Making Kin With Plastic Through Aesthetic Experimentation

2021 ◽  
pp. 51-65
Author(s):  
Louisa Kate Penfold ◽  
Nina Odegard

Recent scholarship in childhood studies has raised concerns about humancentric, singular discourses regarding human-plastic relations. As a result, questions of how to develop new forms of learning with materials in environmental education are now an important issue for researchers, educators, and policymakers. This paper activates a feminist new materialist ontology to position plastic as an active participant in the formation of knowledge. Drawing on visual imagery of children’s and artists’ aesthetic experimentations, we explore the intra-related and complex relationship between plastic, children, and the planet. Haraway’s concept of making kin is operationalized to highlight plastic’s multidimensional complexities as both a destructive and creative force, producing a novel framework for understanding and learning with plastic in early childhood education.

2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Jennifer Lehmann

Welcome to our first Issue of Children Australia for 2018. We hope you have had a wonderful Christmas and entered the New Year with energy and enthusiasm for the challenges ahead. We also welcome back many of our Editorial Consultants and especially want to make our new members of the team feel engaged in the journal's activities for 2018. One of our new Editorial Consultants is Shraddha Kapoor who is Associate Professor at Department of Human Development and Childhood Studies, Lady Irwin College, University of Delhi. Dr Neerja Sharma, now retired, who has supported Children Australia for some years, was Shraddha's Professor before becoming her colleague and now a dear friend. Shraddha herself has been teaching in the department for last 27 years in the subjects of developmental psychology, child development, wellbeing, family and gender. Her particular interests are childcare, early childhood education and gender.


Education ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathryn Underwood ◽  
Gillian Parekh

Inclusive education as a model of service delivery arose out of disability activism and critiques of special education. To understand inclusive education in early childhood, however, one must also engage with broader questions of difference, diversity, and social justice as they intersect with childhood studies. To that end, this article contains references that include other critical discourses on childhood and inclusivity as well as critiques of inclusive education. Inclusive education has a much deeper body of research in formal school settings than in the early years. School-based research, however, often examines social relationships and academic achievement as outcome measures. This research has established that education situated in a child’s community and home school is generally more effective than special education settings, particularly when classroom educators have access to appropriate training, resources, policies, and leadership. Schools, of course, are part of the education landscape of the early years, but they are not inclusive of the full spectrum or early years settings. The early years literature on inclusion is different in focusing more attention on development, family, and community (as described in the General Overview of Early Childhood Inclusion). A critique of early childhood education research has focused on school readiness and rehabilitation and the efficacy of early identification and early intervention. This research is largely informed by Western medical research, but this approach has led global institutions to set out priorities for early intervention without recognizing how our worldview shapes our understanding of childhood and difference. The dominant research domain, however, has also identified that family and community contexts are important. This recognition creates a fundamental difference between inclusion research in school settings and such research in early childhood education and care. Early childhood education and care has always focused on the child and their family as the recipients of services, while educational interest in the family has been viewed as a setting in which the conditions for learning are established. Support for families is at the center of early childhood inclusive practice, both because families are largely responsible for seeking out early childhood disability services and because families are critical in children’s identity. Inclusion in schools and early childhood education and care can both be understood through theories of disability, ability, and capability. In both settings, education and care have social justice aims linked not only to developmental and academic outcomes for individual children, but also to the ways that these programs reproduce inequality. Disability as a social phenomenon has its historical roots in racist and colonial practices, understood through critical race theory, that are evident today in both early childhood and school settings. Understanding the links between disableism and other forms of discrimination and oppression is critical both for teaching for social justice broadly and for better understanding of how ability, capability, and critical disability theory and childhood studies are established through practices that begin in the early years.


2020 ◽  
pp. 146394912090286
Author(s):  
Minsun Shin

This colloquium discusses the intersection of love, care, and education in the field of early childhood education and care. While the name of the field reflects the belief that both care and education are seen as legitimate elements of the field’s professional discourse, love is still unspoken, undefined, and taken for granted. The author argues that love is professional yet very personal, involving the feelings and strong emotional connection that exist in a complex relationship in professional early childhood classrooms. This colloquium urges us to realize and legitimatize both love and care in the field of early childhood education and care, rather than conflating love and care.


