Little Vista Early Years Education Hub — Professional Practice Guides

Jurisdiction: Republic of Ireland

Target Audience: Childcare Managers, Room Leaders, Educators, Service Owners, Quality and Compliance Leads

Publisher: Little Vista Early Years Resource Library

Last Updated: 28 August 2026

Welcome to the Little Vista Early Years Education Hub. This page brings together our growing library of professional practice guides for Irish Early Learning and Care (ELC) providers — covering key areas such as curriculum, play, pedagogy, and leadership. Each guide is designed to help managers, room leaders, and educators strengthen day-to-day practice in a way that is grounded in Aistear, Síolta, and the Tusla Quality and Regulatory Framework. Use the table of contents below to jump directly to the guide you need, or explore our complete collection as it expands.

Table of Contents

Inspiring Quality Play in Irish Early Learning and Care Settings

Little Vista Early Years Resource Library — A Practical Implementation Guide

Revised: February 2026 (Updated ELC Guidance — Version 2.0) | Sector: Irish ELC | Applicable to: All Registered Services

1. Introduction — Why Quality Play Matters in Irish ELC

Play is not a supplementary feature of early childhood education — it is its foundation. In Irish Early Learning and Care (ELC) settings, play is recognised as the primary context through which young children develop, learn, and make sense of the world. This is embedded across the national frameworks that govern practice in Ireland, including Aistear: the Early Childhood Curriculum Framework, Síolta: the National Quality Framework for Early Childhood Education, and the Tusla Quality and Regulatory Framework (QRF).

Despite this consensus, practice observations in Irish settings reveal a persistent gap between the stated importance of play and its consistent, high-quality implementation. Structured routines, adult-directed tasks, and product-focused art experiences continue to occupy time that could otherwise support richer, child-led exploration. This guidance exists to bridge that gap — providing practical, evidence-informed direction for managers, room leaders, and educators seeking to embed genuinely high-quality play into their daily practice.

High-quality play environments do not require significant financial investment. They require intentional thinking, professional knowledge, and a shared commitment to putting the child’s experience at the centre of all decision-making.

2. Theoretical Foundations — Aistear, Síolta and Regulatory Alignment

Quality play practice in Ireland is grounded in two interlocking national frameworks and shaped by the expectations of the Tusla QRF.

Aistear: The Early Childhood Curriculum Framework

Aistear defines curriculum as all of the learning experiences — formal and informal, planned and unplanned — that take place in the indoor and outdoor environment. This understanding is critical: everything that happens in a setting from the moment a child arrives to the moment they leave is part of the curriculum. It is not confined to structured activities at a table.

Aistear emphasises holistic development across four interconnected themes: Well-being, Identity and Belonging, Communicating, and Exploring and Thinking. Play is the primary vehicle through which children progress within all four themes. Aistear calls on educators to create environments that offer children choice, agency, and the freedom to pursue their own lines of inquiry.

Aistear’s updated principles reinforce that children’s holistic development, active learning through play, and positive, responsive relationships with adults are central to a quality experience, and that the child’s voice, agency, and choice must shape the learning environment. These principles are not applied in isolation from one another — they intersect and reinforce each other across every quality theme addressed in this guidance, from the design of the physical environment to the role of the educator in observing and extending children’s play.

Síolta: The National Quality Framework for Early Childhood Education

Síolta establishes quality standards across twelve components of early childhood practice. Of particular relevance to play are the standards relating to the learning environment, interactions, play, and the role of the adult. Síolta recognises the learning environment — both indoor and outdoor — as a key vehicle for learning, and it identifies the adult’s capacity to observe, respond to, and extend children’s play as central to quality practice.

Aistear and Síolta are deliberately interlinked frameworks: Aistear’s principles describe what children need in order to learn and develop, while Síolta’s standards describe how a setting’s practice should be structured to make that possible. Aistear’s principle of holistic development, for example, connects directly to Síolta’s standards on the learning environment and interactions — both of which are explored throughout this guidance in relation to open-ended materials, sensory play, and the educator’s role in extending children’s inquiry. Read together, the two frameworks provide both the rationale and the practical structure for the quality play practices described in this document.

Tusla Quality and Regulatory Framework (QRF)

The Tusla QRF sets out the regulatory expectations for ELC services operating under the Childcare Act 1991 (as amended). The QRF highlights that a programme of activities should be designed to take into account that play is the central means through which young children’s learning, creativity, and development are supported. Inspectors from Early Years Inspectorate and the National Early Years Inspectorate (EYEI) will look for evidence of play-based practice in planning documentation, the physical environment, and observed adult–child interactions.

Key Alignment Points

3. Characteristics of High-Quality Play Environments

A high-quality play environment is not defined by the quantity or cost of its resources. It is defined by how thoughtfully those resources are selected, organised, and made accessible to children — and by how effectively the physical space communicates to the child: your interests matter here, and your exploration is welcome.

Extended, Uninterrupted Play Periods

Children require sustained, uninterrupted periods of free play in order to reach deeper levels of engagement and exploration. Research and practice guidance consistently indicate that a minimum of 60 to 90 minutes of uninterrupted child-led play should be provided in both the morning and afternoon sessions of a full-day care programme. Frequent transitions — changing rooms, regrouping children, moving between scheduled activities — disrupt the flow of play and prevent children from reaching the concentrated, sustained engagement in which the most meaningful learning occurs.

Where a setting’s daily routine includes more than four to five significant transitions in a session, a critical review of that routine is warranted. Transitions should serve a genuine functional purpose; they should not be structured into a routine simply to provide apparent variety or to mark off time.

Open-Ended and Loose Parts Materials

Open-ended materials — sometimes called loose parts — are resources that have no fixed purpose or predetermined outcome. Unlike closed toys (jigsaws, shape sorters, electronic toys with a single function), open-ended materials can be combined, redesigned, moved, and reimagined by children in any way that serves their current line of inquiry. Examples include wooden blocks, fabric lengths, stones, shells, cardboard tubes, corks, metal lids, natural sticks, and recyclable materials.

The practical advantage of open-ended materials is their adaptability: a collection of wooden discs and pebbles can become a shop, a scientific investigation, a construction project, or a storytelling prop, depending on which child is using them and what interests them that day. This adaptability makes open-ended materials uniquely supportive of an emergent, child-responsive curriculum.

Real-Life Materials

Where possible, settings are encouraged to supplement toy replicas with real-life items, consciously choosing to introduce these materials alongside existing resources rather than feeling pressured to discard what is already in place. A real wooden spoon, a porcelain cup, a measuring tape, a working torch, or a genuine stethoscope offer children richer sensory experience, greater familiarity, and more complex learning opportunities than toy equivalents. Real-life materials carry different textures, weights, smells, and functional properties that deepen the quality of children’s exploratory play.

Real-life materials can be sourced at little or no cost by engaging families, approaching local businesses, and utilising charity shops and community recycling initiatives. Settings should brief families clearly on what types of materials are sought and why, ideally sharing a simple explanation of the educational rationale.

Natural and Sensory Materials

Sensory play is recognised as fundamental to the development of young children, particularly those in infant, toddler, and young preschool age groups. Natural materials — sand, soil, water, leaves, conkers, clay, pebbles, and similar items — provide daily sensory engagement that supports cognitive, physical, and emotional development. These materials should be available to children consistently throughout the day as part of the standard environment, not reserved as a time-limited, adult-controlled activity.

Indoor and Outdoor Environment Parity

A consistent finding in practice observation is that outdoor environments in Irish ELC settings tend to be underutilised and under-resourced relative to indoor spaces. Both Aistear and Síolta are explicit that the outdoor environment is an extension of the indoor learning environment, not a separate space for physical release only. Outdoor areas should reflect the same intentional planning, variety of resources, and opportunities for exploration as indoor rooms. Natural loose parts, creative materials, construction elements, and quiet reflection spaces all have a place outdoors as much as they do indoors.

4. The Role of the Educator in Supporting Play

The educator’s role in play is active, intentional, and multi-layered. It is not the role of a passive supervisor. Effective educators in play-based settings simultaneously observe, document, extend, question, and sometimes participate in children’s play — all while making real-time professional judgements about when to intervene and when to remain at a respectful distance.

From Task-Focused to Child-Focused Practice

In settings where play quality is not optimised, a common pattern is that during free play periods, only one educator remains engaged with children while others use the time for cleaning, paperwork, or other administrative tasks. While operational demands are real, the practice of withdrawing adult attention during free play reduces the quality of observation and the opportunity for meaningful extension of children’s interests.

Free play is the primary window through which educators come to know individual children — their interests, their current developmental stage, their social patterns, and their lines of inquiry. It is, therefore, an irreplaceable professional opportunity that deserves full educator engagement, at least for the majority of the free play period. Administrative tasks should be scheduled at other times where possible.

Strengths-Based Observation

Effective educators approach observation with a strengths-based lens: attending not only to what children can do, but to what they are curious about, how they are thinking, and what they are trying to figure out. The question ‘What is that child doing?’ is a surface-level observation. The more generative question is ‘What is that child thinking?’ — and this leads to richer documentation and more purposeful planning.

Active Listening and Open-Ended Questioning

Educators can deepen their understanding of children’s play intentions through the strategic use of open-ended questions and commentary. Commenting on what a child is doing — ‘I can see you are building something quite tall’ — invites the child to respond and reveal their intent. Open-ended questions (‘What happens if…?’, ‘What do you think this could be?’, ‘How did you make that work?’) extend thinking without directing or constraining it.

These verbal interactions should feel natural rather than interrogative. Children who experience adults as genuinely curious about their ideas are more likely to share, elaborate, and take creative risks in their play.

Partnership with Parents and Families

Parents and families are children’s primary carers and first educators. They hold essential knowledge about the child’s home life, interests, recent experiences, and cultural context. This knowledge is foundational to an emergent curriculum and cannot be replicated by the setting alone. Educators should actively maintain communication channels that allow families to share relevant information — and should share their own observations with families regularly, explaining the educational purpose of play-based activities in accessible, jargon-free language.

5. Observation, Extension and Intentional Teaching

The planning and assessment cycle in an emergent curriculum is built on a continuous loop: observe, document, reflect, plan, implement, and observe again. This is not a bureaucratic exercise — it is the professional process through which educators translate what they know about individual children into purposeful learning experiences. Updated Aistear guidance frames this cycle through the terminology of noticing & nurturing: noticing what children are doing, communicating, and thinking, and nurturing that emerging interest through intentional, responsive extension.

Gathering Information

Observation is the starting point of the cycle — the “noticing” stage. Effective observation in a play-based setting involves watching carefully and sensitively, listening actively to children’s conversations (both with peers and with adults), engaging in purposeful conversation, and noting what children choose to return to repeatedly. Both verbal and nonverbal communication carry observational data.

A child who builds the same structure every morning, a child who spends extended time examining water pouring, a child who brings up a recent family event across multiple play contexts — all of these are communicating an interest or a question that the educator can notice and respond to.

Documentation

Documentation should be regular, ongoing, and purposeful. Short, dated observational notes — whether handwritten, dictated, or entered digitally — form the evidence base for planning. The format is less important than the consistency and depth. Documentation should capture not just what the child was doing but what they appeared to be thinking, exploring, or testing.

For settings using digital platforms, tools that allow voice-to-text recording, photographic documentation with attached commentary, and parent-sharing functionality can significantly reduce the administrative burden of documentation while increasing its depth and timeliness.

Invitations to Play

An invitation to play is an intentional, educator-designed setup that uses open-ended materials, natural resources, or real-life items to provoke curiosity, extend an existing interest, or introduce a new concept. It is presented within the environment in a way that is visually engaging and physically accessible to children, inviting them to explore at their own pace and on their own terms. This is the “nurturing” stage of the cycle in practice — taking what has been noticed and building a genuine response to it.

Effective invitations to play are grounded in what educators already know about the children’s current interests. They do not need to be elaborate. A collection of wooden planks, chalk, and small vehicles can be as powerful as a professionally sourced commercial display — provided the educator has been attentive to the children’s play and has crafted the setup in response to genuine, observed interest.

An invitation to play is not a timed group activity. It is a standing offer, available throughout the free play period, which children may engage with individually, in pairs, in groups, and at multiple points during the session. Its appearance will change as children interact with it — and that is a sign of quality engagement, not disorder.

Provocations in Play

A provocation is a deliberate stimulus — an image, a question, an object, a text, or an arrangement of materials — introduced by the educator with the intention of sparking interest, extending thinking, or introducing a new concept. Where an invitation to play responds to an identified children’s interest, a provocation may be either responsive or adult-initiated, aimed at broadening the children’s frame of reference or deepening their understanding of a current theme.

Examples of provocations include: placing photographs of architectural structures alongside construction materials; introducing a book, a real seasonal object, or a community artefact into an area; posing a question on a small display card; or bringing in items from a recent local event that the children have been discussing.

Process Versus Product in Art and Play

A central principle in high-quality play provision is the distinction between process-focused and product-focused art and creative experiences. Process-focused art is concerned with the child’s engagement with materials, their experimentation, their individual creative decisions, and their experience of discovery. There is no predetermined outcome, no template to follow, and no ‘correct’ result.

Product-focused art — in which all children produce the same item using the same template, colours, and method — prioritises the appearance of output over the quality of the learning experience. It provides limited scope for creative development, imposes adult aesthetic judgements on children’s work, and is not consistent with the principles of Aistear or Síolta.

This distinction is particularly relevant in the weeks surrounding seasonal events (Halloween, Christmas, St. Patrick’s Day) when the use of pre-printed templates tends to increase significantly in many settings. Children’s artwork should be identifiably their own: unique in composition, content, and approach. A useful guiding principle is that if an educator is doing more work on a piece than the child, it is not developmentally appropriate or educationally sound.

Process-Focused Art / Play Product-Focused Art / Play
• No template or sample for children to copy • Educator-made sample provided as a model
• No single correct way to create or explore • Step-by-step instructions given
• Child makes all creative decisions • Educator corrects or ‘fixes’ children’s work
• Focus is on exploration and experimentation • Focus is on producing a set outcome
• All outcomes are unique and individual • All outcomes are near-identical
• Educator comments on and records the process • Value placed on aesthetic appearance
• Children can identify their own work easily • Children cannot distinguish their own work

6. Designing the Physical Environment for Quality Play

The physical environment communicates clearly to the children within it. An environment that is well-organised, thoughtfully resourced, and aesthetically considered communicates that learning matters here, and that children’s curiosity is valued and supported. The inverse is also true: cluttered, under-resourced, or poorly organised spaces inhibit the quality of play and limit the range of learning experiences available to children.

The Environment as Third Teacher

The concept of the environment as the ‘third teacher’ — drawn from the Reggio Emilia approach and widely referenced in Síolta — reflects the understanding that the physical space can teach and provoke independently of direct adult instruction. An environment that contains interesting, well-chosen materials, presented at children’s level with clarity and invitation, creates the conditions for self-initiated, meaningful play without constant adult direction.

Practical Design Considerations

7. Supporting Quality Play During Inspection

Tusla Early Years Inspectorate inspections assess not only structural and safety compliance but the quality of the programme being offered to children. Inspectors will observe interactions, review planning documentation, and assess the degree to which the physical environment supports the range of children’s developmental needs.

What Inspectors Will Look For

Documentation as Evidence

Comprehensive, dated observation notes; short-term plans linked to observed interests; samples of children’s work; and photographic documentation are all forms of evidence that demonstrate quality practice. Where digital platforms are used, these records should be accessible and well-organised so that they can be shared with an inspector efficiently.

Interest boards, learning journals, and planning wall displays that show the progression from observed interest to planned experience to extended learning are particularly strong forms of evidence. Settings should retain these records — they should not be discarded when a theme concludes, as they form part of the longitudinal record of each child’s learning journey.

