It’s participation, stupid!
In the Indian state of Maharashtra, the village education committee is holding a meeting. A proposal is put to the chairman. Would it be possible for a representative of the bal panchayat – the children’s council – to participate in future?
Not only does the chairman have no objection, he welcomes the idea. “The bal panchayat have done many good things. They have held a sanitation drive. They have monitored school attendance. We will find their contribution refreshing.”
If “child participation” is so readily acceptable to village officials in hidebound rural India, why is it neglected – even opposed – by many child programme professionals? Participatory learning As far as adults are concerned, it has long been accepted that without engaging their interest and participation, development projects fail – they are, in the jargon, “unsustainable”. And it is over 30 years since the Brazilian educator Paulo Freire pointed out that participatory learning opens up the mind and makes it possible for the downtrodden to transform their lives. Are these truths valid only for the over-18s? No-one could be more downtrodden than children sent out to work in harmful or exploitative circumstances. In India, the numbers of working children are phenomenal – 77 million according to one estimate. Many are born into the families of landless agricultural labourers. They work because they grow up in the pattern of their parents’ lives and that is how it is. Herding, planting, work in the fields, domestic chores in richer people’s houses. And if they end up in a shantytown, as families squeezed off the land increasingly do, then scavenging, begging and shoe-shining take their place. Surely, then, participation is just what working children need. The chance to take part in a children’s council, join a culture of learning, have the confidence to speak up about your dreams – even to have some dreams. Participation can help you discover things about yourself, be somebody, earn respect from your parents and peers. And maybe train for a proper occupation – not just weeding or collecting rubbish out in the boiling sun. New insights empower working children A boy might make scavenging into a business with others; girls might graduate into snacks and fast food. If she’s a domestic, she might quit the job and go back to school – once her parents are persuaded that schooling is worthwhile. If her mother is a sex worker, the girl’s new sense of herself might mean she determines not to follow in her footsteps. All these examples of child participation in action are real. They are among the impacts on working children of having truly “participated” in programmes – been consulted, been empowered – according to a new report by Save the Children (see below). The report aims to win round those who react to the idea of child participation with condescension or disbelief. Allowing children their say is regarded by some as positively dangerous: they may bring the temple of family life and adult authority crashing down.
Maharashtran parents would be surprised by that idea. But then Indian villagers haven’t had the benefit of our discourse on childhood to confuse them. Why is child participation so contentious? Well, first there are the standard arguments about children lacking experience, not knowing what is good for them and getting uppity with adults if given too much say. Then with child workers there are extras. Working children need adult protection from harm and exploitation; they need to stop working and go to school. They shouldn’t be encouraged to develop their own point of view and take control of their destinies. Because, dammit, they might just say: “I’d prefer to go on with my life the way it is.” Then, chances are, they’ll end up truants and rebels.
The findings of the study point in the opposite direction. In all the schemes the researchers looked at (in Bangladesh, Brazil, Honduras, India and Senegal), young workers who enjoyed the mind-opening experience of participation, and had any choice in the matter, wanted to quit their poorly paid and low-status occupations. Everyone gains All valued learning with new enthusiasm, and most wanted to go to school. Where they managed it, their motivation to study was high. Where they did not, they often succeeded in improving their situation: better pay and working hours, more respect and status. Far from finding their children unruly, parents found them better mannered, more positive about life and helpful at home. Their leaders were not incipient gangsters but organisers of village sanitation drives and helpers of school drop-outs. Everyone gained, not just the children. And in the process, entrenched social attitudes about work and school began to shift. If those who devise programmes on working children’s behalf don’t find ways to reach into the closed trap of their existing reality, nothing they devise will have any lasting effect. We all do in life what we have to do – unless our minds are opened up to doing better, seizing opportunities, expanding horizons. That’s what participation for working children is all about. ”Opening Minds, Opening Up Opportunities”, by Maggie Black for the International Save the Children Alliance is available from childrights@scfuk.org.uk or at www.savethechildren.org.uk. --- OneWorld Guest Editorials represent the viewpoint of the authors and not necessarily that of the OneWorld Network. Read and comment on previous Guest Editorials. If you would like to write or suggest a future OneWorld Guest Editorial, please contact miles.litvinoff@oneworld.net or josie.kirby@oneworld.net. |
Printable version
Back to top
