Hi all,

I took the direction of my questions from the Saguisag and Prick paper, but realise, after having had read the Wall piece, that much of what I asked can also be drawn from the material there. So, though I have specifically picked up on text from the former, feel free to reference either in your respective responses. As well, I am a lazy creature who doesn’t re-read her work. I apologise for any typographical errors.

From Saguisag and Prick

• “Children make up roughly one-quarter of the global population, yet they are a political minority who are often neglected, exploited, and disenfranchised in many cultural settings (CIA Factbook).¹
  • One the first day of class, we discussed some of the myriad ideas of how “child,” is defined. Reflecting on both our own beliefs in the class’ nascence, and the discussions from the literature we’ve read, has your idea of “child” changed? This paper suggests by reference that “under the age of 24” can be a determiner? Why do you think this is?
  • Can we or do we have, solidify our nebulous ideas of a child, distinct from childhood, and give it a firm definition or constraints? How should these delimiters be defined and applied? Then in relation to childhood, if we have defined a child, what should that childhood look like. Should these ideas of childhood be child specific, family specific, societal determinations?
  • “It is worth asking then whether the CRC is a truly liberating and empowering institution, or if it expresses and idealizes a particular vision of childhood that is incommensurate with the experiences and desires of many children around the world.” Should (and/or are) the ideas of “the child” and “childhood,” (e.g. age, responsibilities, caretaker responsibility, etc) contextually or situationally contingent? –
• “Around the world, children are seen as too inexperienced and immature to be rights-bearing citizens and are thus often excluded from participating in civic, economic, and political spheres.”
  • If we have some agreement on the child and childhood (or not), then we can, in terms of these arguments, discuss the reaches of agency of, and authority over a child. Looking back to my last question about the ideas of childhood, and the spheres in which they can be structured, from where should the authority of agency extend – the parent? The school? The government?
  • “The CRC attempts to address these injustices by articulating children’s rights in four main ways: survival rights (i.e., the right to life and basic needs); development rights (i.e., the right to education, play, and access to information); protection rights (i.e., the right to be shielded from neglect and exploitation); and participation rights (i.e., the right to free expression, to free assembly, and to join social organizations).” -Should these understandings of authority (or agency) be codified? Should there be some intervening authority of agency? By this, I mean, that in some sense, authorities tend to be reactive, to a perceived wrong, not generally proactive in establishing correct models.   –  Is this something that we want? Need? Are there already prescriptive models of childhood?
• “As we see above, there are significant parallels between discourses of children’s literature and children’s rights.”
  • To what extent do you believe that this is a true/correct assertion? Why and how so?
  • Keeping in mind responses to, and your own ideas about the questions above, what is “child friendly language”?
  • In pondering the “hidden adult,” still thinking about our responses to some of these earlier questions, what role can and should would the child take in the formulation of text for children? Do you think that there exists a need for categories, whether distinct or inclusive of the pedagolical material, peculiar to children?