ah yes, me and Reggio Emilia Italy go way back

I like providing an abstract, oh look Tess, there is a Tess writing this article. What a coincidence, let’s emulate and retroactively create a past where we were raised in a Reggio Emilia like environment on an alien planet, not like this Mormon pre-existence dried up hootenanny, i’d like to make my past life or pre-existence a lot more interesting than the very boring story that the Mormons or the Sufi Masters tell.  Generating a Extraterrestrial Utopian cosmology may be our way to better parallel ourselves to our parallel universe, where we are living in a more utopian realm.

Reactions to Visiting the Infant-Toddler and Preschool Centers in Reggio Emilia, Italy

http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v3n1/bennett.html

Tess Bennett
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Abstract

This article discusses the reflections of an early childhood special education professional on her visit to the preschools of Reggio Emilia, Italy. After describing the activities observed, the schools’ philosophy, and the schools’ environments, the paper discusses how the schools work with children with “special rights” (i.e., special needs). The paper concludes with observations on the role of parents and the community, and lessons learned from the trip.

Introduction

I recently returned from visiting the preschools and infant-toddler centers in Reggio Emilia, Italy. My visit challenged my beliefs about early childhood education and early childhood special education and caused me to reflect on my experience of 29 years in the field.

Activities and Philosophy

The municipality of Reggio Emilia, Italy, has a network of 13 infant-toddler centers and 19 pre-primary schools. These centers are known worldwide for their philosophy of teaching young children through what they term the “hundred languages” of childhood-including graphic representations of the children’s thoughts and ideas, and verbal, motor, musical, mathematical, ethical, imaginary, cognitive, and moral expressions, to name just a few of the other languages of childhood. Learning in the Reggio Emilia centers is connected with children’s real lives. For example, each child has a mailbox, and messages and pictures are exchanged as a natural part of the school day. For younger children, a photo of the child identifies his or her mailbox. For older children, the photo plus the child’s name is on the mailbox. Children see the postperson delivering mail to their homes and can make the connection between those observations and the way their mailboxes are used at school. In this way, the child makes a connection to real experiences in the world.

Daily tasks also provide opportunities for learning in a Reggio Emilia center. Children work in small teams to complete tasks such as setting the tables for lunch. The names of children are on the wall with moveable magnets. Each magnet has a drawing of a knife and fork, soap and water, and so forth. The list is posted each day to indicate different responsibilities for the children in the team for setting up, serving, and cleaning up after a meal. Food is a very important matter in Italy. These activities of the children reinforce the value of enjoying the meal, taking time to enjoy talking to friends, and sharing responsibility.

A basic assumption in the philosophy of the Reggio Emilia schools is that there is an important distinction between teachers teaching and children learning. Teacher-directed teaching is all about the teacher and what the teacher thinks the children need to know. Children may learn content and skills taught, but they may be of little meaning to them. When the learning experiences flow from the children’s ideas, however, there is more likely to be a good match between what the children are ready to learn and activities offered in the classroom than in a teacher-dominated curriculum. This intersection between the children’s interests and their activities is critical: first, because children are more likely to be motivated to learn when they are interested; and, second, because the tension in the classroom between teacher and children is likely to be lessened if children are more engaged. In this way, teachers are learning about how to support the children’s learning. As they say in Reggio Emilia, the teachers and their students are moving together in the same direction. This situation is in contrast to the struggle some teachers experience in other schools in trying to get children to learn, when the intersection of the interests of the children and the goals of the teacher seem to resemble a car wreck! In Reggio Emilia, children are not assumed to be empty vessels to be filled with instruction; they are seen as ready to learn when the right, best, or most appropriate opportunities are offered.

There is a shared belief in Reggio Emilia that children have within them an innate understanding of how to relate to the world. The job of the teacher, then, is to nurture that ability so that the child can grow and learn. I was impressed by the genuine respect for children that I witnessed. For example, the teacher meets with the children in the morning to discuss the activities of the day. These discussions communicate respect for the ideas and preferences of the children. Teachers listen closely to children’s discourse and strive to understand the children’s interests. Believing that teaching is not merely the transmission of knowledge, but that the teacher is a facilitator of the child’s learning, teachers exhibit flexibility in planning the day with the children. Teachers also attend to cues from the children about the point at which interest in a project begins to lag. The children’s work is displayed artfully on the walls.

Children become researchers in the classrooms of Reggio Emilia by learning to ask questions and collect data with which to answer them. Teachers use the arts-including painting, drawing, and working with clay, natural materials such as leaves and shells, and recycled materials such as tubes and spools-as a vehicle for understanding the child’s thinking processes. Teachers observe closely the ways in which the child uses the materials. Teacher observations include not only the child’s attention to the materials but also the child’s level of creativity and the questions he or she poses to the teacher.

The way that the child manipulates and combines the materials gives the teacher clues to the child’s cognitive structures. Ongoing projects-usually in-depth studies of the phenomena in the child’s everyday world-are central to the daily life of the center. These projects may last for weeks, months, or even a whole year. Some projects I observed were on topics such as water, light, bicycles, and growing vegetables.

