̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge - schoolgirls

Sustained, purposeful investment key to ‘leaving no girl behind’, either in education or beyond

tdk25 — Thu, 19 Oct 2023 08:24:14 +0000

̽��ֱ��observations come from an evaluation of 14 projects across 10 countries in Africa and South Asia developed under the ‘Leave No Girl Behind’ (LNGB) initiative, launched in 2016. LNGB is part of the broader Girls’ Education Challenge, run by the UK Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office.

̽��ֱ��programme targets the most marginalised girls through structured interventions aimed at improving their academic skills and life chances. Collectively, these have aimed to reach 230,000 adolescent girls aged 10-19. ̽��ֱ��girls involved tend to come from very poor backgrounds. Many have married early, are teenage mothers, or have disabilities. All have either never attended school or dropped out early.

̽��ֱ��new analysis is the latest in a series of reports evaluating the impact of the UK’s recent, targeted support for the world’s least-advantaged girls in general. It was undertaken by a collaboration led by the Research for Equitable Access and Learning (REAL) Centre, ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge. ̽��ֱ��research assessed the outcomes of the LNGB projects for more than 17,000 adolescent girls, complementing this with case studies from projects in Ghana, Kenya, and Nepal.

̽��ֱ��verdict is broadly positive. As well as enhancing basic literacy and numeracy skills, LNGB initiatives were found to have improved the girls’ life skills and well-being. Participants often displayed greater confidence and increased self-esteem. This enabled them to have more control over decisions relating to their education and work choices. Girls further reflected on how their future aspirations had changed for the better.

Despite this, the researchers highlight several ongoing challenges. Even after participating in an LNGB programme, many girls still encountered significant economic challenges and deep-rooted gender and social norms, which acted as barriers to their education and career development. With the Girls’ Education Challenge concluding in 2024, the report emphasises the need to engage a range of stakeholders in both LNGB projects and equivalent future initiatives, to identify ways to provide sustained support to tackle barriers that the most marginalised girls will continue to face into the future.

Dr Asma Zubairi, who was part of the REAL Centre’s evaluation team, said: “Leave No Girl Behind did a great job of providing more holistic support than many comparable interventions. Based on feedback from the girls themselves, however, it is clear that when the support stops, the same old problems resurface. There are some profound economic and social issues at play.”

Professor Pauline Rose, Director of the REAL Centre, said: “As we approach the end of the Girls’ Education Challenge, we need to consider what comes next. What Leave No Girl Behind has achieved is really impressive, but there are also lessons to learn. In particular, it is clear that we cannot just switch the support pipeline off for marginalised girls, and expect all those good results to be sustained.”

A hallmark of the LNGB projects was their holistic approach to supporting girls in both their education and livelihood journeys. Beyond improving academic skills, such as basic literacy and numeracy, they also charted a ‘pathway’ for each girl’s future: guiding them towards work opportunities, skills training, or back into formal schooling.

Girls and families were often given money or in-kind support to facilitate this. In Ghana, for instance, the families of girls resuming school received one year of financial aid; elsewhere, girls starting businesses were given start-up kits or funding.

Interviews with the girls, families and community members consistently suggested they emerged as confident, independent problem-solvers; while the life-skills training introduced them to topics such as contraception and tackling gender-based violence, of which some were previously unaware. One, speaking about the Aarambha project in Nepal, said it “taught us about contraceptive methods to not give birth to a child…. I did not know anything like that before [and] I learned it after coming to the community learning centre”.

̽��ֱ��report identifies a ‘virtuous’ circle for many girls who entered employment because they often contributed directly to their communities through their work. In Kenya, for example, some girls who trained in tailoring ended up supplying school uniforms to their local area. This increased respect from their families and peers, which added to their overall sense of empowerment and wellbeing.

Despite these positives, there is evidence that societal attitudes remain a formidable hurdle for many of the girls to participate in education. Social expectations also diverted some from their chosen paths following the programme. Older adolescent girls, for example, were seen as too old to return to education and project facilitators noted they potentially faced ridicule if they tried.

In addition, not all girls were able to pursue pathways that matched their preferences. About one-quarter of girls who pursued work-related pathways had originally expressed a preference for formal education but were dissuaded from pursuing it. Moreover, many of the girls following a work-related pathway were pushed towards a limited list of occupations deemed ‘appropriate’ for women, such as tailoring and hairdressing.

̽��ֱ��report cites the case of Ayaan, a 20-year-old mother from Kenya who had originally dropped out of primary school. After joining an LNGB programme, Ayaan wanted to study chemistry, but was considered too old for formal education. She then opted to train as an electrician, only for her husband to reject this as “a man’s vocation”: “They [project in Kenya] told us that only the young kids have the option to go back to school….and my husband refused me to do electrician because he said that it is for men.” Ayaan ended up opening a business selling nuts, charcoal and clothing: a success on paper, but not when measured against her own dreams.

