It is common for kindergarten teachers to reward children with small stars and small items, which not only makes children experience the pleasure of success, but also enhances their self-confidence, and even subconsciously forms a benign incentive competition, which promotes their self-motivation. As a kindergarten teacher, I have always done this. However, a lazy time has given me another understanding of such a reward.

It was a Friday afternoon, a routine week to sum up the reward activities. I wanted to spend some time on it. Every child got a rabbit made of colored paper to make them happy. I broke two rabbits, but I was delayed by other things. Later, I couldn't get up. I continued to fold. What should I do? Suddenly, an idea occurred to me. Why don't I make a mistake and make two rabbits and other stars of different sizes and colors as prizes, and let the children evaluate them themselves. How can I reward them? As a result, the children were extremely active and excited, and their enthusiasm was greatly improved. They all have a say. Every time I present an award, they tell me who the award should be given to and why it should be given to him. After the whole class passed, I gave the prize to the children, and then other children said some encouraging words, hoping that the children who won the prize would work hard to make progress next week.

I tasted the sweetness once, and in the future reward activities, I gave the reward right to the children. Gradually, I found that their thinking has made a remarkable leap, they have their own unique views on various things, they dare to express them boldly, and their oral expression has also been greatly improved. The most important thing is to learn to appreciate the advantages of others and know your own shortcomings.

Looking back, I can't help shivering, can I? Under the protection of all kinds of so-called rewards and external interests, I unconsciously entered a misunderstanding, that is, I naturally monopolized the autonomy of rewards on myself, and measured the performance of children with the teacher's vision and consciousness as the standard, so that I ignored the interaction and openness of the activity itself, which easily made children have an idea that the teacher's standard was right, and the teacher said who was a good child would win the little star slowly. Isn't this against our educational purpose? How terrible! Fortunately, now I finally wake up and get out of the misunderstanding. What's more gratifying is that all the children in our class have consciously improved in different aspects and to varying degrees.