Donald Simpson

Neoliberalism, Global Poverty Policy and Early Childhood Education and Care: A Critique of Local Uptake in England.

The global rise of a neoliberal ‘new politics of parenting’ discursively constructs parents in poverty as the reason for, and remedy to, child poverty. This allows for Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) to become a key policy lever by using human technologies to intervene in and regulate the lives of parents and children in poverty. The article explores the uptake of this policy locally through interviews with 30 ECEC practitioners in three locations across England. The interviews suggested that the neoliberal discursive formation of child poverty as a problem of the poor themselves had symbolic power and was a view shared by most of the interviewees. This appeared to restrict their thinking and action, shaping a limited engagement with parents in poverty. Delivering curricular requirements was seen to further delimit practitioners’ practices with children in poverty by reducing their poverty sensitivity. Although this is a small study, its findings may be of value in questioning neoliberal logics, and their implications are considered critically.

Basic skills, literacy practices and the 'Hidden Injuries of Class'

This paper draws on qualitative data from three research projects that examined the impact of poor skills on the life chances of adults living in two disadvantaged areas of England. We employed the theories of Goffman and Bourdieu to document how problems with literacy have a corrosive effect on the identities of interviewees, threatening their wellbeing. Though learning difficulties occur across all social backgrounds, the poor family resources and educational opportunities of our respondents meant they struggled to overcome their literacy problems when young, thus shaping later life course transitions. Thus the origins of the shame that our adults felt about their poor skills lie in part in the distinctive classed experiences they had when young. However, the resourcefulness of our respondents meant that many had secured employment, bought homes and become parents which obscured the ongoing psychic problems that a lifetime of poor skills had bestowed on our sample. The disjuncture between the apparent material standing of our sample and the ‘hidden injuries of class’ raises questions about how we understand the operation of class across the life course and the role of literacy, learning and wellbeing in the shaping of social identities.

Comprehensive Community Initiatives: Addressing a 'Problem' in Local Governance or Creating One?

Pervaded by ‘third way’ values and identified as archetypal Comprehensive Community Initiatives (CCIs), programmes such as Education Action Zones (EAZs) and Health Action Zones (HAZs) follow a procedural rationale based on heterarchy and partnership. They are a response to an alleged prior fragmentation of service provision in welfare across sectors. Employing evidence from an evaluation of an EAZ and HAZ in one location, this article makes two claims. First, it is claimed that the extent of the alleged ?problem? of fragmentation across the governance of local social and welfare services prior to the introduction of these CCIs is contestable and was exaggerated for political purposes. Second, despite the application of CCIs in the form of EAZs and HAZs, it is claimed that a continuing problem of fragmentation across local governance of social and welfare services is evident. Several insights from the emerging theory of governance failure are employed to offer an explanation for why this situation has occurred.

‘Seen but not heard’. Practitioners work with poverty and the organising out of disadvantaged children’s voices and participation in the early years

ABSTRACT Living in poverty disadvantages young children reducing school readiness. ‘Pedagogy of listening’ can potentially support resilience remediating against poverty’s negative effects. Little, though, is known about how early childhood education and care (ECEC) practitioners work with children in poverty and the attainment gap between such children and their peers remains significant within England and the US. This article reports research using a mixed methodology which explored these issues in localities across both these countries. We argue a dominant technocratic model of early years provision in these contexts creates normalisation and diversity reduction. This, and austerity measures, stymie pedagogical space and practice organising out listening to children in poverty. We suggest this may help explain why the attainment gap remains so stubbornly resistant to reduction across these countries.

Subsidizing Early Childhood Education and Care for Parents on Low Income: Moving beyond the Individualized Economic Rationale of Neoliberalism.

Neoliberalism and an associated ‘new politics of parenting’ adopts a predominantly economic rationale which discursively positions early childhood education and care (ECEC) as essential to tackling several social ills by allowing individual parents (particularly young mothers) to improve their labour force participation, thus boosting family income. This paper considers this discourse and its uptake locally in the context of England. Drawing on qualitative case study research, the paper focuses upon a small number of young mothers who were recipients of nationally and locally subsidized ECEC from 2009 onwards. Although keen to boost individual and family income via paid work through accessing subsidized ECEC, these mothers provide evidence questioning the assumption it can be a panacea helping to reduce susceptibility to low income. Subsidized ECEC’s viability in economic terms is critically scrutinized. However, the mothers’ narratives support the idea of ‘a rationality mistake’ inflicting ECEC policy. Despite on-going economically bounded conditions of choice, they felt subsidized ECEC’s viability was undiminished as it also lay for them in the highly valued access to ordinary patterns, customs and activities in society beyond paid work. This raises important issues in a context where the ‘value for money’ of subsidized ECEC is being questioned.

Pre-school practitioners, child poverty and social justice

Purpose – Several ideas exist about social justice and how inequalities can be tackled to help families and children in poverty. The Coalition government released the UK’s first Child Poverty Strategy in 2011. Pervaded by neoliberal ideology, the strategy mentions “empowering” pre-school services and practitioners within the childcare market “to do more for the most disadvantaged” (Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) and Department for Education (DfE) 2011, p. 35). The purpose of this paper is to bring to light how Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) practitioners across England have engaged with policy discussions and adopted expectations concerning their place in addressing child poverty. Design/methodology/approach – Using a phenomenological qualitative research design the paper draws upon 30 interviews with pre-school practitioners in three geographic areas of England. All interviewees worked with families and children in poverty and were senior ECEC practitioners within their pre-school sett...

Talking Heresy About ‘Quality’ Early Childhood Education and Care for Children in Poverty

This paper considers the socially progressive function of a model of quality early childhood education and care widely prescribed to address child poverty across England and the USA. Ubiquitous, it is imbued with a sense of objectivity, secureness and practicality. We question these foundations. Then using data from practitioners in both countries, we contrast expectations about this model of ECEC as an unmitigated good building resilience to break cycles of disadvantage, with the everyday experiences and frustrations of practitioners pursuing it. Their data suggest this model of quality has limitations and some heresy is required about this policy orthodoxy.

Destined for failure

Early years practitioners know that part of their job is reducing the disadvantage gap. But what do they really think of poor children? Dr Donald Simpson, who has led a two-year study into practitioners perceptions of poverty, reports