“human babies are not like us.” caregiver. in earlier ...ccie.com/library_bw/8223300.pdfit...

■ Continuity of Care with Infants and Toddlers by Mary Benson McMullen

■ Infants and Toddlers: What Have We Learned from Research on Social-emotional Development? by Alice Sterling Honig and Donna S. Wittmer

■ The Future is in Our Hands: Satisfying Babies’ Physical and Emotional Needs through Mindful Tactile Communication by Elsa Chahin, with the mentorship of Anna Tardos

■ From Stumble to STEM: A School’s Journey to Focus on the E in STEM by Carrie Lynne Draper and Susan Wood

■ Making Caring and Learning Together a Career An interview with Abhirami Gunasingam by Margie Carter

For reprint permission, contact Exchange,17725 NE 65th Street, B-275, Redmond, WA 98052

(800) 221-2864 • [email protected]

Infants and Toddlers

www.ChildCareexChange.Com

INFANTS AND TODDLERS 45 JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2017 EXCHANGE

Beginnings Professional Development Workshop

Phot

o by M

aessi

ve (h

ttps:/

/flic.

kr/p

/bp6

G7) l

icens

ed un

der C

C BY 2

.0

Continuity of Care with Infants and Toddlersby Mary Benson McMullen

“Human babies are not like us.” Jean-Jacques Rousseau

Rousseau’s words remind us how truly special babies are and about the uniqueness of very early childhood. Children grow, develop and learn more rapidly during the first three years of life than at any other time (Shonkoff & Phillips, 2000). The remarkable changes they undergo impact who they are now and who they will become in the future. Whether positive or negative, big, small, or in between, everything that happens to infants or toddlers impacts their health and well-being for a lifetime.

Psychologists, sociologists, neurobiologists, health care professionals, philosophers, and educators have published mountains of research about the importance of these first three years. Additionally, babies and everything for and about them are a hot topic in popular literature and social media. Books, magazine articles, websites, videos, blogs, and discussion forums are found alongside research publications. Underlying all of this work — scholarly as well as popular — is the understanding that the first three years matter!

New information and continuing discoveries about the first three years give parents and professionals new ways to think about how very young children can and should spend their days in child care. Most importantly, we’ve learned to support healthy growth, development, and learning by surrounding infants and toddlers with positive, sensitive, and nurturing relationships. Creating and maintaining these relationships is up to the professional infant/toddler

caregiver. In earlier writings (McMullen, 2013; McMullen, Yun, Mihai, & Kim, 2015), I described the highly qualified infant/toddler professional caregiver as someone who:

■ has in-depth knowledge of typical child growth, development, and learning that spans prenatal to age 3.

■ is skilled at responding sensitively to the verbal and nonverbal communications of individual infants and toddlers.

■ comes to know each infant or toddler in his or her care in the context of his or her family and home life, community, and culture.

■ commits to forming respectful partnerships with families in making caregiving decisions and goal setting for his or her infants and toddlers.

Being able to accomplish all of this involves more than having specialized knowledge and skills; it requires individuals willing to invest time and energy toward building and maintaining strong inter-personal relationships between and among all of those in the child care environment — babies, professionals, and family members. It also requires policies and practices that support caring relationships, which are the heart and soul of recommended practices with infants and toddlers cared for outside of the home (Elicker, Ruprecht, & Anderson, 2014; Lally & Mangione, 2008). Ideally, supportive structures ensure these relationships will be long-term, existing over years, rather than a few weeks or months (Zero to Three, 2008).

The characteristics listed above for highly qualified infant/toddler professionals are, of course, important for those working with preschool, kindergarten, and primary-grade children; their emphasis in the first three years, however, is much greater. Individualized, sensitively responsive, relationship-based care is critical, not just important, when caring for very young children, if we are to ensure

Mary Benson McMullen, Ph.D., is Professor of Early Childhood Education at Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, where she has been on faculty for 22 years. Prior to this she was an infant caregiver and preschool teacher, and then early childhood program director. Currently, her primary research and teaching interests involve studying factors that influence the healthy overall growth,

development, learning, and well-being of infants, toddlers, and preschoolers; and looking at factors that influence and ensure the well-being of the parents and professionals who care for our youngest citizens. She and her husband have raised three sons.

Beginnings Professional Development Workshop 46 INFANTS AND TODDLERS www.ChildCareExchange.com EXCHANGE JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2017

Copyright © Exchange Press, Inc.All rights reserved. A single copy of these materials may be

reprinted for noncommercial personal use only.Visit us at www.ChildCareExchange.com or

call (800) 221-2864.

Beginnings Professional Development Workshopwww.ChildCareExchange.com INFANTS AND TODDLERS 47 JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2017 EXCHANGE

their health and well-being at this highly vulnerable and dependent time of life. Also, caregiving relationships that form between parents and professionals — and professionals with the babies themselves — involve a level of physical and emotional intimacy that is deeper and more sensitive than at later periods of childhood.

Infant/Toddler Continuity of Care

The practice of continuity of care (COC) is designed to keep very young children together with their caregiving team over a long period of time, typically two to three years. There are two popular models for achieving COC: one involves multi-age (or mixed-age) grouping and the other is the ‘looping’ method. The multi-age model, like it sounds, involves mixed-age groups that might include young infants, toddlers, and two-year-olds, all together in one room. At some designated time, often during summer or early fall, children who have ‘aged out’ (typically age 3) move out, and new, younger infants or toddlers move in.

In the looping model, a group of caregivers starts with infants, sometimes as young as six weeks old. The group remains together until, typically, all of the children turn three and move on to preschool. The caregivers then ‘loop’ back to begin with a new group of infants for a new three-year cycle. Whether in a setting that uses multi-age grouping or looping, in a COC model, a child who begins a program as a young infant remains with the same caregivers and most of the same peers for up to three years.

‘Discontinuous’ models are much more common for staffing and grouping in infant toddler child care, despite being known to contribute to stress in very young children (Cryer et al., 2005). One such model follows a traditional school calendar, meaning during summer or early fall, children begin each ‘school’ year in a new room with new caregiving professionals. In a second form of discontinuous care, children are constantly transitioning in and out of a group; old ‘friends’ leave as they celebrate their birthday or acquire a new skill (e.g. crawling, walking, being potty-trained,) while new ones enter, creating a revolving door of comings and goings.

Neither form of discontinuous care prioritizes the long-lasting, trusting relationships among caregiving professionals, children, and families that are known to facilitate attachment security. The frequent ‘hellos’ and ‘good-byes’ in discontinuous child care mean everyone spends much time and energy adjusting to new faces, establishing new relationships, and redefining their communities. Contrast that with a COC group, in which

children, families, and professional caregivers enjoy stability created by an extended period of time together, time that allows knowledge of one another to grow and trusting relationships to flourish.

COC recognizes that secure attachments between babies and caregivers and trusting relationships among all involved take time to develop and should last as long as possible (Bernhardt, 2000; Elfer, Goldschmied, & Selleck, 2003; Lally & Mangione, 2008; Raikes & Edwards, 2009). COC is strongly recommended as a practice for ensuring groups of individuals in child care stay together as long as possible to facilitate quality relationship-based experiences during these important first three years. It has been recommended by nearly all major professional organizations that address infant toddler practices (see box below), and it is based upon attachment research that demonstrates the lifelong impact of supportive, stable relationships that begin in infancy (Sroufe, 2005).

Organizations Recommending Infant Toddler Continuity of Care

Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP) www.clasp.org/issues/child-care-and-early-education

Childcare Aware of America http://usa.childcareaware.org/

EDUCARE www.educareschools.org/

HighScope www.highscope.org/

Program for Infant Toddler Care (PITC) www.pitc.org/pub/pitc_docs/home.csp

National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) www.naeyc.org/

National Head Start Association (NHSA) www.nhsa.org/

Ounce of Prevention Fund www.theounce.org/

Zero to Three www.zerotothree.org/

…among others


Benefits of Continuity of Care

Although many organizations, scholars, and leaders in the field promote infant/toddler COC, only recently have researchers examined it closely. Below, unless otherwise noted, I list benefits found in my study of successful infant/toddler COC (McMullen, Yun, Mihai, & Kim, 2015):

■ Increased knowledge of child development — Caregivers develop a more complete understanding of how children grow, develop and learn from infancy to age 3.

■ Stronger knowledge of individual children — Caregivers develop more in-depth knowledge of each individual child and their families, allowing them to better individualize care.

■ Decreased stress — Parents, caregivers (McMullen et al., 2015), and children (Cryer et al., 2005) feel less stressed in COC as compared to discontinuous care where they experience multiple transitions and the more frequent breaking and reforming of important relationships.

■ Smoother developmental progress — Because there is less starting, stopping, and starting over again, children make more steady, even developmental progress, experiencing less regression.