̽��ֱ��evaluation identifies other structural problems. Not all employers, for example, recognised the qualification girls received after graduating from the LNGB interventions, leaving some feeling “underappreciated and stuck with a useless certificate,” according to one interviewee involved in the implementation of an LNGB project in Zimbabwe.

Despite having initial financial backing, girls and families often struggled to afford school or sustain business ventures once the funding ended. In Kenya, about 20% of graduates from the training pathway remained jobless; 39% on the entrepreneurship pathway started businesses that subsequently failed. Societal prejudices sometimes intersected with this: in Kenya there were accounts of men destroying their wives’ sewing machines to stop them from working.

̽��ֱ��report emphasises that future projects will need to collaborate closely with a wide range of stakeholders from inception. These are likely to include governments and NGOs. Such partnerships, the researchers argue, enhance the prospects of girls receiving ongoing, cross-sector support, which is essential for prolonged success.

A host of other recommendations include ensuring that future projects are of sufficient length to enable girls to master the skills they are being taught (which was not consistently true of the LNGB interventions); more comprehensive career guidance to prevent girls being limited to the same handful of occupations; and ties with microfinance to help those who start their own businesses.

“Well-structured interventions like the LNGB projects naturally draw in other entities to help marginalised girls,” Rose said. “They could do so even more strategically. A single education aid project cannot reverse societal or economic constraints by itself, but it can lay the groundwork for a broader approach sustained by others, long after the original project comes to an end.”

A UK-funded programme to support out-of-school girls in low-income countries has significantly enhanced their learning, confidence, opportunities and prospects, a new report says. However, sustained, strategic and targeted investment will be needed to preserve these gains.

It is clear that we cannot just switch the support pipeline off for marginalised girls, and expect all those good results to be sustained

Pauline Rose

VSO Nepal

Young girl in Nepal

̽��ֱ��text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Images, including our videos, are Copyright © ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge and licensors/contributors as identified. All rights reserved. We make our image and video content available in a number of ways – as here, on our main website under its Terms and conditions, and on a range of channels including social media that permit your use and sharing of our content under their respective Terms.

Yes

Global coalition needed to transform girls’ education - report

Anonymous — Tue, 25 Feb 2020 11:26:42 +0000

A ‘global coalition of parliamentarians’ needs to be set up to meet the urgent international challenge of delivering a quality education to millions of girls who are currently being denied access to any at all, a new report says.

̽��ֱ��study, written by academics in the Research for Equitable Access and Learning (REAL) Centre at the Faculty of Education, ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge, and commissioned by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, urges politicians to collaborate ‘across geographical and political divides’, in a concerted drive to ensure that all girls gain access to education by an internationally-agreed target date of 2030.

According to data gathered by UNESCO, an estimated 130 million girls are currently out of school. Over half of all school-age girls do not achieve a minimum standard in reading and mathematics, even if they do receive an education.

̽��ֱ��call for collective, inter-governmental approaches to address this is one of seven recommendations in the report, which together aim to provide a framework for ‘transformative political action’.

Among others, the authors also stress that marginalised girls will only be able to access education if governments adopt a ‘whole-system’ approach to the problem. That means addressing wider societal issues that currently limit women’s life chances beyond education – such as gender-based violence, discrimination, or social norms that force young girls into early marriage and childbearing.

̽��ֱ��full report, Transformative political leadership to promote 12 years of quality education for girls, is being published on 25 February, 2020, by the Platform for Girls’ Education. It is being launched in Geneva, as ministers convene for the 43rd session of the Human Rights Council.

Co-author, Pauline Rose, Director of the ̽��ֱ��’s REAL Centre said: “Everyone – or almost everyone – agrees that improving girls’ access to quality education is important, but progress has been limited. ̽��ֱ��report aims to provide a framework so that governments and those in power can turn goodwill into action.”

“More than anything, we need to look beyond what individuals, or single Governments can do, because we will only address this challenge successfully through bipartisan coalitions and collective approaches.”

̽��ֱ��need to improve girls’ access to education is recognised in the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals, set in 2015. These include commitments to provide inclusive and quality education to all, and to achieving gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls, by the year 2030.

With the clock ticking on that deadline, initiatives such as the Platform for Girls’ Education have been launched to lobby for quality education for girls. ̽��ֱ��Platform is part of the international ‘Leave No Girl Behind’ campaign, which calls for all girls to receive 12 years of quality education – an ambition restated by the present British Government in the December 2019 Queen’s speech.

