From Silence to Voice: Students’ Perspectives in a European Context of School Quality Evaluation
Author(s):
Conference:
ECER 2014
Format:
Paper

Session Information

25 SES 02, Stakeholder Perspectives (Part 2)

Paper Session: continued from 25 SES 01

Time:
2014-09-02
15:15-16:45
Room:
B034 Anfiteatro
Chair:
Ann Quennerstedt

Contribution

One of the main priorities recently recognized by European Community inside the recent ERASMUS plus programme is the ‘development of social capital among young people, the empowerment of young people and their ability to participate actively in society’ (European Commission, 2014, p. 9).

Fielding (2012), among others, clarifies how, in a time of increasing movement within and between countries, many young people ask for more opportunities to express their views. It is time for them to be heard and involved in collaborative process with adults. Grion (2013, p. 136) asserts that ‘ it is necessary for schools to become involved by assuming the participatory traditions of democracy, rethinking internal relationships and stimulating all member participation and co-responsibility’.

Therefore, there are additional reasons to give pupils a new, and more significant role in the school contexts, encouraging them to participate more actively in the processes of management and evaluation.

Many authors (Rudduck, Chaplain & Wallace, 1996; Rudduck and Flutter, 2000; Flutter & Rudduck, 2004; Cook Sather, 2002; 2007; 2009) suggest that students have a unique perspective on what happens in schools and classrooms (Cook-Sather 2009) and their point of view needs to be given more attention by adults. This leads to promising findings about the effects of listening to pupils and incorporating them in a deeper and wider participation in school decisions and actions. A review of the most relevant research, proposed by Cook-Sather (2007), shows that there could be many significant educational advantages by improving practices related to students’ perspective in schools. It seems that when teachers focus on students’ experiences and perspectives and capture this to make what is taught more accessible to them. They can design more engaging curricula and pedagogical approaches by building curricula around themes of interest to students. Not only can this be motivating, but also transformative for students both personally and politically. In these ways, students can feel empowered and highly committed to participate in school activities.

Focusing on the evaluative processes of schools, some authors criticize the passive role of pupils.

They call for ‘more productive approaches to assessment and accountability’ (Stobart 2008, 89),overtaking the dominant ‘Measurement paradigm’ (Broadfoot, 2007) to give a more significant role to stakeholders inside school communities. McNess (2006, p. 517), in particular, clarifies that ‘the definition of quality as expressed through policy may not always accord with the aims and aspirations of individual teachers or, perhaps more importantly, match the constructions given to the concept of quality by pupils’. Therefore there have been criticisms, not only of the measurement approach many governments use to evaluate the quality of schools, but also the implicit idea of ‘quality’ educational systems built with no regard to students’ perspectives.  Levin (2000) noted more than ten years ago, that while the literature on school-based management underlines the importance of giving more significant roles to teachers and parents, students’ views are usually side-lined in the discourse. This disregard for students had persisted: Sargeant (2013, p. 1) confirms that ‘Despite the mounting evidence of its value, in many aspects of education and social provision, the child’s voice remains absent’.

In this context, our aim is to understand what students consider ‘quality’ schools look like, taking a  European point of view by comparing three socio-culturally different countries. The paper presents the findings of a study of the perspectives of French, English and Italian students’ response to the question, ‘What do you think makes a good school?

Method

Participants were drawn from a range of European primary and secondary schools in France England and Italy. All students, in each setting, were invited to participate. Participation was voluntary and the data was anonymised. The three countries were chosen as sites for data collection because, not only do they represent three important national identities within the European Community, but they also have very different school evaluation systems. The students completed an open-ended questionnaire while the researcher was present to answer procedural questions. An open-ended questionnaire was chosen for data collection as it enabled participants to respond freely, using their own terms to explain and/or qualify their responses (Cohen, Manion, and Morrison, 2007). The question was intentionally framed to ‘catch the authenticity, richness, depth of response, honesty and candour’, which are the hallmarks of qualitative research (Cohen, Manion, and Morrison 2007, p. 330). Initially, we treated our data as three single case-studies; one for each country. We chose this method to take into account the different cultural contexts involved. Conducting separate processes of analysis avoided the risk of losing the cultural specificities and details emerging from the texts. We used thematic analysis to draw out from the texts dimensions students consider important to identifying “a good school”. After this phase, we shared our analyses and compared our results in order to capture commonalities and differences in the three different countries.

