![[PDF]](/pb-assets/Icons/adobe-pdf-icon-1498649896243.png){kind=icon}
Abstract
The aim of the study on which this paper is based was to explore in which situations and contexts Norwegian 1–3-year-olds experience subjective wellbeing in day care. The data in this study was collected through qualitative phenomenological observations of 18 children, and an inductive process of analysis was conducted. The results show that 1–3-year-olds express clear wellbeing and pleasure when devoting themselves to social interaction and play, and exploration alone or with other children and staff members. Staff members creating an intersubjective space dominated by high sensitivity and responsivity is also an important factor for toddlers’ wellbeing. Wellbeing is expressed in situations where the child is seen, understood and recognized as a subject with own intentions, needs and preferences, which may be understood as a relational way of participation in everyday life. This study may contribute to developing knowledge about the wellbeing of toddlers by listening to their voices, and enables a better understanding of the content of the wellbeing concept in an educational context for very young children.
Introduction
In the Western world there is a growing attention to people’s happiness and wellbeing, and much effort is put into measuring and monitoring a population’s wellbeing (Ben-Arieh, 2008; Huppert and So, 2013). This interest has grown out of a number of international studies showing that a high degree of wellbeing has many positive consequences, such as effective learning, productivity, good health and longer life expectancy (Huppert and So, 2013). In recent years interest in children’s wellbeing has also increased; if we know more about this we may be able to help children’s general development and learning and their experience of life quality (Mashford-Scott et al., 2012).
Children spend increasingly more time in institutions outside home. To ensure that the development towards more institutionalized childhoods is not only dominated by social-economic and equality-policy interests, we must also discuss what institution quality means for young children (Adamson, 2008; Johansson, 2010). This is important not only in a development and learning perspective, but also in terms of the children’s here-and-now lives, children as human beings (Qvortrup, 1994), and within the quality paradigm of meaning making (Dahlberg et al., 2007). In this perspective, wellbeing plays a decisive role because wellbeing as a subjective experience has a strong sense of the here and now, even if it also has a positive impact on children’s learning and development (Fattore et al., 2009).
In Norway, where the study on which this article is based was carried out, more than 80 per cent of all 1- and 2-year-olds attend a day care institution (Statistics Norway, 2013), often in separate groups for children aged from one to three. All Norwegian day care institutions are bound by the provisions in the Kindergarten Act (Ministry of Education and Research, 2005) and a general curriculum (Ministry of Education and Research, 2011). The educational work is based on a combination of play-oriented education and care, and the child’s right to participation (Bae, 2009). The day care staff must also strive to promote children’s wellbeing, but little is stated about what this means, other than wellbeing being mentioned in the context of such terms as enjoyment, playing, learning, caring, mastering and self-efficacy. This reflects the complexity and slightly diffuse meaning of the term in an educational context, an issue that several researchers have pointed out (Ben-Arieh, 2008; Mashford-Scott et al., 2012).
In this study, which was funded by the Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research, the intention was to develop more knowledge about what promotes and constrains children’s wellbeing and participation in day care (Bratterud et al., 2012). The research question in this article is as follows: In which situations and contexts do Norwegian 1–3-year-olds experience subjective wellbeing in day care? The article is based on qualitative observations of 18 children.
Research on children’s wellbeing
According to Mashford-Scott et al. (2012) there are many perspectives on what wellbeing actually is, and subsequently also on how to measure and support it. Wellbeing is an abstract, multi-dimensional, social and culturally construed phenomenon, and we discern two main directions when it comes to understanding and researching it. One understanding is oriented towards the child’s achievement or demonstration of particular skills, abilities and behaviour, and the second towards the child’s subjective experiences and perceptions of feeling socially, emotionally and intellectually recognized (Mashford-Scott et al., 2012). Up to now we have very little research-based knowledge on what promotes and impedes the perceptions the youngest children have of subjective wellbeing in day care institutions (Mashford-Scott et al., 2012).
Subjective wellbeing
The concept of subjective wellbeing refers to an internal, subjective perception and experience of being recognized by others, feeling appreciated and having a sense of happiness and satisfaction – feeling well also in relation to others (Koch, 2012; Mashford-Scott et al., 2012). The concept may be defined as “a high level of positive affect, a low level of negative affect, and a high degree of satisfaction with one’s life” (Deci and Ryan, 2008, in Mashford-Scott et al., 2012: 236). Happiness is often seen in relationship to subjective wellbeing, as this is a positive affect connected to general satisfaction with life, and Thoilliez (2011) and Koch (2012) both apply the term in approximately the same way as subjective wellbeing when undertaking research on the phenomenon with younger children. This understanding of wellbeing is also the underpinning of our study (Bratterud et al., 2012) and in this article.
What do we know that promotes children’s subjective wellbeing?
Ethnographic studies of everyday life in day care more generally show how children enjoy themselves and create meaning through participating in activities and playing with caring employees and peers, and that friendship also has great meaning for even the very youngest children (Emilson, 2008; Engdahl, 2012; Greve, 2009; Løkken, 2000; Monaco and Pontecorvo, 2010; Ødegaard, 2007). This has also been confirmed by interview studies with older children in day care (Kyrönlampi-Kylmänen and Määttä, 2011).
