ABSTRACT

This article identifies three types of barrier which may inhibityoung children’s spiritual growth and considers how thesecan be overcome. One type includes physical and emotionalharm, stress and discrimination often associated with socio-cultural factors such as gender, race/ethnicity, class, disabilityand religion. The second result from societal expectationswhich commodify children and encourage material pursuit,trivialisation and immediacy and those resulting from perfor-mativity. The third are more individual stemming from howadults interact with children, including tendencies to over-control or overprotect and silence children’s voices and closedown enquiry. The importance of strengthening children’ssense of agency and qualities such as resilience, empathy andreflectiveness is highlighted. Adults must be attuned to chil-dren’s age, backgrounds, feelings and beliefs, guiding ratherthan controlling. A holistic approach with inclusive environ-ments and mutually respectful relationships is advocated butstructural barriers make this difficult in schools in the currentpolicy context.

Introduction

This article considers the barriers which may inhibit how children manifesttheir spirituality and hinder their spiritual growth and how children canovercome these and adults help them to do so. It is argued that thoseinterested in children’s spirituality should take more account of social andcultural factors which are often overlooked, though Mattis et al. (2006)address this especially in terms of ethnicity. And that those thinkingabout how children should be brought up and educated should givemore consideration to the spiritual dimension and the barriers identified.The article aims to provide insights on issues explicitly related to chil-dren’s spiritual growth and on the effects of the social and cultural context and educational policy on children. Without claiming to be com-prehensive or conclusive, it seeks to identify fertile areas for furtherdiscussion and research.

This discussion takes place in a context of rapid social and cultural change,increasing concern about children’s level of happiness and mental health(UNICEF 2021) and policy priorities in education which focus mainly on aca-demic attainment. The focus is on young children up to the age of 11 but muchof the discussion is relevant to older children. While the conclusions apply tomost children, some, especially those who have experienced severe disruptionor trauma, may need more specialised support. While detailed discussion oftrauma-informed practice is beyond the scope of this article, a later sectionincludes brief reflections on this.

The argument is predicated on the beliefs that:

spirituality is a concept with no universally agreed definition (see e.g.,Bregman 2004; Priestley 2000);

how one understands children’s spirituality and childhood inevitablyaffects one’s view of what constitutes appropriate provision; and

identifying barriers can help children to overcome, and adults to minimise,these.

Since there is no consensus on children’s spirituality and how to enable spiritualgrowth, the article tries to identify barriers and approaches which are applicablewhatever one’s view. Some barriers are visible, others more hidden and uncon-scious. The term ‘visible’ indicates that those who do not face the barriers areoften unaware of them, but they are obvious and formidable for those who do.This is so especially for members of groups who may be marginalised based onfactors such as gender, ethnicity, class, disability and religion (see Hirsch 2018;Lareau 2011; Reay 2017).

The next section discusses children’s spirituality and spiritual growth. Seeingthese as important dimensions of, and processes in, the education of the wholechild provides the basis for the subsequent discussion of socio-cultural factorswhich may inhibit children from manifesting their spirituality and may stunttheir spiritual growth. How children can be enabled to overcome the barriersidentified and to what extent, and how, adults and schools can help to dis-mantle or minimise them are then considered. The conclusion includesa tentative typology based on three main types of barrier and calls fora holistic approach where hospitable, inclusive, nurturing environments(Eaude 2014), with relationships of care and mutual trust, are created andsustained.

Exploring children’s spirituality and spiritual growth

Finding an exact, widely agreed definition of, and language for, children’sspirituality has proved problematic, with description seeming a more promisingapproach (see Priestley 2000). If the spiritual domain refers to all, rather thanonly some, children, an inclusive view is required. So, descriptions andapproaches which exclude some children based on factors such as backgroundor religion seem to be fundamentally flawed. Goodliff’s (2013, 28) view thatspirituality is ‘an aspect of humanity common to all persons throughout everystage of their life and is located in the potential of every child to relate to andmake sense of questions of ultimate significance’ provides an inclusive descrip-tion and resonates with much of the research in children’s spirituality.

Priestley (2000) critiqued the metaphor of spiritual ‘development’, advocat-ing instead ‘growth’. With its connotations of cultivation, this metaphor indi-cates that spirituality can be encouraged and nurtured (or inhibited) but notforced. It highlights the need for space, time and support along with (some)constraining, though it may retain the (questionable) connotation that childrenmust become like adults. As Smith (1999, 4) writes, ‘we should think . . . in termsof creating spaces where spirituality is affirmed and spiritual growth can hap-pen’. However, spiritual growth involves more than children just being allowedto manifest their spirituality.

