S1 E2: Discourses of Childhood
Hello. I am Veronica Pacini-Ketchabaw, and this is Rethinking Childhoods.
In this second mini episode, I would like to extend the discussion on displacing child development from episode 1, and say a few words about how discourses of childhood work. Like in the previous episode, I want to recommend to you all that you spend time reading the work of the work of childhood scholar Erica Burman – especially her two books Deconstructing Developmental Psychology and Developments: Child , Image, Nation.
Like any discourses, discourses of childhood are performative in that they not only organize our ideas, thoughts about children, but they also organize our everyday experiences with children, or, in other words, govern our actions in relation to children. We talk to children in a particular way; we might engage children in activities that only speak to what we think is developmentally appropriate (a very concrete example, we might never offer infants clay because we are absolutely convinced that they will not be ready to encounter clay). In this way, discourses of childhood create certain kinds of worlds for children to encounter, and not to encounter other worlds or other ways of being in the world.
As Burman also reminds us in her writings, there are competing and contradictory discourses of childhood. They are not always harmonious and they are not organized in a particular (or even clear ) manner. Think about how multiple and competing discourses of childhood are, for example, integrated in the Ontario curriculum. In the one hand, it states “knowing what to expect in typically developing children can also help educators to recognize when a child is experiencing challenges…” (p. 17); and on the other hand it says “children are competent, capable of complex thinking, curious, and rich in potential” (p. 6). So we have discourses on competence existing alongside discourses on vulnerability.
MUSIC
Burman also reminds us that discourses of childhood shift across time and across places. Yet, we can find many continuities between discourses. In the previous episode I talked about how theories of self-regulation were key to the construction of child care in Canada in the early 1900s, and how they existed in relation to definitions of mothers, of families, and of the state. It is not a coincidence that discourses on self regulation continue to be important in our discussions in education – they are part of the Ontario curriculum. Yes, these discourses engage with different debates within our society. But they continue to reflect and invoke specific models of political organization. I invite you think about how discourses on self regulation work today. What purposes does self-regulation serve today? And more importantly, how do discourses of childhood that value self-regulation are organized in relation to societal and state interests?
MUSIC
The final idea about discourses of childhood that I want to speak about is that dominant discourses of childhood serve to silence other discourses or even silence some conversations. I have been thinking a lot recently about the discourse of children as learners that has dominated discussions about education during the current pandemic. I have noticed that by focusing on the discourse of children as learners, we have avoided an open conversation about what are schools for. I hear in the media, I read in government documents and in international organizations guidelines about that the idea that children are at risk of not learning because schools had to close during the pandemic. What this really means is that children are at risk of not performing well on what has been deemed as basic literacy and numeracy skills. What this idea is doing is ensuring that we don’t open up a conversation about what education is for, or what school is for? Who does school as a societal form of organization serve? In other words, what I am thinking about here is that through the discourse of children as learners, the discourse of education as a mode of subject formation is currently silenced.
You might wonder, why is this really important? Why is it important to understand that there are many different discourses? What I want to emphasize before ending is that as educators it’s key that we are able to analyze, to read how discourses of childhood work and how we are implicated within discourses of childhood. Because childhood is not an innocent category, our role as teachers is not to know the child, to be an expert in child development, to serve as saviours of children’s ignorance. As educators, we are compelled to study what are the current discourses of childhood that exist today? And, importantly, what are the discourses that might open possibilities for new relations? What kinds of discourses might I challenge as an educator, and which ones might I choose to nurture?
MUSIC
Notes from this episode are at http://3.96.195.250/. You can follow me on Twitter @pacinik. You are welcome to post a review of the episode. Thank you so much for joining me this week.
This episode was recorded on the traditional lands of the Anishinaabek, Haudenosaunee, Lūnaapéewak and Attawandaron peoples, where I’m grateful to live and work.
This has been Rethinking Childhoods.
Readings suggestions and references for this episode:
Burman, E. (2017). Deconstructing developmental psychology (Third Edition). London: Routledge.
Burman, E. (2020). Developments: Child, image, nation (Second Edition). London: Routledge.
How Does Learning Happen? Ontario’s Pedagogy for the Early Years, 2014. Online: http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/childcare/howlearninghappens.pdf
Created By: Veronica Pacini-Ketchabaw
Edited and Produced By: Jacob Ketchabaw