The Power to Protect Children

What should the nursery teacher certification exam be making difficult?

I am not saying that I want the exam to be made easier.

Rather, since childcare is a professional job that involves being entrusted with children's lives, I believe a certain level of difficulty is necessary.

However, there is a sense of discomfort I have felt for a long time.

That is, the current nursery teacher exam might have
the 'direction of its difficulty' misaligned with the actual workplace.

Looking at the failure rates of the nursery teacher exam, the difficult subjects are roughly in the following order:

1st: Social Welfare
2nd: Child and Family Welfare
3rd: Principles of Education
4th: Social Care
5th: Child Nutrition and Health
6th: Child Psychology
7th: Child Health
8th: Childcare Practice Theory
9th: Principles of Childcare

Of course, Social Welfare, Child and Family Welfare, and Principles of Education are all important.

Childcare is not a job where you only look at the child.
It is necessary to understand various backgrounds, such as families, communities, administration, welfare systems, abuse, poverty, disabilities, and social care.

Therefore, there is meaning in learning about systems and laws.

But I wonder.

Is that really knowledge that should be questioned so heavily at the beginning, to the point of screening out nursery teachers standing at the entrance?

What is the knowledge used every day when you go out into the field?

It is Principles of Childcare.
Child Health.
Child Nutrition and Health.
Child Psychology.
Childcare Practice Theory.

Principles of Childcare is the foundation of childcare work.
Child Health is the knowledge to protect lives.
Child Nutrition and Health is the knowledge to nurture bodies.
Child Psychology is the knowledge to understand children's hearts.
Childcare Practice Theory is the knowledge to interact with, play with, and express things with children.

In other words, these are the subjects used most in the field.

Yet, looking at the pass rates, these are relatively easier subjects to pass.

On the other hand, subjects like systems, laws, history, chronologies, figures, and statistics tend to be the most difficult.

I have a strong sense of discomfort with this.

This does not represent the importance in the field, but rather,
isn't it just that things that are easier to create as exam questions are being made difficult?

Laws and systems tend to fixate on a single correct answer.

It is written in the articles of the law.
The year is fixed.
The achievements of historical figures are fixed.
There are statistical figures.

Therefore, it is easy to create questions.
It is easy to grade.
It is also difficult to raise objections.

On the other hand, on-site judgment is difficult,

Every child's condition is different.
The situation at the nursery is also different.
The relationship with parents is also different.
Their physical condition that day is also different.
Are they crying, are they sleepy, are they anxious, or are they feeling unwell?
You must determine this on the spot.

Therefore, it is difficult to create case study questions for the field.
It is difficult to narrow it down to one correct answer.
It is difficult to create grading criteria.

But that is precisely why I believe we must not run away from it.

What is truly necessary for childcare is not
the ability to memorize easily answered knowledge, but the ability to choose the right judgment that must not be mistaken in the field, isn't it?

I am not against making the exam difficult in itself.

I am saying that I want it to be a meaningful difficulty.

There should be no subject that is impossible to make difficult.
Rather, if you know the field, I think you can create any number of essential, challenging questions.

What should the childcare worker exam make difficult?

Knowing the system is important.
Knowing the law is also important.
There is also meaning in learning history.

But at the entrance to the profession of childcare, what should be asked first is
the ability to protect the child in front of you, isn't it?

I previously watched a television program that dealt with the swallowing ability of children and the elderly.

Researchers were using machines to collect data and quantify swallowing ability.
I do not intend to deny that in itself.
Research is important, and data is also necessary.
Medical and scientific knowledge also supports the safety of childcare in some parts.

But when that becomes an exam question, I feel a sense of doubt.

For example, suppose there was a question like this.

What is the swallowing ability of a 1-year-old?
1) 0.5
2) 0.75
3) 0.77
4) 1

Suppose the answer is 3.

So, can a childcare worker who can answer that really protect children in the field?

That machine does not exist in the field.
It is impossible to measure swallowing ability with numerical values every time.
In the first place, are those values from when the child is healthy?
What about when they are sleepy?
What about when they are crying?
What about when they are feeling unwell?
What about when the food is unfamiliar?
What about when the child is feeling unstable?

Humans are not beings that can be judged solely by machine-generated numbers.

Childcare workers in the field are watching the children.

Today, their swallowing is slower than usual.
They are a bit fussy.
They look sleepy.
They are holding food in their mouth.
Their expression is stiff.
They look like they might choke.
It is dangerous to force them to continue.

That is how we judge, not by numbers, but by the state of the child in front of us.

If the exam only asks whether you remember numerical values,
that cannot be said to be measuring the ability to work in the field.

What should really be asked is,

Is it okay for this child to keep eating now?
Where should I stop them?
What posture is safe?
What kind of food requires caution?
What should I do first if something goes wrong?
How should I communicate this to the parents?

Isn't that the kind of judgment required?

Childcare is not a job that can be done with numbers alone.
Childcare is a job of watching children.
Their expressions, posture, breathing, swallowing, mood, physical condition, and relationships that day.
It is a job of synthesizing all of these to choose 'what to do now'.

That is why I want to pose a question to the current exam.

It is necessary to test knowledge.
But does that knowledge lead to judgment in the field?

Asking about historical years,
asking about legal provisions,
asking about numerical values,
there is an absolute correct answer to those as problems.

But what is necessary for childcare ishow to use the knowledge you have learned in front of the children.

Instead of an exam that fails people based on knowledge far from the field,
let's move toward an exam that asks about judgments that must not be mistaken in the field.

This is the improvement to the childcare worker exam that I am thinking of.

The childcare worker exam can be closer to the field.

• We can ask about the principles of childcare more deeply.

• We can ask about child health more practically.

• We should be questioning child nutrition and diet more from the perspective of accident prevention.

• We should be questioning the psychology of childcare more as a way to understand children's behavior.

• We should be questioning childcare practice theory more as a way to engage with children.

If we are going to make it difficult, that is where we should do it.

Instead of failing people based on rote memorization of systems, we should test them on the judgment required to protect children in the field.

That should lead to increasing the value of the childcare qualification.

I do not mean to deny scholars or researchers.
I do not mean to belittle laws or systems.
I do not mean to eliminate the rigor of a national qualification.

However, as someone who has stood in the field of childcare, there is something I truly want to convey.

Childcare does not happen only at a desk.
Childcare does not happen only within the confines of exam questions.

Childcare exists in the breathing of the child right in front of you.
It exists in the changes in their expressions.
It exists in those small moments of unease.
It exists in the split-second judgment of sensing that 'today might be a little dangerous.'

I want the exam to be one that fosters that power.

The childcare worker exam should not be a tool to weed out childcare workers,
but rather a tool to foster those who stand in the field of childcare to be safer and more reliable.

Not learning just to get a qualification, but learning to protect children.
Not learning that ends with memorization, but learning that allows for judgment in the field.
Not knowledge for the sake of an exam, but knowledge that reaches the lives and hearts of children.

What is truly needed,is to shift the direction of the difficulty toward the field,I believe.

The thoughts behind this post
I would be happy if you took a look. ↓

Creative Fiction

Useful Goods

Last Week's Post

Last Week's True/False Quiz