The Assignment

Summarize the article by answering the three questions listed below. Each question should have an answer that has a minimum of 5 sentences. Please make sure you read the statement on Plagiarism. Also, do not copy and paste the article- that is plagiarism.

1.  What is the main focus of the article? What is the “problem” with rules?

2.  What are three strategies that are discussed in the article? How can teachers move from rules to

     guidelines?

3.  How will you implement the strategies/ideas (from paragraph 2) when working with children? How will you implement this new knowledge into your classroom?

Article Link: Guidance Matters x 

(If you have difficulty accessing this pdf, contact your instructor for assistance)

Grading Criteria

The summary is graded on a 100 point scale.  Maximum points are given when length of 3 paragraphs with each paragraph containing a minimum of 5 sentences is met and content summarizes key strategies to use with young children and families.

20 points – Three paragraphs are included, each paragraph has a minimum of five sentences

20 points – First paragraph summarizes the main focus of the article

30 points – Second paragraph summarizes three strategies from the article. 

30 points – Third paragraph gives specific strategies/ideas you will use when working with young children.

Points are deducted for errors in grammar and spelling.  Also noted is clarity of the summary and students comprehension of the content.

56

Young Children • January 2012

®

1, 3

From Rules to Guidelines

Dan Gartrell

Guidance Matters

Moving to the Positive

At the end of a wing in an elementary
school, a prekindergarten class walks
past primary grade classrooms four
times a day. The preschoolers have
trouble remembering not to talk. With
doors open due to the school’s old
air conditioning system, their chatter
distracts the primary children and their
teachers. The principal discusses the
problem with Renilda and Cathi, the
pre-K teachers. They agree to figure out
a way to have the preschoolers walk in
line more quietly.
Renilda recalls a group punishment
from her own schooldays—when some
children talked in line, the entire class
had to “practice” walking up and down
the hall five times in complete silence.
Renilda shares with Cathi how she still
feels bummed out about the experi-
ence—she wasn’t one of the ones
talking—and how negative the class
felt toward the “talkers” and upset they
were with the teacher.
Not wanting to introduce the nega-
tive dynamics of group punishment in
their classroom, the two teachers hold
a class meeting. They matter-of-factly
explain the problem to the children and
ask what would help them remember to
walk quietly. The teachers acknowledge
each idea the children offer. One child
says, “We could be mommy and daddy
elephants. We have to tiptoe so we
don’t wake the babies.” Everyone likes
this idea, and they decide to try it.
As the children line up the next day,
the teachers ask them if they remember
how they are going to walk quietly. The
children remember. When the class
tiptoes by the principal’s office, he

Dan Gartrell, EdD, is emeritus professor of early childhood and foundations educa-
tion at Bemidji State University in northern Minnesota. A former Head Start teacher,
Dan is the author of The Power of Guidance, A Guidance Approach for the Encour-
aging Classroom and What the Kids Said Today.
Please send possible guidance anecdotes and other comments to dgartrell@
bemidjistate.edu.
Portions of this article originally appeared in Exchange magazine (July/August
2010; www.ChildCareExchange.com).
A study guide for this article is available through www.naeyc.org/memberlogin.
This column is also available in an online archive at www.naeyc.org/yc/columns.
Guidance Matters has a new schedule. It appears in the January, May, and Sep-
tember issues of Young Children.

notices them and declares, “I like how
you boys and girls are walking quietly
down the hall.”
“Shh,” one child says, “you’ll wake
the babies.”

The problem with rules

Think about the likely differences in
learning climate in these settings:

• One classroom has the rule, “No talk-
ing in line.” Another has the guideline, 
“We are quiet in line so we don’t wake 
the babies” (or with older students, 
“ . . . so we don’t bother children in 
other classrooms”).

• One classroom has the rule, “Don’t 
hand in work with careless mistakes.” 
Another has the guideline, “Mistakes are
 okay. We just need to learn from them.”

In a Young Children article worth 
revisiting, Wien (2004) makes the case 
that rules tend not to be helpful in

early childhood communities. Rules
are usually stated as negatives. In
fact, the way most rules are worded, it 
seems as if adults expect children to
break them (Wien 2004). For example, 
with the rule “No hitting,” teachers 
often feel pressure to be hypervigilant
for this behavior, and then basically 
can only ignore the behavior or pun-
ish the child when it happens—lim-
ited options indeed. Even when rules 
are not totally negative, such as “Be 
nice to your friends,” they may have 
an unspoken “or else” implication in 
teachers’ minds.
  When an adult enforces rules with 
children, the children know they have 
done something wrong. However, the 
negative experience in rule enforce-
ment does not teach them what to do 
instead (Readdick & Chapman 2000); 
for example, “You know the rule, no 
hitting! Go to the time-out chair.” Busy 
with enforcement, adults easily forget 
the importance of teaching children
positive strategies like using words or 
walking away as alternatives to hurt-
ing a classmate.
Rules can cause teachers to label
children, lump them in groups, and 
enforce rules accordingly: be lenient
with the “good children,” who mostly 
obey rules, and be strict with the 
“naughty children,” who often break 
rules. Studies show that children 

frequently subjected to punitive rule 
enforcement feel rejected, develop 
negative self-images, and may have 
long-term problems with aggressive-
ness in school and life (Ladd 2008; 
Ettekal & Ladd 2009). 
  Professor Gary Ladd, at Arizona 
State University, and his associates 
have conducted landmark studies
on the long-term impact of rejection 
on young children (Ladd 2006; Buhs, 
Ladd, & Herald-Brown 2010). Such 
children are rejected by peers, who 
are bothered by their classmate’s 
aggression, and by teachers, who pun-
ish the children for breaking the rules.
(Remember that time-out is really
temporary expulsion from the group
[Readdick & Chapman 2000].)
Rules tend to reduce teaching to
law enforcement. A rule-enforcement 
orientation can make teachers stricter
than they really want to be (Gartrell 
2010a). A joke about this is the 
teacher who meant only “not to smile 
until Christmas”—but didn’t smile for 
30 years! Over those years, what are 
the implications for the groups this
adult leads? For the teacher’s aspira-
tions to be a positive professional?

Toward guidelines

The purpose of having guidelines
is to teach children to use them. For 
instance, with the guideline “We are 
friendly with our mates,” the adult can 
calm down an upset child, then teach 
the child how to use friendlier words 
to express her feelings. (This teaching
is built on a positive adult-child rela-
tionship that the adult is always work-
ing to improve [Watson 2003].) In this 
sense, guidelines are not just “permis-
sive rules”—a common misperception 
(Gartrell 2010a). When there is danger 
of harm, teachers must be firm—but 
firm and friendly, not firm and harsh.
  Techniques like guidance talks
and conflict mediation work well, 
along with class meetings, in the firm 
but friendly teaching of guidelines
(Gartrell 2010a). The expectation is 
that children live up to guidelines
all the time, not just sometimes. 
Guidelines identify classroom stan-
dards that teachers assist children
(and other adults in the classroom) to
learn and to use.
  When adults model positive expec-
tations, they teach children the skills 

they need for civil living (Copple &
Bredekamp 2009). From the guideline 
“We are friendly with our mates,” a 
child extrapolates saying, “Please 
share the markers.” Perhaps with 
a teacher looking on, the comment 
invites dialogue and problem resolu-
tion. This set of interactions sure
beats demanding, refusing, grabbing, 
pushing away, and the teacher’s 
enforcing a “No fighting” rule.
  With infants and toddlers, guide-
lines are expectations in teachers’ 
minds. Teachers consistently refer to
and model them in teaching prosocial
behaviors. An example is “Friendly 
touches, Freddie,” as the teacher 
helps Freddie give gentle pats to 
another child.
  With older children, writing and post-
ing guidelines provides a functional
literacy activity as well as a quick 
visual reminder. Just a few guidelines 
work well; one classroom (as men-
tioned) had only one: “We are friendly 
with our mates.” (These teachers 
preferred the term mates, as in class-
mates, to friends. They respected the
children’s right to define their own 
friendships.)

Powerful Interactions: How to Connect
with Children to Extend Their Learning

Amy Laura Dombro, Judy Jablon, and Charlotte Stetson

Tune out . . . tune in . . . and connect with children.

Powerful interactions may only last a few minutes, but in that time the

teacher tunes out distractions and tunes into the child, launching a learning

experience tailored to that child. Written by the authors of The Power of

Observation, this book guides you through the three steps of Powerful

Interactions (be present, connect, extend learning) in a series of self-guided

lessons enlivened with tips, hints, invitations to reflect, and vignettes.

