Montessori insight
Reclaiming
feminism
in the early
years
sid Mohandas explores how early childhood education is riddled with
inequalities, and proposes the need to reclaim feminism in early years
Throughout history, the lives of women and children
have been intertwined both in their interdependence
as well as in their marginalisation. In reality, children’s
and women’s issues have quite often been dissociated
in politics. Policies are framed in the light of
protecting children’s rights, but used as a lever for the
social and economic progress of a nation, whilst
brushing aside matters relating to women’s right to
better pay, status and working conditions.
By exploring the history as well as current state of
early years education in the UK, i make the case for the
need to restore and reclaim feminism in early
childhood education and care (eCeC).
History
The history of eCeC in the UK is riddled with
gendered, classed and raced inequalities. The
beginnings of eCeC can be traced back to the
inception of the infant school movement in 1816 at
new Lanark, in Lanarkshire in scotland, by the Welsh
16 Ja n u a r y 2020
social reformer, robert owen. Like Maria Montessori,
owen believed that education and social justice were
inextricably linked, and that in order to transform
society we needed to start with its youngest members.
For him, teachers needed to show unceasing kindness
to all children, irrespective of their gender or class.
owen’s vision for social justice kindled the first
organised movement for British women’s suffrage led
by the Langham Place Circle, a group of women who
campaigned for improved women’s rights in law,
education and marriage.
But these ideals for a new society swiftly changed
when english educational pioneer, samuel Wilderspin,
was appointed as leader of spitalfields infant school in
1820. Wilderspin espoused traditional Victorian values,
and believed that men were best suited to educate
children, while women did not possess the physical
prowess or intellectual abilities required to teach and
discipline young children. his views on the role of men
in his schools were shaped by “powerful patriarchal
Monte ssori I nter nati o nal
Women student discourses…supported by religious beliefs” (Burn &
teachers training in a Pratt-Adams, 2015, p20), as driven by an attempt to
kindergarten class in reproduce family structures in public domains (Clarke,
1898 in Toronto, Canada 1985). Women’s role in the infant schools, therefore,
occupied the traditional Christian status of ‘a helper’.
This disparity was further evident in the average pay,
where men were paid £70 per annum, compared with
£35 per annum for women (turner, 1970).
Lost impetus
Wilderspin’s movement, however, lost impetus in the
1840s, resulting in men being considered more as
theoretical experts and physical work with children
PHOTOGRAPHS: ARcHIveS Of OnTARIO
becoming the domain of women (Clarke, 1985). These
roles within eCeC were further consolidated by the
work of german pedagogue, Friedrich Froebel, who
believed that women were best suited for this role ‘as
they possessed an innate maternal tendency’ (hilton &
hirsch, 2000, p12). Considering the social status of
women during the time, where the very thought of
Mo ntes s o r i I nter nati o nal
[Robert] Owen believed that education and social justice were
inextricably linked, and that in order to transform society we
needed to start with its youngest members
women needing an education was viewed with disdain,
Froebel’s emphasis on ‘higher education for women for
the purpose of teaching young children’ (Ailwood, 2008,
p159) was indeed a step forward in raising the social
status of women.
e q ua L pay
Later, Montessori as well as social reformer, Margaret
McMillan, who were both actively involved in women’s
suffrage during the first wave of feminism, saw women’s
contribution to education as a platform for feminist
activism. in 1919, a year after some women in the UK
were granted the right to vote, McMillan set up a centre
Ja n u a ry 2 02 0 17
 Montessori insight

The low pay, status and working conditions in ECEC are

unquestionably a product of depreciating the contributions of
women and work traditionally associated with women

background. These mirror wider concerns of injustices, as

highlighted in successive waves of feminism that
underscore the importance of considering how the
experiences of oppression and discrimination are
inflected by the intersections of identity.

recLaiming tHe f-word

Against this backdrop, where a female-dominated
sector has systematically and consistently been
devalued, mistreated and scapegoated, the need for
feminism and feminist perspectives has never been
more critical. At the core, feminism has always sought
to dismantle patriarchal ideology that justifies the
dominance of men and masculinist perspectives in our
societies. The low pay, status and working conditions in
eCeC are unquestionably a product of depreciating the
contributions of women and work traditionally
associated with women. Dissociating feminism from
eCeC will therefore only work to reinstate the social
reproduction of patriarchy. elevating the status of
women is definitely a starting point, but the deeper
work lies in reconfiguring how we think, live and do
early years every day in the classroom.

