[hre-asiapacific] Re: Pedagogy/methodology of HRE

Dear All

I am M.V. Bijulal, working with the Human Rights and Law unit, Indian
Social Institute - an NGO based in New Delhi, India having consultative
status with the ECOSOC.

Human rights education is a major theme in the trainings we are offering
for all levels of audience -- from organic representatives from village
communities, academics, NGOs and law enforcement officials having direct
responsibility in protecting and promoting human rights.

The following observations are based on my thoughts on pedagogy.

>Many human rights educators claim that HRE's pedagogy should be experiential,
>activity-centered and participatory? Does this make HRE unique compared 
>to, say, citizenship education or peace education? And does this mean
>non-experiential or non-participatory programmes should not be called 
>HRE?

This is in defense of my argument that all trainings in HRE may be on the
principles of shared procedure and collective building of ideas.

Emphasis on class room/exterior activity and promoting participation in
training has become a standard rule in all situations of modern learning.
This is a clear diversion from the archaic conceptions across the world on
hegemony of masters. For example we have in India a hymn:

Agnyaana Timiraandhasya
Gnyaana Anjana Shalaakayaa
Chakshuhu Unmeelitam Yenam
Tasmai Sri Gurave Namaha.

Meaning: A Guru can save us from the pangs of ignorance (darkness) by
applying to us the balm of knowledge or awareness of the Supreme, I salute
such a Guru.

In conditions where the knowledge agencies are becoming more diverse and
multiple across the world, the concept of a person as the sole source of
knowledge is fast reducing. That is why, increasingly, interactions and
exchanges in a classroom provide a more breadth to common learning
process.

However, it may be assumed that a 'shared agreement of dominance of
teacher' is still remaining among cultures invoking at times some undue
assertions from the teachers and some mental blocks among the learners.
This situation can be broadly explained in relation to understandings on
Authority on Knowledge: The urge to possess domination and the failure to
raise just observations fearing them as acts of questioning authority.
This is the situation where a Classroom, fails as a democratic space to
promote and ensure basic human rights in any learning space the right to
expression as well as detailed and specific information. In the' lecture
delivery and clarification model' it is mostly the 'benevolence of the
authority' that is at work.

That is why there is a need for seeing training as a festival of ideas, an
initiative where human relationships are created with intention for
collective thinking on developing interdependent human rights communities.

Also it is important to have an equal feeling among all in a training in a
conducive architecture, and methods which promote sharing.

All the said universal methods are in use till the village level in India.

However in the Indian case I feel the public hearing and case
presentations by victims has emerged as a very effective method. The lead
role of presentations from the affected people in the building of a
collective strategy against specific atrocities (caste related atrocities,
development based human rights violations) is worth mentioning in this
connection. This practice allows making the representations from the
people more direct and organic.

Another (thematic) aspect is regarding human rights investigations and
fact finding where the people are trained to be capable of raising human
rights concerns more effectively.

Finally, the role of the teacher/trainer/facilitator in HRE I see as:

- to maintain the principles of democracy and human rights in the class room;
- introducing and facilitating training themes and building up them with 
the important aspects of experiences and expectations of the house;
- to research on how emerging issues where human rights violations are 
identified could be effectively made reference points in HRE training;
- how to accommodate the critical human rights approach to issues as well 
as human rights thinking on alternatives -- two main concerns that usually
emerge in classroom space.

Kindly send your responses.

Sincerely

M.V. Bijulal
Human Rights and Law Unit
Indian Social Institute
New Delhi




On 10/18/05, Asia-Pacific HRE List Moderator wrote:

>
> This week we propose to concentrate on the pedagogy and/or methodology
> of human rights education: Does HRE differ from other "educations" in
> its pedagogy/methodology?
>
> The following questions can guide our discussion:
>
> - Many human rights educators claim that HRE's pedagogy should be
> experiential, activity-centered and participatory? Does this make HRE
> unique compared to, say, citizenship education or peace education? And
> does this mean non-experiential or non-participatory programmes should
> not be called HRE?
>
> - There are a range of methods for classrooms and other learning and
> training settings, including icebreakers and introductions,
> brainstorming, case studies, creative expression, debates and
> negotiations, discussion, dramatizations, field trips, games,
> hearings, tribunals and mock trials, research projects, simulations,
> storytelling -- most of them not unique to HRE. Has HRE specifically
> generated new methods for learning?
>
> - Given the above, what is the role of the teacher/trainer/facilitator
> in HRE?



======== Asia Pacific Human Rights Education listserv ========
Send mail intended for the list to <       >.
If you have problems (un)subscribing, contact <     >.
**You are welcome to reprint, copy, archive, quote or re-post this item,
but please retain the original and listserv source.