In the European and more broadly international educational landscape, increasing attention is given to alternative education methods and systems by scholars and by the public (Hugon et al., 2021). Some of these alternative methods and systems are strongly in line with the pedagogies developed by pioneers of the Progressive Education movement at the start of the 20th century, such as Montessori from Italy, Freinet from France, or Steiner from Austria. Others operate by borrowing and/or hybridizing these educational trends with more emerging practices such as forest schools, democratic schools, or homeschooling (Viaud, 2021). This diversity can be mapped by highlighting the relationships and ramifications between these different movements (Wagnon, 2018). They seem to be open to other perspectives which, without giving up the learning of the fundamentals (reading, writing, counting), offer ways of teaching and learning likely to give an integral education to the pupils. The resolution of complex problems, critical thinking, creativity or even communication are, for example, among these theoretical and practical skills which enrich the more traditional teaching methods centered on fundamental disciplines (Darbellay et al., 2021).

Alternative methods and systems share a strong interest in considering the rhythms of children and their physical, emotional, psychologic, and social well-being in a perspective of personal and collective development (Sliwka, 2008). The pupils are not solely perceived as passive receivers of knowledge but become actors of their learning and in their school life. Some have suggested that alternative methods and systems can foster the implementation of children’s rights in education (Moody, 2019), their practices distancing themselves from some core values included in more traditional schooling which can hinder the implementation of a rights-respecting teaching and learning environment. These principals are summarized by Quennerstedt (2011) as the hierarchical power structures between adults and children, the transmission of knowledge from adults to children and the predictable way of developing of all children.

In this contribution we will examine the respect of the children’s civil, political, and social human rights in three schools based on alternative education methods and systems. First, the community vision held in these schools will be studied mainly through the governance and the development of transversal skills. Then we will look at the space organization of these schools and classrooms. Finally, children’s choices concerning the teaching and learning activities will be discussed.

To study the place of children’s rights in schools based on alternative education methods and systems, we are using the main results of an exploratory research carried out in 2020 in Switzerland. In this project, three case studies were conducted in three schools diverse in their education methods and systems, but comparable by the way they break with the traditional educational system, as well as by their aspiration to focus on the needs and rhythms of children: A) a Montessori school; B) a school applying a pedagogy in, by and with nature; and C) a democratic school. Educational, institutional, and organizational issues were studied using data produced via a mixed methodological device which was constituted by interviews, a drawing activity, non-participating observations, and documentary analyzes. The triangulation of these data offers several focal points on the same reality perceived differently and allows the complexity of the fields of investigation to be considered (Van der Maren, 2006), which is especially relevant for the interdisciplinary theorical background that links sociology of childhood, children’s rights, and education. The case study approach allows for a local, rooted, and detailed understanding of various situations to be obtained while reaching to certain general comprehensions (Gagnon, 2012). This approach also has a comparative aim as it makes possible to observe a phenomenon in its context, to identify what distinguishes a particular case and what brings it closer to others (Albarello, 2011). Considering the complexity of the questioning, a multi-actor approach was developed to be able to coordinate several points of view. Different actors concerned (directors, teachers, families) participated in the research via interviews and a drawing activity for families and their children. Conducting research with children is also a way to implement children’s rights throughout our methodology, as we consider that children are competent and can provide valuable data (Mayhall, 2000). The interviews addressed different dimensions of the cases like the aim of education, teaching-learning methods, the school system (e.g. governance and participation of children). A part of the interview with the family focused on children’s view of their school. In addition, non-participating observations of half-days of teaching and documentary analyzes of official texts (charters, regulations, etc.) were carried out. The observations gathered within the classes relates to teaching and learning, the interactions between peers and with teachers, the class climate, the material, as well as spatial and structural characteristics of the classroom.

Although the three schools considered in this study differentiate from each other by specific methods and systems, they share many commonalities: most centrally the place of children and their rights in the community, their overall education in line with individual rhythms, needs and interests. Learning is at the heart of the concerns of all the actors in its articulation with the respect, the personality, and the dignity of children through several pedagogical, organizational, and institutional aspects. The system in terms of governance tends to be horizontal and participatory in these schools and children are recognized as subjects of rights, for example through class councils. The respect of children’s rights through peaceful coexistence, including mutual understanding, and applying the rules and managing interactions between peers and teachers, is central in all three cases. Living in a respectful community is found to be both a prerequisite of learning and an educational intention which is the subject of specific teaching and learning activities aiming at acquiring transversal skills such as the principles of the non-violent communication, collaboration, and conflict resolution. Beyond the community aspect, the needs and rhythms of children are a key element organizing space as show the size of furniture, the accessibility of equipment and the freedom of movement. Children have an important possibility of choice regarding the activities they want to accomplish, with a degree of variation depending on the philosophy of each school. These elements demonstrate how school using alternative education methods and system show a strong interest in participation, citizenship, protection, and rights of children. Further research could study the perspective of children, to understand how they really feel in an environment where they are supposed to be listened to, learning at their own rhythm, and feel physically and emotionally secure

Albarello, L. (2011). Choisir l’étude de cas comme méthode de recherche. Bruxelles: De Boeck. Darbellay, F., Moody, Z., & Louviot, M. (Eds.). (2021). L'école autrement ? Les pédagogies alternatives en débat. Neuchâtel : Alphil Gagnon, Y.C. (2012). L’étude de cas comme méthode de recherche. Québec : Presses de l’Université du Québec. Hugon, M. A., Robbes, B., & Viaud, M. L. (2021). Les pédagogies différentes : quelles mises en pratiques? Bricolages, hybridations, appropriations. Spécificités, 16(2), 2-9. Mayall, B. (2000). The sociology of childhood in relation to children's rights. International Journal of Children’s Right, 8, 243. Moody, Z. (2019) Droits de l’enfant et école : diversité, participation et transformation sociale. In J. Zermatten & P. D. Jaffé (Eds.), 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. Quennerstedt, A. (2011). The construction of children’s rights in education – a research synthesis. The International Journal of Children’s Rights, 19(4), 661-678. Sliwka, A. (2008). The contribution of alternative education. In OECD (Eds.), Innovating to learn, learning to innovate. OECD, pp. 93-112. Van der Maren, J.M. (2006). Les recherches qualitatives : des critères variés de qualité en fonction des types de recherche. In L. Paquay, M. Crahay & J.M. De Ketele (Eds.), L’analyse qualitative en éducation : Des pratiques de recherche aux critères de qualité. Bruxelles : De Boeck, pp. 65-80. Verhellen, E. (1999). Facilitating children’s rights in education: Expectations and demands on teachers and parents. Prospects, 29(2), 223-231. Viaud, M.L. (2021). Des écoles différentes ? Perspectives internationales. In F. Darbellay, Z. Moody, & M. Louviot (Eds.), L’école autrement ? Les pédagogies alternatives en débat. Neuchâtel : Alphil, pp. 35-56. Wagnon, S. (2018). Les pédagogies alternatives en France aujourd’hui : Essai de cartographie et de définition. Tréma, 50.