The voices of early childhood practitioners are
important for a revealing insightful glimpse into
their day-to-day engagements with children exhibiting
challenging aggressive behaviors. This
section will present early childhood practitioners’ profile,
procedures, results and qualitative
recorded responses to specific questions of strategies
incorporated in the learning community
environment.
Early Childhood Practitioners’ Profile
One of the first responsibilities of early childhood
practitioners is to observe the interaction among and between children.
Educators can note aggressive behaviors, when they are occurring, and what
strategies can be implemented to combat it. Early childhood practitioners who
“want to guide children toward independent and self-regulation” must first
ensure “that everything they put within children’s sight and reach is meant to
be available for children’s use” (Hildebrand & Hearron, 1999, p. 82). Ensuring
everything is available and meant for children’s use is described by Hildebrand
and Hearron (1999) as having the teacher review the arrangement of furnishings
to ensure there are clearly defined centers or areas, having age-appropriate
diverse materials with duplicates of the items the children like the most, and
creating a balanced lesson plan that includes teacher- and child-initiated
activities.
An early childhood practitioners’ voice is also a
teaching tool, one which helps children know what, when, and how to do things,
while leaving some flexibility for creativity when appropriate. The firmness in
early childhood practitioners’ voice gives children confidence in knowing
expectations and the need to comply with teachers’ directives. When children do
not adhere to the directives, practitioners must “patiently lead them through
the desired behavior so the next time they will know that [the teacher expects]
them to comply” (Hildebrand & Hearron, 1999, p. 329). Teachers should speak
in a normal voice directly to children on their eye level. A softer tone is
more effective. “In classrooms where loud or shouted guidance is being used,
you will probably see fearful children, unheeded guidance, or both” (p. 329),
and children will emulate the behaviors they observe. Therefore, teachers
should model the behaviors they want children to emulate (Hildebrand &
Hearron, 1999).
When early childhood practitioners observe and record
aggressive unacceptable behaviors being promoted then early intervention
technique(s) must be implemented to combat negative behaviors. Therefore, the
implementation of the Antecedent-Behavior-Consequences (A-B-C) behavior plan is
one technique to promote prosocial skill development to reduce or eliminate
aggressive behaviors. Through observations, documentation, identification of
factors, identification of problem behavior, and development of specific
strategies all recorded on the A-B-C behavior plan with reinforcers for desired
behavior of prosocial skills and consistent consequences used for said
behaviors where change should occur with children.
Procedures
Teachers completed each of the Signs
of Aggressive Behaviors Questionnaire, The Teacher Control of Child Behavior,
Preschool Behavior Project 12-item Aggression Scale, and A-B-C
Behavioral Plan, for a period of 5 weeks (i.e., approximately September to
October). Details about the exact
procedures used to administer each measure are reported in the Measures
section. Upon completion of the study
teachers and children were verbally thanked for their participation.
Results
The following analyses were conducted to assess
relationships between early childhood practitioners thoughts, skills and
implementation of strategies to reduce or eliminate children’s aggressive acts
over the five weeks. First, to assess
early childhood practitioners perception and definition of aggression of
preschool age children. In addition, to
perceived notions of increase or decrease in aggressive behaviors. Second, analyses were conducted to assess
programmatic influences on classroom management with the actual implementation
of strategies toward aggressive acts, attitudes working with aggressive
children, and perceptions to reduce those acts.
Third, analyses were conducted to assess the Preschool Behavior Plan
(PBP) 12-item pre- and post scores to reduce or eliminate mid- to high levels
of aggressive acts and early intervention resources needed to combat specific
acts.
Perceptions and
definitions of aggression. The early
childhood practitioners described the aspects of aggressive behaviors observed
from personal experiences. To assess
this question, the 5 early childhood practitioners were interviewed using the
Signs of Aggressive Behaviors Questionnaire. A broad definition of aggressive
behavior emerged from these practitioners as some type of physical act done by
the child on someone else or on himself or herself. For example,
ECP 1 defined aggressive behaviors as ones that exceed the ability of a
teacher to handle. It may be pushing, biting, and hitting.
ECP 2 said that a child that doesn’t listen to their teacher and hits
other children or teacher was aggressive.
