Martin, A. (1990). Social Studies in
Kindergarten: A Case Study. The Elementary School Journal, 90(3).
305-317.
Serriere, S. (2010). Carpettime
democracy: Digital photography and social consciousness in the early childhood
classroom. The Social Studies, 102(1), 60-68.
Leach, T. & Lewis, E. (2011).
Children’s experiences during circle-time: a call for research-informed debate.
Pastoral Care in Education: An International Journal of Personal, Social and
Emotional Development, 1-11.
Some weeks ago we were talking
about Laura Lundy’s article “Voice is not enough” suggesting that there were
two key elements she identifies in Article 12 of the UNCRC[1]:
“the right to express view, and (ii) the right to have the view given due
weight” that needed to be effectively applied (p.932). As a proposal she considers four factors
described as space, voice, audience and influence. In a brief and cursory
summary a) Space refers to assuring there is a space where children can
make effective the right to express their views, where they can express the
matters that they consider impact them and how would they like to be involved;
b) Voice is a complex concept because according to Article 12 the child’s
participation is limited by his/her maturity, capacity and ability to form a
view, an opinion; c) Audience speaks to the idea of guaranteeing that the child
will have an audience that will listen and is interested in his/her views. And d) Influence, which refers to “giving due
weight to their views” through procedures that ensure that their opinions have
an effect on the actions taken (Lundy 2007, p. 939).
I am bringing
this article back to conversation because issues like the skepticism about
children’s capacity especially in relation to their age and level of maturity; I
thought it was very interesting the way in which both Serriere’s and Martin’s
articles challenge the idea of kindergarteners as incapable to handle
conflict. To consider that tensions
related to power also take place in young children communities is something I
had never heard before, but as registered by the examples shown in the
articles, dynamics within these groups reflect tensions that occur in the adult
world. One example of this comes with
Serriere’s piece about Carpet-Time Democracy.
It is refreshing to ‘listen’ to children’s voices to actually know how
the conversations look like, what kind of reflections they are capable of
doing, the kind of events they are confronted with within the school.
The articles are
also dialoguing with a big question deriving from our conversations about how
democratic practices look like in elementary school; I myself was wondering
about how complex problems could be addressed in a young children’s classroom
without disrupting their lives and making them feel sad or powerless. I think the articles do a great job in
showing the level of complexity of children’s interactions at school: “As early
childhood classrooms are not exceptions to the workings of inequity or
privilege, experiences with democracy should begin in students’ first schooling
experiences while the foundations of difference, justice, equality, and human
rights are being laid.” (Serriere 2010, page 60). To be honest a naïve picture
comes to my head when I think of Kindergarten.
I think one of the most interesting points made by Martin’s article was
that young children (and I would even include middle school students) are
seldom believed to understand issues in a deep level and as a consequence the
material used “…tend to belabor the obvious, the cheerful, and the
stereotypical” (p. 306), but on the other hand they might have to confront very
stark problems in their communities.
Carpet-time democracy look very different from these conventional
materials because one main point is that the scenarios used to reflect on
social consequences, addressing topics like social justice in their spaces,
come from scenes from that make part of their real life. Martin’s article and Dorrie’s club are great
examples of the dynamics taking place in these classrooms and how concepts like
inclusion/exclusion can be worked out. I
do not recall the teacher being the one spreading knowledge with these heavy
words, but I do recall her allowing the students to find out how these
experiences felt like, reflecting on them, taking several alternatives into
account and deciding based on their knowledge.
One of the
remaining questions that has been popping up in my head is if behind our ideas
of democracy, of democratic practices in classrooms we are actually looking for
having more classroom control, more discipline, less chaos. I wonder what we would do as teachers if what
goes on in classrooms, in our democratic spaces, does not suit us, we do not
like it, and whether we like it or not we are still vested with the power of
the institutions we represent. This last
point connects with Leach’s and Lewis’ article.
Reflecting on Open Circles the authors point out: “The rethoric is often
about children having an ‘authentic voice,’ when, in reality, they are being
manipulated into accepting and responding in prescribed ways to adult
classifications of types of pupil and behavior (Sellman, 2009)” (Leach and
Lewis 2012, page 7).
Speaking to
Lundy’s “audience” and “influence” I wonder what kind of effects these
democratic practices generate in classrooms within a hierarchic organization. In Martin’s case she made the parents part of
an audience that could support the process and it is evident that her way of
analyzing the dynamic, her specialized logic and the depth of her reflection
was central to the parents’ reaction, as well as, the commitment showed in her
letter. But again I still think there is a structural
question that goes beyond the classrooms and at the same time I believe that
these levels in school are less restricted and commanded by the requirements of
what needs to be learned which usually pushes the teacher to give a great load
of information to go with the pace of the curriculum and that leaves outside
the processes that ensure a long lasting impression of democratic practices. I
think to generate this kind of research really translates theoretical
developments into concrete structures that are usually required to speak to
present policies and curricula.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario