"My ECE Assignment" series is meant to demystify ECE and make it a more pleasurable endeavour for those of us who are willing to commit to it :
Module : Practicum #1, Vocational Placement
Observation #2 : Photographic Documentation
Time and Duration: 9.40am, 15 minutes
Setting: N2 classroom and Shakespeare Corner
Context and Narrative on Photographic Documentation:
L (4.3) was gathered together with his 6 other classmates in their N2 classroom. They were tasked by their teacher to colour a worksheet with a picture of a clown on it.
The children were seated around a table, and L (4.3) was together with 4 boys and 2 girls. His teacher was keeping an eye on all the children but was spending more time at the area closer to L (4.3).
After about 6 minutes into the observation, L (4.3) was asked to move from their current classroom area to a new area by the Shakespeare Corner. They were there for the next 15 minutes until the teacher called for the children to put their colour pencils and containers away, and be prepared to move back to their N2 classroom.
Interpretations:
Physical
L (4.3) appeared to have developed his fine motor skills well. At his age of 4 years and 3 months, his development in this area of fine motor skills was in line with his milestones (Bredekamp & Copple 1997, p. 105). He was able to use the pincer grip well, as he held his colour pencils to colour within the lines of the picture most of the time.
Intellectual and Linguistic
L (4.3) exhibited his development in the intellectual domain when he pointed out to his teacher that his classmate was doing his colouring in the wrong way, according to L (4.3)’s view. In other words, he was able to understand the teacher’s instructions and at the same time, able to perceive his classmate’s work as being incorrect. This fits in well with the theory expounded by Piaget, when he said that children at the age of 4 are in their “Preoperational Stage” and therefore, are expected to form ideas from experiences ( Mooney, 2000).
L (4.3)’s language skills can be better for his age group. When he said to his classmate, “No, I hit you”, it showed the level of linguistic development that he had achieved so far. According to Schickedanz., Schickedanz, Forsyth, Forsyth (2001) , he should be at a more advanced stage than his current development on language skills.
Emotional
L (4.3) had shown that he was prone to being angry. He showed this whenever he did not get his way, or if a classmate was viewed as provoking him. This was typified by his reaction to a classmate who accidentally covered his worksheet, while he was colouring. According to the theory described by Dr Howard Gardner (Campbell, Campbell, Dickinson 1999), L (4.3)’s interpersonal intelligence and intrapersonal intelligence were lacking. Not being able to self-regulate and self-control would be a potential problem for L (4.3) when he grows older.
Social
L (4.2) had shown that his social skills could be improved. When he was asked to move to a new area, he was unhappy with the change and showed his displeasure by snatching at the colour pencil containers that were held by another boy. His forceful nature had caused others to stay away from him, especially the girls. Such an aggressive disposition would become an issue for him, if left unchecked (Schickedanz , Schickedanz, Forsyth , Forsyth, 2001).
Observation #5: Work Sample
Time and Duration: 11.40am, 16minutes
Setting: K1 Classroom
Context: A (5.2) was given the task of completing a worksheet. It consisted of sentences with a word blanked out, for the children to fill in. They were then required to colour the pictures that were aligned to these sentences. All 12 children were seated by their tables, six to each table.
Narrative of Work Sample:
A (5.2) sat together with 2 other girls and 3 boys by a table. Her teacher asked for everyone to be quietly seated, while she passed six worksheets to A (5.2), who took one and handed the rest to the girl, L, seated next to her. A (5.2) was smiling when she first saw the worksheet and said to L, “Look , rabbits”, while pointing to a picture with 2 rabbits on it. L giggled with her.
A (5.2) was then given instructions by her teacher. She was told to read the sentences, complete them by filling in the missing word, and then to colour the pictures. A (5.2) focused on her work at hand by starting with the first sentence. She looked towards L, wanting to see if L had written the first missing word. She didn’t see L writing the word and looked back to her own worksheet. After 5 seconds, she filled in the first missing word. She looked up and realised that L had also written the same word. She flashed a smile and went back to completing the next sentences.
At one point, A (5.2) said to L, “ Do you know what this word is?”, pointing to the word “pretty”. L said she did not know. A (5.2) then stood up, walked over to her teacher and asked, “What word is this, teacher?”. Her teacher then prompted her by using the “Per” phonetic sound of the letter “p”. She then guided A (5.2) with the letter “r”, and so on, until the word was properly pronounced by A (5.2).
A (5.2) then walked back and told L, “It is [pretty]”, and smiled. A (5.2) completed the rest of the sentences, and began colouring the 5 pictures beside each sentence. She started colouring the rabbits first, and then went back to the first picture. Her colouring was not within the lines of two out of the 5 pictures, while the rabbits were coloured fully within the lines, in green.
Interpretations:
Physical
A (5.2) appeared to have developed her fine motor skills well, as shown by her good pincer grasp, when holding her pencil. This would have to be expected of her at her current age of 5 years and 2 months old, and in fact supported by expected milestones in her physical development, according to Bredekamp & Copple (1997). But when she seemed hurried, she was not colouring her pictures within the lines as well as she could.
Intellectual and Linguistic
A (5.2) was able to follow the instructions of her teacher well. She finished her sentences on her worksheet without much effort, showing that she understood verbs. She however needed assistance from her teacher with a more difficult word. The good thing was that she was spontaneous in asking for help from her teacher.
She was conversing with her friends using relatively good grammar in her sentences, which pointed to her good development linguistically.
Emotional
A (5.2) appeared to have a happy disposition. She smiled frequently and did not show any part of her temperament that was out of the norm. This made her an easy and likeable classmate to be with.
