Childhood as Social Investment, Rights and the Valuing of Education

Abstract

This paper discusses the impact of and close interplay between global discourses on children, notions of (a good) childhood at the national and local levels and childhoods as these are lived and experienced in particular social contexts. Two increasingly powerful global images of children are explored: Children as individual subjects with rights to participation as stated in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and children as human capital and early childhood investment. I argue that the market‐oriented politics and ‘global images’ of childhood are connected to particular ideological notions of what it means to be a human being, and an increasing individualization, separating children from an intergenerational social order. The discussion is empirically grounded in case studies in Norway and Ethiopia. The paper highlights the contradictions especially with respect to safeguarding local livelihoods and knowledge suggesting limits to the ‘sector based’ approach to children's participation and rights to education. It highlights the need to move the focus from children as objects of investments to a ‘politics of recognition’, in ways that value individual dignity and knowledge as constructed by children and adults within local ‘belonging communities’.

Playing a part in preschool documentation : A study of how participation is enacted in preschool documentation practices and how it is affected by material agents

“…Playfulness, emotional presence and closeness to the child's perspective are important features in promoting children's participation and influence (Emilson, 2008). In contrast, Kjørholt (2004) found that there seemed to be different agendas applied to children and adults; children's participation, for instance, was thought to be threatened by too much structure, whereas structure was seen by the teachers as something adults required; the teachers expressed that their activities needed to be structured in time and space, which is a different viewpoint from Emilson's (2008), to whom structure was more or less irrelevant. However, Emilson studied preschool practice while Kjørholt studied documents written by teachers, which may explain these differences.…”

“…The idea of children's participation has different connotations in different cultures (Kjørholt, 2004). To participate, take part or be involved in something could, for a child, mean anything from taking part in providing for your family and yourself in order to survive, which is the case for some children in the world (Lund, 2007), to being involved in making democratic decisions.…”

“…These teachers also adjusted to the children in order for them to have a real influence on the topic of the conversations. Davies and Artaraz (2009), Komulainen (2007) and Kjørholt (2004) have studied listening to children's voices. Listening to and consulting children could mean giving them options, although sometimes quite limited ones (Davies & Artaraz, 2009).…”

“…Listening to children can also imply a view of children as competent, responsible subjects, capable of deciding for themselves, and therefore also seeing them as 'self-determining rational subjects' (Kjørholt, 2004, p. 214), which could be seen as a 'truth regime', to use a Foucauldian term. Thus this can be seen as a form of governmentality, governing children through freedom (Kjørholt, 2004). Kjørholt (2004) problematises this and argues for a view of children (and adults) as shifting between dependence and independence; neither children nor adults are solely autonomous, and both categories rely and depend on others to a greater or lesser extent.…”

“…Thus this can be seen as a form of governmentality, governing children through freedom (Kjørholt, 2004). Kjørholt (2004) problematises this and argues for a view of children (and adults) as shifting between dependence and independence; neither children nor adults are solely autonomous, and both categories rely and depend on others to a greater or lesser extent.…”