Sociopolitical development of private school children mobilising for disadvantaged others

Abstract

A contemporary focus on democratic decision-making has occurred in school science through curricular developments such as socioscientific issues (SSIs) and Science, Technology, Society and Environment (STSE), creates opportunities for inclusion of activist education. However, it appears these components are often taught, if at all, as simply add-on content. Private schools represent a domain of education that has received relatively little attention in research literature regarding sociopolitical activism for addressing SSIs. In this study, we aimed to document the extent to which private school students were able to implement socioscientific activism and to map their socio-political development in the context of a project on child labour. Data collected from student projects and interviews indicate, in many cases, dramatic development of socially critical views and activist orientations that took place over time, and in various steps. A discussion of the factors enabling students' activist development, such as the school culture, the curriculum, and their teacher, are discussed.

Critical consciousness in children and adolescents: A systematic review, critical assessment, and recommendations for future research.

“…Focusing on a population occupying positions of (economic) privilege, Hoeg, Lemelin, and Bencze (2015) reported on the use of a social sciences curriculum with affluent 6th grade students attending a private school. Children in the study participated in a research project focused on child labor; as part of the project, they read about democracy, child labor, and human rights, conducted their own primary and secondary research, and developed a multimedia project on the issues they had studied.…”

‘You've Been Framed’: A critical review of academic discourse on philanthrocapitalism

“…When exploring specific areas of philanthrocapitalist activities, education stands out; it has received the most attention and is examined in relation to numerous facets including policymaking (Ball & Olmedo, 2011), activism (Hoeg et al., 2015) and curricula setting (Allen & Bull, 2018). Key points identified include philanthrocapitalism being used by private individuals and institutions to direct education policies (Klees, 2017), recast schoolchildren as marketplace labourers (Brown, 2012) and prioritize business values and objectives (Hursh, 2017).…”

Intersectional politicization: A facet of youth activists' sociopolitical development

“…Watts and colleagues developed the original SPD theory based on a study of a group of Black high school sophomores from “an impoverished section of a midwestern city” (Watts et al, 1999, p. 274). Since then, SPD theory has been applied in a variety of settings, including schools (Hoeg et al, 2015; Hope & Jagers, 2014; Seider et al, 2018) and youth organizing groups (Nicholas et al, 2019), and it has been studied with different samples of young people (e.g., Dull, 2021). Nonetheless, “empirical examinations of SPD in youth have primarily focused on Black and Latinx youth” (Anyiwo et al, 2020, p. 87).…”