Froebel, based on his book The Education of Man, indicated that each individual should actively participate in the recapitulation, “traversing in its own experience the whole previous development of mankind” (p.93). He believed in child-centered approach and education should develop each child according to his/her nature. In line with Froebel, Montessori also believed in child-centered approach and claimed that “normalized child is one who has been freed in a psychically hygienic environment to function normally” (p.147). She encouraged each child to be active and to interact with the environment. However, is child-centered approach always good and suitable for today’s society?
Module 6 Poetry, Drama, Film, Response
13 years ago
4 comments:
The child-centered approach has its roots in the 19th century. In 1837, Froebel founded an institution where young children could grow freely according to their nature and named the institution “kindergarten,” a garden for children. Froebel wanted children to develop at their own pace not as teachers decide. Montessori also believed in child-centered approach and indicated that young children could learn new concepts through their actively involvement in activity. The teacher’s role is not to talk, as Montessori mentioned, but to encourage children to learn freely in the prepared environment. The child-centered approach emphasizes the importance of children’s interests and children are allowed to choose, think and explore freely. However, the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) leaves the child-centered approach behind.
Under the NCLB Act, standards and accountability are highly emphasized, holding schools and teachers accountable for educating children to achieve the standards, leaving no child behind. However, this education reform has resulted in that child-centered approach has given way to high-stakes testing preparation. Child-centered approach focuses on the particular interests of children and encourages children’s autonomy. In contrast, teacher-centered approach focuses more on the teacher’s control over children’s learning and exploration. Due to teaching to the test, there is a tension between teacher control and children’s freedom (Tzuo, 2007). Standards describe the required knowledge and skills that children should know. Hence, the emphasis on academic achievement and the demand for accountability make it difficult to promote the use of child-centered approach, teaching children according to their interests and needs. Teachers struggle to balance their belief in child-centered approach and their obligation to teach the standards (Goldstein, 2007).
Child-centered approach has been an essential basis of early childhood education since the time of Froebel. One of the significant ideas of child-centered approach is that all children have a right to an education that supports their development across all dimensions. Therefore, under the pressure of today’s society, the most critical concern is to find a productive pedagogical way which not only the individual needs of each child can be met but the obligation of the teacher to teach each child to meet the standards can be obtained as well.
Goldstein, L. S. (2007). Beyond the DAP versus standards dilemma: Examining the unforgiving complexity of kindergarten teaching in the United States. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 22, 39-54.
Tzuo, P. (2007). The tension between teacher control and children’s freedom in a child-centered classroom: Resolving the practical dilemma through a closer look at the related theories. Early Childhood Education Journal, 35, 33-39.
Child-Centered Education
Froebel and Montessori believed in education where the child determines the direction of the lesson. Froebel focused his ideas on the play of the child. He investigated how to create a suitable environment for these experiences. Froebel created gifts to help children with this process. Montessori created an atmosphere where the teacher introduces children to different work materials and once the child learns to use these tools he/she can decide when to use the various activities. These educators created early childhood programs that allowed children to determine what activities to focus on each day. Are these types of programs suitable for children in today’s society?
With the creation of the No Child Left Behind legislation, many schools focus on preparing children to pass the standardized tests mandated by this act. Consequently, many teachers are required to give several benchmark tests throughout the year to determine their students’ readiness for these exams. Often preparation for these activities, forces teachers to create lessons that focus on a set of skills that the whole class will work on in a more traditional setting where the teacher gives the students the information they need to know and the students practice this material until these ideas are mastered. Schools seem to be moving away from these child-centered approaches to a more teacher-centered approach because of concerns relating to covering enough material prior to these end-of-the-year exams. Is this type of program suitable for children in today’s society?
Too much focus on one set of skills may not help develop children ready for today’s changing world. When teachers teach test-taking skills, are they preparing students for life outside of the classroom? Dahlberg & Moss (2005), write “[r]ather than attaining a stable end state, a condition of completion, she or he is a fluid flexible being, ready to respond and adapt to conditions of constant change” (p. 21). As educators, we need to think about these words. Which type of environment will encourage children to prepare to respond to these changes in society? One that focuses on the child and that encourages a child to develop learning interests or an environment that focuses on standards and passing a test.
Even going back to Rousseau in the 1700's there was the influence of the child-centered approach. He thought the purpose of education was to draw out the nature of the child by permitting the child to interact and problem solve with nature with little or no interference from adults. He saw the child and the process of learning as more important than the product. Later Froebel and Montessori would build on some of these early ideas (Lascarides & Hinitz 2000).
When it comes to NCLB Richard Allington says that after 30 years of research evidence on the effects of federal testing and accountabiltiy that this approach is largely devoid of any positive effects on student achievement. He claims there is no evidence to support this improves schools. In fact, it undermines the likelihood of reliable school improvement (Allington, 2002). We seem to have moved farther away from the child centered approach.
Continuing with the NCLB discussion.........
The Center for Educational Policy (2008) released its report of trends of student achievement since 2002 and the No Child Left Behind Act and found the achievement gap had narrowed in many states. Several reasons listed were teachers instructing for the tests and teachers as well as parents were more likely to be motivated for students to do better on state tests because these results are posted publicly. Parents are more aware today if their school falls behind other districts.
In their summary the CEP suggested it is not possible to determine whether the achievement gap has narrowed due to the NCLB or because of it. The report specifically examined math and reading scores and subgroups such as Native American Indians. One valid complaint is the removal of arts and music programs to focus more on achievement to meet the goals. Another example is lunch is 30 minutes at high school, 5 minutes to get to the cafeteria, 5-10 minutes to stand in line, and maybe 10 minutes to eat and 5 minutes to get back to class. The National Education Association wrote on its’ website the removal of arts programs is detrimental to students because research has shown the arts improve academic performance. In particular schools are pushing academics and really what is wrong with that picture? Teachers have been teaching for the test for years (this is one argument).
Center for Educational Policy
http://www.cep-dc.org/
Post a Comment