Intersubjectivity, Interpretation and Improvisation

I’ve got a mail (from Norm Denzin) confirming that my submission to the The Sixth International Congress of Qualitative Inquiry has been accepted. The congress will take place in Urbana-Campaign, Illinois, USA May 26-29. 2010… So I still have some time to prepare the presentation.

Here is the abstract that has been sent, with title: Intersubjectivity, Interpretation and Improvisation: How Three-Year-Old Students Challenge Researchers’ Competence

A PhD study of children’s meaning making during explorative play with sculpturing materials conducted by an art teacher/practitioner-researcher in a Norwegian early childhood center. The form of inquiry was inspired by A/R/Tography (Irwin 2004), involving video-recording of own activity with children. Children’s highly imaginative and multimodal forms of communication have challenged the researcher’s ability to create immediate and appropriate responses to the children’s creative verbal and non-verbal contributions. If we respect young children, value their way of living and want them to become self-confident individuals, research methods in early childhood education must respond to their expressive ways of democratic participation.



"Walking a log": I was hoping that he would sit on it, but the boy rather wanted to take it for a walk.

What did we do to make the boy happy?

This is what we did to help the boy in the book who kept crying (see the blog form November 24th ): What I did was to scan some pages form the book “Pekeboka mi” by Kari Grossmann, print them and paste on cardboard. The drawings were later cut form each other so that they could be moved and played with: the doll could be placed in the baby carriage on the same page… Or it could drive a car, as my little friend suggested!

Another thing I did was to digitally manipulate the drawing of the crying boy (I was waiting with tension to hear what Kari Grossmann would say about “spoiling” her work): I changed the boys crying face by opening his eyes and closing his mouth, washed the blood and put a plaster on his knee. And I waited to see what my friend would do…

What he did was first to cover the crying boy with the more satisfied duplicate. But then he tried some other ways to solve the problem: pated the crying boy, placed a plaster on his knee and even gave him some pears to help him forget his pain! I assume that all of his solutions were rooted in his own experience. This means that he knew perfectly well why his mother gave him a piece of chocolate the moment before she left the house…

Reading the book also initiated some new experiences. There were some drawings of fruits and vegetables. The first time we red the book together, my little friend suggested that the image on an anion represented an apple – so I went to the kitchen and fetched an anion to compare with the painted image. This was a week ago and he of course remembered that, and he remembered the anion’s taste. But what about a potato? It also had to be examined…

But the boy in the book kept crying!

My little friend, 2 years and 2 months old, chose a book he wanted to read. His mother and I set by his side. It was a picture book where illustrations on each page covered the same theme: play ground, domestic animals, birthday party etc. When reading the symbols on the pages showing food, the young reader pretended that he took the tiny spoon (the drawing of a spoon) between his fingers and brought it to his mouth: “Mmm… good” he said. Than his little hand carefully approached the egg (again: a drawing of an egg), picked it up and when he was just about to feed me, he warned me: “Egg – hot!” He seemed so sure that these drawings were symbols and not the real things, that he even made jokes about that. He was creating stories about the drown items and interacting with them: pushing the cars, lifting spoons, eating blueberries, bringing socks…

There were pages illustrating a visit to a doctor … and a boy in tears … with blood on his knee… The young reader seemed at first surprised, and then his face and body got more and more said while he was observing the drawing. It looked like the painted boy’s pain was slowly transmitted to the young reader’s body. The sad look on his face spoke of deep, deep empathy for the boy in the book.

I got uncomfortable (Was there any age limit for this book?) and tried desperately to find a way to realise my young friend from his (imagined) pain, while he was thinking - trying to find out how to help the boy in the book. Here is what he came up with: He banded over the book with his mouth almost on the page, and started shouting “Mammy! Mammy! Mammy!”. From the colour of his voice we understood that it was not his own mother he was calling, but the boy’s absent (not-illustrated) mother. The reader’s real mother was sitting beside him and understood what she was to do: She “jumped on her fingers” and ran to the boy with the bloody knee, wiped the blood, kissed him, held him in her arms … But the blood was still painted red…

The young reader, the same one who minutes ago made jokes about car symbols crashing into each other, suddenly had forgotten that the sad boy in the book wasn’t real. His mother and I hurried to go further in the book and read about something more present, but he kept finding the page again and again to see if the boy was still crying… And he was…

I was amazed by the enormous empathy of the two-year-old – he seemed to identify himself with the drawing, and suddenly could'n pretend any longer.

