Ethics and politics as first practice in early childhood education and care

Professor Peter MossThomas Coram Research Unit

Institute of Education University of Londonpeter.moss@ioe.ac.uk

Personal introduction

1970s: Children’s Centre movement in England

Problem: split and under-funded system; services fragmented, unresponsive & far too few

Aim of the movement: to develop a ‘popular and effective’ service for all children 0-5 and families:o Serve small local catchment areaso Planned and supervised by one authorityoMulti-purpose, responding to needs of local

communitieso Available on demando Free

Children’s Centre movement

Solution: Integrated, responsive, multi-purpose ‘Children’s Centres’ for all children and families...a holistic community service

Our criteria suggest that the basic form of service should be through multi-purpose children’s centres offering part and full-time care with medical and other services, to a very local catchment area, but there is much room for experimentation (Tizard, Moss and Perry, 1976)

Image of the EC centreChildren’s Centre is basis for my image of what

the EC centre can be

Common images today = parking space (for children) OR factory producing predefined outcomes OR business selling a commodity (e.g. ‘childcare’) to parent-consumers

My image = public space or forum...a place of encounter for all citizens (children & adults)...a collaborative workshop for communities with the potential for many purposes and projects – some predefined, others not...

Many purposes and projects of the EC centre might include:

Constructing knowledge, identities, valuesProviding family supportBuilding community solidaritySustaining cultures and languagesDeveloping economy (including ‘childcare’)Promoting gender and other equalitiesPracticing democracy and active citizenshipResisting exclusion and other injustices (Add your purposes and projects)

1990s: The problem with ‘quality’Quality in early childhood services is a constructed concept, subjective in nature and based on values, beliefs and interest, rather than an objective and universal reality (Moss & Pence, 1994)If quality is a relative conceptIf the process of defining quality should be participatory and democraticThen definitions of ‘quality’ will differ – due to multiple perspectives

1990s: The problem with ‘quality’Q: Can the concept of ‘quality’ accommodate diversity of values, beliefs and interests? Can you have multiple definitions of ‘quality’?A: No. If value diversity, need to get ‘beyond quality’...find another language to talk about ECCE

2000s: Ethics and politics in ECCEToday ECCE is first and foremost a technical

practice – seeking one right universal answer from experts, but...

ECCE is first and foremost a political and ethical practice

Political practice because ECCE should start from political questions – ‘not mere technical issues to be solved by experts...[but questions that] always involve decisions which require us to make choices between conflicting alternatives’ (Chantal Mouffe).

Some political questions What kind of world do we want? What do we want

for our children? What is ECCE for? What is our image of the child? The EC centre? The

EC educator? What values? What ethics? What paradigm? What theories? What do we mean by ‘education’ and by ‘care’? What is knowledge? How do we learn?

Democracy as a fundamental valueDemocracy is multi-dimensional concept: representative and procedural...but also participatory and everyday

[Democracy is] primarily a mode of associated living embedded in the culture and social relationships of everyday life[Democracy is] a way of personal life controlled not merely by faith in human nature in general but by faith in the capacity of human beings for intelligent judgment and action if proper conditions are furnished[Democracy] must be reborn in each generation and education is the midwife (John Dewey)

Democracy in ECCE : decision-making; curriculum; learning; evaluation; deciding projects etc etc

2000s: Ethics and politics in ECCE

Ethical practice because education is a relational field – we need ethical basis for the relationship

E.g. ethics of care and ethics of an encounter...how do we relate in ways that are caring? and in ways that respect ‘otherness’/ diversity?

2010s: Relationship between ECCE and Compulsory Education

Dominant relationship today: ECEC ‘readying’ children for school...but there are alternatives, e.g. ‘strong and equal partnership’...‘pedagogical meeting place’

Rather than ‘schoolification’, re-think education from 0-18 based on new, shared political and ethical practice

4 propositions

Proposition 1

We need to get ECCE into perspective. We are in danger of over-stating the impact of ECCE on reducing the damaging consequences of inequality and injustice...while understating its potential for individual, family and community flourishing.

