Springtime for children?
Reflection and learning inspired by Reggio Emilia[1]
Ingrid Stålnacke
Umeå university
Department of Education
901 87 Umeå
Sweden
Contact:
Paper presented at the European Conference on Educational Research, University of Lisbon, 11-14 September 2002
Abstract: This paper is a contribution to the EERA network:1. Continuing Professional Development in Schools
It reports observation and documentation which give teachers the opportunity to improve childhood education, based on their reading about innovations in “Reggio Emilia”. How does this kind of “Reggio Emilia” inspired practice affect pre-school, and how do the children respond? The paper is based on data from interviews with Swedish children and their teachers. It has three sections. First it introduces Swedish conception of the child. Secondly it discusses the problems encountered in the collection and analysis of interviews with children and teachers. Thirdly, it offers interpretation of the data. Overall, the paper contributes to wider debates about the value of observation and discussions with pre-school children.
Background
The Swedish pre-school have a long history. From about 1850, it has been part of Swedish society and welfare until today it is a secure part of the Swedish education system.
The pre-school has during a long time been influenced by events, historical and pedagogic. Sommer (1997) suggests that since 1960, this has given us a new and different perspective on children. Before 1960 we had many theories that described children as dependent, vulnerable and expose beings in a dangerous world. Today we have a different perspective, regarding children as thinking and learning as competent human beings. They have their own strategies and they are continuously engrossed in problem solving activities, so we have a constructivist outlook on design how we look upon children. This perspective means, too, that children can change, building upon themselves and their own experience of the world creating an interplay with the world around them (Sommer, 1997; Lenz Tanguchi 1999).
It is important, therefore, how you look upon a child’s learning and his/her acquisition of knowledge. During the last 40 years, developments in the Swedish pre-school have shifted towards pre-school activities, placing the child in the centre. The Child is competent and he wants to capture the world (Pramling Samuelsson & Sheridan, 1999 p.24).
How do we look upon a child? How can we help the child to capture the world? Sommer (1997) recommends that it will be important to observe the children in the process of change around their future development. Children need time too inquire to investigate, to analyse and to reflect. Therefore, pre-school staff must foster these possibilities (Sommer, 1997, p. 286).
Hohmann, Banet & Weikart (1989) ask what is an active learning? It is a connection between how the child thinks and his reasons. If the child wants to learn about the world around him he must be active and examine it (p.17). If something goes wrong the teacher should never correct the child, because it will be important for the child to find his own answers. Children are creative and find out how to invent thing in the world. They usually think on a different way than adults. They can see possibilities, use their five senses and be active all the time. The adults around the children can help the children in their learning process. It’s very important that the child can have the use of a big kind or material and it will be easy to reach and that the material can be classified. They learns lots of things even during times they are cleaning up. It is important to take photos, and documents everything that children are doing. After documentation it can be important to decorate the walls, so that the child and the teacher can have a look and start discussion with other children and their parents. But you had to be prepare and it will take time as Kennedy (2000) indicated, it will take much time looking and make reflecting about what children are doing so they can communicate about it.
I found Vygotskys theories of learning good for my theoretical base. When a child is playing he is working upon what he has been seeing, which is very important for his learning. Therefore the pedagogue has to act in what Vygotsky called ” the zone of proximal development” it is “the distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers.” (Vygotsky, 1978 p. 86) He means that there will be a little inventor in every child. They take the initiative in creating situations where they can learn in collaboration with more capable peers or under adult guidance (Vygotsky, 1995).
A few years ago the Swedish pre-school acquired its first national curriculum (1998) for children between the ages of 1 – 5 year. This means that the pre-school had the same status as the compulsory school (6-16). The pre-school curriculum has compulsory goals. The focus is on a competent child who has lots of thing to learn. The child shall also have confidence in his own capacity to develop a good identity. During play they should develop pleasure-filled, creative feelings and situations, and become wise in the experience experienced. Every child should, the national curriculum states, take part in his own terms (Lpfö 98, 1998). It is necessary for all teachers to discuss this value framework for their work. Teachers have to be good models for the children and stimulate and guide them in showing insight and knowledge. They have to been active and they should be given the pedagogical tools to reach these goals. The curriculum also says that teachers should create a basis for evaluating their work. The environment and the surroundings should be safe and offer encouragement for activity and playing (Pramling Samuelsson & Sheridan, 2000 p. 21).
