What did you learn at nursery today?
In this blog I reflect on four
incidents in the life of Jack, aged 2 years and 4-6 months and raise important
issues about how we engage with small children.
Incident 1: Jack aged 2 years and
4 months comes home from nursery.
Hi Jack, how are you?
I sad.
Why are you sad Jack?
No see Janey no more.
Janey has been Jack’s key worker
at the Sure Start Nursery he has attended two-three days a week since he was
six months. Local authority provision of childcare for babies and small
children is no longer statutory, and the local authority in question decided to
close the nursery. The quality of
provision had been outstanding. Jack loved Janey, his key worker, and now he
couldn’t understand why he wouldn’t see her anymore.
Jack had brought home a book
which recorded highlights from his experience in nursery. He sat with his mummy and looked through the
book. She didn’t want to make light of
his sadness, she explained that the nursery was closing and Janey had a new job
to go to. Jack would be starting a new
nursery and it was OK to feel sad.
Incident 2: Jack, aged 2 years 6 months seems to be
settling well into his new nursery, which is based on the site where his daddy and
mummy work. He particularly enjoys putting on his helmet and cycling to and
from nursery each day with daddy. He’s
stopped talking about Janey and his old nursery.
One day when he was dropped off
at nursery he burst into tears as his daddy left. “Don’t cry Jack”, said a nursery worker, “if
you don’t cry, I’ll give you a sticker.”
Jack’s parents were very unhappy about this and let the nursery know
they didn’t want this kind of response to his distress, they didn’t mind if he
cried, they knew he would soon settle as he became distracted by the activities
on offer, but in that moment of tears they wanted his feelings validated.
Incident 3: The next day Jack’s
daddy was getting him dressed for nursery and Jack said, “Go to Janey nursery today,
daddy.” His daddy told him that Janey’s nursery was closed and so he couldn’t
go there, he would be going to his new nursery.
“No” said Jack.
That day Jack’s mummy took him to
nursery in the car. On the way he was chatting happily, then just before they
arrived his voice reduced almost to a whisper, it was impossible to hear what
he was saying. “You’ll have to speak up Jack,
we can’t hear you when you whisper.” He
carried on whispering. Finally on being asked again to “speak up”, he said,
“Not cry at nursery Mummy.” His mummy
reassured him, “I don’t mind if you cry Jack, it’s fine to cry if you feel sad.
I cry if I feel sad.” They arrived at
nursery and Jack ran to look at the guinea-pigs and then outside. He began to
climb up a small A-frame climbing wall showing dexterity and confidence. It was something he had done a number of
times before and he clearly enjoyed doing it.
The nursery worker came over and alternatively commented, “be careful Jack,”
and “brave boy, Jack”. Why did she say
this? He was not in any danger, he clearly didn’t feel scared and he certainly
wasn’t being brave.
Jack got off the climbing frame
and the nursery worker smiled at him. He
didn’t smile back. “Oh come on Jack, you
promised me you’d smile today.” Jack burst into tears. She scooped him up and took him over to
another play area to distract him and his mummy said goodbye and left.
She both felt very unhappy with
what had happened and in telling me about it, I wondered what Jack was learning
from the nursery’s response to him:
1)
If you are
sad you mustn’t cry.
2)
If you don’t
cry you will be rewarded with a sticker.
3)
If you do
something that demonstrates your physical agility you will be praised for being
‘brave’, even though you were clearly not afraid.
4)
Mummy says
it’s OK to be sad, but nursery workers don’t agree – they want you to pretend
to be happy when you are feeling sad.
What does a parent who wants her
small boy to be able to express his feelings and have them validated do when
faced with this situation? I told
another mother with a two year old and she didn’t understand why I was
upset. She said parents don’t want their
children to cry when they leave nursery and want the workers to have strategies
to stop this. She also thought that her own daughter copied other children who
cried and pretended to cry when she left because she thought she was meant to
cry, she was only pretending to be sad. This led me to reflect on the situation
over the next few days.
What provision do we want for our youngest children?
We know that a child’s experience
in their early years is fundamentally important for their flourishing, so in
providing care for small children we expect much more than provision of a
service so that parents can go to work. The central focus of a nursery is to
meet the needs of the children through offering appropriate activities and ensuring
a safe, caring environment. The relationship between a small child and the
adults at nursery is central. In providing care the attitudes shown towards
children will influence the building of relationships for their whole life and
it is ethically important what the quality of those relationships are like.
Caring for small children is a
moral activity and moral issues will be constantly raised in the practice of
childcare – we have a right to expect sensitivity, trust and mutual
concern. Caring should therefore involve
close attention to the feelings and needs of Jack and his parents. Validating a
child’s feelings is vital for the relationship between the child and the adult
caring for them – it is hard to trust someone who doesn’t validate our feelings
and trust is fundamental if a child is to feel cared for.
The last thing any parent wants is
hostility between them and those who care for their children. We expect the nursery to see and to hear
children’s needs and make sure they are met, the parents have their preferred
ways of responding to their child – it is therefore essential there is dialogue
between home and nursery. Should they
raise the issue with the nursery?
This raises some questions:
·
If they
raise the issue with the nursery what should they say?
·
If, to get the kind of behaviour they want, the nursery
uses rewards in the form of stickers isn’t this encouraging deception?
·
What if this induces fear in the child who knows he can't
comply – the small voice Jack used in the car was in my view an expression of
fear, or perhaps shame that he wouldn’t be able to comply – ‘big boys don’t
cry’.
·
What kind of world are we preparing children for when
adults tell them how to feel and how to behave?