This happened yesterday, and I still feel like I should do something to make it up for him… - for the both of the boys! I think I will have to meet them soon again and bring with me some scissors, textiles, small plasters, glue…? We’ll see…

Here is the information about the book:
Grossmann, Kari (1999). Pekeboka mi. Oslo: Gyldendal Norske Forlag

Teaching Visual Art: How and Why?

During a lecture given to early childhood practitioners I was asked a question: “What does “self-expression” actually mean?” While answering, I kept thinking if I will ever be able to explain that to those who can not recall an experience of own creative expression…

May be a child’s expression and creativity are difficult to explain to adults because there is a difference between a child’s and an adult’s creativity (Runco, 2006)? While creativity of adult’s often leads to some product, children’s creativity does not, but rather “takes the form of imaginative play, self-expression, or new understanding of the world” (Runco 2006, p.121). Children gradually socialize into the norms of the environments they take part in. If the environments don’t appreciate creativity and self-expression, the children might learn to forget what creativity is. And such development would be so unfortunate because creativity is, among other things, a source of “intrinsic motivation, openness, curiosity and autonomy” (Runco 2006, p.127).

What Ola Nordmann (an average Norwegian) thinks about visual art education is probably a result of his own experience from education in this subject. The Norwegian early childhood education, for children 0-5, carries the name “kindergarten” symbolizing Froebel’s ideas of children’s natural growth through play and spontaneous expressions (Flanagan, 2006). But surprisingly, visual art activities are traditionally organized as teacher-centered, or “product-centered”, activities where the main goal is sadly often to produce something (especially around Easter end Christmas). Liora Bresler (1994) calls such teaching orientation “imitative” because the students are expected to copy the model their teacher has provided.

The notion of children’s garden fits well with a teacher who sees a child as a growing flower. Teachers with such “complementary” orientation (Bresler, 1994) don’t want to interfere in the children’s growth, but by such attitude they will unfortunately fail support and challenge. One can find teachers with such orientation in Norwegian early childhood centres, and some of them think that they teach the same way “pedagogista” teach in Reggio Emilia’s early childhood centres.

My understanding of educational philosophy in Reggio Emilia, is that is more like the third orientation Liora Bresler’s specifies: “expansive” teacher orientation. This kind of teaching involves “complex procedure drawing on the communication of sophisticated adult’s knowledge while respecting the child’s current experience and interpretations” (Bresler 1994, p.101). Such teacher style is called “expansive” because it incorporates “a variety of intelligences and modes of thinking” (Bresler 1994, p.90) and “promotes the cognitive and cultural aspects of aesthetic learning” (Bresler 1994, p.101).
In their article “Experiencing the visual and visualizing the experience” Rita L. Irwin and F. Greame Chalmers discuss different ways to understand curriculum in visual arts – even going so fare to present the curriculum as “complicated conversation” (Irwin & Chalmers, 2007) (inspired by Piner 2004). The notion of complicated conversation refers to the process of intersubjective meaning making that takes place when a visual art teacher challenge students reflection, and support experimentation, creativity and critical thinking.

I believe that visual art curricula in early childhood, has to emerge from children’s interests and teacher’s deep believe in the importance of arts in children’s lives. Angela Eckhoff refers to Elington 2003 when she writes that a teacher should be “responsible for engaging and motivating children to participate in an arts-based dialog” (Eckhoff, 2008, p.464). Because such dialogs are of intersubjective nature, the teacher’s competence will have strong influence on the child’s experience and construction of meaning. According to Martin Buber idea of dialogic education: “Dialogue requires real listening as well as real talking (…). Responces are not preoriented or predetermined and the teacher’s reaction to the leraner’s contribution cannot be prepared beforehand” (Flanagen 2006). And with the youngest students are involved, one has to have on mind that “complicated conversations” will be highly multimodal!

