Proposal for Pacific Child Learning Center
Michelle Reilly
Integrated Seminar with Thesis
May 2005
Table of Contents
Goals and Strategies for TEACH
The inspiration behind this paper stems from the plans of Pacific University to begin a building project; the building itself is dubbed the professional building. It will house the College of Education as well as a child learning center called Tualatin Educational Academy for Children (TEACH). This paper will review the origins of Pacific University and how TEACH builds on the same core values. Various articles and research papers will be the starting point for why having child-care is valuable to universities and how to make campus child-care and laboratory schools successful. It will also consider what other campus child-care and laboratory schools provide to the universities that house them. Some plans for TEACH have already been set up by Dr. Mark Bailey. With that information in hand, this paper will be proposed how to make PacificÕs TEACH become an essential and successful attribute to the university and community. With this in mind the aim is to answer the question how can Pacific University make a children learning center successful and an asset to the campus and community?
Pacific is the second oldest university in the state of Oregon, and was founded ten years before Oregon became a state. Pacific University joins the ranks of many highly esteemed universities of the past and present. It all started in the1850Õs when two great people, Reverend Clark and Tabitha Moffat Brown, joined forces to open a local school for children in need.
In the spring of 1846 Tabitha Moffat Brown began a hard journey from Missouri to the Oregon Territory. She had previously been a wife of a minister, and when her husband died she became a teacher to support herself and her family. At the age of sixty-six Tabitha Moffat Brown began a new chapter in her life. Her brother-in law and children were going to the Oregon Territory and she joined them. The trip brought many hardships including being left with her dying brother-in-law, but she arrived and settled in a Methodist missionary house in Salem. It was here that she found a coin in a glove which she used to buy three needles. She then traded some of her clothes with the Native Americans for buckskin. With only these supplies, she made gloves to sell and was able to make a thirty dollar profit (Terry, 2002).
Four years prior to this, Reverend Harvey Clark and his wife had established a school in Glencoe to educate Native American children. He knew that Tabitha was a teacher and invited her to stay with them in the Forest Grove area for the winter. During their time together the Reverend Clark discovered TabithaÕs desire to welcome all poor children and be a mother to them. Clark suggested she stay and teach the local children. There was a small log lodge that she used as her boarding school. Those families who had money paid her one dollar a week to cover board, tuition, and any other educational needs. As she did not have any money left over to pay herself, she worked for free for the first year.
By March of 1848 there were thirty pupils whose ages ranged from four to twenty-one. She even had girls enrolled under her care and instruction, which for the time was an uncommon practice to educate women. A year later, the Oregon Territory established her orphanage asylum named Tualatin Academy. Five years later (1854) Pacific University was added to the academy.
The Tualatin Academy remained open through 1915; this was the last high school graduating class. At this point Pacific University joined the prestigious rankings of ivy schools such as Dartmouth, Carleton, Oberlin, Grinnell, Rollins, and Pomona that are all among the first movement to establish higher education in the United States (Pacific University Website, 2005). In 1863 Harvey Scott received the first degree granted at Pacific University. Scott later became a prominent figure in Oregon, including editor of the Oregonian.
Since its establishment as a university, Pacific has added many fields of study. In 1945 PacificÕs College of Optometry was founded. Many other health programs followed Òincluding Physical Therapy in 1975, Occupational Therapy in 1984, and Professional Psychology in 1985,Ó (Pacific University Website, 2005). In 1995 the already existing education program became the College of Education and in 1996 the Physician Assistant Studies program was added. Pacific continues to grow and holds true to the standards set by Reverend Clark and Tabitha Moffat Brown.
Introduction: Child development and child care is not a new subject or topic for research. There are many theories about child development, how children learn best, how to run day-cares and preschools; the list is long. The research chosen ranges from on-site child-care to laboratory schools, the history of laboratory schools, and how best to operate them. This was done to educate myself as Pacific University prepares a Child Learning Center that will not only serve the children enrolled but also the graduate and undergraduate students on campus.
Child-Care Needs: Many schools are trying to appeal to a diverse demographic population, specifically one that includes parents.
Today, about 50 percent of all college students are ages 25 and older. A growing portion are single parents who struggle to put themselves through school and find care for their children. More and more, colleges and universities are recognizing the need to support these students by providing on-campus child-care centers (New Feature on College Campuses, 1998).
The cost of child-care can appear outrageous, but when it is offered on campus, students are often able to save Òthousands of dollars in tuition and other fees that would be lost by students dropping out...Ó (New Feature on College Campuses, 1998). Not only do these centers help students and faculty by providing child care, but they also further the education of undergraduate and graduate students who use the child-care centers as a laboratory school.
