Australasian Journal of Early Childhood

the overall organisation, routines, content and activitieswithin preschool.Another example from Sweden is Emilson’s (2007) studyof young children’s influence in preschool. Examiningepisodes of ‘circle time’ in early childhood settings,Emilson found that opportunities for child participation andinfluence were dependent on teacher attitudes. Similarly,Bae’s (2009) study of children and teacher interaction inpreschools in Norway found that participation correlatesto how teachers follow children’s initiatives, respondto children and take children’s point of view. Danby,Farrell, Powell and Leiminer’s (2004) research examiningAustralian children’s decision making in their everydaylives suggests that time spent at school was governedmore than was their time at home. Rather than childparticipation principles being embraced, children’slives at school are impacted upon increasingly by adultdeterminedregulation and control (Danby et al., 2004).Research investigating older children’s participation inschools also found it was restricted by adult control.For example, Tholander’s (2007) study of teachers’practices found that co-constructing rules withstudents meant uncertain democratic relationships.He discussed how one teacher first invited students tocollaborate in making a list of rules, and then orderedsanctions for misbehaving. This study showed that thepractice of democracy was a role that children were in‘preparation for’ rather than a matter they attended toin their day-to-day activities (Tholander, 2007). Wyse’s(2001) study of child participation in two secondary andtwo primary schools in England found that children’sviews were not listened to. Despite the inclusion of aparticipatory body such as a school council, there waslittle opportunity for children to express their ideas andmake decisions. Similarly, a study of older children’sparticipation in Australian schools, by Bolzan, Mason &Michail (2005), found that adults controlled decisionsabout who may participate and how, as well as thematters to be discussed (usually adult agendas).Ways forward for early childhoodeducationProjects involving older school-age children in the UnitedKingdom report greater student learning, motivationand attainment, and a safer and more positive schoolenvironment as a result of child participation projects(Save the Children, 2007). For example, Davies, Williams,Yamashita and Man-Hing (2006) in their review of 75studies of child participation programs in UK schools, foundstudents who were in schools that emphasised democraticpractices had improved academic achievement. Thisimprovement was credited to an emphasis on studentengagement in teaching and learning processes.Better teacher–student relationships and school–homerelationships were also attributed to participatory methods.While research shows the benefits of child participationfor older children, participatory evidence for the early yearsremains limited (Brownlee, 2008). However, reviewingchildren’s conceptions of quality of early childhoodeducation and care settings in Sweden, Sheridan andPramling Samuelsson (2001) found a high correlationbetween quality of the early childhood setting, and thechildren’s ability to have influence over the program.Nyland’s (2008, p. 40) review of children’s participatoryrights within childcare contexts in New Zealand, Americaand Australia stated that ‘participation encourages growth,well-being, and imagination’ as well as children as ‘selfregulatedlearners’.Professionals within early childhood education andcare settings have a responsibility to be proactive intheir implementation of children’s rights, including childparticipation (Smith, 2007). Woodhead (2009) suggeststhat the implementation of children’s rights requires a shiftin the view of the child. Australian early childhood educationsettings can take lessons from New Zealand, where childparticipation offers early childhood professionals thepossibility of reframing their professional capabilities andknowledge bases. For example, the curriculum of NewZealand, Te Whäriki, promotes the autonomy of childrenand children as ‘active learners who choose, plan andchallenge’ (Smith, 2007, p. 5).By acknowledging the varied and complex interactionsof children in their care, teachers will come to knoweach child as an individual member of society withpersonal views and influence (Cannella & Grieshaber,2001). Similarly, MacNaughton et al. (2007b) note thatas early childhood professionals redefine their expertise,they may develop more equitable and collaborativerelationships with young children. Teachers, whochange their practices and beliefs of their role fromone as experts acting on behalf of children to one ofcollaborators with children, will advance concepts ofparticipation (MacNaughton et al., 2007b).Making the UNCRC a key document in strategicplanning for early childhood education is one way toimport a child participation focus into the early childhoodsetting (Smith, 2007). Another way to address childparticipation in early childhood education is to includeit as a ‘protocol’ for curricula documents (Bennett,2007; Smith, 2007). On the international scene,curricula documents have attempted to respond tothe UNCRC in their attention to child participation. Forexample, a participatory role for children is a key focusof the Swedish curriculum. The Swedish curriculumdocument, Curriculum for the pre-school (Departmentof Education, 2006), promotes and actively encourageschildren to have an opportunity to express their ownviews in order to influence their own situation, formtheir own opinion and make choices.Vo l u m e 3 6 N u m b e r 3 S e p t e m b e r 2 011 23