Putting ECCE in perspectiveUnrealistic claims made for ECCE...it can fix social and

economic ills caused by inequality and injustice...v.high return on investment

Claims often based on small local studies in US, a country where child poverty remains high after 40 years of early interventions

ECCE by itself is not a magic potion or silver bullet – it is no short cut to a good society...we need to put it into perspective

Putting ECCE in perspectiveAre we sure there is no magic potion that will push poor children into the middle class? Only if the potion contains health care, childcare, good housing, sufficient income for every family, child rearing environments free of drugs and violence, support for parents in all their roles, and equal education for all... Without these necessities, only magic will make that happen (Ed Ziegler)

Putting ECCE in perspectiveInequality has risen to alarming levels around the world....Inequality should be at the centre of our attention...Investing in people...begin in early childhood [and] it must be followed by formal education...Tax and benefit policies [to] promote a better distribution of income...High quality public services...reducing regional disparities (Angel Gurria, OECD Secretary-General, 19/3/2012)

Putting ECCE in perspective Successful countries (Nordics) have very good ECCE –

but one part of a political and social system that is: democratic and egalitarian; sustained by a well-developed welfare state; with high taxes.

EC centres – and schools – have an important part to play in a good society as part of a political and social system and if our image of them is a public space, a place of encounter for all citizens, a collaborative workshop for communities...a public resource of great potential and many possibilities

Proposition 2

We need to get beyond ‘quality’ and talk instead about - what we really value and desire...and in the process acknowledge, welcome and work with diversity, complexity and multiple perspectives

Getting ‘beyond’ quality‘Quality’ becomes meaningless with overuseWhen we try to give it meaning, we end up

with a set of supposedly universal and objective norms defined by experts and ignoring context, diversity and complexity

‘Quality’ cannot accommodate diversity and complexity...treats ECCE as technical practice NOT a political and ethical practice based on critical questions and conflicting alternatives

Getting ‘beyond quality’ means...Not talking about ‘good quality ECCE’ Talking about answers to critical questions,

what images? what concepts? what values and ethics; what paradigms and theories? Etc.

(e.g.) ‘ECCE that values democracy and experimentation...works with the image of a rich child...strives for ‘education in its broadest sense’...adopts a post-structural paradigm and experiments with the theories of Delueze’

Getting ‘beyond quality’ means...No longer evaluating with standardised check-

listsUsing participatory methods including

children, parents, educators, citizens, e.g. pedagogical documentation:making practice visiblesubject to dialogue, reflection and interpretationin relationship with others

Pedagogical documentation

Documenting what has been observed in work with the children is one of the keys of Malaguzzi’s philosophy. Behind this practice...is the ideological and ethical concept of a transparent school and education...

[PD is] an extraordinary tool for dialogue, for exchange, for sharing. For Malaguzzi it means the possibility to discuss and to dialogue ‘everything with everyone’ (teachers, auxiliary staff, cooks, families, administrators, citizens)…being able to discuss real, concrete things – not just theories and words (Alfredo Hoyuelos, 2004)

Proposition 3

We cannot address ‘training’ of teachers, educators etc until we have engaged with critical questions and relational ethics, e.g. ‘what image of the child?’; ‘what relational ethics will the teacher work with?’

What image of the child? Increasing interest in the social construction or

image of the child, e.g. sociology of childhood Many social constructions/images of the child, e.g. as

knowledge reproducer...innocent...nature Each image is ‘productive’ of policy, provision and

practice Images are always present in policy and research –

but implicit, unacknowledged, undiscussed...pretend there is an essential or true child...the political becomes technical

Reggio Emilia asks the question and gives an explicit answer

One of the strong points [of our schools] has always been that of starting from a very open, explicit declaration of our image of the child, where image is understood as a strong and optimistic interpretation of the child. A child born with many resources and extraordinary potentials that have never ceased to amaze us, with an autonomous capacity for constructing thoughts, ideas, questions and attempts at answers (Loris Malaguzzi)

The image of the ‘rich child’

What image of the educator? Substitute mother...technician(applies a

programme) ...expert professional (knows the right answers)

Co-constructor of knowledge, researcher and experimenter, working with the image of a rich child...

more attentive to creating possibilities than pursuing predefined goals… [with] responsibility to choose, experiment, discuss, reflect and change, focusing on the organisation of opportunities rather than the anxiety of pursuing outcomes, and maintaining in her work the pleasure of amazement and wonder (Aldo Fortunati, 2006)

What education for this image of the educator?

