The Value of Individual and Organizational Self-Care in Nature
Karen Walburg
Karen has been teaching and leading nature programming at Westwood Early Childhood Center for over 35 years. She is an advocate for the well-being of early childhood educators, especially in nature. She is open to assisting other organizations in recognizing the value of Self-Care in Nature and to bringing the subsequent benefits to their members and communities. She can be reached at k.walburg@westwood.church

This is the story of the evolution of an idea, as seen through the lens of the inspiration of Reggio Emilia. The Reggio way of seeing the world is an expression of universal truths and the natural world of which we are a part.

In this story we will see an example of those truths playing out for the educators and staff at the Westwood Early Childhood Center (WECC). Using a continuous cycle of Observation, Possibilities and Actualities, we will share a long-term investigation into the value of our place in and with nature as crucial to our well-being. In more or less apparent ways, you will find Reggio inspiration embedded in every step of this investigation.

Observations
For many years, the WECC observed the value of experiences in and with nature for the well-being of children, staff, families and the entire WECC community. We observed that staff well-being translated into deeper, richer and higher quality care and relationships with the children and the community. Two and a half years ago, we also observed that our current staffing situation and other resources might allow us to realize a dream of providing those kinds of experiences in the form of restorative time alone in nature for all staff during their busy work days. Using these and other observations, we developed the WECC’s Self-Care in Nature (SCN) initiative. The initiative’s tentative Mission Statement and Guidelines reflect an ongoing evolution of observations, possibilities and actualities. 

WECC’s Self-Care in Nature tentative Mission Statement
WECC believes there are spiritual, emotional, physical, mental, social, recreational and environmental benefits to taking time alone in nature. The Self-Care initiative gives educators and staff time during their work days, away from other commitments to WECC, to focus on their own self-care and access those benefits. Through work and life, the effects of those benefits are consequently spread to the wider WECC community and the world beyond.

WECC’s Self-Care in Nature tentative Guidelines

• Self-Care in Nature time must be spent for self-care alone in or around nature.

• Self-Care in Nature will occur at locations agreed upon by educator/staff person and administration.

• Cell phone use is permitted only for the purposes of photography, music conducive to self-care or to research discoveries made while in self-care time.

• Self-Care in Nature time may include required reflections such as an entry into a shared journal during allotted time.

Possibilities

Four key possibilities were initially identified:

Logistics - Would our resources be sufficient to support the establishment and maintenance of this initiative?

Benefits - What could/would the benefits be for individuals, the organization, the community and beyond? What would the cost/benefit ratio be?

Evolution - In what ways would/could the initiative evolve? What might drive those changes?

Replicability - Would others see the value in this practice? Would there be a desire to replicate this initiative in other settings/organizations? If so, how might that happen? What could it look like? What part might we play in that exploration?

These possibilities overlapped in many ways as the actualities of this initiative took shape.

Actualities

Logistics - We discovered that we did indeed have the resources to begin this initiative.  

Each educator/staff person is offered 1 or 1.5 self-care hours in nature (depending upon variables) approximately every 2-3 months. Our goal is that everyone will have at least one turn during each of the four seasons. Feedback from educators and staff reflected a desire for more SCN time, to experience the benefits received from that time. Although we are not able to provide more during working hours, staff have found ways outside of work to spend more time in nature either alone or with family or friends.

The staff person who schedules creates an SCN schedule that is basically repeatable for every rotation, with vacations, illnesses, etc. included.

The educator/staff person’s time out is covered by an on-staff float teacher who is qualified to fill each person’s position for that time frame. In our case, this float teacher also provides occasional opportunities for creative expression during a person’s SCN times. She also documents participants’ reflections to share with the WECC community.

We have access to a lakeshore woodland trail onsite. We began our initiative exclusively using this access for SCN.

During the winter months we set up a small tent near the lakeshore, with a battery powered heated blanket, microwaveable heat wrap for the neck and warm beverages available. When the Minnesota cold makes even warm tent time impractical, we have set up an indoor space with an outdoor view.

During the summer months there are cold beverages available. A portable sand play therapy tray is available for use during any SCN time. 

Many participants share that this initiative and these added touches show how deeply they are appreciated and cared for by the organization. This feeling and knowledge of being valued contributes greatly to the well-being of the individual as well as the organization.

Benefits

We created a backpack to be taken along each SCN hour.

The backpack contains a shared journal and pencils, pens, colored pencils and markers to make entries into the journal. We ask that during each SCN hour, a journal entry or another form of documentation be made. This documentation serves as a way for participants to reflect upon their experience and share it with others. It can be as simple or as complex as the author/illustrator desires.

“For the first time, in a long time, I finally feel safe where I work. I feel free to be myself. I feel free to turn mistakes into learning experiences. I feel free to grow. Thanks to you.”

The value and benefits of journal entries go beyond self-expression, insights, memories, gratitude, spiritual connection and cathartic release for the author/illustrators of the entries. They include the benefits of shared experiences and feelings with the wider community, now including you. 

Evolution

The position of the float teacher was originally a volunteer role. Over time, after weighing the cost/benefit ratio, it was determined that the benefits merited the cost of making the position a paid role in the program. This shift also better reflected the embrace of the initiative by the entire organization.    

