This article was downloaded by: [Gebze Yuksek Teknoloji Enstitïsu ]On: 20 December 2014, At: 17:14Publisher: Taylor & FrancisInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Early Childhood Teacher EducationPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ujec20

Can 4‐year olds really do math? Using the projectapproach with preservice teachersLaura Hooks a & Valerie Duarte ba School of Education , University of South Carolina Upstate , Spartanburg, SC, USA Phone: +1864 503 5547 E-mail:b School of Education , University of South Carolina Upstate , Spartanburg, SC, USA Phone: 1864 503 5507 E-mail:Published online: 25 Apr 2008.

To cite this article: Laura Hooks & Valerie Duarte (2005) Can 4‐year olds really do math? Using the project approach withpreservice teachers, Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 25:2, 185-192, DOI: 10.1080/1090102050250211

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1090102050250211

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in thepublications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representationsor warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Anyopinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not theviews of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should beindependently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses,actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoevercaused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

ELSEVIER Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education 25 (2005) 185-192

Journal y

ChildhoodTeacher

Education

Can 4-year olds really do math?Using the project approach with preservice teachers

Laura Hooks*, Valerie Duarte1

School of Education, University of South Carolina Upstate, Spartanburg, SC, USA

Accepted 10 November 2004

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to examine the engagement of preservice teachers in the kind of authenticexperiences that provided the modeling needed to make high-quality instruction in mathematics a reality for youngchildren. Inasmuch as these preservice teachers had not yet received any formal methods classes in mathematics,the authors theorized that classroom teachers whose practices and dispositions were congruent with the NationalCouncil of Teachers of Mathematics standards and the State of South Carolina Mathematics Standards couldmodel effective teaching instruction for young children using the project approach. These same teachers could thenprovide mentoring and encouragement to preservice teachers as they became involved in this high-quality programfor 4-year olds, deepening the knowledge base of the preservice teachers regarding developmentally appropriateways to teach numeracy to 4-year olds.© 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Early childhood education; Mathematics for young children; Project approach; Preservice teacher training

As a society, we are in the process of acknowl-edging that early childhood education is emergingfrom a paradigm shift. What was considered effectiveteaching for young children in the 20th century willno longer meet the call for reform-based instructionin early childhood settings. The growing awarenessof the need for high-quality instruction in these earlychildhood settings is a challenge, and nowhere isthis challenge more evident than in the discipline ofmathematics.

In accepting the principle of equity as establishedby the National Council for Teachers of Mathemat-ics (NCTM, 2000), we embrace the notion that allchildren can learn mathematics. Before they come toschool, young children have an informal understand-

* Corresponding author. Tel: +1 864 503 5547.E-mail addresses: lhooks@uscupstate.edu (L. Hooks),

vduarte@uscupstate.edu (V. Duarte).1 Tel.: 1 864 503 5507.

ing of mathematics that supports their view of theworld around them. These skills need to be developedinto mathematical knowledge that children can use asa foundation for more complex skills. To facilitate thisprocess, preschoolers need high-quality instruction toimprove an already "anemic" curriculum where youngchildren are being exposed to a miniscule amount ofmathematics (Clements, 2001).

Additionally, an invigorating and exciting mathe-matics curriculum will provide the motivation neededto instill a positive disposition towards mathematics,a disposition that tends to wane as children progressthrough grade school because of the current use oftraditional drill, practice and review methods that arepasse (Battista, 1999). To meet this goal, mathematicalexperiences should spring from the interests of chil-dren and these interests should provide the foundationfor curriculum (Clements, 2001; NCTM, 2002). Byadopting this philosophy, teachers are sure to capturethe curiosity and natural joy for learning found innately

1090-1027/$ - see front matter © 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Geb

ze Y

ukse

k T

ekno

loji

Ens

titïs

u ]

at 1

7:14

20

Dec

embe

r 20

14

186 L Hooks, V. Duarte/Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education 25 (2005) 185-192

in the persona of the young child, for it is the teacherwho must plan the tasks and orchestrate the conversa-tion that may appear unstructured and incidental, butin actuality is systematic and well planned (Whitin,2004). Preschool programs that plan numeracy activ-ities where the dialogue between teacher and child iscarefully articulated through discussion and question-ing lay the foundation for a meaningful mathematicalcurriculum (Kendall, 2003).

This investigative approach to learning conciselydescribes a methodology of instruction found in the"project approach." The project approach was used inthe 1960s and 1970s in England (Smith, 1997) with re-newed interest being generated with the 1989 publica-tion of "Engaging Children's Minds: The Project Ap-proach" (Katz & Chard, 1989). Children are allowedto "ask their own questions, conduct their own inves-tigations, and make decisions about their activities"(Helm & Katz, 2001, p. 2). Because projects springfrom their interests, children are highly motivatedto participate. Youngquist and Pataray-Ching (2004)provide an in-depth description of one child's interestand motivation for learning that was supported througha project focused on space. Further support for the useof projects in early childhood classrooms comes fromthe many successful projects described by Edwards,Gandini and Forman in Reggio Emilia, Italy (1998).The need to improve the quality of the mathematicscurriculum offered to young children as well as theneed to effect change in the traditional thinking ofpreservice and classroom teachers towards mathinstruction for 4-year olds can be addressed throughimplementation of the project approach to learning.The use of this approach to facilitate expected changefor effective mathematics instruction provides thebasis for this research study.

1. Purpose of the study

During the spring of 2003, a study was conductedto examine the practices designed for 2nd semesterJunior Early Childhood majors. This project resultedfrom the collaborative efforts between one profes-sional development school and a local university.

The purpose of the study was to examine the en-gagement of preservice teachers in the kind of authen-tic experiences that provided the modeling needed tomake high-quality instruction in mathematics a realityfor young children. Cognizant of the fact that these pre-service teachers had not yet received any formal meth-ods classes in mathematics, the authors theorized thatclassroom teachers whose practices and dispositionswere congruent with the National Council of Teachersof Mathematics Standards, as well as with the State ofSouth Carolina Mathematics Standards, could model

effective teaching instruction for young children us-ing the project approach. These teachers could thenprovide mentoring and encouragement to preserviceteachers as they became involved in this high-qualityprogram for 4-year olds. Both university faculty andclassroom teachers would support and nurture preser-vice teachers as they gained insight into the magnitudeof numeracy skills and concepts that can be taught to4-year olds using the project approach.

The objectives of the study were to: (1) determineif preservice teachers are able to recognize develop-mentally appropriate ways to teach numeracy to 4-year olds using the project approach methodology; (2)deepen the knowledge base of preservice teachers re-garding the teaching of standards-based mathematicsto 4-year olds; and (3) reinforce a positive dispositionamong preservice candidates towards the teaching ofnumeracy to 4-year olds.

2. Participants

This qualitative study included 18 junior-levelearly childhood majors enrolled in co-requisitecourses of early childhood curriculum, child growthand development, language development, assessment,diversity, and management, and a clinical coursetaught each semester at a Child Development and Life-long Learning Center. The Center is part of the pub-lic school system and provides a diverse network ofchild and family services to an at-risk community inSouth Carolina. The population served is low socioe-conomic, and an equal mix of Hispanic, African Amer-ican and European American. The Center provides ex-emplary models for future early childhood educatorsand has a long-standing working relationship with theuniversity as a clinical site.

