Guest Posted October 10, 2013 Share Posted October 10, 2013 Hi All, I am being asked to do plan, do , review with my Reception class, with them recording what they intend to play with on a photocopied sheet, then reflecting at end of session on whether they achieved their plan. I feel this is a throw back to 2000, pre- EYFS. I think free flow means exactly that, allowing the children to move between activities, inside and out, choosing to focus on an area or activity which really grabs them. I don't think they should be sticking their name card up next to a picture of the marble run. I also think this leads to children getting stuck in a rut, whereas allowing them to discover all the exciting opportunities in a high quality continuous provision at their own choosing means they will gain most benefit and learning. I know I am going to have to fight my corner. Can anyone give me any arguments against using the more formal 'Plan, do , review' approach and am I right in thinking in a well-resourced free-flow continuous provision you don't need to circle your intentions on a piece of A4 or 'choosing board'. I really like the Alistair Bryce Clegg way of working. What would he have to say about this? The Head thinks this way of working will bring more 'rigour'...... Any advice warmly welcomed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonyMouse_4562 Posted October 10, 2013 Share Posted October 10, 2013 Hi Edlee, Plan-do-review is from the 'High-scope' practice (I think that is where it originated anyway! - please correct me if I'm wrong). I use it with my Nursery class and it is very successful. I do not get them to record on paper their ideas but they select the area or areas that they would like to 'play and learn' in using a counter on a board with photos of the different areas. The children split into the 3 key groups and have talk partners who they share their ideas with. Each day the adult supports at least 1 pair of children to listen and extend their ideas. We are in no way restricting the children but instead we are supporting their thinking skills, decision making, communication etc as well as building up their self-esteem in their own ideas. The children do not have to stick to what they originally choose and through year at review time the children begin to talk about why they changed their mind or how their play developed. It always amazes me (even at this time of year) how quickly children gain confidence with this and the clear plans that they do come up with and often follow. Some children return to the planning board to decide where to play next and then change their name. We carefully consider the talk partners so that the children are also supporting each other. The result is (mostly) and 'focused' generally calm environment where children have a purpose to what they are doing. The review time is an opportunity to celebrate what children have done, talk about what they might do next time and to share ideas with others. It's worth considering and maybe coming to some sort of compromise with your SMT about how to move forward with the idea. Good luck with whatever you decide to do Green Hippo x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 i used to do this with reception in 1999! it seemed to work well back then, but thinking back the planning board, with 2/3/4 spaces for each activity was unfair on some as more able were better at looking out for a free space somewhere they wanted to go, and some children missed out. and they did get stuck in a rut, as favourite areas always full. and surely it's better to walk through area and choose what you want to do more spontaneously, e.g. seeing a group doing something interesting and joining them. you could introduce a bit of plan/do/review at an appropriate activity, e.g. what will you paint/make from the junk, just to keep head happy? i'm all for objective-led planning using continuous provision as defined by abc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 12, 2013 Share Posted October 12, 2013 It is high scope Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonyMouse_3307 Posted October 12, 2013 Share Posted October 12, 2013 i'm all for objective-led planning using continuous provision as defined by abc. I thought that's what we'd always done!! Isn't all planning objective led?? (I know mine is/was). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonyMouse_47127 Posted October 14, 2013 Share Posted October 14, 2013 So pleased you said the above Catma I was beginning to think I was missing something!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts