Logssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss

Part 1 – Objective Observation

(Observe the child behaviour, focus on the encounter as a problem to be solved)

Examine the context of the problem

Date: Tuesday September 24, 2013

Time: 3:30 pm

Name of Observer: Palwasha Qazzizadah

Name of the Children: Mathew and Conner

D.O.B: Preschoolers

Setting: Child size tables set at the middle of the room for activities

Context: Mathew R and Conner were playing with Lego pieces when Mathew took Conner’s Lego piece

making Conner scream.

I was sitting at a table with Mathew Rose and Conner. They were playing with pieces of Lego to build

something when Mathew took a piece from Conner. Conner screamed and pulled his Lego piece back from

Mathew. I waited for a little to see if they can solve their conflict on their own first before I guide them

through it. Mathew started to cry and yell. I went up to them and took the Lego piece so that both of them

can concentrate on solving the problem instead of getting distracted by the Lego piece. “I see that both of

you want to use the same piece of Lego and only Conner has that piece. Is that correct?” Then I asked them

to contribute their ideas. “What do you think we can do when we want to use the same toy? Do you have

any ideas?” Mathew raised his hand and said, “We can share it.” I looked at Conner and said, “Mathew has

the idea of sharing. Do you want to share that Lego piece with Mathew?” Conner said “I want to play with

it first.” I looked at Mathew and said, “Conner has agreed to share the Lego piece but he wants to use it

first. Is that okay with you?” Mathew looked at Conner and said, “Five minutes.” I said, “Mathew wants to

use the Lego after five minutes. Is that okay with you Conner?” Conner looked at me and said, “No, three

minutes.” I looked at both of them and said, “Conner is saying that you can have the Lego piece in three

minutes Mathew. “Great work! You both solved the problem on your own. It makes me very happy when I

see both of you working together in solving your own problem.” The last step was to follow through with

the decision so I checked on them after three minutes to see what was now going on with them. One of the

children (Mathew) was still playing with the Lego pieces while the other (Conner) had moved on to another

activity. I included both of their ideas so that none of them feels excluded.

Part 2 – Decision

(Choose a guidance strategy. Change the context, change your own practice)

There were a couple of strategies that I used in order for the children to be able to solve their own conflict

with my guidance as a teacher when needed. I used active listening, negotiation and affirmation.

I used Active listening because it is a starting point in guiding the children to solve a conflict since by

actively listening, we are telling the children that they can trust us and that they are important. We are

telling them that we understand them when we restate how they feel back to them with our own words.

According to the text “Active listening describes the first step of many problem solving interactions. It’s a

tool for interpreting a child’s feelings and reflecting them back to the child” (Guiding Young Children, pg

8). I used active listening when I asked both of them to tell me what their conflict was and then I restated

what they just told me.

I used negotiation because it is the process where the children are using their own ideas to solve their

conflict with the help of the teacher as a guide throughout the process. According to the text “the teacher

helps the children identify their problem, encourages them to contribute their own ideas toward a mutually

acceptable solution, helps them decide on their preferred solution, and oversees the implementation of their

chosen solution” (Guiding Young Children, pg 8). I used negotiation when I asked each of them to

contribute their ideas in order for us to come to solution.

I used affirmation because it gives the child encouragement for their effort in doing something positive.

According to the text “affirmations are the teacher’s tools for helping children feel important.” (Guiding

Young Children, pg 9). I used affirmation so that the children can feel like they have accomplished

something like a problem solving skill.

Part 3 – Action (Clearly discuss your actions, the child’s response and the results of the guidance strategy.)

The actions I took included active listening, negotiation and affirmation. I was a guide throughout the

process so that Mathew and Conner can come up with a solution to their own conflict. I didn’t solve the

problem for them to make it easier for myself instead I let them solve their own conflict through my

guidance strategies which were active listening, negotiation and affirmation.

