Preschool reading badge from the viewpoint of preschool teachers, children, and their parents

Bralna značka se je najprej izvajala v osnovnih šolah, od leta 1998 pa jo izvajajo tudi v vrtcih kot predšolsko bralno značko (PBZ). Ravno ta prenos iz šole na vrtec je bil premalo premišljen in se kaže kot problematičen. Poleg pozitivnih ciljev, kot so spodbujanje družinskega branja, razvijanje pismenosti in branja, stik s knjižnico, pa ima projekt tudi negativne učinke, kot so: tekmovalnost, nagrajevanje in ni v skladu z nekaterimi načeli Kurikuluma za vrtce (1999). Večina pedagoških delavcev, staršev in strokovnjakov s področja mladinske književnosti se ne zaveda negativnih učinkov, PBZ pa večinoma izvajajo rutinsko, brez premisleka o njenih učinkih. Podatke za raziskavo smo pridobili z anketnimi vprašalniki in s polstrukturiranim intervjujem. Rezultati kažejo, da se premalo govori o dilemah in negativnih učinkih, saj več kot polovica vzgojiteljev in staršev vidi PBZ tako, kot jo predstavljajo zagovorniki in snovalci projekta. Nesprejemljiv se nam zdi podatek, da tudi tisti vzgojitelji, ki imajo pomisleke in se zavedajo negativnih učinkov, projekt še vedno izvajajo zaradi pričakovanj kolegov in vodstva. Ne moremo mimo tega, da se PBZ izvaja na šolski način, saj prav vse anketirane vzgojiteljice ne glede na otrokove sposobnosti od otrok zahtevajo, da povejo obnovo doma prebrane knjige. Otrokom oziroma njihovim staršem sicer v večini primerov ponudijo različne načine predstavitve (pred celo skupino, individualno, z risbo …), a vseeno zahtevajo obnovo, kar je v nasprotju z razvojnimi značilnostmi predšolskih otrok. Skoraj polovica staršev odloča, kdaj njihov otrok »zna« povedati obnovo in je pripravljen na predstavitev, četudi njihov otrok meni drugače. Vsi otroci za opravljanje PBZ prejmejo nagrade, nekateri že med izvajanjem, drugi pa na koncu projekta. Vzgojitelji in starši so našteli nagrade, ki jih prejmejo otroci: nalepke ali štampiljke za vsako prebrano knjigo, ogled predstave, »bralno majčko« in knjige na koncu. Več kot polovica intervjuvanih otrok je potrdilo, da na koncu prejmejo pohvalo ali diplomo. Nagrajevanje sproži tekmovanje, ki pa ga vzgojiteljice še dodatno spodbujajo z javno objavo dosežkov vseh otrok. Tretjina staršev zaradi dostopnosti dosežkov vseh otrok primerja dosežke svojih otrok z drugimi, s čimer sprožijo pritisk na otroke k hitrejši zaključitvi PBZ. Pridobljeni rezultati niso skladni s Kurikulumom za vrtce (1999), saj kažejo na odstopanja pri načelu odprtosti kurikula, avtonomnosti ter strokovne odgovornosti strokovnih delavcev vrtca, saj pedagoški delavci izvajajo PBZ brez razmisleka o negativnih učinkih. Tisti, ki se jih zavedajo, a jih »spregledajo« zaradi zahtev vodstva, pa pozabljajo na svojo lastno avtonomnost. Kot kažejo rezultati, ni upoštevano načelo omogočanja izbire in drugačnosti. Vzgojitelji otroku ponudijo formalno izbiro sodelovanja in načina izvajanja, dejanske izbire pa otrok nima, saj se o tem še ni zmožen samostojno odločiti. Z raziskavo in pridobljenimi ugotovitvami želimo vodilne in strokovne delavce vrtcev spodbuditi k kritičnemu razmisleku o PBZ ter iskanju dejavnosti za spodbujanje družinskega branja, ki se izvaja na drugačne načine, brez opisanih negativnih učinkov.Reading badge was firstly introduced in elementary schools but as of 1998, it was implemented also in Slovene preschools as Preschool Reading Badge (PRB). However, the transition of Reading Badge from elementary schools to preschools has proven reckless and consequently problematic. Besides its advantageous goals, such as encouraging family reading, development of literacy and reading, and contacts with libraries, the project itself also reflects disadvantages, such as competition and rewarding that are not in accordance with some of the principles of Curriculum for Preschools (1999). The majority of teachers, parents, and experts from the field of youth literature are not aware of negative effects and carry out the PRB routinely without considering its negative effects. We acquired data for the research by means of questionnaires and half-structured interview. The results reveal that dilemmas and negative effects are not taken sufficiently into consideration, as more than a half of teachers and parents see PRB as presented to them by supporters and planners of the project. I find it rather unacceptable that the teachers who are aware of negative effects continue to execute this project due to expectations of their colleagues and management. We cannot neglect the fact that PRB is carried out in the same way as in schools. All of the interviewed teachers require from children to sum up a plot of a book read at home, disregarding their capabilities. Most preschool teachers offer to children various means of presentation (in front of the group, individually, with a drawing...), but still require a summary, which is contrary to development capabilities of preschool children. Almost half of the parents decide when their children are able to present the summary although the children might be thinking otherwise. All children receive awards for doing PRB, some while it is still in progress and some when the project is finished. Teachers and parents have listed some of the prizes the children receive: stickers and stamps for each read book, watching a show, “reading shirt” and books in the end. More than a half of interviewed children confirmed that in the end they receive praise or certificate. Awarding triggers competition that is additionally encouraged by teachers who publically present the achievements of all children. One third of parents compare their child\u27s achievements with other children due to accessibility of the results. By doing so, they trigger pressure on their children to finish the PRB as soon as possible. The acquired results are not in accordance with Curriculum for Preschools (1999), as they reflect deviations in the principle of openness of curricula, autonomy and professional responsibilities of professional workers, as teachers carry out the PRB without taking into account the negative impacts. Those, who are aware of them and disregard them, forget about their autonomy due to requests of the management. The results reveal that the principle of enabling choices and differences is also not respected. The teachers formally offer to children the choice of participation and the form of presenting the book, but the children are in fact left with no actual choice, as they are not yet capable of making such decisions. With this research and findings, I want to encourage preschool management and professional workers to critically rethink the concept of PRB and to search others activities to encourage reading in families, as they may be carried out on different ways without the described negative effects