ECP 3 defined aggressive behavior as any type of behavior that’s going
to put another child, another person, or themselves at harm.
ECP 4 not only defined aggressive behavior as when a child is hurting
himself or others but gave an example of an aggressive act: For example,
throwing a chair at another child or just running wild [in the classroom].
ECP 5 stated that aggressive behavior was behavior that might hurt the
child or someone else, such as hitting, kicking, or fighting.
The teacher’s definition of
aggression corresponded to Kostelnik, Whiren, Stoderman, Stein, and Gregory,
(2000) as “to harm things or people in which the aggressor experiences
satisfaction with the harmful outcome,” (p. 493).
Perceived increase
or decrease in aggressive behaviors.
The early childhood practitioners reflected upon their experiences when
asked whether they had seen an increase or decrease in aggressive behaviors in
children during their years of teaching, 4 of the 5 early childhood
practitioners stated they had witnessed an increase. The reasons they gave for
this increase included: watching violent television shows, residing in violent
communities, and lacking social skills.
ECP 1 said that parents are not helping teachers with their child to
learn appropriate social skills and they [children] are watching too many
violent programs on television. Therefore, the children come to school and act
out those acts on classmate and myself and I have to let them know they can’t
do that.
ECP 2 stated that every school year I’ve seen an increase in children
being aggressive. Most of the children I’ve worked with come from neighborhoods
that there is a lot of violence seen such as cursing out someone, shooting,
fighting, and a whole lot of other things. Unfortunately, the children think
that’s acceptable behavior and come to here [school] not talking about a
problem just reacting physically. I had a boy last year that when he first
started would hit constantly when he wanted a toy or be first in line. I had to
talk with him several times a day to get him to understand to use his words.
Then one day, he used his words and I almost fainted [ha! ha!]. Oh, also the
television shows I hear them talk about have a lot of cursing and violence in
them that they act out here at school.
ECP 4 stated that she believed that the increase in aggressive
behaviors is because parents are not able to spend quality family time to help
children learn good social skills. Everybody [parents] is trying to make that
dollar to give the child all the materials things instead of time. Children
watch all types of programs on televisions in their bedrooms and observe how
people interact in their community that are violent acts to get what they want.
Parents must help us [teachers] reinforce positive social skills.
ECP 5 said that I noticed that many parents will tell their child if
someone hits you, hit them back with no questions asked. This defeats me trying
to help children learn positive social skills to solve problems. Also, I see
and hear the children talk about shows watched on television or at the movies
and they come back to school and respond to what they’ve seen. We are living in
a world that violence is used to solve our problems not the problem solving
skills I was taught in school.
ECP 3 view differed that she hadn’t seen an increase or decrease in
aggressive behaviors. I think percentage wise it is equal just different levels
or types of aggression demonstrated by children.
Programmatic
influenced on classroom management.
Results from the Teacher Control of Child Behavior Scale revealed that 4
of the 5 early childhood practitioners had high positive self- perceptions of
their ability to manage classroom behaviors. Data from this scale indicated
that teachers who scored lower on the Teacher Control of Child Behavior Scale
had more children identified as having mid to high levels of aggression than
teachers who scored high on the scale. This relationship was also been found by
Parkay and Stanford (2004) were teachers who lack appropriate classroom
management skill have children with high levels of aggression. Conversely, the study conducted by
Mavropoulous and Padeliado (2002)
found teachers with high
perceptions of classroom management skills have children who exhibit low levels
of aggressive behaviors. In this study, the teacher who scored lowest (3.57) on
the Teacher Control of Child Behavior Scale, ECP 1, had 8 children who were
scored in the mid to high range on the PBP 12-item Aggression Scale. A-B-C
behavior plans were developed for and implemented with the identified children.
The 2 early childhood practitioners who scored the highest on the scale, ECP 4
(4.71) and ECP 5 (4.71), had 2 and 3 children respectively for whom A-B-C
behavior plans were written. Both ECP 2 and ECP 3 scored (4.0) on the scale and
had 3 and 4 children respectively and A-B-C behavior plans were written for
those children.
