Safe Schools

(1)

Safe Schools

The pre-phase of a trajectory development For War Child Holland

Master Thesis

Student Nicolle van den Hout Student Number S3016900

Programme International Humanitarian Action (NOHA)

University University of Groningen & University College Dublin Date 31^st of December 2016

1^st Supervisor Ms. Peace Buhwamatsiko Tumuheki 2^nd Supervisor Prof. Jacques Zeelen

This thesis is submitted for obtaining the Joint Master’s Degree in International Humanitarian Action.

By submitting the thesis, the author certifies that the text is from his own hand, does not include the work of someone else unless clearly indicated, and that the thesis has been produced in accordance

with proper academic practices.

(2)

2

Abstract

There are many concepts within the humanitarian sector and among scholars that can contribute towards a safer learning environment. The purpose of this study was to contribute towards War Child Holland’s (WCH) pre-phase of their safe school intervention development since they had not identified its direction yet. To be able to understand what safe schools would mean for them several components were researched. The study starts off with explaining the INEE minimum standards, which formed the basis for the proposed safe school framework. In addition, literature reviews were done on three different components. Firstly, In-school violence, secondly, Social Emotional Learning and finally Disaster Risk Reduction. For each component it was researched how they could fit within an educational intervention. The literature review was followed by interviews (n=12) with WCH staff to be able to identify how participants would like the trajectory to move forward. These interviews were transcribed, coded and analysed using ATLAS.ti. Based upon the results a new safe school trajectory definition was constructed. In addition, the results enabled the development of an initial conceptual framework. The results are followed by a discussion in which the literature is compared with the data collected and the INEE minimum standards. From this discussion a more in-depth framework was developed that will be presented as final recommendation for continuing the Safe Schools trajectory. This framework proposes the answer on how WCH should move this trajectory forward. Firstly, the safe school trajectory should be built upon the INEE minimum standards of response, recovery and preparedness. In the same order these refer to addressing In-school violence, Social Emotional Learning and Disaster Risk Reduction as building blocks.

For operationalizing of these concepts it is suggested to start with an initial needs assessment and based on that fill the gaps, with special attention towards the three building blocks and access to schools. In addition, it is suggested to have a referral system in place and a trustworthy person/guidance counsellor, to address the needs of children. In some context of WCH it is also suggested to have a protective individual in place that secures safe access for children from and to school. Moreover, it is suggested to incorporate the three components within the curriculum and to ensure a positive school climate through a monitoring system. Lastly, the finding show that active involvement is needed from different stakeholders such as children, parents, governmental bodies and other organisation. This trajectory also provides the opportunity to interlink with WCH’s care system and integrated approach.

(3)

3

List of Abbreviations

CASEL Collaborative academic, social and emotional learning

CP Child protection

CM Case Management

DRR Disaster Risk Reduction ECD Early Childhood Development GBV Gender based violence

GCPEA Global Coalition to Protect

FO Field office

HFA Hyogo Framework for Action

HO Head office

INEE International Network for Education in Emergencies IRC International Rescue Committee

ICRC International Committee of the Red Cross

IPS International programme support

MDGs United Nations Millennium Goals NGO Non-Governmental Organisation PGM Programme grant managers PM+ Parent support intervention

PSS Psychosocial support

PTA Parent teacher association

R&D Research & Development Department SEL Social emotional learning

(7)

7 SRGBV School related gender based violence

STDs Sexual transmitted diseases TPD Teacher professional development

UN United Nations

UNHR United Nations Human Rights UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund

UNISDR United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction WASH Water, health and sanitation facilities

WCH War Child Holland

(8)

8

Preface

Herewith I present my thesis on “Safe Schools”, to be able to finalise the master of international humanitarian action (NOHA). Moreover, it has been written in cooperation with War Child Holland (WCH). I had the opportunity to do a pre-phase study for the development of one of their trajectories and I was fortunate enough to combine my internship and the topic of my thesis at WCH over a period from August 2016 until February 2017.

Even though the process of writing my thesis did not come without challenges, I still very much enjoyed exploring the topic and its accompanied concepts. Due to the fact that safe schools is a broad topic, I was able to explore several concepts within it and therefore gain more in-depth knowledge. I also learned how to conduct interviews and how to analyse them. Lastly, I very much enjoyed the work that I was able to do with WCH in combination with writing my thesis.

Thus, I would firstly, like to thank R&D for providing me with the opportunity to be part of the team and providing me with the opportunity to contribute towards the safe school trajectory. In addition, I would like to thank my internship supervisor April Coetzee, for providing me with guidance during my internship and for guidance in the development of the trajectory. I would also like to thank all WCH staff who gave me their time, effort and the opportunity to interview them, therewith providing me with information. Lastly, I would like to thank other WCH staff who supported me during the process of writing my thesis and for providing me with the opportunity to learn about WCH’s activities and contributions towards the humanitarian sector.

Secondly I would like to give a special thanks to Mrs. Peace Buhwamatsiko Tumuheki for being my 1^st thesis supervisor. Regardless of the physical distance between us, Mrs. Peace Tumuheki was always able to provide me with constructive and valuable feedback in order for me to continue the process. In addition, she responded quickly to my requests and even provided me with her time during the holidays. Lastly, she always positively supported me and she gave me encouraging words, especially during the more difficult times.

All in all, I enjoyed writing my thesis and proudly present you with my final result. I hope that you enjoy reading my master thesis.

Nicolle van den Hout Amsterdam, December 2016

(9)

9

1. Introduction

Education is one of the most important factors for the development of a child. This importance is reflected in the inclusion of the right to education in article 28 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child as well as the status of education as one of the United Nations Millennium Goals (MDGs) (Godfrey, Osher, Williams, Wolf, Berg, Torrente, Spier & Aber, 2011; United Nations, 1990). Due to these MDGs, the percentage of attendance in primary schools has increased (United Nations, 2015). As a result of its success and due to the continued challenges in the provision of accessible and quality education, it has also become part of the Sustainable Development Goals, which were adopted for the next fifteen years on the 25th of September 2015 (Caprani, 2016). The aim of Goal number four is to “ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all” (Sustainable Development Goals, 2015).

