I am becoming more comfortable with the lack of prescribed formulas. Still not fully comfortable, but the more I am exposed to the idea the more I see it's value.

Such a strong word to characterize the way teachers, especially those in ECE, are treated.

These "regulations" are so different than the ones we see for schools in the US. There is nothing about the content that should be taught, but rather means of achieving the overall goals of the schools.

Is the goal really to suspend these? Is that possible? Or is it to be aware of them and how they are shaping our perception?

This is such a different cultural message than we often get here. I don't know how many times I've heard the phrase, "They just don't listen!" I'm sure I've also said it more times than I'd like to admit. How often are we feeling that way because we are not truly listening to the children, either?

I have re-read this characteristic so many times and I am still struggling with it's meaning.

How to draw the line between helping children succeed in their goals and allowing them to discover the properties of clay on their own?

I struggle with this, I always want to follow every new interest that develops.

This week has been the first time I have really considered what it can mean for a teacher to be a part of the documentation. Why do we always feel like we need to be removed from it when we are such a big part of the process?

COVID has really made me re-analyze what is important as a teacher, which has been a positive and a negative.

This is such a significant shift in how we see our role in the classroom.

Many of these make me giggle a little on first impression, but when I think more deeply about them they are so powerful.

I am really starting to understand this idea more through our small group discussions in all of our classes. These discussions have helped me expand and/or add to my own ideas. Seeing this learning work for myself is helpful to see how it works for children.

I love the idea of having older children interpret rights for preverbal children. It reminds me of a NAREA conference I went to a few years ago in which the speakers shared a story of a child with special rights who was afraid to go into the school's piazza. They asked the children how they could help her and they came up with many great ideas. They mentioned how taking problem about children to other children is helpful because their perspective is so much closer to that child's than that of an adult.

This is one of the things I love about working in an infant classroom, but is sometimes also a struggle. We don't have to wrap things up based on it being lunch time or nap time, we follow the children's lead about when they're done and ready to eat/sleep. However, sometimes my sense of time gets a little warped when there isn't a routine to the day.

It is hard to view children from their own reality, not our reality. I often don't consider how other people's thought processes differ from mine.

So powerful to think of children's relationships with others to be self-sustaining. I know that I have intervened too much in the past and it had led to children becoming dependent on me to interact appropriately with their peers.

Such a good distinction between "observed" and "judged," one that isn't often made in our education system.

This is one reason why I avoid telling a child, "Good job!" Doing so focuses on only the product of something they did, not the process. It tells them that we don't really see them and value them for all that they can offer.

I don't think "potentially damaging" is strong enough language to describe the negative effects on our children that standardized learning causes.

This idea is contradictory to the diversity of students in US classes. Every child comes in so differently, it is impossible to make them come out the same. In this analogy, it just leads to the non-standard items being discarded through out the process.

This natural human inclination is compounded by teachers being forced to teach the same thing, in the same way, year after year. I think it would be hard to value what children bring to the conversation if it was the 8th time I had taught the same concept, often with a script on how to teach it.

I love how all the different components of the schools work together in a cyclical process. Each aspect builds on others. For example, teachers are also learning with children, and documenting that learn also furthers their own professional development.

I have already noticed at BJS that the teachers are highly respected by families and administration. During family exchanges, many of them said, "You guys are the experts." This is rare in ECE and it is refreshing to see teachers of our youngest children being given the respect that they deserve.

Reading things like this makes it so hard to not just feel discouraged about how opposite the community sentiment is here. I'm trying to focus on what we CAN do with the individualistic beliefs that people here hold, but it is difficult when we see what can come from a more collectivist approach.

It's such an interesting perspective shift that parents were involved from the beginning and is a difference in context that we often have to consider here. Schools for young children are usually started independently and then try to incorporate parent involvement later, which would require different strategies than bringing them along from the beginning.

"Preparedness" is not a word that I have ever heard or thought of when considering the image of the child. I like the idea of children being considered prepared for the contexts that they are in. It makes me think of the term "Kindergarten readiness" and how it involves getting children ready for Kindergarten rather than making Kindergarten ready for them.