Democracy and Early Childhood Education
Fitria Ulfah, Hani Yulindrasari and Vina Adriany
Graduate School of Early childhood education, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Bandung, Indonesia
Keywords: early childhood, democracy, Indonesia.
Abstract: Democracy conveys justice, equality, and inclusivity. Understanding democracy involves a long process of
learning about egalitarian values and rights. Young children are the future subjects of democracy and potential
agents of egalitarian society. Thus, the values of democracy should be introduced as early as possible to build
a comprehensive understanding of justice and equality in future generations. Democracy in early childhood
education (ECE) has drawn western scholars attention in the past view years. In Indonesian context, research
about democracy in ECE is very limited due to exclusive assumption that democracy is an adult subject. This
article analyses existing literature about democracy in early childhood education. It investigates the theoretical
framework and methodology used in the related research to develop insights to start researching democracy
in Indonesian early childhood education.
1 INTRODUCTION
Democratization in Indonesia started in 1998 after the
fall of Suharto's authoritarian regime. President
Habibie who was in office from 1998-1999
established instruments of democracy. In his
administration, political parties were growing in
number from only three in Suharto era to forty-eight
political parties, the law of regional autonomy was
established, freedom of the press was restored, and
for the first time Indonesia had more than one
presidential candidates (Isra, 2009; Naímah, 2015;
Azra, 2005).
Democratization happens in every field of
development, including education. The Law of
Indonesian Education System states that education
should be organised based on principles of
democracy, equality, and human rights. In the field of
education, there are two forms of the practice of
democratization: democratizing education and
democratic education (Suharto, 2005).
Democratizing education opens up opportunities for
civil society to get involved in education, including
participating in policymaking. One example of the
products of democratization in education is the
school-based curriculum known as KTSP (Kurikulum
Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan) which was developed in
2006. This curriculum allows schools to develop and
customize their own curriculum together with their
stakeholders. Democratic education is pedagogical
practices that potentially in still understanding and
values of democracy in students. For example,
project-based learning is one of the pedagogical
practices that uses and teaches democratic values.
Early childhood has always been the site of
anchoring foundational knowledge and skills of the
future generation. Unfortunately, how to introduce
democratic values in ECE is rarely discussed in the
Indonesian context. It is common assumption that the
topic of democracy is an adult domain. Democracy is
also rigidly framed in a formal political context rather
than as day-to-day practices that happen throughout
human's life course. Moss (2007) and Arthur and
Sawyer (2009) suggest that children should be
regarded as full citizens who have voice and
aspirations. Thus, they should participate in decision
making of any decision that would affect their lives.
Research about democracy in ECE has been
conducted widely around the globe, especially in
western countries (see Moss, 2007; Hellman, 2012;
Aasen, Grindheim, and Waters, 2009; Serriere, 2010;
and Arthur and Sawyer, 2009). This paper aims to
review existing literature about democracy in early
childhood education to identify theoretical
framework and methodology commonly used in the
topic. The purpose is to provide a reference that can
be applied in research on democracy in ECE in the
Indonesian context.
Ulfah, F., Yulindrasari, H. and Adriany, V.
Democracy and Early Childhood Education.
In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Educational Sciences (ICES 2017) - Volume 1, pages 93-96
ISBN: 978-989-758-314-8
Copyright © 2018 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved
93

2 DEFINING DEMOCRATIC
EDUCATION
There are various definitions of democracy. The term
democracy comes from Greek kratos (rule) and
demos (the people) (Crick, 2002). Thus, democracy
literally means the rule of the people or the majority
of the mop. The concept of democracy itself is highly
contested, complex, dynamic, and unfixed (Crick,
2002). However, the most common contemporary
definition of democracy is institutionalised and un-
institutionalised freedom, independence, and rights
(Dalton, Sin, and Jou, 2008). Democracy is also
considered as a worldview that influences politics,
government administrations, institutional
arrangements as well as social practices. One of the
essential values of democracy is equality and
inclusivity, where no one is left behind in the
decision-making process (Moss, 2007).
John Dewey (1913) argues that democracy should
be mediated through education. The core purpose of
education should be citizenship and the creation of
social spirit, instead of job market-oriented. Social
spirit involves characteristics such as directness,
open-mindedness, single-mindedness, and
responsibility. To in still these characteristics in
children, Dewey proposes a way of learning that
facilitates children's imagination, flexible way of
thinking, and enhances children's communication and
listening skills to be more responsive to the need of
others (Mason, 2017). Thus, education should be the
vehicle to produce inclusive citizenship with high
social awareness (Helman, 2012). Democratic
education views students as agents that can
participate in the education-related decision making,
to collaborate both with teachers and their peers to
solve problems and find a solution that can
accommodate everyone involved in the decision
(Samawi et al., 1995). The goal of democratic
education is to create social justice and equality
(Giroux, 1989).
3 METHOD
The purpose of this paper is to identify core concept
of research on democracy in the field of early
childhood education. It serves as preliminary library
research required to develop further research on
democratic education in early childhood settings. In
addition to library research, the authors also
conducted social media assisted interviews with five
kindergarten teachers to explore their understanding
of democratic education.
