Reference no: EM133097679

Assume the role of a staff member in the meeting concerning the materials listed belowand answer the following questions:

• As a staff member, do you agree with their recommendations? If not, why?
• What could have made their recommendations better or easier to support as a staff member?
• If there was an advocacy plan, do you think this approach would work? If you were in the meeting, would you support the initiative?

The first policy states the following, "Instruction will not change from student to student. All students are to be treated like equals and instructions will not be modified under any circumstances. Often times in life accommodations aren't made and we want to set our children up for success".

Is this policy ethical? Why or why not? I do not believe this policy as a whole is ethical. The NAEYC Code of Ethical Conduct and Statement of Commitment, Ideal 1.5 states, "To create and maintain safe and healthy setting that foster children's social, emotional, cognitive, and physical development and that respect their dignity and their contributions" (NAEYC, 2011). We are violating this ideal as we are not helping to foster a child's cognitive development. Each child is unique and may learn differently than their peers. Early Childhood Educators could be the first to recognize a learning disability in a child, and in doing so, that child will need special accommodations to help them learn.

Since this is not ethical, I would advocate for these students by holding staff meetings that help train teachers in differentiated instruction. There may be educators who went to school during a time where this was not taught. So, helping to teach them that children are different and may need different teaching styles will help to benefit all students. After a training, continuing the education on this topic will be important. We can call in local professionals to demonstrated different teaching styles based on the different types of children as well.

Policy number two states, "On water day, each kid must have a pair of water shoes that are rubber bottoms and purchased by the parents. If the child does not have them, they are not allowed to engage with water play and must remain in the classroom while their peers are outside".

Is this policy ethical? Why or why not? I do not believe this policy is ethical. There are many things to consider here. First, not all families are going to be able to afford any kind of extras. Secondly, leaving children inside and not having outside time is a punishment. All children should be able to have outside time. If a child does not have proper water day items, those without could simply play on the playground. According to the NAEYC Code of Ethical Conduct and Statement of Commitment, P-1.3-"We shall not participate in practices that discriminate against children by denying benefits, giving special advantages, or excluding them from programs or activities on the basis of their sex, race, national origin, immigration status, preferred home language, religious beliefs, medical condition, disability, or the marital status/family structure, sexual orientation, or religious beliefs or other affiliations of their families. (Aspects of this principle do not apply in programs that have a lawful mandate to provide services to a particular population of children.)" (NAEYC, 2011). All children deserve the same rights, regardless of a family's ability to afford supplies.

Since this policy is also not ethical, a staff meeting about different socioeconomic status' of the families that could possibly in our care. Also, that students, regardless of water shoes, deserve time to be outside. If there are no water shoes, then a safe place without water shoes needs to be set up for water activities. If no water gear is provided at all, then children should be given the opportunity to play outside. Continuing the education with teachers in staff meetings on this topic will help to set in the idea that all children deserve the opportunity to participate.