This article was downloaded by: [Northeastern University]On: 09 October 2014, At: 16:53Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

International Journal of Children'sSpiritualityPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cijc20

Spiritual development in theclassroom: pupils’ and educators’learning reflectionsYee-Ling Ng aa Education and Theology , York St John University & University ofLeeds , Yorkshire , UKPublished online: 27 Sep 2012.

To cite this article: Yee-Ling Ng (2012) Spiritual development in the classroom: pupils’ andeducators’ learning reflections, International Journal of Children's Spirituality, 17:2, 167-185, DOI:10.1080/1364436X.2012.726609

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1364436X.2012.726609

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

RESEARCH REPORT

Spiritual development in the classroom: pupils’ and educators’learning reflections

Yee-Ling Ng*

Education and Theology, York St John University & University of Leeds, Yorkshire, UK

(Received 16 July 2012; final version received 30 August 2012)

The importance of spirituality is reinforced in legislation and policy directivesin England and Wales. Nevertheless, it is argued that there is a dearth of studiesinto the practice and pedagogy of spiritual development in classroom settings.Thus, an investigation was developed capturing the experiences and learningreflections of 52 English primary school pupils (7–9 years) who have partici-pated in a literature-derived spiritual development programme. A 10-weekprogramme, based upon an experiential and relational view of children’sspirituality was implemented in two south London schools. Data were collectedin four classrooms with primary school pupils and four classroom teachers andteaching assistants. Through phenomenographic analysis, themes or ‘categoriesof description’ were developed from the data collected (diaries – text anddrawings, discussions and interviews) highlighting variations in pupils’ experi-ences and learning. This paper will focus upon the learning themes derived fromthe analysis of the data and it is argued that pupils’ and educators’ reflectionson learning may have potential implications for the pedagogy and practice ofspiritual development. In summary, the findings reveal that ‘tools’ such assilence, focusing, meaning, questioning, kinaesthetic awareness, use of one’simagination and communication and sharing may be used in the classroom forspiritual development, allowing a child to relate to self and other/s.

Keywords: spiritual development; children’s spirituality; classroom practice;phenomenography

Introduction

Different proponents of children’s spirituality in differing contexts have arguedthat children of all ages can have spiritual experiences (Coles 1992; Errickerand Erricker 2000; Hardy 1979; Hart 2006; Hay and Nye 2006; Hyde 2008).Consequently, there are a myriad of academics and researchers, like de Souza(2006) and Hyde (2008) who argue for the inclusion of spiritual developmentwithin schools, contending that it may enhance the well-being of children. Spiritualdevelopment is legislated in policies and inspected in English and Welsh schools.However, Wright (2000, 93) argues that ‘despite the significant growth of spiritualeducation since 1988, the fact remains that an effective nation-wide programme ofspiritual pedagogy has yet to be implemented’, which highlights a lack of practicalguidance for spiritual development in classrooms.

*Email addresses: y.ng@yorksj.ac.uk; yl_n@hotmail.com

International Journal of Children’s SpiritualityVol. 17, No. 2, May 2012, 167–185

ISSN 1364-436X print/ISSN 1469-8455 online� 2012 Taylor & Francishttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1364436X.2012.726609http://www.tandfonline.com

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

53 0

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

The first statutory requirement to address the spiritual needs of children inEngland arose in the Education Act 1944, stipulating that the Local EducationAuthority, ‘so far as their powers extend …’ should ‘contribute towards the spiritual,moral, mental, and physical development of the community by securing that efficienteducation throughout those stages shall be available to meet the needs of the popula-tion of their area’ (Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, Section 7, 1944, 4). Subse-quently, the Education Reform Act 1988 bundled spirituality within the realm ofspiritual, moral, social and cultural (SMSC) development. Encapsulated within theAct was a clear demarcation of responsibility for schools to cater to the varyingdimensions of a child. The dual nature of the Education Act 1988, which separateddiscussions of pupils’ SMSC development from the more prominent Part 2 thataddressed the National Curriculum (NC), highlights the conflicting nature of policydirectives and the importance attributed to the curriculum (Watson 2007, 126).

The Education (Schools) Act 1992 followed and the responsibility of children’sspiritual development fell within the governance of schools, whilst increasingaccountability through mandatory inspections by the Office for Standards in Educa-tion (OFSTED 2004). However, Rawle (2009, 1), an ex-OFSTED inspector com-ments that, ‘experience has also caused me to view with a degree of scepticism thecomprehension of inspectors concerning spirituality in schools and the soundness ofthe inspection criteria’. This perspective is concerning and begs the question ofhow teachers are to integrate spiritual development within their classrooms, wheninspectors themselves cannot comprehend the notion. This lack of guidance mayhave led to Watson (2008, 48) to argue that ‘there are still very few examples ofclassroom methods for spiritual development in schools’. Further to this, Rawle(2009, 10) also maintains that ‘in the years immediately following the introductionof the NC there was no real guidance about the ways schools should interpret,let alone implement, this statutory obligation’, which suitably emphasises the needfor further research into the pedagogies of spiritual development. Consequently, adoctoral study (Ng 2012) was developed aimed at capturing the experiences andlearning of four cohorts of pupils (7–9 years) as they participate in a literature-derived spiritual development programme.

Characterising spirituality

Within literature, there are a host of differing perspectives with regard to whatunderpins spirituality. The discourse extends across differing clusters of research, invarying subject areas and perhaps a lack of multidisciplinary research has produceda myriad of differing definitions and constructs (MacDonald and Friedman 2002).Moreover, the influence of religion, language, scientific rationalisation and capital-ism has affected the acceptability and meaning of the construct within more con-temporary and westernised contexts. Thus, there are debates contesting the value ofchildren’s spirituality and spiritual development, as exemplified by Marples (2006,295) who asserts that the internal quest that typifies some proponents’ views of spir-ituality ‘must have some basis in truth in order to distinguish it from mere illusion’.He further criticises the experiential and ‘ethereal’ nature of descriptors used indescribing spiritual education and questions whether it provides adequate explana-tions. Moreover, White (1996, 30) argues that terms such as ‘spiritual education’and hence spiritual development continue ‘to be bedevilled by semantic wrangles’,and this ‘impenetrability’ will unfortunately persist due to the subjective and

168 Y.-L. Ng

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

53 0

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

personalised nature of the notion. These debates thus reinforce Wright’s contentionsthat there are now ‘a host of contrasting and conflicting spiritual options which con-tinue to be the subject of fierce debate’.

Priestley (1997, 28) asserts that ‘to arrest the spiritual in order to define it is tomurder it on the spot’; nevertheless, he argues that ‘it [the spiritual] can be described’.The descriptors highlighted in this paper delineate the construct for the purpose of thisspecific research. As appositely stated by Stern (2009, 2), these descriptors are ‘notan attempt at a comprehensive historical or contemporary account [of spirituality], aseither of those would need entire books of encyclopaedic proportions’. In contrast, itis an open and iterative description that provides a construct for pedagogy andpractice to be built upon. Spirituality in this study was encapsulated within the fol-lowing descriptors: ‘an awareness’ (Hay and Nye 2006; Hyde 2008; Priestley 1985;Roeser et al. 2008), ‘experiential’ (Eaude 2006; Hay and Nye 2006; Kibble 1996;Ratcliff and Nye 2006; Rodger 1996; Tirri, Tallent-Runnels and Nokelainen 2005),‘broader than religion’ (Hyde 2008; MacDonald 2000; Maslow 1976; Nasir 2008;O’Murchu 2004; Priestley 1997; Tirri, Tallent-Runnels and Nokelainen 2005),‘personal’ (Maslow 1971; Nasir 2008; Pargament 1997; Pargament and Mahoney2002) and ‘relational’ (Hay and Nye 2006; Stern 2009; Wong 2006). In other words,spirituality is characterised in this paper as an awareness that is experiential andpersonal (including aspects of humanistic and positive psychology). Furthermore, it isalso relational in nature, allowing one to transcend or ‘go beyond’ to connect to self,others, the world and for some, a transcendent other (Hay and Nye 2006).

Methodology

This research embraced the possibility of multiple realities or viewpoints (Creswell2007) and these ‘realities’ are represented through diaries (text and drawings), dis-cussions and interviews. Phenomenography was embraced methodologically in thisstudy, aspiring to understand pupils’ experiences in different learning environments(Newby 2010) and sought ‘to identify the various ways in which people see andexperience things in order to support learning and teaching activities’ (Cousins2009, 184). This research is based upon a non-dualistic view of reality, an ontologi-cal assumption that the phenomena of study, experience, ‘is always an experienceof something’ (Marton and Booth 1998, 536). In a similar vein, Webb (1997, 200)maintains that this framework permits researchers to ‘study “what is there” in peo-ple’s conceptions of the world’. It essentially opposes a more scientific and positiv-istic ontology that ‘rests on the belief that object and subject are separate andindependent – i.e. on a dualistic ontology’ (Marton and Booth 1998, 537). In otherwords, the phenomena of interest within this study are pupils’ experiences and theirreflections of the programme. However, this research does not posit that the object(i.e. the programme) would not exist if there were no children engaged with theobject of interest. In itself, the programme does not represent anyone’s experiences;it is a literature-derived interpretation of potential activities for spiritual develop-ment. In other words, data will only be generated in this study through pupils’interactions with the programme.

Within this paradigm, there are ‘major truth challenges’ (Opie 2004, 22), whichquestion the honesty, reliability and subjectivity of pupils’ and educators’ experi-ences and realities. These deficiencies pertain to ‘how words can actually reflect“reality” and experience is, in itself, complex and problematic’ (Opie 2004, 22) and

International Journal of Children’s Spirituality 169

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

53 0

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

as such, this questions the validity and reliability of the data collected. Despite theseweaknesses, phenomenography was used to find and systematise ‘forms of thoughtin terms of which people interpret significant aspects of reality … it aims atdescription, analysis and understanding of experiences’ and as such it captures data‘which is directed towards experiential description’ (Marton 1981, 178–180). Thus,the purpose of this research is ‘not [to] make statements about the world as such,but about people’s conceptions of the world’ (Marton 1988, 145).

The findings derived from phenomenographic analysis elicited experiential andlearning themes, or pupils’ and educators’ ‘conceptions’ of the literature-derivedspiritual development programme. Ultimately, the aim was to provide time andspace for children to reflect, question, focus, use their imagination and share theirdeveloping awareness of self and others. Accordingly, this research studied humanphenomena, that is, the experiences of pupils as they interact with different activi-ties within the classroom. This investigation captured and categorised pupils’ andeducators’ reflections and is essentially adopting a perspective that highlights thepossibility of ‘multiple realities’ or viewpoints. In other words, this research will setforth to ‘conduct a study with an intent of reporting these multiple realities’(Creswell 2007, 18). The different modes of communication (text, drawings, discus-sions and interviews) utilised in this study may reinforce Hegarty and Evans’(1985, 53) belief that the ‘multiple perspectives’ garnered through differing methodsare ‘highly desirable’ as they provide scope for differing perspectives, whichenhances validation and triangulation. They further argue that this may improve thevalidity of small ‘N’ studies, which reflect the sample within this research.

There may also have been a discrepancy of power between the researcher andchildren, which may have led them to respond with answers that they perceivedwould please the researcher. To minimise the imbalance, pupils in this study wereasked if they wanted to participate and advised that they had the right to withdrawfrom the research. In other words, pupils were informed that they did not have togive the researcher their diaries or be tape-recorded during the sessions. As well asthe formal process of consent, at the end of each lesson, pupils could choose tohand in their work to the researcher or, alternatively, it could be left at the schoolwith the classroom teacher. Children were also asked to caption or provide adescription of their drawings, which may have minimised misinterpretations by theresearcher. Moreover, children were also given a choice on how they would like tobe interviewed: in groups or individually.

It is acknowledged that biases may have resulted from the researcher facilitatingthe classes. Perhaps, the researchers’ existing knowledge and viewpoints may haveinfluenced the manner in which the lessons were facilitated. Despite these uncon-scious actions that may or may not have influenced the data collected, it is still pos-tulated that the stable constant of having the researcher within the classroomthroughout the four different classes brought forth some parity in how the lessonswere implemented. Additionally, the researcher had consciously attempted to facili-tate the lessons, rather than teach the children about spirituality. Perhaps, having theresearcher as facilitator may have reduced other biases such as different: teacher’sperspectives, teaching styles and interpretation of the programme (Table 1).

A non-exhaustive 10-week programme (one hour/week) based upon a relational(Hay and Nye 2006) and experiential view of spirituality was developed, integratingsuch skills as reflection, silence, contemplation, focusing, discussion, sharing,questioning and meaning. This programme represents a step towards a pedagogical

170 Y.-L. Ng

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

53 0

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

view of children’s spirituality and amalgamates the perspectives of differing aca-demics and educators, who argue for the development of children’s spiritualitywithin the classroom.

Sampling

The two schools (Community School and Church of England school) who partici-pated in this study are from an inner-city location in South West London. Four

Table 1. Spiritual development programme.

