The Importance of Intentional Socialization

among Children in Small Groups:

A Conversation with Loris Malaguzzi
Baji Rankin
1,2
Loris Malaguzzi, founder and guide for 50 years to the schools of young children in Reggio
Emilia, Italy, passed away in January 1994. In this interview, conducted in 1990, Malaguzzi
speaks directly to early childhood educators in the United States. He blends theory and
practice as he claries the theoretical base of the Reggio schools and discusses pedagogical
implications for early childhood practitioners who want to work from a deep understanding of
childrens thinking and questions.
KEY WORDS: observation; Reggio Emilia; early childhood curriculum; early childhood theory.
INTRODUCTION
This conversation with Dr. Loris Malaguzzi took
place in June 1990 in the city of Reggio Emilia, Italy, at
the end of the year that I lived in Reggio while studying
their schools of young children. Malaguzzis inuence
as philosopher, founder and guide (Rinaldi, 2001,
p. 28) of the schools was fundamental (Bredekamp,
1993; Gardner, 2001). The powerful words and ideas
that Malaguzzi expresses in this conversation have
stayed with me in my work with children and teachers
since that time. While this conversation took place
fourteenyears agoandalthoughMalaguzzi diednearly
ten ago, the issues Malaguzzi identied are still rele-
vant and useful today for teachers who want to work
from a deep understanding of childrens thinking and
questions. Malaguzzis ideas have exerted a major
inuence on the eld and the themes that emerge from
this conversation can support and strengthen the
capacity of early childhood educators to improve their
work with young children.
In this conversation, Malaguzzi oered accessible
ways to begin this work. Malaguzzi challenged edu-
cators to develop new eyes to really see the intelligence
of the children. Presenting his words is especially
timely given the publication of the book Making
Learning Visible (Reggio Children & Project Zero,
2001), which is bringing more attention to the value of
observing and documenting childrens learning.
Malaguzzi began his reply to my rst question
about the importance of small group work by
immediately clarifying the theoretical perspective that
developed in the Reggio schools.
While theory came rst in Malaguzzis response,
the theory he spoke of was immediately and deeply
connected with practice. In Malaguzzis work, theory
served to improve practice and practice was oriented to
improve theory. This living connection between theory
and practice was a hallmark of Malaguzzis work and
of the dynamic system of education in the Reggio
schools.
In this conversation, Malaguzzi also provided a
context for his response to my questions about the
value of working with small groups of children. The
beginning indispensable point in working with
children, he said, is developing a personal rela-
tionship with each child that values every child.
1
Excellence in Early Childhood Education, Arroyo Seco NM, USA.
2
Correspondence should be directed to Baji Rankin, Excellence in
Early Childhood Education, P.O. Box 575, Arroyo Seco, NM
87514, USA; e-mail: bajirank@laplaza.org
Early Childhood Education Journal, Vol. 32, No. 2, October 2004 ( 2004)
81
1082-3301/04/1000-0081/0 2004 Springer Science+Business Media, Inc.
Developing relationships that are personal and
individual with every child is a preliminary oper-
ation, constant and permanent and sets the foun-
dation for the group work that takes place.
Malaguzzi also pointed out that American
theories play more with the idea of the child who is
endowed with his own intelligence. This is supported
by the emphasis for many years in the United States
on Piagetian theory, which emphasizes the internal
growth of intelligence in children. In contrast,
Malaguzzi pointed out that it is not so much that we
need to think of a child who develops himself by
himself but rather of a child who develops himself
interacting and developing with others. This view of
the child growing within a group context has gained
the attention of US educators within the same con-
text of and contributing to a growing interest in
Vygotskys work. In fact, Reggio educators feel in
tune with Vygotskys view of teaching and learning
(Malaguzzi, 1998, p. 84).
And now, here are his words. Each of his state-
ments is preceded by the question that I posed during
the interview. I have also inserted section headings to
identify major themes he touched upon in his answers.
