It is evident at the College School that Reggio Emilias approach is greatly valued and

incorporated. Almost all crafts and decorations are handmade by the students. Ordinarily

printed alphabets and number lines have been replaced by letters and numbers fashioned out of

things found in nature, classrooms arent filled with gaudy color, but rather with pastels and

wooden chairs and tables, and the feel of the entire school is refreshing and calm. These things

make the learning spaces feel lived in and help students gain a sense of ownership of their

education.

In meeting with the assistant head of school, Nikki Gamrath, it became clear that student-

autonomy is something cultivated in all ways at the College School. Unlike at most other

schools, positive and negative reinforcement are rarely (if at all) used by teachers and

administration. Students dont have behavioral problems, so they arent praised or punished for

it good behavior is simply expected of them. I wonder if this kind of approach would work in

public school classrooms. If a teacher were to supply students with the kinds of things one

would find at the College School nice books, oil pastels, and classroom instruments would

this positively affect the behavior of the students? Would it make any difference?

One of this facilitys biggest draws is its lack of mass-marketed items. While teachers and

administration make a point of supplying students with nice equipment, they also ensure that

classrooms arent tacky or cheesy. Though it seems like many educators are fans of displaying

motivational posters on almost every wall of their teaching space, the College School staff seems

to have all agreed to refrain from over processing the classroom. Furnishing the rooms with

things made from nature seems to help students relax and recognize that the environment is one

of their greatest teachers. Placing a focus on students natural curiosities and inclinations can
enhance the quality of their education. Allowing them to interact with nature can give them the

same experience.

It is evident that the scholars at this school are encouraged to take on leadership positions,

which allows both students and teachers to accomplish more within the school year. Some

teachers are afraid of losing control of their classrooms, but most educators at the College School

realize that allowing students to lead is what makes the classroom community truly thrive.

Motivating scholars to craft and execute group projects encourages life-long learning and

leading. If students view school as a place in which they can promote change, expand their

thought, and improve their skill set, they will likely bring these practices into their homes, their

workplaces, and the world.

Just as the UMSL keynote speaker (Diana Laufenberg) emphasized the importance of

making learning relevant, the College School strives to do the same. Laufenberg gets her

students involved in the community and gives them a platform from which to share their beliefs.

The College School gives students the opportunity to plan, coordinate, and facilitate their own

learning on a week-long outdoor excursion. This helps students to become passionate about their

communities and the environment. School turns from something they dread into something they

dread leaving. It is obvious that the implementation of experiential education makes this theory

a reality and is at the heart of the College School.

Though many of my questions were answered during the tour, Im still left with a few. What

aspects of which theorists are utilized in the classroom? Why doesnt the College School extend

into 9th 12th grade? How do other high schools in the St. Louis area expand upon/take away

from the work of the College School? Have other schools been inspired to emulate ideas from

the College School? How does the College Schools mission reach into the community?