Introduction: Supporting Children’s Agency in Art Museums
David Matteson Associate Curator of Education, Rollins Museum of Art
The celebrated American artist and art educator Robert Henri (1865-1929) once advised:
“If you paint children, you must have no patronizing attitude towards them. Whoever approaches a child without humility, without wonderment, and without infinite respect, misses in his judgment of what is before him, and loses an opportunity for a marvelous response.” 1
Though Henri’s wisdom was intended for aspiring painters, his message will surely resonate with anyone who wholeheartedly believes in children’s profound ability to shape our world. This impetus guided the development of Symbolic Languages: Children’s Understandings of the Collection (Rollins Museum of Art, January 18 –May 11, 2025). For this exhibition, fifty children between the ages of 2 and 5 participated in the curatorial process by contributing their insights, voices, and creativity—or what Henri, whose 1928 portrait Rosaleen (FIGURE 1.1) is included in the exhibit, more succinctly referred to as “a marvelous response.”
Symbolic Languages is the result of a year-long partnership between the Rollins Museum of Art (RMA) and the Rollins College Hume House Child Development & Student Research
Center (CDC). Within the exhibition, the didactics and interactives foreground the child curators’ understandings of select works from the RMA collection. This booklet intends to augment the curatorial narrative with essays that provide additional insight into the research that informed the exhibition and the context from which it emerged.
To begin, this introduction situates Symbolic Languages within the ongoing effort to reimagine the relationship between children and museums, an initiative that gained momentum in the late twentieth century. By recognizing differences between Symbolic Languages and earlier exhibitions and programs, I elaborate on the ways this initiative distinguishes itself by positioning children as co-creators, rather than just consumers, of museum experiences. Inspired by the 2022 exhibition Clyfford Still, Art, and the Young Mind (Clyfford Still Museum, Denver, Colorado), Symbolic Languages adopts a collaborative approach that empowers children to actively shape the interpretation and presentation of artworks.
In the booklet’s first essay, the CDC’s Executive Director Dr. Alice Davidson and Director Diane Terorde-Doyle report on the findings of their research study into children’s perception and
FIGURE 1.1 Robert Henri (American, 1865-1929), Rosaleen, 1928, Oil on canvas, 35 1/2 x 27 1/2 x 2 in. On long term loan from The Martin Andersen-Gracia Andersen Foundation, Inc., 2022.16.LTL
appreciation of fine art. For this study, children enrolled in the CDC’s laboratory preschool viewed works of art both at the Museum and via eye tracker technology. The study demonstrated young children’s capacity for art appreciation and revealed additional insights that informed the exhibition’s curatorial selection and thematic sections: Power of Color, Fantastical Narratives, and Exploring Self.
In addition to being the culmination of a campus partnership, Symbolic Languages opens on the celebratory occasion of the CDC’s fiftieth anniversary. In his essay for this booklet, Olin Library’s Head of Archives and Special Collections Wenxian Zhang chronicles the CDC’s evolution through the years. While its programming, staff, enrollment, and campus footprint have certainly grown, the CDC remains true to founder Dr. Carolyn Burnett’s vision of a laboratory school where young children and Rollins students collectively learn from each other. Zhang’s institutional history sheds light on the many creative ways that the CDC serves as a campus hub for connection, creativity, and curiosity.
The Hundred Languages of Children
At the CDC, teachers guide the children through lessons informed by the Reggio Emilia approach, an educational philosophy named for the town of Reggio Emilia, Italy where it developed after World War II in their municipal preschools. Symbolic Languages derives its title from the Reggio Emilia principle that children use “one hundred languages” to construct and communicate their understanding of the world. As such, the approach emphasizes the importance of cultivating and respecting children’s symbolic sensibility through acts of creative expression like painting, drawing, movement, collage, shadow play, and sculpting. 2 By the end of the twentieth century, “Reggio” (the colloquial name for the approach among educators) was recognized internationally as an innovative teaching methodology. In 1991, Newsweek lauded Reggio Emilia’s schools as “an international role model” for early childhood education. 3
The touring exhibition The Hundred Languages of Children brought significant attention to Reggio by showcasing its pedagogical value. 4 Organized by Reggio Emilia schools, the exhibition featured preschool children’s
art alongside classroom transcripts, photographs documenting their learning experiences, and teachers’ written reflections. Between 1981 and 2008, the exhibition traveled across Europe and North America as it was displayed in schools, community centers, college galleries, and the occasional regional museum. An educator involved in the 1997-98 showing at the Nicolaysen Art Museum (Casper, Wyoming), described its impact as “challenging a lot of our assumptions about children.” 5 Adult visitors found the exhibition enlightening. A Miami attendee in 2005 reflected, “This is a total impact. It has taught me that kids are able to learn pretty much by themselves and have fun in the process.”6
Like The Hundred Languages of Children, RMA’s exhibition intends to elucidate research on young children’s developmental learning and includes elements authored by children throughout the display. Yet Symbolic Languages differs from this earlier exhibition in both its curatorial methods and its interactive design. Whereas The Hundred Languages of Children was organized by and for adults with children’s learning as its subject, Symbolic Languages was collaboratively organized by and for children and adults with the interpretation of museum objects as its subject. Sharing authority
with our child curators included allowing their interests to guide the object selection process and carefully documenting their understandings of these objects, which were prompted through a variety of teaching strategies. Several of these teaching strategies have also inspired the exhibition’s touch-friendly, interactive components. By including these opportunities for visitors to actively respond and create, Symbolic Languages is perhaps unlike the passively contemplative, aesthetic experiences those who frequent art museums may be accustomed to. Yet in disrupting this modus operandi, we move closer to articulating RMA’s distinct identity as not just an art museum, but also a teaching museum where art is the means to learning.
Inviting Children into the Art Museum
Efforts to engage children in art museums are nearly as old as the institutions themselves, but it was not until the twentieth century that clear priorities and standards emerged.7 As art museums across the United States were increasingly professionalized, administrators and critics openly debated the value of youth education. Although many museums offered children’s programming, not everyone
saw these initiatives as worthwhile. In a 1942 study for the American Association of Museums (today the American Alliance of Museums), Theodore Low observed that children who participated in museum programming tended to abandon museums by adolescence, viewing them as one of the “childish things” they should leave behind. 8 Low recommended museums prioritize adult education, leaving children’s learning to schools. He also suggested this shift would alleviate the risk of “overcrowding” caused by parents bringing children to museum programs.
Although no art museum fully embraced Low’s recommendation to entirely abandon efforts to engage “the future generation,” the divide between adult and youth programming persists. Apart from school-organized visits, children’s programs offered by museums at midcentury tended to focus on artmaking—sometimes, but not always in connection to the collection—whereas adult programs were primarily structured as objectcentered tours and lectures. 9 In his 1979 survey of the field, Edward Alexander concludes that museums can be “great discovery experiences” for children but only if the programs are “carefully tailored to [their] interests and attention span.” 10 He encouraged administrators to draw inspiration from the “relatively
unstructured” learning environments of children’s museums.
Beginning in the 1980s, this perspective gained traction among an emerging generation of art museum educators. Unlike their predecessors, who typically trained in art history, these professionals often earned advanced degrees from newly established museum studies or museum education programs.11 They revolutionized many of the country’s foremost institutions, applying their knowledge of pedagogy to design visitor-centered initiatives. One prominent outcome was the establishment of “discovery rooms,” interactive displays for children and families within designated gallery spaces.12 Conceptually informed by theories of play education and constructivist pedagogy and aesthetically influenced by the exhibition practices of children’s museums and science centers, these discovery rooms featured developmentally appropriate materials and activities—not unlike those included in Symbolic Languages 13
While discovery rooms aimed to foster accessibility and equity, they often reinforced the divide between child and adult audiences—designating specific spaces for children while reserving most galleries for adults. At RMA, previous child-oriented, interactive installations have followed this model (FIGURE 1.2)
FIGURE 1.2 A 2017 child-oriented installation in the front gallery of RMA (formerly the Cornell Fine Arts Museum). Note the use of the colorful floor tiles to divide the interactive, touch-friendly components from the artworks on display.
In designing Symbolic Languages, we sought to bridge this division. By integrating elements typically confined to children’s spaces—such as question prompts, close-looking exercises, and hands-on activities—throughout the exhibition of collection artworks, we invite all visitors, regardless of age, to engage in the discovery process.
Co-Creating with Young Children
Symbolic Languages not only differs from discovery rooms because of its design, but more importantly, because of its authorship. Though designed for children, discovery rooms are like The Hundred Languages of Children exhibition in that they are authored by adults. While there are many examples of art museums offering programs and exhibitions designed for children, there are far fewer instances of children co-creating these experiences for themselves and others. One early instance occurred in the 1930s when the Toledo Museum of Art (Ohio) conducted “experiments” with childdirected tours (FIGURE 1.3). Seeking to move beyond the “old set method of a teacher speaking to a silent group,” they reversed the traditional tour structure by allowing children to lead adult docents through the galleries, stopping
to discuss and ask questions about artworks that interested them.14 By 1940, the Nelson-Atkins Museum (Kansas City, Missouri) took this concept further by offering a junior docent program, where children studied the collection, passed a qualifying exam, and voluntarily led tours.15 Building on this success, the museum created the Little Museum for Young Moderns, managed entirely by a “juvenile staff,” including a child director and curators who organized exhibitions for children.
While noteworthy for their promotion of children’s agency, the initiatives in Toledo and Kansas City primarily targeted school-aged children, leaving younger audiences less represented. This gap began to close with the founding of the Smithsonian Early Enrichment Center (SEEC) in 1988, which offered pioneering educational programs for preschool-aged children using museum collections as a foundation for early learning. SEEC emphasized hands-on, inquiry-based experiences tailored for children five and under, setting a new standard for engaging this age group in museums.16 In the 2000s, programs for preschoolers gained momentum, as more art museums across the United States began integrating early childhood education principles into their offerings. These efforts reflected a growing recognition of the cognitive and social
1.3 Children studying a painting at the Toledo Museum of Art, where in the 1930s, museum educators experimented with child-directed tours. Image from The Museum Educator (1936) and reproduced without changes in compliance with Creative Commons, CC BY-NC-ND 4.0
FIGURE
benefits of engaging children in cultural institutions from an early age, further expanding the role of museums as spaces for intergenerational learning.17
The Clyfford Still Museum recently set a powerful precedent by merging collaborative curation with early childhood programming in an art museum context. For the 2022 exhibition Clyfford Still, Art, and the Young Mind, museum staff partnered with over 250 children, ages 6 months to 8 years, to select, organize, and interpret objects from their permanent collection.18 This groundbreaking initiative not only highlighted children’s creative agency but also yielded meaningful research into its impact on visitors. An independently conducted evaluative study revealed that the exhibition challenged conventional notions of learning in museums, emphasizing that education between adults and children is reciprocal, not hierarchical. As the report noted,
“This finding flips the traditional narrative on its head and recognizes that children are not only learners, but co-teachers. Conversely, adults are not only co-teachers but co-learners.” 19
This revelation has profound implications for museums seeking to evolve beyond traditional models of accessibility and inclusion, advocating
instead for reciprocity as a core principle. By embracing co-creation, museums and visitors alike can engage in transformative, shared learning experiences. The scale and vision of Clyfford Still, Art, and the Young Mind directly inspired the development of Symbolic Languages, and we hope this exhibition will further demonstrate the immense potential of empowering children as co-creators in reimagining the museum experience.
Discovering a “Rainbow Firework”
In addition to recognizing children’s capacity for wonder, Robert Henri also warned this ability could be easily stifled. He was particularly skeptical of museums, once lamenting, “When children are taken to a museum they are too often talked out of their personal appreciations.” 20 Throughout the process of developing Symbolic Languages, our child curators have shared many surprising insights that have changed my outlook of works in the RMA collection. Like Wyatt, age five, who interpreted Chuck Close’s 1993 portrait Lucas as a “rainbow firework.” Or Annabelle, age five, who referred to Rufino Tamayo’s 1977 painting Estela (FIGURE 1.4) as “birthday cake frosting.” There were also moments that confirmed art’s
1.4 Rufino Tamayo (Mexican, 1899-1991), Estela, 1977, Mixografia on paper, 29 59/64 x 22 3/64 in. The Alfond Collection of Contemporary Art, Rollins Museum of Art. Gift of Barbara ‘68 and Theodore ‘68 Alfond, 2020.1.8 © 2025 Rufino Tamayo/Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York.
FIGURE
FIGURE 1.5 Richard Joseph Anuszkiewicz (American, 1930-2020), Reflection VII-Red Line, 1979, Silkscreen and acrylic on Masonite, 64 1/2 x 47 in. Gift of Charlotte Colman, 1990.18.
ability to communicate in ways that transcend language. Like when Liana, age five, was inspired to burst into dance while looking at Richard Anuskiewicz’s dizzying 1979 abstraction Reflection VIIRed Line (FIGURE 1.5). These moments underscore the profound and unfiltered ways children engage with art, revealing perspectives that adults might overlook or dismiss. By honoring their voices and interpretations, Symbolic Languages challenges the traditional hierarchies of knowledge within museums and affirms the transformative power of co-creation. If museums hope to remain relevant and dynamic in the twenty-first century, they must not only make space for children, but also actively invite them to shape the narrative. In doing so, we can ensure that the wonder Henri championed is not only preserved but amplified for generations to come.
Acknowledgments
I am extremely grateful to Dr. Alice Davidson and Diane Terorde-Doyle for their creativity, leadership, and professionalism throughout the project. The exhibition would not have been possible without the CDC’s talented teachers who guided the children with great care and enthusiasm:
Lauren Duhon, Ruth James, Felysha Lenis, Jerica Stone, Nayeli Brown, Angele
Triassi O’Callahan. In addition to the teachers, Rollins student Caitlin Moser ’26 also led several art appreciation lessons for the children, and her insights informed the structure of the exhibition’s interactive components.
