There are two ways to look at documentation.
One way is the standards based approach. The question is a common one--"What is my child learning from this experience?" followed by several questions usually all centered around the same thought, "What do I do to move this child to the next level/standard?".
The second way is what I like to call the process approach (a varient of the typical know/what to know/what we learned approach associated with the project approach). The guiding question here is, "What is my child experiencing?" Followed by a vast array of questions---What is there in the environment that has contributed to the experience? What do other individuals have to offer that may expand this experience? What are the commonalities between what I've observed here and other observations I have made? What can I do to provide further opportunities for exploration?" And perhaps most important, " What is the guiding power behind this experience for the child?" Nothing is 'wrong' per say with the standards based approach--but the process approach feels much more authentic, at least to me, and gives me a deeper appreciation for the child as a competent learner.
So, let's take a peek at one documentation sample (for educators: this sample is available on the ReggioDocumentation yahoo group). Here is a brief video clip showing three children--N, L, and B in the garden. This was during our unit study of fall/pumpkins (different than projects, as I had selected the topic based on ease of access to materials rather than the child's interests).
The children had previously had the experience of cutting, carving, and removing the seeds from the pumpkin and reading a book where the farmers in the story "Keep the best, and sell the rest". With limited assistance they had sorted out the "best" pumpkin seeds to plant. Aside from that exposure I hadn't provided any further information on pumpkins, the growth process, or gardening in general so all the children's input is based primarily on prior knowledge.
Some of the following questions are what came to mind as I viewed this clip--why don't you give me your input on them?
-What led to N & L's sustained interest in this activity, while B was distracted (by the neighbor's dog paying him a visit).?
-What prior knowledge did N & L demonstrate about pumpkins and gardening?
-Whas there anything significant about the dialouge between N & L throughout this clip?
-What was available in the environment that supported the girls exploration? (Note: I did not do anything specific to prepare the environment in this case, everything they utilized was already in the yard).
Which led to thinking about the environment & what was available, a key factor in Reggio's view of the environment as the third teacher--"What physical materials can I make available within the environment to further the children's interest?"
And moved me into considering further questions in the "What's next" category?
"Is the interest the children have in the pumpkins themselves, or is the guiding power something else about the experience?"
"How do I feel about the relationships shown between the children in this clip? Do they demonstrate a sense of community, or a sense of individuality? Do the children show interest in pursing this activity as a group? Or is one child perhaps more engaged--meaning it would be better to offer opportunites only to a specific child?"
Then questions about my own engagement in the activity...
Was this activity primarly teacher directed or child directed, or was there a balance between the two? Did the questions I ask lead to further exploration or did they detract from the children's self directed exploration? Who values this experience more--the children as the learners or myself as the educator?
The correct answer, for the record, should be the children! If the children are engaged in the process and the teacher is properly guiding them utilizing the environment as the third teacher they will develop a complete working knowledge--whereas if I value the "content" of the activity more than the "process" I'm more likely to plan and direct activities that feed my need as an educator to make the children progress, which will lead to content knowledge. Again, there's nothing inherently wrong with content knowledge, it's useful to have a store of content knowledge to draw from. Most of what I learned in my general education classes was content knowledge, information someone decided it would be helpful for your run of the mil college graduate to know. But I don't use algebra (content knowledge) nearly as much as what I learned in my teaching internship (working knowledge) on a day to day basis.
I will come back and finish these thoughts later...and would love feedback please!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment