Taylor Lesko

ECE 251-1001

April 9th, 2017

Group Time Evaluation

School: CSN Early Childhood Education Lab

Telephone: 702-651-4004

Teacher: Ms. Cody

Age/Grade level: 3 years old

Beginning and ending of group time: 9:40am 10:00am

Date: April 4th, 2017

Number of adults: 1 Number of children: 3

1. Group Time: Ms. Cody started off the day by telling the children what different centers

are in the classroom. She told the children, if you were interested in coming to the

science table, there will be slime. Ill be at that station. The table had a plate in the

middle with pink slime, a box that had scissors in it, rolling pins, and a box that held

round gems. Around the table there were four different spots that were designated for the

children and each spot had a plate for the child on which the child could work. The

children were able to choose whether or not they wanted to go to the table to engage in

the activity. Ms. Cody started to play with the children and the slime. They would spread

the slime and cut it into small bits. They would also add the small round gems to see how

they formed into the slime. Once the children and Ms. Cody played with the slime

enough, Ms. Cody bought out two wire racks that were stacked on top of one another.
 She then showed them that if you press the slime in, it will slowly fall down because of

gravity.
2. Appropriate: This activity was appropriate because it was a hands on activity for the

children. They were able to feel the texture of the slime and experience it for themselves.

Another reason for it being appropriate was because the children engaged in using

scissors, which help them with their fine motor skills.

3. How long and appropriate: The activity was around 20 minutes long because that is

when the children started to interact at the science table. This timeframe is appropriate for

children because it was long enough for them to explore and get familiar with how the

slime works and why it falls so slowly. The three children in this group were all 3 years

old.
4. Space: The space for this activity was an open and accessible space that allowed all the

children to be able to use all the materials on the table. The children and teacher all sat on

the floor together close by so they could talk to each other about what they were

experiencing.
5. Bring the children together and begin group time: When the children first started to

explore the table, Ms. Cody walked over to the table to start the group time. She first

started to ask questions like What is this?, Why does slime feel like this?, and What

is your plan?. She was asking questions to get the children interested in the items on the

table. The children grabbed the materials and started to explore the slime.
6. Involve the children: Ms. Cody involved the children by allowing them to choose what

materials they wanted to use. She had scissors, a rolling pin and round gems on the table

and allowed the children the freedom to choose what they wanted. Ms. Cody also

involved the children by asking them questions that got them thinking. She was asking

open ended questions that helped the children discuss what was going on. She would ask

them Why do you think it is so sticky? and What other things feel like slime?.
7. Percentage of the time: actively vs passively: Around 80% of the time the children

were actively participating in the activity. They remained interested in the slime and

continue to explore its features whether they were cutting it with the scissors, using the

rolling pin, or using the wire rack to watch it fall. The child stayed connected with the

teacher by communicating what they were discovering. They were able to passively build

their knowledge of the slime as they continued playing with the substance and as they

tried to manipulate it into new shapes. This is appropriate for the children because they

should be able to freely explore the slime without the teacher guiding them all the way.

The teacher was aware of what the children were doing but still let them think for

themselves.
8. Children react: The children loved this group time because they were learning

something with out realizing it was science. The children showed they loved this activity

because they did not want to stop. When it was time to clean up the center to go outside

the children asked if they would be able to play with the slime again.
9. Flexibility: Ms. Cody was extremely flexible during this activity because she was

constantly adapting to how the children were using the slime. The children started to get

bored with the materials they had and that was when she bought out the two wire racks.

She introduced a new material to keep their attention on how the slime moves and works.
10. Individualization with special needs and the typically developing: During this

activity all three children seemed very interested in the slime and did not show any need

for more attention or a lack of understanding of the way the slime works with gravity.
11. Gender and inappropriate behaviors: During this group time there were two girls and

one boy at the table. I did notice that the boy was having a harder time understanding that

the slime didnt belong to just him and the wire rack was for everyone. Ms. Cody had to
 redirect him from taking all the slime and using the entire area of the rack. The little boy

continued to try and reach across the whole rack to take the girls slime.
12. Inappropriate behaviors and behavior management techniques: The little boy in the

group continued to try and take all the slime so that it could be his. When he would take

the slime from the little girls he would make them upset. The teacher started off by telling

the little boy that The girls expressed to you that they didnt like you taking the slime.