An ERIC Digest article went over the statistics of how many more female faculty and students with children there are today as compared to the past. From 1975 to 2000 the number of full-time female faculty at colleges and universities increased 13.5%. A similar rise was seen in undergraduate students with a child. About 10% of the student population in 1995-96 had children; by 1999-2000 it has increase to 13.3%. Because there is a growing number of parents in the workforce and attending school, there is an increasing need for child-care. Campuses are finding that providing some sort of child-care can help in ÒÉrecruiting and retaining faculty and students with child care responsibilitiesÓ (Boswell, 2003). Not only does having child-care on campus help attract and keep faculty and students, it has also been shown that the graduation rate is much higher for students with campus child-care. In addition, these students are more likely to stay in school, do better in school and even continue to a graduate level. (Boswell, 2003).
To help students, ÒIn 1998, Congress passed the Campus Child Care Supplements to the original Higher Education Act of 1965 as a means to assist low-income parents enrolled in postsecondary educationÓ (Boswell, 2003). The Child-Care Access MEAN to Parents in School Amendment aides in financing low-income students so they will be able to pay for the child-care (Boswell, 2003). A survey of 223 campus child centers showed that 46% of these centers not only provided child-care but served as a laboratory school for undergraduate students (Boswell, 2003).
Leah Carlson explains how having on site child-care at her work has helped. She works for the Computer Associates who have provided child-care since 1992 which helps encourage a family friendly work place (Carlson, 2004). These centers use a Montessori approach to teaching, which encourages spontaneous exploration and child-centered activities. The rate for this service in about $125-225 per week. Having centers on site allows parents to have lunch with their child or visit them throughout the day. It also allows mothers to breastfeed their child in designated rooms. Other conveniences include being able to attend to a sick child. If there are any last minute changes in the parentsÕ schedule such as meetings, deadlines or last minute assignments it is easier to adjust for these. The results are that the company is able to attract more women and keep employees happier by making work a family friendly environment.
Child-care is just as valuable for universities. According to Marc Goulden, ÒUniversities are using child-care centers as their major initiative to address gender-equity issuesÓ (Wilson, 2005). In a 2003 survey at UC Berkley, ÒÉcampus child care was the more important Ôfamily-friendly resourceÕ the university could provideÓ (Wilson, 2005). The UC system is offering up to 1.25 million in grants to encourage the building of campus child-care centers.
The idea of child-care centers in not new but the focus of todayÕs centers is much different from the focus of centers 20 and 30 years ago. One of the biggest changes is that more are going from being laboratory schools to child-care centers. The centers are different from mainstream day-care in that parents have more part-time care to match the flexible hours of college life (Wilson, 2005). These campus child-care centers not only provide flexible care but can offer drop-in care and summer programs for employeesÕ school age kids (Wilson, 2005). The laboratory schools are often kindergarten and preschools run through the university that allow for undergraduate and graduate students to learn from observing and interacting with the children. In 1964 there was a count of 212 laboratory schools but by 1973 the number had dropped to 166. Today there is an estimated 100 laboratory schools in the United States (Cassidy & Sander, 2002).
On site care means that parents can stop in and watch their child or say hello. It also cuts back on time spent away from the child. Often the parents drop off the child at day-care and then drive to work. With the care being on site the parents have that driving time to interact with their child. Being in a day-care system has been shown to be beneficial to the child. One mother notes how her son is able to have more social interactions from child-care. This has helped in his social, emotional, and physical development (Wilson, 2005).
The need for child-care is easy to see as well as the benefits of having child-care on campus. On site child-care does not only benefit those with children but it can be expanded to the entire campus and the community. From an academic orientation, the biggest benefit is to allow undergraduate and graduate students to interact with the children in the child-care programs.
Child-Care and Laboratory Schools: Susan Gano-Phillips explains a specific interaction that can take place in child development and human development classes. The activity helps with real life application of what is being taught in class. The three steps of this specific activity are as follow:
1)
the class is divided into subgroups representing different aspects of development (i.e. cognitive, social, physical/motor) which collaborate to design activities to asses development within their specific domain;
2)
students implement their activities during a class period where children are present and discuss their observations with the class; and
3)
knowledge and understanding are assessed through a writing assignment or examination. (Gano-Phillips, 1997)
Each group would do their activity in front of the class which allows other groups to observe the children and the specific area of development being tested. It gives opportunities to illustrate how a childÕs development includes physical, emotional, and social aspects, all simultaneously.
