Shaking off the cloak of ‘certainty’ and embracing ethical dilemmas in baby rooms research

For a decade, we (the authors) have been actively engaged in funded research about Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) for babies and toddlers. In all cases, our work was approved by a Research Ethics Committee (REC). This scrutiny process provides an important mechanism for encouraging researchers to consider carefully the impact of their intentions and for protecting research participants from harm. But it can be simplistic in its requirements, its application and its conceptualisations of research relationships, procedures and outcomes. This article is not concerned with the shortcomings of RECs; instead, we consider some of the situated and relational ethical considerations that we encountered and which, in our experience, rarely surface in applications for ethical approval. We acknowledge that the very act of researching can do harm or lead to unintended consequences. Through our work, we became aware that research can produce results that may be unpalatable to the researchers and / or the participants. We have used Tronto’s (2013) five elements of an Ethic of Care to frame our post hoc reflections about researching the principles and practice of early childhood education and care (ECEC) for babies from birth to two in England. We employ the term, ‘palimpsest’ to convey our understanding of the ways in which multiple scripts, including research narratives, are layered upon those working with babies and young children. For example, the imposition of a national curriculum ‘script’ has the potential to usurp pre-existing professional beliefs, knowledge, understanding, identity and autonomy

Seeking Froebel's mother songs in daycare for babies

In 2013, we undertook a small exploratory study that involved baby room practitioners who work in full daycare settings in southeast England caring for babies from 3 weeks to around 18 months of age. We had received funding from The Froebel Trust to examine whether Froebel’s principles for early childhood education and care and the particular emphasis he placed on singing with babies and young children resonated with contemporary practices in settings that did not express any affiliation to Froebelian ideas. We adopted an interpretative approach, used predominantly narrative methods for data collection (including practitioners’ reflections on filmed observations of their practice) and applied thematic methods for qualitative data analysis. Our enquiry was framed and guided by findings from our previous research into the processes and practice of baby rooms (Goouch and Powell 2013) and a rapid review of literature about the benefits of singing to/with babies and Froebel’s writings on the subject. Our initial conceptual framework was underpinned by four propositions, which guided our research questions and design for the study. Although this pilot left us with many questions requiring further exploration, we were reasonably confident that our four propositions had been affirmed by our enquiries. Namely, that singing can facilitate intimacy; supports language development; can be a means to improve relationships with families; and enhances the wellbeing of practitioners during their working day. But we also discovered that singing is not overtly promoted in policy nor are its multiple facets and benefits necessarily recognised in practice. Consequently, although the practitioners involved frequently demonstrated that they broadly concurred with Froebel’s ideas about the value of singing, they did so only when it was drawn to their attention. Also they were largely unaware of Froebel’s principles and any resonance was coincidental. But they were fascinated by the enquiry, keen to learn about research on singing and Froebel’s beliefs, enthusiastic in their engagement in the project and replete with suggestions about how they could explore singing as a tool for connecting with babies’ parents and home lives

Babies and toddlers outdoors: a narrative review of the literature on provision for under twos in ECEC settings

This paper reports the findings of a narrative review of international research literature about babies’ and toddlers’ engagement with the outdoor environment whilst attending ECEC (Early Childhood Education and Care) settings. Based on the in-depth review of 21 papers, it identifies four dominant themes in the literature: the outdoors as a space to be physically active, the outdoors as a risky space, the challenge of creating an appropriate outdoor environment and the significance of the practitioner outdoors. The article argues that there is a need to re-conceive the ways in which the youngest children engage with the outdoors and to move beyond possible narratives of exclusion