Notions of success and life plans for children with displacement trajectories in Colombia: Challenges in formal and non-formal educational settings

• In Event: Education and Migrant Communities

Proposal

In Latin America, Colombia holds the highest rates of forced displacement with more than six million people who have been internally displaced due to high violence levels. Issues such as armed conflict, drug trafficking, and gang violence have driven people to look for new places to live and build their life plans. Forced migration implies that school-age children move with their families across the country to witness the transformation of their regular life patterns.
Drawing from ethnographical methods (diaries and semi-structured interviews), this research explores notions of success and life plan among children who have experienced forced migration. This study compares a formal and non-formal educational setting in Soacha – an area in the outskirts of Bogotá, Colombia, well-known for the historical presence of self-defense groups, gangs, guerrillas, and military forces (FAMIG, CODHES, & OIM, 2007).
This paper analyzes how children’s displacement trajectories and educational experiences at educational contexts influence the way they think about their future. In doing so, we consider two concepts: notions of success and life plan articulation. The importance of these terms is found on the notion of building a personal identity from previous experiences and with a prospective vision. Henao Gaviria (2015) analyzed the importance of religious accompaniment with the victims of armed conflict in Colombia. He identifies that “one goal of accompaniment is the active participation of communities in decision-making and strengthening their life-plans to deal with situations of violence” (p. 190). This is important because it is a way to promote resilience in children and adolescents who have experienced war and violence (Barber, 2009). Additionally, this paper intends to influence the educational practice to guide children with migration trajectories (Faris, 2013).
The first scenario is a primary school with a population of 240 students. The study was done with 40 students of 4th and 5th grades, considering an analysis of what they “want to do” after they finish primary school. In the non-formal educational setting, we examined a community-driven initiative in which school-age girls lead the efforts to construct a peaceful society. We held semi-structured interviews with students, teachers, parents, and school members (formal setting) and girls and community leaders (non-formal setting).
In this study, we recover three theoretical frameworks: Positive Psychology with the concept of flourishing (Fredrickson & Losada, 2005), the architecture of practices in education from Kemmis, Wilkinson, Edwards-Groves, Hardy, Grootenboer, & Bristol (2014), and futures in action (Mische, 2009). Flourishing means to feel good and do good (Catalino & Fredrickson, 2011; Fredrickson, 2013) within “…an optimal range of human functioning, one that connotes goodness, generativity, growth, and resilience” (Fredrickson & Losada, 2005). This viewpoint was enriched the theory of the architecture of practices in education (Kemmis et al, 2014), which are understood as the personal projects that occur in the present, but that are influenced by the past and directed toward the future. From these authors’ perspective, education is “…the practice by which children, young people, and adults are initiated into other practices” (Kemmis et al, 2014, p. 37). Finally, Mische (2009) promotes a sociological vision of the study of “future”, with the notions of projects and projectivity, as tools for social analysis to revive human agency.
The first finding is what children think about “being successful”. Juan, a student from fifth grade said: “For being someone in life, I need to study and go to university”. These ideas are related with the notion of flourishing and architectures of practice, in the sense that he wants to be successful and have well-being, but at the same time he intends to build a life plan from his past experiences and what he has heard from his parents and teachers.
Additionally, children’ notions of success and life-plan creation are permeated with the social context. Some of them expressed their desire to help their families and communities to “be out of their condition” of poverty, underdevelopment, and/or lack of education. One of the girl leaders in the community initiative said she “wanted to be a teacher to help others to achieve their goals and objectives”.
Finally, children mentioned that their objective was not “to make money” but to help their communities: With more safe spaces, economic integrity, and family’s well-being. When we asked Pedro, a fifth-grade student, if success was “earning money”, he firmly said “no”, because money “is acquired from liars and corruption that is shown in the government”. Also, he emphasized how the school has changed how he assesses opportunities in his context.
These observations could be analyzed from Fredrickson & Losada’s (2005), Kemmis’ et al (2014), and Mische’s (2009) perspective, because children are in the process of pursuing success within the definition of concrete projects to show their leadership and agency. This process takes place in their family and educational contexts, with discourses and examples of their relatives and teachers. Also, children learn how to think about their future and “what they want to be when they are grown up” with what they listen, observe, and learn at school and family settings.
Another element is how students are trained by their parents and teachers on “how to be successful”. During this stage of their lives, they learn how to flourish and reach well-being, but also on how to build projects that are crucial elements to make their goals a reality (Mische, 2009). Furthermore, the actions of teachers and parents evidence how the composition of a practice (sayings, doings, and relatings) (Kemmis et al, 2014) is essential to define priorities to educate the future generations.
We conclude that while forced displacement trajectories influence the way children think about the future, the educational setting, with the inclusion of different participants such as teachers, community leaders, and parents, plays a crucial role in the definition of goals and ideals in children’s lives. Thus, education has a pragmatic perspective to help children and their families improve their living conditions, a vision that is aligned with Kemmis’ et al (2014) objective of education: “To help people live well in a world worth living in” (p. 24).

Authors

• Noé Abraham González Nieto, Tecnologico de Monterrey

• Diana Rodríguez, Universidad de los Andes, Colombia