age 3 through 5) of developmentally appropriate practices that impacted the observations for this study (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997, pp. 123-135). The guidelines recommend that 5-year-olds be included in this grouping because “most children at that age have not yet made the major shift in cognition” that is believed to happen between the ages of five and seven (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997, p. 98). Thus, “it follows that kindergartens that are much like programs for 3- and 4-year olds are most appropriate for children at age 5” (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997, p. 98). Kindergarten classrooms need to resemble preschools more than primary schools (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997). Observations in every classroom focused on the following areas: a) learning environment; b) learning experiences; c) teaching strategies; d) curriculum; e) motivation and guidance; and f) assessment (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997, pp. 123-135). The initial observation session in every classroom included observing the physical
59 layout of each classroom and developing a detailed sketch of the classroom. Sketches involved a floor plan of each room, including furniture arrangement, center placement, and bulletin board displays. Sketches were updated throughout the study when physical changes occurred in the classroom. As a nonparticipant observer, I sat in a corner of each room. Rich, thick description was used to document the activities and interactions of each classroom (Aubrey, et al., 2000; Gall, et al., 1996; Glesne, 1999; Goodwin & Goodwin, 1996; Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Merriam, 1998; Stake, 1995; Wolcott, 1992). Any interactions that occurred between the children and myself were initiated by the children, usually during center time or choice time. After briefly answering their questions, I redirected the children to their activities. Extensive field notes were taken during and after observations. A summary report was developed away from the site after each data collection session. An observer comment section was added to the bottom of each document (Glesne, 1999; Merriam, 1998). This section allowed me to express my thoughts, my emotions, my reactions, and my questions (Glesne, 1999; Goodwin & Goodwin, 1996; Merriam, 1998). This process allowed me to continuously reflect on my own biases and subjectivity. It also assisted in refining research questions and further observations.
Interviews Semi-structured interviews were used to collect data because this process “allows the researcher to gain insights into others’ perspectives about the phenomenon under study; it is particularly useful for ascertaining respondents’ thoughts, perceptions, feelings, and retrospective accounts of events” (Goodwin & Goodwin, 1996, p. 134). Each teacher was interviewed two to three times, lasting approximately 45 minutes to an hour each session. At the beginning of the first interview session, each teacher provided the following information: a) educational level; b) teacher certification; c) additional training; and d) teaching experience. With the teachers’ consent, interviews were audio-recorded. Note taking occurred along with the audio-recording process. After each visit, interviews were transcribed by the researcher. Constant reading and rereading of the data allowed for refinement of the questions to better understand the teachers’ worldview. A semi-structured interview protocol, developed specifically for this study, was used to guide the interviews (See Appendix B). Guiding interview questions focused on the following:
60 a) the teacher’s beliefs about the role of kindergarten; b) the teacher’s beliefs about her role as a kindergarten teacher; c) the teacher’s beliefs about appropriate practices; d) the teacher’s beliefs of the program’s effectiveness; and e) the teacher’s beliefs about what forces impact her program. Although questions were developed to guide the interviews, I entered each interview session with the full understanding that each teacher “had unique experiences, special stories to tell” (Stake, 1995, p. 63). Therefore, interview sessions remained flexible and questions emerged. Several changes were made to the interview protocol during the interview process. After the first 3 interviews, question #13 (Describe how developmentally appropriate practices impact your classroom environment.) was removed from the protocol. Teachers were naturally explaining developmentally appropriate practices in their classrooms without a prompt. This question was removed to eliminate redundancy. Several questions emerged during the interview process and were added to the protocol as well. Any questions added were asked to every participant in an additional brief interview session. In the first round of interviews, every teacher discussed the pressure to make their program more academic. Question #18 (Tell me more about the pressure to make your program more academic.) was added to allow teachers to dig deeper into this area. Teachers were very passionate in their initial responses about this. One teacher even expressed, “I need to stop! I could go on forever about this topic! You might want to do a second dissertation on that subject alone!” Also, after the first round of interviews, every teacher briefly discussed play in their classroom. This was an area that I felt teachers wanted to talk more about as well. Therefore, I added #19 (Describe how play is valued in your classroom.). Once interviews and observations were completed, I constructed a summary paper for each teacher to make sure I represented each teacher accurately. Once summary reports were completed, I met with each teacher to explain the member check procedure. Each teacher was given several days to review the summary paper and to make comments or adjustments if necessary. I then met with each teacher to discuss any changes. Only one teacher made changes on the summary paper. Changes were made to extend her expectations of kindergarten children at the end of the year and to clarify the academic pressure she was feeling.
Document Collection Throughout my time at the site, the principal and the teachers graciously provided me with documents they felt would assist in my data collection. These documents were used “in order to
61 more fully describe and understand the culture” of Pinecrest Early Childhood Center (Goodwin & Goodwin, 1996, p. 137). The principal provided the following documentation: a) school report card; b) school calendar; c) student handbook; d) DIBELS information; e) tutoring program information; and f) third quarter progress report. Several teachers also provided copies of the following documents: a) lesson plans; b) classroom letters to parents; c) substitute teacher information packets; d) copies of blank report cards; e) curriculum guides; and f) DIBELS assessment reports. These documents were analyzed off site. Notes were taken during the reading of the documents and added to the field notes.
Data Analysis According to Glesne (1999), “data analysis involves organizing what you have seen, heard, and read so that you can make sense of what you have learned” (p. 130). Data analysis for the current study began the first day of data collection and continued after data collection was completed. Collecting data and studying it immediately allowed me to reflect on initial categories and themes that emerged, as well as questions that arose. This continuous process allowed me to reshape questions and redirect observations to better understand the data material (Glesne, 1999; Goodwin & Goodwin, 1996). Throughout the data collection process, I used a combination of note cards and a field notebook to make memos about my thinking process. I made notes to myself about possible ways to organize the data, about possible patterns and complex relationships that might exist across the cases, and about possible ideas for analyzing the wealth of data collected (Merriam, 1998; Stake, 1995). As the research process began, several thinking units guided my development of the interview and observational process (Hofmann, 1995). These thinking units included what the teachers felt about appropriate “practices” and what instructional “strategies” the teachers actually implemented in their classrooms and why. To further the analysis, the collected data was coded (Glesne, 1999; Goodwin & Goodwin, 1996; Hofmann, 1995; Stake, 1995). According to Goodwin and Goodwin (1996) coding “requires the researcher to organize the information – all of the words, phrases, behaviors observed, and events recorded – into meaningful categories” (p. 144). Even more specifically, coding is a “progressive process of sorting and defining and defining and sorting those scraps of collected data” (Glesne, 1999, p. 135). Data were further analyzed using a constant comparative method and conceptual narrative
62 units (Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Merriam, 1998; Hofmann, 1995). After each observation and interview, the narrative and field notes were analyzed and compared with previously gathered data. During this continuous and reflective process, data was coded into meaningful segments or textual units, searching for patterns, relationships, or connections. These segments were read and reread, looking for similarities and differences in the teacher- informants’ responses to questions and observations of the classroom environments (Glesne, 1999; Hofmann, 1995; Merriam, 1998). These segments were then grouped together into categories and further examined for emergent themes (Goetz & LeCompte, 1984; Merriam, 1998). Direct quotes from each teacher-informant were “used to capture the substance and nuances of participants’ perspectives and beliefs” (Goodwin & Goodwin, 1996, p. 111).
Confessional Tale This research has impacted the way I think about the process of educating young children and the practice of using developmentally appropriate practice. As I listened to the teachers’ stories, I know that I listened for the ones that related to my own – stories of children who struggled in this type of program and stories of their own personal struggles of implementation in a public school. I did hear these stories. A few teachers did mention that they observed children who struggled at times. For example, Mrs. Manford expressed: Some children struggle in this environment. Some are easily distracted. Even though it is organized play in here, it does get noisy. There are 19 children doing 19 different things. There is something different going on in every part of the room. So those children that are easily distractible do have a hard time. They are looking all around and focusing on others. It usually takes a few weeks, but they do start to find the routine and become a part of it.
Mrs. Townsend also discussed the difficulty some children have in this type of learning environment: Some have a hard time zooming in on things and will look all over the room but can not focus on one thing that they really want to do. I have to say, “Do this” or “Do that.” I think some kids have had behavior issues because of this environment. For some kids, I think there is too much freedom and they get kind of wild.
I did hear stories about personal struggles with using these practices. Mrs. Manford shared her personal conflict:
63 There is a really big struggle going on inside of me. Are we pushing them to the point where even kindergarten isn’t going to be fun any more? The other part of me goes, “OK, they need this.” I just keep having these battles inside me. I step back and take a look at the whole scope of things and think that these kids have only been on earth for 5 years. When you look at that in the whole realm of their life, I think we just need to let them be kids. I think we push these developmentally inappropriate things on them and my insides scream, “NO!” Some things you have control over. Some things you don’t.
I realize that many educators are facing similar personal struggles; however, they do not appear to be sharing these concerns with other practitioners. During the interview process, several teachers commented, “It would be interesting to see how other teachers handle this issue.” and “I think our programs are pretty similar…Are they?” It seemed like the only issue they did speak openly about was their frustration with additional testing and progress reports being added to the kindergarten program. These teachers, like myself, faced their struggles alone. These teachers are questioning their practices. They, too, are wondering whether their practices are ‘best’ for their children. These stories have made me look further inward. I have begun to critically examine my own beliefs, my own thinking, and my own practices. At times, this research was problematic for me. I went in looking for evidence that a practice was difficult to implement and that outside forces impacted a program despite one’s beliefs. However, this research has forced me to ask myself some difficult questions, such as: Why did I really walk away from my beliefs at times and implement more teacher-directed instructional approaches? b) Why did I remain silent about my frustrations? Why didn’t I fight for what I really believed was best for children? d) Why did I let outside forces dictate the way I taught? and e) Why didn’t I become an advocate for the children? I stand guilty of not standing up for the importance of childhood and for the importance of play in a child’s development. I stand guilty of not communicating with my administration and families about my beliefs. I did not stand up for the children who were in my care. This realization has greatly impacted me. I am truly saddened by the number of children who may have been negatively impacted by my practices. I realize that I must move beyond this sadness and guilt. For me, the challenge now becomes: How do I use this new knowledge of self to improve my practices in the best interest of my future students?
64 Chapter Four A Glimpse Inside the Classrooms
The following chapter captures the day-to day experiences of the five participating kindergarten teachers and the children in their classrooms. Each story will be presented as an individual case, providing a guided tour of the classroom and revealing “a day in the life” of each participating teacher. Each story will reflect the data gathered through the numerous observation sessions. Although observations occurred on many different days of the week and at different times of the day, each story will weave these observations together to reflect one “typical” day. Thick, rich description of the physical environment and the classroom activities will be presented “in order to develop vicarious experiences for the reader” (Stake, 1995, p. 63). The intent is to provide the reader with “a sense of ‘being there’” (Stake, 1995, p. 63). Description of each context will assist the reader in understanding my interpretation of what is going on in these classrooms. Interpretation will occur in a later chapter. This chapter will introduce all five of the kindergarten teachers, including Mrs. Manford, Mrs. Morgan, Mrs. Jones, Mrs. Townsend, and Mrs. Dell.
Mrs. Manford’s Story
A Guided Tour As you enter Mrs. Manford’s classroom, you notice a bright, sunny environment that has a real lived in look about it. Books are on the floor, pillows are tossed here and there, chairs are where they need to be for that moment, and half-finished puzzles are on the tables. This is also an environment that honors children’s creations. You notice that very few commercially prepared posters and bulletin board materials are present in this room. Children’s work is displayed everywhere! Pictures of rainbows, drawings of the children and their families, and finger paintings of hearts are taped to file cabinets, classroom doors, and windows. Stories, poems, and “I love you, Mrs. Manford!” letters are taped to the side of the teacher’s desk and are tacked to the bulletin boards. Vibrant stuffed flowers that the children created at the art center are hanging from the ceiling. Upon each visit, at least one child grabbed my hand and led me to an area of the room where he or she had displayed a new masterpiece!
65 The other thing that you notice is the use of language throughout the room. Signs are placed in every center as well as on items throughout the room, such as “dry erase board,” “door,” “clock,” “television,” “window,” “Art Center,” Reading Center,” and “Computer Station.” Two posters adorn the walls that encourage sharing, respecting others, making new friends, and believing in self. Pocket charts are placed throughout the room, providing interactive opportunities for children to manipulate language. Some contain theme-related poems on sentence strips and others contain word games. Books are in every center, extending the current theme. Paper and pencils are placed in every center to encourage the children to use written language to express themselves. One note in the Block Center read: ples dnt nk ofr!!! (Please don’t knock over!!!). Another note in the Reading Center read: eez a goo bc. u sd red et! (It’s a good book. You should read it!) The room is organized so that small group and individual work areas are on one side of the room and centers are on the opposite side of the room. Mrs. Manford explains: It is important to have separate areas in the room, where tables are away from centers. Some children need to have a place where they can work by themselves and not be distracted by the activity that is happening in the centers. My centers are set up in a way that respect young children’s need to be active. Many have very active bodies! They need a place to move, to play, to laugh, to talk, and to socialize. Children also need a place separate from that where they can go work, quietly think, and be by themselves. This is not meant to serve as a punishment, just a place available for self-control. We also use the table area to do small group and whole group activities where we need to focus. If the tables were placed in the centers, it would be too distracting for them even if activity wasn’t going on.
As you enter the door, five tables that are assigned a color are positioned to the left. The tables seat four children and are used during seatwork time, individual work time, and center time. Along this wall are coat hangers and cubbies for the children to store their coats, backpacks, and miscellaneous belongings. There are also storage cabinets above for teacher materials. These cabinets are also used to display shapes, colors, and a Word Wall. In the back left corner sits the Art Center, complete with cabinets, a sink, an easel, a table, and shelves overflowing with art supplies. Yarn, glue, paint, buttons, paper bags, chalk, markers, crayons, scissors are crammed onto the shelves and falling into the floor. Along the back wall is a bulletin board filled with self portraits and a Computer Center complete with three computers for the children to create stories and to play skill-related
66 computer games. Next to this center is a teacher supply shelf containing assessment material and the children’s portfolios. A Listening Center is positioned next to these shelves along with a small carpet area and oversized pillows for the children to sit on while they listen to a favorite story. In the back right hand corner is Mrs. Manford’s work area. This area contains shelves filled with guided reading material, file cabinets, a desk, and a large horseshoe-shaped table used for both small group and individual instruction. The center of the room contains a carpeted reading area that comfortably seats about six children. Bean bag chairs and pillows are provided for the children, as well as a classroom library. A Language Center and a shelf filled with puzzles, blocks, and games further help to divide the room into two separate areas - centers and work areas. Along the right wall, next to Mrs. Manford’s work area, is the Science Center. This center has many manipulatives, such as magnifying glasses, scales and items to weigh, magnet wands, prisms, and a tornado maker. There are also a butterfly house, several terrariums made in liter soda bottles, and numerous books on the life cycle, spring, weather, and butterflies. This center also has a sensory table filled with sand and digging tools. The Math Center is next along this wall and contains several tubs of manipulatives, including pattern blocks, links, counting bears, sorting items and sorting containers, dominoes, and unifix cubes. Next to this area is the Writing Center. This center has a table big enough for three children. A small postman’s hutch sits on the back edge of the table filled with markers, crayons, pencils, different sized paper, envelopes, shape books, scissors, glue, and letter stamps and ink pads. At the front of the classroom is a large colorful carpet area that displays the letters of the alphabet. This carpet area is large enough for the entire class to sit around and is used for both whole group instruction and small group activities. On this carpet area, the children complete morning routines, listen to stories, sing songs, play games, assemble puzzles, and participate in guided reading groups. On the corner of the carpet is a large pad of chart paper sitting on an easel waiting for the class to dictate the “Message of the Day” to Mrs. Manford. An oversized rocking chair, also known as the Share Chair, is positioned next to the easel. Above the rocking chair area is a bulletin board entitled “All About Me.” Each week a different child is chosen to share a written autobiography, family photos, and special personal belongings. This bulletin board is dedicated to that child. The next two bulletin boards contain a monthly calendar, a weather chart, a weather graph, a hundreds board, a base ten pocket chart, a money counting
67 chart, a tally mark chart, and a lost tooth graph. Hanging on the wall next to the bulletin board is the Daily Schedule. This schedule uses visual and written cues to inform the children of the daily routine. The front wall contains a large magnetic dry erase board. This board is divided into several sections. The first section is labeled “Center Work” and indicates which centers the children need to complete on a given day. There is also a “Packer and Buyer” chart. The second section displays “Today’s D.O.L” (Daily Oral Language). The third section is the Poetry Center, filled with poems of the month, interactive charts, and class-made poetry books.
A Day in the Life Of Room 1 It is 9:00 on a Monday morning. One by one, the children begin to walk through the door of Room 1, an all day kindergarten classroom that is home to 19 students. Mrs. Manford, who is bustling around the room getting materials ready for the day, looks up and exclaims to Mrs. Anthony, her educational assistant, “Here come our little friends! It is time to start the day!” While Mrs. Anthony greets the children at the door and assists them in unpacking their backpacks, Mrs. Manford makes her way to the sensory table. Here she waits for the children to bring her any notes, to sign in for the day, and to mark whether they are buying or packing lunch. She greets each child with a smile, a pat on the shoulder, or a tousle of the hair. She takes time to ask each child personal questions, like “What did you do last night?” “How is your new baby brother?” or “Have you read the next chapter in Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone?” Once the children complete this routine, they grab a small piece of paper from a tray in the front of the room and move to their assigned work table to complete their first job of the day, Daily Oral Language (or as the children call it “D.O.L.”). Today on the front dry erase board is printed the letter “j.” The children know without being told that they are to draw a picture of an item that begins with “j” and label the picture. If they are able to write a complete sentence, they are encouraged to write one. Mrs. Manford calls two children over to take the attendance forms and lunch count to the office. The principal comes over the intercom to greet the children and to lead them in the pledge of allegiance. The children stop whatever they are doing, turn toward the flag, put their hand on their chest, and recite the pledge. When announcements are over, the children resume their activity without missing a beat.
68 Mrs. Manford then begins to walk around the tables, kneeling beside each child to check their work. After receiving a big, bright, happy face at the top of their paper, the children place their papers in their cubby, choose a book from the reading area and find a comfy place to read in the room. Some children sprawl out on the large carpet area. Some children curl up in beanbag chairs. Others sit on oversized pillows underneath the art table. Others remain at the tables. Children are reading alone, as well as with partners. A very soft mumbling sound is heard throughout the room. Children are pointing to pictures in their books, giggling, asking questions, and sounding out words. Mrs. Manford looks at Mrs. Anthony, smiles, and gives her a thumbs up. Mrs. Anthony grins back. When later asked about the “thumbs up” motion, Mrs. Manford replies, “Listening to the sound of children enjoying reading is the greatest part of teaching! If we can keep this joy alive, then we have done our job well!” Around 9:30, Mrs. Manford retrieves a microphone from a little girl’s backpack and clips it onto her shirt. She checks Tina’s hearing aide to make sure it is turned on and working properly. When she is satisfied with the sound level, Mrs. Manford begins to sing, “Good Morning! Good Morning! Good Morning to you!” The children look up from their books, smile, return their books to the proper area, and join Mrs. Manford on the large carpet area. Each child sits on an assigned letter on the carpet, puts their hands in their laps, and shows Mrs. Manford that they are ready to start morning routines. Mrs. Manford sits in a large rocking chair and positions herself so that everyone can see her and so she can make eye contact with the several children who are hearing-impaired. Two little boys are pushing one another and giggling. Mrs. Manford softly says, “Let’s remember to respect each other. Keep hands to yourself.” The boys giggle again and put their hands down. Mrs. Anthony sits next to Josh, a very high functioning autistic child. She places her hand on his back, rubbing gently in circular motions. She reminds him to turn on his hearing aid and to put on his glasses. Mrs. Manford and the children complete their carpet routine which includes: a) calendar; b) odd/even number recognition; c) Word of the Week; d) skip counting; e) number line; f) tally board; g) money; h) lost teeth graph; and i) weather. Songs like “Seven Days of the Week” (sung to the tune of “The Farmer and the Dell”) and “What’s the Weather Like Today?” (sung to the tune of “London Bridge is Falling Down”) lead each activity. Children are clapping, tapping their knees, and dancing. Children take turns pointing to numbers, leading songs, and counting out loud. After the last song, a little boy named Todd
69 begins to shout, “Mrs. Manford! Mrs. Manford! It is my turn now.” Mrs. Manford replies, “Todd, how can you get my attention?” Todd slowly raises his hand. She continues, “What would be a more polite way to say that?” Todd replies quietly, “May I have my turn now?” Mrs. Manford smiles and reminds the class that Todd is the special student of the week! Todd stands in front of the class and shares pictures of his family vacation to Disney World. The children are then given a time to ask Todd probing questions about the pictures. Children are jumping up and down, waving their arms, shouting “OOOH! OOOH! Pick me!” Mrs. Manford reminds them that Todd can pick only three people for questions and reminds Todd to only choose friends who have their hands raised. After three questions are answered, a series of loud groans echo throughout the group. Mrs. Manford suggests that they visit with Todd during recess to get their answers. Todd takes a deep bow and everyone claps! Josh is having a difficult time sitting on the floor and asks to sit in his chair. Mrs. Anthony gets his chair and then places a red box underneath his feet to help him remain balanced and begins to rub his back. Mrs. Manford then calls up Bob to lead the children in a Word of the Week activity. The word this week is “then.” Bob uses “then” in the following sentence: “First spread on the peanut butter, then put the jelly on the bread.” Mrs. Manford writes each word on a 5x7 index card and distributes the cards to children sitting on the carpet. These children stand up and scramble themselves up so that the sentence is out of order. Bob then rearranges the children so that the sentence is back in order. Bob uses a pointer to read the sentence and then asks the children to read it out loud with him. Before the class is finished reading all the words, Bob is jumping up and down, barely able to contain himself! Mrs. Manford understands his excitement as she exclaims, “This is our biggest sentence so far this year!” Everyone starts clapping and cheering, “Way to go, Bob!” “Yeah, Bob!” “Super job, Bob!” Alyssa suggests that they hang Bob’s sentence out in the hall so everyone can see it. Mrs. Manford agrees and sends Alyssa and Bob out into the hall to display it. Mrs. Manford glances at the clock and announces, “Boys and Girls, we have had so much fun today with our morning routines that we need to rearrange our morning schedule. We normally do not spend 45 minutes at carpet time!” Mrs. Manford walks over to the front wall that displays the daily schedule using both written and visual cues to describe the activities. The order for the day includes: a) Check In; b) Daily Oral Language; c) Books; d) Carpet Time; e) Seatwork; f) Recess; g) Snack Time; h) Choice Time; i) Lunch; j) Carpet Time;
70 k) Journal; l) Seatwork; m) Choice Time; o) Pack Up; p) Recess; and q) Home. These visual displays are on large 5x5 cards that hang on individual hooks making it easy to rearrange as needed. Mrs. Manford moves the schedule cards around to accommodate the time left in the day. She then dismisses the children from the carpet area one color table at a time and reminds them that seatwork is next. Mrs. Manford explains that instead of completing their usual two worksheets today, they were going to make a shamrock hat. Mrs. Manford stands in front of the children with all of her materials for the project laid out in front of her and proceeds to demonstrate how to complete the project. The children are told to listen carefully as she describes the several steps involved in making the hat: First, cut out the green paper hat like this. Make sure you stay on the black line. Second, glue the yellow square here. Third, glue the white shamrock here. Fourth, write your name on the back of the hat. When you are done, see me or Mrs. Anthony to staple your hat to fit your head. The object of this activity is to see if you can follow directions.
After checking to see if the children understand, she points to three visual cues on the board: a) cut (picture of a pair of scissors); b) glue (picture of a bottle of glue); and c) write (picture of paper and pencil). Each child is then called up to get the materials and returns to his or her seat. Josh moves to the Writing Center to work alone. Two boys use their scissors to have a sword fight. Mrs. Manford turns as she hears one little boy say, “On guard!” Mrs. Manford kneels between the boys. “Boys, I am worried about how you are using your scissors. Scissors are for cutting paper only. Show me you know how to use them.” The boys look down at the ground, whisper “Sorry,” and return to work without talking to each other. As the children complete the assignment, they place their scissors and glue back in a community supply container provided at their assigned table, place their shamrock hat in their cubby, retrieve their coat, and line up for recess. Mrs. Manford leads the children outside, carrying a big container of balls and jump ropes. Mrs. Anthony helps any remaining children finish their assignment. After twenty minutes of outside recess, the children return to the room, wash their hands, get a drink of water, and settle back down at their tables. Abby leads the class through the “Snack Poem” as leaders from each table pass out snacks. Children are reminded to throw away their trash from snacks and prepare for Center Time. Mrs. Manford greets two moms and shows them what she wants them to do with individual children today. These moms move around the
71 room and assist in centers. Children look up at the front board which displays their Center Time assignment for the day and begin to move to their first center. Each child is assigned two centers each day of the week. Center Time includes: a) Team A completes Language Center and Browsing Box; b) Team B completes Listening Center and Browsing Box; c) Team C completes Writing Center and Browsing Box; d) Team D completes Write the Room Center, Pocket Charts and Browsing Box; and e) Team E completes Computer Center, Read the Room Center, and Browsing Box. Each center contains at least one required activity and many additional open-ended manipulatives. Once the children complete their assigned centers and have shown an adult in the classroom their completed jobs, they are free to enter Choice Centers. Choice Centers include: a) Math Center; b) Art Center; c) Language Center; d) Reading Center; e) Games, Blocks, and Puzzles Center; f) Science Center; g) Computer Center; and h) Writing Center. During this time, three children are sitting on the large carpet area with Mrs. Manford having Guided Reading Time. At Mrs. Manford’s request, the school districts’ reading interventionist is observing her reading groups today to give suggestions of how to improve higher level questioning skills. The group activity involves predicting the events of the basal reader entitled The Parade. The children examine the cover and the title page for clues. Then they share any personal knowledge they have with parades. After they read the story, Mrs. Manford guides them through several comprehension questions. The books are then placed in the children’s reading folder to take home and share with their families. During this time, two children from the Science Center approach Mrs. Manford and tap her on the shoulder. She whispers, “Remember, I am with a group right now. I am not a choice.” Mrs. Manford then calls another guided group over to join her on the carpet. This group uses dry erase boards to review letters and their sounds. Together they read another basal reader called My Cat. They place their books into their folders to take home as well. When reading group is over, Mrs. Manford visits a few minutes with the reading interventionist and then walks around the room stopping at each area, asking questions, checking work, and reading children’s stories. She sits down at the large carpet area and takes a child on her lap to read a poem. Mrs. Manford then moves to the Language Center where three children, including Josh, Tina, and Bob, are working with Mrs. Anthony. They are building words with tile letters. She talks with Mrs. Anthony about the children’s progress and then asks her to extend the activity by building simple sentence
72 structures. Mrs. Manford then works with Josh individually at her worktable. She uses her assessment notebook to record his progress in several skills, including number counting, number recognition, one to one correspondence, and letter sound recognition. Music is turned on to transition from Center Time to Clean Up Time. Children begin to chime in with the music and return materials to their centers. Another mom enters the room and Mrs. Morgan explains that she will be working with the children individually out in the hallway writing a story. The children can either dictate the story to her or she can assist them in their writing. Mrs. Manford sits in the rocking chair and children begin to gather around her to listen to the big book called It Looks Like Spilt Milk which is displayed on an easel. Children then ask to listen to a class favorite “The G Song.” Mrs. Manford turns on the tape and the children stand up, dance, and sing. The children then take turns coming up to the big book and place “magic tape” over “g” words that they find on the pages. The children are then told to line up for lunch and rest time. Two children leave early because they are responsible for carrying several big blue tubs filled with lunch boxes to the lunchroom. After lunch and recess, the children go to a large room filled with mats so that they can rest. Some children fall asleep, others look at books while lying down. When the children enter the room they gather on the large carpet area for Carpet Time. Mrs. Morgan reads to them the book called Chicken Soup with Rice. The class reads the book one more time. This time Mikayla is called up to lead the group, pointing to the words and encouraging the class to read chorally. Mrs. Manford then reads a book David brought in about how his family celebrates Passover. Mrs. Manford notices several children are wiggling in their places. “Let’s stand and sing “Shake, Shake, Shake My Sillies Out!” “Ok now. 5-4-3-2-1. Sit down.” One little boy pulls on a little girl’s shirt and begins poking her. Mrs. Manford extends her hand and has the little boy sit next to her. She quietly whispers in his ear and he apologizes to the little girl. “We have four little friends who are not listening to our friend David. We listened to you when it was your turn. Please do the same.” After three reminders, one little boy was asked to sit at a nearby table until he could listen politely. Mrs. Anthony returns to the room after helping in another classroom and sits next to this little boy. Mrs. Manford then dismisses the children to the table area for Journal Time. The children take their journals from a basket and get out their pencils from the supply container. She asks the children to open their journals and write today’s date at the top. She models how to write the
73 date and also has Elizabeth walk around with a date stamp in case some children are unable to write the date. The journal prompt is “Spring is….” Mrs. Anthony sits with Josh, Tina, and Greg, helping them with their writing. Mrs. Manford walks around to each table, asking questions and prompting ideas. She encourages children to sound out the words when they ask her for the correct spelling. After about fifteen minutes, Mrs. Morgan asks them to put their journals away because it is time for “Mr. Pencil – Handwriting without Tears.” Several children moan. Others clap. Mrs. Manford models on the dry erase board how to make the number 3. To prompt children to begin the numbers at the top rather than the bottom, she sings “Where do you start your numbers? At the top (clap, clap)” (sung to the tune of “Mulberry Bush”). Mrs. Manford makes several examples of 3s on the board. Children begin giggling and shouting “NO!!” at her modeled mistakes. After the children correct Mrs. Manford, they are instructed to try their own. She notices that Tina is not paying attention to her. She walks over and checks her hearing aide. Tina has turned it off! She then checks Josh’s hearing aid as well. The children then complete the next two pages in their handwriting book on their own. When they are finished, they show their work to Mrs. Manford. She tells them to get out their egg book that they were working on last week and finish it. When all their seatwork is completed, the children are able to move to Choice Time. All centers are open at this time except for the art easel and computer. After about a half-hour, the lights flicker indicating that the children need to begin to clean up the room. After all centers are straightened, the children pack up and place their backpacks on the back of the chair. Mrs. Anthony takes the children outside for recess while Mrs. Manford places notes in the children’s back packs, picks up the room a little, and begins preparing a lesson for tomorrow. When the children return from recess, they gather on the large carpet area. With Mrs. Manford’s assistance, they dictate a “Message of the Day” which is recorded on chart paper. The message reads: “Dear Class, Today Todd made our biggest sentence! We made shamrock hats. We read a lot of stories. Love Mrs. Manford.” Mrs. Manford leads them in a quick “Share Time” where they can discuss any interesting event from the day. Mrs. Manford then returns the microphone to Tina’s backpack and calls the children to line up for dismissal. As each child leaves the room, Mrs. Manford gives him or her a hug or a pat on the back. She tells each child that she is looking forward to seeing him or her tomorrow. Mrs. Manford and Mrs. Anthony
74 spend a few minutes rearranging some furniture, reviewing tomorrow’s schedule, and preparing for another interesting day in Room 1.
Mrs. Morgan’s Story A Guided Tour As you walk into Mrs. Morgan’s room, you get the impression that neatness and order are valued in this classroom. This large spacious sun-filled room is very clean and very organized. At certain times of the day, you can even smell the Lysol used to sanitize the tables, chairs, and shelves. Everything in this room has its place. There are specific areas in the room that are clearly designated for small group activities, whole group instruction, and center-based instruction. Every storage cabinet is labeled, indicating what materials are stored in them. Cubbies, coat hangers, mailboxes, homework boxes, center assignment signs, and behavior charts are designated for the morning group and the afternoon group by color. All items in blue are for the morning group and all items in red are for the afternoon group. Most centers have two or three activities that are accessible to the children. These activities are stored in labeled bins with lids. Children’s creations, including rainbow paintings, pots with gold glitter, and tissue paper flowers, are displayed neatly on designated bulletin boards. You also notice that language is abundant throughout the room. Labels are found in every center and on many items in the room, including “door,” “dry erase board,” “shelf,” “plant,” “sink,” “piano,” “closet,” “Art Center,” and “Science Center.” Color words, shape words, word wall words, and words of the month are displayed on the outside of cabinets. Directions are placed in every center to tell children what to do with the material. Class made books, shape books, interactive charts, and poems on flip charts are in the class library area. Subject-related books are placed in every center. Pocket charts on stands are in two areas of the room, providing opportunities for the children to manipulate language. These charts contain poems on sentence strips, rhyming words, and word families. As you enter the room, directly in front of the entrance are two desks pushed together to create a Word Family Station. Two shelves sitting on top of the desks hold a homework box. One is blue for the morning group and one is red for the afternoon group. There are also clipboards with “Write the Room” activity sheets, pencils, letter tiles, rhyming words games, and magnetic letters with magnetic boards. Right next to this station is one child’s desk. Rather than
75 being part of a group, this child sits at the desk during whole group table activities and individual activities. Mrs. Morgan explains the decision for this seating arrangement: This particular little guy has difficulty with self-control. He is a very active little boy and can not keep his hands to himself and often is touching other children and taking items from them. I have tried him at every table and he ends up getting frustrated, along with everyone else. I’ve tried talking to him. I’ve tried rewarding him. Nothing seems to work. Now he sits alone. It seems to help with his boundaries. We have had only a few issues since this arrangement.
Five round tables with four chairs each occupy the center of this large open space. Each table has a different color of construction paper taped to the center, indicating table assignments, including orange, blue, red, green, yellow, and purple. The left side of the room contains coat hooks and cubbies for the children to store their belongings. Above the cubbies are storage cabinets for teacher materials. The doors of the cabinets are used to display shape posters, shape words, and a word wall. In the back left hand corner of the room sits a very small workstation for Mrs. Morgan. This includes a table, a chair, a computer, a note tray, a few files, and a canister of pens and pencils. Centers line the back wall and right hand wall of the room. Next to Mrs. Morgan’s station is a Science Center that includes a table, two chairs, a few books on butterflies, a large magnifying glass, and a butterfly house filled with chrysalis. The shelves behind this table are empty. Several plants sit on top of this shelf. Next to the Science Center is a Math Center. This center has several containers filled with manipulatives, including unifix cubes, links, geoboards and bands, pattern blocks, base ten blocks, and play money. Children are able to take these containers to a nearby table and use the materials in the ways that Mrs. Morgan has instructed. In the far right corner is the Computer Center. This center contains one computer where individual children can play word family games. The next center is the Listening Center where individual children can listen to an assigned story and then complete a worksheet about a learned story element. Next to this center is the Writing Center. This center sits underneath a large dry erase board that runs the length of the classroom and includes a table with four chairs. The dry erase board is divided into five different display sections, including: a) Journal Words; b) Daily Oral Language; c) Class Created Math Problems; d) Center Time and Choice Time; and e) Daily Schedule. These sections contain cards that include both written and visual cues for the children. Near the Writing Center sit two low shelves pushed together, back to back. The shelf
76 closest to the writing table holds the children’s journals, a container of crayons, a container of pencils, the children’s Mr. Pencil workbooks, some markers, and a few clip boards. The shelf facing the other direction contains reading series material, puzzles, and games. This shelf faces a horseshoe-shaped table which is used only for Guided Reading Time. The back corner of the room has a large window, an upright piano, and a large colorful carpet with primary colors and letters and numbers. This carpet area is large enough for the entire class to sit around. This area is used for morning routines and center time activities like reading and playing games. Around the perimeter of the carpet area sits the classroom library, an easel with big book storage underneath, a rocking chair, and a pocket chart with the poem of the week. Hanging on the back wall is a bulletin board that displays: a) a calendar; b) a weather graph; c) a hundreds board; and d) a birthday chart. The next bulletin board is dedicated to the “Special Person of the Week.” Each week a different child is chosen for this honor. Family photos and an autobiography are displayed on this board that is bordered with large silver, sparkling stars. A large closet with a refrigerator inside frames the other side of the carpet area. A television on a moveable cart is stored in this area. This is used primarily to extend science activities by showing appropriate, related videos. The front of the room has a large sink area with storage above and below, a microwave, and a drying rack for paintings. A table sits in front of the sink. This table is designated as the Art Center. Materials are stored inside the cabinets and are accessible to only the teacher. Classroom rules are displayed in this area, stating “Respect. Listening. Quiet Voices.” A behavior chart is also placed in this area. Outside the room is a small table with two chairs for volunteers to work with children one on one.