The children’s response during the problem solving process was positive since they were working together

with me and their peers to come up with solutions to solve the conflict. I asked them open ended questions

in order for them to use their cognitive domain to come up with possible ideas for the conflict. I held on to

the Lego piece first so that they can both concentrate on finding a solution to the conflict without being

distracted by the toy. I was at their eye level when I was talking to them so that they can feel like I am

paying attention to them. I restated the problem to them once they told me what the problem so that they

can see that I am paying attention. “I see that both of you want to use the same piece of Lego and only

Conner has that piece. Is that correct?” Then I asked them to contribute their ideas. “What do you think we

can do when we want to use the same toy? Do you have any ideas?” Mathew raised his hand and said, “We

can share it.” I looked at Conner and said, “Mathew has the idea of sharing. Do you want to share that Lego

piece with Mathew?” Conner said “I want to play with it first.” After they contributed their ideas, I made

sure that they were both okay with the solution of sharing that Mathew had come up with. I looked at

Mathew and said, “Conner has agreed to share the Lego piece but he wants to use it first. Is that okay with

you?” Mathew looked at Conner and said, “Five minutes.” I said, “Mathew wants to use the Lego after five

minutes. Is that okay with you Conner?” Conner looked at me and said, “No, three minutes.” I looked at

both of them and said, “Conner is saying that you can have the Lego piece in three minutes Mathew. After

they had both come to a solution of sharing and taking turns for three minutes, I used affirmation in order

for them to feel important for solving the conflict so that they can continue this great effort if they are faced

with a similar conflict of wanting the same toy. “Great work! You both solved the problem on your own. It

makes me very happy when I see both of you working together in solving your own problem.” The last step

was to follow through with the decision so I checked on them after three minutes to see what was now

going on with them. One of the children (Mathew) was still playing with the Lego pieces while the other

(Conner) had moved on to another activity. I included both of their ideas so that none of them feels

excluded.

The result of the guidance strategies that I used was that the children were able to solve their own conflict

without the teacher solving the problem for them. I was the guide throughout the process and asked them

open ended questions so that they can come up with solutions using their cognitive domain. They ended up

coming with solutions of sharing and taking turns as a solution to the conflict on their own.

Part 4 – Reflection

(Clearly discuss your strengths and needs and the changes that you would make if needed.)

Strengths

I used more than one guidance strategies to guide the children into solving their own conflict which

include active listening, negotiation and affirmation. I didn’t solve the conflict of the

children for them which is one of the temptations that we tend to get into just to solve the conflict faster. Instead, I was patient with the children so

that they can figure out a solution to their conflicts giving then enough time to think for a

solution on their own. I was at the child’s eye level when I was interacting with them throughout the process. I used open ended questions to lure the

children into getting ideas for solving their conflicts. The whole problem solving process was child centered where the children used their own cognitive domain and interacting with their peers to solve their conflict. I wanted the children to be more independent which can be learned at their

early stages of life when they are children by asking them to come up with ideas own their own for a solution instead of giving them the answer. This way the children won’t depend on adults to solve their conflicts and will be encouraged to do

it themselves. I used affirmation to encourage their self esteem in themselves that they can solve

their own conflict without the teacher having to do it for them.

Needs

I feel like I gave away too much help to them when I asked them some closed ended questions that requires on a yes and a no answer since by

saying yes or no, they are not using their cognitive domain too much.“Mathew has the idea of

sharing. Do you want to share that Lego piece with

Mathew?” Even though my point by asking this

question was to see if Mathew was okay with this

idea, this question also gives the other child a

chance to just say yes or no.

Changes-(Prevention)

Things that went well were that I used more than one guidance strategies to guide the

children into solving their own conflict which include active listening, negotiation and

affirmation. I didn’t solve the conflict of the children for them which is one of the temptations

that we tend to get into just to solve the conflict faster. Instead, I was patient with the children

so that they can figure out a solution to their conflicts giving then enough time to think for a

solution on their own. I was at the child’s eye level when I was interacting with them

throughout the process. I used open ended questions to lure the children into getting ideas for

solving their conflicts. The whole problem solving process was child centered where the

children used their own cognitive domain and interacting with their peers to solve their conflict.

I wanted the children to be more independent which can be learned at their early stages of life

when they are children by asking them to come up with ideas own their own for a solution

instead of giving them the answer. This way the children won’t depend on adults to solve their

conflicts and will be encouraged to do it themselves. I used affirmation to encourage their self

esteem in themselves that they can solve their own conflict without the teacher having to do it

for them.

I need to change my practice since I feel like I gave away too much help to them when I

asked them some closed ended questions that requires on a yes and a no answer since by

saying yes or no, they are not using their cognitive domain too much.“Mathew has the idea of

sharing. Do you want to share that Lego piece with Mathew?” Even though my point by asking

this question was to see if Mathew was okay with this idea, this question also gives the other

child a chance to just say yes or no.

I also need to modify the environment so that it can meet to development and the

needs of the children. I need to duplicate toys that are popular so that children won’t have to

fight over one toy that more than one child wants to play with at a time.

Therefore, everything went well since the two children were able to find a solution to

their problem of wanting to play with the same toy at the same time. They both decided on

taking turns with the Lego piece so that the problem could be resolved. I loved the fact that

they both ended up still playing together. They just took turns using the Lego piece.




Date: Tuesday Oct 1, 2013

Time: 4:30 pm


Name of the Children: Mathew

D.O.B: Preschoolers

Setting: Carpet set at the middle of the room for train track activity.

Context: Mathew Rose didn’t want to clean up the activity that he was doing to go outdoors.

It was time to take the children to the playground and all the children were tidying up their toys that they

were using. I saw that Mathew Rose was on the carpet, in the middle of the room and he was still playing

with the trains, pushing them into the train tracks. I waited a little before interfering to see if he will start

cleaning up himself. One of the teachers told him to tidy up but he didn’t move. That’s when I went to him

and said, “Mathew, it’s clean up time.” He looked at me with tears in his eyes and said, “No, still playing.”

Part 2 – Decision (Choose a guidance strategy. Change the context, change your own practice)


with my guidance as a teacher when needed. I used active listening, natural or logical consequences, I-

messages and giving choices.






8).

I used natural or logical consequences because I wanted to let Mathew know what he will be missing if he

continued to play with the train and the train tracks instead of getting ready to go outdoors. He will miss on

outdoor playtime if he continued to do that activity. According to the text “natural and logical consequences

are an outgrowth of the child’s behavior, and the result always follows the action immediately. This is a

concrete, tangible way to teach children the principle of cause and effect as it applies to their own behaviors

as well as to teach them the need to accept responsibility.” (Guiding Young Children, pg 211).

I used I-messages because I wanted to tell Mathew how I feel when he throws toys on the floor and

explaining why he shouldn’t be doing it since it can break. According to the text “I-messages are used to

convey the teacher’s feelings when a child’s behavior becomes inappropriate.” (Guiding Young Children,

pg 208).

I used giving choices because I wanted Mathew to chose between two acceptable choices that he has which

were to clean up the rest of the train tracks in order to go outside or that I can help him clean up. According

to the text “the technique of giving choices may be used when other limit-setting techniques have not

produced satisfactory result. It also works especially well with children who are strong willed and in need

of a great deal of control.” (Guiding Young Children, pg 212).

Part 3 – Action (Clearly discuss your actions, the child’s response and the results of the guidance strategy.)

The actions I took included using a variety of different guidance strategies like active listening, natural or

logical consequences, I-messages and giving choices. I was a guide throughout the process so that Mathew

can come up with a solution to his own conflict. I guided Mathew through asking him open ended questions

to lure him into coming to a possible solution.

The child’s response during the problem solving process started out as being a little temperament by

screaming to a more positive response of agreeing to clean up and go outdoors after using a variety of

different guidance strategies to calm him down. I sat at Mathew’s eye level so that we can communicate on

one level. First, I used active listening as a guidance strategy to calm him down and to reflect his feeling

back to him. “Mathew, I understand that you want to still keep playing with the trains and it makes you

upset when we have to tidy up.” Then I used natural or logical consequences to tell him what will happen if

he continues this behavior. “But if you keep playing, than you will miss outdoor playtime where you can

use the bikes to ride. You can play with the trains again after we come back.” Mathew looked at me and

said, “No, I want to go outside but later.” That’s when Mathew started to throw the trains around the room

while screaming. I started to put all the trains into the bin and said with a little firmer voice using I-

messages strategy, “It makes me very upset when you throw the toys on the ground because they can get

broken and other children won’t be able to use them if they are broken.” Then I gave him choices. “Now,

you can clean up the rest of the train tracks so that we can go to the playground or I can help you. It’s up to

you Mathew.” At that point, Mathew started to pick up the train tracks and put them into the bin while

saying, “Ok, can I play with train when we come back?” I looked at him with a smile and said “sure you

can if you are gentle with the toys.” He started to smile back and said, “Ok I will be gentle.”

