This snapshot, taken on 02/08/2004, shows web content selected for preservation by The National Archives. External links, forms and search boxes may not work in archived websites.

Find out more about web archiving at The National Archives

See all dates available for this archived website

Enabling Effective Support

Development education in schools Consultation Report

Introduction | The Consultation: Responding to the key propositions | The Consultation: Responding as a 'region / country' | Three key issues: 1. Stakeholders | 2. Regions | 3. Schools | A shared vision | Goals and the strategy of 'proposals' | Creating opportunities for others to contribute | Innovation and creativity is pivotal | There is much to build on | The initiative, the process and the developing of plans

Preamble

This document is designed to share debate to support the building of effective plans. Any views are offered in that spirit. They are not necessarily the views of DFID.

It is only through debating the issues that joint visions will emerge. This document is therefore offered as background to further work on Enabling Effective Support.

Note on terminology:

'Region/country': The focus has been on the potential of regional strategies but Wales and Scotland are countries. Hence the term 'region/country'. Reference is also made to 'UK national' to distinguish this from national initiatives in Wales or Scotland.
Development education: This term has been used when presenting the best of current practice in terms of meeting the educational needs of young people growing up in an increasingly global context.

Written by Scott Sinclair [Director, Development Education Centre, Birmingham] for DFID Enabling Effective Support 2001.

With thanks to all those who have contributed to the process, joined meetings, sent letters, documents and emails. Particular thanks go to Eleri Elliot, Bill Rigby, Ann McCollum, Richard Calvert and Frances Burns.

Back to top

Introduction

The Government’s White Paper on international development calls for increased public understanding of our global mutual dependence and the need for international development. It also calls for every child to be educated about development issues so that they can understand the key global considerations which will shape their lives.

Enabling Effective Support [EES] is a Department for International Development [DFID] initiative. It set out to build on what has been achieved in development education in the school sector, to raise the debate and to stimulate creativity about the potential for a dynamic future.

This document takes stock of some of the issues which have come out of the EES process to date. It offers a focus to engage key stakeholders in responding to those issues.

The process to date, and that proposed for the future seeks:

To build a framework to support and stimulate a wide range of development education activity;
To develop this framework to engage teachers, schools, new curriculum projects, development of new materials, new networks, new research and academic exploration of the field and to stimulate debate about the educational issues;
To enable schools to play there part in responding to the challenges raised by the government white paper Eliminating World Poverty and the subsequent document Building Support for Development.

The EES has, as it set out to, raised many debates. It would seem that there is potential for ‘regional scale’ strategies to provide a better context for existing initiatives and to generate new ones. However it is important that networking and regional frameworks should not be seen as an alternative priority but a complementary one. ‘Local scale’ work is the most important work. Frameworks should be designed to maximise this, to enable better sharing of ideas and experiences and to build up greater confidence in the value of development education as a vital contribution to meeting the educational needs of young people growing up in an increasingly global context.

There is at this time a wonderful opportunity to make the most of a confluence of interests by developing approaches and strategies that could bring about significant change. It brings with it major challenges which call for nothing less than a culture change in “development education”. This document invites you to be part of that confluence.

Back to top

The Consultation

The Enabling Effective Support [EES] initiative was set up to engage interested parties in a consultation process to support development education in schools. From the initial work it became clear that there was a need to heighten debate about the issues and possibilities for future plans. To this end a document was produced inviting people to respond to key propositions.

This document has been widely used throughout the UK. Particular processes were set up in both Wales and Yorkshire & the Humber Region. The document also has also been made use of as a focus for similar processes in a number of other regions and in Scotland.

Responding to the key propositions

The following is a summary of the main responses to the propositions. There was much agreement about the key ideas but less about the implications and the need for new approaches and greater creativity to respond effectively to the challenges they raise.

1. That young people should have an entitlement to development education. There is a need for creative work to clarify what this means in practical terms and what support teachers need to bring it into practice.

Work has been done on the nature of such entitlements which could provide a starting point for further debate.
The experience in England, Wales and Scotland has many distinctive aspects which reflect the different official approaches to curriculum change. Much could be learnt from exchanging experiences and identifying effective approaches for development education.
Development education entitlement has much in common with other educational entitlements. There is potential for new partnerships in thinking about how best to integrate development education. This is not simply about selling development education to everyone else. The partnerships would have to be more equal. “No one has the whole agenda”. The future of development education is also dependant on the input from other fields.
“There is no point in everybody doing development education if it is not good quality development education well integrated with other learning objectives”.

2. That schools have an important role to contribute to the building of a fuller understanding of development issues and their significance to our lives.

