Tag Archives: early childhood

Educators Thoughts On Teaching the Way Children Learn

Leave a reply

 

A group of educators recently decided to meet on Zoom to discuss what we could do about the disturbing direction of Early Childhood education in the New York City public schools.  Years that should be filled with opportunities for exploration, inquiry, social interaction and play have turned into days filled with scripted, direct instruction. This leaves very little, and in many cases, no, opportunities for joyful, engaged learning and informative, insightful and fulfilling  teaching. We have composed a proposal that we will present to Mayor-Elect Zohran Mamdani and to his eduction transition team.

Ideally, we would like our proposal to be circulated as widely as possible. To this end, we hope that you will share it with anyone who is particularly concerned with the education of  children, 4 to 8 years old.

We would also love to have your feedback.

Here is who we are .

Anna Allanbrook    (retired principal, The Brooklyn New School)

Nancy Cardwell Ph.D  (faculty member, Graduate Program in Early Childhood Education, School of Education , The City College of New York)

Renee Dinnerstein  (Early Childhood Literacy Consultant)

Beverly Falk Ed.D  (director, the High-Quality Early Learning Project and Professor/Director Emerita, Graduate Program in Early Childhood Education , The School of Education, The City College of New York)

Deborah Meier,  (founder and retired director , Central Park East schools)

Lauren Monaco  (early childhood educator and activist)

Gil Schmerler, Ed.D ( retired director.  Leadership for Educational Change, Bank Street College of Education)


                                                                Our proposal
We are a group of NYC educators – founders/principals of learner-centered schools, faculty of the City College School of Education and Bank Street College of Education, and teacher/parent activists for learner-centered education. We write to share some of our thoughts/concerns/recommendations for the NYC Public Schools that we hope the Mamdani administration will consider and put into action. While there are many structural/budgetary issues that need to be addressed, we are especially concerned with early childhood education and will focus on this – our area of experience/expertise. What follows are some of our concerns with recommendations for how to address them.

1. We believe that the NYC Public Schools (NYCPS) view of early childhood is too narrow.

Currently, early childhood – and the central administrative team overseeing it – considers early childhood to be birth – 4. The nationally recognized professional standard and developmentally-based age range for early childhood is birth – age 8. It is widely accepted in the fields of education, medicine, psychology and neuroscience that during the first 8 years of life optimal development is supported by active learning/play where children have extensive periods for choice and inquiry facilitated by teachers’ responsiveness to children’s questions, interests, and understandings. Young children learn through active involvement with materials and relationships with children and adults. Unfortunately, in too many classrooms there are no opportunities for this: no choice/work time, no materials with which to engage in educative play. Kindergartens throughout the NYC Public Schools do not have choice/work centers, blocks, dramatic play areas, trips, and/or recess. Work sheets and didactic teaching dominate the day, with brief periods of ‘playtime’ given as a reward at the end of the day. The absence of educative play opportunities in kindergarten through 2nd grade is resulting in increased incidences of anxiety and depression. Some pediatricians have noticed a significant enough pattern to call this ‘play deprivation’.
We recommend instead:
– Align the NYCPS early childhood definition with national, professional, and global standards, birth to age 8 years, specifically to include kindergarten through 2nd grade.
– Give responsibility for young children’s learning in K-2 to the NYCPS early childhood team.
– Ensure that choice/work time be a prominent part of every early childhood classroom where children can make choices, engage in inquiry.
– Ensure early childhood classrooms be amply provisioned with materials for active learning, including (but not limited to) blocks, manipulative materials, dramatic play equipment, books, and art supplies.
– Ensure all children have at least an hour of outdoor play/recess each day

