What do You Consider to be the Most Effective Pedagogic Principles for Teaching in the Early Years Today - Essay Example

Introduction: Pedagogy encompasses the variety of skills and the ideas that are used in teaching. It also gives the rationale behind the decisions that a teacher will take in the teaching process for the learning of the pupils to be effective (Moyles, Adams & Musgrove 2002). In some definitions, the term is limited to the action of teaching and the core skills that the teacher needs to posses to make effective instruction decisions. It mainly relates to the early childhood teaching process and in some cases extended to social contexts like in orphanages and retirement homes. There are several pedagogical principles that are applied in early childhood learning. The difference is based on the educators intention to produce an effective pedagogical principle that will result in the best learning experience and results. Effective as used, in this case, implies the ultimate attainment of the desired goals in the learning process. The result of teaching which is the development of the desired skill, in this case, is the benchmark for measuring the effectiveness of the teaching or the pedagogical principle adopted. Within this paper, two pedagogical principles will be examined. It gives the details of the principle in their use and how each of the principles would look like in practice. Apart from the outlook of the principle in practice, the disadvantages of the use of these principles in todays pedagogy are also examined. The principles The department for education and skills developed some pedagogical principles after a wide consultation with the local authorities, schools and other stakeholders. These principles were developed to be principally relevant to all learners despite the difference of age or stage of learning. The main pedagogical principles identified by this study are Co-agency and the principle of inclusion of everybody in learning (Minaya-Rowe 2002). According to the principle of Co-agency, the central decision-making that guides the pedagogue is the fact that options in learning either increase or do not increase. It leads the instructor in making choices of classroom activities that have a potential to improve the scope of the learners potential to shape or influence their learning. Much focus of this principle is the responsibility bestowed on the learners in taking charge of the direction of their learning and the level of their input as opposed to the teachers direction. In young peoples learning, the Co-agency principle recognizes the fact that the input of the teacher and the contribution of the students are necessary. The learning activities, in this case, are not bound or tightly specified by the instructor but is a subject of change based on the desired outcome of the whole process. In pedagogy, the selection of group activities as well as the selection of children into groups for play and learning is important. It is essential for the instructor to choose activities that are relevant, novel and motivating for the kids. This selection would aid the free social interaction and development of the diverse ideas about the material selected. According to Ostrosky & Meadan (2010), the interaction between children is essential in determining their learning relations. However, the difficulty that most pedagogues experience is related to the fact that the interactional learning procedure poses a challenge to non-social learners. In most cases, the learners that prefer a personal environment in play will often be alienated by the co-agency principle. In this case, the pedagogue has the dilemma of moving at their pace of interaction mode or to leave such students behind in the interactions. The co-agency principle of pedagogy requires the instructor to provide an interactive environment to the students to create the environment that is sustainable for their interaction. The challenge that occurs, in this case, is the fact that in some cases, the children require more alone time than others who are more sociable. In this case, the development of the children would be likely impeded by their natural social interactions. The social interactions in this perspective would be in difficult to the pedagogue to assemble the best possible position to deal with the students of this nature. Rogoff (2003) describes a paradigm that is referred to as the social constructivist learning process. In this kind of learning, the input that is given by other people is important in formulating the ideas by the young mind. In contrast, the learning process can be articulated as individual. In this case, the input of others and the environment is assumed as null. The social constructivist nature of learning can be illustrated by the complex interplay between the teacher, the learning materials and other individuals in the whole process. A characteristic like scaffolding that is demonstrated by the pedagogue’s ability to analyse the potential of a student and assist them to reach higher capabilities is an effective demonstration of the Co-agency principle. It involves skills like motivation which makes learners push their limits to their best possible level (Martin 2012). In a normal learning environment is a format taken that admires the fact that the child needs to praise or be motivated to make the learning environment conducive (Ostrosky & Meadan 2010). The most significant principle is the fact the relevance in the method used in dealing with the situation that is about the environment. The disadvantages are bound to result from the situation in which the learning occurs. The factor of child motivation and the ability to attain the standards the availed for a pedagogue is important. The disadvantage of the co-constructive nature of learning is based on the fact that that the ability of the learning to be constructed is limited or aligned to the opportunities that the other learner in the same setting have had. It is therefore difficult for novel learners to make progress in their original position and develop part the learners that have had the considerably high experience to them in the learning (Hartley 2008) The related principle to this kind of pedagogue is related to the principle of everyone inclusion to ensure that teachers efforts of strengthening and transforming the learning capability are applicable to everyone in a fair manner. The setting of the standards as high as they might be is a common factor with this kind of intervention. The interventions and the learning process took as based on the fact that everyone in the presence is taken as equal. At the moment, the formative years of the children is based on the learning experiences that are personal to the industry. In making choices, the teachers that present the process do give the learners the opportunity to take part in the learning process. Each of the learning activities and the learning processes is open to every individual child. In the psycho-dynamic theories of learning, the children, the learning process of children is depicted as not entirely dependent on the conscious processes. In (Dean 2008), the motivation of the learning process is also described as not entirely dependent on the conscious mind or events. This study also opines that although the psycho-dynamic theory does not relate directly to classroom teaching, the bearing of this theory is significant as it is a behaviour theory. In this perspective, the subconscious mind and motivation