3. Methodology

During the semester, university courses were con-ducted Monday through Thursday in the designateduniversity classroom at the Center. Lectures anddiscussions included topics surrounding an introduc-tion to early childhood education. Topics includedthe various curriculum models for early childhoodclassrooms, connections between theory and practiceregarding child growth and development, languagedevelopment and emergent literacy, and various as-pects of classroom management including assessmentand attention to diversity. In addition to 2.5 h daily ofinstruction by university faculty, preservice teacherswere assigned to 4-year old kindergarten classroomswhere they completed clinical hours throughout thesemester. Assignments extended topics discussed dur-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Geb

ze Y

ukse

k T

ekno

loji

Ens

titïs

u ]

at 1

7:14

20

Dec

embe

r 20

14

L. Hooks, V. Duarte /Journal ofEarly Childhood Teacher Education 25 (2005) 185-192 • 187

ing class and included: (1) completion of observationsthat allowed students to witness first hand what wasdiscussed theoretically, (2) completion of both formaland informal assessments of children's learning and(3) directed teaching assignments, some of which weredeveloped and implemented by the preservice teach-ers and some of which were developed by cooperatingteachers and implemented by the preservice teachers.

Both pre/post questionnaires and reflective jour-nals were used as tools to collect data for this study.Preservice teachers included their reflections in a clin-ical portfolio but did not otherwise receive a grade fortheir reflections or pre/post questionnaires.

Data for this study were gathered at four differentpoints in the semester. First, prior to formal instructionand training on the project approach curriculum,preservice teachers were asked to complete a pre-questionnaire (see Appendix A). The purpose ofthe pre-questionnaire was to ascertain a baseline ofpreservice teacher knowledge and beliefs regardingthe project approach as a curriculum model and theteaching of numeracy to young children. In week 6 ofthe semester, a teaching professional with extensivetraining and experience in the project approachcurriculum provided preservice teachers with anintensive introduction and training workshop on theproject approach. Preservice teachers were asked towrite reflections on their project approach training.These reflections served as the second point of datacollection and were used as a means of assessing theirtheoretical understanding of the project approach andas baseline data to measure growth and understandingwith regards to that curriculum model.

Preservice teachers were then required to plan andimplement at least one lesson as part of the on-goingclassroom project in their clinical classroom. Workon this project required a collaborative effort betweenpreservice teachers and their classroom teachers, withteachers acting as mentors.

Data from the training reflections were coded andanalyzed resulting in identification of nine recurringthemes. These nine themes were used to create aframework upon which a focus for the final reflec-tion was built (see Appendix B). Using this frame-work, preservice teachers completed a final reflectionon their experiences with the project approach duringthe last week of classes. These reflections providedthe third point of data collection and a means to de-termine the growth of the preservice teachers' depthof understanding of the impact of the project approachas a viable means of effective mathematics instructionfor 4-year olds.

The fourth and final point of data collectionwas gathered after preservice teachers completed thesemester. Preservice teachers were mailed a post-questionnaire (see Appendix A) and asked to complete

and return it anonymously in the postage-paid enve-lope. Ten of the eighteen respondents returned this fi-nal questionnaire. Data from post-questionnaires wereaggregated and used for a final evaluation of the ob-jectives for this project.

4. Findings

Three objectives were the foci of the project: todetermine (1) if preservice teachers were able torecognize developmentally appropriate practice; (2)if the knowledge base of preservice students wasdeepened regarding connections between mathemat-ics activities for 4-year olds and standards; and (3) ifpreservice teachers would render positive dispositionstowards the teaching of mathematics to childrenthrough their reflective joumaling after experiencesusing the project approach.

4.1. Developmentally appropriate practice

The focus of the pre/post questionnaire (seeAppendix A) was to determine to what extent par-ticipants were familiar with the project approach asa methodology for instruction with young children.Additionally, we wanted to determine how confi-dent participants felt in the teaching of mathematicsto young children, and what knowledge participantshad regarding topics that 4-year olds could learn inmathematics.

