by Lesley Tait, Head of Quality.
A few years ago our friends at the Curiosity Approach touched on the history of Valentine’s Day and if babies could actually understand these traditions.
As Valentine’s Day approaches we thought it was worth reconsidering how we frame this celebration within our early learning and childcare settings.
Traditional Valentine’s imagery doesn’t align with children’s developmental understanding, but the themes of connection, friendship, and kindness certainly do. This gives us a meaningful opportunity to shift the focus towards belonging, empathy, and the relationships that matter to children most.
For most young children, Valentine’s Day does not mean romantic love. Their understanding of “love” is usually:
- secure attachment — the comfort of family, carers and familiar friends
- kindness and care — being helped, held, supported and noticed
- belonging and connection — feeling part of a group, valued, and included
Hearts, cupids, and roses are symbols, but without context they’re largely decorative, children may enjoy them visually, but they don’t inherently deepen understanding unless we deliberately scaffold meaning.
So the question becomes:
Are we offering something children can make sense of, or something they just consume and is very adult led?
Is Valentine’s Day relevant to children’s interests and development?
It can be, but not automatically. Valentine’s Day becomes relevant when it connects to:
- friendships and peer relationships
- emotions and empathy
- kindness, inclusion, and respect
- communication (“how do we show care?”)
A week of themed crafts doesn’t necessarily support this. However, thoughtful experiences can:
- support emotional literacy
- encourage social skills (turn-taking, empathy, cooperation)
- align with children’s real-life experiences of relationships
Traditions, culture, and age-appropriateness
The question whether we should “we go back to the beginning.” Some useful reflective questions for you:
- What is Valentine’s Day, historically and culturally?
- Which parts are adult-constructed, commercialised, or romanticised?
- Which elements are developmentally appropriate for young children?
Exploring traditions doesn’t mean a history lesson, but it could look like:
- talking about different ways people show care across cultures
- comparing celebrations (Valentine’s Day, friendship days, family celebrations)
- discussing symbols and what they represent (and who decides that)
This shifts learning from doing “Valentine’s” to thinking about meaning.
Can we turn this into meaningful learning? Instead of “hearts everywhere”, we might ask:
- What does kindness look like in our room?
- How do we show care to friends, pets, family, ourselves?
- What makes us feel loved or safe?
Learning experiences could include:
- storytelling around friendships and emotions
- children co-creating “kindness rules” or care routines
- role play about helping, sharing, and resolving conflict
- noticing and celebrating kind actions in everyday play
These experiences are ongoing, authentic, and far more powerful than one-off themed activities.
Is it too easy to default to an explosion of pink hearts? Short answer: yes—and that doesn’t mean it’s wrong, just that it’s often unexamined.
Themes are tempting because they’re:
- predictable
- easy to resource
- visually pleasing
- familiar to families
But meaningful pedagogy asks us to pause and ask:
- Who is this really for—children or adults?
- What learning is happening here?
- Could this be deeper, more inclusive, more reflective?
A thoughtful approach doesn’t mean banning Valentine’s Day, it means intentionality.
A balanced way forward
It doesn’t have to be all or nothing. Some services choose to:
- reframe Valentine’s Day as Friendship or Kindness week
- limit overt romantic symbols
- follow children’s interests rather than pre-planned themes
- use Valentine’s as a prompt, not the curriculum itself.
When we do that, we’re modelling critical thinking, respect for children’s developmental understanding, and strong pedagogical practice.
