Whole group instruction in the early childhood classroom must be done with

consideration to the childs age and attention span. Whole group instruction can be done in a
developmentally appropriate way if the teacher is aware of student limitations and uses engaging
teaching methods. Copple and Bredekamp suggest the following teaching strategies as a part of
teaching to enhance development and learning, posing problems or pointing out discrepancies,
asking through provoking questions, adding complexity to tasks, and engaging in reciprocal
discussion in which they take childrens ideas seriously. (p. 295). This contributes the students
feeling of community within the classroom. Whole group can be done very well, but it can easily
be done very poorly. Poor classroom management makes a whole group discussion difficult to
control. This often leads to whole group instruction where the teacher is the provider of
knowledge rather than the facilitator. However, whole group instruction, while more time
efficient, can never be as individually focused as small group instruction. It is best used when
giving the introductions to units, so all students have a shared basic knowledge of a topic.
The whole group lesson I taught was to review and reinforce elapsed time. The students
did very poorly on their unit test, and my mentor teacher wanted them to have additional
practice. This lesson addressed the standard: 3.MD.A. Solve problems involving measurement
and estimation of intervals of time, liquid volumes, and masses of objects. 1. Tell and write time
to the nearest minute and measure time intervals in minutes. Solve word problems involving
addition and subtraction of time intervals in minutes, e.g., by representing the problem on a
number line diagram. No formal assessment was done. Through student participation and
conversation, I feel the standard was met. All students were actively engaged throughout the
lesson. They explained how to solve the problem, gave alternative solutions, and asked
questions. As students explained their though process and the jumps on their timeline, I would

challenge students to consider a different set of jumps that would work. If a student did
something incorrectly, I would quickly correct the student. I made sure to explain the incorrect
line of reasoning, and asked students how to avoid that mistake in the future. For example, one
student solved a problem and found the end time when the question called for the start time. I
was able to point out how easy it is to misread the problem and make such a mistake. One of his
classmates suggested labeling the known information in the problem when reading it. This
advice seemed to help many of the students, who have now begun labeling the information in
word problems. The students were able to use both the practice clocks and draw a time line to
solve the problems. I feel this appealed to the various strategies the students used in solving
elapsed time. Further I think reviewing the three pieces of information need in an elapsed time
problem, helped the student focus on only the relevant information. Further, I feel the real world
problems helped students see elapsed time as a practical application. One thing I struggled with
in this lesson was the pacing. I was concerned about getting through all three problem sets. I was
placed in a departmentalized classroom and was able to perform the lesson three times. By the
third time through, I had gotten good pacing. I discovered that for students to have enough time
to explain their reasoning and draw their solution on the board, only two problems from each set
could be demonstrated. I feel this was a good problem to have. I under estimated the time each
problem would take. This was due to high student participation in the lesson. Students voiced
what they did not understand, and offered alternative solutions. This made the lesson run a bit
longer. Overall I feel the format of choosing one problem to solve and then reviewing the
problems worked very well.
I feel this lesson went over very well for a few reasons. The first being it was taught later
in the semester. By that point I had come to know the students, I had taught whole group a few

times, and I was familiar with the techniques the students used to solve problems. I was able to
use their prior knowledge to the students advantage to present material in a familiar way. The
familiarity with the students also increased their willingness to listen and participate. By that
time, I was seen as a teacher in the classroom, and someone who can help them. Allowing the
students to explain their reasoning seemed to be motivating for the students. Those who
understood the material well were able to share their strategies, and students who did not
understand were shown alternative solving methods. This was particularly important in my
classroom as many students struggling with elapsed time were prone to copying the exact steps
done by the teacher. They were unable to see the time as a tangible item that could be divided in
multiple ways. At the beginning of the lesson, I informed the students that if they remained
engaged and participated their work would not be picked up. This lesson was taught after a unit
test, which most students failed. They were feeling very unsure and not confident about their
abilities. Taking away the anxiety of their work being evaluated, again, for more possible failure
seemed to allow students to focus on the work.

Copple, C., & Bredekamp, S. (2009). Developmentally Appropriate Practice in Early Childhood
Programs Serving Children from Birth through Age 8 (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: National
Association for the Education of Young Children.