强奸视频

In my kindergarten classroom, I strive to provide an engaging environment where play is the prominent support for and means of learning. But in truth, I find it challenging. Earlier in my career, I used a didactic听approach full of worksheets and drills because it was 鈥渆xpected.鈥� While I see small amounts of direct instruction as useful, I also know that play-based learning is essential for young children. Play encompasses knowledge building, problem solving, communicating, and collaborating; yet throughout my career I鈥檝e often felt that the field is gently nudging me toward focusing on 鈥渟kills and drills.鈥� Even after 23 years as a teacher, I feel torn between ensuring the children achieve certain benchmarks at certain times and offering a more child-centered education that creates opportunities for听exploration.

The current educational emphasis on standards and high-stakes assessments places tremendous pressure on teachers and children, leading to 鈥減otentially problematic teaching practices鈥� (强奸视频 2009, 4). Considering the long lists of specific objectives that must be accomplished by the end of the year鈥攗sually without extended learning time or other additional resources鈥攊t is easy to understand why teachers would be skeptical about devoting their limited class time to child-centered approaches to instruction. Child-directed, playful learning is often less efficient than teacher-directed learning; but if we value healthy child development, we must find a balance in our classrooms (Hassinger-Das, Hirsh-Pasek, & Golinkoff 2017).

The teacher鈥檚 role

During play, teachers are researchers, observing children to decide how to extend their learning both in the moment and by planning new play environments. They must figure out how to quietly intervene to help children connect contexts to everyday concepts and academic content, leading to further cognitive, social, and emotional development (强奸视频 & NCTM [2002] 2010; Fleer 2009). By strategically expanding play and asking questions that challenge children鈥檚 thinking, teachers create meaningful learning opportunities to help children draw an understanding between their observations, ideas, and judgments (Blake 2009). A mix of child-directed and guided play should be incorporated into the day. When the play environment is intentionally created, the learning that occurs is as deliberate and logical as any teacher-directed lesson, yet the activities are offered in a manner that is appropriate to the development of each child (Leong & Bodrova 2012).

In my classroom, children play every day, but I am never 鈥渏ust letting children play.鈥� I am observing, guiding, and planning.

This situation reflects my many roles as a teacher (Synodi 2010). In the beginning, I was an听observer, expecting (based on prior observations) that the two boys would likely need some help initiating play. As an听instructional leader, I selected a game that would develop their academic and social abilities. As a听participant, I modeled a new game and invited another child to join the group. When the first dispute occurred, I became the听mediator, emphasizing the agreed-on听rules.

During play-based learning, teachers are often subtle participants or gentle guides who seek to enrich or expand on the present experience. With the card game, I was able to reinforce an important math concept (comparing number values) and support the children鈥檚 growing abilities to work with others and regulate their feelings.

In this case, setting time aside for play resulted in a teachable moment when David and Marco asked for my help鈥攂ut such opportunities do not always occur. As a teacher dedicated to providing significant amounts of playtime every day, I continually ask myself: How can I extend the play experience that I鈥檓 watching to connect it to the standards I鈥檓 required to听teach?

From theory to听reality

Some may argue that play is an inappropriate means of achieving standards. I have found that children can meet and exceed standards through playful learning that combines open-ended experiences, child-directed initiatives, and teacher-guided activities. However, as simple as play may sound, I will admit that achieving a balance between accomplishing set curricular goals and sustaining a child-centered environment is more difficult than one would think (Ranz-Smith 2007). Through experience, I have learned that there are three primary factors I need to address to bring play and standards together: being intentional in crafting activities, identifying children鈥檚 developmental needs, and assessing听growth.

Intentionally crafting听activities

To address specific academic standards, I sometimes introduce a concept with a whole-group activity, then establish an environment that supports further exploration during free-play time. I consciously determine the purpose and intentionality of all activities (including play), asking myself, 鈥淒o all of the materials and activities have a purpose?鈥� It is the meaningfulness of the activities, as determined by the child, that creates a springboard for learning through curiosity and exploration (强奸视频 & NAECS/SDE听2003).

An example of my effort to use play as a primary means of learning is a lesson in which I introduced the concept of sink or float. The weekly theme was Life in the Ocean, which prompted a child-directed discussion about boats and why they are able to float in the water. I engaged the children in making boats out of foil and seeing how many dice it took to sink their boats. I introduced how density and shape, not size, determine whether an object floats. After giving a demonstration to the whole group, I made the activity an independent center for the children to explore. I watched as they eagerly tried to make boats, which was quickly followed by piling up dice and revising their boat designs. While the beginning of the activity was a group demonstration, it motivated the children to explore their own questions independently and to investigate and challenge their assumptions.

I am certain that the children enjoyed, and learned a great deal from, this activity鈥攂ut was this an example of play? If play must be open ended, child selected, and voluntary, play did not happen until after my demonstration. The demonstration, though, sparked the children鈥檚听curiosity.

Identifying developmental听needs

One of the greatest yet most challenging facets of teaching kindergarten is accepting that individual development has its own time frame. To honor individual development, teachers do their best to implement activities that are suitable for each child. Play is beneficial because it allows for more variation than many teacher-directed lessons. With children varying in their current abilities and needs cognitively, socially, emotionally, and physically, having a flexible approach to teaching and learning鈥攊ncluding lots of time for free and guided play鈥攊s essential. An illustration of how I apply this understanding is the changes I made to my classroom听schedule.

Knowing that a developmentally appropriate environment does not mean giving the children full control of the classroom, I focused on designing choices that are active and engaging. For example, I incorporated math games (including board and card games) into our morning meeting and restructured recess to allow more time for outdoor exploration (including science investigations). Materials (such as paint, tape, and musical instruments) that I previously brought out only on special occasions, I made available for the children to use at their will during open play every day.

Assessing听growth

Overall, my instructional approach is based on my knowledge of children鈥檚 development and effective teaching practices. However, the direction of learning and specific activities are determined by my ongoing observation of the children鈥檚 interests, abilities, and efforts. For me, assessment includes seeking evidence of children鈥檚 learning and honestly reflecting on my own practice. I regularly ask myself whether I have an effective instructional plan in place and, if so, what I can expect the children鈥檚 growth to look like.

In kindergarten, teachers use a variety of evaluation tools, such as portfolios, running records, anecdotal notes and narratives, and formal assessments that measure acquisition and application of skills and concepts. As I have shifted toward play-based learning and created more time for child-directed activities, I have carefully observed children鈥檚 interests, efforts, and growth. Over time, I have found that the combination of observing play and conducting skill-specific assessments provides well-balanced information. Examining both, I am able to determine the direction of learning and develop activities that are appropriate, flexible, and challenging, including more free and guided听play.

Reflection

In my experience, there are times when trying to make the academic standards meaningful while guiding and extending children鈥檚 interests and curiosity feels like a walk in the dark. In putting aside the safety of worksheets and trusting in the guidance provided by the children, I find myself wondering on a daily basis, What did the children gain today from being in my class? Did I miss an opportunity for learning? Did I reinforce the connection between intentionality, developmentally appropriate activities, and assessment? Based on my observation, what did they learn from playing? While my answers are almost always much richer than they were when I relied heavily on worksheets, I find that these questions are essential to my ever-increasing intentionality, and thus to the children鈥檚听learning.

Although children may not fully understand the broader ideas they are exploring while playing, play provides experiences that contribute to their present knowledge and abilities that they will rely on when solving problems in the future (强奸视频 & NCTM [2002] 2010). Teachers鈥� professional knowledge of child development directly impacts instruction and the creation of an effective play-based learning environment (强奸视频 2009). When teachers connect academic standards to play activities, they free themselves to support the overall development of听children.

References

Blake, S. 2009. 鈥淓ngage, Investigate, and Report: Enhancing the Curriculum with Scientific Inquiry.鈥澨�Young Children听64 (6): 49鈥�53.

Fleer, M. 2009. 鈥淯nderstanding the Dialectical Relations between Everyday Concepts and Scientific Concepts within Play-Based Programs.鈥澨�Research in Science Education听39 (2): 281鈥�306.

Hassinger-Das, B., K. Hirsh-Pasek, & R.M. Golinkoff. 2017. 鈥淭he Case of Brain Science and Guided Play: A Developing Story.鈥澨�Young Children听72 (2): 45鈥�50. .

Leong, D.J., & E. Bodrova. 2012. 鈥淎ssessing and Scaffolding Make-Believe Play.鈥澨�Young Children听67 (1): 28鈥�34.

强奸视频 (强奸视频 for the Education of Young Children). 2009. 鈥淒evelopmentally Appropriate Practice in Early Childhood Programs Serving Children from Birth through Age 8.鈥� Position statement. .

强奸视频 & NAECS/SDE (强奸视频 of Early Childhood Specialists in State Departments of Education). 2003. 鈥淓arly Childhood Curriculum, Assessment, and Program Evaluation: Building an Effective, Accountable System in Programs for Children Birth through Age 8.鈥� Joint position statement. .

强奸视频 & NCTM (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics). 2002. Updated 2010. 鈥淓arly Childhood Mathematics: Promoting Good Beginnings.鈥� Joint position statement. .

Ranz-Smith, D.J. 2007. 鈥淭eacher Perception of Play: In Leaving No Child Behind Are Teachers Leaving Childhood Behind?鈥澨�Early Education and Development听18 (2): 271鈥�303.

Synodi, E. 2010. 鈥淧lay in the Kindergarten: The Case of Norway, Sweden, New Zealand, and Japan.鈥澨�International Journal of Early Years Education听18 (3): 185鈥�200.