With an agenda that promotes greater children’s participation worldwide (Hill, Davis, Prout and Tisdall, 2004), the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC, 1989) demands its member states to respect children’s rights, including their right to voice their opinion and take decisions in matters that affect them. From my interpretive and constructionist position, I embrace a children’s rights tradition that endorses a participative approach where I regard children as social and knowledgeable actors who are able to act and interpret the world they live in (Bitou and Waller, 2011; Farrell, 2005; James and James, 2004; James, Jenks and Prout, 1998; Mayall, 2002, 2000b; Moss and Petrie, 2002). I therefore hold the position that children can be trusted as “active participants” (Alderson, 2005, p. 30) and reliable “informants” (Morrow, 2005, p. 151), who are capable of understanding, investigating and contributing towards the research process, and whose drawings and views are worthy of investigation (Christensen and James, 2000a; Greig, Taylor and MacKay, 2007; Uprichard, 2010). As suggested by Fraser, Flewitt and Hammersley (2014), within the framework of this study, I consider children as the primary producers of research, knowledge and data, where I involved them as partners in the data collection process where together, we collected, organised and interpreted their drawings.
____________________________________________________________________ 9
1.4.1 Perceiving children’s voices
Frequently considered as “‘the right to be heard’, ‘the right to participate’ or ‘the right to be consulted’” (Lundy, 2007, p. 930), the concept of voice is problematic as it carries different connotations. For Dahl (1995) the “voice [of the child] reveals the deeper meanings and perspectives of individuals, and reflects learners' personal realities” (p. 124). Bucknall (2014), takes a more complex position, claiming that “voice is not only about expression but perhaps more importantly, about being listened to and being heard: it is about being taken seriously” (p. 71). This perspective of voice as an opportunity for children to communicate their ideas is also embraced by Papatheodorou (2002), who claims that such a disposition allows adults to get in-tune with the children’s needs and understand their perspectives. Similarly, albeit differently, Cruddas (2007) ascertains that voice goes beyond the expression of the self to include a “complex product of past meanings and sedimented histories enacted within a dialogic context” (p. 485), where children construct and co-construct meanings through their active interaction and participation with others, and across texts and situations (Clark and Moss, 2001; Dahlberg, Moss and Pence, 2007; Harcourt and Einarsdottir, 2011; Santos Pais, 2000). Listening to children’s voices is therefore, a multi-faceted, multi-dimensional and ambiguous social construction which transforms and changes in a process of dynamic interaction (Komulainen, 2007; Rinaldi, 2006b, 2005). It is a dialogue within the self and between the self and the others in an attempt to listen and understand others from their own perspective (Dahlberg and Moss, 2005). This perspective is in line with socio-cultural theory which also informs this study where, supporting Smith’s (2007b) view, I maintain, that children’s voices are influenced and construed by everyday contexts, experiences and human relationships.
Within this study, I perceive voice as a way for children to participate and have a say in what they do and communicate what they think. Taking Rinaldi’s (2006a), Sheridan and Pramling’s (2001) and Skivenes and Strandbu’s (2006) suggestions, I enabled the children’s voices to be heard, by creating spaces for them to communicate their understandings in modes and media that suited them. I tried to achieve this by prompting children to use drawing as a language for communicating their meaning- making processes about matters that interested them; matters, which, in my view, are frequently misunderstood, overlooked or regarded as insignificant by adults. Within
____________________________________________________________________ 10 this context, Clough and Nutbrown’s (2012) concept of “radical looking” (p. 26), or in other words the “exploration which makes the familiar strange” (Clough and Nutbrown, 2012, p. 26), and which questions what Mukherji and Albon (2010) regard as the “taken-for-granted practices and assumptions” (p. 25), comes in as a relevant notion. This allowed me to look at children’s drawings and gain insights into their contributions, reflections and meanings of their everyday experiences from their viewpoint. It also provided me with information about how other people and the environment, influence what children think, feel and communicate. This changed and informed my knowledge about what, how and why children draw.
1.4.2 Ways of listening
Listening is an active, interactive and reflective process of communication that involves hearing, interpreting, constructing and exchanging connections and meanings (Clark, 2005b; Clark, McQuail and Moss, 2003). It is a dynamic, ethical and democratic process, which is open to different modes of communication in a milieu of respect (Moss, 2006). Conversely, Rinaldi (2001), describes listening as, “an active verb, which involves giving an interpretation, giving meaning to the message and value to those who are being listened to” (p. 4). Through their social semiotics concept, Kress and others (Kress, 2010, 1997; Kress and Jewitt, 2003; Kress and Van Leeuwen, 2001, 1996), provide a similar way of listening, which I espouse with Malaguzzi’s metaphoric notion of the “hundred languages of children” (Edwards, Gandini and Forman, 1998, p.12) as both support the theory that children use a range of “symbols and codes” (Dahlberg and Moss, 2006, p. 49) to communicate their thoughts and understandings.
Guided by The New London Group’s (2000) concept of “multiliteracies” (p. 25), that also denotes “alternative forms of communication” (Yelland, Lee, O’Rouke, and Harrison, 2008, p.10), which are pluralistic, flexible, and dynamic, I also draw on Bearne and Wolstencroft’s (2007), Jewitt’s (2002) and Kress’ (2000a) notion that children make use of a range of linguistic, visual, audio, gestural and spatial modes such as movement, drama, gestures, drawing, story-telling, play, and other forms of literacy, to help them illustrate their understandings. This notion goes beyond a passive way of listening to verbal utterances, to entail a process of listening and being listened to “with wide eyes and open minds” (Nutbrown, 1996, p. 47). Drawing on
____________________________________________________________________ 11 these perspectives, I define listening as an interactive process of verbal and non- verbal ways of communication or in other words, through multimodal ways of text production which capture the children’s different voices, constructs of meanings and theories. This process of “multiple listening” (Rinaldi, 2005, p. 22) helped me understand how children think and learn, question and make connections, and live and interpret reality.
1.4.3 Doing research with children
Adopting a children’s rights perspective encompasses a broad range of paradigms and methods that facilitate the involvement of children as participants (Fraser, et al., 2014; Kellet, 2014). In the context of my study I realised this by undertaking research “with” (Mayall, 2000a, p. 121) children, rather than “on” or “about” them. The latter position is frequently challenged and considered as problematic as it often underestimates children, assuming that they are vulnerable, poor informants, incapable of contributing towards inquiry, and unable to fully understand information or of taking informed decisions (Coyne, 2010; Gallagher, Haywood, Jones and Milne, 2009; Keddie, 2000).
Mayall (2000a) explains, that while research about children is exclusively planned, initiated, led and interpreted by adults, research with children, is not predefined, but necessitates flexibility and creativity on the researcher’s part who, as Pink (2007) suggests, needs to adapt and modify the methods along the process of data collection. This was one of the most difficult aspects of my study where I had to constantly be sensitive to the children’s needs, think-in-action and be open to adapt my methods, tools, and the data collection process as it transpired. As is argued by Darbyshire, MacDougall and Schiller (2005), and Tay-Lim and Lim (2013), this demanded of me to be knowledgeable about the research process and in-tune with the overt and covert messages children convey, so as to implement appropriate methods that could effectively elicit their perspectives. Basing my research on the belief that “the best people to provide information on the children’s perspectives, actions and attitudes are children themselves” (Scott, 2000, p. 99), as they are the ones who are able to provide expert information about their experiences (Thomson, 2008), I considered the three children’s viewpoints and together with them took decisions that changed the data collection process. To achieve this insider’s perspective, I tried to see the world
____________________________________________________________________ 12 through the children’s eyes, while, as O’Kane (2000) suggests, recognising their competence to construct and communicate their perspectives and ways of doing things.