■ Easier adaptation to preschool — Children transitioning to preschool after infant/toddler COC ‘hit the ground running’ in terms of knowing how to use the environment and socialize with friends.

■ Stronger family-caregiver partnerships — Parents and caregivers in COC build stronger partnerships that value each other’s expertise in decision-making and goal setting.

■ Parents empowered — COC parents become empowered to be strong advocates for their children, an empowerment that carries through to formal schooling.

■ Family-like atmosphere — Parents and caregivers develop a closeness that mirrors feelings they have for extended family members and close friends.

■ Increased sensitive-responsiveness — Caregivers are more likely to respond in sensitively responsive ways to infants and toddlers (Ruprecht, Elicker, & Choi, 2015).

■ Improved behavior of children — Caregivers in COC identify fewer behavioral concerns for infants and toddlers

than those in discontinuous care (Ruprecht, Elicker, & Choi).

■ More secure attachments — Infants and toddlers in COC with the same caregivers for at least 12 months develop stronger, more secure attachments (Raikes, 1993).

Confronting Old Fears

Despite its many benefits and strong endorsements, infant/toddler COC is still not a widely adopted practice (Aguillard et al., 2005; Cryer et al., 2000; Essa, Favre, Thweatt, & Waugh, 1999). Caregivers and administrators express many reasons for their reluctance to engage in COC.

“It’s too difficult.” Some administrators fear the initial change to COC will be too difficult or too costly, believing their programs would need expensive changes to existing physical structures and materials. In reality, although transitioning to COC from discontinuous care does take careful planning, it should be possible within most settings with limited disruption and it should not cost anything beyond normal operating expenses. Typically, programs move existing furnishings and materials around to accommodate the needs of a group, or they rotate an entire group to a more appropriate room as needed.

“Families won’t like it.” An often-expressed fear is that families will not like COC because they might feel ‘stuck’ with the same caregivers over a two- to three-year period. Professionals and parents in my study believed this does not happen if all involved are willing to invest in the long-term relationships. If you know that you will be together with other people for two to three years, rather than a few months, you work hard to build and maintain positive, supportive relationships, and are more likely to address issues that arise, rather than just let them go.

“Caregivers won’t like it.” “I’m only good with babies (toddlers).” Sometimes caregivers feel very competent with one age group and worry their expertise would not extend to another. Some caregivers in my study admitted having similar concerns as they began COC, but said those fears quickly vanished. They enjoyed the benefits of watching the children in their care develop and took pride in being a part of that growth and change. They also appreciated the opportunity to grow, themselves, as professionals with increased knowledge and skills throughout birth to age 3. In addition, they grew very close to the children and their families, coming to truly value those relationships.

“Life is change.” “They better get used to it.” Some parents in my study told us that they had initially been

against the idea of COC because they believed children need to start preparing for the realities of school — even as infants! “They better get used to it,” I was told, referring to the multiple transitions and constantly changing relationships they’ll experience in formal schooling. A colleague of mine responds to this attitude by reminding us that to prepare for a hurricane, we don’t actually practice going through a hurricane; rather, we stock up on non-perishable foods and bottles of water, cover windows with plywood, and similar measures. In other words, we stockpile resources and prepare. Similarly, a strong, relationship-based beginning with the first three years buttresses children for the multiple transitions they will face in the future.

Considering Real Challenges

Most of the concerns presented above are based upon fear of the unknown. This is not to say, however, that COC is without its difficulties. Caregivers in my study reported their most challenging time is when children transition to preschool from the infant toddler program. As caregivers say goodbye to children and families they have grown to love, they must open their hearts to make room for new relationships and change the physical space to accommodate the new group of infants.

Final Thoughts on Continuity

So true are Rousseau’s words, written so long ago: Human babies are not like us. Infants and toddlers have needs, interests, preferences, and capabilities that are different from those of older children and adults, and thus they need to be supported differently. Increased understanding of the importance and life-long impact of the first three years of life, along with new understandings of the role of babies’ attachment to secure adult caregivers have resulted in support for COC.

A word of caution is needed, however; programs should not simply launch into doing COC if other elements of quality do not exist: proper ratios and group sizes, a healthy and safe environment, stable qualified professional staff, consistent program philosophy, strong leadership and supportive administrative structures (Ackerman, 2009; Garrity, Longstreth, & Alwashmi, 2015; Norris, 2010). COC is the icing on the cake for an already strong, quality setting, serving to increase the overall quality and ensure the best possible experiences for children as they live, love, work, and play through their days in infant toddler child care settings.

References

Ackerman, D. (2008). Continuity of care, professional community, and the policy context. Potential benefits for infant and toddler teachers’ professional development. Early Education & Development, 19, 753–772.

Aguillard, A. E., Pierce, S. H., Benedict, J. H., & Burts, D. C. (2005). Barriers to the implementation of continuity of care practices in child care centers. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 20(3), 329–344.

Bernhardt, J. L. (2000). A primary caregiving system for infants and toddlers: Best for everyone involved. Young Children, 55(2), 74–80.

Cryer, D., Hurwitz, S., & Wolery, M. (2000). Continuity of caregiver for infants and toddlers in center-based child care: Report on a survey of center practices. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 15(4), 497–514.

Cryer, D., Wagner-Moore, L., Burchinal, M., Yazejian, N., Hurwitz, S., & Wolery, M. (2005). Effects of transitions to new child care classes on infant toddler distress and behavior. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 20(1), 37–56.

Elfer, P., Goldschmied, E., & Selleck, D. (2003). Key persons in the nursery: Building relationships for quality provision. London, England: David Fulton.

Elicker, J., Ruprecht, K. M., & Anderson, T. (2014). Observing infants’ and toddlers’ relationships and interactions in group care. In L. J. Harrison & J. Sumsion (Eds.), International Perspectives on Early Childhood Education and Development 11, Lived spaces of infant-toddler education and care: Exploring diverse perspectives on theory, research, and practice (pp. 131–145). London, England: Springer.

Essa, E. L., Favre, K., Thweatt, G., & Waugh, S. (1999). Continuity of care for infants and toddlers. Early Child Development and Care, 148(1), 11–19.


Benefits of Infant Toddler Continuity of Care

• Increased caregiver knowledge of child development • Stronger caregiver knowledge of individual children • Decreased stress for children, parents, and caregivers• Smoother developmental progress of children • Stronger family-caregiver partnerships• Parents empowered as advocates for their children • Family-like atmosphere • Children adapt more easily to preschool• Increased sensitive-responsiveness of caregivers • Improved behavior of children • More secure attachments of babies to adults

Garrity, S., Lonstreth, S., & Atwashmi, M. (2015). A qualitative examination of the implementation of continuity of care: An organizational learning perspective. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 36, 64–78.

Lally, J. R., & Mangione, P. L. (2008). The program for infant toddler care. In J. P. Roopnarine & J. E. Johnson (Eds.), Approaches to early childhood education (5th ed., pp. 25–47). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

McMullen, M. B. (2013). Understanding development of infants and toddlers. In C. Copple, S. Bredekamp, D. Koraleck, & K. Charner (Eds.), Developmentally appropriate practice: Focus on infants and toddlers (pp. 23–50). Washington, DC: NAEYC.

McMullen, M. B., Yun, N., Mihai, A., & Kim, H. J. (2015). Experiences of parents and professionals in well-established continuity of care infant toddler programs. Early Education & Development, 27(2), 190–220.

Norris, D. (2010). Raising the educational requirements for teachers in infant-toddler classrooms: Implications for institutions of higher education. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 31(2), 146–158.

Raikes, H. (1994). Relationship duration in infant care: Time with a high-ability teacher and infant-teacher attachment. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 8, 209–325.

Raikes, H., & Edwards, C. P. (2009). Extending the dance in infant and toddler caregiving: Enhancing attachment and relationships. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.

Rousseau, J. J. (Translated by Allan Bloom) (1772/1979). Emile: Or on education. New York: Basic Books.

Ruprecht, K., Elicker, J., & Choi, J. (2015). Continuity of care, caregiver-child interactions, and toddler social competence. Early Education & Development, 27(2), 221–239.

Shonkoff, J. P., & Phillips, D. (Eds.) (2000). From neurons to neighborhoods: The science of early childhood development. A report of the National Research Council. Washington, DC: National Academic Press.

Sroufe, L. A. (2005). Attachment and development: A prospective, longitudinal study from birth to adulthood. Attachment and Human Development, 7(4), 349–367.

Zero to Three (2008). Caring for infants and toddlers in groups: Developmentally appropriate practice (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: Author.


The past decades have seen the emergence of surprising and interesting new knowledge about the social-emotional development of infants and toddlers. Below, we summarize findings that help us gain new respect for, and new determination to support, the growth and development of very young children.

