Back Next Contents

V

SIP & DISSEMINATION

Spreading the Word

What do we share

with whom do we share

Do they really want change ?

Do they really care ?

Perhaps what works in one setting

is a failure in another .....

Where do we begin .....

Where is the need felt the most ?

Do others have the resources

Could they work with what they have ?

How do we explain to the inspector that we aren’t flouting rules.......

merely trying to run differently our own school .....

It is so easy to forget one’s own initial struggle .....

When we witness another’s endeavours and wonder .....

Why isn’t it happening quickly ?

Patience ..... observation ..... reaching out ..... allowing them their own space to learn and grow .....

these are perhaps our

learnings from sharing.

In the initial years of School Improvement, engrossed in its own exploration and experimentation, the project found little time or inclination to share its early learnings. Besides, the outcomes were as yet hazy. Were we really making an impact? There was a hesitancy about talking about experiences that were as yet new. When the programme had visitors from abroad, the project solicited feedback on its own progress. Even when the Diamond Jubilee teachers visited other schools, they went more as learners than as disseminators of the process of change that was taking place within their own schools. The first foray into sharing took place at the end of the first year of the programme when the two Head-mistresses of the Pre-schools visited a community school at Gadchiroli, Maharashtra. The scenario was familiar - poorly ventilated small classrooms, high student-teacher ratios, a playground without any materials for play. The Pre-school had an examination system. The visitors shared their own experiences and suggested creating an informal classroom arrangement, and doing away with exams and tuition. A salient comment made was that the management should try not to be too critical of its teachers as change needs a lot of adjustment and understanding. Worth sharing However, no further follow up was done, and this exposure did not lead to any specific steps towards dissemination. It began actually

towards the end of Phase I, when occasionally the Principals or Supervisors were invited to other schools to make a presentation or conduct a workshop. Exposure at other workshops and participation in group discussion brought forth an awareness that the Diamond Jubilee teachers did have something to share that was meaningful. The Pre-school head at the girls school was invited by the Indian Association for Pre-school Education as a resource person. This was the first occasion when an organisation had invited a D.J. school member. Meanwhile, the management was also becoming aware that the educational fraternity needed to be informed about the changes within the schools. Towards the end of Phase I the Foundation requested that the programme be viewed in the light of its replicability. As learning became more exciting and accessible both for the implementers and the students, they became confident that some of this experience was worth sharing. The high financial investment in the project and the fact that there would be much to learn from seeing it in operation in a larger educational context , was an important motivation, in fact an obligation, to disseminate. The issue of dissemination became an important one towards the end of Phase I, and the transition between the two phases was an appropriate moment to come to grips with this issue. The questions that arose were : Þ Do we need to disseminate?

Þ If so, what could we disseminate? Þ To whom could we disseminate? Þ How would we disseminate? Þ What would be a good time to start the process? Þ Who would be key people we could use for dissemination? Þ How could this change be managed in the context of different schools? Þ How comfortable were schools with the idea of change in the context of the State Curriculum? Þ Where finance was not available for extra teachers, how would teachers manage the extra work involved in planning such a curriculum? It was recognised that dissemination would gradually become the central challenge for the programme in its Third Phase. Initially dissemination was viewed as encouraging inter-actions between schools through preliminary visits and exchange of materials. By the end of the first year of Phase II, there had been varied exposure through interactions at many levels. The need for a brochure describing the programme was recognised and project members along with AKES,I jointly produced a brochure that was subsequently shared at a symposium conducted by SNDT University, Bombay on “Innovative Educational Approaches to Felt Needs”. The Aga Khan Foundation was also keen to see larger numbers accessing and benefiting from the programme. A workshop was planned. Here the story of the School Improvement Programme and its coming of age were told to the

outside world. Groups were invited to D. J. Schools to see the programme in action. Reactions were plenty and positive: “For those who work in the field of teacher training and attempt school improvement, academic inputs together with sincerity make for such phenomenal changes”. “A delightfully insightful experience.” “Self confidence among the teachers and their commitment to hear, share and care for children are the biggest assets.” “Hard work shows and also demonstrates the potential that there is to do great work”. Such comments along with the media attention that followed brought forth a host of requests for help. Visitors swamped the schools. The project implementers got invited to read papers and participate in discussions. Initially the dissemination took place in a slightly haphazard manner. Visitors arrived at different times, with different agendas, different needs. With each group the programme’s components had to be presented again and again. Not every group returned. Quite clearly the project did not have the infrastructure to sustain this flood of enquiries pouring in from all directions. Apart from lack of personnel there were no readily available documents that could be handed out to visitors. Also, how could one encapsulate the experience of seven years in maybe an hour or two? How much could a brochure illustrate, explain and communicate the whirls of change ?

Breaking Free

Krishnaveni was to conduct a workshop on `Project work at the Primary’ at a school seeking help from the School Improvement Programme. Armed with chart paper, plenty of stationery, an overhead projector and screen, a lot of teaching aids as well as photographs of project work conducted at Diamond Jubilee Schools, we sailed up to the school premises in a taxi clutching the overhead projector and its screen held diagonally across within the cab.

he ground was swelling with boys marching up and down practising for the 15th August Independence Day celebrations. We trooped in to look for the supervisor of the primary. "The trains are late" we were told, "the supervisor has not as yet come". The secondary supervisor was most helpful -- although she did not know about this workshop. This is a normal feature at many schools of one section not knowing the programmes of the other.

We were taken upstairs to the audio visual room, a large spacious room full of furniture. Blue metal chairs were arranged in rows. The room was lined with bulletin boards covered with pictures. The thumb tacks holding them in place were rusted. Up on a stage were two tables with six elegant chairs arranged in a semi-circle. It was obvious the room was used for special occasions.

Krishna stopped and looked around “How can I have a workshop where I want people to participate? It’s all so impersonal” she said under her breath. The participants sat in rows facing the stage.

“Can we break up into groups and remove these rows please?” asked Krishna. The idea was clearly new. In this teaching/learning situation too the teachers were ingrained to play the same role their students played ------ one they played years ago when they were themselves students. That there could be a teacher who did not want to stand on the dais and talk down was hard to understand. As the session progressed and there was a loosening up they spoke more freely and confidently. While the ingredients of what makes a good project did get imbibed, a glimmer of understanding of how learning can be participative and fun came about within the group.

Looking back we examined our selves and our expectations. It wasn’t all that long ago that we were in a similar situation. We had found it hard initially to break with traditional habits, speak freely in a group, listen to each other. Yet continued exposure had helped us break free. So much so that five years down the line we were struggling to understand the struggle of others being pushed into a similar situation.

Structured Dialogue The visitors were persons who were either beginning new schools or planning changes in existing institutions. The need was felt to have a plan for dissemination wherein some financial commitment would be made by the interested institutions so that there was no strain on our internal budget and the costs of such a programme were at least met. After the workshop the Ministry of Education invited to attend a meeting to review and extend help in the context of Primary Education in the State of Maharashtra. A District Primary Education Programme (DPEP) funded by the World Bank invited a number of non-government organisations in Maharashtra with a view to beginning a dialogue. The district of Nanded in Maharashtra was offered to our programme to develop a proposal for change. Project implementers felt that prior to submitting a proposal, a needs assessment of the situation would be required. A core group of teachers and programme personnel made a visit where they interacted with the Block Development Officer, teachers, parents, even volunteer members of the National Education Drive, to gain an idea of the requirements of the district. The subsequent proposal written was broad based. It involved making a series of interventions that had components of training at all levels rather than providing a ready model for change - this was in keeping with

our conviction that the process of change had to be through participation, communication and training at all levels over a long term period rather than the delivery of a package. Being resource intensive, the proposal proved to be too expensive from the point of view of the government. However, the exchange provided our Primary teachers exposure to a rural context. Moreover, their abilities to talk with conviction about their philosophy was developing rapidly. Meanwhile a number of schools had requested help to institute similar programmes. While some schools sought in-depth intervention, others sought help in specific areas. The issues in these schools have been large student numbers, the gap between management and teachers perception, a very rigorous idea of following the state curriculum, students with poor language skills, the organisational structures being hierarchical. Sometimes there were too many people making decisions without informing each other. The difficulties that our programme members face in these schools are in getting the decisions makers and implementers together on one platform. This could stem from the gulf between management and the staff, where the former may view themselves as being in a position where they already know. The dissemination schools thus all have some commonalties. While there

is a will to do something concrete, there isn’t the know-how. Largely the reasons for their wanting change stemmed from a real concern for the student. The pre-primary teachers at Anjuman-e-Islam for instance were concerned that many of their children cried in school, throughout the year. There was also a frustration about the exam system - perhaps the media attention “education” has received in the recent years has played a part in this change. Universally, teachers seem to operate under a tremendous pressure, and their fears are related to student performance and whether their children are learning. When the change process shifts focus from rote learning to activity based learning these anxieties seem to grow. Tailor-made solutions Often schools want change but don’t really know their own needs. Also the levels of training differ from school to school. The dissemination strategy then has to be tailor made to suit individual schools. One school may lack the systems to make the change process smooth, although they may have a total openness to change. Yet others may be very effectively run, all teachers trained - but they may be totally unwilling to stay back an extra hour as an investment in their own growth. The nature of inputs that we as disseminators give would thus depend upon the prevailing environment. A combination of personal and professional growth workshops has been a strategy adopted in these schools.

