The belief that you can teach anyone anything if you break learning into discrete pieces and provide extrinsic rewards can be true based off of certain circumstances. In the circumstance of teaching English language learners and in depth learning, direct instruction can be challenging. This kind of instruction makes me think of the question I asked myself in my first blog post about rushing children to learn. Direct learning is based off of scripted lesson plans and is designed to essentially accelerate the child's learning. As an early educator it is never my goal to have a child memorize correct answers and be drilled on answering with correct responses. By having them memorize things doesn't help them make connections to their learning.
When a child is a English language learner or a immigrant, it is already a challenge to communicate basic needs and wants. So does teaching them through direct instruction work would be a question of debate. If we teach from a scripted lesson plan, we a not teaching based on a child's interest. And if we frequently to assessments which is a feature of direct instruction, we may be focusing on how much a child gives us the correct answer versus taking the time to truly see if he/she understands what we have been trying to teach them.
This school year I have two children that a English language learners, a child that speaks Serbian and child that speaks Samoan. At the beginning of the year I wondered how I would communicate and interact with them meaningfully. I am happy to say that 6 months later, both children are speaking in English completely in the classroom and use 3-4 word sentences. The parents of theses children say they hear much more English at home and are continuously labeling what they see and hear. Each child is able to interact with other children and staff in the room. When it comes to teaching, we use lots of repetition, gestures, and simple words. I don't have a script I follow and as much as they are learning, I am learning with them to.
When I meet with parents during conference time, a very common question is "when are you going to start to teach reading". My response to each parent is different based off of what their goals are for their child and the development of the child individually. In early childhood education, there is a progression to reading. The child will first learn to recognize the letters, learn the phonetics before reading. For example, before a child can write his/her name, they will learning to spell it and recognize the letters before writing it. I understand that children start to learn to read early in elementary years so the thought of teaching them early sounds practical. However, a early childhood educator knows to teach a child based on his/her individual needs and teaches what is developmentally appropriate.
This weeks readings made me think of these questions: "Do some aspects of my teaching reflect direct instruction, and is it effective?" and "How can we change the view of importance of phonetics/learning to read among parents and legislators?"
Ashlyn,
ReplyDeleteSo many points in your article stood out to me, but this sentence, " As an early educator it is never my goal to have a child memorize correct answers and be drilled on answering with correct responses." stood out the most!
Thank you for having this belief! Your students are extremely fortunate to have an educator who isn't caught in her own web of biases! I personally do not see how instructors can hold young children up to such high expectations. I can almost guarantee when said instructors were in preschool, they were floating around in campus like academic wizards. Why do these humans have such large standards for children? Is this a side effect from legislative influences? Pressure they receive from parents? Or pressure received from the school board, who imposes standardized programs from the government? When did 'make learning fun' become so controversial that facilities are teaching educators 'how to have fun'?
As for phonics vs whole language, I firmly believe it depends on the student which method to use (more than the other), just as long as we encourage children to read!!!
...they were NOT*** floating around...
DeleteI also agree with Cassandra about your statement "As an early educator it is never my goal to have a child memorize correct answers and be drilled on answering with correct response." This is very strong statement and I feel we as early educators should all feel this way. We are in the division of Early Childhood Education to help nurture a child in their developmental growth. I sat in a parent/teacher conference meeting today and listened to what my daughter's teacher had to say about her reading skills and what they are currently learning in school. I asked her teacher, "when did it get so complicated?" From learning how to read to learning how to figure out a simple math problem. Educators are encouraged and expected to teach children a certain way in order for them to have their test scores boosted up.
ReplyDeleteHi Ashlyn,
ReplyDeleteYour example demonstrates ways in which language learning can take place without scripted lesson plans. Children who do not speak Mainstream American English (MAE) or who are ELL have added challenges when they come to school that go beyond just the "academics" - just being able to have their basic needs taken care of can be challenging. Still, why do you think the presence of negative reinforcements might be worse for children who do not speak MAE? How could this influence their approach to learning in the long run?
I wonder why do you think phonics is so prevalent in schools? Why do parents and legislators find it so attractive? What can we do to highlight the ways we teach young children to read and write without having to resort to using practices that might not be appropriate for young children? Thanks!