Abstract
Re-situating Canadian Early Childhood Education, edited by Veronica Pacini-Ketchabaw (Professor of Early Childhood Education at Western University) and Larry Prochner (Professor of Early Childhood Education at the University of Alberta), is a thought-provoking read that uses post-foundational theories to explore a variety of topics such as literacy development, queer theory, and professional authority within mainly Canadian contexts.
As a graduate student working in preschool settings in the US context, and relatively new to critical early childhood scholarship, I found the foreword by Curry and Cannella, as well as chapter 1 written by the editors, to be a welcome introduction into the work explored throughout this book. Collectively, these two chapters provide a very helpful historical or, as Curry and Canella prefer, “herstorical” account of reconceptualist scholarship within early childhood education (ECE). The 10 chapters that follow commendably open the conversation to more complicated and diverse ways of engaging with children. They center voices, beliefs, and values of those typically marginalized; question many western modernist notions of ECE, such as developmental psychology, the “normal” child, and binary thinking; and take a political stance towards confronting social injustices that dominate early childhood spaces across the globe, and Canada specifically.
Davidson provides a persuasive argument in chapter 2 for how multiple theories and perspectives can work together—in this case, cognitive and sociocultural theories. She highlights how developmental practices need not be fully eliminated, but rather the possibilities that are created when an integrated approach is enacted, and multiple theories and perspectives work together. This chapter supports the idea that both educational achievement and social and educational equity can be achieved when a variety of theories are adopted and welcomed.
Rose and Whitty explore governance within ECE classrooms and professional development spaces in relation to time in chapter 3, and question what opportunities and/or complexities are missed when focus is placed heavily on routines, schedules, and time. As a former director, time was always front and center, and the functioning of our center seemed dependent upon it. This chapter creates space for pause and reflection; does it have to be that way? What possibilities are missed when time is strictly regulated?
The next three chapters all call attention to the ongoing critically reflective work that is needed when reconceptualizing ECE beliefs and practices. For example in chapter 4, Iannacci and Graham convincingly illuminate that while teacher education programs are a good place to start critical conversations (surrounding disability), more research is needed to build the literature base. Moreover, further policies and practices need to be put in place in schools that are asset-based to better support pre-service teachers in integrating theory and practice where such deeply rooted deficit perspectives lie.
In chapter 5, Langford successfully highlights a need for ECE teachers to work towards establishing and defining themselves as professionals who have authority and abilities to work with children in ways that move beyond positioning themselves as technicians towards seeing themselves as researchers and experts within the field. Additionally, she brings forth the need for teachers to have a sense of professionalism that utilizes critical dialogue and enables them to be intentional in their work with children as they move away from simply reproducing inequitable existing conditions and work towards social justice.
Janmohamed’s work in chapter 6 makes a case for including queer pedagogy in teacher preparation programs, and contributes important insights into how developmentally appropriate practices can reinforce heteronormativity and are “problematic to the complexity of diversity and difference” (103). While this chapter sheds an important light and starts the conversation of troubling curriculum that further inscribes the status quo of heteronormative families, teachers and children seem to be missing from this conversation, and could be added for a more robust look at why and how queer pedagogy can be influential in ECE spaces.
Bernhard’s chapter 7 uses notions of critical pedagogy (Freire, 1999), social capital (Bourdieu, 1986), and Cummins’ (1989, 2001, 2002) work on identity, engagement, and community to approach working with immigrant families in supportive and trusting environments with facilitators who speak the native home languages of the families. This chapter effectively illuminates how important dialogue can be in breaking barriers and creating authentic and meaningful space for families typically othered to engage in critical conversations, and empowering them to find their voices within the education system.
In chapter 8, Kummen, Pacini-Ketchabaw, and Thompson use memories in the shared space of a college graduate course to articulate how the notion of “developmental worker” comes to be embodied through the discursive as well as the material. I found the authors’ use of the metaphor of “stutter and stumble” particularly compelling as a way to call attention to the ongoing influences impacting the assemblage of what it means to understand and live developmental knowledges, as well as the need to diversify and complicate them.
In chapter 9, Kirova investigates play as a cultural activity within an intercultural early learning program, highlighting how a “new” shared culture can be built when teachers not only provide cultural materials, but also engage with and scaffold children in their home languages. This chapter provides significant insight into the important role first-language facilitators can have in supporting children’s play, as well as the vast opportunities teachers create when they value children’s home cultures and identities within the classroom.
Chapter 10 focuses on the value of utilizing stories and calls attention specifically to how Inuit knowledge(s) can be made visible through the use of documentation, reflection, and conversations with children. Rowan’s work successfully captures the space within early childhood centers where teachers can not only reflect on children’s home cultures, but also make them visible, included, and valued.
Swadener, Peters, and Gaches (all US scholars) close the book in chapter 11 by discussing how to create opportunities for children to be heard within ECE spaces, and offer critical reflection and utilization of post-structuralist frameworks as a beneficial way to do so. Looking across three countries—Australia, Northern Ireland, and Canada—this chapter is an important reminder that while issues of marginalization vary across countries, there is a need, regardless of region or context, for reconceptualist work in all ECE spaces.
In closing, I found this book to be a welcome addition to reconceptualist scholarship. While set in a Canadian context, it addresses multiple ways of starting critical conversations that can be impactful regardless of origin. Its accessibility makes it a good option for those in teacher preparation programs or as a possible resource for discussion starters for ongoing professional learning communities. As a former director, I would have welcomed this book to support my team in working towards challenging dominant modernist narratives of child development. Reading from a US perspective possibly limits broader critiques, but the examples of the work being done in Canada create and offer insight into the possibilities of working within the realm of reconceptualist work in all ECE spaces, and illuminate a variety of ways to trouble existing dominant notions and insure that the voices, perspectives, understandings, and values of those typically marginalized/othered are not only heard, but also respected, valued, and included.