This gave the girls meaning to their reactions and showed the little boy his actions were

incorrect. After the boy started to realize his actions, she told him that, This is not your

slime or her slime, it is ours. If it becomes an issue, we can always split up the slime

completely. I feel that this technique was appropriate for this age group. She stated that

the girls didnt like that he kept taking the slime and it showed them that their feelings

mattered. She also gave the boy a choice of what he wanted to do and let him know that

she can help by splitting it up if he isnt fair.

13. End group time: Ms. Cody lets the children know that it is almost time for the center to

be done by telling the kids We have 3 minutes left and then we will need to clean up to

go outside.
14. Activity follow: The activity that follows is the whole class going outside to play. I find

this appropriate because it is apart of the routine to go from centers to playing outside.

Evaluation: Ms. Cody was genuine while interacting with the children because she was

interested in what they had to say about the activity. She continued to ask open ended

questions that got the children thinking. She inspired them to think more about the slime than

just an object that is squishy and fun to play with. Teachers frequently engage children in

planning or in reflecting on their experiences, discussing a past experience or working to

represent it (Pg. 155). Ms. Cody helped the children plan what they were going to do next

and also reflected on their experiences with the slime. The activity was done at the childs
 pace and they were able to explore the materials given at their own speed. Once the teacher

noticed that they were starting to get bored she brought out new materials like the wire rack.

This activity is also good for children because it allows them an opportunity to develop their

fine motor skills while handling the slime, cutting the slime with scissors, and rolling the

slime. Teachers provide opportunities throughout the day for children to develop fine motor

skills through working with suitable materials (Pg. 164).

Powerful Interaction Observation

Date: April 4th, 2017

School: CSN Early Childhood Education Lab

Teacher: Ms. Cody

Age of Child: 3 years old

Time: 10:45am -11:00am

Setting: During this powerful interaction it was Ms. Cody interacting with a 3-year-old girl.

They just came inside from playing outside and the children had a free choice to play again. This

child decided to use the sensory table. Ms. Cody started to look through the sensory table with

her to find animal bones.

Interaction

1. Objective anecdotal observation:

The little girl started to walk over to the sensory table where there was dirt, sifters, animal

bones, and little dinosaurs. The little girl beings to look at the animals and picks up a

bone.
Teacher: What did you find?
Girl: Look!
Teachers: It looks like a ribcage, dust it off more.
Girl continues to keep looking.
 Teacher: I think we found most of the bones.

Girl: No, I found one! Look!

Teacher: I spoke too soon.

Teacher: Lets put all the bones in a dish.

Girl: Look what I found now

Teacher: It looks like a leg bone

Girl now compares the bone she found to her leg.

The little girl starts to grab the dinosaur figures and plays with them.

Girl: I saw something

Teacher: Look at that

Girl: It looks green.

Teacher: Do you think they ate that before?

Girl: Yeah, like a leaf!

Teacher: That is true it does look like a leaf.

The teacher now had to leave and tells the child to keep exploring. The child continues to play

with the dinosaurs.

2. Powerful interaction behaviors observed: This interaction was powerful from the start

because the caregiver was on the childs level while looking at the sensory table. Put

yourself at the childs level: Sit or kneel. Look into the childs eyes. (Pg. 47). The

caregiver showed the child that she was interested in the findings.
3. Powerful interactions if they were included: I think that it would have improved this

interaction if the caregiver said the childs name (Pg. 51). Saying the childs name is a

simple way of personalizing the interaction. Also I believe that the caregiver could have

improved the interaction by giving the child time to process their findings. For example,
Dont fill the childs silence with your own words (Pg. 47). I felt as if the teacher was

so quick to say what the child found instead of waiting to see if the child recognizes what

they found.