Participation and Children’s Rights

Summative Assessment Essay

‘Children are meant to be seen, not heard’ is an adage that has formed the opinion
of many adults for centuries. According to the Dictionary of Proverbs (Latimer
Apperson et al, 2006) the proverb originated in the 15 th century, it started off as a
proverb referring to young women, who should not speak unless spoken to, but its
meaning quickly and very conveniently expanded from ‘all maids’ to ‘children’. It is
one of the proverbs that has a literal meaning and it has survived well until today.
Throughout history, the perception of childhood has changed, and nowadays many
countries view childhood as a discrete part of society, that has its own niche with its
own characteristics and needs (King, 2016). The Convention of the Rights of the
Child (United Nations, 1988), a fairly recent document, was ratified by the required
amount of countries only in 1990. Article 12, in particular, elaborates on the right of
the child to be ‘heard and taken seriously’. In this essay, I shall discuss the meaning
of participation and the different forms and levels of participation, most notably with
reference to the work of Sinclair (2004), Shier (2001) and Lundy (2009) Then I will
explore literature that speaks about barriers to child participation as well as what
benefits can children and society in general gain. Here reference will be made to the
work of Venninen (2013) and Wyness (2009), Sinclair (2004), Bae (2010) and Khoja
(2016). After discussing the benefits, I would like to discuss how participation can be
promoted, with appropriate reference to current literature, such as Dunn (2015),
Shier (2001), Kellet (2010) and Clark and Moss (2011).

What is ‘Participation’?

Articles 12, 13, 14 of the United Nations Convention of the Rights of the Child
(UNCRC) all deal with the theme of Children’s Participation. Article 12 states that
children should participate in all decisions that concern them, Article 13 states that
children have the right to express themselves freely and Article 14 states that
children have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. Even though
there is not a single fixed definition of participation, when one reads said UNCRC
articles, one can say that participation is the child’s right to express an opinion on
things that concern their life and well-being, as well as the child’s right to influence
any decisions that may impact their life. Different scholars have explored the
different aspects and levels of participation. The meaning of participation can vary
according in different societies, as the concept of childhood can differ greatly, since it
is a social construct that reflects the history, culture, values and hierarchical structure
of the particular society in which it exists (King, 2007). Ruth Sinclair, in 2004, wrote
about the four key aspects of participation. The first is the level of participation,
meaning how much participation a child is allowed to have. In explaining this, Sinclair
(2004) refers to various models of participation. The oldest one to which she refers is
Hart’s Ladder of Participation (1992), which starts off at the bottom rung of eight,
where the adult has total control and manipulates the child into complying with the
adult’s decisions, to the topmost rung, where the decisions are initiated by the child,
who then shares them with the adult.

Following on Hart’s work, Shier, in 2001, came out with a model of participation that
starts off at the very basic tenet of participation: listening to children. This model has
five levels and at each level Shier introduces three questions which challenge the
teacher into being auto-critical and self-reflective about their practice. Shier (2001)
also says that the different levels of participation may be suitable subject to the
activity at hand. In reference to the various models of participation, Sinclair
comments that in each model there is a will to move children towards a more
autonomous decision-making capacity. The second facet of participation Sinclair
writes about is the focus of the decision-making in which children may be involved,
whether private or public. Private participation might affect one child only, within the
family, but public participation, such as advocacy, might affect many children at the
same time, and it might be more effective as many children can advocate together.

Morrow (1998) comments about the growing interest in children’s participation within
their families. One of her findings was that children found it harder to speak within
their private circle, and many children wished they could be listened to within their
families. Another facet to consider is the nature of participation, as there are many
different ways a child can participate, which can range from a one-off question to
child-led advocacy. The last facet to consider is the children and young people
involved, a child, for the UNCRC, is anybody from birth to the age of 18. She states
that it is important to consider the age of the child and the ability before designing a
participation process for the child. Children of different ages use different language
and have different levels of comprehension. Kellet (2010) highlights the importance
of child-led advocacy as this gives us the best insight into what children are thinking.
Consolidating all this, Lundy (2009) splits participation into four processes: Space,
Voice, Audience and Influence.

