cym dissertation - lauren jewhurst
DESCRIPTION
How the inborn spirituality of primary school children might be nurtured and developed through regular access to and use of a prayer space.TRANSCRIPT
How the inborn spirituality of primary school
children might be nurtured and developed
through regular access to and use of a prayer
space by Lauren Jewhurst
CYM Dissertation Showcase
www.cym.ac.uk
AM75293-6 Lauren Jewhurst mw006600
“If we are to believe that we are made in the image of God, then we must take seriously that everyone –
including children – has an inborn spirituality” (Dallow 2002: 80)
When God created man in Genesis 1 and 2, it was clear that it was for a purpose. Man was made in God’s
image; God himself would come and walk among the garden with him. There was a relationship,
communication. Even in the face of sin and disobedience, God has always been striving to draw close to us,
to speak to us, to be with us. It goes without saying that this innate relationship between God and man has
been nurtured in a religious and faith context throughout history; and in recent times spirituality has been
acknowledged as an essential part of human development to be nurtured by educational establishments
also. Following the 1988 Education Reform Act, the National Curriculum encouraged spiritual development
as part of a wider focus on the development of moral, personal and social skills and behaviours, and defines
it as such:
“Pupils' spiritual development involves the growth of their sense of self, their unique potential, their understanding of their strengths and weaknesses, and their will to achieve. As their curiosity about themselves and their place in the world increases, they try to answer for themselves some of life's fundamental questions. They develop the knowledge, skills, understanding, qualities and attitudes they need to foster their own inner lives and non-material wellbeing.” (DoE [online] 2011)
Just as God can be encountered in many different contexts, so too can spirituality be developed in contexts
outside of the church.
In this dissertation I will be looking at how the inborn spirituality of primary school children might be
nurtured and developed through regular access to and use of a prayer space: a sacred space set aside for
children to think, reflect, question, and rest in the presence of God. My decision to focus my research on
prayer spaces in schools is two-fold. From a spiritual point of view, I am interested in the topic of how and
why children pray, and the impact that has on their spiritual development. Secondly, my work within local
primary schools as part of my job has led to an interest in how I can engage better with schools in order to
develop children’s spirituality beyond occasional assemblies or RE lessons. The findings of this study will
provide me with insights and information immediately applicable to my job as Children’s Worker.
There are 3 main aims for my study:
To look at how spirituality develops in children: By studying the work of well known theorists and
practitioners in this area, such as Nye, Lamont, Piaget, Fowler and Westerhoff, I will summarise the key
elements of spiritual development in the early years of childhood.
2
AM75293-6 Lauren Jewhurst mw006600
To study prayer as a tool for spiritual development: I will be using the above information to assess where
prayer fits in, in addition to studying further material which indicates a link between prayer and spiritual
development.
To establish if prayer spaces are conducive to spiritual development in a school context. By observing
established prayer spaces in primary schools, I hope to ascertain exactly how and why these spaces might
encourage prayer and thus contribute to spiritual development.
As this is a predominantly qualitative research project, it is difficult to give an exact hypothesis as I am not
seeking to prove or disprove a particular theory. Instead, I hope to gain an insight into the effects of prayer
spaces on children’s spiritual developmental stages. Many theorists and practitioners have studied the
subject of child spirituality but few look closely at how prayer fits in, especially prayer within a school
context. Therefore I will be interested to see how prayer and schools fit together, and suggest how schools
can use prayer spaces to support an ethos of self-reflection, growth and personal development.
I have studied key theories from other practitioners surrounding the subject of spirituality and prayer with
children, assessing how they are relevant to my study and spiritual development as a whole. I developed a
methodology for a study based upon this research and my own aims as outlined above. Using techniques
suggested by research theorists and experts, I conducted the study as outlined in my methodology, and
analysed my findings in light of my literature review and the key issues which arose in the course of my
research. Recommendations have been made in light of my findings, both from a personal point of view of
my own practice and by means of feedback for the schools themselves. I trust that this will be a useful
source of information for anyone who is considering the use of a prayer space in their context.
3
AM75293-6 Lauren Jewhurst mw006600
The academic research presented in this Literature Review outlines the ways in which my research has
been underpinned by key development theories. A number of themes presented themselves and I saw
them in my mind’s eye as the building blocks on which my study should be based, with more general
concepts forming the foundation onto which more specific theories could be built. My study was simply the
final layer, rather than the whole structure. The foundation topics for research were the theories of
cognitive development, spiritual development, and faith development; moving on to how prayer is
informed by each of these, before thinking about the practicalities of how this could translate in a school
setting.
Cognitive Development
It may seem strange to start what is essentially a theological study on something so general and seemingly
secular, but it is widely acknowledged by many theological authors that an understanding cognitive
development – the way humans think – is essential when undertaking spiritual or faith-based work with any
individual or group, adult or child. Such theories act as a pre-cursor to other theories of faith and spiritual
development. Piaget’s stages of cognitive development (Table 1, overleaf) present the practitioner with the
concept that as “little scientists” children have an innate desire to acquire knowledge. Children place value
on learning as something in and of itself, not a means to an end (Beckett 2002:74). By assimilation and
accommodation, children learn as they watch and experience different physical or cognitive processes.
They go through stages of development roughly according to their age. This theory may not seem spiritually
relevant to the untrained eye, but to a Children’s Worker this is essential when understanding the cognitive
capabilities of the children with whom we work. As Dallow states, “We need to understand how children’s
thinking develops so that what we offer them is real and relevant” (Dallow 2002:58). The child’s innate
desire for knowledge will also prove to be significant later as we explore spirituality and prayer.
Other theories of cognitive development can also be applied. Lamont (2007) highlights the work of
personality type specialists Myers-Briggs, and developmental psychologist Erikson as key theorists to
consider when engaging with children on a spiritual level (Lamont 2007:33,74). Similarly, Dallow uses the
work of Vygotsky, who introduced the “zone of proximal development” whereby children will move from
potential development to actual development with “scaffolding” from a significant adult which is slowly
removed as they learn and grow (Dallow 2002:77). This is relevant to any form of Children’s Work whereby
an adult is guiding the child through a concept or skill.
4
AM75293-6 Lauren Jewhurst mw006600
Table 1: Piaget’s stages of cognitive development. Stages relevant to this study are highlighted.
Stage Approx age CharacteristicsSensori-motor 0-18 months Learning is based around movement and the senses
Pre-operational stage 18 months – 7 years
The child begins to use language and symbols as well as objects. Magical thinking is prevalent. The child can link between emotions and circumstances. The child is unable to grasps reversible operations and
relational terms.
Concrete Operations 7 – 12 years
The child is beginning to link concrete objects with abstract thoughts, and is developing logical thinking.
Children at this age enjoy hands on learning experiences, but they cannot imagine what they haven’t seen. This stage is so named because the
child can work with what is in front of them – objects, symbols etc.
Formal Operations 12 years – adulthoodWe are able to solve abstract problems in a
systematic and deductive way. We can imagine situations we have not experienced.
Source: summarised from Beckett [2002] and Lamont [2007].
