Society for History of Children and Youth statement:
Our organization seeks and depends upon a vibrant and open exchange of ideas from scholars from around the world. This commitment has encouraged the SHCY Executive Committee, on behalf of the SHCY membership, to endorse the American Historical Association’s recent denouncement of the Executive Order restricting entry to the United States. The AHA statement, endorsed by the SHCY, states in part that “(t)he AHA represents teachers and researchers who study and teach history throughout the world. Essential to that endeavor are interactions with foreign colleagues and access to archives and conferences overseas. The executive order threatens global scholarly networks our members have built up over decades. It establishes a religious test for scholars, favoring Christians over Muslims from the affected countries; and it jeopardizes both travel and the exchange of ideas upon which all scholarship ultimately depends.” You can read the complete statement on the part of the AHA here:
The Journal of the History of Childhood and Youth (JHCY) is seeking a new editor! This is an exciting opportunity to be involved with the most important journal in our field.
The JHCY is published by Johns Hopkins Press and is the official journal of the SHCY. From the website: The JHCY “explores the development of childhood and youth cultures and the experiences of young people across diverse times and places. JHCY embraces a wide range of historical methodologies as well as scholarship in other disciplines that share a historical focus. The Journal publishes original articles based on empirical research and essays that place contemporary issues of childhood and youth in a historical context. Each issue also includes an ‘object lesson’ on the material culture of childhood, contemporary policy pieces, and relevant book reviews.”
The duties of the editor include:
recruiting articles and object lessons
managing the peer review process through the online ScholarOne system
copyediting all articles and object lessons, and proofreading book reviews
ensuring that authors submit illustrations and permissions to publish text and illustration
supervising copyeditor and proofreader
procuring cover illustrations
submitting annual reports to the JHCY Board and SHCY members (including a budget)
appointing the committee that awards the Best Article Prize for the JHCY
submitting JHCY nominations for Fass-Sandin Prize
maintaining communication with the President of the Society
The JHCY is published three times a year. Deadlines for submitting completed issues are March 1, July 1, and November 1. The editorship position has followed different successful models, from one person to a committee of three. Currently, the book review section is co-edited by Cori Field and Nick Syrett. For additional information concerning the position, please contact current editor Professor James Marten at firstname.lastname@example.org.
The Society recognizes this as considerable (unpaid) labour. This may be offset through course releases given by the editor’s (or editors’) institution(s).
Start date is negotiable but ideally the new editor(s) would be ready to take on full responsibility for the July 2018 issue.
Statement of interest and applications [including relevant experience] should be addressed to the JHCY editor search committee through Tamara Myers (email@example.com); we aim to have the position filled by July 1, 2017.
The SHCY will award two $500 grants for events that take place in 2017 to projects deemed worthy by the Outreach and Executive Committees of the SHCY.
The $500 grants will help defray expenses for speakers, workshops, and other scholarly events fully or partially devoted to the history of children and youth.
•Keynote speakers or panelists
•Support for students attending the event
Application deadline for both grants: February 28, 2017.
Terms of the grants:
•Applicants must be members of SHCY. (See http://shcyhome.org/membership/ for membership information.)
•Recipients of 2015 and 2016 Outreach Grants cannot receive 2017 grants, and no one may apply for more than one 2017 grant.
•Funds will be distributed directly to host departments or institutions prior to the event.
•SHCY must be acknowledged as co-sponsor on all print and web-based materials and announcements, and, when appropriate, in speaker introductions. When possible, use the SHCY logo and link to the SHCY website.
•SHCY must be sent PDFs or links to announcements and promotional materials before the event.
•A report must be submitted to the chairs of the Outreach Committee no later than thirty days after the funded event. It should consist of the following:
—Blog post describing the event for use on the SHCY website
—Summary of the attendance (size, makeup)
—Copy of appropriate printed materials or screenshots of websites
—Description of the actual expenses covered by the grant
Note: If the event funded by the grant is part of a larger conference or other function, the funded portion of the conference must be identified as discrete portions of the program and labeled as co-sponsored by SHCY.
One-page applications should be submitted as PDF files via email to the Outreach Committee chair Stephanie Olsen (firstname.lastname@example.org). They should include:
—Date, location, and primary sponsor of event
—Description of audience (size, makeup)
—Total cost of event and other confirmed or potential funding sources
—Description of event that articulates how it contributes to all or part of SHCY’s mission: promoting the history of children and youth by supporting research about childhood, youth cultures, and the experience of young people across diverse times and places; fostering study across disciplinary and methodological boundaries; providing venues for scholars to communicate with one another; and promoting excellence in scholarship.
–Note: The Committee may request additional information from applicants about their event and about the participants and intended audience.
The Outreach Committee will recommend awardees to the SHCY Executive Committee, which will make final decisions. Recipients of grants will be announced by March 13, 2017.
The Journal of the History of Childhood and Youth seeks articles (8000 words) for a themed issue on the portrayal of the histories of children and of childhood in museum settings. The issue will be guest-edited by Loren Lerner, Professor of Art History at Concordia University in Montreal.
Potential topics for articles include:
histories of childhood museums: their origins, ideologies, changing philosophies, and current practices;
frameworks and perspectives on national museum collections of childhood objects;
studies on the constructions of children and youth in recent exhibitions across diverse cultures and socio-economic backgrounds;
discussions on the evolution of artefacts in museums reflective of childhood and child rearing such as toys and games, clothing, furniture, books and diverse items related to home and school life;
debates on the issues, practices, and policies of childhood museums including collection development, education, research, and other subjects of concern to academic scholarship and, or the local community.
Proposals for articles to be sent to Loren Lerner at email@example.com by 1 April 2017 should include:
Name of author, institutional affiliation, email address
Title of article
300-500 words abstract of the article
Estimated number and type of illustrations
50-words brief bio
Successful proposers will be notified by 1 May 2017, with finished articles to be delivered by 1 September 2017. Publication is projected for Summer 2018.
Childhood: history & critique (CHC) is a multi-media series of interviews, essays, and reports on happenings in the historical study of childhood hosted by a team of scholars and edited by Dr. Patrick J. Ryan. The series is published and circulated online by the Society for the History of Children and Youth.
Audio of Ning de Coninck-Smith’s Conversation with Mathias Gardet
Commentary by Ning de Coninck-Smith
”I must know more…” was my first reaction, when professor Mathias Gardet from the University of Paris 8 in the meeting room of the General Assembly of UNESCO began his presentation about the children’s villages, born out of the ruins of WW2. This was a story about children’s self-governance, progressive educational ideas and citizenship across national borders. The occasion was a conference marking the 70th Anniversary of UNESCO in October 2015. In the reconstruction of the world after WW2 education was thought to play a key role, and to UNESCO children’s villages, republics and communities held high promises for the creation of a future child-centered educational system. It was confirmed at the General Conference in Mexico in November 1947.
Where did the ideas come from, and how many villages where there? What did children’s self-governance imply and how did it work? And who were the people behind? These were the questions, which triggered my interest. During a sabbatical month in Paris in April and May 2016 I contacted professor Gardet for an interview, soon to realize that his research into the children’s villages was part of a long academic engagement with the children on the margin and the history of special education in a French historical context. Apart from serving on the editorial committee of La revue de l’historie de l’enfance irrégulière, he is also one of the initiators to the Centre d’exposition: Enfants en justice, located at a former youth correction home at Savigny-sur-Orge, south east of Paris. Visitors can see the reception building with its 18 cells, where the young inmates where left to their own thoughts for the first three days, as well as an exhibition telling the history of the French youth criminal system. The museum also functions as a documentary and research center. You can read more – and plan a visit – on the website enfantsenjustice.fr
At a time when so many children again are “war-handicapped”, due to the loss of parents, or because they have had to flee together with their families from villages, cities and homelands, the stories about the children’s villages unfortunately gain a new actuality. We might not learn directly from this unknown chapter of the history of childhood and youth of how to handle the current situation. My hope is, that we can learn something as historians – and humans. Something about methodologies, engagement, transdisciplinarity – and the usefulness of transnational scholarship. For these camps and the ideas behind them ranged from the US to Switzerland, from France to Denmark, and from Italy to Spain, from the East to the West. Their number remains unknown, but alone in France there were 55. (See map and photos in Impetus, vol III, no. 8-9, September-October, 1949 ) The ideas were not interpreted identically, the conditions varied – and the disagreements were many. And even though we know much more about the founding fathers – and mothers, than before – thanks to work of Mathias Gardet, and his colleagues Samuel Boussion (University of Paris 8) and Martine Ruchat (Geneva University), we still know very little about how the camps functioned, who the children were, and how they experienced this part of their lives.
