The Bridge - Journal of Educational Research and Theory Vol.1

Journal of Educational Research and Theory

Journal of Educational Research and Theory

Vol. 1 Spring Summer 2025

Published by The Bridge

Head of Research

Dr Karen L Taylor

ktaylor@wellingtoncollege.org.uk

The Bridge

Wellington College

Dukes Ride

Crowthorne

RG45 7PU

Email: thebridge@wellingtoncollege.org.uk

Web: thebridge.wellingtoncollege.org.uk

Follow us on: LinkedIn

Phone: +44 (0) 1344 444 238

Introduction

Karen L. Taylor

Welcome to the first volume of The Bridge: Journal of Educational Research and Theory!

This journal seeks to build a vibrant community of inquiry that explores the interconnectedness of educational theory, research, practice, and purpose. We aim to foster meaningful collaboration between classroom practitioners and university researchers in a dialogic space of mutual exchange—one that challenges hierarchical notions of knowledge and promotes a shared, transformative understanding of learning and teaching.

Together, we contribute to a growing body of knowledge that addresses the complexities of contemporary education. The articles in this volume offer a wide range of provocative insights into teaching and learning across diverse contexts. Collectively, they invite us to reexamine our principles, values, and practices as educators. We hope these articles stimulate reflection, dialogue, and continued inquiry into the pressing challenges and possibilities in education today.

Leaders

as agents of positive transformation

A focus on leadership, defined in varying ways, is frequent in both the discourse on education and in society. Evan Dutmer explores a virtue ethics-based approach to leadership education at Culver Academies. He emphasizes the dynamic, co-constructed relationship between leaders and followers, aiming to cultivate virtues that support the flourishing of both individuals and societies.

Assessing the true effectiveness of online learning tools

Giancarlo Dentico presents school-based action research into the effectiveness of Tassomai, a leading UK EdTech platform. While students enjoy using the tool, the study found no statistically significant impact on KS3 progress—raising important questions about engagement, efficacy, and the need for independent evaluation of EdTech claims.

Empowering students to interrogate school carbon data

Cyrus Golding and Katy Millis offer a practical methodology for helping schools measure their carbon emissions. Their approach empowers students and teachers to foster sustainable school cultures through methodological transparency and collaborative inquiry.

Interdisciplinary collaboration for effective innovation

Inspired by a presentation on agile, decentralized decision-making in a military context, Ryan Clinesmith Montalvo examines how interdisciplinary collaboration in high-performing teams can inform educational innovation—particularly in preparing students for an uncertain future.

Supporting cultural and linguistic identity in refugee education

Lipsey Ojok challenges us to reflect on what inclusive education means beyond our own contexts. His study of Uganda’s Education Plan for Refugee and Host Communities highlights how the policy aims to build trust and address inequality. The findings underscore the need to critically reframe notions of ‘quality education’ in support of social cohesion, peacebuilding, and the rights of refugee learners.

Cultivation of Character for Ethical Leadership: The Department of Leadership Education at Culver Academies

Evan Dutmer

Abstract

Since 1894, Culver Academies has aimed to develop leaders of character. Rooted in the military academy and boarding school traditions, Culver has centered leadership development around central virtues and values. In 1986, recognizing the need to provide integrated, successive leadership learning experiences for students across 4 years, Culver instituted a standalone academic Department of Leadership Education. The Department of Leadership Education, housed in the Schrage Leadership Center, is unique among secondary boarding schools in offering four successive academic leadership education classroom experiences alongside Student Life curricula. Each year’s curriculum is centered in a transformational leadership framework, utilizing evidence-based tools to guide students’ leadership and character growth at each level. Ultimately, students’ growth is assessed by faculty (and students themselves) according to core leadership and character competencies developed by the Academies. Continual improvement of the department is ensured through a comprehensive triennial review process. The aim of this article is to illustrate a successful, iterative character and leadership education experience in a 4-year secondary school context. ¹

Keywords: leadership, character education, virtues, values, transformational leadership, competencies

Introduction

The mission of the Culver Academies is to educate “students for leadership and responsible citizenship in society by developing and nurturing the whole individual— mind, spirit, and body—through integrated programs that emphasize the cultivation of character” (About Culver Academies, 2023). Culver lives out this mission across two constituent academies— Culver Military Academy and Culver Girls Academy. Following in the military academy tradition, each academy is organized around the school’s foundational virtues and values (Zanetti, 2020; Metcalf & Heller, 2022). The Culver Virtues align with the High Six Virtues of the VIA Classification of Character Strengths and Virtues: wisdom, courage, justice, moderation, humanity, and transcendence (Peterson & Seligman, 2004). The values, again evidencing the influence of the US military, are honor, truth, duty, service.

In 1986, Culver Academies inaugurated the Department of Leadership Education, marking a significant step toward fostering an integrated, consistent leadership education experience for every student. The driving force behind this initiative was the conviction that while the Honor Code, Code of Conduct, and Student Life curricula left students well-prepared for their personal and career futures, a unified, integrated leadership education experience would further guarantee virtues- and values-based leadership development for every student. Led by the Committee on the Culver Experience, this department was designed to harness the institution’s diverse program offerings in pursuit of a unified goal: producing exemplary leaders of character who aimed to selflessly serve their communities.

¹ CONTACT evan.dutmer@culver.org © 2024 The author(s) This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Citation: Journal of Character & Leadership Development 2024, 11: 277 - http://dx.doi.org/10.58315/jcld.v11.277

In other words, at Culver, leadership and character were already caught (through the Student Life curriculum) and sought (through the inculcation of the Culver Code of Conduct and other aspirational creeds); but it remained for the Academies to make sure that leadership and character were consistently and comprehensively taught in academic, classroom settings (Arthur et al., 2022).

Over the past three and a half decades, the Department of Leadership Education, housed in the Schrage Leadership Center, has evolved while maintaining the unwavering focus on the overarching aim of cultivating leaders and citizens of character. The department remains committed to educating whole individuals who embody the virtues and values necessary for responsible citizenship and developing the capacity to inspire others within a democratic society (Bass & Bass, 2008). Rooted in Culver’s virtues and values, the curriculum merges ancient and contemporary virtue ethics, leadership studies, psychology, and positive organizational scholarship (POS) to deliver a comprehensive and iterative educational experience for each student.

Leadership as a Co-Constructed Process

Building on the seminal work of James MacGregor Burns, the department views leadership as a collaborative process shared between leaders and followers, transcending traditional hierarchical roles, and in service to elevating ends. Accordingly, the department agrees with Burns when he writes that “[transformational leadership] occurs when [leaders and their followers] … raise one another to higher levels of morality and motivation” (Burns, 1978, p. 20). Burns critical of understandings of leadership that exaggerated the role of designated leaders, argued that leadership is a process in which power is derived from a relationship between leaders and followers. Burns underscored the significance of the relationships between leaders and followers and highlighted the ways in which leaders and followers can mobilize one another bi-directionally. This has been called understanding leadership “as a coconstructed process” (Northouse, 2022, p. 364; see also Kotter, 1990).

The result is energizing leadership that can bond teams, transform organizations, and elevate individuals’ character (Bass & Riggio, 2006; Sosik & Jung, 2018). This understanding of leadership draws inspiration from historical figures such as Mahatma Gandhi, Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., Nelson Mandela, Desmond Tutu, contemporary voices like Malala Yousafzai, Pope Francis I, and Indra Nooyi, and extensive social science research on organizational effectiveness demonstrating how transformational leadership can catalyze positive change on personal and societal levels (Bass & Riggio, 2006).

A Focus on Virtues and Values: Authentic Transformational Leadership and Positive Organizational Scholarship

The department’s approach to leadership education is underpinned by Culver’s Virtues and Values. Far from advancing a “naked power-wielding” analysis of leadership, the department aims to draw on renewed interest in ethical, values-driven leadership in the last 50 years (Ciulla, 2012, 2014; Jones, 2023; Lamb et al., 2022). The department emphasizes the concept of leadership as a catalyst for personal and collective growth—especially with respect to human potential. Leaders are envisioned as agents of positive transformation who not only uplift themselves but also elevate their followers and team members, all in pursuit of better societies and human flourishing (Cameron & Winn, 2012).

The department educates, then, for what has been called “authentic transformational leadership” (Bass & Steidlmeier, 1999; Sosik, 2015). Authentic transformational leadership is understood as transformational leadership that is rooted in leaders’ and followers’ mutual

pursuit of the good and character development and growth, namely, virtues and flourishing or individuals and societies (Sosik, 2015).

This ideal of authentic transformational leadership connects to the department’s broader commitments to educate students in the foundations of POS. Students learn how virtuousness in organizations has been connected to greater effectiveness on traditional measures of workplace performance while noting the power of strengths to improve individuals’ subjective well-being and engagement in organizational contexts (Cameron, 2021; Miglianico et al., 2020). Consequently, a strengths-based approach using the VIA Classification of Character Strengths and Virtues (including students taking the VIA Inventory of Strengths (VIA-IS) Assessment each calendar year) is employed at each grade level. John Yeager led the integration of VIA Strengths across Leadership Education curricula beginning with his arrival in 2007 (Yeager et al., 2011). Further, the department serves a leadership role within Culver as a resource for enacting positive leadership practices among faculty and staff to enhance virtuousness across the entire organization.

Curriculum Design: An Integrated Path to Transformational Leadership for Each Student

The academic journey through the Department of Leadership Education is carefully structured to instill transformational leadership at each stage of a student’s education and run alongside and in complement to the athletic, extracurricular, and Student Life residential curricula at each grade level. The current core iteration of courses in the department were co-created by a core teaching team and has been in place since 2014. These courses are (in order from grades 9 to 12): Learning Living Leading (LLL), Teaming and Thinking (TNT), Ethics and the Cultivation of Character (ECC), and Senior Leadership Reflection (SLR). Throughout each course, instructors take care to order their experiential learning designs around core learning strategies that have been recently identified as the “Seven Strategies for Leadership and Character Development” (Lamb et al., 2022). These strategies (virtue practice, virtuous exemplars, virtue literacy, moral reminders, reflection, systems awareness, and friendships of mutual accountability) serve as helpful guides to in-class instruction and help to further ground the experiential emphasis of the course design across the department (Kolb, 1984).

9th Grade: Living, Learning, Leading

A student’s leadership education journey begins with a required 9th grade leadership, learning, well-being, and belonging course. This course builds on an understanding that leadership begins as “self-management” (Drucker, 2005). Self-awareness, character development, well-being, power awareness, implicit and explicit biases, and bias mitigation are emphasized. Students take the VIA Strengths Inventory as a first step of strengths spotting, connecting institutional virtues and values to those present in evidence-based positive psychology. Students engage in a wellness module in support of institutional aims in health and well-being and continue this learning through an integrated wellness check-in running throughout the course. Further, students engage in basic routines of Social Emotional Character Development, especially through emotional self-awareness and self-regulation using the Mood Meter, developed at the Yale Center for Emotional Intelligence (Brackett, 2019).

Committed to a vision of leadership education that honors the structures of individual human brains and learning, students also learn how to learn best through a basic understanding of the science of learning and relevant brain science (Barrett, 2020; Willingham, 2022). Key to this portion of the course is students’ engagement with growth mindset research and examination of their own academic mindsets (Dweck, 2007).

Students use these resources in engaging in early study of transformational leadership. Students familiarize themselves with the five practices model of exemplary leadership and reflect on exemplary leadership they witness around campus and how they could leverage their VIA Strengths to effect those practices themselves in varied team contexts (Kouzes & Posner, 2018).

10th Grade: Teaming and Thinking

In the 10th grade course, TNT, students embark on an in-depth study of teams, team dynamics, and effective teaming. Using a transformational framework which emphasizes the bidirectional processes of leadership, students analyze their existing teams for varied leadership actions and reflect on both effective and ineffective teams they have participated in. The department utilizes the Five Behaviors model of effective teaming for this reflection (Lencioni, 2011).

Students conclude their experience with a presentation describing an exemplar effective team and setting goals for future teams and team leadership positions they will occupy in their 11th grade year. This course nurtures experiential learning in complex human groups, empathy, problem-solving, and an appreciation for diverse perspectives in team environments.

11th Grade: Ethics and the Cultivation of Character

The 11th grade course, ECC, is a graduation requirement for every student. It consists of an enacted, practiced virtue ethics course and a deeper introduction to an ethical leadership model via authentic transformational leadership. Students study ancient origins of contemporary virtue ethics and positive psychology through Aristotle, Confucius, and other character-based ethics around the world (Dutmer, 2022). Further, students apply their learning through several applied reflective exercises — for instance, constructing a goal hierarchy that leverages their VIA Signature Strengths in service of drafting possible “ultimate concerns” (Duckworth, 2016). The Seven Strategies complement the curriculum for the course and, in particular, assist in guiding the structure of the applied experiences.

The application backbone for the course is an ongoing Character Lab that runs throughout the entire course. It is a weeklong intention-setting and evidence-gathering exercise that allows students to chart their growth toward mastery of particular virtues and character strengths. Growth in the virtues over the 9-week experience is ordered around a spiral curriculum model, as has previously been developed at the Jubilee Centre for Character and Virtues (Arthur et al., 2017). Contemporary topics in leadership studies introduced include emotional intelligence, empathy, and leadership applications of the dual process theory (fast and slow thinking). The course provides opportunities for competency performance via an interview for an imagined student leadership position of character integrator (modeled on some of the recent curricular work at the United States Military Academy), an ethical film analysis podcast (ethical films viewed and studied include SELMA,12 Angry Men, and He Named Me Malala), and a final written performance reflection that draws on each weekly Character Lab and is assessed around evidence of growth in the five leadership education competencies.

12th Grade: Senior Leadership Reflection

Each senior engages in a comprehensive reflective experience on competencies across 4 years of leadership experience, drawing on extensive research in educational psychology emphasizing the importance of developing students’ reflective capacity for deeper learning (Lamb et al., 2022). Students craft an essay that reflects on summative performances relating to each of the core leadership competencies. These reflections offer an opportunity for

both celebration of accomplishment for students while also providing excellent evidential opportunities for competency assessment by the SLR faculty facilitator. The department collects a repository of qualitative evidence of students’ leadership experience that could be used for future internal and external research.

Electives: Psychology and Psychology of Leadership

Building on its deep curricular connections with contemporary psychology, the Department of Leadership Education also offers an introductory and advanced course in psychology. Both focus on positive psychology and the psychology of leadership. Psychology of Leadership is an upper-division course taught as an introduction to POS, focusing on virtues and strengths development in complex human organizations. The concluding performance for the course consists of an academic literature review on an area of POS of students’ choosing.

Senior Elective Capstone: Honors Seminar in Leadership Education—The Theory and Practice of Leadership (HIL)

An Honors Seminar in the Theory and Practice of Leadership offers advanced students an opportunity for continued study of leadership through a college-level seminar in Transformational Leadership, culminating in creation of research papers in conversation with contemporary leadership studies, presented before the Department of Leadership Education. Students simultaneously engage in a college course in Leadership Studies while practicing essential academic skills for upper-level collegiate research. The research paper is understood as an academic service to the Academies community.

Leadership Education by Design

As part of its most recent triennial review process, the department engaged in a thorough renovation of its curricular documents using the Understanding by Design (UBD) framework in 2022–2023 (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005). Key to this work is the crafting of shared core understandings and essential questions for our students’ leadership education careers. These core understandings and essential questions can be integrated horizontally and vertically across courses according to the spiral curriculum previously discussed. In this way, students are able to engage with core knowledge and understandings at greater levels of complexity over successive years.

The department has arrived at some of the following core leadership understandings and essential questions to guide its work:

Sample Enduring Understandings

• Virtues are alive, and to be lived, and practiced. As virtues are applied and practiced, human beings can improve and continue to strive for a eudaimonistic life.

• Ethical leadership in teams requires continual character improvement among leaders and followers toward ends that contribute to overall human flourishing.

• Transformational leadership requires transformation (higher levels of character and higher levels of productivity/engagement/motivation) from both leaders and followers.

• Leadership requires an understanding of human behavior and attitudes.

• Leadership can be understood as a co-constructed process (between leaders and

followers) in human organizations.

• Leadership is a phenomenon in human organizations that can be studied using the tools of psychology.

• Organizational culture impacts employee performance and well-being.

• Leadership practices can be taught and are improvable.

• Certain team member behaviors can enhance teamwork; others can hinder it. Service is promoting the welfare of others in the community.

Sample Essential Questions

• What is leadership?

• Who is a leader? Who is a follower?

• What does good leadership look like?

• How do I improve and grow as a leader?

• How can I connect my philosophy of leadership with my practice of leadership?

• How do I live out my philosophy of leadership in my community?

• How do I help develop and nurture others for leadership?

• What observable evidence is there for effective leadership?

Each level of the curriculum offers successive opportunities to engage with these understandings and questions at great sophistication and depth. Further, cross-course agreement on foundational key understandings enhances student learning across course experiences (Bruner, 1960; Mehta & Fine, 2019).

Competencies of Character and Leadership Education

Evaluation of Culver’s leadership and character education has evidenced the need for continued development of the department’s evaluation methods. Further, Culver has enacted an institution-wide adoption of competency-based learning. As part of this curricular evolution, Culver has developed a draft of competencies around five core distinguishing characteristics of a Culver graduate: leadership, scholarship, communication, well-being, and citizenship. These competencies were developed by cross-campus, interdisciplinary drafting teams aiming for maximum interdepartmental feedback and ownership of the competencies. Each of these core distinguishing characteristics is accompanied by 4–6 competencies. Accordingly, the department has begun and continues to make important changes in its assessment of student growth through adoption of five core leadership performance competencies and four process competencies.

The Department of Leadership Education, following a growing number of educational institutions, has begun to assess student growth according to two sets of competencies: performance competencies and process competencies (Paulson Gjerde et al., 2017). The performance competencies under “Leadership” are:

Positively Influencing: A Culver graduate practices effective leadership approaches by positively influencing others.

Achieving Goals: A Culver graduate achieves goals for personal growth aimed at improving their contribution to their team or group.

Modeling and Empowering: A Culver graduate serves as a model for peers and empowers

leaders and followers in order to support community values and the group’s purpose.

Serving Communities: A Culver graduate fulfills their responsibilities and engages in meaningful acts of service in order to improve their communities.

Power Awareness: A Culver graduate recognizes the power dynamics inherent in systems, events, and circumstances and that change is made by working within or challenging existing systems.

The process competencies are collaboration, iteration, perseverance, and behaving honorably. These are shared across the campus rather than being the possession of any single department. This is indicative of broad agreement across departments and disciplines that these competencies are important habits for students to develop as learners and leaders in the campus community. They are as follows:

Iteration: A Culver graduate engages in cycles of practice, feedback, reflection, and revision to improve.

Collaboration: A Culver graduate shares responsibility for group goals, exchanging ideas and questions with respect and humility.

Perseverance: A Culver graduate perseveres in the face of setbacks through their own agency or by seeking appropriate assistance.

Behaving Honorably: A Culver graduate speaks up for and acts on behalf of what is right and holds themselves and others accountable for what they do and say.

The proficiency indicators—established by a school wide calibration—are distinguished, proficient/distinguished, proficient, developing/proficient, developing corresponding to traditional grade point averages of 4.0, 3.7, 3.4, 3.0, and 2.7. Faculty regularly meet to calibrate standards within levels and across the department and offer students chances to assess their own proficiency according to rubrics for each of the above competencies.

Measurement and Evaluation

Following its most recent triennial review process, the department has identified key areas for growth and improvement in the coming years. First, Culver is uniquely positioned to engage in leadership and character research on its campus. The department has committed to engage in measurement of student progress in its curricula using standard tools. For example, the department plans to provide for each student assessment of leadership behaviors in a transformational framework through the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ; Bass & Riggio, 2006). Further, following the example of the Jubilee Centre of Character and Virtues, the department will build on its work assessing student character strengths and development through a process of triangulation (Kristjánsson, 2015). VIA-IS Assessments, on this method, can be combined with other measures of character development, especially those that aim to activate virtue-relevant schemas in students (Walker et al., 2017). Along with teachers’ assessment of students’ progress toward the leadership and character competencies outlined earlier, this process of triangulation will help to produce a fuller snapshot of students’ character and character development over a Culver academic career.

Fully Integrated Programs

Next, the department recognizes the need to continue deepening integration of its leadership and character development aims across campus and between its two constituent academies, Culver Girls Academy and Culver Military Academy. Student Life, extracurricular, and athletic areas offer excellent opportunities for continued collaboration and development of the

leadership performance and process competencies outlined earlier. The shared leadership competencies—identical across campus and both academies—will greatly accelerate this collaboration. With a central repository of student competencies, faculty and staff across the Academies will be able to offer feedback regarding students’ progress. Further, given the connections between positive psychology and the science of well-being (PERMA Theory of Well-Being - Positive Emotion, Engagement, Relationships, Meaning, Accomplishment), there exist opportunities for continued and deeper collaboration with the Department of Wellness. As the department leverages its programming in support of these complementary departments, it will assist in achieving the overarching mission of the Academies.

Conclusion

Culver Academies has striven to educate and mold leaders of character since its inception in 1894. The Department of Leadership Education, founded in 1986, is a key part of that mission. The Department of Leadership Education has ensured each student receives a reflective, charted course of leadership and character growth as a graduation requirement. Through a 4-year sequence of course offerings, Culver offers a unique level of ethical and leadership training for high schoolers in a US context. Given the recognized need and continued desire for character and leadership development programs that engage students to learn more deeply beyond standalone course experiences, Culver Academies Department of Leadership Education stands as an important example among secondary schools that aim to cultivate the whole person.

Acknowledgements

The author acknowledges and thanks current and former colleagues in the Department of Leadership Education and senior administration at Culver Academies for their energy, collegiality, leadership, support, and vision in aiding in the continued success of this department. The author would like to thank Don Fox, Susan Freymiller deVillier, Joshua Pretzer, Jacqueline Carrillo, Emily Uebler, Deirdre Dolan, Kevin MacNeil, John Yeager, Stephanie Scopelitis, and Chris Kline, in particular.

References

About Culver Academies. (2023). Culver Academies. https://www.culver.org/about Arthur, J., Fullard, M., & O’Leary, C. (2022). Teaching Character Education: What Works. Jubilee Centre for Character and Virtues, University of Birmingham. https://www.jubileecentre. ac.uk/project/character-education-pedagogies/ Arthur, J., Kristjánsson, K., Harrison, T., Sanderse, W., & Wright, D. (2017). Teaching character and virtue in schools. Routledge. Barrett, L. (2020). Seven and a half lessons about the brain. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Bass, B., & Riggio, R. (2006). Transformational leadership. Psychology Press. Bass, B., & Bass, R. (2008) The Bass Handbook of Leadership: Theory, Research, & Managerial Applications. Simon and Schuster.

Bass, B., & Steidlmeier, P. (1999). Ethics, character, and authentic transformational leadership behavior. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 181–217. https://doi. org/10.1016/S1048-9843(99)000168.

Brackett, M. (2019). Permission to feel. Celadon Books.

Bruner, J. (1960). The process of education. Harvard University Press.

Burns, J. (1978) Leadership. Harper & Row.

Cameron, K. (2021). Positively energizing leadership. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Cameron, K., & Winn, B. (2012). Virtuousness in organizations. In G. Spreitzer & K. Cameron (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of positive organizational scholarship (p. 231–244). Oxford University Press.

Ciulla, J. (2012). Ethics and effectiveness: The nature of good leadership. In J. Antonakis & D. Day (Eds.), The nature of leadership (p. 508–540). SAGE.

Ciulla, J. (2014). Ethics, the heart of leadership. Praeger.

Duckworth, A. (2016). Grit: The Power of Passion and Perseverance. Scribner.

Drucker, P. (2005). Managing oneself. Harvard Business Review Press.

Drucker, P. (2008). Managing Oneself. Harvard Business Review Press.

Dutmer, E. (2022). A model for a practiced, global, liberatory virtue ethics curriculum. Teaching Ethics, 22(1), 39–67. https://doi.org/10.5840/tej2022824115.

Dweck, C. (2007). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House. Jones, G. (2023). Deeply responsible business: A global history of values-driven leadership. Harvard University Press.

Kristjánsson, K. (2015). Aristotelian character education. Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group. Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice-Hall.

Kotter, J. (1990). A force for change: How leadership differs from management. Free Press.

Kouzes, J., & Posner, B. (2018). The student leadership challenge: Five practices for becoming an exemplary leader. Wiley.

Lamb, M., Brant, J., & Brooks, E. (2022). Seven strategies for cultivating virtue in the university. In J. Brant, E. Brooks, & M. Lamb (Eds.),Cultivating virtue in the university (p. 115–156). Oxford University Press.

Lencioni, P. (2018). The Five Dysfunctions of the Team. Jossey-Bass.

Miglianico, M., Dubreuil, P., Miquelon, P., Bakker, A., & Martin-Krumm, C. (2020). Strength use in the workplace: A literature review. Journal of Happiness Studies, 21(2), 737–764. https://doi. org/10.1007/s10902- 019-00095-w.

Metcalf, E., & Heller, J. (2022). Building a Deliberate and Repeatable Program for Developing Leaders of Character. Journal of Character and Leadership Development, 10(1), 58–64.

Mehta, J., & Fine, S. (2019). In search of deeper learning: The quest to remake the American high school. Harvard University Press.

Northouse, P. (2022). Leadership: Theory and practice. SAGE.

Paulson Gjerde, K., Padgett, M., & Skinner, D. (2017). The Impact of Process vs. Outcome Feedback on Student Performance and Perceptions. Journal of Learning in Higher Education, 13(1), 73–82.

Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. (2004). Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and classification. Oxford University Press, American Psychological Association.

Sosik, J. (2015). Leading with character: Stories of valor and virtue and the principles they teach. Information Age Publishing.

Sosik, J., & Jung, D. (2018). Full range leadership development: Pathways for people, profit, and

planet. Routledge.

Walker, D., Thoma, S., Jones, C., & Kristjánsson, K. (2017). Adolescent moral judgement: A study of UK secondary school pupils. British Educational Research Journal, 43(3), 588–607. https:// doi.org/10.1002/berj.3274

Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design. ASCD.

Willingham, D. (2022). Outsmart your brain: Why learning is hard and how you can make it easy. Simon& Schuster.

Yeager, J., Fisher, S., & Shearon, D. N. (2011). SMART strengths: Building character, resilience and relationships in youth. Kravis Publishing. Zanetti, N. (2020). Values and virtues in the military. Peter Lang.

The Impact of Tassomai on KS3 Science Learning in Tianjin: An Independent Evaluation

Gianpaolo Dentico

Abstract

Tassomai, an online learning platform widely used in the UK, employs a combination of videos, quizzes, and feedback to enhance pupil’s understanding of subjects such as science, maths, and English. Despite its popularity, peer-reviewed assessments of its core spaced repetition platform are limited, with much of the existing research conducted by Tassomai themselves. This study investigates the effectiveness of Tassomai in aiding Key Stage 3 (KS3) science pupils in Tianjin. Two randomly selected classes from Years 7, 8, and 9 were assigned either to use Tassomai as a supplement to homework or follow traditional homework methods from October 2023 to June 2024. Pupil progress was assessed using the computer-based PTS test. The study found no evidence that Tassomai accelerated pupil progress in KS3 science. Survey responses indicated positive pupil perceptions of Tassomai, despite the lack of measurable academic benefits. This study suggests that while Tassomai is popular and perceived as helpful by pupils, its efficacy in enhancing broader science learning at KS3 is questionable. Future research should continue to evaluate the impact of educational technologies with rigorous, independent methodologies to address the current research gap.

Keywords: Online learning, science learning, Tassomai

Introduction

Tassomai is an online learning platform designed to provide personalised and adaptive learning in subjects such as science, maths, and English. It combines videos, quizzes, and feedback aiming to help pupils learn and retain information more effectively. The platform is widely used in schools across the UK, with over 500 schools and 300,000 pupils enrolled (Our Impact! Tassomai makes a difference — Tassomai, 2024).

Tassomai’s design is rooted in retrieval practice, a well-established cognitive science strategy that enhances long-term retention by requiring learners to actively recall information over time. Research has shown that retrieval practice strengthens neural connections, improves memory consolidation, and deepens understanding (Agarwal & Bain, 2019; Roediger & Butler, 2011). Tassomai leverages this effect through algorithm-driven quizzes that space out questions and adapt to pupil responses and claims to reinforce learning in a structured manner. Given the strong theoretical support for retrieval practice, Tassomai has the potential to improve pupil learning and retention—though the extent to which this translates into measurable academic progress remains an open question.

This study aims to evaluate the impact of Tassomai on KS3 pupil learning (Years 7, 8, and 9) in Tianjin, assessing whether the platform enhances progress beyond traditional methods.

Background Research

Despite the widespread use of Tassomai in the UK, the evidence base for the platform is limited. A search on Google Scholar found only one peer-reviewed journal article that mentioned Tassomai (Morrison et al., 2021). However, this study did not test Tassomai’s core spaced repetition platform but evaluated the effect of video feedback on learners’ ability to answer science questions correctly. On the other hand, the author of this study could not find a single peer reviewed article evaluating Tassomai’s core spaced repetition platform, highlighting a

significant research gap in the field.

An MSC thesis that assesses the impact of a four-week Tassomai course on pupil premium pupils’ GCSE results in a UK state school is available online (Lean, 2015). This study found a positive impact of Tassomai. However, it is worth noting that the authors did not mention how they selected their control and intervention groups, so we cannot confidently conclude that Tassomai was causal in improving GCSE performance in their intervention group.

Despite the extensive use of Tassomai and its self-conducted research on the platform’s impact on UK-based GCSE pupils, there is a clear need for third-party research. This is particularly true for the platform’s impact on pupils internationally or on KS3 pupils. This study aims to provide an independent evaluation of Tassomai’s effectiveness in helping KS3 pupils progress in science, filling this crucial research gap.

Critical Analysis of Tassomai Claims

Tassomai’s website presents several claims about the platform’s effectiveness, with figures that may appear highly impressive at first glance. However, it is essential to interpret such results with caution and consider potential sources of bias or confounding factors that could influence the findings. As Tassomai is a commercial product, there is an inherent motivation to present its impact in a favourable light to encourage subscriptions and continued adoption by schools. Therefore, independent evaluation is necessary to assess the platform’s true effectiveness in improving pupil outcomes.

Claim 1:

“When students use Tassomai regularly (i.e. they complete 80% of the course material by working through the online quizzes), their GCSE science grades have been significantly higher than the national average.” (Tassomai: Helping Our Pupils Succeed with GCSE Science, 2018).

Claim 2:

“From the 68,010 module results we’ve received from schools, we’ve seen that of those “regular users” (the students completing 80% of the course), 50% had achieved an A or A* grade in their GCSE science exams and 90% achieved a grade C or above” (Tassomai: Helping Our Pupils Succeed with GCSE Science, 2018).

Claim 3:

“Some schools had uniformly low Tassomai usage (with the majority of their students spending less than 5 hours on the site all year); others had uniformly high achievement on the software (where all their students covered at least 75% of the course content). In the high-coverage schools, the A* to C pass rate was 26% greater, overall.” (Tassomai: Helping Our Pupils Succeed with GCSE Science, 2018).

Analysis of the Claims

It is worth noting that the claims 1 & 2 compare pupils who meet Tassomai’s rather strict criteria (80% course completion) with a control group based on the performance of pupils nationally. Tassomai provides no information on the number or proportion of pupils in the experimental group who completed 80% of the course over the study period. This means that that the study may not have controlled for a major factor in pupil performance – trait conscientiousness as measured by tests of the big five personality traits (Poropat, 2009; Richardson, Abraham, & Bond, 2012). The pupils who have completed 80% of the course could reasonably be more conscientious on average than both those pupils in the experimental group who didn’t complete the course and the control group, who did not use Tassomai at all. This means that the observed performance difference could be due to increased levels of conscientiousness as opposed to the use of Tassomai.

In addition, no information is given about the schools involved in the comparison, which took place in 2017. Schools trailing this platform in 2017 may have had pupils from different socioeconomic backgrounds and demographic makeups than the control group. This is alluded to in the MSC thesis (Lean, 2015), which states that at the time of the trial, “a high percentage were private school students, and the programme had not been deployed in state schools due to the costs involved.” This cannot be confirmed as no additional information about the original trial can be found online. However, any differences in socioeconomic background between the control and treatment groups would be major flaws in a study aiming to judge the impact of an educational intervention (Sirin, 2005; Bradley & Corwyn, 2002).

Methods

Participants and group selection

Pupils in Years 7, 8, and 9 were assigned to either the Tassomai group or the non-Tassomai group. Each group followed the same curriculum throughout the school year to ensure comparability. In Year 7, different teachers taught the two groups; however, they followed an identical scheme of work, teaching materials, and instructional activities to maintain consistency in content delivery. In Years 8 and 9, both groups were taught by the same teacher, reducing potential variability in instructional approach.

