Fall 2015 Issue - SJR

1

The Social Justice Review

2 The Social Justice Review

This volume is dedicated to the pursuit of justice, not just at our doorstep but across systems and on different shores.

3

The Social Justice Review

The Social Justice Review Staff

Editor-in-Chief: Anna Silk Editorial Board: Marina Kay Maggie Deagon Naveen Dasari Design Team: Jane Byon Serene Boachie

CopyrightŠ 2015 The Social Justice Review All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form without the express written consent of The Social Justice Review.

Views expressed in this journal are solely those of the authors themselves and do not necessarily represent those of the editorial board, faculty advisors, or the University of Southern California.

4 The Social Justice Review

Editor’s Note: Dear Reader, It is with great pleasure that I present the second issue of The Social Justice Review. It is our hope that you find in these pages a voice that calls to you, excites you, haunts you, guides you, and most importantly, a voice that challenges you. Conversations of justice should not make us comfortable -- they deal with the most fundamental, callous, and outmoded forms of unfairness -- yet, for these reasons, they must enliven us to engage, inform, and instigate positive change.

It is not a coincidence that this journal grows and develops as the conversations about social justice amplify in our communities, on our campuses and in the world at large. This journal was conceptualized as a starting point and landing place for a dialogue about seminal issues of our times. This issue alone tackles immigration, women's access to education, and terrorism, to name a few. Under the auspice that making progress on complex issues requires both creativity and analysis, we hope to provide a space where artistic and academic pieces form a collective, not dichotomous, discussion.

When we pieced together this issue, we found not just individual stories but a compelling conversation about recognizing and answering social injustices in both familiar and foreign settings. As you turn the pages, you will see work that exemplifies injustices faced by the individual and those that plague nations. These pieces collectively call us to be global citizens who choose not to avert our eyes to injustices outside the context of our immediate environments. Although this journal addresses the discomforts and hardships that afflict today's society, the published pieces do not foster despair; rather, they deepen our sense of humanity and hasten our drive for tangible change.

This journal is a result of the grit of our authors and the guidance of a dedicated team both within the Journal and at the Levan Institute for Humanities. Without authors there is no need for a platform, and without a platform, these conversations cannot be amplified and addressed.

Thank you for allowing us to be a part of this process.

Sincerely, Anna Silk Editor-in-Chief

5

The Social Justice Review

Table of contents Something Nothing

Amy Hutto

Local Control Funding Formula, the Achievement Gap, and the Power to Change: An Analysis of Public School Finance in California

Linda Wang

Numbers

Eunice Gonzalez-Sierra

The Conflict Minerals Campaign and The Democratic Republic of Congo: an Inadequate Solution to a Complex Problem

Erica Behrens

Ant Season

Constance Chan

Gender Equality through Education and Policy

Rebecca Homan

6 The Social Justice Review

A Sestina

BY Amy hutto

A girl stands silently in front of the mirror, watching the fat on her hips. Even her eyelashes are too short and her lips too thin. Takes a pinch of her belly, thinks it’s a tire. Thinking, just add three more, I could drive away from this nothing, and find something, maybe. She wants to bleed, but knows she shouldn’t. She’s already bled enough. So instead, she’s there, staring in the mirror.

Imagining her hair blonde; eyes blue; so she’s nothing “Something, Nothing” is a sestina exploring a girl’s inner thoughts as she stands in front of a mirror. She is obsessed with her body, the way she looks compared to other women (especially those in media) and considers how to obtain the look she wants. The mirror (or her image in the mirror) eggs her on, reminding her of every imperfection she isn’t noticing enough. This poem is meant to display the intensity of emotion behind the obsessions that girls experience with regards to their bodies.

Amy Hutto is a junior at the University of Southern California majoring in creative writing and minoring in marketing and music recording. She is originally from Boise, Idaho and enjoys writing, playing music, and dogs.

like herself. And she’s thinking about fake eyelashes because hers are so short, and they could add something. If they were just a pinch longer or so. Her heels are tall and pinch her toes and she gets blisters that break and bleed, and she’s worried they’ll ruin the shoes. Scars only add to the list of imperfections recanted by the mirror, its quiet eyes finding fault everywhere, and her eyelashes especially, so short and thin that they’re nothing

7

like the women in commercials, or even like Susie. Nothing like the billboards, with women so thin you couldn’t pinch anything from their bodies. With eyelashes so thick and full, it makes her heart bleed with simple jealousy, if only, if only. And the mirror watches, nodding along, pointing out that she could add more make-up, more exercise, less food. Add some kind of eating disorder; Susie eats nothing and so could you, or get rid of it later, the dirty mirror whispers, eying her round hips as she pinches at them again. She bites at her lips until they bleed and she’s putting mascara on her eyelashes but they’re never going to be long like the eyelashes of a model or Susie. And she keeps adding and adding and her lips are bleeding but she doesn’t care. She feels like nothing.

The girl rubs her hands over herself, pinches at the fat on her arms. The mirror approves. The mirror reminds her to pinch at her thighs, too, add tears to ruin her eyelashes.

And she’s bleeding, bleeding. And she feels nothing.

The Social Justice Review

8 The Social Justice Review

LOCAL

CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA, THE

ACHIEVEMENT GAP

& THE POWER

TO CHANGE

9

The Social Justice Review

An Analysis of Public School Finance in California

By Linda Wang

University of Southern California, 2015

Abstract: This paper examines the role funding formulas play in contributing to or mitigating inequality in the California public school system. After analyzing the historical processes that led to the public school system’s current state, this paper assesses the benefits, risks, and shortfalls of Local Control Funding Formula, the measure Governor Jerry Brown introduced in 2013 to re-address the diverse needs of public schools. The paper concludes by formulating recommendations for what actions can be taken to ensure that schools are funded equitably, adequately, and robustly.

10 The Social Justice Review

California’s public school system is failing its students, and there is ample evidence to prove it. This year, it was ranked 41st nationally out of 50 states for public school quality by StudentsFirst, a high-profile education advocacy group run by former Washington, D.C. School Chancellor Michelle Rhee (Schwartz).

In terms of standardized testing, California scored near the bottom among states in this year’s National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) scores with its 4th graders ranked as 47th in math and reading and its 8th graders 45th in math (Noguchi).

The National Council on Teacher Quality found in their 2013 study that California was among one of the three worst-rated states in terms of teacher quality (Mader).

Over and over, across every measure, we see signs of a broken public school system, and the fundamental reason our public school system fails so glaringly and so offensively is because it has become effectively two separate systems: one serving middle to high-income students in primarily suburban and more affluent urban districts, and one serving low-income students in urban and rural areas (Hackney 19).

That second system is in dismal shape. About 18% of Californian students dropped out before they reached their high school graduation, and the vast majority of those students were low-income and/or a racial minority. The dropout rate for low-income students is shockingly 5 times greater than that of their wealthier peers (Zhao). More than half of California’s lowincome public schools were labeled “failing” by the U.S. Department of Education last year (Kazakoff), whereas there isn’t a single “failing” public school among the 20 wealthiest counties in California (Infante).

Additional indicators—like the rate of completion of A-G course requirements needed for 4-year university eligibility, rate of college admissions, and performance on other standardized tests (EdSource.org)—have shown the same results: a Californian opportunity and achievement gap.

To address our poor-performing schools, politicians and the public alike have long debated how much funding schools should receive and where that funding should come from. Traditionally, local property taxes provided the primary source of revenue for school districts and supplemental aid came from the state and federal governments. In 1971, the plaintiffs of Serrano v. Priest challenged the constitutionality of such an educational finance

system, arguing that children of equal age and aptitude were not afforded equal educational resources due to differences in district wealth and resultant differences in school funding (Hallett 55). The California Supreme Court ruled in their favor in 1976, finding that, because poorer communities generated a lower overall tax revenue, they were burdened with a higher tax rate in order to afford the same or lesser educational opportunities as wealthy communities. Their decision affirmed that education is a fundamental right, and discrepancies in per-student funding constituted a violation of the “Equal Protection” clause of the California Constitution (Sonstelie iv).

After Serrano v. Priest, the state responded by passing Proposition 13 in 1978 as an attempt at equalizing local per-student funding. Proposition 13 imposed a 1% property tax rate and prohibited local increases in taxes, thus creating a ceiling on revenue per student for each district that would be equalized over time (Weston). The leveling effect Proposition 13 had was to “level down.” Since school districts could no longer rely on property tax revenue to fund the bulk of their operations, the state increased its support, “shifting the responsibility for funding schools away from local districts” (Weston 6). Proposition 98, passed in 1988, required that, at minimum, 40% of the state’s general fund be spent on K-12 school and community colleges (Grubb 55), and this mandate continues to drive revenue to California public schools.

However, about half of property tax were levied on commercial and industrial property. Taxes on these properties actually subsidized homeowners’ and renters’ ability to afford quality education for their students. Turning over funding responsibility to the state ended the subsidy and “increas[ed] the marginal cost of school spending to residents” (Stonselie 8).

Sharp state budget cuts (such as the Great Recession) combined with per-student spending reductions have resulted in school districts hiring fewer teachers, increased student-teacher ratios, less funding allocated to disadvantaged students, and wealthier parents enrolling their students in private schools or donating their resources to their student’s school (Sonstelie). In the 1970s, California’s schools were considered among the best in the country quality-wise and within the top 10 best-funded states (Grubb 94). By the 1980s, California schools were funded more equitably than before, but they were, on the whole, funded less. By taking away resources from high-spending districts

11 The Social Justice Review rather than increasing resources for low-spending districts, schools predictably started to show poorer performance. By 2010, California ranked 46th in terms of spending per student and last in terms of teacher-tostudent ratio (Kaplan).

While there has been extensive discussion over the past 30 years on where to better source funding from, how to increase the amount of funding, and whether or not to undo Proposition 13 and 98, there has been little movement toward changing the way we fund schools—up until recently. In January 2013, Gov. Jerry Brown introduced a proposal to reshape how funding is spent, called Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF). When the LCFF came into law in August, it marked a revolutionary moment for public school finance and became one of the first methods of its kind in the country. Its aim is simple: to provide each school district or public charter school with “funding that is fair and responsive to the varying needs of its students, while providing them maximum flexibility to meet those needs” (Gill). Formerly, the state not only provided the majority of the funds but also dictated how school districts were to spend it.

Districts received about 39% of their funding through more than 60 different unwieldy “categorical” grant programs. Each categorical grant was a mandate to spend a certain amount on each state priority, whether it be anti-tobacco lessons, repairing school buildings, libraries, reducing class sizes for younger kids, Advanced Placement curriculum, English Language Learner programs, or even oral health assessments (Holyoke 37). LCFF patterns itself after charter school funding models; instead of categorical grants, charter schools receive block grants with fewer restrictions to spend as they see fit, and, in exchange, have stricter and more transparent accountability measures expected of them. LCFF will ensure that each school district or public charter school receives a base grant between $6,947 and $8,289 per student, based on grade level, and, in addition, for each student who is low-income, an English Language Learner, or in foster care, the district will receive 20% more of the base grant for that student. If 55% or more of a school district’s enrollment is comprised of disadvantaged students (low-income, English Language learners, or in foster care), the district will receive a “concentration grant” of 50% of the base grant for each student above the 55% threshold (Holyoke). The school boards, administrators, principals, and teachers are given a new freedom and flexibility to use their resources as

they see effective for the needs of their students. The rationale behind this augmented autonomy is that a school’s teachers and administrators, as the contact point on the ground and closest to students, will understand best how to efficiently allocate resources.

In exchange for more freedom, the school district or charter school will be required to adopt Local Control and Accountability Plans that describe “how they intend to meet annual goals for all pupils, with specific activities to address state and local priorities” (CA Department of Education). There will be high level of required parent and community engagement in planning and implementing LCFF at each school with the expectation that parents and community members will hold school administrators accountable.

It is appropriate now, in the wake of its recent enactment, to assess the benefits, risks, and shortfalls of LCFF, in contrast to the traditional model of public funding. Various scholars have argued for and cautioned against LCFF. I aim to analyze and compare their work, and, in doing so, formulate recommendations for what actions can be taken to ensure that schools are funded equitably, adequately, and robustly.

Many proponents of LCFF have argued its most compelling benefits are its potential to close the achievement gap and serve the state’s most vulnerable students more effectively than ever before. California’s student population is one of the most diverse, with about 51% of its students Latino, 27% white, 11% Asian, and 7% black (Testa 2). Close to half of Californian students live in poverty and over a quarter are English Learners (Testa 2). Communities across the state have widely different needs and concerns that cannot be easily addressed from the top down. By adopting LCFF, parents, educators, and communities are empowered with the local control to make tailored decisions about what is best for their students, whether that’s more teachers for English Language Learners in linguistically-isolated households, dropout prevention programs and behavioral support, or meaningful college and career-preparatory options.

The argument hinges on the premise that increased per-student spending will result in better performance, and a study from Rutgers University found affirmative results. The Rutgers study conclusively found that “sustained improvements to the level and distribution of funding across local public school districts...largely leads to improvements in the level and distribution of

12 The Social Justice Review student outcomes” (Baker 6). Some researchers have argued LCFF more accurately captures the spirit of Serrano v. Priest. They maintain that the legislators behind Proposition 13 and 98 “misunderstood the inequities under local school finance because, although many low-income and minority families lived in lowspending school districts, just as many lived in highspending ones” (Weston 3). LCFF, on the other hand, targets where there are documented disadvantaged students and funnels resources there directly and without complication. Proposition 13 inevitably served as a revenue ceiling, whereas LCFF will serve as a revenue floor—a minimum amount to be spent on each student, rather than a cap. LCFF does not operate on a zero-sum redistribution model; it raises funding for every student.

LCFF will also allow for a more fair evaluation of school districts and charter schools. The traditional funding model distributed funding based on formulaic inputs, while its accountability system operated on student performance (Timar 4). Such a model was cognitively dissonant and allowed for misleading evaluations. Furthermore, LCFF will pave the way for maximized transparency. By encouraging and making accessible community participation, LCFF changes the culture of parent involvement and creates a place for the parent at the policy table. More active parent involvement can only be a good thing, with many upwards-spiraling effects.

On the other hand, there have been numerous critics who expressed skepticism over LCFF’s promises. Some have argued that LCFF places too heavy a responsibility on parents because parents lack the resources and time to make informed decisions about educational practices. California itself lacks comprehensive collected data on students’ learning experiences, compared to other states. For example, though some proponents of LCFF claim that financial transparency to parents will increase financial accountability, which is not a certain result. In Levacic and Downes’ case study of foreign countries, they found that in many instances, such as Poland, Australia, and the UK, financial formulas are too difficult to understand for non-expert parents and create a barrier to accountability (Levacic and Downes). There has also been a camp of researchers who have questioned whether increased funding necessarily equates to higher performance. After all, the U.S. places 5th in terms of most money

spent per student out of 34 OECD countries, yet American students score along the OECD average in every subject except math, where Americans score below average (Kaplan). Domestically, there have also been cases that raise the same question; for example, Washington, D.C. spent the most in perstudent funding in 2012, but they consistently place at the bottom of the barrel, ranking 40th in student performance that year (Mader).

By far, though, the two biggest fears both policy analysts and the public have concerning LCFF are damage to high-performing schools and potential misuse of control (Desimone 435). Some advocates have pointed out how low the current educational spending base is due to recent budget cuts, and they worry that LCFF went into effect too early. Districts with low numbers of disadvantaged students will be “locked” into an inadequate spending base. Furthermore, for those schools, they worry that, without revenue for high numbers of disadvantaged students, they will be unable to fund crucial initiatives that were formerly covered by categorical programs, like training teachers in math instruction or maintaining school infrastructure. These advocates argue that, while the school districts with many disadvantaged students can recover any lost revenue from categorical programs, the school districts with fewer disadvantaged students would lose the funding permanently without opportunity to recover it (Hallett). Property-rich districts like Palo Alto, Beverly Hills, and Irvine will become labelled as “basic aid districts” because their per-student amounts are largely funded on their own through private fundraising measures. Basic aid districts will continue to receive categorical funding, and that funding will eventually become cut to the minimum “basic aid” amount: $120 per student. For parents and educators in basic aid districts, LCFF can seem like a Robin Hood-esque redistribution from the wealthy to the poor, depriving their students of benefits afforded to other districts and unfairly leaving their communities no choice but to privately fundraise even more intensely (Desimone 476).

Opponents of LCFF are also wary over the amount of freedom allowed school administrators.

Some have expressed their concern over the potential free reign of school administrators to use the money allocated for disadvantaged students to pay down salary, health benefits, and other debts. Indeed, groups

13 The Social Justice Review like Public Advocates, the ACLU, and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund have found a “significant loophole” in the language of LCFF (Rebell 10). Current LCFF regulations mandate that whatever additional funding is given to a school for its high-needs students must be used proportionally to serve those students, and there are 3 ways districts can satisfy the requirement: spend more on high-needs students, provide proportionately more services, or achieve more by setting and attaining proportionately higher student achievement goals. These three options make sense in theory, but, with greater levels of autonomy in schools, some education advocates have identified the “achieve-more” option as a possibility for dollars generated by high-needs students to be spent entirely on expenditures that do not affect them (Rebell 7).

There have been strong points and counterpoints made across scholarly and journalistic work, but overall, LCFF is a well-researched measure that represents a whole system overhaul that has been long overdue. However, there are three important design and implementation challenges that Gov. Brown must address in moving forward: transparency, accountability, and customization. Firstly, school policies and practices can only be made transparent if made accessible, and they ought to be made accessible to all stakeholders. Stakeholders do not just constitute parents and community leaders; the largest stakeholder in public education is the student, and students should have representation in the decisions that affect them most. All written materials should be translated and distributed en masse to stakeholders, and meetings should be held at times that are convenient for stakeholders. LCFF regulations should include clearly that there must be defined committee structures, responsibilities, and timelines, available for all stakeholders to participate in and have democratic representation on.

Secondly, LCFF’s regulations to ensure accountability may be too weak. Local Control and Accountability Plans (LCAP) is a vague standard for schools to hold themselves to; instead, traditional public schools should mimic the accountability measures of public charter schools. In order to stay in operation, charter schools must be renewed every 5 years, meaning they are essentially reviewed and re-authorized. Charter schools submit their petition for renewal to the county board of education, and

they are held to stringent expectations for Academic Performance Index (API) scores as well as the performance of high-needs groups to similar students (Timar). As a result of LCFF, traditional public schools have effectively switched over to a means of funding that is parallel to charter schools’. This method of funding allows for high autonomy on the condition of high accountability. It only follows, then, that traditional public schools ought to adopt the same rigid measures of accountability as charter schools, if they are to be funded in the same way.

Lastly, the legislators behind LCFF must be careful not to make the same mistakes that statecontrol funding did: assume different schools can be treated with the same solution. While LCFF accounts for the disparities from district to district, it does not account for the disparities among schools within one district. For example, San Juan Unified School District spokesman Trent Allen explained that, though the majority of schools in SJUSD do not serve high numbers of disadvantaged students, there are still a few schools that do—and those schools do not qualify for additional funding, though the schools in the neighboring district that serve the same number of disadvantaged students will due to their district makeup (Roxas). LCFF needs to go one step further by evaluating per-student funding on a school-by-school basis, instead of district-by-district.

In conclusion, the LCFF has the potential to narrow the achievement gap by funneling money to where it is needed. As long as administrators choose to address the achievement gap by improving achievement for all students and especially for high-needs students, instead of by allowing highachieving students to slip through the cracks, LCFF will boost statewide academic performance rates. The funding formula encourages the creation of enduring partnerships between community stakeholders and educators, and it has built-in ways to ensure schools hold up their end of the bargain in terms of accountability. The LCFF can be strengthened and made more dependable with the adoption of further initiatives in transparency, accountability, and customization.

14 The Social Justice Review

15 The Social Justice Review

Works Cited “Achievement Gap in California.” EdSource.org. EdSource, n.d. Web. <http://www.edsource.org/stu_achivegap.html>.

Baker, Bruce. “Revisiting That Age-Old Question: Does Money Matter In Education?” Albert Shanker Institute (2012): I-44.

Print.

Desimone, Laura. “How Can Comprehensive School Reform Models Be Successfully Implemented?” Review of Educational Research 72.3 (2002): 433-79. Print.

Gill, Sean. “With LCFF California Sets the Stage to Meet Student Needs.” StudentsFirst, 27 June 2013. Web. 6 Dec. 2013. <http://www.studentsfirst.org/blog/entry/with-lcff-california-sets-the-stage-to-meet-student-needs>.

Grubb, W. N. “Multiple Resources, Multiple Outcomes: Testing the “Improved”School Finance With NELS88.” American Educational Research Journal 45.1 (2008): 104-44. Print.

Hackney, James R. “Philosophical Underpinnings of Public School Funding Jurisprudence.” Journal of Law & Education 22.423 (1993): n. pag. Print.

Hallett, Nick. “Public school funding formula: point-counterpoint”. The Advocate 34.1 (1991): 6.

Holyoke, Thomas T., Jeffrey R. Henig, Heath Brown, and Natalie Lacireno-Paquet. “Policy Dynamics and the Evolution of State Charter School Laws.” Policy Sciences 42.1 (2009): 33-55. Print.

Infante, Martha. “The Affluent, Failing, Public School: Does It Really Exist?” The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 03 Jan. 2011. Web. 06 Dec. 2013.

Kaplan, Jonathan. “A Decade of Disinvestment: California Education Spending Nears the Bottom.” CBP.org. California Budget Project, Oct. 2011. Web. 6 Dec. 2013. <http://www.cbp.org/pdfs/2011/111012_Decade_of_Disinvestment_%20SFF.pdf>.

Kazakoff, Lois. “California’s failing Public Schools.” Opinion Shop. SF Gate, 26 Dec. 2012. Web. 06 Dec. 2013.

“LCFF Frequently Asked Questions.” Local Control Funding Formula. CA Department of Education, Aug. 2013. Web. 06 Dec. 2013. <http://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/aa/lc/lcfffaq.asp>.

Levacic, R., and P. Downes. “Formula Funding of Schools, Decentralization and Corruption: A Comparative Analysis.”

International Institute for Educational Planning, UNESCO. 54.17 (2004): 1-132. Print.

Mader, Jackie. “After Years of Reform, California Education Schools Fall Short on New Ranking System.” Hechingerreport.org.

Hechinger Report, 18 June 2013. Web. 06 Dec. 2013. <http://hechingerreport.org/content/after-years-of-reform-californiaeducation-schools-fall-short-on-new-ranking-system_12388/>.

Noguchi, Sharon. “California Students Score at Bottom of Nation in Reading, Math.” MercuryNews.com. N.p., July 2013. Web. 06 Dec. 2013.

Roxas, Gabriel. “Gov. Jerry Brown’s Local Control Funding Formula for School Districts Helps Some More than Others.”

News10.net. ABC, 24 Apr. 2013. Web. 06 Dec. 2013. <http://www.news10.net/news/local/article/242581/2/Brownseducation-plan-worries-some-in-rich-districts>.

Rebell, Michael A. “Achieving High Educational Standards for All.” Conference Summary, National Research Council (n.d.): 1-45. Print.

Stonselie, Jon, Brenner Eric, and Kenneth Ardon. “For Better or For Worse? School Finance Reform in California.” Public Policy Institute of California 13 (2000): n. pag. Web. 6 Dec. 2013. <http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/report/R_200JSR.pdf>.

Schwartz, Carly. “California Education Policies: State Earns A Failing Grade.” The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 08 Jan. 2013. Web. 06 Dec. 2013.

Testa, William A. “Resources, Outcomes, and Funding of Public Schools.” Chicago Fed Letter 145.B (1999): 1-4. Print.

Timar, Thomas. “How California Funds K-12 Education.” Institute for Research on Education Policy and Practice, Stanford University 75.3 (2006): 1-43. Web. 6 Dec. 2013. <http://cepa.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/2-Timar(3-07).pdf>.

Weston, Margaret. “The Evolution of California’s School Finance System.” School Finance 12.1 (2013): 1-14. Public Policy Institute of California. Web. 6 Dec. 2013. <http://www.ppic.org/main/publication_quick.asp?i=1040>.

Zhao, Emmeline. “High School Dropout Rates For Minority And Poor Students Disproportionately High.” The Huffington Post.

TheHuffingtonPost.com, 20 Oct. 2011. Web. 06 Dec. 2013.

16 The Social Justice Review

1,950 miles: This is the length of a border that separates dreams from nightmares.

Upon leaving her home, my mother was promised the American Dream: A land that would allow the pursuit of happiness.

A pursuit she has yet to venture on. A happiness that has not been readily available for her.

This is a land where if you are not white, straight, upper-class or male, the pursuit of happiness is not up for grabs, so she clings onto the weeds she pulls to feed our family in hopes that one day sheâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ll pull hard enough to be able to grab it.

Although, she has made it to the other side, my mother is still fighting a war she has been unknowingly drafted into.

2,100 migrants: This is the number of lives that were lost in trying to reclaim a land that was stolen from them.

Upon leaving their native country, they ventured on the quest to find a more stable home.

Water bottle in hand, dreams of happiness in their heart and the possibility of never seeing their family again, roamed with them as they left the only home theyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ve ever known, a home that was crumbling.

The sun proved to be their enemy that day, as they became nothing more than a statistic for me to read in my privileged class at a university as safe as this one, as secure as this one.

This is a country that does not want us, a country that would rather see us dead than on their soil.

Brown bodies laying across the earth, camouflaged their skin with the dirt that nourishes the food we consume.

Brown bodies that are either left for dead or working in the fields until their bodies can no longer move forward.

They were martyrs to a war they had unknowingly been drafted into.

Why are brown bodies so disposable? Why do we risk our lives in order to survive?

Eunice Gonzalez is a Mexican-American who first arrived to the United States in the belly of her immigrant mother. She was raised in Santa Maria, CA where her parents immigrated to and dedicated their lives to picking one of the sweetest fruits in the world, strawberries. She is passionate about social justice, immigrant rights, and exuding lots of self-love. While an undergrad at UCLA,

17 The Social Justice Review

Eunice was a part of their Spoken Word Space, where she performed many of her pieces and found the power in her voice (even when it shook). With a bachelor’s degree in Chicana/o Studies, she hopes to continue spreading consciousness and kindness through her words and the love for her people, remembering that “your silence will not protect you.”

This is a paradox I have yet to understand.

2,100 migrants, 2,100 families, 2,100 dreams transformed into nightmares and they’re all just trying to wake up.

A 1,950 mile-long border has separated families from each other, children from parents, parents from children, They’ve exchanged home for a station where they were preparing for war.

72 hours: The amount of time my mother works to have the energy to sleep and feel her American dream come to life.

The amount of time my mother spends picking strawberries for the americans that hate her existence within their country, with their fucked up version of humanity.

The amount of time it takes her to remind me that 2 hours of class doesn’t mean shit in comparison to the amount of work she does on the daily.

3: The number of attempts my mother had to get to the other side to give birth to a child that will be her ticket in claiming her American dream.

3 attempts to ensure that her children would never face hunger, not like before, not this time.

Our people have been drafted into a war that they were not prepared for. I have the memory of many who have fought and fallen to the oppressive regime that has deemed their bodies not worthy of survival.

Our brown brothers and sisters are constantly fighting to stay alive.

We may not be prepared for battle, but I have my books as a weapon, my voice as my barricade and the resiliency of my mother tugging at me to continue to fight.

1,950 miles of a border that separates life and death, but too many times the latter seems prominent on both sides.

18 The Social Justice Review

THE CONFLICT MINERALS CAMPAIGN & THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC

OF CONGO

19 The Social Justice Review

An Inadequate Solution to a Complex Problem

By Erica Behrens

University of Southern California, 2015

Abstract: In the war-ravaged Democratic Republic of Congo, still today in the midst of internal conflict, the Western consumer may have more of a connection to the ongoing brutality in the war-ravaged Democratic Republic of Congo than he or she knows. The issue of “conflict minerals” refers to the high-demand minerals used in many common Western products, such as jewelry and technological devices, that originated from unethical sources in the DRC. These unethical sources are the numerous mines controlled by armed militias in the country who that uses their profits to fund much of the violence and terror they inflict on the local people to remain in control. Advocacy and awareness groups such as “Raise Hope for Congo” have largely promoted the idea that more conscious Western consumerism and more pressure on Western companies to adjust their business practices to work solely with “conflict-free” mines will bring an end to the conflict minerals issue and thus an end to the ongoing violence. However, while the sale of these precious minerals certainly play a significant role in the continuation of the conflict and are a severe obstacle to achieving peace, their role must not be depicted as the only barrier. Largely due to these popular advocacy campaigns, the issue has been oversimplified and important factors also contributing to the violence, such as poverty and land disputes, have been overlooked. The result of this oversimplification has not only been inefficient in the aim of bringing peace to the Congolese people, but in some ways has even led to further harm. Unless the international community is willing to take into account the opinions and facts presented by the local people and humanitarian aid groups in the country itself to look at the conflict more comprehensively, it will do little to achieve its goals of greater peace and stability in the region.

20 The Social Justice Review

Most consumers don’t often think about how their products are made. The long and complicated process of transforming raw materials into marketable goods is usually of little concern to the buyer who only sees the product in its final stage. But in the midst of this process, certain companies allow for peoples’ exploitation and mistreatment for the sake of better business, seeking to maximize profit often at the expense of workers’ wellbeing or basic human rights.

But how much of this are we as consumers willing to accept and, through our purchases, support? The “conflict minerals” campaign concerning the DRC showcases the link between Western consumerism and conflict commodities in a way that leaves the consumer with little excuse to not reconsider his actions.

Conflict commodities are those products that “fund violent groups at their source,” allowing for the perpetuation of violence through the sale of these products in legitimate markets around the world (Ochoa and Keenan 2014). In the immensely resource-rich land of the Congo, the highly valued minerals pervasive in Western electronics and jewelry fall under this category of conflict commodities.

The minerals, commonly referred to as “conflict minerals,” have become the focus of international attention amongst those concerned with commercial activities affecting the region (Ochoa and Keenan 2014; RaiseHopeforCongo 2014). Certain minerals— namely tin, tungsten, tantalum—referred to as the “3T’s”—and gold are at the center of the crisis in the Congo as various armed groups fight for control over these precious resources. The sale of these highlydemanded minerals allows the armed groups in control of the mines to make a sizeable profit that is then used to fund the group such as in their weapons’ purchases (RaiseHopeForCongo 2014). The militant armed groups consist both of rebel groups and government forces who all are vying for power in the country. In the pursuit of further money and power, the groups perpetuate violence against the civilians, “wreak[ing] havoc...by terrorizing communities and fighting for control of and access to mineral resources” (RaiseHopeforCongo 2014).

Fully understanding the violence in the DRC and the conflict’s link to the sale of conflict minerals relies first on a general awareness of the devastating crisis in the DRC and its history. The country, located in the heart of sub-Saharan Africa, has suffered a gruesome and shocking past. The roots of the

violence are deep-seated in the country’s history of colonial rule and subsequent period of illegitimate government (Congo, Democratic Republic of (Kinshasa) 2014). However, the origins of the current conflict can be traced more definitively to the end of the 1994 Rwandan genocide committed by ethnic Hutu extremists. Following the genocide, Rwandan and Ugandan forces entered the DRC in the pursuit of Hutu militia members, sparking social unrest.

The invading forces took over the Congolese capital of Kinshasa and a Congolese rebel leader named Laurent-Desire Kabila declared himself the new president in 1997, ousting the former president and renaming the country from Zaire to its current title (Congo, Democratic Republic of (Kinshasa) 2014).

The new president, however, soon became the target of Rwandan and Ugandan forces and significant civil infighting ensued as rebel groups were formed on each side either for or against the government. The conflict was further complicated by the support of nearby countries of Angola, Chad, Namibia, Sudan, and Zimbabwe for the pro-government forces, turning the conflict into an even messier multi-national entanglement (CIA World Factbook 2014). In the late 1990s and early 2000s, the conflict involved over forty different rebel groups and nine countries, but the number of combatants can now be categorized into four larger groups: “the Rwandan Hutu FDLR; the Rwanda and Uganda-backed M23; and various local armed ‘Mai Mai’ groups and the Congolese army itself ” (RaiseHopeforCongo 2014).

The suffering endured by the Congolese people amidst this long and tumultuous conflict cannot be understated. Since the start of the conflict, over five million people in the Congo have died, tens of thousands have been raped and otherwise sexually abused, over 2.9 million have been displaced, over 450,000 refugees have been created from eastern DRC, and large numbers of children have been recruited and used in the conflict (Ochoa and Keenan 2014, Human Rights Watch 2014, Resolution 2147 2014).

This struggle is cited by some as the deadliest crisis since World War II (RaiseHopeforCongo 2014).

The numbers alone are shocking, but the personal testimonies of those who have survived militia attacks and the photographs of the war-ravaged country add another dimension to the conflict’s portrayal. One victim recalled an attack, unfortunately not uncommon in its cruelty:

21 The Social Justice Review

“When the soldiers attacked us at Shalio, I lost six members of my family, including my 8-yearold daughter, 12-year-old son, and 15-year-old son, who were all beaten to death with wooden clubs in front of me.” She recalls how the soldiers then abducted and raped her, telling her that they could now do “whatever they want” to her. Another woman recounted her own experience being assaulted while tied to a tree: “When I wanted to defend myself, one of them immediately cut my left hand with his machete.”

She then lost consciousness, not regaining it until the next morning. “I don’t know how many others raped me. It was night, and I don’t know when they left” (Human Rights Watch 2014). The gut-wrenchingly disturbing and profoundly heartbreaking stories such as these remind the outside world that the statistics are merely a quantitative representation of a terrible human reality.

The Enough Project, an NGO advocating for the promotion of human rights in the DRC, personalizes the conflict for the consumer of Western products, explaining how “your mobile phone, your jewelry, your computer...all contain minerals that fuel fighting in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo” (RaiseHopeforCongo 2014). The Enough Project, one of the largest proponents of conflict-free products, breaks down the long journey that conflict minerals’ undergo in their transition from Congolese mines to the manufactured good sold in the West by explaining the process in a series of several steps. The illegally mined minerals are first given to trading houses who do not involve themselves with the minerals’ origins. The minerals are then exported to “transit countries.” Later the minerals enter refineries where they are made into metals, at which point the minerals origins have now been significantly obscured.

Finally, companies use these metals to produce their products and thus Western consumerism has become inextricably linked to the ongoing violence (Turner 2013). According to the advocacy campaign, the consumer has the power to lessen the violence in the DRC by using her purchasing power to only buy from companies that are taking steps to become “conflictfree” (RaiseHopeForCongo 2014).

The campaign to end the sale of conflict minerals has had obvious success in the effort to increase accountability and transparency, as lawmakers at the international and federal levels have pushed for legislative reform. One of the most notable of these laws is the American Dodd-Frank Wall Street

Reform and Consumer Protection Act. Signed into law in July of 2010 under President Obama, the bill served as a reaction to America’s 2008 financial crisis.

With the stated aim of promoting financial stability by “improving accountability and transparency in the financial system,” among other means, the bill also included a provision concerning conflict minerals, requiring that American companies certify to the Securities and Exchange Commission “that their products did not contain conflict minerals from DRC or adjacent countries” (GovTrack.us 2014; Turner 2013).

The illegal exportation of minerals from the Congo is undoubtedly a “significant cause of conflict,” a point on which even critics of the campaign can agree (Autesserre 2014). However, the questionable part of this picture lies not in the importance or significance of the conflict minerals trade, but rather in the apparent ability for Western consumers to change it. The breakdown provided by the Enough Project simplifies the conflict minerals trade phenomenon into a brief and comprehensible series of steps for the average consumer to understand but, in doing so, leaves out a great amount of the conflict’s depth. Analyzing the conflict more comprehensively reveals the complexity of the DRC’s sources of violence and exposes the inaccuracies put forth by the dominant advocacy campaigns working to combat the purchase of conflict minerals.

The implementation of measures such the Dodd-Frank Act and greater social responsibility on the part of Western business can certainly affect change in the conflict minerals trade. However, significant change within the lives of those in the DRC requires major changes within the country itself as well, not just Western influence (Turner 2013).

Advocacy campaigns and collaborative international efforts have largely framed the conflict minerals trade as the cause rather than a cause, leading international actors to “overlook the myriad other causes” contributing to the violence (Autesserre 2014).

Those most deeply involved in understanding the conflict, such as “think tanks, academics, Congolese intellectuals…interveners on the ground,” are those who are most likely to emphasize that there are a number of competing causes, including a large number at the local level (Autesserre 2014).

One of the largest factors contributing to violence in the country lies with the Congolese

22 The Social Justice Review government, where corruption amongst the authorities is “persistent and widespread” and continues to be “entrenched” in the system (DFID’s Anti-Corruption Strategy 2014; Congo, Democratic Republic of (Kinshasa) 2014). The government has been described as a “vast, organized scam” whose officials are “getting rich from keeping their state dysfunctional” and “promoting local violence to serve their interests” (Englebert 2014). Understanding the often corrupt, dysfunctional, and sometimes malicious actions of the Congolese government is necessary to understand the limitations on the potential effectiveness of the conflict minerals campaign.

The inadequacy of the DRC government in combating this issue remains a formidable obstacle to meeting the intended goals of international laws and standards. Rather than calling on companies as in the Dodd-Frank Act, the United Nations has called on all states “to take appropriate steps to end the illicit trade in natural resources, including if necessary through judicial means” (Resolution 1856 2008) and has called upon DRC and states in its surrounding area to strengthen control of state mineral imports and exports and to make statistics concerning the trade of these minerals more public (Resolution 2021 2011).

However, despite the international call for the DRC to take action, it is “far from evident” that the Congolese government would want to or even have the capacity to carry out major changes even if desired (Turner 2013). Carrying out significant changes would likely not only be potentially impossible, but would work against certain political interests of those currently in power (Turner 2013). This systemic corruption can be largely seen when examining the role of the Congolese military, who not has engaged in the illegal mineral trade, but has at times worked in cooperation with armed rebel groups and worked against state mining officials and police (Turner 2013).

Given this knowledge, it may seem that the solution to the violence in the DRC lies in the combination of greater social responsibility in the West and the Congolese government’s implementation of measures to retake control of the mines, increase transparency, and rid illicit mineral trade from the region completely. The argument follows that if the government of the DRC had the capacity and willingness to carry out the recommendations accorded to it, then Western consumers would have the agency to bring the violence in the DRC to an

end. This however, is also an oversimplification, and one with dangerous consequences. Issues of “land conflict, poverty, corruption, local political and social antagonisms, and hostile relationships” between state officials and the general public are just some of the other issues that must be included in the conversation if peace in the DRC is ever to be achieved (Autesserre 2014). Reducing the Congo’s internal issues solely to those of government corruption not only gives false hope for the ease of ending the conflict, but results in a false sense of understanding of the conflict’s cause and potential solutions.

A prime example of the ways in which the international community misunderstands the effects of the “conflict minerals” issue is in its linkage to the prevalence of sexual assault. The DRC is, without contestation, rampant with widespread sexual assault, with “tens of thousands” sexually assaulted annually, many cases including horrific torture (Autesserre 2014). The international and advocacy community constantly seeks to remind the public of this fact, as advocacy groups and media sources have adopted ‘rape capital of the world’ and the ‘most dangerous place to be a woman’ as alternate names for the DRC, using these labels a countless number of times (214).

These labels are very likely true and raising awareness of this horrific reality is commendable. However, aggressively using the attention-grabbing nature of these labels and of the statistics for the prevalence of sexual violence in order to gain attention for the conflict minerals campaign creates a link between sexual violence and conflict minerals that is somewhat deceiving. The link is actually “far less direct than the NGOs suggest” (Turner 2013). Much of the sexual violence is not linked to conflict minerals since armed groups uninvolved in the conflict minerals trade and even other civilians take a heavy part in the perpetration of the violence. Even those committing sexual violence due to fighting over natural resources may not be fighting specifically over minerals, again demonstrating the misunderstanding that can stem from oversimplification (Turner 2013).

Adding to the disillusionment in the conflict minerals advocacy campaign is the evidence showing that, in some ways, the focus on conflict minerals has not only ignored other aspects of the conflict but actually worsened the conflict minerals issue itself.

The incomprehension of the government’s corruption, for example, not only impedes progress in many ways but actually reverses it. Though many international

23 The Social Justice Review regulations go unimplemented, the implementation of certain technical measures, such as mining bans in certain areas, have backfired as military leaders have allowed armed groups to augment their mining operations while robbing the â&#x20AC;&#x153;deprived vulnerable populationsâ&#x20AC;? of their only means of income (Autesserre 2014).

Given this information, it may seem hopeless or even detrimental to carry on the conflict-free advocacy initiative at all. However, despite its shortcomings, it is important to similarly acknowledge the great deal of progress that has come from the movement. The advocacy campaigns have brought significant attention to the DRC through their simplification of the conflict, sparking both legislative and humanitarian action. Without it, international regulations may have not been created until much later and changes in company ethics concerning the region may have never begun to take place. The advocacy campaigns themselves must also be defended, with the awareness that complex, impersonal, and lengthy explanations of foreign conflict do not often grab international attention.

Although the explanation of the conflict minerals issue by these advocacy groups is a shallow one, it is likely the only one that could have received recognition on such a wide scale.

The significance of understanding this conflict in greater depth is not to view the advocacy community or the international efforts taken to combat the conflict in a negative light. Rather, it is to increase understanding so that misguided and potentially harmful attempts to improve the situation on the ground can be transformed into effective policies. The conflict speaks as well to constant tension between the publicâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s desire for simple explanations and solutions and the reality of the complex nature of conflict situations. Understanding this conflict may serve as a reminder of the need for us to dig deeper and to throw ourselves more fully into the heart of any conflict, domestic or foreign, before taking action on it, even if dealing with its complexity is inconvenient for us.

24 The Social Justice Review

25 The Social Justice Review

Works Cited Autesserre, S. “Dangerous Tales: Dominant Narratives on the Congo and Their Unintended Consequences.” African Affairs: 202-22. Web. 14 Nov. 2014.

“CIA World Factbook.” Central Intelligence Agency. Central Intelligence Agency. Web. 14 Nov. 2014.

Englebert, Pierre. “Clinton’s Challenge in Congo.” The Christian Science Monitor. The Christian Science Monitor, 10 Aug. 2009. Web. 14 Nov. 2014.

“Congo, Democratic Republic of (Kinshasa).” Freedom in the World. Freedom House. Web. 14 Nov. 2014.

“Democratic Republic of Congo: Ending Impunity for Sexual Violence | Human Rights Watch.” Democratic Republic of Congo: Ending Impunity for Sexual Violence | Human Rights Watch. 10 June 2014. Web. 14 Nov. 2014.

“DFID’s Anti-Corruption Strategy for Democratic Republic of Congo.” Department for International Development 2013, 1 Jan. 2013. Web. 14 Nov. 2014.

Keenan, Patrick J. and Christian Ochoa, “Regulating Information Flows, Regulating Conflict: An Analysis of United States Conflict Minerals Legislation.” 3 Goettingen Journal of International Law 129 (2011): 129-154. Web. 10 Oct. 2014.

“Raise Hope for Congo.” Raise Hope for Congo. Enough Project, n.d. Web. 18 Oct. 2014.

“Text of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.” GovTrack.us. Web. 14 Nov. 2014.

Turner, Thomas. Congo. Malden, Mass.: Polity, 2013. Print.

UNSC Resolution 1856 (22 December 2008) S/RES/1856.

UNSC Resolution 2021 (29 November 2011) S/RES/2021.

UNSC Resolution 2147 (28 March 2014) S/RES/2147.

26 The Social Justice Review

"Around the time my family was battling an onset of ants in our kitchen, I was reading articles about the struggles of the Syrian refugees and the inhumane treatment with which they have been faced in multiple countries. I was also reading a collection of poems by Norman Dubie, who often juxtaposes human and animal death to highlight the grotesqueness and cruelty of violence and the loss of human dignity. Something clicked in my mind, and I wrote ‘Ant Season’. ” Constance is a junior majoring in Creative Writing and minoring in Law and Society. She enjoys reading Emily Dickinson and breakdancing, and dreams of becoming a human rights or public interest attorney.

27 The Social Justice Review

Summer in the beach cities means ant season.

With a damp roll of newspaper, my sister flattens the thick band of bodies shining black in the kitchen light, massed infinitesimals crawling from their hole, which caved in from warm July rains, the rains that beat on the house like bullets. I can read the front page of the New York Times through the net of compressed bodies, the stories about refugees fleeing Denmark like a human chain.

Ants funnel into liquid sugar bait, and stagger out stuffedâ&#x20AC;&#x201D; the ones lying on the counter are squirmed with chemicals into perfect triangles, where head and abdomen meet, dotting the iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s of an article about two Syrian children found dead in the October snow.

Their last vision, clouded by acidâ&#x20AC;&#x201D; the heat lamp heaving orange like a dying sun.

They say such small creatures hold only enough room for a single emotion.

Sister sips the smoke of a dying cigarette, wondering between long draws how such tiny bodies could contain such bursting terror, as if everything about the world they knew was coming to an end.

28 The Social Justice Review

GENDER EQUALITY THROUGH

EDUCATION

& POLICY

29 The Social Justice Review

By Rebecca Homan

University of Southern California, 2016

Abstract: This piece looks at how public discourse about women's roles in society has changed historically as a result of structural adjustment programs. Through this lens, education of girls is assessed as a tool for bridging gender inequality and increasing economic parity. Rwanda's enactment of the "National Gender Policy" and implementation of the Ministry of Gender and Family Promotion serve as a case study in how a legal commitment to women's equity impacts society.

