UK Consultation Framework

UK Consultation on Minimum Standards, Indicators and Guidance Notes
March 12, 2004

ANALYSIS

Analysis standard 1: Initial Assessment
A participatory assessment is conducted, taking into account local capacity, the political, economic, sociocultural, geographical and humanitarian context.

Key Indicators

  • All potential stakeholders are identified and given the opportunity to participate in the assessment process; special consideration is given to including marginalized and vulnerable groups in this process (see guidance note 1).
  • There is a minimum audit of the past, current and planned education and other relevant activities of local, national and international actors with target population (see guidance note 2).
  • The assessment identifies potential risks and opportunities for educational intervention (see guidance note 3).
  • The available educational human, physical and financial resources are identified and documented, such as teachers, textbooks, NGOs and school infrastructure (see guidance note 4).

Guidance Notes

  1. Potential stakeholders should ensure representation of key groups within the community, such as diverse representative by age, gender, disability and ethnic origin. Any efforts to achieve participation should ensure measures are taken to address issues of participants safety.
  2. The audit will help to ensure an understanding of the work of other actors in this context, which will facilitate coordination and appropriate response.
  3. The initial assessment must locate the emergency situation within the context of factors likely to affect the success of intervention, including such factors as security and political stability, the likely duration of the emergency.
  4. Human resources should take particular account of available skills, for example, teachers capacity, or lack thereof, to offer psychosocial support.
  5. No consensus/debate: The minimum standards are trying to ensure that education is seen as a priority response within emergency situations. But if the initial assessment must take into account local capacity, the political, economic, sociocultural, geographical and humanitarian context and be participatory, will this take too long to formulate a response in an emergency?

Analysis standard 2:
Institutional learning (incomplete)

To build upon: Any standard or indicator developed for institutional learning should articulate the need to build capacity for learning from past experience and for information sharing and dissemination (particularly evaluation data) in order to positively build upon past programming and policies. This category should be cross-referenced with standards developed under the categories of Program Management and Educational Policy and Coordination


LEARNING CONTENT AND METHODOLOGY

Learning Content and Methodology Standard 1
A focused learning environment is established.

Key Indicators

  • Learning programmes are closely integrated to the survival needs of the affected population.
  • Where possible and appropriate, continue previous educational provision, such as curriculum, textbooks and teachers (see guidance note 2).
  • The learning environment promotes the identities and cultures of the learners.

Guidance Notes

  1. The learning environment should be established as soon as possible and in an uninterrupted manner, where possible.
  2. The previous curricular materials can provide a safety net for learning in an emergency, but efforts should be made to ensure that it is appropriate and that negative aspects of ideology do not transfer from historical background. Curriculum can be political, and there should be a guidance note to reflect this. Who gets there first and delivers/sets the curriculum?
  3. To build upon: How and where to link community participation in these issues?

Learning Content and Methodology Standard 2
All relevant stakeholders are engaged in a process of dynamic curriculum development.

Key Indicators

  • Teacher development involves critical reflection on education processes, such as curriculum.
  • There is a flexible curriculum that responds to learners diverse and evolving needs and competencies (see guidance note 2).

Guidance Notes

  1. Stakeholders include representatives across sectors and affected communities, such as learners, educational authorities and personnel, parents, health officials, etc.
  2. Curriculum should not be static; it should evolve. Resources should be sourced and depend on local availability.

Learning Content and Methodology Standard 3
Learning is recognized and validated.

Key Indicators

  • Learning is accredited where possible and desirable.
  • Links are made with appropriate education authorities to ensure accreditation and certification of learning programmes.
  • Learners participate in their assessment (see guidance notes 1 and 2).

Guidance Notes

  1. To build upon: Efforts should be made to actively engage learners in the critical reflection of their learning to advance their learning. Assessment promotes the acquisition of transferable skills.
  2. No consensus / debate: Some participants felt that this indicator is not realistic, even in many developed countries. Others felt that, as emergencies provide opportunities for positive change, this indicator could provide an opportunity to allow for learners greater participation and reflection on their own learning. Also, we need to always keep in mind that having a higher standard for the affected-community vs. host community is dangerous, and can we meet this indicator in all situations?

ACCESS, EQUITY AND LEARNING ENVIRONMENT

(Note on category: the participants regrouped the categories to overlap: Access, Equity and Learning Environment; they also suggested grouping together Learning Content, Resources and Teachers and other Education Personnel.)

