NORTH CAROLINA KINDERGARTEN TEACHERS AND DEVELOPMENTALLY APPROPRIATE INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICES: A PHENOMENOLOGICAL STUDY A dissertation presented to the faculty of the Graduate School of Western Carolina University in partial fulfillment of the Requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education. By Sherry Richards Willis Director: Dr. Eleanor Blair Hilty Associate Professor Department of Educational Leadership and Foundations Committee Members: Dr. Mary Jean Ronan Herzog, Educational Leadership and Foundations Dr. Jane Clarkson Perlmutter, Elementary and Middle Grades Education June 2010 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am very grateful to my director, Dr. Eleanor Hilty, for her encouragement and high expectations. I was fortunate to have Dr. Jane Perlmutter, and Dr. Mary Jean Herzog serving on my dissertation committee. I thank them for the guidance and support they graciously extended to me. I appreciate the unwavering support provided by my family and friends during challenging times. I send a special message up to Daddy thanking him for his love and encouragement throughout my life. To Maxine McCall, Wayne Honeycutt, Ann Demiter, Beverly White, Dr. Vanessa Howerton, and all those educators who have inspired me to keep learning and growing, I thank you for your support and continue to be awed by you. You have made me a better person—both personally and professionally. To Tony, my hero, who has displayed incredible patience and unconditional love, I thank you from the bottom of my heart for your support and your kind willingness to do whatever was needed to help. You made all the difference. I truly could not have accomplished this without you. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page List of Figures................................................................................................................. 5 Abstract .......................................................................................................................... 6 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 8 The Face of Kindergarten.................................................................................... 10 Purpose of the Study........................................................................................... 16 Importance of the Study...................................................................................... 16 Theoretical Framework....................................................................................... 20 Data Collection.................................................................................................... 22 Limitations of the Study...................................................................................... 23 Review of Literature........................................................................................................ 24 Kindergarten—Historical Overview of Its Purpose and Practice....................... 24 Developmentally Appropriate Practice............................................................... 32 Teacher Beliefs and Practices............................................................................. 39 Cognitive Dissonance Theory............................................................................. 40 Summary............................................................................................................. 42 Methodology................................................................................................................... 44 Selection of Participants for Study...................................................................... 45 Contacting Participants....................................................................................... 46 Interviews............................................................................................................ 46 Data Collection and Analysis.............................................................................. 47 Researcher's Biases............................................................................................. 49 Results and Analysis....................................................................................................... 51 Results................................................................................................................. 51 Disposition.......................................................................................................... 54 Background............................................................................................. 54 Beliefs...................................................................................................... 55 Attitudes.................................................................................................. 58 Support................................................................................................................ 61 Administrative Support........................................................................... 62 Colleagues............................................................................................... 64 Power of Kindergarten............................................................................ 65 Barriers................................................................................................................ 69 Non-Support by Administration.............................................................. 70 Mandates................................................................................................. 71 Limited Professional Development......................................................... 77 Non-Support of Colleagues..................................................................... 78 First Grade Expectations......................................................................... 81 Parental Expectations.............................................................................. 82 Leadership........................................................................................................... 84 Voice................................................................................................................... 86 Esteem and Autonomy............................................................................ 86 Belonging................................................................................................ 88 Other Findings..................................................................................................... 89 Other Data Sources.............................................................................................. 92 Analysis of Results.............................................................................................. 92 Support from Administrators and Colleagues......................................... 93 Barriers.................................................................................................... 93 Cognitive Dissonance.............................................................................. 94 Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs................................................................. 98 Leadership...............................................................................................101 Other data sources...................................................................................103 Summary.............................................................................................................105 Discussion and Recommendations..................................................................................107 Discussion...........................................................................................................107 Purpose....................................................................................................107 Theoretical Framework...........................................................................108 Methodology...........................................................................................109 Participants..............................................................................................110 Interview Questions.................................................................................110 Strengths and Limitations........................................................................111 Implications for North Carolina..........................................................................111 Administrators.........................................................................................112 Teacher Recruitment and Retention........................................................114 Professional Development.......................................................................115 Power of Kindergarten............................................................................116 Recommendations for Further Study..................................................................116 Conclusion...........................................................................................................117 References.......................................................................................................................120 List of Appendices..........................................................................................................131 Appendix A: Attributes of a Future Ready Citizen.............................................132 Appendix B: Power