30 The Social Justice Review

Within the last few decades, the question of women’s role in society has become a highly deliberated topic. Since WWII, various forms of feminism have sparked discussion about sex and gender and how it affects women and ultimately society as a whole. Women have traditionally been disadvantaged within society—particularly in light of the patriarchy which presents women with little to no political and economic opportunities. In many developing countries, women’s roles have been limited to mothers, housekeepers, and farmers. However, changing societal values have transformed public discourse about women’s role within societies, and particular developing societies. Although women have historically been disadvantaged due to unequal treatment and a lack of access to opportunities, shifts in public discourse, education, and strong institutions have been important tools to empower women and overcome gender inequality.

Two pivotal waves of feminism that have shaped public discourse about women’s role in development are women in development (WID) and gender and development (GAD). The 1970s saw the beginning of a dialogue about women’s roles and was significant because they recognized women’s issues as a hindrance to social equality and development.

The UN declared 1975 “International Women’s Year” and worked to focus on policies that would reduce discrimination against women. The increased effort to include women on the development agenda pushed for modernization for both men and women.

As the world was modernizing and becoming interconnected at an extremely fast rate, it became clear that there was a need for policies and institutions to promote gender equality—especially in developing countries where household chores were the responsibility of women. The “gender and development” era in the 1980s examined how women’s roles were assigned through social construction.

However, despite any economic, political, and educational gains made throughout the 1970s, women in developing countries “were the first to feel the effects of [structural adjustment programs (SAPS)]” that came about in the 1980s (Jaquette & Staudt, 27). The Reagan era of development represented a shift from Carter’s platform based on human rights and humanitarian efforts as the key to development.

Reagan, with the support of the British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, avowed to confirm the United

States’ “strategic power” within the international system. Consequently, the debt crisis that emerged in the 1980s were seen as an opportunity for northern countries and institutions, such as the World Bank and the IMF, to reassert their influence over the poor, and ultimately women in developing countries.

Structural adjustment programs are aimed to cut tariffs, lower barriers to foreign capital, and privatize state enterprises. SAPs proved to have “devastating social consequences,” particularly in Latin American countries where women were taking “marginal jobs” or forced out of the labor force to make room for men. Often times this demotion pushed women down into a lower class only to accept lower standards of living (Jacquette, 27). To ensure that women are not vulnerable to market volatility and economic insecurity, it is important to empower women and give them the necessary tools, such as education and access to institutions, needed to support themselves and their family.

Women have been disadvantaged by not having the same political and economic opportunities as men. With this in mind, solutions to bridge the gender gap should attack the problem early and at the source—lack of quality education for girls. Historically girls have been disadvantaged in regards to education due to traditional values and inadequate educational resources. Ruth Levine’s article “Educating Girls, Unlocking Development” reasons that educating young girls will not only positively impact their future but will also have positive economic and social impacts for society as a whole. Levine explains how educating a girl will positively impact “her lifetime health, labor force participation, and income; her (future) children’s health and nutrition; her community’s and her nation’s productivity” (Levine, 127). Studies in Egypt, Kenya, Mexico, and India have shown a positive correlation between mothers with a “basic education are substantially more likely to educate their children, especially their daughters” proving that education is a cycle (or lack thereof is a cycle) (128).

Educating young girls is crucial to ending gender-based discrimination in the future.

Basic schooling is absolutely crucial for a state’s development. Women make up about half of a state’s population; therefore, it is critical to educate women and men equally. The Global Poverty Project reported that across developing countries, girls’ primary school

31 The Social Justice Review completion increased by 17%, while boys’ completion rate increased by 8%. However, it is important to note that progress has been slower in regions such as sub-Saharan Africa and Southeast Asia. Ultimately, promoting education in these slow-growth areas is one way to promote gender equality in development.

The case of post-genocide Rwanda is one example of a state working to promote gender equality through political participation. After 1994, Rwanda’s social fabric was completely destroyed by the genocide that killed nearly 1 million people in a 100-day period. Although many saw this as an impossible situation, Rwanda saw this period of rebuilding as an opportunity to correct mistakes, such as gender inequality, that previously hindered economic growth in the former patriarchal society.

In an effort to rebrand itself as a developed and cohesive state, post-genocide Rwanda launched a series of new organizations and policies including the National Gender Policy, the Ministry for Gender and Family Promotion, and the Gender Monitoring Office (GMO). Rwanda’s “National Gender Policy” is a comprehensive planning process to create “an environment conducive to the promotion of social security, democratic principles of governance, and an all-inclusive social and economic system that involves effective participation of all social groups within the population” (GMO). Effects of this updated policy can be seen throughout the constitution. One evident progression that this policy has brought has been the promotion of women through increased participation in government. Rwanda currently has the highest rate of women in its parliament—a majority of over 63%.

Although there is a 30% quota as required by the constitution, it is clear that in this new era Rwanda has gone above and beyond.

Furthermore Rwanda has also implemented the Ministry of Gender and Family Promotion, which has been responsible “for coordinating the implementation of national policies and programs for the promotion of the family, of gender and of children’s rights’ protection in order to facilitate their socioeconomic and political integration” (Ministry of Gender and Family Promotion). One tangible change that the ministry promoted was allowing women to inherit property; this was particularly essential women empowerment after the genocide. By identifying gender issues as a setback, Rwanda acknowledged that the root of gender inequality stemmed from

the patriarchal system itself and the its unequal nature. This office is responsible for coordinating and developing Rwanda’s national gender policy in addition to the “strategy for its implementation.” This office has been a significant liaison for networking Rwandan women at a national and international level to continue to provide the tools needed, such as education, to ensure long-term gender advocacy.

Another step that Rwanda has taken to promote has been the implementation of the “Gender Monitoring Office” with the goal of “developing clear performance indicators in line with priority areas to ensure effective monitoring and evaluation of progress” (GMO). This type of monitoring mechanism is crucial for states looking to eliminate any unequal social power relations between genders. Creating a tool to determine if programs are successful and measure progress supports the ultimate goal of supporting and adapting programs to promote gender equality.

By examining the case of Rwanda it is clear that restructuring political and educational institutions to consider and promote gender equality can make a huge difference for women and society as a whole. Ultimately the solution to gender equality in the context of development lies in stronger institutions and legislation. While it is not easy to select and successfully implement a combination of programs and policies to empower women within societies that have historically been patriarchal, it is essential to take a multidimensional approach. Through a combination of methods developing states will no longer just have to follow the “trending” wave of feminism, they can initiate and lead it.

Bibliography “Ministry of Gender and Family Promotion in the Office of the Prime Minister.” Ministry of Gender and Family Promotion in the Office of the Prime Minister. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Nov. 2014.

“Promote Gender Equality and Empower Women.”

United Nations Development Program, n.d. Web. 10 Nov. 2014.

32 The Social Justice Review