Spiritual Development
By moving on to spiritual development, we are moving from a broad theory to one which is more specific to
the study. While cognitive development studies how children think, spiritual development presents the
theory that human nature wishes to study the things which are seemingly “beyond” our immediate
situation. The work of Nye is especially relevant in this area. She passionately states a case for taking child
spirituality seriously, acknowledging that her simple definition – “God’s ways of being with children and
children’s ways of being with God” (Nye 2009:5) – comes with the many ambiguous forms spirituality can
take. Because of this, she warns against using frameworks based upon cognitive and physical stages of
development because she feels spirituality is not a linear process which one travels along in the same way
as everyone else (Nye 2009:85). It therefore seems contradictory, although helpful, that she presents her
own framework of “spiritual” behaviours displayed by children categorised by their age (Nye 2009:87-88).
The outworking of this can be seen in Lamont’s research with children which reflects clear stages of
development in the children’s responses to thinking about God – who He is, what He does etc. (Lamont
2007:98-114). It is clear therefore that frameworks and criteria are not an exhaustive benchmark against
which we should study children’s spirituality. As Dallow argues, spirituality is a complex, long term issue
and many children may need their spirituality “repaired” before they even begin to develop it (Dallow
2002:83). However it is clear that the cognitive development theory of “ages and stages” still echoes in the
5
AM75293-6 Lauren Jewhurst mw006600
responses children make, albeit in different ways for each individual, and should not be ignored when
measuring and assessing these responses.
Nye also cites the work of Pierre Ranwez as a pioneering “voice in the wilderness” regarding child
spirituality. Ranwez used psychological and theological reasoning to argue a case that a child is born with a
spiritual awareness which takes shape and meaning as they develop consciousness (Nye 2009:79). In other
words, cognitive development feeds the spirituality with which a child is born. A simple reflex act, such as
smiling at a parent, can be a spiritual experience whereby the child is learning love and security. By bringing
spirituality into the everyday, Ranwez was radical and ahead of his time. This is shown in the works of
Goldman, who felt that children could not possibly relate to the spiritual because they simply hadn’t lived
long enough to appreciate the meaning of religion in everyday situations (Nye 2009:78). Despite the fact
that both Ranwez and Goldman were contemporaries, it was Goldman’s views which were widely adopted.
This is regarded as catastrophic in terms of spiritual provision for children, and Sunday School teaching
materials and programmes are presented as an example of the “casualties” of Goldman’s legacy (Nye
2009:78). Therefore it is imperative to conduct careful and open observation of children in order to avoid a
default approach that “children’s lives are seldom or ordinarily the site of valid spiritual experience” (Nye
2009:78). I believe that my study is also contributing in some way towards challenging this attitude.
Faith Development
It could be argued that in the context of my research faith development theories are largely irrelevant
because spirituality and faith are acknowledged to be very different. Dallow presents one such argument
for this distinction, arguing that spirituality is innate whereas faith is developed. Spirituality looks at that
which is both “beyond” yet part of everyday life; faith builds a framework of belief and actions around that
spirituality (Dallow 2002:80). In this sense, Dallow isn’t so much separating the two, as distinguishing them
from each other whilst acknowledging a subsequent link between them. Prayer is seen as a physical
(internal or external) outworking of spirituality, a communication with something unknown and “out
there”, one of the actions that Dallow speaks of in her definition of a developing faith. From this
perspective faith development is as relevant to my study as cognitive and spiritual development, albeit on a
smaller scale. The theories of Fowler, and Westerhoff present so many similarities to that of Nye, Ranwez
and Piaget that I believe crossover between them is possible, if not inevitable.
Both Fowler and Westerhoff’s frameworks (Tables 2 and 3,) work on the basis that children move through
the stages in order, with no stage omitted: a clear challenge to Nye’s argument against linear spiritual
development. There are many overlaps and while exact age brackets can be disputed the journey of faith is
6
AM75293-6 Lauren Jewhurst mw006600
clear. Importantly, both frameworks start at birth, suggesting that faith is there from the beginning.
Specifically, Fowler believed that faith was a universal human activity whereby we try to make sense of the
world we live in – everyone tries to make meaning in their lives (Dallow 2002:86). Similarly, Westerhoff’s
“tree trunk” analogy on which his framework is based emphasises that “A tree in its first year is still a
complete tree” (Dallow 2002:88) – in other words, while faith may grow with experience, like rings on a
tree trunk , there is a core of faith present from the moment the child is born. It is no less important or real,
nor is it a watered down version of what is to come.
Therefore, with these theories in mind, if faith is as innate as spirituality then I cannot ignore it on the
grounds of distinction. I believe that I am dealing with the early stages of faith and therefore an
understanding of these stages is essential for my analysis.
Table 2: Westerhoff’s stages of faith. Stages relevant to the study are highlighted.
Stage Approx age Characteristics
Experienced Faith 0-7/8 years“It’s not what you say it’s what you do”
Faith is learnt through actions and needs love and security to flourish.
Affiliative Faith 6/7 – teens
“I want to belong” Faith is developed through community, and participation. Stories, symbols, and religious experiences develop the sense of belonging.
Searching Faith Teens – adulthood
“What do I believe?”A time for searching, questioning and doubting in order to replace the faith borrowed from others.
Faith is individual and personal.
Owned Faith Adulthood
“This is what I believe”Faith is secure enough to be open to other points of
view and is enriched by encounters with different perspectives.
Source: summarised from Dallow [2002] and Westerhoff [2000]
7
AM75293-6 Lauren Jewhurst mw006600
Table 3: Fowler’s Stages of Faith. Stages relevant to the study are highlighted.
Stage Approx age CharacteristicsPrimal 0 – 4 years Faith begins and is learned in the carer’s arms
Intuitive-Projective 3/4 – 7/8 years
Thinking is intuitive, immediate and full of imagery. Faith is closely tied in to significant adults. Symbols are what they represent. Children are more open to
encountering God in different, non-anthropomorphic forms.
Mythical-Literal 6/7 – 11/12 years
As thinking becomes more ordered and logical, children begin to question “Is it true?” Faith is linked with story and identity, and the need for belonging.
Symbols remain concrete and literal.
Synthetic-Conventional 11/12 – 17/18 yearsThinking becomes abstract and reflective. Faith is about fitting in and has a strong need to conform.
Many adults remain at this stage.
Individuative-Reflective Adulthood Faith is about taking responsibility for one’s own beliefs.
Conjunctive AdulthoodFaith is based on remaining true to our own beliefs but also accepting others whose truth may be very
different to ours
Universalising Adulthood – later in life
Faith is selfless and involves relinquishing self for the ultimate reality. Very few adults reach this stage.
Source: summarised from Astley [2001] and Dallow [2002]
Spirituality and Prayer
Throughout the course of my research I found a distinct lack of material relating specifically to children and
prayer together. Dallow, Lamont, Hay and Nye all included prayer in their materials and research, but only
as part of the wider picture. Dallow talks about prayer as a means for including children in the corporate
worship of church and family, emphasising that the practitioner must allow children to pray as a means of
natural communication with God rather than a forced activity (Dallow 2002:139). Lamont takes a more
practical view of prayer, using the Godly Play ethos to present prayer as a ritual or lesson (Lamont 2007:95).
While these authors present interesting theories and ideas for prayer with children, Cloyd was able to offer
an exclusive argument solely focussing on children and prayer. In Cloyd’s view, prayer is an antidote to
spiritual poverty. Children who are growing up unaware of their worth and divine purpose in life are given
opportunities to realise this through experiences of prayer: “Prayer provides spiritual grounding through
which life is given meaning and hope” (Cloyd 1997:xiii) Cloyd attributes a child’s spirituality as something
which makes them more open to the joys of prayer, even more so than adults: “Some persons believe that
since children have so recently come from God, they are closer to God than us who have lived a longer
time” (Cloyd 1997:2). This is charming, and perhaps a little naive, but it does strike a chord with those who
8
AM75293-6 Lauren Jewhurst mw006600
might believe that without the trappings of adult experience and cynicism children are more open to
spiritual experiences in everyday life. It is also a direct challenge to Goldman’s views that children are
incapable of spiritual experience because they haven’t had enough life experience.
Despite the lack of material devoted to children’s prayer as a spiritual experience, there are naturally other
sources that look at prayer from a broader theological view. Both Houston (1989) and Watts (2001)
acknowledge that prayer is an innate human desire. Watts claims that it springs from the reciprocal
relationship God and humanity share, a form of dialogue which fully involves both parties (Watts 2001:1).
Houston states that our being made in God’s image leads to our God given ability to communicate with him
(Houston 1989:60). Both of these views support those outlined by Piaget, Nye, Fowler et al. regarding our
innate need to be spiritual, to learn, and to have faith.
Spirituality in Schools
The theories presented regarding prayer and spiritual development so far must now be put into the context
of my research itself – my study is taking place exclusively in schools, so I must look at how prayer and
spiritual development fit in a school context.
It has been apparent from my research that there is little by way of information on prayer in schools. Many
journals and articles relate to the American issue which dominates the political scene there. While it is
relevant and interesting, it has no bearing on the work I am conducting in my study. Here in the UK, the
Education Reform Act of 1988 states that schools have a duty to deliver a curriculum which “... promotes
the spiritual, moral, cultural, mental and physical development of pupils at the school and of society.”
(HMSO [online] 1988) The presence of spiritual development on that list shows that spirituality does have a
place in schools. Interestingly, both Cloyd and Dallow speak of the responsibilities of church and home in
raising a child spiritually and within a way of faith (Cloyd 1997:xv; Dallow 2002:18-33), which made me
question where school fits in. Clearly the Government and Education governing bodies believe that school
can and should be a place where children are allowed to develop spiritually. This also provides me with a
rationale for future practice when approaching schools to encourage the use of a prayer space. My own
experience of teaching and schools work suggests that many schools struggle to deliver an effective RE,
collective worship or spiritual development curriculum. This may be because of lack of knowledge,
confidence, experience, or a reticence based upon a society increasingly cynical about the role of religion in
state affairs.
9
AM75293-6 Lauren Jewhurst mw006600
Conclusion
I have outlined a number of key themes which have formed the basis for my research and study into the
effectiveness of prayer spaces in schools. I have discovered the importance of a foundation of
understanding regarding cognitive development theories, onto which spiritual and faith development
theories can be added. Frameworks provided my Piaget, Nye, Fowler and Westerhoff are not exhaustive,
yet they are essential in forming an understanding of the children with whom my study will be based.
Children will respond to spiritual stimuli in different ways according to their age, experience and
background, and I look forward to seeing how my research goes about confirming or challenging these
theories.
An overwhelming pattern I have sensed in my research is that there is an innate need within us to look
beyond the here and now. Our natural thirst for knowledge, our desire to be with God in response to his
desire to be with us, our reflection of God by being made in his image, and the faith with which we are born
– these are all strong arguments in favour of any activity which provides children with the opportunity to
learn, communicate, reflect and believe. This study will not be groundbreaking or pioneering, but I trust it
will prove that children are spiritual beings in need of nurture.
10
AM75293-6 Lauren Jewhurst mw006600
My research method does not come under one specific category, instead I used multiple methods in order
to answer the question. Bell (1999) promotes the use of multiple research methods, even where time
constraints might limit the scope of research, in order to get as wide a picture as possible (Bell 1999:102).
Therefore I set out to use focus groups, questionnaires and observation to assess children’s response and
staff opinion on prayer spaces. By taking a predominately qualitative approach, I was not seeking to prove a
hypothesis through statistical data. However, I still had a number of objectives as the basis for my study so
that the focus remained clear and answered the question (Bell 1999:26). My aim was to find out if prayer
spaces contribute to spiritual development, and through observation and conversation discover exactly
how they do so.
It was important for me to involve both children and adults in my research. This might seem obvious, but by
nature research involving children has often gone beyond them to adults who think they know what the
children believe (Scott 2008:87). As Scott argues, “The best people to provide information on the child’s
perspective, actions and attitudes are the children themselves...” (Scott 2008:88). Therefore my main
research took place with the children, with additional feedback from adult staff. It is still important to get
this adult feedback, but not at the expense or instead of that from the pupils.
I chose two primary schools from a neighbouring county in which to conduct my research (hereafter
referred to as School 1 and School 2). This ensured bias was limited as I was unknown to the pupils and
staff. I chose email as a method for contacting the schools, as it is a fast and effective way to communicate.
Bell highlights the importance of using such techniques –
“Whatever the size of the undertaking, techniques have to be mastered and a plan of action devised which does not attempt more than the limitations of expertise, time and access permit.” (Bell 1999:1)
While emailing is such a simple process it could hardly be described as a “technique”, I still believe that it
took into account the fact that the schools were a significant distance away, and that I may not have been
able to speak to the Headteacher or RE co-ordinator on the phone during a school day. I initially contacted
the school offices, asking to have the message passed on to the RE or Collective Worship co-ordinator. This
ensured that the message was not lost in the busy-ness of school life and that my intentions would remain
clear. My initial contact email set out my objectives for the study, the needs I had regarding participants,
and a number of dates available to conduct the study (Appendix – email example). Bell emphasises the
importance of clarity when approaching participants of a study; full details of the study and any
11
AM75293-6 Lauren Jewhurst mw006600
commitments they need to make will enable them to be “...convinced of your integrity and of the value of
the research before they decide whether or not to co-operate” (Bell 1999:37) For this reason, I presented
my rationale for the study and asked if they could clarify that it was definitely something they would be
prepared to participate in.
Once I had confirmed that the schools were willing to participate in the research a letter was posted to
each participating school establishing the details of the study (appendix). I also addressed the issue of
consent. When working with children it is imperative to get informed consent from either parents, or
school teachers in loco parentis. Many parents feel strongly about their strangers coming into contact with
their children, and so I did not wish to cause difficulties by making their children the focus of my study
without them knowing. Additionally, the belief that children should be actively involved in the research on
a deeper level (Scott 2008:90) leads many practitioners to consider it essential to also seek the children’s
consent. However many schools have their own policies and practice for this, some gaining an overall
consent from each parent upon registration, others asking for consent for individual contexts. Therefore, I
provided a hard copy of each consent form (appendix) and left it at the Headteacher’s discretion to decide
how consent would be sought. In the end, I was provided with informed consent on the staff and children’s
behalf from both Headteachers.
I sent these letters out well in advance of the date for conducting the research in order to give the
participants plenty of time to read through the details and understand fully what they were participating in.
Hart and Bond (1995) suggest this as a manner of good practice, as well as advising participants make an
additional copy for their own records (Bell 1999:39).
Establishing an effective methodology should start not by asking “Which methodology?” but “What do I
need to know and why?” (Bell 1999:101) As my main objectives were to find out if a prayer space can help
with children’s spiritual development, my methodology needed to include methods which would find that
out. I initially chose 3 main methods for my research:
Observation of children using the prayer space: This was only possible in one of the schools. School 1 could
not provide me with an opportunity to observe as the prayer spaces weren’t being used at a set time.
Instead, teachers tended to set aside 10 minutes in the school day for reflection or allow children to use the
space of their own accord throughout the day. In School 2, I was observing a prayer space provided by an
12
AM75293-6 Lauren Jewhurst mw006600
outside agency which made observation much more straightforward. However while this was an interesting
exercise, it did not provide appropriate data for my analysis, and so has not been included.
Focus groups with 5 children: This 20 minute session was divided into 3 parts.
1. “Tell me about your prayer space” – a chance to brainstorm their thoughts (appendix). I did not ask
for any particular information, just for them to write whatever they wanted about it (Plate 1,
below).
Plate 1: Brainstorming exercise
2. “Emotions” – I gave the children 3 jelly babies, one colour per child, and laid out pieces of card with
an emotion written on it with corresponding cartoon face. I asked them to place a sweet on the
card which best described their feelings before, during and after their time in the prayer space
(Plate 2, below)
Plate 2: Emotional Responses
13
AM75293-6 Lauren Jewhurst mw006600
3. “When I am in the prayer space I...” – children were asked to complete this sentence in words or
illustrations and we discussed them afterwards. Children were then asked if they had anything else
they wanted to add to the session as a whole.
Staff questionnaires: Staff members were asked to provide information by way of list questions (Bell
1999:174) regarding prayer space usage and the responses that pupils give, noting any significant behaviour
which may indicate development of spirituality. “Significant behaviour” was defined in a list of actions and
responses which I collected from the various research sources in my literature review. There were also
questions with a Likert scale (Bell 1999:186) provided so that staff could record strength of feeling on a
variety of issues regarding the prayer space such as benefit to pupils and relevance to school ethos. The
questionnaires were given to all staff regardless of whether their children had been observed or used in a
focus group. This was to ensure a wide range of data.
As I was largely a participant researcher, I needed to keep my methods simple and easy to collate. Had I
been a non-participant observer I could take notes and photographs without distraction. However with the
focus groups note taking was difficult, although essential to record conversations and comments which
weren’t part of the main activities yet significant in terms of my research aim. I typed up my observation
notes as soon as possible so that I could recall the session effectively with it fresh in my mind. I kept the
original copies of the brainstorming and sentence completion activities, and took photographs of the
emotions activity to record where the children had placed their coloured jelly baby. By giving the children a
colour for all three activities I could distinguish each child’s answer clearly whilst maintaining their
anonymity. The full range of data for each focus group can be seen in the appendix.
I analysed the focus group data by collating the responses from all three activities into tables (appendix).
This ensured I could easily locate key pieces of information within the data at a glance. It also provides the
reader with a succinct record of the data collected. A quantitative approach was used to assess the
emotional responses given by children during the “Emotions” exercise, and put into a graph to give a
graphic representation of the frequency and volume of responses given. These charts are provided in the
analysis section (pg ref). With the information clearly displayed I then looked for themes, interesting
responses including possible anomalies, and any patterns emerging.
The full range of staff questionnaires can be seen in the appendix. When analysing the data I used a similar
approach to that with the focus group data. Qualitative answers given regarding opinions on spiritual
development and descriptions of the prayer space were studied for key words, phrases and patterns. I did
this by way of annotation on the original document, and therefore the data has been re-recorded in
14
AM75293-6 Lauren Jewhurst mw006600
electronic form so that it can be read easily. The qualitative data gathered from Likert scale and list
questions was collated into tables (appendix) then charts for my analysis (pg ref).
As with any research method, there are pros and cons. Time restrictions meant that I needed to limit my
variables. I could only work with 2 schools, and within that a small number of children from a small number
of classes (3 classes in School 1, 2 classes in School 2). I believe that I still had enough data to make the
study viable but I will assess the overall impact of this in my conclusion. It is also possible that my presence
may have caused difficulties and had an adverse effect on the children’s responses. In many school
contexts, the presence of a stranger elicits responses ranging from curiosity to nervousness. Child may
close up entirely, or give an unnatural response due to their desire to please – “...pre-teens have often
mastered the art of impression management and tailor their answers as such.” (Scott 2008:91). This was
avoided by providing many different ways for children to register their opinions and feelings. Direct
questioning can sometimes give children the impression that they are taking a test (Scott 2008:92),
whereas a more visual, tactile approach can make the issue more concrete and clear than simple verbal
instruction (Scott 2008:91). In this way, I believe that my approach presents many positive factors. The use
of focus groups enabled me to elicit more detailed responses than a simple survey. Using brainstorming,
jelly babies, pictorial cues, writing and illustrations as means to record data meant that I could engage
children of variable learning styles and abilities.
I feel the best way to evaluate my methods is to do so from a standpoint of reliability and validity. Bell
defines reliability as “...the extent to which a test or procedure produces similar results under constant
conditions on all occasions...” warning that “Questions asking opinions may produce different answers for a
range of different reasons” (Bell 1999:103). This is an unavoidable issue in this particular study. In order to
gauge children’s responses in the prayer space, I must also ask their opinions. I cannot foresee if their
opinion or response would be different on a different day; after all, we come to prayer in many different
mindsets. Without observing and questioning on a regular basis over a significant period of time, I can only
assume that perhaps their response would be different under other circumstances. I don’t believe that this
lessens the impact or validity of the study however. If anything, it simply paves the way for future research
in this area to get a clearer picture. An additional element of reliability of a study, especially one involving
children, is in relation to the ethical considerations that needed to be taken into account. Throughout the
study I sought to ensure that my data was reliable from an ethical perspective. The consent forms clearly
set out the conditions of the study and how the information gathered would be used. At all times, the
15
AM75293-6 Lauren Jewhurst mw006600
participants were reminded that they could withdraw from the study at any time. I preserved anonymity
throughout, devising a code to refer to children, staff, and the name of the school in my findings; this code
is clearly explained in the analysis chapter. By maintaining anonymity beyond individuals to the school
itself, I have reduced any chance of identification. Bell supports this, stating that where anonymity is
concerned simply disguising names is not enough (Bell 1999:45). In terms of validity, Bell asks if the study
does what it set out to do – would another researcher given the same information and research instrument
get the same results? (Bell 1999:103) Again, it is difficult to say where opinion and internal response are
concerned. However validity can also be measured in the results – did my study do what it set out to do? I
will evaluate this further in my analysis.
16
AM75293-6 Lauren Jewhurst mw006600
The following results and subsequent analysis come from the data gathered from questionnaires, focus
group activities and additional discussions. The raw data for these results can be found in the appendices,
while specific Figures can be found at the end of this chapter.
While analysing my research a number of clear links and themes came through, which help to answer the
research question and give recommendations for future practice. Many of these are linked to staff and
pupil responses, opinions and feelings about the prayer space, and are both qualitative and quantitative in
nature. As discussed in the methodology, a key has been devised to references sources from the data:
Table 4: Key for Source ReferencingC = child S = school FG = focus group
Each child, school and focus group session has been numbered to maintain confidentiality
E.g. C1 S1 FG1 = child 1, school 1, focus group 1
Staff questionnaires are denoted by the letters a – e
E.g. S1a = staff member ‘a’ from School 1
Fig. 1 (pg ref) outlines data relating to prayer spaces usage. It shows that children from both schools are
given access to the Prayer Space once a week or more. Staff S1d (appendix ref for questionnaires) allows
their children to use the space “Whenever they wish” which also implies regular use. However staff S2a
indicated that their children use the prayer space less than once a term. It is worth noting that S2a also
registered no responses made by children using the prayer space (appendix ref) which could be linked to
lack of use. S2d’s comments that they would like to see “all children” using it implies that perhaps usage is
not as frequent by all classes, something which is shown in S2a’s data and might suggest that some children
use it only at the teacher’s discretion.
Children’s comments made during the focus groups gave a two-sided approach to prayer space usage. One
child highlights that their prayer space is often used on a Monday or Tuesday at the end of the day (C2 S1
FG1, appendix ref), however another laments that the prayer space isn’t used often enough and more
attention should be paid to it (C 4 S1 FG3 appendix ref).
One member of staff linked the prayer space with learning, suggesting that using a prayer space helps to
promote discussion of wider topics and is linked to pastoral care and readiness to learn (S2c appendix).
Even though most of the children get regular access to a prayer space others feel more time should be
spent in the space, and would like it to be more accessible, so this could be attributed to the Piagetian view
17
AM75293-6 Lauren Jewhurst mw006600
that children want to learn and discover (Beckett 2002:74). They see a space which is there to use and want
to use it more effectively. In the same way, Fowler’s view that faith is an innate desire to make more sense
of the world could be attributed to the children’s desire to take part in a spiritual activity more often
(Dallow 2002:86). However, as only a small number of children and staff gave this view we cannot
conclusively say if this is the case.
Fig. 2 pg ref outlines the overall data from children in both schools who were asked to record their feelings
before, during and after their time in the prayer space. Most children recorded their feelings as happy
when entering the prayer space, calm during their time in the prayer space, and thoughtful afterwards.
There are also a number of unexpected answers, such as miserable during the time in the prayer space,
and frightened afterwards. In some cases children offered an explanation for their choice. For example, one
child stated that they were miserable in the prayer space because they were thinking about their pet cat
that had died (C2 S1 FG1 appendix). Another recorded that he was miserable afterwards because he didn’t
want to leave (C3 S2 FG2 appendix). The child who recorded that they were frightened after the time in the
prayer space said it was because God might not have heard his prayers (C3 S1 FG3 appendix). Therefore
one could conclude that the children’s emotional responses to being in the prayer space show a process of
thought and analysis of why they feel that way. According to Piaget’s stages of cognitive development
(table and page ref), primary school children are moving from pre-operational to concrete operational
ways of thinking. Feelings are linked to circumstances, and logical thinking begins to develop in light of new
understanding of the “rules” which dictate those circumstances: “My dog died, so I am sad” (Lamont
2007:21). A child enjoys their time in the prayer space, so they are sad when they leave. A child is given
space to think and therefore thinks about a much loved pet. It is a logical and uncomplicated way of
acknowledging a process of thought and suggests that the prayer space is an ideal time for them to develop
an awareness of their internal emotions.
In addition to the child who thought about her dead cat whilst in the prayer space (C2 S1 FG1), I noticed
that other children’s responses associated time in the prayer space with reflections on death. For example
using the time to think about an Uncle who had committed suicide (C4 S1 FG2 appendix), or a recently-
deceased great grandmother (C3 S1 FG2 appendix), or linking reflection time with thinking about the death
of Jesus (C4 S1 FG2; C3 S1 FG1 appendix). As discussed previously, this is a clear indication of a pre-
operational process of thinking. The prayer space gives time to think, so it is natural that children think
about the things that are important to them. Additionally, Lamont speaks of older, “concrete operational”
children being unable to imagine what they haven’t experienced (Lamont 2007:22). As shown in the lengthy
discussion about suicide during S1 FG2 (appendix) the children brought a discussion on a difficult topic to a
18
AM75293-6 Lauren Jewhurst mw006600
conclusion by associating Heaven with what was familiar to them – football. This could be a sign of trying to
make abstract and unfamiliar notions more concrete even if, as in the case of C2 in this focus group, the
questions are still there. For C2, Heaven cannot be real because no one can prove it. C2’s behaviour is
typical in a stage when children are beginning to question what they are told. However if we are to place C2
on Westerhoff’s scale (table and page ref), he breaks the mould slightly. Westerhoff’s “Searching Faith”
stage which typically takes place during the teenage years, involves challenging the norms that have
formed an individual’s faith up until that point:
“In order to move from an understanding of faith that belongs to community to an understanding of faith that is our own, we need to doubt and question that faith” (Westerhoff 2000:96).
C2 frequently states during the discussions that he is not a Christian – he is forming his own identity
separate to that of the C of E school of which he is a part (appendix). Although C2 may appear to be a
developmental stage before his time this is a prime example of how frameworks are not exhaustive and
apply differently to individuals.
Additionally the concept of “mystery-sensing” – thinking about what is out there, what we don’t
understand beyond everyday life, is an essential part of spiritual development according to Nye’s theories.
Mystery-sensing is one of 3 key elements for spiritual development, where children are immersed in awe
and wonder, imagination and fantasy (Dallow 2002:81). Unlike Fowler and Westerhoff’s stages, Nye’s are
not linear and mystery-sensing is something that can be done at any time and alongside other ways of
making meaning of the spiritual. It appears from this discussion that time in the prayer space, and the
opportunity to discuss issues, are giving children permission to think about issues they find difficult to
imagine or understand but nonetheless wish to think about.
C2’s contributions to S1 FG2 also raised an interesting issue of prayer as a corporate and community
activity. Many teachers linked spiritual development and their class prayer spaces to more corporate school
activities such as assemblies and prayers before lunch time (S1c, S1d, S1e appendix). Whole school topics
and values were brought into individual prayer spaces to bring a sense of continuity with the whole school
in mind (S1b, S2b). However this sense of community is argued by the comments from C2 S1 FG2 who
shared that he is often “bored” in the prayer space because he is not a Christian and yet feels he cannot
share this “because it is a Christian school” (appendix). Other children found resonance with the emotion
“withdrawn” with one child using it to define her feelings of wanting to be left alone – “I don’t like anyone
talking to me when I am reflecting” (C3 S1 FG2 appendix). This indicates a need for personal space in a
corporate activity. This information raises interesting questions in terms of faith development especially in
19
AM75293-6 Lauren Jewhurst mw006600
light of Fowler and Westerhoff’s theories. Primary school children, especially those at C2’s age, are finding
their identity and developing their faith through communion with others. Westerhoff’s “Affiliative Faith”
and Fowler’s “Mythical-Literal Faith” both centre on a child’s need for belonging to a larger group or
community. C2 clearly feels excluded from this community because of his difference in beliefs and it could
be further proof that he is moving beyond the Affiliative Faith stage on to the Searching stage.
An additional comment from S1e gives the sense that while the prayer space is often a class and
community activity, it can also be used as a chance for personal and individual reflection: “[The prayer
space] helps children understand that we don’t only learn about God or talk to God when someone else
tells us to” (appendix). It is implied through this that prayer is as much a personal activity as a corporate
one, and children should not feel under duress or forced to think about God in a particular way. The
difficulty lies in appreciating that for many children their cognitive, spiritual and faith development depends
upon the actions and guidance of another person, usually an adult. Vygotsky’s scaffolding approach is
evident in S1d’s data when they state that responses from the children – especially saying sorry – come
about with guidance and intervention from an adult (appendix). This is not to say that the response isn’t
genuine, simply that the children are learning a new social skill with the help of an adult who will gradually
step back as the children learn to respond unprompted. This is a positive aspect of adult intervention, yet
as S1e suggests it is also beneficial for children to meet with God in their own terms. There are some
aspects of spirituality which cannot be “taught” and therefore a balanced approach of personal and
communal is necessary.
When asked to describe how they would define spiritual development, there was a clear sense of process
and journey in staff responses (appendix). S1a spoke of a “transformation” while S1d spoke of reaching a
“level of maturity” through “personal growth”. This correlates with the views of Fowler, Westerhoff, Piaget
and others who believe that development is a linear process. This sense of personal growth was also
suggested by other members of staff, specifically in relation to actions and consequences (S1b), assessing
strengths and weaknesses (S1c), making sense of feelings (S2d). As well as highlighting internal aspects of
spiritual development, external aspects such as considering what affects relationships (S1a) and
understanding others (S1b) were also cited. Staff believed that identity and sense of self was key to spiritual
development, particularly through looking at achievements (S2c), their unique potential (S1c) and the
difference they can make in their lifetime (S2b). S2d and S1e are the only staff members to link spiritual
development with faith and religion – S2d believes spiritual development is about reflecting on beliefs,
while S1e believes it lies with church and understanding of God. The sense of mystery and awe was also
highlighted – S1a believes that spiritual development involves thinking about that which is “out there” and
20
AM75293-6 Lauren Jewhurst mw006600
beyond everyday life. These reflections and responses have particular resonance with the work of Nye, who
believes that part of a child’s spiritual development is becoming aware of an inner self, sense of conscience,
and right and wrong.
However the most compelling argument for whether the prayer space itself supports spiritual development
by these and “official” definitions comes from the responses observed by staff and some comments given
by the children themselves. Members of staff were also asked to record any responses they observed when
their pupils had been using the prayer space, the results of which are shown in Fig. 3 pg ref and seem to
correlate with their views on spiritual development and those held by, for example, Nye. In this set of data
the most commonly observed responses relate to the children’s own actions and their concern and
empathy for others. In their own discussions, children spoke about how time in the prayer space gives them
an opportunity to reflect on their day and the events that happened (C1 & C3 S1 FG2; C1 S1 FG3 appendix),
while others believe that time in the prayer space can provide an opportunity to think about those in need
(C4 S1 FG3). These responses seem to correlate with staff observations as they indicate a growing sense of
self, need for reflection, and concern for others. While only two staff members linked spiritual development
specifically to the Christian faith, the children themselves frequently associated the prayer space with God
and Jesus. Alongside moments to reflect were moments to ask God for something or think about the death
of Jesus. From a Christian point of view, this makes sense. If we are to believe that children are made in
God’s image then “...it would be difficult to understand why [we] are created without an instinctive
capacity to respond to our Creator” (Nye 2009:9) If a prayer space gives children the opportunity to spend
time with God (C4 S1 FG3 appendix) then it is arguably serving a purpose in developing their awareness and
understanding of the spiritual. Spiritual development may not be limited to religious contexts but that does
not negate the impact religious concepts can have on that development.
The physical prayer space was also commented on and discussed at length in both focus group sessions
appendix and questionnaires appendix. It is clear that the atmosphere of the prayer space impacts pupils’
experience and staff views on it. Staff members S1b, S2c and S2d referred to comfortable aspects of the
prayer space such as beanbags, cushions, a rug and soft lighting. Additionally, S1b and S1d provide thought-
provoking or classical music which seems to promote a sense of calm and reflection. In most cases the
prayer spaces rely heavily on objects and symbols to provide focus and stimulus. All the prayer spaces
described in School 1 have Bibles, crosses, candles and prayer books for children to look at and focus on.
Additionally S1b, S1e, and S2c provide the children with tactile symbols relating to a theme e.g. Nativity set,
Noah’s Ark, or pictures relating to a Christian value. Rather than just providing visual focus, the objects and
symbols in the prayer spaces were there to provide a hands on and tactile experience for the children. The
21
AM75293-6 Lauren Jewhurst mw006600
tactile element of the prayer space seemed to be important to S1e who states that the children “are
allowed to play with the figures” as part of their time in the prayer space. In a more general way, S2b
makes reference to the tactile nature of the prayer space as a whole.
Plate 3: School 1 class prayer space
The children also made reference to these aspects of the prayer space in their comments. Some children
remarked that they felt comfy and relaxed (sleepy) in the prayer space (C3 & C1 S1 FG1 appendix). They
acknowledge that they have symbols and objects to look at as a means of focus (C1 S1 FG3 appendix). The
cross is a symbol which was referenced frequently; C2 S1 Fg2 (appendix), C1 & C4 S2 FG2 (appendix)
highlighted the crosses when describing their prayer space, and the children of S2 FG1 all drew crosses in
their brainstorming and sentence completion activities (appendix). It was noted by some children that
being able to hold the crosses was a positive part of being in the prayer space (C1, C4 & C5 S2 FG2
appendix). We have already seen how Nye’s mystery-sensing theory explains a child’s need to explore the
unknown, but within the same framework is a theory that “Awareness-sensing” can also help children deal
with what is happening in the here and now. Awareness-sensing can take place through sensitivity to the
aesthetic, such as a piece of music or visual stimuli. In a similar way, Piaget emphasises that children who
are moving from pre-operational to concrete operational thinking need hands on experiences to learn new
skills and link the objects in their hands with the images in their minds (Lamont 2007:22). Children in
Fowler’s “Mythical –Literal Stage” will also learn about faith through symbols and concrete representations
of them (Astley 1991:22). If crosses the children hold in their hand become synonymous with the death of
Christ, it could progress onto thinking about what that story means to them thus developing a sense of
identity to make that story real (Lamont 2007:75). In S2 FG2, C4 stated that she felt “...safe and secure in
22
AM75293-6 Lauren Jewhurst mw006600
the prayer space because I know God is with me because I don’t feel that way all the time” ( appendix). This
child has learnt to associate the space and the symbols within with comfort and security not felt elsewhere.
Perhaps holding a cross or looking at a candle during a peaceful time of reflection may help the children
find comfort and solace in God’s presence through that object. It is from this that we can therefore
conclude that a prayer space full of tactile images, symbols and stimuli will in some way support children’s
spiritual development.
However not all of the children were as positive about their prayer space. In both schools, a small number
of older pupils said that they found their prayer space too small or cramped. In School 1, the children of
FG3 agreed that the prayer space was not utilised properly; when C4 showed me the prayer space (Plate 4,
below) she pointed out that it was “quite small and in a corner so we can’t use it properly” (appendix ).
Plate 4: S1 FG3’s class prayer space
In S2 FG2 (appendix), C4 remarked that their communal prayer space (Picture 5, overleaf) was “very small
and cramped”. C5 concurred, adding “The one in the hall should be bigger”. It is worth noting at this stage
that the children of School 2 had been in a session with the Prayer Spaces for Schools team, who had
turned an ICT suite into a multisensory prayer space. The children’s remarks may have come because their
time in the larger prayer space brought to their attention the issues of the smaller communal one. Indeed
comparisons were made between the 2 by C2 and C5 of S2 FG2 who felt the larger prayer space was bigger
and better.
23
AM75293-6 Lauren Jewhurst mw006600
Plate 5: School 2 communal prayer space
The issue of space is an important one and is highlighted by Dallow who maintains that a damaged or ill-
thought-out environment does not promote a sense of self worth with the children, nor does it encourage
them to show respect to their surroundings (Dallow 2002:68). A danger is that even well-meaning adults
may inadvertently stilt spiritual development by not taking note of what the children respond to and need. I
will look at this further in the conclusion of this chapter.
The concept of prayer itself and how it might be defined was touched upon in some of the answers given
by both children and staff. Many of the children saw prayer as a time to make petitionary requests of God
for help or something specific. For example in S1 FG3 (appendix), C1 states that the prayer space is there to
“Pray to God for help in work”, while C3 states that in the prayer space “I ask God for different things”. C2
implies a two way conversation during prayer – “I ask God about things and listen to his answers.” This
supports the view put forward by Cloyd who believes that children, “...have a formula and it is simple: we
have a need, we present it to God, God hears our prayers and God answers.” (Cloyd 1997:7)
In School 2, S2c implied a problem solving approach to spiritual development, stating that children
understand “how they approach problems...” as they develop spiritually (appendix). While this doesn’t
suggest prayer specifically as a way to do this, if that particular member of staff links spiritual development
with problem solving then School 2 pupils may also chose to use their time in the prayer space accordingly.
24
AM75293-6 Lauren Jewhurst mw006600
This behaviour was also seen by Hay and Nye in their research, and they came to the conclusion that up
until the ages of 10-12 children’s prayers follow a mechanical formula of making requests to God. It is only
as teenagers do children use prayer to share confidences and intimacies (Hay and Nye 2006:52). When I
first encountered this view I was sceptical, and I think it is important at this stage to look at comments
during a discussion in S1 FG3 (appendix) where a distinction was made in the definition of prayer. C4
related prayer to taking to or thinking about God, whereas “...if you are just relaxing...not thinking about
God, then you are not actually praying.” This implies an understanding of prayer as direct communication
with or thoughts about God. Her peers went on to clarify – “Praying is talking to God, he listens to you and
makes a decision for you” (C3). Therefore, if I am to test Hay and Nye’s theory against the theory put
forward by the children, then indeed their “prayers” did centre on requests. Their “reflections” centred on
their day, their feelings, relaxation and other people. In terms of what this means for the prayer space and
spiritual development, I think that it shows an interesting level of thought by the children. They are giving
the prayer space a multifunctional use themselves, recognising and demonstrating that spiritual
experiences can be defined in many ways. Dallow defines prayer as “...listening to and being aware of God’s
presence” (Dallow 2002:139). It is clear that for some children that can happen through direct
communication with God or simply by being with Him in the prayer space as they relax and reflect.
However we cannot take for granted that the children are cautious in their views on how prayer is
answered. Within their confidence that they are able to talk to God in the prayer space are questions and
doubts as to whether or not He will hear. This was demonstrated especially in S1 FG3 as both C3 and C4
express a concern that God may not have heard their prayers (appendix refs). C4 also ponders how prayers
are answered; sharing a story about a prayer which in her mind took a day to be answered. C1 reply is
simply “That’s how long they take to get there” (appendix). This sharing of ideas and concepts is vital in
helping children ponder aspects of prayer they may find difficult to understand. As we have already seen,
questioning and doubting is a typical stage of spiritual development. In Fowler’s Mythical-Literal stage,
typically between ages 6-12, children want to know “Is it true?” They begin to find meaning by questioning
and seeking proof. Perhaps C1’s suggestion is sufficient to show C4 that prayer is answered. However it is
likely that her journey will involve more questioning and the prayer space appears to be an ideal place for
that to happen.
I am satisfied that my research has brought about conclusive, but not exhaustive evidence in support of
prayer spaces and their impact on spiritual development. Naturally there is much more to find out and I will
look at ways in which this research can be developed in the following chapter.
25
AM75293-6 Lauren Jewhurst mw006600
Figure 1: Prayer Space Usage
26
AM75293-6 Lauren Jewhurst mw006600
Figure 2: Children’s Emotional Responses
27
AM75293-6 Lauren Jewhurst mw006600
Figure 3: Children’s Responses Observed by Staff
28
AM75293-6 Lauren Jewhurst mw006600
This research has brought about a clear argument in favour of prayer spaces in the spiritual development of
our children in primary schools. That is not to say, however, that there isn’t more that can be done. In light
of the research there are a number of recommendations to be made.
Nye’s “SPIRIT” model is a good way to ensure good practice and develop the spirituality of children in many
contexts (Nye 2009:51-59). By applying this model to the context of prayer spaces, we can think about how
they can be more effective in supporting that spiritual development:
Space
We have already seen how the physical space impacts on the children’s experiences of the prayer space.
They need space which is big enough and easily accessible, and the opportunity for regular access. Having
tactile and visual objects in the space will help the children develop understanding of symbols and
concepts, while a comfortable setting can ensure relaxation and enjoyment. Space is also a Biblical
imperative. God provided His people with a space in which they could come and worship Him (1 Kings 8),
find meaning in rituals (Luke 1) and comfort in His presence (1 Samuel 1). A child from Biblical times will
have found identity through the visual memorials and artefacts from Hebrew history (Dallow 2002: 27). This
is as important today as it was then – a well thought out prayer space offering opportunities to experience
God’s presence can have the same benefit in developing the spiritual identity of our primary school
children.
