Rationales for and linkages between the two fields of literature 43

The reasons for choosing these two fields of literature are as follows: Globalisation, defined as consisting of cross-national and erratic flows of capital, labour, services, goods and ideas (Ball, 1998), has a profound impact on different aspects of life, including education. It involves an increasing globalisation of educational ideas and policies through globalised education governance in which international organisations play an important role. A significant impact of globalisation on education is the demand for skills and qualifications required for performing in the high value-added sector – which constitutes the so-called knowledge economy – ‘in order to survive in the global economic competition’ (Green, 2002: 14). This calls for tying education more closely to national economic interests (Ball, Goodson and Maguire, 2007) so as to construct the knowledge economy and promote human capital development. In fact, globalisation is characterised by prioritisation of the economic dimensions of nation-states’ activities above all others (Dale, 2007). Another important impact is the diminished power of

nation state to define their education policy – termed ‘decoupling of education from direct state control’ (Ball, Goodson and Maguire, 2007: xi) - and the strengthened power of international organisations to influence it (Green, 2002). These globalisation effects are particularly relevant to this study, as they support particular kinds of educational ideas and policies associated with economic neoliberalism. Therefore, my task here is to explore key concepts related to globalisation to see whether globalisation might have a tendency of supporting a certain kind of relationship between early childhood and compulsory education built upon particular kinds of ideas, purposes and management of early childhood and primary education.

There is a growing academic interest internationally in the social construction of the child, in particular through the sociology of childhood, which began to be established in the 1980s (Qvortrup, Corsaro and Honig, 2011). In the sociology of childhood, children are understood not as actual children but a social construction reflecting the social, economic, political and cultural circumstances at a given historical time and place. The social construction of the child influences the manner in which policies and services are shaped, prioritised and governed (Jones, 2008).

The value of applying the social construction of the child approach in examining the issue of the relationship between early childhood and primary education was demonstrated in the Dahlberg and Lenz Taguchi (1994) paper, discussed in Chapter 2. The paper begins with an analysis based on the premise that Swedish preschool and school work with different images of the child: child as nature in preschool, and child as reproducer of culture and knowledge in school. These images affect decisions about appropriate purposes of preschool and school, teachers’ roles, pedagogical approaches and institutional environments; and have serious implications for constructing a new relationship between the sectors. While their analysis applies only to the Swedish case, their method can usefully be applied to analysing the relationship in other countries. The present thesis finds inspiration in this work of Dahlberg and Lenz Taguchi as well as other more recent writings that work with the social construction of the child in the development of ECE, such as in the municipal schools of Reggio Emilia (e.g Rinaldi, 2006).

Two linkages can be suggested between these fields of theoretical literature. Firstly, both the globalisation and the sociology of childhood literature emerged around the 1970s. According to Robinson (2007), globalisation studies arose around several sets of phenomena, such as ‘the emergence of a globalised economy involving new systems of production, finance and consumption and worldwide economic integration, global political processes’, ‘the rise of new transnational institutions, and accompanying spread of global governance and authority structures of diverse sorts’, and ‘new social hierarchies, forms of inequality, and relations of domination around the world and in the global system as a whole’ (Robinson, 2007: 125).

Globalisation literature does not embrace a single theory of globalisation but many theoretical discourses (e.g. world-system theory, theories of global capitalism, the network society), rooted in broader theoretical traditions and perspectives such as Weberianism, Marxism, postmodernism, critical and feminist theory (Robinson, 2007). Meanwhile, the sociology of childhood emerged as a response to the traditions of social sciences that existed before the 1970s, which conceptualised children and childhood in terms of ‘instability, dependency, passivity and vulnerability’ (James, 2011: 35). The paradigm shift took place in the 1970s and 1980s, which increasingly recognised children’s active role in human development and the importance of ‘here-and-now’ as well as the future for children (Qvortrup, Corsaro, Honig, 2011; James, 2011). The process of negotiations around the Convention on the Rights of the Child that commenced in 1979 was crucial for the establishment of a new sociology of childhood in the early 1980s (Qvortrup, Corsaro, Honig, 2011).

Secondly, both globalisation and the social construction of the child suggest possible influences on the relationship, although the types of influence are very different. Globalisation points to common, cross-national forces and directions, while the social construction of the child points more to national and local differences reflecting particular traditions and cultures. Possible influences of globalisation are expected to be more direct and explicit, as well as stronger on a policy level rather than an individual level. By contrast, possible influences of the social construction of the child may be more indirect, operating through culture and tradition, and impacting more strongly on the views and experiences of individuals regarding the relationship.