References:
Bresler, L. (1994). Imitative, Complementary, and Expansive: Three Roles of Visual Arts Curricula. Studies in Art Education, A Journal of Issue and Research, 35(2), 90-104.

Eckhoff, A. (2008). The Importance og Art Viewing Experiences in Early Childhood Visual Arts: The Exploration of a Master Art Teacher's Strategies for Meaningful Early Arts Experience. Early Childhood Education Journal, 35, 463-472.

Flanagan, F. M. (2006). The greatest educators ever. London: Continuum.

Irwin, R. L., & Chalmers, F. G. (2007). Experiencing Visual and Visualizing Experience. In L. Bresler (Ed.), International Handbook og Research in Arts Education. Dordrecht: Springer.

Runco, M. A. (2006). The Development of Children's Creativity. In B. Spodek & O. N. Saracho (Eds.), Handbook of research on the education of young children (pp. 121-131). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Can children's imagination infect their teachers?

A short text that presents the main points form my presentation on Imaginative Education conference in Vancouver, has be written by Jon Olav Skålid and published on Forskning.no

Pedagogical documentation in “Hide and seek”

How often do you change you point of view in “looking at” yourself or at a text you are writing? (I’ve just realized that I am switching approximately each 22nd second between being myself, being a three-years-old, and being a reader). We can never know how other people see us because we can’t really take their position, but we can imagine… if we find it worth our imagination… The incident I’ll tell you about made me wonder when and how we people develop our ability to take position of others and imagine ourselves as seen from the outside.

The question: “How can we be sure that others do not see us when we hide form them?” can be approached in many different ways: form mathematics - it is about distance and size of our body and objects we hide behind; chemistry - it is about opacity and transparency of the materials we hide behind; geography – it is about landscape and position of the Earth and the Sun (that angle of sunlight is dependent on); biology – it is about types and colors of vegetation, but also about the position human eyes are placed in the scull …etc. etc…

Actually, my intentions here were not to discuss this complex question, but rather to approached it form a young girl’s point of view! This is what I experienced when a 3-years-old girl invited me to play hide-and-seek:

The rules of the game were really simple: She told me where I should stand while she was hiding. And then she told med where I should hide. May be it didn’t matter for her that we kept finding each other quickly, but
I thought that she might feel more “successful” in this game if I didn’t find her at once. So I told her: “You know, I can see you when you hide behind that little tree.” And she said: “No you can’t!”

Then I remembered that I had a camera with me, and I said: “I can take a picture of you so you can see yourself the way I can see you” – and so I did. She could now see herself on the little camera screen. I pointed at the picture and commented: “See here: your pink jacket is visible on the both sides of the tree, and I could see your hands”.

There was a second of silence. She was looking at the screen and thinking. She probably discovered that her jacket was visible because it was open. She struggled with the zipper and pooled it all the way up. “Now you can try again” she said and hid behind the same tree. When she was in the right position (with her face behind the tree) she first stood with the arms hanging down – and then she remember that her hands were visible on the picture and harried to hide them behind her back. To make sure that I couldn’t see her this time, she closed her eyes really hard.

The same day during my observations on a playground, I took pictures of children who wanted to see how they looked like: they had asked their teacher to paint their faces (as princesses, rovers or lions) and didn’t have any mirror available outside the building. A digital camera seems to be a terrific tool for viewing oneself the way others see us … at least how they experience us visually.

Used this way the camera became a tool for pedagogical documentation because the pictures were immediately used to talk about. They were used as a part of multimodal communication, they initiated reflections and motivated problem solving. I hope that the example of “hide and seek” illustrates my point.

Facial expressions of symbol-using beings

Have you ever experienced how demanding it is to explain what you mean in a language you can’t speak? Speaking in our mother tongue seems so easy and is often taken for granted, but when we experience how difficult it can be to find a foreign word that matches what we want to say, and to pronounce it in a way that others can understand what the word is supposed to refer to, then we might understand how complex this process of “finding words” can be. And when one is so young that this is his first and only language, he really does not have any other choice than to use all of his competences, and use them with creativity…

“What makes human action distinctive is the capacity of people not only to understand the world symbolically but also to understand themselves and others as symbolic and symbol-using beings” (Rock 2001). Let me explain this with a short story from the life of my two years old friend.

