Childhood and Education in the United States and Russia

Sociological and Comparative Perspectives

Katerina Bodovski

• Publisher: Emerald Publishing Limited
• Year: 2019
• ISBN:
  9781787439337
• Topic: Pedagogía
• Subtopic: Educación comparada

Current tensions between the U.S. and Russia are at their highest since the end of the Cold War. In such circumstances, it is imperative to go beyond headlines and rhetoric and take a closer look at the texture of Russian and American societies. Childhood and Education in the United States and Russia provides a rich illustration of the social processes within these countries. Through an extensive interdisciplinary literature review and quantitative analyses of both national and international datasets, this book sheds light on three main areas. Firstly, it explores the extent to which the institution of education intersects with the institution of childhood in Russia and the U.S. Secondly, the author provides an illuminating study of how childhood is stratified by the social background into which a child is born in Russia and the U.S. Finally, this book gives new insight into how we observe the strengthening of children's agency, both in theoretical developments in sociology of education and childhood, and educational practice and parental strategies. By discussing education and childhood from a sociological perspective with a focus on similarities and differences by time and place, this book will prove an invaluable resource for students and researchers in the fields of Sociology of Education, Sociology of Childhood and International Education.

PART 1:ESTABLISHING THEORETICAL TOOLS

Chapter 1

Childhood and Education Intertwined

What is childhood? A period of life between birth and the age of 18, which in most parts of the world is considered the official beginning of adulthood.³ Yet, in the discipline of sociology, one would go beyond the biological definitions and examine the cultural and social meaning behind this category. Berger and Luckmann (1966) introduced the idea that social reality is socially and culturally constructed. In other words, rather than attributing the societal structures and relationships to natural forces or religious authorities, sociologists have shown that human society defines and redefines its institutions, allowing change over time and differences across places. Childhood is perceived as a period of time during which a new generation of future members of a given society is socialized, educated, and prepared to take upon themselves adult roles. Time and place modify the types of knowledge, skills, and values transmitted and the ethical codes endorsed. The conversations about race or LGBTQ rights we are having today would be inconceivable in America of the 1950s, while many attitudes of the 1950s are perceived incomprehensible now.

Aries (1962) provided a historical analysis of childhood and family life, identifying distinct stages in how children have been perceived throughout history. Analyzing medieval art, Aries argued that up to the thirteenth century a distinct concept of childhood has not existed. He coins the period between the thirteenth and sixteenth century a “coddling period” because children were depicted as sweet innocent beings, semi-angels in need of protection. As a reaction to and a response for the perceptions of the coddling period, the “moralistic period” took place between the sixteenth and eighteenth centuries. In a complete reversal of ideas, children are now perceived as evil, immature beings, in need of moral guidance and strict discipline. Parents were held responsible before society and before God for their children's souls and characters. Aries linked such changes in perceptions to demographic shifts from extended to nuclear family and the appearance of educational institutions with its age-graded idea of grouping children into classrooms (Corsaro, 2011). From that point on, schools made a profound effect on the concept of children and their place within the family by introducing the school demands to the family calendar.

Hays (1996) traces the history of childhood in America, essentially continuing Aries's typology. The New England Puritans brought their ideas regarding child-rearing to the New World from the very core of the moralistic period in Europe, promoting harsh punishments and reinforcement of obedience to parents and the church. According to Hays, the end of the eighteenth century – beginning of the nineteenth century – is characterized by the idea of a child as “an innocent redeemer”: psychological manipulations and efforts to instill consciousness will bring the desirable results. The second half of the nineteenth century witnesses the return of some of the elements from the coddling period: children are again precious innocent beings, in need of affectionate persuasion or withdrawal of love to modify their behavior. The progressive era of the first half of the twentieth century brings the experts to the conversation of children and child-rearing: mothers need to be trained to do the right thing, children need to have strict schedules, and misbehavior is to be handled in a detached manner of various scientific techniques. Finally, toward the end of the twentieth century, the Western society enters the permissive era: children are subjected to the “child-centered, experts-guided, emotionally absorbing, labor intensive and financially expensive” mothering (Hays, 1996, p. 54).