Expected Outcomes

The purpose of this research is to look at identifying an assessment method which are related more closely to what students thought made a quality school. More specifically our aims are to: 1. Gain insight into fundamental questions such as: What do students in three different countries expect from their teachers? What do pupils consider is the purpose of schooling? What do students look for in schools?; 2. Identify commonalities and differences in the idea of school quality across three distinctive European countries; 3. Start to build and share a new European idea of school quality, coming from student’s perspectives, different from that linked to the adult-driven Measurement paradigm (Broadfoot, 2007). Furthermore, following Fielding (2001, p. 124) claim, arguing ‘for a transformative, ‘transversal’ approach in which the voices of students, teachers and significant others involved in the process of education construct ways of working that are emancipatory in both process and outcome’, we expect that our actions into schools encourage students to participate more actively in the life of their own school, reflecting on their perspectives and contributing to the processes of school improvement toward an actual fulfilment of democracy and citizenship.

References

Broadfoot, P. (2007). An Introduction to Assessment. New York: Continuum. Cook-Sather, A. (2002). Authorizing Students’ Perspectives: Toward Trust, Dialogue, and Change in Education, Educational Researcher, 31 (4): 3-14. Cook-Sather, A. (2007) What Would Happen If We Treated Students as Those With Opinions That Matter? The Benefits to Principals and Teachers of Supporting Youth Engagement in School, NASSP Bulletin, 91 (4): 343-362. Cook-Sather, A. (Ed.) (2009) Learning from the Student’s Perspective. A Sourcebook for Effective Teaching. London: Paradigm Publishers. European Commission (2014). Erasmus Plus. Programme Guide. Version 1: 01-01-2014. Fielding, M. (2001). Students as radical Agents of Change. Journal of Educational Change, 2: 123–141, 2001 Fielding, M. (2012), Beyond Student Voice: Patterns of Partnership and the Demands of Deep Democracy, Revista de Educación, 359: 45-65. Flutter, J. & Rudduck, J. (2004) Consulting Pupils. What’s in it for Schools?. Oxon: Routledge. Grion, V. (2013). Partecipazione e responsabilità nelle Indicazioni Nazionali per il curricolo del primo ciclo d’istruzione (pp.136-154). In V. Grion, A. Cook-Sahter (Eds.), Student Voice. Prospettive Internazionali e pratiche emergenti in Italia. Milano: Guerini. Levin, B. (2000) Putting Students at the Centre in Education Reform, Journal of Educational Change, 1: 155–172. Mc Ness, E. (2006). “Nous écouter, nous soutenir, nous apprendre: a comparative study of pupils’ perceptions of the pedagogic progress”. Comparative Education 42 (4): 517-532. Sargeant, J (2012). Prioritising student voice: ‘Tween’ children's perspectives on school success, Education 3-13: 1-11. Rudduck, J. & Flutter, Julia (2000). Pupil participation and pupil perspective: carving a new order of experience, Cambridge Journal of Education, 30 (1): 75-89. Rudduck J., Chaplain R., & Wallace G. (1996) School Improvement: What Can Pupils Tell Us?. London: David Fulton. Stobart, G. (2008). Testing Times. The uses and abuses of assessment. Oxon: Routledge

Author Information

Valentina Grion (presenting / submitting)
University of Padova (IT)
FISPPA
UDINE
Carmel Capewell (presenting)
University of Northampton (UK)
The University of Northampton
Centre for Education and Research
Northampton
University of Sassari
Education Science
Sassari
University of Cergy-Pontoise (FR)

Update Modus of this Database

The current conference programme can be browsed in the conference management system (conftool) and, closer to the conference, in the conference app.
This database will be updated with the conference data after ECER. 

Search the ECER Programme

  • Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
  • Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
  • Search for authors and in the respective field.
  • For planning your conference attendance, please use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference and the conference agenda provided in conftool.
  • If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.