Pupils in the Tassomai group used the platform as a supplement to traditional homework. They were required to complete retrieval practice on Tassomai at least four times per week. Pupils engaged with the platform by answering quizzes designed to reinforce topics covered in class, earning points towards a daily goal as part of its gamified learning system. The non-Tassomai group completed traditional homework assignments without access to Tassomai.

Unlike previous studies conducted by Tassomai, which often excluded pupils who did not fully adhere to the treatment, this study included all pupils originally assigned to the groups. This decision was made to reflect the real-world implementation of educational technology, where pupil compliance is often variable (Slavin, 2002). By retaining all participants, the study aimed to provide a more representative and valid assessment of Tassomai’s effectiveness in typical classroom conditions.

Assessment Instrument

The Progress Through Science (PTS) assessment by GL Assessment was chosen as the instrument to assess pupil progress in this study. PTS provides a Standard Age Score (SAS), which allows for the comparison of individual pupil performance against a representative national sample of pupils educated in the UK. This means each pupil’s progress is compared not just within our school, but against the broader performance of pupils in the UK at the same age. By using these scores, we can objectively determine if our pupils are making more, less, or the expected level of progress relative to their British peers. Rather than merely assessing final or raw scores, this method evaluates pupils’ improvement from their initial baseline score (taken at the start of the academic year) to their score at the end of the academic year, offering a clearer measure of the progress each pupil has actually made. This approach reduces potential distortions in results due to pre-existing differences in pupil attainment. Additionally, choosing the computer-marked PTS assessment, instead of internally marked end-of-year assessments, reduces the risk of unconscious or conscious bias affecting outcomes, making the evaluation more objective and reliable, especially important in a study aiming to independently assess the effectiveness of Tassomai.

Unlike the studies published by Tassomai, which excluded pupils from the experimental group who did not strictly follow the intended protocol, we have not excluded any pupils who started the trial. We hope that this decision gives a more relevant analysis of the feasibility

and impact of using Tassomai in a real-world school as non-compliance is a factor that affects the success of any educational intervention (Slavin, 2002). Furthermore, whilst including some pupils who have not strictly followed the protocol in the analysis may cause some issues with the validity of the comparison, it will also reduce the potential for bias.

Statistical Analysis

An independent samples t-test was conducted to compare pupil progress between the Tassomai and non-Tassomai groups in Years 7, 8, and 9. The t-test is appropriate for comparing the means of two independent groups to determine whether there is a statistically significant difference in their progress (Field, 2018). P-values were reported with a threshold of p < 0.05, following conventional statistical significance standards.

Cohen’s d was also calculated to assess the magnitude of any observed differences between groups (Cohen, 1988). Effect size provides a measure of practical significance, indicating whether any differences, even if not statistically significant, might be meaningful in an educational context. A Cohen’s d value of 0.2 is considered small, 0.5 moderate, and 0.8 large (Cohen, 1988). Reporting effect sizes alongside p-values is considered good statistical practice, as it provides additional context to significance testing and helps interpret the meaningfulness of findings (Wasserstein & Lazar, 2016). This addition strengthens the interpretation of the results.

Results Usage

The table below shows the average number of daily goals per week, the fractional daily goals per week (including goals that weren’t 100% completed and extra work) and the standard deviations of these numbers during the trial period. It also shows the percentage of pupils who complied with the four daily goals/week average over the trial period.

No year groups strictly complied with the four daily goals/week protocol as suggested by Tassomai. However, when accounting for partial goals and additional work, year seven and year nine pupils met an average of four weekly goals. Furthermore, year eight pupils were only 0.04 fDG away from meeting expectations on average. Compliance with the protocol was highest in Y7, with 93% of the treatment group completing an average of over four fDG/week.

PTS Tassomai vs Non-Tassomai Cohort Analysis

The tables below show the PTS SAS conducted in May 2024 (New) against the SAS of the PTS assessment conducted at the start of the academic year (Old). Progress is the difference between the two scores. A progress score of 0 indicates expected progress. Pupils with positive scores are making greater levels of progress than they would be expected to make in other schools.

Overall, PTS scores indicate high levels of progress across KS3, regardless of Tassomai usage. Out of 110 pupils, only four were not making expected progress, and Year 9 showed the highest levels of progress, with 65% of pupils achieving higher or much higher than expected progress. The mean progress scores for the whole cohort were 10.9 in Year 7 (Much Higher than Expected), 5.1 in Year 8 (Higher than Expected), and 17.73 in Year 9 (Much Higher than Expected), according to PTS criteria.

Y7 Pupils

The Tassomai group had a mean progress score of 8.94 (SD = 10.31), while the non-Tassomai group had a mean score of 12.94 (SD = 15.85). The non-Tassomai group improved by nearly four points more on average than the Tassomai group. A statistical comparison showed no significant difference between the two groups (t = -0.819, p = 0.210). The effect size (Cohen’s d = –0.30, Hedges’ g = –0.29) suggests a small negative effect, meaning that if any difference exists, it slightly favours the non-Tassomai group, though the difference is too small to be meaningful.

The Tassomai group had a mean progress score of 4.56 (SD = 11.84), while the non-Tassomai group had a mean score of 5.80 (SD = 12.17). The non-Tassomai group improved by about one point more on average, but the difference was not statistically significant (t = -0.278, p = 0.392). The effect size (Cohen’s d = –0.10, Hedges’ g = –0.10) was very small, suggesting little to no real difference in progress between pupils who used Tassomai and those who did not.

Y9 Pupils

The Tassomai group had a mean progress score of 19.69 (SD = 12.40), compared to 15.77 (SD = 12.24) for the non-Tassomai group. While the Tassomai group’s mean score was slightly higher, this difference was not statistically significant (t = 0.780, p = 0.221). The effect size (Cohen’s d = 0.32, Hedges’ g = 0.31) suggests a small-to-moderate effect in favour of Tassomai, but since the p-value was above 0.05, this result could easily be due to natural variation rather than a real impact of the intervention.

Discussion

This study found no statistically significant evidence supporting the claim that Tassomai enhances pupil progress at KS3. Pupils in the non-Tassomai groups in Years 7 and 8 demonstrated slightly higher progress, according to the PTS assessments. Although pupils in the Tassomai group in Year 9 showed modestly greater progress, this difference was not statistically significant, indicating it could easily have arisen by chance rather than as a genuine effect of the intervention.

Several limitations should be considered when interpreting these findings. First, there may be alignment issues between the content assessed by the PTS tests and the topics delivered in class and practiced using Tassomai. While PTS predominantly measures recall and factual knowledge rather than conceptual understanding, this critique is somewhat mitigated by the fact that Tassomai itself targets knowledge recall through retrieval practice. Nonetheless, differences in the sequencing or emphasis of topics could affect the sensitivity of the tests in detecting Tassomai’s true impact.

Another important consideration is pupil engagement with the platform. Compliance data revealed no year group fully achieved Tassomai’s recommended usage target of four daily goals per week, although Year 7 pupils came closest with 93% regularly achieving this in fractional terms. Year 8 had notably lower compliance, which aligns with the negligible difference observed between groups in this year. This suggests that consistent usage may be a necessary condition for any potential benefits of Tassomai to become measurable, but further research is needed to confirm this.

Ensuring the experimental group complies with the treatment is a common challenge in educational studies (Slavin, 2002). Our study is limited by the level of compliance with Tassomai’s suggested protocol, which may limit the validity of our conclusion. Nevertheless, we chose not to skew our analysis by solely comparing pupils who strictly adhered to the daily goal allocation against the control group, as had been done in Tassomai’s studies, as this may result in a biased data set consisting of the most diligent pupils who have higher levels of motivation for revision than the average pupil in the control group. It also provides a clearer picture of what can be expected if the Tassomai platform is introduced in real-world schools.

Despite the lack of third-party evidence regarding Tassomai’s efficacy, it remains a popular platform amongst schools and pupils. The popularity of the platform is reflected in our pupil survey responses. Our cohort tends to think using Tassomai is helping them, with over 75% of pupils agreeing that the platform is very helpful or somewhat helpful, and 60% saying they would recommend it to a friend. Pupil perceptions of the platform may be influenced by the system’s design, which is gamified and visually appealing, and progress can easily be tracked by watching a tree grow (Hamari, Koivisto, & Sarsa, 2014). It is possibly a more rewarding system than traditional revision methods, which may be much more cognitively challenging and uncomfortable than using Tassomai.

It seems that whilst pupils can quickly remember the answer to a specific multiple-choice question in the Tassomai platform, it may not help them to make generalisations and apply this knowledge in other contexts, such as in the PTS test, which is another multiple-choice platform, relatively similar to Tassomai. Assuming that Tassomai cannot help bridge the gap between these two computer-based multiple-choice platforms, we can reasonably doubt that it impacts pupils’ wider performance in science.

Whilst we did not gauge teachers’ views on Tassomai via a survey in our school, Tassomai’s research claims that 98.6% of teachers using Tassomai would also recommend the platform to a colleague. This aligns with research showing that teachers are often influenced by EdTech marketing claims that emphasize workload reduction and the latest educational trends (Selwyn, 2016). After reading the marketing materials, it is easy to understand some potential reasons for these high levels of teacher approval. The website is awash with all the latest educational buzzwords and links to hot topics in educational research – retrieval practice, AI, Edtech, individual needs. In addition, claims of a solid evidence base and paragraphs about why any tool used in schools must have a strong foundation in research are likely to appeal to science teachers especially. Finally, teachers are not required to set any work or give feedback on Tassomai, reducing teacher workload. In fact, the platform itself recommends that teachers not interfere with the algorithms. It even sets reminders if you attempt to do so, reinforcing trust in its spaced repetition software. Members of staff in our school were initially impressed by these marketing materials. However, the unexpected results of this study prompted a more critical evaluation of some of Tassomai’s claims. It is important to remember that this is a single, flawed study that should be contextualised within other research on the platform. Decisions on whether to continue with the platform should, therefore, consider research from elsewhere. In addition, Tassomai is bringing out new innovations on a regular basis, and some of them have a reasonable basis in evidence. For example, they have added video-based interventions to the platform (Tassomai Receives Evidence Applied Award from UCL, 2019). However, the results of this study cast doubt on

some of Tassomai’s own research.

Ultimately, this study underscores the necessity of independent, rigorous evaluations of educational technology platforms like Tassomai. The results and limitations discussed here will inform future departmental decisions regarding the continued use of Tassomai, alongside other potential strategies for improving pupil learning outcomes.

References

Bradley, R. H., & Corwyn, R. F. (2002). Socioeconomic status and child development. Annual Review of Psychology, 53(1), 371–399. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135233

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Field, A. P. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS Statistics (5th ed.). SAGE Publications Ltd.

Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., & Sarsa, H. (2014). Does gamification work? A literature review of empirical studies on gamification. Proceedings of the 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 3025–3034. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2014.377

Lean, J. (2015). Supporting Pupil Premium Attainment in Science Exams (pp. 1–87) [MSc Thesis]. https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:afdf75ed-b43f-4052-b7ef-47d024be5725/files/ma22e214c54bce7686e5eb81f3ba4d83f

Morrison, M., Blake, C., Embleton-Smith, F., Gosiewski, J., & Zvesper, J. (2021). Pre-emptive intervention and its effect on student attainment and retention. Research for All, 5(1). https://doi. org/10.14324/rfa.05.1.05

Our Impact! Tassomai makes a difference — Tassomai. (2024, June 3). Tassomai. https://www. tassomai.com/our-impact#:~:text=The%20program%20is%20used%20by

Poropat, A. E. (2009). A meta-analysis of the five-factor model of personality and academic performance. Psychological Bulletin, 135(2), 322–338. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014996

Richardson, M., Abraham, C., & Bond, R. (2012). Psychological correlates of university students’ academic performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 138(2), 353–387. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026838

Selwyn, N. (2016). Minding our language: Why education and technology is full of bullshit… and what might be done about it. Learning, Media and Technology, 41(3), 437–443. https://doi.org /10.1080/17439884.2015.1012523

Sirin, S. R. (2005). Socioeconomic status and academic achievement: A meta-analytic review. Review of Educational Research, 75(3), 417–453. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543075003417

Slavin, R. E. (2002). Evidence-based education policies: Transforming educational practice and research. Educational Researcher, 31(7), 15–21. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X031007015

Tassomai receives evidence applied award from UCL. (2019, March 7). Tassomai. https://www. tassomai.com/blog-content/2019/3/07/tassomai-evidence-applied-award-from-ucl-educate-programme

Tassomai: Helping our Pupils Succeed with GCSE Science. (2018, March 27). Tassomai. https:// www.tassomai.com/blog-content/2018/3/27/2017-results-how-tassomai-is-helpingstudents-succeed-at-gcse-science

Wasserstein, R. L., & Lazar, N. A. (2016). The ASA’s statement on p-values: Context, process, and purpose. The American Statistician, 70(2), 129–133. https://doi.org/10.1080/00031305.20 16.1154108

Sustainable school cultures: A democratic methodology for transitioning schools to net-zero

Cyrus Golding and Katy Millis

Abstract

There is a pressing need for scholarly work which explores the specific ways in which schools can reduce their carbon emissions on a path to achieving net-zero by 2050 in line with UK government guidelines. This article makes several key contributions to literatures on net-zero, education for environmental sustainability (ESD) and school-based professional cultures. 1) It provides what we understand to be the first complete practical methodology that enables schools to account for their carbon emissions; 2) it argues that this data is key for galvanising pro-environmental student actions in which students can become agents of change supporting schools on their net-zero journey; 3) we develop the concept of ‘sustainable school cultures’ to argue that carbon accounting is more than a technical process and must begin by and be enabled through creating a distinctive ethos of methodological transparency and collaboration.

Keywords: Education for Sustainable Development, Sustainable Development Goals, School culture, Climate change

Introduction

The importance of schools in managing and mitigating the effects of the climate emergency is becoming increasingly apparent. The Department for Education (DfE) (2022: np) strategy on sustainability and climate change provides explicit policy direction for English schools to ‘reduce direct and indirect emissions from education and care buildings… to meet legislative targets and provide opportunities for children and young people to engage practically in the transition to net-zero’. These legislative targets relate to the UK’s legal responsibilities to reach net-zero by 2050 (Deben et al., 2020).

Net-zero is a concept which emerged from physical climate science (Fankhauser et al., 2022). This is a shift away from stabilising levels of atmospheric CO2 towards keeping within the 1.5 degrees of warming above pre-industrial levels as called for by the 2015 Paris Agreement. The key idea is that there is a balance between the release of greenhouse gas and its removal from the atmosphere (Allen et al., 2022). However, net-zero is not without its challenges as often the largest amount of emissions are beyond direct control of schools themselves. These emissions are classed as Scope 3 emissions meaning they are generated up and down an organisation’s supply chain (Jones, 2023).

In short, Scope 1 emissions relate to emissions produced within a school and under its direct control. Scope 2 emissions are those from externally supplied energy. Despite increasing pressures from internal and external stakeholders for schools to account for and reduce their carbon footprint, including from children themselves in the form of climate activism and school sustainability committees, there remains a lack of an agreed methodology for school carbon accounting and, more broadly, a paucity of academic literature on reaching net-zero that pertains specifically to schools. This makes it difficult for all but the most well-resourced schools to begin accounting for their emissions. The few schools that have begun to do this have done so by devising their own methodologies often in conjunction with external consultants (see A Planet Mark x ICS, 2023). This methodological opaqueness masks the political decisions behind carbon calculations (Blakey, 2021), and potentially underreports emissions and limits opportunities for student/ teacher participation

by framing the calculation of carbon footprints as a purely technical endeavour.

At the same time as attempts to account for and reduce the carbon emissions on school sites, there has also been a parallel effort to increase Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) in school curricula. ESD can take many forms from educating children about the causes and consequences of climate change to taking actions in their own lives that can make a difference (Greer et al., 2023). Whilst some authors have begun to acknowledge that ESD is most effective when students are exposed to real-world data and problems (Rap et al., 2022), we wish to take these arguments a step further to argue that effective ESD should see students directly involved in debating and critiquing carbon accounting methodologies and using this information to inform pro-environmental action in and around the school site. This ethos of methodological transparency, data sharing and involvement of students is core to the concept of sustainable school cultures which we develop here and acts as the ethical foundation to how schools approach their work around net-zero targets.

This article therefore makes two original contributions. The first is technical in that it provides what we understand to be the first complete methodology for school-based carbon accounting (assessing Scope 1, 2 and 3). We do so as a starting point for discussion across different schools in the UK and internationally not to advocate for a one-size-fits all methodology. The second is we argue we argue that students themselves are a crucial component in helping schools get to net-zero both through their actions being informed by school carbon emissions data and when they are empowered to interrogate the methodology behind school carbon data.

