pop-up learning › ... · popp earning 6 popp earning 7 irc team conducting interview with a...

Pop-Up Learning 1

|

Pop-Up LearningPrototyping Feasibility Study Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh

International Rescue Committee September 2018

Pop-Up Learning Pop-Up Learning2 3

This work was generously supported by John O’Farrell, Gloria Principe, Aaref Hilaly, Fariha Hilaly, Nick McKeown and Asena Gencel, who also provided valuable feedback on the Pop-Up Learning vision and development considerations.

The Pop-Up Learning concept was conceived as a way to address the complex challenge of providing access to education for primary school aged children in a humanitarian emergency. In these contexts, physical space and qualified teachers are often in short supply and more formalized schooling options take many months to get off the ground; and when they do they rarely are able to reach the entire out-of-school population.

The objective of this study was to determine the feasibility of running a Pop-Up Learning design innovation project in Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh, where 53% of Rohingya refugee children aged 3-14 have no access to education. Pop-Up Learning seeks to address this critical period and support children’s learning as soon as possible after a crisis. Our summary conclusions:

Executive summary Summary of key feasibility questions

Acknowledgments

Questions Summary Answer

Confirm a specific location within Cox’s Bazaar that has the necessary conditions to conduct the pilot

An established camp, such as Camp 4; a newer camp, such as Camp 11; and the nearby Ukhia host community, would provide a good diversity of testing sites.

Confirm government approval for the pilot project.

Likely to be approved but unable to file without resources committed.

Confirm that the chosen location can withstand the weather conditions (e.g. heavy rains) expected during the pilot phase.

The camps rely on solar energy which is limited by the lack of sunshine. Other weather factors, such as monsoons, could be disruptive, but all the aid agencies are focused on mitigation.

Confirm that there will be strong on the ground support from parents for this type of instruction for their children.

Parental support is strongly confirmed, although there is a reluctance to permit adolescent girls outside of the home to facilitate or take classes.

Confirm the availability of reliable source(s) of electric power for charging the devices – in detail for the pilot project, and at a high level for a broader rollout.

The prototyping phase will rely on the existing network of solar power and generators. Further stages will be determined by the success of the initial prototype phase.

Develop an initial well-informed hypothesis on the language to be used.

English and Burmese are the only languages approved by the government for use in non-formal education environments. There are time tested-technology solutions in English for primary school math.

Develop an initial well-informed hypothesis on what content – math, social/emotional learning or English – will be provided and for what age/literacy groups.

Math taught in English for primary school aged children (6 - 14). Also considering English language as a viable option.

Identify specific qualified willing facilitators in the chosen location for the pilot project.

Adults and young adults drawn from the refugee and host communities will likely serve as facilitators for Pop-Up Learning. We are confident that we will be able to build the right program to support them.

Identify the specific local IRC team members for the roles necessary to support the pilot project, including a local team leader.

IRC staff supporting the project has already been identified to support the project. We will work with the DDP to hire additional staff once resources are secured.

Take a position on the level of literacy required for facilitators, and confirm at a high level that there are likely to be enough qualified individuals in the refugee population to support a broader rollout following a successful pilot project.

The level of English and Burmese literacy for facilitators need not be high, as voiceovers will be provided in the Rohingya dialect and the instruction will be delivered through interactive software on the tablets.

>

>

>

Cox’s Bazar is a good location for this project, both in terms of the obvious need for such a solution, as well as the viability of running an intensive design and testing process.

The main feasibility questions on technology, space, facilitators and community receptivity and interest were all answered with clear next steps for developing prototypes; and

While the political environment is challenging, we feel confident the project would be approved by the Government of Bangladesh.


Since August, 2017, over 706,000 of Myanmar’s Rohingya have fled into Bangladesh, following decades of state persecution and recent violence that the United Nations has deemed a genocide. Joining approximately 213,000 Rohingya who fled to Bangladesh in successive waves since 1990, 919,000 Rohingya now live almost entirely reliant on humanitarian assistance in camps situated in the southern part of Cox’s Bazar District in southeastern Bangladesh.

GHANDUNG

BAHARCHHARA

NHILLA

TEKNAF

WHYKONGJALIA PALONG

RAJA PALONG

PALO

NG

KHA

LI

M Y A N M A R

596,384Kutupalong Expansion Site

102,002Camp 14 / Hakimpara, Camp 15 / Jamtoli, and Camp 16 / Moynarghona 12,281

Camp 21/ Chakmakul

22,321Camp 22/ Unchiprang

10,879Camp 23/ Shamlapur

9,700Camp 25/

Ali Khali

33,714Camp 24/ Leda

42,824Nayapara Expansion

13,005Camp 27/ Jadimura

27,032Nayapara RC

19,007Kutupalong RC

Registered camp

Other camps / sites

Creation date: 15 September 2018 Sources: UNHCR, ISCG, RRRC Feedback: [email protected]

The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this map do not imply o�cial endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.2 km

1 This figure includes 5,113 refugees residing outside formal camp / site boundaries.2 Kutupalong RC includes 14,277 registered refugees of 2,617 families & Nayapara RC includes 19,895 registered refugees of 3,704 families.

