RUNNING HEAD: FOUNDATION1

Laying the Foundation: A Kindergarten Classroom

Randall L. Noggle

ECE311: Early Childhood Curriculum & Methods

Instructor Merrian Gagnon

12/8/14

FOUNDATION2

The age group that I have chosen is Kindergarten. I chose this age group because it is

essentially the first real, assessed form of education and the primary foundation that the rest of

further schooling builds upon. This is not trying to discount pre-K educational programs by any

means, but rather, infers that the results of academic progress in Kindergarten and high stakes

testing can ultimately decide a child’s primary educational fate (Jaruszewicz, 2012). There are

numerous variables involved in a high quality Kindergarten classroom that fosters an

environment of comfort, creativity, and positive interaction and participation. The most

prominent of classroom variables are environmental factors, teacher interaction, and

curriculum. While some may consider these variables mutually exclusive in nature, they are

congruous in a quality Kindergarten classroom.

The first thing that is noticed about a classroom is its aesthetics. Aesthetics is not only a

matter of vanity but also functionality regarding classroom usage and effect on child behavior.

According to Education and Treatment of Children, “The evaluation of the influence of

environmental features on children's behavior is not new. In fact, researchers from a number of

related and unrelated disciplines (e.g., environmental psychologists, architects, child

development scholars, educators) have studied children's environments and their effects on a

number of behaviors” (McEvoy, 1990, para. 4). Some teachers prefer brightly colored and

adorned from wall to wall with posters, diagrams, charts and a host of other visual aids. This,

however, goes against what Curriculum and Methods for Early Childhood Educators states in

that, “Children and adults alike benefit from spaces that are soothing to the senses and inviting

without being overwhelming or artificial” (Jaruszewicz, 2012). Essentially, the developmentally

appropriate approach would coincide with the old adage “less is more”. While there are

FOUNDATION3

numerous approaches to the classroom environment, the philosophy behind my desired

environmental influence and arrangement of the classroom is similar to a blending of

Montessori and Reggio Emilia programs. This would be the calm, orderliness of a Montessori

classroom with the home-touch feel of a Reggio Emilia program.

The physical environment sets the initial “feeling” of a classroom, but the teacher

interaction is what makes the classroom habitable. Teacher interaction is essential to the

classroom and can either work for or against student engagement. Teacher interaction is

paramount in any classroom, regardless of what program or philosophy is utilized and/or

required. In my Kindergarten classroom, there would be a huge focus on Lev Vygotsky’s zone of

proximal development and the usage of scaffolding by the teacher in a form of differentiating

instruction. As the Journal of Russian & East European Psychology states, “…children have

different boundaries not only at different ages but even within the same age

group”( Bozhovich, 2009, p.49). This is further supported in Preventing School Failure that “All

students benefit from a variety of instructional methods and supports and an appropriate

balance between the challenge of instruction and the opportunity for success” (Rock, Gregg,

Ellis, & Gable, 2008, p. 33). This would also include the way in which the teacher presents

themselves in the classroom. I am very much inclined to coincide with the Waldorf approach in

that a teacher is much like a performer demonstrating activities and being a role model for

highly influential children who have a propensity to model adult behavior in play (Jaruszewicz,

2012). This teacher interaction, coupled with environmental influence, makes a path for the

curriculum.

FOUNDATION4

The curriculum that is utilized for instruction plays a vital role in how subject material is

presented. One of the worst things that can be forced upon a child is a textbook-based

curriculum. A textbook curriculum is inflexible and does not accommodate different learning

styles. Although this is one of the most traditional approaches, it can have a serious negative

consequence. According to Differentiating Instruction in Inclusive Classrooms, traditional broad

curriculums are “Teaching to the middle” (Haager & Klinger, 2005, p. 19). In essence, a tightly

controlled and regulated curriculum, while attempting to teach to everyone, does not teach any

one individual effectively. In the curriculum there needs to be both open-ended and didactic

materials utilized as an essential part of the curriculum.

The curriculum, while being influence by both environmental influence and teacher

interaction, is how teachers go about meeting educational requirements and student

competencies. In reality the curriculum is the heart of the classroom. It is where the main

concepts of the subject material dwells and every variable should be addressed so that those

concepts can be solidified in order to create a firm foundation for further building in the subject

areas of mathematics, reading, science, and the fine arts. The concepts of these specific areas

that I will address fall within the Iowa Core Standards set forth by the Iowa Department of

Education (Iowacore.gov).

The first academic area is mathematics. It is a little more straight-forward at the

Kindergarten level and does not require as much abstract thinking. The main focus will be

numbers with the concepts of rich mathematical tasks and distributed practice that is

meangingful and purposeful. The main competency goal is to understand what numbers are

FOUNDATION5

and the discrete quantity associated with the numeral. This is what it means to truly

understand early mathematics. The first activity I would use would include counting

manipulatives in order to reinforce the association between the numeral and the discrete

quantity that matches. After this concept is firmly rooted I would move on to a more complex

sequencing game utilizing number cards that would need to be placed in order. By gradually

moving towards number recognition the transition from rote to rational counting could occur.