Emotions

Infants and toddlers express a range of emotions. By six weeks, infants give dazzling social smiles to familiar, loving caregivers who feel deeply the joy of those smiles. Babies by three to four months also give facial/emotional signals and cries of distress, disgust, fear, joy, sadness, pain, and anger (Chóliz, Fernández-Abasca, & Martínez-Sánchez, 2012; Malatesta & Haviland, 1982).

Young children can also feel jealous. Jealously is defined as the threat of losing to a rival, or losing former exclusivity in a valued relationship (White & Mullin, 1989). When mom talked with another adult, 10% of five-month-olds cried; but 50% cried when mom cuddled another baby (Draghi-Lorenz et al., 2001). When mom cuddled a baby doll, 13-month-olds showed anger and sadness as mom gave gentle cooing attention to a ‘stranger’ baby. They often ceased playing, acted resistant to mom’s suggestions, and struggled to re-secure mom’s exclusive attention by clinging, whining, and pestering her for attention (Hart, 2015). Toddler jealousy at the birth of a newborn sibling may cause decreased joy, increased tantrums, crying, deliberate naughtiness, bodily complaints, sleep problems, and regression: “I want a bottle, too!” complains a toddler, completely weaned months ago.

Separation anxiety starts anywhere between eight to ten months and often peaks between 15 and 18 months. If mothers told their toddlers when they would be back after leaving them in care, then less separation protest occurred than when mom left them without any explanation (Weinraub & Lewis, 1977).

What Teachers Can Do:

■ Caregivers are on the front line to model gentleness, cherishing, and soothing so infants and toddlers learn that their feelings — even angry feelings — are truly understood.

■ Offer to hold both babies if one baby acts jealous of your holding another.

■ When infants and toddlers are upset, provide a calm environment and loving, comforting hugs.

■ Give words for feelings. Use and encourage emotion talk: ‘mad’ and ‘sad’ are easy toddler words!

■ Cheerfully accept a bit of regression: toddlers can have a small bottle with water when feeling jealous at birth of a new baby.

Attachment

Attachment, according to British psychiatrist Dr. John Bowlby, is a bond formed with another specific person that binds them together in space and endures over time. During the first year, infants learn to trust or not trust their primary


Dr. Alice Sterling Honig, Professor Emerita of Child Development at Syracuse University, for over 40 years taught courses including: Infant/toddler development; Cross-cultural study of children in families; Language development; Research methods; Prosocial and moral development; Quality Infant/Toddler Caregiving; and Parenting. She has authored over 600 articles and chapters as well as

more than two dozen books. As a New York State licensed Psychologist, she serves children and families with troubles. Dr. Honig has given invited presentations in many states and countries, and in 2014 in China she taught child care providers and, as well, was honored by being asked to present an award in her name to a prominent Beijing pediatrician.

Donna Wittmer received her Ph.D. from Syracuse University in 1985. She taught classes at Syracuse University in Child and Family Studies and then was a professor of early childhood/early childhood special education at the University of Colorado Denver for 17 years. She is a coauthor of the books, Infant and Toddler Development and Responsive Program Planning (4th edition), Endless Possibilities (2nd

edition), and The Young Child from Birth to 8 (7th edition), all published by Pearson. She has presented at numerous NAEYC and ZERO TO THREE conferences.

Infants and Toddlers: What Have We Learned from Research on Social-emotional Development?

by Alice Sterling Honig and Donna S. Wittmer



call (800) 221-2864.

caregivers. Mutually enjoyable verbal and physical loving exchanges between a caregiver and baby create emotional connections that meet the basic needs of the infant. Each attachment of baby is to a few special persons — caregivers who are attuned to baby’s signals of distress, sensitive to baby tempos, and promptly and effectively meet a baby’s needs — for nursing, attentiveness, diapering, cuddling, or soothing. By one year, an infant stays near his attachment person and also ventures out to explore the world. When scared or hurt, baby may gallop back and throw himself onto his special attachment person.

Children Who Feel Secure

Babies at about a year are assessed by the 20-minute Ainsworth Strange Situation Procedure (SSP), during which reunion responses after brief separation from mom are recorded and identified. Securely attached (‘B’ babies) greet mom with smiles and accept loving hugs upon reunion. They feel loved and act more socially competent with peers (Gauthier, 2003). Secure babies are better able to regulate emotions; show more positive and fewer negative emotions; cope through problem-solving (Abraham & Kerns, 2013), and experience higher levels of self-worth (Booth-Laforce et al., 2006).

Children with Insecure Patterns

During the SSP, some insecure infants show hesitant/ambivalent responses (‘C’ babies). They may run for a hug and then push mom away and struggle to get down. They have experienced discordant maternal responses — sometimes attentive and sometimes negligent or insensitive. Insecure attachments were predicted at 12 months, when babies had been observed in interactions with mother at four months: their mothers had not used affectionate looks, touches, and vocalizations (Beebe et al., 2010; 2012).

Babies who are identified as avoidantly attached (‘A’ babies) act indifferent to mom and do not seek contact at reunions during the SSP. Although often demanding at home, they may not protest at separation even during the first day left in group care. Their moms, observed as often cold and intrusive into baby’s play, do not seem to enjoy snuggling or close physical contact. Although these children come across as ‘cool,’ their heart rate, stress hormone levels, and attentional capacity suggest they are definitely distressed by the separation (Fraley, 2013).

Babies identified as disoriented/disorganized (‘D’ babies) during SSP reunions may run toward mom but then

stop, as if bewildered and sometimes show mixtures of ‘A’ and ‘C’ behaviors.

Insecurity with both parents has a robust effect: ‘Double-insecure’ children reported more overall problems, and were rated by teachers as having more externalizing problems than those secure with at least one parent (Kochanska, & Kim, 2013).

Long-term Predictors of Early Attachment

Infants and toddlers who are securely attached show:

■ greater involvement and success in peer interactions (Hedenbro & Rydelius, 2014; Kerns & Brumariu, 2014).

■ less peer conflict in first grade (Raikes, Virmani, Thompson, & Hatton, 2013).

■ four times as much compliance with mom’s requests compared with insecure toddlers (Kok, van IJzendoorn, Linting, Bakermans-Kranenburg, Tharner, Luijk, & Tiemeier, 2013).

■ fewer anxious, internalizing and externalizing behaviors (Groh, Roisman, van IJzendoorn, Bakermans-Kranenburg, & Fearon, 2012).

■ lower levels of anxiety when they are teenagers (Brumariu, & Kerns, 2013).

Infants and toddlers who are insecurely attached:

■ expect more hostile responses from peers than do children who are securely attached (Mcquaid et al., 2009).

■ when in preschool, former ‘A ’babies behaved as bullies while playing with former ‘C’ babies (Sroufe & Fleeson, 1986).

■ disorganized insecure toddlers observed at 36 months were most likely to show significant unresolved attachent with respect to loss and trauma years later (Groh et al., 2014).

Infants and Toddlers Need Secure Relationships with Teachers

Infants and toddlers can be securely attached to more than one person. Secure attachments to both family members AND teachers provide children with emotional support, build children’s sense of self-worth, and help them value relationships (Honig, 2002). Infants and toddlers develop secure attachments with family members and teachers



over time when they experience responsive, affectionate, emotionally available interactions (Wittmer & Petersen, 2013). When infants and toddlers feel secure with their teachers in a program, they are more socially competent (Howes, Phillips, & Whitebook, 1992); have better language development; can regulate their emotions; and participate more in problem-solving activities (Howes & Smith, 1995).


■ Warmly greet each child personally every day.

■ Demonstrate affection and positive regard for each child.

■ Watch carefully for babies who never fuss at all on entering child care. They may need extra reassurance — with warm voice tones and loving cuddles.

■ Respond contingently with appropriate soothing to distressed children’s needs.

■ Provide primary care for a small group of infants whose feeding, toileting, and sleep patterns you know intimately.

■ When possible, implement care continuity, where a teacher stays with the group during the first three years.

■ Support children in safe explorations and in difficult tasks (Bernier et al., 2014).

■ Be available for ‘emotional refueling’ (Kaplan, 1998) (for example, after a boisterous peer knocks down a toddler’s newly built tower).

■ Home visitors support parents’ needs for nurturing. They also note when residues of past parental traumas may require professional mental health specialists.

Temperament

Does temperament style affect infant development? Temperament traits cluster into three major patterns: easy going/flexible; fearful/shy/withdrawn; triggery, impulsive/intense/feisty. Temperament is partly genetic. Babies who were most active at four days of age were also more active eight years later (Korner et al., 1985). That said, adults still can positively affect children’s temperament with their supportive interactions.

However, differential susceptibility has been the focus of recent studies. That is, infants with a difficult temperament have been noted as more sensitive to the quality of caregiving. A longitudinal study of over 6,000 children for 18 years revealed that those with a more difficult infant temperament (compared with easy infants) were more vulnerable to

negative parenting. But, they also thrived more with positive parenting (Slagt et al., 2016).