Comprehensive Member Benefit.

®

Order online: www.naeyc.org/store or call: 800-424-2460, option 5

ISBN: 9781928896722 • Item #245
Members: $24 20% savings • List: $30

New!

Scan for a
preview

Young Children • January 2012

  In the elementary grades, three or 
four guidelines work well (too many 
makes things complicated) (Gartrell
2010). Examples are

• We are friendly with others and 
ourselves.

• We solve problems together.

• Mistakes are okay. We just need to 
learn from them.

Class meetings

In the vignette Renilda and Cathi
use a guidance fundamental, the class 
meeting, to engage children in work-
ing with guidelines. Teachers remark 
that solutions to problems reached
through class meetings—such as tip-
toeing like mommy and daddy ele-
phants—are frequently more creative 
than what they themselves might have 
come up with (Gartrell 2010b). Class 
meetings can involve children in set-
ting new guidelines and re-teach the 
use of existing ones (Gartrell 2006). 
Teachers often hold class meetings at
the beginning of the year to invite the
group to develop a few overall guide-
lines (Vance & Jimenez Weaver 2002). 
Class meetings empower children to 
be contributing citizens of a learning 
community, work together to attain a 
sense of belonging, and develop indi-
vidual responsibility (Vance & Jimenez 
Weaver 2002; DeVries & Zan 2003).

Toward the positive

  As I see it, moving to the posi-
tive requires an attitude shift by the 
teacher from being a technician to
being a professional. A technician
operates with the ongoing mission 
of rule enforcement. In contrast, a 
teacher who is a professional continu-
ously makes judgments about situ-
ations based on a mission to under-
stand and guide—a mission greatly 
aided by the use of guidelines that
transcend rules and their baggage.
In the process of becoming more
effective professionals, teachers need 
to trust in and refine their developing 
skills of observation, communication, 
and relationship building. Change, 
which often takes some courage, 
begins within the mind of the teacher. 
Adults learn even as they teach, and 
that is a good thing—for the children 
and for the adults.

References
Buhs, E.S., G.W. Ladd, & S.L. Herald-Brown. 
2010. “Victimization and Exclusion: Links 
to Peer Rejection, Classroom Engagement, 
and Achievement.” Handbook of Bullying in
Schools: An International Perspective, eds.
S.R. Jimerson, S.M. Swearer, & D.L. Espelage.
New York: Routledge.

Copple, C., & S. Bredekamp, eds. 2009. Develop-
mentally Appropriate Practice in Early Child-
hood Programs Serving Children from Birth
through Age 8. 3rd ed. Washington, DC: NAEYC.

DeVries, R., & B. Zan. 2003. “When Children Make 
Rules.” Educational Leadership 61 (1): 22–29.

Ettekal, I., & G.W. Ladd. 2009. “The Stability of 
Aggressive Behavior toward Peers as a Pre-
dictor of Externalizing Problems from Child-
hood through Adolescence.” Handbook of
Aggressive Behavior Research, eds. C. Quinn 
& S. Tawse. Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science 
Publishers.

Gartrell, D. 2006. “The Beauty of Class Meet-
ings.” Guidance Matters. Young Children 61 
(6): 54–55. 

Gartrell, D. 2010a. A Guidance Approach for
the Encouraging Classroom. Belmont, CA: 
Wadsworth/Cengage.

Gartrell, D. 2010b. “Beyond Rules to Guidelines.” 
ChildCare Exchange (July/August): 52–56.

Kontos, S., & A. Wilcox-Herzog. 1997. “Teach-
ers’ Interactions with Children: Why Are They 
So Important?” Young Children 52 (2): 4–12.

Ladd, G.W. 2006. “Peer Rejection, Aggressive 
or Withdrawn Behavior, and Psychological 
Maladjustment from Ages 5 to 12: An Exami-
nation of Four Predictive Models.” Child
Development 77 (4): 822–46.

Ladd, G.W. 2008. “Social Competence and Peer 
Relations: Significance for Young Children 
and Their Service Providers.” Early Child-
hood Services 2 (3):129–48.

Readdick, C.A., & P.L. Chapman. 2000. “Young 
Children’s Perceptions of Time Out.” Journal of
Research in Childhood Education 15 (1): 81–87.

