|
SoundOut is an
expert assistance program focused on promoting
Student Voice and Meaningful Student Involvement
throughout education.
We work with K-12
schools, districts, state and provincial education
agencies, and nonprofit education organizations
across the United States and Canada.
|
<Back
to Articles
Expanding on
the Key Characteristics
of Meaningful Student Involvement
By
Adam Fletcher
When I first drafted the "Key
Characteristics" of meaningful student involvement in 2003 my
mental map was inundated with the pressures of No Child Left
Behind, and I was simply unclear about the power the necessity
of defining the edges of the puzzle. I had studied James Banks'
Dimensions of Multicultural Education, and was determined to
wrap my head around what the parameters of meaningful student
involvement could be.
In the following article I expand on the "Key
Characteristics", first published in a shorter form in the Meaningful Student
Involvement Guide to Students as Partners in School Change. By expanding on
them, my hope is that they become a larger tool that is more effective in
identifying, implementing, sustaining and critically reflecting on the power of
student voice throughout education.
Key Characteristics of Meaningful
Student Involvement
-
School-wide approaches
- All students in all grades are meaningfully involved throughout their
education, including their learning experiences, classroom management,
interactions with peers and adults throughout the school, and ongoing throughout
their educational careers. This may include becoming engaged in education
system-wide planning, research, teaching, evaluation, decision-making, and
advocacy. It may also mean partnerships between students and adults in learning
communities; student-specific roles in building leadership, and; intentional
programs designed to increase student efficacy as partners in school
improvement.1
-
High levels of student authority
- The ideas, knowledge, opinions and experiences of students are validated and
authorized through adult acknowledgement of students’ ability to improve
schools. This should reflect a schools' commitment to
intergenerational equity in sustainable activities, comprehensive planning
and effective assessments that measure shared and individual perceptions and
outcomes of meaningful student involvement.2
-
Interrelated strategies
- Students are incorporated into ongoing, sustainable school improvement
activities in the form of learning, teaching, and leadership in schools. Every
school should be in a continuous mode of improvement; every single improvement
effort should seek nothing less than to engage students. Meaningful student
involvement allows a practical avenue towards that engagement, opening up doors
for classroom teachers, building principals and other adults in schools to fully
and completely partner with students. Each of these strategies should be
integrated with a building's school improvement plan, as well as their regular
policies, in order to encourage collaboration among stakeholders - particularly
students.3
-
Sustainable structures of support
- Policies and procedures are created and amended
to promote meaningful student involvement throughout schools. Sustainability
within schools cannot be seen solely through a structural lens; instead, it must
happen with the intermixing of culture and structure. The characteristics above
deal with the first; this characteristic addresses the latter. These structures
of support may include student action centers that train students and provide
information to student/adult partners; curriculum specifically designed to teach
students about school improvement and student action, and; fully-funded, ongoing
programs that support meaningful student involvement.4
-
Personal commitment - Students and adults must acknowledge their mutual
investment, dedication, and benefit, visible in learning, relationships,
practices, policies, and school culture. This builds community and connection
among partners who may have previously seen "the other" as different and
separate, both in intention and action. That may be particularly true among
low-income students, students-of-color and low-achieving students in buildings
where predominately white, upper-income and/or high achieving students have been
perceived as having greater value or more importance than other learners.
Sharing and re-affirming personal commitment is a powerful characteristic of
meaningful student involvement.5
-
Strong learning connections
- Classroom learning and student involvement are connected by classroom credit,
ensuring relevancy for educators and significance to students. Meaningful
student involvement should not be an "add-on" strategy for educators - it should
be integrated throughout their daily activities. Classroom teachers should
acknowledge exceptional projects and involvement by students with credit, just
as they acknowledge service learning activities - because meaningful student
involvement is a service learning activity. The difference is that students
focus on schools, the way John Dewey intended when he originally wrote about the
structure of schooling in Democracy and Education.6
Closing considerations
Meaningful student involvement can help meet the
goals of learning in all schools by dramatically re-envisioning the roles of
students throughout education. These characteristics can bring schools towards
the first steps of finding their footing - SoundOut can help, too. Contact our
office at (360)753-2686 or email info at soundout.org for more information.
Footnotes
1. Michael
Fullan is a widely recognized expert on the necessity of school-wide approaches
to school improvement. See Fullan, M. (2000). "The three stories of education
reform," Phi Delta Kappan, 81(8), 581-584.
2.
I always defer to Alison
Cook-Sather's expertise on student authority. See Cook-Sather, A. (2002).
"Authorizing students' perspectives: Toward trust, dialogue, and dhange in
education," Educational Researcher 31(4).
3. In 2005 I wrote about this for
the Washington State Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction. See
"How to Meaningfully Involve
Students in School Improvement," in
School Improvement Process Guide,
(2005) by Washington State
Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction: Olympia, WA.
4. I found White, C. and Crump, S.
(1993) "Education and the three 'P's: Policy, politics and practice: A review of
the work of S. J. Ball," British Journal of Sociology of Education, 14(4)
pp. 415-429 useful for understanding the role of policy in creating sustainable
conditions in schools.
5. This is reflected in
what Peter Senge calls "personal mastery".
In The Fifth Displine Senge writes,
“People with a high level of personal mastery are acutely aware of their
ignorance, their incompetence, their growth areas. And they
are deeply self-confident." See the
Society for
Organizational Learning website for
more information.
6. Learn more about the value of service learning
from
Cipolle, Susan (2004) "Service-learning as a counter-hegemonic practice:
Evidence pro and con," Multicultural Education, 11(3), 12-23. Also,
curriculum maps can be a useful tool to identify curricular connections in
meaningful student involvement.
About SoundOut
SoundOut has worked in more than 100 K-12 schools and districts
across the United States and around the world. Learn more
about us,
and for more information
contact us.
|