8. Common Challenges in Practice

Practice observation in Irish ELC settings identifies a number of recurring challenges in the implementation of quality play. Naming these challenges is not a criticism of individual educators — they arise in part from systemic pressures including staffing shortages, time constraints, and the ongoing demands of ECCE and NCS programme administration. However, identifying them creates the conditions for genuine improvement.

Commonly Observed Practice Challenges

9. Practical Implementation Framework

The following framework is intended to support managers and educators in reviewing their current practice and identifying actionable steps towards higher-quality play provision.

Review Your Daily Routine

Audit Your Environment

Build Observation Practice

Develop Staff Knowledge

Engage Families

10. Reflective Questions for Educators and Managers

The following questions are designed to support professional reflection at individual and team level. They may be used in supervision meetings, team discussions, or as prompts for self-evaluation.

For Educators

For Managers and Room Leaders

11. Conclusion

Quality play in Irish ELC settings is not an aspiration — it is a professional responsibility, embedded in national frameworks and regulatory expectations. Children who have access to rich, child-led, well-resourced play environments develop the social, emotional, cognitive, communicative, and physical competencies that equip them for a lifetime of learning. The role of the educator in making that possible is irreplaceable.

The principles described in this guidance are not new. Aistear and Síolta have provided the framework for this approach for many years. The challenge for the sector is consistent, practical implementation — and that is a challenge best addressed through shared professional knowledge, honest reflection, and a willingness to examine existing routines with an open mind.

Managers and educators who invest in developing their play environments, observation practices, and pedagogical approaches will find that the benefits extend well beyond compliance. Engaged children, professionally fulfilled educators, and environments that tell a compelling story of children’s learning are the natural outcomes of genuinely high-quality play provision.

Building an Emergent and Inquiry-Based Curriculum in Your Early Years Setting

Little Vista Early Years Resource Library — Practice Guidance Series

A Guidance Document for Irish Childcare Professionals

Aligned with Aistear, Síolta, and the Tusla Quality and Regulatory Framework

Prepared by the Little Vista Resource Library Team | Version 1.1 — February 2026 Revision

1. Introduction

Curriculum in early learning and care is not confined to planned activities or structured lessons. It encompasses everything a child experiences from the moment they arrive in a setting until they leave — every interaction, care routine, learning environment, and relationship. This broad understanding of curriculum is consistent with both Aistear, Ireland’s early childhood curriculum framework, and Síolta, the National Quality Framework for Early Childhood Education.

An emergent and inquiry-based curriculum represents a particular approach to curriculum planning — one that places children’s genuine interests, questions, and current experiences at the centre of learning. It is not a fixed programme delivered from a workbook or an external source. It is a living, responsive practice that requires educators to observe, listen, and interpret what children are communicating, and to plan accordingly.

This guidance document sets out the principles, practices, and implementation strategies associated with an emergent and inquiry-based curriculum in Irish early years settings. It is intended to support managers, room leaders, and educators in understanding what emergent and inquiry-based curriculum means in practice, and how to embed it within their daily workflows in a way that meets regulatory expectations and genuinely improves outcomes for children.

2. Theoretical Foundation: Aistear and Síolta Alignment

Both of Ireland’s primary frameworks for early childhood education provide the theoretical and practical basis for an emergent and inquiry-based curriculum approach.

Aistear

Aistear defines curriculum broadly, describing it as all learning experiences — formal and informal, planned and unplanned — that occur in both indoor and outdoor environments. This definition makes clear that curriculum extends well beyond structured learning time. It includes how an educator responds to a child during a nappy change, how mealtimes are facilitated, how the outdoor space is organised, and how children are supported in navigating peer relationships.

Aistear’s four themes — Wellbeing, Identity and Belonging, Communicating, and Exploring and Thinking — provide a holistic framework through which children’s learning can be observed and extended. In an emergent and inquiry-based curriculum, these themes are not taught in sequence; rather, educators identify how children’s current interests and enquiries connect naturally with one or more of these themes and use that connection to deepen learning.

Aistear’s updated principles bring a stronger focus to the relational, holistic, and agency-driven foundations that underpin an emergent and inquiry-based curriculum. Principles relating to the child’s active engagement in their own learning, the value of relationships and interactions, and the importance of a responsive, well-planned environment all directly underpin why an emergent and inquiry-based approach — rather than a fixed, externally imposed programme — is considered best practice in Irish early years settings. These principles reinforce that curriculum must be built around the real, observed child rather than a predetermined schedule of topics.

Síolta

Síolta describes curriculum as encouraging children’s holistic development through the implementation of a broad-based, documented, and flexible programme. The word flexible is particularly significant. A flexible curriculum is one that adapts to children’s changing interests and emerging lines of enquiry rather than adhering rigidly to a pre-set sequence of topics.

Síolta’s emphasis on documentation and broad-based planning also underpins the importance of observation as a foundation for curriculum planning. Educators cannot plan responsively without first gathering rich information about what children already know, what they are curious about, and how they are developing.

The Tusla Quality and Regulatory Framework

The Tusla Quality and Regulatory Framework (QRF) sets expectations for how registered providers demonstrate quality in their services. In relation to curriculum, the QRF looks for evidence that planning is responsive to children’s interests and needs, that learning environments are stimulating and appropriately resourced, and that educators can articulate the basis for their planning decisions. An emergent and inquiry-based curriculum, when well implemented and properly documented, provides a strong evidential base for inspection purposes.

3. What an Emergent and Inquiry-Based Curriculum Looks Like in Practice

Defining Emergent and Inquiry-Based Learning

The term emergent curriculum was first introduced by educator Betty Jones in 1970, who described curriculum as “what happens” — a deliberate counter to the model of pre-packaged, externally imposed programmes disconnected from the specific children in a given setting.

In practical terms:

A key characteristic of this approach is that lines of inquiry can last for a day or several weeks. There is no prescribed duration. When children’s interest in a topic fades, a new line of inquiry emerges. Equally, a single moment — a child arriving with a favourite toy, a community event, a change in the weather — can spark sustained learning if educators are attuned to its significance and respond with intentionality.

Emergent and Inquiry-Based Curriculum is Not Unplanned

A common misconception about an emergent and inquiry-based curriculum is that it involves no planning. This is not the case. It requires a different kind of planning — one that is informed by observation and responsive to children rather than driven by a predetermined theme. The educator’s role is to identify children’s interests and then plan the environment, provocations, experiences, and interactions that will extend and deepen that inquiry.

Educators and managers bring their own knowledge, values, and interests to this process. An emergent and inquiry-based curriculum does not mean the educator withdraws; it means the educator participates as a thoughtful, curious co-learner alongside the children.

Practice Observation

Settings that follow children’s genuine interests consistently report deeper levels of engagement, more sustained concentration, richer language use, and stronger peer collaboration. This is consistent with what both Aistear and Síolta describe as meaningful learning — learning that connects to a child’s existing knowledge and sense of identity.

4. The Role of the Educator in an Emergent and Inquiry-Based Curriculum

The educator’s role in an emergent and inquiry-based curriculum is active, skilled, and pivotal. It requires the ability to observe carefully, interpret what is being observed, make curriculum decisions grounded in those observations, and create conditions in which children can pursue their interests with depth and purpose.

Getting to Know the Child, Family, and Community

Responsive curriculum planning is only possible when educators have a genuine and current understanding of each child — their strengths, interests, questions, home experiences, cultural background, and family context. This knowledge does not come solely from enrolment forms. It is gathered continuously through daily interactions, conversations with families, and close observation.

The child’s community context is also relevant. Events, seasons, and local experiences that are meaningful to children and families are valid and rich starting points for curriculum. An interest that emerges from a community event, a family celebration, or a local landmark reflects exactly the kind of authentic, contextually grounded learning that an emergent and inquiry-based curriculum supports.

Listening and Observing

Effective listening in the early years is both verbal and non-verbal. Children communicate their interests and thinking through what they say, what they choose to do, how they engage with materials, who they play with, and what they return to repeatedly. Educators who are attuned to these signals are better positioned to identify emerging lines of inquiry and to respond in ways that extend children’s understanding.