2. We are concerned about the damaging effects of the mandated, scripted curricula implemented in all grade levels.

Developmental and neuroscience research have established the importance of educators’ responsiveness to children’s interests, questions, cultural and linguistic backgrounds. A scripted curriculum does not allow opportunities for the “serve and return” exchanges that neuroscientists point to as critical for optimal brain development. Further, the scripted, generic curriculum doesn’t provide the necessary responsiveness to the diversity of children’s and families’ backgrounds, because the mandated, scripted curriculum does not connect to the children’s backgrounds/contexts/languages. Children and teachers are required to be passive recipients of external forces, rather than dynamic and active participants in their learning as promoted by neuroscientists, psychologists, and pediatricians. Additionally, millions of dollars are being spent on purchasing and enforcing use of these curricula that could be better spent in ways we suggest below.
We recommend instead:
– Center curriculum development around national/state/district/professional standards, for example, those of the National Association for the Education of Young Children
(NAEYC).
– Collaborate with community-based teachers’ and parents’ groups to choose/shape/develop their own curricula that is relevant/connected to the contexts of children’s lives.
– All curricula should be mapped to demonstrate the coverage and alignment with national/state/district/professional standards.
– Offer ongoing, substantive professional development to support educators’ content and pedagogical knowledge to sustain young children’s learning and optimal development.
And/or
– Offer pre-developed curricula, as guides, that integrate young children’s diversity of experiences/languages/cultures, making it clear that the curricula are guides, not mandates.
– Offer ongoing professional development to assist educators in how to be responsive to children’s interests, questions, different strengths and modes of inquiry, cultural/racial/linguistic backgrounds
– Provide active learning/play-based environments that will develop young children’s academic skills, content knowledge, social emotional learning and critical thinking skills to help them distinguish between facts and misinformation.
– Provide time in the school day for young children to exchange ideas, learn to listen to and be respectful of others, and reposition children as well as the teacher as resources for learning in the classroom.
– Provide time for conversations and relationships in the classroom to support the development of empathy and understanding toward others that are critical to learn about and sustain a democratic community in the classroom in preparation for life-long, active civic engagement. For example, in Denmark all children aged 6-16 years have a period in their school day focused on the development of empathy toward others. This contributes to the fact that they are ranked internationally as the happiest society in the world.

3. We are concerned about the reading programs that do not reflect the consensus research from developmental psychologists and neuroscientists about how children learn to read.

We are further concerned about the lengthy periods of time spent on worksheets, passive instruction on phonics, phonemic awareness, and decontextualized skills at the expense of meaning making and other elements of literacy development. Neuroscience advocates for a dual focus on meaning-making elements (content and experience-based knowledge, children’s interests, culture/linguistic backgrounds) in addition to decoding elements (phonics, phonemic awareness, alphabet knowledge etc. See chart below.
We recommend instead:
– Expand the notion of reading development beyond phonics by adding the extensive rich supply of children’s literature to skill instruction in order to capture children’s interests and excitement that has been proven to enhance the literacy learning process.
– Infuse literacy learning into active, project-based learning experiences across all content areas, both fiction and non-fiction. We also urge the use of ‘functional literacy development’ that includes making signs in the block area, writing lists, letters, and labels in dramatic play areas, using charts to document children’s comments, questions, ideas and understandings, and pointing out awareness of environmental print, etc.

4. We are concerned about the overuse of testing that does not support children’s learning and that consumes inordinate amounts of educators’ time.
We recommend instead:
– Encourage and support educators’ use of professional development standards-based performance assessments and multiple forms of data collections mapped to standards. This can include portfolio collections of children’s work, documented observations, and the use of developmental continua mapped to professional, national, state, and district standards. This approach was developed in NYS in the 1990s and early 2000’s and has data to back up its efficacy.

5. We are concerned about the overuse of screens and artificial intelligence in schools.

Developmental and neuroscience psychologists along with pediatricians warn against screen time for children, especially young children under 9 years old. Neural connections that are the brain structures that support learning are consolidated quickly and effectively with ‘serve and return’ relational and in real-life interactions rather than through abstracted online/digital encounters. Additionally, artificial intelligence can be deceptive and keep children from developing the social emotional and relational intelligence necessary for sustained relationships throughout the lifespan as well as developing the skills they need to be critical thinkers and distinguish reality from misinformation.
We recommend instead:
– Limit screen time and the use of artificial intelligence to encourage real-life, in-person interactions that support learners to learn how to be critical thinkers and to distinguish fact from fiction. Limiting screen time is an important support to help children develop social emotional learning to support interactive and project learning.
– Provide ongoing professional development to help educators develop ways to harness technology in developmentally supportive ways to nurture healthy brain development and learning.

6. We are concerned that large numbers of children and families in NYC schools are unhoused, suffer from food insecurity, and/or are in need of comprehensive supports to survive.

Additionally, we see a need for schools to attend to the voices and concerns of parents/families/caregivers in the community and involve them in the learning life of the school.
We recommend:
– Reintroduce the community school model that utilizes the resources of community-based organization such as the Children’s Aid Society to provide the necessary supports like access to food, housing, health screening, vaccines, dental care, hearing exams, eye exams all critical for children’s academic success.
– Create collaborative governance structures that give voice to parents/families/caregivers/community concerns in decisions about the education of their children.

Respectfully submitted (in alphabetical order):
Anna Allanbrook, retired principal, the Brooklyn New School
Nancy Cardwell, Ph.D., faculty member, Graduate Program in Early Childhood Education, School of Education, The City College of New York
Renee Dinnerstein, early childhood literacy consultant
Beverly Falk, Ed.D., director, The High-Quality Early Learning Project and Professor/Director Emerita, Graduate Program in Early Childhood
Education, The School of Education, The City College of New York
Deborah Meier, founder and retired director, Central Park East Schools
Lauren Monaco, early childhood educator and activist
Gil Schmerler, Ed.D., retired director, Leadership for Educational Change, Bank Street College of Education



Changes!

