2 Educating Children in Conﬂict Zonesfor addressing the educational needs of children in conﬂict zones. The volume isorganized into four main sections: deﬁnitional and conceptual issues; the voices ofchildren and teachers; international programs and interventions; and new direc-tions in research. In what follows, we provide an introduction to the study of education in con-ﬂict zones, to help readers situate the individual chapters in broader debates andchallenges. We begin by describing the scope of the problem and the tricky deﬁ-nitional question: Which countries should we consider conﬂict-affected? Next wediscuss some of the key conceptual and practical debates in the ﬁeld; the needs ofchildren and teachers in different phases of conﬂict; and the roles played by inter-national actors. Finally we look at the need for more and better research, situatingthe chapters of this volume at the cutting edge of a call for new methods and ap-proaches to understanding the needs of children affected by conﬂict. THE SCOPE OF THE PROBLEM: OUT-OF-SCHOOL CHILDREN IN ZONES OF CONFLICTIn recent years, remarkable progress has been made in meeting the internationalEducation for All (EFA) goals and the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) foruniversal primary education. Globally, the number of children decreased from 115million to fewer than 70 million between 2000 and 2010 (UNESCO, 2011, p. 40).However, in conﬂict-affected countries, progress has been less robust. As com-pared with children in other low-income countries, children affected by conﬂictare less likely to survive to school age; more rarely attend school and complete afull basic education; and are much less likely to gain access to secondary education.Children in conﬂict zones receive a poorer quality education and face greater mar-ginalization in education due to poverty, gender, and ethnicity than do children incountries not affected by conﬂict. To understand the scope of the problem, we must begin with a broad de-scription of conﬂict zones themselves. In the literature on education and conﬂict,conﬂict typically is deﬁned as any situation in which armed violence over govern-ment or territory emerges and disrupts the lives and livelihoods of citizens. Thenature of such armed conﬂicts has changed since the end of the Cold War: Con-ﬂicts increasingly play out between competing groups within national boundaries,rather than as wars among states. Since 2000, there also has been a rise in externalmilitary intervention in internal conﬂicts—as in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Somalia.Contemporary conﬂicts are both more deadly to civilians and more destructiveof civilian infrastructure (including schools) than traditional interstate warfare.They are particularly deadly for children. For example, UNICEF estimates thatbetween 1998 and 2008, over 2 million children were killed in conﬂicts. Another 6million were disabled, while 300,000 were recruited as child-soldiers. An estimated
Educating Children in Zones of Conﬂict 320 million children had to ﬂee their homes as refugees or internally displaced per-sons (UNICEF, 2010a). The roots of conﬂict develop over many years, and the aftereffects of conﬂictcan create an overhang of instability. For this reason, the literature on educationand conﬂict tends to deﬁne as zones of conﬂict not only situations where there isactive armed violence, but also those that have been affected by armed conﬂict inthe past. For example, the UNESCO Global Monitoring Report includes in its listof conﬂict-affected states countries that have been affected by conﬂict over thepast 10 years (see Box 1.1). The UNESCO deﬁnition of conﬂict-affected states isnot, however, the only one in use. Save the Children includes 28 countries in itsanalysis of education in conﬂict zones, adding two countries that do not appearin the UNESCO list.1 For example, Save the Children (2010) includes Haiti, which Box 1.1. 35 Conﬂict-Affected Countries in 2009 Low Income: Afghanistan, Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad, Democratic Republic of Congo, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Guinea, Liberia, Myan- mar, Nepal, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Uganda, Yemen Lower Middle Income: Angola, Côte d’Ivoire, Georgia, India, Indone- sia, Iraq, Nigeria, Pakistan, Palestinian Occupied Territories, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Thailand, Timor-Leste Upper Middle Income: Algeria, Colombia, Russian Federation, Serbia, Turkey. Source: UNESCO, 2011has had periods of weakly controlled violence against civilians by government-sanctioned militias. Other reports sometimes also describe as “conﬂict-affected”countries where the line between widespread criminal violence and armed conﬂictaimed at the state is blurred. Efforts to describe conﬂict zones and their impacts on education frequentlydraw on the notion of “fragile states” as well (see contributions by Turrent, Kirk,and Davies, this volume). The concept of fragility has the advantage of includingstates where governance and institutional factors create a predisposition for futureconﬂict. However, there is limited consensus on the key factors that predisposecountries to armed conﬂict (and that therefore deﬁne fragility) (Brown, 2010).The World Bank, which in 2011 published a list of what it describes as 33 “fragilesituations,” includes low-income countries with ratings below 3.2 on its internalCountry Policy and Institutional Assessment (CPIA), along with those that havehad UN peace-keeping or peace-building missions in place during the past 3 years
4 Educating Children in Conﬂict Zones(World Bank, 2011). The OECD deﬁnes fragility as simply those countries thatare “failing to provide basic services to poor people because they are unwilling orunable to do so” (OECD, 2007a). Neither the OECD nor the World Bank claimsthat its deﬁnition of fragility is comprehensive or superior to others. Both orga-nizations (along with the authors in this volume) recognize the inevitable need tochange the list of conﬂict-affected/fragile countries when new conﬂicts erupt andolder conﬂicts die down. In this volume, we use the term conﬂict-affected to mean countries that areimpacted by violent and armed conﬂict, resulting in weak governance and in-equality in resource allocation that negatively affect the lives and livelihoods ofchildren. Our use of the term education in conﬂict zones—as opposed to the morecommon education in emergencies—is intended to exclude natural disasters fromour analysis and reﬂects the fact that contemporary conﬂicts are often protracted.Like other contributors to this volume, we recognize the conceptual advantages ofusing the term fragility in order to keep the root issues that lead to conﬂict moreclearly in focus (Winthrop, 2010). However, as will be discussed in a subsequentsection, readers also need to be aware that current understandings of the causesand dimensions of conﬂict are hotly debated. All lists of conﬂict-affected states—including those generated by UNESCO and Save the Children, and the OECD andWorld Bank fragility lists—need to be used with care by education researchers andpractitioners. They are limited but important tools in any effort to monitor thescope of current and potential conﬂicts and their effects on children’s education. Deﬁnitional debates about conﬂict and fragility, along with the inherent chal-lenges of collecting administrative and census data in situations of conﬂict, havemade it very difﬁcult to come up with exact numbers of children out-of-school inconﬂict zones. Nonetheless, using its list of conﬂict-affected states (and includingonly the regions of large countries affected by conﬂict), UNESCO estimates thatthere are currently 28 million children of primary school age out-of-school inlow- and lower middle income conﬂict-affected states. This is 42% of the world’stotal out-of-school children (UNESCO, 2011, p. 132). Even in conﬂict-affectedcountries where considerable progress has been made in expanding access, prima-ry school completion rates are very low. In Afghanistan, for example, of those chil-dren initially enrolled, 54% drop out during the ﬁrst 4 years of school (Mansory,2007, p. 28). The legacy of conﬂict is reﬂected in literacy levels: UNESCO calcula-tions indicate that only 79% of youth and 69% of adults are literate in conﬂict-affected countries, as compared with 93% and 85% in other countries (UNESCO,2011, p. 132). Furthermore, conﬂict contributes to disruptions in teacher trainingsystems, destruction of physical infrastructure, and a culture of violence that im-pacts classroom pedagogy, resulting in poor-quality teaching and learning (Lewin,2009; Save the Children, 2008; UNESCO, 2011). Both UNESCO and Save the Children report that the majority of out-of-school children in conﬂict-affected situations are concentrated in a few countries.
