Hi everyone,
i think this discussion reflects some of the difficult areas to find consensus in our profession again. Lesson plan, learning plan, guided play experience, emergent curriculum, project-based, theme-based... it gets confusing. Personally, I have stumbled over the word curriculum often. Although "curriculum" has one, rather clearly defined meaning in the context of early childhood education or child development as taught on campus, leave the campus for the broader field and the word, " curriculum" can have a variety of meanings. A popular meaning for curriculum that is found in the context of online teacher to teacher resources is actually "lesson plan". I have sort of been banging my head over folks talking about creating curriculum when they mean lesson plans for a while. To correct some one on this point reeks of elitism, and dredges up the prickly subject of the value of experience and the value of developmental course work... Yet forget what goes into the word "curriculum" as defined in the context of the study of child development, and you easily fall short of creating the enriched experiences that form a strong base for lifetime learning and meet the needs of children & families that don't fit easily into neurotypical-based early childhood environments. It's 3 am., Hope I am making sense! What I mean is: a lot of people think curriculum means lesson plan, they go the sort of "old school preschool" path, and follow the daily plan that includes - welcome/arrival ( free choice of table activities that include small manipulatives, couple worksheets that focus on the weekly theme, say "Letter M" or "transportation" , a couple manips with numbers on them, a couple manips with letters on them, a couple manips that feature science, usually this means, wait for it, magnets... or butterflies... or, as "nature-based" play is growing more popular, possibly balancing stones in realistic colors, or wax bendy sticks, these are rotated on a daily/ weekly basis. Lead teacher greets at the door, caregiver says good bye at the door ( we have all been in settings where there is the "magic line" that parents do not cross, as it supposedly holds the magic touch to make separation more efficient, like ripping off a band aid). After arrival time comes circle time with calendar, jobs, maybe sharing time, but that is often cut to to make sure there is enough time for a couple songs with finger plays, and a short, shared story book that will serve to organized our art project, and maybe also our dramatic play area or science project. Then line up, potty break, snack ( might also fit the theme, especially on special shape or color days), book and puzzle time until every one is finished with snack ( nothing too interesting while some children are eating snack or lunch, because we do not want to encourage children to rush through eating or get distracted). Snack and lunch may include teachers sitting & eating with the kids, but usually teachers walk around nibbling and setting up while kids eat. If it gets too noisy, a song or recorded story might be played so children eat quietly. After that, we fit in centers, including dramatic play area that may rotate with monthly theme, or it could be house keeping, and our big art project of the day, or maybe it is a science, or cooking project day instead of art. Some classrooms will have awesome art projects they take home, others will have "process-based" art, like shaving cream on tables, or large group paintings with veggies as brushes, or marbles, or toy cars, anything different from a standard paint brush. There will be outside free play, maybe another short circle with book or song and a short review before it is time to sing the good bye song and go home. Nothing wrong with daily plan too much; it can be incredibly enriched and actually gives most preschoolers what they need for good development just fine. Of course, it will not work for infants and 1-2's classrooms. And it can collapse when a student or family with special needs comes to class, say a child who is a dual language learner, a precocious learner, a developmental delay, or a child who has experienced trauma. Because humans are robust learners, and generally resilient, development will fold largely according to plan. But what is missing is the underlying curriculum that could be guiding this classroom and informing the daily lesson plans and projects. The curriculum that explains how we think actual individual learning takes place; what makes learning happen, what triggers developmental change? And when we step back from "weekly letters" and "transportation," we may see that the main fuel of development is experience, and we may leave calendars and worksheets for kindergarten or later. We may see that children learn best when they feel safe, so talking about our feelings may be more important than talking about butterfly metamorphosis. We may decide that children in our classroom have many language learning needs, and learning to take short turns in conversations is more appropriate than listening quietly while the teacher reads, for now. We may begin to value peer interactions including conflicts as great learning opportunities. We may even decide that spending some time asking questions together may help us generate highly enriching classroom environments, and that by following the children's lead, instead of leading the children will do a better job for reducing problem behavior than "time outs." Of course, coming in with an entirely open program, and bouncing from toy to toy without some kind of a schedule will hardly meet most children's need for daily routine, repetition and expectations will create an environment where children can feel safe, and get back to the business of serious play. An experienced teacher understands this, an educated educator is ready for the day ahead- the classroom environments, indoor & outdoor is modified and ready, so that children can play safely and are not bored or overwhelmed ( order the classroom, not the child...). Although art projects, science projects, cultural experiences - lesson plans, are helpful, they are less important than a trained adult watching how development is unfolding, ready to discuss red flags and guide families to help when there are questions. Although bugs and bubbles and letters and numbers are wonderful, and preliteracy and math foundations start in the infant & toddler room, even in the pre-k's class, the subjects matter less than the opportunity for interaction, conversation and problem solving. It's awesome if my teacher can show me tadpoles transforming to toads, but it is more critical that she has a chance to model pro social play, and has an opportunity to see how I am doing with my peers. Am I anxious? Do I get a turn? Am I excluding other children, or being excluded by my classmates?
Possibly, my response has drifted far afield from the original question: lesson plans to meet accreditation standards- having examples of specific lesson plans, whatever we call them, helps gives us a framework to ensure that the early childhood school/center/ environment is introducing critical learning domains and following developmentally appropriate practices. Sadly, when we focus too intensely on the idea of lesson plans and learning objectives or we risk forgetting the core needs of of early childhood development and how to provide those needs. From age 0-5, it's not really about "what" is being taught, but "how" we are "teaching." It's too early, or too late for me to reread this, so my apologies for sending out at rough draft. I love The NAEYC forums, and reading and interacting with all of on it is a constant source of growth and passion for me!
thanks for the opportunity to join in!
Margro Purple
Rockville, MD
------------------------------
Margro Purple
Rockville MD
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 07-22-2019 09:59 AM
From: Sophia Breytenbach
Subject: NAEYC Lesson Plans
It is such a privilege to get to know so many experts stating their viewpoints and knowledge. I never miss "Hello" !! Thanks to Dr. Gundling for his contribution.It really seems as if the conception regarding "lessen plans" vary in many ways. His explanation seems to cover the understanding that the emphasis should be on the planning of lessons to help the teacher/educator to plan for the potential of the whole child and not on formal presentation of such "lessons". It is understandable that where formal presentations and ridged curriculum are still a large problem in the Early Childhood setting, the experts have reason to be concerned when misunderstandings are possible. Thank you for caring for teachers and children.
Sophie
Original Message------
As one who has the opportunity to serve as a mentor/coach for Directors and Teachers, I found some interpret lesson plans as an activity or materials a teacher uses with a whole or small group of children. As I learn from and with those I serve, my understanding of focusing on the child(ren) first and then planning experiences to support the growth and development of the child(ren) is most important. I support intentional action to observe young children as they engage with adults in experiences to learn that are connected to their interest, Standards and current research in child development that identifies skills, behaviors, etc. of typically development of children at the age of the children the teacher is working with at any given time. Planning activities connected to observations of children in previous activities, where I find what is of interest to the child(ren), connected to Standard and the social, emotional, cognitive and physical development of the child(ren) is what I believe is most important. Continuous, high quality opportunities to learn where children are able to develop in ways that is moving them along in reaching their full potential is what I think, at this time, is most important in interactions with young children.
------------------------------
Robert Gundling, Ed.D.
Better Futures LLC
Senior Consultant
Washington, DC
------------------------------