There is a need for work to demonstrate the potential of schools recognising themselves as civil society organisations … and the implications of their local leadership.
There is a lot of work needed to encourage people to recognise that global dimensions are part of the local community landscape and crucial to local citizenship.
There is a need for support to Heads and teachers to enable them to develop their own understanding of this potential and to experiment in its practical implementation.
There is a need for new up to date teaching materials dealing with new understandings of development, relating to new curriculum in each of the jurisdictions and responding to current international issues. [ It would be best if this need was met by also meeting other strategic aims such as engaging teachers, stimulating creativity and building wider confidence in development education.]

3. That development education has something to contribute to the essential core educational needs of young people and as such, should increasingly be the responsibility of teachers, schools and the structures of the education system.

There is work to be done to further develop the background thinking to development education. This needs to be backed by more research and academic work.
There is a need to deal with the limitations of development education being seen as valuable because it is about “the good cause / charity” … rather than education.
There is an assumption that “development education is clear” about what it would like to see happening in schools. In terms of major policy, potential curriculum change in the future etc this is not the case. There is, for example, a need for work now in order to have coherent ideas and arguments prepared for future official curriculum reviews.

4. That a global dimension, development perspectives and human rights principles have a crucial part to play in the implementing of a curriculum which responds to the challenges posed by citizenship, sustainable development, democracy and a the multi-ethnic society.

There are considerable opportunities for shared agendas on new creative work at this time. “This involves really sharing, taking joint risks, working together on the problem. It is not simple a ‘marketing’ of dev. ed.”
There is work needed to “Put development perspectives, global dimensions and human rights principles at the heart of education”

There is a need for in-depth action research relating to each of the 4 key propositions.

The document also featured propositions about operational matters.

There is a need:

To build on what has been already achieved and the good practice which many development education initiatives demonstrate.
To embrace other educational agendas and curriculum matters to fully integrate thinking about development education.
To develop a long term perspective and identify strategic goals looking ten years ahead. Proposals for more immediate plans need to be judged in the context of how they move towards such goals.
For a coalition strategy involving a range of partners including NGOs [such as Development Education Centres] and structures within the education system.
to make effective use of other complementary initiatives and support structures which are available both locally, regionally and nationally.
For regional/national policies and appropriate curriculum frameworks to support local development education work. Potential policy changes need to be identified and plans made well in advance in order to be able to respond to opportunities as they arise.
For more effective dissemination and for new creative projects to make the most of the opportunities that are available for development education in schools.

There was broad agreement about these propositions.

Back to top

Responding as a 'region/ country'

The experience of EES to date suggests that there is potential for regional strategy and it is therefore proposed that this is a realistic approach for DFID to facilitate.

It is also clear that such plans should emerge locally, be “owned” locally and have the potential to be sustainable (i.e. in the longer term not dependent on one single source of funding). This has tended to make the EES process more difficult. In addition the fact that EES is not prescriptive has ironically caused some tensions.

In each region/country there is a need for further planning and the setting up of those structures felt to be most appropriate.

This document is not suggesting a “blueprint”, nor is it suggesting that work in particular countries/regions should develop such a “blueprint” in the future. It is proposed that strength should be drawn from a diversity of approaches and creative response to core goals.

The work in Wales and in Yorkshire and the Humber Region, for example, offer different models. There are separate papers about the background situation in Wales and in Yorkshire and the Humber Region. The distinguishing features of those particular plans are outlined below.

In Wales

The existence of the Welsh Assembly with its responsibility for education. It is proposed that core to strategy will be the setting up of a working group responsible to the Minister of Education but also in partnership with DFID.
Devolution has meant that Wales is looking more to its wider identity and its role in the world this is a particular opportunity for development education.
The PSE (Personal Social Education) framework and in particular the work of ACAC (the Welsh qualifications authoity) has tremendous potential. This initiative also would lend itself well to focusing projects building capacity within the system engaging teachers etc
The potential for partnerships with core agendas by engaging teachers in producing materials in Welsh.
There is potential to build on existing network structures such as Cyfanfyd.
The Welsh Assembly also has a particular brief for sustainable development there is an opportunity here. There was much interest from organisations such as RSPB and the Agenda 21 network.
A joint DFID/Welsh Assembly publication on Global Dimensions to the Curriculum is being developed.
There are numerous possibilities for new initiatives based on for example some of the ITE institutions, Oxfam which is a particularly well developed programme. The DECs and CEWC Cymru.

In Yorkshire and the Humber

The regional structures are less developed in this context but there is considerable potential for contributing to newly emerging structures.
There is particular potential linked to the regional responsibility for sustainable development and the initiatives that are in place.
The main proposals to date build round the network of Development Education Centres (and similar organisations) and the potential for building structure.
There is a framework proposed to engage those involved in a wide range of development education activity.
There are several possibilities for new projects building around the structure above or in ITE institutions.

