District Institutes of Education and Training - Teacher Education

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