Renee Dinnerstein is an early childhood educator with many years of experience. In this post, she shows how the overly prescriptive approach encouraged by the Common Core can ruin the concept of Choice Time in kindergarten.
She writes: “Choice Time is not a time to give children tasks. It should be an opportunity for children to direct their own play and therefore, their own learning. The teacher carefully sets up centers with materials that provoke investigations but it is the child who discovers ways of using the materials.”
And further:
“Once we outline a detailed guide for kindergarten mastery we are immediately off –base. As the authors of Developmentally Appropriate Practice write, educators of kindergarten children need to, “meet children where they are as individuals and as a group.” Micromanaging what all kindergarten children must master by the end of a school year is contradictory to what we know about how young children develop and about what we need to do to support their creative, social and intellectual development. I’m not implying that we should not have high standards for all children. We do not need to have a checklist of how, what and when children need to meet very specific academic benchmarks.”
Frankly, the very idea that five-year-old children are on track for “college and career readiness” is absurd.
A few years ago, I went to an event at the Aspen Ideas Festival where Secretary Arne Duncan waxed eloquent about the importance of unstructured play and tinkering. He seemed to grasp that young children should not be placed on a treadmill of benchmarks and prescribed standards.
Too bad that the Common Core for young children does not reflect that wisdom.

A couple of comments concerning the last two sentences. “He seemed to grasp. . . .
Too bad that the Common Core for young children does not reflect that wisdom.
As a politician, he’s definitely not an educator, Duncan knows what to say, when to say it and where to say it, then go about his merry business ignoring if not doing the opposite of what he pronounces. That should not be a surprise. And to mention wisdom in the same thought, well perish that thought.
LikeLike
Amen. Dinnerstein writes “(Duncan) seemed to grasp that young children should not be placed on a treadmill of benchmarks and prescribed standards. What reason do we have to assume the there is any relationship between what he says and what he believes?
LikeLike
Duane Swacker & anncberlak: there is no question that Arne Duncan’s actions are completely at odds with his behavior. At the recent AERA [American Education Research Association] annual meeting he chided his audience that among the things they should be concerned about was the fact that:
“Some schools have an almost obsessive culture around testing, and that hurts their most vulnerable learners and narrows the curriculum. It’s heartbreaking to hear a child identify himself as ‘below basic’ or ‘I’m a one out of four.’ ”
Yes, to many of the very same people who for years and years have tried to get him to stop creating an “almost obsessive culture around testing.” And he told them to come up with solutions to the problem he has had a very large hand in creating. As George W. might have said, “Way to go, Arne!”
🙂
Click on this link for a good summary of Arne’s [almost] hilarious incoherence at AERA: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arnold-dodge/the-solution-to-a-bad-guy_b_3238930.html?utm_hp_ref=tw
As some other commenters have alluded to, one of the key problems with ‘traditional LIFO-lazy’ teaching is that it actually [I know you will cringe at this] encourages ‘self-directed play’ and even worse, ‘self-directed critical thinking.’
How in the world will ‘self-directed’ individuals who think for themselves fit into the corporate consumer model? Not well, I imagine, because the edubullies instinctively recoil at Hannah Arendt’s observation: “There are no dangerous thoughts; thinking itself is dangerous.”
Me? I’m a traditionalist. I’m all for thinking. It’s my “consumer choice.”
🙂
LikeLike
i agree totally with what is said here. This should also be true for pre-Kindergarten children who are now under the thumb of the Common Core as well. What the Early Childhood Research proves, what is common sense about early childhood learning, what has been shown to be deelopmentally appropriate has all been thrown out becuase of the monied interests and power of the education deformers. How about getting four-six year olds ready for and interested in formal learning first? Let’s get them excited about the world around them, about books and numbers, about themselves and others before we start applying labels that will stigmatize the way they are seen. The 1% lets their children be children.. They don’t cram facts down the throats of youngsters that they are not ready for. They expose them to learning, nature the arts and don’t apply data points to their development. Their teachers in the private schools have academic freedom to be the teachers they studied to be. Let’s put the billions wasted on technology that tracks and fails, high stakes tests, consultants, lawyers and companies like Pearson/McGraw Hill and put it into the crumbling infrasturcture of our public school buildings, into curriculum that is child friendly and culturally relevent. into teacher training programs that have teachers prepared to walk into classrooms ready to teach (with knowledge and enthusiasm). Children need time and space and encouragement to grow into functioning adults. Those in charge right now are hurting our future. They must be stopped or we shall all be doomed.
