THE CHALLENGE: MEETING REQUIREMENTS AND DOCUMENTING AS RESEARCHERS

In a previous blog post, Fiona wrote: ‘I think that documentation is the strategy that will allow us to transform the way we spend our time with children, colleagues and families.’ Speaking from my experience as a teacher, school leader and consultant, I wholeheartedly agree with her.

Learning and teaching in my classroom changed significantly when I started documenting. This process of ‘active listening, distilling and interpreting’ made me consider the thinking of the children in unexpected ways. The documentation ‘spoke back’ to me and made me discover new things about myself and the children that I had not noticed before. I have seen similar discoveries in teaching teams across the world. The practice of documenting opened the door for them to re-examine their image of the child and their construct of learning (and teaching).

What makes documentation pedagogical is the curiosity that we bring to it. When we research our practice alongside young children, we can bring a certain question or hypothesis based on previous interpretations and/or learning proposals to our ‘lens’. Alongside this intention, we want to be open to noticing and documenting significant moments of learning and the intersection of ideas. This could entail differing points of view or explanations that children bring to the learning group.

Regular opportunities to reflect on interpretations of pedagogical documentation is a powerful way for teams to deepen their shared understanding of their pedagogy and their work alongside children. If we view time as a value, then we need to think very carefully about how we choose to spend our time and make decisions about our time that support our pedagogical practices and beliefs.

Many of us work in schools where they are required to document their observations of children in key domains such as social, language, physical and cognitive development. A systematic approach to documenting 'what children know, understand and can do' (knowledge, conceptual understanding and skills) may keep us, from time to time, away from a focus on wonder, discovery and joined meaning-making. It does ensure though, that we are keeping track of the development of each child in every domain. Another benefit might be that we get to know the learning goals well and spend time looking for the learning of all children (not only those who eagerly share their perspectives or those who often have creative suggestions and ideas).

Perhaps this requirement of ensuring we document ‘everything’ comes from, like Lisa Burman suggested, a lack of trust in the child, the curriculum and the educator. There often seems to be little faith in children’s capacity to direct their learning. Teachers need to record everything to prove that learning is taking place. It speaks to a belief that learning is controllable and measurable instead of fluid, in the moment and non-linear. The curriculum is often packed with a myriad of facts, conceptual understandings and specific skills around literacy, numeracy and other subjects. I believe it is often the amount of all these learning goals that get teachers into a mode of covering, documenting specific learning goals (usually using checklists) and reducing opportunities for a more spontaneous, playful way of learning. It seems to me that there is too much faith in the curriculum and not enough trust in play as a space where children develop a key set of skills and dispositions that gives them a strong foundation.

So the question for me is, as a consultant and teacher working with the Dutch rules and regulations, how we can meet the requirements and still document as researchers?

To be systematic, I think we need to ensure we plan for certain focused observations during a day or week. We can decide to focus on one child per day, on a certain skill or on a specific learning goal. Many systems can be designed but we need to ensure that:

• we can manage the amount of data we are looking for

• we look at different children and domains of development over time

• it gives us joy

• we can use the information for our planning.

When working alongside teams that have engaged in this challenge, I have found that a high degree of intentionality ensures there is still room for our wonderings, questions and interest in meaning-making processes. It makes documentation and pedagogical documentation more sustainable, joyful and mutually supportive.

We need to continue to challenge the current paradigm and advocate for change. In the meantime, please share your perspectives, experiences and solutions in navigating the challenge of time, intention and requirements. It is through constant conversations that we continue to grow and learn as educators. We look forward hearing your thoughts…