school and community collaboration - unesdoc...

School and community collaboration for educational change

Seminar on school and community

collaboration for educational change

Report of an H E P seminar

Cipanas, Indonesia 29 M a y to 6 June 1991

by

Sheldon F. Shaeffer

International Institute for Educational Planning (established by U N E S C O )

The views and opinions expressed in this volume are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of U N E S C O or of the IffiP. The designations employed and the presentation of material throughout this document do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of U N E S C O or IffiP concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or its authorities, or concerning its frontiers or boundaries.

The publication costs of this report have been covered through a grant-in-aid offered by U N E S C O and by voluntary contributions m a d e by several M e m b e r States of U N E S C O , the list of which will be found on the last page of this document.

This volume has been typeset using H E P ' s computer facilities and has been printed in IffiP's printshop.

International Institute for Educational Planning 7-9 rae Eugène-Delacroix, 75116 Paris

© U N E S C O August 1991

Contents Page

Introduction 1

Part I Report of the seminar 5

Part П Abstracts of selected case studies presented at the seminar 26

Active learning and professional support project (ALPS) — Indonesia 27

School clusters ~ Thailand 32

The parent-learning support system (PLSS) — Philippines 34

Experiences in school and community collaboration ~ Indonesia 38

Community participation in the planning and management

of educational resources ( C O P L A N E R ) - Indonesia 40

Facilitation assistance program on education (FAPE) — Bangladesh 43

M I N D S A C R O S S -- Uganda 46

Promoting primary and elementary education (PROPEL) — India 49

National policies regarding parent and community participation

Malaysia 52

Vietnam 54

Part Ш Presentations of training institutions and international agencies 59

Center for personnel education and training (Pusdiklat) ~ Indonesia 60

Institut Aminuddin Baki — Malaysia 64

Institute for the Development of Educational Administrators (IDEA) - Thailand 69 National Institute for Educational Planning and Administration (NIEPA) --

SEAMEOINNOTECH --

PROAP/UNESCO

Asian Cultural Centre for UNESCO

Annexes 91

A . Opening speech by Prof Dr Harsja W . Bachtiar, Department of Education and Culture, Indonesia 92

B . Address to participants by H . E . Dr Isidro D . Cariño, Secretary of Education, Culture and Sports, Philippines 95

C . Address to participants by Dr U d o K . Bude,

German Foundation for International Development 98

D . Agenda 101

E . List of participants 104

India

Philippines

76

81

84

89

Introduction

F r o m 29 M a y - 6 June 1991, a seminar and workshop were held in Cipanas,

Indonesia, on "collaborating for educational change: the participation of government,

schools, N G O s , and the community in the improvement of basic education". These

meetings were hosted by the Research and Development Centre of Indonesia's Ministry

of Education and Culture and organized by the International Institute for Educational

Planning ( IŒP) with the co-operation of the G e r m a n Foundation for International

Development ( D S E ) . Additional support for the meetings was provided by the Swedish

International Development Authority (SIDA) and the Canadian International

Development Agency ( C I D A ) .

The general purpose of the workshop and seminar was to assist IIEP and

participating countries and agencies to further develop mechanisms by which

collaboration a m o n g the various actors in basic education could be strengthened.

Specifically, the objectives were to:

1. describe and analyze educational innovations in Asia which are based on

collaboration within and across schools, and a m o n g schools, non-government

organizations, and communities, and which focus on issues of resource allocation,

school policy and governance, and educational content and processes;

2. identify the factors within schools, communities, and educational administrations

(e.g., organizational norms, resources, management structures and procedures,

individual skills and attitudes) which both hinder and encourage such

collaboration; and

3. develop training guidelines and materials which can help to:

(a) enhance the capacity of government officials and school personnel to

collaborate more effectively with each other, with parents and the

community, and with non-government organizations in the improvement

of primary schooling; and

(b) lead to the creation or reinforcement of mechanisms and procedures which

encourage greater collaboration in the development of school- and

community-based innovations.

1

Seminar on school and community collaboration for educational change

S o m e 45 participants were invited for the seminar which began this activity

(29 M a y - 1 June). These included policy-makers, planners, practitioners, trainers, and

donor agency staff from several countries in South and South-east Asia and authors of

studies of educational innovations (or heads of the institutions in which they are being

developed) in Bangladesh, India, Thailand, Indonesia, and the Philippines [Annex E] .

Opening addresses were delivered by Dr Harsja Bachtiar, the Chairman of the Ministry of

Education and Culture's Research and Development Board; M r Isidro Cariño, Secretary

of the Department of Education, Culture, and Sports in the Philippines; and D r U d o Bude

of the German Foundation for International Development. The conceptual framework for

the seminar was then given by D r Sheldon Shaeffer of 1 Ш Р and is contained in a publication, " A framework for collaborating for educational change" (1ШР Research and Studies Program Monograph N o . 3, 1991).

The subsequent program [see Annex C] included the presentation and discussion

of the case studies, reports from participants on national policies regarding parent and

community participation in education, a description of the А Р Е Г О program of Unesco,

the viewing of several videos on innovative collaborative projects, and a visit to a nearby

site of an Indonesian innovation in the development of active learning and professional

support to teachers (the so-called C B S A / S P P or A L P S project).

The cases presented during the seminar included the following:

• "The Parent Learning Support System: A School and H o m e / C o m m u n i t y

Collaboration for Raising Pupil Achievement" (Philippines), by Isidro Cariño and

M o n a Dumlao Valisno.

• "Qualitative Improvement of Primary Schools Through Professional Support for

Their Teachers" (Indonesia), by Djam'an Satori.

• "Collaboration for Educational Change: Improvement of Basic Education through

M I N D S A C R O S S : A School Literacy Project in Uganda", by Katherine N a m u d d u .

• " A Case Study of Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee's Facilitation

Assistance Program on Education", by A b u Hamid Latif.

• "Improving Basic Education through Collaboration and Co-operation: School

Clusters in Thailand", by Christopher Wheeler, Jaithip Chuaratanaphong, and

Pragob Kunarak.

2

Introduction

• "Research Report on Community Participation in Education at the Primary School

in Indonesia", by Moegiadi, Jiyono, Haris Mudjiman, Sutarno, Iskandar Agung,

Karmidah, Tedjawati, and Philip Suprastowo.

• "Collaboration for Educational Change" (a study of the P R O P E L project in India),

by Chitra Naik.

• Also distributed at the seminar was a draft of a paper on current decentralization

activities in the United States entitled " A Review and Analysis of Recent Efforts

in Restructuring Educational Governance: Major Issues and Implications for

Educational Policy", by George Papagiannis, Peter Easton, and J. T h o m a s O w e n s .

T h e workshop which ended the meeting (3-6 June) was limited to 15 specialists in

the training of planners and managers in education and selected donor agency staff and

researchers. They heard reports of relevant training activities in the region and then

worked in small groups to outline the kinds of structures and mechanisms which could be

introduced to encourage greater collaboration; the skills and knowledge required to

implement such activities; and the training programs and materials directed at officials at

various levels of education ministries which would be required to develop these skills.

Before the seminar was closed by D r Harsja Bachtiar, the participants discussed

several activities related to the theme of the meeting which they intended to implement on

their return. These included the development of training courses and modules for

teachers and ministry officials, a revision of regulations concerning the roles and

functions parent-teacher associations, and the design of training programs to implement

n e w regulations concerning school clusters.

In addition to this report, a monograph containing further description of the

individual case studies and a synthesis of their findings will be published by П Е Р .

3

Parti

'Report oftfu, seminar


I

ЧЯг background

N o w more than ever, the quality of education provided to the youth of the world must be improved. The challenges of the day ~ in health and the environment, in peace and democracy, in economic development — are different in kind rather than in degree from in the past. Increasing poverty and environmental degradation, the permanence of old diseases and the scourge of new ones, the continuing presence of natural disasters and war, the instabilities derived from the promise of democracy and the reality of renewed nationalisms - all of these conditions must be met by education systems, formal and non-formal, able to teach people not only h o w to cope with and adapt to change, but also h o w to stimulate and control it. M a n y countries in sub-Saharan Africa as well as in Asia and Latin America face increasing problems of environmental pollution and ill-health. S o m e , for example, with literally hundreds of thousands of H I V positive adults and infants, face an immense challenge of educating people in quite different ways and for quite different purposes ~ requiring the participation of all sectors and levels of society, in complementary fashion, with a greater emphasis than ever before not only on additions of knowledge, but also on profound changes in attitudes and behaviour.

Given these problems, there has been a certain conjuncture of interests and events

in education over the last year that are particularly propitious. Most notably, there has

been a renewed and growing interest in basic education, a m o n g nations and donors, in the

face of increasing problems of development. This interest led to the "expanded vision" of

the Jomtien declaration endorsed by most nations and m a n y donor agencies and

non-government organizations of the world. Although there m a y be differing views of

the utility of the Jomtien process and eventual outcomes of its conclusions, the final

"vision" is an important one. It consists of five points: the universalizing of educational

access and the promotion of educational equity, a focus on learning acquisition, the

broadening of the means and scope of basic education, the enhancing of the environment

for learning, and the strengthening of partnerships in the planning and implementation of

education.

The first two of these are what could be called the "hard" side of Jomtien — neatly quantifiable and measurable outcomes to which m u c h of the world, donors and governments alike, will turn their attention. The final three are equally important and

6

Report of the seminar

must not be neglected. The last — the strengthening of partnerships — is what has

motivated the n e w IffiP program on "collaborating for educational change" and thus was

the basis for this seminar.

T o quote from the Declaration of Jomtien:

" N e w and revitalized partnerships at all levels will be necessary:

partnerships among all sub-sectors and forms of education, recognizing the

special role of teachers and that of administrators and other educational personnel;

partnerships between education and other government departments, including

planning, finance, labour, communications, and other social sectors; partnerships

between government and non-governmental organizations, the private sector,

local communities, religious groups, and families .... Genuine partnerships

contribute to the planning, implementation, managing and evaluating of basic

education programs. W h e n w e speak of "an expanded vision and a renewed

commitment", partnerships are at the heart of it." [Page 7]

But w h y are such partnerships necessarily part of the possible solution to the

problems of education? First, there is a crisis of economics and of management in the

world today ~ in both the North and the South ~ a difficulty of implementing centrally

organized innovations and reforms. There is not enough m o n e y available and not enough

control able to be exercized over the daily workings of the average school at the very

bottom of a bureaucracy to guarantee that the reforms planned and organized at the

central level can achieve their anticipated goals at the level of the school. There is thus

the need to expand out to other actors, both for financial and material resources and for

assistance in planning and implementing educational change.

Second is a crisis of relevance, appropriateness, and sustainability of the reform of

innovation. Even if reforms designed in a central ministry could be implemented in the

average school ~ financially and bureaucratically ~ they might not be relevant to local

needs and thus be unable either to stimulate local demand or to be sustained. This has led

to the increasing realization of the need to decentralize and devolve authority down to

other parts (and "partners") of the system. Such a process is more and more being

apparent around the world. A n e w Indonesian law on education, for example, devotes a

major section to "community participation"; the trend to "re-structuring" education in

North America, where in some cases state departments of education have been abolished,

to be replaced by boards advisory to fully autonomous school districts, is growing apace;

7


and the m a n y different kinds of local school cluster models tried out around the world ~ where decisions on curriculum, upgrading, materials, and school schedules are m a d e ~ are more frequently found as part of routine system administration.

The goal of the seminar held in Indonesia in mid-1991 ~ and of the 1 Ш Р

program which lies behind it ~ was to determine h o w to encourage greater collaboration

a m o n g the partners involved in education in order to enhance and improve its quality: its

relevance, the quality of its teaching and learning process, and thus the demand for and

access to its services. The assumptions behind the seminar included the following:

(i) that government is not omnipotent, that it does not alone have the resources, expertise, mechanisms, and knowledge to improve education as it n o w needs to be improved;

(ii) that such improvement can in part be brought about through more, more active,

and more participatory and collaborative partnerships a m o n g the various actors in

education;

(iii) that at one time such partnerships did, in fact, occur in m a n y places as a result of the natural interest of families and communities in the education (not necessarily the schooling) of the young — so that education was a part of the community and not a separate institution imposed by the state — but that in m a n y cases this natural interest has been damaged or even destroyed;

(iv) that such interest, and the resulting collaboration and participation in education,

needs to be regained and revived in order to enhance its quality;

(v) that this in turn requires: (a) the devolution of some authority to lower levels of the system and their partners, and (b) a shared sense of ownership, responsibility, and accountability for education among the government, school personnel, and the community;

(vi) that such devolution and sharing will not just happen by themselves but rather

require both n e w skills, attitudes, and behaviours ~ a n e w mindset — a m o n g the

actors in education, and n e w norms, structures, and mechanisms within

educational institutions that permit and facilitate collaboration and participation;

and

8


(vii) that some of these can be trained in people and some can be developed,

systematized and ultimately institutionalized in bureaucracies.

The question for the seminar was what this n e w mindset, these n e w norms, and these n e w structures and mechanisms are and h o w they might be best be transmitted to the systems and managers of education. This question led first to a conceptual background paper prepared at 1 Ш Р . 1 This paper does several things:

• it describes the possible range of activity which can be defined as "participation";

• it provides a definition of desired participation (as involvement in real decision-making at every stage — identification of problems, the study of feasibility, planning, implementation, and evaluation), a definition certainly not achievable in every context and every time;

• it describes the "typical" characteristics of major actors in education —

government, schools, parents and community, and non-government organizations;

• its describes several areas in education where there is greater potential for collaboration: the contribution and management of resources, school policy and governance, school operations, and the instructional program, both the content and the teaching-learning process;

• it discusses the factors and conditions which encourage collaboration at the

macro- and micro-levels: institutional norms; resources; knowledge, attitudes,

skills, and behaviours; structures and procedures; and

• it concludes with the call for the need to re-train people, re-structure

organizations, develop n e w approaches, define n e w roles of the actors at various

levels in order to seek a best hybrid or mix of responsibilities and powers, and to

change institutions, rather than merely to build or strengthen their capacity.

1. A framework for collaborating for educational change. IIEP research and studies program, increasing and improving the quality of basic education, monograph n \ 3, IffiP/UNESCO 1991.

9


This conceptual framework led to the writing of several case studies of

educational innovations in the region characterized by collaboration. M a n y others might

have been chosen, in the region and beyond, but the ones selected were deemed to

represent a variety of types and/or to have proven relatively sustainable or at least

successful beyond the pilot stage.

The cases are fascinating on several levels: (a) as descriptions of contexts (e.g.,

the administrative inefficiency of Bangladesh and the economic disasters of Uganda; the

centralized powers of Indonesia and the strong state governments of India); (b) as

analyses of processes of innovation; and (c) as fodder for quite profound education debate

(e.g., whether the ultimate goal of reform is process от product, higher pupil performance

or the building of capacity for individual and institutional change).

The examples available are quite varied: (1) those which describe quite elaborate

school cluster projects in Thailand and Indonesia; (2) those which analyze innovations

involving partnerships beyond the school ~ between government and an N G O in

Bangladesh, between schools and parents in the Philippines and in Indonesia; and (3)

those which describe considerably more complicated and more integrated collaboration

a m o n g several actors: the large multi-sectorial, multi-partner projects of P R O P E L in

India, C O P L A N E R in Indonesia, and M I N D S A C R O S S in Uganda.

II

ЧЯг discussion

At the opening of the seminar, a number of challenges were issued to the

participants concerning the underlying issues at stake. These included the following:

1. If the language of decentralization and devolution is n o w being used in a

particular country, what really is meant by it? H o w serious is the commitment to

it, at various levels of the system, and what are its limits?

10


2. W h o is really at fault for the general lack of community involvement in schools?

Is it the lack of awareness of parents - as government officials and school

personnel often claim — or is it the mystification and the over-professionalization

of education by professionals which, purposefully or not, keeps the community

out of the school?

3. T o what extent are there contradictions between rhetoric and reality concerning

participation? For example, the n e w basic law on education in Indonesia n o w

calls for greater community participation in schools, but the old regulations

concerning parent associations prohibit these associations from becoming

involved with anything "technically educational".