2021 ◽  

The concept of habitus is central to the work of Pierre Bourdieu (b. 1930–d. 2002) the French sociologist, anthropologist, and philosopher. As with all of his work, it is a concept that operates interchangeably with others (especially capital and field), to raise questions about the impact of social structures on the practices and dispositions of individuals across diverse cultural and social contexts. Habitus is central to Bourdieu’s theory of practice—how patterns of power and inequality are reproduced through the practices that are embedded in everyday life. It is the habitus—the dispositions, ways of “doing” and “being,” thinking, talking, dressing, walking—the full compendium of our preferences, tastes, and desires that reflects our orientation in the world. Habitus is not explicitly “taught”; however, it is deeply embodied—a form of “knowing” that derives from the totality of immersion within a given cultural and social context. It is this ‘knowing’ that filters expectations, setting unarticulated boundaries or possibilities for future actions depending on the habitus in play. This is the power and impact of the habitus, and, with respect to social class (middle-class habitus/working-class habitus), clear patterns of advantage accrue to those whose habitus is most valued and recognized, that of the elites and middle class in society. This is especially evident, for example, in the field of education, which Bourdieu argued, embodies the middle-class habitus to the detriment of those from the working classes, who inevitably exit the system with lower rates of success. While Bourdieu was especially focused on dynamics related to social class stratification, the concept of habitus has been used widely in sociological studies. As a concept it is very applicable to childhood studies, providing an important frame of reference to analyze how diverse social structures influence the dispositions of children across different contexts. Further, as an action-oriented concept it aligns with the emphasis within childhood studies on children’s agency, providing a mechanism to explore how such agency is both enabled and /or constrained by the contexts within which children find themselves. As early childhood education and care takes increasing precedence, the concept has also been extended for use in relation to early childhood education and care settings. Typically, the concept of habitus focuses on issues related to language, literacy, and social class dynamics that influence children’s capacities to engage with their learning and education. However its flexibility as a concept—exactly as Bourdieu intended—ensures that it has been drawn on to explore the realities of children’s lives in their families, communities, and schools, including studies of children’s ethnic, gendered, and class relations; academic achievement; parenting practices; and leisure activities.


Author(s):  
Tony OHolmes

The Centre for Early Childhood Studies/Te Pumanawa Rangahau Kohungahunga is a new initiative to develop and promote early childhood education in Aotearoa/New Zealand. The Centre aims to initiate, co-ordinate, facilitate and supervise early childhood research, organise seminars and conferences, collect and disseminate information, analyse and critique early childhood policy, and work on behalf of early childhood educators. The Centre’s work will complement other early childhood initiatives, and will invite collaboration with early childhood groups, centres and educators. The Centre will become a resource available to all those committed to working for quality early childhood education and enhanced professional recognition.


2007 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne B. Smith

THERE IS STILL RESISTANCE and hostility within some circles to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (the Convention), but professionals working with children should be familiar with rights principles and their use in advocating for change. A rights perspective fits well with the new paradigm of Childhood Studies, which is critical of developmental psychology and recognises multiple childhoods, children's agency and competency, and the primacy of children's lived experience. The Convention has been used in advocating for reforms in early childhood services in New Zealand. One example is the development and implementation of our early childhood education curriculum, Te Whariki. The second example is New Zealand's Strategic Plan for Early Childhood Education (Ngā Huarahi Arataki), which is focused on improving early childhood education quality and participation. It is argued that child advocacy for better early childhood education policies can be strengthened by the use of the Convention.


2019 ◽  
pp. 123-133
Author(s):  
Michelle Jones ◽  
Brooke Richardson ◽  
Alana Powell

This paper takes the position that early childhood education students are an underutilized resource in strengthening the Canadian child care advocacy movement. The authors come to this topic as undergraduate and graduate students and a contract lecturer member in Ryerson’s early childhood studies program. Over the past year and a half, we have worked with our peers and colleagues to establish and lead the Ryerson Student Childcare Advocacy Association. Drawing on student movement and devaluation of care literature, this paper describes and explores our opportunities and experiences reconceptualizing the value of early childhood education and care that motivated us to become student leaders in the child care advocacy movement. Ultimately, we hope to both illustrate that students can and do make a meaningful difference in advocacy efforts and inspire and support postsecondary early childhood education programs to build the political capacity of students in the broader child care movement.


2020 ◽  
Vol 96 (1) ◽  
pp. 138-159
Author(s):  
Corrie Thiel ◽  
Katharina Hans

Abstract On Shaky Foundations. An Essay on the Problem of Investigating the Quality of Education in Childhood Studies Over the last two decades, early childhood education has become a well-established subdiscipline of German educational research. This is due to its claim to generate important insights to the normative question of high-quality education by using empirical social science research methods. However, normative questions cannot be answered empirically according to a modern understanding of social science, in which the legacy of empiricism is still prevalent in terms of the fact-value dichotomy. After elaborating on this problem, we present a stance towards science, which might serve as a starting point for non-empiricist but still empirical scientific engagement in questions of quality in early childhood education.


1979 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 81-92
Author(s):  
Susan Freedman Gilbert

This paper describes the referral, diagnostic, interventive, and evaluative procedures used in a self-contained, behaviorally oriented, noncategorical program for pre-school children with speech and language impairments and other developmental delays.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document