Trusting Children to Learn Through Real Experiences—Part Two
By Rosie Pupo
In Part Two of this blog series, Rosie continues her reflection on risk and its place within early childhood education. Drawing on the experiences and observations from her placement at E&D Annandale, she explores how risk is embedded within our philosophy and everyday practice.
Rosie reflects on children’s engagement with real tools and authentic materials, the complexities of managing turn-taking and social responsibility, and how educators balance opportunities for challenge with child-safe practices. Through these reflections, she examines how thoughtful approaches to risk can support children’s competence, confidence and agency.
Rosie concludes by considering the many benefits of risk-taking for children’s learning and development, and shares how this experience has influenced her thinking and how she will carry these insights into her role as Nominated Supervisor at Inner West Family Day Care.
Explore & Develop Annandale’s practices strongly reflected the Reggio Emilia image of children as capable, rights-bearing learners who communicate and make meaning in many ways. Malaguzzi’s work encourages educators to listen deeply, value children’s thinking and view learning as relational and co-constructed (Edwards et al., 2012; Rinaldi, 2012). This aligns with the service philosophy, which positions children as capable participants in their own learning (Explore & Develop Annandale, 2024).
The service links trust with children’s agency and their ability to assess risk. Its practice statements describe environments where children can safely explore challenge and an excursion program that recognises children as capable citizens and active community members (Explore & Develop, 2023).
Trust does not mean leaving children to manage alone. It is shown through preparation, respectful dialogue, thoughtful environments and attentive educators who notice children’s confidence, hesitation, gestures and strategies, then adjust the level of challenge when needed (Cooke & Francisco, 2021) with younger children, this begins slowly and relationally.
Teachers, educators, families and children build shared routines, language and expectations over time. Even very young children can participate in decision-making through visual cues, gestures, words and actions, while families reinforce the message that children are capable learners who can listen, wait, negotiate and make safe choices with adult guidance (Australian Government Department of Education, 2022).
At mealtimes, children used glass bowls, cups and drinking glasses rather than relying only on plastic alternatives. Some educators may initially view this as risky, yet Cooke and Francisco (2021) remind educators to provide opportunities for children to take appropriate risks.
My observations during my placement revealed intentional teaching instead of unnecessary risk-taking. Children were trusted to handle real materials carefully and respectfully, while educators remained actively engaged and maintained close supervision.
Of course, accidents can still occur. On one occasion, a child dropped a glass, just as an adult might. What stood out was the children’s response. They immediately froze and remained still, showing that they understood the agreed safety procedure. The educator calmly assessed the breakage, directed the children away from the affected area and managed the clean-up safely. This response showed that the children understood that moving near broken glass could increase the danger.
When an accident happened, the use of glass bowls, cups and drinking glasses was not treated as a failure. Instead, the moment became an opportunity for children to learn that safety involves knowledge, calm responses and shared responsibility. These real materials became part of children’s everyday learning as they practised caring for objects, responding to unexpected events, and protecting themselves and others.
An example of children learning shared responsibility was evident in the way turn-taking and safety were managed around the large tyre swing. During meeting time, educators invited children to think about how everyone could have a turn safely. The swing, positioned in the centre of the outdoor area, became a practical opportunity for children to take responsibility for themselves and for one another. Children recognised their names and placed them on a waiting board to show whose turn was next. This system supported emerging literacy, patience, fairness and self-regulation within a meaningful everyday routine.
Children were also supported to understand how the swing moved and why standing in its path was unsafe. The purpose was not to frighten children or rely only on repeated adult warnings. Instead, through discussion, observation and experience, children learned to make safer choices. They began to understand that their decisions could affect both their own wellbeing and the wellbeing of others.
A particularly thought-provoking practice occurred during the morning meeting and Acknowledgement of Country, where a candle was used as part of the shared ritual. With an educator physically present and guiding the experience, children were introduced to the controlled use of a lighter and the lighting of the candle. Fire and lighters were clearly presented as serious tools, not toys.
Before lighting the candle, the educator discussed safety expectations, including the heat of the flame and where children should place their hands and bodies. The experience was brief, purposeful and closely supervised. The lighter remained under adult control, except during the specifically supported action, and the educator stayed ready to intervene immediately.
This practice required careful professional judgement (Cooke & Francisco, 2021). Active supervision alone does not make every activity appropriate. Educators must consider children’s ages, abilities and prior experience, the service’s policies, the environment, the purpose of the activity, safer alternatives and foreseeable risks. When a risk-benefit assessment supports the practice, intentional teaching can help children develop respect for fire and understand that safety comes from knowledge, clear boundaries and responsible action.
Reflecting on my role as Nominated Supervisor at Inner West Family Day Care, I recognise that children must be supported to participate meaningfully while adults remain responsible for their safety. Children’s agency should never shift legal, ethical or professional responsibilities onto them. My role requires safe environments, active supervision, risk assessment and consistent adherence to legislation, regulations, service policies and procedures (Australian Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority [ACECQA], 2024).
