The Legacy of Fred Rogers in the Professional Development of Early Childhood Educators

The following is a written version of the presentation made at The Work of Fred Rogers: A Conference on His Context and His Legacy, held June 16-17, 2023 at The Fred Rogers Institute.

By way of quick introduction, my name is Amanda Morgan, and I write, speak, podcast, and provide professional development for early childhood educators from my site and independent small business, Not Just Cute.  Primarily, I work to support intentional whole-child development and to help all members of learning communities – the parents, teachers, administrators, and decision-makers – to understand that the work we do in early childhood, teaching through play and communication and relationships, is not just “cute,” but it’s actually very powerful, extremely important, and in too many environments, it’s being pushed out.

But before I started doing all of that, I was, of course, a child.  And as a child, I spent a generous amount of time watching PBS, which means I spent a lot of time visiting Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood.  So much so, that I’m a bit embarrassed to admit how old I was when I realized that the back of a penny was, in fact, NOT Mister Rogers’ trolley.

Knowing the impact Fred Rogers and Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood has had on me, not only as a child, but as an early childhood professional, I wondered how that compared with the experiences of other professionals in the early childhood field.  Perhaps some of our earliest professional development training actually happened when we were in early childhood ourselves.

I asked a sample of about 200 early childhood professionals about the impact Fred Rogers’ legacy has had on them as professionals.  One of the first questions I asked, was whether or not they watched Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood.  About 72% said they watched the program.  That’s a high number, but what was more interesting, was that an even higher number, about 81%, said they felt Fred Rogers’ legacy influenced them as professionals.  So, we can already see that his impact extends beyond the scope of those who watched his program.

When those who had watched were asked about the outstanding or overarching memories of that experience, there were the expected answers —  comments about puppets and songs and memories of love, kindness, and acceptance.  What really stood out, however, was that as they shared these memories, the language was often very personal.  They didn’t just watch it, they experienced it.  Common patterns in the phrases emerged such as, “I felt loved”, “I felt safe,” “He was talking right to me,” or even, “He could see into my soul.”

As children, we watched Fred teach us what to do with the mad that we feel and how crayons are made, but what I realize now was that he was also modeling best practices based on powerful, deep, and simple theories.  Nothing made it onto his program without first going through a filter of intentional child development based on his personal study of human development, as well as his work with his mentor, Dr. Margaret McFarland.  Based on the many influences of his time, he had formed his own patchwork philosophy and practice, which, incidentally, still holds up well against today’s ongoing research. 

Realizing that for many early childhood professionals, their first experience with foundational theories and practices may actually have been watching Fred Rogers model them, I asked my sample how familiar they were with various theorists and researchers.

Using a Likert scale, I asked them to rate how familiar they were with prominent figures in developmental theory, research, and practice.  The percentages in the chart reflect those that rated their familiarity with these people as a 5 – the highest on the scale.  The work of Fred Rogers aligns with various parts of the work of each of these people.  However, while few participants indicated a high level of familiarity with these figures, over 60% of them rated their familiarity with Fred Rogers’ impact as high.

Figure	Rated Familiarity as 5
Maria Montessori	40.8%
Jean Piaget	36.7%
Erik Erikson	27.5%
T. Berry Brazelton	22.9%
Lev Vygotsky	20.4%
Friedrich Froebel	9.1%
Alison Gopnik	4.3%
Kathy Hirsh-Pasek	3.3%
Margaret McFarland	2.8%
Fred Rogers	64.8%

That difference became even more pronounced when asked if these educators visually recognized some of those same people.  (How would you do?)

Almost 100% of participants recognized Fred Rogers.  About half could identify Maria Montessori.  Around a third attempted to identify Jean Piaget, though several misidentified him as Freud, Erikson, or Vygotsky.  And the hardest one?  Modern-day developmental psychologist, Dr. Alison Gopnik – only 30 people even attempted to identify her and about a third of those were wrong.

While this finding isn’t surprising, it is significant.

We saw Mister Rogers; we didn’t just read about him.  We watched as he modeled his work.  While there is great value in the work and the words of each of these giants, there is a particular potency in having the personal experience of watching Fred Rogers put these theories into action.  That personal experience becomes an indelible part of our own personal practice – a reference point.  In a way, many of us were mentored by Fred without even realizing it.

