children as decision makers in education.pdf
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/20/2019 Children As Decision Makers in Education.pdf
1/193
-
8/20/2019 Children As Decision Makers in Education.pdf
2/193
Children as Decision Makers in Education
-
8/20/2019 Children As Decision Makers in Education.pdf
3/193
Also available from Continuum
Thinking Children, Claire Cassidy
Children's Lives, Children's Futures,
Paul Croll, Gaynor Attwood
&
Carol Fuller
-
8/20/2019 Children As Decision Makers in Education.pdf
4/193
Children as Decision Makers
in Education
Sharing Experiences Across Cultures
Sue Cox, Caroline Dyer, Anna Robinson-Pant
and
Michele Schweisfurth
ont nuum
-
8/20/2019 Children As Decision Makers in Education.pdf
5/193
Continuum International Publishing Group
The
Tower Building
80
Maiden Lane
11
York Road Suite
704
London
New
York
SE1 7NX NY
10038
www.continuumbooks .com
© Sue
Cox, Caroline Dyer, Anna Robinson-Pant, Michele
Schweisfurth and
Contr ibutors 2010
All r ights reserved. N o part of this publication may be reproduced or t ransmit ted in any form or
by any
means, electronic
or
mechanical, including photocopying, recording,
or any
in formation
storage or retrieval system, without prior permission in writing
from
the publishers.
Sue Cox, Caroline Dyer, Anna Robinson-Pant, Michele
Schweisfurth and
Contr ibutors have
asserted their right under
th e
Copyright, Designs
and
Patents Act, 1988,
to be identified as
Author of this work.
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
A
catalogue record
for
this book
is
available from
th e
British Library.
ISBN: 9780826425485 (hardcover)
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
A
catalog record
fo r
this book
is
available
from th e
L ibra ry
of
Congress
Typeset by BookEns, Royston, Herts .
Printed and bound in Great Britain by MPG Books Group, Bodmin, Cornwall .
http://www.continuumbooks.com/http://www.continuumbooks.com/
-
8/20/2019 Children As Decision Makers in Education.pdf
6/193
Contents
Motes
on Contributors viii
Introduction 1
Sue
Cox,
C aroline
Dyer, Anna Robinson-Pant Michele Schweisfurth
Part 1: Can we make space for children s 5
decision-making?
Perspectives
on
educational policy
1 The changing context of decision-making in English primary 7
education: ages; myths and autonomy
Colin Richards
2 'Prefigurative' approaches to participatory schooling: 15
experiences
in
Brazil
Tri s ta n Mc C owa n
3 Grasping
rare
moments for change: children's participation 25
in
conflict contexts
Sheila
Aikman
4
Long time coming: children
as
only occasional decision makers
35
in schools
Clive Harber
Part
2:
Children s decision-making:
its
impact
on
life
in 45
schools
and the community
5
Children's clubs
and
corporal punishment: reflections
f rom
Nepal
49
Teeka Bhattarai
-
8/20/2019 Children As Decision Makers in Education.pdf
7/193
vi
Contents
6
Participatory School Governance: Children
in
Decision-Making
59
in the
Zambian Context
Gina M u m b a Chiwela
7 EveryChild: NGO experiences with children as decision makers 69
in
Peru, India and Moldova
Liz Trippett with
Jane
Banez-Ockelford, Daniela
Mamaliga,
Payal
Saksena,
Lionel Vigil
8 Paving the way for pupil voice? School councils campaign for 79
fairtrade
in
Liverpool
Anne-Marie Smith
9 Student voice in Portsmouth: a city—wide approach 89
Fiona Carnie
Part
3:
Children
as decision
makers: what
are we
trying
97
to achieve? The ethical and political
dimensions
10
Assessing
the
Benefits
of
Students' Participation
99
Hiromi Yamashita,
Lynn
Davies
Chris Williams
11 Uprooting
fear
of cultural diversity: becoming participative 107
together
Juan
Carlos Barrdn-Pastor
12 Pedagogy and cultural diversity: children's participation for 115
overcoming
differences
Rohit
Dhankar
Part 4: Facilitating children s participation in research 123
and
decision-making
13
Children
as
Researchers: experiences
in a
Bexley Primary School
125
Doug
Springate and
Karen
Lindridge
14
Life
in the
classroom:
a
pupil perspective
133
Allan Fowler
15 Children as researchers: a question of risk? 143
Sue
Cox and Anna Robinson-Pant
-
8/20/2019 Children As Decision Makers in Education.pdf
8/193
Contents
vii
16
Children's participation: radio
as a
medium
in Ghana 153
Esmeranda Manfu l
17
Children
as
research protagonists
and
partners
in
governance
161
P.
J.
Lolichen
Endpiece: What can we learn about children as decision makers 171
by bringing together perspectives and experiences f rom
dif ferent
cultures?
Sue
Cox,
Caro line
Dyer,
Anna Robinson-Pant
Michele
Schweisfurth
Index 1 76
-
8/20/2019 Children As Decision Makers in Education.pdf
9/193
Notes on Contributors
Sheila Aikman is Senior Lecturer in Educa t ion and Deve lopment at the
U niversity of Eas t An glia. She was form erly the Policy Ad viser for Oxfam GB
and has been researching and publ i shing in the areas of qual i ty educat ion,
gender equal i ty
in
educat ion
and
in tercul tura l educat ion.
Jane Banez-Ockelford was the
Development Director
for
Asia, South
America
and the
Caribbean
for
Every Child
U K
unt i l
October
2008
and
continues to provide strategic management and technical support to the
Every Child Ca mbodia Liaison Office. Jane current ly works within Asia as a
consul tant
in governance and strategic management based in the P hil ippines.
Juan Carlos Barron-Pastor (Juancho Barron) is a PhD candidate and
assistant tu tor at the School of Dev elopm ent Studies, Un iversity of East A nglia,
and was recently Visiting Professor at the National Au tonom ous Univers i ty of
Mexico (UNAM). He has seventeen years of experience in coordinating,
administrating, consulting, teaching,
and
researching
for
community develop-
ment projects
in
Mexico.
His
current research explores
how to
interpret
th e
theory of becom ing (Deleuze; Braido tti) thro ug h an inter-subjectivist approach
(Lenkersdorf), taking collective em otions into acc oun t (Forgas; Marina)
to
better understand culturally diverse education spaces.
Teeka Bhattarai has been associated with the School of Ecology,
Agricul ture
and C om m uni ty W orks (Seacow) and Foru m for
Popular
Educa t ion — Edu cat ion Network, in Nepal since their foundation. Current ly
under taking formal studies
on
educat ion
in
Belgium,
h e
cont inues
h is
work
as
an education activist , campaigning for education for all as the 'great
equalizer ' .
Fiona Carnie is a Visiting Research Associate at the Ins t i tu te of Educat ion,
Universi ty
of
L ondon .
She is
current ly working
in the
fields
of
Student Voice
-
8/20/2019 Children As Decision Makers in Education.pdf
10/193
Motes on
Contributors
ix
and
Parent
Voice. Her books, Alternative Approaches to
Education
(Routledge
Palmer, 2003) and Pathways to Child Friendly Schools (Human Scale
Education, 2004), explore ways of involving key stakeholders such as
parents and young people in shaping educational provision. Fiona is Vice
President of the European Forum for Freedom in Education
www.effe-eu.org.
