Conference Agenda

.

This research examines children´s human rights education in compulsory schools for pupils with intellectual disabilities. The writings about children's human rights in the Swedish school´s governing documents (for pupils without and with intellectual disabilities) are consistent with the UN documents, which define human rights education as education about, through, and for human rights (Strouthers, 2015). Through human rights education, children must be allowed to develop and grow as rights holders. A rights holder is a person who has knowledge of their rights and their ability to exercise their own, as well as respect the rights of others. Growing as a rights holder is something children do when they learn about human rights as well as they acquire rights-conscious attitudes, values, and behaviors through being a participant in human interaction.

Sweden has a long tradition of educating pupils with intellectual disability in segregated schools. In Sweden, the education of this group of pupils has a separate national curriculum and course syllabus, and teachers have a rather large room for interpreting values, goals, and regulations (Göransson & Klang, 2021).

Internationally, much research has examined educational institutions as arenas for children´s rights, and human rights education research in formal education is an emerging field of study (Quennerstedt & Moody, 2020). However, the adapted school is an institution where research about Human Rights Education is lacking. Therefore, knowledge about Human Rights Education for pupils with intellectual disability is almost non-existent, both in Sweden and internationally.

Something that has been noticed in research on the teacher's role is that teachers feel uncertain about how to teach human rights (Struthers, 2016; Quennerstedt, 2019; Quennerstedt et al., 2020), and that teachers' knowledge of human rights tends to be too weak and without subject matter depth (Cassidy, Brunner & Webster, 2014). There is a lack of knowledge about how teachers who work with pupils with intellectual disability interpret and implement the curriculum.

A Didaktik approach and terminology create the theoretical framework. Didaktik is the theory and practice of teaching and learning (Gundem, 2011). Collected data are analyzed with qualitative content analysis using Didaktik theory and Dewey's theory of collateral or embedded learning (Dewey, 1938). Dewey´s collateral learning is the lesson learners take from the accidental experience with the lesson rather than from the instructor´s intent.

This study explores the role of teachers educating children with intellectual disability in adapted primary schools about, through, and for human rights.

The purpose of planned teaching about children's human rights is examined, as well as the content and implementation of the teaching. Also, embedded human rights education is examined. The investigation of unplanned/embedded education is directed at two rights themes: equal value and freedom of expression. The following questions guided the research:

- How can planned human rights education take place in an adapted primary school, and how do teachers view planned education as part of human rights education?

- How can embedded human rights education take place in an adapted primary school, and how do teachers view embedded education as part of human rights education?

Students live in an age of increasing global inequity and moral ambiguity, raising concerns about the purposes of education in schools (Biesta, 2020). Shifting demographics exacerbate social, political, and economic disparities, creating contexts of disadvantage for certain members of society. Iceland and Lutruwita/Tasmania, Australia are both island communities characterised by increasing cultural diversity in schools. In Iceland this has been the result of a rapidly increasing migrant population. Migration is also a factor in Lutruwita/Tasmania, in addition to assertion of indigenous identity and culture. Additionally, the role of religious studies in state school programmes, one of the main contributors to values formation in the past, has declined (Evans, 2008; Gunnarsson, 2020; Poulter et al., 2017). In Iceland and Lutruwita/Tasmania there have been discussions about how best to address diversity and the moral development of students through schooling (Aðalbjarnardóttir, 2011; Gunnarsson, 2020; Kristjánsson, 2001; Walker et al., 2012) with attention being paid to multicultural, inclusive and citizenship education.

In this paper, we argue that addressing cultural diversity is interrelated to the debate on schools as a place to foster socio-moral development. We call for social justice pedagogies that engage with the social, economic, cultural, civil, and political dimensions of lived realities in response to the the risk of drawing on particular philosophical or religious beliefs and principles which are culturally specific. We propose an education framework which is transcendental in the sense that it is universally recognised and pays attention to the intersecting moral, legal and political dimensions of life. Although applicable internationally, we focus on the Icelandic and Lutruwitan/Tasmanian school contexts to answer the question: How can human rights education assist lower secondary school students to form values and apply them to make decisions in their own lives and about communities at local, regional and global levels?

HRE is a new field in the school contexts of Iceland and Australia, implemented in fragmented and ad hoc ways dependent on committed individual teachers (Burridge et al., 2016; Gollifer, 2022a, 2022b). Despite democracy and human rights being one of the six fundamental pillars in the general section of the Icelandic national curriculum guides for all levels of schooling, HRE is not a compulsory part of teacher education. Democracy has a longer history in Iceland than human rights, as is the case in other Nordic countries where democracy and human rights tend to be understood as synonymous with national values (Osler & Lybæk, 2014; Strømmen Lile, 2019; Vesterdal, 2016).

In Australia, individual states manage their own state school systems informed by national government curriculum guidelines. The Lutruwita/Tasmanian Department of Education has adopted the Australian National Curriculum for lower secondary students (Yr. 7-10). The Civics and Citizenship strand of the Humanities and Social Science subject area focuses on Australians’ legal and constitutional rights and the parliamentary/democratic process and how they underpin a socially cohesive society. In Year 9 and 10 students look beyond Australia but with a strongly Australian perspective (ACARA, n.d).

The disparate ad hoc approach to addressing social justice and moral concerns in schools through preservative pedagogies that favour national perspectives can dilute attention towards opportunities for students to critically and holistically form value-based beliefs. We propose a HRE conceptual framework that emphasises the core cosmopolitan principles of universality, indivisibility, solidarity, and reciprocity as relevant to multiple country contexts, irrespective of distinct historical and cultural backgrounds.

This paper brings together two distinct but interrelated fields: human rights education (HRE) and safeguarding. It endeavours to show that the former can be beneficial for the efficacy of the latter. By extending an argument put forward recently by Laura Lundy and Gabriela Martínez Sainz, and subsequently by me in a Human Rights Education Review article, that for Human Rights Education to be effective it must enable children to recognise and respond to lived human rights injustices, the paper places this important issue within the existing framework and processes associated with safeguarding young people in formal education. It attempts to both elucidate and consolidate the connection between HRE and safeguarding, arguing that if HRE were to become an integral part of safeguarding training and delivery, children may be better equipped to recognise and speak up about violations of their human rights, rather than relying on a passive system of adult observation.

This paper places these arguments in the context of an empirical study carried out by me, together with my Co-I, Dr Ruth Brittle, in 2021, which sought to tentatively map the landscape of the interaction between HRE and safeguarding in the separate jurisdictions of Scotland and England. I will present the findings from our scoping survey, offering a glimpse into current attitudes and practice amongst teachers and Designated Safeguarding Leads (DSLs)/Designated Child Protection Officers (DCPOs) in England and Scotland. I will then discuss some of the interesting points raised by the data and offer some tentative concluding observations, as well as suggestions for areas of future research.

If teachers currently lack knowledge and confidence on the topic of human rights, having received little or no training in this area, then simply dictating that HRE should form part of existing safeguarding guidance and training is likely to be an ineffectual route to meaningful change. By mapping a small part of the landscape in this area, we gained a better understanding of the current interaction between safeguarding and HRE in each jurisdiction, thus enabling us to start a conversation about how best to approach the next steps of introducing meaningful change in safeguarding practice that will be beneficial to researchers and practitioners beyond the UK context.

Rights Education for children and young people is an important but understudied area within educational children’s rights research both in Europe and elsewhere. The United Nations connects rights to education in multiple international human rights treaties such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Article 26, United Nations 1948), the Convention on the Rights of the Child (Article 42, United Nations 1989) and the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights Education and Training (2011). Even so, there remains variability in the framing and substance of rights education for children and young people in its various configurations such as Human Rights Education (HRE), Children’s Human Rights Education (CHRE), and Children’s Rights Education (CRE). For those working in the field of rights education, there is a broad understanding of what it encompasses and why it is significant, but there do not appear to be any agreed definitions of subtypes of rights education aside from HRE (but even this is contested). When there is not a clear and agreed definition for terms used to refer to different forms of rights education or when the boundaries between the different types of rights education are unclear, those seeking to engage with the concepts cannot be sure they are talking about the same thing when planning, delivering, learning, and researching different aspects of rights education. The lack of conceptual clarity makes it difficult to be certain that what is being delivered within a 'rights education’ framework fulfils its obligations.

The study of human rights education (HRE) has emerged in recent years, and many scholars have addressed the various definitions, pedagogical approaches, contents, and limits of such education (for an overview, see Kayum Ahmed, 2021). However, fewer HRE studies have paid specific attention to the learning processes of the schooled child as a learner of HRE. This gap in the research is surprising given the prevalence of ‘child-centred’ approaches in sociological and educational discourse (e.g., Lerkkanen et al., 2016; Parker, 2018; Power et al., 2019). The current study aims to conceptualise children’s rights learning processes in school. It focuses on rights education that explicitly concerns children’s rights. More specifically, it aims to answer the following question: What characterises rights learning processes in school when children are the learners and children’s rights is the content?

The analysis presents various features of children’s human rights education (hereafter CHRE) learning processes in school, organised into three dimensions. The first dimension highlights the individual child, whose learning is influenced by developmental and socio-cultural factors (see Vygotsky, 1978), and considers child-centred aims, content, and approaches (see Lundy & Martínez-Sainz, 2018). The second dimension accentuates the prominent role of interactions and relationships in CHRE. It is embedded in the daily interactive experiences that comprise CHRE in schools and CHRE’s underscoring of children’s participation rights and agency, which requires adults to share power (see Author 2, 2020). The third dimension emphasizes the role of the school environment as the multidimensional space where CHRE learning processes transpire (see Isenström & Quennerstedt, 2020). This dimension stresses the importance of a whole-school approach for effective CHRE (see Author 1, 2020) and the challenges that may constrain children’s ability to make sense of CHRE in school in light of gaps between CHRE aims and more traditional institutional practices (see Osler & Starkey, 2010; Author 2, 2021). Whereas these three dimensions are interconnected, the analysis aims to discern the distinctive features of each to promote a comprehensive understanding of the CHRE learning processes in school.

The prominent link between the different features of CHRE learning in school is student participation rights (UNCRC, Article 12). These rights are central in all the dimensions we conceptualised: developing child-centred content, aims, and approaches for CHRE requires participatory pedagogy, relational learning of CHRE implies reducing power gaps between educators and students, and whole-school CHRE programmes should provide children with opportunities to participate in organisational decision making. This insight aligns with the fundamental role of participation rights in the interpretation and implementation of all the other rights in the UNCRC (UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, 2009; Hanson & Lundy, 2017). It also underscores the significance of analysing CHRE as a concept embedded in the children’s rights discourse, which partly overlaps with HRE but also has distinct features.

What are teachers supposed to teach and students supposed to learn about human rights? The international community, nations, and teachers widely support the idea that children and young people should receive human rights education in school. Several studies have, however, shown that alongside this strong support, there is widespread uncertainty about what this education should consist of – or phrased in another way: what the educational content of children’s human rights education should be (Parker, 2018‚ Quennerstedt, 2022). This paper maps and analyses the educational content in children’s human rights education examined or advocated for in previous research.

There is currently no established term for human rights education given to children and young people. In this research, children’s human rights education – CHRE – is used inclusively for other terms for educating children about rights. The overarching aim of human rights education is to promote respect for and observance of human rights, and to empower people to contribute to the building of a universal culture of human rights (UN, 2011). The 2011 UN Declaration for Human Rights Education and Training launched the now-established tripartite definition and conceptualisation of HRE. It is to include education

• about human rights: knowledge and understanding about the norms, principles and values, and the mechanisms for their protection,
• through human rights: teaching and learning in a rights-respecting way, and
• for human rights: empowering learners to enjoy and exercise their rights and respect and uphold the rights of others.

The UN conceptualisation emphasises that what is learned and how this learning occurs are vital and intertwined aspects of HRE – learning about rights requires certain educational surrounding and relations.

When the UN’s definition is to be translated to concrete education, a content selection must be made – it is not possible to teach everything. The selection of educational content is not a representation of truth but is always normative, resting on the culture and views of a particular society (Willberg, 2015). What knowledge students should be able to acquire at school therefore needs to be considered by each society (Young, 2013). In many countries, there is a division of labour between the state and the teachers concerning the selection and delivery of educational content: the state prescribes the main topics of instruction (an intended curriculum), while the planning and enactment of the concrete teaching are left to the teacher (the enacted curriculum). Content and pedagogy are thus drawn apart. This may be problematic in the case of CHRE, with its’ bearing idea of content and pedagogy as a whole.

The theoretical backdrop to our analysis is two perspectives on whether content and pedagogy are separable. Traditional curriculum theory assumes that this separation is possible and also needed to ensure that qualified knowledge content is maintained when disciplinary knowledge is transformed into school knowledge (Young, 2013). Didaktik theorising, on the other hand, emphasises a close connection between subject matter and subject meaning and argues that the meaning does not reside in the matter but emerges in the teaching situation. Therefore, content and pedagogy are entangled (Hopmann, 2007). Awareness and consideration of these two countering views form the analytical gaze in this study.

The analysis presented in this paper demonstrates how education about, through and for human rights appear in research publications as intended, enacted or suggested educational content of children’s human rights education.

While the importance of enhancing children’s agency - those actions made by children that are not simply reactions to adults’ inputs (Baraldi, 2022) - is increasingly becoming a central part of education (OECD, 2018), studies show that traditional education keeps promoting children’s conformity minimising experimentation and risk-taking (Kirby, 2020). On a similar note, traditional narratives about children describe them as incompetent and unreliable (Baraldi, 2014). This tendency is confirmed by research studies that show that children have the feeling that their opinions are not considered seriously and specific groups of children do not have the opportunity to raise their voices as loudly as others and remain excluded (European Commission, et.al., 2021). At school, 16,7% of children feel adults never listen to their opinions when making policy decisions (Unicef & Eurochild, 2019). Moreover, even when participatory activities, like children’s councils, are promoted, they often suffer from issues of sustainability and continuity, as guaranteeing staff capacity and training is a challenge. The project GOTALK challenges this trend and complies with the idea that children have the right to share their opinions and adults should take those opinions into account when they take decisions that affect children. To do so, the GOTALK project proposes an innovative participatory creation and implementation of youths’ councils in two contexts, Italy and Belgium. In the framework of the project, three schools and one youth center embarked on the GOTALK journey towards more inclusive and sustainable councils that would also lead to effective policy impact. The trajectory was inspired by insights on living wall, pedagogical documentation and the mosaic approach (Bjartveit et.al., 2019; Clark & Moss, 2011). The analysis was done together with the members of the children’s and youth’s councils and will be discussed with other children from the schools to ensure they also recognize themselves in the analysis, aiming at the inclusiveness of the analysis and saturation of the data . In order to ensure the sustainability of the insights, the GOTALK project focuses on one policy theme for the entire school year: in Belgium children’s councils will discuss the topic of out-of-school care and activities (following up on the Decree BOA, 2019), while in Italy, also following the introduction of the new law on civic education (Law 92/2019), citizenship education related topics will be at the pipeline of the children’s activities.

As the credibility of the actions is a key issue to ensure that youths and children feel heard and entrusted, sustainability is also a fundamental aspect of the children councils. In this regard, the GOTALK team supports schools and youth organizations in ensuring the continuity of the councils by raising awareness and appreciation of the student councils inside and outside the school or organization. Ensuring policy impact is guaranteed by engaging with policy makers in a discussion on the boundaries of the policy impact that children councils can have and by facilitating the direct dialogue between children and policy makers.

The GOTALK research aims at strengthening children’s participation by enhancing it’s inclusiveness, policy impact and sustainability. In this research we focus on two questions: (1) How do children between 10 and 18 in children’s councils attribute meaning to the concepts of inclusiveness, sustainability and policy impact? And (2) How can we build upon these meanings in order to cocreate an inclusive, sustainable trajectory with policy impact at the children’s councils?

Children’s possibility to participate in everyday life is a fundamental right, mentioned in The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) which is a part of Swedish law (Act on Convention on the Rights of the Child, 2018). In Sweden many children in the age of 6-12 years take part in the school-age educare (SAE) which is an activity taking place before and after school, as well as during holidays. SAE has a unique position within the Swedish school system as the activities are conducted within the framework of the school based on school law and curriculum, but also have a clear anchoring in everything that can be associated with leisure and social activities. SAE is an important part of the school´s activity (Cronqvist, 2021) where the education is affected by relationships and well-being in general, based on children´s needs, interest and experience (Swedish National Agency for Education, 2022). For the SAE-centre to be able to assert high quality in teaching, Hjalmarsson (2013) is addressing the problems surrounding the children's opportunities to participate in and design their own activities in relation to the adults' endeavour to offer the children a variety of activities. There seems to be a tension within SAE, on the one hand, meeting children’s needs and interests and, on the other hand, conducting activities based on a curriculum aimed at children's development and learning, which could indicate that teachers organize specific activities for teaching purposes. However, Pálsdóttir (2014) claims that social learning does not seem to be the subject of educators' planning but takes place informally in the activities. Jonsson and Lillvist (2019) believe that the everyday practice when teachers in SAE must deal with many children at the same time means that there is no time for reflection, and the activities are allowed to run on. There are thus limits to the extent to which children's interests and needs can be met, and many times the solution can lie in children being allowed to play freely. Haglund (2015) advocates children's influence in the activities based on the democratic mission on which the school lean towards, which would be another challenge based on the conclusions drawn by Jonsson and Lillvist (2019). It is not enough just to plan and reflect on the activities that the teachers organize, but the children's perspectives, thoughts, opinions and needs have to be asked for and involved in the planning. The problem that is relevant to how children's perspectives can be made visible and add quality in SAE is how an individualistic approach can be accommodated within leisure activities, which are traditionally group-oriented and focused on relationships between children (Lager, 2016). Throughout, there is a gap in research where more knowledge is needed about how children's perspectives can be taken advantage of in leisure activities to increase their participation and thereby create quality. The current project aims to reduce this gap.

The project aims to pay attention to children's perspective on the leisure activities they participate in and, based on their lived experiences, identify and define a concrete development area to increase children's participation in SAE, implement an action and then follow up and reflect on the experiences of the action. If time allows, possible adjustments can be made in the activities based on the reflections. The purpose has been formulated based on the needs that representatives of the school have identified, and the implementation has been jointly discussed. The teachers experience difficulties when taking advantage of the children's perspective in the daily activities and want to expand their opportunities to be involved.

Children have the right to form their own views and be heard on matters affecting them. As detailed in Article 12 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), children have the right to express their views and opinions and for these views to be given due weight and the right to being heard (UNCRC, 1989, Art. 12). As it has been articulated in the Lundy model of child participation (2007), voice is one of the core elements of children’s right to participation. For the full exercise of this right, children’s voice requires safe and inclusive opportunities where they can form and express their views (space), and also demand that children are listened to (audience) and their views are acted upon as appropriate (influence). Breaches to children’s right to participate, including disregard or neglect to consider their views or exclusion from decision-making, have been consistently corroborated since then particularly in relation to their education and schooling experience (McMellon & Tisdall,2020), despite children's clear desire to participate (Forde et al. 2018; Martinez Sainz & Daminelli, 2022; Waldron & Oberman, 2016). Children’s capacity to express their views on matters related to teaching, learning and curriculum is encompassed by the concept of ‘pedagogic voice’ (Arnot & Reay, 2007), which aligns with their right to be listened to on matters that affect them and the extent to which their views are fully considered and acted upon as granted in the UNCRC.

This paper brings together the sociology of pedagogic voice and a children’s rights framework to answer two research questions. First, how do children experience being heard and actively participate in decision-making processes related to their learning in diverse primary school settings in Ireland? Second, how do the relationships between children and teachers and their pedagogical encounters in the classroom inform and transform children’s voice? We proposed a rights-based approach to children's pedagogic voice as a relevant framework to explore their experiences of participation in decision-making and whether and if so how these shape their learning experiences. We draw on quantitative and qualitative data from the longitudinal mixed-methods cohort study Children’s School Lives (CSL) study in Ireland to analyse the views and experiences of children and teachers regarding children's voice and their capacity to influence their own learning.