1

2

2

BANGLADESH REFUGEE EMERGENCYRefugee population density

(as of 15 September 2018)

894,262Total population

Context: Rohingya Displacement in Bangladesh

The host community of Cox’s Bazar has increasingly

struggled with the influx, and strain on local services and

livelihoods centered on the district’s forests, many which

have been cleared to make way for refugee shelters,

has heightened tensions. Bangladesh, while applauded

by the international community for keeping its borders

open, has denied the Rohingya refugee status, freedom of

movement, and access to basic public services. The latest

influx of Rohingya has come during a period of increased

political and inter-ethnic turbulence in Bangladesh, with

elections called for December 2018. While Myanmar,

Bangladesh, UNHCR, and UNDP recently agreed on steps

for Rohingya repatriation, conditions in Myanmar remain

unfit for return—exemplified by the recent torture of

Rohingya returnees to Rakhine.

The majority of Rohingya live in one of three main camps,

Kutupalong, Balukhail, and Leda, near the main crossing points

from Myanmar. With an estimated population of 626,000,

Kutupalong is the world’s largest refugee camp. 54.6% of

Rohingya are children or adolescents; 51% are women; and

16% are single mothers. 66% of refugee settlements are only

accessible on foot, and the average usable space per person

is 10.7 square meters (rather than the international standard

of 45). According to a recent Education Sector report, among

school aged children from 3-14, only an estimated 53% have

access to education. For the higher age range from 15-24,

a staggering 98% have no access to education. Severe

congestion remains the primary challenge for humanitarian

access. Hurried and crowded construction of settlements

along uneven terrain has also compounded disaster risk,

specifically during the monsoon and cyclone season, leaving

215,000 at risk of landslides and flooding. Heavy rains are

expected to continue to reduce access and exacerbate health

needs significantly, increasing risks of water and vector-borne

outbreaks.

The Government of Bangladesh (GoB) has thus far refused

refugee status to the Rohingya and erected significant

bureaucratic barriers to service provision. GoB refers to the

population as Forcibly Displaced Myanmar Nationals (FDMN),

although UNHCR has registered 33,956 Rohingya refugees as

of July 2018. The Bangladeshi public largely sees the Rohingya

as Myanmar’s problem; and given the political risks of shifting

towards a needed long-term response ahead of national

elections, long-term programming and funding approvals are

severely limited. Privately, however, GoB officials have indicated

their understanding of a need for long-term planning. Domestic

law requires approval of international NGO emergency activities

and funding through what is known as the “FD7” (Foreign

Donations) process, managed by the NGO Affairs Bureau.

While the process is legally given a 24-hour time-frame, many

approvals take longer than 6 weeks. Domestic law also gives

GoB officials broad authority to deregister INGOs that make

derogatory comments about the government, increasing risk for

INGO advocacy activities.

Furthermore, GoB has denied refugees freedom of movement

and access to public services such as education, healthcare,

and the justice system. Access to camps at night is limited

and controlled by the army. As of September 2018, GoB

plans to begin relocating 100,000 Rohingya to the previously

uninhabitable island of Bhasan Char in the Bay of Bengal.

Freedom of movement on and off the island for Rohingya and

service providers is undetermined, and no prior consultations

have been conducted with refugees. Public service availability

and livelihood opportunities are also undetermined; and critics

have raised alarm that the island could become completely

submerged given tidal ranges of up to six meters (19.7 feet).

In Cox’s Bazar, the Rohingya join an increasingly strained host

community of Bangladeshis. Malnutrition, health status, and

food insecurity are at crisis levels, and poverty rates are far

higher than the national average. Including host community

members, the UN estimates a total of 1.3 million people in

immediate need in the district; and GoB has requested that

25-30% of services are provided to the host community.

Rohingya speak a different dialect than the host community,

and estimates put Rohingya illiteracy at 95%. Compounded

with rising prices and falling wages, host community economic

insecurity has been further driven by the ecological degradation

of over 4,000 acres of forest removed to settle the Rohingya.

The forest has traditionally provided the main source of

livelihood opportunities for the District, and current projections

indicate complete deforestation by the end of 2019. Moreover,

pressure on basic services, water, and the environment

continue to increase, as pollution and contamination hamper

daily activities.

Concerning the domestic political situation, coming elections

present additional challenges for the Rohingya and the country

as a whole; and international dynamics further compound these

challenges. Given the heavy levels of violence and civil unrest

during the 2014 election, much of the same is expected of

elections currently scheduled for December 2018. In recent

years, both main parties, the ruling Awami League and the

Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), have curried favor with

more hardline Islamist organizations to maintain control. These

organizations, such as Hefazat-e-Islam, now maintain significant

political influence and have vowed jihad against Myanmar

unless its persecution of the Rohingya ceases.

While conditions for repatriation remain unmet, Bangladesh

remains wary of criticism against Myanmar, both from fear

of exacerbating tensions and angering Myanmar backers

India and China, Bangladesh’s biggest trading partners.

Sheikh Hasina, current Prime Minister and head of the Awami

League, now finds herself balancing appeasement of Islamist

organizations, Bangladesh’s relationship with India and China,

and the Bangladeshi army’s desire for a more aggressive

posture towards Myanmar and India, with the Rohingya squarely

in the middle.


