and reach thousands of daily visitors
No. 2160
Cottage routines or chores are an essential part of the child-care worker's regular daily practice diet. They are a constant for the children as well. Morning routines before breakfast or before going to school and chores each afternoon upon returning from school and before activities begin often seem to be viewed by all as negative. The following definition of "routine" in the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, when taken literally, becomes a definition of the problem as well: "A prescribed and detailed course of action to be followed regularly; a standard procedure ... a set of customary and often mechanically performed procedures or activities." To do something in a routine way is to imply that it is lacking in interest, to do it in accordance with established procedure, in a habitual or regular way. In addition, tasks performed in routine ways are "lacking in interest or originality." It seems small wonder that these tasks are continual problems for children and staff members.
Might turning to the definition for "chores" provide greater inspiration? Not at all. The American Heritage Dictionary defines a chore as "A routine or minor task; any daily or routine domestic task." It further qualifies a chore as "an unpleasant or burdensome task." When child-care workers perceive routines and chores in this manner, they will inevitably have to use coercion and exercises of power to get children to do these "prescribed and detailed courses of action."
Would it not be much better to view these tasks as part of the group's total program and approach them differently? By involving the group in defining the scope of the domestic tasks and the best means for dealing with them through group process, the group could do its own prescribing and detailing of how the domestic work is to be done within the general guidelines set down by the childcare workers. The staff would then be placed in a facilitating rather than an enforcing position. The tasks would not be performed mechanically or in a rote way but rather according to the group's own plan, which would be subject to review in a later meeting if flaws were detected in it.
It is essential that workers be clear on the fundamental nature of any activity, and in the case of domestic chores it would seem that what workers ought to be talking about and planning and working on with children is the managing of the essentials of daily life as a total activity, demanding joint action and full involvement of children and staff members because "it's our place and, therefore, it's our project."
If the vehicle of a group meeting is used to identify responsibilities that the group must address, then the fine points of daily program and schedule can become part of the group's responsibility, and it can become the group's task to consider how to include all of the things that are required — group time, optional time, time for group activities, time for basic maintenance — and to manage the scheduling and allocating of the various responsibilities inherent in a group living situation. This process becomes a learning/planning, problem-solving aspect of an overall educative approach.
An often-heard criticism of this approach is that the staff members will be abrogating their authority, and essentially asking the children's permission to perform essential tasks. That argument is a straw man. To develop such an approach with the children does not mean that the workers lose their authority. Instead, it means that, rather than controlling the children, the workers are controlling the process and the content, leaving the children free to make choices, to learn by operating with some autonomy in a situation that is made secure for experimentation by the definition and structure which the workers provide.
This point can be illustrated with an example of directing children and then of the alternative, controlling the process.
As breakfast was ending on a Saturday morning, Gary told the children he wanted them all to stay at the breakfast table after they were finished so he could give out the chore assignments. Immediately he began getting complaints: "Oh, that again. I wonder how long it's going to take this Saturday." "I always get the lousiest job," coupled with, "Here we go, watch him give Rob the best job, he's his favorite," and on down the list of complaints — usually numerous and usually reliable.
Jim, however, a more experienced worker who understands that the goal isn't just to get the laundry done and the place picked up, started differently. As breakfast was ending, he said, "OK, gang, as soon as everyone is finished with breakfast and the cleanup is done, I'd like us all to meet in the living room so we can plan what we're doing today." "What's happening today, Jim?" asked one of the boys. "Well, that's what we have to discuss, so let's hurry it up," said Jim.
He then began busying himself with various aspects of cleanup, talking with the boys as they worked together. When they were all gathered in the living room, Jim opened the discussion by outlining the several things that were on line for the day. "This is the day we said we wanted to go to the mall to shop for Halloween. We also invited Mr. Smith, from school, to come to lunch, and of course we have regular Saturday cottage chores to get fitted in, too. What we'd probably better do is figure out whether we'll get this all in and still be able to go to the movies as several guys have suggested. Who wants to start us off with a strategy for how we do this?"
Jim has set up a process in which, though leader, he is also a participant with the boys, helping all to share their ideas or gripes while making sure that they cover all the essentials in their planning, and that they make a group decision about the sequence and content of the day's events. Gary, however, will spend the morning being an enforcer, and the group will probably go off shopping or to the movies with unresolved conflicts that then spill over into the next activity.
Herb Barnes
Barnes, F. Herbert. From Warehouse to Greenhouse: Play, Work and the
Routines of Daily Living in Groups as the Core of Milieu Treatment. In
Beker, J. and Eiikovitz, Z. (ed.) (1991). Knowledge Utilization in
Residential Child and Youth Care Practice. Washington DC: CWLA, pp.
139-139
