Deadline is midnight on Sunday 24^th January, 2016

• The prize of £500 is for a paper presented by a student member at the ÌÇÐÄ´«Ã½ Conference (12-14 September 2016) and fully written up afterwards.
• Entrants will be asked to provide a letter from their department that attests to either their student status or that they have completed a postgraduate course within the last 6 months prior to the deadline for submission.
• The paper should deal with a subject relating to comparative or international education, and may be conceptual or empirical in nature.
• No senior scholars or supervisors should have co-authored the paper. It should be the student’s own work.
• The prize will be shared in the event of a jointly presented/written paper. All co-authors must conform to the same criteria as regards student status.
• The length of the paper should be 5,000-7,000 words.
• Papers and supporting information should be submitted in a single Word or Pdf file to the ÌÇÐÄ´«Ã½ Secretary, Anneke Newman (ku.ca.ECIABobfsctd-399112@yraterceS) by midnight on Friday, 20^th January 2017.
• Judgment criteria are found in the document below.Ìý Papers must score at least 24 out of 30 points in order to be considered for the prize.
• The Association will not enter into correspondence with students who have not been awarded a prize. The decision of the judges, endorsed by the Executive, will be final.

Jing Kun Bai: Citizenship education in China: an analysis of the university textbooks of a compulsory ‘Politics’ course. What does this tell us about possible development towards democracy in China?Ìý

ÌýJing Kun is using the bursary to supplement her textbook analysis and undertake classroom observations and interviews in Chinese higher education institutions. She is assessing whether democratic values of critical thinking, multi-culturalism, pluralism and tolerance are being encouraged. Her research is focusing on traces of democratisation which have emerged in the context of economic growth and the one-party political system in China’s reform era as well as the possibilities for democratisation which may emerge in the future.

Ìý

Sayaka Hashimoto: Local government involvement in education for ethnic minority children in post World War II Japan

Sayaka’s fieldwork is based across four areas of Japan and is exploring how education reforms aim to cater for diversity, particularly in relation to migration and ethnic minorities. She is focusing on Japan’s distinctive bottom-up policy development process, the conditions under which these policies are initiated and the ways in which these locally-driven policies are taken up at the national level.

Nozomi Sakata: Learner-centred pedagogy (LCP) in Tanzanian primary schools: mixed methods vertical case study to investigate LCP implementation and its effects on pupils

Nozomi’s PhD is exploring how Tanzania is implementing LCP in primary schools through a lens focusing on national historical and ideological contexts. Her fieldwork took place in Tanzania at the end of 2015. She distributed questionnaires, and conducted lesson observations, interviews and focus groups with teachers and pupils in 13 public and private primary schools in two regions. She also visited the hometown of Tanzania’s first president Julius Nyerere to explore his influence on educational priorities.

Over the coming months, the award winners will submit a report to ÌÇÐÄ´«Ã½ on their fieldwork, and highlights of these reports will be available on the ÌÇÐÄ´«Ã½ website.

The deadline for the second round of funding for ÌÇÐÄ´«Ã½ Student Travel Bursaries is May 1^st 2016. More information is available on the ÌÇÐÄ´«Ã½ website. Please share widely!

Alison Buckler, ÌÇÐÄ´«Ã½ Executive Committee

Welcome to the ÌÇÐÄ´«Ã½ e-forum, again! Today’s discussions are facilitated by Ms. Malini Ghose, Founder member of Nirantar, India.

Malini Ghose has worked in the fields of literacy, education and women’s rights for over 20 years, in various capacities – as a grassroots practitioner, trainer, curriculum developer, researcher and advocate. She has provided technical assistance to government and NGO interventions and engaged with policy development on gender and education related issues, nationally and internationally. Malini is a founder-member of Nirantar, a resource centre for gender and education in New Delhi, India. SheÌýhas an M.A. in Political Science from the New School for Social Research, New York. She is presently a PhD scholar in Social Sciences at the Centre for Modern Indian Studies at the University of Göttingen, Germany.

Issues for Discussion

Recently there has been a growing interest in the use of ICTs in literacy programmes, in policy and practitioner circles.

ICTs are offered as the solution to several challenges facing adult literacy programmes – low quality, poor results, lack of learner motivation, and paucity of resources. ICT-based literacy packages claim to make people literate within very short timeframes and with minimal investments in teacher/facilitator training.

Then there are the sceptics who argue that a simple “technological fix” cannot address the complexities confronting adult literacy programmes or larger issues: of the digital divide, for instance.

What does the field reality look like? I would like to initiate the discussion by briefly sharing some observations from a meeting I attended with women learners in rural North India, organised by an NGO exploring the possibility of introducing a mobile based literacy programme (a donor had expressed interest).

