Strasbourg, 28 September 2016




1.      The Education and Culture Committee, chaired by Sabine Rohmann:

-        Adopted the draft agenda [CONF/EDUC(2016)OJ2]

-        Adopted the draft synopsis [CONF/EDUC(2016)SYN1]

Sabine Rohmann presented the main theme of the meeting, which was “social inclusion”.  Education had a key part to play in society, which was undergoing massive change, with a view to ensuring inclusive, sustainable development.  New competences for democratic culture were needed.

2.    Keynote 1: The European Framework of Competences for Democratic Culture: a Good Beginning Is Needed, by Maria Esther Rabasa Grau – Ambassador, Permanent Representative of Andorra to the Council of Europe

Maria Esther Rabasa Grau referred to the Brussels Conference, “Securing Democracy through Education”.

The importance which Andorrans attached to education was very longstanding.  The principality’s geographical situation as a small mountainous country meant that learning to read, write and count had always been vital.

In 1993, Andorra had adopted a new constitution with legislation focused on the existence of three education systems (Andorran, French and Spanish).

The three free state education systems were key to the successful integration of the immigrant population.

This diversity had become an asset for the country.

Several objectives had been set for education in Andorra, in particular:

·         preparation for lasting employment,

·         preparation for democratic citizenship.

Some fundamental questions had had to be asked first:

·         what competences were needed?  What types of knowledge and skills?

·         could the “concept” of living together in harmony be taught?

Although initially sceptical, the Committee of Ministers had ultimately acknowledged the importance of education in building an inclusive democratic society and had made it a major issue.

In 2013, the Committee of Ministers High-Level Conference in Andorra on

“Education for democracy in an intercultural society” had stressed the objectives of education:

·         Holistic development of the individual, including the social and civic dimensions;

·         Learning of four languages (Catalan, French, English and Spanish).  Pupils were able to speak those four languages at the end of primary school.  They also learned Portuguese.

·         In Andorra, education was priority number one.

In conclusion, she quoted the comments by Paul Valéry that people were enriched by their reciprocate differences.

In Andorra, living together in harmony had become a reality through education.

3.      Keynote 2: The European Framework of Competences for Democratic Culture: Implementation, by Matthew Johnson, Director of Democratic Citizenship and Participation, DG II

Why adopt a framework of this kind?

To prepare young people to take part in building democratic citizenship and to build their capacity to implement these key values.

To promote education and the competences needed for that democratic culture.

These needs for education had been highlighted by the attacks which had shaken Europe.

The Council of Europe had redefined education:

·           preparation for employment

·           democratic citizenship

·           personal development

What was meant by democracy?  Institutions and laws, as well as a democratic culture: types of conduct which enabled society to function, a desire to experience intercultural relations.  What did people know and understand?  What were the limits to freedom of expression?  That many necessary competences.

So what framework?  Not one single model, but a reference instrument for teachers and everyone else involved in teaching…

A reference framework with four component elements:

·         values

·         attitudes

·         knowledge

·         skills

It was a reference framework (not a model) which had to be adapted to each country and each education system and was teachable and accessible.

It had been launched by the Committee of Ministers in Brussels on 11 and 12 April 2016.

Websites for more details:




Several points were made:

·         it was important to offer young people and trainers a human experience;

·         informal education should not be forgotten;

·         democracy should be applied and not just taught in the formal education setting;

·         personal commitment was important: before learning skills or competences, was it not necessary to have a desire for dialogue and for democracy?  Could this be encouraged?

·         language learning was vital;

·         schools needed to be inclusive; that was what mattered most.  Learning between equals (co-operative groups).


Maria Esther Rabasa Grau cited the example of Andorra, which offered a comprehensive, relevant response to the questions:

·         “Language is never a problem, our children learn in Catalan, French, Spanish and English, that is a strong point.  A language is never learned at the expense of another.  On the contrary, it is an asset.  Andorran schools teach all pupils, regardless of their language or even disabilities.

