Early Childhood Teachers’ Pedagogical Reasoning About How Children Learn During Language and Literacy Instruction

The knowledge that teachers hold about children’s learning is important to teachers’ practice. Few studies have examined how early childhood teachers use such knowledge during moment-to-moment instruction for language and literacy learning. This study employed a phenomenological approach to understand the knowledge that eight early childhood teachers used to inform their pedagogical reasoning during language and literacy activities. Stimulated recall interviews about practice were conducted with the prekindergarten teachers. Results indicated that the teachers used multiple sources of knowledge to inform their pedagogical reasoning that included: conceptions about how children learn; knowledge about specific children and the learning goals for these children; factors related to the school context; and ideas about themselves as teachers. The analyses revealed that the teachers’ various sources of knowledge functioned together to influence their enacted practice. Implications for professional learning and policy are discussed. Résumé -- Les connaissances que les enseignants ont de l’apprentissage des enfants sont importantes pour leur pratique. Peu d’études ont examiné comment les enseignants de la petite enfance utilisent ces connaissances sur le vif lors de consignes relatives au langage et à la littéracie. Cette étude a utilisé une approche phénoménologique pour comprendre les connaissances que huit enseignants de la petite enfance utilisaient pour former leur raisonnement pédagogique au cours d’activités de langage et de littéracie. Des entrevues de rappel stimulé sur la pratique ont été menées avec les enseignants de pré-maternelle. Les résultats indiquent que les enseignants utilisent diverses sources de connaissances pour former leur raisonnement pédagogique, y compris: les conceptions de la fac¸on dont les enfants apprennent; des connaissances sur des enfants particuliers et les objectifs d’apprentissage pour ces enfants; des facteurs liés au contexte de l’école; et des idées sur eux-meˆmes en tant qu’enseignants. Les analyses révèlent que les diverses sources de connaissances des enseignants fonctionnent ensemble pour influencer leur pratique concrète. Les implications pour l’apprentissage professionnel et les politiques sont discutées. Resumen -- El conocimiento que los docentes tienen sobre el aprendizaje de los niños es importante para la práctica docente. Pocos estudios han examinado cómo los educadores preescolares utilizan esos conocimientos durante momentos de instrucción para el aprendizaje de lenguaje y alfabetización. Este estudio empleó un enfoque fenomenológico para comprender el conocimiento que ocho maestros de la primera infancia utilizaron para informar su razonamiento pedagógico durante actividades de lenguaje y alfabetización. Entrevistas de recuerdo estimuladas sobre la práctica se llevaron a cabo con los maestros de pre-kinder. Los resultados indicaron que los maestros utilizaron múltiples fuentes de conocimiento para informar su razonamiento pedagógico que incluyeron: concepciones acerca de cómo los niños aprenden; conocimientos específicos acerca de los niños y los objetivos de aprendizaje para los niños; los factores relacionados con el contexto escolar; e ideas acerca de sí mismos como maestros. El análisis reveló que las variadas fuentes de conocimiento de los maestros funcionan juntas para influir en la práctica. Implicaciones para el aprendizaje profesional y político son discutidas

What knowledge do early childhood teachers use during literacy instruction? Using stimulated recall to investigate an unexplored phenomenon

This study utilized a novel phenomenological approach with a stimulated recall procedure to understand the pedagogical reasoning of eight early child teachers during the enactment of literacy instruction in whole-group meeting and language arts activities. This approach to investigating knowledge—in contrast to more tra­ditional conceptualizations of knowledge—focused on knowledge use as a process and prioritized teachers’ perspectives on knowledge used to enact literacy instruc­tion in their own classrooms. Additionally, it allowed for a more nuanced investi­gation of the role of setting and teacher characteristics that are often examined in association with literacy instruction (e.g., degree attainment, years of experience, curriculum, instructional activity). Six types of knowledge were used by teachers in their pedagogical reasoning. In order of frequency of use these were knowledge of: goals for instruction, children, feelings, school environment, developing skills, and past experiences. Importantly, teachers made more references to knowledge derived from their immediate contexts as compared to decontextualized knowledge. Impli­cations for understanding connections between knowledge and literacy instruction are discussed