The result of the guidance strategies that I used was that Mathew was able to solve his own conflict without

the teacher solving the problem for him. I was the guide throughout the process and asked him open ended

questions so that he can come up with solutions using his cognitive domain. He ended up coming with

solutions of cleaning up the toys to go outdoors and to use the train tracks later on again while telling me

that he will be gentle with the toys.



Strengths

Things that went well were that I used more than

one guidance strategies to guide the Mathew into

solving his own conflict which include active

listening, natural or logical consequences, I-

messages and giving choices. I followed through

until Mathew cleaned up his activity and got ready

to go outdoors which he didn’t want to do at the

beginning. Even though, he was giving me a

tantrum, I didn’t give up and let him do what he

wanted. Instead, I guided him though the process

of using a couple guidance strategies. I also told

him the reason why I wanted him to clean up the

activity so that he knew why it was important to do

the task. I was at the eye level of the child when I

was interacting with him so that he understands

that I am listening to him and that he is important. I

asked him lots of open ended questions in order to

provoke his cognitive domain to come up with

ideas on how he can solve his conflict. The whole

process was child centered since I didn’t punish

him for not listening instead I was guiding him

through the whole process with passions, giving

him enough time to realize that he needs to

transition from one activity to going outdoors. I set

limits of I-messages, giving him choices and

letting him know the natural or logical

consequences of his behavior instead of rules

which is more teacher centered and teaches the

children to act differently while with adults. Plus

Needs

I also need to modify the environment so that it

can meet to development and the needs of the

children. I need to set up a simple activity and

nothing complicated with lots of pieces to clean

up since cleaning up also takes a lot of their time

which can confuse the children into wanting to

keep play the same activity before we transition to

outdoors. We can also try and add some new and

exciting toys in the playground so that the children

will be lured into wanting to go outdoors.

rules can be broken while limits can teach a very

good lesson of independence to the child which in

this case was to tidy up an activity to go outdoors.

Reflection


Mathew into solving his own conflict which include active listening, natural or logical

consequences, I-messages and giving choices. I followed through until Mathew cleaned up his

activity and got ready to go outdoors which he didn’t want to do at the beginning. Even though,

he was giving me a tantrum, I didn’t give up and let him do what he wanted. Instead, I guided

him though the process of using a couple guidance strategies. I also told him the reason why I

wanted him to clean up the activity so that he knew why it was important to do the task. I was

at the eye level of the child when I was interacting with him so that he understands that I am

listening to him and that he is important. I asked him lots of open ended questions in order to

provoke his cognitive domain to come up with ideas on how he can solve his conflict. The whole

process was child centered since I didn’t punish him for not listening instead I was guiding him

through the whole process with passions, giving him enough time to realize that he needs to

transition from one activity to going outdoors. I set limits of I-messages, giving him choices and

letting him know the natural or logical consequences of his behavior instead of rules which is

more teacher centered and teaches the children to act differently while with adults. Plus rules

can be broken while limits can teach a very good lesson of independence to the child which in

this case was to tidy up an activity to go outdoors.


needs of the children. I need to set up a simple activity and nothing complicated with lots of

pieces to clean up since cleaning up also takes a lot of their time which can confuse the children

into wanting to keep play the same activity before we transition to outdoors. We can also try

and add some new and exciting toys in the playground so that the children will be lured into

wanting to go outdoors.

Therefore, everything went well since the Mathew was able to find a solution to his

conflict of not wanting to clean up and go outdoors through my guidance strategies that I

applied into the process and some open ended questions that lured him into thinking. He

decided on playing with the train track activity when we come back from outdoors and to clean

up with me so that we can all go outdoors to play.




Date: Monday, November 4, 2013

Time: 12:00 pm


Name of the Children: Aiden and Conner

D.O.B: Preschoolers

Setting: In the playground where the children were using child size bikes and cars to ride

Context: Aiden kept pushing Conner’s car with his bike so that he can keep riding his bike while Conner

was yelling at him to stop.