Each infant-toddler center and pre-primary school has an atelier, which translates as studio or laboratory, which is filled with natural materials and art supplies. Many of the settings also have mini-ateliers. The atelierista, who works with the teachers and children, is a specialist in the graphic arts. This individual helps to plan weekly activities related to the project at hand. These activities might include helping children learn to express themselves in a new medium, such as clay, drawing, collage, painting, or sculpture. The infant-toddler centers share an atelieristawith several other centers.

In addition to the atelierista, each center has a pedagogista who is available for consultation, planning, assistance with, and management of individual childrenone day a week for each of four centers. The pedagogista not only develops relationships with center staff, families, and children but also engages in problem solving with staff, exploring new options and reflecting on what is going on in the center. The pedagogista is instrumental in assisting the teachers in planning for children with “special rights” (i.e., special needs), which will be discussed later in this paper. In addition to high-quality interaction between teachers and children and support from the atelierista and the pedagogista, the environment in each center is referred to as the third teacher.

Environments

Some of the environments are breathtakingly beautiful. The environment of each center supports the imagination and creativity of each child. The inside of the center is warm and calm (no primary colors jump out at you), featuring wood, glass, and muted colors. There is space to be alone, yet the environment encourages children to interact with others. Every center has a welcoming area with comfortable adult-size chairs for parents to give a last cuddle before saying goodbye for the day. The centers are very inviting and beckon you to come in and play. Each center contains many real plants and flowers, a kiln, kitchen, piazza, dining room, toileting rooms, and garden areas.

One interesting and unique feature of the centers is the light table, which is a table with lighting underneath a glass or Plexiglass cover, used for drawing and related activities. Overhead projectors are used by the children for projecting colors or pictures on the wall. At one center, I also saw computers and scanners that were intended for the children who were working with animation. In infant-toddler centers, the changing and bathing rooms are equipped with several waist-high tubs for bathing. The environment does not look institutional in color or type. It seems much more like a home environment than an institutional one.

Classrooms do not belong to individual teachers. All staff members work together and plan together. The weekly planning time includes the cook and other staff in the center. There is no staff hierarchy, so everyone is included in planning and working with the children. There are two teachers for each age group (e.g., for 3-year-olds). However, some centers have multiage grouping with classes of about 20 children. If a child with “special rights” (i.e., special needs) is in the class (only two are allowed per class), another teacher is added to the class. This additional teacher works with all children in the class, not only with the child with special rights.

Documentation of children’s learning is everywhere, usually in the form of large photos of two or three children working together on a project with text about what the children are doing, thinking, feeling, wondering, and questioning. This documentation is revisited many times in order to review where the children were at the beginning of a project, where they are going, and what they have learned. Mobiles of natural materials made by the children hang in many of the rooms. Frescoes and large murals are displayed on walls. In one center, string hanging from the ceiling, rather than room dividers, marked off areas of the room.

I saw no plastic or cheap toys. The environment has wood floors and many wooden toys. The doors are partly glass, in order to be able to see easily from inside to outside and from room to room. All the materials I saw were from the natural world or the recycling center. Wooden blocks were in each center. Often, I saw very intricate block structures (which had obviously taken children many days to complete) in the foreground, with the overhead projector casting colors or pictures onto the wall behind the blocks. A variation of this was the slide projector showing, for example, a scene of a meadow, with the block structure looking like a part of the meadow. Homemade puppets and a puppet theater made by parents are in some centers. In some centers, a sheet was hung from the ceiling for shadow play. This sheet could be rolled up when not in use.

The atelier and mini-atelier have a beautiful array of art materials, including colored pencils, markers, watercolor paints, materials for collage and sorting (usually in a box with sections, each section containing different materials such as dried red peppers and beans), pencils and pens of different kinds, and various colors and shapes of paper. These are very inviting spaces. I wanted to sit down and draw! Trough sinks are in the bathing, changing, and toileting rooms. These low spacious sinks with several spigots allow children to easily reach the tap and stand close together while washing hands, or engage in water play. The floors are wood, but there are also small carpeted areas. I saw inviting, comfortable book corners and housekeeping areas with baby dolls very much like you find in infant-toddler or preschool centers in the United States.

The outside environments are also interesting. I saw areas for water play, hills with climbers, a child-size maze of small trees planted by the parents, and picnic tables.

Children with “Special Rights”

Children with “special rights” have priority in enrolling in the Reggio Emilia schools. Children with special rights are included in all of the activities with other children. Every effort is made not to call attention to the special needs of the child; therefore, I did not see much adaptive equipment on my visit. One day, I saw a child with a motor delay walking with the help of the teacher but no walker. My understanding is that adaptive equipment is used when needed. The teachers try to set up the environment so it is easy to navigate for the child with special rights.

