Introduction to the Special Issue: Antibias Curriculum and Critical Praxis to Advance Social Justice in Inclusive Early Childhood Education

Abstract

As young children traverse complex worlds in which some individuals are seen through a deficit lens based on identity markers (i.e., ability, race, language, gender), they are exposed to oppressive ideas about themselves and others (Derman-Sparks & Edwards, 2011), which they learn to negotiate in their day-to-day lives (Park, 2011). Contrary to common belief, young children are aware of social differences such as skin color (Aboud et al., 2012) and ability (Diamond & Tu, 2009), but without language to interpret and make sense of the diversity they see, they may internalize negative messages or learned hierarchies (Jones, 2004). Without guidance to explore the meanings embedded in socially constructed similarities and differences, children are likely to rely on their own observations and related assumptions. A number of scholars have written about the importance of educators purposefully engaging young children in examining issues of social justice through antibias curriculum and critical praxis in early childhood (e.g., Farago, Murray, & Swadener, 2017; Hyland, 2010; Schoorman, 2011; Souto-Manning, 2009).

“Social justice approaches to curriculum, such as antibias education and critical praxis, are crucial for all young children.”

Despite the existing body of work on social justice approaches in early childhood, there is very little guidance in the literature to support early childhood and early childhood special education (EC/ECSE) teachers in bringing social justice topics into classrooms, particularly those that include children labeled with and without disabilities. The purpose of this Special Issue is to highlight innovative practices and frameworks that create contexts for young children with or at risk of disability labels to not only access but also to meaningfully engage in social justice curriculum. Our Special Issue’s focus on social justice approaches in EC/ECSE settings both aligns with and extends the Division for Early Childhood’s (2018) professional priorities of achieving inclusion and addressing bias in early childhood.

The Imperative of Social Justice Approaches to Curriculum in EC/ECSE

Social justice approaches to curriculum, such as antibias education and critical praxis, are crucial for all young children. Antibias education (Derman-Sparks & Edwards, 2011) is a social justice approach to curriculum, in which educators support young children developing comfort with differences and awareness of unfairness and bias while explicitly teaching children about the complexity and nuances of human diversity (Kuh, LeeKeenan, Given, & Beneke, 2016). Such an approach requires creating curricular spaces in which children can wrestle with diversity as they conceptualize what it means to be a citizen and take social action (Banks & Banks, 2010). Moreover, critical praxis is a process to continuously engage in social justice issues through curriculum. As Freire (2018) explained, “Praxis [is] reflection and action on the world in order to transform it” (p. 51). Through critical praxis, early educators recognize that no practice can simply be universally applied to all children. Instead, early educators need to engage in an ongoing, iterative process of reflection and action on antibias learning, seeking to transform educational spaces for social justice. Moreover, critical praxis can be useful for EC/ECSE educators in uncovering barriers to all children having opportunities for antibias learning in the name of readiness or prioritizing “basic skills”—which may serve as a gatekeeper to such learning (Ladson-Billings, 2014).

“While critical to address, positive representation alone will not fully account for the kinds of messages young children with and without disabilities are navigating about themselves and others in educational environments.”

In our current sociopolitical climate, there is a critical need for both antibias education and critical praxis in EC/ECSE settings. Hateful rhetoric, outward expressions of prejudice, and incidents of public harassment based on a number of identity markers (e.g., ability, race, language, gender, immigration status, religion) have increased during and following the 2016 U.S. presidential election (Crandall, Miller, & White, 2018; Paluck & Chwe, 2017; Southern Poverty Law Center, 2016a, 2016b). Explicit instances of prejudicial bullying and teasing have also increased in educational settings, exacerbating experiences of marginalization for young children and families (Costello, 2016; Derman-Sparks, LeeKeenan, & Nimmo, 2016; Nygreen, Lazdowski, & Bialostok, 2017). To counter the deficit-based messages currently being perpetuated about children’s identities, we argue that all young children have a right to positive and accurate representation of themselves and their communities in educational curriculum.

While critical to address, positive representation alone will not fully account for the kinds of messages young children with and without disabilities are navigating about themselves and others in educational environments. For example, the majority of preschoolers with disabilities currently receive their special education services in segregated environments (U.S. Department of Education & U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2015). Moreover, preschool children of color continue to be disproportionately suspended and expelled as compared with their White peers (U.S. Department of Education & U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2014). And while national data reveal that one third of all young children are dual language learners (Child Trends, 2014), in early childhood settings English is predominately the language of instruction without attention to developing or sustaining children’s home language (Baker, 2019; Cheatham & Hart Barnett, 2017). As young children witness and experience these multiple forms of educational exclusion (among others), they are interpreting information about whose identities are socially valued, asking critical questions, and trying out forms of exclusion in their play (LeeKeenan & Allen, 2017). Therefore, in addition to positive and accurate curricular representation and inclusive instructional practices and policies, all young children also deserve support in navigating messages about identity, power, and fairness.