Key listening and observation strategies include:

The Educator as Co-Inquirer

In an emergent and inquiry-based curriculum, the educator is not a passive facilitator. They bring knowledge, genuine curiosity, and their own interests to the planning process. When an educator is genuinely engaged with the topic being explored, children experience that engagement as authentic and it deepens the quality of interactions. Emergent and inquiry-based curriculum planning involves the educator researching topics alongside children, sourcing relevant books and materials, adapting the environment, and making connections between what is being explored and broader learning goals.

Shifting language from ‘activity’ to ‘learning experience’ is one practical step that can reframe how educators conceptualise their role. A learning experience is multi-sensory, flexible in how children engage with it, and open to multiple pathways of investigation. It may take place at a table, on the floor, outdoors, or during a care routine.

5. Observation and the Planning and Assessing Cycle

The planning and assessing cycle is the operational backbone of an emergent and inquiry-based curriculum. It consists of four interconnected stages, each of which informs the next. Updated Aistear guidance describes this cycle using the terminology of noticing & nurturing — noticing what children are doing, thinking, and communicating, and nurturing that observed interest through intentional, responsive action across the stages below.

Stage 1: Gathering Information

This stage involves collecting rich observational data about individual children and groups. Observation should be regular, ongoing, and focused on what children are doing, saying, and thinking — not just on developmental milestones. This is the noticing stage of the cycle — the foundation on which all subsequent nurturing of children’s interests depends.

Effective information gathering involves asking not only ‘What is this child doing?’ but ‘What is this child thinking?’ Digging beneath the surface of an observable behaviour to consider its meaning and intent is a skill that develops with practice and with collegial conversation.

Illustrative Example

A child observed building a tower of blocks may, when asked, reveal that they are recreating a building they visited on a family trip. This changes the direction of curriculum planning entirely — from a generic construction interest to a specific, personal narrative that can be extended through books, photographs, conversations, and relevant provocations.

Stage 2: Documenting Key Moments

Documentation involves recording what has been observed in a form that is usable for planning. This can include written observations, photographs with accompanying notes, voice recordings, and children’s drawings or mark-making. What matters is that documentation captures not just what a child did, but the context, the quality of engagement, and any indications of the child’s thinking or interests.

Documentation does not need to be lengthy. Brief, dated observations that record a specific moment of learning or interest are valuable. What is important is consistency — regular documentation builds a longitudinal picture of a child’s development that is both meaningful for planning and useful as evidence for quality review or inspection.

A useful tool for teams is an interest board or observation wall where emerging interests are noted as they arise. These observations should be retained and linked to short-term planning records rather than removed when the topic moves on, as they constitute important evidence of a responsive curriculum.

Stage 3: Reflecting and Planning

Using the information and documentation gathered, educators plan experiences and environmental changes that will extend children’s current lines of inquiry. This stage marks the beginning of the nurturing process — translating what has been noticed into a genuine, intentional response. Reflection involves considering what the child already knows, what they are curious about, and what experiences, materials, or interactions might deepen their understanding.

Planning in an emergent and inquiry-based curriculum is often short-cycle and iterative. A plan made on a Friday for the following week may need to be adapted by Monday morning if children’s interests have moved on. This is not a failure of planning — it is the system working correctly.

Stage 4: Implementation

The final stage involves putting the plan into action — preparing the environment, resourcing the space, and being present and attentive as children engage with the experiences provided. This is where nurturing is enacted in practice, through the environment, materials, and relationships educators provide. Even carefully planned provocations may not generate the anticipated response. Educators who maintain a research orientation — treating children’s engagement as data to inform the next cycle — will find that even unexpected outcomes are informative and useful.

6. Environment and Provocations

The Environment as Third Teacher

A widely held principle in early childhood education is that the physical environment functions as a third educator — alongside the child’s key adults. An environment that reflects children’s current interests, provides open-ended and loose materials, and invites investigation communicates to children that their curiosity is valued and that this is a place where questions are explored and ideas are taken seriously.

Adapting the environment in response to observed interests is one of the most practical ways in which educators enact an emergent and inquiry-based curriculum. This does not require significant financial investment. It requires intentionality — selecting materials that connect with what children are currently exploring, adding relevant books, photographs, or natural materials, and creating provocations that invite children to extend their thinking.

Open-Ended and Loose Materials

Open-ended materials — those that have no single correct use — are particularly well suited to an emergent and inquiry-based curriculum because they support children in following their own lines of inquiry. Natural materials, construction resources, fabrics, containers, and mark-making tools can all be used in multiple ways by children at different stages of development and with different interests.

Loose parts, in particular, support creativity, problem-solving, and sustained engagement. When children have access to materials that they can combine, rearrange, and use in self-directed ways, the quality and duration of their play tends to increase significantly.

The Importance of Uninterrupted Play

Children need extended, uninterrupted periods of free play in order to develop their lines of inquiry to any significant depth. Practice observations across early years settings in Ireland indicate that where free play is limited to short blocks or frequently interrupted by transitions, children do not have the opportunity to reach more complex levels of play and investigation.

As a general benchmark, settings should aim to provide at least 60 to 90 minutes of uninterrupted, child-led play in both the morning and afternoon sessions where operationally possible. During this time, adults’ primary role is to observe, engage, and support rather than to manage transitions or complete administrative tasks.

Art and Creative Experience

Art and creative work within an emergent and inquiry-based curriculum should be understood as a process rather than a product. The value lies in what children experience and discover during the creative process — the sensory exploration, the problem-solving, the expressive communication — not in the item produced. Template-based art activities, while administratively convenient, significantly limit the creative and cognitive value of the experience and are not well aligned with an emergent and inquiry-based curriculum approach.

A Useful Reframe

Documentation of children’s learning does not require a physical art product. A photograph of a child deeply engaged in an investigation, accompanied by a brief note about what they were exploring, is a far richer record of learning than a template completed quickly to meet a routine expectation.

7. Supporting Documentation for Inspection

When Tusla inspectors review curriculum practices in an early years setting, they are looking for evidence that planning is responsive to children’s actual interests and needs, that observations are being used to inform planning, and that there is a documented connection between what children are doing and what educators are planning.

Key documentary evidence that supports inspection readiness in relation to emergent and inquiry-based curriculum includes:

Documentation does not need to be exhaustive to be effective. Observations that are brief, focused, dated, and linked to planning records will serve both the child and the setting well. Over-documentation — attempting to record every moment — can become counterproductive, diverting educators’ attention from the children themselves.

Interest boards and observation walls are useful planning tools, but the underlying notes and observations they display should be retained as part of the documentary record rather than discarded when the interest moves on.

8. Practical Implementation Framework

Introducing or strengthening an emergent and inquiry-based curriculum approach in a setting does not require a complete overhaul of existing practice. This framework is grounded in the same Aistear principles discussed in Section 2 — particularly the emphasis on relationships, agency, and holistic development — which continue to underpin each step below. The following framework offers a graduated approach to implementation.

Step 1: Audit Current Practice

Before introducing changes, take stock of what is already happening. Review your daily routine to identify the proportion of time currently allocated to child-led free play versus transitions, wait times, and adult-directed activities. Consider whether planning is currently evidence-based or primarily theme-driven, and whether observations are being used consistently to inform plans.

Step 2: Extend Free Play Time

If structured activities and transitions are currently dominating the day, begin by identifying unnecessary transitions that could be reduced or removed. Increase the duration of uninterrupted free play gradually, allowing staff time to adjust to their role during extended play periods. Discuss the rationale for this change with staff, connecting it to children’s outcomes and to Aistear’s emphasis on play as the primary vehicle for learning.

Step 3: Strengthen Observation Practice

Introduce or reinforce a simple, consistent approach to daily observation. This does not need to involve complex documentation systems. Brief notes, dated photographs, or voice-to-text recordings captured in the moment are sufficient. The key is that observations are regular, linked to individual children, and used as the starting point for planning.

