Developmentally Appropriate Practice: Continuing the Dialogue

Where is the (postmodern) child in early childhood education research?

“…Cannella and Viruru (2004, 3) argue that, 'we must start thinking about those who are younger as people who are a part of a much larger and complex whole, as linked to and influencing the larger and more complex world'. Reconsidering constructions of the child within early childhood education research fosters a space for education and education research to counter the longstanding domination of psychology on education (Walkerdine 1993;Hatch et al 2002) and broaden our understandings of children.…”

“…In reaction to modernist approaches, there is a demand for research where young people are considered subjects (e.g. Christensen and James 2000;Cannella 2002;Greene and Hill 2005;Hatch 2007), or social actors who enact agency (Christensen and Prout 2005), as well as a demand for the inclusion of the voices of young people in research about them (Cannella 2002;Soto and Swadener 2005;MacNaughton et al 2007). This shift creates a space in which young people are considered valuable experts in their cultures, as people who have knowledge and insight to offer, and therefore as integral partners in the research process (Alderson 2000;Cannella and Viruru 2004;Christensen and Prout 2005;Soto and Swadener 2005).…”

Multiple Ways of Knowing and Seeing: Reflections on the Renewed Vigour in Cearly Childhood Research

“…Traditionally, one of these has been the developmental psychology paradigm. The debate in early childhood, referred to as the DAP (Developmentally Appropriate Practice) debate (Charlesworth, 1998;Hatch et al, 2002;Lubeck, 1998), or as being DAP-centric (Fleer, 1995), has been controversial for many years now. Although this ongoing international discussion has assisted the early childhood sector by questioning the bedrock of the foundational discipline (developmental psychology) that has driven early childhood for many years as the main theoretical informant, the discussion is beginning to change in its nature.…”

“…Although this ongoing international discussion has assisted the early childhood sector by questioning the bedrock of the foundational discipline (developmental psychology) that has driven early childhood for many years as the main theoretical informant, the discussion is beginning to change in its nature. Some still argue that DAP provides a solid foundation from which early childhood practitioners and researchers can work, and they continue the discussion about the benefits of a developmental viewpoint (Hatch et al, 2002). Others argue the benefits of working outside this developmental discourse and recommend that researchers and practitioners 'pursue more personal, liberating, democratic , humanizing, participatory, action driven, political, feminist, critically multicultural, decolorizing perspectives' (Hatch et al, 2002, p. 450) in early childhood education.…”

Why i hated socio-cultural theory: confessions of a reformed cognitive-developmentalist

“…Soto writes in Hatch et al (2002) that the century-long dominance of developmental theory, as an informant to early childhood education, has resulted in it becoming a 'taken-for-granted' knowledge base for the field (p. 50). Likewise, Bloch (1992) explains the historical relationship between developmental theory, its positivistic scientific roots and early childhood education (Bloch, 1992, pp.…”