Gina Mumba Chiwela has
been working
as
Programme Development
Manager
with the Peoples Action Forum, Zambia, since 1994. She has
particular responsibility
for
training adult learning facilitators
in the
Reflect
approach, policy research
and
advocacy
and
HIV/AIDS programmes.
She
led the
programme
on
participatory school governance,
an
initiative
to
bring
communities into active participation in the planning and management for
schools. Gina currently represents the Reflect Network in Zambia on the
PAMOJA Council that oversees the Africa Reflect Network.
Sue Cox is a Senior Lecturer at the University of East Anglia in the School of
Education and Lifelong Learning where she teaches on postgraduate initial
and continuing teacher education courses and undertakes research. Her
particular area
of
interest
is
primary education (including philosophy
of
education, art and design education and citizenship education) and her
research has included projects with children and teachers in primary schools
on children's participation and decision-making.
Lynn Davies is Professor of
International Education
in the
Centre
for
International Education
and
Research, University
of
Birmingham.
Her
main interests
are in
education
and
conflict
(the
contribution
of
schools
to
peace
and to
conf l ic t ) ,
and in
education
for
democracy (pupil voice, school
councils).
She is also working in the
area
of education and violent extremism,
and her book
Educating
Against
Extremism
(2008)
is being used by educationists
and governments in the UK and beyond.
Rohit Dhankar
is
Secretary
of the
Indian non-government organization
Diganter, of which he is a co-founder. A curriculum expert, he has served on
the
Government
of
India's National Curriculum Framework advisory team
and currently teaches on the MA in Elementary Education at the Tata
Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai.
Caroline Dyer is a linguist by training and works at the Leeds University
Centre
for
International Development, where
she
lectures
in
development
practice. Her research interests
focus
on early years and adult literacy, and the
educational inclusion of nomadic and migrant groups; she has authored
numerous papers on these topics, and in 2006 edited an international volume on
the Education
of Nomadic
Peoples: current issues, future prospects (Berghahn Books ) .
http://www.effe-eu.org/http://www.effe-eu.org/
-
8/20/2019 Children As Decision Makers in Education.pdf
11/193
x Motes
on
Co ntributors
Allan Fowler is a
former high school teacher turned researcher
who has
taught for over 35 years in comprehensive educat ion. He now works part-
t ime
for the
Open Universi ty.
Clive Harber is
Professor
of Interna tional Edu cat ion at the Universi ty of
Birmingham.
He was
previously Head
of the
School
of
Educa t ion
at the
Universi ty
of
Birmingham
and the
Universi ty
of Natal in
Durban, South
Africa.
He has a
long-standing internat ional research interest
in
both
educat ion for democracy and its opposi tes.
Karen Lindridge has been a prim ary school teacher for twenty years and has
taught all age groups
from
4 [pre-school] to 11. She is currently Deputy
Head
at Old Bexley Church of Eng land Primary School, Bexley. In addition, she
spent three years as a teacher trainer at the University of Greenwich w here she
specialized in early years and physical education. She is currently interested in
the
area
of
providing chi ldren w ith op portun ity
and
empowerment , which
includes her involvement in the area of children as researchers.
P J Lolichen heads
the
Centre
for
Ap plied R esearch
and
Documenta t ion
at
The
Concerned
for
W orking C hildren, Bangalore, India.
He has
been
spearheading r ights-based information management by chi ldren for the past
1 2
years
and is a
recipient
of the
MacArthur Fe l lowship
for
Leadership
Development .
H is
most recent publicat ion
is
'Taking
a
Right Turn: Children
Lead the Way in Research' , and he has published other works on informat ion
management
by
children, enabling their participation
in
governance .
Daniela Mamaliga has
been EveryChild Moldova's Program m e Director since
2004. She
joined
EveryChild
Moldova
in
2001, initially
as
their Press
Officer,
becoming Project Coordinator
and
then Programme Director . Prior
to
that,
Daniela worked for the government news agency Moldpress.
Esmeranda
Manful is a Research Associate at the Centre for Research in
Social Policy, Loughborough Universi ty.
Her
interests include chi ldren's
rights, partic ularly the interp retatio n of the con cept to im pro ve the we lfare of
chi ldren.
Tristan
McCowan
is
Lecturer
in
Educa t ion
and
Internat ional Develop-
me n t at the Ins t i tu te of Educat ion, Univers i ty of London . H is current
research focuses on educat ion and ci t izenship in Latin America .
Colin Richards
is
Em er itus Professor
at the
Universi ty
of
Cum br ia
and has
been a senior HM I and a visiting professor at the Universities of W arwick,
Leicester
and
Newcast le .
-
8/20/2019 Children As Decision Makers in Education.pdf
12/193
Motes on
Contributors
xi
Anna Robinson-Pant is
Reader
at the Centre for Applied Research in
Education, University of East Anglia, where her research has included
projects with children
and
teachers
in
Norfolk schools,
as
well
as
with
international students studying at the university. For around ten years, she
worked in education, research and development with various
NGOs
in
Nepal. Publications include: W hy E a t Green
Cucumber
at the Time o f Dying?
Exploring the Link between
Women's
Literacy and Developm ent: A
N e pa l Perspective
(Unesco IOE,
2001),
Wo men , Literacy a nd Development: Alternative Perspectives
(Routledge,
2004) and
Cross-cul tural
Perspectives o n Educational Research (Open
University Press, 2006).
Payal
Saksena
joined
EveryChild India
in
2008
as
their Advocacy
and
Communications Manager. Before this, Payal worked
for
f o u r years
as a
gender and law consultant for Global Rights: Partners
for
Justice, a US-based
organization implementing
an
'Access
to
Justice' project
in
Karnataka
and
Rajasthan in India.
Michele Schweisfurth
is Reader in
Comparative
and
International
Education, and Director of the Centre for International Education and
Research at the University of Birmingham. CIER's 'Educating for Global
Justice' theme reflects her research interests. She is also joint editor of the
journal Comparat ive Education.
Anne-Marie
Smith is Postdoctoral Teaching Fellow at Liverpool Hope
University, where she teaches in Childhood and Youth Studies. She
previously worked
as
Children's Partipation coordinator
at
Liverpool World
Centre.
Her
research with displaced children
in
Mexico
has
been published
in
Children,Youth a nd
Environments
( 2 0 0 7 ) .
Doug
Springate now retired f rom the University of Greenwich, has
teaching experience in primary and secondary schools and was a teacher
trainer
for the
primary
age
phase
for
more than thirty years, lecturing
in four
institutions, including an American university. He was a Primary
Ofsted
Inspector.
He has considerable international experience and is ex-chairman
of ETEN,
the European
Teacher
Education Network. He is currently further
exploring
the
primary school
as a
democracy
and
researching
and
promoting
the
area
of
'Children
as
Researchers', including
an
European Community
funded
project with institutions f rom seven European countries.
Liz Trippett worked for EveryChild UK as the Programme Off icer for Asia,
South America
and the
Caribbean
for
three years until October 2008.
She
currently works
in a
psychiatric hospital
in the UK
with children
and
adolescents
experiencing mental health problems.
-
8/20/2019 Children As Decision Makers in Education.pdf
13/193
xii Motes
o n
Co ntributors
Lionel
Vigil
has
been
EveryChild Peru'?,
Programme Manager since
March
2008.
Prior to that, Lionel worked for
Management
Science fo r Health Inc. in Peru
as a
Programme Manager
for a
USAID-funded communi ty hea l th project ,
for
the Peruvian
NGO,
PRISMA,
and for the Peruvian Ministr ies of
Health
and
Educa t ion .
