Extend Extending Extensions

DISCLAIMER: I shall have to preface this post and probably every post I write from now on with: I do not subscribe to the Assessment and Rating process. I am down with the NQS and QIPs and the EYLF – for the most part. I am a reflective practitioner and I love learning and improving.  I think A&R is a colossal waste of money that could be spent many other ways – research, educational support for current and future educators ... funding for services etc. I’m a teacher, an educational leader’s educational leader, a mentor, an educator, a weaver of curriculum. I do my own thing, as I was educated to do and I do it with pride and knowledge and experience sitting behind my pedagogical choices. I am a professional and I don’t need to be asked to prove it to others repeatedly.

Anyway, let’s start the show ... 

The inspiration for this article is from online forums where over and over I see educators asking about extension ideas for experiences or activities that they have observed children engaged in. I believe that the idea behind this is that these educators will then know what to plan for the child. I struggle with this notion for a few reasons. One of which is - a bunch of strangers on the internet do not know the child, nor do they know the learning that you are trying to foster for that child. They also don't know the learning that you have observed, unless of course you have articulated that - simply asking for an extension activity idea based upon another activity isn't the point of planning. Even when it is interest based.

It seems to me that by planning from one activity observed to another activity provided we are missing a critical element or two  - learning being the major part. We are missing the learning observed and identified through thoughtful analysis or reflection. And we are missing the potential learning we wish to foster. Activities or experiences do not equal learning. 

I have to acknowledge that I have a few personal professional issues with extensions as they are used in the early childhood education field today (I find "follow-ups" abhorrent).

I'd like to make a few points in regards to "extensions"  and I know I’m repeating myself a bit, but I so want to make these points. Repeatedly. 

1. An ‘extension’ or ‘extension of learning’ is not an obligatory blanket requirement of the NQS and EYLF nor is it a ‘must do’ for the ‘what’s next.’
2. We are the educators, we have the knowledge, experience, and the position to be able to choose what to extend upon, as well as how and when we extend it. We should own our professionalism. Like a boss. You earned it. (This is not to detract from the rights of children).
3. Where do children's rights fit into all of this? When do they get to choose their own extensions? And for how long they extend their own interest in learming? Why must the educator have all that power?
4. We don’t need to extend everything.
5. An extension does not need to be a separate activity or experience.
6. An extension can be something that we do in the moment - a sneaky little intentional teaching strategy.
7. An extension is not a follow-up. A follow-up is not an extension. Yet the two are often used interchangeably. 

Just so we're all on the same page,a follow-up and an extension can be defined as:

•   A follow-up - is “the act or an instance of following up” or “something that follows up
•  An extension - is “the action of extending:  state of being extended” or “a part constituting an addition”

I hate follow-ups (like, heaps) -- it's not a secret -- and I think that using “extensions” as the new “follow-up”  isn't the direction we have to go in. Who decided that this was the cycle of planning for early childhood services anyway? Who decided that this was quality and then started to perpetuate that myth. 

You observe a moment in time, analyse, plan a follow-up activity, implement that activity and then 'tick that box' - all to say that you've completed the cycle of planning for the (each) child? And if you do 40 of these, two times a month, then each child is sufficiently included in the planning cycle?!?!?!?! 

Go away. That's so superficial and not sustainable! How overworked and worn out and tired are you? Seriously? How much planning do you have to do at home because you cannot do the panning at work because you're too busy trying to catch up with the follow-ups/extensions/extensions of so called learning?!?!?!

Some of you are doing (are required to do by your Educational Leaders or your Managers) five of these a month per child - sometimes regardless of the child's attendance pattern!... I feel for you. I really do. It is beyond ridiculous. RIDICULOUS! I'm all about being genuine, human, and authentic. It's about relationships, connections, conversations. Learning and teaching is complex. It CANNOT be simplified into one learning story observation whatever the hell you want to call it and a follow-up-extended-extending-extension-of-learning. 

The NQS requires us to have a planning cycle which is informed and guided by our assessment of children's learning and development: "Element 1.2.1 Each child’s learning and development is assessed as part of an ongoing cycle of planning, documenting and evaluation."  We can plan using the broad learning outcomes, child developmental theory and our knowledge of each and every child in our care as a guide. There are of course so many other elements we can weave into our plans that I could explore here, but I'd run out of room. And honestly its difficult enough for me to maintain one train of thought, let alone 10. 

