GRADUATE PROGRAM IN COEXISTENCE AND CONFLICT

COEX 220a – Coexistence Intervention, Monitoring and Evaluation

Class time: Spring 2018 / Mondays, 2-4:50 pmLocation: G4

Contact information for Prof. JeanE-mail: ijean@brandeis.eduOffice Hours: Mondays before or after class, by appointment.

DescriptionThis course explores a range of strategies for coexistence and peacebuilding interventions. The course develops policy and program design skills and introduces monitoring and evaluation methods for peacebuilding interventions. Peacebuilding and coexistence practitioners want to be strategic and effective in their efforts and to be able to trace the outcomes and impacts of interventions. Most donors now require that peace practitioners demonstrate short-term and long-term results achieved in conflict prevention and peacebuilding interventions. Designing and applying effective DM&E tools and systems require competence, resources and organizational commitment to learning.

This course offers a review of the core concepts, skills and practical steps in design, monitoring and evaluation of coexistence and peacebuilding interventions. The course will stress complexity thinking, strategic design, as well as ethical and participatory methods in monitoring and evaluation. The course will feature in-class exercises, reflective essays, practice with writing a policy brief and developing an evaluation plan for a peacebuilding program.

Learning Objectives: To develop understanding of the international landscape in which peacebuilding takes place; To enable participants to analyze and match coexistence interventions to contextual needs and key

driving factors. This includes leveraging the appropriate role of structural approaches (such as political agreements, constitutional developments, democracy, human rights, governance, legislation, equity work, and development), as well as psycho-social, religious, dialogue and mediation approaches;

To design strategies that are anchored in theories of social change and other related theories (leadership, institutional cultures and dynamics, social group and human needs theories, etc.);

To ensure students consider the ethical issues that arise in peacebuilding work, and increase their awareness of the various codes of ethics, which have been developed to address these issues;

To review state of the field in peacebuilding monitoring and evaluation; To identify effective methods and techniques for monitoring and evaluating projects, particularly

those related to peacebuilding and coexistence interventions.

The Heller School for Social Policy and

Requirements

Attendance, Punctuality, and Active ParticipationIn order to benefit from experiential learning, you are required to attend every class, barring documented illness. Please be on time at the beginning of class and after the break. If you know you will be absent or late, for a legitimate reason, make sure you warn in advance your instructor or teaching assistant, who will not accept unexcused absences. Should you miss more than two classes, unfortunately, you will not qualify for credit and you will have to retake the class. Attendance is more than just coming to class. You are expected to do the readings and actively participate.

Assignments and ReadingsIn order to ensure active participation in the best possible conditions, make sure you complete the assignments listed below in advance of each class. It is highly recommended that students annotate personal copies of, or take notes from the readings.

Please check on website before each class to see if extra readings have been added – or substituted. Students will be called upon to discuss the readings in class and to participate in collective or individual presentations. They must therefore come to class prepared to allow well-informed discussions. Students enjoy complete academic freedom in the classroom, within the limits defined by mutual respect in a safe environment.

Writing RequirementsThe writing requirements listed below are intended to encourage students to approach reading materials critically, to foster improved research and writing skills, and to serve as a basis for contributing to class discussion and a diversity of opinions. Students are expected to devote careful attention to the technical quality of their written work, as well as its substance. They must be honest in all academic work.(See: http://www.brandeis.edu/studentaffairs/srcs/ai/top10students.html)

All written work for this course must include appropriate citation of the sources used. See section 56c (“Avoid Plagiarism”) of the Concise English Handbook. See http://www.brandeis.edu/svpse/academicintegrity/index.html - on academic integrity and

http://brandeis.libguides.com/content.php?pid=10580&sid=99216 - in particular the section dealing with citations

The university policy on academic honesty is distributed annually, as section 5 of the Rights and Responsibilities handbook. Academic integrity is critical in all that you write and say, and transgressions are treated severely. Instances of alleged dishonesty will be forwarded to the Office of Campus Life for possible referral to the Student Judicial System. Potential sanctions include failure in the course and suspension from the university. If you have any questions about this, please ask.

Safety, Confidentiality and AnonymityDuring their work, in class and outside class, in team or individually, each student will be particularly attentive to the safety of all students, group members and the class. They will carefully ensure the confidentiality and anonymity of everyone’s work.

Brandeis University, Heller School for Social Policy and Management, MA Coexistence and Conflict 2

Graded AssignmentsThe final grade in this course will consist of the following components:

AssignmentType

Assignment Instructions Due Date

Grade %

Group assignment

Policy Options Presentation

Your small group represents an influential think tank. Prepare and present policy options to the US government (with a focus on State Department and USAID decision-makers) on most strategic interventions (increases or reductions in aid, types of interventions and expected results) in one country from this list:Myanmar, Syria, South Sudan, Israel/Palestine, Afghanistan, North Korea, Venezuela. 10-minute presentation in class.

Feb 12 20%

Group assignment

Program Co-Design

Your program team will design a strategic program intervention using a co-design concept canvas. Design process will start in class on March 5. Concept canvases will be shared on March 12. A case study and instructions for the design process will be posted on Latte. Concept canvas contains one single large sheet of paper – to be distributed in class on March 5th.

March 12

25%

Group Assignment

Evaluation Plan

(5 pages max)

A peacebuilding organization has commissioned an evaluation of its peacebuilding program in [country]. You are a team of independent consultants bidding on this evaluation contract. Develop and propose an evaluation plan for the client. Your evaluation plan should include key lines of inquiry, evaluation approach to be used, proposed data collection methods, staffing and indicative budget. Submit by e-mail to instructor and TA.

April 16 25%

Individual Assignment

Critical Reflection Essay (5 pages max)

As a peacebuilding practitioner, offer your personal critical reflection on key topics covered in course readings and class discussions. Students will be given a list of topics and questions to choose from.

May 4 20%

Class participation

Each student is expected to contribute to all small group exercises during class sessions

n/a 10%

Note about Written AssignmentsAs all writing assignments are academic papers, please use the APA writing format, with appropriate references to literature, readings, and or/lectures. A bibliography of quality (more than just URLs for example) is expected, as well as explicit connections to the readings of the course. All written assignments must be typewritten, double-spaced in 12-point font (like this syllabus), and submitted electronically via LATTE through a drop box, as a Microsoft Word attachment.

Brandeis University, Heller School for Social Policy and Management, MA Coexistence and Conflict 3

Core TextsSome texts are available on the web. Some will have specific chapters posted on Latte.

Autesserre, S. (2014). “Peaceland: Conflict Resolution and the Everyday Politics of International Intervention.” Cambridge University Press.

Zelizer, Craig. (2013) Integrated Peacebuilding: Innovative Approaches to Transforming Conflict. Western Press.

Church, C., Rogers, M. (2006) “Designing for Results: Integrating Monitoring and Evaluation in Conflict Transformation Programs.” Search for Common Ground/United States Institute of Peace (USIP). Available for download online:

http://www.sfcg.org/Documents/manualpart1.pdf (Part I)http://www.sfcg.org/Documents/manualpart2.pdf (Part II)

OECD DAC (2012) Guidelines: Evaluating Peacebuilding Activities in Settings of Conflict and Fragility. Available online.

In addition, GSDRC Topic Guides are useful starting points for research on topics covered in this course. Below are relevant topics (cf. GSDRC compilation).

1. Conflict 2. Fragile States3. Climate Change4. Conflict Sensitivity5. Gender6. Inclusive Institutions

7. Political Systems8. Sequencing reforms in fragile states9. Social Exclusion 10. State-building and peacebuilding11. State-society relations and citizenship

Visit the GSDRC Topics Guides online to read the compilations: http://www.gsdrc.org/go/topic-guides

Brandeis University, Heller School for Social Policy and Management, MA Coexistence and Conflict 4

Class Session 1: Thursday January 18 (Brandeis Monday) Coexistence and Peacebuilding Landscape

Required Readings:

Vernon, Phil. (2017). Redressing the balance: Why we need more peacebuilding in an increasingly uncertain world.

