ABSTRACT
The purpose of this chapter is to provide an examination of critical theory as enacted in early childhood classroom. We discuss how postmodern teachers might think about their work with young children and families. Using a critical lens, we deconstruct issues of developmentally appropriate practice (DAP) that influence curriculum and pedagogy. We believe that a postdevelopmental perspective opens possibilities for educators to envision a classroom that is inclusive of the multidimensionality of children. Critical theory is an all-encompassing term for theoretical lenses such as post-
modern, poststructural, feminist, and queer, that may be used by teachers to examine how knowledge is socially constructed. As suggested by Grieshaber (2008), to engage critically is to “challenge the assumed consensus that comes with the dominant group, to make way for the contradictions and inconsistencies that accompany all forms of diversity, and to undermine notions of homogeneity” (p. 515). As authors of this paper we position ourselves as feminist poststructuralists who examine ways in which social structures, gender, and sexuality are influenced by discourses of power and knowledge (Blaise, 2005; Robinson, 2002; Ryan & Grieshaber, 2005; Yelland, 2005). We have selected the following stories because of our own lived experiences and the shared goal of social justice and equity for all children. In this paper, the tools of deconstruction are inspired primarily by Foucault’s
concepts of power and knowledge, which allow us to examine how children learn, who controls the knowledge children learn, and what knowledge counts as important (Foucault, 1982; MacNaughton, 2005). Using a critical perspective, all knowledge is tentative and contextualized; therefore there are multiple meanings
for many words and concepts in the field of early childhood education. An example of using deconstruction is to wonder about one universally accepted definition of curriculum. Instead we ask, how many meanings might there be for the word “curriculum”? MacNaughton (2005), looking toward others, found quite a variety of contradicting metaphors and concepts, such as: (1) everything that happens in an educational setting; (2) a carnival; (3) an historical accident; and (4) a gift. These images offer differing ideas and possible enactments of a curriculum for teachers and young children. To offer a critical look at curriculum and imagine possibilities, we use a definition
from Bredekamp:
Curriculum is a written plan that describes the goals for children’s learning and development, and the learning experiences, materials and teaching strategies that are used to help children achieve those goals. The goals include the knowledge, skills, and dispositions that we want children to achieve.