The NQS indicates that we should use teaching strategies intentionally to support and extend children’s learning potential. The NQS doesn’t tell us how. We work that little gem out for ourselves. The NQS does not demand that we extend everything we observe, everything we plan, everything we see. The NQS does not demand a follow-up activity attached to each and every written document. It just doesn’t. If you are convinced it does, please point me to where it says so... If an Assessor told you so (and I know that some have) ask them nicely to support you in understanding this, and could they please show you where - in the Early Years Learning Framework? In the Regulations? In the Law? In the Standards? WHERE!? it says so!?

It is my belief that 'follow-ups' and the current interpretation of 'extensions' as follow-ups is a leftover or residual understanding from the times before. The boxes. The Monday to Monday, Tuesday to Tuesday type of planning. Activity to activity. All those little boxes, little boxes ... Let's have a little sing-a-long shall we?

Little boxes all the same.

There's a green one and a pink one

And a blue one and a yellow one,

And they're all made out of ticky tacky

And they all look just the same.

- Malvina Reynolds - 

I love a good protest song ... 

I'd like to explore point number six further: “extension can be something that you do, such as a sneaky little intentional teaching strategy.” I mean we can support the child in the here and now. A word of encouragement, resources to extend the time the child engages in the play or resources that add a new level of complexity to that play, some open-ended questions that prompt the child’s thinking, a sustained conversation between educator and child, or a group of children... All these are teaching strategies. Teaching strategies, used intentionally to extend the opportunities for learning in the moment that the child is actively engaged in - that is an extension – I think that this should be our definition of an extension – the little thing or the big thing we did to support the child at the time which facilitated the learning potential further. 

An extension can be another experience flowing from the original moment - which may seem unrelated but is in fact quite related - Aunt Annie explores that in her blog article "Extending children's play, and the joy of red herrings" - so if you can do something in the moment, do it. And realise that it might not be 'like to like' or 'same to same'  - as Aunt Annie explores in her writing it can be 'like to different to very different'. 

If you can’t see the learning potential in that moment for the children or that particular child, then move onto another moment and devote some brain power to that. Be gentle with yourself. Don't belittle yourself or feel inadequate. You don't have to have the 'one answer' or the 'one right activity' - the perfect solution follow-up-future-extension-of-learning-idea.

If you know the child, know their development, their needs, their strengths, their gifts and their challenges then you should know what to do. Know the child. Plan for the child. Don't plan for an activity. An activity is not learning.

If you know what learning you’re trying to facilitate then you might have a better idea of what you’re going to do to promote opportunities for further learning. [Did you note that I said 'opportunities'? As in plural? As in not just one?] Keep in mind that not all children will want to learn the same thing at the same time in the same way OR that all children are capable of learning the same thing in the same way at the same time ... Children are individuals who have unique learning interests and needs and speeds. Just like us. Children are people too. Don't forget that.

I would like us all (well, mainly them, the them that annoy me, the them that are the system) to embrace the fact that not all learning can be planned or forecast. 

Sometimes the best learning just happens.

- G

© Teacher’s Ink. 2014 All Rights Reserved 

Why So Many Ways to Document?

When I studied the first time around I learned how to observe and document using the following methods:

Anecdotal Observations
Running Records
Jottings
Time Samples
Event Samples
Sociograms ...

I'm sure there were more, but those are the ones that come to mind.

That was 1996. Waaaay back when.

Now, there are training organizations, the now defunct DEEWR with their 'Educators Guide'  and the self-proclaimed consultants who are passing the old formats of observations off as if they are something new, and adding:

Morning meeting minutes
Afternoon meeting minutes
Reflective practice
Reflective Oblongs
Children's Philosophies
Family Philosophies
Surveys
Projects
Learning Stories
Mind Maps
Analysis of learning
Etcetera

Do you not wonder why you are being told to spread yourself too thin? And who are these experts? Have they been through Assessment and Rating themselves? Have they even managed a centre consistently under the new National Quality Standards? What are their early childhood qualifications? Are they certified? Or are they just out to make a quick buck out of your insecurity and fear? If they were really out to help you, they wouldn't charge you exorbitantly for their time and supposed expertise.

I am a consultant. That's my nine to five. But I resent using the word because of those who are laying claim to it. Abusing it. Abusing you.

No one, NO ONE can get you exceeding. EVER. Apart from the fact that I have little faith in the A&R system as it is, I certainly think that if a centre gets Exceeding then it's their own doing. They did the work, not the books that they read, the websites they joined or the consultants they consulted with. The centre earned it. Not the hired help.

Are you even comfortable with someone claiming to take credit for your hard work? Is that fair? Is it ethical for someone to take your success, pass it off as their own, and then use your success to advertise themselves to make more money from other educators and service providers?

Just because someone delivers something in a way that you connect with. Just because they are charismatic and friendly, doesn't mean that they are speaking the truth and giving you sound information or advice.

My advice to you: Stick with a few styles of documentation and do them well. You only need a few. Don't fall for the "children's magical voices" bullshit. Writing anything down is worthless without some serious reflection behind it. And children are not magical beings. They are people. If you called me magical I'd smack you across the head for demeaning me and tell you it was just fairy dust. Don't. Call. Me. Magical. It's degrading. I'm a person who deserves respect.

Don't fall for empty promises and spread yourself too thin. That is not the path to a "Meeting" rating much less an "Exceeding" one.

Reflection is deeper than asking the children what they liked or didn't like about their day. Reflection is not about what you liked or what 'went' well or how lovely it was in the sandpit with all the children playing so nicely or what the children said.

I've given you plenty of professional reflection on my blog - go read it.

So what sorts of documentation would I use?

The Teacher's Ink Approved Documentation Methods: < tongue in cheek in case ya didn't know.
Anecdotal observations
Jottings
Photo montages
Conversations
Narratives

And then I'd tie it all in together with my reflections of my knowledge of the child and what I would like to see the child working on in the near future.

I personally am not a fan of (New Zealand) Learning Stories - I think they're great for NZ and I think they're fabulous for centres that are above ratio and provide their educators with a) a computer and b) extensive time to document. Otherwise who has time to do them? I didn't.

I've never particularly liked them. And most people don't do them properly anyway. I doubt that many people know they come from NZ in the first place. You don't need to do them. They're not required. No matter what anyone says. There is NOTHING in the NQS or EYLF that says you need to use them.

So in regards to children's portfolios, I would have five main documentation formats. Five. That's it. FIVE. Not 10, not 20 or 30 or 86 different ways to document (yeah you think I'm joking? I've heard this one).

Pick five, and do them well. Especially the jottings - do lots of them! They're more meaningful that a whole long drawn out story.

In regards to hiring consultants, Google them, do some research! Just because they're nice and charismatic doesn't mean they're qualified.

Remember that: Charismatic is NOT the same as Qualified.

And a pretty portfolio is NOT an assessment of learning nor is it your curriculum documentation.

Portfolios are not even required, yet many of us do them. But that's another story.

I think perhaps the moral of this story is that you shouldn't spread yourself too think. You're not Vegemite.

Work smarter, not harder. I know. That's what they say. They all say it. But they're full of shit. Because they tell you to do it 10 or 20 or 30 or 86 different ways.

© Teacher’s Ink. 2014 All Rights Reserved

  

Well, Let Me Tell You A Little Bit About Me

Who am I?

I’m a 4 year educated teacher who proudly holds a Bachelor of Education.  I also have a Diploma in Child Care and Education and I am studying the Certificate IV in Assessment and Training.  I’m currently employed as an early childhood advisor or consultant or whatever you want to call it. My job is about supporting educators in regards to understanding curriculum planning and reflective practice. I don’t know everything, but I know a fair amount.

I believe that the National Quality Standards - Assessment and Rating process is, as it is, flawed.  I have little to no faith in it. I do however believe that the Standards and the Early Years Learning Framework are worthwhile and leading us down a path of quality improvement. It’s the inequities in the process of assessment that I have issues with.

I am going vegan. It’s a decision I made last week after umming and aaahing about it for months. I figure I would just jump and commit. I’m already a vegetarian ... might as well go all the way and walk the talk ... practice what I’m preaching and all that jazz.

I’m a strong believer in protecting our natural environments.  I love trees and forests and deserts and mountains and valleys and rivers and oceans and beaches and nature. I love my garden and I am amazed by it.  I pick birds up from road when they are terrified or injured. I find stray dogs like no  one’s business.  I am also involved in animal rights and small self-funded home based domestic animal rescues local to where I live. I HATE pet stores that sell puppies and kittens sourced from puppy mills and backyard breeders. I struggle with breeders – even the registered ones – when we have in our pounds hundreds of thousands of dogs and cats, puppies and kittens, rabbits and guinea pigs and so on and so forth killed each year. Unnecessarily.

I live in a home filled with eclectic furnishings from antiques to retro to designer to repurposed to opportunity shop finds, even from footpaths and council cleanups. I am house proud. I love my nest.

