Versión para Imprimir – Printable Version
00 Editorial Issue 1 “We live life in a state of alert, feeling that we are part of everything that happens, even though it is only as tiny actors in the plot of a story or in the lives of all men. It is not destiny, but merely community (coexistence) that we know enshrouds us: we know we share life with all those who live here and even with those who once lived. The entire planet is our home.” María Zambrano Said the sparrow: “There I was, on the branch of a fir tree, close to its trunk, when it started to snow… And as I had nothing better to do, I started to count the snowflakes that settled on the stems of the branch I was on. When the time came and the next snowflake settled… the branch broke.”And the dove, an absolute authority on the subject since the times of Noah, thought about what the sparrow had told her and finally said: “Perhaps only the voice of one more person is missing for solidarity to find its place in the world.” Kurt Kauter
NEW AND OLD METAPHORS FOR NEW AND OLD REALITIES
There has always been a traditional metaphor between the fishing world and the successive generations of Development Education. Thus, “care-charity” is compared with giving fish to hungry people. In the second “development-based” generation, the idea was to give the rod instead of the fish. It was the next “critical-solidarity” generation that started to question who had access to the river and who didn’t and who was to get the best fishing places, etc. With the arrival of the fifth generation and a change of paradigm, the fishing simile is no longer of interest as a means for obtaining benefits, but it leaves us with two beautiful metaphors. The first is that the small fry can eat the big fish if they take hold of their power, make sure they don’t allow themselves to be eaten, join together and organise themselves. The second is that in a globalised world, the individualism required for rod fishing does not achieve any significant changes; the biggest and longest-lasting transformations come thanks to the nets.
No individual or institution is a guarantee of change and there is no one single leadership in the construction of a fairer world. However, there is a wide variety of proposals that emphasise different matters and have different focuses. We have often lost a great deal of energy in “fighting” to impose a dominant focus.
GLOBAL NETWORKS FOR GLOBAL REALITIES
Education that is committed to social change is questioning the causes of inequality and the ethical concern that leads to the commitment to justice. It analyses and acts from every sphere of science and technology. It prepares for intervention and carries out proposals for change by the individuals and institutions involved in alternative forms of understanding and experiencing politics, economics, sociology, ethics and ecology, etc. Its strategies are also characterised by a common denominator: they are developed by networks.
There is a growing awareness of the fact that said plurality is a value that allows us to enhance our view of the world with contributions from those who see reality from different standpoints. From there, we will be able to focus the different faces of globalisation: economics, international migration, culture, the environment, energy and telecommunications, etc. and the corresponding “crises” in each of said areas. The phenomena of exclusion, food crises and hunger, the examples of great inequality, the insults to human dignity, the low-level recognition of the human rights of every man and every woman, the armed conflicts in different countries and the destruction of the environment, etc. stand out in a way that cannot be ignored.
Complex realities that can only be changed by working from the various areas involved and with the integration of the initiatives that come from the diversity of proposals, skills, characters, efforts, knowledge and cultures, etc., together with an approach to such a complex reality. In other words, working on plural networks.
In view of the subordination of social goals to economic interests, in view of the weakness of states that confirms the unlimited deterioration of the environment and the evident denial of human rights, the fact that social exclusion and inequality do not belong exclusively to any one region of the world, all that remains is to strengthen civil society and foster the concept of global citizens who call for democracy and good international government. And the NGOs and new social movements have shown themselves to be the most active players in the promotion of this new citizen model through their constitution and their motto of ‘act locally, think globally’.
Indeed, with three years left to the end of the term given to reach the Millennium Development Goals, the time is ripe to remember that the eighth of said goals is “develop a global partnership for development”. We are not in full agreement with what we consider to be a limiting view of the MDGs, since it is our opinion that they have prevented finance for relevant issues that were not included in the priorities. However, we do believe that, when this eighth goal was added, there was an awareness of the essential need for coordination, joint effort, joint will, participation in and the constitution of a large world organisation in which networking stands as an irreplaceable way of working in the fight against poverty. Among other reasons, because knowledge is held by certain individuals and institutions; others have the resources; others take decisions; and many others suffer from exclusion. A coordinated contribution from everyone is what can make this fight effective.
NETWORKS, AN ESSENTIAL TOOL FOR GLOBAL EDUCATION
Accordingly, one of the new methods used in Development Education and Global Citizenship is the support, drive, creation and implementation of all kinds of networks to achieve their objectives. And that is why this issue of the Journal is to look at how these networks are connected to Global Education: what characterises them; how relations between the different players in education can be started up and developed (students, teachers, educational institutions, administrations, research projects and centres, civil associations and NGOs, etc.
A first glance shows that educational networks can operate for the exchange of individuals, ideas, experiences and resources and for common actions towards alternative development, looking for new alliances between citizens of the world in their roles as educators, pupils and researchers, etc. willing to make a commitment to equality and justice.
When looking at these networks closely, we can pinpoint three types as useful in education: those used to exercise active citizenship that is committed to social change; those used to exchange experiences and practices in Global Education; and those used for reflection and research in education.
In the first of the three, it is possible to share knowledge and the experience of the good practices that are in place. For example, learning-service experiences, which are contributing to improving local reality at the same time as enabling the learning of the curriculum. Accordingly, these networks are ideal means for such learning and for practice in exercising citizenship, as well as for learning about the surrounding reality and the world as a whole. These networks focus on the principle of working locally as part of a global context of solidarity. With no reference from the global context, we run the risk of losing sight of the real causes of poverty (exclusion) and the solution (inclusion). Without the local approach, we would be uncommitted observers. To achieve the aim of the individual being active and responsible, there is a need for including participatory practices and experiences that foster skills in cooperation and democracy. And networking favours that.
The second type of network has been designed to make use of synergies and improve the impact of the work carried out by the organisations involved in order to bring about social change. They do so in the belief that they share a common horizon: education must focus on building critical citizens who foster a culture of solidarity, justice and the defence of human rights. They share the awareness of it being positive, having a multiplying and, therefore, enriching effect to share learning and experiences gained through socio-educational and political processes, such as training programmes, the revision of knowledge and curricula that are being used to adapt them to this new focus, awareness campaigns, social action and political incidence, etc. in order to collectively build global citizens who become gradually more organised for the creation of societies that are fair, sustainable and inclusive.
Finally, research and reflection networks are crucial for the collective and intercultural construction of knowledge and for acquiring global, plural knowledge of global issues. They make it possible to bring in focuses that are not used by the local academies.
They provide information, data and principles that are not available at great distances.
They allow the exchange of work models and innovative methods in places in which they are not applied. But above all, they enable the collective construction of knowledge, finding global solutions to global problems, even when they appear in different forms in different places of the world. When networks are truly plural and involve adequate representation, they voice the opinions of the individuals and collectives who are excluded in their social contexts, since those who work are integrated in chain fashion in the processes of analysis and exchange.
ÁGORA
Accordingly, Ágora is constituted as part of the Educación Global Research project as a network for research and reflection. Its aim is to become a global learning community among different educational players in research and action in Development Education and Global Citizenship. To do so, it provides a space, along with the electronic journal, to expand the university research stage, allowing for participation at other times and in other research formats.
The call for participation focuses on all the individuals who take part in one way or another in action-reflection-action processes or in actual research in any of the spheres of Global Development Education and on any of its focuses and approaches or its many philosophies and denominations. Indeed, this diversity and its limits are now one of the first subjects of debate and an opportunity for joint learning and enrichment.
As our position shows, we are convinced that educational research (reflecting on how we learn) is a structural dimension in the development of individuals and social groups and it is one of the essential elements in empowerment and emancipation for individuals and societies.
The network constituted in Ágora needs to be open, participatory and shared by individuals from different organisations, cultures and places around the world. It has room (and we hope that it also has representation) for many levels of research, from the simplest to the most specialised, but on any level it provides a basic, characteristic feature of our view of Global Development Education. We want to approach it from a standpoint of rigour without being limited by its current limits, but we know that it represents a force for the practice of holistic teaching models that allow for actions on a larger scale.
THE POLITICAL DIMENSION OF GLOBAL EDUCATION NETWORKS
Educational networking allows for greater development of one of its essential features, i.e. its political dimension, by revealing the relationship between knowledge and power: how access to knowledge (or a community’s most significant knowhow) enables access to and the exercise of power. On this socio-political level, studying and intervening in the network reveals the relationship between education and social organisation.
It does so on its levels of organisation (in the group, in the classroom, in the school, in social organisation), but above all in the learning that “takes place in” and “leads to” changes to institutions, a city area, a community, a region or country, etc. Learning to organise ourselves and exercising organised participation can enable and contribute to small social changes and to the transformation of the society we live in. Furthermore, organisation processes involve significant learning that fosters changes in the organised parties themselves, in their groups and in the context. That’s why organisation processes are significantly educational.
Many of the networks still remain in the private sphere. Even when they are open access, the ownership and management of most of the networks are in the hands of the institutions by which they are maintained, for commercial or altruistic purposes. It is time to consolidate and increase the number of networks constituted as public spaces, not only through free access to participation, but also because they are collective spaces for exercising citizenship financed and maintained by the state to ensure progress in the consolidation of the structures that uphold the processes of Development Education and Global Citizenship. Accordingly, we consider that in order to consolidate the networks and processes of Development Education, we must focus on the design and implementation of new and better public policies. For example, those that formalise or ‘officialise’ the many work experiences that are taking place.
It is also becoming more and more appropriate for the networks to include the state as an institution and the individuals it “employs”, the officers of government institutions.
Furthermore, one important role of organised civil society on these networks will be that of mediator. For example, between the state and enterprise; or between the state and the citizens themselves. Always in search of transparency, the surrendering of accounts and greater efficiency in the development of public policies.
The political dimension of Global Education networks can be seen in the following concepts, among others:
• The concept of popular education as an expression and production of teaching that liberates independence. Democratic practices in education require community participation and social organisation processes that must be promoted and accompanied.
• The concept of organised participation and the social protagonism of childhood and youth. This is a democratic exercise of power, participating from the assumption of collective rights and duties.
• The concept of dialectic change. This is a constant dialectic relationship between practice, reflection and the production of knowledge based on said reflection, which takes us back to the reconsideration and reformulation of specific practices in accordance with what has been learned. This includes the possibility of self-change, of change with others and of change of the environment, not only the transfer of knowledge.
• Coherence. The aim is to prevent the structures, processes and results from reproducing the models and attitudes that are to be changed, that favour the capacity for report, political incidence and social mobilisation throughout the process, that affect social change by creating alternative models and acting as a reference for the change model that is being proposed.
THE IMPORTANCE OF “NETWORKING” RATHER THAN “CREATING NETWORKS”
Networking involves a number of benefits for the individual and for the entity taking part. However, at the same time, it is an exercise of generosity since control over the processes, knowledge, tools and even the shared values is given to the common good.
Therefore, when they realise the importance of networking, many entities often decide to create new networks under their own umbrella. This makes it possible to main a certain (low) level of control over contents and processes, but the opportunities offered by working openly on plural networks are reduced.
For our part, we would like to list a number of principles that define how we understand networking and that we would therefore like to see in the Ágora network:
• Networking is a way of doing things that involves “weaving” relations, learning, involvement, advancing “node by node” until a common space is constituted that is open and diversified and that contains new initiatives, proposals and undertakings.
• Networking means emphasising the construction process of spaces for meeting and common action rather than the organisational structure, which plays a secondary role in accordance with the dynamics of the processes and requirements (which are dynamic, multidimensional and complex).
• The driving factor behind networking is marked out by the strategic targets or goals rather than by the networking itself. The network that faces inwards has no sense; the sense comes from what is “networked” outwards, its efficiency and its effectiveness. Accordingly, the form and intensity of the networking process will depend on how far we can help change the initial situation towards the objective that is set.
• Therefore, networking means respecting and making use of diversities. They constitute a factor of strength insofar as they are respected and used and no particularities are imposed on others. Consequently, importance is placed on debate, planning and laying down purposes and actions, as well as task specialisation, to make efforts and skills complementary to each other.
• Promotion of a mutual system and spirit of learning. This implies a willingness to share what each one knows, but also a willingness to listen in order to learn from others. As a result, it is important for there to be a reflexive action that is critical and self-critical, that allows us not only to exchange descriptions or stories of particular experiences, but also to share the teachings left by said experiences. This task is the result of a systematisation process (as a critical reflection of own practice) and it is fundamental for networking since it enables the construction of shared, own thought based on contributions from everyone.
Accordingly, in the words of Paulo Freire, networking means the constitution of conditions and willingness for learning. In each practical context, the creation of a theoretical context that allows the production of critical knowledge of experience: its characteristics, interrelations, roots and demands.
Today’s challenges are huge and go beyond the traditional fight for justice, equality, peace and human rights. In this 21st century, marked by planetary dynamics and contradictions, by the predominance of an economic, social, political and cultural model that is neither universal nor sustainable and sinks into a deeper crisis on a daily basis, there is a need for those of us who believe that another world is possible, who also work with another political culture and build other relations of power in all the lands in which we find ourselves. With other ethics, with the focus placed on human beings and planetary awareness, networking can become an effective and efficient option for making changes on both a local and global scale.
From community work, sector-based organisation, the establishment of electronic communications with the entire world, the constitution of organisations, institutions and social movements, networking (peer-to-peer or connected in cyberspace) comes as a significant option for dealing with social exclusion anywhere on our planet.
THE ARTICLES OF ISSUE 1
In issue 1, which constitutes the Journal’s first steps towards the objectives set (following an interesting spell from issue 0), we have gathered a series of articles with which we are very satisfied.
First, we wish to inform you of a series of decisions that we have made regarding formal and layout aspects of the Journal:
- Given that our Journal is published in two languages, we have decided to always prioritise the article’s original language. If this were a language other than English or Spanish, it will first be presented in this language and subsequently in both English and Spanish. If it is written in English or Spanish, it will be published in the original language in which it was written.
- We continue to have “childish” front covers with a social sense. These constitute an aesthetically beautiful reminder of the age when we learn the most, when our prejudice levels are down to a minimum and where our open-mindedness might even be more unconditional. This picture is entitled “Winds of Change” and was made by Eneko González Yagúe. The image is rather clear in the way it makes a reference to how girls and boys hold a banner of hope in the world of today, even in the most terrible scenarios.
But let us move on to the Articles. Acting as a hinge between issue 0 and 1, the first article was written by renowned University of London Professor Douglas Bourn, entitled Development Education: from the Margins to the Mainstream. Prof. Bourn is an eminence on Development Education in Europe and particularly in the United Kingdom. From the point of view of his various activities conducted at the prestigious IOE (Institute of Education), in his article, he presents an interesting journey (from a British perspective) from to origins of DE to the present day. We could say that this article complements the one we published in Manuela Mesa’s issue 0, although further expanding on the decade in which the latter was written. In our opinion, this article is a must-read for anyone involved or wishing to engage in DE. Its conclusions take us to the future and prompt us to ponder upon our work.
In this issue, we are joined once again by Oscar Jara, a member of our Editorial Board, from the CEP Alforja in Costa Rica, and with an overall view of Latin America through CEAAL, to take a step further towards standardisation. His article, Standardisation of experiences, research and assessment: three different approaches, proposes different perspectives to assess and learn from social transformation experiences. This perspective he proposes gathers, in a rather current manner, the concerns and tendencies on this matter on both sides of the Atlantic.
Below, Danilo R. Streck, an expert on Freire, from Brazil, presents an amazing article on the mystique surrounding Popular Education: Outra maneira de ler e mudar o mundo: a mística na educação popular. The Brazilian professor, alongside a working group, ponders on the role that the –religious and non-religious– mystique has had with regards to the creation, history and sustainability of social groups. His suggestive ponderings tell us about how intangible matters may have a major role in laying the foundations that give rise to transformative participation.
Fourth, we have a Spanish working team that is closely linked with this Board: Miguel Ardanaz, Journal director and FERE-CECA Madrid member; Cesar García-Rincón, Prosociality Education teacher and Homo Prosocius president; and Belén Urosa, dean at the School of Social Science and Humanities of Comillas P. University. The article presented seeks to show a learning-based alternative to the logical framework approach. We believe that the article’s proposal entitled A proposal for a logical framework for Global Development Education: the GEBL Model may give rise to an entirely different concept of Development Education, from the point of view of planning and assessment. His intuition totally changes the perspective and contextualises the projects in the field of education, with their particularities and idiosyncrasies.
Towards the end of the article section, we have Chilean researcher Edgardo Álvarez’s contribution. The text he presents, entitled Public Policy and Citizen Participation: Eight tensions of Popular Education advocacy, arose from the Chilean movements taking place in recent times with regards to the problems with quality and access to education. Prof. Álvarez ponders on and analyses the learning and participation processes from which these movements were created. The article, very much linked to present-day reality, will help us to ponder on the evolution and development of Popular Education initiatives.
In the Reviews section, we can see three contributions. In the International Document section we can find an interesting commentary and standardisation of DEAR IN EUROPE (Final Report of the ‘Study on the Experience and Actions of the Main European Actors Active in the Field of Development Education and Awareness Raising). This is one of the most significant official documents in Europe on DE, and was published in November 2010. One of its authors, Alessio Surian, from the University of Padua, has worked on it for the purpose of this analysis.
In the books section we can find a commentary recently published entitled Debates in Citizenship, conducted by Mark Chindler, member of our Editorial Board and citizenship professor at Newman University College (Birmingham, United Kingdom). In the International Meetings section, we can find a written analysis of DEEEP’s Summer School, which took place in the summer of 2011 in Finland. We hereby thank Pepa Martínez, Education coordinator of the Catalan Federation of NGDOs, for organising it.
Last, we will be featuring a Guest Journals section. In knowing and expanding the Global Education Research project network, we have come to know more interesting people and projects. In this respect, we have found “sister” journals that complement ours. Therefore, each issue will present a journal from a different part of the world linked to ours through a common topic of interest. On this occasion, we present you a journal run by one of the authors who collaborated in this issue: Douglas Bourn. We are honoured to share an article from The International Journal of Development Education and Global Learning in our Journal’s first issue. We would like to thank Prof. Bourn and professors Oberman, Waldron and Dillon, of Ireland, who shared the article from their latest issue entitled Developing a Global Citizenship Education Programme for Three to Six Year Olds. The quality of the article together with the lack of resources and research available for this significant age bracket led us to choose this article out of a series of high-quality articles.
So, we wish to end this editorial by encouraging research networking, participating in different places and with different perspectives. In these times of crisis (which seems to be never-ending in some parts of the world), it seems that everyone is trying to “play things down”, but from here, we encourage you all to take risks and step out of our comfort zone. These pages echo Paulo Freire’s words :
“For example, do the people have the right or not to know better what they already know? Another question: Do the people have the right or not to participate in the process of producing the new knowledge? I am sure that a serious process of social transformation of society has to do that. Of course, it implies a change in the way of producing economically. It implies a much greater participation of the masses of the people in the process of power. Then it means to renew the understanding of power”.
(M. HORTON, P. FREIRE, We Make the Road by Walking, Conversations on Education and Social Change. Temple University Press, 1990, pp. 97.)
Versión para Imprimir – Printable Version
And the dove, an absolute authority on the subject since the times of Noah, thought about what the sparrow had told her and finally said: “Perhaps only the voice of one more person is missing for solidarity to find its place in the world.” Kurt Kauter
NEW AND OLD METAPHORS FOR NEW AND OLD REALITIES
There has always been a traditional metaphor between the fishing world and the successive generations of Development Education. Thus, “care-charity” is compared with giving fish to hungry people. In the second “development-based” generation, the idea was to give the rod instead of the fish. It was the next “critical-solidarity” generation that started to question who had access to the river and who didn’t and who was to get the best fishing places, etc. With the arrival of the fifth generation and a change of paradigm, the fishing simile is no longer of interest as a means for obtaining benefits, but it leaves us with two beautiful metaphors. The first is that the small fry can eat the big fish if they take hold of their power, make sure they don’t allow themselves to be eaten, join together and organise themselves. The second is that in a globalised world, the individualism required for rod fishing does not achieve any significant changes; the biggest and longest-lasting transformations come thanks to the nets.
No individual or institution is a guarantee of change and there is no one single leadership in the construction of a fairer world. However, there is a wide variety of proposals that emphasise different matters and have different focuses. We have often lost a great deal of energy in “fighting” to impose a dominant focus.
GLOBAL NETWORKS FOR GLOBAL REALITIES
Education that is committed to social change is questioning the causes of inequality and the ethical concern that leads to the commitment to justice. It analyses and acts from every sphere of science and technology. It prepares for intervention and carries out proposals for change by the individuals and institutions involved in alternative forms of understanding and experiencing politics, economics, sociology, ethics and ecology, etc. Its strategies are also characterised by a common denominator: they are developed by networks.