Lundy (2009) states that children’s participation should not be considered a token
given to them by adults. Quoting Article 12, she insists on participation as a right.
Children might not be ready to participate, and should not be compelled into
participation, however adults must construct structures that will ease children into
their journey into participation. The first process is Space: all children should be
given the opportunity to speak up. The way children express themselves could vary,
and not all children are at a stage where they can vocalise their thoughts, but they
can express themselves through play, art, and body language. Malaguzzi (1996),
from the school of thought that advocates the child-centred Reggio Emilia Approach,
writes about the ‘Hundred Voices of Children’, where he states that children find
endless ways to communicate their feelings and desires to adults. Even silence can
be a way of communicating with us. Spyrou (2011) discusses Mazzei’s work (2009)
on a child’s silence. Mazzei states that what a child omits or does not answer speaks
volumes, and that adults should go beyond the silence in listening to that child.
Children are not forced to participate, but are encouraged through ‘Voice’, which is
Lundy’s second process. Voice is defined as adults creating situations where
children can be listened to. This is far from the case in which children are regimented
into rows and speak up only for short times during a lesson. Adults in the classroom
can create situations through drama, puppetry, and art. This is echoed by Hill and
Head (2012) who encourage professionals to help children find their voice, by
creating openings for children to speak up. Trained adults should be able to read a
child’s body language, the same way parents can read their child’s non-verbal
requests. Children need to have times where they can be listened to, not only in day-
to-day classroom activities but also in matters that might impact them for the rest of
their lives. The 2009 general comments on Article 12 of the UNCRC expound in
detail on what rights and access the child should have in a courtroom, from the kind
of environment in the place where the child is giving their participation, to the
sensitivity of the people speaking to the child, to protection from harm and trauma
when voicing their needs.

Children get used to being listened to, and having their voice valued. One example
of Voice is ‘The Nurseries of Democracy’, a phrase coined in Germany, referring to
kindergartens as places where children learn participation. (Hansen et al., 2009 in
Klein, A., Landhäußer, S., 2017). This is echoed in Venninen et al.’s (2013) study of
child care centres in Finland where children’s participation is encouraged from a very
early stage. Children get opportunities to influence decisions in the classroom micro-
environment, such as kindergarten rules, what topic to work on, and what toys to
play with. Venninen et al. found that the more a teacher let go of her ‘control’, the
bigger the children’s participation was.

The third process in Lundy’s system is Audience: adults listening to children. This is
important especially when major decisions regarding child welfare are taken, such as
separation proceedings in court. Children who are used to being listened to in their
everyday lives will be more comfortable voicing their opinions in more serious
matters.

The last and most crucial process is Influence: changes are made according to
children’s ‘voice’. Influence might not have a huge impact in a child’s life, in minor
things such as the colour of their bedroom curtains or what toy to play with next, but
in situations such as court cases and separation proceedings, the outcome might
have a more permanent effect on a child’s life. Lundy insists that children should be
informed of the extent of their influence and how and why the decision was taken.

What are the potential barriers and benefits of participation?

History has taught us that not many new ideas pass through without a fair amount of
opposition. Children’s participation is not bereft of barriers. Christansen and James
(2001) comment that schools present timetables, a curriculum and set rules for
children, and children are taught to accept that as a natural part of their lives.
Disrupting this notion and getting children to have more say is a challenge and
potentially, a barrier. One of the barriers Venninen et al., (2013) found in their
research in Norwegian child care centres was that the adults were not fully aware of
their obligations towards children, as stated in the UNCRC. Another barrier was
class size. Venninen quoted research in Australia by Duncan (2009) where it was
found that where class size was very large, the caregivers were more focussed on
establishing and carrying out routines, creating more dominance over the children,
rather than establishing space where children could practise participation.
Sometimes adults use children’s participation for their own agendas, and not to really
help children. Here in Malta, this is often seen where politicians use ‘The Children’s
Parliament’ as a photo opportunity, and nothing of what the children discuss or ask
for in Parliament gets heard of again. These types of adults are unapologetically
referred to as ‘parasites’ by Fletcher (2010) and are described as a hindrance to
children’s participation. Wyness’ 2009 research with young people and participation
resulted with a lot of responses from children saying their participation was futile and
that they felt they were being used. Wyness (2009) also commented that adults
sometimes do not value children’s opinions, thinking they are too childish (one
example was a teacher complaining about children wanting better toilets), and
therefore they ignore the requests made by children When the people in power take
on a pro-active role, great changes can be made. One of these was the change from
a formal school uniform to a more comfortable tracksuit. The Minister of Education in
Malta created the space for a group of children to talk about their uniforms and
subsequently carried out an online public consultation. Children from all state
schools were encouraged to participate, as well as parents from their electronic
devices, and based on the overwhelming majority for change, a decision was taken
(Times of Malta, 2019). Listening to children does not mean that children should get
whatever they want. Bae (2010) writes that adults use their judgement whilst
considering all opinions. One group of children could advocate for unlimited use of
video games, when adults know full well the research on blue screen addiction
(Moreno et al, 2011), and hence they could communicate this information to children,
just as Lundy (2009) suggests in her four processes.

Attitudinal barriers can be a big issue with children’s participation. Hill et al. (2004)
write about adults who think their authority will be undermined if children participate
more. This shows a lack of self-confidence in adults as well as a lack of trust in
children’s capabilities. Another barrier discussed by Fathi and Taleb (2012) is when
adults work with very young children, as being non-verbal makes participation more
difficult. The barriers to children’s participation should not stop adults from facilitating
it, as the benefits are many. A 2014 UNESCO report on the state of the world’s
children strongly advocates for children’s participation, as children are deemed to be
the experts on their own lives and only the children themselves can provide first-
hand information that pertains to them. The report continues to say that children can
also use the knowledge they acquire through their own advocacy to bring about
changes in their society. The recent school walk outs, spurred on by Greta
Thunberg, have brought climate change to the attention of many countries. A
phenomenon known as ‘The Greta Effect’ (The Guardian, 2019) in which many
businesses and individuals in Europe are looking to reduce their carbon footprint.
Sinclair and Franklin (2000) list the benefits of children’s participation. These benefits
have been put to use by various children’s organisations, one of them being Save
the Children. Children’s participation improves services as the adults get a clear
picture of what children experience. A 2005 Save the Children initiative in Nicaragua
has resulted in the coordinator for the municipal governments noticing that
improvements happened in localities where the local government listened to
children. Another initiative was to bring forth changes in the use of corporal
punishment in India (Save the Children, 2008). Sinclair and Franklin (2000) also
write that children’s participation improves decision-making, because the people
bringing about change are better informed. This was true in our school when the
Principal decided on a weekly no-homework day. Consultation with the children
resulted that the best no-homework day would be a Wednesday, since it was the day
our local football nursery had sessions for children of our school age and it was the
day where the little ones went to after-school religion lessons. The result was
overwhelming, mostly from parents who relayed to us how much family stress was
reduced. Two more benefits, according to Sinclair and Franklin are the enhancing of
a child’s self-esteem, and the enhancing of a child’s skills. This sentiment is echoed
by Khoja (2016) in that children are not always confident in their abilities and
participation brings out this confidence. I see this daily in my work as a Nurture
Group teacher. My lessons are based mostly on circle time. As a teacher who
receives children with Social, Emotional, and Behavioural difficulties, I see children
on both ends of the communication spectrum: those who talk over each other without
listening to what the other has to say, and those who are silent. Through games,
puppetry, art, and discussion using circle time rules, children are encouraged to
speak up on issues that directly affect them, and to listen to others. We focus on face
to face playtime and we create situations where children have to negotiate and
cooperate. This kind of practice not only has a positive effect on children, but also on
me as a teacher. Flutter and Ruddock (2004) write that participation improves
teaching and learning and enhances democratic ethos in the class.

How can participation be promoted?

Kellet (2010) quotes Hill et al. (2004) in saying that children are the group which
uses most services, yet it is the least consulted. In fact, many adults think they know
better than children and they are the experts, having lived a longer time on this earth.
This discrepancy is a sheer contrast from what the UNCRC obliges us as adults to
do, therefore we must seek ways to promote participation. Mayall (2009) disputes
this in saying that it is true that grown-ups have more knowledge about many things,
but on childhood itself, the ‘here and now’ of the particular child we interact with, the
child is the most knowledgeable. Shier (2001) suggests that teachers must actively
listen to children, then they should sustain the expression of children’s views and
consider children’s opinions, then moving on to have the children participate,
together with the adults, in the decision-making process. They should also share
their power with children. Venninen et al (2012) suggest breaking away from routine,
as routine is set by adults and reduces child input and adopting practices where
teachers reflect on their work and how much they are allowing children to participate.
This will lead to adults focussing on the child’s point of view. Fathi and Taleb’s
(2012) work on early child education lists the children being non-verbal as one of the
primary barriers often cited by teachers, but even in this case participation can be
promoted through play as it is an activity children have most influence on. Greve
(2019) writes on how children appreciate each other’s objectives, learn respect and
get acquainted with friendship relations. Bae (2009) stresses the value of play as an
activity that comes naturally to children, and staff can learn a lot from observing how
children interact and make decisions. Play also enhances a child’s initiative, and
reducing routine, as Venninen (2013) suggested, encourages very young children to
take initiative and create their own play choices. According to Folkesson and
Emilson (2004), this allowance for initiative gives the adults insight to a child’s point
of view and to their way of comprehending the world around them. In this way a child
is viewed as an active participant in their life and not as a helpless being. The
importance of ‘free play’ is also discussed by Myrstad and Sverdrup (2009), in saying
that improvisation challenges a prescriptive routine and encourages children to have
a say on what they are learning. Lundy (2009) writes that participation can also be
enhanced through ongoing service training for the adults taking care of the child.
Many adults are not aware of the UNCRC, and knowledge of this convention is not
only beneficial to a child’s education but also a moral obligation that adults owe to
children. This self-awareness on part of the adult can be enhanced through the
adoption of Shier’s model of participation (2001). These five pathways have
questions along the way that challenge the teacher into self-reflection. Hill et al.
(2004) write about the importance of teaching citizenship in schools, not as training
for the future but for children to become self-advocates in the here and now. This
gives children responsibility, knowing that adults are sharing the power they have
over what happens in the children’s lives. This can be enhanced through Space: the
actual physical space, the people children interact with, the wider society outside the
school. Just like the student/teacher and teacher/student model in Paolo Freire’s
(1970) writing, teachers and students co-construct knowledge. When a teacher also
becomes a learner, they will learn about the background of every child, using the
language and the voice of the child to encourage them into participation, letting no
child feel inferior or excluded. This is important in my work because at times I feel
that children who are chosen or voted in the school council are the children who are
more popular, the ones who have higher grades, or the ones who come from a better
social class. Educators need to appreciate the value of diversity and that even the
children at the edges of the bell curve (Spratt & Florian, 2013) can also contribute
towards decision-making. In order for this to happen, Spyrou (2011) advises that the
adults allow children to use different media to express opinion. For example, an
interview style of questioning can be too rigid for a child, but using puppets for role-
play, or using drawings, might be more child-friendly activities. Thompson (2008)
suggests the use of drawings to elicit quicker responses from children, as not all
children can verbalise what they are feeling, nor can they necessarily write
adequately. Dunn (2015) recommends us adults to be familiar with the current pop
culture children are currently enjoying. This closes the gap between adult and child,
and it is particularly important when said adult is acting as an intermediary or as a
child advocate. Kennan et al. (2018) advise child advocates in family issues to have
child-friendly family-led meetings, so that the child can attend and feel comfortable to
self-advocate. Both Dunn (2015) and Spyrou (2011) refer to the ‘mosaic approach’ to
learning about a child. Often used in research, this approach was written about
extensively by Clark and Moss (2011). In the Mosaic Approach, children take their
own photographs and these can be joined with tours, drawings, maps and child-
centred interviews to get a better understanding of a child’s point of view about any
topic in early childhood (for example, Clark and Moss asked children about their
outdoor environment). In the child-centred Reggio Emilia Approach, a teacher uses
the mosaic method even in early years, to gain insight about the child, thus
understanding the child’s voice in a better way. This approach is also useful when
conversing with older children who have communication barriers, such as a Syrian
child refugee who is still learning English. As Sinclair (2004) commented, most
models of child participation lead to child-led participation, and this can be made
possible if, at the earlier stages, adults gradually let go of their ‘power’ and let
children have some of it.

Conclusion

In disability self-advocacy groups, the saying ‘nothing about us without us’ is quite a
strong motto. It was made popular by James Charlton, a disability rights activist, in
1998. This slogan has been used by many other minority groups and I feel it should
apply for children too. Just because us adults were children many years ago, we do
not have the right to speak for the children of today. Kellet (2010) tells us that only
children can give us the ‘insider’ viewpoint and our job as adults is to make sense of
what children are telling us. In doing so, we teachers must examine our practice and
be critical of it. Keeping Shier’s model of participation (2001) in mind as we work
makes perfect sense as each level gives us food for thought. Each opening leads us
to an opportunity and, in turn, we can contribute to a change in policy for our school
or institution, and hence make the opportunity an obligation.
References

Bae, B. (2010) Realizing children's right to participation in early childhood settings:

some critical issues in a Norwegian context, Early Years, Vol. 30(3) pp.205-218.

Christensen P, James A (eds). (2000). Research with Children: Perspectives and

Practices. Falmer Press: London.

Clark, A., Moss, P., (2011). Listening to Young Children: The Mosaic Approach (2nd
ed., London: National Children's Bureau for the Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

Duncan, J. (2009). ‘‘If you think they can do it—then they can.’’ Two year olds in
Aotearoa New Zealand kindergartens and changing professional perspectives. In D.
Berthelsen, J. Browlee, & E. Johansson (Eds.), Participatory learning in the early
years. Research and pedagogy (pp. 164–184). UK, London: Routledge

Dunn (2015) Insiders’ perspectives: a children’s rights approach to involving children

in advising on adult-initiated research. International Journal of Early Years Education
Vol. 23 (4) pp. 394-408.

Fathi, T., & Taleb, A. (2012). Job satisfaction among Jordan’s Kindergarten teachers:
Effects of workplace conditions and demographic characteristics. Early Childhood
Education Journal, 41, 143–152

Fletcher, A. (2014) The Guide to Meaningful Student Involvement [Online] Available:

https://soundout.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/The-Guide-to-Meaningful-Student-
Involvement.pdf [Accessed: 1 December 2019].

Lani Florian & Jennifer Spratt (2013) Enacting inclusion: a framework for
interrogating inclusive practice. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 28(2)
pp. 119-135

Flutter, J. & Ruddock, J. (2004) Consulting pupils: What’s in it for Schools? London:
Routledge Falmer.
Emilson, A., & Folkesson, A.-M. (2006). Children’s participation and teacher control.
Early Child Development and Care, 176(3&4), 219–238

Freire, P. (1972). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Herder and Herder.

Greve, A. (2009) Friendship and participation among young children in a Norwegian

kindergarten. In Participatory learning in the early years, research and pedagogy,
Edited by: Berthelsen, D., Brownlee, J. and Johansson, E. 78–2. London: Routledge.

Hart, R. (1992). Children’s Participation: From Tokenism to Citizenship (no. 4). Italy:
UNICEF International Child Development Centre.

Hill, M., Davis, J., Prout,A & Tisdall, K. (2004) Moving the Participation Agenda
Forward. Children and society, Vol 18 (2) pp. 77-96.

Hill, M. (2012) Children's Services: Working Together, London: Pearson.

Kellett, M. (2010) Small shoes, big steps! Empowering children as active

researchers. American Journal of Community Psychology. Vol. 46:pp.195 – 203

Kennan, D., Brady, B. & Forkan, C. (2018) Supporting children’s participation in

decision making: A systematic literature review exploring the effectiveness of
participatory processes. British Journal of Social Work (48) [Online] doi:
10.1093/bjsw/bcx142 [Accessed: 3 October 2019]

King, M. (2007) The Sociology of childhood as scientific communication:

Observations from a social systems perspective. Childhood, Vol 14 (2) pp. 193-213

Klein, A., Landhäußer, S. (2017) Children’s Voice in “Nurseries of Democracy“.

Participation in Early Childhood Institutions. Social Work and Society International
Journal 15 (2)

Khoja, N. (2016) Situating Children’s Voices: Considering the context when

conducting research with young children.  Children & Society 30, pp. 314–323

Latimer Apperson, G., Manser, M. Curtis, S. (2006) The Dictionary of Proverbs.

Wordsworth Reference, Hertfordshire, UK.
Lundy, L. (2007) 'Voice' is not enough: conceptualising Article 12 of the United
Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. British Educational Research, 33 (6)

Moreno M.A., Furtner F., Rivara F.P., (2011) Reducing Screen Time for
Children. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine.165(11):1056. Online
[Available:] https://doi.org/10.1001/archpediatrics.2011.192 [Accessed: 1st December
2019]

Malaguzzi, L. (1996). The Hundred Languages of Children: The Reggio Emilia

Approach to Early Childhood Education. New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation.

Mayall, B. (1999). Children and childhood. In S. Hood, B. Mayall, &S. Oliver (Eds.),
Critical Issues in Sociology Research (pp.10–24). Buckingham, UK: Open University
Press.

Mazzei, L., (2009) An impossibly full voice. In: Jackson A and Mazzei L (eds.) Voice
in Qualitative Inquiry: Challenging Conventional, Interpretive, and Critical
Conceptions in Qualitative Research. London and New York: Routledge

Morrow, V. (2005) Social capital, community involvement and community cohesion in

England: A space for children and young people? Journal of Social Sciences,
Special Issue no. 9: 57–69

Myrstad, A., Sverdrup, T. (2009). Improvisasjon– et verktøy for å forstå de yngstes

medvirkning I barnehagen? (Improvisation – a tool for understanding the youngest
children's participation in kindergarten). BARN, : 51–68

Save the Children (2014) Emerging Consensus: Building agreement for the post-
2015 agenda. Save the Children, US.

Shier, H. (2001) Pathways to participation: Openings, Opportunities and Obligations.

Children and Society, Vol 15 (2) pp. 107-117.

Sinclair, R. (2004) Participation in Practice: Making it Meaningful, Effective and

Sustainable. Children and Society, Vol 18 (2), pp.106-118.
Sinclair R., Franklin A., (2000). A Quality Protects Research Briefing: Young
People’s Participation. Department of Health, Research in Practice and Making
Research Count: London.

Spyrou, S. (2011) The limits of children’s voices: From authenticity to critical,

reflexive representation. [Online] Available: DOI: 10.1177/0907568210387834
[Accessed: 1st November 2019]

The Guardian International Edition (2019) 'Greta Thunberg effect driving growth in
carbon offsetting’. The Guardian 8 November 2019. Online [Available:]
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/nov/08/greta-thunberg-effect-
driving-growth-in-carbon-offsetting [Accessed: 1st November 2019]

Times of Malta (2019) ‘Tracksuits to replace formal uniforms at state schools:

Overwhelming majority vote for change’. Times of Malta, June 18, 2019 Online
[Available:]

https://timesofmalta.com/articles/view/tracksuits-to-replace-formal-uniforms-at-state-
schools.714748 [Accessed: 1st November 2019]

United Nations (1989) Convention on the Rights of the Child. [Online] Available:
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/crc.htm [Accessed: 1 st December 2019]

UNESCO (2014) The State of the World’s Children 2014 in Numbers. Revealing
Disparities, Advancing Children’s Rights. UNESCO, NY.

Venninen, T., Leinonen, J., Lipponen, L., & Ojala, M. (2014). Supporting children's
participation in Finnish child care centres. Early Childhood Education Journal, 42(3),
211-218. Online: [Available] https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-013-0590-9 [Accessed:
1st December 2019]

Wyness, M. (2009) Adult’s Involvement in Children’s Participation: Juggling

Children’s Places and Spaces. Children & Society, vol.23, pp.395 - 406