The Reggio Emilia schools work with children with special rights in a very responsive way. For example, one child with autism was allowed to roam around the school for several months while the teachers observed her to find out what was interesting and motivating for her. The staff noticed the child was interested in light. They began to offer her opportunities to experiment with light, and eventually she started to interact with another child at the light table. Continuing the interest in light, the child with special rights interacted with another child while experimenting with a prism. Reggio Emilia staff believe in starting with all children “where they are.” This strategy requires knowing the child well and having good communication with the child’s family about the child’s interests. The Reggio Emilia staff believe that finding out what motivates a child is worth more than hundreds of meaningless exercises. Observation is used extensively for children with special rights, as with all children, in order to gain insight into the child’s thinking process and understanding of self. The pedagogista is a helpful resource to the staff in adapting activities and materials for the child with special rights.

I asked about the interventions used to address behavior problems, a common concern of teachers in the United States. The Reggio Emilia staff reported having few behavior problems, primarily because the children are so engaged in learning. If a child is having a tantrum or other behavioral issue, there is no punishment. The staff try to empathize with the child, verbalizing the feelings the child may be having, trying to help the child understand these feelings. Teachers report looking for clues for the behavior beyond the child’s outward signs in order to figure out what is going on. They consider behavior problems as an indication that the child is upset in some way and needs support. Because of the European philosophical heritage based on the psychodynamic model, Reggio Emilia staff have a philosophy that is decidedly nonbehavioral, and time-out is not used in the centers. Staff discuss these issues with the child’s family, if they come up. Another strategy often used in the Reggio Emilia schools is making reference to the child’s positive traits. Self-knowledge and self-understanding are major goals for young children in the Reggio Emilia schools. Every interaction with an adult is intended to facilitate the development of a child’s self-knowledge and self-understanding.

The Reggio Emilia philosophy, in which each child is accepted for his or her unique learning style, facilitates acceptance of all children. The continuum for acceptable behavior is quite broad. A child who is very active is not seen as a problem but as a child who needs to move around during the day, and adaptations are made for that child. Drugs are not given to children for behavior problems. Adaptations are made in the environment through thoughtful observation of the child. Children are valued because of their differences and are not medicated or expected to change. This assumption fosters a flexible and adaptive attitude that children and families find very supportive. This attitude also supports the process of assisting the children in developing self-knowledge and insight about their own learning style, interests, and strengths.

Reggio Emilia staff often discuss the use of wait, watch, and respond as a strategy to use when working with all children-especially children with special rights. Because funding for the Reggio Emilia schools is not based on labeling children, children are always treated as children first. If the child has a documented disability, such as Down syndrome, this fact is noted. The child is observed, and documentation is developed about the child’s strengths and areas of concern. A formal document is developed, called the “declaration of intent,” which is a written agreement between the school and health authorities to ensure collaboration. Parents are included in this collaboration with every step of the development of the “declaration of intent.” This document is flexible, providing a direction for the education of the child with special rights. In addition, a portfolio is developed for each child with special rights, as it is for all children in Reggio Emilia schools. This portfolio documents the child’s progress over time in all developmental areas. Copious observation notes are collected about each child as well.

I think the services for children with special rights are carried out in a very thoughtful manner. The naturally occurring environment for all children is adaptive and inclusive. The goal for all children is to emphasize the value of differences rather than the stigma associated with disability.

Parents and Community

The parents of the children in the centers are essential participants in all planning and in many activities. They are on local and community advisory boards, and some parents volunteer in the centers. Parents help with projects, discuss projects with their children, and help children gather information for projects. On our visit, we met parents who seemed very engaged and pleased with the educational experiences for their child. An essential component of the Reggio Emilia philosophy is creating a community of caring adults who value children.

The Emilia Romagna region in which the small town of Reggio Emilia is located is in a part of Italy that has been governed by socialists since World War II. This philosophy is evident in the Reggio Emilia schools and community. Individual needs are balanced by the needs of the group. The community support for the schools is remarkable. The town supports education with a large portion of its budget-indicating the high priority in which children, families, and community are held. Also, in Italy, there are strong cultural beliefs about the importance of family. These philosophical and cultural values provide the rich context of support for the Reggio Emilia schools.

Reflections

The following statements are a summary in “telegraphic” language of what I learned from my visit to Reggio Emilia:

• Take time to listen; know what you are listening for.
• Listen to each child’s melody.
• Provide space and time to be alone.
• Accept the premise that learning need not be lonely.
• Recognize that dialogue is more valuable than singular thought.
• Keep boredom away.
• Value the process of thinking.
• Ask “Why?”
• Help children ask “Why?”
• Question everything.
• Seek truth, but realize there is no one truth.
• Accept and value differences.
• Shun the stigma associated with disability.
• Have a profound respect for each child.
• Look further into the reasons for a child’s behavior, rather than just the external signs.
• Recognize that it is all about relationships.
• Reflect.
• Understand the importance of enjoying food and rest.
• Observe, document, and interpret.
• Wait, watch, and respond.
• Recognize that documentation is visible listening.
• View the child as the protagonist in the environment.
• See the teacher as a facilitator and guide assisting the child in learning.
• Understand that instruction and education are different.
• Do not hurry the children or yourself.