IRC team conducting interview with a community lead and a teacher, inside their shelter in Camp 4

We conducted a rapid qualitative study with 61 stakeholders in the refugee camps and surrounding host communities. Each stakeholder was interviewed in-depth to answer our feasibility questions and interviews lasted approximately one hour. The interviews with the Rohingya and Bangladeshi community members were conducted with the support of translators provided by Translators Without Borders (TWB). In addition, we spent time observing and learning in unstructured ways in the refugee camps.

The data included in this report should not be extrapolated to the population as a whole. Aside from the small sample size, the use of translators and potential response bias limits our ability to draw conclusions on the population as a whole. However, the findings here are useful for sense-making and to increase overall confidence.

5 IRC Field Staff

• IRC Country Director, Dhaka

• IRC DDP, Cox’s Bazar

• IRC Child Protection Coordinator, Cox’s Bazar

• IRC Girl Shine Technical Specialist, Cox’s Bazar

• IRC Operations & Logistics Lead, Cox’s Bazar

34 Rohingya refugees from 3 different environments

• 2 male community lead “Maji”, Camp 3 & 4

• 1 female community lead “Maji”, Camp 3 & 4

• 2 young mothers, Camp 3 & 4

• 1 male teacher, Camp 3 & 4

• 3 young fathers, Camp 3 & 4

• 2 older mothers, Camp 3 & 4

• 5 young girls 6-10, Camp 3 & 4

• 5 young girls, 10-14, Camp 3 & 4

• 5 young boys 10-14, Camp 11

• 2 dads, Camp 11

• 4 adolescent males 15-17, Camp 13

• 2 adolescent females 16-17, Camp 13

Interviews

Methods

9 Bangladeshi youth from the host community

• 4 male university students

• 3 female university students

• 2 mixed translators working with TWB

13 staff from NGOs, UN stakeholders & other actors:

• 1 BRAC, Cox’s Bazar

• 1 UNHCR, Cox’s Bazar

• 3 UNICEF, Cox’s Bazar

• 1 NRC, Cox’s Bazar

• 1 Plan International, Cox’s Bazar

• 1 Mukti Cox’s Bazar, Cox’s Bazar

• 1 DCA, Cox’s Bazar

• 1 Save the Children, Cox’s Bazar

• 3 education sector coordination team members, Cox’s

Bazar


“I have never seen a touch screen before.” – young father, Rohingya refugee


Key feasibility questions

Understand and test connectivity and technology

landscape in Cox Bazar.

Rohingya refugees are not allowed private ownership

of mobile phones or to access the internet;

nonetheless, many do.

This does not preclude the use of technology by

NGOs in programs.

There is network coverage in some areas; while it is

not strong enough to support internet applications, we

found SMS reliable. Among men, we found moderate

ownership of SIM cards, and high ownership of mobile

phones. Women generally do not have access to any

kind of technology.

There is a very low smartphone ownership (close

to none). We spotted a few smartphone users, all

of whom were male. No computers or tablets were

visible in the camps. 100% of Rohingya refugees

interviewed had never seen a tablet, but children

quickly learned to navigate and manipulate interfaces.

We conclude the distribution and use of mobile

devices by NGOs, particularly tablets, is feasible—

but we must design a solution that does not require

persistent internet connectivity.

Tablets will likely need to be re-installed with a custom

operating system and WiFi radios disabled, so parents

trust that their children are actually learning and to

simplify government approval.

> Confirm at least one specific location within

Cox’s Bazar makeshift refugee camps (and

ideally at least one more as a backup) that has

the necessary conditions to conduct the pilot.

With over 800,000 Rohingya refugees, the

makeshift “Mega” refugee camp offers plenty of

interesting locations for prototyping and testing.

The overall environment is challenging, as expected,

and will encourage us to think creatively about

infrastructure.

The necessary conditions can be summarized as

follows:

> Ability to reach children in their homes and

provide them with a valuable learning experience

at scale and without creating any protection

risks.

> Ability to securely store tablets.

> Ability to charge tablets with enough power for

sustaining several hours of learning in a day.

> Ability to monitor facilitators and provide them

with the support they need.

We have identified many locations that will be able

to accommodate intensive prototyping and testing.

We anticipate prototyping and testing in at least

three locations with different characteristics:

> Type 1: a new, congested, difficult to access

camp, with little access to learning centers and

services. (Camp 11, 12, or 14).

> Type 2: an older, more established and less

crowded camp, with more stable situation.

(Camp 2, 3, or 4).

> Type 3: an office in a host community town

neighboring the camp, which would facilitate

access to energy and security and to the host

community facilitators (the town of Ukhia would

be suitable).

>

Within each of these locations, we have identified a few

permanent structures as well as non-permanent shelters,

some of which are already serving as “Friendly Spaces” in

each camp. While they are mandated to provide specific

targeted programming, we can use them as storage places and

programmatic touch points. We anticipate facilitators will take

equipment with them and return it to these locations..

Although these structures are suitable for storage during the

prototype, they are not sufficient to serve the high number of out

of school children—a challenge to be addressed in later stages.

While our prototyping and testing footprint will be relatively small,

we will seek to avoid pulling children away from existing learning

and community centers, focusing on where needs are high and

still unmet. If children are already exposed to learning centers,

they will benefit from Pop-Up Learning in their homes as a high

quality complement to their education.


