sign in sign up
<<
Home , Jean Piaget

Journal of Rese~rch in Childhood Educa!ion Copyright 2008 by the Asoociation for 2008, Vol 22, No.4 Otildhood Educ.z!.(ion Jnterna1;ona( 0256·8543/08 Skinner Meets Piaget on the Reggio Playground: Practical Synthesis of Applied Behavior Analysis and Developmentally Appropriate Practice Orientations

Bobbie Warash Reagan Curtis Dan Hursh West Virginia University Vied Tucci Tucd Learning Sol11tions, Inc.

Abstract. We focus on integrating developmentally appropriate practices, the project approach of Reggio Emilia, and a behavior analytic model to support a quality preschool environment. While the above practices often are considered incompatible, we have found substantial overlap and room for integration of these perspectives in practical application. With the growing number ofchildren with disabilities and challenging behaviors in regula.T preschool classrooms, it is essential for teachers to have the skills to identify and help all learners. lf children do not have the competencies to listen, observe, participate, talk, and problem solve, then they cannot function in a developmentally appropri­ ate classroom or go beyond their developmental potentials.

Imagine the scenario-Jean Piaget (1937, among , or can they integrate 1955, 1962, 1971, 2000) and B. F. Skin­ and mesh various theories (as Reggio Emila ner (1948, 1953, 1954, 1968) meet on the does) and still preserve the integrity of their preschool playground in Reggio Emilia, preschool classroom? Italy, not to dispute ideas but to "share" The complexity of teaching in early child­ theoretical issues that would contribute to hood is not an either/or situation. It requires a quality and functioning early childhood enacting a continumn ofideology with no the­ classroom. How beneficial this would be ory practiced in isolation. The Reggio Emilia for preschool teachers who are struggling approach, with its infusion ofvarious theories to apply the views of Reggio Emilia within and innovative practices, achieves a harmony their educational training and background among many contrasting philosophies and of developmentally appropriate practice sheds light on how to reconfigure such a rigid (DAP). Add the behavioral pe:r:spective of categorical system (Gardner, 1998). Enthusi­ the special needs teacher to the mix and asm for the came at a there is a menagerie of philosophical issues time when there was considerable professional floating in the air.... who is right? Do early discourse over the content ofDAP guidelines childhood educators have to dichotomize and constructivism as educational practices (Mallory & New, 1994). With its blended edu­ cational and cultural perspectives, Reggio has Authors' Note: The authors wish to acknowledge the ongoing support of Ron Zdrojkowski for the not only inspired American educators, but also work described here. His financial generosity stimulated the creation of a powerful arena and personal encouragement have been very· for reflecting on and questioning educational importa~t in making these efforts feasible. practices.

441 WARASH, CURTIS, HURSH, AND TUCCI

The increased excitement and notable analysis of the dynamics of behavior-envi­ strengths ofinstructional practices used in ronment interactions focused on how events Reggio Emilia are recognized as being com­ establish, strengthen, maintain, and weaken patible with DAP. These advantages, com­ behavior. This extremely student-centered _, bined with the increased number of special focus is sensitive to the existing repertoires needs students included in preschools, forces of students (Skinner, 1968). Consistent" the early childhood teacher to filter through with Vygotsky (1978), it demonstrates how a wide variety of and approach- teachers can arrange activities that scaf­ ..- es:~< Can early childhood educators consider fold students' learning within their zone of themselves developmentally appropriate, proximal development so as to develop more have children engage in long-term proj­ sophisticated repertoires. All ofthese can be ects that provide for coinmunicative skills interpreted as developmentally appropriate and patterns of discourse, and "scaffold" practices. children to their developmental potential, The contrasts between these philosophical _ plus integrate behavior analytic teaching foundations are clear, but the commonalities methods (such as and are often ignored. Both constructivism and Precision Teaching) into their fully inclusive have as their goals the devel­ classrooms? We believe so. The first author opment of independent learners, learners is the director of a constructivist-oriented who have the skills to construct their own preschool influenced b¥ Reggio Emilia and learning (Skinner, 1968). Both suggest that . explores applications of behavioral theory, sufficient support be provided so that the the second author is a constructivist trained skills needed to learn are developed. Both developmental researcher, the third author focus on the learning ofindividual students, is an educational trained in tailoring instruction to ensure that learn- · Applied Behavior Analysis, and the fourth ing. Behaviorism as well as constructivism author is the creator of the Competent asserts that is constructed by Learner Model, a behavioral approach based the learner, rather than transmitted to the on the works of B.F. Skinner. Our focus in learner (Brooks & Brooks, 1993; Skinner, this article is on describing our integration of 1968). . DAP, the project approach of Reggio Emilia, We recognize that what we are proposing and the use ofbehavior analytic strategies as flies in the face oftradition. Yet, early child­ the theoretical basis for a quality preschool hood educators face increasingly diverse environment at the West Virginia University student populations and can be assisted in (WVU) Nursery School. · facing the challenges of student diversity by We recognize that constructivist and DAP exploring the potential of integrating the perspectives based on the work of Piaget, highly influential perspectives of DAP and Vygotsky (1978), Bredekamp (1987), and behavioral practices to support their stu­ others are often presented as near polar dents' development as independent learners, opposites ofbehavioral accounts oflearning much the same way Reggio opened doors to and development (e.g., Berk, 2003; Cham­ various theoretical views. pagne & Tausky, 1976; Cobb, 2001; Santrock, 2001). While it is true that constructivism ofDevelopmentally developed at least partially in response to an /!ppropriate Practice (DAPJ increasing prevalence ofbehavioral practices The philosophical framework of DAP bas in U.S. preschools in the early 1960s (Brun­ been ingrained in the minds of early child­ er, 1986; Gardner, 1985; Gremmo & Riley, hood teachers for over 20 years-almost to 1995; Kagan, 1978; Kamii & Radin, 1967), the exclusion of other philosophical views. we are finding substantial overlap and room The term "developmentally appropriate prac­ for integration of these perspectives in prac­ tice" was first published in 1986 in a position tical application. Skinner's (1953) thorough statement from the National Association for

442 SYNTHESIS OF APPLIED BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS AND DAP

the ofYoung Children (NAEYC) individual childr~n. because the controversy as a tool for programs seeking accreditation between predominantly child-initiated activ­ by NAEYC (Bredekamp, 1987; Bredekamp & ity and predominantly -initiated direct Copple, 1986). The position statement was instruction has left some children stranded drawn up partially in response to trends in the middle, when a balanced position is toward more formal academic instruction in their best interest. . in early childhood programs (Shepard & These advancements in educational prac­ Smith, 1988). tices indicate significant changes and dem­ Ten years later, a revised version of the onstrate that early childhood . is a position statement had significant changes journey toward best practices. Early child­ regarding what DAP entailed, particularly hood educators and researchers continually with respect to literacy and cognitive devel­ learn more as they strive to keep up with opment (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997; Dick­ ever-changing early childhood classrooms. inson, 2002). Based on major advances in Those struggling to keep developmentally research affecting interpretations of what appropriate practices in the forefront, but was and what was not considered DAP, also wanting to utilize other approaches, statements referring to the increased use realize that just as adjustments occurred of formal instruction in academic skills and in the definition of DAP, they should be the widespread use of inappropriate formal fostered in one's personal efforts to utilize teaching techniques for young children were best practices. Teachers of young children removed. In fact, the most recent version need to broaden the scope of DAP to include warned teachers about not challenging chil­ teaching practices that help children become dren adequately. There was a shift toward more competent in all domains. asserting the value of teaching, especially At the 2006 National Institute for Early as it pertains to literacy. Childhood Professional Development, In 2007, NAEYC published The Inten­ NAEYC held forums to launch discussions tional Teacher (Epstein, 2007). Epstein revisiting the current position statement reiterated that teachers need a repertoire on DAP (Koralek, 2006). As we write this of instructional strategies to accommodate article, NAEYC is seeking comments regard­ children's different ways of learning. She ing the concepts and language ofthe existing argued that "both child-guided and adult­ statement and any controversial issues or guided experiences have a place in the early suggested alterations to be considered for re­ childhood setting" (p. 2) and "best practices vision. This is a message to early childhood and intentional teaching work in synergy" educators that they can-and should-ques­ (p. 21). Intentional teachers are defined as tion and expand their approaches to accom­ those who act purposefully with a plan to ac­ modate the diverse needs ofchildren in their complish a goal, and Epstein suggested mov­ classrooms. ing carefully toward more teacher-directed approaches in instruction when appropriate. Reggio Emilia and Developmentally Head Start also refers to teacher-directed Appropriate Practices instruction as an acceptable strategy. The Reggio Emilia is one approach that DAP has Head Start Leaders Guide to Positive Child assimilated and accommodated. Piaget's Outcomes (2003) specified a continuum theory and developmental stages are major of teacher behavior, from non-directed to components of DAP. Malaguzzi (1998), the teacher-directed teaching, as a mechanism founder of Reggio, claims that the richest to enhance children's learning(p. 24). Is the potentiality of Piaget's work is in the epis­ pendulum swinging back toward the middle temology domain or the theory of knowl­ of the "direct versus child-initiated instruc­ edge, which is consistent with Piaget's own tion'' continuum? This would empower stated focus. Malaguzzi's contention is with teachers to make educational choices for the applied value of stages and the use of

