As a teacher, how do we identify our strengths? I believe that they can be reflected through the students and parents. I think I’m strong at showing commitment to students and student learning by treating every child with respect, acknowledging their differences, and guiding them to develop into young people who are loving and caring.
It is my personal teaching philosophy to teach children that living, learning, laughing and loving are integral to what life is about. I’m devoted to incorporate community building processes such as Tribes to build a safe learning environment where everybody respect, listen, and genuinely care about each other. I observe and make notes of their personality and the way they interact with other children, work with them as a whole group to resolve problems and arguments, and give praises to good behavior. I also have daily activities such as asking students to think about one nice thing that a classmate has done to him and say thank you to her.
Once in a while, I’d handwrite notes to parents telling them about my observations of their children. They appreciate this little effort that I make, and sometimes they’d respond by telling me the nice things that they see their children doing, and that they’re happy to see their children coming home being more polite and caring. I take this as a sign that I’m doing an OK job in the students’ personal and social development!
One thing that I need to improve on in order to become a more effective Kindergarten teacher is to take more initiative in seeking out professional knowledge. I need to stay current on issues that are happening in the education system, policies that are relevant to teaching, and educational research that would expand my knowledge of teaching. I also believe that gaining a deeper understanding in educational theories, pedagogy and curriculum would help me in planning lessons that enhance my students’ learning and development.
Saturday, June 26, 2010
Friday, June 25, 2010
Shapes Reflection: Worksheet Dilemma - Benefits of Play-Based Curricula
Article: < http://www.earlychildhoodnews.com/earlychildhood/article_print.aspx?ArticleId=134 >
Three things I want to remember are:
1) In order for early learners to acquire knowledge about letters and numbers, they have to make sense of what they are learning through tangible activities that are relevant to their life.
2) Mere recognition of letters and numbers doesn’t necessarily mean that students have learned and understood the concepts.
3) Asking early learners to sit still for a long period of time to do paper & pencil work is an unreasonable task that’s incompatible to their developmental needs and abilities.
One thing that “squares” with my beliefs is:
I agree that engaging early learners in play-based activities such as stringing beads and setting up lunch tables would enhance their learning, because this approach shows students that learning is not a “task”, but a fun, on-going and spontaneous process that helps them make sense of the world. I agree that before understanding the meaning of “four” in real, tangible contexts, circling the number on a worksheet is merely a task to show parents that their kids are learning numbers.
Things that are rolling around in my head are:
At my preschool center, I send students home with homework on Fridays. I like to design homework that’s interactive. For example, I was teaching them about size. I printed out a page with circles in different sizes, and the instruction was to colour the circles, cut them out, and then arrange them from smallest to largest and glue them onto the given construction paper. Only one child returned on Monday with the work completed.
I believe that it’s important for the parents to reinforce concepts that are learned at school with their child, but parents usually find it easier if the homework is in the form of worksheets. I don’t want to embed in the children’s mind that “homework is boring” when they’re only 3 years old! Is it a good practice to send them home with homework? How can we get parents to be more involved in engaging their children to learn in ways that are compatible with what teachers do in the classroom?
Three things I want to remember are:
1) In order for early learners to acquire knowledge about letters and numbers, they have to make sense of what they are learning through tangible activities that are relevant to their life.
2) Mere recognition of letters and numbers doesn’t necessarily mean that students have learned and understood the concepts.
3) Asking early learners to sit still for a long period of time to do paper & pencil work is an unreasonable task that’s incompatible to their developmental needs and abilities.
One thing that “squares” with my beliefs is:
I agree that engaging early learners in play-based activities such as stringing beads and setting up lunch tables would enhance their learning, because this approach shows students that learning is not a “task”, but a fun, on-going and spontaneous process that helps them make sense of the world. I agree that before understanding the meaning of “four” in real, tangible contexts, circling the number on a worksheet is merely a task to show parents that their kids are learning numbers.
Things that are rolling around in my head are:
At my preschool center, I send students home with homework on Fridays. I like to design homework that’s interactive. For example, I was teaching them about size. I printed out a page with circles in different sizes, and the instruction was to colour the circles, cut them out, and then arrange them from smallest to largest and glue them onto the given construction paper. Only one child returned on Monday with the work completed.