·         There are never more than 20 pupils per class and the pupils work in co-operative groups of four in which each one has a role, which is not always the same.  The pupils do project-based work.

·         At junior secondary level, volunteer pupils act as conflict-resolution mediators.

·         Political will is necessary, we need you to put pressure on your national authorities to promote approaches of this kind and funding for them.”

4.      Keynote 3: World Forum of Women of La Francophonie, by Yamina Benguigui – former French Minister for La Francophonie

Women’s rights were the barometer of the development of societies.  They could never be taken for granted.

The first World Forum of Women of La Francophonie, which had been held in Paris on 20 March 2013, had mainly focused on violence against women in armed conflicts and political crises.

The second World Forum of Women of La Francophonie, which had been held in Kinshasa on 3 and 4 March 2014, had focused on women as agents for development and on education for girls.

Yamina Benguigui made a powerful plea for the liberation of women through education:

·           schools and education were the keys which opened the doors to all knowledge and all power;

·           school attendance should be made compulsory up to the age of 16 in all French-speaking countries;

·           education was the top priority so that women could take control of their destinies;

·           women were vectors for peace and agents for development;

·           each country which hosted the forum had to propose a legislative advance for women;

·           educating girls was the only way of opposing traditional practices which enslaved them and forced them into submission;

·           the Council of Europe should play a key part in highlighting that educating women was a major tool for their development and emancipation.


Several points were made:

·           education was a struggle for peace;

·           everything began with the teaching of values;

·           all education started out with the universality of human rights;

·           any attempts to attach more importance to some rights than to others should be combated.


Yamina Benguigui provided more information with reference to two films she had made:

·           Film 1: “Mémoire d’immigrés, héritage maghrébin” (Immigrant Memories, Maghreb Heritage), concerning migration from the Maghreb region of North Africa.

In 1974, there had been a shift from worker immigration to mass immigration, when women and children had been brought in with absolutely no preparations having been made to cater for the families concerned.

When the women were moved, they never left.  It was also the era of feminism, but that had never reached those Maghreb women.

·           Film 2 : “Mémoire d’immigrés, héritage musulman” (Immigrant Memories, Moslem Heritage) (1998)

She had filmed several women and asked them about their status as Moslem women in an attempt to understand what they had gone through, their pasts and their experiences between family traditions and democratic principles, and how to avoid a whole community retreating into itself.

She wondered:

·           Why Israel had still not been admitted to La Francophonie?

The reason Israel did not apply to join the OIF was probably because the rules provided that if an OIF member country (Lebanon, Arab League) refused, the application would be rejected.

5.      Working groups

·           The reports would be transmitted online;

·           The reference framework presented at the meeting was a new guiding strand for all the committee’s work.

·           The committee was not alone and could work in co-operation with DG II.


Draft Synopsis of the meeting of the working group

A Educating with a view to intercultural dialogue; living together in Europe Roseline Moreau

1. Evaluation of our research concerning the practices in intercultural education:

Fernand Jehl, evaluation of the survey:

We have received about 50 replies which are all worthy of interest. However:

. Some actions focus on a humanitarian project without any appearance of an intercultural dialogue.

. Others target essentially integration, adaptation to local culture.

From these results, we have decided to open up 3 new developments:

1) learn on research, reports, recommendations and actions of the COE for whom intercultural dialogue is essential (see P Dussère analysis below)

2) Organize detailed interviews with project managers or organization leaders who are particularly significant.

3) Choose a precise development towards the Rom community.

Pierre Dussère, our references in the work and actions of the COE :

The White Book on intercultural dialogue (7th May 2008) is our first reference. It globally concerns us, but let us underline 3 aspects of it:

1) The analysis: how does the model of intercultural dialogue differ from other models ? (ch.1 & 2, a point which was studied at our January meeting)

2) The conceptual aspect (ch.3) : the topic of Lilia Bensédrine's talk below

3) The recommendations, mainly ch4.3: learning and teaching intercultural skills. This point has been the object of a very important study which includes intercultural dialogue in education to Democracy and has just concluded by the proposal of a model: “Competences for democratic culture - Living together as equals in culturally diverse democratic societies” (2016). (COE, April 2016, see Ch 6 in particular).

