Children’s Own Perspectives on Participation in Leisure-time Centers in Sweden

Helene Elvstrand¹ and Anna Liisa Närvänen^2,

¹Department of Social and Welfare Studies, Linköping University, Norrköping, Sweden

²Department of Social Studies, Linnaeus University, Växjö. 35106, Sweden

Cite this paper:
Helene Elvstrand and Anna Liisa Närvänen. Children’s Own Perspectives on Participation in Leisure-time Centers in Sweden. American Journal of Educational Research. 2016; 4(6):496-503. doi: 10.12691/education-4-6-10

Abstract

This article presents a study conducted at two different leisure time centers (LTCs) in Sweden. LTC is a voluntary after-school setting that according to the national curriculum should support for example development of values and children’s social skills. The analysis is a part of a larger action research project comprising various research issues relating to LTCs. The present article focuses on the democratic objective of LTCs. The Swedish educational system, of which LTCs form a part, is considered to be rights-based with reference to the United Nations Conventions on the Rights of the Child. The national curriculum stresses citizenship education, and both schools and LTCs are considered venues where children should have the opportunity and ability to practice democracy in their everyday activities. The point of departure in the theoretical framework is children’s participation and agency. This article focuses on data gathered through ‘drawing and talking with children’ that reveals children’s perspectives as to their own participation at LTCs. A total of 19 children participated in the study and were asked to draw a map of their LTC and describe their experiences of participation at the LTC. The results show that children clearly favored activities that, at least to some extent, could be carried out with less adult supervision, such as free, unstructured play. Opportunities to participate were described in terms of formal proceedings such as voting or writing suggestions and depositing them in the suggestion box. The children also described their participation in terms of opportunities to make individual choices in accordance with their preferences. When asked to name obstacles to participation, the children mentioned rules that were decided on by adults, and fixed routines that structured the children’s afternoon hours in terms of both time and space.

Keywords:
participation leisure time center agency children’s perspective democracy

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

References:

[1]	Rohlin, M, Fritidshemmets historiska dilemman: en nutidshistoria om konstruktionen av fritidshemmet i samordning med skolan. Stockholm: Stockholms universitets förlag. 2012.
[2]	The Swedish National Agency for Education, Statistics. The Swedish National Agency for Education. Stockholm. 2014.
[3]	The Swedish National Agency for Education, SKOLFS 2010:37. The Swedish National Agency for Education: Stockholm. 2010.
[4]	Närvänen, AL & Näsman, E. “Age Order and Children’s Agency”. I: H. Wintersberger, L. Alanen, T. Olk. & J. Qvortrup (eds) Childhood, Generational Order and the Welfare State: Exploring Children's Social and Economic Welfare. Vol. 1 of COST A19: Children's Welfare. University Press of Southern Denmark: Odense, 2007.
[5]	James A, “To Be (Come) or Not to Be (Come): Understanding Children’s Citizenship”, ANNALS, AAPSS. 2011.
[6]	James A. and A.L. James, Constructing Childhood: Theory, policy and social practice. Basingstoke. UK. Palgrave Macmillan. 2004.
[7]	Stoecklin D, “Theories of action in the field of child participation: In search of explicit frameworks”. Childhood, 20, (4). 443-457. November 2013.
[8]	Bacon K. & S. Frankel, “Rethinking Children’s Citizenship. Negotiating Structure, Shaping Meanings”, International Journal of Children’s Rights, 22 (1). 21-43. 2014.
[9]	Haglund, B, Traditioner i möte: en kvalitativ studie av fritidspedagogers arbete med samlingar i skolan, Acta Universitets Gothoburgensis, Diss. Göteborg:2004.
[10]	Haglund, B, ”Fritid som diskurs och innehåll. En problematisering av verksamhet vid >afterschool-programs> och fritidshem”, Pedagogisk forskning i Sverige, 1, 22-44. 2009.
[11]	The Swedish National Agency for Education, Curriculum for the compulsory school, the preschool class and the leisure time centre. Stockholm: Fritzes. 2011.
[12]	The Swedish National Agency for Education, Allmänna Råd. Stockholm: Fritzes. 2014.
[13]	Saar, T, “Towards a new pedagogue in the after-school setting”, European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 22, 254-270. 2014.
[14]	Pihlgren, A. S. & Rohlin, M, ”Det ”fria” barnet”. I Klerfelt, A. & Haglund, B. (red.), Fritidspedagogik: fritidshemmets teorier och praktiker (s. 14-41). Stockholm: Liber. 2011.
[15]	Bergström, M. & Holm, I, Den svårfångade delaktigheten i skolan: Ett ungdomsperspektiv på hinder och möjligheter (Working papers on childhood and the study of children, 83). Linköping: Linköpings universitet. 2005.
[16]	Forsberg, E, Elevinflytandets många ansikten (Uppsala studies in education, 93). Uppsala: Uppsala universitet. 2000.
[17]	Rosvall, P, ”Och det vore bättre om man kunde vara med och bestämma hur det skulle göras. En etnografisk studie om elevinflytande i gymnasieskolan. Institutionen för tillämpad utbildningsvetenskap. Högskolan i Borås. 2012.
[18]	Rönnlund, M, Demokrati och deltagande: elevinflytande i grundskolans årskurs 7-9 ur ett könsperspektiv, Institutionen för tillämpad utbildningsvetenskap, Umeå universitet, Diss. Umeå: Umeå universitet. 2011.
[19]	Kamperinen, R.M, Villkorad delaktighet. Ungdomars möjligheter till inflytande i skolan. Licentiatavhandling Göteborgs universitet. 2010.
[20]	Boman, Y, Utbildningspolitik i det andra moderna: Om skolans normativa villkor (Örebro studies in education, 4). Örebro: Örebro universitet. 2002.
[21]	Roth, K, “Valfrihet, gemenskap om deliberativa samtal”. I B. Jonsson & K. Roth. (red.), Demokrati och lärande: om valfrihet, gemenskap och övervägande i skola och samhälle (s. 19-47). Lund: Studentlitteratur. 2003.
[22]	Elvstrand, Helene, Delaktighet i skolans vardagsarbete, Institutionen för beteendevetenskap och lärande, Linköpings universitet, Diss. Linköping: Linköpings universitet, 2009, Linköping, 2009.
[23]	Aspán, M, Delade meningar: om värdepedagogiska invitationer för barns inflytande och inkännande, Pedagogiska institutionen, Stockholms universitet, Diss. Stockholm: Stockholms universitet. 2009.
[24]	Lelinge, B, Klassråd: ett socialt rum för demokrati och utbildning: om skola och barndom i förändring, Lärarutbildningen, Malmö högskola, Licentiatuppsats Malmö: Lärarutbildningen: 2011
[25]	Thornberg, R. & Elvstrand, H, “Children’s experiences of democracy, participation and trust in school”, International Journal of Educational Research, 53, 44-54. 2012.
[26]	Allan, J. & Ianson, J, “Children’s rights in school: Power, assemblies and assemblages. International Journal of Children’s Rights, 12 (2). 123-138. 2004.
[27]	Pedder, D. & McIntyre, D,” Pupil consultation: The importance of social capital”. Education Review, 58 (2). 145-157. May 2006.
[28]	Clark, A., & Percy-Smith, B, “Beyond consultation: Participatory practices in everyday spaces”. Children, Youth and Environments, 16 (2). 1-9. 2006.
[29]	Bjerke, H,” It’s the way they do it’: Expressions of agency in child- adult relations at home and school”. Children and Society, 25 (2). 93-103. March 2011.
[30]	Pálsdóttir, K, Care, learning and leisure: The organizational identity of after- school centres for six-to nine-year old children in Reykjavík. The organizational identity in after-school centres for six to nine years old children. University of Iceland. 2012.
[31]	Klerfelt, A. & Haglund, B, “Presentation of Research on School-Age Educare in Sweden”. International Journal for Research on Extended education, 2 (2). 45-62. 2014.
[32]	Simoncini, K, Cartmel, Y &Young, A, “Children’s Voices in Australian School Age Care: What do They Think About Afterschool Care?” International Journal of Research of Extended Education, 3 (1). 141-131. June 2015.
[33]	Haglund, B, “Pupil’s opportunities to influence activities: a study of everyday practice at a Swedish leisure-time centre”. Early Child Development and Care, 185 (10). 1556-1568. February 2015.
[34]	Smith, A, “Children and Young People’s Participation Rights in Education”, International Journal of Children’s Rights, 15, 147-164. 2007.
[35]	Wall, J. & A. Dar, “Children’s Political Representation: The Right to Make a Difference”, International Journal of Children’s Rights, 19 (4). 595-612. 2011.
[36]	MacArthur, J, “Sustaining friendships, relationships, and rights at school”, International Journal of Inclusive Education, 17 (8). 793-811. 2013.
[37]	James, A & Prout, A, Constructing and Reconstructing Childhood. Contemporary issues in the sociology study of childhood. Falmer Press. 1997.
[38]	Kay, E. & Tisdall, M, “The Challenge and Challenging of Childhood Studies? Learning from Disability Studies and Research with Disabled Children”, Children & Society, 26 (3). 181-191. May 2012.
[39]	Emirbayer, M & Maynard, D. W, “Pragmatism and Ethnomethodology”. Qualitative Sociology. 34 (1). 221-261. March 2011.
[40]	Närvänen, AL. & Elvstrand, H, “På väg att (om) skapa fritidshemskulturer. Om visioner, gränsdragningar och identitetsarbete”, Barn, 3, 9-26. 2014.
[41]	Chambers, R, “Participatory mapping and geographic information systems: Whose map? Who is empowered and who disempowered? Who gains and who loses?” The Electronic Journal on Information Systems in Developing Countries, 25 (2). 1-11. 2006.
[42]	Lansdown, G & O’Kane, C, A Toolkit for monitoring and evaluating children's participation: A 10-step guide to monitoring and evaluating children's participation. Save the Children UK. 2014.
[43]	Wertz, F.J. et al. (Eds.), Five ways of doing qualitative analysis: phenomenological psychology, grounded theory, discourse analysis, narrative research, and intuitive inquiry. New York, NY: Guildford Press. 2011.
[44]	Alderson, P, Children as researchers: Participation rights and research methods. In P. Christensen & A. James (Eds.), Research with Children: Perspective and practice (pp. 276-290). London: Falmer press. 2008.
[45]	Rubinstein, D, Structure, Culture, Agency: towards a truly multidimensional society. Sage. London. 2001.
[46]	Davies, L, “Researching democratic understanding in primary school”. Research in Education, 61 (1). 39-48. May 1999.
[47]	Thomas N, “Towards a Theory of Children’s Participation” International Journal of Children’s Rights, 15 (2). 199-218. 2007.
[48]	Parnell, R. and Patsarika, M, “Young people's participation in school design: exploring diversity and power in a UK governmental policy case-study”, Children’s Geographies, 9 (3-4). 457-475. 2011.