Eaude (2005) writes that spiritual development (or what may be betterdescribed as growth) involves search into questions related to identity, meaningand purpose – such as who am I? where do I belong? and why am I here? A viewof spirituality which focusses only on children being happy and having positiveexperiences fails to recognise that many questions related to identity, meaningand purpose are difficult and possibly painful. Such questions can be consideredinside or outside organised religion (McLaughlin 2003) and are inherently lessopen to definite, conclusive answers than factual ones. They may be exploreddirectly through words, but young children, particularly, mostly do so moreindirectly, such as through imaginative play, drama, the arts and experience ofthe natural world (Goodliff 2013; Robinson 2022).

Building on Hay and Nye’s (1998) idea of ‘relational consciousness’, andHyde’s (2008) emphasis on meaning and connectedness, children’s spiritualgrowth seems to involve them becoming more connected with other peopleand the natural world and (for some) God; and gaining a greater sense ofbelonging and interdependence.

While many people believe, explicitly or otherwise, that children’s spiritualityis expressed through experiences of wonder (Robinson 2022), of mystery or ofGod, these do not necessarily lead to spiritual growth. However, such experi-ences frequently provoke existential questions, as do unsettling ones. So, theycan help provide the soil in which spiritual growth can occur, as children explorequestions about themselves and the world around them, unless they cease to be curious. Such a process can happen anywhere, but spiritual growth seemsoften to occur largely unnoticed during everyday life, prompted by a question,a story, a piece of music or a puzzling experience. But Adams, Hyde, and Woolley(2008) highlight that children’s voices in areas associated with spirituality areoften not heard or silenced.

Hull (1996, 1998) sees spirituality as based on relationships, writing that‘spirituality exists not inside people, but between them’ (Hull 1998, 66). Heargues that spirituality is not only individual but that groups and societiesmanifest spiritualities in the values which they reflect and promote; and thatcapitalist societies demonstrate and encourage values based mainly on money,consumption and commodification. Children are inevitably influenced by thecultures and traditions in which they grow up and the assumptions, values andbeliefs which these convey (Adams 2019), whether explicitly or more subtly.Spiritual growth seems to entail children questioning and challenging at leastsome of these.

This discussion suggests that, although understandings of spirituality differ,spiritual growth requires time, space and (the right sort of) guidance; and thattoo individual or cosy a view of children’s spirituality and how spiritual growthoccurs should be avoided. The environments in which children grow up arecrucial, but to understand what such environments should be like and how socio-cultural factors affect children, let us consider possible barriers to be overcome.

The importance of basic needs being met

A useful starting point is Maslow’s hierarchy of needs (Maslow 1998). Thisemphasises that physical needs, such as food, exercise and sleep and feelingsafe and having a sense of belonging, must be met before others can be. Somegroups of children, especially those from deprived socio-economic back-grounds, are more likely to have poor diet and health and be subject to greaterstress than others (Sanders-Phillips et al. 2009). Some are likely to find it hard tomaintain a sense of belonging and security which helps to counter the fear –and the reality – of exclusion. For instance, belonging is more difficult forchildren from families under stress who face constant discrimination andthose who have been displaced and/or move home and school frequently(see Eaude 2020).

Linked to children’s wish to belong is their desire for approval and concernabout status and embarrassment. Children tend to crave adult approval thoughthey may seek it in very different, sometimes counter-productive, ways (Davidand Powell 1999). Most young children usually seem less obviously concernedwith the pursuit of status than older children and adults; and their questions andresponses more open and less guarded. However, this often changes as childrenapproach adolescence and they become more concerned with what otherpeople, especially their peer group, think.

Socio-cultural factors – some cautionary words

This and the next two sections consider how intersecting socio-culturalfactors may influence children’s identities, beliefs and self-esteem. Theseinclude gender, race/ethnicity, class – especially poverty – disability andreligion and wider cultural influences. Some may be sources of belongingor pride but may also affect children adversely by providing the basis forbarriers and make it harder for children to overcome them. Some may notseem, at first sight, to be associated with spirituality. However, if thespiritual dimension is one aspect of the whole child, these factors, andthe attitudes and expectations which often accompany them, influence,rather than determine, individuals’ identities; and may affect spiritualgrowth.

Three important points must be remembered. The first is that these factorsmust not be seen in isolation and this brief discussion inevitably oversimplifiesthe complex issues involved. Eaude (2020), especially Chapter 2) providesa more detailed and nuanced discussion.

