Living in Hawaii, we are truly blessed to be called the melting pot of all cultures. It is no secret that this island we live on embraces differences and is accepting no matter what language you speak or what color your skin is. As teachers, we need to display this type of acceptance in our classrooms if we want the children in our classrooms to do the same. Professor Ladson-Billings gave three components of culturally relevant pedagogy. I really appreciated point number two when she said "an attempt to develop all students cultural competence". This means that we help children to understand their culture while learning about another. As teachers, it may be easier to teach what is familiar to ourselves and what we know. However, it does not give the children or us a chance to learn something new.
In my classroom, this year I am happy to say that I have several students that speak another language fluently and have lived in different states/countries. The children who speak different languages are eager to share words that they can translate and even bring books in their native language from home. By allowing these children to express themselves from their culture in front of their peers enthusiastically, it is exposing the other children to something that is unfamiliar and new.
In this day and age, it is no lie that society bases everything on what a person looks like. However, children have a gift of being non-judgmental, accepting, and loving to each other no matter what their wearing or what kind of hairstyle they have. If we want our children to continue this "gift", we as early childhood educators need to embrace differences in our classroom and keep trying to make everything how everyone thinks it should look like.
When it comes to the terms achievement "gap" or "debt", I agreed with Professor Ladson-Billings when she said that "gap makes it seem like you need to catch up. The debt, for me helps to evoke some shared responsibility". I relate this to the achievements in my classroom. Families are always concerned about their child hitting crucial milestones, however they blame or put the pressure on the teacher when their child doesn't achieve at their expected time line. How can we as educators get families out of the mindset "its the teachers job to catch my child up?" After this reading I can ask myself "how can I share the "debt" instead of feeling the need to always be the one to catch up?"
Monday, April 6, 2015
Sunday, April 5, 2015
Blog Posting- P8
The word curriculum can carry a variety of meanings depending on what age group you work with, the school you teach at, and your own personal values as a teacher. I think it is very important to explain to the families in your classroom, what curriculum is used in the class. There are benefits and a negatives to standard curriculum and emergent curriculum. Standard curriculum generalizes the children instead of looking at each as an individual. This type of curriculum does not focus on the child's individual interest of knowledge. Yet, this curriculum is very responsive to the needs of learning objectives/goals in the large educational system. This type of curriculum allow the teacher to plan well in advance and can maybe even mimic another teachers lesson plans or activities since the lessons are based of a set planning and assessment.
On the other hand, the goal of emergent curriculum is to respond to the individual interest of every child. This learning is self-directed with no right or wrong answer. As I always say, "its not about the product but the process that counts". This curriculum focuses on the interactions between the child, teachers, and environment. Emergent curriculum takes time and effort to develop and it means that the teacher is focusing on observing the children's play, needs, and interest. Focusing on all of this in a full classroom (I have a class of 25) can prove time consuming and maybe even a little overwhelming. This type of curriculum is not based on outcomes, rather on how the child arrived at his/her discovery (learning) which is the best part!
In my classroom I make sure that I display emergent curriculum in my classroom. As much as my center does not follow rigid standards, we do base our learning and periodic assessments on the Hawaii Early Learning Development Standards (H.E.L.D.S). After reading this article I asked myself "Do I have a clear curriculum set up in my room?'. And another question that comes up is "how can I accommodate my families that are focused on academics to be open to an emergent curriculum?". The diversity of outcomes my families have for their child's preschool experience can vary. Some may say that they want their child to develop strong social and emotional skills, while others make it clear that academics (writing, reading, math) is their highest priority. But is there a way to mesh a standard and emergent curriculum together?
On the other hand, the goal of emergent curriculum is to respond to the individual interest of every child. This learning is self-directed with no right or wrong answer. As I always say, "its not about the product but the process that counts". This curriculum focuses on the interactions between the child, teachers, and environment. Emergent curriculum takes time and effort to develop and it means that the teacher is focusing on observing the children's play, needs, and interest. Focusing on all of this in a full classroom (I have a class of 25) can prove time consuming and maybe even a little overwhelming. This type of curriculum is not based on outcomes, rather on how the child arrived at his/her discovery (learning) which is the best part!
In my classroom I make sure that I display emergent curriculum in my classroom. As much as my center does not follow rigid standards, we do base our learning and periodic assessments on the Hawaii Early Learning Development Standards (H.E.L.D.S). After reading this article I asked myself "Do I have a clear curriculum set up in my room?'. And another question that comes up is "how can I accommodate my families that are focused on academics to be open to an emergent curriculum?". The diversity of outcomes my families have for their child's preschool experience can vary. Some may say that they want their child to develop strong social and emotional skills, while others make it clear that academics (writing, reading, math) is their highest priority. But is there a way to mesh a standard and emergent curriculum together?
