1. How can you connect the book to other learning experiences you have had or are having in the residency?
It is difficult to directly connect YCSYCP to any specific experiences. In my Gen Ed 5th grade placement, there was a student who was experiencing being bullied. However, I did not observe this in the classroom and was not made privy to specifics. In the Pre-K Disabled placement, the people who said "you can't play" were the teacher and aids. This happened usually as threat of punishment or punishment. It is a strategy that I will not use in my classroom. In my Gen Ed Pre-K, I didn't observe any active rejection of kids. Those kids were having more issues with learning how to share. However, I did notice that the student who used the wheelchair was passively rejected. The other kids would let her parallel play in their areas, but they did not often actively include her in their play. This student would then actively seek out Deb, myself, the teacher, or an aid to play with. Se was actually a bit more mature than the other students. So I wonder how this impacted her play. She was happy and did not express sadness in her interactions. At Ben Samuels, I haven't observed much indoor Free Play where exclusion and rejection could be more easily observed. When we go into the classrooms at 9am, the kids are going into Group Time.
In my own educational history I remember an instance of a kid being strongly rejected. I do not remember the teacher intervening to improve the situation. During the first half of 1st grade, I lived on K.I. Sawyer Air Force Base in Michigan. I went to the base school. There was a girl in our class named "Candy". She wore the same clothes everyday and she smelled bad. None of the other students wanted anything to do with her at all. The teacher must have been aware of this. There was only one 1st grade class and there were only about 15 kids in the class. I do not want to demonize the teacher but I don't remember any form of intervention/explanation/inclusion. Through reading Paley, I can see how important it is to know and understand each kid so that we can intervene when needed.
2. How does Paley's educational ideology support or challenge your own?
"She (Lisa) takes for granted that there must be a child 'in charge.' How long will it take to get rid of the notion of a boss? The fourth grade girl who labeled herself as an 'owner' said this is where the problem lies/ Do away with the owners and the rule could work, she told everyone." (p. 94-95)
Does that mean, "The workers must control the means of production." Well, that didn't work out to well on a large scale. However, if workers/kids playing have some direct input/influence over "the means of production/play" then they can become invested in shared responsibility and kindness to strangers. "The workers must control the means of production" is authoritarian. "The workers needs must be taken into account in the means of production.' is more authoritative. Authoritative, as we discussed in Child Dev is good for White Middle/Upper class.
I find YCSYCP challenging. I totally agree with the goal of inclusion. However, the implementation is top down. The kids have to accept it. Sure, they can discuss it but ultimately it's Mrs. Paley's way or the highway. It's seems authoritative but ultimately it's authoritarian. I believe that I as a teacher can not legislate "shared responsibility" (p. 34) or "the kindness of strangers." (p. 57) I can/will model and encourage these values. I will make every effort to make sure my students will internalize these values. But it must be a bottom-up implementation. Students need to given the opportunity to chose to do the right thing. They also need to know that they are accountable for their actions. Just as I the teacher am accountable for my actions and will need at times to intervene/defend/include individual students.
I really liked Octavio's post. By inserting himself literally into the play, he could monitor and intervene/defend/include individual students. This is a great modeling strategy yet it is not authoritarian. It's not absolutely authoritative either. It allows for the kids who were doing the rejecting to save face and feel that their input was valued. Their incentive is that they get to play with the teacher. The outcome hopefully is that the rejected kid does find that one friend.
3. What ideas from the book are you interested in incorporating in to your classroom?
The strategy of the teacher scribing a story is great for Early Childhood/ Special Needs students. In 3-5th grades I might assign pairs to act as scribes. Taking turns writing so that the storyteller could concentrate on flow rather than the technique of writing.
Joe, unlike you, I did experience exclusion as an elementary school student. I think it was first grade...I was the only African-American in my class and everyone was given a birthday party invitation, except me. I was told, "you can't come to my birthday party because you're colored, and my grandmother doesn't like colored people." To be honest, I don't recall being hurt, I just remember thinking, "how stupid is your grandmother that she doesn't like color...color makes the world prettier..." Anyway, although I have no recollection of feeling excluded as a child, I have seen the effect that it has on even very young children. I personally believe that it scars the psyche and will do anything I can to ensure that my sudents never feel the pain of exclusion, in my classroom.
ReplyDeleteA great analysis of the top-down vs. bottom-up models of implementation, Joe. And I completely agree that if such a concept were to work in a classroom, it would have to be bottom-up. If you want the students to truly believe in it, to be vested in it, they have to have a stake in it, and being the creators of the concept would be the best way to do that. I also like how you're importing the terms from child development and applying them to the teaching strategies.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of Child Development, didn't we also just learn that rejected kids actually don't fare that badly? What we need to watch out for are the neglected kids, whom Paley's rule does not address. As long as the child is playing, even if it's parallel play, Paley's rule is being enforced, even if that parallel play results in de facto neglect of certain excluded students.
If we apply what we learned about neglect to Paley's model, what we should be more on guard for than the outright rejection of students are the students who AREN'T complaining about being left out, but are just left out anyway. Those who quietly play in the corner, appearing content. We should find ways to buddy them up or incentivize their participation (or incentivize their peers to include them). YCSYCP only works with active rejection of would-be participants; it does no service to those who have given up on participation completely.
Joanne, I totally agree with you. However, I'm not sure I would go about it the way Paley did. Evan makes a good point that a teacher(maybe not Paley per se) could implement YCSYCP and still do damage to kids by not getting to deeply know each of their students. My question is how can we get students to buy into YCSYCP from the bottom up, instead of legislating YCSYCP from the top down?
ReplyDeleteA related story...
In 4th-6th grade there were 2 African-American kids in my whole K-6 school(one of the best in Louisiana). Shirley was in my year (but not in my class). Her brother James was in the next lower grade. Their father was in the Air Force. Kids left Shirley alone cause she would kick their butt if anyone messed with her or her brother. However, this left her without any friends because everyone was scared of her. I knew that for her this was a defensive strategy. But again, I don't remember any teachers attempting to intervene or include Shirley. She just got punished for fighting. I don't remember a lot about my elementary career. But I do sadly remember the catch-22 this girl found herself in because of the internalized racism of a majority of students and teachers. Fight(keep her dignity) and have no friends or don't fight(suffer indignities) and probably still have no friends. It's a memory that would would go on to shape my perception of the need for social justice. And I hope Shirley and James had a better life after they left 1970s Louisiana.
Really interesting thoughts, Joe. Evan, I might have to recheck my notes, but I think you've got the Child Development content backwards. "Rejected" kids fare poorly. "Neglected" kids don't. In the sense of the study, the term "rejected" meant the kids that the majority of the class listed as those who they did not want to play with. "Popular" kids were the kids they listed that they did want to play with. "Neglected" kids were just never listed by the other kids - not mentioned negatively nor mentioned positively. So the YCSYCP is a specific intervention for those rejected kids.
ReplyDeleteMy initial reaction to the book was the same as yours, Joe. I got enough of being told what to do in school. Free play with my friends was one of the only times I could relax and just be myself. But the more studies I've read about outcomes for rejected children and the outcomes where YCSYCP has been implemented, the more I'm questioning my own initial thoughts.
I think classrooms are inherently authoritative/ authoritarian in many ways. We don't let children pick who they sit next to or decide who will be in their class project groups... what would make this rule any different from those?