Challenging myths: what is the difference between teaching children social behaviours and telling children the social behaviours? How are the differences translated in child outcomes?

Early years educators across six Catholic early years schools in Singapore embarked on a journey of discovery, examining two questions: What is the difference between teaching children social behaviours and telling children social behaviour? How are the differences translated in child outcomes?\ud \ud Educators were introduced to four socialization styles and the child outcomes associated with these styles: authoritarian, permissive, training, and authoritative. The authoritarian paradigm, based on external control, sees the child as an empty vessel, promoting unquestioned compliance, and stimulus-response thinking. Whilst authoritarian styles are teacher centered, the opposite is extreme leniency associated with an overly child centered permissive approach. Rarely are there social rules or behaviour expectations, with children making their own decisions and acting on them in any way they please. Training combines reasoning with punishment. Expecting immediate compliance, this style prioritizes obedience, respecting elders, honouring the family, emotional self-control, humility, and achievement. The fourth socialization style is the authoritative model of socialization. Social behaviours are clearly defined, respectfully and intentionally taught. Mistakes in behaviour are regarded as a necessary part of lifelong teaching and learning. \ud \ud Environment processes and instructional factors associated with the authoritative style of teaching were translated into everyday social practices. Through this process, educators continued building their capacity for teaching and guiding young children's social behaviors. It is this paradigm and these tactics that are presented in this workshop