There is a growing awareness of the fact that said plurality is a value that allows us to enhance our view of the world with contributions from those who see reality from different standpoints. From there, we will be able to focus the different faces of globalisation: economics, international migration, culture, the environment, energy and telecommunications, etc. and the corresponding “crises” in each of said areas. The phenomena of exclusion, food crises and hunger, the examples of great inequality, the insults to human dignity, the low-level recognition of the human rights of every man and every woman, the armed conflicts in different countries and the destruction of the environment, etc. stand out in a way that cannot be ignored.
Complex realities that can only be changed by working from the various areas involved and with the integration of the initiatives that come from the diversity of proposals, skills, characters, efforts, knowledge and cultures, etc., together with an approach to such a complex reality. In other words, working on plural networks.
In view of the subordination of social goals to economic interests, in view of the weakness of states that confirms the unlimited deterioration of the environment and the evident denial of human rights, the fact that social exclusion and inequality do not belong exclusively to any one region of the world, all that remains is to strengthen civil society and foster the concept of global citizens who call for democracy and good international government. And the NGOs and new social movements have shown themselves to be the most active players in the promotion of this new citizen model through their constitution and their motto of ‘act locally, think globally’.
Indeed, with three years left to the end of the term given to reach the Millennium Development Goals, the time is ripe to remember that the eighth of said goals is “develop a global partnership for development”. We are not in full agreement with what we consider to be a limiting view of the MDGs, since it is our opinion that they have prevented finance for relevant issues that were not included in the priorities. However, we do believe that, when this eighth goal was added, there was an awareness of the essential need for coordination, joint effort, joint will, participation in and the constitution of a large world organisation in which networking stands as an irreplaceable way of working in the fight against poverty. Among other reasons, because knowledge is held by certain individuals and institutions; others have the resources; others take decisions; and many others suffer from exclusion. A coordinated contribution from everyone is what can make this fight effective.
NETWORKS, AN ESSENTIAL TOOL FOR GLOBAL EDUCATION
Accordingly, one of the new methods used in Development Education and Global Citizenship is the support, drive, creation and implementation of all kinds of networks to achieve their objectives. And that is why this issue of the Journal is to look at how these networks are connected to Global Education: what characterises them; how relations between the different players in education can be started up and developed (students, teachers, educational institutions, administrations, research projects and centres, civil associations and NGOs, etc.
A first glance shows that educational networks can operate for the exchange of individuals, ideas, experiences and resources and for common actions towards alternative development, looking for new alliances between citizens of the world in their roles as educators, pupils and researchers, etc. willing to make a commitment to equality and justice.
When looking at these networks closely, we can pinpoint three types as useful in education: those used to exercise active citizenship that is committed to social change; those used to exchange experiences and practices in Global Education; and those used for reflection and research in education.
In the first of the three, it is possible to share knowledge and the experience of the good practices that are in place. For example, learning-service experiences, which are contributing to improving local reality at the same time as enabling the learning of the curriculum. Accordingly, these networks are ideal means for such learning and for practice in exercising citizenship, as well as for learning about the surrounding reality and the world as a whole. These networks focus on the principle of working locally as part of a global context of solidarity. With no reference from the global context, we run the risk of losing sight of the real causes of poverty (exclusion) and the solution (inclusion). Without the local approach, we would be uncommitted observers. To achieve the aim of the individual being active and responsible, there is a need for including participatory practices and experiences that foster skills in cooperation and democracy. And networking favours that.
The second type of network has been designed to make use of synergies and improve the impact of the work carried out by the organisations involved in order to bring about social change. They do so in the belief that they share a common horizon: education must focus on building critical citizens who foster a culture of solidarity, justice and the defence of human rights. They share the awareness of it being positive, having a multiplying and, therefore, enriching effect to share learning and experiences gained through socio-educational and political processes, such as training programmes, the revision of knowledge and curricula that are being used to adapt them to this new focus, awareness campaigns, social action and political incidence, etc. in order to collectively build global citizens who become gradually more organised for the creation of societies that are fair, sustainable and inclusive.
Finally, research and reflection networks are crucial for the collective and intercultural construction of knowledge and for acquiring global, plural knowledge of global issues. They make it possible to bring in focuses that are not used by the local academies.
They provide information, data and principles that are not available at great distances.
They allow the exchange of work models and innovative methods in places in which they are not applied. But above all, they enable the collective construction of knowledge, finding global solutions to global problems, even when they appear in different forms in different places of the world. When networks are truly plural and involve adequate representation, they voice the opinions of the individuals and collectives who are excluded in their social contexts, since those who work are integrated in chain fashion in the processes of analysis and exchange.
ÁGORA
Accordingly, Ágora is constituted as part of the Educación Global Research project as a network for research and reflection. Its aim is to become a global learning community among different educational players in research and action in Development Education and Global Citizenship. To do so, it provides a space, along with the electronic journal, to expand the university research stage, allowing for participation at other times and in other research formats.
The call for participation focuses on all the individuals who take part in one way or another in action-reflection-action processes or in actual research in any of the spheres of Global Development Education and on any of its focuses and approaches or its many philosophies and denominations. Indeed, this diversity and its limits are now one of the first subjects of debate and an opportunity for joint learning and enrichment.
As our position shows, we are convinced that educational research (reflecting on how we learn) is a structural dimension in the development of individuals and social groups and it is one of the essential elements in empowerment and emancipation for individuals and societies.
The network constituted in Ágora needs to be open, participatory and shared by individuals from different organisations, cultures and places around the world. It has room (and we hope that it also has representation) for many levels of research, from the simplest to the most specialised, but on any level it provides a basic, characteristic feature of our view of Global Development Education. We want to approach it from a standpoint of rigour without being limited by its current limits, but we know that it represents a force for the practice of holistic teaching models that allow for actions on a larger scale.
THE POLITICAL DIMENSION OF GLOBAL EDUCATION NETWORKS
Educational networking allows for greater development of one of its essential features, i.e. its political dimension, by revealing the relationship between knowledge and power: how access to knowledge (or a community’s most significant knowhow) enables access to and the exercise of power. On this socio-political level, studying and intervening in the network reveals the relationship between education and social organisation.
It does so on its levels of organisation (in the group, in the classroom, in the school, in social organisation), but above all in the learning that “takes place in” and “leads to” changes to institutions, a city area, a community, a region or country, etc. Learning to organise ourselves and exercising organised participation can enable and contribute to small social changes and to the transformation of the society we live in. Furthermore, organisation processes involve significant learning that fosters changes in the organised parties themselves, in their groups and in the context. That’s why organisation processes are significantly educational.
Many of the networks still remain in the private sphere. Even when they are open access, the ownership and management of most of the networks are in the hands of the institutions by which they are maintained, for commercial or altruistic purposes. It is time to consolidate and increase the number of networks constituted as public spaces, not only through free access to participation, but also because they are collective spaces for exercising citizenship financed and maintained by the state to ensure progress in the consolidation of the structures that uphold the processes of Development Education and Global Citizenship. Accordingly, we consider that in order to consolidate the networks and processes of Development Education, we must focus on the design and implementation of new and better public policies. For example, those that formalise or ‘officialise’ the many work experiences that are taking place.
It is also becoming more and more appropriate for the networks to include the state as an institution and the individuals it “employs”, the officers of government institutions.
Furthermore, one important role of organised civil society on these networks will be that of mediator. For example, between the state and enterprise; or between the state and the citizens themselves. Always in search of transparency, the surrendering of accounts and greater efficiency in the development of public policies.
The political dimension of Global Education networks can be seen in the following concepts, among others:
• The concept of popular education as an expression and production of teaching that liberates independence. Democratic practices in education require community participation and social organisation processes that must be promoted and accompanied.
• The concept of organised participation and the social protagonism of childhood and youth. This is a democratic exercise of power, participating from the assumption of collective rights and duties.
• The concept of dialectic change. This is a constant dialectic relationship between practice, reflection and the production of knowledge based on said reflection, which takes us back to the reconsideration and reformulation of specific practices in accordance with what has been learned. This includes the possibility of self-change, of change with others and of change of the environment, not only the transfer of knowledge.
• Coherence. The aim is to prevent the structures, processes and results from reproducing the models and attitudes that are to be changed, that favour the capacity for report, political incidence and social mobilisation throughout the process, that affect social change by creating alternative models and acting as a reference for the change model that is being proposed.
THE IMPORTANCE OF “NETWORKING” RATHER THAN “CREATING NETWORKS”
Networking involves a number of benefits for the individual and for the entity taking part. However, at the same time, it is an exercise of generosity since control over the processes, knowledge, tools and even the shared values is given to the common good.
Therefore, when they realise the importance of networking, many entities often decide to create new networks under their own umbrella. This makes it possible to main a certain (low) level of control over contents and processes, but the opportunities offered by working openly on plural networks are reduced.
For our part, we would like to list a number of principles that define how we understand networking and that we would therefore like to see in the Ágora network:
• Networking is a way of doing things that involves “weaving” relations, learning, involvement, advancing “node by node” until a common space is constituted that is open and diversified and that contains new initiatives, proposals and undertakings.
• Networking means emphasising the construction process of spaces for meeting and common action rather than the organisational structure, which plays a secondary role in accordance with the dynamics of the processes and requirements (which are dynamic, multidimensional and complex).
• The driving factor behind networking is marked out by the strategic targets or goals rather than by the networking itself. The network that faces inwards has no sense; the sense comes from what is “networked” outwards, its efficiency and its effectiveness. Accordingly, the form and intensity of the networking process will depend on how far we can help change the initial situation towards the objective that is set.
• Therefore, networking means respecting and making use of diversities. They constitute a factor of strength insofar as they are respected and used and no particularities are imposed on others. Consequently, importance is placed on debate, planning and laying down purposes and actions, as well as task specialisation, to make efforts and skills complementary to each other.
• Promotion of a mutual system and spirit of learning. This implies a willingness to share what each one knows, but also a willingness to listen in order to learn from others. As a result, it is important for there to be a reflexive action that is critical and self-critical, that allows us not only to exchange descriptions or stories of particular experiences, but also to share the teachings left by said experiences. This task is the result of a systematisation process (as a critical reflection of own practice) and it is fundamental for networking since it enables the construction of shared, own thought based on contributions from everyone.
Accordingly, in the words of Paulo Freire, networking means the constitution of conditions and willingness for learning. In each practical context, the creation of a theoretical context that allows the production of critical knowledge of experience: its characteristics, interrelations, roots and demands.
Today’s challenges are huge and go beyond the traditional fight for justice, equality, peace and human rights. In this 21st century, marked by planetary dynamics and contradictions, by the predominance of an economic, social, political and cultural model that is neither universal nor sustainable and sinks into a deeper crisis on a daily basis, there is a need for those of us who believe that another world is possible, who also work with another political culture and build other relations of power in all the lands in which we find ourselves. With other ethics, with the focus placed on human beings and planetary awareness, networking can become an effective and efficient option for making changes on both a local and global scale.
