Negotiating Change: Participatory Curriculum Design in Emergencies

Abstract

This paper examines an important component of the developing field of education in emergencies: curriculum decision-making processes. The paper argues that in order to fully meet the commitment articulated by the INEE Minimum Standards to provide quality education for all, curricula decisions cannot be ignored or postponed until after a crisis has occurred. Practitioners, advocates, and policy makers in the field of education in emergencies must recognize that in order for quality education to be provided equitably, curricular decisions must not only be fully part of the remit for those organisations, agencies, or governments providing education in emergencies, but the decision-making processes must be transparent, inclusive, and participatory. The INEE Minimum Standards as they continue to be promoted, contextualised, and institutionalised, could play a crucial role in this process. A increasing amount of attention has been paid to education in emergencies during the last decade. The principal mandates of humanitarian relief organisations typically involve provisions of food, shelter, water, sanitation, and healthcare. Education is often seen as part of longer-term development work rather than a necessary intervention in emergency responses. Today, attitudes and assumptions are changing as education is increasingly included in the planning and provision of humanitarian relief.[2] However, when education is included as part of a humanitarian response, there is a tendency to focus on the provision of school supplies. One example of this is the UNICEF ‘School in a Box’ kits, which comprise basic materials such as pencils and chalk, but on their own do not provide quality intervention (Anderson, Martone, Perlman Robinson, Rognerud & Sullivan-Owomoyel, 2006). The Inter-Agency Network for Education in Emergencies (INEE) is a body working to ensure that education in emergencies is not only part of a humanitarian response, but also that the education meets minimum standards of quality, access, and accountability. INEE has conducted broadbased advocacy efforts to ensure that the importance of education in emergencies is globally recognized. It has also facilitated a global consultation to develop a set of minimum standards for education in emergencies, chronic crises, and early reconstruction. The resulting document contains six categories of standards, including: Community Participation, Analysis, Access and Learning Environment, Teaching and Learning, Teachers and Other Education Personnel, and Education Policy and Coordination (Inter-Agency Network for Education in Emergencies [INEE], 2004a). The Minimum Standards also include Key Indicators and Guidance Notes to help in their implementation. The Minimum Standards Handbook has been adopted and used in over 80 countries and 25,000 copies have been distributed to humanitarian agency staff, educators, government ministries, donors, and multilateral agencies (INEE, 2006). Workers across six continents have been trained in their use, and increasing efforts are being made by the network to further contextualise the global standards so they may be a useful tool in any situation, from post-crisis to reconstruction and development. © 2007 Current Issues in Comparative Education, Teachers College, Columbia University, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Current Issues in Comparative Education, Vol. 9(2): 33-44. 34 Summer 2007 This paper examines an important component of education in emergencies: curriculum decisionmaking processes. It argues that in order to fully meet the commitment articulated by the INEE Minimum Standards to provide quality education for all, curricula decisions cannot be ignored or postponed until an indeterminate ‘post crisis’ phase of development. Practitioners, advocates and policy makers in the field of education in emergencies must recognize that in order for high quality education to be provided with accountability and equity, curricular decisions must not only be fully part of the remit for those organisations, agencies or governments providing education in emergencies, but the decision-making processes must be transparent, inclusive, and participatory. This is not an easy task. Curriculum development or revision in times of stability and peace can be fraught with sensitivities: issues of power, knowledge, and collective identity emerge in debates over what should be taught and how. In emergencies, particularly in those involving violent conflict where education itself can exacerbate or cause tensions, these issues become even more difficult to surmount. However, this paper will argue that participation is itself one way of responding to exactly these challenges. It can occur at different stages of the decision-making process, and could begin in small ways in individual classrooms and schools, without necessarily entailing wholesale national educational reform. This paper draws upon the experience, literature, and practice of educationalists working on negotiated curriculum theory. Negotiated curricula are learning plans that are collaboratively developed by teachers, students, and occasionally parents. Proponents of negotiated curriculum techniques highlight the advantages of encouraging students to be active agents in their own learning as they contribute to the choices and directions of their learning. Teachers are not presented as experts of knowledge, rather teachers and students engage in joint problem solving, the sharing of responsibility and mutual learning. These theories of negotiation in education provide a starting point in exploring how participatory curriculum design might be attempted in emergency situations. Through examining literature from a number of sub-fields from the education and development disciplines, this paper aims to provide insights into how the ultimate goal of quality education for all expressed in the INEE Minimum Standards might be realised. The argument is grounded in an in-depth study of the INEE Minimum Standards and their development as well as other tools that have been developed to aid practitioners in the field. It also draws upon the author’s observations and analysis after participating in several professional trainings on the INEE Minimum Standards and having informal conversations with members of the Network who use the Minimum Standards in their work. The pedagogical approach and practical techniques from contemporary progressive curriculum scholarship provide a theoretical framework and a useful model for adoption and adaptation. This problematisation of the current discourse is designed to incite discussion of the critical issue of curricula design in emergencies and to prompt much needed empirical research into current practices in order that we might more fully understand the opportunities for change that emergency contexts present. The term “emergency” encompasses a wide range of situations. These include natural disasters such as earthquakes, hurricanes, droughts and floods as well as complex emergencies that are ‘man-made,’ often caused by conflict or civil unrest (INEE, 2004a). Education is increasingly recognized for providing life-saving and life-sustaining relief in acute emergency phases and is a necessary component of early recovery and ongoing development (INEE, 2006). In this way education can provide continuity across all stages of the relief development continuum. There is growing recognition that “all individuals – children, youth and adults – have a right to education during emergencies” (INEE, 2004a, p. 5), in part because of education’s normative status as a Negotiating Change