Building effective relationships with families and communities is a critical standard that should be included in all early childhood educators’ preparation programs. Educators and other early childhood professionals cannot understand children’s development if they are not aware of the sociocultural contexts in which children grow and develop. From the sociocultural (Rogoff 2003) and ecological (Bronfenbrenner 1979) perspectives, child development is viewed as a cultural process in which children become active participants in their contexts. Children’s families, communities, and societal ideologies and systems are all contexts in which children learn about the world. As educators partner with families, they come to understand how families raise children based on what they perceive to be the requirements of the context in which they live. For example, parents might not allow children to play outside of their homes because of fear of violence in their neighborhood. Or they might discourage children from speaking in social gatherings with adults because it is considered disrespectful for children to talk when adults are talking.  

As educators and human beings, we judge others according to our own beliefs, life experiences, and practices. When we work with families, our attention tends to shift to those events or practices that are incongruent with our beliefs and values. This is especially true with regard to our ideas about how children should be raised and how children develop. In this piece, Jamara Knight explores her views of child development and her relationship with families. Her perceptions of Madina’s family are shaped not only by her own upbringing and her experiences as a mother, but also by her professional knowledge. As indicated in the NAEYC position statement “Advancing Equity in Early Childhood Education” (2019), early childhood education has traditionally been strongly influenced by theories and research based primarily on the study of children from middle class families, White, and English-only sociocultural contexts. As Jamara is exposed to a family from a cultural context different to hers, she questions her own beliefs, experiences, and professional knowledge. This process of inquiry can be described as practitioner research as she develops questions to examine her own practice as a home visitor (Cochran & Lytle 2009).  

Our early childhood education preparation program offers students a course on working with families both at the undergraduate and graduate levels. Jamara attended a graduate program here, and the experience described in her article is part of an assignment in which students visit a family throughout the semester. The assignment is based on the service-learning experience described in Able et al. (2014), in which higher education students spend several hours with families of young children. Students are asked to select families with young children who are willing to participate in the experience and who are different to the student in some way (i.e., race, ethnicity, ability, sexual orientation, socioeconomic class, etc.). Since most of the students enrolled in the program are White, this usually means a family of color. The purpose of the selection criteria is to challenge preconceived ideas about families belonging to particular groups. Rather than learning about families, the service-learning experience allows students to learn with families (Gillanders & Sánchez 2021).  

During the experience, students spend time in everyday routines with the families and provide some kind of “service” agreed to by the family. An important emphasis during the experience is to restrain oneself from trying to “fix” the family. Rather, the focus is on trying to suspend judgment and understand what it means to raise young children of color with or without disabilities in the United States of today, as well as how to create meaningful relationships with families. The service provided emerges from the family’s self-described needs rather than from the student’s perspective of what the family is lacking. It is important to emphasize this point since we have noticed throughout the years that educators have a propensity to act as the “white saviors” (Matías 2013), especially with families of color. Despite good intentions, they continue perpetuating deficit perspectives on the ability of families of color to raise their children and therefore feel the need to “save them from themselves.” 

Underlying these deficit views are the beliefs that children follow universal developmental milestones and that families should use certain specific practices when raising children to promote their development. Families should read aloud to their children before going to bed, should talk to their children in specific ways, and should give them opportunities to play on the floor. These practices, well-cited in the professional literature, are often unquestioned and considered universal truths. However, in order for educators to work in partnerships with families, there needs to be a recognition that families’ raising practices come from what they consider to be best for their children. Their beliefs emerge from their own upbringings and cultural and physical contexts. Madina keenly demonstrated this value and belief as she was hesitant to allow her child to play on the floor. She always preferred to hold her child rather than letting him play on the floor. 

So how do we change these attitudes and beliefs in prospective and currently practicing educators? How do we move them outside of their own beliefs and experiences? Teacher educators have suggested that these changes might occur when higher education students are exposed to a combination of interactions with others in the field, readings, discussions, and opportunities for reflection (Able et al. 2014). Giving educator candidates the chance to interact with families who are different from themselves, to observe and be immersed in the families’ lives, and to reflect on their experiences shapes their knowledge, skills, and dispositions. McFalls and Cobb-Roberts (2001) explain this process from the cognitive dissonance theory: “an individual can experience psychological tension or dissonance when new knowledge or information is incongruent with previously acquired knowledge. . . . Because dissonance between opposing ideas is unpleasant, people are motivated to reduce the dissonance” (165). Individuals then attempt to reduce the discomfort by changing beliefs and behaviors. In the case of educators, as they interact with families with different beliefs and values from themselves, a cognitive dissonance is created between their own beliefs and those of the family. As a result, educators might choose one of the following alternatives: 

• devalue the families’ beliefs altogether 
• truly partner with the family instead of trying to modify their beliefs and practices 
• find additional information about the origin of the family’s beliefs and practices in order to understand their goals and purposes 

As Jamara describes in her piece, she chose the two latter alternatives. With a strong sense of the importance of establishing positive relationships with the family, she found ways to partner and dialogue with Madina in a “respectful, reciprocal, and responsive” way. Instead of jumping to encourage Madina to change her practices, she patiently observed and tried to understand Madina’s goals as a parent. As a result, Jamara questioned her professional knowledge of child developmental milestones and gained a deeper understanding of the many ways in which families can raise their children.  

