This chapter represents the beginning stages of the programme over a period of three months from October – December 2015 during which time participants attended three sessions, a network event and an individual tutorial. Engaging with the first four steps of the TLDW model, participants clarified their professional values. By tapping into their moral purpose, participants began to identify a concern which becomes the focus of their development work. They negotiated with colleagues to explore that concern. For most participants, this was the first time they have engaged in such professional dialogue. Following these negotiations, I guided participants to design and produce an action plan for their development work detailing, a sequence of planned activities.
Each of these is discussed in the following chapter, but I begin by explaining how I set the environment for learning.
Creating the physical environment
I took care to provide a welcoming learning environment for the participants. The participants generally did not know each other. I wanted to establish a welcoming atmosphere, partly to put participants at ease but also to assist the growth of critical friendships within the group. I understood that collaboration would stand a better chance if the group had strong social bonds (Mylles, 2017). Parking facilities, toilets and the meeting room were all signposted. The caretaker had kindly arranged the room for me with rows of chairs facing a long table holding the power point projector. He found me rearranging the room and eyed me curiously as I told him the participants needed to be able to see and talk to each other, rather than focus on me, and that I would not be using the power point projector. I provided refreshments, sweets to share on each table and stationery for the participants, including brightly coloured folders. Also, on each table were baskets of markers, pens and sticky notes. I had a registration table by the door where I greeted
participants with name tags. I set up another table with books, academic journals and professional literature pertaining to early years education.
Participants began to arrive. We greeted each other and I introduced participants to each other. Participants made hot drinks, looked at the book table and found themselves a seat. There was a good deal of laughter as everyone seemed to want a purple coloured folder.
Creating the conditions for a safe environment
The first activity of the first session encouraged further openness. In my individualised welcome email, I had asked the participants to send me an interesting fact about themselves. These were anonymised and collated on a sheet for a ‘human bingo’ activity. Instead of the usual introductions made in turn around a group, the participants were energised and animated trying to discover which one of them for example, had five grandchildren and who had spent the Summer holiday trekking in the Andes.
(Participants engaging in activity, Session 1 on 17.9.15) Some participants recalled meeting each other in the previous academic year at a training event, two were previous colleagues, others were engaging with colleagues from differing early years settings for the first time. This was more than a light- hearted icebreaker. I had intentionally sought introduce participants to each other in this way. It set the tone for the dialogic activities to follow but importantly, was the first step in what I hoped was the creation of a safe environment.
The session also involved compiling a set of ground rules for the programme. Individuals were asked to record on sticky notes three rules they felt were important for establishing good working relationships for the group.
I created a poster of these to be displayed at each session and participants were asked to sign this to demonstrate their agreement with the rules they had suggested. I hoped this would demonstrate the importance of developing relational trust (Timperley, 2015). Such trust might enable participants to engage respectfully with perspectives that differ from their own in order to flourish and learn; I envisaged a group where participants would appreciate being sincerely listened to and understood, rather than just being heard (Kaser and Halbert, 2009:50).
Beginning identity work
Step 1 of the TLDW process involves participants reflecting on their core values and their identities as educators. The premise here is that these reflections are the starting point for the process of developing, engaging and using an extended professionality (Wood and Bennett, 2000).
One of the first tasks I planned in the first session was an invitation for the participants to make a visual representation to demonstrate their current experience of being an early years educator. It was a non-serious task that took seriously ‘the teacher’s purpose, the teacher as a person and the real-world context in which teachers work’ (Fullan and Hargreaves, 1992: 27). I was prepared for there to be a cry of ‘I’m no artist!’ and so I introduced the activity carefully, ensuring that participants recognised that this was a task intended to give them time to reflect and think about what mattered to them in their work with young children and families. The artistic merit of the representation was not of importance but the reflection and the dialogue that followed was key. I found the activity acted as a ‘tin-opener’ for critical conversations about the participants’ perceptions of their role and professional identity. Amanda created the following drawing, entitled ‘My professional smile.’
(Amanda’s representation created in session 15.9.15) Amanda took the opportunity to share with the larger group her feelings about her work and her perceptions about her identity. Despite the challenges of her role she was determined that she would present nothing less than a ‘professional’ face to children, parents and colleagues.
I have to be so many things to so many people. But there’s so much… contradiction in what I do and what I’m feeling… I am nurturing… but I’m frazzled by my workload. I do get overwhelmed but my work…It’s important and it’s important to me that I’m doing something worthwhile…and well I’ve called my picture my professional smile because that’s what I do.
(Research journal 17.9.15) The sense of being overwhelmed, but absolutely committed to working with young children, is also demonstrated in Debbie’s representation below, which she named ‘All tabs are open’ in an attempt to convey the complexities of her role, the competing tasks she needed to accomplish and her perceived expectations that senior leaders had of her.
(Debbie’s representation created in session 15.9.15) Debbie was realistic about the difficulties and busyness of the job, whilst resolutely maintaining her focus on children’s learning and well-being. Violet, too, reflected on her professional values.
