Conference Agenda

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.