Facilitating and Supporting Meaningful Student Voice in Middle and High Schools

• In Event: Empowering Student Voice in Educational Practice: Student Voice to Student Outcomes

Abstract

Objectives
Historically, students have been excluded from school decision-making processes. Recent research shows the benefits of incorporating student voice to improve curricula, instruction practices, and graduation rates. However, student voice practices do not expand in a vacuum. Additionally, research shows that adults play an important role in facilitating student voice practices. This paper focuses on the role of adults in supporting and facilitating student voice in middle and high schools. Specifically, it distinguishes between meaningful and non-meaningful student voice practices that occur in schools.

Perspective
Our research questions were guided by youth researchers and how they interpreted meaningful and non-meaningful student voice. This paper explores the ways adults facilitate and support student voice in schools, and what disingenuous engagement with student voice practices looks like. This paper also defines key themes that categorize meaningful and non-meaningful student voice.

Data Sources and Methods
Our data was gathered through student focus groups (N = 10) and interviews with educators and school administrative staff (N = 7). We analyzed qualitative data using thematic analysis to understand how students’, teachers’, and school administrators’ perspectives of student voice practices could be organized into meaningful/ non-meaningful student voices. The codebook was co-created with youth researchers to identify student voice themes that were meaningful to them based on their lived experience. Interviews were coded in Dedoose and then organized into major themes explored in the paper.

Findings
From the qualitative data, excerpts were categorized into either meaningful or non-meaningful student voice. There are 170 excerpts total; 98 were coded in the “meaningful student voice” category and 72 were coded in the “non-meaningful student voice” category. In the results section, prominent subthemes within meaningful and non-meaningful student voice were explored. Two of the subthemes that were most frequently referenced in the meaningful voice data were “student self advocacy and initiative” and “meaningful inclusion” of student voice in school and classroom decisions. Two of the most referenced subthemes in the non-meaningful data were “superficial student voice opportunities” and “lack of student involvement in decision making.” From this data, students and adult partners can see common gaps and strengths that they can investigate in their own school communities.

Significance
This paper provides a broad overview of how students and adult partners perceive student voice practices. Through focus groups and interviews with students and staff, it is clear to see how opinions on student voice practices align and differ between these groups. By organizing these perspectives into thematic categories, this research can be used to understand which student voice practices are meaningful to all parties, and will help adult partners identify gaps and strengths for how they engage students in school decisions. Additionally, because this paper is guided by youth researchers, it presents one way to involve youth in research about student voice and other issues that impact them.

Authors

• Devan O'Toole, Child Trends

• Bailey Bonds, University of Mississippi

• Paula Akakpo, American University

• Samantha E. Holquist, Child Trends

• Jonathan Tansey

• Yosmary Rodriuez, Child Trends