Step 4: Connect Observation to Planning

Establish a clear and visible link between what is being observed and what is being planned. Short-term plans should reference specific observations or identified interests. Teams should have a brief regular opportunity — at the end of the day or at a weekly team meeting — to share observations and discuss planning implications.

Step 5: Review and Adapt the Environment

Regularly review the physical environment in light of observed interests. Add materials, books, photographs, or loose parts that connect with current lines of inquiry. Remove resources that are no longer in active use or that are not supporting any identified interest. The environment should change in response to children, and those changes should be visible and documented.

Step 6: Strengthen Partnership with Parents

Parents are a child’s primary educators and know their child in ways that are not always visible within the setting. Establishing a regular channel for sharing observations and planning with parents — and for gathering information about children’s home interests and experiences — significantly enriches the emergent and inquiry-based curriculum process. This partnership is also a quality indicator within the Tusla QRF.

9. Common Challenges in Irish Early Years Settings

The following challenges are frequently observed in early years settings in Ireland and are worth addressing explicitly when implementing or reviewing emergent and inquiry-based curriculum practice.

Confusion Between Theme-Based and Emergent Planning

Many settings operate a rolling theme programme — a different topic each week or fortnight, planned in advance. While topics can occasionally align with children’s interests by coincidence, a pre-set theme does not constitute an emergent and inquiry-based curriculum. The key distinction is the starting point: emergent planning starts with what children are expressing interest in; theme-based planning starts with what adults have decided to cover.

Insufficient Free Play Time

Settings with high levels of transitions and short blocks of free play limit children’s ability to develop lines of inquiry to any depth. Educators often report that the day feels chaotic and that children’s engagement is shallow. Reducing transitions and extending free play typically leads to calmer, more purposeful sessions.

Adults Not Present or Engaged During Play

Free play time is sometimes used by educators to complete administrative tasks or to prepare materials for the next activity. While these tasks are necessary, they should be scheduled at times that do not coincide with children’s primary play periods. During uninterrupted free play, adult attention should be focused on children — observing, engaging, and gathering information that will inform planning.

Documentation Anxiety

Many educators report anxiety about whether their documentation is correct, sufficient, or of the right type. This anxiety can lead either to over-documentation — recording every moment without clarity about purpose — or under-documentation, where educators avoid recording for fear of doing it incorrectly. The most important qualities in documentation are regularity, relevance to individual children, and a clear link to planning. Documentation does not need to be lengthy or elaborately formatted to be effective.

Product-Focused Creative Work

Art templates and product-focused creative activities remain common in Irish early years settings, particularly around seasonal events. While there is a place for structured creative experiences, a curriculum that relies heavily on identical, adult-directed art products does not reflect an emergent and inquiry-based curriculum approach and does not make full use of the creative and cognitive potential of art and craft as learning experiences.

10. Reflective Questions for Teams

The following questions are intended to support team reflection and professional conversation about emergent and inquiry-based curriculum practice. They may be used in team meetings, supervision sessions, or room leader reviews.

# Reflective Question
1 When we plan learning experiences, are we starting from what children are currently interested in, or from a pre-set theme or schedule?
2 How do we gather information about each child’s interests — and how consistently is that information being used to inform our planning?
3 How much uninterrupted free play time do children in our setting have each day? Is this sufficient for children to develop their lines of inquiry?
4 How present and engaged are adults during free play? What is our role, and are we consistently fulfilling it?
5 When we look at our documentation, can we clearly trace the connection between an observation, a planning decision, and a learning experience?
6 Are the materials and environments in our rooms currently reflecting children’s interests? When did we last make a change to the environment in response to something we observed?
7 How do we communicate with parents about curriculum? Are parents contributing information that shapes what we plan?
8 If a Tusla inspector asked us to explain the basis for our current planning, could we clearly articulate the observational evidence behind it?
9 Are all members of our team confident in their understanding of what an emergent and inquiry-based curriculum means and how it differs from theme-based planning?
10 Where are the biggest gaps in our current practice? What would be the most meaningful first step in addressing them?

11. Conclusion

An emergent and inquiry-based curriculum is one of the most powerful approaches available to early years practitioners in Ireland. When implemented well, it produces children who are more deeply engaged, more confident in expressing their ideas, and more enthusiastic about learning. It produces educators who are more observant, more reflective, and more attuned to the individual children in their care. And it produces settings that can demonstrate clearly, both to families and to regulatory bodies, that their curriculum is grounded in genuine evidence about each child.

Implementation takes time and requires a shift in mindset — particularly for teams that have operated a theme-based model for many years. The shift is most sustainable when it is introduced gradually, supported through team conversation and professional reflection, and connected clearly to the frameworks and expectations that already shape the work of the setting.

The planning and assessing cycle, the key principles of observation and documentation, the role of the environment, and the central importance of uninterrupted free play are all areas where focused, sustained effort will yield meaningful improvements — for children, for staff, and for the quality of the setting overall.

Where further support is needed, practitioners are encouraged to engage with the Aistear Síolta Practice Guide (www.aistearsiolta.ie), the Better Start Quality Development Service, and available CPD resources on the Tusla Early Years platform. These sources provide detailed, setting-specific guidance that complements the principles outlined in this document.

The Key Person Approach in Irish Early Learning and Care Settings

A Practical Implementation Guide

Resource Type: Professional Practice Guidance

Audience: Managers, Room Leaders, Educators, Service Owners

Regulatory Context: Aistear, Síolta, Tusla Childcare Regulations, QRF 2018

Version: 1.1 — February 2026 Revision

Series: Part 4 of 4 — Little Vista Early Years Practice Resource Series

1. Introduction

This guide provides practical, evidence-informed guidance on implementing the key person approach in Irish early learning and care (ELC) settings. It is designed as a working reference for managers, room leaders, and educators who are reviewing, developing, or strengthening this practice within their services.

The key person approach is not simply an administrative structure or a means of dividing observation responsibilities across staff. It is a relational practice rooted in child development research, and it is central to quality provision in early years settings. When implemented with understanding and consistency, it supports children’s emotional security, strengthens partnership with families, and underpins meaningful developmental observation.

This resource does not present the key person approach as a simple or cost-free change. It acknowledges the practical realities of the Irish childcare sector, including staffing pressures, varied room structures, and the challenges of sustaining consistent care routines. Where relevant, it offers realistic guidance on how the approach can be built progressively within existing constraints.

2. Why the Key Person Approach Matters

Children in ELC settings spend significant time — in many cases, more hours per day than with their own families — in group care environments. For babies, toddlers, and young children, the quality of the relationships they experience during this time directly influences their emotional well-being, their capacity to learn, and their overall developmental trajectory.

Developmental research consistently shows that young children need at least one consistent, responsive adult to form a secure attachment within any group care setting. This attachment mirrors the primary caregiver relationship and provides the child with a secure base from which to explore, engage, and develop confidence.

Core Purpose of the Key Person Approach

In practice, settings that implement a genuine key person approach — one that extends beyond observation tasks to encompass care routines, emotional support, and family communication — tend to experience lower levels of child distress, more engaged and productive staff, and stronger family relationships. Settings without a consistent approach often encounter challenges that are, in part, a reflection of the absence of this relational structure.

3. Alignment with Aistear, Síolta and the Tusla Quality and Regulatory Framework

The key person approach is embedded in the quality frameworks and regulatory expectations that apply to all registered childcare services in Ireland.

Aistear: The Early Childhood Curriculum Framework

Aistear places relationships at the heart of early learning and development. It identifies that children learn and develop through their relationships with others, and that the quality of interactions between educators and children is central to positive outcomes. Aistear’s themes of Well-being, Identity and Belonging, Communicating, and Exploring and Thinking are all underpinned by the secure, responsive relationships that the key person approach is designed to nurture.

Síolta: The National Quality Framework for Early Childhood Education

Síolta Standard 5 focuses on interactions, emphasising that responsive, sensitive relationships are fundamental to quality provision. Standard 3 addresses parents and families, recognising their central role in the child’s life and the importance of meaningful partnership between the setting and the home. The key person approach operationalises both of these standards in daily practice.

Tusla Quality and Regulatory Framework (QRF) 2018

The Tusla QRF, which underpins inspection under the Childcare Act 1991 (Early Years Services) Regulations 2016, gives clear guidance on what is expected in relation to relationships and communications within settings.

QRF Area Relevance to Key Person Approach
Positive Relationships Each child should have a consistent adult who knows them well and supports their emotional security.
Partnership with Parents A named key person provides a consistent point of contact for families, supporting open and ongoing communication.
Child Well-being Secure attachments within the setting are recognised as essential to each child’s overall well-being.
Observation and Documentation Meaningful observation is more achievable when educators have an assigned small group of children to focus on.
Management and Leadership Services are expected to have systems in place that support consistent, high-quality interactions for all children.

Inspectors from Tusla’s Early Years Inspectorate will observe how children relate to staff in the setting and whether children are settled and secure. While the term ‘key person approach’ may not always be used explicitly during inspection, the underlying qualities it supports — responsive care, emotional security, continuity, and family partnership — are directly observable and directly relevant to compliance.

4. Practical Implementation Guidance

Implementing the key person approach requires more than dividing a room’s children into lists and allocating one educator per group. It involves building genuine, responsive relationships and embedding that relational practice into the daily structure of the setting.

4.1 Defining Key Groups

A key group is the small group of children for whom a named educator carries primary responsibility. As a starting principle, key groups should be no larger than the applicable adult-to-child ratio for that room. Where additional staffing is available, smaller key groups allow for deeper relational focus.

When forming key groups, consider the following:

4.2 The Three Core Areas of the Key Person Role

Area What This Involves in Practice
Triangle of Trust (Family Partnership) Serving as the primary point of contact for the child’s family. Managing settling-in communications, daily handovers, phone calls regarding illness or incidents, and ongoing relationship-building with parents and carers. Being the person who reads enrolment documentation and builds a baseline understanding of the child before they begin.
The Secure Base (Relational Care) Building a close, consistent relationship with the key child. Carrying out care routines — nappy changes, feeding, sleep settling, toileting support — for key children where possible. Knowing the child’s individual preferences, comfort objects, communication style, emotional triggers, and family context.
Observation and Documentation Observing key children closely and regularly. Documenting emergent interests, developmental milestones, and moments of learning. Planning experiences that extend and respond to each child’s individual interests and stage of development.

4.3 Care Routines and the Key Person

One of the clearest expressions of the key person approach in practice is who carries out intimate care routines for a child. Nappy changes, sleep settling, bottle feeding, and mealtime support are not simply procedural tasks — they are moments of close interaction that contribute significantly to the child’s sense of security and to the depth of the key person relationship.

In settings where this level of consistency is fully embedded, the key person carries out these routines for their key children wherever possible. A secondary key person (see below) covers these routines when the primary key person is absent.

Note on Practical Realities

Many Irish ELC settings operate under significant staffing pressures, with shift patterns that do not always allow for full consistency in care routines. This is a recognised challenge across the sector.

Where full consistency is not immediately achievable, the aim should be incremental improvement: begin with what is possible, document it as policy, and build from there. For example, committing first to ensuring that the key person carries out settling-in procedures and morning handovers before extending to full care routine consistency.

4.4 The Secondary Key Person

Every child should have both a primary and a secondary key person. The secondary key person is the adult who supports the child when the primary key person is absent — due to leave, illness, or shift patterns. This person should have a meaningful relationship with the child, not simply be whoever happens to be available.

In rooms with two educators, the secondary key person is typically the other educator in the room. In settings where there is only one regular educator per room, the secondary key person is often a senior staff member, the manager, or a consistent cover staff member. The key principle is that the child is never left without a familiar adult who knows their needs and can provide a degree of relational continuity.

4.5 Settling-In and the Key Person

The settling-in period is one of the most important opportunities to establish the key person relationship. Where possible, the key person should be present for:

Information gathered during settling-in — including sleep preferences, comfort objects, feeding routines, family structure, cultural background, and the child’s known interests — should be documented and made accessible to the secondary key person. This ensures continuity if the primary key person is absent during a critical period.

5. Leadership and Management Considerations

The key person approach cannot be embedded in practice without clear leadership commitment and practical management support. Managers and service owners carry responsibility for creating the conditions in which the approach can genuinely operate.

5.1 Policy

Services are required under the Childcare Regulations to have policies and procedures covering the care and welfare of children. A key person policy should clearly set out:

5.2 Staff Rosters and Shift Planning

The most common barrier to implementing the key person approach consistently is the mismatch between shift patterns and a child’s attendance hours. When planning rosters, managers should consider:

5.3 Training and Team Understanding

All educators in the setting — not only room leaders or senior staff — should understand the rationale behind the key person approach, not simply the mechanics of who is assigned to whom. Without this understanding, the approach is unlikely to be implemented with the depth and consistency that makes it effective.

Training considerations include:

5.4 AIM Support and Ratio Implications

Where a child has been allocated Level 7 AIM support, the additional educator in the room is there to reduce the adult-to-child ratio for the group as a whole — not solely to shadow or support the child with additional needs. The AIM educator should be allocated their own key group and should be a full participant in the relational life of the room. Limiting the AIM educator to administrative or support tasks is not consistent with the purpose of the allocation and may limit the effectiveness of the placement for all children in the room.

6. Common Challenges and Reflective Considerations

Introducing or strengthening the key person approach in a setting will bring certain recurring challenges. Being aware of these in advance allows managers to address them proactively and to support their teams through the adjustment.

6.1 Staff Concerns About Child Attachment

Some educators express concern that a child becoming closely attached to them creates a problem — particularly when that educator is absent or eventually moves on. This reflects a genuine care for children but can become a barrier to implementation.

It is important to address this concern directly: secure early attachments are not a risk to children — they are a developmental asset. Children who form secure attachments within a setting are better equipped to manage separations, transition to new rooms or settings, and build relationships with other adults over time. The secondary key person structure is designed specifically to support continuity during absences.

6.2 Child Preferences That Do Not Match Assigned Groups

Children will not always form their deepest attachment with the adult to whom they have been formally assigned. This is normal and should be expected. When an observable preference for a different educator emerges, and when that preference is consistent rather than transient, it should be respected and the key group arrangement adjusted accordingly. Maintaining a rigid key group structure that does not reflect the child’s relational reality is counterproductive.

6.3 Staffing Instability and Turnover

High staff turnover is a significant challenge across the Irish ELC sector. The disruption this causes to children’s attachments is a real concern. While no guidance can fully resolve this systemic issue, services can take steps to minimise its impact:

6.4 Educator Workload and Time Pressures

Educators often feel that the key person role adds to an already demanding workload. In practice, when the approach is genuinely embedded — with documentation integrated into daily routines rather than treated as a separate task, and with observation happening as a natural part of engaged interaction — it can reduce rather than increase pressure. The key person’s deeper knowledge of their key children means that observation notes are richer and require less time to write, and that behavioural challenges are better understood and more easily anticipated.

7. Inspection Awareness

Tusla’s Early Years Inspectorate and the Department of Education’s Inspectorate (for preschool inspection in the context of the ECCE programme) will observe the quality of interactions and relationships within a setting as part of any inspection process. The following aspects of the key person approach are likely to be observable and assessable during an inspection visit.

What Inspectors May Observe

Child Well-being and Settling:

Inspectors will observe whether children in the setting appear settled, emotionally secure, and comfortable in their environment. They will look for evidence that children seek out specific adults when they need comfort or reassurance, and that those adults respond promptly and sensitively. Inspectors may also note whether children who are new to the setting are being supported through a structured, calm settling-in process, and whether the service has documented how each child’s individual needs are being met during this period.

Under the Tusla Quality and Regulatory Framework, child well-being is a core theme, and inspectors are expected to assess whether the environment and adult interactions actively support each child’s sense of safety and belonging.