To my RMA colleagues, thank you for your boundless patience with me as I learned not only how to curate an exhibition, but how to curate with over fifty collaborators. Your unwavering belief in this project speaks to our institutional character—I am proud and humbled to work alongside you.
And finally, on a more personal note, to my father, Jim, who took me to my first museum when I was not much older than the children who contributed to this exhibition, an experience I credit for inspiring my insatiable sense of wonder— may other children be so fortunate.
1. Robert Henri, The Art Spirit: Notes, Articles, Fragments of Letters and Talks to Students, Bearing on the Concept and Technique of Picture Making, the Study of Art Generally, and on Appreciation, 85th anniversary ed (Cambridge: Basic Books, 2007), 242.
2. Carolyn P. Edwards, Lella Gandini, and George Forman, eds., The Hundred Languages of Children: The Reggio Emilia ApproachAdvanced Reflections (Greenwich, CN: Ablex Publ, 1998).
3. Pat Wingert, “The Best Schools In The World,” Newsweek, December 1, 1991, https://www. newsweek.com/best-schools-world-200968.
4. “The Hundred Languages of Children,” Reggio Children (blog), accessed December 1, 2024, https://www.reggiochildren.it/ en/rc/exhibitions/.
5. Dierdre Stoelzle, “The Hundred Languages of Children,” Caspar Star Tribune, December 12, 1997.
6. Angela Castillo, “Exhibit Reveals a Child’s Mind,” The Miami Herald, March 17, 2005.
7. Elliot Kai-Kee, “A Brief History of Teaching in the Art Museum,” in Teaching in the Art Museum (Los Angeles, CA: J. Paul Getty Museum, 2011), 19–58.
8. Theodore L. Low, The Museum as a Social Instrument: A Study Undertaken for the Committee on Education of the American Association of Museums (New York, NY: The Metropolitan Musuem of Art, 1942), 34.
9. Steven D. Lubar, Inside the Lost Museum: Curating, Past and Present (Cambridge, Massachusetts London, England: Harvard University Press, 2017), 294–96.
10. Edward P. Alexander, Museums in Motion: An Introduction to the History and Functions of Museums (Nashville: American Association for State and Local History, 1979), 208.
11. George Washington University offered the first dedicated graduate training program in museum education beginning in 1974. At the time of writing, the American Alliance of Museums lists fifty-three graduate programs in museum studies, and six programs specifically offered in museum education. The academic turn in museum education is documented in: Lee Oestreicher, “Perspectives: The Degree Program in Museum Education at George Washington University,” Roundtable Reports 9, no. 2 & 3 (Spring-Summer 1984): 23–25; Council on Museums and Education in the Visual Arts, The Art Museum as Educator: A Collection of Studies as Guides to Practice and Policy, ed. Barbara Y. Newsom and Adele Z. Silver (Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press, 1978), 13–20.
12. The Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History’s “discovery room” was used as a case study by Council on Museums and Education in the Visual Arts, The Art Museum as Educator, 108–10.
13. Julia Forbes and Marianna Adams describe the growing popularity of interactive displays and their work to formalize these efforts since the early 2000s in “Family Interactive Spaces: Are They Necessary or Just Nice?,” American Alliance of Museums (blog), May 27, 2022, https://www.aam-us.org/2022/05/27/familyinteractive-spaces-are-they-necessaryor-just-nice/.
14. Molly Ohl Godwin, “The Museum Educates” (Toledo, OH: Toledo Museum of Art, 1936), 18, https://archive.org/details/the-museumeducates/page/n5/mode/2up; Rika Burnham and Elliot Kai-Kee, Teaching in the Art Museum: Interpretation as Experience (Los Angeles: J. Paul Getty Museum, 2001), 26–28.
15. Lauren Kroiz, Cultivating Citizens: The Regional Work of Art in the New Deal Era (Oakland, California: University of California Press, 2018), 114.
16. Sharon E. Shaffer, Engaging Young Children in Museums (Walnut Creek, California: Left Coast Press, Inc, 2014).
17. Betsy Bowers, “A Look at Early Childhood Programming in Museums,” The Journal of Museum Education 37, no. 1 (Spring 2012): 39–47.
18. Early in the exhibition planning process, the adult curators virtually met with CSM’s Director of Learning and Engagement Nicole Cromartie, who enthusiastically supported our efforts and offered her advice. She and her co-curator Bailey Palczek elaborate on CSM’s efforts in “‘This Drawing Is a Tunnel for a Hungry Monster’ Collaborative Curation with Young Children at the Clyfford Still Museum,” Exhibition 41, no. 1 (Spring 2022): 64–75.
19. “Clyfford Still, Art, and the Young Mind Summative Evaluation Report” (Trainer Evaluation, 2022), 5, https://shorturl.at/GX6tw.
20. Henri, The Art Spirit, 212.
Art Appreciation in Early Childhood: Implicit and
Explicit Preferences
Dr. Alice Davidson
Executive Director, Hume House Child Development & Student Research Center
Diane Terorde-Doyle
Director, Hume House Child Development & Student Research Center
The Child Development & Student Research Center (CDC) at Hume House is a laboratory school where we involve Rollins College students in conducting applied research that informs the curriculum and Reggio Emilia approach of our high quality, inclusive preschool.1 Our research questions and studies aim to build upon existing scholarship and answer previously unexplored questions. For this study, we aimed to examine the implicit and explicit artistic preferences of young children, ages three to five years old, who attend our lab school. Our study design considered existing research on contributions to children’s art appreciation, including the role of emotions, meaning-making, symmetry, color, and exposure to art. We collected data on how quickly and for how long children looked at images of four artworks from the Rollins Museum of Art (RMA) via an eye tracker, and we presented these works to children in person at the Museum and engaged them in conversation about their preferences. We analyzed the data and concluded that young children are more capable of art appreciation than we allow them to be. As such, we will incorporate more direct engagement with artworks and artists in our preschool curriculum.