Chris Williams is based at the Centre for Interna tional Edu cat ion and
Research (CIER), Univers i ty of Bi rmingham. He has also held posts at the
universities of Lon don , Cam bridge, C airo, and the Uni ted Nat ions . H is
engagement in global justice and part icipat ion includes: s t reet-working
children
in
South Africa, Turkey, Lebanon
and
A fgh anistan; disabil ity r ights
in Britain, Egypt, China,
Thailand
and
Japan;
environmental vict ims
in
India; cul tural diversi ty in Korea; and educat ion for all in Palestine and
Liberia.
Hiromi
Yamashita is Research Fellow at the Centre for Interna t ional
Educa t ion and Research (CIER), Univers i ty of Birm ingham , which engages
in research and teaching in the areas of global just ice. Hiromi 's interests
include
issues of
participation
(at all
ages) , democrat ic decision-making,
envi ronmenta l
risk
communica t ion, sus ta inable development
and
global
citizenship.
-
8/20/2019 Children As Decision Makers in Education.pdf
14/193
Introduction
Sue Cox, Carol ine Dy er, A nna Rob inson-Pant and
Michele Schweisfurth
Since
the
Uni ted Nat ions Convent ion
on the
Rights
of the
Child came into
force in 1990, there has been an increasing recognition that, globally, children
need to have mo re inpu t into decisions concerning their ow n educat ion.
Researchers, act ivists , pol icy makers, internat ional
and
nat ional non-
governmental organizat ions (NGOs)
and
educat ional in st i tut ions have been
looking a t ways o f promot ing chi ldren 's involvement in decision-m aking. This
book explores
how
children can,
and do,
actively participate
in
decision-
making. It brings together perspectives from developed and developing
countr ies ,
with
the aim of
extending
the
current debates
on
chi ldren's
participation
by
engaging
a
range
of
researchers
and
pract i t ioners with
differing practical agend as, philosop hical orientation s, and m ethodo logical
approaches .
At the
heart
of quest ions over what decisions chi ldren should make, and
how and when, is how we conceptualize children, their abili t ies and their
rights.
The UN Co nve ntion itself stipulates that the views o f children need to
be given due weight in accordance with their age and maturity (Article 12 ) .
But the age at which children are believed to be ready to make serious
decisions
that affect them and their educ at ion is open to interpretat ion, and
these beliefs changes over time and across contexts. We would argue that it is
impor tan t to go beyond token decision-making at an early stage, to give
children
a
t rue sense
of
agency
in
their
own
lives,
and not
only
to
rehearse
for
adu lthoo d. Several of the co ntributo rs to this book draw on
Hart's
( 1992)
'ladder of par t ic ipat ion ' to analyse the pu rpose and ways in which chi ldren
participate
in
decision-making.
T he
ladder helps
to
dist inguish
different
levels
of chi ldren's input , ranging from the minim al end of m anipu lat ion and
tokenism, thro ug h chi ldren being consu lted while adults take the initiative, to
the high est level of yo ut h initiatives in which they d ecide how f ar to inclu de
adults .
As ma ny of the case studies in this book will show, it is usual ly adults
who decide whethe r chi ldren can m ake decisions, and which chi ldren qualify.
-
8/20/2019 Children As Decision Makers in Education.pdf
15/193
2 Children as Decision M akers in Educat ion
As th e agenda
approaches
th e
level
of
policy,
in
particular, adults
are
increasingly likely to be in control. Yet, as illustrated in this book, the benefits
of chi ldren's decision-making
to
themselves
and to schools and
other
organizations are mult iple .
Schools
have
the
potential
to be sites of
power
for
children,
but
they
can
also be, and often are, sites of repression. Many educators do not feel
comfortable
with allowing children's decisions
in
areas where power relations
might shift as a result . Eq ually, the virtually universal stan dard s agenda, with
it s
focus
on the 'basics' of
literacy
and
numeracy,
may not
help
to
encourage
th e development of the less obviously scholastic skills of self-confidence and
critical questioning
that
need
to be fostered if
chi ldren's involvement
in
decision-making
is to
grow.
It is intere sting that while most of the UK -based chap ters in this book refer
to
schools,
m any of the contribut ions
from
developing countries
refer
to NGO
actions and other non-formal sites of education. This raises questions about
wh ether it is best to work
from
within or outsid e the form al school system, and
from
within
a set of
cul tural norms,
or from a
m ore cosm opoli tan perspect ive.
When considering
the
possibilities
and
limits
of
chi ldren's decision-making
powers in different contexts, should local cultures and practices set the
agenda,
or are we
working toward
a
shared
set of
goals bou nde d
by a
global
moral framework? If the latter, how should this framew ork b e negotiated, and
is it
realistic
to
apply
it to
inst i tut ions
so
different
from
each other?
The book is based on an Economic and Social Research Council-funded
seminar
series
held
at the
Universities
of
East Anglia, Birm ingha m
and
Leeds
dur ing 2006—7. The seminars broke new ground in bringing together
educators, researchers
and
activists work ing
in a
range
of
countries
to
present
papers, discuss practice, and
form
collaborations. The chapters are based on
papers presented,
and the
book
seeks to
develop
the
themes explored
in the
seminars and to present case
studies
of children involved in decision-making
internationally.
It
does
not do so
uncritically,
and the
barriers
to
their
participation
are
also explored.
The
book
is
divided into
four
parts .
The
chapters
in Part 1
ask,
in
various
ways,
whether we can make space for children's decision-making. They focus
on the m acro level of policy and how this is a starting poin t for p ractice.
Policy includes
that of
nat ional governm ent ,
but
also regional bodies
and the
work of international NGOs. Case studies include England, Brazil and the
Philippines. From policy we move to practice: the chapters in
Part
2 explore
how children's decision-making affects practice in schools, com m unities and
beyond, and the authors
offer
insights from Nepal, Zambia, Peru,
India,
Moldova, and the UK In Part 3, we consider the social and political
dimensions of
children
as
decision makers, asking what
we are
trying
to
achieve
in
te rms
of
political agendas
and
social integ ration , eq uity,
and
citizenship.
Along with fur ther chapters
from U K
contexts, there
are
papers
-
8/20/2019 Children As Decision Makers in Education.pdf
16/193
Introduction 3
exploring these issues
in
Mexico
and
India. Finally,
Part 4
asks
how we
facilitate
children 's part icipation.
It
draws mainly
on
experiences
of
children
as researchers ,
as
well
as
o the r
fo rms of
dec i s ion-making , p rov id ing
perspectives
from
India
and the UK on the
ques t ion .
In the
closing chapter
of the
book,
as
editors
we
a d o p t
a
compara t ive
perspective
to
investigate what these cases
from different
national
and
cultu ral con texts tel l us abo ut children as decision m akers, and wh at som e of
the faci l i ta tors and barriers are to fuller and more meaningful par t ic ipa t ion .
We h o p e that th i s c ross -cu l tu ra l v iew wi l l he lp to i n f o rm d e b a t e
internationally
—
and
that children will
be
included
in the
debate .
Notes
W e have chosen to use these
terms
rather
than
North/South or First/Third W orld,
reflecting the preference of
most
of our contributing authors.
References
Hart , R. (1992) Children's Participation: From Tokenism to Citizenship, Innocenti Essays
No. 4. Florence:
U N I C E F International Child
Development Centre.