Democratising school carbon calculations

There are difficulties in reconciling planetary-scale environmental changes with the types of actions that should be taken at the school-scale. The Independent Schools Council (2023) highlights case studies of sustainable actions undertaken by UK schools which involve actions such as switching school energy supplies away from gas in favour of renewable supplies, offsetting emissions through tree planting and introducing charging points for electric vehicles. Yet, there are a paucity of examples of where students are intimately involved in the decision-making or monitoring process for these projects in a way which empowers them to make change and validates the practical application of their environmental knowledge. Moreover, without calculating a school’s carbon emissions first, it makes monitoring the carbon reduction of any student interventions difficult and inhibits the ability of students to understand the most important areas in which emissions can be reduced.

Students’ own ideas are valuable in shaping the priorities related to the teaching of environmental change in the school curriculum (e.g. Dunlop et al., 2022; Rushton, 2021; Dunlop and Rushton, 2021). However, there is a lack of work that explores how students can be seen as collaborators in the journey to net-zero on school sites, particularly in regards to the technical aspects of emissions calculations. We suggest, this is not only important as a form of democratising environmental knowledge, but it also transfigures the spaces and locales in which climate change actions can be undertaken to the more local scales of the school site.

There is therefore an inherent politics to the scales at which climate change is and should be tackled as local scales may hide the structural factors such as economies based on consumption, which continue to contribute to climate change, species loss and land degradation (e.g. Wright and Nyberg, 2015; Baer, 2012). Yet, it might well be at the local scale of the school site that students can exercise their ideas across a whole range of sustainabilityrelated issues from purchasing decisions to the temperature of classrooms that not only create learning opportunities for the application of ESD, but potentially more ethical decisions rooted in everyday, collaborative decision-making (Gibson-Graham et al., 2013).

It is this interconnection between the school site, operational expertise, curricula and students that has been neglected in literature on enabling sustainable transitions. Some recent work has foregrounded the importance of dialogue between teachers and students and the importance of short and longer-term goals in enabling climate action (Tappel et al., 2023; Almeida and Vasconcelos, 2013). Whilst others have argued that sustainable transitions in any institution occur when there are ‘openings’ or disruptions to the policy landscape which allow for new innovations and ideas to take hold (Lawhon and Murphy, 2011). It could be argued that as the realities of climate change are being felt in concert with increasing pressure from students (including climate anxieties), organisational pressure from groups such as ‘Let’s Go Zero’ (letsgozero.org) and recent government policies mean there is a window in which meaningful action between students and school emission reduction can start to take place. A concern about the contribution of UK schools to climate change is not new. A 2008 report explored the carbon emissions from English schools and estimated that across the whole school estate 45% of emissions are from procurement, 37% from buildings, 16% from travel and transport and 2% from waste making up an estimated 9.4 million tonnes of carbon dioxide (Sustainable Development Commission, 2008). The report showcases early examples of strategies schools were taking to reduce their emissions including advocating for the idea of creating targets for emissions reductions and the idea that we might one day create opportunities to compare carbon emissions data between schools. Whilst it is far from universal, some councils have developed their own policies to reach net-zero by 2030 and provided guidance to schools. For example Hertfordshire Council has provided guidance to maintained schools to cut electricity and reduce carbon emissions (Herefordshine Council, 2017). Yet, there is a tendency to focus mainly on electricity as this has immediate cost reduction implications for schools but calculating the emissions from the whole school operation, including procurement (Scope 3), which is where most emissions are likely to lie, is more complex.

In the following section we provide what we regard to be the first methodology of accounting for a school’s carbon footprint. There is a risk however that the methodology behind such calculations is not open to proper democratic scrutiny from students, school staff and the broader school community, thus obscuring the political choices through which carbon is calculated potentially creating crude trade-offs between consulting students and arriving a quantified carbon footprint. In outlining our methodology we invited students and other stakeholders to question the assumptions behind it and advocate for the ‘making public’ of carbon data else we mask the political deliberations which go into such methodologies and close down opportunities for meaningful discussion and debate (see also Latour, 2005; Braun and Whatmore, 2010).

Methodological reflections

Methodological philosophy

We write this article as a joint exercise between an academic Head of Department with a background in geography and the other a Head of Sustainability and Procurement. It is through our own work, reflections and collaborations that this paper and the methodology for carbon calculation comes about. The empirical detail we discuss is derived from own school: a large inner-London UK independent school with the objective of providing a framework which schools in the UK looking to reduce their emissions and involve students and teaching staff in the process can adapt as their starting point and can guide other schools’ journeys.

In publishing this methodology, we are doing so alongside an increasing trend towards methodologies for carbon calculation across a range of sectors. For example, recent pioneering

work has provided methodologies for calculating the CO2 emissions from digital data (Jackson and Hodgkinson, 2023) and, for example, recent work which calls for methodologies for carbon reporting across higher education (EAUC, 2023).

Our own philosophical position is one which resists calls for standardisation and instead advocates for methodological transparency and visibility. Standardisation risks closing debate and conversations between students and stakeholders. Whilst there are indeed commonalities between all schools such as electricity use and waste, there may be differences to account for such as the commuting of boarding students, meaning that we intend that the methodology below should be taken as a starting point for discussion and data collection across different school types and geographies.

Methodological reflections

The methodology we present below is derived by using the Greenhouse Gas Protocol (GHGP) as its starting point [https://ghgprotocol.org]. This is a multi-stakeholder partnership of businesses, non-government organisations and governments convened by the World Resources Institute (a US based NGO) and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (a Geneva-based coalition of 170 International companies). Launched in 1998 they developed an internationally accepted greenhouse gas accounting and reporting standards for businesses and promote their broad adoption across different organisations. The GHGP initiative will be used throughout this paper as a reference document to assist in calculating carbon emissions within educational organisations.

Within the GHGP there are technical guidance documents which we have drawn on and adapted to create a methodology for Scope 2 (Sotos, 2014) and Scope 3 guidance (WBCSD and WRI, 2008) bespoke to schools. This methodology has been adapted for schools and, therefore, includes guidance for all categories that relate specifically to the secondary education sector. We developed and used this methodology at Dulwich College to create a baseline carbon footprint in 2022. However, it can be adapted to start a carbon accounting journey for all schools.

One key difference between school types (maintained/ trusts/ academies) is where information is captured and stored within each school environment; for example, a trust may operate all energy procurement centrally and information may be held within a head office. Requesting data from a central office will enable schools to understand, action and therefore make changes to their own individual campus carbon footprint. We suggest that calculating carbon footprint at the school-level rather than trust level may provide more opportunities for student involvement given children’s familiarity of their own specific educational setting.

Within the methodology for calculating emissions, schools are required to look-up the emissions values of the different aspects of their operation including energy, waste disposal, transport and recycling.

• DESNZ & BEIS conversion factors are used for any data that is measured in weight, distance, volume, energy (see Department for Business Energy & Industrial Strategy, 2022). These are most likely to be useful in the calculation of Scope 1 and 2 emissions.

• DEFRA conversion factors are used for any data that is measured in currency (specifically, GBP) (see DEFRA, 2023). These are most likely to be useful in Scope 3 emissions calculations.

It is also possible to convert between the different conversion factors. For example, the cost of a given fuel could be used to estimate the number of litres – the carbon emissions of which could then be looked-up using the DESNZ & BEIS conversion factors. The conversion factors listed ‘for most uses’ should be sufficient for these calculations.

A well designed and maintained inventory of greenhouse gases (GHG), specifically carbon dioxide in the case of this methodology, can serve several organisational goals including:

• managing GHG risks and identifying reduction opportunities,

• public reporting and transparency,

• participating in mandatory reporting programs,

• recognition for early responsible action.

Calculating school carbon footprints

i) Define the recording period

When starting to review carbon emissions consider where information might already exist. Choose the period for an annual carbon review across all scopes; this may fall within a financial year or an academic year. All data collected for Scopes 1, 2 and 3 must align with the agreed reporting period.

ii) Calculating Scope 1 emissions

Gas

Create a spreadsheet for Scope 1 emissions which include Meter Point Reference Number(s) [MPRN]s from gas billing. Record the total used kilowatt hours [kWh] for each month per meter reference point. The carbon emissions can then be calculated annually for gas use in all areas. Utility brokers can also help provide this information.

Vehicles and equipment

Scope 1 also includes fuels used for actions relating to day-to-day activities and services, these may include petrol, diesel and oil. To track all fuel consumption, use invoices from suppliers. List fuels and track litres purchased on a monthly basis. It is then possible to use the conversion factors to look up emissions.

It can help to list all vehicles which the organisation owns or leases which can then be used to calculate the emissions from fuel use. In an educational establishment this may include:

• minibuses,

• service vans,

• grounds vehicles,

• sports vehicles.

Note their engine type and fuel used. This can be cross-referenced with the conversion factor for that particular fuel to calculate the carbon emission. Other uses of fuels may include oilbased heating or diesel or petrol fuelled power tools or grounds equipment, including leaf blowers or grass cutting equipment.

F-gas emissions are included under Scope 1: these are emissions from air conditioning leakage. F-gases are greenhouse gases which act as a coolant in air conditioning units. If any gas leaks occur from air conditioning units over the reporting year, it must be captured in the inventory by assuming the amount of gas needed to re-gas equals the amount of gas lost to leakage.

Using data already collected is the first action to start the school’s carbon balance sheet. As more data is collected a clearer picture can be established; however, this method will serve as a starting point.

iii) Calculating Scope 2 emissions

For Scope 2 emissions, list the Meter Point Administration Number [MPAN]s from electricity statements or billing.

Electricity emissions are calculated on a location and market-basis. Location-based calculations use country-specific grid emission factors whilst market-based calculations use contract-specific emissions factors based on the proportion of renewable energy in the contract.

List the MPANs on a spreadsheet with meter numbers and a location description. If a utility broker is used, ask for assistance in putting this information together. Compile kilowatt hours [kWh] data consumed for each month for each meter point.

Once there is a full 12-month history which falls into the chosen reporting period, emissions can begin to be calculated.

iv) Calculating Scope 3 emissions

Most of the information for Scope 3 will be found in a school’s purchase ledger reporting. To do this, download the annual spend of a school or college for the reporting period: include invoices paid, direct debits and any other method of payment, including corporate card spend. Once this data has been compiled, it can then be manipulated to identify key suppliers and service providers. To assign the correct spend conversion factors, identify the products/ services provided by each supplier (see Table 1). To make this exercise more manageable focus on top suppliers first before becoming increasingly granular in matching specific spend to the respective conversion factor.

Note the total spend of the whole portfolio of suppliers, take any providers with an annual spend over £20,000 to analyse in year 1 to create a baseline of analysed data. Do not delete the remaining supplier spend. This will be needed to extrapolate emissions data to cover the full spend over the reporting period.

Once a list of top suppliers has been compiled, these will be the fundamental analysis that needs to be reviewed and subsequently relationships established to work on reducing emissions together, through positive engagement and communication (Tidy et al., 2016).

Some items not relevant to Scope 3 include:

• utilities which are removed as they are accounted for in Scope 1 and 2;

• fuel including fuel card bills which is accounted for in Scope 1.

Table 1 provides a non-exhaustive list for subcategorising spending:

Subcategory

IT services

Food

Scope 3 Category

Category 1

Category 1

Water Category 1 & 5

Waste Category 5

Consumables Category 1

Legal services

Category 1

Insurance services Category 1

Professional services

Pupil clothing and sports kit

Sports equipment

Routine maintenance

Capital goods and site improvements

Staff clothing and PPE

Print services

Category 1 and 2

Category 1 and 12

Category 1

Category 1

Category 1

Category 1

Category 1

Subcategory Scope 3 Category

Copiers services or lease

Exam board services

Health services

Council tax and business rates

HR Services

Grounds services

Books

Fixtures and fittings

Professional Memberships

Pensions

Financial and bank charges

Postal and courier services

Category 1

Category 1

Category 1

Category 1

Category 1

Category 1

Category 1

Category 1

Category 1

Category 1

Category 1

Category 4

From these sub-categories, it is possible to then build a picture of the annual spend for each Scope 3 category and utilise this when calculating a baseline footprint initially using a spendbased method.

Once a baseline has been captured in year one, further investigation can be actioned yearon-year to drill down into each category by supplier to provide more accurate emissions data. Below, we summarise emissions data by category and suggest how some improvements can be made to gather accurate information.

Category 1 - Purchased goods and services

This category includes all emissions embedded in goods and services the school purchases over the reporting year. A spend-based methodology is usually used for this category (lookingup conversion factors for each category of spending) as supplier-specific information is not usually available.

Capture all category 1 expenses as detailed in the table above broken down into:

• supplier name,

• total spend over the reporting period,

• categorisation of the product/service provided.

Professional and legal services may cover capital projects, where this is relevant the expenditure can be allocated to each category according to relevancy.

Over time, subcategories can be expanded, for example food expenditure can be calculated by food type and weight so that emissions are calculated in more granular detail.

Water billing information can be utilised to capture water used throughout a school site.

To collect water data:

• create a spreadsheet detailing all water meters and where each water meter feeds within your building’s portfolio;

• track water usage by m3 used per month.

Category 2 - Capital goods

This category covers emissions from all capital goods that have been purchased by a school over the reporting period. Capital goods are normally large, one-off investments for example

and final products that have an extended life and are used to provide a service. Within the education sector, this maybe a fixed asset such as plant upgrade, the refurbishment of buildings or the upgrade of facilities or the purchase of a vehicle. Capital spend is sometimes grouped with other purchased goods and services within the purchase ledger.

Using a value-spend methodology and capturing all category 2 expenses as detailed in the table above and using conversion factors, total emissions can be calculated.

Category 3 - Fuel and energy related Activities Not included in Scope 1

This category includes emissions relating to the upstream extraction and transportation of gas and electricity. To calculate these emissions, no further work is needed. The data provided for Scope 1 and Scope 2 is also used for Category 3 using the average data method.

Category 4 – Upstream Transportation and distribution

This category includes emissions from third party transport and distribution that is paid for by the school. The data required for this category usually comes from Category 1 and emissions are calculated on a spend basis. From purchase ledger calculations, include all postage and courier costs under Category 4. This should include all spend related to moving articles or items that the school takes responsibility for sending or moving.

Category 5 – Waste Generated in Operations

Category 5 includes emissions from processing waste generated on school property.

Table 2 shows categories of waste produced by schools.

General waste [black bin bag]

Dry mixed recycling, paper, cardboard, cans, plastic bottles, and glass

Food

Green vegetation

Skip waste for bulky items

Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment, waste for electronics and computers (WEEE)

Soft furnishing waste – this must separate from skips

Recyclable clothing

Spectacles or sunglasses

Confidential waste

Shredded paper

Chemical waste

Medical waste

Sanatory waste

Hazardous waste

Wrappers from sweets, crisps and snacks

To collect waste emissions, gather as much information on what leaves site as waste.

• Produce a bin container list, most waste bins are measured using how many litres of waste they hold. This can be converted to average weight per bin collected. Note how many collections are made weekly/monthly to calculate data needed to calculate overall waste off campus.

• Consult the waste management company to collate weights from all the waste your site produces. This may be recycled, waste to energy or made into other end products; for example, food waste sent for anaerobic digestion to make fertiliser.

• Specialised collections of electrical waste [WEEE], chemical waste or confidential waste should also be collected. Start to build connections with these service suppliers to identify how weight information and emissions may be gathered.

Emissions can then be calculated by each specific waste type.

Category 6 – Business travel

This category includes emissions from business travel, including staff travel for business purposes and student travel for trips. If a school has a boarding community, include their travel within this category.

Staff travel

If staff are travelling to events, shows or seminars these travel arrangements need to be logged. If senior staff are travelling to inspections or boarder recruitment shows or development office events, all these journeys should be captured and included in Category 6. It is important to collect information on the date, start and end location of the journey and mode of transport.

Student travel for trips

If a school uses a booking system such as SOCS, utilise this system to track movements of students with accompanying staff on residential trips and excursions.

If a system-based booking record is not available, a spreadsheet should be kept with records of all journeys travelled.

The information that is required is:

• Date of travel [to enable the correct accounting year is recorded];

• Destination;

• Distance in km [this varies by air];

• Main method of transport [with class if applicable];

• Number of passengers.

Category 7 - Employee and student Commuting

This category includes the emission from employees travelling to work and student travel to school.

