Terms of Reference for the Evaluation of Project 534/RER/1010

“Intercultural and Human Rights Education in Albania”

  1. Background information

a)Why was the project established

The goal of the project was to contribute to peace and understanding in the Balkan region, and specifically in Albania, and to promote intercultural cooperation and respect for human rights in the formal education system in Albania.

b)When was the project established

The project was designed in 1998. The duration of the project was 2 years. The Project effectively started on the 01.05.2001, due to the long national approval process, which involved five ministries and the parliament. (See Annual report, 1 May 2001 – 30 June 2002)

c)How the project was established, including any amendments or revisions of the original project document

A detailed project document was designed by the specialists of the Institute of Pedagogical Studies and the Ministry of Education and Science, in co-operation with the UNESCO Project Office in Tirana and UNESCO HQs, to make sure that it complied with the needs and the priorities of the Albanian education system.

In September 2002, a UNESCO mission to Albania was undertaken. As a result of this visit an updated plan of action for the remaining months of the project was agreed and established to fit with the local situation. (See the Mission report of the September 2002 mission and the Report on the project progress, September 2002 to January 2003)

d)Objectives

  1. Long-term objectives

To promote a climate of intercultural co-operation and respect for human rights in all educational establishments by mainstreaming human rights education into the formal education system. This will be achieved by focussing on the creation of capacity building, especially within the Ministry of Education and the Institute of Pedagogical Research.

  1. Immediate objectives

–To produce unbiased textbooks in Albania to promote the spirit of tolerance and mutual understanding at primary and secondary levels;

–To introduce the dimension of intercultural understanding, co-operation, peace, human rights and democracy in educational curricula, and to develop a new integrated curriculum for pre-university level, teacher guidelines and training materials;

–To train teachers, curriculum designers, textbook writers and educational administrators about the concepts and practices of intercultural understanding and human rights.

–Set up a network of HRE teacher trainers all over the country recognised by the Institute of Pedagogical Studies and the Ministry of Education and Science

e)Expected results:

  1. Initially expected results

–Publication of a study for textbooks analysis in Albania;

–Assessment of past and current activities in the field of civics and human rights education;

–Review of the current situation in civics and human rights education (curricular and extracurricular);

–Development of integrated curricula and plan of implementation for pre-university levels;

–Development of training modules and guidelines for both pre- and in-service teacher training on civics and human rights education;

–Experimentation phase of the integrated curriculum and teacher guidelines (12 inspectors and 240 teachers trained);

–Translation and/or adaptation of UNESCO teaching materials on human rights, peace, tolerance, intercultural understanding and democracy into national language;

–Training workshops for 50 inspectors and 800 teachers.

  1. Expected results for the last 6 months and determined in September 2002 :

–Design of the in-service teacher-training curriculum on Human Rights education (HRE).

–Design and dissemination of interactive HRE kits for teacher-trainers and teachers.

–Training of local teacher trainers for HRE and the establishment of a national network of HRE trainers.

–Local teacher training seminars (60 training seminars for 900 teachers and education directorate inspectors)

f)Budget of the project

The total budget of the project was USD 339.000 funded by the Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, from which 300.000 were earmarked for the implementation of activities and 39.000 for overhead costs.

g)Legislative authority and mandate

In November 1997, during a meeting between the Minister of Education of Albania and the Director-General of UNESCO, the Minister highlighted the importance of civics education in his country in order to promote democratic principles. As a result of the discussions, three UNESCO missions took place in Albania in order to assess the situation, and draft the project summary and the operational work-plan, together with national experts designated by the Vice-Minister of Education, Mr xxxxxxx.

Finally, an agreement was signed by the then Minister of Education of Albania Mr. xxxxxx in December 1999, and was endorsed by the Parliament.

  1. Evaluation purpose

a)Who initiated the evaluation

The evaluation was initiated by the project officer in agreement with the national project manager.

b)Reasons for undertaking the evaluation

–The project terminates on 31 May 2003;

–Assess the outcomes of the project against long-term and immediate objectives;

–Evaluate the outcomes of the project in comparison with the expected results;

–Determine which results have been attained;

–Determine why some of the original expected results have not been completely attained.

c)What the evaluation intends to accomplish

–Produce an assessment of whether the expected results match the effective outcomes of the project and which results have been attained.

–Produce a review of the causes as to why certain project components were modified during the life of the project.

–Produce recommendations as to whether and how to continue with a second phase of the project.

– Assess the lessons learned, including difficulties and constraints. The assessment and related recommendations should be designed in such a way as to become an important tool for the future planning and execution of similar projects by UNESCO and its partners.

d)Main stakeholders

Government of Albania and particularly the Ministry of Education, the Institute for Pedagogical Research, the Core Group of Experts who coordinates the project, the beneficiaries of the project, as well as the Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and UNESCO.

e)Intended use of evaluation results

–As a tool to remedy the difficulties and problems in the future implementation of HRE activities in Albania and of such projects in similar contexts.