He and I were watching fishes in an aquarium at my home. The boy turned to me and said a word. I understood that he addressed me with intentions to share something … may be he asked me something (he had an “asking expression” on his face), but I didn’t understand the word he had pronounced. The next second, he grabbed the plastic box with fish food and repeated the word “mise” (he was speaking Norwegian), but this time he pointed at the box with his tiny forefinger and looked strait into my eyes with his face close to mine. I guessed that he wanted to say “spise” (which means “eat”) and that his question was: “Can I feed the fishes?” But first after I had answered “Yes”, and big smile occurred on his face, I was sure that I had understood his a-half-word-question!

So, what actually happened here? The little boy used different forms of communication: words, body language, tone of voice and facial expression. He obviously understood that he and I were “symbol-using beings”! When one symbol didn’t function alone, he supported it with another: pointing to the physical food box - which again was a kind of symbol (food box was symbolizing the action of eating). Wasn’t that creative!? His motivation to solve the communication problems seems to lay in his desire to feed the fish.

What I find the most amazing is the way he understood that I didn’t understand his word! I believe that this is an evidence of his extreme ability to read facial expressions!

According to Ellen Dissanayake, humans have during evolution developed the ability to communicate through facial expressions in order to become enculturated in their social group, and survive – just imagine how helpless a fragile infant would be without care from its “pack”. Babies are born wanting specific kinds of interactions (Dissanayake 2007). And it is not the adults who teach them to respond but “rather infants teach us (…) they reward us so that we want to keep entertaining them” (Dissanayake 2007, p.788). It seems like my little friend has been doing a lot of successful teaching and entertaining – and has become an expert of body language. And now he uses this language competence in order to learn other languages.

Dissanayake, E. (2007). In the beginning: Pleistocene and infant aesthetics and 21st-century education in the arts. In L. Bresler. International Handbook of Research in Arts Education, Dordrecht, Springer

Rock, P. (2001). Symbolic Interactionism and Ethnography. In P. Atkinson. Handbook of ethnography. London, Sage: XVIII, 507 s.

A young photographer’s point of view

When we observe children we can not do anything else but to suggest and assume – we can never know for sure what they think or for instance what they find interesting in their surroundings. Careful documentation of our observations can get us closer to knowing a bit more about the children, and “pedagogical documentation” (the way its has been practiced in the early childhood institutions in Reggio Emilia in Italy) can even take us to the level of self-reflection - necessary if we want to improve out pedagogical practice…
But what happens when children themselves make documentations? When we give them a camera they might probably act according to their understanding of the task (What are we supposed to do?) or they might imitate what they observed adult’s usually do with a camera. But they would probably also extent the task by their imagination, intuition and play.

The images shown here are made by a three years old girl. The selection of these five is made from a large number of images with different motives. I have chosen portraits because the most of the pictures showed people. Does this tells us what the girl believed people usually take pictures of – or can her choice of motives tell us about her relationship to the people she photographed? (The most of the portraits showed her mother :)

I find it interesting that there is a lot of action in the portraits: they are everything but boring - there is always something happening: the point of view is seldom neutral (of course limited by the size of her body); sometimes her fingers cover the part of the lance and the horizontal lines are not quite horizontal (because her hands are not steady); the compositions have diagonal lines … as if she knew how much action can be achieved by such lines..!

PS. All of the pictures people, including the photographer, have approved the use of the photos in this blog.

Defeating a blueberry

”Each thing organizes the space around it (…) each thing calls, gestures to their beings or battles them for our attention…”, says David Abram. In his text “Astonished by a stone: Art and the eloquence of matter” he writes about body’s ancient relation to nature, claiming that “our animal senses know no (…) passive reality; they perceive things only by interacting with them”.

I am sure that each of us has experienced how “things “catch our eye” and sometimes refuse to let go” (Abram 2007). Even if we do not remember the moments when textures, colours or forms spoke to us and invited us to listen, look and touch, I am sure that such moments were at least the part of our early childhood. If you do not remember the last time a stone or a blueberry spoke to you, here is how such meeting might look like;

Observing my two years old friend tells me about how forms with different surface, size, shape and mass invite his body to action. I can’t hear the voices the way he does, but I can notice the way he tunes his responses. This teaches me how much he (or his body) already knows about the physical world around him. Another thing I realize is how willing he is to extend the limits of his body. It seams like there is an interactive relation between the challenges that the forms provide him with, and his own choices that lead him to construct challenges he need…as if he was aware of Vygotsky’s “zone of proximal development”!

