Reimagining Refusal: Part II

What 26 Studies Reveal About Children's Right to Say No (And Why It Matters for Your Classroom)

Welcome back! In Part 1, we met Micah – the three-year-old who declared "No, I don't want to!" at story time. We started exploring why his refusal might actually be a sophisticated expression of participation rather than a problem to solve. Today, I want to share what research reveals about children's refusal in early childhood education. Fair warning: Some of these findings might surprise you. They might even make you a little uncomfortable. But they also offer a path forward.

I recently completed a comprehensive review of research on children's participation rights in ECE, analyzing 26 peer-reviewed studies published between 2019-2025 (Clark, 2025). I was specifically looking for how children's right to refuse participation was conceptualized.

Here's what stopped me in my tracks: Not a single study focused primarily on children's right to refuse. Not one.

Even more striking:

• 42% of studies never mentioned children's refusal at all

• Only 38% explicitly discussed aspects of what I call "refusal-as-participation"

Think about that. We have decades of research on children's participation rights, but we've somehow created a massive blind spot around the most fundamental aspect of authentic choice: the ability to decline.

When "Participation" Becomes Pressure

Here's where it gets really important for your daily practice. The research reveals something troubling: Even well-intentioned teachers who genuinely believe in children's rights often struggle to honor refusal.

One study found that teachers took pride in their carefully planned activities and felt it was "a personal failure if not all children want to do an activity that was painstakingly, precisely, and carefully planned" (Canning et al., 2022, p. 228).

Can you relate? I know I can. We pour our hearts into our planning. We consider children's interests, developmental stages, learning objectives. And then a child refuses to participate, and it stings.

But here's the problem: When we take children's refusal personally, we risk turning participation from a right into a requirement. And when participation becomes mandatory, it's no longer authentic.

Another study found something even more concerning: Teachers focused on "child engagement" rather than genuine participation, inadvertently pressuring children into activities in the name of their participation rights (Nauss, 2023). The very thing meant to empower children was being used to coerce them.

The Four Spaces Where Refusal Gets Lost

My search identified four key areas where children's right to refuse plays out in ECE settings:

1. Curriculum

When we plan activities based on children's interests (which is wonderful!), we sometimes forget that participation isn't just about planning – it's about daily, moment-by-moment respect for children's choices. Interest today doesn't mean mandatory participation tomorrow. Research across five European countries found that focusing on curriculum planning alone isn't enough to support genuine participation (Piškur et al., 2022). Another study revealed that pre-service teachers often viewed participation as a means to achieve curricular goals rather than recognizing it as a right with inherent value (Avgitidou et al., 2024). When participation becomes primarily about learning outcomes, refusal becomes problematic.

2. Choice

We've gotten good at offering children choices: "Do you want to paint or play with blocks?" But these are choices between options. True choice includes the ability to choose none of the above. It includes the right to say, "Actually, I need some quiet time alone right now." Research shows that young children themselves understand participation as explicitly including the ability to say no to a teacher's idea and to choose not to participate at all (Correia et al., 2024). In fact, one quantitative study found that as adult decision-making decreased, children's observed choices increased—as did their own perception of their participation (Correia et al., 2020). Choice-making that centers children's refusal as a right requires careful restructuring of typical adult-centric norms and policies (Whitington et al., 2024; Ylikörkkö et al., 2025).

3. Play

Here's a bright spot! Research suggests that teachers are more likely to honor children's full participation during play than during other activities (Heikka et al., 2022). Why? Perhaps because play feels less tied to specific outcomes. There's less pressure.

One study found that during play, teachers did respect children's refusal to take up their ideas (Lagerlöf et al., 2023). However, research across seven countries revealed that children's agency in play is often restricted by adults who engage in play for predetermined, adult-centered goals (Rentzou et al., 2023). Even in play, children's ability to make decisions about their own participation can be limited, and their refusal to engage in adult-prescribed ways must be respected (Murray, 2022).

4. Power

This is the big one. Every single theme ultimately comes back to power. Who gets to decide? Whose choices matter? A systematic review of children's participation literature in Spain found that participation rights continue to be "conditioned by attitudes and the adult-child power disparity that silence children's voices" (Castro-Zubizarreta & Calvo-Salvador, 2024, p. 654). One particularly powerful study asked children directly what would improve their ECE settings (Macha et al., 2024). Every single theme in their feedback centered on enabling their power to participate and refuse. The researchers concluded that while children are crystal clear about their needs, adults "do not respond adequately in their daily actions" (p. 257).

Ouch. But also: What an opportunity.

The Gap Between What We Say and What We Do

Multiple studies found a troubling disconnect: Teachers expressed strong beliefs supporting children's participation rights, but their actions told a different story. Their classroom practices didn't match their stated values (Banko-Bal & Guler-Yildiz, 2021; Hayes, 2024).

One discourse analysis study found that teachers saw participation rights predominantly as "unrealized," "adult-defined," or "elusive" (Sevón et al., 2023). As one researcher noted, "for a variety of reasons, meaningful attention to young children's views is not as evident in practice as the commitment to it is" (Hayes, 2024, p. 839).

Why? I don't think it's because teachers don't care. I think it's because we've never been given frameworks for understanding refusal as legitimate participation.

Without explicit guidance, we default to seeing refusal as a problem. We interpret it as non-compliance instead of recognizing it as sophisticated communication. We try to overcome it instead of honoring it.

The Good News

Before you close this tab feeling discouraged, let me share the hopeful part: Some research showed that when teachers do respect children's refusal, something beautiful happens.

Children who have their "no" honored actually become more willing to participate later (Correia et al., 2022). When refusal feels safe, children develop trust. They learn that their voices matter. They discover that participation is an authentic choice rather than a requirement.

Studies also identified concrete supports that help:

• Providing children with clear information about activities

• Allowing time for processing and decision-making (Correia et al., 2022)

• Structural supports like adequate staffing ratios (Nauss, 2023)

• Environmental design that includes spaces for withdrawal (Knauf, 2019)

• Involving children in decisions about materials and daily routines (Whitington et al., 2024)

  
  

This isn't theoretical. It's practical. And it's possible.

Research has also identified promising models for supporting meaningful power-sharing. The Lundy (2007) model of participation, which conceptualizes children's participation as consisting of space, voice, audience, and influence, explicitly recognizes refusal as part of participation rights (Barros et al., 2024). Another approach, the "we-narrative," has been described as a tool for creating sustainable participation that changes ECE culture to focus on interdependence, allowing children's participation rights—including their right to say no—to flourish (Weckström et al., 2022).

Perhaps most importantly, research highlights that young children's refusal strategies—including silence, resistance, or avoidance—represent important interaction skills and competencies that express agency and power (Correia et al., 2019). Viewing children's refusal as a capability rather than a liability may help support the understanding of refusal-as-participation as a fundamental right.

What This Means for You

If you're feeling overwhelmed, take a breath. The research isn't saying you've been doing everything wrong. It's illuminating a blind spot that affects our entire field.

The question isn't "Have I been perfect?" The question is "What will I do now that I know?"

In Part 3, we'll answer that question together. I'll share concrete, practical strategies for creating classrooms where children's "no" is honored just as much as their "yes" – without sacrificing structure, learning objectives, or your sanity.

Trust me: It's more doable than you think. And the impact on children's wellbeing and authentic development might just transform your teaching.

What surprised you most in these research findings? Have you noticed the gap between beliefs and actions in your own practice? Let's talk about it in the comments – this conversation matters.

References:

Avgitidou, S., Kampeza, M., Karadimitriou, K., & Sidiropoulou, C. (2024). Pre-Service Teachers' Beliefs about Children's Participation and Possibilities for Their Transformation during Initial Teacher Education. Education Sciences, 14(3), 236.

Banko-Bal, C., & Guler-Yildiz, T. (2021). An investigation of early childhood education teachers' attitudes, behaviors, and views regarding the rights of the child. International Journal of Child Care & Education Policy, 15(1), 1–26.

Barros, S., Coelho, V., Wyslowska, O., Penderi, E., Taelman, H., Correia, N., Markowska-Manista, U., Petrogiannis, K., Boderé, A., Pessanha, M., Guimarães, C., & Aguiar, C. (2024). A Focus Group Study on Participatory Practices in Early Childhood Education and Care across Four European Countries. Early Education and Development, 35(6), 1292–1315.

Canning, N., Teszenyi, E., & Pálfi, S. (2022). Are you listening to me? Understanding children's rights through Hungarian pedagogic practice. Journal of Childhood, Education & Society, 3(3), 218–232.

Castro-Zubizarreta, A., & Calvo-Salvador, A. (2024). Child participation in early childhood education in Spain: When having rights does not mean being able to exercise them. Policy Futures in Education, 22(4), 642–658.

Correia, N., Aguiar, C., & Amaro, F. (2023). Children's Participation in Early Childhood Education: A Theoretical Overview. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 24(3), 313–332.

Correia, N., Aguiar, C., & Consortium, T. participa. (2022). Children's Right to Participate: The Lundy Model Applied to Early Childhood Education and Care. Children & Society, 36(2), 258–276.

Correia, N., Camilo, C., Aguiar, C., & Amaro, F. (2019). Children's right to participate in early childhood education settings: A systematic review. Children and Youth Services Review, 100, 76–88.

Correia, N., Carvalho, H., & Aguiar, C. (2024). Does Participation Benefit Children's Socio-Emotional Development? Positive Associations between Children's Participation and Self-Concept, through Children's Perceptions. Early Education and Development, 35(7), 1461–1482.

Correia, N., Santos, S., Freitas, C., Cerqueira, P., & Aguiar, C. (2020). Children's right to participate in early childhood education settings: A systematic review. International Journal of Early Childhood, 52, 227–243.

Hayes, N. (2024). "It's not fair": Hearing the voices of young children. Education 3-13, 52(6), 830–842.

Heikka, J., Kettukangas, T., Turja, L., & Heiskanen, N. (2022). How educators commit to enhancing children's participation in early childhood education pedagogical plans. South African Journal of Childhood Education, 12(1), 1–12.

Knauf, H. (2019). Physical Environments of Early Childhood Education Centres: Facilitating and Inhibiting Factors Supporting Children's Participation. International Journal of Early Childhood, 51(3), 355–372.

Lagerlöf, P., Wallerstedt, C., & Pramling, N. (2023). Participation and responsiveness: Children's rights in play from the perspective of play-responsive early childhood education and care and the UNCRC. Oxford Review of Education, 49(5), 698–712.

Lundy, L. (2007). 'Voice' is not enough: Conceptualising Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. British Educational Research Journal, 33(6), 927–942.

Macha, K., Urban, M., Lonnemann, J., Wronski, C., & Hildebrandt, F. (2024). Children's perspectives on quality in ECEC as a specific form of participation. International Journal of Early Years Education, 32(1), 246–260.

Murray, J. (2022). Any questions? Young children questioning in their early childhood education settings. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 30(1), 108–130.

Nauss, M. (2023). Participation, Agency, and Children's Rights: A case study. Antistasis, 13(2), 107–114.

Piškur, B., Takala, M., Berge, A., Eek-Karlsson, L., Ólafsdóttir, S. M., & Meuser, S. (2022). Belonging and Participation as Portrayed in the Curriculum Guidelines of Five European Countries. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 54(3), 351–366.

Rentzou, K., Slutsky, R., Gol-Guven, M., Kragh-Müller, G., Tuul, M., & Paz-Albo, J. (2023). A Cross-Cultural Study on Factors Affecting Children's Agentic Action in Their Play. International Journal of Early Childhood, 55(1), 89–112.

Sevón, E., Mustola, M., & Alasuutari, M. (2023). Dilemmas Related to Young Children's Participation and Rights: A Discourse Analysis Study of Present and Future Professionals Working with Children. Social Sciences, 13(1), 27.

Weckström, E., Lastikka, A., & Havu-Nuutinen, S. (2022). Constructing a Socially Sustainable Culture of Participation for Caring and Inclusive ECEC. Sustainability, 14(7), 3945.

Whitington, V., Sisson, J., & Shin, A. (2024). Enacting everyday democratic pedagogies in a birth-five early years setting. Australian Educational Researcher, 51(5), 1795–1811.

Ylikörkkö, E., Karjalainen, S., & Puroila, A. (2025). Toddlers with the Doll Carriage: Children Doing Space of Participation in Early Childhood Education. Early Childhood Education Journal, 53(1), 329–340.