 |
Latests
News > Report of UNAIDS on AIDS, Schools and Education |
|
 |
| |
| |
| Inter-Agency
Working Group on AIDS, Schools, and Education |
| |
| |
| 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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
===========
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
