Week Five: Early Years Learning Environments

Reflection 

In learning about the importance of space and creating a dynamic learning environment in the classroom, Louise framed the intentionality behind the design of an early years learning space and discussed precisely how this space is communicated to children. The Reggio Emilia philosophy understands the pedagogy, architecture and power of aesthetics in the design of play space4. It is essential the learning environment compliments a lesson and enhances student engagement through quality resources (open-ended), classroom displays and areas that are designed to encourage dramatic play and acts as a third teacher4.

     (Dunn, 2005)

The following steps are developed to introduce students to a range of literacy experiences within a dynamic learning space and has given me a practical understanding of how the environment can be altered to enhance learning1:

• Select a play context with opportunities across the full range of literacies  
• Develop a shared understanding of the fictional or real-world context to be explored in the play space using the teach-in-role strategy
• Involve the children in the process of designing the play space    
• Plan for play: including the facilitation of discussions around the what's up factor
  

From our reading material this week about natural, unstructured play spaces, I have learned that where children are spending more of their time in the natural environment they are shown to engage in more creative play, have improved school attendance and enhanced motor skill development2,5. The opportunity to use the natural environment and harness children's interests and curiosity in learning is an interactive and supportive way to foster children's intellectual development and strengthen their social partnerships with peers2. 

Within the classroom, flexible spaces that can be changed to suit the learning needs of students will be a focus in my own teaching. I want to engage students through an intrinsic motivation to participate and create their own dynamic classroom space for play as well as learning. 

Bibliography:

1. Dunn, J. (2005). Building drama worlds, Four steps to creating literacy rich dramatic play environments. Every Child. 11(2).

2. Galizio, C., Stoll, J., & Hutchins, P. (2009). We Need a Way to Get to the Other Side! Exploring the Possibilities for Learning in Natural Spaces. YC Young Children, 64(4), 42-48.

3. Gandini, L. (2012). Connecting through caring and learning spaces. In C.Edwards, L. Gandini, G. Forman (3ed Ed.) The hundred languages of children: The Reggio Emilia experience transformation (pp.317-341). Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger. 

4. Phillips, L. (2013). Week Five: Early Years Learning Environments[Powerpoint Slides]. Unpublished manuscript, EDUC2704, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Australia.  

5. Walsh, P. (2006). Creating child-friendly play spaces: A practitioner's perspective. In B. Gleeson & N.Sipe. Creating child-friendly cities (pp.136-150). New York: Routledge. 

Week Four: Early Years Curriculum

Reflection

Curriculum documents at this point of my degree (second year) are somewhat overwhelming, particularly with there being more than one to decipher (we looked at four separate documents related to the early years curriculum alone in the lecture)with different guidelines, structure, assessable elements, and the list continues - I still feel I have much to learn. 

EYLF and ACARA each reflect a different focus on learning.The EYLF reflects a holistic approach to learning and development, set within play-based environments with broad learning outcomes2,4. The ACARA is more content driven with focus on content and proficiency strands, with content descriptions and elaborations2,4.

I found a useful website below designed for those with limited knowledge of the EYLF document. It provides a step-by-step guide of how to use the EYLF document in planning and teaching. If you click on the picture below it will expand. While there were other useful examples on this website, I felt planning is most relevant to me at this stage of degree1. 

(Aussie Childcare Network, 2009)

The emphasis this week was recognising that there are differences in curriculum documents and as Louise mentioned in the lecture, they are to be used as a guide, not an instructional manual5. This makes the content covered in the previous two weeks of pedagogy and the teaching body of particular importance when planning content and teaching for engagement while adhering to curriculum in a more practical way.  

  

Bibliography:

1. Aussie Childcare Network. (2009). EYLF Curriculum planning and documentation. Retrieved from http://www.aussiechildcarenetwork.com/early_years_curriculum_planning.php 

2. Braise, M. & Nuttall, J. (2011). Chapter 4: The early years curriculum (pp. 78-109). Learning to teach in the early years classroom. South Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

3. Commonwealth of Australia. (2009). Belonging, being and becoming: The early years learning framework for Australia. Australian Government Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations  for the Council of Australian Governments.

4. Perry, B., Dockett, S., Harley, E. (2008). The Early Years Learning Framework for Australia and the Australian Curriculum: Mathematics – Linking Educators’Practice through Pedagogical Inquiry Questions. Retrieved from
http://www.merga.net.au/sites/default/files/editor/books/1/Chapter%208%20

5. Phillips, L. (2013). Week Four: Early Years Curriculum [Powerpoint Slides]. Unpublished manuscript, EDUC2704, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Australia.  

6. The State of Queensland (Queensland Studies Authority)(2010) Queensland Kindergarten Learning Guideline. Brisbane: QSA

7. The State of Queensland (Queensland Studies Authority) (2006). Early years curriculum guidelines. Brisbane: QSA 

Week Three: Early Years Pedagogy

Reflection

This week I realised why it important to understand the many perspectives of teaching and learning theory in practice, particularly in the early years. I discovered that it is not necessarily about following one theory or one practice, but rather to have an understanding of how they are interrelated and support one another to modify and better our teaching strategies in the classroom.  

I created this mind map which led to my understanding of why a comprehensive knowledge of child development and teaching strategies is so important to creating an inclusive learning environment. 

Fundamental to teaching practice, significant to the pedagogies mentioned in my mind map and in early years education is the pedagogy of listening from a Reggio Emilia perspective. Rinaldi discusses the importance of observation, documentation and interpretation of learning processes in the development of professional teaching:  

           
    (Rinaldi, 2012)

I find this useful in providing an effective way to reflect on my own teaching practice, communicating with a range of evidence the outcomes of my teaching practice and perhaps most importantly, identifying ways I can improve in the future for my own sake and for the sake of my students. 

Principles and Practices of The Reggio Emilia Approach3.

• Children must have some direction over their learning
• Listening pedagogy 
• Children should learn through experiences that involve touching, moving, listening, seeing and hearing
• Emergent Curriculum
• Children's interaction and relationship with other children is paramount to their development
• Children must be allowed to explore and interact with a variety of materials
• Children should be given endless ways to express themselves

Bibliography:

1. Braise, M. & Nuttall, J. (2011). Chapter 5: Power and pedagogy (pp. 52-77). Learning to teach in the early years classroom. South Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

2. Phillips, L. (2013). Week Three: Early Years Pedagogy [Powerpoint Slides]. Unpublished manuscript, EDUC2704, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Australia.  

3. Regio Emilia Information Exchange. (2011). Retrieved from http://www.reaie.org.au/ 

4. Rinaldi, C. (2012). The pedagogy of listening. The listening perspective of Reggio Emilia (pp. 233-246) in C. Edwards, L. Gandini, G. Forman (3rd Ed.). The hundren languages of children: The Reggio Emilia experience in transformation. Praeger: Santa Barbara, CA.

Week Two: The Early Years Teaching Body

Reflection

The teaching body is a significant attribute of teaching and influences the ways in which we communicate, construct and deliver knowledge to our students. The teaching body is a new concept for me, however from the content covered this week, my understanding is that the teaching body requires a sense of self-awareness and intentionality on the part of the teacher to design instruction as a participant in the learning process. I understand my own teaching body to be the way I interact with students, engage children with learning when modeling task expectations and present content in a way that motivates students' learning using affective force (also a new terminology).

Affective Force is associated with teaching strategies used in the classroom and is influenced by the presence of the teaching body2,4. The teaching body promotes student engagement in tasks and generates a desire to learn that is more conducive to learning than simply preparing developmentally appropriate activities without situated actions1. 

Louise provided helpful examples to better understand concepts of the teaching body in a number of ways. In particular, I found the example of making the comparison between a teacher wearing a suit and a teacher wearing jeans and a t-shirt useful in evaluating how the discursive body can construct our teaching identities and communicate aspects of identity such as professionalism. Each of us experience our body differently across professional and personal contexts; inside and outside of the classroom, the way we conduct ourselves, dress, and interact with others changes dependent on the social context1. Further, the difference between a teacher standing in front of a class and a teacher sitting on the floor with the children impacts upon the social setting of the classroom and phenomenological teaching body as the learning is interactive rather than directive. I see the teaching body as consistent in respect to attitude and approach towards teaching (positively) and flexible depending on the class activity or delivery of task to bring about a depth of communication otherwise not utilised. 

   

 

(Serbe, 2009)

Bibliography: 

1. Braise, M. & Nuttall, J. (2011). Learning to Teach in the Early Years Classroom. South Melbourne, Victoria: Oxford University Press.

2. Phillips, L. (2013). Week Two: The Early Years Teaching Body [Powerpoint Slides]. Unpublished manuscript, EDUC2704, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Australia.  

3. Serbe, M. (2009). Teaching and Body Language.[Web log message]. Retrieved from http://visualculture09.wordpress.com/2009/12/02/teaching-and-body-language/