CONVERSATION
I would like to know more about working with
children in small groups. Why is it so important in
your work? And how can we in the United States
begin working with small groups of children?
On the Basic Theoretical Problem
The basic theoretical problem is that there
cannot be social development without simultaneous
cognitive development and vice versa. This means
that it is necessary to have relationships that are
personal and individual with every child. This is a
preliminary operation, constant and permanent, one
that values every child: the child who knows how to
do things, the one who knows less how to do things
and the one who does not know how. In any case, I
would say a personal relationship is indispensable.
On Intentional Socialization
On the contrary, the theme that has not yet
been duly tackled either on the organizational or on
the theoretical level is the work of groups of children.
Therefore the issue is not so much one of gen-
eral socialization but of intentional socialization, of
socialization that tries to show up through a partic-
ular organization of the routine and of the work that
one does with a class with about 20 children.
The problem is that of breaking up the group of
20 children. We can also have moments when we can
interact with 20 children altogether, but these mo-
ments, I would say, are among the most dicult and
risky because in some ways they tie children down to
a situation which, for dierent reasons, they do not
always accept. The problem is how to break up the
group of 20 children. This means to nd numerical
solutions in activities for children that are extremely
uctuating and mobile and ways where the activities
of children can be the object of very attentive
observations.
On Groups of Two ChildrenAn Opportunity
for Children and Adults
I would say that perhaps a group of two should
be a relationship to support very early on, when the
child is young, say three years old, because it means
putting one child facing the other; it means helping a
child reach or gain a self identity that is dierent than
what he had before.
As long as children are left to themselves, they
approach each other, they back o, they play, they
work, they speak, but I would say that this is a kind
of huge spontaneous beehive. This is extremely
important, but on the other hand it is important to
try to produce observations close to where two chil-
dren are working. Two children are two children.
Three children are a crowd. The third child, when
added, breaks up a dialogue that is much easier,
much more accepted, by children in two.
A dialogue is capable of developing very strong
verbal production such as the solution to many
problems of communication. The child must learn
many things. He must learn that if he speaks with
another he must speak in a way that the other
understands. He must therefore make many correc-
tions and adjustments in the course of the experience.
Children can read a book together or they can read
two books together, but it is important when they
comment together. They can manipulate objects or
work with clay or with other games etc. In any case
the situation with a group of two is extremely rich
because it facilitates the progress of socialization
through communication that evidently is conveyed
through hands when they work and when they
manipulate, but evidently also is conveyed through
verbal communication and gestures.
82 Rankin
On Childrens Discovery that They Are Dierent than
They Were BeforeA Continual Reconstruction
of Their Identity
It is necessary to value the fact that in this kind
of situation children discover that they are dierent
from what they were yesterday. Perhaps they did not
have reciprocal knowledge, which begins to emerge
playing in two. Now they can communicate in a
completely dierent way and with other codes and
keys of interpretation. The child must learn how to
speak so that the other understands; he must produce
a pause, a silence so that the other can respond. He
must wait until the other has responded. He must
wait to have understood perfectly what the other
says, what he wants, what he asks, what he desires,
etc. And then he must learn to respond. That is, I
mean, the situation is like a large gymnasium, a
communicative and social gymnasium. The word
becomes a vehicle of socialization, but it also be-
comes an attempt at accommodation, permanent and
incessant. It is really as an adjustment at the level of
reciprocal knowledge of children.
But why is it important? Because if you talk with
another you realize that the other can have memories
and points of viewintellectual, mentalthat are
dierent from yours. You discover, perhaps for the
rst time, in very exact terms, that the other thinks,
speaks, hypothesizes, imagines using codes and keys
that are dierent from yours. This means that chil-
dren discover that they are dierent than they were
yesterday.
They discover abilities and behaviors that in
spontaneous games in groups they do not always
have the place or time to develop. Therefore within
this play of two children, there is a kind of upset, a
loss of the acquaintance of the child that you knew
before and the recomposition and the reconstruction
of a child who is dierent. Children, in this way,
discover how they are dierent, and being dierent,
they must nd the keys for communicating, for being
friends, for exchanging ideas and objects, etc.
Therefore it is a situation of continual reconstruction
of one child and of the other child, and thus there is
an assignment of qualications, of merit, of ability, of
competence that you did not know before.
On the Importance of Understanding the Value
of Conicts
And this makes it possible for two children to
play, communicate, and exchange in an easier and
more adaptable way. At the same time, we have to
realize that conicts can also arise in the course of the
experience of two children. But conicts in and of
themselves are not necessarily negative; conicts,
through situations of unbalance in the exchange, can
produce the desire to return to equilibrium, that is a
desire to reformulate a more balanced situation that
allows you to have relationships.
On Groups of Three and Four ChildrenMore
Challenging
But in this play other very important conditions
also arise. Now I am speaking about two children
playing together, but you can also produce an expe-
rience of three children together, realizing, however,
that the third child, one of the three, is always at risk
in some way to fall into minority, into subordinancy.
The third child can also be seen as a child who
intrudes and interferes in an easy game, easier when it
is with two children. Therefore it is a situation which
probably promotes conicts, on the one hand, and a
risk of emargination on the other hand. This can be a
situation that produces much less learning than the
work of two children.
Working with four children both simplies and
complicates because the variables multiply several
times.
The problem now is to see how the child dis-
covers the movement of this unity of four. It can
happen that two of these children get together and
the other two children play separately. Or it can be
that one child is left out and three, on the other hand,
nd an agreement. Here, one child, for his gifts, for
his resources and for his maturity can get the upper
hand; his role becomes asymmetrical in respect to the
others.
Or there can be an alliance between three with
the emargination of the fourth. Always thinking
about a group of four children, it can happen that
two children get together in an exchange of commu-
nication, but in communication that is rather distant
even if it is communication in fact. On the other
hand, the other two children attain a capacity of
identication so great that one almost becomes the
other. The situations are very dierent.
Or you can nd two children and two children,
who as pairs get along very well up to the point of
agreement. . . Then you have a division of four in two
pairs: two and two. These are all the dynamics you
can nd when you experiment with what happens in a
situation of four children.
83 Intentional Socialization in Small Groups
On an Ideal Situation to Work For
The ideal situation would be this: the possibility
of having exchanges with all four, an exchange with
two, and with three. The best situation is when all
four play with behavior that has the character of
being circular, unitary, and complex. This is the ideal
situation but it is, perhaps, a point of arrival after a
long time of experience, of a situation that we can
think of but it is not given that it will happen easily
like this.
And it is not even given that if it happens in
another way it does not have many merits and ben-
ets that perhaps are dierent from these but that are
just as useful. All these situations in themselves are
useful in some way, always useful.
The group has an internal dynamic in which the
type of relationships intensify, the kind of conduct
adjusts itself, diversies, disperses, contracts, be-
comes closer, and overlaps, but it is full of great
dynamics that are always rich. This is the problem in
fact.
On the Contention that Each Child is Unique
and Learns in a Dierent and Personal Way
At this point in the conversation, Lori Malaguzzi
started to refer to a drawing of irregular shapes to
point out the importance of recognizing that each
child is unique and learns in a dierent and personal
way. He also emphasized that adults, teachers in
particular, tend to perceive the children as similar
before they get to know the children well.
Here, then, is an example of how adults, in-
stead, see children or how they can see children.
(Malaguzzi refers to another drawing, this one with
four nearly square shapes). This is the perception of
that. Here then there is a problem of perception that
is very dierent about children initially. It is a per-
ception that adjusts itself in the course of familiarity
and through the experience that you, as an adult,
have with them. Given this experience you can not
say that all children have gained the same advantage.
Every child receives his advantage in dierent ways.