He sees a rock of just right size: he tries to climb, but slides down. He tries again from another angle, explores different techniques and manages to get over the top.

He sees a round stone – quite the same size as a football. He tries to kick it – but it doesn’t move. He tries to lift it with his fingers grabbing around, but the weight of the stone pushes his fingers into the ground. He doesn’t understand why he can not lift the stone smaller that a football…and he learns about weight and different materials.

He picks and eats small blueberries, and discovers some really big ones. These, he doesn’t try to pick or lift. He doesn’t’ try to push them downhill (or my be he does but soon realizes that they are fixed to the ground because they are a part of the sculpture park “Sti for øye” - “Path for the eye”). The large round forms invite him to climb… and the polished surface to slide down again.

Writing about a stone, David Abram says: ”To my sensing and sentient body, the rock is first and foremost another body engaging in the world.” This might be similar to how the little boy experienced the stone, the rock and the blueberry sculpture, but he is not able to verbalize his experience. Fortunately our knowledge about the world is not limited to verbal language – there are many others modes of knowledge and thought (Eisner 2002). The boy’s new knowledge about texture, shape, volume and weight remains embodied in his muscles and veins…

Sculpture park "Sti for øye", Fossnes, Stokke South-East Norway
Eisner, Elliot (2002): The arts and the creation of mind, New Haven: Yale University Press
Abram, David (2007): Astonished by a stone: Art and the eloquence of matter. In Bresler L. Ed. International Handbook of Research in Arts Education

Children’s consent, or not?

The title of this year’s EECERA-conference (held in Strasbourg, August 26th-29th ) was Diversities in Early Childhood Education, and the theme involved many different kinds of diversity: language, social situation, disability, gender, and also methodological diversity in research with young children. My presentation was about diversity in children’s expressive languages (and merging of the languages during children’s play 3D materials), but I wish to write about something else here – some reflections about children’s consent in research.

I attended the parallel session “Qualitative research – revolutions of continuing tensions?” where one of the presentations was: “Children should be involved in research design: even in early years?” by Lorna Savage and Muriel Logan, form Stirling Institute of Education. Some of the addressed questions were how to involve “the competent child” in the research process and design, and “whether early years children have adequate skills and research training to be included in the design process”.

At the same time, one of my colleagues attended another presentation which was about children’s consent and “research contracts” in form of drawings. When we occasionally met that sunny afternoon, we exchanged our experiences form the presentations. This made me think about ethical challenges when I, as a researcher, see a child as both competent and fragile in the same time. I believe that we have to be attentive to the children’s voices (also when they are silent), but isn’t is something completely different to ask them a questions like: “Is it OK for you that I take pictures of you and put them on the internet?”? Can we expect a child to consider all consequences before giving us the answer? Probably not…

What scares me here is that it is possible to be superficial: ask a direct question, and later say that the child has been informed and has given her/his consent (one can even show a contract). But how ethical is it misuses the child’s impossibility to understand complex questions about research and ethics? We can’t be serious to believe that a four year old would understand what “research” means? The complexity of a question is not about how easy it is to give an answer (like in “yes-no questions”), but in the thick levels of consequences that lay behind.

Making a language of friendship

Do you believe in friendship at first sight?

In the following case such friendship can not be denied. It was really about sight (or touch, or smell – I don’t know) because it certainly was not was not about words!

Two girls age 4 and 5 met for the first time. They were from two distant countries, and one might say that they did not share any common language – but they must have had since it took them just a few minutes to become attached to each other. Full of happiness the four-year old was jumping and singing: “I’ve got a friend! I’ve got a friend!” She was looking forward to every minute she would spend together with her new friend.