To further understand this impact, I asked the 81% who said they were influenced as professionals by Fred Rogers’ legacy, to describe that influence in an open-ended format.  As I read over those responses, I began to notice themes emerging, so I coded the answers according to those themes.  Some descriptions included more than one theme, which meant a single response could be included in multiple categories.  Those five main themes were Love, Acceptance, Being Child-Centered, Quietude, and Valuing Play and Wonder.

I’d like to share a little about each of those themes, how they emerged in the responses and how, for many professionals, the familiarity of Fred Rogers’ words and work create a bridge to developmental theory as well as current research.  Early childhood professionals may not feel familiar with the names and theories of current researchers and foundational theorists, but by knowing Fred, they actually know more about those corresponding principles than they realize.

LOVE

It’s not surprising that love was an overriding theme in many responses.  Words like “care,” “compassion,” “kindness,” “relationships,” and “connection” were used frequently.

One respondent said: “…He made a point of seeing and connecting with people. In my most precious moments as an educator that is what I have done too.  This is a good reminder for me to have less “robot moments” of trying to check things off my list – and more connection instead.”

This connects with a growing body of current research shared by Harvard’s Jack Shonkoff and others, showing that love and relationships quite literally change the brain and its ability to learn effectively.  When I share some of this research in my trainings, participants find that research fascinating and important, but I often wrap it up by saying, “and if you don’t want to listen to psychologists and neuroscientists, you can always listen to Mister Rogers, who taught us that, ‘A love of learning has a lot to do with learning that we are loved.’” (source)

There’s a different feeling that comes over the room.  A look of recognition.  Of not just knowing the truth of those words because they sound good and make sense, but because they’ve personally seen and felt that truth themselves.

The original Mr. McFeely, David Newell, stopped by the conference for a “Speedy Delivery.”

ACCEPTANCE

Acceptance was another top theme, with words and phrases like “inclusive,” “without judging,” “ok to make mistakes,” and “just the way you are.” I think Fred would likely argue that the type of acceptance respondents described with these words is just a subset of love, as he explained, “To love someone is to strive to accept that person exactly the way he or she is, right here and now.” (source)

In addition to his humanist and religious influences, his perspectives on acceptance may have come from his understanding of Erikson’s theories of identity and sense of self. They also perfectly embody Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory.  Afterall, one could say Fred was “irrationally crazy” about every child in his Neighborhood, loving what others may not see or even want to see.

But it’s often Fred’s words that connect the educators in this sample to the principles from these theorists, as one respondent shared, “I strongly value each child ‘just the way they are’ and I work hard to make them feel seen and important.”

CHILD-CENTERED

Being child-centered emerged as well, with references to Fred’s amazing ability to connect with children on their level, to speak in a way that wasn’t patronizing but also respected their unique perspective.  He was a fierce advocate for children and for childhood in every space he entered.

This child-centered perspective connects to many theorists and practitioners – Maria Montessori is just one powerful example, as she reminded us to “follow the child.”

But it’s Fred that these educators mention as influencing them to think of the children first. (source)

One participant’s comment could almost be mistaken for something Fred would have said himself, speaking of his influence saying, “I think it is always important to listen, really listen to children.  Too many times we think what an adult has to say is more important and we need to make sure children know we care about what they have to say.”

QUIETUDE

Quietude was a theme that was easy to see but difficult to name.  Many responses included references to Fred’s calm, quiet, peaceful, and unhurried demeanor.

In an interview in the 1990s, Fred said, “I’m very concerned that our society is much more interested in information than wonder – in noise, rather than silence.” I often wonder what he would think of our society’s pace today.

As responses reflected on his influence on their own practice, I was struck by the recognition that there was actually strength in Fred’s kind and gentle approach (He was “kind and gentle, but strong.”).  One educator reflected on Fred’s direct influence on her practice, saying, “When I think of him, I am reminded to slow down, to be gentle, to really listen and pay attention to each individual child no matter how busy I am.  I don’t always succeed, but thinking of him helps.”

