Categories
Power in Praxis

Why is Breaking Gender Stereotypes so Difficult?

The news about rapes in India has been very disturbing for me. 7-year-old girl gang-raped who eventually passed away in the hospital after suffering from multiple injuries. A college going girl in my hometown Bhopal was raped near a railway station at a stone throwing distance from my house. The girl was riding her scooter going back home from her tuition classes. Statistics say that there is a rape every 13.5 minutes in India somewhere.

I visit my hometown, Bhopal, multiple times a year. In the morning my mother and I usually spend time reading the newspaper having a cup of chai. We chat about many things. This time I noticed that there was a separate section on the brutality against women in the English daily. A separate section just devoted to news from the state reporting on rapes and molestation instances. I found this very shocking, even though I was aware of the many instances of crime against women. But in the newspaper, there it was and suddenly all this hit me harder. The section was filled with a crime against the 4-month-old baby girl to an 84-year-old woman. I just couldn’t read beyond that page. My mother discussed politics news and events in the city. She was unshaken by this page and I was wondering doesn’t she find all this very disturbing. The truth is that these news articles have become a part of everyone’s lives. My mother is off-course very disturbed about crime against women as we often talk about it over the phone. She and my sister run an NGO, Mahashakti Seva Kendra, in Bhopal dedicated to women’s economic empowerment and the topic is very dear to them.

My question still remains, can rape be normalized? How does a society like India with more than a billion in numbers react to the crimes that are committed over and over again on women? There are protests mainly by women, men do join. My acquaintances don’t leave the sight of their young daughters. A few drop and pick-up their daughters from school and avoid buses. Other moms keep calling their daughters’ cell phones while the girls return from work. I have been told never to take a taxi at night especially in Delhi. Never to be out late at night as I would be inviting trouble. Never to do this and never to do that. My sister has often told me “Be careful, this is India”.

With all these thoughts, the researcher in me probed me to conduct a mini-study on gender stereotypes. I am by no means a gender studies expert. I come fresh with actually no perspective with no gender theories in my head. This served me well since the data will help me to find a theoretical perspective that I can relate to and not vice-versa. Asking a group of women “so what do you think of how women should be treated by men” or “what do you think of women emancipation” would have been a major failure. This was a sensitive topic layered with culture, traditions, and beliefs that are very difficult to disentangle. I had to tread on this very carefully. Since the group of women at Mahashakti Seva Kendra were coming from a very different background than mine, I had to be careful not to reveal my opinions even though the topic was so close to my heart and I was ready to change the world. I had to stop my feelings and be an external observer asking many “whys”.

I decided to take a more nuanced route of how values are formed and what are our values. Later on, I showed them some pictures that clearly will make a good topic to debate. For instance, the pictures included a girl wearing shorts and playing hockey, two lady pilots, a lady driving a taxi. I asked them to stand up and take sides rather than just stating their opinions. There were some ladies who changed their opinion quickly when they were asked to move to the “agree’ side and “disagree” side. It is also important to note that many women in India are never asked for their opinion, they are simply instructed to do things. So this was a big step when they had to form an opinion and take a (physical) side to the argument. There were a few ladies who were reluctant to share their opinions because they were in opposition to the stance being discussed. My sister, who meets them on a continuous basis, made everyone feel comfortable. The ladies would often look at me to see if I approve or disapprove, but got puzzled since I took no side. They were looking for the right answer and my role was to debate the topic and not tell them what is the “right” thing to do. I was myself confused once they started discussing as I became aware of their contextual realities. I showed no signs of confusion and remain neutral.

Here are some of the findings. Values, as expected, were formed by our environments and we don’t realize when this happens and internalize these values unknowingly. Roles are divided by gender. Men are supposed to earn money and work outside. Women are supposed to stay at home. Younger women seem to question some practices at home and are in the process of negotiating with their husbands or fathers on some of them. Patriarchy still exists and men take most of the household decisions. Women look to men for a validation of their decisions on the rare occasions they take the decision. There are intergenerational differences in terms of men holding more progressive stance. The family and the community environment hold back many steps that can be taken to bring gender equality.

Many of these findings hold true irrespective of economic status and educational status. Many of them hold true for me and I can relate to them. I still did not get at the question of rapes and why people opt for such a brutal action. But my research shows some underlying principles of what needs to change. Terms like gender equality, SDG goal 5, equal pay for women, women empowerment are far too removed from what needs to be done. We need to start by changing people’s mindsets. We need to start with men. We need us, women, to be fearless and ask questions and make our presence felt. We need to raise our voices and be rude. Challenge our believes and values. If we don’t ask, we don’t get it.

One question that remains is what is my theoretical framework. In my reading so far, I find Arjun Appadurai’s notions of “scapes” and Witenstein & Saito (2015)’s discussion on “third spaces” very relevant. Mahashakti ladies are transitioning to a space in their lives where they are trying to define their identity which is very different from their home culture. Hope their exploration continues and they let me be a small part of their journey.

#genderstereotypes

 

Categories
Power in Praxis

Who is responsible for the Gender SDG?

SDG 5: Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls. Targets include:

  • End all forms of discrimination against all women and girls everywhere.
  • Eliminate all forms of violence against all women and girls in the public and private spheres, including trafficking and sexual and other types of exploitation.

SDG 5 is a tall order. Any takers? According to the 2018 Global Education Monitoring Report, the Gender Parity Index for youth is .89 for sub-Saharan Africa and .94 for Southern Asia. For adults, they are .79 and .78 respectively for the two regions. The adult women remain marginalized as compared to men and as compared to their youth counterparts. Gender parity is illustrated with a value of 1 and being further away from 1 implies greater disparity. It is essentially a socioeconomic measure to show the relative access to schooling for females as compared to men.

The 2018 GEM Gender Report mentions that fewer women have ICT skills than men. Much of this data is not available for sub-Saharan Africa and for Southern Asia. There are fewer women than men in leadership positions. In India, there are cases where women are elected as the Sarpanch,or the leader of the local village council, while their husbands take all the executive decisions. There are also inspiring women who are leading the country in impactful ways. However, the platform is still very uneven for women in majority of the countries with underrepresentation and decision-making power.

Let us take the case of Amuda. She is in her mid 30s. Amuda has two daughters and is working hard to educate them. Education is something that she was deprived of in her childhood. She wants to see her girls as “big sahibs” (senior officers) in government offices. She comes to the Mahashakti workshed(non-profit based in Bhopal) and makes beautiful eco-friendly bags. She represents the “lost generation” of women in India who are past their early 30s, who didn’t get an opportunity to go to school. They are now considered too old to learn anything new. Their husbands repeatedly tell them that they are “good for nothing” and have lost all confidence that they are capable to learn anything new.

Most women past their early 30s in India cannot learn new skills, such as computers, because the courses are expensive and are not catered to their needs. Sitting in a cyber café is considered a social taboo. Poly-technique institutions require them to pay fees and the classes are at inconvenient times– they are either busy taking care of their extended families or are in search of small jobs that will help them to get some income.

Historically, an overwhelming focus on basic and especially primary education led to the neglect of post-basic education and training, including Technical Vocational Education and Training (TVET), and their non-inclusion in the UN Millennium Development Goals (Hartl, 2009). Bennell, 1999 (in Hartl, 2009) found that vocational education and training (VET) was largely absent in most government and donor poverty reduction strategies in developing countries. This marginalization of VET is due to a lack of donor investment and inaction by many governments. However, policies and approaches to TVET have undergone major readjustment in the 1970s and 1980s.

Venn (1964, as cited in Diwakar, 2015) explains the meaning of the term ‘vocational’ as a sort of ‘calling’. The author notes that Venn (1964) refers to the term vocational as education that enables a “stable job”. The term came about during the industrial revolution. Diwakar (2015) further explains that ‘Technical and Vocational Education is a study that involves the learning about technologies and related sciences which go beyond “general education”. Therefore it involves acquisition of practical skills, attitudes, understanding and knowledge relating to occupations in various sectors of economic and social life (UNESCO, 2001).

The National Skill Development Mission, headed by India’s Prime Minister Modi, was launched in 2008. Its mission is “ To rapidly scale up skill development efforts in India, by creating an end-to-end, outcome-focused implementation framework, which aligns demands of the employers for a well-trained skilled workforce with aspirations of Indian citizens for sustainable livelihoods”. As a part of TVET programs, the government mandated that the Women’s Vocational Training Programme be expanded with the institutional network providing training facilities exclusively for women. This was a means to expand the potential for women to obtain skills with highwage and increase the possibility of self-employment. Skill development for self-employment is a consideration and effort that will be especially important in rural areas. More specifically, post-training support, including mentoring for access to markets, credit and appropriate technologies, is an important part of skill development strategy for self-employment (Diwakar & Ahamad, 2015). It is also important to incorporate specific needs of target groups, e.g. literacy, the level of education and the local language in the training modules. The delivery of training needs to be flexible in terms of hours and duration to encourage participation, particularly among women (Diwakar & Ahamad, 2015).

There are several challenges in this mission. Agrawal (2013) highlights that the quality and financing of the system is a major challenge. Among other factors are an ineffective funding model, strong mismatch between demand and supply side factors, and misalignment between labor market needs and vocational courses. The report suggests that the major reforms in different areas are required before expanding the VET system and making the system more responsive to the needs of the labor market.

A Bhopal based non-profit, Mahashakti Seva Kendra, is using Government’s skill development funds to impart tailoring skills. When the 6-month training period is completed, interested candidates are asked to continue with the organization to make eco-friendly products. The non-profit sells these products in the market to provide a fair wage to its women partners. Such ventures are needed to match the vocation-demand link. Such apprenticeship-based programs related to traditional arts need expansion and market linkages for 1) promotion of traditional arts and crafts and 2) more job opportunities in the formal and informal sectors. Vocational training specific to a job may become outdated very quickly if the nature of the job changes or if training content becomes outdated. Employers should be constantly consulted regarding the design of vocational schooling curricula. This requires a systematic coordination with networks or associations of employers (Biavaschi. et al.,2012). Especially for women, education leading to economic empowerment is more than ensuring livelihood; it can lead to a life of dignity.

Reference

Agrawal, Tushar (2013). Vocational education and training programs (VET): An Asian perspective. Asia-Pacifci Journal of Cooperative Education. 14(1), 15-26.

Goal, Vijay (nd). Technical and vocational education and training (TVET) System in India for Sustainable Development. Ministry of Human Resources, department of Higher Education. Government of India.

Nitika Diwakar, Nitika., & Ahamad, Tauffiqu (2015). Skill development of women through vocational training. International Journal of Applied Research 1(6): 79-83.

Biavaschi. et al. (2012) Youth Unemployment and Vocational Training, IZA DP No. 6890. IZA. Discussion Paper Series. October 2012.

Mishra (nd)“Skill Development: A way to leverage the demographic dividend in India”. IK Gujral Punjab Technical University. Accessed March 15th 2017

Hartl, Maria (2009). Technical and vocational education and training (TVET) and skills development for poverty reduction – do rural women benefit? Policy Paper for PATHWAYS OUT OF POVERTY, Gender and Rural Employment.

Sudarshan, Ratna (2012) National skills development strategies and the urban informal sector: the case of India. Background paper prepared for the Education for All Global Monitoring Report 2012. Youth and skills: Putting education to work.

Das, Arup Kumar (2015). Skill development for SMEs: Mapping of key initiatives in India. Institutions and Economies. Vol 7. Issue2. July 2015. Pp 120-143.

Categories
Power in Praxis

Engaging the Business Community to Improve Youth Skills: A Conversation with Jamira Burley

By Tara Stafford Ocansey.

Jamira Burley is Head of the Youth Engagement and Skills Initiative of the Global Business Coalition for Education (GBC-Education). GBC-Education brings the business community together to accelerate progress in delivering quality education for all of the world’s youth. It combines the voice, capabilities, resources, and innovations of over 100 companies and leading brands to address the leading challenges of education for children and youth. Beyond her role leading the Youth Engagement and Skills Initiative, Ms. Burley is an accomplished youth advocate with a wealth of experience leading youth initiatives on critical issues from gun violence to human rights to voter turnout. She has been recognized as a Champion of Change by President Obama, and by Forbes 30 under 30.

 

This article has been transcribed from a conversation between Ms. Burley and Tara S Ocansey from the Center for Sustainable Development’s Connect To Learn initiative, and highlights some of the key messages from GBC-Educations new report, written in collaboration with Deloitte, “Preparing tomorrow’s workforce for the Fourth Industrial Revolution”. The conversation has been lightly edited for clarity.

