Browser does not support script.
Receive regular email updates and personalise your pages. Register now!
The importance of listening to what pupils have to say about teaching, learning and the general school experience is now written into education policy (DfES, 2003). It is also a matter of concern to schools and to researchers who are working to support and document the practices of schools working with ' pupil voice ' (Macbeath, Demetriou, Rudduck, & Myers, 2003).
In this paper I argue that it is important to listen to pupils ' at risk ' (1), those children and young people who are at risk of being excluded and/or of not completing mainstream schooling. These pupils are too often omitted from ' pupil voice ' forums and activities. I sketch an approach to working with, and for, pupils designated by schools as being at risk. I begin by briefly summarising the case for ' pupil voice ' .
Policy connects the purpose of ' pupil voice ' with citizenship. It is suggested that ' having a say ' is an important aspect of adult franchise and the reasons for this must be taught in school as part of learning about how to become a citizen. ' Pupil voice ' is a way of practising for adult rights. But it is also suggested to schools that they contribute to the creation of social capital and strengthen democracy by ensuring that all views and voices - teachers, parents, community stakeholders and pupils - are taken into consideration in important decisions.
While very important, these perspectives glide over the history of the idea of ' voice ' , which grew directly from the struggles of oppressed groups. Weary of their experiences, understandings of the world and proposals for change being ignored by powerful institutions, social movements used the term ' voice ' to encapsulate their claims to be heard (e.g., Fine, 1992; Peel, 2003). As Deborah Britzman (1989, p.146) puts it:
' The concept of ' voice ' spans literal, metaphorical, and political terrains: in its literal sense, voice represents the speech and perspectives of the speaker; metaphorically, voice spans inflection, tone, accent, style and the qualities and feelings conveyed by the speaker ' s words; and politically, a construct of voice attests to the right of speaking and being represented ' .
While policy makers correctly associate ' voice ' with citizenship and franchise, they downplay the ideas about extending the rights of particular marginalised groups to speak, be heard, be respected and have their ideas become the basis for change.
However, this idea is used in relation to schooling, even if not in policy. In professional and scholarly writing, ' voice ' is linked with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (Franklin, 1986; John, 2003). Here, the historical association of ' voice ' with the struggle to be heard produces the contemporary argument that:
But these are not the only reasons for ' pupil voice ' .
Another argument is related to school change. It is suggested that planning for genuine improvement relies on:
Some argue that pupils can be more than givers of information but can also be co-researchers of educational ' problems ' and active agents for purposeful change (Fielding & Bragg, 2003).
This paper takes the view that ' pupil voice ' and the active engagement of pupils are integral to successful school improvement. It also takes up the historical idea that ' voice ' is integral to equity and justice, by looking specifically at the children and young people who are least likely to be invited to speak about the school plans, policies and practices that affect them profoundly.
There are a common set of reasons given for not inviting pupils ' at risk ' to speak:
1. If ' voice ' is seen as a privilege, then pupils ' at risk ' may be deemed unworthy. After all, they often don ' t do what is required. They don ' t always speak when spoken to; they often speak without invitation, in the wrong place, at the wrong time and regardless of the consequences.
2. If ' voice ' is seen as being articulate, evidenced through the use of particular forms of standard English expression, then many pupils ' at risk ' will be deemed incompetent - although their messages are very often unavoidable and unambiguous!
3. If ' voice ' is seen as working to support the general parameters of the school culture and policy, then pupils ' at risk ' will be seen as ineligible. They are much more likely than successful and more compliant pupils to criticise practices and people that do appear to be working for the majority. What they have to say can be negative and not easy to accept.
The difficulty with each of these objections is that they begin by affirming the status quo. The rationale for school improvement and for equity begins by acknowledging that the status quo is inadequate and needs to change. Because the interests of pupils ought to be ' at the centre ' of school improvement (Levin, 2000), the rationale for deliberately seeking out the voices of pupils ' at risk ' is precisely because these are the young people for whom the school is not working well. Their perspectives are vital if we are to understand how this comes to be.
In stark contrast to an approach that blames poor school performance on children and young people, or their families and communities, an inclusive approach to working with the ' voices ' of pupils ' at risk ' recognises that at least some of the reasons for ' risky behaviours ' are located within the school itself, and some within the operations of other services (transport, health, housing, welfare) with whom the school might jointly work.
When the school accepts responsibility for changing its own activities, then hearing - and working with and from - the experiences, needs, perspectives and ideas of pupils ' at risk ' becomes vital to improvement.
The single most important move with pupils ' at risk ' is to not only invite them to speak, but also to listen and to treat their words and their ideas with respect.
The majority of pupils that are designated as ' at risk ' suggest that they are not seen as individuals but as untrustworthy labels and problems (Riley & Rustique-Forrester, 2002; Thomson, 2001). Many such pupils say that they do think that some schoolwork is important and worthwhile, and that there are teachers with whom they enjoy productive relationships. But overall, they tell researchers, they do not get on well with many teachers and often with most of their peers (Coopers Lybrand & Ashenden Milligan, 1992; Farrell, 1990). They also often get into unproductive cycles of anger, depression and resistant behaviour that seem beyond their control (Riley & Docking, 2004).
Pupils with ' risky behaviours ' value the opportunities to work together in safe spaces where they are not subject to the low-key harassment of peers and where the specific issues they must deal with are able to be addressed confidentially and without blame (Cruddas & Haddock, 2003). These pupils tell researchers that they have both strengths, as well as difficulties, in their lives and that they would appreciate opportunities to change the ways in which their education is (not) working for them (Smyth & Hattam, 2004). Pupils ' at risk ' often demonstrate, when given opportunities to take action, remarkable energy and creativity and learn quickly the kinds of positive attitudes and skills that take them rapidly out of the ' risky ' category altogether (Thomson, McQuade, & Rochford, 2004, in press).
As Roger Holdsworth (2000 p. 354) points out, this means that:
' In classroom forums, and in forums for enabling students to ' enact their voices ' , we need to ensure that all voices are heard and that all students are enabled to walk the bridge from voice to action. That will mean taking specific measures to overcome the legacies of silence, distrust and inactivity that have traditionally and particularly locked some students out ' .
Thus, the processes we use must be recognised as powerful agents for change. It is not simply a question of what we do in relation to ' pupil voice ' , but also how we do it that makes the changes we desire. ' Voice ' is neither simply a means to an end or an end in itself. It is both at once.
There are several ways of thinking about the purposes of working with pupils ' at risk ' . The most common reason is to improve their behaviour. Another is to establish programmes to increase their confidence and social competencies. Yet another is to offer different curriculum that either remediates lack of existing skills, such as literacy and numeracy, or offers alternative activities and credentials, such as vocational education. These interventions already suppose an answer to the problem of why ' risky behaviour ' exists - it ' s the pupils ' lack of self discipline or their lack of self-esteem or social skills or it ' s the curriculum that is too focused on university-oriented examinations.
But committing to ' pupil voice ' means that we begin by acknowledging that we don ' t already know the answer - and we want to find out by asking pupils. However, it is still helpful in these circumstances to have some broad aims that sum up what we intend to do for, and with, pupils ' at risk ' . These aims organise the conversations to be had with pupils.
One way of thinking about improvement is to have increasing pupil participation as the overall aim. Roger Holdsworth and I (2003) have proposed five ways to categorise pupil participation.
1. Increasing participation meaning being physically present at school, measured through attendance and retention data. When this kind of participation is disaggregated by population groups, such as gender and race, it is a representation of ' access ' to schooling. Increasing participation in this sense is both a means and a measure of the ' democratisation ' of education through/as increasing mass levels of schooling.
2. Increasing participation meaning being involved in school and taking part in school activities and in lessons. Here, the term works like the notion of engagement and as the opposite of alienation. It is often argued that student engagement produces better attendance and thus policy emphases on curriculum and school reform can do double work by both encouraging students to come to, and stay at, school and also to learn and achieve. This perspective has strong connections to proposals for more inclusive and equitable education (Meier, 1995). Participation also has connections with particular forms of ' pupil voice ' .
3. Increasing participation meaning involvement in formal school decision-making: this can range from being consulted occasionally by staff, to formalised student councils and forums, to representative places on school committees. Some suggest that increasing attendance and engagement requires participation by some students in decision-making. This category covers elitist forms of student leadership, as well as more open and democratic practices.
4. Increasing participation meaning initiating, deciding and acting in the school and beyond the school boundaries. Here, the majority of students are involved in making decisions about school reform, curriculum purposes, curriculum directions, community projects and neighbourhood capacity-building. In schools, such activities are often spoken about as ' active citizenship ' through which students engage with the school and/or classroom as a polity, and with community organisations and local government. This has strongest links with ' deliberative democracy ' (Fielding, 2001b) where student leadership is seen as diffuse and extending to many.
5. Increasing participation meaning community or social activism and ' organising ' . This participation sometimes finds a place in schools as projects concerned with human rights, the environment, social justice and local, state or national issues. It also extends to political action and resistance, as in the engagement of pupils in school-sanctioned and unsanctioned protests. This kind of participation does not feature significantly in this article.
Using the five categories of increasing participation, I propose some scenarios in which in which pupils ' at risk ' might be encouraged to speak. I give some examples of questions they might be asked to speak about.
Type of increased participation
School improvement scenario
Questions asked of pupils could include:
Participation meaning being physically present at school
A school decides that it is important to improve risky pupils ' attendance. Teacher researchers consult with pupils about attendanceTeacher researchers analyse the data and draw up a plan of action that is approved by senior management and governors.
Participation meaning being involved in school and taking part in school activities and in lessons
A school decides to investigate how its formal programmes, culture and practices might be contributing to pupil disengagement.Teacher researchers consult with pupils about curriculum, pedagogy and levels of engagement in school in generalTeacher researchers analyse the data and draw up a plan of action that is approved by senior management and governors.
Participation meaning involvement in formal school decision-making
A school is making decisions about planned changes, expenditure of funds and appointment of staff.Pupils at risk work on school committees with their peers and are specifically asked to contribute from their perspective.Support and training are offered to assist them in participation.
Participation meaning initiating, deciding and acting in the school and beyond the school boundaries
Pupils ' at risk ' and teachers together work as co-researchers and/or researchers to decide on what constitutes important areas for inquiry, how they might be investigated, and the implications arising from the findings. An example is for school truants to investigate truancy.After the research is completed, pupils ' at risk ' work as school and community activists in order to put the recommendations from their research into action.
These scenarios are not plucked from thin air. A number of schools in the UK, USA, Canada and Australia have worked with such approaches (Batten & Russell, 1995; Thomson, 1999).
The experiences of schools working to provide a more inclusive and equitable education suggest that these categories of ' voiced ' participation ought not to be thought of as a hierarchy. Rather, each of them is significant and produces significant change in the school ecology.
But the greatest change happens when all four are in operation and become integrated in the ' way we do things around here ' , and when pupils ' at risk ' have sustained and equal opportunities to speak and be heard in real and relevant conversations.
The disaffection of pupils designated as ' at risk ' is strongly connected with their disenfranchisement. Moving to increased participation, inclusion and engagement requires listening to the perspectives of pupils who are passively or actively resistant to schooling as it is currently organised.
How we listen and what happens as a result is a key to unlocking the secrets to producing more democratic and equitable schools. The ideas for change generated through ongoing conversations are one component of this reform: another is the production of robust practices of dialogue that build trust, mutual understanding and shared commitments to continued learning and improvement.
Notes
1. The term ' at risk ' is contentious. It is a term which often has toxic effects on those to whom it is attributed. I use it here in quotations to indicate there is a problem which there is no space to discuss (see Thomson, 2002).
Batten, M., & Russell, J. (1995). Students at risk. A review of Australian literature 1980-1994. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.
Britzman, D. (1989). 'Who has the floor? Curriculum teaching and the English student teacher's struggle for voice', in Curriculum Inquiry, 19(2), 143-162.
Coopers Lybrand, C., & Ashenden Milligan. (1992). Students at risk: case studies. Canberra: Department of Employment, Education and Training, AGPS.
Cruddas, l., & Haddock, L. (2003). Girls' Voices. Supporting girls' learning and emotional development. Stoke on Trent: Trentham Books.
Devine, D. (2003). Children, Power and Schooling. How childhood is structured in the primary school. Stoke on Trent: Trentham Books.
DfES. (2003). Working Together: Giving children and young people a say. London: DfES.
Farrell, E. (1990). Hanging in and Dropping Out: Voices of at risk high school students. New York: Teachers College Press.
Fielding, M. (2001a). 'Beyond the Rhetoric of Student Voice: New departures or new constraints in twenty first century schooling?', in Forum, 43(2), 100-110.
Fielding, M. (2001b). 'Students as radical agents of change' in Journal of Educational Change, 2(2), 123-141.
Fielding, M., & Bragg, S. (2003). Students as Researchers: Making a difference. Cambridge: Pearson Publishing.
Fine, M. (1992). Disruptive Voices. The possibilities of feminist research. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Flutter, J., & Rudduck, J. (2004). Consulting Pupils. What's in it for schools? London: Routeldge Falmer.
Franklin, B. (1986). The Rights of the Child. Oxford: Blackwell.
Holdsworth, R. (2000). 'Schools that Create Real Roles of Value for Young People', in Prospects, 115(3), 349-362.
John, M. (2003). Children's Rights and Power. Charging up for a new century. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
Levin, B. (2000). Putting Students at the Centre in Education Reform', in International Journal of Educational Change, 1(2), 155-172.
Macbeath, J., Demetriou, H., Rudduck, J., & Myers, K. (2003). Consulting Pupils: A toolkit. Cambridge: Pearson Publishing.
Meier, D. (1995). The Power of their Ideas. Lessons for America from a small school in Harlem. Boston: Beacon Press.
Peel, M. (2003). The Lowest Rung. Voices of Australian poverty. Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.
Riley, K., & Docking, J. (2004). 'Voices of Disaffected Pupils: Implications for policy and practice', in British Journal of Educational Studies, 52(2), 166-179.
Riley, K., & Rustique-Forrester, E. (2002). Working with Disaffected Students: Why students lose interest in schools and what we can do about it. London: Paul Chapman.
Rudduck, J., & Flutter, J. (2004). Improving Schools, Involving Pupils. London: Continuum.
Smyth, J., & Hattam, R. (2004). Dropping out, Drifting off, Being Excluded: Becoming somebody without school. New York: Peter Lang.
Thomson, P. (1999). 'Against the Odds: Developing school programs that make a difference for students and families in communities placed 'at risk', in Childrenz Issues, 3(1), 7-13.
Thomson, P. (2001). 'Young People - Risks or assets?' in Working Together - Reducing the risk. Full service schools conference papers December 2000. (pp. 1-12): Equity Coordination Unit, New South Wales Department of Education and Training: New South Wales.
Thomson, P. (2002). Schooling the Rustbelt Kids. Making the difference in changing times. Sydney: Allen & Unwin (Trentham Books UK).
Thomson, P., & Holdsworth, R. (2003). 'Democratising Schools through 'Student Participation': An emerging analysis of the educational field informed by Bourdieu' in International Journal of Leadership in Education, 6(4), 371-391.
Thomson, P., McQuade, V. & Rochford, K. (2004, in press). 'My little special house': Re-forming the risky geographies of middle school girls at Clifftop College, in G. Lloyd (Ed.), Problem Girls. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Pat Thomson is Professor of Education at the University of Nottingham, in England, in the United Kingdom and also Adjunct Professor at the University of South Australia, in Australia. A former headteacher in Australia, she spent twenty-seven years working collaboratively with colleagues for, and with, young people and families in neighbourhoods scarred by poverty and social exclusion. Together with Professor Bridget Somekh (Manchester Metropolitan University), Professor Michael Fielding (University of Sussex), and Dr Jane McGregor (Networked Learning Communities), she is directing an ESRC-funded seminar series, entitled ' Engaging Critically with Pupil Voice: Children as partners in school and community change ' . Details of forthcoming seminars can be found on www.pupilvoice.org.uk.
Buy publications by the author
Contribute a discussion paper to this year's online conferences on the transformation of education