As the facilitator waved and circulated her mobile phone the excitement in the group was palpable as few in the group had regular access to phones. Many were not ‘allowed’ to use phones of male family members or felt scared to (in case something went wrong). When I asked one of the women how she managed to navigate her way, as she couldn’t read, she said giggling, “I put a picture along with the names. My husband is a sheep.” Ìý“It’s a phone, I use it to speak. Why do I need to read?” complained another woman. Another countered her and said she had learnt the English numbers after getting her phone. (Excerpted from field report)

1. Is the optimism around ICTs overstated? Can ICTs offer a transformative learning experience or will they only serve to reinforce existing iniquitous social and economic relations?
2. The above field situation points to several complexities, including the exercise of power relations, as well as the possibilities. Do any of these observations resonate with your experiences or do you have different ones that you would like to share?
3. Being a relatively new area of enquiry, not much research is available. What kind of a research agenda do you think would be useful to strengthen literacy programmes or unravel some of the complexities being discussed?
4. The use of ICTs have changed people’s literacy, numeracy and communication practices yet these have not found their way into literacy classes, training or curricula. What kinds of collaborative research or other projects could support such efforts?
5. The focus of ICT interventions seems to be limited to improving teaching and learning or improving learners’ access to information. Shouldn’t greater efforts be made to ensure that the voices of adult learners are heard on social media or digital platforms?

Welcome to the ÌÇÐÄ´«Ã½ e-forum, again! Today’s discussions are facilitated by Dr. M. Ehsanur Rahman,ÌýExecutive Director, Dhaka Ahsania Mission.

Ehsanur is currently the Executive Director of Dhaka Ahsania Mission and chairperson of the Coalition for Urban Poor, the network of CSOs working with urban poor in Bangladesh. He has been active in the education sector for about three decades. At the national and international level, he contributed significantly in capacity development of non-formal primary education, adult education, early child education and development personnel including planners, managers, curriculum developers and field level implementers. In development of education resource packages, he closely worked with various national and international teams. His significant contribution includes mapping Asia-Pacific regional scenario of adult literacy as a tool for empowerment of the poor. At present he is working relentlessly for promoting Community Learning Centre and inclusive technical vocational education as sustainable strategies to reach the poor and marginalized people.

Issues for discussion

Issue # 1: Roles of higher education institutions in professional development of literacy/adult learning educators and widening the vision of adult literacy/learning.

The scope of adult literacy and learning are often kept limited and programmes are designed with narrow vision. Women literacy/learning courses are, for example, confined to certain stereotype fields, having no scope for future journey or career ladder. There is absence of diverse and context specific literacy/adult learning programmes supported by wider goal of education suitable for the next decades.

Professional development of adult literacy/learning educators is a key to widen the vision of adult learning/ literacy education, as it can bring longer term insights in course planning. At present in most cases the scope for professional/career development of adult literacy/learning practitioners is either very limited or not available.

In many higher education institutions there are departments/programmes on adult literacy/learning offering academic courses and undertaking researches. On the contrast, we see very few of those courses are linked with practical adult literacy/learning programmes;the adult educators are seldom engaged in the studies.

The point of discussion is thus, how we can enhance the roles of higher education institutions for professional development of literacy/adult learning educators and widen the vision of adult literacy/learning.

Issue # 2: Providing convincing evidence to the financers on effectiveness of adult literacy and learning for increased investment

We often advocate for increased roles of donors and investors in promoting adult literacy/learning. Simultaneously we observe low key on the part of the adult educators to provide the investors convincing evidence on effectiveness of adult literacy.

There is difference in perceptions of the academics/researchers and the adult learning practitioners about effectiveness of literacy/adult learning. The objectives of research/study in adult learning/literacy education by these two groups often vary. Eventually the findings vary.

Over last few days in the e-Forum the issue of limited scope for dissemination of research findings/usage of literacy programme documents in the academic courses and vice versa came repeatedly.

I propose to bring the discussion again in the forefront to bring these two groups closer to bring synergy in this field to develop convincing evidences targeting the donors/financers for increased investment in adult learning/Literacy education.

Welcome to the ÌÇÐÄ´«Ã½ e-forum, again! Today’s discussions are facilitated by Ms. Mari Yasunaga, Programme Specialist, Section for Youth, Literacy and Skills Development, UNESCO, Paris.

Mari is a Programme Specialist, currently working in the Section for Youth, Literacy and Skills Development in the Division for Policies and Lifelong Learning Systems of the UNESCO Education Sector. Within UNESCO, she has almost 20 years of experience in the field of education and international development, especially basic education, literacy and non-formal education.

Discussion Issue

Women’s literacy and sustainable development: bridging the gap for more integrated and coordinated efforts within the education sector and beyond Ìý

Today’s e-Forum discussion is framed by the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development which was adopted at the United Nations Sustainable Development Summit (New York, 25-27 September 2015) to stimulate and step up the efforts of the international community over the next 15 years. Among the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) set, education is addressed as Goal 4 “Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all” with youth and adult literacy being focused as a specific target and featured by other targets.

This means the beginning of a 15 years process that is intended to connect, meaningfully, the global agenda with policies and practice on the ground. Although adults from across the world who need to benefit most may not feel the changes overnight, this global agenda offers an opportunity to revisit the interrelations between literacy and sustainable development in order to accelerate the pace of positive transformation for them, including women with limited literacy skills.

