Third Assembly of the World Movement for Democracy, "Building Democracy for Peace, Development, and Human Rights"

WORKSHOP REPORTS: Democracy Education

Teaching Civic Education: What are the Best Approaches In School and Out?
Organizers: Electoral Institute of Southern Africa – South Africa Foundation for Education for Democracy – Poland	Moderator: Chima Ubani – Nigeria

Representatives of organizations experienced in civic education from 29 countries were divided into six groups during this workshop. Each person shared his or her experiences with other group members and one of the stories was shared with the larger group.

Four illustrative examples emerged from the group discussion:

A participant from Iraqi Kurdistan shared experiences relating to the collection of real-life stories from children. These stories were turned into plays and reenacted in the schools.
A Nigerian participant described an approach of training religious group leaders in churches and mosques to promote democratic values.
A participant from Russia described work with difficult drop-out students and their families to give the students a second chance at school.
A participant from Kosovo presented examples of youth participation in parliament.

Recommendations:
Workshop participants discussed various strategies and Recommendations:

In schools

Increase public participation in civic education;
Encourage parental involvement;
Encourage financial support and cooperation among local authorities.

Outside schools

Support non-traditional methods of civic education and encourage innovative methods, such as drama, games, field trips and student volunteering;
Lobby for the inclusion of topics, such as human rights, gender equality, youth participation, and election procedures, in the school curriculum of each country.

Combating Political Extremism through Civic Education: What should be Taught and How to Teach It?
Organizers: Civitas International American Federation of Teachers – USA	Moderator: Joseph Davis – USA Rapporteur: Christina Houlihan – USA	Presenters: Krzysztof Stanowski – Poland David McQuoid-Mason – South Africa Radwan Masmoudi – Tunisia/USA

The goal of this workshop was to begin to develop civic education strategies for combating political extremism at the national, regional, and local levels. It was attended by participants from 15 countries. The discussion included a presentation explaining the segregated system of education that existed under apartheid in South Africa, a presentation explaining the need for civic education for youth in the Arab world, and a presentation on the state of civic education in post-communist countries and the need for new methods to engage youth.

After a brief initial discussion among the participants, the group was divided up according to geographic regions (Africa, the Middle East, and Eastern/Central Europe). Each group identified the types of extremism present in their regions, brainstormed on ways to combat such extremism, and chose one of these ways for development into a plan of action. Each group then presented its work, which covered ideas ranging from using the Internet to providing information about human rights and democracy, to lobbying governments to change educational policies, to examining the content of textbooks to find examples of discrimination.

Recommendations:

Conduct “training of trainers” (NGO leaders, teachers, community leaders, etc.) on extremism so they can easily identify it and employ strategies for dealing with it.
Include young people who are outside the formal education system in civic education programs.
Identify and engage allies in the fight for effective civic education.
Develop awareness campaigns about extremism for various audiences, including the general public, young people, religious leaders, community leaders, etc.
Develop strategies for both formal and informal civic education, since it can often take years for the formal curriculum to be changed.
Link democracy education with religious and cultural values.
Train politicians, traditional leaders, and religious leaders in civic education.
Encourage NGOs to pressure their governments to implement the promises of the UN Decade of Human Rights and the UN Decade of Peace and Non-Violence.

Democracy Education in Difficult Political and Cultural Environments
Organizers: Sisterhood is Global Institute – Jordan Tashkent Public Education Center – Uzbekistan	Moderator: Muborak Tashpulatova – Uzbekistan Rapporteur: Julia Kharashvili – Georgia	Presenters: Krzysztof Stanowski – Poland Dilyara Seytveliyeva – Ukraine Maxim Charniauski – Belarus

Challenges:
A number of challenges were identified based on experiences in several countries, as follows:

Conditions were difficult for democracy education in Poland and in post-Soviet republics some 15 years before Poland became a champion of strikes, protest action, and underground publications. Those working in Poland were well prepared for protest actions, but completely unprepared for arranging everyday work and taking on responsibility. The approach at the time was to give people a chance to experience the dangers of communism; there were all kinds of rights in the Constitution, but they were only on paper, and people needed some experience in how to be responsible for other people’s communities. Teachers were assisted in building new relations in the classroom and they discovered that such approaches could be used in difficult circumstances.

In Uzbekistan, it was difficult to say the words “human rights,” and it was thus important to introduce more active methods of teaching. To empower people, it was necessary to teach them how to listen and how to take responsibility. The next step was to prepare a constitution for the schools and to link it with the real constitution. When students get the opportunity to experience self-governance it becomes an experiment for real life. This is an important exercise in its own right, not in connection with possible benefits.

In Jordan, the tasks of liberalization and democracy have not yet been achieved. Since 1960, a number of organizations have been created to support the building of democracy and human rights. Their aim is to develop civic NGOs, provide education, and create laws for the defense of citizens. In addition, in Jordan, as an Islamic country, western manuals cannot be fully used and must be adapted, and more resources are required to bridge the gap between formal and informal education and to disseminate the experiences of other countries.

In Lebanon, Egypt, Palestine, and Jordan a number of organizations try to develop the principles of democracy and advocate for women. The main challenge to democracy education there is unstable relations among schools, government, and society. NGOs are thus engaged in advocacy and the realization of democracy education, trying to ensure necessary resources and the preparation of training modules. Civic education is also a matter of both formal and informal education. Modest attempts to include civic education in the school curriculum are thus also an objective of advocacy efforts, and it is important to widen existing experience in these efforts to other Arab countries. One obstacle in Arab society is the difficulty of actively involving women and youth in NGO activities.

Recommendations:

In post-conflict countries it is necessary to link education and human rights to the real needs of the people (for example, with sports or after-school activities, or to link it with the distribution of humanitarian assistance).
It is highly important to have good knowledge of the community in which one is working in terms of background and culture.
It is necessary to work well with both teachers and trainers.
The possibilities for education are related to the self-organization of the community, which is why self-organization should be promoted.
The challenge of integrating refugees should be addressed through the creation of refugee centers. To assist them in adapting, both refugees and local citizens should be invited to civic education centers and to participate in seminars.
Those who are supposed to train others should be well prepared and have knowledge of “best practices” from other regions and countries; this would help build solidarity with people with similar traumatic experiences.
Religion should neither be united with nor divided from education artificially; in some cases, religion adds values and support for democracy while in other cases it opposes democracy, which is why the relationship should be addressed carefully.
Given cultural autonomy, it is difficult, but nonetheless important, to mobilize people politically.
Memories of traumatic experiences should be promoted, and money should be identified for post-conflict rehabilitation.
Proposing idealistic methods should be avoided because they lead to a loss of trust.
People should be taught how to restore civic rights.
With some exceptions, human rights education should be related to the cultural context of a country and to its social relations.

Conclusions:
In sum, the workshop concluded that:

When working in difficult cultural or political environments it is important to identify clearly the context of the difficulties. It is necessary to identify the political situations of a country, and then discover the historical background.
Efforts cannot build only on Western examples; local traditions and contexts also need to be utilized so they can be easily understood.
The development of a civic education curriculum should be based on the local needs of the country, not on fashions, which would only serve as an object of criticism.

Putting Democracy Education on the Global Agenda: Strategies for Working with National, Regional and Multilateral Institutions
Organizers: Street Law – USA David McQuoid-Mason – South Africa American Federation of Teachers – USA	Moderators: Joseph Davis – USA David McQuoid-Mason – South Africa	Rapporteur: Patricia Keefer – USA

The purpose of this workshop was to disseminate and further develop the Pocantico Global Strategic Plan for the promotion of civic education that was drafted by an international task force of democracy educators in June 2004 under the auspices of the Council for the Community of Democracies (CCD). The participants reviewed the Pocantico draft and were asked to make comments and specific recommendations to strengthen the strategy for promoting civic education among national governments and multilateral institutions. They were also asked to make recommendations for implementing the Global Plan within their own countries and regions. The genesis and evolution of the Strategic Plan for Democracy Education, which was initiated in Warsaw in 2000 at the launch of the Community of Democracies, was described, including the principles that have guided its development: “Civic education is essential to the survival and expansion of democracy in all countries and regions and democracy education needs to be sensitive to the issues of culture, gender, and tradition.”

In reviewing the Pocantico Plan, a synopsis of the national and regional action plans was presented, following which the workshop participants organized themselves into two working groups, one composed of the African participants and the other a multi-national group, for the purpose of closely reviewing the Plan and making recommendations for improvement and implementation.

Participants focused their attention on how NGOs can forge cooperation with national governments for two purposes: to advance national implementation plans for effective democracy education, including standards for a formal education curriculum, and to pressure governments to advocate for the inclusion of democracy education and a commitment of resources in national, regional and multi-national development plans.

The New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) was identified as an ideal target of opportunity for incorporating democracy education in its peer-review process and for advocating the education for democracy initiative. The Africa Democracy Forum (ADF), a regional network affiliated with the World Movement for Democracy, should represent the democracy education nongovernmental sector at NEPAD conferences and proceedings and possibly as accredited official observers.

Recommendations:
Africa Group

The participants in the Africa group agreed in principle with all of the regional, multi-national, and national recommendations in the Pocantico Plan. They suggested a few modifications but focused most of their attention on implementation.
Three specific amendments to the Plan were recommended:
- Support for tax exemptions for organizations conducting democracy education activities. National governments should extend these to indigenous NGOs and CBOs, whereas international organizations should receive tax exemptions from their respective home governments.
- National governments should establish national endowments sourcing public and private funds for democracy education.
- In addition to NGOs, CBOs, faith-based organizations and others need to be included in the recognition of interest groups engaged in democracy education, and national and community groups should be linked with each other to minimize fragmentation.
The ADF should take the lead in facilitating continental linkages for national, regional, and sub-national democracy education. It should set up an interest group sector dedicated to democracy education and host a Web site for information, materials, and training resources; it should advocate for continental, regional, and national support for democracy education; and it should assist national organizations in strengthening cooperation, coordination, and integration.
The ADF should convene a meeting of all national organizations conducting democracy education activities, and any organization offering democracy education programs should subscribe to the protocols and practice of internal democracy.
There is a critical need for democracy education trainers. A comprehensive training initiative should be advanced, including training-of-trainers, certification of trainers, and a database of training resources, including people, materials, and training modules. Training issues and demands should be prioritized.
Election authorities should be invited to expand their current technical applications in voter education to include more substantive components of democracy education.

Organizations that participated in the Africa group of the workshop will take the lead in their respective sub-regions, as follows:

Southern Africa: IDASA and Street Law (South Africa)
East Africa: Ethiopia Human Rights Commission and the Kenya Human Rights Commission
West Africa: Liberia Center for Law and Human Rights Education

Multi-national Group

The recommendations of the Multi-national working group focused on European cooperation and donor support from members of the Community of Democracies, donor governments and regional organizations, such as the EU and the Council of Europe. The government of the Netherlands and Denmark were identified as possibly having particular interests in democracy education.

When considering support for democracy education the needs and resources of “two Europes” – West and East/Central – should be recognized.
There should be individual consultations with the Westminster Foundation for Democracy (Great Britain), the Danes, the Dutch, and possibly a European approach to Turkey for support of democracy education.

It was recognized that more information is needed to identify donors giving priority to national and international democracy education with a view to convening a European meeting to further the Pocantico Plan of Action and to fund democracy education in emerging and established democracies. It was proposed that the meeting be held in Brussels in cooperation with the EU and other multi-international agencies.

Creating a Network for Higher Education’s Role in Democracy Building
Organizer: Europaeum – UK	Moderators: Paul Flather – UK Michael Pinto-Duschinsky – UK Rapporteur: Marcin Walecki – Poland	Presenter: Paul Flather – UK Adam Habib – South Africa

Observations: A diverse group of democracy activists with experience in higher education presented their views on the issue of promoting democracy through an educational network.

The group made the following general observations:

Leading universities are engaged in, and contribute to, civil society at many levels, serving as critic, knowledge producer, trainer of skills, protector of culture, and galvanizer of rural and economic development.
Universities are inevitably political institutions in the widest sense; they contribute to the development of societies.
Universities have a responsibility to face up to the challenge that in future decades some 85 percent of the world’s population will have no access to tertiary education, while 15 percent will enjoy a variety of life chances as a result of tertiary educational opportunity.

The workshop participants agreed that universities should be economically and socially responsive to today’s challenges. Moreover, established universities have a duty not only to work with their own civil society, but to support other institutions in transitional societies. Participants contributed specific examples, from South Africa, Ghana, Indonesia, Moldova, Poland and the United Kingdom, of civic engagement, successful interconnections, as well as obstacles and difficulties faced in transitional societies.

Participants also pointed out that universities face serious challenges, such as political and economic pressures, lack of leadership, apathy, decline of student movements, bureaucratic interference, and even political repression.

Against this background, the workshop participants agreed to develop a proposal for creating a network with the following characteristics:

To work with institutional leaders and individuals with energy and commitment
To exchange knowledge and transfer technology
To engage in “two-way” processes
To recognize that leading universities can contribute to the global process of democratization.

Recommendations:

A meeting should be held of appropriate university consortia to discuss specific ways of linking leading universities with those of the developing world. This initiative should be supported by the World Movement for Democracy.
A “Democracy Visitors Program” should be established through which visiting academics and students can be linked to other universities.
A short questionnaire should be produced to elicit examples of successful transnational engagement, and an annual prize should be awarded to the most successful innovative partnership.
Universities should explore the establishment of programs though which joint diplomas or courses can be offered linking development and emerging universities.
A “Disciplinary Support Program” should be identified and supported through which universities would offer curriculum, research papers, and reading lists to other educational institutions.
A “Global University for Democracy” should be established offering virtual workshops for democracy activists, for example in human rights, political accountability, transparency, politics and money, etc.
An Internet “Database of Academics-without-Frontiers” should be established of those willing to travel and engage with other university colleagues to help them develop civic engagement programs and other democracy-promotion projects.

World Movement for Democracy || National Endowment for Democracy
1101 15th Street, NW Suite 800 || Washington, D.C. 20005 USA || world@ned.org || webmaster@ned.org