Running Head: Preschool Student Choice with Free Play Centers

Practicum 1

Running head:Preschool Student Choice with Free Play Centers

Preschool Student Choice with Free Play Centers

Elizabeth L. Pourciau

Southeastern LouisianaUniversity

Summer 2003

Abstract

This is a descriptive action research case study of two preschool classrooms over a three-week instruction period. This action research project was designed to describe the choices that preschool students take when given options during “free play”. The focus of this action research was to determine in a center- based curriculum, preschool students choice of centers. An attempt was made to determine whether or not students had a preference regarding technology centers or non-technology centers. In this Head Start Program, the students were allowed “free play” in the center time activities. Data is collected by an observer who has no direct contact with any of the students or the teachers at the facility. Additionally, the most popular center was also determined from the available data. A comparison of students’ usage of technology centers to the proficiency scores on the developmental checklist will determine the overall success of the students in the center-based curriculum.

This action research project was designed to describe the choices that preschool students take when given options during “free play”. More specifically, the focus was how student choice of technology oriented centers compared to other centers during a specific time period.

Review of Literature

In 1964 a panel of experts in early childhood development developed a program for the Federal Government. The panel submitted their findings which became the starting point for the program we know as Project Head Start. The project was originally to be an eight week summertime program geared toward the disadvantaged youth in the communities in the nation. This program was to be the necessary elements to break the cycle of poverty in the United States. Project Head Start was to provide low-income families with emotional, social, health, nutritional and psychological needs of the children ages three to school entry age. Today this program has blossomed into a program administered locally by nonprofit organizations to provide these services to the low-income families in the communities across the nation (U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 2002). The backbone of the program is based on the parent and community involvement for the success of the children.

Every child enrolled in the program receives a variety of learning experiences that fosters growth. This includes the importance of early identification of health problems. The Head Start Program also involves the parents in parent education, as well as having a voice in the decisions of the program. Included in the Head Start Program, specific social services are geared toward the family after a needs assessment has been completed. Many of the social services for the family are funded by non-profit agencies or by grant monies. Twenty percent of the total cost of a Head Start must be funded by the community in which it serves (hsrtc.org, 2003). Head Start programs can be found in all 50 states, as well as all of the outlying U.S territories.

The developmental learning process of young children takes time and will go through stages in order for understanding to occur. At the ages of 3 and 4 the children are only learning by trial and error. This stage of the learning process is really on sided. The children at this age find it hard to focus on more than their own perception (Miller, January/February 2003). The same age children also use words to help them or make sense of the world around them (Miller, April 2003). Research shows that make-believe play develops symbolic thinking, self-regulation and creativity (Leong & Bodrova, April 2003). This is the necessary catalyst that helps the children develop and practice their social skills (Leong & Bodrova, March 2003). The children at this age are also developing new large-motor skills (Miller, April 2003). At age 3 the children still confuse fantasy and reality (Miller, April/ May 2003). It is a good idea for teachers to provide real-world activities for them to experience. Some of the three year old, may not want to actively participate, rather they may seem shy about the strange newness of an object or strange noises. Instead, they just may want to participate passively, still curious enough to take a look (Miller, March 2003). Healy interjects and tells us that children under the age of five have the tendencies to confuse the appearance with reality (Healy, 1998). The four year olds on the other hand will almost always jump right in and try new things (Miller, April 2003). This is the best time for a teacher to use the children’s multiple intelligence to stimulate the learning process (Miller, January/February 2003).

Centers are the stepping stones to learning for the early educational classroom. The centers approach to learning is a well established strategy that provides opportunities for the learners to engage in hands on learning for children. Using this idea, the teacher can create literate environments through these centers to create meaningful real-world experiences for students to engage the learning process. With the center activities the students are allowed to engage successfully in the activity at their skill level (Stone, 1996).

Pretend play is another vehicle that stimulates the foundational skills (Leong &Bodrova, April/May 2003). It is only through the careful planning of the teacher to provide meaningful learning experience that the students will further their academic learning (Leong & Bodrova, March 2003). A child’s appetite for learning emerges only when teachers understand the engagement process in thinking and problem solving based on issues that matter to them (Scott, 2003).

Technology has explored the diversity with children in many new and exciting ways. Using the digital camera or tape recorder has allowed students to listen or have others in the class to identify the sound (Buckleitner, 2002). In order to successfully use a computer in the classroom a teacher must first decide which way is developmentally appropriate for the children, and then must review the curriculum goals and standards to see if the software can be successfully used in the class (Kneas, 1999). According to Healy, the computer should be used if it accomplishes the task better than other materials or experiences. She also believes that at age six or seven that a child should be combining computer and manipulative activities to better the learning activities (Healy, 1998).

Adding a computer in the early childhood educational classroom has been a difficult part of adjusting the curriculum to meet the needs of the learners. In this sense the children are being exposed to materials and activities that are developmentally appropriate. Children react to the computer in the classroom “matter of factly”. It is the child’s experiences that help the adults make the necessary changes to promote computer literacy in the classrooms. By blending the computer technology into the curricular, it has been able to provide a balance the availability of resources in the classroom. This effective strategy is becoming the vehicle to encourage family participation and equalize play in the Head Start Classroom (Hutinger, Robinson and Johanson, 1990). Healy claimed that “computers are not necessary or even desirable in the lives of most children under the age of seven”. Healy also reminded us that profound developmental tasks that have to be mastered and they may be distorted with too much electronic stimulation (Healy, 1998).

As part of the standards for early educational classrooms developmentally appropriate practices have been established. By using this method of appropriate practices provided the key elements of connecting children with the various academic foundations. Computers also could be considered a tool to help ChildrenBridge the gap in education, but should not replace manipulative in the classroom. The young child must have many multi-sensory as well as three-dimensional learning experiences throughout the developmental stages (Scholastic Early Childhood Today, 2002).