Table 3 Main modes of transport

Public transport

School bus

Cycle or scoot

Walk

Car

Car share

Electric car

Staff and student commuting

A student hands up survey can be taken or a full survey including student postcodes. A more systematic approach can be used with staff. To gather commuting data, issue an online survey which requests information on: distance to travel to work, mode of transport, how often per week they travel to work.

For both staff and students create an average emission per person which can be extrapolated to include those that do not complete the survey.

Category 8 – Upstream leased assets

This category relates to anything that your school leases from a third party. The emissions associated with the use of leased assets are often included in Scope 1 and 2 emissions. For example, in a school, the printers and washing machines are sometimes leased but the energy they consume is provided by the school which would be included in Scope 2 not Scope 3. The main items to include in this category are leased properties where energy procurement is managed by the landlord as this is outside of a school’s operational control.

Category 9 – Downstream transportation and distribution

This category relates to any third-party transport and distribution which is paid for by someone else. For example, a customer paying for a product to be couriered to their site. This category is not normally relevant for schools as most customers are students who are on-site when purchasing products.

Category 10 – Processing of sold products

This covers a manufacturer or industry supplier that produces parts that go on to be sold as part of another product. This category is not normally relevant for schools.

Category 11- Use of sold products

This category includes the energy used by a product that is sold by school. It is only relevant to products that consume energy or leak f-gas during use. The category is sometimes relevant to schools; for example, if laptops are sold to students, then the lifetime emissions of the laptops sold that reporting year would be included in this category.

Category 12- End of life of sold products

This category takes into account the emissions from the disposal of sold products at the end of their life. If in Category 1, items such as pupil uniform are included that are then sold to internal stakeholders, emissions relating to their disposal should be included. This category includes responsible procurement of products that can be fully recycled.

To calculate emissions the following data is required:

• Total number of products sold over the reporting period;

• The average weight of each product;

• The material type of each product e.g. plastic;

• The method of disposal e.g. landfill or recycled.

It is then possible to look-up the specific waste values to estimate the end-of-life disposal emissions.

Category 13 - Downstream leaded assets

This category takes into account the energy used in any assets that the school owns and leases out to a third party. For example, staff accommodation is included here. This category includes the Scope 1 and 2 emissions of the leased assets over the reporting period (e.g. gas and electricity) which should be calculated using the methodology for these scopes.

Category 14 – Franchises

This category relates to emissions from Scope 1 and 2 from franchises. This is not normally relevant to schools.

Category 15 – Investments

If a school makes any investments within the reporting year the emissions from the portfolio’s carbon footprint for the reporting year must be included. For example, % of shares and time owned x spend factor can be used.

Sustainable school cultures

Whilst initial reporting may be attempted by school staff with an operational remit, it need not be an exercise which is closed to students, teachers and the broader school community who may also be able to have a say in questioning methodologies as well as using the data to inform pro-environmental actions. This approach is inspired by pioneering work in science and technology studies (STS) which frames knowledge from different stakeholders as valuable as a means to involving a multiplicity of voices and ideas and thereby opening up that which may be closed to proper scrutiny to due process and evaluation (see Lane et al., 2011). This is also in-keeping with the ethos of ESD in which actions which promote student agency are placed front and centre. There would be a disconnect if students were excluded from the process of creating and critiquing a school’s carbon balance sheet if educators then expect students to show leadership in aspects of addressing climate change.

In keeping with this ethos, in November 2023 we shared our school’s carbon balance sheet with a group of ten self-selected Year 12 geography students as a first step to broader engagement with this data across the school. In this workshop setting, KM facilitated discussion about each aspect of the school’s emissions, including the methodology behind how emissions were recorded. Students were invited to ask questions and critique the carbon accounting methodology. Far from being unable to participate due to a lack of specific technical knowledge, students’ intimate knowledge of the school site gave them a sense of confidence in highlighting areas of school where emissions might be underreported. In this way, the process of creating and refining a carbon balance sheet becomes a co-production exercise: the result of dialogue and mutual learning. The plurality of student and staff voices thus has the potential to enhance carbon reporting.

Students also used the carbon data from the baseline estimate we calculated to suggest important areas for energy reduction. For example, questioning if taps need to be supplied with hot water for washing hands. They also entered into more complex decisions about school trips and the trade-offs between how different forms of transport may be less carbon intensive but might make it harder for teachers to monitor children. Students also noted how the carbon emissions from waste are relatively low and were surprised at the amount of focus on reducing food and other forms of waste given its relatively minimal contribution to CO2. Involving students and academic colleagues has the potential to inspire positive actions that link to student wellbeing, the broader academic and operational structures of the school and curricula across different subjects.

Figure 1 shows three axes which characterise what we suggest are core aspects of sustainable school cultures. The first component is that students should be able to view, explore and interrogate carbon emissions data of their own school. Similarly, we suggest a culture which embodies the open sharing of a school’s carbon data to integrate this in curricula and measure the impact of collective decisions and behaviour change. There are important further deliberations to explore here around the extent to which school management would wish to publish carbon data on websites and indeed facilitating opportunities for comparison between other local schools which is likely to require cultural shifts across schools.

The second aspect of sustainable school cultures follows in that strict divisions of labour between operational staff, who might typically be tasked with the operational implementation of net-zero strategies, and teachers responsible for academic curricula are made more fluid. As educationalist Michael Young (1993) notes the separation of knowledge from its application is reinforced through academic/ vocational divides and continues to hinder what he regards as progress towards 21st century skills. If schools are to reach net-zero it will require students applying what they have learnt in the classroom to the school site (Rap et al., 2022), changing their own behaviours – as some are already doing such as through the Eco-Schools initiative (www.eco-schools.org.uk). The third axis relates to the scale at which schools focus their attention on climate action. There is a risk that the local scale of the school and individual life is neglected as an important site from which practical pro-environmental actions can be taken.

Figure 2 shows a conceptual diagram that illustrates the reinforcing processes at play once schools embody sustainable school cultures that begin at level 1 in the diagram. The middle level 2 shows how measuring school carbon emissions (Scope 1, 2 and 3), can inform school curricula in which students can between understand these data and generate meaningful pro-sustainable actions that contribute to emissions reductions. It is also at level 2 where there is an on-going dialogue between students, academic and operational staff which leads to better reporting through sharing of student behaviours and ideas.

Figure 2 Conceptual diagram showing interconnection between carbon accounting, curricula and pro-environmental action (Source: Authors)

Figure 1. Dimensions of sustainable school cultures (Source: Authors)

We argue that this co-construction of school carbon balance sheets can then lead to reinforcing feedbacks in which students and educational staff can take practical actions to reduce their carbon footprint and see this reflected in subsequent year’s reporting. Therefore, for schools to reach net-zero we argue that it is vital that there is a methodological approach to carbon reporting, shared and critiqued by students, and then embedded into ESD, the efficacy of which is monitored through the balance sheet. Figure 2 can serve as a touchpoint to frame the important ethical and methodological considerations around net-zero which have hitherto gone underacknowledged in the academic literature and to shape fundamental questions around the ethos and school cultures necessary to reduce emissions.

Conclusion

This article advocates that schools’ transitions to net-zero are more than a technical exercise. Not only at the level of creating school cultures in which students feel empowered to take proenvironmental actions, but importantly in the way in which there is an openness around data sharing and methodological collaboration which, we argue, enables better reporting through understanding student behaviours in school and more targeted actions which can be measured in subsequent years’ carbon recordings. The technical and the cultural thus come together at the very start of the carbon accounting process.

Reaching net-zero will inevitably become more important for schools over the next few years, but there remain many unresolved areas for further research. These include how ESD curricula can be informed by school carbon data, the ways in which school operations can be changed to reduce emissions and the trade-offs this will inevitably involve, how to better allow stakeholders in school to visualise the magnitude of carbon emissions in a way in which is meaningful, how tools such as online calculators can be built which allow for participation from school stakeholders as well as comparing how schools across the different nations of the UK and internationally are approaching this challenge.

References

A Planet Mark x ICS (2023) Independent Schools Council White Paper on Sustainability 2023.

Allen, M. R. et al. (2022) Net Zero: Science, Origins, and Implications. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 47 p.849–887.

Almeida, A. & Vasconcelos, C. (2013) Teachers’ Perspectives on the Human-Nature Relationship: Implications for Environmental Education. Research in Science Education. 43 (1), 299–316.

Baer, H. A. (2012) ‘Global Capitalism and Climate Change’, in Handbook on International Political Economy. WORLD SCIENTIFIC. pp. 395–414.

Blakey, J. (2021) Accounting for elephants: The (post)politics of carbon omissions. Geoforum. 1211–11.

Braun, B. & Whatmore, S. (eds.) (2010) Includes bibliographical references and index. Political matter: technoscience, democracy, and public life. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Deben, L. et al. (2020) On Net Zero: Analysis and ideas on Net Zero. Available from: http://man. ac.uk/04Y6Bo].

DEFRA (2023) UK and England’s carbon footprint to 2020. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/ government/statistics/uks-carbon-footprint.

Department forBusiness Energy& Industrial Strategy(2022) Greenhouse gas reporting: conversion factors 2022 - GOV.UK. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ greenhouse-gas-reporting-conversion-factors-2022%0Ahttps://www.gov.uk/government/

publications/greenhouse-gas-reporting-conversion-factors-2022%0Ahttps://www.gov. uk/government/publications/greenhouse-gas-reporting.

Department for Education (DfE) (2022) Policy paper: Sustainability and climate change strategy.

Dunlop, L. et al. (2022) Youth co-authorship as public engagement with geoengineering.

International Journal of Science Education, Part B. 12 (1), 60–74. [online]. Available from: https:// www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21548455.2022.2027043.

Dunlop, L. & Rushton, E. A. C. (2021) Why we need a manifesto on education for environmental sustainability [online]. Available from: https://www.bera.ac.uk/blog/why-we-need-amanifesto-on-education-for-environmental-sustainability (Accessed 30 May 2021).

EAUC (2023) Standardised Carbon Emissions Framework (SCEF). Available from: https://www. eauc.org.uk/scef.

Fankhauser, S. et al. (2022) The meaning of net zero and how to get it right. Nature Climate Change 12 (1) p.15–21.

Gibson-Graham, J. K. et al. (2013) Take Back the Economy: An Ethical Guide for Transforming Our Communities. Minneapolis: University Minnesota Press.

Greer, K. et al. (2023) ‘Standing back’ or ‘stepping up’? Exploring climate change education policy influence in England. British Educational Research Journal. 49 (5), 1088–1107.

Herefordshine Council (2017) Guide for Schools on Energy Savings and Carbon Reduction Resource pack. Available from: www.derea.ioe.ac.uk.

ISC (2023) Sustainability for Schools [online]. Available from: https://www.isc.co.uk/sectorinfo/sustainability-for-schools/case-studies/.

Jackson, T. & Hodgkinson, I. (2023) Is there a role for knowledge management in saving the planet from too much data? Knowledge Management Research & Practice. 21 (3), 427–435.

Jones, P. (2023) European supermarket retailers and climate change: reducing greenhouse gas emissions towards net-zero. Geography. 108 (3), 157–162.

Lane, S. N. et al. (2011) Doing flood risk science differently: an experiment in radical scientific method. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers. 36 (1), 15–36.

Latour, B. (2005) From Realpolitik to Dingpolitik or How to Make Things Public. Making Things Public-Atmospheres of Democracy. 4–31.

Lawhon, M. & Murphy, J. T. (2011) Socio-technical regimes and sustainability transitions: Insights from political ecology. Progress in Human Geography. 1–25.

Rap, S. et al. (2022) Curriculum development for student agency on sustainability issues: An exploratory study. Frontiers in Education. 7.

Rushton, E. A. C. (2021) Building Teacher Identity in Environmental and Sustainability Education: The Perspectives of Preservice Secondary School Geography Teachers. Sustainability. 13 (9), 5321.

Sotos, M. (2014) GHG Protocol: Scope 2 Guidance. GHG Protocol Scope 2 Guidance (March). Available from: http://ghgprotocol.org/files/ghgp/Scope 2 Guidance_Final.pdf.

Sustainable Development Commission (2008) Carbon Emissions from Schools: Where they arise and how to reduce them. Available from: https://research-repository.st-andrews.ac.uk/ bitstream/handle/10023/2383/sdc-2008-school-carbon.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.

Tappel, A. P. M. et al. (2023) Promoting sustainable educational innovation using the Sustainability Meter. Journal of Professional Capital and Community. 8 (3), 234–255.

Tidy, M. et al. (2016) The role of Supplier Relationship Management in reducing Greenhouse Gas emissions from food supply chains: supplier engagement in the UK supermarket sector. Journal of Cleaner Production. 1123294–3305.

WBCSD & WRI (2008) Technical Guidance for Calculating Scope 3 Emissions. Greenhouse Gas Protocol p.1–182.

Wright, C. & Nyberg, D. (2015) Climate Change, Capitalism, and Corporations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Young, M. (1993) A curriculum for the 21st century? towards a new basis for overcoming academic/vocational divisions. British Journal of Educational Studies. 41 (3), 203–222.

Decentralization and the Road to Innovation

Ryan Clinesmith Montalvo

Abstract

This opinion article explores the role of decentralization in driving innovation in schools, drawing on examples from military operations and business contexts. It highlights how decentralized leadership, as exemplified by General Barry McCaffrey’s military strategies and Anduril’s “crucible” approach, can foster rapid innovation by empowering decision-making across different levels of an organization. The article argues that schools, often hindered by traditional hierarchical structures, can benefit from adopting decentralized organizational models. Specifically, because decentralization helps facilitate innovation within rapidly changing contexts and because the future’s challenges will require that students operate within these contexts. By embracing objective-driven and interdisciplinary approaches under time pressure, schools can catalyze innovation and better equip students for the complexities of the modern world.

Keywords: Decentralization, Leadership, Decision-making, Interdisciplinary, Innovation

The Road to Innovation

While researching the importance of Non-Sibi (Not for self) at Phillips Academy Andover, an Independent School in Andover Massachusetts serving 9-12th grades, I came across the “Andover and the Military” website. Among the website’s archives is a presentation by General Barry McCaffrey ’60 during a veteran’s day event held at Paresky Commons in 2014. McCaffrey is a retired four-star general that led one of the most decisive maneuvers in Iraq during the Gulf War and Operation Desert Storm. During the recorded conversation I was struck most by one portion of the speech. Especially as it related to organizational capacity. The exposition General McCaffrey offered was about his “Left Hook” maneuver during the Q and A portion of the discussion. He was responding to the difference between his position as a general and that of director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, a component of the Executive Office of the President of the United States. It’s important to point out that the executive offices are components of a large bureaucracy that is predominantly accountable to the President of the United States and the office therein, in a kind of hierarchy. Like the composition of many independent schools, including Phillips Academy Andover. While the kind of division that an army general such as McCaffrey would lead is a network of authority connected by a common objective. General McCaffrey shared the following anecdote during the veteran’s day event:

“I ran a twenty-six thousand soldier division that in four days went eight hundred kilometers constantly under fire, building three roads as we moved twenty or thirty miles an hour, that had fourteen hundred armored vehicles, five thousand wheeled vehicles, fuel, ammunition, medevac, - complicated, and at the end of the war a couple of New York Times reporters were talking to me about it and how complex and magnificent this had been. And I said, ‘not at all’. It’s a decentralized operation. That was thirty-six battalion commanders and nine brigade commanders that ran it. So, the military as an organization is not hierarchical, it’s decentralized. And in civilian life, I’ve spent most of the last ten years primarily in business,

which works pretty darn good. I tell people, I’ve been on a lot of boards and involved in a lot of businesses of high integrity smart people trying to deliver products that actually work. But clearly you don’t have that level of ability to execute things rapidly [as in the military]. You tell the marines to put five thousand people in Afghanistan they’ll be there in forty-eight hours…” (McCaffrey)

Time Pressure

At the Tang Institute, a center for the advancement of teaching and learning where I work as a Project Manager, we are constantly investigating agility at the organizational, project, and student level. In the context of rapidly changing technologies like AI, the challenges of environmental sustainability, the challenge of productive discourse as it relates to change management, and the national demographic shifts are prompting students to ask, “Why college?”. More than ever, pressures external to schools are requiring schools to challenge the status quo, innovate new approaches to teaching and learning, and find ways to prepare students for the increasingly unpredictable future. However, school contexts, maybe even more than the private business sector, “…don’t have that level of ability to execute things rapidly…” (McCaffrey). The schools that fail to innovate, facilitate change, and operate agilely, will not be preparing their students adequately for the future. How can schools, as organizations, lay the foundation for the rapid global changes students face? Fortunately, or not, the organizations that innovate most rapidly are military organizations that are operating between chaotic and complex contexts as defined by “A Leader’s Framework for Decision Making” by Snowden & Boone (2007).