In a statement accompanying the report’s release, however, the UN Girls’ Education Initiative (UNGEI), which provided feedback on the study, observes that: “Political momentum is not being sufficiently translated into reforms that will put us on track to achieve our Global Goals by 2030. ̽��ֱ��world is failing to deliver on its promise of quality education, and girls remain the most marginalised.”

Building on earlier studies, the new report identifies seven ways in which governments can take concrete, sustainable and effective action to resolve this.

It was based on a global review of current efforts, with a focus on low and lower-middle income countries. ̽��ֱ��researchers also carried out interviews with 11 current and former political leaders involved in championing girls’ education.

Its seven main recommendations are:

Heads of government, ministers and MPs must use their platform to demonstrate commitment to the development of policies supporting the aim of 12 years of quality education for all girls. Senior civil servants should be equipped to ensure that this continues across election cycles.
Women leaders should be represented at every level of government to improve gender-balance in decision-making and to act as role models.
A global coalition of parliamentarians should be established to advocate for girls’ education, working across political divides.
Senior civil servants should invest in and use data on education that separates out information on gender and other sources of disadvantage, so that this evidence can inform policy-making.
Political leaders must collaborate with key stakeholders in gender equality and education issues – such as women’s and youth organisations, civil society organisations, and religious leaders.
Government ministers and civil servants should take whole-system approaches to embedding gender equality in national plans and policies, given the multiple barriers to girls’ education.
Governments should implement gender-responsive budgeting, that ensure sufficient domestic resources are applied to girls’ education.

“Successful reform rarely depends on individuals acting alone,” the authors add. “It relies on alliances, collective action and advocacy. Networks and coalitions are vital to tackle issues that are beyond the capacity of individuals to resolve, as well as to provide a stronger, collective voice.”

̽��ֱ��full report is available at: https://lngb.ungei.org/

A new report aims to provide a framework so that "governments and those in power can turn goodwill into action”.

We need to look beyond what individuals, or single Governments can do

Pauline Rose

̽��ֱ��text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Images, including our videos, are Copyright © ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge and licensors/contributors as identified. All rights reserved. We make our image and video content available in a number of ways – as here, on our main website under its Terms and conditions, and on a range of channels including social media that permit your use and sharing of our content under their respective Terms.

Yes

Sewing stories: unpicking the reality of young lives

sj387 — Sat, 12 Oct 2013 07:00:00 +0000

A black-and-white photograph, taken in 1905, shows rows of small girls wearing identical dark dresses and white pinafores. All have the same pudding-bowl haircut; each child holds a needle, thread and square of cloth. ̽��ֱ��setting for this poignant image is one of the Bristol Orphan Houses, where girls as young as six began sewing lessons and in their teens produced samplers as examples of their needlework skills.

An online exhibition, ‘Stories behind the Stitches: Schoolgirl Samplers of the 18th and 19th Centuries’, unpicks what is known about eight girls who were taught to sew at some of the hundreds schools set up by churches and individual benefactors to educate the children of the poor. Samplers by some of these girls, completed when they were aged between ten and 17, are now part of the extensive collection held by the Fitzwilliam Museum.

Among them is Mary Ann Tipper, born into a working class family in 1852. At the age of ten, having lost both her parents and with no-one willing or able to offer her a home, Mary Ann was presented to the care and trust of George Müller, who ran a number of orphan houses in Bristol. Her admittance records show that she was orphan number 1395 to enter the institution and lived at house No 3, Ashley Down.

Mary Ann’s sampler, which was made when she was 16, survives in the 400-strong collection of samplers at the Fitzwilliam. ̽��ֱ��collection, which boasts examples dating from the late 16th century right up to the 20th century, is particularly rich in 17th century samplers.

̽��ֱ��online exhibition, which went live at the end of September, was curated by Leena Rana, one of six recent graduates awarded internships in 2012-2013 to work on individual projects across ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge Museums.

Rana saw the Fitzwilliam’s schoolgirl samplers as an opportunity to explore a small number of individual stories and, in doing so, unlock the role that sewing played in the lives of countless other girls from modest and poor backgrounds. “I was drawn to these school objects as they incorporate personal data about the maker, including her name and the year in which the sampler was stitched,” she said.

“This information alone isn’t enough to if you want to discover more about the embroiderer. ̽��ֱ��objects I chose to focus on, however, give the name of the school in which they made. This allowed me to research more about the girls, the schools they attended, and the role of needlework in educational institutions.”

̽��ֱ��word sampler comes from the Latin exemplum (an example for imitation). As specimens of needlework stitched onto a piece of fabric, they allowed makers to demonstrate their skills. Coptic pattern samplers, dating around AD 400-500, have been found in Egyptian tombs. In Europe, there is evidence for sampler making in the early years of the 16th century.

