17 Mag PROGRAMME REVIEW – LETTERA DEL CISV ITALIA
Cari soci CISV,
vorremmo condividere con voi alcune importanti informazioni in merito al cambiamento che sta avvenendo nel CISV relativamente ai programmi educativi. È un cambiamento che dovrà essere presto votato da tutte le associazioni nazionali, quindi anche il CISV Italia, e si chiama Programme Review.
Cos’è la Programme Review?
La Programme Review è una proposta sulla revisione dei programmi educativi internazionali programmi che sono una delle modalità tramite le quali CISV sviluppa la propria mission e vision. Questa revisione è stata proposta dal Governing Board all’interno del piano strategico triennale e, nel 2015, approvata dalle associazioni nazionali, i Membri di CISV International.
È seguito un lungo processo di analisi che ha visto il supporto anche di un consulente esterno, la PwC, al termine del quale sono emerse le raccomandazioni sulla base delle quali il Governing Board ha a sua volta proposto delle mozioni sul futuro dei programmi educativi internazionali del CISV, mozioni sulle quali ogni Associazione Nazionale (NA) è chiamata a votare quest’anno.
Quindi, come CISV Italia abbiamo deciso di scrivere questa lettera, una dichiarazione, che precisi come CISV Italia voterà sulle mozioni che riguardano la modifica dei programmi educativi internazionali come li conosciamo oggi. Il documento è riportato integralmente alla fine di questo articolo, se vuoi stamparlo clicca qui per scaricare il pdf.
Secondo CISV Italia, alcune delle mozioni proposte non tengono conto dell’enorme valore educativo che alcuni dei nostri programmi hanno e non tengono neanche conto del drastico calo delle possibilità di partecipazione delle famiglie.
Nonostante ci siano stati scambi di opinione e incontri sul tema, tra NAs, con il Governing Board – e apprezziamo il lavoro di tutti i volontari coinvolti – sentiamo che non tutte le NA si sono espresse. Quindi, questo documento non solo vuole condividere la posizione di CISV Italia, ma vuole continuare a promuovere (o attivare) – nonostante il voto sia imminente – ulteriori scambi e dibattiti, dialogo costruttivo e pensiero critico rispetto alle mozioni che ci vengono poste. Questo non perché non stimiamo il lavoro svolto dai volontari del Governing Board e dei comitati internazionali, ma perché crediamo che accettare queste modifiche senza discuterle in una prospettiva più ampia, internazionale, non solo quindi all’interno della propria NA, ma tra NAs, valutando più complessivamente l’impatto dei cambiamenti ipotizzati, non possa essere una scelta valida per un’organizzazione internazionale come la nostra.
Crediamo che CISV ci abbia insegnato e insegni esattamente questo: a creare momenti di confronto, di dialogo, a fare domande, a mettere in connessione contesti locali con quelli globali, e a esercitare una democrazia partecipativa verso l’esterno, nelle nostre comunità locali, ma anche all’interno della nostra stessa associazione, per essere veri Active Global Citizens. Ed è su questa strada che vogliamo continuare.
Per questo, vogliamo incoraggiare chiunque voglia contribuire al dialogo sulla Programme Review e sulle mozioni a contattare esecutivo e NAR scrivendo a italy@cisv.org
Le 4 mozioni proposte dal Governing Board e la sintesi della posizione di CISV Italia
Mozione 1: “CISV è per tutti, ma i Programmi Internazionali sono solo per gli under 18”
CISV Italia è contrario perché crediamo nella “Life-long-education”, ovvero nella possibilità di crescita derivata dalla partecipazione ai programmi internazionali anche per gli adulti.
Mozione 2: “I programmi internazionali sono solo camp-based”
CISV Italia è contrario. Perseguendo il principio della “Life-long-education”, crediamo che cancellare l’Interchange sia un programma chiave perché i genitori che si approcciano a CISV sanno che saranno parte integrante del programma educativo e che sono stati scelti non solo i loro figli, ma anche loro stessi.
Mozione 3: “CISV offre un tipo di programma camp-based per età”
CISV Italia è contrario. Avere differenti programmi e possibilità educative permette diversi risultati, soprattutto perché bambini e ragazzi della stessa età potrebbero non essere pronti allo stesso momento a partecipare ad un certo tipo di campo.
Mozione 4: “Aggiungere un’ulteriore delegazione allo Step Up”
CISV Italia è favorevole. Questo aumenterebbe la possibilità di partecipazione al programma educativo senza compromettere la gestione del campo.
Allegati e link
Ai seguenti link trovate maggiori informazioni sulla Programme Review (in lingua inglese):
Di seguito la versione integrale della lettera scritta da CISV Italia (lingua inglese).
Cliccando qui potete anche scaricarla in pdf, formato stampabile.
Dear fellow NAs and CISVers,
as CISV Italy, we have decided to share with all of you our thoughts on the four motions on Programme Review that have been put forward by the Governing Board this year. As we all have done, our organization has been discussing Programme Review for over two years and these are the results of long debates and development of opinions.
The goal of sharing this document is that it might help your NA in the same process and maybe provide additional food for thought.
It is important for us to underline the fact that we are not criticizing the work that has been done by the Programme Review Team, we are indeed ready to work on friendly amendments of the complete motions when we will have them and working on motions of our own. The purpose of this document is relating our interpretation of the organization’s values to the proposed changes.