Educating Children in Zones of Conﬂict 5In Nigeria, for example, Save the Children estimates that there are 8.2 millionprimary school-aged children who do not have access to school; in Pakistan, 6.8million; in Democratic Republic of Congo, 5.2 million; in Ethiopia, 3.7 million;in Sudan, 2.8 million (Save the Children, 2010, p. 3). In addition, a substantialnumber of children in smaller, low-income, conﬂict-affected states are also out-of-school. A growing proportion of the world’s children affected by conﬂict aredisplaced internally or have ﬂed to neighboring countries with weak educationalsystems and limited capacity to provide education; many do not live in traditionalrefugee camp settings. Children affected by conﬂict today are thus particularlydifﬁcult to reach. Recent research demonstrates that conﬂict disproportionately affects theschool opportunities of the poorest and most marginalized groups, often becausethese children must contribute directly to household livelihoods or because theirparents lack the funds to pay for schooling (Save the Children, 2010; UNESCO,2011). Conﬂict also contributes to severely constrained opportunities for the edu-cation of girls, both because of family poverty and concerns for their security. Asan example, in the conﬂict-affected region of North Kivu in Democratic Republicof Congo, adolescents and young adults are two times as likely to have receivedunder 2 years of schooling as compared with populations in other parts of thecountry. Poor women are three times as likely to have had this little education(UNESCO, 2011, p. 134). International human rights legislation and international protocols for childprotection stipulate that each out-of-school child must be a priority for the in-ternational community. There is an urgent need for greater attention to the stateof education in conﬂict settings in order to overcome the obstacles that conﬂictpresents to meeting EFA targets of access to a quality education for all children. UNDERSTANDING THE LINKAGES BETWEEN CONFLICT AND EDUCATIONUnderstanding the variety of social, cultural, economic, and political grievancesand contests, as well as the economic and institutional factors that increase thelikelihood of outright conﬂict, is one of the major challenges facing both research-ers and practitioners involved in educational development today. In recent years,research has focused on “opportunity theories” of conﬂict, which emphasize the“pull” created by a weak state, the existence of “lootable” natural resources, andthe availability of unemployed youth for armed combat (Brown, 2010; Collier &Hoefﬂer, 2004; Fearon & Laitin, 2003). A second school of thought emphasizesintergroup grievances as a motivating cause for violent conﬂict, suggesting thatinequalities in the political, cultural, and socioeconomic spheres are fundamentalrisks, particularly when governments are believed to be treating one or another
6 Educating Children in Conﬂict Zonesgroup inequitably (Stewart, 2008; see also Novelli, Chapter 4, this volume, for anoverview of these debates). In either explanation, education can be seen to play a central role. In the op-portunities-based analysis, the provision of adequate education that is linked toemployment is particularly important, since it lowers the attractiveness of joiningin armed conﬂict. Grievance and inequality theories of conﬂict are more expan-sive about the role played by education. Structurally, such theories agree with theopportunities-based assessment that there is a link between education, employ-ment opportunities, and conﬂict, but they emphasize in particular the fact thateducation can help to lower intergroup inequality in the labor market. However,if educational opportunities are unequally distributed (or if having an educationis rewarded unequally for different ethnic or religious groups), this can becomea major source of grievance (Brown, 2010). Furthermore, the content of school-ing itself can feed socioeconomic grievances, exacerbating ethnic, religious, andlanguage differences, and undermining intergroup trust (as seen, for example, inKing’s case study of Rwanda, this volume). In this volume, Davies (Chapter 3) illustrates how what goes on in schoolscan quickly become a vector for grievances about political and social exclusion. Yetwhen carefully and equitably provided, schooling also can contribute to peace andstability, by assisting in the creation of shared identities and values (see Kirk, Chap-ter 2, this volume). Thus schooling has been described as having “two faces.” Oneface increases the risk of conﬂict; the other mitigates against it (Bush & Saltarelli,2000). In this volume, contributions by Davies (Chapter 3) and King (Chapter 9)provide nuanced accounts and examples of the