Report on Co-Creative Educational Models for Displaced Populations on the Thai-Myanmar Border

Introduction: Addressing Educational Disparities in Conflict Zones through the Lens of the SDGs

Armed conflict currently obstructs the fundamental right to education for 32 million children globally, presenting a significant barrier to the achievement of Sustainable Development Goal 4 (SDG 4): Quality Education. The protracted social unrest in Myanmar, exacerbated by the 2021 coup, has resulted in large-scale displacement, with approximately 80,000 refugees residing in temporary shelters along the Thai-Myanmar border. In response, a grassroots, participatory leadership model is being implemented, aligning with SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals). This initiative focuses on co-designing a culturally and linguistically relevant curriculum to ensure inclusive and equitable education for migrant and refugee learners.

A Collaborative Framework for Inclusive and Equitable Education (SDG 4 & SDG 17)

Overcoming Historical Inequities in Emergency Education

Historically, educational approaches in emergency contexts have been dominated by external, Western-centric models. This practice often results in curricula that lack cultural, linguistic, and contextual relevance, thereby failing to meet the specific needs of displaced learners and undermining the principles of SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities). To counter this, a new framework, Collaborative Massive Open Online Courses (CoMOOCs), has been co-designed on the Thai-Myanmar border. This model ensures that educational content is relevant and effective, directly supporting the mandate of SDG 4.5 to ensure equal access to all levels of education for the vulnerable.

Fostering Epistemic Justice and Equal Partnerships

Professor Elaine Chase of University College London emphasizes that a collaborative approach is essential to avoid the “risk of people from outside the context imposing their own assumptions.” This methodology embodies principles of “epistemic justice” by recognizing and foregrounding the diverse knowledge of refugee educators from the initial stages of design. This process is a practical application of key SDG principles:

• SDG 16.7: Ensuring responsive, inclusive, participatory, and representative decision-making.
• SDG 17: Building effective multi-stakeholder partnerships that mobilize and share knowledge and expertise.

Implementation and Modality: Ensuring Access and Inclusivity

Flexible Learning Modalities

The collaborative process highlighted the critical need for “flexibility in modality.” While CoMOOCs are delivered via digital platforms, the frequent absence of reliable digital access in conflict-affected areas necessitates a hybrid approach. The provision of paper-based materials alongside digital content is crucial for making education fully accessible, upholding the core SDG principle of leaving no one behind and directly advancing SDG 4.

Prioritizing Educator Well-being for Sustainable Outcomes (SDG 8)

Teachers in emergency settings face significant threats to their well-being, which impedes the delivery of quality education. Key challenges on the Thai-Myanmar border include:

1. A lack of adequate resources.
2. Insufficient and unfair salaries.
3. Substandard living conditions.
4. High levels of stress from overcrowded learning centers.

These conditions are contrary to the principles of SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth). The CoMOOC design fosters solidarity and a support network among refugee educators, contributing to a more resilient and sustainable teaching workforce, which is essential for achieving long-term educational goals.

Pathways to Professional Development and Decent Work (SDG 4 & SDG 8)

Accredited Learning for Enhanced Social Mobility

A significant outcome of this initiative is a pathway to learning accreditation. A partnership with the University of London enables refugee educators on the border to complete an internationally recognized Post-Graduate Certificate in Education (PGCERT). This highly subsidized program provides a “portable qualification,” empowering teachers with the credentials needed for professional mobility and career advancement. This directly addresses two critical SDG targets:

• SDG 4.c: To substantially increase the supply of qualified teachers through international cooperation for teacher training.
• SDG 8.6: To substantially reduce the proportion of youth not in employment, education, or training.

Redefining Success Metrics for Education in Crisis Contexts (SDG 4 & SDG 16)

A Holistic Approach Beyond Academic Attainment

The project advocates for a shift in how educational success is measured in conflict zones, moving beyond traditional academic markers to more holistic outcomes. According to Professor Chase, important indicators of success include students’ feelings of safety, security, and subjective well-being, as well as their ability to envision their futures. A strong sense of identity among displaced students serves as a key indicator of a culturally and linguistically relevant curriculum, aligning with the human-centric vision of the SDGs.

Education as a Tool for Peace and Global Citizenship

Given the politicization of education in Myanmar, where it is often used to promote specific ideologies, this new model prioritizes “longer-term peace-enhancing aspects of life and learning.” By teaching students to navigate a complex world and encouraging understanding across diverse cultures and languages, the curriculum actively promotes peace and open-mindedness. This focus is a direct contribution to SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions) and fulfills the mandate of SDG 4.7, which calls for education that promotes a culture of peace, non-violence, and global citizenship.

Conclusion: A Decolonized, SDG-Aligned Model for Crisis Education

The work on the Thai-Myanmar border demonstrates the value of collaboration and local involvement in decolonizing crisis education. The CoMOOC framework delivers a linguistically and culturally relevant curriculum while prioritizing teacher well-being. This approach provides a tangible and effective model for achieving multiple Sustainable Development Goals—notably SDG 4, SDG 8, SDG 10, SDG 16, and SDG 17—in highly challenging displacement contexts.

