Showing posts with label EFA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label EFA. Show all posts

Is it time to rethink our strategy?

|

The global banking crisis hit us more than two years ago – in August 2008. Meeting just a month after the fall of Lehman Brothers, the EI Executive Board foresaw the risks for education funding and called for a campaign to focus on education as a key investment in sustainable recovery. EI Officers and staff worked on a campaign strategy that was endorsed by the Board in March 2009 and pursued by EI and many member organizations through the remainder of 2009 and into 2010.

This strategy combined global advocacy with national and local action. We worked with our coalitions of Global Unions and the Global Campaign for Education to get our key messages to the G8 and to the G20 as well as the UN, the OECD, the World Bank, ILO and UNESCO. Our messages on education as an investment not a cost, and on maintaining funding commitments for EFA, were carried forward nationally during the Global Action Weeks of 2009 and 2010.

By the time the EI Board met in December 2009, we knew that the big risk for education was the push by many governments towards so-called “exit strategies”, which would translate into budget cuts in many OECD countries, and reduced aid budgets for the developing countries.

In the wake of the Greek debt crisis and destabilization of the Euro zone, by the time the G20 met in Toronto in June 2010, the focus had shifted from stimulus to fiscal consolidation. This trend was confirmed at the latest G20 in Seoul last week, overshadowed by the US-China tension on trade imbalances and currency exchange rates.

And education is virtually nowhere on the agenda.

Today it is time to rethink.

The situation does vary significantly among countries – as three EI’s surveys of member organizations have shown. There are some bright spots. But in general, our campaign to put education in the spotlight in all countries and wherever leaders meet seems to have run out of steam.

There are both external and internal reasons for this.

Externally, the environment is far from favourable, as the pendulum of economic orthodoxy has swung back to cost-cutting of national budgets. The political environment in many countries has not been favourable either.

Internally, we have not maintained the vital link between global advocacy and national/local action that we talk about all the time. We have to ask ourselves why. Is it because national member organizations are overtaxed with the daily exigencies of responding to national situations? Talking with colleagues from other sectors, such as the banking industry, we are not alone. As one Global Union colleague put it: “Our national members are too busy putting out the fires at home to give much attention to our global calls for action”. Yet, we all recognize that the crisis was and remains a global one; that the way out must also be sought globally.

We will have to rethink how EI can help its member organizations join global advocacy to national action. Our campaign website “Hands-up for Education” needs revamping. It is hardly used anymore. Mea culpa: entries on this blog have not been as frequent either!

After the successful Quality Public Services: Action Now! Conference in Geneva last month, a new attempt will be made to mobilize locally, with joint campaigns to defend and promote public services in selected cities around the world.

But, if we are honest with ourselves and objective in our evaluation, the time has surely come to rethink our strategy for defence of education. Any suggestions?

The G20 “shrinking agenda”: how the Canadian host gutted the G20 of substance

|

Unfortunately, the Toronto G20 met our expectations – which were very low! On the Monday before-hand, WTO Director General Pascal Lamy told the ITUC Congress in Vancouver that the summit had a “shrinking agenda”. Before that, on Friday 18 June, I participated on behalf of Global Union Federations in a consultation with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, host for the G8 and G20 “twin summits”. Although Global Unions made points on defence of the public sector in the face of “exit strategies”, we had few illusions about Mr Harper’s interest – or lack thereof – in education.

When you read the brief Leaders’ Declaration, you have to wonder how the Canadian government justified the expense to Canadian taxpayers. The cost was widely reported in local media as running up to $1.3 billion, with security costs 8 times those of the previous G20 in Pittsburgh. $1.3 billion would go a way towards closing the financing gap for Education for All! But EFA is not mentioned in the G20 Declaration. Instead it is referenced in an annex to the G8 Declaration on accountability for MDG commitments. The G20 Declaration gives a one-line mention in another annex to “appreciation” for the work of ILO and OECD on a training strategy (http://www.ei-ie.org/en/news/show.php?id=1292&theme=ei&country=canada).

It was not for want of trying. EI affiliates in Canada, the CTF and FPUQ, wrote excellent letters to their Prime Minister, while CTF held a well-attended press conference, and achieved good media coverage, especially e-media. The Presidents of US affiliates NEA and AFT wrote a formidably well-argued joint letter to President Obama, backed up by a personal note from the AFL-CIO President to the US “Sherpa” (top official) for the summits. EI key messages were included in the Global Unions’ Statement to the G8 and G20. And EI participated on behalf of Global Unions in the consultation with the host Prime Minister.

That consultation was itself indicative of the approach of the host government. Flanked by two of his Ministers, for Labour and Human Resources and Skills, as well as his “Sherpa”, Stephen Harper said he would just “listen” to the trade union presentations. Thanks to well-framed questions put to him by ITUC’s Guy Ryder, Harper was drawn into a more interactive exchange with the delegation than he probably intended. He was articulate and politically astute. Neither of the Ministers said a word. While we felt that getting Harper to engage in the exchange was a small “plus”, at the end of the day it did not change much. It was to be contrasted with the convening, on the eve of the G8, of a B-20 summit of business leaders, at the invitation of the Canadian PM, and a commitment by the G8 to finance with public funds worthwhile business initiatives!

Nevertheless, as labour leaders we were clearly the object of a charm offensive by this right-wing politician. Harper has run a minority government for 4 years. In the Toronto Star the next morning I read an article on his strategy to outflank the left by supporting expansion of the publicly-run Canada Pension Plan. The article quotes CLC chief Ken Georgetti as lavishing praise on the decision, stating that the Conservatives have “felt the heartbeat of Canada on this one”. (Toronto Star, Sat June 19, 2010).

This all seemed to be consistent with what I observed in the consultation. An astute politician moves from his core base, in order to build support in the centre and create conditions for governing with a majority rather than a minority. The Toronto Star columnist notes, however, that ‘Harper’s strategy with popular social programs is not to eliminate them but to transform them over time into forms that he and his political base find more ideologically amenable’.

Harper proposed a photo with all of us in front of the G20 flags, with Ken beside him. It was rather obvious that we served mainly as a backdrop for the playing out of some domestic Canadian politics. Meanwhile, I thought of all our members, in the G20 countries and in 160 other countries, and the millions of children in those countries, who face education budget cuts and see the prospect of achieving Education for All recede over the horizon!

We knew that for the Canadian G8 and G20 summits, our task was to put down “markers”. This we did. The strong EI delegation at the ITUC Congress in Vancouver, backed by the many EI and PSI delegates in national delegations, succeeded in getting the ITUC to adopt a 7th priority on Defence of the Public Sector and Education and Health for All.

Our work to get EFA and Teachers on the G20 agenda must continue through the upcoming UN Summits and the G20 in Seoul, Korea, in November. By the time the G20 convenes again in France in June 2011, just before the EI World Congress in July, we want to see concrete proposals in place. Ambitious, hugely ambitious. But necessary!

At the G20: Close the financing gap; support qualified teachers

|

Statement by Bob Harris to the World Economic Forum,
Global Redesign Initiative Summit, Doha, 30-31 May 2010


Session on “Rebuild in Depth: Education”

If we are to rebuild in depth, we must start with people.

The premise of the Global Agenda Council on Education Systems is contained in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: “Everyone has the right to education”.

Yet more than 60 years after that declaration was adopted at the United nations, and just 5 years before the new target date for achievement of Education for All, there are still 72 million children of primary school age out of school, and about the same number unable to go on to secondary school or to pursue relevant vocational education. The challenge was laid out clearly in the inspiring keynote address by Queen Rania yesterday.

The quantitative statistics for children and young people in school are actually significantly better than they were a decade ago. That is in itself a sign of hope. But today we face a challenge of quality in education, and linked with that, a challenge of relevance.

The issue of quality confronts us at 3 levels:
1. The statistics don’t tell the full story. Children registered for school may not all attend, and many drop out. This is of particular concern for girls.
2. When you have 100 children or more in a classroom, with a teacher who did a 3 week course after his/her secondary school, you do not have quality.
3. When schooling in such classes is limited to rote-learning, you do not have the quality of learning required for the 21st century.

The challenges of quality and relevance are there in all countries. But in the developing countries, the quality of education is a key factor in emerging from cycles of poverty and in achieving autonomous growth.

Desmond has spoken of the financing gap that has to be closed to achieve Education for All. I will speak of the people gap. We know from UNESCO that 10 million more qualified teachers will be required by 2015 to replace those who will retire and to meet the basic EFA goals.

In both cases, closing the financing gap, and closing the people gap, the approach we must take is essentially a bottom up approach. In addition to the report which you will find on your USB key, and copies are available here, we have produced side papers that make that clear. In the global community of the 21st century, we need a framework that creates opportunities for that bottom-up approach.

In both cases, we need leadership. We need political leadership. But also leadership from the international community, from the business community, from civil society, from the teaching profession, and from our universities. The engagement of all these actors is the key to an effective response to the challenge.

In Davos this year, when we presented our preliminary report, we heard many expressions of willingness to engage. There was consensus around the notion that people are the key, the people of education, and especially the teachers. In an age of unprecedented challenges, opportunities and risks, we need a new vision of teaching. It is a vision that recognizes that learning will be life-long, in school and out of school. It is a vision that will help children and young people to equip themselves for the skills they will need in the 21st century – to fulfill their potential, for themselves and for their communities. It is a vision that teachers will be able to apply the science of pedagogy, and the art of teaching to enable every child, every young person, to achieve his or her potential as a person and as a member of society.

But these teachers must themselves be equipped to fulfill this vision. There are 60 million teachers in the world today – internationally the largest professional group in the world, present in every community, and at least 10 million more needed within 5 years. This is a huge challenge. It engages the responsibility of all governments and it requires the engagement of all those groups I mentioned earlier.

The education and professional development of teachers is essential to systemic success. Our Global Agenda Council proposes a “Global Partnership for Teacher Education” to mobilize financial, human and intellectual resources in support of national initiatives to train qualified teachers.

We need a fresh approach to the mobilization of resources, and re-ordering of priorities. Investing in teacher education and professional development has often not happened yet it is precisely this investment that can have the biggest impact on quality. And it is not enough to recruit and train teachers. Frameworks for mentoring and professional development are needed 1) to assist these qualified teachers to improve their teaching skills, and 2) to enable teachers to develop throughout their careers, and 3) to motivate them.

Successful corporations know the importance of good human resource practices. Education Systems should do no less. Systemic failure to apply best practice translates into the loss of potentially good teachers, undercutting the effect of recruiting new teachers.

There is enormous potential to use the tools of the 21st century to support teachers. We recommend building on existing instruments to develop an Educators, Professional Development Portal and exchange capability. We recommend dissemination and localization of UNESCO’s framework on ICT competency for teachers, developed with three of the Forum’s leading constituents in the IT field. Multistakeholder support can be mobilized for the extension free broadband access for schools and teachers around the world.

The teaching profession is organized in much of the world through Education International and its national unions, bringing together teachers from pre-school to university. The profession is actively engaged in debates on issues of accountability, ethics, development of competency profiles, self and peer assessment. In all these questions the logical intergovernmental interface is UNESCO. Our GAC sees a leadership role for UNESCO. Responding to the challenges of rapidly changing world can be daunting. When Jacques Delors presented UNESCO’s report on education for the 21st century (Learning the Treasure Within) he described teaching as “the noblest of professions”. But the daily reality faced by 60 million teachers is often far from that aspiration.

Society expects much of its teachers, and those expectations are not diminishing. Global mobility means our societies are increasingly diverse, and even the most developed societies are increasingly unequal. It is an oversimplification to distinguish between the developing and the developed countries, for through migration the world comes into every community. In addition to their other tasks, teachers must encourage every child to take pride in his or her cultural identity, while respecting the cultural identity of others, and each school community must function according to that principle.

In another session yesterday, I heard Dennis Snower call for increased mobility of teachers facilitated by recognition of teacher education qualifications.

Even before the crisis there was the challenge of relevance for young people entering the job market for the fist time. Already, youth unemployment, whether in developing or so-called developed countries, is far too high. Now with fiscal consolidation in the OECD countries, there is a very real risk of a lost generation. G20 Labour and Employment Ministers met in Washington in March and presented their recommendations to President Obama for the G20 Leaders. They have stated clearly that a skills strategy is vital to sustainable recovery, and to a just transition toward green growth. And they also stated that quality basic education was the foundation. Again, if we are to expand VET, as we must, we should address the issue of training for VET teachers and instructors, which in turn raises questions of mobility between teaching and industry. Good work is being done on this at the ILO and the OECD. Importantly, this is an area where there is common ground between employers and trade unions, and scope for really practical work at the national and regional levels.

Like the Labour and Employment Ministerial , our GAC strongly supports the move to place education on the G20 agenda. Education and skills are factors in a smart strategy for sustainable recovery. We see the need for the active engagement of the emerging economies through the G20, and to go beyond the valuable declarations already made by the G8, to a more wholistic approach to education, as a factor of human development in the 21st century.

It means putting the emphasis back on people, investing in people through education. And that also means a renewed effort to put new emphasis on and mobilize support for the people of education – the teachers.

Reforming funding for EFA

|

The Global Monitoring Report 2010 (GMR) released in New York on 19 January warned that the world is not on track to achieve the goal of universal primary education by 2015. With 72 million children still out of school, the aftershock of the global financial crisis threatens to deprive millions of children in the world’s poorest countries of an education (link: http://www.unesco.org/en/efareport/).

As GMR Director Kevin Watkins stated there remains a great financing gap – 16 billion US dollars – which has to be closed in order to achieve the goal. And Kailash Satyarthi, Global Campaign for Education, stated that, yet again, the most vulnerable children are the ones who miss out. UN Secretary General Ban-Ki Moon said “education should never be an accident of circumstance”.

These issues were laid squarely on the table at the World Economic Forum in Davos last week. EI pointed out that the so-called “Fast-Track Initiative” is simply not doing the job. Too few countries benefit, there are too few donors, there is too much bureaucracy, and there is not enough involvement of key stakeholders. So EI is pressing for a new approach, such as a Global Fund for Education, with strong stakeholder participation, including the voice of teachers. EI’s proposal for reform of funding for EFA is winning support – but we are not there yet.

Davos was however the setting for some frank talking on the role of teachers. EI’s General Secretary told a well-attended private session with leading CEOs and university leaders: “Just putting an unqualified person in front of a class of 250 children doesn’t provide education for them”. Fred van Leeuwen was immediately backed up by UNESCO Director General Irina Bokova. Although this was a private session, and “off the record”, you can read Ms Bokova’s comments on the UNESCO website: (http://www.unesco.org/new/en/unesco/about-us/who-we-are/director-general/). “Education is a cause that must be taken up by the G8, the G20, and the international financial institutions” Ms Bokova said to a special WEF plenary session on education the next day. Queen Rania of Jordan said “Education is not just another social issue, it’s the social issue – one that underpins progress in all global challenges we face today, from alleviating poverty, hunger and HIV to building stability, fighting climate change, and more”.

Governments have the prime responsibility, but the private sector can support through advocacy and working with the education unions, said Fred. The biggest challenge is to recruit enough qualified teachers, and professional development is the other key factor in educational quality, he added.