A Day In the Life of Room 2 It is 9:00 on Monday morning. The sun is shining through the many windows of Room 2 that is home to 23 children in the morning and 19 children in the afternoon. Mrs. Morgan looks up from her computer where she is checking her email messages, removes her bifocals, and walks over to the door to greet her morning kindergarten group. “Good morning, boys and girls. Let’s get started on our day. We have a lot to do today.” The children enter the room, unpack their backpacks, turn in any notes to the blue tray and sit at their assigned table area to complete their first morning work. One little boy named Chris sits at a desk that is separated from the rest of the class. Their works consists of completing Daily Oral Language (D.O.L). and
77 making an illustration for a class book. Today’s D.O.L. is “I can ______.” The children need to fill in the blank and then illustrate their sentence. The children are encouraged to sound out their words and use inventive spelling. Mrs. Morgan walks to each table, checks their work, and reminds a few children what to do with their backpacks. She moves to Chris’ desk and reminds him that he will visit Mrs. Paulie today, the school counselor. The principal comes over the intercom to greet the children and to recite the Pledge of Allegiance. The children stand up, recite the pledge, and return to their morning work. When the children finish, they place their work in a blue homework box and move to the large carpet area and sit on the perimeter of the carpet. Mrs. Morgan is waiting for them at the carpet, sitting in a rocking chair. “We are still missing some of our friends this morning. While we wait, let’s do some of our favorite finger plays.” The children follow Mrs. Morgan’s lead and sing, “Itsy Bitsy Spider,” “Twinkle, Twinkle, Little Star,” and “The Muffin Man.” By the time they are finished, the last several children have arrived, exploding with excitement about a bus accident. They are telling everyone about a car that had rear-ended their bus. Mrs. Morgan tells the children, “That will be enough now, children. We need to get busy. We are falling behind our schedule. Please unpack and sit down.” Mrs. Morgan then picks up a big red box covered with bright yellow question marks. “It is time for our Mystery Box!” Throughout the year, the children have studied a different letter of the alphabet. Now they are in the process of reviewing all the letters. This week the letters are “S” and “T.” Children are invited to bring in an item hidden in a paper bag and place it in the Mystery Box. Children give clues about the item while others try to guess its identity. Joey comes up first and gives his clues: “It starts with “T.” “It has many colors.” “It spins.” Several children jump up at the same time and shout, “A TOP!” Katie comes up next and gives her clues: “It starts with S.” “It looks like a rainbow.” “It is springy.” The class sits silently for a few seconds. Katie is beaming from ear to ear because she has “fooled” everyone! “It’s a slinky,” she replies! Mrs. Morgan asks her if they can take the slinky outside at recess to watch it walk the stairs. Katie smiles and nods. Mrs. Morgan then reminds the children that they are continuing their program called “Lap Reading” this month. This is a program that she created for her students and their families to encourage reading together and to increase the enjoyment of reading. Mrs. Morgan then invites children to come up and share their favorite book for April. Several children show their books, share their favorite part of the story, and tell a little about the main characters. These
78 children receive a reading award. “Let’s clap for our friends!” Everyone cheers. Brian is moving around the carpet and turning around looking at books that are behind him. “Turn your body around so you can see.” After a few more minutes, Mrs. Morgan asks Brian to sit next to her and “Show me your polite behavior.” She begins to sing, “Open, shut them. Open, shut them. Give a little clap. Open, shut them. Open, shut them. Put them in your lap.” The class then begins to complete morning routines which includes: a) calendar; b) weather; c) graphing; d) base ten; and e) number line. Sherry, the calendar helper, is called forward to lead the activities. Alex is the “Special Person of the Week” and comes to the front of the group to share pictures of his family. The children are allowed to ask him three questions about the pictures. After three questions are asked, several children keep raising their hand to be called on. Mrs. Morgan informs them that they have been doing this since the first week of school and that they know that only three people will be called on. The children become silent. “Ok, let’s stand up and get those wiggles out.” The children stand up and sing, “I’ll wiggle my fingers, I’ll wiggle my toes, I’ll wiggle my ears, I’ll wiggle my nose. Now that all the wiggles are out, I’ll listen to what the story is about.” The children scoot up very close to Mrs. Morgan for the story called The Farm Concert. The children look at the cover and make predictions about the story. Several ideas are shouted out, including “farm,” “fall,” “pigs,” and “cows.” “Those are great ideas!” They read the title together and then they look at the characters’ faces and make predictions about how they are feeling. Mrs. Morgan begins to read the story and the children chime in. Mrs. Morgan reads with a lot of expression, making her voice sound like an old, weary farmer and imitating the farm animals. By the end, the children and Mrs. Morgan are giggling. They read the story one more time with her reading the narrator’s role and the children reading the animals’ roles. She announces that tomorrow they will prepare to act this story out. They will be making costumes and scenery and be giving out parts to read. They will even present this story to several other classes at the end of the week. “Give yourself a clap! You were great.” “Now let’s stand up and sing ‘Shake Those Sillies Out!’” After the song, the children remain on the carpet but turn towards the back of the room, now facing an easel that has a word chart from The Farm Concert. Two boys lie down on the carpet and put their heads down. “Sit up, boys. Criss-cross applesauce.” The boys moan and sit up. “Ok, 1, 2, 3. Eyes on me.” The children then search the word chart for words with the “w” sound and cover these words with magic tape. They quickly review the story The Farm Concert,
79 checking for comprehension. “What happened first, next, and last?” Mrs. Morgan then dismisses the children back to their table area to complete whole group “Quick Math.” Mrs. Morgan passes out a paper barn and small farm animals to each child. These manipulatives are used to complete several story problems. “Count out 8 animals. Now count out 2 more animals. Who can tell me a math story?” Many children begin waving their hands in the air, “OOH! OOH! Pick me!” Okay, Mary, come write the problem on the board.” The children work through about six more problems together with different volunteers coming to the dry erase board, standing on a chair, and writing out the mathematical equations. Each child takes a big bow and the class claps for his or her efforts. Next, Mrs. Morgan explains their morning jobs. Each child is to complete a telling time worksheet and a beginning sound worksheet. She explains what to do on each one of them. She then reminds newly assigned table leaders to take care of their table. One person, known now as the “Table Leader,” walks around the table and checks to see if everyone has their name on their paper. Tony whispers to his table, “Remember, I am your boss. I get to tell you what to do!” In return, his tablemates stick their tongues out at him. The worksheets take very little time for many children to finish. As Grant and Ben were walking to their center, they were discussing their morning work. “That was super easy!” said Ben. “Yeah, that took me about a millibillisecond!” exclaimed Grant. A mom enters the room and checks the volunteer table for her assignment. She moves to the Writing Center to work with the children in their journals. Children are writing about spring. On the dry erase board are spring words which the children must use in their writing. Some of these words include “flowers,” “rain,” “spring,” and “grow.” Mrs. Morgan walks around the room and checks each child’s work. Mrs. Paulie, the school counselor, enters the room and takes Chris with her. When the children are finished, they begin to move to Center Time. Children rotate to a different set of centers each day, including: a) Team A completes Art Center/Games; b) Team B completes Science Center/Listening Center/Computer Center; c) Team C completes Browsing Box/Writing Center; d) Team D completes Charts/Word Families/ABC Center; e) Team E completes Math Center; and f) Guided Reading Time. Each day Mrs. Morgan calls a different team to work with her on reading. When they are finished working with her, they move to their assigned centers. Team A is called to work with her today at the reading table. First, they use tiles to build words. They count out the phonemic sounds that they hear in
80 different words. For example, c-a-t = /c/ - /a/ - /t/ - 3 sounds. Next, they read a new book called The Cat. Mrs. Morgan’s eyes are constantly scanning the room. She interrupts the reading group several times to talk to children at centers. “Boys, what did I tell you to do at that center?” “Let’s use our quiet voices, Science Center.” “What should you be doing at the Math Center?” “Only two children at that center.” “Find your own activity.” “Sit up, Mark. We do not lay down.” “How should you be sitting?” At one point, she leaves the reading table and moves to the Word Family Station. “Boys, move back to your table. You are not following directions.” She then moves to the carpet area where three children are playing checkers. She noticed that they did not finish their worksheets. “You did not finish that job. You did not listen. I did not give you permission to do that. Go back to your work.” She walks back to the reading group and tells them that they can go to their centers now because she is done. Mrs. Morgan begins to walk around the room, checking children’s work, asking questions, and reading some of their journal entries. She notices that two boys are struggling with the math game placed in the Math Center. She sits with them and models the game. Around this time, another mom comes into the room. She reads the volunteer clipboard to see what she is supposed to do today. She sits out in the hall and staples books together and then she begins taking children in pairs to the computer lab. Mrs. Morgan then moves to the piano and begins playing a song. The children look up from their centers and start to sing “Clean Up, Clean Up” along with Mrs. Morgan. Games, tubs, and books are returned to their respective places in the room and the children return to their tables. Mrs. Morgan walks around the room and inspects each center. She then dismisses each table to pack up. “Yellow, orange, red, blue, green, and purple.” Once everyone is packed up, Mrs. Morgan gives the last set of directions. “Stand up, tuck chair in, and line up for recess.” Mrs. Morgan walks the children down the hall for recess. After 20 minutes of outside recess, the children return, retrieve their backpacks, and listen for Mrs. Morgan to call their bus name for dismissal. Once the room is empty, Mrs. Morgan erases the dry erase board, prepares it for the afternoon group, and changes the morning routine bulletin board so that the afternoon group can complete calendar activities. She empties the Mystery Box and takes the magic tape off of The Farm Concert chart. Satisfied that the room is ready, she turns off the light and heads to lunch and planning time. In about an hour, she will return to greet her afternoon group.
81 Mrs. Jones’s Story A Guided Tour As you enter Mrs. Jones’ room, you notice that every area of this warm and inviting space is connected by a theme. The children are currently studying things that hatch from eggs. Every area of the room has pictures of animals that hatch from eggs, including birds, turtles, and alligators. Theme-related poems, interactive charts, and posters are dispersed throughout the room. Every center has games in the shape of eggs, egg-shaped vocabulary word cards, and related books. Every center is filled with prescribed and open-ended manipulatives that allow the children to explore the current theme even deeper. Themes tend to change every two weeks, transforming the room once again. You also notice that this room is very child friendly. Materials are easily accessible to the children, placed on low shelves that are color-coded and clearly labeled with words and pictures. Games and activities in the centers are self-correcting. Every center is labeled and includes a number of dots to indicate how many children are allowed in the center. When centers are not in use, there is a red stop sign indicating that it is closed. When Choice Time occurs, a green go sign indicates that this center is now open. Signs are all over the room, including “door,” “desk,” “computer,” “Reading Center,” and “clock.” Children’s creations of butterflies, flowers, and chicks are placed on bulletin boards, on the entrance door, and on the wall outside the classroom. As you enter the doorway, there are six round tables with four chairs at each table. Each table is color-coded, including a red frog , a blue frog, a green frog, a yellow frog, a orange frog, and a purple frog. The frogs represent the theme currently studied and this table identification changes with each new theme. At each table is a container that holds pencils, crayons, markers, scissors, and glue. Along the side wall are coat hangers and cubbies for the children’s belongings. Storage area for classroom material is provided above the cubbies. On the outside of these cabinets is displayed a cute mouse on house sign-in board labeled, “I’m Here Today!” Also displayed is the Class Word Wall. The back of the room has a large area rug approximately 15 x15 that has bright primary colors, letters, and numbers. Several centers surround the carpet area, including: a) Puppet Theater; b) Class Library; c) Puzzles; d) Listening Center; and e) Big Book and Interactive Chart Center. There is also a large white rocking chair which is called the Share Chair. On the corner of the carpet stands an easel with a dry erase board area on
82 one side and Big Books displayed on the other side. A Computer Center is also along the edge of the carpet. This center has three computers for the children to use to write stories and to play various subject-related computer games. There is also a computer for the teacher. In the back corner are Mrs. Jones’s file cabinets, her desk, and a television on a moveable cart. The next area is a horseshoe-shaped table that has one chair for the teacher and four chairs for the children. This table is used to conduct guided reading activities and to work with small groups of children. Next to this table are two shelves that hold reading series books and browsing boxes. Next is the Science Center. This center is filled with open-ended manipulatives, including several scales, a butterfly house, magnifying glasses, books, color wands, magnetic wands, and objects to weigh. There is also a water and sand table in this area which presently houses science-related games. The House Center is next to this table. It includes a kitchen set, several baby dolls, a vacuum cleaner, and a few stuffed animals. A plastic woodshop area also occupies this space, including plastic hammers, screws, screwdrivers, and blocks. The Math Center is next. This is a “pull-out” center. Children may pull tubs of manipulatives off the shelves and sit at a nearby table or carpet area. Many items, like links, unifix cubes, sorting bears and bowls, and tape measurers, are made accessible to the children. In the front left hand corner of the room is the Writing Center. It has a small table with two chairs and a bulletin board positioned above the table. The bulletin board displays words of the month and an example of a writing page they need to complete, such as “______hatch from eggs.” Folders, markers, paper, glue, pencils, markers, envelopes, stamps, stickers, and various sizes of paper are made available for the children. The front of the room is lined with centers also. The first center is a Block Center. It contains a small low-pile carpet and two shelves. One shelf is filled with trucks, cars, and small people. The other shelf is filled with blocks. Next is the Art Center. This center has an easel, a small work table, a sink, and many containers of supplies. Some of these supplies include paint, paintbrushes, glue, markers, scissors, yarn, paper plates, and paper bags. Also along the front wall is a very long dry erase board. This board is divided into several display and work areas, including: a) Daily Schedule; b) Daily Oral Language; and c) Poetry Center.
83 A Day in the Life of Room 3 It is 9:00 on a Monday morning. Room 3, home to 19 children in the morning and 18 children in the afternoon, is about ready to open its door. Mrs. Jones is meeting with Mrs. James, the educational assistant, and Mrs. Lane, the intervention specialist, about two children with special needs. They are discussing how Friday went and reviewing the modifications for today’s work. As the children begin to enter the room, Mrs. Jones casually walks over to the door with her hands in her pockets and begins to greet the children. The children are eager to talk with Mrs. Jones. “Guess what? My brother said ‘Da Da’ last night!” “I won my soccer game last night!” “I can ride a two-wheeler now!” Mrs. Jones makes a point to say something to each and every child as he or she enters, hangs up a coat, takes a blue folder out of his or her backpack, and places the folder in a blue tray. The children then sign in by putting a cute little mouse onto a house with their name on it. Terry checks the class helper chart and remembers that he is the class mail person. He places two handouts from the office and a monthly letter from Mrs. Jones in each child’s cubby. The rest of the class take a piece of paper from a tray, sit at their assigned table, and complete Daily Oral Language. Today’s assignment is “J.” The children must make a capital and lower case J and then write two J items on their paper. They are encouraged to write a sentence with a J word if they can. The principal comes over the intercom to greet the children and recite the Pledge of Allegiance. The children stop their activity, recite the pledge, and continue with their morning routines. Once they show their paper to Mrs. Jones, the children then move to Choice Time. Choice Time includes: a) Reading Center; b) Puppet Theater; c) Science Center; d) Game Center; e) Block Center; f) Art Center; g) Puzzle Center; h) Computer Center; and i) House Center. Each center has a sign that indicates how many children are allowed in the center. As the children are transitioning to centers, Mrs. Jones quickly goes through the children’s folders, removing any notes and checking to see that each parent signed the daily behavior chart. The room becomes a buzz of activity, with children playing house, lying on the floor enjoying books, painting umbrellas, building a castle, weighing items, measuring tables and chairs with links, writing letters to friends, playing checkers, solving puzzles, and more. Children move in and out of centers, checking to see that the number of children in each center is acceptable. Mrs. James, the educational assistant, sits with Becky at a table putting together puzzles. Mrs. Jones then slowly walks around the room, stops at every center, and talks to the children again. “How is your new
84 baby sister, Shannon?” “What did you do this weekend, Jacqueline?” She notices Trevor struggling with the computer and walks over to assist him. “This computer always works a little slower in the morning, doesn’t it, buddy?” After helping Trevor, she walks across the room to the Game Center and sits on the floor with Sydney who is quietly playing Barrel of Monkeys all by herself. She was not smiling as she entered the room and only mumbled “hi” to Mrs. Jones earlier. “How are you doing today, Sydney? Are you missing Emily today?” Sydney nods. “She will be back tomorrow. She had to visit her Grandma. You could make her a card later and tell her how much you miss her.” She tousles her hair and gets up and moves to the Math Center where Josh is sorting a large tub of farm animals. “Will you play farm animals with me, Mrs. Jones?” Mrs. Jones sits at the table. “Tell me how you grouped your animals.” Three girls are at the puppet theater, announcing that their puppet show is ready. “Who wants to watch our show? It is really one of our best productions!” In very loud unison voices, the girls proclaim, “Introducing…The COOOOOL Guy!” Mrs. Jones walks over to that area and whispers, “Girls, you have worked very hard on your show and I’m sure our friends would love to watch it; however, you need to be a little quieter, please. Please respect our other friends.” Mrs. Jones continues to walk to all the different areas, spending a few minutes at each asking questions, engaging in the children’s play, and observing their interactions. She then pulls Carl aside to a table and holds a conference with him. They discuss the quality of work that is expected of him. His behavior will be recorded on a chart that is kept on top of Mrs. Jones’s desk. When five smile faces are recorded, he can choose from the treasure box. Mrs. Jones explains that this will continue for two more weeks and then she expects him to do this on his own without any type of reward. They shake on their deal and he goes back to his center. The Reading Specialist, Mrs. Top, enters the room and takes Mark out of the room. Two parents are now out in the hallway, testing children individually on letter sounds. One parent is in the room working with individual children writing a class book. After about a half-hour, Mrs. Jones flicks the lights on and off. “Freeze. Clean Up. Meet me at the carpet.” Mrs. Jones walks around the room and helps the children straighten up the room. “5, 4, 3, 2, 1. Let me first remind you of today’s schedule.” This schedule includes: a) Sign-in; b) D.O.L.; c) Choice Time; d) Carpet Time; e) Center Time; f) Pick up; g) Recess; and h) Home. The daily schedule is magnetically displayed on the dry erase board using visual and written cues. During Carpet Time, Mrs. James sits at a nearby table working with the two children with special needs,
85 Becky and Justin. These children have their own calendar that is a wooden puzzle. This allows them to manipulate the date themselves. Carpet Time includes: a) alphabet song; b) calendar; c) counting by 1s, 2s, and 5s, and d) weather. Once completed, Mrs. Jones sits in a large white rocking chair and guides the children in writing a daily message on a nearby chart paper. The message reads: “Dear Class, Today is Monday. We did our jobs. We met Mrs. Thomas. We have a new student named Camden. Love, Mrs. Jones.” Throughout this process, the children discuss where the punctuation marks and capital letters belong. Mrs. Jones then reads the children a new April poem called Little Baby Chick! which is displayed on a poster board. The children read along with her as she points to the words. The children then look at the number of sounds in a few words from the poem. “chick - /ch/-/i/-/ck/ - 3 sounds; baby - /b/-/a/-/by/ - 3 sounds; small - /sm/-/all/ - 2 sounds.” Mrs. Jones reminds them that this is called phonemic awareness and can help them sound out words when they read by themselves. She then reads the story called Chickens, Frogs, and More. The children have heard this story before and begin to chime in, making animal noises. By the end of the story, the children and Mrs. Jones are giggling and can barely finish the story. Several children exclaim, “Let’s read it again, PLEASE.” Mrs. Jones explains that they will have to wait until another day to read it together; however, they are more than welcome to enjoy it during Center Time later. She dismisses children to their worktables and tells them to get ready for morning seatwork. The first job for the morning is journal. Mrs. Jones calls this a “mini-modeled lesson.” She tells the children to open their journal to the next blank page. She models how to write the date on the dry erase board. The children copy her and put their hand on their head when they are done. Mrs. Jones walks around to check their date. She then tells them that they are able to write about anything today. It is their choice. Some children cheer; others moan. Mrs. Jones then explains their other two jobs, including a math sheet counting to 20 and a beginning letter sound worksheet. She explains that she does not expect them to color the worksheets. She is not looking for their ability to color. She wants them to show her that they know their beginning sounds and can count objects to twenty. They can color them at home. She demonstrates how to do one problem on each sheet. She then reminds the children to do their journal first. After they have shown her their journal, they can get their other jobs. On the board she places visual cues for those who need a reminder of the job order. First, she places a picture of a hand holding a pencil (for journal) on the board. Next, she places a picture of
86 numbers 1,2,3 (for math worksheet) on the board. Last, she places a picture of the letters A,B,C (for letter sound worksheet) on the board. Before the children begin their morning work, Mrs. Jones briefly shows the children the new activities that are placed in several centers. Once finished worksheets are placed inside their blue folders, the children can transition to their assigned center. Mrs. Jones walks around to each table, kneeling by children, asking questions to prompt ideas, and encouraging inventive spelling. She also takes out a writing assessment notebook and records anecdotal notes about the children’s writing. It takes the children approximately 15 minutes to complete their seatwork. The children soon are transitioning to Center Time. Children are assigned to teams and each team must complete two assigned centers during this time. Specific activities are prepared for the children and teams are rotated through centers each day. These teams include: a) Team A completes ABC Center and Browsing Box; b) Team B completes Listening Center and Browsing Box; c) Team C completes Math Center and Browsing Box; d) Team D completes Writing Center and Browsing Box; and e) Team E completes Guided Reading and Browsing Box. When completed with these activities, the children are able to move into Choice Time again. During this time, Mrs. James and Mrs. Lane are working with Becky and Justin on letter sounds. Instead of a worksheet, these children have large sandpaper letters that they trace with their fingers. Then they find small objects from a tub that have the same beginning sound. Mrs. James then shows Becky and Justin their personal daily schedule which has visual cues. She points to a card and shows them that it is time for Center Time. She also shows them a small clock to indicate that they do not have much time left. When Becky enters the Math Center, she grabs unifix cubes from two children. Mrs. Jones walks over to the area. As she speaks to Becky, she also uses sign language to tell her that she can not take items from others. Becky stomps off and plops in the middle of the floor. Mrs. Jones walks away and ignores the behavior. Becky watches her intensely. Realizing Mrs. Jones will not pay attention to her, she returns to the Math Center and finds something else to do. Mrs. Jones then calls a reading group over to the guided reading table. She guides them through a short lesson, involving checking for comprehension of a previously read story. The children take turns reading the story aloud. As each child takes a turn reading, Mrs. Jones records information on a clipboard labeled “Reading Assessment.” When the reading group is
87 finished, Mrs. Jones works with a newly enrolled girl, Camden, testing her on initial letter sounds, letter recognition, rhyming words, and sight words. During this time, the janitorial staff enters the room, empties garbage cans, and wipes down tables for the afternoon group. “Is there anything else we can do for you today, Mrs. Jones?” “I think that will do it! What do we say boys and girls?” “Thank You!” After working with Camden, Mrs. Jones walks over to the carpet area and Becky crawls onto her lap. Together, they read a story. She then moves to the Writing Center. “Tell me about your story. What will your characters do next?” She notices that two boys are pushing another little boy out of the Math Center. “Please let him enter. He has work to do.” She glances at another center and says, “I see one too many in the Block Center.” Two girls are at the Puppet Center playing peek-a-boo. She walks over to this area and says, “It is ok that you are at this center, but use it the right way.” Before one of the mothers leaves for the day, she talks with Mrs. Jones and gives her a hug. After about an hour, the lights flicker again. “Time to clean up, friends.” Mrs. Jones opens each child’s blue folder and stamps his or her behavior chart, indicating what type of day the child has had. She also responds to any notes. The children clean up the room and prepare it for the afternoon group. After backpacks are ready and placed on the back of their chairs, the children line up for recess. Upon return, the children gather their materials and wait to be dismissed. “Have a great afternoon, friends. I can’t wait to see you tomorrow.” Several children give Mrs. Jones a hug and tell her they will miss her. Mrs. Jones walks around the room making sure everything is in order for the afternoon. After a brief discussion with Mrs. James and Mrs. Lane, she turns off the lights and heads to lunch. Her afternoon class will be arriving soon.
Mrs. Townsend’s Story A Guided Tour As you enter Room 4, you notice that there is no shortage of activities for the children. This bright and colorful room is filled with interactive charts, manipulatives, and games that are theme related. The children are currently working on a two week theme called “Things that Hatch From Eggs.” Every center revolves around this theme, including pictures, books, and
88 games of animals, such as chicks, ostriches, alligators, turtles, and snakes. The children have an abundance of manipulatives to choose from at each center. Despite the amount of materials, this room is very organized and inviting. Materials are stored on low shelves, making most everything accessible to the children. Every center is clearly labeled with words and pictures. Every thing in this room has its place. Mrs. Townsend explains: It is important for the children to feel like this is their room and not just mine. It is important for them to be self sufficient in their daily routines. We work a lot at the beginning of the year on routine and where things go so that this becomes a natural daily process without my having to tell them everything. This is a shared space and if I am constantly in control of everything then the children don’t feel ownership. I try to make this room run as smoothly as possible with the children learning to be independent and to take responsibility.
Manipulative storage containers are labeled with words and pictures to help children return material to its designated space. Separate trays for turning in notes, homework folders, and finished work are provided for the children as they enter the room. Items are color-coded blue for the morning group and color-coded red for the afternoon group. As you enter the doorway, there are five color-coded round tables. Colors include red, blue, green, yellow, and orange. Each table seats four children and has a color-coded basket that holds pencils, glue, scissors, journals, folders, number lines, and unifix cubes. This area is used for whole group seat work, small group instruction, and center time activities. Along this side wall are coat hangers and cubbies for the children’s personal belongings. There are also cabinets available to store classroom material. A daily sign-in chart, shape words, color words, and a Class Word Wall is displayed on the outside of these cabinets. In the back left hand corner is the Art Center. This center contains a sink with storage above and below. There is also a painting easel, a set of shelves, and an old wooden table that seats two children. The shelf in this area is overflowing in supplies, such as: a) yarn; b) scissors; c) clay; d) feathers; e) markers and crayons; and f) glitter. Along the back wall is a large carpeted area that is used for whole group instruction, as well as small group and individual activities. The carpet is bright and colorful, displaying the alphabet in primary colors. This carpet area is large enough to seat everyone in the classroom comfortably. This area is used to conduct morning routines, play games, read stories, sing songs,
89 and complete puzzles. On the left hand side of the carpet is an easel that is complete with a dry erase board on one side, a display area on the other, and Big Book storage underneath. There is a long shelf next to the easel that holds the classroom library. Books are placed in individual baskets that are labeled, such as “Clifford Books,” “Bear Books,” and “Frog and Toad Books.” Baskets are also color-coded for non-readers. Morning routine activities are displayed along the back wall on a bulletin board. Activities displayed include: a) a calendar; b) a birthday graph; c) a hundreds chart; d) an odd and even number chart; e) a weather graph; and f) a “Secret Message of the Day” chart. Next to this area is the Listening Center. This center allows for two children to sit on the floor on over-sized pillows and enjoy several stories that are provided. Along the right edge of the carpet area is the ABC Center. This center includes a pocket chart hanging on a moveable display rack. The pocket chart displays letter cards including beginning letter sounds, blends, and digraphs. Underneath this chart are many small round containers that hold manipulatives for each letter sound. Several pointing sticks are placed in this area. A Poetry Center containing interactive charts and poetry books is found on the other corner of the carpet area. In the back right hand corner of the room is a small carpet area that is used primarily for guided reading time and individual assessment time. This area has two sets of shelves that contain reading series material and browsing books for the children. The children’s portfolios are sitting on top of the shelves. The Computer Center is found in this area as well, housing three computers. Two of the computers are for the children to use to write stories and to play skill- related computer games. The other computer is for the teacher. Next is a file cabinet that holds theme-related units. Next is Mrs. Townsend’s desk which contains items such as: a) individual assessment binders for reading, writing, and math; b) lesson plans; c) modified work for children with special needs; d) containers holding pencils, markers, scissors, and pens; and e) binders containing state standards and district courses of study. Above her desk is a bulletin board designated for “Special Person of the Week.” Every week a different child is chosen to display a chart filled with personal information, family photos, and personal belongings. Along this wall are many center areas. The first center is the Science Center. This center contains many items that are open-ended, such as: a) a scale with items to weigh; b) a tornado maker; c) several magnet wands; d) several prisms; e) three magnifying glasses; and f) a globe. There is also a basket filled with informational books on animals that hatch from eggs. A water and sand table in this area contains: a) sand; b) plastic eggs filled with little animals,
90 like chicks and turtles; c) digging and sifting tools; and d) sorting bowls. Next to this area is the Puppet Theater and the Dramatic Play Area. This area is carpeted and contains the following: a) a shelf holding puppets and a wooden theater; b) a kitchen set and a small plastic table with two chairs; c) a baby doll changing table, crib, and high chair; d) a free standing mirror; and e) a container of dress up clothes and shoes. In the front left hand corner of the room is the Writing Center. This center contains two sets of shelves filled with writing material, such as: a) alphabet books; b) dictionaries; c) journals; d) different shaped writing paper; e) letter stamps and ink pads; f) markers; g) colored pencils; h) crayons; and i) envelopes. A round table with four chairs sits in this area. There is also a bulletin board that is labeled “Love Lines.” This bulletin board has a clothesline strung across it with clothes pins attached. This board is made available for children to send notes to their friends, as well as to Mrs. Townsend. Envelopes are provided so messages are private. A magnetic file cabinet is in this area as well. Magnetic letters are placed on the file cabinet along with a sign displaying theme-related words. Children are encouraged to use the letters to form these words and others from the Class Word Wall. At the front of the room is another carpeted area that holds about six people. This area is the Block Center. This center has two shelves. One contains different sized Legos. The other shelf contains wooden blocks. On top of these shelves are baskets of cars, trucks, small buildings, and people. On the right hand corner of this carpet area is a set of stacked baskets that hold morning and afternoon work. The Math Center is next. It has eight labeled containers that hold material such as: a) unifix cubes; b) counting bears and sorting bowls; c) pattern blocks; and d) geoboards. Children are able to pull containers off the shelf and work with the open- ended materials at a small provided table. At the very front of the room is a small round table that holds two sets of stacked trays for notes, homework folders, and completed work. One is color-coded blue for the morning group and the other is color-coded red for the afternoon group.
A Day in the Life of Room 4 It is 9:00 on a Monday morning. Room 4, which is home to 22 children in the morning and 18 children in the afternoon, is already bustling with life. The educational assistant, the occupational therapist, the intervention specialist, and the speech pathologist are discussing their daily plans and coordinating their schedules so they can better serve the children that they work
91 with in this room. Mrs. Townsend is talking to a parent about working with the children. She then joins the group of teachers and discusses today’s modified work for three children who are identified with special needs. One little boy, Tom, who is confined to a wheel chair, has a new communication tool. It is a computer device that records his voice for frequently used words. When he is unable to communicate them, his teachers can help him push the appropriate button which has a visual reminder. All the teachers are making sure that they understand how to use the device and how to record Tom’s progress. Several of the children begin to arrive in the room. Mrs. Townsend and the other teachers begin to greet the children. “Good morning, friend. Are you excited that your mom is here today?” “Chelsea, how is your kitten today?” “There is our guy Tom! How are you today?” “Thank you, Mike, for helping Tom get to the room today.” “We are so glad to see you today!” Several children ask Mrs. Townsend about a new adult that is sitting in a chair in their room. She tells them that she is a freshman at a local University who wants to be a teacher. She will be observing in their class for the next several weeks. Without being told, the children sign in by putting a mouse on a house with their name on it, put a folder in a blue homework basket, and retrieve a piece of paper from a front table. Once they are at their assigned work table, they begin to work on Daily Oral Language (D.O.L.) and math problems that are written on the front dry erase board. Today’s D.O.L. is “A rainbow is ______.” Math problems include: a) 13 – 8 = ?; b) **!**!**!_ _ _; and c) 7 7 7 (printing). Several children take out unifix cubes and number lines from a container on their table to help them solve the subtraction problem. After the children show their work to an adult in the room and receive a happy face or a star, they place their paper in their mailbox and choose a book from the class library. Then they find a comfy place to read on one of the carpet areas. Mrs. Townsend sees Tiffany struggling with the pattern problem. Her friend, Tami, sits next to her and helps her think it through without giving her the answer. “Tami, helping Tiffany was very kind.” Ricky and Lisa are working with Mrs. Venture, the educational assistant, completing their morning work. Mrs. Townsend goes through the children’s folders, taking out any notes and putting in handouts from the office. The principal comes on the intercom to say the Pledge of Allegiance with the assistance of several chosen children from Mrs. Townsend’s class. The children stand, say the pledge, and return to their morning activities.
92 Mrs. Townsend begins to pull children individually to test letter and sound recognition. She records information on a clipboard. As she is working with one child, Lisa crawls up on her lap and says, “I want to read with you!” She rubs Lisa’s back and tells her to wait one minute. When she is finished testing the little boy, Mrs. Townsend reads the story with Lisa. Two more moms have entered the room and are sitting with a small group of children, helping them with a beginning sound recognition worksheet that they were unable to finish on Friday. Mrs. Townsend then moves to the large carpet area where many children are sitting in beanbag chairs and on large oversized pillows reading. Mr. Roland, the physical therapist, returns to the room and kneels next to Tom, looking at his work. He whispers “Hi!” and Tom pushes the “Bye!” button on his communicator and smiles! “Are you ready to go?” Tom pushes “Bye!” again! Mr. Roland laughs and wheels Tom from the room to begin a therapy session on his arms and legs. Music is turned on to indicate that it is time to put away books and transition to the large carpet area for morning routines. Mrs. Townsend announces that another parent is here to help them make a class book for Madden who will be moving at the end of the week. Each child will either dictate or write a special message for Madden. This will be made into a book and presented to Madden so she can always remember her special classmates. Carpet Time includes: a) calendar; b) weather; c) math equations; d) money; and e) alphabet code message. As Mrs. Townsend is calling on children to help her with these activities, she uses a pattern, such as “boy, boy, girl, girl, boy, boy, girl, girl.” At the end of the morning routine the children try to tell her the pattern and then give it a letter code, such as “a-a- b-b-a-a-b-b.” Several children are tickling each other. “Let’s remember to keep our hands to ourselves.” After a few minutes she bends down next to Logan and whispers “Look in my eyes. You need to listen and sit still.” The children help Mrs. Townsend write a class message. The children share something fun they did over spring break and Mrs. Townsend records it on large chart paper. Through this process, the children indicate where capital letters go and why, where punctuation marks belong and why, and how to spell words they know from the Class Word Wall. Logan continues to disrupt the group and Mrs. Townsend tells him to come sit next to her. The next activity is called “The Mystery Star Student.” Mrs. Townsend reaches into a brown paper bag and reveals the first clue about this week’s “Mystery Student.” The clue is a round ball. “What does this ball tell us about the person? “Who thinks it is a boy?” (Several hands go up.) “Who thinks it is a girl?” (More hands go up.) “Tomorrow we will find out our next clue.”
93 Story time is next. Mrs. Townsend explains that the class will start talking about things that hatch from eggs. Together they make a K-W-L chart, filling in the first column with ideas of what they think they know about this topic. Ideas, such as lizards, fish, roosters, spiders, monkeys, are placed on the chart. Everyone helps read the chart out loud. Then they listen to the story entitled Things That Hatch Out of Eggs.The children then check their guesses. Items that are not correct are crossed off the chart and newly learned information is added. Comprehension questions are then asked. Mrs. Venture is sitting at a table with Ricky and Lisa reading the same book as the class and making their own chart. The children then look at an interactive chick poem. Mrs. Townsend reads the poem first and then the children read it with her. Several children then take turns filling in rhyming words. Mrs. Townsend looks up at the clock and realizes that they need to adjust their schedule this morning. They need to move on to morning seatwork. Tom returns from his morning therapy session. Mr. Roland remains in the classroom to help Tom with his morning routine. A few minutes later, Miss Taylor, the occupational therapist, enters the room and joins Tom and Mr. Roland. Mrs. Townsend sends the children back to their table by colors and begins to explain morning seatwork. Today we are going to begin making a chick book. Each day we will do another page. The title of the book is “What is in the Egg?” What is this a picture of? (A chick) “How many sounds do we hear in chick? Count with me. /ch/ (hold up one finger) /i/ (hold up two fingers) /ck/ (holds up three fingers). Watch me so that you know how to do the first page. Put your eyes on me. First you color the chick and the egg. Then you cut the top of the egg off. Stay on the jagged black line. Next cut out the chick. Then glue the chick and the bottom part of the egg onto the first page of your book. Then glue the top of the egg like this so it looks like the egg is open. Underneath write “chick.” If you can write a sentence, I expect you to do that. Ok. What do we do first? (Color.) What do we do next? (Cut.) What do we do last? (Write.)
Mrs. Townsend places visual reminders of the steps on the front board. Next she explains the other two jobs for the morning. The first job is printing the letter Jj. On the dry erase board she models how to make a letter Jj. The next job is a math worksheet on addition facts to 10. Mrs. Townsend then dismisses the children by their table (green, red, blue, yellow, orange) to go to the morning work basket to get their papers. All the children wait in line to get their morning work. Mrs. Venture, Mr. Roland, and Miss Taylor sit at table with Tom, Lisa, and Ricky. They begin working on printing their name at the top of their paper. Mrs. Venture peels off a sticker
94 that has each child’s name printed in big bold black letters and places it under the “name line” on each child’s worksheet. She then shows them a visual cue card that indicates Seat Work Time. Once the children are settled into their seats, Mrs. Townsend walks to each table to make sure every child knows what to do this morning. She then calls her guided reading group over to the small carpet area by her desk. This group takes turns reading a story they had discussed on Friday. As the children read, she records information in a “Reading Assessment” notebook. The noise level of the room begins to rise and it is difficult for her to hear the children reading. “1, 2, 3, Freeze. Who heard me say we were doing guided reading group this morning? Raise your hands. Who will use their quiet inside voice?” All hands go up. Another mom enters the room and Mrs. Townsend asks her to read with individual children out in the hallway. Mrs. Townsend calls another group to work with her. This group reads a story with her and then completes Reader’s Response Journal. In their journal, they record the title of the story and then write a sentence about their favorite character. As children at the tables begin to complete their morning work, they put their work in their folder and pack up. They hang their coats and back packs on the backs of their chairs. Then they move to Center Time. The children are divided into 5 groups and each group has two centers to complete each day. When they are finished with these centers, they may move to Choice Time. Center Time assignments include: a) Group A completes Art Center and Browsing Box; b) Group B completes Write the Room Activity and Listening Center; c) Group C completes ABC Center, Journal Time, and Interactive Charts; d) Group D completes Writing Center and Top Ten List; and e) Group E completes Question of the Day Activity, Read the Room Activity, and Browsing Box. The room becomes alive with activity. One boy is walking around the room with a clipboard and pencil asking “Can you catch a ball?” He is creating a tally graph with his responses. Children are listening to a story at the Listening Center. Several children are lying on the floor reading. Several children are writing letters and placing them on the bulletin board for their friends. Others are walking around the room with a clipboard and recording “Top Ten” transportation words found around the room. Two children are painting designs on egg-shaped paper while others are rolling out clay. Two girls are walking around the room with large sunglasses on, a clipboard in hand, writing down words that have three sounds (like /c/-/a/-/t/) and words that have four sounds (like /ch/-/a/-/ir/-/s/). Troy, a new student, is having difficulty figuring out what to do next. He walks up to Chris and asks, “Can you show me where to go?” Together they walk over to the Center
95 Time chart. “Find your name up here. You now go to the ABC Center. I will show you where that center is and what to do at that center.” “Thanks!” As children finish their assigned jobs, they begin to move into Choice Centers. Choice Centers include: a) Science Center; b) Reading with a Buddy; c) Reading Alone; d) Puppet Theater; e) Block Center; f) Dramatic Play Center; g) Computer Center; and h) Math Center. Mrs. Townsend notices that Ricky is grabbing blocks from others at the Block Center. She walks over to the center and talks to her quietly about the right way to ask for something in this class. She asks her if she understands and then sends her back to the group to try another approach. She watches her return. Mrs. Townsend spends a few minutes walking to each area of the room, sitting with children, asking questions, reading newly written stories, and enjoying a puppet show. Mrs. Townsend then pulls another reading group to work with her. This group also reads a story and completes Reader Response Journal. These children have to write the title of the book, make a list of all the characters in the story, and write a sentence about their favorite part of the story. After about an hour, Mrs. Townsend flicks the lights on and off. “1, 2, 3, Freeze. Clean up.” She turns on some music while the children begin to clean up their space. She encourages them to help their friends clean up their space if they finish early. After two children walk around the room and inspect the centers and further straighten them up, Mrs. Townsend announces that it is Snack Time. The snack today is a decorated ice cream cone. Children are called to the back table to decorate a vanilla cone with sprinkles, chocolate chips, and wafers. This snack is a class reward that was earned from the previous week. After the children clean up their tables, they line up for recess. Mrs. Townsend asks Tom to pick one friend to escort him to the elevator and help him to the playground. Every child raises his or her hand to be chosen. Mike is chosen for this special job. Mrs. Venture and Mr. Roland take the children outside while Mrs. Townsend remains in the classroom to begin preparing the classroom for the afternoon. She rearranges the morning routine board, puts the Big Books back in order for story time, and prepares material for Guided Reading Time. She places several new items in the children’s portfolios and then checks to make sure she has the modified material ready for one child who has special needs that attends her afternoon session. After about twenty minutes, the children return. After washing their hands and getting a drink of water, the children get their coats and backpacks ready and wait for Mrs. Townsend to
96 call them for dismissal. After the children have left the room, Mrs. Townsend spends a few minutes reviewing afternoon plans with the assistants and specialists. She apologizes to the University student for not being able to spend much time with her. She then turns off the light and heads to the teachers’ lunch room for a quick bite to eat. Her lunch break and planning period today are consumed with an IEP meeting for one of her morning students. After this meeting, she will prepare to greet her afternoon group of kindergartners.
Mrs. Dell’s Story A Guided Tour As you enter Room 5, you become amazed at how many different centers can be placed in one room! Every bit of floor space is utilized with over 25 centers filling this room! Despite the many centers, the room is neatly organized and has a clear traffic pattern. Centers tend to flow from one to the next with theme-related activities in every single center. The class is just finishing two units, including Weather and Animals that Hatch from Eggs. They are beginning a unit on Dinosaurs. Since some children did not have a chance to finish activities at the Science Center and the Language Center last week, materials on weather and eggs are still made available. This room is in a constant state of change. Mrs. Dell explains: Most of our units last about one to two weeks. Therefore, I change every single center every week. Every Monday, the children walk into a new room. The routine is the same at each center, but the activities are different. I change every bulletin board, change every set of theme-related books, put up new interactive charts. Everything is different. You can find me here very late every Friday night!
This is a bright and colorful room that is exploding with language. Throughout the room are unit webs, Venn Diagrams, class stories, KWL charts, story prediction charts, and story wheels. There are sentence strip passages from stories placed in pocket charts for children to arrange in correct order. There are interactive poetry charts. There are message centers, daily news charts, and word posters. Baskets of fiction and nonfiction books are placed in every single center. Class books are displayed on easels throughout the room. Songs and fingerplays are written on poster board and displayed throughout the room. Signs are placed in every center and on many classroom items, including “Art Center,” “closet,” “door,” “telephone,” “Word Family Center,” and “dry erase board.” A large magnetic Class Word Wall is placed on the dry erase board at the front of the room. Every nook and cranny of this room is covered in words!
97 As you enter Room 5, there are three round tables that each seat five children. These tables are used for whole group instruction, individual work, and Literacy Center Time. Since this space does not seat all the children in the classroom, nearby tables in the Art Center and Writing Center are also used during these times. Along the side wall are coat hangers and cubbies for the children to store their belongings. There is also storage above the cubbies for classroom material. Literacy Center Assignments are displayed on the outside of the cabinets as well as a sign-in board and a classroom behavior chart. In the left back corner of the room is a large carpet area that displays the alphabet in bright primary colors. This carpet is large enough for everyone to sit around the perimeter. This area is used to complete Morning Meetings, to listen to stories, to read books with classmates, to play language games, to complete math lessons, and to sing songs. This carpet area is surrounded by many center activities. On one corner of the rug is a hanging pocket chart that displays poems written on sentence strips that the children are able to manipulate. In another corner there is a rocking chair which is also called the Share Chair. Next to this chair sits a large wooden easel that has a display area on top which holds chart paper, a dry erase board on the bottom, and storage on the back side. On the back wall is a large bulletin board that displays many of the materials used in Morning Meeting Time, such as: a) a calendar; b) a weather graph; c) a lost tooth graph; d) a hundreds chart; e) a money chart; f) a math equation board; and g) a tally graph chart. A third corner of the carpet has another easel that displays interactive charts on both sides. The other side of the carpet is lined with a small Reading Center. This area has a small carpet that is big enough for about 6 children. It also has beanbag chairs and pillows for the children to relax on while they choose from baskets of theme-related books and reading skill-level books that are placed on a nearby shelf. There is also a small flannel board and containers filled with flannel board stories. Next to this area is a small table area that has a small tabletop easel displaying poems, interactive charts, and children’s poetry journals. A Listening Center sits along the back wall. This center includes a tape recorder and a wide selection of stories for the children to choose from. Next to this center is an overhead on a moveable cart. Children are able to pull down a movie screen, place transparencies on the overhead, and play word games with a classmate. In the right hand corner of the room is the Computer Center. This center has three computers which children use to write stories and to play skill-related computer games. This corner also has a horseshoe-shaped table that is used for guided reading time, small group
98 activities, and individual conferencing. This corner also has a small work area for Mrs. Dell, a file cabinet, and a bulletin board for the “Special Child of the Week.” This area also has a cart that stores the children’s portfolios, assessment notebooks, and observation notes. Mrs. Dell’s work space also contains: a) lesson plans; b) unit material; c) district and state standards; and d) educational magazines and resources. Many centers line the right hand wall of the room. The first center is the Science Center. This center contains a three-sided display board that currently focuses on Dinosaurs. Several handouts and activities for the children are located in pockets on the display chart. This center has a small shelf containing many manipulatives, such as magnet wands, prisms, and magnifying glasses. There is a butterfly house hanging from the ceiling, hermit crabs in an aquarium, and a class running observation journal. A water and sand table is also in this area which is filled with plastic dinosaurs, sand, and digging tools. Next to this center is the Math Center. This center contains: a) a round table that seats four children; b) a shelf filled with manipulatives; c) theme-related math books; and d) an interactive bulletin board. The next center is the Language Center. This corner area includes a round table that seats four children, two interactive bulletin boards and a shelf containing many manipulatives. Some of these manipulatives include: a) word family games; b) letter tiles; c) word charts; d) alphabet charts; e) children’s alphabet books; f) theme-related alphabet books; and g) rhyming games. A magnetic file cabinet also sits in this area and serves as the Making Words Center. Magnetic letters and theme-related vocabulary word charts are on the sides of the cabinet for children to manipulate. In the front of the room is the Writing Center. This center contains a round table that seats four children. It also has several shelves that contain: a) markers; b) shape-books; c) decorative pens and pencils; d) scissors; e) glue; f) staplers; g) tape; h) envelopes; i) letter stamps and ink pads; and j) children’s journals. An Art Center sits in the front corner of the room. This center has an easel, a small table, and a sink. A large pocket chart hangs on a bulletin board and is filled with supplies for the children to use. Some of the supplies include: a) yarn; b) feathers; c) glitter pens; d) glue; e) scissors; f) foam shapes; g) brown lunch bags; and h) buttons.
99 A Day in the Life of Room 5 It is 9:00 on a Monday morning. Room 5, an all day kindergarten class which is home to 23 students, is just about ready to open its doors for another fun-filled, action-packed week. Mrs. Dell is busy at the back table, cutting out laminated materials for yet another bulletin board activity she has created. She puts finishing touches on the Science Center interactive bulletin board, hangs a new song chart in the carpet area, and adds a few more books to the Writing Center. Mrs. Dell exclaims, “There is never enough time in the day! I have all these cool things I want to share with the children!” As children begin to enter the room, Mrs. Dell continues to make adjustments to the room while she greets the children. She has an energy about her that makes most of the children light up when they see her. “Good morning! Good morning! How are you doing, my friends?” “Did you have a great weekend? I am excited to hear all about it!” She stops to talk individually with children, placing a hand on their shoulder or reciprocating a hug. The children begin to unpack their back packs, sign in by placing a craft stick in a pocket with their name on it, turn in any notes from home, and then find a book to read. This is called “Book Look Time.” Some children are sitting at a table. Some children are lying on the large carpeted area. Other children are sitting on beanbag chairs and oversized pillows. After about 15 minutes, Mrs. Dell turns on music to indicate that it is time to put the books away and join her on the carpet for “Morning Meeting Time.” The children sit on the perimeter of the carpet while Mrs. Dell stands in front of the bulletin board. Morning Meeting Time includes: a) calendar; b) weather; c) room helpers; d) addition and subtraction sentences; e) measuring; f) tally marks; and g) money. Most every activity begins with a song, such as “Days of the Week” (sung to the tune of “The Adam’s Family”) and “Weather Watcher, Weather Watcher” (sung to the tune of “Are you Sleeping, Are You Sleeping, Brother John, Brother John?”). The children sing, clap their hands, and tap their knees to the beat. Mandy and Kyle have a difficult time settling down after the songs. They continue to talk to each other and pat each other on the back while Sue is trying to ask Mrs. Dell a question. Mrs. Dell gently places a hand on Mandy’s shoulder, looks them both in the eye, and reminds them to listen. After a second reminder, they begin to listen. Last is an activity called “Mystery Word.” Each week, Mrs. Dell picks a new word to add to the Class Word Wall. This word is displayed on the bulletin board; however, it is covered up so that the children can not see it. Each day a new letter of the word is revealed. The first letter of the new mystery word is “h.” The children help Mrs. Dell create a chart of possible
100 words. Their guesses include “house,” “hippo,” “hit,” and “horse.” Tomorrow a new letter will be displayed and the children will make corrections to their word list and add new possibilities. At the end of this week, the class will write sentences with this word and place it on their Class Word Wall. During this time, Mrs. Marks, an educational assistant, comes into the room to prepare material for Mrs. Dell’s classroom. She begins making copies, putting notes from the office into the children’s folders, cutting out laminated materials, and collating books on dinosaurs. She then pulls three children to a small table and helps them complete work that they did not finish on Friday. While on the carpet, the class completes a few more activities. The first is “Star of the Week.” Joey is called to the front of the group and gets to sit in the Share Chair. He has brought in a very large stuffed animal snake to share today! The room fills with “Oohs” and “Way Cool, Man!” Joey tells the class what his stuffed animal’s name is, where he got it, and why it is special to him. The children are allowed to ask him three questions about his snake. After the questions are over, Mrs. Dell asks Joey if it would be okay to place his snake in the Math Center so that everyone could have a chance to measure it. Joey nods his head and smiles from ear to ear! They talk about the different items they could use to measure the snake, including nonstandard and standard units. Mrs. Dell also reminds the children to look for patterns on the snake. Joey then gives Mrs. Dell an estimation jar filled with candy. She asks him to place it in the Math Center as well and reminds the class to get their estimations turned in by Friday. The class then participates in “Read Aloud Time/ Book Talk Time.” Mrs. Dell places a Big Book entitled Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs on the easel and asks if any one can read the title. The children discuss the cover of the book and make predictions about possible story events. After Mrs. Dell reads the story, the children discuss the sequence of events. Mrs. Dell records their responses on chart paper, underlining the words “first,” “next,” and “last” with a red marker. Individual children are then called up to place “magic tape” over any words in the story that begin with the /cl/ sound. Mrs. Dell then picks up a large basket that has large, colorful cardboard cubes. She tells the children that they are going to play “Dibbles.” Several children get up on their knees and start clapping. The children scoot back and sit around the edge of the large carpet waving their hands in the air. Three children are called up to roll the dice into the center of the group. One cube is red and has consonants printed on each face of the cube. One
101 cube is yellow and has vowels on each face of the cube. The last cube is green and has consonants printed on each face of the cube. The children take turns rolling the dice and making real and nonsense words, like “pl-o-t,” “tr-i-p,” and “z-a-t.” Children sitting around the edge of the carpet are called on to use these words in oral sentences. When the game is over, Mrs. Dell calls the children by groups to line up for recess including, “If you have red on, you may line up,” “If you have sneakers on, you may line up,” and “If you have a dress on, you may line up.” After about 20 minutes of outdoor recess, the children enter the room, wash their hands, get a drink of water, and prepare for snack time. As the children are enjoying their snack, Mrs. Dell walks around the room describing all the new activities in the centers. She reminds them of activities that must be completed and turned in to her. She demonstrates how to play several interactive bulletin board games. The children then begin to transition into Literacy Centers. There are fifteen Literacy Centers throughout the room. The children are divided into five teams and each team completes three centers each day. Within minutes, the room becomes alive with activity! Several children are walking around the room with clipboards writing down words that have two and three syllables. Several children are wearing big sunglasses and reading the room. A few children are making words with letter tiles. Two children are sitting at the Writing Center creating stories in dinosaur-shaped books. Two boys are lying on the carpet area playing Boggle. Two girls are sitting at a table playing Scrabble. One little girl is using magnetic letters to build words on a file cabinet. One child is pointing to words on poetry charts and matching rhyming words on an interactive chart. A parent volunteer is playing “Magic Vowels” on the overhead with two children. Two children are listening to “The Little Red Hen” at the Listening Center. One boy is building compound words on the bulletin board in the Language Center. Two children are finishing a page in their alphabet book. One child is drawing letters in a box filled with sand. During this time, Mrs. Dell is conducting Guided Reading Time with a small group of children. This group is beginning a new book. Together, they look at the cover of the story, make predictions about story events, and then read the story. While each child reads out loud, Mrs. Dell records information in a reading assessment notebook. The children then write about their favorite part of the story in their Reader’s Response Journal. She sends this group to their next Literacy Center and then begins taking children individually to complete Dibbles testing. She records information in a Dibbles assessment notebook. After working with a few children,
102 Mrs. Dell flicks the lights to indicate Clean Up Time. The children put all their materials away and line up for Lunch, Recess, and Rest Time. After about an hour, the children return to the classroom and sit on the large carpet area for Writing Time. Mrs. Dell sits in the rocking chair and begins to complete the Mystery Message. Mrs. Dell writes a letter to the class but leaves out many letters. The message reads: “Dea_ _oys and _irls, It is _onday_ It is _unny and warm. We _ill lear_ abou_ _inosaurs. _ove, _rs. _ell.” The children watch as she writes the letter and then helps her fill in missing letters and punctuation marks. The class then takes a look at the class message dry erase board that several children used during Literacy Center Time. Some of the messages include “I cn rd my bk.” (I can read my book.) and “My mom is a god coook.” (My mom is a good cook.) Several children share stories that were written during Literacy Center Time. “Let’s show our friends how proud we are of them.” As the children bow, their classmates applaud loudly. The children then move back to their seat for Journal Time. Journals are passed out. Mrs. Dell tells them to open up their journal to the next available page. The children write the date on the next available page. Joey walks around with a stamp for those who need help printing the date. Mrs. Dell tells the children that they are able to write about any topic. She refers to the Class Word Wall and tells the children that she expects them to write learned sight words correctly. The children are encouraged to write complete sentences. She walks around to every table, helping children sound out words and use correct punctuation. As she walks around the room, Mrs. Dell notices that one little boy is crying. She kneels beside him and asks him what is wrong. “Joey colored on my paper.” Mrs. Dell turns to Joey and asks him if this is true. He shakes his head up and down. “Would you like for someone to color on your work?” Joey is silent. “You need to erase that mark and tell Tony you are sorry.” Joey slowly erases the mark and mumbles, “Sorry.” Mrs. Dell rubs Tony’s back and continues to walk around the room. After Journal Time, the class completes a Mr. Pencil Activity, a whole group direction following activity. If the children follow Mrs. Dell’s oral directions correctly, they will have a picture like a windmill, a jack-in-the-box, or a house. This is the last page in the book. The children are able to take the books home to share with their families. Mrs. Dell then introduces a new poem called Rain. She reads it orally for the children while pointing to the poetry chart. The children chime in the second time. Mrs. Dell passes out small copies of the poem in book form to all the tables. Words are left out on each page, and the children need to fill in the blanks. For example,
103 “Rain on the (grass), Rain on the (house).” When the children are done, they move to the large carpet area for Buddy Reading Time. They share their new poetry book with a classmate. After about ten minutes, Mrs. Dell tells the children that it is Math Time. Today they are reviewing telling time to the hour and to the half-hour. Mrs. Dell quickly reviews what they have learned about telling time in previous lessons. Mrs. Dell uses a large clock to demonstrate how to make different times like 1:00, 1:30, and 5:00. She holds up a very large red hour hand and a small red minute hand and asks the children to tell her their function. She then passes out small clocks to each child. “Show me 2:00.” The children move the hands on their clocks and hold them up to show her. She then moves the hands on her large clock to demonstrate the correct answer. Several children are called to write the time in digital form on the dry erase board. Mrs. Dell notices that two children are not moving the hands on their clocks. “Check your neighbor’s work. See if they know where the hands should be. If not, help them.” After several examples are completed, Mrs. Dell collects the clocks and tells the class that they are going to wrap up their egg unit with a fun jelly bean math activity. Many children jump up and cheer! “Ok, boys and girls. Settle down so we have time to do it.” The children try to sit back down; however, many are still wiggling in place! She reads them the story Jelly Beans for Sale. This story involves counting by fives and tens and money. Mrs. Dell then tells the children that she has hidden eggs around the room that have jelly beans in them. As she calls out their name, the children are allowed to search the room for one egg and then return to their seat. Once everyone is back at their seat, Mrs. Dell passes out a piece a graph paper to each child. “Can we eat our candy, PLEASE?” “Once the activity is done, you can eat it.” The children are then instructed to open up their egg and sort the jelly beans by color. When they are done, they need to lay the jelly beans onto the graph paper to make a physical representation. Then they are to use their crayons to fill in the corresponding space for each jelly bean. After adding a title to their graph, the children are instructed to turn their paper over and write an addition sentence to represent the total number of jelly beans in the egg. Mrs. Dell, Mrs. Marks, and a parent helper walk around the room and assist the children. “Mica, what is nine minus one?” “Eight.” I think you need to change your number for the yellows. I saw you sneak one!” “Oh, rats!” As this activity is going on, the parent helper walks over to me and whispers, “She is always doing such fun things with the children. I’m so glad my daughter has her.” After the activity is over, Mrs.
104 Dell encourages the children to share their graphs with the other children at their table. Finally, they are allowed to eat the jelly beans! While they are enjoying the candy, Mrs. Dell begins to call out children’s names, asking what Developmental Center they want to go to today. These centers include: a) Book Corner; b) Science; c) Computers; d) Art; e) Math; and f) Writing Center. Only four children are allowed at each center and the children remain at their center the entire time. Mrs. Dell records their choice on a clipboard, making sure that the children visit all the centers throughout the week. After about a half-hour, the children go outside for a quick recess. When the children return from outside, it is Theme Time. This time is dedicated to social studies and science units. This week’s science unit is called Dinosaurs. The children sit as a whole group on the large carpet area, ready to start their new unit. “I can’t wait! I know everything about dinosaurs!” “Well, I can name every dinosaur there is.” “Dinosaurs aren’t around any more. They are stink!” Mrs. Dell laughs and says, “You mean extinct.” “Yeah, that’s it.” She tells the class that they are going to make a K-W-L chart together to see what they think they know and what they want to learn. When the chart is finished, Mrs. Dell reads them a book called Dinosaur, Dinosaur. The children then help Mrs. Dell cross off incorrect information and add newly learned information to the previously made chart. The children are then sent back to their table and begin to create a dinosaur fact book. After completing one page together, Mrs. Dell realizes that they are out of time for the day. “Boys and girls, please close your books. We will work on this again tomorrow.” The children are once again called to the carpet area where they sit in circle for about ten minutes for Sharing Time and Wrap up Time. The children are called by tables to pack up and clean up the room. The children then line up for dismissal when their bus number is called. Once the children leave the room, Mrs. Dell straightens up the Science Center, makes a few adjustments to the interactive bulletin board in the Literacy Center, and heads to the teacher workroom to make copies. She has a lot to do before her children return tomorrow morning!
105 Chapter Five Teachers’ Beliefs and Practice
Once the interviews and observations were conducted, the data was coded, categorized, and combined to produce emerging themes. These themes were used to develop the following discussion, which was guided by the research questions. These questions included: a) What are the teacher-informants’ beliefs about the role of kindergarten? b) What are the teacher- informants’ beliefs about how children learn? c) What are the teacher-informants’ beliefs about appropriate practices? d) What do practices in their own classrooms look like? and e) What elements impact the teacher-informants’ program design? These five subsidiary questions were developed to gain a deeper understanding of the overarching research question: How do the beliefs of kindergarten teachers’ affect their use of developmentally appropriate practices in their classrooms? In the following chapter, I will first use each teacher’s own words to better understand her beliefs about kindergarten children and appropriate classroom practices. In addition, this chapter will focus on observed practices in each teacher’s classroom. At times, it will be apparent to the reader that the teachers’ beliefs and practice are not fully consistent. I will, however, reserve an explicit discussion of these inconsistencies for the next, and last, chapter.
Mrs. Manford’s World Her Views Mrs. Manford has ten years of teaching experience, all at the kindergarten level. She is currently teaching full-day kindergarten, a program that was newly implemented in the district. She expresses her love for this grade level and hopes that she will teach kindergarten for the rest of her teaching career. She comes from a long line of kindergarten teachers, including her mother, her grandmother, and her great aunt. I guess it is in my blood. We just love this age group. They are so inquisitive, honest, and eager. They come to school excited and with bright eyes. It makes me love being here every day! Plus they still love their teacher! I value those hugs! I can’t imagine teaching any other grade.
106 Beliefs About the Role of Kindergarten Mrs. Manford views kindergarten as one of the most important steps in a child’s life. Even if children have had previous “school” experiences, she believes nothing compares to the kindergarten experience. Mrs. Manford stresses that the biggest role of kindergarten is introducing children to the “world of school.” Kindergarten is to prepare them for “what school is really like.” She also believes that an important role of kindergarten is to further the child’s social-emotional and physical development. Kindergarten is a time to build each child’s self- esteem, to make friends, and to learn how to get along with others. She believes that it is important to have plenty of opportunities for social interaction and play. Another important role of kindergarten is to “lay a strong foundation” so that the children are better prepared for the next years in school. Mrs. Manford believes it must prepare them for first grade. Kindergarten is where it is at! Our job is to make these little ones love school - to show them how much I love school and learning and to get them just as excited. They need to learn that school is a fun place to be. There needs to be a great emphasis on making friends and playing. We really need to lay a strong foundation for them. They need to feel successful and how to get along with other children.
Although social skills are a priority for Mrs. Manford, she stresses that this “strong foundation” also includes academic skills as well. These academic skills include letter sounds, letter association, sight words, and number recognition. We need to provide a strong foundation in areas like math, science, social studies, and especially reading. We really need to focus on early literacy. We need to teach them that reading is fun. This foundation is more of an introduction, an exposure. There are certain skills that they should know, like letter recognition, their name, left to right progression, counting to 20, things like that. Mostly, though, it is a building block process, taking what they know and then building upon that. However, it has to be more than just knowing these skills. They need to know how to apply them. They need meaningful ways to use them.
Beliefs About Children’s Learning and Developing Mrs. Manford believes that children need to be actively involved in the learning process. Children at this age are very active, concrete learners. They construct knowledge through experiences that allow them to use all five senses, to test out their own ideas, and to ask questions. Children need plenty of time to explore materials in ways that they see important. They need opportunities to manipulate their environment, to move freely around the room, and to
107 interact with adults and peers. Activities also need to be personally relevant and meaningful to the children. She believes that children learn more effectively through interacting with child- related activities that are open-ended.
Beliefs About DAP Mrs. Manford believes that appropriate practices are those that take into consideration the age of the child as well as the child’s unique qualities. Every child has his or her own special gifts, interests, needs, and learning styles. The planned activities and experiences must value what each child brings to the classroom. Appropriate practices are those that meet the child where he or she is at instead of those that try to force a child into a particular “kindergarten mold.” Appropriate practices allow for the child and the teacher to make decisions together about what goes on in the classroom. Appropriate practices value choice, exploration, interaction, and flexibility. Mrs. Manford believes that at this age play should be the primary means of learning. However, she stresses that play is not a “free for all time” where children can do whatever they want. She describes play as “play with a purpose.” Educationally relevant activities and experiences are planned by the teacher in the form of center material and lessons. There are goals and objectives that guide her planning, yet there is a lot of flexibility to allow the children to direct the activities and determine the outcome. It is important for the children to be able to have choices and to be personally involved in the classroom. Mrs. Manford discusses the importance of personal connections: Children need to make a personal connection with what we are doing. If they are not able to connect, then it really isn’t going to mean anything to them. What is the point? They need a lot of concrete materials, things that they are actually doing, things that they are able to manipulate. They should not just sit and listen to teacher talk. They need to be read to. Sometimes we get so carried away with making sure that they can read that we forget that they need to be read to. It is in my plans every single day. It is not an option. They need to have gross motor time every single day. They need to play. They need art, painting, finger-painting, things they can do with their hands. They need time to manipulate things with their hands, things like clay and Play-doh. They need a lot of visuals. All these connections are very important to their construction of knowledge. They need to see it, feel it, hear it, experience it in order to understand it. They need to be able to do what you are expecting them to do. We have to remember that they are little children, not adults.
108 Mrs. Manford believes that instruction needs to be a balance between child-directed and teacher-directed instruction. This balance will help the children become better prepared for their first grade experience. Activities need to be well balanced. There needs to be a lot of hands-on experiences. This age is still very active, still very concrete learners. They need to have the visuals in front of them to manipulate. But I think they also need a mixture of when they are sitting on the carpet area, when they need to sit and listen. You also need to mix in the seatwork. As they go on in school, first grade and on, it just becomes more and more. So they need that exposure. If we don’t show them what it is like now, we might set them up for a very difficult next year. Everything needs balance. I think some structured activities during the day are good for them. It teaches them responsibility.
Mrs. Manford stresses that instruction must remain a “healthy balance” between the two approaches. Teachers, however, must not allow themselves “to overuse teacher-directed instruction.” There are times when this approach meets the needs of the classroom; however, “it should not be used extensively with this age or any age for that matter.” Mrs. Manford also discusses practices that she believes are not appropriate for this age group. She discusses practices at the classroom level and at the school-wide level. At this level, sitting in a chair all day is very inappropriate. They do need to be ready for first grade, but teachers can get carried away with this goal. First grade in our district still uses a lot of hands-on, but there is more time where they work independently. So I think it is ok for us to expose them to that type of activity, but it needs to be relevant, not busy work, and should not occupy a great deal of their time. It is inappropriate if that is all they do. Spending extended periods of time listening to me talk is not appropriate. If the children have not interjected in the last five minutes then there is too much “teacher talk.” We do whole group activities, like Carpet Time, Story Time. Carpet Time needs to be interactive or you lose them. They need to be actively participating, even during these more teacher-directed times.
In regards to schoolwide practices, Mrs. Manford makes reference to rules about walking in the hall, attending special school functions, and rest time. I also think that our expectations for rules schoolwide are sometimes inappropriate. As far as attending assemblies, like how they sit still or have to be quiet for a long time, not talking, speaking, or moving. You really can’t expect a 5 or 6 year old to sit for 30 minutes. Also for these little ones not to talk when going from one classroom to the other, walking in the hall. Our school is better about this than most, though. It is ok for a soft whisper. We just don’t want to interrupt others. It is more about respect for others than control. Another one is going to rest time and not moving or saying a word. Little ones can’t do this. Again, we have to remember they are children.
109 Beliefs About Outside Influences Over the last few years, Mrs. Manford has found herself moving further away from a more developmentally appropriate approach. She discusses several issues that have impacted her program over the last 10 years, including state standards, time, physical space, and funding. She admits that her classroom would look a lot different if she did not have to deal with the fore- mentioned issues. There is such a push for academics being felt at the kindergarten level. This comes from testing, standards, and parents. If I were an independent person and didn’t have to follow state standards and other guidelines, my classroom would look different. I would have more things in my classroom like a house keeping area, a dramatic play area, a puppet theater, etc. It would be possible to do all those things. State standards do impact what I do. Our curriculum is so packed now that we just can’t do it all. It seems like we are running out of time in the classroom to do all the fun stuff. Another issue for me is space, classroom space, which I know is a lame excuse. Last year I had a bigger room. I had a puppet theater and a house center and a water/sand table and a block center. Then I got moved to this room downstairs. This room is a third of my old room. I actually had to get rid of stuff. I know I should bring it back but at the beginning of the year when I get money, I think, ummm…what can I buy? I think of reading material first. I don’t know if it is the push for all of the “No Child Left Behind” stuff and all the testing or what. But the only way I can emphasize early literacy is by having books, lots of books, in my room. We really don’t have a lot so I use my allocation money to get more. As much as I think these children still need these experiences in kindergarten, there just doesn’t seem to be enough time or support for it. It really should be more of a priority to start putting some of those things back into our rooms. They need a puppet theater and a dramatic play area. But, listen to me. I took them away. I’m not helping matters any.
Mrs. Manford’s Practice Learning Environment Mrs. Manford spends a great deal of time creating a learning environment that is comfortable and child-friendly. She gives great care to the arrangement of the room. She carefully plans the physical layout of her classroom and is constantly evaluating it to make sure it is meeting the needs of all her children, particularly her children with special needs. She rearranges the room as needed. She provides a print-rich environment that is calm and soothing to the eye. Children’s artwork, stories, and letters are displayed throughout the room. I have many children who experience sensory overload, both visually and auditorially. I need to be very sensitive to this issue. The children are able to hang their creations wherever they want in this room and I believe this room is visually appealing. I have
110 found, though, that a cluttered look can be overwhelming to many of my little ones. So I try to go easy on what is displayed and the amount of material that is available for choice. Some children just can’t handle it. I take the approach of providing a pretty blank room at the beginning of the year with regards to visuals and materials and then add to it. It has been good for me to see what children can manage. Our room sort of evolves. Right now it is a little busy visually, but the children have asked me not to take it down. Sort of a Montessori approach to the environment.
Her room has a well-designed traffic pattern that allows for natural transitions from one center or workspace to the next. The physical layout is designed to allow an adult to observe the entire classroom from any position in the room. Moveable equipment lends itself to a flexible arrangement. Alternate workspaces are intermixed throughout the room, including whole group areas (large carpet areas), small group areas (small tables with chairs), and individual work spaces (desks, oversized pillows, and beanbag chairs). Spaces are provided for privacy and enclosure, yet the room is arranged so that the children have room to move about. Carpets and soft rugs are used throughout the room to help absorb sound, making it more acoustically sensitive. Individual places are provided for children who have self-control issues. Centers and workspaces are organized according to the noise level and to the amount of concentration that is required for the activity. For example, the game and block centers are stationed across the room from the reading and writing centers. The environment is fully stocked with interesting materials and experiences. Centers contain mostly open ended, multiple-use material. Materials are attractively displayed on low open shelves that allow easy access to the children. Children are able to choose what they want to work with and where they want to work in the room. Materials are displayed in color-coded plastic containers that are labeled with words and pictures to assist the children in their choices. Materials are changed every two weeks along with the studied theme. However, repeated experiences with some materials are provided, such as pattern blocks, unifix cubes, lacing links, and checkers. Center-based instruction is highly valued within this classroom. Most centers are subject-related, such as Math Center, Writing Center, Reading Center, ABC Center, and Science Center. The centers incorporate the studied theme, creating an integrated approach. There are over fifteen centers in this classroom that are filled with relevant hands-on materials. Although all the centers are designed with goals and objectives in mind, many of the activities are open-
111 ended in design. For example, the Math Center includes manipulatives like pattern blocks, unifix cubes, tangrams, counting bears, sorting trays, and play money. The Writing Center is fully stocked with writing supplies, including markers, stickers, pencils, pens, blank books, lined and unlined paper, letter stamps, and dictionaries. The Science Center includes items such as magnifying glasses, prisms, magnets, scales, rocks, microscopes, and tornado makers. The Language Center includes items such as letter tiles, magnetic letters, dry erase boards, markers, and foam letters. Each center is filled with quality literature and language-rich material such as subject-related books, poetry, and interactive charts. More teacher-directed activities are also found at the centers. During Center Time, the children must complete daily assignments that are planned by Mrs. Manford. However, she tries to build flexibility into most jobs. For example, at the Writing Center the children are given the theme of “Spring.” Spring vocabulary words, flower paper, butterfly paper, flower stamps, and rainbow pencils are provided for the children. Even though the topic is provided, the children have the opportunity to write or dictate a relevant story, poem, or even cartoon strip. At the Listening Center, the children are to listen to The Very Hungry Caterpillar and then draw a picture of their favorite part of the story or their favorite character. At the Math Center, the children are to open up a packet of Rainbow Skittles, sort them by color, and make a bar graph representing their findings. At the Science Center, the children are to water their plant, measure its growth, and record the findings in their science log. At the Language Center, the children are to use magnifying glasses and newspapers to search for words that rhyme with /sun/ and /bug/ and cover the discovered words with magic tape. At the Art Center, the children are to paint a rainbow scene using the colors in the spectrum and copy a rainbow poem. At the Reading Center, the children are to choose several books from their Browsing Box and record the titles of the books in their reading logs. Centers are “geared slightly below average since it is independent work so children can complete it successfully.” Centers are changed every week except for stationary centers, like Listening Center, Reading Center, and Computer Center. Mrs. Manford creates a daily schedule that provides a balance of work and play experiences. For example, there is time to play board games with friends, time to eat snacks and socialize, time to write in journals, time to participate in guided reading groups, time to practice handwriting, and time to come together as a large group. Mrs. Manford refers to large group time as “Community Time.” She states:
112 It is important for the children to understand the concept of community. We need time during the day to come together. We need to know each other, to share ideas and thoughts, to learn new concepts together. Despite our respect for individuality, we need to learn that we are a family as well. We have others we depend on and care about.
There is also a balance between active and quiet times throughout the day. For example, during the morning the children move from reading quietly alone, to having lively conversations and activities at Carpet Time, to completing moderately structured grouptime experiences and seatwork, to engaging in highly interactive Center Time and Choice Time experiences, to participating in outdoor recess activities. Children have access to outdoor or gross motor play two times every single day. Mrs. Manford explains: It is so important for them to expend that energy and use their little bodies – no matter what. Weather is not going to stop that nor will our schedule. They will do this every day. This is a very important part of the day for them. They need to play and move and be with their little friends.
Within this daily schedule, Mrs. Manford has created a system that allows her to remain flexible and to make daily changes to better meet the needs of the children. The daily schedule is displayed for the children and is designed to be physically rearranged as well. The classroom schedule has structure; yet, it allows for flexibility. If the children are truly engaged in an activity, she allows them to continue on instead of moving on to the next planned activity. Mrs. Manford will “go with ideas” or experiences that are great educational opportunities for the children. Mrs. Manford explains this approach: Children need to see that school is a place where their ideas are valued and important. They need to feel like they are listened to. They often come up with a way I never thought of. I learn a lot from them. They need to understand that about teaching and learning. It is a give and take relationship. We are in this together.
A good portion of the day revolves around Center Time and Choice Time. This portion of the day provides an opportunity for the children and adults to have unrushed time for less structured child-initiated activities. This is a very active time of the day. Children are seen moving around the room, completing daily jobs, choosing from a variety of material, showing their work to Mrs. Manford, and then moving on to the next choice. The teacher assistant works with small groups of children on various reading and math skills. These groups are playing letter Bingo, rolling dice and moving pieces along a counting board game, and taking turns pointing to rhyming words on an interactive poetry chart. Children are seen painting pictures together,
113 measuring the length of the room together, helping each other write stories, playing team checkers, playing games on the computer together, and reading aloud to adults. Parents float in and out of the room, taking the children one at a time to write a story. They help children at the Listening Center. They read stories with small groups of children. They assist children in making covers for their newly published books. Children and adults move in and out of areas as jobs and choices are completed, talking with each other, taking turns, solving problems, and contributing ideas. The adults walk around the room, stop at each area, and sit down with the children. Sometimes they ask questions. Sometimes they engage in the children’s play. Sometimes they just sit and watch. Every child receives attention numerous times throughout this large allotted period of time. At the end of Choice Time, Mrs. Manford uses music and movement as a way to transition the children into the next activity for the day. Sometimes she turns on their favorite CD to signal “Clean Up Time.” Other times she sings, “Clean up, clean up. Everybody, every where. Clean up, clean up. Everybody do their share.” Everyone in the room pitches in, including the adults. Then everyone prepares for the next experience. Mrs. Manford works diligently to make all children feel a sense of belonging in the classroom. She includes all children in instruction and modifies activities to better meet the needs of her children. This includes those children with special needs and those who need extra reinforcement or challenge in a particular skill. Visual cues and the daily schedule are displayed for everyone on the front board. Several children have their own set of visual cue cards and a daily schedule at their table so adults can help them personally understand the classroom routine. The alphabet is displayed at certain tables in Braille to assist a child whose vision is rapidly deteriorating. She provides weekly and daily lesson plans for children with IEPs (Individual Educational Programs). These plans are made with her teaching assistant and are adjusted daily as needed. She works with her teacher assistant to make sure the children with hearing aides have functioning equipment and are positioned in Mrs. Manford’s direct line of sight for lip reading during group time. She has taught the rest of the class to use sign language, lip reading, and visual cues to communicate with one another. There are several specialists in the room throughout the day, including an occupational therapist, a speech pathologist, a special education aide, and a physical therapist, that help Mrs. Manford better meet the needs of the children. These individuals work specifically with children diagnosed with special needs.
114 Learning Experiences Mrs. Manford provides a variety of experiences in the daily planning. Experiences include opportunities to work alone, to work with a partner, to work with a small group, and to work with the whole class. Children are seen working by themselves in cozy nooks under tables, next to other children at the Writing Center, and with other children at the Game Center. Children are allowed to move at their own pace. They are able to interact frequently with others, use their imagination, and set their own challenges. Children are often heard saying, “Mrs. Manford, I think I am ready for a harder computer game”; “Mrs. Manford, do you have any chapter books I could read?”; or “Mrs. Manford, can you show me how to use this dictionary?” These questions are responded to and used to take the children to the next level in their learning. Play is used as a medium for learning throughout the day. Active participation and first hand experiences dominate the environment. Children spend the majority of their day moving about the room, handling manipulatives, experimenting with materials, and playing games. Classroom experiences provide a daily balance of reading, writing, listening, and speaking. Mrs. Manford uses every opportunity to teach children about the value of books and to show them her love for reading. She reads to the children every single day. Literacy expression, story telling, dramatic play, and inventive spelling are a part of this daily experience. She provides opportunities for choral reading, singing, and dancing. She uses songs, fingerplays, and rhymes to introduce activities, to teach particular skills, and to provide enjoyment. She is often heard saying, “Come on, friends. Join me on this one.” or “Oh, this song is too good to sit through. Let’s get up and BOOGIE!” She joins the children in their excitement and laughs at her own dancing and singing ability. She allows the children to express their enthusiasm for activities and cheers them on for their accomplishments. She incorporates their “favorites” and does not mind “listening to the same song 50 times or rereading a story over and over.”
Teaching Strategies Mrs. Manford uses several types of approaches to instruction within the classroom program. She uses whole group instruction (Carpet Time, Handwriting Time, Seatwork Time), small group instruction (Center Time, Choice Time, Guided Reading Time) and individual instruction (D.O.L. Time, Book Look Time, Seatwork Time). She uses a combination of child- directed and teacher-directed experiences to guide the instruction. There is a balance between
115 opportunities for the children to choose their own experiences and for the children to participate in activities planned and directed by Mrs. Manford. In some structured experiences, Mrs. Manford allows the children to guide the activities. For example, the routine during Morning Carpet Time is developed by Mrs. Manford. However, the activities are led by the children. She tends to fade into the background and allows the children to “run the show.” Children become the Calendar Leader, the Meteorologist, and the Banker leading the class through the routine. With the help of the student volunteer, the children graph the daily weather, add numbers to the number line, count by 2s, 5s, and 10s, and find the value of the daily coins. Mrs. Manford encourages the children to add their own “flair” to the experience. For example, two little boys brought in suit coats and a microphone to help them with the “Daily News.” Mrs. Manford exclaimed, “What a clever idea! You really look the part!” At the end of this time, Mrs. Manford comes forward and begins a language experience with a song. Volunteers are then called forward to help with this experience by reading out loud, pointing to words, and leading choral reading. She also incorporates direct instructional approaches, including Carpet Time, Handwriting without Tears Time, Journal Time, Guided Reading Time, Message of the Day Time, and occasional theme-related projects. These planned experiences usually last about 10 to 15 minutes in duration. During these experiences, Mrs. Manford assumes a direct leadership role in the classroom. For example, during Handwriting Without Tears, she stands in front of the children, models the correct formation of a letter on the dry erase board and directs the children to practice the letter on their paper. She then walks around the room, checks the children’s work, provides feedback, and then proceeds with another letter. During these more structured times, she uses any and every opportunity to actively involve the children. She uses volunteers to be “The Pointer” –leading the rest of the class in oral reading. She gives every child a miniature clock to manipulate during a whole-group math activity. She provides every child with a small copy of the Big Book and a word wand so they can participate in whole-group literature time. Throughout the day, Mrs. Manford assumes many different roles in the classroom. She arranges the classroom environment and prepares the activities and experiences. She facilitates group activities and supervises Center and Choice Time. Mrs. Morgan has a high level of involvement with the children throughout the day. She constantly walks around the room, meets with each child, and extends his or her learning. She observes every child in his or her chosen
116 activity. She is often seen observing, asking questions, and engaging in play. She is often so engaged with the children that it is difficult to distinguish her from the children. She is sitting on the floor listening to a child read, working at a table helping a child with a puzzle, or lounging in a bean bag chair helping a child finish writing a poem. She is usually on the children’s level, listening intently, and making eye contact. I am a caretaker, a role model, an educator, a mother, a nurturer, and a facilitator; the list goes on and on. I am whatever the children need me to be. I am definitely not a dictator, that’s for sure. I hate to sit and hover over a child and say, “Do this. Do that. You are not doing this. Fix that.” I think there is time when you need to do direct instruction. But most of the day is set up where they can work independently and I am there to supervise and facilitate their learning. I am there to be a kid watcher. I try to extend their learning by asking challenging questions, by providing different material and activities. My job is also to find out what they are interested in and imbed that into our program.
She has created a classroom of mutual respect. She has a positive stance and is very friendly to the children and other adults in the room. She uses a calm, nurturing approach to the children – constantly interacting with them, participating in their play, asking questions, and redirecting them when necessary. Opening activities set a positive tone for the day. Children are greeted every day with “Good Morning!” “So glad you are here!” and “We sure missed you!” She talks to each child as he or she signs in and turns in notes. She also connects with each child while walking around the room during SeatWork time and Choice Time. She gives all the children regular attention. She provides nonverbal support when needed. She is often seen winking at a child, giving pats on the back, and thumbs up. Mrs. Manford values the children as partners. At the beginning of the year, the children help develop classroom rules. They are free to talk to her about activities. They let her know when they need help or when they would like to try something new. She encourages the children to share their many ideas, thoughts, and answers. She has arranged the environment to help children become self-reliant learners. Materials, such as staplers, hole punchers, tape, and scissors, are made available to the children. She has high expectations for those children and encourages them to always do their best and take pride in their work. The children show a strong sense of responsibility within this classroom, particularly for completing certain work tasks. They complete journals, daily assignments, work logs, investigations charts independently during their Morning Work Time. The children know the routines throughout the day and are able to make transitions from one activity to the next without any prompts. From entering the
117 room, unpacking, completing D.O.L., checking mailboxes, packing up, to lining up for dismissal, the children know what is expected of them throughout the day. Children are also responsible for “running” the room. They take ownership by assuming classroom duties, such as “Office Messenger,” “Pledge Leader,” and “Line Leader.”
Motivation and Guidance Mrs. Manford models appropriate behavior and sets high expectations for behavior in the classroom. She recognizes that each year brings a new group of children and a new set of challenges. Classroom management must be based on each classroom’s specific needs, not a “one-size-fits-all approach.” At the beginning of the year, Mrs. Manford and the children develop classroom rules that are posted in the classroom. Children sign their names to the rules as a symbol of agreement. Rules are also sent home at the beginning of the year. When problems occur in the classroom, Mrs. Manford schedules Community Time to discuss the best way to handle the situation. She helps the children resolve issues, helps them think through situations, leads discussions about better options, and provides them with appropriate language. She reminds children of appropriate behavior, such as “How can you get my attention?” or “Next time, please raise your hand.” She does not allow the children to say or do hurtful things to each other. Consequences are logical. For example, “if you make a mess, you clean it up. If you make fun of someone, you apologize either verbally or in a note.” She helps the children learn from their mistakes and helps them take responsibility for their own behavior. She uses a combination of verbal and behavioral reinforcements. Occasionally she will provide a classroom reward, such as a cooking experience. When needed, Mrs. Manford will use a school-wide card system for individual children. She will also rearrange seating and create boundaries on the carpet area.
