‘Why don’t fish have eyelashes?’: understanding the intersections between creative thinking and disadvantage in early years education in two schools located in areas of high deprivation

<p dir="ltr">This research uniquely brings together two aspects of policy and practice, namely disadvantage and creative thinking. It seeks to understand the intersections between these areas and explores the impact which understandings of disadvantage and creative thinking can have on the enabling environment for Reception age children (4- to 5-year-olds), where the enabling environment is defined as both the organisation of physical spaces and the pedagogies and practices adopted in those spaces and the wider school.</p><p dir="ltr">Literature suggests that Pupil Premium (PP) remains the dominant discourse related to disadvantage in the English educational system. National government performance measures focusing on the gap in attainment between PP children and the rest ensure that schools remain highly invested in reducing this gap. However, writers have critiqued the narrowness of the understanding of disadvantage, as captured in PP policy. Creative thinking skills are referred to as a characteristic of effective learning in early years curriculum policy documents, wording that implies that creative thinking has the power to improve academic outcomes. Although previous research establishes an association between language delay and disadvantage, literature also indicates that creative thinking might not rely solely on spoken language, suggesting language delay associated with disadvantage does not necessarily lead to delays in creative thinking development.</p><p dir="ltr">This research took the form of a comparative case study of two schools serving coastal communities affected by disadvantage. The research addressed the following questions:</p><p dir="ltr">RQ1 How is disadvantage recognised and understood by adults in Reception classes?</p><p dir="ltr">RQ2 How is creative thinking recognised and understood by adults in Reception classes?</p><p dir="ltr">RQ3 How do understandings of creative thinking and disadvantage intersect, and accommodate creative thinking for children from families affected by disadvantage in Reception classes?</p><p dir="ltr">RQ4 How do contextual factors shape pedagogical practices in the case study schools?</p><p dir="ltr">Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with adults (senior leaders, teachers and teaching assistants), and observations of both child-led and adult-led learning in the indoor and outdoor Reception spaces.</p><p dir="ltr">Although staff in both schools questioned the way in which policy conceptualised disadvantage, data analysis suggested that disadvantage policy took precedence over creative thinking policy. Pressure from disadvantage policy led to a greater focus on key literacy and numeracy skills, and the range of creative thinking opportunities available were subsequently constrained. Although there was some empathy for families affected by disadvantage, a narrative of lack and blame associated with these families by some staff ultimately proved to be unhelpful when working to improve children’s outcomes. Accounts of the material effects of disadvantage, particularly at one school, were striking and evidence suggested that language delay did not appear to overly hinder children’s creative thinking capacities. Adult attitudes to risk, however, impacted on the available creative thinking opportunities with risk tolerance being identified as a positive characteristic which teachers associated with children from families affected by disadvantage. Hence, the strengths of these children, even from a very young age, were sometimes not developed.</p><p dir="ltr">This research adds to a growing body of work that brings together analysis of wider policy and micro level research, critiquing current policy constructions of disadvantage. It highlights the unintended consequences of mechanisms ensuring the dominance of PP policy. It argues the need to positively reframe resilience, independence and risk tolerance, in children from families affected by disadvantage, as characteristics that support creative thinking skills, which in turn have the power to unlock future learning success.</p>