Research exploring children’s voice in school and community life has looked at different processes and practices from consultations or collaborations with students to participation spaces and mechanisms and leadership opportunities for children (Cook-Sather, 2006; Fielding, 2004; Fleming, 2013; Mitra & Gross, 2009). It also has explored the opportunities children have to analyse and revise educational approaches or act as partners in research projects (Lundy & Cook-Sather, 2016). The inclusion of children in decision-making has been demonstrated to result in meaningful contributions to school improvement (Mitra, 2001; MacBeath et al, 2003; Flutter and Rudduck, 2004; Pedder & McIntyre 2006; Rudduck & McIntyre, 2007; Thompson, 2009). Fostering children’s voice in schools contributes to their development as citizens, preparing them for active and informed participation in society (Devine, 2002; Jerome & Starkey, 2021); and can lead to a stronger commitment to their own learning, including improved motivation and positive attitudes towards learning as well as a stronger identity as a learner (Flutter and Rudduck, 2004). As children are “expert witnesses” (Flutter and Rudduck, 2004, p 4) or legitimate informants (Lundy & Cook-Sather, 2016) of learning, teaching and schooling processes, they can provide unique insights into challenges and possible solutions.

In 1989, two remarkable frameworks came into being that would come to have a significant impact on children’s lives. The first was the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The second was when the computer scientist Tim Berners Lee invented a system for organising and accessing information on the internet, the World Wide Web. Both frameworks changed children’s lives significantly, one intentionally, the other unintentionally. The Convention on the Rights of the Child was designed for children, without children (Freeman, 2020). The World Wide Web was created for adults by adults, without children in mind, but now “one in three internet users is a child” (Livingstone, Carr & Byrne, 2016). Thirty-five years on, the debate on children’s rights in relation to the digital and education, should be more dynamic and questioning than ever, as artificial intelligence and other emerging technologies bring new considerations, challenges, and opportunities to the discussion.

Today’s children are born in an era of technology. They have never experienced a world without the digital, and they bring a newness, a natality, with their participation in the digital that no other generation has brought to education. It is crucial for adults to seriously consider the new opportunities emerging from children’s lived experiences in the digital age (Third et al, 2019). Taking into consideration the unique aspects of the new generation’s digital experiences, teachers need to shift away from viewing knowledge as linear (Graham and Fitzgerald, 2010) and their role as the primary source of information. Education for the digital needs to be an earnest participatory dialogue between the teacher and the children. The significance and complexity of the digital in children’s lives finds acknowledgement in the recent UNCRC General Comment No. 25 (2021) on children’s rights in relation to the digital environment. It recognises the value of the views of children in informing policy and practice. It highlights the urgency of analysing the digital environment from a child’s perspective, through the lens of children’s rights, within a local context, to gather valuable information and understanding.

This paper explores how children’s rights education in relation to the digital environment can be conceived, by listening to children’s views through the lens of children’s rights, in a world of ever-changing, adult-centric, digital technology. The main research questions of the paper are:

1) How are intergenerational relationships formed, and informed, in educating for the digital environment?

2) How are the rôles of educators and learners negotiated in children’s rights education?

3) How can education respect and develop the views of the younger child in learning for participation in the digital environment?

4) What supports are needed from adults in children’s rights education?

The answers to these questions can provide a systematic approach for children’s rights education to open entry points for digital environment education that address the complexities of the digital divide and digital literacy between the generations. This research listens to the views of younger children. It gives due weight to the opinions and expressions of ten-year-old urban primary school children, at risk of educational disadvantage, in Ireland. Its framework is founded on the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UN, 1989), following the Lundy Model of Child Participation (2007). As Lundy states there, can be no “watering down” of listening to children and giving their views due weight. This research dives deep into the experiences of younger children of the digital environment and examines how the UNCRC can provide a lexicon to express their views, appropriate to an educational setting.

The research reported in this paper examined the effect of an NGO school program aiming to strengthen schools’ work with children’s rights.

Children’s human rights is a complex area for schools to handle, and human rights is conceived as a difficult matter to teach. National direction in curricula is often lacking (Bron & Thijs, 2011; Leung et al. 2011). Research has shown that many teachers feel that they lack sufficient knowledge about children’s human rights and that teaching material is scarce (Rinaldi, 2017; Tibbitts & Kirschsläger, 2010). To get guidance, schools and teachers may turn to actors outside the school, such as NGOs, perceived as experts in human and child rights issues.

Previous evaluations of such school programs for children’s rights have shown promising effects, for example, improvements on school climate, relations, behaviour, and children's influence (Covell, 2010; Sebba & Robinson, 2010; Halås Torbjörnsen, 2020), but also raised some concerns, for example, a tendency to focus on responsibilities rather than rights and doubts about how durable the positive effects are (Sebba & Robinson, 2010; Howe & Covell, 2010; Dunhill, 2019). The evidence presented for a correlation between learning about rights and the claimed positive effects is relatively weak, according to Jerome and colleagues (Jerome et al., 2015). The authors argue that most studies have focused more on implementation processes than outcomes. They also highlight methodological weaknesses in some studies: low response rates in surveys and few interviews in interview studies, mainly drawing on teachers’ views and views of students selected by teachers to participate. The knowledge available about how school programs for children’s rights affect schools is accordingly disparate and insecure.

One of the children’s rights programs available for schools is offered by UNICEF. The program was developed by UNICEF UK, and named Rights Respecting Schools Award. The program was brought to Sweden and modified by UNICEF Sweden to align with Swedish national school culture. It was also renamed to Rights-based school. Since its start in 2010, the Swedish version of the program has spread and is now used in about 30 Swedish schools.

Commissioned by UNICEF Sweden, we have undertaken a large-scale evaluation research project to elucidate how well the program works to strengthen schools’ work with children’s rights. The evaluation was designed to identify how Rights-based school affects students' and teachers' knowledge, experiences and views, and whether differences can be found when compared with students and teachers in schools that do not use any program. The following questions guided the evaluation.

1. How does using Rights-based school affect:

• students’ knowledge about children’s rights,
• students’ experiences of student influence,
• teachers’ work with children’s rights,
• teachers’ views on student influence?

2. Are there any differences in these aspects compared with schools that do not use a program?

Environmental issues, resulting from global warming, have made care for the environment an increasingly urgent matter. The careless usage of limited and valuable resources such as water, fossil fuels and forests, as well as the pollution of air, water and soil, has led us to a situation where we are in need of an urgent change of behaviour towards the environment. Experiences in the early years form attitudes and behaviour in a child and can have a long-lasting effect into adulthood (Pramling Samuelsson et al., 2019). Through education and with the support of influential role models such as their teacher, children can become active and informed participants in shaping the environment they live in (Davis, 2015) and to care sustainably for it (Prince, 2010). There is a trend to advocate research with children about environmental topics (Green, 2015), yet a lack of studies using methods that recognise that young children articulate their thoughts and feelings about an environmental topic differently to older children and adults (Somerville and Williams, 2015).

This project explores how to do meaningful and age-appropriate research with young children about what they think, experience and learn about how to care for our planet. It also explores ways to empower children to make decisions on matters that affect them such as environmental issues.

Children have the right for suitable and supportive education, which is supported by SDG 4.7 (UN General Assembly, 2015). It is thoroughly desirable to respect their voices and stands as well as giving them hope for the future. In my research, I advocate for children to be seen as capable members of society and explore ways to enable their right to be informed, to be heard and their “views ... given due weight” (UN General Assembly, 1989, p. 5). Investing in children and adequate methodologies can impact future leaders and citizens’ environmental behaviours. This is turn, is important not only at local or European levels but also globally.

Children need opportunities to play in and with nature in their daily life in preschool and at home, in order to meaningfully and authentically connect to nature and care for it. While playing outside on their own terms following their imagination and motivation, activities initiated by teachers should be child-led and guided by children’s interests, understanding and explorations. Offering learning opportunities and chances to explore in and with nature were shown to be a foundation to agency and connection to nature (Rios and Menezes, 2017). Research has also shown that learning particular pro-environmental behaviour and actions would not help to develop children’s care for nature. However, positive feelings towards and meaningful interactions with nature, can result in a caring and protective attitude towards nature (Rios and Menezes, 2017). Additionally, “when educators promote children’s success in ‘making a difference’, foundations are built for future resilience, agency and social participation” (Davis, 2014, p. 34).

Education for Sustainability is promoted as lifelong learning and serves as a driver for transformative change for living sustainably on a national and worldwide scale. However, in the field of early childhood, the deliberate involvement in Education for Sustainability has been slow (Davis and Elliott, 2014). Education for Sustainability is currently “largely a matter for individual settings to decide upon thus depending on staff commitment” (Barratt et al., 2014, p. 231). It requires policy change, a widespread mind shift and “centre culture that embraces sustainability” (Elliott, 2010, p. 34). This project was conducted with children in England but contributes to the international discourse around young children’s agency in times of instability and crisis such as the climate emergency.

Since 24 February 2022, following Russia's aggression against Ukraine, Poland, whose eastern border is also the EU border, has experienced an unprecedented influx of war refugees, the majority of whom are children and women. Poland has become one of the most important countries on the front line in solidarity to provide refugees from Ukraine with shelter and access to services, including care and education, and thus human and child rights. As a result, the number of migrant students has increased significantly. They are from both economic and forced migrant families. Data from November 2023 shows that 286,000 refugee-children, mainly Ukrainian and Belarusian, attend Polish schools. The scale and changing nature of refugeeism and migration present new challenges and opportunities for Polish education and schools unprepared to accommodate such large numbers of foreign students (Markowska-Manista 2023). This has deconstructed the way hitherto mono-cultural schools operate and opened up the search for solutions directed at rights to and rights in education in a situation of intercultural diversity (Górak-Sosnowska, Markowska-Manista 2022). In order to provide access to education for Ukrainian children, a number of legislative changes have been introduced concerning their rights to and in education. Despite the efforts made, school principals and teachers are still struggling with the difficult problems that arise when integrating such a large group of children and adolescents into the existing educational system. The situation is not helped by the sense of temporariness with which some Ukrainian families treat their stay in Poland. Research indicates that more than 53% of school-age refugee children registered in Poland are still outside the Polish education system, including 112.8 thousand children of primary school age (Chrostowska 2023). Empowering the teaching staff involved in working with students with migration experience, improving teachers' competences, creating good teaching practices, as well as working with Polish students and their parents, who are often critical of diversity in the school and classroom environment, are the most important challenges in this area today. The presence of students with migration background in the Polish educational system is not a temporary situation, and schools are undoubtedly those social institutions that have a key impact on the integration and support of migrant children. In order to support the socio-educational integration processes of children with migration background and to strengthen their well-being and sense of belonging to the school community, it is necessary to identify the factors for these actions at individual and institutional levels and to analyse the strategies and methods for putting them into practice in educational situations.