I hate racism and prejudice. I hate bullies. I have a not tolerance policy for physical, verbal or psychological abuse of anyone: adult or child. It’s not cool. I hate people exercising power over others. I hate bigotry.

I listen to all sorts of music. I’m a triple J fan and I have a particular fondness for Heavy Metal, Blues and Roots, Aussie Hip-hop ... I also love Latino Jazz, Classical and so on and so forth. I love art, architecture, design. I love writing and photography. I love expressing who I am. The older I get the less I care.

And, as a person,

I have politics. I swear from time to time.  I own and manage and control the content of this page and you are welcome to be here with me. Or if you feel that my opinions and offerings don’t sit with you and your philosophy of education and/or life, you may unsubscribe. The choice is yours. I support your decision whatever it may be. Teacher’s Ink. is my project. I’m not paid for it. I do not at this point derive any income from it. I do it because I like supporting educators beyond the scope of my paid employment and I like having an unrestricted space in which to voice my opinion. The key here is, my opinion.

That’s me. 

Scribble: a game of turn taking and laughing

I’ve been visiting and working with a service for a few weeks. There are twin girls “Olivia” and “Sophia” in the toddler room. They are about 2.5 years old. Olivia is outgoing and confident and loves to play and laugh. She has a wicked glint to her eyes and she loves to be chased. I comply with her wishes of course. Her sister Sophia is more reserved and shy. She stands back and sometimes becomes upset. I respect her wish to feel secure by keeping my distance and telling her so. “I don’t want to upset you, so I will move away and give you some space.”

Today, something beautiful happened. I of course continued with giving Sophia space. And it paid off. I was engaging with Olivia at the white board drawing experience on the table, and Sophia came to sit near me (Yay!). I helped Olivia with her sleeves which were going to be stained with ink. Sophia looked at me and smiled (Yay!) and then did her sleeves. I commented on her independence. She smiled.

The children then were transitioning to lunch (I won’t bore you with the details) and Olivia stayed with me. She eyed my clipboard which I had some notes written upon. I asked her if she’d like to do some writing. She smiled at me and reached out for my mechanical pencil. She made her mark. Then Sophia spied us, and she joined us. I smiled at her. She smiled back. I asked her if she would like a turn. She responded with a smile and said “my turn.” So she had her turn and made her mark. It was then when the lead ran out, and I had to show the two how to click the top to make the pencil work again.

We were playing a spontaneous game of “my turn, your turn” using my paper and pencil. It was my turn, then Olivia’s turn, then Sophia’s turn. Then mine and so on and so forth. Theo then joined us with a big smile on his face and he said “my turn?” So, we added Theo to our game, my turn, Olivia’s turn, Sophia’s turn, then Theo’s turn. We did a few more rounds, then Theo moved on to lunch. Sophia left, and Olivia and I continued our game for a couple more rounds. Sophia couldn’t stay away and she came back (Yay!).

I decided to mix things up and do some subtle intentional teaching stuff, I said to the two “I’m going to do a small one” and I proceeded to make an itty bitty little scribble on the top right hand corner of the page. This resulted in fits of hysterical giggling. I’d made a joke.  Olivia then decided she would do the opposite to me and she did a “big one” across the middle of the page. Then Sophia did a little one (which was really more medium than small as her skills aren’t as refined as mine). I did a teeny tiny little one, which resulted in even more hysterical laughter. Olivia then outdid herself and did a much bigger one, again saying “big one.” Sophia did her mark, but she decided to be loud and proud and do a big one like her sister.

I am going to finish this later and do some clever outcome talking type stuff … but for now on my lunch break, I wanted to get this story down while it was still fresh in my mind and my heart.

Today I was blessed with trust. And trust is so precious.  

* Olivia and Sophia and Theo are made up names.

(c) Teacher's Ink. 2013 All Rights Reserved.

Groups: Big or Small? Small of course!!!

I actually have two other posts that I have been wanting to publish - they are still works in progress ... but this idea about groups just needed to be written! Certainly to justify my choices - based on research as well as the Standards and Regulations and the EYLF. So here we have it ... My stance on large groups. Ready? It's 4 pages long in MS Word!

I’ll be upfront here about my bias. I don’t like whole groups for children. This is my personal belief around large groups. 

So. I’m tired of people talking about doing whole group experiences, especially with babies and toddlers. It is by no means appropriate. Please don’t justify it!  Just because a child is going to be in the preschool room next year doesn’t mean you need to prepare them when they are two! Just because a child is going to school next year, doesn’t mean you should start preparing them 12 months in advance!

“But the parents ask us to! They expect it.”

