by Richard Pierre Claude
A Report with Recommendations for Table of Contents I. BACKGROUND
VI. RECOMMENDATIONS
Enhancing Participatory Non-formal A Report with Recommendations for
Historical and Global Context. In the 1990s, programs of Human Rights Education (HRE) are being instituted all around the globe, and there is reason to think these initiatives do not constitute a mere passing teaching fad. Among the explanations for HRE taking root in the 1990's, three can be singled out for relevance to the objectives and work of The Asia Foundation.
In a larger historical context, it should be noted that human rights education is an international obligation with a half century history beginning in 1945 when the Charter of the United Nations called for cooperation "in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms."[Articles 55 and 56]. The Charter's references to "promoting and encouraging" to create state responsibilities for teaching human rights, and that duty is clarified by the preambular language of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). It announced that "teaching and education" are not simply new post-World War II state functions --among the governmental duties attending membership in the U.N. Rather, as if to acknowledge popular action at the grass-roots level and the work of non-governmental organizations (NGOs), "teaching and education" are specified in the Declaration of 1948 as the obligations of "every individual and every organ of society...."
Forms and Formats of HRE. Of course, human rights education takes diverse forms and is presented in various formats worldwide. Taking Asian references into account, these include:
II. HUMAN RIGHTS EDUCATION: GOALS AND OBJECTIVES Goals of Human Rights Education. Human rights education can be defined as a process of learning, discovery and action that cultivates the knowledge, skills, attitudes, habits and behavior needed for people effectively to know, assert and vindicate their human rights consistent with the Universal Declaration and to respect the rights of others. HRE derives its goals from internationally defined norms such as those found in human rights instruments. Goals include the long-term vision of the UN to secure freedom, justice and peace on a foundation of respect for human rights and on what is necessarily implied by that goal: the people's right to know their rights. Thus, the Preamble to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights says that this fundamental document was proclaimed as a "common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations," who are directed to "strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms....." Moreover, Article 26 of the UDHR specifies everyone's right to education, which should include among its goals the "full development of the human personality and the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms....quot;
Teaching Objectives. Specified long-term goals require examination of the choice of related short-term objectives. It is important to understand that the definition of human rights education and the goals entrenched in the UDHR nevertheless, leave open a wide range of useful and appropriate educational objectives from among which educators must make selections. Educational objectives refer to short-term expected learning competencies designed for students and participants. In any and every educational format, teachers and educational groups concerned with HRE may pursue many different pedagogical objectives. They need to pick and chose among learning objective which include the educational aims of professors, teachers, students, facilitators, and participants to:
This list should not be taken to suggest that one or any cluster of objectives is better than the other. Rather, because HRE involves sensitive and important materials with significance for life-long learning, the teacher has a responsibility to identify and select learning objectives in a critical and self-conscious way. For educators to be clear about their respective goals and objectives also helps to supply the basis to evaluate whether the work involved is successful. [1]
Teacher-Centered-Learning. In those countries where NGOs undertake HRE activities, there is an evident tendency to begin with the first objective of enhancing knowledge. Pursuit of this objective allows teachers to rely on time-tested and culturally ingrained habits of lecturing, with largely one-way communication. In this traditional approach, the teacher is viewed as the expert briefing students who, in turn, are expected to take notes and commit information to memory. Such Teacher-Centered-Learning (TCL) is commonplace and can, to a limited degree, be used to meet one or two of the initial objectives noted above. Significantly, however, these objectives are ranked from weak to strong according to whether they are likely to have long term effects in bringing about change in the student and in society. As one moves down the list of teaching objectives, TCL becomes ever less effective in achieving objectives important to civil society, such as attitude and behavior change. Indeed, achieving the objective of empowerment is virtually impossible based on low-participation methods of TCL. Rather, Learner-Centered Education (LCE) is essential to empower participants to gain mastery over their own lives by knowing and using their human rights. Learner-Centered Education. Advanced educational objectives, such as developing critical understanding and changing attitudes and behavior, are all directed towards participants who, while not necessarily literate, nevertheless are more mature and adult in their expectations of education than those concerned with merely acquiring knowledge to pass a memory test. For the former, Learner-Centered Education (LCE) becomes ever more important. LCE requires substantial participation in order to achieve the competencies expected, such as critical understanding of problems faced by people in their own community. Teacher-Centered Learning certainly need not be wholly abandoned, but it must be supplemented with increased and meaningful participation on the part of students to achieve the objectives needed among people in emerging and re-emerging democracies and to achieve the success markers of serious human rights education.
HRE Success-Markers. Human rights education programs can be judged as successful from the student/participant's point of view, based on whether the education and training is in harmony with human rights principles, provides knowledge and information about human rights, enhances the participants' capacity to assert and enjoy their human rights, and in the process develops attitudes and behavior respectful of those rights. In short, human rights education must empower people, not only to know their human rights in terms of developing cognitive mastery of information, but must also develop skills to use, assert and vindicate their rights. Thus human rights education should become ever more mature, moving from accumulating information to empowering people's capacity to act on information. Such empowering action plans include:
As suggested by the figure above, the efficacy of Teacher-Centered Learning (TCL) involves diminishing returns as teaching objectives progress toward empowerment. The figure is designed to demonstrate that empowerment and cognate objectives cannot be attained without reliance on participation-rich features of Learner-Centered Education (LCE). In the figure, the row of categories refers to the teaching objectives of: knowledge enhancement, value clarification, the development of critical skills, and problem-solving skills, attitude change, behavior change, and the objective of empowerment. The percentage references in the left hand column should be understood only to reflect the author's experiential estimate.
III. EMPOWERMENT OBJECTIVES FOR HRE Empowerment as the Objective of Non-formal HRE. Empowerment objectives in popular education cannot be achieved without high levels of participation. Empowerment is a process through which people and/or communities increase their control or mastery of their own lives and the decisions that affect their lives. Empowering education differs from most formal education traditionally designed to promote the storing of knowledge and honing of analytical skills. The scholarly literature on education for empowerment is not extensive, partly because empowerment is seldom central to the concerns of professional educators in the industrially developed democracies of the "First World." It is best known and used with some exemplary results in various "Third World" countries where the literature is philosophically rich and politically grounded. [2] Non-formal HRE for empowerment does not treat students simply as receptacles to be filled with useful ideas and information, as if knowledge is an object to be received rather than a continuous process of inquiry and critical reflection. The literature of empowerment education stresses the need to look in new ways at the learning process from both the participants' (student's) perspective as well as from that of the facilitator (teacher). From the Participants' Point of View. Education for empowerment must go beyond the acquisition of knowledge and operate from the premise that humans not only have the ability to know reality, but they also have the capacity for critical reflection and action. Therefore, education aimed at developing this capacity must enable students to analyze the underlying structures of an issue, action or experience, to unveil and apprehend its causal relationships, and to discover the hidden motives or interests which it conceals. To understand how any given policy benefits some and harms others is an important step toward action. People need such perspectives to deal with many issues, such as children exploited though prostitution; women suffering from spousal abuse; farmers hurt by the diversion of water resources; workers toiling for 16 hours per day, not knowing the law that is designed to protect them with maximum hours rules. From the Facilitator's Point of View. Empowering education supplies the means by which people deal critically and creatively with reality and discover how to participate in the transformation of their world. To take this goal seriously, HRE facilitators must use problem-posing techniques whereby facilitators and participants are involved in a partnership of mutual cooperation and in which the role of teacher as "know it all" is abandoned. The challenge for the facilitator is to accept an idea that is new to many, viz., that the teacher/student dichotomy should be dissolved in a learning group in which all participate. Indeed, the teacher should not even be referred to as such, but should adopt the role of a facilitator who helps participants to do several things. For example, the group members go through a process of consciousness-raising about their needs as human beings and the circumstances in which they live. They develop critical skills to assess their human rights and that of others. They improve their abilities to analyze the obstacles and social structures that stand in the way of enjoying rights and freedoms. They develop the ability to analyze the causes of human rights violations and to connect their learning with action. They become empowered to undertake remedial actions. They become ready to learn more and acquire new skills using law and human rights as instruments of change, development and justice. Pedagogy directed toward the goal of empowerment and seeking the objective of reinforcing political efficacy on the part of participants has been successfully used in various less developed and developing countries relying on the methods of the late Brazilian scholar, Paulo Freire: conscientization; dialogic teaching --discarding the role of omniscient teacher; emphasis on student participation in the defining of community needs; and reliance on the design of plans for collective action to promote social transformation and to demonstrate solidarity with those most in need. [3] Perhaps paradoxically, Freire himself avoided claims about the utility of his methods outside the cultural framework of Latin American peasant populations in which he showed that significant advances in literacy skills were possible in the context of continual political-educational dialogue. In any event, Freire's techniques have been adapted for use as empowerment pedagogies, most prominently in Asia where Clark, [4] Dias, [5] and Timm [6] have linked Human Rights Education for empowerment to allied economic, political and legal development objectives.
