Summary of keynote

Let us disagree

Michel Vandenbroeck, Department of Social Welfare Studies, Ghent University.

When “diversity” is chosen as the central theme of the EECERA’s conference, this indicates that the early years community has moved beyond advocacy for respect for diversity. This may mean that there is a growing consensus about the need to take into account society’s diversities, when discussing early childhood care and education. So far, so good.

In the discussions on respect for diversity, some notions are commonly used, such as “participation”, “inclusion”, “citizenship”, “identity”, or “belonging”, to name but a few. It is far from obvious that this use of a common vocabulary also reflects shared understandings.  In this lecture, I propose to attempt to untangle some of these notions and the contradictory values they may convey. These values are closely interconnected with ways of viewing the relationships between individuals and the state and among individuals. In this sense they express views on how democracy in early childhood education may be understood. The discourses on diversity, and specifically on cultural or ethnic diversity, may serve as a way in which structural social inequalities are masked. The reverse side of a plea for tolerance education may be the individualization of responsibilities. In this sense, it may help to understand democracy as a plea for equal opportunities. However, traditionally, discourses on equal opportunities and citizenship focus on a “head start” in the rat-race of life. In contrast with this approach, democracy may also be about disagreements on what needs to be achieved. Democracy in this sense may be understood as the organization of disagreement.

Concrete examples from daily practice of early childhood care and education show that it is disagreement, rather than consensus, that helps to shape quality, that triggers discussion and reflection and that fosters questions, rather than answers. It is also disagreement that can be identified as a “fil rouge” that runs from historical dissidents as Henri Wallon to the present, connecting activism with academia. It is the diversity of opinions, beliefs, perspectives and backgrounds that challenge our taken for granted notions of “the good life” for children. For respect for diversity is not about tolerance for those who deviate from the norm. It is about deconstructing the norms that create deviations.  It challenge us to meet the one we do not know, assuming that not knowing may very well be a condition for listening.