A Critique of Normative Play Constructs and Their Impact on Gender Diverse Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper examines how play in the early years contexts continues to be informed and governed by parents and professionals through normative gender play constructs. It explores how psychologies of development read play in particular ways that can impact how children learn about gender especially when their movements and interests are corrected by adults in their lives. Play through a dominant developmental psychology approach is a mechanism for assessment where diversions of play outside normative gender play expectations can be questioned and lead to intervention. With play at the centre of practice in the field of early childhood education, it is critical to examine how normative pedagogical structures of play informs children’s gender expression. This research aims to examine what happens when children’s play is viewed predominantly through a traditional developmental psychology approach and how these perspectives are detrimental to young children’s sense of self. The data is derived from a qualitative research study that used semi-structured focus groups with 15 early childhood educators (ECEs) who work with young children, ages 3-5 years, at licensed early childhood centres in Nova Scotia, Canada. ECEs play an important role in shaping young children’s understandings of gender, therefore it is necessary to learn more from their lived experiences. The findings show that when play is structured predominantly through heteronormative forms of gender categorization it can stifle children’s diverse gender expression. This research concludes by arguing that diverse forms of play that support gender fluidity for young children is crucial to liberate children from traditional gender normative play paradigms.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".