443 WARASH, CURTIS, HURSH, AND TUCCI

such constructs as conservation of matter. egocentrism and operations, as well as in his Malaguzzi has stated that teachers try to treatment of children's classificatory skills. extract ideas from Piaget's theory, but have Katz (1998) observed that in Reggio difficulty using them in educational settings. Emilia, preschool children use a wide variety Despite some contradictions with DAP, Reg­ of graphics and other media to represent gio has gained credibility in the early child­ and communicate their constructions and hood field because Reggio and DAP share are considered very competent to do so at philosophical roots. a younger age than predicted by Piaget's Reggio is acknowledged in the updated ver­ theories. Gardner (1998) succinctly de­ sion ofD evelopmentally Appropriate Practice scribed the Reggio system as a collection of for Early Childhood Programs (Bredekamp schools in which each child's intellectual, & Copple, 1997) and serves as a major point emotional, social, and moral potentials are of reference in evaluationguidelines for DAP carefully cultivated and guided. Reggio is (New, 1998). While Reggio Emilia is viewed focused on helping children to develop their as one of the best preschool systems in the potential within a social context (Edwards, world, as reported in Newsweek ("The Ten 2005). The Reggio Emilia approach puts a Best Schools," 1991), and is often cited as a focus on the potential of children and views prime example ofgood practices, some feel it is them as capable, rather than focusing on too teacher-directed and not developmentally their limitations. Documentation, of the appropriate (Phillips & Bredekamp, 1998). Reggio processes, is looked at as a form of The writings of Dewey (1900/1971, communication because it systematically il­ 1933/1998, 1938/1971) and Vygotsky (1978) lustrates the process and results ofchildren 's also resonate with both philosophies, but are work. It provides children with a "concrete" similarly difficult to translate into educa­ of what they said and did, serves tional practice. It is in the interpretation of as a jumping-off point for next steps, and these theories that DAP and Reggio begin to provides educators with a tool for measuring diverge (Edwards, 2005). Malaguzzi (1998) continuous improvement (Edwards, Gan­ 1 argued that children at a very young age dini, & Forman, 2005). Teachers in Reggio are capable of making from their transcribe hours of comments that children daily life experiences through mental acts make during the process ofa project in order · involving planning, coordination of ideas, to assist children in revisiting and editing and . While, on the one hand, their work. Documentation is a vehicle for this is in agreement with Piaget's episte­ teachers to understand the children and mology (his view of children .constructing make modifications to teaching strategies knowledge through active exploration), on (Katz, 1998). American preschool teachers i the other hand, Piaget (1937, 1962) argued often use the term "docwnentation," but as that such mental acts as planning, coordina­ Katz says, "in U.S. classrooms, the children tion of ideas, and abstraction were beyond spend large proportions of time making children's capacity in early childhood. Piaget · the same pictures with the same materials \ and Malaguzzi agreed that what children about the same topic on the same day in the learn does not follow as an automatic result same way[;] it is unlikely that documented from what is taught. Rather, it is in large displays would intrigue parents and provide part due to the children's own doing as a rich content for teacher-parent or child-par­ consequence of their activities and their ent discussion" (p. 40). Within the process of own resources. Malaguzzi was critical of documentation, Reggio teachers encourage Piaget's relative lack of attention to social conflict of ideas to uncover children's beliefs. interaction, the distance between Teachers and children confront each other and language in Piaget's theories, and his and work through conflict in order to have overemphasis on what children cannot do, a better understanding of all perspectives. which is embodied in Piaget's concepts of This type of conflict is not the norm in early

444 SYNTHESIS OF APPLIED BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS AND DAP

childhood settings outside of Reggio Emilia many early childhood teachers strive to and may be viewed by some as inconsistent adapt documentation and other Reggio prac­ with DAP. While the ideas ofReggio are not tices to help their classrooms become better wholly consistent with those of DAP, com­ and more interesting for all children, includ­ mon philosophical threads aid integration ing those children with special rights. of the two perspectives. Reggio has shown educators that diverse philosophies can be Children With Special Rights integrated in a DAP environment. · Reggio emphasizes children's competency, The first author, while observing in the but what about preschoolers who have dif­ Aprile XXV school in Reggio Emilia (per­ ficulty learning? Reggio calls these chil­ sonal , May 30, 2005), witnessed dren "children with special rights." Early a teacher working with six preschoolers at a childhood teachers in the United States table. There were many authentic materi­ are expected to implement a quality cur­ als (e.g., branches, leaves, a vase offlowers) riculum that aligns with NAEYC's DAP on the table as the children were making guidelines and also meets individual state clay sculptures of animals. The teacher, content standards, while also making good talking to a child, pointed to a picture ofan educational decisions for all children in animal that was available on the table for their classrooms. With more fully inclusive children to observe. The teacher pointed to preschools, demands to implement early the child's clay sculpture as he was work­ and guidelines, and such ing on it, and then asked questions and mandates as the No Child Left Behind Act followed up on the child's answers with CNCLB, 2001), there are more evaluations more questions. The teacher vigorously and accountability efforts likely to reveal pursued helping the child see discrepancies more children with learning and behavior between his sculpture and the picture of the challenges in early childhood classrooms real animal. The teacher asked even more (Coleman, Buysse, & Neitzel, 2006). thought-provoking questions, to the extent While most children are prepared to take that conflict between the teacher and the full advantage of their preschool learning child was clearly visible. This persistence environment, some struggle because their of questioning witnessed in Reggio is not learningenvironment does not accommodate often seen in U.S. preschools, where foster­ their specific needs. In fact, over 5 percent ing self-esteem is often a more dominant of the school-age population in the United concern. Teachers in the United States are States will be identified as having a spe­ encouraged to use open-ended questions to cific learning disability (National Center for help children obtain higher level thinking Education Statistics, 2006). The trend is to skills, but the difference observed in Reggio identify children with difficulties earlier and was the teacher's persistence to the level of help them at a younger l',tge. The Division creating cognitive disequilibrium. Children ofEarly Childhood (DEC) of the Council for in Reggio schools are not praised for work Exceptional Children (CEC) recently en­ that is below their full capability. Instead, dorsed a document on an early intervention they are viewed as capable learners who can system for young children at risk for learn­ go beyond developmental expectations. ing disabilities (Coleman et al., 2006). Many A single unifying theory for education is preschoolers with learning disabilities do not not likely to emerge anytime soon, hut Reg­ have the academic skills that would allow gio gives early childhood professionals the for an observable distinction between their opportunity to reconfigure their educational intellectual ability and their achievement. views and to "think outside the box," which Thus, it is difficult, using this criterion, to helps achieve harmony between contrasting identify children as having a learning dis­ dichotomies. As they accept the innovative ability and therefore qualify them for the developed in Reggio Emilia, appropriate services.