Organizations like Anduril prepare innovations for the US military on strict deadlines by simulating complex and chaotic contexts. Anduril builds software for military applications that are deployed rapidly into conflict areas by creating “…environments and experiments that allow patterns to emerge” (Snowden and Boone) and catalyzing innovation through what it calls “crucibles”. Basically, simulations require team members from across different departments in the organization to solve for real time dilemmas, like an enemy drone approaching a base. In the “Crucible,” the cross disciplinary team deploys software that is meant to stop the drone. Software components that before the “Crucible” were being developed in silos for an integrated system to be sent to the U.S. military. The “Crucible” then allows the team to rapidly deploy systems in an integrated way, to prove efficacy, while solving for any system misalignments that occur in trying to stop the drone from reaching the base. Thereby bridging silos, fostering innovation, increasing “levels of interaction and communication” across teams, and using …methods that can help generate ideas: open up discussion (as through large group methods); set barriers; stimulate attractors; encourage dissent and diversity and manage starting conditions and monitor for emergence (Enayet and Subramanian).

It’s important to note that the “Crucible” is an event. The entire Anduril organization tunes in to watch a few team members from interconnected departments solve a problem. The event “stimulates attraction”, the whole organization pays attention. The “Crucible” is then followed by a “closing bell” in which all departments debrief and often implement any emergent strategies within hours of the event and days before the product is sent to the military. Importantly, the “crucible” occurs on a strict schedule:

“Deadlines are Everything: Collaboration between teams can only happen when schedules become aligned. Otherwise, planning is an exercise in futility with each team waiting for others to become ready. A magical thing happens when you confront a hard and fast deadline, however. Suddenly all ties must be broken! It’s no longer feasible for teams to work within their silos. They must confront and resolve open issues or face missing a deadline.” (Enayet & Subramanian 2024).

Objective

Both Gen Barry McCaffrey’s 24th Infantry Division and Anduril’s “crucible” are objective driven. More importantly, the shared objectives are clear across decentralized leadership. Build three roads and defeat an approaching drone. In the 24th Infantry Division’s context, the leaders of the “fourteen hundred armored vehicles, five thousand wheeled vehicles, fuel, ammunition, medevac…” all had to operate cross-disciplinarily with a shared objective to be able to make real time decisions in the face of obstacles, or “…constant fire…” (McCaffrey). Whether team members in a simulation or officers below a general, when individuals are empowered to make decisions rapidly at the level of team, platoon, or academic division, while being forced to operate across silos, rapid innovation toward achieving an objective is the outcome. Done well in schools, this kind of decentralization often looks like a strategic plan that guides department led curricular renewals toward two or three objectives set forth by the strategic plan.

Interdisciplinary Input

As Gen Barry McCaffrey noted in his speech on Veteran’s Day, the civilian business sector often does not have the ability to innovate rapidly. Certainly, independent schools struggle with the ability to innovate fast. Largely, it seems, because independent schools operate between simple and complicated contexts, relying on experts, PhDs, and a “the way it’s always been done” mentality to determine how things should be done in the future. Across contexts, the expert mindset will almost always work to overcome the threat of change or innovation and often succeeds in rejecting change or innovation in the absence of threat or conflict. For example, during the COVID-19 pandemic, schools adopted video call technology, adopted learning management systems that facilitate asynchronous learning, and deployed professional development to scaffold the use of such technologies. It took a pandemic for schools to adopt these technologies that were founded, developed, and readily available many years before the pandemic. These were technologies that many schools or faculty rejected before the pandemic.

Another example is the adoption of diversity, equity, inclusion, and justice, activities (including PD, curriculum, statements, and guest speakers) in response to the widely publicized and racially motivated murders in the United States over the past decade. Fundamentally, change and the implementation of innovation is often driven by chaotic contexts. How then, can schools adopt an organizational process for practicing these conflict contexts, intentionally debriefing after them, and implementing any emergent ways of doing, to create innovations that will benefit our twenty-first century learners?

Resistance to Change

Simple and complicated contexts are inherently resistant to change. This is why, for example, every week NASA brings its experts and innovators together to address common challenges. Those that are trained on the nature of physics with advanced degrees are often less likely to accept new theories on the nature of dark matter’s implications on combustion. Rife disagreements are often the outcome of cross-disciplinary meetings, but bridging department opinions while being tethered to a common objective, again, is the catalyst to innovation. For example, schools ought to run regular simulations. Not just for the fire drill, or active shooter. Rather, simulations in which X learning variable that was once consistent has now been lost. For example, the academic schedule, computers, or the traditional teacher. If leaders have brought together a team of both educational experts and leaders from sectors unrelatable to schools and asked this group to solve the problem presented by the missing variable, the

group will create an exciting innovation. Undoubtedly, if you’ve ever seen the Apollo Thirteen scene where a group of scientists dumps what seems garbage onto a table and then builds an air filter, you’ll know that time pressure plus input from across divisions divided by objective creates innovation.

Time Pressure + Interdisciplinary input

Objective + Chaotic/Complicated Context

= Innovation

What independent schools often miss is that meeting and talking about change or innovation is not enough. The product side of innovation, whether to save an astronaut’s life, avoid an IUD, learn through a pandemic, or ensure a company hits its next quarter’s profit goal, is circumvented when the idea of “why fix it when it’s working so well” or “this is how it’s always worked” rules the roost. These ideas, or ways of operating, often run schools. It may be that those frames of thinking rule schools because they are easier and safer (especially for leaders and boards) then working to innovate. I think, in some ways it comes from school boards ‘ aversion to risk. However, what matters is that the schools that will survive and thrive into the next millennium will be the ones that can model innovation for their students and organizations. Schools that can agilely adapt consistently to the fluctuations of higher education, industry, and global environment.

Decentralization

and the Road

to Innovation

School organizations ought to rapidly deploy departments that can build “three new roads” (McCaffrey) to learning at the globe’s exponential pace of change. Whether through simulation or rapid response to the state, national, or global context, as the 24th Infantry Division (Mechanized) effectively accomplished what seemed an impossible or difficult task during the Gulf War. Whether those roads lead to lasting change is not necessarily of consequence, what matters is that there is a department or organization that is decentralized enough to rapidly execute innovations, acting as an engine of exploration. Each school should have at least one department that can innovate across the school context. Ideally one with a lateral organizational chart that can make decisions quickly and in unison toward a common goal with both academic and administrative units. Such an organization ought to rigorously assess its innovations for good causal improvements in teaching and learning, whether through data or robust debriefing processes. Then the road can be paved for others to safely follow. As the education ecosystem endeavors to help students become citizens, servants, and leaders, endowed with a sense of Non Sibi, it seems prescient to heed General McCaffrey’s reflection that decentralized operations are what can achieve solutions to the biggest problems. Moreover, today’s business and leadership contexts will require individuals to have the ability to make decisions that catalyze rapid innovation. As the leaders of learning, schools ought to model the operational contexts students will be graduating into. If students and teachers are allowed to innovate in a place where decisions are up to the many, and the goal is defined by a cross disciplinary objective, then schools will have a good shot at preparing future leaders for the globe’s challenges.

Key Words and Phrases:

Non-Sibi: Latin phrase meaning “Not for self,” emphasizing selflessness and service to others.

Decentralized operation: An organizational structure where decision-making and authority are distributed among various levels rather than concentrated at the top.

Crucible: In the context of Anduril’s approach, a simulation or event that brings together crossdisciplinary teams to solve real-time problems under pressure.

Chaotic context: A situation where cause-and-effect relationships are unclear and unpredictable, requiring rapid response and adaptation.

Complex context: An environment where patterns can only be understood in hindsight, necessitating experimentation and emergent strategies.

Interdisciplinary: Involving or combining two or more academic disciplines or fields of study.

Agility: In an organizational context, the ability to adapt quickly and easily to changing circumstances or environments.

Silo: In business, a system or department that operates in isolation from others, often hindering communication and collaboration.

Emergent strategy: A pattern of actions that develops over time in an organization, often in the absence of or in addition to intentional strategy.

Left Hook maneuver: A military tactic, referring to a flanking movement used to outmaneuver an enemy, as mentioned in the context of General McCaffrey’s Gulf War strategy.

References

Enayet, N., & Subramanian, G. (2024). Inside the Crucible: Anduril’s Secret to Rapid Development at Scale. Anduril. https://www.anduril.com/article/anduril-project-crucible/.Accessed 6 Mar. 2025.

McCaffrey, Barry. “Veteran’s Day 2014.” Phillips Academy Andover, 2014, media.andover.edu/ media/t/1_uggbwvmv.

Snowden, D. J., & Boone, M. E. (2007). A leader’s framework for decision making. Harvard Business Review, 85(11), 68–76. https://hbr.org/2007/11/a-leaders-framework-for-decisionmaking

The 4Rs Approach: The Viability of the Uganda Education Response Plan for Refugee and Host Communities for Safety, Social Cohesion, and Peacebuilding

Lipsey Simon Peter Ojok

Research Network Overview

This report was produced as part of the activities of the Political Economy of Education Research Network (PEER), a collaboration between the Universities of Cape Town, Nazarbayev, Sussex and Ulster, to support early career researchers working on issues of education and conflict in Africa and Central Asia. Funded by the UK Global Challenges Research Fund (GCRF), the PEER Network aims to strengthen critical and locally grounded approaches to Political Economy Analysis (PEA) of Education that will help national, regional and global level policymakers and practitioners make socially just decisions about investments in education that benefit children and young people in contexts of conflict and crisis.

Abstract

The study examined how the Uganda Education Plan for Refugee and Host-communities addresses inequalities and builds trust between refugee and host communities. It identifies gaps in the literature on inclusive education systems using the 4Rs framework. The study addressed questions on funding, cultural diversities, governance and trust building for the two groups. Conducted in Yumbe and Adjumani districts, Uganda, this qualitative study involved skey stakeholders from OPM, MoES, UNHCR, UNICEF, Save the Children and schools. Findings highlights the need to deconstruct and reconstruct the concept of ‘quality education’ from a broader perspective of the recipients, inclusive social policies, and internationally accredited curricular to address refugee education, social cohesion and peacebuilding.

Keywords: 4Rs Approach, Refugee education, Uganda Education Response Plan, Social Cohesion, Peacebuilding

Introduction

Research Context and Problem:

The Uganda Education Response Plan for Refugees and Host Communities, introduced in January 2018, was a groundbreaking policy initiative aimed at providing quality, accredited, inclusive education within Uganda’s national education system. The plan, which operated until June 2021, was developed in line with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the World Humanitarian Summit’s call for education to prevent conflict, maintain peace, and foster economic development. However, by 2020, only 4% of refugee children were enrolled in school, and Uganda’s education services were already under strain, with overcrowded classrooms, a shortage of teachers, and inadequate educational materials. Some classrooms had over 150 children, with some reaching 250 students (UNHCR, World Bank, 2021; UNICEF, Save the Children International, 2020), making this an appropriate period to mirror at the Plan’ viability for safety, social cohesion, and peacebuilding in Uganda and as an adoptable international framework for refugee crises.

The study aimed to examine, using the 4Rs framework, the extent to which Uganda’s inclusive education system for refugees and host communities addresses inequalities and fosters trust between these groups. Specifically, the study sought to explore four main questions:

1. How do the funding and management practices of the Education Response Plan affect educational and social inequalities among refugees and host communities?

2. How receptive is the plan to the cultural diversities of both refugee and host communities?

3. How do governance and management practices within the plan foster a sense of belonging and equality among refugee and host communities?

4. What is the level of trust, fairness, and reparations being created within the refugee and host communities through the governance and management of the plan?

These questions aim to assess the effectiveness of the Education Response Plan in fostering social cohesion and peacebuilding, and to evaluate its potential as an international model for refugee education.

Literature Review

Evolution of Approaches to Refugee Education

The evolution of refugee education has been influenced by humanitarian, socio-political, and migration dynamics, with over 26 million refugees globally (UNHCR, 2023). Education for refugees is seen not only as a fundamental human right but also as a tool for resilience, social cohesion, and integration within both refugee and host communities. While early models focused on standardized educational approaches, recent frameworks have shifted towards more inclusive and culturally responsive practices that honor the unique backgrounds and diverse needs of refugees (Novelli et al., 2014). This paradigm shift aligns with global educational goals such as the SDGs, which advocate for inclusive, equitable, and quality education for all.

Critics however, argue that these evolving approaches still grapple with the tension between global standardization and local relevance (Mendenhall et al., 2017; Sayed et al., 2018). While international frameworks, such as the UNHCR’s guidelines, emphasize integration into national systems, the question remains whether these systems are adequately equipped to support refugees varied educational needs, especially in countries with strained resources like Uganda (Akesson, 2018). Moreover, as Novelli et al. (2014) note, refugee education is often subject to the broader international agendas of security and stabilization, which can undermine the educational focus.

Historical and Policy Evolution of Refugee Education

Historically, refugee education was seen as secondary to immediate humanitarian needs, with NGOs and faith-based organizations often stepping in where state responses were lacking (Kirk & Winthrop, 2013). Over time, international recognition of refugees’ right to education grew, marked by the 1951 Refugee Convention, which emphasized education as crucial for rebuilding lives and facilitating social integration (UNHCR, 1951). The 1990s saw the UNHCR formalize its educational guidelines, but the effectiveness of these policies was mixed, largely due to inconsistent implementation across host countries (UNHCR, 2003).

While the 2018 Global Compact on Refugees reinforced the importance of education, debates persist over its implementation. Wright and Gertler (2021) highlight the growing involvement of international organizations in funding refugee education, but they caution that dependency on external aid can create unsustainable systems. By contrast, Kagan (2011) argues that local ownership and governance are critical for ensuring long-term success. In countries like Uganda, decentralized approaches have allowed for more localized responses, yet challenges persist regarding resource allocation and coordination among stakeholders (Mugisha, 2018).

Refugee Educational Practices

Early refugee education initiatives focused largely on formal schooling, but over time, there has been a shift towards non-formal education to meet refugees’ broader needs, such as life

skills and psychosocial support (UNESCO, 2017). This shift reflects a broader understanding of education as a multi-dimensional process, encompassing not only academic learning but also social and emotional well-being. Vocational training and community-based learning have become increasingly important, particularly in emergency settings where formal educational structures may be absent (UNESCO, 2017).

The rise of digital education offers a transformative solution for refugees, particularly in contexts marked by instability. E-learning platforms and mobile technology are seen as promising tools for increasing access to education in remote areas (Kirk & Winthrop, 2013). However, as Akesson (2018) points out, digital education can exacerbate inequalities due to disparities in access to technology. This issue is particularly salient in countries like Uganda, where the digital divide remains a significant barrier to equitable education.

Language barriers further complicate refugees’ educational experiences. Cummins (2000) and Skutnabb-Kangas (2000) emphasize the critical role of mother-tongue education, arguing that it facilitates smoother cognitive development and cultural integration. In Uganda, where refugee students often speak multiple languages, incorporating local languages alongside national languages like English is essential for fostering inclusion (UNESCO, 2016). However, integrating mother-tongue instruction remains a significant challenge, particularly when national curricula prioritize English proficiency (Lewis, 2014).

Curriculum adaptation is another contentious issue. While the internationalization of education frameworks, such as the International Baccalaureate (IB), offers mobility opportunities for refugees, it may neglect the local relevance needed for refugees to feel connected to their education (Sayed et al., 2018). Akesson (2018) calls for a curricular hybridization that respects both local and international educational standards, allowing refugees to retain their cultural identities while also preparing them for integration into globalized societies.

Access, Quality, and Protection

The intersection of access, quality, and protection is central to effective refugee education policy. While access involves the ability to enroll and remain in school, quality education ensures that students’ basic learning needs are met, and their educational experience is enriching (UNHCR, 2009). The UNHCR’s education strategy focuses on achieving certain standards, such as student-teacher ratios and the percentage of qualified teachers, aiming for at least 80% qualified educators (Chabbott, 2007). However, critics argue that these standards are overly focused on service delivery rather than broader educational outcomes (Rizvi & Lingard, 2010).

Moreover, protection measures such as ensuring the safety of students in conflict settings are vital but often underdeveloped, particularly in urban areas where refugee populations may be less visible and more vulnerable (Kirk, 2005). As Barbelet et al. (2018) suggest, holistic protection measures that address the psychological, emotional, and social needs of refugees are necessary to foster an environment conducive to learning. However, these protective measures are frequently compromised by resource limitations and political tensions, particularly in host countries facing economic challenges.

Social Integration and Inclusion

Social integration through education plays a pivotal role in breaking down barriers between refugees and host communities. Barbelet et al. (2018) emphasize that engaging refugee communities in policy-making is essential for ensuring that issues of belonging and inclusion are adequately addressed. Educational environments signal who is considered a legitimate member of society, with language, curricula, and school structures acting as gatekeepers to inclusion (Abu El-Haj, 2015).

Dryden-Peterson (2018) suggests that refugee inclusion in educational systems helps to reduce stigma and fosters a sense of belonging. However, the extent to which integration can

be achieved depends on the commitment of host countries to adopt inclusive educational practices. While Uganda’s approach to refugee education has been lauded for its inclusivity and efforts to foster social cohesion (Schraven et al., 2018), challenges remain in ensuring that refugees’ educational needs are not overshadowed by the demands of the broader host population (Mugisha, 2018).

Refugee Education in Uganda

Uganda has emerged as a model for refugee education, particularly through its commitment to integrating refugees into the national education system (Mugisha, 2018). The country’s refugee policy and Comprehensive Refugee Response Framework (CRRF) emphasize refugees’ right to education, aiming for a whole-of-society approach (UNHCR, 2017). However, despite the country’s progressive stance, the implementation of these policies is often hindered by financial constraints and the uneven distribution of resources (UNHCR, 2019).

Uganda’s multi-donor trust fund has helped streamline financial support, but questions remain regarding the sustainability of this model. Partnerships with organizations like UNHCR and UNICEF have led to the creation of educational programs that offer teacher training and psychosocial support (UNHCR, 2020). However, some scholars argue that the localized management of education in Uganda may limit the scalability of successful initiatives (Schraven et al., 2018). Furthermore, language and curricular adaptation remain pressing issues for refugee students, particularly for those who have faced interrupted education (Mugisha, 2018).

Methods

Theoretical and conceptual framework

The study used the 4Rs Framework to analyze the interconnected dimensions of the Plan in driving safety, social cohesion, and sustainable peacebuilding in Uganda’s conflict-affected contexts. Developed by Professor Mario Novelli and colleagues from the University of Amsterdam and Ulster University, the framework was designed for the Research Consortium on Education and Peacebuilding (PBEA). Building on Galtung’s concept of ‘positive peace,’ the framework emphasizes peace with justice and the role of education in post-conflict societies (Novelli, Lopes Cardozo, & Smith, 2015). Expanding on Nancy Fraser’s work on social justice, it introduces reconciliation as the fourth R, alongside redistribution, recognition, and representation (Novelli, Lopes Cardozo, & Smith, 2017). The 4Rs aim to address inequities in education by redistributing resources, recognizing diversity, ensuring representation in decision-making, and fostering reconciliation to prevent conflict relapse. The first three Rs focus on the drivers of conflict, while reconciliation addresses the legacies of conflict. The arrows in the framework highlight the interconnections between these elements, emphasizing their complexity and interdependence.

Figure 1: The 4Rs Approach. Adopted from Novelli, A Lopes Cardozo, and Smith 2017

Redistribution involved analyzing existing data to explore vertical and horizontal inequalities related to education resources and outcomes for both refugee and host communities, and how these inequalities influenced conflict dynamics. Recognition required examining how the Plan addressed language of instruction, cultural and religious diversity in the curriculum and teaching practices, and gender relations and norms. Representation involved understanding the historical factors behind the Plan’s formulation, political control, the role of stakeholders in school governance and decision-making, and whether the Plan promoted fundamental freedoms, including gender equality. Reconciliation focused on how the Plan addressed historical and contemporary economic, political, and sociocultural injustices underpinning the conflict, its impact on refugee-host community integration, and the levels of trust both within schools (vertical trust) and between refugees and host communities (horizontal trust). The framework also guided the design of research tools, data analysis, interpretation, and presentation of primary data.

In applying the framework, the researcher avoided deterministic or overly descriptive claims of the framework to correspondingly warrant cognizance of a broader context-specific aspects. Instead, used it as an explanatory tool to highlight how the interconnected dimensions of redistribution, recognition, representation, and reconciliation were reflected in the study. As Pherali (2021) noted, while the 4Rs framework reveals structural tensions in education, it does not necessarily transform unequal power structures or systems of domination at the macro level.

Research Design

This study employed a qualitative case study design, chosen because it allows for in-depth exploration of context-specific issues with a small, purposively selected group of respondents (Yin, 2009; Yin, 2003; Kusi, 2012). This approach provides detailed insight into the subject matter

(Gall et al., 2007). The study was conducted in the refugee settlements of Yumbe and Adjumani in Uganda’s West Nile region. The higher-level population included staff from the Office of the Prime Minister (OPM), Ministry of Education and Sport (MoES), UNHCR, UNICEF, Save the Children, and Finn Church Aid. Field-level respondents included refugee desk officers, school staff, camp leaders, students from two secondary schools, and parents of active registered students from both refugee and host communities.

The study adopted the theoretical sampling saturation technique of grounded theory to determine sample size (Creswell, 2012; Jones & Alony, 2011). Charmaz (2015) suggested that saturation occurs when collecting additional data no longer yields new insights. Partial data analysis was carried out during data collection to identify theoretical saturation, which was validated by conducting additional interviews to confirm emerging patterns, categories, and concepts (Corbin & Strauss, 1998).

Data Collection and Analysis:

In-depth interviews and document analysis were employed as data collection methods. Responses were recorded through note-taking and audio recording. Interview transcripts were analyzed using open, axial, and selective coding. Open coding identified categories and subcategories related to the study’s focus. Axial coding involved focusing on a central category and linking other categories to it. Selective coding developed a theory from the interrelations among categories identified during axial coding. Interpretation of findings included a comparison with the literature, a personal analysis, and suggestions for future research.

Validity and Reliability:

Potential threats to validity and reliability, such as researcher bias, reactivity, and credibility in generalizing findings, were addressed through prolonged engagement and intensive interviews with participants (J.A. Maxwell, 2012; Onwuegbuzie, 2003; Creswell, J. W., 2014). Interviews were conducted in local languages to ensure comprehension, and trained research assistants facilitated the process. Member checks were used to verify interpretations and to minimize biases in understanding participants’ perspectives. The research also employed qualitative observation and interviews, involving two research assistants to reduce measurement bias (J.A. Maxwell, 2012).

Ethical Considerations:

Ethical issues centered around asking refugees about their experiences within inclusive education programs and interactions with host communities and local leaders. These concerns were mitigated by ensuring voluntary participation, informed consent, and the principle of ‘process consent’ (Department of Health, UK, 2001). Continuous attention was given to participants’ willingness to engage, and interviews were conducted in safe, accessible, and confidential locations to ensure participants’ comfort and privacy.

Findings and Discussions

This section presents the findings from the study, followed by a critical discussion of these findings in the context of the 4R framework (Redistribution, Recognition, Representation, and Reconciliation) which serve as the central lenses through which the success, challenges, and implications of the Uganda education response plan for refugees and host communities are analyzed. While the findings highlight key patterns and themes, the discussion aims to explore the underlying complexities, critique assumptions, and critically engage with the relevance and potential of the plan for fostering social cohesion, peacebuilding, and safety.

Key Themes

Through an initial data analysis using NVivo, several critical themes emerged: vertical and horizontal inequalities, the Plan’s receptivity, governance and participation, offsetting the legacies of conflict, social cohesion and peacebuilding, and rejoining key assumptions of the Plan. These themes provide a nuanced understanding of the dynamics at play, highlighting both the strengths and limitations of the educational response.

Vertical and Horizontal Inequalities

The findings clearly highlight the persistence of vertical inequalities—disparities based on socioeconomic status—and horizontal inequalities—gender and cultural divides—among refugee and host community members in Uganda’s educational system. Vertical inequalities are evident in the governance and trust dynamics, where disparities between teachers, students, parents, and school administrators continue to undermine the establishment of a conducive learning environment (UNHCR, 2023). This is especially problematic in contexts where resources are already limited, and these inequalities are compounded by historical grievances stemming from conflict. The lack of acknowledgment of these grievances in the planning stages is a significant oversight, as it leads to mistrust and discontent among refugees (Verkuyten, 2018).

From the perspective of the Recognition component of the 4Rs framework, the failure to account for historical injustices within the ERP limits the potential of education to act as a vehicle for healing and reconciliation. According to Kagawa (2019), recognizing the unique experiences of displaced individuals is crucial for promoting social cohesion, as it validates their lived experiences and fosters a sense of belonging within the host society. In this regard, the ERP’s failure to incorporate refugees’ histories of displacement and trauma risks reinforcing existing divisions and undermining efforts to bridge cultural divides.

The Plan’s Receptivity

The positive reception of the educational program—particularly its focus on gender equality and inclusion—is commendable. However, the findings also point to a major flaw in the plan: the lack of integration of refugee children’s cultural identities into the curriculum. This aligns with Kanno and Kangas’s (2014) argument that successful educational inclusion for minority groups must go beyond language instruction and address the cultural and historical contexts that shape students’ experiences. The absence of culturally relevant content within the curriculum contributes to a sense of alienation and exclusion, particularly for refugees from diverse linguistic and ethnic backgrounds.

In relation to Recognition, the absence of cultural relevance in the curriculum reflects a failure to validate refugees’ identities and histories. This can have a profound effect on their academic engagement and overall sense of belonging, which is essential for educational success and integration (UNESCO, 2017). Mendenhall et al. (2017) note that educational programs designed for refugee populations should prioritize cultural sensitivity to facilitate not just academic learning, but also the social and emotional development necessary for successful integration. Governance and Participation

The governance structures designed to ensure refugee and host community participation in decision-making processes have proven insufficient in guaranteeing meaningful representation. The bicycle allocation incident, where girls were prioritized over boys, is illustrative of the disconnection between local needs and top-down decisions made by external actors like UNHCR and national organizations. UNESCO (2021) highlights that such decisions, when not based on the real needs and priorities of local communities, can undermine social cohesion and foster resentment, especially in resource-scarce environments.

From the Representation perspective of the 4Rs framework, this issue emphasizes the need for direct political representation for both refugees and host community members. Without

genuine involvement in decision-making, communities remain disconnected from the policies that affect them. Mugisha (2018) advocates for decentralized governance frameworks that promote local ownership and ensure that decisions are made in consultation with those who are directly impacted by them. Only through genuine representation can governance structures effectively address the diverse needs of both refugees and host communities, contributing to more inclusive, equitable, and contextually relevant educational outcomes.

Offsetting the Legacy of Conflicts

The role of education in mitigating the legacies of conflict and promoting peacebuilding is evident in the finding that education served as a stabilizing force for students who had lived through violence and displacement. The shared educational spaces fostered intergroup understanding, tolerance, and integration, which are foundational for peacebuilding (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2008). However, the findings also suggest that refugees continue to face significant barriers to accessing higher education and leadership roles, which reflects a persistent gap in political and social inclusion.

This issue speaks directly to the Reconciliation dimension of the 4Rs framework. The ERP’s success in promoting intergroup understanding and cooperation is commendable, but reconciliation goes beyond simply fostering harmony in classrooms—it involves ensuring that all groups have equitable access to opportunities for advancement and participation in the broader societal and political processes. Chappell and Chittenden (2020) argue that reconciliation requires long-term commitments to addressing structural inequalities, including access to education, employment, and leadership positions, which remain critical for achieving lasting peace.

Social Cohesion and Peacebuilding

The findings indicate that the ERP has had a positive impact on social cohesion, particularly through its focus on integrating refugee and host community children. This aligns with Abu El-Haj (2015)’s assertion that inclusive education programs are key to promoting social cohesion by creating shared spaces for dialogue and cooperation. However, the success of these initiatives depends on the Representation and Redistribution of resources. Inadequate resources, overcrowded classrooms, and a lack of trained educators limit the ability of the education system to deliver on its peacebuilding potential. Schraven et al. (2018) highlights the need for equitable resource distribution to avoid exacerbating tensions between refugee and host communities, which can undermine efforts to build lasting peace.

Rejoining Key Assumptions

The Plan assumed that quality education (1) is central to achieving all other Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), (2) strengthens the likelihood of preventing conflict, maintaining peace and security, and (3) advances economic development. However, upon closer examination, the validity of these assumptions is nuanced, and the findings highlight areas where further attention is needed, especially with regard to 4Rs framework.

Assumption 1:

Quality Education is Central to Achieving All Other SDGs: Quality education is often recognized as a cornerstone of sustainable development. The findings from Uganda’s ERP indicate that while the plan emphasizes the importance of education in contributing to other SDGs, several barriers hinder the realization of this vision. Despite the positive reception in terms of gender equality and inclusion, challenges remain in ensuring access to quality education, particularly in contexts of limited resources and overcrowded classrooms. The failure to ensure equitable distribution of resources, such as infrastructure, teaching materials, and trained educators, significantly undermines the ability to meet the educational needs of both refugee and host communities (Mendenhall et al., 2017).

From the Redistribution perspective, these findings highlight the critical need for a more

equitable allocation of resources. As Ager and Strang (2008) note, addressing disparities in resources is essential to achieving social justice, especially in refugee contexts. Resource inequalities between refugee and host community schools often foster competition, tension, and resentment, which can undermine the broader goals of the ERP, including social cohesion and peaceful coexistence (UNHCR, 2023). Ensuring equitable distribution of resources is crucial for achieving the SDGs, particularly SDG 4 (Quality Education), which calls for inclusive, equitable, and quality education for all. Mendenhall et al. (2017) emphasize that addressing the educational needs of refugees requires adequate funding, infrastructure, and teacher training, which are often in short supply in contexts where refugee populations are rapidly growing.

Assumption 2:

Quality Education Strengthens the Likelihood of Preventing Conflict and Maintaining Peace and Security: The Uganda ERP acknowledges the role of quality education in preventing conflict and fostering peacebuilding. The educational program’s success in promoting social cohesion especially through shared classrooms and interactions between refugee and host community children demonstrates the potential of education to build bridges and reduce intergroup tensions (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2008). However, the findings suggest that despite these positive effects, the ERP struggles to fully address the legacies of conflict that many refugees bring with them. The lack of consideration for the unique histories of refugees and their experiences of displacement and trauma has resulted in missed opportunities for reconciliation (Verkuyten, 2018). This problem is directly related to the Recognition component of the 4Rs framework. Education cannot function as a vehicle for peacebuilding if it fails to recognize and validate the diverse histories and identities of both refugee and host communities. Kirk & Winthrop (2013) stress the importance of ensuring that education frameworks respect the histories and cultural identities of all groups, as this fosters a sense of belonging and inclusion, which is essential for peacebuilding. The failure to integrate refugees’ cultural and linguistic identities into the curriculum risks alienating students and undermining the social cohesion that education seeks to promote.

Likewise, refugees’ limited participation in decision-making processes highlighted by their lack of representation in governance structures—diminishes the effectiveness of education programs in preventing conflict and fostering sustainable peace. Meaningful inclusion of refugee voices in educational decision-making processes is crucial for building lasting peace and security (Dryden-Peterson (2018). The ERP’s inability to provide direct political representation for refugees means that decisions about education may not always reflect their needs or priorities, which can lead to dissatisfaction and, in some cases, perpetuate underlying tensions.

Assumption 3:

Quality Education Advances Economic Development: The assumption that education can drive economic development is especially relevant in refugee contexts, where displacement often leads to disrupted educational trajectories and diminished opportunities for socioeconomic advancement. However, the findings reveal that while the ERP has made some progress in integrating refugees into the national education system, substantial barriers remain in ensuring access to higher education and leadership roles. Refugees often face significant challenges in accessing educational opportunities beyond primary and secondary levels due to economic constraints, overcrowding, implicit higher education policy for refugee and the lack of infrastructure (Schraven et al., 2018). This issue ties directly to the Redistribution and Representation dimensions of the 4Rs framework. Without adequate redistribution of resources, including access to higher education, refugees remain excluded from key economic opportunities that could enable them to rebuild their lives and contribute to the economic development of their host countries (UNHCR, 2020). Kagan (2011) emphasizes that education should not only focus on basic literacy but also ensure that refugees have

access to the competitive skills and qualifications necessary for economic participation and leadership roles.

Furthermore, the exclusion of refugees from decision-making processes particularly in areas related to economic opportunities, training programs, and leadership positions limits the Uganda ERP’s ability to promote true social and economic inclusion. Mugisha (2018) argues that local governance frameworks should include refugees in the development of policies that impact their economic integration. Ensuring that refugees have a seat at the table in discussions about educational opportunities is critical for advancing economic development and fostering a more equitable and inclusive society.