Samplers were made by girls from all backgrounds and were seen as an education tool. “Samplers made by a girl from a well-off family were displayed in the home as evidence of her skill in needlework, her good upbringing and refined domesticity. Those made by girls at charity schools would have a more practical function, demonstrating to potential employers their ability to sew, mark and mend personal and household linen,” said Rana.

“Many of the thousands of girls brought up in charity schools and orphanages went into service. ̽��ֱ��records of the George Müller Charitable Trust in Bristol show that Mary Ann Tipper left the institution aged 18 and went to work as a housemaid for a Mrs Peters in Croydon. After that Mary Ann disappears from the historical record.”

Samplers were used as an opportunity to instil morals as well as skills and were used as a means of teaching the alphabet and numbers. ̽��ֱ��decorative sampler made by Mary Ann demonstrates her ability to stitch several rows of alphabets and numerals in a number of styles and scripts as well as to embroider images. ̽��ֱ��verse she chose, or was instructed, to transcribe in neat cross- and four-sided cross-stitch reflects the strong Christian ethos of most orphanages.

In his lifetime George Müller cared for more than 10,000 orphans at a time when illegitimacy was a disgrace, there was no welfare system as safety net, and poverty carried a profound stigma. Muller was criticised for giving the children in his care a varied education of a high standard but ignored comments that he was educating them above their station.

He faced formidable opposition in the shape of prevailing social attitudes. “Children of the poor should not be educated in such manner as to set them above the occupations of humble life, or so as to make them uncomfortable among their equals,” wrote Sarah Trimmer in Reflections upon the Education of Children in Charity Schools; with the Outlines of a Plan of Appropriate Instruction for the Children of the Poor (1792).

̽��ֱ��earliest sampler in the online exhibition was made by Mary Derow in 1723, when she was just ten. She was a pupil at St Clement Danes School in Drury Lane, London, one of more than 60 schools set up the by Society for the Promotion of Christian Knowledge. Children entering the care of the school were provided with clothing and shoes and given quills and inkpots for writing. ̽��ֱ��beautifully executed figures in Mary’s design show pupils wearing the blue school uniform. Girls were taught to knit as well as sew and had instruction in reading and singing.

Although they reveal little flashes of individuality from their young makers, samplers were primarily a means of demonstrating proficiency and diligence rather than artistic flair. Designs were faithfully copied from examples provided by instructors and older pupils, or taken from books illustrating techniques and motifs.

The Fitzwilliam has samplers by mother and daughter, Mary Reeder and Jane Reeder Cole, both of whom went to school in the East Cambridgeshire village of Kirtling in the 19th century. ̽��ֱ��similarity of some of the details, including their portrayal of a bounding dog with a curly tail, suggests that Jane might have modelled elements of her sampler, dated 1852, on her mother Mary’s, which is dated 1826. Both samplers were given to the Fitzwilliam in 1943 by Sarah Cole, who was Mary’s daughter and Jane’s younger sister.

Apart from its immediate visual appeal, the exhibition is an opportunity to reflect on the ever-shifting relationship between women and needlework – and the changing status of handicrafts as mechanisation progressively took over the production of textiles and clothing.

“For some people, needlework represents the oppression and exploitation of women, particularly seamstresses of 19th-century London who were grossly underpaid, sometimes abused and over-worked,” says Rana. “It has to be remembered, however, that before the introduction of embroidery and sewing machines, knowing how to stitch was an essential skill.”

To see ‘Stories behind the Stitches: Schoolgirl Samplers of the 18th and 19th Centuries’ go to http://www.fitzmuseum.cam.ac.uk/gallery/samplers/

For more information about this story contact Alex Buxton, Communications Office, ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge, amb206@admin.cam.ac.uk 01223 761673

Inset images from top: Infant Orphan Girls Learning to Sew in One of the Bristol Orphan Houses, c. 1905; Mary Ann Tipper, Bristol Orphan House, 1868; Jane Reeder Cole, Kirtling School, 1852. First image taken from Centenary Memorial 1805-1905 (Bristol: J.Wright and Co., 1905), copyright, and reproduced by permission, of the Bristol Central Library. Second and third image credited to Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge.

An online exhibition at the Fitzwilliam Museum explores the narratives contained in eight samplers made by school girls from poor backgrounds in the 18th and 19th centuries.

[Samplers] made by girls at charity schools would have a more practical function, demonstrating to potential employers their ability to sew, mark and mend personal and household linen

Leena Rana

Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge

1723 Sampler by Mary Derow, St Clement Danes School

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Licence. If you use this content on your site please link back to this page.

Yes