“…All young children deserve support in navigating messages about identity, power, and fairness.”

Enacting Social Justice: Gaps in the Knowledge Base for EC/ECSE Educators

Our EC/ECSE educators—the majority of whom are White, able-bodied, and English speaking—are navigating conversations with young children about identity, power, and fairness, despite having been socialized themselves to evade these topics in school spaces (Amos, 2016; Kale & Luke, 2017; Lalvani, Broderick, Fine, Jacobowitz, & Michelli, 2015). There is increasing awareness and concern with regard to the widening gap between EC/ECSE classrooms which are becoming more racially, culturally, and linguistically diverse than ever before (BUILD Initiative, 2008) and the mostly White, monolingual English-speaking workforce of teachers (Souto-Manning & Cheruvu, 2016). Teacher education programs have responded to this increasing demographic gap by offering stand-alone courses in multicultural education, culturally responsive teaching, and dual language learning (Keengwe, 2010; Souto-Manning & Mitchell, 2010). Despite these efforts to prepare EC/ECSE teachers for co-constructing more equitable classroom communities, teacher candidates may not be prepared to help young children navigate and interpret perceived differences. Simultaneously, while teachers of color may feel morally obligated to engage issues of social justice in their classrooms, they may also face challenges in enacting such curriculum for a variety of reasons, including their own racialization, internalized racism, and/or lack of support (Philip, Rocha, & Olivares-Pasillas, 2017).

An additional challenge for early educators from special education backgrounds is that the training and professionalization often emphasizes evidence-based practices to develop children’s specific skills (i.e., Artman-Meekr, Fettig, & Barton, 2015; Coogle, Ottley, Storie, Rahn, & Kurowski-Burt, 2018; Winton, Snyder, & Goffin, 2015), without sufficient opportunities to interrogate the cultural meanings and contexts embedded in particular interventions (Bal & Trainor, 2016; Kozleski, 2017). Such a focus may impede EC/ECSE teachers’ recognition of the relationship between identity, power, and cultural norms in EC/ECSE practice (M. R. Beneke & Cheatham, 2016). Unfortunately, many early educators feel ill-prepared to engage young children with disabilities in meaningful curricular content (S. Beneke & Ostrosky, 2015) and may feel even less prepared to engage young children with and without disabilities in social justice approaches to curriculum (Kuh et al., 2016).

Children are actively making sense of messages about themselves and others, and EC/ECSE teachers need support in guiding children in this work. Although social justice approaches have been widely discussed, these resources are often interpreted as only applying to children in general education settings (Waitoller & King Thorius, 2016). Yet EC/ECSE settings include children with and without disabilities, children of color, and children from culturally, linguistically, and economically diverse backgrounds. EC/ECSE practitioners need resources for engaging young children with a wide range of abilities and intersecting identities (e.g., race, language, gender, culture, class) in social justice curriculum because all children deserve opportunities to be supported in examining identity, power, and fairness.

“We dedicate this issue to the thousands of young children and families whose daily lives are affected by curricular misrepresentation, deficit-based thinking, and exclusion in early childhood contexts.”

Organization of the Special Issue

The contributing articles of this Special Issue provide readers with a better understanding of practices and frameworks that create contexts for young children with or at risk of disability labels to meaningfully engage in social justice curriculum. In the introductory article, Souto-Manning, Rabadi-Raol, Robinson, and Perez extend this introduction by discussing the preparation of early childhood teachers committed to engaging in equity and inclusion. The article guides readers through several practical examples for supporting preservice teachers to critically analyze and transform classroom materials and environments for teaching equitably and inclusively. In the second article, Beneke, Park, and Taitingfong introduce an inclusive framework for antibias teaching and learning about race with young children in EC/ECSE settings. Drawing on examples from research and practice, the authors illustrate a process for ensuring all children have opportunities to access and meaningfully engage with curriculum about race and racism. In the third article, Lalvani and Bacon present and explain anti-ableism curricula for young children. By applying a Disability Studies in Education perspective to the four goals of antibias education, this article provides concrete examples of ways early educators can purposefully infuse anti-ableist lessons into EC/ECSE curriculum. Finally, Madison describes the necessity of addressing structural inequities faced by the EC/ECSE teaching workforce so that they can engage in antibias education. This article provides readers with reflection questions and strategies to consider as they strive to build equitable early childhood settings in which all children, families, and educators can thrive.

The Special Issue has been a labor of love. We dedicate this issue to the thousands of young children and families whose daily lives are affected by curricular misrepresentation, deficit-based thinking, and exclusion in early childhood contexts. The opportunity to work with Special Issue authors has allowed for rich conversation across multiple disciplines regarding inclusive education and social justice teaching in early childhood. For us, this Special Issue is only the beginning of an ongoing conversation about seeking educational justice in early childhood, helping us to build a collective understanding about how to support all young children’s learning about diversity, identity, and fairness. We hope this Special Issue illuminates the importance of social justice approaches for all children and provides readers with insights into practically engaging these approaches in EC/ECSE settings.

Footnotes

Authors’ Note

You may reach Margaret R. Beneke by e-mail at beneke@uw.edu

References

Aboud

F. E.

Tredoux

Tropp

L. R.

Brown

C. S.

Niens

Noor

N. M.

(2012). Interventions to reduce prejudice and enhance inclusion and respect for ethnic differences in early childhood: A systematic review. Developmental Review, 32, 307-336.

Amos

Y. T.

(2016). Voices of teacher candidates of color on White race evasion: “I worried about my safety!” International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 29, 1002-1015.

Artman-Meeker

Fettig

Barton

E. E.

Penney

Zeng

(2015). Applying an evidence-based framework to the early childhood coaching literature. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 35, 183-196.

Baker

(2019). Playing, talking, co-constructing: Exemplary teaching for young dual language learners across program types. Early Childhood Education Journal, 47, 115-130.

Bal

Trainor

A. A.

(2016). Culturally responsive experimental intervention studies: The development of a rubric for paradigm expansion. Review of Educational Research, 86, 319-359.

Banks

. (2010). Multicultural education: Issues and perspectives (7th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Beneke

M. R.

Cheatham

G. A.

(2016). Inclusive, democratic family–professional partnerships: (Re)conceptualizing culture and language in teacher preparation. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 35, 234-244.

Beneke

Ostrosky

M. M.

(2015). Effects of the project approach on preschoolers with diverse abilities. Infants & Young Children, 28, 355-369.

BUILD Initiative. (2008). Building early childhood systems in a multi-ethnic society: An overview of BUILD’s briefs on diversity and equity. Retrieved from http://www.buildinitiative.org/WhatsNew/ViewArticle/tabid/96/ArticleId/171/Building-Early-Childhood-Systems-in-a-Multi-Ethnic-Society-An-Overview-of-BUILDs-Briefs-on-Diversity.aspx

10.

Cheatham

G. A.

Hart Barnett

J. E.

(2017). Overcoming common misunderstandings about students with disabilities who are English language learners. Intervention in School and Clinic, 53, 58-63.

11.

Child Trends. (2014). Dual language learners: Indicators on children and youth. Washington, DC: Child Trends Databank. Retrieved from http://www.childtrends.org/indicators/dual-language-learners/

12.

Coogle

C. G.

Ottley

J. R.

Storie

Rahn

N. L.

Kurowski-Burt

(2018). Performance-based feedback to enhance preservice teachers’ practice and preschool children’s expressive communication. Journal of Teacher Education. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/0022487118803583

13.

Costello

(2016). The Trump effect: The impact of the 2016 presidential election on our nation’s schools. Teaching Tolerance. Retrieved from http://www.tolerance.org/sites/default/files/2017-06/After%20the%20Election%20Trump%20Effect%20Report.pdf

14.

Crandall

C. S.

Miller

J. M.

White

M. H.

(2018). Changing norms following the 2016 U.S. presidential election: The Trump effect on prejudice. Social Psychological & Personality Science, 9, 186-192.

15.

Derman-Sparks

Edwards

J. O.

(2011). Anti-bias education for young children and ourselves. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.

16.

Derman-Sparks

LeeKeenan

Nimmo

(2016). Post-election: What do we say to the children? Berkeley Review of Education. Retrieved from http://www.berkeleyreviewofeducation.com/cfc2016-blog/post-election-what-do-we-say-to-the-children

17.

Diamond

(2009). Relations between classroom context, physical disability and preschool children’s inclusion decisions. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 30, 75-81.

18.

Division for Early Childhood. (2018). DEC priority issues agenda. Retrieved from https://www.dec-sped.org/priorityissues

19.

Farago

Murray

Swadener

B. B.

(2017). Confronting and countering bias and oppression through early childhood policy and practice: An introduction. International Critical Childhood Policy Studies, 6(1), 1-6.

