Any daycare with a preschool curriculum that has been in existence for over 20 years is going to experience changes throughout time. The center of review is located in Flatbush, Brooklyn, New York City. There are no significant historical foundations for the center and there are no specific issues of the time to address. The center opened as a needed place to provide childcare for working parents in the community.
Some of the social and cultural changes that have affected the center have been the population of the neighborhood. Although the location of the center has not changed, the neighborhood has changed from being Russian to now predominately West Indian. The parents are mostly quite young. Most of the children that attend the center are in government sponsored programs, so the parents are not directly paying for the tuition or expense for their child or children to attend the center. Because of this lack of accountability, some of the children do not attend for weeks at a time. Parents at this center do not make the connection between attendance and academics and social skills (Gleason, 2002). The dress code is more of a concern to the parents than the curriculum that their children are being taught. Since there is a lack of financial support from the community, and the government resources cannot be stretched enough, the dedicated teachers use their own money to buy educational material for the children, but it goes unnoticed by the parents or anyone but the other staff at the center. It seems, at times, that every possible obstacle that can be in the way of the educators is there, and that the only ones who care about the academic achievement of the children are the teachers at the center.
Attendance may not be as major an issue for the infants and toddlers at the facility, but in the preschool program, where there is a curriculum, it does make an impact on the learning, instruction, and the progress that the child is able to make both in academics as well as social development. It is true, that throughout the country, young children in urban areas are spending more time in the care of non-familial members because of welfare policy reforms and the expansion of early childhood education programs. Studies support that centers that have high-quality care and are focused on the cognitive growth of the children do have positive and long-lasting effects in the academic development of the children who attend such programs (Loeb, Fuller, Kagan, & Carrol, 2004).
In the particular center on which this paper is based, the pre-school curriculum includes teaching children to identify and count from 1-100, learn the concepts of addition and subtraction and some basic computation, and learn over 200 family and sight words within the academic year. This is a challenging program, and it is difficult to get parents to buy-in to the concept and believe that their child is indeed able to develop these skills before they enter their years of formal schooling. The city does provide a therapist to come to the school and assist with the students who have been designated as special needs students. At this time, the only children being worked with are four that are receiving speech therapy. The teachers and staff do meet with the therapist to discuss how to support the children and assist the children when the therapist is not present. Teachers have also been taught how to identify when potential therapy may be needed for other students (Balason & Dollaghan, 2002). There are also assistants to the certified teacher in the classroom. Most of the children are eager to learn. It is the lack of parental support that is the biggest obstacle.
Many of the families from this particular center do not seem to understand, or demonstrate concern, about how important it is to foster the skills that are taught in school in the home environment. Even as teachers and support stress try to stress to the parents that such involvement can help students achieve better academically and socially later in school, they are too tired, unmotivated, or unwilling to put forth the extra required effort needed to integrate some of the academic skills with their children after they leave the center. Even though the majority of the students at the center are attending through government sponsored programs, there are no requirements for the parents to integrate academics or other suggestions made by the staff once the child leaves the center.
Some of the basic family activities that can help enrich a preschool child’s academic life include reading together, practicing letters, numbers, counting, phonics, and one-on-one discussions between a parent and child where the child is actively engaged in conversation with the child. Counting the number of shirts going into the washer, naming the colors of the pairs of shorts, counting to two while finding pairs of socks, counting the number of cans in the pantry, naming the shapes of the crackers, and other simple things that can be done as a fun activity. This excitement about learning fosters interest in the learning process. Encouraging learning in the home is something that parents can do to facilitate learning and promote continuity between the classroom and the home (Hindman, Miller, Froyen, & Skibbe, 2012). The center staff tries to encourage the parents to participate, but the children report that there is no follow through after they go home.
Being that the center is in a lower socio-economic neighborhood, many of the children are not exposed to cultural events such as museums or the theatre. Their parents do not bring them to the library. Some of them do practice a religion and attend some form of worship. Much of these are lacking because the parents do not see them as necessities or the parents themselves were never exposed to such events. Many of the parents also work on the weekends and struggle to find childcare when the center is closed. Taking the time to take their children to such activities that are also foreign to they themselves is too difficult and the value that would be gained is not understood.
Another need that the center provides is a nutritious breakfast, lunch, and snacks. Many of the children inquire about the food served, especially fresh fruits and vegetables. They are intrigued by the foods that they do not see at home. Knowing that the children are eating well during the greater part of the day, parents do have one less thing to worry about when they do drop their children off. They are calm in the knowledge that their child or children are well-fed and well cared for while in the care of the center staff.
Most of the children that attend the center are well-groomed and dressed. Some of the parents do struggle to provide the basic necessity of proper clothing for the season, such as a warm winter coat, hat, mittens, and boots for their child. Many years ago, the center started its own clothing drive. As children outgrow their clothing, if parents have nowhere else to donate it, it can go into a back storage room. The tables and racks are labeled by size to make dropping it off in the right area easier. There are a couple of retired staff members and a couple of other community volunteers, who also get their child abuse clearances and criminal checks done just like the center staff, that come in once a week and organize the goods, if needed. One the first Friday of the month, the parents can shop at no charge for what is needed. Those who are in need are always grateful. Those who donate always seem glad that they have been able to help others.
