The aim of this paper is to (re)(e)value(ate) current micro- and macropolicies and politics that shape – and are shaped by – conceptualisations of and, in consequence, practices towards young children in a range of institutions/figurations. The ‘geopolitical’ location for our investigation is Europe, understood as conceptual space(s) as well as (geographical) territory. Whilst we begin by focusing attention on events within an English context, we nevertheless move beyond geographical boundaries. We argue that movements that are currently being undertaken in England are not individual activities. Rather, England is infected and affected by European and global histories, practices, policies, philosophies and epistemologies. We argue that it is the oscillations between different components within a broad European assemblage (human and nonhuman) that makes something happen. Subsequently, we detail and question whether ‘happenings’ that are occurring in England can be considered as possible creative openings where early childhood education/care could be reassembled ‘differently’.
Council of the European Union. (2010, May 26). Council conclusions of 11 May 2010 on the social dimension of education and training.Official Journal of the European Union, C 135/2–7.
12.
DahlbergG., & MossP. (2005). Ethics and politics in early childhood education.London: Routledge Falmer.
13.
DeleuzeG. (1995). Negotiations.New York: Columbia University Press.
14.
DeleuzeG., & GuattariF. (2004). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia (B. Massumi, Trans.). London: Continuum.
15.
DelignyF. (1970). Les vagabonds efficaces, et autres récits.Paris: François Maspero.
EliasN. (1982). The civilizing process.Oxford: Blackwell.
19.
European Commission. (2010). EUROPE 2020. A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth (COM[2010] 2020 final). Brussels, Belgium.
20.
European Commission. (2011). Early childhood education and care: Providing all our children with the best start for the world of tomorrow (COM[2011] 66 final). Brussels, Belgium.
21.
FreireP. (2004). Pedagogy of hope: Reliving pedagogy of the oppressed.London: Continuum.
GrewalI., and KaplanC. (Eds.). (1994). Scattered hegemonies: Postmodernity and transnational feminist practices.Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
24.
HaggertyK. D., & EricsonR. V. (2000). The surveillant assemblage.The British Journal of Sociology, 51, 605–622. doi:10.1080/00071310020015280
25.
HouseR. (Ed.). (2011). Too much, too soon? Early learning and the erosion of childhood.London: Hawthorn Press.
26.
JessopB. (2002). The future of capitalist state.Oxford: Polity Press.
27.
JonesL., MacLureM., HolmesR., & MacRaeC. (2012). Children and objects: Affection and infection.Early Years: An International Research Journal, 32, 49–60. doi:10.1080/09575146.2011.593029
MacLureM., JonesL., HolmesR., & MacRaeC. (2012). Becoming a problem: Behaviour and reputation in the early years classroom.British Educational Research Journal, 38, 447–471. doi:10.1080/01411926.2011.552709
30.
OECD. (2001). Starting strong: Early childhood education and care.Paris: Author.
31.
OECD. (2006). Starting strong II: Early childhood education and care.Paris: Author.
32.
OECD. (2012). Starting strong III: A quality toolbox for early childhood education and care.Paris: Author.
33.
OngA. (2007). Neoliberalism as a mobile technology.Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 32, 3–8. doi:10.1111/j,1475-5661.2007.00234.x
34.
OzgaJ., & JonesR. (2006). Travelling and embedded policy: The case of knowledge transfer.Journal of Education Policy, 21, 1–17. doi:10.1080/02680930500391462
35.
PalmerS. (2006.). Toxic childhood: How the modern world is damaging our children and what we can do about it.London: Orion.
36.
SchwandtT. A. (2004). Hermeneutics: A poetics of inquiry versus a methodology for research. In PiperH., & StronachI. (Eds.), Educational research: Difference and diversity (pp. 31–44). Aldershot: Ashgate.
37.
SimpsonK. (2011). The unfolding self—the essence of personality. In HouseR. (Ed.), Too much, too soon? Early learning and the erosion of childhood (pp. 147–159). London: Hawthorn Press.
38.
StakeR. E. (2003). Case studies. In DenzinN. K., & LincolnY. S. (Eds.), Strategies of qualitative inquiry (2nd ed., pp. 134–164). London: Sage.
39.
TobinJ., HsuehY., & KarasawaM. (2009). Preschool in three cultures revisited: China, Japan, and the United States.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
40.
TobinJ. J., WuD. Y. H., & DavidsonD. H. (1989). Preschool in three cultures: Japan, China, and the United States.New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
41.
TompkinsS. S. (1995). Exploring affect: The selected writings of Silvan S. Tompkins (DemosE. V., Ed.). New York: Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge.
42.
TurnbullD. (2000). Masons, tricksters and cartographers: Comparative studies in the sociology of scientific and indigenous knowledge.Australia: Harwood Academic.
43.
UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre. (2008). The child care transition. A league table of early childhood education and care in economically advanced countries (Report Card 8). Florence: UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre.
44.
UrbanM., & DalliC. (2011). A profession speaking and thinking for itself. In MillerL., DalliC., & UrbanM. (Eds.), Early childhood grows up: Towards a critical ecology of the profession (pp. 157–176). London: Springer.