Smiles and gestures, shells and pebbles, running and swimming were enough for the friendship to flourish in the beginning. Words were really not necessary, but they emerged with the girls’ wishes to share more. The youngest started to imitate the other girl’s language - not exactly the words, but the sounds and the melody of the Norwegian language. When her mother asked her: “What are you saying?”, she replied: “I don’t know, but you see that it works!”. After a while the other girl also started to adjust her words to what she experienced sounded like Serbian. Both seemed to try getting closer to the other one’s language – and it worked: the girls were talking in their strange language, nodding and smiling, and were completely overwhelmed when a familiar word occasionally was pronounced.

During the five days they spent together, I observed only one occasion where the “language of friendship” appeared to have some limitations: Some problems came about when one of them tried to explain rules of a game they wanted to play together. But it didn’t matter because they still had their language of body, action of play (like taking pictures of each other), and shared interests in objects – like shells and cameras!

Today they are thousands of kilometres apart from each other. I wonder how a telephone conversation between them would sound like(?) A video conversation would probably be much better – but even if visual it would still be inferior to a personal meeting; Interactions between children really are multisensory and dependent on their three-dimensional bodies in space, and all kinds of actions they can do together with or without physical objects like flowers, water, sand…

Imaginative Education at Simon Fraser University in Vancouver

The 7th International Conference on Imagination and Education was my second and at least as inspiring as the last summer’s! The keynote speaker Dr. Eleonor Dunckworth suggested in her plenary session that one should go where one can be found, and that is exactly what I did: I went to Vancouver “to be found” by those who share my interests in imaginative education, and see arts and imagination as sources of creativity and invention. And I found many kindred souls who share a vision that it is possible to “build a better world by thinking of the possible, not just the actual” – as the conference title suggested. (Read more about the conference)

I met Dr. Kieran Egan (se the photo below), the man with great ideas and the driving force behind the IERG and the conference on imagination and education. I appreciate that he chose to come to my presentation also this year. I also appreciate that people spoke to me after my presentation –This is how I met Kerrie Bellisario from Lesley University in New York who spoke about arts-integration as “universal design for learning” for students of all ages, and arts, creativity and imagination as important part of “21 century skills”.

I met, and became a friend with, Liudmila Gusteva from Magnitogorsk State University situated on the river Ural, exactly at the border between Europe and Asia. She presented Leonid Zankov’s educational system directly related to his teacher’s (Vygotsky’s) work, and especially to “the zone of proximal development”. She invited me to the conference at her university in November this year (with submission September 10th ).

I met Marni Binder and Sally Kotsopoulos form the School of Early Childhood Education in Toronto, who share my interests in visual arts and teaching student how to foster children’s imagination, creativity and play. Fortunately, these two wonderful lades are also coming to the EECERA conference in France this August, where I hope to meet them again!

I met Prof. Gradir Cadral form Criciuma in Brazil who told us about the interesting concept of the Museum of Childhood – a museum without walls, where visiting children are involved in re-interpretation, “museumization” and creation of the exhibition objects.

And I met Heidi Davis form Indiana University who spoke warmly about sculpture as “playground for the imagination”, and Milena Droumeva from Simon Fraser University (SFU) who took us to a “sound walk” in the streets of avncouver, and many other most imaginative and inspiring people!

During the closing session, Mark Fettes form SFU expressed his hopes that imagination will be given a larger importance in upbringing and education around the world. He said: “imagination is re-emerging on the educational scene as a significant concept”. But his words also reminded us that “the lack of theoretical and philosophical coherence undermines its (imagination’s) impact in the field (education)” and in a way invited us to continue with research that can show why and how imagination is essential for learning and development.

Commercial - but still a unique experiencing

We have all seen pictures of a fantastic castle flowing in clouds, surrounded by fireworks!? I’ve just seen it for real, and I’ve experienced the Disneyland (in Los Angeles) with all of my senses: a sweet smell of syrup, unusual taste of a frozen banana, texture of a yellowish retro-decorated napkin, and sounds of old-fashioned music accompanied with the noise form crowded streets and the old-fashioned cars.

Apart form choosing to travel with an old car, one could choose between different kinds of high speed entertainment facilities which could give you un unique 3D (or even 4D) experience of insecurity and fear, either you are afraid of height or of crashing your space ship into a planet.

