Places for Young People to Influence Decision-Making: Developing Means for Democracy Education in Finland

This study examines young people\u27s (ages 13–18) perceptions of their own opportunities to influence the development of their own environment through an experiment aimed at developing civic democracy in Finland in 2020–2021. The purpose of the experiment was to try out new ways of participating and influencing meaningfully for young people at school, to encourage young people to bring up grievances, and to support them in finding solutions that end up in decision-making. The experiment involved young people from different educational institutions (secondary school, upper secondary school, and vocational schools), teachers, and local decision-makers. Data was gathered with ethnographic methods by observation, video-taping, and keeping a field diary in the workshops and other events organized during the experiment. Inclusion and participation is examined through the experiences, activities, and interactions of young people and other actors participating in the experiment. Findings suggest that being able to focus on team discussions, creating a safe atmosphere, and providing suitable information during the tasks strengthened participation and experiences of inclusion during the experiment’s lifetime. In addition, it was crucial to connect the activities to the development of existing decision-making structures, as well as to develop school routines, to enable more processual teaching needed in democracy education

Deliberative Facilitation in the Classroom: The Interplay of Facilitative Technique and Design to Make Space for Democracy

Widespread global interest and adoption of deliberative democracy approaches to reinvigorate citizenship and policymaking in an era of democratic crisis/decline has been mirrored by increasing interest in deliberation in schools, both as an approach to pedagogy and student empowerment and as a training ground for deliberative citizenship. In school deliberation, as in other settings, a key and sometimes neglected element of high-quality deliberation is facilitation. Facilitation can help to establish and maintain deliberative norms, assist participants to deliberate productively, and enable collective goals. By participating in facilitated deliberation, students can develop awareness, skills, and voice that empower them to engage with democracy, in school and beyond. This article draws on our experience as scholar/practitioners running a Deliberation in Schools program in Australia to explore challenges and strategies for deliberative facilitation. The challenges we discuss are power, inequality, diversity of expression and knowledge, and disagreement and these are discussed in the general context of inclusiveness. We highlight two facets of deliberative facilitation—technique and design—that are important for dealing with these challenges and increasing inclusion in school deliberation and in democratic deliberation more generally

Democratic Disagreements. A Book Review of \u3cem\u3eLived Democracy in Education. Young Citizens’ Democratic Lives in Kindergarten, School and Higher Education\u3c/em\u3e

As the title Lived Democracy in Education suggests, the predominantly Norwegian writers of the book share a deep and robust vision of democracy. Drawing on deliberative democratic theory and many other theoretical perspectives, the authors blend theory, practice, and empirical case studies to illuminate these modes of “lived democracy” in educational contexts. In particular, the book’s chapters examine different communicative interactions between children and young people, presenting these as examples of learning to live with controversies in communities of disagreement. The book contains valuable perspectives on democratic discussion in education. As several authors are experts in mathematics and science education, and some chapters integrate democratic education into STEM, the book might particularly benefit readers interested in democratic education within STEM subjects

Moving Toward Critical Political Education with Elementary Preservice Teachers. A Response to “The Impact of Polarization on the Political Engagement of Generation Z Elementary Preservice Teachers and Their Teaching

In “The Impact of Polarization on the Political Engagement of Generation Z Elementary Preservice Teachers and Their Teaching,” Keegan and Vaughan engaged with questions of preparing Gen Z, elementary preservice teachers (PSTs) in political education. Their much-needed study confirmed the continued call for social studies teacher educators to cultivate critical, civically active elementary PSTs who will intentionally attend to political education in the classroom. In this response, I situate Keegan and Vaughan\u27s findings in white discomfort (Zembylas, 2018) as a way to consider a path forward in elementary teacher preparation, moving from a centering of white PSTs’ individual responses to a pedagogy of shared responsibility (Zembylas, 2019)

Position and Power. A Book Review of \u3cem\u3eReclaiming Democratic Education: Student and Teacher Activism and the Future of Education Policy\u3c/em\u3e

In his book, Reclaiming Democratic Education: Student and Teacher Activism and the Future of Education Policy, Thomas (2022) provides an overview of historical connectedness between student and teacher activism. He proposes that while the Nation At Risk paradigm has effectively positioned students and teachers as passive objects and recipients, respectively, of education policy, recent activism by both groups demonstrates a rejection of the paradigm. Although I am not entirely convinced that wholesale rejection of such a pervasive paradigm is at play, I appreciate Thomas\u27 (2022) reminder that the struggle to reclaim democratic education is certainly worth fighting for

Pragmatist Thinking for a Populist Moment: Democratic Contingency and Racial Re-Valuing in Education Governance

