Reggio Emilia Part 1: What I Thought “Choice” Meant… and What I Saw in Bologna

Dr. Cynthia DiCarlo, Louisiana State University

This six-part blog series highlights a visit to the Cinema School in Bologna, Italy, and explores the shifts early childhood educators might consider when rethinking choice in their own programs. The school, directed by Beatrice Vitali, was toured in collaboration with ECEI researcher Marcella Terrusi of the University of Bologna. While many classrooms emphasize child choice within centers or activities, this school demonstrated what it looks like when choice is embedded into the design of the entire environment. Across this series, key structures, from movement across spaces to flexible routines, are examined with consideration for how these ideas might translate into practice in early childhood settings.

What “Choice” Means… and What It Can Look Like in Practice

In many early childhood classrooms, choice is often conceptualized as children selecting from a set of options within a defined space. This may include choosing centers, materials, or activities during a designated portion of the day. While this approach is valuable, it reflects a more limited view of what choice can be within a learning environment.

A broader conceptualization of choice positions it not as an added component of the schedule, but as something embedded within the structure of the environment itself. In Reggio Emilia–inspired contexts, the environment is intentionally designed to support children’s decision-making, independence, and engagement. This aligns with the understanding of the environment as a “third teacher,” working alongside the child and the adult to shape learning experiences (Santín & Torruella, 2017).

As illustrated below, the organization of space itself invites different types of engagement, rather than directing children toward a single activity or group experience.

An open, connected learning environment designed to support children’s movement, decision-making, and engagement across multiple areas.

Rather than being confined to a single classroom or rotating through activities on a fixed schedule, children in this type of environment move across spaces based on interest, engagement, and social interaction. Movement is not treated as a transition between activities, but as an integral part of how children access learning opportunities. This reflects a shift from viewing learning as something that occurs within a designated space to understanding it as something that unfolds across environments.

This raises an important question for practice:What opportunities do children have to make decisions beyond selecting materials within a single space?

The role of the adult also shifts within this structure. Instead of directing a fixed group of children, adults are positioned within specific areas of the environment, providing consistency, support, and intentional interactions within those spaces. This allows children to navigate the environment while still benefiting from the presence of knowledgeable and responsive adults.

These structures are grounded in a particular image of the child. Within the Reggio Emilia philosophy, children are viewed as capable, competent, and active participants in their own learning (Malaguzzi, 1993; Santín & Torruella, 2017). When educators adopt this image, the design of the environment, the organization of time, and the role of the adult begin to shift accordingly.

There is also a growing body of research suggesting that when children are given meaningful opportunities for choice, engagement increases. Studies examining sustained attention in early childhood settings indicate that children demonstrate higher levels of engagement when they have opportunities to make decisions about their learning experiences, particularly when those choices extend beyond adult-directed structures (DiCarlo & Ota, 2025).

This leads to another consideration: Are current classroom structures supporting children’s ability to make meaningful choices, or are they limiting those opportunities to predetermined moments in the day?

Supporting meaningful choice may require looking beyond the addition of options within existing structures and instead examining how those structures influence children’s ability to make decisions. This includes reflecting on how movement is managed, how spaces are organized, and how control is shared between adults and children.

The goal is not to replicate a specific model, but to begin asking different questions about practice. When choice is embedded into the structure of the day, rather than added as an isolated component, it has the potential to fundamentally change how children experience learning.

Reggio Emilia Tenets in Practice

This example reflects the role of the environment as a “third teacher,” where space is intentionally designed to support children’s decision-making and engagement (Santín & Torruella, 2017). It also aligns with the image of the child as capable and competent, as children are positioned as active participants who are able to navigate environments and make meaningful choices.

References

DiCarlo, C. F., & Ota, C. (2025).  Sustained attention in three-year-old children: The impact of teaching conditions and choice. Early Childhood Education Journal. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-025-01985-w

Malaguzzi, L. (1993). For an education based on relationships. Young Children, 49(1), 9–12.

Santín, M. F., & Torruella, M. F. (2017). Reggio Emilia: An essential tool to develop critical thinking in early childhood. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 6(1), 50–56. https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2017.1.207

---

Dr. Cynthia DiCarlo is a Professor and Program Coordinator of the Early Childhood Education at Louisiana State University and the Executive Director of the Early Childhood Education Institute www.lsu.edu/ecei

Want to get connected? Join one of our online LAAEYC groups to network with other professionals who teach the same age group you do!!