Preservice teachers were asked to identify the mosteffective method for teaching 4-year olds numeracyskills and to tell why they thought so. Upon exam-ination, the questionnaires revealed that 98% of ourpreservice teachers selected direct instruction as themost effective teaching method to use with 4-yearolds over drill and practice or the project approach.When asked to tell "Why," respondents connectedthe fact that direct instruction was the method mostfamiliar to them, and the method most had experi-enced in their own schooling. Some of the respon-dents reported: (I favor direct instruction) "becauseit is the way I was taught and I've never seen [in-struction] done any other way;" and "At this point,I would think direct instruction since I do not knowabout another approach." At least one student reportedsome confusion regarding the definition of what di-rect instruction actually means by stating, "I believedirect instruction is probably the best way to go be-cause some students would benefit from visualiza-tion techniques (i.e. If five children each had an appleand two ate them how many would be left?)." Sev-eral respondents noted that they knew little about theproject approach. No responses connected develop-mentally appropriate practice for teaching numeracy to

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Geb

ze Y

ukse

k T

ekno

loji

Ens

titïs

u ]

at 1

7:14

20

Dec

embe

r 20

14

188 L Hooks, V. Duarte/ Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education 25 (2005) 185-192

4-year olds to any of the three choices available in thequestionnaire.

Upon examining the post questionnaire, we wereable to determine that respondents were able torecognize developmentally appropriate ways to teachnumeracy to 4-year olds. All preservice teachersselected the project approach as the most effectivemethod of instruction (a change from their initialreporting). Additionally, they were able to articulatewhy they thought this was the best approach bydescribing developmentally appropriate practicesin which they had engaged in the classroom. Someexamples of these descriptors revolved around thefollowing themes: (1) the use and value of theintegrated curriculum, (2) the need for children to beactively involved in their learning, and (3) the need forchildren to acquire ownership for their own learning.

4.1.1. The value of the integrated curriculumPost-questionnaire responses supporting the value

of integrating the curriculum included the followingstatements:

• Numeracy is embedded in the context of theresearch and lessons. Students apply numeracyskills in real life hands-on activities.

• Children apply math to everyday things, devel-oping a better understanding.

From recognizing that children were taking an activepart in the learning process, students were able to ob-serve "discovery" at its best. In a project on transporta-tion, a preservice teacher wrote that "transportation isa real topic that every child needs to learn about; youcan cover all of the state standards through many activ-ities associated with transportation." Another studentagreed that an in-depth investigation of a real topicthat reaches across the curriculum is found within theproject approach.

4.1.2. The need for children to be activelyinvolved

Such responses as "Students apply numeracy skillsin real-life hands-on activities," and "This approachuses meaningful, hands-on activities to interest andengage students" demonstrate the recognition on thepart of preservice teachers that children need to beengaged in the "doing of mathematics." These state-ments clearly support the NCTM (2000) standardsand its vision for teaching meaningful mathematicsto children, since young children are at initial stagesof creating mathematical knowledge and have littleskill in procedural learning. In the "doing of mathe-matics," young children create the conceptual foun-dation upon which the procedural learning will bebuilt. This way we can be sure that young children are

meaningfully constructing mathematical understand-ings (Reys, Lindquist, Lambdin, Smith, & Suydam,2004).

4.1.3. Children need to acquire ownership fortheir own learning

Responses supporting the need for children to feelownership for their own learning were found in thefollowing statements:

• The project approach gives children a chance tohave a say in the lessons.

• [The project approach] uses methods and expe-riences the children are interested in.

• This approach allows children to make connec-tions.

Here students supported the idea that if children are in-terested and motivated in what they are doing becausethey had the opportunity to help in the planning pro-cess, this will convey ownership to the child of his orher learning. Having ownership implies a commitmentto the learning process; when children have a specialinterest in the choosing of the topic and the planningof the project, it is more meaningful to them. As sup-ported in the NCTM vision (2000), effective instruc-tion in mathematics seeks a curriculum where students"have access to high-quality engaging mathematicalinstruction and are actively engaged in learning" (3).