Relationalconsciousness (Hayand Nye 2006) Theme Activity

Awareness sensing • Silence and mindfulness(Arweck, Nesbitt and Jack-son, 2005; Hyde 2008; Kess-ler 1998; Miller andNickerson 2007; Palmer1993; Suhor 1998)

• Bodily awareness, silenceand reflection

• ‘Widening the horizon’ (Hayand Nye 2006)

• Russian doll as a metaphorof self (Hay and Nye 2006)

• ‘Felt sense’ (Hyde 2008) • Beading activity and silenceactivity (Hyde 2008)

• Experiencing nature (Hay andNye 2006)

• Silence activity whilst out-side

Mystery sensing • ‘Awe and wonder’, imagina-tion (De Souza 2006; Hart,2006; Hay and Nye 2006;Kessler 2000; School Curricu-lum Authority Association[SCAA] 1995; Wong 2006)

• Use of photographs to elicitpupils’ thoughts and experi-ences (Hay and Nye 2006;Hyde 2008)

• Explicating what is magical,mysterious or beautiful tothe pupil through differingexpressions

• ‘Mysteries questions’: pupilswriting down questionsabout which they ponder(Kessler 2000)

Value sensing • Meaning (Baumeister andVohs 2002; Bruce and Cock-reham 2004; Kessler 2000;Qualifications and CurriculumAuthority [QCA] 1997;SCAA 1995; Ubani 2006)

• Delight and despair (Hay andNye 2006)

• Use of important things aschosen by pupils as a chan-nel to discuss meaning(Kessler 2000)

• Questions: ‘I wonder whatyou think really, really mat-ters …’, ‘I wonder what youmight wish for …’ (Hay andNye 2006)

International Journal of Children’s Spirituality 171

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

53 0

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

classes (7–9 years) participated in the study. The non-probability and purposivesample included pupils from differing socio-economic and cultural backgrounds, ashighlighted in their OFSTED (2011) reports. Overall, data for 52 out of 116 pupils(approximately 44%) were collected and analysed. Although no parents objected totheir child participating in the programme, less than half of the data was collected.Post-programme interviews with a cross section of pupils across four classrooms(eight boys and eight girls) were also undertaken at the end of the programme.Furthermore, interviews with four teachers and four teaching assistants were alsoundertaken to gauge their views of children’s experiences and to triangulate the datacollected. The educators were all female with the exception of one male teachingassistant. Additionally, their levels of experience varied, ranging from newlyqualified to educators with over 10 years experience in the classroom.

Findings and discussions

Through the analysis of data, ‘categories of description’ (Marton 1988, 148) orthemes were derived. Holloway (2008, 178) maintains that ‘phenomenographicanalysis starts with searching for meaning and relationships between them’. The‘outcome space’ (Cousin 2009, 195) are descriptive categories based upon similari-ties and differences in the data-set. Resulting from the analysis were six categoriesof description, which reflect pupils’ experiences and learning (Table 2).

Pupils’ experiences or what have been labelled in this study as the ‘ExperientialWorlds’ includes four different yet related worlds that accentuate the various experi-ences that pupils encountered during these classes. Within these four worlds, sub-cat-egories have also been developed, highlighting the similarities and differences withinthese groupings. In addition to these four worlds, pupils’ and educators’ learning

Table 2. Themes.

World of selfWorld with others(people) Imaginary world World of other

What did pupils experience? (Experiential Worlds)• Emotive world• Sensory world• Existential

world• World of

concerns

• World of family• World of friends• Lonely world• A better world

• Imaginaryplaces

• Hybrid worlds• Imaginary

experiences

• Worldly places:Built andnatural places

• Worldly things:entertainmentand sentimental

• Worldly pon-derings

• Unworldly:higher power

What did pupils learn? (Learning Themes)• Relation to self:

• Awareness and meaning• ‘Little person inside’ and ‘Deeper thinking’• Relaxation and calm• Openness to communicate

• Relation to others

172 Y.-L. Ng

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

53 0

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

reflections or ‘Learning Themes’ were also derived from the data. As opposed to theexperiential categories, these groupings are not based upon work undertaken in theclassroom but instead are centred upon reflective data that sought to ask the sampleand staff directly what they perceived was learnt during this time period. Essentially,the analysis of data emphasised pupils’ ‘Relation to self’ and ‘Others’. It is theselearning themes that will be focused upon and discussed in this paper.

Learning themes

They would be doing lots of things, well everything really about their inner self andjust them and not to do with anybody else. And they would be experiencing doingkind of meditating and having the silent time, and also they, they would do lots ofwriting and drawing … About things that are important to them, magical places,things that they like doing and then talking about your inner self. (Bertha, 7–8 years)

Things I’ve learnt is that sometimes you can feel happy on the outside and sad on theinside, what [is] means [meaningful] to you and friendship. (Caitlyn, 7–8 years)

The above quotes by Bertha and Caitlyn reinforce the ‘Learning Themes’ thatstemmed from the data: pupils’ ‘Relation to self’ and ‘Relation to others’. Throughchildren’s evaluation of the programme (text and drawings) and interviews withpupils and educators, categories of description in learning were developed. Thefindings reveal that pupils primarily learnt to relate to self and others. Their relationto self could be further grouped into sub-categories, which include: Self-awarenessand meaning, ‘Little person inside’ and ‘Deeper thinking’, Relaxation and calmand Openness to communicate. It should be noted that the categories and sub-cate-gories derived were not equally mentioned.

Relation to self

Awareness and meaning

The data highlighted pupils’ ‘Relation to self’ through the development of self-awareness and meaning. Furthermore, pupils’ and staffs’ reflections also emphasisedthe influence of the programme on pupils’ sense of identity and individuality andalso, a developing reflexivity. This is exemplified in an interview with the Year 3Teacher, who believed that these lessons allowed pupils to talk ‘about who you are,your identity’. She further argued that, ‘of course having a positive identity is abso-lutely crucial … having a better idea of who you are and, and the choices youmake’. The excerpt below from the Year 3 teacher illustrates that the programmemay have provided a place for pupils to develop a sense of ‘who they are’:

I think they learnt how to be a bit more reflective and think about things and not tojust give sort of, when they are thinking about things that are important to them,things you know that are important to their character, and to who they are, as whothey feel they are, to sort of go beyond the superficial and I think that, as the weekswent on perhaps it became more apparent that they were able to do this.

Pupils also mentioned that they have learnt about their individuality and thedistinctiveness of each person, as accentuated by Alice’s (8–9 years) learningobjective (LO) or learning question (LQ) for the lessons; essentially she stated that

International Journal of Children’s Spirituality 173

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

53 0

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

she has learnt ‘that everyone’s different’. Furthermore, Ajay (8–9 years) conveyedthat he had discovered that ‘evrybody’s [everybody is] unik [unique]’. Similarly,Bertha (7–8 years) also ascertained from the lessons ‘that everybody is different’and explained that ‘you have teached [taught] me that everybody is speshle [spe-cial] in their own way’ and ‘it doesn’t matter what other people think about your-self because you are unique and you can, you can kinda only have one’.Additionally, Billy (7–8 years) conveyed that he had learnt about the importantthings in his life and in the process discovered his uniqueness. He stated that ‘whenwe fill out these sheets, I was thinking about somethings that are kinda important tome’. When asked how he felt when he thought about these important things hereplied, ‘it kinda makes me feel special because I have, I was thinking about myfamily and friends and my cousins, and I think I am special in one only way’.