Back to top

Three Key Issues

1. Stakeholders

Who wants to talk about development education?
What do we need to be talking about?

A fundamental problem with the EES consultation document and process to date is about who wants to discuss development education in this way. There is a danger of the process itself reinforced the idea that the development education agenda “belongs to” particular groups of organisations and that that agenda is driven by “advocacy” rather than by “education”.

There has been significant interest from people with a variety of key roles in the education system in EES. However, the scope of this is wider and given greater depth when it is seen as part of other educational goals.

The core dilemmas need further exploration and an airing in a UK context. There is a need for both clarity and creativity about the potential for a change in “development education culture”. For example:

The implications of longer term strategies that focus on educational goals.
The need to give priority to supporting new thinking about development education generated within the context of such educational goals [and therefore to give less priority to profiling, specific causes, “branding”, short term “changes in attitude” etc].

One of the longer term goals is that development education should be integral to the curriculum and core educational practice in schools … and therefore owned and valued by teachers, schools [managers, governors etc], parents [and the community], curriculum planners etc. However, at this stage it would seem that such a strategy is dependent on the commitment of those interested in “talking about development education”. They therefore are the current key stakeholders.

What do we need to be talking about?

Vested interests: can we be open about this?
Pulling in the same direction?
Evaluation: part of the dynamic?
Funding: vital, urgently needed, but is it the starting point?
The implications of ideas in section about Regions
The implications of ideas in section about Schools

Vested interests

It has been suggested by many of those consulted that there are considerable vested interests in not engaging in such long term educational strategic goals. If the ‘development education community’ is going to have a role in ‘enabling schools to play their part’ then there has, at a minimum, to be an open debate about the possibility of vested interests and their implications.

How do we best raise the debate about the issues involved so that they are understood and seen constructively? It is not possible to develop regional strategy in isolation from such factors anymore than it is to ignore wider policies about education, curriculum etc.

Organisations like the DEA, CYFANFYD in Wales and IDEAS in Scotland have to a certain extent engaged with these issues. See, for example, the DEA paper 'Principles and Practice for Development Education Practitioners working with Schools'.

At this stage in the process NGOs, including national development organisations and more local development education centres (DECs), are key ‘stakeholders’. An awareness of how we each contribute to the ‘big picture’ will be vital if a key element of strategy is about the education sector (rather than NGOs) taking increasing responsibilities for development education. It is difficult to see how any coherent vision can emerge unless we engage maturely with such sensitive issues.

Tentatively I offer an example to make the significance clear and to help focus debate:

A major aid organisation that probably sees itself as a leader in development education advertises for a Education Post... “You will ensure that yy’s aims and concerns are effectively and appropriately communicated to pupils, teachers and policy makers to maximise the potential of education, fundraising, campaigning and raising yy’s profile.”

How do they see themselves fitting into the ‘big education picture’? Are they seeking DFID support for this work? How many other organisations have similar profiling interests? What are the implications?

Pulling in the same direction?

It is proposed that the function of a “regional scale” strategy is to enable and interact with “local scale” activity. There are however, also implications for what happens at a “UK national scale”.

“UK National” initiatives have a contribution; but there is a need to avoid the trends such as:

“National scale” thinking simply imposing on the regional/ local;
“National organisations” using regional partnership to attract funding to national scale projects, but with disproportionate use of expenditure;
Organisations that happen to be based in London taking on the “national” mantle.

There are a number of “national” projects/ organisations which are particularly important to regional work. There is, for example, strong evidence of the work of Oxfam Development Education in each country. Planning strategy should give consideration to seeking partners at this scale to contribute to regional framework objectives.

It should also be recognised that initiatives which are essentially seen as regional, for example Manchester DEP’s Global Express, DEDU resource services, or the Development Education Commission set up by DEC Birmingham/80:20 have “national” functions.

EES, it is proposed, should have UK strategies, for example:

To offer major challenges [e.g. from Ministers, leading educationalists, etc];
To develop forum for sharing experiences, challenging each others strategies and other creative activities;
To develop DFID Data web site including for example more effective “hot links”, etc;
To enable co-ordination [in best sense] …and deal with issues such as above.

Evaluation: part of the dynamic

Evaluation should be considered in the early stages of planning regional/country strategies and at the UK level. Clearly there is a need to take stock and to measure progress. There is also a particular need to document the process and the different experiences in different regions/ countries. As part of this it is important, if the different projects are to learn from each other, that a feature is made of the dilemmas involved, the difficulties that arise and what is seen to be learnt within each of the projects.

