Question 1

Using information/examples from the course text, explain what the developmental
psychological discourse of childhood says about children/childhood. Additionally, please
highlight what is problematic about the developmental psychological discourse of
childhood and what it fails to account for.

The developmental psychological discourse of childhood states that “developmentalism

describes the child’s progress to adulthood as a series of age-related steps.” (McNamee, 2016,

pg. 29). This particular quote describes the developmental psychological discourse as solely

basing it’s theories on the age and maturity of the child, as well as focusing on the brain function

of the child in order to figure out a way to successfully progress an incompetent child into

becoming a competent adult. This theory heavily describes children as becomings, rather than

human beings. “Developmental psychology is the discipline that has most often been considered

the province of theorizing about childhood, so much so that most of our common-sense thinking

about children is (often unconsciously) framed by the discourse of development.” (McNamee,

2016, pg. 29) That being said, the developmental discourse is a very prominent way of thinking

towards children within our society, and can set high, unrealistic standards for children, mostly

academically, which can be extremely toxic towards the child’s emotional well-being.

This theory prominently stresses the fact that children are different from and inferior to

adults, which in some ways, limits a child’s right to advocacy and expression, limiting their

agency to an unhealthily low level. The psychological discourse of childhood says that children

are becomings and not beings, they are ‘natural’ and not ‘social’ beings, childhood is a process

towards maturation, and that there are key stages in development which all children should meet,

and if they do not, they are considered somehow deficient.

“If childhood is seen as little more than a staged progression to adulthood, children are

thus seen as adults in the making, as ‘becoming’ adult rather than as children in the present.”
(McNamee, 2016, pg. 30). From this statement, it is seen that the psychological developmental

discourse can be disregarding childhood and it’s experiences as a whole, focusing just on

creating ‘competent’ adults. This bring with it the issue of shutting out children as individuals

and their very own experiences of being a child, which is crucial to a child’s full social,

emotional, and even psychological development as a whole, even if it may not be mentioned

within this discourse.

Not experiencing childhood to the full extent can cause later issues to arise within

adulthood and lead to intellectual and social deficiencies. Although mental and educational

development is extremely important for children, it should not be what defines them as deficient

or not. The social and emotional experiences as a child are critical to the entirety of childhood

and one’s progression into adulthood.

The psychological developmental discourse fails to account for children’s lived

experience, impact of social, cultural, political and historical comments on childhood, children’s

capacities or competencies, individual differences or abilities and universal childhood. This

discourse lacks many of the fundamental aspects of childhood which are detrimental towards the

ability for children to experience a fulfilling childhood. This discourse sets a bar which expects

all children to learn and behave in the same manner, which is unrealistic as every child has their

differences, causing the psychological discourse to be a problematic and an unhealthy way of

viewing children and childhood as a whole.

Question 2
Drawing on the course text, explain why it is important to study various childhood
discourses. In addition, using the specific example of the Romantic discourse of childhood,
explain how this particular childhood discourse may be problematic to young people’s lives

Studying various childhood discourses is crucial because as mentioned by McNamee

(2016), discourses can and do frame what may be said and thought about a specific topic, like

childhood. That being said, within the main discourses which inform society’s perspectives on

children, they all play a role in the way that childhood and children are perceived within the

world, each in a different manner. It is extremely important to study many different childhood

discourses as it “helps us to deconstruct childhood” (McNamee, 2016, pg. 24), allowing us to get

a greater view on the fact that the way we understand childhood today did not exist as a concept

in history, and that the main discourses (puritan, blank-slate, romantic etc.) were the main and

almost fully exclusive ways of viewing children in the past. We know now that this is in fact not

true, and that after the Middle Ages philosophers started addressing the nature of childhood and

marking it as a social time within a life span, rather than a strict time of ‘becoming’.

‘Discourses of childhood are never simply discourses, they are and indeed have to be

enacted, given practical realization and material form through the minutiae of the everyday social

practices that take place between adults and children’ (James and James, 2001: 32). This quote

explains how childhood discourses can be a lot different from any other form of discourses

within the world, and often give better explanations and understanding towards the socialization

of children and the idea of childhood as a whole. It is extremely important to broaden our

knowledge on all discourses, because it can help us to better understand certain aspects the

historical and social construction of childhood.

 When focusing specifically on the Romantic discourse of childhood, it can be seen as

problematic due to its unrealistic standards for children to uphold in order to stay ‘innocent’

within the eyes of society.

The romantic discourse lays the child within the arms of the adult as they are seen as the

protector of the child’s innocence which can only be ruined by the cruelty of the outside world.

Within this view, the child is seen as ‘un-good’ when this innocence is considered gone, which

can be limiting towards a child. The discourse can limit curiosity within children and be shaming

towards their certain thoughts or ideas as they are viewed as ‘impure’. When strictly viewing

children with the romantic discourse, it can become problematic towards young peoples lives as

it has a set view on what can decay a child’s innocence and essentially ‘end’ a childhood,

causing children to possibly have feelings of shame or worry when it comes to certain aspects of

their thoughts, or the world as a whole.

Question 3
What key messaging does the new paradigm (aka the social study of childhood) hold about
children/childhood? If this perspective was more widely used, how might society benefit?
Use relevant examples, drawing on the course text to support your response.

The new paradigm hold’s an entirely new perspective and way of thinking about

childhood. The social study of childhood defies the scientific approach taken to view childhood

and sees children as active, competent beings rather than passive and incompetent. The key

messaging that the new paradigm holds about children and childhood is the message of children

being competent and shaping towards their environment, while also being shaped during this

process. In simpler terms, the new paradigm accounts for children’s experiences and allows for

childhood to be a full lived experience by children, while also giving them the voice that they
need; the new paradigm focuses on childhood and how children are individual beings, not just

becomings concerned about their adult life.

As McNamee (2016) mentions, when comparing the new paradigm to socialization

theory, it is clear that many things are left out, including what children are doing whilst others

socialize, and when others are not socializing, as well as the worlds that children create by

themselves and for themselves. Furthermore, the socialization theory fails to account for many of

the essential aspects which make up for the importance of childhood as well as the experiences

of each individual throughout the stages of childhood and their individual agency.

The new paradigm views childhood and children as active, competent, beings (rather than

becomings) and fully accounts for all aspects of childhood and how important it is for children to

be able to make decisions and be viewed as beings rather than blank slate becomings with the

sole purpose of becoming a ‘competent adult’.

If this perspective was more widely used, society would benefit greatly as it gives

children the full potential and sees children as agents rather than passive, really emphasizing the

fact that children’s views and voices matter, and that they have control within their lives and

childhood. Implementing this perspective allows us to see children’s contributions to society,

along with how society shapes childhood (McNamee 2016).

The new paradigm allows for society to take children’s voices and experiences seriously,

as well as how society acts on children and how children act back towards society, fully applying

the thought that children are beings (rather than becomings) and are all very different, meaning

they should not conform to one set standard which indicates whether they are seen as deficient or

not (psychological view).

Question 4
Why it is important to recognize the reality of childhoods instead of focusing strictly on one
concept of childhood? Explain, with relevant examples/draw on the course text to support
your response.

It is essential to recognize the reality of childhoods instead of focusing on just the

concept of childhood because every child is different, making childhood a vastly different

experience for every individual child. Many factors can cause these differences including

cultural, types of families, income levels etc.