The first article in this series looked at how a strong ethos provides the framework for supporting all children, including those whose actions make life difficult for themselves and others. But while ethos is fundamental, it can't always help in the moment when a child's emotions ignite and staff find themselves struggling to respond. Nor can ethos alone sustain practitioners who are coping with distressing circumstances over a lengthy period. For that, flexibility and a constant eye on staff needs are required.
Staff are the 'most valuable resource'
'Practitioners everywhere will struggle to support children if they do not feel supported themselves,' says child psychologist Jennie Lindon. 'It's vital for any practitioner to be able to say what they are really feeling in a quiet and professional way to at least one colleague, and to know that they will not be judged.'
Early years consultant Anni McTavish agrees. 'The greatest difficulty facing a child who proves to be challenging over a long period is that staff can begin to feel that they hate her because they think they have failed. It's very difficult to keep a sense of goodwill if nothing seems to work.'
So, while a setting's principles will guide the approach to children's capabilities and needs, they must also be concerned with the skills and needs of staff - and that is a delicate balance to maintain. If staff are to value children, they must be valued themselves: involved in policy-making and problem-solving, encouraged to offer their personal skills, respected for their own expertise and vulnerabilities. Or, as inclusion expert Mary Dickins puts it, 'Leadership and management are very important for supporting children, but success is about the team, and therefore about each member of the team.'
But how can the well-being of all be maintained when a child is unable to stay within the boundaries that a setting has established to further its principles? How can the abilities and needs of all children and staff be addressed when the actions of one child repeatedly upset the 'delicate balance'?
Well, after lots of reading and many conversations, it's clear that there are no simple answers! Even so, many settings construct and nurture their team so that members of staff trust their leaders, their peers and the children, and feel able to solve problems together. No solution can work for all, but constructive lessons have been learned by strong teams as they worked through difficult circumstances. Accordingly, the personal accounts here reveal how two settings maintained the balance of respect for children and adults in their response to the extreme needs of one child.
While neither experience will fit any other circumstance precisely, each one illustrates how a team addressed problems which other settings might recognise, and show that - with reflective practice supported by strong foundations - a path can be laid to include a confusing and vulnerable child (as well as all others) while respecting staff confidence and skill.
Both interviewees stressed the importance of their relationship with parents, which is the subject of the next article and so has not been included here. Both settings have been judged outstanding by Ofsted. Names have been changed to protect the identities of children and families.
Helping Alex communicate and cope with change
Proprietor, private day nursery
My most valuable resource is the staff team: their knowledge, qualifications and experience. All our staff have a Level 3 qualification or above, and we exceed statutory adult:child ratios (we have 34 staff when we could operate legally with just 17).
All four managers are qualified, and they work among the staff team so that there is always someone to assist if a child needs to withdraw with her key person or be taken by another adult. Staff are also able step out for a little while if needs be.
Concerns about Alex began in the baby room, when staff observed that he would explore things with his head instead of his mouth and hands, and felt the relationship with his key person was not developing effectively. Later, when he moved into the toddler room, Alex started having violent temper tantrums. These would go on so long, whatever attempts were made to soothe or distract him, that we simply had to make sure he and others were safe until he had worked through it.
Around this time Alex was diagnosed with glue ear, but new behaviours emerged despite ongoing treatment. For instance, Alex would lie on the floor and thrash during transitions, even when a pictorial or visual warning had been given and, again, we would just make sure he and others were safe and give him the time to calm down. This was possible because additional staff were available to step in and support all the other children, sometimes by taking them off to do something else, while explaining that Alex just needed a bit of time and space.
Alex often found it difficult to sit with the rest of the children, and we would let him do his own thing supported by his key person (mainly one-to-one and unfunded), unless we really needed or wanted him to be part of the group. In that case, he had a box of special things to play with while sitting with us and supported by his key person.
At age three, Alex was assessed by a paediatrician and was assigned a specialist teacher funded by the local authority. He was soon statemented and given 7.5 hours per week of funded one-to-one support across the three days he attended the setting. The specialist teacher supported the staff as well as Alex, enabling them to introduce a picture exchange communication system (PECS), aimed at helping him to express his needs more clearly, and a pictorial time-line showing Alex that, for example, FIRST he would put on his shoes and NEXT he would go into the garden.