IV. HUMAN RIGHTS EDUCATION ADVISORY ACTIVITIES Terms of Reference. Two reports to The Asia Foundation, one by Dr. Shahdeen Malik of the Bangladesh Legal Aid and Services Trust and the other by Professor Stephen P. Marks of Columbia University, noted significant commitments made by Cambodian NGOs since 1993 in terms of undertaking programs of human rights education. [7] Moreover, both reports noted the tragic disruptive effects of events in 1997 which poignantly raised questions about Cambodia's direction. Many thereafter recognized that if the window for democratic progress were to re-open, the opportunity must be taken ever more seriously. In light of the two TAF reports noted, and in the context of this report, the compelling question is whether HRE is up to its potential as a humane framework to promote the rule of law and as a building block for peace and democracy? In their reports, Malik and Marks placed special stress on the limited scope and effectiveness of human rights teaching methods relying, as they found, so heavily on lectures and the one-way communications techniques typical of Teacher-Centered Learning. To show how this situation could be remedied, Professor Marks conducted a series of preliminary workshops in 1998 for Foundation NGO partners using lesson plans and educational formats stressing participatory approaches. He recommended intensive follow-up work by the author of this report, and I accepted the invitation of The Foundation to spend six weeks working with Cambodian NGOs to introduce learner-centered educational methods. In fulfillment of these objectives and in advance of my visit to Southeast Asia, I composed an 80-page training manual titled: Bells of Freedom -Cambodia- with Resource Materials for Facilitators of Non-Formal Education and 24 Human Rights Exercises. The Table of Contents of this "participation-rich" handbook is found in Appendix A of this report. [8] With my permission, this manual was duplicated by TAF and distributed to all their NGO-Grantees in advance of my arrival on 28 January 1999.
Negotiating with NGOs to Demonstrate LCE. I spent my first week in Phnom Penh in late January, 1999 meeting with Grantee NGO's, learning about their programs, and "marketing" my program of high-participation exercises drawn from The Bells of Freedom -Cambodia. All the NGOs visited expressed interest and most of them organized meetings of their educators for one, two, and three day training sessions. In each such workshop, the receiving NGO selected the exercises that interested them, TAF arranged for translation into Khmer, and an agreement was drawn up specifying the schedule and plan. For example, on 4 February, TAF staff and I met with the Coordinator of Education for the Cambodian League for the Promotion and Defense of Human Rights (LICADHO). In a memo of understanding (or more typically an oral agreement with various NGOs), LICHADO and I agreed to a three-day workshop with 22 trainers from Phnom Penh and provinces. Coordinator Vann Sophat selected nine participatory exercises for demonstrations emphasizing their organizational priorities for women's and children's issues. We agreed on LICADHO trainers facilitating three exercises per day in Khmer with plenty of time for discussion, criticism and questions among all of us. The workshop's pedagogical objectives from the point of view of end-use participants were to: (1) promote confidence and efficacy of participants in making use of their rights; (2) develop participant articulation skills to assert and voice their human rights; (3) show the relation between participant needs, issues of everyday life, and social and economic rights; (4) strengthen the analytical ability of participants to understand and use human right drawing from their own experience; (5) promote empowerment skills leading to plans of action; and (6) promote reliance on human rights and the development of remedial programs that are mutually cooperative and respectful of officials and in harmony with Cambodian and international law. The workshop featured oral evaluations of each exercise by the participants along with my critique, and the three-day session ended with Khmer language written evaluation forms distributed to all participants, among other things, asking whether they plan to use the new participation methods in their own teaching in the future.
Workshop Demonstrations. Eight NGOs organized their own respective workshops for trainers and trainers of trainers, with my participation in every instance. The eight TAF-Grantees are profiled in Appendix B, below. These groups are: (1) Khmer Institute of Democracy (KID) which combined its trainers for a joint workshop with the (2) Human Rights and Community Outreach Project (OUTREACH); (3) Cambodia Institute for Human Rights (CIHR) and (4) Cambodia Health and Human Rights Alliance (CHHRA) which sent its trainers to the workshop hosted by (5) Khmer Kampuchea Krom Human Rights Association (KKKHRA); (6) Cambodian League for the Promotion and Defense of Human Rights (LICADHO); (7) Project Against Domestic Violence (PADV). (8) Human Rights Vigilance of Cambodia (VIGILANCE)
Given time constraints, I perceived an unmet need for and interest in fresh guidance on customized planning of well-organized lessons and curriculum design, all of which went beyond the time available for our workshops on pedagogical techniques. (The components of a well-planned lesson are critically important to achieving identifiable teaching objectives, and these components are illustrated in Appendix D.) Nevertheless, in the case of the KKKHRA workshop, participants took an interest in curriculum design, and with my advice, developed their own participatory exercise on "Ethnic Minority Rights," set out in Appendix E. When appropriate and when requested by workshop participants, I gave numerous examples of "action-oriented participation-rich" techniques adopted in other countries, as well as guidelines for facilitators using learner-centered approaches. These ideas are sketched out in Appendix F. In short, pedagogical demonstrations consumed most of my consulting time, with insufficient time for curriculum design. Outside observers attended many of our demonstration sessions. For example, Kim Mony Pheck, President of the Khmer Students Association sat in on the demonstrations organized by OUTREACH and KID. Two visiting observers attended LICADHO "demos." Narin Sok, Project Management Assistant of the US Agency for International Development attended two half-day sessions hosted by LICADHO, as did Ms. Micaela Wolf, Advisor to the Khmer Women's Voice Center. CIHR demonstrations were observed by visitors from the Ministry of the Interior: Duch Son, Tep Tony, and Lao Bun Da. The table in Appendix C accounts for the consulting activities and workshop programs conducted between the end of January and early March. Eight NGOs, mostly singly but twice in combination, put on demonstrations in Khmer language, engaged in critical reviews of the demos, and conducted consultations. The table aggregates these activities showing a total of 119 hours of interaction, whether in planning consultations, briefings for participants, and, most voluminously, taking time to proceed step-by-step through a total of 33 demonstrations. Altogether, 115 trainers were reached, either participating in a demo or observing one or more. Of course, by dint of the number of workshop days, some benefited more than others because of exposure to more demos than others. E.g., PADV took time for only two demonstrations, KID and OUTREACH put on three; and four demos were undertaken by CIHR; four by CHHRA sharing time with VIGILENCE. LICADHO showed a high level of energy and made the greatest investment of time and effort, putting on nine demonstrations. Because each NGO had attained a different level of LCE experience or understanding, and because each had its own mandate and target groups (rural women, children, police, Buddhist monks, the disabled, etc.), I decided to lead individual workshops instead of mammoth demonstrations combining multiple NGOs. Such combining, while certainly less labor-intensive for me, would have reduced the number of participants by virtue of scheduling problems but would have greatly reduced the participation of each NGO and of each trainer and educator. More would have been spectators and fewer participants. Moreover, the "one NGO at a time" approach had the added benefit of identifying several truly gifted HRE facilitators whose work showed full mastery and command of the methodologies of learner-centered education. These included: Ms. Keo Sok Khim (Licadho); Ms. Sim Chanthan (Outreach); Mr. Keo Bun Thoeun (Vigilance); Mr. Ung Soksay (KID); and Mr. Prom Sory, Kompot Provincial Coordinator, (CIHR).
Evaluation. After each exercise, the TAF Program Officer conducted an oral evaluation lasting about 15 minutes and eliciting opinions on the following questions:
I critiqued each demonstration in detail, suggesting points of strength and weakness and occasionally proposing alternative teaching techniques and participation-rich possibilities as well. Finally, after the completion of the one, two or three day meetings, a Khmer language written evaluation instrument was given each participant with instructions to the NGO education coordinator to deliver it to TAF as soon as possible. Preliminary and partial results show 46 of 72 respondents affirming their plans to employ LCE methods (five said they would do so when circumstances allowed). Thus 70.8% affirmed plans to use LCE; there were no negative responses, and 21 respondents did not answer the last question. In the assessment of Mr John Lowrie, British consultant to CIHR, the workshops produced "a major breakthrough." (Memo of 4 March 1999)
Field observations of NGO education in a provincial location as well as demonstration sessions organized by NGO-Grantees helped me identify several important problems arising in the process of NGOs shifting from Teacher-Centered Learning to Learner-Centered Education. In the case of one field site demonstration in Koh Kor Village, Kandal Province, I observed a skilled facilitator confidently face 30 participants. These included men, women and children, none of whom had ever experienced a human rights education program. On the first day (the only one of the three-day program I observed), the facilitator made a successful effort from beginning to end to use a process of Socratic dialogue, but she seemed not to proceed from premise to conclusion, from an examination of community problems to a concluding wrap up. In short, I saw no evident structure or planned sequence leading from the opening query-and-response process to any conclusive results. Among the 33 demonstration-exercises conducted in Phnom Penh, this and other problems arose which I identify below according to several categories. 1. The Problem of Participation for Its Own Sake. Field observations as well as experience in workshop activities, lead me to conclude that facilitators are willing (with only a very few hard-line exceptions involving older men) to adopt participation-rich methodologies, but need to appreciate that participation for its own sake does not necessarily meet a chosen teaching objective. The problem of participation for its own sake arises when educators lack imagination (which usually means lesson plans) on how to conduct interactive teaching. They seem to fail to realize that for learner-centered education to succeed, the facilitator needs a mental template to proceed from premise to conclusion, from problems (where villagers are always more expert than outside teachers) to action-plans. The framework for such a template is illustrated in all of the 24 exercises planned out in The Bells of Freedom-Cambodia. For example, its exercises cue the facilitator about when to intervene in participant's discussion by introducing specific human rights ideas so as to prompt them to employ normative ideas and standards as tools for problem-solving, around which to organize self-help projects, or on the basis of which to develop an argument so as to back up a claim or complaint. Overcoming the problem of participation for its own sake can be done by laying out a clear lesson plan with articulated teaching objectives and step-by-step progression toward participatory decision-making for action. A model for structuring an HRE lesson plan can be found in Appendix D. 2. The Problem of Over-reliance on TCL. Among most NGOs beginning HRE, the usual practice has been to use lecturing and