Jacob
is a two-year new to my program. He attends
two days a week. At first glance Jacob
appears to keep to himself and is extremely quiet. Visiting the classroom I could see that Jacob
likes to observe his environment, taking things in however keeping his
interactions to a minimum. The
particular day that I visited I was rather surprised at what I saw. Jacob was walking back and forth from the
dramatic play area carrying in his had a piece of plastic food. He would walk up to the teacher, hold it up towards
her face and wait for her response. The
teacher would say, “Those are grapes, grapes”, and Jacob would walk back to the
kitchen and return with another item, “That is a tomato, tomato” said the
teacher. This exchange continued for
some time in this simple manner; Jacob focused on his task and the teacher
simply identifying each item he carried.
The teacher allowed the communication exchange to evolve as Jacob saw
fit. She did not grow tired of the
activity nor did she try to interject her own idea of how the exchange should
occur. In addition she did not try to
encourage Jacob to go play with his peers, nor did she encourage him to open
the experience up to other children. At
some point I thought she would ask Jacob to try and repeat the words she was
saying, but she did not. Somewhere in
her observation of Jacob she realized that Jacob had something in mind and that
she had to “…relinquish” her “own narrow agenda…to hear other messages”
(Stephenson, 2009). I think that not
only did the teacher show she valued Jacob’s form of communication she also
recognized and valued his desire to spend “…time with an adult who was keen to
listen” (Stephenson, 2009).
Although
Jacob did not use verbal language to communicate he was using the physical interaction
as a form of communication. “Children
tend to actively participate in conversations that they initiate, that are
relevant to them” (Dangel, & Durden, 2010).
Jacob’s actions were a way of building trust between Jacob and the
teacher and Jacob’s needs were validated as he was not turned away from the
teacher or re-directed based on what the teacher thought she should be teaching
Jacob.
As
I observed the interaction I kept waiting for the teacher to ask Jacob to
identify type of food he was holding. I
wanted to know if he knew and was able to label different foods. I also wanted to hear him use words. I was growing frustrated, wanting her to take
Jacob down this path and it was difficult holding myself back from
intervening. I felt she was missing a
teachable moment, letting it slip between her fingers especially as it
pertained to this quiet little boy. I
was allowing my own personal perceptions of the situation take the lead without
slowing really examining the teacher’s intentions or Jacob’s intentions. I was focused on my own intentions and I feel
I would have communicated with this little boy in an ineffective manner. Communication is a two way street that has to
take into account all the parties in the communication exchange. I need to “deconstruct…schemas” that tell me
children don’t know how to communicate (O’Hair, & Wiemann, 2009), whereby
creating new schemas or views of children as capable communicators and in order
to do this I need to be reflective in my exchanges giving children the reigns
as it pertains to messages they want to share.
References
O’Hair,
D., Wieann, M. (2009). Real
Communication. Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martin’s
Rainer
Dangei, J., & Durden, T. R. (2010). The nature of teacher talk during small
group activities. YC: Young Children, 65(1), 74-81. Retrieved from http://ezp.waldenulibrary.org/lo
Stephenson,
A. (2009). Conversations with a 2-year-old. YC: Young Children, 64(2),
90-95. Retrieved from http://ezp.waldenulibrary.org/login