Weather and other factors dictated that we expand our options for agreed-upon locations for a person’s SCN time. Locations now include the small wooded lakeside area on our campus,  a nearby nature center and a few other sites close enough that the majority of the hour could still be spent alone in nature.  

For the first year there was no structure to the time; it was entirely left to the participant to choose how the hour alone in nature was spent. The second year, we added the occasional opportunity for artistic expression, which was always optional. The third year, we added more in-depth learning opportunities about self-care. Extra time was given for reading and journaling as a more structured approach, but we soon realized that the structure could be too limiting. The learning opportunities were subsequently made available in a more ongoing model, available at any time and without expectations.  

Replicability

WECC has found the benefits of this initiative to be varied, impactful, far-reaching and replicable. We have given presentations about this initiative at conferences and gatherings, working with individuals and groups interested in beginning similar practices.

Avoiding Burnout: The Importance of Self-Care
Q&A with Jen Johnson as told to Eileen Galvin
A reprint from the 2017 RINM newsletter
Jen Johnson is the Director of Willow & Sprout in Minneapolis, Minnesota. In spring 2017, they hosted a Monthly Gathering at their center. During that Gathering, Jen talked about the importance of self-care, which resonated with those attending. We followed up with her about the importance of self-care in a teaching practice that requires observation and reflection.

How do you define self-care for yourself and your teachers?

For me, it is about being mindful and intentional to nurture and love one’s whole self – your mind, your body and your spirit. We, the staff, sit down and create personal goals for each of those areas, and it is the same thing that we do with the children. We have leading questions – how do you love yourself? How do you notice yourself – your whole self, your mind, spirit and physical body? And then, how do you nurture yourself? How do you love yourself? We separate those because nurturing can be different than loving. I tried to make it as simple as possible. This could be a new topic for some of us, and I didn’t want to make it too complicated. 

One of the things I think about is how do you rest? How do you replenish? How do you find those quiet spaces in your day so you can replenish and get a break from daily rhythms? 

How do the goals work? Weekly? Yearly?                                           

We have yearly goals and then every month I do a check-in and then if they need something different in between we can talk about it and change it. Up until now the check-ins have been via email because that was what we all wanted. This year we are going to go deeper into the work with a physical check in addition to email. We need to figure out if email needs to be bi-weekly. With email it is easy to let the work go; with a physical check-in there is a different level of accountability. It is vulnerable work.

Why is it important for a practice that requires teachers to be present and reflective to have self-care as a priority?

When I looked at the profession I really saw high turnover. At my first teaching job there was turnover after turnover after turnover. We know from research and best practice that young children need consistency. There are many factors that go into consistency, but one of the things I noticed across the profession was that the teachers are really not looked at as professionals.

They need to be treated with respect as professionals and as a whole person...with hobbies, interests and families outside of work as well. 

We have a huge disparity in how the teachers are valued and seen, not only in their organization, but as a culture. We have some work to do; we need to consider all of the parts that create a caring environment in our early childhood communities. It has to be about holistic living. It has to be about connection. It has to be about the four parts - children, environment, parents and teachers. We need to consider all of those entities. Also, in order to be present and reflective you have to be able to do that for yourself. If you don’t take that time, there is often a huge disparity between what you say you want and desire and what you can actually do. I do like the airplane analogy. Put on your oxygen mask first; then you are stable and you can go and nurture others. Then that becomes the ripple effect and they become as regulated as they can be.

Jen provided the following update:

Currently, we have monthly staff check ins. This is a place where we reflect and set goals for each month. In our reflection time we go over what we connected about the month prior. What happened or didn’t happen and why? Maybe new ideas and goals were pursued that we get to capture in our time together. Sometimes they do get accomplished and we articulate how it was accomplished. Next, we work on setting new goals for the upcoming month based on what we discovered during our reflection time. Lastly, we do take time to connect about where things feel full of flow and spaces where the flow may be feeling stopped. In other words, where are spaces that feel things are going well and what support may you need during times of stress in your day? 

I have found that when humans feel a sense of worth and contribution to a community they are more dedicated to themselves and the community as a whole.

From All Outside to Functioning Outdoor Classrooms
Amy Warzybok
Amy has her M.A. in Early Childhood Education from Sonoma State University and her B.S. in Business from the University of Minnesota. Before Dodge, Amy taught preschool using a Reggio Emilia approach, managed family, preschool and camp programs in nature and environmental centers and was an Adjunct Child Development Professor.

In 2019, I joined the Dodge Nature Preschool team as the Preschool Director.  Little did I know six months later I would be collaborating with an amazing teaching team to figure out how to move forward with preschool during a pandemic. After finishing our 2019-2020 school year with Zoom story times and car parades, we knew we wanted to get back to in-person preschool, but how? A team of eight brave teachers came together for three weeks in summer 2020 to figure out how to utilize our large outdoor nature playscape to meet the safety needs of preschool during the pandemic. 

Our team had been discussing an outside model, which we adapted and adjusted as we learned more about the pandemic. We piloted strategies in a small summer camp program and landed on dividing our large outdoor space into three separate outdoor classrooms. We created tree swings, found loose part slides, built new sandboxes, added planter gardens, playhouses and much more. The teachers put a lot of love into designing these spaces so we could run an All Outside Preschool.

