Hi everyone! I finally did get my new computer to work in Arizona but it was too late to send the weekly review so here comes the next one. It is numbered #9 so they keep coming in order but at the same time recognizing that the word ‘weekly’ will have to be interpreted loosely!!
Introductions:
Please introduce yourself with a brief paragraph (esp. Brett, Pam, Clayton, Madison, which of you are we hearing from? Your messages come without a signature!)
Interesting messages this week about:
1. Topics mentioned:
Birds, fire station, bakery, golf course, whales, rabbit, trees, fish tank, worms, rocks,...
If I had to prioritize these for most liklihood of success or potential for development with young children I would apply the following criteria:
This list emerges from years of watching projects and analyzing what seems to attract and sustain children’s interest for a substantial period of time. Children’s interest can most easily be developed and sustained when topics have easily discernable connections to other real world and local topics.
Trees: shade, leaves, trunks, branches, roots, seeds, seedlings, other plants, water, sunlight, climbing, caring for, measuring, counting, insects, birds... etc. etc.
Children’s interest is not static. The disposition to be interested in finding out about something develops as children learn what is worthwhile being interested in. The worthwhileness of a topic is learned in a social context, usually from the adults who are most significant in the children’s lives. Children learn to be interested in
Adults can be seen to know about, care about, interact with and tell more stories topics which are local and real world than any other kind.
In the set of topics we have been thinking about these last two weeks (birds, fire station, bakery, golf course, whales, rabbit, trees, fish tank, worms, rocks) how do these criteria enable us to predict their potential for success as project topics?
Worms and fish may have shortlived interest for very young children. Even the rabbit is limited in the possibilities it presents for interaction with human beings.
Trees on the other hand are a natural resource (wood, paper), have functions appreciated by the children (shade, climability), have interesting parts which can be observed closely and studied in many different ways (seeds, leaves, bark, roots, flowers), they come in many different forms (deciduous, old, young, colors, shapes), changing (with the seasons), children see them outside school as well as within (home, park), are homes for other things (birds, insects), jobs (lumber, carpentry, wood carving)... and on and on...
(Do some of these ideas give you some pointers for the continuation of your project, Shirley? Let us know what happens next. Have you visited the Project Approach Home Page, by the way? Internet address: http://www.ualberta.ca/~schard/projects.htm)
When you brainstorm some of the other topics you will find some offer more opportunities for active learning within or near to the classroom than others. Some will relate more easily to other interesting topics.
Topics can also be seen as being hierarchically related to other topics. For example, take the rabbit, as Suzy pointed out, there are other pets to compare with the rabbit once the interest begins to wane. Comparison of a cat and a rabbit will reawaken interest as the children investigate what they have in common and what is usually different between cats and rabbits. These animals belong to the class of pets which belong to the class of mammals which belong to the class of animals, etc. etc. Staying at the same level in the hierarchy it might be possible for the children to look at other examples of rodents, mice, rats, guinea pigs, hamsters, gerbils, etc. The fish tank example was similar. Again, how about other pets? other animals? other living things?
2. Reference to earlier Weekly Reviews.
I have now put the Weekly Reviews on the Projects Home Page with a brief description of the contents of each:
This information may be of interest to newer members of this discussion group as there are qusetions raised in the last two weeks which were addressed in earlier weekly reviews. For example in response to Pam’s question this week, “I would like to know how the project approach and the project approach in Reggio Emilia Schools differ?” I wrote March 4:
“Reggio Emilia has developed a wonderful range of integrated early childhood education practices. Projects are part of what they are concerned with and known for. Our work with projects predates our first acquaintance with Reggio. Mine especially emerges from a different cultural background and experience, that of teaching in England in the 1970s together with a historical perspective on and critical analysis of the failure of ‘open education’ to serve the needs of those North American teachers of a previous era. Since 1989 when I came to Canada, I have learned much more about the in-service needs of teachers interested in integrating project work into regular elementary school classrooms, K-Grade 6.”
3. The Rocks Project.
Thank you, Dot and Eileen for writing up and sending us this excellent example of a second grade project. Examples like this one are so helpful to teachers. I have put it on the Home Page and look forward to adding the photographs of children at work and of some of the representations of their learning. I shall also add further details as these become available.
If anyone else has a story of a completed project please send it so that I can add it to the collection.
Well, it’s getting late and I’m off to Utah again tomorrow. Have a good week and keep us posted on those proejcts!
Goodnight,
(April 22 '96)