Category: Assignment 1

Hello Everyone,

Welcome to my final reflection as I look back at my learning journey over the past three months!

Context

I am fortunate to teach Kindergarten at an International Baccalaureate World School in North Vancouver. The IB mission very much aligns with the Redesigned BC Curriculum in its open-ended, inquiry-based nature. This mandated curriculum for students from K-12 includes a subject called Applied Design, Skills, and Technology (ADST). For Kindergarten, the expected learning outcomes are as follows:

(Source: https://curriculum.gov.bc.ca/curriculum/adst/k)

Additionally, the government of BC also offers a Digital Literacy Framework (PDF) which outlines six characteristics based on the National Educations Technology Standards for Students (NETS•S) standards. These characteristics encompass the skills considered necessary to be successful learners in the 21st century. To further elaborate on these characteristics, The National Council of Teachers of English (NTCE) has created a set of of 21st century literacies. The NTCE (2013) posits that literate 21st century global citizens are required to:

1. Develop proficiency and fluency with the tools of technology
2. Build intentional cross-cultural connections and relationships with others so to pose and solve problems collaboratively and strengthen independent thought;
3. Design and share information for global communities to meet a variety of purposes;
4. Manage, analyze, and synthesize multiple streams of simultaneous information;
5. Create, critique, analyze, and evaluate multimedia texts;
6. Attend to the ethical responsibilities required by these complex environments.

With these technological competencies in mind, my inquiry process was far from linear as I initially struggled with narrowing my focus. At first, I was interested in the home-school connection because I was struggling to find an effective way to communicate with my Kindergarten families. This challenge lead me to consider:

• Does technology help to bridge the gap between home and school or does it widen it?

Once I began my first IB unit of inquiry with my Kindergarten students I considered:

• How can technology serve as a tool for authentic knowledge construction in the early years?
• How can technology support inquiry-based learning within an early years context?

It wasn’t until I read Alison Galloway’s MEd project about a Reggio Emilia inspired makerspace that I was inspired to look into the following inquiry:

• Does technology support or disrupt the Reggio Emilia philosophy?

It took me several weeks of reading and conversations with my learning pod and the network of teachers in my school district to realize that my inquiry had actually developed into how to authentically and effectively integrate technology in an early years learning environment while honouring the Reggio Emilia philosophy.

I am passionate about the Reggio Emilia philosophy and consider it to be the leading force behind my pedagogical practices. The Reggio Emilia philosophy emphasizes the environment as the third teacher, the image of the child, documentation, and community connections. Therefore, my inquiry topic arose out of a sense of discomfort when envisioning the warm, inviting environment, natural materials and childcentered approach of the Reggio Emilia philosophy in comparison to a cold, sterile room filled with rows of isolated computers. However, as I delved into the research and connected with others, it became glaringly evident that technology plays a large role in a 21st century Reggio Emilia inspired early learning environment. It was time to face my misconceptions.

The Environment as the Third Teacher

Take one step into our classroom and it is evident that the learning environment reflects the Reggio Emilia philosophy. Our room includes soft, home-like furnishings, dim lighting, natural materials, loose parts, and the children as well as their families are honoured throughout. The environment acts as a third teacher, offering students opportunities to learn and play together while exploring their surroundings. Through my inquiry I learned about Makerspaces and how they can create an environment in which everyday materials as well as digital materials are offered as provocations for students. By meeting with Alison Galloway, reading her MEd project, and visiting her website, it became evident that Makerspaces and the Reggio Emilia philosophy reflect one another. Following the makerspace movement Bers, Strawhacker & Vizner (2018) suggest that providing children a mixture of digital and non-digital tools such as robotic kits, circuitry materials, vinyl cutters, powered hand tools, robotics kits, cardboard, clay, scissors, tape, and metal brads may be a good first step to technology in a Reggio Emilia inspired early learning environment.

The Image of the Child

My students are trusted and valued as competent, capable navigators of their own learning. They have full access to their environment. It is common to see a child standing on a chair to help themselves to something up in the cupboard or getting up on the windowsill to use the natural light for their drawing. Yes, safety is prioritized in the classroom but so is student agency. For instance, some of my students found a picnic basket yesterday which contained real plates, utensils, and cups. Immediately the boys wanted to use their new-found tools in our home-centre. Instead of shutting down this potentially risky play, I brought over an appleand demonstrated the appropriate way to cut using the found tools. The boys took turns cutting the apple and enjoying, quite literally, the fruits of their labour.

As demonstrated, curriculum is emergent as children explore their surroundings. Through my research I was introduced an article by Hong and Trepanier-Street (2004) which discussed KidPix and Kidspiration–digital platforms for children to express their ideas. These platforms reaffirm the image of child as competent and capable by offering them the tools to demonstrate their thinking more complexly and accurately than if they were to use conventional tools.

Documentation

Documentation occurs multiple times a day in our classroom. I frequently hear, “Ms. Pulice, take a picture!” Pictures, videos, and voice recordings enable us to capture moments and creations that would otherwise disappear after clean up. The students advocate for the documentation of their work and will often ask for it to be shared with their families. They take pride in their work and feel a sense of gratification knowing that their families will see what they have accomplished at school. This ongoing documentation allows us to look back, reflect, and revise our learning. The students have the opportunity to build off of their prior work and knowledge while I have the opportunity to revisit lessons and extend students’ thinking. My learning pod, Emily and Trisha, shared with me their successes with the Seesaw and Freshgrade apps for documenting students’ work. They both work with older primary students (Grades 1-2) so they also find that students have agency when documenting their own learning. In the Kindergarten context, students can still have a voice in what is being documented even if they are not the ones directly accessing the app. Rinaldi (2006) found that documentation also motivates students because they feel that their work is being valued.  Through the Kindergarten teachers network in my school district I was introduced to the HP Instant Ink program for teachers. The program provides teachers with the tools to honour their students’ work by offering affordable coloured printing options.

Community Building

Students work together and learn from each other while also sharing with their families, the community at our school and in the district. I see children helping each other through their inquiries and sharing their knowledge through play. Families in the digital age are connected to their children’s learning through online platforms. My learning pod shared FreshSchools with me which is a platform which enables families to access all school information in one easy place. Through my school, I have been introduced to Managebac which is a platform specifically for IB schools which also enables students and teachers to document and share learning online. Lim and Cho (2019) found that mobile documentation is an effective way to connect with 21st century families and have them more present in their children’s educational journeys. Not only can online platforms support family engagement, they can also be used to reach the greater community and invite knowledge sharing from around the world. These connections can build rich sites of knowledge construction for young learners.

Enduring Understandings

The open-ended, inquiry process has been uncomfortable and yet has offered many opportunities for failure as well as growth. Through my own inquiry trials and tribulations I have realized how challenging open-ended learning must be for my young students. However, I have also seen the great value in sitting in the discomfort. I came to many roadblocks throughout my inquiry including a lack of research on my topic as well as reframing my thinking about the Reggio Emilia philosophy which I originally thought I was very knowledgable about. There was a large component that I was missing in my practice and this inquiry has lead me to the realization that technology is not separate from the Reggio Emilia philosophy and is instead imbedded within in it as a 21st century literacy. Moving forward I intend to weave the following enduring understandings from my inquiry into my practice:

1. Technology should be readily available for children, coinciding with the loose parts and natural materials in the learning environment.
2. Children should have the opportunity to be creators, not just consumers of technology.
3. Technology should be used as a tool to build community through documentation and sharing.
4. Technology should support multimodality and be considered as one of children’s “one hundred languages.”
5. As per the SAMR Model, technology should be used primarily for the modification or redefinition of a task as opposed to simple substitution or augmentation.

Thank you for following my inquiry journey. I look forward to using this platform to document my learning as I refine my search for my final MEd project.

Take care,

Miss P.💕

References

BC Ministry of Education. (n.d.). BC’s New Curriculum. Retrieved from, https://curriculum.gov.bc.ca/curriculum/social-studies/2

BC Ministry of Education. (2016). Digital Literacy Framework. Retrieved from http://www.bced.gov.bc.ca/dist_learning/dig_lit_standards.htm

Bers, M., Strawhacker, A., & Vizner, M. (2018). The design of early childhood makerspaces to support positive technological development two case studies. Library Hi Tech, 36(1), 75-96. doi:10.1108/LHT-06-2017-0112

Galloway, A. (2015). Bringing a reggio emilia inspired approach into higher grades to 21st century learning skills and the maker movement (Unpublished master’s project). University of Victoria, Victoria, BC

Hong, S. B., & Trepanier-Street, M. (2004). Technology: A tool for knowledge construction in a reggio emilia inspired teacher education program. Early Childhood Education Journal, 32(2), 87-94. doi:10.1007/s10643-004-7971-z

Lim, S., & Cho, M. (2019). Parents’ use of mobile documentation in a reggio emilia-inspired school. Early Childhood Education Journal, 47(4), 367-379. doi:10.1007/s10643-019-00945-5

NTCE. (2013). The NCTE Definition of 21st Century Literacies. Retrieved from http://www2.ncte.org/statement/21stcentdefinition/

Rinaldi, C. (2006). In dialogue with Reggio Emilia: Listening, researching and learning. New York: Routledge

Hello Everyone,

I was lucky enough to connect with Alison Galloway, a former MEd student from the University of Victoria. I was immediately drawn to Alison’s MEd project because of its embodiment of the Reggio Emilia philosophy. Alison’s experience prior to her MED project included working in a Reggio Emilia inspired school, visits to the Opal charter school in Oregon and the Bishop Strachan School in Toronto, as well as a two-week Summer Institute in Reggio Emilia, Italy. Her rich knowledge of the Reggio Emilia philosophy offered a strong foundation for her inquiry into the intersection of the Reggio approach and the Maker Movement. Through her MEd project Alison was able to create a space within her school which she called the iLab to give life to the intersections of these two approaches. She now teaches 

Applied Design Skill and Technology (ADST)  to students from Kindergarten to Grade 3. The iLab has progressed to now be a space not only for ADST but also for Alison to teach her students about social-emotional learning and for them to hone their core competencies–creative thinking, critical thinking, communication, and personal/social awareness.

 

Alison has documented the process of her co-creation of the iLab as well as the evolution of the work of the students within the space through her website. When asked about where her passion for ADST came from, Alison responded that she has always had an interest in the power of technology with children. She also mentioned the importance of technology literacy for children to prepare them for life after school in the 21st century. The BC Ministry of Education’s (2016) Digital Literacy Framework, defines digital literacy as:

“the interest, attitude and ability of individuals to use digital technology and communication tools appropriately to access, manage, integrate, analyze and evaluate information, construct new knowledge, and create and communicate with others” (p.1).

I shared my concerns with Alison about technology disrupting the fundamentals of the Reggio Emilia philosophy (e.g. natural materials, loose parts); however, she assured me that the Reggio Emilia community prides themselves on constantly evolving and improving. Alison insisted that technology is viewed as one of the “hundred languages of children” and can be used to further inquiry, documentation, provocations, new knowledge construction and learning opportunities. I was curious about the role of the teacher versus that of the students when using technology. Alison suggested that the teacher needs to let go of their apprehensions and allow the children the space and time to pursue their personal interests. 

When asked about the must-have technologies in the iLab, Alison warned about the misconception that we need to invest in all the latest technological devices when in fact the learning depends not so much on the tools but how they are used. For instance, I have signed out the school iPads for Monday afternoons but so far have only taught my students to use the Starfall app. With this limited opportunity my students are mostly consumers of information as opposed to creators of new content. Alison shared the importance of having digital technologies (e.g. coding mats, robotic mice, Scratch jr., circuitry, LEDs, motors, copper tape, 3D printers, and laser cutters) in congruence with tools such as cardboard cutters, crafting materials, loose parts, and recycled items. Interestingly, this last suggestion created a dialogue about the repurposing of materials because once students used the recycled materials for their creation, they were no longer recyclable. To combat this issue, Alison offered the idea of students using loose parts for their creations, taking a picture of what they had made, and then taking the creations apart so that the materials can be used again.

Alison offered the following advice to any teacher wanting to implement technology in the early years classroom:

• Think of the purpose of the technology and the learning goals
• What is the  technology doing that you couldn’t teach in another way?
• Don’t be afraid to make mistakes or try new things
• Practice a growth mindset–be okay with chaos, be flexible and responsive

Finally, Alison discussed the ways in which technology can promote problem solving skills, curiosity, communicating, critical thinking. This was particularly important to my own professional reflection because not only do those skills mirror the core competencies of the Redesigned BC Curriculum, they are also directly relate to the IB learner profile which is at the core of my teaching practice at an IB World School. 

Until next time,

Miss P.

Hello All,

“It’s a tool, not a toy” is a common phrase within elementary school classrooms. When using technology in the classroom with early primary students, this idiom becomes increasingly poignant. Technology can easily be viewed as a toy, a distraction, or a way to appease young learners. While these perspectives may be true, technology has the potential to be a powerful educational tool for young learners.

A study conducted by the University of Michigan-Dearborn analyzed the implementation of technology within the university’s Reggio Emilia inspired teacher education program and on-campus early learning centre. The Reggio Emilia philosophy values children as agents of knowledge construction. The philosophy recognizes that children hold their own histories and culture which offer each of them a unique lens when accessing new information.

Children at the university’s early learning centre were afforded the opportunities to access information and engage with their peers in knowledge construction through various forms of technology including computers, cameras, video camera, scanners, and, of course, the internet. Hong and Trepanier-Street (2004) identified four uses of technology within a Reggio Emilia inspired early years program:

(a) representation and organization of ideas in a different medium, (b) communication of ideas and collaboration among members of a specific learning community, (c) visualization and reflection on thinking of children and teachers, and (d) extension and communication of consolidated learning to the broader community. 

(p.88)

The Reggio Emilia philosophy proposes that when provided with the time and space to play and explore, young children are able to think with creativity and ingenuity; however, their ability to physically express these thoughts can be impeded by their fine motor control. Hong and Trepanier-Street (2004) found that technologies such as KidPix and Kidspiration enabled children to better represent their thoughts and understandings of the world. 

As noted in past blog posts, documentation of learning is a large component of the Reggio Emilia philosophy. Children and educators are intended to make learning visible via photos, videos, and anecdotal notes. The purpose of the documentation is not so much to showcase a polished, finished product; instead, learning displays are created to engage learners, educators, and the community in reflective thinking–valuing process over product (Hong & Trepanier-Street, 2004). Throughout the study, the teacher candidate and mentor teacher would switch roles with one teaching while the other documented using digital cameras and videocameras. The educators were then able to go back and reflect and collaborate together to create extension lessons within an emergent curriculum. Hong  and Trepanier-Street (2004) also noted how documentation opened up communication with parents and the larger community including administrators and policymakers because it provided insight into the learning that occurred within the classroom. The researchers suggested that documentation displays helped children to feel pride in their work which may be true; however, within the Reggio Emilia philosophy the role of the child throughout documentation of learning goes beyond feeling pride. While Hong and Trepanier-Street (2004) described the educators as viewing children as powerful and competent learners, the importance of the revisiting, reflecting, and knowledge construction of the children seemed to have been missed. When working with young learners we must ensure that their voices are not only heard but listened to intently. 

Reference

Hong, S. B., & Trepanier-Street, M. (2004). Technology: A tool for knowledge construction in a reggio emilia inspired teacher education program. Early Childhood Education Journal, 32(2), 87-94. doi:10.1007/s10643-004-7971-z

Hello All,

Over the past week I found an article which discussed the use of technology in Reggio Emilia inspired programs. While it addressed the various ways in which technology can be used in the early learning environment, the article also caused me to pause and consider the covert technology that is used in my classroom by myself and my kindergarten students almost every day. When I think of technology I often think of computers or iPads but technology can be found in less apparent ways as well. Now with that being said, I am not considering scissors or pencils as technology. Instead, I took a look around my classroom and noticed the following:

• light table to illuminate objects and for tracing
• CD player used for the listening center
• lights used for shadow play
• electric pencil sharpener
• hot glue guns for building
• power drill for larger projects
• SmartBoard
• Macbook

The range of technologies in my classroom is wide; however, depending on how they are implemented, they can all very much fit into the Reggio Emilia philosophy. Mitchell (2007) outlined 8 different ways in which technology may be a part of Reggio Emilia inspired programming:

• Technology as Tools of Inquiry
• Constructing New Knowledge
• Tools to Promote Creativity
• Bringing Inanimate Things to Life
• Use of Assistive Technology to Support Learning
• Documentation
• Communication
• Training

Prior to reading Mitchell’s (2007) work, as indicated in my previous blog posts, I had really only considered the documentation and communication facets of technology within the Reggio Emilia philosophy. I have previously discussed photo documentation and communicating home digitally; however, Mitchell (2007) adds technology’s ability to connect children and their learning to the wider community. This connection enables children to not only share out but also to learn from experts in the community-a proponent of Vygotsky’s Socio-Cultural theory.

When considering technology as tools of inquiry, tools to promote creativity, and tools of knowledge construction, I see these three categories as very much overlapping and being fluid with one another. Mitchell (2007) suggested digital libraries as tools of inquiry which is really only a substitution for traditional library research. Mitchell (2007) indicated technology’s ability to help problem solve which in turn leads to knowledge construction. The example given was about a group of children making spaceships out of clay and wanting to join their spaceships to make one large creation. Mitchell (2007) envisioned the children problem solving by doing an internet search and watching videos of spaceships. The use of technology in this scenario is very much intertwined in inquiry-based learning because the children are inquiring about how to meld their spaceships and the materials to use. To promote creativity, Mitchell (2007) offered the idea of housing technology in the atelier–the artistic space for creative exploration in Reggio Emilia learning environment–alongside art supplies and natural materials. The juxtaposition of the natural materials with technological tools creates a sort of cognitive dissonance for me. I had a preconceived notion that the Reggio Emilia philosophy solely encompassed natural, loose parts; however, it has become apparent after reading Mitchell’s (2007) article and browsing Galloway’s (2015) website  that technology is yet another tool for children to play, learn, grow, and express themselves.