In fact it is the COE as a whole which is concerned by intercultural dialogue:

The CLRP (Congress of Local and Regional Powers) : a tool-kit ; the PACE (The Parliamentary Assembly) : actions targeting political decision-makers ; the Pestalozzi program and above all the « Intercultural Cities » program already mentioned at our meeting in January : see below Mrs Irina Guidikova's talk.

We will save only about ten experiments conducted by intercultural Cities.

In addition we will point out national or regional actions (Spain, Italy, Portugal, Greece, France……)

For all these experiments, P. Dussère noticed the difficulty encountered in entering directly into contact and wished to enlist the help of Mrs Irina Guidikova….as well as that of our NGOs.

2. Lilia Bensédrine : the key concepts which prop up our work.

The term « multicultural » describes a fact : a multiplicity of people or groups who bear different identities and rub shoulders without really coming into contact.

« Interculturality» is a dynamic process of meetings which entail interaction between people.

« Reciprocity »determines interculturality: being aware of one's own references, trying to know who our neighbour is, what are his or her representations of the world, his or her expectations, searching for mutual understanding. It is not a one-way process, not just one person who gives and the other who receives.

« Dialogue » is the ability to square up to the differences of our neighbour, to try to fit in better, to weave a series of relationships, to take on board the interests and orientations of others. (Bruno Etienne in « Intercultural Dialogue and Prevention of Conflicts »

As a conclusion, we must remind ourselves that these concepts: dialogue, culture, intercultural are not set but are dynamic. They are perpetually evolving…..and the new realities do not come to us with their instructions.

3. The conditions necessary to an education to intercultural dialogue: testimony of Kari Flornes, University of Bergen, Norway.

Education to intercultural dialogue in general and to interreligious dialogue in particular belongs to the initiation to democracy. It concerns the whole school, including parents, necessitates a sound training for the teachers. It also entails a thorough training in empathetic communication. In the wake of Mrs Lisbeth Brudal, Kari Flornes suggests a very thorough method starting with a time for each one to relate his or her own personal history in the school, taking into account feelings and emotions and inciting them to reciprocate in the sharing of personal experiences.

4. Presentation of the programme « Intercultural Cities » by Irena Guidikova, Council of Europe, manager of the programme « Intercultural Cities ».

Intercultural Cities: is an art of social mixing which entails rethinking the strategies of integration. It aims at avoiding leaving people on the fringe of society or in ghettos.

On the contrary it entails building up mutual trust with local inhabitants to create a social fabric, which is called « inclusive citizenship » bringing foreigners to take part in public life at a local level.

Among the elements necessary to interculturality and therefore to an inclusive society:

Ensuring the respect of rights and a basis of common values; giving a positive visibility of diversity; favouring intercultural skills ; diversifying political and technical personnel ; not avoiding or concealing conflicts, but learning to handle them.

Today more than 90 cities in Europe take part in this project « Intercultural Cities », in which we can notice a growing trust between groups, a decrease in the intensity of conflicts, a greater level of safety, a growing feeling that all inhabitants have equal rights.

See the CoE guide : “The intercultural city step by step - Practical guide for applying the urban model of intercultural integration” (2014)

Pierre Dussère

B   L’enseignant en interaction avec son environnement (in French only)

Animé par Brigitte Besson

Etaient présents :

-       Begona Ocio                          ONG Pax Romana

-       Joelle Hauesser                       ONG UEF ( Union féminine européenne )

-       Piet Tutenel                            ONG Erasmus

N’avaient pu nous rejoindre 

-       Monique Binda                      ONG Eurotalent

-       Annick de Mongolfier           ONG Decere ( Démocratie, construction européenne et religions)

Les enjeux de la réunion :

Deux pistes de travail

·      Point de consensus à la réunion de janvier 2016 : la difficulté principale pour innover dans l’enseignement n’est pas le manque d’idées mais la  difficulté à faire essaimer de nouvelles pratiques qui restent souvent confidentielles. Notre objectif : tenter de caractériser ce qui permettrait une meilleure diffusion des pratiques innovantes