It is important to note that this process did not happen overnight. Jamara had previous experience as a home visitor and early childhood teacher. She also spent 20 hours with Madina throughout the semester, gaining her trust and getting to know her. In addition, she reflected on her journals, read, and discussed with peers and with the instructor about her experiences. As she got to know Madina more deeply, Jamara got to better understand Madina’s beliefs and motivations. This facilitated a more meaningful relationship with this family, which enabled Jamara to embrace her dissonance and expand her horizons as a home visitor.   

In the context of this assignment, Jamara conducted practitioners’ research as she conceptualized a question about her relationship with Madina, intentionally and systematically collected data as she visited the family to answer her questions, and interpreted her findings by questioning what she thought she already knew (Cochran-Smith & Lytle 2009; Henderson et al. 2012; Kroll 2018). It is important to note that before doing this assignment, Jamara visited families with a “curriculum” in mind. Through this experience, Jamara had the opportunity to approach this family from a stance of curiosity and openness to learn, which she had not been afforded before. The project then allowed her to partner with Madina and reflect on this particular family’s goals. Through observation and reflection, Jamara gained insights about her own ways of interpreting Madina’s beliefs and actions. She was able to trace her interpretations to her own upbringing, her “culturally learned ways of seeing and personal core values” (Henderson et al. 2012, 5).   

In settings which stifle teachers’ and professionals’ imagination, practitioners’ inquiry can deepen their self-awareness and renew their intentions in their work. It can also become a habit of mind that permeates their practices and becomes a “stance” (Cochran-Smith & Lytle 2009) rather than an undertaking to complete an assignment. As teacher educators, we recognize that powerful learning experiences such as the one described in Jamara’s article are designed to directly address implicit negative biases toward specific populations of children and families and to open educators’ awareness to a variety of cultural assets. With creativity and perseverance, we continue to look for ways to best address the need to prepare early educators not only to respect families and children who are different to them, but also to embrace them.  

References

Able, H., H. Ghulamani, R. Mallous, & J. Glazier. 2014. “Service Learning: A Promising Strategy for Connecting Future Educators to the Lives of Diverse Children and Their Families.” Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education 35 (1): 6–21. 

Bronfenbrenner, U. 1979. The Ecology of Human Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 

Cochran-Smith, M., & L. Lytle. 2009. Inquiry as Stance: Practitioner Research for the Next Generation. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. 

Gillanders, C., & S.Y. Sánchez. 2021. “Learning from Sociocultural Contexts: Partnering with Families of Young Bilingual Children with Disabilities.” In Language, Learning, and Disability in the Education of Young Bilingual Children, eds. D.C. Castro & A.J. Artiles, 112–136. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. 

Henderson, B., D.R. Meier, G. Perry, & A. Stremmel. 2012. “The Nature of Teacher Research.” In Our Inquiry, Our Practice: Undertaking, Supporting, and Learning from Early Childhood Teacher Research(ers), eds. G. Perry, B. Henderson, & D.R. Meier. Washington, DC: NAEYC. 

Kroll, L.R. 2018. "Teacher Inquiry, Research, And Pedagogical Documentation." In Documentation and Inquiry in the Early Childhood Classroom, eds.  L. R. Kroll & D. R. Meier, 3–18. New York, NY: Routledge. 

Matías, C.E. 2013. “Check Yo'self Before You Wreck Yo'self and Our Kids: Counterstories from Culturally Responsive White Educators? . . . To Culturally Responsive White Educators!”. Interdisciplinary Journal of Teaching and Learning 3 (2): 68–81. 

McFalls, E.L., & D. Cobb-Roberts. 2001. “Reducing Resistance to Diversity Through Cognitive Dissonance Instruction: Implications for Teacher Education.” Journal of Teacher Education 52 (2): 164–172. 

NAEYC. 2019. “Advancing Equity in Early Childhood Education.” Position statement. Washington, DC: NAEYC. https://www.naeyc.org/resources/position-statements/equity 

Rogoff, B. 2003. The Cultural Nature of Human Development. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.