Gendered Norms and the Evolution of Early Childhood Education: Historical Influences and Pathways for Change
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The field of early childhood education has long been influenced by gendered norms rooted in maternalist discourse, which historically linked childcare to women’s innate caregiving abilities. While this association created career opportunities for women, it also perpetuated the essentialization of women’s identity and shaped the profession’s educational requirements, remuneration, and working conditions. This literature review examines the historical development of gendered norms in early childhood education, the enduring impacts of these norms today, and opportunities for change. Key historical influences—including the Second World War, feminist movements, maternalist ideology, and the work of figures like Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi, Friedrich Froebel, Maria Montessori, and G. Stanley Hall—are analyzed to understand how they contributed to the predominantly female composition of the profession in North America. Present-day consequences of this history include inequities in professional recognition, compensation, and working conditions for early childhood educators, with over 96% of the workforce in Canada identifying as women. The review concludes by exploring a vision for the future of early childhood education, emphasizing the importance of fair compensation, professional recognition, and dismantling gendered stereotypes. Based on the findings, it is clear that addressing these systemic issues requires both local and broader societal changes, with a focus on equitable compensation, gender-neutral training, and policies that challenge traditional caregiving roles. Opportunities for local and systemic change are discussed, including reforms to educational requirements, remuneration practices, and working conditions, as well as broader shifts in societal perceptions. This analysis seeks to inform efforts to create a more equitable and inclusive future for the field.
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 | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".