Fred’s pace is actually referenced in the more current work of Dr. Dimitri Christakis, who has contrasted Fred’s deliberate, slower pace with the detrimental impacts of the more frenetic pacing of many of today’s programs.  The importance of a powerful pause is also found in emerging work on language development, cognition, and coregulation.  The ability to use silence effectively truly is a quiet strength.

PLAY AND WONDER

Last, but not least, the theme of valuing play and wonder emerged.  (Examples included “imagination,” “explore the wonder of things,” “playful,” and “made learning feel magical.”)

Certainly, this theme could be found in many prominent theories of Fred’s day, (Piaget, Montessori, and Steiner all asserted children require long uninterrupted periods of play and exploration, for example) and it was certainly a frequent topic of conversation with his mentor, Dr. McFarland.

The importance of play has also been supported by more current research.  One of my favorite examples is the work of Kathy Hirsh-Pasek and Roberta Golinkoff who have shared that a growing body of research shows that the best learning happens in a playful learning environment, where children are actively engaged in meaningful, social, iterative, and joyful experiences.

Their work would come as no surprise to Fred, whose quote about play received more positive responses from participants than any of the other Fred quotes on the survey.  Many respondents even mentioned this quote directly as they discussed what they had learned from Fred:

“Play is the best teacher.”

“In a nutshell: play is the work of children.”

“That play is work.  Children learn through their play and in a playful, safe environment.”

We can see how a part of Fred’s legacy has been woven into how these early childhood professionals see their work and engage in their practice.  But what I hadn’t anticipated is that just as Fred’s work became a model and a mentor for many young neighbors turned early childhood professionals, those professionals are now integrating that influence into their own work as mentors, weaving that legacy into the lives and the work of those who may not personally be as familiar with Fred’s work.

“The idea that I begin all of my Intro to EC classes with is that you must have two guide stones – respect and relationships.  I feel that this is a direct reflection of Fred Rogers’ philosophy.”

“I have learned over the years the value of relationships and being in relationship with my staff and children at my school is one of the most important areas I can develop.  We are here to be in relationship with one another.”

“My colleagues and I would often ask each other ‘what would Mr. Rogers do?’”

Fred would often invite people to think about those who had loved them into being.  And for many of us, he was one of those people who loved us into the professionals that we are today, even if it was years ago in that sacred space between the television screen and our young eyes.   

As I think of Fred’s impact, I am reminded that professional development isn’t something we simply transmit in words and information, but that we love people into being.  We model and mentor and built relationships.  This is where people move from seeing their work as a job to seeing it as a calling.

I asked several people about how they were loved into the professionals they are now, and how they’re doing that for others today.  And as they and each of us think about that for ourselves, we begin to see many of those same five elements discussed above: love and acceptance of where we are now, encouragement and modeling to help us to grow, joy and wonder in the process. 

I want to end by sharing one of my favorite responses to Fred’s special question.

I asked Kelli Barker, a close friend from grad school who now directs the Child Development Lab at Utah State University.  Thinking about the question, she first reminisced about mentors and peers who showed her equal parts of inspiration, challenge, and acceptance.  Then she said something profound:

“Children are the ones who really loved me into being….”

“….Every experience that I’ve had with them deepens my love for what I do and my love for wanting to pass that on to other people –  to feel what I feel.”

It reminded me so much of Fred, who, when he was asked what he had learned from the children, replied, “practically everything.”

It’s a reminder that ultimately, that is what this work – his work, our work – is all about.

 The children.

A part of Fred Rogers’ legacy is that for many of us, he modeled and mentored and loved us into being the professionals we are today.  We all have a bit of that red sweater woven into who we are, and he’s shown us how to give that gift to others as well.

As amazing as it is to be in Pittsburgh and Latrobe and see the statues and buildings and archives and artifacts here, Fred Rogers’ legacy isn’t in the “stuff”.  As Pericles is believed to have said, a legacy isn’t what is “engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others.”  Fred wove his legacy into every person he came in contact with – in person, or through the screen, or through the words and work he left behind.

His legacy is woven into each of us who engage in the work of serving children and families, and it continues as we weave the thread forward into the lives of those we teach.

And that is why YOU are Fred Rogers’ legacy.