Curriculum Mrs. Manford takes many steps to develop her classroom program. The district and state standards serve as guides for the goals and objectives that she must cover for the year. She must make sure that her children have met the given objectives by the end of the year. However, she takes into consideration the group of children she has each year and adjusts those goals accordingly.
118 It really depends a lot on the kids too. Last year I had a very low developing group, very young who were not ready to do a lot. They still get the same exposure that the kids get this year, but on a very basic level. This year I have a very high developing group so we have been taking things and running with it. I think it is important for teachers to do that. If you come in every year with the same lesson plans and say, “These are my plans and we are going to do them whether the kids are getting it or not,” then I think that is when we fail because you are either boring them to death because they already know it or they are frustrated because you are teaching way over their heads. You have to look at your class every year and say, “Ok, this is where we are and this is what we need to do with them.”
At the beginning of the year, she spends time with each child to determine where he or she is in regards to skills like letter recognition, number recognition, counting, and interest in reading. She then establishes a baseline for the class. She seeks those that are above or below the baseline and uses that as a guide for designing experiences and activities. Whole group activity is based on the baseline and small group activity is based on skill level for reading and math. Small groups are flexible and based on need. Curriculum is then developed through thematic units, such as Plants, Farms, and Spring. She selects general topics prior to the school year; however, the emphasis of those topics and concepts is shaped by the needs and interests of the children. Themes usually last about two weeks. She constantly encourages the children to share their ideas and often uses their ideas to further develop a lesson or a unit. We work together to plan. I pick and choose and they pick and choose. But sometimes I have to step in because they pick some crazy things which I don’t think are appropriate, like Captain Underpants! There is no way I will turn that into a theme! Do I discourage their interest in that? No way! They are interested in a book! But maybe there is something embedded in one of those books that really interests the children and we can use that as a focus. I love when kids bring up something that would be interesting for us to research. Things just naturally turn into a theme. I have my plans for the year, but I always let them take the lead. If we are doing something and out of that comes another topic of interest, then I will go with it. I have no problem with that whatsoever.
Parents play an active role in this classroom. Every day Mrs. Morgan has two to three adults volunteer to work with the children. Parents help the children at centers, with their daily jobs, and with special class projects. Mrs. Manford also takes several steps to communicate regularly with the parents. She sends home weekly class letters and makes frequent phone calls to every parent. Parents are also encouraged to share their special talents or hobbies with the children. They are also encouraged to share special family traditions or celebrations with the class.
119 Assessment Assessment is ongoing and diagnostic. Mrs. Manford uses a variety of assessment approaches throughout the year to determine student readiness for ideas and skills, interests, and learning profiles. She uses a combination of anecdotal notes, checklists, work samples, and DIBELS assessment to gather information on each child. This information is used to adjust the program in regards to experiences, activities, and pace. She assesses each child every month to determine his or her progress, to plan individual activities for that child, and to plan small group reinforcement experiences. She frequently walks around the room with a clipboard and jots down observations. At the end of the day, this information is transferred to the children’s files. She also assesses the classroom as a whole before beginning a theme or a unit, using KWL charts, webbing activities, brainstorming, and interest surveys.
Mrs. Morgan’s World Her Views Mrs. Morgan has taught kindergarten for her entire teaching career. She expresses her love for this age group and the fact that she has never wanted to teach another grade level. She is “comfortable” in her role – or at least she has been up until the last few years. She discusses all the different methods of teaching that have “gone in and out of style. If you wait long enough, it will always come back – just like fashion. I have seen it all – several times.”
Beliefs About the Role of Kindergarten Mrs. Morgan claims that the last 5-8 years have been the most challenging of her career. She has always felt that kindergarten was “isolated to some degree from the elements of the elementary school.” This is no longer the case. She believes a lot of the “fun” has been taken from kindergarten. Over the years she has witnessed many changes in areas such as curriculum, programming, and assessment. In my 25 years, I have seen a huge change – more now than ever. What we used to do in first grade is now being done in kindergarten and what used to be done in kindergarten is now done in preschool. Speaking of preschool, most children did not go. Now it is the socially expected thing to do. When I first started, the kindergartners were 5 years old. Now most of them are 6 years old. Kindergarten used to be only half-day with a nap and recess in there. Now we have some full day programs that barely have time to play. Kindergarten was not mandatory. Most states now require it. We used to accept all
120 children of age. Now we test them to see if they are ready for us. We offer prekindergarten for children who are not ready for kindergarten and a two-year program for those children who are not ready for first grade. Everything is different. It used to be a fun, social, laid back experience. Not any more.
Despite these changes, Mrs. Morgan still seems to view kindergarten as an extremely important step in each child’s academic career. Even though some children have already had previous group experiences, like day care, nursery school, and preschool, before entering her classroom, Mrs. Morgan describes kindergarten’s role as introducing children to the school environment and to “the way of the school.” Mrs. Morgan discusses the fact that the early care experiences are very diverse in program design. Therefore, one can not assume that children enter kindergarten with this knowledge. Children need to learn what is expected of them so that they can be better prepared for later schooling. Children need to have an understanding of what it means to be “a student” and the expectations that go along with that new role. Kindergarten is the foundation for their whole school career, despite what they have had before. Our biggest goal is to introduce kids to school, to lay that strong foundation, to prepare them for what school will be like. Simple things like sitting in a chair, waiting your turn, walking in line. They need to know these things. Kindergarten is also the time to build a lot background knowledge.
Mrs. Morgan admits that now she needs to add academic skills to this list. Some of these skills include beginning sounds, letter recognition, phonemic awareness, number recognition, and one- to-one correspondence. If you had asked me this question maybe 10 years ago, I would have said that it was all about socializing and play and learning things like following directions and cleaning up your space. But now I guess they want me to say it is also where we make sure they have all their basic skills in math and especially reading. I do agree with this to some degree, but not to the extent that they want us to do. To me it should be embedding these skills into what we do through play, more of an exposure thing. Not a cramming down their throats like we have now.
When asked to define “they,” Mrs. Morgan mentioned district administrators, curriculum directors, and “so-called expert developers of state standards.”
121 Beliefs About Children’s Learning and Developing Mrs. Morgan believes that children at this age learn by doing. Children are visual, tactile, and auditory learners and must have multisensory experiences. Children develop at different rates and need to be successful where they are and “not force them to be where we want them to be.” Children learn through play and through social interaction. Children need plenty of opportunities “to move, to explore their surroundings, and to ask questions.” Children need to be active participants in their learning, with “the teacher tapping into their natural curiosity and motivation.” Children need “to be afforded the opportunity to be little children.”
Beliefs About DAP Mrs. Morgan believes that appropriate practices are those that take into consideration the many different domains of children, including social, emotional, physical, and cognitive. The teacher needs to honor where each child is and needs to provide experiences and activities that are both “achievable and challenging.” She describes looking at the “whole child” and recognizing that each child is unique in his or her own abilities, interests, and needs. Understanding that children at this age are still in “their little concrete stages of development,” Mrs. Morgan believes experiences need to be more relevant and hands-on in nature rather than abstract. The environment needs to value play. Children need to be able to move around the room, to work in centers, to make choices, and to interact with one another. It is about looking at the whole child, not just the academic side of him. It is about understanding where a child is in their development and helping them move along the continuum. It means that children develop at different levels at what they are ready to do physically with their little bodies, with fine motor and gross motor, expressive language, and listening. It is all very different from child to child. It is about allowing a child to work at his own pace while you encourage and provide many opportunities for that child to grow and explore. Part of this understanding is that children construct their knowledge by exploring their environment and interacting with others. It is a very social process in my mind. It is about looking at their age-related characteristics as well as their individual characteristics. It is not understanding that all my kindergartners are at the same place and need the same things. It is really about understanding the child. Some are very concrete thinkers and some are able to move onto more abstract concepts. But for this age, everything needs to be very concrete. They need time to manipulate objects. They need time to put things together.
Within this environment, children need to work on both socio-emotional skills and academic skills. Mrs. Morgan stressed that it is important to help children learn how to get along with one
122 another, how to take turns, how to clean up after themselves, and how to listen and follow directions. Although personally she believes social skills should be the main emphasis at this level, she recognizes that not everyone agrees with her. In every interview session, she discussed an “uncomfortableness” that she has experienced with “a strong academic emphasis” now in kindergarten. The biggest emphasis now is reading. This includes beginning sounds, letter recognition, phonemic awareness, early literacy skills. Every thing we hear now is early literacy, early literacy, early literacy. Writing skills are very important too. In math we must emphasize a lot of simple counting, patterning, simple addition, and graphing. It has gone from exposing children to lots of rich literature and developing in them a true love of reading to now making sure they know all their phonemic blends and are able to understand sentence structure. We have taken a wrong turn somewhere along the way. I feel sorry for these little ones today.
Mrs. Morgan believes that kindergarten children need to experience “student driven as well as teacher-directed” approaches. She believes that the children need time when the teacher is modeling and directing experiences, and they need time when they can “play with the concept.” However, she admits that there is more directing being done these days in her classroom than playing. Parents don’t seem to understand that working with manipulatives and creating story problems together is math. There is too much emphasis on computation at this level. Parents want to see a worksheet coming home. Children need to have the basic understanding that adding and subtracting is composing and decomposing sets and this can only happen if children are involved in making it happen with real objects. We should not have these expectations. We push too much at this level.
Mrs. Morgan expressed strong beliefs about what types of activities and experiences that kindergarten children should not participate in, referring to them as ‘inappropriate.” Inappropriate is expecting the children to be in a stage of development and function in a classroom in which they have to be older than they are. Kindergarten should not be the same as second grade and we need to remember that. We have to be careful not to expect them to have the same gross motor skills, fine motor skills, listening skills. We walk a very fine line with this. I think with fine motor skills we expect way too much of them. Like handwriting. We are expected to do this with them. They have to use paper with lines and pencils. I don’t think they are ready for this at kindergarten, at least not all of them. I don’t think there is any reason to push at this level either. There is not enough time for exploration, particularly in math. They need to play with real things to understand this.
123 Beliefs About Outside Influences Mrs. Morgan admits that what goes on in her classroom does not necessarily reflect her beliefs. She discussed expectations that come from the district, from the state, and from the parents that impact her program. Many of these expectations, in her opinion, “are not necessarily in the best interest of the children.” She finds herself moving further and further away from what she considers appropriate for kindergartners. She is often “frustrated with my role as teacher. I just can’t figure out what they want me to do any more. Sometimes I wish I could just close my door and do what I know is right.” We can not keep everything DAP because a lot comes from the state. This year is definitely different. The alignment of the curriculum to state standards has changed everything. In half-day kindergarten we used to build dinosaurs, paint dinosaurs, play with dinosaurs, read stories about dinosaurs, make houses for dinosaurs with blocks. Now we are just into basic skills and that is it. Now we learn that dinosaur begins with d. /d/ -/d/ -/d/ - dinosaur. Then we print a lower and capital /d/. The curriculum tells us what we have to teach. We no longer have time for questions like, “How many bones are in a dinosaur?” “How many teeth does a T-Rex have?” We no longer have time to research these questions. That is a big frustration. I try to incorporate play along with the basic skills. I try to make it interactive so that it feels like play to the children. For instance, we get out money and count, we spin spinners and count. Since basic skills have to be taught we don’t spend the time with expressive language like we used to. Dramatic play areas, blocks are not here any more. The curriculum doesn’t value it. Parents don’t value it.
She has found herself changing the materials and the activities she provides to help her teach “the basics.” She describes everything she does with the children as “teacher- driven.” She admits that she used to have an environment where children were able to make choices and to have ownership in activities. Now there are “things I have to do. They tell me what to do, so it can’t be that way any more.” I know that at the writing center lots of word cards and words should be available and all kinds of writing instruments should be there. The children should be able to choose what they want to write about. That would be more DAP rather than me telling them what to write about. It would also be more DAP if at the science center they could play with the tornado maker, they could build their own terrarium, they could test out magnets on all kinds of material instead of completing a worksheet or something that is not teacher- driven. It has to be this way now. I am trying to meet the skills that they say we have to meet. They need to be able to recognize forms of transportation, they need to be able to recognize beginning sounds of words, and you must incorporate reading and writing in as many places as you can. You can’t do that when it is all child-centered.
124 Mrs. Morgan’s Practice
Learning Environment Mrs. Morgan has created a learning environment that is extremely clean, organized, and visually attractive. She gives great care to the arrangement of the room, creating an uncluttered look. She stated that this is “less confusing and less frustrating for the children.” She uses moveable furniture to make the arrangement more flexible. The classroom arrangement is influenced by the size and shape of the room, as well as the location of doors, outlets, and windows. A clear traffic pattern is created that provides plenty of space to move around. The physical layout clearly designates specific work areas within the room, including individual (desks and carpet squares), small group (tables with chairs), and whole group areas (large carpet area). Small group tables are placed in the center of the room, subject area centers are placed along the perimeter of the room, and the large group carpet area occupies the L-shaped corner of the room. The physical layout is designed so that all areas of the room can be viewed from the Guided Reading Group table. All areas of the room are clearly labeled and color-coded. Primary colors on the walls, bulletin boards, and carpets are used to accent the room and to provide a bright, cheerful atmosphere. Stuffed animals, pictures of Sesame Street characters, baskets and baskets of books, and green plants placed throughout the room help to create a more child-friendly classroom. Children’s artwork, stories, and “Good Work” samples are displayed neatly throughout the room. Many objects are labeled throughout the room. Center-based instruction is used to extend activities and to provide reinforcement in skills. These activities are provided to help the children “internalize all the skills they must learn.” Most centers are subject-related, such as Math Center, Science Center, and Writing Center. A few of the centers are more open-ended and experience-related, such as the ABC Center, Game Center, and Puzzle Center. These centers have several concrete materials that the children are able to use in a way that they feel is important. Materials are stored in plastic containers with lids on low shelves to provide easy access and to allow materials to be moved to the tables or carpet area. Activities at the centers are minimal in number and include a combination of concrete manipulatives (i.e., pattern blocks, wooden puzzles, and letter tiles) and abstract materials (i.e., flashcards, worksheets, and worksheets made into games). A lot of the material is two-dimensional and teacher-made. Some games are made from worksheets that
125 include dice and spinners. Games reinforce various basic skills, like letter recognition, word families, and number recognition. During Center Time, the children must complete daily activities and assignments planned by Mrs. Morgan. The children are required to use the center items as Mrs. Morgan instructs. For example, the Writing Center contains a box of paper, a set of spring vocabulary words, a can of pencils, and a box of crayons. The children must write at least two complete sentences while at the center. The Math Center contains a box of play money, a set of paper flowers with written money values, a worksheet, and a money game with a spinner. The children are required to first sort the money into groups, complete an attached worksheet, match coins to the values written on the flowers, and then play the money game. The Science Center has a book about butterflies, a magnifying glass, and a butterfly house. The children are required to “read” the book, observe the butterfly house, and record their observations in their science log. The Art Center has a sample rainbow which the children are to paint. The children must wait for Mrs. Morgan or another adult to dispense the paint onto the paper plate before they begin. The Language Center has a box of letter tiles and a clipboard with a word chart attached. The children are to make word families and record their words on the chart. The Game Center and Puzzle Center provide more open-ended materials and rule-based play experiences, such as dominoes, pattern blocks, checkers, Legos, unifix cubes, and various puzzles. Materials are changed within the centers and throughout the room to coordinate with the studied science or social studies unit. The daily schedule provides a balance between active and quiet times throughout the daily routine. For example, the children move from completing D.O.L., to participating in highly interactive Morning Carpet Time, to engaging in structured Math Time, to completing seatwork, to rotating through centers, to practicing handwriting. Center and group activities have been explained to the children. The children are often heard saying to each other like: “Remember, we are suppose to do it Mrs. Morgan’s way”; “Mrs. Morgan is not going to like that”; and “You are going to get in trouble.” Mrs. Morgan tends to have a more rigid daily schedule. Children tend to be rushed from one activity to the next. Time is inflexible on most days. She is frequently heard saying, “Hurry up, boys and girls. We have a lot to do today.” “We don’t have time to talk about that now, we have to keep going.” Mrs. Jones recognizes the “rushed feeling” to her daily schedule:
126 We now spend about a half-hour in whole group carpet time, then we rush through whole group math, then we move to centers. Before we go to centers I quickly model morning seatwork and tell them exactly what to do on each job. Everyone has to complete a math sheet, everyone has to do lowercase letters, then it is off to the races we go. It used to be different. At the beginning of the day, I would ask them what center they would like to go to and it was more open-ended. Now I need them to reinforce skills and work on different things. This is the rotation. It is what most of our teachers are doing so it is what I am doing. Used to be that I would ask them and make sure they were not spending all of their time at art and clay. Letting them make the choice used to be important. Now we have to hurry up and go fast. Now I have to spin them through the centers.
Several times, Mrs. Morgan became upset when the daily schedule was interrupted by a visit from the school counselor or school nurse. She made comments like: Oh, this really agitates me. See, this is what we have to deal with. I am supposed to get through all these skills, but my time is taken away with stuff like this. How do they expect us to do it all?
Lessons and center activities are planned for the whole class. Children are often seen doing the same thing at the same time. At the end of most whole group lessons, the children complete a provided worksheet. Throughout the week, children rotate through planned centers completing the same activities. Little modification is made for individual children.
Learning Experiences Mrs. Morgan provides different experiences throughout the daily program. Experiences include opportunities to work independently, to work next to other children, and to occasionally work with other children. She does allow the children to interact during Center Time and Choice Time. However, she is quick to “nip behavior in the bud when they get too loud or too silly.” Children are to complete work independently and are not to share answers when completing a worksheet. She provides opportunities for listening, reading, writing, and speaking. Recorded information is throughout the room such as attendance charts, sign-out sheets for books, daily message, and experience charts. She creates enthusiasm for books and reading. Quality literature is placed in every center. Signs about reading are displayed throughout the room. Mrs. Morgan reads stories with expression, allows children to act out stories, and helps children create plays. Music and movement are incorporated throughout the day. Children learn songs with repetitive refrains. Singing is both spontaneous and formal. Mrs. Morgan plays the piano and
127 sings songs to lead transitions, to guide routine activities, and to teach particular skills. Children are encouraged to sing along and move their bodies to the beat. Children frequently ask Mrs. Morgan to sing or play “my favorite song, PLLLEEEAAASSSEEE!” Mrs. Morgan is always happy to oblige them.
Teaching Strategies Mrs. Morgan uses several types of approaches in instruction within the classroom program. She uses whole group instruction (Morning Carpet Time, Math Time, Handwriting Without Tears Time), small group instruction (Guided Reading Time, Choice Time, Center Time), and individual instruction (Morning Jobs, Center Time, Choice Time). The daily schedule moves through several grouping approaches. The daily pattern consists of the following: a) whole group seat work; b) whole group morning routine; c) whole group math activities; d) whole group seat work; e) individual and small group center rotation; and f) whole group handwriting lessons. During whole group activities, Mrs. Morgan serves as a presenter, a guide, and a model. She sits or stands in front of the children, introduces the lesson, demonstrates the activity, and directs the children to follow her lead. She checks the children’s work and then continues to model the next step. Mrs. Morgan tries to make each experience as interactive as possible by active responding, following along, and responding to questions. The children are given material to use throughout the lesson, such as plastic farm animals to practice addition problems along with Mrs. Morgan, individual clocks to practice time to the hour modeled by Mrs. Morgan, and individual reading books to track along with Mrs. Morgan. She also calls on volunteers to help point out words on interactive charts, to cover words in Big Books with magic tape, to read poems aloud to the class. During group lessons, she pulls in manipulatives but also incorporates a worksheet for the children to take home. Mrs. Morgan recognizes that her practices are more structured, teacher-planned, and teacher-directed: Sadly, every part of my day is teacher-directed, teacher-driven now. We do teacher- directed instruction for reading. I give them a worksheet; they copy the sight words onto the worksheet. Math time is teacher-directed. I lead the activity. I show them a coin; they identify it. I count; they count back. Then we identify coins on a worksheet. Even Choice Time is teacher-directed. I make the game. I determine the product. I tell the kids what to do with it. I never just set out a box of coins for them to play with. I tell them what to write in their journal. It is all me now. There is no time provided just to explore and play. Those days are over.
128 Mrs. Morgan assumes several roles in the classroom, including planner, facilitator, and director. Mrs. Morgan tends to direct and monitor the children’s behavior throughout the day. Opening activities set the tone that the children are to be productive while in the classroom and that there is a lot to do everyday. From the minute they enter the door, Mrs. Morgan reminds them of the routine, what they are to do next, and how they are to behave. “Hang up your coat and backpack and begin D.O.L.” “Sit up tall.” “Raise your hand.” “Pay attention.” Mrs. Morgan is in charge of the development of all the activities and experiences throughout the day. She is responsible for the presentation of lessons and for the demonstration of planned activities. She provides reinforcement activities usually in the form of a worksheet. Mrs. Morgan is in charge of the learning process whether the children are at centers, at reading group, or at calendar time. Mrs. Morgan tends to “run” the classroom. Even Choice Time is structured to meet the goals and objectives of the classroom. The children are directed how to use the material. She takes play and makes it a more formal lesson. Children are required to stay at centers for a period time, yet the materials provided do not satisfy their interest for that length of time. When children begin to use the material in a different way, Mrs. Morgan often is heard saying, “Children, did I tell you that you could do that? That is not what I said you could do.” Mrs. Morgan has a moderate level of involvement with the children throughout the day. She tends to focus on the class as a whole rather than the individual children. She often makes comments like, “This group has challenging behaviors”; “This group needs a lot of structure”; and “This group is hard to keep on track.” She is seen mostly sitting at the reading table scanning the room and giving direction to children working across the room. She often leaves the reading group to talk to other children about their behavior. She is often heard saying, “You are interrupting our reading group. Finish your papers and go to your center.” During Center Time, Mrs. Morgan walks around the room checking children’s work and making sure materials are returned to their appropriate place. When asked to describe her role in the classroom, Mrs. Morgan again discusses the changes that have occurred over the years. She makes reference to a juggler in a circus as her new role. You know when you are at the circus and the guy spins the plates? That is me now. It never really was that way until we had the reading series. Now everything has changed. I used to read Big Books to them. We used to sing all the time. We used to develop plays around all the books. The books I used had repetitive language and were
129 predictable. Now the approach we use is different; I have to pull at least a group of children to read with me every day. So now children are coming over to me on their own reading levels and reading to me while other children are at centers. So you have to facilitate the centers. You have to keep your eyes on the children. You have to set up the centers. You have to prepare the material. You have to make sure it is all inviting. We have to make sure that what we are working on is the concept that we just introduced. Centers reinforce that skill and concept. I try to prepare all the material ahead of time, it is just a lot of juggling. I am trying to individualize reading more while making sure the children are engaged in a center appropriately, reinforcing a skill that we are working on. This works best when the class size is under 20. When it is over 20, it is too difficult to spin the plates and make sure everyone is on task appropriately.
Motivation and Guidance Mrs. Morgan uses verbal, behavioral, and tangible reinforcers to manage classroom behavior. Classroom rules are established by Mrs. Morgan before the year begins. The rules and consequences are explained and posted the first day of school. Mrs. Morgan has implemented a behavioral card system that involves a series of color-coded consequences. She explains the reason for this implementation: I have never had to use a system like this before. This year’s group, particularly my morning group, is difficult to manage. I have tried everything I can think of. Nothing works. Another teacher gave me this idea, so I tried it. Most kids don’t need it any more, but some do. I don’t like to use it really but when they won’t listen, what can you do?
Mrs. Morgan also has individual behavioral modification plans for several children. These children work on particular behaviors and receive stickers and rewards for accomplishments. Mrs. Morgan is often heard encouraging appropriate behavior, such as “I see George sitting the right way” and “You are such good listeners.” She is often heard calling children on their behavior, such as “Where should you be right now?” and “You need to sit up. We do not lay down on the carpet.”
Curriculum Mrs. Morgan takes several steps to plan her program. First and foremost, she uses the district curriculum to “dictate my classroom experiences.” She admits that “the district curriculum which is driven by state standards” defines her program. Coverage of the reading series and district curriculum drives her instruction. Again she admits that “children not meeting the competencies drives my curriculum.” Mastery of facts and skills are the focus of the learning
130 activities. She has the performance competency list that the district mandates for kindergarten displayed on her desk. She checks each one off as she covers it. Many objectives have several check marks next to them. She also uses the newly created progress reports to make sure these benchmarks have been accomplished by the designated quarters. She uses a combination of long term planning and weekly planning to develop her program. She uses skill sheets to determine what has been covered and to determine what the children know or do not know. She then uses this information to develop a curriculum that is based on science or social studies concepts rather than “cute themes.” Many of these concepts overlap and she is able to develop a concept throughout the entire year, such as Weather, Seasons, Life Cycles, Plants and Animals, Ecology, and Community. I do not say that our theme is Penguins for example. I try to pull everything into our unit and we may touch on the theme of penguins but I try to keep it more broad. I have a difficult time with themes and then trying to tie everything to those themes. I try to make sure that all ties to our science or social studies concepts and what they say needs to be taught.
All of the units are selected before the school year begins. Every center activity and classroom experience revolves around the studied unit. For example, during the animal unit the children weighed plastic animals, measured stuffed animals, completed worksheets about animals, read The Farm Concert and The Little Red Hen, and acted out story problems about animals. Mrs. Morgan added an aquarium to the classroom with a new turtle for the children. She invited an educator from the local zoo who brought animals to the classroom. She took the children to a local farm. She taught them songs and fingerplays about animals. Every poem, poster, interactive chart, and book related to animal families. Despite her efforts to plan relevant experiences, Mrs. Morgan admits that the students’ interests are rarely used in the planning of classroom activities. There is not a lot of their ideas in the planning, except maybe their own expression in journal writing or if they bring in something from home. But there is not a lot of things coming from them. This is because of the standards and what they say needs to be taught. It limits what we are able to do.
Parent volunteers are in the classroom almost every day. As parents enter the room, they address her as Mrs. Morgan and wait to take direction from her. Parents usually work with children out in the hallway on various skills such as building word families, letter recognition, printing the alphabet, and counting to one hundred. Mrs. Morgan communicates regularly with
131 the parents, using monthly class letters, phone calls, and e-mails. She has recently developed a class website so parents can view pictures of the classroom and read about class activities on a weekly basis. Mrs. Morgan admits that she struggles with her relationship with parents: Parents are the hardest thing for me. To one person I am the greatest thing in the whole world. I am the greatest thing since crunchy peanut butter. To another parent, well…they don’t see me that way. Some parents think I am the best thing for their child and others complain about everything I do. I can never figure out what they want out of me.
Assessment Mrs. Morgan uses several approaches to determine whether children have mastered the kindergarten behavioral objectives. She has a list of the skills for each learning domain posted on her desk and she refers to these skills daily. As she plans daily lessons, she refers to the list and documents when she provides instruction on a particular skill. She uses daily worksheets to determine children’s level of understanding. Performance on some worksheets is documented before they are sent home. Samples of children’s work are also placed in portfolios. Individual assessment is conducted with each child regularly to determine their progress on skills such as letter recognition, letter sounds, basic sight word recognition, and number recognition. DIBELS assessment also provides information for Mrs. Morgan. All this information is used to determine which skills need further reinforcement.
Mrs. Jones’ World
Her Views Mrs. Jones has five years of teaching experience. Two of those years have been at the kindergarten level and the previous three years were at the first grade level. Mrs. Jones describes the transition from first grade to kindergarten as “an easy one.” With the many changes that have occurred in kindergarten programming, she feels like her previous experience in the upper grade has made her a “stronger kindergarten teacher.” I think things have changed a lot here in kindergarten in the last few years. In some ways it resembles what I used to teach. It is more academic now. I am not sure how I feel about that yet. We now have a basal reading series. That impacts what children need to learn in regards to phonemic awareness and letter recognition. I think this has really impacted me since I came from first grade. In first grade, I could look at the reading series and go, “Ok, I can see that’s important here.” But in kindergarten? I don’t know.
132 I know there is an argument about whether a basal reading program at the kindergarten is DAP or not. Not sure where I stand with that. I do agree that if the children are ready, we need to have materials available to help them along. One thing I notice is how many kids are ready to read or are reading when they get to me now. So in a lot of ways I think it is good that the district is providing us with the tools to help take those who are ready even further. Exposure is good for them. I do stress with the parents at the beginning of the year that you need to keep each individual child in mind when using these types of programs. Some come to you in kindergarten reading and some leave kindergarten and still are not there yet. We should not force things on them. I think there are many that are ready to do it. They express eagerness to do it. That is important. If children are not interested, though, I will not push them. We will work on basic things and get them excited. Even if it is just sitting and looking at books to get them excited.
Beliefs About the Role of Kindergarten Despite some of the overlap that she has witnessed in both grade levels, Mrs. Jones believes there are distinct differences as well, particularly in the areas of structure and instruction. I don’t feel like I am teaching first grade. First grade is more different. They have more time at their seat. I had centers in first grade too but they had more time when they were told what to do and a lot more seatwork. A lot more phonics, more long vowel, short vowel, a lot more academic. I think here there is more choice time. They have a quick job and then they have center time. After center time, they have choice time. I feel we cover the academics but if they still want to play in the house center or blocks or whatever interests them, there is ample time for that.
Mrs. Jones expresses her joy in teaching kindergartners, greatly appreciating their “love of learning, their unique way of looking at the world, and their endless questions.” She believes that the role of kindergarten is to nurture a child’s social-emotional development and to further excite them about learning. Even though some children have had preschool, kindergarten is still many children’s first school experience. First and foremost, the role of kindergarten is to make them very enthusiastic about school, to set the tone. They need to know that school is a fun place to be. We need to lay that strong foundation. It starts here. If they can just leave me feeling confident about themselves and socially ready to make friends and to be around other friends, then I feel they have had a successful year. They need to learn how to get along with others, how to clean up, how to play with others, how to make friends, how to play on the playground. We also spend a lot of time on taking pride in our work and doing our best.
133 Mrs. Jones believes that kindergarten is also a time to build a “good, strong academic foundation.” However, she feels this needs to be done in a non-pressured, play-oriented environment. The academic side of it is important, too. We need to make sure that they are comfortable in the next grade. We need to provide a very strong foundation of early reading skills, basic math skills like counting, patterns, simple sets, graphing, basic science skills like predicting, observing, testing ideas. Reading and early literacy skills seem to be the biggest emphasis at this level. We are to have the children at a level 3 before they leave us. But really all that means is they understand left to right progression, they can listen to a story and comprehend it, that they are exposed to like 10 sight words….Nothing is really pressured, just teaching them that reading is fun and enjoyable. Children need to understand the basic writing process. It is important to take the children through this process of putting thoughts down on paper and how to put words together to mean something. We need to get them used to what school is ultimately like. Poor kids! They never knew they had it so easy!
Beliefs About Children’s Learning and Developing Mrs. Jones believes that children at this age are active learners who need ample opportunities to move around, to socialize with others, and to explore their environment. Young children are concrete learners who need to manipulate their world in order to make sense of it. Young children are naturally curious and eager to learn. The learning environment needs to respect this intrinsic motivation. Young children need tangible experiences that they are able to choose and direct. Young children should be actively involved in their learning and should be engaged in personally relevant experiences.
Beliefs About DAP Mrs. Jones believes that appropriate practices are those that value the diverse life experiences, needs, interests, and abilities that all the children bring to school. These unique qualities need to be considered when developing the classroom environment in regards to the physical design, the curriculum, and the instructional strategies. Their natural curiosity and motivation to learn should be respected in the classroom. Children should be allowed to work at their own pace, allowed “to live in that experience” for as long as they need. Opportunities need to be presented to them that will positively challenge them and will help take their thinking to the next level. Opportunities need to be provided for the children to move around the room, to explore the physical environment, and to interact with peers and adults. She believes that
134 childhood needs to be respected, and she believes that play should be an instrumental tool in the learning process. There are so many children who have been in preschool now. We see such a diverse group of kids. At kindergarten, we see kids come in at all kinds of levels. Some children are five. Some children are six. Some have been to preschool; some have not. Some have been in preschool for three years. You need to keep in mind that these children come to school with many different prior experiences. What one child is ready for, another may not be. Some children really need more play. They need more interactions at school. They need to be active over there in the blocks, puppets, or woodworking. Some may be ready to sit and color, sit at the writing center and write a story, sit and look at books. It is very important to have all these things in your room, especially at choice time. First of all, they are doing what they enjoy doing. Secondly, they are doing what they need to be doing. They definitely still need to be able to play in the blocks or go to the house center and play house. These opportunities stimulate conversation, sharing, taking turns, picking up. These social opportunities are important too. They need opportunities to join in the group or to ask another child to join in. We must not lose sight of the joy of childhood. They need to move, to touch, to giggle, and laugh.
Mrs. Jones recognizes that more teacher-directed instruction does have a place in the kindergarten classroom. Like Mrs. Manford and Mrs. Morgan, she believes that instruction should be a balance between both approaches. She believes that children do need academic instruction; however, it should not be “pushed on them and it should be presented in a fun way.” Teacher-directed instruction helps children learn that there is routine in school and that there are responsibilities required of them. I think I have balance, a nice balance. We have a few times that we sit in a whole group and I take a more direct approach in introducing a concept. But I try to find a way so they are not just sitting there and listening to me. I try to find out what they already know about a concept and what they want to learn. I try to make more direct approaches more interactive, like handwriting time, reading group time, etc. We do some paper and pencil. Paper and pencil activities are basically just skills we are working on, like beginning sounds or math skills…things that are important at this level. They do some kind of learning to sit, to complete a job. They come in and have a little job. Then they have choice time for the first half-hour. Then we get settled in our seats, go over their morning jobs as a whole group, when they are done they disperse to their centers. This is nice because they finish at different times and disperse at different times so the centers are not overloaded. We do this every day. This is a very short portion of our day. It does not consume our program. Products are sometimes kept in folders for conferences as sample work. Sometimes I just mark down in my notebook and then it goes home. They need something to take home. At this age, some children go home and tell a lot and others say they did nothing. If parents don’t have a paper they may not get any feedback at all.
135 Mrs. Jones stresses that teacher-directed, drill and skill approaches to teaching and learning should not dominate the classroom. When this does occur, she believes practices are inappropriate for this age group. I would hate to have a kindergarten classroom that was all paper and pencil, sitting at their desks all that time – all that drill and skill kind of thing. Too much at their seats, too much doing what I say is developmentally inappropriate. They need to be able to interact with others. If they are just sitting and being little worker bees, then that is too hard for them. Due to the curriculum there are things that you have to cover. There are times of the day when they do need to sit down at their seats and do their work. Or a time when they have to go to a certain center. That is part of learning that there is routine in school. There are things that you have to do. It is still important to keep all the children in mind and offer as many things as you can to cover all levels. Like I said, it needs to be a balance. I think I have achieved that.
Beliefs About Outside Influences Mrs. Jones discusses forces that impact her program, such as the DIBELS assessment and standards. These forces, however, are not viewed negatively. Mrs. Jones believes these elements help her remain focused and accountable. These forces help her develop a more sound program for the children. Sure we have standards that impact our district curriculum and that curriculum impacts my program, but that is a good thing. We all need goals. We all need to be on the same page. So the district curriculum has changed but not drastically. We have been doing these things all along. The biggest difference now is that everyone has the materials in the classroom before it was just a few people. I use the curriculum as a guide. We all need accountability. We now have DIBELS assessment three times a year. The one in December is really good because you can see what child is struggling with an area and you can see what areas I did not cover well or enough. It lets me see where I need to change my program. So that is really good. I think everyone here would agree because it is one time when you can get those direct results. It is pretty reflective on you and what you have done in your class. It makes you look at what you have done in your class and say, “Ok, we need to do more of this and I need to work with this group more on this area.” You don’t get too many opportunities where it is right there in black and white. You could be cruising along and think everything is going ok. The results may tell you differently.
136 Mrs. Jones’s Practice
Learning Environment Mrs. Jones has created a learning environment that is inviting, comfortable, and child- friendly. There are nursery rhyme characters on the walls, stuffed animals at the centers, children’s art work on the doors, child-sized rocking chairs at the reading center, and a step stool at the sink. Great care is taken to provide the children with an environment of interesting materials and experiences. The room is well organized and designed in a way that encourages frequent social interaction. Centers and work spaces are intermixed throughout the room, including whole group areas (large carpet areas), small group areas (tables with four chairs), and individual work areas (small tables and desks with single chairs, bean bag chairs, rocking chairs, and oversized pillows). These areas allow the children to decide whether they want to work alone, with a partner, or with a small group of classmates. There is space to move around the room freely. Centers are organized according to the noise level and movement that is required for the activity. For example, the house center and block center are located across the room from the reading and language center. Center based instruction is highly valued in this classroom. Great care has been taken to make each center attractive, comfortable, and child-accessible. Along with subject related centers (Science, Math, ABC, Reading), this classroom also has a House Center, Block Center, Puppet Theater Center, and Sensory Table available for the children. There are over 20 centers in this classroom that are filled with many manipulatives. Centers are designed to be completed with a partner or with a small group. Mrs. Jones provides a variety of materials that are high quality and durable. Most materials are three-dimensional and open ended, such as pegs, blocks, and beads. Materials are placed on low open shelves in color-coded, labeled containers so that children can get what they want and they can choose where they want to work. Every center is designed with a plan and an objective in mind, yet there is room for the children to direct their own experiences. Each center is fully stocked with concrete materials. For example, the Art Center has items such as yarn, paper, tissue paper, glitter, beads, crayons, markers, paint, and stencils. The Language Center has items such as magnetic letters, ABC stamps, dry erase boards, markers, Scrabble, and Boggle. The Reading Center has items such as baskets of books, interactive charts, and poetry cubes. The Science Center has items such as balance scales,
137 magnets, magnifying glasses, sorting trays, collection of rocks, and prisms. Mrs. Jones changes the material periodically to make experiences more satisfying, more interesting, and more challenging. She also coordinates materials and activities in each center with the studied theme. She also allows repeated exposure with some materials, including board games, sorting material, magnetic letters, lacing links, pattern blocks, and unifix cubes. Most centers have materials in them that build upon studied concepts. These activities are designed to help the children “develop further connections.” As the year progresses, centers tend to be more prescribed to better meet kindergarten benchmarks. During Center Time, children rotate through different centers throughout the week completing assignments prepared by Mrs. Jones. However, most activities allow for creativity, individuality, and flexibility. For example, at the Writing Center the children are to write or dictate a story or poem about Spring. At the Math Center, the children are to create a number book. Each page has a different number ranging from zero to twenty. The children are to trace the number, print the number five times, and then make picture representations of the number. At the Listening Center, the children are to choose from a selection of taped books and then illustrate their favorite part or favorite character. Mrs. Jones has a daily schedule that is used to guide the activities for the day. This schedule is used to provide structure and security for the children so that they are aware of daily expectations. However, Mrs. Jones takes a laid back approach to the daily schedule in regards to time. She monitors the group and determines the length of time spent at centers on their ability to play and work productively. When play deteriorates, it is time to transition. Time is used flexibly. Mrs. Jones explains her approach: If we don’t get to everything in our two hours and forty-five minutes that is okay. If the children are engaged in their explorations, then they are doing what they should be doing. What they are doing is more important for them at that time than what I have planned. I don’t worry about getting through it all. I just readjust our plans.
There is a balance of Center Time, Choice Time, Seatwork, and Whole Group Time every day. Center Time and Choice Time occupy the majority of each day. Children enter the room, complete a “quick job” and then get into the “more important things, like making friends and playing.” Long periods of uninterrupted time are provided to explore the environment. Children are able to stay with an activity for long periods of time. Flexibility is a part of this program. This allows the children to work at different rates and explore different interests.
138 Mrs. Jones modifies experiences and materials for various children within the classroom. She works with the educational assistants to make daily and weekly plans for each child with special needs, as well as for each child who needs further reinforcement or challenge. She stresses that each child “must feel a sense of belonging in the classroom. We include everyone in everything we do.” For example, during Calendar Time, one of the educational assistants sits with a small group of children and helps them manipulate a special wooden calendar board. She also shows them individual visual cue cards for the next activities. The children are engaged in the same activities but the experiences are adapted to better meet the children’s needs. Mrs. Jones has also provided an area in the room with soft pillows for one child who has anger management issues. Instead of punching fellow classmates, this little girl is able to take her frustrations out on the pillows. There is also a child who is reading on a third grade level. For this little boy, Mrs. Jones provides chapter books and individual project contracts. Mrs. Jones is quick to add, “This does not mean that this little boy gets more work, just more challenging. It has to be at his level. He would not be taking his learning to the next level if he were over there stamping out the alphabet.”