These are questions I asked myself about my work with children and families:

• Do we value and respect all of the various ways children express their thoughts and feelings?
• Do we value equally the verbal and the nonverbal child? The arts? The rational thinker as well as the creative thinker?
• To what extent have artificial labels been developed for children who do not fit into our educational system and its narrow perspective of learning. This narrow perspective rewards highly verbal children who can sit still and do their work.
• What are ADD and ADHD if not different styles of learning?
• Do we label for our own convenience?
• Do we medicate children instead of looking at our own practice and the environment we create and make changes there?
• Do we listen to what children say with their words? Their behavior? Their body language?
• Do we reflect enough? Do we take time to reflect?
• Do we interrupt the thinking processes of children when we adhere to a rigid daily schedule? Do we actually lessen their attention span in this way?
• Do we carry out meaningless activities for short periods of time during the day that are not connected to the child’s real world and experience?
• Do we really value families?
• Could we observe children more often in their daily routines?
• When we assess, do we use the information in planning educational experiences? Or do we primarily utilize the information to label the child?
• Do teachers teach or children learn?
• Do we pay enough attention to a child’s motivation for learning?
• Do we pay enough attention to a child’s strengths?
• How do we help children understand themselves?

My memories of my Reggio Emilia visit are filled with beautiful images and many questions. Yet, I feel very calm with the knowledge and experience I gained in Italy. Now, I am working to share my understanding of the high-quality early childhood education and early childhood special education that I witnessed there. Yes, I believe that we can learn from Reggio Emilia. Such important basic ideas as taking time to listen to and observe children, valuing and respecting children, involving families, valuing differences rather than perpetuating stigma, and being open as a teacher to learn along with the children as they investigate real-life questions through projects are worthy of our consideration. Building strong community educational networks that are supportive and nurturing for all children and families, regardless of social class or cultural and linguistic background, are possible and desirable. But, first, children and families must become a priority.

Author Information

Tess Bennett , Ph.D., is visiting assistant professor in early childhood special education at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, and the director of the Great Lakes Quality Improvement Center for Disabilities for Region V, funded by the Head Start Bureau and the Department of Health and Human Services. She is past president of DEC (Division for Early Childhood) of CEC (Council for Exceptional Children). Dr. Bennett was a Fulbright Scholar at the Center for Child Research at the University of Trondheim, Norway, during the 1992-93 academic year.

Tess Bennett
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
139 Children’s Research Center
51 Gerty Drive
Champaign, IL 61820
Telephone: 217-333-3876
Email: tcbennett@eiu.edu

==—————————————–

now that article went down smoothly enough, see what kind of Two Teachers, (is that like two moms?  Julia always does the two moms joke, maybe i can really have two wives, or two caretakers, they always turn the tables, i’ll turn the tables) turning the tables on those who have dumbed up your role, so they can be ahead of you.  Saying all the bad things about you, in order to make themselves look better , and to get ahead.  Character assassination too, yeah you know what i’m talking about Michael (bear utterance against your fake testimony you don’t care about Jesus or anything else so stop lying)

——————————————-

http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v3n1/hertzog.html

Reflections and Impressions from Reggio Emilia:”It’s Not about Art!”

Nancy B. Hertzog
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Abstract

This article discusses an early childhood program administrator’s reflections on her visit to the preschools of Reggio Emilia, Italy. The following six themes are discussed: (1) teachers’ respect for each child; (2) teachers’ emphasis on relationships; (3) the importance of art as the medium chosen to represent children’s thinking; (4) the critical role of communication; (5) the relaxed pace in the schools; and (6) the teachers’ different roles. The article concludes with ideas and questions inspired by the visit that the administrator would like to share with colleagues in a gifted education environment.

Introduction

I recently returned from a 12-day study tour of the preschools in Reggio Emilia, Italy. With 250 other American educators, I listened to the educators of Reggio Emilia talk about their system of educating youngsters in their municipal preschools and infant/toddler centers. I visited a total of 7 facilities out of 34 infant and toddler and pre-primary centers, with children being present during only two of those visits. Teachers, parents, atelieristas [artists],pedagogistas [curriculum specialists], and even the mayor of the city spoke to us about the schools and the teaching that goes on in them.

I noted all aspects of the school environments-the documentation displayed on the walls, the furniture, the way various things were placed around the rooms, the materials available to children and adults, the bathrooms, the kitchens, and the play areas. I wrote down all that was translated for us about everything from the huge documentation murals to the teacher’s planning sheets posted in the classrooms. I was awestruck by the way that the pieces fit together to make Reggio Emilia early childhood programs exemplary. To help me make sense of all the pieces, I have divided what I learned into broad themes.

