Does It Work?
In this age of accountability, we need to run programs that not only feel right but that get results. Many examples of children’s investigations are given in the book. Are you satisfied that the children’s investigations were worth the time and energy devoted to them by both the children and the staff? Is the method equally strong at fostering the socio-emotional and cognitive domains of development? Are you convinced we can be meet the expectations of parents and State regulatory agencies while teaching this way?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
41 comments:
I'm a firm believer that this kind of hands on learning can work and meet the requirements. As one girl said in the first discussion group, if they didn't have her interest she couldn't focus in. I was the same in school.
One reason for me believing this way of teaching is through my own daughters. Both had a love for horses. Because of hands on teaching/training they are both now horse trainers and probably know more about horses than some that have gone to school for it. They went to public school with no training for this route they took for means of supporting themselves. They honestly make more money than I do!!!
I absolutely agree that hands-on learning works and will meet the requirements. I agree with Susan and mirror the comments during the face-to-face regarding memorizing material for tests then losing the info later.
While some of the children's investigations seemed a stretch based upon the teacher's identification of interests, I found the chicken community puzzling. While the children collaborated on creating a home-like environment for chickens---it included all of the comforts of home (for humans). What did they actually learn about the life-cycle and needs of chickens? It was great for social-emotional development and the children were invested in the planning, designing, and construction but should the teacher have included literature about life on the farm, the life-cycle of the chicken, etc?
I guess I'm not as progressive as I thought.
I have always felt that most children learn easier and retain information if they learn hands-on. What I do not understand is how we can do evaluations on children when the evaluations include criteria like "can child balance on one foot" and "how many letters does child recognise" etc. I feel new evaluations need to be implemented if hands on teaching is what we do.
I completely agree with Andrea's comments above about the chicken house. The same thoughts were going through my head as I was reading that part.
Well I agree as well with hands on learning and based on what I know and do currently I would as Andrea said add into the "Chicken house" exploration my own agenda of life on the farm and things like that to satisfy any requirements state or company wide that need to be met. However, this brings up the conversation between the teacher and Carmen about the sea shells. Carmen just wasn't interested in what the teacher was trying to get her to do. Honestly I am torn with the idea of this because my first instinct would be to continue to slip in my own agenda however with an example like that it makes me think twice about really basing lessons on what the children are interested in. I hope as I read more I see exactly how they meet the requirements set by their companies or state and still keep the Reggio principles because right I still don't see it.
Regarding the "chicken community"; to me, the activities and experiences of this study seemed to me to be more about "community" than "chickens". Although most of the decision making and investigations were directed toward the question, "what do chickens need", the explorations and products were based on what people need in their homes and communities. if i were aligning this activity within state standards or some other type of framework, i would look toward the social sciences rather than the natural sciences in terms of content. In addition there are many ways that the methods of the project align with standards about independent learners and ways for information to be represented. This was not really a project about chickens, even though it evolved from some chicken eggs.
With care and attention the content that arises from the children's interests can be aligned to meet both parent expectations and state regulations. For me, the crux of what this approach has to offer is that it emphasizes for the children as well as the teachers "how to learn" rather than "what to learn" from the emergent curriculum. It stresses problem solving and critical thinking skills all the while developing the socio-emotional growth that arises from working in small group settings.
while everyone learns differently, parents need to be aware that there are options to the way their children can learn. public schools, private and charter schools all have a unique ways of teaching. they all have the same common goal, to educate children. with children, one way can not work for everyone
Does it work?
Yes, Buuut, I am not sure the same results could not have been achieved in another way, less time and effort? Possibly Agenda Based! There are many strategies and methods out there, as there are many kinds of learners. I am not sure this is a complete package, It has many great points and could be useful as part of an IEP plan. Different strokes for different folks, I do not believe it is meant to be a one size fits all program. It is very strong in fostering socio-emotional development with its true nurturing of autonomy, initiative and accomplishment, good positive re-inforcements .. The pipes study I thought was a fine example of the practical instruction levels of fact, understanding and application . I am not convinced we can meet expectations of parents or state although who’s to say they are going in the right/best direction either.
I loved Susan Benson’s comment on Feb. 7th.
If we can teach children how to learn, how to ask questions, where to get information, and how to synthesize all the bits and pieces into coherent ideas, we may be able to solve some of the world’s problems. We need a new generation of kids that can do that, not just regurgitate facts to pass the MCAS.
I have a child in my class right now (pre-k)who will be going to a Catholic kindergarten in Sept. His parents do not like the hands-on approach we presently use...they want their son to sit at a desk and do worksheets every single day. When we explained to mom and dad how we teach and why their response was that they pay us to teach their child not to let him teach himself! His parents went to our director and our director asked us to appease these parents so we had to come up with a way to teach the way we think works best and include worksheets etc... In the end it really was not that hard. When the children wanted to talk about batteries...we did and we made our own math worksheets up counting batteries etc...so basically we continually make our own worksheets up for one little boy but we still enjoy teaching as close as we can to the Reggio way.
It's not easy meeting the needs of all parents. Even with visual displays and documentation of the child's learning, many revert back to their experiences which involved worksheets. Of course, pencil and paper tasks have not been considered developmentally appropriate for a number of years, but many first time parents still expect preschool to be more structured and task-oriented than child care. Years ago, I had a family who decided to send their 3 year old to preschool a couple of days/week after having been in my child care for a couple of years. Once the child had been going for a couple of weeks, mom commented that it was different than she expected--they weren't doing anything different than I was doing. She expected a more "school-like" program.
Perhaps the answer is a blending of approaches. I'm not advocating a worksheet approach, simply a mix of Reggio and agenda based.
i agree with you andrea,i also found myself in the same situation regarding the preschool program. the preschool program that is in the same building as my center does infact do the same day to day activities as we do. i worked with this particular child for two years, we helped him write his name, i was happy that by the end of the year he was able to do it on his own. the disapointing aspect was the preschool program was the only one who got the credit. parents look at daycare as a babysitting service and do not realize how much we do for their children. regardless if you are a daycare, family daycare or preschool, we all do a great job in teaching the children we care for.
anonymous 2/10 at 7:07 is angela leblanc
One aspect of the Reggio program I found interesting was "how much" they did drawings. I didn't realize that they drew about a topic "before" they investigated it and "after". The after part is great because it shows what more they have learned and observed. My only issue with the drawing is that I have many 3 year old children in my classroom who are not making representational drawings. Just circles and scribbling. So I would have to find other ways to find out what they know and what they have learned. I guess I would have to observe more of their play and ask more questions so find this out.
I know this approach is rewarding in the way it opens up children to exploration, documentation, and revisiting. Through these methods I feel State regs could be met. Do I think this will work within the public school system burdened with teaching to the MCAS i highly doubt. At present public preschools are exempt from the same regulatory compliance those of us in the private sector must meet. Ratios, environments, discipline policies, groupings, and curriculum are not governed the same. If they are not willing to follow the same rules they have created for us to follow, I don't see them implementing this approach. I speak generally, for I know of many teachers as individuals that try to open up creativity with in classrooms through research projects that allow childrneon their own to explore their own path of investigation. I feel the principles explored throughout the book would be a good support for all teachers, no matter where they teach.
I agree with Susan and Judith that "how to learn" is an important part of teaching. It helps children to use their creativity and imagination in learning and enables them to gain critical thinking skills and not just learn by rote. Reggio Principles encourage this type of learning and can definitely work with the right approach by teachers and the support of parents.
I agree with Judith and Susan our jobs as teachers is to encourage children to ask questions. It is important to provide children with the time to experience the process, and not just give them the answers.
