Press Room

The Dance of Emergent Curriculum in a Multi-Age Setting
by Linda Hart

As a teacher/preceptor at the Ryerson Polytechnic University Lab School, I have had a unique opportunity to participate in current research on multi-age groupings in a child care setting. To provide the children with a more “family-like” social structure, Ryerson Lab School began grouping children in multi-age classrooms. Typically, there are three infants, five toddlers and eight preschoolers. Within this group, there may also be children with special needs. All are cared for by three teachers and student teachers who rotate through the playroom.

Curriculum planning can be a challenge because of the varying needs of each age group and of individual children. Our goal is to provide a curriculum that comes from the children. By observing the children’s interactions and language, we learn about their interests, experiences and needs. We strive to have this knowledge guide the curriculum. In order to facilitate learning for student teachers, I began to document this process in my classroom.

A Teachable Moment
One cold sunny January morning, a large group of children gathered on the carpet to read stories. Several preschoolers all chose the book Dinosaurs, an inexpensive paperback, which our student intern had brought in to share with us. Little did I know that a visit several weeks earlier to the museum and this book would be the catalyst for an adventure that unfolded with momentum!

While reading the story, two three-and-a-half year-olds, Jack* and Nathan, began their own discussion about the place where dinosaurs lived. They agreed that “there are lots of volcanoes.” The listening preschoolers chanted, “Yeah, lots of volcanoes.” Nathan stated, “There is lots of hot lava coming out,” and Jack parroted, “Hot stuff comes out of a mountain.”

Right then, I recognized a teachable moment. My multi-age group all were interested in the same thing at the same time. Although the discussion had been initiated and carried by the preschoolers, the younger children, even our nine month old infant, chose to stay in the group. Not one child wandered off. The children’s excitement triggered my own enthusiasm. It felt like we were embarking on a fascinating journey into a magical place. Staff were no longer observers; we were active participants, researchers and scientists.

As the discussion continued, the children spoke repeatedly about volcanoes. In a team meeting, staff focused our thinking on various ways to facilitate an exploration of volcanoes. A hands-on experience seemed best to begin the project, given what we know about how children develop cognition.

I chose to put out ingredients for making playdough. It would meet the sensory needs of the infants and young toddlers, while providing a medium for the preschoolers to create three-dimensionally.

Observations and photographs of the activity illustrate how each child at varying developmental stages used the materials, according to their stage of cognitive development. The youngest children (Tom, 22 months, Wade, 9 months, Brian 9 months, Anna, 30 months) enjoyed the sensory component, while the older children – Nathan, April and Jack (4) – were highly focused as they concentrated on making carefully formed mounds of playdough they called volcanoes.

Piaget’s theory of cognitive development was illustrated when children at different developmental stages problem-solved how to make the hole in the volcano without the soft dough collapsing. Younger children at the sensorimotor stage, characterized by egocentricity, tried only one approach. One 18 month toddler stuck a dinosaur in the middle and said, “There, done.”

Nathan, Jack, Allen, April, Jessica and Roy, preschoolers in the pre-operational stage, tried out various solutions. Some children used paper tubes; others pushed their whole hand down the centre. One child tried scissors and another used the handle of a turkey baster. Each preschool child persisted until the problem was resolved.

Following the Child’s Lead
During the playdough activity, Jack, Allen (4½) and Nathan pretended to make their volcanoes erupt. I knew instantly what the next stage of the project would be: we were about to experience volcanic eruptions.

To say one simply follows the child’s lead does not capture the essence of the experience. Berk & Winsler (1997, p.1) caught it eloquently when they said, “The interaction between adult and child, for Vygotsky, is like a dance — the child leads and the adult follows, always closely in tune with the child’s actions.” This idea is also illustrated in the Reggio approach. As in a game of catch, ideas are tossed back and forth, starting from the child, in a playful exchange and partnership; with each exchange comes an increased level of understanding for both the child and the adult (Edwards, Gandini & Forman, 1998).

The next day, the children bubbled with excitement as I prepared a new experience: the hardened playdough mounds from the previous day, baking soda, vinegar and several different colours of food colouring. Their eyes stared in amazement as they watched the baking soda and vinegar slowly fizz and spill over the sides in a array of colour. James (2 years old) and Tom (18 months) imitated the fizzing sound, “whooosh.” Erupting the volcanoes continued for most of the afternoon until one collapsed, leaving a mound of brilliant colour streaming down the sides into a dark purple lake. This became the drinking pool for some toy dinosaurs.

As I reflected on the volcano experience, I felt lost in a jungle. Where do I go from here? I wanted desperately to pull the next activity from one of my own resources, but I knew that doing this would destroy the process. So I waited for the dance to continue. I waited two days. Then the music started, ever so slowly.