Stress is more distressing for highly sensitive infants, especially in non-high-quality child care. Cortisol levels (stress measures) increased from morning to afternoon in infants and toddlers in child care (but not home care,) particularly for those timorous toddlers not as involved in successful peer play (Watamura, Donzella, Alwin, & Gunnar, 2003). Intrusive, over-controlling care was associated with cortisol rise: girls were more anxious and vigilant; boys showed increased angry, aggressive behaviors.

Infants with difficult, irritable temperaments often challenge caregivers. Responsive caregivers make a strong difference. When parents were sensitive to infant distress cues in caring ways, and supportive of enjoyable interaction (observed at 15 months), then highly negative, angry seven-month-olds were noted as more self-regulated at 25 months compared with irritable babies of less responsive parents (Kim & Kochanska, 2012). Infants with irritable temperaments were less anxious or depressed at ages two and three and exhibited fewer behavior problems when mothers were sensitive (Warren & Simmens, 2005), showed positive effect and were less intrusive (NICHD Early Child Care Research Network, 2004).

In Holland, home visitors taught half of a group of 100 mothers of low-income of highly irritable infants how to watch for and respond effectively and appropriately to infant distress cues and how to soothe babies by swaddling, using low soothing tones, and other helpful techniques. At one year, two-thirds of these infants were securely attached compared with less than one-third of the irritable babies whose moms were not given extra help (Van den Boom, 1994). Temperament is not destiny!


■ Become a good detective. Tune in to temperament styles and how you can best help each infant feel comfortable and get calm if upset.

■ Enlist home visitors to support moms with highly irritable infants. Goodness of fit between baby and caregiver can best assist in times of temperament troubles.

Social Interactions

Social Referencing

Babies use caregivers for social referencing quite early. By three months of age, infants respond to an adult’s expression


of fear (Hoehl & Striano, 2010). Baby references a trusted caregiver’s face before venturing toward an unknown object. By social referencing, baby learns to interpret a feeling as mildly upset to be managed or baby learns (if adults respond with exaggerated negatives) to feel scared even if the upset was just a brief and mild tumble (Hennighausen & Lyons-Ruth, 2005).

Babies are alert to others’ focus of attention. From 12 to 14 months of age if an adult looks at a location behind the infant’s body, babies show that they realize that the adult is seeing something that the baby is not seeing (Moll & Tomasello, 2004). Some 12- and 18-month-old infants saw an experimenter handling two novel toys in turn, and then leave the room. Another person then played with a third toy. When the first person returned and exclaimed, “Look at that one! Can you give it to me?”, then babies knew to give the third toy to the adult! They realized she must be referring to the new toy she had not seen before she left the room (Tomasello & Haberi, 2003).

Aggression

Aggression differs markedly, so infants are more likely to tug on a peer’s toy than to strike a peer. Parents of one-year-olds rated their babies’ aggressiveness. Next, families and toddlers gathered for a pretend birthday party with age-appropriate toys. Risk factors linked to both male and female toddler aggressive actions were: spousal and family violence, maternal smoking, stress, anxiety or depression during pregnancy, and maternal history of conduct problems (Hay et al., 2011).

Critical parenting affects child aggression. If moms had been highly critical with them, then insecurely attached infants showed higher aggression in first grade, compared with children who had had secure attachments in infancy (Cyr, Pasalich, McMahon, & Spieker, 2014). The NICHD Study of more than 1,000 dyads also found that secure attachment for 15-month-old infants protected them so they did not show more aggression in grade 1; but insecurely attached babies in first grade had greater behavior problems. Secure attachment buffers children as they grow, and moderates the link between early parenting and later child aggression.


■ Be aware of stresses that cause child outbursts — such as violent fights in the home, divorce, custody battles, or frequent transfers of tots bounced from one household to another. Your insights and compassion are urgently required.

■ Aggressive toddlers may be imitating adults who model angry outbursts. Your calm support helps children regulate negative emotions.

Prosocial Development

Infants have a built-in ability for empathy for sadness (Wittmer, 2009). When 15- and 18-month-old babies (n=92) saw an experimenter wince with pain, pretending to have hurt her finger, they looked sad (Chiarella et al., 2013). Older infants only showed empathy when the adult’s facial emotion matched the event.

Experimenters presented six- and ten-month-old infants with toy wood climbers who made repeated attempts to climb a hill. On the third attempt, one of two new characters either hindered or gave help by pushing the climber up from behind. Encouraged to choose between the two new characters by reaching for one of them, babies significantly more often chose the helping character (Hamlin, Wynn, & Bloom, 2007)!


■ Notice and specifically admire peer prosocial actions.

■ Read picture books emphasizing empathy, kindness, cooperation, and helping.

■ Realize that infants and toddlers are sensitive to whether you and others are helpful and kind.

Caregiver Relationships with Parents

How caregivers and parents get along impacts babies’ emotional well-being. Babies have better social-emotional interactions with caregivers and peers when there are cordial, easy, and positive relations between staff and parents (Elicker, Fortner-Wood, & Noppe, 1999). Open communication, mutual respect, support and trust create an interpersonal context for optimal child care. The Care Quality Checklist (Honig, 2014) can help parents, directors, and teachers recognize the most important aspects of these relationships that help a young child thrive.

Some babies are like dandelions: they will sturdily survive even somewhat stressful/difficult family situations. Others are more like orchids; they wilt when caregiving is severe/cold or ignores distress cues. Caregivers who provide sufficient patient attentive attunement, genuine pleasure and love, help stressed babies flower and flourish. You are at the forefront of providing harmonious care to enhance


infant/toddler development. May you flourish long in your precious work.

References

Abraham, M. M., & Kerns, K. A. (2013). Positive and negative emotions and coping as mediators of mother-child attachment and peer relationships. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 59(4), 399–425.

Beebe, B., Jaffe, J., Markese, S., Buck, K., Chen, H., Cohen, P., & Feldstein, S. (2010). The origins of 12-month attachment: A microanalysis of 4-month mother–infant interaction. Attachment & Human Development, 12(1), 3–141.

Beebe, B., Lachmann, F. M., Markese, S., Buck, K. A., Bahrick, L. E., Chen, H. & Jaffe, J. (2012). On the origins of disorganized attachment and internal working models: Paper II. An empirical microanalysis of 4-month mother–infant interaction. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 22(3), 352–374.

Booth-Laforce, C., Oh, W., Kim, A. H., Rubin, K. H., Rose-Krasnor, L., & Burgess, K. (2006). Attachment, self-worth, and peer-group functioning in middle childhood. Attachment & Human Development, 8(4), 309–325.

Brumariu, L. E., & Kerns, K. A. (2013). Pathways to anxiety: Contributions of attachment history, temperament, peer competence, and ability to manage intense emotions. Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 44, 504–515.

Chiarella, S. S., & Poulin-Dubois, D. (2013). Crybabies and pollyannas: Infants can detect unjustified emotional reactions. Infancy, 18, E81–E96.

Chóliz, M., Fernández-Abascal, E. G., & Martínez-Sánchez, F. (2012). Infant crying: Pattern of weeping, recognition of emotion and affective reactions in observers. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 15(3), 978–988.

Cyr, M., Pasalich, D. S., McMahon, R. J., & Spieker, S. J. (2014). The longitudinal link between parenting and child aggression: The moderating effect of attachment security. Child Psychiatry Human Development, 45(5), 555–564.

Draghi-Lorenz, R., Reddy, V., & Costall, A. (2001). Rethinking the development of “non-basic” emotions: a critical review of existing theories. Development. Review, 21, 263–304.

Elicker, J., Fortner-Wood, C., & Noppe, I. C. (1999). The context of infant attachment in family child care. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 20(2), 319–336.

Fraley, R. C. (2013) A brief overview of adult attachment theory and research. Retrieved: https://internal.psychology.illinois.edu/~rcfraley/attachment.htm

Gauthier, Y. (2003). Infant mental health as we enter the third millennium: Can we prevent aggression? Infant Mental Health Journal, 24(3), 296–309.

Groh, A. M., Roisman, G. I., van IJzendoorn, M. H., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M., & Fearon, R. P. (2012). The significance of insecure and disorganized attachment for children’s internalizing symptoms: A meta-analytic study. Child Development, 83(2), 591–610.

Hamlin, J. K., Wynn, K., & Bloom, P. (2007). Social evaluation by preverbal infants. Nature, 450(7169), 557–559.

Hamlin, J. K., Wynn, K., Bloom, P., & Mahajan, N. (2011). How infants and toddlers react to antisocial others. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 108(50), 19931–19936.

Hart, S. L. (2015). Infant jealousy: Responses to differential treatment. New York: Springer.