·      Définir les formes que pourrait prendre notre collaboration avec la plate-forme du programme Pestalozzi

Diffusion de l’innovation : principaux points abordés

Les points qui suivent ont été dégagés à partir de l’analyse d’exemples concrets et de supports apportés à la réunion par les participants. Les termes  présentés « »en  sont directement extraits

Consensus dans le groupe sur le point suivant : L’école doit donner à tous les enfants les ressources nécessaires pour réussir et chaque enfant doit y trouver des solutions, des clés pour réussir.

·           Comment les projets innovants sont-ils choisis ?

-        Comment sont-ils reliés au projet de l’école ?

-        Comment sont-ils reliés aux caractéristiques des élèves (profils particuliers, difficultés,) ?

·           Comment les articuler avec les contenus d’enseignement, les programmes ?

-        Certains projets concernent des approches pédagogiques, des « méthodologies actives » qui ne nécessitent pas de mettre en question l’organisation par disciplines ou l’organisation des programmes.

-        D’autres projets nécessitent  de « personnaliser les itinéraires d’apprentissage » et pour cela de  « renforcer la perméabilité » entre les disciplines et de repenser l’organisation de programmes trop étanches voire de proposer pendant une période donnée une organisation complètement différente

·           Comment les projets sont-ils partagés ?

-                 Sont-ils présentés, expliqués à l’ensemble de l’école ?

-                 Quelle implication de la hiérarchie (direction de  l’établissement, inspection….) ?

-                 Quel lien avec les parents : sont-ils consultés ?informés ?  participants aux décisions ( via des conseils d’école par exemple ), participant au projet ? intervenants avec les enseignants dans certains cas ? Une réelle difficulté est soulevée sur le degré d’implication des parents et le  bon positionnement à trouver pour chacun.

-                 Quel lien et quels partenariats avec l’ensemble du quartier : associations ? enseignement non formel ?  :

·             Comment les projets sont-ils conduits ?

-                 Le travail d’équipe/travail collaboratif est absolument indispensable mais souvent difficile à mettre en œuvre. Cela prend du temps de travailler ensemble. C’est plus facile lorsqu’il y a du temps dédié dans l’organisation du travail mais dans tous les cas ce travail en commun doit être préparé

-                 L’autonomie des enseignants conduit souvent à une plus grande autonomie des élèves.

Collaboration avec la plate-forme Pestalozzi

Le groupe est d’accord pour initier une collaboration qui pourrait dans un premier temps avoir la forme suivante

-      Présentation de notre travail

-      Appel à contribution pour des exemples de projets innovants. Le groupe de travail proposera des descripteurs et des critères pour permettre ce recueil d’expériences.  Des descripteurs et des critères permettant un recueil

C   Teaching history

Jérôme Grosnon

Presents :

Patrick Long, ESAN

Maxim Tovarev, Mission Russian Federation to the Council of Europe

Maria-Christina Zopff, Soroptimist International

Marie-Louise Van Wijk, Andante

Laurent Grégoire, UNAEC-Europe

Jérôme Grosnon, Pax Romana

The January meeting laid the framework that interests our working group, the April recess has allowed us to open up horizons for the June session we want to root, project & concretely commit our work. For this, we will:

1. Resume the project of the Council of Europe "Shared Histories" from 2014 to 2015

2. Describe the project from 2016 to 2019

3. Make a round on our involvement in this work as an INGO and how we organize

4. Present the key deliverables of the Vade Mecum for the Commission Education and Culture develops, react to the text of "declaration of intent" that the Office of the Commission prepared.

During the round, each summarizes.

-            Maxim Toparev, representative of the Russian Federation, stresses the importance of Russia for the teaching of history. In 2017 celebrates its centenary of the Bolshevik Revolution. it is essential that the Russian authorities have a common understanding of history in order to prevent radicalization. This should also improve the dialogue. The theme of the story is very important now in Russia. M.Toparev studied & graduated history in Moscow.