From community work, sector-based organisation, the establishment of electronic communications with the entire world, the constitution of organisations, institutions and social movements, networking (peer-to-peer or connected in cyberspace) comes as a significant option for dealing with social exclusion anywhere on our planet.
THE ARTICLES OF ISSUE 1
In issue 1, which constitutes the Journal’s first steps towards the objectives set (following an interesting spell from issue 0), we have gathered a series of articles with which we are very satisfied.
First, we wish to inform you of a series of decisions that we have made regarding formal and layout aspects of the Journal:
- Given that our Journal is published in two languages, we have decided to always prioritise the article’s original language. If this were a language other than English or Spanish, it will first be presented in this language and subsequently in both English and Spanish. If it is written in English or Spanish, it will be published in the original language in which it was written.
- We continue to have “childish” front covers with a social sense. These constitute an aesthetically beautiful reminder of the age when we learn the most, when our prejudice levels are down to a minimum and where our open-mindedness might even be more unconditional. This picture is entitled “Winds of Change” and was made by Eneko González Yagúe. The image is rather clear in the way it makes a reference to how girls and boys hold a banner of hope in the world of today, even in the most terrible scenarios.
But let us move on to the Articles. Acting as a hinge between issue 0 and 1, the first article was written by renowned University of London Professor Douglas Bourn, entitled Development Education: from the Margins to the Mainstream. Prof. Bourn is an eminence on Development Education in Europe and particularly in the United Kingdom. From the point of view of his various activities conducted at the prestigious IOE (Institute of Education), in his article, he presents an interesting journey (from a British perspective) from to origins of DE to the present day. We could say that this article complements the one we published in Manuela Mesa’s issue 0, although further expanding on the decade in which the latter was written. In our opinion, this article is a must-read for anyone involved or wishing to engage in DE. Its conclusions take us to the future and prompt us to ponder upon our work.
In this issue, we are joined once again by Oscar Jara, a member of our Editorial Board, from the CEP Alforja in Costa Rica, and with an overall view of Latin America through CEAAL, to take a step further towards standardisation. His article, Standardisation of experiences, research and assessment: three different approaches, proposes different perspectives to assess and learn from social transformation experiences. This perspective he proposes gathers, in a rather current manner, the concerns and tendencies on this matter on both sides of the Atlantic.
Below, Danilo R. Streck, an expert on Freire, from Brazil, presents an amazing article on the mystique surrounding Popular Education: Outra maneira de ler e mudar o mundo: a mística na educação popular. The Brazilian professor, alongside a working group, ponders on the role that the –religious and non-religious– mystique has had with regards to the creation, history and sustainability of social groups. His suggestive ponderings tell us about how intangible matters may have a major role in laying the foundations that give rise to transformative participation.
Fourth, we have a Spanish working team that is closely linked with this Board: Miguel Ardanaz, Journal director and FERE-CECA Madrid member; Cesar García-Rincón, Prosociality Education teacher and Homo Prosocius president; and Belén Urosa, dean at the School of Social Science and Humanities of Comillas P. University. The article presented seeks to show a learning-based alternative to the logical framework approach. We believe that the article’s proposal entitled A proposal for a logical framework for Global Development Education: the GEBL Model may give rise to an entirely different concept of Development Education, from the point of view of planning and assessment. His intuition totally changes the perspective and contextualises the projects in the field of education, with their particularities and idiosyncrasies.
Towards the end of the article section, we have Chilean researcher Edgardo Álvarez’s contribution. The text he presents, entitled Public Policy and Citizen Participation: Eight tensions of Popular Education advocacy, arose from the Chilean movements taking place in recent times with regards to the problems with quality and access to education. Prof. Álvarez ponders on and analyses the learning and participation processes from which these movements were created. The article, very much linked to present-day reality, will help us to ponder on the evolution and development of Popular Education initiatives.
In the Reviews section, we can see three contributions. In the International Document section we can find an interesting commentary and standardisation of DEAR IN EUROPE (Final Report of the ‘Study on the Experience and Actions of the Main European Actors Active in the Field of Development Education and Awareness Raising). This is one of the most significant official documents in Europe on DE, and was published in November 2010. One of its authors, Alessio Surian, from the University of Padua, has worked on it for the purpose of this analysis.
In the books section we can find a commentary recently published entitled Debates in Citizenship, conducted by Mark Chindler, member of our Editorial Board and citizenship professor at Newman University College (Birmingham, United Kingdom). In the International Meetings section, we can find a written analysis of DEEEP’s Summer School, which took place in the summer of 2011 in Finland. We hereby thank Pepa Martínez, Education coordinator of the Catalan Federation of NGDOs, for organising it.
Last, we will be featuring a Guest Journals section. In knowing and expanding the Global Education Research project network, we have come to know more interesting people and projects. In this respect, we have found “sister” journals that complement ours. Therefore, each issue will present a journal from a different part of the world linked to ours through a common topic of interest. On this occasion, we present you a journal run by one of the authors who collaborated in this issue: Douglas Bourn. We are honoured to share an article from The International Journal of Development Education and Global Learning in our Journal’s first issue. We would like to thank Prof. Bourn and professors Oberman, Waldron and Dillon, of Ireland, who shared the article from their latest issue entitled Developing a Global Citizenship Education Programme for Three to Six Year Olds. The quality of the article together with the lack of resources and research available for this significant age bracket led us to choose this article out of a series of high-quality articles.
So, we wish to end this editorial by encouraging research networking, participating in different places and with different perspectives. In these times of crisis (which seems to be never-ending in some parts of the world), it seems that everyone is trying to “play things down”, but from here, we encourage you all to take risks and step out of our comfort zone. These pages echo Paulo Freire’s words :
“For example, do the people have the right or not to know better what they already know? Another question: Do the people have the right or not to participate in the process of producing the new knowledge? I am sure that a serious process of social transformation of society has to do that. Of course, it implies a change in the way of producing economically. It implies a much greater participation of the masses of the people in the process of power. Then it means to renew the understanding of power”.
(M. HORTON, P. FREIRE, We Make the Road by Walking, Conversations on Education and Social Change. Temple University Press, 1990, pp. 97.)
Versión para Imprimir – Printable Version
00 Editorial Issue 1 “We live life in a state of alert, feeling that we are part of everything that happens, even though it is only as tiny actors in the plot of a story or in the lives of all men. It is not destiny, but merely community (coexistence) that we know enshrouds us: we know we share life with all those who live here and even with those who once lived. The entire planet is our home.” María Zambrano Said the sparrow: “There I was, on the branch of a fir tree, close to its trunk, when it started to snow… And as I had nothing better to do, I started to count the snowflakes that settled on the stems of the branch I was on. When the time came and the next snowflake settled… the branch broke.”And the dove, an absolute authority on the subject since the times of Noah, thought about what the sparrow had told her and finally said: “Perhaps only the voice of one more person is missing for solidarity to find its place in the world.” Kurt Kauter
NEW AND OLD METAPHORS FOR NEW AND OLD REALITIES
There has always been a traditional metaphor between the fishing world and the successive generations of Development Education. Thus, “care-charity” is compared with giving fish to hungry people. In the second “development-based” generation, the idea was to give the rod instead of the fish. It was the next “critical-solidarity” generation that started to question who had access to the river and who didn’t and who was to get the best fishing places, etc. With the arrival of the fifth generation and a change of paradigm, the fishing simile is no longer of interest as a means for obtaining benefits, but it leaves us with two beautiful metaphors. The first is that the small fry can eat the big fish if they take hold of their power, make sure they don’t allow themselves to be eaten, join together and organise themselves. The second is that in a globalised world, the individualism required for rod fishing does not achieve any significant changes; the biggest and longest-lasting transformations come thanks to the nets.
No individual or institution is a guarantee of change and there is no one single leadership in the construction of a fairer world. However, there is a wide variety of proposals that emphasise different matters and have different focuses. We have often lost a great deal of energy in “fighting” to impose a dominant focus.
GLOBAL NETWORKS FOR GLOBAL REALITIES
Education that is committed to social change is questioning the causes of inequality and the ethical concern that leads to the commitment to justice. It analyses and acts from every sphere of science and technology. It prepares for intervention and carries out proposals for change by the individuals and institutions involved in alternative forms of understanding and experiencing politics, economics, sociology, ethics and ecology, etc. Its strategies are also characterised by a common denominator: they are developed by networks.
There is a growing awareness of the fact that said plurality is a value that allows us to enhance our view of the world with contributions from those who see reality from different standpoints. From there, we will be able to focus the different faces of globalisation: economics, international migration, culture, the environment, energy and telecommunications, etc. and the corresponding “crises” in each of said areas. The phenomena of exclusion, food crises and hunger, the examples of great inequality, the insults to human dignity, the low-level recognition of the human rights of every man and every woman, the armed conflicts in different countries and the destruction of the environment, etc. stand out in a way that cannot be ignored.
Complex realities that can only be changed by working from the various areas involved and with the integration of the initiatives that come from the diversity of proposals, skills, characters, efforts, knowledge and cultures, etc., together with an approach to such a complex reality. In other words, working on plural networks.
In view of the subordination of social goals to economic interests, in view of the weakness of states that confirms the unlimited deterioration of the environment and the evident denial of human rights, the fact that social exclusion and inequality do not belong exclusively to any one region of the world, all that remains is to strengthen civil society and foster the concept of global citizens who call for democracy and good international government. And the NGOs and new social movements have shown themselves to be the most active players in the promotion of this new citizen model through their constitution and their motto of ‘act locally, think globally’.
Indeed, with three years left to the end of the term given to reach the Millennium Development Goals, the time is ripe to remember that the eighth of said goals is “develop a global partnership for development”. We are not in full agreement with what we consider to be a limiting view of the MDGs, since it is our opinion that they have prevented finance for relevant issues that were not included in the priorities. However, we do believe that, when this eighth goal was added, there was an awareness of the essential need for coordination, joint effort, joint will, participation in and the constitution of a large world organisation in which networking stands as an irreplaceable way of working in the fight against poverty. Among other reasons, because knowledge is held by certain individuals and institutions; others have the resources; others take decisions; and many others suffer from exclusion. A coordinated contribution from everyone is what can make this fight effective.
