District Institutes of Education and Training - Teacher Education

More documents

Recommendations

Info

District Institutes of Education and Training: A Comparative Study in Three Indian States The need to ‘explain’ places restrictions on the SCERT/equivalent, and this is passed downwards. So for example, staff in Udaipur, Dhar and Indore DIETs felt the SCERT/ equivalent was micro-managing them in a way that was inconsistent with their status and needs: We were asked, you tell us 3 problems at SCERT level. The first thing I told them is autonomy, give us autonomy. There shouldn’t be any interference with the work we would like to do. If we do wrong things that’s different, but if I am taking a school and I want to make it the best school and that’s my project, there shouldn’t be anyone interfering in that. Now the thing is, you have to take permission from there, and you never get permission from there. We have to do what they say – how can that work? (MP/DHA/TT03 21.6.99). The perception at the DIET level of a State-level requirement to take permission is contested at the State level, however: It is not possible for us to include all kinds of programmes, it is not possible for us to write each and every thing in the guidelines so they have a Programme Advisory Committee. They can, seeing their needs, double the numbers of any training programme or conduct a different training programme. They are free in this, even in developing learning material or curriculum, they are free (RAJ/SIERT Director Oct 99). While there are constraints to that freedom that are not acknowledged in this remark, this gap between the freedom to innovate and the perception that this freedom is not available persists also in relations between the NCERT at the national level and the SCERTs. An NCERT official reported: In our country people are always looking for some kind of model either in the bank of material or in the form of scheduling or some kind of lecture. They want some models should be given to them…. we are preparing new curriculum now. It is almost ready. It is going to be announced within 15 days. CD Aha? Now as soon as it is announced, again a pressure will come on us that we should prepare a model, how to translate this curriculum, in the form of books, in the form of teaching-learning process, in the form of evaluation, techniques, in the form of question papers up to that level. Because the State will bring a pressure. CD The State will bring a pressure on you [NCERT]? Yes – that, you give us a model. Then our team will see how this model can be adapted in their own area…. It is shame if we take this matter up ourselves. I don’t know why it is happening. I don’t know. But the country is so weak, when we have discussed in the past also, that if in our book if the arrangement is like this, why you have not changed this arrangement, keeping in view your own circumstances, they feel you seem to be of much wider experience, and let us DFID 115
District Institutes of Education and Training: A Comparative Study in Three Indian States make use of your experience. That could be lack of confidence, that could be lack of resources, that could be lack of confidence, I don’t know, but it is not advisable. But somehow it is happening (January 2000). The question of autonomy, then emerges not only as a structural issue, where there are clearly tensions between operating procedures and espoused aims for DIETs; but also as an issue of perception that is also a powerful force in promoting or preventing decentralisation. DIETs in the project sample were at different stages in their capacity and will to accept the accountability and responsibility that decentralisation demands. Where that capacity is well developed, as in Surat DIET, there was little argument about autonomy as the Principal simply exercised it. He had the full support of the GCERT in this, as his DIET could translate GCERT policy ideas into action, providing good practices which were publicised across the State. At the State level in Gujarat, autonomy was also supported by the conscious official effort made to flatten hierarchies and be approachable, which was not the case in either Rajasthan or Madhya Pradesh. Interviews with Surat DIET Principal and the GCERT Director also conveyed a strong sense that both these institutions were there to support teachers. This was less in evidence in the other two States. 6.2.3 Structural changes to promote autonomy In 2000, autonomy at the DIET level in Madhya Pradesh was precipitated by comprehensive institutional reform, underpinned by a rationale that ‘people and not bureaucracies should drive primary education and literacy’ (RGSM 1999: 7). Responsibilities for District level planning and budgeting were devolved to the District level, where three convergent offices were created, with the DIET firmly attached to one of them; and responsibility for recruitment to DIET is also devolved. Further detail on this is given in Annex 4. Neither Rajasthan nor Gujarat had initiated swingeing reforms to promote decentralisation and people’s participation in this way, although both of them made significant changes that promised to impact positively on DIETs. In Rajasthan, DIETs were transferred into the Panchayati Raj management of elementary education which brings them under the same umbrella as elementary schools. This should begin to mark out the DIET as a special posting within elementary education rather than a transferable post within the secondary sector, although the SIERT Director believed that the pool for recruitment to the DIET was still likely to be within the secondary sector (RAJ/SIERT Director 22.2.01). It may also lead to closer relations between relevant Education Department 116 DFID
Page 1 and 2:
DFID’s headquarters are located a
Page 3 and 4:
District Institutes of Education an
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88: District Institutes of Education an
Page 137: District Institutes of Education an
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257:
show all

District Institutes of Education and Training - Teacher Education

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?