Mini-consultation Framework - Olso
Hosted by the Norwegian Refugee Council
LINS, Oslo, 10 June 2004
Helge Brochmann from NRC introduced the work of INEEs Working Group on Minimum Standards for Education in Emergencies (WGMSEE) and some of the main issues involved in this work.
Three groups reviewed some of the material that has come out of the regional consultations conducted by WGMSEE concerning the categories Teachers and other Education Personnel, Learning Content and Methodology and Community Participation.
Recommendations and comments from the groups were:
- The standards developed appear a bit advanced; not even achieved in many developed countries. However, this impression is moderated by the Guidance Notes, which contain much relevant material
- There is a need for a spread of competencies among those designated as teachers/instructors to address the diversity of community learning needs (beyond schooling)
- Standards & indicators should target a broad interpretation of learning, to include adult learning
- School based planning, supervision, support mechanisms seems to be a bit top-down. What about teachers initiatives e.g. as expressed through their associations/unions/organisations?
- What is the place of M&E;? - Evaluation should take many forms
- Find teachers/instructors for all age levels, all relevant topics
- Present text seems to pertain more to traditional schooling and formal education
- Emergency should be seen as an opportunity to introduce new forms of methodology and topics. Changes and adaptations of curriculum should be motivated with reference to the situation, needs and the target group.
- St 2+1 - "adapted to different stages of emergency" is not enough, also have to think beyond, into post emergency
- It should be emphasized that children should acquire reading and writing skills
- St 3: no trace of comments on physical punishment. There should be efforts to change attitudes in this respect based on the actual situation e.g. children having experienced violence. Promotion of the "non-violent classroom".
- St 4: Assessments etc, but not be too exam-driven
- Important to follow school year - but to have a dialogue on flexibility on the part of authorities; recognition and certification
- Code of Conduct: This should be checked against EI's international guidelines
- Gender important in classroom as well - not just for access
- Community members have capacity and knowledge - should be given opportunity to use their voice and influence
- Bottom-up approach; community express themselves; expats/orgs be facilitators; local resources be used, be involved in processes
- Be aware of hidden agendas, representation not always what it appears
- Local community - what is it? Who is counted in? Very complex, challenge to involve the marginal/"excluded"/minority groups
- Parent/teacher associations are important
- Local villages around camp should be part of solutions
- The need for the standards (indicators etc.) to be more quantitative. To make it a set of minimum standards not just another paper on education, it should be more concrete. (Compare to Assessment Tool for Quality Standards in Primary Education for Afghan Refugees, UNICEF, UNHCR et.al.)
- The standards should reflect more what is specific in an emergency situation.
- Community participation should be kept as a separate category
- Dialogue with education authorities is always important
- More than 50 % out-of-school children disabled
- The text is battling with formal terminology from formal situation, where reality calls for a more varied set of terms - based on context.
- There is a need to be more conscious and consequent in the use of terminology e.g. teachers vs. para-professionals, facilitators; Students vs. pupils, learners.
- The value of developing minimum standards for education in emergencies was listed as:
- Ed in emergencies not previously recognized; need for global standards as tool
- Putting education on the agenda
- Opportunities for going into discussion and qualifications
- Checklist of what to think about
1) Teachers and Other Education Personnel
2) Learning content and methodology/curriculum
3) Community participation
Other points of discussion
Participants:
Robert Smith
Centre leader
LINS, Faculty of Education, Oslo University College
RobertLangley.Smith@lu.hio.no
P.O.Box 4 St. Olavs plass, 0130 Oslo
Ellen Carm
Assistant professor
LINS, Faculty of Education, Oslo University College
ellen.carm@lu.hio.no
P.O.Box 4 St. Olavs plass, 0130 Oslo
Leif Svendsen
Namibia Association of Norway
klsvendsen@c2i.net
Nandrups vei 3 B, 0490 Oslo
Bente Sandal Aasen
Development adviser
Norwegian Association of Disabled
bente.aasen@nhf.no
P.O.Box 9217 Grnland, 0134 Oslo
Tone Dalen
Information and Programme Adviser
UNICEF Norway
tone.dalen@unicef.no
Teatergt. 5, 0180 Oslo
Sissel Tove Olsen
Student/Norwegian Refugee Council
University of the Western Cape
sissolsen@tiscali.no
Hamangskogen 57, 1338 Sandvika
Astrid Sveen
Norwegian Refugee Council
astrid.sween@c2i.net
Friggsvei 12 B, 0588 Oslo
Kathrine Blyverket
Consultant
Union of Education Norway
kathrine.blyverket@utdanningsforbundet.no
P.O. Box 9191 Grnland, 0134 Oslo
Inger Marit Nygrd
Projects Officer
Salvation Army
inger.marit.nygaard@frelsesarmeen.no
P.O. Box 6866, St. Olavs plass, 0130 Oslo
Cathrine Arnesen
Education Specialist
Rosenhof skole/Norwegian Refugee Council
arnesensp@yahoo.com
Steenstrupsgate 23 B, 0554 Oslo
Kjersti Okkelmo
Education Adviser
Save the Children Norway
kjersti.okkelmo@reddbarna.no
P.O. Box 6902 St. Olavs plass, 0130 Oslo
Helge Brochmann
Education Adviser
Norwegian Refugee Council
helge.brochmann@nrc.no
P.O. Box 6758 St. Olavs plass, 0130 Oslo
Eldrid K. Midttun
Education Adviser
Norwegian Refugee Council
eldrid.midttun@nrc.no
P.O. Box 6758 St. Olavs plass, 0130 Oslo
