Counteracting Bias and Advancing Justice in Early Childhood

IF 2 4区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SPECIAL Topics in Early Childhood Special Education Pub Date : 2021-05-01 DOI:10.1177/02711214211007068
Margaret R. Beneke, S. Blanchard, M. Vinh, E. Barton
{"title":"Counteracting Bias and Advancing Justice in Early Childhood","authors":"Margaret R. Beneke, S. Blanchard, M. Vinh, E. Barton","doi":"10.1177/02711214211007068","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"All young children have the right to early learning opportunities in which they are positioned to learn, grow, and participate as valued members of their families, programs, and communities. However, substantial societal inequities directly impact access to equitable education for all children. Young children navigate social worlds in which racism, ableism, and many other intersecting oppressions operate to create inequitable systems. Although hateful rhetoric and outward displays of racism and ableism have increased in recent years (Crandall et al., 2018; Paluck & Chwe, 2017; Southern Poverty Law Center, 2016), they also work in neutralized and invisible ways (Annamma et al., 2013). Racism and ableism perpetuate implicitly biased interactions that pathologize young children based on race or ability or both. Whether explicit or implicit, bias can have real material, social-emotional, and psychological consequences in early childhood contexts—directly affecting the ways in which young children learn, grow, and become valued members of their communities. We created this topical issue as an intentional outlet for scholars to grapple with the ways early childhood special education might counteract bias and advance justice. The contributing articles of this topical issue provide critical insights into this important topic. In the introductory article, titled “Confronting Racism and Bias Within Early Intervention: The Responsibility of Systems and Individuals to Influence Change and Advance Equity,” Blanchard, Newton, Didericksen, Daniels, and Glosson critically examine the relationship between bioecological systems and each individual in mitigating systemic racism and bias. The authors acknowledge that racism and bias (such as ableist expectations) permeate early intervention (EI) and early childhood special education (ECSE) systems and outline a framework to counter their negative effects. Through discussing the equity-evolution framework, the article identifies ways to recognize where systems might currently be and areas to strive for more in becoming equity-empowered. When systems are equity-empowered, the authors argue that services are centered around those who have had disparate outcomes and focus on rooting out causes for differential outcomes. This article’s focus on system design and individual responsibility is important in pursuing equity through EI/ECSE research, professional language, and early childhood personnel preparation. In the second article, titled “Who is Centered? A Systematic Review of Early Childhood Researchers’ Descriptions of Children and Caregivers from Linguistically Minoritized Communities,” Soto-Boykin, Larson, Olszewski, Velury, and Feldberg delve into language ideologies undergirding descriptions of linguistically minoritized children and caregivers within ECSE research, and ways the ECSE field might counteract linguistic racism. The authors analyzed bilingualism-focused articles in three peer-reviewed journals in early childhood special education. Through their review of literature spanning over three decades, the authors found that deficit-based language was most often used to describe linguistically minoritized groups. The article offers critical recommendations for anti-racist ECSE research and practice that accounts for language ideologies, calling the field to position bilingualism as a strength. In the third article, “Pursuing Justice-Driven Inclusive Education Research: Disability Critical Race Theory (DisCrit) in Early Childhood,” Love and Beneke bring an intersectional lens to examining and counteracting bias in and through early childhood education research. The authors contend that racism and ableism intersect to define normalcy in early childhood, explicating the ways these ideologies dynamically circulate between macro-level institutions and micro-level interactions. Drawing on the theoretical tools of Disability Critical Race Theory (DisCrit; Annamma et al., 2013) the authors highlight how researchers might pursue justice-driven inclusive education research with and for young children and their