Indeed, “Literacy and sustainable societies” was the theme of International Literacy Day 2015 and the focus of a Global Meeting that was held on 8-9 September 2015 in Paris, during which a renewed focus was given to the notion of literacy as a continuum of skills that are acquired through different learning pathways.

As previously discussed in this e-Forum and elsewhere, literacy is a driver for sustainable development (e.g. poverty eradication, agriculture, health, inclusive economic growth and decent work). At the same time, progress in different areas of development does contribute to promoting literacy, generating a demand, opportunities and enabling environments for people to acquire, use and advance their literacy skills.

In enhancing this interrelation between literacy and sustainable development, generation, dissemination and use of relevant knowledge is a key. As the previous discussions highlighted, a body of knowledge is gradually expanding, including that related to the benefits of literacy for sustainable development, which however may be weaker than what we know about the benefit of education for sustainable development. The impacts of research on policies and practice, and ultimately on people’s lives, need to be greater.

In this context, I would like to invite you to reflect on how to boost more integrated and coordinated efforts of researchers, practitioners, policy-makers and other actors for adult literacy, connecting literacy and sustainable development, especially on the following.

• What are the strengths and weaknesses of the existing evidence base regarding the benefits of literacy for sustainable development? Do we know sufficiently about the impacts of women’s literacy on health, economic growth, environment and other areas of sustainable development?
• How could the evidence base be enhanced regarding how progress in different areas of sustainable development influence people’s motivation and readiness for literacy skills acquisition, as well as their learning and its outcomes?
• What are the kinds of partnership required to strengthen the evidence base on the interrelation between literacy and sustainable development and also to ensure that such evidence base is effectively used by policy-makers, practitioners and other actors?

Welcome to the ÌÇÐÄ´«Ã½ e-forum, again! Today’s discussions are facilitated by Dr. Jan Eldred, Senior Research Fellow, National Institute for Adult and Continuing Education (NIACE).

Jan has scores of years of interest in adult literacy in both the UK and in international development. She has been a literacy tutor organiser, FE officer and Head of Faculty for Community Education as well as Assistant Director of NIACE.Ìý She is currently looking at the impact of literacy and numeracy learning across the UK as part of the European Agenda for Adult Learning. Jan has chaired the UK Literacy Working Group since its inception in 2006 and worked with the group on publications, events and parliamentary representation, particularly related to women’s literacy development.Ìý She volunteers as a team leader with Habitat for Humanity, around the world, being particularly interested in the role of women in legal and financial literacy, related to home ownership.

Discussion Issue

As a practitioner, researcher and developer of adult literacy/literacies, through out my professional life I have spent many hours reflecting on why others don’t ‘get’ what all our Bridging the Gap discussions indicate. This is, that literacy makes a difference to people’s lives in so many diverse ways but quintessentially, by empowering them to be fulfilled human beings, whether in relation to personal development, family, work, community or politics. There is no doubt that literacy development is complex and challenging but so are many other areas of learning.

I agree with some contributors who decry the lack of institutions and infrastructures, which support continuing education. I recognise the dominance of schooling and formal education and equating them with the only form of valuable education as well as the lack of vision of learning as a lifelong, life-wide activity for everyone. I agree with those who believe that this reflects power and hegemony. I also agree with those who say that adult literacy learning is often a campaign or an initiative;both of these suggest that adult literacy is a ‘problem’ which can be addressed by throwing money at it for a limited period of time. An acceptance of the concept of and commitment to lifelong learning would support and sustain adult literacy as part of that life – long continuum. Literacy learning would then be seen as important as any other area of learning and development.

It seems to me that it is up to us, who firmly believe in the value of learning throughout life, for all adults, to pick up the cause and be judged by our actions.

As Anna indicates, there is a lot of research out there, so it’s not necessarily a lack of research, which stops adult literacy development. Participants in this forum agree that the gap is between research and practice. Much research stays within the research community. Yes, it is disseminated, but often, not applied and used. Practitioners are busy doing and don’t have time – or often access – to the documents, which might inform their development. This gap would be unthinkable in medicine, where huge amounts of investment in research lead to changes in practice. (Again, this reflects power;the rich get sick, so influential people find funds;few of them need to develop their literacies.) I suggest we should have research AND development much more closely linked.

Practitioner research, where academics work alongside and in partnership with practitioners, has been demonstrated to be effective. Changes happen in practice as well as in academic thinking, as a result of such partnerships.

• What if research proposals had to involve development partners?
• What if research proposals included post-research development phases with practitioners, as medicine includes clinical trials?
• What if such development phases had to produce materials, tools, guides and development for practitioners?
• What if evaluation studies encouraged and supported reflective practice in the field, in an on-going way, not just evaluation of an initiative or project?
• Would such approaches help researchers and practitioners to work more closely together, to bridge the gap and improve what we are all trying to do? Would such practices help us to demonstrate to those who don’t ‘get it’ the impact of lifelong learning and literacy learning in particular?