Browsing by Author "Tammi, Tuure"

The crucial questions that define democracy relate to its depth and width: who can participate in decision making and what kind of things can be commonly decided? Theories deeper than representative democracy emphasize discussion, in which by evaluating justifications it is possible to achieve consensus in ideal situation. The aim of my research is to develop tools for promoting the participation of third graders in decision making in the classroom. In addition I study the development of depth and width of democracy in the classroom, the development of skills and competencies in the decision making and the challenges of the project. My research method is participative action research. I collected my data between October 2007 and March 2008. I used videos and observation diaries as my primary data. Additional data consisted of the interviews of the students, the conversations between the adults and the material produced by the teacher. Since we discussed the matters students had highlighted in specific lessons, my analysis proceeds according to these lessons constructing a general view of the process. The width and depth of classroom democracy are difficult to define. Though the system we had created enabled third graders to discuss matters they found important the participation was unequal: some of the students couldn't among other things give justifications for their opinions. This poses challenges for models that emphasize deliberation since these theories presuppose that everyone has concordant competencies. But then again only critical citizens who are able to make justifications and to evaluate them are able to oppose indoctrination. This makes teaching these competencies justified. Different decision making procedures define the classroom democracy. Deliberation doesn't necessarily provide deeper information about the preferences of the participants than mere voting. But then again voting doesn't express the reasons which support one's preferences. Structured conversation can equalize the time used for every participant's opinions, but doesn't solve the challenge of unequal competencies. Children's suggestion box diversified the possibilities to participate, and also the silent ones used it during the research. The asymmetry in deliberation might also be caused by the social structure of the students. Teacher's directing and participation encouraging role in deliberation was significant. Diversifying the participation by different roles could equalize the asymmetry in participation.