The second is that identities are socially constructed (Jenkins 2014) andthese factors influence rather than determine how individual members ofa group respond. They intersect in ways which make it hard to know to whatextent any individual child may be affected. Some influence how individualadults interact with children. Other socio-cultural and structural ones mayinfluence whole groups – and therefore children within these. However,individuals may respond differently to apparently similar experiences.Variations within any group are significantly greater than those betweengroups (see Gaine and George 1993, 6–9). It is not a child’s gender, ethnicityor social background, as such, which determines how they come to under-stand and conduct themselves. Therefore, generalisations must be treatedwith caution and no child should be essentialised based on biology orbackground. Adults should avoid a deficit model, labelling individual childrenbased on these factors. However, one should not ignore their influence andthis should not preclude trying to identify barriers which groups, and indivi-duals within these, may face. Barriers and solutions should be seen mostly interms of how children are treated rather than how a particular individual ‘is’or group of children ‘are’, if this implies that they cannot change – thedangerous myth of immutability.

The third is that spirituality is not, and must not be seen as, the preserve ofthe privileged. A narrow range of experiences, often associated with poverty,tends to limit children’s horizons and can easily restrict their imagination andcuriosity. However, many children from disadvantaged groups may be moreopen to spiritual growth than those from more privileged backgrounds, espe-cially if they experience nurturing environments and overcome the barriers theyface.

Factors which affect children’s identities, values and beliefs

The idea of socialisation helps to explain how socio-cultural factors affectchildren both directly and in terms of adults’ expectations. Berger andLuckmann (1967) indicate that primary socialisation takes place during veryearly childhood, especially within the family, when children start to internaliseattitudes and values. Subsequently, broader social interactions lead to second-ary socialisation, in which a child learns how to act and interact in groupsoutside the home, such as the extended family, faith-based or other groupsand formal settings such as nurseries and schools. However, primary exertsa deeper influence than secondary socialisation.

Gender is one of the earliest distinctions which young children make inunderstanding themselves and other people (see Jenkins 2014, 81–2 onthis and early development more generally). Socialisation as a boy ora girl starts very early, for instance in how babies are dressed and thetoys they are expected to play with. In most cultures, boys are expectedand encouraged to be more active and challenging, and girls to bequieter and more conforming. Discrimination on the grounds of genderremains widespread.

The idea that humanity can be divided into discrete races has been discre-dited. Nevertheless, racism, based on aspects such as language, skin colour andtypes of dress or food, seems to be universal in all societies and is frequently thebasis of children feeling inferior or superior to others (Hirsch 2018). Ethnicity isstrongly correlated with outcomes, particularly when linked with other margin-alising factors. For instance, people of colour, especially males and those livingin poverty, frequently have high levels of stress and illness and low levels ofliteracy and educational attainment. These are largely the result of how childrenof colour are viewed and treated, for instance in terms of discrimination, ratherthan how they ‘are’ (see Connolly 2002; Sanders-Phillips et al. 2009). However,many children from such backgrounds demonstrate the qualities and disposi-tions which enable them to overcome the barriers they face.

Although there is no universally agreed definition of class, Reay (2017)distinguishes between two main elements:

socio-economic background and level of family income; and

values, norms, beliefs and practices, which indicate status and what isdeemed to matter.

There is some overlap between these, but each reflects different aspects. Theless tangible ones in the second are culturally contingent and associated withsocialisation; and affect children’s behaviours and identities in ways which it ishard to pin down and quantify. However, poverty, and the stress and exclusionwhich usually stems from this, affects families and children in all societies.

While attitudes towards, and provision for, children with a disability havechanged in recent decades, at least in Western countries, this is not the same inall cultures. Discrimination against children with disabilities, whether throughlow expectations and/or unconscious bias, remains common. Yet, many childrenwith disabilities show great determination and ability to overcome difficulties.

One factor affecting children’s identities which is frequently underestimatedin secular contexts is religion. While many children have little experience orknowledge of religious beliefs or practices, religion is for some, especially manyfrom minority ethnic backgrounds, an integral part of how they live and areexpected to act. Yet, members of some religious groups, including children,experience hostility and discrimination based on their faith, especially whenthey are visibly different from other members of society. Organised religioussettings can, and often do, provide a context which enables children to belongand nurtures spiritual growth. However, they can also be narrowing and restric-tive, especially if enquiry and exploration is discouraged.