one-way communication as the most efficient method of briefing students about historical and legal information in the least amount of time. This is especially so for instructors recruited from the ranks of experienced teachers accustomed to lecture methods. Once established, this form of Teacher-Centered Learning is difficult to change, in part because such instructors easily assume that abandoning the podium forfeits authority, and that methods other than lecturing are more time consuming and more lengthy. Consequently, the problem in achieving learning-centered education is a problem of teachers making the transition to the role of facilitator. The transition is made by demonstrating to teachers the need to adopt the new action-oriented teaching objectives linked to empowerment and in the process, overcoming erroneous assumptions about participation-rich methods being information-poor. 3. The Problem of Identifying Community Needs and Embedding HRE in Context. Among NGO trainers who conducted, participated in, and observed learner-centered education, there appeared to be considerable understanding about the importance of participation. However, if we consider the full range of distinguishing characteristics of LCE methods, one or two important elements can too easily drop out of sight. These characteristics are:
The problem of too easily ignoring, forgetting or failing to take the last two characteristics into account is a function of our workshop 's not being conducted "in the field" and not set in a community context except on a "make believe " basis. Follow-up work will be needed to be sure that learner needs are taken into account and that LCE is actually practiced in the local and community context of real people's concerns and needs. ( See Recommendation Number 1, below) 4. The Problem of Identifying and Defining Target Groups. The selection of the target group for HRE involves an important set of strategic decisions which NGOs should not make opportunistically. I am not confident, based on discussions with NGO directors that the choice of target groups reflects careful consideration of who the subgrantee can serve well and whether it will thereby constructively fill a niche involving a fit between group needs and NGO capacity. Given Cambodia's compelling needs and the scope of the population's suffering, serving any group anywhere can always be justified. But this is not the same as the decision that might be made if problems of overlapping coverage with other NGOs were taken into account, and whether (in cost and benefit terms) a multiplier effect is being forsaken in favor of a micro-level target of opportunity. Moreover, selecting and defining target groups becomes a more rational process when the question of "mapping " is addressed, that is --who is doing what and where? Unmet needs could thereby be better identified. For example, some specialized NGO services closely connected to HRE are not offered to needy target groups. Examples are mediation services and the teaching of conflict resolution techniques to local officials, especially for such target groups as women and ethnic minorities. (See Recommendation 1) 5. The Problem of Defining Effectiveness. Insomuch as Learner-Centered Education does not call for participation for its own sake but rather as a means to the ultimate teaching objective of empowerment, we should focus on empowerment indicators to assess the effectiveness of HRE. Education for empowerment should lead to action-plans on the part of the learning participants. For TAF staff to conduct post-consultancy program-evaluation, they will have to undertake field observations. Most particularly, they should be alert to evidence that participants' work leads at some end-point (not necessarily after the first few lessons) to action-plans. These may take many forms including self-help projects as well as reliance on government implementation of human rights commitments. Such action-plans could include:
There are many "indicators of HRE success" which could be identified, having to do with the scope, coverage and behavioral changes following in the wake of HRE. But a careful data-based assessment of whether a particular program does or does not yield an action plan is a practical evaluation datum which goes directly to the issue of measuring the effectiveness for holistic HRE properly defined. Collection of this information is referenced in the first recommendation below.
1. NGO-Grantees Need Follow-up Work on Pedagogy. My consultancy activities focused on pedagogy and the imperative need to shift from teaching methods using "one-way communication" to "participation rich" methods. This intervention was timely and followed directly from the thoughtful recommendations of Professor Stephen Marks in his report on strategic planning for Cambodian NGOs. If we consider Marks' "needs and capacity assessment" as a kind of "HRE Stage One" in reviewing TAF support for HRE, then my guidance on "pedagogical methodology" served as "HRE Stage Two." The gains made during the pedagogy consultancy are not finished; this stage will not be completed without important follow-up work, preferably by the TAF Program Officers who participated in HRE demos with eight NGOs. TAF Program Officers should direct about 20-25% percent of their time to continued guidance and review of the respective NGOs for which they have responsibility, and monitor their progress and reliance on LCE methods. The Program Officers should do a careful analysis of the written evaluations returned by each NGO, report their results to NGO education directors, and arrange for field visits to HRE sessions. Such visits should:
Such follow-up work is important, not only to monitor and reinforce methodological innovation, but to add value to the successful facilitator 's work by: (1) maintaining the gains made by new methodologies; (2) advancing the cause of social change; and (3) beginning to envision a possible new stage of HRE combined with conflict resolution methodologies. Follow-up work of this sort might reasonably be completed over the course of a year, capped by each Program Officer's evaluation report and presenting their collectively thought-out recommendation on the need to add training on mediation skills to HRE for action.