!\

Camp 9Camp 10

Camp 18

Camp 12

G30214-050

F16214-012

F13214-016

G26214-044

G25214-045

G5214-040G6

214-042

F32214-081

F33214-021

F18214-005

F40214-082

F25214-013

D11214-025G36

214-057

D12214-024

F30215-003

K2215-049

K7215-054

K6215-055

J7218-040

J6218-041

J5218-042

H6218-018

H5218-013

H12218-010

H12218-010

H7218-014

H11218-011

H14218-032

J1217-077

G1218-028

G2218-027

G3218-005

G4218-029

G5218-006G6

218-001

G9218-003

G8218-002

G7218-004

H4218-008

H9218-033

218-050

H8218-012

218-049

H1218-009

G32213-053

G34213-052

G39213-049

G31213-050

C16213-025

G29213-048

G29213-048

C15213-019

G27213-051

F10218-021

F9218-022

F7218-023

F11218-020

H16218-016

J16218-044

H18218-045

G38214-079

J8218-037

J8218-037

J10218-047

F31214-022

F38214-023

F37214-080

F34214-019

218-048

H2218-017

H10218-019

D14217-010

D15217-002B11

217-065

D10217-062 B1-4

217-076

D7217-012

D8217-008

D9217-009

D6217-011

D5-H2217-014 D3(H9)

217-015

D2(H5)217-013

D1(H1)217-017

D4-H3217-016

B2217-075

B8-6217-069 B3

217-073

B4217-066

B5-14217-070

A3217-047

A1217-045

A2217-046

A4217-048

A5217-043

A9217-041

A12217-040

C6217-027

C7217-034

C5217-026

C8217-033

C12217-032

C13217-001

C4217-029 C3

217-035C1

217-028

C2217-030

C11217-036

C14217-039

E12217-020

B15-D217-072

D1-A15217-049

D4-B14217-063

J2217-079

J3217-078

E11217-019

D1-A14217-050

A13217-054

B6217-074

A7217-052

A6-B2217-051

A8217-053

A10217-044

A11217-042

F2217-004

F3217-003

E15217-021

E13217-060

B9217-067

B77217-068

B13217-071

E3217-058

E2217-057

E1217-056

E4217-059

E9217-055

D5-B12217-064

F1217-005

E6217-061

E10217-018E5

217-022

E14217-024

E7217-025

E8217-023

J4217-080

D10217-007

C9217-031

C10217-037

C15217-038

CampOffice 11

CampOffice12

92.16°92.159°92.158°92.157°92.156°92.155°92.154°92.153°92.152°92.151°

21.1

87°

21.1

86°

21.1

85°

21.1

84°

21.1

83°

21.1

82°

21.1

81°

21.1

8°21

.179

°21

.178

°21

.177

°21

.176

°

23300 23400 23500 23600 23700 23800 23900 24000 24100 24200

43100

43200

43300

43400

43500

43600

43700

43800

43900

44000

44100

44200

44300

44400

Disclaimer: This map is for illustrationpurposes only. Names and boundarieson this map do not imply officialendorsement or acceptance by IOM.

Camp 11 ±0 10050

Meters

Needs and Population Monitoring

Ukhia, Cox's BazarChattogram, Bangladesh

Rohingya Refugee Sites: Infrastructure and Majhee Blocks

Map production: 11 Aug 2018Data collection: 01 - 22 July 2018

Infrastructure: REACH (collection rounds 3, 4, 5 & 6)UAV image: IOM NPM 02 Aug 2018Site boundaries: ISCGBUTM kilometer grid: left & bottom.GPS Decimal Degrees grid: top & right.

! Mosque"? Madrassah¾̧ Cemetery

'P Distribution Centre"Z Community Centre! Market Area'̂ Field office'e Info Point

"d Clinic

Vaccination Centre"

Nutrition Centre"

"̀ Women Friendly SpaceChild Friendly Space"