3 Replies

In response to the unfortunate atmosphere of teacher bashing that we are living through, I would like to focus on some wonderful work being done by a group of hard-working teachers in a public school in New York City.

Here’s a bit of background information about this barrier-free, pre-k – 5 school, located on the Lower East Side, which is situated in the shadow of the Williamsburg Bridge. The ethnic breakdown is approximately 75 % Latino, 20 % African-American, 3.5 % Asian and 1.5 % ‘other’. Many of the children live in shelters or foster homes. There’s a large special needs population, often transferring into the school mid-year. Because of the No Child Left Behind legislation, families from other areas of the city transfer their children into this hard-working, caring school and, because children are traveling long distances, there’s a major problem with lateness and absences. This year, the heavy-duty budget cuts came down hard on this community. Without any significant PTA fundraising, staff is often forced to reach into their own pockets if they want to provide any extra materials for their classrooms.

Four years ago, I was approached by their network leader, Dan Feigelson, and asked if I could do some consulting work here with the kindergarten and first grade teachers. He was familiar with the inquiry and Choice Time work that I had done in my own classroom (we had been colleagues at P.S. 321 in Brooklyn) and thought that the children would benefit from more exploration and playtime. The principal, a former pre-k teacher herself, was in agreement.

The school already had a long-term relationship with the Teachers College Reading and Writing Project. The children were making progress in learning the technicalities of reading and writing. However, they were challenged when the content became more complex. Because of personal stress in their lives, children had difficulty working collaboratively and in resolving conflicts without resorting to violence. The administration believed that the children needed more opportunities to learn and practice positive social skills and to engage in abstract thinking. They decided that the place to begin working on these problems was in the early childhood grades and that is when they decided to approach me.

Here were some of my impressions when I first visited the school: very hard-working and committed staff; positive tone in the classrooms; I did not hear teachers yelling or using harsh words when disciplining children; kindergartens had an unplanned form of Choice Time (really more like free-play) for 20 – 30 minutes at the end of a day filled with all academics; classrooms had very little organization of centers and practically no sense that children were expected to use materials independently (in the block ‘center’ were math manipulatives, dramatic play, teacher-materials stored, etc., there was no visible art center); first grade classrooms did not have Choice Time at all (occasional ‘free play’ as a reward for good behaviors); there were no blocks in the first grade rooms and a very small collection of blocks in the kindergartens.

Drawing on the Reggio Emilia philosophy of considering that the classroom is the second teacher, we first worked on room environment. I wasn’t sure if I was putting the cart before the horse, but it seemed like a concrete way of beginning. Major changes were made in the ‘look’ of the classrooms. The principal also ordered unit blocks for all kindergarten and first grade rooms. To my delight, the teachers began noticing immediate changes in the way that the children were using materials and in the general classroom ambiance.

We then planned out some studies that the teachers thought would interest the children, support their curriculum and also interest the teachers. The first grade teachers wanted their inquiry project to have a social element to it. They thought about the day-to-day lives of the children, and what would be important to all of them. Most of the school population, rather than using private physicians, either went to the emergency room of the local hospital or to a nearby clinic. This is where the teachers wanted to begin…with a study of the EMS. This also morphed into an ambulance study because of the children’s interests and questions.

They visited the local clinic, had a doctor and a nurse visit the classroom, and examined up close an ambulance that visited the school specifically so that the children could explore the inside and outside of the vehicle and interview the EMS workers. Some children became fascinated with bones and what was happening inside their bodies. In the classrooms, ‘hospitals’ were created along with x-ray rooms (overhead projectors, old x-rays). In one first grade room during their choice time, I observed a boy, doll in arms, racing to the “x-ray” room. “My baby hurt his arm. He’s crying! Help me”. The doll was quickly put on the overhead projector and the “x-ray technician looked at the shadow on the wall. He held up an x-ray, looked at it and said, “Your baby has a broken arm. Take him to the hospital!”. He wrote a little note on a pad, gave it to the ‘father’, who took it and rushed back to the classroom hospital, where the baby’s arm was carefully wrapped up with an old ace bandage. That same day, at Choice Time in another classroom I noticed two girls tracing the body of a boy on butcher paper and then, using a book as reference, drawing in the bones for the body. At the same time two other children were using the overhead projector to trace an image of an ambulance. They kept turning it on and off to check their work. This drawing was going to be the ‘plan’ for an ambulance model that they would later create out of cartons and other materials.

The Kindergartens began with a study of the local firehouse, making many field trips there, exploring the firetruck, interviewing the firefighters, checking out their own homes for fire exits and smoke alarms and creating their own home-safety plans.

