2002
DOI: 10.2304/ciec.2002.3.1.8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Toward Liberatory Early Childhood Theory, Research and Praxis: Decolonizing a Field

Abstract: This article surveys the emergence and application of critical pedagogy to the field of early childhood education in the USA and beyond. It explores selected portions of the field's vast body of literature vis-à-vis loosely configured and intersecting lines of research and praxis. The field continues to expand, with positivist orientations of child development, postmodern critical reconceptualizing models, and post-colonial discourse spaces. The article concludes with a discussion of liberatory praxis as a spa… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
33
0
1

Year Published

2006
2006
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
5

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 56 publications
(34 citation statements)
references
References 53 publications
0
33
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The difficulties experienced by both Nat and Sally in working with this difference is not surprising for, despite many calls from researchers working toward educational reform for more heterogeneous views of children than offered within a developmental framework, Western child development ideology has continued to maintain hegemony in most educational institutions. As Soto and Swadener (2002) assert, in the early childhood discourse of child development 'Issues of power, issues of language and culture are rarely discussed and when they are included, children and families are essentialised and categorised' (p. 56). As Nat and Sally discuss issues of culture, they struggle with difference in ways that assign some children to categories of deficit.…”
Section: Unbelievable Children and Familiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The difficulties experienced by both Nat and Sally in working with this difference is not surprising for, despite many calls from researchers working toward educational reform for more heterogeneous views of children than offered within a developmental framework, Western child development ideology has continued to maintain hegemony in most educational institutions. As Soto and Swadener (2002) assert, in the early childhood discourse of child development 'Issues of power, issues of language and culture are rarely discussed and when they are included, children and families are essentialised and categorised' (p. 56). As Nat and Sally discuss issues of culture, they struggle with difference in ways that assign some children to categories of deficit.…”
Section: Unbelievable Children and Familiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This democratic approach differed from more traditional classroom problem-solving strategies, as the sociodramatic sessions were meant to provide students with a space that aided them in exploring topics of their choice, not preconceived ideas presented by myself as the researcher or Mrs. Greene as the classroom teacher. This approach is quite unique to the atmosphere of standardsbased accountability that currently exists in many of today's classrooms and does not always consider or represent young children's needs, abilities, or interests (Aina 1998;Aronson 2004;Diaz Soto and Swadener 2002;Garcia 1999;Grumet 1988;Intrator 2005;Noddings 1984Noddings , 1995.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These researchers argue that child development theory, with its focus on the individual 'ahistorical, asocial and apolitical child' (Grieshaber & Cannella, 2001, p. 12), has contributed to the construction of 'deficit' children. Soto & Swadener's (2002) research challenges the 'colonisation' of a 'single official early childhood pedagogy' and they argue that 'only when we work in solidarity and as allies with multiple voices will diverse children, families and communities experience social justice and equity ' (p. 58).…”
Section: An Early Childhood Knowledge Base: the Debatesmentioning
confidence: 99%