³±ZZ Phone Towerf Bridge

!\ CiC Office

"> Learning Centre

!\

Camp 3

Camp 5

Camp 1W

Camp 17

Camp 4Extension

G2209-046

G2209-049

G2209-049

G2209-048

EE209-009

EE53209-001PP-G

209-002

EE209-006

EE54209-008

OO206-004

206-064

AA13205-070

AA14205-074

AA18205-077

AA19205-075

AA15205-064

AA16205-067

AA12205-059

AA17205-063

AA28205-065

AA28205-061

AA9205-062

B5205-010

B4205-009

DD16205-038

B2205-011

B2205-011

DD18205-042

DD1205-046

DD2205-054

DD4205-050

DD4205-053

DD7205-056

DD8205-047

DD5205-048

DD6205-045

DD16205-055

DD10205-043

DD8205-044DD-D4

205-058

DD16205-051

DD-B3205-007

AA1205-072

AA1205-060

AA1205-068

AA3205-076

AA4205-069

DD5205-008

AA23205-004

AA21205-005

AA20205-003

AA22205-002

AA24205-079

AA31205-078

AA31205-080

DD12205-057

AA29205-001

I3-W202-025

I3-T202-021

I2-E3202-052

I2-E3202-053

I2-E5202-057

202-089

H109209-020

DD14205-052

AA30205-006

G2209-019

H94212-019

H92212-023

H95212-018

H90212-016

H97212-006

H85212-017

DD3205-086

H87212-015

H96212-025

H74212-001

H106212-034

H86212-032

I3-W202-085

DD6205-085

DD16205-088

I1-E4202-056

G04209-017

205-089

232-002

232-001

H84212-027

H107209-042

I3-V202-024

202-087

OO206-001

OO206-002

OO206-017

OO206-018

UU1206-029

OO21206-020

DD206-035

DD206-039

D13206-048

PP22206-038

PP26206-033

PP23206-036

DD23206-034DD1

206-040

OO206-007

AA-OO206-006

OO206-011

OO206-015

OO206-014

AA-OO206-013

DD20206-037

D12206-041

DD19206-042

G2206-047

G3206-046

D22206-023

OO206-044

OO206-043

DD206-028

DD16206-026

DD17206-027

PP206-021

DD18206-025

OO206-016

OO206-008

OO206-005

AA-OO206-012

AA-OO206-010

OO22206-009

UU1206-030

UU1206-031

oo205-081

D-H59206-022

UU1206-054

UU1206-057

UU2206-050

UU2206-049

UU2206-055

UU3206-056

UU2206-052

UU3206-058

UU4206-051

OO206-059

UU2206-060

UU3206-053

UU206-032 oo

206-062

OO206-061

206-063

206-065

OO23206-019

AA206-003

Camp Office 4

CampOffice

5

92.149°92.148°92.147°92.146°92.145°92.144°92.143°92.142°92.141°92.14°92.139°92.138°92.137°

21.2

16°

21.2

15°

21.2

14°

21.2

13°

21.2

12°

21.2

11°

21.2

1°21

.209

°21

.208

°21

.207

°21

.206

°21

.205

°21

.204

°21

.203

°21

.202

°21

.201

°

21800 21900 22000 22100 22200 22300 22400 22500 22600 22700 22800 22900 23000 23100

45900

46000

46100

46200

46300

46400

46500

46600

46700

46800

46900

47000

47100

47200

47300

47400

47500

Disclaimer: This map is for illustrationpurposes only. Names and boundarieson this map do not imply officialendorsement or acceptance by IOM.

Camp 4 ±0 10050

Meters

Needs and Population Monitoring

Ukhia, Cox's BazarChattogram, Bangladesh

Rohingya Refugee Sites: Infrastructure and Majhee Blocks

Map production: 11 Aug 2018Data collection: 01 - 22 July 2018

Infrastructure: REACH (collection rounds 3, 4, 5 & 6)UAV image: IOM NPM 31 July 2018Site boundaries: ISCGBUTM kilometer grid: left & bottom.GPS Decimal Degrees grid: top & right.

! Mosque"? Madrassah¾̧ Cemetery

'P Distribution Centre"Z Community Centre! Market Area'̂ Field office'e Info Point

"d Clinic

Vaccination Centre"

Nutrition Centre"

"̀ Women Friendly SpaceChild Friendly Space"

³±ZZ Phone Towerf Bridge

!\ CiC Office

"> Learning Centre

Maps of camp 11 (more recent arrivals) and camp 4 (earlier arrivals). Both locations have been identified as suitable for prototyping and testing Pop-Up Learning due to their varied environments.


Confirm the availability of reliable source(s) of

electric power for charging the devices – in detail

for the pilot project, and at a high level for a

broader roll-out.

Every household receives a solar kit from UNHCR;

many small solar panels are visible on the roofs of

the shelters. In some households and shops we could

see batteries. Some spaces have small solar farms

installed. Despite the poor weather, solar energy is still

highly used by population, staff and aid workers.

Because of weather, logistics, and other factors,

sources of electric power in the camp are not always

dependable. The infrastructure in the neighboring host

communities located nearby is likely more dependable.

For the development period, it will be possible to

charge the tablets through low-wattage portable

generators stored in strategic locations, and through

relatively abundant solar panels.

> Identify the specific local IRC team members for

the roles necessary to support the pilot project,

including a local team leader.

There is buy-in and enthusiasm for this project

from IRC senior management at the regional and

national levels. The Deputy Director of Programs

in Bangladesh and the Protection Coordinator are

confirmed to help lead the project. In addition, we will

recruit additional staff which have been signed off and

approved by the country director.

Medium-high quality male translators are available

to support this project and they are an invaluable

resources. Female translators of high quality are much

more difficult to find and this will add to the difficulties

of our work. The Bangladeshi government has not

made the hiring of staff too complicated, nor has the

issuance of camp permits been difficult.

The roles and responsibilities for Pop-Up Phase 2 and

3 are envisioned as follows:

>

Role Responsibility

Project Manager, based in Cox’s Bazar

Oversees the implementation and roll out of our prototyping plan and testing plan. Coordinates all actors of the project.

Research Lead, based in Cox’s Bazar Collects and analyzes data.

Community Lead, based in Ukhia host community loca-tion

Oversees the day to day management of Pop-Up and oversees program staff based in camps.

CP and Education coordina-tors Resources available through partnership and contracting.