Class 5’s teaching assistant believed that, if one was to create a LO for the pro-gramme, it would ‘probably [be] something along the lines, to become aware ofyourself and your surroundings’. Similarly, the classroom teacher also stated abroad objective for the classes, highlighting how the lessons may have allowedpupils ‘to go on a journey and know myself more deeply and find out what makesme special or what makes me, me really’. This emergent awareness of self was alsosuitably captured through an interview with Holly (7–8 years) who posited that thelessons may help one:

To learn who yourself is, even if yourself is dressed like a lemon walking around withyour friends, even if they go laughing at me to break a leg. I once gave myself anelectric shock, because I licked my finger and put it in an electric shock and then putit in my mouth and it because it was my general habit, so even if that is yourself, italso helps you to learn what is yourself in these lessons.

Pupils’ journals and drawings provided a glimpse of what was meaningful to them,highlighting the personalised nature of this journey. For example, Aerin (7–8 years)believed that the programme taught her ‘to teller [tell] people minifel [meaningful]and speshel [special] things to one another’. Comparably, Holly (7–8 years) high-lighted that during the lessons pupils were given an opportunity to reflect upon‘what is your harts [heart’s] dirsiyr [desire]?’ Wilson (7–8 years) also stated thatthese lessons allowed pupils to think about ‘what makes you feel happy and why?’Furthermore, Camden (7–8 years) also believed he has learnt, ‘want [what] is impor-tant [important] to you?’ Whilst Aidan (8–9 years) suggested, ‘what is meaningfulto you? Where is your special place?’ Angie (8–9 years) also suggested an LQ,‘how can I understand myself?’ Cavanagh (7–8 years) also believed that the pro-gramme had taught him to talk ‘about things that make me happy’ and to write‘what we like and what we don’t like’. This sub-theme was reinforced by the Class6’s teacher who stated that this programme may help develop a ‘rounder child, it’sthem thinking deeper and thinking about themselves and thinking about the thingsthat matter to them; it is really important’.

‘Little person inside’ and ‘Deeper thinking’

Interestingly, pupils from both schools mentioned that they learnt to connect withtheir ‘inner self’ or ‘the little person inside’. This analogy of the inner self mayhave been derived from the ‘Russian doll’ lesson (Hay and Nye 2006), whichsought to highlight different aspects of self. In an interview with Bertha (7–8 years),

174 Y.-L. Ng

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

53 0

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

she gave a description of what one would learn from the programme. She expli-cated that one will be ‘doing lots of things, well everything really about their innerself and just them and not to do with anybody else’. When questioned what learn-ing about the inner self entailed, she replied:

it means that you will learn about, not like your outside, like your eyes or your senses,well kinda your senses, but you think about your emotions, the way you are specialand kind of the way you are unique.

Later on, she explained that:

well I meant what you feel on the inside, so all your emotions and if you are happy,or sad or excited, all of your feelings. Because on your outside, it’s like your bodybut on the inside, it’s like quite private and it’s kinda really like yourself.

Caitlyn (7–8 years) also revealed that the programme has brought her closer to the‘little person inside’. She explained that this programme has allowed the little per-son to say ‘things that we don’t normally say’.

The post-programme interviews also revealed how educators differentiatedbetween the thinking experienced in the programme versus the thinking undertakenin other curricula areas. The notion of a ‘deeper’ kind of thinking was highlightedin the data by several educators, perhaps allowing one to distinguish between theeveryday cognitive exploits of children in their classes and the more experiential,affective and self-focused reflections that took place during these lessons. It may bepostulated that this ‘deeper’ contemplative skill is one that permits children to focusupon self and other/s, which may allow them to relate and connect. Perhaps, thisdeeper thinking is reflective of pupils connecting to their ‘inner self’. Thus, the dif-ference between the thinking that children partake in, in their ‘everyday classes’and the thinking in these lessons may lie in the scaffolds given to pupils. Therefore,it is argued that a more open and reflective practice in the classroom may provide ameans to facilitate this ‘deeper’ kind of thinking. This notion is exemplified in fol-lowing excerpt:

Obviously, there is an opportunity for them to reflect, to think about their feelings;what they are smelling, hearing, you know, obviously you are trying to get deeperinside them really and, I think it’s kinda very therapeutic for them, to be, cos’ theylove doing things like that, where there is no right or wrong answer … And, I thinkit’s something that they can relate to. You know if I ask them something from literacy,it’s different, it’s kinda of academic isn’t it? You have to really think hard, this issomething already inside you, it’s part of you … (Supply teacher, Class 4)

Class 6’s teacher concurred stating that she observed that the children found thereflective tasks difficult, as this was not a usual occurrence in her classroom. Inter-estingly, Class 6’s teacher distinguished between the learning that is at the ‘fore-front’ and the ‘deep thoughts’ that are evoked through such a programme. This isencapsulated in the excerpt below:

I think they found it quite hard initially … They are not used to thinking, not sort offinding those kind of thoughts. Even though it’s probably there, but it’s, it’s just not atthe forefront of their minds. Everything that they are learning now, is kind of at theforefront, but like the deep thoughts is not something that they are prepared for, if

International Journal of Children’s Spirituality 175

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

53 0

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

you’d like. You know, it’s not something that they are ready to, like right at the start.(Class 6 teacher)

Relaxation and calm

Pupils’ and educators’ reflections on the programme reveal that pupils were able toenter into differing states, which included feeling calm, relaxed and being in thepresent moment. These states may be described as spaces where pupils were emo-tionally and physically aware, and a time where they are also mentally in tune withtheir surroundings or mindful of the environment they inhabit. This sense of ‘calm-ness’, ‘stillness’ and ‘quiet’ was mentioned by a staff member who believes that‘often in the classroom they [pupils] don’t get the chance to just be silent … [and]to be honest there aren’t that many chances to be really quiet’. When probed on theeffects of the lessons, she commented that ‘they are much calmer, they are wantingto be quiet and still. And they are almost … [they] quite value having that in theday and they quite value that listening time and that kind of calm time’.

This notion of ‘calm’ was further reinforced by Class 5’s teaching assistant whosuggested a LO for the lessons: ‘how to remain calm?’ She believed:

that [this activity] is quite an important one for our class, in particular remaining ser-ene and calm … what else have they learnt? Yeah, just those kinds of things, [and]being aware of themselves and aware of others and expressing themselves.

Comparably, Class 6’s teaching assistant also asserted that ‘the sitting and relax[ing] time, they don’t get enough of that’. She revealed that after the silence lessons‘It just calms them down’. When probed what ‘calm’ meant she replied ‘that’s quitea difficult one’; however, she continued and explained that:

I think calm is kind of quiet and [they] just sort of realise where they are, the environ-ment they are in, it needs to be like, they need to be quiet and I am going to use thatword again [calm], in order to get on with the day.