In this presentation, we share the results of participatory-oriented research on the situation of children and their rights in education in school intercultural diversity resulting from refugeeism and migration. The context includes analyses of solidarity policies with refugees in Poland (Digidiki et al. 2024) and the legal basis of education and rights in education in a situation of cultural-national diversity in a frontline host country. We also explore an interculturally oriented, participatory, child-centred(Arun et al. 2023), child-potential centered(Gilliam, Gulløv 2022) experimental education programme for primary school students implemented since 2023 in collaboration with researchers and practitioners. Among the most important research questions in the study were:

- how do refugee-children experience the daily life of Polish schools based on respect for their rights to education and in education?

- what factors enhance their well-being, sense of belonging, the processes of social, educational integration (rights in education) in culturally diverse classrooms, how can these be supported at institutional and individual level?

- which solutions, methodologies are used to support students, teachers, parents in improving their intercultural and social knowledge and competences?

Educational philosopher George Counts(1932) urged teachers in the early 1900s that they needed to be present in the community, and that there was a social responsibility for the students and families to see that presence. Years later, educator Miles Horton, founder of the Highlander School would make a similar call in deep dialogue with philosopher Paulo Freire (1990). More recently, the fields of social justice education, ethnic studies, human rights and peace education have continued this call for teachers and educators to be relevant in their lives of their students, whether that be through developing culturally relevant pedagogy (Ladson-Billings, 1995), culturally sustaining pedagogy (Paris and Alim, 2017), humanizing our schools (Bajaj et. al, 2023), making our schools more caring (Hantzopolous, 2016), and as Bree Picower (2012) calls “practicing what we teach”. I see this push articulated in the The Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) in which Article 29 on the right to education pushes for:

(c) The development of respect for the child's parents, his or her own cultural identity, language and values, for the national values of the country in which the child is living, the country from which he or she may originate, and for civilizations different from his or her own;

(d) The preparation of the child for responsible life in a free society, in the spirit of understanding, peace, tolerance, equality of sexes, and friendship among all peoples, ethnic, national and religious groups and persons of indigenous origin.

This articulation of Article 29, has been the backbone of the call for a human rights education beginning with the decade of Human Rights Education starting in 1995 (Tibbits, 2017, Flowers, 2000, Hantzopolous & Bajaj 2021). In particular the recent work of Bajaj, Cislaghi and Mackie (2016) in which they introduce and define Transformative Human Rights Education (THRE). They define transformative human rights education

as community-based approach, intended for children, youth, and adults in formal or non-formal settings, and one that includes cognitive, affective, and action-oriented elements. Contextualized and relevant studies are paired with interactive learning to bring human rights to life and to foster in students and citizens an awareness of global citizenship and a respect for human rights (Bajaj, Cilaghi and Mackie, 2016, para 5-6).

This research expands on the definition of THRE as a tool for the full implementation of Article 29, and speaks to the how, in particular, the how of a “community based approach”. In this piece, the author expands on previous work naming activist accompaniment as research (Hernandez Arriaga & Argenal, 2022) to explore the impact of this scholarship on teaching, in particular, activist accompaniment as pedagogy and the use of this type of pedagogy as a praxis of THRE and a way to work towards the articulation of Article 29. Through a reflection of teaching practices, the author names activist accompaniment as pedagogy as a necessary pedagogical praxis to be relevant in students’ lives and communities, hold justice and movements for justice central in teaching, constantly interrogate power, even in one’s own classroom, and create spaces to practice many of the skills needed to live in a free society, and practice understanding and respect for difference.

Pulling from experiences teaching a high school “service learning” course on migration, the research shares key themes speaking to how a community engaged praxis, in particular, what the scholar names “activist accompaniment” (Hernandez Arriaga and Argenal, 2022), allows for students to connect to lived experiences, create intergenerational relationships that practice values of human rights, and create avenues for student action.

Topic: Transgender children’s rights discourses in international authoritarian movements

Research question: How are debates over transgender children’s rights in education deployed by far-right authoritarian movements?

Background:

In recent years, the conflict over the rights of transgender children and youth has moved from a relatively niche debate largely confined to sexual and gender minority advocates, parents of transgender minors, medical practitioners, education and child welfare workers, and religious groups to prominent battles waged on the front pages of major newspapers, television documentaries on major networks, social media sites, the floors of legislatures, and the streets of many cities. Education has become a flashpoint, with the rights of transgender students debated in every aspect of schooling: policy, curricula, pedagogy, school leadership, comprehensive school health, infrastructure, and extracurricular activities.

Primarily, the debate has centred on the needs and interests of transgender students, which have often been set up as conflicting with the needs and interests of other students, parents, and even transgender children themselves. However, the battle over the rights of transgender students has implications for democracy and human rights beyond the rights of a specific child population or even balancing the rights of some children against those of other children.

This paper examines how transgender students have become an early target in a larger effort to undermine the rights of all children and an instrument in the international movement to destabilize democratic systems of governance and establish (or re-establish) authoritarian regimes that threaten human rights, peace, and international efforts on threats such as climate change and biodiversity loss.

While much international attention has centred on the context of the United States and the United Kingdom, these rights discourses are not limited to one country; while they are locally inflected, they connect to a broader international social movement network on the far right, spreading through both mainstream and alternative media as well as social media sites. Currently, 31 European countries have anti-discrimination laws protecting sexual and gender minorities that affect education (UNESCO, 2023); however, various local policy contexts may shape how these laws are applied when it comes to minors and only 21 countries have strategies to address school-based bullying and discrimination against sexual and gender minority students. Legislative and policy debates are also taking place across Australia, New Zealand, and Canada, led largely by right-wing governments.

Rather than debating the legitimacy of transgender children’s identities, this paper examines how the rights of some children are being used as a wedge by actors whose goals are far larger than reshaping rules around which bathroom a child can use or which sports they are allowed to play.

Theoretical framework:

Childhood can be understood as a kind of structure: it has developed out of social and cultural forces as well as biological influences (Castaneda, 2001; Qvortrup, 2009). Using a childist approach (Wall, 2019), I examine how children are taken up as symbolic objects (Kjorholt, 2013) in international authoritarian movements on the right. In particular, these movements mobilize childhood as a signifier for purity in political discourses, reflecting Shotwell’s description of purity as a means to make claims on what is normative, good, and to be pursued (2016).

Proposal information

The third generation survivors, grandchildren of Holocaust survivors, have started to tell the stories of their grandparents' experiences during the Nazi dictatorship. The grandchildren use various forms of communication to share their stories in a public context. In their storytelling, they incorporate their own testimonies of contemporary antisemitism, either directed towards themselves during their school years or towards the Jewish minority in Sweden.

At the same time, the Swedish educational system, from preschool to high school, has an explicit democratic and value based mission, which is formulated in the curriculums. The school's mission regarding democracy and values is regulated by laws and regulations, including the Education Act. It is also governed by anti discrimination legislation clarifying how educational institutions should act governed by something called ”active measures” against discrimination (see Sarri Krantz, 2023). Legislation against discrimination and offensive treatment clarifies how educational institutions should implement active measures against discrimination. At the same time, research shows that students are subjected to discrimination and offensive treatment in the Swedish educational system (Sarri Krantz, 2018, Gillander Gådin & Stein, 2017, Gyberg et al., 2021).

The purpose of this paper is therefore to investigate how the stories of the third generation survivors can be used in educational contexts to create awareness of human diversity based on the idea presented by Nussbaum (1997, 2010). Ultimately, the goal is to create a more democratic and inclusive education.

2. Theoretical framework

In this paper, I want to call attention to the incorporation of the stories of the third generation survivors concerning their grandparents' experiences during the Holocaust, and their own experiences of contemporary antisemitism. By working with these stories one can create what Nussbaum calls "narrative imagination" (1997, p. 10).

In the effort to create an education system free from discrimination and racism, there is the opportunity to establish a school based on the idea of a liberal education and the possibility to shape future global citizens (Nussbaum, 1997). During the school years, it is crucial that a young person's personal development takes place. Nussbaum pinpoints the idea that education that cultivates a critical approach to different cultural expressions is essential for bringing about change in the individual. Art, literature, music, and film produced by individuals from diverse religious, cultural, social, and ethnic backgrounds can foster a "narrative imagination" (Nussbaum, 1997, p. 10). "The narrative imagination" means that education provides opportunities, and works towards a deeper understanding of students, in order to change their perception and of their understanding of the world.

The purpose emphasized by Nussbaum is to create an education that promotes an attitude that helps students develop essential components such as understanding other people's perspectives, feeling empathy and sympathy, countering stereotypes related to other people, and, above all, developing critical thinking and a critical approach so that discriminatory acts are not left unchallenged (Nussbaum, 1997, 2010).

To train students in this work, Nussbaum argues that ongoing exercises in critical thinking need to be carried out continuously. This should be done by expanding the mission to educate critical thinkers to a variety of subjects, so that teachers collectively and broadly take on the task. Nussbaum criticizes traditional teaching methods where students are passive listeners, and considers this demoralizing and weakening. Instead, she advocates for an education where students are active, engaged, and proactive. They need to learn to investigate and evaluate facts and develop the ability to present their own arguments as well as analyze existing arguments (2010). The goal is to create critical and reflective students who are “active, critical, curious, capable of resisting authority and peer pressure.” (Nussbaum, 2010, p. 73).