Hay, D., Mundy, L., Roberts, S., Carta, R., Waters, C. S, Perra, O., Jones, I., & van Goozen, S. (2011). Known risk factors for violence predict 12-month-old infants’ aggressiveness with peers. Psychology Science, 22(9), 1205–1211.

Hedenbro, M., & Rydelius, P. (2014). Early interaction between infants and their parents predicts social competence at the age of four. Acta Paediatrica, 103(3), 268–274.

Hennighausen, K. H., & Lyons-Ruth, K. (2005). Disorganization of behavioral and attentional strategies toward primary attachment figures: From biologic to dialogic processes. In C. S, Carter, et al. (Eds.): The 92nd Dahlem Workshop Report: Attachment and Bonding: A New Synthesis (pp. 269–299). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Hoehl, S., & Striano, T. (2010). Discrete emotions in infancy: Perception without production? Emotion Review 2(2), 132–133.

Honig, A. S. (2002). Secure relationships: nurturing infant/toddler attachment in early care settings. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.

Honig, A. S. (2014). The best for babies: Expert advice for assessing infant-toddler programs. Lewisville, NC: Gryphon House.

Howes, C., Phillips, D., & Whitebook, M. (1992). Thresholds of quality: Implications for the social development of children in center-based child care. Child Development, 63, 449–460.

Howes, C., & Smith, E. (1995). Relations among child care quality, teacher behavior, children’s play activities, emotional security, and cognitive activity in child care. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 10, 381–404.

Kaplan, L. (1998, Reprint edition). From infant to individual. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Kerns, K. A., & Brumariu, L. E. (2014). Is insecure parent-child attachment a risk factor for the development of anxiety in childhood or adolescence? Child Development Perspectives, 8(1), 12–17.

Kim, S., & Kochanska, G. (2012). Child temperament moderates effects of parent-child mutuality on self-regulation: A relationship-based path for emotionally negative infants. Child Development, 83(4), 1275–1289.

Kochanska, G., & Kim, S. (2013). Early attachment organization with both parents and future behavior problems: From infancy to middle childhood. Child Development, 84(1), 283–296.

Kok, R., van IJzendoorn, M. H., Linting, M., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M., Tharner, A., Luijk, M., & Tiemeier, H. (2013). Attachment insecurity predicts child active resistance to parental requests in a compliance task. Child: Care, Health & Development, 39(2), 277–287.

Korner, A. F., Zeanah, C. H., Linden, J., Kraemer, H. C., Berkowitz, R. I., & Agras, W. S. (1985). Relation between neonatal and later activity and temperament. Child Development, 56, 38–42.


Malatesta, C. Z., & Haviland, J. M. (1982). Learning display rules: The socialization of emotion expression in infancy. Child Development, 53(4), 991–1003.

Mcquaid, N. E., Bibok, M. B., & Carpendale, J. I. M. (2009). Relation between maternal contingent responsiveness and infant social expectations. Infancy, 14(3), 390–401.

Moll, H., & Tomasello, M. (2004). Twelve and 18-month-old infants follow gaze to spaces behind barriers. Developmental Science, 7(1), F1–F9.

NICHD Early Child Care Research Network. (2004). Father’s and mother’s parenting behavior and beliefs as predictors of child social adjustment in the transition to school. Journal of Family Psychology, 18(4), 628–638.

Raikes, H. A., Virmani, E. A., Thompson, R. A., & Hatton, H. (2013). Declines in peer conflict from preschool through first grade: Influences from early attachment and social information processing. Attachment & Human Development, 15(1), 65–82.

Slagt, M., Duba, J. S., Dekovic, M., & van Aken, M. A. G. (2016). Differences in sensitivity to parenting depending on child temperament: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin (10), 1068–1110.

Sroufe, L. A., & Fleeson, J. (1986). Attachment and the construction of relationships. In W. W. Hartup & Z. Rubin (Eds.) Relationships and development (pp. 51–71). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Tomasello, M., & Haberi, K. (2003). Understanding attention: 12- and 18-month-olds know what is new for other persons. Developmental Psychology, 39(5), 906–912.

Van den Boom, D. (1994). The influence of temperament and mothering on attachment and exploration: An experimental manipulation of sensitive responsiveness among lower-class mothers with irritable infants. Child Development, 65(5), 1457–1477.

Warren, S. L., & Simmens, S. J. (2005). Predicting toddler anxiety/depressive symptoms: Effects of caregiver sensitivity on temperamentally vulnerable children. Infant Mental Health Journal, 26(1), 40–55.

Watamura, S., Donzella, B., Alwin, J., & Gunnar, M. (2003). Morning-to-afternoon increases in cortisol concentrations for infants and toddlers at child care: Age differences and behavioral correlates. Child Development, 74(4), 1006–1021.

Weinraub, M., & Lewis, M. (1977). The determinates of children’s responses to separation. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 42(4, Serial No. 172).

White, G. L., & Mullen, P. E. (1989). Jealousy: Theory, research, and clinical strategies. New York: Guilford Press.

Wittmer, D. S. (2008). Focusing on peers. The importance of relationships in the early years. Washington, DC: Zero to Three.

Wittmer, D. S., & Petersen, S. H. (2013). Infant and toddler development and responsive program planning. A relationship-based approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.


Being touched is paramount to every baby’s daily life. The young child’s well-being will depend, in great part, on the way he is touched by the adult. Through the use of our hands, we bathe, feed, and dress these precious souls. Our hands, therefore, represent everything to the infant, not only by the adult that cares for him, but as an expression of the entire world, thus becoming his first connection with the universe around him.

As the late modern dance pioneer Martha Graham once proclaimed, “Movement never lies,” and to that I add, nor do hands. Consider this: If they are rough, impersonal, and

The Future is in Our HandsSatisfying Babies’ Physical and Emotional Needs

through Mindful Tactile Communication

by Elsa Chahin, with the mentorship of Anna Tardos

AUTHOR’S NOTE: For the purpose of clarity and ease of reading, when referring to a child, it will be in the masculine; the caregiver/adult will always be referred to in the feminine.

Phot

o by E

tienn

e Moin

e, CA

SA AM

I, Ecu

ador

Elsa Chahin is an in-demand speaker, writer, teacher, and infant/toddler consultant who has more than 20 years experience working with infants, children, and youth populations around the globe. She has served as a keynote speaker and presenter at over 75 national and international conferences and seminars on the topic of caring for babies with respect. As one of only two certified and accredited Pikler® Trainers

in North America, she is currently President of Pikler/Lóczy USA, through which she carries on the mission of Dr. Emmi Pikler: that of raising healthy, happy children. A staunch advocate of early childhood education and development, Chahin is also a working group leader for World Forum Foundation, RIE® (Resources for Infant Educarers) Associate, and PITC trainer.

Anna Tardos, President of the Pikler-Lóczy Association Hungary is a child psychologist with more than 60 years of experience with early childhood education. Her work at the Pikler Institute includes research, pedagogical work, and management. She also speaks nationally and internationally about early childhood development, care and education. In 1998, she became the director of the Pikler Institute, where she has

continued to carry on the work of her mother, Dr. Emmi Pikler. She has published dozens of articles in five languages, and is also author, co-author and editor of many books and curricula. In addition, Tardos is an honorary member of the French division of the International Professional Organization, World Association for Infant Mental Health and of the University of Liege. She continues to provide support to the Pikler Daycare Center, and Pikler Parent-Child groups. As the president of the Hungarian Pikler Lóczy Association, she also teaches courses offered at Lóczy and abroad.



call (800) 221-2864.

rushed during moments of care, the infant will link these experiences to unpleasant sensations. Indeed, he may look forward to finishing the task by exhibiting resistance, yet the adult may fail to read any cues emanating from the baby’s tense body.

Similarly, when one is in a hurry to finish a task — thinking that the quicker it gets done, for example, the better — she will handle the infant with shorter, faster, and more mechanical movements. This, too, becomes a source of discomfort for the infant, as it is apparent that the more the adult rushes, the less the child participates. In other words, the more urgently she tries getting something done, the more upset the child becomes, with these actions often times becoming a vicious circle.

Moreover, rushed movements do not lend themselves to collaboration or empathy. The child will try to get the adult’s attention by sending small signals, hoping they are interpreted as an invitation to slow down. Through these small signals, the child wants to have an influence on the adult during caregiving interactions, letting his parents or caregiver know that there are ways of creating a partnership. Because an infant requires much attention throughout the day, routines can become simply that, routines, and

not personal meetings of togetherness that are repeated throughout the day.

A baby needs safety, security, and nurturing; he wants to be considered a person. When hands are loving, mindful, and attentive, even the youngest infant will nestle into the palms that envelop him. He will prepare himself to be picked up by relaxing his limbs and cooperating with the gentle movements that the adult has begun. By feeling included, he will then give freely of his disposition. In such instances, more than basic care is being provided, both fueling and fulfilling the baby’s emotional needs.

Renowned Hungarian pediatrician Emmi Pikler (1902-1984) proposed that being respectful with the young stems from the simple idea of considering each child as a unique individual from the first moment of life. After decades of research as a pediatrician, first in private practice and later as director of the Pikler Institute (commonly known as Lóczy; 1946-2011,) Pikler, through her keen observations, found that emphasis needed to be placed on the child-mother or child-adult relationship. This, she believed, ensured that the adult caring for the child was not only attentive to his inner needs, but that a peaceful, healthy, and intimate bond could be forged.

It was also proven at Lóczy that routine-like handling of children could be prevented with the adult’s self-awareness and mindful observation in relationship to the child under her care. “How does the child feel in my hands? Is he reacting positively, or do I need to slow down even more?” By changing her attitude toward the child and eliminating unkind, oppressing movements, the caregiver’s hands are no longer uncomfortable, but gentle and reverent.

Communicating Love and Presence to Infants

When engaged in caregiving interactions, we need to address the infant, talking directly to him, not over him, in a calm and measured voice.

Phot

o by E

tienn

e Moin

e, CA

SA AM

I, Ecu

ador


But it is our attentive, open hands that are initiating such a dialogue. There are questions and answers, with our gestures representing an even-tempered waiting.

“Are you ready for me? Can I pick you up now?” we ask, pausing to wait for the child’s response. His body is relaxed and the tension dissipates. And depending on this young child’s developmental stage, we may even wait for him to give us his arms.

Empathy is the natural and desired byproduct, as adult and child become open and receptive to one another. The infant is learning to cooperate, and it is important for us to see his competence. At the same time, the adult is being responsive to the baby’s cues, and adapting her movements and rhythm to his. This togetherness helps the child to accept the world as a trusting place, where a connection emerges, making the process enjoyable. This process, however, requires patience and should never be hurried.

By following this process, we are showing both sensitivity and presence. Through our articulated movements and gentle tone of voice, we are offering babies an invitation to participate and, in effect, be the co-creators of their care. Slowing down may take a few more minutes than hurried care, but the outcome is a trusting baby who is discovering pleasure in the relationship.

Fostering Feelings of Security in Infants

By being fully present during the intimate moments of care. The adult’s attention is fully given to the child she is caring for. The message needs to be, “I am here for you, nothing else matters in this moment but you. I see you, I hear you, I am here.” Because of this, the hands are completely

aware of and alert to the effects of their actions. And it is this magical process that gives way to a dance, where leader and follower are lost in the musical ebb and flow, and both participants are equally interacting.

By offering our gentle and secure hands. During caregiving interactions, the infant mustn’t feel imprisoned by a tight hold, or unstable because our wobbly arms are not supporting him fully. Each time we hold a young infant in our arms, it is important that his whole trunk and head are supported — that when we pick him up and lay him back down, it is not done abruptly. This will prevent him from losing the feeling of physical safety. During a feeding, for example, he should have the freedom to reach for the adult’s hand, or the bottle or a spoon, thus actively participating in what is happening. During diapering, he should be allowed to change positions, with us following accordingly. If a child is already walking, his independence would not be supported if he were taken firmly by the wrist and pulled, nor if he were being pushed by the head or shoulders. This is not only disrespectful, but it also contributes to a loss of balance, and possibly, a hard landing. We need to send the message that he is valued as a person by turning the moments into pleasant experiences of cooperation.

By embracing him as a competent participant during all care situations and not just as a passive recipient. Togetherness and cooperation mean that the child will respond with his own movements to the gestures begun by the adult. By addressing him, he prepares for what is going to happen. For example, the adult offers the sleeve by saying, “I would like to put this sleeve on your arm,” and then waits for the child to offer his arm. If, instead, the adult took the child’s arm and directly put on the sweater, the child would be denied an opportunity to participate.

By slowing down. This allows us to adapt to the child’s inner rhythm, and is an important aspect of respectful

Phot

o by D

avid

Viglio

tti, L

ittle

Lear

ners

Lodg

e, So

uth C

aroli

na


Photo from Pikler Institute, Budapest, Hungary

togetherness. Having him anticipate what is about to happen prepares him to participate. There is always a verbal cue, followed by a pause signaling the child’s awareness, after which comes the action.

By offering him time to adjust his body to what we are asking of him during mutual interactions. When the adult truly pays attention to each child’s individual tempo, without rendering his movements redundant, the child does not feel pressured and is relaxed during the caregiving interactions. By noticing his expressions, and willingness to answer, we learn to respond to each child accordingly. It is also important that we adjust our activity to the child’s movements. When the child turns onto his stomach, for example, we can change his diaper in this position. By doing so, the reciprocity becomes mutual.

Harmonious Experiences During Togetherness Enrich the Relationship

The adult’s hands, guided by her loving awareness, become the source for healthy and prosperous experiences. Her gentle and caring gestures convey attentiveness and interest.

As Pikler wrote, “The infant who participates actively in his care, and lives in satisfactory emotional balance, will also be active in initiating beyond the ministrations of care.” In

essence, this means that in infancy we are preparing the child for the rest of his life.

As a peaceful beginning includes adults slowing down and following each child’s individual cues, it is up to us to decide precisely what kind of world we wish to create. If we want a more peaceful world, raising babies with respect can have a ripple effect as they grow up to be respectful human beings.

Wouldn’t it be nice to have a more peaceful world? I invite you to draw attention to your own hands, and the message you want to convey to young children, as the future is,

indeed, in our hands, our loving hands.

References

Tardos, A. (2007). From the hands of the caregiver. Bringing Up and Providing Care for Infants and Toddlers in an Institution. Budapest: Pikler-Lóczy Association for Young Children.

Pikler, E., M.D. (1994). “Peaceful babies contented mothers.” Sensory Awareness Bulletin, edited by Mary Alice Roche. United States: Sensory Awareness Foundation.

Photo by David Vigliotti, Little Learners Lodge, South Carolina


• Ph

oto b

y spi

lltoj

ill (h

ttps:/

/flic.

kr/p

/8KW

5uC)

licen

sed u

nder

CC BY

2.0

The Children’s Center at Caltech has been a STEM-focused early childhood center for infant, toddler, and preschool-aged children for more than 16 years. Our teaching staff enjoys sharing how our youngest students continually surprise us, building on and revising their knowledge and abilities as they crawl, stumble, and navigate their world. Many of our children arrive as infants and leave our program five years later to begin their kindergarten journey. Weekly, we share anecdotal stories of our young students’ cognitive and developmental milestones. The infants’ teacher marvels at former students’ growth, as their scientific, engineering, and mathematical knowledge matures as they move through the preschool program.

When we made the decision two years ago to focus on the E in STEM, our goal was “to guide our children’s knowledge toward a more scientifically-based and coherent view of engineering” (NRC, 2012, p. 11). The integration of engineering is advocated by the Next Generation of Science Standards. Engineering provides a context for developing problem-solving skills and a context for the development of communication skills with real-world context for learning science and mathematics.

One of our first challenges was to educate our parents and ourselves. We are a children’s center located on the campus of one of the most well-known technology, engineering, and science universities in the world. We provide child care for children from birth to age six for staff, students, and faculty from the university, in addition to families from our local community. Our children’s parents are busy leading planetary science missions; testing rovers; constructing nano-size robots; and investigating cures for diseases. It may be assumed that our parents would consider their child to naturally be ready to engineer. Aren’t all children born to create, design, test, and reconsider what they have constructed? Much of everything in a child’s world is engineered. Children are naturally curious and want to know how things are made. We decided to get up-close and see what exactly engineering is. What is the engineering design

process? How do you explore engineering with children, birth to age six?

Our discussions and research made us realize we needed to educate our parents as to what is cognitively and developmentally appropriate when it comes to engineering with specific age groups. We decided to give them this opportunity at Back to School Night. First, we would design engineering challenges or ‘scenarios’ to do with their children so we could provide documentation and then allow parents to experience the challenge at our annual Back to School Night. It was our desire to kick off a discussion between the teachers and the families as to how engineering and the design process, skills and the tools needed, can foster engineering habits of mind for all ages. We wanted parents to appreciate the developmental process children

Carrie Lynne Draper is the Executive Director of Readiness Learning Associates, a STEM Readiness organization growing children’s learn-ing processes using science, technology, engineering, and mathe-matics from birth through college. Focusing on the development of scientific dispositions through STEM and pedagogical design of equity-oriented STEM learning environments, Carrie has worked in

STEM education for more than 30 years as a classroom teacher, program adminis-trator, and higher education instructor and administrator. She served on the White House Early Learning STEM Symposium and recently presented at Congressional hearings on Early Learning STEM and STEM Excellence. She has received numer-ous honors and builds STEM partnerships of collaboration to target academic-promising minority students to become future science, technology, engineering, and math innovators.

Susan Wood has served as the Executive Director of the Children’s Center at Caltech since 2000. Susan’s experience over the past 38 years includes serving as classroom instructor, overseeing class-room teachers, coordinating community college preschool practi-cum students, and providing developmentally appropriate actives for children. After 20 years in the classroom Susan chose to work in

an administrative level as a director of two university child care centers: USC and UCLA; as adjunct faculty at Pasadena City College; as partner and trainer for the Center for Child and family Services Head Start; as a trainer for Los Angeles County Office of Education; as UCLA Extension instructor. Susan’s passion to support early childhood educators in providing research based, high-quality STEM child educa-tion has lead to the creation community outreach programs, which has included: workshops, a director support group, research projects, and study groups. She is an active member of National Association for the Education of Young Children and National Science Teachers Association and has presented workshops on a national level in the areas of early childhood curriculum with an emphasis on science edu-cation. She received a MA in Child Development from Pacific Oaks College, Pasadena, California.


From Stumble to STEM: One School’s Journey to Explore STEM with its Youngest Students

by Carrie Lynne Draper and Susan Wood



call (800) 221-2864.

must go through to become confident problem-solvers, communicators, and collaborators while experiencing engineering.

We looked at research by Dr. Valerie L. Ackerson, professor of science education at Indiana University. She examines how young children can conceptualize the NOS (Nature of Science) from an early age. She states, “We need to share how children start with the concrete and move to the abstract; introduce and emphasize the distinction between observation and inference; the importance of contextual clues as well as background knowledge in making inferences.” Nature of Science skills include describing their observations; describing what they notice; and telling what they think will happen next. These NOS skills make it possible for students to engineer. Additionally, we were inspired by the research of Van Meeteren and Zan (University of Northern Iowa) leading researchers in engineering education for young children.

With the help of our Children’s Engineering Facilitator, we decided to create our own engineering challenges or ‘scenarios’ to see what might inspire our children. There is very little engineering curriculum available for this age range. Creating scenarios for our young students would allow us to describe and catalog children’s actions; see the different design process and tools young children use; and identify children’s behaviors that potentially grow engineering habits of mind. Here we share a glimpse of what our early engineering scenarios looked like for each age group.

Engineering is a Sensory Experience for One-Year-Olds

The infant teachers set up clay for children to explore and gain needed sensory experiences. Engineering for this age requires experiences using their senses. The clay was new material for the infants and they were naturally curious about it. We observed some children stopping to look at it. Others went straight in to touch the clay. Some were very careful to touch it only with one finger. After the first feel, they went back in for more pokes or to squeeze a handful of it. The teachers asked them, “What does it feel like?” as they stared at the clay that stuck onto their small hands. We described how we perceived the clay: it’s cold, soft, sticky, and mushy. After a couple of days of clay introduction, we added a spray bottle of water and basic wooden tools for the children to use. The infants used their hands and tools to mold the clay into different shapes and change its form. The teachers described the clay as it became “wet, slippery, and slimy,” which produced a different feeling. The infants were

engaged at the clay table a little bit longer now that they experienced it in a different form. It was interesting to see the children use the new tools we incorporated; however, the most important ‘tools’ they used to engineer the clay were their own hands.

The infants continued to explore the clay through their senses, primarily their hands and mouths. The children enjoyed feeling, rubbing, squishing, and smearing the clay with their hands and on their bodies. Next, we were interested in watching the children explore the clay with large body movements. We put a large amount of clay on canvas, placed on the floor. The children then used their bodies to climb, walk, and feel the clay with their feet. Feet were very important in the room, given that most children were just starting to walk and wear shoes for the first time.

Catapult Construction with 18- to 24-Month-Olds

Children between the ages of 18–24 months were very interested in cause-and-effect. Our first experience

Phot

os by

the a

utho

rs


came from a child’s curiosity with a trash can and a metal container. The child put the metal container on top of the trash can and launched it onto the counter top. At first glance a teacher assumed the child was throwing the container, but then another teacher observed that much more was happening. Teachers began to realize the child’s intentions, grabbed the camera, and began to document this

amazing experiment. Other children became fascinated and wanted to see if they could ‘launch’ other items. The teachers provided additional materials and observed as children constructed and designed other types of catapults using fulcrums, levers, and pom-pom balls.

Architecture and Seismology Engineering for Two-Year-Olds

Teachers placed two wooden structures in the block area. Two children started to build by adding blocks to it and created structures, calling them airports. Three others came to the block area and began

to parallel build. It became important to separate the circle time area from the block area so that it could be designated as a ‘construction zone,’ so that the building process would not be disturbed.

The children were fascinated with balance and with how high they could build their structures. The teacher assisted the children by providing stepstools in order to reach new heights. Children began to experiment by building on large wooden trucks and were interested in how moving their structures could affect ‘sway’ movement before gravity caused their structures to fall. When the structures became too high and wide for the block area, we decided to expand the ‘construction zone’ to the patio outside our classroom. This allowed for structures to be saved and worked on over several days and they became much more intricate in design.

Marine-Science and Materials Engineering with Three-Year-Olds

A favorite story, Lost, by Oliver Jeffers, was the impetus for an engineering project designing boats. This charming story is about a lost penguin finding his way back home with the help of a small boy and a rowboat. The teachers invited students to build boats from aluminum foil to get the penguin home. Originally, we thought the building and testing of boats using aluminum foil would be a huge success. The teachers placed counting bears out, thinking the children would substitute the bears for the role of the penguin. The children expressed no interest in testing their boats at the water table with the counting bears. We

Phot

os by

the a

utho

rs



realized that to connect the book with the activity, these concrete learners needed penguins. Children at this age are often very literal. Having the penguin available made all the difference. As they built and tested their boats, the activity expanded to experimenting with sink, float, and surface tension. The students noticed the differences between the boats’ design and compared and contrasted boats that held multiple penguins up versus the ones that sank. The children began to talk about the size of their boats and the size of the penguin. They noticed similarities and differences and began discussing with each other how they engineered their individual boats. The children could not be pulled away from the activity.

Conclusion

In the short time we have been creating engineering scenarios and focusing on the E in STEM, we have discovered no matter what the age, children naturally use the engineering design process. They:

■ ask

■ imagine

■ create

■ design and test

■ improve

Even the youngest with limited words use their actions to demonstrate they are curious, show their imagination, test and continue to explore. As NSTA blog contributor Peggy Ashbrook shares, “We (as educators) need to discuss how to implement engineering challenges in our classrooms. Children encounter problems to solve in their play.” Some, Peggy suggests, are “keeping block structures from falling over, choosing the best blanket to drape over chairs to make a tent, digging holes that won’t collapse, and carrying armloads of balls.”

We are documenting the children’s experiments by photographing and uploading to an electronic portfolio, where we describe and catalog children’s engineering actions; categorize the different design process tools they

are using; and identify children’s behaviors that potentially represent precursors to engineering habits of mind.

We look forward to comparing our student’s experiences with their parents. What will these engineering scenarios look like when parents are doing them? How will this help

Phot

os by

the a

utho

rs


parents understand the processes their children need to go through when they are engineering?

References

Brophy, S., Klein, S., Portsmore, M., & Rogers, C. (2008). Advancing engineering education in P-12 classroom. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3): 369–387.

NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. www.nextgenscience.org/next-generation-science-standards

Akerson, V., & Donnelly, L. A. (2009). Teaching Nature of Science to K-2 Students: What understandings can they attain? International Journal of Science Education, 30(1): 97–124.

Van Meeteren, B., Ed.D., Director, Regents’ Center for Early Developmental Education, Curriculum Development and Researcher. University of Northern Iowa. Cedar Falls, IA. www.uni.edu/rampsandpathways/program/research-findings/designing-elementary-engineering-education-perspective-young-child

Zan, B., Ph.D., Associate Professor and Research Fellow, Regents’ Center for Early Developmental Education, Curriculum Development. University of Northern Iowa. Cedar Falls, IA.

SEED Papers: Revealing the Word of Young Engineers in Early Childhood Education http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/beyond/seed/zan.html

Ashbrook, P. (2014, October 17). NSTA Blog: Science in Early Childhood. 2014 NSTA area conference, Richmond, VA. http://learningcenter.nsta.org/discuss/default.aspx?fid=ryclPO3p1E8_E

Phot

o by G

ordo

n (ht

tps:/

/flic.

kr/p

/cho

cbE)

licen

sed u

nder

CC BY

2.0

Despite continued research and extensive literature on the importance of children’s early years, the ECE field continues to struggle as a viable profession. Low status, high stress, inadequate salaries and working conditions all conspire to deter teachers from making this a career. Those of us who are aging and retiring from the field wonder and worry about the future of our beloved profession.