Access, Equity and Learning Environment Standard 1
There are safe spaces for learning.

Key Indicators

  • The learning space is free of live munitions, unexploded ordinances and landmines.
  • Learners are protected from the elements.
  • There is freedom from physical and sexual abuse.
  • There is designated space for childrens education.
  • If education is taking place within a physical structure, it is safe.

Guidance Notes

  1. Clarification: Learning space used rather than structure or school as the learning space may be mobile, such as educating women working in markets.
  2. No consensus: Should an indicator or guidance note articulate a minimum distance between learning spaces and military presence? Some felt that the minimum standards offer an opportunity to articulate a safe space policy visa via armed personnel. However, others offered examples of how the armed personnel can help protect learners. The local political reality of having military personnel and weapons nearby was also discussed- how to affect that?

Access, Equity and Learning Environment Standard 2
All people have access to learning irrespective of gender, ethnicity, religion and disability.

Key Indicators

  • Positive steps are taken and documented to ensure girls and womens access to learning (see guidance note 2).
  • Positive steps are taken and documented to ensure girls and womens participation in the learning process (see guidance note 2).
  • Positive steps are taken and documented to include learners of all ethnic and social groups (see guidance note 2).
  • Mechanisms are in place to promote access to learners with special educational needs.
  • Quantifiable targets regarding participation levels are agreed upon and worked towards.

Guidance Notes

  1. Clarification: This standard was originally phrased as: The learning environment is inclusive. However, the definition of inclusive was problematic because it might be read as referring to disability and ignore gender and ethnicity issues. The word ethnicity is also problematic, as in some countries collecting data on ethnicity may encourage discrimination. If ethnicity is included, there should be a guidance note about confidentiality and safety issues.
  2. Suggestion: Combine the first three indicators above into one: Positive steps are taken to ensure access to and participation in learning for all, especially girls, women, members of ethnic and social groups and those with special educational needs.

Access, Equity and Learning Environment Standard 3
The learning environment promotes positive attitudes and practices towards working and living with other people.

Key Indicators

  • As soon as possible, training opportunities that prevent violence, sexual and emotional abuse and intolerance towards others are made available for teaching staff.
  • There are reduced levels of violence in the learning environment (see guidance note 1).
  • Codes of conduct are in place and applied (see guidance note 2).

Guidance Notes

  1. Baseline data is required to meet this indicator.
  2. Codes of conduct may be a formalization of existing rules.
  3. No consensus / debate: Should the standards and indicators be targeted at education for children or adults? Schools vs. informal settings? Some participants suggested that separate standards and indicators might be needed for children and adults.

COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION

Community Participation Standard 1
The community participation process is immediate, ongoing and empowering, involves all significant subgroups of the community and it is respected by all governmental and non-governmental agencies.

Key Indicators

  • Work to establish an effective group to address educational needs starts immediately.
  • The representation of the group echoes balance within the wider constitutes of the community.
  • The community is involved in the design, implementation, resources and budget management and evaluation of emergency education provision.
  • The education provision planned by the group is taken up and carried out.
  • All governmental and non-governmental agencies respect the group as a local decision-making authority in the planning process.
  • The consultation process is on-going and enables changing needs to be reflected in longer-term educational provision.
  • The power dynamics between the different representatives within the group are analysed by the group and every effort is made to ensure everyone has an equal voice.
  • The group ensures that all subgroups are fairly representing their constituents.
  • Education provisions reach the areas of most urgent need within an acceptable time in a form that is acceptable and effective to the learners.