The presented participative mixed-methods study in a German primary school focussed on children’s learning and coping strategies at times of home-schooling during the Covid-19-crisis. Findings in educational research during the pandemic (2020-2022) are increasingly enabling a differentiated view based on national and international results in order to derive consequences for educational settings (Helm et al. 2021) in challenging times. However, it is noticeable (Bujard et al. 2021) that the perspectives of children, and especially those of primary school age, have hardly been heard. A small number of studies have focussed on the perspective of primary-school age in order to gain insights into the learning situation and well-being of pupils (cf. Budde et al. 2021, Bujard et al. 2021). In this context, our main research question was: How do especially school beginners (age 6 to 7) deal with this challenging situation between classroom teaching and home-schooling while Covid-19? The aim of our research was to look specifically at the children’s perspectives on home-schooling phases during COVID-19 lockdowns and the related challenges, as well as coping strategies employed by the learners themselves during this time of crisis and instability.

Numerous theoretical frameworks were combined: including the social constructivist perspective, where a setting, in this case a school is continuously constructed in and through local practices, i.e. where activity is produced and adapted by the actors involved in the sense of doing school. The lens of relational understanding of agency was also employed, where specifically, school was depicted as a network of relationships, characterised by the diverse interactions of the school community of actors - adults as well as children. This study is based on the paradigm, as suggested by Eßer and Sitter (2018), that children are competent actors and are actively involved in the (re)production of school as a social setting. Therefore, the principle for this study was based on actor-network-theory and Ryan and Deci’s (2000) self-determination theory and is informed by ongoing debates about children’s agency. The theoretical framework of this study merges socio-cultural theories in order to better understand the role of children's agency, and understanding children as active constructors of their self, environment and childhood during a time of upheaval. Furthermore, the study’s key aim was to make children’s voices heard at the level of the study’s methodology underpinned by a children's rights perspective. A participatory research approach was therefore chosen. According to Von Unger (2014) and Eßer et al. (2020) participatory research approaches are characterised by the involvement of actors as researchers in order to describe and changing social reality as well as measures for the individual and collective empowerment of the partners. The inclusion of children as co-researchers is attributed to both childhood research and participatory research and has gained particular importance in the course of the implementation process of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) in the 1990s (Bradbury-Jones/Taylor 2014, Spriggs/Gillam 2017). This study’s approach, reflects New Childhood Studies with its long tradition of actively involving children in research while observing research ethical principles (Lundy/McEvoy 2012, Hartnack 2019). As is appropriate to a study involving children, ethical considerations were given priority.

Funded by the UK’s Economic and Research Council (ESRC) and based in Wales, the research tackles the ongoing challenge of transitioning children’s participative rights, as recognised in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), into educational practice. Embedding the participative rights of young children in the pedagogical practices of early years education is recognized globally as being challenging (Correia et al. 2019, Koran and Avci, 2017, Vanner 2023). There is evidence of ‘bounded’ participation (Murphy et al., 2022), where teachers report that the voice and agency of young children might only be enabled at specified times, in specified spaces, for specified reasons, or when children are perceived to have the necessary capacity (Murphy et al., 2022).

Drawing upon a socio-cultural approach (Rogoff, 2003) a conceptual framework of agency (James and Prout, 1997) is employed to explore how children’s participative rights are understood and shaped by the children and adults who design, utilise and ‘live’ in the spaces in which children are educated. Central to the project is a construction of young children as capable and agentic meaning-makers, who make sense of their worlds through their social experiences within it (James, 1998). This approach is interconnected with the conceptual framework of agency is a rights-based approach drawing on the UNCRC (UNICEF, 1989) Article 12, within which all children have a right to participate in decisions that affect them, so these two provide the lenses for this research.

This paper focuses the research question “How do primary teachers in Wales conceptualise and support young children’s participative rights and what are perceived enablers and barriers to practice?”. The paper explores how in-service primary school teachers in Wales conceptualise and experience children’s participative rights, and the perceived barriers and enablers to supporting the enactment of those rights in early years education in Wales. Semi-structured interviews were carried out with the teachers (n=14) before they took part in a series of participatory workshops. Reggio Emilia pedagogical approaches were explored to provoke reflections on how children’s participative rights can be supported and enacted in practice. Group discussions and creative activities enabled participants to consider understandings of children’s participative rights and to surface the possible barriers and enablers to these rights being enacted in young children’s classrooms in Wales. Participants were supported to develop participatory projects with children in their class and creative research methods were employed to explicate young children's perceptions of their participative rights in classroom settings, and how they would like these to be developed. There will be post interviews with the teacher participants conducted after their class projects are completed. Reflexive thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2019, 2020, 2022) is being used to analyse the data generated from the teachers’ and children’s’ engagement.

Data analysis is currently on-going and detailed findings will be presented at the conference, however initial themes from practitioners’ pre-interviews include constructions of children, teachers and schools; differing pedagogical approaches; understandings of children’s voice and participation; and differing school and local contexts. A range of barriers and enablers to young children’s participative rights were also surfaced during the data collection and analysis. How teachers’ perceptions evolved during the research process, and the implications of these perceptions for participatory pedagogies with young children will be presented.

In the face of persistent inequities, discrimination, and violence against women, girls, and gender non-conforming individuals, formal education emerges as a space to intervene and generate the necessary cultural changes to progress towards more inclusive societies (O’Brien et al., 2021). One way to do this is shifting from traditional perspectives on teaching sexuality towards comprehensive sex education (CSE), which broadens the focus on sexuality to encompass human relationships, health, sexual and reproductive rights, reflecting on values, and developing skills to make healthy and informed decisions about life and human relationships and explicitly valuing diversity and affection (Keogh et al., 2020).

In educational environments, it's imperative for teachers to embody comprehensive pedagogical practices to promote comprehensive sexual education (CSE). This entails not only possessing the necessary knowledge and skills but also showcasing appropriate attitudes, emotions, and beliefs, serving as role models in fostering CSE development (Dessel et al., 2017). This importance is magnified in early childhood education (ECE), where social interactions serve as primary avenues of learning for young children. Given that children in ECE spend considerable time engaging with educators and assistants, these adults wield significant influence over their learning and growth (Poblete, 2020). Moreover, ECE serves as a crucial arena for children's social integration and exposure to diverse individuals beyond their immediate families. Within these settings, children learn to navigate diversity, making ECE pivotal in nurturing individual identities. Essential to both ECE and CSE are the processes of learning to interact with others, sharing collective values, and recognizing one's own identity and needs.

Education serves as a foundational platform for these processes, shaping and perpetuating norms and discourses surrounding gender identity according to heteronormative and cisgender standards, which unfortunately exclude certain segments of the child population from their developmental narrative. Similarly, issues of otherness and diversity, including those pertaining to migrants, indigenous peoples, and diverse family structures, are often marginalised, perpetuating notions of inequality. CSE emerges as a catalyst for cultural shifts toward a fairer, safer, more democratic and respectful world that guarantees human rights.

Children and adolescents are rights holders with full capabilities to participate, have their voices heard, and not suffer any type of discrimination. Therefore, adults and the state must consider these rights. As such, the rights that accompany Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE) include the right to receive information to take care of their bodies, adopting responsible and supportive behaviours in relation to others; the right to inhabit school spaces where respect for all individuals prevails; the right to live without violence, to live their gender identity without suffering discrimination, the right to express feelings and emotions, and the right to be diverse However, the implementation of CSE remains a contentious issue, particularly for families and educators, especially in the context of ECE (Shibuya et al., 2023).

This paper presents the preliminary results of a three year study that analyses the representations of early childhood teachers and teaching assistants about what entails CSE and how they include (or not) the fundamental axes of CSE in their teaching practice in the Chilean context. The study seeks to generate knowledge about the representations of the CSE axes (gender, sexuality and diversity) that facilitate the incorporation and development of CSE as a human right from early childhood. Focussing on the findings of the first year of this research, for this conference we will delve into the beliefs, knowledge, and the ways in which CSE is manifested in the practices of teachers and teaching assistants of three Chilean nurseries.

Rooted in the transdisciplinary approach to research as outlined by Darbellay (2015) that aims to include interested parties’ viewpoints, understandings and knowledge throughout the research process, our symposium draws upon the work of Moody (in press), which foregrounds the significance of children’s participatory roles as co-researchers, recognizing them as agentic and knowledgeable stakeholders in research processes. It emphasizes that children’s participation in research is an ethical choice that acknowledges their agency and rights, thus aligning with the principles of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, particularly articles 12 and 13, which assert children’s rights to be heard and express their opinions freely​​.

A project by Moody et al. (2021) exemplifies how children can enrich research with their expertise, especially regarding their experiences of school journeys. This illustrated the potential of transdisciplinary research to yield original contributions to our understanding of childhood and children’s rights. Their work emphasized the need for research that genuinely reflects the lived experiences of children, viewing them as active social agents.

James (2007) highlights issues of representation, authenticity, and the diversity of children’s experiences, stressing that children's voices in research should not merely confirm established views but rather offer fresh, authentic perspectives based on their unique social roles​​​​. The model of “children’s research advisory groups” (‘CRAG’) (Lundy et al., 2011) emphasizes how their active involvement in addressing concepts and analyzing data enhances the validity and applicability of research findings. Gillett-Swan (2018) supports this view, arguing that including children’s insights in data analysis processes fortifies the quality of results.

Incorporating insights from a recent systematic review of research with and by children (Bakhtiar et al., 2023), our symposium will explore the nuanced roles of children in research, reflecting a shift towards recognizing their agency and expertise. This aligns with Thomas's (2021) arguments, which advocate for the validity and necessity of child-led research within the broader scope of childhood studies. Our symposium proposes to extend the concept of CRAGs by embedding it within a transdisciplinary framework, emphasizing how they can be designed and implemented. While participatory approaches have been a cornerstone of children’s rights research, transdisciplinarity offers a broader, more cohesive strategy, treating participatory methods as a subset of its inclusive philosophy which fosters integration of children’s voices into research and policymaking, ensuring their perspectives are not merely included but are instrumental in shaping outcomes.

