Souring palatable formations in DAP: Toward unfamiliar relations with child development in early childhood teacher education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drawing upon Ahmed’s (2006) analysis of how institutional documents become nonperforming, this article argues that teacher education must create opportunities for emerging educators to grapple with the pedagogical consequences of understanding the fourth edition of Developmentally Appropriate Practice in Early Childhood Programs (2022) as a nonperforming text. I contend that as DAP works to moderate universalising developmental knowledges in the name of fostering social justice, DAP reproduces taken-for-granted epistemological relations and hierarchies that maintain dominant understandings childhood and early childhood education. First, I position DAP as a nonperforming text and articulate a mode of nonperformance specific to early childhood education: palatability, built of a rhetoric of childhood innocence and a politics of niceness. I then show how two of DAP’s formations of child development enact nonpeformativity through palatability, illustrating how DAP reiterates status-quo connections between child development and early childhood education. To conclude, I propose souring palatability as a proposition that emerging educators might speculate and experiment with while engaging with DAP.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.045 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".