Individual Submission Summary
Share...

Direct link:

Presenter 2

Mon, March 26, 1:15 to 2:45pm, Hilton Reforma, Floor: 2nd Floor, Don Diego 4 Section A

Proposal

The second panelist will present- from the assessment partner’s perspective- on the methodology selected for South Sudan RERA as well as findings. The research questions for the RERA were the following:

1.What are the risks and opportunities to improving access to education across South Sudan?
2.What are the risks and protective factors that influence learners’ safety when attending schools/temporary learning spaces/alternative learning programs?
3.What is the relationship between the conflict and service delivery (teacher qualification/language of instruction)?
4.What is the relationship between the conflict and curriculum?
5.What are the external, internal and institutional influences on the learning environments (e.g. state actors, non-state actors, international community)

In South Sudan, the RERA was conducted in a participatory and reflective manner. The design was produced as a result of a 3 day workshop with the assessment partner and key members of the USAID/South Sudan office. Other relevant methodological information will be shared by the panelist, such as sampling, data collection and analysis.

After data collection and report writing, the assessment team presented preliminary findings to USAID in Washington DC, and a brainstorming session was conducted to produce preliminary conclusions and recommendations. These findings, conclusions, recommendations will be validated in a workshop set to take place in October 2017 in Juba, with members of the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (MoEST), donors and implementing partners from the international community, and other relevant stakeholders. Key findings emerging for the workshop will be presented during the panel session.
The team also made a concerted effort to ensure conflict sensitivity throughout the assessment process, including:
-rigorous desk review of conflict dynamics and issues related to grievance, dividers and other sensitive issues;
-mix of qualitative and quantitative data collection methods
-advance planning with school community stakeholders where FGDs took place;
-consultations with partners and stakeholders on the identification of diverse stakeholders and informants across identity group lines;
-recruitment/organization of an appropriate RERA team, with gender balance, and knowledgeable about context and equipped with skills and experience to handle delicate matters and discussions;
-RERA team self-assessment conducted once the team was formed, and communication protocols developed for discussing the RERA with local actors;
-a consultative and participatory RERA process, particularly in communicating with key stakeholders about the nature of the exercise, collaborating on data collection, and sharing preliminary findings;
-a careful FGD and KII protocol, including conducting FGDs separately for boys and girls, and ensuring identity groups are equitably participating to the extent possible;
-Ethics protocols: informed consent procedures, maintaining confidentiality, safe storage of data on password protected computers, and protection referral mechanisms;
-disaggregation of data by gender and identity group where possible;
-recruitment of research team members to reflect the identity groups and languages in the communities they engaged.
-A unique feature of this risk analysis is that wide range of consultations at the community level to ascertain perceptions of the impact conflict has had on the education system from traditional leaders, religious leaders, youth leaders, women’s leaders and parents – these views represent local beliefs and values with regards educational barriers and opportunities for children and youth

Author