in learning is of importance. It would be difficult for the pedagogue to develop different standards for each individual learner since the conscious and subconscious motivations are difficult to measure. However, this study argues that a common approach that includes child cantered methodologies can be a possible technique in pedagogy. The aim of the pedagogue as described in this theory is to develop child cantered approaches that will enable all children deal with social and emotional challenges as they go through the learning process. The overall intent of this process is to include all the children and give equal opportunities for them to reach their highest possible level of excellence and learning. The problem with this kind or method of learning and the intention of the pedagogue is that the learners are treated at a more generic level that do not take into their specific learning capabilities. As described in the previous learning experiences and the capabilities of the students at the process, it is essential for the learners to engage in actions that would build their personality. For children that have the low potential in forming relationships that and integrations, the problem is always as a result of the fact that interactions are not a major part of their learning. However, the learning process is all-inclusive, and everyone is needed on board. A category developed by (Moyles, Adams & Musgrove 2002) in the SPEEL study is a demonstration of the inclusion of every learner by a pedagogue. Within this study a field of perceptions is included to give meaning of how the pedagogues set standards both for themselves and the children. The ability to articulate the practice is also closely linked to this amalgamation category and shows that the understanding of the children, the practice and the fellow staff are important aspects of everyone’s inclusion. In early settings today, the conditions that are set regard the use of open-ended learning technique. In this case, the learners are left to develop their position and to come up with a possible right answer that is not universal or bounded by the instructor. The role of the instructor in this kind of pedagogy is not to limit but to guide the young minds in creating the multiple solutions to learning activities. The guidance of the adults whether in a home or school setting is crucial as described in socio-cultural child development theory. The theory of socio-cultural child development as described by Piaget focuses on the role of social interactions on the cognitive development of the child. For development to occur, the acquisition of knowledge from others is the preceding step (Vygotsky 1978). Another approach that has been adopted in pedagogy is related to the aspect of interdisciplinary learning. In inter-disciplinary principle of learning, the activities that are adopted are formatted to make the young mind be in a position to take the basic concepts of math, art or science in a single traditional learning activity. The students are given learning activities that are aimed at building their understanding of the basic concepts that are being taught. The principle in science and the complex interrelations are built as a result of the interactions of the learners as from the early age to create a satisfactory learning. In most cases, the early childhood learning where adults are involved is based on the theory of co-construction. The pedagogue’s role is to provide a level of guidance to the young learners as they try to gain the new cognitive skills. It also involves the input of other young learners and the whole process is collaborative in nature. There is a mutual involvement between the learners in the whole process and the mentorship given by the teacher creates a level of excitement for the learners. Within this principle and theory of co-construction, the time of learning for the children should however not be entirely dominated by the guidance of the adults as envisioned in the findings of the REPEY study (Siraj-Blatchford, Muttock, Sylva, Gilden, & Bell, 2002). The SPEEL study emphasises on the aspect of collaboration as the best possible position to adopt in pedagogy today. According to this study, there are different levels of collaboration for the learning of the children. First, the learning has to be in collaboration with each other. The second level is the input of the teachers or any adult pedagogue guiding the exercise. The level of collaboration with family members and the society is also highlighted by this study. The most important point that is explained at each level of collaboration is the fact that the adults involved in the process should not rigidly direct the whole process. The problem that arises in this case is that effective pedagogy cannot be attained due to the lack of skills in the different groups involved in this collaborative effort. In some cases, the collaborative effort and the socialization lacked challenging exercises that can also promote the cognitive development of the children as shown by the REPEY study (Siraj-Blatchford, Muttock, Sylva, Gilden, & Bell, 2002). Conclusion The department for education specifies some aspects or principle of pedagogy. In specifying these principles, the main aim is to produce outcomes that are consistent to the pedagogues and the learners alike. Within this paper, the Co-agency and the inclusion of every learner are the most basic principles of pedagogy that have been reviewed. The co-agency principle indicates that a child or a learner should be given the opportunity to develop their learning through interactions within the classroom. This includes the position of the instructor as a partner to the learning and the peers. In the inclusion of everybody as a principle, the basic concept is setting the standards to the learning process. The pedagogue has to have the skill of entire involvement of everyone in the standards set so as not to deprive the learners of the learning experience. In todays practice, the most common approaches being used today are not entirely different. Most of the approaches rely on the principles that are set by the department for education. For instance, the level of input of the social interactions is crucial to the learning process in early childhood education. The children are given the opportunity to formulate their concepts in the various fields that include math and the sciences. References Dean, A. V. (2008). Psychodynamic Theory in Early Childhood Education: A Look at the Contributions of Anna Freud, Melanie Klein, Krik H. Erikson, Susan Isaacs, Bruno Bettelheim, ECM Frijling-Schreuder and Margaret Ribble. The International Journal of Bahamian Studies, 5, 34-49. Hartley, D. (2008). Education, markets and the pedagogy of personalisation. British Journal of Educational Studies, 56(4), 365-381. Moyles, J., Adams, S., & Musgrove, A. (2002). SPEEL: Study of pedagogical effectiveness in early learning. Ostrosky, M. M., & Meadan, H. (2010). Helping children play and learn together. YC Young Children, 65(1), 104. Minaya-Rowe, L. (2002). Teacher training and effective pedagogy in the context of student diversity. Greenwich, Conn: Information Age Publ. Martin, D. J. (2012). Elementary science methods: A constructivist approach. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. Siraj-Blatchford, I., Muttock, S., Sylva, K., Gilden, R., & Bell, D. (2002). Researching effective pedagogy in the early years. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Read More