Learning Experiences Mrs. Jones provides a variety of experiences in the daily planning. Experiences include working alone, working with a partner, working with a small group, and working with the whole class. Activities and experiences are geared around a variety of learning styles. She provides information in varied ways, including orally, visually, auditorially, and tactile. Children spend the majority of their day moving around the room, making choices, manipulating concrete objects, and using their imagination. Play is used as the primary medium for learning. Children are seen building with blocks, playing with puppets, feeding baby dolls, assembling puzzles, playing checkers, and finger painting pictures. Children are seen talking with one another, asking each other questions, and giving each other ideas. She creates a safe environment that provides opportunity for risk-taking. Children are able to use materials in a new way to see what will happen. They are encouraged to test their own ideas and abilities. Children are able to set their own challenges. Mrs. Jones recognizes that children need to express themselves in a variety of ways. Some need to draw. Some need to sing. Some need to create puppet shows.
139 Mrs. Jones has created an environment that respects the children’s differences and encourages them to try new activities.
Teaching Strategies Mrs. Jones uses several approaches to instruction throughout each day, including whole group instruction (Morning Carpet Time), small group instruction (Guided Reading Time, Center Time, Choice Time), and individual instruction (Handwriting Without Tears Time, Journal Time, D.O.L. Time, Seatwork Time, Center Time, Choice Time). She also uses a combination of child-directed and teacher-directed experiences to guide the instruction. For example, during Calendar Time, Mrs. Jones uses student volunteers to lead activities. A Calendar Leader shares the date, month, and year and adds a number to the number line. A Meteorologist helps the class add information to the various weather graphs. A Class Alphabet Leader helps the class sing the alphabet song while pointing to letters hanging on the front board. Mrs. Jones only provides assistance when needed. As the morning routine continues, children are called upon to help read interactive charts, to point to words in the Big Book, and to act out characters from a favorite book. Mrs. Jones does incorporate direct instructional lessons, such as Guided Reading Time, Handwriting Without Tears Time, and Journal Time. These types of experiences occupy short periods of time, usually 10 –15 minutes. During these times, she sits or stands in front of the children and models the activity and has the children practice the skill. She provides feedback and then continues with the lesson. She tries to make these lessons interactive when possible. She provides children with individual books to follow along with the reading of a book. She gives the children unifix cubes to practice adding sets while she models the skill. She has the children use a “magic” chalkboard to practice their printing of a letter in the air before they try it on paper. Fingerplays and songs are used frequently to reinforce various concepts. Throughout each day, Mrs. Jones assumes many different roles. She is very focused on building relationships with the children. She has a high level of involvement with the children throughout the day. She studies the children throughout the day and plans activities for them with materials and with other children. She is alert, observing, asking questions regularly, recognizes when to leave the children alone or to give support. She creates an informal, relaxed atmosphere that encourages talk between adult and child, child and child, child and children.
140 She sits on the floor and reads with children. She sits on the carpet and watches a puppet show. She sits in the class restaurant and orders a hamburger and shake. She constantly moves around the room, talks to children, observes their activities, and engages in their play. Mrs. Jones expresses how she views her role as a kindergarten teacher: I need to be a role model for them. I need to show them that I love school and that I love being here with them. My role is to model proper language and appropriate ways to handle situations. I need to help them out with language if they need to ask for something or if they want to play with someone. I also need to be their coach and to give them lots of encouragement. I need to give them praise and to guide them, to show them, and to lead them.
Opening activities set a positive tone for the rest of the day. She speaks with each child as he or she enters the room. She greets each child, asks questions about his or her home, family, and interests. Throughout the day, she gives all the children regular attention. She ends each day with hugs and expression of excitement to be with them tomorrow. She teaches the children to be self-reliant and independent. Materials, such as scissors, tape, and staplers, are provided for the children.
Motivation and Guidance Mrs. Jones uses several approaches to help the children manage their behavior, including modeling, redirecting, classroom rules, group meetings, and individual behavior charts when needed. Mrs. Jones sets high expectations for her children and sets limits for their behavior. At the beginning of the year, the class discusses basic rules that will allow everyone to have a positive school year and to work successfully together. Mrs. Jones helps the children learn from their mistakes. She provides guidance and helps them solve their problems. Consequences are natural. Mrs. Jones explains that, “If the child hurts someone’s feelings, then I help him find a way to apologize. If two children are arguing over a toy, then we work together to resolve the issue.” She takes time everyday to complete a behavior chart for each child. This chart is sent home to provide information about each child’s day. Mrs. Jones also encourages the children to share their ideas and thoughts. She values the children’s thinking and imbeds their interests into the classroom. I did not start this year with a behavior chart and we have made it throughout the whole year without one. You need to feel the kids out and see what kind of kids you have each year. With this group simple reminders of appropriate behaviors and occasionally taking
141 away an activity is all this group needs. Every group is different. If children feel valued, then they want to be here and behavior seems to be so much better because they feel like it is their classroom not just mine.
Curriculum Mrs. Jones takes several steps to develop her classroom program. The district curriculum, state standards, and progress reports serve as a guide for the goals and objectives for the given year. She establishes flexible long-term and short-term goals for the program. Her long-range planning is used to establish clear objectives for the program and to make sure there is continuity of activities and processes. Mrs. Jones is primarily concerned with the overall growth of the child. She looks at the materials in relation to child development and chooses materials that allow the child to make choices and develop his or her own way of working. She spends a great deal of time at the beginning of the year determining each child’s various skill levels, abilities, needs, and interests. She uses this information to plan experiences and activities within the classroom. She checks weekly lesson plans with long-term goals. While planning, she focuses on whole group, small group, and individual experiences. Whole group activities are used to develop a sense of community and to introduce new concepts to the class. Small group activities are based on skill level in reading and math and remain flexible throughout the year. Center activities are planned to reinforce and challenge individual students. Curriculum is developed through thematic units, such as Spring, Dinosaurs, and Families. She assesses the children’s knowledge before beginning a new unit. All experiences and activities revolve around the studied theme to create an integrated approach. For example, during the study of dinosaurs, every center area focused on this unit. The Art Center had large dinosaur-shaped paper to paint. The Writing Center had dinosaur-shaped blank books, dinosaur stamps, dinosaur vocabulary words, dinosaur pencils, and dinosaur markers. The Math Center had dinosaur “eggs” to count, sort, weigh, and measure. The Science Center had dinosaur models and fossils. The Block Center had toy dinosaurs. The Experience Table had been transformed into an archeological dig site, complete with sand, rocks, picks, brushes, and magnifying glasses. Every center had subject-related dinosaur books. Never really use the children to plan what we do in class. However, I try to throw in different things or stories that different groups would like. Some things that boys would like and some things girls would like. Yet, most centers and activities are open-ended. They can write what they want, play what they want, and manipulate items they way they
142 want. I do pay attention to their ideas, interests, and areas of curiosity and try to pull that into the room in different ways, books, games, stuff like that.
Parents are valued in this classroom. Several parent volunteers are in this classroom every day. They read stories to children, help the children write stories, work with the children at the computers, and assist them in their daily jobs. Parents move in and out of the room, greeting all the children and adults in the classroom. They are on a first name basis with Mrs. Jones and many give her a hug upon arrival. Mrs. Jones takes several steps to communicate frequently with all the children’s parents. She sends home a monthly newsletter and informs parents of activities through a class website. She frequently calls parents to praise a child for good behavior or to discuss a concern.
Assessment Assessment is ongoing and diagnostic in this classroom. Mrs. Jones uses various means of assessment to “create a picture of each child” in her classroom. Her means include anecdotal notes, observations, work samples, checklists, and DIBELS assessment. These various forms of data are used to modify content, processes, and activities for the whole class and for each student. Mrs. Jones also develops two portfolios for each child. One is placed in the school office at the end of the year, and the other is given to the parents. Children are able to select work samples to place in their portfolios.
Mrs. Townsend’s World Her Views Mrs. Townsend has five years of teaching experience. She has taught kindergarten for the last three years. Previously she taught first grade for one year and second grade for one year. She expressed that she has always wanted to teach kindergarten and she “jumped at the chance” when the position became available in the district.
Beliefs About the Role of Kindergarten Mrs. Townsend believes that her experience teaching higher grades has prepared her for teaching kindergarten. She believes it better prepared her for teaching more structured experiences that are now part of the kindergarten curriculum, such as handwriting and guided
143 reading. She realizes that some teachers have been challenged by these activities; however, she has not experienced this personal struggle. Mrs. Townsend expressed that “kindergarten is the most important grade” in a young child’s life. Even if children have previously attended day care or preschool, she believes the most important role of kindergarten is to provide a positive first experience and to introduce the children to the “world of school.” We need to give kids a great first experience in starting school. We need to set them up to have a positive outlook. If they don’t have a good first year, then their future years in school may not be as bright. They need to see that school is a great place to be and that there are a lot of opportunities available to them. We also need to help them make friends, solve problems, cooperate with one another, and follow directions.
Mrs. Townsend also emphasizes the need to develop a strong foundation for the children, in regards to both social skills and academic skills. It is important that we lay that solid foundation for them. We need to help them in further developing their social skills and communication skills, things like cooperating, sharing, solving problems. They need to learn how to follow directions, listen to others, things like that. We also need to provide a really strong foundation for literacy, math, and every other subject. At this age, literacy is so very important. We need to expose them to rich literature. We need to read to them every day. We need to show them how exciting reading can be. Phonemic awareness is important too…those basic reading skills like letter recognition, letter sounds, and left to right progression. They also need to have a strong understanding of concepts. They need to understand the “why” of things. They may know how to do 2+2=4, but do they understand why? This is more important.
Beliefs About Children’s Learning and Developing Mrs. Townsend believes that children at this age are concrete learners who need to taste, touch, see, smell, and hear everything. She believes that children learn by doing and that they need to be active participants in the learning process. Children need to explore and manipulate their immediate surroundings. Children need to use materials in ways that make sense to them. They also need plenty of opportunities to socialize with others, including their classmates and the adults. Play must be valued as a medium for learning in kindergarten. Play is important for social, emotional, cognitive, and physical development. Play is how children learn to make sense of their world. They need to explore. They need to see what they can do with the material and how things go together. They need a chance to play and explore before they will understand concepts like measuring, adding, and subtracting. It is play with a purpose. I want them to gain something from it. They need to be able to create with others, to share ideas, to
144 make up activities. Everyone in the class needs to be able to work together. Conversation is so important. Play with a purpose is absolutely essential for interpersonal development, language development, etc. Where better to learn appropriate language and social skills than at the dramatic play center, the house center, the block center. These are highly motivating to all the kids, typically developing students as well as special needs children. I can go over and sit with the kids and model appropriate words that I want to see and they pick up on them naturally. I tell the parents at the beginning of the year that just because you see centers in here it does not mean that your child comes here and plays all day. There are a lot of academics. Right now at the dramatic play center we have an ice-cream shop. They can look at a real menu, take an order, write it down, figure out how much they owe. We are practicing the skills in a fun way. Life skills. At the Block Center, I put up signs that say ‘How many blocks can you put in your structure?’ ‘What would happen if you stack them this way?’ ‘How many rectangular prisms can you use?’ So there is a lot of ways you can pull in the academics in their play. These are centers I will not get rid of. I know many have, but I think they are essential to development.
Beliefs About DAP Mrs. Townsend believes that appropriate activities are those that respect the age of the child as well as the child’s personal interests, learning preferences, abilities, and needs. Appropriate practices recognize the whole child and understand that each child develops at his or her own pace. Each child needs multisensory experiences that are appropriate for him or her, not “for the so-called average kindergartner.” DAP is what is appropriate for that particular child. It is not just an age. It is a stage where that child is. You can not say that every five-year-old is ready for the same things, because each child is different. You have to look at each individual child and see what they are ready for. Are they ready to write letters? Do they still need large print? Do they still need manipulatives? Are they ready to do math in written form?
She believes that instruction needs to include a variety of relevant hands-on experiences and that opportunities need to be provided for whole group, small group, and individualized instruction, with individualized instruction being the primary focus. Choice needs to be an inherent part of the day. As much as possible, the children need to direct their own learning experiences and to determine the outcomes. Whatever instructional approach is used, it all needs to be hands-on and open-ended. The materials should have multiple uses – like using blocks to sort by shape and size, to weigh, to measure. Lacing links can be used to sort by color, to measure objects around the room, to weigh. Activities need to be open-ended as much as possible. For example, in writing, I give them a purpose and set it up so they know the expectations. However as
145 far as the actual writing, it needs to be open-ended so it allows them to be creative, to use their imaginations, to share their ideas, interests, and background knowledge. There is always an expectation or a goal that they need to reach. But there are numerous ways this can be demonstrated. There is always a way each child can make it their own.
Mrs. Townsend also discusses practices that she believes are inappropriate for this age group. Some of the inappropriate practices include the extensive use of drill and skill worksheets, the use of abstract material, and the extensive use of teacher lecture. DIP is providing activities that do not reflect where the children are. Completely paper and pencil classrooms where kids are copying or when they are writing on lined paper is inappropriate. In kindergarten that is not where they are. They need hands-on experiences. There are sensory needs and tactile needs. If you take that away then that is DIP. Classrooms that don’t allow for classroom creativity is DIP. At any age where the classroom is completely teacher lecture and teacher-directed is inappropriate.
Beliefs About Outside Influences Mrs. Townsend discusses forces that impact her program, including testing, grade level expectations, and parents. Although these forces have caused her program to change to some degree, Mrs. Townsend believes that she is able “to hang on to what I believe is best for this age group. I am still able to make this enjoyable rather than stressful.” There is a lot of pressure to push the curriculum down because of the testing at grade levels. Kindergarten used to be more social and more play. Now they need to enter first grade having a good reading foundation. They need to be on a level three. By second and third grade, they need to be ready to perform well on those tests. The biggest pressure is on reading. Some of the pressure comes from parents, particularly those whose children enter kindergarten reading. Some parents who have typical developing kids are stressed because their child doesn’t know all their letters when they enter. Everyone is stressed. The kids and the teachers are stuck in the middle of it all.
Mrs. Townsend’s Practice Learning Environment Mrs. Townsend has created a print-rich environment that incorporates a variety of interesting materials and experiences. Objects are labeled throughout the room and baskets of books are found in every center area. The room is organized and provides a variety of workspaces for the children, including whole group areas (large carpet area), small group areas (tables with chairs, small carpet areas, center areas), and individual work spaces (several desks with chairs, beanbag chairs, center areas). Clear traffic patterns make it easy to move around the
146 room. Paths around the furniture also make the room wheelchair accessible. Areas are attractive and inviting, including soft carpets and rugs, pillows, beanbag chairs, stuffed animals, plants, and posters. Although the room is arranged for each center to have its own workspace, children are able to take materials and work where they feel more comfortable within the room. All the material in the room is organized in color coded tubs and labeled with words and pictures. Centers are fully stocked with concrete, open-ended materials. Materials are stored on low open shelves, making them accessible to the children. Materials are changed in the centers to coordinate with thematic units. Mrs. Townsend allows repeated experience with many materials, such as blocks, pegs, sorting material, pattern blocks, and lacing links. The daily schedule provides time for children to make choices, to work in small groups, to participate in whole group experiences, and to work alone. She provides a daily balance of quiet time and active time. The daily schedule incorporates large blocks of unrushed time for the children to make choices at the centers. This allows the children to work at different rates and explore different interests. Children can stay with an activity for a length of time without feeling pressed for time. If projects and daily jobs are not finished, the children can work on them at another time throughout the week. Mrs. Townsend has developed a flexible schedule that allows room to incorporate unexpected learning experiences. For example, a parent who is a doctor stopped by with x-rays to share with the children. Mrs. Townsend stopped their planned activity and allowed the parent to spend the next twenty minutes discussing the x-rays. Mrs. Townsend also provides outdoor or large motor time twice every single day. She explains, “It is so important for them to have this time every day. They need to release their energy in more active ways. Play is important whether it is structured or more free.” Mrs. Townsend spends an extensive amount of time making the classroom program meet the individual differences among the children. Careful attention is given to the materials made available to the children, making sure that they are multi-purpose in design. Designed lesson plans incorporate many different learning styles and allow for flexibility in outcome. Activities are modified for children who need further reinforcement or extra challenge. She also uses mini-lessons to teach skills to whole class or to small group depending on the need. Centers are based where I think most children are. For those that are above or below that level, I will go over and modify the activity for them. I might modify the outcome. I might change the product. I might change the expectation. If it is a child who is above,
147 they might have to take the concept a little further. They might have to analyze a different area. It is all about meeting their needs and modifying.
Mrs. Townsend also believes in full inclusion and works extensively to integrate children with special needs. She plans weekly with the several educational assistants, the physical therapist, and the speech pathologist that work alongside her in the classroom. She believes that they are a team and need to work together to help every child in the classroom feel successful. At times there are more than eight adults in the room, including educators and parent volunteers. Mrs. Townsend is very comfortable within this environment: I just love all the support we have here. I could not do my job without them. We are a team and we are all here because we love children. We also all believe that ALL children can learn. Their rate of development may be different, but everyone can learn. What I love about this group is they help all the children in here, not just the ones they are assigned to. The children feel comfortable going to them for help or reading to them, whatever. The more people in here the more one-on-one attention every child gets every day.
At the end of every day, Mrs. Townsend meets briefly with the assistants and specialists. Together they discuss the day’s events and the children’s progress. They plan future modifications for various children. All the assistants in the classroom receive an updated daily schedule and are informed of the modifications. When new educational tools are being used with particular children, everyone receives training – not just Mrs. Townsend.
Learning Experiences Developing social skills is valued in this classroom. Mrs. Townsend provides opportunities for children to work alone, to work with partners, to work with small groups, and to work with the whole class. Throughout the day, children are seen interacting with one another or with an adult. Children are seen sharing ideas and helping each other with projects. Extended periods of time to play and to explore the environment are embedded into the daily schedule. Center Time and Choice Time occupy most of the day. During this time, children are seen moving freely around the room. First, they complete more prescribed activities that Mrs. Townsend has prepared, and then they initiate their own activities. Children are able to make choices and work at their own pace on most activities. Activities and experience provide for various levels of complexity and children are able to create their own challenges. Center Time and Choice Time are very active times of the day. Children are seen: a) painting flowers at the
148 easel; b) playing games on the computer; c) lying on the floor watching puppet shows; d) writing down lunch orders at the ice cream shop; e) writing love letters to Mrs. Townsend; f) building towers with blocks; g) conducting surveys of their classmates’ favorite ice cream; h) working on large floor puzzles; i) measuring the room with lacing links; j) participating in guided reading with Mrs. Townsend; and k) dictating stories to parents. Daily opportunities to develop language skills are provided, including reading, writing, speaking, and listening. Reading and writing have meaningful purposes in this room. Children are involved in activities like the following: a) writing thank you notes to visitors; b) making signs for structures like “Ples dnt tch”; c) recording class survey information; d) taking lunch orders; and e) writing in daily journals. Finger plays, poetry, and songs are used throughout the day to initiate transitions, to reinforce a concept, and to provide enjoyment. Mrs. Townsend loves books and shows the children her excitement when reading. She reads every day to the children. She is often heard saying, “Boys and girls, I went to the library this weekend and got some really great books. I can’t wait to share them with you!” or “Don’t you just love these illustrations! What a beautiful book!” She displays her favorite books throughout the room.
Teaching Strategies She uses several types of instruction throughout each day, including whole group (Carpet Time, Handwriting), small group (Center Time, Choice Time, Guided Reading Time) and individual (Daily Jobs, Choice Time, Center Time). Mrs. Townsend uses a combination of “teacher-led and child-directed” experiences in her program, with the focus on child-directed experiences. During direct instruction, Mrs. Townsend assumes a more formal teaching stance. She stands or sits before the children, presents the lesson, models the activities, guides the children, provides feedback, and then proceeds with the lesson. These experiences occur for short periods of time, usually 15-20 minutes. Mrs. Townsend tries to make these experiences as interactive as possible. She pulls in manipulatives, music, and movement. She also pulls in finger plays, poetry, and literature into most lessons. The children spend little time sitting and listening to Mrs. Townsend’s explanations. Continual dialogue occurs between Mrs. Townsend and the children. The children interject ideas, thoughts, and questions to extend and build upon the lesson.
149 Most of Carpet Time is teacher-led because I set up the activities. But there is time for their involvement. Teaching handwriting is the most structured that I do and everything else is done through centers and small groups. My room is very child-centered. Handwriting Without Tears is a series that was developed by an occupational therapist. The most fluid program developed that goes from printing to cursive. It is only teacher- led for a few minutes. It is something we have to do.
Mrs. Townsend appears to have a good relationship with the children. She is supportive, friendly, and helpful to each child. Children gravitate to her, constantly giving her hugs and “love letters.” She has a high level of involvement with the children throughout the day. She greets every child as they enter the door in the morning, asking them questions about their family, their nightly activities, and their friends. She frequently shares information about her personal interest and her family. Throughout the day, she is often found on the floor with the children. She frequently engages in their play - reading storybooks, putting puzzles together, playing board games, or finger painting rainbows. She moves throughout the room and spends time with every child during Center Time. During their play I do a lot of observing, watching the occurrences between children. If I see something that could develop into a situation, I might go over and ask if I can join in. I may try to find a way to become involved in their play. I feel my role is more of a facilitator than anything else. I try to set up the room so that it is accessible to the children, so that it is easy to use and organized. So they feel comfortable with all the experiences that are in here. I may direct certain things but I want them to just go with it while I come around and help them go to the next level, to take them to the next step.
Mrs. Townsend helps the children become independent learners. Children are free to attend to their own needs throughout the day. They are free to use the restroom and get a drink. Materials, like scissors, staplers, dry erase markers, and hole punchers, are made available to the children. The children are also taught how to use classroom equipment, like tape recorders, overhead projectors, and computers.
Motivation and Guidance Behavior management begins by establishing expectations the very first day of school. Mrs. Townsend believes that establishing expectations up front minimizes inappropriate behavior. When forming the rules, the class has a long discussion about what they need to do to have a successful year. A great deal of time is spent talking about how to treat friends, how to handle material, and where to place material. Consequences are natural. Mrs. Townsend
150 explains, “If you make a mess in the Block Center, you can’t move on until you clean up the mess.” Mrs. Townsend also leads by example. She sets limits and helps the children learn to manage their own behavior. Behavior is also facilitated by modeling, peer remediation, and class rewards. I haven’t used a behavioral chart for the last five years because the children know what is expected of them. The children have ownership in how the classroom is taking shape. I try to make the problems that do come up into learning experiences. We talk about what was not appropriate, what would have been a better choice, and what we should do to make up for the behavior. I also model for them appropriate behavior. If I treat them with respect they will in turn treat me and others with respect.
Curriculum Mrs. Townsend takes several steps to develop her program. She uses a combination of long-term and short-term planning to develop the goals and objectives for the year. These goals are guided by the district curriculum and the state standards. Thematic units are used to develop the curriculum and meet the kindergarten objectives. Mrs. Townsend explains her approach to planning: I do have general themes in mind when the year begins but there is flexibility within those themes for the children’s perspectives and interests. I try to plan themes that are highly motivating and fun for the children. Apples, farms, pets, winter, snow are just a few we do throughout the year. I know there are teachers who have similar themes but that is the one thing I like about this school. We have state standards and district curriculum but we are able to develop our own ideas and teach it in a way that works best for you. Individuality is encouraged.
Mrs. Townsend uses KWL charts, brainstorming activities, and webbing experiences prior to a new unit to discover children’s prior knowledge. Weekly plans are coordinated with long-term goals. Mrs. Townsend sets time aside every day to evaluate her lesson plans and to make any needed adjustments. Daily observations help her adjust center-based and whole group instruction. Parents are highly valued in this classroom. There is a minimum of four parents in the classroom every day. Primarily, parents are in the room to work with the children and to engage in their activities. Occasionally, they help Mrs. Townsend prepare center material and bulletin boards. Parents flow in and out of the room throughout the day, aware of what they need to do without direction from Mrs. Townsend. Parents call Mrs. Townsend by her first name and often give her hugs and little presents. Parents who are unable to volunteer in the school have
151 opportunities to take an active role in the classroom as well. Some parents volunteer to prepare materials at home for the children. Some parents donate items for the classroom. Mrs. Townsend tells the class what that parent has done for them. The children always clap and cheer to show their appreciation. She always sends a thank you note home. Mrs. Townsend communicates with the parents through monthly newsletters, emails, and phone calls. These approaches “help us stay connected as a team.”
Assessment Mrs. Townsend uses various measures of assessment, including anecdotal notes, portfolios, checklists, interviews, DIBELS assessment, DRA (Diagnostic Reading Assessment), and observations throughout the year. This information is used to “develop a picture of each child.” This information is also used to shape lessons and to plan center material. Mrs. Townsend modifies the activities and determines the pace based on her assessment of the children.
Mrs. Dell’s World
Her Views Mrs. Dell is a full-day kindergarten teacher. She has ten years of teaching experience, eight years at the kindergarten level and two years previously at the first grade level. She has been teaching full day kindergarten for the last two years as part of a pilot program for the district. She enjoys the full day experience; however, she admits she initially had reservations: I was concerned at first about the length of day for these little ones, that the afternoon would not be fruitful. At first it was a big adjustment for some. They were really tired. We do have rest time for forty-five minutes built into the day so that helps. Some children have been to daycare since they were six months old, so this is not much different for them. What I do love is that we can really accomplish a lot with them. We can really spend time on projects and dig deep into them. I find this very rewarding.
She now believes that it is important for the district to offer full-day kindergarten as an option to parents. She recognizes that family needs are different today and feels that schools must take that into account when designing their programs. She also describes a change in the children entering kindergarten over the last few years.
152 Nowadays there are more coming to kindergarten with beginning reading skills. Many are already reading. Some are even reading at a first and second grade level. This is really different even from a few years ago. Children seem to be a little more advanced than they used to be or at least a little more equipped. Even seems like there is a big push from parents to have their children reading before they get to us. So now we have a reading series we must do.
Beliefs About the Role of Kindergarten Mrs. Dell believes that kindergarten is a very important part of a child’s educational career, despite any previously encountered schooling. She believes that the role of kindergarten is to “set the tone” for children about school. Children need to see that school is “an enjoyable place to be where meaningful learning happens.” Mrs. Dell also believes that the role of kindergarten is to develop a “strong foundation” for every child, particularly in the area of social- emotional development. The children need to learn how to get along with others, how to cooperate, how to work within a variety of group settings. Building self-esteem and working on cooperation are really big parts of kindergarten. Some children really need to work on being around unfamiliar children. They tend to shy away. We work a lot on making new friends. They need to learn how to get along with others, how to take turns, how to respect and enjoy each other. Children need to be more socially independent.
This “strong foundation” also includes academic skills, including curiosity levels, reading skills, and math skills. Getting them strong in their specialty areas is very important. Pulling out of them what they are interested in, whether it is building on their writing or strengthening their love of reading and books. Some have a strong curiosity of science. Whatever it is, just pulling that from them. Getting to know the kids and what they like. Children also need phonemic awareness, building on sounds and letters, segmenting, and blending. They need to have a strong knowledge of letters and sounds and they need to be able to use them in their writing to some degree. They need to get to the first few levels of our reading series. Some mastery of print, like left to right, and one-to-one correspondence. Early reading skills need to be introduced and emphasized through hands-on games. Children are having fun and often do not realize that they will use these skills as they get older. Kindergarten is where we show children that reading is enjoyable and that they can pick up a book and read it themselves using their learned skills. This applies to writing skills as well. Writing must be fun and enjoyable. Science involves experimenting and building on curiosity levels. Social studies involves understanding our surroundings, people, places, and things. Math activities are geared towards counting, graphing, sorting, and problem solving.
153 Beliefs About Children’s Learning and Developing Mrs. Dell believes that children need to play a very active role in the learning process. She believes that children learn by doing and experiencing. Children learn naturally through active exploration and through interaction with other children, adults, and materials. Children learn when they are able to make choices and direct their own play activities. Children are motivated by a desire to make sense of their world, and play needs to be viewed as the primary vehicle for learning at this age. Children learn best when learning is whole, relevant, and integrated.
Beliefs About DAP Mrs. Dell believes that developmentally appropriate practices are those that focus on age and individual characteristics of each and every child. Developmentally appropriate practices are those that recognize that “five year olds come to you with a range of abilities.” The uniqueness of each child must be appreciated and valued. Every child has varying capabilities, needs, interests, and learning preferences. Practices must be responsive to all of these needs. DAP must look at where a child is, what the child can do, and what the child needs to do to further his or her learning. It is understanding that the child has certain interests and preferences. It means creating an environment and opportunities that appeal to the whole child. It means having a clear understanding of child development, understanding how they grow and change. Providing them opportunities to develop their skills. DAP helps children move from the known to the unknown, encouraging them to dig deeper. DAP is an environment that encourages children to discover the world around them, to ask questions, to manipulate their surroundings.
Mrs. Dell believes some practices are inappropriate with this age group, including unrealistic expectations and formal skill and drill activities. I think expecting too much of children who are five and six is inappropriate. For a five- year-old, to sit for even 20 minutes at a time you are not going to get their best behavior. Developmentally they are not able to be stable for so long. Requiring them to do a lot of paper work and sitting for long periods of time. Some skills are not appropriate for some children. There is a big push for reading and if they are not ready then it is a waste of time. You are much better spent working with them on their fine motor skills or whatever they need. You don’t want to jump too far ahead because then you are just going to need to revisit that again. The effects will not last in the long run. You are better to teach to their levels, to their needs.
154 Mrs. Dell also believes that having a DAP classroom is very challenging work. It is time consuming and expensive. I love teaching in this environment, but it is not easy. It takes a lot of work and time. I am constantly adding new material, changing bulletin boards, making games. The hardest part is the time it takes to create the activities that are fun and meaningful rather than just give them a worksheet. The real challenge is the creativity of making a room that will spark interest. I love it but it is exhausting. Thank goodness my husband is understanding!
She describes her practices as a balance between both teacher-led and student/teacher-led. I don’t know if I use traditional methods. I do some paper activities but I think it is more balanced between teacher-led and teacher-student lead. Showing examples, getting them to interject. A more open-ended environment. We are not all whole groups, sit down and do your work. There are things that we have to do. We have to do handwriting things, workbooks, Handwriting Without Tears. This is more teacher-modeled. I show them how to make the letters, top to bottom. Everyone is sitting and I stand to model. There is another thing we do to see how kids can follow oral directions. It is called Mr. Pencil. Kids have booklets that correspond with letters and sounds. I give oral directions and the children follow along to make some object. This is a have to do. I don’t mind doing it and the children seem to enjoy it. Not to say that I am not a paper and pencil person, but to say that we are going to sit down and color something is not going to happen. Reading series has little books, not basals. Small grouped level books. So I do have different groups. There is a component that goes with the teacher manual that is a blackline master. Sometimes I copy it and send it home for them to do. Usually I have them use their response journal and reflect on their favorite character or story part.
Centers are described as following this balance as well: Some are more directed and some are more prescribed. Some have a skill or task to complete and others have manipulatives and they are not given a specific job to do. They can use them in their own way. They can create their own activity. Most centers that have specific jobs are extension activities from a whole group lesson, like matching gold coins with numbers written on black pots. These centers are used as extra help for some of the children.
Beliefs About Outside Influences Mrs. Dell believes that several forces impact her classroom program, including year-end benchmarks, district curriculum, and state standards. She has found herself removing activities that she views important for children, such as blocks and dramatic play, in order to “pull in all those skills.” Rather than skills evolving naturally from experiences, experiences are now planned specifically to teach skills.
155 Where we have to have children by the end of the year is not in my opinion DAP. Some of the things we are expected to do is a little more than what a five-year-old is able to do. Like reading for example and the pushing for more with their writing. I mean we used to have a block center and a dramatic play center which are far more DAP for this age group, working on more social skills. Those things tend to get pushed aside now. So I guess sometimes I feel like I am teaching the skills while trying to make it more DAP. I will try to make it more of a game or a hands-on activity. Like to help with their reading, they do a lot of word families and magnetic letters to manipulate to make new words. Use toys to sort into word families. I try to keep it at their level but try to pull in skills as well. It is hard to set up this room to make it more DAP, to make it more hands-on rather than just a worksheet activity. Instead of putting out paper work for addition and subtraction, I would rather give them two dice and find the number that equals and put down pieces for what it equals. Making it more fun. It is very challenging as a teacher. You want to make the learning fun and meaningful and at their level so they are not frustrated, where they are not grasping the skill.
Mrs. Dell’s Practice
Learning Environment Mrs. Dell gives great attention to the physical arrangement of the room. She is constantly striving to create an environment that “makes children excited to learn – to actively participate.” She is constantly adding materials and rearranging furniture. Mrs. Dell utilizes every inch of the room in creating learning experiences. The environment is a vehicle for learning. Wall space, including bulletin boards and dry erase boards, are used to the fullest advantage. There is very little unused space in the room. Although the room is fully stocked with centers and materials, it is organized. Materials are displayed on low open shelves in color-coded, labeled containers. Centers are filled with sensory learning materials and board games designed for hands-on experiences. This is a literature-rich environment stocked with books, magazines, newspapers, movie schedules, catalogs, menus, and reference materials. This is a print-rich environment filled with signs, messages, and labels. The entire classroom is transformed every week along with the weekly theme. Bulletin boards, posters, center materials, and prescribed experiences are different for the children at the start of every week. The physical environment is arranged so that areas build upon each other. Areas that are louder, like science and math, are placed next to each other. Centers that require more concentration, like reading and writing, are in quieter spots in the room. Some centers are placed
156 by bulletin boards and dry erase boards so they can be used for interactive games. There are areas designated for whole group, small group, and individual activities. Tables also blend into the centers so that the children can “pull items” from the center shelves and work at the tables if so desired. Center-based instruction is highly valued within this classroom. Most centers are subject-related, such as Math Center, Writing Center, Language Center, ABC Center, and Reading Center. The centers incorporate the studied theme. There are over 25 centers in this room that are filled with relevant hands-on materials. All of the centers are designed around specific goals and objectives and include a combination of teacher-directed and child-directed activities. For example, at the Science Center there are items such as a microscope, a scale and weights, several prism wands, several magnets, and a terrarium. There is a wind experiment station. This contains activities that the children must complete such as task cards, worksheets, and vocabulary booklets. At the Math Center there are items such as pattern blocks, lacing links, small clocks, unifix cubes, and base ten blocks. There are also addition worksheets and graphing assignments. Flexibility is built into some assigned jobs. For example, at the Listening Center the children are assigned a book to listen to on tape. However, they can choose a unique way to demonstrate their comprehension, like making a poster or creating a clay character. Mrs. Dell explains how she designs her centers: Centers are usually geared slightly below because it is an independent experience. Most children can be successful. Activities range from very concrete to very product oriented. However, things can take 100 different directions. There is active participation and hands-on experiences, yet still structured. Centers provide an opportunity for them to work independently or to join efforts.
The daily schedule is moderately flexible. The schedule is posted on the room and is usually followed. Exceptions are made if class projects need to be finished or if whole group lessons extend longer than planned. Mrs. Dell creates a daily schedule that provides a balance of active and quiet time throughout the day. A large portion of the day revolves around Center Time and Choice Time. This portion of the day provides opportunity for the children and adults to have unrushed time to move through center experiences. This is a very active and social time of the day. Children are seen moving around the room, completing daily jobs, sharing their work with an adult, and then moving on to the next assigned center. Children are assigned different centers each day and are required to complete the assignments developed by Mrs. Dell. Once
157 these activities are completed, they may use the more open-ended materials at the center and then move on to more Choice Centers. In the afternoon, the children rotate through Literacy Centers. Then if time permits, they may move to Choice Centers again. Children rotate through three centers each day. Children are seen reading the room, building word families with letter tiles, throwing sponge balls at a number targets on the wall, completing addition facts, writing messages to the class on a dry erase board, playing board games, and completing word puzzles on the overhead. Children have access to outdoor or gross motor play three times every single day. Parents float in and out of the room during these times of the day. They work with children at the Word Station. They help children write stories. They help children paint. Children are seen talking to each other, playing games in small groups, and working with adults. Mrs. Dell constantly walks around the room, assists the children in their daily jobs, observes the children in their experiences, and often asks questions to extend the children’s thinking. “What do you think would happen if you add more salt to the mixture?” “Is there another way to sort these rocks?” “Are there any other animals that could be placed in that category?” She often carries a clipboard around and takes notes on her observations. After she has touched base with all the children, she begins Guided Reading Time. She calls small groups of children over to the reading table to work with her.
Learning Experiences Mrs. Dell provides a variety of experiences in the daily planning. Experiences include opportunity for children to work independently, to work in small groups, and to work with the whole class. Children are seen working on the computer alone, reading an interactive poetry chart with a partner, playing addition bingo with a small group of children, and participating in whole group storytime. Children spend the majority of the day handling manipulatives, experimenting with materials, and playing games. Children are able to move freely around the room, talk with one another, share ideas with each other, and help each other with their work. Communication flows freely between the children and the adults. Active participation and hands-on experiences dominate the environment. A good portion of the day is spent building academic skills, like reading, math, and language. Mrs. Dell integrates academic skills with informal child-centered activities.
158 Classroom experiences provide for a daily balance of reading, writing, listening, and speaking. Natural opportunities are provided for reading and writing, including signing in upon arrival each day, writing daily messages to the class, writing thank you notes to class visitors, writing monthly letters to pen pals, and writing observations at the Science Center. Mrs. Dell reads to the children every single day. She focuses on her love of reading and frequently brings in her favorite books and places them on an easel labeled “Mrs. Dell’s Weekly Picks.” Mrs. Dell pulls literature into every planned lesson, either through books or poetry. Literacy expression, story telling, and inventive spelling are part of this daily experience. She provides opportunity for choral reading, singing, and fingerplays. Mrs. Dell uses songs to transition into new activities, to begin lessons, and to teach various skills. All the children sing along and follow learned motions. Children are encouraged to communicate verbally and in writing with each other and with Mrs. Dell.
Teaching Strategies Mrs. Dell uses a variety of approaches to instruction within her classroom program. She uses whole group instruction (Handwriting Without Tears, Math, Carpet Time, Mr. Pencil, Science, Social Studies, Health), small group (Guided Reading Group, Center Time, Choice Time), and individual instruction (Center Time, Choice Time, Seatwork). She uses a combination of child-directed and teacher-directed experiences to guide instruction. Mrs. Dell teaches skills in a play-like fashion, trying to make everything into a game. During teacher- directed experiences, Mrs. Dell assumes a direct leadership role. She stands or sits before the children, explains the objective of the lesson, models the activity, provides opportunity for the children to practice, and then provides feedback. For example, in a math lesson based on the concept of telling time to the hour, Mrs. Dell introduced the lesson, modeled how to show time on a large clock, and then passed out miniature clocks for the children. The children then practiced this skill with Mrs. Dell by playing a game called “Time, time, who has the time?” These experiences usually last for approximately thirty minutes. The children are still actively involved in the lesson through the use of manipulatives, through the use of signaling (thumbs up for yes, thumbs down for no), through the use of fingerplays, songs, and movements. Volunteers are called upon to point to words, to read directions out loud, to demonstrate answers on a large class manipulative, and to lead choral reading. During these experiences, all of the children are
159 doing the same thing as demonstrated by Mrs. Dell. Most lessons end with the children working with partners or in small groups completing a hands-on follow-up lesson. Seatwork is used for mastery and review. During less structured experiences, like Morning Carpet Time, the children help lead the activities. Volunteers lead the children through the morning routine, including calendar, attendance, and weather. The children stand in front of the group along with Mrs. Dell, begin the activity song, and give the daily information. Throughout the day, Mrs. Dell assumes many different roles in the classroom. She arranges the classroom environment and prepares the activities and experiences. She is often seen throughout the day rearranging material, fixing a bulletin board, adding new books to the centers, or cutting out laminated materials. She facilitates group lessons and supervises Center Time. She has a high level of involvement with the children and with the environment throughout the day. She constantly walks around the room, talks to each child, and asks him or her questions when needed. She observes the children and frequently takes notes or refers to her checklists. She sits at tables with the children and helps them with their writing. She sits at tables and sorts items with children. She sits at the Science Center and helps children complete science experiments. Mrs. Dell is often seen doing multiple things at once, such as cutting out shapes while talking to a child or gluing pictures into a class book while playing a board game with a small group of children. My role is to be a support for the children and to be a role model. I need to show them a high interest in reading, writing, and learning in general. I am here as an authority, not an authoritarian – there is a difference. I am here to help them know how to follow rules and know what is expected of them. I need to show them respect so that they will in turn show me respect. During most activities, I see myself as the facilitator. As the year progresses, I tend to give up more responsibility and I expect them to take over more of the roles. Then my role is more of a monitor, encouraging the children to take ownership and to become the facilitators. I guide the activities by showing examples and then the children are weaned off of me. It is very hard sometimes because you often feel like you should be up there doing all the teaching.