For this paper, the authors analysed five
accessible research on ECE and democracy which
was conducted in a western context such as the United
States of America, Australia, Sweden, Norway, and
the United Kingdom.
4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Researching Democracy in ECE
There are two main focuses in researching democracy
in ECE: the policy of ECE and the democratic
education practices. Research on policy (such as
Moss, 2007), look at democratic values that are
incorporated into the curriculum and the principles of
early years learning, while research on democratic
education practices (such as Hellman, 2012; Aasen,
Grindheim, and Waters, 2009; Serriere, 2010; and
Arthur and Sawyer, 2009), investigate how
democratic values embedded in educational practices.
Whichever the focus is, researching democracy in
ECE needs to take into account an analysis of power
relations entrenched within student-peers, students-
adults, and students-other community members
interactions. The key to democratic education is
equality. Therefore, the ultimate research goal should
be improving equality in the school context and the
society in general.
Moss (2007) provides insight on how neoliberal
national policy significantly influences
democratization of education. Market-driven and
business-oriented policy lead education sectors to be
tailored to fulfill market demands, which put the
democratic mission of education at stake. He suggests
that the government should establish a policy that
facilitates and secure democratic education in all level
of educational administration. In Indonesia, Adriany
and Saefullah (2015) argue that Indonesia has
adopted a neoliberal approach to the development of
early childhood education. On the one hand, the
neoliberal approach has given greater opportunity for
ECE administrators to develop their programs
according to their own needs. However, it has a
downfall since neoliberal policy also relies on
privatization for the establishment of ECEs, which
then leads to market-driven ECE programs. The
complicated situation of Indonesian early education
where academic achievement has become parents'
priority in early childhood education (see Istiyani,
2013) leads to academic-oriented ECE program,
ICES 2017 - 1st International Conference on Educational Sciences
94

which put democratic learning at risk. Therefore,
early childhood education should not be a business
commodity; instead, it should be a medium to teach
democratic values such as respect, responsibility,
understanding of difference and multiple
perspectives, open-mindedness, and critical thinking
(Moss, 2007).
Four other articles analysed focus on democratic
education practices. Focusing on the discourse of
power in educational practice, Arthur and Sawyer
(2009) conducted a case study to gain insight from a
successful practice of democratic education in an
early childhood education setting in Australia. Their
finding suggests parents, teachers, the students, and
local community members should conduct
democratic education collaboratively. A shared
vision should be established, and each party should be
able to contribute in the learning process and
documentation of the process. Another important
point in democratic education is an understanding of
the discourse of power, which will sensitise teachers
of whose voice is heard and who is valued. A
successful democratic education empowers children
by acknowledging their freedom to choose not only
the experience but also the meaning that they
construct out of the experience. Children also have to
be given opportunities to explore how the real life
works, to understand the community they live in, and
to be aware that they are part of the community. Like
anybody else in the community, they also have rights
and responsibilities as a member of society.
In addition to child-adult interaction, Aasen,
Grindheim and Waters (2009) also analysed space in
relation to democratic education. They investigate
how outdoor setting contributed to the process of
democratic learning. Playing outdoor is part of
childhood culture in Scandinavian countries since
extensive outdoor play area, including a natural
forest, was available for the children to explore.
Therefore, outdoor playing means understanding
their community better. From their observations,
Aasen et al. (2009) concluded that peers and teacher-
student interactions play an important role in the
process of democratic learning and outdoor setting
provides a medium where negotiation of teachers'
attitude toward children and children's attitude toward
other children take place. They argued that teachers
should reflect on their understanding and values of
democracy and their perception and attitude toward
outdoor activities. Teachers who saw outdoor
activities as potentially harmful for children would
hamper children to participate fully in their learning
and making meaning of their outdoor experiences.
Playing outside symbolises act of freedom where
children are free to build their own knowledge,
discover something new without any adult
interventions. Thus, teachers should assess their
attitudes and values that may impact their interactions
with children and children's learning process.
Outdoor settings provide different context of learning
that can be resourceful for both children and teachers
to reflect and negotiate their beliefs and attitude to
create a more democratic learning.
It is important to discuss democratic education
from a gender perspective (Hellman, 2012). Hellman
(2012) investigates the process of solidarity
formation among young children in a Swedish
preschool. Based on her observation, she highlights
the importance of challenging the stereotyped gender
categorisation in creating a space for solidarity. A
situation where gender stereotypes are not
emphasised creates an opportunity for boys and girls
to play together and create a safe space where
solidarity emerges. Creating activities based on
common interest and common project instead of
based on gender category would open space for
friendship between girls and boys which in turn
would establish a sense of solidarity. Drawing from
Hellman (2012), a democratic education can be
achieved by challenging any form of stereotyped
categorisations whether it is gender, age, religion,
ethnicity, or class and highlighting common interest
instead.
4.2 Indonesian ECE Teachers’
Perception of Democracy
In the rise of Islamic conservatism in Indonesia, the
term democracy has multiple meaning. Some
conservative Islamic groups demonize democracy
and claim democracy as un-Islamic (Bruinessen as
cited in Wahid, 2014). Indonesian society then
becomes polarised into two opposite groups: pro-
democracy and anti-democracy. Democratic
education will work if only the teachers have a
comprehensive understanding of what democracy is
and not against it. According to interviews conducted
in this preliminary research, most teachers understood
the classic definition of democracy that power was in
the hand of the people, by the people, and for the
people (Lincoln cited in Winataputra, 2001). They
also related democracy with freedom of speech and
expressions. Most of the teachers agreed that schools
should teach democratic values as early as possible.
They approved that children should be able to choose
their learning activities and should be encouraged to
share their opinions and thoughts. However, there
was a teacher that did not agree with democratic
Democracy and Early Childhood Education
95

education. The teachers argued that it was against
Islamic teaching. The teacher emphasized that the
most important thing in ECE was teaching children
right or wrong, instead of teaching children to agree
on what the majority said. Preliminary findings of
teachers' perception of democracy trigger further
questions about what these teachers do in practice
since what people say do not necessarily consistent
with what they do. Do teachers who advocated
democratic education incorporate democratic values
into their pedagogical practices? And do teachers who
disagree with democratic education denied
democratic values in their practices?
5 CONCLUSIONS
Researching democracy in ECE involves multiple
data collection methods ranging from document
analysis, observations, interviews, focused groups
discussion. The focus of investigation can be varied -
from policy, space, settings, and other pedagogical
practices, but it is important to conduct an in-depth
analysis of social interactions between children and
adult, children and their peers, and children and other
community members. Researching democratic
education in ECE should also take into account
intersections of various social categories such as
gender, age, religion, ethnicity, and social class in
creating a democratic space. Another important point
to consider in researching democratic education is
teachers' and the researchers' understanding of their
own values and beliefs about childhood, children, and
democracy.
REFERENCES
Aasen, W., Grindheim, L. T., Waters, J. 2009. The Outdoor
Environment as a Site for Children's Participation,
Meaning-Making and Democratic Learning: Examples
from Norwegian Kindergartens. Education 3-13, 371,
5-13.
Arthur, L., Sawyer, W. 2009. Robust Hope, Democracy,
and Early Childhood Education. Early Years, 292, 163-
175. Doi: 10.1080/09575140802628776.
Azra, A. 2005. Pendidikan Kewarganegaraan untuk
Demokrasi di Indonesia. Unisia, 5728, 219-225.
https://jurnal.uii.ac.id/index.php/Unisia/article/view/5
409/4766
Crick, B. 2002. Democracy: a very short introduction.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dalton, R.J, Sin, D. C., Jou, W. 2007. Understanding
democracy: data from unlikely places. Journal of
Democracy, 184, 142-156.
Dewey, J. 1916. Democracy and Education. New York:
The Free Press.
Giroux, H. A. 1989. Schooling for democracy: Critical
pedagogy in the modern age. London: Routledge.
Hellman, A. 2012. Democracy among Girls and Boys in
Preschool: Inclusion and Common Projects. In Eva
Johansson and Donna Berthelsen Eds, Spaces for
Solidarity and Individualism in Educational Contexts,
pp. 99-114. Goteborg: ACTA Universitatis
Gothoburgensis
Isra, S. 2009. Pemilihan Presiden Langsung dan
Problematik Koalisi dalam Sistem Presidensial.
https://www.saldiisra.web.id/index.php/21-
makalah/makalah1/417-problematik-koalisi-dalam-
sistem-presidensial.html
Istiyani, D. 2013. Model Pembelajaran Membaca Menulis
Menghitung Calistung Pada Anak Usia Dini di
Kabupaten Pekalongan. Jurnal Penelitian, 101, 1-18.
Mason, L. 2017. The significance of Dewey’s Democracy
and Education for 21
st
Century Education. Education
and Culture, 331, 41-57.
Moss, P. 2007. Bringing politics into the nursery: early
childhood education as a democratic practice. European
Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 15:1, 5-
20.
Na’imah, H. 2015. Peralihan Kekuasaan Presiden Dalam
Lintasan Sejarah Ketatanegaraan Indonesia.
KHAZANAH, Jurnal Studi Islam dan Humaniora, Vol.
13, No.1
Samawi et al. 1995. Konsep Demokrasi dalam Pendidikan
Menurut Progressivisme Jhon Dewey. Thesis Prodi
ilmu Filsafat. Program Pasca Sarjana. BPPS-UGM. 8
4A.
Serriere, S.C. 2010. Carpet-Time Democracy: Digital
Photography and Social Consciousness in the Early
Childhood Classroom, The Social Studies, 101:2, 60-
68.
Wahid, D. 2014. Kembalinya Konservatisme Islam di
Indonesia. Studia Islamika, 212, 375-390.
Winataputra, U. S. 2001. Jatidiri Pendidikan
Kewarganegaraan sebagai Wahana Sistemik
Pendidikan Demokrasi, Doctoral Thesis, Universitas
Pendidikan Indonesia, Bandung.
ICES 2017 - 1st International Conference on Educational Sciences
96