World Bank (2011), World Development Report. Read Executive Summary.

Suggested Readings:

United Nations; World Bank. 2017. Pathways for Peace : Inclusive Approaches to Preventing Violent Conflict. Washington, DC: World Bank.

Lederach, J. P. Building Peace: Sustainable Reconciliation in Divided Societies. Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace, 1997. (Chapter 1)

Class Session 2: Monday January 22 Systems Analysis Workshop in Class

Required Readings:

Will be posted on Latte by Friday January 19

Class Session 3: Monday January 29 Who is intervening, why and how

Required Readings: Anderson, Mary B., Dayna Brown, and Isabella Jean. Time to Listen: Hearing People on the Receiving

End of International Aid. Cambridge, MA: CDA Collaborative Learning Projects, 2012. Read Chapter 4: What’s Wrong with the Current Aid System? (pages 33-50)

Autesserre, S. (2014). “Peaceland: Conflict Resolution and the Everyday Politics of International Intervention.” Cambridge University Press, 2014. (Chapter 1) on LATTE

Ole Jacob Sending. “Why Peacebuilders Fail to Secure Ownership and be Sensitive to Context.” NUPI Working Paper 755.

Suggested Reading:

Hannah Reich. ‘Local Ownership’ in Conflict Transformation Projects: Partnerships, Participation or Patronage?” Berghof Occasional Paper No 27.

Brandeis University, Heller School for Social Policy and Management, MA Coexistence and Conflict 5

Class Session 4: Monday Feb 5 Policy-level work and integrated programming

Required Reading:

Zelizer, Craig. (2013) Integrated Peacebuilding: Innovative Approaches to Transforming Conflict. Western Press. Chapter 1: Introduction to Integrated Peacebuilding (pages 3-30) - LATTE

Bayne, Sarah with Tony Vaux. “Integrated development and peacebuilding programming: Design, monitoring and evaluation.” DFID: Department for International Development, 2013.

Chapter 1 “Understanding integrated programming” Chapter 2 “Designing ‘evaluable’ integrated programmes.”

AfP (2013), Military Support to Governance. Policy Brief. Online AfP, (2013) Comparing Conflict Prevention & Atrocity Prevention, Policy Brief. Online

Suggested Readings OECD (2012). “International Support to Post-Conflict Transition: Rethinking Policy, Changing

Practice.” DAC Guidelines and Reference Series. Fitzduff, M. (2007). Ten things Leaders Ought to Know – and Do – about Conflicts and War. In

Leadership is Global Eds Link,W, Corral T, Gerzon, M. Shinyo-en Foundation, Japan. McCartney, C. (2002). International Review of Public Policies Towards Improving Inter-community

Relations. Retrieved December 2005 from INCORE website: Chetan Kumar, Benjamin Hoffman What Really Works in Preventing and Rebuilding Failed States:

Catalytic Initiatives for country – level peace -building strategies: What are they accomplishing? Woodrow Wilson Paper Series. http://www.wilsoncenter.org/topics/pubs/Leadership_2.pdf

Class Session 5: Monday February 12 Policy Options -- Presentations in Class

In class policy presentations by country teams

No class Feb 19-23 – No class, Brandeis closed

Brandeis University, Heller School for Social Policy and Management, MA Coexistence and Conflict 6

Class Session 6: Monday February 26 Preventing violent extremism: current approachesPeter Bauman, a Coex Program alum will be a guest speaker in class and will present remotely on Skype

Required Readings: Barkindo & Bryans, “De-Radicalising Prisoners in Nigeria: developing a basic prison based de-

radicalisation”. Journal for Deradicalization, Summer 2016. (On LATTE) Scan through Peter Bauman’s Power Point Presentation prepared for US Africa Command on

“Regional Risk Assessment of Violent Extremism in the Lake Chad Basin” (on LATTE) USAID (2015) Report: Regional Risk Assessment of Violent Extremism in West Africa (On LATTE).