-
8/20/2019 Children As Decision Makers in Education.pdf
17/193
his page intentionally left blank
-
8/20/2019 Children As Decision Makers in Education.pdf
18/193
Part 1
Can we
make space
for children's
decision-making? Perspectives on
educational
policy
Globally, atti tudes
to
children have changed over time, towards acknowl-
edging the importance of their decision-making. This is reflected, for
example , in the almost universal rat i f icat ion of the Uni ted Nat ions
Convention on the Rights of the Child. Among the decision-making rights
upheld
by the
Convention
are
children's right
to
stay with their parents
if
they choose (Article 9 . 1 ) ; to express their views freely (Article
13 . 1 ) ;
and to
assemble peacefully (Article
15 . 1 ) .
W e would hope to see such shifts in
at t i tude,
and
such international agreem ents, reflected
in
national policy and,
in turn , in how these policies are enacted in schools, classrooms and other
educat ional
sites. The
chapters
in
this
part of the
book explore
how
far,
in
different
contexts, these aspirations are manifested; they also introduce
concepts
which facili tate analysis of children's involvem ent at different levels.
A m o n g
the
themes
are the
extent
to
which policy rhetoric
is
matched
by
reality,
and the
roles
of
organizations such
as
non-gov ernm ental organiza-
tions (NGOs) in bridging gaps and support ing chi ldren and adults in making
children's decisions
heard and
realized. Policy
can be an
enabler,
but it
certainly does not guarantee that children are empowered, and, as some of
these
chapters point out, evidence
of
resistance
can be found at
many levels.
An historical overview of the situation in the En gland since 1 965 provides
an interesting case study of som e of these theme s. The intersection of politics
and education creates a f luctuating trajectory. Rather than being taken
seriously,
Colin Richards argues
that
children's decision-making is restricted
by such
factors
as high-stakes examinations and school league tables, driven
by
a
performativity agenda. Increasingly, there
are
moves
to
include
children's perspectives, for example in how their views of their schools and
teachers are now part of the Office for Standards in Educat ion
(Ofsted)
-
8/20/2019 Children As Decision Makers in Education.pdf
19/193
6
Children
a s
Decision Makers
in
Educat ion
process
of inspection, but
'myths '
live on. Along with
'myths ' ,
Richards uses
'ages'
and
' au tonom y '
as organizing ideas in his analysis, which is based on
many years
of
experience with Ofsted
and as an
academic educat ionist
observing policy and practice in England. W e invite readers to compare his
observations with
the
situation
in
other contexts.
Given the limitations of policy, organizations p rom oting children's right to
decide have used interventionist tactics to facili tate the prerequisite
skills,
structures and atti tude s. The following two chapters d oc um ent case studies of
such
strategies,
in different
nat ional contexts .
In Chapter 2 , Tristan
M cCow an considers the 'prefigurative ' po tential of schoo ls in the B razilian
context,
in
relation
to
pupil participation
in
schools
an d
ul t imately
in
society.
In
particular,
he
analyses
a
municipal government 's
'Plural
School' initiative,
based
on the
principle
of
inclusion throug h dem ocrat izat ion.
Once again, we
find the challenges of fac ilitating the partic ipatio n of all childre n, of
democrat izing the relationships between teachers and pupils , and of taking
young people's decision-making powers beyond the more trivial elements of
uniforms
and food. How ever, there is evidence that the prefigurat ive
strategies
employed
can
lead
to
wider exercising
of the
right
to
participate.
The wo rk of the international NG O Ox fam in
conflict
zon es is the basis for
the next chapter. Drawing on experience from
conflict
zones internationally,
th e region of Central Mindanao in the Philippines becomes the focus of an
exploration of how
conflict
and poverty affect scho oling and create particu lar
conditions for the participation of children. Sheila Aikm an considers how
school as a
place
and as a
social space
can
create opportunit ies,
and how the
dynamics of power affect processes. A m ong the achievem ents of the
programme
in
Mindanao
are
higher levels
of
attendan ce, interest
and
participation from children, and
fewer
in terru ption s to schooling as a result of
the
conflict.
Finally, Clive
Harber
draws on evidence
from
a wide range of contexts to
argue that,
on the
whole, school children
are not
decision makers,
and
that
policy
and
teacher educat ion
are
parts
of the
problem.
H e
brings together
studies
of pupils ' views of schooling to il lustrate the 'unfreedoms' inherent in
the purp oses and struc tures of schooling. Crucially, the chap ter also
synthesizes evidence of how very imp orta nt l istening to pup ils and giving
them power
and
responsibili ty are.
W e
might expect this
in
terms
of
developing the capacity for democratic citizenship, but i t proves to be
excellent practice even using more conventional indicators of
effectiveness
such
as
examinat ion outcom es
and
pupil discipline.
-
8/20/2019 Children As Decision Makers in Education.pdf
20/193
Chapter
1
The changing
context
of
decision-making
in
English
primary education: ages,
myths
and autonomy
Colin Richards
Introduction
This chapter discusses chi ldren as decision makers in the context of
deve lopment s
in Engl ish pr imary educat ion. It cannot do jus t i ce to
developments elsewhere, whether
in
other parts
of the
Uni ted Kingdom
or
overseas.
It
uses
three organizing ideas —
ages ' ,
'myths '
and
' au tonom y ' —
as a
way of out l ining the changing context in which English primary schools have
operated, primary teachers have taught and prima ry pup ils have experienced
their schooling over the forty years since the publication of the Plowden
Rep ort (Central Ad visory Coun cil
for
Educa t ion 1967) . Very largely
the
story is one of ad ult decision-m aking, albeit in a chang ing contex t, with
different sets of adults m aking different k inds of decisions at different t imes. It
is
a
story
in
which chi ldren's perspect ives
are not so
mu ch consciously ignored
as not really considered — either in policy, research or school decision-making.
There are
some
signs that at
long last those perspectives
are
being seen
as
impor tan t
—
at least at the level of rhetoric but only very patchily as yet at the
level of
practice.
The
lessons
of
English history
(if it has lessons) are not all
that
hopeful.
There is a need now to make that rhetoric a reality — forty years
after the Plowden Report was published with the ti t le Children
a nd Their
Primary Schools, with its assertion that 'At the heart of the educational process
lies
th e
child' ,
with its slogan 'The child as agent of his own
learning' ,
but
with its 500-page report providing no evidence that children had ever been
consulted
in its
deliberations
-
8/20/2019 Children As Decision Makers in Education.pdf
21/193
8 Children
a s
Decision Makers
in
Educat ion
An age of exc item ent, 1 965-74
The first
period, 1965—74
is
termed 'an age
of excitement '
—
but
this,
of
course,
is an
adult viewpoint
— that of a
teacher. Would children,
had
they been
asked
(which they were not), have seen it in similar terms?
Despite very
real
pro blem s (very large class sizes by current s tandards,
high staff turnover
and the
vestiges
of the eleven-plus
1
)
there
was a sense of
optimism in the system
captured
in the
upbeat
style, messages and
rhetoric
of
th e Plowden Report itself. Primary educat ion was expanding in terms of
numbers
of
pupils, increases
in
resources
and
rising public
and
professional
expectations.