The results she noted were that Ò[t]his classroom-based activity raises the intrinsic motivation of students in Human Development classesÓ (Gano-Phillips, 1997). The students were better engaged and able to take what they saw and apply that to the principles they had been learning. A similar interaction can take place at child-care centers and laboratory schools.
In that past laboratory schools have had three common goals nation wide. These goals formed the general mission of many laboratory schools.
1. Serve as a site for personnel training in child development and early childhood education;
2. Serve as a site for research on various aspects of child development and early childhood education; and
3. Serve in a model program/leadership role for the local, state, and national early childhood communities. (McBride, 1994)
Many schools claim to meet all three ideals but there is a growing gap between the theory, research, and practice. The hope is that future university based child development centers and laboratory schools will be able to close this gap.
Another problem universities face is the lack of connection between what is being taught in their courses and what is being done in the laboratory schools (McBride, 1994). In order for a university to truly reap the benefits of having a laboratory school, course material needs to be linked to activities that take place in the laboratory schools.
A study was designed to measure how beneficial it was to interact with children verses simply observing them. The study assigned one group of students to interact throughout the semester with the children and the second group to observe through a one-way mirror. The first group spent two hours a day for five weeks interacting with infants and toddlers with an additional twenty hours of observing behind the glass. The second group spent thirty hours observing the same children through the glass. The results showed that interacting with the children is an effective way to teach. Not only that but it, Ò[s]tudents reported, Ôincreased comprehension and acceptance of theoretical concepts presented in lectures and textbooksÕÓ (Bower, 2000). The students were able to form more accurate ideas of infancy and toddlerhood.
A benefit for child-care at universities is having very qualified staff working with the children. Campus child-care centers and laboratory schools are able to have the child-to-teacher ratios much lower than usually found in comparable sites. Having laboratory schools can be a valid way of not only educating undergraduate students and graduate students but also providing high quality child-care.
In order to have effective laboratory schools, the programs need to reconnect with the three part mission statement of previous laboratory schools. The schools should strive to Òexpanding program services; reevaluating personnel training functions; revitalizing model programs/ leadership activities; and expanding research opportunities.Ó (McBride, 1994). In order for laboratory schools to be successful they need to provide flexible services to match the flexibility of the university that host them.
University based child development laboratory programs have a long history going back to the 1920Õs. These schools played a major role in child development and early childhood education information. Today, however, many of the schools are being asked to establish that they are still as essential as in the past. There are many problems that these laboratory schools are facing that increase the fear of closure.
There are two threats for campus child-care centers which are cutback and even closures. At the same time more and more universities are adding campus child-care. Both types of centers provide child-care but the laboratory schools fill a very different role for university students.
With many universities in financial crisis, laboratory schools are often a target of cutbacks due to the high cost of running such programs. This is often unfair considering such laboratory schools serve the educational purposes of not only education majors but also many other areas including home economics, psychology, social work, nursing and more. ÒThere has also been a great amount of debate and tension as to who should train/educate child care providers, who should support research facilities for studying children , and who should support laboratory programs themselvesÓ (McBride, 1994). Considerable university funds are being directed toward programs such as engineering, business, and computer sciences. At the same time a ÒÉlow priority placed by society on the education and training of child-care providers, and for research on child developmentÓ is becoming more common (McBride, 1994). As mentioned in articles before, there is a growing need for non-parental child care and yet there is reason for Òserious concern over the quality, availability and affordability of such programsÓ (McBride, 1994).
Collaborative Effort In Laboratory Schools: Universities are also not properly considering the various departments that could be involved with the laboratory schools, including such areas as; disciplines within the health sciences, psychology, and social work. Having laboratory schools can enrich the education across the entire campus Òthrough observational opportunities, class projects, practicum placements, etcÓ (McBride, 1994).
An important role the laboratory schools need to fill is staying current and even developing new ideas about education and child development. The schools and staff should be always updating information (McBride, 1994). Researching new ideas can be done to help stay current. ÒBy enhancing the research activities being conducted at their programs, [child development] lab schools can develop stronger justifications for their continued existence during times of economic difficulties on campusesÓ (McBride, 1994).
One article was purely devoted to what past laboratory schools were like, how modern laboratory schools have fallen short of expectations, and what can be done to change the situation. The role for laboratory schools was to provide training for education students by giving them a chance to practice the methods they have been learning in the classroom. It also allowed Òfaculty and graduate students to experiment with new ideas and methods and to conduct the research needed to validate those ideas or methodsÓ (Cassidy & Sander, 2002).
Modern laboratory schools, like the ones of the past, have a three part mission,
Òto serve as a practicum site for training pre-service and in-service teachers, to serve as a site for research on various aspects of child development and to provide model programs in early childhood education for the national and local educational communitiesÓ (Cassidy & Sander, 2002). This looks like a great goal for all universities but it still does not go without skeptics. ÒCritics maintained that some of the methods, materials, and philosophies that were so successful in the lab schools could not thrive outside the rarefied atmosphere of a campus schoolÓ (Cassidy & Sander, 2002). The reason given relates to the children in the programs being an Òelitist populationÓ making the training that teacher receives, invalid. To counteract this, universities need to be careful in who is admitted to the laboratory schools.
John Goodlad identified five purposes for laboratory schools. They are the Òeducation of the children enrolled, development of new and innovative practices, research and inquiry pre-service education, and in-service educationÓ (Cassidy & Sander, 2002). He thought that is would be better if those students seeking pre-service and in-service training go to the schools in area of the university. Goodlad pointed out that the people involved in laboratory schools all wanted different things Òthe pre-service teacher wants a job; university professors want a hassle-free environment where they can do research; and the director of the school wants all of those things simultaneouslyÓ (Cassidy & Sander, 2002). Goodlad also pointed out that the schools need to keep an open mind especially when it comes to research and trying new method ideas. Also, that the schools were not publishing the information they had been collecting from on-site research.
One laboratory school in Texas was able to allow Òvarious groups of undergraduate and graduate students ...to observe and interact with young childrenÓ (Cassidy & Sander, 2002). Also it allowed the education students to Òhave a chance to observe and practice various developmentally appropriate strategies and techniques as well as to examine age appropriate materialsÓ (Cassidy & Sander, 2002).
One article promoted the involvement of the home, school, and community to reap the most benefits from a laboratory school. ÒCollaboration serves as the bridge between the home, school and community to prepare students for the complex issues they faceÓ (Canales & Duran, 2002). To have a strong collaboration there must be good communication. ÒEach collaborative team goes through four steps: choosing colleagues or team members, dividing the labor, establishing work guidelines, and terminating the collaboration or seeing it through to the next levelÓ (Canales & Duran, 2002). Fradd showed that the parent, teachers, and administrators learned more and so did the children when they collaborated.
A problem can exists when there are duplicate programs operating on one campus. By having proper collaboration, universities can create a new program that offers participants more than the individual child-care centers can offer separately (Canales & Duran, 2002). The idea of involving the home, the schools, and community is not new but most universities never participate.
One article was geared toward parents of the child enrolled in campus child development centers. It looked at how to tell if a child was indeed developing when it seemed like they were just playing all day long. This article included a lot of child development information such as pointing out that children not only develop their intellect but also develop emotionally, socially, and physically (Newton, 2000). It illustrated how even basic toys found in centers can foster education in variety of ways. This was on the belief that Òchildren are natural learners, swallowing up the information around them non-stopÓ (Newton, 2000) It considers blocks and how they can teach math, science, language, and social studies.
Another article went over ways for staff to help the student who work with the children to learn. It noted how to help the student tie what they learn in the class to what they learn while working with the children. One simple idea was just to help the students understand what the purpose of a child development center is and how the specific centers operate. It also suggested giving a schedule of topics to observe and questions to answer through observation and interaction with the children. (Newton, 2000).
The last article was focused on making centers developmentally appropriate which takes each child as an individual and plan out what would be best for his or her development.
Research on effective schools shows that teachers who use a variety of methodological strategies promote the skills of their students most efficiently. Because childrenÕs backgrounds, experiences, socialization and learning styles are so different, any one method is likely to succeed with some children and fail with others. (Ricard, Brown & Sanders, 2002)
The idea is to modify instruction to meet the needs of each specific child. It also points out that Òall individuals who are involved in the education of young childrenÉ are responsible for ensuring that practices are developmentally appropriate.Ó (Ricard, Brown & Sanders, 2002)
The National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) has three ways to insure developmentally appropriate practices (DAP). They are to make sure the activities are Òappropriate for the childÕs age, are appropriate for the individuality of the child, and respect an understanding of the childÕs cultureÓ (Ricard, Brown & Sanders, 2002) The difficulty is less of wanting to lead developmentally appropriate activities as it is to actually perform the activities appropriately. A study was conducted to measure whether the instruction was teacher-directed or child-directed. All the observers were well train in DAP education, and only about 16% of the activities observed were rated as child-directed (Ricard, Brown & Sanders, 2002).
DAP has been shown effective. By age 23, individuals who had participated in DAP education as children were 37.7% less likely to have been arrested for felony than the individuals who had participated in teacher-directed programs. Further, children from appropriate programs were twice as likely to graduate from college (Ricard, Brown & Sanders, 2002). DAP education was formed as result of the new accountability in education. The Ò[d]evelopmentally appropriate practice principles were formulated in an age of increasing accountability and evaluations as a response to the widespread use of inappropriate formal teaching techniques for young children and the overemphasis on standardized achievement and achievement testing of narrowly defined academic skillsÓ (Ricard, Brown & Sanders, 2002.)
This article not only illustrated the nature of DAP education but gave a specific examples how laboratory schools can be productive. The research collected was through students at a Texas university utilizing the campus child development center. ÒThis project illustrates a most appropriate use of university laboratory school facilities to promote best practices for teachers, interns, university students and facultyÓ (Ricard, Brown & Sanders, 2002).
There are key salient aspects of the research presented. One is the need for child-care at workplaces and on a university campus. Having child-care is shown to have many benefits for those who offer it, and also those who use it. Campus child-care helps keep faculty with young children employed and attracts single parents seeking higher education.
Not only does having campus child-care provide a service for staff, faculty, students, and the community; but it also provides many educational opportunities for the students attending the university. By connecting course work with observation and interaction, students whose field of study relates to children can develop deeper understanding of coursework. Even while universities face budget cuts, laboratory schools and campus child-care are growing and have shown to be an asset to the university. By allowing and providing education opportunities to the entire university the worth of a laboratory school becomes immeasurable.
Successful campus child-care and laboratory schools often look back to the goals and mission statements of past laboratory schools. There are three common purposes for laboratory schools which are: to train undergraduate and graduate students, provide research opportunities, and provide models for other educational institutes to follow. A laboratory school can provide invaluable opportunities for research which is one of the three goals of past laboratory schools.
Collaboration is one way that laboratory schools have become successful by communicating with the home, university, and community. This helps foster community programs and outreaches that can take place involving member of both the community and university.
Last is the concept that campus child-care and laboratory schools need to have DAP. It is important that the focus is on the child and that the activities that take place are child-directed and not teacher lead.
Many of the ideas and information presented in these articles have provided a deeper understanding and examples for how Pacific University can begin their own laboratory school and how it will provide new educational opportunities and mark a new beginning for the school, university, and community.
The process for a child learning center at Pacific University began around the time that the College of Education was established in 1995. The idea was to develop a laboratory that would help facilitate the learning of education students by giving them a place to interact with children. In the late 1990Õs collaboration between the College of Education and the Occupational Therapy program began. The Occupational Therapy program needed a new building which it would share with a laboratory school.
Under the leadership of Dean Willard Kniep the education program began to grow rapidly. The College of Education added a number of new degree options and faculty. Now the need for a new site was not only necessary for the Occupational Therapy program but also for the College of Education.
Planning has been taking place and funding is still being finalized. The lay out of the building has been decided and will provide an area to house a preschool learning center. This area of the building has limited entry for childrenÕs safety. It features large versatile rooms that will not only meet the needs of the children but also of the students doing observation work. It will also include an outdoor play area for the children and covered area to accommodate the rainy weather. TEACH will also have a small outdoor amphitheatre which will be a plus to everyone on the campus. A second area includes classrooms and a second floor on top of that for graduate level programs.
The building will be located on Pacific UniversityÕs campus between the Taylor-Meade Performing Arts Center and Murdock Hall. For a 3-D view of the building log on to http://www.pacificu.edu/campaign/projects/professionalbuilding.cfm#
The need for a child development center is easily seen. Plans are beginning for the following College of Education classes to use the TEACH center to meet the requirements for coursework. The classes are:
á
Foundations of Education
á
Early Childhood Education
á
ChildrenÕs Literature
á
Education Psychology
á
Normal Language Development
á
Methods classes and the equivalent in gradate level classes.
There are many classes that are not listed and new classes being formed that can and probably will use the child learning center.
The child development center will not only be used by the education students but also other programs and departments on campus. Other areas are the art department, psychology, social work, second languages and women studies. The graduate/professional programs that are interested include occupational therapy, professional psychology, optometry, and physician assistant studies.
A survey was gathered in 1996 to see how many faulty, staff, and students were interested in having child-care and a laboratory school on campus. Over thirty individuals expressed that they would be interested (Bailey, 2005). In 1999 a second survey was given and over fifty individuals express an interest (Bailey, 2005). The enrollment for TEACH will be sixty children, ages thirty months through kindergarten (Bailey, 2005). The age groups will be broken down into three groups each with their own licensed teacher.
The staff for TEACH will be a team of four professionals and include a director, preschool teacher, kindergarten teacher, and an assistant. These positions will be supplemented by work study and student volunteers. Their schedules are already set up as seen on Table 1.
Table 1 (Bailey, 2005)