Guidelines for Selecting Professional Development for Early Childhood Teachers

Engaging teachers of young children in effective in-service professional development is a critical component of establishing high quality early childhood education. However, not all professional development offerings are effective in imparting new knowledge, enhancing teacher practice, or improving child outcomes, making it difficult for teachers and directors to select professional development that will benefit their centers. This paper critically reviews the research literature on professional development for early childhood education to identify what features of professional development make a difference for teacher interactions and children’s learning and development. Guidance is provided for selecting professional development opportunities which meet the needs of children and teachers. Recommendations for how to create an ongoing professional development program within an early childhood center by creating a professional learning community are also made. Such an approach supports the center to become a place that values learning and continued education for all professionals

Going beyond defining: Preschool educators\u27 use of knowledge in their pedagogical reasoning about vocabulary instruction

Previous research investigating both the knowledge of early childhood educators and the support for vocabulary development present in early childhood settings has indicated that both educator knowledge and enacted practice are less than optimal, which has grave implications for children\u27s early vocabulary learning and later reading achievement. Further, the nature of the relationship between educators\u27 knowledge and practice is unclear, making it difficult to discern the best path towards improved knowledge, practice, and children\u27s vocabulary outcomes. The purpose of the present study was to add to the existing literature by using stimulated recall interviews and a grounded approach to examine how 10 preschool educators used their knowledge to made decisions about their moment-to-moment instruction in support of children\u27s vocabulary development. Results indicate that educators were thinking in highly context-specific ways about their goals and strategies for supporting vocabulary learning, taking into account important knowledge of their instructional history with children and of the children themselves to inform their decision making in the moment. In addition, they reported thinking about research-based goals and strategies for supporting vocabulary learning that went beyond simply defining words for children. Implications for research and professional development are discussed

Teachers’ Perspectives on Year Two Implementation of a Kindergarten Readiness Assessment

In this study we examined teachers’ perspectives regarding the second year of implementing a Kindergarten Readiness Assessment (KRA). Using a mixed-methods approach, we focused on the administration process, the perceived benefits of the assessment, and how teachers used the assessment to inform instruction. We also investigated whether these differed by teacher and district characteristics and how KRA experiences were different in the second year of implementation. Research Findings: Teachers generally did not view the KRA as beneficial for instruction or for students, reporting administration difficulties, inadequate KRA content, and limited utility of KRA data for supporting instruction as ongoing barriers to KRA use. Although the administration process seemed to be easier in the second year, teachers still reported it as burdensome, cutting into important beginning of kindergarten activities. Notably, teacher training and experience were associated with perceptions. Practice or Policy: Reasons for perceived lack of utility have important implications for future KRA design and implementation. These include better integration of KRAs into existing assessment systems, recognizing the added burden of KRAs to teachers (particularly at the beginning of kindergarten), and the role that additional training may have in supporting use of KRAs at the local level

How Do Differing Stakeholders Perceive Instances of Literacy Instruction?

In this study, we investigated how early childhood teachers’ perspectives on their enacted literacy instruction aligned with the perspectives of observers of that same instruction. Two master teachers and two researchers, all with early childhood expertise, observed and reported their perspectives of 45 instances of literacy instruction. These were examined for alignment across each other and with teachers’ descriptions of their thinking during the instruction. Participants’ perceptions of instruction tended to align, yet there were notable differences in perceptions about context and goals. Although we often found common ground among participants regarding the purpose of instruction, there were interesting variations across participants that highlighted the complexity of classroom processes, the value of teachers’ contextual knowledge and the multiple perspectives brought to bear on the same instance of instruction