Based on the more specific studies we have on children and wellbeing, we know that good social relationships are fundamental for wellbeing, and that family, friends and teachers are very important in this regard (Fattore et al., 2009; Foley et al., 2012; Holder and Coleman, 2009; Thoilliez, 2011; Bratterud et al., 2012). Thoilliez (2011) has interviewed children aged 6–12 and concludes that “The voices of all the children who participated in this study have made it clear that the natural habitat of happiness is in human relationships. Thus, children experience their happiness with others and from others. To them happiness is an inter-subjective space” (p.348). This underlines the importance of good social relationships for children’s wellbeing and pleasure.
Fattore et al. (2009) have conducted several types of qualitative interviews and conversations with children aged 8–15, and they have used this to develop a model that shows how children’s wellbeing is fundamentally dependent on their relationships and emotions in connection with significant others, and in particular those relationships where they had experienced some or all of these three overarching and interconnected dimensions.
(1) Positive sense of self: Concerned with a feeling of being okay, experiences of positive recognition and feeling a sense of belonging. Positive recognition is obtained both through everyday acts of recognition and through more ritualized forms.
(2) Agency – Control in everyday life: Having agency, or the capacity to have some control and be able to exert influence on everyday occurrences. Most important in children’s understanding of agency was democratization of everyday life, which could be understood as a condition in which feeling of mastery, control and self-efficacy was experienced.
(3) Security and safety: Children described feeling safe and secure as important to wellbeing because this enabled them to engage fully in life – which underlines the close interconnection between agency and security. One aspect of this was the emotional security, which relates to a warm, satisfying, trusting relationship.
As mentioned above, the youngest children are almost absent in research on wellbeing in day care. Pinazza (2012) conducted a study in a Portuguese crèche and concluded that the wellbeing of small children depends on the educational environment. This environment is made dynamic by the professional’s sensitivity, stimulation and promotion of autonomy. In particular, the day care staff’s willingness to tune in, to make an intersubjective space with the children, is pointed out as important. The importance of warm and intimate relations between children and staff are also highlighted in a new Danish study of 1–3 year olds (Hansen, 2013). In this study intersubjectivity is pointed out as crucial for children’s wellbeing in the institution, and the concept of “love” is used to describe how the interaction should be compared with high-quality parenting (Gerber et al., 2007). Also a Finnish ongoing study has tentative findings on the importance of the relational, social nature of the child, multiple social relations and the educational community, and the sensitivity of the adult for the child’s wellbeing in the everyday life of a day care group (Hännikäinen and Rutanen, 2013).
Methodological considerations
In this study we wanted to obtain more knowledge about what characterized situations where the youngest children in day care experienced wellbeing. Traditionally, research on children’s wellbeing has been dominating by positivistic research where domains and measures are identified by adult researchers, and focusing on survival, negative life situations and preparation for adulthood (children as becomings) (Ben-Arieh, 2008; Fattore et al., 2007, 2009). The critique of this way of measuring children’s wellbeing is based on the argument that the domains and measures adults construct regarding children’s wellbeing do not necessarily apply to what children actually do and want, and that we do not know whether they are meaningful for children (Fattore et al., 2007). Wellbeing indicators frameworks have largely neglected children’s perspectives on wellbeing, and these paradigms have silenced children in research, situating them as objects rather than subjects (Fattore et al., 2009). Children play an active role in creating their own wellbeing by interacting with their environment (Ben-Arieh, 2008). If we aim at adequately capturing children’s wellbeing, children need to be involved in all stages of research, an approach that places the child in the centre and attempts to understand their perspectives and their standpoints (Fattore et al., 2007) Within wellbeing research, where children’s perspectives have been sought this has been among older children usually from the age of 8 (Mashford-Scott et al., 2012).
In this study we wanted to highlight the voice of the youngest (1–3-year-old) children in day care, and thus chose a qualitative phenomenological observation method that gave us insight into the everyday life of the children. Traditional methods applied in research emphasizing children’s voices, such as children taking pictures, making drawings or being interviewed (Christensen and James, 2000; Clark et al., 2005) was not suited for 1–3 year olds.
Warming (2005) claims that observation of children’s different bodily and emotional expressions, what they choose to engage in and not, may open up new understandings of children’s perspectives. She also states that her emotional involvement and reactions as an observer give her a deeper understanding of the child’s possible experience. How we as fellow humans may gain knowledge about the internal perceptions of others through observation is also a theme in Løkken (2011), who refers to Merleau-Ponty and his phenomenology of perception. By observing the other person and endeavouring to understand the other, we will be emotionally touched by the recognition of what is common to human beings. Through observation of the children’s bodily and emotional expressions and their activities and actions, we wanted the children themselves to help us develop our understanding of the wellbeing of young children, as other researchers have done through conversations with older children (Fattore et al., 2009; Foley et al., 2012; Thoilliez, 2011).
Qualitative observations
To increase our knowledge of small children’s subjective wellbeing, we used an observation method inspired by Infant Observation, developed at Tavistock Centre, London (Rustin, 2006). This is an observation method based on the British object relation theory tradition, and which over time has also acquired great relevance in other research outside the traditional mother–infant observation studies. In Norway, it has been further developed by Abrahamsen (2004) to observe the youngest children in day care. We found this method relevant for our study, because the Tavistock tradition may gain insight into the child’s well- or ill-being (Rustin, 2006).
Infant observation is a method for observing the interaction between a child and the caregiver in natural settings. It was developed in England in the 1940s as a method for psychoanalysts to gain more knowledge about the inner world of small children with no verbal language, and to develop the observer’s own sensibility (Rustin, 2006). It is based on the object relation theory, which considers the emotions that arise in the therapist/observer in relation to the patient/observed (countertransference) as a source for information, not as a problem. The observer aims at tuning in on the child’s inner state, “puts herself in the child’s shoes”, and being close to the child emotionally by empathic identification. Through the observer’s own experienced emotions during the observation she will gain knowledge about the child’s emotions in the situation (Abrahamsen, 2004; Rustin, 2006). This is in line with the concept of affect attunement: how we may share an experience of inner state with another human being (Stern, 1985).
Within this tradition the observer does not make notes during the observation period, but rather waits until immediately afterwards. She must be fully occupied with observing the child and stay emotionally sensitive and close. In this project the observer followed the selected child for 30 minutes in free play and 30 minutes of staff-led activities (such as circle time, meals and diaper changes). The focus was on the child and what (s)he did, who the child interacted with, how this interaction appeared and which emotions the child expressed in the situation – and which emotions occurred in the observer.
The first-named author of the article was responsible for the collection and analysis of observation data with assistance from three research assistants. The assistants were experienced preschool teachers taking a master’s degree studies programme in preschool pedagogy. If we want to use the observer’s feelings as a source for information about how the child is feeling, the observer must develop a conscious and analytical approach, and be reflexive to her own feelings in the situation (Abrahamsen, 2004). Therefore, the assistants were given training and the opportunity to test the observation method prior to commencing with the data collection, they received guidance along the way and the researcher’s analysis and interpretation of the children’s expressions were discussed with them afterwards.
Participants
In this project we have selected nine day care institutions in the county of Sør-Trøndelag, Norway (Bratterud et al., 2012). These day care institutions have been strategically selected to take into account variation between town and country, size of municipality and size of the day care institution, its ownership and organization. We observed 18 randomly selected children, two in each day care centre. Our sample consisted of 13 boys and five girls aged between 15 and 38 months when the study was conducted. This is the normal age range for a group of infants/toddlers in the spring at a Norwegian day care institution. Each of the children presented in table 1 was observed for 2 x 30 minutes.
|
Table 1. List of participants.
Analysis of the data material
The total amount of empirical data consisted of transcripts of 18 hours of intensive observation, each child for one hour. The observations were analysed through an inductive process with coding of the observations inspired by Strauss and Corbin (1998). The process of analysis started by sorting out the episodes where each child clearly expressed happiness, joy and satisfaction. By clear we interpret children displaying strong signs of pleasure and satisfaction, such as smiles and laughter, they are in full activity with other children or staff, with rapid movements and focused eyes. Bodily expressions, facial gestures, verbal and nonverbal expressions are found to be equally important and constitute a part of the total assessment of how the child experiences the situation (Løkken, 2011; Warming, 2005). This agrees with how subjective wellbeing is often called a holistic approach (Mashford-Scott et al., 2012).
We selected the observations where the observer was in no doubt that the child experienced the situation as positive. Observations of situations where we were uncertain as to whether the child was experiencing wellbeing have not been included here. Most of the one-hour observation was not characterized by expressions of happiness; they occurred in small glimpses or episodes throughout the observation. Some of the children had many of these episodes and some of them had very few during the observed hour.
By examining what characterized the situations where the children clearly expressed wellbeing and joy, we established one main category, Social relations, with three sub-categories: Positive child–adult relationships, Positive child–child relationships and what we choose to call Community, situations where groups of children and staff were having a great time together. Each of these categories was then analysed in relation to what appeared to lead to wellbeing and joy in these situations, such as how the child was approached through looks, voice and body movements from the others involved.
In the process of analysis the researcher also recognized episodes where the children did not express happiness and joy, as described in the first three sub-categories, but where the researcher herself was convinced that the child was in a state of wellbeing. These episodes were characterized by the child being alone, not in interaction with others in the same room, and their bodily movements were calm. The facial expressions were neutral, but the eyes and the body were clearly focusing on a specific object or task, and the child showed signs of deep concentration, not being disturbed by other activities nearby. These episodes made the ground for the second main category: Concentrated play and exploration alone.
The researcher’s subjective interpretation of the child’s wellbeing constitutes the basis for the analysis, and builds on the researcher’s own emotions in the situation and her experiences and “deeper layers of knowing that are rooted in the situated body of the researcher. (…) When aiming at academic knowledge in search for ways of understanding toddler interaction, I trust my perspective knowing and subjective interpretation” (Løkken, 2011: 164). In line with Løkken and Abrahamsen (2004), we claim that when the researcher recognizes these bodily expressions and actions as familiar, and as expressions of subjective wellbeing and satisfaction, we interpret the child to experience wellbeing in these observed episodes, even though they did not express joy or happiness.
Phenomenological descriptions of the various expressions of the children are both descriptions and interpretations of these expressions. This means there could be different interpretations and understandings of the same observations, but according to Van Manen (1997), the validity of a good phenomenological description will be found in how the reader will be able to recognize the experience or perception, and thus understand and agree with the interpretation because it is dealing with deeply human experiences and expressions.
Ethical considerations
The project was approved by the ethics board of the Norwegian Social Science Data Services. The day care centre staff and the children’s parents gave their written consent, and the study was conducted where ethical awareness was always addressed while observing small children who are unable to say no (Gulløv and Højlund, 2003). For example, the observer in some cases was very careful about approaching the child too closely if (s)he signalled in any way that the perceived situation with the unknown observer was unsettling.
Findings and discussion
We will now present the two main categories and discuss them in light of previous research. The observations are examples of the small episodes taken from the 18 hours of observations, and have been chosen as representative of each category.
Category 1: Social relations
Sub-category: Positive child–adult relationships
In situations with few children in attendance we observed that the staffs were able to see and immediately respond sensitively to each child. These episodes were characterized by close, responsive and warm interaction between staff and the children and the children showed clear expressions of subjective wellbeing. On the bathinette, where a child and a staff member would be alone together, or in the cloak room when getting dressed for going outside, we saw several such episodes. In free play, where the child was playing and exploring more freely, we saw episodes of this type:
Emma takes a colourful plastic tractor, which she pushes down the slide. A staff member is sitting on a low chair next to it watching. Emma laughs when the adult has to move her feet to let the tractor pass. This is repeated several times when Emma pushes toys down the slide. Emma says the name of the toy first; big horse, big boat, bus, ball before pushing them down the slide, and the adult repeats the words and lifts her feet when the toys reach her. Emma laughs loudly each time, and quickly finds a new toy.
In this situation Emma appears to be confident and satisfied. It may appear that she wants to explore what happens when the tractor is pushed down the slide, but when the staff member lifts her feet the activity gains a new dimension, characterized by interaction, humour and play. The staff member shows interest in and confirms Emma’s activity by responding bodily and verbally. This observation indicates how the staff member sees and understands Emma as an actor and gives her the opportunity to explore the physical surroundings and the social relation in her own way. This gives Emma influence over the situation; she participates in designing the activity. When Emma’s initiative is interpreted and understood as an invitation to take part in a playful and exploring interplay, an intersubjective space is established between the child and the staff member.
Sub-category: Community
A characteristic of day care institutions is that the children must interact with other children and staff members in small or large groups for much of the day. Therefore, the quality of group activities will greatly impact the children’s wellbeing. In this study we observed various group activities with varying quality. What characterized the group activities where the children appeared to enjoy taking part was that the staff members managed to create a sense of community. The staff members were aware of each child in the group, read the many signals and responded in a sensitive and caring manner, while also managing to include other children in what was happening. The following circle time is a good example of this:
It is circle time and all the children and two staff members are sitting in a circle on the floor. Dag radiates happily and utters an eeek! (exclamation of joy) when one of the staff members says that now they are going to sing. The staff member asks whether there is a song the children would like to sing. Dag rises quickly, tramping his feet heavily, his body heaves up and down as if in slow motion, he looks straight at the staff member and says “Finefan, finefan”. The employee looks at Dag, asking inquiringly: “Do you mean ‘An elephant came marching?’” Dag nods and is moving before the song starts. All the children get up on the floor, they sing and move, they look at each other and they look down at their feet, very concentrated while they are singing and moving together.
Dag appears to feel confident in this situation; he has done this before, he knows what is going to happen and he displays clear signs of excitement when he understands that they are going to start singing. He also displays great concentration, taking part emotionally in the shared activity, where he is allowed to determine the content. Here we see an example of how the staff members through singing and moving together create a social community where Dag feels he is seen and understood, and where the activity appears to be meaningful for him. As in the observations of Emma, we see how a shared intersubjective space is created, which here includes several children and staff members. When the children have genuine influence in this type of situation they may have a sense of being recognized as an important part of the community (Bae, 2009; Eide et al., 2012). The informants in the Fattore et al. (2009) study talked about how important this democratization of everyday life is, and how this needs to occur within a framework determined by trusted adults. The observation of Dag can serve as an example of how this can be expressed in a group of toddlers. Thus, toddlers may exercise agency and participate according to their own abilities within a relational context (Eide et al., 2012). However, this depends on the adults being present, attentive and involved in the activity with the children.
Sub-category: Positive child–child relationships
As in child–adult interaction, there were various forms of child–child interplay situations where the children clearly showed expressions of wellbeing, particularly in the form of various expressions of joy, such as smiles and laughter, excitement and quick and easy body movements. We can see how Ola clearly expresses joy together with his peers:
Ola and two other boys start climbing up wall bars. They climb up, jump down, laugh, howl with joy, climb up again, all the time looking at each other, imitating each other, and it is obvious from their facial expressions and body language that they are delighted.
This is an example of a mutually playful, pleasure-filled and bodily interaction. The children move together while looking at each other, imitate each other and laugh together. Based on their bodies, facial expressions and sounds it is obvious that they enjoying being together.
It appears that Ola has a fundamental sense of security and confidence in the situation. A feeling of security is here expressed by Ola being confident enough to be driven by his curiosity for play and exploration of the surrounding world: not being continuously occupied with the physical proximity to the adults (Bowlby, 1969; Stern, 1990). Hence, we can see from the child’s activity and bodily expressions whether or not it feels safe and secure in day care.
Ola only has eyes for the other children, and we see how these three create a common intersubjective space by listening to the input from the others, and confirming and recognizing each other through imitation. This is typical of the play of toddlers in day care (Løkken, 2000). It may appear as if Ola experiences a positive sense of self by being seen and understood by the other children, and he appears to have control and influence on the situation together with his peers, which Fattore et al. (2009) describe as important for children’s wellbeing.
In all these sub-categories we find that intersubjectivity is established by joint focus, joint intentions and joint emotions (Stern, 1985). This is in line with what Thoilliez (2011) found in her study: “(…) happiness is an inter-subjective space” (p.348). The episodes are characterized by warm and intimate social relations and affect attunement (Stern, 1985), which is highlighted as crucial for small children’s wellbeing in day care (Hännikäinen and Rutanen, 2013; Hansen, 2013). Emma, Dag and Ola actively participate in social relations, and we see how they use their agency to influence the situation. We will claim that these children experience mastery and self-efficacy in these situations, which are important for children’s wellbeing (Fattore et al., 2009). This also concurs with what Pinazza (2012) found in a Portuguese crèche.
Category 2: Concentrated play and exploration alone
The second main category consists of situations where children had time and opportunity to explore their surroundings alone, on their own premises and at their own pace, without being disrupted by other children or staff. This type of situation generally arose during free play, but also when getting dressed or washing their fingers under running water, and no staff member intervened to help or correct. In this episode Gunn is deeply concentrated on her work with her doll:
Gunn sits down on a mattress in the corner, right behind the back of the staff member. She places the doll and a blanket on the mattress, gets up and goes to the doll corner to fetch a bag to carry dolls in. Then she goes back to the mattress, puts the doll in the bag and spreads the blanket on top. She remains sitting there for more than five minutes, arranging the doll, the blanket and the bag. Alone. She undresses and dresses the doll, spreads the blanket around the doll, takes it off. She makes no contact with anyone, and nobody tries to contact her. She appears to be deeply concentrated and pleased. After a while she gets up and goes over to the other children and starts playing with them.
This observation shows another form of wellbeing than in the other categories. Gunn also appear to be content, but she does not express joy, there is no sign of a smile or laughter or lightness in her body. She is quiet, moves calmly and appears to be deeply concentrated around herself and her own activities. However, the observer was in no doubt that Gunn experienced wellbeing.
In contrast to the other categories, there was no social interaction with other children or staff members. We assume that to enter into this type of deeply concentrated activity, Gunn feels basically safe and confident and experiences a belonging to the social community. If she had found this complex, at times loud and chaotic action going on around her disconcerting, she would probably not have been able to sit so quietly and concentrated, but would rather have been more on guard and alert to what was happening around her (Stern, 1990). We also observe that when she has finished her work with the doll, she goes to the other children to participate in play with them. It may thus appear that she opts out of direct interplay to play with/explore the doll, but when she is finished with this she chooses to participate in the social community again. This is how she performs her agency; she takes control and hence gains much influence and empowerment in the situation, just as the children in the observations above did. This is made possible by the staff member who recognizes the child’s choice of activity and does not disrupt or disturb her, or attempt to stimulate or activate her in other ways.
Observations of children who play and explore their surroundings alone in deep concentration show clear common traits with what Laevers (1997) designates involvement, a state characterized by concentration, persistence and intrinsic motivation. However, Laevers does not include this construct under the wellbeing term, rather seeing it as a separate part of the process quality concept. We would argue that involvement is an integral part of a definition of subjective wellbeing, connected to the concepts of security and agency. This is because involvement is generally about a feeling of mastery and control, which Fattore et al. (2009) found was a vital part of subjective wellbeing. Laevers also states that involvement means a deep satisfaction connected to Csikszentmihayli’s (1979) concept of flow. Flow refers to a fascination with the activity where one forgets time and place, and “a bodily felt stream of positive energy and strong feeling of satisfaction” (Laevers, 1997: 152). By applying a phenomenological analysis of qualitative observations as we have done in this study, where the observer uses own experiences, emotions and knowledge, we would argue that this form of activity is also an important part of the concept of subjective wellbeing for the youngest children in day care.
Common for all categories is that the children appear to feel safe and relaxed, which according to the children in Fattore et al. (2009) is a premise for agency. All these children have influence and become genuine participants in the design of their own everyday life in the institution, not through individual freedom of choice or through forms of formal cooperation, such as children’s meetings (Kjørholt and Seland, 2012), but through an intersubjective togetherness, and by being recognized as competent actors with a meaningful agenda. In this study we find that this kind of participation in everyday life is an important part of small children’s wellbeing.
Concluding remarks
The contribution of this study to research is that it examines empirically what promotes the subjective wellbeing of infants and toddlers in day care from the perspective of the child. Little research has been conducted in this area previously (Mashford-Scott et al., 2012). This study shows how 1–3-year-olds experience happiness and wellbeing when devoting themselves to social interaction with other children and staff members, and when they are deeply concentrated in play and exploration alone. The study confirms previous research that underlines the importance of social relationships for children’s wellbeing (Fattore et al., 2009; Foley et al., 2012; Thoilliez, 2011), but it also expands the concept of wellbeing by including activities characterized of involvement, deep concentration and flow. In both categories the children expressed security and they were allowed to influence the situation; they performed agency as social participants of the day care community.
This study shows the importance of the staff members creating an intersubjective space dominated by high sensitivity and responsivity, which characterizes day care institutions with a high process quality (Bjørnestad and Samuelsson, 2012). Because research has shown that the stress level may be lower when the staff in day care institutions have high relational competence (Bradley and Vandell, 2007), this may implicate that toddlers experiencing subjective wellbeing have lower stress levels than others. Also, the children’s opportunity to be alone, to be concentrated and involved in a self-chosen activity may have influence on the level of stress in a complex institutional setting. This may be an area for further research.
In Norway all children have the right to participate in everyday activities in day care pursuant to the Kindergarten Act (Ministry of Education and Research, 2005), and this also applies to the youngest children. Participation is about influence and agency, which recent research on small children shows is crucial for the child’s development and learning (Adamson, 2008). Participation can be performed as individual freedom of choice, or taking concrete decisions connected to the activities in the day care institution (Seland, 2009; Kjørholt and Seland, 2012), but in Norway the dominating perspective on participation is a relational approach emphasizing caregiving, recognition and participation together with others (Åmot and Ytterhus, 2013; Bae, 2009; Eide et al., 2012; Kjørholt, 2005). Children’s participation in such a context relies on how children and adults interact, listen to and respect each other in an intersubjective community, where the child is a subject and fellow human being with meaningful verbal and bodily utterances. Bearing this study in mind, it may appear as if participation in this sense is a vital part of the wellbeing concept, also for the very youngest children in day care.
The limitations on the validity of this study may be that through its qualitative observations and phenomenological analyses it is closely interwoven with the sociocultural context in which the study was carried out. However, our findings are in harmony with findings from other researchers within the same paradigm (Fattore et al., 2009; Pinazza, 2012; Thoilliez, 2011).
With only 2 × 30 minutes of observation of each child, this study does not claim to evaluate the involved children’s wellbeing in day care, but tries to locate in which situations and contexts the children are experiencing subjective wellbeing. From 18 hours intensive observation of 1–3-year-olds, we have seen a pattern, described in the two main categories. The greatest limitation in this study is that we did not observe the children outdoors, or in different kinds of teacher-led activities, such as aesthetics (Pramling Samuelson et al., 2013). These activities are vital parts of Norwegian day care for the youngest, and this would be an interesting focus in further wellbeing research.
We are also aware that research that applies to this type of method is somewhat different to the traditional positivistic wellbeing research (see the Methodological considerations section). However, we claim that to gain an impression of the subjective wellbeing of the youngest children we must dare to adopt different methods and approaches, and not only rely on predefined indicators and quantifiable observations. We acknowledge that it is possible to be normative or to interpret the child’s feelings wrongly, which is a concern in all qualitative research, and methods where we rely on the observer’s own emotions in addition to the observed expressions are perhaps especially vulnerable. In this study we try to develop a way of listening to young children’s voices, by observing them, looking out for their bodily expressions, their sounds and movement, and try to tune in and feel what they are feeling. The method inspired of infant observation allowed us to observe without taking notes, and to look inside for our own feelings while looking out on the child (Abrahamsen, 2004). Also Løkken (2011) and Warming (2005) have experienced how observing children, where the researcher’s emotions, pre-understandings and experiences always will be a part of the observation process, challenge our understandings of what an observer is. This also challenges what the research community accepts as empirical knowledge. We claim that the infant observation tradition is useful to develop new understandings of young children’s wellbeing in day care, and that these perspectives can supply and maybe expand more traditional phenomenological perspectives in research. This study may therefore contribute to developing knowledge about the wellbeing of toddlers in day care by listening to their voices.
Acknowledgements
We would like to acknowledge the three research assistants that helped us carry out the data collection of this study: Ulla Britt Ertsås, Børge Iversen and Gunn Anita Søraune.
Funding
The project was funded by the Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research.
References
|
Abrahamsen, G (2004) Et levende blikk: samspillsobservasjon som metode for læring [A Living Look: Interaction Observation as a Method for Learning]. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. Google Scholar | |
|
Adamson, P (2008) The Child Care Transition. A League Table of Early Childhood Education and Care in Economically Advanced Countries. Florence: UNICEF. Google Scholar | |
|
Åmot, I, Ytterhus, B (2013) ‘Talking bodies’: Power and counter-power between children and adults in day care. Childhood. Epub ahead of print 25 June 2013. Google Scholar | |
|
Bae, B (2009) Children’s right to participate – Challenges in everyday interactions. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal 17(3): 391–406. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Ben-Arieh, A (2008) The child indicators movement: Past, present, and future. Child Indicators Research 1(1): 3–16. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Bjørnestad, E, Samuelsson, IP (eds) (2012) Hva betyr livet i barnehagen for barn under tre år? En forskningsoversikt [What Does Life in Day Care Mean for Children under Three Years of age? A Research Overview]. Oslo: Høgskolen i Oslo og Akershus. Google Scholar | |
|
Bowlby, J (1969) Attachment and Loss. London: Hogarth Press. Google Scholar | |
|
Bratterud, Å, Sandseter, EBH, Seland, M (2012) Barns trivsel og medvirkning i barnehagen. Barn, foreldre og ansattes perspektiver [Children’s wellbeing and participation in kindergarten. The perspectives of children, parents and staff]. Trondheim: NTNU Samfunnsforskning. Google Scholar | |
|
Bradley, RH, Vandell, DL (2007) Child care and the wellbeing of children. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine 161(7): 669–676. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | |
|
Christensen, P, James, A (2000) Research with Children: Perspectives and Practices. London: Routledge Falmer. Google Scholar | |
|
Clark, A, Kjørholt, AT, Moss, P (eds) (2005) Beyond Listening. Children’s Perspectives on Early Childhood Services. Bristol: University Press. Google Scholar | |
|
Csikszentmihayli, M (1979) The concept of flow. In: Sutton-Smith, B (ed.) Play and Learning. New York: Gardner Press. Google Scholar | |
|
Dahlberg, G, Moss, P, Pence, A (2007) Beyond Quality in Early Childhood Education and Care: Languages of Evaluation. London: Routledge. Google Scholar | |
|
Eide, B, Os, E, Pramling Samuelsson, I (2012) Små barns medvirkning i samlingsstunder [Small Children’s Participation in Circle Time]. Nordic Early Childhood Education Research 5(4): 1–21. Google Scholar | |
|
Emilson, A (2008) Det önskvärda barnet: Fostran uttrykt i vardagsliga kommunikasjonshandlingar mellan lärare och barn i förskolan [The wanted child: care expressed in daily life connunicative behaviour between teachers and children in day care]. PhD Thesis, Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis, Göteborg. Google Scholar | |
|
Engdahl, I (2012) Doing friendship during the second year of life in a Swedish preschool. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal 20(1): 83–98. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Fattore, T, Mason, J, Watson, E (2007) Children’s conceptualization(s) of their well-being. Social Indicators Research 80(1): 5–29. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Fattore, T, Mason, J, Watson, E (2009) When children are asked about their wellbeing: towards a framework for guiding policy. Child Indicators Research 2(1): 57–77. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Foley, KR, Blackmore, AM, Girdler, S. (2012) To feel belonged: The voices of children and youth with disabilities on the meaning of wellbeing. Child Indicators Research 5(2): 375–391. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Gerber, EB, Whitebook, M, Weinstein, RS (2007) At the heart of child care: Predictors of teacher sensitivity in center-based child care. Early Childhood Research Quarterly 22(3): 327–346. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Greve, A (2009) Friendships and participation among young children in a Norwegian kindergarten. In: Berthelsen, D, Brownlee, J, Johansson, E (eds) Participatory Learning in the Early Years: Research and Pedagogy. New York: Routledge, pp.78–92. Google Scholar | |
|
Gulløv, E, Højlund, S (2003) Feltarbejde blandt børn: metodologi og etik i etnografisk børneforskning [Fieldwork among Children: Methodology and Ethics in Ethnographic Children’s Research]. København: Gyldendal. Google Scholar | |
|
Hännikäinen, M, Rutanen, N (2013) Important themes in research on and education of young children in day care centres: Finnish viewpoints. Nordic Early Childhood Education Research 6(26): 1–10. Google Scholar | |
|
Hansen, OH (2013) Stemmer i fællesskabet. [Voices in the community] PhD Thesis, Aarhus Universitet, Aarhus. Google Scholar | |
|
Holder, MD, Coleman, B (2009) The contribution of social relationships to children’s happiness. Journal of Happiness Studies 10(3): 329–349. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Huppert, FA, So, TTC (2013) Flourishing across Europe: Application of a new conceptual framework for defining wellbeing. Social Indicators Research 110(3): 837–861. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | |
|
Johansson, J-E (2010) Letter from the editor. International Journal of Early Childhood 42(2): 77–80. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Kjørholt, AT, Seland, M (2012) Kindergarten as a Bazar. Freedom of choice and new forms of regulation. In: Kjørholt, AT, Qvortrup, J (eds) The Modern Child and the Flexible Labour Market. Exploring Early Childhood Education and Care. London: Palgrave. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Kjørholt, AT (2005) The competent child and ‘the right to be oneself’: reflections on children as fellow citizens in an early childhood centre. In: Clark, A, Kjørholt, AT, Moss, P (eds) Beyond Listening. Children’s Perspectives on Early Childhood Services. Bristol: University Press, pp.151–174. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Koch, AB (2012) Når børn trives i børnehaven [When children enjoy being in day care]. PhD Thesis, Syddansk Universitet, Århus. Google Scholar | |
|
Kyrönlampi-Kylmänen, T, Määttä, K (2011) What do the children really think about a day-care centre - the 5–7-year-old Finnish children speak out. Early Child Development and Care 182(5): 505–520. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Laevers, F (1997) Assessing the quality of childcare provision: “involvement” as criterion. Researching Early Childhood 3: 151–165. Google Scholar | |
|
Løkken, G (2000) Toddler peer culture: the social style of one and two year old body-subjects in everyday interaction. PhD Thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim. Google Scholar | |
|
Løkken, G (2011) Lived experience as an observer among toddlers. In: Johansson, E, White, EJ (eds) Educational Research with our Youngest: Voices of Infants and Toddlers. Dordrecht: Springer, pp.161–184. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Mashford-Scott, A, Church, A, Tayler, C (2012) Seeking children’s perspectives on their wellbeing in early childhood settings. International Journal of Early Childhood 44(3): 231–247. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Ministry of Education and Research (2005) Kindergarten Act (revised 2010). Oslo: Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research. Google Scholar | |
|
Ministry of Education and Research (2011) Framework plan for the content and tasks of kindergartens. Oslo: Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research. Google Scholar | |
|
Monaco, C, Pontecorvo, C (2010) The interaction between young toddlers: constructing and organising participation frameworks. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal 18(3): 341–371. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Ødegaard, EE (2007). Meningsskaping i barnehagen: innhold og bruk av barns og voksnes samtalefortellinger [Meaning-making in day care: content and use of children’s and adults’ conversational stories]. PhD Thesis, Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis, Göteborg. Google Scholar | |
|
Pinazza, MA (2012) The right of young children to wellbeing: A case study of a creche in Portugal. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal 20(4): 577–590. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Pramling Samuelsson, I, Sheridan, S, Hansen, M (2013) Young children’s experience of aesthetics in preschool. Nordic Early Childhood Education Research 6(31): 1–12. Google Scholar | |
|
Qvortrup, J (1994) Childhood matters: an introduction. In: Qvortrup, J, Bardy, M, Sgritta, G. (eds) Childhood Matters: Social Theory, Practice and Policies. Aldershot: Avebury, pp.1–23. Google Scholar | |
|
Rustin, M (2006) Infant observation research: What have we learned so far? Infant Observation: International Journal of Infant Observation and Its Applications 9(1): 35–52. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Seland, M (2009) Det moderne barn og den fleksible barnehagen. En etnografisk studie av barnehagens hverdagsliv i lys av nyere diskurser og kommunal virkelighet [The modern child and the flexible day-care institution. An ethnographic study of everyday life in day care in light of recent discourses on the communal reality]. PhD Thesis, Trondheim: Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU). Google Scholar | |
|
Statistics Norway (2013) Kindergartens, 2012, final figures. Available at: http://www.ssb.no/en/utdanning/statistikker/barnehager (accessed 25 November 2013). Google Scholar | |
|
Stern, DN (1985) The Interpersonal World of the Infant: A View from Psychoanalysis and Developmental Psychology. New York: Basic Books. Google Scholar | |
|
Stern, DN (1990) Diary of a Baby. New York: Basic Books. Google Scholar | |
|
Strauss, AL, Corbin, JM (1998) Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar | |
|
Thoilliez, B (2011) How to grow up happy: An exploratory study on the meaning of happiness from children’s voices. Child Indicators Research 4(2): 323–351. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Van Manen, M (1997) Researching Lived Experience: Human Science for an Action Sensitive Pedagogy. London, Ontario: Althouse Press. Google Scholar | |
|
Warming, H (2005) Doing research with children and young people. Acta Sociologica 48(2): 174–177. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals |
Author biographies
Monica Seland (PhD) is a lecturer and a supervisor in early childhood education and care (ECEC), with special interest in the field of childcare politics, organization and children’s everyday life in ECEC institutions. Her primary research focus is on children’s agency, and she has conducted research on subjective wellbeing, participation and resistance in an institutional context. Her research methods are primarily qualitative, using fieldwork and interviews with professionals and children.
Ellen Beate Hansen Sandseter (PhD) is a lecturer in early childhood physical education and health, and has been engaged in several research projects concerning children’s play, activities and development. Her primary research focus is on children’s physical active play in ECEC institutions, especially on outdoor play and risky play as a means of development and wellbeing. Her research methods have focused on exploring children’s own perspectives on play, wellbeing and participation in their daily life in ECEC.
Åse Bratterud is engaged in research, development, teaching and dissemination in the fields of child and adolescent mental health and child welfare. Her research examines children’s wellbeing and participation in ECEC, child protection and child welfare and children’s rights.
