Currently, in The United States, the educational system is based on the idea that each age group of children should know a specific and limited number of facts, and should be able to pick each these facts out of groups of four options. Children who can identify these facts are considered successful in school, and children who cannot are considered unsuccessful - no matter what other knowledge or skills they possess. As a result, the educational system has now limited itself to force feeding these specific correct answers - leaving no room for original ideas, unique thought processes, creativity or individuality, traits that our society claims to value. However, individuality and innovation do not lead to high scores on standardized tests - and therefore do not lead to school success. This is a nonsensical paradox, but many people still strongly believe in standardization of education (probably because they were never encouraged to think when they were children).
In spite of a strong push for individualized instruction, the system of standardized testing pressures teachers to create a classroom full of unconscious, fact spewing, scan-tron completing, automatons. The individual children and teachers disappear in this system. Respect for learning styles becomes obsolete. Once the age of a child is determined, they become the list of answers that the Iowa Achievement Test deems appropriate. We do not, then, consider an individual child's growth, only their ability or lack of ability to memorize correct answers.
I am fortunate that I teach Preschool. Standardized tests have not yet become the norm for preschool assessment - and hopefully they never will. Still, individuals hold beliefs about what children should know or how they should act, and these beliefs often get in the way of looking at children as individuals. Something that happened in my classroom the other day illustrates this reality. I have a student in my three year old class, C, who is an ESL student. In September, C had not yet begun acquiring English, and, in fact, spoke very few words in any language. His progress, however, has been phenomenal, and he can now express his needs and name many objects in both languages - and has gained confidence in his ability to communicate. He still, however, groups similar objects under one heading (saying 'animal' for all animals rather than 'lion' and 'pig'). I am thrilled with his progress, and expect he will continue to learn language at an accelerated rate.
Early this week a staff member from another classroom was spending time in my three year old class. She heard C call me 'Teacher,' which is his word for all adults working in the school, and she was appalled. She crouched down, put her face inches in front of his face, and spoke to him in a very stern way, "Her name is not teacher, it is Miss Kristi." I intervened and explained to her that he is not ready to delineate all of the different staff members by different names, and that, considering he didn't call us by any name at all two months ago, his use of the word 'teacher' was cause for celebration. Still, she maintained that him not calling me by my name was a sign of disrespect. In the end, I had to use the old 'this is my classroom and I will run it the way I see fit' card because we were clearly not going to come to an agreement any time soon.
Anyway, I believe that children should be assessed on their individual growth, not on some pre-conceived standard. Each child comes to the classroom at one stage of development, and leaves at another. The role of the teacher is to smooth out the rough spots along the road of development - to minimize frustration that sometimes occurs when children are attempting to master a new skill. It is really not possible to assess individual growth and development on a standardized test.
My classroom environments and assessment systems are based on the Reggio Emilia schools in Italy. "The cornerstone of Reggio Emilia experiences conceptualizes an image of the child as competent, strong, inventive and full of ideas with rights instead of needs.” (E.M. Matthews, 2008)
The Reggio Emilia philosophy is based on respecting individual children’s interests, skills, ideas, and developmental stages. Each child is celebrated for simply being who they are, and they are supported by adults who are learning right along with them. Assessments consist of a collection of work that is kept in chronological order – and can then be viewed as a sort of ‘time-line’ of individual development. “Documentation often involves examples of children’s questions, work, and transcriptions that capture not only children’s skills but also their thought processes.” (Bullock, 2002) In addition, I keep an ongoing record of my personal observations and reflections for each child as well as photographs of work being done in the class. All work is dated and labeled with a descriptor as well as with an explanation of Illinois Early Childhood Standards that correlate to the individual child’s experience. This collection of each child’s work is not only used as an illustration of learning and development over time, but it is used to understand each child’s stage of development, thought processes, and needs. I do not believe it is possible to know another person completely – especially because people continuously evolve and change throughout life. In fact, I am still struggling with completely knowing myself. However, by really looking at a child’s creative output and by listening to their ideas and questions with an open and accepting attitude, you can get as close as possible to knowing each child. It is at that point that true individualized instruction and child-directed learning can occur.
My description above is my understanding of assessment practices in the Reggio Emilia schools of Italy. I mentioned that my classrooms’ are modeled after Reggio Emilia, but I do feel the need to stress that I am far from achieving what the Italians have achieved. I am still in the process of learning and internalizing the Reggio philosophy. As I come to understand each new aspect of Reggio Emilia (and there are many many layers of aspects), I add new elements to my classroom environment or I change my approach to teaching preschool. Then there is a period of change and adjustment which is necessary for accomplishing a harmony between the new direction of my personal teaching philosophy, my own personality and style, the class as a whole and the individual students. Because I teach in two different classes, often times the original idea morphs into two completely different classroom strategies. I have found that approaches need to be changed year by year as well – as new children and new classroom dynamics develop. In a way, I am applying the Reggio Emilia approach to my own development as a teacher just as I am applying it to the development of the children in my care.
Bibliography
Bennett, T. (2007, June 1). Reactions to Visiting the Infant-Toddler and Preschool Centers in Reggio Emilia, Italy. Early Childhood Research and Practice . Champaign, Il: University of Illinois.
Bullock, J. B. (2002, Fall). Modeling, Collaboration, In-Depth Projects, and Cognitive Discourse: A Reggio Emilia and Project Approach Course. Early childhood Research and Practice . Champaign, Illinois: University of Illinois.
E.M. Matthews, M. (2008). Reggio Emilia.
New, R. S. (2000, December). Reggio Emilia: Catalyst for Change and Conversation. Eric Digest . Champaign, IL: University of Illinois.
The following link will take you to a wonderful website that describes the Reggio Emilia schools and philosophy and displays many photographs of the children of Reggio Emilia. From this site you can also download a beautiful and inspiring Power Point presentation:
