More? Great? Childcare? A discourse analysis of two recent social policy documents relating to the care and education of young children in England

This paper considers the overt and covert discourses in two contemporary policy documents in England and Wales, The Nutbrown Review: Foundations for Quality ([DfE] Department for Education Department for Education. 2012. ‘The Nutbrown Review: Foundations for Quality: The Independent Review of Early Education and Childcare Qualifications.' DFE-00068 2012. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/175463/Nutbrown-Review.pdf.) and More Great Childcare (MGC) ([DfE] Department for Education. 2013. ‘More Great Childcare: Raising Quality and Giving Parents More Choice.' DFE-00002-2013. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/219660/More_20Great_20Childcare_20v2.pdf.), which advocated a number of significant changes to Early Years provision. It employs Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) to ask questions about relationships between language and society, specifically how these are managed in policy documents. Drawing on Foucauldian analysis on the power behind the words and utilising [Fairclough, N. 2010. Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. Harlow: Pearson Education Ltd.] CDA, indications of underlying values and assumptions, overt and covert agendas were explored. Findings suggest a significant shift in concepts of quality, professionalism and childcare that positions the child as an investment in the future as a strong feature of the discourse within MGC as well as an increase in top-down frameworks. Both documents assert that quality and professionalism will only occur with top-down regulation and inspection. They propose a consumer market based model of practice that has implications for professionalism of the workforce and quality of children's experiences.     

Antenatal prediction of mother-infant difficulties

A prospective study of 143 "low risk" pregnant women expecting their first baby was conducted in Newcastle, Australia. The study was designed to examine the contribution of a woman's perception of her own childhood experiences, her trait anxiety level, socioeconomic status, and social support network to difficulties in her relationship with her baby during the baby's first year. The women were initially interviewed during pregnancy and followed up 3 and 12 months postpartum. Follow-up measures included the Dimensions of Perinatal Adjustment, the Neonatal Perception Inventory, the Ainsworth Strange Situation, and information from hospital records, family doctors, and baby health centre sisters. Women who perceived their social network as less supportive during pregnancy were likely to see their one-year-old babies (p less than .05) as more difficult. The other antenatal measures were not significantly predictive of outcome.     

‘Othering’ the archive—from exile to inclusion and heritage dignity: the case of Palestinian archival memory

This paper seeks to address, from the critical perspectives of cultural heritage discourse, the issues at stake in critically apprehending the archive as both a technology of disinheritance and one of potential inclusion and re-inheritance. The first section draws on the work of Jacques Derrida, Edward Said and other critics whose work has sought to address the marginalizing capacity of dominant European/North American archival and cultural–museological institutions. The remainder of the paper grounds these conceptual–ethical issues in the context of Palestinian cultural politics and memory-work. This critical framework is used not only to draw out the absences and silences in archives and cultural institutions, and the epistemological and ‘real’ violences at play in what Derrida characterises as ‘archive trauma’, but responds to Said’s call to ‘re-read’ the colonial archive ‘contrapuntally’ in order to create an ‘othering’ of dominant archival discourse. What is needed to provoke such an ‘othering’ is a commitment to rethink the archive in terms of alternative understandings of ‘hospitality’, ‘memory-work’ and what Derrida has referred to as ‘heritage dignity’. This strategy is capable of apprehending in greater depth the moral-ethical ‘debts’ and ‘duties’ and the operational ‘responses’ and ‘responsibilities’ towards ‘inclusion’ and towards full recognition of those constituencies which have been disenfranchised or exiled outside the realms of dominant cultural–institutional discourse.