The purpose of standards is two fold: (1) standards express shared expectations and provide a common language for assessing the progress toward the goal and (2) early schooling can have a significant impact on learning later in the academic career. Standards in early childhood education need not be watered down versions of the K-12 standards but should accommodate a wider variety of performances (Kendall, 2003).

The accountability demands on the educational fields have finally dwindled down to the preschool sector. More and more early-childhood educational programs are demanding for assessment practices. In 1998, Congress redirected the Head Start to establish eight broad categories for child development and readiness to focus on a new direction. It is now a requirement for Head Start Programs to measure performance of students and the program itself. The new reauthorization mandates that the Head Start programs gather and analyze data on 13 specific outcomes that include related language, literacy and numeric skills. All of the assessments will be regulated by the federal Administration for Children and Families beginning with the school year of 2001-02 (Meyer, 2002). By the summer of 2003, all states must have early-childhood guidelines in place (Jacobson, 2003). Jacobson also states that these guidelines must also be aligned with the already existent K-12 standards. She also states that the director of public policy over early childhood education hopes that the government would take the next step assisting states in building a better organized system in the early childhood education (Jacobson, 2003).

Since the federal government has stepped in with accountability, the new assessment measures have crated concerns about the testing of 4 year olds. Current policies only require a random sample of testing (Davis, 2003). President Bush outlined the next step in education reform, in his 2002 State of the Union address, as the need to prepare children to read by improved Head Start and early childhood development education (January 2002). This plan outlines the policy to strengthen the early learning program as well as the importance of early childhood cognitive development. Under the scrutiny of the passage of the policy there are still the few that argue that preschool assessments are often unreliable (Jacobson, 2003).

Test that have been established by the No Child Left Behind Act for the 4 year olds will not only find out if the students know how to hold a book right but to decided whether a Head Start center should continue to be funded. The new focus has now been place on the transition from preschool to kindergarten, but the fear remains will they only look at academic skills. The answers to the many of the questions about early childhood education may not be found in the test results we receive (Lewis, 2003).

Existing research shows that the formation of centers to attain exciting learning experiences is the foundations that the K-12 standards are looking for. This study attempts to demonstrate that students prefer learning at different times and with different experiences.

Hypothesis

It is hypothesized that preschool students will have definite preferences regarding technology use in play centers.

It is hypothesized that there will be a statistically significant relationship between global score and the TECH factor among preschool students in a Head Start Program.

Methodology

This action research project was designed to describe the choices that preschool students take when given options during “free play”. More specifically, the focus of this action research was how student choice of technology oriented centers compared to other centers during a specific time period.

Subjects

Pre-school students in two separate classrooms

Classroom 1- 3 year old classroom- Children in this classroom are those students whose birth dates range from 1998-1999. There are 8 male students and 9 female students for a total number of 18 students enrolled in the class.
Classroom 2- 4 year old classroom- Children in this classroom are those students whose birth dates range from 1997-1999. There are 10 male students and 9 female students for a total number of 19 students enrolled in the class.

Setting

The school was the ReginaCoeliChildDevelopmentCenter in Robert, Louisiana. This school is a private, non-profit organization that operate at least fifteen Head Start and EarlyLearningCenters in the southern part of Louisiana. The Center is the setting where over 400 employees are able to service approximately 1,700 children in a five-parish area. The ReginaCoeliCenter was founded in 1969 and is recognized as one of the best Head Start programs in the country. A federal grant has provided about 80% of the funding and the other part must be generated locally.

Research Design

This is a descriptive action research case study of two preschool classrooms over a three-week instruction period.

Procedure

(1)Each student was assigned a number by the teacher of the classroom. The number was placed on their students back so that it could be seen by the observer.

(2)The observer used the daily observation sheet to count the number of students that were “playing” in each of the centers in 5 minute increments throughout the observation time.

(3)For the computer center, the observer wrote the number of the student that was working on the computer and the name of the software that was being used.

(4)The observer had no direct contact the students or the faculty in the classroom during the observation times.

Survey Instruments

3 year old data form –

This form was created in Microsoft Excel. At the very top of the form a place for the name of the school was placed, a place for the teacher to sign as well as places for the times observed and the observer’s signature. Other data included for informational purposes was the actual date and the instruction day was circled. It included all of the centers offered to the students during the center time. For each of the centers there is a column to include the time and the number of students. For the Computers the student number column and the program are included. (Appendix A)

4 year old data form-

Work Sampling for Head Start Three Year old Developmental Checklist

The checklist is intended to aid teachers in monitoring what children know or be able to do, as well as assist in the planning of lessons for the students. The behaviors and skills described in the form are those considered to be developmentally appropriate for most children at this age. The checklist is designed to be completed by the teacher without actually testing each child, although some items may require setting up specific opportunities to the child to demonstrate the skill. The checklist is completed three times throughout the instructional year. For each of the specific skills, behaviors, or accomplishments, a rating of NOT YET, IN PROCESS, or PROFICIENT will be assigned to the student as to the performance of the student in each of the categories. (Appendix B)

Work Sampling for Head Start Three Year old Developmental Checklist

Forms of Inquiry

The forms used in the research project will be used to assist further planning of lessons for student involvement in the subject areas.

Form 1: A list of all of the students in the 3 year old classroom. The only information needed is the student’s birth date and the gender. Names are omitted for confidentiality reasons. (Appendix C)

Form 2: A list of all of the students in the 4 year old classroom. The only information needed is the student’s birth date and the gender. Names are omitted for confidentiality reasons. (Appendix C)