often intersecting ways in whicheducation both exacerbates and assuages conﬂict. A PRAGMATIC TYPOLOGY OF EDUCATIONAL NEEDS IN DIFFERENT CONFLICT SITUATIONSBeyond the conceptual debates about education’s relationship to the push and pullfactors that are at the root of violent conﬂict, this book addresses a much morepragmatic set of issues. How are educational opportunities affected by conﬂict andhow can they be improved? In this section of our introduction, we offer a practicaltypology of different phases of conﬂict and their educational demands, as a start-ing point for answering such questions. Traditionally, conﬂict-affected countries have been understood as goingthrough several stages or phases of conﬂict: build up to conﬂict (latent stage);escalation of conﬂict; acute armed conﬂict; de-escalation and negotiation (oftenaccompanied by a continued state of emergency for the population); and ﬁnally aphase of negotiated settlement, peace-building, and reconstruction. Of course, thehistory of each violent conﬂict is different, and these phases are idealized. Many
Educating Children in Zones of Conﬂict 7conﬂicts are mediated before the acute crisis stage is reached; others are protract-ed, going through many cycles of escalation and de-escalation. These “stages” areonly a heuristic for understanding some of the speciﬁc challenges and opportuni-ties for education in conﬂict zones, useful for situating the chapters in this book. In the latent or build-up phases of conﬂict, education can play an importantrole, either exacerbating grievances and creating (by omission) low opportuni-ty costs for armed conﬂict, or assisting in the distribution of more equitable lifechances and a shared sense of collective identity and values. The use of conﬂictanalysis in planning and programming to monitor the roles played by educationin contexts of fragility or latent conﬂict can be particularly useful, especially whenpaired with pedagogical training and curriculum development that support peaceand a culture of “resilience” (see Davies and Bird et al., this volume). Efforts toensure that children’s fundamental human rights are protected in national legisla-tion, including their right to equitable, high-quality basic education, also can beseen as making an important contribution to conﬂict prevention during this latentstage. At the international level, emergency watch systems that monitor changinglevels of fragility and violence, as well efforts to monitor changes in the realizationof children’s rights, are essential. Protection traditionally has been the main concern during periods of conﬂictescalation and acute conﬂict. Increasingly, education has come to be seen as pro-viding an important dimension of this protection, especially for children, eventhough international humanitarian funding for education still appears to takea backseat to other “life-saving” measures (Save the Children, 2010; UNESCO,2011, p. 255). New patterns of conﬂict have intensiﬁed the challenges of provid-ing adequate and secure education to children affected by active conﬂicts—thefact that contemporary conﬂicts are more often protracted, and produce largernumbers of civilian casualties (including among educators and students) andlong-term mass displacement of populations, makes children much more dif-ﬁcult to reach and protect. At the same time, awareness of the protracted effectsof conﬂict on children has increased the emphasis on using education to ensurerights, human dignity, and long-term opportunities in crisis contexts (UNHCR,2009a; Winthrop, 2010). Many chapters in this volume argue that the provision of education duringacute phases of conﬂict is essential because it provides more than protection: Itfeeds hope and future aspirations, and thus provides an essential bridge to futurelivelihoods and to the post-conﬂict stability of the wider society. During phases ofdirect conﬂict and displacement, the role of caring teachers and of a curriculumthat links up to future opportunities for study or employment, is particularly im-portant. As highlighted in the chapter by Dryden-Peterson, educational challengescan look quite different for children living in more traditional refugee camps(where educational entitlements are customary), as compared with the many whomove into urban settings or settle locally in host communities. Furthermore, as
8 Educating Children in Conﬂict ZonesKirk argues, attention also needs to be paid to gender-speciﬁc needs—particularlyto ensure girls’ safety and well-being. The importance of listening to children andto educators, when responding to educational needs in situations of protractedcrisis, is a common theme for many of the authors in this book. The reconstruction phase in conﬂict-affected countries presents a different setof educational challenges and opportunities. The early provision of education atthe end of a conﬂict provides a tangible beneﬁt for parents and communities andcan enhance legitimacy and support for a new government. The phase of post-conﬂict reconstruction also is regarded as offering opportunities for innovationthat are more difﬁcult to achieve inside established educational systems, so longas adequate external ﬁnance and internal leadership are in place (Nicolai, 2009).At the same time, post-conﬂict governments face enormous challenges in terms oflosses to physical infrastructure, shortages of teachers and educational adminis-trators, the need for new, peace-promoting curricula and materials, and the urgentneeds of returnees with interrupted education (including children who have beenrecruited into combat) (Buckland, 2005). Key questions about the sequencing ofchanges to contentious aspects of the curriculum are particularly difﬁcult to ad-dress—as illustrated in King’s case study of Rwanda (Chapter 9). UNESCO (2011) argues that early interventions, such as withdrawal of userfees, scaling up and coordination of community education initiatives, rehabili-tation of classrooms, and the provision of bridging or accelerated learning pro-grams, can each provide a “peace dividend” in post-conﬂict situations. Utilizingthe skills of returning teachers and students is especially important (see Shepler,Chapter 13; Buckland, 2005). Over the longer term (as the IIEP case study of itswork in Afghanistan, presented in Chapter 12, suggests), strengthened educationalplanning capacity is needed, particularly in the areas of information and ﬁnancialmanagement, teacher recruitment and training, and building systems of participa-tion and monitoring that ensure future equity and inclusivity within the educa-tional system. INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS AND INTERVENTIONS TO SUPPORT EDUCATION IN ZONES OF CONFLICTThe provision of education to children in zones of conﬂict relies heavily on thefunds and interventions provided by international actors. For that reason, thisbook includes a group of chapters that focus on the international aid architecture(Buckland, Chapter 10); key international actors and their programs of support(Chapters 12, 13,15, and 16); and the overall trends in aid for education in conﬂictzones (Turrent, Chapter 11). The focus on providing education for children affected by conﬂict has a longhistory—it has been shaped by the experience of major efforts to reconstruct
Educating Children in Zones of Conﬂict 9school systems at the end of World War II, by the development of the InternationalConvention on the Rights of the Child (with its focus on the right to education),and by the international Education for All agenda and the Millennium Devel-opment Goals, each of which set time-bound targets for the achievement of auniversal right to education. As Buckland (Chapter 10) suggests, today many ma-jor international organizations are active in the provision of programs to supporteducation in conﬂict zones, and their work increasingly is integrated around com-mon protocols and standards for coordination. Key in the development of thesecommon standards has been the Inter-Agency Network for Education in Emer-gencies (INEE), a network of intergovernmental and nongovernmental organiza-tions and individuals formed in 2000. Its Minimum Standards for Education arenow widely used by education providers (for a description, see Kirk, Chapter 5).INEE has been instrumental in the formation of a United Nations HumanitarianResponse “Education Cluster,” which further promotes coordination in fundrais-ing and implementation among global actors. National- and regional-level Educa-tion Clusters are becoming increasingly common, existing in 34 countries in 2009(UNICEF, 2010a). Yet despite a growing system of conventions, standards, and coordinatingmechanisms, each highlighting education as both a human right and an urgentneed in situations of conﬂict, the international community has come relativelylate to the issue of education and conﬂict. Aid ﬂows to low-income, conﬂict-af-fected countries are weaker than to other low-income countries, and within thebroader group of conﬂict-affected states, aid has tended to prioritize countries ofspecial geopolitical interest to the Western world (see Turrent, Chapter 11). Thishas contributed to larger concerns that aid is being used for military purposesand is becoming increasingly militarized—an issue taken up in greater detail byNovelli in Chapter 4. Education also remains a neglected feature of humanitar-ian intervention: Less than 2% of all humanitarian aid is directed at education,and humanitarian appeals for education are consistently underfunded (UNESCO,2011, p. 204). Adequate ﬁnancing for the transition from humanitarian aid to re-construction and development aid also is lacking, leading to reversals in the earlygains to education brought about during the early recovery phase in countries likeLiberia (Buckland, 2005; UNESCO, 2011, pp. 230–231). In contrast to the healthsector, education has no “pooled fund” capable of addressing these gaps in ﬁnanc-ing for conﬂict zones; it relies on a variety of pooled appeals and on the weaklyﬁnanced Fast Track Initiative, an organization that has had difﬁculty in providingfast and adequate support to conﬂict-affected states. In addition to these major gaps in international support to education in con-ﬂict zones, recent reports have suggested a number of other areas where interna-tional interventions are inadequate. Key among these are the need for internationalefforts to monitor violence against children, including in and around educationalsettings; support for preventive forms of education-based peace-building (which
10 Educating Children in Conﬂict Zonescould be bolstered by the combined efforts of the United Nations Peace-BuildingFund, UNESCO, and UNICEF); and the need for better coordination between theUNHCR and UNICEF to address the needs of internally displaced populationsand refugees (UNESCO, 2011, pp. 241, 253–258). A FOREWORD TO THE VOLUMEResearch in the nascent ﬁeld of education in conﬂict has been centered in two tra-ditions. The ﬁrst examines the relationships, both positive and negative, betweeneducation and conﬂict, including the role of education in fragility, peace-building,reconstruction, and reconciliation. The second focuses on the empirical realitiesof education in conﬂict settings, speciﬁcally as related to the provision of educa-tion, and the quality and distribution of available opportunities. The synthesis ofthese traditions was a cornerstone of Jackie Kirk’s work and personal commitmentto education in conﬂict. Jackie’s unique approach married, on the one hand, anemphasis on systemic challenges and the need for large-scale, programmatic in-tervention; and, on the other, the need for carefully tailored responses that listencarefully to the voices of children and educators. Building on Jackie’s approach, this volume is organized into four sections.The ﬁrst part, “Deﬁnitions, Concepts, and Key Issues,” addresses the interrelation-ships between education and conﬂict and outlines key issues that are central tothis ﬁeld of study. It begins with Jackie Kirk’s seminal work, Education and FragileStates, in which she argues that education must be seen as much more than a basicsocial service and, indeed, as more than a mechanism for protection. The chap-ter explores in detail the ways in which education is “cause, effect, problem, andpossible solution” to state fragility. Following Jackie’s chapter, Chapter 3 by LynnDavies draws on empirical data from Liberia, Afghanistan, Bosnia-Herzegovina,Cambodia, and Sri Lanka, to provide a more detailed framework for understand-ing the relationships between education and fragility, focusing in particular oneducation’s role in building resilience among individual citizens and adaptabil-ity in the state. Chapter 4 shifts our gaze to the darker underbelly of support foreducation in conﬂict zones. Using historical and contemporary examples to ex-amine how the policies and practices of Western donors inﬂuence the content ofeducation in fragile states, Mario Novelli argues that there has been a dangerousmerging of security interests with development priorities over the past decade,both in practice and in academic discourse. This is a highly poignant chapter as itreﬂects upon forms of militarization that may have contributed to Jackie’s tragicdeath at the hands of Taliban militants in Afghanistan. This volume’s ﬁrst sectioncloses with Jackie Kirk’s overview of the importance of addressing gender dis-parities in education in situations of conﬂict, an issue for which she was a strongadvocate. In addition to reviewing the many ways that gender vulnerabilities can
