Jeannette Caroline Nduwamariya
Georgina Veitch.png "Debbie Santalesa")
Debbie SantalesaRobyn Baron’s Updates
Week 3 assignment reflections.... and week 4 tips and hints!
Hi everyone -
I have been poking around and commenting on several of your week 3 assignments and I just wanted to share a few things -
First, a hearty congratulations to everybody! You all did fabulous jobs! Many of you highlighted veery different things and, taken as a whole, have definitely convened an ideal RGA plan :)
Second, for those of you who still need to comment on others' assignments in community, please do so on assignments that don't have comments yet. There are several from Thurs/Fri last week.
Third, I really like how many of you identified the need to have gender balanced teams, to put equity measures in place to ensure the women (or men) on those teams can participate safely, to include training on GBV referral pathways and how to address disclosures as part of general training, to adjust and adapt language both linguistically and culturally, to include tools and questions for both (!) sectoral reasons as well as (!) "bang for your buck" general gender reasons (aka asking about decision making orr mobility then applies across ALL sectors, not just WASH or Protection), and so many other things. Truly well done.
Finally, for those of you already well into the week 4 assignment, some of your colleagues have already posted an excellent example to look at in the event you're feeling a bit lost about where to start, or where to go. I encourage you to go take a look. It's great!
Well done again, everyone! Looking forward to seeing the next round of inputs!
Best
Robyn
Hi Robyn
Wondering if you were able to review my Assignment #4 and provide feedback based on our Thursday tutorial call - i am not seeing anything but not sure if I am navigating the system correctly - i think from reading others I have some questions
1 - we are suppose to summarize the information as I am concerned that it is just repeating what was in the MSN report - - how much do we include ?
thanks
debbie
Hi Debbie - I apologize tremendously for taking so long to respond to this!! I didn't see it come up in my notifications. I mentioned on this week's tutorial that I was having trouble finding everyone's assignment's I said I would review. I am looking for yours again but, is there any chance you can tag me in it? So that way it pops up as a notification? It will be easier for me to find so I can share my feedback. Alternately, feel free to message me directly with it?
As for your question - No, you are not supposed to summarize. The idea is to draw out and highlight key MSNA data and to already offer interpretations of what it can mean - especially when triangulated with the FGD/qualitative data. RGA readers do not usually see the MSNA data and, even when they do, they need someone to make sense of what the data means from a gender lens. So that is the key of this section. I.e. there are reports that say X% of women identified this as a priority while Y% of men identified that. However, a better RGA statement would be X% of women identified this as a priority while Y% identified that. FGD information highlights that this might be because of Z, G or F situation happening in Kirkuk city. This is a significant departure from Z situation prior to IDPs entry into Kirkuk and indicates that women are likely experiencing H situation. Obviously, you don't necessarily have access to all of the info needed to complete the analysis to that level, but my point is that a better construction of RGA data/reports is always to explore 1) what the data means and 2) why it is happening. Many reports do concentrate on just the data, without the interpretation, which is what we are trying to address here. Does that help?