Communication-Friendly CollaborationAlison Tweedale


Before implementing the communication-friendly spaces (CFS) approach across the two Children’s Centres and outreach venues


colourful, busy and although exciting to children, did not inspire creativity or imagination.


Our venues were not used to their potential; lighting was harsh, brash and artificial. Blinds offered restricted views


children and babies lying down, ceilings were vast empty spaces. Our outdoor space was a separate space that was very open; a blank canvas, uninviting and rarely used.


“


Running services in local community and village halls posed different challenges; large open spaces and cold hard floors were softened


only and for a staff our static spaces were


with over stimulating mats, cushions and clutter. Adults were reluctant to engage at children’s level and favoured sitting in clusters of chairs as areas were uninviting.


championing each approach


member


As a team, developed through a distributed leadership model (NPQICL), we established that our learning environments did not meet their potential. We began to reflect; collectively discussing the ways in which the spaces were used, how they made us feel when working and asked families how they felt when they accessed our services.


By attending a Communication- Friendly Spaces seminar as a whole team we were able to reflect and plan effectively, working together to use the approach to adapt our environments and create a shared vision.


“


working together to use the approach to adapt our environments and create a shared vision


reflect and plan effectively,


We reduced the amount of resources offered at any one time and created calm, soft, neutral spaces that supported children’s exploration of objects that stimulated response and talk. In each venue we ensured there were opportunities and spaces for children to be social and interact in groups, complemented by cosy places to just ‘be’ and spaces to support communication through free, whole-bodied movement.


Outside became a much more valued part of the centre; a mud kitchen was created, and the natural environment allowed to flourish. This approach invited much exploration and supported


a greater understanding of the 15


families to have


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26