While we press for suitable policies and economic solutions to stabilize the early childhood field, how can we support a new cadre of teachers to move the profession forward? What will grow and sustain new leadership?

I mourn when I see wonderful teachers leave the field, or even leave the classroom to take up administrative positions that might give them a slightly larger paycheck and sense of agency. Somehow we assume this is the only viable career path for those who want to work on behalf of children or ongoing teacher improvement. I want us to rethink this notion and invent new possibilities for a sustainable career in ECE. As we work on financial solutions, we have to simultaneously enhance our work environments, our organizational cultures, and the intellectual engagement of our teachers. This seems a different focus than most quality improvement efforts underway across the United States.

Regulations, rating scales, and ever-growing mandates may hold people accountable to standards, but can they lure and keep people excited about working with children and committed to a career that welcomes young human beings into this world?

An Interview with Abhirami Gunasingam

Last spring while touring a lovely campus center in Lansing, Michigan, I stood in an observation booth watching a remarkable infant teacher. I marveled at her admiring, steady attention to several babies crawling over and around her. She leaned in, smiled, gestured, and shifted her position to give as much acknowledgement and support as each child needed. I was reminded of the lyrics of one of Tom Hunter’s songs, “You’ll know when you are known full well.” Surely this was how these babies experienced their time with Abhi, developing a solid identity as someone appreciated, respected, and known well.

Noticing my keen observation of Abhi, my guide in the observation booth began to tell me about what a delight she was to have as a student and how she transferred her interest in science to child development. She showed me a handbook Abhi had developed for observers and then led me to a stunning piece of documentation on her extensive investigation of babies crying. Now here was an emotionally and intellectually engaged teacher who was already taking her role as teacher researcher very seriously. I wondered what would keep such a fine teacher in pursuit of this work as a career rather than losing her to another field? There wasn’t an opportunity for us to meet in person, but Abhi and I started up an email correspondence.

Margie: Can you tell me a bit about what drew you to work in early learning and whether you have thought of this as a career or just an interim job?

Abhi: I decided to make the United States my new home several years ago. At that point I realized I had an

Abhirami Gunasingam has a bachelor of science in Biology and is currently working on her master’s degree in Early Childhood Education along with earnestly participating in the Resources for Infant Educarers® (RIE®) Practicum Training Program. Prior to working as a teacher, she worked as a researcher for five years and uses the skills gained to enable children in her care to become life-long

learners. Abhi is currently a Board Member of the Central Michigan Association for the Education of Young Children (CMAEYC) and provides trainings in her community. She currently works as a Head Teacher in an Infant Room. Being present and engaged with the children in her care is the best part of her day.

Margie Carter is a former teacher, child care director, and college instructor. She has co-authored seven books with Deb Curtis and is a long-time contributor to Exchange. Margie co-founded Harvest Resources Associates (www.ecetrainers.com) to support those in the early childhood field to strengthen their leadership in calling for an expanded vision of quality programs for children, families, and

teachers. Part of her inspiration for this work comes from the regular study tours she leads to Aotearoa New Zealand to learn from their exemplary policies and practices.


Making Caring and Learning Together a CareerAn interview with Abhirami Gunasingamby Margie Carter



call (800) 221-2864.


opportunity for a new adventure. I reflected on my life and focused on all the aspects that brought me great joy. I came to the realization that working with children brought me great joy. I began my new adventure in the ECE field by enrolling in an ECE program in 2010. Even though I saw this as a potential career, I still needed to prove to myself that I was capable and competent to work with young children. During my degree program I discovered that there was a great need to create nurturing environments for infants, toddlers, and their caregivers. I am grateful for all those who I came into contact with during my teacher training as they fueled my desire to change the way in which infants, toddlers, and their caregivers were seen.

Margie: Have any of your assumptions changed as you’ve gained experience in working in the field?

Abhi: When I started in this field I assumed that every early childhood educator completed a degree prior to being hired to work in the classrooms. I was puzzled when I observed that many in my ECE program were already working in classrooms with children before completing their degree. I was unsettled by this fact. During my degree program I learned that the first three years of a child’s life were crucial for brain development. I wondered why adults who were not educated in child development nor had healthy dispositions to work with a vulnerable population were allowed in classroom positions as teachers. This approach continues to place young children in unhealthy care and learning environments. I am convinced through my observations and experiences that, without compromise, we need to have very knowledgeable and thoughtful individuals working with the youngest of human beings.

Margie: I sure share this assumption with you, Abhi, that our children deserve and will only really thrive when they are in settings with adults who are self-aware and think carefully about what is best for each child and the dynamics between them. This process of translating theory into practice and re-conceptualizing theory with reflective practice is the mindset of someone who wants to make this a career, not just a job to get by.

Growing as a Teacher Leader

Margie: As you move forward with your work in ECE, what guides your thinking?

Abhi: I use my observations, experiences, readings, research information, and self-knowledge to guide my thinking. I take time to reflect on all the knowledge I gain on a daily basis in order to fine-tune my practice. I allow the NAEYC Code of Ethical Conduct to influence my decisions. I have an ethical responsibility to do no harm to the children in my care. Therefore, the child and the adults who care for them become my focus when I start to problem-solve and engage in critical thinking. My intention is to cherish the young children and the adults who care for them on a daily basis by creating environments that match developmental stages and interests of both children and adults.

Margie: As the years moved along, what helped you deepen your understandings, eagerness to learn more, and your commitment to the work?

Abhi: When I started working with young children as a student and then as a new teacher, I asked a lot of questions of all who were in my care and learning environment. At some point my eagerness to ask questions must have been off-putting because my colleagues suggested I become more like Vanna White from the TV show Wheel of Fortune. I could not accept this as a legitimate request of a young

Cherishing young children: Evelyn is offered a bottle of breast milk while held in Abhi’s arms.


professional in the ECE field as it felt like an insult to my intelligence. To me, questions mean that individuals are critically thinking about our practice and serve us well in our decision-making process. Asking questions and critically thinking about your observations is key in creating a sustainable profession as this provides opportunities to gain new knowledge and identify gaps in best practices. Mastering how to support and nurture leaders who make and justify decisions in line with their current understanding of best practices is key in creating a sustainable profession. This skill releases early childhood educators from making decisions out of fear and ignorance. Children will be harmed when adults who care for them waiver in their decision-making or make decisions out of fear. Realizing that I had an important role in building future leaders in my field deepened my commitment to my practice.

For instance, my discoveries of infant crying enhanced my ability to be more responsive to and customize care for individual children. The knowledge gained as a teacher researcher has enriched my practice by helping me guide

adult responses to crying, sustaining my learning, bringing daily practice to contribute to theory, and growing in my role as an advocate.

A Message for Aspiring Teacher Leaders

Margie: What suggestions might you have for teachers, both new and seasoned, who might be stuck in a rut or habitual ways of viewing their work?

Abhi: In a field inundated with early childhood educators of varying experiences and educational qualifications, understand that you are responsible for developing your thinking. Do not outsource this task of thinking to someone else who may not have your best interest at heart. Let your sensitive observations and research guide your thinking. Nurture your social-emotional health because you cannot give young children what you have not experienced for yourself. These are key components of my own journey in developing identity and leadership in a field that combines caring and learning between human beings.

Teacher as a Researcher: My Discoveries of Infant Crying and Changes to My Daily Practiceby Abhirami Gunasingam

My journey to become a teacher researcher has been strongly influenced by wanting to understand more about what infants are communicating when they cry. Teachers in my program are told to help the crying child first. But often, three children would cry at the same time. How do I decide which crying child to partner with first?

I realized that if crying is an infant’s primary way to communicate, that meant I needed to treat crying as a language that had to be deciphered. I decided to respond instead of reacting to crying, which meant I needed to critically think about my own behaviors and plan a sequence of behaviors to implement when I heard an infant begin to cry. For instance, when I identified that a child was protesting, I moved closer to let the child know that I was available to him. From my readings I learned how the caregiver’s response can support or undermine how babies develop a sense of trust. I also recognized that infants need partners to learn and develop self-regulation.

For observers who come to my classroom, I created a documentation display in order to make visible a written plan of how I planned on supporting crying infants. I partnered with one of the parents, Bekah Galer, to create the portrait needed for the documentation display. Bekah is a gifted artist who envisioned her son as her model for the portrait she later named “Cyrus, Crying.” According to Bekah, she applied orange and yellow around his face to capture her feelings of anxiety and stress when her son cried. She chose blue for his tears to express her son’s feelings of pain and sadness. Collaborating with a parent on this project not only strengthened my relationship with the parent, but also deepened my understanding of the feelings surrounding crying infants from a parent’s perspective.

“Cyrus, Crying”: A portrait by Bekah Galer

“human babies are not like us.” caregiver. in earlier ...ccie.com/library_bw/8223300.pdfit...

Documents