This progression, or lack thereof, would aid in dictating what direction the differentiating

instruction would go and classroom instruction could be altered in order to facilitate certain

students firm or loose grasp of numerical concepts.

The second academic area is reading (or literacy). This area is one of the most

comprehensive areas in early childhood education because in Iowa reading falls under the

umbrella category of literacy, which also includes writing, speaking, and listening. As such, the

only real concept present is interdisciplinary instruction because of delineated specific

expectations under the umbrella of subject material. It is essentially viewed as language or

communication skills, which is, in all honesty, the most fitting categorization being as all these

skills have a great deal of interaction. An activity that I would include would be with individual

whiteboards. It would be a gradual progression from writing single letters to eventually

combining sounds to make words, which is very similar to the Fundations curriculum

(www.fundations.com). Another activity I would include would be a basic form of journaling.

This would have both teacher initiated and child initiated forms. The teacher initiated form

would be more specific and used as a type of assessment while the child initiated form would

be open ended and allow more freedom regarding content and expression. This journaling

FOUNDATION6

could also serve as a literal evolutionary model. By that, I mean a person could view the

progress that each individual student has made throughout any point of the year. When viewed

comparatively, overall trends-both good and bad- could be assessed and addressed.

The third academic area is science. This area requires a basis in both logical and abstract

thinking that is fostered in both mathematic and literacy. The main concept that I would stress

would be reasoning skills. This would be viewing information present and being able to come to

a conclusion via logical processes. In essence, it would be the scientific method in its most basic

form. It would be the mindset to look at something, question it, and being able to make

observations. Being as science requires both logical and abstract thinking, student engagement

is essential. The first activity I would use would be the life cycle of a frog. I would first show the

students the eggs, and have them hypothesize what would happen next. As we enter each

stage I would allow for observation, reflection, and alteration of hypothesis. The second activity

I would use would be a sensory exercise. I would have numerous numbered containers and

piles of various materials as a visual aid. I would have them shake the containers and

hypothesize what material was in what container. Upon completion we would open the

containers to see how accurate each hypothesis was. We could further expand upon this by

asking what made them guess this particular item made this noise.

The fourth and final academic area is the fine arts. This is a subject area that seems to

be going to the wayside in lieu of time spent focusing on standardized testing, or rather, the

progressing importance of standardized testing. This is where the environmental influence can

truly shine in my classroom. Given that the physical environment of my classroom would have a

FOUNDATION7

neat but homey feel, each individual students “fingerprint” would be evident. By this I mean

every students area would be a reflection of them. Their areas would incorporate their artwork;

their organization; their personal construct of beauty. An activity that I would include is not a

singular thing, but rather a theme that is similar to what is seen in a Waldorf classroom—music.

I would try to incorporate song or instrument in a host of activities when possible. This also

makes some difficult to grasp concepts or activities that are, for lack of a better word,

lackluster, more engaging. Another activity I would like to include would be artwork. Expression

of understanding through picture is not only part of the fine arts, but also falls into the

communication realm of subject materials. The fine arts, much like literacy, can be seen and

incorporated throughout interdisciplinary involvement. While many schools still participate in

statutory “specials” (art, music, gym), it is usually on a set schedule that does not allow

frequent interaction and immersion in subject material. My classroom would include little bits

of the fine arts sprinkled in on a daily basis to compensate for this near-removal of foundational

thought processes. Creativity lives in the fine arts and depriving a child of this form of

expression could further inhibit abstract thinking and processing ability.

There is no one way to teach and certainly no one “right” way to teach because every

classroom is constructed of numerous variables. That being said, every teacher is different

regarding their experience, knowledge base, requirements and freedoms. It is impossible to

create an all-encompassing blueprint for what “works” for every classroom. Teaching that is

geared solely towards standardized testing often excludes developmentally appropriate

practices and a holistic view of education. While public schools reporting test scores do not

start until third grade, there is a push to get children up to par as early as possible, which can

FOUNDATION8

create conflict in philosophical beliefs and practical application. Regardless of what the state or

school requires, the real learning happens every day in the classroom as a result of the

environmental factors, teacher interaction, and curriculum. These factors must work in a

harmonious fashion in order to provide a foundation for a world-class Kindergarten classroom.

FOUNDATION9

References

Bozhovich, E. D. (2009). Zone of Proximal Development: The Diagnostic Capabilities and

Limitations of Indirect Collaboration. Journal Of Russian & East European Psychology,

47(6), 48-69. doi:10.2753/RPO1061-0405470603

Jaruszewicz, C. (2012). Curriculum and methods for early childhood educators. San Diego, CA:

Bridgepoint Education.

Haager, D., & Klingner, J. K. (2005). Differentiating instruction in inclusive classrooms.

Columbus, OH: Merrill.

McEvoy, M. A. (1990). The Organization of Caregiving Environments: Critical Issues and

Suggestions for Future Research. Education And Treatment Of Children, 13(4), 269-73.

Rock, M. L., Gregg, M., Ellis, E., & Gable, R. A. (2008). REACH: A Framework for Differentiating

Classroom Instruction. Preventing School Failure, 52(2), 31-47.