There
was a sense of
freedom (coupled with anxiety) over
th e
removal
of the
restrictions
on
teacher initiative
following
th e
demise
(in
many
areas) of
selection. There
was a
rh etoric , too,
of
increased freedom
for
children
to
pursue their own
needs
and interests, tho ug h what re search there was into
primary
classrooms (Boydell 197 4 ) and my experience as a primary school
teacher revealed
in
most cases either
the
cont inuance
of
overt teache r direction
or an
illusory freedom
offered
children
to do
what teachers thought
was in the
children's
best interests
a
kind
of pseudo-progressivism
where children were
given
nei ther
the
tools
nor the
opportunities
for
genu ine decision-m aking over
their own
learning.
There
arose
th e myth of a
primary school revolution — founded
to
some
degree
on
highly innovative practice
in a
small minority
of
schools
but
essentially
the result of wishful thinking on the
part
of some child-centred
educat ional i s t s
w ho
occupied prominent posi t ions
in
local educat ion
authorities
(LEAs)
and initial teacher education (Richards
1980) .
Though
mythical, these ideas added
to the
sense
of
interest
and
anticipation
in
working in a system where the children, the teachers and the system itself
were perceived to be full of unrealized possibilit ies. Teachers enjoyed (albeit
rather anxiously) licensed autonomy, they were trusted by politicians and
parents alike
to
take p rofession al decisions abo ut bo th
the
content
of the
curr iculum and the way it should be taught and assessed. A parallel licensed
au tonomy
was not
offered
to
children
—
this
was not the
golden
age of
children's decision-making
that
some nostalgic liberals fondly imagine
An age of disillusionment, 1974-88
The
period
1974—88 was
very different
—
seen from
an
educat ionist 's
perspective.
There was
virtually
no
research into
how
children perceived
or
influenced their educational experience during this period, despite a numb e r
of
major classroom observational research projects. This
was an a ge of
dis il lusionment
—
with
the
post-war dem ocrat ic consensus, with
th e
state
of
the
British economy, with
the
condition
of the
public services, with
the
-
8/20/2019 Children As Decision Makers in Education.pdf
22/193
The
changing
context of decision-making in English
primary
education 9
quali ty
of
pr imary educat ion
and
with
the
standards achieved
by
pr imary
school pupi l s .
National
surveys of prima ry and m iddle schools (D epartm ent
of
Education and Science 1978, 1983), classroom observational research
(Gallon
et
al.
1980) and my own personal experience visiting schools as a
university lec turer and latterly as a government inspector revealed a
sub stantial gap (inevitable to som e degree ) between profe ssional rhetoric
and
practice,
not
least
in
relation
to the
degree
of
freedom accorded primary
pupils — revealed as il lusory despite th e wild claims of populist rhetoric over
teachers abdic ating respon sibili ty over teaching
and
learning
to
their pupils
-
as il lustrated by publications such as the Black Papers (e.g. Cox and Boyson
1975, 1 977) wri t ten
by
conservative academics, many with li t t le direct
experience of English state schools or pupils.
These factors, within and external to the educat ional system, helped
establish
a myth of decline, especially of declining standards in li teracy and
numeracy. Though decision-making over curriculum, teaching and assess-
m ent rem ained largely in the han ds of schools (and, m ore particularly , of
individual teachers) , there
was a loss of
professional self-confidence
and
direction
in the
face
of
continuing criticism, despite
th e
fact there
was no
substantial evidence either from research or school inspection of a decline in
educat ional s tandards
or of
pu pils being ac corded excessive degrees
of
f reedom. Teachers exercised a kind
of
monitored autonomy, as dur ing the 1980s
both central and local go vern m ent beg an to develop policies for the
curr iculum and LEAs tried to moni to r and influence pract ice in individual
schools. H owever,
the
notion
of
pupil perspect ive,
let
alone pup il cons ultat ion
or decision-making, featured in nei ther nat ional nor LEA th inking.
An
age of regulat ion, 1988-97
The next nine-year period can be characterized as an a ge of regulat ion. It
would
be
interest ing
to
know
in
what terms primary pupils experienced
it,
but the
research
w as
neve r under t aken .
The
st i rr ings
of
government
involvement , begun in the previous period, were replaced by s t rong
intervention especially in the areas of curr iculum and assessment . For the
first t ime since 1 897 En glish prima ry schools were req uired to follow a
detailed,
codified,
state-imposed curriculum and were provided with a
national system
of assessm ent successively
m odified over
th e
years
—
there
was
little scope
for
decision-m aking
b y
schools
and
teachers at tempting
to
grapple
with an overloaded, over-assessed cur riculu m . A n a t t empt to in t roduce
citizenship as a cross-curricular theme offered the po ssibili ty of pu pil
part icipat ion beyond the nat ional curriculum, but like the other cross-
curricular them es ci tizenship never got off the g rou nd. There was one
interes t ing counter-movement to note — the in t roduct ion of 'c i rc le t ime' in a
-
8/20/2019 Children As Decision Makers in Education.pdf
23/193
1 0 Children
as
Decision Makers
in
Education
smal l number of
schools —
at last giving children something of a
'voice'
but
not usual ly involving decision-making of any substant ial kind. For teachers,
regulated autonomy
replaced moni tored autonomy.
The
instigation
of a
nat ional
cycle
of insp ection was a very
powerful,
tho ug h indirect , way of regulat ing the
system
—
policing schoo ls' com pliance with nation al directives and severely
l imit ing or even precluding high-risk experimentat ion with content , process
or
decision-making.
The myth of low
standards especially
in the
so-called
'basics' promulgated particularly by Ofsted's second chief inspector (see
Richards 1 997) was used to justify t ighter regulat ion and control , though the
evidence was, at worst, very suspect and, at best, far from conclusive.
An age of
dom ination, 1 997-2003
The first six
years
of the New
L a b ou r gove rnme n t
can
bes t
be
descr ibed
as
an a ge of
dominat ion; chi ldren
m ay
have experienced
it in
t e rms
of
tests,
targets , plenaries
and
carpe t -s i t t ing
F ar from
restoring (albei t
in a
more
accountab le form) ini t ia t ive and f reedom to exper iment in the p r imary
sector,
cent ra l government in tervened ever more di rect ly
and
sha rp ly .
It
i n t roduced a nat ional l i teracy strategy which was far more detai led and
prescript ive
than the na t ional cur r iculu m orders ever were (see W yse et
al.
2008) .
T h e
acc om panying num eracy s t ra t egy prov ided rather m ore 'degrees
of
f reedom'
but
only relative
to its
l i teracy equivalent .
The
gove rnme n t
set
early learning goals for the under-s ixes . It prescr ibed teaching methods
which were dang erously c lose to breaking the law as laid down in the 1988
Educa t ion Reform Act . It
made
a fetish of nat ional test ing — t reat ing it as the
measure fo r judg ing the pe r fo rm ance o f p r imary schools. It signally failed to
curb the
excesses
of Ofsted and used
that
organizat ion to reinforce the
domina t ion of the measurab le and gradable as the expression of s t andards
and
qual i ty .
It was
symp t oma t i c
of
this period
that
pupils ' views
and
perspectives never fea tured in any governmenta l consul ta t ion or inspect ion
f r amework .
The government pursued the myth of m oderniza t ion but paradoxically in a
w ay
more reminiscent
of the
nineteenth than
the twenty-first
century .