-            Patrick Long, network ESAN (in connection with the popular relief), works in the English translation.

-            Maria Christina Zopff, Soroptimist International, proposes to the working group of the service network in the areas of art & history.

-            Marie-Louise van Wijk, Andante, studied history & is very interested in this, but cannot always be with us because of his involvement in numerous working groups.

-            Laurent Grégoire, secretary general of the UNAEC Europe, following in particular issues of Education at the Council of Europe, freedom of education is particularly important for his organization. It is also committed to the European Youth Parliament & can connect with him on the subject of teaching history.

1.        "Shared Histories" from 2014 to 2015

Jerome Grosnon present the 2014-2015 project commenting on the publication of the Council of Europe. There is a paper version in French & English version but this document is also available on the Council of Europe website online. The method used is to organize regional seminars on specific topics of the debate & propose practical conclusions for the countries of the Council of Europe.

For example :

-      Talinn, Estonia, 6-7 October 2014: linking the local, regional and European using electronic tools in teaching

-      Ljubljana, Slovenia, 23-24 October 2014: the use of the electronic book in schools, discussion and sharing new teaching approaches

-      Lisbon, Portugal, 25-26 March 2015: the combination of formal and non-formal education

-      Belgrade, Republic of Serbia, 3-4 June 2015: teaching and learning of history to prevent conflict and violence in the current European plural societies.

For each of these seminars, key concepts are recalled, the important aspects of the seminar are listed, key practices are identified for some countries.

Workshops have also been organized, for example in Nicosia on 11-12 October 2013, on issues of gender equality in history, or in Serbia on 18-19 June 2014 on how to deal with stereotypes and bias in the presentation of the image of the other in history teaching.

Note that the title of this project is plural: it is not a shared history but shared stories. The two words are important and plural itself is significant.

2.    2016-2019 project

Laurent Gregoire present the current project of the Council of Europe. In short, the Council of Europe has had for 50 years a "top-down" approach. Since 2014, it's the opposite approach prevails: leaving the field to go to the general. we look at how history is taught to draw general rules. Thus the "Shared Histories" project was developed. This is the same process that is used today.

The goal of the 2016-2019 project is to achieve a document by the Council of Ministers, perhaps a statement. We want here to describe a quality approach to teaching history. The program and the detailed documents are available on the Council of Europe website. The links are attached to this report.

The general theme is diversity education & Democracy, teaching history in contemporary Europe.

Expected & general considerations are posed at the beginning, in the first phase in 2016 - 2017, it is to listen to the ground, and it stands in a decentralized manner. In the second phase, in 2018-2019, it will consolidate it & draw conclusions & recommendations applicable in the 47 states of the Council of Europe. This phase will probably be centralized, but is less detailed that day.

The questionnaire distributed by Tatiana Milko, as an attachment to this account can & must be completed by the INGOs. One idea would also complete the level working group & to make the subject of a work session.

If the 2 seminars in 2016 are scheduled clearly (Talinn early June 2016 for northern countries, Alexandroupolis on 11-12 October for the southern countries), the 2 seminars in 2017 are yet to clarify regarding their places & dates, to cover the countries of the west and those of the east.

At each seminar, about 12 countries concerned her. There are times for each country a representative appointed by the government & one representative appointed by the Council of Europe representing civil society. It is for this reason that we can help work with the DG2.

If this work leads to a recommendation of the Committee of Ministers, it will complement the previous three.

The first was adopted in 2001 on the teaching of history in the XXI century.

The second in 2009 on the teaching of history during and after conflicts.

The third link in 2011 involving the teaching of history & intercultural dialogue.

Jerome Grosnon will contact Tatiana Milko to know when and where will be held 2 seminars in 2017 & consider, with the working group, how we can participate in this work.

3.        Our involvement in this work as an INGO

Maria Christina Zopff helps us reflect on our involvement in the work of the Council of Europe. It stresses the need to structure our approach by making it more concise, a point on which it will make a proposal to the working group in the coming months. There has to be a structure, prepare a clear & concise working document.

