Bibliographic record
Abstract
By challenging the discourse of play as innocent, this paper argues that children enact and maintain social inequalities in their play in the early years' classroom.The social injustices that exist in society are acted out in children's play, which creates conditions for children to consciously exclude others.Using poststructural theories, this paper examines how dominant theories of play in early childhood education create the social conditions in the classroom that allow for society's inequalities and injustices to be recreated in children's play.This paper uses Foucault's notion of power, to examine how issues of power regulate children's play and examines how issues of power are related to children's play.This paper will argue that when educators do not attend to the issues of power that exist in children's play, children are marginalized and excluded in the classroom.When children are seen as innocent, educators fail to recognize that children do attend to social issues such as race, gender, and size and consciously or unconsciously exclude others.Most importantly, educators unintentionally use the dominant developmental discourse of child development to maintain their classrooms, which is reflected through their pedagogies, policies and procedures.Educators need to understand the importance of self-reflection and be aware of their role of constructing dominant discourses and stereotypes in the classroom.It is integral that an educator be aware of his/her responsibility to educate children on social inequalities and injustices.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".