Mrs. Dell has created an environment of mutual respect. She uses a calm and nurturing approach with the children – constantly talking to the children, listening to them, answering their questions, and sharing new material. She greets each child with a big smile every morning and expresses her enthusiasm for the day. She is often heard saying, “Mark, I found some really cool frog books last night. I put them in the Science Center.” “We have a new baseball game, boys!”
160 She also encourages children to bring in items of interest from home to share. “Mrs. D., I brought my card collection today.” “Mrs. Dell, can I bring in my sunflower from our garden?” Mrs. Dell finds a way to incorporate these interests into the classroom and builds upon them. For example, the sunflower became the center of the Science Center. She placed a magnifying glass, a tweezers, a dish, and several books on sunflowers in the center. Other children started bringing in seeds and flowers, and Mrs. Dell created a new center just for seeds. This is what excites them right now. This is what they are curious about. What kind of teacher would I be if I didn’t allow for these types of experiences? If I didn’t value their curiosity levels? My job is to make them life long learners - to focus on the excitement of learning, not to squelch it.
Mrs. Dell values the children as partners in the classroom. Children help develop classroom rules. She asks their opinion about activities and values their input, often adjusting experiences based on their insight. Children are encouraged to share their ideas and thoughts. She has arranged the environment to help the children become self-reliant learners. Materials, such as tape, scissors, hole punchers, and staplers, are made available to the children. The children are taught how to use and care for the equipment in the room, such as computers, overhead projectors, tape recorders, and slide projectors. Children are free to use the equipment by themselves. The children have a strong sense of responsibility in the classroom, completing daily assignments, journals, and investigation charts. Children know the daily routine and are able to transition from one activity to the next with very few prompts. Children are able to choose materials to place in portfolios. They are able to display work throughout the room. Children also have various duties in the room, including “Calendar Leader,” “Clean Up Person,” and “Attendance Taker.”
Motivation and Guidance Mrs. Dell helps the children learn to manage their behavior through several different approaches, including establishing class rules, modeling appropriate behavior, and redirecting children. Consequences are natural. Mrs. Dell explains, “If you color on someone’s paper without permission, you apologize and help them fix their work. If you hurt someone’s feelings, you find a way verbally or in written form to make them feel better.” Mrs. Dell uses every
161 opportunity to help the children learn from their mistakes and take responsibility for their actions. She is often heard saying, “No one is perfect, but we need to work on being a better person each and every day.” “Remember, we are here to help each other.” Mrs. Dell helps the children solve problems with words. She provides guidance. Classroom meetings are often used to resolve classroom issues. Everyday conflicts, like difficulty sharing and name calling, provide the content for learning shared decision-making and problem-solving. Classroom management takes a great deal of emphasis at the beginning of the year. It is much more basic than now. I take a great deal of time explaining to the children the layout of the room – where things are, how things are used, how to clean up, etc. A lot of time is spent role-playing. This builds independence in the children. Rules are developed together at the beginning of the year. The goal is to focus on the positives and not the negatives. The goal is to help children work through problems and learn from them. Group rewards are often used.
Curriculum Mrs. Dell takes many steps to develop her classroom program. The provided district curriculum and state standards serve as a guide for the skills and objectives she must cover for the year. However, she considers the group of children she has each year and adjusts her goals accordingly. Long-term planning includes established benchmarks created by the district. Benchmarks are referred to when developing weekly lesson plans. Curriculum is then developed through high-interest themes, such as Insects, Families, and Animals. These themes are developed by Mrs. Dell; however, the children can add their own ideas. Before each thematic unit, Mrs. Dell gathers the children’s prior knowledge through the use of KWL charts, class discussions, and webbing activities. She begins with the known and bridges this to the unknown for the children, using numerous multisensory experiences. Throughout each unit, Mrs. Dell provides learning options in different degrees of difficulty to provide appropriate challenges. She also uses mini-lessons to teach skills to whole class or to small group depending on the need. Parents are highly valued in the classroom. Several volunteers are the classroom in the morning and in the afternoon. Parents test children on various skills, play games with children, and read books with children. Several parents come in the afternoon to help the children in the Literacy Centers. Parents often prepare material at home for Mrs. Dell or donate items for the classroom. Parents are on a first name basis with Mrs. Dell. She communicates regularly with
162 the parents through weekly classroom letters, notes, and phone calls. Mrs. Dell appreciates their help, saying: I just love my parents. The parental support here is wonderful. Volunteers are here every day helping me in many different capacities. They work with children and prepare materials for us. Parental response for me is positive. Many parents are asking for their siblings to be placed in my class. That says enough for me!
Assessment Mrs. Dell uses a variety of assessment approaches throughout the year to determine children’s needs and progress. She uses checklists, anecdotal notes, work samples, pictures of projects, standardized tests, and DIBELS assessment to gather information on each child. Mrs. Dell checks her list of benchmarks almost every day to determine her progress in implementation. This information is used to adjust the program in regards to experiences and activities. She assesses each child every month to determine his or her progress on various skills such as letter recognition, letter sounds, number recognition, shapes, and reading level. This information is used to develop flexible skill reinforcement groups. These five kindergarten teachers are very familiar with developmentally appropriate practices and reported beliefs that are highly consistent with NAEYC’s definition of DAP. However, outside pressures have forced these teachers to try to implement what many refer to as developmentally inappropriate curriculum and assessment methods with a more developmentally appropriate pedagogy. These teachers often feel conflicted, struggling with their beliefs and the reality of kindergarten. The next, and last, chapter will examine the results of the study and take a closer look at the inconsistencies that exist between these teachers’ beliefs and practice.
163 Chapter Six Conclusions, Discussion, and Recommendation
This qualitative case study focused on the relationship between teachers’ beliefs and practices. Specifically, the purpose of this study was to examine how five kindergarten teachers’ beliefs impacted their use of developmentally appropriate practices (DAP). Data were collected from five kindergarten teachers in a single mid-western public school through the use of semi- structured interviews and observations. In this chapter, the results have been organized to facilitate addressing each research question, including the overarching question: How do the beliefs of kindergarten teachers affect their use of developmentally appropriate practices in their classrooms? The subsidiary questions include: a) What do the teacher-informants believe is the role of kindergarten? b) What are the teacher-informants’ beliefs about how kindergarten children develop and learn? c) What are the teacher-informants’ beliefs about appropriate practices? d) What do instructional practices look like in their own classrooms? and e) What elements impact the teacher-informants’ program design? After briefly summarizing the answers to the questions, I will discuss my major findings. Finally, I will make several recommendations for further research and practice based on this study.
What are the Teacher-informants’ Beliefs About the Role of Kindergarten? These five teachers discussed at great length the important role that kindergarten plays in the lives of today’s children. Despite the realization that most of their students have been previously introduced to the “world of school,” these teachers still view kindergarten as the “turning point” for their students. Due to the diverse educational experiences previously encountered by most of the children, these teachers believe that kindergarten has several functions, including “setting the stage” and “laying the foundation.” In regards to “setting the stage,” these teachers discussed the socializing role of kindergarten. Kindergarten still provides “a bridge between home and school” and needs to introduce the children “to the ways of our school.” This socialization process includes, but is not limited to, teaching the children: a) how to follow directions; b) how to walk in the halls; c) how to raise their hands; d) how to listen to others; and e) how to cooperate with other children. In regards to “laying the foundation,”
164 these teachers first discussed a foundation of social, emotional, and physical development. As Mrs. Morgan expressed: Kindergarten is a time to help children develop friendships, learn to cooperate, build confidence, build upon their love for learning, and further develop social skills. It is a time to play with one another and a time to have fun.
These five teachers also recognize the importance of the academic foundation. They believe that there is a wide range of objectives, primarily in math and language arts, that need to be emphasized in the kindergarten program. Several of the teachers believe that this academic foundation must occur due to the amount of knowledge today’s children “bring to school with them.” For example, Mrs. Jones commented: I think kids are exposed to more these days and they come to school knowing more. I know a lot of my kids come knowing all their letters and sounds. They come to school with more of a background in things like reading and math. They have more opportunities, more reading at home. Many come from a pretty heavily loaded academic preschool program which they have been in since about birth. There are more parents becoming aware of what the pressures are. They don’t want their child not to be able to read when they go to first grade. Parents are buying toys, books, computer games…all in the hopes of keeping their child one step ahead of the game. I even had one parent tell me she has been doing flashcards with her child since about six months.
What are the Teacher-informants’ Beliefs About How Kindergarten Children Develop and Learn? These teachers believe that development involves the whole child, including, but not limited to, the social, physical, emotional, mental, and intellectual domains. These teachers understand that children are at different levels of development and that their rate of development is varied. Their descriptions of child development focus on an understanding of age- appropriateness and individual appropriateness. Children need to have a learning environment that respects each child’s needs, abilities, learning styles, and interests. These teachers also expressed a belief that children are naturally motivated to learn and have a desire to make sense of their immediate world. Children learn by doing and need to be actively involved in their own learning process. Children learn naturally through active exploration and need ample opportunities to make choices and to direct their own play. Children also learn from one another and need an environment that honors social interaction.
165 What are the Teacher-informants’ Beliefs About Appropriate Practices? When asked to talk about appropriate practices, every teacher focused on the importance of providing essential learning experiences that respect the various needs and abilities of the individual children. The experiences provided need to build on the children’s curiosity and activity level. Mrs. Dell’s explanation of developmentally appropriate practices reflects the other four teachers’ basic understanding of this philosophy: First, it is the understanding of children’s cognitive and maturational processes and how that plays out into this setting. It is about looking at the whole child, not just the academic side of him. It is about understanding where a child is in his development and helping them move along that continuum. It is about allowing a child to work at their own pace while you encourage and provide many opportunities, natural opportunities for that child to grow and explore. Part of this understanding is that children construct their knowledge by exploring their environment and by interacting with others. It is a very social process in my opinion. It is about looking at the age appropriate characteristics as well as the individual characteristics that make up that child. It is understanding that not all 6, 7, 8 year olds are at the same place and need the same things. It really is about understanding the child.
These teachers further believe that play needs to be the primary vehicle for learning. Therefore, activities and materials need to be relevant, hands-on, and concrete. Children need to be allowed to make choices about their learning and to direct many of their own experiences. Long periods of uninterrupted time to explore the room, to manipulate the materials, and to interact with one another and adults need to be a large part of the daily routine. These five teachers also believe that appropriate practice involves an exposure to more teacher-directed activities and experiences. A balance of whole class, structured lessons and play experiences is appropriate. In a lunchroom conversation, Mrs. Carter, a preschool teacher at this school who did not participate in this study, suggested that it is not always clear what developmentally appropriate practices are: This is a really hard question. It is hard to specifically define DAP. DAP means recognizing that children enter school at different levels and that they are moving through a continuum. The teacher’s role, particularly for children ages 4-7, is to provide them with a lot of opportunities to develop and learn reading, writing, and math processes in a natural setting so they can become fluent. It is about honoring where the child is at a specific time, what a child needs to do to move beyond that and knowing that one child may move along sequentially, while another child needs to stay at a place for several months. That child just needs to live in that space for that time. It is more than just the material you use. It is more than just what the child is doing. I really like an eclectic
166 approach. I think you need to remain pure in the program but at times you have to realize that not all the children are going to learn the same way. That does not mean bringing in more traditional approaches. When you do, you are moving away from being pure.
Clearly, this teacher disapproved of “pulling in traditional approaches” and using “whole group instruction” considering them “impure.” All of the teachers agreed that these types of activities, if used, should be used minimally throughout the program. All also agreed, however, that some exposure to this type of instruction is necessary to prepare kindergartners for future schooling. For instance, Mrs. Jones explains her views: There should be very little direct instruction at this level. When the teacher is planning and directing all the activities then it is not appropriate for the children. Yes, you can have some seat work, some whole group guided activities…but only when it lends itself to the activity. We do need to prepare them for what lies ahead. However, this should not be the focus of the day. The teacher and the children should guide the day. Inappropriate practices are those that include activities that are to some degree mindless, like worksheets, basal activities, drill and skill activities. These should not be used very much at this level. The sad thing is, we see it at this school. You see it in my room.
Mrs. Jones’s comments clearly reveal the dilemma the teachers find themselves in: they disapprove of teacher-centered instruction to a great extent, but nonetheless find themselves using it.
What do Instructional Practices in Their Own Classrooms Look Like? Observations of these five kindergarten teachers revealed that practices fell along a continuum between largely teacher-directed instruction and largely child-directed instruction. As found in numerous other research studies, most classroom practices reflected a “combination” or “middle of the road” approach (i.e., Buchanan, et al., 1998; Halpin, et al., 1982; Hart, Burts, & Charlesworth, 1997; Hyson, et al., 1990; Jones & Gullo, 1999; Marcon, 1992, 1993, 1999; Spodek, 1987; Stipek, et al., 1992). These teachers, to varying degrees, tended to “see-saw” back and forth between the types of practices that they implemented, rotating among structured whole group activities, guided small group lessons, and self-directed center time. In most classrooms, whole group activities were used as a way to start and end the day, to complete writing activities, to introduce math concepts, and to complete theme-related projects. During
167 these activities, the teachers were observed being in control of the learning process, presenting the lessons, modeling the activities, and providing structured, individualized practice. Observations revealed a heavy academic component in every classroom. Lessons and center activities focused on phonemic awareness, word recognition, number sense, and operations. In language arts, planned lessons and experiences focused heavily on: a) letter recognition; b) letter/sound identification; c) word families; d) syllables; and e) sentence structure. In math, planned lessons and experiences focused heavily on: a) addition and subtraction facts; b) number sentences; c) graphs and charts; and d) story problems. Although thematic units were used to integrate subject matter, many activities were designed to provide isolated skill development. In some classes, activities were in the form of worksheets, flashcards, and workbooks. Although concrete, hands-on materials were available in every class, most experiences were still teacher-directed with directions provided and often a finished product modeled. The major focus of the day revolved around reading, writing, and math. Science and social studies were subjects that were squeezed in when there was time. Observations revealed many similarities and differences among the five classrooms. All of the classrooms were arranged to provide opportunities for the children to work alone, to work with a partner, to work with a small group, and to work with the whole class. Each classroom environment also contained centers that guided the program’s curriculum to varying degrees. Centers varied in: a) the amount of materials provided; b) the accessibility of material to the children; c) the amount of concrete, open-ended manipulatives; d) the amount of teacher- directed, teacher-made activities; e) the degree of choice for the children; and f) the amount of time used in the daily program. Environments ranged from a “one size fits all” approach where few, if any, modifications were made for struggling or advanced learners to a “full inclusion” approach that was highly responsive to individual learning needs. Environments ranged from one of obedience to one of autonomy and interaction. Environments also ranged from one of sitting primarily at assigned tables completing prescribed activities to one of freely moving around the room choosing from a variety of quality three-dimensional materials and teacher- prescribed activities. Throughout the day, the teachers served as guides, facilitators, observers, and directors. To varying degrees, the teachers’ job appeared to be to observe the children in their work and then adapt the environment to further their learning. Moreover, it appeared to be
168 the teachers’ role, also to varying degrees, to create a rich, challenging environment that incorporated the children’s levels, interests, and needs. Mrs. Townsend described her thinking this way: When arranging my program, there are many elements involved. When I arrange the classroom, I consider the type of interactions the children will have – individual, partners, small group, occasionally whole group – and make sure that there are places in my room for those types of encounters to occur. I have center areas, carpet areas, painting areas, a library, a place to be alone if needed. In my centers I have age appropriate manipulatives and toys that are not prescribed in nature. They are open-ended and allow the children to do what they want with them. They are able to manipulate them in a way that makes sense for them. I also have more teacher-directed activities in each center as an activity for the children to complete each day. This is their daily job. This teaches them responsibility and routine. There are areas for dramatic play for children to act out their understanding of the world around them. Blocks, water and sand table, lots of rich literature. Daily experiences include small groups, partners, individual, and some whole group experiences.
What she is describing is, of course, a very eclectic approach. Although at first she describes whole group work as “occasional,” she finally states that it’s a “daily” experience.
What do the Teacher-informants Believe are Forces That Impact Their Program? These teachers have encountered several forces over the years that impact their programs. As in several other studies, these teachers find it difficult to fully implement what they believe to be developmentally appropriate practices due to outside forces (i.e., Buchanan, et al., 1998; Butterfield & Johnston, 1995; Charlesworth, et al., 1991, 1993b; Haupt & Ostlund, 1997; Spidell-Rusher, et al., 1992; Stipek & Byler, 1997; Vartuli, 1999). Some of these forces stem from state accountability, district demands, parental expectations, and peer expectations. These teachers believe that the greatest forces are the state and the district. Impacted by federal legislation, such as the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) and national standards, the state has called for increased accountability. This call by the state has greatly impacted district policy, and thus, has placed demands on the school to follow traditional standards and assessments that do not necessarily fall in line with the developmental philosophy. Some of the district’s demands include: a) grade level indicators; b) graded courses of study; c) mandated commercially-produced reading and handwriting curriculum; d) quarterly progress reports; and
169 e) standardized tests. Many of these “demands” were reserved primarily for grades first and higher. Now kindergarten, and even preschool to some degree, can not escape these policies. Like other studies, these five teachers believe that another force is parents and the way that they respond to the program (i.e., Buchanan, et al., 1998; Butterfield & Johnston, 1995; Goldstein, 1997; Hatch & Freeman, 1988; Haupt & Ostlund, 1997; Seefeldt & Barbour, 1988; Shepard & Smith, 1988; Spidell-Rusher, et al., 1992; Stipek & Byler, 1997; Vartuli, 1999). Most of these teachers believe that parents are generally satisfied with their program; however, they recognize that many parents desire more teacher-directed environments, more skill-based curriculum, and less play (Burts, et al., 1992; Elkind, 1986; Hatch & Freeman, 1988; Haupt, Larsen, Robinson, & Hart, 1995; Hitz & Wright, 1985; Marcon, 1999; Oakes & Caruso, 1990; Saunders & Goldenberg, 1996; Sigel, 1987; Stipek & Byler, 1997; West, et al., 1993). Many parents in this district have expressed a desire “to see less of this play stuff” and “to see more real work coming home.” To a certain extent, some parents’ expectations reflect their earlier experiences with preschool programs. According to Mrs. Morgan, one parent commented, “My child has experienced enough play in daycare. Now it is time to get busy. I didn’t sign my child up to play with blocks all day.” All of the teachers admitted that this demand, to some degree, has forced them to include more worksheets and to provide more homework. Mrs. Jones explained: I hear a lot of mixed emotions from them. At the beginning I hear a lot of comments like, “How come all they do is play in here?” I just try to be patient and understanding. I try to show them in very concrete ways why play is so important to a child’s development and where their child is on the continuum. But I still have parents who want to see something come home. I think it helps them know school in the way that they knew school and that they can help their children with their work. So you find ways for the children to take things home…worksheets and such.
Mrs. Manford also explained: One thing that I have heard from them is that they want more traditional homework and they want a lot of workbook stuff. I show them what we are doing. Some of them get the hands-on activities and that it is academic in a physical form. Others don’t seem to care. I have to admit that I have incorporated more traditional stuff into my classroom to appease the parents. I have also heard from some teachers that parents don’t like that we teachers are always telling them to read more with their child. They feel that this is the school’s job. So what I do now is make reading at home a more traditional
170 format, where children have to read each night, record the book’s title and author, and parents have to sign it. My parents have responded positively to this. One even said to me, “It is about time we saw some real work.”
These five teachers also discussed the impact that peer expectations have on their individual programs (i.e., Charlesworth, et al., 1991; Charlesworth, et al., 1993b; Haupt & Ostlund, 1997; Hitz & Wright, 1985; Smith & Shepard, 1988; McMullen, 1999). Even though the teachers described this impact as “minimal,” the expectations of first grade teachers does influence their daily planning. These teachers hear requests from the first grade teachers to “make sure our students are ready for first grade.” Mrs. Dell addressed these requests: Now they need to come into first grade with a pretty good reading foundation. They need to be able to start on a level three, so that by the time they get to second and third grade they are ready to pass those tests. As far as word recognition, reading is the area I notice it the most in, more than math and social studies. I think part of the pressure comes from grade level. We meet together and we hear, “Boy, it would be great if the children could come to first grade knowing this.”
How Do the Beliefs of Kindergarten Teachers Affect Their Use of Developmentally Appropriate Practices? Like many other studies, this research found a discrepancy between the teachers’ reported beliefs and their actual classroom practices (i.e., Buchanan, et al., 1998; Bryant, et al., 1991; Charlesworth, et al., 1991; Charlesworth, et al., 1993b; Hatch & Freeman, 1988; Hitz & Wright, 1988; Hyson, et al., 1990; Jones & Gullo, 1999; Kagan & Smith, 1988; Kemple, 1996; Ketner, et al., 1997; Marcon, 1993, 1999; Nelson, 2000; Oakes & Caruso, 1990; Smith & Shepard, 1988; Spidell-Rusher, et al., 1992; Spodek, 1987; Vartuli, 1999; Verma & Peters, 1975). These five kindergarten teachers reported beliefs that were highly consistent with developmentally appropriate practices (DAP) as defined by NAEYC (1987, 1997). However, observations revealed that their reported beliefs about DAP were stronger than their actual classroom practices. In every case, self-reported beliefs and observed practices fell along a continuum, ranging from more developmentally appropriate to more developmentally inappropriate. Beliefs do impact their practices in varying degrees; however, there are other
171 environmental factors that impact this relationship as well. These factors include, but are not limited to, state standards, district curriculum, testing, accountability, and parental pressure.
Interpretation of Data The aim of this research project was to explore how five kindergarten teachers’ beliefs impacted their practices in their classrooms. The overall goal of my investigation was to describe the beliefs and experiences of these kindergarten teachers, using their language to a great extent. Another goal was to describe each teacher-informant’s particular worldview to better understand the various factors that affect her decisions, behaviors, and actions. After closer examination of the coding categories, several themes emerged, including “pressure” and “a combination approach.” These two themes were repeated throughout the interviews. The following section includes my interpretation of the themes. My interpretations will hopefully shed light on the current debate about appropriate practices for kindergarten children and raise new questions that require further research.
Pressure Throughout this study, every teacher made numerous references to the “pressure” she experienced which to varying degrees impacted her classroom practices. It appears that to a great extent these outside pressures made it difficult for these teachers to fully implement what they believe to be DAP. State and district standards for accountability forced some teachers at this school to move away from the established philosophy of developmental education. The influence of stricter standards was very prevalent throughout this early childhood building. Signs were posted throughout the school inviting parents to attend PTA meetings about fourth grade proficiency tests. Awards given for ranking “Excellent” in state standards were displayed in the entranceway. Flyers were made available at the office about programs the district has implemented to help young children, including: a) prekindergarten programs; b) later school entrance ages; c) developmental placement systems; and d) transitional kindergarten programs. Newspaper articles were displayed on the teachers’ lounge bulletin boards that reported each school’s standardized achievement test scores. Articles were left in teachers’ mailboxes about the No Child Left Behind Act and the new SAT. District meetings revolved around standardized testing and alignment of curriculum with state standards. Committees were
172 formed to find commercially produced curriculum material that would help align graded courses of study with state standards. Committees were formed to create quarterly report cards to help demonstrate accountability. During one parent orientation meeting that I attended in the district, the elementary principal discussed at great length the number of weeks out of the year the children would be involved in practice proficiency tests, California Achievement Tests (CAT), and, soon-to-be- used, diagnostic tests. The principal even discussed the new SAT test that would soon be used at the high school level. This new test will contain fewer multiple-choice questions and will have a greater focus on reading comprehension and essay writing. The principal even discussed the district’s membership in the High AIMS (High Achievement in Math and Science) Consortium. The Consortium provides a grant named PROM/SE (Promoting Rigorous Outcomes in Math and Science Education). The purpose of this grant is to help teachers implement the state’s mathematical and science standards and improve student performance in math and science at earlier ages. One parent raised his hand during this meeting and commented, “So what you are really saying is that my child will be spending most of his time filling in little ovals the next few years.” The principal replied, “Unfortunately, this is what it has come to.” The language of the district is one of accountability and standardized tests. The pressure that these teachers sense is very real. Test scores appear to be the driving force for these teachers and principals. This pressure is felt at many levels. The teachers do not appear to be alone in this struggle. Day-to-day pressures have caused these five teachers to struggle with their practices, searching for ways to implement their beliefs while satisfying outside expectations. Each year these teachers find themselves removing centers and experiences that they value and believe are important to this age group’s development. These pressures have caused inconsistencies in the implementation of DAP to occur at this school with teachers fluctuating between block play and worksheets. These pressures have forced some teachers to give priority to subject matter rather than to children’s needs. These pressures have forced some teachers to allow the tests to dictate their curriculum. These teachers often referred to this pressure as “the big push.” This “big push” has forced them to emphasize academic skill development, and thus use more inappropriate practices. Despite the teachers’ belief that kindergarten’s most important role is socialization and play, observations revealed a very different reality. What used to be a year of introducing and exposing children to some basic skills has become a year of skill mastery in
173 these kindergarten classrooms. In varying degrees, observations revealed learning environments that have a preoccupation with tests. These teachers, even at the kindergarten level, seem to be preparing the children for the upcoming proficiency tests. During a lunchroom conversation, a kindergarten teacher who did not participate in this study expressed her concern about the pressure she too has observed in this school: The last few years, I have seen this school move away from the developmental model. So many stipulations and pressures are put on the school, so many standards to meet that some teachers feel forced to pull in traditional approaches so that their children can spit out the information needed to pass those damn tests. Most teachers are not pure in their program. Not that I am blaming them. It is hard now to hold on to your beliefs. Too many people are telling you to do one thing and you feel you should do another. Some teachers can hold on, others fall to the pressure. It is not their fault. People just don’t let kids be kids anymore. Everything is rush, rush, rush. A shame if you ask me.
Vance and Boals (1989) recognize that what these five kindergarten teachers are experiencing is not unique. Vance and Boals (1989) describe the personal conflict that many teachers, like the five in this study, experience: Many teachers experience considerable pressure implicit or explicit from a source that certainly has impacted upon their professional judgement regarding appropriate program development. The teacher’s knowledge of child growth and development, their knowledge of children as individuals with different backgrounds together with knowledge of the long and short-term effects of the different teaching strategies may possibly put teachers in conflict with today’s proliferation of standardized tests, behavioral objectives and performance standards expressed by society as a kind of accountability. This type of accountability is unattainable and harmful to young children. When teachers are confronted with performance standards cited as appropriate for five year olds which are contradictory to the knowledge base of the teachers, undue pressure, and a breakdown of moral and professional judgment is experienced by teachers. ( p. 1)
What surprised me most during the observations was the academic concepts that were being introduced and reviewed in many classrooms. At times, I felt like I was observing second grade classrooms rather than kindergarten classrooms. In language arts, lessons moved away from the enjoyment of language and story elements to a heavy focus on phonics, decoding skills, and sentence structure. In most of these classrooms, I observed many children in reading groups working on various skills, including: a) word families; b) beginning and ending sounds; c) short and long vowel rules; d) numerous sight words; e) decoding approaches; f) contextual clues; g) contractions; and h) compound words. In math, lessons moved away
174 from counting objects and creating sets to a heavy focus on addition and subtraction problems and expanded notation. In most of the classrooms, I observed math lessons that focused heavily on: a) addition and subtraction facts to 10; b) addition and subtraction facts to 20; c) two- digit addition without regrouping; d) telling time to hour, half hour, and quarter hour; e) greater than and less than; and f) fractions. All of the teachers used check-off lists to determine which children were able to demonstrate mastery of various reading, writing, and math skills. Every week that I visited this site, I observed each teacher pulling individual children aside, testing them on yet another skill. Teachers would then use this information to provide individual assistance for that child. Volunteers were often seen in the hallway testing children on letter/sound recognition, sight words, and word families. Despite the teachers’ value of play and the belief that child-directed play was occurring in the classrooms, observed experiences resembled more teacher-directed lessons and teacher-directed centers filled with games and activities made to resemble play. Although center activities included items like spinners, dice, and path boards, these activities were prescribed and designed to review basic skills and facts. There existed, in most classes, an extreme focus on basic skills. The most amazing lesson I observed involved a lesson on determining the perimeter and area of a box. Through the use of an overhead presentation, the children were introduced to vocabulary and basic formulas. Real boxes and tiles were used to demonstrate this concept to the children. When I asked the teacher how she felt the lesson went, she commented that she thought it was way over their heads and she felt like it was a waste of her time and theirs. When asked why she conducted the lesson, she responded, “Because they want them to have an idea about all this before they come to first grade. My job is to expose them to this. I’ve never had to teach this before and I really don’t know how to do it on their level.” When asked to define “they,” this teacher made reference to upper administration and curriculum developers. It was this experience that made me question where the teachers were really feeling the “pressure” from. There is no denying that the pressure from the district was strong and that the language of the district heavily emphasized accountability. However, I could not believe that a district would include indicators at this level for such young children. Mrs. Jones expressed: We have state standards as well which guides our curriculum. BUT when you look at the state standards, it is bare minimum. So here we sit and go, “We are doing way more than
175 that.” I would be worried if my children couldn’t do some of the standards they require the children to meet.
If state standards were really just “bare minimum” like this teacher indicated, then the pressure had to come more strongly from another source. After several weeks of observing, I obtained a copy of the district’s grade level indicators from the district’s curriculum coordinator. Close examination revealed that these kindergarten teachers’ lessons, in many cases, resembled a first and second grade curriculum. For example, kindergarten benchmarks for mathematics (category: numbers, number sums and operations) included: 1. Compare and order whole numbers up to 10. 2. Explain rules of counting, such as each object should be counted once and that order does not change the number. 3. Count to twenty; e.g., in play situations or while reading number books. 4. Determine “how many” in sets (groups) of 10 or fewer objects… 10. Model and represent addition as combining sets and counting on, and subtraction as take-away and comparison…. (Pinecrest School District Early Childhood Indicators Document, 2002-2003)
First grade benchmarks for mathematics (category: number sense and operations) included: 1. Use ordinal numbers to order objects; e.g., first, second, third. 2. Read and write the numerals for numbers to 100. 10. Use place value concepts to represent whole numbers using numerals, words, expanded notation and physical models with ones and tens. For example: a. develop a system to group and count by twos, fives, and tens… 11. Model, represent and explain addition as combining sets (part + part = whole) and counting on… 12. Model, represent and explain subtraction as take-away and comparison… 13. Use conventional symbols to represent the operations of addition and subtraction…. (Pinecrest School District Early Childhood Indicator Document, 2002-2003)
Kindergarten benchmarks for reading (category: phonemic awareness, word recognition and fluency) included: 1. Read own first and last name. 2. Identify and complete rhyming words and patterns. 3. Distinguish the number of syllables in words by using rhythmic clapping, snapping or counting. 4. Distinguish and name all upper- and lower-case letters. 5. Recognize, say and write the common sounds of letters…
176 8. Read one-syllable and often-heard words by sight…. (Pinecrest School District Early Childhood Indicator Document, 2002-2003) Kindergarten benchmarks for reading (category: reading process: concepts of print, comprehension strategies and self-monitoring strategies) included: 1. Demonstrate an understanding that print has meaning by explaining that text provides information or tells a story. 2. Hold books right side up, know that people read pages from front to back and read words from left to right. 3. Know the difference between illustrations and print…. (Pinecrest School District Early Childhood Indicator Document, 2002-2003)
First grade benchmarks for reading (category: phonemic awareness, word recognition and fluency) included: 1. Identify and distinguish between letters, words and sentences. 2. Identify and say the beginning and ending sounds in words. 3. Demonstrate an understanding of letter-sound correspondence by saying the sounds from all letters and from a variety of letter patterns, such as consonant blends and long- and short-vowel patterns, and by matching sounds to the corresponding letters…. (Pinecrest School District Early Childhood Indicator Document, 2002-2003)
First grade benchmarks for reading (category: reading process: concepts of print, comprehension strategies and self-monitoring strategies) included: 1. Describe the role of authors and illustrators. 2. Establish a purpose for reading… 3. Visualize the information in texts and demonstrate this by drawing pictures, discussing images in texts or writing simple descriptions…. (Pinecrest School District Early Childhood Indicator Document, 2002-2003)
During this process, I also examined current state standards and the district’s kindergarten report cards. Close examination revealed that report cards aligned with the district’s kindergarten indicators which, in turn, aligned with the state standards. Report cards, to a great extent, indicated a mastery of basic skills. Even though the teachers expressed that the pressure came heavily from state standards, from a paper perspective, the pressure seemed to come from another source. This pressure appears to come from peer expectations. Peer pressure, even though these kindergarten teachers viewed it as light, greatly influenced what occurred in their classrooms.
177 These teachers, to varying degrees, are greatly concerned that first grade teachers will complain that children are entering first grade without certain skills – that children will “not be able to read at a Level 3” – that children “were not taught how to do individual seat work” – that children will “not know all their letter sounds.” Mrs. Dell commented: I sat in on one curriculum alignment meeting where you had second grade teachers telling the first grade teachers, “You are not doing this.” and “These are the gaps we see when they are coming to us.” Therefore, we realigned the curriculum. We look at what they are expected to know the first month of first grade and use that as a guide for what we have to do to get them ready for by the end of kindergarten. It is not saying that teachers are pointing fingers, but you know how that goes. “Well, if you had done this…they could have done this.”
This pressure has forced these teachers to place extra pressure on themselves to exceed “normal” benchmarks, helping children become overprepared for first grade. These teachers emphasize, to a great extent, a mastery of specific subject matter. Basically, it appears that some of these teachers fear having fingers pointed at them and being told they did not do their job well. An overemphasis on students’ test scores has led to a standardized curriculum in which grade level expectations continue to get “pushed down.” One teacher described this as the “trickle down effect” (i.e., Smith & Shepard, 1988). This pressure also appears to come from the kindergarten program structure and from the kindergarten team members. This district recently began offering parents a whole-day kindergarten option. The intent is to provide extended-day programming for families in need, to allow children more time for building friendships, and to allow teachers the time to “dig a little deeper” into the curriculum. However, the whole day programs greatly resembled first and second grade classrooms. These classrooms were more heavily academically loaded. These classrooms utilized every minute of every day in academic skill development. These extended- day programs did not provide more time for child-directed play, except for one additional recess time. In fact, these were the classrooms that no longer had dramatic play areas, block areas, and sand/water tables. These were the classrooms that had more teacher assignments at centers that children must complete daily. One teacher even commented: I love teaching full day. I am really able to do so much more with them. We are able to take concepts so much further. By the end of the year, my children can write several sentences. They can do math facts. They are so ready for first grade. However, it still feels like there is not enough time in the day to get everything done.
178 Rather than allowing the children to move at a more comfortable pace throughout the day and enjoy experiences longer, these teachers tried to squeeze as much activity into a day as possible. It appeared as if they were trying to prove how much full-day kindergarten programs could accomplish. The pressure of being a successful new program seemed to impact these classrooms. Comments from parents like, “We love what we see our children doing” and “The work our children are bringing home is amazing” added to this pressure to prove children’s ability. This program also appeared to place “pressure” on some of the half-day teachers, creating a sense of competition. One of the half-day teachers alluded to this internal pressure when she commented: We have one teacher here who goes way beyond what we are supposed to do. She has her kids doing two-digit addition that children copy from the board. Parents love it and go, “Ooh! That’s math!” Then parents in my class comment about it and wonder why their children are not doing that in here. “How come my child isn’t bringing home math sheets like that?” How do you explain to them that the typically developing 5- and 6- year-old is not ready for that? How do you compete with that? Pressure comes at you from all sides.
She further discussed that she too has removed “more play-like experiences” in her classroom in order “to fit more in.” Parents’ complaints were somewhat to blame for her decision. The pressure that the kindergarten teachers feel has been transferred onto the preschool teachers in this building. This early level also appears to be struggling with this “pushed down” curriculum effect. These five kindergarten teachers who are feeling pressure from the upper grades are expressing their desire for children to enter their programs also with certain skills. One preschool teacher at this school who did not participate in this study told me: Oh sure, we feel it. During meetings we hear comments like, “It would be great if they knew how to print some of their letters.” “It would be great if they had experience doing some type of seatwork.” Can you believe they expect us to do Handwriting Without Tears with those little ones? Many are just learning how to grip a crayon and they expect us to make them write on lines with pencils. I’m a good teacher, but I’m not that good. We have had many conversations about this year. We don’t agree. People just don’t listen to us about what a typically developing 4-year-old can and can not do. It’s frustrating. But guess what we are doing? Handwriting Without Tears. They won. We joke and say that we need to get them doing worksheets as soon as they are born. We laugh, but it really isn’t that funny. You can see the pattern.
179 These five teachers seem to be buried under the “pressure” of accountability. This pressure comes from unreasonable expectations from parents and peers, district accountability measures, and state standards. These teachers appear to be struggling, to varying degrees, to hold on to their beliefs about what is best for young children. These teachers also appear to be struggling with the many day-to-day pressures that are placed upon them and the children to “prove what they know.” One teacher told me: We hear in other districts where teachers’ salaries will soon be based on how their students perform on tests. What has education come to? I hope that doesn’t happen here. And they wonder why we teach to the test.
No one is immune to the pressure and everyone is looking for a solution – parents, administrators, principals, curriculum coordinators, and teachers. Teachers are turning to the grade level below and placing additional pressure on their peers. Although this pressure may not be documented in the graded courses of study, this pressure impacts the day-to-day lessons and the activities experienced by the children.
A Combination Approach All of the teachers had belief systems that strongly supported developmentally appropriate practices. These teachers spoke passionately about child-centered approaches that: a) met children’s individual needs, interests, learning styles, and abilities; b) were concrete and personally relevant; c) were challenging and achievable; d) were age appropriate and individually appropriate; and e) were based on the importance and value of exploration and social interaction. Despite their child-focused belief systems, all five teachers continually made reference to “the importance of using teacher-directed approaches as well.” All five teachers made reference to “the combination approach,” “the middle of the road approach,” and even “the in-between approach.” Interviews and casual conversations revealed a “belief” in practices that was not an either/or situation but rather a combination of both developmentally appropriate practices and developmentally inappropriate practices. To varying degrees, these teachers expressed the view that each approach has a legitimate role in kindergarten, stating that both methods can be used together if implemented appropriately. These teachers acknowledged that they used teacher-directed instruction to teach skills or concepts. Mrs. Dell explained:
180 This is not a black and white issue with an all or nothing approach. There are no absolutes. A combination approach is fine, if you feel it’s beneficial for your children. There are good elements to pull from each approach.
The question lies with whether these teachers really felt this “combination approach” really is beneficial for their students. Comments like Mrs. Manford’s make me question these teachers’ professed “combination philosophy”: I really struggled with this my first years of teaching. I wanted to say, “This is not my philosophy. This is how I believe I should be teaching.” But then you get these phone calls like, “You are not teaching my child anything.” “My child is not learning anything.” Or “They did all this in preschool.” So then you go to Plan B. You learn and live. After my third year of teaching is when I really started feeling comfortable. I finally had myself thinking, “I have a mixture of all this stuff. I think it is ok. I am comfortable with it now. I think.”