Next to the right of a child to get education, Goal number four also aspires to create a more peaceful society (Caprine, 2012). Nevertheless, there are still many reasons why children are hindered from participating actively in schools, for example child labour, AIDS, poverty or conflict (Godfrey et al., 2012). In countries that are affected by conflict many schools have become systematic targets of armed conflict, barring children from getting an education (Education International, 2011; GCPEA, 2014, United Nations, 2015). Not only are teachers, educational personnel and students threatened by conflict, school buildings have also become targets. In addition, occupied school buildings endanger children by becoming military targets and these occupied buildings cannot be used for educational purposes anymore (Save the Children, 2016). As a result, many children have a fear for going to school and teachers have a fear for teaching classes. Especially in emergency settings, arisen due to conflict, around 58 million primary school children and 20 million secondary school children are without education (Global Protection Cluster, n.d.).

There are several reasons that could explain these high rates. Firstly, The United Nations Security Council has ranked the attacks on schools during armed conflict as one of the six primary focus-points/improvement points for protection of children during conflict, this issue should therefore continuously be addressed (Save the Children,2016). Secondly, in situations caused by conflict children risk being recruited or sexually abused on their road to school. As a result, access to schools is a problem and this enhances the feeling of social exclusion. The feeling of social exclusion affects the social well-being of a child and can even result into children contributing towards the conflict (Davies, 2005). In addition, conflict can undermine

(10)

10 education by destroying its infrastructure and decreasing the spending on school and teachers (Novelli & Lopes Cardozo, 2008). Children can also become victims of violence in schools itself created by other students, teachers or other educational staff (GCPEA, 2014). As a consequence, children grow up without education.

Also, education is, especially in emergency situations, important to provide children with “physical, psychosocial and cognitive protection that can be both life-sustaining and life- saving” (Global Protection Cluster (Global Protection Cluster, n.d.). Likewise, education can teach children how to help with the peace-building process, it can improve social cohesion and stability for children. It is therefore of importance to identify in which way a safer learning environment for children can be achieved (Global Protection Cluster, n.d.). Not only safety is important but also the quality of the education can increase the attendance and long term development of children (Godfrey et al., 2012).

To create a safer learning environment many organisations have developed their own concepts.

Terms such as child friendly schools, conflict sensitive education, and healthy school living are often mentioned in various articles that aim to address violent school environments. This research is conducted in cooperation with War Child Holland (WCH) and therefore aims at improving the current safe school concept of WCH. Since WCH does not focus its activities on schools under attack or occupied schools, this will not further be discussed throughout this study. The focus of this study lies more on violence that emanates from within the school environment.

1.1 War Child Holland (WCH)

War Child Holland aims at empowering children so that they are able to grow up in “in peace, free from violence” (War Child Holland (WCH), 2015, p. 11). WCH is an independent and neutral Non-Governmental Organisation (NGO) and most of their programmes are focused on education, child protection and psychosocial support. WCH has three main principles that form the basis of their work; creativity, participation and inclusion and conflict sensitivity. In addition, WCH uses three overarching approaches for improving the lives of children and young people. Firstly, they use direct support where children actively participate in creative projects.

Secondly, WCH aims at building capacity of the children and all the people involved in the lives of the children, such as the parents and teachers. Lastly, WCH tries to improve the practices of a child’s rights, laws and policies through advocacy initiatives.

(11)

11 In 2015 WCH set out a new strategy where it aims at

creating a supportive, integrated care system¹ across different ecological levels². Moreover, WCH aims at providing more evidence-based care and improving their networked expertise. Within this care system different trajectories are identified to be able to improve the psychosocial well-being and resilience of children and to increase the quality, care and support for children. Figure I visualises this care system where the outer ring has three trajectories that try to improve the quality of the care system and the inner circle tries to improve the enablers of the care system through three different care packages.

The triangle in Figure I and Figure II show the nine different core interventions, which WCH set out, to primarily target primary aged school children, adolescents and youth. The process of such an intervention is split into three different phases.

Where phase one consists of a review and formative research on the intervention and the development of an

intervention. Phase two continues by pilot testing the concept developed in phase one and phase three consists of evaluating and disseminating the concept.

One of the interventions is Safe Schools, however at the current stage there is not yet a common understanding on where the trajectory should be heading because it is still at the beginning of the formative phase. Nonetheless, there is an initial definition developed within the research and development department (R&D). The trajectory of Safe school is defined as

“spaces for learning and healing where children can reach their full potential while exercising their rights” (WCH, 2015, p.12).

This thesis will contribute towards a better understanding of safe schools not only for WCH, but also for a larger audience. In addition, this research helps the trajectory to move forward in phase one. Therefore, this study has the intention to discuss and debate the different approaches

1 Integrated care system refers to an interlinkage between child protection, psychosocial support and education

2 Ecological level refers to different levels, such as individual, family or community level.

Figure II: Core interventions Figure I: Care system

(12)

12 to safe schools using three concepts identified by WCH: Addressing in-school violence, Social emotional learning (SEL), and Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR). Finally, the aim of the study is to answer the following main question; which approach should War Child Holland take towards their safe school trajectory?

1

.2 Research sub-questions

To be able to answer the main question the following sub-questions have been identified:

1. How can the minimum standards by INEE contribute towards operationalisation of the safe school framework?

2. Which types of in-school violence exist in conflict affected countries and how can they be addressed?

3. How can Social Emotional Learning (SEL) be integrated into Safe Schools?

4. How can Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) be integrated into Safe Schools?

5. How would War Child Holland Staff like to see Safe Schools operationalised?

These research questions will contribute towards the following objective: To create a safe school framework for War Child Holland

1.3 Study Limitations

This study is limited in the sense that it is biased towards WCH perspectives and activities because it is aimed at improving the WCH strategy. Also the scope of concepts that have been researched can form a limitation. There might be more topics that can contribute towards a safer school environment that have not been prioritised in the research questions.

In the section on in- school violence a focus was set on violence within the schools without taking the larger community, and parental/caregiver violence in perspective. However, these types of violence might also have influence on the behaviour of children at school thereby their academic achievements. Moreover, the categorisations made within this study do not take teacher-to-teacher violence into account or any other type of violence inflicted at adult-to-adult level, which could have an influence on the behaviour of children at school. Furthermore, schools-under attack was not discussed within this study.

The interviews were limited by the fact that not all countries were able to provide input

(13)

13 towards the safe schools’ trajectory. Also, it might be argued that there was an overrepresentation of head office (HO).

Lastly, it must be mentioned that, since DRR is a large concept, the explanation of the concept in this study is of a limited scope.

(14)

14

2. Methods

For this research literature reviews and interviews have been conducted. Before providing more explanation on data gathering, certain definitions were identified to give more clarity to the rest of the study. These are child, school, safety, psychosocial support (PSS), child protection (CP) and education in emergencies.

2.1 Definitions

Child The Conventions on the Rights of the Child defines a child as someone below the age of eighteen, unless in a particular country the law says otherwise (Majority is reached at the age of eighteen) (ICRC, 1989).

Child protection (CP) the prevention and response to violence, exploitation and abuse against children (War Child UK, 2010).

Education Education tries to improve the knowledge and skills of children for them to be able to improve their academic, social and emotional performances (WCH, 2015).

Education in Emergencies Encompasses different learning opportunities for children of different ages in areas inflicted by conflict or disaster.

It includes primary, secondary, higher, adult, non-formal, and technical education, and early childhood development (INEE, 2012)

Psychosocial support (PSS) Activities that aim to support children in the process of building up their strength and resilience to restore their confidence and trust in others (WCH, 2015)

2.2 Literature Review

For all research questions a literature review was completed with the aim of giving a systematic overview of the current concepts of each topic. The research was limited to more recent studies, but without skipping the most relevant scientific contribution.

(15)

15 2.2.1 Scope for literature review

For the literature review the following scope was used to find the articles:

Databases All databases available through University of

Groningen’s Smart cat library

Databases of humanitarian organisations such as Relief web, database of Save the Children, UNICEF etc.

Search terms question 1 INEE Minimum Standards

INEE Minimum Standards AND

Violence OR Conflict OR abuse OR “in- school”

AND

Good practices Search terms question 2:

In- school violence

Violence OR Conflict OR abuse OR “in- school violence”

And Child*³ AND

Safe* OR Protection AND

Education OR school OR learn*

Search terms question 3:

Social Emotional Learning

“social emotional learning”

AND

Violence OR Conflict OR abuse AND

Schools AND Child*

Search term question 4:

Disaster Risk Reduction

Disaster Risk Reduction OR DRR AND

Schools or Education

3 The * allows the database to search for different words that start with the word child but end differently (e.g.

children, child, childhood; programs, programing etc.).

(16)

16 AND

School programme*

AND

Participation AND

Violence OR conflict OR abuse

Exclusion Criteria Articles in another language than English and Dutch.

Dissertations

2.3 Interviews

The aim of the interviews was to identify where each key informant, would like the new safe school intervention of WCH to go towards and thus provide an answer to question five.

Moreover, it aimed at identifying what the concept of safe schools means to enable a more defined view on the Safe School Trajectory.

2.3.1 Conducting and Gathering Data from Interviews.

There are two types of interviews structured and unstructured interviews (Bryman, 2012;

McClelland, 1994). An unstructured interview is an interview where the interviewer has no specific set sequence of questions planned during the interview (Sekaran & Bougie, 2013).

Whereas with a structured interview, the interviewer has predetermined the list of question in order to reach the desired information output (Sekaran & Bougie, 2013). It is important that at all times the interviewer is not leading the conversation (Bryman, 2012). For this study a semi- structured interview was done since the aim of the data collection was to gather systematic information and at the same time leaving space to explore concerns by the participants regarding safe schools (Wilson, 2013). An interview guide was used to conduct the interviews (Appendix A).

An interview guide is a guiding document which contains certain thematic areas or specific questions which are going to be asked during an interview (Bryman, 2012). However, during the interview, the questions do not have linear order and other questions might be asked depending on the direction of the conversation (Bryman, 2012). This is especially of importance

Table 1: Scope of the Literature Review

(17)

17 for this study because the concept of safe schools depends on the input given by the key informants.

Recording the interviews can give a more in depth analysis in terms of accuracy and recall. However, it does not come without any complications. In some situations, being recorded can influence the amount of information the informant gives because of confidentiality concerns (McClelland, 1994). Therefore, all interviews were only recorded with consent of the key informants. If recording was not possible, a summary was made based on notes taken during the interview. All interviews were transcribed and analysed accordingly (Appendix B).

2.3.2 Participant choice

For semi structured interview the sample size is dependent on the information shared and its often argued that its sufficient when it reaches saturation. Saturation is when information reaches a point where there is no new or other relevant data added towards the data collection process (Dworkin, 2012; Francis et al., 2010). Dworkin (2012) suggest, that in order to reach saturation around twenty-five to thirty participants are needed. Francis et al., (2010), on the other hand suggest to start with a minimum of ten interviews and then proceed with three more to see if there is additional relevant information. If not, then the saturation point has been reached.

Due to time constraints and limited accessibility to country offices (CO), this study tried to get minimum of ten key informants form different perspectives. Therefore, the initial participant choice was to reach a variety of informants from HO to CO of WCH. In each CO and in HO the educational, child protection and psychosocial advisors were approached (Colombia, South Sudan, Burundi, Lebanon, Occupied Palestinian Territory, Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan) (WCH, 2015), however, due to availability and security concerns of the key informants it was not possible to reach all of the countries. Nonetheless this study was still able to get a wide variety of key informants.