Moderniza t ion was to be achieved through an unquest ioning acceptance of
government ini t ia t ives; there
was
'zero tolerance'
of
dissent; criticism
was
treated as indicative of vested interests in
'old'
(i.e.
p re -1997)
educat ion
which needed to be swept away or ignored. The government offered
schools
and teachers rhetorical autonomy, they were free in principle to opt out of
initiatives suc h
as the
national strategies,
but at
their peril, given policing
by
Ofsted
inspectors, LEA
officers
and government officials, all with anxious eyes
on
school, LEA and national targets.
There
were, however, some interest ing counter-ini t ia t ives. Though non-
-
8/20/2019 Children As Decision Makers in Education.pdf
24/193
The
changing context
of
decision-making
in English
primary
education
1 1
statutory (and receiving li t t le other than rhetorical support from the
Dep ar tment for Edu cat ion and Skills), person al, social, health and citizens hip
educat ion was re introduced . 'Circle time' becam e increasingly com m on (it is
interesting to speculate why), notions of student voice were aired (especially
in secondary schools) and the school council m ovem ent began to grow.
Researchers became interested in children's perspectives, as i l lustrated by the
Primary
Asse ssm ent , Cu rricu lum and Experience (PA CE ) project (Pollard
and Triggs 2000; Osborn et
al.
2000) which documented pr imary chi ldren 's
perceived
loss
of auton om y and increas ing ins t rum enta l approach to
school ing
as
they g rew o lde r
amid the
p r e s s u r e
of the
d o m i n a n t
performativity regime.
An age of contradictions: from 2003 to the present
It is part icularly difficult to characterize the current period — an a ge of
emancipa t ion? (hardly) , an a ge o f
illusions?
(possibly) or an a ge o f contra-
dictions?
(mos t likely). But perhaps at long last we may have a better view of
how children are experiencing it through their part icipat ion in school
councils
and in children-as-researcher projects.
In one
sense
surveillance remains a dominant theme. The nat ional
curriculum remains in place; the national
tests
still op era te at the ages of 7
and
1 1 ;
targets s t i l l dominate the educat ional landscape; performance tables
show no
sign
of
disappearing.
A
thousand pages
of
revised numeracy
and
literacy 'guidance ' have been issued on-line. The government has ma de the
teaching of synthe t ic phonics man datory — in clear contradiction to the 1988
Educat ion Reform
Act and to a
cen tury
of
teacher auto nom y over teaching
methodology. Ofsted inspect ions continue — at m ore freq ue nt intervals and
with
a
supposed ly
' l ighter to uch ' bu t
carrying
the
danger
of
constant
surveillance as the psycho logical reality in schools.
Yet there are some counterva i ling developm ents . The government claims
as its goal 'for every primary school to combine excellence in teaching with
enjoyment
of
learning' . Through
the
primary national strategy, schools
are
being encouraged
to be
mo re innovative
and
creative
an d to use the
increased
' f reedom'
to provide a m ore flexible cu rriculu m (tho ug h the possible role of
pupils in influencing that curriculum is unclear). Assessment for learning,
including pupi l
self-assessment,
is in favour ( though not at the expense of
na t ional assessment o f l ea rn ing) . Every Child M at te r s (De pa r t me n t
for
Educa t ion and Skills 2003) promises at long last joined-up thinking and
join ed-u p services. Ex tended schools offer exciting possibili t ies (b ut are
children being consulted, or even making decisions, as to the activities to be
ma de
available?).
Two inquiries
—
one into the na ture of chi ldhood and one
(the Cambridge Primary
Review]
reviewing the state of pr imary educat ion —
-
8/20/2019 Children As Decision Makers in Education.pdf
25/193
1 2 Children as Decision
Makers
in Educat ion
have been undertaken, though
not by the
government ;
in
both, children's
views
are being s ou gh t. Of sted is at long last expecting schoo ls to seek, and act
on, the views of pupils. School councils are gaining ground; work with
children as researchers is beginning to develop. The
issue
of children as
decision
makers
is on the
research agenda
— but is it on
schools'
or the
government 's agenda?
It is not
possible
to offer a
definitive guiding myth
for
this period,
but it is
possible that
we may be witnessing a partial (but sti l l precarious) relicensed
autonomy
for
English teachers.
But what are we offering children forty years on from the Plowden Report?
Are
children
at
last
to
have
a say in
their prim ary schools? Throu gh school
councils
and the like are we simply (but important ly) helping them to
understand their fu ture roles as citizens or are we helping them to develop
here
and now as
participatory school citizens?
What are the
di lemmas,
contradict ions
and
methodological problems involved
in
developing
that
school citizenry, both in Englan d and elsewhere? The rest of this book (with
its cro ss-cu l tural case-s tudies) prom ises fascinat ing gl impses into suc h
questions. What a ge
might
we be
helping
to
usher
in?
Notes
The eleven-plus examination was taken by children at the end of primary school, to
determine eligibility for entry into selective secondary schools. Versions
remain
in
place in some parts of the country .
References
Boydell , D. (1974) 'Teacher-pupil contact in jun ior classrooms',
British Journal
o f
Educational Psychology,
44, 313-18.
Central
Advisory Council
for
Educat ion (1 967)
Children
a nd
Their
Primary
Schools.
London:
HMSO.
Cox, C. B. and Boyson, R . (eds)
Black Paper 1975.
London: Dent.
Cox, C. B. and Boyson, R . (eds)
Black
Paper
1977.
London: Temple Smith.
Department for
Educat ion
and
Science (1978) Primary Education
in England: A Survey by
H M
Inspectors of Schools. London:
HMSO.
Department
of Edu cation and Science (1 983)
9-13 Middle
Schools:
An
Illustrative
Survey.
London:
HMSO.
Department
for Educat ion and Skills (2003)
Every Child Mat te rs :
Change fo r Children.
Nottingham:
DfES Publications.
Galton, M., Simon, B. and Croll , P. (1980) Inside the Primary Classroom. London:
Routledge.
Osborn, M.,
McNess,
E. and
Broadfoot ,
P.
(2000 )
What Teachers D o : Changing Policy
and Practice
in Primary
Education.
London: Cont inu um .
-
8/20/2019 Children As Decision Makers in Education.pdf
26/193
The changing
context
o f decision-making in English primary education 13
Pollard, A. and Triggs, P.
(2000)
What Pupils Say: Changing Policy and Practice in Primary
Education.
London: Continuum.
Richards, C. ( 1980) 'Demythologising primary education'. Journal of Curriculum Studies,
1 2 ( 1 ) .
Richards,
C.
( 1997)
Primary Education, Standards and Ofsted: Towards a M ore Authentic
Conversation. Coventry: Centre for Research in Elementary and Primary Education,
Universi ty of Warwick.
Wyse, D., McCreery, E. and Torrance, H.
(2008)
The
Trajectory
a nd
Impact o f National
Reform:
Curriculum and Assessment in English Primary Schools, Primary Review
Research Survey 3/2. Cambridge: Cambridge Primary Review (University
o f
Cambridge, Faculty o f
Education).