This “mixture” approach did not appear to be comfortable for several teachers. Some educators suggest that there is value in creating an “alternative” learning environment that uses a combination of teacher-directed approaches and child-directed learning (e.g., Carbo, 1996; Carta, 1995; Delpit, 1988; Fowell & Lawton, 1992; French & Song, 1998; Gullo, 1994; Harris & Graham, 1994; Honig, 1996; McIntyre, 1995; Saunders & Goldenberg, 1996). Some educators believe that a combination of instruction is necessary to accommodate the varied learning styles of the children (Carbo, 1996; McIntyre, 1995; Honig, 1996; Pressley & Rankin, 1994; Spiegel, 1996; Delpit, 1988). Other educators believe that programs need to be flexible in order to better meet the children’s specific needs, allowing the use of more structured methods of instruction and behavior management if necessary (i.e., Carta, 1995; Wolery, Werts, & Holcombe-Ligon, 1994). Delpit (1988) states that “a range of pedagogical orientations” needs to be used with all children (p. 282). Saunders and Goldenberg (1996) claim that “(s)ince the goals and ends of teaching are many and complex, so too must be the means. Exclusive reliance on one or another model or theory is unwise.” (p. 158). This combination approach creates a learning environment that combines active, child- initiated approaches with structure. A variety of instructional approaches are utilized. This balance is believed to meet the developmental needs of the children while instructing them in basic skills and concepts that will better prepare them for future learning. Fowell and Lawton (1992) describe an approach that supports more formal instruction; however, they do not
181 advocate the use of rote memorization and drill and skill practices. “It is our position that formal instruction, carried out in a manner suited to the needs of young children, can be appropriate and, indeed, beneficial to young children” (Fowell & Lawton, 1992, p. 71). Their approach, which is influenced by the work of Ausebel, Novak, and Hanesian (1978), utilizes a process of advance organizers and related hands-on activities instruction in general subject matter and skills. Within this process, highly structured, teacher-directed instruction is used with small groups of children for short periods of time. The children are active and use concrete materials to reinforce the learned skills. Information from adults is seen as valuable. Young “children, with limited life experiences, are not in a position to be aware of and thus to seek that knowledge. Exploration is considered to be one, but not the only, effective way for young children to learn” (Fowell & Lawton, 1992, p. 70). French and Song (1998) also discuss a more developmentally appropriate teacher-directed approach that would support “children’s development of essential cognitive skills rather than providing direct instruction in academic skills” (p. 409). Heavily influenced by a program used in Korean kindergartens, French and Song (1998) suggest a program that uses a combination of teacher-directed instruction and child-initiated activities. Rather than being focused on “narrowly defined academic skills,” teacher-directed instruction should contain rich knowledge, high-level comprehension skills, and questioning (French & Song, 1998, p. 410). Children should be active seekers of knowledge, questioning, predicting, and interpreting information shared by the adults. This approach, according to French and Song (1998) will lay a solid foundation for the children’s future academic learning. Once again the issue of pressure for accountability plays a strong role in these five teachers’ programs. Although the teachers described developmentally appropriate practices as including, to some degree, more teacher-directed prescribed activities, I question whether this is what the teachers truly believe. Not once did I hear the teachers discuss the importance of these practices meeting the diverse needs of the children. Not once did I hear the teachers describe these practices as “best” for the children. Not once did I hear the teachers discuss that step-by- step structured lessons and drill and practice activities are cognitively, socially, and emotionally beneficial for this age group. What I did hear, however, were comments about the pressure being placed on these young children. I heard comments about the fear of unreasonable expectations. I also heard comments about the fear that these children were being treated like “miniature adults” (i.e., Elkind, 2001). I wonder if by articulating this combination approach to
182 me these teachers were trying to find a way to justify to themselves using what they often referred to as “inappropriate for these little ones.” It appeared as if they were trying to adjust their beliefs to fit the given social context which, in turn, impacts their practices (i.e., Nelson, 2000). These methods were used to “better prepare the children for first grade,” “to make parents more satisfied,” and “to meet the demands of standards.” These teachers, in many cases, appear to have resigned themselves to a “Well, there is little we can do about it” attitude and “We do what they tell us to do” outlook. Some have compromised more than others. District and community pressure appears to be forcing these teachers to go against what they feel is right for the kindergarten children. The teachers appeared to pull in direct instruction, whole group instruction, and some drill/skill activities when necessary to meet the district’s curriculum expectations and to please more parents. Several of the teachers admitted that their practices have moved away from center-based instruction to more traditional, direct instruction. Fewer individual opportunities, fewer center areas, and less emphasis on play is part of the first grade classrooms. To some degree, their job as a kindergarten teacher is to prepare the children for these upcoming experiences. These teachers appear to be experimenting with their practices, adjusting them to incorporate traditional methods. The teachers feel pressured to use whole-group teacher directed instruction “in order to get through all those skills.” These teachers feel pressure to have children complete worksheets, to write on lined paper, to sit at tables, and to cut on lines. The pressure of reading and writing skills tends to force these teachers to implement more phonics activities, more worksheets, and more handwriting. They seem to be searching for methods that will ensure that their children will demonstrate mastery of year-end benchmarks so that they are ready for first grade. These teachers appear to be dealing with the pressure of basic skills programs implemented in the primary grades. Parental expectations and criticisms also appear to influence the teachers’ use of more traditional methods despite their personal beliefs. It appears that these traditional methods were used, to some degree, to appease the parents and to stop the complaining. As in other studies, parents and teachers appear to differ in their preference for kindergarten (i.e., Hatch & Freeman, 1988; Hill, 1984; Kean, 1980; Knudsen-Lindauer & Harris, 1989). Some parents expressed a desire to see more structure embedded into the daily routine. Some parents expressed a desire to see tangible displays of work, usually in the form of worksheets, being brought home. Some parents expressed a desire to see a greater emphasis on basic academic skill mastery, particularly
183 in reading, writing, and math. These five teachers all discussed their desire for the children to leave kindergarten having more confidence, having better social skills, having an understanding that learning is fun. Academics are important for this grade level, but not as important as the social-emotional aspect of the experience. All of the teachers, to varying degrees, had succumbed to this parental pressure. Mrs. Townsend explains how she handles the pressure: They are usually concerned with what their child is doing and want proof of what they are doing and how well they are doing. That is difficult to do sometimes since we don’t do worksheets very much. Most things are hands on. I have started to send homework home in the form of worksheet packets and the response has been overwhelming from parents. The children love it and always make comments if I am a day late in returning their graded papers. They are often showing each other their work and how well they did. Parents always tell me how pleased they are to see real work coming home.
All five teachers have added more computation lessons, more worksheet activities, more whole group lessons, and, as described above, more homework into their programs. The more parents express their “pleasure in seeing some real work come home for a change,” the more the teachers’ programs appear to be guided by parental expectations.
Dealing With Environmental Pressure
Throughout this study, it appeared that some teachers were more vulnerable to the environmental pressures than others. Although internal conflict existed for all five teachers about what they believe is best for children and what is demanded of them, each teacher felt this to varying degrees. Each teacher’s program reflected the degree of pressure they felt from the state, district, parents, and peers. Throughout this study, one question kept surfacing for me: What causes some teachers to “hold on” to their beliefs more than others? What causes Mrs. Jones to comment: I don’t really feel the pressure as much because of the way kindergarten is set up. It is one of the easiest grades to cater to children’s individual abilities. If some are ready for more, I can go to the writing center and help them extend that. Or if they need help, I can work with them on identifying a picture and what letter that begins with. At the end of the year, I want my children to reach the goals that we have. I really haven’t had a problem with that. There are always a few children who struggle, but with the nature of kindergarten, it is easier to meet their needs. With the repetition and the number of times they do it, they are making the connections and getting what they need. At least the
184 nature of kindergarten here. It is pretty open and flexible with what the children are able to choose. Everything tends to be fluid and flexible.
What causes Mrs. Morgan to express:
Sometimes the pressure is unbearable. You get it from all sides. I often don’t know which way to turn. Who do I try to please? I know I am here for the children, but it doesn’t seem like it any more, not like it used to. Things just keep getting more and more strict because of testing. You feel helpless at times. I am really tired.
The next section will explore a number of possible explanations for these findings, including locus of control, self-efficacy, special education training, and grade level experience.
Locus of Control Throughout this study, each teacher struggled with her personal beliefs and the demand for increased academic learning in kindergarten. Some of these teachers were more successful in negotiating the numerous external constraints placed on their programs than others. The ability to “hold on” to their beliefs may be a function of locus of control. Locus of control is defined as “the extent to which individuals perceive events in their environment as being contingent upon their own behavior” (McMullen, 1999, p. 219). Several studies have found a relationship between locus of control and a higher use of DAP (Bryant, et al., 1991; Buchanan, et al., 1998; Charlesworth, et al., 1991; Charlesworth et al., 1993b; Hatch & Freeman, 1988; Hill, 1995; McMullen, 1999; Rose & Medway, 1981; Sadowski & Woodward, 1995; Smith & Shepard, 1988; Swanson, O’Connor, & Cooney, 1990; Verma & Peters, 1975; Wien, 1996; Wolfgang & Glickman, 1986). Teachers who report having the most control over planning and implementing instruction had the highest ratings on beliefs and practices (Charlesworth, et al., 1991; Charlesworth, et al., 1993b). In this study, some teachers perceived extreme outside pressure from administrators, parents, and other teachers. Some teachers expressed that they had little influence over their planning and implementing of instruction. These teachers often expressed that upper administration and parents had more control over their programs. These teachers seemed to sense a very strong accountability to the school district, adhering to the commercially produced curriculum, district courses of study, and district report cards. These same teachers created a
185 more controlling learning environment where similar activities were developed for the entire class, where lessons stressed skills that would be measured on standardized tests. Graded courses of study were followed to the “t” and prescribed curriculum materials were the focus of most lessons. These teachers tended to use fewer hands-on materials and more worksheets. These teachers may be experiencing what Hatch and Freeman (1988) refer to as “philosophy- reality conflict” (p. 159). Apple and Teitelbaum (1986) also recognize that many teachers experience this loss of control over their program. They have written extensively about the process of the “deskilling of our teachers”: At the local, state, and federal levels, movements for strict accountability systems, competency-based education and testing, systems management, a truncated vision of the ‘basics,’ mandated curricular content and goals, and so on are clear and growing. Increasingly, teaching methods, texts, tests, and outcomes are being taken out of the hands of the people who must put them into practice. Instead, they are being legislated by state departments of education or in state legislatures, and are being either supported or stimulated by many of the national reports, such as A Nation at Risk…. (Apple & Teitelbaum, 1986, p. 179-180)
Although the other teachers in this study experienced this pressure as well, they were able to maintain control of their practices to a greater extent. They tended to create a more laid back, child-centered program that provided more variety, set fewer limits, and allowed for more interactions. Although these teachers were concerned about grade level competencies, they were able to take the given curriculum and state standards and develop a program that was more aligned with their self-reported beliefs. These classrooms used more-hands-on activities, more center-based instruction, and more exploratory experiences. These teachers created their own materials and games that would reinforce kindergarten benchmarks. These teachers appeared more comfortable in providing opportunities for choice and self-directed experiences than did the others.
Self-Efficacy The ability to “hold on” to their beliefs and implement practices more aligned with their personal philosophy may be due to self-efficacy. Self-efficacy is defined as “teachers’ sense of their own effectiveness in having an impact on student achievement” (McMullen, 1999, p. 219). Several studies have found that teachers who expressed higher personal teaching efficacy rated higher in developmentally appropriate beliefs and practices (i.e., Banduri & Jourden, 1991;
186 McMullen, 1999). In this current study, teachers varied in their interpretations of their personal effectiveness. Some teachers expressed confidence in their developed program, believing that their students were learning and growing in all domains and that they had received a “solid foundation” in their class. For example, Mrs. Townsend expressed: I think what I do is effective. A good percentage of children are reading where they should be reading. And in many cases they are beyond what they say kindergartners should be at by the end of the year. I think this is because they are allowed to explore in advance and I am not forcing them to read and write a certain number of pages. They truly are allowed to express themselves. I think this room grows strong children who are prepared for first grade. They know how to be a student because it is a lot more than do they know the facts. Are they equipped with the skills they need to participate in first grade, do they have the social skills?
Other teachers were slightly hesitant to express their effectiveness. Some questioned whether they had developed a sound program. Mrs. Morgan commented: Well, I think so. I guess. I mean my kids are passing those tests but you still have people complaining. Mostly parents it seems. Everything is so different now. If you had asked several years ago, I would have known. I keep checking my lists to see that I have done everything with them. I hope I have them where they need to be for next year.
These teachers relied heavily on input from outside sources to determine their degree of success with the classroom. Perceived success, for these teachers, was measured by test scores and by the number of compliments and complaints they received from parents.
Special Education Emphasis The teachers’ ability to “hold on” to their beliefs may also be a function of special education training. Three of these teachers had prior training in special education either through their bachelor’s degree or master’s degree program. Other studies have found that there is a relationship between special education training and higher developmentally appropriate beliefs and practices (i.e., Buchanan et al, 1998; Kazdin, 1994; Mitchell & Mogdiliani, 1989; Wolery, Werts, & Holcombe-Ligon, 1994; Zirpoli, 1995). Teachers with this training have different educational preparations and are familiar with different bodies of research from teachers with an early childhood background. This training influences what teachers do in their classrooms. These teachers are taught to focus more on the individual than the group. These teachers are trained to focus on the needs of individuals rather than the group and are trained to develop IEPs
187 to help children reach individual goals. The teachers in this study with special education training appear not to experience “pressure” as strongly as the other teachers. They seem more comfortable pulling in more traditional methods of instruction and behavior management. These teachers also appear to better meet the needs of individual children through additional support staff, additional educational aides, and additional resources. These classrooms had more open- ended centers like blocks, dramatic play, sand and water tables, and puppet theaters. These teachers spent more time helping children at centers, working individually with children, and modifying activities and lessons. Mrs. Manford describes her approach to inclusion: I am for full inclusion. I have a great rapport with the special education teachers. Every year I am asked to take those children. I get the feeling that if my room was not developmentally appropriate then they would not ask if those children could be put in here. We have collaboration time every week, sometimes twice a week. I give them things ahead of time to modify, especially with our guided reading. They still have the same book but with a little different activity. We have a computer program that types out the story and activity with picture cues and side-by-side planning. I have a necklace microphone that amplifies for those with hearing aides. It is all about meeting children’s individual needs.
Her words express her special education background and shows how it impacts her teaching.
Experience Teaching Older Children Finally, several teachers in this study appeared more comfortable implementing more traditional methods than others. Previous experience teaching elementary grades may account for this difference (i.e., Mitchell & Mogdiliani, 1989). Those who had only taught kindergarten seemed to struggle more with the “pushed down” curriculum and the need to pull in more teacher-directed methods. These teachers seemed to question more verbally whether children at this level should be engaged in highly structured activities. These teachers seemed to struggle more with finding strategies to help children demonstrate mastery of basic skills. Those teachers whose backgrounds included experience teaching in upper grades appeared to adjust better to the “trickle down effect.” In fact, several expressed that these previous experiences had prepared them well for teaching kindergarten. These experiences allowed them to implement guided reading, handwriting, and individual seatwork with a great comfort level.
188 Future Research
The results of this study suggest that further research needs to be conducted to explore the relationship between teachers’ beliefs and the implementation of developmentally appropriate practice in their classrooms. Although this study added to this body of research, more research is needed for the field of early childhood education. As Vartuli (1999) explains: It is important to examine teaching practice to be able to reflect on what are the best practices for promoting learning, how to help teachers reflect on their actions and thinking processes, and how to help policy makers make connections between teacher efficacy and positive teaching outcomes. Teachers need to have confidence in what they are doing in classrooms. When there is conflict between what teachers believe and what they practice, the outcome is not congruent and the resultant is not effective. (p. 511)
More qualitative studies, using multiple methods, need to be conducted so that more teachers are able to share their stories about the complexity of their professional worlds. Future studies should include the voices of administrators, parents, and concerned community members to better understand their expectations of kindergarten, to better understand their perceptions of classroom demands, and to better understand their opinions of external pressures. Further research is also needed at the preschool and day care level, examining the extent that these programs use developmentally appropriate practices. More research is needed to find out what is going on in these environments and why. Research needs to explore the extent that these programs may be the source of parents’ impatience with DAP in kindergarten programs. The voices of preschool and day care teachers need to be heard to better understand their personal struggles with teaching in early childhood programs. Most importantly, further research needs to be conducted comparing developmentally appropriate practices, developmentally inappropriate practices, and mixed practices at the kindergarten and primary grade levels. Longitudinal studies following children through several years of school would add to the lack of existing knowledge about the effects these practices have on young children.
189 Suggestions for Practice
Continued Training These five teachers may struggle with their practices, to some degree, due to the disconnect between the official ideology of the kindergarten and the messages they receive through other channels. During a conversation with the principal, she mentioned that she fully supports the developmental approach. She encourages the teachers to experiment with enrichment ideas and to individualize the curriculum in creative ways. She is always giving the teachers articles to read and encouraging them to work together. However, she regrets that the inservices and workshops that the teachers attend are focused primarily on early literacy, state standards, and guided reading. She mentioned that unless the teachers took courses on their own, most teachers in her building have not been to a DAP workshop in over eight years, with the exception of more recent graduates. When the revised NAEYC guidelines (1997) where mentioned by me in the interviews, two of the five teachers did not know they existed. One even commented, “I wish I had time to keep up to date on those kinds of issues. It is hard enough to keep up with all the standards. Not enough time to do it all. I am not Super Woman!” Studies have shown that inservice training in DAP helps improve the quality of early childhood environments (i.e., Burts et al., 1993; Haupt, et al., 1995; Vartuli, 1999) and creates a modest increase in DAP beliefs and practices (i.e., Frede, et al., 1993; Mangione & Maniates, 1993; Morales, 2000; Sherman & Mueller, 1996; Shuster, 1995; Smith & Croom, 2000; Wien, 1996). Inservice training helped teachers experience less pressure with early academic preparation and prepared teachers to handle personal struggles with differing expectations. Haupt, et al. (1995) found that inservice training impacted the beliefs and practices of those kindergarten teachers who were interested and motivated to learn DAP. This study revealed that the teachers’ beliefs changed more quickly than their practices. Shuster (1995) found that ongoing inservice resulted in “powerful shifts in teachers’ belief systems” (p. 11). Therefore, districts need to take a good look at their in-service programs for their kindergarten teachers.
Communication Districts need to communicate the importance of developmentally appropriate practice to various members of the school community, including administrators, school board members, and
190 parents. Most of the teachers suspected that the parents’comments stemmed from a lack of knowledge about the value of play and the disconnect between their own school experiences and their child’s. For example, Mrs. Townsend explained: I hear a lot of comments from parents about “messing around” and serious work. They think play is one thing and learning is another. I don’t think they understand the connection. I think it would be too hard to explain to them the importance. They just don’t listen. I do include more traditional elements like worksheets and such so that they are happy and they don’t challenge me as much.
Mrs. Morgan expressed: You could talk until you are blue in the face and tell parents that if your child learns to read when he is seven, he will be ok. But they don’t believe you. The high innate ability child who reads at age four, who has made all those generalizations, just made all the connections. They just did it. Parents think it is because they have been working at it. You can’t convince them that if they have all that scaffolding that it doesn’t matter if they read when they are 5, 6,or 7. What you want is a reader as an adult.
Many parents, as well as the other members, were educated in a very traditional system. They may also have experienced more developmentally inappropriate practices through their child’s day care and preschool program. These groups need to be educated in DAP. They need to understand the rationale behind it. They need to observe it, and they need to see practices demonstrated. Administrators must be trained DAP, and they must guide and support the teachers. Teachers need to be excellent communicators, and they need to explain the value of “play with intent” in the learning process (Gronlund, 1995). As Gronlund (2001) says: …the learning of all academic subjects is playful and exploratory. Children contribute their own ideas, use their own problem-solving strategies, and pursue their own interests. Teachers skillfully weave in the goal and objectives of traditional academics as they build on what children can do and challenge them to try new things. Children are not left to their own devices, nor is their development left to chance. Using classroom-based assessment practices such as careful observation and anecdotal documentation, as well as collecting children’s work…teachers continually evaluate the progress children are making. (p. 43)
Teachers need to be able to explain the importance of these ideas in all areas of development, including intellectual, social, emotional, motivational, and moral. Teachers need to be able to explain the importance of these ideas meeting the many levels of children. In short, there needs to be more dialogue between everyone who has a stake in the lives of the children. More
191 similarity in expectations will hopefully result in a high-quality educational program in the district. Most importantly, more similarity in expectations will hopefully result in a better educational experience for the children.
Lessons Learned
These teachers’ stories illustrate that there are many different personal interpretations of DAP and that these interpretations cause every classroom to look somewhat different. These five teachers have wrestled with a variety of environmental factors that have in turn impacted their practices. Some of these environmental factors have included district pressure for accountability, peer pressure, and parental pressure. These teachers developed a more “middle of the road” approach to teaching and learning for their children. These experiences are believed to teach the children structure and responsibility. These teachers have adapted their practices to varying degrees to respond to these pressures. The following are lessons I have learned about teachers’ beliefs and uses of DAP: 1. Teachers need more information and training on how to use their personal beliefs and how to become advocates for DAP. They also need guidance in negotiating the conflict between DAP and contemporary pressures. 2. Administration greatly shapes and influences teachers’ practices and the classroom environment. Teachers need to have structural support, like educational aides, materials and supplies, small class sizes, and flexible scheduling. 3. Administrators need to provide opportunities for teachers to plan together, to observe one another, to visit other school sites, and to attend related early childhood conferences. 4. Administrators and teachers need to work together to develop curriculum and assessment instruments that incorporate developmentally appropriate practices while integrating other approaches as necessary. 5. Ongoing dialogue needs to exist between teachers, administrators, school board members, and parents about developmentally appropriate practices and their importance for young children.
192 Conclusion
These stories suggest that the relationship between kindergarten teachers’ beliefs and practices needs to be examined further. Teachers and administrators need to continue to examine their programs to determine if they are providing the “best” practices for the children in their school. This study is particularly important for early childhood education because it raises many questions about: a) the use of standardized testing in early childhood programs; b) the many different systemic constraints that impact early childhood programs; c) the different expectations of teachers, parents, and administrators; and d) the impact different instructional methods may have on young children. These five teachers have dedicated themselves to teaching kindergarten children using a combination of pedagogical orientations, one of them being developmentally appropriate practices. Despite the varied pressures that they encounter, these five teachers still value childhood and try to the best of their ability to implement “appropriate” practices. This study expands on the complexity of kindergarten practices, recognizing that what is appropriate for young children may not necessarily be placed in two distinct categories – developmentally appropriate and developmentally inappropriate. As one teacher commented, “This is not a black and white issue with an all or nothing approach.” As Delpit (1988) stated: “(T)he actual practice of good teachers of all colors typically incorporates a range of pedagogical orientations” (p. 282). The “pushed down phenomenon” (Katz, 1988) continues to confront early childhood practitioners today. These teachers are feeling “the big push” from many different sides and, in their own unique ways, are trying to create learning environments that meet various academic demands while still “holding on” to their personal beliefs about how children develop and learn. These teachers are struggling with a narrowing curriculum that focuses on isolated skills at the expense of quality learning opportunities. These teachers are struggling with the negative effects of testing. Hopefully, these teachers’ stories will lead others to take a critical look at their own beliefs and practices. Their stories reveal that further research needs to be conducted to help us better understand the relationship between teachers’ reported beliefs and observed practices. Their stories reveal that further research needs to be conducted to help us understand the range of difficulties inherent in implementing developmentally appropriate practices. Their stories reveal
193 that further research needs to be conducted to help us better understand the complexity of teaching kindergarten. As Wien (1995) so eloquently explained:
Teachers’ work is conflicted, contradictory, muddied, and torn by myriad demands of dynamic lived life in which every teacher must negotiate her way, shaping small moments as she is shaped by the very things she takes most for granted – especially conceptions of use of time. The demands upon her for performance, for action, generate a busyness that is scarcely conceivable to those who have not taught in classrooms. Teachers’ work is extraordinarily difficult and challenging. (p. 144)
194 -Appendix A- Observation Protocol Learning Environment
Appropriate Inappropriate Individual, small group and whole group Individual and whole group work areas areas Learning centers Few, if any, learning centers
Manipulatives Abstract materials Print-rich, language-rich Little print or language material Inviting, organized, safe Unorganized, uninviting, stressful Ample time for play experiences Minimal play time Flexible schedule Rigid schedule Integration of children with special needs Little, if any, integration of children with and disabilities special needs and disabilities
Learning Experiences
Appropriate Inappropriate Relevant, hands-on experiences Workbook, worksheet, and textbook experiences Self-initiated, self-directed experiences Teacher-planned, teacher-directed experiences Based on individual needs, interests, and Based on curriculum guides and textbooks learning styles Peer and environment interaction Little, if any, peer and environment interaction Open-ended material and activities Material and activities with one “right”
195 answer Variety of individual, small group, and Primarily whole group lectures and whole group experiences discussion and individual seatwork Active learning Passive learning
Teaching Strategies
Appropriate Inappropriate Facilitator, guide, observer Supervisor, manager Encourages a variety of responses Searches for the “right” answer Flexible grouping Primarily whole group instruction Combination of child-initiated and teacher- Primarily teacher-directed approaches directed approaches Community-building experiences Competition and grades More informal, caring relationship with More formal, business-like relationship children with children
Motivation & Guidance
Appropriate Inappropriate Activities challenging yet attainable Activities personally irrelevant, too easy, or too difficult Behavior managed by redirection, Behavior managed by threats, punishments, guidance, and problem-solving and external rewards Class developed rules Teacher developed rules Clear rules and consistent accountability Unclear limits and inconsistent accountability
196 Curriculum
Appropriate Inappropriate Clear, flexible goals Narrow focus Whole-child focus Primarily cognitive focus Integrated subject areas Separate subjects Naturalistic experiences Isolated skill development Multicultural and nonsexist experiences Experiences do not value culture, often sexist Daily fine and gross motor experiences Limited gross motor experiences Whole language approaches Fine motor experiences include printing, cutting and tracing Parental input valued Little parental input
Assessment
Appropriate Inappropriate Observation, work samples, anecdotal Testing notes Ongoing, integral Separate Determines needs of child and program Determines performance of child
197 -Appendix B- INTERVIEW GUIDE
Background Information
Interviewee’s Pseudonym:______Date:______
Phone Number: ______Address: ______
Year of Teaching Experience: ______
Year of Teaching Kindergarten: ______
Highest Degree Earned: ______
Major/Area of Specialization: ______
Minor/Area of Specialization: ______
Ethnic Background: ______
Guiding Interview Questions
1. What do you believe is the role of kindergarten?
2. What do you believe kindergarten children should learn?
3. Describe the types of activities you believe kindergarten children should engage in.
4. Describe your role as a kindergarten teacher.
198 5. What are your expectations for the children as they enter kindergarten?
6. What are your expectations for the children as they leave kindergarten?
7. Describe how you make decisions about the classroom’s physical environment.
8. Describe how you make decisions regarding instructional practices.
9. Describe your methods for classroom management.
10. Tell me about developmentally appropriate practices.
11. Tell me about developmentally inappropriate practices.
12. If you use more traditional instructional methods, tell me about them.
13. Describe how developmentally appropriate practices impact your classroom environment.
14. Describe the effectiveness of your practices with your students.
15. Have you ever been challenged when implementing these practices? How do you deal with these challenges?
16. How do you assess children? How do you determine if they are learning?
17. Tell me about parent response to your program.
18. Tell me more about the pressure to make your program more academic.
19. Describe how play is valued in your classroom.
199 -Appendix C-
Pinecrest Early Childhood Center Street City, State 00000
Dear Colleague: I am currently a graduate student at Miami University working on my doctoral thesis which focuses on the current practices of kindergarten teachers in public schools. I am interested in learning what you believe the role of kindergarten is and what types of experiences you plan for your classroom. I am most interested in learning:
1. What kindergarten teachers believe about the role of kindergarten. 2. What kindergarten teachers believe the kindergarten classroom should “look like.” 3. What instructional practices kindergarten teachers use and why. 4. What elements impact kindergarten teachers’ program design.
All information shared during our conversations will remain confidential. Pseudonyms will be used in my research study for the community, school, and teachers. Please understand that you are able to withdraw from this project at any time, with no consequences.
I appreciate your consideration of helping me better understand the beliefs and practices of kindergarten teachers. If you are willing to be a part of this study, please sign the attached consent form and return it to me using the enclosed pre-addressed and stamped envelope. Upon receipt of the consent form, I will contact you by phone to discuss the research process further. If you have any further questions, please contact me at (513) 583-9065. Thank you again for any help you can provide.
Sincerely,
Cara Phillips Department of Educational Leadership 350 McGuffey Hall Oxford, OH 45056
200 -Appendix D-
Consent Form
I, ______, agree to participate in Cara Phillips’ study “Appropriate” Kindergarten Activities: Beliefs and Practices of Current Early Childhood Educators. I understand that my identity will be confidential and that the information I provide will be used in a professional research report with the use of pseudonyms which will render the information not attributable to me. I understand that I am under no obligation to answer any of the questions that are asked of me and that I may stop or leave this conversation at any point, with no consequence.
Signature ______Date ______
Consent to Audio Recording
I, ______, give my permission to have my conversations with Cara Phillips audio-taped. I understand that I can ask Cara Phillips to stop the tape at any time and she will comply. I understand that tape recordings will be destroyed upon completion of the study.
Signature ______Date______
201 REFERENCES Adams, G. L., & Engelmann, S. E. (1996). Research on direct instruction: Twenty-five years beyond DISTAR. Seattle: Educational Achievement Systems. Apple, M. (1990). Ideology and curriculum. New York: Routledge. Apple, M. W., & Teitelbaum, K. (1986). Are teachers losing control of their skills and curriculum? Journal of Curriculum Studies, 18(2), 177-184. Athey, I. (1987). The relationship of play to cognitive, language and moral development. In D. Bergen (Ed.), Play as a medium for learning and development: A handbook of theory and practice (pp. 81-101). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Ausebel, D., Novak, J. D., & Hanesian, H. (1978). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston. ASCD (Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development). (1989). Toward the thinking curriculum: Current cognitive research. Alexandria, VA: Author. Aubrey, C., David, T., Godfrey, R., & Thompson, L. (2000). Early childhood educational research: Issues in methodology and ethics. London: Routledge/Falmer Press. Barbour, N. H., & Seefeldt, C. (1993). Developmental continuity across preschool and primary grades: Implications for teachers. Wheaton, MD: Association for Childhood Education International. Becker, W. C. (1977). Teaching reading and language to the disadvantaged: What we have learned from field research. Harvard Educational Review, 47, 518-543. Becker, W. C., & Engelmann, S. E. (1978). Analysis of achievement data (Technical Report No. 78-1). Eugene, OR: University of Oregon Follow Through Project. Becker, W. C., & Gersten, R. (1982). A follow-up of Follow Through: The later effects of the Direct Instruction Model on children in fifth and sixth grades. American Educational Research Journal, 19, 75-92. Bentley, S., & Wilson, E. (1989, November). NAEYC’s developmentally appropriate practice guidelines: Current research. Paper presented in the preconference sessions at the meeting of the National Association for the Education of Young Children, Atlanta, GA. Bereiter, C. (1986). Does direct instruction cause delinquency? Early Childhood
202 Research Quarterly, 1, 289-292. Bereiter, C., & Kirkland, M. (1984). A constructive look at Follow-Through results. Interchange, 12, 1-21. Berruetta-Clement, J. R., Schweinhart, L. J., Barnett, W. S., Epstein, A. S., & Weikart, D. P. (1984). Changed lives: Effects of the Perry Preschool program on youth through age 19 (Monographs of the High/Scope Educational Research Foundation, no. 8). Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope Press. Biber, B. (1988). The challenge of professionalism: Integrating theory and practice. In B. Spodek, O. N. Saracho, & D. L. Peters (Eds.) Professionalism and the early childhood practitioner (pp. 29-55). New York: Teachers College Press. Blackburn, S. (Ed.) (1996). Dictionary of philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bloch, M. N. (1991). Critical science and the history of child development’s influence on early educational research. Early Education and Development, 2(2), 95-108. Bloch, M. N. (1992). Critical perspectives on the historical relationship between child development and early childhood education research. In S. Kessler & B. B. Swadener (Eds.), Reconceptualizing the early childhood curriculum: Beginning the dialogue (pp. 3-20). New York: Teachers College Press. Bogdan, R., & Taylor, S. J. (1975). Introduction to qualitative research methods: A phenomenological approach to the social sciences. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Bowman, B. T. (1989, Spring). Self-reflection as an element of professionalism. Teachers College Record, 90(3), 444-451. Bowman, B. T., & Stott, F. M. (1994). Understanding development in a cultural context: The challenge for teachers. In B. L. Mallory & R. S. New (Eds.), Diversity and developmentally appropriate practices: Challenges for early childhood education (pp. 119-134). New York: Teachers College Press. Bredekamp, S. (Ed.) (1987). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs serving children from birth through age 8 (Exp. ed.). Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children. Bredekamp, S., & Copple, C. (Eds.) (1997). Developmentally appropriate practice in
203 early childhood programs (Rev. ed.). Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children. Bredekamp, S., Knuth, R. A., Kunesh, L. G., & Shulman, D. D. (1992). What does research say about early childhood education? Oak Park: North Central Regional Educational Laboratory. http://www/ncrel.org. Bredekamp, S., & Rosegrant, T. (Eds.) (1992). Reaching potentials: Appropriate curriculum and assessment for young children (Vol. 1). Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children. Bredekamp, S., & Rosegrant, T. (Eds.) (1995). Reaching potentials: Transforming early childhood curriculum and assessment (Vol. 2). Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children. Bredekamp, S., & Shepard, L. (1989). How best to protect children from inappropriate school expectations, practices, and policies. Young Children, 44(3), 14-24. Brown, M. S., Bergen, D., House, M., Hittle, J., & Dickerson, T. (2000). An observational study: Examining the relevance of developmentally appropriate practices, classroom adaptations, and parental participation in the context of an integrated preschool program. Early Childhood Education Journal, 28(1), 51-56. Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1990). Interactive learning environment and the teaching of science and mathematics. In M. Gardner, J. Greens, F. Reif, A. Schoenfield, A. di Sessa, & E. Stage (Eds.), Toward a scientific practice of science education (pp. 111-139). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Bruner, J. (1985). Vygotsky: A historical and conceptual perspective. In J. V. Wertsch (Ed.), Culture, communication, and cognition: Vygotskian perspectives (pp. 21-34). New York: Cambridge University Press. Bryant, D. M., Burchinal, M., Lau, L. B., & Sparling, J. J. (1994). Family and classroom correlates of Head Start children’s developmental outcomes. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 9, 289-309. Bryant, D. M., Clifford, R., & Peisner, E. S. (1991, Winter). Best practices for beginners: Developmental appropriateness in kindergarten. American Educational Research Journal, 28(4), 783-803. Buchanan, T. K., Burts, D. C., Bidner, J., & White, V. F., & Charlesworth, R. (1998).
204 Predictors of developmental appropriateness of the beliefs and practices of first, second, and third grade teachers. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 13(3), 459-483. Burman, E. (1994). Deconstructing developmental psychology. London and New York: Routledge. Burts, D., Hart, C. H., Charlesworth, R., DeWolf, D. M., Ray, J., Manuel, K., & Fleege, P. O. (1993). Developmental appropriateness of kindergarten programs and academic outcomes in first grade. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 8(1), 23-31. Burts, D. C., Hart, C. H., Charlesworth, R. C., Fleege, P. O., Mosley, J., & Thommason, R. (1992). Observed activities and stress behaviors of children in developmentally appropriate and inappropriate kindergarten classrooms. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 7(2), 297-318. Burts, D., Hart, C. H., Charlesworth, R. C., & Kirk, L. (1990). A comparison of frequencies of stress behaviors observed in kindergarten children in classrooms with developmentally appropriate versus developmentally inappropriate instructional practices. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 5(3), 407-423. Butterfield, E., & Johnston, J. (1995). The NAESP standards for quality programs for young children: Principals’ beliefs and teachers’ practices. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 392 536). Cannella, G. S. (1997). Deconstructing early childhood education: Social justice and revolution. New York: Peter Lang. Carbo, M. (1996). Whole language vs. phonics: The great debate. Principal, 75(3), 36- 38. Carnine, D. (1976). Effects of two teacher presentation rates on off-task behavior, answering correctly, and participation. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 9, 199- 206. Carnine, D., Carnine, L., Karp, J., & Weisberg, P. (1988). Kindergarten for economically disadvantaged children: The direct instruction component. In C. Warger (Ed.), A resource guide to public school early childhood programs (pp. 73-98). Alexandria, VA: Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development. Carnine, D., Silbert, J., & Kamelnui, E. (1990). Direct instruction reading. Columbus,
205 OH: Merrill. Carpenter, T. P., Ansell, E., Franke, M. L., Fennema, E., & Weisbeck, L. (1993). Models of problem solving: A study of kindergarten children’s problem solving processes. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 24, 426-441. Carta, J. J. (1994). Developmentally appropriate practice: Shifting the emphasis to individual appropriateness. Journal of Early Intervention, 18(4), 342-343. Carta, J. J. (1995, April). Developmentally appropriate practice: A critical analysis as applied to young children with disabilities. Focus on Exceptional Children, 27(8), 1-14. Carta, J. J., Schwartz, I. S., Atwater, J. B., & McConnell, S. R. (1991). Developmentally appropriate practice: Appraising its usefulness for young children with disabilities. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 11(1), 1-20. Carver, N. K. (1986). Reading readiness: Aspects overlooked in structured readiness programs and workbooks. Childhood Education, 62(4), 256-259. Charlesworth, R. (1989, March). Behind before they start?: Deciding how to deal with the risk of kindergarten “failure.” Young Children,44(3), 5-13. Charlesworth, R. (1998). Developmentally appropriate practice is for everyone. Childhood Education, 74, 274-282. Charlesworth, R., Hart, C. H., Burts, D. C., & DeWolf, M. (1993a). The LSU studies: Building a research base for developmentally appropriate practice. In S. Reifel (Ed.), Advances in early education and day care: Perspectives on developmentally appropriate practice (Vol. 5, pp. 3-28). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Charlesworth, R., Hart, C. H., Burts, D. C., & Hernandez, S. (1991). Kindergarten teachers’ beliefs and practices. Early Child Development and Care, 70, 17-35. Charlesworth, R., Hart, C. H., Burts, D. C., Thommason, R. H., Mosley, J., & Fleege, P. O. (1993b). Measuring the developmental appropriateness of kindergarten teachers’ beliefs and practices. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 8(1), 255-276. Cohen, D. H., & Rudolph, M. (1977). Kindergarten and early schooling. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Cole, K. N., Mills, P. E., & Dale, P. S. (1989). A comparison of the affects of academic
206 and cognitive curricula for young handicapped children one and two years postprogram. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 9, 110-127. Conant, B. (2001). Developmentally appropriate practice: An explanation for parents. http://www.nauticom.net/www/cokids/DAPparents.html. Coventry, L., & Nixon, M. (Eds.) (1999). The Oxford English minidictionary (5th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. California: SAGE. Cryan, J., Sherhan, R., Weichel, J., & Bandy-Hedden, I. G. (1992). Success outcome of full-day kindergarten: More positive behavior and increased achievement in the years after. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 7(2), 187-203. Cross, T. (1995). The early childhood curriculum debate. In M. Fleer (Ed.), DAP centrism: Challenging developmentally appropriate practice (pp. 87-108). Australia: Australian Early Childhood Association. Dale, P. S., & Cole, K. N. (1988). Comparison of academic and cognitive programs for young children. Exceptional Children, 54, 439-447. Darch, C., Carnine, D. & Gersten, R. (1983, April). Instructional approaches and level of practice in fourth-grade math problem solving. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal. Davis, H. G. (1980). Reading pressures in the kindergarten. Childhood Education, 57, 76-79. Delpit, L. (1986). Skills and other dilemmas of a progressive black educator. Harvard Educational Review, 56(4), 379-385. Delpit, L. (1988). The silenced dialogue: Power and pedagogy in educating other people’s children. Harvard Educational Review, 58(3), 280-298. Delpit, L. (1995). Other people’s children: Cultural conflict in the classroom. New York: New Press. Denzin, N. K. (1988). The research act (Rev. ed.) New York: McGraw-Hill. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.) (1994). Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oakes, CA: Sage. DeVries, R., Reese-Learned, H., & Morgan, P. (1991). Sociomoral development in
207 direct-instruction, eclectic, and constructivist kindergartens: A study of children’s enacted interpersonal understanding. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 6, 473-517. Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York: Macmillan. DeWolf, D. M. (1992, November). Developmentally appropriate and inappropriate practices and observed stress behaviors in preschool children. Paper presented at the preconference sessions of the meeting of the National Association for the Education of Young Children, Denver. Dommes, P., Gersten, R., & Carnine, D. (1984). Instructional procedures for increasing skill deficient fourth graders’ comprehension of syntactic structures. Educational Psychology, 4(2), 155-165. Doremus, V. P. (1986, November). Forcing works for flowers, but not for children. Educational Leadership, 44(3), 32-35. Dowhower, S. L. & Beagle, K. G. (1998, Spring). The print environment in kindergartens: A study of conventional and holistic teachers and their classrooms in three settings. Reading Research and Instruction, 37(3), 161-190. Duchein, M., Frazier, D., Konopak, B., & Palmer, P. (1994, December). Preservice teachers’ literacy life histories: Exploring the influence of personal experience in beliefs about reading and instruction. Paper presented at the annual meeting of National Reading Conference, San Diego. Duncan, T. K., Kemple, K. M., & Smith, T. M. (2000, Summer). Reinforcement in developmentally appropriate early childhood classrooms. Childhood Education, 76(4), 194-203. Dunn, L., Beach, S. A., & Kontos, S. (1994). Quality of the literacy environment in day care and children’s development. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 9(1), 24-34. Dunn, L., & Kontos, S. (1997). Research in review: What have we learned about developmentally appropriate practice? Young Children, 52(5), 4-13. Durkin, D. (1987). A classroom-observation study of reading instruction in kindergarten. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 2(3), 275-300.