Evaluation should also be seen as core to the dynamic of each of the projects:

It is a tool for consultation and engaging a wide range people in the planning and early stages of building a regional / country network.
It is one of the means of sustaining the awareness within a network of what is going on and of engaging how “the network is thinking”. It is a way of participating in its own right and brings added value to being of part of the network.
Early planning for evaluation also helps determine clearer objectives and a basis for whether particular initiatives should or should not be funded.

EES projects could give clear indication of their thinking by using the “why – what – how?” approach to evaluation which is being proposed by the DFID/DEA Measuring effectiveness in development education project.

There may be a wide range of valid answers to the question ' Why are we engaged in development education?' [The question used by Measuring effectiveness to explore “underlying values and long term goals”.] However, in the context of EES there is a need to:

Seek evidence of thinking about long term goals
Give clear priority to projects which demonstrate that their “why” is about contributing to the “education agenda”.
Give priority to projects which widen the range of stakeholders in development education, for example, by giving priority to teacher engagement .

This would also provide a basis for open debate about priorities. For example, while it may be valid for an organisation to be engaged in development education to profile its own work, this need not be a priority for DFID.

Funding: vital, urgently needed, but is it the starting point?

Enabling partnerships, unlocking the creative energy from within the education sector, engaging teachers etc. will enable levels of activity and work disproportionate to funding levels. However, lead funding and commitment over 3 to 5 years is essential if the EES is to establish its potential role. DFID is in a unique position to start this process.

It is proposed that EES initiatives are ‘owned’ locally, that they build strong local networks and of course make good use of funding to develop the network and its role but that at the core they are not fund dependent. Plans need to be driven by ideas and goals rather than by funding.

There is a need to think of realistic funding if we are taking the scale of the task seriously and to see this in the context of issues about levels of pay, expectations of professionalism etc. As a benchmark it may be useful to think in terms of an amount per pupil in school in the region/country. In year 1 and 2 of EES it could be in the region of 10p/15p per head. Later it could move towards 50p or perhaps 1 Euro per head. This benchmark is offered as a planning tool for those making target budgets. It is not suggested that such funding could come from any one source. It is not suggested that this is a figure for DFID’s contribution.

It is recommended that EES is also used as a funding strategy:

To seek new commitment from existing funders of development education;
To interest new funders such as businesses;
To legitimise research applications to academic funding sources;
To provide a clearer framework of civil society objectives which might interest major charitable trusts;
To provide a context which might attract funding from national government in Wales and Scotland and from the new emerging structures in the English regions;
To make a case to the European Community that projects contributing to EES should be considered under their new capacity building criteria. (Note: this funding for NGOs only);
To interest the European Parliament in the idea that funding should be available for experimental work which could contribute to EES from Education budgets;
To interest the DfES in providing funding for experimental work by LEAs, education institutions etc. which could contribute to EES.

… and in the longer term?

Those with prime interest in long term goals of integrating development education into the education agenda in schools will recognise the dilemmas this presents in terms of the role of NGOs and the need for changing roles as we move towards achieving those goals.

They will also recognise that it is not wise to assume that EES funding support from DFID will be sustained for the 10 years span that are suggested for the goals.

Many factors could lead to changes in priority within that time span ranging from political change, level of budget availability, changes of priorities at a ministerial level … or indeed the success of Enabling Effective Support itself.

We should anticipate that within the next 5 years EES will contribute in many ways to a growing recognition and valuing of the educational significance of this work. We should anticipate that this will lead to proposals from within the system, from teacher networks, from academic educationalists and from curriculum planners to reflect such work in policy and curriculum documents. Clearly at some point Education Ministries in England, Wales and Scotland becomes the lead departments of government for this particular agenda.

It is beyond the scope of this report to speculate about the changes in DfES (Department for Education and Skills) and the organisation of education itself. However, it is important to note that there are significant debates going on about the future structure of education at a regional scale in England.

Will regional level decisions in England play significant roles in the organisation of education, school budgets and policy within the time span of the proposed goals? What are the implications and opportunities?

From the outset DFID has made it clear that they are seeking ‘locally owned sustainable action plans’. This is vital to all parties and to ‘development education’ itself. The potential investment from DFID is the most significant of opportunities but will achieve little if it simply institutionalises the existing situation and makes it more dependent. It may appear to serve DFID’s needs in the short term giving them more control/influence over what is happening but longer term it would be counter productive for DFID and more importantly for ‘development education’.

DFID do have to make choices about their approach to supporting EES initiatives and recognise the dilemmas of opening up the agenda and sharing responsibility which does not fit easily with the assumptions that change is about budgets.

If we don’t debate the possibility that approaches to funding for regional initiatives could actually damage the potential for achieving the goals then we increase that possibility.

What advice should we be seeking about this issue?

Back to top

2. Regions

Could a regional strategy support local development education in schools?
What process to build a plan?