“The centre down the road offers it. We need to compete.”

“Their parents want to know what we are doing for ‘school readiness’”

“They want us to give their children homework!”

“They have to learn to be in a group at school!”

“Teachers from schools have told us they have to know!”

People. It is your job to stand up and advocate for what is right. What is right is developmentally appropriate and respectful for children. It doesn’t mean that this will look the same for all children – because all children are different! Services will be in different communities and have different social contexts. But it’s not natural for children to be grouped in large numbers at young ages. Think about our family units. Think about how many children we give birth to and have in our family units. Think about native communities. Think about your own childhood. We played in small groups in our community as children. I did attend preschool, and I only remember one circle time. I was singing. I mainly remember playing with my friends. Three of them. No more. No less. Three. Plus me.

Now this brings us to Dr. Louise Porter. Who? Well, she wrote: Young children’s behaviour: Practical approaches for caregivers and teachers(2008). In her book she talks about groupings of children. She points out that large groups or circle time, is a largely teacher-directed mandatory experience which does not support children in making choices. She also points out the obvious, that while some children may enjoy such events, there will be others who do not. These children often disrupt the event or might sit quietly in sufferance.

Looking at the rights of the child in the context of fairness and equity, how is a mandatory group time fair and equitable? There is NO WAY you are meeting the interests and the developmental level of all the children. If one child is left feeling disinterested or uninvolved or intimidated, how is it fair to that child? It isn’t. How is it fair to:

·         The children who aren’t interested in the topic being delivered?

·         The children who don’t have English as a primary language?

·         The children who are not at a high level of concentration?

·         The children who are full of energy and just want to be running or actively making something?

·         The children with developmental complexities who are NOT able to, either appreciate nor participate?

·         The children who are very introverted and would rather be sitting with two of their peers and their teacher, not sitting in a large group feeling uncomfortable and lost?

·         The educator who really wanted to read the story to a few of the chidlren?

·         The educator who has been told she “has” to do whole groups even though it goes against her personal philosophy?

It’s not fair. It’s not equitable. It’s not realistic. You can achieve the same goal with small groups.

Dr. Louise Porter says that children naturally group with others based on a rough formula: their age plus one. So for example I played with Troy, Kim, Joshua plus myself when I was three. That is my age plus one more (me!).  She also mentions the time frame for small groupings. The general formula is 3 times their age. So a 2 year old, MAY be able to engage for 6 minutes, where a four year old MAY be able to engage for 12 minutes. There is no hard and fast rule. Each child is a unique individual and should be treated accordingly.

So what do we do to offer children group times? Well, Dr. Porter suggests you approach a couple of children and offer them an opportunity to hear a story.  You tell them that story. As the story progresses, others will join based upon their choice to do so. If they aren’t interested, they have the right to leave. You are showing that you think children are capable and competent and able to make their own choices. You are respecting their sense of agency. So, if you repeat this a few times a day, every day of the week, you are giving children the opportunity to hear a “group” story ... It might be 2 children, it might be 5, it might be more. For those children who love stories, they can hear them over and over again. For those that aren’t so in love with them, they can hear less, and have the choice. If you want to see how effective this strategy is, keep a record for a week or two of who attends which groups, and see if everyone is included. If not, then approach those children who you know are missing out on the opportunity, and offer them a story or small group experience that will really inspire them to participate (Porter, 2008 p 148). Dr. Porter also talks about not preparing children for the future  – pointing out that most children will mature into school routines naturally.

 I can hear some of you saying “But what if they don’t mature into school?” Well, that might just be that individual child. There is no proof that if you had done large groups, that the child who takes longer to mature into school would have been more able to settle into the new learning environment. And, to be quite blunt it’s not your job to support children to settle into their first year of school. That is their new teacher’s job. It’s your job to support the transition. Not the actual settling into the new environment.

The EYLF talks about children having a strong sense of identity. Yup, you guessed it. That is Learning Outcome 1. Children will learn to interact in relation to others with care, empathy and respect show interest in other children and being part of a group. It goes on to say that educators will support this by  organising learning environments in ways that promote small group interactions and play experiences (DEEWR, 2009 p. 24).

The EYLF also talks about children being connected with and contributing to their world (Learning Outcome 2). It goes on to say that children develop a sense of belonging to groups and communities and an understanding of the reciprocal rights and responsibilities necessary for active community participation: cooperate with others and negotiate roles and relationships in play episodes and group experiences (DEEWR, 2009 p. 26). 

