ISSUE 4 – CONTENTS The Editors. Davies, J. Editorial: World Heritage Education Quin, C. Keynote Statement on World Heritage Education (Focal Point for UNESCO World Heritage Education Programme) Tlatlane, T R. The role of educational field visits in enhancing World Heritage Education. Jain, I. Heritage Education: Beyond Hermeneutics and Ontology. Mitchenson, D. Culture for kids: Engaging 0-5s with World Heritage and Culture. Taylor, A. Working with young people age 13-25 and World Heritage – A Summit Approach. (Fourth UK UNESCO World Heritage Youth Summit 2015). Röhlen, H and Maio, R. The World Heritage Young Experts Forum 2015 and the Young Heritage Experts Network: Tools to foster youth involvement within the framework of the World Heritage Convention. (39th World Heritage Committee Session- World Heritage Youth Forum 2015). Koomson, K A. My cherished memories: World Heritage Youth Forum in retrospect. (First African World Heritage Youth Forum 2016). Acheson, C. World Heritage and Geography Education: a retrospective view. Ironbridge Institute Call for Papers #Our UNESCO. Call for Papers: World Heritage and Communities Call for Book Reviewers.
To download individual articles visit: https://furnacejournal.wordpress.com/
ISSN 2057-519X (Online)
The Editors @furnacejournal Jamie Davies – j.g.davies@bham.ac.uk My AHRC CDA PhD research at the Ironbridge Institute is on Education at World Heritage Sites- How are World Heritage Values communicated within the formal learning process. From September 2016, I am a Teaching Fellow in Cultural Heritage at the Ironbridge Institute for Cultural Heritage, University of Birmingham. I hold a Archaeology BA and International Cultural Heritage Management MA from Durham University. Outside of my PhD research my interests are Digital Heritage, Maritime Heritage and Community Heritage. I am Vice Chairman of MOROL- Institute of Welsh Maritime Historical Studies, Founder of Cymdeithas Archaeoloeg a Hanes Llŷn/ Llŷn Archaeology and History Society and Trustee and Committee Member for the Llŷn Maritime Museum. Małgorzata Trelka – mxt472@bham.ac.uk I am an AHRC CDA PhD researcher in Cultural Heritage based at the Ironbridge International Institute for Cultural Heritage. My research aims to explore the relationship between ‘community’ and World Heritage. I am an archaeologist holding an MA in both, Medieval Archaeology and Public Archaeology. My professional interest is in field archaeology as well as in heritage policy. I have experience working as a field archaeologist in commercial urban archaeology in the UK. I also worked as an intern in the Culture Department of UNESCO Bangkok, where I coordinated the Museum Capacity Building Programme for Asia and the Pacific undertaken by UNESCO and the Asian Academy for Heritage Management. In 2009, I was a rapporteur for the Intangible Cultural Heritage Field School in Lamphun, Thailand. In 2010, I took up a post with the National Heritage Board of Poland, where I eventually became Head of the Heritage Policy Department tasked with the implementation of the UNESCO 1972 and 2003 conventions.
Editorial: World Heritage Education
Author: Jamie Davies Ironbridge International Institute for Cultural Heritage University of Birmingham, UK
Article 4 of the 1972 UNESCO World Heritage Convention states that each State Party has ‘the duty of ensuring the identification, protection, conservation, presentation and transmission to future generations of the cultural and natural heritage’ (UNESCO 1972); it is through Outreach and Education that this ‘transmission’ is undertaken. Article 27 enshrines the Educational duties of World Heritage Sites, as it states that ‘the States Parties to this Convention shall endeavour by all appropriate means, and in particular by educational and information programmes, to strengthen appreciation and respect by their peoples of the cultural and natural heritage’ (UNESCO 1972). It is important to remind World Heritage Sites and stakeholders, that Education and Outreach is a duty and obligation. This is a timely reminder as many World Heritage Sites are undergoing a period of change through financial and organisational restructuring and are in process the rewriting their Management Plans. World Heritage Education can occur through formal learning programmes at site level (teacher led visits or museums, heritage centres and educational organisations programmes), nationally through State Parties and globally through UNESCO’s World Heritage Education Programme. World Heritage Education however remains under researched. This is a symptom of heritage education in general which remains under researched in comparison to that of museum education. Launched in 2002, the UNESCO World Heritage Centre’s World Heritage Reports series has now published 43 publications on various World Heritage subjects and issues. Out of all 43 publications only one (No.8, November 2002) has been on World Heritage Education. In light of this, Issue Four of furnace is a landmark publication. It is the first time there has been an international publication solely on World Heritage Education and more importantly has allowed participants in UNESCO’s World Heritage Youth Summits and Forums to publish their own experiences, views and perspectives of World Heritage Education. It is hoped that this publication will stimulate UNESCO and State Parties to actively record, collate and publish best practice on World Heritage Education. For example for the first time papers from participants and organisers of recent World Heritage Youth Fora are presented together: the Fourth UK UNESCO World Heritage Youth Summit (October 2015), 39th World Heritage Committee Session World Heritage Young Experts Forum (June 2015) and the Fourth World Heritage World Heritage Forum (April/May 2016). The papers in this issue beyond doubt confirm the value of World Heritage Sites as learning resources and support a learning model developed during my ongoing PhD on World Heritage Education, as presented at Arbeitskreis World Heritage Education (the German National Commission for UNESCO’s World Heritage Education working group) at their meeting in Augsburg in November 2015.
Learning About Learning In World Heritage Sites should be used as an outdoor classroom, and at the very least for field trips.
World Heritage Sites provide a resource to learn about their local, national and global archaeological and historical significance (Outstanding Universal Value).
Learning for Learning from The creativity and inspiration that World Heritage Sites can provide.
World Heritage Sites as resources for the promotion of conservation and Peace (shared culture and cultural tolerance).
Figure 1: World Heritage Education Learning Model. Source: Davies 2016.
As illustrated by Figure 1, Learning should take place in, about, from and for World Heritage Sites (adapted from Scott and Oulton 1998:213, Henson 2004:24-25, Copeland 2006:17 and comparable with Delors 1996 and Ströter-Bender 2007’s World Heritage ‘Learning Paths’). -
Learning In World Heritage Sites
World Heritage Sites should be used as an outdoor classroom, and at the very least for field trips. Tshepang Rose Tlatlane from Botswana’s paper confirms the importance of visits to World Heritage Sites by students all levels of formal education. The paper reaffirms the added value of physical site visits in the digital age of the 21st century, where the majority of World Heritage Sites can be visited virtually from the classroom, at home or on mobile devices. Furthermore the paper rightly recognises the centrality of the teachers in initiating, organising and delivering the visits to sites. Finally the social experience of visits to sites is identified and the lasting impact this can have in terms of one’s personal, social and career development. Furthermore from the UK, Coralie Acheson’s interview with her father, who as a geography teacher took students to numerous World Heritage Sites across the World, confirming the educational value of fieldtrips. Whilst the paper recognises the importance of visiting the sites and especially their cross-curricular value, the lack of awareness of the World Heritage Status raises questions about the extent to which the inscription was a factor in visiting the sites and the resulting awareness amongst students. -
Learning about World Heritage Sites
World Heritage Sites provide a resource for students to learn about their local, national and global archaeological and historical significance (Outstanding Universal Value). From India, Ishita Jain’s philosophical understanding of World Heritage Education strongly argues the importance of a holistic site based understanding. Learning about World Heritage Sites should include the complete
site biography and associated narratives. This approach to World Heritage Education recognises that the World Heritage Inscription and narrative promoted by UNESCO is only part of the site’s developmental and narrative history. Furthermore this spatiotemporal understanding allows individuals to develop a sense of cultural tolerance as the complex history of the site is recognised. -
Learning from World Heritage Sites
Learning from World Heritage relates to the creativity and inspiration that World Heritage Sites can provide. From the UK, Donna Mitchenson’s paper showcases the new Culture for Kids initiative which uses recognised and pioneering pedagogical approaches to enable the currently underengaged Early Years (0-5 years old) students with World Heritage Education. The paper clearly reaffirms the concept of learning from World Heritage Sites as even very young children can learn about aspects of World Heritage through creative learning activities and experiences. -
Learning for World Heritage Sites
Finally Learning for World Heritage is linked to both the global significance and human values, World Heritage Sites as learning resources for the promotion of conservation and Peace (shared culture and cultural tolerance). From the Blaenavon Industrial Landscape World Heritage Site (UK), Ashleigh Taylor’s paper confirms the lack of engagement with young people (18-25) in World Heritage Education initiatives by World Heritage Sites. The success of the recent World Heritage Youth Summit and the innovative and award winning World Heritage Ambassadors pilot scheme provides a new model for World Heritage Education in the 21st century. This approach has not only enabled young people to learn about their local World Heritage Site, it has changed their attitude towards it and enabled them to have a voice it its management. Current plans are underway to roll out the Ambassadors to other UK World Heritage Sites, however there this approach should be encouraged by all World Heritage Sites. Hannah Röhlen and Rui Maio’s paper about the 2015 World Heritage Young Experts Forum similarly confirms the importance of allowing young people to have a voice and recognizes the positive contribution young professionals can make in promoting and engaging with World Heritage. The Young Heritage Experts Network established as a result of the forum similar to the World Heritage Ambassadors Programme would perhaps provide UNESCO with sustainable global mechanisms to engage young people with World Heritage in a more meaningful way. Kwesi Aane Koomson the Ghanaian representative for the 2016 African World Heritage Youth Forum provides a very personal account of engagement with World Heritage. Kwesi’s experience of attending a World Heritage Youth Summit is a clear example of the ‘Learning for World Heritage’ approach as it led to an increase knowledge of the World Heritage programme but also led to long lasting personal and social development, embodying how World Heritage recognizes cultural tolerance but also promotes cultural tolerance through the shared human heritage. The most obvious evidence of ‘Learning for World Heritage Sites’ is in our keynote statement by Carméla Quin who is the Focal Point for UNESCO World Heritage Education Programme. This much welcome statement confirms the value of World Heritage Sites as learning resources and proposes that their value is of even greater significance given the enhanced threat at present. Whilst it is clear that UNESCO’s current active approach to World Heritage Education is through annual Youth Fora and engaging young people globally through social media initiatives, formal educational programmes and infrastructure have been neglected. Within the context of the other papers in this
issue, it would be a positive step if UNESCO set about strategic guidance for World Heritage Sites to fully maximize the learning potential of Sites through formal educational programmes. From the papers in this issue of furnace, it is clear that in the 21st century, 22 years after UNESCO initiated the World Heritage Education programme a new approach is needed. This approach should situate World Heritage Education formal and informal programmes and initiatives at site, national and global (UNESCO) levels within today’s digital age but foregrounding site based learning which promotes a holistic understanding of the site, it’s Outstanding Universal Value and supports humanistic vision, which unfortunately is more relevant than ever.
Jamie Davies furnace Editor World Heritage Education PhD Researcher https://worldheritageeducation.wordpress.com/ Ironbridge International Institute for Cultural Heritage, University of Birmingham Contact: j.g.davies@bham.ac.uk September 2016
Bibliography Copeland, T. 2006. Europe and democratic citizenship, heritage education and identity. Council of Europe. International Centre for Heritage Education University of Gloucestershire Department of Culture and Cultural Heritage. Available from: https://www.coe.int/t/dg4/cultureheritage/heritage/completed/education/DGIV_PAT_HERITAGE_E D%282005%293_EN.pdf .Accessed 04/05/2016 Delors, J. 1996. Learning: The Treasure Within. Report to UNESCO of the International Commission on Education for the Twenty-First Century. Paris: UNESCO. Henson, D. 2004. Archaeology in Schools. In Education and the Historic Environment edited by Henson, D., Stone, P., and Corbishley, M. English Heritage. Routledge. Pages 23-32. Scott, W., and Oulton, C. 1998. Environmental values education: An exploration of its role in the school curriculum. Journal of Moral Education, 27(2), 209–224. Ströter-Bender, J. 2007. Teaching World Heritage – Learning Paths and Museum Coffers. In 2007. Training Strategies for World Heritage Management. Editors: Marie-Theres Albert, Roland Bernecker, Diego Gutierrez Perez, Nalini Thakur and Zhang Nairen. Proceedings of the the International Symposium “Heritage Education and Capacity Building in Heritage Management“ in BTU Cottbus in June 2006. Deutsche UNESCO-Kommission / Asia-Link Programme. Available from: http://www-docs.tu-cottbus.de/interkulturalitaet/public/buch3.pdf .Accessed 04/05/2016
Keynote Statement on World Heritage Education Carméla Quin
The concept of World Heritage was recognized when the UNESCO General Conference in 1972 adopted the Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage. It is one of the most ratified Conventions in the world, with 192 nation signatories (States Parties) to the Convention as of 09-Jun-2016. All countries have sites of local or national interest, which are a source of national pride. Elements of that heritage, because of their exceptional qualities, are worthy of special international protection. The key to this concept is the need to identify, protect, present and transmit to future generations places of outstanding universal value to all humanity. Since its adoption, 1,052 cultural and natural properties considered to be of outstanding universal value have been inscribed in the World Heritage List to which, every year, more sites are added. What is at stake here is more than adding new sites on a list. World Heritage embodies a revolutionary idea, a humanistic idea – the idea that people of all cultures and faith can unite around outstanding universal value, and share the commitment to protect it. This shared positive vision of humanity, in all its diversity, is the spirit of World Heritage. Heritage can lift people and communities, mobilize and unite them. Protecting heritage as a beacon of human values is vital. It is about healing wounded memories, harnessing heritage to regain confidence, to recover and look into the future. Heritage protection takes into account the visions of development that encompass populations, animal and plant species, ecosystems, natural resources and that integrates concerns such as the fight against poverty, gender equality, human rights, education, health, human security and intercultural dialogue. In recent decades, people around the world have begun to understand the need to change the development equation, to strike a balance between conservation and development needs and fully recognize the tremendous potential of heritage. Education is at the centre of social, cultural and economic development and therefore essential to World Heritage protection. World Heritage education is all about transmitting values, underpinned by the need to promote intercultural understanding, respect for cultural diversity and to create a culture sensitive to creating a sustainable environment – principles which are central to UNESCO's mission and at the heart of its contribution to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. World Heritage education is oriented toward the future, and not only concerned with the historical meanings of a site. It rather understands World Heritage as an opportunity to draw attention to social development and to help young people make their voices heard. World Heritage education should therefore enable young people to participate in society, and provide them with the practical competencies required to create a sustainable one. This is what we strive for through the World Heritage Education Programme, one of UNESCO’s most successful flagship programmes for young people. Over the past centuries, much of our heritage has been irretrievably lost. We have witnessed, and continue to witness, the destruction and deterioration of irreplaceable treasures due to natural disasters, wars, industrialization, vandalism, theft and pollution. Other underlying causes of this prolonged and continuing tragedy are extreme poverty, ignorance, indifference, lack of care and lack
of appreciation. And in recent years, we have been confronted by deliberate attacks against culture and heritage, especially in the Arab region. In Syria, all six World Heritage sites have been damaged by fighting -- 60 percent of the Old City of Aleppo and Damascus has been destroyed. The Temple of Bêl and Arch of Triumph in Palmyra, a UNESCO World Heritage, was destroyed by explosives. The Umayyad Mosque in Aleppo has become a battlefield. Eight sites on the World Heritage Tentative List of this country have been affected, destroyed or severely impacted by looting and illegal excavations, and at least six museums have suffered damage. In Yemen, we have seen the destruction of the Citadel of Taez, the Temple of Nakrah in Barraqish and the Dhamar Museum -- and the fabled Marib Dam and the Old Cities of Sana’a and Sada’a have been severely damaged by bombing. In Iraq, two of four UNESCO World Heritage sites -- Hatra and Ashur -- have been bulldozed; the museum of Mosul has been attacked and vandalised. Nimrud has been dynamited. The Monastery of Deir Mar Elia in Mosul, the oldest Christian monastery in Iraq and at least nine other heritage sites have intentionally been destroyed. In Libya, at least eight religious sites have been damaged or destroyed, and many other sites remain threatened by looting and desecration. Increasingly, we see the intentional destruction of irreplaceable landmarks, the systematic persecution of people on the basis of their ethnic and religious identities, and shocking violations of human rights, including cultural rights. Across the region, illegal excavations have taken on an industrial scale, with looting of cultural objects to finance extremist groups that propagate hatred, and especially target young minds. In response to the unprecedented and increased attacks on heritage in the Middle East, Libya, Mali and elsewhere, UNESCO’s Director-General launched #Unite4Heritage at the University of Bagdad in 2015, an important social media campaign to counter propaganda of hatred, intolerance and violence, with messages of unity and solidarity. It is a response to those who seek to destroy heritage, by sharing knowledge and the respect for culture in its diverse forms. “We must respond, by showing that exchange and dialogue between cultures is the driving force for all. We must respond by showing that diversity has always been and remains today strength for all societies. We must respond by standing up against forces of fragmentation, by refusing to be divided into ‘us’ and ‘them.’ We must respond by claiming our cultural heritage as the commonwealth of all humanity.” Irina Bokova, UNESCO Director General, 2015, Bagdad From a modest start, the campaign has become a global movement followed by more than 15 million people, most of them young people, responding to the need to build networks and convey the message of tolerance, knowledge and culture as a force against violent extremism.
In light of the numerous conflicts in many regions of the world, the 1954 Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, known as the Hague Convention, and the 1970 Convention dealing with the illicit trafficking of cultural property (Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property) have taken on special significance. Illicit trafficking of cultural property is a scourge that affects every region of the world today. Practices of looting, theft and illegal excavations affect museums, cultural institutions, places of worship as well as archaeological sites worldwide. It causes irreparable damage to cultural heritage, and deprives a community of its memory, the physical testimony of its past. The UNESCO Culture conventions serve as the interface between culture and development. They are the meeting points between how we understand the world and the tools with which we shape it. Each Convention is unique but they are interrelated. Together, they embody a singular approach to understanding heritage. For example the World Heritage Convention and the 2003 Intangible Heritage Convention function in a complementary manner in so far as many heritage sites possess both material and intangible values that cannot be dissociated. This synergy between built and natural heritage sites on one hand, and spirituality and traditional knowledge and skills on the other hand, is particularly visible in numerous heritage sites. UNESCO also works closely with museum professionals to develop innovative approaches to strengthening the role of young people in safeguarding the world’s cultural and natural heritage. The spirit of the #Unite4Heritage campaign is for young women and men to become engaged in defending their common values and heritage, respecting diversity while living together. The goal is to put forward a counter narrative to extremism, hate and terrorism. Young people comprise about one-fifth of the world's population. They are the most educated generation of youth to date. They are the most affected by the key development challenges of our time. They are at the same time at the forefront of developing innovative solutions to emerging problems. The future of our remaining heritage will depend largely on their involvement and actions. Today's youth are better placed than ever before to respond to the continuing threats facing our heritage. Youth are not only targets of education but key partners and stakeholders in development. Preserving World Heritage has become a constant worldwide concern, and youth must play a key role as caretakers and protectors of cultural heritage and join the fight against its trafficking and destruction. It is imperative to reach out to young people, introduce protection of heritage values into education, and involve them in this battle of ideas through World Heritage education -- in order to encourage young people to unite around heritage and its protection. In this way, a strong message is passed among young people about the importance of culture, heritage and diversity, and the need for fostering them, together. Because at the end of the day, when we speak about heritage and protecting heritage, when we speak about the World Heritage Convention and the more than one thousand sites inscribed on the UNESCO List, let us remember that behind all this lies an extraordinary idea -- that we unite around the outstanding universal value of World Heritage sites, and protect them together. CarmÊla Quin Focal Point for UNESCO World Heritage Education Programme Dated 28th July 2016
The role of educational field trips in enhancing World Heritage Education Tshepang Rose Tlatlane Abstract Heritage is one of the most contested topics in the world as it involves issues that range from political, economic, social, technological and legal in nature. There is a need for raising awareness and sharing knowledge and ideas about this topic. This paper discusses the benefits of field trips as catalysts for heritage education. It explores the potential of visiting world heritage sites and how that could enhance learning about heritage. The research has found that educational visits develop learners critical and problem solving skills. The paper also considers the value of field trips within the context of the digital learning norms of the 21st century. It is therefore suggested that training workshops for teachers and heritage organizations should be made a norm to support them in offering and running field trips to World Heritage Sites. Educational field trips to World Heritage Sites play a pivotal role in encouraging young people to pursue and promote the conservation of natural and cultural heritage. Keywords: World Heritage Education, Botswana, Field trips, Heritage Education
Introduction Heritage sites are faced with many threats such as infrastructural development that encroaches on the significance and authenticity of the sites, climate change, poverty and conflict, which deteriorates and in some cases completely destroys heritage sites. In order to address some of the threats, State Parties pledged by ratifying the 1972 UNESCO Convention to conserve their respective heritage sites by fully adhering with the rules set in the 1972 UNESCO Convention (UNESCO 1992). State Parties made a commitment to develop and promote effective approaches to conservation of heritage sites. The convention emphasised the need for research and training centres in helping to counteract the dangers that threaten cultural or natural heritage. It is the commitment that State Parties shall foster and intensify heritage education which is the basis for educational field trips to World Heritage Sites (UNESCO 1992). World Heritage According to Abungu (1996), heritage refers to the resource of a country; this could be cultural, historical or natural resource. Heritage institutions are those organizations that are entrusted with the custodianship of these resources. Every World Heritage resource has a unique beauty and an exceptional value thus a need to protect them. For example the Historic Centre of Vienna which played an essential role as a leading European music centre from the Viennese Classicism era until the early 20th century, the Robben Island Museum whose buildings signify the triumph of democracy and freedom over oppression and racism in South Africa and Shark Bay, Australia whose outstanding features include its vast sea-grass beds (4,800 km2) and its dugong (‘sea cow’) population (UNESCO 2010). Historic Centre of Vienna was inscribed in 2001, Robben Island in 1999 and Shark Bay, Australia in 1991 (World Heritage Committee 2003). The 1972 World Heritage Convention defined a World Heritage Site as an area or place representing the most outstanding examples of the world’s natural and cultural heritage (UNESCO 1992). For example Shark Bay (2016) noted that the heritage site is as an area of outstanding beauty and wonder; mystery and grandeur; and is meaningful to the world. Heritage Education in the 21st Century In the continued call towards the protection of heritage and heritage resources, transformative education is a viable tool that addresses some of the problems currently besieging culture and heritage. According to IBIS Global Education Group (2014), transformative learning is an approach which develops learners’ academic and practical skills, in a way that lead them to reflect upon and re-evaluate their beliefs and experiences. For example, informal training and educational visits
answer a very important question of “how to enhance learning about World Heritage Sites?” It is therefore crucial to involve all stakeholders to provide quality education and share knowledge through effective approaches to protecting heritage sites. A stakeholder refers to groups or persons that have claim and interest and affect or affected by the operations and decisions of an organization (Jeffery 2009). In relation to World Heritage Sites, the existence of heritage operations and decisions government’s take on heritage sites directly and indirectly impact stakeholders in many ways. It is important that teachers, schools, heritage organizations and museums all work towards enhancing education programmes and field trips their World Heritage Sites. To provide evidence on the importance of educational trips, Shakil, Faizi and Hafeez (2011), explained that educational trips are a means of essential learning, where students go through essential learning experiences under the leadership and guidance of trained instructors. UNESCO (2010) calls it ‘experimental leaning’ and have defined it as an approach that entails creating a platform for debriefing and consolidation of skills and thoughts through feedback, reflection and the application of the ideas and skills to new situations. Learning encompasses more than traditional teaching of sitting down in a classroom with a pen and a paper; paying attention to a tutor or teacher (Behrendt and Franklin 2014). Elias (2011) illustrates that learning is a result of interaction with instructors and tutors, with content and/or with other people. To further elaborate, Houwer, Holmes and Moors (2013) developed the “ontogenetic adaptation”, which the authors defined as changes in the behaviour of an organism that result from regularities in the environment of the organism. Their definition of learning embraces that learning is not subject to interaction with other people only. It embraces that learning is a development in behaviour that is impacted by what is going in the environment, either through experience, interaction and research.
In the context of world heritage education, an educational visit is understood as outdoor and practical field trips to properties of Outstanding Universal Value used to enhance students’ knowledge. It is a way of exposing learners to the ‘tangible’ context of what they have learnt through written and spoken language in the classroom. An educational visit occurs when one goes out of a formal setting to observe and/or do activities that are linked to the theory they have learnt in class and/or formal education.
Educational visits challenge learners to think critically about practical implications of conservation, the ability to solve practical problems in their daily engagements with heritage and decisions on heritage issues. According to Ocal’s (2016) report, educational fieldtrips provide an opportunity for
participants to learn by doing which enables students to understand the link between the past and present and increases student’s sensitivities towards the subject. Behrendt and Franklin (2014) noted that experiential learning at formal and informal field trip venues increases student interest, knowledge, and motivation.
Today learners are sophisticated and use technology more than ever before. The use of technology has made possible digital visits to heritage sites, which involve the use of 3D displays, mobile devices and systems such as the Augmented Reality (AR) to access or navigate a site regardless of the actual physical distance (Walker 2008). According to Ch’ng (2011:6), ‘technology allows remote access to heritage sites at any given space and time without the site damaged by visitor pressure’. Thus, technology is not only a means of sharing and transmitting knowledge but also presents a way of dealing with issues such as degradation of heritage sites and climate change which are a global concern for heritage sites.
Whilst Digital Heritage is now common in museums and cultural heritage sites (Bonacini et al 2015), the challenges that come with it still favour physical field trips. It is argued by Li, Liew and Su (2012) that Augmented Reality (AR) system lays emphasis on intermingling actual with virtual environment from real time interaction, but however, the system does not contemplate the pre-experience and after experience of visitors. Walker (2008) claims that the common problem with digital devices is that there is normally a separation between the contents on the device and the real world experience. That makes the authenticity of the online experience questionable and untrustworthy as also argued by Hazan (2015). In that regard, technologies may hinder students from experiencing the real thing because it is part of the experience that will make people remember the concept. Herein comes a popular saying ‘seeing is believing’ that has some truth in it. Field trips to World Heritage Sites are therefore still essential in today’s digital age.
Learners want to explore, experiment, to see, touch and to feel. This is substantiated in Taylor and Parsons (2011) that learners of today are concerned with ‘relevancy’, which can be achieved by engaging them through educational trips to heritage sites. Taylor and Parsons (2011) further argue that learners ask that their learning apply to real-life scenarios whenever possible as opposed to theory. This clearly illustrates that an authentic and/or hands on experience during field trips helps learners make a better sense of oral and written education and even apply them to their daily lives.
In her report, Kushins (2015:3) explains how a visit to Metropolitan Museum of Art, Greece during one of her school trips shaped her professional life today. “Experiences like this can play a powerful role in creative and intellectual development. My professional life today is rooted in aesthetic awareness and historical empathy grounded by such experiences.” On a similar note, Robben Island Museum (2012) explain that many learners visiting the World Heritage Site normally appreciate that it is a good experience being there and that they are challenged to take on continue the legacies left for them by forefathers. During one of the field trips, one student admitted; “I felt very proud to see that place where they struggled for freedom. That is why I wanted to take my photo here, to show my family who did not visit the island” Experiences such as these will definitely make one remember heritage space, and even share with other people. These experiences even have the power to inform one’s career or line of business. In the very same manner, visits to heritage sites can develop ones interest for heritage. Participants get to have fun and that is actually one of the things that will make them remember the experience. It is being part of the experience that will make people eager to share the stories and inspire other who may as well continue the heritage education cycle. In that sense, visiting heritage sites is undoubtedly a sustainable measure of providing heritage education. Ocal (2016) explains that museums provide an opportunity for students to learn through practical experiences which will increase their sensitivity towards heritage. While Behrendt and Franklin (2014) also concur that interactive exhibits help students play with concepts, activities often not possible in the classroom. Ch’ng (2011) claims that a digital means could be used to get the younger generation absorb knowledge and skills, given the rate that they are involved with technology over the years. However, despite the fact that virtual heritage present a good opportunity to support conservation and dissemination of heritage information; digitization is still at an infant stage in Botswana (Mnjama 2010).
Digital heritage like any other approach has its own benefits and limitations. This approach can be used to transmit world heritage information to the youth as their engagement with technology continuous to grow enormously. Digital heritage is a creative method that can be used to get the younger generation involved in conservation and preservation of cultural and natural heritage as it suites their interests in the current millennium. Virtual heritage is also beneficial in addressing some of the concerns affecting heritage sites like climate change and land deterioration as anyone can
have the experience from their comfort zones. An online experience however cannot entirely replace the authenticity of a physical experience. In addition, the legitimacy and certainty of the online heritage experience is questionable. Therefore, virtual visits and educational trips must be used all together to complement each other. Social training approach Social training is defined as the transfer of knowledge, skills and attitudes that can transform a behavior and lead to improved performance in key social areas (Grossman and Salas 2011). The ‘each one, teach one’ philosophy that was used by ex-political prisoners at Robben Island World Heritage Site applies when participants go into an educational trip to heritage sites. The skills are impacted on others through discussions and questions in a more relaxed environment. Shakil, Faizi and Hafeez (2011) argue that educational trips offer students’ social training as they are normally taken in large group and students are included from different social backgrounds. In fact, many educational visits are organized for groups. Learners from different cultural backgrounds interact, work together, and share information on different cultures and learning about a culture locally and globally. This is necessary for learners to know more about what they learn in classes, workshops and conferences and even to put the ideas into practice. Participants can even watch dramas or do role plays displaying the life of the past which has the power to make history interesting for those who would otherwise find it not. These kinds of activities enable learners to map a relationship between the past and the present; to relate to everyday life situations and give them a deeper understanding than just listening to stories. Through group based visits to World Heritage Sites, learners get to share ideas on what is done differently in their respective countries and how it can benefit other heritage sites. In that process, they also learn more about culture and cultural tolerance and take ideas home, which is also a way of incorporating social training. Social training extends to communities who have impact and are impacted by heritage sites. Community involvement is vital as the concept of “each one, teach one” cannot be implemented if people separate themselves from world heritage sites. Looking specifically at some countries in Africa, for example, Botswana has established youth development projects that seek to engage and sensitize the youth on the importance of conservation through Community Based Natural Resources Management (CBNRM) projects. Mining and Travel (2014) argue that CBNRM was initially aimed at wildlife conservation and has now been extended to heritage management. According to Mining and Travel (2014) The Kalahari Conservation with the Barclays Bank of Botswana launched a Youth Development Rhino conservation project as a response to the CBNRM outreach programme. The
Youth Development and Rhino Conservation project was motivated by the need to develop a great involvement of youth in conservation and teaching environmental sustainability. Engagement of local communities in any form of disseminating heritage education is vital as it gives them a sense of ownership on their local resources and makes them cooperate in decision-making process concerning heritage sites. Specifically, involving the youth is vital and conservation will be undertaken by the youth of today and tomorrow. Incorporation of World Heritage Education in the school syllabus: Botswana Botswana has two heritage sites listed on the World Heritage Sites list, which are the Okavango Delta and Tsodilo Hills. The Tsodilo Hills was declared a UNESCO Heritage site in 2001 and was joined by the Okavango in 2014 (UNECSO 2015). In Botswana, menial efforts have been made to link traditional knowledge to the school curriculum or to incorporate indigenous knowledge into Botswana’s school system (Silo and Khudu-Petersen 2016). However, even so, some attempts which include of incorporation environmental education in subjects such as Environmental Science cannot be overlooked (Silo 2015). Silo (2015) observes that Environmental Education clubs formed at schools are focused much on the environment or natural heritage with emphasis on litter pick-ups and cleaning campaigns and sometimes characterized by visits to the world heritage sites and national monuments. Silo and Khudu-Petersen (2016) on the other hand argue that schools’ educational trips to heritage sites are not compulsory but teachers‘ own initiatives. Even so, Mosothwane and Ndwapi (2012) claim that in a research they conducted with 60 trained primary school teachers, 63% of the participants reported this was not a well established education and 75% said that they have not received enough training that they could use to impact their students. The delivery of World Heritage Education can be fostered by increasing teachers’ knowledge because with the lack of skills and knowledge it is almost impossible to achieve a heritage sensitive future (students). Students should be taught to harmonize and establish the relationship between culture and the environment; appreciating the fact that our cultures are informed or dependent on the natural environment. This will help to prepare students also to respect cultures and traditions practiced at different world heritage sites.
Conclusion In conclusion, experimental and experiential learning through educational visits to heritage sites is one of the categories of learning, which plays a fundamental role in the protection of heritage sites. Visiting World Heritage Sites has emerged as a catalyst for learning and has the power to enhance knowledge. In today’s digital world, physically going to a World Heritage Site has proven value. Educational visits to World Heritage Sites are important as they allow visitors first-hand experiences
that give them the ability to gain social skills and transform their behaviour and attitudes towards heritage. This approach of learning also develops students’ critical and problem solving skills. Through educational trips, learners get to make sense of history, relate it to the world today and even put to practice the skills and ideas needed to protect heritage sites. Field trips develop learners’ appreciation of heritage such that they can even be challenged to pursue a career in heritage. It has also been found out that in most instances, educational trips are taken in large groups that enable interaction among learners and learning from one another in a more relaxed environment. Finally this social interaction allows participants to learn about local and universal cultures, the spirit which promotes cultural tolerance. Recommendations As a result of the findings and conclusion, this study recommends that; Educational trips to World Heritage Sites should be made a norm in heritage education. This will develop and increase learners’ sensitivity about heritage and will help them to raise heritage sensitive future generations. Participants should engage in activities symbolizing the significance of World Heritage Sites, thereby developing a understanding based on the past, present and future. It is essential to intensify education programs targeting the youth in schools to raise awareness of cultural and natural sites. Awareness campaigns in schools will cultivate appreciation for World Heritage Sites as well as promoting domestic tourism.
At World Heritage Sites, the youth should be given the platform to get involved in conservation of natural and cultural heritage. This can be achieved by providing them with education, training and allowing them to voice out on heritage related matters.
Author Tshepang Rose Tlatlane studied BA (Hons) Tourism Management at Botswana Accountancy College. Her education and career in Tourism has introduced her not only to the world of tourism business but to the conservation and preservation of cultural and natural resources as well. Tshepang loves heritage with passion and has participated in the African World Heritage Youth Regional Forum in April 2016. Contact: tshepangrose@gmail.com
Bibliography Abungu, G. (1996) Heritage Community and the state in the 90s: Experiences from Africa. Presented at: The Future of the Past Conference. University of Western Cape, 10-12 July. Apostolopoulou, A.P., Cavoeiras, L.M., and Klonari, A. (2014) Cultural heritage and education: Integrating tour maps in a bilateral project. European Journal of Geography. 5, (4), pp. 67-77. Behrendt, M and Franklin, T. (2014) A Review of Research on School Field Trips and Their Value in Education. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education. 9, pp. 235 – 2345. Ch’ng, E. (2011) Digital Heritage Tourism: Reconfiguring the Visitor Experience in Heritage Sites, Museums and Architecture in the Era of Pervasive Computing. In: Percorsi creative di turismo urbano (Creative Paths of Urban Tourism) Conference. Catania, 22 - 24 September 2011.
Elias, T. (2011) Learning analytics: Definitions, Processes and potential. [Online]. Available at: http://learninganalytics.net/LearningAnalyticsDefinitionsProcessesPotential.pdf (Accessed: 16 May 2016).
Grossman, R. and Salas, E. (2011) The transfer of training: what really matters. International Journal of Training and Development, 15 (2), pp. 103-120.
Houwer, J., Barnes-Holmes, D., and Moors, A. (2013) What is learning? On the nature and merits of a functional definition of learning. [Online]. Available from: http://www.liplab.ugent.be/pdf/learningpreprint.pdf .Accessed 16 May 2016.
IBIS Global Education Group (2014) Concept Paper, Transformative Education. [Online]. Available from: http://oxfamibis.dk/sites/default/files/media/pdf_global/methods_and_approaches/concept_paper _layout_final_-_transformative.pdf .Accessed 06 July 2016.
IUCN Botswana (2016) Programmes and Projects. [Online]. Available from: http://www.iucnbot.bw/projects/index.html .Accessed 21 May 2016.
Kalusopa, T. and Zulu, S. (2009) Digital heritage material preservation in Botswana: Problems and prospects. 28 (3), pp. 98 – 107.
Kushins, J. (2015) Pedagogical Souvenirs: An Art Educator’s Reflections on Field Trips as Professional Development. International Journal of Education & the Arts, 16 (2), pp. 1 – 19.
Hazan, S. (2015) Performing the Museum in an Age of Digital Reproduction. furnace Journal. 2, pp. 1 – 77.
Li, Y., Liew, A., and Su, W. (2012) The Digital Museum: Challenges and Solution. [Online]. Available from: http://www98.griffith.edu.au/dspace/bitstream/handle/10072/49660/79505_1.pdf?sequence=1 .Accessed 08 July 2016.
Mana H. and Mana F. (2014) Poverty Alleviation through Pro-Poor Tourism: The Role of Botswana Forest Reserves. Sustainability, 6, pp. 5697-5713.
Mbaiwa, J. E. (2008) Tourism development, rural livelihoods, and conservation in the Okavango Delta,
Botswana.
[Online].
Available
from:
http://oaktrust.library.tamu.edu/bitstream/handle/1969.1/ETD-TAMU-3064/MBAIWADISSERTATION.pdf?sequence=1 .Accessed 23 May 2016.
Mining and Travel (2014) Barclays Bank Botswana engages Youth in Rhino Conservation. [Online]. Available
from:
https://minetravel.co.bw/general-news/2014/08/01/barclays-bank-botswana-
engages-youth-in-rhino-conservation/#.V4ZSjfl96M8 .Accessed 06 July 2016.
Mnjama, N. (2010) Preservation and Management of Audiovisual Archives in Botswana. 20 (2), pp.139-148.
Mosothwane, M. and Ndwapi, G. (2012) Training Pre-Service Teachers in Environmental Education: The Case of Colleges of Education in Botswana. International Journal of Scientific Research in Education. 5 (1), pp. 26-27.
Ocal, T. (2016) The Effect of Field Trips to Historical Cultural Heritage Sites on Teacher Candidates’ Academic Knowledge and Their Sensitivity. Creative Education, 7, pp. 376-386.
Robben Island Museum (2002) Voices of Young People on Robben Island. South Africa: Robben Island Museum. Shakil, A.F., Faizi, W., and Hafeez, S. (2011) The need and importance of field trips at higher level in karachi, Pakistan. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 2 (1), pp. 67 – 97. Shark
Bay
(2016).
What
is
World
Heritage?
[Online].
Available
from:
http://www.sharkbay.org.au/world-heritage/what_is_world_heritage.aspx .Accessed 16 May 2016. Silo, N. (2015) Using Science as a tool for infusing environmental education in the school curriculum – A barrier to education for sustainable development. European Journal of Educational Studies. 17 (1), pp. 11-22. Silo, N. and Khudu-Petersen, K. (2016) Hearing Ancestral Voices through Creative Art: A Tool for Environmental Education for Sustainability. International Journal of Education & the Arts. 17 (9), pp. 1-22. Taylor, L. & Parsons, J. (2011) Improving Student Engagement. Current Issues in Education, 14 (1), 1 – 33. UNESCO (1992) Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage. [Online]. Available from: http://whc.unesco.org/en/conventiontext/ .Accessed 23 May 2016. UNESCO (2010) Teaching and learning for a sustainable future. [Online]. Available from: http://www.unesco.org/education/tlsf/mods/theme_d/mod20.html .Accessed 16 May 2016. UNESCO (2015) Properties inscribed on the World Heritage List. [Online]. Available from: http://whc.unesco.org/en/statesparties/BW/ .Accessed 07 July 2016.
Walker, K. (2008) Digital Technologies and the Museum Experience. [Online]. Available from: http://www.lkl.ac.uk/people/kevin/book_chapter7.pdf .Accessed 16 July 2016.
World Heritage Committee (2003) Properties Inscribed on the World Heritage List. [Online]. Available from: http://www.waddenzee.nl/fileadmin/content/Dossiers/Overheid/pdf/Werelderfgoed_lijst.pdf .Accessed 10 July 2016.
World Heritage Education: Inheritance Beyond Hermeneutics and Ontology Ishita Jain Abstract: The German Philosopher Martin Heidegger changed the paradigms of hermeneutics when he proposed the idea of ‘positive prejudice’ (Heidegger, 1927) as a major tool to structure any understanding. He insisted on the limited role of ‘method’ and prioritized understanding as a dialogical, practical and situated activity. Heritage sites are in a state of continuous flux. Either they are in constant interaction with the visitors who want to draw their interpretations and construct meanings, or with the community, who rely on these sites for support, both economic as well as to situate themselves. The author identifies this process as a process of consumption, which is linear in nature. Heritage sites, by becoming sources of learning, can become a part of a cyclic process, a process of ‘heritage production’ that allows the site to take an organic course to grow and evolve. This will demand a symbiotic relationship between the sites, the visitors, the managers of the site and the community. This paper is a humble attempt to explore the possibilities of a dialogical pedagogy for World Heritage Education which can support the formation of the process of heritage production through means of interpretative engagement. The pedagogy will look at World Heritage Sites as the biggest resource and the heritage education as an engaging and participatory process, which enriches itself and the participants in equal measures.
Keywords: Heritage Sites, Interpretative Pedagogy, Hermeneutics, Interpretation, Communication, India, World Heritage Education.
Heritage
Education,
World Heritage sites as learning resources World Heritage Sites have been unanimously accepted as being the representatives of the highest achievements of man and its universal significance. They stand as a testimony to the settings that built it. World Heritage Education, therefore, has to extend itself beyond the objectives of formal education. Formal education aims for the emancipation and empowerment of ‘mankind’, while World Heritage Education, as this writer understands, has to aim at enlightenment and empirical awareness of ‘humankind’. The contemporary human has two sides of his ‘being’- the local as well as the global. World Heritage Education, therefore, must be informed by a pedagogy that is dialogical and interpretative. Such a pedagogical approach is envisioned to include the ‘local’-ness as well as the extended and extending ‘global’-ness of the heritage sites. A dialogical methodology, that is participative and engaging, will serve to make aware the ontological implications of the heritage sites by revealing the unique and defining constructs of the site. While Heritage sites are the manifested tangible heritage, what went behind making them is a huge treasure chest of intangible traditions that remain to be acknowledged while engaging with the site. As defined by the Venice Charter (1964): ‘The concept of a historic monument embraces not only the single architectural work but also the urban or rural setting in which is found the evidence of a particular civilization, a significant development or a historic event’. The terms architectural works, civilization, and development carry an importance because of their many layered meanings and implications. The Venice Charter clearly establishes World Heritage Sites as architectural manifestations. Architecture encompasses socio-economic conditions, political bends, beliefs and rituals, technological advancements and the craftsmanship of the people belonging to that space, time and contemporaneity.
Ajanta Caves World Heritage Site: A holistic World Heritage Education approach Heritage sites have grown, evolved and eroded over time. They stand today bearing testimony to several interventions and offer the remnants of these additive forces as a legacy. If one looks at the Ajanta Caves World Heritage Site (Figure 1), located near the city of Aurangabad in Maharashtra, India this idea can be further understood. Known for the 2nd century BC Buddhist cave paintings, these caves are a repository of knowledge for the Buddhist practices, both religious and artistic, of those times. They are also architectural knowledge banks to understand the Rock-Cut Buddhist architecture. This repository has been built over time. The caves themselves have been created in two phases:
1. 1st – 2nd century BC, during the Satvahana reign, where Buddha was symbolically revered in the form of a stupa, leading to sculptural expressions 2. During 420-480 CE, during the Vakataka reign, where imageries of Buddha’s lives take precedence, where Jataka tales have found a canvas in the rock surfaces (Spink, 2009)
Whilst the Anjanta caves are essentially a Buddhist monastery, divided into several quarters for living, teaching and worship, each patron, their position in this context and their worldviews have contributed to how the caves were managed and constructed and looked after. However, when the reign of King Harishena ended, these caves were abandoned and forgotten by the wealthy patrons, only to be rediscovered later by John Smith, in 1819.
Figure 1: Ajanta Caves spread in a horse-shoe formation Since then the caves have found patrons in Royal Asiatic Society, Archaeological Survey of India, The Nizam of Hyderabad, and lastly UNESCO with the site inscribed as a World Heritage Site in 1983 (Gordon, 2011).Each patron has protected, added and augmented the site in their own ways, and for their own agendas. This process has added layers of history to the caves. For example: 1. The Royal Asiatic Society commissioned several copies of the cave paintings to be made. 2. The Nizam of Hyderabad, along with the archaeological department of the State, conserved and researched the caves for 30 years and published several monographs. 3. The Maharashtra Tourism Development Corporation, in 2012, announced replicas of caves 1,2, 16 and 17 to be made at the ASI Visitor Centre to reduce crowding at the original caves. The Ajanta Caves, as a whole, holds all these interventions and offers them as a legacy. It is important to make note of this. They should not be looked at as something that belongs to 2nd century BC. They have been alive since then, growing since then. They have evolved over time, adapting to the nature of intangibles at each point of time. There are new interpretation centres proposed on the site for the participant to have an augmented interaction with the site by creating life size replicas of the caves, complete with the paintings, to scale Buddhist monks and the events of meditation that formed a huge part of the day to day life and need of the caves then. This seems to be an effort to increase the engagement of the visitors with the site. One needs to question what kind of engagement is envisioned and what is the kind of participation that will happen? What can students of heritage draw from such attempts? Will these interventions enhance the learning experience at the World Heritage Site?
Multiplicity of the heritage sites: Multiple Interpretations Kenneth Frampton in his essay ‘Towards a Critical Regionalism: Six Points for an Architecture of Resistance’ (Frampton, 1983) has marked that ‘Civilization has been primarily concerned with instrumental reason, while culture has addressed itself to the specifics of expression’. The heritage sites stand for the triumph of both – reason and expression. Within them are housed the creative nuclei of the particular moment(era) – in space and time. One must not judge them within a singular framework. The multiplicity of creative forces, their manifestation, interpretative opportunities and their representational values must be recognised, recorded and imparted, so that these sites are fully appreciated for all that they stand for. The aforementioned multiplicity is nothing but all the forces that have come together for heritage production, during different times. Heritage sites are in a state of constant flux. They are all cultural expressions, both tangible and intangible. And hence, communication of cultural expressions has to happen through several spheres – cognitive, expressive, moral, practical, etc. (Habermas, 1983). Expressing it through any single expression leads to the fossilization of the heritage either as a monument that is larger than any of us, or as a practice that is no longer relevant. Cultural expressions can no longer be limited to heritage protection or conservation, but they have to adorn a role for ‘Heritage Celebration.’ The multiplicity of heritage sites and especially World Heritage Sites should be at the heart of all education programmes. This approach requires everyone participating with the sites to look at these sites beyond ‘objects’ and instead understand its presence as an ‘event’. However, looking at these sites as ‘events’ ensure that the actions, and all the forces that generate those actions become a part of the framework through which one interprets the site, thereby acknowledging the multiplicity and the continuity. It is very important to establish the continuity of the evolution of these sites in the minds of the participants, as that will ensure that they are conscious about the impacts of their own participation as well, which leads to a cyclic process of heritage production and not the linear process of heritage consumption.
Understanding Heritage Production If looked atavistically, civilizations have evolved due to the interaction of both the tangibles and intangibles of the native culture. As time progresses, the intangibles change form and function, and the civilizations transform. Along with that, the heritage sites, that represent the best the civilization has had to offer also undergoes a transformation. This process of transformation is a part of the story of evolution of the site. It needs to be communicated to the participants while highlighting their role in transforming the site today, for others tomorrow. This may ensure that these sites do grow and evolve and not merely get consumed. Sarkhej Roza, a tomb complex in Ahmedabad, Gujarat is a fine example of how multiplicity of forces transform a site to adapt itself to the needs of the current requirements. It is a site of National Heritage importance that has been incrementally constructed by 3 Sultanate rulers between the years 1445 A.D. and 1584 A.D. It has seen transitions from being a mausoleum for the great Sufi
saint, Shaikh Ganj Baksh Khattu, to becoming a place of repose and meditation for the royal family in the 15th century. It is also a burial place for Sultan Mahmud Begda’s family, thereby making it a part of socio-political history of the state of Gujarat. The Indo-Saracenic complex has become a central beacon in Ahmedabad’s bid to be a World Heritage City, and thereby becoming an active participant in the heritage process. Today, very active efforts are made by the citizens to give the monument back to the community and to invite more people to become a part of the legacy of Sarkhej Roza. The citizens have begun a campaign, ‘Rediscover Sarkhej Roza’ (Figure 2), to open up the monument to the community and to the rest of the country. They see the need for the legacy and the features of the monument to be better communicated. They have also started proposing outreach programmes, in collaboration with several agencies, to generate awareness regarding Sarkhej Roza.
Figure 2 : The motto of the ‘Rediscover Sarkhej Roza’ campaign Such case-studies offer opportunities for academics, institutions and professionals to participate and contribute their expertise. Heritage management plans for such monuments need to account for the participation of academia, including scholars and students alike, and belonging to several relevant disciplines. For instance, Sarkhej Roza will demand communication designers to participate with the community, community to collaborate with the Media experts, Media houses to consult the academia, and so on. Education in such cases will be two-fold. First layer shall include preparing the site to be participatory and interpretative, which involves the academia and related experts. The second layer is when visitors interact with the participative site, become familiar with the several layers of history that have made the site, and finally recognise their own role in carrying the legacy of the site forward. This example showcases how heritage education is not only a result of the heritage process but also central to it’s development.
The need to go beyond ‘Onto-Logicality’ of Heritage Education In ontological terms, if we are to understand anything at all, we must already find ourselves ‘in’ the world, ‘along with’ that which is to be understood. (Gadamer, 1994) It needs to be understood that a structure of situatedness has to be made explicit, so that variables and constant can be juggled as per site specification. We can look at Freeman Tilden’s ideas of engaging with heritage, where he defines heritage as ‘a more inclusive, culturally situated, critically reflexive and dialogical practice’
(Tilden, 1957)and by extension, heritage education should move beyond mere ‘transmission’ as suggested by Article 4 of the 1972 UNESCO World Heritage Convention and become more of an interpretive process, which is both demonstrative and participative as well as contextually situated. Tilden defined interpretation as... ‘An educational activity which aims to reveal meanings and relationships through the use of original objects, by first -hand experience, and by illustrative media, rather than simply to communicate factual information’ (Tilden, 1957:9).
Figure 3: Contemplating ‘anticipation’ and ‘interpretation’
The philosopher Heidegger recognizes two major modes of insight in Being and Time, anticipatory structures that allow what is to be grasped or interpreted in a preliminary fashion and an anticipation of completeness that would determine the complete construction of insight in the participant’s mind. This approach will build an investigation that allows self-disclosure of the structure of understanding, so that the heritage site, which is the subject of interpretation becomes the structure of interpretation. Theoretically, this self-disclosure can be found in the crevice of interaction of the two structures as shown in Figure 3. This crevice is the creation of the ‘positive prejudice’. Here, I mean prejudice as defined by its root latin term ‘prae-judicium’, i.e. prejudgement. It merely means a preliminary exposure for what is to be encountered. The pedagogy of heritage education should look to determine a dialogic structure that will generate an engagement with the site, from the state of ‘prejudice’ to constant interpolation and extrapolation through the dynamics of interpretation.
Conclusion: Dialogical Pedagogy- Interpretation as Education
Visits to World Heritage Sites can be positioned as this crevice of ‘prae-judicium’, where one encounters several experiential simulations that prepares the visitors for what they shall encounter. These simulations can be the transitional journey of evolution of these sites, so that when the visitor encounters the site as it is today, they are enabled to interpret the site in a context that has built it, and then see it for the future it has to adapt to. Each parameter of interpretation is a part of a cyclic process where each part illuminates itself in reference to the whole story of the site. Therefore, every interpretation relies on other interpretations. Heidegger describes this circle of understanding to be permanently determined by the anticipatory movement of fore-understanding. We can conclude by agreeing with Hans-Georg-Gadamer, when he suggested that understanding and interpretation happens ‘...through bringing oneself into question along with the matter itself’. (Gadamer, 1989) This hermeneutical approach demands a pre-exposure to the subject, World Heritage Sites in this case, along with associated interpretive approaches. These approaches cater, not to the ‘accurate’ but ‘right’, in a sense objective, in which scientific, logical and even folk interpretation is an expression of collective identity. Such interpretations also involve visitors as not passive recipients of wisdom, but seekers of understanding, to question, to participate and to take part as equal in creation of identity of the ‘place’ they are a part of. By understanding the multiplicity and biography of World Heritage Sites it will promote universal values and multi-cultural diversities and make each heritage site a vortex of knowledge, wisdom and awareness of its spatiotemporal position, and that of the human dialoguing with it.