445

I WARASH, CURTIS, HURSH, AND TUCCI

A lack ofsuch identification does not elimi­ children exhibiting behaviors associated nate problems for the young child who will with a learning disability, but 'also to young develop more easily identifiable learning children with other developmental difficul­ disabilities later in his or her educational ties and challenging behaviors that inhibit career (Vaughn & Fuchs, 2003). Current their chances for educational success. recommendations include having teachers and parents assist in recognizing children Applied Behavior Analysis in who have learning problems during the pre- Early Childhood Education . school years instead of waiting until children Special education teachers have predomi­ are identified in elementary school. Teach­ nantly employed behavioral approaches. ers know through ongoing if Now special education teachers and early preschoolers show obvious signs of learning childhood teachers have classrooms with · difficulties. It could be the child who has typically developing children, children a difficult time with letter recognition or with challenging behaviors, and children putting a simple puzzle together who falls identified as needing special services. Can behind her peers. It is the child who falls teachers use behavioral approaches in their behind his peers, even with assistance, on classrooms and still be exemplifying DAP? tasks that should be in that child's develop­ We pelieve so. It is not an either/or issue, mental reach. but rather an issue that calls for converging With the growing number of children theories and teaching methods. Reggio pro­ with disabilities and challenging behaviors vides a partial model for this convergence, in in regular preschool classrooms, it is es­ which various philosophical and educational sential for early childhood teachers to have are the basis for an innovative the skills necessary to identify and help program of focusing on the processes and these children. Teachers must recognize potential of children's learning, the symbolic the critical warning signs of a young child meanings of knowledge, and how use who may not be learning. In addition, teach­ that knowledge in children's best interests ers must know how to make modifications, (New, 1998). Our goal is to move toward which include individualized instructional folding behavioral perspectives into that strategies for these children. Unfortunately, convergence, along with Reggio and DAP. teachers are not receiving the type oftrain- · We. have described how DAP has changed ing in higher education institutions that is over the years with still another position needed for this kind ofpreschool intervention · statement in the process of emerging. (Chang, Early, & Winton, 2005). Teachers We have described the value that Reggio who receive more training on how to work Emilia has placed on children's ability to with children with disabilities feel more .create beyond stage expectations. We have confident and have more positive attitudes described the combination of the philoso­ toward (Warash, Curtis, & Mor­ phies of Reggio Emilia and DAP. It is now gan, 2006). Teachers need help bringing time to integrate the theory and practices the practices of the early childhood teacher of Skinner (1948, 1953, 1954, 1968) and and the special education teacher together. those who have built upon his ideas into The early childhood teacher needs strate­ the developmentally appropriate classroom. gies and skills to work with young children Just as Reggio Emilia has entered the early who have learning or behavior challenges childhood arena, it is now time to disregard in order to capitalize on the advantages of prejudices, cross theoretical battle lines, early intervention. Without the expertise and see how the work of Skinner and ap­ to implement appropriate instructional plied behavior analysts can inform practice strategies, teachers become frustrated and in early childhood classrooms. We have de­ children do not receive needed interventions. scribed earlier how this work is ultimately · Intervening early applies not only to young aimed at the same outcome of developing

446 SYNTHESIS OF APPLIED BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS AND DAP

I '1 independent learners. Applied behavior exhibit behaviors that impede their progress . analysts have developed practices that are to become competent learners. Teachers \ developmentally appropriate when used in need specific techniques to incorporate in a developmentally sensitive manner. the classroom, techniques that can be wo­ The WVU Nursery School incorporates ven into the developmentally appropriate developmentally appropriate practices, classroom environment, so that teachers can uses Reggio Emilia approaches, and has arrange learning environments for learners recently incorporated a behavioral model of and help them become competent learners in intentional teaching called the Competent everyday contexts. For exampfe, teachers Learner Model (CLM) (Tucci, Hursh, & could encourage children's participation in a Laitinen, 2004). Within the CLM approach, literacy activity by using peers as models of learning is viewed as primarily a result of that participation and providing assistance individualized instruction across learning as needed for specific learners to success­ environments. CLM integrates Applied fully participate in the activity. CLM gives Behavior Analysis, Direct Instruction, and specific steps on a continuum of directed Precision Teaching to develop Competent to semi-directed to peer-directed, with the Learner Repertoires, focusing on the neces­ necessary environmental conditions to assist sary component skills of observer, listener, in this instruction. . talker, reader, writer, problem solver, and Direct instruction is not a dirty word; it participator. Once these repertoires are constitutes a variety of teaching techniques well-developed, learners become competent that can be used as needed to help children to learn under everyday circumstances in acquire knowledge and skills that allow the absence of formal instruction. , them to successfully learn from their every­ Similar to the DAP and the Reggio Emilia day environment. The problem lies in what approaches, the foundations of the Compe­ early childhood professionals misconstrue tent Learner Model include an appropriate as direct instruction. Direct instruction is curriculum, effective teaching strategies, often referred to in the literature on DAP and ways to structure the learning environ­ as "inappropriate teaching'' or ineffective ment so that children acquire the necessary practice (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997), yet competencies to be competent learners. early childhood educators use direct instruc­ While the language used to describe learn­ tion every day when they work with young ers and their environment differs from what children. Identifying the letters of the al­ developmentally appropriate practitioners phabet is not something children can learn are used to, the goals and core concepts are intuitively but rather is an experience that the same. adults must direct (Epstein, 2007). When The CLM was developed to help educators students have demonstrated their interest learn to use behavioral approaches that have in learning and teachers have carefully demonstrated success with children who are supported the development of that interest, autistic and exhibit other profound behav­ more formal direct instruction programs ioral challenges (Tucci, Hursh, Laitinen, & can help to make that learning efficient and Lambe, 2005). The CLM involves collabora­ generative. Once a student has been taught tive consultations with educators to solve to identify the letters ofthe alphabet reliably pressing behavior problems and coaching across a variety of sizes, colors, and styles, he them through a course of study that prepares can demonstrate that mastery fluently and them to strengthen desirable repertoires and be ready to use that skillful knowledge in weaken undesirable repertoires. In addition other ways that eventually lead to literacy. to working with children who have extreme The rationale for the WVU Nursery School challenges, the authors have found the using the CLM partially came from the CLM valuable to use with children who are book Developmentally Appropriate Practice served in a regular preschool classroom and in Early Childhood Programs (Bredekamp