208 Durkin, D. (1990). Reading instruction in kindergarten: A look at some issues through the lens of new basal reader materials. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 5(3), 299- 316. Egertson, H. A. (1987). The shifting of kindergarten curriculum. ERIC Digest, Urbana, IL: ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood Education. Elkind, D. (1981). The hurried child: Growing up too fast too soon. Menlo Park, CA: Addison-Wesley. Elkind, D. (1986, May). Formal education and early childhood education: An essential difference. Phi Delta Kappan, 67, 631-636. Elkind, D. (1987). Miseducation: Preschoolers at risk. New York: Knopf. Elkind, D. (1989, October). Developmentally appropriate practice: Philosophical and practical implications. Phi Delta Kappan, 71, 113-117. Elkind, D. (1990). Academic pressure – too much, too soon: The demise of play. In E. Klugman & S. Smilansky (Eds.), Children’s play and learning: Perspectives and policy implications (pp. 3-17). New York: Teacher College Press. Elkind, D. (1996, May). Early childhood education: What should we expect? Principal, 75, 11-13. Elkind, D. (2001). The hurried child: Growing up too fast too soon. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Publishing. Engelmann, S. (1999, September). The benefits of direct instruction: Affirmative action for at-risk students. Educational Leadership, 57, 77-79. Entwisle, D. R., & Hayduk, L. A. (1982). Early schooling: Cognitive and affective outcomes. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press. Erwin, E. J. (1998, Summer). Diversity in early childhood environments. The Educational Forum, 62, 323-328. Escobedo, T. H. (1993). Curricular issues in early education for culturally and linguistically diverse populations. In S. Reifel (Ed.), Perspectives on developmentally appropriate practice: Advances in early education and day care, (Vol. 5, pp. 213-246). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press Inc. Fang, Z. (1996, Spring). A review of research on teachers’ beliefs and practices. Educational Research, 38(1), 47-65.
209 Farran, D. C., Son-Yarbrough, W., Silveri, B., & Culp, A. M. (1993). Measuring the environment in public school preschools for disadvantaged children: What is developmentally appropriate?. In S. Reifel (Ed.), Advances in early education and day care: Perspectives on developmentally appropriate practice (Vol. 5, pp. 75-93). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press Inc. Feiler, R. (1994, April). The effects of different instructional approaches on young children’s cognitive and social-motivational outcomes. In D. Stipek (Chair), Reconceptualizing the debate on appropriate early childhood education. Symposium presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. Fein, G. (1986). The play of children. In G. Fein & M. Rivkin (Eds.), The young child of play: Reviews of research, (Vol. 4, pp. vii-ix). Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children. Fleege, P. O., Charlesworth, R., Burts, D. C., & Hart, C. H. (1993). Stress begins in kindergarten: A look at behavior during standardized testing. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 7(1), 20-26. Fowell, N., & Lawton, J. (1992). An alternative view of appropriate practice in early childhood education. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 7, 53-73. Frede, E. (1995). The role of program quality in producing early childhood program benefits. In R. E. Behrman (Ed.), The future of children: Long-term outcomes of early childhood programs, (Vol. 5, pp. 115-132). Los Altos, CA: The Center for the Future of Children. Frede, E., Austin, A. & Lindauer, S. (1993). The relationship of specific developmentally appropriate teaching practices in preschool to children’s skills in first grade. In S. Reifel (Ed.), Perspectives in developmentally appropriate practice: Advances in early education and day care, (Vol. 5, pp. 99-111). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Frede, E., & Barnett, W. S. (1992). Developmentally appropriate public school preschool: A study of implementation of the High/Scope curriculum and its effect on disadvantaged children’s skills at first grade. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 7(4), 483-499.
210 Freeman, E. B., & Hatch, J. A. (1989). What schools expect young children to know and do: An analysis of kindergarten report cards. The Elementary School Journal, 89(5), 595-605. French, L., & Song, M. (1998). Developmentally appropriate teacher-directed approaches: Images from Korean kindergartens. Curriculum Studies, 30(4), 409-430. Freppon, P. A. (1995). Low-income children’s literacy interpretations in a skills-based and a whole-language classroom. Journal of Reading Behavior, 27(4), 505-533. Freppon, P. A., & McIntyre, E. (1999, March/April). A comparison of young children learning to read in different instructional settings. The Journal of Educational Research, 92(4), 206-218. Freire, P. (1997). Pedagogy of hope: Reliving pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Continuum. Fromberg, D. (1992). Play. In C. Seefeldt (Ed.), The early childhood curriculum: A review of current research (2nd ed., pp. 35-74). New York: Teachers College Press. Fry, P. S., & Addington, J. (1984). Comparison of social problem-solving of children from open and traditional classrooms: A two-year longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(1), 318-329. Gall, M. D., Borg, W. R., & Gall, J. P. (1996). Educational research: An introduction (6th ed.). New York: Longman. Gardner, H. (1991). The unschooled mind: How children think and how schools should teach. New York: Basic. Gersten, R. (1986). Response to “Consequences of three preschool curriculum models through age 15.” Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 1, 293-302. Gersten, R., & Carnine, D. (1984). Direct Instruction mathematics: A longitudinal evaluation of low-income elementary school students. The Elementary School Journal, 84(4), 395-407. Gersten, R., Carnine, D., Keating, T., & Tomsic, M. (1984, April). The long-term effects of Direct Instruction: Longitudinal analysis of 1500 low-income students. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans. Gersten, R., Carnine, D., & Williams, P. (1982). Measuring implementation of a
211 structural educational approach: An observational approach. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 4, 67-79. Gersten, R., Carnine, D., Zoref, L., & Cronin, D. (1986). A multifaceted study of change in seven inner-city schools. The Elementary School Journal, 86, 257-276. Gersten, R., Darch, C., & Gleason, M. (1988). Effectiveness of a direct instruction academic kindergarten for low-income students. The Elementary School Journal, 89(2), 227-240. Gersten, R., True, M., & Moore, L. (1987). Hispanic parents’ perceptions of structured English programs in the primary grades. Eugene: University of Oregon. Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of the grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine. Glesne, C. (1999). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (2nd ed.). New York: Addison Wesley. Glesne, C., & Peshkin, A. (1992). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction. White Plains, NY: Longman. Goetz, J. P., & LeCompte, M. D. (1984). Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research. Orlando: Academic Press. Goffin, S. G. (1994). Curriculum models and early childhood education: Appraising the relationship. Columbus, OH: Merrill/Prentice-Hall. Goffin, S. G., & Day, D. E. (Eds.) (1994). New perspectives in early childhood teacher education: Bringing practitioners into the debate. New York: Teachers College Press. Goffin, S. G., & Stegelin, D. A. (1992). Changing kindergartens: Four success stories. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children. Goldstein, L. (1997). Between a rock and a hard place in the primary grades: The challenge of providing developmentally appropriate early childhood education in an elementary school setting. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 12, 3-27. Good, T. L., & Beckerman, T. M. (1978). Time on task: A naturalistic study in sixth- grade classrooms. Journal of Applied Behavioral Analysis, 9, 199-206. Goodwin, W. L., & Goodwin, L. D. (1996). Understanding quantitative and qualitative research in early childhood education. New York: Teachers College Press. Gottlieb, M., & Rasher, S. P. (1995, April). Documenting developmentally appropriate
212 practice in early childhood classrooms. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco. Graue, M. E. (1993a). Expectations and ideas coming to school. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 8, 53-75. Graue, M. E. (1993b). Ready for what? Constructing meanings of readiness for kindergarten. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Graue, M. E., & Walsh, D. J. (1995). Children in context: Interpreting the here and now of children’s lives. In J. A. Hatch (Ed.), Qualitative research in early childhood settings (pp. 135-154). Westport, CT: Praeger. Greenberg, P. (1990). Ideas that work for young children. Young Children, 45(2), 70- 80. Gronlund, G. (1995, July). Bringing the DAP message to kindergarten and primary teachers. Young Children, 50(5), 4-13. Gronlund, G. (2001, March). Rigorous academics in preschool and kindergarten? Yes! Let me tell you how! Young Children, 42-43. Gullo, D. F. (1994). Developmentally appropriate teaching in early childhood: Curriculum, implementation, evaluation. Washington, D. C.: National Education Association. Halpin, G., Halpin, G., & Harris, K. (1982). Personality characteristics and self-concept of preservice teachers related to their pupil control orientation. Journal of Experimental Education, 50(4), 195-199. Hanson, R., & Farrell, D. (1995). The long-term effects on high school seniors of learning to read in kindergarten. Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 908-933. Harris, K. R., & Graham, S. (1994). Constructivism: Principles, paradigms, and Integration. Journal of Special Education, 28, 233-247. Hart, C. H., Burts, D. C., & Charlesworth, R. (1997). Integrated developmentally appropriate curriculum: From theory and research to practice. In C. H. Hart, D. C. Burts, & R. Charlesworth (Eds.), Integrated curriculum and developmentally appropriate practice: Birth to age eight (pp. 1-27). Buffalo, NY: SUNY Press. Hart, C. H., Burts, D. C., Durland, M. A., Charlesworth, R., DeWolf, M., & Fleege, P. O.
213 (1998). Stress behaviors and activity type participation of preschoolers in more and less developmentally appropriate classrooms: SES and sex differences. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 12(2), 76-196. Hart, B., & Risley, T. R. (1995). Meaningful differences in the everyday experiences of young American children. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes. Hatch, J. A., & Freeman, E. B. (1988). Kindergarten philosophies and practices: Perspectives of teachers, principals, and supervisors. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 3(2), 151-166. Haupt, J. H., Larsen, J. M., Robinson, C. C., & Hart, C. H. (1995, Spring). The impact of DAP inservice training on the beliefs and practices of kindergarten teachers. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 16(2), 12-18. Haupt, J. H. & Ostlund, M. (1997). Informing parents, administrators, and teachers about developmentally appropriate practices. In C. Hart, D. Burts., & R. Charlesworth (Eds.), Integrated curriculum and developmentally appropriate practices: Birth to age eight (pp. 417-477). Buffalo, NY: SUNY Press. Hitz, R., & Wright, D. (1988). Kindergarten issues: A practitioner’s survey. Principal, 67(5), 28-30. Hirsch, E. D., Jr. (1997, April 10). Address to California State Board of Education. http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/mathman/ech2cal.htm. Hirsh-Pasek, K., Hyson, M. C., & Rescorla, L. (1990, October). Academic environments in preschool: Do they pressure or challenge young children? Early Education and Development, 1(6), 401-423. Hoffman, D. M. (2000). Pedagogies of self in American and Japanese early childhood education: A critical conceptual analysis. The Elementary School Journal, 101(2), 193-208. Hofmann, R. (1995). Using thinking units to initiate the analysis and interpretation of textual data. Paper presented at the 8th Annual Qualitative Research in Education Conference, Athens, GA. Honig, A. S. (1986). Stress and coping in children. In J. B. McCracken (Ed.), Reducing stress in young children’s lives (pp. 142-167). Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
214 Honig, B. (1996). Teaching our children to read: The role of skills in a comprehension reading program. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. Houser, D., & Osborne, C. (2001). Developmentally appropriate practices: Right for all kids. http://www.nauticom.net/www/cokids/dapei.html. Hsue, Y., & Aldridge, J. (1996). Developmentally appropriate practice and traditional Taiwanese Culture. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 22(4), 320-323. Hughes, F. P. (1999). Children, play, and development (3rd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Hyson, M. D., Hirsh-Pasek, K., & Rescorla, L. (1990). The classroom practices inventory: An observation instrument based on NAEYC’s guidelines for developmentally appropriate practices for 4- and 5-year old children. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 5(4), 475-494. Hyson, M. C., Hirsh-Pasek, K., Rescorla, L., Cone, J., & Martell-Boinske, L. (1991). Ingredients of parental “pressure” in early childhood. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 12, 347-365. Hyson, M. C., Van Trieste, K. L., & Rauch, V. (1989, November). NAEYC’s developmentally appropriate practice guidelines: Current research. Paper presented at the pre-conference sessions of the meeting of the National Association for the Education of Young Children, Atlanta, GA. Hyun, E. (1998). Making sense of developmentally and culturally appropriate practice (DCAP) in early childhood education. New York: Peter Lang. Hyson, M. C., & Lee, K-M. (1996). Assessing early childhood teachers’ beliefs about emotions: Content, contexts, and implications for practice. Early Education and Development, 7(1), 60-78. IRA (International Reading Association). (1989). Literacy development and prefirst grade. Newark, DE: Author. Isenberg, J. P. (1990). Teachers’ thinking and beliefs and classroom practice. Childhood Education, 322-327. Isenberg, J. P., & Quisenberry, N. L. (1988). Play: A necessity for all children. Childhood Education, 64, 138-145. Jarousse, J. Mengat, A., & Richard, M. (1992). Starting preschool at two years old:
215 Educational and social effects in education and development. Paris: French National Department of Education. Jipson, J. (1991, April). Developmentally appropriate practice: Culture, curriculum, connections. Early Education and Development, 2(2), 120-136. Johnson, J. E., Christie, J. F., & Yawley, T. D. (1987). Play and early childhood development. Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman. Jones, I., & Gullo, D. F. (1999). Differential social and academic effects of developmentally appropriate practices and beliefs. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 14(1), 26-35. Kagan, D. M. (1992). Implications of research on teacher belief. Educational Psychologist, 27(1), 65-90. Kagan. D. M., & Smith, K. E. (1988, February). Beliefs and behaviours of kindergarten teachers. Educational Research, 30(1), 26-35. Kagan, D. M., & Zigler, E. (Eds.) (1986). Early schooling: The national debate. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Kamii, C. (1985). Leading primary education toward excellence: Beyond worksheets and drill. Young Children, 40(6), 3-9. Kamii, C. (Ed.) (1990). Achievement testing in the early grades: The games grown-ups play. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children. Kaminski, R., & Carey, S. (1993). Developmentally appropriate practice and early childhood special education: Bridging the gap. Effective School Practice, 12(2), 81-86. Karnes, M. B., Schwedel, A. M., & Williams, M. B. (1983). A comparison of five approaches for educating young children from low-income homes. In the Consortium for longitudinal studies, As the twig is bent…lasting effects of preschool programs (pp. 133- 170). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Katz, L. (1988a). Engaging children’s minds: The implications of research for early childhood education. In C. Warger (Ed.), A response guide to public school early childhood programs (pp. 32-52). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Katz, L. (1988b). The disposition to learn. Principal, 67(5), 14-17.
216 Katz, L. (1995). Talks with teachers of young children: A collection. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Katz, L. (1996, March). The essence of developmentally appropriate practice for children from birth to age 8. Keynote address, Michigan Association for the Education of Young Children, Grand Rapids, MI. Katz, L. (1999a). Child development knowledge and teacher preparation: Confronting assumptions. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 11(2), 135-146. Katz, L. (1999b, November 18). Current perspectives on education in the early years: Challenges for the new millennium. Paper presented at the Ninth Annual Rudolph Goodridge Memorial Lecture, Barbados: University of the West Indies. Kazdin, A. E. (1994). Behavior modification in applied settings (5th ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole. Kean, J. (1980). Aims and objectives of kindergarten programs in Auckland metropolitan area. Journal of Early Childhood, 5, 32-37. Kemple, K. M. (1996). Teachers’ beliefs and reported practices concerning sociodramatic play. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 17(2), 19-31. Kessen, W. (1993). A developmentalist’s reflection. In G. H. Elder, J. Modell, & R. D Parkie (Eds.) Children in time and place: Developmental and historical insights (pp. 226-229). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Kessler, S. (1989). Boys’ and girls’ effect on the kindergarten curriculum. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 4, 470-503. Kessler, S. A. (1991a). Alternative perspectives on early childhood education. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 6(2), 183-197. Kessler, S. A. (1991b, April). Early childhood education as development: Critique of the metaphor. Early Education and Development, 2(2), 137-152. Kessler, S. A. (1992). The social context of the early childhood curriculum. In S. Kessler & B. B. Swadener (Eds.), Reconceptualizing the early childhood curriculum: Beginning the dialogue (pp. 21-42). New York: Teachers College Press. Ketner, C. S., Smith, K. E., & Parnell, M. K. (1997, March/April). Relationship between teacher theoretical orientation to reading and endorsement of developmentally appropriate practice. Journal of Educational Research, 90(4), 212-220.
217 Knapp, M. S., & Shields, P. M. (1990, June). Reconceiving academic instruction for the children of poverty. Phi Delta Kappan, 753-758. Knudsen-Lindauer, S. L., & Harris, K. (1989). Priorities for kindergarten curricula: View of parents and teachers. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 4(1), 51-61. Kohlberg, L., & Mayer, R. (1972). Development as the aim of education. Harvard Educational Review, 42(4), 449-496. Kontos, S., & Dunn, L. (1993). Caregiver practices and beliefs in child care varying in developmental appropriateness and quality. In S. Reifel (Ed.), Perspectives in developmentally appropriate practices: Advances in early education and day care (Vol. 5, pp. 53-74). Washington, DC: JAI Press Krogh, S. L. (1997). How children develop and why it matters: The foundation for the developmentally appropriate integrated early childhood curriculum. In C. H. Hart, D. C. Burts, & R. Charlesworth (Eds.) Integrated curriculum and developmentally appropriate practice: Age birth to age eight (pp. 29-48). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Lay-Dopyera, M., & Dopyera, J. (1992). Strategies for teaching. In C. Seefeldt (Ed.) The early childhood curriculum: A review of current research (2nd ed., pp.16-41). New York: Teachers College Press. Lazar, I., & Darlington, R. (1982). Lasting effects of early education: A report from the Consortium for Longitudinal Studies. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development (Vol. 47, no. 2-3, serial no. 195). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. LeCompte, M. D., & Preissle, J. (1993). Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research (2nd ed.). San Diego: Academic Press. Lennon, J. E., & Slesinski, C. (1999). Early intervention in reading: Results of a screening and intervention program for kindergarten students. The School Psychology Review, 28(3), 353-364. Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage. Love, J. M., Ryer, P., & Faddis, B. (1992). Caring environments: Program quality in California’s publicly funded child development programs. Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research Corporation.
218 Lubeck, S. (1994). The politics of developmentally appropriate practice: Exploring issues of culture, class, and curriculum. In B. L. Mallory and R. S. New (Eds.), Diversity and developmentally appropriate practices: Challenges for early childhood education (pp. 17-43). New York: Teachers College Press. Lubeck, S. (1996). Deconstructing “child development knowledge” and “teacher preparation.” Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 11(2), 147-167. Lubeck, S. (1998). Is developmentally appropriate practice for everyone? Childhood Education, 74, 283-292. Mallory, B. L. (1992). Is it always appropriate to be developmental? Convergent models for early intervention practice. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 11(4), 1-12. Mallory, B. L., & New, R. S. (1994). Diversity and developmentally appropriate practice: Challenges for early childhood education. New York: Teachers College Press. Mangione, P. L., & Maniates, H. (1993). Training teachers to implement developmentally appropriate practices. In S. Reifel (Ed.), Advances in early education and day care: Perspectives on developmentally appropriate practice (Vol. 5, pp. 145- 166). Greenwich, CT: JAI. Mantizicopoulos, P. Y., & Neuharth-Pritchett, S. (1995, April). Classroom environments, parental involvement, and children’s school achievement and adjustment: Two-year results from a Head Start early school transition demonstration program. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Education Research Association. San Francisco, CA. Marcon, R. A. (1992). Differential effects of three preschool models on inner-city 4 year olds. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 7(4), 517-530. Marcon, R. A. (1993). Socioemotional versus academic emphasis: Impact on kindergartners’ development and achievement. Early Child Development and Care, 96, 81-91. Marcon, R. A. (1994). Doing the right thing for children: Linking research and policy reform in the District of Columbia public schools. Young Children, 50(1), 8-20. Marcon, R. A. (1999). Differential impact of preschool models on development and
219 early learning of inner-city children: A three cohort study. Developmental Psychology, 35(2), 358-375. Martin, A. (1985). About teaching and teachers. Harvard Educational Review, 55, 318- 320. Martin, N. K., & Baldwin, B. (1992, November). Beliefs regarding classroom management style: The difference between pre-service and experienced teachers. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Mid-South Educational Research Association, Knoxville, TN. McGill-Franzen, A. (1992). Early literacy: What does “developmentally appropriate” mean? The Reading Teacher, 46(1), 56-58. McIntyre, E. (1995). The struggle for developmentally appropriate literacy instruction. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 9, 145-156. McMullen, M. B. (1999). Characteristics of teachers who talk the DAP talk and walk the DAP walk. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 13(2), 216-230. Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Meyer, L. (1984). Long-term academic effects of the Direct Instruction Project Follow- Through. Elementary School Journal, 84(4), 380-394. Meyer, L. A., Gersten, R. M., & Gutkin, J. (1983). Direct instruction: A Project Follow-Through success story in an inner-city school. The Elementary School Journal, 84(2), 241-252. Meyer, L., Linn, R. R., Mayberry, P. W, & Hastings, C. N. (1984, November). A look at instruction in kindergarten: Observations of interactions in three school districts. Paper presented at the 34th Annual Meeting of the National Reading Conference, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Mezynski, K. (1983). Issues concerning the acquisition of knowledge: Effects of vocabulary training on reading comprehension. Review of Educational Research, 53, 255-279. Miller, L. B., & Bizzell, R. P. (1983). The Louisville experiment: A comparison of four programs. In Consortium for Longitudinal Studies, As the twig is bent…Lasting effects of preschool programs (pp. 25-90). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
220 Miller, L. B., & Bizzell, R. P. (1984). Long-term effects of four preschool programs: Ninth- and tenth-grade results. Child Development, 55(4), 1570-1587. Mills, P. E., Dale, P. S., Cole, K. N., & Jenkins, J. R. (1995). Follow-up of children from academic and cognitive preschool curricula at age 9. Exceptional Children, 6(4), 378-393. Mitchell, A., & Mogdiliani, K. (1989). Young children in public schools? Young Children, 44(6), 58. Mosenthal, J. (1994). Text structure. In Purves, A. (Ed.) Encyclopedia of English studies and language arts (pp. 1201-1203). New York: Scholastic. Moyer, J. M., Egertson, H., & Isenberg, J. (1987, April). The child-centered kindergarten. Childhood Education, 63, 235-242. Munby, H. (1982). The place of teachers’ beliefs in research on teacher thinking and decision making, and an alternative methodology. Instructional Science, 11, 201-225. NAEYC (National Association for the Education of Young Children) (1986). NAEYC position statement on developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs serving children from birth through age 8. Young Children, 41(6), 4-29. NAEYC (2001, January). Five essential lessons learned from NAEYC’s first 75 years. Young Children, 56(1), 51-52. NAEYC & NAECS/SDE (National Association for the Education of Young Children and National Association of Early Childhood Specialists in State Departments of Education) (1991). Guidelines for appropriate curriculum content and assessment in programs serving children ages 3 through 8. Young Children, 46(3), 21-37. NAESP (National Association of Elementary School Principals) (1990). Standards for quality programs for young children: Early childhood education and the elementary school principal. Alexandria, VA: Author. Nagel, T., & McLevie, J. (1981). Status Report I on the progress of implementing the Achievement Goals Program in San Diego Schools. San Diego: Board of Education. Nall, S. W. (1982). Bridging the gap: Preschool to kindergarten. Childhood Education, 59, 107-110. NCEE (National Commission on Excellence in Education). (1983). A nation at risk:
221 The imperative for educational reform. Washington DC: United States Department of Education. NCTM (National Council for Teachers of Mathematics) (1987). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author. Nelson, R. F. (2000, June). Personal and environmental factors that influence early childhood teachers’ practices. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 27(2), 95- 103. Nespor, J. (1987). The role of beliefs in the practice of teaching. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 19(4), 317-328. Oakes, P. B., & Caruso, D. A. (1990, October). Kindergarten teachers’ use of developmentally appropriate practices and attitudes about authority. Early Education and Development, 1(6), 445-457. O’Brien, L. M. (2000). Engaged pedagogy. Childhood Education, 76(5), 238-288. Odom, S. L., & McEvoy, M. A. (1990). Mainstreaming at the preschool level: Potential barriers and tasks for the field. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 10(1), 48-61. Ogbu, J. U. (1994). From cultural differences to differences in cultural frame of reference. In P. M. Greenfield & R. R. Cocking (Eds.), Cross-cultural roots of minority child development (pp. 365-391). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. O’Loughlin, M. (1991, October). Rethinking early childhood education: A sociocultural perspective. Paper presented at the conference on Reconceptualizing Early Childhood Education: Research, Theory, and Practice, Madison, WI. O’Loughlin, M. (1992). Appropriate for whom? A critique of the culture and class bias underlying developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood education. Paper presented at the conference on Reconceptualizing Early Childhood Education: Research, Theory, and Practice, Chicago, IL. Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307-332. Palmaffy, T. (1998, January/February). No excuses: Houston educator Thaddeus Lott puts failing school to shame. Policy Review, 87, 11-17. Paris, S., Cross, D., & Lipson, M. (1984). Informed strategies for learning: A program
222 to improve children’s reading awareness and comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 1239-1252. Parkay, F. W., & Stanford Hardcastle, B. (1998). Becoming a teacher (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Pearson, P. D. (1984). Direct explicit teaching of reading comprehension. In G. C. Duffy, L. R. Roehler, & J. Mason (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Perspectives and suggestions (pp. 222-233). New York: Longman. Pellegrini, A. D. (1992). Kindergarten children’s social-cognitive status as a predictor of first-grade success. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 7, 565-577. Pellegrini, A. D., & Glickman, C. D., (1990). Measuring kindergartners’ social competence. Young Children, 45(4), 40-44. Perlmutter, J. C., & Burrell, L. (1995). Learning through “play” as well as “work” in the primary grades. Young Children, 50(5), 14-21. Phillips, C. B. (1994). The movement of African American children through sociocultural contexts: A case of conflict resolution. In B. Mallory and R. New (Eds.), Diversity and developmentally appropriate practice (pp. 137-154). New York: Teachers College Press. Piaget, J. (1950). The psychology of intelligence. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Prater, M. A., Bruhl, S., Serna, L. A. (1998, May/June). Acquiring social skills through cooperative learning and teacher-directed instruction. Remedial and Special Education, 19(3), 160-172. Pressly, M., & Rankin, J. (1994). More about whole language methods of reading instruction for students at-risk for early reading failure. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston. Quick, B. N. (1998). Beginning reading and developmentally appropriate practice (DAP): Past, present, and future. Peabody Journal of Education, 73(3-4), 253-272. Ratcliff, N. (1995). The need for alternative techniques for assessing young children’s emerging literacy skills. Contemporary Education, 66(3), 169-171. Rathburn, A. H., Walston, J. T., & Germino Hausken, E. (2000, April). Kindergarten teachers’ use of developmentally appropriate practices: Results from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 1998-1999. Paper
223 presented at the annual conference of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans. Roberts, C. M. L. (1986). Whatever happened to kindergarten? Educational Leadership, 44, 34. Rodd, J. (1996). Children, culture, and education. Childhood Education, 2(6), 325-331. Roehler, L., & Duffy, G. (1981). Classroom teaching is more than an opportunity to learn. Journal of Teacher Education, 32, 7-13. Rogers, C. S., & Sawyer, J. K. (1988). Play in the lives of children. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children. Rose, J. S., & Medway, F. J. (1981, July/August). Teacher locus of control, teacher behavior, and student behavior as determinants of student achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 74(6), 374-381. Rosenshine, B. (1976). Recent research on teaching behavior and student achievement. Journal of Teacher Education, 27, 61-64. Rosenshine, B. (1978). Academic engaged time, content covered, and direct instruction. Journal of Education, 160, 38-66. Rosenshine, B. (1986, April). Synthesis of research in explicit teaching. Educational Leadership, 60-69. Rosenshine, B. (1987, May/June). Explicit teaching and teacher training. Journal of Teacher Education, 34-36. Rosenshine, B. (1995, May/June). Advances in research on instruction. The Journal of Educational Research, 88(5), 262-268. Rosenshine, B., & Stevens, R. (1986). Teaching functions. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed.). New York: Macmillan. Rubin, K. N., Fein, G. G., & Vandenberg, B. (1983). Play. In E. M. Hetherington & Mussen, P. H. (Eds.) Handbook of child psychology: Socialization, personality and social development (Vol. 4, pp. 698-774). New York: Wiley. Ruckman, A. Y., Burts, D. C., & Pierce, S. H. (1999). Observed stress behaviors of first grade children participating in more and less developmentally appropriate activities in a computer-based literacy laboratory. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 14(1), 36-46.
224 Saunders, W., & Goldenberg, C. (1996). Four primary teachers work to define constructivism and teacher-directed learning: Implications for teacher assessment. The Elementary School Journal, 97(2), 139-161. Scarr, S., Weinberg, R., & Levine, A. (1986). Understanding development. New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich. Schrader, C. T. (1990). Symbolic play as a curricular tool for early literacy development. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 5(1), 79-103. Schulz, R. (1997). Interpreting teacher practice: Two continuing stories. New York: Teachers College Press. Schweinhart, L. J., & Wallgren, C. R. (1993). Effects of a Follow Through Program on school achievement. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 8(1), 43-56.
Schweinhart, L. J., & Weikart, D. P. (1996). Lasting differences: The High/Scope preschool curriculum comparison study through age 23. (Monographs of the High/Scope Educational Research Foundation, no. 12). Ypsilanti, MI: High Scope Press. Schweinhart, L. J., & Weikart, D. P. (1997). The High/Scope Preschool curriculum comparison study through age 23. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 12, 117-143. Schweinhart, L. J., Weikart, D. P., & Larner, M. B. (1986). Consequences of three preschool curriculum models through age 15. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 1(1), 15-45. Seefeldt, C., & Barbour, N. (1988). Early childhood education: An introduction. Columbus, OH: Merrill. Seifert, K. L. (1991). What develops in informal theories of development? (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 342489). Shavelson, R. J., & Stern, P. (1981, Winter). Research on teachers’ pedagogical thoughts, judgments, decisions, and behavior. Review of Educational Research, 51(4), 455-498. Shepard, L. A., & Smith, M. L. (1988). Escalating academic demand in kindergarten: Some Nonsolutions. The Elementary School Journal, 89(2), 135-146. Sherman, C. W., & Mueller, D. P. (1996, June). Developmentally appropriate practice
225 and student achievement in inner-city elementary schools. Paper presented at Head Start’s National Research Conference. Washington, DC. Shuster, C. (1995, April). Effects of inservice training on the developmental appropriateness in early childhood education programs. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA. Sigel, I. (1987). Does hothousing rob children of their childhood? Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 2, 211-225. Slaughter, H. B., & Powers, S. (1983, November). Effect of increasing allocated and engaged instructional time on the achievement of high risk kindergarten students: An evaluation of the Chapter I extended time kindergarten project. Tucson Unified School District, Arizona. Smerdon, B. A., Burkam, D. T., & Lee, V. E. (1999, Fall). Access to constructivist and didactic teaching: Who gets it? Where is it practiced? Teachers College Record, 101(1), 5-34. Smilansky, S. (1990). Sociodramatic play: Its relevance to behavior and achievement in school. In E. Klugman & S. Smilansky (Eds.) Children’s play and learning: Perspectives and policy implementation (pp. 18-42). New York: Teachers College Press. Smith, K. E. (1997). Student teachers’ beliefs about developmentally appropriate practice: Pattern, stability, and the influence of locus of control. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 12(2), 221-243. Smith, K. E. (1990, January). Developmentally appropriate education or the Hunter teacher assessment model: Mutually incompatible alternatives. Young Children 45(6), 12-13. Smith, M. L. (1991). Put to the test: The effects of external testing on teachers. Educational Researcher, 20(5), 8-11. Smith, K., & Croom. L. (2000, May/June). Multidimensional self-concepts of children and teacher beliefs about developmentally appropriate practices. Journal of Educational Research, 93(5), 312-321. Smith, M. L., & Shepard, L. A. (1988, Fall). Kindergarten readiness and retention: A
226 qualitative study of teachers’ beliefs and practices. American Educational Research Journal, 25(3), 307-333. Snider, M. H., & Fu, V. R. (1990). The effects of specialized education and job experience on early childhood teachers’ knowledge of developmentally appropriate practice. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 5, 69-78. Spidell-Rusher, A. (1988). Play in the classroom: A descriptive study of preschool teachers’ beliefs. Early Childhood Development and Care, 41(1), 153-172. Spidell-Rusher, A. S., McGrevin, C. Z., & Lambiotte, J. G. (1992). Belief systems of early childhood teachers and their principals regarding early childhood education. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 7, 277-296. Spiegel, D. L. (1996). Blending whole language and systematic direct instruction. In R. D. Robinson, M. C. McKenna, & J. M. Wedman (Eds.), Issues and trends in literacy education (pp. 15-22). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Spodek, B. (1986a). Development, values and knowledge in the kindergarten curriculum. In B. Spodek (Ed.), Today’s kindergarten: Exploring the knowledge base, expanding the curriculum (pp. 32-47). New York: Teachers College Press. Spodek, B. (1986b). Introduction. In B. Spodek (Ed.), Today’s kindergarten: Exploring the knowledge base, expanding the curriculum (pp. vii-xi). New York: Teachers College Press. Spodek, B. (1987). Thought processes underlying preschool teachers’ classroom decisions. Early Child Development and Care, 29, 197-208. Spodek, B. (1988a). Conceptualizing today’s kindergarten curriculum. The Elementary School Journal, 89(2), 203-211. Spodek, B. (1988b). The implicit theories of early childhood teachers. Early Child Development and Care, 38, 13-32. Spodek, B. (1991a). Early childhood curriculum and cultural definitions of knowledge. In B. Spodek & O. N. Saracho (Eds.), Yearbook in early childhood education: Issues in early childhood curriculum (Vol. 2, pp. 1-20). New York: Teachers College Press. Spodek, B. (Ed.) (1991b). Educationally appropriate kindergarten practices. Washington DC: National Educational Association. Spodek, B. (1991c, April). Reconceptualizing early childhood education: A
227 commentary. Early Childhood Education and Development, 2(2), 161-167. SREB (Southern Regional Educational Board) (1995). Getting schools ready for children: The other side of the reading goal. Atlanta, GA: Author. Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. CA: Sage Publications. Stallings, J. (1980). Allocated academic learning time revisited or beyond time on task. Educational Researcher, 9, 11-16. Stein, M., Carnine, D., & Dixon, R. (1998). Direct instruction: Integrating curriculum design and effective teaching practice. Intervention in School and Clinic, 33(4), 227-234. Stipek, D. J. (1991). Characterizing early childhood education programs. In L. Rescorla, M. C. Hyson, & K. Hirsh-Pasek (Eds.), Academic instruction in early childhood: Challenge or pressure? New directions for child development (Vol. 53, pp. 47-55). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Stipek, D. J. (1993). Is child-centered early childhood education really better? In S. Reifel (Ed.), Advances in early education and day care: Perspectives on developmentally appropriate practices (Vol. 5, pp. 29-52). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Stipek, D. J., & Byler, P. (1997). Early childhood education teachers: Do they practice what they preach? Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 12, 305-325. Stipek, D. J., Daniels, D., Galluzzo, D., & Milburn, S. (1992a). Characterizing early childhood education programs for poor and middle-class children. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 7(1), 1-19. Stipek, D. J., Feiler, R., Daniels, D., & Milburn, S. (1995). Effects of different instructional approaches on young children’s achievement and motivation. Child Development, 66, 209-223. Stipek, D., Milburn, S., Galluzo, D., & Daniels, D. H. (1992b). Parents’ beliefs about appropriate education for young children. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 13, 293-310. Stone, S. J. (1995, September). Wanted: Advocated for play in the primary grades. Young Children, 50(6), 45-54. Stott, F., & Bowman, B. (1996). Child development knowledge: A slippery base for practice. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 11, 168-183. Swadener, B. B., & Kessler, S. (1991). Reconceptualizing early childhood education:
228 Special issue. Early Education and Development, 2(2), 85-94. Swanson, H. L., O’Connor, J. C., & Cooney, J. B. (1990). An information processing analysis of expert and novice teachers’ problem solving. American Educational Research Journal, 27(3), 533-557. Swick, K. (1987). Managing classroom stress. Dimensions, 15(4), 9-11. Turner, J. (1995). The influence of classroom contexts on young children’s motivation for literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 410-441. Vance, M. B. & Boals, B. (1989, November). The discrepancy between elementary principals’ and kindergarten teachers’ view of the content and procedures which constitute a kindergarten program. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the National Association for the Education of Young Children, Atlanta, GA. Vartuli, S. (1999). How early childhood teacher beliefs vary across grade level. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 14(4), 489-514. Verma, S., & Peters, D. L. (1975, March). Day care teachers’ practices and beliefs. The Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 21(1), 46-55. Vygotsky, L. S. (1976). Play and its role in the mental development of the child. In J. S. Bruner, A. Jolly, & K. Sylva (Eds.), Play: Its role in development and evolution (pp. 537-554). New York: Basic Books. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Walsh, D. J. (1989). Changes in kindergarten: Why here? Why now? Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 4(3), 377-391. Walsh, D. J. (1991, April). Extending the discourse on developmental appropriateness: A developmental perspective. Early Education and Development, 2(2), 109-119. Walsh, D. J. (1992, April). Us against them: A few thoughts on separateness. Early Education and Development, 3(2), 89-91. Weber, E. (1984). Ideas influencing early childhood education: A theoretical analysis. New York: Teachers College Press. Webster, M. K. (1984). The 5’s and 6’s go to school revisited. Childhood Education, 60, 325-330. Wells, G. (1998). Some questions about direct instruction: Why? To whom? How?
229 And When? Language Arts, 76(1), 27-35. West, J., Denton, K., & Germino Hausken, E. (2000). American’s kindergartners: Findings from the early childhood longitudinal study, kindergarten class of 1998-99, Fall 1998. NCES 2000 070. Washington, DC: National Center for Educational Statistics. West, J. Hausken, E., & Collins, M. (1993). Readiness for kindergarten: Parent and teacher beliefs. Washington DC: National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education Office of Educational Research and Improvement (#93-27). Wien, C. (1995). Developmentally appropriate practice in “real life”: Stories of teachers’ practical knowledge. New York: Teachers College Press. Wien, C. (1996). Time, work, and developmentally appropriate practice. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 11(3), 377-403. Williams, C. K., & Kamii, C. (1986). How do children learn by handling objects? Young Children, 42(1), 23-26. Wolfgang, C. H., & Glickman, C.D. (1986). Solve discipline problems: Strategies for classroom teachers. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Wolfgang, C. H., & Wolfgang, M. E. (1999). School for young children: Developmentally appropriate practices. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Wolery, M., Werts, M. G., & Holcombe-Ligon, A. (1994). Current practices with young children who have disabilities: Issues in placement, assessment, and instruction. Focus on Exceptional Children, 26(6), 1-12. Wolcott, H. F. (1992). Posturing in qualitative inquiry: In M. D. LeCompte, W. L. Milroy, & J. Preissle (Eds.), The handbook of qualitative research in education (pp. 3-52). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Wrobel, S. (1996). The effects of direct instruction on the various reading achievement categories (Report No. CS012460). Chicago, IL: Research Technical Report. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service NO. ED 395 292). Yoder, P., Kaiser, A. & Alpurt, C. (1991). An exploratory study of interaction between language teaching methods and child characteristics. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 34, 155-167. Zimiles, H. (1986). The social context of early childhood in an era of expanding
230 preschool education. In B. Spodek (Ed.), Today’s kindergarten: Exploring the knowledge base, expanding the curriculum (pp. 1-14). New York: Teachers College Press. Zimiles, H. (1991). Diversity and change in young children: Some educational implications. In B. Spodek & O. N. Saracho (Eds.), Yearbook in early childhood education: Issues in Early Childhood Curriculum (Vol. 2, pp. 21-45). New York: Teachers College Press. Zirpoli, T. J. (1995). Understanding and affecting the behavior of young children. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Merrill.
231