Education in conflict and crisis – using models and methodologies differently

Why are non-formal and complimentary education models important in conflict settings?

What are the benefits and limitations in operating education programs outside of the formal system?

Is there room for integration into the formal system in the future?

E. Schweitzer, Harvard April 2008

Issues to address

Absence and destruction of materials and infrastructure Death or absence of teachers Dysfunction of ed management

system/payroll/examination systems etc Absence of budget to pay ed system staff Displaced and dysfunctional populations Transition Programming needs

Out of school / over age childrenGaps also in parental education and training if

conflict is long term – 2 generation syndrome – need for ECD and parenting skills

Language of instruction/curriculum/materials for refugees in other countries

How to distinguish formal from non-formal/community institutions? Overlapping types of delivery – sometimes

methodologies and systems the same Bosnia – home based schooling to support

education during siege of Sarajevo Kosovo – parallel formal education system but

run underground – is this formal or non formal? Difference in programming run in formal school

facilities and with government support and programming run outside the government system – this is increasingly rare. Most programs are using govt. facilities.

Schools started by INGOs but with community support – many are like this in conflict affected areas.

Non traditional institutions: Community Schooling in Conflict

Type 1. Community schools – can be existing community schools started prior

to war or disaster

can be schools started during the war or in the aftermath during a vacuum in education ( Educo in El Salvador) - can catalyze change if carefully supported and managed.

Can be managed by community and still have government support or NGO support

What are the effects? Revitalize communities and act as a

focus for community regeneration and solidarity

Provide continuity of education and stability for children

Can have a protective role - in refugee camps, particularly for girls.

Provide the opportunity for education innovation

What are some issues? Can attract unwanted attention to children

and be seen as targets Can be used to indoctrinate children Are very vulnerable to lack of funding if the

situation is economically unstable Are usually fee paying – this runs against

much thinking on the need for free primary education

Do not address youth needs beyond primary

Type II. Methodologies are common, but type of delivery situation differs- Accelerated Learning

Accelerated Learning – what is it ? A systematic approach to teaching the whole

person, with specific elements that enable the students to learn faster across the age ranges.

Similar to effective teaching and learning – child friendly environments, active learning….

HOWEVER “A/L” labelled programs in conflict/post conflict

settings do not always use the formal concepts of A/L – curriculum can just be “catch up” compressed with no new learning techniques

Contexts for A/L use at basic ed. Levels in Africa

Post Conflict Settings – overage children who have missed out on schooling, poor infrastructure and teacher supply

Conflict settings/refugee camps – again targets out of school, disenfranchised

Also used in non conflict settings Vulnerable/inaccessible groups with poor school attendance –

pastoralists, rural girls, service personnel ( S. Sudan)

Drop outs – poor performers - Brazil

Uganda – a post conflict setting

Put in place to address children who missed schooling because of war – aims to get children back into the formal system.

Govt. supported with centers in primary schools, teachers recruited from local communities

Five year curriculum compressed to three 1-3, 4-5 – a third year under development – two tracked, one to finish formal schooling and one with a vocational component.

Liberia – also post conflict

Modeled on Uganda, addressing over age out of school children

Addresses only basic subjects at lower grades

Implemented by consortium of INGOs as non formal after school program

Difficulties include large class sizes, difficulty of curriculum, confusion over facility use, not enough connection between “formal” and “non formal” systems

North Darfur- conflict in rural areas

Many children out of school and in refugee camps – reaches 35,000 children 60% of which are girls. – protective aspect

Run largely by INGOs – to mainstream into regular camp schools

Very poor conditions, lack of staff and materials

Issues for further exploration

Can pull children and teachers from traditional classes to non traditional system

May be unsustainable because of INGO funding for teachers When over age issue is settling down, may be inappropriate

as children skip a grade Insufficient evaluation of programs, M and E weak, data on

mobile populations difficult to access to measure success Little data on costs Should it be short term or a feature of an education system? A/L non traditional faces prejudice from communities and

educational systems ( Kenya, Phillipines) Need to accredit community based teachers Certification of schools and graduation qualifications very

important for children returning home.