20.

Freire

(2018). Pedagogy of the oppressed (50th anniversary ed.). New York, NY: Bloomsbury.

21.

Hyland

(2010). Social justice in early childhood classrooms. Young Children, 65(1), 82-90.

22.

Jones

(2004). A research-based approach on teaching to diversity. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 31(1), 12-19.

23.

Kale

Luke

(2017). Learning through difference: Cultural practices in early childhood language socialisation. In Gregory

(Ed.) One child, many worlds (pp. 11-29). New York, NY: Routledge.

24.

Keengwe

(2010). Fostering cross cultural competence in preservice teachers through multicultural education experiences. Early Childhood Education Journal, 38, 197-204.

25.

Kozleski

E. B.

(2017). The uses of qualitative research: Powerful methods to inform evidence-based practice in education. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 42, 19-32.

26.

Kuh

L. P.

LeeKeenan

Given

Beneke

M. R.

(2016). Moving beyond anti-bias activities: Supporting the development of anti-bias practices. Young Children, 71(1), 58-65.

27.

Ladson-Billings

. (2014). Culturally relevant pedagogy 2.0: aka the remix. Harvard Educational Review, 84, 74-84.

28.

Lalvani

Broderick

A. A.

Fine

Jacobowitz

Michelli

(2015). Teacher education, in exclusion, and the implicit ideology of separate but equal: An invitation to a dialogue. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 10, 168-183.

29.

LeeKeenan

Allen

(2017, July/August). It can be done! Strategies for embedding anti-bias education into daily programming. Child Care Exchange. Retrieved from http://www.antibiasleadersece.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/ABE-LeeKeenan-Allen.pdf

30.

Nygreen

Lazdowski

K. A.

Bialostok

(2017). Educational anthropologists respond to the 2016 U.S. presidential election: Rupture, continuity, and resistance. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 48, 339-348.

31.

Paluck

E. L.

Chwe

M. S. Y.

(2017). Confronting hate collectively. PS: Political Science & Politics, 50, 990-992.

32.

Park

C. C.

(2011). Young children making sense of racial and ethnic differences: A sociocultural approach. American Educational Research Journal, 48, 387-420.

33.

Philip

T. M.

Rocha

Olivares-Pasillas

M. C.

(2017). Supporting teachers of color as they negotiate classroom pedagogies of race: A study of a teacher’s struggle with “friendly-fire” racism. Teacher Education Quarterly, 44(1), 59-79.

34.

Schoorman

(2011). Reconceptualizing teacher education as a social justice undertaking: Underscoring the urgency for critical multiculturalism in early childhood education. Childhood Education, 87, 341-344.

35.

Southern Poverty Law Center. (2016a, December 16). 1,094 bias-related incidents in the month following the election. Retrieved from https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2016/12/16/update-1094-bias-related-incidents-month-following-election

36.

Southern Poverty Law Center. (2016b, November 15). Update: More than 400 incidents of hateful harassment and intimidation since the election. Retrieved from https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2016/11/15/update-more-400-incidents-hateful-harassment-and-intimidation-election

37.

Souto-Manning

(2009). Negotiating culturally responsive pedagogy through multicultural children’s literature: Towards critical democratic literacy practices in a first grade classroom. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 9, 50-74.

38.

Souto-Manning

Mitchell

C. H.

(2010). The role of action research in fostering culturally-responsive practices in a preschool classroom. Early Childhood Education Journal, 37, 269-277.

39.

Souto-Manning

Cheruvu

. (2016). Challenging and appropriating discourses of power: Listening to and learning from early career early childhood teachers of color. Equity & Excellence in Education, 49, 9-26.

40.

U.S. Department of Education & U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2014). Policy statement on expulsion and suspension policies in early childhood settings. Retrieved from http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ecd/child-health-development/reducing-suspension-and-expulsion-practices

41.

U.S. Department of Education & U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2015). Policy statement on inclusion of children with disabilities in early childhood programs. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/earlylearning/joint-statement-full-text.pdf

42.

Waitoller

F. R.

King Thorius

K. A.

(2016). Cross-pollinating culturally sustaining pedagogy and universal design for learning: Toward an inclusive pedagogy that accounts for dis/ability. Harvard Educational Review, 86, 366-389.

43.

Winton

P. J.

Snyder

P. A.

Goffin

S. G.

(2015). Beyond the status quo: Rethinking professional development for early childhood teachers. In Couse

L. J.

Recchia

S. L.

(Eds.), Handbook of early childhood teacher education (pp. 72-86). New York, NY: Routledge.