4.2. Deepening the knowledge base

In examining our second goal of hoping to deepenthe knowledge base of preservice teachers to teachmath to 4-year olds, the pre/post questionnaire askedparticipants what kinds of mathematics content andprocess standards they thought could be learned by 4-year olds. Initially, preservice teachers selected mea-surement and number as the major content areas inwhich 4-year olds could be taught. Post responses indi-cated that participants showed a broader perspective oncontent and process standards that could be learned by4-year olds than was indicated on initial questionnaireresponses. Students realized that mathematics can beintegrated into topics they had not previously consid-ered, and preconceived notions of what was consideredeffective instruction were replaced with pragmatic so-lutions more aligned to NCTM Standards. Some of theresponses that supported this altered way of thinkingwere:

• You do not have to teach mathematics directlyusing worksheets to children.

• I was previously unaware of just how muchyoung children can learn that pertains tomath.

• Four-year olds can leam to graph!

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Geb

ze Y

ukse

k T

ekno

loji

Ens

titïs

u ]

at 1

7:14

20

Dec

embe

r 20

14

L. Hooks, V Duarte /Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education 25 (2005) 185-192 189

Preservice teachers noted that number concepts canbe related and connected to a large number of real-world contexts and that many numeracy activities thatactively involved children can be directly related to theNCTM Standards.

In examining responses from reflective journals(see Appendix B), we were able to determine that pre-service teachers had learned a great deal regarding howmuch mathematical content could actually be taughtto 4-year olds. The children were primarily engaged insix class projects that studied transportation, the farm,creepy crawlers, butterflies, birds, and foods. NCTM(2000) identifies the following content standards as es-sential parts of the mathematics curriculum: numberand operations, algebra, geometry, measurement, anddata analysis. The following paragraphs examine eachof these content areas and identify how each standardwas linked, by example, to investigations that childrenperformed using the project approach.

In the content area of number and operation, pre-service teachers cited in their reflective journals thefollowing examples of activities the children wereengaged in that were aligned to standards. Countingsets to determine quantity and using the language ofgreater than and less than to compare sets and num-bers in sets were among the most prevalent activities.In their projects, children created worm pudding andcounted how many worms were in it using number,children made clay models and compared them; chil-dren compared quantities of vehicles, such as trucksand cars, using the language of more than and less than,and the sizes and speeds of different types of vehiclesin the transportation unit. In the butterfly project, chil-dren counted how many different kinds of butterfliesthere were.

In relation to the algebra standard, children workedwith two-part patterns and extensions, and sortedand classified objects by a single attribute, sorted,classified and compared items according to severalattributes (i.e. length, depth, and thickness), andsorted various farm animals. Sorting, classifying ob-jects by various attributes, and working with pat-terns were popular activities for children in theseprojects, activities that support the content standard ofalgebra.

In relation to the geometry standard, childrenmade models of two and three-dimensional shapes.Children drew representations of various models andinvestigated the results of combining and partitioninggeometric shapes to create and recreate the butterflydesign with pattern blocks in the butterfly project. Inthe creepy crawler project, children used modelingclay to make a three-dimensional figure of a spider,showing that spiders were not flat as seen in books.They designed a spider web using various shapes likelines, circles and triangles.

Children used measurement by making bananapudding, measuring out potting soil and plantingseeds, making butter, and comparing shapes and sizesof fruits and vegetables. When working with recipesfor the pudding and measuring out potting soil, chil-dren became familiar with measuring tools for ca-pacity and became familiar with the processes ofmeasurement. When planting seeds and comparingshapes and sizes of fruits and vegetables, childrenbecame familiar with the language of measurement,as well as with comparison of attributes of objects(such as shorter, longer, greater, smaller, heavier, andlighter).

Demonstrating their understanding of data anddata analysis, children gathered data to find out howmany fish were in each classroom and tallied them ona chart. They used stamps of fish to create a graph andalso made graphs about pets. One group in the trans-portation project went outside to gather data and thencreated a graph showing how many cars, trucks andbuses went by. In a project on birds, children gatheredinformation about various birds in a chart and then sentthe chart to each class to see how many children in eachclass had seen these specific birds. Using this informa-tion, they created a graph representing the number ofbirds that had been seen by children throughout theschool.

One preservice teacher within the group studyingbutterflies noted that the children

. . . worked with pattern blocks to make butterfliesand then described different shapes used to createthe butterfly, meeting the standard of investigatingthe results of combining and partitioning geometricshapes to create and recreate a design using patternblocks.

Preservice teachers were amazed at the number ofmathematical concepts that could be taught to youngchildren through the use of a project approach. As onestudent reported,

I watched the teacher as she pulled out some col-ored animal figurines in the toy area, and I observedthe child organizing and classifying the differentanimals—first by color, and then by species. To methis event was astonishing because no one showed herthe connections between classifying by two differentsystems, color and animal type.

These statements by preservice teachers, and theirability to connect particular activities with state math-ematics curriculum standards strongly support theobservation that preservice teachers deepened theirknowledge base regarding the teaching of mathemati-cal content to 4-year olds. Meeting this outcome withpositive results informs us about the quality of theproject undertaken. It suggests that the project ap-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Geb

ze Y

ukse

k T

ekno

loji

Ens

titïs

u ]

at 1

7:14

20

Dec

embe

r 20

14

190 L. Hooks, V. Duarte /Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education 25 (2005) 185-192

proach is an effective model for future preserviceteachers.

4.3. Raising the level of confidence to teach mathto 4-year olds

Pre-questionnaire results from the initial surveyregarding confidence levels of preservice teachersindicated that 10 (ten) teachers had had very littleconfidence in their ability to teach math to 4-year olds;5 (five) had felt somewhat confident, 1 (one) had noconfidence; and 2 (two) did not answer (see AppendixC). A single exception reported feeling highly con-fident, but added that she might be mistaken. Havinghad no previous experience teaching mathematics toyoung children, it was not unusual that such a largenumber of preservice teachers expressed such lowlevels of confidence.

Results indicated a change in the attitudes and dis-positions regarding confidence levels of participants.The post-questionnaire return rate was slightly morethan half of the pre-questionnaire return rate. Sixtypercent of the 10 preservice teachers who returned thepost-questionnaire now felt very confident; noting theirchange in attitude was the result of experiencing andusing the project approach in a clinical setting. Outof the remaining 40% percent, half of the respondentsindicated that they felt confident, while the remaininghalf indicated that they felt somewhat confident.

Statements examined from reflective journals indi-cate these changes in attitude. Students reported:

• Teaching mathematical thinking skills to 4-yearolds is not as hard as I thought it would be. In thebeginning I was unsure how 4-year olds learnedmath. I did not know how this was going to hap-pen. After observing and working in the projectapproach, I see how this approach brings mathinto the children's experience; I could not be-lieve it.

• When I first looked at the standards I was notsure that I could teach all of these things but be-ing in the classroom and seeing how easy num-ber concepts can be related to anything, makesthe project approach look even better. It helpssimplify the job.

• I have been very encouraged by the differentactivities that I have seen in order to incor-porate math; the project approach is almostsneaky—because children have no idea they arelearning math.

These statements support the notion that students grewin positive attitudes towards the teaching of mathemat-ics through an investigative, hands-on approach. Theywere amazed at how natural the teaching of math can

be if an effective instructional methodology is used,regardless of the age of the child. The preservice can-didates were encouraged and enlightened by the num-ber of different everyday activities that can be used toteach mathematics, things that children do as a part ofeveryday living that can be harnessed to provide thebasis for meaningful mathematical thinking.

5. Implications

Recognizing that the sample size was small andtherefore may not be generalized to the population as awhole, findings continue to support and renew nationaltheories regarding effective mathematics instructionfor children. Grounded in the vision of NCTM (2000),effective mathematical instruction needs to begin atthe interest level of the child. Capturing an audiencewith an intrinsic need to become involved in seek-ing solutions, use of the natural curiosity of a youngchild can only emit positive results. To strengthen theprogram of instruction for preservice teachers, goodmodeling from experienced teachers allows opportu-nities for preservice teachers to grasp the philosoph-ical foundations of the project approach, as well asassists them in bridging the gap between theory andapplication. By participating in this project, preserviceteachers were able to make connections between whatis considered developmentally appropriate practice forchildren, and how that practice actually unfolds in theclassroom. Making connections is a significant hur-dle for preservice teachers; initially, in preservice pro-grams the focus is theoretically based as opposed topractice-based. Practice is often heavily weighted instudent teaching experiences.' Prior to student teach-ing, preservice teachers typically examine in the uni-versity classroom "how to teach" effectively, but arenot afforded enough opportunities to recognize bestpractice in schools. In this project, preservice teacherswere able to observe, implement and reflect on prac-tice, giving them an advantage in being able to under-stand mathematical pedagogy through a practitioner'slens.

Additionally, preservice teachers were able todeepen their own knowledge base regarding the typeof activities that young children should be engaged in,and value how those activities meet standards. Theywere able to raise their level of awareness regardingthe importance and use of various methodologies forinstruction and were able to assess the effectiveness ofuse of a particular method with young children.

Most importantly, preservice teachers becameaware that young children are able to learn mathemat-ical concepts with understanding, if taught in an ap-propriate manner. To answer the question posed at theoutset of this article—Yes, mathematics can be taught

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Geb

ze Y

ukse

k T

ekno

loji

Ens

titïs

u ]

at 1

7:14

20

Dec

embe

r 20

14

L Hooks. V. Duarte/Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education 25 (2005) 185-192 191

to 4-year olds! Historically, preschool early childhoodeducation has been thought of as a "baby-sitting" envi-ronment for children who are not yet ready to partici-pate in formal school settings. Research supports longlasting positive effects of high-quality child-care onthe developmental outcome of the children who attendthese programs (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997). Whatbetter way to get children started on a path of high-quality mathematics instruction than to implement asound instructional program in the beginning years?

Restructuring preservice teacher education pro-grams to stress the teaching of mathematics for youngchildren from a project-oriented perspective will avoidviewing mathematics teaching from the narrow lensof drill and practice, an approach totally inappropriatefor young children. Field experiences for preserviceteachers need to be connected to sites that model high-quality project-oriented instruction in the classroom,helping teacher candidates to deepen their understand-ing of what constitutes developmentally appropriatemathematics teaching.

We feel that the participants in this project havebeen afforded the opportunity to move forward to-wards alignment with the goals set forth by the NoChild Left Behind Act of becoming "highly-qualified."We would like to include one final quote that por-trays an indication of the accomplishment of a partici-pant's growth towards becoming that highly qualifiedteacher:

I have learned that through using an investigativemethod the children are able to learn numeracy with-out really specifically drilling numbers, but relating itto their own learning in the classroom. Children leamso much if you give them opportunities to create theirown way of understanding.

Appendix A. Pre-post-questionnaire

Directions: Please answer the following questionsas completely as possible.

1. What do you know about the project approach?2. Have you seen it used or implemented in your

practicum classroom?If so, describe.

3. What kinds of mathematics content and processstandards can be learned by a 4-year old? (i.e.geometry, number and operations, algebra, dataanalysis and probability, measurement, prob-lem solving, reasoning and proof, communica-tion, connections, representation).

4. What do you feel is the most effective methodin teaching 4-year olds numeracy skills?a. the project approachb. direct instruction

c. drill and practice

Tell why you think so.

5. How confident are you in teaching numeracy to4-year olds?

Appendix B. Guidelines/focus for projectreflection SEDE 422

Consider the following statements (taken fromyour first project reflection) in relation to the projectthat was implemented in your 4k classroom. Doyou agree or disagree with each statement? Pleaserespond to each, reflecting on how it applies ordoes not apply to your experience.- Include evi-dence from this experience that supports or fails tosupport each statement. As a summary, note whatyou have learned and how it will impact you as ateacher.

