A Rudolf Steiner kindergarten

This spontaneous review was prompted by a 5-year-old leaving our service to go to another school. The departure of this child created a ripple effect with other families, as parents started to doubt the benefits of their child staying at Steiner kindergarten until the age of 6 and then moving into the Steiner school.

We discussed the issue at a board meeting. One of the parent representatives explained how hard it was to resist the pressure of other families in the area and the belief that 'real' learning occurred only at school.

Our director suggested that this issue could be linked to our service's vision for each child. She wondered if perhaps we were not taking sufficient time to explain this vision and how it is realised through the Steiner environment. For example, she reminded everyone of the Steiner realms of thought:

• Thinking – Clarity.
• Feeling – Inwardness.
• Willing – Perseverance.

She wondered if parents realised that Steiner philosophy advocated learning that followed a holistic process from kindergarten through to secondary education.

The discussion that ensued led us to formulate a review focus that asked:

“How do we express our vision to families so that they can make informed choices about their children's education?”

We decided that to answer this question, we would need to look at the issue from the perspectives of both management and parents. Were the messages we thought we were giving the same messages that parents were receiving?

We decided that it would be important to find out by talking with parents, looking back over our communications, and talking with management. We chose the following methods:

• A focus group of parents (we invited a group of first-time parents of 4-year-old children), facilitated by an independent person. We chose to invite a colleague who worked in management outside the kindergarten and who had experience in focus group interviewing.
• Management would list all the communications we made available. A partner of 1 of the parents on the board offered to lead this part of the review at our next meeting so that the Director could be part of the process. This was agreed.

We prepared a budget for this work, which we decided would take place over the next 3 months. By the end of that time, we would meet with everyone to decide what to do as a result of the review.

Focus group

The focus group took place a month later. This required some organisation, such as finding the best time, ensuring that everyone understood the process, and working with the facilitator. Management did not attend the focus group, and all 15 of our kindergarten families with first children aged 4 years were invited to attend. Out of 15, 12 were able to attend – an ideal number for a focus group. Food was provided, and other parents offered to provide care for children if it was required. Two families enthusiastically accepted this offer.

The facilitator, in consultation with management, determined questions to prompt discussion. These were intended to provoke rather than drive discussion (as it was recognised that the focus group might choose to take a different direction). The questions were:

• What factors contributed to your choice of childcare?
• What makes this place right for your child right now?
• What factors are likely to inform your choice about primary school education? What will you be thinking about when you make that decision?
• In what ways, if any, does the vision of this service impact on your decision making – either now or in the past?

Responses were recorded by audiotaping the focus group. No names were given, and all responses were anonymous.

List of communications

In preparation for the next management meeting, we were charged with the task of locating and listing all the documentation and archives that we had in relation to the focus. The next meeting, a month later, revealed a wide range of documentation about 'expressing our vision' (evident in such things as our policy documents, our charter, and our management portfolio). However, the only evidence of this vision being conveyed to parents was in our strategic plan, our revised charter, and our enrolment pamphlet. Through discussion, we realised that in the enrolment process, we made an assumption that parents knew about the vision.

Focus group results

The majority of parents chose this service as their preferred choice for reasons including staffing ratios, the teachers, the Steiner philosophy and, in 3 cases, location.

All parents said that the fact that their child was happy and was learning a lot gave them a great deal of confidence in their choice. They talked at length about the importance to them of their child seeing themselves as a learner and of parents feeling that they too were part of the learning process.

Parents indicated that their decisions about primary education were influenced by factors that ranged from location and friendships to a desire for the child to be involved in learning to read and write. Two parents were clear about their intentions to have their children continue in the Steiner school as they were very aware of what was happening across the Steiner service. Both these parents had friends whose children had gone on to the Steiner school and were doing very well. Five parents spoke about the pressure they felt to have their child succeed with literacy and their fears that their child would be left behind educationally if they stayed at kindergarten until aged 6. The factors that affected their decisions about primary school were quite different from their reasons for selecting a kindergarten. Parents conveyed some anxiety about the choices they had to make and were keen to make the right one for their child.

Four parents asked what the vision of the service was as they had not been aware of it at all, let alone been influenced by it in their decision making. Two parents (the same 2 who had already decided to send their children to the Steiner school) said that the vision had played a significant role in their decision making and was something they referred to in discussions with teachers about their children's learning. The remaining 6 parents said that they were aware of the vision but that it did not feature highly in their reasons for choosing a Steiner kindergarten.

They were influenced by other factors. Several parents decided that it might be interesting to compare the vision of each school in the area before making a final choice about their children's primary schooling. Others felt that the vision was too 'ethereal' for them to take account of it when making practical decisions.

Johari window

A Johari window (see Appendix 2) helped us to analyse all our findings. Through this process, we were able to summarise everything we had learned and to recognise potential blind spots in our knowledge.

Johari window

It was clear that management and parents did not always share the same understanding of our vision or reasons for their choice of service. We now knew that our vision was not always accessible to everyone but, for some of those who were aware of it, it was highly significant in their decision making. For others it did not feature at all. This prompted us to decide on several new initiatives.

• We decided to rewrite our vision in plain language so that everyone could see its practical relevance and the connection to Steiner philosophy. We would make this the focus of our next review.
• Enrolment processes would involve a clear verbal explanation of the revised vision statement for this service as well as of the Steiner philosophy.
• Advertising material in the newspaper and radio would include a reference to the revised vision statement for the service and ensure that there was emphasis on the whole education process rather than just on the kindergarten.
• Teachers would ensure that a discussion of our service's vision would become part of their parent interview meetings.

Review reminded us that we need to value what we do and also to value the importance of communication.