Early childhood programs are instrumental in a child’s life as they help in building not only the child’s character but also developing the child’s interests and hobbies (Novak,1990). For this activity, I visited a kids’ community center that has an early childhood program tailored for three-year olds. During this activity, I made guided observations on a number of issues in the kids’ math and science environment. I also used my experience as a preschool teacher to make conclusions on various predetermined issues as pertaining these two fields.
First and foremost, I graded the science environment by going through the science checklist and assigning values in the questionnaire that were an indication of the center’s performance in a particular area. The science activities carried out in this center included; the apple volcano experiment, fizzy cloud dough experiment, weather science, lava lamp experiment, smell and taste experiment and color changing rose experiment. All these experiments are designed to make the learning experience for the children fun as well as educative (Cooper, 2019).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The first observation was with regards to the availability of space to accommodate the children as well as the various activities done at the center. The center had sufficient space for the children and the activities. However, a lot more can be done to make the center an even better place. The sink for instance, was quite far from the children’s activity area, it could be moved closer so as to ensure that in case of spillage of any kind from an activity, there is a convenient way of dealing with it (Novak,1990).
Moreover, the center was well-equipped with a variety of tools necessary for learning. It however, could be better off increasing the number of tools to ensure all the children get to participate. The arrangement of the center in most ways met the requirements needed to ensure that communication and cooperation is encouraged, however, the shelves that store materials were poorly organized making the center score poorly. Process skills were emphasized at the center with the children being engaged in every aspect of their learning. From experience, this is very commendable as they are fundamental in developing a child’s memory skills. (Clements, Sarama, DiBiase 2003).
The center failed to ensure there was no disruption during activities and on top of that the lighting in the room was not to the required standard; this therefore made the environment less conducive for the children to concentrate while learning. The center did not also lay special emphasis on the ability of children to have an open mind and ask questions on various issues. Moreover, there was no provision for use of graph paper, video/ audio recorders, journals and clipboards for children to represent their knowledge. The materials available for the children use were not arranged in a logical order. All these observations were accompanied by a low score of one.
Math activities for three-year olds are vital in ensuring good grasp of key concepts. (Baratta-Lorton,1976). From experience, a number of activities should be included in the curriculum. These activities are counting and color sorting activity, pipe cleaner counting activity, count the coins activity, magnetic fishing number game and number maze counting game. (Cooper, 2019)
The center scored highly in a number of areas within the math environment. First, the teachers used assessment of the children’s knowledge and skills to select material and activities suitable for them within the math center. (Clements, Sarama, DiBiase 2003). There was a clearly defined math area in a quiet section within the room which ensured lack of disruption. Concrete materials for active manipulation were also available and this enabled teachers to interact with the children to help them understand the number concepts and patterns as well as promote their understanding of data collection, organization and representation. (Clements, Sarama, DiBiase 2003). There was a clearly defined place for each math item which was neatly organized.
Some areas got a two as they were either lacking some essential items or they were not well-thought out by the center. Developmental math activities for each of the math standards were insufficient. The children lacked attractive containers in which to put all their essentials and this resulted in disorganization and consequently ineffectiveness of the activities done. The space, despite having a clearly defined math area, was somewhat small and therefore limiting the extent to which the children could work and display their completed math-related work. The material and activities edged towards being open-ended and therefore risked being a hindrance to learning for the children (Clements, Sarama, DiBiase 2003).
The teachers also exhibited some sort of laxity in tutoring of geometry and measurement concepts to the children and this essentially made some children show signs of disinterest on the subject. In addition, the materials being used did not rotate in an attempt to meet the children’s changing developmental needs and interests. Infact, the materials were not enough and there was no variety of material for exploring geometric shapes, spatial relationships and for exploring geometric shapes. Moreover, the children were barely encouraged to communicate and represent their mathematical thinking.
Conclusion
During this visit, I learnt a lot of lessons especially with regards to a child’s growth in knowledge of science and mathematics. In both cases, I learnt that communication is key especially if you want the child to have a deeper understanding of what you are teaching them. (Inagaki, K. 1992). In most cases, the children were not able to express themselves so as to give the preschool teacher an idea of what they had grasped and what they did not clearly understand. Therefore, this if left unchecked, could lead to the children losing interest in what they are learning and consequently failure to understand important mathematical and science concepts.
Moreover, the space in which the children where, was insufficient and this could be a hinderance especially when it came to doing vital activities whose aim is to make it easy for the children to understand and internalize what they learn (Inagaki, K. 1992). In addition, there was an element of disorganization in the center that included the arrangement of materials within the shelves, availability of containers to ensure that the children’s required tools are placed together to avoid confusion during activities and the lack of well-prepared and step by step approach to introduce and ensure understanding of various vital concepts. This disorganization element is unattractive especially in early childhood education in science and mathematics because during this particular period the children’s minds are delicate and require utmost care (Novak,1990).
References
Baratta-Lorton, M. (1976). Mathematics their way: An activity-centered mathematics program for early childhood education. Menlo Park, CA: Addison-Wesley.
Clements, D. H., Sarama, J., & DiBiase, A. M. (2003). Engaging young children in mathematics: Standards for early childhood mathematics education. Routledge.
Novak, J. D. (1990). Concept mapping: A useful tool for science education. Journal of research in science teaching , 27 (10), 937-949.
Inagaki, K. (1992). Piagetian and post-Piagetian conceptions of development and their implications for science education in early childhood. Early Childhood Research Quarterly , 7 (1), 115-133.
Cooper, S. (2019). 25+ Number Games for Toddlers (and Preschoolers!). Retrieved from https://teaching2and3yearolds.com/25-hands-on-number-games-for-toddlers-and-preschoolers/
Cooper, S. (2019). 10 Fun Preschool Science Activities. Retrieved from https://teaching2and3yearolds.com/10-fun-preschool-science-activities-that-are-fun/