Translators, energy experts, IT partners

Based in CXB offices, a percentage of their time will be allocated to ensure we have a level of office support on the project.

For the broader roll-out we will need to work through the

consistency and availability of charging options. We will need

to experiment before fixing on some of the inputs (such as

density of storage locations, frequency of use, number of

tablets to be charged per location, and so on).

What we can say is that the current conditions, while very

difficult, are not extraordinary so. It will be possible to solve

for charging needs and account for them in the ultimate cost

model.

In the coming weeks, we will further price out different

energy options, especially systems that are integrated with

tablet hardware. We previously identified potential partners

like Vodafone (Instant Network Schools foam box with

charging tablet storage), and Kio Kit (a similar system built for

very remote classrooms and schools.)


Solar electricity is available in the camps, and refugees are able to charge their own small appliances (LED lamps), but they would not have the ability to charge other more energy consuming devices.


Develop an initial well-informed hypothesis on

the language to be used.

English will be the prioritized language of learning,

supported by voiceover and explanation in

Chittagonian and Rohingya dialects (which are similar).

According to government regulations, specifically

the Refugee and Repatriation Committee (RRRC)

and the Ministry of Primary and Mass Education

(MoPME), both of which regulate education activities

for refugees, the only language with official approval

for use in non-formal learning centers is the Myanmar

language and English. Bangla is strictly prohibited.

> Develop an initial well-informed hypothesis on

what content – math, social/emotional learning

or English – will be provided and for what age/

literacy groups.

The target age group is primary school aged children

4-14, and we will assume very limited foundational

math and reading skills.

We will prioritize the following content areas for further

refinement during the prototyping period, with the

intention to hopefully test both in tandem. Decisions

on which content to test will be partly informed by

software partnerships.

> Mathematics Levels I and II as defined by the

LCFA as a minimum standard

> English language (strong preference for English

voiced by parents and children both in our study

and in previous assessments done by IRC)

> Note: Social and emotional learning will likely

be integrated into math or English activities as

appropriate

We believe mathematics taught in English could be

a good entry point because mathematical thinking

is cognitively foundational, and children’s early

knowledge of math strongly predicts their later

success in math, and also predicts later reading

achievement. Research shows that doing more

mathematics increases oral language abilities. Finally,

it is easier to find quality time-tested technology

solutions for early grade math in English.

The type of content for English and Math will likely

align with the Learning Competency Framework

and Approach (LCFA, described in more detail in the

section on government approval). The table to the right

illustrates these math learning competencies for the

Levels 1 and 2.

>Bangladeshi teachers from the host community primarily

speak the Chittagonian dialect of Bangla, while Rohingya

volunteers use the spoken language of Rohingya, which

is different from the formal written and spoken Myanmar

language. Rohingya does not have a standardized script. While

teachers speaking Chittagonian are able to communicate with

Rohingya volunteers, communication between host community

teachers and students is challenging. Estimates vary but staff

and teachers have shared that understanding ranges from

60%-80% between Chittagonian and Rohingya languages.

Therefore, although English will be the prioritized language

of instruction, we need to support student learning in the

mother tongue of Rohingya because most children are not yet

comfortable with English or Myanmar language and teachers

also struggle to effectively deliver content in English.

Math learning competencies will include the following:

> For Level I children will be able to:

- Develop concept of categorization, quantity,

measurement, spatial relationships and sequencing

- Recognize and identify various common shapes

develop an awareness of mathematical problems

> For Level II children will be able to:

- Develop the concept of numbers up to 1000

- Develop the concept of addition, subtraction,

multiplication and division up to 1000

- Develop an understanding of different shapes and

sizes understand the concept of measurement (length,

height, weight, liquid, distance).

- Understand the concept of time

- Recognize currency


“This is not learning, this is not education. They are only doing ABCs” – Rohingya male refugee caregiver

Learning centers are perceived by parents and caregivers as low quality — children spend more time singing and playing rather than learning through instruction.

Learning centers are perceived as low quality education centers where children spend more time singing and playing rather than learning.


Take a position on the level of literacy required

for facilitators.

If we deliver learning content on a tablet in English with

Rohingya voiceover, the level of English and Myanmar

literacy required for facilitators can remain low. It is

possible this could effectively improve the subject

knowledge of not only the child but also the facilitator.

We will be able to build the capacity of the Rohingya

facilitator in the competencies that are critical to

successfully facilitating a learning session, namely:

classroom management, positive discipline, creating

a safe and secure learning space, operating the

tablets, monitoring student activity on their tablets,

troubleshooting technical issues with the tablet, and

facilitating a few enjoyable SEL games to engage

the children.

These competencies do not require the facilitator to be

able to read and write in any language. They need to

be able to display an energetic and caring disposition

with a keen interest in the children’s learning and

their own learning, be motivated and demonstrate

responsibility while garnering the respect and trust of

the parents and children.

It’s on us to make the program work for low levels of

literacy, rather than limiting participation to the few

who are able to read and write in a language that is

not their mother tongue.

> Confirm at a high level that there are likely to

be enough qualified individuals in the refugee

population to support a broader roll-out

following a successful pilot project.

Among youth and adults from Rohingya

Bangladeshi host community, we will be able to

recruit a very high number of facilitators.

