Toward inclusive understandings of marriage in an early childhood classroom: negotiating (un)readiness, community, and vulnerability through a critical reading of King and King

Abstract

This collaborative classroom research study examines the ways in which preschoolers made sense of same-sex marriage through a critical reading of the book King and King by De Haan and Nijland. Acknowledging the importance of community in doing critical and political work, this article details the ways in which a preschool teacher and a group of four-year-olds collectively problematized and expanded narrow and exclusive definitions of marriage. Through their words and actions, these preschoolers invite readers to reconsider the centrality of lesbian and gay issues in the early childhood curriculum. Building on work that posits that lesbian and gay issues are an elementary school issue, this article proposes that they are an early childhood issue as well. Weaving reflection and description and theorizing from practice, this article seeks to shed light on the power and possibility of engaging in work that leads to inclusive understandings of marriage with young children in early childhood classrooms. Why? Because, as a four-year-old stated, ‘That’s fair and that’s how it works.’

Keywords:

• Early childhood education
• same-sex marriage
• community
• vulnerability
• critical reading

Notes

1. This article was collaboratively authored by a teacher-researcher and a university professor (and researcher) through a collaborative classroom research project. Yet, the article is written in Dana’s voice to achieve a sense of closeness to the preschool classroom, affording readers a richer text.

2. De Haan and Nijland (2000).

3. For example, a teacher asks: ‘What day is today?’ The child answers: ‘Monday’ and the teacher evaluates: ‘Yes. Good!’ This is done despite the teacher’s previous knowledge of the answer. IRE sequences often do not serve authentic communicative purposes. They often result in procedural displays.

4. US means United States.

5. Defined in alignment with the Supreme Court of the United States decision on Obergefell et al. v. Hodges, Director, Ohio Department of Health, et al. No. 14-556 (argued 28 April 2015 – decided 26 June 2015).