Educating Children in Zones of Conﬂict 11be exacerbated or mitigated through education in conﬂict settings, this chapterprovides an overview of the INEE minimum standards and their role in the pro-motion of gender equality. The second part of this book is entitled “Listening to the Voices of Childrenand Teachers.” Each chapter is informed by the experiences and perspectives ofchildren and teachers in settings of conﬂict. In Chapter 6, Sarah Dryden-Petersonexplores the multiple connections refugee children in Uganda make betweentheir educational experiences and present and future livelihoods, relating theirnarratives to physical and economic security, integration in the local society, andaspirations for the future. In Learning for a Bright Future (Chapter 7), RebeccaWinthrop and Jackie Kirk examine the experiences of refugee children in Ethio-pia, Afghanistan, and Sierra Leone and identify the centrality of schooling in theirpersonal conceptualizations of well-being. Their study illustrates the importanceof the combination of academic and social learning in refugee education, bothfor “coping” in the present and “hoping” for the future. In Chapter 8, RebeccaWinthrop builds upon this analysis, exploring in greater detail the technical, prac-tical, and emancipatory forms of learning valued by refugee children. In Chapter9, Elisabeth King provides an exploration of the interrelationships between educa-tion and conﬂict through different phases of the Rwandan civil war, using inter-view data from students and teachers as well as documentary evidence to providea nuanced understanding of positive and negative “faces” of education in conﬂictsettings. The third part of this book, “Understanding International Educational Pro-grams and Interventions,” examines the role of international programs and in-terventions in addressing the challenge of educating children in conﬂict zones. InChapter 10, Peter Buckland traces the development of institutional coordinationin the ﬁeld of education in conﬂict-affected areas, emphasizing its importancefor bridging gaps between humanitarian assistance and the EFA agenda. VictoriaTurrent (Chapter 11) compares the ﬂows of aid to education in fragile states andother low-income countries, pointing out the need for increased and more pre-dictable aid in conﬂict zones. Two national-level case studies conclude this section.In Chapter 12, Lyndsay Bird and a team from the International Institute for Edu-cational Planning (IIEP) examine a capacity development program between theMinistry of Education in Afghanistan and the IIEP, which led to the developmentof a national education sector plan and enhanced administrative systems. Theyargue for the centrality of trust, participation, and national ownership in capacitydevelopment in post-conﬂict reconstruction. Susan Shepler (Chapter 13) exam-ines the collateral effects of teachers returning home from Guinea after involve-ment in refugee education programs, showing how these teachers serve as agentsof change in reconstruction processes, and yet are constrained by certiﬁcation andministry policies from contributing more fully to post-conﬂict reconstruction ofan educational system.
12 Educating Children in Conﬂict Zones The fourth, and ﬁnal, part of this volume, “New Directions in Research onEducation and Conﬂict,” presents innovations in both qualitative and quantita-tive research on education in conﬂict-affected states. While other recent reportshave explored gaps in the research literature on education in conﬂict (see INEE,2010), this part of our volume is more concerned with the potential for alterna-tive research methodologies. Employing participatory visual research methodolo-gies, Claudia Mitchell (Chapter 14) documents the value and limits of giving voiceto children, using research ﬁndings from Rwanda to explore what participationin research might mean. In Chapter 15, Stephanie Bengtsson and Lesley Bartlettprovide an overview of efforts to use child-friendly, participatory research meth-odologies to study the impact of UNICEF’s Child-Friendly Schools initiative. Inthe concluding chapter, Dana Burde (Chapter 16) argues for a very different andrelatively novel methodology for the study of education in conﬂict: the use of ran-domized impact evaluations. Drawing on her study of community-based school-ing in Afghanistan, Burde explores the feasibility, ethics, and ultimate importanceof providing quantitative measures of outcomes for educational interventions inconﬂict zones. NOTE 1. Save the Children has deﬁned its list of “fragile and conﬂict-affected countries” ascountries that experienced at least one armed conﬂict in the period between 1995 and 2004,or are classiﬁed as critical in the 2005 fragile states list by Project Ploughshares; or countriesthat were classiﬁed as “core” or “severe” in the World Bank’s low-income countries understress list. Using this deﬁnition, Cambodia and Haiti also are considered fragile/conﬂict-affected. UNESCO’s deﬁnition is somewhat different: Developed by the Peace Research In-stitute Oslo (PRIO), the UNESCO criteria deﬁne conﬂict-affected states as those in whichover the past 10 years there has been armed conﬂict involving “contested incompatibility”over government and/or territory where the use of armed force is involved, and where oneof the parties to the conﬂict is the state. The selection criteria also include a threshold forbattle-related deaths (UNESCO, 2011, p. 138).