NETWORKS, AN ESSENTIAL TOOL FOR GLOBAL EDUCATION
Accordingly, one of the new methods used in Development Education and Global Citizenship is the support, drive, creation and implementation of all kinds of networks to achieve their objectives. And that is why this issue of the Journal is to look at how these networks are connected to Global Education: what characterises them; how relations between the different players in education can be started up and developed (students, teachers, educational institutions, administrations, research projects and centres, civil associations and NGOs, etc.
A first glance shows that educational networks can operate for the exchange of individuals, ideas, experiences and resources and for common actions towards alternative development, looking for new alliances between citizens of the world in their roles as educators, pupils and researchers, etc. willing to make a commitment to equality and justice.
When looking at these networks closely, we can pinpoint three types as useful in education: those used to exercise active citizenship that is committed to social change; those used to exchange experiences and practices in Global Education; and those used for reflection and research in education.
In the first of the three, it is possible to share knowledge and the experience of the good practices that are in place. For example, learning-service experiences, which are contributing to improving local reality at the same time as enabling the learning of the curriculum. Accordingly, these networks are ideal means for such learning and for practice in exercising citizenship, as well as for learning about the surrounding reality and the world as a whole. These networks focus on the principle of working locally as part of a global context of solidarity. With no reference from the global context, we run the risk of losing sight of the real causes of poverty (exclusion) and the solution (inclusion). Without the local approach, we would be uncommitted observers. To achieve the aim of the individual being active and responsible, there is a need for including participatory practices and experiences that foster skills in cooperation and democracy. And networking favours that.
The second type of network has been designed to make use of synergies and improve the impact of the work carried out by the organisations involved in order to bring about social change. They do so in the belief that they share a common horizon: education must focus on building critical citizens who foster a culture of solidarity, justice and the defence of human rights. They share the awareness of it being positive, having a multiplying and, therefore, enriching effect to share learning and experiences gained through socio-educational and political processes, such as training programmes, the revision of knowledge and curricula that are being used to adapt them to this new focus, awareness campaigns, social action and political incidence, etc. in order to collectively build global citizens who become gradually more organised for the creation of societies that are fair, sustainable and inclusive.
Finally, research and reflection networks are crucial for the collective and intercultural construction of knowledge and for acquiring global, plural knowledge of global issues. They make it possible to bring in focuses that are not used by the local academies.
They provide information, data and principles that are not available at great distances.
They allow the exchange of work models and innovative methods in places in which they are not applied. But above all, they enable the collective construction of knowledge, finding global solutions to global problems, even when they appear in different forms in different places of the world. When networks are truly plural and involve adequate representation, they voice the opinions of the individuals and collectives who are excluded in their social contexts, since those who work are integrated in chain fashion in the processes of analysis and exchange.
ÁGORA
Accordingly, Ágora is constituted as part of the Educación Global Research project as a network for research and reflection. Its aim is to become a global learning community among different educational players in research and action in Development Education and Global Citizenship. To do so, it provides a space, along with the electronic journal, to expand the university research stage, allowing for participation at other times and in other research formats.
The call for participation focuses on all the individuals who take part in one way or another in action-reflection-action processes or in actual research in any of the spheres of Global Development Education and on any of its focuses and approaches or its many philosophies and denominations. Indeed, this diversity and its limits are now one of the first subjects of debate and an opportunity for joint learning and enrichment.
As our position shows, we are convinced that educational research (reflecting on how we learn) is a structural dimension in the development of individuals and social groups and it is one of the essential elements in empowerment and emancipation for individuals and societies.
The network constituted in Ágora needs to be open, participatory and shared by individuals from different organisations, cultures and places around the world. It has room (and we hope that it also has representation) for many levels of research, from the simplest to the most specialised, but on any level it provides a basic, characteristic feature of our view of Global Development Education. We want to approach it from a standpoint of rigour without being limited by its current limits, but we know that it represents a force for the practice of holistic teaching models that allow for actions on a larger scale.
THE POLITICAL DIMENSION OF GLOBAL EDUCATION NETWORKS
Educational networking allows for greater development of one of its essential features, i.e. its political dimension, by revealing the relationship between knowledge and power: how access to knowledge (or a community’s most significant knowhow) enables access to and the exercise of power. On this socio-political level, studying and intervening in the network reveals the relationship between education and social organisation.
It does so on its levels of organisation (in the group, in the classroom, in the school, in social organisation), but above all in the learning that “takes place in” and “leads to” changes to institutions, a city area, a community, a region or country, etc. Learning to organise ourselves and exercising organised participation can enable and contribute to small social changes and to the transformation of the society we live in. Furthermore, organisation processes involve significant learning that fosters changes in the organised parties themselves, in their groups and in the context. That’s why organisation processes are significantly educational.
Many of the networks still remain in the private sphere. Even when they are open access, the ownership and management of most of the networks are in the hands of the institutions by which they are maintained, for commercial or altruistic purposes. It is time to consolidate and increase the number of networks constituted as public spaces, not only through free access to participation, but also because they are collective spaces for exercising citizenship financed and maintained by the state to ensure progress in the consolidation of the structures that uphold the processes of Development Education and Global Citizenship. Accordingly, we consider that in order to consolidate the networks and processes of Development Education, we must focus on the design and implementation of new and better public policies. For example, those that formalise or ‘officialise’ the many work experiences that are taking place.
It is also becoming more and more appropriate for the networks to include the state as an institution and the individuals it “employs”, the officers of government institutions.
Furthermore, one important role of organised civil society on these networks will be that of mediator. For example, between the state and enterprise; or between the state and the citizens themselves. Always in search of transparency, the surrendering of accounts and greater efficiency in the development of public policies.
The political dimension of Global Education networks can be seen in the following concepts, among others:
• The concept of popular education as an expression and production of teaching that liberates independence. Democratic practices in education require community participation and social organisation processes that must be promoted and accompanied.
• The concept of organised participation and the social protagonism of childhood and youth. This is a democratic exercise of power, participating from the assumption of collective rights and duties.
• The concept of dialectic change. This is a constant dialectic relationship between practice, reflection and the production of knowledge based on said reflection, which takes us back to the reconsideration and reformulation of specific practices in accordance with what has been learned. This includes the possibility of self-change, of change with others and of change of the environment, not only the transfer of knowledge.
• Coherence. The aim is to prevent the structures, processes and results from reproducing the models and attitudes that are to be changed, that favour the capacity for report, political incidence and social mobilisation throughout the process, that affect social change by creating alternative models and acting as a reference for the change model that is being proposed.
THE IMPORTANCE OF “NETWORKING” RATHER THAN “CREATING NETWORKS”
Networking involves a number of benefits for the individual and for the entity taking part. However, at the same time, it is an exercise of generosity since control over the processes, knowledge, tools and even the shared values is given to the common good.
Therefore, when they realise the importance of networking, many entities often decide to create new networks under their own umbrella. This makes it possible to main a certain (low) level of control over contents and processes, but the opportunities offered by working openly on plural networks are reduced.
For our part, we would like to list a number of principles that define how we understand networking and that we would therefore like to see in the Ágora network:
• Networking is a way of doing things that involves “weaving” relations, learning, involvement, advancing “node by node” until a common space is constituted that is open and diversified and that contains new initiatives, proposals and undertakings.
• Networking means emphasising the construction process of spaces for meeting and common action rather than the organisational structure, which plays a secondary role in accordance with the dynamics of the processes and requirements (which are dynamic, multidimensional and complex).
• The driving factor behind networking is marked out by the strategic targets or goals rather than by the networking itself. The network that faces inwards has no sense; the sense comes from what is “networked” outwards, its efficiency and its effectiveness. Accordingly, the form and intensity of the networking process will depend on how far we can help change the initial situation towards the objective that is set.
• Therefore, networking means respecting and making use of diversities. They constitute a factor of strength insofar as they are respected and used and no particularities are imposed on others. Consequently, importance is placed on debate, planning and laying down purposes and actions, as well as task specialisation, to make efforts and skills complementary to each other.
• Promotion of a mutual system and spirit of learning. This implies a willingness to share what each one knows, but also a willingness to listen in order to learn from others. As a result, it is important for there to be a reflexive action that is critical and self-critical, that allows us not only to exchange descriptions or stories of particular experiences, but also to share the teachings left by said experiences. This task is the result of a systematisation process (as a critical reflection of own practice) and it is fundamental for networking since it enables the construction of shared, own thought based on contributions from everyone.
Accordingly, in the words of Paulo Freire, networking means the constitution of conditions and willingness for learning. In each practical context, the creation of a theoretical context that allows the production of critical knowledge of experience: its characteristics, interrelations, roots and demands.
Today’s challenges are huge and go beyond the traditional fight for justice, equality, peace and human rights. In this 21st century, marked by planetary dynamics and contradictions, by the predominance of an economic, social, political and cultural model that is neither universal nor sustainable and sinks into a deeper crisis on a daily basis, there is a need for those of us who believe that another world is possible, who also work with another political culture and build other relations of power in all the lands in which we find ourselves. With other ethics, with the focus placed on human beings and planetary awareness, networking can become an effective and efficient option for making changes on both a local and global scale.
From community work, sector-based organisation, the establishment of electronic communications with the entire world, the constitution of organisations, institutions and social movements, networking (peer-to-peer or connected in cyberspace) comes as a significant option for dealing with social exclusion anywhere on our planet.
THE ARTICLES OF ISSUE 1
In issue 1, which constitutes the Journal’s first steps towards the objectives set (following an interesting spell from issue 0), we have gathered a series of articles with which we are very satisfied.
First, we wish to inform you of a series of decisions that we have made regarding formal and layout aspects of the Journal:
- Given that our Journal is published in two languages, we have decided to always prioritise the article’s original language. If this were a language other than English or Spanish, it will first be presented in this language and subsequently in both English and Spanish. If it is written in English or Spanish, it will be published in the original language in which it was written.
- We continue to have “childish” front covers with a social sense. These constitute an aesthetically beautiful reminder of the age when we learn the most, when our prejudice levels are down to a minimum and where our open-mindedness might even be more unconditional. This picture is entitled “Winds of Change” and was made by Eneko González Yagúe. The image is rather clear in the way it makes a reference to how girls and boys hold a banner of hope in the world of today, even in the most terrible scenarios.
But let us move on to the Articles. Acting as a hinge between issue 0 and 1, the first article was written by renowned University of London Professor Douglas Bourn, entitled Development Education: from the Margins to the Mainstream. Prof. Bourn is an eminence on Development Education in Europe and particularly in the United Kingdom. From the point of view of his various activities conducted at the prestigious IOE (Institute of Education), in his article, he presents an interesting journey (from a British perspective) from to origins of DE to the present day. We could say that this article complements the one we published in Manuela Mesa’s issue 0, although further expanding on the decade in which the latter was written. In our opinion, this article is a must-read for anyone involved or wishing to engage in DE. Its conclusions take us to the future and prompt us to ponder upon our work.