Contribution to Knowledge and Literature Gaps:

The study addresses gaps in the literature on refugee education, specifically within the context of Uganda. While substantial research exists on refugee education globally, this study provides in-depth insights into Uganda’s socio-political landscape, which is crucial for understanding refugee-host community interactions. Uganda’s experience offers valuable lessons for other countries with similar refugee populations.

The study also bridges gaps between education, peace studies, and refugee studies, offering an interdisciplinary framework that can be applied in similar contexts. By highlighting the role of education in fostering social cohesion and peace, the research emphasizes the importance of integrating education into refugee response plans.

Additionally, the study provides empirical evidence on the outcomes of the 4Rs approach, strengthening the evidence base for educational initiatives that promote peace and integration. The findings also underscore the importance of community engagement in educational response efforts, filling a gap in the literature on grassroots involvement in refugee education programs.

Implications

for Future Research and Practice:

Future research could explore the long-term effects of historical grievances on educational outcomes, particularly in multicultural societies. Comparative studies across different national contexts could offer insights into policy transferability. Further research could also focus on exploring innovative approaches to addressing vertical and horizontal inequalities in education and improving governance and participation in inclusive education programs.

It is essential to continue exploring structural barriers to education and promote inclusive policies that foster positive intergroup relations. Research should also focus on addressing the diverse needs of refugee students while promoting integration and social cohesion within host communities.

Conclusion

The findings raise several critical issues that are pertinent to the ongoing evaluation and optimization of Uganda’s ERP for refugees and host communities, especially in relation to the 4Rs framework - Redistribution, Recognition, Representation, and Reconciliation. While the Plan has achieved some successes in fostering social cohesion and peacebuilding, significant gaps remain in addressing the underlying social, political, and historical inequalities.

The ERP’s positive impact on social cohesion and peacebuilding is commendable, but the plan’s success in meeting its broader goals will depend on addressing these gaps. For example, ensuring the equitable distribution of resources across refugee and host community schools is essential for maintaining fairness and preventing further marginalization. Additionally, incorporating refugees’ cultural identities into the curriculum, involving them more meaningfully in governance structures, and providing greater access to economic opportunities through education are critical steps for advancing peace and promoting sustainable economic

The failure to adequately address Redistribution of resources, Recognition of refugees’ cultural and historical identities, Representation in decision-making processes, and Reconciliation of past injustices all contribute to the challenges of implementing a sustainable education system that can foster long-term peace, social cohesion, and economic development. Nevertheless, the findings underscore the importance of aligning Uganda’s ERP more closely with the 4Rs framework to ensure that all communities refugees and host communities alike are genuinely included in the educational processes that shape their futures. Unless these issues are addressed, the Plan’ potentials to become a more effective and internationally scalable tool for fostering social cohesion, peacebuilding, and long-term development is undermined.

References

Abu El-Haj, T. R. (2015). Refugee education and social integration: A study of host country systems and practices. Oxford University Press.

Ager, A., & Strang, A. (2008). Understanding integration: A conceptual framework. Journal of Refugee Studies, 21(2), 166-191.

Akesson, B. (2018a). Bridging the gap: Integrating refugee education into host country curricula. Journal of Refugee Studies, 31(2), 217-235.

Akesson, B. (2018b). Curriculum and cultural integration: Reflections on refugee education. Refugee Studies Quarterly, 37(4), 499-515.

Albaugh, E. (2014). State-building and multilingual education in Africa. Cambridge University Press.

Allen, K., & Kaposy, C. (2017). Participation and representation: Refugee-led organizations and advocacy for refugee resettlement in Canada. Refugee Survey Quarterly, 36(2), 78-97.

Allen, K., Smith, J., Brown, L., & Davis, M. (2016). Refugee education in countries of first asylum: Breaking open the black box of pre-integration education. Refugee Survey Quarterly, 35(3), 54-74.

Antonsich, M. (2010). Searching for belonging - An analytical framework. Geography Compass, 4(6), 644-659. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-8198.2009.00317.x

Barbelet, V., Hagen-Zanker, J., & Mansour-Ille, D. (2018). Refugee inclusion and social cohesion: Approaches and challenges. International Migration Review, 52(3), 613-637.

Becker, H. S. (1970). Sociological work; method and substance. Aldine Publishing Company.

Benson, C. (2012). The role of language instruction in promoting quality and equity in primary education. In J. H. A. Cassola (Ed.), Lessons in educational equality (pp. 191-221). Oxford University Press.

Betts, A., & Collier, P. (2017). Refuge: Rethinking refugee policy in a changing world. Oxford University Press.

Brewer, M. B., & Brown, R. J. (2016). Intergroup relations. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (pp. 1149-1207). Wiley.

Bryman, A. (1988). Quantity and quality in social research. Unwin Hyman.

Burde, D. (2005). Education in crisis situations: Mapping the field. Creative Associates/Basic Education Support Project, United States Agency for International Development.

Chabbott, C. (2007). Carrot soup, magic bullets, and scientific research for education and development. Comparative Education Review, 51(1), 71-94.

Charmaz, K. (2015). Grounded theory: Methodology and theory construction. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed., Vol. 10, pp. 402-407). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.44029-8

Chelpi-den Hamer, M., Fresia, M., & Lanoue, E. (2010). Éducation et conflits: Les enjeux de l’offre éducative en situation de crise. Autrepart, 54, 3-22.

Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (1998). Basics of qualitative research. Sage Publications.

Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage Publications.

Cummins, J. (2000). Language, power, and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire. Multilingual Matters.

Department of Health, UK. (2001). [Title not provided in original citation].

Dodds, T., & Inquai, S. (1983). Education in exile: The educational needs of refugees. International Extension College.

Dryden-Peterson, S. (2018). Refugee education and integration in host countries. Cambridge University Press.

Dryden-Peterson, S., Adelman, E., Bellino, M. J., & Chopra, V. (2018). Building bridges, not walls. Paper commissioned for the 2019 Global Education Monitoring Report, Migration, displacement, and education. UNESCO.

Duncan, R., & Lopes Cardozo, M. (2017). Reclaiming reconciliation through community education for the Muslims and Tamils of post-war Jaffna, Sri Lanka. Research in Comparative and International Education, 12(1), 76-94.

Ebadi, S. (2008). Refugee rights in Iran. Saqi in association with UNHCR.

Fraser, N. (1995). From redistribution to recognition? Dilemmas of justice in a “post-socialist” age. New Left Review, 1(212), 68-93.

Fraser, N. (2005). Reframing justice in a globalized world. New Left Review, 36, 79-88.

Gall, M., Gall, J., & Borg, R. (2007). Educational research: An introduction (8th ed.). Pearson.

Garcia, O. (2012). Ethnic identity and language policy. In B. Spolsky (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of language policy (pp. 79-99). Cambridge University Press.

Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Aldine Publishing.

Government of Uganda Ministry of Education and Sports. (2018). Education response plan for refugees and host communities in Uganda.

Government of Uganda Office of the Prime Minister. (2022). Uganda refugees & asylum seekers as of 30/April/2022.

Hachfeld, A., Anders, Y., Kuger, S., & Sachse, K. A. (2018). The role of social relations in the integration of refugee students. International Journal of Educational Research, 92, 58-68.

Hansen, L. A. (2017). Inclusive education for refugees in western countries: Theoretical perspectives and empirical insights. Refugee Survey Quarterly, 36(3), 39-58.

Hoffman, L. (2020). Navigating global education: The role of international curricula for refugee students. Comparative Education Review, 64(3), 345-368.

Inter-Agency Network for Education in Emergencies. (2010). Minimum standards for education: Preparedness, response, recovery. INEE.

Janmyr, M. (2016). Precarity in exile: The legal status of Syrian refugees in Lebanon. Refugee Survey Quarterly, 35(4), 58-78.

Johnson, D. R., & Smith, A. D. (2019). Historical grievances and educational integration: Evidence from post-conflict societies. Comparative Education, 55(3), 372-391.

Jones, M., & Alony, I. (2011). Guiding the use of grounded theory in doctoral studies: An example from the Australian film industry. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 6, 95-114.

Kagan, M. (2011). Refugee education: A critique of international approaches. Refugee Review, 19(2), 24-35.

Kagawa, F. (2005). Emergency education: A critical review of the field. Comparative Education, 41(4), 487-503.

Kanno, Y., & Kangas, S. (2014). Linguistic diversity, bilingualism, and the education of minority students: A case study of historical grievances and inclusive policies. TESOL Quarterly, 48(3), 533-555.

Kirk, J. (2003). Women in contexts of crisis: Gender and conflict. UNESCO.

Kirk, J. (2005). Violence against girls in school. In J. Ward (Ed.), Broken bodies, broken dreams: Violence against women exposed (pp. 72-83). United Nations OCHA/IRIN.

Kirk, J. (Ed.). (2009). Certification counts: Recognizing the learning attainments of displaced and refugee students. UNESCO-IIEP.

Kirk, J., & Winthrop, R. (2013). The global education crisis: Trends and challenges in refugee education. UNESCO.

Kusi, H. (2012). Doing qualitative research: A guide for researchers. Emmpong Press.

Lewis, M. (2014a). The importance of mother tongue education for refugee students. Journal of Language, Identity & Education, 13(3), 159-175.

Lewis, M. (2014b). Language and education: The case of refugees in Uganda. Journal of Language Policy, 13(1), 45-56.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage Publications.

Maxwell, J. A. (2012). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Sage Publications. Mendenhall, M., Bartlett, L., & Ghaffar-Kucher, A. (2017). Adapting curricula for refugee students in global contexts. Educational Researcher, 46(4), 223-234.

Mendenhall, R., Russell, S. G., & Buckner, E. (2017). Educational adaptation for refugee students: Challenges and solutions. International Journal of Educational Development, 57, 104-113. Mugisha, M. (2018). Refugee education in Uganda: Local responses and challenges. Refugee Policy Review, 24(3), 235-251.

Novelli, M. (2016). Capital, inequality and education in conflict-affected contexts. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 37(6), 848-860. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425692.2016.116 5087

Novelli, M., & Lopes Cardozo, M. T. A. (2008). Conflict, education, and the global south: New critical directions. International Journal of Educational Development, 28(4), 473-488.

Novelli, M., Higgins, S., Ugur, M., & Valiente, O. (2014). The politics of education and refugee crises. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 22(45), 1-22.

Novelli, M., Lopes Cardozo, M., & Smith, A. (2015). A theoretical framework for analysing the contribution of education to sustainable peacebuilding: 4Rs in conflict-affected contexts. Research Consortium on Education and Peacebuilding.

Novelli, M., Lopes Cardozo, M., & Smith, A. (2017). The 4Rs framework: Analyzing education’s contribution to sustainable peacebuilding with social justice in conflict-affected contexts. Journal on Education in Emergencies, 3(1), 14-43.

Obura, A. (2003). Never again: Educational reconstruction in Rwanda. International Institute for Educational Planning.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2011). Social cohesion in a shifting world. OECD Publishing. http://www.oecd.org/site/devpgd2012/49067839.pdf

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2018). Making integration work: Refugee integration in a time of austerity. OECD Publishing.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2020). Trends shaping education 2020. OECD Publishing.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2021). Education at a glance 2021: OECD indicators. OECD Publishing.

Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2003). Expanding the framework of internal and external validity in quantitative research. Research in the Schools, 10(2), 71-90.

Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2011). When groups meet: The dynamics of intergroup contact. Psychology Press.

Plan International. (2017). Putting the CRRF into practice: General issues and specific considerations in Tanzania and Uganda.

Reijerse, A., Van Acker, K., Vanbeselaere, N., Phalet, K., & Duriez, B. (2013). Beyond the ethnic-civic dichotomy: Cultural citizenship as a new way of excluding immigrants. Political Psychology, 34(4), 611-630. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2012.00920.x

Rizvi, F., & Lingard, B. (2010). Globalization and education: Policy, practice, and politics. Oxford University Press.

Sayed, Y., Badroodien, A., Salmon, T., & McDonald, Z. (2018a). Education in emergencies: Global trends and challenges. Education International, 20(4), 299-316.

Sayed, Y., Singh, M., &死, H. (2018b). Globalization and education: Equity and local challenges in refugee contexts. Comparative Education Review, 62(2), 234-254.

Scharp, K. M., & Thomas, L. J. (2019). Disrupting the humanities and social science binary: Framing communication studies as a transformative discipline. Review of Communication, 19(3), 147-163. https://doi.org/10.1080/15358593.2019.1595702

Schraven, B., Adaawen, S., & Rademacher-Schulz, C. (2018). Social cohesion and refugee education: A study of Uganda’s educational framework. International Journal of Educational Development, 60(1), 87-98.

Shin, S. J. (2013). Bilingualism in schools and society: Language, identity, and policy. Routledge.

Skutnabb-Kangas, T. (2000a). Linguistic genocide in education—Or worldwide diversity and human rights? Routledge.

Skutnabb-Kangas, T. (2000b). Mother-tongue education: The key to the linguistic rights of minority children. Educational Policy, 34(5), 365-388.

Smith, A., McCandless, E., Paulson, J., & Wheaton, W. (2016). The links between equity, governance, education and peacebuilding in Kenya. Research Report Prepared for UNICEF Eastern and Southern Africa Regional Office.

Tomaševski, K. (2001). Human rights obligations: Making education available, accessible, acceptable, and adaptable (No. 3). Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency.

UN Women. (2019). Progress of the world’s women 2019-2020: Families in a changing world. UN Women.

UN Women. (2020). Turning promises into action: Gender equality in the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. UN Women.

UNESCO. (2014). EFA global monitoring report 2013-14: Teaching and learning: Achieving quality for all. UNESCO Publishing.

UNESCO. (2016). Mother-tongue instruction and refugee inclusion. UNESCO Education Policy Reports.

UNESCO. (2017). Global education monitoring report 2017/18: Accountability in education. UNESCO Publishing.

UNESCO. (2018). Global education monitoring report 2018: Migration, displacement and education. UNESCO Publishing.

UNESCO. (2019). Global education monitoring report 2019: Migration, displacement and education. UNESCO Publishing.

UNESCO. (2021). Global education monitoring report 2021/22: Building a more just world. UNESCO Publishing.

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. (1951). The refugee convention. UNHCR.

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. (2003). UNHCR guidelines for refugee education. UNHCR.

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. (2009a). Education strategy: A framework for refugee education. UNHCR Press.

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. (2009b). Education strategy: 2010-2012. UNHCR.

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. (2010a). Convention and protocol relating to the status of refugees. UNHCR.

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. (2010b). Fact sheet: Islamic Republic of Iran. UNHCR.

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. (2010c). Report on the enrolment rates to primary and secondary education in UNHCR operations. UNHCR Department of International Protection.

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. (2011). The 1951 refugee convention: Reservations and declarations. UNHCR.

http://www.unhcr.org/cgibin/texis/vtx/search?page=&comid=4dac387c6&cid=49aea9390&keywords=reservations

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. (2016). Global trends: Forced displacement in 2015. UNHCR

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. (2017). The comprehensive refugee response framework. UNHCR.

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. (2018). Education of refugee children: Theoretical perspectives and empirical insights. UNHCR.

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. (2019). Refugee education: A global review. UNHCR.

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. (2020a). Refugee education: Partnerships and policies in Uganda. UNHCR Reports.

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. (2020b). Refugee integration through education: A global review. UNHCR.

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. (2023). Global trends: Forced displacement in 2022. UNHCR.

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees & World Bank. (2021). The global cost of inclusive refugee education. The World Bank.

UNICEF. (2021a). Education for peacebuilding: Key insights for action. UNICEF.

UNICEF. (2021b). Gender equality in and through education. UNICEF.

UNICEF & Save the Children International. (2020). [Title not provided in original citation].

United Nations. (2016). Sustainable development goals: 17 goals to transform our world. United Nations. http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/education/

Van der Veen, R., & Datzberger, S. (2020). The peacebuilding potential of technical and vocational education and training programmes in post-conflict Sierra Leone. Journal of Education Policy, 37(1), 1-19.

Verkuyten, M. (2018). Identity and intergroup relations in minority education: Historical grievances and social integration. European Journal of Social Psychology, 48(5), 654-667.

World Bank Group. (2016). Uganda’s progressive approach to refugee management. World Bank. http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/fragilityconflictviolence/brief/ugandasprogressive-approach-refugee-management

Wright, C., & Gertler, M. (2021). International aid and the future of refugee education. World Development, 141, 105-118.

Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods. Sage Publications.

Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Sage Publications.