BOOK REVIEWS

Too much, too soon? Early learning and the erosion of childhood, edited byRichard House, Stroud, Hawthorn Press, 2011, 337 pp., £20.00 (paperback), ISBN978-1-907359-02-6

Too much, too soon (TMTS) is an edited book conceived and produced by theOpen EYE campaign, a lobby group opposed to the UK government’s Early YearsFoundation Stage (EYFS; DCSF 2008), a statutory set of welfare and learning anddevelopment requirements for early childhood education. The controversial natureof the EYFS needs no explanation to the readers of Early Years: the feeling ofmany involved in early years education and experts in other fields concerned withchild development is that the learning and development requirements set out in theEYFS are too prescriptive and developmentally inappropriate. This sentiment mir-rors the concern that experts in other countries have voiced following moves tointroduce formal academic instruction in early years education (for example, Hirsh-Pasek et al. 2009; for popular coverage see Tullis 2011). I have gone on the publicrecord voicing similar concerns (Kidd 2012), and so it was with much enthusiasmthat I agreed to review this book.

The book consists of 23 chapters divided into four parts. Part I discusses thenuances of the EYFS and its effect on various stakeholders involved in early yearseducation (for example, parents, teachers, childminders). Part II discusses differentperspectives on child development and early years education. Part III discussesresearch on issues concerned with the EYFS, and Part IV attempts to provide aroadmap to guide future changes in early years education provision. The contribu-tors come from a diverse range of backgrounds, and as such there are a broad rangeof opinions. In this sense, TMTS takes a shotgun approach in its opposition to theEYFS. Some of these shotgun pellets hit the mark; others are a fair way off.

The best chapters provide cogent and reasoned arguments in opposition to vari-ous aspects of the EYFS. In Part I, Leach (Chapter 1) convincingly argues againstthe manner in which the curriculum privileges cognitive development at the expenseof development in other domains (for example, social, emotional). Dougherty(Chapter 3) provides key insights into the process of applying for an exemptionfrom the framework, and Adams and Adams (Chapter 4) provide a lucid account oftheir experience as childminders. In Part II Katz (Chapter 8) discusses current per-spectives on early childhood curricula, providing 12 principles for curriculumdesign. Other key chapters discuss alternative pedagogies (Steiner Waldorf and Reg-gio Emilia, Chapters 12 and 15) and the key role of play in child development(Chapters 13 and 14). In Part III, Suggate (Chapter 17) provides a brilliantly astuteexamination of research examining the age at which children begin reading instruc-tion. Sigman (Chapter 19) discusses the deleterious effects of screen technology(for example, TV viewing) on child development, and Margaret Edington (Chapter20) imparts some insightful pearls of wisdom gained from years of experience as

Early YearsVol. 32, No. 3, October 2012, 324–326

ISSN 0957-5146 print/ISSN 1472-4421 onlinehttp://www.tandfonline.com

an early childhood educator. In Part IV, Sheerman (Chapter 22) provides a politi-cian’s perspective on policy development, and Scott and House (Chapter 23) drawupon the contributions in the book to provide a set of recommendations for educa-tors and policy-makers. These chapters represent the best of TMTS.

Some other chapters are not up to this high standard. Too often contributorsmake claims that are not supported by evidence or are simply incorrect. In numer-ous cases there are questionable and over-simplified interpretations of neuroscien-tific research, some of which are drawn from questionable sources. Other chaptersare distinctly anti-science or anti-scientific method, making some rather startling yetunsupported (or incorrect) claims. These misplaced critiques take the reader too faraway from the important issues at hand, and call for a greater collaborative effortacross a range of disciplines to both create and disseminate knowledge.

TMTS will appeal to an audience as broad as its contributors, most of whomwill be concerned about the changing nature of childhood. There is some great stuffhere, but I urge readers to take many of the more controversial points with a grainof salt. Readers who are looking for a more focused argument that is in the samespirit as TMTS would do well to check out Hirsh-Pasek et al. (2009).

ReferencesDepartment for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF). 2008. The Early Years Foundation

Stage: Setting the standards for learning, development and care for children from birthto five. London: DCSF.

Hirsh-Pasek, K., R.M. Golinkoff, L.E. Berk, and D.G. Singer. 2009. A mandate for playfullearning in preschool: Presenting the evidence. New York: Oxford University Press.

Kidd, E. 2012. TEDx 2012 Sydney talk, May 26, 2012, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzCfUvWD0Q4)

Tullis, P. 2011. The death of preschool. Scientific American Mind 22: 37–41.

Evan KiddThe Australian National University, Australia

evan.kidd@anu.edu.au� 2012, Evan Kidd

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09575146.2012.716221

Respecting childhood, by Tim Loreman, London, Continuum, 2009, 152 pp.,£22.99, ISBN 978-0-8264-3244-5

The premise of this book is to unpick modern-day views of childhood and to callfor a more respectful view of childhood. The book comes from the perspective thatadults (be they parents, teachers or policy-makers) frequently have a view of chil-dren and childhood as being in some way deficient. Building and drawing upon aninternational body of work around constructions of childhood the book conducts acritical exploration of the way in which adults have constructed understandings ofchildren and childhood that tend to focus on them as becoming as opposed tobeing. The almost campaigning tone of the book is one that I think no early yearspractitioner would argue against: that we should respect the many qualities childrendo have (being carefree and full of imagination) rather than judging them on theskills that they have not yet acquired.

Early Years 325