Donderdag 22 mei 2014: De paper die ik moet beoordelen = een ramp!

22 mei 2014 - Norrköping, Zweden

NIET LEUK!

Voor het vak "Children's Rights and Participation" moest ik niet alleen een paper schrijven. Ik moet ook een beoordelaar zijn. Ik krijg een paper van een medestudent die ik moet lezen en  evalueren. Deze beoordeling is 20% van mijn cijfer. Ik vind het een ramp. Wat jullie hier niet kunnen zien is dat er geen voorblad, titel, tussentitels of onderzoeksvragen zijn. De titel kwam ik enkel te weten via de naam van het document: Child Perspective. En wat helemaal fantastisch is, is dat deze paper geschreven is door Henry Chau, een vriend van me. Het is helemaal niet leuk om zo'n paper te beoordelen. Ik moet dit voor de klas presenteren.... Btw: voor je begint te lezen: Hij is van Australië en Engels is zijn moedertaal. Toch slaagt hij er in om heel slecht te schrijven. Laat me weten wat je vind.

 

Different cultures and societies have distinct views on child perspective, which aid to form the perception of childhood. How children should be perceived and how they are actually perceived within particular places and periods in time. This essay will discuss child perspective on a global level, the representation of children and the concept of childhood.


Firstly we shall distinguish child perspective from child’s perspective. Child perspectives are the perceptions adults suppose children are like. Child perspective is “created by adults who are seeking, deliberitely and as realistically as possible, to reconstruct children’s perspectives, for example through scientific concepts concerning children’s understanding of their world and their actions in it” (Sommer, Samuelsson, Hundeide, 2010: pg 22). On the contrary, child’s perspective are views by children themselves, they “refer to the perceptions of the non-adult subject themselves”. (Sommer, Samuelsson, Hundeide, 2010: pg 22). Child perspectives and child’s perspective aid to form the concept of childhood.


In Centuries of the Child, Philippe Aries emphasises that the concept of childhood only came to existence towards the end of the Medieval Ages. Prior, children were defined as mini adults who “mingled, competed, worked, and played with mature adults” (Aries, 1962: pg 33). Aries believed that the concept of the transitional period between baby and adult did not exist. He suggests that between the fifteenth and seventeenth century (late Medieval Age, early Renaissance) there may possibly been three factors contributing to the concept of childhood. "First there was a change to what was happening within families as children became perceived of as more vulnerable and more valued and in need of protection. Second, at a later stage, children were seen as being in need of discipline and training. Third, with the development of schooling, children’s ages were seen as significant and schools were seen as the institutions where children belonged” (Smidt, 2013: pg 8).


Arie’s finding is evident through the paintings of the representation of children in the Renaissance period. Tracing back to the early Renaissance period and the late Medieval Ages, children were represented in paintings, but not as they are depicted today. Sandra Smidt critiques Renaissance painter, Caravaggio in representing children in his paintings as mini adults. “The great painters of the Renaissance did not paint realistic infants not because they lacked skill but because they perceived of babies as adults in waiting and an analysis of medieval European paintings does seem to suggest as much” (Smidt, 2013: pg 15). Furthermore, transitioning towards the end of the Renaissance, with the concept of children as mini adults still present, The Brothers Grimm, german academics, published obscene and harsh folklore of what would be considered unacceptable to children in today’s society. Following the Renaissance, the Victorian period depicted images of children as romanticised innocence of childhood. An example is John Millais’s painting of Bubbles in 1886.


Although uncertainties were raised amongst other historians in Aries’s findings that the existence of the concept of childhood as a specific phase of life was absent in the Medieval Ages. We do know that the concept of childhood changes over time and it is evidently “shaped by cultural and social practices and process” (Wells, 2009: pg1). Historically, the child was seen as “miniature adults, the child as a sinner, child as a property and the child as a school pupil” (Heywood, 2001: pg 13). It was not until towards the end of the 20th century that the perceptions of the child as social human beings, began to be accepted as a principle. Scandanavia today, are leaders in the global world in promoting equality and rights of children. In the Scandanavian Model, the concept of children springs from the sociological term citizenship. Thus regardless of voting rights, all citizens are equal members of society. Sommer, Samuelsson and Hundedide states, “Although young children do not match adults in terms of competence or experience they are still considered their equals”. This model may have influences that stemmed from Ellen Key’s The Century of the Child (1901). Key’s emphasises that children are individuals which have their own characteristics which adults should not have a desire to change, but to support their individualism. Furthermore she emphasises that children should be treated equally as adults. Key states, “to treat the child as really one's equal, that is, to show him the same consideration, the same kind confidence one shows to an adult. It means not to influence the child to be what we ourselves desire him to become but to be influenced by the impression of what the child himself is; not to treat the child with deception, or by the exercise of force, but with the seriousness and sincerity proper to his own character (Key, 1901: pg 30). Another key theorist, Jean Piaget focuses on cognitive thinking and emphasises constructivism, that children are and capable of being active thinkers, that they make meaning from their experiences and are able to construct more advanced understandings of the world around them.


Children’s lives are then affected and shaped by social and cultural expectations of what is considered childhood normalities within a particular time and place. These expectations posed by adults and their peers are usually shaped by many factors external to the child. Thus childhood is socially constructed and “children’s lives are profoundly shaped by constructions of childhood, whether in conformity, resistance, or reinvention” (Wells, 2009: pg2).


Although the concept of childhood is socially constructed and varies between cultures and societies, similar characteristics of children extends universally. Such as their needs (dependancy on others for food, physical care, shelter, safety and hygiene) and limitations. Taking into consideration the above, would it be possible to determine a global form of childhood? There are many contributing factors which determine and shape the extent of childhood. These factors may include local and global influences, such as media and the representation of children. Above local laws, there are also interntional insitutions and international laws which aid in governing different aspects of what is considered acceptable or not within childhood. The Convention of the Rights of the Child, a global law which concerns the rights of children universally, except for USA and Somalia, the only two countries which have yet to sign the convention. Wells states, “increasingly the Convention on the Rights of the Child is being incorporated into national law, changing the legal definitions of childhood as well as establishing in law rights and responsibilities that may be at odds with socially or culturally prevalent models of childhood” (Wells, 2009: pg 3). Although there are international laws implemented to reinforce the rights of children globally, as well as the universal similarities of children, according to Wells, “in one sense, history and social studies suggest that there cannot be a global form of childhood” (Wells, 2009: pg 5).


For example, through my experiences in Australian primary schools and my teaching practice placement within a Swedish primary school, the views of child perspective and childhood differentiates significantly. As a comparison to Australia, it feels as though children are treated as equals to adults here in Sweden. Ellen Key’s notion of the child is evident in Swedish primary schools, the freedom to address the teacher by his or her first name, the freedom to interact with teachers, such as eating together and even touching on a friendly basis, trust and confidence in children to operate industrial machinery and tools in Sloyd. On the contrary, these factors would not be possible in Australia (Craftwork-Sloyd begins in highschool). Child perspective in Australia revolves around the notion of the child being vulnerable, inexperienced and inferior to adults.


It is also evident in the classroom setting, where Swedish primary schools have a more mature setting with less decorations (according to my observations), whereas Australian primary school classroom settings appear to child-like, with decorations and colourful drawings and paintings.


Thus child perspective between these two cultures differs significantly. To reiterate, child perspective and childhood have changed throughout the centuries, our perception of child perspective and childhood correlates to a specific time and place. Child perspectives and the concept of childhood are driven culturally and are a social construct. In addition, the representation of children differs worldwide based upon a particular culture and society. From the moment a child is born, they are influenced by cultural and social expectations and formalities within their culture. Heywood states, “Any idea of a purely natural child becomes difficult to sustain once it is realized that children readily adapt to their own particular environment, the product of assorted historical, geographical, economic and cultural forces.” “Childhood is thus to a considerable degree a function of adult expectations” (Heywood, 2001: pg 9)