Deconstructing Developmentally Appropriate Practices and the Notion of Universal Preschool

• In Event: Roundtable Session 54
  In Roundtable Session: Educational Globalization’s Impact on Our Childhoods, Languages, Minds, and Morals

Abstract

Can a set of authorized pedagogical practices be universally applied to all preschool institutions globally? My contention is that the universal preschool (standardized preschool for all) is not universal, as it will always be clashing with the complex cultural structures of its surrounding community. Therefore, in the process of adopting global pedagogical practices based on universal theories, such as developmentally appropriate practices, we run the risk of imposing the values and cultural beliefs of these particular sets of practices onto other cultures.
In this paper, I present a poststructural (Cannella, 1997) and postcolonial reading (Viruru, 2001) of the DAP (Developmentally Appropriate Practices), a set of mission statements, sponsored by the NAEYC (National Association For the Education of Young Children). This document standardizes early childhood education and has been adopted in more than 7,000 centers in over 35 states, as well as British Columbia, New Zealand, and Australia and continues to be legitimized and considered for use in other countries. The main premise of the DAP is to provide developmentally appropriate practices (in the domains of socio-emotional, cognitive and physical) for teachers in early childhood education, so that the experience of quality preschool is universalized. These particular developmentally appropriate practices are based on Western developmental psychological practices (Erikson, Freud, Piaget, Bloom and McVicker), which are considered to be a part of the normative discourse in early childhood educational circles. In my poststructural and postcolonial deconstruction of this document I intend to uncover a consistent theme of cultural hierarchy (based on individualistic Western notions) in which values and beliefs are imposed on ‘inferior’ cultures as part of a process of colonization.
One of the goals of the DAP is to provide an education that will prepare young children for future participation in a “free and democratic society” (Braedekamp, 1997, p. v). This can be interpreted as the United States trying to impose their cultural values of democracy on all nations, regardless of the political climate and cultural structures in place. Individualistic notions of democracy are idealized and furthermore, collectivist approaches to societal organization are refuted and not acceptable practices.
Promoting a child’s sense of self is a good example of a DAP practice that is Western in tradition and adheres to the rigorous structure of the linear progression of child development of a five year old. The DAP emphasizes the guidance of this process in order to “help them to develop a more constant and stable perception of themselves” (Braedekamp, 1997, p. 115). This practice may not fit into collectivist-based cultures in which the five year old is trained to be a more valuable member of the group first and foremost over the promotion of self.
My paper resonates with other critical scholarship in this field. However, the significance of my document analysis is that I am specifically deconstructing the text of the DAP by utilizing content analysis in order to uncover a cultural (Western based) bias of childhood norms that are subsequently being imperialistically imposed on other cultures.

Author

• Miriam B. Tager, CUNY Graduate Center