Beth (7–8 years) also commented that she has ‘learnt how to stay more calmer andrelaxed’, whilst Adam (7–8 years) posited that he had learnt ‘things like relaxing,yeah relaxing. Relaxing, sort of, just relaxing in the day … it’s good to relax …you just relax your muscles … [and feel] calmer’. When queried what calmer meanthe replied:

It would mean probably, sort of when you are relaxing, you sort of, sort of everythingcomes out of you and you just sort of kinda of relaxing. Oh yeah, sort of, you sort ofjust enjoy that moment in a way.

Furthermore, Adam (8–9 years) also explained how the ‘calming down lessons’(silence activity) made him see the world differently because ‘it made me think ofmy surroundings and my surroundings was the world’.

When asked how she felt after the same activity Bernice (7–8 years) replied,‘really calm and relaxed’, akin to when you ‘lie down and do nothing’. Sheexpanded upon this and explained that this experience is ‘peaceful’. She furtherreflected upon what she had learnt, explaining that:

176 Y.-L. Ng

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

53 0

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

I use to think, like every time I was relaxed, I was just like lying down and thenwatching TV or something. But then you showed me that you can like, do thingswhen you [are] lying down that can make you feel even more relaxed.

She later explained, ‘you have taught us to like cherish it whenever we can and justlike the circle time and relax’. A few pupils also mentioned feeling ‘peaceful’ afterthe lessons as exemplified by Angie (8–9 years), who commented that it ‘was calmand things were quiet and peaceful’. Alice (8–9 years) also mentioned how sheliked the silent time because ‘I was calm and relaxed and everything was quiet’.Therefore, the silence activity may have provided an avenue for pupils to slowdown and enter into a state of ‘calm’ and ‘relaxation’.

Pupils also stated that they discovered aspects of their sensory domains and anenhanced bodily or kinaesthetic awareness. For example, Brenda’s (7–8 years) LQfor the lessons was ‘to be more aware of [what] you[r] body is doing as well aswhat things around you are doing’. In another reflection she also commented thatshe ‘liked this activity because it made me notice more about what it was like to bein the classroom’. Similarly, Asia (8–9 years) conveyed how she liked the silenceactivity because ‘it is fun being by yourself and think [ing] about my 5 sence[senses]’. Additionally, Angie (8–9 years) stated that her favourite lesson was the‘silent time because it was intresting [interesting] to fin[d] out about what wasgoing on around me’. She explained that ‘I’ve learnt that if you just stop for a min-ute you can find out so much about what’s around you’. Furthermore, Callum (7–8 years) also revealed that after the lessons he feels ‘ecstatic because I was as smartas my grandpa’. When probed about what he had learnt to make him feel smart, hereplied ‘now I know I don’t have to open my eyes to see something’. Hence, pupilsmay have connected with self through partaking in moments of silence and reflec-tion, which may have led to an awareness of not only themselves, but also the envi-ronment they inhabit.

Emotional aspects of self

The programme also touched upon pupils’ emotional domains, with some pupilsemphasising how they ‘learnt about fillings [feelings]’ (Caleb, 7–8 years) and also‘to show what you feel inside’ (Brianna, 7–8 years). Adrian (8–9 years) suggested apossible LQ for the sessions, to ‘think about youre [your] feelings and make a pic-ture or words’; whilst Campbell (7–8 years) believes that he has learnt to ‘writehow I feel’ and ‘how to think about other people’s feelings’. More simplistically,Camden stated that he is ‘learning to see face[s] ant [and] to tell how there [they]are felling [feeling]’. Adam (8–9 years) also believed that he has learnt ‘that every-one has feelings’ and that ‘feelings are important’. Thereby, these lessons seem tohave allowed some pupils to delve into their emotional centres, whilst also recogn-ising that emotions lay within others.

Educators also emphasised this discovery of self through one’s emotional state,as highlighted by the Class 4 Supply teacher’s reflections on the silent lesson. Whenasked what she thought of the lesson she replied ‘I’m so mature and life is kindathickened with all this experience, whereas there is hardly any opportunity for themto think about, to get inside their feelings, I never had that when I was young’.Comparably, Class 6’s teacher also mentioned the emotional aspect of theprogramme, commenting that it ‘raises the [pupils’] level of sensitivity to the

International Journal of Children’s Spirituality 177

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

53 0

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

emotions’. She further articulated a possible LO for the programme; however, shedid preface her statement by explaining that it ‘sounds quite esoteric’. Nevertheless,she believed that pupils may have learnt to:

Share inner feelings. Something around that I suppose, to become aware of and talkabout, and be more responsive to inner feelings, inner feelings and thoughts … Ithink, I think, putting themselves in, almost that transference, transfer themselves intoa particular position, recalling … (Class 6 teacher)

This theme was further reinforced by the Year 3 teaching assistant, who believedthat after the programme, pupils had a greater ‘understanding [of] what they arefeeling and understanding something, and being, also being able to express it in, inwhichever way they choose’. This is also highlighted in Class 6’s teaching assistantreflections; she commented that these lessons have ‘been quite an eye opener forme as well’. She elaborated, stating that these lessons may have allowed the chil-dren to:

get in touch with their feelings. They go deeper into their feelings and their feelingsfor others … And it’s quite good for them to, at such a young age to get into theirdeep feelings and, and bring out feelings that they might not have.

Openness to communicate

Talking and listening is integrated across key learning areas in the English class-room and thus it was a surprise that pupils and staff both mentioned enhanced com-munication skills as an outcome of the lessons. Perhaps, this may indicate thatalthough schools give children opportunities to talk and listen in class, the commu-nication skills they developed in these classes were somewhat different. It may becontended that these lessons may have provided a means for children to focus upontheir inner dwellings, which may have affected not only their awareness of self butalso their ability to connect with others through the sharing of self. In summary,through diary entries, drawings, poems, discussions and sharing sessions, somepupils in this study learnt to communicate with others.

The data stemming from the study provide us with a glimpse of the emotionalnature of childhood, revealing the gamut of fears, joys, anxieties, despair, loneli-ness, awe, delight and wonder that children experienced during this short period oftime within a classroom setting. Thus, these lessons provided space for some chil-dren to reflect and internalise their experiences as well as allowing some of them toshare this inner aspect of self or what Joshua (8–9 years) described as ‘all the com-plicated things’. This communicative outcome may be seen as a possible pathwayfor children to connect with others, again highlighting the relational nature of spiri-tuality. Perhaps, educators’ roles may lie in providing safe places for children toshare their ‘inner self’ (Bertha, 7–8 years) with others.

