Ed Johnson of Atlanta is a devotee of the Deming philosophy, which is the opposite of test-and-punish, compete-or-close, no excuses discipline.
He shared an example of Deming in kindergarten.
|
Ed Johnson of Atlanta is a devotee of the Deming philosophy, which is the opposite of test-and-punish, compete-or-close, no excuses discipline.
He shared an example of Deming in kindergarten.
|
I can’t watch the video right now, but I’m utterly confused. Is this supposed to be a good thing? Kindergartners coloring in “data-sheets”? Talking about how they all worked together to solve their “big problems”? That sounds like more of the same hokey charter-type blather we’ve been hearing about for so long. Why not just let them play?
BTW, what does “I can look like a learner” even mean? And of course every kindergartner “can focus”. Have you ever seen children really playing? Talk about focus! Or is it “I can focus” on data sheets and talking about “big problems”, in which case, no, just … no.
Also, BTW, it’s not up to kindergartners to “be safe”. It’s up to adults to keep them safe with reasonable room for age-appropriate risk (like falling down and scraping knees, and moderate conflict with peers).
As usual, spot on Dienne!
I was wondering the same thing, Dienne! It doesn’t sound like any Kindergarten that I would want to be involved with.
In Kindergarten, they should be learning about getting along and playing with blocks and dolls ;and swings. Since when did Kindergarten become a mini factory or something?
Wow–you aren’t the only one confused, Dienne! I’d taught Early Childhood (SpEd–3-5-year-old) for 13 years, K for a semester, Developmental K for 2 summers, & was the director of an afterschool
preschool program & the interim director during the summer, so I found it odd that this confounded me (of course, I don’t remember using any such methods, & the kids were alright!). In fact, the preschool was in the Univ. of Chicago neighborhood, where the brilliant E.C. expert /author (You Can’t Say I Can’t Play, et.al.) Vivian Gussin Paley taught. “The work of children is play.”
Charts? & kept by the kids? Data-driven drivel!!!
(But, Ed, I love your motto, “Show me children not ready for Kindergarten & I shall show you Kindergarten not ready for children.”)
&–sorry–this Kindergarten doesn’t seem “ready” for children.
Omg! W. Edwards Deming is turning in his grave,
Where is the like button?
Dienne, I work with 2.5-6y.o.’s. In an age-appropriately-run school, there will be ample time to “just play,” but even there, safety rules are needed. Without them, playing quickly devolves into a joyous or angry tussling heap-‘o-kids, with somebody getting hurt. Rules are also needed for the processes involved in putting on outerwear, getting from classroom to playground, etc. – regardless of how safe the adults have made these spaces.
But you knew that. The issue is how to convey and enforce rules. It helps to understand the value of the approach described, if you consider the alternative: repetitively barking out “keep your hands on your own body” et al typical K-2 rules. Even if you speak gently, demonstrate how to do, & reinforce (e.g., “I like the way Johnny is keeping his hands on his own body”), this is mostly TALK, which floats just beyond many tots’ antennae. So: highly inefficient, requiring nearly constant repetition, with sketchy results (other than teacher getting hot under the collar & lapsing into “barking.”)
The Deming adaptation shown here contains the key: getting kids formulating & adopting their own goals and rules via collaboration. You get instant buy-in, better retention, quicker response.
BUT I’d revise it. The category “I can look like a learner” smacks of Eva & no-excuses schools. They’re probably trying to get at physically demonstrating desired behavior, but the frame is wrong. Ditto “data,” a word that I’d introduce in, maybe, 3rd gr [ & NOT in behavioral context]. I get that they’re steering away from gold star-winner/ loser competition toward achieving goals, but they should never have broken the chart down into publicly-posted comparable versions.
Full disclosure: as a free-lance special, I’m exposed to many variations on how to do this, & I’ve seen better than this Deming adaptation. It’s overkill: the process is cumbersome, & invests too much time/ importance/ daily monitoring on behavior issues which generally self-resolve w/in weeks. Kids this age develop swiftly, & initial “big problems” (not) will quickly be replaced with others.
