ENGAGE
One of the most exciting parts about developing investigations and exploring concepts with children is developing connected experiences. It is also a part that comes naturally to most teachers. But how can we ensure that we are connecting key concepts to children’s discovery in the classroom? Are we considering the foundational vocabulary inherent in these lessons? Identifying “cute” or “fun” activities for children can be short-sighted, while making meaningful, deeply connected experiences part of the classroom can increase student engagement and learning, while reducing challenging behaviors.
According to the ACCESS Curriculum Framework Implementation Guide, “an overemphasis on cute and fun seems to permeate early childhood curriculum. Cute perpetuates a stereotype in early childhood that undermines the ability of many to take the field seriously” (Adams, Baldwin, Comingore, 2012, p. 23).
Furthermore, these “cute” activities or crafts often lend themselves to cookie-cutter, teacher directed experiences where the product is identical for each student and learning is viewed as a transaction from the teacher to the child. This is a manifestation of the value that children are empty vessels instead of the capable learners we know them to be.
Too often we as teachers translate meaningful learning experiences and underlying concepts into themes or units based on our adult interests and can translate into different areas of the classroom. It is also easier to spend time developing a thematic unit and repeating it with the same experiences every year. This “over-reliance on common units that are not typically based on children’s questions and do not encourage inquiry or deep understanding of a topic that is worthy of study” limits our creativity as educators and can be a mismatch between children’s interests and teachers intentions (p. 24). Instead, we want to focus on helping children make connections to previous learning, asking their own important and relevant questions about concepts. This requires the tools and skills present in other PROTONs in the Intentional Planning Element--as well as attention to the difference between adult-directed versus adult-guided experiences.
We currently live in the age of information, which (while helpful) can be overwhelming for teachers. Hours can be spent browsing sites like Pinterest and Facebook, searching for just the right activity, only for the teacher to lose focus and end up with lessons that are cute but disconnected from meaningful content and seemingly random. To ensure that experiences are meaningful, connected, and build up to higher order thinking skills, there are a few components to consider. Which experiences and elements will be structured and which will be unstructured? Will there be any guidance provided by the teacher, or will the primary intent be open-ended play? When we talk about meaningful experiences, we are not necessarily talking about “one and done” lessons, repeat-after-me art, or even tasks that can be accomplished in a single day. Rather, we want to look at experiences related to a central topic in which children can use new vocabulary, explore with new materials, and engage in a cyclical process of inquiry which digs deeper into a central concept.
According to the ACCESS Curriculum Framework Implementation Guide, “an overemphasis on cute and fun seems to permeate early childhood curriculum. Cute perpetuates a stereotype in early childhood that undermines the ability of many to take the field seriously” (Adams, Baldwin, Comingore, 2012, p. 23).
Furthermore, these “cute” activities or crafts often lend themselves to cookie-cutter, teacher directed experiences where the product is identical for each student and learning is viewed as a transaction from the teacher to the child. This is a manifestation of the value that children are empty vessels instead of the capable learners we know them to be.
Too often we as teachers translate meaningful learning experiences and underlying concepts into themes or units based on our adult interests and can translate into different areas of the classroom. It is also easier to spend time developing a thematic unit and repeating it with the same experiences every year. This “over-reliance on common units that are not typically based on children’s questions and do not encourage inquiry or deep understanding of a topic that is worthy of study” limits our creativity as educators and can be a mismatch between children’s interests and teachers intentions (p. 24). Instead, we want to focus on helping children make connections to previous learning, asking their own important and relevant questions about concepts. This requires the tools and skills present in other PROTONs in the Intentional Planning Element--as well as attention to the difference between adult-directed versus adult-guided experiences.
We currently live in the age of information, which (while helpful) can be overwhelming for teachers. Hours can be spent browsing sites like Pinterest and Facebook, searching for just the right activity, only for the teacher to lose focus and end up with lessons that are cute but disconnected from meaningful content and seemingly random. To ensure that experiences are meaningful, connected, and build up to higher order thinking skills, there are a few components to consider. Which experiences and elements will be structured and which will be unstructured? Will there be any guidance provided by the teacher, or will the primary intent be open-ended play? When we talk about meaningful experiences, we are not necessarily talking about “one and done” lessons, repeat-after-me art, or even tasks that can be accomplished in a single day. Rather, we want to look at experiences related to a central topic in which children can use new vocabulary, explore with new materials, and engage in a cyclical process of inquiry which digs deeper into a central concept.