How external factors contribute to creating barriers

The factors discussed in the previous section are correlated with the extent towhich children are excluded or marginalised. They affect attitudes and expecta-tions in both children and adults which can easily lead to stereotyping of, anddiscrimination against, individuals from particular groups and fewer opportu-nities being available. Discrimination may be overt, coded or unconscious butleads to exclusion, isolation and resentment if not addressed. At the root of suchattitudes are issues of power, especially ‘othering’ based on fear of those whoare different and may be seen as threatening (see Nussbaum 2010, 33–4). Moresubtly, such experiences may combine to affect children’s feelings and beliefsabout themselves such as low self-esteem and a sense of shame, especiallywhen these are re-inforced by adults; and so present barriers to spiritual growth.

Many adults believe that very young children are unaware of factors such asethnicity or class or take no notice of them. As discussed in Eaude (2020, 76–92),children’s awareness of such factors develops gradually and unevenly, so thatsome may be unaware of the implication of their actions or the language whichthey use. However, the influence of these factors in children being discriminatedagainst or leading to ‘othering’ those who are different operates from an earlierage than is usually assumed.

While many adults, especially teachers, claim to treat all children the same,not wishing to over-emphasise difference, unconscious bias and stereotypingaffects how different children are seen and treated, often dependent on theirbackground- and adult assumptions based on this (Moule 2009). Even morecorrosive is the view that some children are unable to change, especially whenthis is based on a child’s background or group identity. Failing to address suchattitudes and behaviours helps to perpetuate the status quo.

Wider social and cultural influences

Hyde (2008, 141–159) identifies trivialisation and material pursuit as twofactors which inhibit children’s spirituality. Trivialisation leads to a child’sresponses and questions not being taken seriously and to dismissal oravoidance, whether consciously or not, of experiences which may be signifi-cant to him or her.

Trivialising or dismissing what children feel or say may result from adultsbeing too busy, wishing to protect children or not knowing how to respond, orprovide ‘the right answer’, to children’s questions. This may help to explain whymany adults are reluctant to address difficult and potentially painful issues withchildren and discourage children from talking or thinking about them. Theresult is that adults often, possibly unwittingly, inhibit children from raising orexploring significant questions and issues, especially awkward or uncomfortableones. This, and worry about embarrassment, easily leads children to be reluctantto voice their views, especially ones which may seem, to other people, foolish –and so for their voices to be silenced.

Material pursuit is encouraged by advertising and images of success based oncelebrity and possessions and tends to encourage individualism. The wide-spread availability of media such as television and computer games tends tomake children expect quick and attractive messages – and to respond rapidly.While this may be valuable in some respects, the busy-ness of children’s – andadults’- lives means that time and space to reflect on serious questions arefrequently in short supply. Moreover, watching and responding to a screen isoften an individual rather than a social activity. When combined with seductivemessages, often subtly targeted at children, about success, possessions andconsumption, this encourages excessive desire for material goods, a focus onthe self and narcissism.

Hyde (2021) argues convincingly that an emphasis on performativity,particularly in schools, silences children’s spiritual voices. Performativity (seeBall 2003) is based on constant comparison with other people and is linked,and tends to lead, to hyper competitiveness, regular high-stakes testing andtransmissive teaching. Memorisation and compliance are valued more thanqualities and dispositions such as creativity and imagination associated withspiritual growth. These are too often stifled, and children’s confidence andwillingness to take risks undermined, in a culture of performativity, especiallyas interpersonal competition and the views of the peer group become moreinfluential.

Overcoming barriers to spiritual growth

Three broad types of barrier which may inhibit children’s spiritual growth can beidentified:

those which result from factors in children’s backgrounds often leading togroups, and individuals within them, being disadvantaged, discriminatedagainst and excluded;

those associated with societal expectations, some resulting from the mes-sages to which children are exposed and some more structural especiallyrelated to current education policy; and

those which stem from how adults individually interact with and treatchildren.

It is arguable that overcoming barriers may enhance children’s spiritualgrowth; and that removing them may inhibit this. For instance, succeedingagainst the odds may help to build a child’s resilience. And difficult experi-ences can often prompt reflection on serious issues so that overprotectingchildren may deny them opportunities to do so. However, it would seemperverse not to try to remove or minimise these barriers, where possible.Some may be impossible for individual adults to dismantle, especiallystructural ones and those which are embedded in policy. This, and thenext two, sections consider how children can overcome, and adults mini-mise, the barriers, at least to some extent. For instance, while the stressassociated with poverty and racism are likely to affect a child adversely, theeffects can be mitigated to some extent by a nurturing and secureenvironment.

Children must ideally learn to overcome such barriers where possible, butone may reasonably ask to what extent young children can be expected to doso. While young children are unlikely to be able to surmount them unassisted,they need to be enabled, accompanied and guided, rather than silenced orinhibited.

Some are likely to be more able to do so than others, but this depends notonly on the individual child but to the support and guidance which children,especially young ones, receive.