The Role of Emotions, Meaning-Making, and Symmetry in Children’s Art Appreciation
Early child development is characterized by vast growth in language and creativity, with young children actively exploring their environment alongside family, teachers, and peers. 2 Experiences of awe and wonder are common as young children make new discoveries about themselves and the world around them through engagement with print, nature, and art. In the Reggio Emilia approach to early childhood education, artistic activities enhance these new understandings through exploration with various materials, mediums, and objects. While art education in early childhood tends to focus on thinking through art (planning and doing art activities), this comes at the expense of thinking about art (reflecting on artists, artwork, and their meaning in our personal lives). 3
Emotion is a strong predictor of aesthetic appreciation (e.g., “This painting makes me feel happy!”) with evidence that it is even stronger for younger children compared to older children. 4 As children age, art appreciation becomes more complex as it becomes increasingly cognitive- and knowledge-based (e.g., “This sculpture is made of cedar. It reminds me of
Grandpa’s canoe.”). Collectively, past research suggests that art appreciation among young children is explained by individual processes (seeing meaning in an artwork as opposed to the work’s inherent semantic meaning); shared meanings and associations evoked by artworks, such as emotions or cultural symbols; and developmental processes related to children’s emotional and cognitive skills. 5
Symmetrical features also predict explicit aesthetic preference and perceptions of beauty in art and nature. 6 Evidence suggests that young children looked more quickly and for longer at symmetrical images, indicating an implicit perceptual preference for symmetry.7
Exposure to Art Influences Children’s Art Appreciation
Exposure to art is an important aspect of young children’s art appreciation and unique artistic expression. A 2005 study by Andri Savva and Eli Trimis found that after visiting an art museum, half of the five- and six-year-old participants used the subject matter, materials, or form of the artworks at the museum as inspiration for their own artistic work. 8 This study underscores the importance
of viewing art in person, as it allows children to access the material, texture, color, size, and form of the work in a way that is not possible with a twodimensional, printed reproduction.
Beyond viewing art in person, recent work indicates the power of involving young children in the curatorial process as a means for fostering an accessible museum environment for children and their families. For the exhibition Clyfford Still, Art, and The Young Mind (2022), the Clyfford Still Museum’s staff engaged children as young as six months old in the exhibition’s curation, which resulted in a family-friendly show that highlighted themes corresponding to young children’s visual development and aesthetic preferences. 9 This exhibition inspired our own questions regarding preschoolers’ implicit and explicit artistic preferences and our desire to invite more young children and families to experience and enjoy the art museum located on our college campus.
The Power of Color in Children’s Art Appreciation
Color tends to be a dominant criterion for identifying a favorite or most beautiful work of art among young children, which is consistent with young
2.1 Display of four artworks presented to children at the Rollins Museum of Art. From left to right: Naima (2009), a bronze representational sculpture of a woman’s head by Elizabeth Catlett; Portrait of Artist as an Old Man (1989), a representational oil painting by Gregory Gillespie; Self-Portrait (1999), an abstract self-portrait utilizing a three-dimensional paint piling technique by David Stern; and Lucas (1993), a colorful, symmetrical, and massive, woodcut portrait by Chuck Close.
FIGURE
children’s early identity development.10 Preschoolers begin developing an understanding of very concrete aspects of the self, such as gender and age (e.g., “I’m four now!”), and an understanding of their proclivities for specific activities and items, such as preferred foods and colors. It is common for a four-yearold child to passionately share their favorite color and provide an explanation for their preference (e.g., “I love blue because it makes me feel safe.”).
Preschool classrooms, particularly those embracing the Reggio Emilia curricular approach, offer children rich opportunities for artistic exploration. Children discover color by mixing paints; experimenting with light prisms; discussing different hues and shades; and comparing the effects of shadows in various indoor and outdoor light conditions. Similarly, the discussion of line, form, texture, and scale in artworks changes children’s appreciation for their own and others’ creations.11
Our Research Questions and Hypotheses
The purpose of our study was to understand young children’s art appreciation measured by their explicit and implicit preferences. Specifically, we examined preschoolers’ explicit
preference for four works of art depicting human faces that differed in color, form, material, and style and the explanations given for why they preferred a specific artwork. We also examined children’s implicit preference for the same artworks in terms of how quickly and how long they looked at images of the art via eye tracker technology. Based on past research, we expected children to prefer (explicitly and implicitly) artworks that were symmetrical and colorful, and we expected color and emotion to be described as primary reasons for their preference.
Study Methodology
Thirty preschool children attending the CDC participated in at least one facet of the study in spring and summer 2024. Participants included twelve girls and eighteen boys, ranging in age from 37 months (3 years, 1 month) to 68 months (5 years, 8 months), M age = 52 months (4 years, 4 months), SD = 8 months.
To measure children’s explicit visual preference, participating children visited RMA on one of two occasions in May and June 2024 and selected their preferred artwork from a horizontal display of four works (FIGURE 2.1)
Accompanied one-on-one by a preschool teacher, children entered a gallery at RMA and were led by the teacher to sit down on the floor in front of the artworks (FIGURE 2.2). The teacher said to the child, “Look at each of these four pieces of art (and pointed to each one).” After pausing for about thirty seconds, giving the child the opportunity to view the artworks, she then asked, “Which piece of artwork is your favorite?” After the child gave a verbal (e.g., “that one”) or non-verbal
(e.g., pointing) response, she asked, “Why is that piece your favorite?” and “What do you like about this artwork?”
If the child did not respond to either of the prompts, the teacher followed up with, “What do you see in the painting/ sculpture?” After the child provided his or her description, the session ended. Art museum staff rearranged the display order of the four artworks between sessions. Sessions were videoand audio-recorded and the children’s preferred selections were documented.
FIGURE 2.2 Two children make their preferred art selection at the Rollins Museum of Art (Ages from left to right: 4 years, 3 months; 4 years, 10 months).
We later transcribed the children’s verbal responses.
On a separate occasion at the CDC, the teacher invited each participating child to a small research room to look at the same four artworks displayed as images via a video-based eye tracker (FIGURE 2.3), which tracked their eye movements as they viewed the four art images on a computer. Children’s explicit preference was assessed by measuring how quickly they looked at and how long they looked at each artwork. The images were presented for a maximum of ten seconds, and children were informed that they could press the spacebar when they were done looking at the artworks.
Children’s Explicit and Implicit Preferences
Overall, 50 percent of the children showed an explicit preference for Chuck Close’s Lucas, followed by 21 percent of the children who preferred Elizabeth Catlett’s Naima. In line with expectations, 92 percent of children who selected the colorful and symmetrical Close portrait as their most preferred shared that at least one of the reasons it was their favorite was because of its “rainbow” colors. One child stated, “Cause it has all the colors in the rainbow. It has all my favorite colors too. Rainbow firework.” Similarly, another child commented, “Woah. That’s beautiful. Cause it has rainbow and I love it. I like about all the
FIGURE 2.3 A child (age 3 years, 5 months) examines the four artwork images on a laptop computer as her eye movements are captured by the eye tracker.
colors. Some colors and a rainbow.”
Color was the dominant criterion across the other selections as well, with 80 percent of children commenting on the color of their preferred piece. This is consistent with past research on young children’s art appreciation, and it underscores the power of color in association with a developing sense of self.12
In addition to color, 28 percent of children commented on the emotions evoked in response to the artworks (e.g., “I love it. I love my mommy.”; “I like the grumpy one.”; “Green. Because I love garbage trucks.”; “All of these look cranky.”). While most comments referenced concrete aspects of the paintings (e.g., color, material, facial features) that related to their personal preferences, two 5-year-olds mentioned additional aspects of the self or
memories evoked when explaining their preference. In response to the Catlett sculpture, one child stated, “I like this one because it’s brown like me.” In explaining his preference for the Stern self-portrait, another child commented, “All the big bumps are kind of like mountains…because a long time ago when I was three or two, I climbed up a mountain. But it wasn’t in Florida. That was when I had the old house.” These findings further align with research indicating that children have a stronger explicit preference for artistic works to which they attach personal meaning.13
When viewing the artwork images via eye tracker, children showed an implicit preference for the Close portrait, indicated by how quickly they first looked at the image, and the Catlett sculpture, indicated by how long they looked at the image (FIGURE 2.4)
FIGURE 2.4 Visual heat map indicating the visual attention of a four-year-old child who attended for the longest duration (red gradient) to the Catlett sculpture image, as was the case, on average, for other children.
Overall, the Close portrait and the Catlett sculpture were the most preferred during both the Museum and eye tracker sessions. Our findings indicated that young children are quite capable of art appreciation, which can be captured via their explicit statements of preference, as well as their implicit responses to artwork.
Next Steps at the Child Development & Student Research Center
The cognitive, emotional, and perceptual processes we observed through our data collection at RMA and via the eye tracker will inform the curriculum at our lab school over the coming year as we engage the preschoolers in an artistic exploration of self-image. Children’s responses to the four initial artworks prompted questions from the preschool teachers about the ways in which children’s vocabulary acquired through viewing art will influence their appreciation and preferences for the initial pieces and additional works. Beyond color and material, will children’s understanding of artistic concepts such as form, line, texture, scale, and style affect their explicit preference and the explanations they provide for preferred artworks? Will seeing a work of art created by an artist in person
impact children’s appreciation for the piece? To explore these questions and more, we will encourage children’s thinking through and about art, and we will document their unique artistic expression and personal reflections regarding the art that they and others create. The culmination of this project will be Symbolic Languages, the exhibition at RMA, and an art show for families at the CDC displaying the children’s artistic creations and reflections at the end of the school year.
Acknowledgements
We are grateful to David Matteson for his leadership and thoughtful feedback and encouragement at every step of this collaboration.
We also would like to acknowledge the wonderful Hume House staff for their contribution to this project and for nurturing the preschoolers’ creativity and growth every single day. Thank you, Nayeli Brown, Lauren Duhon, Gretchen Forsythe, Ruth James, Felysha Lenis, Angele Triassi-O’Callahan, Laurie Pritchard, Jerica Stone, and Ashley Wood. Thanks, also, to our mystery artist, Caitlin Mosher ’26, for your inspiring art appreciation lessons.
Special thanks to Dr. MacKenzie Moon Ryan and Dr. Juan Guevara Pinto for their thoughtful feedback on earlier drafts of this essay. And, finally, thank you to the preschoolers whose creativity, wonder, enthusiasm, and imaginations made this project possible and so much fun.
1. Carolyn P. Edwards, Lella Gandini, and George Forman, eds., The Hundred Languages of Children: The Reggio Emilia ApproachAdvanced Reflections (Greenwich, CN: Ablex Publ, 1998).
2. Jean Piaget and Bärbel Inhelder, The Psychology of the Child (New York, NY: Basic Books, 1969); Lev S. Vygotsky, Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1978).
3. Ann S. Epstein and Eli Trimis, Supporting Young Artists: The Development of the Visual Arts in Young Children (Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope Press, 2002).
4. Alfred Schabmann et al., “Where Does It Come From? Developmental Aspects of Art Appreciation,” International Journal of Behavioral Development 40, no. 4 (July 2016): 313–23, https://doi. org/10.1177/0165025415573642.
5. Astrid Schepman et al., “Shared Meaning in Children’s Evaluations of Art: A Computational Analysis.,” Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts 12, no. 4 (November 2018): 440–52, https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000159.
6. Stephen E. Palmer, Karen B. Schloss, and Jonathan Sammartino, “Visual Aesthetics and Human Preference,” Annual Review of Psychology 64, no. 1 (January 3, 2013): 77–107, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurevpsych-120710-100504.
7. Yi Huang et al., “The Aesthetic Preference for Symmetry Dissociates from Early-Emerging Attention to Symmetry,” Scientific Reports 8, no. 1 (April 19, 2018): 6263, https://doi. org/10.1038/s41598-018-24558-x; Yi Huang et al., “Cognitive Basis for the Development of Aesthetic Preference: Findings from Symmetry Preference,” ed. Emily S. Cross, PLOS ONE 15,
no. 10 (October 12, 2020): e0239973, https://doi. org/10.1371/journal.pone.0239973.
8. Andri Savva and Eli Trimis, “Responses of Young Children to Contemporary Art Exhibits: The Role of Artistic Experiences,” International Journal of Education & the Arts 6, no. 13 (November 7, 2005): 1–23.
9. Nicole Cromartie and Bailey H Placzek, “‘This Drawing Is a Tunnel for a Hungry Monster’ Collaborative Curation with Young Children at the Clyfford Still Museum,” Exhibition 41, no. 1 (Spring 2022): 64–75.
10. Schepman et al., “Shared Meaning in Children’s Evaluations of Art”; Michael J. Parsons, How We Understand Art: A Cognitive Developmental Account of Aesthetic Experience, Repr (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987).
11. Mary Hohmann and David P. Weikart, “Active Learning: The Way Children Construct Knowledge,” Journal of At-Risk Issues 8, no. 1 (2002): 25–28.
12. Schepman et al., “Shared Meaning in Children’s Evaluations of Art”; Parsons, How We Understand Art
13. Schepman et al., “Shared Meaning in Children’s Evaluations of Art.”
Rollins College Child Development & Student Research Center: Sustaining
Fifty Years of Experiential Learning and Community Services in Central Florida
Wenxian Zhang Head of Archives & Special Collections, Olin Library
Since its founding in 1885, Rollins College has distinguished itself with excellent academic programs and innovative endeavors in liberal arts education, and one such undertaking is the much-cherished Child Development & Student Research Center (CDC). By connecting students with children and families for early education, psychology learning, and academic research, the CDC is a laboratory preschool that
educates Rollins undergraduates about child development through hands-on research (FIGURE 3.1). The CDC also provides the high-quality diverse and inclusive preschool services for families in the Rollins and local communities and advocates for wider public understanding of current research and best practices in early childhood development.1
FIGURE 3.1 Teaching and learning time at Rollins CDC. Photo by Scott Cook.
