Suchergebnisse

This paper holds to account the ideas legitimising staff management practices currently experienced in my workplace, a university, as bullying. Making these practices visible, and locating them in theories allows movement beyond current understandings of reality and points "to new ways of thinking and action about freedom, civic courage, social responsibility, and justice" [1]. Whilst this is titled a story of frustration I aim at a position of hope using auto-ethnography to reflect on my experiences as a volunteer case worker for the staff union (National Tertiary Education Union - NTEU). I have supported staff complaining of bullying in the workplace and have struggled to achieve fair and equitable outcomes. I have witnessed hard working, valued colleagues becoming disenchanted, disengaged, and resigning. Accepting this without attempting to drive change is unacceptable, thus this study was born. I locate this work in literature related to workplace bullying and the Australian higher education context. I explore my reflections, examining how these link to, and extend understandings of theory. Finally I explain why I think workplace bullying needs redefinition in order for us to enliven democracy as a way of life for those of us working in the university context.

In this paper I argue that early childhood professionals have a key role in providing learning opportunities that aim to prevent children placing their feet on the beginning of the slippery slope of racism. At the bottom of this slippery slope of racism, as we have seen in recent world events, are acts of extremist terrorism. This responsibility is increasingly important given that in many countries political rhetoric is leaning further towards far right extremism accompanied by forms of nationalism where those who are different (for example Muslims and refugee groups) are being portrayed as threatening standards of living of citizens in their host countries. As professionals we have a responsibility to identify early (often, on the surface, benign) acts, reflect on the value position underpinning such acts, and provide opportunities for children to learn to value and respect the differences they see every day in the people around them. In this paper I provide suggestions as to the kinds of behaviours (and the value positions underpinning them) that we see in young children and the ways we might address these.

Despite the relevance of early childhood services to children, families and nation states, the sector is largely undervalued and under resourced and, is not recognised as an established profession. Using collaborative auto ethnography, researchers from six different countries (Australia, Chile, England, Germany, Ireland and the United States) all members of the EECERA Professionalisation Special Interest Group (P-SIG) share their reflections on the professionalisation of early childhood. While professionalisation is associated with discretionary decision making that is premised upon an accepted body of knowledge, neoliberalism imposes constraints from on top, identifying through various forms of curricula, legislated standards, and policies what is appropriate and desirable practice. As a consequence, early childhood personnel are restricted in their professional agency and, their work is characterised by tension, as they strive to balance external expectations from a neoliberal stance and their own perspectives that prioritise a children's rights perspective. This paper questions how the sector manages the constraints imposed on it in a neoliberal political and social world. It calls upon those in the profession to resist neoliberalism and, to make a stand in terms of what is considered best practice. It further argues that ongoing debate is required as to the boundaries of what would be called the early childhood profession: considerations of ways in which the different sectors (education, health, and welfare) contribute to a holistic approach in working with children balanced against the requirement for a profession to have an identified and discrete body of knowledge. The implications of this for professionalisation of early childhood are widespread and, worthy of debate. While the inclusion of different sectors for example, addresses the holistic nature of early childhood work, it risks creating a broad and diffused knowledge base that might make it difficult to claim professionalisation. We hope that this paper contributes to reenergizing conversations on the professionalisation of the early childhood sector.