Rethinking the Rainbow: One year into our Research on Children’s Drawing
- rileywise
- Nov 26
- 3 min read
Last fall, five teachers at APS joined an international research project with the California International Reggio Center (CIRC) that wondered “How do today’s children draw?”
Over the course of the year, we have observed children’s mark-making and collected drawing samples, attended seminars with Vea Vecchi and other Italian educators on teaching and learning, and met as a group onsite every month to compare observations and grapple with new questions.
One big question that has emerged lately relates to the role of the teacher. In many play-based preschools, teachers take on a stepped-back, facilitator role, working alongside children and providing materials and support when needed. In the realm of mark-making, open-exploration and freedom to make choices is valued over direct instruction.
Lately as a group, we’ve been questioning this approach, as we can’t help but compare the complex and diverse drawing samples we see from Italy, to the samples from our own school. At the preschools in Reggio, great value is placed on the process of learning to draw, and the routine of drawing is structured by small, consistent groups, time for observation and reflection, and an expectation that children participate.
At one seminar last Spring, I was struck by Vea Vecchi’s characterization of American drawings of hearts and rainbows as “old concepts and stereotypes” that were “lazy.” In the last couple of years the kids at our school have been obsessed with rainbows, which inspired a Rainbow Museum and even a blog post about it!
Vea's words sparked so many questions for me: Are the children at our school repeating rainbows because they lack the skill to make anything else? Does that make me a lazy teacher? Are the rainbows a byproduct of our open-ended approach to work with materials, which really require more direct instruction? Are rainbows just a warmup, like sitting down and doing scales at the piano?
I brought these questions to our last CIRC meeting at APS and here’s what everyone said:
Jill I think I understand why they said “lazy.” When you learn the order of the colors, you repeat it. It makes me think of when children are interested in spinning on the swing. Almost like a “stim.” Not everything has to be innovative and creative. It’s not like when you sit down at the piano you always play something new. The point of “chopsticks” is sitting down and having fun. There’s nothing wrong with that.
Julie When you do something over and over, it’s calming. Centering. When all the kids are sitting down in the Art Barn and many are doing different forms of rainbows, they are all talking. When they are pushing themselves and trying something new, it’s frustrating. When you know something and can do it well, it’s calming.
Ryan There’s a certain type of mastery, a calming effect of knowing you can do something. I want to push back on it being “lazy.” Kids are experimenting. There are so many kinds of rainbows, and ways they are being creative when making “a different kind of rainbow” - like Lynnden said.
Sima Maybe rainbows is a way in. It’s an access point. It’s helping them explore color. It’s also something they see in nature. It’s happening in large groups where people are sharing an idea. It’s accessible–you can make it happen. Even if you can only do “up” and “down.” When I hear the Italians speaking in the webinars, the translations are not great. Lazy might have a different connotation in Italian. It’s so negative here. Drawing in a large group, it’s calmly meditative. To practice a different form of drawing, it’s got to be a small group. At La Scuola, they do small groups of three or four children. You can challenge kids that way. Learning something new is not comfortable.
Do you remember repeating themes in your own drawing?
What purpose does repetition serve in your own making?
What is the relationship between repetition and creativity?
Comments