Abstract
This article examines the collective research that informs the current federal reform initiative, Preschool for All. The author specifically homes in on the conditions that led to the initiative, which has called for “rigorous curriculum” in the preschool years. The author offers a critique that suggests that the research that informs this policy can be viewed as a “canon” in which only select perspectives and methodologies are put forward. In so doing, there is a counterproductive effect that narrows what counts as language and literacy, as well as a positioning of academic deficits and poverty as synonymous. The author explores multiple interpretations of widely cited research studies and calls for a breadth of methodological perspectives within policy discussions.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
