Response to Workshops 7 & 8

Response to Seminar 7 and 8 Shelley McKenney

“What is your theory of learning?” Just one question posed during an entire day of discussion stopped me cold. The knot in my stomach was not to be ignored. Just what is my theory? My mind raced for a moment before I was brought back to the conversation happening in the room. I left the seminar feeling tense and unsettled, and not sure why.
Had the question been posed five years ago, it would have been an easy answer. I had recently finished my education degree at Acadia University and had spent the previous two years reading Vygotsky and Piaget. Developmentally appropriate activities needed to be considered Children needed opportunities to talk and collaborate, learn in a safe environment, and bring prior knowledge to the classroom. Teachers were to work hard to provide experiences that would facilitate learning. We needed to provide authentic experiences and appropriate materials and teach through problem solving. Not all students learn the same things or in the same way. I was uncomfortable with any lesson that required me to talk me more than the students. Community circles were important to hold at least weekly, if not daily to raise student issues, not my issues. I wanted students to feel valued and empowered every day. My last practicum placement was in a fourth grade classroom, and I loved it.
Since then I have been teaching Kindergarten. I started with no experience with this age and was really unsure of how I could facilitate this kind of learning with 3 to 5 year olds. I had many days of self doubt and my philosophy seemed so far off from what the other members of my team were doing. Here were teachers with years of experience- I watched and what I saw was transmission pedagogy at work. I did not recognize it as that though. I made the mistake of keeping my thoughts to myself and not honouring my beliefs. I began to think that maybe I was expecting too much from these little ones. I didn’t recognize their potential and began to use the transmission method with more and more frequency. Certainly there was a lot they didn’t know and it was my job to teach (tell) them. The joy in teaching was disappearing. Kindergarten didn’t feel like the right fit for me. I wanted to change grades where I could do the kind of teaching I really wanted to do. I have realized that it isn’t the age of the children that was the source of my discontent. It was the assimilation to the transmission method of teaching that wasn’t the right fit for me. If I wasn’t excited about what I was teaching, how could the students ever be excited about learning?
Monday morning after our last meeting, I walked into my classroom and took a good look around. Did this room reflect my philosophy of teaching and learning? A small voice inside of my head said maybe not. The table in the centre of the room had diamond shapes on manila tag for the students to trace and cut out kites. Had anyone of the 36 children I teach ever mentioned a kite? Would making cookie cutter kites to decorate the room provide a rich learning opportunity? How did I get here? Once (and not even that long ago!) a passionate critic of cookie cutter crafts, and there it was, staring me in the face. I thought to myself that it would be good fine motor practice, and they would brighten up the room hanging on the walls. As I began to talk to the students about the kite “activity”, one of the children in the class asked where we were going to fly them. I have since scrapped the “decorator” kite idea. We will make kites, but they will not be attached to the wall.
Clearly it was time for me to step back and consider where to go next. I have thought a lot about the readings for Workshop 7 and 8. The readings and the seminar have allowed me to reconsider my own literacy learning, my methods of teaching, and what I believe about learning. I know that Kindergarten kids can be critical learners. These kids have lots to say and bring experience and excitement to the classroom. It is important to listen to what they are saying and take cues from their conversations. In Rethinking Early Childhood Education (Rethinking Schools Publication, 2008) there is a great chapter by the book’s editor, Ann Pelo entitled “Where are the Game Girls?” A question posed at the lunch table of 4 and 5 year olds- “Why are there Game Boys but not Game Girls?”- led to an unpacking of “girl stuff” and “boy stuff”. It provides an excellent example of critical literacy in Kindergarten. The curriculum can be met through such explorations and students learn their questions matter. All students have potential, we need to recognize it.
So what is my theory of learning? What sort of pedagogy supports my social constructivist theory learning? When considering Osborne’s chapter on recent pedagogies, I see the critical pedagogy as a good fit. Freire’s refers to three qualities necessary for successful dialogue and collaboration- love, humility, and faith. I couldn’t agree more.