RQ3 What are the perspectives and experiences of staff regarding the nurture group curriculum and how it may relate to the mainstream

curriculum?

The staff in all nurture groups appeared aware of the need to consult

stakeholders before setting up the group as identified by Cooper and Tiknaz; 2005 but there appears to have been no communication with the pupils in the initial stages of setting up the group as the pupils had little idea of the reason why they were selected to attend. In all three schools, nurture group staff attended initial meetings with parents that contrasts with the approach in research by Taylor and Gulliford (2011) where the class teacher, head

teacher or special educational needs co-ordinator (SENCo) attended the initial meetings. Both mainstream and nurture group staff felt this initial meeting with parents was very important in starting to build positive relationships with some parents who had proved difficult to communicate with in the past. Two barriers identified during initial discussions with mainstream staff showed that class teachers were worried that pupils would miss key lessons and secondly the selection of pupils as discussed in research by Shaver and McClatchey (2013). As a result, all three nurture groups run in the afternoons to allow pupils to access mainstream literacy and numeracy lessons each day.

Nurture group staff felt the nurture group was an inclusive environment as it gave pupils more opportunities to access the curriculum than mainstream provision provided and how it was based on building pupil self-esteem, raising pupil confidence, improved social interaction and developing social skills. These findings are consistent with research by Kourmoulaki (2013). The

importance of a differentiated curriculum to support the individual interests and identified social and emotional needs of all pupils was identified by nurture group staff who were also aware that the curriculum provided in the nurture group needed to support National Curriculum statutory requirements. The supports the first principle of nurture groups based on the premise that children’s learning needs to be understood developmentally (Nurture Group Network, 2017a). Clarity and continuity of planning was achieved through regular meetings with mainstream colleagues.

It was clear from discussions with nurture group staff that they were aware of the stages of development of individual children and emphasised the

importance of planning relevant curriculum activities to encourage some pupils to develop their play skills towards co-operative play that is appropriate for a child aged four years to beyond six years (Parten, 1932). Nurture group staff commented that they differentiated types of play dependent on the role they planned to take. In many of the play based activities the nurture group staff had minimal or no control (Wood and Cook, 2009) allowing pupils

complete freedom of choice, as their role was more of a facilitator focusing on observing and making comments (Boxall, 2002).

However, in planned play activities they encouraged relevant pupils who were operating at a level below their chronological age to move towards a higher level of play that matched their chronological age (Parten, 1932) in order to develop their social interaction. This could have prepared these children for reintegration into mainstream provision to support confident and successful

interaction with others in a group activity.

Nurture group staff felt it was important that the two adults could model appropriate behaviour and scaffold pedagogy through shared and co- operative activities that could promote inter-personal relationships between pupils. This support through appropriate modelling and scaffolding was identified at the planning stage. When planning the nurture group curriculum staff appeared fully aware of the relevance of scaffolding pupil learning so relevant activities were planned to incorporate this role. Scaffolding in the nurture group is defined as reciprocal scaffolding (Holton and Clark, 2006), where two or more pupils and / or adults work collaboratively allowing individuals to learn from more experienced peers or adults.

Successful transition to mainstream provision was of high priority to nurture group staff and each school had a clear transition plan that involved all relevant staff. This supports the sixth principle of nurture groups (Nurture Group Network, 2017a). Although longstanding mainstream staff were fully familiar with transitional arrangements one mainstream teacher new to the school was not aware of any school policy relating to transition from the nurture group, highlighting the need for regular staff training and updates.

Nurture Group staff felt they offered a high level of support to parents to help address both pupil and emotional needs of their parents through creating a welcoming environment and an ‘open door’ approach so they were available without appointment for parents to visit and discuss any problems they may

have as identified in research by Taylor and Gulliford (2011). Nurture group staff identified various areas of parental concern that included behaviour management at home, homework and their personal circumstances. Although nurture group staff accepted it was part of their role some commented they were not trained counsellors but did their best to listen to parents’ problems and direct them to the relevant professional help if they felt this was

necessary. However they found this part of their role particularly emotionally draining, especially at the end of a challenging day as found in other research by Kirkbride (2014).

Nurture group staff felt that their model of parental engagement through informal events such as shared curriculum activities and shared snack time held in the nurture room was effective in increasing parental involvement, especially for the few parents who had initial concerns about their child attending the group as discussed in research by Shaver and McClatchey (2013) and Kirkbride (2014). Mainstream staff generally welcomed the nurture group initiative and identified evidence of a range of positive outcomes

following nurture group intervention that included improved listening skills and improved social skills through pupils’ increased ability to share and take turns. In addition, following nurture group intervention there was evidence that pupils showed greater motivation with increased positive perceptions of themselves as learners supporting the research by Sanders (2007).

5.2.4 RQ4. How the observations identified any similarities and