It emphasizes that we must attend seminars 2017. It proposes that we present the state of play of our work to the Commission Education and Culture during the January 2017 to attract the attention of other INGOs & create the debate on the subject that interests us. The idea would be to invite an outside expert to engage in debate with the members of the Commission Education Culture.

We recognize that provide the meeting of the Working Group on Monday is not practical for many INGO representatives who arrive on Monday Strasbourg.

4.        The Vade Mecum

Jerome Grosnon present the Vade Mecum on which the Commission Education and Culture works. It is a document that we imagine having a small forty pages and which acknowledges the dangers weighing on Democracy & Human Rights. In the area of ​​education, the Council of Europe countries have they to say something in common? We want to attract the attention of European society on this issue.

The Vade Mecum aims to bring coherence to very different realities, we want to open a collective debate on this subject.

The chapters are short, brief & punchy text based on explanatory diagrams.

We study the working group intends text that was prepared in May by the office of the Commission Education and Culture.

The following points are mentioned in the discussion:

•      There is much talk of digital revolution, and it can also be a digital divide.

•      There are few aspects of "culture" is very focused on the concept of "education".

•      should also mention the ecological question in major risks to our democracies. This affects education & culture.

•      should emphasize how history is written by men. The female perspective is forgotten or ignored.

•      It should also be attractive to younger generations.

•      Education is primarily a matter for the families. We are in a context of family breakdown and of a great variety of shapes has taken the family. What are the consequences for education?

•      It is important to differentiate education & teaching.

The meeting ends at 4:50pm.

D    Good use of digital media in educational practices - a challenge in formal and non-formal education for democratic citizenship and participation”  Didier Schretter

1 / Record of attendance

A round table was conducted in order to allow the participants to introduce themselves and to explain a project of their INGOS in relation to the theme of the WG (Working Group).

Didier Schretter


[email protected]

Per Thrane

Head of the Task Force

[email protected]

Julianne Lagadec

Rapporteur FR

[email protected]

Gilles Roux

Rapporteur EN

[email protected]

Véronique Gaillard

[email protected]

Geert Priem

[email protected]

Paul-Henri Floquet

[email protected]

Grégoire de Fombelle

[email protected]

Heleen Jansen

[email protected]

Niomi Kelly

[email protected]

Anne Kraus

[email protected]

Michel Aguilar

[email protected]

Brigitte Le Gouis

[email protected]

Karl Donert

[email protected]

Monique Binda

[email protected]

2 / Brief history and the meeting report of January 27, 2016

Before this WG

A first WG stressed the importance of the application of human rights (HR) as well in reality than in the digital world:  we have to adapt to new realities, but the DH remain basically the same, and before to want to create new digital-specific legislation we stress the need to apply the current HR.  Otherwise the digital development may strengthen a downturn in the general notion of the HR.

The COE, including the CDMSI, has created simple and accessible educational tools for this. These tools have been validated by the Council of Ministers. Didier Schretter can give references to interested participants. It is essential that they be widely disseminated in education, formal and continuing education.  It also refers to the publication that was presented by Matthew Johnson - Direction of democratic citizenship and participation, attached to the Directorate-General of the democracy of the Council of Europe, the COMPETENCES FOR DEMOCRATIC CULTURE, living together as equals in culturally diverse democratic societies.

The working group through the Commission Education and Culture strives to create close links of cooperation with these initiatives of the Council of Europe and to anticipate future common collaborations.

In this context, the working group opens on the other thematic committees of the Conference of INGOS and want to integrate common groups of work results.

→ Presentation of the order of the day

We have the pleasure of welcoming Michel Aguilar, president of the Commission human rights of the Conference to participate in our working group.

3 / Reminder of the methodology and objectives of the working group according to the action plan

The Culture Education Commission decided to create a vade mecum: a document which should enable to launch a general debate and have contributions to determine substantive expertise on education and the digital frames. The objective is to support democratic change in education. 