Theme 1: Respect for Each Child

Respect for the child was an overarching theme throughout all the discourse and presentations of the study tour. It was expressed in the following ways: “The child is worthy of being listened to.” “Listen, observe, interact, and learn from the child.” “Do not place the child in adult-designed or arbitrary time slots of adult management systems.” “If the child is misbehaving, find out why, find out what the child is trying to communicate, find out how you can help the child.” “Your job as an adult is to help the child communicate his feelings and guide the child toward a positive resolution of the problem.” If this philosophy and belief system were the norm in the United States, there would be no place in early childhood programs for assertive discipline plans, time scheduled in half-hour blocks, lines of children waiting to go to the restroom, lesson plans filled with activities for large groups of children, teacher-made patterns for children to trace, or children talking back to teachers. Instead, there would be more opportunities for teachers to talk individually with each child, more time for teachers to consult with other teachers or parents about the child’s interests or behaviors, more opportunities for children to display their strengths and unique learning styles, and more visible displays of children’s work in classrooms.

Over and over again, I was impressed with the notion that the teacher is one of the learners. The teacher is trying to learn about each child, not just what is typical of 3- or 4-year-olds. Two examples illustrate this theme:

The first example was revealed during a presentation about the differences between boys’ and girls’ perspectives on developing a plan for a city. Giovanni Piazza, an atelierista, explained how two boys worked together for approximately 30 minutes before a third boy joined in. Sitting with his hands on his cheeks, the third boy observed the other two as they worked together. Only after one of the boys drew a road toward this third child did the third child initiate working with the other two. I could imagine that in an American classroom a teacher might have intervened much earlier to coerce participation and collaboration. Many American teachers might have had difficulty respecting the time needed for the third boy to join in. Most American teachers have agendas and preconceived notions of what ought to be for each child.

Another example of this philosophy and attitude of respect toward the child became evident in a presentation about children with special rights (their term for children with disabilities). The presenter demonstrated how the team of teachers worked together to address the needs of a child with autism. For a year, they observed the child closely and documented what she enjoyed doing while she was at the center. They noticed that she had a keen interest in light, so they arranged the environment to give children opportunities to experiment with light sources. Children used flashlights to play with shadows on the wall. They drew pictures on overhead projectors to enlarge them on the wall. Then the teachers designed a device for the child, who had begun to draw on the acetate on the overhead projector, that allowed her to draw on acetate positioned like an easel with another child just on the other side.

The two children were physically close. The child chosen to paint alongside the child with autism was not too far ahead of her verbally and had not shown any difficulty in working with her. By designing the environment and the activities that could take place within the environment, teachers engaged the child with autism in the everyday activities in the classroom, including drawing, social interaction, and celebration of accomplishments. The teachers were patient. They reported that it took nearly two years for the child with autism to become socially integrated into her peer group.

Theme 2: Teachers Emphasized Relationships-Understanding Relationships Involves the Highest Levels of Thinking

In a small art studio off to the side of one classroom, I noticed a book opened to a picture of the Milky Way galaxy. I thought that the children were studying about space. Other objects in the room included a bicycle wheel and an orange. On a large documentation board in another area of this classroom was a photograph of the bicycle wheel and the orange. I asked one of the teachers about the project that the documentation board described. She responded that the children were examining carefully the relationship between things that are found in nature and things that are man-made. In particular, the teachers asked the children, “What structure connects all other structures?” The children were observing the similarities in the physical structure of the objects, such as the sections of the orange and the spokes of the bicycle wheel.

These children were certainly exhibiting high-level thinking. Seeking relationships, comparing and contrasting, and pursuing similarities and differences are all strategies that engage the mind in high-level thought processes. The children were not, as I first suspected, studying factual information about space, the galaxy, or spiral objects.

The same was true with the study of the city of Reggio Emilia. When Giovanni Piazza described the boys’ city as one that was functional and the girls’ as one that involved social relationships, I wondered why the teacher did not intervene and draw their attention to “real aspects of cities” (i.e., they all must have electricity, water systems, sewer systems, etc.). The study was not about facts of cities. It was about the relationship of cities to the people who lived in them. In the context of their study of the town of Reggio Emilia, the children learned many facts about their own city, including many historical events that shaped the history and the development of their city. They made representations of the relationship of the city to their own lives. The study of the city was undertaken by all of the schools in the municipality, not to tell the same story about their city, but to come to understandings about how their city related to the children’s own lives.

Theme 3: Art Is the Chosen Medium to Represent Children’s Thinking

Much of what we see in exhibits of work coming from Reggio Emilia depicts the children’s drawings, murals, 3-dimensional structures, and other forms of artistic products. It is easy to come away thinking that if we only had this type of art expertise in our classrooms, our children’s products would be of equal quality. However, I have come to the realization that it’s not about art! I saw how the teachers focused their attention on what the children were thinking and learning. I saw the teachers’ complex system of planning and documenting what the children were thinking about various topics. I saw what I termed the “art medium” used to advance thinking and present challenges.

The teachers referred to their use of “graphic languages” to make the learning experience “visible.” Carla Rinaldi talked about the “Pedagogy of Listening” using documentation as a visible form of listening. Without the careful attention to how ideas are represented, and the use of the art expertise, the children’s work would be less visible to themselves and to the wider public. The graphic arts, broadly defined as any form of visual artistic representation, are their chosen media to share with others what children are thinking, doing, feeling, learning, and experiencing. They teach children art techniques to give them tools to express their ideas.