Read: Executive Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations. Skim the rest. AfP (2014), Theories of Change on Counterterrorism, Counterinsurgency, and Preventing Violent

Extremism. Policy Brief. Briggs, Rachel & Sebastien Feve (2013). “Review of Programs to Counter Narratives of Violent

Extremism” Institute for Strategic Dialogue

Suggested Readings: Peace Direct (2017) Report: Peacebuilding and Violent Extremism. Denoeux, G. and Carter, L. (2009) Guide to the Drivers of Violent Extremism. Washington: USAID Countering Violent Extremism - Lessons from the Abrahamic Faiths (2007). An EWI Policy Research

Report http://www.mafhoum.com/press10/309C32.pdf Richardson, L. (2006). What Terrorists Want: Understanding the Enemy, Containing the Threat. New

York: Random House, pp. 3-20, 38-49, 60-71, 78-103

Class Session 7: Monday March 5 Program-level peacebuilding strategies and designs.In-class program co-design exercise using a concept canvas

Required Reading:o Church and Rogers. Designing for Results: Integrating Monitoring and Evaluation in Conflict

Transformation Programs. 2006. Read pages: 14-40 (Ch 2: Understanding Change and Ch.3 Program Design)

o OECD DAC. Guidance on Evaluating Peacebuilding Activities in Settings of Conflict and Fragility: Improving Learning for Results. 2012. Read pages 11-16.

o Rogers, M., Chassy, A. & Bamat, T. (2010). Integrating Peacebuilding into Humanitarian and Development Programming: Practical Guidance on Designing Effective, Holistic Peacebuilding Projects. (Read Ch. 6, "Moving from Analysis to Strategic Interventions: The Project Cycle") (6 pages)

Suggested Reading:

o CDA Collaborative Learning Projects. 2012. “Evaluating Relevance in Peacebuilding Programs.” o Ernstorfer, Anita, Isabella Jean, et al. 2016. “Thinking Evaluatively in Peacebuilding Design,

Implementation, and Monitoring.”o USAID/CMM (2010). Theories of Change and Indicator Development in Conflict Management and

Mitigation. CARE UK. (2012). Guidance for Designing, Monitoring and Evaluating Peacebuilding Projects: Using

Theories of Change. (Pages 1-22)

Brandeis University, Heller School for Social Policy and Management, MA Coexistence and Conflict 7

Woodrow, Peter (2012). Practical Approaches to Theories of Change in Conflict, Security & Justice Programmes Part I. DFID: Department for International Development.

Schirch, L. (2013). “Conflict Assessment & Peacebuilding Planning: Toward a Participatory Approach to Human Security.” Kumarian. Chapter 12, “Peacebuilding Planning Guidance”)

Class Session 8: Monday March 12 Measuring & Improving Peacebuilding Practice – State of the Field

Program Design Concept Canvases Displayed in class

Required Reading: OECD DAC. Guidance on Evaluating Peacebuilding Activities in Settings of Conflict and Fragility:

Improving Learning for Results. 2012. Read pages 7-37. AfP. (2011) Starting on the Same Page: A Lessons Report from the Peacebuilding Evaluation Project.

Read pages 7-14 (Section 1 & 2) Life & Peace Institute, Reflections on Peacebuilding Evaluation. New Routes, Vol 13, March 2008.

Pages: 3-6, 11-18. (LATTE)

Suggested Reading:

o Social Impact. “Fragile States and Peacebuilding Programs: Practical Tools for Improving Program Performance and Results.” http://www.socialimpact.com/resource-center/downloads/fragilestates.pdf

o Corlazzoli, V. and White, J. Measuring the Un-Measurable: Solutions to Measurement Challenges in Fragile and Conflict-affected Environments. 2013. DFID: Department for International Development, 2013.

o AU/SFCG and USIP (2012). “Linking Program Design and Evaluation in Peacebuilding: A Challenging Task. A Meta-Review of Peacebuilding Initiatives in Active Conflict Zones in Africa.”

o Fast, L., and Neufeldt, R. “Envisioning Success: Building Blocks for Strategic and Comprehensive Peacebuilding Impact Evaluation.” Journal of Peacebuilding and Development, Vol. 2, no. 2 (2005): 24-41.

o D’Estree, Pearson et al. “Changing the Debate about ‘Success’ in Conflict Resolution Efforts.” Negotiation Journal 17, No. 2: 2001

Class Session 9: Monday March 19 Monitoring and Indicators

Required reading: o Church C. and Rogers, M. Designing for Results: Integrating Monitoring and Evaluation in Conflict

Transformation Programs. 2006. Read pages 43-90 (Chapters 4-6).

Suggested Reading:o USAID. December 2013. Discussion Note: Complexity-Aware Monitoring. o Catholic Relief Services. 2010. GAIN Peacebuilding Indicators.o Search for Common Ground. “Monitoring and Evaluation Plan Module.” Washington. o Search for Common Ground. “Indicator Module.” Washington.

Brandeis University, Heller School for Social Policy and Management, MA Coexistence and Conflict 8

o OECD-DAC. 2010. “Glossary of key terms in evaluation and results-based management.”

Class Session 10: Monday March 26 Data Collection Methods and Research Ethics

Required Reading:

o Church C. and Rogers, M. Designing for Results: Integrating Monitoring and Evaluation in Conflict Transformation Programs. 2006. Read pages 201-222 (Chapters 12).

o Corlazzoli, V. ICTs for Monitoring & Evaluation of Peacebuilding Programmes. DFID: Department for International Development, 2014. Read pages 1-36

o Corlazzoli, V. and White, J. Measuring the Un-Measurable: Solutions to Measurement Challenges in Fragile and Conflict-affected Environments. 2013. DFID: Department for International Development, 2013. Read pages 15-32.

No class March 30 to April 7 – Brandeis closed

Class Session 11: Monday April 9 Evaluation Approaches

Required Reading:

o Church C. and Rogers, M. Designing for Results: Integrating Monitoring and Evaluation in Conflict Transformation Programs. 2006. Read pages 92-135 (Chapters 7 and 8)

o OECD DAC. Guidance on Evaluating Peacebuilding Activities in Settings of Conflict and Fragility: Improving Learning for Results. 2012. Read pages 85-89 (Annex 7)

Suggested Reading:o Chigas, Diana, Church, Madeline and Corlazzoli, Vanessa. Evaluating Impacts of Peacebuilding

Interventions. DFID: Department for International Development, 2014. o Ernstorfer, A., and Jean, I. (2014). Alternative Approaches to Evaluating Peacebuilding Initiatives.

Cambridge, MA: CDA Collaborative Learning Projects.

Class Session 12: April 16 Evaluation Utilization and Institutional Learning

Required Reading:o Church C. and Rogers, M. Designing for Results: Integrating Monitoring and Evaluation in Conflict

Transformation Programs. 2006. Read pages 178-187 (Chapters 10)o AfP. (2011) Starting on the Same Page: A Lessons Report from the Peacebuilding Evaluation Project.

Read pages 22-26 o Patton, Michael Quinn. 2013. Utilization Focused Evaluation Checklist.

Evaluation Plans Due April 16. Please submit by e-mail.

Class Session 13: April 23 Peacebuilding Ethics and Additional Topics of Interest

Brandeis University, Heller School for Social Policy and Management, MA Coexistence and Conflict 9

Required Reading:o Church C. and Rogers, M. Designing for Results: Integrating Monitoring and Evaluation in Conflict

Transformation Programs. 2006. Read pages 188-198 (Chapter 11)o Duggan, C. & Bush, K. (2014) ‘The Ethical Tipping Points of Evaluators in Conflict Zones’. American

Journal of Evaluation. Vol. 35, No. 3, pp. 1-22.

Suggested Reading:o Scharbatke-Church, Cheyanne. 2011. Evaluating Peacebuilding: Not Yet All It Could Be. The

Berghof Handbook II.

Final assignment (critical reflection essay) due May 4. Please submit by e-mail.

Brandeis University, Heller School for Social Policy and Management, MA Coexistence and Conflict 10