All kinds of entertainment (for more or less money) were there to surpass children’s expectations, but this special atmosphere also seems to waken adult’s playfulness – or at least made their ears grow large and round…

And when the evening comes, there is even more to bee seen: thousands of small coloured bulbs light up in the dark, shaping large three-dimensional fairytale characters (and the American eagle) in a parade accompanied by music and followed by fireworks - every night!

“Traces” that lead into children’s imagination and inspire teachers in pedagogical planning

I’ve been working on an article and presentation for the 7th International Conference on Imagination and Education. The conference theme is: Imagination - the Source of Creativity and Invention: build a better world by thinking of the possible, not just the actual. And here is what I will be talking about:

If we want students to participate actively in their own learning, they should be able to influence the methods and contexts of their learning. Student’s influence is meaningful and motivating, but challenges teachers in their work with pedagogical planning: How to plan, but still have enough space for students to create their own solutions and expressions? How open-ended a pedagogical situation can be, but still safely lead toward educational goals? I believe that a teacher should consider arranging of imaginative contexts, including careful choices of physical surroundings and artefacts to be used for inspiration.

The project I present here was carried out in a Norwegian kindergarten, with 3-5 years old children. To begin with, the main project theme was “water”, but the teachers and a researcher (teacher educator, teaching visual-arts) wanted children to influence the theme development. The first project day, storytelling was combined with nature experience, art experience and physical objects as “traces” to provoke children’s curiosity. Pedagogical documentation was used systematically in order to identify children’s interests. Inspiration for teacher’s further planning was often found in children’s verbal expressions – children had left their own traces! The theme “water” ended with “mermaids and monsters”, in the project where borders between reality and fantasy suddenly were dissolved…

Besides teacher’s imaginative usage of suitable artefacts, the respect and appreciation of children’s individual expressions had a significant importance for children’s motivation and joy of learning. This wouldn’t be possible if the teachers had a predisposed attitude towards children’s expressions.

Learning to walk – a matter of physical context?

Isn’t it quite human to be proud of own children? -Tell everyone about their first smile, the first word, the first step... especially if they are "early"! But what do we tell if our child is 15 months old and still not interesting in walking? What do we say when people try to comfort us because they assume that something must be wrong whit the child?

We’ve been thought to apply theories in order to understand, but the same theories can prevent us form understand the world in new ways. Take for example Piaget’s stage-theories: Even if his intentions were good (and the way we know him is a result of misunderstandings and misinterpretations (Sjøberg 1996)), his work has for decades resulted in testing and comparing children, disconnected form contexts. “When we separate considerations of individuals from their contexts (and each other), we tend to look for all explanations within individuals” (Graue and Walsh1998) – And this is exactly what happens when we think that something is wrong with a 15 months old that doesn’t walk.

Ten years ago, my son was 10 months old during a cold Norwegian winter. The house we rented at the time had wall-to-wall carpets. When my son crawled he must have experienced the resistance of his knees against the synthetic carpets, fiction and static electricity. On the other hand, the same carpets were good support for his small feet while he was toddling around. Walking was much more comfortable than crawling.

My friend’s son was 15 months in the winter of 2009. It was cold on the naked parquet flooring, and he wore warm woollen tights that covered his diaper and feet. The boy was easily sliding around on his buttocks. He would sometimes stand up, but just when there was something to hold on. I guess he had experienced how frictionless his feet were against the floor … which also was hard when hitting his falling body…

I am sure that the boy knew much about his environment (at least about the floors). If he could speak he could probably reel off much more adjectives about the floor that his mother could. Who dares to say that something was wrong with him because he didn’t walk? How can we ever forget to consider the importance of physical environment in a child’s development and learning?!

Sjøberg, S. (1996). Forstått og misforstått? -- Brukt og misbrukt? Jean Piaget 100 år - Revitalisering av an kritisert klassiker. Det utdanningsvitenskapelige fakultet, Universitetet i Oslo.

Graue, E. M. and D. J. Walsh (1998). Studying children in context: theories, methods and ethics. Thousand Oaks, California, Sage.