The center seldom has children with special needs, but when an evaluation needs to be done, we explain to the parent why and help the parent through every step of the process. When the referral is for a behavioral issue, whether or not there is a developmental delay, even the most resistant parent seems to come around once services are in place. Oftentimes, but not always, these behavioral issues are based on language delays or other issues regarding difficulties in communication or other social deficiencies (Qi & Kaiser, 2004). This usually involved a psychological consultation, a therapy plan, a Behavior Specialist Consultant (BSC) who works both on site and in the home, and a Therapeutic Support Staff (TSS) who works with the child at the center and sometimes at the home as well. The center is usually very receptive to the service providers and willing to work with them and the treatment plans that are put into place. Occasionally, the plans are too prohibitive, the staff are too demanding, or he expectations are unrealistic, and the center staff does all it can to come to an agreement with the agency staff about a compromise, always trying to keep in mind the best interests of the child but needing to remember that the child is one of a group. Almost always, the differences are worked out, a plan that works is implemented, and progress is made.
The center does have some technological resources, thanks to some grant writing on the part of the teachers and staff. The students love using some of the learning games and certain web sites. Large group learning occurs with a smart board that is in one room and shared by all. One day it is a goal to have a classroom set of tablets so the children are comfortable using them before they are enrolled in traditional schools.
The staff, teachers, and administrators know that they all work for the best interests of the child and do so remarkably well. There is seldom any tension and always a great deal of patience. When someone is having a difficult day, someone else jumps in and takes up the slack, knowing that one day the roles will be reversed. The administrators spend many hours each week working hands-on in the classrooms, with the students. This enables the teachers’ time to plan lessons, have their lunch, and try to collaborate with the community to plan outings. All trips need to be within walking distance of the center since transportation has been eliminated from the budget. By having the teachers plan the trips, it has broadened the scope and the teachers are then able to use lesson planning and projects to lead up to the trip and to reflect on it as well. By being in the classroom on a daily basis, the administrators are also well aware of the needs of the teachers and are better able to understand and address issues as they arise. The community members are often eager to work with the center and allow the children access to their business or facility. The children have adopted grandparents at a nursing home, toured a grocery store, eaten at the local restaurant where they got to make their own pancake batter, gone to a group home for adults with disabilities to do crafts, and visit a consignment shop where they were read a story in the book section.
This frequent interaction of the administrators in the classrooms, working collaboratively with the teachers, enables frequent informal observations. By using these as constructive criticism, as well as praise, teachers are given tips for improvement as well as reassurances of jobs done well on a constant basis. Formal observations are both announced and unannounced several times during the year. Most of the staff does not mind the observations, however, because if a lesson goes horribly wrong, there is time after words to explain, corrections allowed, and a repeat observation made. There need to be two consecutive formal observations or three within a year for any disciplinary proceedings to begin.
Parents are seldom, if ever, involved in the classroom other than picking-up or dropping-off their child. Although staff and teachers encourage their participation, really pushing for it during events such as holiday parties of their child’s own birthday celebration, there is seldom any response. An amazing number of the parents do not even know the names of their child’s teachers. There is a complete disconnection between the home and school environments. Some of the parents are even resentful to be there, having been forced back to work because of welfare reform, having been timed out of the system, and see having to bring their child to a free or subsidized daycare as a burden that they must bear, taking it out on the teachers since there is no one else on which they can do so in their mind.
The staff and administrators of the center should create a course for the parents of the center, child-care provided, and dinner as well. This course should include how to facilitate learning in the home as a fun experience to develop cognitive skills, the importance of conversing daily with each child on a one-to-one basis. Parents should speak in an excited tone when discussing school with their children and call it an opportunity. This course could be a precursor so parents can learn how to be engaged in their child’s education, such as checking nightly for homework, practicing spelling words, and making games out of finding the letter “P” on the boxes in the aisle of the grocery store.
When the parents realize how the administrators, staff, and community members are all there to support them and invest in them and their children, the goal is that they will themselves be more interested in investing in themselves and the academic future of their children as well.
Mentors include Maria Montessori and a classroom of manipulatives, creative spirits, and an open mind. Horace Mann and his eagerness to ensure that all children receive an education is another inspiration. W.E.B. Dubois wanting to ensure that all people can contribute to society, no matter what their skills, talents, and limitations may be, they are valuable and necessary. Students need to feel the same way. They need to feel the passion and creativity of Maria Montessori, the necessity to learn instilled by Mann, and the ability to fit in, no matter what, expressed by Dubois. Education is for all, even the little people at a day care center.
References
Balason, D. V., & Dollaghan, C. A. (2002). Grammatical morpheme production in 4-year-old
children. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 45(5), 961-9. Retrieved
Gleason, T. R. (2002). Social provisions of real and imaginary relationships in early childhood.