Tell us a little about GBC-Education’s mission.

The Global Business Coalition for Education was created back in 2012 with the idea that 1) young people need to have access to quality education wherever they are in the world, and 2) we can engage the business community in a more authentic and comprehensive way to have them not just advise on what quality of education looks like but to deep invest in quality of education around the world. Our goal is to look at most marginalized – through our programs Children On The Move, Girls’ Education, and most recently Youth Skills – so that those most disconnected from access to resources and opportunities can get the same quality of education as those who go to private school, for example

 

What are some of your proudest GBC-Education achievements to date?

Some of our proudest achievements were the creation of our REACT platform. Our REACT platform is dedicated to Children On The Move and children in emergencies. Different organizations around the world can apply for small grants and say ‘we need 20 computers’ and our different business partners can fill that void. Think of it as the Tinder to access in education for refugee youth. It matches the products or services of a corporation directly with the needs of young people on the ground. It removes the middle person and the waiting game of applying for grants.

What I’ve been working on this last year is our Youth Skills and Innovation initiative. It’s the first of its kind. In addition to launching the initiative we launched a commission of 17 individuals from 17 different industries – the business sector, bilateral organizations, government agencies – who are young people on the ground. It was a way for us to bring a wide range of stakeholders together to develop practical recommendations for how the business community can close the skills gap working in collaboration with different entities and looking at a collective approach for how we address education needs. A few years ago the goal was just to provide kids basic education by getting them in school, but we are seeing that isn’t enough. Five year olds today will have jobs 15 years from now that don’t currently exist. How can we make sure the skills they are gaining are qualifiable for the jobs that will be available, and also transferable so that 5-10 years from now we aren’t recreating the will and doing this over again? How do we equip young people with the skills they need to be active citizens and to make the change that they want to make? As a culmination to these questions, we just released our report on September 18th that offers a set of recommendations from the business community to the business community around a framework of how they can actually play a critical role in this crisis.

 

What made GBC-Education decide to conduct the research that has culminated in the report you’ve launched with Deloitte this week?

We are one of the only organizations that focuses on bridging the gap between education, business and young people, so we already have the network to accomplish it. Our mission was ensuring how do we bring these folks who are rarely at the same table together into a conversation that takes them a bit deeper than just providing basic education. It was about recognizing our own power, and more importantly, how we can ensure that the resources were adequately distributed amongst a wide range of stakeholders.

 

The report identifies one of the primary challenges as being to reposition discrete and disconnected programs as systemwide, unified sets of approaches. Can you describe an example of a set of disconnected programs that can be strengthened by coming together to pursue their goals in a more unified way that helps to overcome systemic barriers?

What we are seeing is that there are definitely solutions out there on small and large scales, but are they connected to the institutions of power, meaning the government, and are they connected to the institutions of education, meaning our traditional classrooms and universities? Are they actually serving the needs of their target audience? We want to ensure that there is an interconnecting community of all those different assets, so that what is aligning with this program or initiative make sense for the business community, government agencies, as well as the schools, so it requires these channels to open up. We are seeing that there are a lot of great programs in villages and cities around the world, but often government leaders have no idea, or funders don’t have access and can’t verify the programs to provide additional funding. So it’s about using our network to bridge those communities and connect folks who normally wouldn’t have access. We are launching the Action Hub to create an opportunity for folks to learn about programs that are actually working, be able to help scale them up, or at least be able to duplicate them in other communities. It will also create an avenue for a government official to say ‘I want to find out what programs are in my community that I can support’ and they would have an entire database to filter those initiatives based on the region or country they are in.

 

This is so important, since, from our side in the non-profit world, it can be difficult to reach potential donors who don’t accept unsolicited inquiries. It’s understandable that they don’t want to get flooded with proposals, but at the same time, how do good programs get on the radar of potential donors without such avenues?

I think its unproductive for donors to not have opportunities for unsolicited approaches or programs to come to them. If you think about who often are the program managers in these agencies, they’re not folks who have worked on the ground, they’re not from those communities, so they don’t have a real sense for what’s actually impactful work, and they’re disconnected from real change. Until you build a bridge where there are avenues for folks to get a real understanding for what works for impacting communities, you’ll continue to see the same kinds of programs, led by the same types of people, getting funding, even if they’re not impactful. I think one thing fundraisers have to debate with themselves is if it’s worth getting bombarded with a whole bunch of proposals, versus continuing to fund ineffective programs.