Elevating the status to train young women to care for children from slum
of women in early areas. Despite these efforts, there was an alarming
childhood education increase of uncertified female infant teachers, resulting
is needed, to prevent in women being used increasingly for cheap labour. in
the reproduction of the same year, the national Federation of Women
patriarchy teachers called for an ‘equal pay for men and women
teachers’ of the same professional status, which was
vehemently opposed by the national Association of
schoolmasters (nAs), a trade union of male teachers.
in 1937, the nAs published a booklet making a
case against the demand for equal pay for men and
women teachers. in this booklet, the association argued
in favour of unequal pay, painting women teachers as a
threat to boys’ education and failing education
altogether (graves et al., 1937).
“such feminism claims that woman, given the
teachers was only achieved much later, through the
equal Pay Act 1970. even so, the early years workforce
continues to be deprofessionalised, lacking voice and
agency, but also subject to low pay and working
conditions. A finding from The Early Years Workforce in
England report, published by the education Policy
institute and the nuffield Foundation in January 2019,
suggests that a large portion of staff are struggling
financially, with over 44% claiming benefits (Bonetti,
2019). Despite the undeniable female presence, it is
evident that the early years sector is built on
distinctively patriarchal structures that devalue work
traditionally associated with women.
f e m i n i sat i o n
For the past several decades, there has been an
PHOTOGRAPHS: ISTOcK
responsibility of women. however, the discourses
surrounding the recruitment of men, as revealed in
popular media and government-led policies, frame
children, particularly boys, in crisis as a result of the
so-called ‘feminisation’ of education. The solution thus
offered is to ‘re-masculinise’ education by recruiting
more men into the sector.
A large body of research rejects the correlation
between ‘feminisation’ and ‘failing’ boys, but also
repudiates claims that suggest men’s involvement in
eCeC can resolve the underachievement of boys. For
example, research data that compared male and female
teachers’ impact on achievement from 413 classrooms
with primary-aged children failed to reveal any
conclusive evidence for a correlation (Carrington et al.,
2005). More importantly, such claims portray women as
References
l Ailwood, J. (2008) Mothers, Teachers, Maternalism and Early Childhood Education
and Care: some historical connections, Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood,
8(2), pp157-165, DOI: 10.2304/ciec.2007.8.2.157
l Bonneti, S. (2019) The Early Years Workforce in England London: Education Policy
Institute
l Burn, E. & Pratt-Adams, S. (2015) Men Teaching Children 3–11: Dismantling Gender
Barriers London: Bloomsbury Publishing Ltd
l Carrington, B., Tymms, P. & Merrell, C. (2005) Forget gender: whether a teacher
is male or female doesn’t matter, Teacher: Australian Council for Educational
Research, December, 32–34
l Clarke, K. (1985) Public and private children: infant education in the 1820s and
1830s, in Steedman, C., Urwin, C., & Walkerdine, V. (eds.) Language, Gender and
Childhood London: Routledge & Kegan Paul plc
l Graves, G.M., Jarvis, F.R.A., & Pocock, A.N. (1937) Equal Pay and the Teaching
Profession London: National Association of Schoolmasters

opportunity, can do everything that man can do…if
this is feminism, then we are anti-feminists” (graves et
al., 1937, p42).
regrettably, equal pay for male and female
increased call to recruit more men into the early years
sector. There is no doubt that normalising and
de-stigmatising men’s involvement in eCeC has the
potential to stop childcare being viewed as the sole
having failed the system, whilst concealing the inter-
locking influence of other systemic inequalities on
children’s achievement, particularly those based on class,
race, sexual orientation, location as well as socioeconomic
l Hilton, M. & Hirsch, P. (2000) Practical Visionaries: Women, Education and Social
Progress 1790-1930 Essex: Pearson Education Ltd
l Turner, D.A. (1970) 1870: The State and the Infant School System, British Journal of
Educational Studies, 18(2), pp151-165, DOI: 10.1080/00071005.1970.9973279

18 Ja n u a r y 2020 Monte ssori I nter nati o nal Mo ntes s o r i I nter nati o nal Ja n u a ry 2 02 0 19