Activity One: Play-based Activity for the Group Ages 3-8 - Essay Example

?Task 3a Activity One: Play-based Activity for the Group Ages 3-8 Age of children: 4 Number of children observed: 5 For the group in the age band 3-8, I planned a round of “baseball.” In this game, I made up flash cards that have different shapes on them, such as a star, a moon, a sun, a tree, an animal (elephant, giraffe, penguin, rhinoceros, mouse, dog, cat), a dinosaur (Tyrannosaurus Rex, Brontosaurus, Stegosaurus), a house, a lake, a geometric shape (triangles and squares), and a flower (tulips, roses, daisies). Before the game began, I reviewed each flash card with the members of the group, explained what each shape was, and what the colors were of each shape, and what color each shape was supposed to be. I separated the groups into two groups, and each group formed one team. Each of the cards showed the object to be a different color than what it usually is – such as the Tyrannosaurus Rex was yellow, the sun was green, the moon was purple, the star was red, the Brontosaurus was blue, the Stegosaurus was pink, the elephant was green, the giraffe was grey, the penguin was brown, the rhinoceros was orange. I also designed a spinner, in which the child got a chance to spin the spinner, and the spinner would decide which kind of “hit” he or she would take – a single, a double, or a triple. Around the room were the “bases,” which consisted of a toy strategically placed in the shape of a diamond. If the child spun the spinner, and landed on a single, then that child had to name the shape – what kind of animal, etc., the shape represents. If the child chose a double, then that child had to name the color and the animal, etc. If a child landed on a triple, then the child had to name the color, the animal, etc., and the color that the animal, etc. is supposed to be. So, if the child lands on a triple, then sees the flash card with a grey giraffe, then the child must state that the shape is a giraffe, the giraffe is grey, and the giraffe is supposed to be yellow. If the child only knows one of these, say, the child knows that the shape is a giraffe, but does not know that the color is grey or that the giraffe is supposed to be yellow, then the child advances once, as if he or she got a single. If he does not know anything, he or she gets an out. If he or she gets all three, then that is a triple, and he or she brings home everybody else who are standing on the different bases. The learning intention for this game is to familiarize the children with their shapes and colors, in anticipation of them entering kindergarten. In the beginning, before the game began, I familiarized the children with the flash cards. This strategy was two-fold – one, it helped the children learn the different shapes and colors before playing the game, and, two, it helped me to understand how much the children knew to start with. This would help tailor the game. It also helped the children review what they might have already been taught at home with their books, such as learning what a penguin looks like through storybooks about penguins, etc. In this way, I was able to assess the child’s readiness levels (Vygotsky, 1986), interests (Csikszentmihalyi, 1997), and learning profiles (Sternberg, Torff & Grigorenko, 1998). This exercise also helped me differentiate for the students. It is important to realize that all students have differing abilities (Tomlinson, 2001). Therefore, any educational strategy must be inclusive of all abilities and disabilities (Fukunaga et al.). This exercise helped me realize which of the students were more prepared for this exercise, and which might have difficulties with this game. For the students who appeared more advanced, I gave presented them with a bit more challenging flash cards, such as the Rhinoceros and the Tulip. Those who were less advanced were presented with less difficult shapes, such as a star or a moon. This planning exercise was effective in helping the game go smoothly. The kids really loved playing this game, because most of them succeeded, and the reason why most succeeded is that the cards were tailored to their own individual level of ability. At the same time, it helped all the children learn different shapes and colors. The implementation went very well, because the kids really loved to run the bases – most of them ran, all out, to the bases, like they see real baseball players do. In all, the implementation of this game gave the students a taste of success, as each of them got on base, and when a kid would get a triple and score two runs for his or her team, there was a lot of celebrating and laughter. So, the kids had a lot of fun playing this game, and, because they were having fun, it made it easier to teach the shapes and colors. The kids really wanted to learn these shapes and colors, because they wanted to do well in the game. My role was simply to facilitate and teach, and I also made sure that the children moved along the bases smoothly, and give encouragement to the kids who might get an out. Activity Two: Play-Based Activity for the Group Ages 0-3 Age of children observed: 3 Number of children observed: 2 For these children, I designed a play-based activity for the developmental level that they were at, which would be pre-operational according to Piaget (Reese & Overton, 1970). These were slightly younger children than the other group, and these children probably would not be as familiar with their colors and shapes as the other group, so I planned a more basic activity. This activity was based upon the concept of the microworld, which is considered to be a “small, but complete, version of some domain of interest” (Rieber, 1996). In this microworld, I provided blocks for the children to play with. These blocks were all shapes and sizes. I then instructed the children that they were to construct a building, then pretend that they were the three little pigs, and that they were specifically the pig who constructed the sturdy home. Before the activity began, however, I read them the story of the three little pigs, in case they had never heard the story before. I asked them questions about the type of home that they were going to build – whether they felt that the home would be made of straw, of sticks or of bricks. The children naturally answered “bricks,” then I told them to use the blocks and pretend that they were bricks, and construct a house that the wolf would not be able to blow in. The children had quite a time trying to build that house. The blocks were all shapes and sizes, so, at first, they tried to build the house with larger blocks and smaller blocks in haphazard formation, so the house fell down. It took them awhile, but they finally figured out that the large blocks need to go on the bottom, then the smaller blocks towards the top. All the while, they were making oinking noises, and getting panicky about the wolf coming – they had to build that house fast, or else the wolf would come! Every time the house would fall down, they would pretend to get more and more scared about the prospect of the wolf coming to get them. Then, when they successfully built the house, they were happy and secure in the knowledge that they would be safe from the wolf. The safety precautions that I took with this was making sure that none of the blocks were small enough that a child could choke on it, and making sure that the blocks were dyed with a non-toxic dye. The learning intention of this activity was that the children would learn spatial relationships, that is, that they can understand that larger blocks hold up smaller blocks, and learn the difference between the block sizes. The other learning intentions were to teach the children how to problem solve, because when the house continually fell down, they had to come up with a different plan, and, through coming up with different plans, they were able to see what worked and what did not. My role was simply to read them the story and give them the scenario. I was also there to observe, but I did not help the children when they got stuck. They got frustrated because the building kept falling down, and they asked for my guidance, but I gently told them that they would need to find a way to construct a sturdy house themselves. In this way, the children learned by doing, and had to keep constructing the blocks until they got it right. They had a great sense of satisfaction after they were able to successfully build the building so that it stood up. I felt that this was the appropriate role, as the whole point of the activity was to help the children get spatial construction right on their own, and problem solve when things went wrong. This was a very effective way to introduce the children to the concepts that I wanted to teach them. The children loved hearing the story about the three little pigs, and it turned out that they already knew the story, but wanted to hear it again, as it was a favorite of theirs. They also loved pretending that they were the little pigs, and really got into playing like the wolf was coming to get them, so they had to construct their building properly. They also learned about working cooperatively, because they had to work together to get the building right. Each child also took a leadership role in the project, as one child would direct the other child about how best to construct the building, then, if that did not work out, the other child took the lead and came up with ideas. All the while, the major lesson, which is how to problem solve and learn spatial relationships, was reinforced. Task 3b As stated before, differentiation is an important aspect of play based learning, or any kind of learning. Children’s learning needs are varied, and an educator must be sensitive to this (Danielson 1996). Therefore, the support strategies must be geared towards this reality. I felt that, in the first activity, the differentiation worked very well. Each child had a different readiness for this game, and I was able to ascertain this when I reviewed the shapes and colors with the children prior to commencing the game. I knew that some of the kids would be ready for difficult shapes and colors, while others would not be. I also knew that giving difficult shapes and colors to the kids who were not ready would be harmful to them and their self-esteem, because the other kids might “blame” them for getting an out, and if they got enough of the more difficult shapes and colors and got enough of the outs, then the other kids would probably ostracize them. So, my strategy was to discreetly make sure that the easier colors and shapes would be given to the children who displayed less readiness for the game, so that they would be less likely to strike out for their team. This gave these children confidence, because they were able to contribute and score runs for their team. On the other hand, the kids who were more advanced were able to identify more difficult shapes and colors, and this was a good self-esteem builder for them as well. The reason for this is because they were able to identify shapes that other kids would not be able to, so this gave them a sense of accomplishment as well. At the same time, the game reinforced different shapes and colors to all the children. Therefore, the differentiation and support strategies worked for all levels, and my observation was that these strategies enhanced the self-esteem of all the children, and gave all of them confidence, so they all had fun while they learned, and none of the children were ostracized. Of course, some of the children scored an out for their team, but it was not the same child scoring out after out, so the other children did not have a reason to ostracize or make fun of any one child. I was able to tell which children would be ready for the game, and which children would be less ready, during the initial flash card preparation. I observed which of the children seemed to know most of the cards and colors, and which did not, simply by reading their facial and body language. The kids tended to shout out when they saw a flash card that they knew, so I was able to