Even small transitions were difficult for Alex, so we knew we had to plan carefully for his move to the pre-school room at age four. All children who are due to move visit a new room four times with their current key person and then four times with their new key person, before actually moving. We thought that even this gentle introduction would be too much for Alex so, instead, the new key person came to see him. At the time he loved letters, so we bought a set of glittery letters which the key person brought along, and this helped to build his pleasure at seeing her. On the day of Alex's move, the key person put these letters on the stairs so he could follow them up - and he managed the transition well. Contact with the previous key person was continued, and this support was important for the new key person as well as for Alex.
Alex was included at all times. He often kicked and hit out, though never at other children, and usually only when adults requested something of him.
Our additional staffing does have a knock-on effect on our fees, but the biggest impact is on our profits. If I were an accountant seeing the nursery only as a business with profit as the bottom line, I simply wouldn't do it this way. But while the business must, of course, make a profit, it must also succeed as what I set it up to be: a high-quality nursery. Our approach means that, despite being the most expensive nursery in the area, we rarely advertise and our occupancy level remains at 97 per cent a year in advance. We retain staff because they feel valued and supported and are able to perform in their role, making the setting easier to run. At the end of the day I feel that all needs are satisfied.
Helping Toby towards a calmer solution to anxiety
Deputy head, nursery school and children's centre
Our nursery's behaviour policy began as a staff discussion around our beliefs about children. It is more about managing situations than 'behaviour', and enables children to have a voice and to negotiate. Consistency is also vital. We challenge the behaviour, not the child, in such as way as to invite discussion about it.
Toby came to us at a difficult time in his life. Soon after he arrived, his mother, who suffers from clinical depression, was temporarily hospitalised and, at just two and a half, Toby went to stay with an unfamiliar relative. In addition, he seemed to have some social-communication difficulties.
Toby's lack of control emerged suddenly on a day out of term-time, when the only staff in the centre were those providing wraparound care. On that day, Toby bit several children, and staff called me repeatedly in some distress. Despite this, they calmed the children and spoke to unhappy parents - and kept Toby in the centre by shifting practitioners around so a familiar adult could be with him.
At the end of the session, staff talked to Toby's relative and it became clear that being away from home was taking its toll on him. The relative was also struggling to get him to nursery as she had young children of her own and lived quite a distance away. As a result, we extended Toby's two hours per day to full time. He was rushed into the place without the usual settling-in period, but we felt it was our responsibility to offer him some consistency and security rather than to exclude him.
We wanted a structured approach for Toby. Children generally spend their time playing in groups with adults just available for support, but for Toby we designated a team of three practitioners who took turns to support him individually. That way, he got lots of attention, the other children felt safer and the practitioners did not become over-tired.
Toby's recourse to biting was always unpredictable but, over time, staff concluded that it was some kind of coping strategy. His anxiety levels sometimes rose during open-ended play and this appeared to trigger biting. As soon as he had bitten, his whole body would relax, as if this was the only way he could be certain what would happen next.
We got great support from the local development team and the educational psychologist, whose interaction with staff was important because they felt very emotional and worried that they weren't properly protecting the other children. They were also feeling wobbly about explaining what we were putting in place for Toby to the parents whose children had been bitten.
The psychologist gave staff the opportunity to talk about how they were feeling and how that impacted on their work. They expressed sadness, anger and also guilt for feeling angry. Many said they felt relieved when someone else was with Toby, although they were also clear that they had a responsibility to him. Not once did anyone say that he shouldn't be at the centre - he was a little boy from a family that was struggling.
Six months on, and Toby still has difficulties, so the one-to-one support remains in place. But we have been able to settle him and can now plan for him to learn. Two key adaptations have been especially helpful.
First, Toby comes to nursery half an hour later than the other children, so his key person can greet the other key children first, and then be available to greet Toby. Second, a visual timetable removed the unpredictability of free-flow, enabling Toby's one-to-one adults to show him how to make choices and interact with others.
At first, the adult would choose an activity from the timetable and play with Toby there. Now that he is more familiar with the routine he chooses an activity from a number suggested by the adult, who then remains at a little distance so that he interacts with the adult who is supporting all the children.
Toby's development is now being assessed by the child development team. We accept that things go backwards as well as forwards with how he copes, and are determined to stay relaxed.
Pat Gordon-Smith is a writer and editor for the early years. See her children's rights blog at http://patsky.blogspot.com.
