Articles & papers

In conflict-affected settings, children’s access to education is severely disrupted by attacks on schools and their military use, with girls and female teachers facing unique and heightened risks. Over the 2014-2018 period, the Global Coalition to Protect Education from Attack (GCPEA) documented direct attacks on female students and teachers in at least 18 countries, including bombings, abductions, sexual violence, and forced “marriage,” often driven by ideological, religious, or military motives.

Ce document de recherche et d’orientation étudie certains aspects du droit à l'éducation qui pourraient nécessiter un ancrage plus solide dans le cadre normatif international et une expansion potentielle pour le 21st siècle. L'éducation numérique, la mobilité croissante des personnes, l'évolution démographique, le changement climatique et les attentes en matière de possibilités d'apprentissage tout au long de la vie ne sont que quelques-uns des domaines qui mettent à l'épreuve les limites du cadre normatif international existant.

This policy-oriented research paper investigates some of the aspects of the right to education that might require a stronger footing in the international normative framework and potential expansion for the 21st century. Digital education, increasing human mobility, changing demographics, climate change, and expectations of opportunities for learning throughout life are just a few of the areas that are testing the limits of the existing international normative framework.

In this briefing note compendium, UNESCO IESALC presents the findings of a thematic consultation dedicated to rethinking merit and critically discussing the structural barriers surrounding this concept. The briefing note compendium presents experts’ views on the various challenges associated with merit and some ideas to restart the debate and promote the right to higher education from a social justice perspective.

Within this compendium is a paper published by Delphine Dorsi entitled 'Capacity or Merit? Rethinking notions in access to higher education', pp.18-19.

In her 2022 Report on the impact of the digitalisation of education on the right to education, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the right to education clarified that any introduction of digital technologies in education must be framed around the right of every person to public, free, quality education and the commitments of states in this regard both under international human rights law and Sustainable Development Goal 4.

While South Africa has seen important advances in the provision of early childhood care and education (ECCE), about 3.2 million children still lack access to any programme. Problems of access and quality are most pronounced in the poorest communities. Even before Covid-19 forced many providers to close, these programmes were overcrowded, with poor infrastructure, and an under-paid and under-qualified workforce. ECCE is crucial for a child’s development, meaning that these inequalities are amplified in school and later life.

This background paper prepared for the Global Education Monitoring Report on non-States' actors in education: Who chooses? Who looses? provides both the rationale and the framework for re-centring a human rights’ perspective in education sector analysis.

One of the most serious consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic has been the disruption of children’s education worldwide with the closure of schools for public health reasons. Projections from UNESCO Institute for Statistics show that nearly 100 million children across eight age cohorts would move below the minimum proficiency threshold in reading in 2020 due to the pandemic (UNESCO Institute for Statistics, 2021).

In recent decades, governments have made considerable efforts to provide education for all. However, a large gap remains between international commitments, such as the Sustainable Development Goal 4, and the actual achievement of equitable quality education for all. As a result, certain actors often critique public education as ineffective and inefficient, and thus incapable of addressing this issue. They argue for privatisation as a solution, deeming private providers as more innovative and effective than public ones.