Care and Social Justice: questions, questions, and more questions
I’ve been thinking a lot about care over the past two years. So much so, that I did a little research project on it as part of my formal studies in educational research. Through a small-scale case study, I investigated how care was conceptualised and enacted for 3-year-old children in a standalone kindergarten. What I found was surprising (or not surprising, depending on your philosophical beliefs about care). It turned out that care was so much more than just a practice or something to be done TO children. Care, as I found, was a way of viewing the unique and often complex relationship between people, places and things from the perspective of for, with, to and within. In this way, care, to me, was becoming a more significant concept than just a foundational practice of meeting children’s basic needs. So, I developed a framework* for understanding care and went on to speak at a few events testing my ideas with others. While very well received, I had a niggling thought eating away at the back of my mind. There was a piece to this care puzzle that was missing, and it was keeping me up at night. In true EYLF critical reflection fashion, I began to wonder: is care the same for all children, or are some children ‘missing out’?
At its core, the practice of care in early childhood education and care (ECEC) is often understood as comprising a range of interactions, activities and decisions that aim to support the physical, emotional, cognitive and social development and wellbeing of young children. Common care practices, often considered acts of service, include the provision of healthy food and clean water; clean and safe environments for play and learning; and professionally loving interactions and relationships, all of which contribute to and foster a child’s sense of belonging within an ECEC setting. ECEC professionals, the educators and the teachers, are often the ones providing this care. They are the ones curating the environment for opportunities for thriving, curiosity, and emotional regulation, and supporting the development of the wide range of skills necessary for lifelong learning. It could be argued that this view of care within the ECEC setting is a form of social investment that shapes the future for the individual child and the wider community.
I’m thinking, however, that the practice of care, whether you view it as an act of service, social investment or something else entirely, might have some powerful social justice implications.
Stay with me.
Care in ECEC is not a neutral or passive act but one that can either reinforce or challenge existing social inequalities. When care is practiced with a commitment to equity and access, it becomes a tool for social justice, empowering children while fostering a more just society.
So, what if we took care and considered it through a lens of equity and access? What if we considered that access to high quality ECEC is often unequal, with children from marginalised backgrounds and communities impacted at higher rates? What if we considered the disparities that this unequal access causes in relation to relationships, play opportunities, and lifelong learning outcomes, all of which are foundationally underpinned by care? What if care was the answer to bridging, or even dismantling, some of these systemic barriers?
If these are the questions, and care is the answer, then what might be the bit in the ‘middle’?
Maybe the ‘middle’ is the way we ensure that all children have equitable opportunities to access care. In practice, this might mean providing equitable access to flexible and adaptable resources, ensuring individualised support, and embedding inclusive teaching practices that address the unique needs of every child. In this way, care equity might also mean designing an environment and curriculum that is responsive and respectful of cultural, linguistic, and social differences. By embracing the practices and principles of care, ECEC professionals have the opportunity to make a lasting impact, ensuring that all children, regardless of their background, have the opportunity to thrive.
Or the ‘middle’ could be the way care is used to cultivate curriculums that lend themselves to learning about diversity, respect, rights, and kindness. Through modelling and intentional teaching about these values, ECEC professionals position children to care deeply about their connections with people, places and things. This practice of care as more-than-self creates not just a deeper sense of belonging and being, but also a practical understanding of social justice, leading to a more just and equitable society in the future.
Or the ‘middle’ could be advocacy. Given that for so many children, the common care practices identified earlier (food, water, safety, relationships) are often tied to larger, systemic social justice issues, ECEC professionals are well placed to use care to begin to address these. Care could be considered a tool for acknowledging the lived experiences of children facing marginalisation and discrimination and providing uniquely placed support where needed. Suddenly, care becomes a political act used to ensure that resources, policies and practices are well designed for social change.
Actually, maybe the ‘middle’ is all of this and more, embedded within you and your context and your own interpretation and understanding of care.
*more to come on this framework
Sarah Louise Gandolfo, early years consultant and early career academic