The Empty Chair: Why Student Voice Must Shape the Future of Schooling

At this year’s VicSRC Congress, my opening slide had a picture of an empty chair. 

It wasn’t a prop. It was a reminder.

A reminder of the students who are still missing from too many conversations about what great education looks like - and who it’s for.

Every day in schools, leaders and teachers make decisions about learning, wellbeing, and belonging. But too often, those decisions are made about young people rather than with them. Decisions about what matters in education and how students engage in their schooling is a matter of done to rather than done with. Despite schools being full of rich student and community perspectives, those insights are often underutilised or unheard.

Through our work at Pivot, we hear directly from thousands of students each year, and we were proud to share some of our insights at the recent Victorian Student Representative Council (VicSRC) Congress.

These young voices reveal a powerful truth: when young people are included as genuine partners, change becomes more relevant, sustainable, and human.

A recent post from Shai Naides at UNICEF resonated deeply (thanks for sharing this, Summer Howarth). It references UNICEF Innocenti’s explainer, Why Participation Matters: The Evidence for Involving Children and Youth in Policy and Decision-Making a powerful reminder that youth participation is not a privilege or a box to tick. It is, simply, a right.

The explainer highlights three key messages that align closely with what we share with our schools:

1. Beyond tokenism: True participation is not symbolic; it’s about intergenerational partnership built on respect, trust, and shared power.

2. Inclusion needs to be intentional: Without care, participation can replicate existing hierarchies. Inclusion needs design, equity, and safeguards.

3. Participation transforms:  When done well, it strengthens both the capacity and impact of young people, and the systems they engage with.

   
   

In thinking about how to move beyond tokenism, I’m reminded of the work of Professor Laura Lundy, whose Lundy Model has become foundational in children’s participation theory. Lundy argues that meaningful participation must attend to four interconnected dimensions (space, voice, audience, and influence) so that children don’t merely express opinions, but have those views heard by decision-makers and acted upon. This framework helps us see why the “empty chair” isn’t just symbolic - unless those four elements are present, student voice risks being purely decorative. 

Nadim Kara also advocates the use of participatory evaluation processes as a way to move beyond tokenism and ensure youth involvement is genuinely meaningful. And across reviews of youth-participatory research practice, researchers emphasise that intentional design, equitable support, reflexivity, and transparency are non-negotiables if inclusion is to avoid reinforcing existing hierarchies within our very rigid school ecosystems. 

There’s plenty more incredible research out there (let us know what you’ve found on your journey!) and all of these considered perspectives echo what our Pivot insights show: most students feel cared for and included, yet there’s a degree of strengthening that we could actively engage in with young people through conversation and action.

So, this empty chair is a call to notice that gap; an invitation.

To listen.

To partner.

To share power.

When we make space for student voices - not as a gesture, but as a guiding principle - we create schools that are safer, fairer, and more responsive for everyone. Perhaps the placement of an empty chair when you're meeting to discuss how we can co-design better learning might prompt you to fill that chair with the voice of a young person. And this could be a golden opportunity for many new, previously unheard voices to contribute to the future of schooling.