We lean toward tailoring the facilitator recruitment

to the needs and abilities of the Rohingya youth

and Bangladeshi youth. We will identify facilitators

and community members that have the requisite

motivation, community trust, leadership and

communication skills needed to ensure the project

is widely accepted and supported.

To ensure the quality of the intervention, we will

deliver continuous capacity-building and support

for selected facilitators. We are confident in our

ability to screen the right candidates and to help

them grow as facilitator. Their evolution into

skilled and qualified individuals will be part of the

program itself.

>


Confirm that there will be strong on the ground

support from parents for this type of instruction

for their children.

Parents are very supportive of their children’s

education and have not waited for international

organizations to start taking measures for their

children’s learning.

Based on our interviews and past surveys, the program

is likely to receive very strong support from the

community with the caveats that:

> The quality of the learning content, and our ability

to assess and teach to a child’s level, is similar to

a private tutor - a model that we observed some

parents do trust and often pay for.

> Adolescent girls will have difficulties leaving their

homes to become facilitators or to attend classes

far from their homes.

> Significant and ongoing community engagement

will be needed so it is clear to parents that this

is serious and learning-focused, so they provide

space and support for home-based learning in view

of the many competing demands on children’s time,

and to avoid any rumors or misunderstandings

regarding the programming.

> Identify specific qualified willing facilitators in

the chosen location for the pilot project.

Given our hypothesis that we can work with

facilitators with low levels of education, we are

confident we will find ample numbers of facilitators.

We cannot engage the population this early in the

process without a fully funded project and a clear

timeline, as it risks setting unrealistic expectations.

We will engage in a recruitment process once

funding has been secured. After interviewing

different types of potential facilitators, we will enlist

facilitators from both the refugee camp community

and the host community.

>


Confirm that the chosen location can withstand

the weather conditions (e.g. heavy rains)

expected during the pilot phase.

The refugee population lives under tents and bamboo

shelters. It’s unlikely that permanent structures will be

allowed anytime soon for shelter.

Permanent structures are allowed for specific

buildings, such as hospitals. Secured, waterproof

buildings are available for food distribution and other

important item distribution such as medical material.

Once the total project funding amount is secured,

the IRC operations team will engage with WFP and

others to inquire about opportunity to share some of

these spaces.

During our feasibility study, we experienced many

rainy days and could observe that the weather will

be a challenge for Pop-Up, but will likely not be an

insurmountable deal breaker. The rain did not seem to

penetrate the homes, but it does represent a challenge

for some specific risky shelters (like the ones closer

to rivers, or built on pilotis). During monsoon season,

sessions may need to be temporarily interrupted.

The weather mainly challenges our ability to rely on

dependable solar energy. We noticed the presence of

a few generators in the camp, and the IRC Operations

Lead reassured us that generators and fuel will be

accessible and not too challenging to implement.

> Confirm government approval for the pilot

project.

We cannot submit any request to the government until all project funding is secured. However, the project is likely to be approved on the basis of a final workplan with actual funds committed.

IRC Country Leadership feels positive about our ability

to secure approval. IRC was one of the first newly

arrived international NGOs that was able to secure

registration and has since received government

approval for numerous projects. The approval process

(FD7) will take around 3 months and simply needs to

be accounted for in the operationalization timeline.

There are very positive signs that the government

stance on education is opening up, a view shared by

all actors we spoke with:

> World Bank has set aside $30 million for education

of refugees.

> UNICEF is investing heavily in developing

curriculum for refugees.

> Plan International is already testing a home-based

education model.

Since January 2018, the Cox’s Bazar Education

Sector established a taskforce to develop a Learning

Competency Framework and Approach (LCFA) for

a number of competencies and subject areas: namely,

mathematics, English, Myanmar language, Science

and Life Skills.

The LCFA provides competencies appropriate for

Levels I - IV which correspond loosely to pre-primary

and Grades 1-8. The adoption of this approach is

an important milestone as neither the Bangladeshi

nor Myanmar National Primary Curricula, textbooks

and teaching materials are permitted in the camps.

>

The LCFA is under review by the government of Bangladesh.

This first attempt at providing some structure and basic

competencies for the camp learning centers does not address

learning pathways or accreditation. It’s intended as a temporary

solution that will likely stretch into the medium- and long-

term if there is no resolution by the GoB to permit leveraging

existing education structures, systems and resources in the

country. In the interim, our project will need to align learning

competencies with the LCFA.

We must also take care to avoid a pull factor away from

existing learning centers, and scope the program such that

it either targets out-of-school exclusively, or is viewed as

complementary to school-based programming.


“I gave them my shelter so they could start this school. It was important to make sure children learn.” – Community Leader.


Findings

Education is highly valued by the community.

Despite the Rohingya community’s low levels of education

and their reticence to let older girls go to schools, the

community highly values education for their children

and is critical of the current situation. Parents have high

aspirations for their kids: becoming teachers or doctors.

Male children and youth reported similar aspirations. Female

16-year-olds were open to the possibility of a job, but this

would be contingent on getting their husbands’ permission

(once married).

Learning centers are perceived as low-quality.

The learning centers at present are focused heavily on

rote-learning, recitation of poems and the alphabet, and

counting of numbers in English and Myanmar language.

