A Dissertation
entitled
Human Rights Education in Kuwait: Perceptions, Experiences, and Beliefs of Student-
Teachers in Kuwait University College of Education
by
Mohammad Aljaidyah
Submitted to the Graduate Faculty as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
Doctor of Philosophy Degree in Foundations of Education: Educational Philosophy
______Dr. Dale Snauwaert, Committee Chair
______Dr. Lynne Hamer, Committee Member
______! Dr. Mark Templin, Committee Member
______Dr. Fuad Al-Daraweesh, Committee Member
______Dr. Cyndee Gruden, Dean College of Graduate Studies
The University of Toledo
December 2018
Copyright 2018, Mohammad Aljaidyah
This document is copyrighted material. Under copyright law, no parts of this document may be reproduced without the expressed permission of the author.
An Abstract of
Human Rights Education in Kuwait: Perceptions, Experiences, and Beliefs of Student-
Teachers in Kuwait University College of Education
by
Mohammad Aljaidyah
Submitted to the Graduate Faculty as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy Degree in Educational Theory and Social Foundations
The University of Toledo December 2018
In an age of modern warfare with its unbridled destructive capabilities, a contemporary approach to education has emerged called human rights education (HRE) that, with its pedagogies based on principles of peace and justice, is potentially capable of slowing and reversing trends of escalating violence and terrorism in the world (Watfa &
Alshurai, 2011). The Middle East in particular has gained a reputation for authoritarian governments and sectarian violence, but amidst that, the nation of Kuwait has made progress in promoting peace, humanitarianism, and human rights education (HRE), particularly with its Constitution and Human Rights (CHR) curriculum for high school students. Despite modest progress in this area, Kuwaitis seem to lack knowledge of human rights and HRE. This study focuses on Kuwaiti student-teachers in the College of
Education at Kuwait Universities to better understand the current perceptions of, experiences with, and beliefs about human rights and HRE among them. To address this purpose, this study adopted a quantitative, non-experimental, cross-sectional descriptive survey design using a questionnaire based on a modified and translated version of the
Human Rights Education Attitude Scale (HREAS) (Kepenekçi, 1999). A sample of 292
iii! Kuwaiti student-teachers completed the questionnaire, and the results showed that the students were most aware of rights relevant to them (e.g., right to education), but less aware of those that were less relevant to them perhaps because of their age and lack of real-world experience (e.g., worker, property, and political rights). Additionally, almost half of the student-teachers reported not being aware of the United Nation World
Program for Human Rights Education. Moreover, around one-fifth of student-teachers reported being unaware or unsure of the right to life and surprisingly 5.5% found the right to life to not be important, which is considered a fundamental right related to the security of person. This findings have implications’ for future HRE-based curricula for Kuwait, which are discussed at the end of the dissertation.
iv!
Dedication
I would like dedicate this dissertation to my father’s soul. He always encouraged me to continue my studies and to one day earn my PhD. !
v Acknowledgements
First and foremost, I would like to thank Allah for the grace to see me through this long journey that was full of challenges, excitement, and interesting discoveries.
I must also acknowledge my gratitude to my family: To my mother who always supports me with her kind words and prayers, and my late father, to whom this dissertation is dedicated; to my wife, who showed immense patience while bearing with me throughout the ups and downs of this big academic achievement and took good care of our children while I was busy with my studies; to my siblings who supported me and took care of affairs in Kuwait; and to my children, who give me a reason to work hard to be a father they can be proud of.
I am extremely thankful for my advisors, Dr. Lynne Hamer and Dr. Dale
Snauwaert. Without their assistance and advice, I never would have completed this project. Along with my advisors, I am grateful for the rest of my dissertation committee:
Dr. Mark Templin, whose his comments helped me to improve my project and especially the methodology chapter, and Dr. Fuad Al-Daraweesh, who assisted me a lot in understanding the theories of human rights education.
I would also like to thank my editor, Clay Chiarelott, who helped me with editing, formatting, and polishing my dissertation. Finally, I would like to say thank you to the
College of Education at Kuwait University, who awarded me the scholarship that allowed me to earn my Master’s and Ph.D. degrees.
vi Table of Contents
Abstract iii
Dedication v
Acknowledgements vi
Table of Contents vii
List of Tables x
List of Figures xi
List of Abbreviations xii
I. Introduction 1
A. Problem of the Study 5
B. Objectives and Research Questions 6
C. Significance of the Study 7
D. Scope and Limitations of the Study 8
E. Organization of the Study 9
II. Literature Review and Theoretical Framework 11
A.! Social Foundations of Education 11
B.! Definition of Human Rights 13
C.! Definition of HRE 16
D.! History of Human Rights and HRE 18
a.! Human Rights before the UDHR 19
b.! History of HRE 22
E.! Theoretical Framework 25
a.! Universalism 26
vii b.! Relativism 28
c.! Hermeneutical and Dialogical Approaches 30
d.! Final Note about the Theoretical Framework 34
F.! Approaches to HRE 35
G.! Teaching HRE 37
a.! Teachers Opinions about HRE 40
b.! Student-teachers’ Beliefs about and Experiences with HRE 42
c.! The role of Teachers in Kuwaiti Schools & Society 45
d.! Challenges in Kuwaiti Teacher Education 46
H.! Conclusion 48
III. Methodology 50
A.! Research Design 50
B.! Brief Background of the Study Area 52
C.! Participation 54
a.! Research Population 54
b.! Sampling 54
D.! Data Collection Procedures 55
a.! Instrumentation 55
b.! Administration of the Questionnaire 57
c.! Validity of the Instrument 58
d.! Reliability of the Instrument 59
E.! Data Analysis Techniques 60
F.! Ethical Considerations 61
viii IV. Results 63
A.! Personal Information 63
B.! Human Rights Education Experience 65
C.! Awareness of Human Rights 67
D.! Importance of Human Rights 69
E.! Beliefs about Human Rights 71
F.! Conclusion 73
V. Discussion 75
A.! Discussion about Awareness of Human Rights 75
B.! Discussion about Importance of Human Rights 76
C.! Discussion about Beliefs about Human Rights 77
D.! Discussion about Prior Experience with Human Rights 78
E.! Discussion about Demographics 79
F.! Limitations 80
G.! Implications & Recommendations 80
H.! Conclusion 87
References 89
Appendices
A.! Questionnaire (English) 101
B.! Questionnaire (Arabic) 111
C.! Consent Form (English) 120
D.! Consent Form (Arabic) 122
ix List of Tables
Table 1 Internal Consistency Reliability Coefficients in Cronbach’s Alpha...... 60
Table 2 Demographic Profile of the Participants...... 64
Table 3 Subjects Taught by Student-Teachers in Sample Ranked from
Most to Least ...... 64
Table 4 Year of Study and Nationality ...... 65
Table 5 Frequencies and Percentages of Where Student Teachers First Heard of
Human Rights ...... 65
Table 6 Awareness of Human Rights with Frequencies and Percentages ...... 68
Table 7 Participants’ Awareness of Human Rights ...... 69
Table 8 Importance of Human Rights with Frequencies and Percentages ...... 70
Table 9 Beliefs toward Human Rights Education with Frequencies and
Percentages ...... 72
x List of Figures
Figure 1 Undergraduate programs in Kuwait University, College of Education
(Kuwait University, 2018)...... 53
Figure 2 Pie chart of the yes/no response to the question ‘Are you aware of the
United Nation World Program for Human Rights Education?’ ...... 66
Figure 3 Leading questions regarding student teachers’ prior experience with human
rights Education training. Questions are in dark gray and responses are in
light gray with number of response and percentages out of the total number.
Whether a respondent received the answer marked with an asterisk (*)
depended on their response to the prior question...... 67
xi List of Abbreviations
CHR...... Constitution and Human Rights COE ...... College of Education
HRE ...... Human Rights Education
KU ...... Kuwait University
OHCHR ...... Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
PE ...... Peace Education
SFE ...... Social Foundations of Education
UDHR...... Universal Declaration of Human Rights UN ...... United Nations UNDHRE ...... United Nations Decade of Human Rights Education UNESCO ...... United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization UNICEF...... United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund
xii Chapter One
Introduction
In recent years, the world has seen numerous technological, military, and scientific developments aimed at improving security. However, despite these developments, the world is yet to rid itself from violence, crime, and terrorism. In fact, thousands of people have died and continued to die under the influence of crime, which is still spreading and growing at an alarming rate (Watfa & Alshurai, 2011). According to
Watfa and Alshurai (2011), Kuwaiti scholars of education and human rights, it is under the influence of these tragic events that a contemporary educational approach was born, called human rights education (HRE). HRE, with its pedagogies based on humanitarian activities, is potentially capable of facing the escalating violence and terrorism in the world and limiting their ascendancy (Watfa & Alshurai, 2011). Consequently, politicians and philosophers have begun theorizing that that education can be the peaceful tool to confront terrorism and violence throughout the globe. Today, more than ever, it is evident that education is an effective tool against crime and extremism; it instills generations with values of tolerance, love, and peace, which is effective in rejecting all forms of domination and oppression (Al-Romaidhi, 2010). Similarly, it is only education that can instill human rights within the people, thus transforming rights into a living cultural energy that works towards promoting peaceful coexistence in a society or societies . This reality has compelled nations and societies to develop their educational systems in a way to inculcate human rights and values of tolerance among learners. Consequently, education throughout the world is moving towards establishing human-rights-based methodologies that adequately inculcate aspects of human rights into students, and
1 empower them to integrate these into different aspects of their lives (Watfa & Al-
Romaidhi, 2006).
Despite the increasingly notable role played by HRE in promoting a peaceful coexistence in the society, there are worries that the educational systems in the Arab world suffer a critical lack of HRE. According to observers, HRE is lacking even in Arab countries that are embracing democracy. According to Watfa and Al-Romaidhi (2006), a majority of educational studies pertinent to HRE in Arab countries reveals that some
Arab countries integrate HRE in their curricula based on the influence of global events saturated with violence and terrorism, and by the pressures of the global trend of fostering a culture of peace to prevent extremism. The begrudging nature with which
HRE has been adopted in Arab countries makes it difficult for the field of HRE to truly thrive in such an environment. To have a chance to grow, countries adopting HRE curricula need to properly invest and believe in the teachings and philosophies of HRE and not just superficially adopt it to keep up appearances.
However, many schools in Arab countries still adopt the authoritarian mode of teaching, which reflects the authoritative nature of the respective governments (Watfa &
Al-Romaidhi, 2006; Watfa & Alshurai,2011). Consequently, though some countries in the Arab world may have incorporated HRE, the authoritative classroom settings may not encourage tolerance. Instead, the system may teach students about the values and inspirations of the authority, seeking to promote a blind obedience of the established authority, values and standards of the society. Teaching methodologies in many schools in the Arab world create numerous bottlenecks that discourage adequate skills and experience with HRE, thus there is poor creation of the culture of peace (Watfa &
2 Alshurai, 2011). A study by Stork (2012) determined that human rights conditions in
Qatar, Kuwait, UAE, Bahrain and Oman were quite poor. However, Article 6 of the
Kuwait constitution states that Kuwait shall be democratic, under which sovereignty rests with the people (Al-Nakib, 2011). Thus, Kuwait is undergoing a continuous democratization process, with the Government stating its commitment to education to enhance democratic citizenship.
Consequently, the Kuwaiti Government introduced the Constitution and Human
Rights (CHR) module to the national secondary curriculum in 2006. However, CHR is the only subject in Kuwait that addresses human rights. The CHR program includes two major sections: the Kuwaiti Constitution and Human Rights. The Human Rights section of the CHR teaches students about the definition and history of human rights as well as the national, regional, and international organizations dedicated to promote human rights.
It also includes explanations of a select number of human rights from various perspectives, such as the UN, Islam, and Kuwait; the human rights covered in the CHR are as follows:
•! Right to Life,
•! right to equality and non-discrimination
•! right to human dignity and the prohibition of torture
•! Freedom of belief
•! right to education and learning
•! Women's rights
•! Child Rights
3 •! Political rights
As this curriculum suggests, the CHR simply teaches about human rights but not for human rights, to borrow an important distinction made by many HRE scholars (see, for example, Tibbitts, 2002). Thus, the CHR program is insufficient, as a majority of students, including those whom are enrolled in CHR, have insufficient knowledge and experiences with human rights. For instance, Al-Nakib (2011) noted that a majority of students in Kuwaiti schools were unaware of their rights or were sure that the state can violate their rights, especially their freedom of expression to silence them against criticizing the authority. Likewise, Stork (2012) identified that while Kuwait is striving towards being democratic, the schools remain dictatorial, whereby a typical classroom consist of a teacher who is assumed to be all knowledgeable, teaching students who are rarely allowed to question the decisions of their teachers. This traditionalist approach to teaching has failed to inspire confidence or improve the human rights experiences among students, thus the awareness of human rights is still low in Kuwait (Stork, 2012).
Additionally, HRE is sometimes perceived to be a political act, so sometimes teachers shy away from the political controversies surrounding HRE. As such, Al-Nakib
(2011) noted that Kuwaiti students, including those who took the CHR courses, possess inadequate knowledge of HRE, perhaps due to their poor experiences with human rights in their own nation. For instance, women and children remain marginalized and denied some of their basic human rights. As such, that there still exist notable tensions between citizenship, human rights, and democracy in Kuwait (Al-Nakib, 2011).
4 Problem of the Study
Kuwait has made considerable efforts in establishing HRE through the CHR module. However, previous studies have critiqued the teacher-student relationships in
Kuwait schools, arguing that such a hierarchical relationship has thwarted efforts to enhance democracy and human rights in Kuwait. However, Al-Nakib (2011) asserted that citizenship and human rights in Kuwait are not inherent but vary based on gender, religious, and sect affiliation among other factors; thus, the country is yet to be a fully- fledged democracy, and has yet to attain desired levels of human rights awareness, which is critical in empowering the people towards seeking their rights and promoting the rights of others. According to Gündoğdu (2011), comprehension of a course content is significantly reliant on teachers’ perception of human rights, as well as their experiences with, and beliefs about HRE. Gündoğdu (2011) attested that teachers’ attitudes, experiences, and understandings of a course program in general is largely influenced by the quality of the teacher training programs. However, little research has been conducted on the attitudes, experiences, and understandings of HRE held by students studying in education colleges to become teachers who have reached the practicum/field-based teaching experience stage of their program, whom this dissertation refers to as student- teachers (also called pre-service teachers or teacher candidates in other publications).
Based on these issues and the limitations of previous research, this study explored the perception of human rights among student-teachers in Kuwait University College of
Education, including their experiences with, and beliefs about HRE.
5 Objectives and Research Questions
Given the discrepancy between Kuwait’s stated commitment to promote human rights and its actual steps towards such a commitment in the form of awareness and education, this research has three principle objectives:
1.! To discover how student-teachers in the Kuwait University College of
Education perceive human rights in terms of awareness and importance.
2.! To determine the experiences of student-teachers with HRE in the Kuwait
University College of Education
3.! To ascertain the beliefs about HRE held by student-teachers in the Kuwait
University College of Education.
Based on these stated objectives, the following research questions emerged:
1.! In what ways do student-teachers in the Kuwait University College of
Education perceive the meaning of human rights?
a.! How aware of human rights and HRE are the student-teachers?
b.! How important do they perceive human rights and HRE to be?
2.! What prior experiences with HRE do student-teachers in the Kuwait
University College of Education have?
3.! What are the beliefs about HRE held by student-teachers in the Kuwait
University College of Education?
Research question 1 is divided into (a) and (b) because, in this dissertation, “perceive” was divided into (a) awareness of and (b) perceptions about the importance of human rights and HRE. In research question 2, “prior experiences” are defined as the amount and types of education, training, and exposure to human rights and HRE the student-
6 teachers have. Finally, “beliefs” in research question 3 pertains to the student-teachers’ beliefs about HRE.
Significance of the Study
Available literature attests that effective HRE is important in enlightening the people about their inherent human rights. Knowledge of human rights empowers individuals understand what they must not do to fellow humans based on the basic reason that they too are human beings who have inherent rights. This awareness helps learners to seek, protect, and uphold their rights and those of others, thus helping to create a national culture of peace towards the end goal of establishing global peace. Additionally, the literature attests to the importance of teachers in the acculturation of human rights in the society by educating students about human rights. It is also evident that teachers’ experiences and beliefs pertinent to a topic affect the delivery of the topic, thus impacting students’ understanding of the topic. Similarly, teachers’ understanding and perceptions of human rights, as well as their experiences with and beliefs about human rights, have a direct impact on how HRE is taught and understood by the students. According to
Gündoğdu (2011), teachers’ experiences and beliefs about critical topics is shaped during the teacher training programs, which applies to all subjects including human rights and
HRE; thus, there is a need to model an effective teacher training program that aims at imparting teachers with adequate knowledge and skills pertinent to human rights and
HRE. Consequently, this research aims at exploring the understanding of human rights among student-teachers in the education college in the Kuwaiti University, including their experiences with and beliefs about HRE.
7 The findings of this research could help identify the perception of human rights and the experiences of HRE among students-teachers. This could help the researcher to understand the current organization of the HRE programs for student-teachers. Based on the outcomes of the research, the study may advise for a reorganization, improvement, or retention of the HRE training programs for student-teachers. As such, the study may be helpful for the Institute of Curriculum development and the Ministry of Higher Education of Kuwait, as they seek to empower student-teachers to be more effective in offering
HRE, thus promoting the creation of a culture of peace in Kuwait. The research may also prove useful in other countries and institutions as they seek to improve the effectiveness of student-teachers in offering HRE by enhancing their understanding of human rights and promoting a positive perception of HRE.
Because the acculturation of human rights among students and the society is dependent on teachers’ perceptions of, experiences about, and beliefs about human rights, understanding these perceptions, experiences, and beliefs among student-teachers in
Kuwait University, the College of Education may be used to predict the enthusiasm current and immediate-successive generations may have in protecting and upholding their inherent rights. The research contributes to research exploring the state of human rights and HRE.
Scope and Limitations of the Study
In pursuit of the research objectives and research questions, the study assumes the student-teachers at the College of Education in Kuwait University have had some experiences with HRE long enough to form opinions about the program. This assumption is based on the fact that the CHR module was added to the national secondary curriculum
8 in 2006, so most current college students have studied the lessons in that curriculum while they were in secondary school and many have since learned how about teaching the
CHR curriculum during their undergraduate education program.
This dissertation was delimited to the description of the current perspectives of student-teachers in Kuwait, and as such does not attempt to answer any questions regarding the potential correlations between various types or qualities of student-teachers and their perspectives on HRE. Additionally, no alternative methods or interventions were tested and no conclusions were able to be drawn about the effectiveness of any specific components of the CHR. Moreover, the focus of this study is on student-teachers studying in the College of Education at Kuwait University, it did not address the perceptions, experiences, or beliefs of HRE of K-12 students nor of current, in-service teachers. Finally, this study did not gather information on the perspectives of student- teachers at other colleges and universities in Kuwait because I only had access to the students at Kuwait University as a current faculty member (lecturer) on an educational sabbatical under its sponsorship.
Organization of the Study
The study is organized into five chapters, the first three of which are presented in this proposal: the Introduction (Chapter 1), Literature Review and Theoretical
Framework (Chapter 2), Methodology (Chapter 3), Results and Interpretations (Chapter
4), and finally Conclusions and Recommendations of the study (Chapter 5). In this proposal, the Introduction chapter gives the general background of the study, including the statement of the problem, objectives of the study, research questions and limitations that the researcher expects to face while conducting the research. The second chapter,
9 Literature Review, assesses the literature available pertinent to human rights and HRE.
This includes the history of human rights and HRE and the approaches for human rights among other relevant literature. The third chapter, Methodology, describes the system of methods that were adopted by the study, particularly the research design, population, research sample and sampling procedures, research instruments, data collection, and data analysis procedures. The fourth chapter, Results, reports on the findings from the data, and present it in a consumable information. The fifth and last chapter concludes the study, and offer recommendations based on the information synthesized from the data collected.
10 Chapter Two
Literature Review and Theoretical Framework
This literature review begins with the following questions: In what ways do student-teachers in the education college in Kuwait University perceive the meaning of human rights (HR) and what are their experiences with and beliefs about Human Rights
Education (HRE)?
Framing these questions requires proceeding from two facts. First, HRE is a complex subject, with many facets and approaches. Second, very little is currently known about how Kuwaiti student-teachers (or educators, more broadly) perceive HR, or about what experience they have with HRE. This literature review first clarifies what is meant by human rights and Human Rights Education, exploring their history, definitions, and the approaches and methods. This includes clarifying the relationship between the Social
Foundations of Education (SFE), HRE, and Peace Education (PE). Both PE and HRE fit under the umbrella of SFE; because they are interconnected and closely linked – indeed,
Reardon and Snauwaert (2015) describe PE as grounded in HRE – it is important to show what each is, and how they fit together. Having done this, this literature review then explores the research that has been done on HRE in Kuwait and the larger Muslim world.
Social Foundations of Education
SFE is the broader field within which HRE and PE fit. SFE encompasses the underlying social, historical, philosophical, political, and economic issues that influence contemporary educational practices, policies and theories. The aim of SFE is to introduce pre- and in-service educators to the normative and interpretive uses of knowledge pertinent to education, as well as to critical inquiry (Tozer, Gallegos & Henry, 2011). It
11 can be conducted either formally or informally (Kerr, Mandzuk, Raptis, 2011). A primary advantage of establishing a basis of SFE is that educators are able to make informed conclusions when placed in an environment that presents diverse or contrasting cultures and levels of education. It also helps them to understand the school–society relationship: how and in what ways social forces (economic, political, historical, ideological, philosophical, and cultural) shape the limits and possibilities of schooling and education.
SFE pertains to all social aspects of education, including HRE and PE, and opens up the question of how social forces impact HRE. It is vital to understand the impact of
SFE when enlightening people on the subject of human rights. For example, SFE is an area of study that explains how political, economic, cultural and social factors are directly linked to HRE (Tozer, Gallegos & Henry, 2011). The study of SFE takes trans- disciplinary and multidisciplinary approaches and derives its methods and characters from different disciplines, among them philosophy, anthropology, sociology, political science, cultural studies, economics, LGBT studies, and gender studies (Tutwiler et al.,
2013). These approaches sharpen the abilities of educators (both in-service and pre- service) to understand and apply educational practices and to evaluate their impacts on teaching and learning. In addition, they help educators understand and apply normative and critical perspectives to education and schooling, as well as to the moral principles related to democratic institutions and how these impact instructions. Because SFE offers opportunities for educators to investigate the role of education and schooling within a democracy, it is an important field of study for educators in democratic nations as well as nations aspiring to be democratic. In particular, SFE can help provide a foundation for understanding human rights and HRE.
12 Interpretive, normative, and critical approaches are central to SFE (Kerr et al.,
2011). The interpretive perspective adopts the theories and concepts developed within social science and humanity subjects to promote the understanding of education in different contexts (Tozer, Gallegos & Henry, 2011). This includes understanding the intent, meaning and effects of schools and other educational institutions, and how these vary (Anyon, 1981). The normative perspective explores societal values, thus promoting the understanding of ethical or moral values that define and should define education and schooling. This enables educators to analyze educational policies and determine their moral and ethical impacts on the education. Furthermore, the normative perspective encourages educators to develop their personal value positions in terms of promoting ethical education (Tozer, Gallegos & Henry, 2011). The critical perspective makes use of normative interpretations to cultivate educators’ inquiry skills so that they can question the different educational assumptions and determine the inconsistencies and contradictions among the values and practices in education. The critical perspective compels educators to employ democratic values in assessing educational beliefs, policies, and practices in light of their origins, influences, and consequences (Tozer, Gallegos &
Henry, 2011).
Definition of Human Rights
Having established the value and utility of SFE, particularly for the purpose of
HRE, it is important to step back and explore what is meant by human rights. HRE aims to raise awareness of human rights among the people to enlighten students about what they can or cannot do to one another based on the fact that they have similar inherent rights. This policy is based on the assumption that awareness of human rights creates a
13 common moral language that dictates the public discourse of peace (Office of the United
Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights [OHCHR], 2018). But what are human rights?
According to Al-Daraweesh and Snauwaert (2015), “human rights are the justified demands, claims and protections that one has just because s/he is a human being” (p. 78). Similarly, Bobbio (1996) and Donnelly (1989) see human rights as the inalienable fundamental protections and claims to which people are inherently entitled to simply because they are human, without any discrimination. They should be accorded to all without regard to nationality, age, race, sex, ethnicity religious or political affiliation, language, place of residence, sexuality or any status. As such, human rights by definition are universally egalitarian in that they apply to all human beings irrespective of their status, and are applicable every time and throughout the world. Although there are alternative definitions human rights, notably the universalist and relativist definitions that are discussed in theoretical framework below, the most compelling definitions of human rights are universal in scope because if they are not universal, then “human rights” ceases to be a valid term and concept. That is, if it cannot be said that human rights apply to all humans, then they are no longer human rights but perhaps something more localized or regionalized, such as U.S. Constitutional Rights.
Additionally, Flowers’ (2000) perception of human rights is that they are birthright possessed by individuals of human family be it a man, woman, boy, girl or an infant as long as they are human beings. Human rights basically are not earned or deserved; they are possessed automatically by individuals immediately they are born.
Because human rights are widely considered innate and universal, they are only to be
14 limited in specific circumstances and even then, a due process should be followed
(Bobbio, 1996). There are numerous rights that are inherent to humans, among them, the right to life and freedom from slavery, freedom from arbitrary arrest, and the right to education (Bajaj, 2011b). All these human rights can be categorized into five groups; social, cultural, economic, political and civil rights. Some of the economic, social and cultural rights include the right to social security, the right to quality education, the right to work in a clean environment, and the right to assemble (Bobbio, 1996). Civil and political rights include the right to participation in the political processes, the right to life, freedom of expression, movement and beliefs, equality before the law, freedom from unlawful imprisonment, execution or torture, among others (Stockman, 2010).
Furthermore, human rights can be understood in two senses: as rectitude and as entitlement (Al-Daraweesh & Snauwaert, 2015; Donnelly, 1989). In the first sense of human rights as rectitude, “we talk of something being right; in this sense we say of an action that it is right” while in the second sense, as entitlement, “we talk of someone having a right” (Donnelly, 1989, p. 9). Al-Daraweesh and Snauwaert (2015) argue that human rights as entitlement is a concept that is foreign to many cultures around the world, particularly more traditional ones. Entitlement emphasizes the rights the individual possesses whereas many traditional societies are collectivist more than individualist, so the idea of a right as something an individual is entitled to is a difficult concept to understand (see, for example, the Asian Values or Islamic perspectives on human rights).
However, Al-Daraweesh and Snauwaert argue that the idea of rights as rectitude is more universal, stating, “The concept of human rights as rectitude is a universal concept, since it exists in most cultures around the globe, while the concept of rights as entitlements is a
15 Western conceptualization of rights” (p. 79). Based on this claim about the universality of the sense of right as rectitude, Al-Daraweesh and Snauwaert recommend using it as a starting point to develop isomorphs of human rights that use analogous concepts in different cultures to promote cross-cultural understanding of the concept of human rights and how to realize them. They consider this a philosophical definition of human rights that is consistent with the hermeneutic approach and is exemplified a variety of non-
Western cultures (Al-Daraweesh & Snauwaert, 2015).
There is also a disagreement on the specific rights to be included in the framework of human rights, whereby some thinkers argue that human rights should include all the minimum rights aimed at avoiding worst-case scenario, while others argue that the general framework of human rights should be a higher standard that protects the dignity of all people. Nevertheless, there is a common agreement that human rights provide a common moral language to humankind, which thus creates the discourse for a global peace (Bobbio, 1996).
Definition of HRE
A significant definition of HRE is provided by Ramos (2010) in the article
“Human Rights and Citizenship Education and In-Service Teacher Training: An
Experience.” Ramos defines HRE as “educational programs and activities that focus on promoting equality in human dignity, in conjunction with other programs such as those promoting intercultural learning, participation, and empowerment of minorities” (p. 63).
When people learn about the range of rights, privileges, and freedom entitled to them, they are empowered to protect themselves from dehumanizing acts (Sen, 2009;
Snauwaert, 2011).
16 Similarly, Brander, Keen, and Lemineur (2002) define HRE as educational programs and activities that are geared towards enhancing intercultural learning and participation, as well as empowerment of the minorities and the vulnerable. According to them and to Hayden (2002), this is achieved by enlightening the people on the dignity that defines human beings. Hayden (2001) posits that HRE includes variety of educational programs and activities that help in raising the awareness of human rights among the learners, thus enlightening members of society on what they cannot do to their fellow humans based on inherent human dignity provided in the principles of human rights. By raising the awareness of human rights and enlightening the masses on the importance of upholding the inherent rights of fellow men, HRE aims at creating a culture of peace, which is critical in attaining the much elusive global peace (Hayden
2002, Reardon 2010). This is similar to Stone’s (2002) definition that HRE is all learning that seeks to develop the skills, knowledge and values of Human Rights. From these definitions, it is evident that the ultimate goal of HRE is to build a universal culture of upholding human dignity by imparting knowledge and skills pertinent to human rights.
According to OHCHR (2018), effective HRE imparts learners with knowledge pertinent to human rights and mechanisms to uphold them, and the skills needed to defend human rights against any violations, thus ensuring that human inherent rights are upheld
(OHCHR 2018, Hayden 2001, Hayden 2002).
Besides imparting knowledge, skills and values of human rights, Gündoğdu
(2011) contends that HRE helps learners to transcend national, economic, social, cultural or other boundaries that may impede global peace, and overlaps with intercultural education to promote sustainable development. These views are supported by Carter and
17 Osler (2000) who agree that HRE is one important step made towards the commitment to upholding human dignity as envisioned in UDHR. However, Danesh (2008) noted that
HRE is only considered successful if it is lasting and consequential in promoting peaceful behaviors at both the individual and societal level. According to BEMIS (2013), this is only possible when there is a transformation from conflict orientation to peace orientation. However, there is no doubt that HRE has been successful in promoting peace in the different regions it has been operational; thus, HRE has become an important aspect of moving towards a global peace (Bajaj 2011b, BEMIS 2013, Reardon, 2010).
History of Human Rights and HRE
“Human Rights” as we know them today have a rather recent history, tracing their roots to the post-World-War-II period. WWII led to untold suffering, cruelty, and violation of basic human rights. The increased atrocities of the war compelled the international community to take action that would prevent the reoccurrence of events that would lead to another gross violation of human rights. Consequently, the United Nations
(UN) was formed, with one of its key mandates being to reiterate faith in inherent human rights and dignity, as well as promoting equal rights among all people irrespective of their status, across the globe (Stockmann, 2010). Although human rights stems from the root concepts of natural laws and natural rights that developed throughout the Medieval,
Renaissance, and especially the Enlightenment Periods (Porter, 1999), the concept of human rights came to fruition with the UN mandates. Consequently, in 1947, the Human
Rights Commission of the United Nations, under the leadership of Eleanor Roosevelt created a document that outlined the basic civil, political and socioeconomic rights that all humans should possess irrespective of their status. The document was christened the
18 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), which was ratified by the UN General
Assembly in 1948 in Paris (Stockmann, 2010; UN, 1948). According to the Office of the
United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR, 2018), the UDHR contains both the civil and political, as well as the social, cultural and economic rights owing to the principle of the indivisibility of rights, which postulates that any of the HRs can only be successful if provided in combination with others.
To enhance the enforcement of the UDHR, the UN Commission on Human
Rights drafted two protocols: The International Covenant on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights (ICESCR), and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
(ICCPR) (OCHCR, 2018). The ICESCR focuses on rights pertaining health, education, shelter, and food, while the ICCPR focuses on rights pertaining to freedom of speech, right to life, and participation in the political processes. The two protocols trumpet the universality of the human rights. These compliment UDHR, form the International Bill of Human Rights (Bobbio, 1996). By 1997, more than 130 countries had ratified the two protocols. However, the US has only ratified the ICCP. In addition to the International
Bill of Rights, the UN has also adopted other covenants that elaborate human rights more extensively. These include the convention to prevent atrocities such as genocide, conventions to protect and guarantee the rights of vulnerable groups such as women, children refugees, and racial minorities. Today, the UDHR, together with the U.S. Bill of
Rights is the most influential document that is used as a common standard of achievements of human rights across the globe (United Nations, 2018).
Human rights before the UDHR. This does not mean that human rights did not exist prior to the UDHR; according to Al-Daraweesh and Snauwaert (2013), the concept
19 of human rights has existed in most traditional societies. Though many non-western societies did not base their morals on human rights as laid out in the UDHR, they addressed most of the rights in some other conceptual frameworks. For example, they recognized and valued human life; thus killing a human being was only allowed after due process and sufficient justification. Similarly, rape and promiscuity were prohibited in almost all traditional societies. Additionally, most societies operated on the golden rule of
“Do not impose on others what you yourself do not desire"; thus there was reciprocity in the provision of inherent rights.
Before the UDHR, peoples’ rights were dictated by their social, cultural and economic status, as well as their belonging to certain social groups such as race and family. As such, men typically enjoyed more inherent human rights as compared to the women, aristocrats more rights than their subjects, slave owners and free people more rights than slaves (Donnelly 2013). The most famous ancient legal codex containing human rights provisions is the Code of Hammurabi, issued in 1750 BC, which aimed at enhancing law, order and justice throughout the land. The Code established the laws of the land and the punishments meted for breaking each law. It also included the rights of different categories of people, among them women, men, slaves, slave-owners and children (Moeckli, Shah, & Sivakumaran, 2013). The rights in the Hammurabi code varied with the social economic and cultural status. The next advance in human rights came in 539 BC, when Cyrus the Great occupied Babylon and established a code of rights conferred to all people which did not consider the social-economic statuses of different individuals; thus it is considered to be the first human rights declaration throughout the world. The idea of inherent human rights spread to Greece, India and later
20 on to Rome; it was adopted by the Jews in the Torah (330 BC), and by Islam in the
Constitution of Medina (622) (Clegg & Bailey, 2008). Among these included the right to life and respect of other people’s property. The concept of human rights was also expressed by philosophers such as Confucius (551-479 BC), who introduced the concept of doing unto others what you wish to do unto yourself. This led to the principle of reciprocity of rights. The concept of human rights was also explored Greek and Roman philosophers, among them Plato, Socrates and others, who introduced the concept of natural rights (Khor, 2016).
The earliest written document that asserts individual rights was the Magna Carta
(1215), written to subject King John I to the rule of law. The Magna Carta introduced numerous individual rights such as the right to “habeas corpus,” and the right to life; thus it is widely cited in defense of many individual liberties.
During the Enlightenment Era of the 17th and 18th centuries, the movement toward individual rights grew, culminating in the United States’ 1776 Declaration of
Independence, a document that declared the autonomy of the US from the UK (Clegg &
Bailey, 2008). The US Declaration of Independence was based on John Locke’s theory of
Natural Rights, which advanced the need for protection of human freedoms. The
Declaration became the cornerstone upon which South Americans resisted Spanish rule, and the French resisted monarchy; thus it was the most influential piece of legislation pertinent to individual right throughout the Western Civilization (Khor, 2016). Further developments included the incorporation of the Bill of Rights into the US Constitution
(1791), and the French Declaration of the Rights of Man (1789), which provided for the protection of human natural rights, among them the right to personal liberty, security,
21 property and the right to resist oppression. In 1920 after the First World War, the international community formed the League of Nations with the aim of maintaining global peace and security. The League tried to include policies to protect human rights into its charter, but the signatories failed to agree on the nature of the rights. However, the league affirmed its faith in fundamental human rights (Khor, 2016).
Though the above conventions and declarations were largely regional, they laid the foundation for the enactment of the universal concept of HR. Consequently, after the
Second World War, the world adopted and UDHR in 1948 (Moeckli et al., 2013).
Though the UDHR is not legally enforceable, it has been adopted in numerous constitutions across the globe, making it the most embraced declaration of human rights.
Consequently, the UDHR is also used as the standard measure of human rights; countries that conform to its standard are said to uphold human dignities, while those that do not conform to its standard are criticized for the violation of or promotion of the violation of human dignities (Clegg & Bailey, 2008).
History of HRE. The 20th Century has been synonymous with the proliferation of human rights in the discursive praxis of the UN, and the need to provide education on human rights via HRE developed in parallel with this proliferation. HRE was first introduced by the UDHR (1948), which stipulated that
Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and
to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It
shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial
and social groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the
maintenance of peace. (UDHR article 26)
22 Working within the framework of the United Nations Education Scientific and Cultural
Organization (UNESCO), and the United Nations International Children’s Emergency
Fund (UNICEF), the UN recommended a “human rights-based approach to education” rooted in the principles of accountability, empowerment, inclusion and the respect of the rule of law. The rights-based approach is informed by human rights standards and norms and contributes to positive social transformation and cohesion. In 1993, the Montreal
Declaration on HRE posed that nurture education should aim at nurturing and sustaining democratic values, nurturing and sustaining the culture of peace, and promoting social cultural transformation, creating a culture where the people are empowered to seek and uphold human rights, and speak against human rights violations (Gündoğdu, 2011). Also in 1993, at the Vienna Conference of Human Rights, the UN Secretary General posed that human rights constitutes a “common language of Humanity.” Consequently, the theory that human rights is a “common language of humanity” is embraced as an educational aim in different global human rights treaties all across the globe (Boutros-
Ghali, 1993).The principle of human rights as a language of humanity sought to promote personal development by strengthening the respect for human rights and freedom, empowering individuals to participate effectively in a free and fair society, and also promote the understanding, freedom and tolerance which is key to creation of a culture of peace among other objectives (Galtung, 1969).
HRE gained further international emphasis in 1995 beginning with the United
Nations Decade for HRE (UNDHRE). While this was not the first effort to promote HRE, it gave HRE prominence (Dikovic, 2016). In 1993, the World Conference on Human
Rights published the Vienna Declaration which emphasized on the need for HRE.
23 Pursuant to this, the United National Assembly resolved to proclaim a decade of HRE beginning the January 1995 and running through to 2004 (OHCHR, 2018). This was christened the UNDHRE. Stockmann (2010) notes that the UNDHRE managed to put
HRE on the agenda of different schools in different countries across the globe, thus paving the way for a global HRE initiative. Consequently, school curricula and textbooks were revised to include the concept of HRE.
However, one decade was not sufficient to implement HRE into all schools across the world. In addition, the UNDHRE faced other shortcomings, chief among them insufficient funds for complete implementation, an inability to reach rural communities, and a lack of development of HRE methodologies and insufficient time to teach HRE
(Stockmann, 2010). Thus, in 2005, the UN initiated the World Program for HRE, with the aim of advancing the implementation of HRE programs in learning institutions throughout the world. The program was designed in three phases. The first phase of the program ran from 2005 through to 2009, and focused on introducing HRE to primary and secondary school curriculum. The second phase ran from 2010 to 2014 and focused on introducing HRE to the institutions of higher learning, while the third and last phase of the program started at 2015 and is expected to run until 2019. This final phase of the program aims at promoting HRE among journalists and other media professionals
(OHCHR, 2018). Unlike the UNDHRE, which had a fixed timeline of ten years, the
World Program for HRE is open-ended, and structured in perpetual phases that analyze the successes and limitations of preceding phases, and then build on the success to improve HRE. As such, the successes and shortcomings of the overall program are yet to be evaluated (Stockmann, 2010).
24 In light of these conventions and declarations, different states have realized that human rights is not a topic to be learned once; it is a pivotal part of everyday life that should be learned day-by-day. Consequently, HRE is not a static end-point but rather a process involving a continual process of learning and internalization throughout one’s life, and particularly education (Andreopoulos & Claude, 1997). Before progressing to the review of the core literature on the various specific approaches to HRE and the empirical research on teaching HRE, it is useful to first understand the various competing theories of HRE and the particular theoretical framework that guides the understanding of
HRE in this dissertation.
Theoretical Framework
Theories about human rights tend to revolve around their nature and their scope:
Where do human rights come from? How far should they reach? Who should be considered the subjects of human rights? How inclusive should it be? According to
Zembylas, Charalambous, Lesta, and Charalambous (2014), the understanding of the theories of human rights is pivotal in understanding how human rights are used in practice, such as in the HRE. The relational hermeneutic pedagogical theory of HRE advanced by Al-Daraweesh and Snauwaert (2015) provides the framework for this dissertation, which posits as an alternative perspective in the debate between universalist and relativist theories.
The concept of human rights is rife with debates and controversies, typically from two opposing schools of thoughts: universalism and relativism (Jordaan, 2009; Zembylas et al., 2014). To understand the relational hermeneutic approach, it is helpful to briefly review the universalist and relativist debate as well as some of the various alternatives
25 that have been proposed to bridge the dichotomy of this debate. These two schools of thought offer the main theories through which the concept of human rights is understood, and differ particularly in scope (Al-Daraweesh & Snauwaert, 2015). The universalist– relativist debate about human rights has gone by various names as well, such as universalist–particularlist, and cosmopolitan–communitarian (Healy, 2011; Jordaan,
2009). The common element in these debates, regardless of the exact terminology, is a debate between the whole and the part. Universalists and cosmopolitans emphasize the whole on a global level at the cost of particular differences, while relativists, particularists, and communitarians emphasize the parts (with all their differences) at the cost of a valid concept of human rights. Bajaj (2011) made the connection between cosmopolitanism, universalism, and HRE explicit when she wrote, “Global citizenship, and arguably HRE initiatives that have this as their desired outcome, are aligned with cosmopolitanism and the increasingly de-territorialized conception of universal rights”
(p. 492).
Universalism. The universalist school of thought considers human rights as moral rights that should be accorded to all human beings everywhere and at every time simply because they are human (Donnelly, 1989). According to the universalists, any deprivation of human rights is a contravention of justice. Though the modern concept of human rights is a construct of the west, the universalist school of thought holds that the concept of human rights should apply across all cultures as they are entitlements of all individuals simply because they are human. Accordingly, universalizing human rights gives each individual inherent and inalienable rights, thus bringing justice to humanity (Al-
Daraweesh & Snauwaert, 2015). On some level, human rights must be universal if the
26 concept is to hold any validity; otherwise, it would not carry the name “human” and rather would be called something more regional or individualized, such as American rights, Western rights, Asian rights, Islamic rights, men’s rights, women’s rights, and so on.
In terms of HRE, universalist approaches argue that HRE should follow a universalist curriculum. Educators following the universalist school of thought follow a curriculum beginning with the basic articles of the UDHR, followed by case studies of human rights violations to enlighten the learners about these specific violations (Al-
Daraweesh & Snauwaert, 2015). However, there are concerns that this theory prevents
HRE educators and learners from taking a dynamic and critical orientation toward human rights, and paradoxically make human rights less universal and more about organizational structure of nation-states.
The universalist approach has its fair share of critics, such as proponents of the so-called Asian values perspective and cultural relativists, who criticize it for imposing on all cultures human rights principles without allowing intercultural dialogue pertinent to human rights (Bell, 1996). In general, the major source of criticism of the universalist school of thought is that it fails to accommodate or even assimilate cultural, ethnic, and national differences and instead advances a decidedly Western-centric conceptualization of rights (Healy, 2006). According to Al-Daraweesh and Snauwaert (2015), a lack of intercultural dialogue can lead to a negation of the traditional systems of law established by individual cultures. These views are similar to Donnelly’s (2013), who argued that universalizing and codifying human rights takes away its ability to address human rights
27 violations in specific contexts such as violations in conflict zones, where violations are committed by all parties to the conflict.
Despite the shortcomings of the universalist approach, Al-Daraweesh and
Snauwaert (2015) noted that today’s world seems to be gravitating towards the universal system of human rights. However, they also noted that the universalism-relativism debate has only led to a myopia whereby cultures that have adopted the UDHR have been singled out to be moral, while those that are reluctant to embrace the UDHR are singled out to be morally flawed by those who have embraced it (Galtung, 1994). This has only helped strain the efforts made towards global realization of human rights as well as realizing a global commitment to protection of human rights.
Relativism. In contrast, the relativist school of thought disputes the universality of human rights. Social relativists postulate that morality is a social and historical phenomenon; thus different communities have different and incommensurable moral principles based on their social and historical differences. Since moral principles guide human rights, differences social constructions of morality mean that different societies have different human rights. According to the social relativists, human rights are therefore only valid within the culture in which they are established, and should not be imposed on other communities. As such, each society should be left alone to establish its own human rights standards based on their particular discourse of rights (Al-Daraweesh
& Snauwaert, 2015).
In terms of HRE, relativists argue for a relativist curriculum based on each nations’ or states’ needs. In contrast to universalist approaches the HRE that focus on
UDHR violations to create teachable moments, relativist HRE is offered in the context of
28 raising human rights awareness pertinent to the rights that are violated into their particular society. Educators in this school of thought use varied curricula to fit their specific social context of rights. However, some have argued that the relativist theory of
HRE falls short of realizing global human rights (Al-Daraweesh & Snauwaert, 2015).
According to Al-Daraweesh and Snauwaert, (2015), social relativists believe that universalizing human rights of one culture can impede the ability of the recipient culture to establish their human rights pertinent to their moral principles. However, this principal tenet of social relativism is also the main cause of its criticisms. Critics such as Healy
(2006) argue that the incommensurability argument, which allows each culture to develop its specific human rights principles, can be and at times has been the lever that allows each society to violate some human rights as it provides immunity against the accountability requirements of human rights protection. Furthermore, the theory unfortunately leads to conflict and fights between people who have dissimilar opinions or concerns regarding their rights (Ladson-Billing and Tate, 1995).
In some cases, proponents of one of the above camps or the other make concessions that blur the distinction. Jordaan (2009) has pointed out that there are communitarian authors who acknowledge that obligations of human rights and justice must extend beyond national borders and, conversely, there are cosmopolitans who respect the value of local cultures and the differences they entail. Even though the distinction between the two approaches is not as clear and simplistic as presented above, there is still a clear difference in opinion that must be emphasized. Jordaan emphasized that the remaining distinction between the camps has tended to hinge on what he calls the
29 national–global dichotomy, in which communitarians hold that national interests come first while cosmopolitans emphasize the primacy of global interests.
Hermeneutical and dialogical approaches. Scholars such as Healy (2006, 2011) and Al-Daraweesh and Snauwaert (2015) have sought to move beyond the universalism- relativism debate to forge a third conceptualization of human rights that reconciles the universalists and the cultural relativists and also acknowledges the importance of universality of human rights while promoting intercultural dialogue, which they called a plural impartiality of human rights. These approaches are more inclusive as they strive to reconcile the two dominant schools of thoughts pertinent to human rights (Donnelly
2013). To bridge this divide between universalists and cultural relativists, various approaches have been proposed, many of which share a lot in common, including dialogic cosmopolitanism (Healy, 2011; Jordaan, 2009; Shapcott, 2001), the hermeneutico-dialogical approach (Healy, 2006), and the relational hermeneutic pedagogy (Al-Daraweesh & Snauwaert, 2015). The common thread of all of these approaches is the emphasis on dialogue. However, within these approaches are two philosophical traditions to lead to some differences. One philosophical tradition is based on Habermasian discourse ethics while the other is based on Gadamer’s concept of hermeneutics (Jordaan, 2009). Again, dialogue is the common denominator, but these approaches differ primarily in the belief about what should be the end goal of dialogue in pursuit of morality and ethics, as well as the exact dialogical means of achieving it.
According to Jordaan (2009), discourse ethics emphasizes consensus and agreement as the end goal of dialogue. Moreover, in order to participate in dialogue, one must meet certain standards of logic and reasoning. In contrast, hermeneutics emphasizes
30 understanding, which is a lower threshold than agreement because it allows for disagreement while maintaining mutual understanding (Jordaan, 2009). Furthermore, the barriers to participation are less extreme as well, in that proponents of a hermeneutical approach only ask that participants have the ability to use language, have an attitude of good will, and possess the motivation to find the truth with an admission of one’s own limitations in knowing the truth (Jordaan, 2009). For these reasons, Shapcott (2001) considers the hermeneutical approach to be “radically inclusive” compared to approaches based on Habermas’s discourse ethics (p. 98).
Dialogic cosmopolitanism. Dialogic cosmopolitanism has been discussed in relation to both justice and human rights, but most research has focused on the former
(Healy, 2011; Jordaan, 2009; Shapcott, 2001). It is situated in between the cosmopolitan vs. communitarian debate of justice. As noted by Jordaan (2009), the national–global dichotomy is the most prominent distinction between communitarians and cosmopolitans.
Dialogic cosmopolitanism attempts to bridge the national–global divide by acknowledging that dialogue about human rights must engage people at the national level while striving for a global level of understanding. To achieve this goal, there are four components of dialogic cosmopolitanism:
i.Respect for difference
ii.Commitment to dialogue
iii.Open, hesitant self-problematizing attitude on the part of the individual
iv.An undertaking to expand the boundaries of moral concern towards the point of
universal inclusion. (Jordaan, 2009, p. 757)
31 Jordaan argues that communitarians emphasize respect for difference too much, to the extent that it could be and has been used to justify widely condemned violations of human rights while cosmopolitans overemphasize the universality of moral concerns at the cost of national and cultural differences. Through dialogue and understanding, dialogic cosmopolitanism strives to reach universal moral inclusion from the bottom-up.
Hermeneutico-dialogical approach. The hermeneutico-dialogical approach was developed by Healy (2006) based on Gadamer’s (1976) concept of hermeneutics to
“advance the global implementation of a viable human rights regime in a manner commensurate with the preservation of culture-specific differences” (p. 513). One principle of Gadamerian hermeneutics that Healy relies heavily on is the notion of a fusion of horizons, which provides the framework for the process with which Healy hopes to achieve “deep mutual learning” (p. 530). Healy cautions that, although the hermeneutico-dialogical approach is committed “to mutual understanding and learning as a core condition for the cultural mediation of human rights,” there are a few limitations and qualifications that must be acknowledged (p. 530). He notes that achieving mutual understanding will likely not occur frequently, immediately, formally, or impartially. He acknowledges that the process will be messy and piecemeal. He also clarifies that the end goal is not realistically going to be complete mutual understanding but rather understanding at the “the maximum possible degree” in each given situation (p. 530).
Finally, Healy remarks that any progress towards mutual understanding or fusion of horizons made through the hermeneutico-dialogical approach will depend entirely on the willingness of participants to engage in a communicative mode of interaction rather than a competitive or strategic mode.
32 Relational hermeneutic approach. The particular version of hermeneutics that this dissertation takes as its framework is the relational hermeneutic approach of Al-
Daraweesh and Snauwaert (2015). This theory is similar to Healy’s (2006; 2011) dialogic cosmopolitanism and, in particular, the hermeneutico-dialogical approach (Al-Daraweesh
& Snauwaert, 2015). However, it differs from these theories a few subtle ways. Firstly, they advanced Healy’s approach by moving beyond Gadamer’s concept of “fusion of horizons” and extending it to other hermeneutic concepts, including the whole and part, the sociology of knowledge, experiential meaning, and the geography of logic. Secondly, they analyze fusion of horizons in terms of the institutionalization of human rights globally. Lastly, but most importantly, they developed a pedagogical approach to HRE based on hermeneutics (Al-Daraweesh & Snauwaert, 2015). Their relational-hermeneutic pedagogy provided a frame of reference for interpreting and analyzing the results of the research as well as the recommendations for future research.
The relational hermeneutical theory holds that different cultures have similar beliefs about human rights that are expressed in a variety of ways (Al-Daraweesh &
Snauwaert, 2015). Most traditions in the world have some recognized forms of human rights, and though non-western societies may not have such forms they use some other conceptual frameworks to address human rights. According to relational hermeneutical theory of Human Rights, “the value for human life is taken seriously and respected by all traditions such that relationship between individuals of various social groups is well organized” (Al-Daraweesh & Snauwaert, 2015, p. 42). This theory elaborates the overlying beliefs between the hypothesis of human rights in western and non-western traditions. It builds on the idea of human rights concepts from western traditions
33 potentially having isomorphic equivalents in non-western traditions based on similar intentions or goals (Al-Daraweesh & Snauwaert, 2015). The relational hermeneutical theory of human rights is focused on organizing human relationships in a conducive manner that protects human dignity in a society and also aids individuals in realizing their maximum potential within social groups. This organization is based on a specific moral vision that makes human rights and their isormophical perception is used in various societies work in a similar way, although they have different underlying logical structures
(Al-Daraweesh & Snauwaert, 2013). According to Gadamer, teaching in this approach focuses on a hermeneutical mode of “distanciation,” builds on “comparable validity and dialogic equality,” and brings in “multiple perspectives” to create an “emancipatory” version of HRE that combines the relativistic and universalist approaches in a “fusion of horizons” (as cited in Al-Daraweesh & Snauwaert, 2013, pp. 396–410).
Final note about the theoretical framework. The theoretical framework revolves around the concept of understanding from a relational hermeneutic perspective.
By promoting cross-cultural and international understanding, the theory is that we will make more conscientious decisions as nations towards people in ways that are sensitive to the local and global ideas of morality, ethics, and human rights. This framework can help contextualize the concept of understanding that is presented in the purpose and research questions of this dissertation. In particular, this dissertation addresses the understanding that Kuwaiti student-teachers have of human rights and HRE, which then promotes the understanding that non-Kuwaitis have about Kuwait.
34 Approaches to HRE
There are a number of models or approaches that aim at exploring the meaning of
HRE. One of the approaches to HRE is peace education. It is a critical instrument towards understanding HRE, although the linkages between peace and human rights needs to be made explicit (Hersey, 2012; Tibbitts, 2002). The direct relationship between
HRE and peace education is described by the influential role that the former plays in a society (Tibbitts, 2002). Persons’ rights are termed as the primary reason for the occurrence of education programs aimed at attaining peace. Furthermore, the construction of an environment that exercises peace enriches the protection against the infringement of personal liberties and freedoms (Print, Ugarte, Naval, and Mihr, 2008). Moreover, through the implementation of HRE, people understand the necessity of peace education
(Danesh, 2011; Print et al, 2008). HRE becomes the negotiator of peaceful acts.
Likewise, HRE studies prepare people to enhance their adherence to peace and justice
(Sen, 2009), both of which enable human rights to thrive in a republic. Peace is the pavement to realizing human rights, because rights and liberties are at the heart of both
(Reardon & Snauwaert, 2015); both are also linked to cosmopolitanism (Bajaj, 2011a).
Peace education and HRE advocate that people should be treated with equality and fairness. Activities that minimize the achievement of human rights have a subsequent negative effect on educating people for peace (El-Fadl, 2003; Danesh, 2011). In addition, the study of peace is guided by the principle of dignity. Respecting people ensures that violent actions against humanity are decreased enhancing the existence of peace. Reardon and Snauwaert (2015) argue that sustainable peace is defined when strong emphasis is
35 directed towards obtaining respect for humankind, observing equal treatments, and everybody’s dignity. As they write,
human rights are the ethical core of peace education; not a compliment, or a
particular component, and certainly not an alternative or an educationally
equivalent substitute for peace education. Human rights are integral to peace
education, that is, without human rights peace education lacks a primary
component of its core and essential substance. Human rights are the essence and
the arbiter of peace, the antithesis of violence, touching on multiple and complex
aspects of the human experience, illuminating the necessity of holism to the field.
The potential of human rights as the means to cultivate transformational thinking
lies in viewing all human rights norms and standards as a whole, an integrated
ethical system. (p. 147)
Bajaj (2011a) argued that the content and processes of HRE depend on the goals that
HRE is focused on achieving. The different approaches include; (1) HRE for global citizenship (2) HRE for coexistence and (3) HRE for transformative action (Bajaj,
2011a). HRE for global citizenship fosters knowledge and skills pertinent to universal values and standards, thus enabling learners to belong to the international community.
HRE for coexistence views HRE as a healing and reconciliation tool, thus uses HRE to promote interpersonal and intergroup aspects of human rights, providing the strategies to solve conflicts that arise from ethnic strife rather than absolute deprivation. Finally, HRE for transformative action envisions HRE as radical politics of inclusion and social justice, thus it is offered to people that are economically and politically marginalized (Bajaj,
2011a). Similarly, Tibbitts (2002; 2017) divides HRE models into three types based on
36 the goals of the approach, one of which is also the transformational model, also known as education for human rights. In addition to the transformational model, Tibbitts (2002;
2017) categorizes HRE into the values and awareness model, also known as education about human rights, and the accountability model, also known as education through human rights. These models can build upon one another so that HRE begins with awareness of HRE values, then progresses to accountability for actions that promote or violate human rights, and, finally, leading to education for transformation of the society towards one that strives to bring about justice and peace for all humans (Tibbits, 2002;
2017).
Teaching HRE
Teachers play a vital role in the facilitation of HRE. It is incumbent upon the teachers to facilitate the development of the sense respect of other people’s rights and freedoms, and the responsibility of fighting for the recognition and respect for their, and other peoples’ rights. In addition, teachers have the responsibility of inspiring learners to be responsible for the dignity, equality and freedom of their own selves and those of others. As such, it is incumbent upon teachers to integrate rights based approaches into their respective classrooms (Noddings, 2007). According to Andreopoulos and Claude
(1997), teaching human rights should focus not only what is being taught, but also how it is being taught, whereby the teaching methods adopted for teaching human rights should encourage participation and critical thinking from the learners, and also promote a learning environment that is free from all forms of discrimination. According to
Noddings (2007), the teacher-student relationship in an HRE classroom should always vary from one who is caring or one who is cared for to ensure that the dignity and equal
37 worth of all is realized in the teaching-learning context. UNICEF (2007) asserted that
HRE should be learner centered and practical, whereby learning relates to human rights values and principles in accordance with the real-life experiences of the learner.
Furthermore, HRE should be inclusive and participatory, and taking place in an environment that respects human rights for all the participants. Additionally, teachers should be the role models, teaching by leading and practicing the values of human rights which should grow naturally in the classrooms. Consequently, it is vital that educators demonstrate an in-depth understanding of human rights in both the lesson content and delivery.
According to Ross and Yeager (1999), the fact that human rights should be taught by doing, and the fact that the classroom should have an environment that promotes a general growth of human rights, places a significant burden and responsibility on the teacher, as teachers are responsible for their classrooms. As such, it is important that teachers have an in-depth understanding of human rights, as teachers’ understanding and experiences with human rights have direct impacts on students’ attainment of human rights values. The importance of teachers having an in-depth understanding of human rights is further emphasized by De Moulin and Kolstad (1999), who maintained that human rights teachers should possess a solid understanding of human rights to ensure they create a classroom environment that promotes a natural growth of human rights, and also ensure that learners clearly understand the principles of human rights for empowerment.
According to Stockmann, (2010), sound understanding of human rights is crucial as it helps in the conceptualization of the human rights pedagogy, which dictates whether
38 human rights should be taught as a unit or should be incorporated in all lessons, whether it should be a one-time lesson, or whether it should be taught in stages, among other pedagogical issues. Additionally, Stockmann, (2010), argued that it is the understanding of human rights that dictates teachers’ perception on the topic, including the scope and approaches of human rights, which greatly affect teaching methodologies, thus success of the human rights course. The concept of human rights perception came to the limelight about ten years ago, as part of the welcoming trend of constitutionalization of international law, However, in the recent past, perception of human rights has become an increasing concern even for the national or regional players, either with regard to perception of specific rights, or the perception of human rights in whole. Most scholars that have tackled the issue of the perception of human rights have used the Vienna
Convention on the law of Treaties of 1969 to provide standard procedure for perception.
However, the rules provided by the convention leave much to the discretion of the human rights teachers (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1975). Consequently, the first aim of the research was to explore how student-teachers in the educational College in Kuwait University perceived the meaning of human rights. This helped determine the scope that Kuwaiti teachers teach human rights.
According to Noddings (2007), there are numerous pedagogies that can be used to equip student-teachers with the relevant understanding and perception of human rights, but critical pedagogy is the most appropriate. Critical pedagogy allows learners (student- teachers) to participate in the training process thus gain sound understanding, which helps in the accurate perception of human rights. The participation, or “teaching by doing” approach improves the experience of HRE among student-teachers, thus positively
39 imparts their beliefs with HRE, which promotes their effective delivery of HRE once they transition into teachers.
Teachers’ opinions about HRE. Successful translation of an educational program into practice depends on teachers’ understanding of the vision and implementation of the program. Similarly, a successful translation of HRE into practice largely depends on teachers’ understanding of HRE, including its visions and implementation (Zembylas et al., 2014). Consequently, it is important to explore the understanding of HRE among pre-service and in-service educators, which will in turn provide a baseline and background for understanding the perception of the society pertinent to the HRE. Kezban (2014) found that Turkish teachers valued HRE because it informed learners about their civic rights and duties, and taught them of the fact that human rights were inherent to all people. Additionally, the educators felt that civic and
HRE informed people on how to demand their rights and those of others more forcefully, thus empowering them to champion human rights. Other research has reached similar conclusions (Gündoğdu, 2011; Zembylas et al., 2014).
A majority of educators (both pre- service and in-service) perceive HRE as an important in promoting the awareness of human rights among learners. Kuwaiti educators also value HRE and believe it should be taught (Watfa & Al-Romaidhi, 2006). Yet while many scholars agree that HRE should be set into schools’ curricula (Pirsl & Marusic-
Stimac, 2007; Stockman, 2010; Suárez, 2007), other educators argue that first more democratic environments should be created both at home and in schools to promote the comprehension of HRE (Kezban, 2014). Yet there is broad agreement that HRE training should enhance students’ respect for each other and increase their knowledge and
40 awareness of human rights and their obligations (Zembylas et al., 2014). Other research in Kuwait and elsewhere in the Muslim world suggests that female teachers, primary school teachers and pre-service teachers look more favorably upon HRE than male teachers, secondary school teachers, and in-service teachers (Albudaiwi, 2014;
Gündoğdu, 2011; Kezban, 2014; Pirsl & Marusic-Stimac, 2007; Zembylas et al., 2014).
The interrelation between democratic activities, the element of citizenship, and rights is undeniable in Kuwait (Al-Nakib, 2011). It is necessary to improve the level of people’s lives through improving the protection of the civil rights and citizenship by creating states that exercise democratic plans (Snauwaert, 2011). In this case, the term democracy describes the ability to incorporate it into the residents’ lifestyle rather than a political structure (Walzer, 2008). Having sovereign and self-governed leaders and citizens is not enough to achieve an environment that supports human rights (Snauwaert,
2011). Similar to HRE, education sessions directed towards developing democratic spaces aim at increasing individual’s consciousness of their liberties and others (Sen,
2009). Importantly, student-teachers should be able to guide learners to comprehend the significance of cultural, economic, and moral factors affect human rights (Butin, 2005).
Learning institutions within Kuwait should develop concrete structures and have appropriate organizational plans that facilitate education that focus on democratic social norms (Aldaihani, 2011). Teachers, student-teachers, and learners should embrace a social culture that nurtures individuals who uphold human rights leads to a nation that protects and respects the humankind (Bajaj, 2008). It is essential to understand that factors embedded in democratization lead to the realization of safeguarding human rights against any form of violation and degrading the human value (Sen, 2009).
41 Student-teachers’ beliefs about and experiences with HRE. Besides a solid understanding and accurate perception of human rights, Khozani (2006) noted that it is important that teachers have positive beliefs, right attitude, and beneficial experiences with HRE. According to Mason (1999), teachers’ personal beliefs influence both their behavior s and expectation pertinent to a course program. According to Ajzen and
Fishbein (1975), teachers’ attitudes towards a topic reflects their belief regarding a topic, thus the overall outcome of a lesson. Similarly, the beliefs and experiences of HRE teachers is important for a successful HRE program. This was evidenced by Khozani
(2006), who in a detailed analysis of HRE in Iran concluded that a sound knowledge of human rights does not guarantee that the individual will be an effective HRE teacher.
Success in teaching HRE stems from both the knowledge and awareness of human rights, as well as teachers’ attitudes, beliefs and experiences (Mason, 1999).
Kuwait teachers should integrate the study of HRE and Peace Education
(Aldaihani, 2011). Learning is the initial step of curbing dehumanizing acts imposed on citizens. The completeness of humanity is deteriorated by the increasing harassment and violence witnessed by people (Galtung, 1969). HRE initiatives should be channeled towards curbing any activities that impede the realization of people’s rights like discrimination and dehumanization (Galtung, 1990). Freire (1990/1970) described dehumanization as
Any situation in which ‘A’ objectively exploits ‘B’ or hinders his and her pursuit
of self-affirmation as a responsible person is one of oppression. Such a situation
in itself constitutes violence because it interferes with the individual’s ontological
42 and historical vocation to be more fully human. With the establishment of a
relationship of oppression, violence has already begun. (p. 50)
Teachers are an essential tool to accomplish universalism. Learners should be able to transfer what they learn in the classrooms into the real world. Flowers (2000) explains that humanity is a vulnerable element that can be destroyed through cruelty against any man. Teachers should ensure that at the end of HRE programs students are able to deploy a language of unity intended to protect people’s rights and privileges.
Additionally, through HRE perspectives it is clear that information serves as a crucial tool to attain democracy (Bartlett, 2008). Teachers are expected to enrich students’ knowledge of the nature of human rights (Anyon, 1981). These rights are not a theory or philosophy but the birth entitlement of every individual. In this case, rights and privileges held by people are characterized by untouchability and indispensability
(Bobbio, 1996). However, the success of HRE is associated with the fulfillment of educative plans that intend to improve the political and social aspects (Jover, 2001). It is essential that the administrators working with the ministry of education at Kuwait integrate HRE with citizenship education (Koylu, 2004). A primary objective of HRE is ensuring that learners develop a comprehensive understanding of democracy
(Andreopoulos and Claude, 1997). Teachers are also expected to enhance students’ knowledge in areas of implementation and defending their personal rights (Danesh,
2008). Furthermore, incorporating HRE and peace education courses in schools fosters a culture that encourages the protection of civil rights (Abou El Fadl, 2004). Students become able to move beyond their intercultural differences. They are able to relate to others overcoming lines of race, religion, color, language that may separate them (Butin,
43 2005). At the end of HRE initiatives, educators should evaluate the learners’ level of commitment to human rights (Andrepoulos & Claude, 1997).
According to the OHCHR (2003), a sustainable and effective strategy for infusing
HRE into educational systems must involve incorporating HRE in national legislations regulating education, revising the curricula and textbooks, adequate teachers’ training on the concept of HRE, and establishing support network for teachers and other professionals involved in HRE. The guidelines underscore the need for the teachers’ dedication to promoting HRE. According to the guidelines, teachers should teach for human rights and about human rights; they should go beyond teaching to preaching about, and living by, the principles of human rights, to promote the adoption of HRE in the society. Moreover, the guidelines emphasize the need for building a human rights culture into the whole education curriculum, with each education level being trained on different human rights concept. The pre-school and lower primary curriculum should focus on fostering social tolerance and feelings of confidence, while secondary schools should focus on developing the knowledge of rights and responsibilities of human rights as defined in the UDHR.
Through the pedagogy outlined the HRE requirements for each level, Suárez
(2007) noted that there were significant pedagogical differences pertinent to the inclusion of HRE in school curriculum. However, these pedagogical differences can be resolved by the OHCHR (2003) curriculum that teachers should teach both for and about human rights, whereby human rights should be mandated and incorporated in all curricula, as a subject, and as a practice adopted while teaching other subjects. As such, student-
44 teachers, pre-service and in-service educators must all be trained on offering the highest
HRE to inculcate peace among the people.
The role of teachers in Kuwaiti schools & society. It is critical to understand the role of teachers and particularly student-teachers in Kuwait’s schools and the society. As
El-Fadl (2003) depicts, the state of Kuwait requires schools to integrate lessons aimed at
HRE and all dimensions of human rights at the elementary, college and tertiary levels.
Thirty years ago, Hassan (1987) argued that the Islamic and Arabic proponents within
Kuwaiti society did not recognize the importance of conducting peace education or HRE.
As a result, non-Arabic organizations were forced to educate the people of Kuwait on their human rights, but were not seen as credible. Further, he argued that HRE may be futile in Kuwait because a large percentage of the populace was uneducated, and a lack of basic reading skills hinders the implementation of HRE and peace education (Bajaj,
2008). However, this no longer holds true; the education level in Kuwait has risen dramatically, so Hassan’s concerns are no longer valid. If student-teachers can be brought to value HRE, their ability to connect to and work with students can make the teaching of human rights easy and less complex.
According to Magendzo (2005), teachers should not only disseminate human rights knowledge, they should also be the ‘subject of rights.’ This means that teachers should have an in-depth knowledge of their human rights and the rights of others, and also be aware of the limitations that come with these rights and freedom. As a ‘subject of right,’ teachers should lead by example; they should uphold human rights of others, fight for the recognition of their inherent rights and liaise with institutions that are geared
45 towards protection of human rights to ensure that rights and freedoms of all people in the society are observed.
Challenges in Kuwaiti teacher education. Access to quality education is considered a constitutional right in Kuwait (Al-Nakib, 2011). In this case, the integration of HRE is seen as a tool for achieving knowledgeable citizens and raising awareness of rights among young students (Bajaj, 2011a). The HRE educational curriculum incorporated in Kuwait’s schools comprises three topics: citizenship, democracy, and human rights (Al-Nakib, 2011). Although the study of human rights began in the
Kuwait’s middle schools, the University fails to embrace it (Al-Nakib, 2011), and there are no core or required undergraduate courses related to HRE.
Additionally, student-teachers at Kuwait’s learning institutions experience only one practicum semester (Al-Nakib, 2011). Learners, therefore, lack opportunities to apply what they have been learning in the classroom. Further, male and female learners are taught differently (Al-Nakib, 2012). Male students are favored over female students, unlike in the US, where student-teachers have equal access to resources and take part in
HRE (Tibbitts, 2002).
Kuwait also has a disfranchised education system; the access to fully-government sponsored state school depends on the legal status of individual citizenship. Thus, more nearly three-fourths of the total population who are considered non-Kuwaiti pays for their education in private institutions. Education is also segregated along gender lines and in terms of regions, which are sometimes self-segregated in terms of tribe or sect
(Shia/Sunni, Hadhar/Bedouin). Thus, education, rather than reinforcing and appreciating
Kuwaiti’s diversity while promoting diversity, might have divisive elements as that
46 perpetuate division between the different groups (Aldaihani, 2011). According to Al-
Nakib (2011), this organizational structure is not conducive in promoting democracy in the country.
Moreover, Al-Nakib (2011) faults the curriculum as a hindrance towards furthering democratic aspiration since there is no national curriculum but a combination of national textbooks and several goals and timetables from different departments. In addition, the term ‘democracy’ is absent from the curriculum and from the goals of the education. This makes it increasingly difficult to promote democracy in the country.
Along these lines, Al-Romaidhi (2010) found that there is not only little knowledge about democracy and human rights in Kuwaiti secondary schools, but also that most students perceive schools themselves as lacking any democratic educational practices because of the authoritarian structure of the schools. However, Kuwait has led other Gulf nations in reforming education to try to counteract extremism and intolerance towards non-
Muslims. Nevertheless, a majority of the students argue that they have not received HRE in schools.
Al-Nakib (2011) noted that the terms citizenship, human rights, nationalism and democracy are critical words contained in any HRE program. Other important words but which are absent in Kuwaiti curriculum include “reform,” “radical,” and “active citizens,” among others. These are also absent in teachers’ training program; thus it is apparent that Kuwaiti teachers are inadequately trained on offering the best HRE. This has made the spread of HRE rather slow in Kuwait as compared to the US (Al-Nakib,
2011).
47
Conclusion
The definitions, history, theories, and various approaches HRE have been reviewed in this chapter. It is clear that there is a debate about the best approaches to
HRE and varying teacher attitudes toward HRE. Yet, the majority of the research on HRE supports the use of an approach that strikes a balance toward universalist/cosmopolitan goals of human rights, global citizenship, and world peace with relativist/communitarian objections that maintaining some sense of national, ethnic, and cultural differences are of the utmost importance because otherwise universalist approaches risk becoming imperialistic, imposing laws of human rights from outside and above the lived experiences and beliefs of the diverse groups of people around the world. Approaches that use both dialogic and hermeneutic elements, which go by a variety of names, holds promise in bridging the gaps between universalist/cosmopolitan and relativist/communitarian theories, between the concepts of global and national citizenship, and between the values of justice and difference. Of the alternative approaches to HRE, the relational hermeneutic pedagogy is a particularly well-developed in terms of its educational methods and approaches, so it provides the guiding framework for this research.
The empirical research on the attitudes of teachers and student-teachers both in and outside of Kuwait is rather thin. What is known is that many teachers generally receive education about human rights (values and awareness approach) and have positive attitudes towards such lessons, but very few have received education through or for human rights, whether in terms of human rights accountability or transformative action.
48 Furthermore, very little is known about the perception, beliefs, and experiences of student-teachers in Kuwait towards HRE, even at the basic level of the values and awareness approach.
The importance of a solid understanding and an accurate perception of human rights, as well as positive beliefs and experiences with HRE underscores the need for an all-inclusive teachers training program. Teachers’ training programs should facilitate optimal acquisition of human rights literacy among the student-teachers. This should be done in a caring environment where the student-teachers are allowed to experience human rights in their study, to improve their experience, attitudes and beliefs pertinent to human rights. As such, this research looks forward to evaluating how student-teachers from the educational college in Kuwait University perceive the meaning of human rights, their beliefs about, as well as their experiences with HRE (Khozani, 2006).
This helped the researcher to form an opinion on the scope of HRE offered to student teacher’s, and which is then translated to learners. This data proved effective in the reorganization of teacher education programs in Kuwait, making HRE more effective in imparting student-teachers with knowledge about human rights, and empower them to offer solid HRE to their students once they transition into teachers. This empowerment largely depends on the pedagogy that trainers of student-teachers apply in teaching HRE.
49 Chapter Three
Methodology
This chapter presents the research methodology that is adopted in addressing the research questions raised in the study. The chapter includes the description of the research design, the target population, the sample size, and sampling procedures that is used in the research. The chapter also analyzes the approaches that were used in the collection and analysis of data, as well as the constraints faced in the process.
Furthermore, the chapter comments on the reliability and credibility of the research instruments, and outlines the ethical considerations of the study.
Research Design
The research design is the overall strategy that allows the researcher to integrate different components of a research in a logical and coherent manner, thus ensuring that the research questions are effectively addressed (Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2005).
This research design aligns with the research questions, which are
1. In what ways do student-teachers in the Kuwait University College of
Education perceive the meaning of human rights?
a.! How aware of human rights and HRE are the student-teachers?
b.! How important do they perceive human rights and HRE to be?
2. What prior experiences with HRE do student-teachers in the Kuwait University
College of Education have?
3. What are the beliefs about HRE held by student-teachers in the Kuwait
University College of Education?
50 Research question 1 is divided into (a) and (b) because, in this dissertation, “perceive” was divided into (a) awareness of and (b) perceptions about the importance of human rights and HRE. In research question 2, “prior experiences” are defined as the amount and types of education, training, and exposure to human rights and HRE the student- teachers have. Finally, “beliefs” in research question 3 pertains to the student-teachers’ beliefs about HRE.
