Exploring the idea of human rights education workshops through the Ghanaian school curriculum
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Educating young people on human rights aids in creating a global rights respecting culture. A rights respecting culture signifies a society where people behave in ways that are respectful of others’ rights and are committed to fundamental principles of democracy and development. Human rights education embedded within schools’ curricula plays a central role in preparing young people to understand, appreciate and claim their rights. Even though schools in Ghana and Manitoba teach human rights topics through consideration of other subjects, in both contexts educators are unable to give the teaching of human rights topics the attention and effort required for maximum effectiveness. International human rights instruments consider all persons responsible for ensuring that young people are not denied the right to know about their fundamental human rights. The objective of this paper is to explore other opportunities for human rights education through the Ghanaian school curriculum. The approach to teaching human rights in Ghanaian schools that I recommend involves a combination of the integrated approach and the co-curricular activities approach. This recommendation is based on my practicum experience from creating human rights education workshops at the Manitoba Association for Rights and Liberties (MARL). I conclude that employing a single approach in HRE is inadequate to promoting a human rights respecting culture among young people in Ghana. To be able to advance the co-curricular approach, the national human rights institution of Ghana, CHRAJ, should be equipped with enough resources to lead the development and facilitation of human rights education workshops in Ghanaian schools.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".