! There is a particular focus on formal education because that is where the changes are the most urgent.


a. There was decided to create a directory of projects experienced or known by our INGOS and partners.

There are thousands of projects today. The directory will allow, with its different inputs, search for experiences that corresponding to fields of action for inspiration.

An electronic form has been developed to collect descriptions of these projects.

b.   An index of questions asked by the actors working on the subject of the GT will also be put in place.

It will also be a form. It will allow us to see what are the big issues that arise (and tracks of solutions or no solutions proposed by the person asking the question) as well as to identify what are the anxieties, fears, and hopes of respondents.

Thanks to this index, we can work to the preparation of the broad public debate which must take place on our subject in civil society.

c- Next steps

The WG wishes to set up a group of independent experts who will observe critically our work. The expert group will be advisory.

This proposal also responds to the need to ensure maximum geographical coverage of the 47 Member States of the Council of Europe to our research and work.

Presentation by Per Thrane:

→ About the influence of the Internet on Education

The Internet started a change of society compared by what cars did to mobility and development of society. The influence is deep and will change all aspects of life. Our workgroup takes a look at education and what the Internet does to it.

Some of the aspects challenging current education are

·           An increasing shift toward blended learning, online-learning, and technology-driven collaborative learning;

·           The growth in the potential of social networks to allow teachers to engage students online;

·           Openness of educational resources and technology is "becoming a value";

·           BYOD (Bring Your Own Device) is becoming more common as the cost of technology drops for students; and

·           The role of the educator is being challenged as resources become more accessible on the Internet.

Everything needed in form of internet technology to create full online school and change education is here, we only need someone organizing it, and it is a reality.

The young generation will accept online education as a naturel choice.

→ CE what do these findings for the Organization of our GT

The work group will look at 3 factors that will change for the teacher and what change will do to our understanding of a democratic society

·      New role for teacher

·      New tools and method

·      New pedagogy suited for online learning

Some of the challenges faced in order to reach understanding for the new perspectives among teachers and schools for education are:

·      Challenge 1: Resistance to change. Resistance to technology comes in many forms, but one of the key resistance challenges identified is "comfort with the status quo." Teachers and school leaders often see technological experimentation as outside the scope of their job descriptions.

·      Challenge 2: Professional development. Support from leadership and all administrative levels to guide the teachers to adapt to the new situation.

In the work group we see the developments as positive and an enormous possibility to advance our society in Europe, but we are concerned what the new paradigm in education does to our values concerning human rights, culture, heritage and traditions and it is our aim to explore these aspects and evaluate how we can contribute to the general perspective that the INOGs are working with concerning the influence of the Internet on society.

We can reach our aims due to the richness represented among the INGO and we will draw on the experience among the member INGO working in the field of education.

The first main task for of this group is planning a first Webinar with experts in the field on the 11th of October 2016, at 19.00. It is expected that we promote the webinar among the members of our organization.

The task force will meet before the webinar to plan it in details. The meeting is open to all representatives of the work group and will be announced in the LinkedIn group.

Materials collected and produced by the group is stored in a Google Drive open to all INGO’s

4/ État des lieux du travail en cours et de la Task Force

Mise en place d'une task force animée par Per Thrane

Per Thrane has begun to implement virtual meetings, on a platform online, a task force working on the progress of the GT out of session.

A meeting of the task force will be held in September to follow the action plan implemented.

A reaction of a member present at the meeting:

Intervention of Brigitte the Gouis: she tells an unhappy experience at UNESCO who rode a forum for peace - everything was going on the internet and she gave up because the portal was too complicated. Didier Schretter recalls that the issue has already been addressed: we do and will be careful to prevent these exclusions.

→ Presentation of the working tools of the Task Force by Per Thrane

We need to communicate outside the normal WG meetings.

Several tools are or will be used:

- LinkedIn a closed group are: COMED - digital and Education - Council of Europe.  Comments can there be read only by the members of the group, which includes 91 people at the moment.

- Google Drive for sharing documents and summaries of discussions.

