Child as method and/as childism: Conceptual–political intersections and tensions.
Saved in:
| Title: | Child as method and/as childism: Conceptual–political intersections and tensions. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Burman, Erica |
| Source: | Children & Society. Jul2023, Vol. 37 Issue 4, p1021-1036. 16p. |
| Subjects: | Social theory, Practical politics, Developmental psychology, Social norms, Theory of knowledge, Conceptual structures, Intersectionality, Child psychology |
| Abstract: | This article considers the related projects of child as method and childism, as two critical childhood projects attempting to re‐engage childhood studies with wider geopolitical arenas. Firstly, each model's origins in their respective subject discipline are discussed, to, secondly, highlight how this shapes convergences as well as divergences in political project. Third, there is consideration of what is at stake in key conceptual tensions identified. It is suggested that the differences of address and contrasting (disciplinary and conceptual) sites of intervention work in complementary ways to strengthen the broader project of embedding childhood studies within sociopolitical theories and practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Children & Society is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | This article considers the related projects of child as method and childism, as two critical childhood projects attempting to re‐engage childhood studies with wider geopolitical arenas. Firstly, each model's origins in their respective subject discipline are discussed, to, secondly, highlight how this shapes convergences as well as divergences in political project. Third, there is consideration of what is at stake in key conceptual tensions identified. It is suggested that the differences of address and contrasting (disciplinary and conceptual) sites of intervention work in complementary ways to strengthen the broader project of embedding childhood studies within sociopolitical theories and practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 09510605 |
| DOI: | 10.1111/chso.12615 |