Vance, E., & P. Jimenez Weaver. 2002. Class
Meetings: Solving Problems Together. Wash-
ington, DC: NAEYC.

Watson, M. 2003. “Attachment Theory and 
Challenging Behaviors: Reconstructing the 
Nature of Relationships.” Young Children 58 
(4): 12–20.

Wien, C.A. 2004. “From Policing to Participation: 
Overturning the Rules and Creating Amiable 
Classrooms.” Young Children 59 (1): 34–40.

Copyright © 2012 by the National Association for the
Education of Young Children. See Permissions and Reprints
online at www.naeyc.org/yc/permissions

To become leaders, early childhood education students
must understand how to build dynamic relationships with
staff, families, and the community, as well as learn all the
facts and figures about early childhood administration.
Bruno skillfully breathes life into previously dry topics
like regulatory legislation, facilities management, and
budgeting. The author infuses every chapter with
vibrantly engaging authentic case studies. What You
Need to Lead is a text students will want to read.

ISBN: 9781928896807 • Item #363

Members: $30.40 20% savings • List: $38.00
Scan for a

preview

What You Need to Lead an Early Childhood
Program: Emotional Intelligence in Practice

by Holly Elissa Bruno

Coming this winter!

®
Order online: www.naeyc.org/store or call: 800-424-2460, option 5

The January 2012 issue of NEXT for Young
Children includes a ready-to-use training
outline related to content from this article.
NAEYC members can access NEXT for Young
Children in the newly enhanced members only
section of the website through www.naeyc.
org/login. Not a member? Visit www.naeyc.
org/membership to get this resource and
more!

F om Rules to Guideli

n

es

Moving to the Positive

notices them and declares, “I like how

nice to your friends,” they may have

you boys and girls are walking quietly

an unspoken “or else” implication in

down the hall.”

teachers’ minds.

“Shh,” one child says, “you’ll wake

When an adult enforces rules with

the babies.”

children, the children know they have

The problem with rules

done something wrong. However, the negative experience in rule enforce-

Think about the likely differences in

ment does not teach them what to do

learning climate in these set

tings

:

instead (Readdick & Chapman 2000);

• One classroom has the rule, “No talk-

for example, “You know the rule, no

ing in line.” Another has the guideline,

hitting! Go to the time-out chair.” Busy

“We are quiet in line so we don’t wake

with enforcement, adults easily forget

the babies” (or with older students,

the importance of teaching children

” … so we don’t bother children in

positive strategies like using words or

other classrooms”).

walking away as alternatives to hurting a classmate.

• One classroom has the rule, “Don’t

Rules can cause teachers to label

hand in work with careless mistakes.”

children, lump them in groups, and

Another has the guideline, “Mistakes are

enforce rules accordingly: be lenient

okay. We just need to learn from them.”

with the “good children,” who mostly

In a Young Children article worth

obey rules, and be strict with the

revisiting, Wien (2004) makes the case

“naughty children,” who often break

that rules tend not to be helpful in

rules. Studies show that children

early childhood communities. Rules are usually stated as negatives. In fact, the way most rules are worded, it seems as if adults expect children to break them (Wien 2004). For example, with the rule “No hitting,” teachers often feel pressure to be hypervigilant for this behavior, and then basically can only ignore the behavior or punish the child when it happens—limited options indeed. Even when rules are not totally negative, such as “Be

Aøf472

At the end of a wing in an elementary school, a prekindergarten class walks past primary grade classrooms four times a day. The preschoolers have trouble remcnbering not to talk. With doors open due to the school’s old air conditiorng system, their chatter distracts the primary children and their teachers. The principal discusses the problem with Renilda and Cathi, the pre-K teaches. They agree to figure out a way to havo the preschoolers walk in line more qu etly.

Renilda recalls a group punishment from her schooldays—when some children tal; in line, the entire class had to “prac ice” walking up and down the hall five :rnes in complete silence. Renilda sha: •s with Cathi how she still feels bummc d out about the experience—she wasn’t one of the ones talking—ane how negative the class felt toward tf e “talkers” and upset they were with tm teacher.