Author Ishita Jain, 26, is an architect whose academic interests lie in understanding and exploring the pedagogies of architectural design education. She teaches architectural history and theory under varied models of education to build her research. Her educational qualifications include degrees in architecture, English literature and Indian classical dance (Kathak). Contact: ishitajain1410@gmail.com
References Frampton, K., 1983. Towards a Critical Regionalism: Six Points for an Architecture of Resistance. In: H. Foster, ed. The Anti-Aesthetic. s.l.:Bay Press, pp. 16-31. Gadamer, H.-G., 1994. Heidegger's Ways. Albany: NY: SUNY Press. Gadamer, H. G., 1989. Truth and Method. New york: Cross Road. Gordon, S., 2011. Monumental Visions: Architectural Photography in India - 1840-1901. s.l.:University of London. Habermas, J., 1983. Modernity - An Incomplete Project. In: H. Foster, ed. The Anti-Aesthetic. s.l.:Bay Press, pp. 3-16. Heidegger, M., 1927. Being and Time. 1973 ed. s.l.:Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. Spink, W. M., 2009. Ajanta: History and Development. Painting, Sculpture, Architecture, Year by Year, Volume 4. Tilden, F., 1957. Interpreting our Heritage. s.l.:University of North Carolina Press.
Culture for Kids: Engaging 0-5s with World Heritage and Culture Donna Mitchenson MA Abstract The future of heritage lies in the way the next generations think and feel about it. It is our job to teach our children about the value of heritage, the wonder of diversity of world heritage and promote acceptance and cultural tolerance. It is widely acknowledged that a child’s experiences between the years 0-5, will help shape the adults they become (Raising Children, 2013). Therefore, exposing children to heritage and culture during these years will create positive enduring connotations in their minds. This paper focuses on the community heritage group called Culture for Kids. This new and innovative group allows children aged 0-5 to explore the value and diversity of world heritage. Using crafts, activities and the natural curiosity of children to observe, 0-5s can interact with heritage and culture; acquire new knowledge needed to build heritage education programmes; and forge new attitudes towards heritage. Keywords: World Heritage Education, Early Years, Durham World Heritage Site, Pedagogy
Introduction
Fig. 1. Three year old child at Exploring India Session (2015).
Culture for Kids is a new and innovative initiative allowing 0-5s to explore World Heritage. Founded in September 2015 by the author, in partnership with Pelton Community Centre whom funded the weekly sessions at the centre in County Durham (UK) and the Durham World Heritage Site educational visit. Through the use of crafts, activities and the natural curiosity of children, the initiative allows 0-5 year olds to interact with world heritage and culture. The initiative has gained new knowledge needed to build heritage education programmes and forge new attitudes towards heritage especially for this age group. During the years 0-5, children’s personalities are rapidly developed, therefore it is crucial to sensitize children to heritage and culture during these years to encourage a life-long appreciation. It is difficult to communicate heritage to children of this age, or for them to retain this information. However, research has shown that children of this age learn through play; role play, discovery, art, and sensory activities (Hamilton and McFarlane 2005; Whitebread, et al 2009). Constructivist learning theory upholds learners construct their knowledge and understanding of the world through experience, followed by reflecting on that experience. Constructivism can be defined as cognitive and social learning through which the learner constructs new knowledge and meaning based on their own experiences and motivations (Wankel and Blessinger, 2013:9). Constructivist theories are
concerned with how learners construct knowledge based on their interactions with both the environment and peers. Constructivist theory asserts turning passive learners into active learners enhances the learning interaction and facilitates knowledge retention. This is the aim when engaging 0-5s through crafts and activities. The children, in effect, create their own ‘version’ of artefacts and evidence associated with the culture explored during the sessions, for example, ‘castanets’ of Spain, as illustrated by Figure 2. This supports souvenir theory, for the owner, a souvenir represents an object or artefact which records their experience (Hume, n.d.). The children retain their creations as a souvenir of their learning experience.
Fig. 2. Paper Plate ‘Castanet’, Exploring Spain Session (2016)
Heritage Education Research Heritage education research largely focuses on museum settings. In recent years, museums have been gaining momentum in exploring the under 5’s audience. Esme Ward, head of learning and engagement at Whitworth Gallery and the Manchester Museum, comments ‘We know that museums and galleries can produce a valuable social and learning context for families and new parents. However, only recently have we started to realise the potential of our sites as rich early communication environments for under 2s and babies’ (Ward, 2013). In 2011 Ward partnered with Kids in Museums to launch Babies in Museums for under 2s in Manchester Museums. It has since grown to include participatory programmes and partnerships with nurseries, parent groups, and health visitors, postnatal and family services.
Franklin (2013) offers scientific observations of the Babies in Museums workshops. This research focused on how babies sense the world around them, using eye trackers and baby monitors, to measure eye movements and record responses to faces and objects. Her research highlighted babies as audiences, seeking to understand their physical world through experimentation. She further suggested that babies are ideal museum visitors – because they can sense and perceive, respond to beauty recognize things, reason about objects and learn and remember. Shoulder (2015), states ‘if you get them interested when they are young, you have them for life’. He warns that if left too late, a museum visit might be relegated to a school trip activity rather than something that can be much more meaningful. Kids in Museums, an independent charity dedicated to making museums opening and welcoming to families, have developed a family friendly manifesto, Point 4 of 20 asserts ‘it’s never too early to visit a museum, they’re social, sensory and stimulating places – perfect for babies’ (Kids in Museums, 2008). World Heritage Education Education at World Heritage Sites is not only considered part of visitor service, it is a duty and obligation. Signatories to the 1972 UNESCO World Heritage Convention are obligated to commit to the furthering of heritage education as stated in Article 4 and Article 27: ‘The duty of ensuring the identification, protection, conservation, presentation and transmission to future generations of the cultural and natural heritage’ (Article 4, UNESCO 1972). ‘States parties to this convention shall endeavour by all appropriate means, and in particular by educational and information programmes, to strengthen appreciation and respect by their peoples of the cultural and natural heritage’ (Article 27, UNESCO, 1972). Matsuura (UNESCO, 1998), former Director General of UNESCO, asserts ‘education is the key to personal fulfilment, development, conservation, peace and wellbeing. Through education, young people can find new ways to build new ways to build commitment and strengthen action in favour of preserving our cultural and natural heritage, our tangible and intangible heritage, and our local and world heritage’.
Fig.3.Culture for Kids Explorer Packs (2016). World Heritage Sites could build on the recent progress being made by museums for the 0-5 audience. Barriers to learning activities in World Heritage Sites as recognised by the Culture for Kids initiative include, lack of an appropriate space, difficulty communicating the Outstanding Universal Value to young audiences can be difficult, cost and mess incurred, noise generated, the 0-5 audience may not be compatible with current audiences, and lack of understanding of the importance of sensitising children to heritage. However, educational visits are an important pedagogical approach as they allows for experiential learning. Culture for Kids led a session on Durham World Heritage Site at Pelton Community Centre, County Durham. We explored aspects of the Castle, Cathedral and the surrounding River Wear- the site’s attributes of Outstanding Universal Value. This session was extremely popular, however, the subsequent visit to the site allowed the children to immerse themselves in the site and its rich heritage. The Culture for Kids educational visit to Durham World Heritage Site involved a tour of the Cathedral followed by an Environmental Art session in the Cathedral educational rooms. Both aspects were tailored to the 0-5 age range. During the Cathedral visit the children were able to use the Culture for Kids Explorer Packs. The packs included binoculars, magnifying glasses, clipboards and pencils, as illustrated by Figure 3. These packs aided the children’s engagement with the site in that, the children would spend longer using the equipment to look at aspects of the Cathedral rather than just
a fleeting glance (Figure 4). Given the young age range, these children have short attention spans yet the explorer packs were instrumental in increasing engagement with the site.
Fig. 4. Explorer Packs in Action (2016). Curriculum links and learning approaches Teachers in the UK, wanting to sensitise young people to the importance of world heritage have so far opted for an integrated approach. Heritage education fits specifically in with the Statutory Framework for the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) in England. The framework outlines 17 early learning goals (Department of Education, 2014) for children in EYFS settings. References to EYFS settings include out-of-home providers of early year’s provisions for 0-5 years. All English local authorities (LAs) are required to refer to this handbook when exercising their function under the EYFS (learning and development requirements) Order 2007, Section 42. The learning and development requirements are given legal force by an order made under Section 39(1) (a) of the Childcare Act 2000. Key Early Learning Goals (ELG) linking directly to heritage and culture experiences are defined under the ‘Understanding the World’ section. This involves guiding pupils to make sense of their physical world and their community through opportunities to explore, observe and find out about people, places, technology and the environment (Standards and Testing Agency, 2016). These are explicit in the following ELGs:
ELG 13 people and communities (Department of Education, 2014): pupils talk about past and present event in their own lives and in the lives of family members. They know that other children don’t always enjoy the same things, and are sensitive to this. They know about similarities and differences between themselves and others, and among families, communities and traditions. ELG 14 The world (Department of Education, 2014): pupils know about similarities and differences in relation to place, objects, materials and living things. They talk about the features of their own immediate environment and how environments might vary from one another. They make observations of animals and plants and explain why some things occur, and talk about changes. Further Early Learning Goals which were addressed during Culture for Kids sessions include: ELG15 Expressive arts and design, which involves supporting students to explore and play which a wide range of media and materials. It involves providing pupils with opportunities and encouragement for sharing their thoughts, ideas and feelings through a variety of activities in art, music, movement, dance, role play and design and technology. Also ELG16 Exploring and using media and materials, for example, as pupils sing songs, make music and dance and experiment with ways of changing them. They safely use and explore a variety of materials, tools and technology experimenting with colour, design, texture, form and function. ELG17 Being imaginative, describes pupils using what they have learned about media and materials in original ways, thinking about uses and purposes. Pupils represent their own ideas, thoughts and feelings through design and technology, art, music, dance, role-play and stories (Department of Education, 2014). These ELGs are mainly concerned with art and expressive activities. Culture for Kids sessions therefore followed the current learning standards (Early Learning Goals) and confirms how World Heritage Education can be adapted to support educational policy. Heritage Interpretation and Children ‘Think like a wise man, but communicate in the language of the people’ – William Butler Yeats According to the Ename International Charter, interpretation methods include ‘print and electronic publications, public relations, on-site and directly related off-site installations, educational programmes, community activities, and ongoing research, training, and evaluation of the process itself’ (ICOMOS, 2007). Interpretation facilitates a connection between the meanings of the resource and the interests of the visitor. For most audiences, a flash of insight or a feeling of wonder can connect them to the resource and provoke a deep sense of stewardship (Larsen, 2011). Haphazard attempts will
inaccurately communicate the meanings of the site and alienate visitors. Any attempt of interpretation must consider the motivations of the visitor to interact with heritage. Larson (2011) challenges traditional practice of providing visitors with hard facts and asks ‘what will be meaningful to audiences in the time they have to spend’. This is particularly relevant to this study whereby the audience, children aged 0-5, will interact with heritage in a ‘non-traditional’ way. According to Moscardo (1996) interpretation can produce ‘mindful visitors’ who are carefully processing information and negotiating the meanings. This is relevant for visitors no matter what their age. Tilden (1957) defines six guiding principles of interpretation which have largely dominated interpretation activities over the past 50 years, and correlate with the aims of the Culture for Kids initiative. In particular, the first principle stipulates interpretation should relate to the visitor and that which does not relate to something within the personality or experience of the visitor will be sterile. This was key in planning sessions, as abstract heritage theories, were portrayed in a manner which the children could understand. Principle four states the chief aim is not instruction, but provocation. Activities were planned to provoke positive connotations surrounding heritage and culture. Finally, the sixth principle, asserts interpretation for children should not simply be a ‘dilution’ of the interpretation for adults and should follow a ‘fundamentally different approach’. This was key from the foundation of Culture for Kids that we would be exploring different communication and learning methods for this age range. The only way to fulfil the guiding principles of interpretation, when producing interpretation programmes for 0-5 year olds is to understand how they learn and what will be meaningful to them within the heritage/child interaction. In this way, it is possible to make a lasting heritage education impact. As a matter of course, crafts and activities at Culture for Kids are designed to link with preferred learning modes; play, role play, art, discovery, and sensory activities. By linking activities with how children learn, the Culture for Kids initiative is actively using Tilden’s first principle by relating to the visitor, i.e. the child; principle four, activities are thought provoking; and principle six as culture for kids is defining interpretation for 0-5s. Play ‘Play allows children to use their creativity while developing their imagination, dexterity, and physical, cognitive, and emotional strength. Play is important to healthy brain development. It is through play that children at a very early age engage and interact in the world around them’ (Ginsburg, 2007). Play is often viewed as unimportant, immature, and lacking in serious purpose. However, as demonstrated by Whitebread (2012), ‘play in all its rich variety is one of the highest achievements of the human species, alongside language, culture and technology. Indeed, without
play, none of these other achievements would be possible’ (Whitebread, 2012:3). There is increasing evidence supporting the relationship between play, intellectual achievement and emotional wellbeing. Figure 5, shows children engaging in free play by re-enacting the La Tomatina festival in Spain. This festival is celebrated with a huge tomato throwing pageant.
Fig 5. Red Balloon La Tomatina festival (2016) Role Play ‘Role play is a type of pretend play where children get into character and act out a role or real life context’ (Kalikids, n.d.). Children can get into character and reflect on and develop their knowledge of a topic, for example Figure 6 shows children at the Ancient Greece session, dressed in togas. Role play is a key component of learning as most role play reflects a real life context and is therefore an effective way for children to make sense of the world around them. It encourages children to become active participants as they can wear costume, use props, communicate and make decisions in character, which allows them to take risks and explore different areas.
Fig. 6. Wearing ‘togas’ with the ‘Trojan Horse’ (2015). Discovery ‘I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand’. – Confucius. Discovery learning is an inquiry-based, constructivist learning theory. Models that are based on discovery learning include: guided discovery, problem-based learning, simulation-based learning, case-based learning, incidental learning, to name a few (Bruner, 1915). Through problem solving situations, the learner draws on his or her own past experience and existing knowledge to discover facts and relationships and new truths to be learned. Students interact with the world by exploring and manipulating objects and as a result are more likely to remember concepts and knowledge discovered on their own (Learning-theories, n.d.). Figure 7 shows group members writing an email to a children’s group in India, whilst Figure 8 shows a child discovering artefacts by brushing away sand in a sandpit.
Fig.7: Group writing a letter to India (2016).
Fig.8: ‘Excavations’ (2015) Art Creative art supports a child’s physical development, social development, cognitive development, emotional development. When we value children’s creativity, we help them feel valued as people, raising their self-esteem (Extension, 2015). Figure 9, shows how the children learnt about Mexican tin art by creating their own with aluminium trays, sequins and markers. Figure 10 and 11, shows a child replicating Mining art at the Local Mining Heritage session.
Fig. 9: Mexican Tin Art (2015).
Fig. 10 and Fig. 11: Two year old’s version of mining art (2016)
Sensory Activities Children learn with all their senses, learning about the world by touching, tasting, smelling, seeing, and hearing. Sensory play also contributes in crucial ways to brain development. Stimulating the senses sends signals to children’s brains that help to strengthen neural pathways important for all types of learning (Gainsley, n.d.). Figure 12, shows a three year old recreating Dali’s famous painting, ‘Persistence of time’ with playdoh.
Fig. 12: Three year old creating ‘Dali’s persistence of time’ with playdoh (2016).
Artefacts and Souvenir theory ‘It is an essential characteristic of being human that we feel the urge to reify experience, to give those fleeting moments of pleasure and pain a narrative outline or visual shape’ (Tuan, 1980:464). Tuan discusses the significance of the artefact and describes an artwork as a ‘special type of artefact that resists absorption into daily routine’ (Tuan, 1980:463). This type of artefact has high visibility and permanence in peoples’ awareness. Building on this, items remaining in the realm of daily routine will not leave on imprint on memory nor inspire emotional attachment. At Culture for Kids sessions, the aim was to engage the children by helping them create ‘replicas’ of artefacts associated with the heritage and culture explored. The children could then take the items home as a ‘souvenir’ prolonging the exposure to the learning and stimulating thought beyond the session. Souvenirs are as old as recreational travel and whilst the theory of souvenirs is little researched, Hulme (n.d.) explores the language and expression of souvenirs. Tourists weave a narrative of their experiences, sustained through investment in souvenirs, to form a material anchor for the experience as a whole. It is a completely new concept to think of children’s creations in a learning situation as a ‘souvenir’ of that experience, as opposed to the bought souvenir acquired when visiting a World Heritage Site. Research must be conducted into the viability and the extent to which souvenirs will prolong the learning process and spark memories for learning experiences.
Interim Results After four months of weekly Culture for Kids sessions at Pelton Community Centre, a survey of attendees parents was conducted to evaluate effectiveness and gain insight into experiences. A Limitation of this survey is, only the parent can answer the questions as it was a web based questionnaire.
Fig. 13. How important do you think heritage and culture is for children? (2016). All survey respondents agreed heritage and culture are important for children (Fig. 13). ‘Communication’ at Culture for Kids sessions is through re-creation of heritage by crafts, role play, dance and games. The results (Fig. 14) indicates that heritage and culture were portrayed ‘very well’ during sessions.
Fig. 14. How well do you think heritage and culture is portrayed to the children at culture for kids? (2016).
Fig. 15. Do the children talk about what they have learned after the sessions? (2016). All respondents confirmed the children talked about what they have learned after the session (Fig. 15). Even more compelling, 80% of respondents answered ‘very much so’, 20% ‘a little’ and 20% ‘don’t know’ to the question ‘Do the things the children make, remind them about the culture it represents?’ (Fig. 16). This result is extremely positive for such an overwhelming percentage reporting the souvenir theory works in practice.
Fig. 16. Do the things the children make, remind them about the culture is represents? (2016) Conclusions The age range of the children is 0-5 years and as such it is difficult to communicate heritage to using traditional means of interpretation. They cannot yet read, they cannot easily relay information to confirm they have understood what is being talked about, and they have varying but generally short attention spans. Key observations arising from the Culture for Kids Initiative are: that ‘souvenirs’ prolong the learning process acting as a reminder which sparks memories of what they have learned. Informal feedback suggests the children repeatedly play with certain items, particularly the role playing objects they create which enhances learning. Parents often report they fix items for continued use or create new ones. Adopting learning strategies with the activities is crucial but also to be mindful that different children have different preferred methods of learning therefore variety in sessions is paramount. So whilst school age children are catered for at World Heritage Sites, through formal site visit programmes and workshops by museums and heritage sites, 0-5s are often overlooked. The Culture for Kids initiative has showed that it is feasible to create educational programmes about World Heritage for this age range confirming research by Ward (2013), Franklin (2013) and Shoulder (2015).
Acknowledgments Thank you to all members of the Culture for Kids group and their parents, who have granted me permission to use the photographs throughout this paper.
Author Donna Mitchenson MA (Durham University) Culture for Kids founder, committed to engaging young people and children with heritage and culture. Further details can be found at www.cultureforkids.co.uk. Contact: donnamitchenson@cultureforkids.co.uk
List of Illustrations Figure 1. Mitchenson, Donna (2015) Three year old child at Exploring India session. [Photograph.] At: http://www.cultureforkids.co.uk/sessions.html (Accessed on 09.06.2016). Figure 2. Blakey, Michaela (2015) Paper Plate Castanet, Exploring Spain Session’. [Photograph] At: http://www.cultureforkids.co.uk/sessions.html (Accessed on 09.06.2016). Figure 3. Mitchenson, Donna (2015) Culture for Kids Explorer Packs. [Photograph] At: http://www.cultureforkids.co.uk/sessions.html (Accessed on 09.06.2016). Figure 4. Blakey, Michaela (2016) Explorer Packs in Action. [Photograph] At: http://www.cultureforkids.co.uk/sessions.html (Accessed on 09.06.2016). Figure 5. Mitchenson, Donna (2016) Red Balloon La Tomatina Festival. [Photograph] At: http://www.cultureforkids.co.uk/sessions.html (Accessed on 09.06.2016). Figure 6. Mitchenson, Donna (2016) Wearing Togas with Trojan Horse. [Photograph] At: http://www.cultureforkids.co.uk/sessions.html (Accessed on 09.06.2016). Figure 7. Blakey, Michaela (2015) Group writing a Letter to India. [Photograph] At: http://www.cultureforkids.co.uk/sessions.html (Accessed on 09.06.2016). Figure 8. Blakey, Michaela (2015) Excavations. [Photograph] At: http://www.cultureforkids.co.uk/sessions.html (Accessed on 09.06.2016). Figure 9. Mitchenson, Donna (2015) Mexican Tin Art. [Photograph] At: http://www.cultureforkids.co.uk/sessions.html (Accessed on 09.06.2016). Figure 10. & 11 Mitchenson, Donna (2016) Two year olds Version of Mining Art. [Photograph] At: http://www.cultureforkids.co.uk/sessions.html (Accessed on 09.06.2016). Figure 12. Mitchenson, Donna (2015) Two Year Old Creating Dali’s ‘Persistence of Time’. [Photograph] At: http://www.cultureforkids.co.uk/sessions.html (Accessed on 09.06.2016). Figure 13. Mitchenson, Donna (2016) How Important do you Think heritage and Culture is for Children? [Graph] At: https://cultureforkidsblog.wordpress.com/2016/01/15/the-results-are-in/ (Accessed on 09.06.2016). Figure 14. Mitchenson, Donna (2016) How Well do you Think Heritage and Culture is portrayed to Children at Culture for Kids? [Graph] At: https://cultureforkidsblog.wordpress.com/2016/01/15/theresults-are-in/ (Accessed on 09.06.2016). Figure 15. Mitchenson, Donna (2016) Do the children talk about what they have learned after the sessions? [Graph] At: https://cultureforkidsblog.wordpress.com/2016/01/15/the-results-are-in/ (Accessed on 09.06.2016). Figure 16. Mitchenson, Donna (2016) Do the things the children make remind them about the culture it represents? [Graph] At: https://cultureforkidsblog.wordpress.com/2016/01/15/the-results-are-in/ (Accessed on 09.06.2016).
Bibliography Department of Education, 2014. Statutory Framework for the Early Years Foundation Stage, UK. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/early-years-foundation-stageframework--2. Accessed 8th June 2016. Department of Education, 2016. Early Years Foundation Stage profile, UK. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/488745/EYFS_han dbook_2016_-_FINAL.pdf. Accessed 9th June 2016. Extension. 2015. Creative Art Helps Children Develop across Many Domains [Online]. Available from: http://articles.extension.org/pages/25680/creative-art-helps-children-develop-across-manydomains. Accessed 9th June 2016. Gainsley, S. No date. Look, Listen, Touch, Feel, Taste: The Importance of Sensory Play [Online]. Available from: http://www.highscope.org/file/NewsandInformation/Extensions/ExtVol25No5_low.pdf. Accessed: 9th June 2016. Ginsburg, K., R. (2007) The importance of play in promoting healthy child development and maintaining strong parent-child bonds. American Academy of Pediatrics, 119(1), 182-191. Hamilton, N. and McFarlane, J. 2005. Children Learn Through Play. Putting Children First. 14, 10-11. Hulme, D. L. (n.d.) The language of souvenirs a design theory for the production of tourist souvenirs: three discrete groups, the sampled, crafted and representative. Available from: https://www.academia.edu/2764781/The_Language_of_Souvenirs_A_Design_Theory_for_the_Prod uction_of_Tourist_Souvenirs_Three_Discrete_Groups_-_the_Sampled_Crafted_and_Representative .Accessed: 16th January 2016. ICOMOS (2007) ICOMOS Ename Charter. Available from: http://www.enamecharter.org/downloads.html .Accessed: 4th June 2016. Kalikids (n.d.) How does role playing help my child? [Online]. Available from: https://kallikids.com/page/Role-playing-and-child-learning. Accessed: 9th June 2016. Kids in Museums (2008) Manifesto [Online]. Available from: http://kidsinmuseums.org.uk/manifesto/#wpcf7-f7444-p10830-o1. Accessed: 10th June 2016. Larsen, D. L. (ed.) (2011) Meaningful Interpretation. London: Eastern National. Learning-Theories (no date.) Discovery Learning (Bruner) [Online]. Available from: http://www.learning-theories.com/discovery-learning-bruner.html. Accessed: 9th June 2016. Mitchenson, D. (2016). The results are in. [Blog] Culture for Kids. Available from: https://cultureforkidsblog.wordpress.com/2016/01/15/the-results-are-in/ .Accessed: 17th February 2016. Moscardo, G. (1996) Mindful visitors Heritage and tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 23, 376397. Raising Children (2013) Child development: the first five years. Available from http://raisingchildren.net.au/articles/child_development.html .Accessed: 1st February 2016. Shoulder, J, (2015) ‘From kids in museums to babies in museums.’ Museums and Heritage Advisor, 22nd May. Available from: http://advisor.museumsandheritage.com/industry/from-kids-in-museumsto-babies-in-museums/ .Accessed: 6th June 2016.
Standards and Testing Agency, 2016. Early Years Foundation Stage Profile: 2016 Handbook, UK. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/488745/EYFS_han dbook_2016_-_FINAL.pdf. Accessed 8th June 2016. Tilden, F. (1957) Interpreting Our Heritage: Principles and Practices for visitor services in Parks, Museums, and Historic Places. Carolina: University of North Carolina Press. The British Association for Early Childhood education. (2012) Development matters in the early years foundation stage (EYFS) [Online]. Available from: http://www.foundationyears.org.uk/files/2012/03/Development-Matters-FINAL-PRINTAMENDED.pdf. Accessed: 09th June 2016. Tuan, Y., F. (1980) The significance of the artefact. Geographical Review, 70 (4), 462-472. UNESCO. (n.d.) The four pillars of learning [Online]. Available from: http://www.unesco.org/new/en/education/networks/global-networks/aspnet/aboutus/strategy/the-four-pillars-of-learning/. Accessed: 9th June 2016. UNESCO (1998) World Heritage in Young Hands, to know, cherish and act. The educational resource kit for teachers [Online]. Available from: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001290/129073e.pdf. Accessed: 9th June 2016. Wankel, L. A, and Blessenger, P. (2013) New Pathways in Higher Education: An Introduction to Using Mobile Technologies, in Laura A. Wankel, Patrick Blessenger (ed.) Increasing Student Engagement and Retention Using Mobile Applications: Smartphones, Skype and Texting Technologies. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp. 3-19. Ward, E. (2013) ‘Can babies enjoy museums?’ Museums Association, 1st May. Available from: http://www.museumsassociation.org/museums-journal/comment/01052013-can-babies-enjoymuseums .Accessed: 6th June 2016. Whitebread, D. (2012) The importance of play [Online]. Available from: http://www.importanceofplay.eu/IMG/pdf/dr_david_whitebread_-_the_importance_of_play.pdf. Accessed: 9th June 2016. Whitebread, D., Coltman, P., Jameson, H., & Lander, R. (2009) Play, Cognition and Self-regulation: What exactly are children learning when they learn through play? Educational & Child Psychology. 26(2), 40-52.
Working with young people age 13-25 and World Heritage – A Summit Approach. Ashleigh Taylor MA AMA
Abstract: This paper reviews the 2015 UK UNESCO World Heritage Youth Summit which was held at the Blaenavon Industrial Landscape World Heritage Site. It proposes how the currently under engaged teenage audience can become engaged with World Heritage Sites and World Heritage Education through Youth Summits and a Youth Ambassadors Programme.
Keywords: World Heritage; World Heritage Convention, World Heritage Education, UK UNESCO World Heritage Youth Summit, Blaenavon Industrial Landscape World Heritage Site; Youth Involvement
“I believe World Heritage is important in order to create an understanding of the area and a sense of belonging within the community” Youth Participant at the UNESCO UK World Heritage Youth Summit 2015. Introduction Young people (aged 13-25) are a major human resource for site development and key agents for sector change and technical innovation. Within a World Heritage context in the UK, young people are not capitalised on as a resource, despite making up 15% (Indexmundi.com, 2015) of the UK’s population and being a key demographic for sites to engage with. In 2012, the Blaenavon Industrial Landscape World Heritage Site (BIL WHS) decided to address the lack of participation with young people in their World Heritage Site and created a project to innovatively engage young people aged 13-25; the UK UNESCO World Heritage Youth Summit (Figure 1) and later, the World Heritage Youth Ambassadors Programme. The project was designed to empower young people to have an active role and voice in the management of the World Heritage Site, and has been incredibly successful, winning in 2016 the Welsh Council for Voluntary Action’s National Volunteer Group of the year.
Figure 1: 2015 UK UNESCO World Heritage Youth Summit. UNESCO Youth Engagement and World Heritage Education In 2014, UNESCO launched a youth strategy with three strands which it had identified through a global consultation (UNESCO, 2014). One of the main strands is civic engagement, demographic participation and social innovation, recognising that young people should be supported to engage with their rights and responsibilities as active citizens and to support their communities. The strategy provides high level advice, guidance and information about engaging with young people and its benefits, and the processes needed to engage. Article 27 of the UNESCO World Heritage Convention states that: ‘The States Parties to this Convention shall endeavour by all appropriate means, and in particular by educational and information programmes, to strengthen appreciation and respect by their peoples of the cultural and natural heritage defined in Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention’ (UNESCO 1972) Further guidance is provided by the operational guidelines (UNESCO, 2015) for World Heritage Sites which state that World Heritage Sites should manage their site through participatory means, (Section VI.A, 211, c & d, 217, 219) and that a thorough understanding of the site should be achieved by all stakeholders. Young people should be considered as a key demographic group to achieve this.
The World Heritage Convention supports and encourages the development of educational materials, activities and programmes. To help sites to deliver the convention, UNESCO has produced educational materials such as the “World Heritage in Young Hands� educational resource, (UNESCO, 2002) which is aimed at secondary school teachers to support them in delivering a curriculum based series of lessons exploring World Heritage. Even with encouragement, information and support, World Heritage sites in the UK struggle to engage with the teenage audience. Despite their global importance, World Heritage Sites have no statutory funding available to support the delivery of the World Heritage Convention, or to support their management, preservation, promotion and transmission of their Outstanding Universal Value. They therefore have difficulty in engaging with young people exacerbated by lack of funding, opportunity, resources and knowledge of how to effectively engage with this age group. It is recognised that in the UK young people age 13-18 (and 25 in special education) are considered a hard to reach target audience for any form of heritage and there is limited information available to any heritage organisation on the views and attitudes of young people when considering the historic environment. Within a UK World Heritage Site context, young people age 13-18 are not fully, or well, engaged with. Most World Heritage sites work towards Article 27 through education and interpretation programmes, some of which engage with secondary school children, but most of which are aimed at families, or primary school groups, as they are commonly the easiest audiences to attract and achieve high numbers of engagement. The few World Heritage Sites within the UK that do engage with this age group, (notably in addition to Blaenavon Industrial Landscape; the Jurassic Coast, Maritime Greenwich, Ironbridge, Cornwall Mining Landscape and Saltaire) generally engage through externally funded activity based projects, or the application of secondary school curriculum based learning. There is little long term sustainable engagement with young people as key stakeholders, or as decision makers within World Heritage Sites until recently in the Blaenavon World Heritage Site. Case Study: Blaenavon Industrial World Heritage Site Blaenavon Industrial Landscape World Heritage Site (BIL WHS), situated in South Wales, UK, was in inscribed in 2000 in recognition of the exceptional testimony to the forces that drove South Wales to become the World’s major producers of Coal and Iron in the 19th Century, so fueling the industrial revolution. BIL WHS has a fully established and successful working partnership made up of 12 key partners that deliver the Blaenavon Industrial Landscape World Heritage Site Management Plan. The Partnership has a high level strategic board, under which sits an operational steering group and 6 key working groups, which includes an Education and Interpretation Working Group.
In 2012, the Blaenavon World Heritage Site Partnership undertook a community consultation which identified: -
There was no participatory engagement with young people within the community of Blaenavon, or within the World Heritage Site as stakeholders
-
There was a no meaningful youth engagement outside of formal school and holiday workshops
-
The site did not have an appropriate approach to enable engagement for young people age 13-25.
-
There was no appropriate curriculum that had been developed enough to deliver relevant activity around the World Heritage topic
-
The community had a negative view of young people
-
It would be difficult to allow young people to lead in an already well managed World Heritage Site.
In response to the community consultation, the Education and Interpretation Working Group decided to address the lack of youth engagement and participation and create a meaningful youth engagement project. A Summit was identified as a different and exciting opportunity to engage with young people age 13-18. World Heritage Youth Summits are a conference held over several days to engage young people specifically with the concept of World Heritage and to celebrate the unique beauty and importance of the UK’s World Heritage Sites. Summits are held every few years in the UK. The Blaenavon Summit was held under the patronage of UNESCO and followed on from similar events held at the Jurassic Coast World Heritage Site in 2009, New Lanark (2010) and Greenwich Maritime World Heritage Site in 2012. It was recognised however that a Summit alone could not provide long term sustainable engagement. It would not provide the meaningful participation or youth led practice that was required to engage young people in the decision making processes of the World Heritage Site, and so the “Summit” was broken down into three key project areas designed to engage in different ways, with the maximum amount of young people. These areas were
A three day conference An entry Competition The Youth Ambassadors scheme (Figure 2) and legacy.
Each element of the project provided a unique way to engage with the key demographic of 13-25 year olds and has been subsequently evaluated. This article will focus primarily on the conference and competition elements, as the Youth Ambassador scheme is still underway and requires a more comprehensive and detailed evaluation than is currently available.
Figure 2: Members of the Blaenavon Industrial Landscape World Heritage Youth Ambassadors Programme.
The Youth Summit On 20-22nd October 2015, Blaenavon welcomed 134 delegates to an exciting 3 day Conference exploring World Heritage in the UK. Young people aged between 12 and 17 (25 in special education) came together from across the country to celebrate and learn about World Heritage and how culture can change the world. The delivery and management of the Summit was a key area that was examined to ensure that young people were appropriately engaged. Overall the Summit was overseen by a project board which consisted of the Education and Interpretation Working Group made up of heritage learning professionals and additional key partners who were co-opted to address the youth working professional skill gap that existed within the group. The day to day management was overseen by a single heritage project manager, but importantly was supported by a youth professional project officer. The split of the two professions meant that both areas; transmission of Outstanding Universal Value and youth engagement were considered professionally and appropriately. In addition to this, the Youth Ambassadors were engaged as an advisory group, and often sat in the meetings which ensured there was always a youth voice to the development and management of the Summit. The Summit funding package provided a key way of engaging with the concept of youth engagement at an organisational level. The funding package to deliver the Summit was a key challenge and took 2 years to secure. The primary reason for this was that the eligibility criteria of many sources of external funding meant many were unable to support Summit infrastructure, transport and accommodation costs, no matter how worthwhile. The Summit was therefore largely supported by the members of the Blaenavon World Heritage Site Partnership. All staff time was provided in kind. This funding arrangement meant that the entire partnership was engaged with the concept of meaningful youth participation and engagement, and this has had a longer lasting impact on the management of the World Heritage Site. Youth participation and engagement is now part of Steering Group meetings, youth ambassadors sit on the group, and youth engagement and civic participation will be written into the new 5 year management plan for Blaenavon Industrial Landscape. The project board understood that the overall concept of World Heritage and Outstanding Universal Value would not be easily and immediately understood by young people who had no previous engagement with World Heritage. It was recognised young people in the first instance may not have been engaged in the heritage topic, but may have been interested in the additional add-on experience they could gain from attendance. Time off school for an important CV enhancing experience was an attraction. The international significance was a consideration for some: Mr Rimesh Khanal, an international Youth Peace Ambassador from Nepal was invited to speak (Figure 3). Rimesh was an engaging speaker and initiated many discussions by the young people, who were able to understand the global importance of World Heritage, but for initial engagement, it was the status of an international speaker that was the attraction. Material considerations such as being accommodated in a Premiere Inn hotel, having a smart dinner and disco evening event with live music, having a ‘goody bag’, and a t-shirt were also important. It was the stature of these opportunities, and the material considerations, rather than World Heritage that captured the interest of the young people initially. This approach has been continued within the Youth Ambassadors, and is demonstrably successful in initial engagement.
Figure 3: Press cutting about the summit’s keynote speaker Mr Rimesh Khanal, International Youth Peace Ambassador from Nepal. Design and marketing was a key consideration to appropriately engage with young people. Blaenavon World Heritage Site has an established and professional brand, but had not been used to attract this age group previously. The brand was creatively considered to appeal to a teenage audience, and new ways of using the brand, including a new logo were designed, as illustrated by Figure 4.
Figure 4: 2015 Youth Summit Logo. To encourage a better understanding and support to a longer term sustainable approach to World Heritage youth engagement, a theme was chosen for the Summit; “How can we use World Heritage to change the place we live in for the better?� Using a theme that was relevant not only to Blaenavon, but to every World Heritage Site, helped young people break the wider concept of World Heritage into something they could relate to. It helped them to understand how World Heritage could help not only themselves, but their communities. It encouraged young people to be aware of their own roots, their cultural and social identity, and how they could create meaningful and lasting social innovation and change in their local area. The theme was first used as an engagement tool through an online creative team competition. The competition was deemed necessary as a technique of application to the Summit, as numbers were limited, and as a way to introduce World Heritage to young people with no prior knowledge. To ensure it was appropriate for young people, the competition was developed and designed by young people themselves (Torfaen Youth Forum). This approach was surprisingly met with limited success, however the vast majority of the barriers were at an administrative level, not a youth one. The feedback received was that the criteria for entry to the Summit was too prescriptive, and the work
needed to complete the competition artwork was too time intensive for both the young person and the group leader. It also required a group that was already working together. However the groups that did participate and entered the competition reported that the exercise was worthwhile and enjoyable. Although this technique would have engaged young people effectively, it required sites to have a level of resource that is not available in World Heritage Sites currently, so in the end the Competition was a barrier to the Summit, and only a handful of groups entered. This approach would not be recommend as an entry requirement.
Figure 5: Photograph of delegates from the 2015 Youth Summit with a tour guide miner at the Big Pit heritage attraction. The conference itself was an exciting three day programme with bespoke activities, international speakers and visits to key attractions within the Blaenavon Industrial Landscape (Figures 5 and 6). All of the activities were designed to key learning outcomes, but the delivery was left to the expertise of each individual organisation that the activity was based in. The activities in general were very well received, which was expected as they had been piloted with the Youth Ambassadors previously to ensure they worked successfully. To ensure that the Summit was Youth Led at every stage, and therefore appropriately targeted, the World Heritage Youth Ambassadors were created. The group was originally developed as a mechanism to support the delivery of the Summit and create a meaningful youth led element, but ended up as an externally funded ongoing project to empower young people to participate in the World Heritage Site.
Figure 6: Youth Summit Delegates at a canal side World Heritage Site location. The World Heritage Youth Ambassadors are the fundamental element of the Summit that incurred a legacy of participation, and involvement in World Heritage Management. The World Heritage Youth Ambassador project is 100% funded by the Heritage Lottery Fund and is committed to being driven by young people at every level. It celebrates young people’s voices, opinions and inspires conversations about World Heritage and the community in which they live. They share experiences and communicate the views of young people to help advise on the management of the Blaenavon
World Heritage Site and how services should be designed and delivered to be relevant for young people, by sitting on key management groups, such as the steering committee, and community groups. The project has been so successful that in 2016 it won the National Volunteer Group of the year, the Blaenavon Partnership has now included youth participation as a core element to be considered and written into its new management plan, and the site is looking at the possibility of it being replicated across the UK is being looked at.
Figure 7: One of the World Heritage Youth Ambassadors opening the Youth Summit. As a part of the Summit, the Youth Ambassadors could be identified by staff badges, black t-shirts and jackets (Figure 7). A Youth Ambassador was the main compere for the event and spoke with passion. They were trained as peer mentors, and supported and encouraged other young people to speak up and contribute to the event. The delegates were encouraged to go to the Ambassadors if they had any problems. Two of the bespoke activities were designed and specifically lead by young people themselves. One of those activities (the railway activity) was the top scoring activity from the evaluations, demonstrating that young people engage better with other young people. Following the Summit, feedback from the Ambassadors themselves was that while they had benefited from a lot of training, at the actual event they were treated as another participant. They were not allowed as much responsibility as they had originally thought they would have as there were so many adults around. Although this was unintended, it would be recommended that more work went into training the adults to let the young people lead to achieve a better level of civic participation and feeling of responsibility. Other activities that were highly successful were where the youth services, and professional youth workers were involved in either support or delivery, demonstrating that in order to engage appropriately and effectively, the correct skills are needed. Team building activities were developed and run by the Torfaen Youth Service, part of Torfaen County Borough Council. They sought to bring the young people together in a fun and engaging way using non-heritage related activity that was very successful. Inclusion and recognition of the professional skill needed to engage young people was an important part of engaging appropriately with the teenage audience. Using the local youth service, who also brought safeguarding and welfare expertise, was essential and created the correct atmosphere. During the Summit young people were able to share their experiences and enthusiasm for their local World Heritage Sites and their ambitions for the future of the World they live in. The evaluation forms and subsequent feedback demonstrated that Young People who participated in the Blaenavon World Heritage Site went away understanding the importance of World Heritage and particularly learnt about the social and regenerative impact it had on local communities. The evaluation of the Summit demonstrated that 95% of young people stated that they had learnt something from the
Summit, 83% of participants felt that World Heritage was important or exceptionally important and 67% of the participants felt they wanted to become involved and participate in the heritage area that they came from, and become “champions� of World Heritage. Overall, a success. Conclusion Although young people are recognised as a key demographic for engagement and a key resource to enhance the transmission of Outstanding Universal Value of World Heritage, many UK World Heritage Sites struggle to engage with the teenage audience. This is usually due to a lack of resource, opportunity and knowledge of how to engage effectively and appropriately. As a tool for youth engagement a Summit is an excellent way of encouraging young people to think about World Heritage and become involved in the concept of Outstanding Universal Value. By working together as a partnership at the highest levels and engaging with professionally skilled youth workers ensures that the right skills create the right atmosphere. By recognising that World Heritage is not of instantaneous and immediate interest to young people, appropriate initial and ongoing engagement incentives need to used, this brings young people to a place they may not have engaged with in any other way. By resourcing work with a youth group, and creating ambassadors brings a consistent youth voice and demonstrates that young people can make a real difference to their community and beyond. A Summit is an amazing way to engage with a teenage audience bringing young people together to gain knowledge and understanding of World Heritage and become actively involved with a topic that they are unlikely to engage with in any other circumstances.
Author: Ashleigh Taylor MA AMA Community Heritage Development Officer at Torfaen Borough Council Contact: ashleigh.taylor@torfaen.gov.uk
References www.indexmundi,com, (2015). United Kingdom Age structure. [online] Available http://www.indexmundi.com/united_kingdom/age_structure.html .Accessed 15 June. 2016.
from:
UNESCO (1972). The Convention Concerning the Protection of World Cultural and Natural Heritage. Available from: http://whc.unesco.org/en/conventiontext. Accessed: 06 July 2016.
UNESCO. (2002). World Heritage in Young Hands. [online] France: UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Available from: http://whc.unesco.org/en/educationkit/#downloadkit .Accessed 01 June. 2016. UNESCO. (2014). UNESCO Operational Strategy on Youth 2014-2021. [online] France: UNESCO, p.1415. Available from: http://www.unesco.org/new/en/social-and-humansciences/themes/youth/strategy/ .Accessed 16 June. 2016. UNESCO. (2015). UNESCO Operational Guidelines for the implementation of the World Heritage Convention. [online] France: UNESCO World Heritage Centre, p.46-48. Available from: http://whc.unesco.org/en/guidelines/ .Accessed 21 July. 2016.
The World Heritage Young Experts Forum 2015 and the Young Heritage Experts Network: Tools to foster youth involvement within the framework of the World Heritage Convention. (39th World Heritage Committee Session- World Heritage Youth Forum 2015). Hannah RĂśhlen, Rui Maio
Abstract: This paper discusses the importance of youth related World Heritage Educational Programmes as tools to raise awareness for the importance of the World Heritage Convention, as well as to encourage young people to take an active role in the preservation and conservation of World Heritage Sites. To this end, the paper explores two case studies – the World Heritage Young Experts Forum 2015 and the Young Heritage Experts network.
Keywords: World Heritage; World Heritage Convention, World Heritage Education, Young Heritage Experts Forum 2015, Young Heritage Experts; Youth Involvement
Introduction Recalling UNESCO’s mission to build peace across the world, poverty eradication, lasting development and intercultural dialogue, education forms an indispensable component of UNESCO’s strategic focus. Since its creation in 1945, the international organization has been committed to a holistic and humanistic vision of quality education worldwide. With its numerous programmes it aims to implement people’s worldwide right to education and communicates the belief that education plays a fundamental role in human, social and economic development. In today’s rapidly changing and increasingly interdependent world, in which knowledge and innovation are crucial drivers of development, this approach is more important than ever, as it highlights the importance of good quality education and learning for the well-being of individuals and the progress of countries (UNESCO, 2014). Consequently, UNESCO has recently ratified its latest educational programme, in force from 2014 to 2021, in which the development of education systems, that foster high-quality, inclusive lifelong learning, and empower pupils to become creative and responsible global citizens, were established as strategic priorities (UNESCO, 2014). Education also forms an essential pillar of UNESCO’s most popular programme - the Convention Concerning the Protection of World Cultural and Natural Heritage. When the World Heritage Convention was adopted in 1972, the international community recognized its duty to preserve cultural and natural heritage sites of outstanding universal value for future generations (UNESCO, 1972). Article 27 of the Convention states that this must, amongst other methods, be achieved through educational and information programmes which strengthen people’s appreciation and respect of the cultural and natural heritage, and keep the public broadly informed about the dangers threatening this heritage (UNESCO, 1972). While education in this respect encompasses the local community as a whole, today’s site managers and National Commissions have come to identify youth, as the representatives of the next generation to be entrusted with the preservation and management of the world’s most precious heritage sites, as a main target audience. In 1999 UNESCO therefore initiated the UNESCO Youth Programme, as well as UNESCO World Heritage Youth Forums, dedicated to educate young people about the workings of the World Heritage Convention (UNESCO, 2011). With these programmes UNESCO encourages the integration of youth concerns and issues into the policy agendas of Member States, in order to create spaces and opportunities for empowering young people and giving recognition, visibility and credibility to their contributions. Despite these initiatives, a lot remains to be improved in respect to raise the young communities’ awareness about the necessity of safeguarding World Heritage, to promote a more active involvement and participation of youth, and to provide more career opportunities for young professionals. This paper introduces two innovative case studies which have succeeded to foster youth involvement within the framework of the World Heritage Convention: the Word Heritage Young Experts Forum 2015, organized by the German Commission for UNESCO and the Federal Foreign Office of Germany and the Young Heritage Experts, a global network founded in the aftermath of the Young Experts Forum that is exclusively run by young professionals.
11
The World Heritage Young Experts Forum 2015 Since 1999 Youth Forums form an integral part of UNESCO’s education programme. Most often consisting of lectures, workshops and hands-on activities, these events aim to sensitize young people to the importance of World Heritage sites. They act as networking platforms promoting the active participation of young people in heritage-related issues, provide training opportunities for young professionals, as well as the possibility to present their concerns and ideas to heritage professionals (UNESCO 2011). One very successful example of such a Youth Forum is the Word Heritage Young Experts Forum 2015 (YEF) which took place in Koblenz and Bonn, Germany between 18th and 29th June 2015.
Figure 1: The 32 participants of the YHE Forum Š DUK
Organized by the German Commission for UNESCO and the Federal Foreign Office of Germany the forum offered 32 young heritage experts from 31 countries (Figure 1) the opportunity to deepen their knowledge of the workings of the World Heritage Convention, to network, to develop initiatives on the sustainable management of heritage and to present these during the 39th session of the World Heritage Committee. Today, a year after its implementation, the positive effects of the event are still perceptible: the forum not only produced a declaration written and presented by the young participants (Young Heritage Experts 2015), but also mobilized the young professionals to form an international youth network. The reason for this sustainable impact can be found in the methodological approach of the event, which combined theoretical and practical modules, as well as insights provided by numerous world heritage stakeholders. The following section will discuss four elements in further detail.
12
Encountering Best Practices - The Site Managers Perspective One of the most valuable experiences for young students or professionals was the contact with best practices. Direct encounters with heritage sites and discussions with experienced site managers provided the chance to grasp concrete challenges and efficient solutions. Hence the first week of the YEF was dedicated to field trips to selected World Heritage sites. Each visit introduced one particular aspect of heritage management as seen from the site manager’s perspective and allowed for insights into management tools employed by heritage professionals. The site managers of the “Frontiers of the Roman Empire”, for example, outlined the task of heritage interpretation and education (Figure 2), while the board of the “Upper Middle Rhine Valley” highlighted methods to coordinate large-scale cultural landscapes and to facilitate effective communication between stakeholders. While the visits themselves presented knowledge about management tools, the following group discussions empowered the participants to examine their own experiences and to ask further questions (Figure 3). Oftentimes, the discussions ended with the realization that heritage sites around the globe face similar issues, a fact that enhanced the feeling of solidarity amongst the participants. At the same time, the group-discussions also exhibited a wide variety of management approaches, depending on the specific academic and national background. This diversity opened up new perspectives, a valuable experience for both, the young and the experienced experts.
Figure 2: Excursion to the Frontiers of the Roman Empire © DUK
Figure 3: Group discussions © Laura Roman 13
Engaging in Hands-on Activities - The local communities perspective World Heritage is not only achieved by site managers alone. The local communities residing and using these places on a day-to-day basis are a second group of valuable stakeholders taking care of their local heritage. The field trips during the forum were therefore accompanied by hands-on activities introducing volunteering and community involvement as a useful tool of heritage preservation. During workshops organized by the European Heritage Volunteers the participants not only met local stakeholders, but joined some of their daily activities at the heritage sites. They got to know how the restoration of historic dry stone walls can safeguard the traditional local vineyard cultivation (Figure 4), as well as how bush clearance and grass mowing can help to revitalize abandoned landscapes (Figure 5). Learning about the needs and challenges of the heritage sites through direct observation and involvement, the exchange with the local population and most importantly the contribution of one’s personal manpower was impressive and inspiring. The discourse with local residents opened up new perspectives, as their sense of social responsibility was truly inspiring. Moreover, the workshops marked in important tool to facilitate a good working environment, to deepen the team spirit and to develop a sense of responsibility and cooperation – factors needed for the next step of the Forum.
Figure 4: Hands- on workshop at the Loreley, Š DUK
14
Figure 5: Hands- on workshop in Oberwesel Š DUK
Simulating the World Heritage Committee - The world heritage committees perspective While listening to and discussing about theoretical and practical challenges of heritage preservation and management are in fact important methods to deepen the understanding of the World Heritage Convention, certain questions will only be solved by experience. The third element of the YEF was therefore the simulation of the World Heritage Committee. In the course of this activity the young experts took on the roles of national delegates (Figure 6). Instead of following discussions, they were now at the very center of it, followed the Rules of Procedure, diplomatic courtesy and acted in the spirit of the 1972 Convention. Based on the fictitious example of the Fonta Wildlife Reserve endangered by poaching and industrial agriculture, they experienced firsthand how the World Heritage Committee functions, how it takes decisions and how declarations are adopted. While it seemed to be challenging at first, to put oneself in the role of another country, the participants soon found their roles and discussions got more and more intense. The results were better understandings of the workings of the committee, as well as some surprising insights - most decisions are not agreed upon during the official sessions themselves, but throughout the informal meetings, the smallest words in a resolution can make the biggest difference and patience as well as diligence is essential to reach a consensus.
15
Figure 6: The World Heritage Committee Simulation Š DUK
Drafting a Declaration - The participant’s perspective Following the insights on the site managers, the local communities and the World Heritage Committees perspective on World Heritage, the final module of the Youth Forum enabled the participants to combine all information gained in order to develop and voice their own, young view on world heritage through the draft of a Youth Declaration (Young Heritage Experts 2015). While this was not an easy task to succeed in, the result was overwhelming. The Young Heritage Experts Declaration included various opinions and claims with far reaching consequences. The participants for example highlighted the importance of simulation games for youth within their respective countries, called on other young people to start and multiply youth-led initiatives, as well as for the creation of new structures amongst young experts to share valuable knowledge and experiences gained from youth-led initiatives. Taking part in the Young Experts Forum, gaining valuable insights into the sustainable management of heritage as well as being heard by other heritage professionals was a valuable experience. It proved to the organizers as well as to the participants alike that young people share an insatiable passion for heritage and encompass a vast pool of knowledge and visions. The four components conveyed an encompassing and multi-layered overview of the management challenges, as well as of the various stakeholders responsible for the preservation and management of World Heritage. They provided the possibility to meet likeminded heritage enthusiasts from all over the world, which marked a first step to increase and multiply this knowledge for the sake of humanities common heritage. Moreover, the methods employed fostered the creation of a new network – the Young Heritage Experts network.
16
The Young Heritage Experts network The Young Heritage Experts network (YHE) was brought together by the 39th session of the World Heritage Committee’s Young Experts Forum 2015 in Germany. The international network came into being as a result of the Youth Declaration written by passionate and creative young heritage professionals during the Forum, in order to facilitate connections between young heritage professionals all around the globe. Today, it comprises 32 founding members, as well as more than 900 followers from all around the world, and it is constantly growing. What differentiates the YHE from other existing heritage networks is its target community, which primarily consists of young people, as well as its holistic strategy to approach World Heritage in all its forms by merging manifold fields of expertise towards the realization of one common goal, that of increasing and strengthening young people’s consciousness and awareness for heritage worldwide. Even though the YHE network aims to reach youth communities as a whole, its main target audience includes young graduate students, professionals and researchers working in different fields of World Heritage. This is due to two reasons: We believe it is time to motivate responsible young professionals to pass on the values of UNESCO to other young people, as well as to raise the young generation’s awareness about the necessity of preserving World Heritage in all its forms, as the young generation will soon become the main actors of our society. We furthermore feel it is important to promote and shed light on young professionals’ multifaceted expertise and understanding of the main concerns and challenges of World Heritage matters, in order to successfully contribute to boosting their careers. YHE goals Realizing the role heritage plays in forging a sense of identity among people across the world, and strongly believing that young people can have a great impact in promoting intercultural understanding, we aim to mobilize young people to engage with heritage in all its forms, to share knowledge and resources among ourselves and to link our network with that of heritage professionals. As young professionals, our main aim is to spread awareness about the importance of heritage and to sensitize the public about the various threats posed to it. In addition, we want our network to act as a think tank that will disseminate best practices and lessons learnt from various heritage projects in our respective countries. In order to do so to the best of our abilities, we, through the support of various private, governmental and non-governmental heritage organizations across the world, are starting to develop our own projects (Figure 7).
17
Figure 7: Homepage of YHE webpage.
YHE projects In order to achieve our goals, namely to mobilize the involvement of young professionals and to raise our target community’s awareness and consciousness about the importance of World Heritage management and preservation, we are constantly developing on-going projects and initiatives carried out by the YHE network. The first project initiated was our Online Journal (Young Heritage Experts 2016), which was launched with an opening call for articles in 2015. The call was a great success, with 23 published articles from young professionals around the world. In June 2016 we launched a second call for articles, inviting our target community to share their visions on one of the following topics until July: multi-layered heritage or heritage in conflict. The first topic was launched in advance of the World Heritage Youth Forum 2016: At the Crossroads of Multi-Layered Heritage, which will take place in Istanbul, prior to the 40th session of the World Heritage Committee. Multi-layered heritage can be interpreted in multiple ways. It can refer to cultural or natural heritage sites that exhibit traces dating back from numerous historic periods. Moreover, it can describe heritage which features multiple architectural structures or it can denote the management process of heritage that belongs to manifold stakeholders. Therefore, we expect the contribution of young professionals to share their personal take on the concept of multi-layered heritage, their understanding of the management and conservation strategies needed to protect these heritage sites or their stories and experiences with this unique kind of heritage. Our second theme, Heritage in Conflict, was inspired by the Unite4Heritage Campaign, launched by UNESCO DirectorGeneral Irina Bokova during the 39th Session of the World Heritage Committee, as an active response to the deliberate destruction of World Heritage Sites. As a global movement for the celebration and safeguarding of cultural heritage and diversity worldwide, it calls on the international heritage community to rise against extremism and radicalization. With this topic, the YHE are looking for articles that explore the current discourse around heritage in conflict, describe interesting case studies, or delve
18
into other corresponding sub-themes, such as cultural diversity education and tolerance; illicit trafficking of cultural objects or safeguarding of built heritage and intangible cultural expressions. A second project is our Online Gallery. It aims to invite young professionals to share their artistic perception of heritage in its comprehensive concept, as well as to provide an opportunity to share good photographs of World Heritage sites from across the world that has a special meaning to the author. Just as the Online Journal, the Gallery is addressed to young students, scholars or professionals interested in the promotion or protection of heritage. While this project is still at an early stage of development, the YHE plan to expand the Online Gallery through the organization of an international photo competition, which will be launched in 2016. Next to these major projects, other initiatives are constantly adding new content to our online platform, such as the Inspiration of the Month, Meet the Team, and A Day With campaigns, each one meant to introduce the daily routines and challenges of experienced heritage professionals and young heritage experts to a wider audience. Moreover, we have taken advantage of our Newsletter and social media to keep expanding and spreading our network across the world, and therefore attain the desired disclosure levels. Since its creation, the YHE network unites young students, researchers and professionals, brought together by the same passion for World Heritage by sharing a similar knowledge basis, by disseminating valuable inputs in an appealing and open-access platform, thereby contributing positively to education, research and cultural growth in the different fields of heritage.
Conclusion The paper has set out to discuss two successful case studies of educational programmes within the framework of the World Heritage Convention. While both were organized by two very different stakeholders, namely National Commissions and young individuals, and employ rather diverging methods of raising awareness, they still have certain things in common. On a very basic level both prove that World Heritage Education is an area of heritage management, which is becoming more important than ever. Moreover, they share the same target audience, young students or heritage professionals passionate for our world’s common heritage. And while they occur on two diverging levels of education – one being delivered through a formal learning programme initiated at the institutional, national level and the other being presented through informal projects driven forward by the target audience itself, they understand youth as an important factor for the sustainable management and preservation of World Heritage and serve as reminders that education and outreach is a duty and obligation.
19
The Authors Hannah Rรถhlen is a Young Professional at the Bamberg World Heritage Office, Germany Contact: hannah.roehlen@stadt.bamberg.de
Rui Maio is a PhD Candidate at RISCO, Department of Civil Engineering of the University of Aveiro, Portugal Contact: ruiamaio@ua.pt
Both authors are furthermore members of the Young Heritage Experts Board of Members.
References UNESCO (2011). The UNESCO Youth Forum: celebrating a decade of Youth participation. El-Khoury G., Feustel M. and Kypriotou, M. (Eds.). Paris, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. ISBN 978-92-3-001015-7. Available from: www.unesco.org/en/youth. Accessed: 06 July 2016. UNESCO (2014). UNESCO Education Strategy 2014-2021. Paris, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. Available from: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-ncnd/3.0/igo/. Accessed: 06 July 2016). UNESCO (1972). The Convention Concerning the Protection of World Cultural and Natural Heritage. Available from: http://whc.unesco.org/en/conventiontext. Accessed: 06 July 2016. Young Heritage Experts (2015). World Heritage Young Experts Forum 2015: Declaration. Available from: http://youngheritageexperts.weebly.com/uploads/5/5/9/1/55913355/english.pdf. Accessed: 06 July 2016. Young
Heritage Experts (2016). Online Journal. Available http://youngheritageexperts.weebly.com/online-journal.html. Accessed: 06 July 2016.
20
from:
My Cherished Memories: World Heritage Youth Forum in retrospect Kwesi Aane Koomson
Abstract: This is a personal account of Ghana’s Representative to the African World Heritage Regional Youth Forum which was held at the Robben Island World Heritage Site, South Africa between 28th April and the 4th May 2016.
Keywords: World Heritage Education, World Heritage Youth Forum, Africa, South Africa, Ghana.
HOW IT ALL STARTED Browsing through the internet as usual one day, I chanced upon the link calling for applications. I quickly seized the opportunity and followed the link to the site. To my surprise the requirements were so much that I gave up. In my mind’s eye, printing, filling, getting a supervisor’s endorsement, as well as writing a motivational letter, curriculum vitae, a recommendation and a two minutes video, all to be submitted to an email within the short period, were the main fears that put me off. However, something kept me on to apply after two days. Grudgingly but with hope, I went back to it and started to work. I downloaded the forms, filled my portion and got it to my supervisor who endorsed and recommended me heartily. With the written application done, all that was left was the video entry, which I was not feeling confident about. After much brainstorming I got a camera and a videographer – a good one at that. After a few rehearsals, I wrote my message and tasked my friend to shoot the video for me. Once the video file was converted, I gathered all the documents together, scanned them and finally uploaded, sending them successfully. Lo, it was the last day of the submission actually!
IN ANTICIPATION After a wait of two months, I received an email informing me of the success of my application. I was in disbelief until more preparatory messages about the trip gave me more information about the sponsorship, invitation and accommodation letters. Preparations started in earnest for my South African visa which came through successfully. I was so happy not because I was the only one to represent my beloved Ghana but because it was going to be my first trip to South Africa, the brave land of Mandela, the African hero just like Kwame Nkrumah [President of Ghana who led Ghana to independence from Britain in 1957]. Before going I prepared my PowerPoint presentation on World Heritage Sites in Ghana, about the important tourist centres and cultures of the Ghanaian people. I packed some traditional clothes depicting Ghana –full piece Kente cloth (representing the Southern people) and a Smock (representing the Northern part). With joy, I informed few colleagues, work mates, families and my boss of my short departure to Robben Island, South Africa.
FLIGHT TIME Since my flight was scheduled in the morning of Wednesday 27th of April, I had to travel from Takoradi to Accra to sleep over. Early in the morning I arrived at the Kotoka International Airport ready to go. Eight hours on board was quite boring but I did well to entertain myself with movies, music and looking at the world below in the clouds once a while through the glassy screen.
JOHANNESBURG AT LAST I arrived at the OR Tambo International Airport in Johannesburg at 7pm. After checking out, I identified my hotel which was close to the airport. I checked in, went for a quick rest and then had dinner. There, I met Mohamed Fakih Chum, another participant from Zanzibar, Tanzania who it was easy to spot out since he was the youngest person at the buffet area and appeared to be new. We were happy to meet each other having learnt about each other on the WhatsApp group formed by us.
DOWN CAPE TOWN The next morning, I went back to OR Tambo Airport, Africa’s busiest. I was able to find my terminal and boarded the plane to Cape Town. The Cape and mountains of this beautiful city, like a fairy-tale, welcomed me with a glimpse of the Island I was finally going to visit later. At the luggage belt, I noticed two guys conversing, and by impulse knew they belonged to the forum so I approached them and voila, it was true! One was Sineke Sibanda from Zimbabwe and the other Rebaone Sechogo from the host country. At the waiting area we met others who had already arrived before us. Although I was feeling cold by the weather, I still felt at home meeting up with new friends from other countries. Soon we boarded a shuttle to Victoria and Alfred Waterfront, then the Nelson Mandela Gateway (NMG) to Robben Island.
Figure 1: Meeting of organisers and all participants on the first day at NMG
ROBBEN ISLAND AT LAST We later joined a ferry, ready to sail to the iconic Robben Island. It was a nice cruising of about an hour and everyone loved it. We were greeted by the screeches and hoots of birds upon reaching the Morris Harbour where we joined a bus taking us to the Multi-Purpose Learning Centre (MPLC). This was a nice place with large dormitories, single rooms, library, conference, dining and an open area. We learnt the place was formerly a prison for criminals before being converted to a learning centre. All ladies were placed in one dormitory at one end with the gentlemen in one common dorm on the other side.
The introductory aspect (Figure 1) of the program started with a bit of housekeeping and then a formal section where we introduced ourselves by doing something memorable. There I saw the African in us as some did short cultural displays, singing, and yet others reciting poetry and rap. I did a simple song from Ghana which attracted cheers.
OFFICIAL OPENING Friday, 29th April, was the official opening ceremony and we woke up early to catch the first boat at 6am. We all dressed in our national costumes (Figures 2 and 3). I wore my full piece Kente and jumper with ahenema (traditional sandals). It was a glaring sight to see others also in their traditional attire. An old boat Dias, used to convey workers early in the morning was our means of transport this time. We arrived at NMG, took breakfast and got started with the programme. High profile dignitaries from the Ministries, African World Heritage Fund (AWHF), UNESCO, Robben Island Museum (RIM) and State Officials from nearby countries and Ex Political Prisoners (EPP’s) of the Island were present. There was a video delivery from Dr Mechtild RÜssler (Director, UNESCO Division for Heritage and World Heritage Centre), and presentations from Camela Quin (UNESCO), Mava Dada and Pascal Taruvinga (from RIM), Pamela Mac Quilkan (AWHF) and Hon. Derek Henekom, Minister of Tourism, South Africa. We also had a group picture together in our traditional clothes after the session.
Figure 2: Group picture at the opening ceremony in front of the NMG.
Following a coffee break when the dignitaries had gone, the second section comprised of PowerPoint presentations about the workings of UNESCO, the World Heritage Convention, AWHF and RIM. There was a question and answer forum where we learnt a lot, about World Heritage Sites, what Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) meant, how a site can become a World Heritage Site and the Tentative List process. We were introduced to the main functions of the AWHF and why it was established as well as more about the Island, how it came to exist and the various changes and transitions that had gone on there. A briefing of the activities for the days ahead was relayed and we boarded a ferry to the island on a fun filled cruise again. We took super after which we did our presentations about Heritage sites and tourist centres in our individual home countries. Issues concerning tourism sectors and initiatives involving the youth back home were brought into limelight.
Figure 3: Heanneah from Liberia and myself in our traditional attire.
ACTIVITIES OF SUBSEQUENT DAYS Presentations continued on Saturday 30th April, before we took a tour of the Maximum Security Prison (Figure 4). With the assistance of Mr Thulani Mabaso, a former political prisoner himself, we toured the various sections. A vivid description and explanation of what went on there; the maltreatments, sufferings and above all the brotherly love that kept them together against all odds were recounted. This included the silent clapping or rubbing and the “Each One Teach One” mantra which helped them as prisoners. Herein comes the essence of the word “Ubuntu” meaning each one the brother’s keeper. This relates to “Nkonsonkonson” (Chain-link) the Adinkra symbol that signifies the power of brotherhood or unity in Ghanaian culture.
Figure 4: Tour at the Maximum Security Prison We visited Nelson Mandela’s prison cell and others of high profile persons in the prison. Even till now one can feel the suffering and hardship that went on there, which can be compared to the Forts and Castles on the coasts of Ghana, the last stop where slaves were maltreated before transported to the Americas. We walked to the limestone quarry afterwards, one of the grounds where prisoners suffered. We were instructed to carry a stone each along walking to the site. There I saw a pile of stones which is a monument called Isivivane (pile of stones) from Nelson Mandela and other former prisoners of the island as a symbol when there was a reunion of former prisoners back on the island few years after it was closed down (Figure 5). Ms Vanessa Mitchell of RIM started our Isivivane by writing on her stone her challenges and aspirations for the future, after which she shared with us, placing it on the ground. One after the other all participants shared their written statements on their stones and placed them on each other. Ms Pamela Mac Quilkan was the last to share hers and ended our pile. After a short briefing about the site we returned to the MPLC. On our way I was much relieved having buried all my problems, hoping for the best in the days ahead knowing that in life one has to always let go in order to move on. Once you keep bitterness along, you still carry loads that hold you down.
Figure 5: The Isivivane on the left, our Isivivane top right and myself bottom right.
At MPLC, we grouped into four teams for the practical field work with each having an assignment. Mine was Group Three dealing with Physical environment. With our group supervisor Mr Gershon Manana, we discussed some proposals on the adaptive reuse of old and deteriorating buildings on the Island. After super we were guided by the multimedia team including Ms Carmela on good videoing practice for applications of such programmes, where a variety of videos were shown. Comments and discussions were allowed, thus ending the day. Next day, Sunday 1st May, we continued sharing ideas on our project, visited the site to get a vivid view to practicalise what we wanted to do. We proposed the old power station be used as a museum and that Alpha one, a one-stop for snacks and rest to be expanded for accommodation. We took pictures and later prepared our PowerPoint presentations which were delivered in the evening (Figure 6).
Figure 6: Group three (3) members (above) and during the presentation (below)
After super was an unforgettable night with the Ex Political Prisoners (EPPs) represented by Mr Timothy Nxumalo who told us various stories of his experiences about being arrested, imprisoned and finally freed. His experiences included poetry recitals from his book “Still We Rise”, he charged the atmosphere with freedom songs which got us all on our feet, chanting and jumping. That was enough for the night. Monday 2nd May, saw us at the ‘Residency’ for the UNESCO Youth Model of the World Heritage Committee. Each person had a role to play either as Chair, Vice Chair, Rapporteur and others as State Parties for a country other than one’s own. I was the State Party South Africa and from the morning till evening deliberated on issues defending the Robben Island World Heritage Site and South Africa (Figure 7). Some of the issues were the construction of underwater bridge to link the island to the main land, the solar panel farm and management issues among others. This led to me to gain the accolade “CEO” of Robben Island after the Youth Model because I strongly defended the island as if I was a staff or Board Member and knew the workings of the iconic World Heritage Site. I made use of the short coffee breaks to convince other state parties to be on my side on the deliberation.
Figure 7: Kwesi seated at the UNESCO Youth Model At the end of the day, some of the deliberations were accepted by the committee, while others were amended and the rest adjourned. The day ended with gifts of T-shirts from African Union to be worn for the tour of Cape Town the next day. Tuesday took us to the famous Table Mountain in Cape Town in a red double decker bus. Going to the Mother City without a visit to the Mountain is like going to Giza in Egypt without visiting the Pyramids. In Cape Town the Table Mountain represents freedom and liberty while Robben Island World Heritage Site signifies isolation, suffering and adversity. We went up the mountain in a cable lift and explored the place. It was fun being up there with the clouds and whirling winds passing around us. What a panoramic sight to behold! Passioned with music and explanations on sections of the city, we enjoyed our trip back to Waterfront (Figure 8).
Figure 8: Wilson from Zambia on the Island looking towards the beautiful city of Cape Town and the Table Mountain
THE AFRICAN YOUTH DECLARATION After lunch we were divided into new groups for the drafting of the African Youth Declaration. It was four groups in all, each group was to present issues and concerns that they believed must be addressed with improvements they expect to see relating to Heritage in Africa, more importantly rules and initiatives that will favour the African Youth and the African World Heritage. Back to the island in the evening, two persons each from the four groups constituted a board which sat to cancel out, simplify and combine the four drafts into one that would stand as the African Youth Declaration on World Heritage. Being one of the eight member board we worked into the wee hours before getting the final draft document which urged for investment into World Heritage Sites, youth involvement and employment and curtailing illicit trafficking of artefacts. On Wednesday, all participants worked under the supervision of the panel editing the draft to get the final document. After this tussle, we went to John Craig Hall in the afternoon in our traditional attires for the closing ceremony.