447 WARASH, CURTIS, HURSH, AND TUCCI

& Copple, 1986, 1997), which .included such not a concern for either parent. At the onset stat•emrents as "children ar·e mo:r·e Hkrely of school, Carlton chose to by himself to achieve a positive sense of self if they with no peer interaction. The first full week experience more success than f:ailnre in of school was challenging for Carlton. We the early school years" and "a child's social expected him to adjust quickly to the three­ ·experience with other rchildren during the hour school day, but instead, Carlton had preschool years helps him/her develop skills many episodes of crying, wetting his pants, and confidence to malm friends in the later throwing himself on the ground, screaming, school years" (p. 40). Research supports hitting, and sucking two ofhis fingers while the assertion that childoon must be able to putting his other hand down his pants. negotiate learning tasks ifthey are to main­ A pattern was beginning to emerge when ·tain '(Brophy, 199.2; Lary, 1990). Carlton was asked to participate in any The CLM coaches educators in arranging teacher-directed activity. He Would "fall and vearranging the parts of their learn­ out," in the teacher's words, and regress to ing environments so that children become using toddler-like behaviors. Other children participartors in the variety of instructional were quickly beginning to think of Carlton ·Conditions that a teacher employs to support as a "baby" and referring to him this way. learning. It was observed over time that Carlton could Consistent with behavioral approaches, engage in his own self-directed play but Developmentally Appropriate Practice in avoided any type ofteacher-directed activity. Early Childhood Programs (Bredekamp & He was often disrespectful to the teacher, Copple, 1997) inch,1.ded the statement that throwing himself on the floor in outbursts "Teachers coach and/or directly guide chil­ of tears. He did not talk with his peers nor dren in the acquisition of specific skins as make any friends. His social problem-solv­ needed" (p. 19). Early ·childhood educato.r:s ing skills were at a minimum and he did not want children to be competent and lifelong perform toileting skills independently. learners; withsome,children, educators must The following scenario was the teacher's expedite the learning of essential skills so first attempt at using specific behavioral rthey can be "in the running." There we some techniques to help Carlton. Carlton was as­ difficulties that children encounter that need sessed across the following five ofseven rep­ to be addvessed dir·ectly :arrd immediately so ·ertoires that constitute skill sets: listener, that they can progress as competent learn­ observer, participator, talker, and problem ers.. It makes sense jn these cases to use be­ solver. For example, an effective participator havioral approaches so that a child can move engages in activities under teacher-directed, farward. The dir,ector of the WVU nursery peer-directed, semi-directed (an assigned school chose the Competent Learner Model task), and non-directed instructional condi­ r(Tucci

44~ SYNTHESIS OF APPLIED BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS AND DAP