I believe that it’s important for the parents to reinforce concepts that are learned at school with their child, but parents usually find it easier if the homework is in the form of worksheets. I don’t want to embed in the children’s mind that “homework is boring” when they’re only 3 years old! Is it a good practice to send them home with homework? How can we get parents to be more involved in engaging their children to learn in ways that are compatible with what teachers do in the classroom?
Exploring Current Issues: Full-Day v.s. Half-Day Kindergarten Program
The current issue that I’ve chosen to explore is the comparison between Full-day and Half-day Kindergarten Programs. This is a big topic that’s going around in Ontario, and as teachers, it is important to understand the reasons behind this paradigm shift, so that we can better prepare ourselves to deliver a program that is beneficial to our students. I’ve worked in a preschool for a year, where most students are full-time while some are part-time. I notice that students who come on half days or every other day are less engaged in learning and playing with other children compared to full day students. I also notice that students who stay for the whole day have a greater tendency to whine for staying longer, while part-time children tend to run and greet their parents immediately during pick-up time. I think that extending Kindergarten to full-day is a shift that will affect children’s academic and social development, as well as their emotional attachment to their parents.
From my research, almost all reports have shown results that prove that full-day kindergarten programs are either equivalent to, or more beneficial than half-day programs. One of the major findings is that literacy achievement has improved when students who were enrolled in a full-day kindergarten program were tested in higher grades. This is proved to be the same in the mathematics test scores. In the full-day program, children acquire skills to become emergent readers, which is especially true for students from lower socioeconomic status. They also acquire stronger learning skills. These children gain more school readiness as they are engaged in a whole day of activities in the classroom. Explanations to the benefits are that teachers have more opportunities to work individually with students and incorporate play and social activities into the curriculum, and having a greater sense of continuity as the students are involved in these activities.
Socially, students enrolled in the full-day kindergarten program tend to have a smoother transition into the elementary school community. They tend to be more engaged with other children, show better social skills, as well as better self-concept.
One argument to the full-day kindergarten program is that young learners would be overtired after a day of school, but research showed that it's not proven to be a concern. Another countering point is that although children in full-day programs show better results in literacy and mathematics, these advantages do not last after the students passed Grade 3. The academic differences between full-day and half-day students diminish, as they are developmentally ready for their next stage.
After reading the research papers concerning the issue, I agree that Kindergarten should be viewed as part of the continuum of the Elementary system. There should be continuity from the way these early learners make their transition into Grade 1, 2, and so on. Teachers from the primary and junior divisions should be aware of how the Kindergarteners are taught and the strategies that are employed, and what works well for the early learners' classroom. Afterall, school shouldn’t only be fun for the little ones! In order for the benefits of Full-Day Kindergarten to last, it depends on teachers of all grades to commit to meaningful, interactive teaching that facilitates our students’ learning.
From my research, almost all reports have shown results that prove that full-day kindergarten programs are either equivalent to, or more beneficial than half-day programs. One of the major findings is that literacy achievement has improved when students who were enrolled in a full-day kindergarten program were tested in higher grades. This is proved to be the same in the mathematics test scores. In the full-day program, children acquire skills to become emergent readers, which is especially true for students from lower socioeconomic status. They also acquire stronger learning skills. These children gain more school readiness as they are engaged in a whole day of activities in the classroom. Explanations to the benefits are that teachers have more opportunities to work individually with students and incorporate play and social activities into the curriculum, and having a greater sense of continuity as the students are involved in these activities.
Socially, students enrolled in the full-day kindergarten program tend to have a smoother transition into the elementary school community. They tend to be more engaged with other children, show better social skills, as well as better self-concept.
One argument to the full-day kindergarten program is that young learners would be overtired after a day of school, but research showed that it's not proven to be a concern. Another countering point is that although children in full-day programs show better results in literacy and mathematics, these advantages do not last after the students passed Grade 3. The academic differences between full-day and half-day students diminish, as they are developmentally ready for their next stage.
After reading the research papers concerning the issue, I agree that Kindergarten should be viewed as part of the continuum of the Elementary system. There should be continuity from the way these early learners make their transition into Grade 1, 2, and so on. Teachers from the primary and junior divisions should be aware of how the Kindergarteners are taught and the strategies that are employed, and what works well for the early learners' classroom. Afterall, school shouldn’t only be fun for the little ones! In order for the benefits of Full-Day Kindergarten to last, it depends on teachers of all grades to commit to meaningful, interactive teaching that facilitates our students’ learning.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