I am committed to listening to children and recognising their interests. I try hard to provide a stimulating environment and opportunities for them to explore and express their thoughts and ideas…I think it’s part of my role to model for children how to respect one another, our environment and our resources, and how to keep everyone safe.
(Violet, written initial reflection 23.9.15) These examples might suggest that professional identities of early years educators are susceptible to prevalent normalising discourse, which position them as ‘preternaturally stoic, compliant, self-sacrificing and motivated by the intrinsic rewards of working with young children’ (Sumison, 2004:288). Such self-denying attitudes might breed or feed complacency amongst employers, or be indicative of a workforce composed of overly compliant individuals. However, I realised that what the participants were vocalising was actually a very strong sense of commitment and passion about their work. The discussion between the members of the group was disrupting the image of a downtrodden worker and was instead revealing a highly attuned moral dimension to the identities of the participants. I put this to the group. The following comment indicates the mood of the ensuing discussion.
Downtrodden? Maybe in some ways… but I want to do this job. I could go and work in a supermarket but that’s not want I want in life.
(Participant comment, Research journal 15.9.15) Each participant indicated a similar passionate commitment to make a difference to children’s learning and life chances. The discussion in this first session moved on. The participants were quick to list many routines and tasks which impacted less favourably on their work with young children. Violet found several aspects of her work tiresome. Her representation shows queues of needy children and a large dust pan and brush.
(Violet’s representation created in session 15.9.15) However, other types of situations were encountered that participants viewed as ‘morally wearing’ (Craig, 1995). For example, sharing the above representation with her fellow participants enabled Violet to initiate a discussion about the approach to teaching synthetic phonics advanced by national policy.
How can you teach phonics to a barely 4-year-old like that? One little boy cannot locate where a sound is coming from in a room. He can’t match noises to everyday items…and I have to assess how well he can blend sounds in CVC (consonant-verb-consonant) words! It’s just not appropriate.
(Participant comment, Research journal 15.9.15) Many participants told similar stories, indicating the level to which professional independence and a culture of trust are being replaced by restrictive conceptualisations of effective teaching and learning in the early years (Osgood, 2012; Hargreaves & Shirley, 2009). The intensity of the discussions, and the clearly expressed emotional engagement with their work, particularly struck a chord with my aims for supporting the early years educators. These were circumstances in which the participants experienced incongruence between their beliefs and enforced practices. I realised though that these dilemmas, and the dissonance they created, might also act as a catalyst for participants to reclaim ownership over their practice. At this moment I truly understood that mobilising such tremendous passion or moral purpose was key to supporting them in developing and using an enhanced professionality to make a difference in their settings.
The desire to protect the learning and well-being of young children is described as the ‘ethic of care’ by Mcdowall and Murray (2012:45). For Taggart (2011) working with this ethic involves the maintenance of caring relationships between educators, children and families. It functions to place children’s needs and interests at the forefront of decision-making. They further propose that where this exists in conjunction with moral purpose, what is produced is an emotional drive that they term ‘passionate care.’
Passionate care is an active state (Moyles, 2001; Day, 2004). It is put into practice when a desire to make a difference is coupled with the belief that improvements can be made. It has been argued by Marqurdt (2000:3) that ‘true leadership emerges from those whose prime motivation is to help others.’ I was excited by this, it was highly resonant with my understanding of extended professionality and the concept of non-positional leadership promoted by the HertsCam Network.
What I found perplexing though was a focus in the literature on ‘self-leadership’ and internal drive. The levels of autonomy, persistence, resilience and self-belief in many cases are impressive. I had no reservations that each new participant in my programme could achieve this, my early conversations indicated having support to work in this way was crucial. After all, the participants had enrolled on a programme that was marketed as a means of supporting them to make such a difference. Frost (2011) is forthright about this.
Teachers really can lead innovation; teachers really can build professional knowledge; teachers really can develop the capacity for leadership, and teachers really can influence their colleagues and the nature of professional practice in their schools. However, what is abundantly clear is that teachers are only likely to do these things if they are provided with appropriate support.
(Frost, 2011: 57) Samira’s reflections after the session demonstrate her understanding of the need for such supportive structures to help her put her moral purpose into action.
Before this I thought my views didn’t matter. But I’m starting to feel like I’m finding my voice. I can’t change the world but I can do what’s right for the
children in my setting. I think the course and the people on it will help me do this.
(Samira, Record of participation,15.9.15)
Samira’s comment succinctly recalls those enabling factors emerging from my earlier exploratory study: the need for support for early years educators in making a difference, being valued and making connections. A further activity in the first session assisted with helping participants taking the next step in deciding how they might begin to make this difference.
Identifying a concern
Step 2 of the TLDW process is to begin to identify a focus of practice for development. I was keen to maximise both participants’ strength of feeling and the degree to which discussions had illuminated shared concerns. I gave participants opportunity to spend time individually reflecting about a concern they might have in their work. I asked them ‘what bothers you?’ I reassured them this was a starting point for finding a focus for development and that their concerns might shift and be honed over time as they refined their ideas in the light of consultation with their colleagues and with each other.
