Critical Analysis - âCinderella did not speak upâ
An article by VIII.Su-Jeong Wee, Kyoung Jin Kim & Youngmi Lee (2019) âCinderella did not speak upâ: critical literacy approach using folk/fairy tales and their parodies in an early childhood classroom, takes a close look at childhood folk/fairy tales and their parodies to gain a better understanding of how five-year-old students perceive these tales. The study aims to establish whether or not the students are able to alter their understanding of these storylines, and open themselves up to alternate solutions and endings. Through a critical literacy approach, a Korean class of 5-year-old children started to challenge social norms and stereotypes, and come up with their own versions of stories based on their own backgrounds and circumstances. Â
As part of the critical literacy approach, parodies of certain popular fairy tales were studied to start opening up the minds of the children, encouraging them to look at things from different perspectives. The reading was followed by activities such as discussions, writing and sketching, to ensure that they critically reflect on the reading materials.
Through the medium of folk/fairy tales and parodies the critical literacy approach was examined, and Wee, Kim & Lee (2019) found that the participating children were able to accept multiple perspectives and consider characters in ways that was not highlighted in the original stories. Through this process the children learnt to challenge the socially dominant ideas and gender stereotypes.
They found that it is extremely important for teachers to pay close attention to how they interact with young children. Through asking critical questions, children are able to examine their own insights and those presented in texts. (Wee et al. 2019)
When children question texts connecting to their experiences and beliefs, they could be more deeply engaged in critical analysis (Simpson, 1996). Â
It is important for educators to guide childrenâs own interests and questions in critical ways and offer series of literacy activities that encourage children to âperceive critically the way they exist in the world in which they find themselves. (Freire, 2000, p.83)
With this study, Wee et al. (2019) proved that teachers do not always need to limit the stories and books they teach their kids to topics around social issues, and that these social issues can be addressed through critical literacy. By putting the children in charge of what happens, you are able to identify the issues that surrounds them in their day-to-day lives, offering alternate ways of connecting with them.
Sinno, Charafeddine and Mikati (2012) argue that Early Child Development interventions have been developed with the aim of improving the overall function of children through education, and are based on the fact that young children respond best to specific modalities designed to encourage and stimulate their development process. This supports the work of Wee et al. (2019), stating that children are enriched by well-planned and connected activities, and through this, their understanding of social issues can be even further developed.
This article was written in 2019, and is just as relevant today as it would have been in 1950, and as it will be in 2025. Childrenâs foundations are laid when they are young (between 0-5 years), and it is important to educate them at this level and help them understand that everyoneâs worlds look different.
Being able to understand the social issues that surround yourself, as well as the people around you is and will always be extremely important. It puts you in a position of understanding and sets you up to function in a society with respect. Â
Through the use of data collection such as video recordings of the class activities, interviews with the children and teachers, observational field notes and informal notebooks including memos, the authors were able to capture enough data to support a fact-based argument.
Video recordings were transcribed right after recording sessions to ensure that the sessions are fresh in the researchers mind, and they were able to analyse details like facial expressions and physical gestures of the participants in order to draw their conclusions.
The data analysis was conducted in three phases, adopting Emerson, Fretz, and Shawâs (1996) coding methods. In the first phase, a preliminary coding was performed of all the collected data, allowing the researchers to reach agreement through discussion to verify and validate the data analysis (Golafshani, 2003)
In the second phase, meaningful episodes from each literacy activity were grouped and given descriptive codes. Through repetitive reading of transcripts, they were able to find some core themes such as perspective, stereotypes and social norms, and further investigated how a selected theme was related to other themes (Wee et al. 2019).
Wee et al. (2019) goes on explaining the third phase, where comparative methods were employed among the different data sources in order to check the consistency of the information. In addition, a member check (Kirk & Miller, 1986) was conducted through sharing their analysis with other professionals in the fields of early childhood and literacy education to confirm validity of the categories and themes.
Exchanging ideas enabled a deeper consideration and understanding of the data as well as an analysis that provided alternative interpretations.
Wee et al. (2019) used a combination of neutral and emotional words in their writing. Because the topic is children, itâs almost vital to use language that is easy to understand and digest. Emotional writing is used when talking about interacting with the children, and a higher academic tone is used when analysing the research and data based aspects of the work.
This article was written from a critical standpoint, setting out to prove an outlined theory through several lenses and processes that was planned out in advance.
The article chose to focus on social issues that were brought up by the subjects, rather than the ones that seem relevant to people in general. For example, racial issues that came up in the classroom were viewed from the childrenâs perspectives and were analysed in the form they took when they came up in the follow-up activities, rather than the overall view we have surrounding racism as adults.
I accept the arguments presented by the authors of this article. Through critical analysis and data collection, it has been made clear that thereâs a lot of merit in what they are saying, and I agree that through challenging children to empathise with others and to understand where they come from, we can set them up for a brighter future based on respect for one another.
Emerson, R., Fretz, R., & Shaw, L. (1996). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY: Continuum.
Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. The Qualitative Report, 9, 597â607.
Kirk, J., & Miller, M. L. (1986). Reliability and validity in qualitative research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Kim, Y.-M. (2015). Connecting folk talks and parodies in primary English teaching: Focusing on literacy learning and critical thinking skills (Unpublished Master Thesis). Korea National University of Education, Cheongju.
Simpson, A. (1996). Critical questions: Whose questions? The Reading Teacher, 50(2), 118â127.
Sinno, Durriyah, et al. Enhancing Early Child Development: A Handbook for Clinicians, Springer New York, 2012. ProQuest Ebook Central, https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/herts/detail.action?docID=1081855.
Su-Jeong Wee, Kyoung Jin Kim & Youngmi Lee (2019) âCinderella did not speak upâ: critical literacy approach using folk/fairy tales and their parodies in an early childhood classroom, Early Child Development and Care, 189:11, 1874-1888, DOI: 10.1080/03004430.2017.141785