This section considers

What is particular about the regional context?
A regional planning framework
What key initiatives for regional objectives?

EES proposes that it is realistic for DFID to facilitate the setting up of Regional Strategy.

It is clear from the consultation that much of the creative thinking that shapes current best development education practice took place as part of local scale projects.

Regional strategies also have implication for UK National planning.

Key to any EES regional plan is a need to enable “local scale” work

Core to any strategy must be the need for local scale development education work which is accessible to, and within the scope of, every young person …and that provides a local context for understanding global issues.

What is particular about the regional context?

Each of the regions/countries cover a large geographical area, a considerable population, diverse economic, social and environmental local experiences and multiple identities. They all are increasingly affected by global interdependence.

To varying degrees there are opportunities for global dimensions and development perspectives to contribute to understandings of current regional concerns such as:

Identity and the ways in which a place defines itself in relation to other places socially, economically, politically and environmentally.
Aspirations and the ways in which local people would like to see their “place” contributing to the world [or concerns they might have about its impact on other places and people].
Participation and the building of a new sense of civil society in the context of new regions/countries. [and about the need to see that civil society in its global context].
Interdependence and globalisation and new understandings of ways in which our lives are affected by issues elsewhere and vice versa.

There are also particular strategic opportunities to do with:

Co-operation between LEAs [and those with key roles in different LEAs] within a region/country.
The formative stages of new regional/country structures which will shape educational practice in the future.
Other regional/country initiatives, for example those relating to sustainable development.
New curricula [and in particular Citizenship in England / PSE in Wales]

There is much current change in the thinking about regions/countries. This provides an opportunity to contribute to that change ~ and offer added value to other work by bringing a global dimension and development perspective to the work of those concerned about such regional matters.

Developing a planning framework

It is proposed

That each region /country needs a framework plan to enable a wide range of activity;
That a popular form of this framework should be shared in a high profile leaflet so that a wide range of potential participants can engage in the process;
That the framework should provide core objectives relating to the quality of development education in the region/ country;
That these should be the basis for a variety of contributions towards the objectives:
- From schools themselves;
- From projects funded as part of the strategy;
- From projects that “sign up” to EES but are not formally part of it;
- From other bodies that have roles to support work in schools.

There is a need for support to encourage groups planning regional strategies to explore difficulties and potential difficulties fully. There is also a need to consider whether there are assumptions based on current practice that might inhibit plans. For example about:

Training models, for example, the notion that we have something that “they” need rather than processes that are more engaging;
Seeing schools as a means for getting over particular viewpoints or profiling organisations;
“No-one else is interested” … and that if no-one is engaged in what is being offered that it is “them” at fault, rather than what is being offered;
Partnerships being an easy option rather than one that needs thorough negotiation;
Employment practice, in particular part-time posts and pay levels;
Funding being the main block to developing new plans.

What key initiative will help build a regional strategy?

The following are an example of generic questions to highlight the potential variety of key initiatives which could be used to engage significant groups in taking on aspects of EES work.

1. What high profile focus is there for the work? What opportunities are there for engaging policy makers and those in senior roles in thinking through the issues for themselves?

Would it be useful to set up a global forum? This could provide an overall framework, include a comprehensive range of actors and deliver competent work in a way that is seen to be credible by all players.

2. What capacity is there to support the innovatory work of teachers, advisers etc, to enable effective dissemination of ideas and resources and to build networks?

What core posts are needed? What should their roles be? How are they supported/ managed? How do they maintain priority to enabling the work within the system rather than establishing alternative delivery?

Overall DFID should seek to support a variety of approaches including posts based in DECs and other NGOs as well as those with a base in LEA Advisory Services or Teacher Centres and University Schools of Education.

3. Is there scope for a think tank group? This could provide an opportunity to bring together policymakers, senior people from within the education structures, academics, people from business, politics, the RDA etc.

They could have focussed time specific task reviewing particular issues … stimulating thinking and creating some excitement.

4. Is there scope for a forum for young people [16 to 19] to engage directly with core issues? Would it be a new project or could it add value to an existing project/structure?

This could be designed so that it provided the opportunity for teachers and students to take responsibility for planning together. It could provide a framework of key events bringing young people from different parts of the region together. This in turn could stimulate more locally generated self-sustained events.

It is proposed that such work should not only be a learning experience for the young people involved but also a contribution to “regional thinking” ~ [within the overall strategy].

5. Are there opportunities for curriculum projects, professional development and the networking of teachers?

There is considerable interest among teachers in the issues and an awareness of the need to address the increasingly global context in which young people are growing up.

Who are the potential partners interested in working with teachers? What existing services [eg from ITE institutions or LEAs] could be extended to support this work? What investment would be needed to make this sustainable? Are there NGOs [eg DECs] interested in taking on this role? What support do they need?

