Publishing Web for Students' Final Papers
Publishing Web for Students' Final Papers |
|
From: Angie Burkett
Email: XenaCruz@aol.com
Course: Psych 100G: Issues of Diversity in Developmental
Psychology
College: University of California, Santa Cruz
Instructor: Eugene Matusov
ClassWeb: http://www.ematusov.com/psych100G
ChildrenObservations: No
Date: 14 Dec 1996
Time: 05:02:08
Remote Name: 152.163.237.87
American educators, in their international search for models of quality educational programs have, I believe, discovered such a school in the city of Reggio Emilia, Italy. The Reggio Approach (Edwards, Gandini, & Forman, 1996), continues to gain recognition by American educators, who are challenged in applying the Reggio methods to our culturally and economically diverse nation. However, the Reggio features, including collaboration, project work and documentation, are intriguing and seemingly ideal in providing our children with valuable learning experiences. How do we apply the Reggio Approach to the American educational system and its issues of diversity? This paper attempts to focus on the main features of the Reggio Approach and what we can learn in order to help children represent, explore and expand their ideas to their fullest potential.
The Reggio Emilia Approach: An Interactive Model Challenged By American Cultural Diversity
by Angie Burkett
The Reggio Emilia preschool model encompasses many of the positive aspects we have learned during Psych 100G: Issues of Diversity in Developmental Psychology. The city of Reggio Emilia in Italy contains one of the top-rated schools in the world (Hinckle, 1991). It contains 32 schools whose systems are not typical of Italy. The end of World War II found the women of Reggio wanting to build a school from the rubble of destruction. It was parents and children who gathered the stones and sand from the river to build the first school, and it seems only appropriate for the curriculum to be based on parent/teacher/student collaboration. In pursuit of educational innovation and reform, U.S. educators looked to other nation’s policies, such as the “Reggio Approach” (Edwards, Gandini, & Forman, 1996), which continues to gain support while challenging American ideals regarding appropriate learning methods. Educators and parents worldwide, as well as developmental psychologists and social scientists, are interested in improving the quality of education. However, is it possible to apply the collaborative and holistic methods of the Reggio Approach to the U.S. educational system and its issues of cultural diversity? How can our schools benefit from such methods as collaboration, project work, skilled observation, and generally paying close attention to what our children are doing and saying about their experiences?
The Reggio Approach encompasses the theoretical contributions of Dewey, Piaget, Vygotsky and Bruner, and is similar to the Montessori preschool method, but emphasizes group participation and collaboration rather than working alone. Features of the Reggio approach include many quality aspects of an ideal educational system. A community commitment stems from the fact it was parents and children who gathered the stones and sand from the river to build the first of the pre-schools, and it seems only appropriate for the curriculum to be based on parent/teacher/student collaboration. Therefore, parental involvement is synonymous with community involvement, and thus the concept of supportive relationships goes beyond Italy’s idea that children are the collective responsibility of the state. La Consulta, a school committee that bears considerable influence over local government policy, also reflects strong community involvement through active citizen membership.
The role of the environment also serves as a valuable source of learning and includes an integration of the schools within the community, as well as classrooms organized to interconnect with each other. The physical environment, referred to by Reggio teachers as a “third teacher” (Abramson, Robinson, & Ankenman, 1995) contains aesthetically-pleasing themes and decorations, open doorways, phones and windows connecting classrooms. Large workspaces providing ample room for projects and supplies are attractively arranged to invite playful encounters. The project-based curriculum, also known as the “project approach” or “project work” (Katz, 1994), contains new applications of group projects with the focus on answering questions asked by either the teacher or children, or a collaboration between both. Project work treats projects as in-depth investigations which are designed to stimulate interest. Supporters of project work do not consider it as the basis of curriculum or treated as a subject different from others, such as science or mathematics. Rather, it seeks to compliment curriculum by integrating an inspired and collaborative effort of finding answers to questions. Right answers are not as important as going in-depth and learning about the project itself. As children work in small groups, valuable social skills are fostered through expressive dialogue and problems are solved through collaborative interaction.
Two other unique features are the use of “multiple languages” (Malaguzzi, 1993), which include expressions of symbolic languages through drawing, sculpture, dramatic play and writing; and an emphasis on “documentation” (Katz & Chard, 1996), which involves documenting student’s work at various stages of completion. For example, a child may work on a particular drawing, which the teacher then photographs, makes an audio recording of the child talking about his or her experience with the project, and take notes on supplies used or observations made. All this provides a visual display of learning. However, the focus remains on children’s thoughts, memories and overall experience rather than the work itself.
Taken together, these features seem to offer an ideal model for early childhood education, but is it feasible to apply these concepts to the American educational system? The city of Reggio Emilia is supported by 12% of it’s government’s budget, part of which supports an array of art and educational specialists to assist teachers, and I believe money is what the American educational system lacks in order to implement such collaborative teaching methods. Based on observations and participation in the U.S. school system, I feel it is inconsistent community involvement, as well as a lack of parent participation, which contribute to difficulties in translating to our cultural and economic diversity. However, although Reggio Emilia is a city based largely on cultural homogeneity, the biggest problem seems to lie in America’s vast cultural and linguistic differences. American schools, in most part, do not have the financial means necessary to re-create an identical system, and applying inconsistent, partial concepts in an attempt to “do Reggio” (Fahlman, 1996) within our classrooms would be counterproductive. Also, I believe Americans are challenged by a teaching approach which encompasses the value of purposeful mistakes and open-ended projects, and are even further resistant to the notion of minimal teacher-intervention in peer conflict situations, or allowing students to negotiate their own resolutions. Also, the concept of an emergent, or unplanned, curriculum which lets student’s ideas determine the educational course, seemingly lacks structure and is inhibited by time constraints. However, the most difficult aspect of all seems to be integrating the multitude of ideas proffered by teachers, parents and students, and in persevering with this collaborative educational team. In the face of such cultural, economic and linguistic diversity, what could U.S. educators possibly learn from the Reggio Approach? I believe what we have learned, and continue to learn, thus far includes: challenging old ideas and practices, exploring the many different and non-verbal languages of children , considering the potential of an unplanned curriculum with an emphasis on teacher-directed and child-initiated activity, practicing time management, and persisting with collaborative efforts.