The attitudes, qualities and dispositions to enable children to address diffi-culties and overcome the barriers identified should be encouraged and inter-nalised at an early age. In particular, these include a sense of agency, courageand resilience. A sense of agency entails the belief that one can influence whathappens. Courage enables children to do what they may be fearful of or worriedabout. Resilience involves the ability to ‘bounce back’ from adversity and dis-appointment. Other qualities and dispositions associated with spiritual growthinclude curiosity, imagination and reflectiveness which enable children to askand to think about serious questions; and open-mindedness and empathywhich helps to ensure that prejudice and stereotyping of those who are‘other’ do not become entrenched.

Most young children manifest many of these qualities, though theseneed to be strengthened by practice and encouragement. To what extent an individual child does so is not determined by his or her background,as such, though upbringing and prior experience influence this. However,to see such qualities only in individual terms, rather than enhanced orreduced by the support available, risks children and their families whomay live very difficult lives being blamed for not manifesting suchqualities.

How adults can help to make the barriers less formidable

How children’s spiritual growth should be supported depends to a considerableextent on seeing even young children as capable though inexperienced lear-ners – what Bruner (1996) calls meaning-makers – where they are trying to makesense of what is puzzling. As Geertz writes

seeing even the infant and the pre-schooler as active agents bent on mastery ofa particular form of life or developing a workable way of being in the world, demandsa rethinking of the entire educational process. It is not so much a matter of providingsomething the child lacks, as enabling something the child already has: the desire tomake sense of self and others, the drive to understand what the devil is going on.(2001, 22)

Much of the literature on how young children’s spiritual growth can be nurturedfocuses on activities and programmes to encourage reflection, such as GodlyPlay and mindfulness. Godly Play is an approach where bible stories are intro-duced using a set of small figures which children are encouraged to use to re-telland explore the story (see Campen 2021). Mindfulness is a type of meditationentailing focus on being aware of what one is sensing and feeling in themoment, intended to relax the body and mind and help reduce stress. Suchprogrammes may be beneficial, but adults should be somewhat wary of relyingtoo much on them, especially if other provision gives conflicting messages.Spiritual growth is enhanced by supportive relationships and how childrenexperience and respond to activities, experiences and programmes. This ismore about adults being aware of, and responding to, how children feel,containing their anxiety and encouraging a sense of agency and creativity,than following a particular programme exactly.

Bringing up children involves dilemmas and balancing different considera-tions. For instance, children:

have both rights and responsibilities towards others and enabling childrento balance these is hard;

benefit from having structure and boundaries but must not become toodependent on these; and

need to be protected but not overprotected or infantilised.

Therefore, adults must exercise judgement and should not be too tied to anyone particular approach; and work collaboratively, with the child and otheradults, where possible. What this entails in practice will depend on the child’sage and prior experience, but this section suggests some underlying principles.

The importance of children’s agency and confidence means that adultsshould try to enable and empower, children to express their views and to askquestions, especially about what they find puzzling. However, adults havea responsibility to accompany and guide them on this journey and to setsome limits on behaviour especially for young children. This calls for an appren-ticeship model or what Rogoff (1990) calls guided participation, which entailssome (metaphorical) holding of children’s hands, at some times firmly, at othersmore lightly.

Spiritual growth cannot be planned exactly in advance, though adults canprovide suitable opportunities and affordances by creating and sustainingenvironments and cultures which are as welcoming, hospitable and inclusiveas possible. As discussed in Eaude (2014), hospitable space provides a broadand stimulating range of experiences and the time and space for explorationand reflection so that children can make sense of these, within a structurewhich contains children’s anxiety and provides predictability and a sense ofsafety.

Inclusivity requires children of all backgrounds to be treated with respect,both by adults and other children. This involves much more than tokenisticrecognition of diverse abilities, cultures and religions. Children are enabled andencouraged to engage in different activities and to mix with children who areunfamiliar as well as with their friends. They are both cared for and encouragedto care for others (Noddings 2013). More profoundly, adults try to respect allchildren and believe that their background does not determine who they willbecome; and protect children from discrimination and injustice, enabling andencouraging both those affected and those not directly involved to challengethis, so avoiding ‘bystander syndrome’ and tacit acceptance of such behaviour.

An environment of mutual respect and trust helps to reduce the fear ofchildren being rushed or embarrassed and so their voices being silenced.Sensitivity to, and relationships with, particular children, as well as the wholegroup, are necessary. Adults should take children’s responses, whether of joy orworry, of enquiry or distress, seriously, rather than dismissing or trivialisingthem. This often involves adults simply staying with or alongside children ratherthan ‘doing to’ them. Providing very definite answers to children’s questionsand interfering too much – and so closing down their search – risks inhibitingchildren’s spiritual growth. Adults must not exert too much control and shouldlisten, watch and be attuned to, and partly led by, children; and try to talk anddominate discussion less than often is the case. This may entail something assimple (but often difficult in practice) as adults pausing and waiting to allowa child to reflect, rather than expecting an immediate response or intervening

too quickly. Adults should try to see situations from the child’s perspective,taking their views, concerns, and questions seriously, but sometimes challen-ging them. Such an approach recognises that young children often haveinsights which adults may not notice and worries which may seem trivial orirrational nonetheless matter to the child. In so doing, adults are likely to learnnot only about children but from them.

Adults must set an example by demonstrating qualities such as compassionand empathy and provide accompaniment, guidance and support, enablingchildren, over time, to build up a sense of agency and confidence. In these ways,adults can offer a source of re-assurance and hope, especially for those childrenwho encounter difficulties and find it hard to belong.

While these actions are not all explicitly associated with spiritual growth, thisseems not to matter unduly if the spiritual dimension is seen as an essentialelement in the education of the whole child, rather than as separate.

Implications for schools

While children need to become literate and numerate, adults should not befocused too strongly on cognitive and academic attainment if they are toencourage children’s spiritual growth. Children benefit from a wide range foropportunities for exploration, questioning and discussion, especially throughplay, the arts and the humanities. The importance of example in how youngchildren learn to act and interact suggests that the hidden curriculum is far moreinfluential than the formal curriculum. However, the latter and the demands ofexternal assessment and inspection usually dominate how schools operate inpractice and exert strong influence and constraints on the hidden curriculum.

Children from poor or minority ethnic backgrounds are frequently seen inschools as lacking ‘cultural capital’- the often-unspoken knowledge of a cultureor group’s beliefs, practices and ways of interacting. However, Eaude (2020,175–6) argues that schools do not value or draw enough on the cultural capitalwhich such children bring or on the hidden stories of their families and cultures.Teachers must try to uncover, and draw on, children’s ‘funds of knowledge’(Gonzales, Moll, and Amanti 2005), especially with children who are less familiarwith the types of knowledge and approach expected in schools.

As indicated, children who have experienced severe trauma and stress mayrequire specific support. Authors such as Bilbrey et al. (2022) and Stokes (2022)argue for trauma-informed and trauma-responsive practices and ‘lookingthrough a trauma-informed lens’. While what this entails is not always specified,especially in relation to young children, broadly speaking the implicationsresonate with the points outlined above. For instance, Stokes (2022, 2) writesthat ‘to support children to meet their needs for safety at school, teachersshould be supportive, caring, and avoid acting in ways that might trigger thechild and produce power-laden behavioral responses like bullying’. More generally, she emphasises an orderly environment for learning and non-punitivebehaviour management.

Creating and sustaining hospitable, inclusive environments is harder than itmay seem especially in schools where the emphasis is on speed and attainmentin a narrow range of areas of learning and inter-personal competition. Suchapproaches, associated with performativity tend to disempower many children,especially those who find learning and belonging difficult. A holistic approachentails teachers allowing time and space for reflection and trying to avoidartificial barriers, such as those which restrict children’s exploration acrosssubject boundaries and fragment the curriculum. Such an approach is usuallyeasier to implement in early years settings than in more formal school contextswhere there is more emphasis on what can be measured. Even when legislationcalls for the curriculum to be balanced and broadly-based, other pressures,notably the demand for measurable results and success in achieving thesemilitates against a holistic approach; and so tends to inhibit children’s spiritualgrowth.

Conclusion

This article has tried to avoid being too tied to any particular definition ofspirituality. It has presented children’s spiritual growth as one of several over-lapping processes which can be nurtured or inhibited by how children arebrought up. Various barriers, some visible, others less so, have been identifiedwhich must be overcome or minimised if children are to flourish. A tentativetypology of three types of barrier has started to emerge, though they are notentirely separate.

One type involves physical and emotional harm and constant stress. Childrenmust feel safe and have a sense of belonging. This, and the importance ofsocialisation, help to explain why factors such as gender, race/ethnicity, class,especially poverty, disability and religion – and the discrimination which canresult – may affect children adversely. These operate in complex, often unpre-dictable, ways but adults must attend to, and care for, children’s physical andemotional needs.

