Paley’s book ties directly with
many of the learning experiences I have been having since the school
observation placements began. Paley describes how by the time kids are in
kindergarten, certain children begin controlling the social experiences of their
classmates. These students decide which students are acceptable playmates, and
who will be excluded. This continues on as students get older.
This idea really made me think
about several things I observed in the 2nd grade class at Fourteenth
Avenue School. The children appeared to get along well in the classroom, but I
noticed that there were quiet, short conversations the students were having
with one another that might have been damaging. I realized that as the teacher,
you are not privy to many of these exchanges between students that can be
hurtful, and moments when they are rejected. When my mentor and I would pick the
students up from recess, certain students would consistently come running to explain
all the forms of rejection they had experienced in such a short period of time. I
now understand that this phenomenon probably began in kindergarten for these
students, and that the rejection will have lasting impacts. Paley’s book helped me realize that
it does not have to be this way. It is possible to change the kinds of social
experiences students have, but I agree with the older students Paley interviews
who believe “you can’t say you can’t play” is a rule that must be established
early on.
Paley’s educational ideology
supports the one I have been developing during my time in the NMUTR program. Paley
is completely connected with her students’ experiences because her classroom is
a safe environment where students feel comfortable talking openly about how
they feel. Her students have a voice in what goes on in their classroom, and
Paley uses this information to align her teaching with what the students need
to move forward.
Paley’s approach to teaching is
very student-centered. When she decides she wants to establish this new rule in
her classroom, she spends time talking to the students about what she wants to
do in the classroom and why. She is open to modifying and further unpacking her
rule once she discovers that students have questions about its fairness. She
constantly learns through the process of establishing “you can’t say you can’t
play.” She realizes that it is more complicated than simply telling the
children what they can and cannot do. She wants her students to be active
participants in constructing what the rule means for their classroom.
Paley reflects often about ways to
ensure that the new order she wants to establish is successful. She does not
demonize children who are resistant and seemingly cruel, but is open to
conversations with these children about their interpretation of things. Paley
finds ways to help children understand that everyone benefits when children are
not excluded. I want
my classroom to be
student-centered, and for my students to take active roles in their learning. I
believe children develop a sense of confidence when their views are
acknowledged. Paley was successful in her pursuit because of her educational
ideology. She has high expectations for her students, and trusts that they can
make sense of the challenge she presents to them.
I plan on incorporating several
strategies Paley uses in my classroom. First, I think the Magpie stories were a
great addition to the classroom. Paley used the stories to infuse lessons,
introduce concepts to children, and to represent some of the issues the class
was having. Allowing students to create stories and act them out for the class
is an innovative way to use literacy with young children. I think I struggle
with thinking outside of the box, but I am learning that knowing who the
students are, and taking their ideas into account, will inform my choices.
This story reminded me of the
importance of taking chances. If you want your classroom to be a truly
democratic learning community, I think it that involves trying ideas that might
seem impossible or not worth trying. As Paley’s conversations with the older
students in her school demonstrate, students quickly become hardened by their
experiences in school. The lesson that I gleaned is that it is necessary to do
all you can to shield students from inevitable pain by making your classroom
one where rejection is not an option.
Reading your post I was reminded of our Child Development class yesterday when we discussed parenting styles, peer relations, and friend formations/peer acceptance.
ReplyDeletePaley seems to use an authoritative teaching style in her room. She has rules in her room, but they are explained to the children, and the children are invited to participate in the rule-making process. Paley welcomes student expression, and is warm and caring towards her students. She has high standards for her students, but is flexible and values student input.
While discussing peer acceptance, we concluded that "Rejected Children"-the children others actively stay away from or exclude-are most at risk for negative outcomes. Paley's YCSYCP rule would benefit the "Rejected Children" and may help prevent the negative outcomes associated with rejection.
It is interesting to note that we discovered that there is evidence that suggests that conflict is a 'good thing.' I wonder if Paley's rule would eliminate healthy conflict from the room, and if there are any long-term consequences associated with the absence of healthy conflict.
Camille, I also appreciated Paley's democratic classroom style, and the magic she brought to her classroom through stories. I also like the connection Nicole made to the parenting styles that we discussed in Child Development.
ReplyDeleteI wonder about how the conversations took place. There were moments of short conversations between Paley and individual students, but it seems that there were times that were set aside for class discussions. How did this fit into time management and meeting other goals. Of course, her conversations were at least equally important to everything else the students were learning.
As to the conflict that you mentioned, Nicole. I don't think there will be a shortage of healthy conflict in any classroom, or in any persons life. It is a natural part of life.
Camille, you touched on a really great point when you observed that Paley didn't demonize the children who either practiced or defended exclusion. Reprimand is the typical response to unwanted behavior, but I think Paley recognizes the limited effectiveness of such an approach as well as the fact that many kids will be both bully and victim, excluder and excludee. I also believe that by not targeting her intervention on the "bullies," Paley was able to widen her discussion of classroom exclusion. The children who tacitly appoint the "bosses" so that they can enjoy the benefits of exclusion without getting their hands dirty themselves also have a role to play. These children are indeed the vast majority, and as such have become the focus of a lot of bullying interventions.
ReplyDeleteAs Nicole observed, YCSYCP would seem to most target and benefit "Rejected-children." While reading, I kept asking myself if these kids would really feel "less rejected" if they knew they were only being allowed to play because the teacher ordered it. I wondered what lowly role they would be given in the play or what would be done to them when the teacher turned her back. Would YCSYCP really improve their self-concept and social outcomes? However, when Dr. Lalvani shared the research finding that just one friend can inoculate students from the negative outcomes associated with exclusion, it made me appreciate YCSYCP even more. While the rule may not solve all of a rejected student's social problems, I think it could help them establish at least one friendship. And that, research shows, might just be enough.
Sherry, I had not made that connection "just one friend can inoculate students from the negative outcomes associated with exclusion." I think that is important takeaway for me from from this discussion .
ReplyDeleteCamille, two things about your post really struck me. First, your observation about the "unseen" rejections that happen beyond the teacher's purview is powerful. How many rejections happen that we will never see, and how will it affect the individual dispositions of our students in both subtle and overt ways, and what can we do to be more aware of them? Also, how do those small rejections help shape the social atmosphere of our classroom in ways we can still manage and change?
ReplyDeleteThe other thing I liked about your post was that you point out that Paley probably did something far more significant than develop a rule for her classroom: she established a social means of learning through open dialogue and participation. I keep harping on this on my replies because I'm kind of annoyed with Paley for finding the rule more significant than the process that got her there. I think that what she had her students doing in the process of creating the rule was far more significant than the impact of the rule itself. I think that setting has more to do with her ability to create inclusion and resolve conflict than this particular product of one particular means of doing so.
Camille, your observation that a teacher does not have access to "small sidebar" conversations bewteen students is a great observation that I had honestly not considered. As I think back over my own experiences of exclusion, these experiences did not take place during an open forum but during those smaller and more intimate conversations with classmates.
ReplyDeleteI agree that Paley had a great relationship with her students and cared deeply about each of them. The desire to protect students from hurt and harm came from a place of geniune concern and the desire to make sure that all students had a rich educational experience.
YCSYCP, as a rule, if implemented early and reinfored will make a difference, not simply for ensuring that all students are included, but will empower students to engage in a meaningful dialogue about difficult topics.