Critical perspectives on cultural diversity in Early Childhood

Dr Lynn Ang, School of Education, University of East London

This critique of recent early years curriculum initiatives in England (which are designed amongst other things to improve provision for children and families from culturally diverse backgrounds) starts from a recognition of the high priority given to terms such as ‘inclusion’, ‘diversity’ and ‘equal opportunities’ in recent policy making and in the discourses adopted by government, providers and practitioners.

Over the last few years, in both the Curriculum Guidance for the Foundation Stage (QCA: 2000) and the Practice Guidance for the Early Years Foundation Stage (DCSF, 2007), the principles of respect for cultural difference, and support for diversity, have been clearly enunciated. The paper argues however that these principles are grounded in an inadequately theorised view of ‘culture’ which ignores both the structural underpinnings of social inequality, and the complexity of the cultural contexts experienced by many children and families.

The complex nature of cultural identity

Discussions of culture have their origin, within the English-speaking world, in the work of Matthew Arnold and, later, Raymond Williams, both of whom recognised the essentially political nature of cultural constructs. A recent resurgence of interest in defining culture, such as in the work of Stuart Hall and Homi Bhabha, has drawn on more fluid and shifting understandings of the nature of cultural identity: the ‘culture’ of an individual is understood to be continually under reconstruction, shaped by changing contexts and power relations, and reflecting inequalities in social structures and institutions. It is these more complex understandings which are missing from the statutory curricula.

The paper goes on to suggest ways in which the statutory documents fail to meet current requirements, beginning with a reminder that they are available only in English. It is argued that:

• the rhetoric of ‘providing for cultural difference’ may serve to mask structural inequalities, particularly around class
• the documents do little to promote genuine and meaningful consultation with, and involvement of parents
• the implementation of the key principles is left to practitioners’ interpretations, while there is evidence of underdeveloped notions of culture among the children’s workforce
• the guidance is indicative of fixed cultural orientations rather than notions of fluid, and evolving, hybrid identities
• there is much to learn from children who move between cultural contexts with apparent ease and those who seem to struggle (drawing on the concept of resilience)
• the documents are open to the interpretation that they advocate all children being treated equally, rather than differently, to ensure equality of outcomes.

The paper concluded with a personal account of the ways that diverse parental heritages combine to construct uniquely complex cultural lineages for many children in the UK.