Attitudes Toward Working with Aggressive Children
The Signs of Aggressive
Behavior Questionnaire was also used to assess the teacher’s attitudes toward
working with aggressive children. The ECPs listed the motivation of educators
to continue working with children who exhibit aggressive behaviors as
commitment to education, job satisfaction, and professional development. The
early childhood practitioners willingness to accept feedback and implement
strategies also demonstrated their dedication to the profession and was illustrated
by their satisfaction in successful classroom management skills. These perceptions of the participants is
supported by the research of Caprara, Barbaranelli, Borgoni, and Stecca (2003). For example,
ECP 1 said that educators are to be the facilitators and committed to
provide quality care for the children in our classrooms along with helping the
children learn to use their words. Even though I see an increase in aggressive
behaviors but I love teaching and truly feel I can make a positive impact on
children’s lives. Overall, I love what I do.
ECP 2 stated children change and we as teachers must continue our
education to make sure we are giving the best education to each child. Also, I
have to teach the child good social skills to be fair to all children, and them
know when they act inappropriately.
ECP 3 felt that my role is to take the techniques discussed in my
college classes and bring them back to my classroom. Therefore, I help to
facilitate learning or give the child different ways to calm themselves down
without being aggressive. I thoroughly love my job, seek out different
resources, and talk with my co-workers for ways to work with aggressive
children.
ECP 4 saw that basically, it’s my role to figure out what’s going on
with the child. It’s truly satisfying when I or other resources have helped an
aggressive child. From my love of teaching I must find out what’s going on
because a child who’s aggressive cannot function in the classroom and they are
not learning. Basically, that’s why I’m here to teach.
ECP 5 said that I try to put into practice what I was taught in college
and from educational workshops attended. I have a commitment to children and I
teach children how to use appropriate behaviors and find alternative ones to
solve problems.
Perceptions to Reduce Aggressive Behaviors
Another question on the Signs of Aggressive Behavior
Questionnaire was used to respond to the question where ECPs broadly defined
what’s most important to reduce aggressive behaviors. For example,
ECP 1 said that I use a variety of strategies to reduce aggressive
behaviors discussed my classes and talk with co-workers. I will research out
different resources out to help an aggressive child. In addition, I welcome
people to come in, observe and give me feedback to be a better teacher.
ECP 2 said I talk to the child, set him/her aside, then ask him/her to
tell me what happened. I use the skills learnt while in school and from
professional training workshops attended. When these techniques don’t work for
a child I talk with my director and co-workers for other strategies. The main
thing is my love and commitment to teach all children good social skills.
ECP 3 stated first, and foremost I must figure out why the child is
doing whatever. I review my textbooks and talk with co-workers to try different
strategies to reduce aggressive acts. Through attending workshops I learned
different techniques to help children learn to calm down along with teachers
maintaining a high level of professionalism and my family supports me to seek
out resources to help my aggressive children.
ECP 4 stated that I use the Me Cube as a separate corner in the room to
talk with the child one-on-one and eye-to-eye to better understand what’s going
on. Teachers must have a strong commitment to the field to help educate all
children. From helping children I get a total satisfaction from knowing I
helped a child.
ECP 5 said that each teacher
must be committed to teach all children irregardless to behaviors and have the
basic knowledge from classes and workshops on how to work with aggressive
children. Teach children social skills, ways to solve problems on their own,
and keep children actively involved in activities.
Preschool
Behavior Project (PBP) 12-item Pre- and Post- Scores. One way this question was
addressed was by comparing the children’s pre- and post-scores on the PBP
12-item Aggression Scale, observations, and personal communication. After the
initial classroom observations and completion of the PBP 12-item Aggression Scale,
early childhood practitioners and myself met to discuss the children who were
identified as having mid to high levels of aggressive behaviors. A-B-C behavior
plans were developed with strategies and techniques to reduce or eliminate the
aggressive acts. Of the 20 children identified as having mid to high
aggression, 16 were boys and 4 were girls. According to the early childhood
practitioners, the boys primarily exhibited physical aggression; whereas, the
girls exhibited expressive aggression. There are findings from Crick, Casas,
and Ku (1999) and Fields and Boesser
(2002) who found that boys tend to exhibit physical aggression; whereas, girls
tend to exhibit expressive aggression. Girls expressed themselves verbally;
whereas, boys were more physical in communicating wants or needs.