Staff Knowledge of Individual Children:

Inspectors may speak directly with educators and ask them to describe a specific child in their care. They are looking for evidence that staff know each child as an individual — their interests, developmental stage, communication preferences, care routines, and family context. Responses that are vague or generalised, or that focus only on what a child cannot do, may indicate that a genuine key person relationship is not in place.

In larger settings with multiple rooms, inspectors may also check whether educators have a clear understanding of which children are in their key group and what their specific responsibilities are in relation to those children.

Communication with Families:

Inspectors will look for evidence of regular, meaningful communication between the setting and families. This may include reviewing daily communication records, handover notes, or parent communication logs. They will consider whether families are informed about their child’s progress, interests, and day-to-day experiences in a way that reflects genuine engagement rather than routine-only reporting.

Where a key person approach is in place, inspectors may ask families — or review records to confirm — that they know who their child’s key person is and that they have a direct channel of communication with that person. The Tusla QRF identifies partnership with parents as a quality indicator, and the key person relationship is one of the clearest practical expressions of this.

Documentation:

Inspectors will examine whether observations and learning records are individualised and reflect each child’s unique interests, strengths, and developmental journey. Generic or group-based observations, repeated templates, or documentation that does not appear to influence planning may indicate that observation is being treated as an administrative task rather than a reflective professional practice.

Records should show a clear link between what has been observed, how it has been interpreted in terms of the child’s learning and development, and what has been planned in response. Inspectors may also check that documentation is stored securely and in line with data protection requirements.

Management of Transitions:

Inspectors will observe how the setting supports children through daily transitions — including morning drop-off, movement between activities, lunch and rest routines, and end-of-day collection. They will note whether these transitions are calm and predictable, and whether staff are present, attentive, and responsive to individual children during these times.

Room-to-room transitions, such as moving from a baby room to a toddler room or from a toddler room to a preschool room, are also considered. Inspectors may ask how the setting manages these transitions in a way that maintains relational continuity for the child, and whether families are communicated with and involved in the process.

Inspectors will not typically award or withhold compliance on the basis of a specific named policy for the key person approach in isolation. However, the qualities the approach supports — emotional security, individualised care, and meaningful family partnership — are directly observable and are assessed across multiple standards within the inspection framework.

Practical Documentation Tip

Maintain a record of key group allocations, secondary key person assignments, and any changes made over time. Keep evidence of settling-in meetings, initial information-gathering from families, and the child’s individual care profile. This documentation demonstrates a structured, child-centred approach and supports inspection readiness.

8. Reflective Prompts for Teams

The following prompts are designed for use in team meetings, professional development sessions, or support and supervision conversations. They are intended to support honest reflection rather than evaluation.

For Educators — Individual Reflection

For Managers — Team and Systems Reflection

9. Summary for Managers and Leaders

The key person approach, when genuinely implemented, is one of the most impactful practices a setting can embed. It supports children’s emotional security, enriches family partnerships, enables more meaningful observation, and contributes to a positive and purposeful team culture. It is also aligned with the regulatory and quality expectations that apply to all ELC services in Ireland.

The following summary outlines the essential foundations for a functional key person approach.

Foundation Key Actions
Policy and Procedure Have a clear, documented key person policy. Review it annually. Ensure it is included in the induction process for all new staff.
Key Group Allocation Allocate key groups based on ratio, child preference, and relational fit. Review and adjust as needed. Assign both primary and secondary key persons for every child.
Settling-In Ensure the key person is present and active during settling-in. Gather detailed individual information from families before the child’s first day.
Care Routines Work toward the key person carrying out intimate care routines for key children. Build this incrementally if full implementation is not immediately achievable.
Family Communication Use the key person as the primary point of contact for family communication. Build this into daily handover practice.
Documentation Ensure observations and planning are individualised and reflect each child’s unique interests and developmental stage.
Staff Rosters Plan shifts with key group consistency in mind. Avoid both primary and secondary key persons being absent simultaneously.
Training Invest in ongoing team understanding of attachment theory and the relational dimension of the key person role.

No service implements the key person approach perfectly from the outset. The most effective approach is to identify where the practice is currently strong, identify one or two areas for development, and build progressively. Consistency and genuine relational investment will always be more valuable than a perfectly structured system that is not lived out in daily practice.

Support and Supervision in Early Learning and Care Settings

PROFESSIONAL GUIDANCE RESOURCE

A practical reference for childcare managers, room leaders, and service owners operating within the Irish regulatory framework.

Version: 1.1 — February 2026 Revision

1. Overview

This resource provides structured guidance on establishing, maintaining, and embedding effective support and supervision practice within early learning and care (ELC) settings in Ireland. It covers the legislative basis for support and supervision, the distinction between different types of staff meeting, practical implementation steps, common challenges observed in practice, and a recommended checklist for managers.

The guidance is aimed at:

2. Why This Matters in Irish Childcare Settings

Support and supervision is not optional. It is a regulatory requirement under Irish childcare legislation and forms a key component of quality assurance as assessed by Tusla during inspections. Beyond compliance, settings that embed consistent and structured support and supervision processes tend to report lower staff turnover, more confident educators, and stronger outcomes for children and families.

Observed in Practice

Settings with consistent, structured support and supervision in place tend to have staff who are more confident in their roles, more aware of their responsibilities, and more likely to remain in their positions. Where support and supervision is absent or inconsistent, staff disengagement and elevated turnover are more commonly observed.

3. Legislative and Regulatory Framework

The following legislation and regulatory guidance directly relates to support and supervision in Irish ELC settings.

Childcare Act 1991 (Early Years Services) Regulations

Regulation 9 — Management and Recruitment

As the registered provider, you must ensure that:

Regulation 10 — Policies, Procedures, and Statement of Preschool Service

Regulation 10 requires that a clear written policy and procedure on staff supervision is in place. This is a legal requirement, not a discretionary quality measure. Having the policy documented is not sufficient in isolation — staff must also be aware of it and understand its content.

Inspection Readiness Note

During Tusla inspections, staff may be asked about the staff supervision policy. Settings should ensure that all team members, not just managers, can demonstrate an understanding of what the policy contains and how it is implemented.

Tusla Quality and Regulatory Framework (QRF) 2018

The Tusla QRF, which sits under Regulation 9, provides additional guidance on what effective support and supervision looks like in practice.

Competence and Training

Registered providers must ensure that staff are competent to perform their roles by providing appropriate training, supervision, and performance evaluation.

Staff Awareness of Policy

The QRF specifies that relevant staff must:

Where owners are not directly conducting support and supervision, the responsibility extends to ensuring that managers who do conduct it fully understand the policy and are trained to implement it correctly.

Internal Communication Systems

The QRF further states that an effective internal communication system must be evident within the service. This system should enable the flow of information between staff and management at all levels — including between room staff and room leaders, room leaders and the manager, managers and owners, and across multi-site or group providers.

The QRF specifies that this includes:

4. Understanding the Difference: Support and Supervision vs Appraisal/KPI vs Informal Chat

A common source of confusion in practice is the interchangeable use of different types of staff meetings. These are distinct processes, each with a different purpose, frequency, and format. They complement each other but should not be conflated.

Support and Supervision Appraisal / KPI Review
Purpose: Support professional development and wellbeing; improve outcomes for children and families Purpose: Formal review of performance and professional development against role requirements
Nature: Formal but strengths-based and reflective Nature: Formal and structured; measurable
Frequency: Every 4–6 weeks Frequency: Every 6–12 months (sometimes with a mid-year check-in)
Focus: Holistic — how the staff member is feeling, what is working well, areas for development, any support needed Focus: Review of past performance against job description; setting targets for the period ahead
Format: Structured discussion using a template; both parties prepare in advance Format: Structured meeting with specific measurable criteria
Outcome: Agreed goals, actions, and follow-up; recorded and signed by both parties Outcome: Performance objectives, training plans, documented targets
Tone: Collaborative and forward-looking Tone: Evaluative and achievement-focused

Do Both Need to Happen?