Re-reading everyones blogs it sounds like we are trying too much and too hard! I mean the pipes study started off so innocent , with a few asking questions here and there, and well as I was reading it , I am not quite sure the children played on suggestives more than an interest and yet it seemed to all work out as a great learning tool! I found myself wondering if the children most of the time were not just plain old playing when over comes an adult asking and /or confirming what the child was doing! Which was interesting as to where there minds are coming from. I mean sometimes kids say and do the funniest things and then when asked why and they tell you and it is really creative to us but just so obvious to them! What came to my mind is the saying, walk in their shoes,. If we only could , read there minds. The text was an eye-opener for sure the observing , listening and just stepping back and letting them be for awhile is a task to contend with for me,
I agree that it did seem like alot of playtime which is a needed factor for children but it all seemed so opened ended. These are very young children in this experiment. What did they learn from all this? How much did they retain? How prepared were they for the "BIG SCHOOL " compared to those they were now in class with that did not attend the Reggio project? While some of these methods could be incorporated, a full scale of this I could not find feasible. As a parent I would not enroll my children in this program.
i agree with everyone about the chicken community the teachers put a lot into that and the kids were very hands on but but is it real or fake to them.i mean a chicken coop in the middle of a city? chickens go to stores???do the children know that chickens dont go shopping???? and we dont know the teachers mightve transitioned that into talking about farms and what real chickens do. so it was a lot of work i just wish i knew the very end to see if it was worth it. each curriculum IS different AND the work that goes into it
I think that the Reggio principles are worth trying as well as the time
given to the children for extended exploration. It will take some time and effort to learn
about it and find the ways that this style of teaching can fit into our own unique
settings. In our classroom, there are three teachers which could help to facilitate these
principles. Since we have different strengths and interests, the work involved could
be divided between us. Personally, I need to increase my questioning skills to draw out
more information from the children.
Parents could be easily swayed when they see how excited and involved their
children are in the projects. As mentioned in a previous post , parents need to feel welcomed
and valued. In regard to the state regulations, we as teachers need to be familiar with them
so that we can communicate to others how we are meeting the expectations through the
children's play, conversations, art work, charts etc. I would rather attempt this with four
and five year olds rather than our present class of mixed age group (3-5) , as we have a
couple children who need one on one attention.
I like the back-and-forth on this topic. As much as I am passionate about this way of having children learn, I admit when I read some of the prolonged studies I am more impressed with the process than the product! There is a new push in this State to emphasize not just Frameworks-style content learning but what are being called the "21st Century Skills", which incorporate so many of the process components this book is so strong on. Myself? I think throwing props and prompts into the mix that incorporate solid learning goals is not only acceptable but important. I think of the classroom as a "pedagogical laboratory." As long as I view everything I add to the classroom as an EXPERIMENT and I am (1) willing to let it fail and (2) more interested in seeing what the children DO than "teaching" them, I am on safe ground.
Does it work? As I read the blogs and finish the book I wonder just how Reggio fits into education in the U.S. in 2010. Our current political agenda of accountability, No Child Left Behind, and the MCAS requires that our children produce. This leads me to ask the question of why there are no documented studies on just how well the Reggio method serves children as they continue on with their education. I know the Reggio method has been used in the U.S. for some time, so why no follow-up? That being said, I still feel that any philosophy that values, respects and nurtures children and families while emphasizing the development of critical thinking skills, problem solving, and other higher level thinking skills is worth our serious consideration.
