Promoting Quality Education in Post-Conflict Situations: A Community Participation Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conflicts have devastating impact on children’s education. Formal and non-formal education structures are corroded, communities displaced and fragmented and educational inputs threatened. Maintaining a sufficient educational corps, recruiting educators, properly training and remunerating them become a challenge. During conflicts, the state may not have the capacity and political will to provide education. Communities in troubled or remote areas may become isolated and beyond the reach of government services and this may create gap which needs to be filled by non-state actors to ensure learning continues. Education is important both for its intrinsic human worth and for possibilities for societal improvement which may contribute towards an end to the conflict, the provision of schooling becomes a priority and focus of community engagement. In the absence or inability of an education authority to manage the education system, the community needs to step in to re-establish schools and keep the system functioning. The research sets out to explore the types of roles communities play in the provision of education and the conditions that may hinder or encourage positive engagement in both emergency and reconstruction settings. The research recommends that social and affective aspects of learning and active participation of all should be emphasized towards improving the educational quality in situations of post-conflict. Cultural and social dimension should be at the centre of community participation in education.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".