As more and more of these workshops are being given, one thing is becoming clear. The Diamond Jubilee teachers’ own experience base is so rich they seem to know unerringly just what specific inputs to give in different situations. Ideas seem to take root much faster in these schools than they did at D. J. itself. Their own confident demeanour does a lot to help convince managements that these ideas are workable. The other reality is the fact that some of these teachers are out-growing their own classrooms, beginning to gain a broader perspective. Within our programme, we need to examine these aspirations and provide a platform to meet them. Staff who felt their aspirations were not met, did leave. However, they carried away with them positive ideas for change. In their new jobs they have been attempting to bring in the ideas they picked up at Diamond Jubilee. “After I left D.J., I started thinking about how I should help teachers develop the Curriculum for their children,” reflects Ketayun Bhavnagri, ex-Principal of D.J. Girls School with seven years of School Improvement Programme experience behind her. “I stopped myself from giving a ready-to-implement curriculum. Instead, I tried to make them realise that the needs of our children are much more than what we give them.” Interactions have also increased within the network. Visits to the Andhra Pradesh schools in South India that are also managed by AKES,I have provided new directions. There has been a healthy exchange of ideas as

After I left........

My recollections and special notes of various workshops and experiences that I received during my tenure at D.J. Schools, has indeed helped me to reach out to other schools and teachers.

I have this deep concern for a change in the Early Childhood Care and Education field and so I have been visiting schools, to help them realise the need to rechanelise their present system. At all sessions, at all times without fail, the teachers and Principals responded so spontaneously, that I thought the change may come in immediately. But of course that never happened a little bit of change here and there was the only result. I realised that constant and many visits would be needed to get them started.

Creativity workshops with the Aga Khan Religious Groups were very fruitful. Since the concept of informal training has been implemented in their night school curriculum they responded with greater and better enthusiasm. Sometimes the groups would exceed 70 to 80 teachers at a time, but the response was wonderful and I knew they would reach out to their children in a similar way.

I’m still on my own slow mission of trying to help schools to be creative in their present formal settings.

...... Nafisa Contractor ex- pre-school Headmistress D. J. Girls

another programme of school improvement has been in progress concurrently in these schools as well. Areas of collaboration, invitation to attend workshops etc. have provided greater exposure to both programmes, to their mutual benefit. At another level, the project adopted a municipal school with a view to extending its outreach into the State run schools. The experience was

entirely different. Apathy, cynicism, lack of motivation seemed to be major issues “I attempted generating a discussion on pedagogy but their response was one of harping on constraints. I even attempted co- teaching in a class, and making teaching aids to draw teachers to change their methodology. It has been an uphill task,” says the Dissemination Consultant. The

WHAT DID I TAKE FROM D.J. ?

-- Hira Rupani ,an ex head coordinator of the Primary section reflects

Everything I learnt at D.J. I have used in my new school. I have started co-ordination sessions at the Primary level. We’ve had a number of workshops for professional growth by Resource people from outside as well as from within .

We have brought about changes in the classrooms as well. Children’s work is beginning to be valued by all teachers.

We have a decisive Management that is open to education so we have been able to bring in changes. We have been, in fact, disseminating SIP on our own, independent of D.J.

learning from the experience has been that the idea of using workshops and meetings as a means of changing methodology does not work in the municipal school context. The other thrust area for dissemination has been a Teacher Apprenticeship Programme conc-eived as a tentative training prog-ramme that could contribute towards the design of a full-fledged course which would be based on hands on experience combined with theoretical inputs. The trainees selected were Ismailis from Ismailia Helping Society. While half the

number dropped out, working with those who remained proved to be an enriching experience. The major learning has been in the choice of candidates for an ongoing apprenticeship programme. Trainees aspiring to study further seldom stay to complete their training. Perhaps the best candidates prove to be the ones who want to enter the teaching profession but would like some exposure to it prior to undertaking training. Schools have begun approaching us with a request for training for the forthcoming year.