Reggio philosophy can be used in child cares but only on a part time basis or some of Its tool in an indirect manner. Schedules are important in the daily routine and it is expected by most if not all parents. This schedule must be flexible to respond to what each day may bring with the children. Most if not all childcares do have periods of time set aside for “free play“. To me this is a true Reggio time. Here is a perfect time to listen, observe and ask questions of what the groups are involved in. Usually they are in small groups . It may vary from blocks, dress up, magnets, clay, or drawing, coloring and gluing at tables. The children are deciding what the agenda is for their play and display their interests on a continued basis. This type of learning can also create teamwork and is easily revisited by the children on subsequent days. Teachers can use this time to talk about colors, numbers, letters, words, or how something may work and why. Here is where Reggio meets today’s teachers’ agendas. There is to much expectations on preschool teachers for school readiness programs because we have truly become a results oriented society. The fact that no controlled studies have been performed to measure development outcomes for Reggio methods will keep it from legitimacy and not be a primary factor in learning.
i agree with angela because i do feel like a babysitter sometimes!!!!! the parents think their kids just play all day we sent home a paper showing parents that even when their child plays theyre learning. so even when we do teddy bear day we write in the newsletter that yes we are having teddy bear day but we will be doing sorting,counting,comparing,contrasting,weighing,measuring......parents think that they bring in a bear and just show their friends hey thats socializing!!!!!! i also wanted to say that since september all the boys this year seem to love crashing cars or using dollhouse people to kill/fight eachother thats all they ever want to do during free play.even when we say to be gentle,no weapons at school,no fighting/killing not nice or sit and play "cars"/"people" with them they crash their cars into yours or kill/fight the person in your hand.so when were observing all they say is crash and aw did you see that as the car flies into the wall or "i just killed you" or "im gunna beat you up" one child makes a really great machine gun noise:) should we attempt to go deeper with that maybe go into safety and what happens when real cars do crash???or how fighting/killing is never nice/safe(if i got a penny everytime ive said that:) and if so we'd be doing it scince september!!!!!!! and im tellin ya thats all they do!!!!!!!!!!!HELP
I too am opened to these principles and method and convinced that it does work and agree it is confusing there is no long term data. So is it true of what bill is saying about using it for the younger child and then continue with standard ways of teaching in the upper elementary age group!
I think Bill was commenting on what is happening, not that it is a good way. In early childhood we seem to easily accept the child directed ways of teaching, In elementary years the focus is on meeting state standards and requirements.
I like the Reggio approach as it seems to fit in so nicely with my favorite quote of" A child's work is play" which I believe is part of Piaget's teachings.I will go with YES! it works when used by dedicated creative teachers.
I still feel this is an open-end experiment and still unsettled by if this was benefical to these children who do live and grow in a city enviorment. I have now read the book twice thinking maybe I missed something key along the way. Personally I would love to see a follow up book that had interviews with teachers past and present from this Chicago group, parents who may have had more than one child go thru this process and even any of the children who are quite older now to see if they even remember any of their time there. According to the dates many years have passed since this Reggio approach was implamented.Yes I'm still curious for facts and figures.
I agree pshunstrom,
I went to a Reggio conference in Cambridge and the school speaking had been implementing the principles of the Reggio project for five years. they still considered themselves in the initial stages. I think it is the creativity part that attracts teachers to this model. There is a warmer relationship between teacher and student when the student feels the curriculum is all about them. But as stated by so many others we are governed by such burdensom paper work and requirements to be met within the day, that is takes some of the fun out of it. I have a hard time reaching the infant and toddler teachers as to how they could use these principles. Ideas have to be started or goverend by the teacher at this age and then see where the child takes it. toddlers don't document what they remember as much as they use the feel of the crayon dragging across the paper as the reason for continuing to do it. Texture governs their world. Sensory applications are key to Infant involvement. With these age groups I find photos of the children interacting with the world around them give the teachers a foundation of discussion. From the photos we can see where they are developmentally. Reggio is easier to truly work with when the child talks, around three and up. One can see how crucial experiences are to forming the child's imagination, and inquisitive nature.
