Edwards (2021) presents us with a conundrum: how should we – a diverse community of researchers, scholars, and practitioners concerned with early childhood – proceed to create or establish knowledge that has some value when we differ on how we think knowledge is constituted or created and, indeed, how we understand value? Central to this conundrum is the idea that knowledge is contested, and that this reality, rather than cultivating a healthy contest of ideas, can drive us into research sub-cultures that are discipline specific. While it is undoubtedly true that many kinds of knowledge are contested, it is instructive to examine what follows from this fact within the larger perspective of our collective endeavours. Edwards wants to entertain the view that a contest does not need to yield a winner, “The problem of contestable knowledge does not necessarily need to be one of correctness” (p. 110). She presents us with the idea that contested knowledge can be “… a […] catalyst for communication, including within and beyond disciplinary boundaries” (p. 110). While there is much to like about this idea, the means by which we can release such a catalyst and effectively reach beyond our disciplinary boundaries are far from clear. In response to Edwards’ provocation, this Editorial explores two perspectives that are perhaps worth considering. The first is awareness of the limits of our disciplines, which implies a need for greater humility and openness in our relationship to our own work. The second is the challenge to be clearer on what we value and how we believe the work we do relates to such value.

中文翻译：

---

明确我们在幼儿研究中的价值：对爱德华兹的回应（2021）

Edwards (2021) 向我们提出了一个难题：当我们对知识的构成方式有不同看法时，我们——一个由研究幼儿、学者和实践者组成的多元化社区——应该如何继续创造或建立具有一定价值的知识？创造以及我们如何理解价值? 这个难题的核心是知识是有争议的，而这种现实，而不是培养健康的思想竞赛，可以驱使我们进入特定学科的研究亚文化。尽管许多知识都存在争议，这无疑是正确的，但在我们集体努力的更大视角内研究从这一事实得出的结论是有益的。爱德华兹想要接受这样一种观点，即比赛不需要产生赢家，“可竞争的知识问题不一定是正确性的问题”（第 110 页）。她向我们展示了这样一种观点，即有争议的知识可以“……一种 [……] 交流的催化剂，包括学科界限之内和之外”（第 110 页）。虽然这个想法有很多值得喜欢的地方，但我们可以通过什么方式释放这种催化剂和有效地超越我们的学科界限还远未明确。针对 Edwards 的挑衅，本社论探讨了两个可能值得考虑的观点。首先是意识到我们学科的局限性，这意味着我们需要在与自己工作的关系中更加谦虚和开放。第二个挑战是更清楚我们重视什么以及我们如何相信我们所做的工作与这些价值相关。