2.3.3 Interview setting

Setting of the interviews should be free of any external interruptions or distraction, which can influence the behaviour of the key informant (McClelland, 1994). The setting of the interviews was dependent on the accessibility towards the other person. If the person was at the HO, then a small independent booth was booked where there was no possibility of distraction of the

(18)

18 environment. If there was no possibility for face to face contact, then a skype interview was held. Here however it must be kept in mind that the surroundings may vary and this could have had influence, on the quality of the interview and the behaviour of the participant.

Wilson (2013) suggests, that the time frame of the semi-structured interview should be between one and half to two hours to get enough in depth information. However, due to time constraints of participants the suggested time frame was not possible. Therefore, the first interview which was held served as a pilot to understand how much time was needed for the other interviews.

From this it was clear that 45 minutes to an hour was sufficient for participants to answer all the questions in-depth.

2.3.4 Data Preparation

From each recorded interview, a transcript was made in order to gain the maximum preciseness in classifying and analysing statements (Flick, 2009). A summary was made of the notes during the interview for two interviews that were not recorded due to private reasons. After this a coding procedure followed using ATLAS.ti, in order to further develop the theory behind this study (Flick, 2009).

Coding means: “representing the operations by which data are broken down, conceptualized and put back together in new ways, it is the central process by which theories are built from data” (Flick, 2009, p.307). For this analysis first open coding was used in the form of single words and short string of words to form a concept. Later families were made by combing the codes into certain substantive categories. Afterwards links were made between the categories using axil coding. Axil coding is “the process of relating subcategories to a category

“(Flick, 2009, p. 311). The main categories were based on literature review and the INEE minimum standards. Finally, a visualisation was made of a proposed framework on the basis of the interview outcome. This process of coding is

visualised in Figure III and the output of the coding can be found in Appendix C.

Quote

"Physical violence, when you think of coproral punishment for example".

Category Corporal Punishment

Subtheme Teacher to Student Violence

Family In-school Violence

Figure III: Coding Process

(19)

19 2.3.5 Descriptive results

Twelve interviews were held with WCH staff, from which four are based in CO and eight are based in HO. Within this sample size the interviews were held with four educational advisors, two child protection advisors, one psychosocial advisor, one senior advisor of quality learning with a focus on meaningful participation, one programme development manager, one programme and grand management advisor for Africa, one international consultant for assignments for programme development managers and one manager learning organisation.

The variety of different backgrounds enriched the data and resulted into diverse input. Table II, shows an overview of all the participants.

Table II: Descriptive output

Table II shows that the there is only one participant who has been with WCH for nine years, the rest of the participants have been with WCH for three years or less. Table II also shows that there are three participants who have been active for less than one month with WCH. However, all participants have spent a large amount of time working within the humanitarian or development sector. In conclusion the sample size is large and diverse enough to represent the

Participant Time active within War Child

Time active within humanitarian/development field

Age of

participant

Head Office (HO) / Country Office

P: 1 3 weeks 3 years - CO

P: 2 2 years 20 years 47 HO

P: 3 3 weeks 21 years 46 CO

P: 4 6 months 15 years 40 CO

P: 5 1,5 years 24 years 53 HO

P: 6 1,5 years 17 years 40 HO

P: 8 2,5 weeks 10 years 44 HO

P:10 3 years 6 years 31 HO

P:11 1 year and 7 months

8 years 32 HO

P:12 9 months 12 years 36 CO

(20)

20 next steps for the safe school’s trajectory. Chapter 7 will contain the rest of the data analysis results.

2.4 Study Overview

This paragraph gives a short overview on what is to be expected in the next chapters. Chapter three starts with exploring the minimum standards of the International Network for Education in Emergencies (INEE) as a basis for the development of the rest of the WCH framework.

Chapter four, five and six will discuss the concepts of in-school violence, SEL and DRR and how these fit within a school programme based on scholarly knowledge. Chapter seven will provide the results of the interviews and chapter eight will be the discussion, in which a comparison is made between the three concepts in the literature and perception of the participants on these subjects. In addition, a discussion is provided on how the INEE framework fits within the entire study and the chapter is concluded with the final developed framework for the safe school trajectory. The last chapter ends with a conclusion that includes the answering of the main question: Which approach should War Child Holland take towards their safe school trajectory?

(21)

21

3. INEE – Minimum Standards

The International Network for Education in Emergencies (INEE)’s minimum standards were developed to understand what constitutes the best possible educational programme in cases where there is no education or poor education due to natural disaster and conflict. The aim of these standards is to be able to respond better to and to improve preparedness for calamities and to improve the quality of education (INEE, 2012; Nordtveit, 2016). The continuity of a school’s existence should be based on these minimum standards. If there is no grounded reason why a school cannot adhere to these standards, the school should either discontinue or improve their practices (Nordtveit, 2016). Especially the standard on access, includes not only access in schools but also the access beyond the school grounds. Children often face being raped, killed or recruited on their way to school. This vulnerability should be decreased in order to increase the amount of children who attend and have access to school (Nordtveit, 2016). However, it must be noted that even within in a school children are at risk of many more forms of violence.

Additionally, Nordtveit (2016), argues that using these guidelines will form a context- specific base for educational programming. These minimum standards have been developed by several representatives from different NGO’s, academic institutions and people who are affected by conflict. They are also based on a three step approach; step one: emergency preparedness, step two includes response and step three: recovery. (INEE, 2012; Nordtveit, 2016).

The minimum standards framework is divided into five different domains, each consisting of several standards. The domains are described as follows:

1. ‘Foundation Standards’ – this concerns coordination, participation by the community and needs assessment throughout the entry project cycle. This domain forms the basis of the other four domains.

2. ‘Access and Learning Environment’ – this domain has a focus on creating learning opportunities and access to safe learning environments. Here, links are made with other sectors such as water, health and sanitation facilities (WASH), nutrition and shelter to improve the physical and emotional safety and security in schools.

3. ‘Teaching and Learning’ – the standards within this domain focus on Teacher Professional Development (TPD), with an emphasis on effective teaching including improving the curricula and any other outcome that influences the learning process

(22)

22 4. ‘Teachers and Other Education Personnel’ – here management and administration of human resources are supported to improve the process of recruitment, selection, support and supervision of personnel in the field of education.

