|
[home]>[programmes]>[orientation
course]>report>evaluation
note
Evaluation Note
[Patrick was our evaluator. He attended almost all lectures, went
through the evaluation forms submitted by the faculty members and the
participants, saw several term papers, spent time with the participants
in the evening group discussions, helped many in writing clearly their
ideas, and was a great listener. Below is his evaluation note that he
left for us prior to his departure.]
1. Objective
The third SAFHR orientation course on "War, Violence Intervention,
and Their Impact on Democracy in South Asia", held in Kathmandu from
3-17 August 2002, was designed to bring into focus issues of peace, war
and human rights in the context of South Asia. The goal of the course
was to introduce participants to key concepts of human rights and conflict
resolution, thus enabling them to take a fresh approach to human rights
problems in the region, think things through on their own, and engage
in a fruitful dialogue on solutions and remedies.
2. Structure
The course was comprised of interactive sessions (lectures, roundtable
discussions, workshops and tutorial sessions), self-study opportunities
(term paper and reading material provided in the course binder), a short
field trip, and a distance-learning component. It contained four modules
for further specialization: (A) Laws of Peace; (B) Laws of War and Peace,
Humanitarian Law and Human Rights; (C) Ethics of Rights, Justice and Responsibility;
(D) Collapse of liberal-constitutional culture in the wake of new wars,
and the need to defend the area of conscientious dissent, human rights
and freedom.
3. Composition
The course brought together participants (31) and resource persons from
six SAARC member states and outside the region. Participants were drawn
from a wide range of professions, including non-governmental organizations,
the media, research institutions, and human rights commissions. The faculty
was comprised of peace and human rights activists, academicians, practitioners,
and journalists.
4. Evaluation parameters
This evaluation is based primarily on the evaluation sheets filled out
by resource persons (10 sheets) and participants (21 sheets). The sheets
contained questions pertaining to the overall structure of the course
and its respective modules; the quality of the lectures, roundtables and
material provided; the breadth and depth of interaction; the arrangements
of the course; the usefulness of its approach and its value for participants.
Overall, the questions were responded to openly, in detail, and in a critical
mind frame. For the purpose of evaluation, the feedback provided in the
last class on 16 August, statements by faculty and participants on other
occasions, and participation in course activities were also being taken
into consideration.
5. General Assessment
On the whole, the course was found to be, among other things, "useful";
"thought-provoking"; "well designed"; a "good
opportunity to learn and study various aspects of human rights and peace";
an "amazing experience". The breadth of issues covered in the
curriculum and the diversity of views presented in class were generally
being appreciated, with only few participants arguing that a depth-over-breadth
approach would have been preferable. The inclusion of presentations on
issues reaching beyond South Asia, such as lectures on the situation in
the Middle East, were thought to be "helpful" and "insightful".
Inter-disciplinary presentations on issues such as the human rights implications
of resource conflicts generated interest and discussion among the participants.
Several participants stressed the need for taking a more comprehensive
and coordinated approach to gain a better understanding of the overall
political and legal situation in the human rights arena. Despite the intense
workload and the resulting fatigue, participants felt that the course
had helped them to broaden their horizons and overcome a "frog in
the well" perspective.
With respect to the curriculum, views were at variance as to how to strike
a balance between theory and practice. While some welcomed the grounding
of lectures in human rights theory, others felt a greater need for guidance
on human rights implementation. Recourse could be had to case studies
more frequently, they argued, and an emphasis should be placed on how
human rights advocacy could be used as a tool to change human rights perceptions.
In that context, the cancellation of the field trip was met with regret.
In terms of format, a number of resource persons and participants felt
that the course had not fully exhausted its potential for "interactive",
"participatory" and "lively" sessions. It was suggested
to allow for "breakout sessions" to advance the discussion of
sub-themes in smaller groups before the topic was being taken up by the
group as a whole. The traditional classroom setting was also thought to
be little conducive to generating discussion. It was held that a semi-circular
classroom arrangement would be better able to stimulate debate and keep
"post lunch fatigue" at bay. Despite these shortcomings, faculty
and participants repeatedly stressed that the interaction with persons
from different countries and diverse backgrounds, both in the classroom
and in more informal settings, formed an important, if not "the most
important aspect of the course".
6. Specific Comments
With respect to the module system, some participants expressed the need
for more flexibility. They argued that it was not helpful in an orientation
course to tie participants to a specific module when most were eager to
explore the issues of peace and human rights in their entirety. Although
the modules helped in structuring the course, the participants should
be given incentives to cover as much ground as possible, rather than creating
a "term paper niche" for themselves. In a similar vein, a "refresher
course" at the beginning of the seminar was proposed to provide participants
with a brief overview of core notions and concepts to be elaborated on
during the course. One faculty member suggested that the resource persons
should meet on the first day of the course to "discuss expectations".
Regarding the deadline for submission of term papers, some participants
asserted that, for the purpose of maximizing the gain from lectures, it
would have been helpful to have the deadline extended until the module
lectures had been given in their entirety. Most participants expressed
satisfaction about the accommodation provided in terms of convenience,
service and food. Some suggested that thought should be given to the scaling
down of accommodation in favor of more privacy (participants were made
to share double-rooms) or a "per diem allowance".
7. Echo and Follow-up
It was generally felt that sharing experiences and exchanging views on
issues pertaining to peace and human rights was at the core of the course
and its greatest asset. Early in the course, participants started expressing
their interest in staying in touch and building a network among themselves
and with the resource persons. To that end, participants agreed to launch
an informal e-mail group, which would allow them to share ideas and exchange
information with respect to their human rights work. It was also proposed
that SAFHR conduct country visits facilitated by participants; initiate
cooperation with participants on issues of common interest; and encourage
the participation of alumni in the course.
8. Concluding observations
For peace and human rights to be more than mere empty shells, there is
a need for the recognition of the "right to have rights" as
much as there is a need for "demystification", the realization
of limitations due to the inadequacies of human rights language in the
South Asian context. Drawing on the expertise of a diverse faculty and
the extensive professional backgrounds of a wide range of participants
from a variety of countries, the third orientation course in human rights
and peace studies provided a unique forum for the exchange of ideas on
how conflicts in South Asia can be contained, root causes tackled, and
peaceful change be brought about. The SAFHR course helped clarify core
principles of the international legal and moral system; shed light on
a number of multi-layered political, legal and social issues in all their
complexity; and opened up space for much needed discussion across borders.
While solutions to many of the intricate issues relating to South Asia
loom large, the course, on a micro-level, managed to build what lies at
the heart of peace: sensitivity, knowledge and understanding.
|