Not wanti:a to introduce the negative dynami of group punishment in their classrc ‘m, the two teachers hold a class mec ng. They matter-of-factly explain the oblem to the children and ask what wr ‘Id help them remember to walk quietly. The teachers acknowledge each idea ti children offer. One child says, “We c ald be mammy and daddy elephants. V have to tiptoe so we don’t wake the babies.” Everyone likes this idea, arthey decide to try it.

As the ch

Iren line up the next day,

the teacher

ask them if they remember

how they a

going to walk quietly. The

children rev

•mber. the class

tiptoes by t’

principa:’s office, he

Dan Gartrell, EdD, is emeritus professor of early childhood and foundations education at Bemidji State University in northern Minnesota. A former Head Start teacher, Dan is the author of The Power of Guidance, A Guidance Approach for the Encour aging Classroom and What the Kids Said Today.

Please send possible guidance anecdotes and other comments to dgartreil@ bemidjistate.edu.

Portions of this article originally appeared in Exchange magazine (July/August 2010; wwvv.ChildCareExchange.com).

A study guide for this article is available through www.naeyc.org/memberlogin. This column is also available in an online archive at www.naeyc.org/yc/columns.

Guidance Matters has a new schedule. It appears in the January, May, and September issues of Young Children.

56

Young Children •January 2012

frequently subjected to punitive rule enforcement feel rejected, develop negative self-images, and may have long-term problems with aggressiveness in school and life (Ladd 2008; Ettekal & Ladd 2009).

Professor Gary Ladd, at Arizona State University, and his associates have conducted landmark studies on the long-term impact of rejection on young children (Ladd 2006; Buhs, Ladd, & Herald-Brown 2010). Such children are rejected by peers, who are bothered by their classmate’s aggression, and by teachers, who punish the children for breaking the rules. (Remember that time-out is really temporary expulsion from the group [Readdick & Chapman 20001.)

Rules tend to reduce teaching to law enforcement. A rule-enforcement orientation can make teachers stricter than they really want to be (Gartrell 2010a). A joke about this is the teacher who meant only “not to smile until Christmas”—but didn’t smile for 30 years! Over those years, what are the implications for the groups this adult leads? For the teacher’s aspirations to be a positive professional?

Toward guidelines

The purpose of having guidelines is to teach children to use them. For instance, with the guideline “We are friendly with our mates,” the adult can calm down an upset child, then teach the child how to use friendlier words to express her feelings. (This teaching is built on a positive adult-child relationship that the adult is always working to improve [Watson 20031.) In this sense, guidelines are not just “permissive rules”—a common misperception (Gartrell 2010a). When there is danger of harm, teachers must be firm—but firm and friendly, not firm and harsh. Techniques like guidance talks and conflict mediation work well, along with class meetings, in the firm but friendly teaching of guidelines (Gartrell 2010a). The expectation is that children live up to guidelines all the time, not just sometimes. Guidelines identify classroom standards that teachers assist children (and other adults in the classroom) to learn and to use.

When adults model positive expectations, they teach children the skills they need for civil living (Copple & Bredekamp 2009). From the guideline “We are friendly with our mates,” a child extrapolates saying, “Please share the markers.” Perhaps with a teacher looking on, the comment invites dialogue and problem resolution. This set of interactions sure beats demanding, refusing, grabbing, pushing away, and the teacher’s enforcing a “No fighting” rule.

With infants and toddlers, guidelines are expectations in teachers’ minds. Teachers consistently refer to and model them in teaching prosocial behaviors. An example is “Friendly touches, Freddie,” as the teacher helps Freddie give gentle pats to another child.

With older children, writing and posting guidelines provides a functional literacy activity as well as a quick visual reminder. Just a few guidelines work well; one classroom (as mentioned) had only one: “We are friendly with our mates.” (These teachers preferred the term mates, as in classmates, to friends. They respected the children’s right to define their own friendships.)

In the ele:nentary grades, three or Toward the positive

four guidelines work well (too many

makes things complicated) (Gartrell

As I see it, moving to the posi-

2010). Examples are

tive requires an attitude shift by the

• We are friendly with others and

teacher from being a technician to

ourselves.

being a professional. A technician operates with the ongoing mission

• We solve problems together.

of rule enforcement. In contrast, a

• Mistakes are okay. We just need to

teacher who is a professional continu-

learn from them.

ously makes judgments about situations based on a mission to undermission greatly

use a guidance fundamental, the class meeting, to engage children in working with guidelines. Teachers remark that solutions to problems reached through meetings—such as tiptoeing like tnommy and daddy elephants—arv frequently more creative than what they themselves might have come up

(Gartrell 2010b).