Our sessions will highlight how children can influence research questions and designs, refining methodological tools and engaging in data analysis, thereby actively participating in the co-creation of knowledge​​. However, we will not shy away from discussing the challenges, such as power differentials, the complexities of adult facilitation, and achieving genuine participation. We will delve into the roles and ethical elements regarding varied questions like: How can researchers strike a balance between encouraging participation and respecting a child’s choice not to engage, particularly in settings like schools where the concept of voluntariness may be blurred, while being mindful of the different levels of understanding and competence across varying ages?

During this symposium, we will also discuss the challenges and opportunities inherent in these approaches, considering the diversity of European contexts through experiences from Switzerland, Germany, and the UK. Each presentation within this symposium will concentrate on methodological aspects of participatory research, from conception to implementation, in educational contexts. By uniting the theoretical and practical dimensions, we aspire to create a transdisciplinary space where children’s voices are not just included but are instrumental in shaping the research paradigm and where specific limitations arise.

This doctoral study, grounded in the principles of children’s rights in education, investigates the role of children as co-researchers in exploring the school climate within alternative educational settings. Building on Moody’s (2019) emphasis on involving children in rights-respecting educational environments, this study explores alternative schools as examined by Zerika et al. (2022), revealing environments that adapt curricula to the interests of children and incorporate practices like class and/or school councils, reflecting an indirect approach to fostering child agency. These settings prioritize children’s holistic development, intertwining socialization and learning as key elements of educational experience. The research adopts a case-based, comparative approach across three alternative schools in French-speaking Switzerland, employing multi-informant and multi-method strategies to capture the dynamic nature of school climate, as suggested by Wang & Degol (2016). This includes observations, interviews with teachers, headmasters, and parents, and participatory activities with children (4 to 12). Emphasis is placed on the children’s perspectives on school climate, as elaborated by Cohen et al. (2009), examining how relationships, safety, pedagogical approaches, and the institutional environment contribute to the overall experience of learning and socialization in these schools. An insightful facet of this study is the active participation of children aged 10-11 as co-researchers. Drawing inspiration from Gillett-Swan’s work (2014, 2018), our research employs not only involves children in the development and analysis of data but also places significant emphasis on their insights. This participatory research with children highlighted the need to consider practical, organizational, and temporal aspects for child co-researchers. Balancing the power dynamic and ethically navigating the willingness of children and parents to participate were interesting challenges in these classroom and school settings. Reflections from the study underscore the importance of designing activities that accommodate the logistical and temporal realities of children’s lives. Building trust with participants, being prepared to adapt to the unexpected, and continuously reflect on and adjust methods to suit the needs and preferences of child participants were important. One of the main advantages was the authentic engagement with students, fostering a reciprocal learning environment and enriching data through their creative contributions. This involvement not only provided valuable data but also empowered the children as active participants in the research process.

Cohen, J., McCabe, E. M., Michelli, N. M., & Pickeral, T. (2009). School climate: Research, policy, practice, and teacher education. Teachers college record, 111(1), 180-213. Gillett-Swan, J. K. (2014). Investigating Tween Children’s Capacity to Conceptualise the Complex Issue of Wellbeing. Global Studies of Childhood, 4(2), 64–76. https://doi.org/10.2304/gsch.2014.4.2.64 Gillett-Swan, J. K. (2018). Children’s analysis processes when analysing qualitative research data: a missing piece to the qualitative research puzzle. Qualitative Research, 18(3), 290–306. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794117718607 Moody, Z. (2019). Droits de l’enfant et école : diversité, participation et transformation sociale. In J. Zermatten & P. D. Jaffé (dir.), 30 ans de droits de l’enfant: un nouvel élan pour l’humanité (p. 174-183). Sion, Suisse : Université de Genève, Centre interfacultaire en droits de l’enfant. Wang, M.-T., & Degol, J. L. (2016). School Climate: a Review of the Construct, Measurement, and Impact on Student Outcomes. Educational Psychology Review, 28(2), 315-352. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9319-1 Zerika, S., Moody, Z., & Darbellay, F. (2022). Les pédagogies « alternatives » au prisme de trois études de cas. Recherches & Éducations. https://journals.openedition.org/rechercheseducations/12353

Inscribed in the UN-CRC and in other conceptualisations of children's rights are constructions of children (Storck-Odabaşı & Heinzel, 2019, p. 236). In my dissertation study I am looking at this particular aspect that lies 'underneath' and therefore I want to focus on children's interpretations of child(hood). The UN-CRC, in particular Article 12, also plays a central role in the study design, as my dissertation study is linked to a participatory research project about children’s rights that I am currently conducting with two academic research colleagues and 12 children aged 6-12 in Germany. We all meet once a month from March 2023 after school and sometimes on Saturdays to follow child-led questions. We are also providing workshops addressing children’s rights, research ethics and methods. In order to approach my question, the participating children posed in self-assembled groups still images and photographed themselves, adapting the impulse on the second day. Following the still images, we had a group discussion about the photos based on photo-voice method (Wang, 1999) and also with an impulse that took up a quote from the children given in a previous meeting. Especially at this point it can be seen how the children co-formed the research design. During the discussions, two children left the situation, saying afterwards that they were bored, which provides an interesting point of discussion for the symposium, as it particularly emphasizes the points of voluntary participation and self-determination in the research situation (Lundy, McEvoy & Byrne, 2011, p.719-720). For analysis and interpretation of the data I plan to view and discuss central video segments with the children. I want to use elements of concept mapping for visualization and following convergent interviewing techniques to ask for exceptions and explanations (Dick, 2007). By involving the children in this stage of the research process it is taken into account that the data interpretation is a moment directly affecting children (Lundy, McEvoy & Byrne, 2011). Difficulties and advantages of the study arose specifically from taking place outside school or any other institutional environment, like on the one hand building an intense, voluntary relationship or the possibility to take the time everyone needs for certain steps along the way but on the other hand finding time slots and making sure that the children can attend, which mostly meant, that parents had to drive them and pick them up afterwards.

Dick, B. (2007). What Can Grounded Theorists and Action Researchers Learn from Each Other? In A. Bryant & K. Charmaz (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of grounded theory (pp. 398–416). Sage. Lundy, L., McEvoy, L., & Byrne, B. (2011). Working With Young Children as Co-Researchers: An Approach Informed by the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Early Education & Development, 22(5), 714–736. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2011.596463 Storck-Odabaşı, J., & Heinzel, F. (2019). „Findest du Kinderrechte sind gut und wenn ja, warum?“ Partizipative Methoden der Kindheitsforschung im Kontext von Schulentwicklung zu Kinderrechten. In C. Donie, F. Foerster, M. Obermayr, A. Deckwerth, G. Kammermeyer, G. Lenske, M. Leuchter, & A. Wildemann (Eds.), Grundschulpädagogik zwischen Wissenschaft und Transfer (pp. 233–238). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-26231-0_30 Wang, C. C. (1999). Photovoice: A Participatory Action Research Strategy Applied to Women's Health. Journal of Women's Health, 8(2), 185-192.

Eating habits have social, ecological and health influences, and most of them develop during childhood. As article 24 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) states, children must receive information on health and nutrition. Schools therefore have a duty to offer all pupils fair access to sustainable food, with a view to transforming the situation and helping to reduce social inequalities. The Swiss curriculum includes this education as a theme, without allocating a specific hour in the timetable for pupils aged 4 to 12 years old. In practice little time is devoted to it, and studies show that parents and teachers have little discussion on the subject (Aydin et al., 2022). Faced with these implementation challenges, the project to develop a food education programme for primary schools emerged at the intersection of several Swiss institutions. In this context, several partners were mobilised to reflect on these issues. In addition to scientists, teachers and experts on the subject, a class of 9-10 years old pupils was appointed as a team of expert children, enabling the expertise of the main people involved - the pupils - to be taken into account. A participatory, cross-disciplinary methodology was put in place (Camponovo et al., 2020) to gather the pupils' opinions on the entire development of the programme, from the definition of the themes to the development of the monitoring tools, as well as the graphic design and running of the sessions. A range of innovative methodological tools tailored to children (visual methods, diamond ranking, focus groups, etc.) were used to ensure that children's participatory rights were respected across the 4 dimensions of Lundy's model (2007) (voice, space, audience, influence). This consultation phase will take place during the 2023-2024 school year. This contribution, based on some empirical results gathered during the process, aims to highlight both the advantages and the challenges encountered in our approach. How did the idea of integrating a team of expert children into the project emerge? How was this approach received by the members of the interdisciplinary team working on the project? What conditions and precautions were put in place? In order to draw lessons that can be transferred to another project, we will use field notes taken throughout the process and feedback from team members and children to formulate our thoughts on the effective participation of children in this project.

Aydin, G., Margerison, C., Worsley, A., & Booth, A. (2022). Parents’ communication with teachers about food and nutrition issues of primary school students. Children, 9(4), 510. Camponovo, S., Moody Z., Darbellay F., Berchtold-Sedooka A., & Jaffé, P.-D. (2020). Une approche transdisciplinaire du chemin de l’école : les enfants comme co-chercheuses et co-chercheurs. Dans I. Côté, K. Lavoie, R.-P. Trottier-Cyr (eds), La recherche centrée sur l’enfant. Défis éthiques et innovations méthodologiques (pp. 247-273). Presses de l’Université Laval. Lundy, L. (2007). «Voice» is not enough: conceptualising article 12 of the United Nation convention on the rights of the child. British educational research journal, 33(6), 927-942.

This doctoral research explores the intersection between children's educational rights and their civil and political rights, with a focus on the role of teachers as duty-bearers. The study examines the examples of school protests in Thailand in 2020-2021 as an exercise of civil and political rights in defence of a child's educational rights, as well as other children’s rights under the UNCRC. The original methodology proposed to work alongside a group of Thai secondary school students as co-researchers; however, ethical factors led to the exclusion of children from the research design. Instead, the child rights-based approach (CRBA) developed by Lundy and McEvoy (2012) has been adapted for use with a group of "recent adults" who were in school at the time of the protests but are now over the age of 18. The CRBA is based on a foundation of children's rights and incorporates the concepts of Article 12 and children's ‘right to be properly researched’ (Ennew & Plateau, 2004). The study recruited a YPRAG (young person's research advisory group) (Lundy, McEvoy & Byrne, 2012) of five young people, who were supposed to collaborate throughout the substantive stages of the research project to explore how best to examine teachers’ roles in the implementation of civil and political rights in schools. The collaboration with the YPRAG was intended to mitigate some of the researcher's European bias, reduce the risk of tokenistic examination of the data, and ensure that the research was culturally appropriate (Datta et al., 2014; Hart, 1992). Despite many mitigations explored, COVID-19 presented a substantial challenge, as participatory research relies on sustaining relationships between the researcher, gatekeepers, and the advisory group (Loveridge et al., 2023). The research faced other challenges as well, such as the flux in young peoples’ lives, making it difficult to maintain consistent participation, and after the research design stages, the YPRAG withdrew before data collection had begun. The discussant offers reflections and lessons learned from their doctoral study, suggesting that the CRBA is an ideal standard to maintain, but it should not be used in place of stringent and thoroughly considered ethical decision-making. The participation of children in doctoral research should be thoroughly considered, and researchers must be open to exploring other avenues. The study offers advice for researchers in similar sensitive contexts and emphasizes the need to prioritize ethical considerations and adaptability in decision-making.

Datta, R., Khyang, N., Khyang, H., Kheyang, H., Khyang, M. & Chapola, J. (2014). Participatory action research and researcher’s responsibilities: an experience with an Indigenous community. International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 18. 1-19. Ennew, J. and Plateau, D.P. (2004) How to Research the Physical and Emotional Punishment of Children. Bangkok: Keen Publishing (Thailand) Co., Ltd., International Save the Children Southeast, East Asia and Pacific Region Alliance. Hart, R. (1992). Children’s Participation: From tokenism to citizenship. UNICEF. International Child Development Centre. Loveridge, J., Wood, B. E., Davis-Rae, E., & McRae, H. (2023). Ethical challenges in participatory research with children and youth. Qualitative Research. https://doi-org.queens.ezp1.qub.ac.uk/10.1177/14687941221149594 Lundy, L., & McEvoy, L. (2012). Children’s rights and research processes: Assisting children to (in)formed views. Childhood, 19(1), 129-144. https://doi.org/10.1177/0907568211409078 Lundy, L., McEvoy, L., & Byrne, B. (2011). Working With Young Children as Co-Researchers: An Approach Informed by the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Early Education & Development, 22(5), 714–736. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2011.596463 United Nations (1989). UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

It has been 35 years since the Convention on the Rights of the Child was ratified (CRC; United Nations, 1989). This convention protects the rights of children. Article 12 addresses specifically students' voices and participation: “Children have the right to be listened to and taken seriously in matters affecting their daily lives and that the child’s view is given due weight to the evolving capacities of the child”.

Under the terms of the CRC, governments must ensure that all children are actively included and listened to when decisions are made that affect the daily lives of children (United Nations, 1989). Schools are part of the daily lives of children and therefore, according to the CRC, teachers and school staff should also actively involve children in the decision-making process (Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth, 2021; Thompson, 2011). The daily school lives of children include what pupils will learn and how things are organized at school.

Article 12 states that “the child’s view is given due weight to the pupils’ age and capacity” (United Nations, 1989). This is mostly interpreted as age-appropriate activities to facilitate student voice and teachers, in the educational context, decide which suggestions are rejected and acted upon (Bron & Veugelers, 2014; Lundy, 2007). Providing guidelines to support the interpretation of age-appropriate or “given due weight” in decisions is challenging. There are significant developmental variations among children (Bron & Veugelers, 2014). Children’s capacities are not merely determined by development but also by life- and social experiences (Thomson, 2011).

However, there are multiple theoretical frameworks (e.g. Hart, 1992; Lundy, 2007; Shier, 2001) which support researchers, practitioners and school staff in the understanding of what student voice and pupil participation entail and how this could translate to educational practices (de Leeuw et al., 2020; Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth, 2021). An implementation report on the CRC shows that the level of implementation, regarding student voice and pupil participation, varies per country (UNICEF, 2012). Notwithstanding, the enactment of student voice and pupil participation also depends on determinants such as teachers' beliefs and attitudes (Banko-Bal & Guler-Yildiz, 2021; Huić, 2022; Zorec, 2015) and teachers’ perceptions regarding which capacity and agency a pupil encompasses (Gillet-Swan & Sargeant, 2019; Huić, 2022). Research on teacher-related determinants and the enactment of student voice and pupil participation in specific is scarce. Existing materials regarding teacher attitudes and beliefs focus on general child rights. Research indicates that there is a discrepancy between positive teachers’ attitudes towards student voice and pupil participation and the enactment in the classroom (Banko-Bal & Guler-Yildiz, 2021; Huić, 2022). Explanations for this discrepancy are that teachers’ responses on questionnaires are socially desirable (Banko-Bal & Guler-Yildiz, 2021). Another explanation, which is provided in the literature, is that teachers lack the skills to implement student voice and pupil participation activities, which match their pedagogical and didactical visions (Banko-Bal & Guler-Yildiz, 2021; Huić, 2022; Zorec, 2015).

The question is if and how student voice and pupil participation are realized at primary schools. To explore these questions and establish if there are relations and mediating effects between teacher determinants, attitudes and enactment, a reliable and valid instrument is critical.

The aim of our study is threefold: first, to develop and assess the reliability of a newly designed questionnaire which assesses teacher determinants concerning student voice and pupil participation in primary education, second, to explore what teacher attitudes are and if these attitudes differ from pupil age, and third to map and analyze how student voice and pupil participation are translated and enacted upon in Dutch primary education.

When examining the participation of children in educational institutions, it is widely accepted that the children themselves should be included in the research, at least in a consultative manner. This is justified by children's rights and various considerations on how these rights can be implemented and acknowledged both in educational institutions and schools, as well as in the research itself (Lansdown & O'Kane, 2014; Lundy & McEvoy, 2012).
The challenge that comes with exploring participation in educational settings and schools involves addressing how ‘good’ research with children can effectively capture both the perspectives of the children, and simultaneously meet essential ethical requirements regarding e.g. critical reflection of transparency of research aims, children´s ongoing informed consent, and degrees of children´s participation at different stages of the research process (Alderson & Morrow, 2020; Lundy & McEvoy, 2012; Mayne et al., 2016). The contribution focuses on exploring ethical challenges that arise in the phase of data collection. Based on these findings, a reflective tool has been developed to guide the planning and performing of reflective research with children (Velten et al., 2024).
The presented research is theoretically based on perspectives on three key motifs of research with children. The first key motif is the objective of ascertaining the children’s perspectives. This includes creating spaces for action within the research situation, acknowledging their various modes of expression, and appreciating the content-related impulses of the children (Clark & Moss, 2011; Lundy & McEvoy, 2012; Mayne et al., 2016). A second fundamental motif is the researcher’s aim and expectation to meet the research objectives. The importance of common quality criteria for qualitative research, including comparability of data and the intersubjective plausibility of the analysis, remains (Strübing et al., 2018). Additionally, the actions of researchers are guided by their own research questions and also by ideas about what should be discussed and done, for example, in interviews, taking into account the attention spans of the participants and the total time available within the institutional setting. Thus, the guiding principle of considering research-inherent principles also strongly influences actions in individual research situations (Spriggs & Gillam, 2017).
A third key motif becomes particularly relevant in institutionally framed research settings such as educational institutions and schools: the consideration of the conditions of the research field. This includes organisational conditions such as the available time for data collection and ensuring data protection, both of which are significant for securing access to the field. Furthermore, explicit and implicit expectations of the field regarding what research and researchers can/should achieve in terms of research-inherent goals also are crucial. Additionally, the actions of researchers can be situated within the broader context of considering children's rights, the well-being of the child, and child protection. This includes instances where children may be at risk of harm during the research situation or when information is conveyed to researchers that necessitates actions beyond the scope of the research to ensure the protection of the children (Velten et al., 2024).
When considering the responsibility of professional (adult) researchers in conducting ‘good’ research with children, these notions lead to the assumption, that researchers must perform a balancing act between these different key motifs both in planning the research project as well as in the situatively constructed research situations (Velten & Höke, 2023). The contribution explores these balancing acts by examining different apparently "unsuccessful" or “failing” situations in interviews with children. Practices and strategies for balancing demands and power dynamics were identified, highlighting disclosure of purported “failings” and the importance of ethical data collection.

Although there is agreement on the contribution that students make to the totality of the school environment (e.g. Gislason, 2010), user evaluations of school space often centre on teacher experiences (Frelin & Grannas, 2022). Further, outdoor spaces in schools are used much more by students than by teachers (Woolner et al., 2010) and, while assumptions are made about positive impacts on wellbeing and health, it is less clear how students actually feel about and use these spaces. Responding to such an oversight, this exploratory project, collaborating with England’s Department for Education (DfE), investigated the use of digital technology to understand how outdoor space is being perceived and used by students in a sample of secondary schools (students aged 11-16 or 11-18).

Digital approaches were developed to reveal student use and views. Three tools, which could be used in any combination, were trialled:

Tool 1: Online questionnaire

The aim was to collect views on specific outdoor locations but also to enable respondents to express ideas about other places. The questionnaire’s five outdoor locations included the entrance area, a sports area and three circulation/social spaces. Photographs of these locations were supplied by the schools and a series of questions were replicated for each location. The questionnaires were designed to be completed independently by students and were accessible for all ages.

Tool 2: PosterVote

PosterVote is a low-cost electronic voting system for communities and activists (Vlachokyriakos et al., 2014). The approach allows questions to be asked through a poster at a specific location. The system collects votes for each answer electronically, and the results can be downloaded using a mobile phone. Posters were designed in collaboration with the schools. The final structure of the poster was the same in each location and at each school.

Tool 3: QR codes

QR codes can be used to collect views at specific locations, but also enable more discursive commentary about the place. Codes were placed in the locations and scanned by students using their mobile phones. This directed them to a website which collected open text responses. The pupil could leave comments about the location and respond to previous comments linked to that location.

In this paper, we present our experiences of developing digital approaches, including a participatory approach with students in two schools, then trialling and evaluating these three tools across four schools. Our particular concern is to problematize the optimism of assumptions about student participation and to contribute to ongoing discussions of power in schools. We consider whether revealing more about student experiences enables ‘student voice’ in school decision-making, so empowering students (Coelho et al., 2022), or if instead this increased visibility of outdoor spaces, where students have traditionally had more agency (Holt, 2004), is extending the surveillance of schooling (Gulson and Symes, 2007) and is therefore disempowering.

We use our experiences with the students and school leaders when planning the digital approaches, the data we collected through the digital tools, and the tendency for the students to subvert our intentions. In common with other researchers (Gallagher, 2008; Holt, 2004) dealing with the practical reality of researching in schools, we recognise the complexity of power and discuss our positioning within the system: seeking to empower the students through offering communication tools while being beholden to school leaders for access and cooperation. The student responses can be seen as contributing, on the one hand, to increased understanding of their experiences, which could be beneficial for them if their views are acted on, but also demonstrating some resistance to heightened visibility and a desire to keep some privacy within the surveillance of schooling.

Objectives

This study outlines dimensions for a critical analysis of student participation rights. It seeks to provide a complex and nuanced understanding of these rights by shedding light on their potentially negative ramifications and offering an analytical framework for identifying and exploring these ramifications.

The study draws on data from democratic schools’ participatory disciplinary procedures. Democratic schools exemplify an organizational ethos that sanctifies student participation. This ethos is manifested in a whole-school approach, encompassing the entire school and integrating participation in all school practices (see Gawlicz & Millei, 2022; Korkmaz & Erden, 2014; Wilson, 2015). Given the centrality of student participation to the whole-school ethos of democratic schools, this context facilitates an inquiry into the ramifications of participation rights.

The focus on participation in school discipline was chosen to manifest the interrelations of collective and individual participation rights. Democratic schools’ disciplinary systems are based on committees encompassing both students and teachers. Any conflict or breaching of school rules is submitted to those committees whose members conduct a trial and reach a verdict (Greenberg, 1991; Hecht, 2010).

Whereas the analysis presented in the paper draws on a specific context, it carries broad relevance to various participatory practices in educational settings.

Theoretical framework

Studies about children’s participation rights tend to promote and justify children's participation. Scholars have argued in this regard that critical voices about participation have been muted as the promotion of participation has become a “moral crusade” (Lewis, 2010, p. 15) or a taken-for-granted “mantra” (Tisdall & Punch, 2012, pp. 251, 254). Scholars have also criticized the prevalent monolithic perceptions of participation rights (e.g., Author 2 & Other, 2023; Blaisdell et al., 2021). Some scholars have highlighted the need for more critical thinking regarding the potential ramifications of high participation levels in various contexts (Author 2, 2021; Kim, 2016; Tisdall & Punch, 2012), but empirical studies examining those ramifications are scarce (Authors, 2023a, 2023b).

Several explanations can be suggested for this gap in the research. Scholars who study children’s rights are typically supportive of human rights as a value, thus tending to advocate participation rather than criticize it (Quennerstedt, 2013). Moreover, children’s rights and children’s participation are relatively novel concepts. From an historical point of view, the desire to raise the profile of such research may have compelled the researchers to close ranks so that their avant-garde ideas would be accepted (James, 2007).

Initial criticism concerning children's participation has begun to emerge in regard to participation in research. Some scholars introduced critical questions regarding the practice of research “by” children in which children act as “primary investigators” or “co-researchers” (e.g., Hammersley, 2017; Kim, 2016; Thomas, 2021; Tisdall, 2012). For example, Tisdall (2012) questioned whether children’s expertise in their own lives necessarily makes them experts in other children’s lives (p. 187). Others have doubted the assumption that children are sufficiently competent to perform research (Hammersley, 2017; Kim, 2016).

Another path of criticism has emerged with regard to the unequal implications of participation rights. For example, studies have shown that privileged children may maneuver their participation toward their own interests (Wyness, 2009). Studies have also shown that participatory practices could lead to favored treatment by the participating youth, with youth participation implemented as a tool to reinforce institutional power relations and engender compliance (Drew, 2019; Finneran et al., 2023; Gawlicz & Millei, 2022).

None of these studies offered a comprehensive critical analysis of participation rights. This study aims to address this gap in the literature.

The 21st Century has seen multiple socioeconomic and geopolitical changes and crises that have impacted children’s lives. A global pandemic (COVID-19), wars and climate changes have led to increased disruption, displacement, exploitation (e.g., digital threats to privacy and safety online), violence and poverty (Eisenstadt et al., 2019). These issues affect all children, especially those from socioeconomically deprived backgrounds (SDBs) (UNICEF 2021, Loopstra et al., 2019) and are an ongoing violation of their human rights.

Since 1998, the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) has driven implementation of children’s rights worldwide, leading to researchers and policymakers examining how children can access their rights. To date research examining children’s rights (e.g., Michell, Lundy & Hill, 2023), has either focused on older children (seven+) (Tyrie and Beachamp 2018) or on participation within school decision making related to Article 12 in particular. Less attention has been paid to children’s perspectives on broader rights. Furthermore, research on the experiences and accessibility to rights of children under five years is limited (Correia et al, 2019, Urbina-Garcia et al. 2022) and it is this gap that this research project seeks to address for three- to five-year-olds.

Moreover, public opinion, policies and laws in England and Wales are converging in support of assuring self-determination rights for children to validate their person status. To do so responsibly an appropriate balance between protection and self-determination rights must be achieved for children at every point in their development, no matter their socio-economic background. To determine and support this balance will require the existence of (a) empirical evidence of need and readiness for various protection and self-determination opportunities throughout the developmental period, (b) a broadly supported positive ideology of the child and (c) the active involvement of children in establishing their needs and rights. However, this involvement is problematic in disadvantaged socio-economic areas across UK.

The rights of children within educational settings are well acknowledged within the literature (e.g. Quennerstedt, 2016), and in the last 20 years much work has been undertaken in Human Rights Education (e.g. Robinson at al. 2020). Limited research focuses on the convergence between younger children’s rights (within education and in their everyday lives), however, and their experiences of socioeconomically deprivation. This research focuses, therefore, on the intersectionality between the two marginalised characteristics; younger children (3–5-year-olds) and socio-economic deprivation and seeks to evaluate how these impact access to rights. As discussed below, this is a three-year project that aims to:

1. gain an understanding of educators’ perspective of young children’s access to their rights (age 3-5) [Year 1],
2. to explore pedagogical practices that educators use (if any) to listen to young children about their rights [Year 1],
3. gain an understanding of young children’s experiences of their rights (age 3-5) in four urban regions affected by socio-economic deprivation in England and Wales [Year 2],
4. identify current practices of how children access their rights in practice and if any change is needed [Year 2],
5. investigate ways of amplifying and enacting change where needed through collaboration and co-production with key stakeholders and communities [Year 3].

This presentation is focusing on the first two research questions being examined in Year 1 and reports data from educators in two urban regions in England and Wales that are affected by socio-economic deprivation.

The intention of this paper is to give rise to reflections about the purpose of parent-teacher conferences in the light of children's rights to freely express their views on matters affecting their lives, as outlined in Article 12 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. This will set the stage for a discussion of the obstacles that hinder students' rights and their authentic engagement as valuable contributors to their own school lives. The project is based on an empirical study of student’s participation in parent-teacher conferences within the context of the Danish education system. However, the study has international relevance for all countries in which parent-teacher conferences is part of their school system.

In recent decades, there has been a growing market orientation in the education sector (Ball, 2003; Biesta, 2009; Helms, 2017/2020; Steensen, 2023), alongside with an increased focus on optimizing both schools' and students' performance which has resulted in a heightened demand for individual achievement. Alongside the shift towards enhanced evaluation practices in the school system in general, including the parent-teacher conferences (Helms & Steensen 2023), there has been limited attention to students' right to be heard, have their opinions respected, and participate in decisions related to their own lives cf. Article 12. International research (Förster 2016; Kotthoff 2015; Hofvendahl 2006; Lendrum et al. 2015; Tholander, 2011) as well as Danish studies on parent-teacher conferences (Helms & Steensen 2023; Helms 2017, 2020; Knudsen 2010; Kryger 2012; Kryger and Ravn 2007) have consistently shown that students are not provided with genuine opportunities to contribute with their own voices and perspectives in the parent-teacher conferences. The communication is generally observed as predominantly one-way with teachers addressing students and parents, resulting in student reluctance due to the expectation of being assessed. Taking these aspects into account our main research question is:

What dynamics emerge in the parent-teacher conference regarding the involvement of students' voices and how can we develop practices in school where students' right to express their viewpoints about their own lives is given space and taken seriously?

Drawing from the theoretical framework by Gert Biesta, we seek to illustrate how involving students primarily as objects of external demands displaces participation as subjectification. Subjectification, in this context, refers to the opportunity for students to exercise their freedom, bring their voices into play and be acknowledged as subjects of their own lives. Subjectification also involves becoming a democratic person. Biesta encourages reflections on the opportunities for democratic action and "learning-in-action" we create within the school. What schools can do—or at least should try to do—is to make democratic action possible (Biesta, 2007). If our objective is to foster democratic citizens or students capable of making informed decisions and taking action in an uncertain world, the school must provide students with the opportunity to realize that they possess a voice, and that this voice holds significance in the world.

Furthermore, drawing on the theory of Hartmut Rosa, particularly the concepts of alienation and resonance, we explore students' subjective experiences of participation in parent-teacher conferences as both zones of potential alienation and spaces of resonance within the school environment (Rosa 2021). In addition to Biesta's and Rosa's perspectives, we integrate theoretical viewpoints that directly address children's rights. Harry Shier (2017) contributes with the perspective of children's active agency and emphasizes the importance of recognizing children as vital contributors to discussions about their education and well-being, rather than passive recipients. This viewpoint aligns with Laura Lundy's work, which enriches the discussion by underscoring the necessity for authentic engagement and the inclusion of students' voices in shaping their educational experiences (Lundy, 2007).

Networks hold a meeting during ECER. All interested are welcome.