The best way to enforce rules is to have the kids set them in the first place. Then all you have to say is, “We all agreed,….” Adults usually don’t believe that kids will set “appropriate” rules, but it’s surprising just how closely aligned kid-generated and adult-generated rules tend to be. Funny thing, I guess kids actually want to be safe and protected.
Yes, kids have impulse issues and there will be conflicts, hurt feelings, retaliations, etc., but then you’re not really dealing with rules, you’re dealing with the conflicts and the hurt feelings. If Johnny hits Sammy because Sammy called him a pootyhead, it’s not going to help to remind Johnny about the rule against hitting. He doesn’t care in that moment.
Agree completely re: rule-setting, Dienne. Very young kids need a framework of a few iron-clad rules to start with, & will spend lots of time on learning how to use them – that’s where the guidance on working out feelings comes in. They are learning how to use words to express feelings (instead of insults, hitting etc) – which doesn’t come naturally to 2-4y.o.’s but it’s the other half of the package. (Amazing in 20 yrs how few PreK teachers I’ve seen teach them how , most rely on authoritarian methods.) But I still love the idea of having them collaborate on some of their own even in PreK. That prepares them for a broader discussion – coming up w/ most of the basics themselves – starting in K.
I agree the process is cumbersome for these young students. I give them credit for getting young students to collaborate and reflect on their actions. Coloring in “data” or information, they are teaching students to categorize and how a bar graph works. While some of the terminology does “smell of reform,” the school is trying to get children to think for themselves which is much better than the autocratic behaviorism of so-called reform.
What these students are doing is in no way a substitute for play. Play should be negotiated on students’ terms and self-directed, not the teacher’s.
PDSA? I guess it’s an adjustment of Deming’s PDCA, eh! Or is that OPDCA? (and actually that “O” is probably the most important part)
Yep, it’s one means of control, control of those who have no power nor authority to control.
Yup, PDSA. Deming’s is PDSA, not PDCA. “S” requires learning. “C” requires only inspection, checking up on things, meeting standards and such that all too often inhibit improving.
“PDSA Cycle – A flow diagram for learning and for improvement of a product or process.”
–W. Edwards Deming, in The New Economics for Industry, Government, Education; Fig 13.
Took a course at a community college in MA back in ’87 or so on Deming, JIT while working in production scheduling at a metal building manufacturer.
We are so lost. Pretty sure this never crossed Deming’s mind.
How, by that short video, does one conclude the children don’t have play?
I would agree with the validity of that question, Ed. I would also ask, “How, by that short video, does one conclude” this methodology is so great?
More info., please…
Forcing this nonsense on a 5 year old is as bad as over-testing and replacing developmentally appropriate practices with paper-based, academic teaching. This method WAY overthinks EC development. Let the kids collaborate on a floor puzzle, build a city scape with blocks, or pretend to own and operate a pizza restaurant in the dramatic play area. Watch them work together, divvy up responsibilities, use the process of trial and error, problem-solve, etc. No data sheet filling in necessary- whatsoever.
https://dey.org/kindergarten-teacher-why-our-youngest-learners-are-doomed-right-out-of-the-gate-and-a-roadmap-to-fix-it/
Agreed. That would be the natural way that children learn through play. It would also promote independence and promote confidence. Young children are very resourceful, and at this level they need to develop social skills that are just as important as academics.
Grim. Please teach these kids about polar bears, not ensnare them in this stultifying and useless faux problem-solving process.
To be able to learn about polar bears or anything else, little kids have to learn how to cooperate together in a learning space: how to gather w/o struggling over who-touched-me, I -was-sitting-there, how to ask a Q w/o talking over others, etc. Those are not givens 5-yo’s walk in w/in September.
Er.. Now that I’ve slept on it 😀 … My response is a non-sequitur. There are only a few key things I like about the video’d exercise. Framing it as “solving our big problem” is definitely not one of them. Nor do I like a big, days’-long & daily-updated chart-building exercise around behavior… I might like it a lot if it were part of a unit on learning about polar bears.
Gosh, such a wealth of surprising and eye-opening responses here! Thanks, all, for your comments.