On Teachers Observations of Children in Small
Groups as the Basis for Analysis and Interpretation
Children continue to be dierent from each
other, perhaps even more dierent than before.
Perhaps more the same than before. All these are
hypothesis that we can make, through the experi-
ence of children playing in two or four. You can
also try working with three children but I believe
that it is more dicult than with two or four. This
observation is made at a small table where there are
two children; there is another table where you put
three if you want to try; there is another table
where there are four. The remaining children can
stay in six or eight, or there can also be ten. They
can read books. I mean every day there is a pos-
sibility of changing the form of communication of
the children and changing, therefore, the experience
of children. However, these are forms through
which all children must pass. So, there are ten
children there or who play with another adult or
who read books or who play independently, etc. but
it is necessary that all of them have an experience of
working in a small group because this is a situation
that is more easily observed by the adult. That is, it
makes the situation more visible to the adult. Then
the adult discovers things that he did not know
before. If you record the behavior of children I
believe you will have material that you can think
about and reect on. If you record their voices, the
pauses, the overlaps, the meanings that children
give, this also is material for important analysis and
interpretation.
When Teachers See Children Up Close,
Teachers Change
This is a situation that allows the adult to leave
the eld of discrete senses and discrete perception to a
more optimal form to understand children. If you
begin to observe and study children up close in ways
like this, assuming an experience like this, then the
adult feels that he himself is changing. The adult
changes to the degree that he discovers things that he
did not foresee or think of before. This is a situation;
among many, that allows a possibility of observing
very closely and therefore points out the problems
not only of the children being together, but also of
the adults being together with the children in new and
dierent ways.
The problem is to create situations where there is
interaction among children. Interaction must be an
important and strong word. You must write it in the
entrance to the school. Interaction. That is, try to
work together to produce interactions that are
constructive, not only for socializing, but also for
constructing language, for constructing the forms and
meaning of language. This helps to give order to
communication which needs order, and which
84 Rankin
requires children to nd the right word. Much com-
munication seems to be interrupted not because of
distraction by one or the other, but because com-
munication does not take place.
On Observing the Process of the Children
Then you understand that small children make
sudden detours and you must accept this. The prob-
lem is to see if they return, by themselves, to the
conversation that they had begun. They can begin to
work with clay and therefore they speak of the clay,
What are you doing? Let me see! They watch
each other, they copy and imitate each other, and
they make suggestions to each other. But, at a certain
moment, one child can say, Look at the new shoes
that I have!! There are interruptions of this kind and
time and respect for these things is necessary. It is
also essential to see if the children, after having made
this detour, return to the central focus, the central
activity.
This conversation with Loris Malaguzzi will be
continued in the next issue of the Early Childhood
Education Journal with more ideas on the role of
the teacher and the environment in promoting
intentional socialization among small groups of
children.
REFERENCES
Bredekamp, S. (1993). Reections on Reggio Emilia. Young Chil-
dren, 49(1), 1317.
Gardner, H. (2001). Introductions. In C. Guidici, C. Rinaldi, &
M. Krechevsky (Eds.), Making Learning Visible: Children as
Individual and Group Learners (pp. 2527). Reggio Emilia,
Italy: Reggio Children.
Malaguzzi, L. (1998). History, ideas, and basic philosophy. In C.
Edwards, L. Gandini, & G. Forman (Eds.), The hundred lan-
guages of children: Advanced reections (2nd ed.) (pp. 4997).
Greenwich, CT: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Guidici, C. Rinaldi, C. & Krechevsky, M. (Eds.), (2001). Making
Learning Visible: Children as Individual and Group Learners.
Reggio Emilia, Italy: Reggio Children.
Rinaldi, C. (2001). In C. Guidici, C. Rinaldi, & M. Krechevsky
(Eds.), Making Learning Visible: Children as Individual and
Group Learners (pp. 2831). Reggio Emilia, Italy: Reggio
Children.
85 Intentional Socialization in Small Groups