I considered personal agenda setting would be a powerful driver in helping the participants enact an extended sense of professionality, releasing intense enthusiasm, sustain their interest and so mobilise their moral purpose (Frost, 2012). Moral purpose here refers to the way Fullan used the term in the early 1990s to refer to teaching as a moral enterprise. Similarly, Moyles’ (2001) and Simpson’s (2010) work demonstrate the strong social mission at the heart of early years professional identity and motivation, regardless of formal position. Arguably, moral purpose is unleashed within people when they are given leadership opportunities to pursue issues related to their personal passions and concerns. What is distinct though was that I was not ‘giving’ them the opportunity, I was facilitating the unleashing of their
potential to develop their leadership capacity as part of their developing professionality.
The group briefly shared their concerns whilst I made the following representation.
(Participants’ concerns, session 1 on 15.9.15) Having the resources to hand to quickly produce this representation meant participants were able to connect with new colleagues with a similar interest. This provided the starting point for further reflection to hone ideas for a workable focus but also helped create working relationships with others who were to become critical friends throughout the programme and beyond.
This was a key moment to enable them to make connections with each other. The tool recreated below was devised to help participants make links with each other and to capture their thinking in the moment.
(Tool from session 1 on 15.9.15) Task 1: Learning from each other
Talk with your colleagues about what you • would like to improve ... • want to develop a new way of doing... • would like to create strategies for ... • would like to change about the way we ... • want to help us to find a new way to deal with • why this is important
Make some notes: Who did I link with? Could I visit their setting?
How was this grouping helpful?
What can we learn from each other?
What has this helped me consider?
What appeared to be important in the ensuing discussions was the element of mutuality. Belonging to such a group as this is vital for the cultivation of ‘virtuous friendship,’ to use an Aristotelian term (Nixon, 2006). Such discursive activities seemed to provide support in the sense that participants recognised common concerns and empathised with each other.
At this session I discovered how much I valued other members opinions and ideas and these would help us to move my own ideas about a development project forward.
(Selina, Portfolio reflection, September 2015) I intended for the sessions to develop as a forum for participants, providing protected time and space for them to reflect, to articulate their ideas and benefit from of reciprocal challenge. Nevertheless, I was mindful of the necessity to be sensitive to the needs and experiences of the individual group members. Despite recognising their common purpose as early years educators, there was great diversity between participants’ roles and working conditions. I had to be aware of the perceived and actual difference in status, for example. One participant was a teaching assistant in a primary school – she had half-jokingly referred to herself as ‘the lowest of the low’ in a previous conversation. There were also 3 very experienced nursery school deputy headteachers in the group. I had not appreciated until the end of the first session that these deputy heads had previously offered support and consultation to others in the group. I was alert to the impact of these factors on participants’ willingness to speak out about their concerns and worries or reticence to perhaps divulge or discuss dilemmas in their workplaces.
Nevertheless, the first session appeared to have been successful. Karis noted her impressions of the tone of the evening.
A very positive session with great focus and fun. Some trepidation about writing and managing workload balanced by the support that will be offered by the group and the excitement of a new project.
Providing an early opportunity for participants to explore identity and make values explicit appeared to be a useful strategy. For Sally there is a sense of validation and recognition that passionate care is going to be a key driver to effect change.
Thinking about my role and identity has helped me find a starting point. By reflecting on my present concerns I think I’m now able to begin to think about how to take the project forward.
(Sally, Record of participation, 15.9.15) This first session had a profound impact on my thinking. It reminded me of the challenge from Rinaldi (2006:123) to reconsider the image of the child as a learner who is ‘strong, powerful and rich in potential.’ This conceptualisation reinforced my conviction that adults who work with young children ought to be recast and valued as similarly capable and resourceful adult learners. It also reminded me that I was not there to liberate participants but instead occupied a privileged position to support their development.
Considering leadership in the early years
The first session appeared to have been successful in enabling participants to have greater clarity about their moral purpose. However, I could not presume that this alone would lead to participants setting a process of change into action. The second session was planned with the following words in mind.
Moral purpose cannot just be stated. It must be accompanied by strategies for realising it - and those strategies are the leadership actions that energise people to pursue a goal.
(Fullan, 2001) Supporting participants’ assertiveness and capacity to act on this i.e. the agential aspect to their professionality was of concern for me in the second session. There was much to introduce in this session. I wanted participants to consider their understanding of ‘leadership’ and what leadership actions they might employ to realise changes in practice. I was also keen to provide them with a tool that would help them envisage the various elements the project might involve.
This session began with a number of activities which were intended to help participants consider the notion of leadership and how this might relate to their work. My understanding of the enactment of leadership as a feature of extended professionality reflects Yukl’s (2010) definition. It is about having intentional influence over others, to guide structure and facilitate activities and relationships. My expectation was that this conceptualisation of leadership might be unexpected or less well understood by participants than other models.
I might have merely explained my view of leadership to the participants. However, such a transmission approach was not in-keeping with my understanding of how to introduce new concepts or facilitate a discussion to adult learners. I wanted to