Co-researching with children

I’ve been writing assignments for my PhD-courses, lately … and thinking much about methodology…

The project “Sculpturing Words” is based on the socio-cultural perspective on learning. In pedagogical settings in kindergarten, there is a mutual influence between a child as a competent individual and “democratic participant”, and professional kindergarten personnel. Construction of meaning, that takes place during communication in kindergarten, is essential for learning (Carlsson and Pramling Samuelson 2006). Learning is a result of inter-subjective processes. “Operating from a socio-constructivist perspective, the educators act as careful observers and co-autors of children’s experience” (Piazza 2007). In the same time the children are co-researcher in the process of mutual learning.

Regarding the methodological choices for my project, I wish to undertake a role of a preschool teacher and carry out activities with kindergarten children. This method, where roles of a teacher and a researcher merge, reminds of action research, more specifically intervention (Bjørnsrud2005) - or rather inter-action-research ? As a teacher, I will communicate with the children in order to stimulate their reflections. My own multimodal expressions will influence the inter-subjective meaning making that takes place in the context. Seen form a role of a researcher, such communication can also be seen as a form of inter-view method (Kvale and Brinkmann 2009).

Both a good teacher and a good inter-viewer have to listen carefully, with respect and curiosity, to a child’s different forms of expression. Genuine listening also requires immediate reflections, interpretations and reactions form the teacher/researcher. I am aware of that my feed-back to the children will influence the process of their learning. In the same time the child’s expressions will be an integrated part of the research process – the child becomes a co-researcher in the process of mutual learning…

Bjørnsrud, H. (2005). Rom for aksjonsforskning - om tilpasset opplæring, inkludering og læreplanarbeid. Oslo, Gyldendal akademisk.

Carlsson, M. A. and I. Pramling Samuelsson (2006). "Lekende lærende barn." Barnehagefolk 1/2006: 66-79.

Kvale, S. and S. Brinkmann (2009). Interviews: learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. Los Angeles, Calif., Sage.

Piazza, G. (2007). "On the wave of creativity: Children, expressive language and thechnology." International Journal of Education through Art Volume 3(Number 2): p.103-121.

A minute to "charge"

These days I really don’t have time to blog. I have two dead-lines in a few days, and it feels like I don’t have time for anything else. Yet, I have to breathe (in rhythmic repetitions that my body approves) and have to keep my eyes open. I should try to deny the sounds of the birds outside the window – but I can't. Even if my eyes are mostly busy with the screen, I still give them a minute (or two) to charge… through my aesthetic attention.

Here is what I observed during a minute of such attention: all of these flowers would fit in the category “pink orchid”, and still all of them are so different in size, shape, nuances, patterns, details…

“And so, we examine our dreams. What do we value mostly in ourselves? What do we want to become? We try to have a glimpse of the riches that life has to offer us: to hear more, see more, perceive more, feel more – an aesthetic experience which touches the subtleties and beauty beyond the simple boxes of numbers and other useful categories” (Bresler, L. 1991).

Fortunately, our senses do not just get numb by becoming a researcher. On contrary, we need them more than ever!

Reference: Stake, R., Bresler, L. and Mabry, L. (1991): Custom and Cherishing: The Arts in Elementary Schools, Urbana

A distant celebration

Happy birthday, Norway!

Last night I watched Eurovision Song Contest from my hotel in Stockholm and cheered on Alexander Rybak and his crew! What a fantastic event to start the national holiday by winning!!! I didn’t think that I would so much miss being in Norway. Thanks to the internet connection, I have possibility to take part in the celebration!

These days I am attending a course with Liora Bresler and other (Swedish) students. We have been discussing writing about lived experience in qualitative research, and different points of view. I am trying to imagine how it is to be my son today … trying to “recall his memories” through some old images I want to share with you. I wonder if it is possible (through some kind of empathic approach) to “re-experience” the lived experience of others - ?

They say that 17-th of May is children’s holiday! The day starts watching processions, or walking (in this case sitting in a carriage) in a school procession.

Children are supposed to look neat and tidy, and during the day get green grass-stains on their knees, sticky ice cream spots all over their body and wet hair, and have fun! And the weather is supposed to be very nice, sunny and warm, so that the children wouldn’t freeze after they have splashed water over each other. Joy and fun have to colour everything children do on this day! Enjoy the day!