This year is my fourth year working at this school. Some of the studies that have taken place are a kindergarten exploration of “Beautiful Stuff” ( children brought in ‘found’ objects from home like buttons, toilet paper tubes, broken pieces of jewelry, wood scraps, etc., sorted and labeled all of the ‘booty’ and brainstormed for ideas on how to use these materials in different projects) , a study of the local bakeries, a neighborhood garden study ( I watched children in the block center creating different areas for a classroom garden, using sketches that they worked on together. There were children in the science center planting seeds in small pots that they decorated. When they were finished planting, they brought the pots to the block center where they were put in the ‘community garden’.), a first-grade study of bridges, particularly the Williamsburg Bridge and a study of the NYC subway system. Each first grade class designed and built bridge towers outside their classroom doors and then connected them across the corridor to make one large suspension bridge!

When I asked the teachers if they noticed any positive changes since we began our work, here are some of the things they shared with me:
They noticed that
o Children were becoming more verbal
o The children who are their ‘struggling learners’ are participating more in class work and discussions
o During Choice Time and Inquiry-study time, children with behavioral issues are becoming calmer and more cooperative
o English Language Learners are talking more and sharing stories, possibly because there is no fear of coming up with a right or wrong response
o There is a noticeable carry-over to the writing being done during writing workshop since the children have more shared experiences to draw from
o Field trips have become more purposeful and the children can understand the purpose of each trip
o Parents have told the teachers the their talk about things that they are exploring in class and use a lot of new vocabulary.
o The teachers are more supportive of each other
o There is more professional collaboration
o There’s more of a feeling of a grade-community
o Teachers, along with children, feel a pride in their work
o The cluster teachers have come on board and are planning lessons to support the classroom studies

In a recent email to me, one of the kindergarten teachers wrote about some of the changes that she and her co-teacher made in their classrooms, “ Our block area has been enlarged. Therefore the children have more room to build. We have “blueprint paper” for them to draw their ideas first before building and pencils as well as post- it’s for labeling their building. The art area is more accessible as well as all the different mediums that they need. The dramatic play area is changed with each study and discussed with the children beforehand. There are papers in each work area for the teacher to make notes about what the children are doing, what we think and how to proceed, as well as writing (down) what the children are saying. The room was not as organized and now the children have access to the materials and their projects.”

The children created a market in the pretend center when they studied The Essex Street Market

Building The Essex Street Market in the block center

 

 

 

 

 

 

I am noticing that the flow of the day is much more ‘child-friendly’. Kindergartens have Choice Time for an hour every morning. They go on more neighborhood trips. The first grade has Choice Time at least twice, sometimes more, each week and they too go on curriculum-related trips more often.

When we discussed future professional goals, the teachers asked if we could focus more in depth on using documentation and assessment to help in planning whole class and small group projects and investigations.

These teachers have worked so hard and been so admirable in their professional growth. Their classrooms breathe with imagination, inquiry and a real life force!

On June 10th, two of the teachers and I will be presenting a workshop at Lehman College in the Bronx, NY. The conference is An Early childhood Education Conference: The Reggio Emilia Approach in 21st Century Urban Settings. Our breakout group is titled CHANGE! – DEVELOPING INQUIRY-BASED SOCIAL STUDIES PROJECTS AND CHOICE TIME CENTERS IN KINDERGARTEN AND FIRST GRADE CLASSES AT P.S. 142M. If you’re in the area and would like to attend, you can email Carol Gross at cmg38j@gmail.com

The door is open!

35 Replies

When I taught kindergarten and first grade, the most exciting part of my day was Choice Time, when children had time to pursue an inquiry topic, explore materials and ideas and, of course, have space and time to play.  If you would have asked any of the children what the most exciting time of the day was for them, I would not have been surprised if they would have also named Choice Time as the best part of their school day.

Now that I’m a staff developer working with early childhood teachers I can see that it’s difficult for them, considering the push for high academic standards for young children, to program Choice Time into their daily schedules. My challenge is to help them (and their administrators) understand that a well-planned Choice Time gives children the opportunities to explore new ideas, problem-solve, practice newly-learned literacy skills in personally meaningful contexts, and, quite importantly, to have fun playing!

I’m starting this blog to open up a forum for sharing ideas, reflections, memories, suggestions, problems and questions about Choice Time. Ideally, we will all have the opportunity to dialogue on the topic.

In play a child always behaves beyond his average age, above his daily behavior. In play it is as though he were a head taller than himself.

Lev Vygotsky

The door is open. Let our Choice Time conversation begin!

CLICK HERE to make a comment. I invite all readers (teachers,students, parents, grandparents, etc.) to leave comments.  It would be wonderful to hear what you have to say so we can have more of a dialogue on the subject.