Monday, March 16, 2015
Blog Posting- P7
In my experience of teaching so far, I have learned that it is important to parents to find out what their child is going to learn and how they are going to learn in my classroom. I sometimes feel intimated by this question, because I know that my explanation can potentially make or break the families decision to enroll their child into our program. However, I am very careful to explain that we have standards and learning objectives for our activities and we use different themes/units to capture the children's interest and learning. I liked how this reading explained that "project work" is a growing trend toward integrating the curriculum. When you think of early education, you may not necessarily think "projects" since most times doing projects means a lengthy process.
In my classroom, I use themes/units as a way to integrate the children's interest and knowledge to expand their learning. For example, in the month of January the theme was Transportation. Since there are so many types of transportation and one month isn't enough time to go in-depth about each one, I asked the children to name types of transportation they were interested in. During circle time we did a charting activity that listed each child's response of what type of transportation they wanted to learn about. We looked at pictures of the different types of transportation and in two days of having a large group discussion, they children decided on 5 different types of transportation, airplane, jet, school bus, car, and boat. The activities that were planned for the month were focused on these transportations, but if a child did ask about a motorcycle, monster truck, or helicopter we would address their interest. To make this theme relevant for each child, I asked each family to bring in a picture of the transportation they use to get to school. Some brought pictures of cars, the city bus, walking, and even golf carts. I truly believe that when you can relate learning to the child's life, it becomes real and exciting.
To be honest, I have never done the project approach in my classroom. I believe that you can still pose questions, generate theories, and make predictions while using a theme/unit approach. I think these things can happen during conversations and while working in large/small groups. Doing a project approach is something I would like to try especially after reading this article. When doing a project approach, it will take time. It would be important to observe the children in your class and really get to know what is important/ interesting to them. Informing the parents about the project would be essential since it is always a goal to have the learning carry to the home also. I ask myself "If I had to create a project right now for my class, what would it be?" And I also wonder, "how could I use the project approach with a small group or even an individual child when my class size is 25?"
In my classroom, I use themes/units as a way to integrate the children's interest and knowledge to expand their learning. For example, in the month of January the theme was Transportation. Since there are so many types of transportation and one month isn't enough time to go in-depth about each one, I asked the children to name types of transportation they were interested in. During circle time we did a charting activity that listed each child's response of what type of transportation they wanted to learn about. We looked at pictures of the different types of transportation and in two days of having a large group discussion, they children decided on 5 different types of transportation, airplane, jet, school bus, car, and boat. The activities that were planned for the month were focused on these transportations, but if a child did ask about a motorcycle, monster truck, or helicopter we would address their interest. To make this theme relevant for each child, I asked each family to bring in a picture of the transportation they use to get to school. Some brought pictures of cars, the city bus, walking, and even golf carts. I truly believe that when you can relate learning to the child's life, it becomes real and exciting.
To be honest, I have never done the project approach in my classroom. I believe that you can still pose questions, generate theories, and make predictions while using a theme/unit approach. I think these things can happen during conversations and while working in large/small groups. Doing a project approach is something I would like to try especially after reading this article. When doing a project approach, it will take time. It would be important to observe the children in your class and really get to know what is important/ interesting to them. Informing the parents about the project would be essential since it is always a goal to have the learning carry to the home also. I ask myself "If I had to create a project right now for my class, what would it be?" And I also wonder, "how could I use the project approach with a small group or even an individual child when my class size is 25?"
Monday, February 9, 2015
Blog Posting -P3
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?"
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?"
Monday, January 26, 2015
Blog Posting- P1
Every parents wants what is best for their child, and every educator wants to see every child succeed. When we get children ready for school or try to prepare them for what is to come, it may be misinterpreted as "rushing" the child to be ready for school. If we look through the lens of the Maturationist Theory, we will understand that young children will learn naturally and automatically as they grow older. But if we look through the lens of the Environmentalist Theory, we will also understand that young children learn through their environment. My personal belief is that children learn both ways and one theory isn't better than the other. The change in attitude about school readiness for young children has changed because of increased expectations in Kindergarten or grade school. Because there is so much required for young children to know upon entering Kindergarten, the highly structured learning starts in early childhood classrooms (preschools). As early educators, we don't want to rush or force a child to learn so many things, but its almost necessary if we want them to succeed after they leave our classroom. We all know that young children thrive on structure, so by creating routines, expectations, and an environment that supports learning will help children develop and promote school readiness.