There is a considerable need for new materials to support work in different areas of the curriculum, build in local dynamic, provide up to date information and ‘thinking” and to offer stimulus material, case studies etc about different parts of the world. There is a real shortage but this can not be of prime concern to DFID ~ [with notable exceptions].

What should however be given more priority is the use of material production as a means of teacher engagement, capacity building [within the system] and more confident networking between teachers. This is a cost effective way of meeting those targets.

Is there scope for several teacher groups in different parts of the region to contribute different parts to an overall project? The sharing of work between groups also adds dynamic to the work of the separate groups. Are there teachers or advisers that might take on the co-ordination role of different groups? What support would they need?

Is consideration being given to work at each key stage and to opportunities in different curriculum areas? How can the strategy build up capacity [within the system] in each of these areas? Who are the potential partners to plan for each of these areas?

6. There are key strategic projects and publications which will be needed ‘nationally’. ~ [ for example identified by DFID].

It is proposed that the bid process for such work is designed so that it maximises the potential for fulfilling the objective of local teacher engagement [as outlined above].

It is proposed that the bid process for such work encourages bids from within the education sector in order to contribute to capacity building. Clearly NGOs should get an equal opportunity to bid for such projects but it should not be structured or budget levels assumed so as to exclude others.

7. Is there potential for a key Resource Base/ Centre.

It is proposed that each region/country should have at least one resource point to disseminate materials and provide network information to new teachers.

This Centre could be seen as a local reference point to a much further developed national website database [for example, building on the one already set up by DFID].

This website should link to all organisations “signing up” to EES.

Back to top

3. Schools

How do we enable schools to play their part?
What are the opportunities?

At the heart of the matter is the aim to enable schools to play their part in responding to the challenges raised by the government white paper 'Eliminating World Poverty' and the subsequent document 'Building Support for Development'.

For schools to play their part there is a need to directly engage teachers and school structures in creative work about how they might do this. There is a need to address a range of matters in each of the following areas:

The curriculum and what is taught;
The experience of school as a whole;
The role of the school as a key civil society organisation;
The personal and professional development of teachers

Key to this approach is presenting the challenges as an educational ‘problem’… a ‘problem’ that teachers, schools, LEAs, policy makers etc have to respond to. NGOs such as DECs are there to help schools respond to their “problem”.

The role of EES should be to unlock the creative potential from within the education sector.

There is also a need to address the question of language and the need of an education driven agenda using the “language of education”. In the short term this is important in terms of engaging decision makers in dialogue, but the proposals in this report also highlight the longer term challenge of new models of integrating development education …. and therefore the possibility of new educationally driven language.

Are there opportunities in the curriculum?

The guidance document 'Developing a Global Dimension in the School Curriculum' highlights the potential within the current curriculum (England) for including global dimensions. It also provides some basic examples of how such dimensions enhance young people’s understandings relating to core curriculum needs and skills development.

[This publication also demonstrates the potential for partnership at policy level. It involved DFID, DfEE, the QCA as well as the Development Education Association and the Central Bureau.]

It states that including a global and development dimension in education means that:

Links can be made between local and global issues, and what is taught is informed by international and global matters;
People are given opportunities to examine their own values and attitudes, and appreciate the similarities between peoples everywhere, to understand the global context of their local lives, and to develop skills that will enable them to combat prejudice and discrimination;
People are equipped with the knowledge, skills and understanding to play an active role in the global community. These ideas have implications for how we engage teachers about the opportunities that teachers need themselves to explore these issues and how development education is integrated with other agendas.

The process is not one of introducing externally defined content or values into different aspects of the curriculum.

The practice and in particular the methodology of development education grew out of a projects which asked the questions such as :

What is the global dimension ? …to the subject being considered
What are the development perspectives that affect this area of work? Do they relate to experiences that young people have in any way?
How do we make the concepts involved accessible and understandable to young people?
Does this work enhance their understanding of ………. [the subject in question]?
Does it contribute to developing their skills and if so in what way?
Could it help them have a positive disposition to global issues and the possibilities of positive change?

Are there opportunities for educational partnerships?

There is considerable potential to integrate development education concepts and approaches with, and offer added value to, a wide range of educational initiatives.

This includes matters to do with core educational skills and standards, work on specific curriculum areas and awareness work responding to issues to do with race, gender, human rights and sustainable development.

The Development Education Commission document 'Essential Learning for Everyone' proposes that there is a need for new thinking about building a common agenda.

