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 officials and would thus advise them of details of a forthcoming course which it expected them to fill. These arrangements run the risk of being compromised if the Education Department does not pay attention to detail in the deputation of teachers. It was common to find duplication, where the same teacher attends one programme several times; and gaps, where some teachers do not attend training at all. If a teacher attends the same training twice and brings this to the DIET’s attention, s/he is ‘released’ and the training place goes unfilled. Clerk It often happens that a training is given and the teacher has already had that training. So if they have taken it before we let them go back. RM M Why does it happen that the same teacher comes again? Clerk Often it’s because the BO [Block Officer] makes a mistake (MP/IND clerk 9.6.00). Duplication may also be the result of a school principal’s actions: Clerk Or it could be that BO sends the order to the principal to send this many teachers from your school, ‘send two teachers’, like that. Sometimes principals don’t pay attention and send the same one again. If there are four teachers and the principal favours two, they may give him some reasons why they don’t want to go … then he will just send the old ones. Now those two will come here and will tell us that their problem is they have already taken training and we relieve them. RM Does that often happen? Clerk It hardly happens otherwise… a small percentage in every programme (MP/IND clerk 9.6.00). Since DIETs are essentially concerned with teacher development, not having the power to depute teachers for training is an operational aspect that constrains the emergence of DIETs’ sense of direct responsibility for teacher enrichment. Current arrangements involve duplication and wastage of resources, contribute to DIET inefficiency and are also costly in terms of the negative impact they have on DIET morale and public image. Institutional reform in Madhya Pradesh is likely to improve internal efficiency significantly in all these respects. The opportunity cost of in-service training While administrative procedures are beyond the DIET’s control, perceptions of training quality play a part in whether the District Education office deputes teachers. Training courses are free at the point of delivery, so the issue to be weighed up is the potential longer term gain to the teacher, against the immediate loss of time for the students. Since in-service programmes usually last from three to ten days this can represent a significant loss of teacher contact time. There are DFID 119
District Institutes of Education and Training: A Comparative Study in Three Indian States no cover arrangements for teachers to be released, and cover is done in an ad hoc way at the school level. If the dominant impression in the Education Department is that programmes are not significantly impacting on teachers’ practices, a District Education Officer weighing up the potential costs of training against the potential for added value may be reluctant to be release a teacher if students suffer as a result. Although in-service education has become widespread, no matching system has evolved to provide cover for teachers who attend training. Udaipur DIET had a poor relationship with the District Education office. Across our sample, it experienced the most problems with teacher attendance at its training programmes, with an average during the project period of only 45-50% occupancy of in-service places. It also acknowledged that it was failing to embrace teachers living far away from the DIET. The Programme Advisory Committee Statutory provision for convergence of the DIET and Education Department at the District level was made in the stipulation of a Committee ‘for sorting out field level problems in operationalising the DIET’ (MHRD 1989: 48), of which the District Education Officer/ equivalent is a member. A well-functioning Programme Advisory Committee would achieve convergence between the various offices in elementary education to draw on all available local knowledge to develop programmes to respond to local demand, and shape those suggested by the State level. Relationships with this committee were cited as problematic in both Rajasthan DIETs; Indore and Surat DIETs had good relations with the necessary officials; while in Santrampur and Dhar the DPEP diverted issues through its alternative structures. In Masuda DIET the role of the Programme Advisory Committee was well understood but there was no evidence of any activity. Convergence was achieved through the Lok Jumbish procedures (discussed below) so this committee was not particularly necessary. Udaipur DIET had constituted a Programme Advisory Committee but it was not fulfilling the envisaged function of support. The researcher at Udaipur DIET summed up her observations as follows The DEO office and the DIET are supposed to co-ordinate with each other. The DEO needs to attend the PAC meeting of which he is a member but he always seems to send his deputy to these meetings. According to the DIET staff, the DEOs and SDIs need to play a positive role. They feel these inspecting bodies could identify the training needs from the field and bring it to the DIET’s notice through the Committee. I feel if taken sincerely these bodies could also become a link for the DIET to carry out a follow up of its programmes. But unfortunately this sounds good on paper only as there is a 120 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:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92: District Institutes of Education an
Page 141: District Institutes of Education an
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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?