The Next Dance
Once again, the children chose the dinosaur book for me to read and discussions about where dinosaurs lived again developed. Jessica (4½) thought there were more than just volcanoes because “there were plant eaters and meat eaters so there must have been trees and plants.” After reflecting on Jessica’s comments, I visualized a landscape with more than just volcanoes. This vision prompted me to put out mural paper and paint, not knowing where it might lead. The mural eventually became “Dinosaur Plan Place.”

Dinosaur Plan Place resulted from a multi-age small group painting experience. While painting on the mural paper, several children began painting one colour in front of them. Wade (9 months), while sitting on a student’s lap, was eager to hold a brush and dip it into purple paint and touch the paper after trying to eat it! I have to admit, I was a bit hesitant to include the infant because I thought he might dump the paint and ruin the process. But he persisted and I was wrong! This infant, chewing on a dinosaur, was an equal member of this small group. He liked dinosaurs too!

Children talked excitedly about making a place for their dinosaurs. Nathan said “This green is for T-Rex.” Jack said, “We need a place for our dinosaurs to play and plan,” which is how the name Dinosaur Plan Place came about. Staff decided to mac-tack the mural to give it a longer life as a play mat. The children also decided the dinosaurs needed food. They went to a teacher in another room to get plant clippings. Kevin and Tom thought our dinosaurs should eat blue plasticine! The plant clippings were used as dinosaur food by many children. But several preschoolers had other plans. They began to search for ways to make the clippings stand. Student teachers assisted them in this process. Some children tried using tape; others used balls of plasticine. Eventually, after much experimentation and problem-solving, Dinosaur Plan Place was complete.

Dancing Again
As the days went by, the children initiated many more group discussions, such as why dinosaurs died and which were meat eaters and which were plant eaters. Children’s comments reflected various levels of cognition. Some toddlers included more than one idea in their responses, contrary to preconceived notions of cognitive development. Could it be that children in multi-age groupings move through cognitive stages faster that in single-group settings? More research on cognition in multi-age groupings could support or refute this idea.

The next stage of the dance was more difficult than previous stages. The waiting period for ideas to emerge was longer. I wondered whether I should stop here or wait longer. I chose to wait and to wait! We had brainstormed several ideas in our team meeting but none seemed child-led. Then, as if each musical instrument in a symphony was warming up for another performance, two events put the project in motion again.

The children were talking about oviraptor (an egg-stealing dinosaur) when a colleague from another room saw our project and casually mentioned that a past student had made dinosaur eggs. Once again, our theme emerged. The staff and ECE students prepared a surprise! Away from the children, they inserted tiny toy dinosaurs into balloons — a tricky step — giving them to the children once they were blown up.

A multi-age group gathered around the table. Infants and young toddlers explored the salt, flour and water mixture, while preschoolers and older toddlers began to place strips of paper dipped in paste over the balloons. The children needed more assistance than in previous stages, but we worked together. But once the eggs were painted and dried, a problem arose for the children. How would they get the toy dinosaurs out of the eggs?

In The Hundred Languages of Children (1998, p.187), this obstacle is referred to as a “cognitive knot.” The cognitive knot is a problem or conflict that challenges children to higher levels of thinking and understanding. Several preschoolers resolved the problem in the following ways: one child asked for scissors and a pin; another wanted a stick; two preschoolers began to peel off layers of paper after previous approaches failed. When the pin idea worked best, the child shared his solution with his friends.

When the Dance is Over
The dinosaur project came to an end as magically as it began. The children wanted nothing more to do with dinosaurs for several days. The dance was over and the music had stopped. Interest resurfaced here and there like old songs often do, but it was nothing like the first dance!

On reflection, I have a new understanding for my role as a teacher providing emergent curriculum. To facilitate and move a focus forward, the teacher and the teacher’s scaffolding role to help children reach new levels of understanding may either be in the forefront or remain in the background. Interest in a topic alone, regardless of age and stage, may be enough to hold a group together over time. Although children at each developmental stage participated differently in the project, each child was included. the older children were quite accepting of having the younger children included, even infants. Through this experience, I have begun to question whether a child’s attention span is more dependent on interest in a topic than it is on a particular developmental stage. Thus, this dance can begin again to another tune....

* The names of the children in this article are pseudonyms.

Linda Hart is a teacher and preceptor at the Ryerson Polytechnic University Lab School in Toronto. She has worked in the Lab school, providing quality child care and student training for 10 years. Linda also was a participant in the development and evolution of the multi-age program, which began four and a half years ago.

References
Berk, L.E. & Winsler, A. (1995). Scaffolding Children’s Learning: Vygotsky and Early Childhood Education. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
Edwards, C.P., Gandini, L. & Forman, G. (2nd Ed.)(1998) The Hundred Languages of Children: the Reggio Emilia Approach to Early Childhood Education. Norwood, Greenwich Connecticut, London, England: Ablex.
Hendrick, J. (1997). First Steps Toward Teaching the Reggio Way. Columbus, Ohio: Prentice-Hall, Inc.