to work on the participator repertoire first, and had good verbal skills. The snack scene knowing that the repertoires of problem transpired as follows: As the children began solver and talker would be interrelated washing their hands, Carlton was sucking with participator tasks. The Competent two fingers and watching. The teacher · Learner Model has a curriculum with lesson asked Carlton to take his fingers out of his. plans for various levels of competency with mouth. He did and the teacher responded respect to the repertoires. These were used by saying "thank you." The teacher directed as guidelines by the teacher. The teacher Carlton to the sink to wash his hands. The identified times in the preschool day when four children sat at the small table with the she could construct situations in which teacher. The teacher prompted the children Carlton could respond to directions and by asking what they should say to the assis­ questions and, more importantly, how to tant teacher passing out snack. All replied increase the value of his participation with by saying "thank you," except for Carlton. carefully designed use of items and activi­ The teacher individually prompted Carlton ties that Carlton preferred. Throughout the as to ·what to say. He said "thank you" and semester, the teacher worked with Carlton the teacher socially reinforced this response in the classroom, using specific lessons that while he proceeded to suck his fingers. The she modified based on her observations and teacher reminded him about his hands. The assessments. teacher asked the children, "How do you ask The following is an example of how the for a drink?" and they responded by saying, teacher set up a lesson during snack time. "please." Carlton mimicked this in an echoic Midway into the school year, she used snack manner and the teacher reinforced his re­ time as an opportunity to work on some sponse. The teacher began a conversation social skills. This snack-time lesson is an by asking a child what they had for lunch. example of a natural occurrence when the After the child responded, she told Carlton teacher elaborated on a small-group lesson. to ask the question to one of the other chil­ Snack is a favorite time for most children, dren. She modeled the words for Carlton. and Carlton was no exception. The nursery Each time Carlton asked a question, even school routine included having snack with if he just echoed the teacher, she used so­ small groups of children to maximize op­ cial reinforcers. To the other children, this portunities for conversation. The teacher was like a game, but for Carlton this was arranged for Carlton to practice in a peer a teacher-directed activity in which good situation in which he had the opportunity to modeling was occurring. · respond appropriately. The teacher arranged Having Carrie, a peer, to assist with for an extra snack time with a small group Carlton was productive. Carrie was re­ of children among whom she designated the warding, and putting her in the teacher­ players in this scenario. Because Carrie directed snack activity was beneficial. The (pseudonym), another 4-year-old classmate, teacher wanted to establish a new level talked to Carlton on occasion and he seemed of participation whereby Carlton was en­ interested in her, the teacher placed Carrie gaged in social conversation. The teacher at the snack table with him. Sometimes wanted to weaken the existing behaviors of Carlton would position himself near Carri,e disrespectfulness, such as yelling, saying during free play time. The teacher encour­ "no," and crying. Carlton benefited from aged Carrie to play with Carlton during free social reinforcers, and pairing Carrie with play and they became "buddies" later in the Carlton at this teacher-directed activity school year. was particularly effective. The teacher The teacher decided to pair Carlton and wanted Carlton to interact and answer the Carrie together during this teacher-directed teacher's questions; any approximation was snack activity. The other children she chose reinforced. At first, Carlton's conversation for the extra snack were also good models was mimicking and echoic. The teacher

449 WARASH, CURTIS, HURSH, AND TUCCI

incrementally reinforced the responses, us­ research articles on developmentally appro­ ing prompts to encourage correct responses. priate assessment (e.g., Hyson, Hirsh-Pasek, As the snack time conversations progressed, & Rescorla, 1990; Martin, 1999; Niemeyer, Carlton's performance became more inde­ Cassidy, Collins, & Taylor, 1999). Obser­ pendent of the teacher's prompts. vation, when coupled with documentation Throughout the year, the teacher contin­ from Reggio approaches, becomes a particu- . ued to use various teacher-directed,' semi- . larly powerful way to know and appreciate directed, and peer-directed activities for children and helps teachers know when to Carlton. Prior to beginning the designed intervene to help children (Jablon, Dombro, teacher-directed lessons, the parents had & Dichtelmiller, 2007). These practices are helped to establish a list of potential rein­ vital components of DAP and are consis­ forcers. Different schedules of reinforcement tent with behavioral strategies. Excellent were used in order to establish behaviors to teachers are excellent observers of student · support the various repertoires. Initially, behavior. DAP and behavioral perspectives continuous reinforcement helped to establish both insist on the use of careful observation Carlton's participation; later, intermittent of children as the basis for selecting appro­ reinforcement helped to strengthen and priate teaching techniques and learning maintain participation. opportunities. Some would ask, "Before trying behavioral Many early childhood teachers are ask­ techniques, how would the teacher have ing for help when it comes to working with helped Carlton? Would the same results children who have challenging behaviors. have been achieved?" Prior to using a be­ Deep understanding and facility with tools havioral approach, the teacher would have for working with children who have special discussed the issues relevant to Carlton with needs are missing in many current early the director. The strategies employed might childhood classrooms, because teachers are have included some of the same techniques, not receiving adequate training for special but not with the degree of understanding of education (Chang et al., 2005). Whether it how Applied Behavior Analysis 'and Direct is the Competent Learner Model or another Instruction, if done correctly, can benefit behavioral approach, teachers need specific the child with behaviors that are inhibiting skills to help children with behaviors that his/her learning. Whether it is through the impede learning. Once children become Competent Leamer Model or some other way talkers, participators, observers, listen­ to learn and apply behavioral approaches, the ers, and problems solvers, they fit into the teacher needs a systematic and progressive classroom and can take full advantage of means ofimplementing intentional teaching developmentally appropriate curricula. techniques. Conducting a functional analy­ sis, setting up an appropriate environment, Conclusions and knowing when to use teacher-directed, Our goal for this article was to explain op­ peer-directed, and semi-directed lessons, tions and expand upon what is considered along with choosing proper contingencies, appropriate for early childhood educators. requires thought and practice. Teachers also Simply put, DAP means teaching young need skills, practice, and support for doing children in ways that are effective for their detailed observations, developing formats, developmental skills as individuals and as a and effectively using reinforcers. group, and in ways that help children reach As they do when adapting Reggio, teach­ challenging and achievable goals (Copple & ers have to adapt the parts of the behavioral Bredekamp, 2006). A behavioral approach techniql.leS that are useful for their class­ teaches instructors to formulate, deliver, room and for their specific children. Obser­ and monitor programming for challeng­ vation always has been a primary focus of ing learners (Tucci et al., 2004). Within DAP and has been addressed in numerous the Reggio Emilia approach, teachers and