Obviously, both Aries's and Hays's typologies are to a great degree “ideal types” in the Weberian sense – analytical typologies based on the prevalent patterns; throughout each historical period, deviations from these typologies existed. The critics of the linear history of childhood argue that this view is representative of the dominant groups (white middle class majority in America and European middle class). These are the groups whose accounts of history in a shape of art, literature, and diaries we can analyze today. Given who was literate in those premodern times and who could have a leisure of writing diaries, our view is understandably skewed toward more advantaged groups. Numerous accounts of additional or alternative versions of childhood exist today (see for instance, Lester Alston (1992) and David Wiggins' (1985) work on slave children; David Nasaw's (1985) Newsies, Linda Pollock's (1983) Forgotten Children; Barbara Hanawalt's (1993) Growing up in Medieval London).

But what is interesting despite the variation is the evolution of the concept of childhood and changes in how children – their role in the family and their needs – have been perceived and constructed, often in response to other changes in society (economic, demographic, social, and cultural). Among these changes, the role of educational institutions is truly fascinating because schools separated children from adults and placed them into a distinct category called “students.” Schools came to define the family calendar with progressively more time devoted to schooling: from just a few years of several months during agricultural off-season to master basic literacy and arithmetic, to a nine-month long academic year for over a decade of children's life. In preindustrialized times, children had a specific utilitarian purpose: they were born and raised to help in the household (girls with the house chores and with raising younger siblings, boys for help in farming or trade). Postindustrialized times brought about a new idea of valuing the economically “useless” but emotionally “priceless” child, a change that took place around the turn of the twentieth century (Zelizer, 1994). Attending school and doing well academically have become children's main task in the modern Western world. No longer active or permanent participants in the household economy – family assets – children now are born and raised for the value of their own, to be loved and cared for, and to bring emotional pleasure to their parents and grandparents.

Interestingly, such changes took place in the first decades of the twentieth century, which was also characterized by fast expansion of primary and secondary education in the West. The tight connection between childhood and the institution of education has been sealed in the second half of the twentieth century, around the time when a relatively long compulsory schooling had been introduced all over the world. Mass education, first prevalent in the core of the European and North American countries, gradually spilled over the rest of the world (Dorius, 2013; Meyer, Ramirez, Rubinson, & Boli-Bennett, 1977). Notably, Zelizer (2005) expanded her original argument that children in contemporary society are no longer directly useful to their families economically and agreed with Qvortrup (2005) that schooling has become children's work not only due to the later benefits that an investment in education can bring but also for the sake of prestige and status that children's academic success bestows on their families.

The massive expansion of education, including higher education, throughout the twentieth century and a rapid increase of population with college degree changed society in many ways. In his book The Schooled Society (2014), David Baker argues that the exposure of majority of population throughout the world to mass schooling created “an extensive and robust culture of education that has come to influence all facets of life” (p. 2). He continues: “the education revolution has produced a world where education is an independent social institution that shapes significant parts of all other core institutions in society (Baker, 2014, p. 2, emphasis in the original). Education does not just change the ways jobs are offered, capital is made, or authority is exercised. It ultimately changed the ways people perceive themselves, others, and their behavior and to a great extent, define success and failure. For instance, Baker argues that “a new model of society holds that secondary education has become a necessity to be a modern person” (2014, p. 227). Baker also argues that, contrary to the common belief that education and participation in the organized religions should be reversely correlated, during the twentieth century the US population experienced a drastic increase in education while holding constant a very high degree of religious participation. To solve this seemingly paradoxical finding, Baker suggests that education changed the way people perceive God, religion, and their participation in it. As a result, it changed the institution of religion itself. The same line of reasoning can be used to argue that the institution of education changed parenting in terms of expected roles and content. Better-educated parents both are more likely to consult experts and ask for advice if needed, and to feel empowered to form their own opinions and exercise their preferences. They are more likely to see their children as autonomous human beings with their own interests, talents, and skills to be developed. Sociological studies have indeed shown that more educated parents emphasize the individual characteristics of their children, highlight their unique features and talents, and advocate on their behalf vis-à-vis the educational system, whereas low-educated parents either feel frustrated and misunderstood by the system or promote conformity and obedience (Gillies, 2005, 2006; Lareau, 2011). Since family and school are the two main institutions children are influenced by and spend most of their time in, the culture of education has reshaped both. Education changed the ways children's life is now structured, but it also reinforced the social class differences (that are largely based on educational attainment) in how children are raised.