1. The most important is phase 2 where childreninvestigate a problem.

2. The topic selected should provide learningopportunities to meet standards that must betaught. Identify the standards that were ad-dressed through the project activities (focus onnumeracy).

3. Using the project approach allows each childto display his/her unique strengths on differ-ent levels of understanding and in differentways.

4. The project approach is an in-depth investiga-tion of a real topic that reaches across the cur-riculum.

5. The amount of different skills used and devel-oped by the children without actually "teach-ing" them is astonishing.

6. The project approach helps children to solveproblems, allows them to think through a step-by-step process, use resources, and come upwith unique topics (connect with numeracystandards).

7. The teacher has an obligation to the students tofind out the information needed.

8. Children have ownership in the project andprojects add excitement to learning as the childmeets the state requirements. The project ap-proach relates to Dewey's theory of educationsince it is student-centered, as well as being anexample of constructivism.

9. In what ways has your experience usinga project approach to teaching influencedyour view of teaching numeracy to 4-yearolds?

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Geb

ze Y

ukse

k T

ekno

loji

Ens

titïs

u ]

at 1

7:14

20

Dec

embe

r 20

14

192 L. Hooks, V Duarte/Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education 25 (2005) 185-192

Appendix C. Pre/post data regardingdisposition

Question: How confident are you in teaching nu-meracy to 4-year olds?

Pre:(n=18)

Post: (n= 10)

5%

0%

26%

53%

5%

11%

60%

20%

20%

0%

0%

Very confident

Confident

Somewhat confident

Little confidence

No confidence

No answer

Very confident

Confident

Somewhat confident

Little confidence

No confidence

References

Battista, M. (1999). The mathematical miseducation ofAmerica's youth: Ignoring research and scientificstudy in education: Phi Delta Kappan, 80(6), 425-433.

Bredekamp, S., & Copple, C. (1997). Developmentally ap-propriate practice in early childhood programs. Wash-

ington, DC: National Association for the Education ofYoung Children.

Clements, D. (2001). Mathematics in the preschool. TeachingChildren Mathematics, 7(5), 270-275.

Edwards, C., Gandini, L., & Forman, G. (1998). The hun-dred languages of children: The Reggio Emilia approach-advanced reflections. Greenwich, CT: Ablex.

Helm, H. J., & Katz, L. (2001). Young investigators: Theproject approach in the early years. New York, NY:Teachers College Press.

Katz, L., & Chard, S. C. (1989). Engaging children's minds:The project approach. Stamford, CT: Albex.

Kendall, J. (2003). Setting standards in early childhood edu-cation. Educational Leadership, 60(7), 64-68.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Prin-ciples and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA:NCTM.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics Position State-ment. (2002). Early childhood mathematics: Promotinggood beginnings. Teaching Children Mathematics, 9(1),24.

No Child Left Behind Act, http://www.ed.gov/nclb/overview/intro/index.html. No Child Left Behind Act.

Reys, R., Lindquist, M., Lambdin, D., Smith, N., & Suydam,M. (2004). Helping children learn mathematics (7th ed.).New York, NY: John Wiley & Son.

Smith, L. (1997). "Open education" revisited: Promise andproblems in American educational reform. Teachers Col-lege Record, 99(2), 371-415.

Whitin, P. (2004). Promoting problem-posing explorations.Teaching Children Mathematics, 11(4), 180-186.

Youngquist, J., & Pataray-Ching, J. (2004). Revisiting "play":Analyzing and articulating acts of inquiry. Early Child-hood Education Journal, 31(3), 171-178.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Geb

ze Y

ukse

k T

ekno

loji

Ens

titïs

u ]

at 1

7:14

20

Dec

embe

r 20

14