Onions, Layers & Early Childhood Education Programmes?

A paper written by Massey Child Care Centre and their research associates about their Centres of Innovation (COI) project.

Teacher researchers
Raewyne Bary, Olivia Waugh, Libby Martin, Paulette Moana, Caryn Deans, Monika Charlton, and Heather Hullett.

Research associates
Barbara Jordan and Cushla Scrivens.

Centre Director
Faith Martin.

Introduction
Shrek and Donkey are on their way to rescue the Princess Fiona. Donkey is confused as to why Shrek doesn't just use his ogre strength to reclaim his swamp. Why go to the trouble of rescuing a Princess at all? Shrek tells Donkey that there's much more to ogres than people think. Donkey is puzzled and asks for an example. After some thought Shrek holds out the onion in his hand and tells Donkey that Ogres are like onions. Donkey sniffs the onion and asks if they stink, and make you cry? "No," says Shrek. Donkey thinks again and wants to know if it is because like onions, when left in the sun, Ogres get smelly, brown and furry. Exasperated, Shrek tells Donkey that it is all about layers - onions have layers and Ogres have layers, they both have layers! Feeling that Donkey just didn't understand, Shrek sighs and walks off.

You may well wonder why anyone would start an article about the early childhood COI Programme with a vignette from the movie Shrek. In this conversation between Donkey and Shrek (the ogre) about onions Shrek tries to make it clear to Donkey just how complex being an ogre is. As we have researched and analysed our practices and programmes as part of the COI we quickly became aware that they too are like onions, (not smelly, brown and furry!) but made up of many layers.

In this article I will describe the 'layers' that underlie the innovation that is being researched in the COI project carried out by the teachers at Massey Child Care Centre Hoiho section and their associate researchers, finishing with a brief discussion about the impact that the research has had on the teachers and their practices.

The onion
Massey Child Care Centre Hoiho section was selected to be a part of the COI programme in 2005. The aim of the COI research initiative is for selected centres to undertake action research, with the help of experienced research associates, to investigate the effects the centre's innovative approaches have on both learning and teaching. The COI programme is funded by the Ministry of Education and each round lasts for three years.

The focus for Massey Child Care Centres action research is:

• In what ways does educational leadership, within a community of practice, impact on infants' and toddlers' dispositions to enquire?

The methodology being used is action research using Attachment Based Learning (ABL) as the theoretical approach, which informs and guides the methodology. The method of data generation is by case study. We are documenting what is happening for a selection of children alongside what is happening for the teachers. The seven Hoiho teachers with the support and guidance of two experienced research associates are carrying out the research. In 2005 and 2006 we generated and analysed our data. In 2007, we were contracted to write up the final report, so this is still work in progress.

Layer one: Educational leadership
As part of the COI research we have had the opportunity to explore and develop deeper understandings about educational leadership and how this works for us in the Hoiho section. As we analysed our leadership we discovered the complexities and 'layers' that make up leadership in the Hoiho section. We now describe our leadership as being "distributed" (Ebbeck & Waniganayake, 2003; Hard, 2004; Scrivens, 2003; Thornton, 2005).

All people within our environment are responsible and accountable for all areas of the section, programme, environment, relationships and research. It is about the team working together to find the best path - no one way is the right way; there are many different ways to achieve goals ideas and visions. We recognise that all people in our environment have expertise, skills and their own special talents. It is the responsibility of each team member to take on the responsibilities to share, listen, support, and try, thus ensuring the best possible outcomes for everyone in our environment. Distributed leadership is not about one person delegating roles and responsibilities; it is about each team member stepping up to take on these roles, to recognise that we have a collective responsibility and that sharing ideas in this environment is expected. If there are issues or problems then it is everyone's role to think, suggest, try, and be prepared to face challenges. Having teachers in our environment who are prepared to take risks and challenge ideas means that opportunities for new ideas and new ways of being can flourish. This type of leadership requires a serious amount of cooperation and trust. Operating within our distributed leadership model requires the manager and assistant manager to provide a level of leadership that accepts, adapts and welcomes change. A leadership that is active in guiding others through the process of continual change, offering intellectual stimulation and individualised support (West Chester University of Pennsylvania).

Layer two: Community of practice
As we analysed our leadership we developed a stronger understanding about the organisational culture that is in place which supports this. The organisational culture that has developed at Massey Child Care Centre over the last few years is one of a Community of Practice (Wenger, 1998; Edwards 2005). This is an approach that supports emergent leadership, encourages all members of the community to share and participate. It expects and even demands critical reflection on practice, questioning and challenging of processes and practices, ongoing educational research and in-depth regular professional dialogue. The community of practice too is about never standing still; it promotes a collective responsibility for all members of the community.

Layer three: Attachment Based Learning (ABL)
Another layer of our onion is the ABL programme. Participating in the COI research has meant that we have analysed and further developed our ABL programme. The ABL programme is based on the development of trusting relationships between the child, teacher and family/whānau. Its aim is to foster responsive, reciprocal relationships in order to establish secure attachments for the infants and toddlers that will provide a secure base for children's learning and development, and create a positive sense of self.

We had been operating the ABL system for eight years and once underway with the research some changes have been made on how we operate, although these have not been radical changes. The research has encouraged the teachers to revisit attachment theory, particularly in relation to infants and toddlers in group care. This research confirmed our belief in the importance of consistent, secure relationships in the children's lives and clearly identified that ongoing strong, caring relationships can provide the context for all aspects of healthy growth, learning and development (Edwards & Raikes, 2002; Rolfe, 2004; Gonzalez-Mena & Eyer, 2004).