A second type consists of barriers related to societal expectations. Some areembedded in the macro-culture which encourages material pursuit, trivialisa-tion and immediacy. The constant stream of images about possessions andparticular views of success and beauty emphasises what is superficially attrac-tive and often trivial, commodifies children and encourages them to see them-selves as consumers. The expectation of immediate responses discouragessustained reflection. Other barriers, especially in schools, stem from policiesbased on performativity, encouraging curriculum narrowing, hyper-competitiveness and a lack of time and space for exploration and reflection.

A third type are more individual. Once children stop being curious aboutthemselves and their place in the world, often exacerbated by the fear ofembarrassment, their spiritual growth is likely to be inhibited. This can oftenresult from adults’ tendencies to overprotect children or be too certain and sosilence their voices and close down their search.

In discussing how these barriers can be overcome, the emphasis has been onchildren having a sense of agency and qualities and dispositions such ascourage, resilience, reflectiveness and empathy. Such qualities help childrento consider carefully and to respond compassionately and are strengthened orweakened by the environments in which children grow up and the relationshipswithin them.

Adults can help children to overcome some of these barriers. How theysupport children must be tailored to particular individuals and groups, depend-ing on factors such as the children’s age and prior experience. This may at timesrequire difficult choices and judgements. For instance, challenging widely-heldassumptions about success and possession and enabling children, especially asthey approach adolescence, to question cultural and religious assumptionsseems important aspects of how spiritual growth can be encouraged. Butneither is easy.

Structural barriers, such as those embedded in social attitudes andpolicy, are hardest to address. However, individual adults can help tominimise these, especially by creating and sustaining hospitable, inclusiveand welcoming environments. In these, all children’s basic needs are met,within clear but not rigid boundaries. But children are also encouragedand enabled to ask and explore, individually or as a group, seriousquestions which do not have definite answers and may potentially beupsetting or painful.

While the individual barriers are the easiest, in theory, to break down, thisrequires adults who are sensitive, flexible and attuned to their own andchildren’s emotional responses and who watch and listen carefully.A relational, holistic approach where adults accompany and guide, in con-trast to trying to force information into, and results out of, children, seemsthe most fruitful way of encouraging children’s spiritual growth. Such anapproach is hard to implement in the current context where performativityand an overemphasis on what is measurable narrows the curriculum andpedagogy. However, individual adults can help to minimise the barriers andso help to strengthen children’s identities and create more inclusive culturesin which all children can flourish.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes on contributor

Tony Eaude was previously the headteacher of a primary school in Oxford, UK. He has workedas an independent consultant and author since 2003. Details of his work can be seen on https://edperspectives.org.uk

References

Adams, K. 2019. “Navigating the Spaces of children’s Spiritual Experiences: Influences ofTradition(s), Multidisciplinarity and Perceptions.” International Journal of Children’sSpirituality 24 (1): 29–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/1364436X.2019.1619531.

Adams, K., B. Hyde, and R. Woolley. 2008. The Spiritual Dimension of Childhood. London: JessicaKingsley.

Ball, S. J. 2003. “The teacher’s Soul and the Terrors of Performativity.” Journal of EducationPolicy 18 (2): 215–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/0268093022000043065.

Berger, P., and T. Luckmann. 1967. The Social Construction of Reality. London: Allen Lane.Bilbrey, J. B., K. L. Castanon, R. B. Copeland, P. A. Evanshen, and C. M. Trivette. 2022. “PrimaryEarly Childhood educators’ Perspectives of Trauma-Informed Knowledge, Confidence, andTraining.” The Australian Educational Researcher 51 (1): 67–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-022-00582-9.

Bregman, L. 2004. “Defining Spirituality: Multiple Uses and Murky Meanings of an IncrediblyPopular Term.” Journal of Pastoral Care & Counseling 58 (3): 157–167. https://doi.org/10.1177/154230500405800301.

Bruner, J. S. 1996. The Culture of Education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Campen, T. M. E. 2021. Holy Work with Children: Making Meaning Together. Eugene: Pickwick.Connolly, P. 2002. Racism, Gender Identities and Young Children: Social Relations in a Multi-Ethnic, Inner City Primary School. London: Routledge.

David, T., and S. Powell. 1999. “Changing Childhoods, Changing Minds.” In Young ChildrenLearning, edited by, T. David. 204–219. London: Paul Chapman.

Eaude, T. 2005. “Strangely Familiar? – Teachers Making Sense of Young Children’s SpiritualDevelopment.” Early Years 25 (3): 237–248. https://doi.org/10.1080/09575140500251764.

Eaude, T. 2014. “Creating Hospitable Space to Nurture Children’s Spirituality – Possibilities andDilemmas Associated with Power.” International Journal of Children’s Spirituality 19 (3/4):236–248. https://doi.org/10.1080/1364436X.2014.979772.