And now we move on to Learning Outcome 4: Children are confident and involved learners. This is where children are encouraged to resource their own learning by connecting with people and place, technologies and processed materials. Educators are encouraged to think carefully about how children are grouped for play and to consider the possibility for peer scaffolding (DEEWR, 2009 p. 37). How this can happen in large groups?

I also question that not all children are going to experience the same activity in the same way, nor gain the same learning from a small experience much less a large or whole group one. You are not going to be able to give the children equal attention. Nor are you going to be able to articulate what they got from it. If a child doesn’t speak, or if a child repeats what another child says, they aren’t really sharing with you their ‘distance travelled’ ... they may be in the same place as they were before. Or they may have gone backwards a step or two. How often have you left a meeting or a class or a training session and thought to yourself: “Huh?” ... I’ve left meetings feeling particularly stupid. It wasn’t until following some serious reflection and discussion with peers, that I realised I wasn’t the stupid one! I’m an adult. How the hell are children going to feel?! Are you setting them up for failure and feeling small and insignificant! Please don’t do this!

Ok, let’s step over there to Learning Outcome 5. Children are of course, effective communicators. Children will interact both verbally and non-verbally with others for a range of purposes, contributing their ideas and experiences in play, in large and small group experiences (DEEWR, 2009 p. 40). I don’t read whole group. A large group of 3-5 year olds could be 10/11; of 2 year olds it could be 8; and of 0-2s it could be 4. Think of the ratios as a guideline.

Having said that, I have done large groups, and I didn’t like them. The freely-chosen large whole groups I did were free-form dancing discos – but not everyone had to participate! And they were loud and chaotic and silly and often due to long times stuck inside due to weather!

Now, let’s consider the National Quality Standards. The NQS talks about groups of children. It talks about minimising risks of injury and minimising conflicts between children. It discusses grouping children in ways that supports their learning and development. The guide to the standard also says that Assessors will observe your service’s approach to grouping children (DEEWR, 2012 p 86). I don’t see whole-group.

The NQS goes on to say that indoor learning environments provide children with opportunities to make choices and negotiate activities that can be quiet, active, routine, small and whole-group experiences. “These spaces:

·         support children’s emerging interests and allow them to demonstrate their innate creativity and curiosity

·         reflect children’s different cultures, interests, abilities and learning styles

·         recognise children as active learners and decision makers.

 (DEEWR, 2012 p 86)

Again, I question how we can do this confidently in large, whole-groups. How can you cater for everyone’s curiosity, creativity, interests, abilities, learning styles, decisions, etc all in the one experience?!?!? And define whole-group anyway! It might mean that all children have an opportunity to participate in an event, but not necessarily at the same time in the same way!

The Education and Care Services National Regulations talks about relationships in groups:

“PART 4.5 156 Relationships in groups

(1)   The approved provider of an education and care service must take reasonable steps to ensure that the service provides children being educated and cared for by the service with opportunities to interact and develop respectful and positive relationships with each other and with staff members of, and volunteers at, the service. (DEEWR, 2012 p 163)

(2)   For the purposes of subregulation (1), the approved provider must have regard to the size and the composition of the groups in which children are being educated and cared for by the service.” (DEEWR, 2012 p 164)

While it doesn’t specify group sizes, it does specify we need to have regard for it. Why are you doing what you are doing? What are the reasons for your groupings!? Can you have quality relationships with 20 children as opposed to 4 or 5?

Also, in  Element 1.2.3 “Critical reflection on children's learning and development, both as individuals and in groups, is regularly used to implement the program” (DEEWR, 2012 p. 327).  It doesn’t mean you have to work with children in whole groups. It just means you need to consider them as part of a group as well as an individual.

And last, but not least, “Element 1.1.3 The program, including routines, is organised in ways that maximise opportunities for each child’s learning. minimising the times during which children are expected to do the same thing at the same time” (DEEWR, 2012 p 30). And that my friends is pretty self-explanatory.

Well, I think that I have sufficiently stated my position on large group times. And crap. I’ve just realised I’ve spent my Sunday writing a four page essay for “fun” ... purely to make a point. And not for uni!

Thank you for reading!

T.ink.

© Teacher’s Ink. 2013 All Rights Reserved.

More Postings on Observations

***  I am ranting right by your side! I can’t even remember exactly what I learned all those years ago at TAFE, nor can I remember what I even really learned at Uni and it wasn’t really that long ago, although time is certainly getting away from me. My rants are generally directed at the system and not the individual. I merely ask that the individuals ask WHY? WHAT? And WHERE? Three big questions.