The studies of Gardet, Bouission, and Ruchart show the usefulness of working in the archives of the international organizations, as the UNESCO, where many documents are now online (unesdoc.org) – but also with the papers left by groups and advocates of progressive education. Their work challenges a widespread tendency to remain within a national context when writing the history of childhood and youth. But educational ideas travel and were tested, discussed and revised in transnational contexts through a network of people, educators, administrators, experts, philanthropists, diplomats – and in this case also resistance fighters.
To preserve this transnational ambiance, our conversation is partially in English and partially in French. The resumé of our conversation also draws on articles by Gardet and his colleagues and drafts of chapters to a forthcoming book L’internationale des communautés d’enfants.
After a short introduction, I asked professor Gardet to tell us about the children’s communities– where did the idea come from, how many were there – and how did they work – and until when?
Children’s villages have a long history going back to George Junior Republic in the late-19th-century or to Father Flanagan’s Boys Towns in Omaha, Nebraska in the early 20th-century, but the ideas were also tested by various progressive boarding schools in the UK from Bredales, Abbotsholme to A.S. Neill Summerhill School. These experiments were central to the New Educational Fellowship movement, which was born as a reaction to the horrors and manslaughters of WW1. It’s goal was the creation of a child-centered school, based on children’s self-governance and rooted in the new, rising science of child psychology. Several of the founding members of NEF were active participants in the creation of the children’s villages, like the Swiss educator Adolphe Ferrière, the Belgian teacher and psychologist Ovide Decroly, the American educational reformer Carleton Washburne or the the Swiss peace activist and Quaker Elisabeth Rotten.
As a consequence of WW2 about 13 million children were considered abandoned. Parents had been killed in concentration camps or during bombing of cities, families had been separated on the run, or children born out of relations between German or Russian soldiers and local women, had been left to fend for themselves. The founding stone to the movement of children’s villages was placed at the villages of Trogen in Switzerland in January 1946 – soon 200 children were housed in 8 different national houses – designed by the famous Swiss architect Hans Fischli – together with a surrogate “father” and a “mother”. In the groups the children spoke their own language, but German was the shared language. Understandably, German and Polish children did not get along easily after the war. The educators tried to persuade them that they (as children) were all victims of the same war.
In 1948, the UNESCO called for an international conference on children’s villages to be held in Trogen. The conference had participants from six countries, and the disagreements among the actors became visible. Children’s villages (or “republics”) could be completely self-governed with their own city council and money. This happened in Cittavechia in Italy and at the children’s republic at Moulin Vieux in France. However, we know other children’ s villages were places where children had very few participatory rights.
For my second question, I wanted to know how Gardet came across evidence of these villages? Could he detect the voices of the children? And can we talk about their voices? Or is it rather voices, censured/shaped by the psychiatric experts?
He stumbled over the villages, when reading educational journals from France, Spain and Belgium. The idea of children’s self-governance was either negative described or hailed in the journal of the New Educational Fellowship movement. The story seemed completely forgotten.
Working in the archives in Switzerland, France and Italy he realized that children’s voices were difficult to hear. In several villages the children produced their own newspapers – inspired by the educational ideas of Celestin Freinet – but they seem more like a “defences of the system” than children’s testimonies. A radio appeal was his best bid on how to get in touch with the former “inhabitants”, who now are very old and many are likely to be dead. The village in Cittavechia has alumni association, who take care of the cultural heritage. Yet, detailed children’s files do not exist as they do within youth reformatories.
My third question related to their successfulness and how much did the children decide themselves?
In many ways pragmatism had to reign, the lack of money and the scale of the problem forced children to participate in their own education as well as in the daily routines – in many ways similar to life in children’s homes and orphanages. At the beginning there was no educational project, it was “ a project d’urgence”. Some villages started out as summer camps, where children just stayed on, since they had no other home. In one case, a castle was turned into a camp for Jewish children who had been hidden by their parents during the war.