ran out of room on the other blog. Pipesdreamer sais it so well, "We are trying too hard". I had mentioned in the first face to face how Montessori has come so far as a creditable approach supported by the need for a college degree, and specific environmental set ups. Marie watched children for 32 years and notice that without direction children could match the pot lids to the right pot if left to their own. WOW what mother hasn't done this one. Reggio was founded on the tender need to heal, and nurture. Will we over think this and package it in the same manner? I hope not. What I sense from all the blog's is there are alot of caring teacher's out there who with out a name for it implement reggio principles. I liked the book and it supported alot of what I try to get across to my teachers. It is an imperfect approach as well it should be. If perfect there would be no room for growth or creation. Why now has Reggio come to the fore front to consider in earlyecudation? Why are public schools asking teachers to try it when there creative hands have been tied with MCAS bindings? Children don't come with instructions and not all scenarios have the right answer. I feel it is this abstracton that embelishes society. I want for all children to have a field to play, in animals to feed, nature trails to explore, small groupings, caring teachers, loveing attentive parents etc. But it is not so.
We can only keep trying and using as many approachs as is made known to us. Reggio explores a path to creativity, documenting, and revisiting. Is this not all subject to the teachers interpretation, and should not that not be looked at in a Reggio way. When a teacher is excited and engaged it transfers to the children.
I agree that we need to keep trying to make the Reggio style program work. We need need to resist getting bogged down with the "mcas & School readiness" teaching style and educate parents and others that it serves the children. They learn it and supports their interests and their natural desire to explore .
anonymous on 2/13 @9:29am is angela leblanc
I think regardless of current pressures for accountability, academic learning, and test preparation, we have an obligation to stay focused on the children and to learn how to articulate how and why our approaches best support development and learning. I agree with all the comments already made about how children need a strong foundation for “learning how to learn” – how to express their curiosity, ask good questions, investigate, explore, create, problem solve, and learn from each other. Skills taught without a context in meaningful intellectual pursuits will not be well used or lasting in the long run.
The approaches described in the book are powerful in large part because they are realized through caring, nurturing, respectful relationships. Children cannot reveal their ideas, interests, capacities fully without a sense of emotional safety and security. That security comes out of each teacher’s relationship with individual children and out of a strong sense of community among the children themselves. I think that it is because of these deeply respectful and caring relationships, along with a true interest in partnerships with families that intellectual development can flourish.
For those thinking about whether or not these approaches “work”, and prepare children for future schooling, here’s one anecdote. Last year 7 of our pre-k children went into public school kindergarten in the same district, and ended up in the same class. One parent shared with us early in the fall that the teacher had been asking her questions about where the children had been at preschool, and specifics about our program. The teacher asked these questions as she described some of the activities children had been engaged with in kindergarten, and the unusual (in her view) level of confidence and skill these 7 children all had in approaching new material, problem-solving, organizing tasks, and generally engaging in kindergarten curriculum right from the beginning of the school year. She attributed their general approach to the kindergarten curriculum (since of course each child had their own personal strengths and challenges) to their preschool classroom experiences. This kindergarten class is in a fairly traditional suburban public school district, as focused as any on basic skill development and future tests – nothing particularly progressive or creative.
i agree with helen. i say yes too if teachers are passionate with what they are doing and having a creative mind to help the children be creative also. if the children see the teachers getting into "it" and enjoying what theyre doing then the children will feel more comfortable with opening up and showing how creative they are!
Thanks Katrina,
I enjoyed your clear, insightful posts very much.
I have heard similar comments about the children who've graduated from my program. Some of the families I've kept in touch with had children in my program in the early 80's. They had a strong foundation on which to build future learning. We all know how important early childhood is. Many of my students went on to attend advance placement classes in high school and were honor students. I started to see a trend over the years. The parents almost always credited their children’s pre school years as the place where it all started.
When I first heard of Reggio, I thought, "That's sort of how I do it! I follow their lead.” I've always offered a "Reggio" type program, even before I researched it. It resonates deeply with me; I am sure it is the highest quality. I don't claim to be advanced in my approach; I'm still learning and trying to improve. Newsweek magazine (1991) claimed it was the best in the world! Howard Gardner (Multiple Intelligences Theory) holds the Reggio Emilia programs in high regard. It’s not a fad; it is based on very sound developmental ideas and theories, so I’m not surprised that the kindergarten teachers recognized the skills that the children from your program brought to their classroom. It “works”!