I am currently working in a management role, and the amount of “he said, she said” is unbelievable. Even going back a year ago to when I was working for another mob, they were being told by someone higher up who heard it from somewhere else that they had to link all their observations to theory. So they held a training, and then the educators used the learning story which had the little box to write in the theorist’s names. They all said Vygotsky. Seriously, what purpose did that serve? Nothing really. The obs were still generic and poorly written anyway, adding Vygotsky on them in a box did not make them any more relevent to the child who’s name was written in pencil in the corner. Instructing a child in something isn’t even scaffolding. It was superficial.

I look back at my work from 2010 when we started working with the EYLF – very basic. I look back over 2011 and early 2012, and you can see improvements and growth. I continue to grow, each and every week, if not day by day. And that came with practice and reflection. I know that everyone will be different levels and understandings. You mentioned study, and I’m not even convinced that educational facilities are doing the best in supporting people in working with the EYLF and the NQS. AND consider that many people delivering the learning from the educational institutions haven’t necessarily worked directly with the EYLF as educators. Now I’m not saying they won’t understand, nor am I saying that they won’t be good tertiary educators or creator of ECE curriculum, but they will have a different perspective.

Program and planning is directed by the NQS as well as the EYLF – or whichever framework people are using depending upon their location and service. It’s become an incredibly complicated thing! And because of the way that the government chose to implement it – complicated beyond words.
My understanding is that the framework was written then distributed to services on a trial basis. These services then created some sample observations using the draft EYLF. The EYLF was published, then the educators guide, then the EYLF in practice book. They themselves may not even have had a specific idea of what it would look like in practice! I could be wrong. Seriously, I don’t know this from the inside, but I’m telling you what I witnessed as an educator on the outside.  And that is what it looked like. Even the change in the what is written in the NQS PLP newsletters is interesting. And I'm sure all the authors who write for the PLP will tell you that they have also grown and changed.

That's a large part of the NQS - growth through reflection. Not standing still and remaining the same.

I like that the framework is open ended because I like being creative and inventive. BUT in saying that, I think it leaves so many people lost. And I completely agree that they have the right to panic! Especially with the ratios they are working with!!!! I’d be panicking too! Believe me I would. That is why I’m saying that learning stories are NOT required as the only form of observation. And it’s also why I’m upset generally that there are so many companies popping up saying that they will solve everyone’s problems for them! And am frustrated by the “gossip” ... people panicking and changing things left right and centre. We don’t have to put everything (learning outcomes, principles, practices, being, belonging, becoming, theory, room reflections, group reflections, child reflections, personal reflections, philosophy, group goals, individual goals, NQS/QA reference numbers etc) into the observations of children’s individual learning. I just don’t want people pressured into the unnecessary – and this includes workload. Look at the image at the top of this page! Chaos!
 

If you have to do work at home, there is something wrong with the expectations of work and the system. And yes, I know a great many do this. I used to. A lot. The system is flawed. Or the perception of the system! Chicken or egg?  I think we need to be realistic about what we can do. I also question the focus on learning stories and portfolios vs the curriculum program. Which do we spend more time on?

And I question how much of this do we do to ourselves? Do we set an unrealistic expectation upon ourselves? Do we not stand up to our managers and owners etc and say that we can do this this and this in our work time, but we are not able to do that? So what should we be doing? What should it look like for our service as opposed to another's service? They don't all have to be the same!

Even when looking at a learning story or observation or whatever you call it holistically, and if you do two a month, or maybe one a month as I know some services are doing ... I don’t think you are going to get an adequate image and assessment of a child over the course of the year. I’ve spent more time thinking and writing about this than I can tell you here. Do more photos and jottings and write with outcome terminology eg (LO5) and stress less over the learning stories. Still do them, but be selective. All the while, reflect in your professional journals!

I’m simply suggesting the people look at QA1 for themselves and really read the EYLF. I know many who haven’t, or read it so long ago. My understanding of both those documents has changed and deepened over the last 12 months I can’t even articulate it!

Ok. I've said enough.

© Teacher's Ink. 2013

Shameless (well, slightly shameful) Facebook Plug!



www.facebook.com/Teachers.Ink. 
 

I'd like to see a bigger number. That's all. :)

I'm admitting it.

I'm up-front about it.

It's an ego thing.

I'm imperfect.

I'm human.

I'm gonna go with that!

(share us around with your friends!!!) 

Projects? Really? Who says?