Teachers’ experiences with a state-mandated kindergarten readiness assessment

This study used an embedded mixed method design to examine teachers’ experiences with a state-mandated kindergarten readiness assessment during its inaugural year. Participants were 143 kindergarten teachers from one county in a Midwestern state. In general, teachers did not perceive the Kindergarten Readiness Assessment as useful for one of its intended purposes of guiding instruction. Our findings did not indicate an adversity to assessment in general. Rather, perceptions that the new KRA was less useful for practice seemed to stem from administration issues, problems with the content assessed by the KRA, and participants’ misunderstandings regarding the purpose of the KRA. Furthermore, participants reported that the KRA took away valuable time needed to help students adjust to their first time in formal schooling and needed to create a classroom community. Implications for creating and implementing kindergarten readiness and other assessments as well as preparing teachers to use readiness assessments are discussed

Teachers’ perspectives on the Kindergarten Readiness Assessment in year 2: Easier to administer but what role can it play in instruction?

In this white paper, we present the results of a survey completed by teachers from across Ohio concerning their perceptions of Ohio’s Kindergarten Readiness Assessment (KRA). We examined teachers’ perceptions during year 2 of KRA implementation and compared those results to findings from a similar survey completed in year 1 of the assessment implementation. Over 3,000 Ohio public school kindergarten teachers were invited to complete the survey; of which 841 responded. In year 2, teachers reported that administering the KRA was easier, compared to year 1. However, they expressed concerns that the assessment took too long to administer, distracted from creating a classroom community, and decreased instructional time. Similar to findings from year 1, teachers reported that the assessment was not useful for guiding instruction or otherwise benefiting students; yet, teachers did report an increase in using the KRA to identify students at risk for later academic problems. In contrast to year 1, teachers seemed to better understand the purposes of the assessment although there were still some remaining misconceptions. Overall, despite some changes in perceptions, teachers continued to express concerns with the KRA’s implementation and remained unclear as to its role in improving instruction or outcomes for students

Using the new Kindergarten Readiness Assessment: What do teachers and principals think?

This white paper presents the results of a survey completed by teachers and principals in central Ohio concerning their perceptions of Ohio’s new Kindergarten Readiness Assessment (KRA) during its inaugural implementation year. All kindergarten teachers and principals in Franklin County public elementary schools were invited to complete the survey; 150 responded. Although teachers and principals generally reported using assessments, including the previous state-mandated KRA-L screening tool, to guide their instructional decisions, the majority of participants did not perceive that the KRA, in particular, was useful for guiding instruction. Moreover, teachers reported that administering the KRA took away valuable time needed to help students adjust to learning in a formal school setting and create a classroom community. Administration issues, lack of access to the data, redundancy or incompleteness of KRA data, and misconceptions about the purpose of the KRA all seemed to contribute to participants’ dissatisfaction with the KRA. Overall, it seems that teachers are not using the KRA as intended. Our findings do not indicate an adversity to assessment in general. Rather, negative perceptions and/or lack of use seem to be tied to a misunderstanding of the purpose of the KRA and administration issues

An exploratory study of early childhood coaches’ practices and professional learning needs

Coaching is increasingly being used as a mechanism to improve the quality of early childhood education. Yet, for coaching outside of researcher-controlled interventions, limited information details coaches’ reports of their practices’ professional learning needs. We addressed this gap via an exploratory study utilizing online questionnaires of 91 coaches working with educators in a Midwestern US state across 12 coaching initiatives. Most participants had less than 5 years of experience working as an early childhood coach. Almost a third coached for multiple initiatives. Coaching occurred via multiple formats and often addressed behavior management and social emotional development regardless of the coaching initiative. Coaches identified challenges regarding scheduling and working with difficult learners and reported that peer support and being coached themselves were the most beneficial learning experiences. Findings suggest that the perspective of the coach is important in informing training and professional learning for both coaches and educators