The diagram highlights the need, from the prospective of young people, for more coherence. There is also a need to support teachers if they are to feel confident about making a serious response to this complete agenda. We should not appear to be saying that development education is more important than these other areas of work. It is not about teachers choosing which of these they engage. In practice they all relate to each other. However we also need to avoid the sense that this is about bringing all of the issues there are to worry about and burdening young people with them. This area of work needs considerable creativity.

An enabling role to support schools

There is a need for benchmarks to help NGOs such as DECs to improve planning so that external support engages more effectively the potential for change within the system. There is for example potential for direct NGO work with policy makers, there is also a role to enable teachers to play a fuller part in that process. This may be more appropriate for EES.

There are particular opportunities for new work in response to:

The need for creative work on the potential role of inspection in supporting development education.

It would be useful to design a project to bring together those with inspection experience in England, Scotland and Wales [and also if possible Ireland] to develop proposals.

The need for more work engaging groups of headteachers, deputy heads, curriculum planners [and LEA advisers] in creative work about approaches to school self evaluation about global dimensions, to develop and test strategies on a small scale and then to make such work available for others to use.

This work needs to focus on questions relating to the whole school and its relationship with the community as well as teaching and classroom practice relating to curriculum.

Where should we asking dev. ed. questions?

There is a need to engage practice at local, regional and national scales ~ in this case it is important to focus on the national in England, Scotland and Wales.

There is a need to identify strategic opportunities that ensure that development education questions are being asked as part of other processes of change.

Change for example in:

1. New Curricula … and in particular core thinking and values. There is need to plan ahead and do the ground-work for future Curriculum Review.

2. Thinking and practical work relating to specific curriculum including the major opportunities relating to citizenship, PSE in Wales, sustainable development.

3. Initiatives about professionalising teachers such as the setting up of the General Teacher Councils in England, Wales and Scotland.

4. Contributing to new paradigms based on critical thinking and creative application of skills and the other educational debates about multiple intelligences etc.

5. Work on the spectrum ideas relating to the global dimension [which also engage other sectors of interest] including work based on ideas to do with:

equality

democracy

human rights

global citizenship

freedom

justice

poverty reduction

social environmental responsibility

social equity and diversity

anti-racism

multi-culturalism

peace and conflict resolution

interdependence

6. Leadership, in particular the work of the Leadership College, and thinking about styles of leadership appropriate to the development education agenda.

7. Thinking about the relationship between school and community … and the role of a school as a civil society organisation.

8. Work on standards.

How do NGOs improve teacher engagement?

Strategies which engage, motivate and stimulate creative work among teachers are vital.

Such an approach should take account of the following.

The need for teachers to have practical ideas about teaching about their curriculum area backed up by appropriate materials.
That teachers themselves have a key role in developing such resources.
That teachers require opportunities to learn about these issues for themselves “as adult learners”.
That teachers need an opportunity to reflect, question and re-appraise their own values and attitudes in order to support them in the development of classroom strategies for engaging with development issues.
That teachers need to have firsthand experience of participatory methods and activities designed to make complex concepts more accessible if they are going to really value them as learning processes.
That teachers need to have genuine insights and ownership of what development education is aspiring to if they are going to offer young people appropriate experiences.

This work does not lend itself to being prescribed.

That teachers get a lot of value from opportunities to engage with other teachers who are tackling similar areas of the curriculum etc.

These qualities should therefore be core to proposed strategy and a key instrument in enabling a culture change about how development education is valued and about how it integrates with other educational thinking.

Back to top

A shared vision

It is proposed that there should be a short 'Enabling Effective Support' document designed to clarify the context of EES regional / country initiatives, particular projects and to facilitate a wide range of responses from other interested parties.

It is proposed that there should be a central website and occasional news letter (alternatively this could be a regular part of the DFID magazine 'Developments') to profile the range of work going on in support of EES.

Negotiating a framework should provide a basis for:

core plans and negotiating goals;
a range of other (non funded) contributions;
improved teacher engagement;
raising questions in the context of education change;
evaluation;
partnership and funding strategy

Back to top

Goals and the strategy of 'proposals'

It is far from clear what the detailed outcomes of EES might be over the next 5 to 10 years. It is very clear what the challenges are in terms of both understanding what is going on in the world and educational practice. The strategy proposed is one of sharing those challenges, encouraging others to take them on for their own but also providing support to enable a creative response.

In this context it is important to recognise what someone described as the “power of being tentative”. There is little value in appearing to “have the answer” when clearly we do not. The strategy involves engaging structures and individuals in the process of change and recognising that there is a need for creativity at all levels to make change both appropriate and effective.

There is potential for negotiating regional / country goals about:

Opportunities for young people
Learning entitlement
Engaging other networks
Quality of teacher networking
Professional development opportunities
Research
Funding partnerships
Policy proposals
Frameworks for evaluation

What are our priorities? What is our vision? How do we share it?