of K: North Carolina Position Statement on Kindergartens of the 21st Century...........................................................133 Appendix C: Letter of Invitation to Participate in Study....................................139 Appendix D: Informed Consent Form................................................................141 Appendix E: Letter of Introduction and Consent Form to Participant's Principal...................................................................................................143 Appendix F: Interview Approval Form...............................................................146 Appendix G: Sample Interview...........................................................................148 Appendix H: Interview Summaries.....................................................................184 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Themes and Sub-Themes....................................................................................53 ABSTRACT NORTH CAROLINA KINDERGARTEN TEACHERS AND DEVELOPMENTALLY APPROPRIATE INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICES: A PHENOMENOLOGICAL STUDY Sherry Richards Willis, Ed.D. Western Carolina University (June, 2010) Director: Dr. Eleanor Blair Hilty The purpose of this study was to understand the experiences of kindergarten teachers as they worked to implement a developmentally appropriate approach to teaching. Their stories included details related to the support they receive as well as detailed descriptions of the many barriers faced during a time when accountability is very high. As teachers with a high value for developmentally appropriate practice, they experienced cognitive dissonance when circumstances arose to limit their ability to use the best practices they favored. These practices included differentiation of instruction; provision for active and meaningful learning experiences; small group instruction; the use of centers that supported language development; problem solving; development of social skills; literacy and numeracy skills; as well as learning through play—all practices carefully planned to recognize and honor how children learn best. Mandates requiring the teachers to use scripted curriculum programs were a strong source of the dissonance. These programs were designed to reflect a more academically structured approach to teaching. Instruction was required to be delivered in a whole group setting, with little effort to differentiate instruction. Learning was more passive in nature with children being required to sit for long blocks of time working at tables or desks completing worksheets. The teachers found creative ways to tweak the mandated curriculum to make them more age and grade appropriate. Other barriers reported by teachers included the lack of professional development aligned specifically to their needs, the lack of collegial collaboration, and the inappropriate expectations of parents and first grade teachers. Teachers indicated that they wanted their administrators to be knowledgeable about early childhood education and child development. They wanted to receive meaningful feedback to help them improve their instructional practice. The teachers reported feeling that kindergarten did not appear to be a highly valued component of the educational program. It did appear to them that more attention and more resources were regularly aimed at tested grade levels. The teachers were also concerned about not having a voice in decisions that directly affected them. The major source of support for the teachers came from a group organized by the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction known as The Power of Kindergarten. The teachers in the study were among the members of this group. Strong collegiality, gaining a sense of professional empowerment, and focused professional development were reported by the teachers as being important outcomes of their experiences with Power of K. 8 CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION In 1989 my school system’s Elementary Education Director asked me if I would allow my kindergarten classroom to become a demonstration site for implementing a developmentally appropriate approach to teaching kindergarten. I was provided the instructional and financial support needed to refine my practice and to obtain resources. Teachers and administrators from the school system in which I worked and from surrounding systems visited my classroom during this three-year project. I had the great opportunity to meet other educators, demonstrate instructional practices that I valued as being best for children, and led professional dialogue about those practices. The visitors observed my children engaged in active learning experiences, many of which the children initiated and others that I directed. My classroom contained open-ended learning centers including blocks, dramatic play, sand, water, art, puppetry, music, and woodworking. There were also centers for math, science, reading, and writing. My teaching assistant and I facilitated children’s learning through the use of intentional conversations related to what they were doing in the centers. Child-initiated learning projects were in various stages of completion. There were no worksheets or workbooks used for instruction. Anecdotal notes were recorded to document children's progress. Reactions from the visitors ranged from being eagerly enthusiastic to being politely skeptical. During this time I was frequently invited to provide professional development related to using developmentally appropriate practices in teaching kindergarten. One session at our regional technical support center left a lasting impression on me. The session ended with all teachers saying their good-byes and leaving except for one. She 9 approached me very slowly and then I noticed that she had tears in her eyes. She began telling me of her intense belief and interest in teaching in the way I had been discussing. She went on to say that as much as she wanted her classroom to be an active learning environment for children, she was not allowed to do so. Her administrator had removed all centers from the kindergarten classrooms in the school. Workbooks in reading and math had been purchased for instruction. She was now teaching the class as a whole group with all the children seated at tables for most of the day. She went on to describe the effect her instructional practice was having on her children. Many of the children could not sustain attention for any significant length of time; some of the work assigned was too easy for some children and too hard for others. She believed the children were stressed by the expectations she felt forced to impose upon them. Her feelings of distress and frustration were obvious as she spoke. The scenario she described opened my eyes to the dilemma some kindergarten teachers faced when they received no support for moving their teaching practices toward being more developmentally appropriate. It also made me feel most fortunate and appreciative of the encouragement and support that I experienced in my own school. Seventeen years later, I sat in a conference room filled with over thirty-five North Carolina early childhood educators including private and public school kindergarten teachers, administrators, as well as representatives from community colleges and university departments of education. These educators, representing all regions of the state of North Carolina, had gathered at the invitation of the Early Childhood Section of the Elementary Education Division in the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction (NCDPI) and the North Carolina Birth Through Kindergarten Higher Education 10 Consortium to be members of the North Carolina Kindergarten Task Force. The purpose of the meeting was to find out what was happening in kindergarten classrooms across the state. Discussion would focus on both the successes and the challenges experienced. After a full day of intensive dialogue the group generated lengthy lists related to instruction, environments, assessment, scheduling, and overall concerns held about the varied and inconsistent practices in kindergarten classrooms across the state. The Task Force members expressed their appreciation for the opportunity to share their experiences as early childhood educators. They left the meeting with a sense of satisfaction that their voices had been heard by authorities they trusted to act on the information and suggestions they had provided. As I listened to this group of educators talk with obvious passion about their educational beliefs and their work with young children, I remembered that teacher who had talked with me at the workshop years ago. The concerns she had expressed over fifteen years ago were in many ways no different from the ones these teachers had just described. It occurred to me that there was much more depth to the experiences these kindergarten teachers shared. This realization led me to the decision to conduct this study to investigate those experiences, noting both the celebrations and the frustrations in the professional lives of those educators teaching kindergarten. The Face of Kindergarten As North Carolina schools become more intent on preparing students to become successful and productive citizens in the Twenty-first Century, attention has been given to what happens in the classrooms of the youngest children being prepared to be "future- ready" (North Carolina State Board of Education, 2007).