Founding of the CDC and Its Early Development
The Child Development & Student Research Center traces its beginning to November 1972, when Dr. Carolyn Burnett (FIGURE 3.2) first submitted her proposal for a student involvement
center at Rollins. After earning her doctorate in education from the University of Florida, Burnett joined Rollins faculty as an assistant professor of psychology in 1961 and soon established herself as an expert in Central Florida on nurturing children with emotional and behavioral issues. Besides teaching in behavioral
FIGURE 3.2 Dr. Carolyn Burnett (1917-2002), a psychology professor during 1961-1979, was the founding director of the CDC. Image courtesy of Rollins College Archives
science, she also maintained a private education center in Orlando and served as coordinator of the College’s Student Services Center and director of Psychological Services. In that capacity, she began to train students to work with disadvantaged children and arranged field experiences in connection with their coursework. By 1972, the number of enrolled children in the program reached nineteen. Fully convinced of the value of this behavioral learning laboratory at Rollins, she envisioned the new involvement center staffed with Rollins students and community volunteers “would be the first of its type in any college or university campus in the United States. It could serve as prototype for the establishment of similar endeavors throughout the country.” 2
With modest funding support from President Jack Critchfield’s administration, the Rollins Child Development Center was set up in a large room on the first floor of Knowles Hall II in 1975. Furnished with toys, games, reading materials, other learning equipment, and a designated outdoor playground, the CDC initially enrolled twenty-three children ages 1 to 4 for preschool classes three days a week, and students in Burnett’s psychology courses were required to work two hours each week to design and carry
out education projects to engage the children. 3 While Rollins students learned to use simple behavioral methods to train toddlers in language development, this engagement also turned out to be a very rewarding experience for enrolled children, especially those with learning disabilities, which Burnett believed one “can never prepare a child too early to cope with today’s social environment.”4
Notwithstanding its initial success, the CDC also experienced growing pains in its first decade. When demands from the community far exceeded the capacity, Burnett had to clarify that the Center was established as a learning laboratory, not a daycare or babysitting service of the College. In a letter to a concerned parent in 1976, Burnett wrote:
“People who know my emotional and philosophical commitment to early childhood experiences would never believe that I would be a ‘babysitting service.’ … We are not really ‘educating’ the children, we are trying to show them how to live a creative, satisfying and positive life, so the preparation for school is of this nature rather than learning numbers, writing your names, etc.” 5
After Burnett’s retirement in 1979, Rollins reaffirmed its commitment to keep early childhood education in its
3.3 Tony Delgross and Meaghan Davison at play while Rollins students work with other children in the Ruth House. Image courtesy of Rollins College Archives.
curriculum by establishing an annual regular CDC budget during President Thaddeus Seymour’s tenure, and Dr. Martin Farkash, a clinical psychologist, was appointed to supervise student volunteers led by staff assistant Nanette Mitchell. After Knowles Hall II was demolished in August 1983 to make space for Olin Library, the CDC was first moved to a temporary location and then the Ruth House, a small building that once served as a women’s dormitory and faculty residence on the corner of Fairbanks and Chase Avenues. In 1984,
Professor Robert Thompson became the Center director, and along with his assistant Marien Lugo, the CDC enrolled eighteen children and still operated learning programs on three mornings a week (FIGURE 3.3).
A media highlight in the history of the CDC is Mr. Rogers’s visit in 1991 (FIGURE 3.4). Fred McFeely Rogers ’51 ’74H, one of Rollins’ most beloved alumni, was known as the creator and host of the preschool television series Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood. Rogers once fondly reminisced about his student years for shaping his belief in constructivist pedagogy, stating:
“So many of my particular ‘neighborhood’ at Rollins helped me to see more clearly than ever that education is a process. One learns from within not as something is superimposed from without. It takes a long time to grow. I’m glad that there are still some schools which allow their students ample opportunities for developing their own unique identities.” 6
During his fortieth anniversary alumni reunion on March 8, 1991, Fred Rogers dedicated his stone in the Rollins Walk of Fame. Afterwards, he visited the CDC, sat for circle time, and sang his famous neighborhood song
FIGURE
with fifteen preschoolers. While chatting with faculty, students, and children, he remarked: “I think that whatever profession we choose, the most important thing we can develop along the way is listening.… the only thing that matters is relationships.” 7 After the death of Fred Rogers, the CDC held a special program to celebrate the life of everyone’s favorite neighbor, author, producer, and early childhood educator, who believed “childhood is where we build the foundation for the rest of our
lives.” 8 To honor Mr. Rogers’s legacy at Rollins, and with funding from the McFeely Rogers Foundation and support from Joanne Rogers ’50 ’05H and Hedda Sharapan, associate producer of Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood, the CDC also co-sponsored the Good Neighbor Conference in the ensuing years, which was a two-day, on-campus event with public seminars, workshops, and a sweater drive to explore the ideals of Rogers’s life and work, and how to continue those values in our everchanging, multicultural society. 9
FIGURE 3.4 On March 8, 1991, Mister Rogers visited the Rollins Child Development Center. Image courtesy of Rollins College Archives.
Sustained Growth in Experiential Learning and Innovative Research
In 1990, Dr. Sharon Carnahan joined the Rollins faculty as a developmental psychologist and began to direct the program a year later (FIGURE 3.5) Under her leadership, the Child Development & Student Center experienced a steady expansion. After certified preschool teacher Patricia
Moser and a classroom assistant joined the team, the Rollins CDC obtained the state license in early childhood education and its programs were expanded to five mornings each week, ten months of the year, enrolling children ages 2 to 5. Serving the needs of dozens of undergraduates each semester, the CDC strives to provide an all-inclusive learning environment, including children with special developmental needs. Accordingly, the Center has twice won the Down Syndrome Association of
FIGURE 3.5 Dr. Sharon Carnahan addresses a crowd at the dedication of the Hume House in 2017.
Photo by Scott Cook.
Central Florida Award for excellence in the inclusion of children with special needs and learning disabilities.10 To better align the undergraduate and children’s learning goals, Carnahan adopted the High Scope Child Observation Record that is still in use at the Center.11 The curriculum and the case study methodology that she developed for undergraduates including more than twenty hours of observation, assessments, and a family home visit are still in practice today. In a community outreach effort, Carnahan also implemented Screen for Success in the 1990s, a county-wide program that trained childcare teachers to identify children with special needs and refer them for help, for which she was honored by the Orange County School Readiness Coalition as “Community Partner of the Year” in 2003.12
Over the past two decades, the CDC has sustained its growth as an innovative laboratory school in Central Florida. In 2005, Diane Terorde-Doyle, an experienced teacher in early childhood education, was appointed the program director. With strong institutional support, the center staff received specialized training in Positive Behavior Support, Social Emotional Coaching, and the Reggio Emilia method in child development. Each year under faculty guidance, Rollins first-year students
enrolled in Perspectives in Psychology practice objectively observing the preschoolers at play through the one-way mirrors at the CDC. Upper-level students in Developmental Psychology and Senior Seminar in Developmental Psychology work directly with the preschoolers, applying what they learn in the classroom into real-world practice.