Eaude, T. 2020. Identity, Culture and Belonging: Educating Young Children for a Changing World.London: Bloomsbury Academic.

Gaine, C., and R. George. 1993. Gender, ’Race’ and Class in Schooling: A New Introduction.London: Falmer.

Geertz, C. 2001. “Imbalancing Act: Jerome Bruner’s Cultural Psychology.” In Jerome Bruner:Language, Culture, Self, edited by, D. Bakhurst and S. G. Shanker. 19–30. London: SAGE.Gonzales, N., L. Moll, and C. Amanti. 2005. Funds of Knowledge. Mahwah, NJ: LawrenceErlbaum.

Goodliff, G. 2013. “Spirituality Expressed in Creative Learning: Young Children’s ImaginingPlay as Space for Mediating Their Spirituality.” Early Child Development & Care 183 (8):1054–1071. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2013.792253.

Hay, D., and R. Nye. 1998. The Spirit of the Child. London: Fount.Hirsch, A. 2018. Brit(ish): On Race, Identity and Belonging. London: Jonathan Cape.Hull, J. 1996. “The Ambiguity of Spiritual Values.” In Values in Education and Education inValues, edited by, J. M. Halstead and M. J. Taylor. 33–44. London: Falmer.

Hull, J. 1998. Utopian Whispers- Moral, Religious and Spiritual Values in Schools. Norwich:Religious and Moral Education Press.

Hyde, B. 2008. Children and Spirituality: Searching for Meaning and Connectedness. London:Jessica Kingsley.

Hyde, B. 2021. “Silenced by Performativity: The child’s Right to a Spiritual Voice in an Age ofNeoliberal Educational Imperatives.” International Journal of Children’s Spirituality 26 (1/2):9–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/1364436X.2020.1860914.

Jenkins, R. 2014. Social Identity. London: Routledge.

Lareau, A. 2011. Unequal Childhoods: Class, Race and Family Life. Berkeley: University ofCalifornia Press.

Maslow, A. 1998. Toward a Psychology of Being. New York: Wiley.

Mattis, J. S., M. K. Ahluwalia, S. E. Cowie, and A. M. Kirkland-Harris. 2006. “Ethnicity, Culture,and Spiritual Development.” In The Handbook of Spiritual Development in Childhood andAdolescence, edited by, E. C. Roehlkepartain, P. E. King, L. Wagener, and P. L. Benson.283–295. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

McLaughlin, T. 2003. “Education, Spirituality, and the Common School.” In Spirituality,Philosophy, and Education, edited by, D. Carr and J. Haldane. 185–199. London:RoutledgeFalmer.

Moule, J. 2009. “Understanding Unconscious Bias and Unintentional Racism.” Phi DeltaKappan 90 (5): 320–326. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172170909000504.

Noddings, N. 2013. Caring – a Relational Approach to Ethics and Moral Education. Berkeley:University of California Press.

Nussbaum, M. 2010. Not for Profit: Why Democracy Needs the Humanities. Princeton: PrincetonUniversity Press.

Priestley, J. 2000. “Moral and Spiritual Growth.” In Childhood Studies – a Reader in Perspectivesof Childhood, edited by, J. Mills and R. Mills. 113–128. London: Routledge.

Reay, D. 2017. Miseducation -Inequality, Education and the Working Classes. Bristol: Policy Press.

Robinson, C. 2022. “The Potential of ‘Wonder’ to Engage children’s Spirituality: It’s so MuchMore Than Pondering.” International Journal of Children’s Spirituality 27 (3–4): 158–175.https://doi.org/10.1080/1364436X.2022.2080646.

Rogoff, B. 1990. Apprenticeship in Thinking – Cognitive Development in Social Context. Oxford:Oxford University Press.

Sanders-Phillips, K., B. Settles-Reaves, D. Walker, and J. Brownlow. 2009. “Social Inequality andRacial Discrimination: Risk Factors for Health Disparities in Children of Color.” Pediatrics124 (Supplement 3): 176–186. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2009-1100E.

Smith, D. 1999. Making Sense of Spiritual Development. Nottingham: The Stapleford Centre.Stokes, H. 2022. “Leading Trauma-Informed Education Practice as an Instructional Model forTeaching and Learning.” Frontiers in Education 7:1–14. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.911328.

UNICEF. 2021. Life in Lockdown: Child and Adolescent Mental Health and Well-Being in the Timeof COVID-19. https://Life-in-Lockdown.pdf.

Main article link:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/epdf/10.1080/1364436X.2024.2397971?needAccess=true