child-friendly schools project - home | unicef · pdf file ·...

CHILD-FRIENDLY SCHOOLS PROJECT

BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

External Evaluation of the “Child-Friendly Schools” Project (2002-2007)

UNICEF Staff Contact Point: Sanja Kabil

FINAL EVALUATION REPORT

Joachim Friedrich Pfaffe (Team Leader)

A. E. M. (Ans) Smulders

06 December 2008

PROMAN SA

68, rue Michel Hack – 3240-Bettembourg +352 / 25 46 84 –1 +352 / 25 46 81

[email protected] - www.proman.lu

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.proman.lu/

Child-Friendly Schools Project, Bosnia and Herzegovina: Final Evaluation Report i

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

BiH Bosne i Hercegovine (Bosnia and Herzegovina)

CCM Child-Centred Methodology

CEE Central and Eastern Europe

CEI Centre for Educational Initiatives

CEPOS Centre for Policy Studies

CfS Child-Friendly Schools

CIS Commonwealth of Independent States

CRC Convention on the Rights of the Child

DP Development Partner

DPA Dayton Peace Agreement

ECD Early Childhood Development

EFA Education For All

EU-TAC European Union Training and Consultancy Project

FGD Focus Group Discussion

ICT Information and Communication Technology

INSET In-service Education and Training

ISSA International Step by Step Association

M+E Monitoring and Evaluation

MDG Millennium Development Goals

MDG-F MDG Achievement Fund (Spain)

MoE Ministry of Education

MTSP Mid-Term Strategic Plan

NGO Non-Governmental Organisation

OSCE Organisation for Security and Co-Operation in Europe

OSI Open Society Institute

PTA Parent/Teacher Association

RWCT Reading and Writing for Critical Thinking

RS Republika Srpska

SbS Step By Step

SEN Special Educational Needs

SI School Improvement

TA Technical Assistance

TOR Terms of Reference

TOT Training/Trainer of Trainers

TTI Teacher Training Institute

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

UNICEF United Nations Children‟s Fund

USD US Dollar

Child-Friendly Schools Project, Bosnia and Herzegovina: Final Evaluation Report ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive summary iv

1 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Background 1

1.2 Framework of this external evaluation 2

1.2.1 Purpose and objective of the evaluation 2

1.2.2 Scope and context of the evaluation 2

1.3 Methodology 2

1.3.1 Preparatory Phase 3

1.3.2 Data Collection Phase 3

1.3.3 Reporting Phase 4

1.3.4 Assessment of degree of stakeholder participation in the evaluation 4

1.3.5 Summary of processed evaluation tools 5

2 KEY CONCEPTS OF “CHILD-FRIENDLY SCHOOLS” 6

2.1 Human Rights-based approach to programming 7

2.2 Operationalisation of CfS key concepts 7

2.3 Child-friendly schools within the context of BiH 8

3 OVERVIEW OF THE CfS PROJECT IN BiH 10

3.1 Key challenges 10

3.2 Current status of the project 10

3.3 Anticipated outcomes 12

4 EVALUATION OF THE CfS PROJECT 13

4.1 Relevance 13

4.1.1 Global references 13

4.1.2 Relevance regarding availability, accessibility, acceptability and

adaptability of education

13

4.1.3 CfS in relation to the UNICEF Medium Term Strategic Plan and its

contribution to education reform

15

4.1.4 Primary stakeholders’ needs 16

4.1.5 Degree of “child-friendliness” of participating schools 17

4.2 Effectiveness at school level 18

4.2.1 Outcomes for pupils 18

4.2.2 Outcomes for teachers 21

4.2.3 Outcomes for communities and parents 22

Child-Friendly Schools Project, Bosnia and Herzegovina: Final Evaluation Report iii

4.3 Efficiency 22

4.3.1 Role and contribution of UNICEF and other stakeholders 23

4.3.2 Project costs versus project scope and project outcomes 24

4.4 Inclusiveness 26

4.4.1 Participation of marginalised and vulnerable groups 26

4.4.2 Responses to cultural and ethnic diversity 27

4.5 Sustainability 27

5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 29

5.1 School and community implementation level 30

5.2 Policy and system level (State, Entity, Canton and Departments) 32

5.3 UNICEF institutional and organisational level 33

5.4 Validation of evaluation findings and recommendations 34

5.5 Cost implications 36

List of persons contacted 37

List of documents consulted 38

Appendices

Appendix 1: Terms of Reference

Appendix 2: Detailed Agenda of the Mission

Appendix 3: Evaluation Tools Manual

Appendix 4: Guidelines for Structured Interviews and Focus Group

Discussions (FGDs)

Appendix 5: Questionnaires (English original)

Appendix 5a: Questionnaires (Bosnian translation)

Appendix 5b: Questionnaires (Cyrillic version for Republika Srpska)

Appendix 5c: Questionnaires (Croat translation)

Appendix 6: Summaries of responses to questionnaires

Appendix 7: Validation Workshop programme, summary of workshop

outcomes and list of participants

Appendix 8: Workshop presentations

Child-Friendly Schools Project, Bosnia and Herzegovina: Final Evaluation Report iv

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Background

(1) The Child-Friendly Schools (CfS) Project in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) was initiated in 2002 as a

three year project. Following an evaluation in the autumn of 2004, the project was continued within the

framework of the 2005-2008 programme cycle. It has two overall objectives, i.e. (i) to introduce and

implement quality child-centred education and child-friendly environments in all primary schools in

BiH from kindergarten to 4th

grade (children age 6-10); and (ii) to create conditions for sustainable

systemic change and ongoing professional development in primary education.

(2) The child-friendly school concept thus aims at promoting child-centred, gender-sensitive, child-seeking

and inclusive, community-involved, protective and healthy approaches to education. These approaches

are meant to increase the effectiveness of teaching and learning, and also the efficiency and

accessibility of education systems. In BiH, the CfS project specifically focussed upon equitable access

to quality basic education for Roma children and children with special educational needs (SEN), and at

creating conditions for sustainable systemic change and ongoing professional development in primary

education.

(3) The objective of this formative evaluation is twofold and comprises (i) an assessment of the potential

modalities and strategies of the project to be replicated and scaled up with a particular focus on three

elements of the CfS framework (inclusiveness, effectiveness and stakeholders' participation with the

view of documenting and disseminating the best practices in order to contribute to the Education Sector

Reform); and (ii) the formulation of recommendations regarding the future of the CfS Project

depending on the outcomes of the first objective above, and related to the question if the project has

sufficient potential to be scaled up, replicated and mainstreamed in the education system within a

reasonable timeframe, at a cost that is affordable to the UNICEF Country Programme in BiH and the

respective MoEs.

Evaluation design and methodology

(4) The evaluation revolves around the evaluation criteria stipulated by the Development Assistance

Committee (DAC) of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), i.e. (i)

relevance, (ii) efficiency, (iii) effectiveness, (iv) impact and (v) sustainability. In addition, the issue of

inclusiveness will be assessed since the response of the CfS project to the diverse needs of all students

in a multi-cultural society is regarded to be a core element of the CfS framework.

(5) Particular attention has been given to (i) assessing the status of the implementation of the project, (ii)

providing detailed analytical information for future planning; (iii) reflecting upon lessons learnt; and

(iv) strengthening existing synergies between different groups of stakeholders in terms of promoting

child-friendly schools.

(6) A sample of 15 schools across BiH was visited by the consulting team. At every school, in-depth

interviews with principals and pedagogues were conducted, together with Focus Group Discussions

with teachers, students (Grades 5-7) and parents. In addition, 4,258 questionnaires were completed by

principals and pedagogues (N=27), teachers (N=467) and students (N=3,764) from the fifteen schools

included in the evaluation. Responses were differentiated between the three groups of the evaluation (N

questionnaires Group I, most advanced=1,541; N questionnaires Group II, intermediate=1,770; N

questionnaires Group III, only initial CfS training=947).

Achievements

(7) By the end of 2007, 97% of lower primary school teachers and 58% of upper primary school teachers

had received basic or advanced child-centred methodology training. This includes 82 trainers for

Child-Friendly Schools Project, Bosnia and Herzegovina: Final Evaluation Report v

School Improvement, advanced child-centred methodology, and for the advanced Reading and Writing

for Critical Thinking (RWCT) programme. Principals and management teams received training in

school improvement planning. Since all primary schools in BiH have implemented at least some of the

CfS principles and approaches, it can be said that the CfS project has made CfS available and

accessible to children nation-wide.

(8) The context of the CfS project is a challenging systemic issue which cannot easily be addressed by the

project alone. The most striking results of the application of child-friendly principles by schools

(inclusive, protective, and effective education in which communities are actively involved) were (i) an

increased (gender) equality in enrolment, in particular the enrolment of children from minority groups

and inclusion of children with special needs in regular classes; (ii) children reporting on positive

learning experiences, more freedom of expression in communication with their teacher and classmates,

and an increased sense of self-esteem; (iii) established local partnerships in education; (iv) girls and

boys having been socialised in a non-violent environment; and (v) increased participation of children in

school and community life.

(9) However, principals, pedagogues, teachers and students have similar opinions across all sample groups,

with no hard evidence of differences in child-friendliness between schools. Differences between

schools can most likely be explained by the people involved, in particular the principal, rather than

being exposed to the CfS concept. It could be worthwhile for UNICEF to explore why some of the

people involved accept the concept more deeply and completely than others instead of focusing on

what has changed and how much.

Key recommendations

(10) Within the concept of the “Whole school approach”, teachers in the schools require ongoing in-service

support through mentoring and peer coaching. In particular, it will be important to reach operational

consensus on how to operationalise key concepts of “child-friendliness”, and how to create the

necessary flexibility between individual work, group work, participatory learning and learning by

teacher instruction. There are quite considerable misconceptions in terms of setting boundaries and

saying “no”, up to the perception that within the framework of a child-friendly school the learner is

“always right”.

(11) The school environment needs to be put in context with the larger societal environment. By supporting

processes of reconciliation and cross-cultural understanding at school and implementation level, the

CfS project can make an invaluable contribution to reinforcing prospects for peaceful co-existence and

social cohesion. The aim is to promote interculturalism among the peoples of BiH and lay a sound base

for the future, which is prerequisite for economic revitalisation.

(12) The CfS project (through UNICEF) should exert a stronger influence when it comes to the selection of

schools for support, and should stronger focus on divided (“two schools under one roof”) and

remote/rural schools. Educational interventions at school level need to be based on data gathered from

independent, external research on the root causes for ethnic segregation and the common elements for

possible future cooperation. Research on the attitudes and value systems of individuals with regard to

cultural identity will be used to define communication strategies at the national and community levels,

including strategies to deepen understanding through ongoing exchange and debates. Behaviour change

communication is a challenging, but critical developmental intervention, particularly in this highly

sensitive area.

(13) The future direction of the CfS project needs to put a stronger focus on providing policy advice, thus

utilising positive experiences (“best practice”) from the field to influence policy-making dialogue, also

in order to contribute to the realisation of systemic impact.

(14) There is a need for providing concrete support to the finalisation of legal regulations regarding

curricular issues and inspectorate services, also utilising experiences form the CfS approach to

contribute to the development of common outcome-based framework curricula and quality standards.

Child-Friendly Schools Project, Bosnia and Herzegovina: Final Evaluation Report vi

(15) At policy and system level, policy development is dependent on sound feedback processes from the

field to the policy-making level, and likewise on a functioning communication strategy from the

policy-making level to the field. Within such a hermeneutic set-up, the CfS project also needs to ensure

that activities delivering positive cross-cultural messages at the local level will incorporate strategies to

address barriers to cross-cultural tolerance.

(16) The development of approaches to address issues of ethnic discrimination, exploitation and segregation

in education at the community level is therefore directly related to the operationalisation of overarching

policies. Likewise, through reporting procedures on the implementation of activities, experiences from

the field level will inform policy makers who in turn receive valuable inputs into the policy debate.

(17) The issue of culturally-based social exclusion will need to be continuously addressed by enhancing the

quality and inclusive nature of education at all levels. UNICEF‟s on-going work with technically

specialised NGOs, such as Civitas and Step by Step, should continue, as will the facilitation of

coordination and dialogue between NGOs and cantonal/entity ministries. Good practice models from

the community level will be documented and vertical communication channels ensured to maximise

upstream benefits.

(18) In order to develop appropriate multicultural educational approaches, external and independent

research needs to be undertaken regarding the existing behavioural attitudes and mindsets of

community members as far as different forms of segregation in education are concerned. Outcomes of

the research can then be utilised for the creation of community-based educational interventions

envisaged to take place both in school and school environments. These interventions will address issues

of ethnic discrimination, exploitation and segregation within primary and secondary schools in the

country.

(19) At UNICEF institutional and organisational level, UNICEF‟s leading position in supporting primary

education in BiH needs to be utilised for increased policy support at Ministerial levels. The pursuance

of policy involvement will thus lead to enhanced efficiency and strengthened sustainability of the

project.

(20) Evaluation findings and recommendations were discussed with key stakeholders during a two-day

validation workshop. Participants agreed that (i) findings and recommendations are in line with

perceived needs for the school/community/implementation level as well as the policy/system/

organisational level; (ii) achievements need to be given a solid, formal base through legislation and

certification; (iii) there is a need to clarify roles and responsibilities, for all levels of the education

system; (iv) there is a need for continuous, professional support through professional networks and

networking between teachers and schools, and professional associations, in order to avoid isolation, to

ensure inclusion, and to consolidate achievements. In addition, participants felt a strong need for a

framework (to be developed) to structure and harmonise future actions, i.e. the contextualization of the

CfS conceptual framework incorporating/reflecting realities and CfS practices in BiH.

Child-Friendly Schools Project, Bosnia and Herzegovina: Final Evaluation Report 1

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

The Child-Friendly Schools (CfS) Project in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) was initiated in 2002 as a

three year project. Following an evaluation in the autumn of 2004 (PROACTIVE Information

Services 2005), the project was continued within the framework of the 2005-2008 programme cycle.

It has two overall objectives:

Objective 1

To introduce and implement quality child-centred education and child-friendly environments in all primary

schools in BiH from kindergarten to 4th grade (children age 6-10).

Objective 2

To create conditions for sustainable systemic change and ongoing professional development in primary

education.

The organisational structure of the project has been developed to ensure maximum participation and

ownership by all stakeholders and to bring about sustainable systemic change. Technical advisors

from the Centre for Educational Initiatives (CEI) Step by Step (SbS) guided the project

implementation process, working closely with project coordinators and implementation teams from

each of the participating cantons in the Federation, regions in the Republika Srpska (RS) and Brcko

District. Project coordinators were nominated by the Ministries of Education (MoEs).

Training centres and practice classrooms were established in each canton, region and district

throughout the country to ensure improved school management and ongoing professional

development. The training centres have been used for the training of coordinators, school directors,

pedagogues, trainers, teachers, special education advisors and parents (if and when appropriate). They

also served as resource centres and libraries.

With the aim to place a special focus on the creation of a quality school model, an initiative called

„School Improvement‟ was introduced as part of the CfS project in 2005. This initiative started in 16

primary schools. School Improvement is an ongoing process, focussing upon providing support to

schools to use the existing resources (knowledge and skills of teachers, pedagogues, school principals

and students) for the development of the school and with full participation of all stakeholders. The

School Improvement Programme consists of several key elements, including the development of a

joint vision, an analysis of the current situation, the creation of the school development plans, and the

process of self-assessment.

The process of sustaining systemic change in school management and teacher training was enhanced

through the development of documents to assist the project implementers, school managers, teachers

and trainers. Using a participatory approach involving stakeholders, documents were developed which

included manuals for teachers (based on the existing curricula for pre-school up to Grade 4), teacher

training modules, guidelines for establishing systemic change, and school/teacher certification and

accreditation standards.

In order to facilitate child-centred teaching and learning approaches, the project included a supply

component which made it possible to provide schools with equipment such as round tables, chairs,

bookshelves, display boards, books and teaching aids.


1.2 Framework of this external evaluation

The main users of the evaluation report will be the concerned governments of BiH (especially MoEs,

Pedagogical Institutes, Agency for pre-primary, primary and secondary education) implementing

partners (Centre for Educational Initiatives, Step by Step), the UNICEF BiH Country Office, and

other stakeholders providing support to the education sector. The findings and recommendations of

the evaluation of the CfS Project will be used to inform planning for the new country programme

cycle (2010-2014) of the UNICEF BiH Country Office.

1.2.1 Purpose and objective of the evaluation

The objective of this formative evaluation is twofold and comprises

(i) an assessment of the potential modalities and strategies of the project to be replicated and scaled up

with a particular focus on three elements of the CfS framework (inclusiveness, effectiveness and

stakeholders' participation with the view of documenting and disseminating the best practices in order

to contribute to the Education Sector Reform); and

(ii) the formulation of recommendations regarding the future of the CfS Project depending on the

outcomes of the first objective above, and related to the question if the project has sufficient potential

to be scaled up, replicated and mainstreamed in the education system within a reasonable timeframe,

at a cost that is affordable to the UNICEF Country Programme in BiH and the respective MoEs.

The evaluation will therefore necessitate an assessment of the sustainability of the project, the degree

of ownership by the BiH Governments, and the actual possibilities existing for the best practices

initiated through the CfS initiative to be mainstreamed in mainstream education policies.

1.2.2 Scope and context of the evaluation

The main objective of the external evaluation is to measure the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency

and sustainability of the project. The project is evaluated in relation to its external environment, in

particular in relation with government plans and with similar approaches or programme interventions

tested by other partners. In view of the current scope and duration of the CfS Project in BiH, the

evaluation also addresses issues of overall impact on individuals (children, teachers, parents) as well

as on institutions and communities.

1.3 Methodology

The evaluation revolves around the evaluation criteria stipulated by the Development Assistance

Committee (DAC) of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), i.e. (i)

relevance, (ii) efficiency, (iii) effectiveness, (iv) impact and (v) sustainability. In addition, the issue of

inclusiveness will be assessed since the response of the CfS project to the diverse needs of all students

in a multi-cultural society is regarded to be a core element of the CfS framework.

Particular attention has been given to (i) assessing the status of the implementation of the project, (ii)

providing detailed analytical information for future planning; (iii) reflecting upon lessons learnt; and

(iv) strengthening existing synergies between different groups of stakeholders in terms of promoting

child-friendly schools.


The approach for this external evaluation has been based on the principles of participation and

cooperation. The evaluation team has liaised with the different key players, such as UNICEF Office,

local consultants, Government officials and CEI/SbS representatives. UNICEF has also contracted a

local research company (EU-TAC) for providing support in terms of logistics and translation, and for

carrying out Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) at field level. Such cooperation with a local consulting

team enabled the international team to benefit from their sensitivity and knowledge towards

contextually appropriate behaviour in carrying out the data collection process, specifically regards to

different cultures, local customs, religious beliefs and practices, personal interaction and gender roles,

disabilities, age and ethnicities.

1.3.1 Preparatory Phase

During the preparation phase, the evaluation team started with studying the available information and

documentation related to the CfS project. Documentary sources included progress reports and interim

evaluation reports, UNICEF planning and programming documents, relevant and related professional

publications and documentation.1 In the second half of the preparatory phase the team prepared a set

of evaluation tools, such as guidelines for structured interviews/focus group discussions and

questionnaires for the different stakeholders.2 These included principals, pedagogues, teachers,

students and parents from three groups of selected schools.

A sample of 15 primary schools was identified by UNICEF BiH. The main criterion was the degree to

which the schools have become “child-friendly”. Given that in BiH all primary schools adopted some

elements of CfS, schools were selected at different levels of “child-friendliness”: five that are most

advanced, five that are at intermediate level and five that had only initial training. Criteria also

included geographic focus, urban and semi-urban/rural schools, and schools where two different

curricula (using the same methodology) are being taught, as represented by the so-called Two Schools

Under One Roof model.

Before the arrival of the international consulting team in BiH, UNICEF distributed questionnaires in

the 15 target schools. The consulting team prepared easy-to-understand instructions for the

completion of the questionnaires by the target groups in the schools.3 Completed questionnaires were

then already available for collection and subsequent data processing when the consulting team arrived

at the schools, thus allowing a deeper concentration on interviews and FGDs during the school visits.

1.3.2 Data Collection Phase

The data collection phase commenced with a one-day “Mini-Workshop” which provided a hands-on

introduction into the evaluation tools and the Evaluation Manual. This introduction was directed at the

local research company EU-TAC with their local consultants, recruited by UNICEF, who supported

the data collection process.

For the data collection, the two international consultants split up into two teams with one local

consultant and one translator each. Local consultants were supported by the evaluation team both

through a process of on-the-job supervision and coaching. While visiting the targeted schools, the

evaluation team collected the previously distributed and completed questionnaires, conduced

interviews and focus group discussions and constantly validated the methodology. Between the first

1 A complete list of documents consulted can be found at the end of this report.

2 All tools can be found in Appendices 2-3c.

3 For the evaluation tools manual, please refer to Appendix 3.


and second round of field visits, the two international consultants processed collected data and

reflected upon the school visits. The data collection phase concluded with a debriefing at UNICEF.

1.3.3 Reporting Phase

Immediately following the field phase, the evaluation team prepared the Draft Evaluation Report and

submitted it to UNICEF for review and commenting. After having received comments, the Second

Draft Evaluation Report (including an executive summary and statistical charts) was prepared for

submission to UNICEF, and was subsequently reviewed by UNICEF BiH Country Office and also

shared with the Regional Office.

A Validation Meeting was held in BiH to present, discuss and validate the Second Draft Evaluation

Report. This meeting was a truly participatory event, taking on the characteristics of a validation

workshop. Immediately following the Validation Meeting, the team prepared the Final Evaluation

Report for submission to UNICEF. This Final Evaluation Report incorporates all outcomes of the

Validation Workshop and the consolidated comments received by the UNICEF team. It will

subsequently be translated, printed and disseminated by UNICEF.

1.3.4 Degree of stakeholder participation in the evaluation

The mission considered it of utmost importance to include stakeholders from all levels in the

implementation, including those responsible for the management of the project. Entities participating

in the evaluation therefore included (i) primary stakeholders such as students, teachers, parents or

school directors; (ii) secondary stakeholders such as representatives from the MoE, and other

development partners/NGOs; and (iii) partners in overall management, i.e. CfS Coordinators and

representatives of the UNICEF BiH Country Office.

Stakeholder participation in the GE evaluation

Stakeholders Degree of participation

Questionnaire Interview Focus-group Liaison with

evaluation team

Part of

evaluation team

Validation of

evaluation

Preparation phase

Learners

Teachers

Principals

Pedagogues

UNICEF Country Office

EU-TAC

Field phase

Learners

Teachers

Parents

Principals

Pedagogues

UNICEF Country Offices

EU-TAC

MoE representatives

Development partners

Validation Workshop

All entities


During the preparation and field phase of the evaluation, the degree of participation varied between (i)

the provision of data by means of questionnaires, (ii) the direct consultation through interviews or

focus-group discussions, (iii) direct liaison with the evaluation team, and (iv) being integral part of the

evaluation team (i.e. taking active part in the team‟s consultations with stakeholders). During and up

to the end of the validation phase, all stakeholders are involved in the validation of the evaluation

through participation in the Validation Workshop. Any entity having participated in the evaluation

who might not be in a position to attend the workshop itself, should receive a copy of the proceedings

of this workshop through the UNICEF BiH Country Office. In the case of learners, teachers and

parents, such information could include the outcomes of the questionnaires which were filled by them,

and could be channelled through the respective principals‟ offices.

1.3.5 Summary of processed evaluation tools

In total, 4,258 questionnaires were completed by principals and pedagogues (N=27), teachers

(N=467) and students (N=3,764) from the fifteen schools included in the evaluation. Responses were

differentiated between the three groups of the evaluation (N questionnaires Group I, most

advanced=1,541; N questionnaires Group II, intermediate=1,770; N questionnaires Group III, only

initial CfS training=947).

Number of administered questionnaires

Target Group QST Group I Group II Group III TOTAL

Principals and Pedagogues 1 9 9 9 27

Teachers 2 156 175 136 467

Students, Grade 2, male 3 GR2

153 230 113 496

Students, Grade 2, female 149 218 112 479


304 294 151 749



251 304 165 720


TOTAL 1.541 1.770 947 4.258

The administration and analysis of questionnaires needs also to be seen within the framework of the

overall evaluation which placed responses in direct relation to information gathered through

interviews, Focus Group Discussions and class visits. This approach ensured the contextualisation of

responses, and likewise reduced the risk of over-interpretation of questionnaires. In total, 38 Focus

Group Discussions were conducted with students, teachers and parents of all three groups of schools.4

In addition, the Evaluation team consulted with representatives of MoE and CEI/SbS.5

4 For further details, please refer to Appendix 6.

5 Please refer to the list of persons contacted at the end of this report.


2 KEY CONCEPTS OF CHILD-FRIENDLY SCHOOLS

According to the Child-Friendly School Framework (CHABBOTT 2004), five quality issues are being

matched with four child-friendly issues in order to assess the extent to which schools meet the

characteristics (criteria) of the UNICEF concept of a child-friendly school.

Following the inception of CfS programming in the 1990s, the approach to the implementation of a

CfS strategy has been different from country to country. There is currently a broad implementation

base with more than 50 countries actively involved, and with a solid base of evaluations gathered in

2004-06 from the most “mature” programming.

Central to UNICEF‟s philosophy, education has always been regarded as every child‟s right.

Accordingly, child-friendly schools reflect a quality environment and act holistically in the interest of

the whole child, which includes his or her health, nutrition and overall well-being. Similarly, child-

friendly schools are concerned with the child‟s contextual situation outside school, and thus reach out

to families and communities.

Child-friendly schools need to be seen within the larger framework of the EFA Dakar Goals and the

Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) “Achieve Universal Primary Education” (MDG 2),

“Promote Gender Equality and Empower Women “ (MDG 3), and “Develop a Global Partnership for

Development” (MDG 8). Also, there is a clear implicit linkage to the Convention of the Rights of the

Child (CRC) – not only as far as the “education articles” Articles 28 and 29 are concerned, but also

regarding Articles 12-14 in terms of promoting the child‟s right to freedom of expression.

Based on the EFA Dakar Goals (except for adult literacy), child-friendly schools fall within the

strategic planning of the UNICEF MTSP Focus Area 2 (Basic Education and Gender Equity) which

formulates as its strategic intent that “parents, communities and Governments acquire the capacity and

support necessary to fully implement their obligation to ensure the right of all children to free,

compulsory quality education“. child-friendly schools also support core values and purposes of

UNICEF, such as the incorporation of a human rights perspective into education, the promotion of

children‟s rights in all situations (here particularly the context of school and school-based learning),

the support of capacities of parents including the promotion of families as the fundamental group of

society.