In coming weeks, I’ll be working through the WEF’s Global Agenda Council on Education – and with other EI, CGE, and Global Union colleagues - on the issue of reform of funding for EFA. We simply have to break through on that if we are to achieve the EFA Goal, and to give 72 million children a chance.

Links:

Blocking Reforms

|

The sense of near-panic that pervaded Davos 2009, one year ago, has gone. For the financial sector, it is back to business as usual. For the captains of industry from the real economy the worries are still there. For they know that there will be no recovery of the real economy without recovery of jobs – and the latest ILO report released this week is not good for the OECD countries. The emerging economies, like China, India and Brazil, are doing better, but not the 30 industrialized economies in the OECD group.

Labour leaders are getting more of a hearing in Davos this year. ITUC, TUAC and UNI are pressing the case for reform of financial markets, and EI is working for reform of international cooperation for Education for All. We are getting a hearing, and I guess that must be a step in the right direction.

But is there any real change in the air? That is the big question. Wherever we raise the case for reform, the defenders of business as usual come back with their tired arguments. One of the expressions heard often around Davos this week was “Don’t they get it?” The answer, unfortunately, but realistically, is “No, they don’t”.

Despite the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression of the 1930s, despite a near meltdown of the global economy just one year ago, short-term profit-taking is alive and well, and those who benefit most will do “whatever it takes” to keep it that way by blocking reforms that were agreed as necessary just a few short months ago.

There were fewer major political leaders in Davos this year. They were back home, like the US leadership trying to reset the drive for reform, like the German and Australian leaders who judged they needed to address domestic issues, or they were in London at the conference on Afghanistan.

Today, EI General Secretary Fred van Leeuwen meets in private session with Forum constituents to urge them to throw their weight behind reform of international cooperation for financing of education. Industry leaders from the real economy seem to understand that Education for All is part of the key to real and sustainable recovery. We’ll see if they are willing to help overcome those who want to block reform.

Links:

EFA “further off track than we thought”

|

The new Global Monitoring Report on Education for All will show that “we are much further off track than we thought in achieving Education for All”, the report’s Director told meetings at UNESCO in Paris last week.

Kevin Watkins, Director of the report was speaking to a meeting of the UNESCO/World Economic Forum Partnerships for Education. Kevin said that there was systemic bias in reporting by governments of their progress towards attainment of the EFA targets. Many governments overstate the presence of children in schools, he said.

UNESCO’s analysis corresponds to evidence from EI member organisations. Children may be registered in school, but the statistics do not show those who rarely attend, if at all. Added to this are two other major issues which lie behind the statistics showing progress toward EFA targets. In many countries class sizes are way too large – shockingly so in some cases. And the young people recruited as teachers may not be at all qualified. This is why EI stresses the need for quality education for all.

Kevin Watkins said the financing gap was also much greater than previously thought. Calculations of the cost of achieving EFA from a decade ago were still being used but were not realistic. It had been assumed that the cost of getting all children out of school into education would be of the order 11 billion US$, and that aid would provide around 7 billion, leaving a financing gap about 4 billion US$. But reworking the figures, the real financing gap was more like 15 to 16 billion US dollars, he said, noting that these were preliminary figures as work on the report was still underway.

The financial crisis will exacerbate the problem of education funding. As financial flows to developing countries slow to a trickle, government revenues drop and official development assistance falls. Kevin Watkins said the G20 should put stronger emphasis on the stabilisation of education finance.

This was sobering information from a credible source. Unfortunately, it tends to confirm the warnings given out by EI. Setting of the Millennium Development Goal of primary education for all by the year 2015 was seen as a more serious commitment by the entire international community, compared with earlier efforts, such as the Jomtien Declaration of 1990. But as we near the year 2010 – two thirds of the way to 2015 – there is still a long way to go to achieve Quality Education for All.

 

Education International 2009