Being artistic and creative is highly valued in this school culture. Large space is allocated to art studios, called ateliers, for the school. Each classroom has a small art studio, mini-atelier, connected to it where art materials are plentiful and accessible to the children. Aesthetically pleasing environments are designed purposefully. The ateliers in each school are filled with recyclable materials (e.g., glass beads, pipes, sockets, ceramic pieces) and natural elements (e.g., rocks, stones, beans, barley, seeds, seed pods, dried flowers). All of the materials are laid out aesthetically on open shelves and in clear containers, creating hues of colors to behold. In the bathrooms, there are glass containers of colored water. Calder-like mobiles hang from the ceilings with materials that reflect light such as clear beads, tin foil, and coins. Dividers are made out of transparent materials including acetate murals, strings of beads, and low, see-through shelves. Furniture provides space to work at all levels, including tables and chairs that are at adult heights. Children have high stools to sit at the high tables and small chairs to sit at the low ones. The difference in levels is aesthetically pleasing.

The children’s work in progress is left out, reflecting active and ongoing engagement. Teachers carefully lay out materials for the next day’s choices of activities. Materials are chosen thoughtfully. In one room, I noticed the teacher in her mini-atelier working with a small group of 4-year-olds. The children were painting representations of flowers. The teacher had premixed four shades of pink for the children to use. No matter what the children did with the paint, the colors were beautiful! I saw the teacher put her hand on a student’s hand to help him wipe off the paintbrush so paint would not drip. I saw a teacher go to another part of the room to get a child who was engaged in another activity to come into the mini-atelier to work on a clay representation of a tree. It was something that she wanted him to do.

In another school, I saw large murals of colored designs in different hues of color. One contained oranges and yellows. Another was a mural with pinks and purples; another contained blues and greens. The atelierista told me that she mixed these colors for children to “experiment with the pleasures of working within hues of colors.” There were signs on the wall about how to mix colors. One board that was displayed in the atelier explained in great detail all of the ways one could mold clay to create spirals, circles, rectangles, triangles, the sun, and crosses.

Many of the students’ investigations were about natural phenomena. I saw an ongoing study of trees. While making clay representations of trees, the classroom teacher helped children learn the technique of using water and clay mixed to form a glue that held other clay pieces together. The other teacher in the same room showed children how to use a real leaf to make an imprint of the veins onto a clay piece. Children had many opportunities to learn, practice, and apply techniques related to visual arts.

Their artistic representations were highly valued and were the basic medium for the public to view their work. I bought a book from one school that contained children’s drawings of trees and quotations about their drawings. Each school sells a book about the school, called the “Identity Card,” which includes floor plans, numbers of children, staff hours, recent and past projects, and other information. Many schools sell other artifacts, sharing the children’s work with the world. Artifacts include bookmarks, T-shirts, sweatshirts, books telling the story of their projects, and posters of children’s drawings.

I saw beautiful mosaics at one school where the atelierista specialized in both science and art and had a particular passion for working with natural materials. The mosaics were done on glass-covered tables-not glued but carefully placed in a background of small seeds. The texture was like sand. Each mosaic could be done again and wiped away with a block to smooth the palette. Children were carefully building structures with stones, marble scraps, blocks, and other materials while I was there. I observed children explaining their building structures to all of the other children under the teacher’s direction. I was most impressed with the atelierista’sguidance of an activity with an insect. He put a dead insect under a large magnifying glass and projected the enlarged image onto a video screen. He provided black markers and white paper for the children to make an observational drawing from the large screen image.

If the people from Reggio Emilia used another art form such as music, would their work be as visible to the world? Would songs flow forth and children’s compositions be sold to visitors? If the people from Reggio Emilia hired a dancer and built a dance studio in each school, would their thinking be visible through movement? Would dance concerts be routine events at the end of the day? Would videos of dances be the visible medium for teachers’ reflections? Although I cannot speculate upon the answers to those questions about schools in Italy, there are examples of other schools (i.e., schools for the performing arts) in the United States and abroad that do focus on other art forms and that do strive to make their students’ thinking visible through other “languages.” It is interesting to note that most of the schools that specialize in the arts in this country are secondary schools, and their primary goal is to cultivate the talents of students in those specific art forms.

Graphic languages, the atelierista, and the atelier are all critical to the goals of the philosophy and belief systems in Reggio Emilia. Art is the medium by which the educators in Reggio Emilia are encouraging the children to communicate. It is the medium by which their teachers “listen” to the children.

Theme 4: Communication Is Critical

The documentation boards in every room are examples of the value that the educators in Reggio Emilia place on children’s work and on communicating with others about the children’s experiences. Each documentation board has photographs of children working, samples of children’s products, and text describing some aspect of what the children are doing. Most of these documentation boards are completed by the atelierista and demonstrate graphic design expertise. The teachers from the infant and toddler schools told us that they do their own boards and are much slower in getting them up for parents to see. Documentation boards have a white background and are consistent across schools in style and function.

In addition to having documentation boards in the room, teachers also keep a daily journal in which they communicate to parents how their children spend time during the day. The journal includes a diagram depicting areas of the classroom where children spent most of their time, students’ drawings, and some text reflecting what children said they were thinking about specific topics on a given day.