LikeLike
I wish Arne would stop tinkering with our children and our profession.
He wings it everyday and I wouldn’t believe anything he says…his tune changes depending on what the bloviating billionaire boys have programmed him to say….a true Manchurian candidate for the Gates USDOE.
LikeLike
Anytime a politician speaks so passionately about childhood development, happiness, and the importance of play and imagination always remember they are talking about their kids or their elite friends’ kid. Not poor kids. Poor kids need common core. Yet no private school will participate in ncbl, rttt, or common core and even use that as a sales pitch to attract students.
LikeLike
I support kindergarten programs where children have “choice time,” free play, story time, even naps (don’t get me started on full-day kindergarten). However, I do think a five-year-old child CAN be on track for college. As a very small child, yea, even five years old, my father had set up a savings account for me and into this account I deposited all gift money I received. As I grew and began to earn money, all this money went into my savings. So thoroughly did my father indoctrinate me that I was destined for college that I was a senior in high school before I realized that there was even a choice in the matter, that some of my classmates were not going on to college. “Is that even possible?” I thought. So yes, the seed can be planted in small children. My husband did not go to college after high school because his father never went to college and he (the father) did not know how the process of going to college even worked–what tests to take and when, how to choose a college, how to apply, etc. So there is a role for the school to play in situations where college is not a part of the family tradition and the parents, well-meaning and hopeful that their child could go to college need guidance and encouragement in getting their children there.
LikeLike
Melinda, one year my student teacher hosted a kindergarten trip to her school, Brooklyn College. We quietly walked around the library, observing students studying at the tables, visited her science lab and met her science teacher, and ate lunch among the students in the cafeteria. I know that this exciting day made a big impression on all of my students. This didn’t have anything to do with getting them college ready but it did have a lot to do with getting them inspired.
LikeLike
Really? Five and six year olds were excited to be there? Was there a puppet show? Playground? Hands on activity? They saw people sitting at tables studying and then they had lunch? This inspired them to want to be a student?
LikeLike
Linda, I don’t know if this inspired them to be a college student. I do know that they were really excited to be there, especially (particularly) because it was where their very beloved student teacher went to school. We were sneaking around the library and that was fun. Investigating the science lab was exciting and eating with their student teacher and all of her friends was very special. It’s not a typical trip but it was a memorable one.
LikeLike
I teach kindergarten. I do a chioce time under the radar, but I always feel that i’m going to get in trouble. And guess what? I still have “highly effective” test scores. But I do feel more and more like a guard in a prison. What really worries me about universal pre-school is that they will ruin it in the same way they ruined kindergarten.
LikeLike
“What really worries me about universal pre-school is that they will ruin it in the same way they ruined kindergarten.”
Amen.
LikeLike
Given the research on the 30 million word gap (http://centerforeducation.rice.edu/slc/LS/30MillionWordGap.html), might there be different educational needs for children from different backgrounds?
LikeLike
YES, TE. Exactly!
LikeLike
The most effective language learning strategies for young children of all backgrounds are informal conversations, storybook readings and discussions, and adult labeling and play-by-plays to describe things, events, etc., using rich language, with synonyms, brief definitions, body language, pointing to pictures, etc., to help children understand new words, in the natural environment, NOT drilling kids vocabulary words with flashcards in formal lessons –which is what you are most likely to see with the pushed down curriculum in Kindergarten and Preschool.
LikeLike
TE – yes, that’s why kids from impoverished backgrounds need even more enrichment at school. Drill and kill, however, is not enrichment. Forcing developmentally inappropriate academic material on kids is not enrichment. Strict discipline is not enrichment. Providing rich opportunities for play and exploration, along with plenty of social and emotional nourishment – that’s enrichment.