2. TAF Should Plan for Further Development of HRE Capacity-Building among NGOs in Terms of Enhancing Skills in Curriculum Design. Once educational facilitators are comfortable with participatory methods, they can be expected to show more initiative in meeting the needs of participants. They will be ever more ready to meet their target group's needs by means of adapting and designing new lesson plans and new curricula. This "HRE Third Stage " is important as central-office educational officers begin see the advantages of devolving responsibility for curriculum design, and as facilitators begin to see themselves as agents of social change. According to research findings in social psychology, change agents encounter more difficulties in introducing innovation into groups through reliance on outsiders to the exclusion of in-group participation. [10] Applied to the Cambodian context, HRE for empowerment will be strengthened as experienced facilitators begin to take on the new function of designing curriculum in collaboration with target group members using "ingroup planning methods" and curriculum design along interactive lines with "end-users. " They are members of the grass roots community from among which participants are recruited for HRE. Curriculum design is more eagerly received when teachers as social change agents make serious indigenous connections with the target groups they serve and among whose members are people who have to some degree participated in curriculum design. [11] Experts who might be consulted for "Stage Three," include Felice Yeban, The Philippines Normal University, Nancy Flowers, Amnesty International USA (Bolinas, California), and Betty Reardon, Columbia Teachers College, New York. One modest way to launch this new stage would be to send selected skilled "master trainers" to the Columbia University Center for the Study of Human Rights to attend their three month advocates program which includes curriculum design methodology under the direction of Professor J. Paul Martin, in collaboration with Betty Reardon, and under the administrative direction of Ms. Chivy Sok (Cambodian-American). 3. A Cambodian Information Resource Center Will Enhance HRE Capacity. As HRE in Cambodia becomes more pervasive, advanced and sophisticated, its users will need access to research in the field. Of course, most of the university-based research on problems of human rights is being done in faculties of law, the social sciences, philosophy, and the humanities, often in specialized interdisciplinary centers and institutes. Within the last few years, the collections held by these centers have become accessible through the internet. Indeed, the Science and Human Rights Program of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) lists and profiles over 300 human rights websites in the AAAS Directory of Human Rights Resources on the Internet. [12] The same source carries a guide for human rights research called: Getting on Line for Human Rights. Additionally, comprehensive international listings of such centers, with profiles and addresses, can be found on an internet site sponsored by Human Rights USA [http://www.hrusa.org]. TAF should consider funding an Human Rights Information Resource Center with internet capabilities to be shared by NGO-Grantees. It could incorporate TAF 's existing Gender Resource Center, combining its strengths with additional and complementary human rights materials. The center could be located in TAF offices for a time, and perhaps eventually set up elsewhere. Such a center could also assemble human rights educational materials in hard copy, and become a clearinghouse whereby NGOs could share their curricular materials. The Center could also offer various advisory services, such as translations, workshops on proposal writing, editing, and even on-going advice on curriculum design.
4. Cambodian NGOs Should be Better Integrated into Regional Asia-Pacific Networks of NGOs and Make Use of Asia-Pacific Regional HRE Resources. Several regional and strong national NGOs with experience in human rights education could be interlinked with Cambodian counterparts in exchange programs and consultancies. Regional NGOs include LAWASIA and the Asian Cultural Forum on Development. Examples of strong national NGOs with HRE capabilities include PROCESS, The Diokno Foundation, the Task Force Detainees and the Medical Action Group (all in the Philippines), The Legal Aid Institute in Indonesia, Unicef in Vietnam, and Worldview, and the Civil Rights Movement in Sri Lanka, to name a few appropriate potential exchange partners. Supplementing exchange links are other resources about which Cambodian NGO's need to be appraised. Regional centers appropriate for collaboration include these two examples:
5. Human Rights Education In Cambodia Would Benefit from a Forum Bringing Together HRE Trainers and Students of Khmer Culture Cambodian NGOs engaged in HRE should infuse their work with strong cultural content when appropriate. This proposal is consistent with the regional NGO standards drafted in 1993 when 110 non-governmental human rights organizations met in Bangkok, Thailand and agreed unanimously that: "The promotion of democracy and respect for human rights require human rights education and training of various sectors of society, at both governmental and non-governmental levels." [15] They said NGOs should use participatory learning methods "to enrich the process and contribute to the promotion and protection of universal human rights standards by utilizing the cultural wealth of the region. " The Bangkok Conference concluded that NGOs engaged in human rights education can benefit greatly by a self-conscious examination of the impact of their own culture on the realization of human rights for everyone. Applied to Cambodia, this suggests that Cambodian NGOs could beneficially join with students of Khmer culture to discuss several important questions. For example, who are the chief social carriers of Khmer culture? If one answer is the Buddhist monks, then new, more creative and systematic ways should be found to use the pagodas for human rights education, consistent with "The Five Wonderful Precepts " of Buddhism. [16] In order to deepen the reach of human rights education, questions should be considered by educators about the ways in which Cambodian folklore (e.g., the tales of the hare), symbols and aphorisms about "women 's place," and vocabulary (e.g., the derogatory reference to Cambodians of Vietnamese descent as "yuon") could be taken into account in human rights education so as to ensure use of positive cultural features and avoidance of those that are negative, especially those reinforcing sexism and ethnic prejudice. The Bangkok NGOs concluded that when people know their rights, they will develop the critical capacity to discern when power-holders seek to use cultural traditions and differences as a pretext to justify violations of human rights. They drafted a sharp reply to various Asian government pronouncements contrasting "Western human rights versus Asian values, " and said, by contrast, that cultural difference cannot be used as an excuse to derogate (i.e., set aside) various rights or justify discrimination. Specifically, they said those cultural practices which undermine women's rights must not be tolerated. Moreover, such a conference could squarely face the challenge of Article 5 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) which commits Cambodia and other signatories to an important cultural undertaking: Article 5. State Parties shall take all appropriate measures: (a) To modify the social and cultural patterns of conduct of men and women, with a view to achieve the elimination of prejudices and customary and all other practices which are based on the idea of the inferiority or the superiority of either of the sexes or on stereotype roles for men and women.