 

I think other cultures have done really well in cultivating a sense of community around the sharing of ideas and sharing of resources that isn’t a level of competition. That’s one thing we want to do with the skills initiative is figure out how we create an ecosystem where businesses see that this is not about a competition, this is for the benefit of all of us. This is about eventually increasing their bottom line, but its’ not solely about their bottom line. It’s also about ensuring that you create space for those who know the issues and who knows the communities to actually facilitate real relationships with those people.

 

We’re seeing now that non-profits are replicating unhealthy behaviors that are seen in the business community – creating this ultra-level of competition that doesn’t leave room for collaboration.

 

Deloitte conducted a literature review, interviews with industry leaders, innovators, global leaders, researchers, NGOs, and youth – are there any particular responses or insights that stand out in your memory that you feel are indicative of the overall findings?

What was inspiring through the course of this entire research process was we did consultations with young people, who are not waiting for someone to do the work. These are young people who were often appointed by a service organization that they work with, they are young people who have their own companies or non-profit organizations with social impact missions. That was really inspiring to think that while they are willing to be part of a conversation on how the business community can have an impact, they weren’t willing to wait for that to happen, they were taking action in their own communities, and they were open to sharing their ideas, sharing their resources. So for me while I’m excited about the role that businesses can play, I’m more excited about the transformation of youth leadership, and how they will continue to take the things that they value, and their form of leadership now into the workforce 10-15 years later, which I can only hope will bode well for the future of work and access to resources.

 

One of the activities identified to achieve the goals include building “new norms, culture change” What is an example of that?

One example is the commission itself. That businesses can find ways to collaborate with each other that aren’t in competition with each other. That businesses can see the value in providing quality education to young people beyond their bottom line. That businesses can take an active role in working with non-traditional collaborators like young people, like educators, like government leaders, for a mission that isn’t related to their own company. So for us, the new norm is cultivating a new series of leaders that have an active role in social justice issues, more specifically education, than they had before, and not just asking business leaders to write a check but to think critically about what knowledge do they have, what resources do they have beyond money, that they can contribute to a larger mission. For example, some companies have knowledge to share, or have technology that could be used for education. So for me it’s about how do we create an environment where there is a shared goal and mission that really puts the lives and futures of young people ahead of profit.

 

What do you see as some of the most in-demand skill areas for the members of your coalition? How much do the most in-demand areas differ depending on sector? Region of the world?

What we’re seeing is actually very similar across industries and across sectors. For the past 10 years or so the focus has been on technical skills, coding, robotics, artificial intelligence, all of which are important. But what we’re seeing that’s unique about the 4th industrial revolution is that new forms of technology that we’ve been creating over the past decade will actually be the gatekeepers to transforming what jobs look like in the future. You’ll have one machine that will take the place of thousands of jobs, and so what we’re seeing is that the skills that are in-demand now are non-cognitive skills, they are presentational skills, interpersonal skills, the ability to critically think for yourself and to come to an informed decision. These are not easy to measure, and are harder to implement in classrooms. So for us it’s thinking critically about how do we not totally take away from the importance of learning these technical skills, but how do we infiltrate them and combine them with other transferable skills, what others would call soft skills, in a critical way. The term “soft skills” doesn’t really convey the importance of those skills. When you think about young people now, forms of technology they have now – Snapchat, Instagram, Twitter – people are dating online – and people lack the ability to have genuine conversations and build real relationships, which I think will be the make or break for many young people’s careers if they can’t have a conversation or facilitate an interview with a potential employee. So, it’s really about teaching young people how to be human in a technical way. Young people need access to technology but they still need that human touch.

 

How can businesses better reach marginalized youth to help equip them with these skills?

