Froebelian Leadership in Early Years

In our explorations of Froebelian leadership, one of the key concepts we’re encountering is ‘spiritual motherhood’. The idea of spiritual motherhood was important to so many of the women who took on Froebelian ideas at the end of the 19th century and beginning of the 20th century and used these ideas as the basis for starting and developing kindergarten education around the world. It therefore seems important that in a study of Froebelian leadership, we consider what part spiritual motherhood might play in how we think about early years leadership.

Spiritual motherhood is the foundation of what some call ‘maternal feminism’ (Bakker, 2006). It is the view that women have a spiritual calling to tend to, nurture and heal the world. It suggests that ‘mothering’ goes beyond just mothering your own children as a woman, and instead includes mothering society as a whole. The radical potentials of the concept therefore lie in bringing together private and public involvement and proposing that women have a role to play in both spheres. For women at the turn of the 20th century, spiritual motherhood offered a platform for legitimately taking on roles in public life, including setting up and running institutions of early childhood education.

We can develop insights into how the concept of spiritual motherhood has informed leadership in Froebelian settings by engaging with archival materials, such as memoirs, diaries and letters. For example, in the memoirs of Caroline Caroline Garrison Bishop, Principal of Edgbaston Froebel College, School and Kindergarten, a volume put together by Emily Last and published in 1936, there are various accounts of Garrison Bishop’s leadership as seen through the lens of spiritual motherhood. One student-teacher writes about Edgbaston:

“In our year we were wont, laughingly, to call ourselves ‘the family’, to talk of ‘coming home’ to College, and surely we were not far wrong – for many of the elements of home life were there. We were bound together by a common tie, each had her sphere, her work to be done for the common good, and, above all, we were united in affection, in veneration for the ‘mother-spirit’ of the place. How many of us have been to her [Caroline Garrison Bishop] with pleasures that grew brighter for her sympathy, with difficulties which her insight went far to solve, with joys that came back to our hearts more precious for her reverend handling, with troubles which she helped us to find strength to bear. She took us all, younger and older, a jumble lot, many of us much cumbered with cares of self, and showed us the deeper things of life.’ (p. 71-72)

In this description, Froebelian leadership is shown as centring on the capacity of the leader to transform an institution into a home for all those involved with it – children, student-teachers and teachers. In line with the philosophy of spiritual motherhood, the Froebelian leader awakens and nurtures the ‘mother-spirit’ of the place. This depends on the sympathy and insight she brings to human connection. Through this human connection, the leader can inspire engagement with ‘the deeper things of life’, fostering a sense of connection and unity that then feeds into the educational spirit of the institution.

To what extent does this description of leadership resonate for early years leaders today? In some ways ‘spiritual motherhood’ is clearly outdated, since we don’t need to find ways to legitimize women’s engagement in public life. Women don’t need to have a spiritual calling in order to take on leadership roles. At the same time, is there something about the ‘mother-spirit’ idea that continues to live on in our ideas of early childhood education and how we imagine the archetypal early years leader?

References

Bakker, N. (2013). Cylinders and séances: Elise van Calcar and the spirit of Froebel. History of Education, 42(2), 147-165.

Last, E. (1936) Memoir of Caroline Garrison Bishop. London: Headley Brothers.