I am satisfied with the examples in the book that children's investigations were worth the time. These children are going to really have an experience with something that they enjoy and just on this fact alone they will learn and retain information. I believe the method is equally as strong as fostering the socio-emotional and cognitive domains of development. I believe a good teacher can find ways on how to make sure all of these domains are being touched on while teaching with the Reggio style. I am not convinced at this moment that we can meet expectations of parents and State regulatory agencies while teaching this way. With all of the standardized testing that is being done at such a young age the pressure is on for teachers and parents to cram "knowledge" into children. I feel it is going to time for people to see that the children are just not develoing the ways they used to. children are stressed out and do not want to learn as a result of this. They are acting out in different ways...I wonder if there is a correlation between adhd and this kind of forced learning. If children are able to explore what they are interested in they will want to do it, they will enjoy it and pay attention, and then it is up to the teacher to find ways to intertwine the "necessary" things that children need to learn for school into this Reggio style of learning. If we can take the time and show "proof" of children learning this way and being able to still do well in school then maybe we can start convincig parents and state agencies that this is the way to go as far as teaching goes.
It was encouraging to hear from Katrina and Judith that they were able to track some children that were in a Reggio preschool program and have done very well as a whole. Hearing the success stories - from the kindergarten students making quite an impression on their teacher to the high school honor students taking AP classes - I guess we can say, "Yes, it does work!"
Gregg, i think that in your comment of 2/21, you have hit upon two things about Reggio style education that make teachers and parents VERY nervous
"As long as I view everything I add to the classroom as an EXPERIMENT and I am (1) willing to let it fail and (2) more interested in seeing what the children DO than "teaching" them, I am on safe ground."
No one likes to fail! And I think that no matter how hard we try, teachers have a lot invested in the success of our students and their work. And parents! i work in, and my own children attend a Jewish day school, so i am in some ways very far removed from the whole "no child left behind"/high stakes testing mind set that has had such a negative impact on early childhood settings. but i have to assume that one of the things that makes parents concerned about Reggio schooling is that it does emphasize so strongly that the learning takes place in kids doing, not in teachers stuffing information into them. when you read the comments in the family involvement section here, there is a lot of frustration about the conflict between what the teachers want from families (more involvement, more acceptance from parents) and what parents want from teachers ("babysitting", preparation for elementary school). i wish that there was more high quality, longitudinal research into why and how of this type of education (child centered, inquiry based, project approach, reggio) WORKS and in the end makes better educated and more skilled individuals than any kind of cookie cutter curriculum or standards. i think that would go a long way toward reassuring nervous parents and reluctant co-workers.
I have also been reading Howard Gardner's book, "Five Minds for the Future"(2008). Just last night I came across this(p.130), "Newsweek magazine dubbed these Reggio institutions the best pre-schools in the world. When visitors inquire what happens to the graduates of these schools for the young, longtime residents issue this short but revealing answer: "Just look at our community."" He also says, "From everything that I have observed over the years, Reggio Emilia works exceedingly well." He has visited and studied the culture there for over twenty-five years. Howard Gardner (1997), in his book, Extraordinary Minds, notes, “…we have seen that unusual levels of performance can come from two quite different sources: children of high psychometric intelligence,… and children who may themselves not be remarkable but who are the beneficiaries of a pedagogical method that… provides a very rich set of experiences as in … the Reggio Emilia schools” (pp 44-45). Anyone wishing to see a longitudinal study on Reggio should do some research; it's out there somewhere. Just because you haven't seen the studies, doesn't mean they don't exist. There are a lot of very competent and highly qualified educators in the international community that have been watching and tracking what is going on in Reggio Emilia, Italy for quite some time now, and they are very impressed with the results.
Post a Comment