In 2023, we knew we wanted to continue this design into the future, but we had a hill that was sinking, creating some unsafe conditions. We partnered with Aune Fernandez Landscape Architects to create a design with input from preschool staff, preschoolers, preschool families, nature center staff, board members and other stakeholders in the community. After six months we had a design, and once funding was secure, we selected Parkos Construction and Natural Landscape Designs to help us with the build in summer 2024. We ran our summer camp amidst construction during which preschoolers shared their appreciation for the hard work of the construction team with artwork, cards, lemonade and tea with herbs harvested from our gardens and grounds. We wanted to allow these campers to experience the playground after the build so we hosted a summer playground celebration in September to bring them back to play. Preschoolers, siblings and grown-ups alike enjoyed a morning of playing together in the sandboxes, gardens and playhouses.

As we live in our new outdoor classrooms; I think of all the hardship and stress caused by the pandemic. The children taught us how wonderful outdoor classrooms could be as we experimented together, with different materials and designs. I wonder what Dodge Nature Preschool would be like today if we didn’t have the opportunity to learn with the children in 2020. 

Fundamentals: Organization

In order to create both a pathway for people new to Reggio-inspired work and deepen our shared thinking, we offer a regular column, Fundamentals, to introduce and explore central principles of the Reggio Approach. The Reggio Approach is a complex system of thought and practice with many dynamic entry points that interact; it is not a method, program or curriculum. (Key Principles)

In our contexts, organization is often understood as an administrative concern, influenced by cost, efficiency and practicality. Sergio Spaggiari, former director of the Infant Toddler Centers and Preschools of Reggio Emilia reminds us: “I urge you to think of the value of organization…we believe it is an integral part of the educational project…a decisive element…Organization, in itself, is a pedagogical thought.” 

Viewing organization as a value means that organization of environment, time, roles and responsibilities and materials is not an afterthought, incidental or a bureaucratic set of decisions. Rather, it is essential in strengthening relationships between families and schools and creating opportunities for collaboration among educators. 

The many roles in Reggio – pedagogista, atelierista, cook, educator, family, public official – are layered, organized to maximize interaction and collaboration both within and across the preschools and infant-toddler centers and the city.

In Reggio, they make intentional organizational decisions that prioritize relationships. They group children and schedule staff to “foster stability, continuity, and a sense of belonging.” For example, children remain with each other and their teacher for multiple years. 

Additionally, physical space, furnishings, materials and schedule support small group work, and the walls reflect the history of the children’s experiences. 

“The organization of the work, the spaces, and the time of the children and the adults is a structural part of the values and choices of the educational project.”

The learning environment is itself a teacher. It communicates to children and adults many possibilities and invites multiple responses. The spaces, light, colors, attractive and appropriate materials and visual images surrounding children support learning. Reggio-inspired educators carefully select, arrange, organize and plan a learning environment that is rich, inviting, beautiful, unhurried and stimulating. Time and schedule are also components of the environment. Deliberate choices are made to slow down, to support uninterrupted play, exploration and interaction among children, building connections between experiences. An environment supportive of learning allows children to make choices, use a wide variety of materials, move around, work both alone and with others, engage all the senses, have new experiences and reflect on experiences.

Role of the Learning Environment

As Reggio educators allocate resources (time, space, relationships and attention) they deliberately enact and strengthen their stated mission and values, integrating theory and practice.

Resources

Edwards, C., Gandini, L., Forman, G. (Eds.), (2012). The Hundred Languages of Children: The Reggio Emilia Experiences in Transformation (3rd ed., p. 35). Praeger.

Reggio Children (2010). Indications: Preschools and Infant-Toddler Centres of the Municipality of Reggio Emilia. Reggio Children.

Reggio-Inspired Network of Minnesota: Role of the Learning Environment

Getting to Belonging Part Four
Putting Design into Practice
Rie Gilsdorf and Christy Spencer
Rie Algeo Gilsdorf, MS, MA, has broad experience as a principal, arts administrator, instructional coach, teacher of science and dance and parent in many settings, including the Reggio-inspired programs of Portland’s Opal School and The Blake School in Minneapolis. Rie is a past Board Co-Chair and Civic Engagement Committee Chair of the Reggio-Inspired Network of Minnesota and current member of its Resource Development Committee. She now provides racial equity seminars, coaching and consulting through Embody Equity (www.EmbodyEquity.com).

Christy Spencer, MA is inspired by children’s curiosities and perspectives, and roots her practices in relationships, deep listening, designing dynamic learning environments, observation and pedagogical documentation. Christy has worked in various Reggio-inspired contexts, including The Blake School, Boulder Journey School and the Minnesota Children’s Museum. She has been a RINM Board and committee member. Current professional interests encompass exploring the intersection of design thinking and the Educational Project of Reggio Emilia, mindfulness practices, anti-racist theory, neuroscience around empathy and humanitarian projects focusing on children’s rights.

Over the past year in Getting to Belonging we have had our heads deep in theory, explicating the relationship between a design process and Reggio-inspired pedagogy as they pertain to developing a broader consciousness of race and difference. We’ve broken down each into component parts and attempted to weave them together. This entails oscillating back and forth between theory and practice. It is time to venture into practice.

Documenting Two Prototypes
In this piece we reflect on documentation of two prototypes and the insights they reveal. Similar to the Reggio-inspired practice of offering a provocation and then reflecting on it, we chose current RINM formats, Let’s Talk and Doc Lab, two virtual events. They were opportunities to explore the future by doing, gathering feedback and reflecting on what worked, what didn’t and what might come next. The first, Let’s Talk in January 2024, offered an open-ended conversation framed as an opportunity to explore considerations and anxieties involved in talking with young children about race. February’s Doc Lab focused on exploring race in early childhood by studying documentation of children’s work.

Structurally, Let’s Talk emphasizes dialogue with an invitation for participants to bring their own questions. This event, following previous Network Gatherings, asked, “What do you worry about in exploring race and culture with young children?” Thus, educators’ anxieties became the springboard for this discussion. The conversation had an organic flow and was lightly facilitated with the only ground rules being to listen with curiosity and speak your truth.

By contrast, Doc Lab focused on transcriptions of student conversations and utilized a formal protocol to structure the conversation. The protocol included specific prompts, each with an allotted time, from observation and description, to questioning, to speculation about children’s strategies for constructing understandings. The structure positioned participants as careful, nonjudgmental observers and colleagues. It also required more active facilitation as well as in-depth note taking to enable later reflection.

The Role of Intentionality
There was a palpable difference between the two prototypes, despite significant overlap in participants. As we later reflected on documentation of the events, we became more aware of the nuances within the structures. As our awareness grew, it became apparent that we had unintentionally created a discrepancy in tone between the two.

The Doc Lab felt collaborative and supportive. The protocol positioned the presenting teacher to first listen, saving clarifications for later. This listening practice involved letting go of the role of teacher as expert. The predictability inherent in the structure invited vulnerability, of the presenting teacher and of the observers who must comment on children’s work with minimal context.

Let’s Talk began with prompts about anxiety, unconsciously positioning people to show up either in certainty or defensiveness. As a result, a subtle tone of rigidity arose. Unlike Doc Lab, this format had neither traces of children’s encounters nor a structured protocol to provide a supportive container that would have allowed participants to embrace ambiguity. The conversation spiraled away from possibility as it amplified limiting concepts we fully believe, but that are figments of the imagination. “We can’t. . . because. . . .”

The language we captured from each conversation is also telling. In Doc Lab, we noted words such as “tricky,” “nuanced,” “context,” “interconnectedness,” “dynamic,” “flexible.” These words acknowledged the complexity of the children’s expression and the teacher’s nimble responses. On the other hand, Let’s Talk produced words such as “ominous,” “fear,” “pressure,” “confronting,” “avoidance,” “roadblock.” These words indicated a mindset that is not conducive to curiosity, creativity or compassion. Doc Lab’s language of potentialities was strengthened by its protocol’s progression from observation through speculation.

Making Space for the "Why" and "How"
In Let’s Talk, participants shared books, websites and scope and sequence documents, but we now realize this exchange didn’t encourage deeper critical discourse. Rather than “How might we use this?” the conversation leaned toward “I did this,” or even “Do it this way,” adding to a tone of certainty. While these resources were useful, a “why and how” conversation might have deepened the conversation.

One metaphor that came up during Let’s Talk was Malaguzzi’s idea that “the eye jumps over the wall,¹” which suggests going beyond boundaries to see with fresh eyes. This generative idea moved the conversation to the notion that we as adults need to go over the wall; children are always ready to do this. This is just the kind of organic flow that we have seen arise in Let’s Talk. However, it was quickly squelched as conversation reverted to how adults can get past the anxieties of going over the wall. Soon the voice of certainty crept back in, attempting to grasp onto resources as a way of coping with these anxieties.

Doc Lab participants also shared resources. The difference lay in the foregrounding of the “why” and “how” – the children’s responses and the exchange between teacher, children and resources. Broad themes such as democracy, fairness/justice, interconnectedness and gratitude were woven together in a process of revisiting and recombining resources and experiences. The resources, from a classroom scale to an outdoor pond, served as tangible scaffolding for the big ideas and these ideas provided a thematic framework for the resources. This beautifully illustrates the iterative and generative process of negotiated curriculum.

Intentionality and consciousness – the “why” and “how” – come into play in selecting resources and using them as provocations. Both are crucial. Even the most excellent book or resource only creates part of the conditions for rich understandings to be made. And, with “why” and “how” in mind, resources are literally everywhere. For example, in the exchange presented at Doc Lab, the presenting teacher wove a common classroom scale into themes of race and belonging. In addition to providing a concrete metaphor for these abstract ideas, it offered a reference point for children to enter the conversation.

Suggested Iterations: Let's Talk & Doc Lab
What comes next? What could we tweak and try again? Reflecting on Let’s Talk, we want to make clear that this format leads to valuable emergent conversations if presented with intention. In the case of conversations about race, it could include starting from “How do we?” vs. “I’m worried about.” The latter leads to a deficit mindset, expressed as “we can’t.” Starting from the “why” and “how” promotes an asset mindset that reveals more possibilities.

Historically, Let's Talk and Doc Lab have not been paired. If we were to prototype a similar pairing we might reverse the order and use Let's Talk to continue the conversation. This would allow all participants to share inspiration they took from the Doc Lab, how they translated it into their environment, how children responded and how it affected their practice. Our intention would be to create space for new curiosities to arise and dive deeper into the discourse in a spirit of collaboration and support.

Both the Doc Lab and our reflections on it have been fruitful in that they promote a spirit of prototyping and experimentation that inspires action. It strikes us that this should not be a “one and done,” but rather an ongoing practice that invites multiple people to share documentation on the topic of equity across human difference. We could also experiment with different modalities: video, audio, transcripts, photos, artifacts. We also learned that we should allow a full two hours for conversation.

Conclusion:
In this series, “Getting to Belonging,” we proposed a Reggio-inspired design process for adults, to animate substantive change and actualize early childhood communities that are dialogic and democratic. The series explored how these ideas might support complex and nuanced conversations about human difference, especially racial difference, that engender a sense of belonging. Doc Lab and Let’s Talk are practices that support this work. These adult conversations must precede dialogue with children, and the arc of this learning comes to fruition in ongoing work alongside children.

Getting to Belonging Part One
Getting to Belonging Part Two
Getting to Belonging Part Three

Citation:

1. Spaggiari, S. (2004). “The path toward knowledge: The social, political and cultural context of the Reggio municipal infant-toddler center and preschool experience.” Innovations in Early Education: The International Reggio Exchange.

The Life of a Dead Tree Trunk in the Classroom
Tom Bedard
Originally Posted in Sand and Water Tables, March, 22, 2021
Now retired, Tom Bedard, M.Ed. has worked in early childhood education since 1986. He has taught thousands of children representing diverse backgrounds and abilities, from infants to preschoolers. His particular interest has been to promote and analyze how children explore the area devoted to sensory play, to better understand their curiosity and competence in all areas of development. He has presented locally, nationally and internationally. Tom was the first early childhood teacher to be a finalist in the Minnesota Teacher of the Year program.

In a way, this post is a sequel to my previous post about the possibilities for play in a provocation I called the Swamp. The environment helped determine the possibilities. And by environment, I meant the process of setting up the provocation by me; I meant the children and the curiosity and imagination they brought to their investigations; and I meant the materials themselves, which begged to be explored.

This post is an experiment to see how the possibilities of play unfolded when just one of the materials offered to the children got placed in other parts of the room. The object and its potential I would like to examine is a piece of tree trunk from a tree I cut down in my yard.

As part of the swamp, the tree trunk was a loose part that could be used as a place where some of the plastic animals could find a home. (If you look closely in the picture above, there is a plastic grasshopper on the tree trunk.)

And because it was a loose part, it did not have to stay in the table. In the picture below, the child lifted the tree trunk out of the table and was about to drop it on the floor.

In a way, he was deconstructing the swamp by piling the pieces of wood on the floor. But at the same time, he was constructing his own collection of wood by using the floor as an open platform to pile.

After the swamp, I moved the tree trunk to the housekeeping area to see how the children would use it in their play and explorations. I placed it on the shelf by the window and by some living plants.

In the picture above, the child noticed that the tree trunk had a hole in it. She found a stick from the bowl of sticks on the bottom shelf and used it to explore the hole. By the way, the hole was an entrance to an old bird nest so it was worth exploring.

One child took the tree trunk off the shelf to put it on the floor where he proceeded to dislodge a piece that had rotted and become weak.

I noticed that the child found the work gloves in the house area to add a little authenticity to his deconstruction operation.

I subsequently moved the tree trunk to the writing table as a provocation with other Fall elements like gourds and corn. The children found many more ways to explore and examine this natural element.

For example, the child pictured below examined the bottom of the tree trunk. That way she was better able to see that the hole was bigger on the inside where the nest had been.

For another example, the child below found a different way to examine the hole in the tree trunk. He used one of the ears of the Fall corn to "measure" the size of the hole.

A good question is: Did any of the children draw the tree trunk? I do not know and since these pictures were taken more than five years ago, I do not even remember. However, one of the more stunning pictures I took was a picture of a child showing his mother the picture of the girl examining the bottom of the stump.

This was the same child who had used the Fall corn to explore the hole in the top of the tree trunk. In other words, the documentation from the week before triggered a memory, a memory that he could share with his mother about his own interaction with the tree trunk.

This was actually an enjoyable reflection for me. I remembered that I had brought a tree trunk into the room to add to the swamp, and I remembered that I had moved it around the room. However, I had not realized how this dried up piece of wood spawned so much engagement by the children in multiple areas of the room, whether that engagement was with the piece itself or in concert with other objects. The quintessential point was that this was a narrative about just one object in a sea of objects in my early childhood classroom. As it moved, so did the narrative. And it was not lost on me that this dried up piece of wood was basically waste wood not even good enough for firewood. Leave it to the children to bring it back to life and make multiple meanings out of it.

The Influence of Collaboration on Understanding 
Inez Hohn
Inez Hohn student-taught at the Fishback Center for Early Childhood Education, the lab school at South Dakota State University. She now teaches Kindergarten at Freeman Academy in Freeman, South Dakota. Inez enjoys finding new ways to engage her students each day as she learns from them. She recently received the Early Childhood Student of the Year, awarded by South Dakota AEYC.

Introduction
How do children learn, not only from experience, but also from each other? How do children co-construct meaning? As a student teacher, these questions informed my work as I facilitated an inquiry of towns and maps with a small group of four and five-year-old children that spanned two months. The four children possessed varying dispositions, skills and background knowledge, which they brought to the investigation. 

Map Making
In our initial mapmaking, the children illustrated scenes and buildings that were important to them. Their maps reveal how they viewed the world and what they thought of when imagining a map. They included places we had talked about; for example, Margaret focused on her house, a playground, roads and stop lights. Oliver included houses, farms and playgrounds. Some had roads while others did not. This presented the opportunity to look into how roads are represented on maps.

  

While there are roads in Margaret’s map, she focused more on scenic aspects such as houses and a playground.

Oliver’s map is a specific scene which includes grass, trees and farm buildings. 

An Exchange of Ideas, Resources and Actions
We continued with an exchange of ideas. To elevate the idea of roads on maps, I brought in a variety of road maps and posed ideas and questions. The children responded and crafted interpretations. In turn, they located towns and used their fingers to trace roads, pretending to drive from place to place. They associated roads with traveling and used past experiences to make sense of characteristics of roads, such as how they connect places and that the curvatures matter for smooth driving. They brought their experience to the discussion and in doing so talked about places they had traveled, referencing the maps in front of us. The conversation focused on their hometown, Brookings. They branched out to talk about places they had traveled, such as Sioux Falls, a major nearby city.

Looking at road maps

When we revisited map-making, the children focused on the roads. The children took what they noticed from examining the published map and transformed their maps to include more prominent roads. I noticed a deeper understanding in their discussion of road function and representation on maps. From this point, all the children added roads to their maps. One map focused on having straight roads and the child resisted using circular and curvy roads. Their reasoning was to make sure people traveling through the town didn’t get sick from all the loops.  

“The roads are straight, no circles for roads.” -Oliver

“It’s a straight-line road and then you go left and right. When people are walking, they have stop signs.” -Cora

They focused on including spacing between roads and logical paths to ensure that travel from place to place was possible. They took these ideas directly from the experience of their fingers driving on the printed road maps. Travel became the purpose of roads.

 Margaret made sure to make all the roads connected for smooth travel.

  

 Oliver focused on having straight roads with corners so there were no loops.

As we walked around campus, I pointed out the use of sidewalks to travel. The children made the connection that sidewalks were similar to roads. Henry labeled the sidewalks as “walking roads,” which opened up another meaning-making conversation. The group noticed the sidewalks as college students walked past them. They contrasted walking and driving in their analogies.  

We had some experience with 3-D maps when we used Google maps to get a street view of places in our town. We changed our perspective by switching between street view and aerial view, which allowed us to get a better idea of locations. To navigate our walk, we referenced a 2-D map of the SDSU campus in which the buildings were drawn to appear three-dimensional. They explored their surroundings making connections between where they were and their location on the map. They again followed the pathways with their fingers. This time, they traced our walking journey. The children noticed the aerial view and realized the connection between sidewalks in aerial view and the same sidewalks in street view. The children’s conversations deepened over time. Their understanding of maps evolved, highlighting their growing understanding of the concepts of travel, how travel flows, the purpose of roads and sidewalks and finally how they are represented.

.

The children traveled along the sidewalks as if driving on roads.

Meaning-Making
Through these interactions and exchanges, children’s perspectives shifted. Still working independently, they created a third map, increasingly aware of each other's efforts. Their experience of finger tracing the road maps, their campus walk and what they learned from each other was evident in their third map, which included more elaborate buildings and roads with more connections. They focused on the pathways that connected places and highlighted movement between places. Then, the children worked to solve the problem of representing buildings that fit between connected roads.

Margaret drew the roads first, focusing on leaving room in between them for buildings.

 

Oliver created an intersection which left room for buildings.

In these drawings, I saw the give and take between their experiences and their growth in knowledge. When I revisited and reflected on this inquiry process, I found that each child influenced the others through common themes, such as landmarks, representing roads, and including space for buildings and homes. 

The children’s ideas about maps developed as they participated in activities, drawing and conversations. They included the purpose, flow and visual representations that are apparent in maps and formed their own versions. Through each step, they made sense of their experiences as they constructed together what maps meant to them. Although they developed individual interpretations, their experience deepened as they collaborated.

Collaboration
This inquiry continued for another three weeks. As the project progressed, I called them to work together on parts of the town. 

The children collaboratively drew a new map that they later built into a three-dimensional town.

Reflection on My Learning
I reflected on our inquiry project and noticed a process had unfolded. I brought information in the form of activities, materials and experiences and the children made meaning. At the same time, the children brought their ideas to the conversation and formed meaning from what their peers shared. I then crafted my plans to fit what I saw and heard from the group. This shifted the path of our inquiry and sharpened my attention to what the children said and did, ultimately allowing me to better support their engagement and enrich their learning. 

The children learned to collaborate through this inquiry. I, too, collaborated, creating an idea map (below) with my mentor that outlined aspects of our journey. The graphic provided a visual representation of our process, promoting further reflection.

I found a deeper understanding of the interactions that occurred between the children and I, including the energy bursts that occurred among us. When I pay close attention, I can see the growth of children's thinking more clearly and respond to it.

Fundamentals | Documentation

The Reggio Approach is a complex system of thought and practice with many dynamic entry points that interact; it is not a method, program or curriculum. (LINK to Key Principles)

Documentation is central to the Reggio Approach, a fundamental tool. 

An essential component of a Reggio-inspired program is to make visible the learning of both children and adults. This happens through documentation, in which the process of learning is recorded through note-taking, dialogue, photographs, video and other means of transcribing the interactions of children with the environment, with adults and with each other. Through this process the learning can be studied, reflected upon and re-entered; ideas can be brought in to add variety or complexity to renew the experience.

More than mere “evidence” of completed work, documentation in the Reggio tradition becomes part of a reflective loop: it makes initial ideas visible, creates access points for new participants and new dialogue and paves the way for fresh ideas–which will, in turn, be documented and incorporated into the growing body of thought. In Reggio-inspired practice, documentation helps children grow their ideas; it also opens up an avenue of participation for parents, elevates the professional discourse among teachers, and serves as a source for advocacy in the world of public policy.

Reggio-Inspired Network of Minnesota - Seeing Children

Documentation is not limited to making visible what already exists: it also makes things exist precisely because it makes them visible and therefore possible.

Rinaldi, C. 2006 In Dialogue with Reggio

We tend to believe that observation and documentation can be objective, but the Reggio tradition acknowledges that we are always, whether or not we are aware of it, selecting what to pay attention to and what to ignore. Documentation is never neutral. That’s why it’s important to share it in a tentative and ongoing process and invite other perspectives.

Fundamentals: Formazione
In order to create both a pathway for people new to Reggio-inspired work and deepen our shared thinking, we offer a regular column, Fundamentals, to introduce and explore central principles of the Reggio Approach. The Reggio Approach is a complex system of thought and practice with many dynamic entry points that interact; it is not a method, program or curriculum. (Key Principles)

In the United States, we typically refer to professional development as processes that occur outside of the everyday and external to the individual, such as instruction or ‘training’ via classes, certificate and degree programs and in-service workshops or conference sessions.

While teachers in Reggio Emilia do engage in formal activities similar to what we call professional development, they value a deeper and more daily avenue of professional learning, which they refer to as formazione.

Formazione…from Malaguzzi’s perspective, is an integral part of the everyday pedagogical work, an attitude of mind, a way of thinking and being, a part of life, an inseparable element of what it means to be an educator. Valuing uncertainty and wonder and with the concept of evolution in mind, Malaguzzi would have hoped for and welcomed surprising and unexpected consequences, the creation of thought, understandings and knowledge.

-Peter Moss, Role of the Pedagogista, p. 10

Formazione is used to refer to processes of continuous collegial dialogue, engaging multiple perspectives, research based on observation, interpretation and documentation, resulting in knowledge-building and professional learning. Therefore, formazione is from within, with others and socially co-constructed. Inquiry into the not-yet-known-possible involves continuous exchange. We never ‘arrive.’

Getting to Belonging, Part 3: Navigating Participation and Evolving Perspectives
Rie Gilsdorf and Christy Spencer
Rie Algeo Gilsdorf, MS, MA, has broad experience as a principal, arts administrator, instructional coach, teacher of science and dance and parent in many settings, including the Reggio-inspired programs of Portland’s Opal School and The Blake School in Minneapolis. Rie is a past Board Co-Chair and Civic Engagement Committee Chair of the Reggio-Inspired Network of Minnesota and current member of its Resource Development Committee. She now provides racial equity seminars, coaching and consulting through Embody Equity (www.EmbodyEquity.com).

Christy Spencer, MA is inspired by children’s curiosities and perspectives, and roots her practices in relationships, deep listening, designing dynamic learning environments, observation and pedagogical documentation. Christy has worked in various Reggio-inspired contexts, including The Blake School, Boulder Journey School and the Minnesota Children’s Museum. She has been a RINM Board and committee member. Current professional interests include mindfulness practices, anti-racist theory, neuroscience around empathy and children’s rights.

Previously in Getting to Belonging, we’ve looked at embracing ambiguity (Part 1), dispelling ideas of developmental appropriateness, and taking on new mindsets and practices (Part 2) in order to welcome negotiated curriculum, discourse, and a view of the teacher as researcher. With these in place several other Reggio-inspired principles surface, each facilitating the next: (1) participation and pedagogy of listening and (2) group construction and multiple perspectives. These, too, are tools of designing for belonging. At the end of this article, we will highlight how these interact with each other to cultivate belonging.

Participation & Pedagogy of Listening
Equal Participation is a value statement that tends to float in the aspirational realm. Negotiated curriculum can actualize equitable participation in the here and now by facilitating and valuing participation of all stakeholders. Kelsey Blackwell (2018) argues for creating intentional ‘architectures of conversation’ to disrupt unequal participation perpetuated by the dominant discourse. She views this discourse as “the water in which we all swim. No one is immune. Those values dictate who speaks, how loud, when, the words we use, what we don’t say, what is ignored, who is validated and who is not.” By making everyone’s participation visible, a negotiated curriculum opens the possibility of a new architecture of communication.

Following the design steps Open Mind, Open Heart and Open Will, the next move is Co-creating. When co-creating we explore the future by doing, remaining open to feedback and reflecting on what’s working and not. This learn-by-doing process is also called prototyping. Reggio-inspired teaching includes a similar responsiveness between provocations and dialogue, as well as observation and documentation of the unfolding process. Engaging in the documentation process provides adults with feedback and opportunities for reflection that are necessary for co-creating. “The most ‘design malpractice’ happens when people are acting but not reflecting,” (Montoya, 2022). Reflection is an active choice that keeps us out of habitual thought and action.

The co-creating design step requires letting go of the role of the expert with a voice of certainty. In designing for belonging, it can be tempting to try to actualize idealistic value statements in one grand gesture. In reality, change is iterative and generative. Prototyping the smallest practical ideas will produce the clearest insights to inform next steps. We never ‘arrive,’ instead we inhabit a state of ‘perpetual beta.’ Certainty is a facade distracting us from acknowledging the complexity that is a constant in every context, including race and culture.

Children operate in perpetual beta. We expect conversations and encounters to be revisited as they acquire more information or experience additional interactions. Children will grapple with misconceptions and partial knowledge as they construct  a coherent understanding. Our role is to hold space for children to return again and again to scaffold their learning. As adults we also must extend ourselves the same courtesy. When caught off guard by children’s expressions about race we may falter in the way we respond; however, we also have the opportunity to revisit and ‘repair’ those conversations with children (Haulcy, 2023). Like the learning process itself, the race conversation is iterative and generative.

In addition to their ideas, children’s vocabulary is in perpetual beta. They don’t yet have an adult vocabulary and we may misinterpret what they are trying to express. A pedagogy of listening grants a reflective pause to consider the child’s context before responding. In practice, we must choose to listen to the words and beyond the words to the emotional content and patterns of lived experience. This allows for reflective discourse, rather than projecting adult meanings onto children's words.

Group Construction & Multiple Perspectives
As adults model this deep, reflective discourse, children learn to construct meaning as a group. In a climate of group construction, children feel agency and enhance their capacity to listen and weigh ideas. The standard power dynamic of adult-as-expert is disrupted and children are more inclined to express their thinking. An atmosphere of ‘perpetual beta’ supports divergent thinking. By contrast, environments where a singular ‘correct’ way of thinking is implied engender cynicism in children. Why express ideas when there’s only one that’s right? Current societal shifts, including shifts in public discourse about race, bring us to a place of uncertainty. In Design for Belonging, Susie Wise highlights the example of group construction by reflecting back to constituents that “their inquiries mattered and they were indeed participating in a civic process,” (2022).

Group construction of meaning requires us to hold and value multiple perspectives. This applies to both children and adults and is embedded in the definition of the Reggio collective design process, progettazione. When participants have equitable but distinct roles, a rich array of results are apt to arise, honoring their individuality within the collective. As in the folktale of the blind people and the elephant, no individual perspective is complete, yet all provide important insights.

Because human systems are dynamic, we now employ the final design step of  Co-evolving. In this step, constituents create flexible infrastructure that adapts to an ever-evolving context. This requires letting go of the voice of certainty (Scharmer, 2018a). The educators of Reggio Emilia refer to their schools as an ‘an evolving educational project.’ Their infrastructure is a set of principles that are not prescriptive, but rather promote nimbleness. As a result, the educational project of Reggio has adapted in response to societal shifts as they arise, beginning at its inception in the aftermath of World War II. Leaning on the flexible infrastructure of the Reggio principles positions us to co-evolve.

Belonging via Broader Consciousness
In addition to providing a flexible infrastructure, the Reggio-inspired principles that we have outlined are cumulative. While there is benefit to practicing even a single principle, the impact is multiplied by their synergy.

Further, just as understanding each of these Reggio principles helps us navigate the complexity of the whole, understanding multiple perspectives helps us navigate the complexity of human systems and leads us to develop a broader racial consciousness. A narrow consciousness may persist in both children and adults unless we become more aware of others. Broader consciousness disrupts habitual patterns of attention, increasing the capacity to notice patterns of interaction, contribution and flow. Design thinking provides a road map to belonging: when we listen deeply to all constituents, we can be confident enough to take the small next steps to prototype inclusivity, knowing that they are not the end point. We must continue to listen and adapt, both individually and programatically. In essence, to cultivate communities of belonging for adults and children “means creating a learning environment in which the learner can step into his or her highest future potential in the context of hands-on societal challenges,” (Scharmer, 2018b).

Drawing from the Reggio and design thinking concepts we’ve discussed in Parts 1, 2 and 3, in Part 4 we will continue with the idea of ‘getting to belonging’ by focusing on practice. What might ‘getting to belonging’ look or sound like in adult conversations when talking with young children about race.

Resources

Blackwell, Kelsey. (2018). “Why people of color need spaces without white people.” The Arrow Journal. https://arrow-journal.org/why-people-of-color-need-spaces-without-white-people/

Haulcy, Diane. (2023). “White Parents Navigating Anti-Racist Parenting in Minneapolis.” Early Risers Podcast. https://www.mpr.org/episodes/2023/03/22/white-parents-navigating-antiracist-parenting-in-minneapolis Accessed 8/17/23.

Montoya, Louie, quoted in Andrea Small and Kelly Schmutte. (2022). Navigating Ambiguity: Creating Opportunity in a World of Unknowns. Stanford d.school guide. Ten Speed Press.

Scharmer, Otto. (2018a). The Essentials of Theory U: Core Principles and Applications. BK, Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., a BK Business Book.

Scharmer, Otto. (2018b). “Education is the kindling of a flame: How to reinvent the 21st-century university.” Huff Post, https://www.huffpost.com/entry/education-is-the-kindling-of-a-flame-how-to-reinvent_b_5a4ffec5e4b0ee59d41c0a9f Accessed 8/17/23

Wise, Susie. (2022). Design for Belonging: How to Build Inclusion and Collaboration in Your Communities. Stanford d.school guide. Ten Speed Press.