Developmental Psychology 38(6), 979-992.
Hindman, A. H., Miller, A. L., Froyen, L. C., & Skibbe, L. E. (2012). A portrait of family
Involvement during head start: Nature, extent, and predictors. Early Childhood
Research Quarterly 27(1), 654-667.
Justice, L. M., Mashburn, A., Pence, K. L., & Wiggins, A. (2008). Experimental evaluation of a
preschool language curriculum: Influence on children's expressive language skills. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 51(4), 983-1001. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/232333136?accountid=35812
Linver, M. R., Brooks-Gunn, J., Kohen, D. E. (2002). Family processes as pathways from
income to young children's development. Developmental Psychology, 38(5), 719-734.
Loeb, S., Fuller, B., Kagan, S. L., & Carrol, B. (2004). Child care in poor communities: Early
learning effects type, quality, and ability. Child Development 75(1), 47-65.
Palincsar, A. S., & Klenk, L. (1992). Fostering literacy learning in supportive contexts. Journal
Of Learning Disabilities 25(4), 211-225.
Qi, C. H., & Kaiser, A. P. (2004). Problem behaviors of low-income children with language
delays: An observation study. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research,
47(3), 595-609. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/232321310?accountid=35812
Skarakis-Doyle, E., & Dempsey, L. (2008). The detection and monitoring of comprehension
errors by preschool children with and without language impairment. Journal of Speech,
Language, and Hearing Research, 51(5), 1227-43. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/232313316?accountid=35812
Annotated Bibliography
Balason, D. V., & Dollaghan, C. A. (2002). Grammatical morpheme production in 4-year-old
children. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 45(5), 961-9. Retrieved
This article looked at specific morpheme sounds in 4-year-old children and their accuracy and consistency rates over a variety of environments. The grammatical morpheme needs to be incorrect more than 25% of the time at this age to warrant speech therapy.
Hindman, A. H., Miller, A. L., Froyen, L. C., & Skibbe, L. E. (2012). A portrait of family
Involvement during head start: Nature, extent, and predictors. Early Childhood
Research Quarterly 27(1), 654-667.
Family involvement and reinforcement of the learning and educational goals that were taught to their children through the Head Start program were assessed in the fall and spring. There was more participation in the fall than the spring, as was expected. There was little, if any, integration in what was learned in school into the home-life of the students on a regular basis.
Gleason, T. R. (2002). Social provisions of real and imaginary relationships in early childhood.
Developmental Psychology 38(6), 979-992.
The early childhood years are some of the most influential in learning how to establish relationships. These can be either with a real or an imaginary friend as the distinction between real and imaginary has not yet been made at this time.
Justice, L. M., Mashburn, A., Pence, K. L., & Wiggins, A. (2008). Experimental evaluation of a
preschool language curriculum: Influence on children's expressive language skills. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 51(4), 983-1001. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/232333136?accountid=35812
This study aimed at teachers in lower socio-economic pre-schools using expressive language programs with their students. The purpose was to encourage the students to be exposed to a broad language curriculum program before attending kindergarten. The main component was to imitate the teacher’s language techniques.
Linver, M. R., Brooks-Gunn, J., Kohen, D. E. (2002). Family processes as pathways from
income to young children's development. Developmental Psychology, 38(5), 719-734.
Lower socio-economic status added to maternal distress. This stress was directly related to children’s behavioral problems. Poorer parenting practices were also associated with the same group of mothers.
Loeb, S., Fuller, B., Kagan, S. L., & Carrol, B. (2004). Child care in poor communities: Early
learning effects type, quality, and ability. Child Development 75(1), 47-65.
When children spend time with non-family members in a child-care situation, such as a daycare, that has a well-developed curriculum and is focused on the cognitive growth of the child as well as addressing the child’s care needs, the child benefits from the academic development as the child enters into the years of formal education.
Palincsar, A. S., & Klenk, L. (1992). Fostering literacy learning in supportive contexts. Journal
Of Learning Disabilities 25(4), 211-225.
When practicing any form of literacy in a supportive environment, such as children sounding out words to peers or stuffed animals, as long as they receive praise for effort and positive corrections, they are usually eager to continue with their efforts.
Qi, C. H., & Kaiser, A. P. (2004). Problem behaviors of low-income children with language
delays: An observation study. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research,
47(3), 595-609. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/232321310?accountid=35812
Preschool children often express much of their social development through their language skills. Longitudinal and cross-sectional studies of nonclinical and clinical populations have demonstrated that there are distinct associations between poor social skills, language impairments, and problem behaviors.
Skarakis-Doyle, E., & Dempsey, L. (2008). The detection and monitoring of comprehension
errors by preschool children with and without language impairment. Journal of Speech,
Language, and Hearing Research, 51(5), 1227-43. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/232313316?accountid=35812
Children learn from their mistakes and from the mistakes of their peers. Children with no auditory disorders are able to pick up on informal corrections easier than their peers that have difficulty hearing in the classroom setting.