Back to top

Creating opportunities for others to contribute

It is proposed that EES be structured so that it provides a framework for contributions of substantive work that are not funding related.

For example it could provide a focus for initiative:

From individual schools, groups of school or an LEA;
From teacher trade unions;
From subject associations such the Geographical Association, the Historical Association, the Humanities Association;
From organisations with a focus on awareness of particular issues or areas eg those networks concerned with Europe;
From new education structures such as the Teacher Councils (which have been set-up in each of the jurisdictions) and the new Leadership College;
From organisation such as the SHA (Secondary Heads Association), the Headteachers Association and the SEO (Society for Education Officers);
From organisations supporting work with school governors and PTAs (parent teachers associations)
From development non-governmental organisations.

Back to top

Innovation and creativity is pivotal...

The EES project has highlighted the fact that much of the creative thinking that shapes current best development education practice took place as part of locally based projects … many of which engaged teachers in the process. It proposed that further work of this style is vital to further development of good practice.

There is a continued need within each region for centres, projects [or other institutions] to facilitate innovatory work. Such work needs to be designed so that it is also the foundation for capacity building within the education sector.

Over the years there should be a significant growth in the numbers of teachers, advisers, education tutors etc that have first hand experience in thinking through the issues for themselves and applying that experience, for example, to the development of learning materials

… as is the need for high profile debate

There is a need for leading government and academic figures to raise the debate about the educational implications of global dimensions, development perspectives and human rights principles.

EES should provide opportunities for seminars, occasional papers etc. to profile such debate and to follow up appropriate ideas.

There is a need for official support and recognition of the teacher creativity needed.

Back to top

There is much to build on...

...there is considerable potential for regional scale initiative, there are many people ready to undertake the creative work that is going to be vital.

There is a need for a wider range of stake holders but there is plenty of work for us all to do. NGOs have a particular key role in generating partnerships between NGOs and those in the education sector and indeed between different parts of the education sector.

To say that much has been achieved despite very limited resources is an understatement. There are significant partnerships that have built up and many examples of NGOs working with education sector organisations, engaging teachers in creative processes and in producing relevant resources.

There are many opportunities for development education, DFID's EES being only one of them. There are opportunities resulting from curriculum change, new thinking about education and increasing awareness of environmental issues, economic independence and issues of identity. The process of devolution and regionalisation has itself brought new opportunities and the need to see such countries/regions in their wider context. The demands and challenges are massive. Partnerships therefore also have a pragmatic dimension.

It is clear that there is considerable interest (and concern) among young people, teachers and the community at large about the global considerations which shape our lives … and about the impact we have on others.

It is proposed that such a positive disposition should be the corner stone to building effective strategy.

Back to top

The initiative, the process and the developing of plans

The Enabling Effective Support [EES] initiative was set up by DFID to engage interested parties in a consultation process to support development education in schools. From the initial work it became clear that there was a need to heighten debate about the issues and possibilities for future plans. To this end a document was produced inviting people to respond to key propositions (see The Consultation).

This initiative recognises that young people should have an entitlement to development education and reflects the priority DFID has given to development education work in schools.

It is clear from the process that there is considerable interest and motivation from a number of advisors, teachers and those involved in initial teacher education from each of the regions/countries. However there is considerable work to be done on popularising the notion of such an entitlement. This is also linked to the need to move away from seeing development as important but in terms of “compassion and charity” rather than in terms of understanding interdependence and commonality and therefore in terms of core educational issues.

There is also substantial work to be done to back this entitlement up with appropriate professional development opportunities, quality teaching materials and backup documentation about theory and learning outcomes. Surveys such as those carried out by the Development Education Commission and the DFID audit of development education resources have established that much has been achieved on which to build future plans. This includes a range of support that is already available and high quality teaching resources.

There is nevertheless much to be done improve on such infrastructure and to provide a basis for a much wider range of people to be involved in such roles. There is also clearly a need for new teaching material featuring different issues and different parts of the world and which address the opportunities provided by new curriculum.

EES to date has established that there is potential for regional strategy and it is therefore proposed that this is a realistic approach for DFID to facilitate. It is also clear that such plans should emerge locally, be “owned” locally and have the potential to be sustainable (i.e. not dependent on one single source of funding). This has tended to make the process more difficult and the fact that is not prescriptive has ironically caused some tensions.

In each region/country there is a need for further planning and the setting up of those structures felt to be most appropriate. This document is not suggesting a “blueprint”, nor is it suggesting that work in particular countries/regions should develop such a “blueprint” in the future. It is proposed that strength should be drawn from a diversity of approaches and creative response to core goals. This document seeks to set the scene for the next phase of EES which is about the implementation of such plans.