LikeLike
“I still have “highly effective” test scores.”
Personally, I wouldn’t be proud of that.
LikeLike
I’m not proud. I was just saying that it’s possible to be developmentally appropriate, give children choices and still give administration the test scores they want. Do I want to test kindergartners? NO. What galls me is that urban public school administrators don’t think that developmentally appropriate kindergartens can deliver on the scores without kill and drill. I’m saying that they can. Children can play in kindergarten, talk to each other and still pass those tests. I’ve done it. With children who live in poverty. The only reason they leave me and my kids alone is because of my “highly effective” test scores. Did you notice “highly effective” is and was in quotes? Trust me, I’m not proud of the test scores. I said I feel like a guard in a prison camp. I’m proud of my kids and the choices they make.
@Deinne. Right on about the enrichment our kids need. That’s what I try to do every day, and it’s what I and my colleagues argue for in all our planning times.
LikeLike
Yes, I taught kindergarten many years ago. Our Early Childhood director in the district told us that the painting easwl was going to be the forst to go and blocks. Within the year her prdiction proved right. Many kindergartens have no choice time. In many others, teachers do what you do and have the same feelings. Pre-K is still supposed to be a social-emotional learning experience for the children. However if we begin to be assessed under the new evaluation system, all that will be gone too. Tasks and a million assessments will take over. and forget about good childrens fiction.
LikeLike
I can easily imaging they will make pre-k the new 1st grade. In Clark County, Nevada, the superintendent has already admitted that in Kindergarten we will be teaching things that used to be taught in third grade. Piaget may be dead, but he wasn’t wrong. I envision future generations researching the notion that inappropriate instruction hinders the ability of children to learn appropriate basic skills. Pushing the envelope will yield poorer results.
LikeLike
If you replaced pre-k with the word kindergarten, you would be spot on. This year in NYC, pre-k and K have the exact same report card. We never had a report card before. We had progress reports 3x a year that focused mostly on their social emotional development and a bit about recognizing their name and listening skills and following directions.
This year we had to grade our students in ELA and Math on the index cards we gave to the principal so she could divide the classes.
I feel so sorry for my students coming in September.
I’ll do my best but I’m already known as a problem because I use playdough
LikeLike
” This year in NYC, pre-k and K have the exact same report card.”
What!!! No “plays well with others”?
LikeLike
there is a box for getting along just like all the grades have a box for conduct, but the bulk of the report card is ELA, Math, Science, Social Studies. Nothing about following directions or self regulation or being independent. It’s a sad day for education. Sadder still, most of the parents think all this “rigor” is wonderful and want more of it. “He plays too much” is usually what I hear from parents. I am known as the “creative” one implying that I am not teaching students to be ready for K. We are building a house of cards.
LikeLike
Arne Duncan cannot be taken at his word.
I sometimes teach things in Pre-K that I taught in K against what I know is right. My administrators want to see graphs, charts, accountable talk and levels of depth of knowledge. . When I hear the K teachers giving lessons on nouns and pronouns, verbs and adjectives (yes using that vocabulary), I cringe. Also my school ordered desks a few weekas ago to replace the kindergarten tables. And the teachers, who are good, defend this saying, “Well they need room for all their books.” No painting easel, few blocks, hardly any dramatic play or manipulatives.. It’s a wonder the state still gives an early childhood license (birth to 2nd grade.)
LikeLike
Patricia, I am so sorry to read your post. Desks?! What are the suits thinking? I am hanging on tooth and nail but the last 2 years have been horrible. Suits coming in my room and being disrespectful and challenging me. I was told “it’s not what you want. it’s what the DOE wants” Children are not in the equation. I’m spending the summer trying to figure out how to give the suits what they want and still give my kids what they need.