Piaget and Vygotsky continue to have a great influence on early childhood development. Although, they both have similarities in their influences, they also have differences. The greatest difference between the two is that Vygotsky viewed social interaction as central to the developmental process, whereas Piaget emphasized the children exploratory behaviors in the external world as central to development. I favor the Piagetian theory. Like Piaget, I believe that children learn from their actions and their environment. Also, a child's learning and development is linked to their physical and social environments. In my classroom, it is my goal to create a loving, safe, nurturing environment. You can have the biggest classroom, with the best materials and equipment, but without the appropriate interactions and knowledge of development, children will not be set up for success.
From this weeks readings I had to reflect closely on my own teaching and ask "Am I rushing my children to learn what's important right now, or am I focusing to much of what they need to know later". Another question is "Could there be a way to blend Piagetian and Vygotskian theories appropriately and effectively?"
Piaget and Vygotsky continue to have a great influence on early childhood development. Although, they both have similarities in their influences, they also have differences. The greatest difference between the two is that Vygotsky viewed social interaction as central to the developmental process, whereas Piaget emphasized the children exploratory behaviors in the external world as central to development. I favor the Piagetian theory. Like Piaget, I believe that children learn from their actions and their environment. Also, a child's learning and development is linked to their physical and social environments. In my classroom, it is my goal to create a loving, safe, nurturing environment. You can have the biggest classroom, with the best materials and equipment, but without the appropriate interactions and knowledge of development, children will not be set up for success.
From this weeks readings I had to reflect closely on my own teaching and ask "Am I rushing my children to learn what's important right now, or am I focusing to much of what they need to know later". Another question is "Could there be a way to blend Piagetian and Vygotskian theories appropriately and effectively?"
Monday, January 19, 2015
Introduction
Hi! My name is Ashlyn Nishimura and I am pursuing my Bachelor degree in Early Childhood Education at UHWO. I am a teacher at Seagull School at Ko Olina, working with 3 year olds. Our school is currently in the process of opening our seventh classroom. It is really exciting to see the demand for early education on the west side of our island. While I am not in the classroom, I enjoy spending my time traveling with my husband, bowling, and trying out new places to eat!
When looking through the list of programs, I realized I wasn't familiar with many of them. I chose the programs based on the needs of the children that are in my class currently and how it many benefit the children and families, and I chose programs I have heard of but never looked at the details of the program.
The first program I chose is the Cognitively Oriented Curriculum Model. I believe that even though children are the same age, no two children will develop exactly the same. I think that as a teacher, I need to be aware of each child's developmental abilities and expand their learning on what they already know. The second program is The New School Approach to Follow Through. My classroom is divided by 7 learning centers with the objective of having teacher directed activities but also child-initiated activities or learning. I hope that learning about this program will give me better insight on how to use my learning centers to encourage curiosity. The last program I will compare is the Behavior Analysis Approach. Our school participated in the program Hawaii Preschool Positive Education Program. This program emphasized the importance of positive reinforcement. By learning more about this program I hope to continue to use this method to also learn about behavior analysis methods.
By comparing these programs, I will be able to implement them into my classroom and truly accommodate and meet the needs of each child and family in my classroom. Learning about these programs will also give better insight into how other teachers implement learning the classroom.
When looking through the list of programs, I realized I wasn't familiar with many of them. I chose the programs based on the needs of the children that are in my class currently and how it many benefit the children and families, and I chose programs I have heard of but never looked at the details of the program.
The first program I chose is the Cognitively Oriented Curriculum Model. I believe that even though children are the same age, no two children will develop exactly the same. I think that as a teacher, I need to be aware of each child's developmental abilities and expand their learning on what they already know. The second program is The New School Approach to Follow Through. My classroom is divided by 7 learning centers with the objective of having teacher directed activities but also child-initiated activities or learning. I hope that learning about this program will give me better insight on how to use my learning centers to encourage curiosity. The last program I will compare is the Behavior Analysis Approach. Our school participated in the program Hawaii Preschool Positive Education Program. This program emphasized the importance of positive reinforcement. By learning more about this program I hope to continue to use this method to also learn about behavior analysis methods.
By comparing these programs, I will be able to implement them into my classroom and truly accommodate and meet the needs of each child and family in my classroom. Learning about these programs will also give better insight into how other teachers implement learning the classroom.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)