“Who’s got the power?”: A critical examination of the anti-bias curriculum

Abstract

Young children are commonly perceived as being devoid of racist inclinations or behaviors, such that they are often characterized as "racially innocent. " Yet, a long-standing record of scholarly investigations consistently indicates otherwise. Indeed, one of the earliest studies targeting children and race revealed that the onset of racial self-identification-that is, identifying with a particular aspect of one's racial ancestry, such as skin color (Aboud 1988)-develops between the ages of three and four (see, for example, Clark and Clark 1939). Since then, the pedagogical literature has begun to widely acknowledge that young children recognize racial criteria and identify with their respective racial group using collective labels and or physical characteristics (e.g., Aboud and Doyle 1995;Holmes 1995;Park 2011). Closely aligned with racial awareness and selfidentification, and constituting a significant component of the children and race literature, are the racialized meanings children assign to in-and out-group members (and the processes that inform such perceptions).Social scientists continue to examine how and when children develop racial attitudes, and how the content of such attitudes varies per majority and racialized group status. Correspondingly, many scholars have employed various methodologies to assess children's racial attitudes, including dolls (e.g., Clark and Clark 1947); AbstractAmple research data indicate that young children recognize racial characteristics and subsequently exhibit both positive and negative racial attitudes toward their own and other racial groups. In the early childhood field, educators commonly adopt an antibias/multicultural curriculum to address such issues with young children and-with rare exceptions-such methods are subject to ongoing endorsement in the scholarly literature. This article, however, offers a more comprehensive critique of the anti-bias curriculum, including an analysis of the conceptual frameworks underpinning several of the associated teaching strategies. In addition, the present article illustrates how the anti-bias curriculum, though presented as congruent with the empirical evidence with respect to the education of young children and race, departs considerably from these data. Furthermore, the curricula under scrutiny fail to engage young children in critical discussions and classroom practices centering on: (i) power relations; (ii) racism; (iii) whiteness; and (iv) white privilege. This critique concludes with a preliminary conceptualization of anti-racism in early childhood education. which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Anti‐racism in U.S. early childhood education: Foundational principles

“…Anti‐racist education supports the holistic well‐being (academic and social–emotional) of students of color and Black children in particular. In the early childhood field, fostering children's identity development as well as cultivating awareness of social justice have been lauded as exemplary teaching practices, but these have largely been conceptualized from a developmental point of view; furthermore, instead of centering race with a view towards intersectionality, race is lumped with other social identities, thereby continuing a dangerous trend of masking the saliency of race in the U.S. context (Escayg, ).…”

“…Conversations around equity, diversity, and inclusion in early childhood education typically fall under the domain of the anti‐bias curriculum (Escayg, Berman, & Royer, ). The anti‐bias curriculum shares some conceptual similarities with anti‐racist education and anti‐racist early childhood education, though a key distinction is that anti‐racist education accents race as an entry point for addressing other social identities (Escayg, ), and advocates for discussions about racism and White privilege with young children (Escayg, ). Specifically, however, similar to anti‐racist early childhood education, anti‐bias education supports healthy racial, gender, and economic identity, while also promoting a positive relationship with families (Derman‐Sparks & Edwards, ).…”

“…As well, anti‐racist early childhood education elucidates and challenges how White power and privilege manifest in early years pedagogy, knowledge systems, and institutional policies and practices (Escayg, ). Further, an anti‐racist perspective on developmentally appropriate practice, serves to highlight how specific interpretations of young children's racial competencies, as well as early learning curricula and teaching practices, contain discourses that align with dominant narratives of race.…”

“…One reason for this is the ability of anti‐bias education to address various social identities (such as class, race, gender, and ability) while ensuring the “inclusion and empowerment of all children, and activism in the face of discrimination and oppression” (Farago, Murray, & Swadener, , p. 2). Despite its prevalence and strengths, scholars have noted several limitations of anti‐bias curricula (see Escayg, ; Escayg, ; Pacini‐Ketchabaw, ). Although they have identified specific areas in which anti‐bias curricula fall short, these curricula continue to inform much of the pedagogical practices in the U.S. early childhood classroom.…”

Practical Resources for Talking to Children with Autism about Systemic Racism

“…Bias can be defined as an inclination "for or against one person or group, especially in a way considered to be unfair" (Matsuda, Garcia, Catagnus, & Brandt, 2020). Children as early as age 3 are able to identify with a cultural group, construct theories about how other groups operate, and pick their social group based on factors such as race (Park, 2011;Escayg, 2019). This points to a need for imbedding race discussions in curricula or activities designed for children.…”