Posthumanism is a broad philosophical school with various interpretations in different disciplines. It is not possible to elaborate on all aspects of posthumanism in this article. I therefore draw on three salient principles of posthuman theories that are relevant to this study on inclusion. Firstly, posthuman perspectives adopt a worldview in which ideas about the perfect human need to be subverted. In other words, humanism’s ideal human-male, able-bodied, White, and bourgeoisie-needs to be challenged. Posthumanism calls for the restructuring of our ideas about diverse groups that are othered, and where marginalised identity markers are seen as a norm rather than as a deviation (Barden, 2020). Therefore, it follows that instead of fixing people to be assimilated (Reygan eta al., 2018) into standardised ideas of “normal,” we need to reject this idea of normal. Diversity then, is not seen as a problem or deviation but as a rich resource that enhances the early learning environment. Secondly, posthumanism emphasises interconnectedness with others as well as collective, rather than individual, achievements (Braidotti, 2013). This implies that learners, teachers, families, and communities all need to work together to create inclusive early learning spaces. Thirdly, posthumanism contests Western dominant, ageist, child development discourses, in which the child is seen as a lesser human or a marginalised other (Murris, 2019). These ageist discourses exclude because the child is seen as a human in the making, waiting to become an adult, whereas posthumanism emphasises the being child as an already active agent in their learning and development.
Reimagining Inclusion in Early Childhood Care and Education: A Posthuman Perspective
The original foundation of inclusion has always been humanist given that educational institutions are expected to embrace a shared humanity (Naraian, 2020). However, in recent years, these concepts of human rights and equality have come under scrutiny as the concept of human is aligned with dominance over other beings that inhabit the planet, including those who are considered subhuman due to marginalised identity markers. With the hegemonic Vitruvian man at the centre of creation in our history, we see the inhumane effects of colonisation, patriarchy, and slavery by those who dominate. Moving away from humanism, diversity needs to be reconceptualised as the rule-similar to the box of crayons mentioned by Participant 6 where every colour has a critical role in creating the picture. Every different crayon makes a unique contribution to the overall picture. In a similar way, diversity needs to be embraced and society needs to thrive on difference rather than similarity. In Cycle 1, most participants initially regarded diversity as a deviation from the norm and therefore saw it as a challenge and problem in their learning environments. Following their discussions and collaborative learning, personal experiences were shared that aligned with posthumanist beliefs of diversity in a more optimistic light (Barden, 2020). In this posthumanist perspective, human identity is constantly in flux and the perfect representation of the ideal human specimen in the Vitruvian concept of White, bourgeoisie, male, and able-bodied, is challenged (Braidotti, 2013).
Reimagining Inclusion in Early Childhood Care and Education: A Posthuman Perspective
A humanist perspective is based on the premise that the human is an autonomous and capable individual who is able to navigate through life successfully, based on their individual capabilities. A posthumanist perspective however gives credit to the relationships that are fostered while the human attempts to navigate through life. The “post” indicates a rethinking of the individualism and superiority of the human in our worldly relations (Keeling & Lehman, 2018, p. 5). Similarly, in Cycle 1, the narratives were centred on individualism because parents were not encouraged to make meaningful contributions to the running of the centre. Managers and teachers were in superior positions as policy makers, whereas parents were invited as mere guests on certain occasions. Following the learning and collaborative discussions, participants highlighted a change by focusing on building relationships between children, with families and communities, and by networking with colleagues. Posthumanist thinking emphasises not just the interconnectedness of people with nature and animals, but codependency and symbiotic relationships with fellow human beings. Thus moving away from individualism-da Vinci’s Vitruvian man therefore no longer belongs at the centre of the universe (Braidotti, 2013). A posthumanist thinker understands that they are part of a bigger picture, accepts their individual roles, but also interacts with others in a way that leads to the greater good and sustainability of everyone and everything. This perspective would signify the fostering of interaction between all stakeholders and the fostering of relationships of trust, irrespective of differences in the early learning space. Aligned with the beliefs of collectivism, the PALAR research design emphasises relationship building among participants, epistemic democracy that values the knowledge created by practitioners in the field, as well as a collaborative meaning-making.
Reimagining Inclusion in Early Childhood Care and Education: A Posthuman Perspective
Posthumanism calls for teachers to adopt a pedagogy that seeks a shift from didactic teaching practices, disruption of what counts as knowledge and authority of the teacher as the knowledge giver, and a shift in power relationships in the learning space. Here, the child is an active thinker and a resourceful constructor of knowledge (Murris, 2019). Cycle 1 conceptualised the becoming child as a passive recipient of knowledge, controlled by adults and the requirements of the curriculum to develop cognitively and to become ready for school-in opposition to the beingchild. The becoming child was constructed as lacking or incomplete, due to age discrimination. This concept of age discrimination is challenged by ideas of the posthuman child (Murris, 2019). Cycle 2 however emphasised the being child as an active participant who is fully human and able to own their learning by interacting in an assemblage of varied play activities. The posthuman child is therefore capable of learning through play and taking charge as an active enquirer. This child is able to make choices and develop the agency to take control of their own learning. Deconstructing the false dichotomy of play versus learning therefore aligns with posthuman constructions of early childhood identity because play is learning in the early years. During play, the child makes sense of the world, and important values are learnt regarding difference. In this posthuman worldview, standardisation cannot exist because the child’s individuality is valued. Given that learning is a complex process, the child may select their own path during play in keeping with a rhizomatic learning perspective (Murris, 2019). It follows that teachers, even with differentiated instruction, activities, and assessment, may still be unable to accommodate the individual needs, interests, and contexts of each individual child. In keeping with these ideas of a rhizomatic curriculum, the outcomes of PALAR are difficult to predict because they are the product of a collaborative meaning-making controlled by the participants rather than the researcher. PALAR moves away from traditional research and aligns with the posthuman perspective because the research participants are autonomous beings capable of constructing valuable knowledge that is relevant in their contexts.
Reimagining Inclusion in Early Childhood Care and Education: A Posthuman Perspective
To become inclusive, teachers need to be prepared to continually learn and adapt to ever changing situations-they need to invent and reinvent themselves because the process of inclusion is dynamic and evolving (Cologon, 2019; Winter & Raw, 2010).
Reimagining Inclusion in Early Childhood Care and Education: A Posthuman Perspective
