Making Society Bounce with People Living in the Margins (Serialized Column / Chapter 2)
The School Community and Children's Agency
In the previous column (Chapter 1), I organized my thoughts on the nature of community from the perspective of "designing without eroding individual agency".
I feel that this way of thinking can be applied directly not only to adult spaces but also to elementary and junior high schools, which are "environments where children spend a long time."
Agency is something to be "protected," not "cultivated"
When we talk about children's agency, words like "fostering independence," "developing the ability to think for oneself," and "encouraging proactive learning" tend to come up.
However, I think that children are already more than proactive enough to begin with.
What they are interested in, what games they choose, how they feel and express themselves... children are inherently beings who "choose," "experiment," and "assign meaning."
Despite this, they are given the correct answers in advance, made to avoid failure excessively, and have their behavior adjusted by evaluations and grades. Because of this accumulation, agency is sometimes chipped away little by little before it even has a chance to grow.
Perhaps agency is not a power to be newly planted, but something that is maintained by an attitude of "not taking away what was already there".
Is the school also fully committed to being a "stage"?
Last time, I described a community by saying, "The protagonists are each individual, and the space is merely a stage." I wonder if this composition applies directly to schools as well.
Originally, the protagonists should be the "children," the school should be the "stage," and the teachers should be the "supporters."
However, in reality, it seems there are "moments when the system becomes the protagonist," such as curricula, evaluation systems, school rules, and management.
As a result, situations arise where children are replaced from being "beings who learn" to "objects to be managed."
Wouldn't it be far more organic for a school to be a "place where order emerges as a result of children growing up as themselves" rather than a "place where children are made to adapt for the sake of order"?
When being a "good child" erodes agency
Children often try to be "good children" by "being praised by the teacher," "not being scolded," or "not disrupting the atmosphere."
That in itself is a noble attitude. However, if a "structure where suppressing one's own feelings becomes the right thing to do" intensifies, I become a little worried.
Saying "I'm fine" even though you actually hate it
Saying "I want to do it" even though you don't want to
Silently complying despite having doubts
When only the ability to meet external expectations grows in this way, autonomy becomes masked under the name of 'cooperativeness'.
Autonomy is neither selfishness nor rebellion. Isn't it
the power to not betray one's own senses?
My report cards during elementary and junior high school were consistently marked with 'lacks cooperativeness'.
Even so, thanks to my parents sensing somewhere that I didn't want to betray my own senses, I was never scolded for that point. Looking back, that experience is one of the precious memories that supported my autonomy.
What education needs is 'margins' rather than 'correctness'
School education tends to prioritize 'correct answers,' 'efficiency,' and 'reproducibility' above all else.
However, I strongly believe that autonomy is nurtured through the repetition of 'hesitation,' 'detours,' 'waste,' and 'failure'.
Instead of giving answers immediately or passing judgment right away, we should leave room for children to keep thinking about 'what they want to do' and 'how they feel'.
This is very similar to the attitude of 'not over-hyping' and 'not forcing participation' in community management, as I mentioned in the previous column.
The idea of 'creating an environment' rather than 'instruction'
I feel that autonomy is something that grows naturally within an 'environment where one can choose with peace of mind' rather than being born from instructions or guidance.
Not being denied even if you fail
Not being laughed at even if you express an opinion
Not being excluded even if you don't participate
Such an environment is shaped by 'what is not forced' rather than 'what is made to be done'.
This overlaps deeply with the community concept of 'design that does not erode individual autonomy'.
Being 'trusted' rather than 'guided'
Adults tend to...
Want to show the right path
Want to prevent failure
Want to help by getting ahead of things
However, isn't it true that for a child, being trusted to choose for themselves is more empowering than being taught the 'correct answer'? isn't that the case?
That is not the same as neglect.
It is an attitude of watching over and engaging with them, while still not depriving them of the 'right to choose'.
Trusting a child actually requires great courage.
That is why it is difficult.
Still, I want to keep in mind that guiding them can easily become 'depriving them of the right to choose'.
School does not have to be the 'center of a child's life'
Just like a community, school does not need to be the center of a child's life. Rather, I want it to be a place that gently provides expansion without taking over the center of their life.
If school becomes a place that 'determines a child's value,' 'fixes their future,' or 'selects their possibilities,' it will likely become a place that narrows their potential rather than one that nurtures their agency.
What is required of both communities and schools may not be the 'power to make people act as one wishes,' but rather the 'margin that allows people to continue standing on their own'.
For people to remain the protagonists, rather than the place itself becoming the protagonist
To trust and delegate rather than to manage
To not deprive rather than to guide
It is only in such an environment that both children and adults can lead a 'life they are satisfied with' rather than a 'life for someone else's expectations'.
If it is a hardship one takes on willingly, there is satisfaction and growth in it.
However, if one only continues to face hardships imposed by others, one might eventually lean toward a 'life lived to meet someone else's expectations' or a 'way of living that only seeks rewards'.
That is precisely why I sincerely hope that more adults will value 'not depriving' over 'instilling'.
[Making Society Bounce with People Living in the Margins] Serial Structure
Introduction | Starting a conversation about loosening up on 'doing things properly'
Chapter 1 | How a community can exist without infringing on individual agency
Chapter 2 | The school community and children's agency (This article)
Chapter 3 | Rethinking the 'first community': the family
Chapter 4 | The struggle of parents who don't want to deprive but end up taking away the margins
Final Chapter | Parents living their own lives set their children free
Backstage, Inc.
Culture Formation Designer
Yoshinori Kawai
#IdealismIsFine
#ValueGroupOverWinningGroup
#RocknRollWorkEthic
#DontGetTheEffortWrong
#SelfSwitch