The educational frame and the reference to the ideas of NEF came gradually. But as mentioned, the cleavages were fundamental to the movement, even though they all distanced themselves from the historical heritage of children’s homes with their strict discipline, hard work and rough environment. I asked Gardet to reflect on how traumatized these children must have been and what role it played in the discussions. He told me that the educators and psychiatrists took two different stands. One group warned against children’s trauma and also that the responsibility of running a village risked doing more harm than good. The other group found it fascinating and promising that the children had survived in gangs and on the streets with hardly any food nor shelter. In their opinion this energy should be drawn upon for their education and civilization. Others claimed that children’s villages created an artificial environment, and therefore made it difficult for children to grow into adulthood. From these debates rose new understandings and definitions of children’s trauma.
The end came in the early 1950s, when the villages – and UNESCO – were caught up in the cold war, and the contact across the iron curtain stopped, while the Americans and Canadians threatened to cut funding if grants were made to children’s communities in Eastern Europe. A major crisis arose when around 27,000 Greek children, who the Greek government claimed had been kidnapped by the federation of children’s villages – with the support of UNESCO, were placed in villages in Bulgaria, Romania and Czechoslovakia. There were fewer and fewer war injured to save. As the years passed, more of the children were victims of poverty after the war, rather than the war itself.
The last part of our conversation turns around Gardet’s role as co-editor of the journal La revue de l’historie de l’enfance irrégulière and his other activities related to the history of special education. He explained that the journal together with conferences was meant to work as a platform for exchanges between scholars in the franco-phone world and an opportunity to develop not a comparative but a transnational and prosographic approach to the field. He finds it fascinating how ideas travelled through the international conferences during the 19th century, and yet the Northern and British countries seem to differ in their attitude to the children on the margins from Southern Europe. To the north, experts advocated family placement, where institutionalization were the preferred solution to the south. There were expert in the south, too, who claimed that institutions were not the best way to introduce children to their life as adults. Instead they advocated placement in a family with a similar social background.
When asked about where this strong academic interest in the history of the prison system among franco-phone scholars could come from, he mentioned the importance of philosophers, sociologists and historians such as Michel Foucault, Michelle Perrot and Jacques Guy Petit.
Samuel Boussion, Mathias Gardet and Martine Ruchat: Bringing Everyone to Trogen. UNESCO and the Promotion of an International Model of Children’s Communities after World War II in Poul Duedahl (ed): A history of UNESCO: Global Actions and Impacts, Palgrave Macmillan 2016
Gardet, Mathias: Le modèle idéalisé des communautés d’enfants à l’épreuve de la réalité française, 1948-1955. Published on line from the international congress of AREF (Actualité de la recherche en education et formation) Geneva, 2010.
Gardet, Mathias (en collaboration avec Martine Ruchat) : “Le Village Pestalozzi, un modèle de communauté d’enfants pour l’Europe. Entre utopie pédagogique et propagande politique, 1944-1954”, in Furrer, Markus, Heiniger, Kevin, Huonker, Thomas et al., Entre assistance et contrainte : le placement des enfants et des jeunes en Suisse 1850-1980, Schwabe, supplément de la Revue suisse d’histoire, 2014, p. 123-138
Gardet, Mathias (en collaboration avec Fabienne Waks) : Une histoire de la jeunesse en marge, Textuel, Paris, 2015
See also Nicholas Stargardt : Witnesses of War: Children’s Lives Under the Nazis, Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group, 2005
Ning de Coninck-Smith is professor of the history of childhood and education at the University of Aarhus, Denmark. She has most recently co-edited and contributed to a five volume history of the Danish school system [Dansk skolehistorie. Hverdag, vilkår og visioner gennem 500 år]. Together with Marta Gutman she has edited Designing Modern Childhoods. History, Space and the Material Culture of Children (Rutgers University Press, 2008). She is currently working on a project on the shaping of Danish children’s culture within museums, libraries and theatres during the 1960s and 1970s.
photograph by Lars Kruse/AU Kommunikation
Mathias Gardet is since 2014 professor in educational sciences at the University Paris VIII. As professor of 20th Century social history he is affiliated with CIRCEFT [Centre Intrauniversitaire de Recherche, Culture, Formation et Travail]. He defended his ph.d.- thesis at the University Paris I in 1996. The theme of the thesis was youth organizations in Mexico from 1929-45 and their history with the church and the Mexican state. In 2013 he obtained his « habilitation » [Habilitation à diriger des recherches] with the theme Orphans and young delinquents. Two categories of children, placed outside their home. (1889-1959).
It is with great pleasure that the committee for the Fass-Sandin Prize for the best article (German or Italian) on the History of Children and Youth for 2015 announces that the award goes to Miriam Turrini for her wonderful essay “Poco oltre la soglia: racconti autobiografici di aspiranti gesuiti a metà Seicento,Studi storici, 3/2014, July –Sept., pp. 585-614. Congratulations Dr. Turrini!
The Prize Committee wrote:
Within a varied field, Turrini’s article stood out for the richness and productivity of the sources used, as well as for the methodological and conceptual issues that her work raises for the study of the history of childhood and youth in early modern Europe.The article is based on a meticulous archival research, whose main focus are the questionnaires compiled between 1636 and 1644 by young aspiring Jesuits admitted to noviciate of S.Andrea, in Rome. Out of the 180 questionnaires available, 82 include the novices’ narratives of their vocation. It is on the sources combining questionnaires and vocational stories that Turrini’s analysis is constructed.
The author presents us with an extraordinary source from a period in which the voices of young people remain elusive and difficult to find. These sources provide information on the background and life experiences of these young people, together with the narration of the discovery of their vocation and subsequent decision to enter the noviciate. Most of the aspiring Jesuits were between 14 and 18 years olds, they came from various Italian and European territories, and from various family backgrounds. Only a minority came from either very rich or very poor family, and many of them were orphans of one or both parents. Young adults rather than children, their testimonies provide precious glimpses into the complicated transition from childhood to adulthood, which in these cases coincided with the equally complicated passage from their “old” secular life to their new life as novices in the Compagnia di Gesù.
While the narratives studied by Turrini follow a recognisable scheme, the sources offer important insights into the individuality and subjectivity of young people engaged in a process of self-analysis and self-representation.
In order to successfully complete the probation period, the aspiring Jesuits had to answer questions relating to their past, and had to present a vision of their future, seen as a project of self-realisation that should coincide with the obtainment of Christian perfection.
Although inevitably informed by the need to satisfy the expectations of their examiners, the sources studied by Turrini show the complicated effort to narrate a radical life project: a project that required young people not only to resist worldly temptations but also to defy parental opposition. Only in a few cases, in fact, we find examples of solicited or even forced conversions, pursued as part of family strategies.
Turrini compare texts written by a majority of younger novices with the texts written by (fewer) older writers, thus highlighting both the specificity of younger people’s voices and experiences and the methodological and theoretical issues brought up by the sources.
The essay by Turrini represented an initial approach to this type of egodocuments, which have since been studied further. The article is bound to promote further historiographical reflections on the categories relevant to the history of youth in Europe.
Many thanks to the Prize Commitee: Patrizia Guarnieri (chair, University of Florence), Stefania Bernini (UNSW Australia), Patrizia Dogliani (University of Bologna), Dirk Schumann (chair, University of Göttingen)
“Jones’ study is an outstanding example of what happens when a researcher approaches a familiar historical narrative from a child-centered perspective. Based on meticulous, extensive and creative archival research, and successfully blending traditional social history with novel analytic categories, Intimate Reconstructions reveals not only how children in Virginia were affected by the process of Reconstruction, but also how Reconstruction itself was shaped by concerns and debates about the treatment, training, reformation and protection of children.
Jones convincingly claims that children, both as direct participants and as cultural symbols, were central to postemancipation struggles over the meaning of freedom, victory and defeat; kinship and citizenship, and the interplay of public and private life.
By attending to the diversity of children’s postwar experiences (in the households of formerly enslaved people and former slaveholders, as apprentices or institutionalized orphans, in the new public schools), to whatchildren had in common as a group (age) and what divided them (race, class, and gender), Jones offers a rich and subtle account ofthe social, political and emotional gains and costs of emancipation. Intimate Reconstructions is an original contribution to the histories of Reconstruction and children, but its detailed storytelling, compelling and clear arguments, and important lessons on the interdependence of private and public—of families and the political and economic contexts in which they are embedded—give it a much broader appeal as well.”
Thank you to the members of the Grace Abbott Prize Committee for their service, Adriana Benzaquén (chair, Mount St. Vincent University), Nara Milanich (Barnard College), and Hugh Morrison (University of Otago).
by Mona Gleason, President, Society for the History of Children and Youth