families. Through a discussion of DisCrit’s seven tenets, the article illuminates how early childhood researchers can interrogate the ways interlocking systems of oppression manifest in everyday early childhood processes. Ultimately, Love and Beneke argue that such an examination affords possibilities for reflexively transforming unjust exclusionary early childhood systems. In the fourth article, “Counteracting Dysconscious Racism and Ableism Through Fieldwork: Applying DisCrit Classroom Ecology in Early Childhood Personnel Preparation,” Hancock, Morgan, and Holly apply DisCrit to teacher education contexts. The authors explicitly reframe bias as a matter of dysconsciousness (i.e., the uncritical acceptance of existing practices and structures). 1007068 TECXXX10.1177/02711214211007068Topics in Early Childhood Special EducationEditorial editorial2021","PeriodicalId":47496,"journal":{"name":"Topics in Early Childhood Special Education","volume":"41 1","pages":"4 - 5"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/02711214211007068","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Topics in Early Childhood Special Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02711214211007068","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

All young children have the right to early learning opportunities in which they are positioned to learn, grow, and participate as valued members of their families, programs, and communities. However, substantial societal inequities directly impact access to equitable education for all children. Young children navigate social worlds in which racism, ableism, and many other intersecting oppressions operate to create inequitable systems. Although hateful rhetoric and outward displays of racism and ableism have increased in recent years (Crandall et al., 2018; Paluck & Chwe, 2017; Southern Poverty Law Center, 2016), they also work in neutralized and invisible ways (Annamma et al., 2013). Racism and ableism perpetuate implicitly biased interactions that pathologize young children based on race or ability or both. Whether explicit or implicit, bias can have real material, social-emotional, and psychological consequences in early childhood contexts—directly affecting the ways in which young children learn, grow, and become valued members of their communities. We created this topical issue as an intentional outlet for scholars to grapple with the ways early childhood special education might counteract bias and advance justice. The contributing articles of this topical issue provide critical insights into this important topic. In the introductory article, titled “Confronting Racism and Bias Within Early Intervention: The Responsibility of Systems and Individuals to Influence Change and Advance Equity,” Blanchard, Newton, Didericksen, Daniels, and Glosson critically examine the relationship between bioecological systems and each individual in mitigating systemic racism and bias. The authors acknowledge that racism and bias (such as ableist expectations) permeate early intervention (EI) and early childhood special education (ECSE) systems and outline a framework to counter their negative effects. Through discussing the equity-evolution framework, the article identifies ways to recognize where systems might currently be and areas to strive for more in becoming equity-empowered. When systems are equity-empowered, the authors argue that services are centered around those who have had disparate outcomes and focus on rooting out causes for differential outcomes. This article’s focus on system design and individual responsibility is important in pursuing equity through EI/ECSE research, professional language, and early childhood personnel preparation. In the second article, titled “Who is Centered? A Systematic Review of Early Childhood Researchers’ Descriptions of Children and Caregivers from Linguistically Minoritized Communities,” Soto-Boykin, Larson, Olszewski, Velury, and Feldberg delve into language ideologies undergirding descriptions of linguistically minoritized children and caregivers within ECSE research, and ways the ECSE field might counteract linguistic racism. The authors analyzed bilingualism-focused articles in three peer-reviewed journals in early childhood special education. Through their review of literature spanning over three decades, the authors found that deficit-based language was most often used to describe linguistically minoritized groups. The article offers critical recommendations for anti-racist ECSE research and practice that accounts for language ideologies, calling the field