More layers
As we researched and looked deeply into our practice, we discovered that the ABL programme is multi faceted and combines several systems which ensure continuity and consistency for the children and families/whānau. These include:

• The key teacher system: where children and families/whānau are allocated to specific teachers. This system supports the development of critical attachment relationships, and the development of a child's positive sense of self.
• The buddy teacher system: where two teachers work closely together with their groups to support children, families and whānau. Not unlike Shrek's and Donkey's relationship, the teachers are discovering not only about themselves but about others and developing better strategies for working together for the benefit of all.
• Self-sustaining teams: The team manages the day-to-day operations of the programme. Rosters, responsibilities, meal breaks and non-contact times are flexible; negotiated and coordinated by the team for effective implementation. The centre doesn't run an area-specific roster such as an inside/outside roster, but has teacher responsibilities. These responsibilities are also negotiated between each other on a daily basis around the needs of the children and the programme.

Layer four: Enquiry
Part of this research was focused on enquiry for infants and toddlers. One of our associate researchers challenged the teachers with the question "so what does enquiry for infants and toddlers look like?" In order to answer this question the teachers have worked hard to develop shared understandings about infant and toddler enquiry, creating their own framework for describing enquiry for infants and toddlers based on current research. To create the framework for enquiry the teachers all undertook their own personal research of current literature around enquiry and dispositions for learning (Carr, 2001; Carr & Claxton, 2002; Katz, 1995; Claxton & Carr, 2004). We spent several meetings sharing, brainstorming, arguing and discussing infants and toddlers and what 'makes them tick', focusing on learning, development, cultural heritage and individuality. This research and discussion led to the teachers in the Hoiho section identifying enquiry for infants and toddlers as being ready, willing and able to:

• think
• persist
• contribute
• investigate
• be responsible for their own learning.

Once these points were listed the teachers used video footage to further develop their framework by analysing the children's recorded experiences. The teachers then developed four 'markers' or dispositions for enquiry. They are: security, resourcefulness, resilience and reciprocity. Once the teachers had identified these markers they went on to develop what they call 'signposts' or behaviours, which indicate to them a child's security, resourcefulness, resilience and reciprocity. At present this framework is still under construction but it has already had a big impact on the teachers' practice. Teachers are now more able to identify an infant or toddler's interest and to support, encourage and guide the children in their learning journey at a much deeper level.

Conclusion
So after peeling all these layers away, what have the outcomes been for the teachers and the children, families/whānau? The teachers have been able to re-theorise their practice, define and refine their philosophy. They have developed a distributed leadership framework, which in turn has supported the strength of the teaching team and the professional and personal growth of individual teachers. The use of an action research methodology has supported the teachers' research capabilities and refined their reflection on practice, which has in turn caused a flow-on effect into the depth of programme planning and curriculum development. They have discovered that things don't just happen: a harmonising of the multiple 'layers' is necessary; and that attachment and relationships are at the core of what we do. The research has highlighted to us the complexities of a successful infant and toddler programme and has shown clear links between the infants' and toddlers' positive sense of self, their relationships with people, places, and things, and the strength of their enquiry.

So to get to the heart of any programme we must be prepared to peel back those layers to discover step-by-step what, why, and how we do what we do. But, unlike Shrek, we are not able to sigh and walk off. Because we have started down the path of critical reflection on practice, research and ongoing programme development, the journey is like a never-ending story!

References
Carr, M. (2001). Assessment in early childhood settings: Learning stories. London: Paul Chapman Publishing.

Carr, M. & Claxton, G. (2002). Tracking development of learning dispositions. Assessment in Education, 9 (1) 10-36.

Claxton, G. & Carr, M. (2004). A framework for teaching and learning: the dynamics of disposition. Early Years, 24 (1) 87-97.

Ebbeck, M., & Waniganayake, M. (2003). Early childhood professionals: Leading today and tomorrow. Sydney: MacLennan & Petty.

Edwards, A. (2005). Lets get beyond community and practice: The many meanings of learning by participating. The Curriculum Journal. 16 (1), 49-65.

Edwards, C,P., & Raikes, H. (2002). Extending the dance: Relationship-based approaches to infant/toddler care and education. Young Children, 57 (4), 10-17.

Gonzalez-Mena, J. & Eyer, D.W. (2004). Infants Toddlers and Caregivers: A Curriculum of Respectful, Responsive Care and Education, 6th Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Hard, L. (2004). How is leadership understood in early childhood education and care? Journal of Australian research in early childhood education, 1 (11), 123-131.

Katz, L.G. (1995). Dispositions in early childhood education. L.G. Katz (Ed.), Talks with teachers of young children: A collection. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. ED 3380 232.

Raikes, H. (1996). A secure base for babies: Applying attachment concepts to the infant care setting. Young Children, 51 (5), 59-67

Rolfe, S. (2004). Rethinking attachment for early childhood practice: Promoting security, autonomy and resilience in young children. Australia: Allen & Unwin.

Scrivens, C. (2003). Educational Leadership: What might we learn from research in schools? Early Education, 31, 29-35.

Thornton, K. (2005). Leaderful centres: Collaborative leadership in the Centres of Innovation programme. Early Education 38, 22-27.

Watson, S. (2001). Attachment Theory revisited. The First Years, Nga Tau Tuatahi. New Zealand Journal of Infant and Toddler Education, 3, (1), 22-26.

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

West Chester University of Pennsylvania: Distributed leadership. www.wcupa.edu/_information/afa/VPAdminFiscal/DistLead.htm
Retrieved 03.03.06

Steig, W, & Elliott, T. 2000: Shrek: The greatest fairytale never told. Dreamworks.

© Crown copyright. This research was funded by the Ministry of Education. The views expressed in this article do not represent the views of the Crown.