All the writers and thinkers whose ideas I have engaged with in regards to the institutionalization of childhood discourse inspired me, according to their unique approach to the subject. However, Dahlberg and Moss’s (2005) ideas in their text, Ethics and Politics in Early Childhood Education profoundly inspired me. The part of their text that interested me most is how they position themselves in their ideas.
According to Dahlberg and Moss (2005) their approach is to recognise multiple perspectives and identities,the importance of individual choice and responsibility, and to welcome the ensuing diversity and plurality. However, for them this does not mean that they adopt a position in which every perspective is of equal value and merit, a relativism in which everything goes. "We make choices, which we recognize as ethical and political, and we take responsibility for those choices; they cannot be determined for us by some objective assessment of evidence or by the weight of expert opinion" (p. 28).
One of the choices and position taken by Dahlberg and Moss(2005) is the choosing of another concept of institutions for children. Their concerpt is 'children's spaces'which according to them has a different rationality to that of 'children's services' - aethertic and ethical rather than instrumental. "The metaphor is the forum or meeting-place, for the concept understands institutions for children as environments where the coming together of children and adults, the being and thinking beside each other, offers many possibilities - cultural and social, but also economic, political, ethical, aethetic, physical. Another important position chosen by Dahlberg and Moss is their veiw of preschools; which according to them is radically at odds with a market rationality, and thus determining their views about policy. They believe that like schools, preschools should be publicly funded and children should be entitled to go to them either from birth or, as in Sweden, from 12 months of age (after a period of well-paid parental leave shared between mothers and fathers): going to a preschool should not be conditional on, e.g. the employment of a parent or on a child being categorised as 'in need' (p. 29).
Institutionalization of childhood in Dahlberg and Moss's perspective is not necessarily a bad thing. But they point out that “it does demand of us - as adults – to take responsibility for what we have set in motion, in particular to look critically at the conditions for childhood that we are creating (p. 3). Dahlberg and Moss's positioning of themselves is the one that I also would like to strive for in my role as a teacher, a co-worker and a world citizen.
References
Dahlberg, G. & Moss, P. (2005). Ethics and politics in early childhood education. London: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc.
The two quotes you have chosen are very powerful in respect to our work in the classroom.
ReplyDelete“But it does demand of us-as adults- to take responsibility for what we have set in motion, in particular to look critically at the conditions for childhood that we are creating.” (Dahlberg &Moss, p.3) and
“We make choices, which we recognize as ethical and political, and we take responsibility for those choices; they cannot be determined for us by some objective assessment of evidence or by the weight of expert opinion.” (Dahlberg & Moss, p 28).
The quotes also reflect the ethical responsibility of the educator to take ownership for the choices that we make in the classroom. Dahlberg and Moss have inspired us to open up spaces to disrupt our own truths and challenge the discourses we sit in to engage in ethical practice. From a Foucauldian perspective “… we can choose the truths we privilege and that the possibility of choice implies the possibility of disrupting a regime of truth and its inequitable effects.” (as cited by Mac Naughton, p. 39). To disrupt a regime of truth, “we need the provocation of different perspectives, viewing a particular field from across borders” ( Dahlberg & Moss, p. 23). It is a ‘choice’ whether we cross these borders to maintain an ethical and political practice. But how do we ensure that we don’t collapse back into our old regimes of truth? Does everyone have the same possibility to resist? Part of the responsibility for the choices we make is to routinely critique our own practice. To revisit the 4 cycles of Action Research- (personal communication, Educ 474) reconnaissance, planning, action and critically reflecting- to help us reflect on the position we sit in (discourse) and create possibilities for other ways of thinking .To take a critical look at the conditions we are privileging can help rupture dominant discourses and offer an alternative plan. To take the responsibility to make ethical/political choices, is a step towards the creation of turning institutions into ‘children’s spaces’. A democratic space which embraces the multiple perspectives of the whole community.
Dahlberg, G. & Moss, P. (2005). Ethics and Politics in Early Childhood Education. New York:RoutledgeFalmer.
Mac Naughton, G. (2005). Doing Foucault in Early Childhood Studies Applying poststructural ideas. New York:Routledge.
The two quotes you have chosen are very powerful in respect to our work in the classroom.
ReplyDelete“But it does demand of us-as adults- to take responsibility for what we have set in motion, in particular to look critically at the conditions for childhood that we are creating.” (Dahlberg &Moss, p.3) and
“We make choices, which we recognize as ethical and political, and we take responsibility for those choices; they cannot be determined for us by some objective assessment of evidence or by the weight of expert opinion.” (Dahlberg & Moss, p 28).
The quotes also reflect the ethical responsibility of the educator to take ownership for the choices that we make in the classroom. Dahlberg and Moss have inspired us to open up spaces to disrupt our own truths and challenge the discourses we sit in to engage in ethical practice. From a Foucauldian perspective “… we can choose the truths we privilege and that the possibility of choice implies the possibility of disrupting a regime of truth and its inequitable effects.” (as cited by Mac Naughton, p. 39). To disrupt a regime of truth, “we need the provocation of different perspectives, viewing a particular field from across borders” ( Dahlberg & Moss, p. 23). It is a ‘choice’ whether we cross these borders to maintain an ethical and political practice. But how do we ensure that we don’t collapse back into our old regimes of truth? Does everyone have the same possibility to resist? Part of the responsibility for the choices we make is to routinely critique our own practice. To revisit the 4 cycles of Action Research- (personal communication, Educ 474) reconnaissance, planning, action and critically reflecting- to help us reflect on the position we sit in (discourse) and create possibilities for other ways of thinking .To take a critical look at the conditions we are privileging can help rupture dominant discourses and offer an alternative plan. To take the responsibility to make ethical/political choices, is a step towards the creation of turning institutions into ‘children’s spaces’. A democratic space which embraces the multiple perspectives of the whole community.
Dahlberg, G. & Moss, P. (2005). Ethics and Politics in Early Childhood Education. New York:RoutledgeFalmer.
Mac Naughton, G. (2005). Doing Foucault in Early Childhood Studies Applying poststructural ideas. New York:Routledge.
Posted by Maureen to Institutionalization of Childhood at April 10, 2011 8:17 AM