SDGs Addressed in the Article

1. SDG 4: Quality Education

   • The article’s primary focus is on providing education to children and training for teachers in conflict-affected areas, specifically for refugees from Myanmar on the Thai border. It discusses the challenge that “armed conflict denies 32 million children around the world their right to a formal education” and explores solutions like co-designing culturally relevant curricula to ensure quality learning.

2. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

   • The article is set against the backdrop of “oppressive military force and social unrest in Myanmar.” It promotes an educational model that prioritizes “longer-term peace-enhancing aspects of life and learning” and encourages “understanding and connections across language, ethnic and cultural diversity” as a way to foster peace. The collaborative approach also embodies “principles which are about epistemic justice.”

3. SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

   • The article highlights the inequalities faced by refugees, a vulnerable group. It notes that the “Thai education system does not officially recognize many of the education services provided in refugee settings,” which hinders social mobility. The initiatives described aim to reduce these inequalities by providing access to quality education and accredited qualifications.

4. SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

   • The well-being and professional development of teachers are central themes. The article points out the lack of “fair salaries and decent living conditions” for refugee educators. The PGCERT program is presented as a solution to provide teachers with a “portable qualification which they can use in whichever context they end up,” enabling them to pursue a career and achieve economic stability.

5. SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals

   • The entire initiative described is built on collaboration. The article emphasizes the partnership between University College London (Elaine Chase), local “partner organizations,” and “refugee educators” on the Thai-Myanmar border. This multi-stakeholder partnership is crucial for co-designing and implementing effective educational solutions.

Specific SDG Targets Identified

1. SDG 4: Quality Education

   • Target 4.1: By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys complete free, equitable and quality primary and secondary education. The article directly addresses this by focusing on the “32 million children” denied education by conflict.
   • Target 4.5: By 2030, eliminate gender disparities in education and ensure equal access to all levels of education and vocational training for the vulnerable, including… children in vulnerable situations. The work focuses on refugee learners, who are a key vulnerable group.
   • Target 4.7: By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development, including… a culture of peace and non-violence. The article highlights the importance of teaching students to navigate a “complex and diverse world” and promoting “peace-enhancing aspects of life and learning.”
   • Target 4.c: By 2030, substantially increase the supply of qualified teachers… through international cooperation for teacher training. The CoMOOCs and the PGCERT program for refugee educators are direct examples of international cooperation to train and qualify teachers in a crisis context.

2. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

   • Target 16.7: Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels. The article champions a “participatory leadership model” and the process of co-designing curricula with local stakeholders and refugee educators to avoid “imposing their own assumptions and ideas.”

3. SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

   • Target 10.3: Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory… policies and practices. The article identifies the Thai system’s non-recognition of refugee education as a discriminatory practice and presents the accredited PGCERT as a way to overcome this barrier to opportunity.

4. SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

   • Target 8.5: By 2030, achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all… and equal pay for work of equal value. The article identifies threats to this target, such as the lack of “fair salaries and decent living conditions” for teachers.
   • Target 8.6: By 2020, substantially reduce the proportion of youth not in employment, education or training. The PGCERT program directly addresses this by providing a pathway for aspiring refugee educators to gain qualifications and enter the teaching profession.

5. SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals

   • Target 17.16: Enhance the global partnership for sustainable development, complemented by multi-stakeholder partnerships that mobilize and share knowledge, expertise… The collaboration between a UK university, local organizations, and refugee communities to “co-design” education models is a clear example of this target in action.

Indicators for Measuring Progress

1. For SDG Target 4.1 & 4.5 (Access to Education for Vulnerable Children)

   • Quantitative Indicator: The number of children affected by conflict who are out of school (mentioned as “32 million children around the world”).
   • Quantitative Indicator: The number of refugees in a specific location requiring educational services (mentioned as “80,000 refugees are living in nine temporary shelters”).

2. For SDG Target 4.c (Supply of Qualified Teachers)

   • Quantitative Indicator: The number of teachers receiving accredited training (mentioned as “eight students on the Thai-Myanmar border to complete an internationally recognised PGCERT”).
   • Qualitative Indicator: Teacher attrition rates, which are implied to be high due to “high levels of stress” and poor conditions. A reduction in this rate would indicate progress.

3. For SDG Target 4.7 (Education for Sustainable Development and Peace)

   • Qualitative Indicator: A shift away from purely “academic attainment markers” to holistic measures.
   • Qualitative Indicator: Students’ “feelings of safety and security; subject well-being and how young people envision their futures.”
   • Qualitative Indicator: The development of a “sense of identity amongst displaced students” as a result of culturally relevant curricula.
   • Qualitative Indicator: The ability of education to foster “understanding and connections across language, ethnic and cultural diversity.”

4. For SDG Target 8.5 (Decent Work)

   • Qualitative Indicator: The state of teacher working conditions, with “lack of resources, fair salaries and decent living conditions” cited as negative indicators. Improvement in these areas would signal progress.

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Analysis

Source: borgenmagazine.com