to position bilingualism as a strength. In the third article, “Pursuing Justice-Driven Inclusive Education Research: Disability Critical Race Theory (DisCrit) in Early Childhood,” Love and Beneke bring an intersectional lens to examining and counteracting bias in and through early childhood education research. The authors contend that racism and ableism intersect to define normalcy in early childhood, explicating the ways these ideologies dynamically circulate between macro-level institutions and micro-level interactions. Drawing on the theoretical tools of Disability Critical Race Theory (DisCrit; Annamma et al., 2013) the authors highlight how researchers might pursue justice-driven inclusive education research with and for young children and their families. Through a discussion of DisCrit’s seven tenets, the article illuminates how early childhood researchers can interrogate the ways interlocking systems of oppression manifest in everyday early childhood processes. Ultimately, Love and Beneke argue that such an examination affords possibilities for reflexively transforming unjust exclusionary early childhood systems. In the fourth article, “Counteracting Dysconscious Racism and Ableism Through Fieldwork: Applying DisCrit Classroom Ecology in Early Childhood Personnel Preparation,” Hancock, Morgan, and Holly apply DisCrit to teacher education contexts. The authors explicitly reframe bias as a matter of dysconsciousness (i.e., the uncritical acceptance of existing practices and structures). 1007068 TECXXX10.1177/02711214211007068Topics in Early Childhood Special EducationEditorial editorial2021
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
消除偏见促进儿童早期司法
所有幼儿都有权获得早期学习机会,在这些机会中,他们能够作为家庭、项目和社区的重要成员进行学习、成长和参与。然而,严重的社会不平等直接影响到所有儿童获得公平教育的机会。年幼的儿童在种族主义、能力主义和许多其他交叉压迫的社会世界中穿行,创造了不公平的制度。尽管近年来仇恨言论以及种族主义和能力主义的外在表现有所增加(Crandall等人,2018;Paluck&Chwe,2017;南方贫困法律中心,2016),但它们也以中立和无形的方式发挥作用(Annamma等人,2013)。种族主义和能力主义使基于种族或能力或两者兼有的带有隐性偏见的互动永久化。无论是显性的还是隐性的,偏见在幼儿时期都会产生真正的物质、社会、情感和心理后果,直接影响幼儿学习、成长和成为社区重要成员的方式。我们创建了这个话题,作为学者们努力解决幼儿特殊教育如何抵消偏见和促进正义的一个有意的出口。本期专题的贡献文章提供了对这一重要主题的批判性见解。在题为“在早期干预中对抗种族主义和偏见:系统和个人影响变革和促进公平的责任”的介绍性文章中,Blanchard、Newton、Didericksen、Daniels和Glosson批判性地研究了生物生态系统和每个人在减轻系统性种族主义和偏差方面的关系。作者承认,种族主义和偏见(如能力主义期望)渗透到早期干预(EI)和幼儿特殊教育(ECSE)系统中,并概述了应对其负面影响的框架。通过讨论公平演变框架,文章确定了如何认识到系统目前可能在哪里,以及在实现公平赋权方面需要努力的领域。当系统被赋予公平权力时,作者认为,服务是以那些有不同结果的人为中心的,并专注于根除导致不同结果的原因。本文对系统设计和个人责任的关注对于通过EI/ECE研究、专业语言和幼儿人事准备来追求公平具有重要意义。在第二篇题为《谁是中心?幼儿研究人员对语言少数群体儿童和照顾者的描述的系统回顾》的文章中,Soto Boykin、Larson、Olszewski、Velury和Feldberg深入探讨了语言意识形态,这些意识形态是ECSE研究中对语言少数民族儿童和照顾人的描述的基础,以及ECSE领域如何对抗语言种族主义。作者分析了三份同行评审期刊上关于幼儿特殊教育的双语文章。通过对三十多年来的文献综述,作者发现,基于缺陷的语言最常被用来描述语言上的少数群体。这篇文章为反种族主义ECSE的研究和实践提供了批判性的建议,解释了语言意识形态,呼吁该领域将双语定位为一种优势。在第三篇文章《追求正义驱动的包容性教育研究:幼儿期的残疾批判种族理论》中,Love和Beneke将交叉视角带到了幼儿教育研究中以及通过幼儿教育研究来审视和消除偏见。作者认为,种族主义和能力主义交叉定义了幼儿时期的常态,解释了这些意识形态在宏观层面的机构和微观层面的互动之间动态传播的方式。根据残疾批判种族理论(DisCrit;Annamma等人,2013)的理论工具,作者强调了研究人员如何与幼儿及其家庭一起并为其家庭进行正义驱动的包容性教育研究。通过讨论DisCrit的七条原则,文章阐明了幼儿研究人员如何质疑相互关联的压迫系统在日常幼儿过程中的表现方式。最终,洛夫和贝内克认为,这样的检查为反射性地改变不公正的排斥性幼儿系统提供了可能性。在第四篇文章《通过实地工作对抗有意识的种族主义和排外主义:在幼儿人事准备中应用DisCrit课堂生态学》中,Hancock、Morgan和Holly将DisCrit应用于教师教育背景。作者明确地将偏见重新定义为意识障碍(即对现有实践和结构的不加批判的接受)。1007068 TECXX10.1177/02711214211007068幼儿特殊教育主题编辑编辑2021
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
4.80%
发文量
18
期刊介绍: Topics in Early Childhood Special Education (TECSE) communicates information about early intervention, which is defined broadly and includes services provided to (a) infants, toddlers, and preschoolers who are at risk for or display developmental delays and disabilities and (b) the families of such youngsters. TECSE includes articles on personnel preparation, policy issues, and operation of intervention programs. The intent is to publish information that will improve the lives of young children and their families. Manuscripts from (a) diverse theoretical perspectives, (b) all disciplines related to early intervention, and (c) all authors with information of value to the early intervention community are welcome. There are two topical issues—which address an identified problem, trend, or subject of concern and importance to early intervention—and two non-topical issues.
期刊最新文献
Fostering Dialogic Reading Through Older Siblings in Immigrant Latino Families: A Pilot Study Absolute Thinking Gets Us Absolutely Nowhere: Resisting False Dilemmas in Early Academics Emotion Talk in Early Childhood: A Systematic Literature Review Future Topics A Survey and Content Analysis of the Quality of Behavior Guidance Policies in Tennessee Early Childhood Programs
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1