Graduate 0-6 profession (what % of workforce? 50% 80%) ...parity with school teachers

Continuing education, including workplace and postgraduate studies

Education to cover:Diversity, complexity, uncertainty, experimentation... ‘pleasure of

amazement and wonder’ ...people and communities + paradigms and theories

Democracy and participation: a democratic practitionerCritical thinkingRelational ethics

Diverse profession...20%+ men

Proposition 4

The process of engaging with political and ethical questions should extend to the whole education system and provides a basis for a relationship between ECCE and school that rejects the discourse of ‘readying for school’

Relationship between ECCE and CSE No.1.ECEC ‘readying’/‘preparing’ for school

Dominant relationship today...and increasing Increases ‘schoolification’ - the downward

reach of traditional compulsory schooling Concerns about relationship I: inappropriate

content and methods...loss of identity and strengths of early childhood education...no change in the conservative school

SchoolificationEarly education is assimilated, both conceptually and administratively, to a traditional primary school model... Schoolified early childhood services are characterised by age segregation, with children grouped by year of birth; ...a predominantly knowledge transfer model with whole class exercises; large numbers of young children assigned to each group and insufficient attention given to the needs, talents and agency of the individual child; and often a neglect of children’s play, family outreach and the social dimensions of early education (John Bennett)

No.2. ‘Strong and equal partnership’ (OECD Starting Strong)

A strong partnership with the education system should provide the opportunity to bring together the diverse perspectives and methods of both ECE and CSE, focusing on their respective strengths, such as the emphasis on parental involvement and social development in ECE and the focus on educational goals and learning in CSE (John Bennett)

No.3. ‘The vision of a pedagogical meeting place’

ECCE and CSE come together to:understand different traditions, images, values,

practicesco-construct something new in response to critical

questions...new shared images, values, goals, practices

shared approach from 0 to 18...new, shared images, values, goals and practices (e.g. rich child, democracy, ethics of care) and ‘education in its broadest sense’... understood as a broad, holistic concept, concerned with all aspects of well-being and development.

Some concluding reflections on the concept paper and cases

‘Early Childhood: seeds for the future’ or ‘Early Childhood: one important ingredient for a flourishing life - here and now & in the future’

‘Quality ECCE’: drop ‘quality’ – instead talk/argue about what we value and desire

(I)NGOs: important role in developing a democratic politics of early childhood...critical thinking to dominant discourses...asking and discussing political questions...resisting the ‘dictatorship of no alternative’

‘Creation of original, flexible and locally relevant ECCE provision’. Meaning? Why these? More work on image of the EC centre?

ECCE for ‘improved school readiness’ – don’t take this relationship for granted...there are alternatives!

Democracy as a fundamental value and democratic practice can support and enrich participation of parents/ families/ communities.

Technical practice does matter, e.g. structures, resources, methods...but always comes after political and ethical practice.

Innovation/experimentation important, but as continuous movement, not occasional movement from one position to another... need to pay far more attention to sustaining experimentation over time.

Where to? Without asking this question, danger of more of the same, reproducing dysfunctional systems.

Dahlberg, G. & Moss, P.(2005) Ethics and Politics in Early Childhood Education. London: Routledge.

Dahlberg, G., Moss, P. and Pence, A. (2007, 2nd ed) Beyond Quality in Early Childhood Education and Care. London: Routledge.

Fielding, M. and Moss, P. (2010) Radical Education and the Common School: a Democratic Alternative. London: Routledge.

Fortunati, A. (2005) The Education of Young Children as a Community Project. Available from Children in Scotland, http://www.childreninscotland.org.uk/html/pub_tshow.php?ref=PUB0202

Kaga, Y., Bennett, J. and Moss, P. (2010) Caring and Learning Together. Paris: UNESCO

Moss, P. (2009) There are alternatives! Markets and democratic experimentalism in early childhood education and care. The Hague: Bernard van Leer Foundation. http://www.bernardvanleer.org/publications_results?SearchableText=B-WOP-053

Rinaldi, C. (2006) In Dialogue with Reggio Emilia: Listening, researching and learning. London: Routledge.

Vecchi, V. (2010) Art and Creativity in Reggio Emilia. London: Routledge