Deconstructing ‘Early Childhood’ as portrayed in key policy documents of Bangladesh: A critical psychological perspective

• In Event: Globalization and Education Policy Reform in South Asia: Part I

Abstract

The objective of this paper was to analyse key government policy documents of Bangladesh using a critical psychological lens to understand how the concept of early childhood is understood and constructed in the policies. Critical psychology is not a branch of psychology; rather it questions and challenges the knowledge production of mainstream developmental psychology. In order to reveal how the knowledge of psychology is used to maintain the oppressive and hegemonic power structures of the society, critical psychology draws on a wide range of vibrant theoretical resources such as humanism, discourse theory, critical cultural theories and post-structuralism (Parker, 1999). Critical psychologists allege mainstream developmental psychology for its unproblematized and ‘objective’ nature of seeking truth (Barker, 2012). Through mechanisms such as standardization, scientization, professionalization, universaliztion and so on this ‘objective’ nature of psychology actually plays the role of claiming the authority of knowledge about individual and his/her community. Critical psychology further argues that developmental psychology has a tendency to isolate child development from its culture and history and thus preventing us from perceiving the historical nature of both development and the study of it (Broughton, 1987). Using this conceptual framework, I analyzed two key government policy documents, i.e., Comprehensive Early Childhood Care & Development (ECCD) Policy Framework and Operational framework for Pre-primary Education. The ECCD framework provides policy guidelines on definition, scope, goals, objectives, principles, standards, capacity building, coordination and supervision of ECCD activities in Bangladesh while the Pre-Primary Education Operational Framework outlines the rationale, goals, vision, mission and theoretical stance of pre-primary education and illustrated detailed guideline on curricular, operational, capacity building, monitoring and supervision strategies for successful implementation of pre primary education at the field level. In order to analyze the policy documents I have performed discourse analysis as my research method. Discourse analysis analyzes texts to understand how particular social ideologies are manifested and established through language (Potter & Wetherell, 1987; Fairclough, 1992; Van Dijk, 1998; Kroskrity, 2000; Collins, 2003; Nafstad & Blakar, 2013 ). In particular, I have used Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) model proposed by Norman Fairclough. The aim of CDA is to analyze the role of discursive practices in maintaining the social world, particularly the unequal power relationship in the society and thus contribute to social change to create more equal power relations (Jorgensen and Phillips, 2002). CDA considers discourse as both constitutive and constituted and believes that discourse serves the functions of social identity, social relations and ideation. Therefore, Fairclough’s CDA includes analysis of text itself; but it also goes beyond the textual analysis, and explores how the text is produced and consumed and how the text represents, reproduces or changes larger social practices and the power relations (Fairclough, 1992, 1995, 2003). The analysis suggested that a western image of universal childhood has been constructed throughout the documents and strict emphasis has been given on ‘developmentally appropriate’ guidelines produced in the west portraying a docile child uprooted from her culture. The processes of scientization, standardization and labeling have been put in place to legitimize the western construct of early childhood. There is also a heavy emphasis on expertise and professionalism as legitimate authorities on early childhood as opposed to community and cultural wisdom as significant source of early childhood knowledge construction. The role and participation of parents, community and schools has been reduced to ‘duty bearer’ who would merely help in implementing the early childhood programs as prescribed by the experts. Finally there is an absence of language on oppression portraying an ‘unproblematized’ nature of society. The findings has significant implications for the field of comparative and international education since early childhood care and education has become an increasingly growing practice in many countries, particularly in countries labeled as ‘developing’. Understanding how knowledge is created, transferred and legitimized in countries like Bangladesh would help understand how western hegemonic knowledge plays a role in manipulating early childhood. A better understanding of this unequal power relations would help put forward the need of a more just and equal, socio-culturally relevant epistemologies for conceptualizing early childhood which are key to promote a humanist perspective in education and development.

Author

• Mohammad Mahboob Morshed, University of Massachusetts Amherst