Process
It is vital to remember that spiritual development is a process, not a product: “There is no such thing as a
static faith.” (Dallow 2002:84). Frameworks can be useful in gaining a better understanding of development
and improve service provision for children in order to support that development, but we must not allow
them to tempt us into thinking that there is a goal or target to be reached with latter stages deemed more
important than earlier ones (Nye 2009:85). In a school environment where targets and attainment are so
important, it goes against the grain to suggest children do not need to demonstrate certain qualities by a
certain time. Their responses can give us an indication of their development but they are not conclusive
and this development should be nurtured at all times for as long as possible. Our spiritual journey as a
human being ends only when our life journey ends.
29
AM75293-6 Lauren Jewhurst mw006600
Imagination
Primary school children begin school brimming with imagination and creativity in their cognitive
development (Lamont 2007:70). While this moves on to more literal interpretations of life, the desire to
make and play is still there. Therefore, if a prayer space or reflection time can somehow harness this
imagination by presenting new situations, stories or symbols, it can undoubtedly develop a child’s
spirituality. Using imagination in prayer reinforces the idea that prayer is informal and natural (Nye
2009:60).
Relationship
This aspect has many dimensions, first of all the relationship between the child and staff members. The
more staff members know about their pupils, the better they can understand where they are coming from.
When I shared C2’s input into S1 FG2 with his class teacher, she immediately understood why he had said
those things (appendix). However she was still taken aback at his fear of sharing those feelings, which
implies that more communication is needed. Secondly, the relationship between the children and God: in
the same way that spiritual development cannot be forced, neither can a relationship with God. The Biblical
example of Samuel from 1 Samuel 3 is relevant here – Samuel’s first encounter with God came about in an
everyday situation. When Samuel informed Eli of God’s words, Eli did not go and intercede on Samuel’s
behalf. Instead he sent Samuel back to continue the communication himself. A child’s relationship with God
can come about with adult guidance but not interference. Adults can provide the space but children are
capable of making use of it. Their responses might vary and differ from what we expect or want, but that
does not make them invalid. Children must realise that they can come to God as they are.
Intimacy
Linked to relationship, this is about making the child feel safe. As demonstrated by C4 in S2 FG2, security in
a prayer space is conducive to being able to use it effectively. Prayer is a deeply personal thing, and children
must be allowed to share as much or as little as they want. Children need to feel able to share their feelings
and prayers without fear of being laughed at or corrected.
30
AM75293-6 Lauren Jewhurst mw006600
Trust
Again, this is linked to intimacy and relationship. Trust means children learning to have a mutual respect for
each other. By showing trust in their ability to respect other children’s ways of praying, we are encouraging
that respect even further. In the same way, staff can show their trust of the children by consulting them
more often on the actual prayer space. As we saw with a number of the children, they felt their prayer
space was not used enough, not easily accessible, or rather small and cramped to use properly. This
differed from staff opinions and suggests that communication on the issue which empowers children to
make the prayer space more “their own” may help it become more effective. A “Mosaic” approach, as
pioneered by Clark and Moss (2001), may be helpful here. Originally used to empower those in
impoverished rural communities, it uses many different techniques to gain a whole picture of an individual
or group perspective (Greig et al. 2007:158). In this context, and it is important to consider time restrictions
on members of staff, children can feedback their views and opinions on the prayer space by taking photos,
giving guided tours (which was helpful for my own research), and mapping out areas and objects of
importance to them (Greig et al. 2007:159). Empowerment of this sort shows a level of trust between staff
and pupils – children are entrusted with gathering information, and staff are trusted to take the children’s
opinions seriously. Schools may find that changes are made to the prayer spaces which bring about more
effective encounters and meaningful responses as a result.
31
AM75293-6 Lauren Jewhurst mw006600
“If we, as people of faith value our children, then we will recognise that one of our most significant
responsibilities is to help them stay in touch with their spiritual selves” (Cloyd 1997:xiv)
In my position as a Children’s Worker I am acutely aware of my responsibility for the spiritual well-being of
the children in my care. My intention in this study was to discover the ways in which prayer spaces
contribute to spiritual development and I believe that I have been successful in doing so. It is clear from the
data presented in my analysis that prayer space can support the spiritual development of the children using
them. This is shown in the children’s responses and observations made by the staff. Children have
demonstrated an awareness of self and identity, meaning-making, questioning and doubt, as well as
demonstrating various stages of cognitive development.
It must be understood, however, that the call of duty laid down by Cloyd is not just limited to practitioners
within a faith context like myself. Primary school teachers are also charged with a responsibility for
nurturing spiritual development through their National Curriculum provision. Prayer spaces can provide
staff with the opportunity to meet that responsibility of nurturing their pupil’s spiritual development
through reflection and prayer. However, caution must be taken to make prayer an inclusive activity and one
which incorporates the principles laid down by the “SPIRIT” model outlined in the recommendations. If a
prayer space is not accessible and functional, it is not going to meet its full potential and neither will the
children.
I feel that this research project has only begun to scratch the surface regarding the impact of prayer spaces.
I can only present what I have discovered within the limits of time and opportunity. Had I the opportunity
to do this research again, or progress it further, I would ensure that data was collected from a wider
demographic of schools. I would also include all children in the primary school age range to gain a better
comparison of ages and stages. It would be interesting to set up a prayer space from scratch and research
any difference in responses from children who had never had access to a prayer space compared to those
who did. This would give a clearer indication of whether regular use equates to more progressive spiritual
development.
This study has provided opportunities to explore prayer spaces outside of the school context, but still
within the remit of my role as a practitioner. I would like to bring prayer spaces into the church through
Junior Church sessions and All Age Services, encouraging children to communicate with God in a new and
exciting way. I also feel that the responsibilities laid out in Deuteronomy 6 are not simply limited to parents
– the whole church “village” has a responsibility to raise the child (White 2008:11). Demonstrating to
32
AM75293-6 Lauren Jewhurst mw006600
parents how prayer spaces can contribute to the spiritual development of their child and using the “SPIRIT”
model to give ideas on how to set one up in the home will encourage parents and children to meet God
together as a family according to the Biblical models given to us.
When forming my dissertation aims I was reluctant to commit to proving a hypothesis. My research set out
to study a possible link between prayer spaces and spiritual development, and I have concluded it by
suggesting that the link is clear. Perhaps that is sufficient to argue a case. However I am limited to simply
highlighting correlations because ultimately spirituality is a deeply personal issue. There are limits to how
much we can quantify a personal response. Further research could present more evidence but I believe
that we will never really know exactly how our children are communicating with God internally. We can
only speculate, and with good intentions assist them in that communication.
It is in conclusion of this study that we can go back to the very simple definition of spirituality given by Nye:
“God’s ways of being with children, children’s ways of being with God” (Nye 2009:5). A child’s relationship
with God is ultimately none of our business. It is personal, internal and private. With this in mind I finish
with the words of Jesus to His disciples: “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them...”
(Matt 19:14). Put simply, we must bring the children to a safe place where they can meet with God. The
rest is up to them.
Word count: 10,985
33