Education is not the only force that affected the shift in the perception of children. Prior to the 1970s, developmental psychology, cultural anthropology, and sociology equally perceived children as the objects of inquiry and as the opportunity to see the cultural and social norms being reconstructed and recreated rather than agents in their own right (James, 2009). Social changes of the 1960s, including anticolonial, feminist, and human rights movements, challenged the dominant paradigm within social sciences. Additionally, as James (2009, p. 39) explains, more attention in sociology turned to the equal necessity to explain the social structures and the individual actors' choices and behaviors within them. It is within this structure versus agency axis that childhood studies emerged.

Parallel to these transformations within social sciences are the international efforts to define and establish children's rights, beginning with the Leagues of Nations' Declaration of the Rights of the Child in 1924 that was mostly concerned with child hunger in the aftermath of WWI. Next, in 1948 the United Nations founded UNICEF, followed by Declaration of the Rights of the Child in 1959 that focused on protection and free education. The year 1979 was declared the International Year of the Child to draw public attention to the issue of the world's children. These efforts eventually culminated in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) that was adopted in 1989 and focused on provision, protection, and participation (Freeman, 2009, 2014; Wyness, 2006). Freeman (2009) suggests that even UNCRC should be seen “as the beginning rather than a final word on children's rights” (p. 388), as it does not sufficiently address gender issues (girls' rights), sexual orientation issues (rights of the gay children), nor does it ensure or reinforce the proper implementation of the declared rights. As he states: “rights require remedies, and remedies require the injection of resources” (Freeman, 2014, p. 9).

The CRC not only affected a legal framework through which children are seen but also challenged and changed educational perceptions and pedagogical practices. In their analysis of the legal framework and history of CRC in the last 25 years, Coppock and Gillett-Swan (2016) write that we have witnessed a shift in the paradigm of how society views children and the new approach that perceives children as autonomous beings and social actors (pp. 8–9). Children are entitled to fundamental human rights that need to be addressed both at home and in school. One of the contributions to the volume specified the implementation of Article 12 of the CRC in the Finnish classroom. Article 12 assures that “the child who is capable of forming his or her own views has the right to express these views freely in all matters affecting the child, the views of the child will be given due weight in accordance with the age and maturity of the child.” Although that article targets primarily the judicial and administrative proceedings, it is certainly interesting that the Finnish educators applied it to the classroom situation. One of the models discussed in the chapter is by Lundy (2007) who argues that four elements should be present in the classroom: “space (children must be given an opportunity to express a view); voice (children must be facilitated to express their view); audience (the views must be listened to); and influence (the views must be acted upon as appropriate)” (Niemi, Kumpulainen, & Lipponen, 2016).

This is a fundamental change not only from a teacher-centered to a child-centered learning framework; it indicates the institutionalization of student voice in educational practice. These changes did not occur overnight or even over a decade. The seeds of these ideas can be found in Montessori schools that started in 1907 to serve disadvantaged kids and in Reggio Emilia's approach after WWII that centered on students and considered the teacher and the student as co-learners. Remarkably, the last two decades of research on student voice resulted in the establishment of a specific outlet, the International Journal of Student Voice.⁴

Education plays a crucial role in defining the modern idea of childhood. The World Summit for Children that took place in 1990, right after the adoption of UNCRC, laid the foundation for practice for years to come. Specifically, Article 28 of CRC recognizes the right of the child to education and urges the parties to facilitate and ensure the following:

• a)“Make primary education compulsory and available free to all;
• b)Encourage the development of different forms of secondary education, including general and vocational education…;
• c)Make higher education accessible to all on the basis of capacity by every appropriate means;
• d)Make educational and vocational information and guidance available and accessible to all children;
• e)Take measures to encourage regular attendance at schools and the reduction of drop-out rates.”

Article 29 continues to relate to education and specifies its goals as follows:

• a)“The development of the child's personality, talents and mental and physical abilities to their fullest potential;
• b)The development of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and for the principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations;
• c)The development of respect for the child's parents, his or her own cultural identity, language and values, for the national values of the country in which the child is living, the country from which he or she may originate, and for civilizations different form his or her own;
• d)The preparation of the child for responsible life in a free society, in the spirit of understanding, peace, tolerance, equality of sexes, and friendship among peoples, ethic, national and religious groups and persons of indigenous origin;
• e)The development of respect for the natural environment.”

As such, the goals of education are now perceived as intertwined with fundamental children's rights. The access to and the right for primary, secondary, and higher education based on a person's capacity are at the core of the modern understanding of what it means to be a child and what modern societies are supposed to provide for their children. Furthermore, it is a society's responsibility to ensure that children's personalities, talents, and abilities are actualized to their full potential.

Indeed, the right for education has become a cornerstone of international policy and development. Echoing the CRC and strengthening the education core, the Education for All (EFA), a “global commitment to provide quality basic education for all children, youth, and adults” (UNESCO website), was launched at the World Conference on Education for All in 1990 in Jomtien, Thailand by UNESCO, UNDP, UNICEF, and the World Bank. At the World Education Forum in 2000 in Dakar, Senegal, representatives of 164 countries pledged to achieve the following goals by 2015:

• “Goal 1
  Expanding and improving comprehensive early childhood care and education, especially for the most vulnerable and disadvantaged children.
  Goal 2
  Ensuring that by 2015, all children, particularly girls, children in difficult circumstances, and those belonging to ethnic minorities, have access to complete, free, and compulsory primary education of good quality.
  Goal 3
  Ensuring that the learning needs of all young people and adults are met through equitable access to appropriate learning and life skills programs.
  Goal 4
  Achieving a 50% improvement in levels of adult literacy by 2015, especially for women, and equitable access to basic and continuing education for all adults.
  Goal 5
  Eliminating gender disparities in primary and secondary education by 2005 and achieving gender equality in education by 2015, with a focus on ensuring girls' full and equal access to and achievement in basic education of good quality.
  Goal 6
  Improving all aspects of the quality of education and ensuring excellence of all so that recognized and measurable learning outcomes are achieved by all, especially in literacy, numeracy, and essential life skills.” (UNESCO website)
  UNESCO leads the monitoring of the progress the countries make toward these goals through the UNESCO Institute of Statistics and a yearly publication of the Global Monitoring Report. By the year 2015, about one-third of the countries achieved the goals. Currently, the international efforts are directed toward global agenda for sustainable development Education 2030. Going into the details of policy documentation is not a goal of this book; but the developments described above show just how powerful the conversation on education has become and how high it is on the international agenda.
  In the recent work, Schaub, Henck, and Baker (2017) set to investigate the emerging global ideology of the “whole child” by analyzing 65 years of policy documents from the multilateral agency UNICEF (United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund). Founded by the United Nations in 1946 in the aftermath of WWII as an agency to assist emergency needs of children in Europe and China, UNICEF has become a leading international actor to promote, advocate, and assist children with an annual budget exceeding $3 billion. Schaub et al. (2017) describe the evolution of the agency's mission that began in its focus on children's protection (fighting famine and disease by providing nutrition, clean water, and addressing health needs of children), preparation (in the form of education), and finally self-actualization of the whole child (the need to address physical, cognitive, and psychological development of a multidimensional child). These ideological shifts are reflected ...