Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Gemma Mangino
Professor Gray
ECE 251-3001
Environment Observation
Environment Observation
2. Telephone: (702)-799-3430
6. Centers: Reading center held five students, writing center held ten students, math center
held four students, audio learning center (Smart A.N.T.S) held four students.
❖ Centers are clearly defined: Some centers, the audio learning, and reading centers
were clearly defined by obvious materials placed within the centers, such as books,
and laptops. The other centers, the math and writing centers, were not clearly defined
or labeled in any way, however, the students knew where each center was easily
❖ Space for Privacy: The space for privacy was very limited. The students working on
writing were limited to the individual spaces of their desks if they desired privacy.
Mangino 2
The majority of the students were grouped together but worked independently if they
❖ Space of each center: Each center was spaced out evenly, however, it was a little
tight due to the small size of the classroom. Regardless the students were able to work
❖ Visual Boundaries: The visual boundaries were limited to each center. The reading
center was easy to locate because of the books, the audio center was obvious due to
the laptop location, although the math and writing centers were not easily spotted
❖ Laminated name tags: The only laminated area was the reading center.
❖ Noise level: The noise level was tolerable for a small classroom. Students worked
❖ Clear pathways: There were no easily accessible pathways because students were
given the chance to work at their desks or on the floor for their writing center.
❖ Gross Motor Equipment: There was no gross motor equipment. However, there was
❖ Chairs: There was a chair for each student for each center and desk. Also, there were
❖ Desks: Majority of the desks were grouped in fives and some in four. They were all
❖ Laptops: Laptops were placed accordingly at the audio learning center, and each
❖ Easel: The easel was placed in the reading center where some students worked with
❖ Writing materials: The students had their own writing materials at their desk or has
❖ Books: Books were placed in the reading center, and placed in the front of the room
❖ Worksheets: The worksheets for the writing center appeared to be given to the
❖ Math blocks: There were various blocks in the math center with different colors, and
sizes to them. They were stored in a storage bin near the assigned center.
❖ Plastic Coins: There were coins in the math center that were stored separately from
❖ Familiar materials: There were only a few similar materials, such as a computer that
most students use at home. And there were certain books the students seemed to be
familiar with.
❖ Storage Bins: Storage bins were clearly placed for each center and stored in open
❖ Shelving: The shelving for books were placed neatly with books on them for students
❖ Book casing: The bookcases had more books in them than the shelving did and
❖ Personal Storage: Each student had their own hook near the door for their personal
belongings. On top of the hooks was a shelving unit that had their personal
mailboxes. Each student also had their personal storage in their desks.
❖ Easy Access to materials: Each center had materials that were easily accessible for
the students to utilize on their own without needing help from their teacher.
❖ The consistency of Stored Materials: The consistency of the material was very
accurate. Students knew that when they were given a five-minute transition time they
had to put the materials they were using back where they were originally stored.
❖ Safety: The centers are deemed as safe. However, due to an unclear pathway, it is no
ventilation present in the room. However, there was no natural lighting present. There
were windows available, but each one was closed and the blinds were shut preventing
❖ Colorful objects: The only colorful objects at a center were the math blocks at the
math center. The classroom was decorated with colorful learning posters and student
artwork.
❖ Correct size and shape of furniture: The furniture was the correct sizing for the
11. Diversity: The way the teacher represented diversity within her classroom was
displaying student’s artwork on a bulletin board. Each student had artwork up explaining
12. (a.) Classroom in Action: Students were assigned to different centers along the walls of
the classroom by groups for twenty minutes. Each student worked either individually or
in partnerships depending on their assigned center. They were given the opportunity to
work at their desk or on the floor. Each student used this time to work on their activities
and engage in quite a conversation with their peers. They used the materials each center
provided. After the twenty minutes was over the teacher gave a five minute clean up a
warning. Students then proceeded to clean up their area, put materials away, and then
13. (b.) Evaluation: The children were given enough time to complete their tasks efficiently
and interact with their peers. For example, a pair of students worked together with their
vocabulary assignment at the writing center and interacted with one another by asking
each other questions and helping each other with the words they had to write down.
Another interactive example was during their reading center students read the same book
together and talked about the book together. The students were given the opportunity to
work where they wanted in their center. For example, they could work at their desks or
on the floor near their center. The transition time was timed well because it gave them
enough time to put their items away and wait for further instructions.
14. Rating: 4
15. Strengths and Weaknesses: The strengths found in this classroom were the materials
given in each center, for example, a number of books they could choose to read from.
Mangino 6
However, a weakness in this area would be the lack of variety of centers the students had
to choose from, considering there was a maximum of four centers. Another strength was
the social interaction the students were allowed while working. Also, the group sizes
were appropriate for each center size. However, a weakness was that the writing group
was the largest center due to the lack of how many centers there were total. Another
weakness was the option to actually choose where the students wanted to go, the teacher
16. Improvements: The teacher could provide more stimulating centers that are more
creative, for example, an art center. Also, she could space out her students more evenly
among each center instead of assigning ten students to the writing center. She could also
label more clearly where each center is with name tags. I also believe that she should
allow her students to choose where they want to work that day instead of automatically