5. ‘Educational Policy’: this minimum domain has a focus on the formulation, planning and implementation of policies.

Each of these standards are divided up into a total of nineteen more specific standards that will be explained in more detail below based on the handbook of the INEE (2012) minimum standards.

3.1 Foundational Standards Domain

The aim of this first standard is to get the entire community involved in the process of taking action on education. As a result, education becomes more accountable and more sustainable (INEE, 2012).

This first standard is divided into three main areas; community participation, coordination and analysis. Each of these areas are separated into even more specific

standards. In Figure IV this division is graphically visualised.

Community Participation

Community Participation is divided into participation and resources Participation

Within this standard the community should be able to actively participate without any discrimination and with transparency to the project cycle, including the monitoring and evaluation (INEE, 2012). The participatory and inclusive approach is of importance because exclusion of community members often results into problems. Moreover, participation can lead to ownership and a better context-specific approach, consequently leading to a better response to the occurring problems (INEE, 2012). Also, there is an emphasis on including children and youth in the project cycle to empower them, to create a connection between children and to

Figure IV: Foundational Standards Domain

(23)

23 stimulate school and social growth (Nordtveit, 2016). Moreover, children will learn how to contribute to a more resilient community.

Resources

It is important to create educational activities based on existing structures. Therefore, the existing resources, skills and capacity should be identified, mobilised and used to create appropriate learning opportunities (INEE, 2012).

Coordination

The actors responsible for the right to education in a specific context should take the lead on educational responses. Humanitarian organisations and other relevant stakeholders should then build upon and strengthen the local capacity by offering support and the necessary resources.

However, there should be caution in the role taken by the organisation since there is a possibility of doing harm by interfering with the legitimate roles of the local actors. The tasks of coordinating these efforts are often not prioritised by governmental officials because they fear that it will cost too much resources or they simply lack the resources to provide a coordination structure (t, 2016). So when the responsible authorities lack the ability or capacity to take up the role of coordination, this responsibility can be handed over to an inter-agency committee such as the education cluster. In the latter case, coordination should be transparent, timely, result-oriented and accountable (INEE, 2012).

Analysis

Analysis is dived up into assessment, response strategies, monitoring and evaluation. All four will be summarised as one in this next paragraph.

When trying to understand the local context, a needs assessment should be conducted to be able to ensure effective and timely response to the context and to prevent doing harm.

This need is divided into three other standards, response strategies, monitoring and evaluation.

These consist of looking at the wider perspective, beyond education. Also, an overview should be made of the existing knowledge, skills and capacities of local community members in order to improve the response to a certain emergency. Collecting data, should be done in a transparent and rapid manner to prevent doing harm or contributing to the conflict. Moreover, the results should be publicly available and disaggregated at all stages of the process to create accountability. Furthermore, the monitoring and evaluation process should be done in the same inclusive and transparent way (INEE, 2012).

(24)

24

3.2 Access and Learning Environment Domain

In times of conflict access to education can be very limited, therefore this domain stresses the importance of access (Figure V). Education provides the opportunity for people to learn how to cope with certain situations and find some sort of normality back in their lives. It can also provide lifelong academic and social learning skills.

Within an emergency setting the national authorities have the responsibility to provide safe and quality education. Vulnerable groups that develop due to conflict or disasters or

reoccurring vulnerable groups should be given special attention since these groups face most difficulties in accessing schools. The authorities must also insure that there is an element of physical protection and psychosocial well-being, of not only children but also other staff members within the schools, such as teachers. In the recovery phase of an educational emergency, teachers and other school staff members risk physical or psychosocial consequences on their way to the school. Therefore, the recovery phase should ensure that teachers are emotionally and physically protected. In addition, the physical building and infrastructures should be designed and constructed to be able to mitigate the risks of hazards.

Equal access

Every child should have the possibility to have access to relevant and quality education. This means that nobody is discriminated against based on their race, sex, gender, sexual orientation, nationality, tribe, ethnicity etc. “Physically and mentally disabled people, those who suffer from severe mental health and psychosocial difficulties, girls, youth, children associated with armed forces and armed groups, adolescent heads of household, teenage mothers and persons from particular ethnic or other social group” (INEE,2012, p.56), are most vulnerable to not have access to schools in a conflict setting.

An educational programme should encourage opportunities for children, especially the above mentioned vulnerable groups to enter or re-enter the education system. These vulnerable groups should be taken into account within a needs assessment mainly because their needs are different

Figure V: Access and Learning Environment

(25)

25 and more context specific from the children who are less distressed or included in the socially accepted environment.

To encourage a more accessible learning space, the documentation needed for admission or enrolment should be flexible and when there are certain security concerns, this documentation should be handled with care and with confidentiality. Moreover, schools should provide learning opportunities in social, economic and political subjects in order for children to develop themselves and later contribute towards the larger community. These learning opportunities should also be able to continuously adapt to the context. Moreover, the community should be involved in the creation of these learning opportunities. Lastly, an educational programme should have enough financial, human and material resources to provide relevant and quality education (INEE, 2012).

Protection and well-being

This standard aims at ensuring a safe and secure physical environment. Moreover, it aims at promoting the well-being of teachers and children within an educational programme. A secure learning environment means:

“A learning environment that provides protection from threat, danger, injury or loss. A safe environment is free from physical or psychosocial harm” (INEE, 2012, p.61).

The emotional, physical and social well-being of a child depends on the health of a child, happiness and warmth between students, between teachers and other educational personal and between peers. Also, there is a component of safety, protection and security that contributes to the well-being of a child. With protection a child is free from all different kinds of exploitation, of physical, social and emotional threats and of sexual maltreatment. To understand which security or protection threats are present, a programme should consult the community during its needs and risk assessment to better understand the context. Other elements that can increase safety and security, are TPD, non-violent classroom management, disaster risk deduction in the programme, keeping schools safe from external attack and the ensuring that the route towards school is accessible (INEE, 2012).