We examine school governance in populist era, using contemporary readings of pragmatist philosophy. We are in a “populist moment,” a time of uprisings and movements of the demos making political claims (Mouffe, 2018). School officials in the U.S. are subject to an array of political demands in the form of protests and campaigns. We focus on the struggles around critical race theory in K–12 schools. Glaude (2017) has advocated pragmatism’s use in light of racial revaluing and democratic struggle. Rogers’ work (2009) has highlighted inquiry, founded on contingency, in the face of disagreement and power struggles. These scholars show us educational governance’s dual task in this moment: a revaluing of racialized Others in educational institutions done while simultaneously crafting conditions for deliberative judgment and meaningful policymaking in the face of political contingency. In light of this racial reckoning, we argue that populism presents a democratic irony for educational governance. Racial justice cannot be achieved without populist expression, taking the form of campaigns and persistent nonviolent signals that institutional racism is unacceptable. Yet our populist moment also contributes to the increasing political polarization that makes the conditions for democratic deliberative policymaking more elusive. Deliberative conditions for policymaking and curriculum development in schools are critically necessary for reinventing and reimagining our shared society

Navigating Context Collapse: A Strengths-based Approach to Building Youth Civic Empowerment. A Response to “Blended Spaces: Reimagining Civic Education in a Digital Era”

In the article “Blended Spaces: Reimagining Civic Education in a Digital Era,” the authors joined a new area of research on civic media literacy, or the capacity to use media with civic intentionality. Building on previous scholarship that examined how to support youth capacity for effective civic inquiry, dialogue, expression, and action in the digital age, the authors contributed to this literature by usefully elaborating on the phenomenon of “context collapse” and the challenges this blurring of the boundaries between public and private spheres may present, particularly in the liminal spaces where the shifting boundaries most clearly depart from the pre-internet era. A central premise of the feature article is that youth and adults are entering into this context with “no training.” However, it has been more than a decade since social media emerged, and we respond by pointing out that in some sense, youth have been training for this for most of their lives. In our response, we reinforce many of the major points of the feature article, but we elaborate to draw focus on youth-driven practices and adaptations that have emerged in our own research and discuss the implications for civic education

Liberating Children, or Breaking the Backbone of Our Democracy? A Book Review of \u3cem\u3eHostages No More: The Fight for Education Freedom and the Future of the American Child\u3c/em\u3e

In Hostages No More, former Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos provides a 10-chapter memoir in which she argues for school privatization, including the expansion of government funding of charter schools. DeVos argues that the modern public education system, supported by an “establishment” of government bureaucracies, the education industrial complex, and teacher unions, holds American children, especially poor Black and Hispanic children, “hostage” (DeVos, 2022, p. 261) and that her life’s work has been a civil rights struggle to help parents and their children obtain their “education freedom” (p. 216). However, many of her claims are supported with misleading information, and while DeVos provides a vision for American education that she claims will liberate our children, her plan contrarily works against that aim and is better characterized as a blueprint for undermining the institution that serves as the backbone of our democracy. This book review rebuts many of DeVos’s premises and argues that her vision of replacing traditional public schools with segregated charter schools run by outside private interests with little transparency and little accountability is not the direction we should turn for improving American education—it’s bad for our democracy, and it’s the wrong direction for America

Navigating the Indeterminate Relationship Between Politics and Pedagogy. A Response to Education as Commons, Children as Commoners: The Case Study of the Little Tree Community”

In their article, Pechtelidis and Kioupkiolis added a case study to research at the intersection of politics, pedagogy, and the commons. Examining the Little Tree Community to deepen our understanding of how education can operate as a common practice, they raised key questions about the political possibility of subjectification in an education in the commons, leaving the question of politics and pedagogy open. Case studies in general, especially in the article format, require a delicate balance of theoretical exposition, contextual explication, data presentation, and analysis. In this response, I propose one way we might refine the politics assumed in the common pedagogy in order to prevent the communing project and its analysis from reinforcing and stabilizing the capitalist and imperialist logics it wants to struggle against. I turn to the foundational role that the production and enclosure of subjectivities, social relations, and other resources necessary for capital’s continual accumulation, a process that includes enclosure, expropriation, and dispossession. This is not a critique of the political dynamics of their common pedagogical practices but rather an attempt to define the political teacher as one who navigates between the openness of pedagogy and the determination of politics

Beyond Just Techniques: Toward Deliberation Facilitation That Minimizes Harm. A Response to “Deliberative Facilitation in the Classroom: The Interplay of Facilitative Technique and Design to Make Space for Democracy”

In Deliberative Facilitation in the Classroom: The Interplay of Facilitative Techniques and Design to Make Space for Democracy, the authors offered several useful techniques for the facilitation of standard classroom deliberations. However, not all open controversial issues are created equal, and many have the potential to implicate student identities. In those cases, it is imperative that facilitators move beyond basic techniques and think about how to conduct deliberations that protect marginalized students and do not validate systemic injustices. In this response to Deliberative Facilitation in the Classroom, I extend upon the authors\u27 argument and offer suggestions for how to effectively engage students in deliberations of sensitive issues