As discussed earlier, the focus on the graphic languages is a means to help children communicate about and wrestle with their ideas. The environment in the classrooms is conducive to dialogue and exchanges of ideas. Because children are working in small groups, teachers have time to record what children are saying and to reflect on these conversations at a later date. Teachers have time to talk with small groups of children.

Theme 5: Children and Adults Are Not Hurried

At no time did anyone appear to be in a hurry during my trip to Italy. It may be a part of U.S. culture to be constantly hurried. Most American teachers feel the pressure to cover required content. Time is fragmented in most American schools. Teachers rush from one activity to another, especially within the structure of American elementary schools, where children’s activities are dictated by schoolwide master schedules that fit classes of children into music, P.E., lunch, art, and so forth.

Schools in Reggio Emilia are small enough for all of the children to eat together. All of the children may go out to play at the same time (and without teacher monitors!) because the outside play area is within view of the teachers in the classroom. Children that I observed flowed from one activity to the next. I did not see a schedule posted on the wall. I was told that they have a group meeting in the morning, a work period, a play period, a lunch time and playtime, a nap time, and another work time or playtime. What does not get completed in one work time may be completed in the next work period. Children are not urged to hurry to complete a project because teachers are not trying to initiate a different activity.

From my perspective, there seems to be a relaxed approach to the way time is used in the Italian culture. Getting engaged in something at a deep level takes time-weeks, months, even years. Initially, when topics are brainstormed, the staff thinks about them in terms of the academic year. What topic might they like to spend the year pursuing? This approach does not mean that every topic is preplanned for the year. However, by thinking about topics with long-range possibilities, teachers are not rushing students from one topic to another. Their flexible use of time allows students to spend whole mornings with the atelierista. The atelierista does not have to fit all of the children from one classroom into his or her schedule-unlike our typical art teacher’s schedule where each student has to have so many minutes in a special class. The atelierista is not used as a break for the regular classroom teacher. Atelieristas are valued members of the community of teachers. They decide with the teachers who needs their help with a particular aspect of a project, and they usually work intensely with no more than half a dozen children for about an hour and a half per day.

Theme 6: The Teacher Has Different Roles

The teacher in Reggio Emilia is the researcher, the data gatherer, the learner, and the strategic contributor to the child’s capacity to learn. The responsibility is on the community of teachers to provide the contexts for learning. I observed one teacher taking notes and watching a small group of children playing in the dramatic play area. I was intrigued with a planning matrix that I saw on one of the walls in a mini-atelier.The matrix articulated the contexts in which the teachers would observe and listen to the children. It described how the teachers would document what they were looking for within a given context. It also detailed skills, attitudes, and dispositions that they were looking for, including a child’s sentence structure, choice of friends, attention span, how the child holds his paintbrush, his ability to wait for his turn, if he remembers who is absent, and so forth.

The curriculum emerges with purpose, direction, and detail. Teachers constantly gather information about what is emerging. One statement on the planning form was translated to me: “In relationship between story and everyday experiences of children, the theme of feelings has emerged. Feelings are about friendships, love and affection, happiness, anger, hate, conflict, sadness, and fear.” Most definitely, the role of the teacher was not just to impart facts and knowledge. The role of the teacher was to help children come to understand the relationships of things around them to themselves. Teachers wanted children to learn “big ideas” such as community, respect, and competence.

What Does It All Mean to Me?

As an administrator of an early childhood program, I take from Reggio Emilia some ideas that I want to implement, some that I want to convey to those with whom I work, and some that I want to think more about. Naturally, the things that can be implemented are those on the surface of their approach. I agree with what one speaker told us, using words from The Little Prince by Saint-Exupery, “What’s essential is invisible to the eye.” In Fullan’s words, “You can’t mandate what matters” (Fullan, 1993, p. 21).

There are a number of things I can try to implement and share with colleagues and co-workers:

• I can strive for more aesthetically pleasing environments in our classrooms. I can ask teachers to examine their classrooms for clutter. I can bring someone into the rooms with more experience in the field of aesthetics to help us create classrooms that are functional and beautiful at the same time.

• I can look for more recyclable materials and have teachers create spaces that resemble an atelier. I can emphasize the importance of having these man-made and natural materials available for the children.

• I can work with teachers on ways to inform parents and the community about the learning and the experiences that children have at school; for example, getting help with documentation boards, having more parental input into our topics of investigation, and distributing an informative pamphlet about our school with recent and current projects described.

• I can make better use of technology and strive to make that technology available to teachers, students, and helpers. I am definitely interested in exploring ways we can use scanners, videos, and software to further develop and extend the ideas of the students.

• I can share the concept of the entire school community with the teachers at my school so that they let go of the concept of “the classroom” as its own entity. By establishing the school as one community, human and other resources across classrooms can be shared. Responsibility can also be shared.