LikeLike
Yes individual desks! When I saw them coming in I blew my stack. The AP pretended she didn’t know who they were for (the first grade was also getting furniture). I am trying to hang in there too. I can retire at the end of the summer, but I love teaching. Some days after seeing and experiencing what is coming down, i want to throw in the towel after 20 years in the DOE and 10 in Day Care and Head Start. I can “play the game,” and did so my school could get a second Pre-k class. However when my superintendent said that Danielson worked in Pre-K under the pilot program, I wanted to scream, “No it didn’t!” I am grateful to diane Ravitch and other blogs/education groups for giving us an outlet to express ourselves so we don’t blow up in front of “the bosses.”
LikeLike
How awful. NYC is using Danielson. I worry about my kids and what we’re doing to them. Imagine if you weren’t there. Who would take your place? A brand new TFAer who will stay one year? I love teaching and I love my kids and I can’t imagine this will last forever. Stay strong.
LikeLike
“My administrators want to see graphs, charts, accountable talk and levels of depth of knowledge. ”
Your administrators are ignorant idiots! And if your one of Patricia’s administrators, bring on your rationales for such nonsense so that you may be exposed for the fraud of administrator that you are.
LikeLike
“Many kindergartens have no choice time.” This should be a big scandal. Self-directed play is the most powerful mode of learning for young children. And it’s the most important kind of learning. Externally imposed “rigor” can wait. In fact, middle school and high school kids need choice time, too. True academic rigor is for graduate school.
It’s a horrible shame that American kids are becoming less and less involved in their own learning and teachers are increasingly forced to follow a script. School could be restrictive and boring enough as it was, before NCLB, but the path we’re on now will further oppress students and teachers alike. Hats off to the teachers who know this and are willing to subvert the system!
LikeLike
In a graduate course back in the day, I had professors who told us to read a book every day even to the middle and upper grade students. One would read at the end of our session in every class. We loved it and so do the students. My third grade intervention students are witmess to that. Those days are almost gone. I have to have a reason ready in case an administrator comes in during intervention and catches ME reading to the children. Sigh!
LikeLike
That’s alarming. I wonder where these administrators are getting their information about literacy (or any other educational topic).
LikeLike
The most upsetting thing to me is that all the people who are in charge of making these children return to the 19th century, send their own children to schools that have art, music, dance, small classes, choice time. The head of the NYS Dept of Ed sends his child to a Montessori but wants Dickensan work houses for “other people’s children”
LikeLike
Sheila, who is the DOE official who sends his child to a Montessori school?
LikeLike
John King
LikeLike
The CCSS documents include this information as an integral part of the Standards themselves and these Language Arts Key Design Considerations are part of the adoption of the CCSS. If your school, district, or state is claiming to follow the CCSS then they should familiarize themselves with the documents. Clearly these fools haven’t.
I post it here for those other subversive teachers, like myself, who are fighting to maintain play in the primary grades. It can provide you some cover an justification when you are bullied and criticized for allowing young children to explore through play. I learned about this component through Lucy Calkins who has used this document to defend and protect the right of teachers to teach and plan their lessons themselves.
From The CCSS Language Arts “Key Design Considerations”
Subsection: “What is not covered by the Standards”
“The standards should be recognized for what they are not as well as for what they are. The most important intentional design limitations are as follows:
a. The Standards define what all students are expected to know and be able to
do, not how teachers should teach. For instance, the use of play with young
children is not specified by the Standards, but it is welcome as a valuable
activity in its own right and as a way to help students meet the expectations in
this document. . . .”
I keep a copy of this document handy at all times in order to defend my use of choice time and play in my 1st grade classroom. If you are being bullied and forced to give up choice time and play time then the bullies are not following the CCSS guidelines, though they may claim to be doing just that. I doubt many of them have even read the Key Design Considerations or have any familiarity with the document outside the “checklist” of standards. Now you can educate them and tell them to back off.
Foreknowledge is forearmed and formidable. I hope this might be helpful to some of you our there who are fighting the good fight too! I have no choice in teaching to the CCSS if I want to stay employed and earn my pension after 23 years. By reading the CCSS documents carefully and knowing what they say and what they don’t say I have been able to shelter my children somewhat from the most egregious implementation ridiculousness. I wish you good luck!