Class 5’s teaching assistant reinforces this theme ascertaining that these lessonsallowed pupils to ‘express themselves in different ways, they don’t just have to saysomething, they can draw. You know, there is different ways to get your feelingsand thoughts out and make yourself feel better, and to help others understand you’.Pupils also highlighted how their communicative skills had developed over time,which may have allowed Wilson (7–8 years) ‘to show your feelings [and] not getworried’ and also for Nicholas (7–8 years) to ‘tell people things’. Aerin’s

178 Y.-L. Ng

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

53 0

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

(7–8 years) ‘before and after’ drawing (Figure 1) suitably captures this notion. Sheconveyed that she has learnt ‘that it [is] ok to tell people speshel [special] thin[gs]when you are afrad [afraid]’.

Holly (7–8 years) also utilised drawings (Figure 2) as a means to reveal how shehas developed skills in expressing herself. She explained that ‘before the lessons, Ifelt a little nervous that all of my friends would find out my deepest stuff and it feltreally scary, but after the lessons I felt really relaxed and a little bit jumpy’. Sheexplained that after the lessons she feels ‘free and I don’t really mind that much’.When probed what ‘free’ meant she stated that ‘basically it means you don’t reallymind if other people do, you feel more ok to do what you want’.

A heightened ability to communicate was further reinforced in one of the classeswhen a child came forth to share with her classmates questions that she had been

“Me wen [when] I was happy to sher [share]”

“Me wen [when] I was sced [scared] to tel [l] evrything”

[everything]

Figure 1. Aerin.

“Free” “Afread [afraid]”

Figure 2. Holly.

International Journal of Children’s Spirituality 179

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

53 0

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

pondering; ‘why am I alone?’ and ‘why don’t I have any friends?’ After thismoment, Class 5’s teaching assistant believed that ‘she’s definitely learnt it’s ok tosay, why isn’t anyone playing with me?’ As a consequence of sharing, the teachingassistant noticed that in the playground, pupils became friendlier and ‘were beingreally conscious of saying come and play with us’. Consequently, this experiencehas led the teaching assistant to further reflect that perhaps ‘people hadn’t realisedthat she was playing on her own may be?’ And thus, through the act of communi-cating how she felt, this child may have connected with herself and potentially alsoenhanced her relationship with others:

‘I’ve learnt that I shouldn’t hide my expressions’. (Caitlyn, 7–8 years)

Caitlyn’s (7–8 years) reflection pertaining to what she has learnt highlighted how,throughout the lessons, some of the children have learnt how to express themselves.She explained that these lessons have enabled her to start ‘saying things that wedon’t normally say to people’. She revealed that these things include ‘my religion,what I care about, who I care about’ and ‘my life story’. It seems that these sharingsessions may have allowed Caitlyn to express herself and to share her thoughts,feelings and fears with others. Acacia (8–9 years) also posited that she had learnt‘that no one will laugh at your work’, whilst Bessie (7–8 years) revealed that theselessons taught her ‘not to be shy when I show my work in front of other people’.

Bertha (7–8 years) commented that the programme has ‘made me feel less self-conscious and it’s made me more bold’ and she explained that this is ‘because, it’skind of, like you don’t have to feel upset about or scared about telling everybodywhat you think because they might have something a bit strange, that they, that theymight have in themselves’ and ‘basically we all have like soft spots and we all havethings like that’. Bertha’s (7–8 years) drawing (Figure 3) emphasises what she haslearnt. She stated that before the lessons ‘I felt worried that people would laugh atmy opinions’, whilst after she revealed ‘I feel more bold’.

Staff interviewed also emphasised this sub-theme, as exemplified by Class 6’steaching assistant, who asserted that this programme may have provided pupils with

‘I feel more bold’ ‘I felt worried that people would

laugh at my opinions’

Figure 3. Bertha.

180 Y.-L. Ng

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

53 0

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

‘an opportunity to explore their thoughts and feelings and being able to, learninghow to communicate with them I suppose, to express themselves as well’. The Year3 teacher also suggested that, as time passed, pupils became ‘very eager for that,for that opportunity to share’. She also ‘noticed that it was nice for children whohave perhaps, you know, have personal family issues to talk about them’. She fur-ther explained, ‘like how they missed someone in their lives, who isn’t here any-more, who is important to them. I thought it was very useful to reflect.’ Later on,she conveyed that she has observed her class ‘starting to talk, reflect on death, theymention it quite a lot’.

Relation to others

Pupils and educators mentioned that during the programme pupils learnt to ‘Relateto Others’. These ‘Others’ ranged from family members, friends and deceased rela-tives to soft toys. This notion was appositely captured through an interview withNicholas (7–8 years), who stated that he had learnt ‘to be better friends with people’and also, ‘I’ve learnt that it is not always going to be about one person’. He furtherexplained that the lessons ‘makes you think about your whole family if you plan todo that, and [also] think of what is special to them and you’. Bertha’s (7–8 years)reflection also emphasised how these lessons were ‘really good because it made methink about like, it’s not all about yourself, it’s about other people and other things,and I thought about my bear and my family’. She further explained that this makesher feel ‘happy and comforted, not really my bear, but with my family, they arealways going to be there for me’.

Jessica (8–9 years) stated that the lessons had taught her ‘about other people’and also that ‘people have feelings’, whilst Holly (7–8 years) maintained that at theend of the programme, ‘I feel a lot more happier and much more mature, and ableto listen and a bit more able to get a bit more fit into other people’s shoes’. Pupils’relation with others was also reinforced through the Class 5’s teaching assistant’sreflections, where she explicated that pupils ‘probably experienced how to be moreaware of other people … Yeah, I’d say that’s probably the biggest thing that they,they are slightly more aware of each other’. Furthermore, she explained that ‘I thinkthat’s what I have seen actually, the biggest, the biggest thing was that they wouldlisten to other, sort of think, not only how they are feeling but how somebody elsemight feel’. This awareness of ‘other people’ emphasises how some pupils relatedwith others during these lessons. Caitlyn (7–8 years) also believes that she hadlearnt about ‘friendship’, revealing that ‘I use[d] to not have many friends, but nowI know how to make friends better’. She explained that ‘I’ve learnt what other peo-ple like and I’ve learnt I shouldn’t hide my expressions’ as ‘it makes me morefriendly and I can get people’s attention by talk[ing] to them about what we’velearn[t]’.

Staff’s reflections were also comparable to those of the pupils, with Class 6’steaching assistant commenting that she believed that the lessons ‘are good becausethey make children think of others as well, and make them think of others and howthey feel as well’. Comparably, the Year 3 teaching assistant also commented thathe thought that the children have become more ‘thoughtful in feelings for others’.Class 6’s teacher also revealed how she thought the lessons tended to be a ‘reflec-tive experience’. She explained that it would be useful, ‘particularly for those chil-dren who have difficulty, relationship difficulties, giving them that opportunity to

International Journal of Children’s Spirituality 181

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

53 0

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

think back’. And perhaps develop ‘skills to reflect on what’s going on inside them,and shove them to actually take more responsibility for what’s going on’. She alsobelieved that this might then give them a chance to reflect upon how ‘other peoplefeel and not just me, because children are very self-focused, and so it encouragesthat other focus. It gives them that opportunity’.