Facilities and services

This standard aims at promoting the well-being and safety of children, teachers and other school educational personnel. Moreover, within this standard the learning environment tries to find a link between psychosocial support, protection, nutrition and health. This means that the location of the learning facility should be built in a space where it promotes physical safety and equity.

In addition, the construction of the building should take into account a disaster-resistant aspect

(26)

26 and inclusiveness to be able to mitigate any risks that come with disasters. In the construction of the building it is also of importance to take into account the needs of children with both physical and visual disabilities. More importantly, there should be proper and safe WASH facilities that are accessible for everyone within a learning environment. Lastly, within this standard, the learning facility should have a referrals system in place, that allows teachers and other in-school personnel to refer a child in need of more external support to other relevant actors who can help the child (INEE, 2012).

3.3 Teaching and Learning Domain

Even if there is safe access towards education, if the quality of the programme within the school is not sufficient or does not contribute towards the academic development of the child, education will not be meaningful.

To ensure that education is meaningful and supportive, several action can be taken such as positive development of the curricula, TPD and supporting the instruction, and assessment of the learning process and outcome.

Curricula

First of all, a curriculum can be defined as “a plan of action to help learners to improve their knowledge and skill… it includes learning objectives, learning content, assessments, teaching methods and materials” (INEE, 2012, p.7). The curricula can contribute towards meaningful education by prioritizing its focus on positive learning opportunities. Within this, there should be a component that teaches children how to improve their skills, knowledge and language.

Therefore, the instruction of the curricula should be language appropriate and context specific.

There should also be an element that teaches the children how to minimise the risks of natural hazards. In addition, the curricula should include a module on children rights in order for children to empower themselves through education. So, overall the curricula should be context

Figure VI: Teaching and Learning Domain

(27)

27 specific where formal and non-formal education is socially and culturally adapted and relevant for the children in school (INEE, 2012).

Training, professional development and support

It is very important that educational personnel should have regular updated and structured trainings on their professional development. The updates should be development grounded on the needs and circumstances of a context. It should be based on the available resources and the needs of children and educational personnel in distress. Regular updates on resilience building, including a training on disaster awareness, risk response and preparedness should be ensured (INEE, 2012).

Instruction and Learning Processes

This element should guarantee that the education for children within schools is inclusive and participatory. Teachers should provide opportunities for children to interact with each other through for example, role playing or team-building exercises. Using recreational elements such as play can increase the participatory element within the learning environment. Moreover, there should be a focus on improving the learning capacities of the children.

When capacity improvements are made in a teaching method, the involvement of relevant authorities should always be taken into account. Mainly because their approval and support is needed to accept the changes. In addition, it is of importance to take into account the concerns of the larger community and parents to be able to make the learning process sustainable (INEE, 2012).

Assessment of Learning Outcomes

This component tries to ensure that relevant measuring tools are used to evaluate the learning process and its outcomes. The measuring tools should be relevant, consistent, provide opportunity, be frequent, safe and appropriate for the context, transparent and show opportunity for children with disabilities to learn alternatively.

When collecting data, it is of importance to have a code of ethics developed to ensure that the process is reliable, fair and does no harm. Lastly, it is of importance to ensure that an evaluation is relevant to what you want your research to achieve (INEE, 2012).

(28)

28

3.4 Teachers and Other Educational Personnel Domain

This domain (Figure VII) mainly concerns the recruitment, conditions and support towards the teacher and other educational personnel.

INEE (2012), defines the teachers and other educational personnel as follows:

“classroom teachers and classroom assistants, early childhood or pre-school teachers, educator of people with disabilities, subject specialist and vocational trainers, facilitators in child-friendly spaces, community volunteer, religious educator and life skills instructors, head teachers, principals, school supervisors and other education officials” (p.94).

In this domain it is important that programmes should ensure that all of the relevant actors within the school are included in the decision making process and that there is an opportunity to improve their professional development within an educational programme (INEE, 2012).

Recruitment and Selection

The process of recruiting and selection of teachers and other personnel, should always be non- discriminatory, transparent and participatory. Within this process it should be ensured that there is a sufficient number of people in place, a good gender balance and significant community representation. The relevant experience of the desired personnel should also be taken into account as, the relevant competencies are crucial to ensure good educational practices and to support the needs of children within the educational system (INEE, 2012).

Conditions of Work

To ensure that teachers do what they are hired to do, there should be a clearly defined code of conduct, roles, responsibilities, working conditions and suitable compensation. In the process of creating these working conditions, the teacher should always have the opportunity to negotiate on his or her standpoint (INEE, 2012).

Support and Supervision

In the context of crisis, it is of importance to provide teachers with the relevant support in order for them to learn how to deal and cope with their own distress before they start helping children.

Figure VII: Teachers and other educational personnel domain

(29)

29 Moreover, this will ensure that teachers do their work effectively. Once this support is provided, the teachers are more capable of teaching children how to be more resilient, it enables teachers to improve the learning opportunities of children and it allows teachers to provide support towards children in distress (INEE, 2012).

3.5 Education Policy Domain

The final domain described in the INEE framework consists of two standards which are based on a child’s right to education (INEE, 2012).

Law and Policy Formulation

The first standard tries to ensure that the relevant national authorities provide support to a child’s right to education. Within their capacity, authorities should ensure continuity, recovery and the quality of inclusive education. There should also be a component on the physical safety of a building or the space where the educational

programmes are implemented. Beyond this, there should be a context specific reflection and a risk- analysis of educational laws and policies to ensure that the right to education, reaches everyone within the wider society and that there is no place for corruption or discrimination.

Moreover, the process of educational policy development should be transparent in information sharing (systems) and should be part of a larger disaster preparedness framework. Lastly, UN or other relevant non-profit actors should be able to complement the existing structures (INEE, 2012).

Planning and Implementation

The planning and implementation of activities should always take into account the existing national and international policies, laws, regulations and standards to meet the needs of children and to ensure their right to education. Moreover, the programme should be able to show that it responds to those needs and it should ensure that education is of quality and accessible to everyone.

Furthermore, there should be a clear link with resilience and other relevant sectors such as, WASH facilities or nutritional programmes within a community. There should also be

Figure VIII; Educational policy domain

(30)

30 cooperation between relevant stakeholders to provide the community with sufficient resources for programme implementation. Lastly, in order for a programme to be sustainable it is of importance that the community is involved throughout the whole process of planning and implementation (INEE, 2012).

3.6 Summary

The minimum standards by INEE provides a framework which is to improve the quality of educational programmes, to increase access to schools and to ensure that relevant actors can work together within one context to provide emergency education response, preparedness and recovery (Figure IX). Within this framework all the above mentioned domains, with corresponding standards, contribute to one larger framework (Figure IX). Moreover, each domain and standard has guidance notes which go into more detail on how good practices can be considered in applying the minimum standards context specifically. So when deciding to implement a new programme based on these standards, it is recommended to look more closely into these guidance notes to improve the quality of an educational programme (INEE, 2012).

In this study, the minimum standards set out the basis for the safe school trajectory, where the domains will be incorporated into the three phases of response, recovery and preparedness, in like manner, referring to addressing in-school violence, SEL and DRR.

These three concepts will be analysed in the following three chapters.

Figure IX; INEE minimum Standard Framework

(31)

31

4. Literature Review on In-school Violence

To be able to respond to in-school violence it firstly, must be understood what it is, which components it has and how it can be addressed in an educational programme. Therefore, a literature review will provide a more in-depth understanding.

Feeling safe is a very important component of a child’s wellbeing. However, due to an increase of violence in schools, this feeling of being safe has decreased (Yablon & Itzhaky, 2015). This is especially true in communities with a high violence rate, resulting in the normalisation of the usage of violence as a way of resolving conflicts. Children are therefore more likely to become perpetrators and victims of violence. (Baker-Henningham; Furlong & Morrison, 2000; Meeks- Gardner, Chang & Walker, 2009). As a result, children find themselves seeking for a safe space free of violence. Schools have the highest potential to become a space where children can regain a sense of safety, because of the intrinsic teaching and learning systems in place. Schools can influence the negative social norms and values and are therefore the best places to address violence (Postmus & Davis, 2014; Yablon & Itzhaky, 2015). Nevertheless, violence is still apparent within schools, subsequently negatively influencing the well-being of school-going children. Therefore, there is a need to respond to in-school violence (Furlong & Morrison, 2000.

It must be kept in mind that this research will only focus on violence that emanates from within the school environment.

4.1 Definitions of In-School Violence

Violence can be defined as “acts carried out with the intention, or perceived intention, of physically injuring another person” (Furlong& Morrison, 2000, p.79).

More specifically, in-school violence has been identified as “the lack of respect for others property, lives and feelings” (Bon, Faircloth, & LeTendre, 2006, p. 152). Within this definition both students and teachers can feel mentally and physically unsafe. Another definition of in-school violence is “a multifaceted construct that involves both criminal acts and aggression in schools, which inhibit development and learning, as well as harm the school’s climate” (Furlong & Morrison, 2000, p.71). Herewith, in-school violence can also be the witnessing of violent acts or participating in anti-social behaviour towards other peers (Baker- Henningham et al., 2009). Generally speaking, a distinction of in-school violence is made on two different levels; peer-to-peer violence and teacher-to-student violence.

(32)

32

4.2 Peer-to-Peer Violence

Peer-to-peer violence can be described as an intentional aggressive act by a peer(s) while operating in a position of higher strength or power, whereby the one who is victimised is perceived to be weaker. The aim of the perpetrator(s) is to damage the victim in a way that he or she will suffer with either physical or mental consequences (Brock, Nickerson, O’malley &

Chang, 2006). Peer-to-peer violence can have several forms, such as physical, emotional and sexual violence. Non-fatal forms of physical violence include fights, grabbing, pushing, shoving, kicking or hitting with fits or other objects (Brock et al., 2006l Furlong and Morrison, 2000)

To emotionally damage a victim, peers can use name-calling, teasing, ostracizing, spreading rumours or forcing another child to do something he/she does not want to do (Blosnich and Bossarte, 2011; Turner, Finkelhor, Shattuck, Hamby & Michell, 2015). Another form of emotional violence is hostility towards other peers with regard to their race, age, sexual orientation, ethnicity or disability. The use of these forms of violence can result in homophobia and harassment and can affect the mental health of the vulnerably minorities (Turner et al., 2015). Making threats is another way of emotionally hurting someone, where a peer can use verbal threats with the intention to harm someone, or threaten someone with objects such as a gun or a knife. Important to note is that in the previously mentioned threat, no actual physical harm is inflicted upon the other (Furlong & Morrison, 2000).

Baker-henningham et al., (2009) and Hong & Espelage (2012) list another type of peer-to-peer violence. They refer to this type of violence as the ‘Bystander Effect’. This type of violence is characterised by children witnessing fights or seeing other children carrying weapons to school.

There are two categories of bystanders: an outsider, someone who is not involved in the act, or a defender, someone who is trying to help the victim of a violent act. The bystander often finds him/herself in a difficult situation, where there is a fear that speaking up will lead to him/herself also becoming a target (McEvoy, 2005). The bystander can suffer from anxiety or depression as a result of what he or she has witnessed or he or she might have a fear of being victimised as well (Thapa et al., 2013).

(33)

33 4.2.1 Bullying

Bullying is the form of violence that is most known and most common and will therefore be defined in more depth. There is not one specific definition for bullying but the definition often used is the following (Agnich & Miyazaki, 2013; Blosnich & Bossarte, 2011);

“A student is being bullied or victimized when he or she is exposed, repeatedly and over time, to negative actions on the part of one or more other students (Olweus, 1996, p.265)”.

Herewith, Olweus (1996) argues that bullying has two components. Firstly, there is an intent to repeatedly wanting to do harm to someone over a longer period of time. Secondly there is a certain power dynamic, in which one is perceived weaker than the other (McEvoy, 2005; Turner et al., 2015). In addition, the bullies tend to have little empathy for their victims. Also, there is distinction between two modes; direct and indirect. Where direct bullying happens in front of other children, so there is a face-to-face interaction in which the child is either physically or verbally abused. On the contrary, indirect bullying happens without the presence of the targeted child, this can be for example spreading harmful rumours online (Nordtveit, 2016).