Guidance Notes

  1. Background information for the chapter introduction: In emergency situations, government structures are often not functioning and community participation is the only way to guarantee legitimacy. It is wrong to believe that emergency interventions can ignore community participation and education, even from day one. Top-down interventions may seem quicker and efficient, but if we ignore voices of the affected community, interventions can do more damage than good, for example by perpetuating conflict. Long-term sustainability of educational provision is fundamentally tied to the community participation. In addition, over time the participation process must extend to surrounding areas, including non-affected populations, to ensure consistency in provision; if the surrounding population is excluded in the longer-term, it can generate new conflict.
  2. This category cuts across other sectors and categories and should be cross-referenced throughout the final standards document.
  3. Significant subgroups of the community include women, caste, clan, tribe, age groups, religious denominations and conflict groups.
  4. All governmental and non-governmental agencies should have agreed upon and established procedures for ensuring community participation in designing education responses. These procedures should be an essential part of the immediate response from day one, and should include the use of participatory methodologies to rapidly establish:
    • The immediate education needs of diverse subgroups (children, adults, young people)
    • Available human, financial and material resources
    • Power dynamics between sub-groups, including language groups
    • Limits presented by security arrangements
    • Feasible locations for education provision
    • Ways of integrating education into all aspects of emergency relief, especially where education can play a life-saving role.
  1. There is a need for locally generated materials that are culturally sensitive, which should be identified by the community.
  2. No consensus/ debate: Calling for equal participation may upset norms. Is this social engineering? No, emergencies provide an opportunity to break these barriers and divisions. Token participation is a missed opportunity and ineffective in the long-term. Community participation itself is an educational/learning opportunity. Community participation must include real and sustained empowerment and capacity-building and must build upon efforts already underway on the ground.
  3. No consensus / debate: Can you empower during an emergency?

EDUCATION POLICY AND COORDINATION

Education Policy and Coordination Standard 1:
Partners in education decision-making have demonstrable legitimacy.

Key Indicators

  • The affected community is supportive of the decision-making process.
  • The decision-making body includes representation from the affected community.

Guidance Notes

  1. Where possible and appropriate, the education authority should be involved.
  2. Representatives should cut across a wide spectrum of stakeholders.
  3. No consensus / debate: The exercise is unrealistic in conflict situations, but it depends on how the standards and indicators are interpreted. Still need to try with the belief that the standards may be aspirational. Need to make sure that interventions and responses do not creates an opportunity for provision of education that the host population does not have access to.

Education Policy and Coordination Standard 2:
An inclusive structure coordinates educational plans and programs.

Key Indicators

  • The education authority plays a lead role in coordination.
  • A common statement of aims, indicators and monitoring procedures is in place to which agencies have committed themselves.
  • Regular meetings are held.
  • Education information reaches key actors.
  • There is no conflict between plans of various educational actors.

Guidance Notes

  1. Discussion of designating a lead agency
  2. Completeness of inclusion is negotiable

Education Policy and Coordination Standard 3:
There is effective intersectoral collaboration.

Key Indicators

  • A transparent mechanism exists for sharing information between sectors.
  • Resources from other sectors are utilized for education aims.

Education Policy and Coordination Standard 4:
Emergency response takes into account the policies and practices of the affected areas.

Key Indicators

  • There is continuity between response plans and existing policies and practices.
  • Implementing agencies take into account national legal framework and policy documents.
  • Implementing agencies taken into account international legal framework and policy documents.

Guidance Notes

  1. No consensus / debate: Using top down approach in emergencies is convenient, but it can lead to perpetuation of difficulties that exist and prevent sustainability.
  2. No consensus / debate: There is a tension between respecting local policies and practices and taking the opportunity afforded by an emergency to change the system. Minimum standards may oppose social norms but this is also an opportunity to alleviate and/or address inequalities and discrimination, especially taking into account the most disadvantaged and affected. Is empowering those who suffer the most social engineering? Are minimum standards imposing values on communities? They involve judgments about culture, social norms and political will.
  3. Are the minimum standards and intervention or a response? Humanitarian agencies short-term commitment is damaging; they must not interfere with efforts that already exist, but build upon them.
  4. How is emergency defined? This influences the scope of the standards.

Education Policy and Coordination Standard 5:
Domain of intervention

To build upon: In plenary, participants felt that there is a need to develop a standard around the domain of intervention- when, under what circumstances, etc.



Participants Attending the UK Consultation on Minimum Standards for Education in Emergencies,
12 March 2004

Karen Evans
Chair in Education (Lifelong Learning)
Head of School
Institute of Education, University of London
20 Bedford Way, London WC1H OAL
Tel.: 020 7612 6000
k.evans@ioe.ac.uk
www.ioe.ac.uk

Anil Khamis
Lecturer in Education and International Development
Course Leader of MA in Education and International Development
Institute of Education, University of London
20 Bedford Way, London WC1H OAL
Tel.: 020 7612 6000
a.khamis@ioe.ac.uk
www.ioe.ac.uk

Elaine Unterhalter
Senior Lecturer in Education and International Development
Institute of Education, University of London
20 Bedford Way, London WC1H OAL
Tel.: 020 7612 6000
e.unterhalter@ioe.ac.uk
www.ioe.ac.uk

