1 / 18

GCRD Global Child Rights Dialogue Consultation Workshops - globally - the example of Greece

GCRD Global Child Rights Dialogue Consultation Workshops - globally - the example of Greece. Summary of GCRD Participation as of May 1, 2019. The decision about the number of countries per region was made according to the fraction of children of the globe living in that region.

gmichael
Download Presentation

GCRD Global Child Rights Dialogue Consultation Workshops - globally - the example of Greece

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. GCRDGlobal Child Rights DialogueConsultation Workshops- globally- the example of Greece

  2. Summary of GCRD Participation as of May 1, 2019 The decision about the number of countries per region was made according to the fraction of children of the globe living in that region

  3. How was the GCRD organised Prof. Laura Lundy and her team at the Centre for Children’s Rights / QUB have produced a “Facilitators’ pack” with the methodology and ethics to be followed. They developed, with the assistance of an advisory group of children, a child friendly summary of every UNCRC Article and the identified attributes,. CRC articles were distributed among participant centres. A formwas prepared for reporting workshops’ data. Collected data was stored in a SYNC cloud and reviewed by the GlobalChild team. CCR/QUB prepared a report on possible incorporation of children’s views into the indicators.

  4. Pre-Workshop-GCRD Staff Feedback • Clearly articulated age range of 10-17 • Request feedback separated by article • Assignment by article not by cluster group • Request all images translated and transcribed • Smaller facilitator pack • Skype call with every facilitator • Clarify that we want a capacity building section first • Set a deadline for when the last site can join to allow enough time to set up/write reports • Reporting template provided

  5. Workshop related Facilitator Feedback • More time to host workshops • Children had difficulty differentiating “how do we know” and “how do we show” question prompts • Some terminology too complicated for younger children • Difficult to steer children away from discussing personal experiences • Would have been helpful to have more images depicting children’s rights

  6. Workshop related Facilitator Feedback “Although the previously mentioned suggestions were made, the overall feedback from facilitators was positive with many expressing that the workshops generated an interest in children and hosts wanting to increase their knowledge about children’s rights”. Sinclair, C. GCRD research assistant

  7. GCRD workshops in Greece Athens – Thessaloniki 18.11 – 16.12.2018 “Zoom in on children’s rights!”

  8. Workshops in Athens and Thessaloniki Coordinator: Initiative for Article 12 UNCRC (InArt12) Collaboration with: 2 Public Authorities (Centre for Social Welfare of Attica, Directorate of Secondary Education of Thessaloniki) 6 NGOs(SOS children’s villages, ARSIS, Schedia, ActionAid, Faros, Network for Children’s Rights) 12 secondary schools (6 in Athens-6 in Thessaloniki) Facilitators involved: 8 in Athens, 8 in Thessaloniki Participatingchildren: 27 in Athens, 26 in Thessaloniki(born between 2001 and 2006) Time of each workshop: around 4 hours

  9. Introductorymeetingsamong representatives of involved agencies, ngos and invited experts • Translationto Greek language of relevant material provided by GlobalChild • Preparation of information sheets, applications for children/parents, declaration for parents/guardians • Finding venues – organizing operational details • Contacting / visiting schools – collecting applications – selecting children • Training and preparation of facilitators Preparation

  10. Procedure (1) • Welcome by coordinator – facilitators • All sat around in circle. Got to know each other through energizers and warm-ups. • Introduction to the purpose of the meeting and its ethic rules. • Presentation of UNCRC and articles 2-3-6-12 • Split through game to 2 groups (younger – older) • Exercise on Article 12 (participants exchanged stories and thoughts, put up stickers on Table 12 and discussed)

  11. Procedure (2) • Split to 4zoom groups (each with around 6 childrenand 2 facilitators) • Every zoom group worked for 2 hours with 20’ break and concentrated on 2 articles • 2 groups focused on Art. 2+3 and 2 on Art. 12+6 • Zoom tables were drawn and put up on the walls • Finally, children filled in their evaluation forms and sat around again in a big circle. They were invited to give a quick oral feed-back on their feelings about the meeting.

  12. Content of work in zoom groups (1) • Children were presented with the printed CF versions of the attributes of the articles and were empowered to start discussing on 3 different discussion themes (around 10’ each), written in coloured papers on their desks: (a) examples of violations, (b) proposals for measures to protect the rights and to identify violations (how should we know), (c) ideas how it could be shown that the government fulfils its obligation to implement the law and protect the right (how should we show).

  13. Content of work in zoom groups (2) • After 30 minutes of discussion on the themes, children were let to freely communicate, write words and draw pictures on “Zoom tables”, big sheets of paper with 3 large “lenses” with the titles: • “It happens”, • “Measures”, • “Monitoring”. Discussions in all workshops were recorded following children’s information and consent • Facilitators explained the objectives of the discussions, tried to make everyone speak, helped the procedure and kept notes.

  14. Characteristics of the children Athens (27) • Attended 17 schools • 4 lived in (3) care homes and 1 in a shelter for UMs • 1 physically disabled • 2 referred by probation service • 4 immigrants • 1 asylum seeking UMs • 2 of Muslim minority • 1 Roma Thessaloniki (26) • Attended 15 schools • 4 lived in (2) care homes and 2 in a shelter for UMs. • 1 physically disabled • 6 immigrants • 2 asylum seeking UMs • 1 Roma

  15. Evaluation (1) • Children were asked to declare anonymously the degree they liked the workshop in a scale from 1 to 4 • In Athens: 17 out of 27 rated it with 4, 9 with 3 and one with 2. • In Thessaloniki 18 out of 23 (who completed the forms) rated it with 4, 4 with 3 and one with 2. • 46 out 50 kids noted that they would like to have similar workshops in their schools.

  16. Evaluation (2) Words mentioned in the final evaluation discussion: Interesting, unexpected, unusual, change, youth, happiness, hope, joy, great experience, revelation to reality, get to know each other, perfect, cool, power, emotion, children know, children’s revolution, warmth, flame, energy, YOLO, we try to make a good life, thank you.

  17. “Continue your efforts to change the world” “This would be one of the best experiences for you to be part of, something so simple but yet so important for everyone. Your voice can be heard, and this is one of those places”. “If they ask you whether you want to participate in the workshop, say YES!” Messages to children who participate in similar workshops in other countries of the world:

More Related