Equity and peace with justice in and through education: Promising findings from a multi-country study

• In Event: Methods That Matter: Rethinking How We Study Education in Crisis

Proposal

Inequities in educational access, quality and outcomes are likely to fuel socioeconomic disparities and disrupt social cohesion (UNICEF, 2016; Langer and Kuppins, 2019; Stewart, 2002). In politically contested environments, education policies such as, language-in-education, school governance, and the curriculum and textbook contents often represent cultural identities of privileged social groups, discriminating against marginalised communities (Pherali, 2022; Duranni, 2008; Duranni and Dunne, 2008). Even though education is equally valued as a vehicle for conflict prevention and social transformation (Novelli et al., 2019), the evidence around the positive influence of education on peace is largely inconclusive (Ishiyama and Breuning, 2012). This is because a) most studies are qualitative, context-specific and involve practitioners and researchers in the field of education; b) the education data in conflict-affected contexts is often missing and there is a lack of comparable international as well as subnational data on education and peacebuilding; and c) the nexus between education, conflict and peace is complex and multidirectional (Østby et al., 2019). Nevertheless, the existing body of quantitative research shows that education generally has a pacifying effect on conflict (Østby et al. 2019; Østby and Urdal, 2010) though little is known about how the positive change happens and is sustained.

To address this gap, Education Research in Conflict and Protracted Crisis (ERICC) has developed a novel conceptual framework; synthesised the existing body of knowledge; and generated new education evidence on pathways to learning and to peace with justice (Kim et al, 2024). The research engages with critical questions around in/equities in drivers of learning (access, quality and continuity) and achievement of holistic child outcomes (academic learning, socioemotional learning and physical/ mental wellbeing) to build foundations for societal peace. At the system level, the framework posits that political economy drivers, involving incentives, system operations and capacities of actors influence how education is delivered, for whom, and at what cost. A critical understanding of these processes can enable education actors to develop mechanisms to prevent both victimisation and weaponisation of education in conflict-affected settings and promote the role of education in addressing social injustices and building peace with justice. These pathways to change build on the theoretical knowledge that redistributing educational resources to reduce horizontal inequalities, involving diverse local communities in educational decision-making, promoting inclusive curricular reforms, and implementing educational programming aimed at peace and reconciliation can contribute to narrowing equity gaps, reducing violence within schools and communities, and fostering hope for longer-term social transformation (Burde et al., 2015; Higgins et al., 2016; Smith et al., 2016; Sayed and Novelli, 2016; Datzberger, 2017; Novelli et al., 2019). However, there remains a lack of robust and coherent empirical evidence to substantiate these claims in conflict and crisis settings.

This paper draws on a mixed methods study in three ERICC focal countries - Myanmar, South Sudan and Syria - to investigate equity and peace with justice in and through education. It synthesises the preliminary findings from three work packages: 1) horizontal inequalities in terms of access to, quality of and continuity in education; achievement gaps in terms of literacy, numeracy and socioemotional learning across different groups; and students’ attitudes towards peaceful coexistence and equal rights of all social groups; 2) an investigation into educational processes, analysing relevant policy documents, curricular frameworks and textbooks and the way teachers and students exhibit their subjectivities towards equity and justice; and 3) a critical analysis of educational initiatives aimed at peacebuilding and social transformation in each of the three contexts.

The data for Work Package 1 was drawn from learners’ surveys in Monastic education and Karen education in Myanmar, IDP camps and state schools in South Sudan. In each context, teachers, students and headteachers from around 30 schools participated in the survey. Following a preliminary analysis of the quantitative data, we selected four case study schools as part of Work Package 2 and 3 to carry out qualitative interviews with teachers, headteachers, policy makers and education practitioners about their perspectives on and school practices about the ways they promote equity and peace; and captured students’ subjectivities through a drawing activity. We also observed physical environments of the school/ classrooms and artifacts to understand the values that were being promoted in the educational settings. The survey data was analysed to reveal equity gaps in drivers of learning and holistic learning outcomes across children from different socioeconomic and cultural backgrounds. WP 2 involved critical discourse analysis of relevant policies, curricula and textbook contents and thematic analysis of interviews and children’s drawings. WP 3 focused on implementation of the language-in-education strategy in Karen education in Myanmar; alternative education programmes in South Sudan; and a participatory approach to educational reforms, reconciliation and social transformation in post-war Syria. The research questions, instruments and methodological approaches were co-developed in collaboration with local education stakeholders through a series of in-person workshops and online meetings to ensure that the research addressed the local needs, and findings were policy-relevant and actionable.

A synthesis of emerging findings from this multi-country study reveals three key findings: a) understanding the nature of horizontal inequalities and equity gaps in education can help education actors in conflict settings to reorient their educational programmes for peace and social cohesion; b) discrepancies between the intended curriculum (policy and frameworks), enacted curriculum (how schools interpret and implement the curriculum) and outcomes of the curriculum (how students manifest their subjectivities) characterise the normative gap that often emerges between educational ideals and classroom realities. The political nature of education processes which are often encrusted in the hidden or null curriculum, hinder the cultivation of peace, justice, and inclusive ways of being in schools and society; c) educational initiatives that are designed by and implemented with local authorities are more likely to be sustainable, adaptable to new challenges and impactful in setting the path for peace with justice.

Authors

• Tejendra Pherali, UCL Institute of Education

• Vanessa Ozawa, Insternational Rescue Committee

• William Gray Rinehart