Conclusion

An interventionist programme that is designed to give students the ability to accessand nurture their inner lives, to develop their sense of self and to promote a feeling ofconnectedness to the other in their community, world and beyond appears to bebeyond the grasp of most decision-makers and politicians in contemporary educationalcircles. (de Souza 2006, 167)

The findings from this relatively short programme may highlight to ‘decisionmakers’ and ‘politicians’ that spiritual development in the classroom is viable. Theprogramme represents a step towards the development of better pedagogy and prac-tice, allowing educators a glance at what can be done in the classroom. The diver-sity in pupils’ and educators’ responses emphasise the relativity of children’sspirituality. It also fortifies the notion that spiritual development is not specificallyabout teaching children about spirituality, but is concerned with providing themwith certain skills, space in the classroom and time for them to touch upon and, ifneeded, construct their own spirituality. They may then share this with their peers,connecting self to others.

Therefore it is argued that activities or lessons should remain quite open, cater-ing to this inherent range. The role of the teacher could then be viewed as a facilita-tor, a person who guides the experiences and learning of pupils. In providing aconducive milieu, perhaps we are countering what Hay and Nye (2006, 143) per-ceive to be the ‘intractable problem’ that ‘stifles’ our educative environments: ‘alack of social context which gives permission for an open acceptance of spiritual-ity’. Further to this, children’s learning reflections also reinforce the importance ofpedagogy in pupils’ spiritual development. These observations emphasise that cer-tain skills need to be facilitated in the classroom, otherwise innate spirituality maylay buried deep within. This reinforces Hay and Nye’s (2006, 122) research, whichfound that pupils utilise explicit and implicit strategies to ‘maintain their sense ofthe spiritual’ and thus, the task for future researchers and educators may lie in test-ing and studying what these strategies may encompass.

It is acknowledged that this investigation is a small, qualitative study, whichprovides an in-depth pedagogical view of children’s engagement with differentactivities in the classroom; thus additional studies in pedagogy and practice are ofutmost importance. It is also acknowledged that these practices are not exhaustiveand only reflect some perspectives on spirituality. It is also recognised that there areinherent reliability concerns with regards to this small-scale investigation. Nonethe-less, what it does represent is a step towards shifting research from theoretical con-structs and debates to a more practical and pedagogical focus. The results of thisstudy illustrate that pupils experienced and learnt something. Whether these catego-ries of learning and experiences are spiritual may be the subject of debate. Never-theless, it is argued that through the implementation of a spiritual developmentprogramme in classrooms, this study elicited data that highlighted learning out-

182 Y.-L. Ng

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

53 0

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

comes that relate to some perspectives on children’s spirituality. Hence, this paperpostulates that, akin to other subject areas of development, spirituality in theclassroom should be facilitated through guidance and thus reinforces Rawle’s(2009, 1) assertions that spirituality will not ‘necessarily grow and flourish indepen-dently of structured guidance and assistance’. Furthermore, the results of this studymay also reinforce Watson’s (2007, 134) contentions that ‘education in spiritualbeliefs and values is a complex and broad subject which warrants designated curric-ulum space’.

In summary, it is argued that silence, meaning, questioning, bodily or kinaesthet-ic awareness, focusing, reflection, use of one’s imagination and subsequently, com-munication of one’s spirituality may be pedagogical instruments for spiritualdevelopment. These learning reflections emphasised pupils’ developing awarenessof self and others and hence a term was developed, a ‘Pedagogy of Awareness’,encapsulating different channels for which spiritual development may manifest inthe classroom. These ‘tools’ or pedagogies were not conduits for all children todevelop their spirituality; however, they did provide differing pathways for somechildren to relate and connect. It is postulated that through further developments inthe pedagogy and practice of spiritual development, schools may nurture pupilsmore holistically, so that the next generation may gain a better concept of selfthrough their awareness of the ‘little person inside’, whilst also learning to express,communicate and relate to others.

Notes on contributorYee-Ling Ng is a doctoral candidate at The University of Leeds/York St John University,UK. She is also a part-time visiting lecturer at York St John University. Her current researchinterests centre on the practice and pedagogy of spiritual development within classroomsettings.

ReferencesArweck, E., E. Nesbitt, and R. Jackson. 2005. Common values for the common school?

Using two values education programmes to promote ‘spiritual and moral development’.Journal of Moral Education 34, no. 3: 325–42.

Baumeister, R.F., and K.D. Vohs. 2002. The pursuit of meaningfulness in life. In Handbookof positive psychology, ed. C.R. Snyder and S.J. Lopez, 608–18. New York, NY: OxfordUniversity Press.

Bruce, M.A., and D. Cockreham. 2004. Enhancing the spiritual development of adolescentgirls. Professional School Counselling 7, no. 5: 351–5.

Coles, R. 1992. The spiritual life of children. New York, NY: HarperCollins.Cousin, G. 2009. Researching higher education: An introduction to contemporary methods

and approaches. Oxon: Routledge.Creswell, J.W. 2007. Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approa-

ches. 2nd ed. London: Sage.De Souza, M. 2006. Educating for hope, compassion and meaning in a divisive and intoler-

ant world. International Journal of Children’s Spirituality 11, no. 1: 165–75.Eaude, T. 2006. Children’s spiritual, moral, social and cultural development: Primary and

early years. Exeter: Learning Matters.Erricker, C., and J. Erricker. 2000. Reconstructing religious, spiritual and moral education.

London: RoutledgeFalmer.Hardy, A.C. 1979. The spiritual nature of man: A study of contemporary religious experi-

ence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

International Journal of Children’s Spirituality 183

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

53 0

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

Hart, T. 2006. Spiritual experiences and capacities of children and youth. In The handbookof spiritual development in childhood and adolescence, ed. E.C. Roehlkepartain, P.E.Ebstyne, L.M. Wagener, and P.L. Benson, 163–77. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hay, D., and R. Nye. 2006. The spirit of the child. Rev. ed. London; Philadelphia: JessicaKingsley.

Hegarty, S., and P. Evans. 1985. Research and evaluation methods in special education:Quantitative and qualitative techniques in case study work. Windsor, Berkshire: NFER-Nelson.

Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. 1944. Education Act 1944. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1944/31/pdfs/ukpga_19440031_en.pdf.

Holloway, I. 2008. A-Z of qualitative research in nursing and healthcare. 2nd ed. Chiches-ter: Wiley-Blackwell.

Hyde, B. 2008. Children and spirituality: Searching for meaning and connectedness. Lon-don: Jessica Kingsley.

Kessler, R. 1998. Nourishing students in secular schools. Educational Leadership 56, no. 4:49.