“We have become an example to other schools”

Interviews with Rehana Salamat, Principal, and Zakiya Madekar, in-charge, Primary section, Anjuman-e-Islam School --- Excerpts

Why did you decide to Network with D.J. Schools ?

Rehana : What made me go to SIP.... I found the children weren’t doing things. I felt some thing was wrong with us. I heard about SIP and came to take a look. I was impressed with the confidence of the children and the teachers’ attitudes. I found the teachers could discuss clearly what they were doing. SIP is something I could relate to. I felt it was something constructive.

Which are the areas where you feel SIP has been constructive in helping your school ?

Rehana : There is a subtle awareness in our teachers. They plan more about what they want to do, they are no longer so traditional. One contribution has been group discussions and joint decisions. As a group we have grown closer to the management. Our management has become more interested in what is happening in the classrooms. We have become an example to other schools in our own group. Perhaps the most constructive change has been in the way our classrooms look. We bought new furniture after a lot of dialogue. Another important contribution of SIP has been the help rendered in setting up a PTA. We did not have one and now the parents are so involved. They have even offered to pay the salary of the counsellor when we decided to set up that post.

What has been SIP’s contribution to academics

Zakiya : Our Pre-school has changed. Processes in the Primary are slow but it will take time. In the Secondary section also I have used some ideas of SIP. I’ve included oral work there to help with language development, the emphasis is less on written work. Of course parents complain. We are able to explain to them.

For me the key areas of gain have been

i. Improvement in children’s academic performance.

ii. Their attempts to speak in English.

iii. Increased parental involvement.

iv. Reduction in syllabus taught.

What about the teachers’ own personal growth ?

Rehana : We do want more such workshops. Our way of looking at the school has changed. We are open to ideas. I find the D.J. teachers good resource persons because they are at the same level as our teachers and give workable ideas. Our teachers are able to share their experiences.

What role do you think SIP can play in the future ?

Rehana : For the future I would like to have more workshops on classroom methodology and creativity. I want our children to read more and more. So far I have really felt that Networking is meaningful.

Zakiya : I hope we can have more combined residential workshops in the future so that all our teachers get an exposure to new ideas.

At a conference organised in December ‘96 to create a platform for networking and dissemination among institutions the following questions about School Development were raised :

¶ The staff of a school alone cannot work on school development. The willingness of the management is vital. How is it to be achieved ?

¶ How should teachers be motivated ?

¶ Could we network with teacher training institutions to really work towards bringing about awareness and attitudinal change amongst would be teachers ?

¶ How should reflective practise be inculcated into any school system.?

¶ How can parental support be enlisted for school development ?

¶ Does shool development mean development of adults of today i.e. the teachers or the development of the adults of tomorrow i.e. the children ?

¶ Does it imply adapting to the existing environment or changing it ?

With dissemination becoming more widespread and project personnel having to make presentations outside Bombay, the need was felt to encapsulate the programme for these audiences. A film titled `You Call this a Ladder’, capturing the essence of the programme evocatively records the effects of the change that we have together wrought.

Our varied experiences with the programme as well as its dissemination have illustrated that dissemination has to be continuous and sustained. A one off workshop or two does not really help. Ultimately, the onus of change rests with the individual schools and not with the disseminating agency.

What are the key learnings from the disseminating process? Ö Unless the management is involved, no change initiative works. Ö Skill based inputs should come first as change in the work place leaves teachers feeling ill equipped to deal with it. This could be followed by personal growth sessions. There is a need for the disseminator to get involved in different parts of teachers’ working lives: the fun as well as difficult parts. Where does SIP go from here in Phase III when dissemination is to become the core of the programme? Thus far SIP has been a programme of the Aga Khan Education Services, India for its two schools in Bombay. The processes that have been instituted in these schools have been dynamic and hence attractive to other

institutions. There has been a growing awareness that the benefits of this process must accrue to increasing numbers of the community children accessing education in other schools. The Third Phase intends working on the one hand with the network schools in the states of Gujarat and Andhra Pradesh as well as other schools. The act of dissemination itself has been an act of learning. The experiences from these future forays would indubitably increase our own knowledge base in dimensions hitherto unexplored. Be it physical structures, financial issues, resource allocation, teacher training, teacher commitment, children, or parental pressures each issue would require a different mix of approaches; in that lies our learning.

Back Next Contents