Class

meetings c involve children in setting new
lelines and re-teach the use of exis•

•g ones (Gartrell 2006).
Teachers
•n hold class meetings at the begi

of the year to invite the group to
•lop a few overall guidelines (Vane & Jimenez Weaver 2002). Class mee empower children to be contrib citizens of a learning communi •,vork together to attain a sense of I naging, and develop indi-

In the process of becoming more effective professionals, teachers need to trust in and refine their developing skills of observation, communication, and relationship building. Change, which often takes some courage, begins within the mind of the teacher. Adults learn even as they teach, and that is a good thing—for the children and for the adults.
References
Buhs, E.s., C.W. Ladd, &S.L. Hecald-Crown. 2010. “Victimization and Exclusion: Links to Peer Rejection, Classroom Engagement, and Achievement.” Handbook of Bullying in Schools: An International Perspective, eds. S.R. Jimerson, S.M. Swearer, & D.L Espelage.
New York: Routledge.
Copple, C., & S. Bredekamp, eds. 2009. Developmentally Appropriate Practice in Early Childhood Programs Serving Children from Birth

stand and guide—a aided by the use of guidelines that transcend rules and their baggage.

Class
n
tings

Comin

vidual ressibility (Vance & Jimenez through Age 8. 3rd ed. Washington, DC: NAEYC. Weaver 2Devries & Zan 2003). is winter!

What You NeeLead an Early Childhood Program: EmoI Intelligence in Practice

by Holly Elissa Bruno

To become leaders must understand h staff, families, and facts and figurer Bruno skillfully W like regulatory legr budgeting. The at” ntly engaging d to Lead is a

ISBN: 97? Members:

Order onll*”

DeVries, R. , & B. Zan. 2003. “When Children Make Rules.” Educational Leadership 61 (l): 22—29.

Ettekal, L, & G.w. Ladd. 2009. “The Stability of Aggressive Behavior toward Peers as a Predictor of Externalizing Problems from Childhood through Adolescence.” Handbook of Aggressive Behavior Research, eds. C. Quinn & S. Tawse. Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers.

Gartrell, D. 2006. “The Beauty of Class Meetings.” Guidance Matters. Young Children 61

(6): 54-55.

Gartrell, D. 201 Oa. A Guidance Approach for the Encouraging Classroom. Belmont, CA:

Wadsworth/Cengage.

Gartrell, D. 2010b. “Beyond Rules to Guidelines.” ChildCare Exchange (July/August): 52—56.

Kontos, S., & A. Wilcox-Herzog. 1997. “Teachers’ Interactions with Children: Why Are They So Important?” Young Children 52 (2):4—12.

Ladd, G.W. 2006. “Peer Rejection, Aggressive or Withdrawn Behavior, and Psychological Maladjustment from Ages 5 to 12: An Examination of Four Predictive Models.” Child Development 77 (4): 822—46.

Ladd, G.W. 2008. “Social Competence and Peer Relations: Significance for Young Children and Their Service Providers.” Early Childhood Services 2 (3):129—48.

Readdick, C.A., & P.L. Chapman. 2000. “Young Children’s Perceptions of Time Out.” Journal of Research in Childhood Education 15 (I): 81—87.

Vance. E., & P. Jimenez Weaver. 2002. Class Meetings: Solving Problems Together. Washington, DC: NAEYC.

Watson, M. 2003. “Attachment Theory and

Challenging Behaviors: Reconstructing the

Nature of Relationships.” Young Children 58 12-20.

Wien, C.A. “From Policing to Participation: Overturning the Rules and Creating Amiable Classrooms.” Young Children 59 (l): 34—40.

Copyright 0 2012 by the National Association for the Education of Young Children. See Permissions and Reprints online at www.naeyc.org/yclpermissions

The January 2012 issue of NEXT for Young Children includes a ready-to-use training outline related to content from this article.

NAEYC members can access NEXT for Young Children in the newly enhanced members only section of the website through www.naeyc. org/login. Not a member? Visit www.naeyc.

org/membership to get this resource and more!

Young Children •January 2012