An Art Education Teaching Approach: Reggio Emilia
Teaching has always been a dream of mine. The part that I always get hung up on is what grade to teach – do I want to teach elementary, middle school, high school or college? I really enjoy working with children. I like their openness, their energy, and unbiased outlook on life. So with that said, I believe the best teaching approach for me to research would be the Reggio Emilia approach. Throughout this paper I will explain the history and basics of this teaching method, discuss if and how it can be applied in a modern setting, and finally I will go over my personal experimentation with the Reggio Emilia approach in art exploration.
HISTORY AND BASIC PRINCIPLES OF REGGIO EMILIA APPROACH
To begin, I will explain what the Reggio Emilia approach is all about – the who, what, when, where, why, and how of this approach. First off, Reggio Emilia is a small city located in the “region of Emilia Romagna” (NAREA, 2008). The city fell into despair after World War II; the citizens had lost many men and needed to “begin rebuilding their lives.” Because of the effects of war, they realized that the best way to rebuild a solid future was to start with the children. So they built a new preschool. “They saw this as a way of giving their children a better future by building a new type of school – one where children would be taken seriously and believed in” (Brunton & Thornton, 2007, p. 6).
The community of Villa Cella, which was “seven kilometers from Reggio,” received a bit of money that came from “the sale of a tank, a few horses and a truck that had been abandoned by the retreating Nazis.” There was much dispute over where the money would go to – the men wanted a theater, the women wanted to “build a preschool to provide a new form of education that would ensure that they would never again bring up a generation of children who would tolerate injustice and inequality” (Brunton & Thornton, 2009, p. 8-9).
Loris Malaguzzi was the founder of the Reggio Emilia teaching approach. At age 19, Malaguzzi began taking “teacher training courses” which he finished “during the war.” “In 1946, Malaguzzi enrolled in the first postwar psychology course in Rome – and this marked the beginning of the Reggio Emilia adventure” (2001, p. 46). Malaguzzi had been teaching elementary students in Reggio when he caught ear of an amazing “project taking place in Villa Cella.” When he went to see what the construction of this new school was all about, he was baffled by what he saw. The whole community had pulled together – all of them were helping to build this school (Brunton & Thornton 2009, p.10). He was so moved by how vital the preschool was to the community that he wanted to be a part in this new teaching approach. He trained in child psychology and guided a staff to teach based on “social interaction and cognitive development” (Brunton & Thornton, 2007, p. 7).
From what I’ve read, the Reggio-Emilia approach is more of an idealistic approach rather than a set-in-stone teaching method with complete directions and instructions. One area of this approach that is consistent is the classroom setup and involvement of “children, families, and teachers working together to make schools dynamic and democratic learning environments” (New, 2003, p. 34). In the original Reggio Emilia teaching style, there are three staff responsibilities – the “pedagogista”, “teacher”, and “atelierista.” The pedagogista is basically in charge of the school. They are the ones assigning curriculum to the teachers. The teachers usually “work in pairs” so they can provide a good one-on-one relationship with the child. Aterlieristas are usually the “art experts that work with the teachers to help them plan and carry out long-term projects with the children” (Brunton & Thornton, 2007, p. 8-9).
The point of this approach is to allow the child to thoroughly involve themselves in a subject (usually a subjective discipline like art or music) by exploring and experimenting on their own terms. The teacher is there to engage the student in the subject by asking questions that require the student to involve the senses when exploring (Pelo, 2007). For example, while having students play with clay, a teacher may ask the students to describe how the clay feels, smells, and sounds as they are molding and sculpting it to their liking. To explore color theory, a teacher may ask students how a certain color makes them feel or what memories a certain color brings to mind. Reggio Emilia is a personal exploration where the “child is encouraged to develop an individual understanding of the world and the objects within the world” (Eckhoff & Spearman, 2009, p. 10).
THE REGGIO EMILIA APPROACH APPLIED IN MODERN TIMES
This teaching method sounds amazing and successful in creating young art students who are imaginative, creative and active in school, community, and life. With that said, the big question is, can it be applied wholly in a modern academic art setting? I believe there is no definite answer. Yes, the Reggio Emilia approach can be applied in modern curriculum, but most likely with some modifications to fit certain classroom criteria/layouts. If it is compliant with the higher-ups, then changes can be applied internally to the curriculum to meet the requirements of this teaching approach. However, some argue that there is “no essential “true” Reggio Emilia” and that “all narrations are built on interpretations, choices, and interests” (Cannella & Soto, 2010, p. 320). I had a long discussion about the Reggio Emilia approach with Rob Weiner, the Texas Tech University Libraries’ arts, music, theater, and dance librarian, hoping to gain an experienced perspective on modern art education methods. We debated whether or not the Reggio Emilia approach could be applied in today’s education system. Rob stated a few issues with this teaching method that could possibly prevent it from working well in the modern academia. First off, the approach requires one-on-one involvement to create a special program for each individual student. This is impractical when a teacher has classes of 20-40 students at a time. Secondly, Rob had some concerns on how the teaching method could be measured. When I told him that the teacher measures the child’s progress by documenting the “child’s art exploration” in a series of writings based on personal opinions (Pelo, 2007, p.13), he shook his head:
Now we have an educational system here in the United States that is based on tests. Its not based on learning. It’s not based on creativity. It’s not based on anything that measures any kind of content or true education. You have to teach to the test, so we’re teaching students how to take tests, we’re not teaching them any kind of content (personal communication, March 14, 2011).