- An online tool for online meetings

- Webinars to involve experts, make presentations and debate. The webinar enables an online conference format.

Any suggestions are welcome to make better our actual discussion group between the Strasbourg meetings.

5/ collaboration with other WGs / Commissions

→ With the other WGs / Commissions

Our actions must be coordinated and cross-cutting between the working groups and the committees of the Conference of INGOS.

Michel Aguilar - President of the Human Rights Commission - stresses that there is a partnership between the GT and the GT of his Commission on human rights and the digital. It highlights the networks and contacts of his Commission. It evokes especially Promo-Lex - which ensures the protection of human rights and respect for democracy in Moldova. He is also in touch with advocates of the DH in Ukraine, etc. His Commission is constantly linked with them and so could be a relay for our GT.

The next steps are:

- A representative of this WG can go to the other GT

- When groups will have the material to bring,  at this time, we will be able to communicate with the outside.

→ Outside of the Conference of INGOS

Karl Donert stresses that there is a group member of the PACE reflecting the use of the digital. We should go there to build bridges. Many critical issues are discussed, sometimes with proposals and motions presented and voted on by MPs, notably on control of the Internet. !

Calendar problem - meetings at the same time as our own

Didier Schretter suggests to define a plan of action and ensure that our diaries are well coordinated. 

Karl Donert brings details: the next round of meetings of this group of parliamentarians will be held the week of November 10. Idea: send someone.

Another idea: invite one of their group members to a side event at one of our meetings or a webinar.

6 / discussions and exchanges of the Group

The exchanges and discussions in bulk:

Brigitte the Gouis: reflection on new technologies: large family and therefore fractures: it broke relations, everything that is not put on the internet has no value, so digital breaks exchanges with each other. More exchange with his grandchildren, for example.

Didier Schretter: we try to think a little more forward. Our children can learn very quickly. It is our responsibility to guide them to values of a democratic society.

Question: what is the view today of what we wants to, and can, teach our children, to students at school, adults, at work and in general? We can learn everything, but this is also nothing! Because that determines nothing either, so it gives no direction. We should be able to redefine what we want as education and cultural skills, fundamental objectives for what kind of human. What is the direction we want to take?

What is the position of civil society? Before school had well-defined objectives, today we build new frameworks.

Grégoire Fombelle: digital useful for him to connect to others, enabled for example to learn more about his brothers and sisters. Close and binding humans more.

Heleen Jansen: talking about her grandchildren, she uses Skype to help, for example with homework

Véronique Gaillard: This is part of the young born with digital. Digital's Exchange. Now we do parenting training on Facebook, the use of the mobile phone, basic software (that a family needs to make the connection with the administrations, schools...). A point that she keep in mind from her experience: there where there is no dialogue in a family, that there is important use or not of digital technology, there will be no more dialogue.

Didier Schretter: concepts of media education. This group is also considering media education in education and digital. He understood after attending a conference of Max Schrems, lawyer and activist for the defence of rights on internet, that won the 'Safe Harbor' trial against Facebook, that Max does not believe in the effectiveness of education to the media in the current context because it would be above all a way to bear and share anything and everything by the technology, without having to protect the user. Under the pretext of a critical education, which is presumed to be taught at school, and of entrepreneurial freedom, it justifies all uses, even those who do not respect the human rights. We know that today the adults are not trained to deliver critical media education = we must reflect on how rights and freedoms are used.

William de Fombelle: should we be educated by the technology or with the technology?

Heleen Jansen: not the same use of digital at school and at home, we must also respect the health of young people and it's not good to stay in front of it to the level of physical activity

Véronique Gaillard: students are very active with digital and no liabilities, so they get better results. They take less time to make their courses, so there is more time for creative, sports activities, etc.

DS: for example we won't say that we remove the tablets or smartphones. We're on more essential things: what is “in” today for education? What is the role of education, of the digital teaching? We will not come with a magic receipt.

7 / Conclusions and end of the meeting

A round table was made to collect the impressions of the participants.