Child_Observation_Example

Play is John’s Work Student December 1, 2007 Assignment 2: Preschool Years Play is John’s Work Child’s Name: John* Age: 4 years 7 months Site: Sandy Hill Nursery School *I do not believe in using a child’s real name for observation essays. Although I may get marked down for this, I stand firm in my belief that it is not necessary to use a child’s real name. Everything in this essay is based upon my observation of a single male child who is 4 years and 7 months old, but John is not his real name. Sandy Hill Nursery School in Solana Beach is very much in line with Jean Piaget’s and Lev Vygotsky’s child-centered approach and that children actively try to understand their world. They should be free to play and explore with some guidance (Berger, 261). At Sandy Hill, children are not told what to play or what they should be doing. Instead, they have a choice of many different activities that they may want to participate in. For instance, I observed the classroom on a rainy day. Although it was still wet outside, the children were not forced to stay inside and do the art project of the day, which was painting leaves. They could stay at the table painting leaves or they could go outside and play with the toy trucks if they wished. They could even stay inside and read the books or play with the other toys in the classroom. The children were not forced to all stay inside, sit at a table, and do the art project. They were allowed to “explore” their surroundings and do as they wish. This is the type of preschool that I observed. On this particular day, I observed a boy named “John”. John is 4 years 7 months and will be entering kindergarten next fall. Throughout this paper, I will focus specifically on John and what he did for the day. I will describe his physical and motor ability, I will take a look at his social and language ability, and also his cognitive ability. At the end, I will tell you whether or not this child-centered preschool is a good fit for him. John has very age-appropriate motor skills. While outside on the playground, John’s gross motor skills were easily observed. He was running back and forth carrying buckets of water from the water fountain to a “ski slope” that he and two other children were building. John was not nervous in his movements or hesitant at all. He ran with confidence and did not worry about tripping over anything. Berger notes that “most North American 5-year-olds….[can do] activities that demand balance as well as coordination” (Berger, 234). John was doing an activity that required balance and coordination. He had to balance the bucket of water upright while running so he would not spill the water before he got back to his “ski slope.” This gross motor skill also involved hand-eye coordination. When the water was brought back to the “ski slope,” John would dump it in the same spot every time. He did not simply throw the water all over. It seemed very precise and accurate each time. John’s fine motor skills also seem to be developing on track. John was one of the children who decided to participate in the art project of the day. As I mentioned earlier, the art project consisted of painting with a paintbrush onto a leaf. “Many fine motor skills involve two hands and thus two sides of the brain” (Berger, 235). John had to hold the leaf with his left hand to keep it steady and in place while he held the paintbrush with his right had. Although he was not using single direction, even strokes, John was still able to keep the paint on the leaf and not paint onto the table. With time, I presume that his fine motor skills will develop more and he will use the even strokes with the paintbrush. The type of play that John most participated in was cooperative play. Mildren Parten described cooperative play as when “children play together creating and elaborating a joint activity or taking turns” (Berger, 296). This is exactly how John played. He was not the only child creating the “ski slope” out on the playground. He was working with two other children, and they were all playing together. John and the other two boys were very comfortable with each other. John also showed prosocial behavior when one of the boys fell while carrying a bucket of water. John went over to the boy, helped him up, and got more water. Prosocial behavior involves “being helpful and kind without gaining any obvious benefit” (Berger, 293). This is exactly what John did when he helped the other boy up. During his cooperative play outside, John did act as a leader some of the time. He was never mean or bossy. But when one of the two boys he was playing with dumped water in the wrong area, John asked him not to do that. He then showed him where the water should be and how the sand should be arranged to build the “ski slope.” John was an onlooker during a little portion of the morning. An onlooker is a child who watches other children play. (Berger, 295) After John was done with his art project and before he went out to the playground, he did spend a little bit of time sitting at the table watching others. He did not do much during this time, just sat quietly to himself. However, this did only last for a little while. When it was time to go play on the playground, he got up and was ready to play again. John was very happy for the time period that I observed him. I did not observe him in any antisocial behavior. Although he helped the boy up who tripped while carrying the water, I do not think that John showed any empathy for the other boy. He was more sympathetic towards the boy rather than empathetic. He did not feel with the boy, he felt sorry for the boy. (Berger, 293) I never saw John get upset or angry at another child. He never screamed or yelled at anyone. Even when he was acting as the leader outside, he did not become angry or get upset at the two other boys. I could tell that he was always happy because he smiled constantly. Much of John’s expression of emotions was through his facial reactions. As I mentioned earlier, he showed that he was happy through his smiles. During the art project, when he seemed to be concentrating, his eyebrows were wrinkled a little. When he was building the “ski slope,” and he got excited, his eyes opened up real wide, and he had a huge grin on his face. His facial expressions were also a form of nonverbal language. The two boys building the “ski slope” knew that they were doing everything correctly when John smiled. I did not see John using any private speech. I did, however, see him use language in social mediation. During the brief circle time, John was able to count the number of days left in the month and was also able to say the days of the week. “Language facilitates the interaction of child and mentor in social mediation” (Berger, 261). This is what was happening when the teacher had the calendar up on the wall and John was counting the numbers and saying the days of the week. John communicated well with his peers and teacher. He was easily understood and spoke clearly. However, he did get excited at one point and continually asked the teacher what a written letter said. As he got excited, his speech became less easily understood. He began to speak faster and at a higher volume when he was excited. After he calmed down, he was able to start over and was understood. I did observe John “play” with language when he and the other boys were building the “ski slope.” They were making up stories about being at the top of a slope and going down the mountain. Other than that, John did not sing any songs or tell any stories. The majority of his speech that I observed when I was there was true life happenings. He told the other kids how to build the “ski slope.” He asked his teacher what a note said. He told his classmates what color he had painted his leaf. Much of the speech that I observed was very factual and straightforward. During my observation, I only saw John play with a few different things. As I have mentioned earlier, when he was out in the playground, he and two other children were building their “ski slope.” During this play, John was using a bucket to carry water and a toy dump truck to help move sand. Most of this play was purely creative. After the children built their “ski slope”, they all took turns jumping down it. I thought that it was interesting that John was going down it as if he were on a snowboard. The other two children just ran down it. But John jumped down with his feet to one side as if he were on a snowboard. What John was doing seemed to be sociodramitc play. Sociodramatic play is “pretend play in which children act out various roles and themes in stories that they create” (Berger, 297). John was pretending to be a snowboarder. He created this story of skiing and played the role of a snowboarder. John never seemed to get frustrated during his activities. During the building of the “ski slope,” there were times when the sand would not stay where he wanted it or other children would run right through it. Throughout this entire time, John did not get upset or frustrated. When something happened to the sand, he would just fix it. At another point during the morning, I observed John doing his art project. John painted his leaf a single color and did not seem to be very much into this project. I would maybe suggest that because he did not seem too interested in the project, that he was not creative with it. Other children were using different colors and wanted glitter, but not John. He just used the single color paint and then was done with it. John did not need any scaffolding for the art project. He was able to do it on his own without anyone’s help. Most of his activities were concentrated in a single area. He did go from the classroom out to the playground, but when he began his activity, he did not move much from it. He stayed in his space only I did not see any specific materials to facilitate fantasy play. For instance, I did not notice any baby dolls or dress up clothes. I suppose that these may have been present, but I did not observe them since John was not using them. I think that most of John’s fantasy play came from his own imagination. There were no snow goggles or ski jackets when he was out on the playground. Instead, John and the other two children used their own imagination and creativity to make the “ski slope.” Overall, I think that Sandy Hill and John were a good match. Sandy Hill is very much into Jean Piaget’s idea that “Play is the work of the child” (chapter 10 lecture notes). This is what John did. He played the entire timed that I was there. Not only did he seem very happy doing it, but his developmental progress seems right on track. I would definitely place a child similar in age in Sandy Hill. The children were taught their numbers and days of the week in their circle time, but it was not an aggressive, rigorous teaching style. It taught them what they needed to know in a very open and non-competitive manner. Most of the day was spent playing. The children were allowed to pick the activities that they wanted to participate in and were free to do as they wished, although with some guidance and boundaries. I do think that preschools should be more play-centered like Sandy Hill is. This observation taught me a lot about kids. I never have thought about how children play, are they leaders or followers, are they comfortable with their movements, when do they use nonverbal language' I thought it was very interested to watch not only John, but also some of his classmates, and how they were all different. When you focus on a single individual or a small group playing, you really see what their personality is like. I think it is interesting how by just observing a single person, you can really get an insight into what that individual is like.