Time, things, teacher, pupil: engaging with what matters

Abstract

This article presents an empirical study of everyday life in school and a methodological attempt to emphasise children’s views and to find ways other than representation to analyse them. The empirical portion took place in a Finnish elementary school in which the author was the class teacher. The ten-year-olds in the class engaged in an unstructured classroom diary activity in which they freely wrote their observations, thoughts and stories. The study takes a relational materialist approach to the children’s writings focusing on various moments and gatherings in the classroom as assemblages and illustrates how time, things, teacher and pupils are co-produced in them. Temporality and materiality are also considered in relation to research methodologies. Research with children is reconceptualised based on the focus on mattering. The analysis is enacted as a non-linear and nomadic process through retelling and responding to the children’s texts. It highlights particular situations, unstabilities, ‘tiny’ things and the complexities of children’s lives in educational environments.

Keywords:

• Assemblage
• research with children
• time
• classroom diaries
• mattering

Funding

This work was supported by the Jenny ja Antti Wihurin Rahasto; Suomen Akatemia [grant number 1134911]; Suomen Kulttuurirahasto.

Notes

1. The activity was called ‘classroom diaries’ in the school context, but in the research context it has been conceptualised as ‘children writing ethnography’ (see Hohti, 2016a).

2. The children’s classroom diaries are presented here as sentences on separate lines: this analytical step will be dealt with in section 3. All the texts written by the children have been translated by Johannes Ihamuotila, 11, and Anna Ihamuotila, 14.

3. It is important to note that this kind of classroom discussion is always dominated by the louder voices, with some children remaining quieter, so that it is not possible to be sure that the enthusiasm expressed was shared by all. But nor could any questionnaire or interview prove that unanimous enthusiasm was really the case.