‘Maslow before Bloom’: Implementing a caring pedagogy during Covid-19

Abstract

The speed at which the novel coronavirus, known as Covid-19, spread around the world in early 2020, has been well-documented. Countries closed their borders, cities and regions went into lockdown, schools and businesses closed and hospital geared up for an influx of patients (Cameron, 2020; OECD, 2021; UNESCO, 2020). On March 25, New Zealand went into Level 4 lockdown, the most restrictive of the government’s alert level system. The school holidays, due to start on April 9, were brought forward two weeks to give the Ministry of Education and schools a chance to prepare for school-led home learning. A survey of schools highlighted that only half the schools in the country felt they could deliver learning fully online, with lack of devices and limited Internet connectivity being the major problems (New Zealand Government, 2020). Most schools moved into home learning on April 15 and continued until after May 18, when the country moved down to Level 2. On return, schools needed to alter their approaches to comply with social distancing and hygiene requirements until the country returned to Level 1 in June. In August 2020, Auckland schools closed again and yet again several times in 2021 (Author, 2020; Cameron, 2020; Education Review Office [ERO], 2021; Henrickson, 2020; Ministry of Education, 2020). The arrival of the Delta variant in Auckland communities, in late August 2021, led to further regional lockdowns, some of which are still in place at the time of writing.
 This article draws on in-depth qualitative interviews with 20 teachers in either late 2020 or mid-2021, as part of a larger study of New Zealand schools’ responses to Covid-19. The article begins with a short synthesis of research literature on teachers’ responses to lockdowns overseas and in New Zealand. The methodology for our study is briefly outlined before describing the ‘caring pedagogy’ theoretical framework that underpins the approach to this article. The findings are presented in a semi-chronological order, from teachers’ preparation, to implementation, to returning to school. The findings are interspersed with ‘found poems’ created from verbatim transcripts to highlight teachers’ voices. The discussion section revisits the concepts in the article’s title, that is, ‘Maslow before Bloom.’ The overall purpose of our article is to portray the tension between teachers’ willingness to adopt a caring pedagogy and the toll that it took on them, personally and professionally.

“I couldn't do what I needed to do for my own family”: Teacher-parents during COVID-19 lockdowns

“…While not wishing to downplay the pressure that this requirement put on principals and their school leadership teams, our focus in this article is on teachers as frontline workers ( Beames, Christensen, & Werner-Seidler, 2021 ; Pressley, Ha, & Learn, 2021 ), that is, those who were charged with teaching on a daily basis. Studies of teachers early in the pandemic reveal high levels of uncertainty, anxiety and frustration ( Allen, Jerrim, & Sims, 2020 ; Beames et al, 2021 ; Billett, Turner, & Li, 2022 ; Education Review Office, 2021 ; Kim & Asbury, 2020 ; Mutch & Peung, 2021 ; Pressley et al, 2021 ). In later studies, some of these intense emotions appeared to level out as schools and parents reduced expectations and teachers settled into a delivery rhythm ( Kim & Asbury, 2020 ; Sharma et al, 2022 ) but exhaustion increased, and mental health and physical wellbeing decreased ( Beames et al, 2021 ; Education Review Office, 2021 ; Kim et al, 2022 ; Letzel, Pozas, & Schneider, 2020 ; Mutch & Peung, 2021 ; Pellerone, 2021 ).…”

“…Teachers experienced high levels of concern, personally and professionally ( Letzel et al, 2020 ; Mutch & Peung, 2021 ) but their most pressing concern was for their students, especially for those in the most vulnerable families and communities ( An et al, 2021 ; Drane et al, 2020 ; Education Review Office, 2021 ; Kim & Asbury, 2020 ; Kim, Dundas, & Asbury, 2021 ; Mutch & Peung, 2021 ; Phillips et al, 2021 ). Many teachers felt that the pandemic would only exacerbate the inequalities that already existed in society ( Hood, 2020 ; Kim & Asbury, 2020 ; Letzel et al, 2020 ; Mutch, 2021 ; Riwai-Couch et al, 2020 ).…”

“…Many teachers felt that the pandemic would only exacerbate the inequalities that already existed in society ( Hood, 2020 ; Kim & Asbury, 2020 ; Letzel et al, 2020 ; Mutch, 2021 ; Riwai-Couch et al, 2020 ). Where possible, prior to full lockdowns, schools delivered basic supplies – devices, learning materials, food and other necessities to families most at risk ( Kim & Asbury, 2020 ; Mutch & Peung, 2021 ). Teachers worried about their students’ home environments, whether they could access learning, how much their parents could support them, and how they might cope with a different routine and set of circumstances ( Aytaç, 2021 ; Kim & Asbury, 2020 ; Mutch & Peung, 2021 ).…”

“…1–16; Kim & Asbury, 2020 ; Maitland & Glazzard, 2022 ). As well as the intensity of learning about new pedagogies and platforms, teachers faced limited preparation time, a lack of suitable resources, increased workload, guilt about the quality of their teaching, and the loss of their former teacher identity ( Billett, Turner, & Li, 2022 ; Flack, Walker, Bickerstaff, & Margetts, 2020 ; Hood, 2020 ; Kim et al, 2022 ; Leech et al, 2020 ; Letzel et al, 2020 ; Mutch and Peung, 2021 ; Van Bergen & Daniel, 2022 ; Weißenfels, Klopp, & Perels, 2022 ; Marshall et al, 2020 ). Many teachers missed the face-to-face interactions of teaching, the buzz of a busy classroom, and their individual students ( Leech et al, 2020 ; Letzel et al, 2020 ; Truzoli, Pirola, & Conte, 2021 ; Van Bergen & Daniel, 2020 ).…”

“…Many teachers missed the face-to-face interactions of teaching, the buzz of a busy classroom, and their individual students ( Leech et al, 2020 ; Letzel et al, 2020 ; Truzoli, Pirola, & Conte, 2021 ; Van Bergen & Daniel, 2020 ). Their feelings of competence, usefulness and optimism tended to decline ( Allen et al, 2020 ; Billett, Turner, & Li, 2022 ; Kim et al, 2022 ; Maitland & Glazzard, 2022 ; Mutch & Peung, 2021 ;).…”