Cultural diversity requires a new approach that emphasizes language as a meaningful tool of communication while taking into consideration a student’s own experience as a valuable source for language and conceptual development (Abramson, Seda & Johnson, 1990; Enright, 1986; Enright & McCloskey, 1985; Hudelson, 1984). This can be done through projects which incorporate individual experiences and interests. For example, one study (Allen, 1986) describes how linguistically diverse children read one story, each in their own language, then tested “magic” objects and powders based on their reading, then played with different types of pasta, eventually combing the activities into creating a pasta lunch. It provided the children an opportunity to collaborate and exercise nonverbal communication. Crawford (1993) believes that multicultural themes are of great interest to children, and the use of bulletin boards as visual displays, audiovisual media, and opportunities for dramatic play are excellent ways of introducing children to new concepts.
There are other ways American educators can benefit from the Reggio model, such as the concept of “teachers as learners” (New, 1990), where teacher autonomy and lack of manuals, achievement tests and curriculum guides allow teachers to become skilled observers of children, as well as skilled listeners of children’s dialogue. These observations and evaluations are then shared with staff and parents in order to further develop curriculum goals. An emergent curriculum does not necessarily mean advanced planning cannot be done, but suggests integrating curriculum in a way that hypothesizes the direction projects may take, while remaining flexible to children’s emerging creativity.
American educators share a common vision towards quality education, and can benefit from the basic principles of the Reggio Emilia preschool method. Projects should be approached in new ways, allowing for both the evolution of creativity and potential for change. Teachers should become skilled observers and listeners, and be open to the many languages of children as they are presented in different representational media. Parents should work in collaboration with teachers and staff in deliberating curriculum, and a collaboration with the community teaches children the vital importance of community involvement. Finally, when educators can understand how a child’s potential is reflected in how they explore the world, how they present their interpretation of the world, and how they choose to communicate with the world, they understand how to implement the most successful methods of learning.
REFERENCES
Abramson, Shareen; Seda, Ileana; Johnson, Candy. Literacy development in a multilingual kindergarten classroom. Childhood Education v67, n2 (Wntr, 1990):68 (5 pages).
Allen, V. G. (1986). Developing contexts to support second language acquisition. Language Arts, 63, 61-66.
Bruner, J. S. (1966). On cognitive growth. In J.S. Bruner, R.R. Olver, & P.M. Greenfield (Eds.). Studies in cognitive growth. New York: Wiley.
Carlson, Barb (Ed.). Working parents support group newsletter. March 1996 issue. http://mat.gsia.cmu.edu/BARB/news0496.html#Reggio
Crawford, L. W. (1993). Language and literacy learning in multicultural classrooms. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Dewey, J. (1911). Culture epoch theory. In P. Monroe (Ed.), A cyclopedia of education (Vol.2). New York: Macmillan.
Fahlman, Penny (1996). Reggio Emilia at NAEYC http://www.nauticom.net/www/cokids/reggio.html
Gandini, L. (1993). Educational and caring spaces. In C. Edwards, L. Gandini, and G. Forman, The hundred languages of children: The Reggio Emilia Approach to early childhood education. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. ED 355 034.
Hinckle, Pia (1991). A school must rest on the idea that all children are different (early childhood education in Reggio Emilia, Italy) (The Best Schools in the World). Newsweek v118, n23 (Dec 2, 1991):52 (3 pages).
Katz, Lilian G. and Chard, Sylvia C. (1996). The contribution of documentation to the quality of early childhood education. http://ericps.ed.uiuc.edu/eece/reggio/lkchar96.html
Katz, Lilian G. (1994). The project approach. http://ericps.ed.uiuc.edu/eece/reggio/katzpr94.html
Katz, Lilian G. (Ed.), and Cesarone, B. (Ed.). (1994). Reflections on the Reggio Emilia Approach. http://ericps.ed.uiuc.edu/eece/pubs/books/reggio.html
Malaguzzi, L. (1993). History, ideas, and basic philosophy. In C. Edwards, L. Gandini, and G. Forman, The hundred languages of children: The Reggio Emilia Approach to early childhood education. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. ED 355 034.
Montessori, M. (1912/1964). The Montessori method. New York: Schocken Books.
Montessori World Web Site http://www.montessori.co.uk/index.htm
New, Rebecca S. (1990). Reggio Emilia: Some Lessons for U.S. Educators http://ericps.ed.uiuc.edu/eece/reggio/new93.html
Piaget, J. (1972). Intellectual evolution from adolescence to adulthood. Human Development, 15, 1-12.
Reggio Emilia Contact Information http://ericps.ed.uiuc.edu/eece/reggio/reginfo.html
Vygotsky, L.S. (1934/1987). Thinking and speech. In The collected works of L.S. (Vol.1). Problems of general psychology. (N. Minick, Trans.). New York: Plenum Press.
