What does it mean to educate Growing holders of rights in Preschool?

Author(s):

Britt Tellgren(presenting / submitting)

Conference:

ECER 2017

Network:

25. Research on Children's Rights in Education

Format:

Paper

Session Information

25 SES 02, Teaching and Learning Children's Human Rights

Paper Session

Time:

2017-08-22

15:15-16:45

Room:

W4.13

Chair:

Ann Quennerstedt

Contribution

The Curriculum for Preschool in Sweden (Swedish National Agency for Education, 2016) emphasizes that an important preschool task is to impart and establish respect for human rights and the fundamental democratic values on which Swedish society is based.

The paper is part of a project in which the role of education for children’s and young people’s development as rights holders is investigated. More specifically, the project examines how teaching and learning within early childhood education and school give possibilities or constrain children’s and young people’s growth as holders and practitioners of human rights. This paper has a specific focus on preschool children (1-5 years).

The particular purpose of this paper is to understand what content of knowledge and skills emerge when it comes to focusing on children’s human rights in two different preschools. By examining on-going teaching and learning of children’s human rights the study seeks to answer the question: What is the content in teaching and learning in, through and about children’s human rights?

The project draws theoretically on a combination of rights theory, sociology of childhood (e.g. James, Jenks & Prout, 2012; Corsaro, 2014) and the educational philosophy and theorising of John Dewey. Firstly are rights for children understood as included in the human rights, which means that human rights vocabulary is used to categorise and discuss rights. Secondly, the project views children as competent and knowledgeable persons with full human value and dignity in the present. Further the childhood is regarded as a political phenomenon included in societal power structures, which influences adults’ perceptions of and relations to children. Thirdly and with inspiration from Dewey, education is regarded as a process of growth. The aim of education is with this view not to prepare the child for the future, instead educationis constant process of reconstruction and reorganisation of knowledge, with the inherent being growth through reconstruction of experience.

In short, rights research in early childhood education has centred children’s participation, child perspective and children’s perspective (e.g. Pramling Samuelsson, Sommer & Hundeide 2011, Sheridan & Pramling, 2001). However, there is a need to widen the gaze and approach early childhood education as a site for children’s rights in new ways. It can be noted that rights-oriented research on children under the age of three is very limited and that few studies have investigated children’s everyday practices and lives from a rights perspective.

Method

The study was conducted in two Swedish preschools. Preschool 1 is a unit for children between 3-5 years of age and preschool 2 for 1-3 year-olds children. The data was collected between October 2014 and Mai 2015 in the two preschool units. The fieldwork was of long-term character; each group was followed during a period of 4 months, 2-3 days per week. Data analysis has focused through video documented observations of everyday practice and scrutinizing field descriptions. Interpretation of these data is both from the transcriptions but mostly directly from the video. In-depth interviews with 2 educators and 18 children from preschool 1 and with 4 educators from preschool 2 make up another load of these data. Ethical principles relating to basic individual protection requirements were followed (Swedish Research Council, 2011) with regard to information, informed consent, confidentiality and the use of data. The children and their teachers were invited to take part in the research. The teachers were asked to undertake planned teaching about children’s human rights. They were free to choose educational content and working methods, and were given no further guidance by the researcher about content or methods. The material underwent a didactical analysis, which means identification of what was taught, how it was taught, and what the teacher´s purpose was. These matters were examined both from the perspective of the teacher and of the children, and as observed in on-going practice. The need to become familiar with all kinds of activities was important, as well as the everyday practices of certain groups were children where supposed to experience rights. A wide variety of common situations were observed: children’s free play indoors and outdoors, teacher-led assemblies or activities indoor and outdoors, excursions outside the preschool area and mealtimes. The researcher alternated between observing passively with no interaction with the children and actively observing with interaction, for example by taking part in a play situation, assisting the children with something or engaging in conversation. The observations focused on situations and interactions where the children’s actions could be reflected as a human right.