In this issue, we are joined once again by Oscar Jara, a member of our Editorial Board, from the CEP Alforja in Costa Rica, and with an overall view of Latin America through CEAAL, to take a step further towards standardisation. His article, Standardisation of experiences, research and assessment: three different approaches, proposes different perspectives to assess and learn from social transformation experiences. This perspective he proposes gathers, in a rather current manner, the concerns and tendencies on this matter on both sides of the Atlantic.
Below, Danilo R. Streck, an expert on Freire, from Brazil, presents an amazing article on the mystique surrounding Popular Education: Outra maneira de ler e mudar o mundo: a mística na educação popular. The Brazilian professor, alongside a working group, ponders on the role that the –religious and non-religious– mystique has had with regards to the creation, history and sustainability of social groups. His suggestive ponderings tell us about how intangible matters may have a major role in laying the foundations that give rise to transformative participation.
Fourth, we have a Spanish working team that is closely linked with this Board: Miguel Ardanaz, Journal director and FERE-CECA Madrid member; Cesar García-Rincón, Prosociality Education teacher and Homo Prosocius president; and Belén Urosa, dean at the School of Social Science and Humanities of Comillas P. University. The article presented seeks to show a learning-based alternative to the logical framework approach. We believe that the article’s proposal entitled A proposal for a logical framework for Global Development Education: the GEBL Model may give rise to an entirely different concept of Development Education, from the point of view of planning and assessment. His intuition totally changes the perspective and contextualises the projects in the field of education, with their particularities and idiosyncrasies.
Towards the end of the article section, we have Chilean researcher Edgardo Álvarez’s contribution. The text he presents, entitled Public Policy and Citizen Participation: Eight tensions of Popular Education advocacy, arose from the Chilean movements taking place in recent times with regards to the problems with quality and access to education. Prof. Álvarez ponders on and analyses the learning and participation processes from which these movements were created. The article, very much linked to present-day reality, will help us to ponder on the evolution and development of Popular Education initiatives.
In the Reviews section, we can see three contributions. In the International Document section we can find an interesting commentary and standardisation of DEAR IN EUROPE (Final Report of the ‘Study on the Experience and Actions of the Main European Actors Active in the Field of Development Education and Awareness Raising). This is one of the most significant official documents in Europe on DE, and was published in November 2010. One of its authors, Alessio Surian, from the University of Padua, has worked on it for the purpose of this analysis.
In the books section we can find a commentary recently published entitled Debates in Citizenship, conducted by Mark Chindler, member of our Editorial Board and citizenship professor at Newman University College (Birmingham, United Kingdom). In the International Meetings section, we can find a written analysis of DEEEP’s Summer School, which took place in the summer of 2011 in Finland. We hereby thank Pepa Martínez, Education coordinator of the Catalan Federation of NGDOs, for organising it.
Last, we will be featuring a Guest Journals section. In knowing and expanding the Global Education Research project network, we have come to know more interesting people and projects. In this respect, we have found “sister” journals that complement ours. Therefore, each issue will present a journal from a different part of the world linked to ours through a common topic of interest. On this occasion, we present you a journal run by one of the authors who collaborated in this issue: Douglas Bourn. We are honoured to share an article from The International Journal of Development Education and Global Learning in our Journal’s first issue. We would like to thank Prof. Bourn and professors Oberman, Waldron and Dillon, of Ireland, who shared the article from their latest issue entitled Developing a Global Citizenship Education Programme for Three to Six Year Olds. The quality of the article together with the lack of resources and research available for this significant age bracket led us to choose this article out of a series of high-quality articles.
So, we wish to end this editorial by encouraging research networking, participating in different places and with different perspectives. In these times of crisis (which seems to be never-ending in some parts of the world), it seems that everyone is trying to “play things down”, but from here, we encourage you all to take risks and step out of our comfort zone. These pages echo Paulo Freire’s words :
“For example, do the people have the right or not to know better what they already know? Another question: Do the people have the right or not to participate in the process of producing the new knowledge? I am sure that a serious process of social transformation of society has to do that. Of course, it implies a change in the way of producing economically. It implies a much greater participation of the masses of the people in the process of power. Then it means to renew the understanding of power”.
(M. HORTON, P. FREIRE, We Make the Road by Walking, Conversations on Education and Social Change. Temple University Press, 1990, pp. 97.)
Versión para Imprimir – Printable Version
María Zambrano Dijo el gorrión: “Estaba yo posado en la rama de un abeto, cerca de su tronco, cuando empezó a nevar… Y como yo no tenía nada mejor que hacer, me puse a contar los copos de nieve que se iban asentando sobre los tallitos de la rama en la que yo estaba. Llegado un momento, al caer el siguiente copo de nieve … la rama se quebró.”
Y la paloma, toda una autoridad en la materia desde la época de Noé, quedó cavilando sobre lo que el gorrión le contara y al final se dijo: “Tal vez esté faltando la voz de una sola persona más para que la solidaridad se abra camino en el mundo.”
Kurt Kauter
NUEVAS Y VIEJAS METÁFORAS PARA NUEVAS Y VIEJAS REALIDADES
Tradicionalmente se ha hecho una metáfora entre el mundo de la pesca y las sucesivas generaciones de Educación para el Desarrollo. Así, a la “caritativa-asistencial” se la equiparaba a darle el pescado a quien pasaba hambre. En la segunda generación “desarrollista” se defendió dar la caña en lugar de dar el pescado. Fue en la siguiente “crítica-solidaria” donde empieza a cuestionarse quién tiene acceso al río y quién no, quién acapara los mejores lugares de pesca, etc. Con la llegada de la 5ª Generación y el cambio de paradigma, el símil de la pesca deja de tener interés como medio para la obtención de beneficios, pero nos deja dos hermosas metáforas. La primera es la de que los peces chicos pueden comerse al grande si se empoderan, toman conciencia de no dejarse comer, se unen y se organizan. La segunda es que en un mundo globalizado el individualismo que requería la pesca con caña no consigue cambios significativos y, por el contrario, las mayores y duraderas transformaciones se dan gracias a las redes.
Ninguna persona ni institución es garante del cambio ni hay un liderazgo único en la construcción de un mundo más justo. Por el contrario, hay una amplia variedad de propuestas que ponen el acento en distintas cuestiones y con distintos enfoques. Frecuentemente hemos perdido mucha energía en “luchar” por imponer un enfoque dominante.
REDES GLOBALES PARA REALIDADES GLOBALES
La educación comprometida con la transformación social se pregunta sobre las causas que provocan la inequidad y la inquietud ética que lleva al compromiso por la justicia. Analiza y actúa desde todos los ámbitos, científicos y técnicos. Prepara para la intervención y ejecuta propuestas de cambio de la mano de personas e instituciones implicadas en modos alternativos de entender y vivir la política, la economía, la sociología, la ética, la ecología, etc. También sus estrategias se caracterizan por un denominador común: se desarrollan por medio de redes.
Cada vez más, se extiende la conciencia de que esa pluralidad es un valor que nos permite enriquecer nuestra visión del mundo con los aportes de quien ve la realidad desde otros puntos de vista. Desde ellos podremos enfocar las distintas caras de la globalización: economía; migraciones internacionales; cultura; medioambiente; energía; telecomunicaciones;… y las correspondientes “crisis” en cada uno de estos ámbitos. Sobremanera destacan los fenómenos de la exclusión, las crisis alimentarias y el hambre, las enormes desigualdades, los agravios a la dignidad humana, el escaso reconocimiento de los Derechos Humanos de todos y todas, los conflictos armados en diferentes países, la destrucción del medioambiente, etc.
Realidades complejas que sólo puede transformarse incidiendo desde los distintos ámbitos que las constituyen y con la integración de las iniciativas generadas desde la diversidad de planteamientos, capacidades, caracteres, esfuerzos, conocimientos, culturas… y afrontando esa realidad tan compleja. Es decir, trabajando en redes plurales.
Frente a la subordinación de las metas sociales a los intereses económicos, ante la debilidad de los estados constatando que el deterioro del medio ambiente no entiende de fronteras y siendo evidente que la negación de derechos humanos, la exclusión social y la inequidad no son patrimonio exclusivo de ninguna región del mundo, sólo queda el fortalecimiento de la sociedad civil y la promoción de una ciudadanía global que exija una democratización y buen gobierno internacional. Y son las ONGs y los nuevos movimientos sociales los que se vienen revelando como los agentes más activos para promover, a través de su articulación y de la acción local con perspectiva global, el surgimiento de ese nuevo modelo de ciudadanía.
De hecho, a tres años de finalizarse el plazo dado para alcanzar los Objetivos de Desarrollo del Milenio, es buen momento para recordar que justamente el 8º es “Fomentar una asociación mundial para el desarrollo”. No es que estemos en total acuerdo con la visión, a nuestro entender, limitante de los ODM, pues consideramos que han servido para impedir la financiación de cuestiones relevantes que no figuraban entre las prioridades previstas. Pero sí creemos que existía, al añadir este 8º objetivo, la conciencia de que es imprescindible la coordinación, la unión de esfuerzos, la suma de voluntades, la participación y la constitución de un gran entramado mundial en el que el trabajo en red se presenta como un modo de trabajo insustituible para luchar contra la pobreza.
Entre otros motivos, porque son unas personas y entidades quienes tienen el conocimiento; otras, los recursos; otras, la toma de decisiones y muchas otras quienes sufren la exclusión. Es la aportación de todas, de manera coordinada, la que puede hacer eficaz esta lucha.
LAS REDES, UNA HERRAMIENTA IMPRESCINDIBLE DE LA EDUCACIÓN GLOBAL
Por eso, una de las novedades metodológicas de la Educación para el Desarrollo y la Ciudadanía Global es el apoyo, impulso, creación e implementación de redes de todo tipo para alcanzar sus objetivos. Y ese es el motivo por el que vamos a asomarnos en este número del Journal a observar cómo son estas redes que guardan relación con la Educación Global: qué las caracteriza, cómo pueden iniciarse y desarrollarse las relaciones entre los diferentes agentes educativos: alumnado, docentes, instituciones educativas, administraciones, centros y proyectos de investigación, asociaciones civiles, ONGs…
Una primera mirada nos permite comprobar que las redes educativas pueden operar tanto para el intercambio de personas, ideas, experiencias y recursos, como para acciones comunes a favor de un desarrollo alternativo, buscando nuevas alianzas entre ciudadanos/as del mundo en sus roles de personas educadoras, educandas, investigadoras, etc. dispuestas a comprometerse por la igualdad y la justicia.
