Globally, children’s participation has never been higher on the policy agenda. Propelled by the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 12 established that a child has the right to have his or her views given due weight in all matters that affect the child. The European Union is planning a new strategy on children’s rights, while the Council of Europe’s programme on ‘Building a future for and with Children’ has activities to strengthen children’s participation. Children’s rights to participate should apply to schools, as any other institutions that provide services to children and young people. Yet schools have frequently been criticised for failing to meet children’s rights, and particularly failing to involve children in decision-making (e.g. Alderson 2000; Fielding 2007; UK Children’s Commissioners 2008). This coincides with considerable interest in reviving civil society and inspiring young people to become more involved in formal politics, following concerns about dropping voting rates and political disengagement. One response has been the formal encouragement of pupil (or school) councils. Pupil councils have been required legally for some time in certain European countries (e.g. Germany, Hungary, Sweden – note structures, powers and membership differ) while others, like the UK, have only recently moved towards some legislative underpinning of children’s participation in schools. Given the increased promotion of pupil councils in Scotland, 3 year research funding (2006-09, Big Lottery Fund) was obtained to provide the first systematic and independent evidence from Scotland on pupil councils, in primary, secondary and independent school settings. For this paper, we interrogate the data for pupil councils’ delivery on Article 12 of the UNCRC generally and more particularly on their particular form of ‘democracy’ and role in school governance. The paper will situate itself with the children’s rights literature on participation (e.g. Hart 1992 and more recent theoretical work by Liebel 2008, Thomas 2007 and special cross-national issues of International Children’s Rights (2008, edited Tisdall et al.)), challenging it with political science ideas of governance and democracy (as Cockburn & Cleaver (2008) and Tisdall 2009, for example, have been developing).

The paper will draw on data gathered through the following methods: • Surveys of 32 Scottish local authorities and analysis of local authority policies on pupil councils • Postal questionnaires sent to a stratified random sample of primary schools and a census of secondary, special and independent schools (587 staff questionnaires returned (35% return rate); 476 pupil council returns) • Case studies of 6 schools, involving: focus groups with pupil council members at the start and end of the academic year; surveys of pupil council members; staff interviews; documentary analysis. • Further research in 2/6 schools, involving: observation of pupil council meetings throughout the year; surveys of non-pupil council members. Case studies were selected based on threshold criteria (e.g. pupil council had existed for 2 years), geographical and school type criteria, and results from perceived ‘effectiveness’ questions within the postal questionnaires.

We will particularly draw upon the findings that address: the stated, perceived and observed purposes of pupil councils; structures and implementation for election, representation and communication between pupil council members and their peers; and the stated, perceived and observed roles of pupil councils within overall school governance and associated decision-making. Initial analysis suggests: • Varied purposes of pupil councils, which feed into consumerist, symbolic and pedagogical rationales as well as (or instead of) democratic ones • Implications of setting up various structures for election, representation and communication for the effectiveness of the pupil council from teacher, pupil council members and other pupils’ perspectives • Limited roles within broader school governance, highly dependent on the role of key adult teachers.