Download the complete report - Unicef

framework, it became a part of the system and was integrated thus, and thereafter
factored into their work plan and budget. This was done in a phased manner, taking
3-3.5 years to move across the state.
Peer assessments and school visits: State field teams undertook peer assessment for
each other. This worked well allowing them to share and learn from one another. School
visits happened for three months and monthly meetings were done at the cluster level
where teachers shared/analysed findings of the process and went back to baseline to
see what they achieved. Decision making happened at monthly meetings. They did not
go back to Director or state MoIS. Everything happened at block and cluster level.
Ownership and enthusiasm: Teachers and cluster resource coordinators felt involved
since they were part of something they were creating. This was embedded in the
national and state planning frameworks with proper allocation of budgets and issuance
of directives/government orders.
Outputs: A range of standards and tools were developed and tested. These included
Standards for Teacher Performance/Trainer Performance/HMs, CRCs, BRCs, DIETs
and SCERTs. Also state-specific versions of standards, tools (for assessing current
performance against standards), Peer State Reviews, Desk Reviews of Teacher
Training and inputs towards improved planning for quality improvement would need to
be developed.
Including in annual SSA work plan: The programme was implemented in the planning
process of the annual SSA work plan. Performance standards were reviewed, baseline
was done, enabling conditions provided and then rolled out in schools. Preparations
were done in regular schools at block and cluster levels. Resource groups were created
at state, block and district level and implementation of the process was done through
in-service teacher training that provided 20 days budget for training in a year.
Teachers’ standards divided into various levels of difficulties: These included
cognitive dimension to understand background of children and their academics levels;
social dimension to create warm and attractive emotional environment; physical
dimension to encourage children to maintain the school and keep their class tidy;
organisational dimension to ensure teacher arrives on time and stays till closing time.
Establishing partnerships: State Core Teams (SSA + SCERT); State Field Teams to
undertake Peer Assessment; National Core Team (involving NCERT & MHRD); MHRD
supervision and TSG support; National Coordinator and UNICEF support at different levels.
Next Steps
The initiative would need to be further embedded into the education system at the
state level. It would need involvement of Teacher Associations; refining of standards to
make it more contextual; capacity building of teachers, head teachers, CRCs & BRCs
linked to Adepts; strong Code of Conduct for teachers and administrators to create
greater ownership and definitive statements like, “I will not let any child be abused in
my school”. Some of the inherent systemic limitations would need to be overcome, like
there being too much focus on documentation; short-term duration of teachers; and
lack of consistent leadership.
40
Consultation on Supportive Supervision to Strengthen
Capacity of Frontline Workers and Service Providers