Commitment to student participation
Adult-led to student-led.
On this page:
In practice, student participation can happen across five levels, ranging from basic to high level, and from adult-led to student-led. Usually, the higher the level of student participation, the more meaningful it is to students.
The ladder of participation
Developed by Dr Roger Hart, the ladder of participation(external link) is a model for thinking about where children and young people are and where we would like them to be in terms of their involvement. This ladder does not suggest students have to be at the top rung, but rather we aim to move off the lower rungs of non-participation and think of ways to genuinely engage with them. This table gives examples of student voice at each level of involvement.
8 |
Students’ initiative, shared decisions with adults (student-adult partnership)Students have the ideas, set up the project and invite adults to join them in making decisions. Students are equal partners with the power to make positive changes based upon their own views and ideas, and access and learn from the life experience and expertise of adults. |
7 |
Student-initiated and directed (students’ initiative and leadership)Students initiate and direct the project themselves. Decision-making happens solely among the students. Adults are available, but do not take charge; adults provide students with the resources and information they need to achieve their views and ideas. |
6 |
Adult-initiated, shared decisions with studentsAdults have the initial idea, but the decision-making is shared with the students. Students are jointly involved in planning, designing and implementing the project. |
5 |
Adults make decisions, students are consulted and informedThe project is designed and run by adults. Students are not involved in the decision-making, but they are asked to share ideas to inform the decisions adults make. Students fully understand the process and how their advice will be used. They are kept informed of the decisions made by adults. |
4 |
Adult-led decision-making, students assigned but informedAdults decide on the project. Students are assigned tasks, which they volunteer for only after the purpose of the project has been explained. Students understand the project and know who decided they should be involved and why. |
3 |
Tokenism (participation for show)Students are asked to participate in a project run by adults, but do not fully understand the issues, the reason for the project, or what their contribution adds. Students appear to be given a voice, but in reality this is limited with little or no choice about planning the project and no time to critically reflect and form their own opinions. |
2 |
Decoration (students help implement adults’ initiatives)Students are used to support or ‘bolster’ a project in an indirect way (adults do not pretend that the project is inspired by students). E.g. taking part in an event but with no involvement in organising or understanding the project. Students have no role in decision-making. Involves, quite literally, decorating students. |
1 |
Manipulation (adults use students’ ideas and voices for their own gain)Adults consciously use students to support their own project but pretend it is inspired or supported by children and young people. Students do or say what adults suggest they do, but have no real understanding of the issues or how their actions contribute. Adults’ actions may be misguided rather than manipulative. |
Shared decision-making or student-only decision making?
In Roger Hart's Ladder of Participation student-initiated, shared decisions with adults is shown as the top form of participation, followed by student-initiated and directed.
Some consider that shared decision-making is most beneficial to both students and adults. Others think that students are most empowered when they are making decisions without the influence of adults – this doesn't necessarily exclude adults, but reduces their role to that of support.
Ultimately, it is up to each group to determine which form of decision-making best fits with their students’ needs.
Examples of bullying prevention and the ladder of participation
Degrees of participation |
||
8 |
Student-initiatied, shared decisions with adults |
Students develop a bullying prevention action plan and go to staff for advice and support. Staff do not direct – they listen and act as sounding boards for the ideas and plans of the students. |
7 |
Student initiated and directed |
Students decide to set-up a buddy scheme. They develop a plan and present it to the principal, who provides the necessary tools and resources to enable students to implement their scheme. |
6 |
Adult-initiated, shared decisions with students |
Adults decide to start a peer mediation project. Students are involved in decision-making and sharing project planning and implementation. |
5 |
Consulted and informed |
Students are consulted about an anti-bullying initiative designed and run by staff. They understand how their input will be used and are kept informed on decisions made. |
4 |
Assigned but informed |
Students are organised to participate in an anti-bullying activity. They are informed of its purpose and feel ownership of the issue. |
Degrees of non-participation |
||
3 |
Tokenism |
The school decides to make a video on bullying. Three students are given topics to consider. Staff record students’ feedback, editing out sections they decide not to include. |
2 |
Decoration |
Students attending an anti-bullying campaign are given t-shirts with slogans and told to line up for a group photo. Photo distributed to media as part of the launch. Students are not informed or do not understand why the photo is being taken. |
1 |
Manipulation |
Students take part in a bullying prevention role play and are given a prepared script to read from. The play is filmed and used to promote adults’ anti-bullying initiatives. |
Shared decision-making or student-only decision making?
In Roger Hart's Ladder of Participation student-initiated, shared decisions with adults is shown as the top form of participation, followed by student-initiated and directed.
Some consider that shared decision-making is most beneficial to both students and adults. Others think that students are most empowered when they are making decisions without the influence of adults – this doesn't necessarily exclude adults, but reduces their role to that of support.
Ultimately, it is up to each group to determine which form of decision-making best fits with their students’ needs.