In Reggio Emilia (a town in the northern part of Italy), a new kind of philosophy was invented after the Second World War. It is built upon deep respect for children’s rights and is strongly connected to a scientific state of mind. The key vision in “Reggio Emilia” philosophy is a researching and inquisitive child working with a researching teacher (Morén, 1999). Kennedy (2000) describes how she taught after she hade made a visit in Reggio Emilia and met one of the founders, leaders and psychologists working in Reggio Emilia, Loris Malaguzzi. He told her how he looks upon a child. It’s necessary for every pre-school staff to have the responsibility to see that the child is alert, curious and competent, and with the will to learn more and more. Documentation and observation is really important. It is a gateway to knowledge. It will be like, as Wehner-Godée (2000) suggest, an attitude. Malaguzzi had one basic thought he will see this kind of philosophy as something that will change all the time. He says “I had preserved my world because I have always try to change the world”. The pedagogic practice must always be the object of change and renewal in development of society(Svedberg & Zaar, 1998 p.284).
There is a great difference between looking and observing. Observing is more than looking. When you are observing you have an intention and a motive and you have to choose a perspective. The result is not the most important thing. Rather, it is the way the child acted. By observation we can learn about how the child might think and after that we can interpret and make some hypotheses. The goal is to identify the child’s competences so that teachers can improve pedagogic practice (Wehner – Godée, 2000 p. 21). In Reggio Emilia it is important to document. It gives the teacher and the children possibilities for reflection. Through observing what the child is thinking and doing they can have a voice in the society. Therefore the documentation ca be part of history. In Reggio Emilia it is the teachers most important task to give the children confidence, appreciation, confirmation and stimulating them to active. It is also very important to have a good environment that gives inspiration to the child (Lenz Tanguchi 1999).
Research, Purposes and Methods
This study reports, through observation and documentation, how teachers had the opportunity to improve childhood education, based on their reading about innovations in Reggio Emilia. The questions was: How does this kind of “Reggio Emilia” inspired practice affect a pre-school, and how do the children respond? Will the Swedish conception of the child be a good one so they can make their own decision, and can they be in participants and think as themselves as good and full of possibility as described in the national curriculum.
The data in this study is descriptive, qualitative and is based on interviews and observation of thirteen five-years old children and their teachers in one Swedish pre-school inspired by “Reggio Emilia”. I have also studied some documentation’s put together by the teachers.
Results
Interviews with the teachers
Before the end of the 1990 the pre-school worked traditionally with vertical grouping (1-5). In 1996 some of the pre-school teacher started to read about and visit Italy to study “Reggio Emilia” pre-schools and their philosophy. They found it very interesting. They could se how the children in the pre-school were curious, happy and demonstrating many capabilities. When they arrived back in Sweden, they started discussions in the teachers' common room. Two years later, when the pre-school got a national curriculum, (Lpfö 98, 1998) discussion revived, about value frame work, the meaning of values, and whether to adopt a shared platform of values and how to look upon a child.
All pre-schools have the requirements to do something better for children. The playground offered an abundance of possibilities. The teachers started to share the children in the way that children, with brothers and sisters in the same departments couldn’t be together any longer. They had to go to different departments. After sharing the children in the same age department, the teachers found that many children started to be more in depend and seemed to be blossoming like beautifully flowers. They also had learned from their observations. They saw that children should be able to develop both independence from others and the ability to meet society’s demands. As one of the teacher say “Children have to learn things from other children, find things out knowledge on their own and, by observation I can learn how they think and how they want to do?”
The teachers have discovered more respect for the children and learned something good about the children. They also started to have pedagogic discussions with an instructor one day a month, where they focused on questions such as what do you think are the children’s thoughts about that? And what have you been learning from your documentation and from your reflections and discussions with other teachers?
The teacher thought it was important to make observations and document them. They observed children numerous of times becoming engrossed in interesting play. They were very keen on documentation. I could see it on the wall, in the computer. And they kept files for each child. I saw things made by the children in different materials, and that they have to write down their thoughts with the help from the teachers. All this documentation makes the children keen to talk with other children. The teachers reflected a lot and had many discussions so they could learn more and more and undertake new experience. But they also touched upon the difficulty of having time for all the documentations. They could arrange it because they had children who were very independent and could help themselves.