Expected Outcomes

When these teachers are working with human rights in preschool it often takes different forms than in school (see Brantefors, Quennerstedt, 2016). Instead of planning special content during particular weeks, these preschool teachers work with long-term themes and content can change over time. However the results indicate that children’s influence and participation is still a challenge in preschools as well as to educate them as right holders and practitioners of rights. In Preschool 1 the education about children’s human rights forms as a basis on human relations and children’s perspectives of their own culture. The purpose was to prepare the children to understand fundamental democratic values by making use of the influence of different characters from the children´s own television and Internet world. The goal was to take advantage on children´s interest and knowledge about these characters in order to discuss ethical values, dilemmas and attitudes regarding play and social relations with the children. It is evident that the teachers’ have integrated goals within the theme and that these children have the opportunity to develop their language based on their own interest. It is also recognised that these children have used the opportunity to express their opinions about the characters and also reflect the concepts for the value. In Preschool 2 the teachers describe their work with human rights more in terms of their attitudes or approaches to the children in different situations. The major goal was to create a secure environment for the children. In the daily routines, the preschool teacher team adopts a highly structured approach in order to devote more time to be with and close to the children, both physically and mentally. The fact that they in several activities shared the children into small groups gives the younger children more speaking space and also playing space.

References

Bobbio, N. (1996) The Age of Rights. Cambridge/Malden: Polity Press. Corsaro, William (2014). The Sociology of Childhood. New York: SAGE Publications, Inc. Dewey, J.(1916/1997) Demokrati och utbildning. Göteborg: Daidalos. Englund, T. (1986) Curriculum as a Political Problem. Uppsala Studies in Education 25. Lund: Studentlitteratur. Gundem, B. & Hopmann, S. 1998: Didaktik and/or curriculum. An international dialogue. New York: P. Lang. Hägglund, S. & Thelander, N. (2011) Children’s rights at 21: policy, theory, practice. Introductory remarks. Education In quiry 2(3), 365-372. James, A. and James, A. 2004. Constructing Childhood. Theory, Policy and Social Practice. Hampshire/New York: Palgrave Macmillan. James, A., Jenks, C., Prout, A. (1998) Theorizing childhood. Cambridge: Polity Press. Mayall, B. (2001) The sociology of childhood in relation to children’s rights. The International Journal of Children’s Rights 8, 243-259. Mayall, B. (2008) Conversations with Children: Working with Generational Issues. In P. Christensen & A. James, Research with Children. Perpectives and Practices, 109-124. Pramling Samuelsson, I; Sommer, D and Hundeide, K (2011). Barnperspektiv och barnens perspektiv i teori och praktik. Stockholm: Liber. Quennerstedt, A. (2010) Children, But Not Really Humans? Critical Reflections on the Hampering Effect of the “3 p’s”. International Journal of Children’s Rights 18, 619-635. Quennerstedt, A. (2011) The construction of children’s rights in education – a research synthesis. International Journal of Children’s Rights 19, 661-678. Quennerstedt, A. & Quennerstedt, M (2013) Researching children’s rights in education: Sociology of childhood encountering educational theory. British Journal of Sociology of Education. Regeringskansliet (2007): Sveriges fjärde periodiska rapport till FN:s kommitté för barnets rättigheter om barnkonventionens genomförande under 2002-2007. Socialdepartementet. Swedish National Agency for Education, 2016. Curriculum for the Preschool Lpfö 98 Revised 2016 Sheridan, S., & Pramling Samuelsson, I. (2001). Children´s Conceptions of Participation and Influence in Preschool. A Perspective on Pedagogical Quality. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 2(2), 169-194. United Nations (1989) Convention on the Rights of the Child. Vetenskapsrådet (2011) God Forskningssed. Stockholm: Vetenskapsrådet.

Author Information

Britt Tellgren (presenting / submitting)

Örebro university

Humanity, education and social

Örebro

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 you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.