Let’s consider the incident from Jack’s perspective. That morning he had asked his daddy if he
could go to his old nursery – why did he do that? I think he had noticed differences between
the way his old nursery interacted with him and the new one. The Sure Start
nursery had had extensive training in emotional literacy, they often discussed
Jack’s emotional reactions to his day and reference to his developing emotional
literacy was frequently the subject of comment in his daily diary that was
passed between home and school. Parents
were encouraged to write in the diary and let the nursery know what feelings the
child had been expressing at home. Their
policy was to acknowledge and welcome children’s feelings, to believe the child’s
expression of emotion was genuine and to respond with empathy and encourage each
child to talk about their feelings.
Jack’s parents made an appointment to see the manager at the
new, private nursery to discuss their concerns and to raise questions about
policy with regard to responding to the children’s feelings. They had a very productive meeting, however
they found out that the staff had not had any training in emotional literacy
and had no strategies for promoting it.
Their focus was the parents – they were told that parents don’t want
their children crying when they drop them off in the morning and so the nursery
did their best to make sure this didn’t happen. It would seem that the parents’
needs, not the children’s are being prioritized – she who pays the piper calls
the tune.
Let’s consider it from the nursery worker’s point of view. She (and sometimes he) is trying to maintain
social order in the nursery where it has been decided that happiness, not
sadness should be shown by children when they enter the nursery. Children who
smile are given stickers – children who cry are promised stickers if they don’t
cry. This raises the issue of what kind
of society will be created when children are told to pretend about their
feelings in this way.
Why was Jack afraid he wouldn’t be able to stop himself crying?
I don’t think it was because he wanted a reward in the form of a sticker. I think it was because he didn't want to
upset the nursery nurse. To a small
child having the approval of your care worker withdrawn because you don't smile
is devastating and of course he was worried. If children are given stickers if
they don't cry this will shape their emotional development. Surely using
rewards to regulate behaviour when it requires a child to deny their feelings
is indefensible.
What kind of environment is being created if Jack gets a sticker
for not crying? The sticker represents ‘praise’ for not crying and is therefore
a moral judgement: those who don’t cry are the ‘good’ children. Young
children's moral learning arises from the sum total of the responses of others
to what they do – this is not an appropriate response to a child’s sadness. Through
her use of language, the nursery worker is imposing on Jack the identity of the
‘good child’ who is rewarded when he doesn’t cry and doesn’t show his negative
emotions, so through her expectations and his need to please her, he is being
encouraged to inhabit a false self.
The climbing wall incident is another
example of an inappropriate response. Jack is given language to describe his
actions, a very important part of language development for a two year old – but
in this case the language used does not match what is happening. To be able to
ensure children’s safety and yet not over-control is an important requirement
for a nursery worker – taking care of a small child so that he does not hurt
himself yet is not unduly fearful is a skillful job; in the incident on the
climbing wall this was not achieved. He
is told he is ‘brave’ and at the same time he is admonished to be
cautious – such mixed messages are not helpful to the young child and labeling
his actions as ‘brave’ when he was without fear and admonishing him to ‘be
careful’ when he was clearly competent, is linguistically and emotionally
confusing and says more about the nursery’s priorities that the child’s.
Incident 4: The evening after this event Jack asked for a
bedtime ‘knight’ story – he loves ‘Mike the Knight’, a character on the
Cbeebies children’s channel. His Mum told
him the story of Rupunzel – substituting the prince for a knight. For those
unfamiliar with the story it involves a prince (knight) falling in love with
Rupunzel who has been locked in a tower by a witch. On finding out about the
knight the witch takes Rupunzel far away and, pretending to be Rupunzel, tricks
the knight into the tower. She pushes the knight out of the window and he falls
into thorn bushes and is blinded. The
knight wanders the forest for some years until he is found by some children, who
take the knight to their mother, who is no other than Rapunzel. She throws her
arms around the knight and weeps with joy to have found him and as her tears
touch his eyes he is able to see again.
A complex story for a two year old you may think. The next
morning Jack asked for the story again and then made some comments. “Don’t like knight thrown out of tower, Mummy”
and then, “like it he not blind now, Mummy”.
In showing his understanding that it is bad to throw the knight out of
the tower and good that his sight is restored, Jack demonstrates a deeper
understanding of moral issues than most people would think a 2 year old capable
of. This raises an important question: if he can understand the moral issues in
Rapunzel, what is he to make of being asked to lie about his feelings?
I believe that small children like Jack are able to understand
abstract concepts such as good and bad, sad and happy and can engage in
exploration and reasoning about them. After
all traditional fairy tales from all cultures across the world are full of such
concepts – rich and poor, brave and cowardly, ugly and beautiful, strong and
weak – happy and sad. We frequently and
wrongly assume that small children can’t reflect on such ideas – so it’s OK to
impose how we want them to feel, rather than help them explore how they do
feel. It follows that when a small child
expresses their feelings they should not only be respected and validated, but they
should have the opportunity to talk about them as well. A child’s feelings should be treated with respect as well as kindness. How we respond to small children will shape
their understanding of themselves and their world – it is a huge moral
responsibility and there should be no place for manipulation. Manipulation is the manifestation of childism[1]
and childist attitudes.
[1] Childism is when the adults’ needs are
prioritized over the child’s, when adults make assumptions they know how a
child should feel at any time and take steps to manipulate children’s emotion
to comply with adult expectations.
Great piece, Dr. Lyle. Thanks! But the lingo seems confusing to me. My immediate interpretation of "childism" is that it would mean favoring and promoting the child--like "communism," "nationalism," "nomadism," etc.
ReplyDeleteThink more as "racism", "sexism", ect.
DeleteHe spoke like that at two? I could spell simple words at one! One of my earliest memories was my father trying to discuss the possibility of taking me to hotel pool to distract me for a while, but he was spelling it out, so it was P-O-O-L, instead of pool, so I more or less said "Pool? Are we going to the pool?". I can't remember what happened after, though.
ReplyDelete