It was outdoor time and some of the children were riding the bikes while others were running around the

playground. Aiden was riding a child size bike all around the playground. As he was riding his bike, he

made a stop in front of Conner’s child size car which was in the middle of the playground. Aiden pushed

his bike on Conner’s car making way to keep riding. At this point, Conner started to yell at Aiden, “Stop

pushing my car Aiden.” Aiden continued to push Conner’s car to make way for his bike to pass. I went

towards them and sat at their eye level. I sat in between Conner and Aiden so that Aiden won’t push his

bike on Conner’s car any further. I looked at Aiden, “I see that we are having a problem in here. I heard

Conner telling you to stop pushing his car but you kept pushing your bike on his car.” Aiden looked at me

with tears in his eyes, “Yes that’s right because I just want to pass by.” I said, “It makes me sad when I see

you pushing the bike on the car because the car can break and then other children won’t be able to use it

anymore.” “What do you think that you can do to pass instead of pushing your bike on Conner’s car which

can break our toy? Do you two have any ideas?” Conner said, “He can go the other way.” I looked at Aiden

and said, “Conner has the great idea of going around the car so that you won’t have to bump into the car.

What do you think Aiden?” Aiden wiped his tears with his hand and smiled at me, “I will go around the

playground.” That’s great! Both of you solved your own problem and now our toys won’t break because

you won’t keep pushing it with your bike.” At that, both of them rode their car and bike around the

playground again without bumping into each other’s car or bikes.”

Part 2 – Decision (Choose a guidance strategy. Change the context, change your own practice)


with my guidance as a teacher when needed. I used active listening, negotiation, I-messages and

affirmation.






8). I used active listening when I asked both of them to tell me what their conflict was and then I restated

what they just told me.

I used negotiation because it is the process where the children are using their own ideas to solve their

conflict with the help of the teacher as a guide throughout the process. According to the text “the teacher

helps the children identify their problem, encourages them to contribute their own ideas toward a mutually

acceptable solution, helps them decide on their preferred solution, and oversees the implementation of their

chosen solution” (Guiding Young Children, pg 8). I used negotiation when I asked each of them to

contribute their ideas in order for us to come to solution.

I used I-messages because I wanted to tell Aiden how I feel when he pushes his bike on Conner’s car and

explaining why he shouldn’t be doing it since it can break. According to the text “I-messages are used to

convey the teacher’s feelings when a child’s behavior becomes inappropriate.” (Guiding Young Children,

pg 208).

I used affirmation because it gives the child encouragement for their effort in doing something positive.

According to the text “affirmations are the teacher’s tools for helping children feel important.” (Guiding

Young Children, pg 9). I used affirmation so that the children can feel like they have accomplished

something like a problem solving skill.

Part 3 – Action

(Clearly discuss your actions, the child’s response and the results of the guidance strategy.)

The actions I took included active listening, negotiation, setting limits-I-messages and affirmation. I was a

guide throughout the process so that Aiden and Conner can come up with a solution to their own conflict. I

didn’t solve the problem for them to make it easier for myself instead I let them solve their own conflict

through my guidance strategies which were active listening, negotiation, I-messages and affirmation.

The children’s response during the problem solving process was positive since they were working together

with me and their peers to come up with solutions to solve the conflict. I asked them open ended questions

in order for them to use their cognitive domain to come up with possible ideas for the conflict. I was at their

eye level when I was talking to them so that they can feel like I am paying attention to them. I restated the

problem to them once they told me what the problem so that they can see that I am paying attention. I sat in

between Conner and Aiden so that Aiden won’t push his bike on Conner’s car any further. I looked at

Aiden, “I see that we are having a problem in here. I heard Conner telling you to stop pushing his car but

you kept pushing your bike on his car.” Aiden looked at me with tears in his eyes, “Yes that’s right because

I just want to pass by.” I used setting limits by using I-messages so that Aiden can stop pushing the car on

the bike which can break the car. I said, “It makes me sad when I see you pushing the bike on the car

because the car can break and then other children won’t be able to use it anymore.” I then asked them both

to contribute their ideas on solving the problem through negotiation. “What do you think that you can do to

pass instead of pushing your bike on Conner’s car which can break our toy? Do you two have any ideas?”