Kessler, R. 2000. The soul of education: Helping students find connection, compassion, andcharacter at school. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Devel-opment.

Kibble, D.G. 1996. Spiritual development, spiritual experience and spiritual education. InEducation, spirituality, and the whole child, ed. R. Best, 64–73. London: Cassell.

MacDonald, D.A. 2000. Spirituality: Description, measurement, and relation to the five fac-tor model of personality. Journal of Personality 68, no. 1: 153–97.

MacDonald, D.A., and H.L. Friedman. 2002. Assessment of humanistic, transpersonal andspiritual constructs: State of the science. Journal of Humanistic Psychology 42, no. 4:102–25.

Marples, R. 2006. Against (the use of the term) ‘spiritual education’. International Journalof Children’s Spirituality 11, no. 2: 293–306.

Marton, F. 1981. Phenomenography: Describing conceptions of the world around us. Instruc-tional Science 10, no. 2: 177–200.

Marton, F. 1988. Phenomenography: A research approach to investigating differentunderstandings of reality. In Qualitative research in education: Focus and methods, ed.R.R. Sherman and R.B. Webb, 141–61. London: RoutledgeFalmer.

Marton, T., and S. Booth. 1998. The learners experience of learning. In The handbook ofeducation and human development: New models of learning, teaching and schooling, ed.D.R. Olson and N. Torrance, 534–65. Oxford: Blackwell.

Maslow, A.H. 1971. The farther reaches of human nature. New York, NY: Viking Press.Maslow, A.H. 1976. Religions, values, and peak-experiences. Middlesex: Penguin Books.Miller, D.N., and A.B. Nickerson. 2007. Changing the past, present, and future-potential

applications of positive psychology in school-based psychotherapy with children andyouth. Journal of Applied School Psychology 24, no. 1: 147–62.

Nasir, N.S. 2008. Considering context, culture, and development in the relationship betweenspirituality and positive youth development. In Positive youth development and spiritual-ity: From theory to research, ed. R.M. Lerner, R.W. Roeser, and E. Phelps, 285–304.West Conshohocken, PA: Templeton Foundation Press.

Newby, P. 2010. Research methods for education. London: Pearson Education.Ng, Y. 2012. Spirituality in the classroom: A study of primary school pupils’ experiences

and learning. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Leeds, Leeds.Office for Standards in Education (OFSTED). 2004. Promoting and evaluating pupils’ spiri-

tual, moral, social and cultural development. http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/promot-ing-and-evaluating-pupils-spiritual-moral-social-and-cultural-development.

Office for Standards in Education (OFSTED). 2011. OFSTED inspection reports. http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/inspection-reports/find-inspection-report.

Opie, C. 2004. Doing educational research: A guide to first-time researchers. London: Sage.ÓMurchú, D. 2004. Quantum theology: Spiritual implications of the new physics. New York,

NY: Crossroad.Palmer, P.J. 1993. To know as we are known: Education as a spiritual journey. New York,

NY: HarperCollins.

184 Y.-L. Ng

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

53 0

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

Pargament, K.I. 1997. The psychology of religion and coping: Theory, research, practice.New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Pargament, K.I., and A. Mahoney. 2002. Spirituality: Discovering and conserving the sacred.In Handbook of positive psychology, ed. C.R. Snyder and S.J. Lopez, 646–62. NewYork, NY: Oxford University Press.

Priestley, J. 1985. Towards finding the hidden curriculum: A consideration of the spiritualdimension of experience in curriculum planning. British Journal of Religious Education7, no. 3: 112–9.

Priestley, J. 1997. Spirituality, curriculum and education. International Journal of Children’sSpirituality 2, no. 1: 23–34.

Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA). 1997. The promotion of pupils’ spiritual,moral, social and cultural development. Draft guidance for pilot work. England: QCA.

Ratcliff, D., and R. Nye. 2006. Childhood spirituality: Strengthening the research foundation.In The handbook of spiritual development in childhood and adolescence, ed. E.C. Roe-hlkepartain, P.E. Ebstyne, L.M. Wagener, and P.L. Benson, 473–83. Thousand Oaks,CA: Sage.

Rawle, M. 2009. Perceptions of spirituality and spiritual development in education held byteachers and students on teacher training courses. Unpublished PhD thesis, CardiffMetropolitan University, Cardiff.

Rodger, A. 1996. Human spirituality: Towards an educational rationale. In Education, spiri-tuality, and the whole child, ed. R. Best, 45–63. London: Cassell.

Roeser, R.W., S.S. Issac, M. Abo-Zena, A. Brittain, and S.C. Peck. 2008. Self-Identity pro-cesses in spirituality and positive youth development. In Positive youth development andspirituality: From theory to research, ed. R.M. Lerner, R.W. Roeser, and E. Phelps, 74–105. West Conshohocken, PA: Templeton Foundation Press.

School Curriculum Authority Association (SCAA). 1995. Spiritual and moral development,SCAA discussion papers: No. 3. http://www.schoolswork.co.uk/media/files/spiritual-moral-development.pdf.

Stern, J. 2009. The spirit of the school. London: Continuum International Publishing Group.Suhor, C. 1998/1999. Spirituality – Letting it grow in the classroom. Educational Leader-

ship, 12–16.Tirri, K., M.K. Tallent-Runnels, and P. Nokelainen. 2005. A cross-cultural study of pre-ado-

lescents’ moral, religious and spiritual questions. British Journal of Religious Education27, no. 3: 207–14.

Ubani, M. 2006. What makes life spiritual? Exploring the life orientations of Finnish pre-adolescents. In Religion, spirituality, & identity, ed. K. Tirri, 119–134. Bern: Peter LangAG, International Academic Publishers.

Watson, J.D. 2000. From transcendence to ethics: Shaping spirituality to schools. Journal ofBeliefs & Values: Studies in Religion & Education 21, no. 1: 39–50.

Watson, J.D. 2007. Spiritual development: Constructing an inclusive and progressiveapproach. Journal of Beliefs & Values: Studies in Religion & Education 28, no. 2:125–36.

Watson, J.D. 2008. Can children and young people learn from atheism for spiritual develop-ment? A response to the National Framework for Religious Education. British Journal ofReligious Education 30, no. 1: 49–58.

Webb, G. 1997. Deconstructing deep and surface: Towards a critique of phenomenography.Higher Education 33, no. 2: 195–212.

White, J. 1996. Education, spirituality and the whole child: A humanist perspective. In Edu-cation, spirituality and the whole child, ed. R. Best, 30. London: Cassell.

Wong, P.H. 2006. A conceptual investigation into the possibility of spiritual education. Inter-national Journal of Children’s Spirituality 11, no. 1: 73–85.

Wright, A. 2000. Spirituality and education. London: RoutledgeFalmer.

International Journal of Children’s Spirituality 185

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

53 0

9 O

ctob

er 2

014