Are alternative education programmes effective ways to ensure the goals of Education For All (EFA) are met for populations in situations of conflict and reconstruction?
 Before, during and after conflicts, it may not be possible for systematic formal education to take place. However, education remains a basic human right, whatever the security environment. In these circumstances alternative approaches to education delivery often arise to “fill the gap” in education provision caused by damage to the (educational) infrastructure, and security issues.
The Dakar World Education Forum in 2000 stressed the importance of meeting
‘the needs of education systems affected by conflict, natural calamities and instability and conduct educational programmes in ways that promote mutual understanding, peace and tolerance, and that help to prevent violence and conflict'.
Alternative provision can take a variety of guises to augment or replace state provision; but capacity, resources or opportunities to provide a comprehensive education system are rarely available to non-governmental organisations (NGOs) or community-based groups who undertake this provision. Subsequently, even when emergency education is provided it may only be offered to certain age groups or within certain areas. NGO-driven education may also encompass specific educational provisions that are labelled alternative, in so far as they are outside of the mainstream curriculum, but which respond to specific needs of the particular population. These include programmes such as landmine awareness education and HIV/AIDS education. Other programmes are labelled as alternative even though the only difference is the mode of delivery with the curriculum taught via alternative methods rather than formal, classroom-based education. | Distinctions can also be drawn between alternative education programmes in terms of the timescales of the interventions. Generally these can be categorised as short-term substitute ‘emergency’ provision and longer-term developmental provision which tends to focus on capacity building. The distinctions between the two, however, are often unclear with projects evolving or striving to integrate developmental aspects into emergencies provision.
In 2007, millions of children remain out of school, including at least 43 million children in conflict-affected fragile states
Although individual case studies of various forms of alternative education programmes (AEPs) have been undertaken, there has to date been no systematic study of the range of approaches and how effectively they respond to the goals of EFA. Yet because AEPs respond to a diverse set of circumstances and a complex set of needs there is no simple framework for the assessment of these programmes. The question of whether these programmes are an effective response to meeting the goals of EFA for populations in crisis: refugee, internally-displaced and returnee children and youth, is actually only part of the issue. There is also a need to examine under what circumstances these responses are most effective and, by default perhaps when these programmes are used in lieu of regular programmes and why.
The project will address this question from three perspectives:
• The relevance of AEPs and how suitable activities are for learners;
• Their effectiveness and the extent to which AEPs meet their objectives; and
• The impact AEPs have, directly and indirectly, intended and unintended, and positive and negative. The research will conclude by offering a set of evidence-based “best-practice” principles for policy-makers and practitioners of effective programming for AEPs which most successfully respond to the goals of EFA. |