observe which ones were the most engaged. However, I also know that just because a child is quiet and does not shout out does not necessarily mean that this child is unaware of the shape and color of the flash card, so I observed which of the children looked puzzled by most of the cards, and which looked like they knew the card but were not verbalizing it because they felt shy. It was somewhat tricky, but by observing I was able to pinpoint the readiness of most of the children in the groups. On the other hand, with the second observation, it seemed as if both children were at the same basic level, so there was not a need to differentiate with strategies. That said, each of the children had a different role in the construction of the building, and that role changed from time to time. Still, I realized that the kids had different learning styles. One boy seemed to be a tactile learner, which is why he took the lead with the building blocks. The other boy seemed to be an auditory learner, as he was able to recount the story to the other boy, telling the other boy how the pig would build the house, while reminding the other boy about different aspects of the story. So, they meshed well together. I took advantage of their learning styles by telling the little boy who was the auditory learner directions on how he might go, while still letting him figure it out for himself. With the tactile learner, I encouraged him by showing him the different sizes of the blocks, and the different shapes, and asked him how he might fit these together to build a sturdy house. I let him hold these blocks in his hand, while explaining the differences between the blocks. In this way, I was able to differentiate their learning styles, although I did not really have to do any remedial instruction to either boy, because both boys seemed to have roughly equivalent intelligence and readiness levels. I found that these strategies worked very well with these two boys, as they worked well together and cooperatively found a way to build the house. In all, I was proud that I was able to devise strategies for all the children that I created activities for. With the baseball scenario, my strategies for the children helped all the children have fun with the game, while nobody got picked on because they were unable to identify certain shapes or colors. Therefore it was a positive learning environment, as each child cooperated to make sure their team got the most runs, and each child felt that they contributed to their team scoring. At the same time, some of the kids who were advanced got an added boost to their self-esteem, as they were able to score triples and impress their classmates with their knowledge. And, with the second activity, I was able to ascertain the learning styles of each of the boys and tailor my instructions to their learning styles, while letting them discover, on their own, the best way to construct the building. This gave each of these boys a sense of accomplishment, and they were very excited to finally see their building project come to fruition. Task 4 I took a different tact to observing in each of these activities. In the first activity, I was more of a facilitator, as I was showing the children the flash cards, and assigning them to their bases, as well as helping them run the bases. I felt that this was appropriate, because the other children probably would not be able to facilitate the game, so I needed to be the one to do it. Still, I was able to observe how the children took to the game, as well as observe initially which children were ready for the game and which were less ready, and I made a documentation of this before beginning the game. The documentation was important, as it helped me keep on track as to which children would be presented with which cards. With the second activity, I was more of a passive observer, even though the children wanted me to guide them more. This method of observation was important, as the children needed to figure out the building construction for themselves, as this was the whole point of the exercise. Therefore, I needed to stand back and simply observe most of the time, instead of actively participating. I personally learned how important it is to make sure that children feel included and welcomed. I knew that children tend to ostracize other children if that child is perceived as hindering the group effort, so my observation of what children needed what flash card was important and gave me a valuable lesson on how to tailor these types of games. And with the second exercise, I learned the value of standing back and letting things unfold, for this gives the child more incentive to come up with their own solutions and not rely upon the instructor. In all, these lessons are important to me going forward in my educational career. Sources Used Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1997) Finding Flow: The Psychology of Engagement with Everyday Life. New York: Basic Books. Danielson, C. (1996). Enhancing Professional Practice: A Framework for Teaching. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Fukunaga, L., Simonelli, S. & Sperry, L. “Individualized Educational Support Strategies for Students with Autism in Inclusive Classroom Settings.” Available at: http://www.hulu.com/watch/205604/the-bachelor-week-2-part-1 Reese, H. & Overton, W. (1970). “Models of Development and Theories of Development,” Available at: http://www.temple.edu/psychology/overton/ documents/ReeseOverton1970.pdf Rieber, L. (1996). “Seriously Considering Play; Designing Interactive Learning Environments Based on the Blending of Microworlds, Simulations, and Games,” Educational Technology Research & Development 44(2), 43-58. Sternberg, R.J., Torff, B. & Grigorenko, E.L. (1998). “Teaching Triarchically Improves Student Achievement.” Journal of Educational Psychology 90(3), 374-384. Tomlinson, C. (2001). “Differentiation of Instruction in the Elementary Grades,” Available at: http://www.ericdigests.org/2001-2/elementary.html Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Read More