The teacher’s ideology perceived children to be competent and capable beings who should be provided with contexts in which they could develop their abilities. They liked the inspiration that Reggio Emilia gave (and still gives) them and think it is must easier to follow and realise the goals in the curriculum: They work to questions the children’s thought so they could give them what they need by way of raised horizons - so “the bar will be higher”. They are convinced that it will be necessary to find their own models, not to do exactly the same as in the Italian “Reggio Emilia”, because it is like a way to see things.
The teacher have been studying the goals and they have regally discussions from the meaning of the values, deliberative democratic is very important for them. It is necessary for them to share the same values, norms, attitudes and habits so the influence of the national curriculum will enable them to create a shared platforms of values. In conclusion with help of the national curriculum and the practice inspired by “Reggio Emilia”, the pre-school teachers attitudes towards the children, their own profession and the environment were displayed and change substantially.
Children and their thoughts about learning?
The children liked building with blocks, playing cards and playing on the computer. They also liked to be in the garden and use the bicycle and all of them liked drawing dinosaurs, cars, and people, and then cut them out and used them in their play.
I asked the children how they have been learning? Most of them answered, that they have been learning by themselves, they already know how to do. Others possibilities to learn things was to look how another child will do and then do at the same way. If they want to teach another child something, they said it will be very easy because they just have to show.
I asked them if the teachers had taught them anything. Only two of the children answer that the teacher has taught them anything. The first said that the teacher had taught him to cut circle and squares with the scissors while he was standing on one leg, and a girl told me that the teacher had taught her to look after some paper, so she could found a clue as in a treasure hunt. They told me that their ideas came from their thoughts and that every child could have different thoughts, and that the adults also have different thoughts from children. Their thoughts were in their forehead and gave them lots of different ideas.
Sometime they could have one idea, something they wanted to do. If they were afraid to forget they make a cross on their hand. I observed that many of the children had crosses on theirs hands. I asked them about them. Sometimes the children have already gone to school and recognised that the thing they should have brought to pre-school was at home. Other times the cross helped them to remember what to do.
Results from the observations and documentation
I found from my own observation, that the teachers had good interaction with the children. I studied two fascinating projects, the first one was about some dinosaurs and the second was about building cars and motorways. In both projects the teacher challenged the children with lots of questions, which gave them more to think about. They went to the library and, museum. Through the dinosaur project the children started to walk and talk like a dinosaur and to collect sticks to make a skeleton. The teacher saw by the observations, what the children showed interested in, so they distributed new things for the children to discover and use in their playing. The children liked what they found and played together in new ways. They started to have discussion to each other like ”Why have we used the green colour? It’s because the palms are green. Why can’t the motorway be wider? The boy answer “because there will be a fence stopping the cars”. Thechildren tested their ideas while the teacher is listening, asking and documenting. In general the children were quite confident and seemed to feel both motivated and secure in their surroundings.
Discussions a comparison
According to both Summer (1997) and Tanguchi (1999), teachers in pre-schools are up to date in their thinking about child development. Their manner of acting towards the children was more in accordance with current research findings. The children could in many ways obtain independence because the teacher let the children participate in activities. I think that children learn in all situations but they seem to have their best learning from each other. The teachers could offer them good opportunities because they had similar views regarding children’s capabilities. They found their work very interesting because they could see how the children in the pre-school were curious and happy, and that the children have lots of capabilities. They, as Sommer (1997) suggests, have found the right way to look upon a child.
The teachers act to follow the goals in the national curriculum (Lpfö 98,1998). They started discussions about the value framework of the curriculum, because they had found it necessary to share a platform of values for regarding the child. They were active and had pedagogical tools so they could strive to reach the goals in the national curriculum with an focus on a competent child with lots of things to learn. I think that the teacher in my study could evaluate the children by making observations and documentation. They have been reading and studying innovations in Reggio Emilia and they had regular discussions about values in the national curriculum. As Pramling Samuelsson & Sheridan (2000 p 21) found, they saw the possibility of using documentation to evaluate the pre-school. The teacher touched upon the difficulty of having time for all the documentations and to get the children as Kennedy (2000) indicated. In my study they could arrange it because they had children of five years who were very independent and could help themselves.