Fuentes de Información

This section will discuss how each research question has been or has not been answered with the empirical findings.

 To what extent do Scottish Rights-respecting secondary schools have the features

of a ‘democratic school’?

The schools investigated were found to have respect for individual rights and equal share of responsibility in school management within limitations. As reported in the main findings, schools reflected their pastoral care service and the workings of their pupil councils when implementing the RRSA. However, the schools upheld rights to education

for behavioural management but less so for individual pupils’ rights to decide how, when, what, where and with whom to learn. On the other hand, some issues which were traditionally the adults’ responsibilities such as school improvement plans and staff appointments were being considered to consult pupils. Nevertheless, the adults were still the decision makers after collating the responses from pupils, teachers and parents rather than allowing equal vote for each stakeholder. Learning content was also decided by the teachers rather than by the pupils but welcomed pupils’ input in teaching evaluation and allowed choices in some occasions. Nevertheless, this answer for this research question is rather bounded with what could be derived from school documents and interview responses. Participant-observation on classroom teaching and on school grounds may give a different picture to my answer.

 What are the teachers’ and head teachers’ perceptions of a ‘democratic school’ and

to what extent are they aiming to provide a ‘democratic’ education?

Despite the variation in responses, most teachers’ and head teachers’ conceptualisation of a democratic school was bounded by pupils having a voice that was acted upon. There were also mixed responses over the desirability of a democratic school. Positive comments on a democratic school were based on the fact that it could promote positive relationships and improve school ethos while negative comments were that a democratic school could only occur in an ideal world since pupils were thought not to be mature enough to make decisions and planning. Their motivation to provide a ‘democratic’ education was initiated by the national policy and bounded by the RRSA criteria. Some of them were thinking of following the recommendation by the RRSA inspection report, more parental involvement and considering the possibility of consulting pupils in the school improvement plans and staff appointments.

 What are the facilitating factors and obstacles for mainstream schools seeking more

democratic approaches to education?

Partnership with other schools, the local council and supportive national policies were seen as external facilitating factors for schools to be democratic through the motivation from the RRSA. Other than that, pupils, teachers and the SMT were also the important drivers for democracy in schools. The benefits brought by the democratic approaches such as improved behaviour and positive relationships have convinced many

teachers to continue supporting and to help expand democratic practices in their schools. The obstacles for democratic practices in schools were perceived to be time constraints, teacher resistance and pupil disengagement and immaturity. In addition, the researcher has identified the constraints posed by the national policy and the bounded duty of the school as the obstacles for pushing schools to be more democratic.

6.3 Summary

As discovered in the main findings, there are signs and momentum for mainstream schools to become more democratic but there are also obstacles for such process. The RRSA has brought about many positive changes such as positive relationships and improved pupil welfare through upholding and practicing the UNCRC. Pupils and teachers could also bring about changes in their school through the RRSA where the situation allowed, showing a shared responsibility in school management with the SMT. Pupil consultation on school improvement plans and staff appointments is also being considered by the participants. Hence, these are the good signs for rights-respecting schools to become more democratic through improving pupil voice and participation in school management.

Nevertheless, the RRSA has its limitations in making schools more democratic due to the issues of pupil maturity, constraints from the national policy and its inherent language in dichotomising the role of adults and children, as highlighted in the previous chapter. Although the RRSA was not intended to promote a democratic school, it has certainly encouraged schools to be as democratic as possible within adults’ judgement and under the constraints of their defined duties. It must not be denied that the RRSA has at least opened teachers’ eyes that the children’s rights in the UK were yet to be improved.

This research has hence situated itself within the debates of children’s rights in schools, the impact of national examinations in schools and the evaluation of school external initiatives, which are the RRSA and the national policy. These debates were centred on the concept of a democratic school such that how these issues could have affected schools’ respect for individual pupil’s rights and the sharing of school management responsibility were explored.

6.4 Limitations

Before moving on to the implications of this research for various educational stakeholders, I would like to state the limitations of this research. As described in the methodology section, this study was a qualitative study and only a small number of schools and participants were involved in order to give an in-depth picture of the RRSA implementation and their views on a democratic school. This study also faced time constraints so it could only involve a limited number of participants and excluded pupils from the interview data. Furthermore, this study could be biased as it involves a number of researchers’ interpretations when collecting, analysing and presenting data (Scott & Morrison, 2005). These are true of a qualitative research generally, and affect generalizability while being accepted within this paradigm. Other than that, the range of sampling and recruitment is also limited in number and in quality such that the findings might not represent the views of all teachers and head teachers in Scottish rights-respecting secondary schools. The researcher’s cultural background and lack of experience as a teacher and a pupil in the Scottish secondary school could have limited and exaggerated the issues and findings in the schools.

Acknowledging the complexity of an educational system, the coverage of the issues in this research may be one-sided due to limitations in the researcher’s knowledge. Hence, this research has potential to over-simplifying issues in the Scottish educational system, including the interaction between politics, economic development and educational policies. However, a cultural outsider’s view brings strengths as well, as discussed in Chapter 3. This also implies the dangers of extrapolating these findings from the Scottish context to other nations due to differences in culture, demographics and history that transferring the national policy should be taken with extra caution. Other co-existing issues during the research may be present. For example, the current generation may have certain effect on the perception of a democratic school that the findings cannot hold true for a longer period of time.

Therefore, different educational stakeholders should take the many limitations of this study into consideration when interpreting the implications of this research. Nevertheless, I hope the concepts and issues discussed here will be taken seriously.