References

Galloway, A. (2015). A reggio emilia inspired maker space. Retrieved from http://reggioinspiredmakerspace.weebly.com/reggio-emilia-background.html

Mitchell, L. M. (2007). Using technology in reggio emilia-inspired programs. Theory into Practice, 46(1), 32-39. doi:10.1207/s15430421tip4601_5

 

Hello,

I have now narrowed down my inquiry to the ways in which technology support or disrupt the ideologies of the Reggio Emilia philosophy. In doing so, I have recently discovered that the literature around technology and the Reggio Emilia philosophy in quite limited which makes me question why there is a lack of research around a topic which seems so prevalent to the 21st century world of early childhood education.

During my search however, I did come across an article by Alper (2013) which examined Jenkins’ (2006) work around New Media Literacies (NMLs) within the Reggio Emilia context.

New Media Literacies as defined by Jenkins (2006):

• play
• performance
• simulation
• appropriation
• multitasking
• distributed cognition
• collective intelligence
• judgement
• transmedia navigation
• networking
• negotiation
• visualization

Alper (2013) warns that we must not label children as “digital natives” because this limited view excludes unequal access to opportunities, young learners challenges in identifying the ways in which media shifts perception, and children’s ethical responsibilities as media makers and participants. While respecting that digital literacies are not necessarily innate competencies of young children, Alper (2013) turned to the Reggio Emilia philosophy which positions children as competent, capable beings with what Malaguzzi (1996) describes as “100 languages.” According to Alper (2013), technological skills are just one of children’s many languages and are a way for young learners to explore “self-awareness, pleasure and gratification in learning how to manipulate, respond to and communicate with [digital tools]” (p.185).

Interestingly, unlike most educational settings in which digital tools are offered in isolated events, within the Reggio Emilia philosophy technology is provided liberally within the learning environment among other learning tools. It is through play that both learners and educators learn to manipulate, create, view, communicate, and document with technological tools. Alper (2013) also took note of the Reggio Emilia philosophy’s alignment with Jenkins’ (2006) distributed cognition principle which outlines learners’ abilities to use tools which expand mental capacities. Within the Reggio Emilia philosophy, documentation is given much gravity. Educators and learners use photography and videography to make learning visible, allowing all participants to revisit, reflect, and revise learning engagements. 

Documentation should not be confused here with display, which may be a result of societal and cultural pressures for children to mass-produce artefacts in preschool for their parents’ delight or as ‘proof’ of learning… It is part of a process of negotiated learning, or a dynamic system of causes, effects and counter-effects via design, discourse and documentation ( Alper, 2013, p.186)

Finally, Alper (2013) examined Jenkins’ (2006) transmedia navigation principle which refers to the ability to attend to multimodal stories and information. This principle is particularly salient in the Reggio Emilia approach because of Malaguzzi’s assertion of the 100 languages. Under the Reggio Emilia umbrella has transpired Story Workshop which is a multistep method to introduce young learners to the writing process. Story Workshop engages multimodal ways of creating, sharing, and viewing. Students work to either individually or collaboratively create stories using loose parts. These stories are then photographed or video recorded and then students have the opportunity to write or draw about the story they have created. Depending on the engagement of the children, a single story may take place over many Story Workshop sessions. I am currently enrolled in an online course provided by the Opal School in Portland, Oregon which practices the Reggio Emilia philosophy. The course will go into depth about Story Workshop so I will be sure to share information that I learn over the next few weeks pertaining to technology in early childhood education.

Update:

To support story workshop, kindergarten teachers in the school district in which I work have shared that they have enrolled in the HP Instant Ink program for teachers. With the purchase of an HP printer, this program provides teachers the tools to print up to 300 coloured pages for only $9.99 a month. The printer notifies HP when it is running low on ink and the company mails a new cartridge to you so that you do not need to worry about running out of ink. Coloured printing enhances story workshop by enabling teachers to print the photo documentation of their students’ stories and bind them into books. By printing hardcopies of students’ stories, the children have an opportunity to review and reflect on their stories which pushes their thinking further. The teachers who shared the printing program information with me said that during quiet time, their students often choose to read and re-read their “published” stories, giving them a sense of pride and empowerment as writers.

 

Reference

Alper, M. (2013). Developmentally appropriate new media literacies: Supporting cultural competencies and social skills in early childhood education. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 13(2), 175-196. doi:10.1177/1468798411430101