Al mirar con más detalle cómo son estas redes, podemos destacar, por su utilidad educativa, tres tipos de redes: las que se utilizan para el ejercicio de la ciudadanía activa y comprometida con la transformación social, las que se utilizan para el intercambio de experiencias y prácticas de Educación Global; y las que se utilizan para la reflexión y la investigación en materia de educación.
En las primeras se pueden compartir los conocimientos y experiencias de buenas prácticas que se están llevando a cabo. Por ejemplo, experiencias de aprendizaje-servicio, que están contribuyendo a una mejora de la realidad local al tiempo que se aprenden los contenidos curriculares. Así, estas redes, son medios idóneos tanto para este aprender y practicar el ejercicio de la ciudadanía como para aprender cómo es la realidad circundante y el mundo en su conjunto. Son redes que inciden en el principio de realizar el trabajo local dentro de un contexto global de solidaridad. Sin referencias del contexto global, corremos el riesgo de perder la visión real de las causas del problema de la pobreza (exclusión) y de las soluciones (la inclusión). Sin la perspectiva local seríamos espectadores faltos de compromiso. Para lograr el propósito de que la persona sea activa y responsable, se requiere la inclusión de prácticas participativas y experiencias que fomenten habilidades cooperativas y democráticas. Y el trabajo en red lo favorece.
Las segundas se conciben con el deseo de aprovechar sinergias y de mejorar el impacto del trabajo que las organizaciones implicadas realizan con el objetivo de realizar transformaciones sociales. Lo hacen desde la creencia de que se comparte un horizonte común: el de que la educación ha de tender a la construcción de una ciudadanía crítica y que promueva una cultura de la solidaridad, la justicia y la defensa de los derechos humanos. Comparten la conciencia de que es positivo, multiplicador y, por tanto, enriquecedor compartir los aprendizajes y experiencias vividas a través de procesos socioeducativos y políticos como pueden ser los programas formativos, la revisión de los conocimientos y contenidos curriculares al uso para adaptarlos a este nuevo enfoque, las campañas de sensibilización, las acciones de movilización social e incidencia política, etc. con la intención de construir colectivamente una ciudadanía global, progresivamente más organizada para la creación de sociedades justas, sustentables e inclusivas.
Finalmente, las redes de investigación y reflexión son cruciales para conseguir la construcción colectiva e intercultural del conocimiento y para la adquisición de un conocimiento global y plural sobre cuestiones globales. Permiten incorporar enfoques que las academias locales no suelen atender. Aportan información, datos y principios que no están disponibles a mucha distancia. Permiten intercambiar modelos de trabajo y metodologías innovadores en los lugares que no se aplican. Pero sobre todo permiten la construcción colectiva del conocimiento, encontrando soluciones globales a problemas globales, incluso cuando se manifiestan de forma distinta en diferentes lugares del mundo. Cuando las redes son realmente plurales y con la representación adecuada, permiten dar voz a las personas y colectivos que son excluidos en sus contextos sociales, pues quienes trabajan se integran a modo de cadena en los procesos de análisis e intercambio.
EL ÁGORA
El espacio Ágora se constituye así, dentro del proyecto Educación Global Research, como una red de investigación y reflexión. Nace con vocación de convertirse en una comunidad de aprendizaje global entre diferentes actores educativos sobre investigación y acción en Educación para el Desarrollo y la Ciudadanía Global. Para ello proporciona un espacio, junto con la revista electrónica, para ampliar el nivel universitario de la investigación y dar participación a otros momentos y formatos de la misma.
Están convocadas a participar en ella todas las personas que de un modo u otro participan en procesos de acción-reflexión-acción o de investigación propiamente dicha en alguno/s de los ámbitos de la Educación para el Desarrollo Global, y en cualquiera de sus diferentes enfoques y aproximaciones, o en sus diferentes filosofías y denominaciones, De hecho, esta diversidad y dónde se encuentran sus límites es ya una de las primeras fuentes de debate y una oportunidad para el enriquecimiento y el aprendizaje conjunto.
Como ya expresamos en nuestro posicionamiento, tenemos el convencimiento de que la investigación educativa –reflexionar sobre cómo aprendemos– es una dimensión estructural del desarrollo de las personas y de los grupos sociales, y es uno de los elementos básicos del empoderamiento y emancipación de las personas y sociedades.
La red que se constituya en Ágora tiene que ser abierta, participativa, compartida por personas de diferentes organizaciones, culturas y lugares del mundo. En ella tienen cabida –y esperamos que también representación–, una pluralidad de niveles de investigación, desde el más sencillo al más especializado, pues cualquiera de ellos aporta un elemento básico y característico de nuestra visión de la Educación para el Desarrollo Global. Queremos abordarla con rigor, pero no reducirnos a sus actuales límites, pues sabemos que representa una fuerza para la práctica de modelos pedagógicos holísticos que permiten realizar acciones de mayor envergadura.
LA DIMENSIÓN POLÍTICA DE LAS REDES DE EDUCACIÓN GLOBAL
El trabajo educativo en red permite un mayor desarrollo de una de sus facetas esenciales, su dimensión política, al poner de manifiesto la relación existente entre saber y poder: cómo el acceso al conocimiento (a los saberes más significativos de una comunidad) posibilitan el acceso y ejercicio del poder. En este sentido socio-político, al estudiar e intervenir en red, se pone de manifiesto la relación entre educación y organización social. Lo hace en sus niveles de organización (en el grupo, en el aula, en la escuela, en las organizaciones sociales) pero sobre todo en los aprendizajes que “se hacen en” y que “llevan a” la realización de cambios en instituciones, un barrio, una comunidad, una región, un país, etc. El aprender a organizarnos y el ejercicio de la participación organizada pueden posibilitar y contribuir a pequeños cambios sociales y a la transformación de la sociedad en la que vivimos. A su vez, los procesos de organización implican aprendizajes significativos que promueven cambios en los propios sujetos organizados, en los grupos y en el contexto. Por eso, los procesos de organización son fuertemente educativos.
Todavía muchas de las redes se mantienen en el ámbito de lo privado. Aún cuando su acceso sea abierto, la propiedad y gestión de la mayoría de las redes está en manos de instituciones que, con fines comerciales o altruistas, las mantienen. Es tiempo de consolidar y aumentar el número de redes que se constituyen como espacios públicos, no sólo por el libre acceso a la participación, sino por ser espacios colectivos para el ejercicio de la ciudadanía financiados y sustentados por el estado para avanzar en la consolidación de las estructuras que sustenten los procesos de Educación para el Desarrollo y la Ciudadanía Global. En este sentido, consideramos que para consolidar las redes y procesos de la Educación para el Desarrollo es preciso incidir en el diseño e implementación de nuevas y mejores políticas públicas. Por ejemplo, aquellas que formalicen o en las que se “oficialicen” las numerosas experiencias de trabajo que están resultando.
También se va haciendo conveniente incluir en las redes al estado como institución y a las personas “empleadas” por él, al funcionariado de las instituciones gubernamentales. Por su parte, en estas redes, un rol importante de la sociedad civil organizada va a ser el de mediar. Por ejemplo, entre el estado y la empresa; o entre el estado y la propia ciudadanía. Siempre buscando la transparencia, la rendición de cuentas y la mayor eficiencia en el desarrollo de políticas públicas.
La dimensión política de las redes de Educación Global queda de manifiesto, entre otras, por las siguientes concepciones:
• La concepción de la educación popular, como expresión y producción de una pedagogía liberadora de la autonomía. A prácticas educativas democráticas se corresponden procesos de participación comunitaria y organización social que deben ser promovidos y acompañados.
• La concepción de participación organizada y protagonismo social de infancia y juventud. Es un ejercicio democrático del poder, participando desde la asunción de derechos y deberes colectivos.
• La concepción de transformación dialéctica. Es una constante relación dialéctica entre práctica, reflexión sobre ella y producción de conocimiento a partir de esa reflexión, que nos vuelve a llevar al replanteamiento y reformulación de las prácticas concretas, en función de lo aprendido. En ella está la posibilidad de transformación de sí mismo, de transformación con otros y de transformación del entorno, y no sólo transmisión de conocimientos.
• La coherencia. Se trata de evitar que sus estructuras, procesos y resultados reproduzcan los modelos y actitudes que se quieren transformar; que a lo largo de todo el proceso favorezcan la capacidad de denuncia, incidencia política y movilización social; que incidan en la transformación social creando modelos alternativos y siendo una referencia del modelo de transformación que se propone.
LA IMPORTANCIA DE “TRABAJAR EN RED” MÁS QUE DE “CREAR REDES”
El trabajo en red conlleva una serie de beneficios para la persona y para la entidad que participa. Pero al tiempo, supone un ejercicio de generosidad pues se cede al bien común el control sobre los procesos, los conocimientos, las herramientas e incluso los valores compartidos. Por eso, es frecuente que, ante la toma de conciencia de la importancia de trabajar en red, muchas entidades deciden crear nuevas redes bajo su paraguas. Con ello se consigue mantener un cierto control (sólo un poco) sobre contenidos y procesos, pero se reducen significativamente las oportunidades que ofrece el hecho de trabajar abiertamente en redes plurales.
Por nuestra parte, queremos expresar una serie de principios que definen nuestro modo de entender el trabajo en red y que, por consiguiente, queremos que sean constitutivas de la red del espacio Ágora:
• El trabajo en red es una forma de hacer las cosas, que supone ir “tejiendo” relaciones, aprendizajes, complicidades, avanzando “de nudo en nudo” hasta tener constituido un espacio común, abierto y diversificado, en el que se puedan ir sumando nuevas iniciativas, propuestas y empeños.
• El trabajo en red supone dar énfasis al proceso de construcción de los espacios de encuentro y acción común y no tanto a la estructura organizativa, la cual deviene en secundaria y en función de la dinámica de los procesos y sus necesidades (que son dinámicas, multidimensionales y complejas).
• El factor dinamizador del trabajo en red está jalonado por los objetivos o metas estratégicas y no por el trabajo en red en sí mismo. No tiene sentido la red hacia dentro, sino en función de lo que se haga “en red” hacia fuera, su eficiencia y su eficacia. Por eso la forma y la intensidad que tome el trabajo en red dependerá de cuánto podamos incidir en transformar la situación que nos sirve de punto de partida hacia el objetivo planteado.