–As an assessment document for financial contributors for this and future projects.

  1. Evaluation scope
  1. Timeframe: From the conclusion of the agreement in 1999 to the conclusion of the project on 31 May 2003
  2. Geographical coverage: Albania including the locations where training and/or analysis have been undertaken
  1. Substantive scope of the evaluation:

Project Planning and Relevance

–Whether the objectives of the project are relevant to the needs and the priorities of Albania having regard to the political, social and cultural background/constraints.

–Whether the project is relevant to UNESCO’s fields of expertise and whether the activities undertaken have enabled it to further develop its competencies in these areas.

Project implementation

-Whether the project was implemented as planned, if not, causes.

The effectiveness of the project in achieving the objectives

–The degree to which the immediate and long-term objectives have been achieved measured by establishing:

–Whether capacities were built in intercultural and human rights education within the Ministry of Education and the Institute of Pedagogical Research;

–Whether the beneficiaries to the project consider that the “study for textbook analysis” is useful and relevant;

–Whether the beneficiaries to the project consider that the “review of the current situation in Civics and human rights education” is useful and relevant;

–The opinion of the beneficiaries, especially teachers regarding the training and materials provided by the project;

–The level of knowledge acquisition and capacities developed by the beneficiaries of the project;

–Practical results of the training provided to teachers and teacher-trainers;

–Whether the teachers / teacher-trainer trained use the capacities and knowledge gained through the teacher training provided by the project;

–What use has been made of the materials produced and disseminated;

–Increase in the support on the part of the educational communities and premises;

–The experience gathered so far in the field of human rights education;

–Factors that contributed to the achievement of the objectives:

–The level of support from the Ministry of education and other partners in Albania;

–The reputation of the partners and the level of cooperation among them;

–The modality of cooperation between the project office in Albania and the Programme Section responsible for the management of the project at HQ.

The impact of the project

- Any impact, direct or indirect, expected or unexpected of the project on the target groups in Albania, as well as on the stakeholders.

The risks threatening the achievements of the project in the future

–Political instability: change of governments or minister of education during the implementation of the project;

–The last evaluation report of the World Bank on the Institute for Pedagogical Research.

The sustainability of the activity

–Financial and structural capacity as well as the commitment of the Ministry of Education for the human rights education as a part of the formal school curricula;

–Capacity of the staff in the government and school teachers to undertake the human rights education;

–The institutionalisation and the degree of mainstreaming of the in-service teacher training curriculum and the locally produced teacher-training kits.

Given the time and budget allocated for the evaluation, the particular focus of the evaluation should be given to the relevance, the effectiveness of the project in achieving its objectives and sustainability.

  1. Evaluation methods

The evaluator will choose the methodology he sees fit for the present evaluation. However, two field visit are scheduled to take place during the evaluation. The first one will take place from 23 to 27 April 2003 and the second field visit will take place from 26 May to 1 June 2003. The methodology could include among others document review (desk study), interviews, organisation of focus groups, questionnaires, etc.

The data collected through the documentation review, literature, questionnaire, interviews and field visits will be all made good use of for analysis and are reflected in the report. The views expressed by the stakeholders and beneficiaries form only a part of the data and they need to be analysed alongside the data collected by other means (triangulation).

  1. Evaluation team

It has been agreed with the project officer and the national project manager that the evaluation of the project will be conducted by the Italian evaluation expert Bruno Losito, from the National Institute for the Evaluation of the Education System (Rome, Italy) and the Albanian expert Rezana Lati from the National Institute of Evaluation. Thus, capacity-building will take place as a component of the evaluation process.

  1. Others

TIMETABLE

  • 23-27 April 2003: return travel Rome/Tirana/Rome;
  • 27 April-16 MAy 2003: Development of evaluation plan along with evaluation instruments and start the desk study;
  • 26 May to 1 June 2003: return travel Rome/Tirana/Rome;
  • End of May - end of June: elaboration of the evaluation report.

BUDGET

  • FeesUSD 6,000
  • TravelUSD 5,000 (approximately)

STRUCTURE OF THE REPORT

In presenting the evaluation report, the evaluators should be guided by the following report structure:

  • Executive summary (maximum 4 pages)
  • Programme description
  • Evaluation purpose
  • Major findings
  • Lessons learnt (from both positive and negative experiences)
  • Constraints that impacted programme delivery
  • Recommendations”

In this regard, please note that the evaluator will bear in mind that

  • Recommendations of the evaluation should focus on implementation modalities/mechanisms (including HQ/Project Office interaction);
  • Recommendations should be practical, operational and measurable;
  • Recommendations should be outcome-oriented and relevant to UNESCO’s decision making, overall policy and mandate with a special focus on EFA.

1