Jagdish Gundara
Head of International Centre for Intercultural Studies (ICIS)
Institute of Education, University of London
20 Bedford Way, London WC1H OAL
Tel.: 020 7612 6000
j.gundara@ioe.ac.uk
www.ioe.ac.uk

Moses Oketch
Lecturer in Education and International Development
Institute of Education, University of London
20 Bedford Way, London WC1H OAL
Tel.: 020 7612 6000
m.oketch@ioe.ac.uk
www.ioe.ac.uk

Susan Nicolai
Education in Emergencies Manger
Save the Children UK
1 St. John's Lane
London
EC1M 4AR
Tel.: 20 7012 6400
s.nicolai@scfuk.org.uk
www.savethechildren.org.uk

Andriy Dubovyk
Save the Children UK
1 St. John's Lane
London
EC1M 4AR
Tel.: 020 7012 6400
a.dubovyk@scfuk.org.uk
www.savethechildren.org.uk

Lola Gostelow
Emergencies Policy Adviser
Save the Children UK
1 St. John's Lane
London
EC1M 4AR
Tel.: 020 7012 6400
l.gostelow@scfuk.org.uk
www.savethechildren.org.uk

Katy Webley
Education Advisor
Save the Children UK
1 St. John's Lane
London
EC1M 4AR
Tel.: 020 7012 6400
k.webley@scfuk.org.uk
www.savethechildren.org.uk

Christine Patterson
Development Education Co-ordinator
15 Richmond Park
Belfast
BT10 0HB
Tel.: 028 9043 1123
c.patterson@scfuk.org.uk
www.savethechildren.org.uk

Philippa Thomas
Disability Policy Officer
Healthlink Worldwise
Cityside
40 Adler Street
London E1 1EE
Tel.: 020 7539 1570
thomas.p@healthlink.org.uk
www.healthlink.org.uk

Michael Brophy
Director
Africa Educational Trust
38 King Street
London WC2E 8JR
Tel.: 020 7836 5075
aet.mbrophy@care4free.net
www.africaed.org

Emily Oldmeadow
Programme Manager
Africa Educational Trust
38 King Street
London WC2E 8JR
Tel.: 020 7836 5075
aet.eoldmeadow@care4free.net
www.africaed.org

Alice Shirley
Projects Assistant
Education Action International
14 Dufferin Street
London EC1Y 8PD, UK
Tel.: 020 7426 5835
alice.shirley@education-action.org
www.education-action.org

Jason Pennells
Education Adviser
International Extension College
Michael Young Centre
Purbeck Road
Cambridge CB2 2DS
Tel.: 01223 414760
jason@iec.ac.uk
www.iec.ac.uk

Faith Emmett
Project Manager
Book Aid International
39-41 Coldharbour Lane
London SE5 9NR
Tel.: 02077333577
faith.emmett@bookaid.org
www.bookaid.org

Tesfaye Dubale
Executive Director
PO Box 9443
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
code.et@telecom.net.et

Iman Ammus
Librarian
Tamer Institute of Community Education
PO Box 1973
Ramallah
West Bank
Palestine
Tamer@palnet.com
www.tamerinst.org

Alan Smith
UNESCO Chair
University of Ulster
Coleraine BT52 1SA
Northern Ireland
Tel.: 028 703 24137
a.smith@ulster.ac.uk
www.ulster.ac.uk/unesco

Jason Hart
Research Officer
Refugee Studies Centre
Queen Elizabeth House
University of Oxford
21 St Giles
Oxford, OX1 3LA
Tel.: 01865 270722
jason.hart@queen-elizabeth-house.oxford.ac.uk
www.rsc.ox.ac.uk

Rachel Harvey
Assistant Director
International Policy and Programmes
Children's Legal Centre
University of Essex
Wivenhoe Park
Colchester
Essex CO4 3SQ
Tel.: 0044 1206 87 3483
armedcon@essex.ac.uk
www.essex.ac.uk/armedcon

Desmond Bermingham
Head of Profession, Education
Department for International Development
1 Palace Street
London SW1E 5HE
Tel: 020 7023 0000
D-Bermingham@dfid.gov.uk
www.dfid.gov.uk

Adaeze Igboemeka
Assistant Education Adviser
Department for International Development
1 Palace Street
London SW1E 5HE
Tel: 020 7023 0000
A-Igboemeka@dfid.gov.uk
www.dfid.gov.uk

Bridget Crumpton
Education Adviser
Department for International Development
1 Palace Street
London SW1E 5HE
Tel: 020 7023 0000
B-Crumpton@dfid.gov.uk
www.dfid.gov.uk

David Clarke
Senior Education Advisor
Department for International Development
1 Palace Street
London SW1E 5HE
Tel: 020 7023 0000
D-Clarke@dfid.gov.uk
www.dfid.gov.uk

David Archer
The Head of International Education
ActionAid
Hamlyn House
Macdonald Road, Archway
London N19 5PG
Tel.: 020 7561 7561
DArcher@actionaid.org.uk
www.actionaid.org

Peter Fell
Senior Education Specialist
Development Services
British Council
Bridgewater House
58 Whitworth Street
Manchester, M1 6BB
Tel.: 0161 957 7036
Peter.fell@britishcouncil.org
www.britishcouncil.com

Jill Rutter
Senior Lecturer in Education
London Metropolitan University
31 Jewry Street
LONDON
EC3N 2EY
Tel.: 020 7320 1000
j.rutter@londonmet.ac.uk
www.londonmet.ac.uk

Tim Spafford
Education Advisor on Pupil Mobility and Refugee Inclusion
31 Sidney Road
London E7 0ED
Timspaff@aol.com
www.refugeeeducation.co.uk

Sathya Varghese
Senior Learning Adviser
Plan International Headquarters
Chobham House
Woking
Surrey GU21 6JG
Tel.: 01483 733248
Varghese.Sathya@plan-international.org
www.plan-international.org

Jackie Kirk
The McGill University
Burnside Hall, Suite 110
805 Sherbrooke Street West
Montreal, Quebec H3A 2K6
Tel.: 514-398-4455
jkirk2@po-box.mcgill.ca
www.mcgill.ca

John Wood
Director of Education Development
Education for Change Ltd
17A Christopher Street
London EC2A 2BS
j.wood@efc.co.uk
www.efc.co.uk

Allison Anderson Pillsbury
INEE Focal Point on Minimum Standards for Education in Emergencies
Children Affected by Armed Conflict Unit
International Rescue Committee
122 East 42nd Street
New York
NY 10168-1289
Allison@theirc.org
www.ineesite.org

Shehneen Dhamani
MA student, Education and International Development
Institute of Education, University of London
20 Bedford Way, London WC1H OAL
shehneen@yahoo.com
www.ioe.ac.uk

Ai Matsubayashi
MA student, Education and International Development
Institute of Education, University of London
20 Bedford Way, London WC1H OAL
amatsuba@yahoo.co.jp

Keiko Nakao
MA student, Education and International Development
Institute of Education, University of London
20 Bedford Way, London WC1H OAL
petite_kel@hotmail.com

Carolyn Conway
MA student, Education and International Development
Institute of Education, University of London
20 Bedford Way, London WC1H OAL
cconway2uk@yahoo.co.uk

Koichi Yamauchi
MA student, Education and International Development
Institute of Education, University of London
20 Bedford Way, London WC1H OAL
Kyama314@aol.com

Paula Valentine
MA student, Education and International Development
Institute of Education, University of London
20 Bedford Way, London WC1H OAL
Paulavalentine@hotmail.com

Cathy Tang
MA student, Education and International Development
Institute of Education, University of London
20 Bedford Way, London WC1H OAL
cathytang@canoemail.com

Peter Merckx
Education Advisor
MA student, Education and International Development (Institute of Education, University of London)
Petermerckx@trclusprov.kabissa.org

Momoko Goto
MA student, Education and International Development
Institute of Education, University of London
20 Bedford Way, London WC1H OAL
Momoko0905@hotmail.com

Rebecca Heuberger
MA student, Education and International Development
Institute of Education, University of London
20 Bedford Way, London WC1H OAL
REBH23@aol.com

Caine Rolleston
MA student, Education and International Development
Institute of Education, University of London
20 Bedford Way, London WC1H OAL
m_rolleston@yahoo.com

Keiko Takahashi
MSc Student, Development Management
London School of Economics and Political Science
Houghton Street
London WC2A 2AE
keiko_wakawak@yahoo.co.jp
www.lse.ac.uk