Based on these questions, this study adopted a quantitative, non-experimental, cross-sectional descriptive survey design. This design is the best approach to answering the research questions because the questions only ask about what the ways of perception, experiences, and beliefs of Kuwaiti student-teachers are and do not ask about how they are related to any other variables. The research questions simply address the need to understand what, in basic terms, what ideas Kuwaiti student-teachers have about human rights and HRE. As Cresswell (2015) explained, a cross-sectional, descriptive survey research design is a systematic subjective approach that is useful for reliably describing current life experiences, attitudes, beliefs and opinions pertinent to an issue, which, in this case, is HRE. Moreover, according to Cohen, Manion and Morrison, (2005), the descriptive survey is the most preferred in the collection of data for education and social sciences researches. This descriptive design allowed me to categorize predetermined answers to research questions, thus providing statistically inferable about Kuwaiti student-teachers’ ways of perceiving, experiences with, and beliefs about HRE. This data allowed the assessment of the type and extent of the opinions, attitude and experiences of the respondents at a single moment in time, which can help inform the approaches used towards HRE and possible revisions to the CHR curriculum in Kuwait.
51 Brief Background of the Study Area: Kuwait University, College of Education
Kuwait University (KU) was established in 1966, with four pioneer colleges, namely the Colleges of Education, Science, and Art, and the Women’s College. KU has since grown and now has seventeen colleges which include the Colleges of Law, Science,
Arts, Education, Medicine, Allied Health Science, Sharia and Islamic Studies,
Engineering and Petroleum, Pharmacy, Dentistry, Women, Dentistry, Architecture,
Graduate Studies, Computer Science and Engineering, and Public Health (Kuwait
University, 2018). KU is ranked first in Kuwait and 19th best in Arab regional ranking in terms of offering the best education (“Kuwait University,” 2018). Kuwait University enrolled more than 36,704 students in the 2017/2018 academic year, with 5832 students being enrolled in the College of Education (Kuwait University, 2018).
According to its vision, the College of Education seeks to provide pedagogical education that is characterized by quality for every learner. The Mission of the College is to
Prepare and develop teachers and professional specialists educators who are
competent, caring, and reflective, have the theoretical and modern applied
knowledge and skills in using the educational technology, obtain profession’s
ethics, have a desire to life-long learning, develop their work experience, and seek
to improve the lives of others through the process of teaching and learning.
(Kuwait University, 2018)
The College of Education programs are divided into three basic categories. The first category includes undergraduate programs. This seeks to prepare kindergarten and elementary school teachers, prepare the intermediate and secondary school teachers for
52 science subjects, and also for literature subjects. These have different specialty programs that have different areas of study as shown in Figure 1. The second category offers post- graduate diplomas, a course to counsel and prepare graduates from non-educational colleges. The third category offers a Master’s program that provides degrees in educational foundation, curricula and teaching methods, educational administration and also psychological counseling (Kuwait University, 2018).
Figure 1. Undergraduate programs in Kuwait University, College of Education (Kuwait
University, 2018).
One of the main objectives of Kuwait University College of Education is to prepare and develop professional manpower required of teachers, specialists and leading educators according to the standard accreditation institutions (Kuwait University, 2018).
This goal compels the college to offer HRE to the student-teachers to empower them to effectively teach human rights to the society, thus promote the creation of a culture of
53 peace. The effectiveness of HRE program offered in the college can only be evaluated by exploring the perception of human rights.
Notably, Kuwaiti University is the leading public University in Kuwait, and 19th best in Arab Region Ranking. Further, the University has one of the highest graduate employability ratios in Kuwait and in the Arab region (Kuwait University, 2018). Its
College of Education is reputable for producing among the best teachers in the Arab world. As such, understanding the experiences of student-teachers in the college of
Education pertinent to human rights, as well as their beliefs about and experience with
HRE are pivotal in understanding human Rights and HRE among student-teachers in
Kuwait. This understanding proved adequate in promoting the development of a curriculum that fosters adequate understanding of human rights and HRE among student- teachers in Kuwait called the CHR, which translated to an in-depth understanding of human rights in Kuwait (Kuwait University, 2018).
Participation
Research population. The research population is a well-defined collection of objects or individuals that are bound by similar characteristics, such as age, sex, locality and experiences among other characteristics, and which the research intends to study
(Peck, Olsen, & Devore, 2015). In this study, the research population is student-teachers in the College of Education at Kuwait University (KU), who, according to an administrator at KU, amount to 846 student-teachers (117 males and 729 females).
Sampling. According to KU, the College of Education has 846 student-teachers.
Using the Krejcie and Morgan (1970) table based on their method for determining sample size, an adequate sample size for a population of 846 is approximately 265. The sampling
54 procedure is the process that is followed while deciding the elements of the population to be sampled. Because the research aims at collecting data from a sample of 265 respondents from the College of Education in Kuwait University, a total population sampling method is employed. A total population approach is necessary because 265 constitutes 30% of the overall population. Response rates for surveys, particularly online surveys, tends to be around 33% (Nulty, 2008), so to achieve an adequate sample size, it is likely that the entire population needed to be invited to participate. As a result, this is a non-random method that depended on the responsiveness of certain members of the population, which may skew the data somewhat and cause some limitations to generalizability. Only those who are currently student-teachers were included in the research; all other students of the education college were excluded. Students in Years 1-2 were excluded because student-teaching does not usually begin until Year 3 (and occasionally continues into a fifth year). The actual sample size was 292 (35% response rate)
Data Collection Procedures
Instrumentation. The research intends to collect survey data from the student- teachers through the use of self-administered questionnaires. The issue of human rights and HRE is imperative and requires honest response from the respondents, thus the researcher choose to use self-administered questionnaires. The student-teachers from the
Educational College of Kuwait University received a set of standardized questionnaires that were used in the collection of data.
The closed-ended questionnaire were divided into two parts (see Appendix A).
Part I collected personal (but not identifiable) information on the participants. This
55 section includes demographic questions regarding age, sex, marital status, and level of study as well as a series of 5 yes/no questions regarding the degree of experience they have with HRE courses, materials, and publications.
Part II was based on the Human Rights Education Attitude Scale (HREAS), originally developed by Kepenekçi (1999), with slight modifications. The official permission for use of the instrument was received from the author. Part II was divided into two subparts (a) and (b). II(a) asks about the awareness and perceived importance of
15 HRs, which was ranked on a 3-point Likert type scale of awareness (1 –Unaware to 3
– Aware) and 5-point Likert type scale of importance (1 – Very Unimportant to 5 – Very
Important). Part II(b) presents a series of 13 statements regarding beliefs about HRE in which the respondents were asked to rate them on a 5-point Likert-type scale of agreement (1 – Strongly Disagree to 5 – Strongly Agree) (see Appendix A). Although some researchers have argued that 4-point scales are better because they avoid the tendency to choose the middle item, thereby distorting the response (Garland, 1991), most research shows that this belief is only a suspicion and is not supported by empirical research (Allen & Seaman, 2007; Leung, 2011). In a comparison of 4-, 5-, 6-, and 11- point Likert scales using 1,217 high school students in Macau, China, Leung (2011) found no significant difference in the measures of mean, standard deviation, item–item correlation, item–total correlation, reliability, exploratory factor analysis, or factor loading among all scales. This included also finding that the existence of a neutral middle value did not result in any significant difference in responses, showing that the neutral value did not skew responses (Leung, 2011). The only difference found between the scales is that the higher the number of values, the more the responses resembled a normal
56 distribution (Leung, 2011). This makes sense because the Likert scale is designed to approximate a continuous spectrum of beliefs, so the more data points available on the spectrum, the more accurately it approximates the continuous nature of the value.
Furthermore, a problem with scales without a neutral value is they introduce the forced choice flaw whereby respondents who legitimately have no opinion on an issue are forced to take a side (Allen & Seaman, 2007), which is particularly undesirable in some
“political and sensitive cases” (Leung, 2011, p. 413); HRE is, indeed, a political and sensitive topic. Finally, the original survey design by Kepenekçi (1999) that was adapted for this research used a 5-point scale, and it was important to keep modifications to surveys minimal so as to maintain the original reliability and validity.
The modifications included a ranking of “Importance” in addition to
“Awareness.” Additionally, all negatively phrased items were positively phrased for ease of analysis. Finally, the questionnaire was in both English and Arabic languages since
Arabic is the native language of the respondents. The translation method is discussed further in the validation section.
Administration of the questionnaire. The researcher first sought permission from the Dean of the College of Education at Kuwait University to conduct research in the institution. After receiving consent to conduct research, the researcher acquired from the College a list of current student-teachers with their emails. The researcher intended to get the highest rates of honest responses from the respondents. Csikszentmihalyi and
Larson (2014) noted that the method and timing of issuing the self-administered questionnaires is pivotal tin determining the rate of response attained by the research. As advised by Csikszentmihalyi and Larson (2014), this research administered the
57 questionnaires during the periods when there is high-turnout of student-teachers to maximize response rate. This research used an online survey based on the Google Forms software administered via email because of the long-distance nature of the study, yet, as
Nulty (2008) emphasized, online-based questionnaires tend to have significantly lower response rates than paper-based ones. Along with the questionnaire, the email included a letter that outlines the importance of the study and encourages respondents to give honest responses. The questionnaire also explained how to fill out the questionnaire, including when and how they were turned-in for data analysis. Most importantly, a consent form was attached to the email in which the researcher emphasized the fact that the anonymity and confidentiality of the respondents were maintained at all times, that the data collected was purely for educational purposes, and the risks are very minimal and are far outweighed by the potential benefits.
Validity of the instrument. Validity is the extent to which a data collection instrument performs as it was designed to, such that it collects the data it was intended to collect. According to Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2005), there are two types of validity of research instruments: the face validity and the content validity. Content validity measures the extent to which the research instrument covers the content is supposed to measure. According to Gonçalves and Ierra (2015), content validity is obtained from the literature, from the representatives of the populations and from the experts. The content validity test helped the researcher to determine whether the instrument used for data collection sufficiently covered the research questions raised by the study, Conversely,
Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2005), posit that face validity assesses whether a test the face value of a research and tests whether the research seems sufficient in examining the
58 subject matter it is intended to examine. The face validity evaluates the appearance of a questionnaire in terms of readability, consistency of formatting and style, feasibility and the clarity of the questions and language used in the study. This helps the researcher to determine whether the sample population would be able to answer the questions as raised in the questionnaire (Cohen, Manion & Morrison, 2005). Although the original creator of the HREAS already assessed the validity of the questionnaire with positive results
(Kepenekçi, 1999), modifications were made that could affect the validity, so reassessing it is a good idea. The researcher used the Content Validity index (CVI) to estimate the content validity and used a panel of three experts to assess face validity. The research expected that the research scored high on both the face and content validity owing to the scope adopted by the researcher.
The translation in particular was validated using forward-and-back translation and an expert panel. The researcher created the initial Arabic translation based on his knowledge of English and his first-language understanding of Arabic. The Arabic translation then was given to a panel of experts in education who are bilingual in Arabic and English to review the clarity, accuracy, and understandability of the survey. Finally, a back translation was done by someone with English as a first language and fluency in
Arabic. The back translation and original English version was analyzed for similarity.
Reliability of the instrument. Reliability is degree to which the research instruments consistently yields the same data or results after a series of repeated trials
(Cohen, Manion & Morrison, 2005). The questionnaire is based on a previously designed and tested questionnaire. The instrument used in this survey study was HREAS
(Kepenekçi, 1999). Kepenekçi (1999) tested the reliability of the HREA using the alpha
59 reliability coefficient, and it was subsequently tested by Gündoğdu, (2011) and Nduta,
(2015). The alpha coefficient ranged from 0.73 to 0.93 in these studies, indicated a moderate-to-strong degree of reliability. In order to test the reliability of the translation, however, a small pilot study was conducted in which the Arabic version of the questionnaire with modifications was given to 28 Kuwaiti student-teachers and the alpha reliability coefficient was tested.
Table 1
Internal Consistency Reliability Coefficients in Cronbach’s Alpha
Scales No. of Responses No. of Items Cronbach’s Alpha
(N)
Human Rights Education in Kuwait 28 56 0.88
(HRE)
Data Analysis Techniques
Data analysis is the manipulation of the collected data through the systematic application of logical and/or statistical techniques to describe and illustrate the data into consumable information that responds to the questions raised in the research. Data analysis is pivotal as it gives the information used in answering the questions raised by a study (Peck, Olsen, and Devore, 2015). To address the research questions in this study, the data was analyzed using descriptive statistics. Measures of central tendency (mean, median, mode), normality (skewness and kurtosis), and measures of frequency
(distribution tables, histograms, and percentages). Furthermore, these descriptive
60 statistics were divided into overall values (total for all participants) and subgroup values, which included the personal and demographic values of marital status, age, year of study/credits, nationality, and subject area specialty. These descriptive statistics provided a picture of the perceptions and beliefs of current student-teachers at Kuwait University
College of Education.
Ethical Considerations
The researcher sought permission to conduct the research from all the relevant authorities, namely from the Dean of the College of Education at Kuwaiti University, and followed all the guidelines issued by the relevant authorities. Furthermore, the researcher collected data during the free times of the student-teachers to reduce learning interruptions. The researcher encouraged the respondents to respond to all the questions in the questionnaire but did not force any of the respondents that were unwilling to participate in the whole process, or those unwilling to answer some questions in the questionnaire. The participation was on the free will of the respondents. The researcher strived to enhance the anonymity and confidentiality of the respondents. As such, the questionnaire did not request the respondents to divulge any personal information that may lead to their identification, such as names or their university’s registration numbers.
Additionally, the researcher used the data that was collected only for the intended purpose of exploring the perception of human rights among student-teachers and evaluating their beliefs about and experience with HRE. As such, the researcher never disclosed the data collected to third parties except with the express permissions from the respondents. Finally, the researcher used the collected data as is, without any alterations or falsification, thus the findings were an accurate representation of the population.
61 However, the data may be edited but only to ensure logical completeness and reliability of the responses.
62 Chapter Four
Results
This chapter presents the descriptive statistics that resulted from the responses of student-teachers in the College of Education at Kuwait University to the survey. The survey consists of 55 items. First, personal information of the participants is reported, including sex, age, marital status, year of study, and subject specialization. Second, the experiences the participants had with human rights education are presented. Third, the participants’ awareness of human rights is provided. Fourth, the results related to the importance of human rights according to the participants’ opinions are reported. Finally, the participants’ beliefs toward human rights education are described in the end of this chapter.
Personal Information
Responses were received from 329 students, of which 37 were eliminated because they were not currently student-teachers or because they were not education majors. As can be seen in Table 2, 292 student-teachers participated in the questionnaire, 114 (39%) were males, and 178 (61%) were females. In the age variable, 101 participants (34.6%) of the sample were between 19-22, 147 (50.3%) were between 23-26, 26 (8.9%) were between 27-30, and 18 (6.2%) were over 30. In terms of the participants’ marital status,
175 (59.9%) were single, 112 (38.4%) were married, and five (1.7%) were divorced.
Thus, the most common participants were single females under the age of 26.
63 Table 2
Demographic Profile of the Participants
Variable Frequencies Percentage Sex Male 114 39.0% Female 178 61.0% Age 19-22 101 34.6% 23-26 147 50.3% 27-30 26 8.9% Over 30 18 6.2% Marital Status Single 175 59.9% Married 112 38.4% Divorced 5 1.7%
Table 3 shows participants’ different subjects. There were 271 (92.9%) participants who stated their subjects, while 21 (7.2%) participants preferred not to share their subjects. The subjects that had the highest numbers of participants were Arabic
Language (69 [23.6%]), English (45 [15.4%]), and Islamic Studies (41 [14%]). In contrast, Physics and Philosophy subjects recorded the lowest number of participants, both of which only had two (0.7%).
Table 3
Subjects Taught by Student-Teachers in Sample Ranked from Most to Least
Subject Frequencies Percentage
Arabic Language 69 23.6% English 45 15.4% Islamic Studies 41 14.0% History 30 10.3% Psychology 26 8.9% Prefer not to share 21 7.2% Social Studies 15 5.1% Math 15 5.1% Biology 8 2.7% Chemistry 7 2.4% Geology 4 1.4% Geographic 4 1.4% Sciences 3 1.0% Physics 2 0.7% Philosophy 2 0.7%
64 As can be seen in Table 4, 14 (4.8%) participants, which was the lowest number, were in the third year, 136 (46.6%), which was the highest number, were in the fourth year, 123 (42.1%) were in the fifth year, and 19 (6.5%) were in others. In the nationality variable, Kuwaitis were the majority 233 (79.8%), but non-Kuwaitis comprised a sizable portion at 59 (20.2%).
Table 4
Year of Study and Nationality
Variable Frequencies Percentage Year of Study Year 3 14 4.8% Year 4 136 46.6% Year 5 123 42.1% Others 19 6.5%
Nationality Kuwaiti 233 79.8% Non-Kuwaiti 59 20.2 %
Human Rights Education Experience
In Table 5, student teachers answered the question “Where did you first hear of human rights?” Television/Radio had the highest number 94 (32.2%), followed by School
91 (31.1%), while Others and Legal documents had the lowest numbers at 1 (.3%) and 2
(.7%), respectively.
Table 5
Frequencies and Percentages of Where Student Teachers First Heard of Human Rights
First heard of human rights from: Frequencies Percentage Television/Radio 94 32.2% School 91 31.1% Family/parents 58 19.9% Internet/website 27 9.2% Newspaper/Magazine 19 6.5% Legal documents 2 0.7% Others 1 0.3%
65 The pie chart in Figure 2 shows the results of the question “Are you aware of the
United Nation World Program for Human Rights Education?” The responses showed that most of the student teachers in the College of Education at Kuwait University reported being aware of the UN’s HRE program (56%). However, this is only slightly above half, with the rest (44%) being unaware.
Are you aware of the United Nation World Program for Human Rights Education? No 44% Yes 56%
Figure 2. Pie chart of the yes/no response to the question ‘Are you aware of the United Nation World Program for Human Rights Education?’
Figure 3 shows the leading question in the questionnaire regarding student teachers’ experiences with HRE, which was “Have you ever attended any training on human rights education?” Two hundred forty-two (82.9%) participants answered “No”, and 50 (17.1%) answered “Yes.” Participants who answered “No” to the leading question led them to a different question, which was “Would training on human rights education be helpful to you?” of which 197 (67.5%) answered Yes, while 45 (15.4%) answered
“No.” On the other hand, participants who answered “Yes” the leading question led them to another question, which was “Was the training useful to you?” Seven (2.4%) participants answered “No”, and 43 (14.7%) answered “Yes.” The final question in the experience part was “How would you rate your confidence with regards to the teaching of
Human Rights Education?” In response to this question, 38 (13%) participants were “Not
66 confident,” 186 (63.7%) participants were “Fairly confident,” and 68 (23.3%) participants were “Very confident.”
Have!you!attended!
training!on!HRE?!!
No! Yes!!
(N=242;!82.9%)! (N=50;!17.1%)!
Would!training!on! Was!the!training!
HRE!be!helpful?*! useful?*!!
No! Yes!! No! Yes!
(N=45;!15.4%)! (N=197;!67.5%)! (N=7;!2.4%)! (N=43;!14.7%)!
Rate!your! confidence!about! teaching!HRE.!
Not!confident! Fairly!confident! Very!Confident! (N=38;!13%)! (N=186;!63.7%)! (N=68;!23.3%)!
Figure 3. Leading questions regarding student teachers’ prior experience with human rights Education training. Questions are in dark gray and responses are in light gray with number of response and percentages out of the total number. Whether a respondent received the answer marked with an asterisk (*) depended on their response to the prior question.
Awareness of Human Rights
Table 6 shows the participants’ responses to the 15 questions concerning their awareness of various human rights on a 3-point scale (Unaware, Not Sure, Aware), while
Table 7 shows the responses on a 2-point scale (Unaware, Aware) with “Not Sure”
67 combined with “Unaware.” Overall, participants reported a high percentage of awareness of most of the rights listed in the questionnaire. Participants reported being most aware of the Right to Education (n=263 [90.1%]), while they were most unaware of Property
Rights (n=63 [21.6%]). Finally, they were most unsure of the Worker’s Rights (n=111
[38.0%]).
Table 6
Awareness of Human Rights with Frequencies and Percentages
Right to… Unaware % Not Sure % Aware % Life 21 7.2 40 13.7 231 79.1
Just and favorable 23 7.9 71 24.3 198 67.8 working conditions
Freedom of worship 15 5.1 30 10.3 247 84.6
Social security, social 39 13.4 105 36.0 148 50.7 benefits and pension
Freedom of expression 17 5.8 62 21.2 213 72.9
Form, join trade unions 51 17.5 111 38.0 130 44.5 and strike
Freedom of movement 39 13.4 91 31.2 162 55.5 and residence
Acquire and own 63 21.6 89 30.5 140 47.9 properties in a just way
Participate in and 47 16.1 62 21.2 183 62.7 preserve one’s cultural heritage and language Fair trial 31 10.6 61 20.9 200 68.5
Participate in the political 61 20.9 88 30.1 143 49.0 process
Adequate shelter and 24 8.2 55 18.8 213 72.9 good living standard
Health care 15 5.1 33 11.3 244 83.6
Education 9 3.1 20 6.8 263 90.1
Freedom from 22 7.5 49 16.8 221 75.7 discrimination
68 Table 7
Participants’ Awareness of Human Rights
Right to … Unaware/Unsure % Aware % Life 61 20.9% 231 79.1% Just and favorable working conditions 94 32.2% 198 67.8% Freedom of worship 45 15.4% 247 84.6% Social security, social benefits and pension 144 49.3% 148 50.7%
Freedom of expression 79 27.1% 213 72.9% Form, join trade unions and strike* 162 55.5% 130 44.5% Freedom of movement and residence 130 44.5% 162 55.5% Acquire and own properties in a just way* 152 52.1% 140 47.9% Participate in and preserve ones cultural heritage and language 109 37.3% 183 62.7% Fair trial 92 31.5% 200 68.5% Participate in the political process* 149 51.0% 143 49% Adequate shelter and good living standard 79 27.1% 213 72.9%
Health care 48 16.4% 244 83.6% † Education 29 9.9% 263 90.1% Freedom from discrimination 71 24.3% 221 75.7%
* Right that over half of the student teachers were unaware or unsure of. † Right that the most student teachers were aware of.
Importance
Table 8 shows the participants’ responses to the 15 questions concerning the
importance of human rights on a 5-point scale (Very Unimportant, Unimportant, Not
Sure, Important, Very Important). Overall, participants reported most of the rights were
“Very Important.” Most participants found the Right to Education (n=245 [83.9%]) very
important, while Property Rights had the lowest ranking of “Very Important” least
important (n=9 [3.1%]). Finally, they find unsure of the Worker’s Rights (n=82 [28.1%]).
69 Table 8
Importance of Human Rights with Frequencies and Percentages Very Not Very % Unimportant % % Important % % Unimportant Sure Important Life 7 2.4 3 1.0 6 2.1 50 17.1 226 77.4
Just and favorable working conditions 5 1.7 4 1.4 21 7.2 87 29.8 175 59.9 Freedom of worship 6 2.1 7 2.4 22 7.5 70 24.0 187 64.0 Social security, social benefits and pension 2 0.7 6 2.1 34 11.6 97 33.2 153 52.4 Freedom of expression 5 1.7 5 1.7 29 9.9 99 33.9 154 52.7 Right of workers to form, join trade unions and strike 6 2.1 22 7.5 82 28.1 86 29.5 96 32.9 Freedom of movement and residence 5 1.7 10 3.4 56 19.2 107 36.6 114 39.0 Acquire and own properties in a just way 9 3.1 12 4.1 53 18.2 100 34.2 118 40.4 Participate in the cultural activities, preserve ones’ cultural heritage and language 6 2.1 18 6.2 44 15.1 101 34.6 123 42.1
Fair trial 2 0.7 3 1.0 17 5.8 67 22.9 203 69.5 Participate in the political process 5 1.7 18 6.2 79 27.1 98 33.6 92 31.5 Adequate shelter and good living standard 2 0.7 5 1.7 17 5.8 75 25.7 193 66.1 Health care 2 0.7 3 1.0 6 2.1 43 14.7 238 81.5 Education 4 1.4 3 1.0 5 1.7 35 12.0 245 83.9 Freedom from discrimination 2 0.7 9 3.1 20 6.8 61 20.9 200 68.5
70 Beliefs
The participants’ responses regarding their beliefs about HRE can be seen in
Table 9. The statements “I think teachers should be respectful of the rights of all students” (192 [65.8%]) and “I believe that people should be educated in the human rights field so they can realize and interpret human rights related issues” (162 [55.5%]) had the strongest agreement compared to other statements. On the other hand, the statements “I believe that human rights violations can be eliminated by having human rights education only” (51 [17.5%]) had the most participants who strongly disagreed, followed by “I believe that human rights education should be offered beginning from kindergarten” (33 [11.3%]). Moreover, the statement “I believe that human rights violations can be eliminated by having human rights education only” had the most neutrality (77 [26.4%]) among all the statements.
71 Table 9
Beliefs toward Human Rights Education with Frequencies and Percentages
Strongly Strongly Questionnaire Item disagree % Disagree % Neutral % Agree % agree % Teachers should be respectful of the rights of all students. 6 2.1 6 2.1 15 5.1 73 25.0 192 65.8
Students should be listened to in the classrooms. 4 1.4 6 2.1 19 6.5 110 37.7 153 52.4
Students should be respected even if they think in a different 8 2.7 9 3.1 34 11.6 113 38.7 128 43.8 way. Schools and classrooms should be democratic. 10 3.4 16 5.5 54 18.5 108 37.0 104 35.6 Students should participate directly in the university 11 3.8 26 8.9 59 20.2 99 33.9 97 33.2 administration or through a member acting on their behalf.
People should be educated in the human rights field so they 5 1.7 6 2.1 16 5.5 103 35.3 162 55.5 can realize and interpret human rights related issues.
Human rights education should be offered beginning from 13 4.5 33 11.3 49 16.8 107 36.6 90 30.8 kindergarten.
Human rights education has a great effect on the 4 1.4 6 2.1 20 6.8 106 36.3 156 53.4 development of self-respect in people.
Human rights course is needed in order to learn what human 10 3.4 8 2.7 33 11.3 102 34.9 139 47.6 rights are.
A human rights course should be a “must course” 12 4.1 24 8.2 46 15.8 99 33.9 111 38.0 (compulsory) in the curriculum. Human rights violations can be eliminated by having human 25 8.6 51 17.5 77 26.4 74 25.3 65 22.3 rights education only.
There is a need to have a human rights course for people to 8 2.7 23 7.9 37 12.7 130 44.5 94 32.2 respect each other.
Human rights contributes to making people more tolerant 8 2.7 13 4.5 35 12.0 117 40.1 119 40.8 and understanding
72 Conclusion
This chapter described the statistics that resulted from the survey responses. The survey questions and the descriptive analysis were designed to answer the research questions, which were:
1.! In what ways do student-teachers in the Kuwait University College of Education
perceive the meaning of human rights?
2.! What are their experiences with human rights education?
3.! What are their beliefs about human rights education?
For Research Question 1, the student-teachers’ perceptions were measured using the questions about awareness and importance. Overall, participants had a strong awareness of most of the human rights, but they reported the highest awareness of the right to education while they reported the lowest awareness about labor, property, and political rights. As students, these perceptions make sense as education is the focus of their lives at this point, whereas working, owning property, and participating in politics are not activities many have started doing yet.
Additionally, the questionnaire items addressing experience were designed to answer Research Question 2. The results of those questions showed a very mixed picture regarding the student-teachers’ prior experiences. They heard about human rights from a wide variety of sources, with none of the sources of information resulting in a majority of responses. Moreover, the awareness of the UN’s HRE program was mixed at nearly a fifty-fifty ratio (44% unaware and 56% aware to be exact). Finally, most of the participants had no prior training in HRE and expressed mixed feelings about if they would find it helpful and how confident they would be teaching an HRE course.
! 73 Finally, in regards to Research Question 3, the questionnaire items on their beliefs showed largely positive beliefs towards the value of human rights and human rights education. It is important to note, however, that a large number of participants did not believe that education alone could eliminate human rights violations. Thus, while they may believe in the power of education in general, they do not seem to believe it is so powerful as to achieve this goal of HRE. Surprisingly, the Kuwaiti student-teachers in this study had mixed beliefs regarding student representation in institutional governance.
! 74 Chapter Five
Discussion
This chapter includes a discussion of the major findings from the previous chapter, particularly regarding the student-teachers’ awareness of, importance of, beliefs about, and prior experiences with and knowledge about human rights. Each of these findings is discussed in relation to other research on related topics as well as possible future research that could further address the gaps in the literature. Next, the limitations of the current study are identified and discussed. Finally, recommendations for future research, changes in policies, and practical applications in education and training are proposed before concluding overall.
Discussion about Awareness of Human Rights
Other than worker, property, and political rights, over half of the participants were aware of most of the rights listed in the survey. Furthermore, participants reported being most aware of the Right to Education (n=263 [90.1%]). Because the sample was students in the College of Education at Kuwait University, it makes sense that they would be most aware of educational rights, and is a positive indicator about to what degree the student- teachers’ know about the Right to Education. Similarly, because they are students and are in large part under the age of 26, they are not likely employed, do not own much if any property, and have not had much time to be active in politics. Therefore, it is not particularly surprising that awareness of worker, property, and political rights was low among this sample. In two studies using a similar survey among teachers and students in
Kenya, the Right to Education also scored highly in the awareness factor. For example,
Nduta (2015) found both teachers and students in Nairobi, Kenya reported the highest
75
! awareness of the right to education, followed by the right to life, the right to quality health care, and the right to food and shelter. Likewise, Kiprotich and Ong’ondo (2013) conducted a study in Eldoret, Kenya that revealed students and teachers were most aware of the rights to education, food and shelter, and life.
Somewhat surprisingly, while the student-teachers were aware of most of the human rights included in this study, only slightly more than half were aware of the UN
HRE program (56% aware versus 44% unaware). This is a high percent of student teachers who reported not being aware of the United Nation World Program for Human
Rights Education. In contrast, Nduta’s (2015) sample of teachers in Kenya revealed that the vast majority (96.7%) were aware of the UN’s HRE program. Perhaps that could be due to the fact that he surveyed teachers rather than student-teachers, and also perhaps
Kenya provides more education about the UN HRE program in particular than Kuwait.
Discussion about Importance of Human Rights
Most participants found the right to education (n=245 [83.9%]) very important, while property rights had the lowest ranking of “Very Important.” Additionally, they were unsure of the worker’s rights. The participants’ responses to the questions concerning the importance of HR are similar to the awareness part in that both importance and awareness were rated highly for most items, especially education rights but not for those related to property or worker’s rights. As noted above, the fact that this study sampled student-teachers helps explain why education rights were rated so highly, while property and worker’s rights were not.
Perhaps the most unusual finding was that seven student-teachers rated the “Right to Life” as “Very Unimportant,” three rated it “Unimportant,” and six were “Unsure.”
76
! While these 16 student-teachers only comprise 5.5% of the sample, it is alarming that any of them would consider the right to life to be anything less than important. In fact, the right to life can be considered one of the basic rights, those rights that meet the bare minimum for one’s security upon which all other rights depend (Shue, 1980). It is surprising that some other rights would be rated as having higher importance than the right to life, since what do those rights mean if life itself is not protected?
Discussion about Beliefs about Human Rights
The statements “I think teachers should be respectful of the rights of all students”
(192 [65.8%]) and “I believe that people should be educated in the human rights field so they can realize and interpret human rights related issues” (162 [55.5%]) had the strongest agreement compared to other statements. These findings were similar to
Gündoğdu’s (2011) study of candidate teachers’ attitudes towards human rights, in which teachers being respectful of students’ rights had the highest level of agreement.
On the other hand, the statement “I believe that human rights violations can be eliminated by having human rights education only” had the most participants who strongly disagreed, followed by “I believe that human rights education should be offered beginning from kindergarten,” with a mean score of 3.35 and 3.78, respectively. These findings differ slightly from findings from Gündoğdu (2011), who found a moderate level of agreement in the belief that human rights violations can be eliminated by education and that HRE should be offered from kindergarten, with means of 3.43 and 3.93, respectively. It is impossible to know if the lower attitude towards the power of HRE in the Kuwaiti sample differs from the Turkish sample because of cultural differences or changes over time, since Gündoğdu’s study preceded this study by seven years.
77
!
Discussion about Prior Experience with Human Rights
The source from which the highest percentage of student-teachers reported they first heard of human rights was from Television/Radio (32.2%), which surprisingly ranked slightly higher than School (31.1%). That means the majority of student teachers did not hear it in schools, which was the expected result. Nduta (2015) arrived at a similar finding of his sample of teachers, in School was not the most frequently cited source from which respondents first heard about human rights; rather, Internet and Websites was highest, followed by Family and Parents and media through television. These findings indicate that students, student-teachers, and teachers are not primarily hearing about human rights from school, but from other media outlets. This finding is a wake-up call to educators to realize that they are not the first source of information on human rights, and that other, perhaps less reliable, sources of information are reaching people first.
The finding that most of the student-teachers have not attended any training on
HRE (82.9%) might help explain why other sources of information have a more immediate influence on the information about human rights and HRE received by the participants. Likewise, Nduta (2015) found that all of the teachers who responded to his survey reported that they had not received any training on HRE, despite the fact that they taught subjects that incorporated some aspects of human rights in the lessons.
Promisingly, the majority (67.5%) of student-teachers in the College of Education and Kuwait University reported that training on human rights education would be helpful to them. Moreover, of those who reported receiving training, 86% reported that it was helpful while 14% reported it was not. While the high number of those reporting that it was helpful is a positive finding, it is still a bit concerning that a non-trivial percentage 78
! found it unhelpful, perhaps because of problems with their training programs that need to be further investigated in a follow-up study.
Not surprisingly, nearly two-thirds (76.7%) of the participants were not very confident about teaching HRE, which makes sense given that most of them heard of human rights from the media and did not receive any kind of formal training. A Review of Human Rights Education in Schools in Scotland conducted by the Black and Ethnic
Minority Infrastructure in Scotland (BEMIS, 2013) organization found similarly low levels of confidence in teaching about human rights among Scottish teachers (p. 36). To address this finding, HRE training seminars and workshops could help improve student- teachers’ confidence in teaching topic related to human rights. Prior research has shown that attitudes and self-efficacy toward teaching human rights can increase with additional training programs (Stellmacher & Sommer, 2008).
Discussion about Demographics
It is interesting to note, especially for non-Kuwaiti readers, that in the nationality variable, non-Kuwaitis comprised a sizable portion of student-teachers (20.2%), although
Kuwaitis were still the majority (79.8%). Presumably, most other nations only have citizens in their teacher education programs because of the difficulty for non-citizens to get jobs and particularly to work in schools. However, Kuwait is an anomaly in the world in that the majority of residents living there are non-Kuwaitis. Out of a population of approximately 4.5 million, nearly 3.2 million are non-Kuwaitis, while Kuwaiti citizens comprise 1.3 million (Zaki, 2018). Moreover, non-Kuwaitis can get an education and teach in Kuwait in order to help meet the demand for teachers as a result of a shortage
(Alessa, 2017). Based on the descriptive methods of this study, it is not possible to say if
79
! differences in nationality correlate with differences in responses regarding their experience with and perceptions of human rights and HRE. This could be an area for future research.
Limitations
There are a few limitations that this study faced. First, it cannot be generalized to the whole Kuwaiti population because the target sample was student-teachers in the
College of Education in Kuwait University. It is likely that other subpopulations of
Kuwaitis would rate different rights as being very important or something they are very aware of. For example, currently employed Kuwaitis might find worker’s rights to be something they are more aware of and something they find to be more important than what the student-teachers reported.
Second, the study is limited by the fact that the survey questionnaire was a self- reported instrument that suffers from a variety of disadvantages. For example, self-report instruments made lead to a social desirability bias in which respondents give responses that align with what they believe society upholds rather than what they truly feel, which could produce results that skew more positive in beliefs and attitudes towards HRE.
Similarly, the participants sometimes predict what the researcher is looking for and provide responses that confirm the researcher’s conjectures. Self-report data can also be affected by the participants feelings at the time of the survey rather than deeply held beliefs.
Third, the non-random, convenience sampling method likely resulted in a biased sample of student-teachers who were most willing and eager to promote HRE and HRE-
80
! related research while not capturing more negative or apathetic attitudes. The sample therefore limits the generalizability of the data.
Fourth, the quantitative and descriptive nature of the study results in a shallower understanding of the phenomenon being observed. For example, it lacks the depth needed to understand to unexpected responses from the participants. The descriptive nature also means it could not address questions related to correlations or differences between groups.
Implications & Recommendations
There are three findings that have major implications for how HRE is incorporated into the education system in Kuwait, particularly for education majors. First, in spite of the student-teachers’ high level of reported awareness of most human rights,
82.9% of the student-teachers reported not attending any training on HRE. Therefore, even if they are aware of and have some knowledge of various human rights, they still lack any formal training that would allow them to be well-equipped to teach concepts related to human rights. Second, among the student-teachers who reported attending training on HRE, around 15% of them found the training program not useful. Although that is by no means a majority of students, it is a number that can be improved upon.
Third, regarding the question of confidence about teaching HRE, only 23.3% reported being very confident about doing so. To improve the number of student-teachers with
HRE training, to improve the usefulness of existing training, and to increase their confidence about teaching HRE to their students, it is necessary to reconsider the current approach to HRE in Kuwait.
81
! There are a couple currently existing HRE components of the Kuwaiti education system that can be further developed. One HRE component is provided as an elective course at the higher education level for undergraduate students in the College of
Education at Kuwait University. The other component is a required course at the secondary school level on the (Kuwaiti) Constitution and human rights (CHR). Working from these two pre-existing components can help make the following recommendations more feasible and likely to succeed.
The elective course on human rights and education in the College of Education of
Kuwait University is a three-credit course that teaches pre-service teachers about human rights from global and local perspectives, with particular focus on educating and coexisting with the diverse international populations that comprise Kuwaiti society. This course is not required, and most students do not take it; additionally, as the survey in this dissertation showed, not everyone who does take the course finds it useful. In the open- ended comments section of the survey, one of the respondents mentioned,
ﺪﺟﻮ" (ﺮﻘﻣ ﻲﻓ ﺎﺟ ﺔﻌﻣ ﺖ"ﻮﻜﻟ/ 5ﺪﺤﺘ" ﻦﻋ ﺔ9ﺑﺮﺘﻟ/ : >ﻮﻘﺣ @ﺎﺴﻧﻹ/ ﻦﻜﻟ: ﺘﺤ" Aﺎ ﺮ"ﻮﻄﺗ
(There is a course that teaches human rights and education, but it needs
development)
This comment brings to the forefront the necessity to evaluate the goals and outcomes of the current human rights and education elective, as well as how and whether the goals and outcomes are being met.
Among the factors that need to be reconsidered is whether this elective could become a required course for all education majors at Kuwait University since everyone is responsible for teaching students who come from both Kuwaiti and non-Kuwaiti
82
! backgrounds. Because Kuwaitis must live in a society that is over two-thirds non-
Kuwaiti, it is arguably everyone’s job to promote the principles of human rights. As an alternative to one single, required course, another respondent recommended,
ﻦﻜﻤﻣ ﻌﺿ: F : FﺠﻣG ﻊﻣ J/(ﺮﻘﻣ Lﺮﺧ/
(Maybe integrate human rights in other courses)
This suggestion would be more difficult to implement, but perhaps would have a better outcome than making an extra course mandatory because it would not require loading any more credits into the standard curriculum and it would reinforce how human rights is not a separate subject but an aspect of everyday life.
In addition to the human rights and education elective for education majors at
Kuwait University, in the secondary education system of Kuwait, the year-long CHR course already covers the topic of human rights to some extent. It is a required course during the senior year of high school, and is similar to civics education courses in the US.
As noted earlier in the dissertation, the CHR course was originally introduced in 2006 as a three-year program on the topic of human rights, democracy, and citizenship, the first of its kind in the Gulf region (al-Nakib, 2011). It was initially divided into the following units:
•! Grade 10: Introduction to the principles of democracy, the Kuwaiti
Constitution, and human rights.
•! Grade 11: Human rights from three perspectives: Islam, international
agreements, and the Kuwaiti Constitution.
•! Grade 12: Kuwait’s democratic system of government, Constitution, and
distribution of power.
83
! However, in 2010, it was reduced to one-year, focusing on the Grade 12 unit (al-
Nakib, 2011). I recommend that the Kuwait Ministry of Education reconsider the CHR course to extend it to its pre-2010 scope and perhaps even further. Such CHR/HRE-based courses can even be incorporated into the educational system beginning from kindergarten. While starting an HRE-related course in kindergarten might seem a bit early for such a complex topic, it is possible to incorporate simple elements of human rights—such as respect and tolerance—in a kind of “hidden curriculum,” as coined by sociologist Philip Jackson (1968) and further explored by educational theorists such as
Paulo Freire (1990/1970). This HRE curriculum could then progress in complexity and emerge as more explicit lessons throughout the higher grades.
Typically, the CHR course is taught by the school’s social studies teachers, but they do not require any special certification. If the human rights and education course for education majors at Kuwait University cannot be required for all teachers or incorporated into multiple courses throughout the curriculum, then perhaps it would be most feasible to require the teachers who teach the CHR course to have an HRE certificate or a minor in HRE. To gain a certificate/minor, a student could complete 3-4 courses (9-12 credits) in their undergraduate education program or after graduation as an extra continuing education program.
This program could help make sure that they understand the meaning of HR, and they are able to teach the CHR course. Most of the respondents reported that they had no prior training or courses in HRE, and also that they would not feel confident teaching
HRE topics to their students. To address the lack of training and lack of confidence, an
HRE training program could be developed and implemented at the college level to
84
! education majors. Making an HRE certification/minor a requirement for CHR teachers would accomplish two goals: (1) making the preparation of HRE more comprehensive and integral to at least some teachers’ careers and (2) improve the quality of the CHR program and its learning outcomes. That way, the certification/minor confers some benefits to the teachers who complete it, rather than an elective that very few students take or a required course that many students might find purposeless, impractical, irrelevant, or worse.
To get the discussion started on implementing a possible HRE certification/minor program in the College of Education at Kuwait University, I propose the following four courses, divided into freshman, sophomore, junior, and senior levels:
•! Freshman Level - Introduction to Human Rights Education
This will be a survey course that will provide an overview to the history of
development of human rights from Western and Islamic societies, as well as the
basic theories of human rights and ethics.
•! Sophomore Level - 21st Century Issues and Events in Human Rights
This course will take a closer look and contemporary events in human rights and
human rights education. In particularly, it will focus on studying and analyzing
events that have had local implications for Kuwait, such as the Iraqi invasion of
Kuwait and the development of the CHR courses.
•! Junior Level – Pedagogy of Human Rights Education
This course will engage students in the application of practical methods and skills
of HRE through the lenses of the history, theories, and principles of human rights
85
! learned in the prior two courses. It will emphasize teaching methods and
approaches to teaching the CHR course.
•! Senior Level - Relational Hermeneutics and HRE
This will be a seminar course with a heavy focus on reading and discussion. It
will include cross-cultural research, comparative education, identifying
isomorphic equivalents of human rights around the world, and other topics that
emphasize varying degrees of consensus, agreement, and mutual understanding.
These courses are designed to build upon one another, starting with basic foundations, then local and current examples, followed by practical applications, and finally broad and generalizable lessons that can be transferrable in many contexts.
Other recommendations based on the findings of this dissertation pertain to future research. One research recommendation would be to conduct a qualitative study about
HRE in Kuwait, especially student-teachers in the College of Education in Kuwait
University. This research would allow for more in-depth analysis of reasons why some of the student-teachers would not find an HRE training program useful, and likewise why so many respondents disagreed and strongly disagreed that an HRE course should be offered beginning from kindergarten. Other future research studies could focus on whether any statistically significant differences exist between various groups, such as Kuwaitis and non-Kuwaitis, men and women, year of study, and subject of study. The current study was only able to provide descriptive statistics, so was unable to address such correlations, but such information could be informative for future researchers to pursue. Future research could also compare and contrast the similarities and differences between
Kuwaitis and non-Kuwaitis in terms of their perspectives and beliefs towards human
86
! rights. Such comparisons would be interesting because of the unique composition of the demographics of Kuwait in which Kuwaiti citizens are both a numeric minority in their own country and a political majority in terms of power, while non-Kuwaitis comprise three fourths of the population but without a permanent political status.
Conclusion
To the author’s knowledge, this dissertation includes one of the first research studies to focus on the perceptions, experiences, and beliefs of student-teachers in Kuwait towards human rights and HRE. The descriptive statistics in this study provide a starting for this topic upon which future studies can build in order to generate a better understanding of the way those training to work in the education field, particularly in
Kuwait, think about HRE.
One of the most important findings is that despite the fact that nearly all of student-teachers studied CHR, almost half of the student-teachers reported not being aware of the United Nation World Program for Human Rights Education. Moreover, around one-fifth of student-teachers reported being unaware or unsure of the right to life and 5.5% found the right to life to be very unimportant, unimportant, or unsure of its importance, which is a surprising finding considering it is a fundamental right related to the security of person. It is important to conduct further research to better understand the aspects of the culture of Kuwait that might have contributed to this result. Perhaps the prioritization of social good over individual rights is at work given that Kuwaiti culture tends to be more collectivistic than individualistic. However, at this point, such a proposition is pure speculation, so additional investigation into this phenomenon is needed.
87
! This study emphasized that effective HRE is essential in educating people about their inherent human rights. Learning human rights enables individuals to understand what they must do or not do to fellow humans based on the basic reason that they too are human beings who have inherent rights. This perception helps learners to seek, protect, and uphold their rights and those of others, thus helping to create a national culture of peace towards the end goal of establishing global peace.
Kuwait has led other Gulf nations in promote education to try to spread the peace around the world, but there is much more room to grow in this regard. Therefore, if
Kuwait implements HRE and continues to promote human rights and peace not only through its humanitarian and peacekeeping efforts but also through its education system via comprehensive HRE programs in K-12 education as well as higher education, it is poised to serve as an example for other nations in the region to follow.
88
! References
Abou El Fadl, K. (2004). Islam and the challenge of democracy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1975). A Bayesian analysis of attribution
processes. Psychological bulletin, 82(2), 261.
Albudaiwi, D. (2014). The impact of culture and religion on the perception of freedom of
expression between older and younger generations in South Africa and state of
Kuwait: An international and comparative study (Doctoral dissertation).
Retrieved from
https://dc.uwm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1656&context=etd
Aldaihani, M. (2011). A comparative study of inclusive education in Kuwait and
England (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from
http://etheses.bham.ac.uk/1547/1/Aldaihani_11_PhD.pdf
Al!Daraweesh, F., & Snauwaert, D. T. (2013). Toward a hermeneutical theory of
international HRE. Educational Theory, 63(4), 389–412. doi:10.1111/edth.12030
Al-Daraweesh, F., & Snauwaert, D. T. (2015). HRE beyond universalism and relativism.
New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Alessa, B. (2016, July 28). Minister of Education: Only 38 percent of Kuwaiti male
teachers compared to expatriates (Arabic). Al Rai Media. Retrieved from
http://www.alraimedia.com/Home/Details?Id=f8f229a7-fef4-4364-8bd8-
8bb9b574b32a
Allen, E., & Seaman, C. (2007). Likert scales and data analyses. Quality Progress, 40(7),
64–65.
89
! Al-Nakib, R. (2011) Citizenship, nationalism, human rights and democracy: A tangling
of terms in the Kuwaiti curriculum. Educational Research, 53(2), 165–178.
doi:10.1080/00131881.2011.572364
Al-Romaidhi, K. (2010). Democratic educational practices in the Kuwaiti school: A
sample of fourth grade secondary students in Kuwait (Arabic). Journal of
Damascus University, 26(4), 155–213.
Andreopoulos, J. & Claude, P., (1997). HRE for the twenty-first Century. Philadelphia,
PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Anyon, J. (1981). Social class and school knowledge. Curriculum Inquiry, 11(1), 3–42.
doi:10.2307/1179509
Bajaj, M. (2008). Critical peace education. In M. Bajaj (Ed.), Encyclopedia of peace
education (pp. 135-146). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Bajaj, M. (2011b). Teaching to transform, transforming to teach: Exploring the role of
teachers in HRE in India. Educational Research, 53(2), 207–221.
doi:10.1080/00131881.2011.572369
Bajaj, M., (2011a). Human rights education: ideology, location, and approaches. Human
Rights Quarterly. 33(2), 481–508. doi:10.1353/hrq.2011.0019
Bell, D. (1996). The East Asian challenge to human rights: Reflections on an East West
dialogue. Human Rights Quarterly, 18(3), 641–667. doi:10.1353/hrq.1996.0027
BEMIS (2013). A review of HRE in schools in Scotland. Retrieved from
http://www.bemis.org.uk/documents/BEMIS%20HRE%20in%20Schools%20Rep
ort.pdf
Bobbio, N. (1996). The age of rights. London, UK: Polity Press.
90
! Boutros-Ghali, B. (1993, June 14). Human rights: The common language of humanity.
Address at the Opening of the World Conference on Human Rights, The Vienna
Declaration and Programme of Action. New York, NY: United Nations
Department of Public Informaiton.
Brander, P., Keen, E. Lemineur, & M.-L. (Eds.) (2002). Compass. A manual on HRE
with young people. Strasbourg, France: Council of Europe Publishing.
Butin, D. W. (2005). Teaching SFE: Contexts, theories, and issues. London, UK:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Carter, C., & Osler, A. (2000). Human rights, identities and conflict management: a study
of school culture as experienced through classroom relationships. Cambridge
Journal of Education, 30(3), 335–356. doi:10.1080/03057640020004496
Clegg, S., & Bailey, J. R. (2008). International encyclopedia of organization studies.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2005). Research methods in education (5th ed.)
London, UK: Routledge.
College of Education. (2013). The Annual Report for the College of Education
2011/2012. Kuwait City, Kuwait: Kuwait University
College of Education. (n.d.). Al-Eittar Al-Mafaheemi Le Koliat Al-Tarbiah [The
Conceptual Framework of the College of Education] (Arabic). Kuwait City,
Kuwait: Kuwait University.
Cresswell, J. W. (2015). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating
quantitative and qualitative research (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson
Education.
91
! Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Larson, R. (2014).Validity and reliability of the experience-
sampling method. In Flow and the foundations of positive psychology: The
collected works of Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi (pp. 35–54).
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9088-8_3
Danesh, H. B. (2008). The education for peace integrative curriculum: Concepts, contents
and efficacy. Journal of Peace Education, 5(2), 157–173.
doi:10.1080/17400200802264396
Danesh, H. B. (Ed.). (2011). Education for peace reader. Victoria, Canada: EFP Press.
De Moulin, D. F., & Kolstad, R. (1999). Change in a pre-teacher education group for
democratic maturity during college and graduate education. Journal of
Instructional Psychology, 26(3), 145–148.
Dikovic, M. (2016). Integration of values and awareness model of HRE in primary school
curricula. Metodički Obzori 11(1), 60–75. Retrieved from
https://hrcak.srce.hr/index.php?show=clanak&id_clanak_jezik=249198
Donnelly, J. (1989), Human rights and Asian values: A defense of Western universalism.
In J. R. Bauer & D. A. Bell (Eds.), The East Asian challenge for human rights
(pp. 60–87). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Donnelly, J. (2013). Universal human rights in theory and practice (3rd ed.). Cornell,
NY: Cornell University Press.
Flowers, N. (2000). The HRE handbook: Effective practices for learning, action, and
change. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota.
Freire, P. (1990). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY: Continuum Press.
(Original work published 1970).
92
! Gadamer, H.-G. (1976). Philosophical hermeneutics. Berkeley, CA: University of
California Press.
Galtung, J. (1969). Violence, peace, and peace research. Journal of peace research, 6(3),
167–191. doi:10.1177/002234336900600301
Galtung, J. (1990). Cultural violence. Journal of peace research, 27(3), 291–305.
doi:10.1177/0022343390027003005
Galtung, J. (1994). Human rights in another key. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
Garland, R. (1991). The midpoint on a rating scale: Is it desirable? Marketing Bulletin, 2,
66–70. Retrieved from http://marketing-bulletin.massey.ac.nz/
Gonçalves, B., & Perra, N. (2015). Social phenomena: From data analysis to models.
New York, NY: Springer.
Gündoğdu, K. (2011). Candidate teachers’ attitudes concerning HRE in Turkey.
Education and Science, 36(162), 182–194.
Hassan, R. (1987). Peace education: a Muslim perspective. In H. Gordon & L. Grob
(Eds.), Education for Peace: Testimonies from world religions (pp. 90–108).
Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books.
Hayden, P. (2001). The philosophy of human rights: Readings in context. New York, NY:
Paragon House.
Hayden, P. (2002). John Rawls: Towards a just world order. Cardiff, UK: University of
Wales Press.
Healy, P. (2006). Human rights and intercultural relations: A hermeneutico-dialogical
approach. Philosophy & Social Criticism, 32, 513–541.
doi:10.1177/0191453706064023
93
! Healy, P. (2011). Situated Cosmopolitanism, and the Conditions of its Possibility:
Transformative Dialogue as a Response to the Challenge of Difference. Cosmos
and History, 7(2), 157–178. Retrieved from
https://www.cosmosandhistory.org/index.php/journal
Hersey, P. E. (2012). Supporting teachers as transformative intellectuals: Participatory
action research in HRE. (Honors Scholar Thesis). Accessible from
https://search.proquest.com/docview/1284826907
Jackson, P. W. (1968). Life in classrooms. New York, NY: Holt, Reinhart & Winston.
Jordaan, E. (2009). Dialogic cosmopolitanism and global justice. International Studies
Review, 11(4), 736–748. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2486.2009.00893.x
Jover, G. (2001). What does the right to education mean? A look at an international
debate from legal, ethical, and pedagogical points of view. Studies in Philosophy
and Education, 20(3), 213–223. doi:10.1023/a:1010305416970
Kepenekçi, Y. K. (1999). Eğitimcilerin insan haklarina yönelik [Educators’ perceptions
toward human rights] (Turkish). Ankara University Educational Sciences Faculty
Journal, 32(1), 213–227. Retrieved from
http://dergiler.ankara.edu.tr/eng/detail.php?id=40
Kerr, D., Mandzuk, D., & Raptis, H., (2011). The role of the SFE in programs for teacher
preparation in Canada. Canadian Journal of Education, 34(4), 118–134.
Retrieved from http://cje-rce.ca/
Kezban, K. (2014). Teachers’ perspectives on civic and HRE. Education Research and
Review, 9(10), 302–311. doi:10.5897/err2013.1707
94
! Khor, L., (2016). Human rights discourse in a global network: Books beyond borders.
London, UK: Routledge.
Khozani, M. A. (2006). Human rights in the Iranian education system. Human Rights
Education in Asian Schools, 9, 45–56. Retrieved from
https://www.hurights.or.jp/archives/human_rights_education_in_asian_schools/
Kiprotich, A., & Ong'ondo, C. O. (2013). An assessment of the level of awareness about
children's rights among children in Eldoret municipality, Kenya. Journal of
Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies, 4(2), 279–287.
Retrieved from http://jeteraps.scholarlinkresearch.com/
Koylu, M. (2004). Peace education: An Islamic approach. Journal of Peace Education,
1(1), 59–76. doi:10.1080/1740020032000178302
Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities.
Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30(3), 607–610.
doi:10.1177/001316447003000308
Kuwait University, (2018). About Us: The College of Education. Retrieved from
http://kuweb.ku.edu.kw/ku/AboutUniversity/AboutKU/index.htm
Kuwait University. (2018). World university rankings. Retrieved from
https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/kuwait-
university
Leung, S.-O. (2011). A comparison of psychometric properties and normality in 4-, 5-, 6-
and 11-point Likert scales. Journal of Social Service Research, 37(4), 412–421.
doi:10.1080/01488376.2011.580697
95
! Magendzo, A. (2005). Pedagogy of HRE: a Latin American perspective. Intercultural
Education, 16(2), 137-143. doi:10.1080/14675980500133549
Mason, T. C. (1999). Prospective teachers’ attitudes toward urban schools: Can they be
changed? Multicultural Education, 6(4), 9–13. Accessible from
https://search.proquest.com/openview/b5764da44cf381df62b3ebcdb50f8a8a/
Moeckli, D., Shah, S., & Sivakumaran, S. (2013). International human rights law.
Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Nduta, J. N. (2015). School factors influencing integration of HRE in public secondary
school curriculum in Kasarani sub-county, Nairobi City County Kenya (Master’s
thesis). Retrieved from
http://erepository.uonbi.ac.ke/bitstream/handle/11295/92838/Nduta_School%20F
actors%20Influencing%20Integration%20Of%20Human%20Rights%20Educatio
n%20In%20Public%20Secondary%20School.pdf
Noddings, N. (2007). Curriculum for the 21st Century. Educational Studies in Japan:
International Yearbook, 1(2), 75–81. doi:10.7571/esjkyoiku.2.75
Nulty, D. D. (2008). The adequacy of response rates to online and paper surveys: What
can be done? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(3), 301–314.
doi:10.1080/02602930701293231
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (2018). HRE and
training. Retrieved from
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Education/Training/Pages/HREducationTraining
Index.aspx
96
! Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. (2003). ABC:
Teaching human rights: Practical activities for primary and secondary schools.
Retrieved from http://s3.amazonaws.com/inee-
assets/resources/ABC_Teaching_Human_Rights.pdf
Peck, R., Olsen, C., & Devore, J. L. (2015).Introduction to statistics and data analysis.
Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.
Piršl, E., Marušic-Štimac, O., & Pokrajac-Bulian, A. (2007). The attitudes of students and
teachers towards Civic education and Human Rights. Metodički Obzori, 2(2), 19–
34. Retrieved from https://hrcak.srce.hr/file/30414
Porter, J. (1999). Natural law to human rights: Or, why rights talk matters. Journal of
Law and Religion, 14(1), 77–96. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1051779
Print, M., Ugarte, C., Naval, C., & Mihr, A. (2008). Moral and HRE: the contribution of
the United Nations. Journal of Moral Education, 37(1), 115–132.
doi:10.1080/03057240701803726
Ramos, F. (2010). ‘Human rights and Citizenship Education’ and in-service teacher
training: An experience. Exedra, 1(3), 92–123. Retrieved from
http://www.exedrajournal.com/docs/N3/07A-Fernando_ramos_pp_91-124.pdf
Reardon, B. (2010). Educating for human dignity: Learning about rights and
responsibilities. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Reardon, B. A., & Snauwaert, D. T. (2015). Betty A. Reardon: A pioneer in education for
peace and human rights. New York, NY: Springer International Publishing.
97
! Ross, D. D., & Yeager, E. (1999). What does democracy mean to prospective elementary
teachers? Journal of Teacher Education, 50(4), 255–266.
doi:10.1177/002248719905000403
Sen, A. (2009) The idea of justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Shapcott, R. (2001). Justice, community and dialogue in international relations (Vol. 78).
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Shue, H. (1980). Basic rights: Subsistence, affluence, and American foreign
policy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Snauwaert, D. (2011). Social justice and the philosophical foundations of critical peace
education: Exploring Nussbaum, Sen, and Freire. Journal of Peace
Education, 8(3), 315–331. doi:10.1080/17400201.2011.621371
Stellmacher, J., & Sommer, G. (2008). Human rights education, an evaluation of
university seminars. Social Psychology, 59(1), 70–80. doi:10.1027/1864-
9335.39.1.70
Stockmann, S., (2010). Teachers' views of HRE (Honors scholar thesis). Retrieved from
http://digitalcommons.uconn.edu/srhonors_theses/139
Stone, A., (2002). HRE and public policy in the United States: Mapping the road ahead.
Human Rights Quarterly, 24(2), 537–557. doi:10.1353/hrq.2002.0029
Stork, J. (2012). Human rights in the smaller Gulf states: Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar
and the UAE. Oslo, Norway: Norwegian Peacebuilding Resource Center.
Suárez, D. (2007). Education professionals and the construction of human rights
education. Comparative Education Review, 51 (1), 48–70. doi:10.2307/4122376
98
! Tibbitts, F. (2002). Understanding what we do: Emerging models for human rights
education. International Review of Education, 48(3), 159–171.
doi:10.1023/a:1020338300881
Tibbitts, F. L. (2017), Revisiting ‘emerging’ models of HRE. International Journal of
HRE, 1(1), 1–24. Retrieved from https://repository.usfca.edu/ijhre/vol1/iss1/2/
Tozer, S., Gallegos, B. P., Henry, A., Greiner, M. B., & Price, P. G. (Eds.). (2011).
Handbook of research in the SFE. New York, NY: Routledge.
Tutwiler, S. W., deMarrais, K., Gabbard, D., Hyde, A., Konkol, P., Li, H-l, Medina, Y.,
Rayle, J., & Swain, A. (2013). Standards for academic and professional
instruction in foundations of education, educational studies, and educational
policy studies third edition, 2012, draft presented to the educational community
by the American Educational Studies Association’s Committee on Academic
Standards and Accreditation. Educational Studies, 49, 107–118. doi:!
10.1080/00131946.2013.767253
United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund. (2007). A human rights-based
approach education for all. A framework for the realization of children’s right to
education and rights within education. Retrieved from
https://www.unicef.org/publications/files/A_Human_Rights_Based_Approach_to
_Education_for_All.pdf
United Nations. (2018). The foundation of international human rights law. Retrieved
from http://www.un.org/en/sections/universal-declaration/foundation-international-
human-rights-law/index.html
99
! United Nations. (1989). The teaching of human rights. Report of an international seminar.
Geneva, Switzerland, December 5-9, 1988. (ED 423 149).
United Nations. (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Retrieved from
http://www.jus.uio.no/lm/un.universal.declaration.of.human.rights.1948/portrait.a
4.pdf
Walzer, M. (2008). Spheres of justice: A defense of pluralism and equality. Basic books.
Watfa, A. & Al-Romaidhi, K. M. (2006). The problem of HRE in the Kuwaiti
Educational System: The views and aspirations of the educational staff. Journal of
the Gulf and Arabian Peninsula Studies, 32(123). Retrieved from
http://pubcouncil.kuniv.edu.kw/jgaps/home.aspx?id=8&Root=yes
Watfa, A. & Alshurai, S. (2011). HRE in the Kuwaiti School from the perspective of a
sample of educational supervisors. Journal of the Gulf and Arabian Peninsula
Studies, 37(140). Retrieved from
http://pubcouncil.kuniv.edu.kw/jgaps/home.aspx?id=8&Root=yes
Zaki, A, (2018, July 22). Kuwait Population. Alanba. Retrieved from
https://www.alanba.com.kw/ar/kuwait-news/845985/22-07-2018
Zembylas, M., Charalambous, P., Lesta, S. & Charalambous, C., (2014). Primary school
teachers’ understandings of human rights and HRE (HRE) in Cyprus: An
Exploratory study. human rights Review, 16(2), 161–182. doi:10.1007/s12142-
014-0331-5
100
!
Appendix A
Questionnaire (English)
This questionnaire is aimed at collecting data on student-teachers’ perception of human Rights in
College of Education Kuwait University, as well as their experiences with and beliefs about
Human Rights Education. The data collected will be used for academic purposes only will be treated with strict confidentiality. Further, the data will never be availed to third party EXCEPT with express permission from the respondents.
You are kindly requested to participate in the study by providing answers to the items in the sections as indicated. Where appropriate, use a tick (✓).
Part One: Personal data
1.!Sex:
1. Male 2. Female
2.! Age: a)! 19-22 years old b)! 22-26 years old c)! 27-30 years old d)! Over 30 years old
3.! Marital status: a)! Single b)! Married c)! Divorced d)! Widowed
4.Subjects of study......
5.Year of Study a)! Year 1
101
! b)! Year 2 c)! Year 3 d)! Year 4 e)! Year 5 Others (please specify)......
6.! Credits completed……………
7.! Nationality a)! Kuwaiti b)! Non-Kuwaiti
8.! Where did you first hear of human rights? a)! Television/Radio b)! Family/parents c)! Newspaper/Magazine d)! School e)! Internet/website f)! Legal documents g)! Others (please specify)…………
9.! Are you aware of the United Nation World Program for Human Rights Education? 1. Yes 2. No 10.!Have you ever attended any training on human rights education?
1. Yes 2. No
11.!If the answer to the previous question (yes) was, was the training useful to you?
1. Yes 2. No
12.!Would training on human rights education be helpful to you? 1. Yes 2. No 13.!How would you rate your confidence with regards to the teaching of human rights education? 1. Not confident 2. Fairly confident 102
! 3. Very confident
Part Two: A. Perception of Human Rights
•! Indicate your level of awareness in regard to the following rights on a scale of 1-3 (1= Unaware, 2= Not Sure, 3=Aware)
1. Right to life:
1.! Unaware 2.! Not Sure 3.! Aware
2. Right to just and favorable working conditions:
1. Unaware 2. Not Sure 3. Aware
3. Right to freedom of worship:
1. Unaware 2. Not Sure 3. Aware
4. Right to social security, social benefits and pension:
1. Unaware 2. Not Sure 3. Aware
5. Right to freedom of expression:
1. Unaware 2. Not Sure 3. Aware
6. Right of workers to form, join trade unions and right to strike:
1. Unaware 2. Not Sure 3. Aware
7. Right to freedom of movement and residence:
103
! 1. Unaware 2. Not Sure 3. Aware
8. Right to acquire and own properties in a just way:
1. Unaware 2. Not Sure 3. Aware
9. Right to participate in the cultural activities, preserve ones cultural heritage and language:
1. Unaware 2. Not Sure 3. Aware
10. Right to fair trial:
1. Unaware 2. Not Sure 3. Aware
11. Right to participate in the political process:
1. Unaware 2. Not Sure 3. Aware
12. Right to adequate shelter and good living standard:
1. Unaware 2. Not Sure 3. Aware
13. Right to health care:
1. Unaware 2. Not Sure 3. Aware
14. Right to education:
1. Unaware 2. Not Sure 104
! 3. Aware
15. Right to freedom from discrimination:
1. Unaware 2. Not Sure 3. Aware
Part Two: B. Importance of Human Rights Indicate the level of importance on a scale of 1-5 (1= Very Unimportant, 2= Unimportant, 3= Not Sure, 4=Important, 5= Very Important).
1. Right to life:
1. Very Unimportant 2. Unimportant 3. Not Sure 4. Important 5. Very Important
2. Right to just and favorable working conditions:
1. Very Unimportant 2. Unimportant 3. Not Sure 4. Important 5. Very Important
3. Right to freedom of worship:
1. Very Unimportant 2. Unimportant 3. Not Sure 4. Important 5. Very Important
4. Right to social security, social benefits and pension:
1. Very Unimportant 2. Unimportant 3. Not Sure 4. Important
105
! 5. Very Important
5. Right to freedom of expression:
1. Very Unimportant 2. Unimportant 3. Not Sure 4. Important 5. Very Important
6. Right of workers to form, join trade unions and right to strike:
1. Very Unimportant 2. Unimportant 3. Not Sure 4. Important 5. Very Important
7. Right to freedom of movement and residence:
1. Very Unimportant 2. Unimportant 3. Not Sure 4. Important 5. Very Important
8. Right to acquire and own properties in a just way:
1. Very Unimportant 2. Unimportant 3. Not Sure 4. Important 5. Very Important
9. Right to participate in the cultural activities, preserve ones cultural heritage and language:
1. Very Unimportant 2. Unimportant 3. Not Sure 4. Important 5. Very Important
10. Right to fair trial: 106
! 1. Very Unimportant 2. Unimportant 3. Not Sure 4. Important 5. Very Important
11. Right to participate in the political process:
1. Very Unimportant 2. Unimportant 3. Not Sure 4. Important 5. Very Important
12. Right to adequate shelter and good living standard:
1. Very Unimportant 2. Unimportant 3. Not Sure 4. Important 5. Very Important
13. Right to health care:
1. Very Unimportant 2. Unimportant 3. Not Sure 4. Important 5. Very Important
14. Right to education:
1. Very Unimportant 2. Unimportant 3. Not Sure 4. Important 5. Very Important
15. Right to freedom from discrimination:
1. Very Unimportant 2. Unimportant 3. Not Sure
107
! 4. Important 5. Very Important
Third part: Beliefs about HRE Indicate your beliefs on a scale of 1-5 about the following statements pertinent to HRE using a tick (✓). (1= strongly disagree, 2= disagree 3=Neutral, 4=agree, 5=strongly agree)
1. I think teachers should be respectful of the rights of all students:
1. Strongly disagree 2. Disagree 3. Neutral 4. Agree 5. Strongly agree
2. I believe that students should be listened to in the classrooms:
1. Strongly disagree 2. Disagree 3. Neutral 4. Agree 5. Strongly agree
3. I believe that students should be respected even if they think in a different way:
1. Strongly disagree 2. Disagree 3. Neutral 4. Agree 5. Strongly agree
4. I believe that schools and classrooms should be democratic:
1. Strongly disagree 2. Disagree 3. Neutral 4. Agree 5. Strongly agree
108
! 5. I believe that students should participate directly in the university administration or through a member acting on their behalf:
1. Strongly disagree 2. Disagree 3. Neutral 4. Agree 5. Strongly agree
6. I believe that people should be educated in the human rights field so they can realize and interpret human rights related issues:
1. Strongly disagree 2. Disagree 3. Neutral 4. Agree 5. Strongly agree
7. I believe that Human rights education should be offered beginning from kindergarten:
1. Strongly disagree 2. Disagree 3. Neutral 4. Agree 5. Strongly agree
8. I think human rights education has a great effect on the development of self-respect in people:
1. Strongly disagree 2. Disagree 3. Neutral 4. Agree 5. Strongly agree
9. I think that a human rights course is needed in order to learn what human rights are:
1. Strongly disagree 2. Disagree 109
! 3. Neutral 4. Agree 5. Strongly agree
10. A human rights course should be a “must course” (compulsory) in the curriculum:
1. Strongly disagree 2. Disagree 3. Neutral 4. Agree 5. Strongly agree
11. I believe that human rights violations can be eliminated by having human rights education only:
1. Strongly disagree 2. Disagree 3. Neutral 4. Agree 5. Strongly agree
12. There is a need to have a human rights course for people to respect each other:
1. Strongly disagree 2. Disagree 3. Neutral 4. Agree 5. Strongly agree
13. I think that human rights education contributes to making people more tolerant and understanding:
1. Strongly disagree 2. Disagree 3. Neutral 4. Agree 5. Strongly agree
THANKS FOR YOUR COOPERATION 110
!
Appendix B
Questionnaire (Arabic)
ﺘﺳ! ﺒ % 'ﺎ
PﺪO" ﺬQ / ﺘﺳﻻ/ ﺒ 9 @ﺎ ﻰﻟV ﻊﻤﺟ Jﺎﻧﺎ9ﺑ Xﻮﺣ ﻓﺮﻌﻣ ﺔ ﺔﺒﻠﻄﻟ/ ﻦ9ﻤﻠﻌﻤﻟ/ >ﻮﻘﺤﻟ @ﺎﺴﻧﻹ/ ﻲﻓ ﻠﻛ ﺔ9 ﺔ9ﺑﺮﺘﻟ/ ﺔﻌﻣﺎﺟ ]ﺖ"ﻮﻜﻟ/ ﺔﻓﺎﺿﻹﺎﺑ ﻰﻟV /ﺮﺒﺧ ﺗ ﻢO ﻌﻣ: ﺘ ﻘ ﺪ / ﺗ ﻢX Oﻮﺣ ﻠﻌﺗ ﻢ9 >ﻮﻘﺣ @ﺎﺴﻧﻹ/ . 9ﺳ ﺘ ﻢ ﺪﺨﺘﺳ/ / ^ ﺒﻟ/ Jﺎﻧﺎ9 ﻲﺘﻟ/ ﻢﺘ" ﻤﺟ ﻌ O ﺎ a/ﺮﻏﻸﻟ ﺎﻛﻷ/ G 9ﻤ" ﺔ ﻂﻘﻓ "ﺮﺴﺑ ﺔ ﺔﻣﺎﺗ . . :ﻼﻋ e ﻰﻠﻋ ﻚﻟf ﻦﻟ ﻢﺘ" ﺘﺳﻻ/ ﻔ ﺎ e G ﻦﻣ Jﺎﻧﺎ9ﺒﻟ/ ﻰﻟP Vﺮi ﺚﻟﺎﺛ ﻻf@ Vﺈﺑ ﺮﺻ " ﺢ ﻦﻣ ﻦ9ﺒ9ﺠﺘﺴﻤﻟ/ .
ﻰﺟﺮ" ﻚﻨﻣ ﺔﻛ(ﺎﺸﻤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ ﺔﺳ/(ﺪﻟ/ ﻦﻣ Xﻼﺧ ﻢ"ﺪﻘﺗ ﺎﺟV ﺑ Jﺎ ﻰﻠﻋ ﺌﺳﻷ/ ﻠ ﺔ Geﻮﺟﻮﻤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ ﺎﺴﻗﻷ/ ^ ﻤﻛ ﺎ ﻮQ ﺪﺤﻣ G . ^ﺪﺨﺘﺳ/ ﻣﻼﻋ ﺔ (✓ ) ) ﻨﻋ ﺪ ﺎﺟﻹ/ ﺑ ﺔ ﺔﺒﺳﺎﻨﻤﻟ/ :
,ﻮﺤﻤﻟ! /.ﻷ! : 1ﺎﻧﺎ%ﺒﻟ! ﺔ%ﺼﺨﺸﻟ! s . ﺲﻨﺠﻟ/ : s. ﺮﻛf u. ﻰﺜﻧv u . ﺮﻤﻌﻟ/ : uu-sx .s ﻨﺳ ﺔ uy .u-u٦ ﻨﺳ ﺔ y|-u{ .y ﻨﺳ ﺔ ٤. ﺮﺜﻛv ﻦﻣ |y ﻨﺳ ﺔ y . ﺔﻟﺎﺤﻟ/ ﻤﺘﺟﻻ/ 9ﻋﺎ ﺔ : s ﺰﻋv A u:ﺰﻣ y ﻄﻣ ﻠ ﻖ ٤ ﻞﻣ(v
٤ . ﺺﺼﺨﺗ ﺔﺳ/(ﺪﻟ/ ......
٥ . ﻨﺳ ﺔ ﺔﺳ/(ﺪﻟ/ s . ﺔﻨﺴﻟ/ s u. ﺔﻨﺴﻟ/ u y . ﺔﻨﺴﻟ/ y 111
! ٤ . ﺔﻨﺴﻟ/ ٤ ٥. ﺔﻨﺴﻟ/ ٥ Lﺮﺧv ( ﻰﺟﺮ" ﺪ"ﺪﺤﺘﻟ/ ) ......
٦ . J/ﺪﺣﻮﻟ/ ﺔﻠﻤﺘﻜﻤﻟ/ ......
} . ﺔ9ﺴﻨﺠﻟ/ s. ﻮﻛ " ﻲﺘ u. ﺮ9ﻏ ﻮﻛ " ﻲﺘ
Ö . ﻦ"v ﻤﺳ ﺖﻌ X:ﻷ eﺮﻣ ﻦﻋ >ﻮﻘﺣ ؟@ﺎﺴﻧﻹ/ s. @ﻮ"ﺰﻔﻠﺘﻟ/ / ﻮ"G/ﺮﻟ/ e .uﺮﺳﻷ/ / ﻦ"ﺪﻟ/ﻮﻟ/ y. ﺮﺟ " ﺪ e / ﺠﻣ ﻠ ﺔ ٤. ﺔﺳ(ﺪﻤﻟ/ ٥. ﻧﻹ/ ﺖﻧﺮﺘ / ﻊﻗﻮﻤﻟ/ ٦. ﺴﻣ ﺘ ﻨ ﺪ J/ ﺔ9ﻧﻮﻧﺎﻗ Lﺮﺧv ( ﻰﺟﺮ" ﺪ"ﺪﺤﺘﻟ/ ) ...... x . ﻞP Qﺮﻌﺗ ﻧﺮﺑ ﺞﻣﺎ ﻢﻣﻷ/ eﺪﺤﺘﻤﻟ/ ﻲﻤﻟﺎﻌﻟ/ ﻢ9ﻠﻌﺘﻟ >ﻮﻘﺣ ؟@ﺎﺴﻧﻹ/ s . ﻢﻌﻧ u. ﻻ
|s . ﻞQ ﺮﻀﺣ vâ J ﺐ"(ﺪﺗ ﻰﻠﻋ >ﻮﻘﺣ ؟@ﺎﺴﻧﻹ/ s . ﻢﻌﻧ u . ﻻ fV .ss/ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ /ﻹﺟﺎﺑﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ /ﻟﺴﺆ/X /ﻟﺴﺎﺑﻖ (ﻧﻌﻢ)] Qﻞ ﻛﺎ@ /ﻟﺘﺪ("ﺐ ﻣﻔ9 ًﺪ/ ﻟﻚ؟ s . ﻢﻌﻧ u . ﻻ fV .su/ ﻟﻢ ﺗﺘﻠﻖ âv ﺗﺪ("ﺐ ﺳﺎﺑﻖ ﺣﻮX ﺗﻌﻠ9ﻢ ﺣﻘﻮ> /ﻹﻧﺴﺎ@] Qﻞ ﺗﻌﺘﻘﺪ v@ /ﻧﻀﻤﺎﻣﻚ ﻟﺪ:(e ﺗﺪ("ﺒ9ﺔ ﻓﻲ Qﺬ/ /ﻟﻤﺠﺎX ﺳ9ﻜﻮ@ ﻣﻔ9 ًﺪ/ ؟ﻚﻟ s . ﻢﻌﻧ u . ﻻ sy . ﻒ9ﻛ ﻢ9ﻘﺗ ﻚﺘﻘﺛ ﺎﻤ9ﻓ ﻖﻠﻌﺘ" ﻢ9ﻠﻌﺘﺑ >ﻮﻘﺣ ؟@ﺎﺴﻧﻹ/ s . ﺮ9ﻏ /: ﻖﺛ u. /: ﻖﺛ ﻰﻟV ﺪﺣ ﺎﻣ y. :/ﺛﻖ ﺟ ًﺪ/
! ,ﻮﺤﻤﻟ ﻲﻧﺎﺜﻟ! : ﺔﻓﺮﻌﻣ <ﻮﻘﺣ 'ﺎﺴﻧﻹ!
! ءﺰﺠﻟ /.ﻷ! : ﺪﺣ E ﺴﻣ ﺘ Fﻮ ﻓﺮﻌﻣ ﻚﺘ ﺎﻤ%ﻓ ﻖﻠﻌﺘH <ﻮﻘﺤﻟﺎﺑ ﺔ%ﻟﺎﺘﻟ! ﻰﻠﻋ ﻘﻣ % Nﺎ ﻦﻣ Q-P 112
! ﺚ%ﺣ 'P) S = ﻻ UﺮﻋW V S = ﺮ%ﻏ ﺘﻣ ﺪﻛﺄ U = QVﺮﻋS )
s- ﻖﺤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ eﺎ9ﺤﻟ/ : s . ﻻ Pﺮﻋv u . ﺮ9ﻏ ﺘﻣ ﺪﻛﺄﺘ P . yﺮﻋv
u- ﻖﺤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ ﺮP è: ﻞﻤﻋ ﺎﻋ G ﻟ ﺔ : ﺋﻼﻣ ﻤ ﺔ : s . ﻻ Pﺮﻋv u . ﺮ9ﻏ ﺘﻣ ﺪﻛﺄﺘ P . yﺮﻋv
yـ ﻖﺤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ ﺮﺣ " ﺔ Geﺎﺒﻌﻟ/ : s . ﻻ Pﺮﻋv u . ﺮ9ﻏ ﺘﻣ ﺪﻛﺄﺘ P . yﺮﻋv
٤ـ ﻖﺤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ @ﺎﻤﻀﻟ/ ﻤﺘﺟﻻ/ ﻲﻋﺎ /: /ﺰﻤﻟ " ﺎ ﻤﺘﺟﻻ/ 9ﻋﺎ ﺔ /: /ﺮﻟ ﺐﺗ âﺪﻋﺎﻘﺘﻟ/ : s . ﻻ Pﺮﻋv u . ﺮ9ﻏ ﺘﻣ ﺪﻛﺄﺘ P .yﺮﻋv
٥ـ ﻖﺤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ ﺮﺣ " ﺔ ﺮ9ﺒﻌﺘﻟ/ : s . ﻻ Pﺮﻋv u . ﺮ9ﻏ ﺘﻣ ﺪﻛﺄﺘ P . yﺮﻋv
٦ـ ﻖﺣ Xﺎﻤﻌﻟ/ ﻲﻓ ﻦ"ﻮﻜﺗ ^ﺎﻤﻀﻧﻻ/: ﻰﻟJ Vﺎﺑﺎﻘﻧ Xﺎﻤﻌﻟ/ /: ﻖﺤﻟ ﻲﻓ /ﺮﺿﻹ/ : s . ﻻ Pﺮﻋv u . ﺮ9ﻏ ﺘﻣ ﺪﻛﺄﺘ P . yﺮﻋv
}ـ ﻖﺤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ ﺮﺣ " ﺔ ﻞﻘﻨﺘﻟ/ ﺔﻣﺎﻗﻹ/: : s . ﻻ Pﺮﻋv u . ﺮ9ﻏ ﺘﻣ ﺪﻛﺄﺘ P . yﺮﻋv
Öـ ﻖﺤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ Xﻮﺼﺤﻟ/ ﻰﻠﻋ íﻼﺘﻣ/: J/(ﺎﻘﻌﻟ/ "ﺮﻄﺑ ﻘ ﺔ ﺎﻋ G ﻟ ﺔ : s . ﻻ Pﺮﻋv u . ﺮ9ﻏ ﺘﻣ ﺪﻛﺄﺘ P . yﺮﻋv
xـ ﻖﺤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ ﺔﻛ(ﺎﺸﻤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ ﺔﻄﺸﻧﻷ/ ﺔ9ﻓﺎﻘﺜﻟ/ ] /: èﺎﻔﺤﻟ ﻰﻠﻋ 5/ﺮﺘﻟ/ ﻲﻓﺎﻘﺜﻟ/ /: ﻟ ﺔﻐﻠ : 113
! s . ﻻ Pﺮﻋv u . ﺮ9ﻏ ﺘﻣ ﺪﻛﺄﺘ P . yﺮﻋv
|sـ ﻖﺤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ ﺤﻣ ﺎ ﻛ ﻤ ﺔ ﺎﻋ G ﻟ ﺔ : s . ﻻ Pﺮﻋv u . ﺮ9ﻏ ﺘﻣ ﺪﻛﺄﺘ P . yﺮﻋv
ssـ ﻖﺣ ﺔﻛ(ﺎﺸﻤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ ﺔ9ﻠﻤﻌﻟ/ ﺔ9ﺳﺎ9ﺴﻟ/ : s . ﻻ Pﺮﻋv u . ﺮ9ﻏ ﺘﻣ ﺪﻛﺄﺘ P . yﺮﻋv
suـ ﻖﺤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ L:ﺄﻤﻟ/ ﻢﺋﻼﻤﻟ/ ﺘﺴﻣ: Lﻮ ﺔﺸ9ﻌﻤﻟ/ ﺪ9ﺠﻟ/ : s . ﻻ Pﺮﻋv u . ﺮ9ﻏ ﺘﻣ ﺪﻛﺄﺘ P . yﺮﻋv
syـ ﻖﺤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ ﺔ"ﺎﻋﺮﻟ/ ﺔ9ﺤﺼﻟ/ : s . ﻻ Pﺮﻋv u . ﺮ9ﻏ ﺘﻣ ﺪﻛﺄﺘ P . yﺮﻋv
s٤ـ ﻖﺤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ ﻢ9ﻠﻌﺘﻟ/ : s . ﻻ Pﺮﻋv u . ﺮ9ﻏ ﺘﻣ ﺪﻛﺄﺘ P . yﺮﻋv
s٥ـ ﻖﺤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ (ﺮﺤﺘﻟ/ ﻦﻣ ﺰ99ﻤﺘﻟ/ âﺮﺼﻨﻌﻟ/ : s . ﻻ Pﺮﻋv u . ﺮ9ﻏ ﺘﻣ ﺪﻛﺄﺘ P . yﺮﻋv
ءﺰﺠﻟ! ﻲﻧﺎﺜﻟ! : ﺮﺷS ﻰﻟ\ ﺴﻣ ﺘ Fﻮ ﺔ%ﻤ[S <ﻮﻘﺤﻟ! ﺔ%ﻟﺎﺘﻟ! ﻰﻠﻋ ﻘﻣ % Nﺎ ﻦﻣ P- ٥ ﺚ%ﺣ 'P) S = ﻏ%ﺮ ﻣ_ﻢ ﺟ ًﺪ! W V = ﺮ%ﻏ ﻢ_ﻣ Q V = ﺮ%ﻏ ﺘﻣ ﺪﻛﺄ V ٤ = ﻢ_ﻣ V ٥ = ﻣ_ﻢ ﺟ ًﺪ!)
s- ﻖﺤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ eﺎ9ﺤﻟ/ : s. ﻏ9ﺮ ﻣOﻢ ﺟ ًﺪ/ u . ﺮ9ﻏ ﻢOﻣ y . ﺮ9ﻏ ﺘﻣ ﺪﻛﺄﺘ ٤ . ﻢOﻣ 114
! ٥. ﻣOﻢ ﺟ ًﺪ/
u- ﻖﺤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ ﺮP è: ﻞﻤﻋ ﺎﻋ G ﻟ ﺔ : ﺋﻼﻣ ﻤ ﺔ : s. ﻏ9ﺮ ﻣOﻢ ﺟ ًﺪ/ u . ﺮ9ﻏ ﻢOﻣ y . ﺮ9ﻏ ﺘﻣ ﺪﻛﺄﺘ ٤ . ﻢOﻣ ٥. ﻣOﻢ ﺟ ًﺪ/
yـ ﻖﺤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ ﺮﺣ " ﺔ Geﺎﺒﻌﻟ/ : s. ﻏ9ﺮ ﻣOﻢ ﺟ ًﺪ/ u . ﺮ9ﻏ ﻢOﻣ y . ﺮ9ﻏ ﺘﻣ ﺪﻛﺄﺘ ٤ . ﻢOﻣ ٥. ﻣOﻢ ﺟ ًﺪ/
٤ـ ﻖﺤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ @ﺎﻤﻀﻟ/ ﻤﺘﺟﻻ/ ﻲﻋﺎ /: /ﺰﻤﻟ " ﺎ ﻤﺘﺟﻻ/ 9ﻋﺎ ﺔ /: /ﺮﻟ ﺐﺗ âﺪﻋﺎﻘﺘﻟ/ : s. ﻏ9ﺮ ﻣOﻢ ﺟ ًﺪ/ u . ﺮ9ﻏ ﻢOﻣ y . ﺮ9ﻏ ﺘﻣ ﺪﻛﺄﺘ ٤ . ﻢOﻣ ٥. ﻣOﻢ ﺟ ًﺪ/
٥ـ ﻖﺤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ ﺮﺣ " ﺔ ﺮ9ﺒﻌﺘﻟ/ : s. ﻏ9ﺮ ﻣOﻢ ﺟ ًﺪ/ u . ﺮ9ﻏ ﻢOﻣ y . ﺮ9ﻏ ﺘﻣ ﺪﻛﺄﺘ ٤ . ﻢOﻣ ٥. ﻣOﻢ ﺟ ًﺪ/
٦ـ ﻖﺣ Xﺎﻤﻌﻟ/ ﻲﻓ ﻦ"ﻮﻜﺗ ^ﺎﻤﻀﻧﻻ/: ﻰﻟJ Vﺎﺑﺎﻘﻧ Xﺎﻤﻌﻟ/ /: ﻖﺤﻟ ﻲﻓ /ﺮﺿﻹ/ : s . 9ﻏ ﺮ ﻣOﻢ ﺟ ًﺪ/ u . ﺮ9ﻏ ﻢOﻣ y . ﺮ9ﻏ ﺘﻣ ﺪﻛﺄﺘ ٤ . ﻢOﻣ ٥. ﻣOﻢ ﺟ ًﺪ/
}ـ ﻖﺤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ ﺮﺣ " ﺔ ﻞﻘﻨﺘﻟ/ ﺔﻣﺎﻗﻹ/: : s. ﻏ9ﺮ ﻣOﻢ ﺟ ًﺪ/ u . ﺮ9ﻏ ﻢOﻣ y . ﺮ9ﻏ ﺘﻣ ﺪﻛﺄﺘ ٤ . ﻢOﻣ ٥. ﻣOﻢ ﺟ ًﺪ/
115
!
Öـ ﻖﺤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ Xﻮﺼﺤﻟ/ ﻰﻠﻋ íﻼﺘﻣ/: J/(ﺎﻘﻌﻟ/ "ﺮﻄﺑ ﻘ ﺔ ﺎﻋ G ﻟ ﺔ : s. ﻏ9ﺮ ﻣOﻢ ﺟ ًﺪ/ u . ﺮ9ﻏ ﻢOﻣ y . ﺮ9ﻏ ﺘﻣ ﺪﻛﺄﺘ ٤ . ﻢOﻣ ٥ . ﻢOﻣ ﺟ ًﺪ/
xـ ﻖﺤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ ﺔﻛ(ﺎﺸﻤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ ﺔﻄﺸﻧﻷ/ ﺔ9ﻓﺎﻘﺜﻟ/ ] /: èﺎﻔﺤﻟ ﻰﻠﻋ 5/ﺮﺘﻟ/ ﻲﻓﺎﻘﺜﻟ/ /: ﻟ ﺔﻐﻠ : s. ﻏ9ﺮ ﻣOﻢ ﺟ ًﺪ/ u . ﺮ9ﻏ ﻢOﻣ y . ﺮ9ﻏ ﺘﻣ ﺪﻛﺄﺘ ٤ . ﻢOﻣ ٥. ﻣOﻢ ﺟ ًﺪ/
|sـ ﻖﺤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ ﺤﻣ ﺎ ﻛ ﻤ ﺔ ﺎﻋ G ﻟ ﺔ : s. ﻏ9ﺮ ﻣOﻢ ﺟ ًﺪ/ u . ﺮ9ﻏ ﻢOﻣ y . ﺮ9ﻏ ﺘﻣ ﺪﻛﺄﺘ ٤ . ﻢOﻣ ٥. ﻣOﻢ ﺟ ًﺪ/
ssـ ﻖﺣ ﺔﻛ(ﺎﺸﻤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ ﺔ9ﻠﻤﻌﻟ/ ﺔ9ﺳﺎ9ﺴﻟ/ : s. ﻏ9ﺮ ﻣOﻢ ﺟ ًﺪ/ u . ﺮ9ﻏ ﻢOﻣ y . ﺮ9ﻏ ﺘﻣ ﺪﻛﺄﺘ ٤ . ﻢOﻣ ٥. ﻣOﻢ ﺟ ًﺪ/
suـ ﻖﺤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ L:ﺄﻤﻟ/ ﻢﺋﻼﻤﻟ/ ﺘﺴﻣ: Lﻮ ﺔﺸ9ﻌﻤﻟ/ ﺪ9ﺠﻟ/ : s. ﻏ9ﺮ ﻣOﻢ ﺟ ًﺪ/ u . ﺮ9ﻏ ﻢOﻣ y . ﺮ9ﻏ ﺘﻣ ﺪﻛﺄﺘ ٤ . ﻢOﻣ ٥. ﻣOﻢ ﺟ ًﺪ/
syـ ﻖﺤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ ﺔ"ﺎﻋﺮﻟ/ ﺔ9ﺤﺼﻟ/ : s. ﻏ9ﺮ ﻣOﻢ ﺟ ًﺪ/ u . ﺮ9ﻏ ﻢOﻣ y . ﺮ9ﻏ ﺘﻣ ﺪﻛﺄﺘ ٤ . ﻢOﻣ ٥. ﻣOﻢ ﺟ ًﺪ/
116
! s٤ـ ﻖﺤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ ﻢ9ﻠﻌﺘﻟ/ : s. ﻏ9ﺮ ﻣOﻢ ﺟ ًﺪ/ u . ﺮ9ﻏ ﻢOﻣ y . ﺮ9ﻏ ﺘﻣ ﺪﻛﺄﺘ ٤ . ﻢOﻣ ٥. ﻣOﻢ ﺟ ًﺪ/
s٥ـ ﻖﺤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ (ﺮﺤﺘﻟ/ ﻦﻣ ﺰ99ﻤﺘﻟ/ âﺮﺼﻨﻌﻟ/ : s. ﻏ9ﺮ ﻣOﻢ ﺟ ًﺪ/ u . ﺮ9ﻏ ﻢOﻣ y . ﺮ9ﻏ ﺘﻣ ﺪﻛﺄﺘ ٤ . ﻢOﻣ ٥. ﻣOﻢ ﺟ ًﺪ/
,ﻮﺤﻤﻟ! ﺚﻟﺎﺜﻟ! : ﻌﻣ ﺘ ﺪﻘ 1! /ﻮﺣ ﻢ%ﻠﻌﺗ <ﻮﻘﺣ 'ﺎﺴﻧﻹ!
ﺮﺷv ﻰﻟV ﻌﻣ ﺘ ﻘ ﺪ / ﻚﺗ Xﻮﺣ J/(ﺎﺒﻌﻟ/ ﺔ9ﻟﺎﺘﻟ/ f/J ﺔﻠﺼﻟ/ ﻢ9ﻠﻌﺘﺑ >ﻮﻘﺣ @ﺎﺴﻧﻹ/ ﻰﻠﻋ ﻘﻣ ï 9ﺎ ﻦﻣ s-٥ ] ﺚ9ﺣ @s) v = ﻻ /:v ﻖﻓ eﺪﺸﺑ ] u = ﻻ /:v ﻖﻓ y = ﺤﻣ ﺎ " ﺪ ] ٤ = ﻮﻣ / ﻖﻓ ] ٥ = ﻮﻣ / ﻖﻓ eﺪﺸﺑ )
s . ﺘﻋv ﻘ ﺪ @v ﻦ9ﻤﻠﻌﻤﻟ/ ﺐﺠ" @v /ﻮﻣﺮﺘﺤ" >ﻮﻘﺣ ﻤﺟ 9 ﻊ ﺔﺒﻠﻄﻟ/ : s . ﻻ /:v ﻖﻓ ﺪﺸﺑ e ﺸ u . ﻻ /:v ﻖﻓ : y . ﺤﻣ ﺎ " ﺪ"ﺎﺤ ٤ . /:v ﻖﻓ : ٥ . /:v ﻖﻓ eﺪﺸﺑ
u . ﺘﻋv ﻘ ﺪ Fﻧv ﻲﻐﺒﻨ" ﻤﺘﺳﻻ/ ñﺎ ﻰﻟV ﺔﺒﻠﻄﻟ/ ﻲﻓ Xﻮﺼﻔﻟ/ ﺔ9ﺳ/(ﺪﻟ/ : s . ﻻ /:v ﻖﻓ ﺪﺸﺑ e ﺸ u . ﻻ /:v ﻖﻓ : y . ﺤﻣ ﺎ " ﺪ"ﺎﺤ ٤ . /:v ﻖﻓ : ٥ . /:v ﻖﻓ eﺪﺸﺑ
y . ﺘﻋv ﻘ ﺪ Fﻧv ﺐﺠ" /ﺮﺘﺣ/ ^ ﺔﺒﻠﻄﻟ/ ﻰﺘﺣ ﻮﻟ ﺎﻛ /ﻮﻧ @:ﺮﻜﻔ" "ﺮﻄﺑ ﻘ ﺔ ﺨﻣ ﺘ ﻠ ﻔ ﺔ : s . ﻻ /:v ﻖﻓ ﺪﺸﺑ e ﺸ u . ﻻ /:v ﻖﻓ : y . ﺤﻣ ﺎ " ﺪ"ﺎﺤ ٤ . /:v ﻖﻓ : ٥ . /:v ﻖﻓ eﺪﺸﺑ
٤ . v ﺘﻋ ﻘ ﺪ @ï v(/ﺪﻤﻟ/ /: ﻟ Xﻮﺼﻔ ﺔ9ﺳ/(ﺪﻟ/ ﺐﺠ" @v @ﻮﻜﺗ ﺔi9/ﺮﻘﻤ"G : s . ﻻ /:v ﻖﻓ ﺪﺸﺑ e ﺸ u . ﻻ /:v ﻖﻓ : 117
! y . ﺤﻣ ﺎ " ﺪ"ﺎﺤ ٤ . /:v ﻖﻓ : ٥ . /:v ﻖﻓ eﺪﺸﺑ
٥. vﻋﺘﻘﺪ vﻧF "ﺠﺐ ﻋﻠﻰ /ﻟﻄﻠﺒﺔ v@ "ﺸﺎ(ﻛﻮ/ ﻣﺒﺎﺷﺮeً ﻓﻲ e)/GV /ﻟﺠﺎﻣﻌﺔ v: ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼX ﻋﻀﻮ "ﻨﻮ ﻋﻨOﻢ: s . ﻻ /:v ﻖﻓ ﺪﺸﺑ e ﺸ u . ﻻ /:v ﻖﻓ : y . ﺤﻣ ﺎ " ﺪ"ﺎﺤ ٤ . /:v ﻖﻓ : ٥ . /:v ﻖﻓ eﺪﺸﺑ
٦ . ﺘﻋv ﻘ ﺪ Fﻧv ﻲﻐﺒﻨ" ﻠﻌﺗ ﻢï 9ﺎﻨﻟ/ >ﻮﻘﺣ @ﺎﺴﻧﻹ/ ﻰﺘﺣ /ﻮﻨﻜﻤﺘ" ﻦﻣ VG)/í ﺗ: ﺮ9ﺴﻔ ﺎ"ﺎﻀﻘﻟ/ ﺔﻘﻠﻌﺘﻤﻟ/ >ﻮﻘﺤﺑ @ﺎﺴﻧﻹ/ : s . ﻻ /:v ﻖﻓ ﺪﺸﺑ e ﺸ u . ﻻ /:v ﻖﻓ : y . ﺤﻣ ﺎ " ﺪ"ﺎﺤ ٤ . /:v ﻖﻓ : ٥ . /:v ﻖﻓ eﺪﺸﺑ
}. vﻋﺘﻘﺪ vﻧF "ﻨﺒﻐﻲ ﺗﻌﻠ9ﻢ ﺣﻘﻮ> /ﻹﻧﺴﺎ@ ﺑﺪ ًء/ ﻣﻦ ("ﺎa /ﻷiﻔﺎX: s . ﻻ /:v ﻖﻓ ﺪﺸﺑ e ﺸ u . ﻻ /:v ﻖﻓ : y . ﺤﻣ ﺎ " ﺪ"ﺎﺤ ٤ . /:v ﻖﻓ : ٥ . /:v ﻖﻓ eﺪﺸﺑ
Ö . ﺘﻋv ﻘ ﺪ @v ﻠﻌﺗ ﻢ9 >ﻮﻘﺣ @ﺎﺴﻧﻹ/ Fﻟ ﺮ9ﺛﺄﺗ ﺒﻛ ﺮ9 ﻰﻠﻋ ﺔ9ﻤﻨﺗ /ﺮﺘﺣ/ ^ J/ﺬﻟ/ Lﺪﻟ ïﺎﻨﻟ/ : s . ﻻ /:v ﻖﻓ ﺪﺸﺑ e ﺸ u . ﻻ /:v ﻖﻓ : y . ﺤﻣ ﺎ " ﺪ"ﺎﺤ ٤ . /:v ﻖﻓ : ٥ . /:v ﻖﻓ eﺪﺸﺑ
x . ﺘﻋv ﻘ ﺪ @v ﻨí Qﺎ ﺔﺟﺎﺣ ﻰﻟGe " Vﺎﻣ >ﻮﻘﺣ @ﺎﺴﻧﻹ/ " ﻦﻣ ﻞﺟv ﻓﺮﻌﻣ ﺔ >ﻮﻘﺣ @ﺎﺴﻧﻹ/ : s . ﻻ /:v ﻖﻓ ﺪﺸﺑ e ﺸ u . ﻻ /:v ﻖﻓ : y . ﺤﻣ ﺎ " ﺪ"ﺎﺤ ٤ . /:v ﻖﻓ : ٥ . /:v ﻖﻓ eﺪﺸﺑ
|s . ﻲﻐﺒﻨ" @v @ﻮﻜﺗ " Geﺎﻣ >ﻮﻘﺣ @ﺎﺴﻧﻹ/ " Geﺎﻣ ( ﺔ9ﻣ/ﺰﻟV ) ﻲﻓ ﺞOﻨﻤﻟ/ ﻲﺳ/(ﺪﻟ/ : s . ﻻ /:v ﻖﻓ ﺪﺸﺑ e ﺸ u . ﻻ /:v ﻖﻓ : y . ﺤﻣ ﺎ " ﺪ"ﺎﺤ
118
! ٤ . /:v ﻖﻓ : ٥ . /:v ﻖﻓ eﺪﺸﺑ
ss . ﺘﻋv ﻘ ﺪ Fﻧv ﻦﻜﻤ" ءﺎﻀﻘﻟ/ ﻰﻠﻋ JﺎﻛﺎOﺘﻧ/ >ﻮﻘﺣ @ﺎﺴﻧﻹ/ ﻦﻣ Xﻼﺧ ﻠﻌﺗ ﻢ9 >ﻮﻘﺣ @ﺎﺴﻧﻹ/ ﻂﻘﻓ : s . ﻻ /:v ﻖﻓ ﺪﺸﺑ e ﺸ u . ﻻ /:v ﻖﻓ : y . ﺤﻣ ﺎ " ﺪ"ﺎﺤ ٤ . /:v ﻖﻓ : ٥ . /:v ﻖﻓ eﺪﺸﺑ
su . ﻨí Qﺎ ﺔﺟﺎﺣ ﻰﻟGe " Vﺎﻣ >ﻮﻘﺣ @ﺎﺴﻧﻹ/ " ﻰﺘﺣ ^ﺮﺘﺤ" ïﺎﻨﻟ/ ﻢOﻀﻌﺑ ﺾﻌﺒﻟ/ : s . ﻻ /:v ﻖﻓ ﺪﺸﺑ e ﺸ u . ﻻ /:v ﻖﻓ : y . ﺤﻣ ﺎ " ﺪ"ﺎﺤ ٤ . /:v ﻖﻓ : ٥ . /:v ﻖﻓ eﺪﺸﺑ
sy . ﺘﻋv ﻘ ﺪ @v ﻠﻌﺗ ﻢ9 ﺣﻘﻮ> /ﻹﻧﺴﺎ@ "ﺴﺎQﻢ ﻓﻲ ﺟﻌﻞ /ﻟﻨﺎv ïﻛﺜﺮ ﺗﺴﺎﻣ ًﺤﺎ :ﺗﻔO ًﻤﺎ: s . ﻻ /:v ﻖﻓ ﺪﺸﺑ e ﺸ u . ﻻ /:v ﻖﻓ : y . ﺤﻣ ﺎ " ﺪ"ﺎﺤ ٤ . /:v ﻖﻓ : ٥ . /:v ﻖﻓ eﺪﺸﺑ
ﺷﻜ ًﺮ! ﻟﺘﻌﺎ.ﻧﻜﻢ !
119
! Appendix C
! Consent Form (English)
! ! !Foundations!of!Education! The!University!of!Toledo! Main!Campus! Gillham!Hall,!5th!floor! ! MS!921! ! Toledo,!OH!4360613390! ! Phone!#!419.530.2461! ! Fax!#!419.530.8447! ! ! ! ! ! ADULT!RESEARCH!SUBJECT!.!INFORMED!CONSENT!FORM! ! Human!Rights!Education!in!Kuwait:!Perceptions,!Experiences,!and!Beliefs!of! Student.Teachers!in!Kuwait!University!College!of!Education! ! Principal!Investigator:!Dr.!Dale!Snauwaert!:!419136719935! Other!Investigator:!Mohammad!Ali!Aljaidyah!(Doctoral!Candidate1!Foundations!of! Education!in!the!University!of!Toledo)!785197911572! Purpose:!!You!are!invited!to!participate!in!the!research!project!entitled,"!In!what!ways! do!student!teachers!in!the!Education!College!in!Kuwait!University!perceive!the!meaning! of!human!rights!(HR)!and!what!are!their!experiences!with!and!beliefs!about!Human! Rights!Education!(HRE)?"!which!is!being!conducted!at!the!University!of!Toledo!under! the!direction!of!Dr.!Dale!Snauwaert,!the!University!of!Toledo.!The!purpose!of!this!study! is!to!explore!the!level!of!perception!of!students!teachers!in!the!Education!College!in! Kuwait!University!about!the!meaning!of!human!rights!and!what!their!experiences!and! beliefs!about!human!rights!education.! ! Description!of!Procedures:!!This!research!study!will!take!place!in!the!Education! College,!Kuwait!University!in!Kuwait.!In!the!Fall!2018,!the!researcher!will!use!a!primary! data,!that!will!be!obtained!through!administrating!an!questionnaire.!The!questionnaire! will!be!distributed!by!the!researcher!to!the!student!teachers!through!E1mail!or!smart! device!applications,!such!as!WhatsApp,!(an!instant!messaging!application!widely!used! in!Kuwait).!This!questionnaire!is!part!of!my!doctoral!research.!It!asks!you!questions! about!your!perception!of!human!rights!and!what!your!experience!and!belief!about! human!rights!education!are.!The!questionnaire!contains!56!questions!and!should!take! from!10!to!15!minutes!to!complete.!Thank!you!for!your!initiative!to!participate!in!this! study.!Your!participation!will!enable!me!to!propose!plans!and!programs!for!the! development!of!human!rights!education.! ! 120
! Potential!Risks:!There!are!minimal!risks!to!participation!in!this!study,!including!loss!of! confidentiality.!!Answering!the!survey!(or!participating!in!this!study)!might!cause!you!to! feel!upset!or!anxious.!If!so,!you!may!stop!at!any!time.! ! Potential!Benefits:!!The!only!direct!benefit!to!you!if!you!participate!in!this!research!may! be!that!you!will!learn!about!“In!what!ways!do!student!teachers!in!the!Education!College! in!Kuwait!University!perceive!the!meaning!of!human!rights!(HR)!and!what!are!their! experiences!with!and!beliefs!about!Human!Rights!Education!(HRE)?".!Others!may! benefit!by!learning!about!the!results!of!this!research.!! ! Confidentiality:!!The!researchers!will!make!every!effort!to!prevent!anyone!who!is!not!on! the!research!team!from!knowing!that!you!provided!this!information,!or!what!that! information!is.!Although!we!will!make!every!effort!to!protect!your!confidentiality,!there!is! a!low!risk!that!this!might!be!breached.! ! Voluntary!Participation:!Your!refusal!to!participate!in!this!study!will!involve!no!penalty! or!loss!of!benefits!to!which!you!are!otherwise!entitled!and!will!not!affect!your!relationship! with!the!Education!College!in!Kuwait!University.!!In!addition,!you!may!discontinue! participation!at!any!time!without!any!penalty!or!loss!of!benefits.! ! Contact!Information:!!Before!you!decide!to!accept!this!invitation!to!take!part!in!this! study,!you!may!ask!any!questions!that!you!might!have.!!If!you!have!any!questions!at!any! time!before,!during!or!after!your!participation!you!should!contact!a!member!of!the! research!team!Mohammad!Aljaidyah:! Email:[email protected]! Phone:!785197911572!or!+96599995285! Or!the!principal!investigator!Dr.!Dale!Snauwaert!:!419136719935! ! ! If!you!have!questions!beyond!those!answered!by!the!research!team!or!your!rights!as!a! research!subject!or!research1related!injuries,!the!Chairperson!of!the!SBE!Institutional! Review!Board!may!be!contacted!through!the!Office!of!Research!on!the!main!campus!at! (419)!53012844.!!! ! Before!you!complete!this!survey,!please!ask!any!questions!on!any!aspect!of!this!study! that!is!unclear!to!you.!!You!may!take!as!much!time!as!necessary!to!think!it!over.!! ! ! ! !
121
! Appendix D
Consent Form (Arabic)
ﺘﺳ/ ﺒ 9 @ﺎ ﻠﻌﺗ ﻢ9 >ﻮﻘﺣ @ﺎﺴﻧﻹ/ (HRE) IRB # 0000202946
ﺚﺣﺎﺒﻟ! ﻲﺴ%ﺋﺮﻟ! : G . ﻞ"G ﻨﺳ J(ﻮ9 419136719935! ﺚﺣﺎﺒﻟ! ﺮﺧﻵ! : ﻤﺤﻣ ﺪ ﻲﻠﻋ ﺔ"ﺪ9ﻌﺠﻟ/ ( ﺢﺷﺮﻣ Xﻮﺼﺤﻠﻟ ﻰﻠﻋ ﺔﺟ(e G/(ﻮﺘﻛﺪﻟ/ ﻲﻓ ﻧﺮﺑ ﺞﻣﺎ Xﻮﺻv ﺔ9ﺑﺮﺘﻟ/ ] ﺔﻌﻣﺎﺟ ﻟﻮﺗ :ﺪ9 ) ) 017859791572 jﺮﻐﻟ! : ﺖﻧv ﻮﻋﺪﻣ ﺔﻛ(ﺎﺸﻤﻠﻟ ﻲﻓ ﺬQ / ﺚﺤﺒﻟ/ @/ﻮﻨﻌﺑ " ﻰﻟL vâ Vﺪﻣ Pﺮﻌ" / ﻠﻄﻟ ﺒ ﺔ @ﻮﻤﻠﻌﻤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ ﻠﻛ ﺔ9 ﺔ9ﺑﺮﺘﻟ/ ﺔﻌﻣﺎﺟ ﺖ"ﻮﻜﻟ/ ﻌﻣ ﻰﻨ >ﻮﻘﺣ @ﺎﺴﻧﻹ/ : ﻲQﺎﻣ /ﺮﺒﺧ ﺗ ﻢO : ﻌﻣ ﺘ ﻘ ﺪ / ﺗ ﻢX Oﻮﺣ ﻠﻌﺗ ﻢ9 >ﻮﻘﺣ @ﺎﺴﻧﻹ/ "] ﺬQ / ﺚﺤﺒﻟ/ ﺖﺤﺗ P/ﺮﺷV (ﻮﺘﻛﺪﻟ/ ﻞ"G ﻨﺳ J(ﻮ9 ﻦﻣ ﺔﻌﻣﺎﺟ ﻟﻮﺗ :ﺪa . 9ﺮﻐﻟ/ ﻦﻣ ﺬô Q ﺔﺳ/(ﺪﻟ/ ﻮP Qﺎﺸﻜﺘﺳ/ ﺴﻣ ﺘ Lﻮ ﻓﺮﻌﻣ ﺔ ﺔﺒﻠﻄﻟ/ ﻦ9ﻤﻠﻌﻤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ ﻠﻛ ﺔ9 ﺔ9ﺑﺮﺘﻟ/ ﺔﻌﻣﺎﺟ ﻮﻜﻟ/ ﺖ" ﻰﻨﻌﻤﻟ >ﻮﻘﺣ @ﺎﺴﻧﻹ/ : ﻲQﺎﻣ /ﺮﺒﺧ ﺗ ﻢO : ﻌﻣ ﺘ ﻘ ﺪ / ﺗ ﻢX Oﻮﺣ ﻠﻌﺗ ﻢ9 >ﻮﻘﺣ @ﺎﺴﻧﻹ/ .
ﻒﺻ. 1!ء!ﺮﺟﻹ! : ﺬQ / ﺚﺤﺒﻟ/ Pﻮﺳ ﻖﺒﻄ" ﻰﻠﻋ ﺔﺒﻠﻄﻟ/ ﻦ9ﻤﻠﻌﻤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ ﺔ9ﻠﻛ ﺔ9ﺑﺮﺘﻟ/ ﺔﻌﻣﺎﺟ ﺖ"ﻮﻜﻟ/ ﻲﻓ :G ﻟ ﺔ ]ﺖ"ﻮﻜﻟ/ : ﻚﻟf ﻲﻓ ﻞﺼﻓ ﻒ"ﺮﺨﻟ/ u|sÖ] ^ﺪﺨﺘﺴ9ﺳ ﺚﺣﺎﺒﻟ/ Jﺎﻧﺎ9ﺑ ﻟ:v ]ﺔ9 /: ﻟ ﻲﺘ 9ﺳ ﺘ ﻢ Xﻮﺼﺤﻟ/ ﻠﻋ ﺎ9O ﻦﻣ ﺧ Xﻼ ﺘﺳ/ ﺒ 9 @ﺎ ﻢﻋ ﺮi " ﻖ ﻧﻹ/ ]ﺖﻧﺮﺘ 9ﺳ ﺘ ﻢ ﻊ"öﻮﺗ ﺘﺳﻻ/ ﺒ 9 @ﺎ ﻦﻣ ﻞﺒﻗ ﺚﺣﺎﺒﻟ/ ﻰﻠﻋ ﺔﺒﻠﻄﻟ/ ﻦ9ﻤﻠﻌﻤﻟ/ ﻦﻣ Xﻼﺧ ﺪ"ﺮﺒﻟ/ ﻟﻹ/ ﻲﻧ:ﺮﺘﻜ :v ﺪﺣv ﺒﻄﺗ 9 ﻘ Jﺎ eﺰOﺟﻷ/ ]ﺔ9ﻛﺬﻟ/ ﻞﺜﻣ /: ]ﺎﺴﺗ ﺒﻄﺗ ﻖ9 ﻞﺋﺎﺳﺮﻟ/ ﺔ"(ﻮﻔﻟ/ ﺔﻣﺪﺨﺘﺴﻤﻟ/ ﻰﻠﻋ >ﺎﻄﻧ ﻊﺳ/: ﻲﻓ :G ﻟ ﺔ ﺖ"ﻮﻜﻟ/ . ﺬQ / ﺘﺳﻻ/ ﺒ 9 @ﺎ ﻮQ ءﺰﺟ ﻦﻣ ﺒﻠﻄﺘﻣ Jﺎ Xﻮﺼﺤﻟ/ ﻋ ﻰﻠ ﺔﺟ(G ]e/(ﻮﺘﻛﺪﻟ/ : ﻮõ Qﺮﻄ" ﺌﺳv ﻠ ﺔ @ﺄﺸﺑ ﻓﺮﻌﻣ ﻚﺘ ﻰﻨﻌﻤﻟ >ﻮﻘﺣ @ﺎﺴﻧﻹ/ : ﻲQﺎﻣ ﻚﺗﺮﺒﺧ : ﺘﻋ/ ﻘ ﺎ X Gíﻮﺣ ﻠﻌﺗ ﻢ9 >ﻮﻘﺣ @ﺎﺴﻧﻹ/ . âﻮﺘﺤ" ﺬQ / ﺘﺳﻻ/ ﺒ 9 @ﺎ ﻰﻠﻋ ٥٦ ﺳﺆ/ ًﻻ : ﻻﺳﺘﻜﻤﺎQ Xﺬ/ /ﻻﺳﺘﺒ9ﺎ@ ﺗﺤﺘﺎA ﻣﻦ |s ﻰﻟV s٥ ﺔﻘ9ﻗG . ﺮﻜﺷ ً / ﻰﻠﻋ ﺒﻣ ﻢﻜﺗ(Gﺎ ﺔﻛ(ﺎﺸﻤﻠﻟ ﻲﻓ ﺬô Q ﺔﺳ/(ﺪﻟ/ . ﺸﻣ ﺎ ﻛ( ﺘ ﻜ ﻢ ﺘﺳ ﻜﻤ ﻨ ﻲﻨ ﻦﻣ õ/ﺮﺘﻗ/ ﻂﻄﺧ : ﺞﻣ/ﺮﺑ ﺮ"ﻮﻄﺘﻟ ﻠﻌﺗ ﻢ9 >ﻮﻘﺣ @ﺎﺴﻧﻹ/ .
ﺮmﺎﺨﻤﻟ! ﺔﻠﻤﺘﺤﻤﻟ! : ﻧg dﺎ ! iﺣ ! ﻰﻧm ! jiﻣ ! qrﺎﺧﻣﻟn ! ﺔﻛrﺎﺷﻣﻠﻟ ! ﻲﻓ ! z dy ! ﺔﺳirnﻟn !|! ﺎﻣﺑ ! ﻲﻓ ! gﻟinm ! yﻘﻓ ! ﺔrﺳﻟi .! nﻗ ! ri ! ÅiÇﻟn ! ﻰﻠﻋ ! ﺗﺳﻻn ﺑ mﺎ !( jÜ ! ﺔﻛrﺎﺷﻣﻟn ! ﻲﻓ ! z dy ! ﺔﺳirnﻟn !) ﻰﻟÜr ! áﻌﺷﻟä ! nﺿﻟﺎﺑ ! ä ! jÜﻠﻘﻟm ! áyn .! nﺎﻛ ! rﻣﻷy ! nﻛ gﻟ ! mﻛﻣ!| ! åﻗÜﺗﻟn ! ﻲﻓ ! ç ! jÇﻗÜ .
ﺪﺋ!ﻮﻔﻟ! ﺔﻠﻤﺘﺤﻤﻟ! : iê ! ámﺋﺎﻔﻟrê ! nﺷﺎﺑﻣﻟiê ! nﺣÜﻟg ! nﻟ ! ç ! áynﻛrﺎﺷ ! ﻲﻓ ! ë ! n dyﺣﺑﻟi ! nﻗ ! Ümﻛﺗ ! gﻧj ! ﺗﺳ ﺗ råﻌ ! ﻰﻠﻋ !" ﻲﻓ L vâﺪﻣ Pﺮﻌ" ﺔﺒﻠﻄﻟ/ @ﻮﻤﻠﻌﻤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ ﺔ9ﻠﻛ ﺔ9ﺑﺮﺘﻟ/ ﺔﻌﻣﺎﺟ ﺖ"ﻮﻜﻟ/ ﻌﻣ ﻰﻨ >ﻮﻘﺣ @ﺎﺴﻧﻹ/ : ﻲQﺎﻣ /ﺮﺒﺧ ﺗ ﻢO : ﻌﻣ ﺘ ﻘ ﺪ / ﺗ ﻢX Oﻮﺣ ﻠﻌﺗ ﻢ9 >ﻮﻘﺣ @ﺎﺴﻧﻹ/ "] iﻗ ! ﺗﺳ ﻔ rÜm ! iﺧm ! íﻣ ! îﻼﺧ ! råﻌﺗﻟn ! ﻰﻠﻋ ! ﺞﺋﺎﺗﻧ ! ë ! n dyﺣﺑﻟn .
ﺔHﺮﺴﻟ! : 9ﺳ ﺒ Xﺬ @ﻮﺜﺣﺎﺒﻟ/ ﻞﻛ Oﺟ ﺪ ﻦﻜﻤﻣ ﻊﻨﻤﻟ vâ ﺺﺨﺷ ﺲ9ﻟ ﻦﻣ ﻖ"ﺮﻓ ﺚﺤﺒﻟ/ ﻦﻣ ﻓﺮﻌﻣ ﺔ ﻚﻧv ﺖﻣﺪﻗ ﺬJ[ ô Qﺎﻣﻮﻠﻌﻤﻟ/ :v ﻲQﺎﻣ ﻚﻠﺗ Jﺎﻣﻮﻠﻌﻤﻟ/ . ﻤﺟ 9 ﻊ Jﺎﻣﻮﻠﻌﻤﻟ/ ﻲﺘﻟ/ ﺎOﻣﺪﻘﺗ Pﻮﺳ @ﻮﻜﺗ ﺮﺳ " ﺔ : ﻆﻔﺤﺘﺳ ﻲﻓ ﻜﻣ @ﺎ ]ﻦﻣù ﻰﻠﻋ ﻢﻏﺮﻟ/ ﻦﻣ ﺎﻨﻧP vﻮﺳ Xﺬﺒﻧ ﺎﺼﻗ O )Lﺟ ﺪ ﻧ ﺎ ﺎﻤﺤﻟ " ﺔ ﺮﺳ " ﺔ ﻌﻣ ﻠ ﻣﻮ ﺎ ]ﻚﺗ : ﻨí Qﺎ ﺮﻄﺧ ﺾﻔﺨﻨﻣ ﻣﻦ @v ﺬJ ô Qﺎﻣﻮﻠﻌﻤﻟ/ ﺪﻗ ﻢﺘ" /ﺮﺘﺧ/ ﺎOﻗ .
ﺔﻛ,ﺎﺸﻤﻟ! ﺔ%ﻋﻮﻄﺗ : @V ﻚﻀﻓ( ﺔﻛ(ﺎﺸﻤﻠﻟ ﻲﻓ ﺬô Q ﺔﺳ/(ﺪﻟ/ ﻦﻟ Gﻮﻌ" ﻠﻋ ﻚâ 9ﺄﺑ ﺑﻮﻘﻋ ﺔ :v ﺴﺧ ﺎ ( e ] : ﻦﻟ ﺮﺛﺆ" ﻰﻠﻋ ﻼﻋ ﻗ ﺘ ﻚ ﻊﻣ ﻠﻛ ﺔ9 /ﻟﺘﺮﺑ9ﺔ v: ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ /ﻟﻜﻮ"ﺖ] ﻣﺸﺎ(ﻛﺘﻚ ﻓﻲ Qﺬô /ﻟﺪ(/ﺳﺔ /ﻻﺳﺘﻄﻼﻋ9ﺔ ﺗﻄﻮﻋ9ﺔ ﺗﻤﺎ ًﻣﺎ. : ﺑﺎﻹﺿﺎﻓﺔ Vﻟﻰ fﻟﻚ "ﻤﻜﻨﻚ /ﻟﺘﻮﻗﻒ ﻋﻦ ﺔﻛ(ﺎﺸﻤﻟ/ ﻲﻓ vâ ﺖﻗ: @:G ﺑﻮﻘﻋ ﺔ :v @/ﺪﻘﻓ vâ ﺰﻣ / " ﺎ ﻊﺘﻤﺘﺗ ﺎOﺑ ﺎﺣ ﻟ 9ً ﺎ .
ﻌﻣ 1ﺎﻣﻮﻠ /ﺎﺼﺗﻻ! : ﻞﺒﻗ @v (ﺮﻘﺗ Xﻮﺒﻗ ﺬe ô Qﻮﻋﺪﻟ/ ﺔﻛ(ﺎﺸﻤﻠﻟ ﻲﻓ ﺬô Q ﺔﺳ/(ﺪﻟ/ ﻚﻨﻜﻤ" õﺮvâ i ﺆﺳ / X ﻚ"ﺪﻟ ﻲﻓ vâ ﺖﻗ: ﻞﺒﻗ :v ءﺎﻨﺛv: v ﺪﻌﺑ ﺔﻛ(ﺎﺸﻤﻟ/ ﻦﻣ Xﻼﺧ ﻞﺻ/ﻮﺘﻟ/ ﻲﻌﻣ ﻤﺤﻣ ﺪ ﺔ"ﺪ9ﻌﺠﻟ/ :
122
!
ﺪ"ﺮﺒﻟ/ ﻟﻹ/ ﻲﻧ:ﺮﺘﻜ : [email protected]
ﺎQ ﻒﺗ ﺎﻜ"ﺮﻣu : v}s{Ö٥x{xs٥|
ﺎQ ﻒﺗ ﺖ"ﻮﻜﻟ/ : x٦٥xxxx٥uÖ٥+
/Vf @ﺎﻛ ﻚ"ﺪﻟ ﺌﺳv ﻠ ﺔ ö:ﺎﺠﺘﺗ ﻚﻠﺗ ﻲﺘﻟ/ ﺎﺟv ﻨﻋ O ﺎ ﺚﺤﺒﻟ/ :v ﻚﻗﻮﻘﺣ ñﻮﺿﻮﻤﻛ ﻲﺜﺤﺑ :v ﺎﺻV ﺑ Jﺎ ﻠﻌﺘﻣ ﺔﻘ ]ﺚﺤﺒﻟﺎﺑ ﻼﻓ ﺗ GGﺮﺘ ﻲﻓ Xﺎﺼﺗﻻ/ (IRB CHAIR) ﻰﻠﻋ ﻢﻗﺮﻟ/ : s٤sx٥y|uÖ٤٤| THE UNIVERSITY OF TOLEDO SOCIAL, BEHAVIORAL & EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD The research project described in this consent has been reviewed and approved as EXEMPT by the University of Toledo SBE IRB SBE IRB # 0000202946 Project Start Date
ﻦﻣ /ﻼﺧ ﺮﻘﻨﻟ! ﻰﻠﻋ ,ﺰﻟ! ﻲﻟﺎﺘﻟ! . ءﺪﺑ ﺒﺘﺳﻻ! ﺎ Vﺔﻧ ﻚﻧﺈﻓ ﺮﻘﺗ ﻚﻧﺄﺑ ﺪﻗ S1ﺮﻗ 1ﺎﻣﻮﻠﻌﻤﻟ! !ﻟﻮ!,S tEﻋﻼu . ﺗﻮ!ﻓﻖ ﻋﻠﻰ !ﻟﻤﺸﺎ,ﻛﺔ ﻓﻲ [ﺬ! !ﻟﺒﺤﺚS Vﻧﺖ HS ًﻀﺎ ﺗﺆﻛﺪ S' ﻋﻤﺮP{ z ﻨﺳ ﺔ .S ﺮﺜﻛS ! ! !
! ! !
123
!