6. As Cambodian Government Officials Appear to Lack Appreciation for the Benefits of A Civil Society, NGOs Should Organize a GO-NGO Forum or Series of Informal Meetings to Clarify their Distinct Functions but Mutually Beneficial Relationships. In December, 1998, Professor Yash Ghai of the Hong Kong Law Faculty published an NGO-drafted document entitled, "Our Common Humanity, Asian Human Rights Charter. " It said: "A humane and vigorous civil society is necessary for the promotion and protection of human rights and freedoms, for securing rights within civil society and to act as a check on State institutions. Freedoms of expression and association are necessary for the establishment and functioning of institutions of civil society." [17] The Cambodian Institute for Human Rights is one of only a few NGOs that regularly invite officials from Government Ministries to sit in on and observe their functions. For example, in the March 2, CIHR demonstration of the HRE exercise entitled: "Building a Civil Society, " a member of the Interior Ministry sat in on and commented constructively on our "Methodology Workshop." However, this situation was exceptional; generally the Cambodian Government, like many weak emerging regimes, does not understand the concept and advantages of fostering civil society. Seeing NGO activities, including HRE programs as competitive with government programs, political authorities view NGOs with envy as if engaged in zero-sum competition. Such mis-understanding should be dealt with prudently, assuring Government officials that NGOs are not, and certainly should not be concerned with power aggrandizement. At the same time, officials need to learn, either sooner or later, that when human rights education is taken seriously, citizens may finally expect a future in which governments will be judged externally and internally, less by the symbols of divine mandate, revolutionary heritage, or charismatic authority, and more by the performance criteria specified in constitutional and internationally defined standards of human rights. That prospect should be the hallmark and one of the goals of human rights education for citizenship empowerment in the future. 7. HRE Master Trainers and TAF Staff Should Be Rewarded with Credentialing Opportunities. An increasing number of colleges and universities offer advocacy training workshops and scholarly human rights programs, including degree programs. Master trainers among Cambodian NGOs and TAF Program Officers should be rewarded for their good work by offering them opportunities to enhance their professional credentials in the field of human rights education. For example, in the Asia-Pacific region, such programs may be found at Mahidol University (Bangkok), the Hong Kong Law Faculty, the University of New South Wales, the Philippine Normal University, the Ateneo University de Manila, and the United Nations University (Tokyo). As Shahdeen Malik said: "Opportunities for upward mobility in any large scale venture may help to enhance its effectiveness and attractiveness for the participants." [18] Moreover, short-term fully funded advocacy programs are available for human rights activists at the Center for the Study of Human Rights, Columbia University (New York) and the University of Notre Dame (USA). The Columbia University program is especially attractive because, (1) it constitutes a three month certificate program; (2) it accepts only applicants from developing countries so as to generate global networks of "South-South Human Rights Advocates"; and (3) it fully funds successful applicants. (See Recommendation 2.) In the Asia-Pacific region, a very strong but little known program is offered in Australia. It is the Diplomacy Training Institute of the Law Faculty of the University of New South Wales which provides yearly training for human rights workers from Asia and the Pacific region providing communications, reporting, and analytical skills for human rights work directed toward United Nations human rights mechanisms. They teach Asia-Pacific NGO staff and trainers the skills of argumentation, report writing, and the filing of complaints.
EPILOGUE Effective human rights education, if it is to build a "universal culture of human rights" as envisioned in the United Nations General Assembly's proclamation of the Decade for Human Rights Education, must be a participatory learning process that includes cultural mediation so that human rights are given meaning and made effective within each local context. The prospect is no longer utopian and the challenge is no longer beyond the horizon. We are faced with the obligation to implement effective programs of human rights education and to employ methodologies that will ensure that the task is well done, consistent with the goals of world peace, democracy, development, and respect for human rights everywhere.
FOOTNOTES [*] Richard Pierre Claude is Professor Emeritus of Government and Politics, University of Maryland, College Park. He was the Founding Editor of Human Rights Quarterly (Johns Hopkins University Press), and is the author of Educating for Human Rights, The Philippines and Beyond (University of the Philippines Press, 1996, and University of Hawaii Press, 1997); and co-author (with George Andreopoulos) of Human Rights Education for the 21st Century (University of Pennsylvania Press, 1998). A translation into Japanase was published in 1999. [1] Felisa Tibbitts, Evaluation in the Human Rights Education Field: Getting Started (The Hague: Netherlands Helsinki Committee, 1997). Full-text is available on-line: http://www.hrea.org/pubs/EvaluationGuide/. [2] Christian Bay, Strategies of Political Emancipation (South Bend, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1981). Seth Kreisberg, Transforming Power: Domination, Empowerment, and Education (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1992) [3] Paulo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed (London: Penguin Books, 1972). See also, Garth Meintjes, "Human Rights Education as Empowerment: Reflections on Pedagogy," in Andreopoulos and Claude, op cit., pp. 64-79. [4] John Clark, Democratizing Development, The Role of Voluntary Organizations (London: Earthscan Publications Ltd, International Institute for Environment and Development, 1991). [5] Clarence J. Dias, ed., Initiating Human Rights Education at the Grassroots, Asian Experience (Bangkok: Asian Cultural Forum on Development, 1991). See also, Dias, "Human Rights Education as a Strategy for Development," in Andreopoulos and Claude, op. cit., pp. 51-63 [6] R.W. Timm, Working for Justice and Human Rights: A Practical Manual (Dacca, Bangladesh: Hotline Asia/Oceania and Commission for Justice and Peace, 1989). [7] Shahdeen Malik, Human Rights in Cambodia, A Forward Looking Assessment of the Asia Foundation's Subgrantees (Phnom Penh: The Asia Foundation, 1998). Stephen P. Marks, Report on the Effectiveness and Strategic Planning of Cambodia Human Rights Grantees (Phnom Penh: The Asia Foundation, 1998). [8] The Bells of Freedom is my work product importantly relying on: (1) research by and advice from Professor Betty Reardon of Columbia University Teachers College, author of Educating for Dignity, K-12 (Philadelphia and London: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1995); (2) NGOs in Ethiopia (Action Professionals Association for the People), Mali, Senegal, Haiti and the Philippines; and (3) contributors to Human Rights Education for the 21st Century (Philadelphia and London: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1998), edited by George Andreopoulos and Richard Pierre Claude. [9] Donna Hicks, "Conflict Resolution Methods and HRE among Cambodian Women's Groups," in Andreopoulos and Claude, op. cit. [10] E. Katz and P.H. Lazersfeld, Personal Influence (Glencoe, ILL: The Free Press, 1955). [11] See Felice I. Yeban, Shopping List of Techniques in Teaching Human Rights (Manila: Philippines Amnesty International, 19940. Curriculum design is more than lesson plans and models of pedagogy, however participative. The process of curriculum design forces strategic planning choices on educators well beyond the choices made by facilitators in their adaptation to learner centered education. Curriculum design involves more than a written document or lesson plan with teaching objectives, and a sequence of activities. It is an education project through which ones chooses the body of knowledge, skills, attitudes and behaviors essential to meeting particular target group needs; it is the construction of a strategy for social change. [12] Stephen A. Hansen, ed., AAAS Directory of Human Rights Resources on the Internet 3, No. 1 (Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science, Spring 1998). http://shr.aaas.org/dhr.htm. [13] Asia-Pacific Human Rights Information Center, Human Rights Education in Asian Schools (Osaka: A-P HRI Center, 1998). See chapter 8, "Regional Approaches," in Richard Pierre Claude, Educating for Human Rights, The Philippines and Beyond (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1997). The Asia Pacific Human Rights Center, HURIGHTS, 15th Floor, 2-1-1500, Benten 1-chome, Minato-ku, OSAKA 522-0007, Japan; telephone 06-577 3577-8; FAX: 06-5779-3583. [14] Jefferson Plantilla, ed., The HRE Pack (Bangkok, The Asian Regional Resource Center, a component of the Asian Cultural Forum on Development, 1994). ARRC Office, 494 Soi 11, Lardprao Road 101, Klongchan, Bangkapi, Bangkok 10242, Thailand (or) P.O. Box 26, Bungthonglang Post Office, Bangkok 10242 Thailand. Tel. (662) 377 9357; Fax. (662) 374 0464. [15] Our Voice, "NGO Proposals to the Asia-Pacific Regional Meeting for the World Conference on Human Rights 1993". [16] Thich Nhat Hanh, For a Future to Be Possible (Berkeley, CA: Parallax Press) [17] Yash Ghai, "Our Common Humanity, Asian Human Rights Charter," Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights, vol.16/4 (1998), 539-552, at 550. [18] Shahdeen Malik, Human Rights in Cambodia: A Forward Looking Assessment of The Asia Foundation's Subgrantees (Phnom Penh: A Report Prepared for the Asia Foundation, April, 1998), p. 15.
|
|||||||