Within this there are four types of bullying; verbal, physical, relational and damaging of property (Nordtveit, 2016). Examples of physical and emotional bullying are hurting someone, using mean words or gestures, or making sure someone is excluded from a group (Blosnich & Bossarte, 2011). Relationship violence consists of a combination of physical and verbal violence, where one peer deliberately hurts or manipulates their relationship. In addition, this form of victimisation involves systematic physical or verbal persecution of another peer who is perceived as stronger (Brock et al., 2006). Damaging or destroying property happens without the permission of the victim and often in front of their eyes (Nordtveit, 2016). Bullying can lead to the extreme event where a child develops suicidal thoughts that may result in a suicidal action and eventually to death (Blosnich & Bossarte, 2011).

A child can also bully teachers by threatening the ability and feeling of a teacher to feel safe and secure in his or her own classroom (Bon, Faircloth & LeTendre, 2006). Children bully, humiliate and threaten teachers in order to break down the hierarchical power dynamics. As a consequence, teachers tend to leave the school (Tamutiene, 2008).

(34)

34 4.2.2 Sexual Violence

Sexual violence amongst peers, it is often referred to as ‘dating violence’, and can be described as “Physical, emotional or sexual violence that occurs between two people who are in a close relationship. Some experts include relational aggression, such as gossiping or shunning”

(Stephenson, Martsolf & Drucker, 2012, p.205).

Sexual abuse can result in sexual transmitted diseases (STDs), substance abuse, decrease of academic performance, distress, suicidal thoughts and unhealthy relationships (Stephenson et al., 2012). The main difference between sexual violence amongst children and child abuse is that it does not involve an adult. However, both forms do involve one party who is perceived to have more power and control over the other. The perpetrator of sexual violence amongst peers is often also significantly older than the other.

4.3 Teacher to Student violence

Teachers have a large influence on the emotional state of children, especially because, the way teachers respond to the behaviour of a child can influence future actions of a child. If a teacher shows warm feelings towards a child it will have a positive effect on the behaviour of a child.

However, when a teacher uses violence, it can have a negative effect on their behaviour (Brock et al., 2006). Teachers can also influence the learning ability and lifelong skills of children, such as showing respect to others. So, if a teacher uses violence in school it can result into a decrease of the physical and emotional well-being of a child (Benbenishty & Astor, 2005). Teacher to student violence can be separated, similar to peer-to-peer violence, in three different categories;

physical abuse or punishment, sexual maltreatment and emotional abuse (Benbenishty & Astor, 2005; Taylor et al., 2008).

4.3.1 Physical Abuse

Physical abuse has many forms. It can range from teachers bringing weapons (e.g. knifes, belts etc.) to school and threatening to use the weapons, to actually using the weapons to hurt children. The latter is often referred to as corporal punishment, whereby the teacher uses certain objects to hurt a child or makes the children feel uncomfortable by, for example, throwing objects towards them or making them stand or sit in an uncomfortable position (Baker- Henningham et al., 2009; Benbenishty & Astor, 2005). The use of corporal punishment is prohibited by the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. Nevertheless, it is still used in

(35)

35 schools to change the behaviour of the child (United Nations, 1990). Teachers justify their harmful behaviour by claiming that the student was behaving inappropriately and therefore needed to be disciplined. Another way teachers justify their behaviour is by saying that the children misunderstood or misperceived an action by the teachers as something damaging and that therefore the child is imagining it all in his/her mind (McEvoy, 2005). Consequences of corporal punishment are academic underperformance, aggressive behaviour, fear, bodily complaints and re-experiencing of the traumatic event (Benbenishty& Astor, 2005).

4.3.2 Sexual Abuse

Sexual violence is not only perpetrated by peers but it can also be done by teachers (Denmark et al., 2005). Sexual violence is often referred to as sexual assault, and is defined as

“The force, threat or coercion, physical or psychological to make a person engage in sexual activity without that person’s consent” (Denmark et al., 2005, p.104).

It is often argued that sexual harassment in school is based on social norms that are grounded within a community. Students who are victims of sexual abuse feel humiliated, intimidated, victimised or dominated. Sexual abuse may be based on gender, physical or psychological hierarchy (Benbenishty & Astor, 2005). However, there is no significant difference between the amount of victimisation between boys and girls. In some cases, boys can be even more victimised than girls (Postmus & Davis, 2014). Sexual maltreatment constitutes being touched inappropriate or even being forced to engage in sexual interactions. Emotionally, the teacher can use inappropriate comments or name-calling (Benbenishty & Astor, 2005). Unwanted sexual activities can also be used by teachers as a way to threaten the academic performance of a child. In these cases, the teacher will use his or her power to exchange a sexual deed for something that a student needs, such as a good grade (Postmus & Davis, 2014). When a relationship between student and teacher is not forced, this power dynamic is often used to get a child high academic results, often with the consent of the parents for the same reason (Postmus

& Davis, 2014).

4.3.3 Emotional abuse

The use of humiliation, rejection or intimidation by teachers is a form of emotional abuse.

Students feel rejected when the teacher does not show attention to a child or by making the

Safe Schools

Safe Schools

Abstract

Table of Contents

List of Abbreviations

Preface

1. Introduction

1.1 War Child Holland (WCH)

.2 Research sub-questions

1.3 Study Limitations

2. Methods

2.1 Definitions

2.2 Literature Review

2.3 Interviews

2.4 Study Overview

3. INEE – Minimum Standards

3.1 Foundational Standards Domain

3.2 Access and Learning Environment Domain

3.3 Teaching and Learning Domain

3.4 Teachers and Other Educational Personnel Domain

3.5 Education Policy Domain

3.6 Summary

4. Literature Review on In-school Violence

4.2 Peer-to-Peer Violence

4.3 Teacher to Student violence