-
8/20/2019 Children As Decision Makers in Education.pdf
27/193
his page intentionally left blank
-
8/20/2019 Children As Decision Makers in Education.pdf
28/193
Chapter 2
'Prefigurative'
approaches to participatory
schooling: experiences in
Brazil
Tristan
McCowan
Recent interest in increasing pupil participation in school decision-making
has had diverse motivations. Participation can be seen as a right, as enshrined
in the 1989 United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Y et there
are a n u m b e r of other instrum ental just i f icat ions. Pupil part icipat ion has
been linked to 'school effectiveness' and 'school
improvement ' ,
increases in
test
scores, im prov em ents in the behaviou r of pupils , and enhancing the
overall ethos of the schoo l (F lutte r and Ruddock 2004; Harber and Trafford
1999; Macbeath and Moos 2004) .
l
The rationales outlined above are characterized by an extrinsic value
given to participation, in relation to the educat ional and o ther benefits it
brings
to individuals and inst i tut ion s. How ever, part icipat ion can also be
suppor ted
from the stand poin t of i ts intr insic dem ocrat ic value. Dem ocrat ic
structures in schools, from this perspective, are a good in themselves, whether
or not they contrib ute to the perfo rm ance of s tud ents academically or
socially. At the same time they m ay also be means by which s tudents can
develop knowledge, skills and valu es related to dem ocratic particip ation
outside
the school .
This chapter explores part icipatory approach es
to
schooling based
in an
intrinsic valuing of democracy. Specifically, it focuses on the prefigurative
approach. A case of school democratization in Brazil — the Plural School
—
is
analysed in order to exp lore the possibili t ies of these prefigurative forms.
While th is exper ience encounters s igni f icant problems in relat ion to
i mp l e me n t a t i on ,
it
represents
an
impor tan t ins t ance
o f
par t ic ipa tory
approaches .
-
8/20/2019 Children As Decision Makers in Education.pdf
29/193
1 6 Children
as
Decision Makers
in
Education
The notion of th e
'prefigurative'
Boggs
1 9 7 7 — 8 )
defines prefiguration as 'the embo diment , wi thin the ongoing
political practice of a movement, of those forms of social relations, decision-
making, cul ture and human exper i ence that are the u l t ima te goal'.
Historical ly, prefigurat ive movements developed
in
opposi t ion
to
forms
of
Marxism that looked
to a
revolut ion headed
by a
strong party
as the
mos t
effective way of achieving the goal of the socialist society. In these
consequentialist
forms, the means were in tension with the ends, in that
hierarchical organization and violence were used to achieve a peaceful , non-
hierarchical society. In c ontrast, oth er forms of revolut ionary organizat ion
aimed to em bo dy the v alues of the desired society within their political
activities.
Prefigurat ive forms have been incorporated
in a
variety
of
forms
of
organ ization, but p articularly in anarc hist (e.g. Fra nks 200 3) and
feminist
movements
(e .g . Epste in 1 991; Ro wbo tham 1979) .
A key characteristic of the prefigurative is
that
it cannot simply be
abandoned in favour of a more effective strategy, since it is not only a means
but also an instant iat ion of the end in the present . It involves either a harmony
between or a unification of ends and m eans (M cCo wan 20 08 ). In addit ion,
prefigurative
forms
are not only instrum ental to the t ransf orm ation of society,
but
also
for
personal l iberation (Go rdon 2007) , providing imp ortant informal
learning experiences for those involved, both individually and collectively. It
is also possible for formal educat ion to be p refigu rat ive. M ichael Fielding's
(e.g.
1997,
2007)
work
on radical
state schooling,
for
example, draws
extensively on the idea of the prefigurative.
The
Brazilian context
Brazil
has a history of author i ta r ianism, and of extreme socio-economic
inequalities. However, in the period following the military dictatorship of
1964—85, there has been a wave of democrat izat ion, and a n u m b e r of
inspiring
civil society organizations and m ovem ents have emerged, part icu-
larly in the area of educ at ion (e .g. Gandin 2006; McCowan 2006; Myers
2008).
The decentral ized nature of the Brazilian system has meant that
opposition
to dominant paradigms has taken the form not only of pressu ring
cent ra l government
for
policy changes,
but
also
of
act ively construct ing
alternatives at the local level. A n um be r of significan t local gov ernm ent
initiatives have emerged in the last twenty years, many under municipal
governments of the Workers ' Party (Partido d o s Trabalhadores, PT) . The case
discussed
here, the Plural School, is a local initiative of this type.
The case stu dy involved qua litative research carried o ut in 2005—6. In
add ition to a general overview, three scho ols were cho sen for in-de pth
-
8/20/2019 Children As Decision Makers in Education.pdf
30/193
'Prefigurative'
approaches
to
pa rticipa tory schoo ling: experiences
in
Brazil
1 7
research. Interviews were conducted with three officials of the M unicipal
Secretariat of Ed uca t ion (Secretaria Mu nicipal de Educacao , SMED) , and ,
in the
focus
schools, with the head -teache r, three classroom teachers, and
three groups
of
students aged
1 3 — 1 7 .
Interviews were conducted
and
t ranscribed in Por tuguese (quota t ions appear ing in this chapter have been
translated into English by the author) . Classroom observat ions were also
carried out,
as
well
as
documentary analysis involving official curr iculum
guidance
and
pedagogical materials
at the
school level.
There are many aspects of interest in this initiative, but this chapter will
focus on appro ach es to pu pil participation. The Plural S chool does not use
the l anguage of the
'pre f igura t ive '
explici t ly, but clearly displays a
commitment to this form of organizat ion in both i ts wri t ings and pract ice.
First ther e will be an o verview of the initiative, follow ed by an ou tline of its
approac h to pupil part icipat ion and assessment of i ts im plem entat ion in
practice.
The
Plural School
The Plural School (P S) is an initiative of the m unic ipal go vern m ent of
Belo
Horizonte, a large city with a m etropol itan
area
of over 5 mill ion inhab itants .
The city is the capital of M inas Gerais, a relatively wealthy state, but one
with severe inequ alities, leaving
a
significant prop ort ion
of the
popula t ion
in
poverty and polit ical m arginal izat ion. A disprop ort ionate part of this gro up is
ma de up by the black and mixed-race com mu ni t ies , many descendants of the
slaves who were brou ght to the region during the gold boom of the eighteenth
cen tury. Belo Ho rizonte 's mu nicipal system has some 1 64 prim ary and 26
secondary schools,
as
well
as pre-school,
special education
and
you t h
and
adul t educat ion provision ( In s t i tu to Nacional
de
Es t udos
e
Pesquisas
Educacionais Anisio Teixeira ( IN EP)
2007) .
The PS,
initiated
in the 1990s, is a
f ramework
of
policy
and
practice based
around
the
principle
of
inclusion.
In
part icular ,
the PS
aims
to
comba t
'school failure' , represented
by
d rop-ou t
and
grade repet i t ion.
The
traditional
school is seen to exclude sections of the c om m unity in a n um ber of ways:
th rough its choice of valued knowledge, its assessment procedures , the
s truc ture
of the school day and the teacher—student relat ionship. The
framework,
therefo re, repre sen ts an ope ning of this rigid sy stem to a plu rality
of individuals , group s a nd cultures, giving each equal value and oppor tun i ty .
The distinctive feature of the PS is i ts recognition that the realization of the
right to education can be a
form
of exclusion if atten tion is not p aid to
processes and experiences with in the schoo l. Im ple m en tation of this vision,
however, is not w itho ut challenges. Ex isting research (e.g. Da lben 2000;
Gloria and M afra 2 004 ) shows these difficulties, particularly in relation to
-
8/20/2019 Children As Decision Makers in Education.pdf
31/193
1 8
Children
as
Decision
Makers in
Educat ion
misunders tanding
of and
resistance
to the
initiative
by
teachers, students
and
the local communit ies.