• Trabajar en red supone, por lo anterior, respetar y aprovechar las diversidades. Ellas constituyen un factor de fortalecimiento, en la medida precisamente que se respeten y aprovechen y no se impongan unas particularidades sobre otras. Por eso, es importante el debate, la planificación y la fundamentación de los propósitos y acciones, así como la especialización de tareas, para posibilitar la complementariedad de esfuerzos y capacidades.
• Impulsar una dinámica y un espíritu de aprendizaje mutuo. Ello implica disposición a compartir lo que cada quien sabe, pero también disposición de escuchar para aprender de lo que otros y otras saben. Es importante, por ello, una acción reflexiva crítica y autocrítica, que nos posibilite no sólo intercambiar descripciones o narraciones de las experiencias particulares, sino compartir las enseñanzas que dichas experiencias nos dejan. Esta tarea, producto de un proceso de sistematización –como reflexión crítica sobre la propia práctica- es fundamental para alimentar un trabajo en red, pues va posibilitando construir un pensamiento propio compartido, a partir de los aportes de cada quien.
En este sentido, el trabajo en red significa en lenguaje de Paulo Freire, la constitución de condiciones y disposiciones para el aprendizaje. Crear, ante cada contexto práctico un contexto teórico que permita producir un conocimiento crítico de lo vivido: de sus características, interrelaciones, raíces y exigencias.
Los desafíos de esta época son inmensos y van más allá de la tradicional lucha por la justicia, la equidad, la paz y los derechos humanos. En este siglo XXI, signado por contradicciones y dinámicas planetarias, marcado por el predominio de un modelo económico, social, político y cultural no universalizable ni sostenible, cada día en una crisis mayor, demanda a quienes creemos en que otro mundo es posible, que también trabajemos con otra cultura política y construyamos otras relaciones de poder en todos los terrenos en que nos encontremos.
Con otra ética, con el centro en el ser humano y una conciencia planetaria, el trabajo en red puede convertirse en una opción eficaz y eficiente para realizar cambios a nivel local y a nivel global. Desde el trabajo comunitario, la organización sectorial, el establecimiento de comunicaciones electrónicas con todo el mundo, la articulación de organizaciones, instituciones y movimientos sociales, el trabajo en red (persona a persona o conectados en el ciberespacio), se nos presenta como una posibilidad significativa para enfrentar la exclusión social en cualquier rincón de nuestro planeta.
LOS ARTÍCULOS DEL NÚMERO 1
En este numero 1, con el que la Revista comienza su andadura con los objetivos que se propuso (tras el interesante paréntesis del número 0), tenemos un conjunto de artículos del que estamos muy satisfechos.
En primer lugar, queremos comunicar una serie de decisiones que hemos tomado, en cuestiones formales y de presentación de la Revista:
- Dado el carácter bilingüe de nuestra Revista, hemos decidido optar por poner siempre en primer lugar el idioma original del artículo. Si fuera distinto del inglés o del castellano, se presentará primero en solitario ese idioma, y a continuación, de manera combinada, el inglés y el castellano. Si el idioma fuera inglés o castellano, se pondrá primero el idioma original en que fue escrito.
- Cada artículo se pondrá alterno por caras de página con cada idioma, de manera que se pueda consultar con facilidad las expresiones del otro idioma. Esta opción tiene una vocación educativa, con el objetivo de que, de alguna manera, vayamos conociendo las expresiones y el vocabulario en el otro idioma. Estas elecciones son validas para la revista “en papel”. Para la revista en la web en formato html los criterios son otros por cuestiones técnicas.
- Continuamos con nuestras portadas “infantiles” y de significado social. Éstas son un recordatorio visualmente hermoso de la edad donde más aprendemos, donde nuestros prejuicios son mínimos y donde nuestra apertura al mundo, quizá sea más incondicional. Esta ilustración se titula “Nuevos Vientos” y está realizada por Eneko González Yagúe. La imagen es muy clara en su referencia a como las niñas y los niños, incluso en las situaciones más desastrosas, son bandera de la esperanza en el mundo actual.
Pero pasemos a los Artículos. Como si de una bisagra entre el número 0 y éste, el primer artículo está escrito por el prestigioso profesor de la Universidad de Londres Douglas Bourn: Development Education: from the Margins to the Mainstream. El profesor Bourn es una referencia en Europa y especialmente en Reino Unido en lo que se refiere a la Educación para el Desarrollo. Desde sus diferentes actividades en el prestigioso IOE (Institute of Education) presenta en su artículo un interesante recorrido (en perspectiva británica) desde los orígenes de la EPD hasta nuestros días. Podríamos decir que se trata de un artículo complementario al que publicábamos en el número 0 de Manuela Mesa, pero ampliando la década desde que se escribió éste. En nuestra opinión estamos ante un artículo imprescindible para cualquier persona que se dedique o se quiera dedicar a la EpD. Sus conclusiones nos sitúan hacia el futuro y nos llevan a la reflexión sobre nuestro trabajo.
Volvemos a contar en este número con Oscar Jara, miembro de nuestro Consejo Editorial, desde el CEP Alforja de Costa Rica, y con la mirada global de América Latina a través del CEAAL, para dar un nuevo paso respecto a la sistematización. Su artículo Sistematización de experiencias, investigación y evaluación: aproximaciones desde tres ángulos, pone sobre la mesa diferentes perspectivas a la hora de valorar y aprender con las experiencias de transformación social. La perspectiva que nos presenta, junta de una manera muy actual, las preocupaciones y tendencias de ambos lados del Atlántico en torno a este tema.
A continuación, desde Brasil, un especialista en Freire como es Danilo R. Streck nos presenta un sorprendente artículo sobre la mística en la Educación Popular: Outra maneira de ler e mudar o mundo: a mística na educação popular. El profesor brasileño reflexiona con un grupo de trabajo sobre el papel que la mística –religiosa y no religiosa- ha tenido en la configuración, historia y sostenibilidad de los grupos sociales. Sus sugerentes reflexiones nos hablan de cómo a veces lo intangible tiene un importante papel en la creación de los cimientos de la participación transformadora.
En cuarto lugar contamos con un equipo de trabajo español muy relacionado con este Consejo: Miguel Ardanaz, director de esta Revista y miembro de FERE-CECA Madrid, Cesar García- Rincón, profesor de Educación en la Prosocialidad y presidente de Homo Prosocius y Belén Urosa, decana de la Facultad de Ciencias Humanas y Sociales de la Universidad P. Comillas. El artículo que presentan trata de mostrar una alternativa al enfoque del marco lógico desde una mirada que se centra en el aprendizaje. La propuesta de este artículo Una propuesta de marco lógico para la Educación para el Desarrollo Global: Modelo GEBL, pensamos que puede abrir una visión totalmente diferente a la Educación para el Desarrollo, desde la perspectiva de la planificación y la evaluación. Sus intuiciones cambian por completo la perspectiva y contextualizan los proyectos en el campo de la educación, con sus peculiaridades y situaciones propias.
Cerrando la sección de artículos, contamos con la aportación del investigador chileno Edgardo Álvarez. El texto que presenta Política Pública y Participación Ciudadana: Ocho tensiones para la incidencia desde la Educación Popular, nace de las movilizaciones en Chile de los últimos tiempos en torno al problema de la calidad y el acceso a la educación. El profesor Álvarez reflexiona y analiza los procesos de aprendizaje y participación de donde surgieron estos movimientos. Un artículo engarzado en la realidad actual que nos ayudará a reflexionar sobre la evolución y el desarrollo de las iniciativas de Educación Popular.
En la sección de Reseñas podemos encontrar tres aportaciones. En el apartado de Documentos Internacionales podemos encontrar un interesante comentario y sistematización del DEAR IN EUROPE (Final Report Of The ‘Study On The Experience And Actions Of The Main European Actors Active In The Field Of Development Education And Awareness Raising). Se trata de uno de los documentos más significativos a nivel oficial en Europa sobre EpD, publicado en noviembre de 2010. Ha sido trabajado para este análisis por uno de sus autores, Alessio Surian, de la Universidad de Padua
En el apartado de libros podemos encontrar un comentario de la reciente publicación Debates in Citizenship, realizada por el miembro de nuestro Consejo Editorial y profesor de ciudadanía en el Newman University College (Birmingham, Reino Unido). Mark Chindler. En el apartado de Encuentros Internacionales, podemos encontrar la narración y análisis de la Escuela de Verano del DEEEP, que tuvo lugar el pasado verano de 2011 en Finlandia. Agradecemos su realización a Pepa Martínez, responsable de Educación de la Federación de ONGD de Catalunya.
Por último, empezamos con una sección de Revistas Invitadas. En nuestro conocer y ampliar la red del proyecto Educación Global Research cada vez conocemos más personas y proyectos que merecen la pena. En este sentido nos vamos encontrando con revistas “hermanas” que son complementarias con la nuestra. De esta manera, en cada número presentaremos una revista de alguna parte del mundo relacionadas con nuestras áreas de interés. En esta ocasión presentamos la revista que dirige uno de los autores de este número: Douglas Bourn. Nos sentimos honrados de compartir un artículo de The International Journal of Development Education and Global Learning, para este primer número de la nuestra Revista. Agradecemos al profesor Bourn y a los profesores Oberman, Waldron y Dillon, de Irlanda, que hayan compartido el artículo de su último número Developing a Global Citizenship Education Programme for Three to Six Year Old. La calidad del artículo y la escasez de recursos e investigaciones en este tramo de edades tan importante nos ha hecho seleccionar un artículo de un gran conjunto de artículos de alto nivel.
Así pues, terminamos esta editorial animando a la investigación en red, participando desde diferentes lugares y con diferentes perspectivas. En estos tiempos de crisis (que en algunas partes del mundo parece que fuera perpetua) parece que todo el mundo apostara por “recoger velas”, pero desde estas páginas animamos al riesgo y a romper los moldes de nuestras seguridades. Desde estas páginas resuenan las palabras de Paulo Freire :
Por ejemplo: ¿las personas tienen derecho a conocer mejor lo que ya saben o no? Otra pregunta: ¿las personas tienen derecho a participar en el proceso de producción del nuevo conocimiento, o no? Estoy seguro de que un proceso serio de transformación social de la sociedad tiene que hacer eso. Por supuesto, esto implica un cambio en cómo concebimos la producción económica. Implica una participación mucho mayor de la gente en el proceso del poder. Entonces esto significa renovar la comprensión del poder.
(M. HORTON, P. FREIRE, We Make the Road by Walking, Conversations on Education and Social Change. Temple University Press, 1990, pp. 97.)
!!!Te recuerdo!!!.... 
Educacion Global Research es un proyecto de:
Entidades colaboradoras:
