Session 3

"Experiences often lead us to unanticipated learning and moves us into deeper understanding of the world around us."  This quote guided me in the facilitation of our last study group which I am embarrased to admit was at the end of July and I am only now posting (photos are still to come).  As a group we engaged in some individual reflection, group reflection and presented the ongoing projects.  We also read and discussed a wonderful article on thinking routines in the classroom, an article to which I would like to return for further discussion.  The idea of getting children to think about their thinking and be aware of this process is not only fascinating, but also I believe crucial in supporting the deeper level of investigation necessary for the Project Approach.  And as teachers, it is critical that we are not only aware of this phenomenon, but actively engage students within the classroom in thinking routines.  As we continue on in our journey, it is my hope that we can truly move into deeper conversations on this topic in relation to the process of projects.
With this said, although I have much more I could say, I will hold off given that we will meet in two days.  What I am posting are the two questions from the last meeting:
1)  How do we keep the level of engagement necessary for Phase 2 in students in order to actually have a project, and
2) How do we keep teachers engaged in the project enough to support the deep level of investigation necessary for Phase 2 of project work.
While these obviously are incredibly intertwined, both questions are very important on their own.  We only began to discuss the need to have frequent, sustained conversations with children, but I think this could lead us towards one answer, or possibly another question, can we really move to Phase 2 with out a deep level of conversation and discussion?

Two questions

The two questions posed this time are 1)  How do you keep children of all ages interested in the project?  2)  How do you get the time to document and plan?

Summer Session 2

There was such an energy and excitement to our second study group session. Many of the participants are engaging in projects for the first time and it was amazing to see and hear about their investigations in trains, gardens and water. Not only was their evidence of the children’s stories, discussions, wonderings and questions, but also of the teachers. As we worked through their Phase 1 of their projects in their classrooms we charted successes, issues and questions while posing provocations to one another. It was the discussion and sharing about their projects that really created energy in the room and the pride in what they are doing in the classrooms was clearly visible. It was also great to hear teachers using the language of the Project Approach, for example I overheard one infant-toddler teacher state don’t you remember how Sylvia Chard called it Project Practice with infant-toddlers, not projects. Yes!

The quality of the documentation was also visible. We could truly see the questions of the children and their deep involvement and interest in the projects. What was clear is how the documentation made the learning visible, both of the teachers and of the children. The infant toddler groups really were able to show the potential of young children to be fully engaged in concepts, from water to trains. Their questions and knowledge are being discovered by the teachers. One of the questions raised was in relation to how you can hear their stories and have discussions for some of the children who are still non-verbal? What they soon discovered through discussions was the concept of the 100 languages and that through deeper observation infants and toddlers show us what they know, what they want to know and what intrigues them.

In addition to sharing about the projects one purpose of the study group is to also provide experiences for the teachers. This occurred in a variety of ways. We began with time for personal reflection and then moved towards some group experiences. One being what is called mirror in the performance arts where you pair up with another and must mimic as a mirror everything the other individual does. While fun, this is an aesthetic experience that helps individuals observe another in a different way, react and respond to them. The other experience was to engage with the visual arts while developing building on the language of the Project Approach. We began by doing memory drawing of the topic each teacher was engaging in. Following this, each then worked either on an observational drawing or informational drawings. During this various techniques were also introduced, particularly with using watercolors (terms such as wet on wet and dry on dry). All were engaged and discovering the materials that will support them using them in the classroom.

A tour through the classroom of one of our participants also allowed to see how she is making a project come alive in her classroom.  Her classroom is engaged in gardening and developing a garden outside, which is also working its way into the classroom.  For me what was truly amazing was to hear the teachers talking about the plants and knowing the names of different animals and plants (and this from one teacher who prior to this project hadn't ever pulled a weed).  This shows the true power of projects for teachers and the transformations that can occur when there is investigation and curiosity within the classroom.


As facilitator, it was wonderful to be able to step back and watch the teachers engage in talking about teaching. Not all of the barriers that often come up during a professional development and the yeah buts, but talk about the learning that is occurring in the classroom and the planning of a curriculum that emerges. Couldn’t have been a better day.

First questions posed

Here are the two questions posed by the teachers during our meeting. 
The first is as infant-toddler teachers how do you know what is a suitable topic for Infants and Toddlers, especially when there is such a wide age and developmental range?  There were some resources on infant toddler projects to help support this, but any responses would be valued.
The second is how do you get all support staff to understand the Project Approach and be on the same page? 

Image of the Child

Malaguzzi (1994) wrote "there are hundreds of different images of the child. Each one of you has inside yourself an image of the child that directs you as you begin to relate to a child. This theory within you pushes you to behave in certain ways; it orients you as you talk to the child, listen to the child, observe the child. It is very difficult for you to act contrary to this internal image" (52). The image of the child and Malaguzzi's article "Your image of the child: Where teaching begins" provided the context for our discussion at our June 9th meeting. We read, reflected and webbed images in teams of teachers. Present were 3 teams of infant-toddler teachers and 2 teams of preschool teachers. To begin with the task was to web as a team an image of the child with the challenge of coming up with at least 100 words. This challenge encouraged us to go deeper into all of the components of a child, from gender and temperament to children as learners and their interests. The webs showed some common threads such as temperament, but each was unique to the teams and the children with whom they work.  Teachers working with infant-toddlers saw from this developmental perspective just as the preschool teachers did, allowing for some rich discussions and understandings among the different teams of teachers.

This was followed with reading Malaguzzi's article (1994), small group and large group discussions.  Through our dialogue we discussed many pertinent topics which included:  the importance of relationships with the children as well as with families and colleagues; the understanding that children should be able to question and that teachers respond to questions; the point that early childhood is unpredictable; addressing the child who doesn't seem to engage socially with others and letting them learn in their own way; changing the role of the teacher to that of facilitator and waiting on the child; the constant value for the child to know he/she is being observed and is honored to be observed; teachers seeing themselves as researchers; the need to have an alliance with our families; and understanding that it is a child's right to be recognized for their strengths.  This rich discussion really provided the space to begin our summer investigation of the Project Approach as teachers.

We then moved into a discussion of the Project Approach with an introduction to The Project Approach study guide written by Sylvia Chard.  All of us on the study group had attended a conference in May with Sylvia Chard and so some discussion was related to this conference and what was for some an introduction to this curricular approach.  We then began work on webbing project ideas where some worked on webs for projects they would like to begin or had done some preliminary work on which included 2 garden projects; one investigation into a creek in connection to working in the garden; one project thinking about water (an infant toddler classroom where they know water is of great interest of the children and one with which they know the children have experience).  One infant-toddler teacher has been taking walks around the center with her children and so she webbed the surround area of the building and campus on which they are housed, generating ideas on where the project could go.  These were webbed and then each teacher worked with art materials to do a preliminary or anticipatory drawing connected to their project ideas.

 

 

We left with a web on our project ideas, resources such as the study guide to support our understanding and implementation of phase 1 and tasks to write reflective journals to bring back.  We also have project portfolios that have a space for resources, reflections, but also a section to document Phase 1, 2 and 3 with descriptions and elements of the phases as a way to guide our work and documentation.   Each team also had examples of projects in relation to infant toddler and preschool classrooms to become more familiar with how other teachers and classrooms engage in the Project Approach.

There were also two questions posed by the teachers to which we should all respond and investigate, find above in the following post.

Introducing Project Study Group

My name is Stacey Pistorova and I am currently a doctoral student in early childhood education with a bachelor’s in the Visual Arts. It is just this combination that led me to the Project Approach which I found made most visible in the schools of Reggio Emilia, Italy. The potential of young children are seen throughout the entire curriculum and most powerfully in the images that emerge out of these approaches; images evoking the power of their words carefully dictated by the teachers, photos taken of children deeply engaged in the process of investigation and learning, and the intentionality and beauty of the children’s drawings.


While I was energized by an approach to education that supported young children and embraced the concept of that children are capable and competent and have multiple means of making sense of the world around them, I felt I was faced an ever increasing field where children and teachers were forced to conform to a system that discredits creativity and investigation for the apparent sake of accountability. While I would never oppose the concept that we are accountable to young children, the question is whether our current educational practices are supporting young children or discrediting and harming them. And in addition, how does the current push for proficiency and an academic, push down model of education affect the role of the teacher and his/her understanding of child development, individualization and curriculum development?

The Project Approach and the Reggio Approach provide an alternative, for teachers as well as students to actively engage in the process of learning. And this is just what a group of teachers and I are investigating within the context of a study group, where we go deeper into the questions pertaining specifically to the Project Approach, but which also leads to many questions to investigate relevant to teaching and the education of young children. And so, here we are, trying to further our dialogue through Project Study Group, an online component of our ongoing dialogue. The hope is that we will: discuss our image of the child in connection to teaching and curriculum development; engage in dialogue around the barriers, joys and issues pertaining to implementing the Project Approach; respond and comment on readings that further our understanding; and post ongoing projects, the phases and questions related to implementing project work in the classroom.

We welcome anyone who would like to join us in this journey as we pose good questions and engage in good conversations about teaching and learning as the means of maintaining and in some cases finding again the energy to teach and joy in the incredibly important work we do, educating young children.