CLOSING CEREMONY I wore this time the Smock (Figure 9), which is Ghana’s second traditional garb. To crown the ceremony was the presence of Ms Rejoice Thizwilondi Mabudafhasi, the Deputy Minister of Arts and Culture, South Africa and few dignitaries. There was a group song by all participants after which others presented a cultural display. The African Youth Declaration was also read and finally there was the presentation of certificates to all participants. A group picture including the Deputy Minister and the staff for the programme was taken (Figure 11).
Figure 9: Receiving my participation certificate
CULTURAL NIGHT The final night, each participant displayed the culture of his/her home country (Figure 10). Some were cultural displays while others were music with dance and recitals. It ended with a small party where we enjoyed music, dancing and food. It was with mixed feelings as we hugged each other, exchanged contacts and goodwill messages hoping for a future event.
Figure 10: Myself in the Ghanaian Smock on the left and Sineke in Zimbabwean Amabhetshu outfit on the right.
HOME AT LAST I woke to find I was to be in the very last batch to leave the island for Cape Town en route for home Ghana. We waited at the Cape Town International Airport where we were individually waiting for our flights. One of the most difficult things to do now was leaving my new friends. Arriving in Johannesburg I went to the same hotel but a different room this time. The next morning, I saw Vanessa Nsona of Malawi who I learnt also stayed there and we kept company till she left. We will all keep in touch through social media and there are discussions to plan for a reunion among ourselves in the near future. For now, we are busy doing our own businesses and planning for projects that will help ‘Increasing Youth Involvement in the Promotion and Protection of African World Heritage’ in our respective countries, since that was the theme of our forum.
Figure 11: The Participants and the Organisers at the end of the programme PERSONAL OVERVIEW From the depths of my heart, the impact of this forum is very huge looking at the many things these 23 ambassadors learnt and the lasting ripple effects on their countries. About half of the total world population are youth under 30 years but their involvement and engagement in heritage issues is very less. I believe these kinds of forums are a step in the right direction to increase youth involvement. It creates networking among young minds across different countries, cultures and backgrounds to deliberate and share their diverse ideas and experiences. It is very informative and serves as capacity building. It is a complete experience too, on its own, to meet up in a different environment with other dynamic young people to plan and contribute to continental or global issues. Lastly, there is a lot of networking among participants and organisations without which there would have been no connections between them. I would also commend our sponsors for sending one of us, Njeri Mbure from Kenya to the main event at Istanbul, Turkey this July to have a feel of the main UNESCO activity. Finally, it is my hope that both Francophone and Anglophone forums are held together with translators to assist with language barriers and that they should be organised every year.
Author Contact: youthinspiredgh@gmail.com
World Heritage and Geography Education: a retrospective view Coralie Acheson
As one of the Editors of Furnace, I was particularly interested in the theme of World Heritage and Education, being the daughter of a Geography teacher who, I knew, had led a huge number of trips to sites around the world, including many World Heritage sites. My Dad (David) was generous enough to allow me to interview him, and this is our conversation.
Coralie: So, Dad, tell me about your career in Geography teaching David: First of all Northern Ireland for six years, and then I went to Zimbabwe for six years, and taught there: Waddilove High School. And then I returned to the UK, did a Master’s Degree in Geography in Education at the Institute of Education, then one year at Dame Alice Owen’s School in Potters Bar, then 22 years in Boston High School, in Boston, Lincolnshire. Coralie: That was a lot of years David: 35 years Coralie: 35 years! And for how many of those were you on trips? David: Well, of the 22 years at Boston High School, I reckoned there was at least one year, a year and a third, taking students out of school on trips. Coralie: What is the reason to take students on trips, particularly in Geography, but also in other subjects? David: It’s about bringing the world into the classroom. It’s about giving the students an experience of the real world, and of the human landscape, the physical landscape, so that they can see and feel and touch it for themselves. Coralie: I know you went to quite a lot of different places, could you tell me where you went, on field trips? David: Well, for Year 7 we used Castle Acre and its Priory for a number of years. We also went to Lincoln. Year 8 most recently has been the East London, the Olympic Park and Greenwich. Previous to that we did Blakeney Point in Norfolk. Year 9, for a lot of years, a visit to Cadbury World in Birmingham. GCSE, most recently a 2 day trip to Castleton in the Peak District, which is a National Park. Before that we did city center in Lincoln and we did a country park - we looked at a river, a river flowing through the Snipedales Country Park in Lincolnshire. We’ve also done trips to Italy, I think eight or nine trips to Italy in the last ten years. These were mostly trips to Rome and Sorrento. In Sorrento we’d have visits to the Isle of Capri, to Pompeii. On our last visit, which didn’t include Rome we took in Amalfi and we went to Herculaneum. We went up to Vesuvius, walked round the top of Vesuvius.
Coralie: Very exciting. And I know A-levels was the Lake District, for a week? David: A-levels… most recently 5 days in the Lake District. Previous to that we’d been going to the Yorkshire Dales, York and the Holderness Coast. There were two to Greece, classical sites in Greece, and two to Italy, which was essentially the same places as the Italy Geography trip, but from a different perspective. Coralie: Where did you go in Greece? David: Greece was everywhere. Coralie: Everywhere?! David: Everywhere that you can think of. In other words the Parthenon, Aegina, Epidaurus, Delphi, Ithaca… Coralie: What about Japan? David: Oh yes, Japan. Three trips to Japan. These were cultural exchanges, very heavily with a cultural emphasis: tea ceremonies, visits to Shinto temples and shrines. I was able to visit Kyoto, although that wasn’t part of the group experience that was with the host family. We also went to Tokyo. Coralie: I know that quite a lot of those places are World Heritage Sites, but how much were you aware of World Heritage status, or not, of some of the places you’ve visited? David: I don’t think I knew the term World Heritage status until about six or seven years ago when I was teaching GCSE, and there was actually a section on the specification about tourism. Coralie: So it was in a tourism context that that first appeared? David: Yes, there was a page in the text book and there was a section requiring us to look at heritage, and heritage tourism was the phrase that was used, and obviously that included World Heritage Sites. Coralie: So it didn’t come up in the natural context. It was specifically the cultural heritage? David: It was the cultural heritage. I mean I knew Giant’s Causeway, as I’d done fieldwork, Geology fieldwork, with students from Regent’s House, in my first teaching post 30 years ago, at the Giant’s Causeway, before it even had World Heritage status. Truth be told, most of us on the mainland [Great Britain] haven’t really known, haven’t really been informed, about the status of places like the Giant’s Causeway until recently, with the growth of tourism in Northern Ireland. Coralie: If you were to ponder the value of World Heritage in educational terms, specifically geography, what would you say it is, and perhaps what could it be? David: The value of World Heritage… I suppose it’s a means of highlighting things which are of fundamental importance, and the importance of which goes beyond the purely academic, geographical importance at that particular point in time. So Pompeii is a World Heritage Site, and we were looking at it specifically from the eruption of a volcano and the impact of that, but it would be
lunacy, for us not to look at that from the impact on the people, and the artefacts that result from that, and in fact on our last trip to Italy we went to the archaeological museum in Naples to look at the wall paintings, the frescos. So I would say that, for me, in educational trips, the importance goes beyond the pure geography, or history, to the culture of the area you’re going to. Get them to experience the food, in fact on our last trip we did pizza making when we were visiting a farm… Coralie: Intangible heritage? David: Yes. And heritage is, for me, much more than the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel, which I’ve had students in. It’s much more than what you can touch, which of course at the Sistine Chapel you’re not allowed to touch. It’s much more than things you can see, because seeing is a very limited view in terms of the tourist experience. It’s about the people and their lifestyle and their culture, and hopefully some of that is conveyed to the young people as part of the experience.
Discussion One thing that was particularly striking in this interview was the fact that my Dad, a man who had taken a considerable number of well researched school trips across the UK, Europe and beyond, had not even been aware of what World Heritage was until relatively recently. Communicating the value of World Heritage is part of the UK’s obligations as a State Party to the World Heritage Convention. While this can and does occur on site through education programmes, this is reliant on teachers opting to use schemes which may not always meet their practical and pedagogical requirements. Teachers are a phenomenal resource to World Heritage sites in terms of assisting their outreach, but they are perhaps underutilized. The interview emphasized the real enthusiasm that teachers like my Dad have for broadening the learning experience for their pupils. Dad’s insight that World Heritage status indicates that there are multi-levels of significance to a place was really interesting here. It would be really exciting to see education programmes at World Heritage sites embracing the opportunities in this: a group may have come to learn one thing but that doesn’t mean they cannot also learn much more! Ultimately, school trips are a wonderful environment for encouraging young people to engage with our world’s incredible cultural and natural heritage, and this is something they can take with them beyond the learning setting.
David Acheson: Biography David Acheson recently retired after 35 years of teaching Geography. He taught in Newtownards (Northern Ireland), Marondera (Zimbabwe), Potter’s Bar (Hertfordshire, England), and, for the last 22 years, Boston (Lincolnshire, England). He has a BSc in Geography (Queen’s University Belfast), a PGCE (Queen’s University Belfast) and a MA in Geography in Education (Institute of Education). Over the course of his career he took field trips to a large number of World Heritage sites, including Rome and the Vatican City, Pompeii and Herculaneum, Villa d’Este and Villa Adriana, the Amalfi Coast, Greenwich, Epidaurus, Delphi, the Acropolis, Olympia, Mycenae, Japan, and the Lake District, which is the UK’s nomination for 2017.
Coralie Acheson, PhD researcher, University of Birmingham
International Conference Announcement Call for Papers
The Heritages of Migration: Moving Stories, Objects and ‘Home’ Buenos Aires, Argentina National Museum of Immigration 6 – 10 April 2017 Held at the National Museum of Immigration, Buenos Aires, Argentina – a country that itself has seen mass immigration – this conference asks:
What objects and practices do migrants value and carry with them in their movements between old and new worlds? How do people negotiate and renegotiate their “being in the world” in the framework of migration? How is memory enacted through material culture and heritage into new active domains? What stories are told and how are they transmitted within and between migrant communities and generations? How is the concept of home made meaningful in a mobile world? Where do performances of identity “take place” so as to generate new landscapes of collective memory? How do the meanings of place and placelessness change over generations from an initial migration?
The conference is designed encourage provocative dialogue across the fullest range of disciplines. Indicative topics of interest to the conference include:
The heritage of trans-Atlantic encounters – ways and means of crossing distances Performing place and new inscriptions of placelessness Migration and urban territories – settlement processes and practices Travelling intangible heritages – the rituals, practices, festivals of home away Diasporic heritage communities Migrating memories Representations of migration/immigration in popular culture
Abstracts of 300 words submitted in the conference format should be sent as soon as possible but no later than October 14 2016 via our online form: www.universityofbirmingham.submittable.com www.heritagesofmigration.wordpress.com
Bridge: The Heritage of Connecting Places and Cultures. An International Conference. https://bridgeconference.wordpress.com/ From a log crossing a stream to a road linking continents, the bridge is an embedded structure in our daily lives. Though its form and design has changed over the centuries its function remains one of connecting two points for a purpose; be it one of mere social convenience, economic necessity, for conquest or technological showmanship. Bridges (viaducts, overpasses, fly-overs) physically and symbolically connect places, communities and cultures; they remind us of division while at the same time providing the means for unification. Fought on and fought over, bridges are strategic markers in the landscape and in our own lives. Crossing over, or under a bridge carries a symbolism of passage and transition and in real terms marks a change in environment and perspective. In their history bridges have been built of a wide variety of materials, in all shapes and sizes, and are emblematic of technological advance. But they also reflect shifting socio-cultural preferences in art, architecture and design and quickly reflect and project the identities of the communities and places they bring together. While of course bridges are still actively being constructed, the world is covered with a vast variety of bridges we have come to value as our heritage from the World Heritage Vizcaya Bridge near Bilbao to the covered wooden bridges of Vermont and New England in the USA, to the Sydney Harbour Bridge in Australia and the Pont d’Avignon in France. Built in a multitude of materials and styles, each bridge is laden with its own specific stories and meanings. From the Bridge of Sighs to the Bridge of Spies, bridges provide a dramatic setting for the fullest range of human endeavours and emotions. It is the role of bridges in the human imagination that adds significantly to their value as important and remarkable objects in the landscape. This conference seeks to engage in an open multi-disciplinary analysis of the heritage of bridges –not only as physical structures connecting places and cultures but also as symbolic and metaphorical markers in the landscape. It seeks to explore the relationships that places, cultures and communities develop with bridges and to discuss how and why societies value bridges as an integral part of their heritages. It seeks to examine the variety of bridges we designate as heritage and the changes in their form and functionality over the years. In particular we wish to examine the full range of meanings we ascribe to the bridge in social and cultural life. The conference welcomes academics from the widest range of disciplines and wishes to act as a forum for exchange between the sciences, social sciences and the humanities. The conference will draw from anthropology, archaeology, art history, architecture, engineering, ethnology, heritage studies, history, geography, landscape studies, literature, linguistics, museum studies, sociology, tourism studies etc. The conference will take place at the World Heritage Site of Ironbridge Gorge – the birthplace of the industrial revolution and the home of the World’s first iron bridge. Indicative themes of interest to the conference include:
The materials and technologies of bridges – the heritage of form and function National and local iconographies of bridges Narratives of bridge construction and destruction Communities united and communities divided by bridges Poetics of the bridge – representing the bridge in art, literature and film Love and death on the bridge The language of the bridge – metaphors and meanings in social life Touring bridges – travel narratives and tourism economies Alternative bridge crossings – tunnels and ferries
Abstracts of 300 words submitted in the conference format should be sent as soon as possible but no later than November 1st 2016 to www.universityofbirmingham.submittable.com. Contact Ironbridge@contacts.bham.ac.uk
A series of online debates led by students from the Ironbridge International Institute for Cultural Heritage, University of Birmingham, in collaboration with archaeology and heritage students from Universities and early career professionals across the world. #OurUNESCO is designed to provide a forum to critically evaluate the state and role of UNESCO ahead of its 70th anniversary. Past Debates: January 19th 2015- The World Heritage List First debate with contributors from Birmingham, UK, Durham, UK, Germany, Mexico and The Netherlands. Significantly raised the profile of furnace Journal. February 16th 2015- Intangible Heritage Second debate with contributors from Birmingham, UK, Durham, UK, York, UK, Canada, India, Mexico, Spain and The Netherlands. March 16th 2015- UNESCO: The Institution Third debate with contributors from Birmingham, UK, Bristol/Glasgow, England, UK, Germany and Spain. April 20th 2015- World Heritage and Tourism May 18th 2015- World Heritage Education With contributors from Birmingham, Cornwall, Devon, South Wales, the Giant’s Causeway and Panama!
CALL FOR PAPERS World Heritage and Communities This is a Call for Papers for contributions to furnace, an open access, postgraduate/ graduate journal. Edited by doctoral researchers in the Ironbridge International Institute for Cultural Heritage (IIICH) at the University of Birmingham. furnace hopes to be a facilitator for sparking debates and discussions surrounding the expanding and diversifying disciplinary field of cultural heritage. Within the wider global trend of the democratisation of heritage, the ‘rhetoric of community’ is becoming increasingly a matter of concern. The considerable interest in the role of local communities in the preservation of their heritage can be seen in the academic discourse as well as in policy. In the World Heritage process, especially in the first decade of the 21st century, communities were added as one of the main strategic objectives of the Convention. Recent changes to the Operational Guidelines for the implementation of the Convention recommend involvement of indigenous peoples and local communities in decision-making, monitoring, and evaluation of the properties and their Outstanding Universal Value. There are a range of approaches to heritage management in different parts of the world and within these, the role of ‘people’ in management of World Heritage properties is given different levels of importance. Although there have been numerous research projects concerning the role of communities in heritage conservation, this crucial area of understanding has not yet been explored adequately. We are seeking submissions with a focus on exploring the relationship between ‘community’ and World Heritage, this can be approached theoretically or through a case study.
What are the main obstacles in the World Heritage system which prevent communities from engaging actively in the conservation process? What is the interaction between universal values and ‘local knowledge’ or does this interaction exist at all. What does a World Heritage site mean to its local communities and what does it do for them?
The theme of the 5th issue of the IIICH Postgraduate journal furnace is World Heritage and Communities. Full papers are required by Friday, September 30th 2016. They should be sent to: furnace@contacts.bham.ac.uk . Decisions will be made quickly by the editorial board. Those accepted will be reviewed and corrected for publication launch on Monday January 9th 2017. See the webpage for further information on submissions. https://furnacejournal.wordpress.com/ For further information or any questions, please contact us via the email above or tweet at @furnacejournal
Call for Book Reviewers Book review submissions can also be of any length, but the word count cannot be over 1,500 words. For more information on submissions see: https://furnacejournal.wordpress.com/information-for-authors/ Books to be reviewed: Barbiera, I. Choyke, A. M. Rasson, J. A. 2009. Materializing Memory. Archaeological material culture and the semantics of the past. Barbiera, I. Choyke, A. M. Rasson, J. A. (eds). BAR International Series 1977. Hurcombe, L.M. 2007. Archaeological Artefacts as Material Culture. Routledge. King, T. F. 2013. Cultural Resource Laws and Practice (4th edition) Lanham, AltaMira Press. Labadi, S. 2013. UNESCO, Cultural Heritage, and Outstanding Universal Value: Value-based Analyses of the World Heritage and Intangible Cultural Heritage Conventions. Rowman and Littlefield. St. Clair, A. Taylor, K. Mitchell, N. J. 2014. Challenges and New Directions (Routledge Studies in Heritage). Taylor & Francis Group. Worrell, S. Egan, S. Naylor, J. Leahy, K. Lewis, M. 2007. A Decade of Discovery. Proceedings of the Portable Antiquities Scheme Conference. Archeopress.
If you are interested in obtaining a copy and reviewing these books, please get in touch with us: furnace@contacts.bham.ac.uk