After they contributed their ideas, I used affirmation strategy to make them feel important for solving their

own conflict. Conner said, “He can go the other way.” I looked at Aiden and said, “Conner has the great

idea of going around the car so that you won’t have to bump into the car. What do you think Aiden?” Aiden

wiped his tears with his hand and smiled at me, “I will go around the playground.” That’s great! Both of

you solved your own problem and now our toys won’t break because you won’t keep pushing it with your

bike.” I followed through with the decision by checking up on them after they agreed on a decision to make

sure that they are following through with the idea they chose. At that, both of them rode their car and bike

around the playground again without bumping into each other’s car or bikes.”

The result of the guidance strategies that I used was that the children were able to solve their own conflict

without the teacher solving the problem for them. I was the guide throughout the process and asked them

open ended questions so that they can come up with solutions using their cognitive domain. They ended up

coming with the solution of Aiden going around the playground to avoid pushing the car again since the

playground is big with lots of space to move around as a solution to the conflict on their own.



Strengths Things that went well were that I used more than

one guidance strategies to guide the children into

solving their own conflict which include active

listening, negotiation, I-messages and affirmation.

I let the children solve their own conflict by

working together as a team and coming up with

ideas. I was the guide throughout the whole

process by asking them open ended question to

lure them into coming up with some ideas for

solving the conflict themselves. I followed through

with the decision by supervising them and seeing

if the problem occurred again but it didn’t occur

again. I acknowledged the children’s efforts of

solving the conflict by using affirmation guidance

strategy so that they can feel like they have

accomplished something which was solving the

Needs I also need to modify the environment so that it

can meet to development and the needs of the

children. I could’ve taken away some of the

outdoor bikes or cars that were not being used by

the children so that it didn’t confuse the children

with too many toys in their way of riding. Basically,

I would be clearing the playground a bit to avoid

the children bumping into each other.

conflict. I was at their eye level and not talking to

them from standing up which can confuse the

children. I sat down in between the children and

got their attention by actively listening to each of

them. I included both of their ideas so that they

can feel included and important. I was patient

with the children and gave them enough time to

think and come up with their ideas. I didn’t rush

them into solving the conflict for them which is a

temptation that a lot of us can get into just to

make our lives easier and to solve the conflict

faster. I boosted their self esteem by telling them

that they worked together to solve the conflict

themselves.

Changes-(Prevention)


children into solving their own conflict which include active listening, negotiation, I-messages

and affirmation. I let the children solve their own conflict by working together as a team and

coming up with ideas. I was the guide throughout the whole process by asking them open

ended question to lure them into coming up with some ideas for solving the conflict

themselves. I followed through with the decision by supervising them and seeing if the problem

occurred again but it didn’t occur again. I acknowledged the children’s efforts of solving the

conflict by using affirmation guidance strategy so that they can feel like they have accomplished

something which was solving the conflict. I was at their eye level and not talking to them from

standing up which can confuse the children. I sat down in between the children and got their

attention by actively listening to each of them. I included both of their ideas so that they can

feel included and important. I was patient with the children and gave them enough time to

think and come up with their ideas. I didn’t rush them into solving the conflict for them which is

a temptation that a lot of us can get into just to make our lives easier and to solve the conflict

faster. I boosted their self esteem by telling them that they worked together to solve the

conflict themselves.

I need to change my practice since I feel like I gave away too much help to them when I

asked them some closed ended questions that requires on a yes and a no answer since by

saying yes or no, they are not using their cognitive domain too much. I looked at Aiden and

said, “Conner has the great idea of going around the car so that you won’t have to bump into

the car. What do you think Aiden?”


needs of the children. I could’ve taken away some of the outdoor bikes or cars that were not

being used by the children so that it didn’t confuse the children with too many toys in their way

of riding. Basically, I would be clearing the playground a bit to avoid the children bumping into

each other.

Therefore, everything went well since the two children were able to find a solution to

their conflict where Aiden was bumping into Conner’s car. They both decided on Aiden going

around the car to avoid bumping his bike with Conner’s car.

Bibliography

Miller, Karen. Ages and stages: developmental descriptions & activities, birth through eight

years. Marshfield, MA: Telshare Pub. Co., 1985. Print.

Reynolds, Eleanor. "Terms of Problem Solving." Guiding young children: a problem-solving

approach. 4th ed. Mountain View, Calif.: Mayfield Pub. Co., 2001. 8,9 and 10. Print.

Documents

Logssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss