Page 93 - Šolsko polje, XXXI, 2020, 3-4: Convention on the Rights of the Child: Educational Opportunities and Social Justice, eds. Zdenko Kodelja and Urška Štremfel
P. 93
u. boljka et al. ■ who calls the shots? the insiders and outsiders ...
and, on the other side, the ones who participate the most. To accomplish
this, we contacted NGOs working with and for children and youth and
four focus groups with the NGOs’ assistance were performed. Two focus
groups were with children with either a disadvantaged socio-economic
and cultural background and/or behavioural, emotional and learning dif-
ficulties (here one participant older than 14 participated; in her answers,
she reflected on her experiences of participation in elementary school) and
one with children participants in the project Children’s Parliament.
The measurement instrument
In order to conduct the focus groups, we developed semi-structured,
child-friendly question guidelines which followed the logic of the Child
Participation Assessment Tool’s indicators.
The guidelines assess several areas important to children’s lives. The
topics discussed with the children were: (1) the provision of information
regarding their right to participate; (2) children’s representation in chil-
dren’s forums; (3) child-targeted feedback mechanisms on local services;
(4) the availability of child-friendly, individual complaint procedures; and
(5) an independent children’s rights institution. The article deals with the
first two topics and the proposed guideline questions for these two topics
are thus enclosed in Appendix 1.
Procedure
Organising the focus groups included sending out invitations to schools
and NGOs, communication with schools and NGOs (participants, ven-
ues, protocols etc.), arranging formalities with regard to data confidenti-
ality, parents’ permissions, small rewards for children (as recommended
by Fargas Malet et al., 2010) and the development of child-friendly com-
munication tools (emojis) (as suggested by Fargas Malet et al., 2010; Hill,
1997; Veale, 2005). The two focus groups with children with either a dis-
advantaged socio-economic and cultural background and/or behavioural,
emotional and learning difficulties were performed by the NGOs them-
selves (after short training of the facilitators by our team), while the oth-
ers were performed by the authors. All sessions were audio recorded (with
the children’s consent) and transcribed. Anonymisation was ensured by
asking the children to come up with nicknames for use during the focus
groups and by anonymising the names of the schools and NGOs.
Data analysis
The data were analysed by MAXQDA, a coding software package. The
thematic analysis was carried out in a deductive way (Boyatzis, 1998; Braun
91
and, on the other side, the ones who participate the most. To accomplish
this, we contacted NGOs working with and for children and youth and
four focus groups with the NGOs’ assistance were performed. Two focus
groups were with children with either a disadvantaged socio-economic
and cultural background and/or behavioural, emotional and learning dif-
ficulties (here one participant older than 14 participated; in her answers,
she reflected on her experiences of participation in elementary school) and
one with children participants in the project Children’s Parliament.
The measurement instrument
In order to conduct the focus groups, we developed semi-structured,
child-friendly question guidelines which followed the logic of the Child
Participation Assessment Tool’s indicators.
The guidelines assess several areas important to children’s lives. The
topics discussed with the children were: (1) the provision of information
regarding their right to participate; (2) children’s representation in chil-
dren’s forums; (3) child-targeted feedback mechanisms on local services;
(4) the availability of child-friendly, individual complaint procedures; and
(5) an independent children’s rights institution. The article deals with the
first two topics and the proposed guideline questions for these two topics
are thus enclosed in Appendix 1.
Procedure
Organising the focus groups included sending out invitations to schools
and NGOs, communication with schools and NGOs (participants, ven-
ues, protocols etc.), arranging formalities with regard to data confidenti-
ality, parents’ permissions, small rewards for children (as recommended
by Fargas Malet et al., 2010) and the development of child-friendly com-
munication tools (emojis) (as suggested by Fargas Malet et al., 2010; Hill,
1997; Veale, 2005). The two focus groups with children with either a dis-
advantaged socio-economic and cultural background and/or behavioural,
emotional and learning difficulties were performed by the NGOs them-
selves (after short training of the facilitators by our team), while the oth-
ers were performed by the authors. All sessions were audio recorded (with
the children’s consent) and transcribed. Anonymisation was ensured by
asking the children to come up with nicknames for use during the focus
groups and by anonymising the names of the schools and NGOs.
Data analysis
The data were analysed by MAXQDA, a coding software package. The
thematic analysis was carried out in a deductive way (Boyatzis, 1998; Braun
91