Support and supervision and appraisal/KPI reviews serve different functions and both have a place in a well-structured people management approach. Support and supervision is more frequent and focuses on ongoing professional reflection and wellbeing. Appraisals are less frequent and focus on documented performance outcomes. Where time is limited, the regularity of support and supervision should be prioritised given its direct regulatory basis.

Informal Chats and Impromptu Meetings

Day-to-day informal communication between managers and staff is valuable and should be encouraged. However, it does not replace structured support and supervision. Key distinctions include:

Informal communication enhances the support and supervision relationship but cannot substitute for it.

5. Educator Awareness and Responsibilities in Support and Supervision

What Educators Should Expect

Support and supervision should be presented to all staff as a professional entitlement, not something that is done to them. Educators should understand, in advance, that these meetings:

When educators are clear about the purpose and format of support and supervision from the outset — ideally during induction — they are more likely to engage constructively and to see the process as a professional resource rather than something to be endured.

The Educator’s Responsibility as an Active Participant

Support and supervision is a two-way process, and its quality depends heavily on the preparation and engagement of the educator attending, not solely on the manager conducting it. Educators attending a support and supervision meeting should understand that they are expected to:

Treating support and supervision purely as something that happens to them — a top-down evaluation delivered by the manager — undermines the reflective, collaborative purpose of the process. Educators who actively prepare and contribute gain significantly more professional value from each meeting.

Guidance for Managers: Communicating These Expectations Clearly

Managers play a central role in ensuring educators understand and embrace their responsibilities within the support and supervision process. Practical steps include:

6. Common Challenges Observed in Practice

The following patterns are commonly observed across ELC settings. They are presented as practice observations, not universal experiences.

Support and Supervision Ending After Probation

Many settings conduct structured check-ins during an induction period, then discontinue the process once a staff member is confirmed in their role. This leaves educators without a formal mechanism for ongoing professional reflection and can contribute to disengagement over time.

Substituting Informal Communication for Formal Supervision

In smaller settings where the manager and staff work closely together daily, there can be an assumption that regular conversation substitutes for formal support and supervision. While close day-to-day working relationships are beneficial, they do not fulfil the regulatory expectation of a planned, recorded, structured meeting.

Impromptu or Unplanned Meetings

Time pressures in ELC settings often lead to support and supervision being conducted informally when a pocket of time becomes available. Meetings conducted in this way are typically less effective because neither party has prepared, the environment may not be private, and the record-keeping is often inadequate.

Using Support and Supervision Reactively

Where support and supervision only occurs in response to a performance issue, it can have a negative effect on the staff member’s relationship with the process. Staff who associate supervision meetings with having done something wrong are less likely to engage openly. A consistent, strengths-based approach from the outset establishes a trust framework that makes difficult conversations, when they do arise, significantly easier to navigate.

Conflating Appraisals with Support and Supervision

Appraisal and KPI reviews are sometimes recorded in place of support and supervision. While both are valuable, they are not interchangeable. Appraisals focus on performance measurement; support and supervision focuses on professional reflection and wellbeing. Both are needed.

7. Key Principles of Effective Support and Supervision

1. Strengths-Based Approach

Support and supervision should begin by acknowledging what the staff member is doing well. Managers should come to the meeting prepared with specific observations of positive practice, not just areas for development. A strengths-based approach builds confidence, encourages reflective thinking, and creates a more productive conversation overall.

2. Reflective Discussion

Support and supervision is a reflective process, not a reporting process. Effective questions focus on how the staff member is thinking about their work, not simply what they have done. Example prompts include:

3. Two-Way Process

Both parties should come prepared. The supervisee should have an opportunity to contribute topics to the agenda and to reflect on their own practice in advance. This shared ownership of the process increases engagement and the quality of conversation.

4. Consistency and Frequency

Support and supervision should take place at a regular, agreed interval — typically every four to six weeks. A schedule should be established at the start of the year and communicated to all staff. Where a planned meeting must be rescheduled, an alternative date should be set promptly.

5. Privacy and Confidentiality

Meetings should take place in a private space, free from interruption. Conducting supervision while in a room with children present, or in high-traffic areas of the setting, is not appropriate. Anything discussed within a support and supervision meeting is confidential to the two parties involved, with the exception of disclosures that relate to the welfare of a child or the safety of the person disclosing, in which case the relevant reporting procedures must be followed.

6. Consistent Record-Keeping

All support and supervision meetings must be documented. Records should be stored securely and in compliance with data protection legislation. Both parties should sign the completed record to confirm the content is accurate.

8. Practical Implementation Guidance

Step 1: Establish a Support and Supervision Agreement

Before beginning the support and supervision cycle, both the manager and staff member should sign a support and supervision agreement. This document sets out:

The agreement should be renewed annually. Where managers are themselves supervised by an owner or area manager, a parallel agreement should be in place at that level too.

Step 2: Agree and Share the Template in Advance

Staff should be familiar with the support and supervision template before their first meeting. During staff induction, time should be set aside to walk through the template questions, explain the purpose of each section, and clarify expectations around how much detail is appropriate to include.

Sharing the template in advance of each meeting allows both parties to prepare their notes, which leads to more meaningful conversations and better outcomes.

Step 3: Create an Agenda

An agenda should be shared before each meeting. This can be drawn from the standard template sections, with additional items added by either party. Having a prepared agenda ensures that meetings remain focused and that both parties arrive ready to engage.

Step 4: Conduct the Meeting

Meetings should take place without interruption in a private, comfortable space. The structure should follow the agreed agenda, beginning with strengths and positive observations. Key discussion areas typically include:

Step 5: Record and Sign

The completed template, reflecting the content of the discussion, should be signed and dated by both parties. This constitutes the official record of the meeting. Both parties should retain a copy. In larger settings, records should be filed securely and consistently — either in a physical staff file or within a compliant digital platform — in line with GDPR and data protection obligations.

Step 6: Follow Up

Each meeting should result in a clearly documented set of agreed actions with time frames. These form the opening agenda item for the next meeting, creating continuity and demonstrating to staff that what they raise is taken seriously and acted upon.

9. What Should a Support and Supervision Template Include?

The template does not need to be complex. A straightforward, clearly structured record serves the purpose well. The following are the core components:

Personalising Your Template

The template should be adapted to reflect your setting. Consider involving staff in reviewing or contributing to its format — asking them what they would find helpful to include increases their ownership of the process. Early Childhood Ireland and Bristol City Council Early Years both publish example templates that can serve as useful starting points.

10. Using Technology to Support the Process

Digital tools can support the logistics and record-keeping aspects of support and supervision without replacing the human interaction at its core. When evaluating whether a platform is suitable, consider whether it enables the following:

Where a digital platform is used, it should supplement — not replace — the quality of the supervision conversation. The record held in the system is only as meaningful as the preparation and engagement that preceded it.

The following checklist summarises key actions for managers implementing or reviewing their support and supervision process.

12. Summary for Managers

Support and supervision is a legal requirement under the Childcare Act 1991 Regulations and the Tusla QRF. It is also one of the most effective tools available to managers for building team confidence, improving practice, and reducing staff turnover.

Effective support and supervision is:

It is distinct from, but complementary to, appraisal and KPI processes. Both have a role. Neither replaces the other.

Where support and supervision is consistently embedded in practice, settings report more confident and productive teams, clearer communication, and a more positive working culture. The initial investment of time in establishing the process is offset by the longer-term gains in staff retention, quality of practice, and inspection readiness.

13. Further Reading and Reference Sources

The following resources provide additional guidance on support and supervision in Irish ELC settings:

Training on support and supervision practice is available through a range of providers, including county childcare committees, Better Start, and Barnardos, with much of it available free of charge online.

Professional Disclaimer

This resource is designed to support professional reflection and practice in Irish Early Learning and Care (ELC) settings. It does not constitute legal or regulatory compliance advice. Settings remain solely responsible for ensuring full compliance with current Irish legislation, regulations, and statutory guidelines. Little Vista accepts no liability for outcomes resulting from the implementation of this guidance. Framework references are drawn from Aistear, Síolta, and the Tusla Quality and Regulatory Framework.