Third, the Reggio Emilia approach requires “extraordinary parent involvement” to extend the lessons and their methods to the home environment (Benham, 2008, p. 21). It would be difficult to ensure this involvement because most families are so busy that they wouldn’t have time to implement this approach in their hectic schedules. Also, family members may not agree with this teaching style and completely disregard its methods.
A PERSONAL EXPERIMENT WITH THE REGGIO EMILIA APPROACH IN ART EXPLORATION
To help me understand the Reggio-Emilia approach even better (and how it can be applied to art), I decided to try some of its methods on seven-year old twins, Jason and Jeremiah. For the projects we did, I used the book, The Language of Art: Inquiry-Based Studio Practices in Early Childhood Settings, by Ann Pelo, as my guide. This book has all sorts of art projects inspired by the Reggio-Emilio approach. Also, the book has a section that explains how to review the projects involving the children exploring art techniques (a part of Reggio that helps to track a child’s progress) (2007). Below, I have included written documentation of our art experiment with fingerpaints using the Reggio Emilio approach:
I started this exploration with the fingerpainting lesson on page 27 of Pelo’s book (2007). I first cleared a workspace on the kitchen table and set out red, blue, green and yellow paints. I set out mostly primary colors because I was hoping to engage the children in experimenting with color mixing as well as application. I then invited the children to the workspace and was relieved/surprised when they didn’t fight over where they sat. To begin the session, I talked with them a little about art. They both agreed that the definition of art was “projects” or “special projects” – creating things such as “reindeer, dragons, spaceships, and space elephants.” Out of the two boys, only Jeremiah was in an art class at school. Both had experimented with fingerpaint paper at daycare but didn’t like it much because they thought it was too hard to draw on with pencils. I then explained to them that they were allowed to play with fingerpaints and paint whatever they wanted on the paper. Once I had turned them loose, they both seemed very hesitant about touching the paints. I had to encourage both of them to use the paints and assure them that they wouldn’t get in trouble for getting messy. They both went straight for the blue and mixed it with yellow and were so happy to see that it had made green (which I thought was interesting even though I had provided them with green). Jeremiah mixed all the colors together to find out what color that made – a brownish hue. They both proceed to paint dragons. Jason painted a happy-faced dragon and Jeremiah painted a dragon with a frown. Jeremiah and I had a conversation on why the dragon was sad. “I wonder why the dragon is sad, do you know why he is sad,” I asked. “Because he didn’t get none [sic] ice cream,” he replied. I asked why he didn’t get ice cream and he replied, “Cuz [sic] his mom didn’t let him. And his mom and his brother gots [sic] ice cream, even though he was being good.” Throughout the painting session, I encouraged the boys to engage their senses when painting. I asked how the paint felt and how the paper felt. It was slick, cold and wet to them and at one point Jason looked like he wanted to eat some of the paint (I guess it looked tasty to him). In the end, Jason finished with a painting of a dragon/dog with really interesting hands. Jeremiah continued to apply paint on the paper, mixing and massaging it all together creating interesting lines and swirls. He had created a “rainbow” (Adams & Jones, 2011).
This project was the jump-start to some really exciting results. When I saw the boys the next Thursday, out of the blue, Jeremiah started talking about his art class and how he used fingerpaints to paint ladybugs. I started asking him questions about his method of applications and the color of the paints he used. Before this experiment, Jeremiah didn’t realize he was in an art class (I had asked both boys if they had an art class this year, and they both said “no”). Now he is more aware and continues to report back to me on their lessons. Both boys have asked me when we will have “art time” again. So every weekend we have the boys, we will explore a new art project applying the Reggio-Emilia approach and I will continue to record their progress.
References
Adams, S., & Jones, K., (creators). (2011). Art Session: Experimenting With the Reggio Emilia Approach [video].
Benham, A. (2008). Powerful children: understanding how to teach and learn using the Reggio approach. New York: Teachers College Press.
Brunton, P., & Thornton, L. (2007). Bringing reggio approach to your early year practice . London: David Fulton.
Brunton, P., & Thornton, L. (2009). Understanding the Reggio approach (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.
Cannella, G. S., & Soto, L. D. (2010). Childhoods: a handbook. New York: Peter Lang.
Eckhoff, A., & Spearman, M. (2009). Rethink, Reimagin, Reinvent: the Reggio Emilia Approach to Incorporating Reclaimed Materials in Children’s Artworks. Art Education, 62(2), 10-16. doi: 10.2307/27696325
History | NAREA. (2008). NAREA - North American Reggio Emilia Alliance | NAREA. Retrieved March 12, 2011, from http://www.reggioalliance.org/reggio_emilia_italy/history.php
(2001). Loris Malaguzzi, founder: the Reggio Emilia approach, believing in the power of the child. Scholastic Early Childhood Today, 15(8), 46. Retrieved from OmniFile Full Text Mega database
New, R. (2003). Reggio Emilia: New Ways to Think About Schooling. Educational Leadership, 60(7), 34-8.
Pelo, A. (2007). The language of art: inquiry-based studio practices in early childhood settings. St. Paul, MN: Redleaf press.