From the pre- to post scores, each of the 20 children
showed a decrease in the number of specific aggressive acts during the study
period. As the study progressed, the meetings were held during naptime to
discuss the children’s progress according to the A-B-C behavior plan and
whether other modifications were needed. The plans were reviewed at each
meeting and discussions took place on whether stated behaviors had occurred
from the last visit to date and, if so, did the strategies listed reduce aggressive
behaviors. If not, alternative strategies were discussed to modify the listed
one(s). The results of this study found reduction of aggressive acts using an
A-B-C behavior plan, as did studies conducted by Bandura (1976), Binder, Dixon,
and Ghezzi (2000), Boyajian et al., (2001), Burke, Hagan-Burke, and Sugai
(2003), Frey (2000), Hoff, Ervin, and Friman (2005), Kolis and Dunlap (2004),
Slaby et al., (1995) and Wardle (2003).
Only ECP 5 shared the technique of creating a special signal (‘give me
five”) for the child to know the rough play was unacceptable and was not an
effective strategy for the child. However, it was observed that this early
childhood practitioner did not make eye contact and use a firm voice tone so
that the children did not understand they needed to conform the directive
spoken. It was pointed out to ECP 5 of her ineffective voice tone and she
practiced the command while I was there to gain comfort in implementing it with
the children. In the coming weeks, the strategy worked in reducing roughhousing
acts. For example, during one observation a boy in the block center tossed a
unit block into the music center. ECP 5 walked over calmly to the child, made
eye contact, and held up her hand. The child stopped, put his hands by his side,
and made eye contact with the teacher. The teacher proceeded to bend down and
discussed the behavior. The child walked over to the music center and picked up
the unit block then continued to build his house with the blocks.
In conclusion, the early childhood practitioners who
are the heart of learning community
environments must be shown appreciation for their
experiences of strategies that are incorporated
for each individual child and seeing the importance of
the flow of the day, know through
capitalizing on each child’s interests, furnishings,
materials, relationships with child, family
members and external partners along with support from
administrator working towards keeping
child in program setting. The transcribed responses must be taken into
account through being
embedded in college/university coursework in courses
such as introduction to early childhood
education, child guidance, and social and emotional development
ensuring practitioners gain a
better breath, depth and application when faced with
challenging aggressive behaviors which
would lead to child being suspended or expelled from program.
References
Bandura, A. (1976). Social learning theory.
Binder, L. M.,
Boyajian, A. E., DuPaul, G. J., Handler, M. W., Eckert, T. L., & McGoey, K. E. (2001). The use of classroom-based brief functional analyses with preschoolers at-risk for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. School Psychology Review, 30, 278-293.
Burke, M. D., Hagan-Burke, S., & Sugai, G. (2003). The efficacy of function-based interventions for students with learning disabilities who exhibit escape-maintained problem behaviors: Preliminary results from a single-case experiment. Learning Disability Quarterly, 26(1), 15-24.
Crick, N. R., Casas, J. F., & Ku, H. C. (1999). Relational and physical forms of peer victimization in preschool. Developmental Psychology, 35, 376-385.
Frey, K. S. (2000). Second step: Preventing aggression by promoting social competence. [Electronic version]. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 1-14.
Hildebrand, V., & Hearron, P. F. (1999). Guiding
young children (6th ed.).
Hoff, K. E., Ervin, R. A., & Friman, P. C. (2005). Refining functional behavioral assessment: Analyzing the separate and combined effects of hypothesized controlling variables during ongoing classroom routines. School Psychology Review, 34(1), 45-57.
Kolis, M., & Dunlap, W. P. (2004). The knowledge of teaching: The K3P3 model. Reading Improvement, 41(2), 97-107.
Mavropoulous, S., Padeliado, S. (2002). Teachers’ casual attributions for behaviour problems in relation to perceptions of control. Educational Psychology, 22(2), 191-202.
Parkay, F. W., & Stanford, B. H. (2004). Becoming a
teacher (6th ed.).
Slaby, R. G., Roedell, W. C.,
Wardle, F. (2003). Introduction to early childhood
education: A multidimensional approach to child-centered and learning.