LikeLike
Good Post
LikeLike
It’s amusing that we are told that “The Standards define what all students are expected to know and to be able to do” when the CCSS for ELA are almost completely agnostic with regard to both world knowledge and specific procedural knowledge.
Nonetheless, have some of this frightful scripture memorized to spew back at the enforcers of the new regime will doubtless prove useful.
LikeLike
Good to know
LikeLike
“Children learn what they live” has always been the best bit of wisdom I can find regarding nurturing and educating young children.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on David R. Taylor-Thoughts on Texas Education.
LikeLike
What a fascinating conversation. Many thanks to all you K teaches who have read and/or responded to this post. You really are at ground zero when it comes to teaching. In my school and district, rigor has been the flavor of the day for several years now. Here is one example of how rigor is addressed at my school. All of us must have our daily schedules posted, including academic language and measurable outcomes. I’m not against schedules that inform the children about what they are learning and when it will happen, that encourage them to read for real purposes, that give them opportunities for independence. I’m also not against rigor. I’m not against using academic language with young children, for like Cosmic Tinkerer posted, adults modeling language in natural settings is part of what grows vocabulary and understanding, especially at a school like mine where part of their poverty is lack of language development. However, when the class schedule reads like the CCS in Kindergarten, and administrative walk-throughs focus on lack of rigor in the class schedule, and supporting pictures are discouraged, all in the classroom of a teacher with many years experience who is Board Certified, well then I know I live in crazyland. And the only filter, at school, between the children and the craziness is the teacher. My hat goes off to all you Kindergarten teachers!
LikeLike
The problem with Arne is that he is not a teacher and does not understand child development. All he understands in test scores—numbers. Somehow we need to convince him that education is not about numbers.
LikeLike
He ain’t being and can’t be “convinced”. It’s not his position to question his talking points coming from those who butter his bread and/or will be buttering his bread when he takes his dog and pony show out on the road after his current gig is up.
LikeLike
Hi all,
I enjoyed your comments and agree with most of them, particularly Renee’s. It is clear that most people do not understand what learning is or how it happens or how children learn to think or even what business needs in future workers. I understand why conservative and teacher-directed ideas (the commonly held ones about learning) get so much more play in the general world than ours. It is easier to think you can just MAKE someone learn. What I don’t understand is why we can’t get any play in the media and how we can help the general public understand authentic learning. I also don’t get why Obama (forget Duncan!), who seems to be a smart and thoughtful man, cannot even begin to understand this. I suppose it is because his girls are successful in school. It is not too difficult for them to comply with today’s school ways of learning. I know their school must be more engaging than most public schools, but I bet it
is still highly competitive and over-structured.
Let’s really try hard to think of a way to get others outside early childhood to understand learning. I am thinking of writing an op-ed for the New York Times about it. I know that serves a very specific audience, but it might be a start.
LikeLike
I think you over estimate the President’s thoughtfulness. He’s a committed progressive, socialist, Communist, and never concealed that orientation. It’s people who don’t understand what communism really is who see him as a regular, commonsensical person. He is committed to change, and is succeeding. It’s a disaster.
LikeLike
Hogwash. Ignore this acrimonious Tea Partier who just comes here to spew venom and vent his political resentments over losing the last election. He sees everyone who doesn’t support his Tea Party dogma as “progressive, socialist, Communist.”
Obama is a committed capitalist who promotes neo-liberal doctrines that appease corporations, just like the GOP and ALEC. If Obama was a progressive or supported more social policies, he would have a lot more support today from the people who voted for him than he does.
The only change Obama is committed to is privatizing public services, including education, which both parties promote. He bailed out and protected the billionaire banksters who brought down our economy, just as Bush did, and any calls to raise taxes on the wealthy are moderate gestures at best.
There are minimal differences between the Democrats and Republicans today, with the exception of extremist Tea Party factions that contributed to the GOP losing elections last November. So, the GOP is trying to highlight the few differences that exist between the two parties by leveraging their weight to bring government to a standstill. But that’s not likely to win more voters to their side. Many voters feel they already compromised their principles because a vote for Obama was a vote for GOP lite.
LikeLike