Social
A (5.2) worked well amongst her classmates. She appeared to have no hang-ups working along side either girls or boys. She appeared to particularly enjoy sitting beside and working with her classmate, L.
Observation #8 : Anecdotal Record
Time and Duration: 10.25am, 15 minutes
Setting: Dramatic Corner
Context: A (5.2) was given free play time at the Dramatic Corner with her 11 classmates. While her teacher was sitting on the side making observations on her class children, A (5.2) was playing with her plastic cup and saucer set, together with a boy, D.
Observations:
A (5.2) was seated against the wall. She had a plastic cup and saucer set with her, and pretended to make breakfast for her and her classmate, D. She included another play piece, in the shape of a fried egg and was making the “Shhee, shhee” sound to imitate the cooking of the fried egg.
She told D, “Breakfast is ready, D. You can come me and eat now”. She served the fried egg on a plate and pretended pouring Milo into the cup. When finished pouring, she said “There, drink”. D was happy to see A (5.2) serving breakfast to him and gave his thanks. A (5.2) joined him in eating, while making the “Chomp, chomp” sound.
Another girl came over to pick up A’s (5.2) cup and saucer, but A (5.2) did not react negatively to her. A (5.2) stood up and got hold of another play set of cup and saucer from the main kitchen play area.
While at the kitchen area, A (5.2) watched another girl, S cooking and asked “Is this breakfast?”. S said no but this would be lunch for the teacher. A (5.2) smiled and said to S, “Oh, can I cook with you?”. S agreed to the request and showed A (5.2) a ladle piece, and then asked A (5.2) to stand beside her and cook like her. A (5.2) flashed a big smile and moved beside S, and began cooking together.
A boy came over and tried to grab hold of the frying pan that S was using, and A (5.2) said to the boy, “Hey, that’s not yours!”, and both A (5.2) and S then said loudly for the boy to go away and play somewhere else. The boy noticed he was outnumbered and moved away from the 2 girls. Both girls giggled, as they began to finish their cooking and prepared to serve their food for the teacher.
Interpretations:
Physical
A (5.2) displayed her gross motor skills as she moved from area of the Dramatic Corner to the next with ease. She squatted down and stood up twice during her play, which showed that her large muscles of her legs were well developed. This was in line with her physical development at her age (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997).
Intellectual and Linguistic
A (5.2) was able to make pretend play a part of her daily interactions with her classmates, both when making breakfast and when cooking at the kitchen. This was in line with Jean Piaget’s Theory of the 4 Stages of Cognitive Development of a child (Mooney, 2000). Piaget’s theory expounded the notion that a child at the Pre-operational Stage would exhibit an ability to make mental representations, which were the cornerstones of pretend play.
A (5.2) showed good linguistic skills for a child of 5 years of age. Her sentences were grammatically correct most of the time. This coincided with her developmental milestones, according to Bredekamp & Copple (1997).
Emotional
A (5.2) showed her ability to control her emotions when one of her classmates snatched a toy away from her play area. She did not pursue the matter with him further, except to indicate her displeasure over the incident. Such self-regulation on her part showed her emotional development level her age of 5 (Schickedanz., Schickedanz, Forsyth, Forsyth, 2001).
Social
A (5.2) was socialising with her classmates well. She did not show a preference to play with girls only, as her time with classmate D showed. Her interpersonal intelligence was also on display as she moved from one group of classmates to the next, during her time making breakfast and the time cooking at the kitchen. She talked and socialised well with her classmates. This, according to Dr Howard Gardner, showed she had very good interpersonal intelligence (Campbell, Campbell, Dickinson 1999).
Reflections
6. Reflections on Tuesday, 23 September 2008.
The day started with an incident pertaining to the health of an N1 child. She was screened at the entrance for her temperature and checked for symptoms of HFMD, a daily procedure which this centre had instituted 18 months ago. The N1 child had a higher than normal temperature. Compounding that were blisters on her palms, as well as several ulcers in her mouth. Her father was told that his child needed to be taken to the nearest clinic for a doctor to examine her more thoroughly. He refused to do so, and said that he had to leave for his office matters, despite the centre supervisor’s best efforts to reason with him.
The child was brought to the office instead of her class, and isolated. It was decided by the supervisor that the child needed to be examined by a doctor as soon as possible. A call was made to her father to seek his permission for the centre to bring his child to see a local clinic doctor nearby. He agreed.
I decided to volunteer to bring this N1 child to the doctor, and the supervisor agreed to this task for me. After a 20 minute wait, the doctor confirmed that the child had HFMD. He wrote a note to her parents, requesting that their child be isolated at home for the next 7 days. I brought the child back to the centre, and related the doctor’s prognosis to the supervisor, who immediately called the child’s father to have his daughter brought. After 30 minutes, the child’s mother came to fetch her home.
My first instinct was to feel sympathy for the child, which I did. But when I heard from the supervisor that the child’s father did not mutter a word of appreciation for the centre’s initiative to bring his child to be examined by a doctor, I felt indignant. Why would a parent compromise his child’s health for his job’s requirements, I thought. And would it not be reasonable to expect a word of appreciation from this parent for the out-of-the-norm effort put in by the centre for his child?
As I thought about it more, I rationalised that the father might have felt angry that the centre had inflicted the HFMD virus on his child. In that instant, I realised that what the father did was understandable, but not excusable. His child’s health ought to be the first priority of his day, and not his job.
I also realised too that childcare centres of today carried a huge responsibility, not just for the education of a child but also the potential exposure of deadly illnesses such as HFMD to the children in the centre. It was therefore incumbent upon a teacher in the centre to ensure that the probability of an occurrence of such deadly illnesses to the children be minimized as much as possible, if not totally prevented from happening in the first place.
