District Institutes of Education and Training - Teacher Education

District Institutes of Education and Training: A Comparative Study in Three Indian States
Box 0.1: The District Primary Education Programme
The District Primary Education Programme (DPEP) was launched in 1994
with twin purposes:
1 to operationalise decentralized planning and management
2 to accelerate the pace of universalisation of primary education in the country.
Consciously the districts where female literacy was lower than the national
average and where the total literacy campaign had generated enough demand
for the universalisation of elementary education were selected for the
implementation of the programme. DPEP aims to reduce gender and social
disparities that prevail in the existing system. Its specific objectives are:
• To reduce differences in enrolment, dropout and learning achievement
among gender and social groups [sic] to less than five percent;
• To reduce overall primary dropout rate for all students to less than 10
percent;
• To raise average achievement levels by at least 25 percent over measured
baseline levels and ensuring achievement of basic literacy and numeracy
competencies and a minimum of 40 percent achievement levels in other
competencies by all primary school children;
• To provide, according to national norms, access for all children to primary
education classes (I-V), i.e. primary schooling wherever possible, or its
equivalent non-formal education.
[Source: DPEP Calling, Volume VI, No. 11, December 2000, Government of India,
New Delhi http: www. arunmehta.freeyellow.com/bose1.htm downloaded 15.4.03]
0.6 About this report
The ‘data’ generated in this project take the form of words rather than numbers,
and this report has been written to allow the views and voices of teachers, their
educators, educational managers and members of the research team to be heard.
The narrative develops accounts that are based on observations and interview, and
excerpts from both are reproduced throughout. They are referenced in brackets,
giving the State, District, designation and date. These data were generated over
two years, and it would be invidious to attempt to enumerate the number of
interviews with teacher educators and teachers held over that period: project
researchers were in constant contact and conversation with both, and immersed
themselves thoroughly in the DIETs’ activities during the whole time.
The report contains ten chapters. The first six reflect the ‘situation analysis’ strand
although some of the data were generated through the professional development
activities; chapters 7-9 report on professional development with DIET staff,
DFID 7