The Difficult Question of Evaluation

Third annual conference of the International Network Education for Democracy, Human Rights and Tolerance

Bautzen (li./uhl) – "Imagine a country where recently tensions and violence occurred between a local majority and an ethnic minority. After these events the government of this country asks the International Tolerance Network for help. The network carries out several educational programs for non-violent conflict resolution. The result: The minority declares that it opposes any use of violence. Instead it has started a campaign for cultural autonomy that may even end in a declaration of independence. The tension between the majority and the minority has increased even more. Was the intervention of the network successful?" – With the help of this fictitious example the working group of the International Network Education for Democracy, Human Rights and Tolerance, which deals with the theoretical and moral basis of the network, made the participants of the 3rd Annual Conference aware of the dilemma that many educational organizations face in their work. The appropriateness of means and their effects on educational measures raise questions about the "right" approach in tolerance education – and at the same time show the limits of educational intervention.

But within these limits a lot can be done, as the previous results of the network have proved. The International Tolerance Network began its work two years ago as a manageable group of best-practice organizations to exchange and develop innovative and successful methods of education for democracy, human rights and tolerance. Different working groups were formed to develop solutions for the improvement of educational measures in this field.

A central question during this years‘ network conference on the 16th and 17th of November 2000 was the possibility to evaluate such educational programs. The academic coordinator of the network, Viola Georgi (Bertelsmann Group for Policy Research at the Center for Applied Policy Research, Munich) presented results of a first, not representative international survey of educational organizations with regard to their evaluation methods. The results showed that evaluation is mainly used as method of proof for a client or sponsor. The organizations questioned proved great interest, if not much experience, in the question whether the effects of educational programs can be measured. This question had come up repeatedly in the work of the network. Based on the current results the working group "Evaluation" wants to concentrate on solutions to this problem.

A group of network members who spent the last months addressing the problem of language as a trigger of intolerance and inequality in seminar and classroom situations also presented concrete working results. They assembled a substantial compendium of different didactic methods used by the different network members. These should help teachers identify, address and develop strategies to solve problems in their daily work caused by the connections between language and dominance. A collection of methods will be published this year as a workshop model and will also be implemented in the educational organizations of the network.

Professor Werner Weidenfeld, member of the Board of the Bertelsmann Foundation, introduced two new member organizations from Latin America: Novamerica from Rio de Janeiro (Brazil) and Participa from Santiago de Chile. They gave an impressive report on the situation of human rights and democratization in their countries and presented concepts and methods for educational projects based on their specific historical, political and social context. The work of Novamerica focuses on the development and implementation of innovative human rights education programs. Social inequality, the multi-ethnic character of the Brazilian society, violence, human rights violations and a democratic deficit play an important role in the development of educational tools. Trainings for multipliers and the distribution of teaching and learning materials within a wide network of schools throughout Brazil guarantee a nationwide implementation of the programs – especially in the poor districts of the larger cities (page 3).

Participia has set a different focus in their educational work. In Chile this NGO is considered one of the pioneers in democracy and human rights education after the Pinochet period. This NGO consults members of the government and political parties in questions on how to organize democratic educational processes and carries out research on the development of democracy in Chile. Participia also develops curricula for democracy education and offers programs for teenagers and young adults.

By now it has become a tradition that the annual conference of the tolerance network is also placed in the context of a topic related to German history. In the year 2000 Germany celebrated the tenth anniversary of its reunification. This was used as an opportunity to reflect about backgrounds of the German separation and the rapprochment together with the international members. During a visit to the Bautzen II memorial, the most notorious prison of the Ministry for State Security (STASI), the conference participants were able to get an authentic image of the oppression enforced by the GDR regime. The discussion with former inmates of the prison revealed a few parallels to experiences of network members with dictatorships, for instance in Chile and the Philippines.

In a dinner speech based on his experiences, the author Erich Loest brought to life the fate that many "unpleasant" critics of the system faced. His story left no doubt that democracy, human rights and tolerance are parts of an indivisible entity. This was the conclusion, that all conference participants drew for themselves. It is not only an exhaustive conclusion but one that points the way ahead.

See also: Conference Summary

Index: Podium

Human Rights and Human Rights Education
by K. Peter Fritzsche

The Difficult Question of Evaluation
by Thomas Lillig and Katrin Uhl

Portrait
Novamerica: a Brazilian NGO

Expert's Commentary
by Katrin Uhl