I have been immensely privileged, over the years, to have known a large number of truly wonderful teachers: first as a pupil and student; then, in the course of my career, as a colleague in the multi-agency child protection arena; and again, on a personal level, as some valued friends. Increasingly, though, I am struck by the huge pressures that teachers are under, and the incredible dedication and commitment they bring to their role. It seems that austerity measures, inspection regimes, the challenges of many children’s lives, and the complexities of our 21st century culture all contribute to increasing stresses for those who so faithfully strive to educate our children.
To teach, to nurture, care and protect
The primary role of a teacher is to teach: to educate, impart knowledge and facilitate learning. It is what teachers are trained to do, and what they do best. And yet, the teachers who tend to stand out are those who see their role as something more than just to teach, but to nurture, care and protect those in their charge. This is the theme picked up in the first paper in our latest issue of Child Abuse Review. In a qualitative study based in 16 primary schools in Ireland, Margaret Nohilly explores the care practices and systems that support child protection work in the schools. One of the most consistent findings from their interviews was a consensus ‘that the ethos of a school, by its very nature, was one of caring and that attending to the pupils’ needs was the priority’. This emphasis on nurture, care and protection was most prominent in those schools designated as disadvantaged and a special school, and it included providing meals, addressing other care needs, running before and after school activities, and programmes to support parents.
This ethos of care seemed to permeate all areas of school life and was felt to contribute in a significant way to pupil safety and protection. And yet, these elements of nurture, care and protection appeared to fall outside the statutory interagency framework of child protection to the extent that it was perceived that the Child and Family Agency was not aware of the care practices established at the school level.
This carries some important implications for the value and validity of such care, and raises some important questions for schools:
- To what extent should this aspect of the teaching role be recognised? If this forms a major part of a teacher’s role, and yet is neither remunerated nor allocated time, and is not recognised in training, supervision or inspection, how sustainable is it?
- Should such work be subject to inspection as are other aspects of the teaching and management of schools? If it were, what implications would that have for the quality or spontaneity of the care provided? Would it enhance or stifle these elements of a school’s ethos?
- Is the provision of care and nurture within a school setting always the most appropriate response to a child in need? Does such an approach merely provide a sticking plaster, patching over the problems and not addressing the root causes? Does it counteract the duty of the teachers to report child abuse and neglect? Does it undermine the interagency approach to child protection?
These are challenging questions which warrant some reflection. Nohilly, in her paper, suggests that ‘student support teams’ and having allocated social workers in each school may be helpful approaches to improving the quality of care and interagency working. Others may have developed other initiatives to support the care and protection of children in schools.
Given that, outside the home, children spend a majority of their time in school, it is clear that professionals in the school environment are in a unique position to support children and respond to particular care needs. Whatever systems are developed, these underlying cultures of care and support should be encouraged and not stifled, and our teachers supported in the amazing job they do, not just to teach, but to nurture, care and protect.
You can download and read my editorial for free here. Margaret Nohilly’s paper and the other papers in this issue are freely available to members of the Association of Child Protection Professionals, and those whose institutions have a Wiley licence.
Child Abuse Review, Issue 28:4
Table of Contents
Editorial: Peter Sidebotham. Broader Concepts of Safeguarding: To Teach, Nurture, Care and Protect
Margaret Nohilly. Cultures of Care in Primary Schools in Ireland that Support Child Protection Work