From the Gifted Education Perspective

I believe there is a strong relationship between teachers’ values and beliefs and how teachers define their role. I have been immersed in the field of gifted education for more than 20 years and have articulated some of those beliefs about children that teachers of children of high ability generally possess:

• They assume their students are capable.
• They believe their role is to help their students fulfill their potential.
• They believe they should engage their students in higher levels of thinking.
• They believe they should allow opportunities for students to pursue their interests, talents, or passions.
• They view themselves as facilitators of learning.
• They respect the talents of their students.
• They believe their students are unique and have different learning style preferences.
• They believe that learning should be challenging and intrinsically rewarding.

Based on these beliefs, educators trained in gifted education tend to provide opportunities in their classrooms for students to work at varied paces, on different projects, and in authentic and meaningful ways. Gifted programs tend to include project investigations and opportunities for children to engage in in-depth studies. Therefore, I found the values that were conveyed in Reggio Emilia complementary to those that educators of gifted students would likely hold, with perhaps one exception. In gifted education, we tend to focus on individual needs, interests, and abilities. In Reggio Emilia, teachers highlighted group work, group products, and group studies. Documentation boards, however, contained pictures of individual children engaged in thinking through a problem. I need more information to draw conclusions about the delicate balance between individual and group effort in the Reggio Emilia environments.

I would like to know what values and beliefs teachers must hold to implement the philosophy of the teachers in Reggio Emilia. Which values and beliefs are most compatible with the researcher role that teachers play in Reggio Emilia? If teachers valued children’s thinking about big ideas and relationships, would they see the fallacy of teaching all children the same thing at the same time-expecting all children to learn the same thing? If teachers held as their goal for children that they become better members of a community, would they engage in practices that enhance competition?

Two burning and related questions I take away from Reggio Emilia are: (1) How can we, as teacher educators, change teachers’ practices from creating passive learning environments to engaging children in active, meaningful activities? and (2) How can we, as teacher educators, change the role of the teacher in the United States to become a facilitator and enhancer of learning? How do we help people change their belief systems, which ultimately affect their practices? What are the relationships between practices, values, and beliefs?

What are the conditions that need to exist for teachers to deepen their understandings of the effects of our conventional practices? What can I do as a teacher educator to “provide the context” for this type of change in teaching philosophy and style? How can we create communities of teachers, as they do in Reggio Emilia, who value their students’ ideas and value the way children come to learn about the world around them?

I want to go back to Reggio Emilia. I have only scratched the surface of what I learned and observed there. I want to learn more about how their projects are initiated, how different children decide to do different things, how teachers have time to listen so intently to what children are saying, how teachers and staff members work so cooperatively in their school community, how children enter into a project with theatelierista, what concepts they want children to gain from being engaged in a study, and how they evaluate their work.

When I visited the Documentation Center, an office that collects documentation from the schools, the speaker whet my appetite for dialogue about evaluation. She explained several things that they examine at the Documentation Center:

• What topics are more frequently used for children?
• How do we cover 100 languages?
• Are some schools keener on some topics than others?
• Have we increased our ability to communicate?
• Is the documentation just a record or is there an interpretation?
• Is the documentation just description or does it go to another cognitive level?
• How does the documentation reflect each school?

I am intrigued by these questions and want to continue my study of Reggio Emilia.

Reference

Fullan, Michael. (1993). Change forces. Probing the depths of educational reform. London: Falmer Press. ED 373 391.

Author Information

Nancy B. Hertzog is an assistant professor in the Department of Special Education and the director of University Primary School at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Her research focuses on curricular approaches and teaching strategies designed to differentiate instruction and challenge children with diverse abilities. Specifically, she has studied teachers’ implementation of the Project Approach in classrooms with both high-achieving and low-achieving children. She has been the chair of the Early Childhood Division of the National Association for Gifted Children and currently serves on the Education Commission of the National Association for Gifted Children.

Nancy B. Hertzog
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Department of Special Education, Rm. 288
College of Education
1310 S. Sixth St.
Champaign, IL 61820
Telephone: 217-333-0260
Email: nhertzog@uiuc.edu

For more information about Reggio Emilia, please visit http://ecap.crc.uiuc.edu/info/reggio.htmlEditor’s note: This url has changed:http://ceep.crc.uiuc.edu/poptopics/reggio.html

——————————–

look they do it in Spanish too?  get Elizabeth and Andressa back into that idea, that was funny idea, now i’m far enough into this blog that no one would be paying attention to what i write later to myself, Emily.  Hayley i think Hayley would be most likely to latch onto improving, the rest of that inlaw family has a collective mental disease where they don’t want to change anything, and remain set in their ways, and only order other people around and never take any new ideas, or grow at all, unless it’s growing from stealing money from others because my in-laws are a bunch of damn robbers.

—————————————–

Reggio Emilia: impulsor del diálogo y del cambio
ERIC Digest by Rebecca S. New. (2001) (Spanish translation of Reggio Emilia: Catalyst for Change and Conversation)\\

Three Approaches from Europe: Waldorf, Montessori, and Reggio Emilia

Carolyn Pope Edwards
University of Nebraska at Lincoln

university of Nebraska Lincoln?  i’m gonna have to do another one of these!