I’ve been thinking about projects. A great deal. And I don’t even know where to begin. Why do we do them? Who said we have to do them? What is their purpose? How are they meant to benefit the children? When is it a project and not a theme? When is it a theme and not a project? Do you like doing them? Do you get anything out of them?

Look, I’m not a project expert. I’m not even 100% sure what my feelings are about them. Sure, there are benefits of putting together a document for and with children ... BUT ... unless you really are strong in your practice and you know what you are doing ... well, are you doing more theme-harm than good?

I was planning to write on this weeks ago, but I got distracted and have been downsizing the house. Work before Play after all. And once I get all the work stuff done, then I can play!

Anyway, Projects. I remember being told that I had to do them. That it was a requirement of my teaching practice at the service I was working at. I never really questioned it. I just did them. I did try to do them smartly – put excerpts from the day book and observations and the like into them along with drawings and quotes and mind maps and the like to create these project books. They were simply a collection of random materials that maybe illustrated children’s engagement rather than their learning. They were merely put on display for maybe parents to look at ... they were never really used much. The children occasionally looked at them. They were pretty much a tool for the Director to use to show what we do at the service on a tour ... All that time and effort? What for?

As I was looking for information I came across this from Kathy Walker: http://earlylife.com.au/info/node/4594

 “The reality is that young children are not mini adults and they do not make sense of their world through long, adult driven, adult agenda laden projects and predetermined topics!”

Ok, yes, that statement is a very strong one ... and I’m actually agreeing with it more than disagreeing.

At what point is a project driven by children? What do the children benefit?

I especially ask this, because I see so many people across Facebook or the internet at large, either saying they are doing a “project” with under two year olds on this topic or that, or asking for help on project topics to do with this age group of that age group ... That to me just screams topic or theme. And it really doesn’t illustrate play or natural learning to me.

This blog entry is just about what is churning on inside me right now. I don’t have any conclusions at this point ... just a lot of swirly questions and ideas going through my mind!

And I need to bring in some laundry. Thank you for reading and following and being my quiet secret admirers! It’s much appreciated! Don’t forget there is a facebook page!

© Teacher’s Ink. 2013

Reflections on Observing & Programming

I have been pondering a great many things ... It’s part of my job you see. BUT in this pondering I have had some conscious ideas about my practice as an educator. 

Many people are in this cycle: 

1. We see the child doing something.
2. We (the all-knowing-educator) then decide that the child will do something else that we choose based upon all our knowledge (which we can’t admit might be limited!) and our perspective (which again, isn’t necessarily a balanced one!)...
3. We then observe and make judgements based upon whether the child has achieved what we have set out for them to do.
4. We then document our findings based upon this one moment where the child may or may not have done what we wanted them to do...

Does anyone else see what might be wrong with this cycle?

This is many people’s planning cycle! This was my planning cycle ... We see, we make choices, then we act, then we evaluate and go again ...

Why don’t we plan for many different possibilities rather than just the one? Why don’t we problem solve and think about how many other ways we can support children in their learning and growing and being and becoming? 

I think the problem is the new is being overlapped with the old ... You know the old school way of doing things where we just essentially programmed in the boxes ... I always hated doing this and I was and am a day book programmer ... But even now I’m thinking of other ways I can do the same thing without the day book ... The day book requires (for me at least) a computer and time to write ... and not everyone will have that. I've started playing around with other ways and am starting to ponder using documentations and mind-maps and webs, even notations!

I’m not providing you with any concrete answers here ... I might even be leaving you with more questions! But what I’m thinking is ... what happens if we provide really excellent learning environments for children that are well thought out (because we write reflections) and have so much content that will support children over time ... 

Time to learn and grow being the key here ... 

What if, when we are writing our observations or reflections on particular children’s learning and growing, we make suggestions about:

1. Different experiences within the learning environment that might already suit the needs of the child or the group as a whole?
2. Different teaching strategies that might support that child achieve that outcome or milestone or satisfy their need?
3. (Here’s some novelty) Act NOW! What can you do NOW to support that child? Is it asking a question or providing a resource to extend their engagement? Could it be role modelling by their side? Or could it possibly be helping them hand over hand? Could it be as simple as a smile of encouragement!? Write THAT down!

So that is what I have been wondering ... how much of what we already do in regards to our teaching practice is left unsaid and undocumented? How much of what we might be able to do, but feel we can’t do because it has to be something that we “follow-up” or do later is left undone, or done so far in the future that it no longer serves a purpose for that child?!?!

Signing off,

G @ Teacher’s Ink.

© Teacher’s Ink. 2013