Addressing school democratization
The
importance
of
pupil participation
in the PS
framework
is
shown
in the
following statement by SMED
(2002:
1 5 ) :
'All
[the politico-pedago gical
plans] p ropo se the d evelop m ent of the citizen for participation in society. All
these
propo sals note
that
school will develop these collective
subjects
in as far
as they m ake them part icipants in the cons truct ion of hum anized school
spaces. '
The deve lopm ent of dem ocratic c itizenship, therefore, dep end s on the
democrat ic cul ture prefigured
in the
schools.
There are a
n u m b e r
of
bodies
in
which pupils participate.
The
School Assembly, with
the
participation
of the
whole school community,
has the funct ion of
making decisions
on key
issues
such
as
arrangemen ts d uring
a
teachers' strike.
The
smaller School Council
(clearly distinct
from that
seen
in the
UK), with student , teacher
and
community representat ives,
has a
more executive role, with responsibilities
including management of the budget . While there are federal, state and
municipal guidelines on the curricu lum , individual schools have a large
degree of leeway regarding wh at is taug ht. Schools, therefore, con struc t their
own distinctive
'poli t ico-pedagogical
plans' , which provide the basis for the
curriculum. Direct elections for head-teachers are also universal, aiming to
make school leadership more responsive
to
local needs
and
political demands.
The
participation
of
stud ents , therefore, takes place
in the
context
of a
wider
democratic basis for schooling, involving teachers and communities as well .
The gremios are another key site for pupil participation. These are pupil
associations,
elected by the pu pils themselves, which organize cultural,
sporting and political activities in the school and act as a
forum
for discussion
and as a
mouthpiece
for
stud ent views. These have
a
long history
in
Brazilian
schools, yet the municipal government has aimed to give them impetus, and
particularly
to
enhance their political
funct ion.
A key aspect of the participa tory cu lture in PS schools, and one which
serves to
different iate
i t from
some other
efforts at
school democratization,
is
that it is embedded within a commi tment to transforming political relations.
This
is
contained particularly
in the
adherence
to
Freirean dialogue
as a
pedagogical principle. Dialogue,
in the
Freirean sense, involves
a radical
alteration
of the
relations between teacher
and
s tudent ,
and of the
process
of
knowledge construct ion and acquisi t ion (Freire 1972) .
The PS approach, therefore, is one in which the specific opportunit ies for
pupil participation
in
decision-making
—
such
as the
School Council
and
gremio —
are
underp inned
by a
commi tment
to
democrat ic teacher-student
relations
and
Freirean dialogue.
-
8/20/2019 Children As Decision Makers in Education.pdf
32/193
'Prefigurative '
approaches
to
participatory schooling: exp eriences
in Brazil
19
Challenges
of implementation
While there were a n u m b e r of s t ructures through which s tudents could
participate, the
gremio
was the most prominent in the
data.
Those s tudents
strongly engaged
in the
gremios reported significant pol it ical dev elopm ent .
Thais, a gremio leader, described the process of broadening her under -
standing
of
political
issues as a
resul t
of her
part icipat ion:
The gremio campaigns for things for the school . F or example, you see there
is
a teacher m issing. Ah You c om plain to the head. But it is not the
faul t
of
the
head that there
is a
teacher missing, that
the desks are
broken, that
there
are not
enough materials .
It is a
nat ional problem.
Y ou
begin
to see
that the stru ctu re of society is m uc h bigg er. So you begin to get involved in
larger issues
than
this, not only in the gremio.
How ever, w hile s tude nts l ike
Thais
had very rich p rocesses of political
development, they are not representat ive of the whole pupi l body. Students
who did not participate directly in the gremio associated it principally with
organ izing parties and excu rsions and expressed scepticism abo ut i ts political
nature, and its efficacy in giving a voice to s tud en t views.
As
well as
difficulties
in extending participation to all within the school,
there were also divergences between schools.
At one
school,
th e gremio was
almost non-existent :
TM: Is there a gremio in the school?
Pupil 1 : Ah. I 've
heard
there is, though I 've never seen it .
Pupil 2:
There
is a
gremio,
but
I've
never seen their proposals, there
isn't even an election. . ..
Pupi l
3: You
see, they organized
a
t ime
for
meeting that
was
only
convenient
for the
organizing group,
it
wasn ' t
for
other
people in the school.
However, taking a perspect ive broader than p art icipat ion in the
gremio,
there
was evidence of a general increase in student part icipat ion in decision-
making. Dora,
a
deputy head, bel ieved strongly
that the
s tuden t s
in her
school had undergone a process of pol i t ical empowerment . She emphasized
the l ink between democrat ic processes in the school and political participa-
t ion outside
it,
be tween
the
prefigurative
and the
pre f igured :
So I see that a
good proport ion
of our
s tudents manage
to
unders t and
and
live that d em ocrac y and then live it ou tside . Bec ause if i t is l ived in the
school . . . if he
[sic,
the
pupil] manages
to
part icipate
in the
life
of the
-
8/20/2019 Children As Decision Makers in Education.pdf
33/193
20 Children as Decision M akers in Educat ion
school where he is seen as a citizen with rights, he can exercise these rights
here in the school, and that implies duties too. For him it seems clear to
have
that
role outside,
to be an aware
citizen.
Student act ion was often restricted to decid ing relatively trivial elem ents of
school rules, such as their not wear ing uni forms, a nd being able to leave the
school at
lunch t imes .
Yet at
t imes
it
also extended
to the
cu r r i cu l um.
Segu ndo pointed to the em pow erm ent of his s tu de nts to cri t ique his own
teaching:
So
they have
a
strong critique
of my classes. So if I
enter into
any
contradiction, they stop m e there and then, something
that
I think is
gr ea t . . .because I see that they contest things, they don't accept passively
everything that I say . . . [BJecause often the pupi l sees the teacher as the
master of know ledge.
Even three s tudents w ho were not act ive part icipants in the
gremio
emphasized
the
change
in
power relations:
TM : Do you think in general the voice of the stu de nt is heard?
Pupil 1 :
It has
more weight than
the
voice
of the
teacher
I
think.
Pu pil 2: Yes, it 's bec aus e the stu de nts are in the m ajo rity. . . . one or
other voice doesn't count for much, but the voice of the
people
I
think
it has
more power
than the
voice
of the
teachers themselves, of the head-teach er.
Pupil
3: And
also
we can
demand things, what
we
want ,
we can ask
for
our
rights,
you
see.
TM : And do you
manage
it?
Pupil 2: W e even get rid of teachers who
aren't
teaching properly.
While
the
pupils have perhaps overstated their influence
in
relation
to
teachers here, the key point is the
perception
of their right to pow er in the
school.
Not
surprisingly, teachers were
a
li t t le nervous about this growing
student
influence, and about the evaluations of them that the students were
beginning to carry out in som e schools.
Another important aspect
of the
initiative related
to
gender, with
the
disparities of political
influence
in the wider society to a large extent
overcome. Girls were more prominent than boys as representatives in
decision-making bodies
(such
as the
gremio],
and had female role models not
only in relation to classroom teachers but also in positions of responsibility in
school and
local authority.
So, while participation in the gremios may have been limited, there was
evidence
of a
significant
shift in
power relations
in the
schools,
and
-
8/20/2019 Children As Decision Makers in Education.pdf
34/193
'Prefigurative'
approaches
to par ticipato ry schoo ling:
experiences
in
Brazil
2 1
empowerment
of the
s tudents .
In
addition
to