Page 94 - 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. 94
šolsko polje, letnik xxxi, številka 3–4
and Clarke, 2006; Hayes, 1997) and the data were analysed on the ba-
sis of systematic coding (breaking down the data to the coding system to
identify relevant patterns), following the approach suggested by Saldana
(2012). The coding system followed the logic of the Child Participation
Assessment Tool’s indicators and was organised hierarchically over three
levels. It consists of seven main codes (first level) which summarise the
main focus group topics: (1) co-decision-making in the family environ-
ment; (2) children’s rights to be informed about the right to participate;
(3) informedness about the right to participate and child/human rights;
(4) forums for children; (5) co-decision-making in the local communi-
ty; (6) an ombudsperson; (7) child-friendly, individual complaints proce-
dures, with 24 subcodes (second level) which further categorise the main
codes, and 27 subcodes (third level) which further detail the 24 subcodes
of the second level. The analysis included almost 5,000 coded segments or-
ganised in the coding system.
Analysis of the determinants for equal participation in school
Are children informed about the right to participate and can all children
equally exercise their right to participate in school? In general, the focus
group analysis shows that the children feel they are provided with the in-
formation about their right to participate and that this information is
mainly given in the school setting. Some children who participated in the
focus groups also reported they would not have been informed about their
rights at all had it not been for the school. Besides school, other impor-
tant sources of information are parents and other members of their fami-
lies, some children receive information from the media. As we continued
with conversations about their views on the equality of opportunities to
be informed about their rights or to be actively involved in participation
practices, several children were convinced (as they follow the same curric-
ulum in the public school system) that all children in Slovenia are equally
informed about their rights and can equally participate in school (partic-
ipation) activities (e.g. running for class president). If we judge the edu-
cation system solely by these merits and only consider Rawls’ (1971) the-
ory of justice, the Slovenian education system and its ability to inform
children about their right to participate may be described as being in line
with Rawls’ first principle – the greatest equal liberty. Namely, some focus
group participants argue that the right to be informed about child parti
cipation is fully ensured.
Yet, a different side to the story is revealed by the group of children
who had either a disadvantaged socio-economic and cultural background
92
and Clarke, 2006; Hayes, 1997) and the data were analysed on the ba-
sis of systematic coding (breaking down the data to the coding system to
identify relevant patterns), following the approach suggested by Saldana
(2012). The coding system followed the logic of the Child Participation
Assessment Tool’s indicators and was organised hierarchically over three
levels. It consists of seven main codes (first level) which summarise the
main focus group topics: (1) co-decision-making in the family environ-
ment; (2) children’s rights to be informed about the right to participate;
(3) informedness about the right to participate and child/human rights;
(4) forums for children; (5) co-decision-making in the local communi-
ty; (6) an ombudsperson; (7) child-friendly, individual complaints proce-
dures, with 24 subcodes (second level) which further categorise the main
codes, and 27 subcodes (third level) which further detail the 24 subcodes
of the second level. The analysis included almost 5,000 coded segments or-
ganised in the coding system.
Analysis of the determinants for equal participation in school
Are children informed about the right to participate and can all children
equally exercise their right to participate in school? In general, the focus
group analysis shows that the children feel they are provided with the in-
formation about their right to participate and that this information is
mainly given in the school setting. Some children who participated in the
focus groups also reported they would not have been informed about their
rights at all had it not been for the school. Besides school, other impor-
tant sources of information are parents and other members of their fami-
lies, some children receive information from the media. As we continued
with conversations about their views on the equality of opportunities to
be informed about their rights or to be actively involved in participation
practices, several children were convinced (as they follow the same curric-
ulum in the public school system) that all children in Slovenia are equally
informed about their rights and can equally participate in school (partic-
ipation) activities (e.g. running for class president). If we judge the edu-
cation system solely by these merits and only consider Rawls’ (1971) the-
ory of justice, the Slovenian education system and its ability to inform
children about their right to participate may be described as being in line
with Rawls’ first principle – the greatest equal liberty. Namely, some focus
group participants argue that the right to be informed about child parti
cipation is fully ensured.
Yet, a different side to the story is revealed by the group of children
who had either a disadvantaged socio-economic and cultural background
92