One way businesses can engage our marginalized communities is by going to the experts. Finding locally based organizations who already have relationships with and are serving these young people. That’s not just organizations who do work around education, but also agencies who provide social services to young people or other institutions that young people filter through, like our criminal justice system. Being very creative about where we reach young people, and providing them a pathway to action or engagement. It’s not forcing young people to come to us. If we have to, we take a flight and go to that community and knock on doors. We did a survey of young people that was very effective because what we found was that there are still young people we are unable to reach because they don’t have a form of technology, they may not be able to read, they may not be able to comprehend what we’re asking them, and they may not be able to fully express themselves. Or we didn’t do the report in a language they understand. So it’s hiring people on your staff who know these impacted communities who can help you navigate how to get to them. It’s not recreating the wheel saying we need to create a new organization, its saying I’m going to support organizations who are already on the ground, who already have those relationships and trust, to ensure sustainability of that work. Because 10 years from now you may lose interest as a company, but that organization still has to serve those young people.

 

What’s really important too is that, if you’re a company, its recognizing that when we talk about education, we can’t forget about the host of other adversities young people are impacted by, because there could be pathways to engagement by those other issues as well. Whether that’s access to clean water, access to healthcare, access to a safe place to lay their heads, there are a number of avenues to go through. It’s about being creative, and being intentional with the population that you want to impact. Not being afraid to say I just want to focus on girls’ education in India” or “I just want to focus on boys and men of color” because if we’re all doing our part, hopefully we’ll move all young people forward and not try to do everything for everyone at the same time which will just water down our efforts.

 

If people start sharing their results and their methods early on, so that people can start learning from them, we can all hold each other accountable. There’s been a huge movement in the past years for open source data for cities, there needs to be a similar movement of open source data for organizations and companies who say they’re serving the public, and what that really means.

 

What recommendations do you have for NGOs and other program implementers and field practitioners to align their programs to the needs of the business community and to better align and collaborate with the business community, particularly the very local, small business community that may not be as engaged in these kinds of movements as a larger multi-national business?

 

What we’re struggling with now with our educational institutions is we’re actually teaching young people to train for jobs that don’t exist, and that’s a huge disservice. Nonprofits, education institutions and governments need to build a bridge with the business community and find out what jobs are going to look like for the future, and be very specific to the industries that are based in your country, city, or village, and try to align those goals and your program curriculum to fit those needs. Say you have a program that is supposed to, by the end, get the young person a job, and you haven’t actually taught them the skills for the jobs in the region they’re in, then you’ve done them a disservice. We need to develop collaborative programs with businesses that say, we know you’re going to train them for the jobs that will exist in 5-10 months, 5-10 years from now, and that when they graduate from their program, we’ll be willing to hire them. We’ve seen examples of that in the past, and we’re hoping to connect nonprofits who didn’t have relationships with businesses together. The struggle is we don’t know what those jobs are going to look like, its changing every day, so we have to be very diligent in recognizing that soft skills are universal, regardless of the industry. Not everyone needs coding.

 

If we can teach young people how to learn, they can teach themselves a new skill. What we’re finding is that we have to hand hold every child through the process of learning because they can’t comprehend on their own. Our education systems for so long have been about memorization, a test to a test, but not how to teach young people to question the answers, how to critically think about everything that they’ve known for so long and to do their own research and build their own hypothesis, and even if their hypothesis is correct today that they’re willing to go back and re-do it again when the data changes. We need to teach young people to teach themselves and to be curious and willing to be wrong. Willing to look at the intersections of different things to come to a solution. So if you’re looking at poverty, maybe using different kinds of technology like drones to track poverty in communities, or understanding how climate change impacts poverty. Really being curious and being willing to ask questions.

 

One thing we’ve seen in a lot of the places we work is that this idea becomes challenging because of cultural norms that encourage young people to defer to their elders and not to speak up to share their differing opinions or different ideas.

No matter what industry you’re in, often you find yourself overshadowed by the elders. Depending on the company or the country, it varies for different reasons. We need to have shared power with young people, because if you look at almost everything we’ve been using for the past two decades has been created by millennials, young people who didn’t wait for a major investor, didn’t wait for permission, who went against the grain of what was conventionally thought of for their industry and created something amazing that has transformed how we think. There needs to be opportunity for intergenerational dialogue, intergenerational connection that allows for young people to teach older folks and vice versa, because there is something to learn from each other, versus feeling like there’s a level of competition that prevents people from sharing power and sharing access to resources. It’s about trusting young people to do the job.