SESSION 1

1. Rebuilding resilience: planning education in ‘fragile contexts’ SESSION 1 Drivers of Fragility - The case of Afghanistan’s education system

2. About the study • How can education be delivered effectively in the fragile context of Afghanistan, and how do aspects of education contribute to, or mitigate/ reduce fragility in Afghanistan? • Desk review of plans, reports, interviews IIEP Summer School 20-31 July 2009, Paris

3. Governance Social Security EDUCATION Economic Environmental The 5 fragility domains/lenses

4. The INEE Analytic Framework • Starting point: attempt to analyse all aspects of an education system in 1 matrix • Focus on interplay: education system vs. non-education system • Several existing frameworks for fragility, and for education; few cover combination • Based on other education and fragility analytic frameworks by e.g. USAID, FTI

5. Fragilitycontext • But also: • National pride • Well-functioning educational system in 1970s • Foundation for hope in the midst of chaos • Afghanistan is at the bottom of all development and fragility indexes • 30 years of armed conflict

6. Achievements and challenges • Massive rise in enrollment: From 1 to 6 millions, 2002-2008. (But the quality…) • National Education Sector Plan no. 1 (2007). NESP no. 2 drafted without external help • Attacks on schools, lack of school buildings, lack of qualified teachers, bureaucratic system, and more

7. Security • No security guaranteed despite troops and police, who, too, are a source of fragility • Taliban presence in 72% of the territory • Taliban attacks on schools and esp. girls • Curriculum impact on security • Divisive curriculum, Sunni vs. Shia muslim

8. Security - solutions • Community and home based education • "If they [the Taliban] want to call schools ‘madrasa’ we will accept that, if they want to say Mullah to a teacher we have no problem with that. Whatever objections they may have we are ready to talk to them“ – MoE spokesman Asif Nang, 2009 • Distance education, radio • Security the overriding driver of fragility • but willpower, not just firepower is needed

9. Economy Opiumfuels insecurity andcorruption

10. Economy • Foreign aid, a driver of fragility • Educated population is necessary for non-aid, non-opium economic growth • MoE is Afghanistan’s largest government employer, • Salaries • Contruction of 73000 classrooms

11. Governance • Inefficient bureaucracy • The MoE’s NESP sees it as a challenge too • Corruption • ranking 5th from world bottom, Transparency Int index • NESP, EMIS and Schools survey (2008) • first moves towards evidence based governance • School Management Committees as local democracy • building block for civil society?

12. Social • Education system: key to nation-building • Foundation for state-building • Religion • Definition struggle over ‘the true meaning of’ Islam • Taliban: Islam = rebellion, madrassas • Government: Islam = “pious Afghans” (education law) • “Islam makes it a duty for everyone to seek knowledge and discover facts.” (NESP) • Languages (2+x) • Urban/rural divide • Numerous clans

13. Social • Gender • attacks on girls, girls schools, female teachers • Education for girls can worsen fragility when attacked • principles vs. compromise ?

14. Environment • Harsh climate • just 25% usable school buildings • time in school, curriculum, attendance rates drop • Natural disasters • floods, drought, famines etc.

15. Environment • Teachers’ salaries • supplemented by land and food • School feeding • Anti-famine, but also problematic • Ministry of Disaster Preparedness exists • But no disaster preparedness plan in MoE • No environmental education in curriculum • Education for Sustainable Development (a UNESCO focus area) is absent

16. Method • Back to the Analytic Framework

17. The Analytic Framework. Dilemma – Simplicity vs. Sophicticated analysis • 5 fragility domains(a. security, b. economy, c. governance, d. social, e. environment), • 3 levels(a. National education sector plans; b. Programming in country by international donors; c. Community level projects by civil society and local NGOs) • 4 sub-headingsfrom the FTI progressive framework (a. Planning; b. Service delivery; c. Resource Mobilization; d. Monitoring systems) • 2 types of analysis: a. how education has been affected by fragility andb. how education has had an impact on each of the fragility domains. • 10-15 years of timespan. • Imagine the matrix: 120 cells and 10-15 years in each.

18. My choices • 5 fragility domains a. security, b. economy, c. governance, d. social, e. environment: used as headings • 3 levelsa. National education sector plans; b. Programming in country by international donors; c. Community level projects by civil society and local NGOs: focus on a +c • 4 sub-headings from the FTI progressive frameworka. Planning; b. Service delivery; c. Resource Mobilization; d. Monitoring systems: focus on a, b, d • 10-15 years of timespanFocus on the present plus flashbacks to milestones.

19. A few important points! • 2 types of analysis: • a. how education has been affected by fragility • b. how education has had an impact on each of the fragility domains • a easier than b, but: • We want to focus on b • 2 subcategories: • Learn from education that reduces fragility • Avoid repeating mistakes of education that makes fragility worse

20. Read more... • Published on IIEP website: • http://www.iiep.unesco.org/information-services/publications/abstracts/2009/education-and-fragility-in-afghanistan.html