The National Quality Standard reinforces this responsibility through expectations for health and safety, physical environments, relationships with children, family partnerships, governance and leadership. Child-safe practice requires educators to listen to children, support their voice, maintain clear professional boundaries and act promptly on concerns (ACECQA, 2024).
Practices such as using glassware, excursions, climbing, swings, candles or lighters should never be copied as isolated ideas. These practices must be grounded in the service philosophy, policies, risk assessments, educator capability, family partnerships and knowing each child’s individual capabilities. At Explore & Develop Annandale learning opportunities were balanced with foreseeable risks through clear safety controls, active supervision and a strong commitment to keeping child safety paramount (ACECQA, 2024; Australian Government Department of Education, 2022).
My placement at Explore & Develop Annandale reinforced and challenged my understanding of risk in early childhood education. Quality practice is not about creating a risk-free childhood, but about recognising the difference between danger that must be removed and meaningful risk that can be assessed, supported and used for learning (Cooke & Francisco, 2021). I came to understand risky play not as a lack of supervision, but as an intentional pedagogical choice grounded in trust, respect and a strong image of children as capable learners (Cagliari et al., 2016).
As educators, our role is not to remove every obstacle from children’s path, but to walk alongside them through teaching, listening, guiding and intervening when needed. This placement helped me see that professional judgement sits between protection and possibility (Cooke & Francisco, 2021). I observed educators moving closer when children needed support, offering language to help them problem-solve, adjusting the environment when risk became unreasonable and allowing time when children were ready to work things out. This shifted my thinking from, “How do we stop children from getting hurt?” to, “What can children learn here, and how do we make it safe enough to try?”
Through managed risk, children develop responsibility. Through responsibility, they develop agency. Through agency, they strengthen their capacity to participate as confident, capable and active citizens. I now see that play involving real tools, natural spaces, glassware, community walks, swings, sewing machines and fire-safety rituals can show deep respect for children when it is intentional, ethical and well supervised. These experiences invite children to think, negotiate, wait, assess, repair, create and care. They also remind me that safety is not only about preventing harm; it is about teaching children how to understand, respond to and move through the world with increasing confidence.
My future practice must hold both responsibilities together: protecting children from unacceptable harm while also protecting their right to challenge, discovery, agency and meaningful participation. This connects strongly with Malaguzzi’s reminder that educators should “stand aside for a while and leave room for learning, observe carefully what children do, and then, if you have understood well, perhaps teaching will be different from before” (Cagliari et al., 2016). For me, this placement made teaching different from before (Cooke & Francisco, 2021).
I would like to sincerely thank Su, Mel and the team at Explore & Develop Annandale for the opportunity to learn, observe and reflect during my placement. I am grateful for the generosity, guidance and professional insight shared with me. My time at E&D deepened my understanding of children’s agency, risk management, responsibility, and the powerful learning that occurs when children are trusted, respected, and supported as capable participants in their world.
Australian Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority. (2024). Guide to the National Quality Framework. https://www.acecqa.gov.au/nqf/about/guide
Australian Government Department of Education. (2022). Belonging, being and becoming: The Early Years Learning Framework for Australia (Version 2.0). https://www.acecqa.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-01/EYLF-2022-V2.0.pdf
Australian Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority. (2018). Developmental milestones and the Early Years Learning Framework and the National Quality Standard. https://www.acecqa.gov.au/sites/default/files/2018-02/DevelopmentalMilestonesEYLFandNQS.pdf
Cagliari, P., Castagnetti, M., Giudici, C., Rinaldi, C., Vecchi, V., & Moss, P. (Eds.). (2016). Loris Malaguzzi and the schools of Reggio Emilia: A selection of his writings and speeches, 1945–1993. Routledge.
Cooke, M., & Francisco, S. (2021). The practice architectures that enable and constrain educators’ risk-taking practices in high quality early childhood education. Early Childhood Education Journal, 49(6), 1073–1086. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-020-01112-x
Edwards, C. P., Gandini, L., & Forman, G. E. (Eds.). (2012). The hundred languages of children: The Reggio Emilia experience in transformation (3rd ed.). Praeger.
Explore & Develop. (2023). Pedagogy in practice. https://exploreanddevelop.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Final%20-%20Explore%20and%20Develop%20Pedagogy%20in%20Practice%20Booklet%20-%20March%202023.pdf
Explore & Develop Annandale. (2024). Reviewing our philosophy 2024–2025 [Unpublished service philosophy].
Rinaldi, C. (2012). The pedagogy of listening: The listening perspective from Reggio Emilia. In C. P. Edwards, L. Gandini, & G. E. Forman (Eds.), The hundred languages of children: The Reggio Emilia experience in transformation (3rd ed., pp. 233–246). Praeger.
Rinaldi, C. (2001). Documentation and assessment: What is the relationship? In Project Zero & Reggio Children, Making learning visible: Children as individual and group learners (pp. 80–81). Reggio Children
