| |
| Inter-Agency
Working Group on AIDS, Schools, and Education |
|
|
|
Sheldon
Shaeffer
|
| |
|
Document
8
|
| Background |
| |
| Why
this strategy framework? |
| |
| At the
request of UNAIDS, the UNAIDS Inter-Agency Working Group (IAWG)
on AIDS, Schools, and Education met very recently in Geneva
at UNAIDS (1-3 November, 2000) to discuss a global strategy
framework on AIDS, Schools, and Education. For the first time,
this IAWG expanded participation to include non-UN agencies,
including key bilaterals, INGOs, and international teachers'
unions and education associations. The IAWG is expected to report
to the UNAIDS PCB meeting early in December on progress regarding
the development of the global strategy. |
| |
| Who
is it for? |
| |
|
| The idea
for this strategy framework was initiated through UNAIDS and
is intended to articulate with the UNAIDS global framework currently
being developed. By definition, a global strategy framework
cannot be specific, and so will be designed to guide potential
stakeholders at any level through the key issues, but to encourage
adaptation and local level iteration. While clearly directed
at education systems, and particularly at improving the reach
and effectiveness of programs delivered by or through schools,
all that needs to be done cannot be achieved by the education
sector alone. A range of sectors are encouraged to consider
the key issues and collaborate on supportive strategies for
achieving common goals. |
| |
| What
is the purpose? |
| |
| The proposed
global strategy framework is intended to highlight AIDS issues
related to schools and education systems, within a broader framework
which will focus on young people, which will in turn link to
the overarching UNAIDS global framework. As such, the strategy
framework will be necessarily limited to schools and education
systems as important vehicles for reaching young people, who
are of critical importance to the prevention of AIDS and to
promoting caring and supportive communities and schools, while
some are themselves affected by AIDS. The strategy framework
will sharply focus on children and young people of school age,
especially those in school, but will also look to bring more
children into school as well as to reach out into the community.
|
| |
|
What
are the key elements of the strategy framework?
|
| |
|
The current
draft of the global strategy framework on AIDS, schools, and
education focuses two main tracks:
(i) Responding
to the impact of AIDS on education, and
(ii)
Using education for AIDS prevention, within a continuum of
care and support
|
| |
|
| (i)
Responding to the impact of AIDS on education |
| |
|
|
|
While
in some parts of the world AIDS is not having a clear impact
on education, in the most AIDS affected countries, especially
Sub-Saharan Africa, the main ways that AIDS is making an impact
is by affecting
- the
supply of education (teachers dying, sick, or caring for others),
- the
demand for education (orphans, children affected and infected
by AIDS not able to attend school regularly),
- the
quality of education (AIDS escalates the problems of already
struggling systems), and
- the
management of education (inability or inactivity regarding
long term planning which considers and responds to AIDS)
|
| |
|
| Some studies
on the impact of AIDS on education have been conducted in African
countries affected by AIDS. The overwhelming need is for guidance
on possible responses. One possibility is to look to the relative
success in some countries or to consider AIDS as integral to
a broader agenda of overall education reform. The International
Institute of Educational Planning (UNESCO) in Paris is working
to serve as a clearinghouse for studies and activities in this
area. |
| |
|
| (ii)
Using education for AIDS prevention, within a continuum of care
and support |
|
| AIDS prevention
education delivered through schools, whether via formal and
non-formal approaches, has enormous potential for reaching children
and young people with necessary information and skills to protect
themselves and to help them to cope with the impact of AIDS
on their lives and their communities. Effective skills-based
health education, in whatever form it takes at the school level,
is considered a key strategy. However, in general this potential
has not been realized. |
|
|
Three
key reasons why effective AIDS prevention education has not
reached its potential for preventing AIDS and for helping
people cope with the impact of AIDS include:
a) A
belief that AIDS prevention, reproductive or sexual health
education leads to increased sexual activity Despite volumes
of research evidence to the contrary, this persistent belief
has stymied many attempts to provide young people with the
information and skills they need to protect themselves and
to care for and support others affected or infected by AIDS.
Cultural taboos and the 'sensitivity' of the content area
are often cited as the reasons why AIDS prevention cannot
be institutionalized. In reality, sex is a sensitive or special
issue in all communities, but some overcome this barrier more
effectively than others.
b) A
belief that AIDS prevention education doesn't work Two key
factors influence the above belief. Firstly, expectations
of AIDS prevention education are often too high. AIDS prevention
focuses on the intermediate factors of knowledge, attitudes,
and skills which can contribute to behaviour change; however
AIDS prevention education alone are unlikely to achieve and
maintain behaviour change in the long term. To achieve long
term behaviour change, a range of consistent, long-term, supportive
strategies, including AIDS prevention education through schools
will be required.
Secondly,
AIDS prevention education has seldom been implemented with
sufficient quality and coverage to allow for a fair evaluation.
Where evaluations are unfavourable, the conclusions often
point to ineffective implementation rather than an ineffective
program per se. This is also true for many other education
programs. Education in general is labour intensive and relies
on human capacity to a great extent, which makes good quality
education expensive. However, education, and especially marginalised
programs such as AIDS prevention programs, is often under-funded
with inadequate attention to the necessary related strategies
which will maximise the success of such programs - such as
appropriately funded and effectively implemented policies,
related health services, and links with the community and
other sectors.
c) The
broader context of struggling education systems AIDS exacerbates
the challenges of already struggling education systems. AIDS
prevention education is one of many strategies required to
respond to the challenges of preventing AIDS and mitigating
its impact. AIDS prevention education works best in the context
of supportive and consistent policies, related services, and
links to the broader community and other sectors. Any form
of education will be less effective, or even ineffective,
where the physical environment is inadequate (classrooms,
furniture, health facilities…), where the psychosocial environment
is less than child-(or teacher-) friendly (physical and sexual
abuse, corporal punishment…), where education management and
administrative considerations are less than supportive (overcrowded
classes; low or irregular salaries for teachers; ineffective,
discriminatory or "AIDS-risky" policies. As such, the effectiveness
of AIDS prevention education is frustrated by the same factors
which erode broader education systems.
|
|
| In order
to implement effective AIDS prevention programs through schools
which have the necessary quality and coverage, intensive advocacy
is required to influence the three key barriers outlined above.
Communicating the evidence, listening and responding to community
concerns, and valuing community opinions must be considered
key factors to success in this regard, while effective resource
mobilization will underpin the success of such efforts. |
|
| |
|
| Other
Considerations within the Global Strategy Framework |
| |
|
|
| The current
structure of the draft strategy framework encourages attention
to both macro and micro issues within the two main tracks of:
(a) the impact of AIDS on schools and education systems and
(b) using education to prevent AIDS, within a continuum of care
and support. In addition, the drafting group and collaborating
agencies and stakeholders are currently grappling with the challenges
of making the strategy framework timely and sufficiently relevant
for the diverse experiences of countries around the world without
being prescriptive. Key issues include: |
| |
|
|
1. Reflecting
the range of country experience Recognition of the need to
engage countries with low prevalence, to motivate countries
with emerging prevalence, and to activate countries with high
prevalence must be reflected in the final document.
2. Reflecting
cross-cutting issues A range of important cross-cutting issues,
such as the pervasive effect of poverty, gender, inequality,
and human rights abuses, needs to be reflected in the strategy
document.
3. Encouraging
innovation and intersectoral collaboration Improving the effectiveness
of schools to prevent AIDS and related discrimination, and
to promote care and support for those affected and infected,
needs to be considered within the broader intersectoral capacity
and a need for innovation - beyond formal school-based programs
to non-formal and community-based approaches; beyond schools
as passive institutions and towards schools as active community
resources; and beyond teachers as the only facilitator of
programs and support.
4. Broad
participation in an inclusive process The recent meeting in
Geneva at UNAIDS (1-3 November, 2000) was merely the initiation
of a broader process designed to rally the support, interest,
and debate of the full range of stakeholders in improving
the capacity for schools and education systems to both respond
to the impact of AIDS and to deliver more effective AIDS prevention,
within a continuum of care and support necessary for those
already affected or infected. A number of mechanisms have
been put in place by this core group, including informal dissemination
of the first draft to regional and local levels, and to other
potential partners, before developing subsequent drafts, and
releasing a final document in time to coincide with other
important events.
|
| |
| |
|
|
============
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