450 SYNTHESIS OF APPLIED BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS AND DAP

parents view children as capable and foster serving children from birth through age 8 (Ex­ their intellectual development through cre­ pandeded.). Washington, DC: National Associa­ ativity, symbolic representation, research, tion for the Education of Young Children. and documentation (Malaguzzi, 19'98). All Bredekamp, S., & Copple, C. (Eds). (1986). De· of these frameworks can improve the lives velopmentally appropriate practice for early of children. If children do not have the childhood programs. Washington, DC: Na­ competencies to listen, observe, participate, tional Association for the Education of Young talk, and problem solve, then how can they Children. function in a developmentally appropriate Bredekamp, S., & Copple, C. (Eds). (1997). De­ classroom or go beyond what Reggio suggests velopmentally appropriate practice for early are their developmental potentials? Certain childhood programs (Rev. ed.). Washington, skills must be in place to take advantage DC: National Association for the Education of of what existing early childhood programs Young Children. have to offer. Brooks, J. G., & Brooks, M. G. (1993). The case Malaguzzi (1998) stated, "Like Piaget, the for the constructivist classroom. Alexandria, VA: aim of teaching is to provide conditions of Association for Supervision and Curriculum learning" (p. 83). Is this not what Skinner Development. (1968) said as well? Malaguzzi says that a Brophy, J. (1992). Probing the subtleties of sub­ unifying theory of education that sums up ject matter teaching. Educational Leadership, all the phenomena of educating does not 49(7), 4-8. exist and never will. Educators must act Bruner, J. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. according to their own personal theories Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (which are informed by the work of others) Champagne, P., & Tausky, C. (1976). Alterna­ and their own direct experience of working . tive perspectives in education: The radical with children. "The validation of the practi­ school or reinforcement theory? Behaviorism, cal work of the teacher is the only rich 'text­ 4, 231-243. book' on which to count for aid in developing Chang, F., Early, D., & Winton, P. (2005). Early educational reflections" (p. 86). childhood teacher preparation in special educa­ "Sharing theories is a response to uncertain­ tion at 2-year and 4-year institutions of higher ty. This is the reason why any theory, in order education. Journal ofEarly Intervention, 27(2), to exist, needs to be expressed, communicated, 10-24. and listened to by others" (Clemens, 2006, p. Clemens, S. G. (2006). Sylvia Ashton-Warner goes 28). This is what we hope to accomplish by to Reggio Emilia. Dimensions of Early Child· the collaboration described in this article. We hood, 34(2), 26-31. encourage our readers to consider embarking Cobb, N. J. (2001). The child: Infants, children, on such collaborations of their own with oth­ and adolescents. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield ers willing to share their perspectives and Publishing. practices. If we focus on what arrangements Coleman, M. R., Buysse, V., & Neitzel, J. (2006). enhance our students'lchildren's participation Recognizing and response: An early intervening in well-designed learning activities, then we system for young children at risk for learning will develop competent learners-those who disabilities. Full Report. Chapel Hill, NC: The learn under everyday conditions. This is what University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, · parents, teachers, and society strive to achieve FPG Institute. . fur all of us. Copple, C., & Bredekamp, S. (2006). Basics ofde ­ velopmentally appropriate practice. Washington, References DC: National Association for the Education of Berk, L . E. (2003). Child development (6th ed.). Young Children. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Dewey, J. (1971). The child and the curriculum; Bredekamp, S. (Ed.). (1987). Developmentally ap­ The school and society. Chicago: University of propriate practice in early childhood programs Chicago Press. (Original work published 1900)

451 WARASH, CURTIS, HURSH, AND TUCCI

Dewey, J. (1998). How we think: A restatement of and Company. the relation ofreflective thinking to the educatipe Kamii, C. K., & Radin, N. L. (1967). A frame- · process. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. (Original work for a preschool curriculum based upon work published 1933) Piage.t's theory. Journal of Creative Behavior, Dewey, J. (1971). Experience and education. New . 1, 3,]4-324, York: Collier Books. (Original work published Katz, L. (1998). What can we learn from Reg­ 1938) gio Emilia? Iri C. Edwards, L. Gandini, & G. Dickinson, D. K (2002). Shifting images of devel­ Forman (Eds.), The hw~dred languages of chil­ opmentally appropriate practice as seen through dren.: The Reggio Emilia approach-advanced different lenses. Educational Researcher, 31(1), reflections, {2nd ed., pp. 2,7/'-45). G:reeEwich, C'f: 26-32. Ablex. Edwards, S. (2005). Children's learning and Koralek, D. (2006). Professional development: developmental potential: Examining the theo­ Revisiting the NAEYC position statement on retical informants of early childhood curricula developmentally appropriate practice. Young from the educator's perspective. Early Years, Children, 61(5· ), 63. 25(1), 67-80. Lary, R. T. (1990). Successfui students. Education Edwards, C., Gandini, L., & Forman, G. (Eds.). Issues, 3(2), 11-17. (1998). The hundred languages ofchildren: The Malaguzzi, L. (1998). History; ideas,, and basic Reggio Emilia approach-advanced reflections philosophy: An with Leila Gamlini. (2nd ed.). Greenwich, CT: Ablex. ]n C. Edwards,,JL . •.Garuli~ni, & G ..Forman (Eds.), Epstein, A. (2007). The intentional teacher: Choos­ The hundred languages ofchildren: The Reggio ing the best strategies for young children's learn­ Emilia approach-advanced reflections (2nd ed., ing. Washington, DC: National Association for pp. 49-97). Greenwich, CT: Ablex. the Education of Young Children. Mallory, B., & New, R. (Eds.). (1994). Diversity and Gardner, H. (1985). The mind's new : A developmentally approprinte practices: Chal­ history of the cognitive revolution. New York: lenges for early childhood education. New York: . Teachers GoJilege Press. Gardner, H. (1998). Foreword: Complementary Martin, S. (1999). Take a look: Observation and perspectives on Reggio Emilia In C. Edwards, portfolio assessment in early childhood (2nd ed.). L. Gandini, & G. Forman (Eds.), The hundred Readlilil!g, MA: Addi!s~m-Wesley. languages of children: The Reggio Emilia ap­ National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. proach-advanced reflections (2nd ed., pp. xv­ Department of Education. (2006). Digest of xviii). Greenwich, CT: Ablex. Education Statistics, 2005 (NCES 2006-030). Gremmo, M., & Riley, P. (1995). , self­ Retrieved February 5, 2008, from http://nces. direction and self access in language teaching ed .g~twl\l rogr ams/digestii:I05/tah}es/dt05,_ 050. and learning: The history of an idea. System, asp 23, 151-164. National Head Start Training and Technical Hyson, M., Hirsh-Pasek, K., & Rescorla, L. (1990). Assistance Resource Center. (2003). Head The Classroom Practices Inventory: An observa­ Start leaders guide to positive child outcomes. tion instrument based on NAEYC's guidelines Arlington, VA: Authocr. for developmentally appropriate practices for New, R. S. (1998). 'flloory and praxis ~n Reggi(l) 4- and 5-year-o]d children. Early Childhood Emilia: They know what they are doing, and Research Quarterly, 5, 475-494. why. ]n C. Edwards,. L. Gandini, & G. Fonnan Jablon, R. J., Dombro, A. L., & Dichtelmiller, M. (Eds.), The hundred languages of children: L. (2007). The power of observation for birth The Reggio Emilia approach-advanced re­ through eight. Washington, DC: Teaching flutions. (2;nd ed,, IDP· 2'61-284). Greeriwiclil, Strategies. · CT: Abiex. Kagan, J. (1978). On the need for relativism. The Niemeyer, J., Cassidy, D., Collins, E., & Taylor, growth of the child: Reflections on human de­ B. (1999). Facilitating individual planning velopment {pp. 45-61). New York: W. W. Norton for young chi]dren with disabilities in devel-

452 SYNTHESIS OF APPLIED BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS AND DAP

opmentally appropriate classrooms. Early Skinner, B. F. (1948). Walden two. New York: Childhood Education Journal, 26, 255-262. The Macmillan Company. · No' Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and human be­ 107-110, 115 Stat.1425 (2002). Retrieved havior. New York: The Free Press. January 15, 2008, from www.ed.gov/policy/ Skinner, B. F. (1954). The science of learning elsec/leg/e sea02/107-110. pdf and the art ofteaching. Harvard Educational Phillips, C., & Bredekamp, S. (1998). Reconsid­ Review, 24, 86-97. ering early childhood education in the United Skinner, B. F. (1968). The technology of teach­ States: Reflections from our encounters with ing. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Reggio Emilia. In C. Edwards, L. Gandini, & The ten best schools in the world, and what we G. Forman (Eds.), The hundred languages of can learn from them. (1991, December 2). children: The Reggio Emilia approach-ad­ Newsweek, pp. 50-59. vanced reflections (2nd ed., pp. 439-454). Tucci, V., Hursh, D. E., & Laitinen, R. E. (2004). Greenwich, CT: Ablex. The Competent Learner Model (CLM): A Piaget, J. (1937). Principal factors determining merging ofApplied Behavior Analysis, Direct intellectual evolution from childhood to adult Instruction, and Precision Teaching. In D. life. In E. D. Adrian et al. (Eds.), Factors J. Moran & R. Malott (Eds.), Evidence-based determining human behavior (pp. 32-48). Ox­ educational methods (pp. 109-123). San Diego, ford, England: Harvard University Press. CA: Elsevier. Piaget, J. (1955). The language and thought of Tucci, V., Hursh, D., Laitinen, R., & Lambe, the child. New York: Meridian Books. A. {2005). Competent Learner Model for in­ Pia get, J. (1962). The stages of the intellectual dividuals with autism/PDD. Exceptionality, development of the child. Bulletin ofthe Men­ 13(1), 55-63. ninger Clinic, 26, 120-128. Vaughn, S., & Fuchs, L. (2003). Redefining Piaget, J. (1971). The construction ofreality in learning disabilities as inadequate response the child. New York: Ballantine. to instruction: The promise and potential Piaget, J. (2000). Piaget's theory. Childhood problems. Learning Disabilities Research and : The essential readings Practice, 18, 137-146. (pp. 33-47). Blackwell Publithing. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The Santrock, J. W. (2001). Child development (9th development of higher psychological process. ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Shepard, L. A., & Smith, M. L. (1988). Esca­ Warash, B., Curtis, R., & Morgan, K. (in press). lating academic demands in kindergarten: Attitudes toward inclusion in preschool set­ Counterproductive policies. Elementary tings. Journal ofEarly Childhood Education School Journal, 89, 135-145. and Family Review.

453