The conceptual framework of child-friendly schools defines a school as “child-friendly” if it is

rights-based,

child-seeking and inclusive,

gender-sensitive,

participatory, and

quality-based.

Child-friendly schools can be described as child-centred learning environments which see and

understand the whole child in a broad context, thus making education relevant due to the

consideration of the reality of children‟s lives. Child-friendly schools reflect a quality environment

which is both effective for learning and protective of children, and likewise involved with families

and communities.


2.1 Human Rights-based approach to programming

The goal of the current BiH country programme is to support the Government in meeting its

obligations under the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and the Convention on the

Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). It is specifically aimed at

ensuring inclusion of all children, young people and women in the provision of basic education, health

and child protection services with their increased and genuine participation. Together with

government and NGO counterparts, United Nations agencies and donors, the UNICEF country

programme seeks to ensure that (i) policy makers and community representatives will provide

leadership in developing national policies that contribute to the realisation of the rights of children,

young people and women; (ii) service providers and caregivers will adopt behaviours that facilitate

access to education, health and child protection services for the most vulnerable; and (iii) policy

makers and community representatives will encourage and facilitate the meaningful participation of

children and young people in their communities, including in addressing the risk of landmines.

2.2 Operationalisation of CfS key concepts

Due to the close linkage of quality issues to child-friendly issues, child friendly schools therefore

operationalise the need to realise quality learning in a non-threatening learning environment. Such

environment leads to learning activities which can be enjoyed by the children who also have a say in

the process of their own learning. Children are seen as partners in a learning context which includes

teachers, parents and communities who actively collaborate in order to ensure the realisation of their

rights. These rights include the right to education, health, play and leisure, and the right to be

protected from any form of violence. Child-friendly schools ensure the free expression of children‟s

views, and encourage children to participate in decision making processes according to their own

growing capacities. Overall, a child friendly school promotes quality learning and puts a strong value

on children participating in all activities affecting both their school and their immediate community.

This conceptual framework is further illustrated in the matrix below (cf also CHABBOTT 2004):

Conceptual framework of Child-Friendly Schools Child-friendly

issues

Quality issues

Inclusive / gender-

sensitive

Protective

(healthy and safe) Effective

Involved with the

community

Learners

(Gender) equality in

enrolment and

achievement

Safe from drugs,

corporal punishment

and harassment

Active, cooperative

and democratic

atmosphere

Children participate

in school and

community life

Content

Gender-appropriate

curricula, no gender

or other stereotypes

Life skills-based

education

Structured content in

child-friendly

presentation

Family-focussed and

based on community

needs

Teaching/learning

processes

Respects diversity

and ensures equality

of learning

Promotes physical

and psycho-social

emotional health

Quality materials and

resources

Encouraging local

partnership in

education

Environments

Socialises girls and

boys in a non-violent

environment

Children protected

from outside abuse

and harm

Commitment of

teachers towards

children‟s rights

Working with other

actors to ensure

children‟s rights

Outcomes

Respect for others‟

rights, dignity and

equality

Positive learning

experience, sense of

self-esteem

Quality learning

outcomes based on

children‟s needs

Harmonious

relationships between

children, parents,

teachers


2.3 Child-friendly schools within the context of BiH

BiH faces similar challenges in basic education as most countries in Central and Eastern Europe and

the Commonwealth of Independent States (CEE/CIS), notably in the following areas:

Equity in access to quality basic education, particularly regarding Roma children and children

with special educational needs (SEN);

Equity in learning outcomes of education;

Governance, management and financing of education systems.

Child-Friendly Schools require child-friendly systems and policies, practices and regulations. A key

issue that has a direct impact on child-friendliness relates to the promotion of cross-cultural

understanding and tolerance in BiH. However, the segregation of children in schools based on their

ethnic and religious origin, also known as the “Two Schools under One Roof” phenomenon, still

prevails in 50 schools in BiH. Such practice illustrates the ethnic segregation that affects all schools in

the country, and is a serious concern. Segregation is also in sharp contrast to existing human rights

treaties which have been signed and ratified by the country, in particular the Convention on the Rights

of the Child (CRC). The current system of segregation has an inherent risk of fuelling divisions,

intolerance and potential future conflicts. However, the education system needs to contribute to the

building of a peaceful, democratic, fair and just society, an objective to which the CfS Project aims to

make a substantial contribution.

The Education Reform Agenda (2002) and the subsequent Education Reform Strategy (2008-2015)

reflect the commitments that the Ministers of Education of BiH have publicly agreed. Both documents

set the goals that need to be achieved to reform the education sector as well as the strategies needed to

realise these goals. The documents‟ overriding objective is to depoliticise education while creating the

conditions that will ensure equal access to high quality, modern education throughout BiH. Apart

from this overriding objective, the 2002 document contains five pledges which are still very much in

line with the core principles of the Education Reform Strategy.

Three pledges are particularly relevant for the Child-Friendly Schools Project, as shown in the matrix

below:

BiH Education Reform Agenda related to CfS principles and anticipated outcomes

Education Reform Agenda of BiH CfS Principles and Anticipated Outcomes

Pledge 1: Ensure that all children have access to

quality education, in integrated multicultural

schools, that is free from political, religious,

cultural and other bias and discrimination, and

which respects the rights of all children

Child-friendly Schools are rights-based,

proactively inclusive and gender responsive

Child-friendly Schools promote a healthy

environment and are safe and protective of

children

Pledge 2: Provide basic education of good

quality at the pre-school, primary and general

secondary levels, with a modern curriculum and

a modern system of assessment and certification

for students and teachers. Ensure that students

are taught by well-trained teachers, in properly

equipped and efficiently managed schools

Child-friendly Schools promote quality learning

outcomes relevant to children’s need for

knowledge and skills

The infusion of CfS dimensions throughout

Grades 1-9 will enrich the teaching and learning

process and enable a higher level of curricular

cohesion and integration



Education Reform Agenda of BiH CfS Principles and Anticipated Outcomes

New pedagogical approaches will vivify learning

and teaching

Teachers will acquire new skills and confidence,

and a new sense of professionalism and purpose

Students will make significant gains in

knowledge, understanding and skills

Students are likely to develop more pro-social

attitudes

Students will be more motivated within the

enhanced learning environment

Pledge 5: Ensure the transparent, equitable, cost-

effective and financially sustainable investment

of public resources, and implement education

legislation at all levels that is based on European

standards and norms, and grounded in

international human rights conventions.

Child-friendly Schools are actively engaged with

students, families and communities

School-level and Ministry-level educational

administrators will acquire new understanding

and skills in the development, monitoring and

evaluation of children-centred learning/teaching

approaches (thus contributing to enhanced

utilisation of public resources)

Best practices initiated through CfS will be

mainstreamed in education policies and

education reform goals


3 OVERVIEW OF THE CfS PROJECT IN BiH

3.1 Key challenges

A major challenge for the social and economic development of BiH is the complexity of its political

and administrative structure inherited from the Dayton Peace Agreement (DPA) which comprises a

total of five levels (State, Entities , Cantons, Towns, Municipalities). With 14 Ministers of Education6,

the education system is extremely fragmented, highly politicised and ethnicised. Within the systemic

context of BiH administration, State level Ministry and Federal Ministry only play a predominantly

coordinating role and do not exert direct control on policy interpretation and implementation at the

level of cantons, towns and municipalities. In addition, BiH faces similar challenges in basic

education as most countries in Central and Eastern Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent

States (CEE/CIS), notably in the following areas:

Equity in access to quality basic education, particularly regarding Roma children and children

with special educational needs (SEN);



3.2 Current status of the project

Currently, some CfS principles and approaches (mainly active learning and child-centred teaching

methodologies) are being implemented in all primary schools of BiH, although not in all classrooms.

In order to strengthen CfS principles in practice, the CfS project supports training in three areas, i.e.

Training of classroom and subject teachers;

Creating a professional network, mentor system for classroom-based support, set-up of local

training centres;

Setting up school improvement teams.

When the project started in 2002, it initially included 74 primary schools from six Cantons and one

entity. From November 2001 until December 2004 a total of 1,100 teachers were trained in child-

centred methodology, 480 of whom received advanced training, while 110 were trained to become

trainers or mentors. A total of fourteen training centres for teachers has been established. After the

local trainings were initiated, run by the certified teacher trainers and organised by the Ministries of

Education, the total number of participating schools was increased by 20% (from 60% in 2004 to 80%

in 2007).

In 2005, a new initiative called School Improvement was piloted in 16 primary schools, aiming at

supporting schools to use their existing resources for the development of the school and with full

participation of all stakeholders. In 2007, the initiative was extended to 32 new schools. At the end of

2007, nine different teacher training programmes7 for 1,050 primary school teachers were delivered.

6 10 Cantonal, 1 Federal, 1 Republika Srpska Entity, 1 Brcko District, 1 Ministry of Civil Affairs.

7 The nine training programmes include: (1) Child-centred methodology, basic; (2) Child-centred

methodology, advanced; (3) Child-centred methodology, Training of Trainers; (4) Child-centred learning

material development; (5) How to create a child-centred classroom environment; (6) Methods for the

development of critical thinking through reading and writing; (7) School improvement methods; (8) How to

evaluate teachers‟ training programmes; (9) Training on quality school standards.


As a result, 96.5% of lower primary school teachers and 58% of upper primary school teachers in BiH

passed basic or advanced child-centred methodology training, including Training of Trainers (ToT)

training of 82 trainers.

The project addresses a wide range of stakeholders and addresses attitudes of key decision makers in

the educational and societal overall system, including

Government authorities at all levels;

civil society and the media;

school managers;

school teachers, principals and pedagogues (counsellors);

children, particularly girls and children with special needs, in and out of school;

parents.

UNICEF has been an important stakeholder in terms of the development of models for the promotion

of social inclusion. Practice has shown that lessons learnt from experience in the field and community

level need to be fed back to the policy making level in order to ensure future sustainability. UNICEF

achieved significant results at the policy as well as at school level, and seems to be considered as a

credible partner in the education sector at both levels. This is an important consideration for the future

development of activities by UNICEF:

The development of standards and regulatory frameworks for basic education and Early

Childhood Development (ECD) resulted in the recent adoption by the government of a

Framework Law on Pre-Primary Education;

The development of life skills standards for students and teachers focusing on the prevention

of risky behaviours were successfully integrated into the curriculum of secondary and even

primary schools in Republika Srpska;

The implementation of CfS approaches at school level led to most of the 600-700 schools in

the country actively applying some CfS principles, which open up paths for cross-cultural

dialogue particularly in non-formal (out of school) settings.

A strong field presence and stakeholder empowerment, combined with involvement in political

lobbying and advocacy against segregation in schools, have been strategies in the past for both

UNICEF and the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).

However, these efforts have not been successful to end segregation in schools. UNICEF is currently

preparing a new initiative based on the development of a communication and advocacy strategy, also

within the framework of the Culture and Development project. Undoubtedly, the issue of segregation

is highly complex and requires a combination of various approaches (possibly also by various

stakeholders).


3.3 Anticipated outcomes

According to the TORs for this evaluation, the CfS Project anticipates seven major outcomes:

Anticipated outcomes of the CfS Project

1. The infusion of CfS dimensions throughout grades 1-9 will enrich the teaching and learning process

and enable a higher level of curricular cohesion and integration.

2. The new pedagogical approaches will vivify learning and teaching. There will be a move away from

predominant use of didactic methods employed in schools.

3. Students will make significant gains in knowledge, understanding, and skills; they are likely to evince

more pro-social attitudes; they will be more highly motivated within the enhanced learning

environment that will follow from learning/teaching style diversity and the teacher assuming a more

facilitative role.

4. Teachers will acquire new skills and confidence; a new sense of professionalism and purpose.

5. School-level and Ministry-level educational administrators and other supporting institutions will

acquire new understandings and skills in the development, monitoring, and evaluation of children-

cantered learning/teaching approaches. There will also be important lessons learned in terms of

approaches to teacher development and training, and in terms of the employment of new student

assessment strategies.

6. Teacher training courses based upon delivering the lower and upper primary school curriculum using

interactive learning approaches will have been tried and tested.

7. Best practices initiated through CfS will be mainstreamed in the education policies and education

reform goals.


4 EVALUATION OF THE CfS PROJECT

The child-friendly school concept aims at promoting child-centred, gender-sensitive, child-seeking

and inclusive, community-involved, protective and healthy approaches to education. These

approaches are meant to increase the effectiveness of teaching and learning, and also the efficiency

and accessibility of education systems. In BiH, the CfS project specifically focussed upon equitable

access to quality basic education for Roma children and children with special educational needs

(SEN), and at creating conditions for sustainable systemic change and ongoing professional

development in primary education.

4.1 Relevance

The CfS project needs to be assessed within global references in the field of education; the larger

context of national and international priorities/policies; specific UNICEF strategies and policy

concerns; and primary stakeholders‟ needs.

4.1.1 Global references

The CfS project shows clear linkages to the EFA Dakar Goals and the Millennium Development

Goals (MDGs) “Achieve Universal Primary Education” (MDG 2) and “Develop a Global Partnership

for Development” (MDG 8). Also, there is a clear implicit linkage to the Convention of the Rights of

the Child (CRC) – not only as far as the “education articles” Articles 28 and 29 are concerned, but

also regarding Articles 12-14 in terms of promoting the child‟s right to freedom of expression.

Regarding MDG 3 (“Promote Gender Equality and Empower Women”), child-friendly schools stress

inclusiveness and equal opportunities also in terms of gender equity.

4.1.2 Relevance regarding availability, accessibility, acceptability and adaptability of education

QST 1 PRI-PED:

Comparison of Consent Value Averages across

Questionnaire Items between Principals and Pedagogues

By the end of 2007, 97% of lower primary school

teachers and 58% of upper primary school

teachers had received basic or advanced child-

centred methodology training. This includes 82

trainers for School Improvement, advanced child-

centred methodology, and for the advanced

Reading and Writing for Critical Thinking

(RWCT) programme. Principals and management

teams received training in school improvement

planning. Since all primary schools in BiH have

implemented at least some of the CfS principles

and approaches, it can be said that the CfS project

has made CfS available and accessible to children

nation-wide.

In general, principals and pedagogues have

similar opinions as could be observed in the

analysis of the questionnaire items (see chart on

the left). Items related to training received

support the importance of such training, and also

confirm the relevance of parental and community

involvement in school.


Item 1: I am familiar with the aims and objectives of the Child Friendly Schools Project / SbS Initiative

Item 2: Apart from subject teaching, it is very important to teach practical life skills

Item 3: I regularly interact with my colleagues in order to teach better

Item 4: It is important for teachers to use a portfolio to document my journey of professional growth

Item 14: I wish there would be more advanced training on CfS since I would like to learn more

Item 16: Because of the training received, I (the teachers) do much less of the talking, and the pupils talk more

Item 23: It is important for me to have a lot of contact with the parents/communities of my pupils

The improvement of education envisaged by the CfS project does address key stakeholders needs.

Principals stressed that through parental and community involvement in school, enrolment of children

from minority or marginalized groups increased. They also stressed the importance of the

development of social and communication skills, and building self-confidence for the development of

society. Parents (mothers) talked with, highly valued the CfS concept because of the sense of well-

being of their children, increased sensitivity of teachers for their child‟s individual needs, and the

specific attention to social skill development, creativity and play. This was particularly the case for

mothers of children with special needs (although they mentioned that it only worked because they

were able to spent the full day with their child in the classroom.)

The school visits, interviews and focus group discussions (FGD) further revealed that full

comprehension of the concept, a willingness to invest time, and cooperation between stakeholders

contributed to successful implementation of the CfS concept. Schools with a clear and shared vision

on how to create a child-friendly school, and schools/principals that managed to generate motivation

and cooperation among stakeholders, had achieved more child-friendly characteristics than schools

without such vision and leadership. Teachers who invested additional time in (joint) lesson

preparation, designing learning materials, and the integration of subjects were most positive about the

effectiveness of their teaching i.e., the effectiveness of CfS methodologies. Schools cooperating with

higher levels of the education system (municipality, Pedagogical Institute, MoE) were most confident

about sustaining the application of CfS principles and methods.


Whereas it is relatively easy to make stakeholders aware of the value of having (access to) child-

friendly schools, ensuring acceptability and adaptability requires a deeper understanding of the

underlying principles and assumptions of (all facets of) the CfS concept. In this respect, the project

has only been partly successful since only few principals and management teams fully appreciated the

CfS concept. In these cases, the concept had been translated in a clear vision on whole school

improvement and, consequently, CfS elements and approaches were applied effectively at the

classroom, school and community level. In these schools, principals and staff created a more healthy

and safe environment through community involvement and cooperation, for instance, through

community participation in repairing school buildings, toilets and playground fences, in campaigns

for road safety, or in better organising garbage collection and storage. In one school, safety of children

increased after the Ministry of Interior installed traffic lights, in another, the community secured the

open sewage system, an idea brought up by the students.

Also, these principals used the Annual Work Plan as a tool for school improvement planning by

including strategies on how to avoid youth delinquency or on how to develop professional capacity of

their teaching staff. To enable handicapped students to continue upper primary education, classes

were re-organised with teachers adjusting their classroom schedule to the need of the student. In

schools where a clear vision and management support were lacking, CfS principles remained mainly

theoretical (being able to state the “why”) and were not translated in practical strategies on how to

make it work. This indicates a need for (further) training of (school) managers in how to plan, manage

and sustain education reform.

At the classroom level, a key factor negatively affecting the implementation of CfS principles,

particularly for upper primary education (subject teaching), is the current curriculum. All (subject)

teachers mentioned that the (new) curriculum is textbook-centred, overloaded and focused on

cognitive development. This would explain the reluctance of classroom teachers in adopting CfS

methodologies. These are designed to develop social and higher order learning skills and are less

effective for transfer of factual knowledge. In addition, requirements of the MoE to frequently test and

record student subject knowledge hampers the implementation of CfS assessment instruments such as

self- and peer-assessment (see also Chapter 4.2.1). The inconsistency of the current curriculum with

child-centred approaches also explains why the CfS project has not been successful in achieving “a

higher level of curricular cohesion and integration.” Integration of subjects requires a curriculum

framework organised around developmental objectives whereas the current curriculum is organised

around subjects with a focus on subject-matter content.

4.1.3 CfS in relation to the UNICEF Medium Term Strategic Plan and its contribution to

education reform

Based on the EFA Dakar Goals (except for adult literacy), the CfS project falls within the strategic

planning of the UNICEF MTSP Focus Area 2 (Basic Education and Gender Equity) which formulates

as its strategic intent that “parents, communities and Governments acquire the capacity and support

necessary to fully implement their obligation to ensure the right of all children to free, compulsory

quality education“. The CfS project covers primarily seven interventions to be supported under the

UNICEF MTSP Key Result Area 3, “Equality and Quality Models: Educational quality improved and

school retention, completion and achievement rates increased” (cf UNICEF 2005:63-70):

(i) to improve the learning environment in schools through support for development of models to

make schools violent-free;

(ii) to enhance pedagogical quality in schools through teaching/learning processes that help ease

transition from home to school;


(iii) [to promote] interactive learning for knowledge, skills, attitudes, values and behaviour change

(e.g., rights, peace, democracy, management of “risk behaviour”);

(iv) to build capacity of teachers and their support networks;

(v) to build capacity of [learners and]8 parents to participate in school governance;

(vi) to promote modern technological skills and use of appropriate technologies/teaching methods;

(vii) to provide high-quality, relevant teaching-learning materials and other learning resources.

The CfS project also supports core values and purposes of UNICEF, such as the incorporation of a

human rights perspective into education, the promotion of children‟s rights in all situations (here

particularly the context of school and school-based learning), the support of capacities of parents

including the promotion of families as the fundamental group of society.9

4.1.4 Primary stakeholders’ needs

At an immediate, practical level, the CfS project has addressed primary stakeholders needs by (i)

contributing to children‟s‟ well-being and holistic development; (ii) bringing teachers‟ and principals‟

knowledge at par with the latest thinking about learning and education; (iii) upgrading teaching and

education management skills at school level; and (iv) by creating space for participation of parents

and communities in education. To sustain the results achieved so far, addressing stakeholders‟

practical needs has to continue although adjusted to emerging stakeholders needs. Teachers may

benefit more from school-based coaching and support than from continuation of teacher training

workshops. The existing network of mentors (principals and pedagogues) could become such school-

based support system. School principals and management teams may need further improvement of

their school-based management skills, skills in school improvement planning and monitoring. They

may also benefit from capacity building in how to overcome more emotional, illogical, subconscious

and psychological (human) factors that hamper improvement and change.

In addition, attention needs to be given to stakeholders‟ strategic needs, including, the alignment of

the current curriculum set-up and approach with CfS teaching requirements; and adjustment of the

pre-service teacher training to CfS approaches (in particular the inclusion of micro-teaching, i.e. the

development of teaching skills through application, feedback and reflexion on the effectiveness of

teaching behaviour).

Addressing strategic interests goes beyond the scope of the CfS project since it requires cooperation

and support of higher levels of the education system. However, the CfS project provides ample

opportunities to advocate and support stakeholders‟ strategic needs. First, evidence on how to ensure

(i) equal access to quality education, (ii) based on a modern curriculum and assessment system and

provided by well-trained teachers, (iii) in properly equipped and efficiently managed schools, through

(iv) a transparent, equitable, cost-effective and financially sustainable investment of public resources

(Pledges 1, 2, and 5, Paragraph 2.3), can be made available to decision-makers so that lessons learned

may feed into the current policy-making process aiming at a reform of the education sector. Second,

CfS experiences could be beneficial for curriculum developers when aligning the current curriculum

set-up and approach with new teaching requirements following the Education Reform policy. In a

similar way, the CfS project may be of value for the adjustment of pre-service teacher training (in

particular the inclusion of micro-teaching i.e., the development of teaching skills through application,

feedback and reflection on the effectiveness of teaching behaviour), as well as for the development of

new teaching standards.

8 Within the GE context, the focus is more on the capacity building of parents. This already is a rather

ambitious goal which, however, lies within the scope of the GE project. 9 cf also UNICEF 2005:13-14.


4.1.5 Degree of “child-friendliness” of participating schools

As already stated, a school can be regarded as “child-friendly” if it is rights-based, child-seeking and

inclusive, gender-sensitive, participatory, and quality-based. Classroom observations and

questionnaire analyses showed that students seem to be adequately satisfied with their school

environment, and that males and female students are treated in an equitable way. Teachers are

generally viewed as the authority in the classroom who is concentrating power around him/her, which

however does not really reflect a high degree of child-centredness. This has also been reflected in

children‟s drawings which largely recognise the teacher, the blackboard or even desks (instead of

pupils!) as central focus of the classroom.


It is interesting to note that the teacher rates highest (and pupils lowest) in Group I which has been

regarded as having the “most advanced” level of child-friendliness; this was certainly unexpected, and

might point to a paradox situation whereby the teacher – in attempting to give all the attention to the

children – actually attracts the most attention him-/herself. This could also be observed during class

observations in “child-centred” classes, where the teacher certainly played an unnecessarily and

overtly dominant role, and which should be continuously reflected by means of in-service coaching

and training.

4.2 Effectiveness at school level

In order to assess the effectiveness of the CfS project at school level, the evaluation team held focus

group discussions with key stakeholders (students, teachers, parents) at selected schools; observed

classes in schools of all three groups; and analysed the questionnaires presented in detail in Appendix

5-5c.

The purpose of the CfS project at the school level was (i) to enrich the teaching and learning process;

(ii) to enable a higher level of curricular cohesion and integration; (iii) to revive learning and

teaching; (iv) to make significant gains in knowledge, understanding and skills; (v) to evince more

pro-social attitudes and enhance motivation. School principals were expected to acquire new

understanding and skills in the development, monitoring, and evaluation of child-centred teaching-

learning approaches.

A clear indication of the effect of CfS activities is the decrease of the use of abusive language and

behaviour of pupils, an increase in the interest and motivation of students, greater parental

involvement in school, and a greater awareness of the importance of involvement of parents in school

by teachers. However, only few school principals were able to create an “effective, protective and

inclusive school in which families and communities are actively involved.” This may be explained by

the fact that the training provided under the CfS project focused predominantly on (i) creating

understanding of the CfS concept; (ii) building CfS teaching capacity, and (iii) on skill development

in using reading and writing to foster critical thinking. Only few principals referred to a school action

plan, only one school mentioned the establishment of a school improvement team, and no reference

was made to the quality school standards or their use for school improvement planning. It was also

understood that the use of school networking as a means for professional development did not

materialise. Conducting follow-up sessions, trainings or workshops stopped due to a lack of funding.

The lack of human resources, i.e. classroom assistants, speech therapists, child-psychologists

combined with little or no training in special needs education has a negative impact on effectively

including children with special needs in regular classes.

4.2.1 Outcomes for pupils

Almost all classroom teachers stated that Grade 1-3 pupils are more relaxed, enjoy the CfS approach

(learning through play), and improved their self-confidence and social behaviour (honesty, less

conflicts). Classroom observations in the lower Grades showed the application of CfS methods among

which whole group activities and small group work, teachers demonstrating the ability to engage

pupils actively in the teaching-learning process.

Focus group discussions with children from the Grades 5-7 (subject teaching) showed a different

picture, indicating that the majority of teachers in upper primary education (Grades 7 to 9) do not

apply CfS principles. These statements were confirmed by classroom observations. Most students

talked with considered their education to be boring, the teacher talking too much with no room for


discussion or exchange of opinions, and often no time to further explain or deepen a topic. Key

problems mentioned by many pupils were unpredictable and inconsistent teacher behaviour, too many

tests, marks given subjectively and as punishment, and verbal abuse.

It is interesting to note that perceptions of pupils from Grades 5-7 are coherent across grades, sample

groups (I-III) and even gender, apart form two deviations regarding “girls learning better than boys”

(with girls affirming and boys denying). This however makes it difficult to identify a specific impact

of the CfS project, or, in other words, the current perception of schooling by pupils in BiH seems to

be largely unaffected by the activities of the CfS project. This is further illustrated when comparing

the consent value averages across questionnaire items, sample groups and the whole sample, as shown

in the charts below:

Grade 5, male respondents:

Consent values for the three respective

groups

The coloured lines are basically

identical with the white line, showing the

average response values of the male

respondents. There are no statistically

significant differences across the three

sample groups, as is reflected in the

similar patterns.

The same applies to the charts for

Grade 5 (female), Grade 7 (male) and

Grade 7 (female), below from left to

right.

Students, like their teachers, struggle with the transition from lower primary (where CfS methods are

being applied to a more or lesser degree) to upper primary where CfS methods conflict, according to

many teachers, with curricular (Ministry) requirements. The responses to items 24 (teachers) and 21


(students) confirm that teachers and students alike view progressing to even higher grades with a

certain degree of apprehension, especially as far as the transition between Grades 5 and 7 is

concerned.

Item 24, Teachers: "I am worried what will happen when my pupils are progressing to higher grades which

are not supported by the child-friendly schools approach"

Item 21, Students: “I think when I go on to higher classes, the teaching and learning will get tougher since

teachers will teach differently”

There is generally high consensus across all sample groups (1=overall average, 2=Group I, 3=Group II,

4=Group III), particularly regarding Students in Grade 5.

Although one can say that there is a mismatch between curriculum set-up and CfS approach, the

problems referred to by students (and teachers) seem to be related to a misapprehension of “child-

friendliness”. Students (and teachers) need further assistance in learning how to communicate in a

“non-violent” way, without blaming or accusing. This means that if something is said or done in a

given situation, teachers and children need to learn to give the facts without judgement, point out the

feeling they get because of this action and why, and then clearly say what they need.

Ultimately, the success of the CfS project is measured at the level of the students, their gains in

cognitive, personal, social, moral, and artistic development. According to people talked with,

students‟ social and communication skills, self-awareness and self-confidence improved when

compared with the behaviour of children educated under the previous traditional education system.

There is less agreement about the extent to which the CfS project contributed to gains in knowledge.

The purpose and use of assessment instruments promoted by the CfS project were not understood by

most of the teachers or parents. With one exception, teachers did not report on the use of individual

student assessment for student self-reflexion and self-improvement and thus, for enhancing

responsibility for their own learning. Parents acknowledged the positive impact of positive, child-

friendly feed-back for children in the lower primary school age-group. For upper primary however,

they felt that testing and marks were more informative and easy to understand.


The confidence in the testing and grading system for assessing cognitive development, by both

teachers and parents, is a reason for concern. Testing is not done objectively, there are no minimum

standards or standardised tests. Marks, therefore, do not provide a fair idea of what knowledge a

student acquired or comprehends. Furthermore, since CfS methods aim at the holistic development of

each child, its assessment instruments are designed to track progress in different developmental areas.

If this is not appreciated by the MoEs, teachers will remain reluctant in using the portfolio system,

peer- or self-evaluation, nor will they become effective in applying these assessment instruments to

improve learning.

4.2.2 Outcomes for teachers

Questionnaire QST-2, Teachers

As with the students, outcomes for teachers have

been assessed on the basis of class observations,

focus group discussions and questionnaires.

To create CfS, lower and upper primary school

teachers were trained in child-centred

methodology and in Reading and Writing for

Critical Thinking (RWCT). All teachers talked

with, recognised the central role of the student in

the teaching and learning process, all stressed the

importance of a more open relationship between

teacher and student(s), as well as giving children

the self-confidence to express their ideas and

opinions. Training has contributed to build

understanding of the importance of child-centred

teaching-learning approaches. However, as

already observed during the questionnaire

analysis regarding the outcomes for pupils

(4.2.1), perceptions of teachers are similarly

coherent across sample groups (I-III) with even

less deviations. Specific impacts from CfS

training do not become evident, at least not

regarding the teachers‟ mindsets and behavioural

attitudes.

Only few of the teachers observed, demonstrated an effective use of CfS methods such a group work.

It was understood that not all training was equally practical and that there has been little or no

opportunity to try out new methods and apply new skills in a controlled but real classroom set-up.

Also, teachers expressed a need for immediate feedback on the quality (soundness) of the application

of CfS teaching practices in their classroom. Such school-based support through classroom

observation and feedback was, however, provided by very few school principals and/or pedagogues.

This indicates that there is no mentor system or functioning professional network (2-3 network

schools linked to a model or pilot school) yet although principals, pedagogues and teachers all

mentioned the importance of the availability of such system, not only for (continuous) professional

development of teachers but also for sustaining achievements of pilot schools, and as a means to

exchange experiences between school directors.

Practical problems with the application of CfS principles mentioned by teachers include extensive

time required for lesson preparation, lack of materials and equipment, and the costs of development of

learning materials. Fundamental problems mentioned by many (subject) teachers is a decrease in


respect for teachers, lack of student discipline, and students claiming to be right all the time. This

observation was shared by principals, parents and recognised by students and may be explained by a

misapprehension of CfS principles the most important one being that “child-friendly” equals “having

to except everything the child does or says as good”. It is an issue that needs to be addressed urgently.

Teachers need to become skilled at acting in a child-friendly way in particularly in situations where

children explore boundaries and challenge restrictions.

Teachers primarily regarded it as a weakness that, in the CfS training provided so far, they primarily

had to practice “on each other” (colleagues pretending to be children) instead of in a real classroom

setting. The gap between some kind of „laboratory‟ training and the real classroom situation is

probably the main cause for gaps on the side of the teachers regarding the application of CfS methods,

together of course with the systemic constraints which however cannot be immediately addressed.

4.2.3 Outcomes for communities and parents

Generally, parents are well introduced to all modern trends in the process of teaching and learning, at

times even with schools running specific workshops for this purpose. Consequently, the expectations

of parents towards the teachers are raised but not always fulfilled, since the system does not

necessarily allow all changes introduced during the CfS approach. Parents got increasingly aware

regarding the importance of the „modern‟ way of educating, particularly in terms of team work and

team building; group work, humanity as a specific value, and open communication with all employees

at the school.

Parents appreciate creativity and the way creativity is encouraged by the CfS approach, including

innovations both by teachers and children. The CfS methodology is generally well accepted by

children and therefore by their parents, although parents are thinking that the curriculum is too large

with too many activities for children. Parents increasingly criticise the educational system which

would “push children to join the school at a too early age”. Also, the seating arrangement in groups is

at times understood in a too dogmatic way by teachers, with children not being able to see the

blackboard in a lecturing situation which of course still needs to remain part and parcel of a

diversified methodological and didactical approach.

Parents in their clear majority appreciate the fact that their children are happier with the school and

that they like to go to school if CfS principles are being applied. Teachers are generally regarded as

authorities, although there appears to be a tendency among parents to approach them in a more open

way even in problem situations. This is probably also related to the fact that parents observed that

children are “more free to express theirs opinion and in communication with teacher and their

classmates”.

Although many schools have established a parent council,10

parents (as community representatives)

do not yet fully utilise such fora for voicing their concerns in terms of teaching and management

issues. This should be explored further in future.

4.3 Efficiency

In assessing efficiency, it will be important to ascertain how the costs of the CfS project compare to

international benchmarks for similar projects, and how the most value can be generated from

UNICEF‟s initial investment.

10

At one school, the school board comprised parents, teachers and community members.


4.3.1 Role and contribution of UNICEF and other stakeholders

In comparison to investments of other stakeholders, UNICEF‟s contributions for the CfS project are

rather small when compared to international benchmarks for investments in the education sector. That

is also why UNICEF‟s role will have to focus on the utilisation of outcomes of the CfS project for

future policy making processes, in terms of institutionalising worthwhile elements of their

interventions. Among other factors, such integration and institutionalisation of CfS components needs

to take into account different conditions across the political entities of BiH. Within such a context, it

will be important to liaise with other important stakeholders in the field in order to create synergetic

effects which are also at the core of UNICEF‟s corporate strategy. The following matrix analyses the

stakeholders who are crucial for enhancing efficiency of the CfS project.

The following definitions are used in this analysis:

Stakeholders

Individuals or institutions that may affect or may be affected by the outcomes of the action.

Beneficiaries

Those who benefit from the action

a) target groups: groups/identity directly affected by the main action at the project purpose level

b) final beneficiaries: those who benefit from the project at the long term at the level of society/sector at large

Project partners

Those who implement the action in the country

Indirect project partners:

Indirect project partners will neither be implementing, nor cooperating, direct or indirect, since they themselves

are employed by the project partners in order to deliver specific services as per their respective job

descriptions. In that role, however, they will be important agents of the project partners, and need to be

considered strongly for the successful implementation of the proposed intervention. This particularly refers to

the need for building up their specific capacities of service delivery.

Stakeholder Analysis – Key players for the creation of synergetic effects with the CfS Project

Stakeholders Main focus Stake-

holder

Beneficiary

Project

partner

Target

group at

purpose

level

Final

beneficiary

Ultimate target group (PURPOSE LEVEL)

Learners of BiH

Learners of BiH are affected directly by an increase

in quality in education, and by being able to benefit

from a healthy, safe and child-friendly learning

environment

yes yes yes

Government Agencies and NGOs

Ministry of Civil

Affairs and Federal

Ministry of

Education

Predominantly a coordinating role; little or no power

when it comes to enforcing legislation yes partly yes

Cantonal Ministries

of Education (10),

Republika Srpska

MoE and Brcko

District Education

Department

Have power to make and implement laws yes yes yes


Stakeholder Analysis – Key players for the creation of synergetic effects with the CfS Project

Stakeholders Main focus Stake-

holder

Beneficiary

Project

partner

Target

group at

purpose

level

Final

beneficiary

Pedagogical

Institutes

“Technical wing” of the MoEs, charged with the core

business of the MoEs, including curricular issues and

inspectorate services

yes yes

Pre-service teacher

training institutes Training of teachers yes

poten-

tially

CEI, Step by Step

Interactive methodologies for elementary school

teachers: Child-centred methodology (CCM) for

lower elementary grades; Reading and Writing for

Critical Thinking (RWCT) for upper elementary

grades; School Improvement [SI] for school

management and teachers.

yes yes

4.3.2 Project costs versus project scope and project outcomes

The following table is based on information provided by the BiH Country Office and shows the rough

unit cost calculation per school, based on the expenses UNICEF had to pay during the past years. This

is direct cost, and other elements such as communication, indirect cost, etc. are not included.

Summary of unit cost calculation

Type of cost Unit Cost (USD)

(1) School improvement training per school 2,000

(2) Social Justice Training per school 600

(3) RWCT training per school 2,000

(4) Child centred methodology (CCM) training per school 1,500

(5) Classroom furniture per classroom 1,500

(6) Development, adjustment and printing of didactical materials

(including pro rata expert fees) per school 22,400

TOTAL 30,000

Based on the history and current status of the project, as also documented in the TORs for this

assignment, the CfS project during the period 2002-2007 directly supported a total of 122 primary

schools (total 600 main schools in BiH) and provided training to a total of 2,150 primary school

teachers, out of which 480 teachers received advanced training, and 192 qualified as mentors and/or

trainers of trainers (ToTs). In 2008, no further investments were made, also pending the outcome of

this evaluation.


Summary of provided support and project outcomes

Year Summary Primary

Schools Teachers

Advanced

training.

Mentors/

ToTs

2002 Start-up of CfS Project 74

2003

2004 2001-04: Training in CfS methodology 1,100 480 110

2005 School Improvement, Pilot 16

2006

2007 School Improvement, Extension 32 1,050 82

Delivery of 9 teacher training programmes

TOTALS 122 2,150 480 192

Given a total investment of USD 3.66 million (122 times the rough unit cost calculation per school as

outlined above) over 6 years, the total investment could be broken down as follows:

Summary of total investment

Type of cost Cost (USD)

(1) School improvement training 244,000

(2) Social Justice Training 73,200

(3) RWCT 244,000

(4) Child centred methodology 183,000

Sub-total: Training activities 744,200

(5) Classroom furniture 183,000

(6) Development, adjustment and printing of didactical materials (incl. pro rata expert

fees)

2,732,800

TOTAL 3,660,000

UNICEF thus invested 530,000 USD per year (direct costs), with 647,000 USD spent in total on

training activities for a total of 2,822 training beneficiaries. This results in an average unit cost per

trainee of approximately 230 USD (probably around 150 USD for basic training only). This is well in

line with international benchmarks and experience values for similar interventions.


It needs to be borne in mind that the cost for “Development, adjustment and printing of didactical

materials” covered substantial material development costs (including the translation in three

languages) which do not have to e repeated at this scale for subsequent project phases (see also

budget proposal for the next phase, Section 5.4).

4.4 Inclusiveness

Within the context of BiH, inclusiveness revolves around (i) marginalised and vulnerable groups

(including learners with special educational needs), and also – maybe even more importantly – around

(ii) a strategy to overcome the current ethnical divide in schools. Due to the long-term aspects of such

objective, involving changing of attitudes and mindsets, and also due to the political sensitivities, such

strategies cannot be achieved through the more traditional approaches of advocacy alone.

Inclusiveness has been achieved mainly in terms of gender, minority background and children with

special needs. In terms of cross-cultural education, the CfS project has not been able to achieve

respect for diversity, for others‟ rights, dignity and equality, or for ensuring equality of learning

(existence of different curricula). This was to be expected, since integration is a distressing and long

process. Lessons learned from creating inclusive education could help in further developing a strategy

to address issues of segregation.

4.4.1 Participation of marginalised and vulnerable groups

Within the context of educational policy development and implementation, appropriate topics for

educational interventions towards social inclusion have been addressed by the CfS project. These

need to be strengthened further within the larger framework of community involvement, cultural

education and education settings, both formal and non-formal. Key issues include the following:

Topics for educational interventions within the CfS framework towards social inclusion Educational topic Relevance towards culturally-based social inclusion

Child centredness

Acknowledging the importance of the physical and emotional well-being

of the child as part of a multicultural society which allows for

intercultural dialogue

Critical thinking

Strengthening the capabilities of expanding existing mindsets and

behavioural attitudes in order to negotiate socio-psychological borders

within a multicultural context

School improvement Creating opportunities for multicultural encounter through improving

learning spaces and playgrounds, also in the school surroundings

Cultural education and

development

Infusing concepts of a variety of cultures and cultural expressions (i.e.

through the arts) into the educational set-up in order to initiate

intercultural dialogue

Anti-bias training

Reflecting existing perceptions and mindsets in order to create new

definitions and concepts, also integrating the reflexion on perceptions of

others

Children with special educational

needs (SEN)

Overcoming social exclusion of disadvantaged children, also with a view

to cultural constraints and disadvantages based on cultural values

Social justice Understanding the concept of justice in relation to cultural contexts,

specifically in terms of determinants for justice through a cultural lens


4.4.2 Responses to cultural and ethnic diversity

Following the Dayton Peace Agreement, the tripartite principle of equal representation and sharing of

power among the three main ethnic groups was established at the macro level. While the DPA

managed to stop the war, it did not bring reconciliation to the country. At the contrary, the tripartite

principle was institutionalised and has “trickled down” and dominates various spheres of the society

such as in the educational and cultural sector, with the current education system reinforcing the

separate identity. This contributes to further ethnicisation and segregation. As the UNICEF research

on divided schools has shown, children do not learn much about other ethnic groups in BiH apart

from their own but would like to learn more.

It must not be forgotten that the three main ethnic groups of BiH all are rooted in Slav culture, they

basically speak the same language and they share important eras in the Balkan history such as the time

of the medieval kings and the period of the communist government. In reality, the major cultural

difference in BiH comes down to religion. Thus, there is strong need for any development project to

promote the commonalities of peoples of BiH and counteract this tendency of reducing culture to

ethic/religious specificity.

UNICEF has been an important stakeholder in terms of the development of models for the promotion

of culturally-based social inclusion. Experiences from the CfS project in this regard need to be fed

back to the policy making level in order to ensure future sustainability of already achieved progress.

UNICEF achieved significant results at the policy as well as at school level, and seems to be

considered as a credible partner in the education sector at both levels. This is an important

consideration for the future development of activities by UNICEF also in cultural education:

However, the deliverance of positive cross-cultural messages at the local level has often been

negatively affected by deep-rooted mindsets and behavioural attitudes following the prolonged period

of war in BiH. Based on such mindsets which are strongly characterised by feelings of grief and

sorrow, particularly for those who lost relatives and friends during the war, it will be crucial to focus

on commonalities beyond cultural divisions (as can be found especially in contemporary arts and

culture, and also sports activities which should all be utilised in school curricula and/or school

activities for overcoming such divisions). UNICEF should thus strengthen its focus on providing

opportunities for multicultural encounter at schools (ranging from pre-primary and primary to

secondary schools) and surrounding environments such as playgrounds or youth clubs. This is clearly

justified on the basis of the Government‟s Education Reform Agenda (2002), the new Education

Strategy (2008-2015) and the ongoing preparation of BiH‟s National Development Plan and Social

Inclusion Strategy (2008-2012) which invites opportunities to advocate on key issues such as

overcoming current segregating structures.

4.5 Sustainability

The overall sustainability of the CfS project is determined by three main factors: (i) the methodology

of its initial design in terms of addressing key issues which might impact on its overall sustainability,

(ii) the specific context of the project within larger educational reforms and Ministerial capacities, and

(iii) the capacities (and powers) of the CfS coordinators. All these factors constitute the context within

which the intervention is placed and have direct bearing on the degree of future sustainability, even

before the actual implementation phase has started.

The context of the project within larger educational reforms and Ministerial capacities is of specific

importance since it relates to the question of political will (and ability) on the side of the BiH


educational ministerial authorities. This certainly is a challenging systemic issue which can not easily

be addressed by the project alone. However, sustainability for the CfS project can be ensured through

the utilisation of community level experience for informing the policy debate at policy level. If the

project succeeds in informing policy debate to such a degree that key “child-friendly” elements also

regarding ethnic discrimination, exploitation and segregation are taken on board, “behaviour change”

elements can be mainstreamed into the government system. Such mainstreaming primarily refers to

curriculum development and the integration of teacher training programmes focussing on issues of

social inclusion. Much will depend on achieving sound local ownership regarding the outcomes of the

CfS project, a task which greatly depends on the liaising capacities of the CfS coordinators who need

to bridge the gap between field and policy-making level.

The CfS project has certainly added value to the education reform efforts in BiH, although key

elements still need to be mainstreamed in the education system of the country. It will be crucial to

engage in direct exchange with teacher training institutions in order to create synergetic effects

already at pre-service training level. This particularly will need to refer to common quality standards

and the development process regarding a common outcome-based framework curriculum across BiH.

UNICEF will always remain an important partner in the country to ensure future sustainability of the

CfS-related programmes even if there would be further need for advocacy. Such need can be related

to addressing a major risk in case of a possible persistent resistance to overcoming segregation in

schools.


5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The most striking results of the application of child-friendly principles by schools (inclusive,

protective, and effective education in which communities are actively involved) were

an increased (gender) equality in enrolment, in particular the enrolment of children from

minority groups and inclusion of children with special needs in regular classes;

children reporting on positive learning experiences, more freedom of expression in

communication with their teacher and classmates, and an increased sense of self-esteem;

established local partnerships in education;

girls and boys having been socialised in a non-violent environment; and

increased participation of children in school and community life.

Findings and recommendations have been discussed during a validation workshop11

in which

representatives from evaluation sample schools, Ministries and Pedagogical Institutes, implementing

partners, and UNICEF participated.

First, results of the school environment becoming more child-friendly were presented from the

perspective of the teachers and other stakeholders to illustrate that project achievements can be

experienced as problematic:

Project achievements change working conditions presence of children from minority

groups and with special educational needs; developmental instead of cognitive objectives; and

integration of subjects/curriculum;

Project achievements create new issues to deal with children are more outspoken which is

felt as a loss of respect; active learning requires different teaching methodologies; lessons

need to be planned together, and teaching/learning materials need to be developed.

Evaluation findings were then related to the CfS conceptual framework (see Section 2.2). It was made

clear that (i) achievements are found predominantly at the level of the learners, the school and

parents/community, contributing to the first objective of the CfS project; and (ii) gaps are found in

creating conditions for sustainable, systemic change and ongoing professional development, the

second CfS project objective.

In working groups, participants explored (i) the dissonance between existing conditions and new

requirements; (ii) if current CfS insight, mindset, abilities, and skills are sufficient for seeing solutions

on how to deal with emerging issues and problems; (iii) if “higher” level requirements (frequent

testing of cognitive knowledge; subject oriented curriculum) still match the changing, “lower” level

realities; (iv) if barriers to change are accurately recognised and adequately managed; and (v) if

achievements are properly consolidated and supported.

CfS project achievements and gaps in terms of CfS characteristics (CHABBOTT 2004) are reflected

upon in the tables below. An outline of a framework for future actions is given in Section 5.4, as was

recommended by the validation workshop. However, it needs to be stressed again that the context of

the CfS project is a challenging systemic issue which cannot be easily addressed by the project alone

(see also Section 4.5).

11

Please refer to Appendix 7 for the Validation Workshop programme, a summary of workshop

outcomes and the list of participants.


5.1 School and Community/Implementation level

Overview of CfS Project achievements and gaps, and recommended actions

School and Community/Implementation level

Specific objectives of the

CfS Project Achievements Gaps Recommendations

Inclusive, gender-

sensitive education

Increased (gender)

equality in enrolment, in

particular for children

from minority groups and

children with special

needs

Girls and boys socialising

in a non-violent

environment

Respect diversity and

ensure equality of

learning (classroom level)

Build deeper

understanding of child-

friendliness and the

concept of a child-

friendly school

Protective (healthy and

safe)

Positive learning

experiences

A sense of self-esteem

Safe from drugs, corporal

punishment and

harassment

Life skills-based

education

Promotion of physical

and psycho-social

emotional health

Children protected from

outside abuse and harm

Deepen school principals

and management teams‟

understanding of the

underlying principles and

assumptions of the CfS

concept, particularly

outside the classroom

situation

Promote the „whole

school“ approach

The school environment

needs to be put in context

with the larger societal

environment

Effective (quality of

teaching and learning)

Increase in structured

content in child-friendly

presentation (classroom-

level)

Availability of quality

materials and resources

(classroom-level)

Coherently active,

cooperative and

democratic atmosphere

(school-level)

Commitment of teachers

towards children‟s rights

Quality learning

outcomes based on

children‟s needs

Further develop school

networking for

professional development

of teachers and for

building a school-based

coaching and support

system

Involved with the

community

Children participate in

school and community

life

Increased local

partnership in education

Working with other

actors to ensure

children‟s rights

Established relationships

between children, parents,

teachers also outside the

school context

Segregation in (school)

communities effectively

addressed

Deepen communities‟




concept


Key recommendations:

(1) Within the concept of the “Whole School Approach”, teachers in the schools require

ongoing in-service support through mentoring and peer coaching.

(2) Consensus on how to operationalise key concepts of “child-friendliness” need to be found,

and flexibility between individual work, group work, participatory learning and learning by

teacher instruction, created. Misconceptions in terms of how to deal with setting boundaries

and saying “no”, up to the perception that within the framework of a child-friendly school the

learner is “always right” need to be addressed.

(3) The school environment needs to be put in context with the larger societal environment. By

supporting processes of reconciliation and cross-cultural understanding at school and

implementation level, the CfS project can make an invaluable contribution to reinforcing

prospects for peaceful co-existence and social cohesion. The aim is to promote

interculturalism among the peoples of BiH and lay a sound base for the future, which is

prerequisite for economic revitalisation.

(4) The CfS project (through UNICEF) should exert a stronger influence when it comes to the

selection of schools for support, and should stronger focus on divided (two schools under

one roof) and remote/rural schools.

(5) Educational interventions at school level need to be based on data gathered from

independent, external research on the root causes for ethnic segregation and the common

elements for possible future cooperation.

(6) Define communication strategies at the national and community levels based on research on

the attitudes and value systems of individuals with regard to cultural identity. Deepen

understanding through ongoing exchange and debates. Behaviour change communication is a

challenging, but critical developmental intervention, particularly in this highly sensitive area.

(7) In order to develop appropriate multicultural educational approaches, external and

independent research needs to be undertaken regarding the existing behavioural attitudes

and mindsets of community members as far as different forms of segregation in education

are concerned. Outcomes of the research can then be utilised for the creation of community-

based educational interventions envisaged to take place both in school and school

environments. These interventions will address issues of ethnic discrimination, exploitation

and segregation within primary and secondary schools in the country.


5.2 Policy and system level (State, Entity, Canton and Departments)

Overview of CfS Project achievements and gaps, and recommended actions

Policy/system level

Specific objectives of the

CfS Project Achievements Gaps Recommendations

To create conditions for

sustainable systemic

change

Gender-appropriate

curricula, no gender or

other stereotypes

Respect for others‟ rights,

dignity and equality

Life skills-based

education

Promotes physical and

psycho-social emotional

health

Children protected from

outside abuse and harm

Deepen the understanding

of Ministry staff, staff

from pedagogical and

from teacher training

institutes of the



concept

Support capacity building

in the management,

planning, monitoring,

quality assurance, and

development of education

system in BiH

To create conditions for

ongoing professional

development in primary

education

Content is family-

focussed and based on

community needs

Quality learning

outcomes based on

children‟s needs

Build deeper




concept at State, entity,

Canton and Department

levels

Key recommendations:

(8) Put a stronger focus on providing policy advice, thus utilising positive experiences (“best

practice”) from the field to influence policy-making dialogue, contribute to the development

of a common education policy based on CfS principles, in order to contribute to the

realisation of systemic impact.

(9) Use experiences from the CfS approach to contribute to the development of common

outcome-based curriculum framework.

(10) Concrete support needs to be provided to the finalisation of legal regulations regarding

curricular issues and inspectorate services, and to harmonise existing legislation with

reform documents.

(11) At policy and system level, policy development is dependent on sound feedback processes

from the field to the policy-making level, and likewise on a functioning communication

strategy from the policy-making level to the field. Within such a hermeneutic set-up, the CfS

project also needs to ensure that activities delivering positive cross-cultural messages at the

local level will incorporate strategies to address barriers to cross-cultural tolerance.


(12) The development of approaches to address issues of ethnic discrimination, exploitation and

segregation in education at the community level is therefore directly related to the

operationalisation of overarching policies. Likewise, through reporting procedures on the

implementation of activities, experiences from the field level will inform policy makers who in

turn receive valuable inputs into the policy debate.

(13) The issue of culturally-based social exclusion will need to be continuously addressed by

enhancing the quality and inclusive nature of education at all levels. UNICEF’s on-going

work with technically specialised NGOs, such as Civitas and Step by Step, should continue, as

will the facilitation of coordination and dialogue between NGOs and cantonal/entity

ministries. Good practice models from the community level will be documented and vertical

communication channels ensured to maximise upstream benefits.

5.3 UNICEF institutional and organisational level

Key recommendation:

(14) At UNICEF institutional and organisational level, UNICEF’s leading position in supporting

primary education in BiH needs to be utilised for increased policy support at Ministerial

levels. The pursuance of policy involvement will thus lead to enhanced efficiency and

strengthened sustainability of the project, as shown in the diagramme below.

Policy and System Level

Infusing core outcomes of CfS project into

policy debate

Integrating CfS-related (child-centred)

methodology into pre-service training at teacher

training institutes

Presenting experiences based on CfS best

practice in terms of educational quality

UNICEF Institutional/Organisational Level

Pursuing involvement at policy level

Constantly informing the policy-making

process based on practical applications and

experiences

School and Implementation Level

Creating larger multiplier effects through

establishing base at institutes for teacher training

Pursuing on-the-job coaching for teachers

(through mentors and/or experienced teachers)

Enhancing efficiency of the project

Strengthening sustainability of the project

Community Level

Building and sustaining partnerships with

communities and with higher levels of the

education system

Conducting research on existing behavioural

attitudes and mindsets of community members

regarding different forms of segregation in

education


5.4 Validation of evaluation findings and recommendations

During the two-day validation workshop, participants agreed that:

Findings and recommendations are in line with perceived needs for the school/community/

implementation level as well as the policy/system/organisational level;

Achievements need to be given a solid, formal base through legislation and certification;

There is a need to clarify roles and responsibilities, for all levels of the education system;

To avoid isolation, to ensure inclusion, and for consolidation of achievements there is a need

for continuous, professional support through professional networks and networking between

teachers and schools, and professional associations.

Participants felt a strong need for a framework (to be developed) to structure and harmonise future

actions, i.e. the contextualisation of the CfS conceptual framework incorporating/reflecting realities

and CfS practices in BiH. The matrix below relates evaluation recommendations to workshop

outcomes:

Specific CfS

project objective

Recommendations,

Implementation level Actions to be taken

Responsible/

Involved

Inclusive,

gender-

sensitive

education

When selecting schools for support,

place a stronger focus on divided (two

schools under one roof) and

remote/rural schools

Explore why some of the principals/teams

involved accept the CfS concept more deeply

and completely than others

UNICEF,

implementing

partners

Protective

(healthy and

safe)

Consensus on how to operationalise

key concepts of “child-friendliness”

need to be found

Define minimum CfS quality standards for

schools (buildings, equipment, materials, etc.)

and for school management

Further training of school managers in how to

plan, manage and sustain education reform

(school improvement planning)

Bring in social pedagogues (social workers) into

the training

Train teachers in how to communicate with

children in a non-threatening way to secure

children‟s emotional well-being

UNICEF,

implementing

partners

Effective

(quality of

teaching and

learning)

Within the concept of the “Whole

school approach”, teachers in the

schools require ongoing in-service

support through mentoring and peer

coaching

Consensus on how to operationalise

key concepts of “child-friendliness”

need to be found

Define teaching standards and competencies of

teachers, mentors, and other education

professionals in line with CfS principles/

standards and clarify their roles and

responsibilities

Define and operationalise “effectiveness” and

“quality” of teaching and learning and

incorporate these definitions into CfS guidelines,

training material and brochures

Set minimum CfS quality standards for

education institutions (including schools) as well

as school management

Within minimum CfS standards, create space for

teachers and schools to voluntarily join the CfS

project and have them explore what approaches

work for them

UNICEF,

implementing

partners


Specific CfS

project objective

Recommendations,

Implementation level Actions to be taken

Responsible/

Involved Continue training of mentors in non-threatening

ways of communicating with teachers; in

classroom observations and in providing

feedback

Conduct further training of teachers in how to

use CfS assessment instruments to effectively

support individualised learning

Involved with

the

community

The school environment needs to be

put in context with the larger societal

environment

Community-based educational

interventions need to be based on data

gathered from independent, external

research on the root causes for ethnic

segregation and the common elements

for possible future cooperation

Develop approaches to address issues

of ethnic discrimination, exploitation

and segregation in education at the

community level

Conduct external and independent

research regarding the existing

behaviour, attitudes and value systems

with regard to cultural identity of

community members (behaviour

change communication)

Explore to what extent parents/communities

understand CfS terms and concepts and clarify

them if necessary

Develop strategies on how to communicate CfS

principles and approaches to the different target

groups within the community

Organise exchange of and debates on CfS

experiences for school principals

Provide further training of school managers in

how to build and sustain partnerships (with

communities and with higher levels of the

education system)

UNICEF,

implementing

partners

Specific CfS

project objective

Recommendations,

Policy and System level Actions to be taken

Responsible/

Involved

To create

conditions for

sustainable

systemic

change

Put a stronger focus on providing

policy advice, thus utilising positive

experiences (“best practice”) from the

field to influence policy-making

dialogue

Concrete support needs to be

provided to the finalisation of legal

regulations regarding curricular issues

and inspectorate services, and to

harmonise existing legislation with

reform documents

Ensure sound feedback processes

from the field to the policy-making

level, as well as from the policy-

making level to the field

Develop appropriate approaches to

multicultural education

Continue support to enhance the

quality and inclusive nature of

education at all levels

Define quality standards for schools and set

minimum requirements (including minimum

learning outcomes) based on/derived from CfS

principles and approaches

Support the development of clearly defined

functions, responsibilities and roles of

Ministries, Pedagogical Institutes and other

stakeholder/stakeholder institutes;

Support the incorporation of CfS principles into

guidelines for the Inspectorate

Exchange CfS findings and recommendations

on how schools achieved inclusive, protective,

effective education in which communities were

involved with Ministries and other educational

authorities

Undertake external and independent research

regarding the existing behavioural attitudes and

mindsets of community members as far as

different forms of segregation in education are

concerned

UNICEF/

Ministries of

Education/

Pedagogical

Institutes, etc


Specific CfS

project objective

Recommendations,

Policy and System level Actions to be taken

Responsible/

Involved

To create

conditions

for ongoing

professional

development

in primary

education

Use experiences from the CfS

approach to contribute to the

development of common outcome-

based curriculum framework

Use experiences from the CfS

approach to contribute to the

development of common teacher

competencies

Based on clearly defined responsibilities and

functions between Ministries and Pedagogical

Institutes, exchange CfS quality standards with

relevant stakeholders;

Organise exchange workshops on CfS findings

and recommendations with teacher trainers,

curriculum developers and inspectors on:

Harmonisation of the existing curriculum

with CfS approaches to teaching and

learning;

Curriculum content and methods of

working;

The “why” of curricular cohesion and

integration;

The “why” of CfS approaches to

assessment and testing.

Create professional networks between schools/

teachers; establish professional associations

UNICEF/

Ministries of

Education/

Pedagogical

Institutes, etc.

5.5 Cost implications

For the forthcoming three years (January 2009 until December 2011) UNICEF can expect

approximately USD 1.9 million from the Spanish MDG Achievement Fund (MDG-F) under the

“Culture and Development” window. A tentative activities and costing table for this component has

already been prepared for UNICEF in January 2008. In addition, UNICEF can probably expect USD

1.0 million from the Dubai Cares campaign and an additional USD 0.5 million from the 2007

Thematic Funding allocation requested by the Regional Office for BiH. In total, the expected funding

for three years would thus amount to a maximum of USD 3.4 million, including indirect costs.

The following table shows a proposed breakdown of funds according to thematic areas and funding

sources, in line with the recommendations presented in this report: While the expected funding

regarding the MDG-F has been allocated in full, only USD 1.0 million have been allocated for the

combined funding from the Dubai Cares campaign and the UNICEF Thematic Funding window, in

order to allow for possible budget reductions.

Summary of total investment

Activity / Thematic Area Funding

sources Cost (USD)

(1) Improvement of Policy and Legal Framework MDG-F 800,000

(2) Capacity building (MoEs/Government agencies/Teacher Trg. Institutions) MDG-F 150,000

(3) Improvement of cross-cultural understanding at community level MDG-F 950,000

(4) Training activities at school level (incl. in-service coaching) Dubai Cares

campaign/

Thematic

Funding

window

500,000

(5) School improvement training 200,000

(6) Supplies to child-friendly schools 100,000

(7) Adjustment and printing of didactical materials 200,000

TOTAL 2,900,000


LIST OF PERSONS CONTACTED

HADŽAGIĆ, Esma, Assistant to the Minister: Education Sector, Ministry of Civil Affairs, Sarajevo.

JAKIROVIĆ, Prof. Sabit, Inspector, Ministry of Education, Science, Culture and Sports,

Hercegovačko-neretvanski Kanton, Mostar.

JUSOVIĆ, Radmila Rangelov, Executive Director, Centre for Education Initiatives, Sarajevo.

KABIL, Sanja, Education Project Officer, Participation for Good Governance Programme, UNICEF,

Sarajevo.

KUNUGI, June, Representative, UNICEF, Sarajevo.

Principals, pedagogues, teachers, students and parents of the following schools (in alphabetical

order):

Dositej Obradovic, Banja Luka

Dzemaludin Causevic, Sarajevo

Fra Ilije Starcevica, Tolisa

Gornji Rahic, Brčko

Huso Hodzic, Tesanj

Il Osnovna, Mostar

Ilovaca, Gorazde

Ivan Goran Kovacic, Mrkonjic Grad

Kiseljak, Kiseljak

Mak Dizdar, Zenica

Marin Drzic, Buna

Pazar, Tuzla

Petar Petrovic Njegos, Banja Luka

Rudera Boskovica, Donja Mahala

Suljo Cilic, Jablanica


LIST OF DOCUMENTS CONSULTED

CENTRE for Educational Initiatives Step by Step (2005): Education for Democracy. April 2005.

CENTRE for Educational Initiatives Step by Step (2007): Child-Friendly Schools Project

Implementation Report. November 2007.

CHABBOTT, C. (2004): UNICEF‟s Child-Friendly Schools Framework. A desk review. New York:

UNICEF.

CHILD Friendly Schools as Foundations of Democracy. Second Progress Report to the Government

of Andorra and Andorra National Committee for UNICEF (2006).

CHILD Friendly Schools as Foundations of Democracy. Third Progress Report to the Government of

Andorra and Andorra National Committee for UNICEF (2007).

CHILD Friendly Schools as Foundations for Democracy. Final Report to the Government of Andorra

and Andorra National Committee for UNICEF (2008). Sarajevo, March 2008.

CONVENTION on the Rights of the Child, Adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations

on 20 November 1989.

FUNCTIONAL Review of the Education Sector in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Final Report. The

European Union‟s CARDS Programme for Bosnia and Herzegovina. March 2005.

HUJIĆ, Faruk (2007): Report: Primary and Secondary Education in BiH Budget Quality Analysis.

LAW on Ministries and Other Bodies of Administration of Bosnia and Herzegovina. “Official

Gazette” of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 5/03.

OPEN Society Fund BH; CENTRE for Policy Studies (CEPOS) (2007): Education in Bosnia and

Herzegovina: What do we teach our children? Surveying attitudes of students and parents

about values in curricula and textbooks in primary and secondary schools in BiH. Sarajevo:

May 2007.

OSCE Mission to BiH Education Department (2007): Lessons from Education Reform in Brčko.

October 2007.

PFAFFE, Joachim Friedrich (1998): Contextual Pedagogy. The Didactics of Pedagogical

Emancipation within the Context of Disempowered and Marginalized Societies.

Frankfurt/Oder: Viademica Verlag.

PROACTIVE Information Services Inc. (2005): Evaluation of the Child-Friendly Schools Project.

Final Report. Prepared for UNICEF, March 2005.

READING and Writing For Critical Thinking (2005): http://cmw.ct-net.net/rwct_ABOUT.

REVISED Standard Joint Programme Document (2008): Improving Cultural Understanding in Bosnia

and Herzegovina. Programme Duration: 3 years, May 2008 – May 2011.


SCHOOLS as Foundations of Democracy. First Progress Report to the Government of Andorra and

Andorra National Committee for UNICEF (2005).

SMULDERS, Ans (2004): Child Friendly School Initiative Project, Kosovo. Evaluation Report.

November 2004. Bettembourg: PROMAN S.A.

SOROS, George (2000): Open Society: Reforming Global Capitalism. New York: Public Affairs

Publishing.

TESTOT-FERRY, Philippe (2007): Programme Support Visit in Bosnia & Herzegovina. Education

Component. Sarajevo, December 3rd

– 7th, 2007.

UNICEF (2004): UNICEF Evaluation Report Standards. September 2004. Evaluation Office.

UNICEF (2005): The UNICEF medium-term strategic plan, 2006-2009. Investing in children: the

UNICEF contribution to poverty reduction and the Millennium Summit Agenda.

E/ICEF/2005/11, 11 July 2005.

UNICEF Bosnia and Herzegovina (2007): Child Friendly Schools”. Submitted by Centre for

Educational Initiatives Step by Step, March 2007.

UNICEF Bosnia and Herzegovina (2007a): An Analysis of Teachers‟ Needs with Respect to In-

Service Teacher Training and An Analysis of the Budget for Quality in Primary and

Secondary Education. UNICEF Bosnia and Herzegovina 2006-2007. Sarajevo, December

2007.

UNIVERSITY of Jyväskylä; GOPA Consultants (2008): Institutional and Capacity Building of

Bosnia and Herzegovina Education System. Final Documents. Book 1-3.

APPENDIX 1:

Terms of Reference

1

PROJECT EVALUATION

Terms of Reference for Institutional Consultancy Services

TITLE

External Evaluation of the “Child-Friendly Schools” Project (2002-2007)

in Bosnia and Herzegovina

(CEE/CIS Region)

BACKGROUND

The Child-Friendly Schools Project in Bosnia and Herzegovina was initiated in 2002 as a three year

project with the overall objectives:

To introduce and implement quality child-centred education and child-friendly environments

in all primary schools in BiH from kindergarten to 4th grade (children age 6-10)

To create conditions for sustainable systemic change and ongoing professional development

in primary education

The organizational structure of the project has been developed to ensure maximum participation and

ownership by all stakeholders and to bring about sustainable systemic change. Technical advisors from the

Centre for Educational Initiatives Step by Step (CEI) guided the project implementation process, working

closely with project coordinators and implementation teams from each of the participating cantons in the

Federation, regions in the Republika Srpska and Brcko District. Project coordinators were nominated by

the Ministries of Education.

Training centres and practice classrooms were established in each canton, region and district throughout

the country to ensure improved school management and ongoing professional development. The training

centres are used for training the coordinators, school directors, pedagogists, trainers, teachers, special

education advisors and parents (if and when appropriate) as well as serving as resource centres and

libraries.

With the aim to place a special focus on the creation of a quality school model, an initiative called „School

Improvement‟ was introduced as part of the CFS in 2005. This initiative started in 16 primary schools.

School Improvement is an ongoing process consisting of several key elements such as: development of the

joint vision and the joint mission, analysis of the current situation and creation of the school development

plans, the process of self-assessment etc. The goal of this training programme was to support schools to

use the existing resources (knowledge and skills of teachers, pedagogues, school principals and students)

for the development of the school and with full participation of all stakeholders.

The process of sustaining systemic change in school management and teacher training was enhanced

through the development of documents to assist the project implementers, school managers, teachers and

trainers. Using a participatory approach involving stakeholders, documents such as teachers manuals,

based on the existing kindergarten through fourth grade curricula, teacher training modules, guidelines for

establishing systemic change and school and teacher certification and accreditation standards were

developed.

2

The project also had supply component and provided schools with equipment such as round tables, chairs,

bookshelves, display boards, books and teaching aids to facilitate child-centred teaching and learning

approaches.

Overview of Child-Friendly Schools

The child-friendly school concept, introduced in the mid to late 1990s, is based on the principles of child

rights as expressed in the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The framework promotes child-seeking,

child-centred, gender-sensitive, inclusive, community-involved, protective and healthy approaches to

schooling and out-of-school education. These approaches are intended to increase the learning

effectiveness, efficiency and reach of education systems and to enable all children to realize their right to

learn. They also help expand the focus of attention beyond formal schooling per se into the broader

environments and spaces where learning of all sorts takes place. This is in line with the holistic, child-

centred approach that stresses connections between home, school and the larger environment. The child-

friendly framework - in its various dimensions – has been applied in many settings around the world, in

both formal and non-formal education, early child development, and educational responses to

emergencies. In all such settings, the CFS/learning space is promoted as the locus for fulfilling many of

the rights of the child and – as such – calls for intersectoral partnerships and stakeholder participation in

educational processes and outcomes that aim at the holistic development of the child within a supportive

and protective environment.

Child friendly schools are:

1. Rights-based and proactively inclusive

2. Gender-responsive

3. Promoting quality learning outcomes relevant to children‟s need for knowledge and skills

4. Healthy, safe and protective of children

5. Actively engaged with students, families and communities

Moreover, they require:

6. Child friendly systems and policies, practices and regulations

C Child Overview of the Project

The CFS project started in 2002 and initially included 74 primary schools from 6 Cantons and one

entity. During the three-year implementation of the Child-Friendly Schools Project in Bosnia and

Herzegovina (November 2001 – December 2004) a total of 1,100 teachers from all over Bosnia and

Herzegovina were trained in child-centred methodology, 480 of whom received advanced training,

while 110 were trained to become trainers or mentors. The child-centred methodology is being

implemented in over 60% of the schools in Bosnia and Herzegovina. 17% of class teachers (i.e. those

teaching in junior grades in primary schools) and 5% of subject teachers (i.e. those teaching particular

school subjects) received a comprehensive training.

Aiming to strengthen and develop modern and sustainable teacher professional development system

and increasing professional training capacities, a training centre was established and adequately

equipped in each administrative area (canton/entity/district). The aim of these centres is to gather

trainers and mentors who are qualified to carry out trainings independently.

3

In the autumn of 2004, UNICEF and CEI Step by Step, launched an external evaluation of the Child-

Friendly Schools Project. Proactive Information Services Inc., Canadian company specializing in

educational evaluation, was contracted to oversee the evaluation. Recommendation from the evaluation

was considered in planning the continuation of the CFS project for 2005-2008 programme cycle.

In 2005, nine training centres out of the total of fourteen have been put in place, in which more than

500 lower primary grade teachers received training. Besides being more efficient, training at a local

level also offers a possibility to hold workshops in a real classroom environment while using the

materials adapted to the needs of community and children.

After the local trainings were initiated, run by the certified teacher trainers and organized by the

Ministries of Education, the total number of participating schools was increased by 20% (from 60% in

2004 to 80% in 2007)

In 2005, project started with the new initiative called School Improvement which was piloted in 16

primary schools. School Improvement is an ongoing process consisting of several key elements such

as: development of the joint vision and the joint mission, analysis of the current situation and creation

of the school development plans, the process of self-assessment etc. The goal of this training

programme was to support schools to use the existing resources (knowledge and skills of teachers,

pedagogues, school principals and students) for the development of the school and with full

participation of all stakeholders.

In 2007, School Improvement initiative was extended to 32 new schools

At the end of 2007, nine different teacher training programmes for 1,050 primary school teachers were

delivered. As a result, 96.5 per cent of lower primary school teachers and 58 per cent of upper primary

school teachers in BiH passed basic or advanced child-centred methodology training. This included

ToT training of 82 trainers for School Improvement, Advanced Child-Centred methodology and

Advanced Reading and Writing for Critical Thinking programme.

It can be stated that some CFS principles and approaches (mainly active learning and child-centered

teaching methodologies) are implemented in all primary schools of BiH, although not in all

classrooms.

Anticipated Outcomes of the CFS Project

The infusion of CFS dimensions throughout grades 1-9 will enrich the teaching and learning process

and enable a higher level of curricular cohesion and integration;

The new pedagogical approaches will vivify learning and teaching. There will be a move away from

predominant use of didactic methods employed in schools.

Students will make significant gains in knowledge, understanding, and skills; they are likely to evince

more pro-social attitudes; they will be more highly motivated within the enhanced learning

environment that will follow from learning/teaching style diversity and the teacher assuming a more

facilitative role.

Teachers will acquire new skills and confidence; a new sense of professionalism and purpose.

4

School-level and Ministry-level educational administrators will acquire new understandings and skills

in the development, monitoring, and evaluation of children-centered learning/teaching approaches.

There will also be important lessons learned in terms of approaches to teacher development and

training, and in terms of the employment of new student assessment strategies.

Teacher training courses based upon delivering the lower and upper primary school curriculum using

interactive learning approaches will have been tried and tested.

Best practices initiated through CFS will be mainstreamed in the education policies and education

reform goals.

PURPOSE OF THE EXTERNAL EVALUATION

1. Assess potential modalities and strategies of the project to be replicated and scaled with a particular

focus on three elements of the CFS framework: inclusiveness, effectiveness and stakeholders'

participation with the view of documenting and disseminating the best practices developed through

the project and thus contribute meaningfully to the Education Sector Reform. This will specifically

necessitate an assessment of the sustainability of the project, degree of ownership by concerned

governments and actual possibilities existing for the best practices initiated through the CFS initiative

to be mainstreamed in the education policies.

2. Make recommendations regarding the future of the CFS Project according to the following scenarios:

(1) The project can be scaled up, replicated and mainstreamed in the education systems within a

reasonable timeframe, at a cost that is affordable to UNICEF Country Programme in Bosnia and

Herzegovina and the respective Ministries of Education; (2) The project cannot be replicated, scaled

up, mainstreamed in the education systems within a reasonable timeframe, at a cost that is affordable

to MOEs and UNICEF Country Programme in Bosnia and Herzegovina and therefore, it should be

phased out.

The main users of the evaluation report will be the concerned governments (ministries of education,

pedagogical departments and institutes …), implementing partner (CEI Step by Step), UNICEF Country

Office in Bosnia and Herzegovina, IFIs supporting the education sector and other stakeholders. The

findings and recommendations of the evaluation of the CFS Project will be used for planning of the

remaining current programme cycle as well as to inform planning of the new country programme cycle of

the UNICEF Country Office in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

SCOPE AND FOCUS OF THE EXTERNAL EVALUATION

The main objective of the external evaluation will be to measure the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency

and sustainability of the project. The project will be evaluated in relation with its external environment, in

particular in relation with government plans and with similar approaches or programme interventions

tested by other partners. In view of the current scope and duration of the CFS Project in Bosnia and

Herzegovina the evaluation will also assess the overall impact on individuals (children, teachers, parents)

as well as on institutions and communities.

More specifically, for each of the above criteria, the external evaluation will provide answers to the

following questions which – for many of them – derive directly from the anticipated results of the CFS

Project:

5

Relevance

What is the relevance of the CFS in BiH with regards to four criteria, i.e. availability, accessibility,

acceptability, adaptability of education.

What is the value of the CFS Project in relation to primary stakeholders‟ needs, national priorities,

national and international partners‟ policies and global references such as human rights and in

particular, the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), and the Concluding Recommendations of

the UN Committee of the Rights of the Child made to Bosnia and Herzegovina?

For UNICEF, what is the relevance of the CFS Project in relation to the 2006-2009 Medium-Term

Strategic Plan (MTSP) and its contribution to the Education Reform?

For stakeholders, what is the relevance of the CFS in relation to their involvement in planning and

design of the project based on their needs and priorities?

What is the contribution of the CFS project to the Education Reform (for MoE, Pedagogical Institutes,

other stakeholders such as international development organizations etc.)

The evaluation will also investigate the extent to which primary schools meet the characteristics

(criteria) of the UNICEF concept of a child-friendly school. Are all participating schools “Child-

Friendly”? In other words, are they inclusive, effective, healthy and protective, gender-sensitive and

involving children, families and communities?

How relevant are networks of teachers and training centres for Ministries of Education, Pedagogical

Institutes and schools?

Effectiveness :

In general terms, the formative evaluation will measure the effectiveness of the project at school level

in terms of school environment, teaching and learning methods, assessment methods, and identify key

achievements and lessons learnt. In particular, the extent to which the CFS project has enriched and

added value and relevance to the teaching and learning process by applying CFS themes as well as the

degree to which the learning and teaching environment has been renewed through the implementation

of interactive and participatory methodologies, will be assessed.

More specifically, the external evaluation of the CFS Project will look at the following:

Effectiveness of the CFS Project at school level in terms of outcomes for pupils

To what extend did the CFS project resulted in: Greater class participation? Freedom to engage in

dialogue and opinion exchange? Improved problem solving skills? Improved learning achievements?

Improved capacity for relationship building and increased tolerance for difference? Improved self-

esteem and improved participation of pupils in their own learning process?

Effectiveness and relevance of the CFS Project at school level in terms of outcomes for teachers

6

To what extend did the CFS project resulted in: Increased satisfaction and comfort of teachers with

interactive and participatory teaching methods? Increased effectiveness in keeping pupils engaged in

the learning process and improved academic achievement? Improved understanding of their role as

facilitators and not as lecturer merely imparting information? Increased capacity of teachers to develop

and tailor their own lessons, exercises and pedagogical activities? Improved capacity to test and

evaluate pupils‟ learning achievements through unbiased and transparent assessment methods?

Were the CFS trainings considered useful and effective? Has the CFS Project increased the capacity of

trained teachers to train their colleagues? Is there a demand for more advanced training and

development of a training of trainers model?

How effective and relevant are the networks of trainers and training centers created through project?

Have teachers found the implementation of the CFS Project more time consuming than the traditional

model of the past and have they been able to cover the entire curriculum within the given teaching

time?

Were the pedagogical resource allocated for the activities adequate or is there a need for more

technological and reference resources to implement the project as planned?

Effectiveness of the CFS Project in terms of outcomes for communities and parents

To what extend did the CFS project (School Improvement initiative) resulted in: Improved school and

community relations? Creation or strengthening of Parent-Teacher Associations? Greater involvement

from parents in pilot school governance and management?

Efficiency

How do the actual costs of the CFS Project compare to international benchmarks for similar projects

(MOE staff capacity building, teacher and school principals training, curriculum development or

revision …)?

What would be the most cost-effective way to obtain the expected CPD results (i.e. 1. To introduce and

implement quality child-centred education and child-friendly environments in all primary schools in

BiH from kindergarten to 4th grade (children age 6-10), 2. To create conditions for sustainable systemic

change and ongoing professional development in primary education

Inclusiveness

How much did the CFS Project managed to address and respond to the diversity of needs of all

students through increased participation of marginalized and vulnerable groups.

To what extend did the CFS Project enriched the educational experience by reflecting cultural and

ethnic diversity, and gender analysis in its programme?

To what extend is the CFS Project sensitive to cultural and ethnic diversity?

Is CFS project ensuring that students are able to form relationships with, and treat all persons with

respect and dignity irrespective of such persons‟ cultural and ethnic beliefs and orientations?

Sustainability

Has the CFS Project appeared to strengthen or add value to the lower primary grade curriculum reform

effort in the education systems of Bosnia and Herzegovina (introduction of 9-year primary education)?

7

Has the CFS Project been in any way mainstreamed by MoE in the school curriculum, training of

teachers, participatory and interactive teaching methods …etc?

Are there any quantitative or qualitative outcomes that can be measured at national level?

Have teacher training institutions (Pedagogical Institutes, Pedagogical Academies and Universities)

become partners in the project?

To which extent has the CFS Project complemented and created linkages as well as synergetic or

multiplier effect with education projects implemented by other partners?

Is UNICEF and its implementing partners seen as essential to the present state of achievement of the

project?

To which extent the CFS Project has developed the capacity of teachers to independently develop and

design lessons and exercises in line with active learning and participatory teaching methods?

To which extend the CFS Project has developed the capacity of project coordinators to plan, coordinate

and mainstream the CFS themes and approaches into ongoing pedagogical activities and annual work

plans of the Pedagogical Institutes and Ministries of Education?

Have school principals, inspectors, administrators of education departments at all levels as well as

MOE officials all strongly supported the implementation of the CFS project?

Are school principals, inspectors and administrators of education departments at all levels promoting

in-service training within their regions and in which manner?

Are there a political will and available resources by MoE/Pedagogical Institutes to bring the project to

scale and mainstream the CFS concept and principles in the education system? How is this reflected in

MoE annual and/or long-term programme planning and budgetary allocations?

What would be the cost of scaling up the project?

What would be the cost implications of scaling up the project and mainstreaming its worthy

components in the national education system?

Results-Based Management

In examining the relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, outcomes/impact and sustainability of the CFS

Project, the external evaluation will explore some underlying questions as to how the project was designed

and is managed and what information stakeholders at different levels have had access to and used to take

key decisions in design and implementation:

Did the initial project proposal include a result log frame with result-oriented objectives (specific,

measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound)? What indicators the programme/project had

planned to use to monitor programme/project performance?

What indicators were used and how they were used?

How they influenced adjustments to the programme/project?

These indicators may not be explicit. The evaluation may rather document the reasons for programme

adjustments and comment on whether this process was driven by a focus on results.

8

Human Rights-Based Approach to Programming

The goal of the current BiH country programme is to support the Government in meeting its obligations

under the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of

Discrimination against Women. It is specifically aimed at ensuring inclusion of all children, young people

and women in the provision of basic education, health and child protection services with their increased

and genuine participation. Together with government and NGO counterparts, United Nations agencies and

donors, the UNICEF country programme seeks to achieve the following three major outcomes:

(a) policy makers and community representatives will provide leadership in developing national policies

that contribute to the realization of the rights of children, young people and women;

(b) service providers and caregivers will adopt behaviours that facilitate access to education, health and

child protection services for the most vulnerable; and

(c) policy makers and community representatives will encourage and facilitate the meaningful

participation of children and young people in their communities, including in addressing the risk of

landmines.

Geographical focus of the formative evaluation

Bosnia and Herzegovina, 15 primary schools (5 advanced, 5 intermediate, 5 beginners). Schools will be

distributed in both urban and rural areas. One school “2 schools under 1 roof” will also be part of the

evaluation. 1

EXISTING INFORMATION SOURCES

Project Proposal for CFS in Bosnia and Herzegovina– 2002.

CFS External Evaluation, 2004.

UNICEF Guidelines on “Child Friendly schools”.

Country Programme Documents (CPDs), Country Programme Action Plans (CPAPs) and Annual

Work Plans (AWPs) from Bosnia and Herzegovina.

CFS Project Budget (itemized planned and actual expenditure) for CFS in Bosnia and Herzegovina

The Convention on the Rights of the Child

Concluding Recommendations of the UN Committee of the Rights of the Child made to Bosnia and

Herzegovina.

Education reform documents

Education sector review and relevant analysis and evaluations done by other donors

1 The international community supported the establishment of “two schools under one roof” as a means of

supporting the return of refugees to their pre-war places of residence. This permitted the ad hoc schools formed by

returnees (often in private homes) to be moved into a local school building instead. They were supposed to be strictly

a temporary measure. The phenomenon known as “two schools under one roof” is currently the most discussed issue

in education in Bosnia and Herzegovina today. But this phenomenon is more complicated – and more widespread –

than it first appears. “Two-in-one” schools themselves actually fall into two general categories. The first

encompasses schools in the same building but administratively separate and with differing curricula. The second

encompasses schools where the main school operates on one curriculum and one or more branch schools of the main

school operate on a different curriculum, often with little communication between the two.

9

EVALUATION TEAM COMPOSITION AND QUALIFICATIONS

Composition of the Team

In view of the purpose, scope, focus of the evaluative work, the evaluation will be conducted by an

external institution or consulting firm with expertise in evaluation of education projects, quality of

education, teacher and curriculum development, education policies, formulation of education sector plans,

planning of education programmes and coordination of research work.

The consulting firm/institution will have to put together a multidisciplinary team, composed of at least 2

international consultants with different responsibilities, as follows:

The first consultant will have the responsibility to:

conduct school observations in the field

assess the changes induced by the CFS project at school level in terms of:

teaching and learning environment,

curriculum revision,

teachers capacity

teaching methods,

examination and assessment methods,

school governance and management,

parents, teachers and students participation

report writing

The second consultant will have the responsibility to:

investigate the potential of the project to be scaled up

assess specific elements and best practices of the project to be mainstreamed into government

policies ensure the oversight and coordination of the entire evaluation

report writing.

The competencies required from the consultants will be the following:

Advanced degree in Educational Sciences.

8-10 years of professional experience at the national and international level.

Previous experience of research, documentation and evaluation of education projects; 2-3 major

publications an asset.

Ability to work in an international environment; previous experience of working in CEE & CIS

countries an asset.

Excellent analytical and report writing skills.

Familiarity with UNICEF‟s mission and mandate an asset.

Fluency in English.

STAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION

During country visits, local stakeholders - coordinators, specialists from MOE‟s departments, teachers,

principals and pupils, staff from pedagogical institutes, NGOs and other partners working on the project

will be involved in the evaluation process, in particular at the planning stage as well as during the

validation process. In addition, two national consultants may be hired by UNICEF Country Offices to

10

assist and support the external consultants before and during their field missions in Bosnia and

Herzegovina and will provide them with relevant information about the respective national education

systems. Scenarios for focus group discussions, questionnaires and interview sheets will be designed by

the Evaluation Team and reviewed by and discussed with the local stakeholders and consultants.

The external evaluation team will have meetings with education policy makers and planners and

administrators (officials from MOE, pedagogical institutes, etc) as well as with donors (European Union,

Council of Europe, OSCE, World Bank …) and other partners/actors in the field of education (Save the

Children UK, Save the Children Norway and other NGOs).

ACCOUNTABILITIES

The evaluation of the CFS Project is country office undertaking initiated by the UNICEF Office in Bosnia

and Herzegovina. The Education Project Officer will be the primary responsible for the evaluation work;

the external evaluation team will report to her.

At country level, the UNICEF Representative will provide the external evaluation team with the technical

assistance and logistical support required in the design, planning, and organization of the evaluation work.

If needed, the UNICEF Country Representatives may wish to establish a Task Force composed of

members of the MOE, the external evaluation team and UNICEF Education Focal Point, in order to

facilitate and guide the evaluation process during and after the country visit.

MoE coordinators and UNICEF Country Office will be responsible for organizing the field visit

schedules, providing access to the pilot and non pilot schools, and coordinating the other local

stakeholders.

The Evaluation Team will be responsible for conducting the desk review of the project, organizing the

technical preparation of the field visits (scenarios for focus group discussions, questionnaires, interview

sheets …), undertaking the field visits and writing the draft and final reports. The Evaluation Team will

take measures and will put mechanisms in place to ensure that the evaluation process was ethical and that

stakeholders were protected, and will address any ethical dilemmas or issues that could emerge. These

could include an initial process of ethical review of the evaluation design.

Possible responsibilities of the national consultants – who will work under the supervision and

coordination of the UNICEF Education Project Officers, could be:

Assist in the preparatory work of the appraisal in advance of the arrival of the international expert in

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Assist the international experts in the design of the questionnaires for the interviews;

Collect and select project documents for evaluation;

Coordinate and support evaluation activities: focus groups, classroom observations, meetings, etc;

Brief the international experts about key relevant issues of the national education systems;

Gather relevant information at school level (school records, enrolment and attendance records,

dropouts, tests marks and results, inspector records ....) , and organized this information in English;

Propose specific recommendations for the respective Ministries of Education;

Comment on the intermediate and final evaluation reports and provide inputs as appropriate;

Accomplish other tasks to assist the international experts as required.

11

The UNICEF Country Offices and respective MOEs will be responsible to organize a validation meeting

during which the findings and recommendations of the evaluation work will be presented by the external

evaluation team. The UNICEF Regional Office for CEE/CIS and Baltic States and UNICEF BiH Country

Office will approve the final product and arrange its dissemination.

EVALUATION METHODS AND PROCESS

Desk Review of all documents related to the CFS project and UNICEF Programmes of Cooperation

implemented in the countries concerned by the evaluation: reports and evaluations as listed above,

model lessons, teacher guides, students achievements reports ….etc. The desk review will not be

limited to UNICEF documentation but will take the external environment of the education sector into

account, and will also include the review of national education plans, PRSPs, reports and publications

produced by the World Bank and the EU, existing analyses of the education sector, evaluations and

documentation of similar projects implemented by other partners …

Field Observations in Bosnia and Herzegovina where the CFS Project has been actually implemented

at school level: focus discussions with children, review of school records and interviews of principals,

teachers, administrators, pupils, parents, and other stakeholders (local NGOs and community-based

associations involved in the project). Necessary tools such as focus group guides, interview protocols

and questionnaires will be developed. Field observations will be conducted in both CFS and non-CFS

schools (controls) in order to establish relevant and unbiased comparisons.

Meetings and Consultations with education policy makers, planners and administrators (officials from

MOE, pedagogical institutes, regional and district education directorates …) as well as donors (

European Union, OSCE, World Bank, CoE …) and other partners/actors in the field of education (Step

by Step Association, Save the Children UK, Save the Children Norway and others).

The Evaluation Team will spend 7 days in their duty station to conduct a thorough and comprehensive

Desk Review of all documents related to the CFS project and UNICEF Programme of Cooperation

implemented in Bosnia and Herzegovina (see “Existing Information Sources” above). The Evaluation

Team will also spend 3 working days in their duty station to undertake the technical preparation of the

country visits (Scenarios for Focus Group Discussions, Interview Sheets, Questionnaires …). The

Evaluation Team will spend 10 days (+ travel time) in the country. During these ten days they will visit 5

advanced CFS schools, 5 intermediate level CFS schools and 5 regular/beginners schools (non CFS).

Interviews with key stakeholders (to be determined in coordination with UNICEF Country Offices) and

consultations with donors as well as other partners and actors in the education sector (also to be

determined in coordination with UNICEF Country Offices) will be conducted as required. One focus

group discussion with children and one round table with 25 parents and community leaders will be

organized by partner NGO and conducted by consultant, with the technical support of UNICEF Country

Office. Once the country visit will have been completed, the Evaluation Team will have 10 working days

to prepare a draft evaluation report. The draft report will then be presented by the Evaluation Team to all

stakeholders of the project during a validation meeting organized by UNICEF Country Offices and

respective MOEs. Following the validation meeting, the Evaluation Team will have 5 days to produce a

Final Evaluation Report which will then be translated into local language and disseminated.

12

Tentative Timeframe

28 Feb. : TOR finalized by Regional Office

3 March. : Final TOR forwarded to potential institutions/consulting firms for bidding

15 March. : Bids received from potential institutions/consulting firms for bidding

April : UNICEF Internal process for Institutional Contract preparation

April/May : Evaluation work* – Desk Review (7 working days)

May. : Evaluation work – Technical preparation of the consultancy (3 working

days)

May. : Evaluation work – Field Visit (10 working days + 2 days travel)

May. : Evaluation work – Draft Evaluation Report prepared in English – 10

working days

June. : First Draft Report reviewed by Country Office and shared with

Regional Office for review and comments June : Evaluation work – Comments from Country Office and Regional Office

incorporated in the first draft evaluation report (5 working days)

July : Second Draft Report reviewed by Country Office and shared with

Regional Office (comments will be given to the evaluation team

during the Validation Meeting) August : Evaluation work - Validation meeting and Presentation of the second

draft Evaluation Report by the Evaluation Team – (2 working days

meeting + 2 days travel)

August/September. : Evaluation work - Final Report prepared and submitted by the

Evaluation Team to UNICEF Country Office in Bosnia and

Herzegovina – (3 working days)

September. : Final Report translated into local language and printed

October. : Final Report disseminated

* Evaluation work: work carried out by the Evaluation Team.

Logistics

Office space, cars, meeting rooms, translators, interviewers and drivers will be provided by the local

partner contracted by UNICEF Country Offices (external evaluators are expected to come with their own

laptop computers.

Any specific information - regarding work schedule considerations, special procedures, for example on

relations with press, security, evacuation in emergencies; benefits and arrangements such as insurance;

seasonal constraints, travel constraints/conditions and socio-cultural conditions that may influence data

collection; reporting requirements apart from products to be delivered (e.g. as accompanying invoices) –

will be provided by the concerned Country Offices and/or by the CEE/CIS Regional Office.

PRODUCT

By the end of September 2008, the Evaluation Team is expected to provide UNICEF Bosnia and

Herzegovina Office and CEE/CIS Regional Education Advisor with a final evaluation report of 60 pages

(maximum) in 3 sections; the first part will be devoted to the evaluation of the relevance, effectiveness

and efficiency of the CFS Project in Bosnia and Herzegovina; the second part will provide an analysis of

sustainability of the of the CFS Project and its potential to be scaled up and mainstreamed in the national

13

education systems; and the third part will focus on recommendations for future directions of the project.

Annexes will provide detailed information collected during field visits (focus discussion reports,

summaries of interview sheets, summaries of responses to questionnaires ….).

Schedule of deliverables:

Desk review report and evaluation tools (May 2008)

First draft project evaluation report (June 2008)

Final draft project evaluation report (September 2008)

The report – in both its format and content - will have to comply with the UNICEF Evaluation Report

Standards, which will be made available to the Evaluation Team at the beginning of the consultancy. The

report will have to contain an assessment of the evaluation methodology, including its limitations.

The report will be typed in Word Format, Font Times New Roman 11. UNICEF reserves the right to

withhold all or a portion of payment if performance is unsatisfactory, if work/outputs are incomplete, not

delivered of for failure to meet deadlines.

ESTIMATED RESOURCE REQUIREMENT

Institutional Fees

The institutional fees (lump sum payable against deliverables) will include the following:

2 consultants (at P5 level) x 30 working days

Travel for field mission to Bosnia and Herzegovina (by the most direct and economic route)

Travel for Validation Meeting (by the most direct and economic route)

Daily subsistence allowance (when on travel)

Any other cost related to the consultancy

Local Costs

2 national consultants

PCA with local NGO (for logistical support, translation, transportation, organization of meetings,

etc.)

Validation Meeting – 1 day (conference room, translation, coffee break …),

Translation Fees

APPENDIX 2:

Detailed Agenda of the Mission

APPENDIX 3:

Evaluation Tools Manual

EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF CHILD FRIENDLY SCHOOLS PROJECT

BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

EVALUATION TOOLS AND MANUAL

Joachim Friedrich Pfaffe (Team Leader)

A. E. M. (Ans) Smulders

21 August 2008

PROMAN S.A.

68, rue Michel Hack – 3240-Bettembourg +352 / 25 46 84 –1 +352 / 25 46 81

[email protected] - www.proman.lu

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.proman.lu/

External Evaluation of the Child-Friendly Schools Project – Manual for administration of evaluation tools 1

0 INTRODUCTION

This Manual for the Administration of Evaluation Tools is based on (i) the Terms of

Reference for the External Evaluation of the Child-Friendly Schools Project (2002-

2007) in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) and (ii) the Organisation and Methodology

contained in the Technical Proposal agreed upon between UNICEF and PROMAN. It

also takes into account the consultations with key stakeholders during a previous

mission to BiH by the Team Leader from 20 January to 01 February 2008.

Specifically, the Manual

(i) summarises the objectives of the external evaluation;

(ii) presents an operationalisation of the Child-Friendly Schools (CfS)

concept based on the available UNICEF documentation and the January

consultations;

(iii) outlines the general design of the evaluation;

(iv) provides corresponding evaluation tools together with implementation

guidelines.

The Manual will also serve as accompanying training material for the briefing of local

researchers1 before the onset of the field visits.

1 OBJECTIVES OF THE EXTERNAL EVALUATION

The objectives of the evaluation are

(i) to assess potential modalities and strategies of the CfS project to be

replicated and scaled up;

(ii) to make recommendations regarding the future of the CfS project.

The evaluation revolves around the five OECD/DAC evaluation criteria, i.e. (i)

relevance, (ii) efficiency, (iii) effectiveness, (iv) impact and (v) sustainability. This is

explained in more detail in the table below:

1 “Mini-Workshop” scheduled to take place on 15 September 2008.

Relevance

Value of the project to address education reform, in relation to stakeholders’ needs, national and international policies and priorities;

Consistency of the project with contextual conditions of learners in a multi-cultural environment, specifically seen against current overall development policy and promotion of ownership at all levels;

Degree of relevance of networks of teachers and training centres for Ministries of Education, Pedagogical Institutes and schools, and degree of integration into the existing social context;

Appropriateness of CfS project objectives to the problems that it was supposed to address and to the physical and policy environment within which it operated, also seen against the 2006-2009 Medium-Term Strategic Plan;

Assessment of the quality of project preparation and design – i.e. the logic and completeness of the planning process, and the internal logic and coherence of the project design.

Efficiency

Economical utilisation of existing resources in order to achieve targeted results;

Adequacy of intervention design versus cost and purpose;

Assessment of how well inputs and means have been converted into results, in terms of quality, quantity and time, and the quality of the results achieved.

Effectiveness

Degree of achievement of results versus stipulated objectives;

Analysis of reasons for (non-) achievement of objectives, including proposals for enhancing overall effectiveness;

Assessment of the contribution made by results to the achievement of the project purpose and how assumptions have affected the project achievements.

Assessment of the extent to which teaching and learning is child-centred

Assessment of school and community relations

Impact

Analysis of community, educational, and social impact of the Project;

Degree of beneficiaries’ and implementing agents’ perception of directly benefiting from the project, also in terms of possible capacity development at Ministerial level;

Assessment of measurability of changes related to the project;

Assessment of the effect of the project on its wider environment.

Assessment of impact of the CfS project on stakeholders’ perceptions on gender issues and cultural and ethnic diversity

Sustainability

Degree of the project having become (or being in the process of becoming) part of the national education system in terms of school curriculum, teacher training, participatory methods, financial viability and the degree of generated “added value”;

Appropriateness of applied methods and strategies for long-term integration into the education system of BiH;

Degree of opportunity for future replication and adaptation of the project;

Assessment of the likelihood of benefits produced by the project to continue to flow after external funding has ended and with particular reference to factors of ownership by beneficiaries, policy support, economic and financial factors, socio-cultural aspects, gender equality, appropriate technology, environmental aspects, and institutional an management capacity.

In addition, the evaluation will focus on issues of (i) coverage (of groups having been

reached by the project), (ii) coordination (with other stakeholders), (iii) coherence

(across policies) and (iv) protection (in terms of adequacy of the project’s response

to protecting vulnerable groups).

Particular attention will be given to

(i) assessing the status of the implementation of the project;

(ii) providing detailed analytical information for future planning;

(iii) reflecting upon lessons learnt;

(iv) strengthening existing synergies between different groups of

stakeholders in terms of promoting child-friendly schools.

Also, an overall focus on marginalised, vulnerable and hard-to-reach groups will

emphasise the social context which in turn determines the current status of

education within the prevailing larger social context.

2 OPERATIONALISATION OF CfS KEY CONCEPTS

According to the Child-Friendly School Framework2, five quality issues are being

matched with four child-friendly issues in order to assess the extent to which schools

meet the characteristics (criteria) of the UNICEF concept of a child-friendly school.

Following the inception of CfS programming in the 1990s, the approach to the

implementation of a CfS strategy has been different from country to country. There is

currently a broad implementation base with more than 50 countries actively involved,

and with a solid base of evaluations gathered in 2004-06 from the most “mature”

programming.

Central to UNICEF’s philosophy, education has always been regarded as every

child’s right. Accordingly, child-friendly schools reflect a quality environment and act

holistically in the interest of the whole child, which includes his or her health, nutrition

and overall well-being. Similarly, child-friendly schools are concerned with the child’s

contextual situation outside school, and thus reach out to families and communities.

Child-friendly schools need to be seen within the larger framework of the EFA Dakar

Goals and the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) “Achieve Universal Primary

2 Chabbott, C. (2004): UNICEF’s Child-Friendly Schools Framework. A desk review. New

York: UNICEF.

Education” (MDG 2), “Promote Gender Equality and Empower Women “ (MDG 3),

and “Develop a Global Partnership for Development” (MDG 8). Also, there is a clear

implicit linkage to the Convention of the Rights of the Child (CRC) – not only as far

as the “education articles” Articles 28 and 29 are concerned, but also regarding

Articles 12-14 in terms of promoting the child’s right to freedom of expression.

Based on the EFA Dakar Goals (except for adult literacy), child-friendly schools fall

within the strategic planning of the UNICEF MTSP Focus Area 2 (Basic Education

and Gender Equity) which formulates as its strategic intent that “parents,

communities and Governments acquire the capacity and support necessary to fully

implement their obligation to ensure the right of all children to free, compulsory

quality education“. child-friendly schools also support core values and purposes of

UNICEF, such as the incorporation of a human rights perspective into education, the

promotion of children’s rights in all situations (here particularly the context of school

and school-based learning), the support of capacities of parents including the

promotion of families as the fundamental group of society.

The conceptual framework of child-friendly schools defines a school as “child-

friendly” if it is

rights-based,

child-seeking and inclusive,

gender-sensitive,

participatory, and

quality-based.

Child-friendly schools can be described as child-centred learning environments

which see and understand the whole child in a broad context, thus making education

relevant due to the consideration of the reality of children’s lives. Child-friendly

schools reflect a quality environment which is both effective for learning and

protective of children, and likewise involved with families and communities.

Quality issues are being matched with child-friendly issues. Child friendly schools

therefore operationalise the need to realise quality learning in a non-threatening

learning environment. Such environment leads to learning activities which can be

enjoyed by the children who also have a say in the process of their own learning.

Children are seen as partners in a learning context which includes teachers, parents

and communities who actively collaborate in order to ensure the realisation of their

rights. These rights include the right to education, health, play and leisure, and the

right to be protected from any form of violence. Child-friendly schools ensure the free

expression of children’s views, and encourage children to participate in decision

making processes according to their own growing capacities. Overall, a child friendly

school promotes quality learning and puts a strong value on children participating in

all activities affecting both their school and their immediate community.

This conceptual framework is further illustrated in the matrix below:

Conceptual framework of Child-Friendly Schools

Child-friendly issues

Quality issues

Inclusive / gender-sensitive

Protective

(healthy and safe) Effective

Involved with the community

Learners Gender equality in enrolment and achievement

Safe from drugs, corporal punishment and harassment

Active, cooperative and democratic atmosphere

Children participate in school and community life

Content Gender-appropriate curricula, no gender stereotypes

Life skills-based education

Structured content in child-friendly presentation

Family-focussed and based on community needs

Teaching/learning processes

Respects diversity and ensures equality of learning

Promotes physical and psycho-social emotional health

Quality materials and resources

Encouraging local partnership in education

Environments Socialises girls and boys in a non-violent environment

Children protected from outside abuse and harm

Commitment of teachers towards children’s rights

Working with other actors to ensure children’s rights

Outcomes Respect for others’ rights, dignity and equality

Positive learning experience

Quality learning outcomes based on children’s needs

Harmonious relationships between children, parents, teachers

3 CHILD-FRIENDLY SCHOOLS WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF BiH

BiH faces similar challenges in basic education as most countries in Central and

Eastern Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States (CEE/CIS), notably

in the following areas:

Equity in access to quality basic education, particularly regarding Roma

children and children with special educational needs (SEN);



Child-Friendly Schools require child-friendly systems and policies, practices and

regulations. A key issue that has a direct impact on child-friendliness relates to the

promotion of cross-cultural understanding and tolerance in BiH. However, the

segregation of children in schools based on their ethnic and religious origin, also

known as the “Two Schools under One Roof” phenomenon, still prevails in 50

schools in BiH. Such practice illustrates the ethnic segregation that affects all

schools in the country, and is a serious concern. Segregation is also in sharp

contrast to existing human rights treaties which have been signed and ratified by the

country, in particular the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). The current

system of segregation has an inherent risk of fuelling divisions, intolerance and

potential future conflicts. However, the education system needs to contribute to the

building of a peaceful, democratic, fair and just society, an objective to which the CfS

Project aims to make a substantial contribution.

The Education Reform Agenda (2002) reflects the commitments that the Ministers of

Education of BiH have publicly agreed; this concise but comprehensive document

sets the goals that need to be achieved to reform the education sector as well as the

strategies needed to realise these goals. The document’s overriding objective is to

depoliticise education while creating the conditions that will ensure equal access to

high quality, modern education throughout BiH. Apart from this overriding objective

the document contains five pledges, of which three are relevant for the Child-Friendly

Schools Project, as shown in the matrix below:


Education Reform Agenda of BiH CFS Principles and Anticipated Outcomes

Pledge 1: Ensure that all children have access to

quality education, in integrated multicultural schools,

that is free from political, religious, cultural and other

bias and discrimination, and which respects the rights

of all children

CFS Schools are rights-based, proactively inclusive and gender responsive

CFS Schools promote a healthy environment and are safe and protective of children

Pledge 2: Provide basic education of good quality at

the pre-school, primary and general secondary levels,

with a modern curriculum and a modern system of

assessment and certification for students and

teachers. Ensure that students are taught by well-

trained teachers, in properly equipped and efficiently

managed schools

CFS Schools promote quality learning outcomes relevant to children’s need for knowledge and skills

The infusion of CFS dimensions throughout Grades 1-9 will enrich the teaching and learning process and enable a higher level of curricular cohesion and integration

New pedagogical approaches will vivify learning and teaching

Teachers will acquire new skills and confidence, and a new sense of professionalism and purpose

Students will make significant gains in knowledge, understanding and skills

Students are likely to develop more pro-social attitudes

Students will be more motivated within the enhanced learning environment

Pledge 5: Ensure the transparent, equitable, cost-

effective and financially sustainable investment of

public resources, and implement education legislation

at all levels that is based on European standards and

norms, and grounded in international human rights

conventions.