Built on the principles of respect, responsibility, and community through exploration, discovery, and play, the theoretical framework of the CDC is the Reggio Emilia philosophy in early education. Reggio Emilia is a city in northern Italy, and the Reggio Emilia approach was developed by teacher, psychologist, and pedagogical consultant Loris Malaguzzi (1920-1994) after World War II, which is a student-centered and constructivist curriculum that uses self-directed, experiential learning in relationship-driven environments.13 Based on this pedagogical approach, the CDC has provided a special learning opportunity for young children as well as a genuine laboratory experience for students where they can practice active learning through hands-on work. Reflecting upon their times at the Center, many students saw that they are among their best activities at Rollins, and “some of the most memorable lessons learned during their college years were taught to them by two-year-olds.” 14
With its exceptional preschool programs that serve the family needs of faculty, staff, alumni, and community members, the CDC has also offered faculty and students a wealth of opportunities for on-site research and scholarship. Based on her experiences at the CDC and with the Screen for Success program, Carnahan in 2004 published Making a Difference: Best Practices in Screening, Assessment, and Curriculum Means Quality Outcomes for Children. This co-authored book has been used by Florida Children’s Forum to train teachers and childcare staff to identify and help children with learning problems.15 Another fascinating example of innovative learning that took place at the CDC is the Rollins’
Philosophy for Children project. In 2015, Dr. Erik Kenyon required his students to develop child-oriented philosophy programs that were first tested out at Rollins’ preschool laboratory. Through partnership with the CDC, Kenyon collaborated with Terorde-Doyle and Carnahan to formulate lesson plans that use games, dialogical readings, and art project to encourage children to engage in discussions of ethical ideas such as love, friendship, fairness, right and wrong.16 As a result of their groundbreaking preschool teaching and research, since its publication in 2019, Ethics for the Very Young has become a great pedagogical resource for early childhood educators (FIGURE 3.6) 17
FIGURE 3.6 On the left, the book cover of Ethics for the Very Young, which features innovative learning at the CDC. On the right, Visiting Assistant Professor Erik Kenyon observes the preschool children building models. Photo by Scott Cook.
In 2008, Dr. Alice Davidson joined the psychology department as an Assistant Professor of Developmental Psychology and has been teaching and conducting research at the CDC ever since. Her community-engaged scholarship on young children’s narrative skills and social-emotional development and on parental wellbeing has involved numerous undergraduate students at Rollins, who have served as co-authors on journal article presentations and copresenters at international conferences. Dr. Davidson assumed the role of Executive Director of the CDC in 2024 with Carnahan’s retirement. In addition to overseeing the laboratory preschool, she and Terorde-Doyle launched a pilot aftercare program in 2024 for elementary-aged children of Hamilton Holt School students, Holt Evening EduCare. Hosted in the undergraduate classroom at Hume House, this is a new, low-cost evening childcare program where engagement is on and iPads are off, with “no other service like this in the Central Florida community.” 18 Thanks to a generous donation from the Hume Foundation, this program provides subsidized, high-quality childcare for children of adult learners and an additional learning lab for Rollins students.
Hume House: A Vital Hub for Learning, Scholarship & Community Outreach
Operated in the Ruth House since the 1980s, the CDC could not meet the growing demands of the community in early childhood learning given the limited space restrictions of their facility. On February 18, 2016, Rollins broke ground for the new building on the west edge of the campus (FIGURE 3.7); and on March 6, 2017, Hume House was dedicated at the corner of Holt and New York Avenues in Winter Park. Named for Warren ’39 ’70H and Augusta Hume ’39, Hume House is made possible with generous contributions from Warren and Augusta Hume Foundation, Elizabeth Morse Genius Foundation, Elinor and T.W. Miller Jr. Foundation, Daniel and Amy Fields, Thomas ’84 and Katherine Hauske, and Elin Nordegren ’14.19 The 5,050-square-foot building has tripled the size of the previous structure, including three children’s classrooms with observation booths, a full undergraduate classroom with one-way mirror, art studio, and expanded office and research space. On the dedication of the Hume House, President Grant Cornwell remarked with excitement:
“We are pleased that our students and the children and families served
by this program have an updated, spacious facility that will benefit the children who attend our Center today and our future professionals of tomorrow.”20
Since the dedication of this new building, the CDC has increased its enrollment to forty children, the staff has grown to nine employees, and each semester over 150 undergraduates from multiple disciplines work in the classrooms or observe through the one-way mirrors.
In addition to those from psychology, students from anthropology, art & art history, biology, education, mathematics and computer science, global languages, philosophy, physics, the Holt School, and the Crummer Graduate School of Business have either actively participated in or experienced the real-world learning at the Center. One such innovative example of student engagement occurs in Writing Books for and with Young Children, a course taught by Dr. Matt Forsythe, which pairs honor students
FIGURE 3.7 At the Hume House groundbreaking ceremony on February 18, 2016, President Grant Cornwell and Board Chairman David Lord ’69 ’71MBA pose with a group of young helpers from the CDC. Photo by Scott Cook.
with preschoolers experimenting on how to create new children’s literature at the Hume House (FIGURE 3.8). By partnering with four- and five-yearolds in brainstorming from book titles and characters to plots, narratives, and illustrations, the takeaways from this class extend far beyond the creative process, as the immersive collaboration provided such a transformative experience for both the students and children when they learn together while exploring the fine art of writing children’s
books. 21 In a typical academic year, the student contact hours at the CDC easily surpass 1,000 hours, and over the last thirty years more than 1,500 Rollins students have experienced the high-impact practice at the CDC. These learning experiences with children, teachers, and researchers, prepare Rollins students to go on to serve their communities as psychologists, scholars, behavior analysts, pediatricians, allied health professionals, and future parents.
FIGURE 3.8 In Writing Books for and with Young Children, Dr. Matthew Forsythe and his students work with preschoolers at the CDC. Photo by Scott Cook.
In 2024, after more than three decades of teaching, research, and services, Carnahan retired from Rollins. Reflecting on her long stint at the CDC, she passionately observed:
“We like to think we’re changing lives with psychology. But here we see it working across campus. Undergrads from physics, art, and English are asking to come and contribute. Because no matter what field of study you’re in, when a three-year-old sits on your lap, it changes the way you look at the world.” 22
Today, with a full-time staff of seven teachers, a director, and executive director, the CDC serves approximately forty children between the ages of 2 and 5 years with a full range of abilities from accelerated learners to those with Down syndrome and on the autism spectrum. Hume House has become a vibrant space where preschool and college studies intersect, and where people of all ages learn and socialize together. Within the International Association of Laboratory Schools (IALS), there are about fifty laboratory preschools at liberal arts colleges, and Hume House is the only one at a private, four-year liberal arts institution in Florida. Following the best practices in early childhood education, Hume House is also a demonstration site for Positive Behavior Support, and has welcomed visitors and observers from
Carnegie Mellon, University of Miami, Fred Rogers Company, United Way, University of Central Florida, Seminole State College, and many preschools.
Over its fifty-year history, the CDC has grown to become a flagship program in experiential learning and community service at Rollins. As a laboratory school, the CDC today incorporates undergraduate teaching, excellence in children’s education, experimentation in curriculum, a commitment to staff development, and community service. Through its all-inclusive learning environment tailored to individual needs, the CDC has provided not only an essential service to the local community, but also an active, firsthand teaching and learning experience to Rollins faculty and students. Symbolizing the College’s heritage of innovation and excellence in liberal arts education, the Hume House Child Development & Student Research Center is not just a preschool, but “a cornerstone of learning, research, and community engagement” in Central Florida. 23
Acknowledgements
Professional guidance and support from Drs. Sharon Carnahan, Alice Davidson, Ms. Diane Terorde-Doyle, and Mr. David Matteson are gratefully acknowledged.
1. Mission of the Hume House Child Development & Student Research Center, https://www.rollins.edu/child-developmentstudent-research-center/.
2. Carolyn Burnett and James Upson, “A Proposal to Establish and Fund an Involvement Center at Rollins College.” November 17, 1972. 20M Child Development Center, Jack Critchfield Presidential Records111:4, Rollins College Archives, Winter Park, Florida.
3. “Social Development Gets Early Start,” Sentinel Star/Winter Park Sentinel, June 3, 1975.
4. “Social Development Gets Early Start.”
5. Carolyn Burnett to Mrs. Sprimont, October 15, 1976. 20M Child Development Center, Jack Critchfield Presidential Records121:17, Rollins College Archives, Winter Park, Florida.
6. Fred Rogers, “An Alumnus Speaks: Misterogers’ Neighborhood,” Rollins Alumni Record, December 1968, 5, https:// scholarship.rollins.edu/cgi/viewcontent. cgi?article=1154&context=magazine.
7. Karen Pankowski, “Mr. Rogers Returns to Old Neighborhood,” Orlando Sentinel, March 9, 1991, A1 & 7.
8. Sharon Canahan, “Are Kids Learning from Mister Rogers’ Example?” Orlando Sentinel, December 10, 2019.
9. “Rollins Holds Conference on Being a Good Neighbor in Today’s Multicultural Society,” Rollins College New Release, February 17, 2009; Juwon Ajayi, “Good Neighbor Conference Encourages Dialogue,” Sandspur, February 27, 2009. http://stars.library.ucf.edu/cfmsandspur/1879.
10. “Child Development Center Receives Award from the Down Syndrome Association of Central Florida,” R-Net, August 10, 2011.
11. Lara Bueso, “Carnahan Rates High on the Scale,” Sandspur, November 7, 2003.
12. “Faculty Feats,” Rollins Alumni Record, Spring 2004, 3.
13. Archie Moss, Curriculum Development in Elementary Education (Waltham Abbey, Essex: Edtech Press, 2019), 253.
14. Sunni Caputo DeNicola, “At the Child Development Center, Learning Is a Twoway Street…” Rollins Alumni Record, Winter 1991, 23-26, https://scholarship.rollins.edu/ magazine/316/.
15. “Rollins Readables: Making a Difference!” Rollins Alumni Record, Fall 2004, 4.
16. Michael McLeod, “A Philosophy Day in the Neighborhood,” Winter Park Magazine, Summer 2019, 108-110, https://winterparkmag. com/2019/07/08/a-philosophy-day-inthe-neighborhood/.
17. Erik Kenyon, Diane Terorde-Doyle and Sharon Carnahan, Ethics for the Very Young: A Philosophy Curriculum for Early Childhood Education (London: Rowman & Littlefield, 2019).
18. Jazmyn Reed, “Growing Together,” Rollins News, November 20, 2024, https://www.rollins.edu/ news/growing-together/.
19. “Rollins Breaks Ground on Hume House Child Development and Student Research Center,” Rollins360, February 23, 2016.
20. Nolan Brewer, “Rollins Opens New CDC Building,” Sandspur, March 23, 2017, https://www.thesandspur.org/rollins-opensnew-cdc-building/.
21. Elsa Wenzel, “Cool Class: Writing Books for & with Children,” Rollins News, August 10, 2020, https://www.rollins.edu/college-of-liberalarts/news/cool-class-writing-books-for-andwith-children/.
22. Robert Stephens, “An All-Ages Education: Preschool and Undergraduate Studies Converge at the All-New Hume House,” Rollins Magazine Fall 2017, 12-13, https://scholarship.rollins.edu/ magazine/359/.
23. Nicolas Simon, “Executive Director of Child Development Center Retires as Cener Celebrates 50 Years,” Sandspur, March 6, 2024, https://www.thesandspur.org/rollins-collegechild-development-center-celebrates-50years-of-impact-as-executive-director-sharoncarnahan-retires/.
Symbolic Languages: Children’s Understandings of the Collection is the result of a collaboration between the child and adult curators credited below.
Child Curators
Emilio Avila
Karissa Baldauf
Kit Bond
Emerson Brady
Remi Conner
Carter Cruise
Lucie David-Coyle
Margot David-Coyle
Noah Dawkins
Nicolas DeCampli Jovita
Alex DeCamps
Mila Douguet
Gwendolyn Ellis
Isabela Fernandez
Kieran Finnerty
Maribelle Friedman
Eli Golden
Adult Curators
David Matteson
Felix Golden
Myles Guerrier
Noemie Harrington
Emerson Hilend
Xander Houck
Sophie Jiawon
Guy David Johnston
Pierre Kaba
Saara KC
Lily Kebbel
Lucas Kebbel
Liana Medina
Eva Menzel
Gram Menzel
Nathan Moore
Anna Ordway
Kiera Pieczynski
Annabelle Reader
Brinley Shideler
Delaney Staggs
Kaleb Staker
James Starrett
Hudson Strickland
Wyatt Strickland
Alma Trauschke Lemire
Mila Trauschke Lemire
Stella Tremonti
Remy Vu
April Wasson
Cristiano Welsh
Benjamin Westerman
Michael Westerman
Walter Yount
Dr. Alice Davidson
Note about the design
Diane Terorde-Doyle
Lines used as design elements in the exhibition and in this booklet were sourced from a drawing completed by Nate, age four.
Exhibition-Related Programs
February 4, 2025 | 6 P.M.
Lecture
Who’s in Charge Here? Sharing Authority with Young Children in Museums
Nicole Cromartie, Director of Learning and Engagement, Clyfford Still Museum
March 18, 2025 | 6 P.M.
Arte y Café Con la Curadora
(Recorrido de la exhibición en español)
Dr. Gisela Carbonell, Interim Director and Curator
March 28, 2025 | 11 A.M.
Exhibition Tour
David Matteson, Dr. Alice Davidson, and Diane Terorde-Doyle, adult co-curators
All programs are free and open to the public.
BACK COVER Chuck Close (American, 1940-2021), Lucas, 1993, Woodcut with pochoir on Korean kozo paper, 46 1/4 x 36 in. Museum purchase from the Wally Findlay Acquisitions Fund, 1995.11. © Chuck Close, courtesy Pace Gallery
ABOVE The result of a group drawing exercise completed by the children in response to Chuck Close’s Lucas.