Children preferred the madrassas to the learning centers

although most attend both. The lack of teaching and

learning material makes the community believe that the

current learning centers are not real schools, making some

parents less inclined to send their children. Participants

also reported concerns around the overcrowding and noise

in learning centers.

“This is not education, this is not study. They are only doing ABC.” – Male Caregiver

Private tutoring is common for boys. Students reported

attending additional tutoring at the master’s home costing

around 200-300 Takka per month, further illustrating the high

value placed on education by the community.

Girls are remaining indoors and less likely to attend

learning centers or private tutoring.

Older girls are not encouraged to pursue education but

instead are asked and encouraged to remain indoors.

This is perceived to them as a sign of dignity and respect

towards their religion.

Madrassas offer boys and young girls the opportunity to

learn Arabic and religious teaching.

Boys of all ages reported meeting in Madrassas every morning

as part of their daily routine. These religious centers appear to

be important learning environments for the community but they

don’t represent any competition for other forms of education.

Children go to them from 6:30 to 9am to learn religious texts

and practice and then go to the learning centers later in the day,

e.g. from 9am or 8:30am to 12pm.

Reactions to Pop-Up learning are positive and

constructive.

“If we use the tablets at home, it’s better because my wife can learn at the same time.” – Male Caregiver

The Pop-Up program with tablets at home would be well

received and is perceived as adding value to the family.

“This tablet is great, it’s just like a teacher.” – Male Caregiver

Parents are enthusiastic about the content available on

tablets, and it would not seem to be perceived as a threat

to the (non-existent) schools. Parents suggest a double

programming where kids could get the benefit of both learning

experiences.

“It would be good to have both the tablet and the school.” – Caregiver

Learning centers are perceived as good social structures for

children. They are motivating and competitive. Community

members see a strong value in providing learning to children,

despite the very difficult conditions they live in.

Parents are very receptive to a teacher coming to their

home to instruct children.

“If teachers come to our home, it’s better because our children would get better attention. ” – Male Caregiver

Parents are not receptive to mothers teaching children, even

if they are trained, as they perceive them as too familiar to

the children, so they assume that children would not behave

well. Interestingly, boys aged 10 to 14 were open to being

taught by their parents - they ranked it second, with their first

preference being teachers.

Parents are receptive to learning happening in the homes, and

were very enthusiastic about it. However, they refused to host

in their homes when prompted to start the clubs.

“ We can’t have children learning here, we live here. We need to be here and we are 6 to live in this shelter.. ” – Male Caregiver

Accessing learning centers is still full of challenges for

some.

Sickness and diseases are key blockers for children to attend

learning centers. Conditions are very rough. Some children

need to work to provide for their families. There aren’t enough

learning centers available. Boys in early adolescence have

greater freedom of movement than adolescent girls, who are

largely expected and encouraged to stay at home.

Language of instruction is mandated by the government

to be Myanmar language and English.

Children do not understand either language, as they

speak Rohingya at home so learning centers often have

a Bangladeshi teacher paired with a Rohingya community

volunteer who communicate with each other in Chittagong,

which is a dialect similar to Rohingya. As such, children’s

learning is delivered through an intermediary and the quality of

this secondhand information is not documented.

“English is better because it’s international language. It is an important skill.” – Youth

For Pop-Up Learning, we aim to teach English, which is highly

valued by the community.

Tablets will need to be sourced locally.

After a quick market study we have determined to source

tablets locally. Given the very digital Bangladeshi market,

procurement will not be a problem.

Access to technology is forbidden, but happening anyway.

Refugees are officially not allowed to own a mobile phone,

a Bangladeshi SIM Card, or access the internet. However it

is likely that all these things are happening anyway.. Despite

being forbidden to the refugees and a sensitive topic for the

government, at least 3 NGOS are implementing initiatives with

education and technology. Technology is a sensitive topic for

the government and this population, yet some initiatives are

underway with a few NGOs. We are unsure of the outcomes

yet and will plan to engage with them to learn about their

experience.

Mothers are perceived as too close to their children and

too uneducated to facilitate learning.

Male caregivers, dads and community leads did not trust that

mothers would be good facilitators for Pop-Up. In addition to

the already-known lack of literacy and education, issues about

respect and trust were raised.


Recommendations & Next Steps

This study was instrumental in helping us understand

the specific environment we will operate in and its

unique challenges. As a result, we are confident that

Bangladesh is a great location to prototype and test

the Pop-Up Learning concept that could then be

implemented into other crisis contexts.

Now that we have answered our basic feasibility

questions, we are ready to start tackling Phase 2 of the

project and start building and testing the minimum viable

solution and parallel work on cost model.

As immediate next steps, we will:

> Refine our budget, workplan and timeline.

> Refine the different versions of Pop-Up

components (spaces and content) and prepare for

intensive prototyping and testing.

> Create a plan to experiment and test variations of

the facilitator model.

> Once seed round is complete, engage the

government in the approval process.

> Identify vendors and partners.

> Source a large quantity of tablets in Bangladesh,

a portable generator, and work with the logistics

team to prepare specific storage locations.

Notes

pop-up learning › ... · popp earning 6 popp earning 7 irc team conducting interview with a...

Documents