CFS Schools are actively engaged with students, families and communities

School-level and Ministry-level educational administrators will acquire new understanding and skills in the development, monitoring and evaluation of children-centred learning/teaching approaches (thus contributing to enhanced utilisation of public resources)

Best practices initiated through CFS will be mainstreamed in education policies and education reform goals

4 EVALUATION DESIGN, TOOLS AND IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES

A sample of 15 primary schools has already been identified by UNICEF BiH.

The main criterion was the degree to which the schools have become “child-friendly”.

Given that in BiH all primary schools adopted some elements of CfS, schools were

selected at different levels of “child-friendliness”: five that are most advanced, five

that are at intermediate level and five that had only initial training. Criteria also

included geographic focus, urban and semi-urban/rural schools, and schools where

two different curricula (using the same methodology) are being taught, as

represented by the so-called Two Schools Under One Roof model.

Before the arrival of the international consulting team in BiH, UNICEF will

already distribute the questionnaires contained in this manual to the 15 target

schools.3 Questionnaires will be completed by Principals/Pedagogues,

Teachers and Students (Grades 2, 5 and 7). Completed forms will be

collected during the school visits by the consulting team and processed by the

end of the field mission.

The main data collection phase commences with a one-day “Mini-

Workshop” which will provide a hands-on introduction into the

evaluation tools and the Evaluation Manual. This introduction is directed at

the local researchers to be recruited by UNICEF who will support the data

collection process, in order to combine expert input from the evaluation team

with the utilisation of local expertise.

Data collection will be done in two rounds of four days each, with the two

international consultants splitting up into two teams with two local researchers

each. While visiting the targeted schools, the evaluation team will collect the

previously distributed and completed questionnaires, conduct interviews and

focus group discussions and constantly validate the methodology.

An in-depth interview will be held at every school with the Principal and

the Pedagogue, followed by Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) with (i)

students and (ii) teachers. Time and availability of parents permitting, an

additional FGD can be conducted with Parents.

Between the first and second round of field visits, the two international

consultants will process collected data, reflect upon the school visits and hold

further consultations with UNICEF and/or the local consultants as deemed

necessary. This interim period can also be utilised for meetings with

additional stakeholders, even on an informal basis.

3 Completed questionnaires will then already be available for collection and subsequent data

processing when arriving at the schools. This will allow a deeper concentration on interviews and FGDs during the school visits.

Three types of participatory evaluation tools (questionnaires, focus group

discussions and interviews) will be administered for four different target groups as

presented in the table below:

Target group Evaluation tool Minimum output of

completed tools Evaluation Sheet No.

Principals and Pedagogues

Interview with Principal 15

INT PRI-PED

Interview with Pedagogue

15

Questionnaire 2x15 = 30 QST-1 PRI-PED

Teachers

FGD with teachers 15 FGD-1 TEA

Questionnaire 15 x N(all Teachers) QST-2 TEA

Students (mix of Grades)

FGD with students 15 FGD-2 STU

Students Gr. 2 Questionnaire (Gr. 2 by means of drawings to be made)

15 x N(Students Gr. 2)

QST-3

STU-GR2

Students Gr. 5 Questionnaire 15 x N(Students Gr. 5) STU-GR5

Students Gr. 7 Questionnaire 15 x N(Students Gr. 7) STU-GR7

Parents (optional) FGD with parents optional FGD-3 PAR

The procedure for data collection comprises two phases:

Before the arrival of the international consulting team, the team of local

researchers will distribute all questionnaires to the 15 schools. They will be

administered in time to be ready for collection during the schools visits of the

international consulting team.

During the main data collection (Field Phase: 14-27 September 2008), the

team of local researchers will join the international consulting team. Local

Researchers will be primarily responsible for conducting the FGDs and for

assisting in the interviews and class observations (to be led by the

international consultants).

This is further illustrated in the table below:

Procedure for Data Collection

Step Task Evaluation Tool

Local Researchers (Before the arrival of the international consulting team)

1a Distribute all questionnaires to the 15 schools, to be completed by (i) Principals and Pedagogues

4, (ii) all teachers, (iii) all students

in Grade 2, (iv) all students in Grade 5, (v) all students in Grade 7.

QST-1 PRI-PED

QST-2 TEA-ALL

QST-3 STU-GR2

QST-3 STU-GR5

QST-3 STU-GR7

1b

Administer all questionnaires before the arrival of the international consulting team. Completed forms will be collected during the school visits.

Local Researchers and International Consulting Team (Field Phase 14-27 September 2008)

2a

At the school, first visit the Principal and explain the purpose of the evaluation. The Principal also needs to organise a focus group discussion (FGD) with a group of 8-12 teachers which s/he should not attend. If possible, s/he should invite parents to attend a FGD as well (optional).

INT-1 PRI-PED

2b Conduct in-depth interview with the Principal and Pedagogue.

2c If possible, visit a representative of the relevant Ministry of Education and conduct an interview (before, after or during school visit).

INT-2 ADM

3 International Consultant to observe teaching in at least one Grade 2, 5 and 7 class.

Notes taken by international consultant

4a Conduct the focus group discussion with teachers nominated by the Principal.

FGD-1 TEA

4b Conduct the focus group discussion with students from a mix of Grades.

FGD-2 STU

4c Conduct the focus group discussion with parents (optional). FGD-3 PAR

During the course of the field visits, the two international consultants will process

and analyse collected data, reflect upon the school visits and hold further

consultations with UNICEF and/or the local consultants as deemed necessary.

Following the field phase, the Draft Evaluation Report will be prepared (including an

executive summary and statistical charts) and submitted to UNICEF for review and

commenting.

4 Should a school have more than one Principal and/or Pedagogue, all should complete a

separate form. Deputies should complete the form as well.

APPENDIX 4:

Guidelines for structured interviews and Focus Group Discussions (FGDs)

Child Friendly Schools Evaluation, BiH Guidelines for structured interviews / focus group discussions

FGD-1 TEA: Teachers INT-1 PRI-PED: Principals and Pedagogues

Topic 1: Introduction What is your background? What is your involvement in education now? How were you trained? How do the training centres for professional development relate to the pre-service training conducted at teacher training

institutions?

Topic 2: Expectations of CfS concept For you, what does “child-friendly school” and “child-centred learning” mean? How is the CfS approach different to the “standard” education policy? What does the CfS concept mean for your country as a whole? What are the benefits of the CfS approach? Should the CfS approach continue to grow, what would you expect to see in three/five/ten years time? How can the CfS approach help students to develop into socially competent individuals?

Topic 3: Most important challenges of child-centred learning In your opinion, what are the most important challenges that Child-friendly schools are facing? (then to be followed up from the challenges mentioned; if not mentioned, additional questions should be asked as listed

below) Critics say that child-centred learning is too time-consuming. What is your opinion on that? Critics say that child-centred learning and new teaching methodologies might be too costly in the long run. What is your

opinion on that? We heard that the CfS approach is duplicating what the “standard” policy (and related training) is already doing. Based

on your experiences, what would you say to that? Personally as a teacher, what is the most important challenge you are faced with professionally when it comes to the

implementation of child-centred learning and “child-friendliness” in BiH?

Topic 4: CfS in practice – classroom experiences Judging from your day-to-day teaching experience, how well were you prepared for teaching? What was of particular

benefit, what would still be needed? How exactly do you infuse CfS methodology into your daily teaching? Can you give an example? What new skills or methods do you use most? When do you use them and what for? How often do you interact with your colleagues? What changes do you observe in the students when comparing to earlier times when you did not apply CfS

methodology? In what ways (how) do you assess students’ performance and progress? When, how often? What are the advantages

of this way of assessment/testing? How do you resolve conflict in the classroom, and in what way does the CfS philosophy help you to achieve that?

Topic 5: Cooperation with students, parents and communities Child-centredness should address the whole individual in the teaching process. In what way do you involve parents and

communities in that process? Assessment is always an important issue. How do you involve the students in the assessment process? Do they have

an opportunity to assess themselves? How do they do that? Judging from your discussions with parents, how do you think they feel about the CfS concept? Can you give us an example that shows how cooperation with either students, parents or communities is different from

what used to happen in more “traditional” settings? In order for us to understand better what the CfS philosophy means for the student, can you describe for us how you

facilitate better cooperation and mutual respect in the classroom?

Child Friendly Schools Evaluation, BiH Guidelines for structured interviews / focus group discussions FGD-2 STU: Students

Topic 1: Introduction Tell us about yourselves – where do you come from? What are your professional aspirations?

Topic 2: Expectations of GE concept For you, what does “child-friendly school” and “child-centred learning” mean? In your opinion, how does the CfS concept help you to become a better student? Where would you like to be in three/five/ten years time? How can the CfS approach help you personally in BiH?

Topic 3: Most important challenges of child-centred learning In your opinion, what is not working so well at the moment in school? (then to be followed up from the challenges mentioned; if not mentioned, additional questions should be asked as listed

below) Some people say that child-centred learning wastes a lot of time in the classroom. What is your opinion on that? Critics say that child-centred learning is too expensive. What is your opinion on that? Thinking of yourself, what would you like to see improved in your class?

Topic 4: CfS in practice – classroom experiences Just think about an average school day. How do you experience your teachers in the classroom? In what way are they

different from other teachers you knew? Thinking of your classmates, has the CfS approach made them different in any way? How? If you have a problem with someone in class, how do you go about it? Can you give an example? In your personal experience, how do teachers react to you if you don’t really understand the lesson? How do you know how well you are doing in school?

Topic 5: Cooperation with students, parents and communities Are your parents or your parents’ friends interested in what is going on at school? If so, what do they do? In school, there are many tests and teachers assessing you. How do you participate in what teachers have to say about

you? When you talk to your parents at home, how do they feel about school? How do you feel about your teachers? How do you think your teachers feel about you and your classmates?

Child Friendly Schools Evaluation, BiH Guidelines for structured interviews / focus group discussions FGD-3 PAR: Parents

Topic 1: Introduction What is your background? Tell us a bit about your children – how many, how old, which classes? What would you like your children to be one day? What are your own “school memories”?

Topic 2: Expectations of CfS concept For you, what does “child-friendly school” and “child-centred learning” mean? How can the CfS concept help your child to become a better student? What does the CfS concept mean for your country as a whole? What are the benefits of the CfS approach? Should the CfS approach continue to grow, where would you like to see your child in three/five/ten years time? How can the CfS approach help your child to develop into socially competent individuals?

Topic 3: Most important challenges of child-centred learning In your opinion, what are the most important challenges that Child-friendly schools are facing? (then to be followed up from the challenges mentioned; if not mentioned, additional questions should be asked as listed


opinion on that? Thinking of your children, what would you like to see improved in their class?

Topic 4: CfS in practice – experiences with your children Just think about an average school day. What do you hear from your children about school? Is it different in any way

from what you hear (heard) from other children? Can you think of an example of a very special lesson that your children might have told you about? Thinking of your children, has the CfS approach made them different in any way? How? Has the CfS approach changed the behaviour of your children at home? Can you give an example? How do your children feel about going to school? How do they feel about their teachers? How do you know how well your child(ren) is (are) doing in school?

Topic 5: Cooperation with students, parents and communities Are you or your friends interested in what is going on at school? If so, what do you do? In school, there are many tests and teachers assessing your children. How do you participate in what teachers have to

say about your children? How do they feel personally about school? Can you give us an example that shows how you as a parent contribute to the success of the CfS philosophy How do you feel about the teachers of your children? How do you think the teachers feel about your children and about

you as a parent?

Child Friendly Schools Evaluation, BiH Guidelines for structured interviews / focus group discussions INT-2 ADM: Administrators

Topic 1: Introduction What is your background? What is your involvement in education now? What is your role, what are your responsibilities?

Topic 2: Expectations of CfS concept What is the long-term vision for education in your entity/canton? What is the ambition of your entity/canton in terms of educational (in relation to socio-economic) development? Where

do you expect your entity/canton to be in 20 years time? How is the CfS approach different to the “standard” education policy? What does the CfS concept mean for your country as a whole? What do you see as advantages and disadvantages of the CfS approach? Should the CfS approach continue to grow, what would you expect to see in three/five/ten years time? What kind of students/adults does your entity/canton need, what kind of qualifications do you expect them to have when

leaving school?

Topic 3: Most important challenges of child-friendly education In your opinion, what are the most important educational challenges your entity/canton is facing? In your opinion, what are the most important challenges regarding the implementation of Child-friendly schools? (then to be followed up from the challenges mentioned; if not mentioned, additional questions should be asked as listed


opinion on that? We heard that the CfS approach is duplicating what the “standard” policy (and related training) is already doing. Based

on your experiences, what would you say to that? Personally as an administrator, what is the most important challenge you are faced with professionally when it comes to

the implementation of child-friendly education in BiH? How would you assess the resources (human, financial, time) required to implement CfS versus resources available?

Topic 4: CfS in practice – experiences In what way are you involved in the CfS project and implementation process? What kinds of external assistance have you or your organisation received over the last 5 years? How often do you (or your institute) interact with other educational partners on the CfS project? What are the benefits of

these interactions? How do you know about the performance of CfS? And what about the performance of the “traditional” education

system? Can you think of any changes in the set-up or functioning of your organisation since the introduction of CfS? What kind

of changes?

Topic 5: Cooperation and partnerships How is the quality of education assessed or assured in your entity/canton? What about the quality of CfS? Based in the

information you have, how do you feel about the CfS concept? Have responsibilities of your (and other) educational institutes changed since the CfS concept was introduced? Can you give us an example that shows how cooperation with other educational partners is different from what used to

happen in more “traditional” settings?

APPENDIX 5:

Questionnaires (English original)

Please tick appropriate box

Child-Friendly Schools Project, Questionnaire 1 (QST-1 PRI-PED): Experiences of Principals and Pedagogues

Your Canton/Entity: Your Općina: Principal Pedagogue Male Female

To be completed by Principals and Pedagogues of a school

No. of years in the project:

No. of years you have been teaching:

No. of trainings you have received:

No. of training days:

Instruction: The purpose of this exercise is to collect information on the Child Friendly Schools Project, and how it might have influenced you and the teachers in your school. The information provided by you will help us improving the Project. It will also help improving education in your country.

We therefore ask you to sincerely and carefully provide the relevant and appropriate information as much as possible. There is no “right” or “wrong” answer. The information given will be treated strictly confidential, and will not be used against anybody. Please help us by answering all the questions by ticking the appropriate box, and by supplying the correct information as necessary.

In the following, please indicate how strongly you agree or disagree with the given statements:

No Statement strongly agree

agree disagree strongly disagree

1 I am familiar with the aims and objectives of the Child Friendly Schools Project / Step By Step initiative

2 Apart from subject teaching, it is very important to teach practical life skills

3 I regularly interact with my colleagues in order to teach better

4 It is important for teachers to use a portfolio to document my journey of professional growth

5 I know the pupils of my school well and also know what their particular problems are

6 Parents should not interfere with what is going on in my classroom

7 Pupils in our school usually share the teacher’s opinions and views

8 Girls learn better than boys

9 In our school, children with different cultural backgrounds are encouraged to work together in mixed groups

10 Girls participate more in class when compared with boys

11 The training that I received through the project did not change the way I approach education

12 The child-friendly methodology does not really fit into the existing instructional plan and programme

13 Children from minorities (e.g. Roma children) make classroom management more difficult

14 I wish there would be more advanced training on Child Friendly Schools since I would like to learn more

15 It is not important that all children of one grade fulfil similar grade level expectations

16 Because of the training our teachers received, they now do much less of the talking, and the pupils contribute more

17 It happens that older pupils push the younger ones around or bully them

18 It is easier for a pupil to be taught by a teacher sharing the same religion

19 Teachers do not need a mentor to develop professionally

20 At home, boys need to spend less time than girls to do work for the family

21 Outside school, every ethnic group should be with their own ethnic group

22 Female pupils and male pupils can equally share their problems with the teacher



23 It is important for me to have a lot of contact with the parents/communities of my pupils

24 I am worried what will happen when pupils taught through the child-friendly schools approach are progressing to higher grades which are not supported by a similar methodology

25 The environment of my school is not a safe place for my children

26 I am very interested in the opinions of pupils, even if they differ from my own

27 It is not always possible to apply child-centred methodology in the classroom

28 It is more difficult for a girl to perform well at school

29 Good education is the most important factor to realise a strong and positive future of my country

30 Parents are generally very interested in what is happening in class

31 It is good to have two schools under one roof

32 Our teachers visit parents’ homes if a child does not attend school

33 Boys are more often non-attendant than girls

34 When assessing pupils, it is important to know how they assess themselves

35 The reasons for non-attendance are the same for boys and girls

36 Active and child-centred learning methodology is more costly than the traditional way of teaching

37 Within my school, all children are treated equally, regardless their ethnicity, skin colour or religion

38 Children with special needs (i.e. hearing impairment, visual impairment) cannot be taught together with children without special needs

39 Child-friendly teaching methodology is already part of all teacher training (not only at project-supported Training Centres)

40 Children prefer to share worries and fears with me rather then with the teachers directly

41 It is important to organise meetings with parents

42 Parents often approach me because they are very interested in what the Child Friendly Schools are all about

43 During class visits, I observed that there is much more interaction “on task” between the boys and girls

44 I could not tell an outsider what the idea of the Child Friendly Schools Project is all about

45 Teachers need to have all the power in the classroom

46 Girls and boys at my school respect and help each other

47 When there is a problem in the classroom, teachers and pupils find a solution together

48 It is important to test all pupils together at regular intervals

49 It is more difficult for a girl than for a boy to find a job after school

50 The Child Friendly Schools Project is not really adequate for the situation my country is in

Thank you for your cooperation!

Child-Friendly Schools Project, Questionnaire 2 (QST-2 TEA-ALL): Experiences of Teachers

Your Canton/Entity: Your Općina: Grades you teach: Male/Female:

To be completed by ALL teachers of a school

No. of years in the project:

No. of years you have been teaching:

No. of trainings you have received:

No. of training days:

Instruction: The purpose of this exercise is to collect information on the Child Friendly Schools Project, and how it might have influenced you in your teaching and/or the way you think about education. The information provided by you will help us improving the Project. It will also help improving education in your country.





1 I am familiar with the aims and objectives of the Child Friendly Schools Project / Step By Step initiative

2 Apart from subject teaching, it is very important to teach practical life skills

3 I regularly interact with my colleagues in order to teach better

4 I like to use a portfolio to document my journey of professional growth

5 I know my pupils well and also know what their particular problems are

6 Parents should not interfere with what is going on in my classroom

7 My pupils usually share my opinions and views


9 I encourage children with different cultural backgrounds in my class to work together in mixed groups

10 Girls participate more in my classes when compared with boys

11 The training that I received through the project did not change the way I teach

12 The child-friendly methodology does not really fit into the existing instructional plan and programme

13 Children from minorities (e.g. Roma children) make classroom management more difficult

14 I wish there would be more advanced training on Child Friendly Schools since I would like to learn more

15 It is not important that all children of one grade fulfil similar grade level expectations

16 Because of the training I received, I now do much less of the talking, and the pupils contribute more

17 It happens that older pupils push the younger ones around or bully them

18 It is easier for a pupil to be taught by a teacher sharing the same religion

19 I do not need a mentor to develop professionally



22 Female pupils and male pupils can equally share their problems with me



23 It is important for me to have a lot of contact with the parents/communities of my pupils

24 I am worried what will happen when my pupils are progressing to higher grades which are not supported by the child-friendly schools approach

25 The environment of my school is not a safe place for my children

26 I am very interested in the opinions of my pupils, even if they differ from my own

27 It is not always possible to apply child-centred methodology in the classroom

28 It is more difficult for a girl to perform well at school

29 Good education is the most important factor to realise a strong and positive future of my country

30 Parents are generally very interested in what is happening in class


32 I visit parents’ homes if a child does not attend school

33 Boys are more often non-attendant than girls

34 When assessing my pupils, I am interested in how they assess themselves

35 The reasons for non-attendance are the same for boys and girls

36 Active and child-centred learning methodology is more costly than the traditional way of teaching

37 Within my school, all children are treated equally, regardless their ethnicity, skin colour or religion


39 Child-friendly teaching methodology is already part of all teacher training (not only at project-supported Training Centres)

40 In my school children share worries and fears with the teachers or the guidance teacher (pedagogue)

41 It is important to organise meetings with the parents of my pupils

42 Parents often approach me because they are very interested in what the Child Friendly Schools are all about

43 In the lesson, there is much more interaction “on task” between the boys and girls

44 I could not tell an outsider what the idea of the Child Friendly Schools Project is all about

45 As teacher, I have all the power in the classroom


47 When there is a problem in the classroom, we all try to find a solution together

48 It is important to test all pupils together at regular intervals


50 The Child Friendly Schools Project is not really adequate for the situation in my country


Child-Friendly Schools Project, Questionnaire 3 (QST-3 STU-GR2): Experiences of Students (Grade 2)

What is the name of your Canton/Entity?

What is the name of your Općina?

To be completed by Students in GRADE 2 only

How old are you?

Are you a girl or a boy?

We are interested to learn from you about your life in school and at home!

We therefore ask you to draw us four pictures below. Will you help us? Thank you very much!!

1. Please make a drawing of your classroom. Show us also where you sit, where your friends sit and where the teacher is.

2. What do you need to be happy at school? Show us in a picture.

3. Please draw a picture of the teacher teaching. Show us where you are.

4. Please show us how you play at school.

Thank you!!


What is he name of your Canton/Entity: What is the name of your Općina:


How old are you? Are you a girl or a boy?






1 The Child Friendly Schools Project (Step By Step Initiative) is well known in my school

2 Apart from learning mathematics or languages, it is important to learn how to live together with others

3 I like to use a portfolio to document my learning

4 I think my teachers know me well and also know where I need help

5 My parents should not really interfere with what is going on in school

6 I usually have the same opinions and views that my teacher has


8 In my class, children with different cultural backgrounds work together in mixed groups

9 Girls participate more in my class when compared with boys

10 I am happy with the way my teachers teach me

11 For our class, we have all defined our own classroom rules

12 I wish my teachers would receive more training to help us learning

13 I feel that I can contribute well in the classroom

14 I would like older students not to push us around or bully us

15 It is easier for me to be taught by a teacher sharing the same religion

16 I am looking forward to being in Grade 7 in two years time





19 I can share my problems with my teacher

20 My teacher has a lot of contact with my parents

21 I think that when I go on to higher classes the teaching and learning will get tougher since teachers will teach differently

22 I do not really feel safe outside my school

23 The teacher is very interested in my opinions, even if they differ from her/his own

24 I prefer it when the teacher just talks to us instead of asking us to work in groups

25 It is more difficult for a girl to do well at school

26 For a good future of my country, receiving good education is the most important thing

27 My parents are generally very interested in what is happening in my class


29 The teacher visits my parents if I do not attend school

30 Boys are more often absent from school than girls

31 When my teacher is giving us marks, she/he is always interested to know what marks we would give ourselves

32 Children in our class are my friends, no matter their race, skin colour or religion.


34 If I have problems, I speak to my teacher or the pedagogue

35 In the lesson, we often work in groups




39 We are tested by the teacher at regular intervals




What is he name of your Canton/Entity: What is the name of your Općina:


How old are you? Are you a girl or a boy?






1 The Child Friendly Schools Project (Step By Step Initiative) is well known in my school

2 Apart from learning mathematics or languages, it is important to learn how to live together with others

3 I like to use a portfolio to document my learning

4 I think my teachers know me well and also know where I need help

5 My parents should not really interfere with what is going on in school

6 I usually have the same opinions and views that my teacher has


8 In my class, children with different cultural backgrounds work together in mixed groups

9 Girls participate more in my classes when compared with boys

10 I am happy with the way my teachers teach me

11 For our class, we have all define dour own classroom rules

12 I wish my teachers would receive more training to help us learning

13 I feel that I can contribute well in the classroom

14 I would like older students not to push us around or bully us

15 It is easier for me to be taught by a teacher sharing the same religion

16 I am looking forward to continue my education after Grade 9





19 I can share my problems with my teacher

20 My teacher has a lot of contact with my parents

21 I think that when I go on to higher classes the teaching and learning will get tougher since teachers will teach differently

22 I do not really feel safe outside my school

23 The teacher is very interested in my opinions, even if they differ from her/his own

24 I prefer it when the teacher just talks to us instead of asking us to work in groups

25 It is more difficult for a girl to do well at school

26 For a good future of my country, receiving good education is the most important thing

27 My parents are generally very interested in what is happening in my class


29 The teacher visits my parents if I do not attend school

30 Boys are more often absent from school than girls

31 When my teacher is giving us marks, she/he is always interested to know what marks we would give ourselves

32 Children in our class are my friends, no matter their race, skin colour or religion.


34 If I have problems, I speak to my teacher or the pedagogue

35 In the lesson, we often work in groups




39 We are tested by the teacher at regular intervals



APPENDIX 5a:

Questionnaires (Bosnian translation)

Označite odgovarajuće polje

Projekt «Škole po mjeri djeteta», Upitnik 1 (UPI-1 DIR-PED): Iskustva direktora i pedagoga

Kanton/entitet: Općina: direktor pedagog muškarac

ţena

Popunjavaju direktori škola i pedagozi

Broj godina na projektu:

Godine iskustva u nastavi:

Broj treninga koje ste pohaĎali:

Broj dana treninga:

Uputstvo: Svrha ove vježbe je da se prikupe informacije o Projektu “Škole po mjeri djeteta”, te o tome kako je moguće uticao na vas i nastavnike u vašoj školi. Informacije koje nam date pomoći će nam da projekt usavršimo. Također će pomoći unapređenju obrazovanja u vašoj zemlji.

Stoga vas molimo da tačno i pažljivo pružite relevantne i prikladne informacije, koliko god je to moguće. Nema “tačnih” i “pogrešnih/netačnih” odgovora. Informacije koje nam pružite su strogo povjerljive prirode i neće se koristiti ni na čiju štetu. Molimo vas da nam pomognete odgovarajući na pitanja označivanjem odgovarajućeg polja, te pružanjem tačnije/preciznije informacije gdje je to potrebno.

Molimo da naznačite koliko se snažno slažete ili ne slažete s navedenim izjavama. No Izjava U

potpunosti se slaţem

Slaţem se Ne slaţem se

Nikako se ne slaţem

1 Poznati su mi ciljevi i svrha projekta “Škola po mjeri djeteta”/STEP by STEP inicijative.

2 Veoma je bitno, pored nastavnog predmeta, podučavati djecu i u praktičnim životnim vještinama.

3 Redovno sarađujem sa svojim kolegama kako bismo unaprijedili podučavanje.

4 Za nastavnike je bitno da koriste portfolio kako bi dokumentirali sopstveni dnevnik profesionalnog uspona.

5 Dobro poznajem učenike u svojoj školi i upoznat/a sam s njihovim specifičnim problemima.

6 Roditelji se ne bi trebali miješati u to što se događa u mojoj učionici.

7 Učenici u školi obično dijele mišljenje i viđenja svojih nastavnika.

8 Djevojčice bolje uče nego dječaci.

9 U našoj su školi djeca iz različitih kulturoloških sredina ohrabrena da zajedno rade u mještovitim grupama.

10 Djevojčice više učestvuju u nastavi nego dječaci.

11 Trening koji sam pohađao/la kroz projekt nije promijenio način na koji pristupam obrazovanju.

12 Metodologija po mjeri djeteta/prijatelj djeteta se baš i ne uklapa u postojeće nastavne planove i programe.

13 Djeca pripadnici manjinskih grupa (npr. Romi) otežavaju vođenje nastave.

14 Priželjkujem napredniji trening o školama po mjeri djeteta jer želim naučiti više o tome.

15 Nije važno hoće li sva djeca istog razreda ispuniti sličan nivo očekivanja za taj razred.

16 Nakon treninga koji su pohađali, naši nastavnici mnogo manje pričaju, a učenici mnogo više doprinose.

17 Dešava se da stariji učenici grubo zadirkuju mlađe ili da su nasilni prema njima.

18 Za učenika je lakše da ga/je uči nastavnik/učitelj iste vjeroispovijesti.

19 Nastavnicima nije potreban mentor za profesionalni razvoj.

20 Kod kuće dječaci trebaju provesti manje vremena obavljajući kućne poslove nego djevojčice.

21 Van škole bi se svaka etnička grupa trebala držati svoje etničke grupe.

No Izjava U potpunosti se slaţem



22 Učenice i učenici mogu jednako podijeliti probleme koji ih muče sa svojim nastavnikom.

23 Za mene je bitan intenzivan kontakt s roditeljima i zajednicama svojih učenika.

24 Zabrinut-a sam šta će biti s učenicima koji su prošli program škole po mjeri djeteta kad pređu u starije razrede koji ne podržavaju sličnu metodologiju.

25 Okruženje moje škole nije sigurno mjesto za moju djecu.

26 Veoma me zanima mišljenje učenika, čak i kad se razlikuje od mog.

27 U učionici nije uvijek moguće primijeniti metodologiju usmjerenu ka djetetu kao centru nastavnog procesa.

28 Djevojčicama je teže postići dobar uspjeh u školi.

29 Dobro obrazovanje je najvažniji faktor osiguranja snažne i pozitivne budućnosti moje zemlje.

30 Roditelji su općenito veoma zainteresirani za to šta se dešava na nastavi.

31 Dobro je imati dvije škole pod jednim krovom.

32 Naši nastavnici posjećuju roditelje ako dijete ne pohađa nastavu.

33 Dječaci češće izostaju s nastave nego djevojčice.

34 Prilikom ocjenjivanja učenika, važno je znati kako oni sami sebe ocjenjuju.

35 Razlozi nepohađanja nastave isti su i kod dječaka i kod djevojčica.

36 Aktivna i ka djetetu usmjerena nastavna metodologija skuplja je od tradicionalnih nastavnih metoda.

37 Sva djeca u mojoj školi imaju jednak tretman, bez obzira na njihovu nacionalnost, boju kože ili vjeroispovijest.

38 Djeca s posebnim potrebama (npr. oštećenjem sluha ili vida) ne mogu pohađati nastavu skupa s djecom koja nemaju takve potrebe.

39 Metodologija nastave po mjeri djeteta već je dio sveobuhvatnog procesa obrazovanja nastavnog kadra (a ne samo kroz trening centre podržane kroz projekt).

40 Djeca radije podijele svoje brige i strahove sa mnom nego direktno sa svojim nastavnicima.

41 Važno je organizirati sastanke s roditeljima.

42 Roditelji mi često pristupe jer su jako zainteresirani o čemu je riječ u školi po mjeri djeteta.

43 Tokom posjeta razredima, primijetio/primijetila sam da ima mnogo više interakcije između dječaka i djevojčica u obavljanju radnih zadataka.

44 Ne bih znao/znala objasniti nekome sa strane šta je u stvari ideja Projekta Škole po mjeri djeteta

45 U učionici sva moć mora biti u rukama nastavnika.

46 Djevojčice i dječaci u mojoj školi se uzajamno poštuju i pomažu.

47 Kad se pojavi problem, nastavnici i učenici zajednički nalaze rješenje

48 Važno je vršiti ocjenjivanje svih učenika u redovnim intervalima

49 Djevojčicama je po završetku škole teže pronaći zaposlenje nego dječacima.

50 Projekt «Škole po mjeri djeteta» nije adekvatan za situaciju u kojoj se moja zemlja nalazi

Hvala na saradnji!

Projekt «Škole po mjeri djeteta», Upitnik 2 (UPI-2 NAS-SVI): Iskustva nastavnika

Kanton/entitet: Općina: Razredi kojima predajete:

Muškarac/žena:

Ispunjavaju svi nastavnici u školi




Broj dana treninga:

Uputstvo: Svrha ove vježbe je da se prikupe informacije o Projektu “Škole po mjeri djeteta”, te o tome kako je možda uticao na vas i nastavnike u vašoj školi. Informacije koje nam date pomoći će nam da projekt usavršimo. Također će pomoći unapređenju obrazovanja u vašoj zemlji Stoga vas molimo da tačno i pažljivo pružite relevantne i prikladne informacije, koliko god je to moguće. Nema “tačnih” i “pogrešnih/netačnih” odgovora.

Informacije koje nam pružite su strogo povjerljive prirode i neće se koristiti ni na čiju štetu. Molimo vas da nam pomognete odgovarajući na pitanja označivanjem odgovarajućeg polja, te pružanjem tačnije/preciznije informacije gdje je to potrebno.

I Molimo da naznačite koliko se snažno slažete ili ne slažete s navedenim izjavama. Br. Izjava U potpunosti

se slaţem Slaţem se Ne slaţem

se Nikako se ne slaţem



3 Redovno sarađujem sa svojim kolegama kako bismo unaprijedili podučavanje

4 Volim koristiti portfolio kako bih dokumentirao/la sopstveni dnevnik profesionalnog uspona

5 Dobro poznajem svoje učenike i upoznat/a sam s njihovim specifičnim problemima.


7 Učenici obično dijele moje mišljenje i viđenje stvari.

8 Djevojčice uče bolje nego dječaci.

9 Na svojim časovima ohrabrujem djecu iz različitih kulturoloških sredina da zajedno rade u mještovitim grupama.

10 Na mojim časovima, djevojčice su aktivnije na nastavi nego dječaci.



13 Djeca pripadnici manjinskih grupa (npr. Romi) otežavaju vođenje nastave.



16 Nakon završenog treninga, mnogo manje pričam, a učenici mnogo više doprinose.



19 Nije mi potreban mentor kako bih se profesionalno razvijao/razvijala.



Br. Izjava U potpunosti se slaţem



22 Učenice i učenici mogu jednako podijeliti probleme koji ih muče sa mnom.


24 Zabrinut-a sam šta će biti s mojim učenicima koji su prošli program škole po mjeri djeteta kad pređu u starije razrede koji ne podržavaju sličnu metodologiju.








32 Odlazim u posjetu roditeljima ako dijete ne pohađa nastavu.


34 Prilikom ocjenjivanja učenika, važno mi je znati kako oni sami sebe ocjenjuju.






40 U mojoj školi djeca podijele svoje brige i strahove s nastavnicima ili uz podršku pedagoga.



43 Na nastavi ima mnogo više interakcije između dječaka i djevojčica u obavljanju radnih zadataka.


45 Kao nastavnik, svu moć u učionici držim u svojim rukama.


47 Kad se pojavi problem u učionici, zajenički pokušavamo naći rješenje.

48 Važno je vršiti ocjenjivanje svih učenika u isto vrijeme u redovnim intervalima



Hvala na saradnji!

Projekt Škole po mjeri djeteta, Upitnik 3 (UPI-3 UČE-RAZ2): Iskustva učenika (II razred)

Ime tvog entiteta/kantona?

Ime tvoje općine je?

Samo učenici drugog razreda popunjavaju upitnik

Koliko imaš godina?

Jesi li dječak ili djevojčica?

Zanima nas da saznamo više o tvom životu u školi i kod kuće!

Zato te molimo da nam ispod nacrtaš 4 crteža. Hoćeš li nam pomoći? Puno ti hvala!

1. Molim te, nacrtaj svoju učionicu. Pokaži nam gdje sjediš, gdje sjede tvoji prijatelji i gdje se nalazi nastavnik/učitelj.

2. Šta ti je potrebno da bi bio/bila sretan/sretna u školi? Pokaži nam crtežom!

3. Nacrtaj učitelja/učiteljicu kako drži čas. Nacrtaj i sebe – gdje se nalaziš.

4. Pokaži nam kako se igraš u školi.

Hvala ti!!

Projekt «Škole po mjeri djeteta», Upitnik 3 (UPI-3 UČE-RAZ5): Iskustva učenika (V razred)

Tvoj kanton/entitet zove se: A općina:

Ispunjavaju samo učenici V razreda Koliko imaš godina? Jesi li dječak ili djevojčica?

Svrha ove vježbe je da se prikupe informacije o Projektu “Škole po mjeri djeteta”, te o tome kako je moždauticao na tebe i na to kako razmišljaš o svom obrazovanju. Informacije koje nam date pomoći će nam da projekt usavršimo. Također će pomoći unapređenju obrazovanja u vašoj zemlji.


Molimo da naznačiš koliko se snažno slažete ili ne slažete s navedenim izjavama:




1 Projekt “Škole po mjeri djeteta” (Step By Step inicijativa) je dobro poznat u mojoj školi.

2 Osim što učimo matematiku ili jezike, važno je naučiti i kako se živi zajedno s drugima

3 Volim koristiti portfolio kako bih pratio/pratila svoje učenje

4 Mislim da me moji nastavnici dobro znaju, te da znaju gdje mi je potrebna pomoć

5 Moji roditelji se baš i ne bi trebali miješati u to šta se događa na nastavi

6 Uglavnom mislim i gledam na stvari isto kao moj nastavnik/ca.

7 Djevojčice uče bolje nego dječaci

8 U mom razredu djeca različitog kulturološkog porijekla zajedno rade u mješovitim grupama

9 Djevojčice su u mom razredu aktivnije na nastavi nego dječaci

10 Sretan sam s tim kako me nastavnici uče

11 Mi smo uvijek određivali pravila za svoj razred

12 Volio/voljela bih kad bi moj(i) nastavnici prošli kroz još treninga kako bi mi još bolje pomogli u učenju

13 Osjetim da mogu dobro doprinijeti na nastavi

14 Volio/voljela bih da nas stariji učenici grubo ne zadirkuju i da ne budu nasilni prema nama

15 Za mene je lakše da mi predaje nastavnik iste vjeroispovijesti

16 Nadam se da ću za dvije godine biti u VII razredu






19 Mogu podijeliti svoje probleme sa svojim nastavnikom

20 Moj nastavnik intenzivno kontaktira s mojim roditeljima

21 Mislim da će nastava u starijim razredima biti teža jer će je nastavnici predavati na drugačiji način

22 Ne osjećam se baš sigurno van svoje škole

23 Nastavnika/cu jako zanimaju moja mišljenja i stavovi, čak i ako nam se mišljenja razlikuju

24 Više volim kad nastavnik/nastavnica sam/a govori nego kad nas raporedi da radimo po grupama

25 Za djevojčicu je teže da postigne dobar uspjeh u školi

26 Dobro obrazovanje je najvažnija stvar za dobru budućnost moje zemlje

27 Moji roditelji su općenito veoma zainteresirani za to šta mi se dešava na nastavi

28 Dobro je imati dvije škole pod jednim krovom

29 Nastavnik/nastavnica obilazi moje roditelje ako ja odsustvujem s nastave

30 Dječaci češće izostaju s nastave nego djevojčice

31 Kad nas ocjenjuje, moj nastavnik/nastavnica je uvijek zainteresiran/a šta bismo sami sebi dali kao ocjenu

32 Djeca iz razreda su mi prijatelji, bez obzira na njihovu nacionalnu pripadnost, boju kože ili vjeroispovijest


34 Ako imam neki problem, razgovaram s nastavnikom/nastavnicom ili pedagogom.

35 Na času često radimo u grupama

36 Nastavnik treba da svu moć u učionici drži u svojim rukama


38 Kad se pojavi problem u učionici, zajednički pokušavamo naći rješenje.

39 Nastavnik/ci nas testira(ju) u redovnim vremenskim intervalima

40 Djevojčici je po završetku škole teže pronaći zaposlenje nego dječaku

Hvala na saradnji!

Projekt “Škole po mjeri djeteta”, Upitni 3 (UPI-3 UČE-RAZ7): Iskustva učenika (VII razred)

Naziv tvog entiteta/kantona: Općina:

Ispunjavaju samo učenici VII razreda

Koliko imaš godina? Jesi li dječak ili djevojčica ?

Uputstvo: Svrha ove vježbe je da se prikupe informacije o Projektu “Škole po mjeri djeteta”, te o tome kako je možda uticao na tebe i na to kako razmišljaš o svom obrazovanju. Informacije koje nam date pomoći će nam da projekt usavršimo. Također će pomoći unapređenju obrazovanja u vašoj zemlji.


Molimo da naznačiš do koje se mjere slažeš ili ne slažeš s navedenim izjavama:







4 Mislim da me moji nastavnici dobro znaj, te da znaju gdje mi je potrebna pomoć

5 Moji roditelji se baš i ne bi trebali miješati u to šta se događa u školi



8 U mom razredu djeca različitog kulturološkog porijekla zajedno rade u mješovitim grupama








16 Radujem se nastavku svog školovanja po završetku osmog razreda

17 Kod kuće dječaci trebaju provesti manje vremena obavljajući kućne poslove nego djevojčice










24 Više volim kad nastavnik/nastavnica sam/a govori nego kad nas raporedi da radimo po grupama











35 Na času često radimo u grupama






Hvala ti na saradnji!

APPENDIX 5b:

Questionnaires (Cyrillic version for Republika Srpska)

Означите одговарајуће поље

Пројект «Школе по мјери дјетета», Упитник 1 (УПИ-1 ДИР-ПЕД): Искуства директора и педагога

Ентитет: Општина: директор педагог мушкарац жена

Попуњавају директори школа и педагози

Број година на пројекту:

Године искуства у настави:

Број тренинга које сте похађали:

Број дана тренинга:

Упутство: Сврха ове вјежбе је да се прикупе информације о Пројекту “Школе по

мјери дјетета”, те о томе како је можда утицао на вас и наставнике у вашој

школи. Информације које нам дате помоћи ће нам да пројект усавршимо. Такођер

ће помоћи унапређењу образовања у вашој земљи.

Стога вас молимо да тачно и пажљиво пружите релевантне и прикладне информације, колико год

је то могуће. Нема “тачних” и “погрешних/нетачних” одговора. Информације које нам пружите су

строго повјерљиве природе и неће се користити ни на чију штету. Молимо вас да нам помогнете

одговарајући на питања означивањем одговарајућег поља, те пружањем тачније/прецизније

информације гдје је то потребно.

Mолимо да назначите колико се снажно слажете или не слажете с наведеним изјавама.

бp Изјава У потпуности се слажем

Слажем се Не слажем се

Никако се не слажем

1 Познати су ми циљеви и сврха пројекта “Школа по мјери дјетета”/СТЕП бy СТЕП иницијативе.

2 Веома је битно, поред наставног предмета, подучавати дјецу и у практичним животним вјештинама.

3 Редовно сарађујем са својим колегама како бисмо унаприједили подучавање.

4 За наставнике је битно да користе портфолио како би документирали сопствени дневник професионалног успона.

5 Добро познајем ученике у својој школи и упознат/а сам с њиховим специфичним проблемима.

6 Родитељи се не би требали мијешати у то што се догађа у мојој учионици.

7 Ученици у школи обично дијеле мишљење и виђења својих наставника.

8 Дјевојчице боље уче него дјечаци.

9 У нашој су школи дјеца из различитих културолошких средина охрабрена да заједно раде у мјештовитим групама.

10 Дјевојчице више учествују у настави него дјечаци.

11 Тренинг који сам похађао/ла кроз пројект није промијенио начин на који приступам образовању.

12 Методологија по мјери дјетета/пријатељ дјетета се баш и не уклапа у постојеће наставне планове и програме.

13 Дјеца припадници мањинских група (нпр. Роми) отежавају вођење наставе.

14 Прижељкујем напреднији тренинг о школама по мјери дјетета јер желим научити више о томе.

15 Није важно хоће ли сва дјеца истог разреда испунити сличан ниво очекивања за тај разред.

16 Након тренинга који су похађали, наши наставници много мање причају, а ученици много више доприносе.

17 Дешава се да старији ученици грубо задиркују млађе или да су насилни према њима.

18 За ученика је лакше да га/је учи наставник/учитељ исте вјероисповијести.

19 Наставницима није потребан ментор за професионални развој.

20 Код куће дјечаци требају провести мање времена обављајући кућне послове него дјевојчице.

21 Ван школе би се свака етничка група требала држати своје етничке групе.

22 Ученице и ученици могу једнако подијелити проблеме који их муче са својим наставником.

бp Изјава У потпуности се слажем



23 За мене је битан интензиван контакт с родитељима и заједницама својих ученика.

24 Забринут-а сам шта ће бити с ученицима који су прошли програм школе по мјери дјетета кад пређу у старије разреде који не подржавају сличну методологију.

25 Окружење моје школе није сигурно мјесто за моју дјецу.

26 Веома ме занима мишљење ученика, чак и кад се разликује од мог.

27 У учионици није увијек могуће примијенити методологију усмјерену ка дјетету као центру наставног процеса.

28 Дјевојчицама је теже постићи добар успјех у школи.

29 Добро образовање је најважнији фактор осигурања снажне и позитивне будућности моје земље.

30 Родитељи су уопштено веома заинтересовани за то шта се дешава на настави.

31 Добро је имати двије школе под једним кровом.

32 Наши наставници посјећују родитеље ако дијете не похађа наставу.

33 Дјечаци чешће изостају с наставе него дјевојчице.

34 Приликом оцјењивања ученика, важно је знати како они сами себе оцјењују.

35 Разлози непохађања наставе исти су и код дјечака и код дјевојчица.

36 Активна и ка дјетету усмјерена наставна методологија скупља је од традиционалних наставних метода.

37 Сва дјеца у мојој школи имају једнак третман, без обзира на њихову националност, боју коже или вјероисповијест.

38 Дјеца с посебним потребама (нпр. оштећењем слуха или вида) не могу похађати наставу скупа с дјецом која немају такве потребе.

39 Методологија наставе по мјери дјетета већ је дио свеобухватног процеса образовања наставног кадра (а не само кроз тренинг центре подржане кроз пројект).

40 Дјеца радије подијеле своје бриге и страхове са мном него директно са својим наставницима.

41 Важно је организирати састанке с родитељима.

42 Родитељи ми често приступе јер су јако заинтересирани о чему је ријеч у школи по мјери дјетета.

43 Током посјета разредима, примијетио/примијетила сам да има много више интеракције између дјечака и дјевојчица у обављању радних задатака.

44 Не бих знао/знала објаснити некоме са стране шта је у ствари идеја Пројекта Школе по мјери дјетета

45 У учионици сва моћ мора бити у рукама наставника.

46 Дјевојчице и дјечаци у мојој школи се узајамно поштују и помажу.

47 Кад се појави проблем, наставници и ученици заједнички налазе рјешење

48 Важно је вршити оцјењивање свих ученика у редовним интервалима

49 Дјевојчицама је по завршетку школе теже пронаћи запослење него дјечацима.

50 Пројект «Школе по мјери дјетета» није адекватан за ситуацију у којој се моја земља налази

Хвала на сарадњи!

Пројект «Школе по мјери дјетета», Упитник 2 (УПИ-2 НАС-СВИ): Искуства наставника

Ентитет: Општина: Разреди којима предајете:

Мушкарац/жена:

Испуњавају сви наставници у школи

Број година на пројекту:

Године искуства у настави:

Број тренинга које сте похађали:

Број дана тренинга:

Упутство: Сврха ове вјежбе је да се прикупе информације о Пројекту “Школе по мјери дјетета”, те о томе како је можда утицао на вас и наставнике у вашој школи. Информације које нам дате помоћи ће нам да пројект усавршимо. Такођер ће помоћи унапређењу образовања у вашој земљи

Стога вас молимо да тачно и пажљиво пружите релевантне и прикладне информације, колико год је то могуће. Нема “тачних” и “погрешних/нетачних” одговора. Информације које нам пружите су строго повјерљиве природе и неће се користити ни на чију штету. Молимо вас да нам помогнете одговарајући на питања означивањем одговарајућег поља, те пружањем тачније/прецизније

информације гдје је то потребно. Молимо да назначите колико се снажно слажете или не слажете с наведеним изјавама.

Бр Изјава У потпуности се слажем



1 Познати су ми циљеви и сврха пројекта “Школа по мјери дјетета”/СТЕП бy СТЕП иницијативе.

2 Веома је битно, поред наставног предмета, подучавати дјецу и у практичним животним вјештинама.

3 Редовно сарађујем са својим колегама како бисмо унаприједили подучавање

4 Волим користити портфолио како бих документирао/ла сопствени дневник професионалног успона

5 Добро познајем своје ученике и упознат/а сам с њиховим специфичним проблемима.

6 Родитељи се не би требали мијешати у то што се догађа у мојој учионици.

7 Ученици обично дијеле моје мишљење и виђење ствари.

8 Дјевојчице уче боље него дјечаци.

9 На својим часовима охрабрујем дјецу из различитих културолошких средина да заједно раде у мјештовитим групама.

10 На мојим часовима, дјевојчице су активније на настави него дјечаци.

11 Тренинг који сам похађао/ла кроз пројект није промијенио начин на који приступам образовању.

12 Методологија по мјери дјетета/пријатељ дјетета се баш и не уклапа у постојеће наставне планове и програме.

13 Дјеца припадници мањинских група (нпр. Роми) отежавају вођење наставе.

14 Прижељкујем напреднији тренинг о школама по мјери дјетета јер желим научити више о томе.

15 Није важно хоће ли сва дјеца истог разреда испунити сличан ниво очекивања за тај разред.

16 Након завршеног тренинга, много мање причам, а ученици много више доприносе.

17 Дешава се да старији ученици грубо задиркују млађе или да су насилни према њима.

18 За ученика је лакше да га/је учи наставник/учитељ исте вјероисповијести.

19 Није ми потребан ментор како бих се професионално развијао/развијала.



22 Ученице и ученици могу једнако подијелити проблеме који их муче са мном.

Бр Изјава У потпуности се слажем



23 За мене је битан интензиван контакт с родитељима и заједницама својих ученика.

24 Забринут-а сам шта ће бити с мојим ученицима који су прошли програм школе по мјери дјетета кад пређу у старије разреде који не подржавају сличну методологију.

25 Окружење моје школе није сигурно мјесто за моју дјецу.

26 Веома ме занима мишљење ученика, чак и кад се разликује од мог.

27 У учионици није увијек могуће примијенити методологију усмјерену ка дјетету као центру наставног процеса.

28 Дјевојчицама је теже постићи добар успјех у школи.

29 Добро образовање је најважнији фактор осигурања снажне и позитивне будућности моје земље.

30 Родитељи су уопштено говорећи веома заинтересовани за то шта се дешава на настави.

31 Добро је имати двије школе под једним кровом.

32 Одлазим у посјету родитељима ако дијете не похађа наставу.

33 Дјечаци чешће изостају с наставе него дјевојчице.

34 Приликом оцјењивања ученика, важно ми је знати како они сами себе оцјењују.

35 Разлози непохађања наставе исти су и код дјечака и код дјевојчица.

36 Активна и ка дјетету усмјерена наставна методологија скупља је од традиционалних наставних метода.

37 Сва дјеца у мојој школи имају једнак третман, без обзира на њихову националност, боју коже или вјероисповијест.


39 Методологија наставе по мјери дјетета већ је дио свеобухватног процеса образовања наставног кадра (а не само кроз тренинг центре подржане кроз пројект).

40 У мојој школи дјеца подијеле своје бриге и страхове с наставницима или уз подршку педагога.

41 Важно је организирати састанке с родитељима.

42 Родитељи ми често приступе јер су јако заинтересовани о чему је ријеч у школи по мјери дјетета.

43 На настави има много више интеракције између дјечака и дјевојчица у обављању радних задатака.

44 Не бих знао/знала објаснити некоме са стране шта је у ствари идеја Пројекта Школе по мјери дјетета

45 Као наставник, сву моћ у учионици држим у својим рукама.


47 Кад се појави проблем у учионици, заједнички покушавамо наћи рјешење.

48 Важно је вршити оцјењивање свих ученика у исто вријеме у редовним интервалима

49 Дјевојчицама је по завршетку школе теже пронаћи запослење него дјечацима.

50 Пројект «Школе по мјери дјетета» није адекватан за ситуацију у којој се моја земља налази


Пројект «Школе по мјери дјетета», Упитник 3 (УПИ-3 УЧЕ-РАЗ5): Искуства ученика (V разред)

Твој ентитет зове се: А општина:

Испуњавају само ученици V разреда Колико имаш година? Јеси ли дјечак или дјевојчица?

Сврха ове вјежбе је да се прикупе информације о Пројекту “Школе по мјери дјетета”, те о томе како је можда утицао на тебеи на то како размишљаш о свом образовању. Информације које нам дате помоћи ће нам да пројект усавршимо. Такођер ће помоћи унапређењу образовања у вашој земљи.

Стога вас молимо да тачно и пажљиво пружите релевантне и прикладне информације, колико год је то могуће. Нема “тачних” и “погрешних/нетачних” одговора. Информације које нам пружите су строго повјерљиве природе и неће се користити ни на чију штету. Молимо вас да нам помогнете одговарајући на питања означивањем одговарајућег поља, те пружањем тачније/прецизније информације гдје је то потребно.

Молимо да назначиш колико се снажно слажете или не слажете с наведеним изјавама:

Бр.

Изјава У потпуности се слажем



1 Пројект “Школе по мјери дјетета” (Степ Бy Степ иницијатива) је добро познат у мојој школи.

2 Осим што учимо математику или језике, важно је научити и како се живи заједно с другима

3 Волим користити портфолио како бих пратио/пратила своје учење

4 Мислим да ме моји наставници добро знају, те да знају гдје ми је потребна помоћ

5 Моји родитељи се баш и не би требали мијешати у то шта се догађа на настави

6 Углавном мислим и гледам на ствари исто као мој наставник/ца.

7 Дјевојчице уче боље него дјечаци

8 У мом разреду дјеца различитог културолошког поријекла заједно раде у мјешовитим групама

9 Дјевојчице су у мом разреду активније на настави него дјечаци

10 Сретан сам с тим како ме наставници уче

11 Ми смо увијек одређивали правила за свој разред

12 Волио/вољела бих кад би мој(и) наставници прошли кроз још тренинга како би ми још боље помогли у учењу

13 Осјетим да могу добро допринијети на настави

14 Волио/вољела бих да нас старији ученици грубо не задиркују и да не буду насилни према нама

15 За мене је лакше да ми предаје наставник исте вјероисповијести

16 Надам се да ћу за двије године бити у ВИИ разреду


Бр.

Изјава У потпуности се слажем




19 Могу подијелити своје проблеме са својим наставником

20 Мој наставник интензивно контактира с мојим родитељима

21 Мислим да ће настава у старијим разредима бити тежа јер ће је наставници предавати на другачији начин

22 Не осјећам се баш сигурно ван своје школе

23 Наставника/цу јако занимају моја мишљења и ставови, чак и ако нам се мишљења разликују

24 Више волим кад наставник/наставница сам/а говори него кад нас рапореди да радимо по групама

25 За дјевојчицу је теже да постигне добар успјех у школи

26 Добро образовање је најважнија ствар за добру будућност моје земље

27 Моји родитељи су уопштено веома заинтересовани за то шта ми се дешава на настави

28 Добро је имати двије школе под једним кровом

29 Наставник/наставница обилази моје родитеље ако ја одсуствујем с наставе

30 Дјечаци чешће изостају с наставе него дјевојчице

31 Кад нас оцјењује, мој наставник/наставница је увијек заинтересиран/а шта бисмо сами себи дали као оцјену

32 Дјеца из разреда су ми пријатељи, без обзира на њихову националност, боју коже или вјероисповијест


34 Ако имам неки проблем, разговарам с наставником/наставницом или педагогом.

35 На часу често радимо у групама

36 Наставник треба да сву моћ у учионици држи у својим рукама


38 Кад се појави проблем у учионици, зајенички покушавамо наћи рјешење.

39 Наставник/ци нас тестира(ју) у редовним временским интервалима

40 Дјевојчици је по завршетку школе теже пронаћи запослење него дјечаку


Пројект “Школе по мјери дјетета”, Упитни 3 (УПИ-3 УЧЕ-РАЗ7): Искуства ученика (VII разред)

Назив твог ентитета: Општина:

Испуњавају само ученици VII разреда

Колико имаш година? Јеси ли дјечак или дјевојчица ?

Упутство: Сврха ове вјежбе је да се прикупе информације о Пројекту “Школе по мјери дјетета”, те о томе како је можда утицао на тебе и на то како размишљаш о свом образовању. Информације које нам дате помоћи ће нам да пројект усавршимо. Такођер ће помоћи унапређењу образовања у вашој земљи.

Стога вас молимо да тачно и пажљиво пружите релевантне и прикладне информације, колико год је то могуће. Нема “тачних” и “погрешних/нетачних” одговора. Информације које нам пружите су строго повјерљиве природе и неће се користити ни на чију штету. Молимо вас да нам помогнете одговарајући на питања означивањем одговарајућег поља, те пружањем тачније/прецизније информације гдје је то потребно.

Молимо да назначиш до које се мјере слажеш или не слажеш с наведеним изјавама:

Но Изјава У потпуности се слажем



1 Пројект “Школе по мјери дјетета” (Степ Бy Степ иницијатива) је добро познат у мојој школи.

2 Осим што учимо математику или језике, важно је научити и како се живи заједно с другима

3 Волим користити портфолио како бих пратио/пратила своје учење

4 Мислим да ме моји наставници добро познају, те да знају гдје ми је потребна помоћ

5 Моји родитељи се баш и не би требали мијешати у то шта се догађа у школи

6 Углавном мислим и гледам на ствари исто као мој наставник/ца.

7 Дјевојчице уче боље него дјечаци

8 У мом разреду дјеца различитог културолошког поријекла заједно раде у мјешовитим групама

9 Дјевојчице су у мом разреду активније на настави него дјечаци

10 Сретан сам с тим како ме наставници уче

11 Ми смо увијек одређивали правила за свој разред

12 Волио/вољела бих кад би мој(и) наставници прошли кроз још тренинга како би ми још боље помогли у учењу

13 Осјетим да могу добро допринијети на настави

14 Волио/вољела бих да нас старији ученици грубо не задиркују и да не буду насилни према нама

15 За мене је лакше да ми предаје наставник исте вјероисповијести

16 Радујем се наставку свог школовања по завршетку осмог разреда

17 Код куће дјечаци требају провести мање времена обављајући кућне послове него дјевојчице

Но Изјава У потпуности се слажем




19 Могу подијелити своје проблеме са својим наставником

20 Мој наставник одржава интензиван контакт с мојим родитељима

21 Мислим да ће настава у старијим разредима бити тежа јер ће је наставници предавати на другачији начин

22 Не осјећам се баш сигурно ван своје школе

23 Наставника/цу јако занимају моја мишљења и ставови, чак и ако нам се мишљења разликују

24 Више волим кад наставник/наставница сам/а говори него кад нас рапореди да радимо по групама

25 За дјевојчицу је теже да постигне добар успјех у школи

26 Добро образовање је најважнија ствар за добру будућност моје земље

27 Моји родитељи су уопштено веома заинтересовани за то шта ми се дешава на настави

28 Добро је имати двије школе под једним кровом

29 Наставник/наставница обилази моје родитеље ако ја одсуствујем с наставе

30 Дјечаци чешће изостају с наставе него дјевојчице

31 Кад нас оцјењује, мој наставник/наставница је увијек заинтересиран/а шта бисмо сами себи дали као оцјену

32 Дјеца из разреда су ми пријатељи, без обзира на њихову националну припадност, боју коже или вјероисповијест


34 Ако имам неки проблем, разговарам с наставником/наставницом или педагогом.

35 На часу често радимо у групама

36 Наставник треба да сву моћ у учионици држи у својим рукама


38 Кад се појави проблем у учионици, зајенички покушавамо наћи рјешење.

39 Наставник/ци нас тестира(ју) у редовним временским интервалима

40 Дјевојчици је по завршетку школе теже пронаћи запослење него дјечаку

Хвала ти на сарадњи!

APPENDIX 5c:

Questionnaires (Croat translation)

Označite odgovarajuće polje

Projekt «Škole po mjeri djeteta», Upitnik 1 (UPI-1 RAV-PED): Iskustva ravnatelja i pedagoga

Ţupanija/entitet: Općina: ravnatelj pedagog muškarac žena

Popunjavaju ravnatelji škola i pedagozi




Broj dana treninga:

Uputstvo: Svrha ove vježbe je da se prikupe informacije o Projektu “Škole po mjeri djeteta”, te o tome kako je moguće utjecao na vas i nastavnike u vašoj školi. Informacije koje nam date pomoći će nam da projekt usavršimo. Također će pomoći unaprijeđenju obrazovanja u vašoj zemlji.

Stoga vas molimo da točno i pažljivo pružite relevantne i prikladne informacije, koliko god je to moguće. Nema “točnih” i “pogrešnih/netočnih” odgovora. Informacije koje nam pružite su strogo povjerljive prirode i neće se koristiti ni na čiju štetu. Molimo vas da nam pomognete odgovarajući na pitanja označivanjem odgovarajućeg polja, te pružanjem točnije/preciznije informacije gdje je to potrebno.

Molimo da naznačite koliko se snažno slažete ili ne slažete s navedenim izjavama.


Slaţem se

Ne slaţem se




3 Redovno surađujem sa svojim kolegama kako bismo unaprijedili podučavanje.

4 Za nastavnike je bitno da koriste portfolio kako bi dokumentirali sopstveni dnevnik profesionalnog uspona.

5 Dobro poznajem učenike u svojoj školi i upoznat/a sam s njihovim specifičnim problemima.


7 Učenici u školi obično dijele mišljenje i viđenja svojih nastavnika.

8 Djevojčice bolje uče nego dječaci.

9 U našoj su školi djeca iz različitih kulturoloških sredina ohrabrena da zajedno rade u mještovitim skupinama.

10 Djevojčice više učestvuju u nastavi nego dječaci.



13 Djeca pripadnici manjinskih skupina (npr. Romi) otežavaju vođenje nastave.


15 Nije važno hoće li sva djeca istog razreda ispuniti sličnu razinu očekivanja za taj razred.

16 Nakon treninga koji su pohađali, naši nastavnici mnogo manje pričaju, a učenici mnogo više doprinose.



19 Nastavnicima nije potreban mentor za profesionalni razvoj.


21 Van škole bi se svaka etnička skupina trebala držati svoje etničke skupine.

22 Učenice i učenici mogu jednako podijeliti probleme koji ih muče sa svojim nastavnikom.


Slaţem se

Ne slaţem se



24 Zabrinut-a sam što će biti s učenicima koji su prošli program škole po mjeri djeteta kad pređu u starije razrede koji ne podržavaju sličnu metodologiju.






30 Roditelji su općenito veoma zainteresirani za to što se dešava na nastavi.


32 Naši nastavnici posjećuju roditelje ako dijete ne pohađa nastavu.


34 Prilikom ocjenjivanja učenika, važno je znati kako oni sami sebe ocjenjuju.






40 Djeca radije podijele svoje brige i strahove sa mnom nego direktno sa svojim nastavnicima.



43 Tokom posjeta razredima, primijetio/primijetila sam da ima mnogo više interakcije između dječaka i djevojčica u obavljanju radnih zadataka.


45 U učionici sva moć mora biti u rukama nastavnika.


47 Kad se pojavi problem, nastavnici i učenici zajednički nalaze rješenje

48 Važno je vršiti ocjenjivanje svih učenika u redovnim intervalima



Hvala na suradnji!

Projekt «Škole po mjeri djeteta», Upitnik 2 (UPI-2 NAS-SVI): Iskustva nastavnika

Ţupanija/entitet: Općina: Razredi kojima predajete:

Muškarac/ţena:

Ispunjavaju svi nastavnici u školi




Broj dana treninga:

Uputstvo: Svrha ove vježbe je da se prikupe informacije o Projektu “Škole po mjeri djeteta”, te o tome kako je možda utjecao na vas i nastavnike u vašoj školi. Informacije koje nam date pomoći će nam da projekt usavršimo. Također će pomoći unaprjeđenju obrazovanja u vašoj zemlji Stoga vas molimo da točno i pažljivo pružite relevantne i prikladne informacije, koliko god

je to moguće. Nema “točnih” i “pogrešnih/netočnih” odgovora. Informacije koje nam pružite su strogo povjerljive prirode i neće se koristiti ni na čiju štetu. Molimo vas da nam pomognete odgovarajući na pitanja označivanjem odgovarajućeg polja, te pružanjem točnije/preciznije informacije gdje je to potrebno.

I Molimo da naznačite koliko se snažno slažete ili ne slažete s navedenim izjavama.






3 Redovito surađujem sa svojim kolegama kako bismo unaprijedili podučavanje

4 Volim koristiti portfolio kako bih dokumentirao/la sopstveni dnevnik profesionalnog uspona

5 Dobro poznajem svoje učenike i upoznat/a sam s njihovim specifičnim problemima.


7 Učenici obično dijele moje mišljenje i viđenje stvari.

8 Djevojčice uče bolje nego dječaci.

9 Na svojim časovima ohrabrujem djecu iz različitih kulturoloških sredina da zajedno rade u mještovitim grupama.

10 Na mojim časovima, djevojčice su aktivnije na nastavi nego dječaci.



13 Djeca pripadnici manjinskih skupina (npr. Romi) otežavaju vođenje nastave.



16 Nakon završenog treninga, mnogo manje pričam, a učenici mnogo više doprinose.



19 Nije mi potreban mentor kako bih se profesionalno razvijao/razvijala.



22 Učenice i učenici mogu jednako podijeliti probleme koji ih muče sa mnom.





24 Zabrinut-a sam šta će biti s mojim učenicima koji su prošli program škole po mjeri djeteta kad pređu u starije razrede koji ne podržavaju sličnu metodologiju.








32 Odlazim u posjetu roditeljima ako dijete ne pohađa nastavu.


34 Prilikom ocjenjivanja učenika, važno mi je znati kako oni sami sebe ocjenjuju.






40 U mojoj školi djeca podijele svoje brige i strahove s nastavnicima ili uz podršku pedagoga.



43 Na nastavi ima mnogo više interakcije između dječaka i djevojčica u obavljanju radnih zadataka.


45 Kao nastavnik, svu moć u učionici držim u svojim rukama.



48 Važno je vršiti ocjenjivanje svih učenika u isto vrijeme u redovnim intervalima



Hvala na suradnji!

Projekt Škole po mjeri djeteta, Upitnik 3 (UPI-3 UČE-RAZ2): Iskustva učenika (II razred)

Ime tvog entiteta/ţupanije?

Ime tvoje općine je?

Samo učenici drugog razreda popunjavaju upitnik

Koliko imaš godina?

Jesi li dječak ili djevojčica?

Zanima nas da saznamo više o tvom životu u školi i kod kuće!

Zato te molimo da nam ispod nacrtaš 4 crteža. Hoćeš li nam pomoći? Puno ti hvala!

1. Molim te, nacrtaj svoju učionicu. Pokaži nam gdje sjediš, gdje sjede tvoji prijatelji i gdje se nalazi nastavnik/učitelj.s.

2. Šta ti je potrebno da bi bio/bila sretan/sretna u školi? Pokaži nam crtežom!

3. Nacrtaj učitelja/učiteljicu kako drži čas. Nacrtaj i sebe – gdje se nalaziš.

4. Pokaži nam kako se igraš u školi.

Hvala ti!!

Projekt «Škole po mjeri djeteta», Upitnik 3 (UPI-3 UČE-RAZ5): Iskustva učenika (V razred)

Tvoj ţupanija/entitet zove se: A općina:

Ispunjavaju samo učenici V razreda Koliko imaš godina? Jesi li dječak ili djevojčica?

Svrha ove vježbe je da se prikupe informacije o Projektu “Škole po mjeri djeteta”, te o tome kako je možda uticao na tebe i na to kako razmišljaš o svom obrazovanju. Informacije koje nam date pomoći će nam da projekt usavršimo. Također će pomoći unapređenju obrazovanja u vašoj zemlji.


Molimo da naznačiš koliko se snažno slažete ili ne slažete s navedenim izjavama:







4 Mislim da me moji nastavnici dobro znaju, te da znaju gdje mi je potrebna pomoć

5 Moji roditelji se baš i ne bi trebali miješati u to šta se događa na nastavi



8 U mom razredu djeca različitog kulturološkog porijekla zajedno rade u mješovitim skupinama.








16 Nadam se da ću za dvije godine biti u VII razredu











24 Više volim kad nastavnik/nastavnica sam/a govori nego kad nas raporedi da radimo po skupinama











35 Na času često radimo u skupinama



38 Kad se pojavi problem u učionici, zajenički pokušavamo naći rješenje.



Hvala na suradnji!

Projekt “Škole po mjeri djeteta”, Upitni 3 (UPI-3 UČE-RAZ7): Iskustva učenika (VII razred)

Naziv tvog entiteta/županije: Općina:

Ispunjavaju samo učenici VII razreda

Koliko imaš godina? Jesi li dječak ili djevojčica ?

Uputstvo: Svrha ove vježbe je da se prikupe informacije o Projektu “Škole po mjeri djeteta”, te o tome kako je možda utjecao na tebe i na to kako razmišljaš o svom obrazovanju. Informacije koje nam date pomoći će nam da projekt usavršimo. Također će pomoći unapređenju obrazovanja u vašoj zemlji.


Molimo da naznačiš do koje se mjere slažeš ili ne slažeš s navedenim izjavama:







4 Mislim da me moji nastavnici dobro znaj, te da znaju gdje mi je potrebna pomoć

5 Moji roditelji se baš i ne bi trebali miješati u to šta se događa u školi



8 U mom razredu djeca različitog kulturološkog porijekla zajedno rade u mješovitim skupinama








16 Radujem se nastavku svog školovanja po završetku osmog razreda

17 Kod kuće dječaci trebaju provesti manje vremena obavljajući kućne poslove nego djevojčice










24 Više volim kad nastavnik/nastavnica sam/a govori nego kad nas raporedi da radimo po skupinama











35 Na času često radimo u skupinama






Hvala ti na suradnji!

APPENDIX 6:

Summaries of responses to Questionnaires

QST-1 PRI:

Comparison of Consent Value Averages across Questionnaire Items,

Sample Groups and Whole Sample

0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

3,00

3,50

4,00

12 3

45

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

2122

232425

262728

2930

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

4647

4849 50

Group 1

Group 2

Group 3

Overall Sample

QST-1 PRI:

Comparison of Mean Deviation across Questionnaire Items,


-0,2000

0,0000

0,2000

0,4000

0,6000

0,8000

1,0000

1,2000

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49

Item #

Mea

n D

ev

iati

on

Group 1

Group 2

Group 3

Overall Sample

QST-1 PED:



0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

3,00

3,50

4,00

12 3

45

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

2122

232425

262728

2930

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

4647

4849 50

Group 1

Group 2

Group 3

Overall Sample

QST-1 PED:



0,0000

0,2000

0,4000

0,6000

0,8000

1,0000

1,2000

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49

Item #

Mea

n D

evia

tio

n

Group 1

Group 2

Group 3

Overall Sample

QST 1 PRI-PED:

Comparison of Consent Value Averages across Questionnaire Items

between Principals and Pedagoues

0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

3,00

3,50

4,00

12 3

45

67

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

2021

2223

242526

272829

3031

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

4546

4748

49 50

Principals

Pedagogues

QST-2 TEA-ALL:



0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

3,00

3,50

4,00

12

34

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

2223

2425

2627

2829

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

4748

4950

Group 1

Group 2

Group 3

Overall Sample

QST-2, TEA-ALL:



0,0000

0,0500

0,1000

0,1500

0,2000

0,2500

0,3000

0,3500

0,4000

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49

Item #

Mean

Dev

iati

on

Group 1

Group 2

Group 3

Overall Sample

QST-3 STU-GR5, Male Respondents



0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

3,00

3,50

1

23

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

1920

21

2223

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

3940

Group 1

Group 2

Group 3

Average, Male Respondents

Average, Female Respondents

QST-3 STU-GR5, Female Respondents



0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

3,00

3,50

12

34

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

1819

2021

2223

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

3839

40

Group 1

Group 2

Group 3



QST-3 STU-GR7, Male Respondents:


0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

3,00

3,50

12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

1920

2122

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

3940

Group 1

Group 2

Group 3



QST-3 STU-GR7, Female Respondents:


0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

3,00

3,50

12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

1920

2122

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

3940

Group 1

Group 2

Group 3



QST-3 STU-GR5 / QST-3 STU-GR7:

Comparison of Consent Value Averages

between Grades 5/7 and Male/Female Respondents

0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

3,00

3,50

12

34

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

1819

2021

2223

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

3839

40

Grade 5, Male Respondents

Grade 7, Male Respondents

Grade 5, Female Respondents

Grade 7, Female Respondents

APPENDIX 7:

Validation Workshop Programme,

Summary of Workshop Outcomes

and

List of Participants

Validation Workshop, 01-02 December 2008

Presentation and Discussion of Key Evaluation Findings

Participants

Representatives from school/community level (including parents), implementing partners

(CEI step-by-step), CfS project coordinators (Ministry level), UNICEF

Aim

To find consensus on and to validate the findings and recommendations as proposed in the

evaluation report.

Timetable

Monday, 01 December 2008

Time Activity Methods and content Resources

9.30-10.00 Introduction Welcome, introduction to the workshop,

explaining workshop set-up and topics

10.00-11.15

PowerPoint

presentation,

Questions and

answers

Presentation of evaluation findings in the context

of the CfS concept/conceptual framework

PowerPoint

equipment

Flip chart paper,

pens, post-its

11.15-11.30 Tea and coffee break

11.30-12.30 Introduction to working sessions

Flip chart and

paper, pens,

post-its

12.30-13.30 Lunch

13.30-15.00

Small group

work

Summarise key

findings

Working sessions to discuss evaluation findings

for different stakeholders:

Discuss possible dissonance between

conditions now and new requirements;

Discuss possible barriers to/for change

Pens, paper,

post-its


15.15-15.45

Small group

work

Present key

findings in

plenary

Working sessions, small group work (continue)

Hang flip chart papers on the wall;

Ask each group to summarise key observations;

Note observations on flip chart;

Summarise

Flip chart and

paper, pens,

post-its, sticky

tape

15.45-16.00 Informal

discussion Tea and coffee

Tuesday, 02 December 2008

Time Activity Methods and content Resources

09.30-10.00 Presentation Recapture workshop “conclusions” regarding

dissonance and barriers for change

Flip chart

papers, sticky

tape

10.00-11.00

Small group

work;

Summarize key

findings

Working sessions (continue):

Discuss needs/ways to support (consolidation

of) change

Flip chart

paper, pens,

paper, post-its


11.15-12:30

Group

presentations in

plenary;

Questions and

answers

Hang flip chart papers on the wall;

Ask each group to summarize key observations;

Note observations on flip chart;

Summarize findings and conclusions;

Discussion, validation;

Wrap-up

Flip chart

papers, sticky

tape

12.30-13.30 Lunch

Workshop outcomes, first day:

1. The recommendations are in line with perceived needs for both the school/community/

implementation level and the policy/system/organisational level

2. It was felt necessary to phrase the recommendations in a more clear way, less ambiguous;

3. There is consensus that achievements need to be given a solid, formal base through legislation

and certification. Achievements also need to be consolidated through the formulation of

minimum standards for child-friendliness for both education organisations and professionals

(including mentors);

4. The need to clarify roles and responsibilities, for all levels of the education system, is

recognised and acknowledged

5. It was acknowledged that i) Teaching standards and teaching competencies; ii) Minimum

learning outcomes and curriculum standards; and iii) Quality standards for schools and

management need to be defined and set based on or derived from CfS principles and

approaches;

6. Participants agreed that the curriculum framework and teacher competencies (teacher

training) need to be harmonized with CfS approaches to teaching and learning;

7. There is a need for continuous support. To avoid isolation, to ensure inclusion, and for

consolidation of achievements there is a need for more/better professional support through

professional networks and networking between teachers and schools, professional

associations.

Workshop outcomes, second day:

The groups today focused the discussions on barriers and possible solutions. Participants felt a strong

need for a framework to structure and harmonise future actions (adjustment of the CfS conceptual

framework to realities and CfS practices in BiH):

1. CfS terms and concepts need further clarification. To what extent do different stakeholder

groups (parents, communities, Ministry staff, etc) understand CfS concepts? How have

concepts and terms been communicated, and isn‟t it necessary to communicate differently

with different target groups? (behaviour change communication);

2. Understanding CfS concepts (by experts in educational legislation) is also required for

harmonising the existing legal framework with reform documents. Currently, there is a

contradiction between legislation and reform documents;

3. Quality is a term that needs to be (re)defined, operationalised more clearly and

unambiguously. This new definition of „quality‟ needs to be included in guidelines, manuals,

brochures etc.

4. If minimum standards for child-friendliness (for schools and professionals) are set, the project

can provide space for teachers and schools to voluntarily join the project without being

„forced‟ to work in one pre-scribed, child-friendly way. It creates space to explore approaches

that work for them (since the minimum requirements are clear). If professional standards for

mentors are set, they will be able to support and facilitate implementation of CfS methods and

approaches, gradually;

5. Next to physical security there is a need to ensure emotional security of children and teachers.

Teachers need training in communication with children, pedagogues in communication with

teachers.

List of participants:

June Kunugi, UNICEF

Sanja Kabil, UNICEF

Nedzada Faginovic, UNICEF Bosnia and Herzegovina

Sabit Jakirovic, the Ministry of Education of the Hercegovina – Neretvian Canton

Marko Nedic, the Ministry of Education of the Canton Posavina

Zoran Matosevic, the Ministry of Education of the Canton Central Bosnia – Travnik

Ernest Sehic, The Educational Council of DC Brcko

Mensura Alibegovic, the Pedagogical Institute, Zenica

Hasa Albinovic, Elementary School Dzemaludin Causevic, Sarajevo

Selma Dzemidzic, Elementary School Dzemaludin Causevic, Sarajevo

Marko Dominikovic, Elementary School Fra Ilija Starcevic, Tolisa

Dragan Andjelic, Elementary School Rudjera Boskovica, Donja Mahala

Nizama Djozic-Mulamujic, The Eight Primary School, Dc Brcko

Vitka Grgic, Elementary School Kiseljak, Kiseljak

Vedrana Misanovic, Elementary School Kiseljak, Kiseljak

Mustafa Dzafic, Druga Osnovna Skola, Mostar

Zinadia Livnjak, Druga Osnovna Skola, Mostar

Edin Idrizovic, Elementary School Suljo Cilic, Jablanica

Resud Subara, Elementary School Suljo Cilic, Jablanica

Semso Aganspahic, Elementary School Hasan Turcalo Brzi, Gorazde

Elvina Husic, Elementary School Hasan Turcalo Brzi, Gorazde

Aida Muratovic, Elementary School Huso Hodzic, Tesanj

Lejla Mulalic, Elementary School Huso Hodzic, Tesanj

Milos Celic, Elementary School Ivan Goran Kovacic, Mrkonjic Grad

Milenko Lekic, Elementary School Ivan Goran Kovacic, Mrkonjic Grad

Mensur Milak, Elementary School Mak Dizdar, Zenica

Selvedin Delic, Elementary School Mak Dizdar, Zenica

Davorka Djikic, Elementary School Marina Drzica, Buna

Salar Njavro, Elementary School Marina Drzica, Buna

Sanja Handzar, Step by Step, Sarajevo

Radmila R. Jusovic, Step by Step, Sarajevo

Slobodanka Zivkovic, Step by Step, Sarajevo

Melisa Gazdic, EU TAC

Emina Pasic, EU TAC

Nina Seremet, Association EU TAC

Alisa Uzunovic, translator

Emina Mukovic, translator

Elisabeth Didriksen, University of Oslo

APPENDIX 8:

Workshop Presentations