Motion 1 – CISV is for everyone, but our International Programmes are for under 18s
The current CISV International programme and activity framework provides volunteers in CISV Local Chapters and NAs with the practical tools to pursue continuing education and lifelong education in the field of Peace Education and Cross-Cultural Friendship.
We strongly believe that this lifelong approach to education/training should be more valued and structured in our organization.
We believe that CISV should continue to offer activities and educational programmes also for adults in all the different forms present today and possibly in more innovative forms. Beside this general vision in favor of Lifelong Education, we believe that limiting the scope of CISV to educational programmes and activities for people younger than 18 is a very short-sighted decision for different reasons:
Without a set of programmes for people older than 18 it is difficult to retain young adults who do not aspire to become leader and Staff. We think, indeed, that not every participant to our educational programmes wants to be a leader within CISV. We also believe that framing our programmes in view of turning participants into leaders and staff is a narrow and self-serving interpretation for an organization like ours that aims at creating active global citizens.
Specifically, cancelling IPPs and limiting Mosaics to participants younger than 18 concerns us exactly for this: they are our two programmes that allow volunteers to implement our values and really become active global citizens within our organization.
Moreover, without a focus on adults, specifically parents, it is difficult to foster the engagement in the administrative roles needed in supporting CISV at local and national level.
Adults can and should be engaged within an educational framework in CISV programmes and activities with a dual purpose: continuing education and developing a sense of belonging in the association that fosters personal engagement in voluntary administrative and educational roles.
Our view is that volunteers at all levels should be targets of further education and training, which we have to develop and promote. We would like to stress this point especially in the case that motion 1 is approved. Educational spaces in our organization exist also outside of our international programmes and they are not limited to leaders and staff. We have to find ways to enhance learning spaces that have been developed throughout the years by volunteers at every level of our organization and in different fields, such as education, training, chapter development, risk management …
Motion 2 – CISV’s International Programmes are camp-based
Given this general lifelong educational framework it is clear to us that CISV Interchange plays a vital role in the success of CISV.
Parents approaching CISV know that they shall and will be part of the educational programme they have selected not only for their children, but also for themselves.
During Interchange, parents continue to learn along with their children, and this provides a more aligned message between the educational experience we propose for youths and the development of a widespread educational framework apt to influence the social and domestic surroundings of the individuals.
CISV Interchange provides a great opportunity to immerse oneself in another culture and, unlike other exchange programmes, leverages the group and family experience in a situated cultural and cross-cultural dimension.
We believe that diversity is still a fundamental value of our organization and of peace education, and that Interchange is the one programme which, nowadays, still allows us to enjoy and explore such value because it allows participants to actually experience the everyday life within a family.
The argument that Interchange is the most “risky” programme could be true, but we should be working then towards tools and strategies that allow us to assess, train and evaluate families and leaders in a more precise way. We cannot accept the simplistic idea that the only way to address this issue is to cancel an educational programme.
Notwithstanding the external views less acquainted with the CISV ways, as an organization, we can promote an appropriate culture, reinforce the existing training tools and introduce new ones to facilitate a better understanding of our common rules on appropriate behavior (R07 and CPP).
We also understand where the criticisms related to Interchanges’ educational content comes from and we understand the challenges related to finding proper volunteers for facilitating the education experience of Interchange participants. However, educational content in CISV Programmes has evolved. A lot of effort has been put to ensure consistency in the content and a lot more should be put in place in order to train and educate our volunteers and families taking part in the programme in order to make it effective education wise.
Creating more standardized Interchange programmes with prepared educational activities can support us in maximizing the potential of Interchange uniqueness as well as in delivering content in a differentiated format.
CISV Interchange provides chapters with the ability to grow a stronger support and an administrative base of volunteers that actively build the organization and participate in CISV chapters’ life. The volunteer work done by adults and youth within the chapter is essential for building a stronger community of agents of change. For our chapters, it will be hard to replace the functioning mechanism of recruiting and retaining volunteers based on our Interchange families.
Used properly, the CISV Interchange programme provides Chapters with financial strength and the volunteer organizational strength to host camp-based programmes.
Motion 3 – CISV offers one type of camp-based programme per age group
We fully disagree with the idea of having just one type of camp per age group. Having different programmes and educational possibilities helps the educational outcomes and outreach: it’s important to have different types of programmes for the same age group as children/youth might not be ready at the same age to take part in a certain programme (for its length, educational goals, etc.). Instead of proposing a unilateral path of education, it seems to us important to educate about peace in a plurality of ways and elements. Instead of proposing a “universal” path towards the development of active global citizenship, we should encourage plurality of opportunities and understand how different individuals have differentiated paths in peace education as well.
Diversity of programmes and activities serves also the different organizational strength and ability of Chapters.
In addition, this motion refers only to camp-based programmes immediately eliminating Interchange from the discussion, without contemplating the case in which motion 2 will not be approved.
We would also like to highlight the fact that, on the contrary, in case motion 2 is approved, but motion 3 is not, we will significantly reduce opportunities to participate in international programmes for 12-13 y/o.
Motion 4 – Add another delegation to Step Up
We support this motion as it expands the possibility for youths to participate in our educational programs as we feel that the group dimensions would still be of a manageable size for adolescents to get to know each other and – above all – have time to plan and run activities (as this is one of the specific element of the programme, giving time to participants to develop leadership skills through the planning and running of activities).