4. T o what extent should schools — in the words of the Philippines case study — be

"open to the gaze, support, and appropriate intervention" of the community? H o w

aggressive and intrusive should such intervention be?

5. T o what extent is or should effective school management explicitly be defined in

teacher training programs, principal upgrading, and promotion mechanisms to

include the mobilizing of partnerships?

6. T o what extent is it economically, practically, and politically feasible to permit a

larger role to be played by N G O s — formal or informal in nature — in education?

7. T o what extent do the innovations and changes described in the case studies

represent merely the fine-tuning of routine school operations (some more

complicated than others), the refinement of "possible and everyday occurrences in

the life of schools, teachers, and pupils" [Namuddu:13] and the development of

feasible, do-able, and workable ideas and actions? O r are these innovations

actually quite radical and often quite profound — towards something which m a n y

reformers, planners, and donors (and perhaps the Jomtien conference) only pay lip

service to: (a) the sharing of authority, responsibility, and accountability across

more partners; (b) the reforming and governing of schools through an opening of

the school to the community, more "bottom-up" planning, and n e w roles for

parents and communities; and (c) the planning and implementing of activities in

more participatory and collaborative ways, suitable to a particular context, in

order to improve the quality of basic education?

11


The discussion of these questions in plenary session and in small groups led to a

considerable enrichment of the conceptual background for the seminar. Several issues

arose in this regard:

1) The first concerned the range of possible participation in education, from the

mere use of a service to full participation in decision-making at every stage of the

development, implementation and evaluation of the educational program. It was

clear from the case studies and comments that the collaboration possible in

various contexts (national as well as local) would be located at different parts of

the range. In Thailand, for example, the nature of such collaboration, and the

kinds of structures which might encourage it, would differ across urban, suburban,

and rural contexts.

2) The cases and discussions resulted in a clearer-delineation of why community

involvement could be useful: in short, as both a "means" to better education and as

an "end" in itself. A s a means, participation was considered as a w a y of providing

more resources, facilities, and perhaps even more places to the education system;

of helping the school to become more relevant to local needs and conditions; of

making it more effective and efficient, through community inputs and monitoring

of both pupil and teacher attendance; and of assisting the community to see value

in the school ~ an institution often seen as an alien institution — and therefore to

accept it.

But in addition to participation and collaboration becoming a means to

these ends, they also could be an "end" as well, leading; (a) at the individual level

to changes in knowledge, attitudes, and skills; greater awareness, self-confidence,

self-reliance, and efficacy; and better practice; (b) at the community level, to

greater control over information and technologies, the formation of alliances and

networks, more effective management of local resources, and the development

and strengthening of local organizations; and (c) at the social level, to lower

development costs, greater equity of benefits, and more utilization, continuity,

maintenance, and sustainability of development programs.

3) Yet serious constraints to participation were also frankly discussed. These

included: the absolute lack of resources in some communities; social

heterogeneity and conflict; the passivity, poverty, and illiteracy of m a n y

communities; the resistance or inability of institutions to change; organizational

12


and administrative obstacles; political and cultural factors; suspicion between

governments and N G O s ; the lack of skills in collaboration, of all of the potential

partners; and the difficulty of sustaining participatory processes.

Serious risks of participation were discussed as well: the additional expense,

raised expectations, and potential frustration of participatory processes; the risk of

failure and the decline in quality of services; the power given to elites able to

manipulate others and to increase the inequities of development; the emphasis on

narrow community self-interest and short-sighted benefits; the risk of tokenism —

that only marginal change will be achieved and that attempts to change society

more fundamentally will fail; threats to the political order; the difficulty of

evaluating and measuring the success of participatory process; and the inability to

standardize or generalize the process of participatory development.

A n additional risk was the possibility that excessive private involvement in

education — especially from non-sectarian, for-profit organizations such as m a n y

found in the Philippines — might skew the nature of education provided, lead to

the polarization of educational provision, and, if the government becomes too

dependent on private provision of places, result in pressure on the government to

rescue private enterprises at risk of failure.

Another issue concerned the extent to which there is a governmental obligation to

provide basic education to its citizens. Participants m a d e it clear that there should

be no relaxation in attempts to convince government that it is its primary

responsibility to provide a good quality of education to their people.

Governments should be continually pressured to provide adequate resources and

facilities for basic education. Only w h e n weaknesses exist, as they inevitably do,

should the community c o m e in as a supplementary force — but with a clear

understanding that this should not absolve the government of its ultimate

responsibility for basic education. Thus, the nature, extent, and limitations of

community involvement should be very clear.

Another issue concerned the extent to which formal regulations were needed to

ensure or encourage community participation, or whether informal relationships

were not the better model. Clearly, the answer will be context-specific; some

nations quite easily and informally permit and encourage innovation, even at the

school level, while in others, where this is less easy, more formal instructions m a y

be required.

13


7) A major focus on the seminar was on the factors and conditions which facilitate

collaboration. This will be discussed in detail below, but one factor was of

particular general interest and importance: the openness of the school and the

education system to the "gaze, support, and appropriate intervention" of the

community. Three questions were asked in this regard: (a) H o w "open" and

transparent can or should the school be to the community? (b) H o w m u c h sense of

ownership, responsibility, and even accountability should the community have in

regard to basic education? (c) T o what extent should the school be held

accountable by the community for the quality of education provided?

These questions led to the discussion of several related issues:

(a) O n e potential benefit of opening the school to the community is to

establish more clearly and directly the link between good education and

greater parental and community demand and support for education. This

link is not a particularly obvious one. In theory, more conscientious

teachers, better teaching, more textbooks, etc., lead to more satisfied

pupils, a lower drop-out rate, and a higher rate of promotion and

continuation. These, in turn, translate into greater parental support for the

school. But an even more direct link might be established to the extent

that the school itself, and its activities and results, are "open to the gaze" of

the community. This includes both the obvious — P T A s , parents' days, the

observation of classes by parents (as done in the Parent Learning Support

Scheme in the Philippines), etc. - and the less concrete (e.g., policy and

practice that m a k e parents feel welcome and comfortable in the school).

Thus, h o w visible and concrete an innovation is ~ even more than its

impact as mediated through pupils — m a y determine parental interest in,

and support for, the school.

(b) A n "open" school is often a necessity in private systems, as in the variety

of private schools examined for the seminar in Indonesia. W h e r e a market

for such schools exists, the school must be visible to the parents w h o pay a

premium price for their children's education. If the school is criticized as

a result of such visibility, funding m a y suffer and the sponsoring

foundation must act to improve the quality of the service provided.

14


But openness is not an unmixed blessing. O n e participant suggested that if

the community is to be at all involved in planning the objectives and

evaluating the activities of education, and thus to "gaze" at the school, they

have to k n o w what they are gazing at. For example, the community might

wish to look only at examination results ~ their particular interest — and so

must be educated to look beyond such outcomes and see others which

should equally receive their attention.

A n "open" system can also lead to manipulation within highly

politicized contexts (such as Sri Lanka), and to domination of school

affairs by a local elite. In some countries, for example, local councils are

meant regularly to inspect schools; this can disturb teachers and principals

and also create considerable havoc in communities marked by ethnic or

class polarization.

In general, however, the participants felt that open schools and systems

represent an important means by which communities can gain a sense of

ownership and responsibility for the school. This, coupled with more

active involvement in school affairs, can help m a k e parents, in partnership

with the school, feel accountable for education and therefore can

encourage them to press for the best possible quality of schooling. There

is a risk in this, also, in that the government m a y be able to blame poor

results and poor quality on the other partners in the exercise. The more

actors involved, in other words, the more blame can be distributed, and the

less the government itself can be held accountable.

This leads to perhaps the most difficult question: the extent to which

communities, almost as pressure groups, should be able to apply sanctions,

formal or informal, on "defaulting" schools and teachers — for low

attendance, abuse of pupils, financial mis-expenditures, poor examination

results, etc. Participants felt this should be encouraged, but with

considerable caution. They felt the need for such accountability up and

d o w n the system, but only with a clear definition of responsibilities which

could be the basis for such accountability and clear procedures concerning

h o w it would be exercized. They also agreed, however, that it is just as

important, or perhaps even more important, to find a w a y for governments

to apply the sanctions usually already available (but often unused) in order

15


to guarantee the quality of teaching and management for which large

amounts of money and large percentages of educational budgets are

expended.

Ill

с1Яе results

A major part of the second half of the meeting — the more specialized workshop

of trainers and researchers ~ focused on the factors and conditions which help to

encourage collaboration in education. Considered critical at the most general level were

two important norms: that of the "open" system and school (discussed above), and that of

comprehension of, and commitment to, the principle of greater participation throughout

the system. W h a t is necessary, in other words, especially in the strongly centralized and

hierarchical systems mostly represented at the seminar, was strong commitment to the

principle that good school management and good teaching, by definition, have to include

collaboration and participation. Thus, teacher training colleges must train teachers in

h o w to mobilize and work with the community, curriculum development centers must

develop guidelines for h o w to involve communities in the development of local curricula,

and national staff colleges must teach the same message — to be sensitive to community

collaboration and participation — to officials at all echelons of the system.

A . Facilitating conditions at the school and community level

W h e n seminar participants summarized the more concrete and specific structures

and procedures useful in encouraging greater collaboration, the knowledge and attitudes

required to implement successfully these structures and procedures, and kinds of training

necessary to put this all into place, greatest attention was placed at the school and

community level ~ where an enduring reform must take place.

STRUCTURES

Three types or levels of structures were identified: (1) within and across schools,

(2) between the school and parents, and (3) more generally between the school(s) and the

community and local government.

16


1. Within and across schools

The various experiences with school clusters in Indonesia and Thailand are

examples of within and across school collaboration rather than of "partnerships" with the

community, though the community, especially in Thailand (e.g., through the temple),

does play some role in supporting the cluster programs. Cluster offices in Thailand, with

full-time staff to assist in cluster activities, and the various school discussion groups,

teachers' clubs, headmasters' clubs, and teachers' centers in Indonesia are the venues for

collaboration. Others mentioned included regular staff meetings in schools,

subject-specific panels or committees, and local branches of teachers' unions or

associations.

2. Between the school and parents

Parent associations (the only kind of parent group allowed in most of Indonesia)

and parent-teacher associations (found in most other countries represented in the seminar)

are the most c o m m o n venue for collaboration between the school and the parents of its

pupils. These m a y be formed around individual classes, grades, and/or the entire school

and m a y , depending on their mandate, have the power of a school management

committee or a school board. Parent groups m a y also form more specifically into alumni

organizations or even private foundations in support of the school.

3. Beyond the PTA

M a n y participants felt it necessary to go "beyond the P T A " in the sense of seeing

education as an integrated, location-specific whole, involving all sectors of the

community in some shared responsibility, and accountability, for education. There was

thus some concern that the seminar's apparent emphasis on mechanisms and structures

related to the formal school might reduce interest in the relationship between the primary

school and more general, out-of-school, community education. Should these not, in the

best of worlds, be more genuinely integrated? Is not the Village Education Committee of

B R A C and P R O P E L a better model to pursue than the P T A ? Should w e not already be

moving to a more inclusive body of individuals and organizations, such as the

Community Forum for Educational Development in the C O P L A N E R project in

Indonesia, which is meant to include representatives of various kinds and levels of

school, local government, N G O s , religious groups, community associations, and

government offices?

17


But moving beyond the P T A and its focus on parental participation brings one to a

considerably more complex world of potential collaboration. Here appear links with

schools and education activities at other levels (secondary schools, literacy programs);

with N G O s and religious bodies (the temple, church, or mosque); with local councils or

development committees and autonomous or council-appointed local education

committees; and with officers and agencies of other sectors such as health and

agriculture.

Here one enters into the world of "community schools" where the school becomes

a genuine community facility, a centre where the community can learn and get something

of quite direct benefit from the school. This could simply be education and training

programs for out-of-school youth and adults, but it could go further. S o m e primary

schools in Thailand, for example, offer information and counselling services, lunch

programs, a co-operative store, and insurance. Whatever the nature of services offered,

such schools are usually linked in some w a y with local education committees or councils

and need to work with them to reach shared goals, responsibilities, resources, and

complementarities of purpose. Thus, for example, the school staff might advise and assist

the council with education and training activities in exchange for council and community

assistance in maintaining the school, monitoring pupil attendance, supervising h o m e

study, and focusing special effort on children with learning difficulties.

P R O C E D U R E S

W h e n the seminar moved on to the mechanisms and procedures required to

implement these various structures effectively, several were discussed, ranging from the

general to the quite specific. These included the following:

1. clear, but flexible guidelines and frameworks for collaboration and participation;

2. open dialogue, frank feedback, and clear channels of communication a m o n g the

participants (perhaps via meetings and short announcements of school activities);

3. regularity in meetings of the various school/community groups and clarity in

reporting on their decisions;

4. for each of the participants, clearly defined (and written) rights; tasks,

responsibilities, and functions; possibilities and limitations, resources, and

accountability procedures;

18


5. the establishment of assessment and promotion procedures and criteria to reward

principals and teachers for skill in community mobilization and collaboration;

6. mechanisms for collaboration in tasks such as surveys of needs, setting of goals

and priorities, mobilizing and managing resources, selecting and monitoring

teachers, setting timetables and calendars, developing curricula, assisting in

teaching and tutoring, helping in guaranteeing pupil enrolment and continuation,

and monitoring of school performance and achievement of goals;

7. innovations in providing teachers from within marginal communities where

non-local teachers are difficult to send and retain (such as admitting

underqualified applicants from these communities into teaching and then

providing remedial training as required).

KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES AND SKILLS

T h e discussion then focused on the kinds of knowledge, attitudes, and skills that

would be required of school personnel (especially of principals) in order to ensure the

effective operation of these structures and procedures and thus to facilitate greater

collaboration within and across schools and with communities. Most generally, this

included:

1. knowledge of the rationale for greater participation, its potential advantages and

its constraints and risks;

2. knowledge of local conditions ~ economic, social, cultural — which influence

educational demand and achievement, of local social and political relationships,

and of the local education system and its problems;

3. "research" skills: the ability to carry out simple surveys and interviews to collect

and analyze such information;

4. attitudes which encourage an "open", transparent, collégial environment in the

school and open channels of communication between the school and the

community;

19


5. school management skills — the ability to:

(a) encourage shared, more participatory decision-making, in regard to issues

such as setting school goals, defining problems, designing solutions,

managing resources, evaluating success, etc.;

(b) define clearly the responsibilities and functions of each participant;

(c) plan, organize, conduct, and report on meetings;

(d) manage and account for government and community resources provided to

the school; and

(e) encourage teachers and the community to assist in developing and

adapting curricula relevant to the local environment.

6. supervisory and leadership skills: the ability to develop more collaborative skills

in other school personnel and within the community;

7. h u m a n relations skills: the ability to gain the trust of parents and other partners in

the community; to communicate, collaborate, and build consensus with them; and

to animate them and encourage their involvement in the school; and

8. resource mobilization skills, and strategic and political skills: the ability to

mobilize the resources (financial and otherwise) available from the various

interest groups and power centres in the community.

T R A I N I N G

It was clear that these kinds of attitudes and skills could not be taught in the

traditional style of teacher upgrading and principal training. T h e training itself would

need to be more participatory, with the trainees playing a more active role in identifying

needs, discussing and solving problems, and evaluating results. Several specific

suggestions were m a d e in this regard:

1. simulation games designed to develop collaborative skills in tasks such as setting

goals and designing alternative means of reaching these goals;

2. role plays of meetings (e.g., P T A meetings) designed to gain a consensus, resolve

conflicts, divide responsibility for solving a particular problem, and encourage

collaboration;

20


3. case studies of collaborative experiences in order to examine what was achieved

or not achieved and w h y ;

4 . practical exercises, including preparing meeting agendas, proposals for

school-community action, and minutes; keeping records and accounts of

school-community activities; and encouraging group dynamics (e.g., stimulating

active participation in group activities through task assignments, discussions, and

reporting the results of group work);

5. training in interviewing techniques, questionnaire design, and the analysis and

interpretation of resulting data;

6. actual experience in collaborative projects, and perhaps in the observation of

successful collaborative activities; and

7 . guidebooks, handbooks, manuals, etc., providing guidelines on specific topics

(e.g., h o w to carry out village surveys, h o w to conduct meetings).

Such training could obviously benefit from a range of materials (videos, games,

case studies) and activities (simulations, role-playing, brainstorming, parent-teacher

dialogues) considerably different from that found in most upgrading courses, and

therefore requiring special expertise and careful preparation and testing.

B . At the sub-district and district levels

Discussion concerning the facilitation of collaboration at a level above the school

~ a m o n g supervisors, inspectors, education office staff, even principals of secondary

schools — was not particularly rewarding. This was partly because the school-level and

the national-level were of considerably greater interest, but also because m a n y of the

points seemed redundant to those raised concerning the school. There were some useful

insights produced, however.

21


STRUCTURES AND PROCEDURES

1. Because this level of management is very often responsible for the administration

of school clusters, it could be especially useful in clarifying cluster

responsibilities, pushing them to be more active, and facilitating collaboration

within clusters and between the clusters and the community. A n d given the range

of schools it often has responsibility for, it can also serve a useful function in

helping to exchange information about collaborative activities across schools.

2. Given this level's links to a wider community beyond that of a particular school, it

m a y also help in identifying a wider range of partners for schools and in

identifying and lobbying for a wider range of resources. It might be especially

critical in the development of village (or sub-district, or district) education

committees, councils or forums.

3. This level is also very often a crucial mediator and channel of communication

between the top and the bottom of the system. T o the extent that it performs this

role well, passing information both up and d o w n the system, it can assist in

helping to clarify regulations about, and provide information about actual

experiences with, community involvement in schools.

4. This level also very often has the authority to select, place, and promote teachers

and principals, and perhaps to provide other special incentives as well; it can

encourage greater collaboration in education by using it as a criterion for such

personnel decisions.

KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, AND SKILLS

M a n y of these would be the same as those required at the school level: skills in

open communication, leadership, motivation, group dynamics, problem-solving, etc.

W h a t is probably n e w here is the need to be able to work with a wider range of agencies

and actors, at somewhat higher levels of the bureaucracy.

22


T R A I N I N G

The training programs required would also be similar: modules and guidelines,

case studies and role plays, with perhaps more substantive content in reading materials,

more self-study, and more use of structured discussions and field trips.

С At the provincial and national levels

At the provincial and national levels of the system, the needs and proposed

activities are quite different from those at other levels. The planners, managers,

administrators, and policy-makers at these more central levels can be encouraged to

implement two kinds of activities related to the facilitation of greater collaboration for

educational change: (1) the development of structures and procedures to encourage such

collaboration at their o w n level, and (2) the development of policies and regulations to

encourage it at the school level.

1. At the national and provincial levels, as at lower levels, structures and procedures

can be developed which facilitate collaboration among the various actors in educational

development. These include national education councils, advisory boards or

commissions, education-for-all committees, etc., which bring together various parts of the

education establishment, representatives of other development sectors, and members of

non-government organizations. Systematic contact with the last m a y require some kind

of co-ordinating unit for N G O activities in the ministry of education in order to encourage

N G O participation and seek ways of identifying appropriate representation from the N G O

community. More specific multi-sectorial consultative groups or task forces might be

formed on particular educational issues, and policy seminars might be organized to

examine the nature of participation in education. Such forums as these might also lead to

the more informal discussion of problems and policies in education ~ such as conflicts

between ministries responsible for various aspects of basic education and the greater

involvement of non-government organizations and other community-level associations in

education.

2 . Offices at these levels can also establish policies, laws, regulations, guidelines,

and procedures for encouraging greater collaboration at the school level, within and

across schools and with the community. These can relate to the responsibilities and

functions of parent-teacher associations, school management committees, and/or village

education committees; to the implementation of school clusters; to the training of school

23


and education office staff in collaborative skills; to procedures for involving the

community in curriculum development activities; and to the use of collaborative activities

as criteria for the assessment and promotion of school personnel.

The development of these kinds of structures and procedures can be encouraged

less through the explicit training of personnel at the provincial and national levels, and

more through their sensitization or orientation to the rationale for, potential of, and

constraints to greater participation in educational development. Several methods might

be useful in this regard: well-chosen case studies concerning the role of collaboration in

solving educational problems; the dissemination of information about successful

experiences elsewhere in the world; the implementation of policy seminars on this issue;

and the development of high-level task forces and pilot projects using more participatory

and collaborative approaches.

This summary of the potential structures and processes by which collaboration

within and across schools, and between the school and the community, can be

encouraged, and the skills and knowledge required to do so leads to a very important

further question: h o w can these structures and procedures, these skills and knowledge,

and the longer-term change which would sustain them, be institutionalized into

contemporary bureaucracies? This is the m u c h larger question of h o w to alter

bureaucracies in general: h o w to m a k e them more willing to adapt and adopt some n e w

forms of work behaviour — more professional and less bureaucratic, more open and

permeable to n e w ideas, less rigid and more participatory in their work, and more

supportive of bottom-up planning.

Several ideas were raised in this regard: the possible intervention of creative

high-level administrators committed to change; the staggered, large-scale training of staff,

followed by some reinforcement through specific projects in which n e w skills and

attitudes can be tried out; a support system of sorts to continue to encourage and help

those newly trained in performing their tasks differently; and the establishment of a

"think tank" — an autonomous, innovative commission of sorts under the Minister,

charged with exploring creative ways to resolve problems in the bureaucracy.

In summary, by the end of the seminar and workshop, the original framework on

which they had been planned had been considerably enriched — both in the understanding

of the processes of participation and collaboration and in the "menu" of practical ways to

enhance these processes. Participants had been reinforced in their belief that

collaboration and partnerships, à la Jomtien, could lead — under certain conditions - to

24


more effective education, greater equity of such education, greater demand for and

acceptability of education, more relevant education, and more resources for education.

There were structures and mechanisms of a wide range which could be established to

assist in this effort - an effort m a d e easier by the extent to which there were clear,

systematic outlines of the functions, goals, and responsibilities of the various

collaborating actors and clear accountability mechanisms up, d o w n , and across the

system. There were also n e w kinds of knowledge and skills about collaboration and in

regard to shared decision-making, needs analysis, budgeting and planning, etc., which

could be developed, as well as very practical skills in things such as h o w to hold

meetings. A n d there were suggestions about training materials and methods which

themselves are more participatory in nature, specific manuals to assist the newly trained

in carrying out their work, and methods to sensitize higher levels of a bureaucracy.

T h e challenge left for participants was to return to their individual countries and

try to do something "different" — e.g., to create forums or centers for discussion, n e w or

revised curricula for training teachers or managers, and/or n e w regulations for P T A s or

village education committees — and to constantly remind colleagues that community

participation in education, with all of its constraints and occasional risks, cannot be

forgotten in attempts to achieve and sustain improvement in the quality of basic

education.

25

Part II

Abstracts of

selectedcase studies -presented at the seminar

Selected case studies presented at the seminar

Active learning and professional support project ( A L P S )

Indonesia

By Dr Djam'an Satori and Mr Tangyong

The Active Learning and Professional Support Project ( A L P S ) was initiated to

resolve certain problems evident in Indonesian primary education which included:

• inadequate school administration and supervision systems;

• lack of co-ordination and synchronization among educational personnel;

• an unsatisfactory teaching-learning process where "chalk-talk" methods were used

which did not facilitate interaction among children;

• lack of understanding among parents and the community about their responsibility in

contributing to the improvement of educational quality; and

• inappropriate in-service training which was often theoretical rather than practical,

covered too m a n y topics in a short time, and trained too m a n y teachers at one time.

It is based upon a horizontal cluster system at the public primary school level — a system

which was devised as a vehicle to ensure that efforts to improve education, including models

for in-service training and professional support, and teaching-learning processes developed

at the Ministry for introduction in schools, would be implemented in a structure which

would facilitate success.

In the Cianjur sub-district of West Java, where the project was first developed,

primary schools are divided into ten clusters. The number of schools per cluster varies, and

the size of the cluster depends upon the number of supervisors assigned. Each cluster has a

nuclear school, the others being satellites. The nuclear school is provided the best facilities

and teachers, and becomes recognized for the provision of good quality education. The head

teachers of this school receive in-service training to prepare them to share experiences with,

and give leadership to, all heads and teachers in the cluster. Teachers meet once monthly on

average to discuss and share experiences, and supervisors and heads also meet regularly to

learn from each other.

27


Implementation structure and procedures

W a y s of improving the quality of instruction through professional support to primary

school teachers at the local level were explored through A L P S , focusing on the provision of

a locally-based support system for in-service teacher training, and the promotion of active

learning methods in the classrooms and among students to expand their role in improving the

quality of their o w n education.

A locally-based support system for teacher in-service education development

Through the locally-based support system, programs of action are organized at the

sub-district level to encourage local initiatives and the active involvement of education

personnel, with the hope that similar programs of this type will become a regular feature of

the corporate lives of all teachers.

The structure of the support system constitutes a series of components or groups of

educational actors which inter-relate easily and concentrate their attention and activities on

understanding and improving the teaching-learning process. These include school-based

discussions, teachers' clubs, principals' clubs, teachers' centers and supervisors' clubs. O f

greatest interest are teachers' clubs which bring together teachers and principals from

neighbouring schools. Meetings are held at a mutually convenient time and place, and

provide forums for communication between teachers and principals focusing on improving

professional ability, solving problems, spreading "new ideas", acting as agents to bring about

change; and promoting good relations.

The Teachers' Centers provide in-service training for local teachers using the

interactive approach in preference to the didactic methods of previous training programs,

and act as resource centers for student teachers and members of the teaching profession. The

training is activity-based; teachers are encouraged to devise, develop and produce materials

to form the bases of discussions, and problem-solving techniques are used to reflect the

teaching-learning processes expected in the classroom.

Active learning

Through co-operation with the community, and through n e w methods and

approaches to teaching, class activities introduce co-operation into the teaching-learning

process, thus facilitating learning. Such techniques include:

28


• opportunities for problem-solving based on real observations, and

• using the environment as a resource for learning, e.g.:

visiting the local market, shops, government offices, etc.; studying local history, village government; interviewing formal and informal village leaders; preparing a village m a p ; and participating in community programs or services (sanitation, clean/healthy water, etc.).

Communi ty co-operation can entail the provision of resources and materials available in the

locality; financial support; and the assistance of resource persons in school activities or

administration.

The essence of the A L P S approach is the element of appreciation for all individuals

and their efforts, and work satisfaction is the key to success. Travel expenses to meetings

are covered for teachers, but no special monetary incentives are provided through the

project; instead, these are promotion-related and teachers gain credit points for involvement

and participation.

Educational and institutional gains

The A L P S Project expanded its operations in 1985, despite some hesitation that the

Cianjur model might not be directly transferable to other districts. Following evaluation of

it's operations in 1987, further dissemination took place, and the model presently operates in

seven provinces which are expected to function as beacons for future dissemination.

Several positive outcomes have become evident in the educational process since

1980. These include:

• Greater co-operation among educational personnel (teachers, principals, supervisors,

and other staff) with regard to improving the quality of instruction.

• Increased support from parents and the local community, since over time parents

have c o m e to realize that this n e w approach is of benefit to their children.

• The active-learning approach has brought change to the learning environment, the

learning process and learning outcomes through changing pupils' attitudes and

learning outcomes as pupils become more active and creative.

• Creativity among teachers is n o w recognized as an important skill.

• The project has influenced curriculum development — the revised primary school

curriculum uses the A L P S approach.

29


• Textbook production has increased; during the period 1987-90, particularly, m a n y

textbooks using the active learning approach were published.

• Teachers' handbooks have been prepared for several subject areas to assist teachers

in achieving the classroom objectives set by the project.

• School principals have improved their management and educational leadership

practices, most noticeably with regard to:

monitoring the work of teachers and advising them; providing resources and support for teachers; identifying models for practice; and co-ordinating professional work.

• Relations formerly of a bureaucratic nature have become professional, and even

collégial.

• There have been positive changes in the work and attitudes of all those w h o

participated. Although achievement scores have not been extensively researched, the

sixth grade national examination results were analyzed with promising results in

science, mathematics, social studies and languages.

• The illuminative model of evaluation focusing on educational processes shows

significant changes in the interactions. School environments vary, with learning

being undertaken in positive ways.

The n e w approach has become institutionalized over time so that status differences

which were initially prominent among schools within the clusters are no longer clear, and

discourse has become easier.

Factors which facilitated implementation of the project, and obstacles encountered

A n important factor in the achievement of the basic objectives was the clarity and

explicitness of the project aims and expected outcomes as they were communicated to the

educational actors and the community. Local leadership was provided in a supportive

environment. Discussions in which teachers, principals and supervisors actively participated

focused systematically on the voicing of ideas and the methodical application of these ideas

to the problems pinpointed for resolution.

Through over a decade of operation, the innovation has been constantly internalized

and has undergone long-term reinforcement. The m o m e n t u m has been maintained through

the provision of training programs, the training of key personnel in-country and abroad, and

through constant supervision and monitoring.

30


The top-down approach has dominated in Indonesian education for some time,

however, so that the behaviour of both parents and teachers is in m a n y ways conditioned.

The supportive facilities which would have facilitated a new approach to education did not

exist, and it has taken time to encourage interest in an approach which requires changes at all

levels, and to change the attitudes of those willing to defend the status quo or those w h o take

the view that projects are generally well-funded through formal financial channels, and do

not warrant participation and community effort.

Conclusions and recommendations

The project has shown that where the ideas, support and efforts of students, teachers

and others involved in the educational process (at whatever level and in whatever capacity)

are seen to be appreciated, individuals are encouraged to make a greater effort to identify

their o w n real needs. Once people at the ground level become confident in their capacity to

analyze their problems, it is essential that project organizers and those in positions of

authority listen to these actors and incorporate their reactions and their ideas in all plans,

wherever possible.

Following the experience gained throughout this period, several recommendations

m a y be made :

• Schools and local education personnel should be given greater power to implement

ideas relevant to school and local needs.

• Greater knowledge and understanding of their expected roles should be provided to

principals and supervisors.

• Subject advisors should be available in the locality.

• The expertise of all those involved at different levels must be applied in n e w

development strategies for change. It was with this in mind that an inter-active

model was used at the planning stage of the present project.

• Local community members and parents must be involved, e.g., through organizing

Associations of Parents and Local Community Members (BP3s).

31


School clusters in Thailand

By Dr Christopher Wheeler, Dr Jaithip Chuaratanaphong, and Dr Pragob Kunarak

School clusters represent an international movement to implement organizational

strategies for school improvement close to the building level. Thailand's experience with

clusters suggests that, under certain conditions, they play a useful role in this effort.

Specifically, their mission of promoting collaboration and co-operation within and across

schools can be used by a principal intent on improving school performance to enhance his or

her o w n efforts. This capacity-building role is especially important, since it contributes to

building and supporting the very components of collaboration and co-operation which are

important determinants of quality within an individual school.

Briefly, a school cluster consists of seven to ten schools within a geographical area in

which contact and communication among the cluster members are convenient. The school

cluster management body is a board consisting of the principals of each cluster school and a

number of elected teachers (generally half the number of teachers in a cluster) as committee

members of the Board. The philosophy underpinning school cluster management is that

working and managing schools through teamwork should achieve better results than working

alone. In reality, primary schools usually have some uneven management resources and

capabilities; therefore, collaboration among cluster members should result in enhancing

quality of teaching-learning management in each school since collaboration is a significant

means of mobilizing, sharing and utilizing limited resources efficiently and effectively. For

example, a school having a qualified teacher in science might help another school by

initiating team teaching as a w a y to improve science teaching. The scope of the work of the

school cluster is therefore based on the collaboration among members through teamwork,

participation, brainstorming, and sharing management tasks in the areas of construction and

facilities, financial matters and general affairs, academic matters, personnel and student

activities.

Cluster activity is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for cluster influence.

Actual influence depends on the receptivity of the school, and in this context the principal

plays a pivotal role. A number of studies of individual schools illustrate h o w response to the

same cluster policy varied according to the internal dynamics of each school. S o m e show

h o w influential a cluster can be when it actively pursues both accountability and

capacity-building policies and the principal is intent on improving his school. Others show

what can happen when clusters are relatively inactive because of weak support from

32


principals and district offices, where principals either ignore cluster policies or create

programs, such as test preparation, to insulate their schools from outside pressure to embark

on programs of internal reform.

T o reform clusters will require a serious training initiative, in part because impending

changes in the regulations will likely lead to a large turnover in cluster staff, in part because

previous in-service programs were not as effective as they could have been. T h e lessons

from the most active clusters studied suggest the need for n e w ways of thinking about cluster

initiatives. N e w forms of staff development ~ emphasizing the use of local knowledge of

good practice, more effective methods for getting materials and equipment to teachers so

that they actually benefit from the cluster's resource center, assistance in developing n e w

materials and n e w curricular lessons and units, and support for innovative programs to help

teachers — are some of the most important training needs. Specific attention should be

devoted to the n e w office staff, since it is their responsibility to carry out the cluster's

program. But the principal of the core school, w h o will become the head of the cluster

office, will need to participate in this training in order to understand what will be expected of

his/her staff. In addition, cluster committee m e m b e r s (including principals of all schools in

their ex-officio role) need training in h o w to perform their roles more effectively,

specifically on the importance of principal support for cluster activity. Similarly, district

office staff need training in h o w to help clusters become more active, especially in the area

of capacity-building initiatives.

But training alone will not lead clusters to perform their roles as intended. Clusters

operate within a set of organizational and political constraints. Unless national policy

provides more support for capacity-building initiatives to improve schools, it is unlikely that

district offices will do m u c h to support capacity-building programs at the cluster level.

Unless there is a greater focus on prodding inactive principals at low-achieving schools

through the coordinated efforts of district offices and school clusters, school receptivity, and,

thereby, cluster influence, will remain limited in such schools.

33


Parent-learning support system (PLSS) A school and home-community collaboration for raising pupil achievement

Philippines

By H.E. Dr Isidro D . Cariño and Dr Mona Valisno

The Parent-Learning Support System (PLSS) in the Philippines taps and harnesses

the teaching responsibilities and capabilities of parents and community members through

allowing them to participate in teaching-learning activities in school, in the community and

at h o m e . Fundamentally, the P L S S is a school-based initiative which aims at organizing

parents for the ultimate purpose of ensuring that they can assist meaningfully in the

upgrading of the quality of elementary education, and specifically in the raising of the

achievement levels of pupils. Operationally, it is a grassroots strategy which represents the

collective effort of an organized group of parents in coordination with principals. The first

P L S S experiments were in a disadvantaged, urban poor area in Metro Manila (a squatter area

in Fairview, Quezon City) and in a rural area in Leyte, Eastern Visayas Region.

In view of the success of the P L S S , the Secretary of Education, Culture and Sports

directed all Department of Education, Culture and Sports ( D E C S ) Regional Directors and

school administrators to take appropriate steps to implement it beginning in 1991-1992. The

National Educational Testing and Research Center ( N E T R C ) , in coordination with the

Bureau of Elementary Education (BEE) and D E C S field offices, is currently undertaking the

development of training manuals, modules for parents (especially those in the disadvantaged

areas), and other basic teaching-learning devices designed to ensure the smooth and

successful conduct of this innovative scheme.

Educational, institutional and developmental gains

The most prominent gain the education system has derived from the P L S S is the

fostering of direct and strong relations with the community and the families the schools

profess to serve, and the improvement of the learning environment. The entry of parents

into formal teaching-learning settings greatly enhances the emerging belief that the

education of children is not solely the responsibility of schools, teachers and administrators,

but that parents — as partners of teachers and school administrators ~ are also responsible for

the provision of education.

34


The P L S S has contributed significantly to the enhancement of the effectiveness of

education and training; it has raised the achievement levels of pupils in certain selected

disadvantaged areas, and it has solved the drop-out problem in the schools where it operates.

The Project has injected into the development process a particular methodology aimed at

drawing the beneficiaries into its activities and with parents being involved in the

fundamental requisites of development, i.e. planning and implementation, the dominant

top-to-bottom process of development is reversed.

It m a y be too early to detect the P L S S ' s contribution to certain specific changes in

the development process. W h a t it proves at this point is that, contrary to the general belief,

the intended beneficiaries ~ particularly the poor segments of the population — can think,

plan, act, manage, and assess what is good for them given an honest and sincere opportunity

to do so. Through this collaboration, children attending school in difficult economic

circumstances can attain academic progress in m u c h the same w a y as their economically

well-off counterparts do.


The P L S S program was initiated by a school district (Pinahan, Quezon City) with

N E T R C through the Joint Innovative Project (ЛР) of D E C S with U N E S C O / А Р Е Ш ,

Bangkok. Effective as of the school year 1991-1992, P L S S will be managed by the fourteen

Regional Directors throughout the country through 129 school division superintendents. At

the school level the school administrator, assisted by the school guidance counsellor, serves

as the overall P L S S Program Director. The grade-level P L S S is managed by an assigned

grade teacher, while the class P L S S is managed on a daily basis by the respective classroom

teacher. At the school level, staff are given flexibility to develop, design and execute

monitoring and evaluation activities.

Training

The P L S S project has trained principally teachers, guidance counsellors,

headmasters, and parents and community members. Officials in responsible positions at the

Ministry have received orientation on the concepts and practice of P L S S : the implementation

strategy, the organization of the model, the need for strengthening parental and teacher

capacity, and issues of monitoring and evaluation. Teachers and headmasters are trained in

managerial skills such as effective collaborative mechanisms and shared decision-making

techniques (defining and diagnosing programs, setting goals, etc.), effective collaborative

teaching approaches, skills in teacher-parent and teacher-pupil dialogue, and sensitivity

35


training to the attitudes required for P L S S to work. This is carried out largely through

school-based in-service training — effective links with the regular pre-service or in-service

courses are not yet operational. Parents are trained through parent education and guidance

seminars. Various institutional change mechanisms are also put in place: teachers are treated

as professionals, leadership a m o n g teachers is enhanced, and emphasis is placed on the

openness of the system, a flexible and permeable school organization, bottom-up planning,

and the revival and recognition of the roles of parents in education.

T h e m i n i m u m conditions considered essential to establishing an effective

and long-lasting collaboration

• Openness of the school system

Broadly, this refers to the readiness of the- school to welcome changes and to

receive and utilize inputs from its local community. Specifically, this refers to a

democratically-oriented school leadership and a liberal orientation which accepts and

expounds the belief that "everyone can learn through nurturing".

• Willingness and strong desire of the community and families to participate

and collaborate with the school

Generally, this pertains to the positive attitude of the community towards the

school and a constructive appreciation of the school's mission in educating men-

children.

• Strong association of parents and teachers

Collectively, this refers to the presence of a strong parent-teacher association

in the school and its readiness to assume a lead role in establishing firm work

structures with the rest of the community and other civic organizations.

• Availability of minimum physical and other resources for effective collaboration

This pertains directly to the presence of school facilities for seminars,

conferences, demonstration classes, etc., where parents, teachers, school

administrators and pupils can be gathered, as well as an area for reference materials

such as books, newspapers and other periodicals. The provision of these depends

heavily on the resourcefulness, ingenuity and creativity of the participants.

36


• Regularity of participants' interaction

This refers to the regular conduct of meetings and/or exchanges and

programmed or planned activities for parents and community leaders w h o report to

the school. It refers also to coherent workflow, functions and responsibilities that are

consistently required or asked of participants.

T h e methods which had been put into practice have yet to be refined and carefully

adapted to suit the changing needs and requirements of the participants, of the education

sector, and of those for w h o m these initiatives have been taken. The Philippines experience

with this teacher-parent collaboration is just the beginning. While the positive results drawn

from the collaboration signal the appropriateness of the methods employed, and suggest that

the conditions obtaining or prevailing in the school are equally appropriate, m u c h remains to

be done to ensure its sustainability. Specific conditions arising in particular school and

community contexts, for example, will dictate different methods and/or approaches.

37


Experiences in school and community collaboration Research and Development Centre (Balitbang)

Indonesia

By Dr Moegiadi, Dr Jiyono, Dr Haris Mudjiman, and Dr Soemardi

Trends in community involvement in education

Education L a w 5, introduced in Indonesia in 1984, authorized the decentralization of

certain central government responsibilities in education to the provincial levels, in an effort

to remedy the damage to community involvement in education which had occurred during

the oil b o o m of the late sixties and early seventies when communities retreated from

participation in education. Through efforts since then, self-sustaining local development

with an accompanying sense of the school belonging to the community has been encouraged

and has resulted in more autonomy at lower levels of administration. The 1989 Education

L a w stipulated that education is the responsibility of the government, the community and

parents, and that resources for education provision and improvement should come from

these sources. It stated clearly that the community - as a partner of the government in

education — should have ample opportunity to participate, and this participation will become

increasingly necessary in the present climate of general cutback by the Government of

Indonesia. District officers are to play important roles in ensuring greater community and

private sector involvement and interest in the education process.

BP3s (Parent Teachers' Associations) and the role of the private sector in education

The percentage of private schools as a share of the total schooling offered is as

follows: primary — 7 % ; junior secondary ~ 64%; senior secondary — 76%; higher education

— 94%. Islamic (Pesantren) schools are all private, and account for 13% of all primary

school enrolment. The private sector also plays an important role in technical education. At

the senior secondary level, the programs offered by private technical/vocational schools

include 30-40% of training in the school with 60-70% given to 'on the job' experiences.

Although the percentage of the financial contribution from parents to the school

budget varies greatly, the averages are 100% for private schools, 4 4 % for public schools in

wealthy urban areas, 10-20% in poorer rural areas and 1% in remote schools. Apart from

the general level of socio-economic status, other factors such as parents' appreciation of the

school, the competence of the B P 3 or parent committees, accountability for the utilization of

P T A funds, and the usefulness of school programs also influence the level of parental

contributions to education.

38


The B P 3 is a reflection of the relative success of the decentralization process

implemented slowly but steadily over the last decade. Although primary education is

theoretically free, an important role of the BP3s is financial management of parental

contributions to schools. Through the process of devolution, this will increasingly become

the case. The role of the B P 3 is clearly outlined by the government to bring together parents

and school personnel in order to:

• arrange for the community to provide material or financial support so that parents do

not bear all the burden, and to hold financial control over the utilization of these

contributions for capital or current expenditure;

• provide information on school fees;

• improve organizational and h u m a n relations between the school and parents;

• ensure the school's success by not interfering with technical teaching matters;

• select local curricula content (local ecology, geographic and economic conditions,

and current affairs) and identify local resource persons in this regard; and

• offer general advice to the school.

The financial contributions collected through the BP3s are generally allocated to:

teachers' welfare — honoraria, transport, etc.;

teaching-learning processes, including additional lessons;

teacher activities (training, meetings);

educational materials and facilities; and

school repair and construction.

In this w a y , the parents' input directly leads to an improved learning environment,

more proper or intensive teaching, and improved quality.

Perspectives for the future

M o r e effective links must begin to operate across partners. The contributions

encouraged through the project should not be limited to material ones only. Training of

teachers and the community in curriculum development, for example, is needed at the level

of the individual school unit. The development of manuals and guidelines for staff on h o w

to mobilize resources and enhance participation could be effected immediately, and the

membership of teachers in parents' groups, prohibited in 1974, could be encouraged.

39


Community participation in the planning and management of educational resources

( C O P L A N E R )

Planning Bureau, Ministry of Education and Culture

Indonesia

By Drs Simanungkalit, Dr Colin Moyle, and Dr Doran Bernard

Decentralization of the education system in Indonesia began 15 years ago and has

steadily been reinforced. The process was aided by an earlier project of the Planning Bureau

which trained district officials in bottom-up planning processes. The current project ~

C O P L A N E R — is a Ministry of Education project which began in March 1991 with

U N E S C O and U N D P assistance. It operates with the objective of working even more

closely to the local level — in sub-districts, villages and schools — in order to build a

needs-based system through joint decision-making between the school and T H E community.

W a y s will be sought to utilize community resources of all kinds in education through

community participation in the planning and management of primary, secondary (public,

private and religious) and out-of-school education at the sub-district level, in the framework

of improving the quality of education. In the short term, school-level planning mechanisms

will be developed to improve identification and prioritization of needs, the management of

resources, supervision and evaluation; organizational mechanisms will be designed to

encourage community participation in a bottom-up style process; and training programs and

orientation meetings will be organized to ensure that administrative personnel at all levels,

and community level participants, have appropriate knowledge and skills in project

management, program evaluation and financial management.


The project will lead to models for the dissemination of decentralization processes as

outlined in Repelita V I (Five-year Plan, 1995-1990). A n inter-ministerial task force will be

set up, and a set of guidelines will be established within which all aspects of C O P L A N E R

will be developed. Provincial implementation units will come into operation; evaluation

plans and systems will be organized; and a reporting and control system will be set in place.

From the national to the district levels, the vertical structure of C O P L A N E R will

operate through:

40


• A Steering Committee

T o give advice, guidance and support to the C O P L A N E R team.

• A Task Force

T o oversee all aspects of C O P L A N E R (implementation guidelines, ideas,

technical assistance, coordination, monitoring and evaluation) and suggest corrective

measures.

• A Project Implementation Unit

T o administer the allocation of funds for programs and activities of the

Community Forum for Education Development ( C F E D ) , and to monitor, evaluate,

supervise and report on these activities.

• Working Groups

T o prepare, arrange and provide inputs to provincial Project Implementation

Units.

• Advisory Groups

T o review the planning of activities proposed at the C F E D level, and to

provide technical support, monitoring services, and inputs to provincial working

groups.

• Community Forums for Educational Development (CFED)

T o plan and implement innovative activities within the framework of

developing community participation in the planning and management of educational

resources; to carry out monitoring and evaluation activities, and to report on these.

The most important tool in this process is the Community Forum for Education

Development which will bring together village leaders, headmasters, teachers, supervisors,

parents, and other community participants. The forum will be directly linked to the local

cluster of public, private and religious schools in primary, secondary and out-of-school

education. It will take some time before it is fully operational, and in the meantime, an

"interim" and sub-forums will be established to determine the membership and processes,

and specific needs for transition to the C F E D respectively.

41


At present, the project operates through a series of working and advisory groups at

the provincial and district levels and the forum at the sub-district level. Twenty-four

sub-districts will be identified for the project in four provinces. W h e n the C F E D is in place,

the sub-district will act as the administrative unit for the school community and all the

schools in the community will be considered as one vertically organized group or cluster.

The community forums to be formed will co-ordinate and forward annual plans for the

resource needs of all schools and out-of-school education units within the sub-distict.

Mechanisms to develop budgets at the school level have yet to be formulated, but the

concept of "sub-forums" will be explored.

Perspectives and recommendations for the future

In order for this process to succeed, it is important that attitudes begin to change

visibly. This can be encouraged through participatory-training and real devolution to the

provincial level, with guidelines and some major components determined at the central level,

but with m u c h room for exploration by the forums in h o w to bring the school and

community together. Evaluation will help in identifying possible conflicts and potentially

useful practices.

If decentralization is actually to be implemented, it is essential that the central level

refrain from taking decisions which m a y be made at lower levels. This will entail greater

planning and coordination of activities. The planning cycles of the Ministries of Education

and H o m e Affairs and C O P L A N E R will need to be coordinated. W h e n the C F E D develops

its draft annual budget for all education activities, fifteen months previous to the

formalization of annual plans, C O P L A N E R will begin to operate.

The decentralization process, however, is complicated. Planning at m a n y levels

implies extensive training, especially in technical skills such as evaluation and auditing.

This m a y be built up through fairly simple plans (and training) at the lower levels of the

system.

Through the project, sources of funding will be encouraged other than those granted

by the central level or received directly from parents. More established planning systems

should lead also to greater utilization of available resources.

42


Facilitation assistance program on education A co-operative B R A C / G o v e r n m e n t of Bangladesh project

By Dr Abu Hamid Latif

The Government of Bangladesh introduced and implemented a Universal Primary

Education (UPE) program during its Second and Third Five-year Plans (1980-1985 and

1985-1990 respectively). The Compulsory Primary Education Act was enacted in

parliament in 1990, and is expected to be passed during the current (Fourth) Five-year Plan

1990-1995. It is further hoped that the goal of universal primary education m a y be achieved

by the year 2000.

During the period of the second and third five-year plans, the thrust of the U P E

program was on the development of physical facilities and utilities," increasing enrolment

(especially among girls), reducing repetition and drop-out rates through specific measures

(e.g., distribution of free school uniforms and textbooks for all children), employing more

female teachers, providing relevant education through the renewal and modification of

curricula, and providing training and re-training for headmasters and teachers of primary

schools. Certain steps were taken by the Ministry of Education ( M O E ) and the Directorate

of Primary Education (DPE) to ensure the effective implementation of those measures,

including the appointment of Assistant Upazila Education Officers ( A U E O s ) to ensure

regular supervision of schools, and to set up School Management Committees (SMCs) and

Parent-Teacher Associations (PTAs) to facilitate community participation in school affairs.

Rationale and objectives

The quantitative and qualitative aspects of primary education could be enhanced if all

these measures were actually functional and effective. Unfortunately, however, the formal

education system in Bangladesh suffers from internal inefficiency due to manifold problems,

and it was in this context that the Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee ( B R A C ) ~

equipped with the experience of having conducted a successful Non-formal Primary

Education Program (NFPE) over a number of years ~ thought it desirable to assist the

government in achieving its goal of achieving universal primary education by the year 2000.

The project proposal prepared by B R A C was entitled the "Facilitation Assistance Program

on Education" (FAPE), and had as it's overall objective the development of a framework for

strengthening the primary school management and supervision system, the improvement of

the quality of education through increasing the managerial and professional competencies of

the school staff, and ensuring community participation.

43


Plan, design and implementation of the program

The proposal of F A P E was informally discussed at the M O E and D P E levels. Being

conscious of the weaknesses of the school management system and the poor quality of

teaching-learning in the schools, the administration was ready to support a program that

might help to find solutions to some of the major problems and issues of the primary

education sub-sector. At the D P E Office, the project proposal was discussed and approved

in a formal meeting attended by the Director General ( D G ) , his deputies and the B R A C staff.

The program was planned for implementation by B R A C staff over a period of two years, in

three Upazilas (sub-districts), and in co-operation with Upazila Education Officers (UEOs),

A U E O s , the school staff, S M C s andPTAs .

Since its inception in July 1988, F A P E has come through various developmental

stages. During the first year (July 1988 to June 1989),- a survey to collect base-line data,

financed by B R A C , was carried out in the three selected Upazilas, and the program

interventions and measures were experimented in 22 schools of one of these. Activities in

the second year (July 1989 to June 1990) involved program implementation in 55 primary

schools in each of the three Upazilas, and were financed by S I D A . The one-and-a-half year

period of project implementation, July 1990 to December 1991, was funded by U N I C E F .

A U of the government primary schools in the three Upazilas (324 schools) have n o w been

brought under the program and the implementation period has been extended from two to

two-and-a-half years. The program is implemented by B R A C staff: a team leader and 3-5

program organizers (POs) — each in charge of 15 to 20 schools — in each Upazila, under the

overall guidance and supervision of B R A C s Executive Director and of the personnel of the

Education Section at B R A C Headquarters.

The educational problems which the program was meant to address include low

enrolment rates (70 to 72 per cent ~ for girls 44 per cent); low attendance rates (40 to 50 per

cent; high drop-out rates (72 per cent); poor rates for completion of the primary cycle (30 per

cent); absenteeism among teachers; lack of a congenial school environment; traditional

teaching practices; lack of managerial skills of headmasters and teachers; irregular and

casual supervision; lack of accountability among the officials and the school staff; irregular

S M C and P T A meetings; and non-involvement of the community in school affairs. S o m e of

the measures and interventions identified in the F A P E project proposal for tackling those

issues and problems include:

(i) briefing community leaders (chairmen of the Upazila Councils, S M C s and PTAs) ;

(ii) orientation of government officials (Upazila Nirbahi Officers and U E O s ) ;

44


(iii) training of A U E O s , headmasters and teachers at B R A C ' s Training Centres;

(iv) joint action plans (for organizing S M C , P T A and local level social mobilization

meetings, cluster training programs and supervision of schools);

(v) personal contact (headmasters and teachers are encouraged to contact parents, S M C

and P T A members, and community leaders), and

(vi) quality improvement (teachers are encouraged to introduce modern teaching-learning

methods and techniques, use lesson-plans regularly, and introduce co-curricular

activities).

Collaboration and partnership through the program

B R A C ' s tradition of collaboration with the government and the funding agencies

facilitated the development of partnerships ~ at macro-level and with donors — throughout

the F A P E project. The tripartite agreement prepared by U N I C E F spelled out the

responsibilities of the partners involved in F A P E ( D P E / B R A C / U N I C E F ) . But at the

micro-level (Upazila Offices and schools), the F A P E program personnel faced difficulties,

and in one Upazila resistance, in initiating the program. These have been overcome to some

extent through orientation, training, personal contact and joint action plans. But the most

effective means for activating the Upazila level officers and the school staff, according to

B R A C personnel, was to involve the S M C and P T A members, parents and the people of the

locality in the affairs of the schools through personal contact, visits, and organizing the S M C

and P T A meetings regularly in each school.

Results of the program and its development

N o evaluation of the program has been done so far, but the reports prepared by

B R A C staff indicate that improvements have taken place during the program implementation

period. A s the program is yet to complete its cycle, it is difficult to predict its effectiveness

or sustainability. It is, however, expected that some of the interventions and mechanisms

will be useful in bringing about changes in the primary education sub-sector.

45


Improvement of basic education through M I N D S A C R O S S A school literacy project

Uganda

By Dr Katherine Namuddu

M I N D S A C R O S S is a literacy project implemented during the two-year period

1988-1989 in which pupils aged between 5 and 14 years of age, in both urban and rural

environments, practised and consolidated their developing literacy skills through writing for

themselves and for their peers.

T h e project was initiated within the context of an education system which had

suffered more than fifteen years of neglect and decay resulting from war, political instability

and the accompanying destruction of the country's economic base. A combination of the

rapid and ill-planned expansion of the primary education sector to cope with a population

which was growing quickly ~ accompanied by the constraints of a large proportion of

untrained teachers, an inactive inspectorate, and the absence of adequate instructional

resources ~ had resulted in a low quality of education. In particular, a large proportion of

pupils were either dropping out of school or graduating after the seven-year cycle without an

adequate mastery of the basic literacy skills of reading and writing.

T h e goal of M I N D S A C R O S S was to demonstrate a simple but comprehensive

strategy through which the fragility and incompleteness of the pupils' acquisition of reading

and writing skills could be decreased while their overall skills in communication could be

consolidated. T h e strategy consisted of three main project tasks:

(a) assisting teachers to develop and use a more practical concept of literacy through

reflection and discussion regarding the efficacy of their instructional strategies, their

interpretation and implementation of the curriculum, and their involvement of pupils

in learning and using social communicative strategies;

(b) imparting to pupils a broader concept of books and authorship through encouraging

them to write books and to display their written texts for purposes of discussion,

debate and dissemination of information; and

(c) encouraging schools to improve the literacy skills of pupils through engaging in

practices which would result in concrete literacy-enhancing products useful for the

school as a whole.

46


During the inception of the project in four primary schools in 1988, the government

was in the process of planning the reform of the total education system, and schools and

communities at this time were responsible for meeting more than 90 per cent of the cost of

primary education. Partly because of the nature of literacy as a community activity and

partly because of the large amount of financial and h u m a n resources necessary,

M I N D S A C R O S S sought to set up collaborative relationships with foreign and national

donors, personnel from various departments of the Ministry of Education, and schools,

pupils and parents from the community.

Through collaboration with donors (foreign and national), support was extended

through the provision of research and development funds, production equipment, paper, and

allowances for professional development meetings, seminars and workshops. Collaboration

with personnel from different departments of the Ministry of Education was somewhat

limited due to the shortage of personnel and lack of time and resources to enable personnel

to visit schools regularly. Collaboration with and across schools was also problematic.

Working with project implementors, teachers and pupils eagerly participated in the project

and produced large quantities of literacy-enhancing materials of various genres and in

different formats for their classes and schools. There was little or no effort, however, to

build genuine, functional and participatory links across pupils, teachers and schools, nor

between these and the local community of parents and other adults.

The main constraints to building such relationships appear to have been the lack of

an adequate number of implementors and researchers at the project centre as well as

committed educational leaders in the schools; the piecemeal nature of the implementation

process at the school level; inarticulation of a clear and practical strategy for the

collaboration of various levels of participants; and failure to address adequately the

traditional but unfortunate separation between in-school and out-of-school or community

knowledge.

A s a result of these constraints and weaknesses in project planning and

implementation, various forms of 'bartering' resources rather than of genuine collaboration

evolved to cater for the needs and demands of project participants and supporters

respectively. Having failed to bring about a model of collaboration, M I N D S A C R O S S

developed into a workable strategy for harnessing support from a variety of people w h o

generally believed that pupils could be creative authors and that writing is a good and

practical outlet for such creativity.

47


Experiences, processes and products of the project were documented throughout the

implementation of M I N D S A C R O S S . These experiences revealed not only characteristics of

the workings of projects of this nature, but also the kinds of factors which halt change in

schools whenever n e w curricula and organizational structures are introduced. It was

observed that in general, inadequate and scarce material and h u m a n resources curtail the

sharing of knowledge, skills and information. The archaic examination system stressing

recall of discrete facts instead of problem-solving skills stifles experimentation with n e w

pedagogical strategies. The all-pervasive competitive ethos dampens collective initiative,

especially at the upper primary level. In combination, these factors create a cycle of

isolationism, suspicion of outsiders and unjustified satisfaction and complacency with the

status quo. T h e environment created in such a context is hardly receptive to innovation and

collaboration.

Since improvement in the delivery of basic education for all is likely to be affordable

only through building collaborative relationships between institutions, personnel and interest

groups, the experiences of short-term projects such as M I N D S A C R O S S are relevant for

projects in education being implemented elsewhere. Based on experience, such projects can

contribute specifically by defining the conditions important for the creation, building,

sustaining and consolidating of collaborative relationships. According to the experience of

M I N D S A C R O S S , these include:

• clear channels of communication a m o n g collaborators;

• accountable management of all resources;

• realistic strategies for demonstrating both the mastery of n e w skills or knowledge

and success in and outside the project; and

• ensuring that all collaborators have sufficient reason to regard themselves as central

to both the project and its products, as well as to its collaborative structures,

successes and shortcomings.

Policy-makers, planners and decision-makers have a central role to fulfill in designing

strategies which can encompass such collaborative relationships, and need to be trained in

the nature of the collaborative process in a variety of situations through participation in

collaborative ventures in project planning, design and implementation.

48


Promoting primary and elementary education ( P R O P E L ) Institute of International Education ( H E )

India

By Dr Chitra Naik

Background

In India, universalization of primary education is a constitutionally-recognized

responsibility of the Central and State governments, and parliament legislation promotes

primary education and prevents child labour. Since 1957, countrywide educational surveys

have been undertaken to facilitate school-mapping, the supply of teachers, the production of

textbooks, teacher training, incentives for school-age children living in difficult areas or in

disadvantaged social groups, etc. However, of the 160 million children in the 6 to 14

year-old age group, 40 million children between the ages 9 and 14 remain non-enrolled. The

figure for working children (including drop-outs) below the age of 14 is presently about 70

million. Furthermore, among an average of 100 children enrolled in class I at primary

school, only 45 reach classes I V / V and 25 reach classes V u / V i n . Girls form the bulk of the

non-enrolled and drop-out children, and there is clear evidence that school schedules,

curricula and pedagogy, are unsuitable for rural children, and that the conventional

administration of primary education is responsible for blocking universalization.

During the last fifteen years, alternatives to the linear and culturally 'neutral' patterns

of primary education which have dominated in India for over a century have been discussed.

Non-formal primary education is n o w an accepted alternative and has been included in the

Sixth and Seventh Five-year Plans. However, the notion of the school as a

community-managed enterprise is not yet c o m m o n . The P R O P E L project is working on

building up this image of the school through total educational mobilization of the rural

community based on collaborative action between government organizations and individuals

at the grass-roots level.

PROPEL

The P R O P E L project is a continuation of a series of projects initiated by the Institute

of International Education in 1979 in different types of agro-climatic areas. Started in 1988,

P R O P E L presently operates in 137 villages (18,000 households, 120,000 persons) and 82

Graml Panchayats (Village Councils). Each Panchayat has a Village Education Committee;

49


about 4-5 Panchayats form a "Panchayat Cluster" as the first coordination level for local

planning; and about 5-6 "Panchayat Clusters" form a "Planning district" (35,000 to 40,000

persons).

The main objective of the project is to ensure the effective collaboration of all

government and non-government agencies and actors at the grassroots level in the planning

and implementing of education projects at village level so that the community can become

the 'stimulator' and 'owner' of various forms of popular education. The vital focus of its

efforts at present, however, is on the universalization of primary/elementary education.

P R O P E L interventions in this regard are:

(i) child-recreation centers (pre-schools);

(ii) w o m e n ' s support groups, concerned with the physical, emotional, social and

intellectual development of pre-school children; -

(iii) re-training of teachers of classes I and П in methods appropriate for the transition

pupils need cope with in class I to primary school, and in class 1П to

attainment-oriented learning;

(iv) part-time, non-formal education for out-of-school children in the 9 to 14 age group;

(v) adult literacy, particularly for w o m e n ;

(vi) provision of a People's Education House (Jana Shikshan Nilayam) as a

library-cum-information and cultural center for the community;

(vii) w o m e n ' s empowerment camps;

(viii) youth awareness groups; and

(ix) training of the members of the Panchayats and Village Education Committees in

micro-planning techniques.

Insights gained through P R O P E L

Through the application of the insights gained through the P R O P E L project, it is

hoped that the effectiveness of the U P E program m a y be accelerated. These include the

following:

• Manpower for U P E is available locally and can function m u c h more effectively

through community affiliation than through the recruitment of persons from outside

the locality.

• Community management of U P E / U E E , child education, adult education, etc., creates

a local 'demand' for educational development.

50


• Parents approve of the education of girls provided it does not interfere with their role

as family economic assets, and girls enjoy learning if it helps them to relax.

• The community takes an intelligent interest in education if it is thrown open and is

not 'mystified' through closed 'professionalism'.

• Officials working at the village level gradually begin to appreciate collaborating with

the community as it brings them job satisfaction. It is essential that officials are

trained in collaborative planning and action for educational development.

• There is little resistance or adverse opinion with regard to non-formal education at

the community level, but primary teachers and administrators in the formal system

appear to react with reservation and even hostility.

• Local secondary teachers appreciate the idea of integrated education "complexes"

and the decentralized development of education m u c h sooner than primary teachers,

and participate in collaborative activities with m u c h greater openness.

• W o m e n ' s empowerment camps, youth awareness camps and child development

orientation for caretakers of pre-school children, have been extremely rewarding

activities in creating an intensive awareness and action for U P E , particularly for girls.

• The training of Panchayat members and members of the Village Education

Committees requires the preparation of special materials. T h e materials required do

not already exist and need to be developed in the form of print and non-print media

packages such as videos and slide shows.

O n the whole, the experiences of P R O P E L indicate that well-designed training

programs in collaborative action for policy-makers, planners, administrators and teachers are

important for educational development.

51


National government policy on participation in education

Malaysia

By

Dato' Asiah Abu Samah Deputy Director-General of Education

There has been a dichotomous approach to education in Malaysia in recent times,

formalized education being the responsibility of the Ministry of Education and non-formal

education the responsibility of other ministries and agencies.

Studies and experience have shown that community involvement in education and

support for n e w initiatives of educators leads generally to greater academic achievement

among pupils. Community involvement in education is therefore appropriate, but in order to

participate, the people need to be trained.

Community participation has been a feature in education in Malaysia since the 1970s

through Parent-Teacher Associations (PTAs) which operate similarly to the BP3s in

Indonesia. The objectives of these associations are, firstly, to provide a forum to improve

schools through educational innovation; secondly, to contribute to school activities in terms

of material support; and thirdly, to facilitate the exchange of ideas whereby parents and

teachers have regular forums to discuss student progress and propose means of resolving

difficulties. The inherent collaboration and co-operation built into the framework should

ideally create the most appropriate environment for all-round pupil development (moral,

intellectual and physical).

Although the P T A s currently comprise parents and teachers, increasing efforts are

being m a d e to promote the involvement of prominent members of the community and others

w h o m a y be interested in contributing in some w a y although they m a y not have children

attending school. There are generally no more than 15 members in the committee, including

the school principal as the association's education officer and a teacher as it's secretary.

The role of the P T A s is understood to be one primarily of material support; for

example, they contribute to building school halls, canteens, and additional classrooms, and

to providing learning aids. They are not, in principle, entitled to interfere in matters relating

to pedagogical methods and program content. S o m e P T A s have been requested to act as

mediators where discipline at the school, among staff or pupils, is problematic.

52

National government policies on participation in education

The P T A s in Malaysia are helping to forge greater co-operation not simply between

the school and its immediate benefactors, but between the school, parents and the private

sector w h o — in the medium- to longer-term — shall gain from the improved quality and

recognized importance of education. Technical education programs, in which this sector is

directly involved, are currently being developed and implemented.

53


Qualitative improvement of basic education through the collaboration and co-operation of parents' associations

Vietnam

By

Bui Gia Think Director, National Institute for Educational Science

Education in Vietnamese society

Learning for living is a philosophy traditionally venerated in Vietnamese society.

Education and ethics are closely linked concepts, and education and educators are highly

respected. "Literacy makes a m a n " , for example, is a phrase not unfamiliar to the ears of

young Vietnamese students.

The educational reforms currently being institutionalized in Vietnam began in 1981

with the aim of ensuring that citizens were equipped intellectually and affectively to absorb

the best from national and foreign cultures. A twelve-year curriculum divided into three

stages — 5 years in primary school, 4 years in lower secondary and 3 years in upper

secondary — has replaced the previous ten-year cycle. O n e of the primary guidelines which

has governed these educational reforms is that there should be collaboration and

co-operation in education between the state and the people, and between social forces,

schools and families.

In the coming years, efforts will be concentrated on the qualitative improvement of

basic education. This will require closer collaboration between the three bodies involved ~

the school, the family and society. A n important structure which can contribute to the

qualitative improvement of basic education is the Parents' Association (PA). Statutes have

been elaborated and promulgated by the Ministry of Education of Vietnam advising the

establishment of P A s throughout the country and outlining the activities in which they

should become involved. The aims set for P A action are:

• to build good relations between schools and families, between teachers and pupils'

parents; and

• to assist schools in improving the quality of education.

54


At schools where P A s already operate, three to four meetings are held annually in

which the P A Executive Committee and the school's Board of Directors discuss problems of

mutual concern. Class P A s are informed of the contents and outcomes of these meetings,

and it becomes their responsibility to ensure that each activity decided upon is implemented

at the class level; in this w a y , students take responsibility for the improved quality of their

o w n education. In some places, P A s operate at the district and provincial levels, but at these

levels activities are merely symbolic, the raison d'être of the associations being linked

essentially to school-based action.

T h e activities of Parents' Associations

The activities of the Parents' Associations m a y be categorized into four types:

(i) pupil-oriented activities, (ii) teacher-oriented activities, (iii) involvement in school

construction, and (iv) participation in councils of education.

1. Pupil-oriented activities

D u e to the difficult economic climate, the drop-out rate in basic education is high.

From 1981 to 1989, the average rate per annum was 14.7 per cent in the first grade, 11.3 per

cent in the second grade, 5.0 per cent in the third grade, 8.5 per cent in the fourth grade, and

3.5 per cent in the fifth grade. The contribution of P A s in reducing the drop-out rate is fairly

important. Needy pupils (those from poor families or families in temporary distress due to

bereavement or divorce), for example, are assisted by these associations through the

provision of clothes and school equipment.

The associations also assist pupils in the following ways:

• P A Executive Committee members are responsible for initiating and maintaining

good relations with parents with the aim of helping both parents and pupils to

improve study patterns. The class P A ensures that in every house, however small, a

quiet space ~ what is commonly referred to as 'the study corner' (equipped with the

basic essentials of a table, chair, bookshelf and light) ~ is reserved for study

purposes. D u e to the shortage of space, general education pupils attend school either

in the morning or in the afternoon and carry out independent study at h o m e . It is the

function of the P A to monitor this work, particularly for pupils in rural areas. W h e r e

the P A structure is well-established, this monitoring is done methodologically: bells

are rung for pupils to time their study and P A members go from hamlet to hamlet to

assist in this work.

55


• Extra classes are offered to w e a k pupils to help them keep to the rhythm of their

classmates. W h e r e problems are apparent, teachers and parents are consulted in

order to identify and understand the roots of the problem (e.g. learning conditions)

and to take appropriate measures.

• D u e attention is given to fostering and encouraging gifted pupils. P A s are informed

of pupils w h o appear to be multi-talented or talented in particular disciplines. Gifted

pupils' examinations, with the aim of encouraging the development of individual

potential, are organized annually at the school, district, provincial, city and national

levels. T h e P A s help to prepare the selected students for these examinations through

the provision of funds for extra-curricular courses and prizes contributed by parents.

• P A s have also played an important part in vocational orientation and training.

Parents in posts of responsibility, or working, in the industrial sector receive pupils

on visits and for on-the-job training. M a n y are involved in teaching a number of

basic trades or advising pupils career choices. In rural areas, fields close to the

school are regularly m a d e available for teaching cultivation and livestock breeding.

• P A s are most active in the organization of out-of-school activities. They provide

funding and physical facilities for the school to conduct activities such as excursions,

artistic performances, sporting tournaments, domestic arts competitions for girls,

"good manners" competitions, etc. These activities have contributed to improving

the quality of education and to strengthening pupils' identity with their school.

Teacher-oriented activities

Teachers are key figures in education and yet ~ due to the general economic climate

— are not materially well rewarded for their duties. P A s therefore focus attention on this

group. Special attention is attached to the notion of upholding the traditional "respect" for

teachers. T h e link between the P A s and the teachers is a very close one. O n traditional

festival days, P A s c o m e in person to each teacher to offer greetings. O n e of these days, the

Vietnamese Teachers' D a y (20 November) — referred to as the Great D a y ~ is symbolic of

the gratitude of Vietnamese society for the ongoing services the sector extends to the this

society.

56


The associations contribute to encouraging job satisfaction a m o n g the teaching

profession, and to improving their material well-being in the following ways:

• They request local authorities to grant land or to sell building materials at reduced

prices to teachers. In m a n y localities, financial and m a n p o w e r assistance is granted

for the construction of teachers' residences.

• They offer appropriate extra-time work to teachers to increase their income.

• They recommend holiday resorts and travel facilities, secure reduced rates for rest

homes and hotels, and provide holidays free of charge for teachers with particularly

good work records.

• They have recently become involved in the strengthening of pedagogical skills

through attendance at teaching, offering constructive criticism, providing documents

and assisting in the preparation of teaching aids.

• A series of best-teacher competitions are held annually at school, district, provincial

and town levels in which P A s contribute financially and in terms of personnel:

association members attend teaching sessions while these competitions are being

held, and offer tokens of appreciation to the teachers w h o take part.

Involvement in the construction of school buildings

The state budget allotted to education is very low (4 to 5 per cent of the state budget),

and about 25 per cent of this is allocated to primary education ~ this is sufficient to cover

teachers' salaries and the schools' teaching activities only. In this context, Parent's

Associations have c o m e to play a central role in the construction and maintenance of school

buildings and facilities.

• In association with the Local Education Council, P A s persuade and encourage local

production and trading establishments to assist in building education facilities. Most

primary schools presently being used have been built by people through the P A s and

the Local Councils of Education. Ambitious projects involve the construction of

semi-solid structures which are expected to last no more than ten years. In less

c o m m o n cases, where the economic life of a community has improved, solid schools

of two to four storeys m a y be built.

57


• The associations are involved in the maintenance and repair of schools also, and in

the provision of desks, benches, teaching aids, etc. The contributions of P A s in this

regard m a y vary according to the school, the locality and the time of the year.

Councils of Education

These are organized at communal and district levels in both rural and urban areas.

Each Council of Education (CE) is composed of representatives of the local administration,

the schools, the P A s , the local offices, production-marketing units and a number of

prestigious personalities interested in educational development.

Conclusion and perspectives

Parents' Associations have an important role to play through the diversified activities

in which they are involved. They have quite clearly contributed in the following areas:

• building active relations between schools and families, thus helping to improve the

quality of learning;

• improving teachers' material and spiritual life and their pedagogical skills;

• preserving and promoting the traditional respect for teachers; and

• providing the physical facilities for teaching and learning.

It is to be regretted that serious research has yet to be undertaken of an accurate

evaluation of the effectiveness of P A activities in the improvement of the quality of basic

education. Following such an evaluation, discussion could take place on more concrete

aspects of their potential in enhancing the educational environment for the future.

58

Part III

(Presentations of training institutions and international agencies


Ministry of Education and Culture Center for personnel education and training

( P U S D I K L A T )

Indonesia

By Dr Nyoman Dekker

P U S D I K L A T is the aconrym ~ in Indonesian ~ of the Center for Personnel

Education and Training of the Ministry of Education and Culture of Indonesia which was

established in 1975 and is currently responsible for conducting training programs and for

guiding and coordinating all training units within the Ministry. P U S D I K L A T has

twenty-four permanent instructors and trainers and 252 administrative or structural staff.

P U S D I K L A T ' s mandate

In the course of its development, the Center has been involved in formulating

Ministerial policies and programs for personnel education and training. It is n o w

responsible for designing technical and operational activities for personnel education and

training based on the government's Five-Year Development Plan.

The objectives behind it's training mechanisms are basically: (1) to improve the

participants' understanding of educational and cultural matters within the framework of

the development and progress of the nation; (2) to improve their skills in administration

and management through field study and paper writing assignments; and (3) to allow

them to discuss matters on the art of leadership to be applied for the success of the

organization. Matters related to professional behaviour patterns are also important

elements in the training programs since progress depends to a great extent on the attitudes

and actions of those in leadership posts.

The programs organized by P U S D I K L A T are of three kinds: hierarchical and

non-hierarchical training and co-ordinative efforts.

Hierarchical training

The roles of managers at all levels of organizational structures are paramount. In

order for objectives to be chosen well and to be achieved, strong and skilful leadership is

required. This should be well defined and well organized, and with this in mind,

P U S D I K L A T offers training for managers at different levels. These hierarchical training

60

Presentations of training institutions and international agencies

programs are aimed at preparing officials in advance to work in positions which are

graded one step higher than the positions they are occupying at the time of training.

These programs are as follows:

• S E S P A is the term used to refer to the training offered for those at the top of the

hierarchical structure (high-level staff and managers). O n e group of thirty

participants is trained over three months annually at P U S D I K L A T headquarters,

Jakarta. Candidates are nominated by the central and provincial offices of the

Ministry, and participants ~ generally university or other tertiary education

graduates in various fields ~ are selected according to specific criteria.

• S E P A D Y A is a form of training aimed at middle-level managers and conducted

over a two-month period once annually or more, according to requirements. It is

currently conducted at P U S D I K L A T headquarters since it is easier to find

instructors at the central level.

• S É P A L A are training programs conducted over one-and-a-half months at

provincial capitals for groups of thirty participants. The frequency of these

programs depends on the allocation and the availability of funds.

• S E P A D A is a form of administrative training which is part of the Center's overall

design for training. D u e to the lack of funds and priority considerations in the

present climate, however, this training is not offered as yet.

In co-operation with the Institute of Government Administration which is

responsible for hierarchical training conducted at the central level, P U S D I K L A T is

involved also in curriculum development. In reality, however, ~ to ensure efficiency and

funding, — responsibility for curriculum development is shared by different ministries

insofar as each ministry develops curriculum content in regard to it's specific

requirements.

Non-hierarchical training

This type of training focuses on improving the administrative and managerial

skills of staff in their present positions. Participants include officials of culture, office

administrators, secondary school principals, treasurers, etc.

61


The goals are principally the same as those set for hierarchical training, with

certain variations - these programs aim at broadening participants' views of what is

encompassed by education and culture, at improving their skills in administration and

management, and at strengthening their attitudes as civil servants. Evaluation of these

training programs is not limited to the skills acquired by participants or reinforced, but

also to the diligence, sincerity and resolute approach of participants in regard to their

duties.

The curriculum is designed and developed through a two-fold system. Firstly, it

relies on the results of needs assessment which is carried out by interviewing the

participants' superiors or managers. Secondly, it is based on the curriculum which has

been used in previous training activities, and has been reviewed and evaluated through

the reactions of former trainees.

The trainers are P U S D I K L A T personnel and other professional officials. Far

more people have been trained through the non-hierarchical structure than through the

hierarchical one. M a n y more require training in appropriate skills, and these will grow as

a result of the continuous changes in requirements brought about through development.

Co-ordinative efforts

Other training institutions operate also under the auspices of the Ministry of

Education and Culture. Six centers — which have been established at different times to

meet the demands of progress in the field — are n o w involved in the development of

teacher training (PPPG) in mathematics, languages, social studies, science, vocational

subjects and technology. At the provincial level, Ministry units are involved in training

activities for school subject teachers (BPGs).

In the co-ordination meetings organized by P U S D I K L A T as coordinator of the

activities of all training institutions of the Ministry of Education and Culture, the main

concerns are focused on the relationship between the P P P G s and P U S D I K L A T in terms

of the general tasks carried out. Under the organizational structure of the Ministry,

P U S D I K L A T is a unit of the Secretariat General and the P P P G s are units of the

Directorate General of Primary and Secondary Education. Being structurally separate

and involved in different programs, co-ordination between these two units is not easy,

and it is hoped that the co-ordination which has been achieved up to n o w will not become

incidental, i.e. planned to fulfil temporary needs only, but will become increasingly more

permanent and well-programmed.

62


S o m e problems

Developing an effective training mechanism

Indonesia is a large country consisting of many islands and a great number of

people w h o require training. Under the present system, the percentage of people reached

through the training mechanisms is very small in relative terms. Efforts are being made

to develop more effective systems and mechanisms, but these will evidently amplify the

problems of organization and funding.

Curriculum development

This is essential and highly relevant for non-hierarchical training, and to be

effective, must involve good preparation and appropriate needs assessment.

Evaluation of training outcome

Evaluating the results of training is difficult. Efforts are being made to set up

appropriate means of evaluation, including that of the work of trainees once they have

returned to their workplace.

The planning and implementation of tracer studies should be improved in order to

determine more objectively the results and impact of training.

63


Institut Aminuddin Baki (IAB)

Malaysia

By Dr Mohd. Idris Jusi

The Ministry of Education Staff Training Institute (MESTI) was established in

March 1979 to improve the quality of the management of the education system, and to

increase the effectiveness and efficiency of the system's operations. In 1984, the role and

scope of the activities of the Institute were expanded to provide training in educational

management for all staff of the Ministry of Education, it became k n o w n as the National

Institute of Educational Management ( N I E M ) , and was conferred the status of a Ministry

Division for staff training. In March 1988 it was renamed the Aminuddin Baki National

Institute of Educational Management.

The primary training objectives of the Institut Aminuddin Baki (IAB) are set in

accordance with national educational policies and goals, and include the following:

• to advance the professional growth and development of educators, educationalists,

and administrators in education as agents of change; and

• to promote the systematic development of educational planning and management.

It is envisaged that through the training provided at the Institute a corps of

qualified and competent educational managers will be built up which will contribute to

ensuring that the environment where Malaysian youth grow is one which allows them to

mature and to live wholesome lives.

The basic value premise for the development of the I A B in the context of current

educational reform is that consistent staff development is crucial for the improvement of

the quality and effectiveness of education. In order to meet the challenges of developing

and implementing more relevant and effective educational programmes, educational

planners and managers must be given adequate opportunity to continually update and

upgrade their professional knowledge of and competence in the management of

educational change.

The primary focus of training programmes at the Institute is the school principal

since it is believed that through the organizational and leadership skills of this person,

educational change and reform can best be secured.

64


O f the training programs offered by and coordinated at the Institute, the

Community Education Program is the program which is of particular relevance in the

context of school and community collaboration for educational change.

C o m m u n i t y Education Program

The Community Education Programme is an educational programme which has as

its aim the nurturing of individual potential in a holistic manner ~ both physically and

spiritually — to produce individuals w h o are both self-reliant and capable of helping

others (families, colleagues, organizations and the nation at large).

In accordance with the spirit of the National Educational Policy in Malaysia, the

program focuses on the development of human resources through united effort. It is an

alternative delivery system which operates as an extension of the formal system in terms

of time, facilities, infra-structure, curriculum content, etc.

Rationales behind the program

The rationales upon which the program is built are outlined clearly below:

• Education is often perceived as being the domain of formal educational

institutions and for this reason parents and members of the community do not get

involved in educational processes.

Schools are inclined to believe that the scope of their activities is limited to the

school compound. Resources made available to schools — whether physical or in

terms of humanpower — are rarely felt to be directly beneficial for the community.

• The school can serve the community through providing professional advice and

expertise, and through either encouraging adult education or assisting in the

education of community members by sharing experiences, knowledge and skills.

Moreover, the school's physical facilities and infra-structures can be used for

community-based projects.

• Every community has a unique set of human , physical and financial resources that

can be used to enrich and assist the school educational programs, yet, in general,

schools neither draw nor benefit from this abundance of local resources.

65


• School and community collaboration can lead to an improvement in the

organizational skills of the community, particularly in administration and

management.

• Current socio-economic problems m a y lead to the deterioration of community

potential, and to deal effectively with risks of such critical importance, all

community potential should be mobilized, including the humanpower at the

school level.

• Education, in reality, is a process which is not limited to the formal structures

provided through government or community resources; it is a life-long process.

It is therefore essential that formal education re-focus its mission so that the

education is offers is a systematic and well-organized element of a learning

process which is understood to be relevant for all persons, and therefore life-long.

Objectives of the program

These are as follows:

• T o raise and consolidate a sense of awareness, consciousness and sensitivity

a m o n g participants so that they can contribute in a committed and responsible

manner to the development of a healthy society.

• If a positive sense of identity and morale is to exist a m o n g all Malaysians, it is

essential that a national confidence be recovered in the value of learning. The

program focuses attention on this premise and contributes through strengthening

the commitment a m o n g participants of the program to work collectively in

educational activities at the community level.

• T o provide the participants with the necessary skills in planning, organizing and

implementing changes at the community level through appropriate approaches.

• T o consolidate the positive qualities of perseverence and willpower a m o n g

participants so that they can become catalysts in the struggle to achieve high

moral standards and social pride.

66


• T o sensitize participants to greater awareness and understanding of the nation's

plight as seen through a historical perspective, with the aim of re-discovering in

society the traditional concepts of a united community and of Urn or knowledge.

• T o develop and nurture individual potential (physical, mental and spiritual) so that

all individuals can understand, administer, manage and satisfy their individual

needs and the needs of others.


Throughout the program, efforts will be focused on consolidating community

activities in order to strengthen their impact. The targets selected for program

implementation are as follows:

All individuals

Overall, the program aims at consolidating efforts to increase the awareness of the

potential of the individual in society in order to increase the commitment and

responsibility among individuals for their personal development and for the well-being

and development of those with w h o m they live.

The family unit

The program aims at promoting the image of the family as a unit which not only

assimilates knowledge but disseminates it also. Through its activities, the program will

work towards ensuring that families (i) are aware of the central role they can play in

strengthening the social and cultural fabric of society, and (ii) begin to assume their

responsibility in this regard and contribute to building stable foundations and to working

for an improved quality of living.

The community

The program contributes to developing organizational skills among members of

the community by working to provide a conducive environment in which efficiency ~ in

terms of the organization of humanpower and of the physical and natural environment —

will result in the achievement of organizational excellence.

67


Nation building

Through the greater social awareness built up among members of the community

through the program, people should become more active in working to ensure national

security, h u m a n integrity and social prosperity.

The school unit

Effort is being m a d e to increase the effective use of the school as a formal

institution of learning and as a nexus for community reform and capacity-building.

The community

Schools are encouraged to draw on community resources such as available

expertise through consulting professionals and requesting assistance, and also through

organizing the use of physical and infra-s true rural facilities readily available in the

community.

Strategic groups and organizations

The program is planning to mobilize strategic government and non-government

group organizations at various levels and/or strata.

68


Institute for the Development of Educational Administrators

(IDEA)

Thailand

By Mr Somsak T. Suntarodom

The Institute for the Development of Educational Administrators (IDEA) was set

up in M a y 1979 under the direction of the Office of the Permanent Secretary of the

Ministry of Education to serve as a specialized training institution for the needs of the

Ministry. In February 1982, the Ministry of Education authorized the I D E A to expand its

activities by setting up a training network composed of twelve training centers servicing

the country's twelve Regional Offices of Education. A Regional Education Officer acts

as Training Director for each center and the Chancellor of the teacher training college is

the Deputy Director.

While it is held that administrators at every level need continuously to develop

new knowledge, skills, concepts and techniques in administration to cope effectively with

the changing world of economy and technology, studies have shown that in fact many

administrators spend most of their time carrying out organizational missions, and as a

result are not in a position to acquire the new skills society requires of them. In

establishing the I D E A , the Ministry of Education recognized the importance of

co-ordinating and serving the training needs of all Ministry Departments. It is planned

that training resources will be effectively and economically managed by the Institute, and

that it may function as a venue for administrative personnel from various Departments to

come together to build co-operative working relationships for the attainment of c o m m o n

goals under policies directed by the Ministry of Education.

I D E A ' S mandate

1. It serves as a center for the development of educational administrators (both

in-service and prospective), providing them with up-to-date management

knowledge, skills, attitudes and techniques in education, and promoting an

understanding of official policies of the Ministry of Education.

2. It functions as an educational research and development center to provide new and

effective ideas, concepts, and practices on educational administration.

3. It grants consultancy services to educational management agencies working in

education.

69


4 . It provides information services on educational management through its library

which is specialized in teaching and learning media on educational administration.

Organized structure of I D E A

T o attain the mandated goals, the I D E A operates with the status of a Division of

the Office of the Permanent Secretary of Education. The Director is appointed by the

Permanent Secretary of Education, and the Institute is designed and operates through a

network system. At the I D E A headquarters located at Sampran, Nakornpathom, training

is provided mainly to high-level educational administrators, while at the twelve Regional

Training Centers the training offered is limited to entry-level educational administrators

only.

Currently, the I D E A has about 90 staff members. About sixty of these are

involved in training, and the others are support staff. Around twenty persons are invited

as guest lecturers or resource persons for each training program.

The I D E A was allocated 32.6 million baht (roughly 1.3 million U S dollars) for

it's operations in 1989 when 77 pre-promotion training programs were conducted for

3,370 trainees ~ 40 of these programs were launched at regional training centers.

Nineteen in-service training programs were conducted in the same year for 600 trainees

and seven seminar programs were attended by a total of 540 participants.

Training curriculum development

The Institute has created a Training development model which outlines the

development stages of a training program before it finally receives clearance as being

appropriate for specific needs. This process m a y be divided in six stages: (i) needs

assessment and analysis; (ii) training requirements; (iii) cost benefit, cost effectiveness;

(iv) objectives and tests; (v) instructional design; and (vi) development of materials. The

course is then implemented, and materials, activities and evaluations are recorded for

future application and reference.

70


Training programs offered

These can be classified under four headings:

Pre-promotional training programs (twenty-three working days)

All Ministry of Education Departments are served through these programs which

aim at preparing qualified potential educators to act as educational leaders and

administrators.

In-service training programs (fifteen working days)

These comprise mainly cross-section training of top-level administrators at the

central administration of the Ministry of Education and at the local level with the aim of

enhancing the co-ordination and co-operative working relationships among Departments.

These programs m a y be offered to Departments upon request.

Specialized training programs (five working days)

These are organized to provide knowledge and skills in emerging management

techniques and technologies, and are offered according to the needs of various

Departments of the Ministry of Education.

Seminars and brainstorming courses on special issues (five working days)

These focus on special issues of educational management in order to find

solutions to c o m m o n problems facing various Departments. The philosophy behind this

training approach is increasing participation and co-ordination among Departments to

solve educational management problems effectively.

Training relevant to collaboration on resource mobilization and utilization

Functioning as a Ministerial training institute, the I D E A ' S training curricula have

been designed to contain courses relevant to collaboration on resource mobilization and

utilization in educational development. T w o courses are worth particular mention here,

and these are discussed below:

71


Community Relations Development Course

This course (three training hours) — offered as part of the pre-promotional training

curriculum — is devoted to community resource mobilization through the development of

school-community relations.

The objective of the course is to provide trainees with the knowledge, attitudes,

and skills to improve and manage school-community relations in order to ensure the

building of capacities and individual abilities in the following areas:

• managing schools in accordance with the national education plan concerning the

roles and functions of the school in regard to the community;

• applying school management concepts and principles in developing

school-community collaboration;

• being a community leader in the capacity of school administrator;

• setting the guidelines, roles and functions of the school in developing

collaboration with the community; and

• analyzing and solving problems arising between the school and the community.

The contents of the course comprise:

• analysis of national education plans relating to policy and strategies regarding

community collaboration and development;

• methods of studying and analyzing community characteristics;

• guidelines and methods of school-community relations development;

• joint utilization of resources between the school and the community;

• roles and functions of administrators and educational personnel in developing

collaboration and relations between the school and the community.

Since course participants will have served in a management team capacity in then-

schools prior to attending training, training modalities and activities of the courses are

mainly situational and problem-based discussion, and case studies, supplemented by

lecturing on emerging trends and techniques of managing school-community

collaboration.

72


School cluster management course

The Ministry of Education manages primary education through the Office of the

National Primary Education Commission ( O N P E C ) which was set up by the National

Primary Education Commission Act 1980. Under the authority granted to it by the Act,

the O N P E C issued a regulation on school cluster management in 1980 which specifies

criteria for setting up school clusters, the scope of the activities of clusters, and

management functions and procedures. The guidelines outlined in the Act are used by the

I D E A as the foundation for it's training programs in primary education cluster

management.

The School Cluster Management Course (three training hours) ~ devoted to

management techniques in mobilizing, sharing, and utilizing educational resources among

schools in the cluster ~ is part of the pre-promotion program for school principalship. It

was designed with the following objectives and training activities:

• reviewing the school cluster management concept, the procedures currently in use,

and their future development;

• developing knowledge of the roles and skills of the school administrator w h o

participates in the school cluster board;

• discussing the experiences and problems involved in school cluster management;

• brainstorming on the strategies and management techniques employed in sharing

resources among cluster members;

• developing a proposal on h o w to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of

school cluster management with the support of district and provincial primary

education offices, and the O N P E C .

A one-day field trip to an outstanding school cluster is organized close to the end

of the training to reinforce the knowledge acquired. Trainees are then required, in groups,

to prepare and present a paper reflecting on the experiences, ideas and suggestions they

learned after the visit study.

73


Training methodology: efficiency versus effectiveness

The training methodology at the I D E A is on a continuum from efficiency to

effectiveness. However , the I D E A is gearing itself more towards effectiveness and

excellence training which puts the emphasis on outcomes and prepares administrators to

use creativity and innovation in their work. This type of training encourages the

manipulation of rules and resources rather than a strict ideology of the correctness of

procedures, in order that tasks are completed to the highest quality. The training is thus

goal-oriented. I D E A believes that the challenge of equipping Thai educational

administrators with training in a proactive- rather than reactive-style of management is a

major responsibility insofar as this type of management has the potential to ensure

progress.

Trainees' experience and expertise is used in the training process, and methods

such as case studies, role simulations and role plays dominate the training process. The

effectiveness and excellence training concept is applied at the Institute whenever

possible, and particularly in training programs of high-position administrators such as

Provincial Education Superintendents and Directors of Provincial Primary Education

Offices. However , efficiency training still exists in a group of task-oriented subjects such

as laws and regulations, budgeting, finance and accounting, and facilities and materials

procurement.

Initiatives for the future

T h e I D E A has a significant role to play as a catalytic agent of development in

implementing the ministerial policies of educational development through training. T o

fulfil this role, it is planning a national three-day seminar on the subject of

school-community collaboration to arouse awareness and brainstorm ideas and practices

which could contribute to success of the policy.

A workshop on local support for primary education is also being planned.

Participants will be school principals and leaders of local organizations. The objectives

and activities of the workshop are to develop strategies and procedures for mobilizing

local support from parents, individuals, local organizations, industrial and business firms

and religious bodies. Particularly, the strategies and procedures to be developed would

be h o w to mobilize local support in these three forms of contribution: capital investment,

74


recurrent expenses and service contributions. It is expected that the workshop will

provide effective management guidelines, tools and linkages between schools and

communities.

75


National Institute of Educational Planning and Administration

(NIEPA)

India

By Dr Pramila Menon

The National Institute of Educational Planning and Administration (NIEPA) is an

autonomous body set up by the Government of India as the national apex institution in

the field of educational planning and administration. Over the last 25 years, the Institute

has provided services in the areas of educational planning and administration to the Union

and State Governments and other organizations within the country and also to several

other countries, particularly of the Third World. It has close links with national

organizations in India, and with agencies like the International Institute for Educational

Planning in Paris, the U N E S C O Regional Office in Bangkok, and the Commonwealth

Secretariat in London.

N I E P A ' s main areas of activity are: (i) training of educational planners and

administrators, (ii) research, (iii) diffusion of innovations, and (iv) consultancy services.

Training programs offered by N I E P A

Programs for Indian Personnel

The N I E P A organizes seminars, workshops and training programs each year for

various government departments involved in education in India. The seminars and

workshops are intended to generate discussion and provide a forum for the preparation of

work-plans on important issues concerning educational policies and programs and their

implementation. The training programs ~ either cadre-based or thematic ~ are generally

aimed at sensitizing the participants to new educational developments, acquainting them

with modern techniques of educational management, enhancing their capabilities and

bringing about changes in attitudes with a view to ensuring greater efficiency in

educational planning and administration.

The thematic programs deal with a variety of subjects ranging from micro-issues

in educational planning and management such as School Complexes, School Mapping

and Educational Planning in a District to macro issues such as the Planning and

76


Management of Universal Elementary Education Program, the Management of Incentives

for Children of Weaker Sections of Society, the Management of Adult Education

Programs and Distance Education, etc.

The cadre-based programs are aimed at a variety of educational personnel. Each

program is designed to suit the requirements of the target group, and a lot of effort goes

into the preparation of the design, readings, appropriate teaching-learning methodologies,

and organization of the program. The training covers a wide spectrum of themes such as

Current Issues in Education; Multi-level Planning; H u m a n Resource Development; and

Leadership. Special attention is given to implementation of the National Policy on

Education, removal of disparities, implementation of the National Literacy Mission, etc.

National Diploma Course

The Diploma Course in Educational Planning and Administration is offered

annually for recruited or newly promoted district education officers, in-service D E O s and

Officers of equivalent rank involved in the planning and management of education.

Training of Indian Administrative Service (IAS) Personnel

In response to a request by the H o m e Ministry, the Institute organizes special

training programs for officers of the Indian Administrative Service with the aim of

familiarizing them with the latest problems and techniques of educational planning and

administration.

Programs for foreign personnel

These include regional workshops on the future of education, long-term

educational planning, education and rural development, environmental education,

micro-level planning, complementarity between formal and non-formal education and the

exchange of experiences in the field of educational facilities. Most programs of this type

have to date been sponsored by U N E S C O .

The objectives of the international programs are to augment national training

capabilities and competencies in educational planning and administration.

77


International Diploma Course

The International Diploma in Educational Planning and Administration (ГОЕРА)

has been offered at the Institute since 1985. The course broadly aims at training

educational planners and administrators of Third World Countries to understand

educational development with special emphasis on the universalization of elementary

education; vocational education; the development of skills in analysis, statistical

interpretation, forecasting, project preparation and the processes of macro- and

micro-level educational planning; the improvement of capabilities for designing and

managing information systems of education; and monitoring and evaluation. The

Diploma consists of three months of course-work in N Œ P A and three months of project

work in the participants' countries.

N I E P A ' s Research Program

O n e of the major n e w thrusts of N Œ P A is its Research Program. This is intended

both to link research and training so that the former serves as a vital input into the

Institute's various training programs and as a useful aid to policy-makers, planners and

educational administrators in their decision-making and planning.

The N I E P A ' s research activities are varied and include action research, surveys,

analytical studies and research projects having policy implications for different sectors of

education. A m o n g the studies which have been completed in the recent past are: the

administration of elementary education in the nine educationally backward states of India

in the context of the universalization of elementary education, school inspection systems

and practices, diagnostic studies of educational administration in India, educational

financing in Kerala and Uttar Pradesh, higher education and employment in India,

policies and perspectives in India with special emphasis on health and nutrition, and

teacher-pupil ratios for schools in India.

Projects in hand

The Institute is currently engaged in a number of research projects. These cover

different aspects of educational planning, administration, policy financing and

management. There are projects like the educational development of some tribal sub-plan

areas; school 2000 A . D . - a long term perspective action research based on innovative

practices in education in a cluster of 20 villages in Punhana, district gurgaon, Haryana;

78


management of change in education; resource allocation mechanisms in selected thrust

areas of higher education; regional disparities in literacy; and experiences of Latin

American countries in non-formal education.

Research assistance

The scheme of assistance for research has been newly instituted by N I E P A in

order to undertake, promote and coordinate research in various aspects of educational

planning and administration, including comparative studies in planning techniques and

administrative procedures in different states of India and in other countries of the world.

Associateship

Under the associateship program scholars from-India and other countries m a y

pursue a post-doctoral work in the Institute for a year in the field of educational planning

and administration.

Diffusion of innovations

In order to serve as a catalytic agent in the diffusion of innovative practices

adopted by various states in the area of educational planning and administration, the

N I E P A undertook an in-depth study of the Innovative Rapport-Based Program of School

Complexes in Maharashtra. It also examined the system of school complexes in other

states. The results of the study have been published under the title "Revitalizing School

Complexes in India".

Consultancy and other services

N I E P A has provided consultancy services to various States and U T s for

re-organization of their Departments of Education. For example, it has evolved norms for

the opening and upgrading of schools, the transfer of teachers, the construction of

buildings, etc. at the request of Haryana. It also assists the Government of India and the

states in the Universalization of Elementary Education Program and the National Literacy

Mission.

79


N I E P A ' s Publication Program

The Publication Program is devoted to educational planning and administration

including books, monographs, journals/periodicals, occasional papers, research

reports/studies, etc. A Quarterly Journal of Educational Planning and Administration

provides information and ideas on training, research and extension in the field of

educational planning and administration including articles, summaries, documents, and

book abstracts. In support of this work, N Œ P A has a library, documentation centre and

computer centre.

80


SEAMEO INNOTECH (Regional Center in Educational Innovation and Technology)

Philippines

By Dr Efrain Abracia

S E A M E O is the acronym for the Southeast Asian Ministers of Education

Organization which currently oversees the operation of Research and Training Centers in

six Southeast Asian countries: in Brunei (VocTech), Indonesia (BIOTROP) , Malaysia

( R E C S A M ) , the Philippines ( S E A R C A and I N N O T E C H ) , Singapore (RELC) and

Thailand (SPAFA and T R O P M E D ) .

The mandate of I N N O T E C H is to serve as a problem-solving arm of S E A M E O in

the area of educational innovation and technology. - It is thus involved in staff

development and training, developmental research, and information dissemination.

I N N O T E C H Training Programs

The courses organized by S E A M E O I N N O T E C H comprise regular and special

courses and attachment programs. The regular courses are planned according to the

theme of "greater learning effectiveness for all" as outlined in the Center's Fourth

Five-Year Program, 1991-1996. Special courses are organized in response to requests

from Ministries of Education and educational institutions. Attachment programs are

organized in response to requests from U N E S C O Bangkok.

The training programs focus on educational planning; educational management;

instructional/delivery systems improvement; instructional supervision; project/program

monitoring; and the organization of N F E activities. Evaluation is carried out using an

innovative problem-solving method, and is accorded much importance.

Training courses offered under the Fourth Five-Year Development Program (1991-96):

The courses listed below are of two weeks to three months duration and are

conducted on an annual basis:

• Educational planning, management, innovation and technology.

• Promoting learning effectiveness through research and evaluation.

• Educational management and supervision for greater learning effectiveness.

81


School-based evaluation: use of educational indicators (new course).

Monitoring and evaluation procedures for non-formal education programs.

Evaluation in values education.

Training trainers for remedial education.

Computers for efficient educational administration.

Computers for curriculum developers.

Computers for teacher trainers.

Developing thinking skills.

Building scenarios in education.

Forecasting educational m a n p o w e r needs/training.

Individualized modularized instruction.

Special topics of current interest in non-formal education.

Training activities focusing on the facilitation öf greater collaboration within

schools and clusters, and between the school and the community, focus on (i) context

and/or problem analysis, (ii) brainstorming for ideas towards a solution, and (iii)

development of proposed solutions (project proposals). Courses are organized at the

school and cluster levels according to the concept that if educational/school problems

cannot have been caused by one person solely neither can they be solved by one person

alone — it is emphasised that the principal of a school cannot alone be held responsible

for the problems that exist, and that solving problems requires the co-operation,

collaboration, advice and participative involvement of educators and the community.

Other training courses focus on non-formal education problems with action based at the

school and community levels.

Clientele served by I N N O T E C H training programs include:

• educational planners (deputy directors, section heads, senior planning office

staff);

• educational administrators/managers at various hierarchical levels (assistant

school superintendents, district education officers, district supervisors/inspectors,

school principals, assistant principals);

• instructional supervisors;

• curriculum developers;

• educational researchers and evaluators;

• faculty deans and heads of departments;

82


• members of staff development institutions;

• non-formal education organizers/supervisors/monitors;

• educational project implementation staff.

The training techniques used at the Center include group dynamics; module

reading and interacting; and small group work (2 to 6 persons or more) and seminars.

Lecture-discussion sessions are frequently media-assisted, and fishbowl and

brainstorming techniques are used as well as activities such as simulation games with role

playing, hands-on learning activities and educational visits. Learning is

computer-assisted, and video and slide-tape presentations are also used.

83


Asia-Pacific Program of Education for All P R O A P / U N E S C O

Thailand

By TM. Sakya Education Adviser and Coordinator, APPEAL

The role of P R O A P / U N E S C O in promoting basic education

Since its inception in 1946, U N E S C O has taken a leading role in the promotion of

basic education. The first primary education for all project in the Asia-Pacific Region

was the Karachi Plan initiated in 1960. Although many countries did not achieve the

target set by the Karachi Plan of providing seven years of primary education for all

children remarkable progress was made between 1960 and 1980, and universal enrolment

in primary schools is n o w within reach in most of the countries of the region. But

retention and graduation rates of primary schools do not match the enrolment rates. In

the region as a whole, there are still 54 million drop-outs annually. Most drop-outs are

either girls or children of disadvantaged populations.

People in the region have come to realize that making primary education available

to all is not in itself sufficient. Ensuring quality educational achievement is even more

important. A s the achievement levels of primary school children are not satisfactory,

m a n y countries in the region are n o w engaged in introducing major program reforms to

increase enrolment ratios, reduce dropout rates and improve school achievement levels.

Cognizant of the problems associated with learning and achievement of children

in primary education, U N E S C O ~ in collaboration with M e m b e r States — organized a

wide range of national and regional programs and projects during the 1980s which

focused on critically important aspects which contribute to raising the learning

achievement of children. These various innovative national and regional programs led to

the launching of a joint innovative project to raise achievement levels of children in

primary education in 1985, in which nine countries participated (China, India, Indonesia,

Malaysia, Nepal, Philippines, Republic of Korea, Sri Lanka and Thailand). Follow-up

work on various aspects of the subject are n o w being taken in these countries with

U N E S C O / P R O A P support. The overall thrust of the project is to improve learning

achievement of children through the promotion of appropriate innovations and research in

such crucial areas as the early preparation of children, instructional strategies and

methods, teacher competency, parental and community involvement, and administrative

and supervisory support mechanisms. The areas for critical attention are:

84


• the effective preparation of young children for primary schooling;

• the implementation of more effective strategies and methods of instruction to

enable all children to attain a satisfactory level of competence in the basic skills of

numeracy, literacy and communication, as well as in the life skills — co-operating

with others, diligent and systematic work habits, etc. ~ and in one or more manual

skills;

• the provision of teachers with competencies, attitudes and perceptions necessary

to enhance pupil achievement and with the skills required to enlist out-of-school

resources;

• the effective involvement of parents and the community in the education of their

children; and

• ensuring that educational administration and supervision are conducive to the

enhancement of achievement among primary level children.

The number of literate people in Asia and the Pacific increased from 393 million

in 1960 to 1,377 million in 1990. The rate of literacy has also improved from 39.6 per

cent in 1960 to 68.7 per cent in 1990. Remarkable progress has thus been made towards

solving the problem, but there is a long way to go to achieve universal literacy in the

region. D u e to population growth, non-enrolments, and drop-outs in primary schools, the

number of illiterates increased from 600 million in 1960 to 628 million in 1980. Since

1980, the number has actually started to decrease, and it is forecast that it will fall to 562

million by the year 2000 if the present trend continues.

Asia-Pacific Program of Education for All ( A P P E A L )

In 1987, U N E S C O launched the Asia-Pacific Program of Education for All

( A P P E A L ) with the aim of promoting an "integrated approach to education for all" within

the framework of the Universalization of Primary Education (UPE); the Eradication of

Illiteracy (EOI); and providing Continuing Education for Development ( C E D ) .

The World Declaration on Education for All adopted by the World Conference on

Education for All held in Jomtien in March 1990 ~ which marks a watershed in the

history of basic education and an enormous challenge for us all ~ endorsed this approach

and recommended an expanded vision of education for all.

85


Following this Conference, U N E S C O / P R O A P convened a Second Meeting for

Regional Co-ordination of A P P E A L in October 1990, and U N E S C O Headquarters

prepared a Follow-up Action Plan to the World Conference. Based on the deliberations

and documents of those meetings, U N E S C O / P R O A P has identified certain priorities

areas for action. These include:

Preparation of National Plans of Action for Education for All

In order to implement the World Declaration on Education for All, each M e m b e r

State has been requested to prepare a National Plan of Action adopting integrated

planning and management systems to link all components of E F A . The approach should

be pilot tested at the micro level and extended gradually to the whole nation. U N E S C O ,

in co-operation with other U N Agencies and the Asian Development Bank, will provide

support to M e m b e r States in the design and implementation of the projects, and success

will depend on the mobilization of community participation in these efforts.

Improvement of basic education for girls, women, and disadvantaged populations

Illiteracy among girls and w o m e n is one of the most serious problems in m a n y

societies. During the period 1970 to 1985, there was a reduction of 14 million male

illiterates, while during the same period an increase of 28 million illiterates among

w o m e n was recorded. W o m e n ' s education is not only a technical issue — it is also a

structural one ~ and programs to raise awareness of the importance of education for

girls, to revise curriculum and learning materials which reflect their needs.

Under the Skills-based Literacy Project, assistance is being provided to M e m b e r

States to develop curriculum and learning materials which directly respond to w o m e n ' s

needs and help sustain their interests. Programs to raise civic consciousness and promote

role models for w o m e n are also being implemented. In all of these projects, success can

only be guaranteed if the involvement of w o m e n themselves, parents and community

leaders can be secured.

86


Improvement of the quality of basic education

Improving the quality of basic education is a complex process which needs

multi-disciplinary action at various levels. U N E S C O / P R O A P has undertaken a number

of projects to help M e m b e r States, one of the most important of these being the Joint

Innovative Project on raising achievement levels of children in primary schools. The

involvement of parents and the community has helped to m a k e the Л Р a success.

Analysis of the national studies of A P P E A L which have been presented by eleven M e m b e r States reveal that effective strategies have always combined primary education and literacy programs. The quality of the learning experience is essential to m a k e literacy programs meaningful for the learners and to help them to improve their quality of life. A P P E A L training materials and programs have been developed for literacy personnel to improve the quality of the programs they provide. A - n u m b e r of alternative learning materials have also been prepared in co-operation with the Asian Cultural Centre for UNESCO (ACCU).

Development of appropriate strategies for functional literacy and continuing education

A large number of children and youth drop out from primary schools and most of

those w h o complete primary school do not continue to secondary school. Without

post-literacy and continuing education programs, these pupils will relapse into illiteracy.

Furthermore, it is evident that in the rapidly changing technological environment, basic

literacy skills are not sufficient to equip youth for the job market. Functional literacy

programs and continuing education with special emphasis on science, technology and

n e w skills to neo-literates, youth and adults are required; these include the development

of appropriate curricula, training materials, the training of teachers, etc. Community

involvement will be most essential in the development of curriculum and learning

materials since these programs are fundamentally aimed at meeting the requirements of

the individual communities.

The countries in the region are involved in developing continuing education to

provide learning opportunities to neo-literates and literates through village reading

centers, public libraries, radio and correspondence courses, and short courses clustered

around health hygiene, family planning, sanitation, vocational courses, apprenticeship,

etc.

87


Monitoring and evaluation

In order to assess the progress in providing basic education for all at the micro-

and macro-level, effective monitoring methods and mechanisms, and innovative ways to

evaluate learner achievement and effectiveness of the projects need to be set up. Greater

use should be m a d e of the research expertise of national universities and research

institutions, and of community participation, in the development of these monitoring and

evaluation systems.

88


Asian Cultural Centre for UNESCO (ACCU)

Japan

By Mr Shinji Tajima

The Asian Cultural Centre for U N E S C O ( A C C U ) is a unique institution which

co-ordinates development activities with a "cultural" base. A C C U national centers are

involved in the promotion of literacy, and their activities in this respect include training

workshops focusing on the production of materials for literacy and textbook production.

A C C U central headquarters is in Tokyo where a meeting of representatives of all A C C U

centers in the region are held on a biennial basis.

W o r k s h o p s and textbook production

T o date, eight regional workshops have been coordinated by A C C U focused on

the production of materials to help the literacy drive following the Jomtien Conference in

1990. The Centre co-ordinates its activities with those of U N E S C O in M e m b e r States,

and is regularly involved in the co-production of materials and texts in different

languages.

Efforts are made to ensure that the concept of culture is always combined with

educational goals. Clarity and simplicity are of paramount importance, not only in terms

of the materials produced but at the administrative level also, in the procedures, and

throughout the projects and actions promoted by A C C U .

Various types of media are used, and a c o m m o n denominator in all of these is the

element of creativity and attraction. The materials fall into four general types: booklets

which are an easy w a y to present sequential material; posters which present the message

clearly; cartoon-style material as a useful device for attracting interest; and games to act

as an exciting motivator. The unit is involved on an ongoing basis in developing creative

means of interesting people in the media and in the printed word as part of its literacy and

basic education program. Such media are increasingly being aimed at the female

population, given the potential multiplier effect.

89


Co-operation and participation in textbook production is sought from various

sectors of government and the society/community, especially for production and

distribution. W h e r e textbooks are produced for use in primary schools, the writer,

illustrator and administrator must work closely together if the final product is to achieve

its objectives.

90

Ännei(es

Prof D r Harsja W . Bachtiar

Head , Office of Educational and Cultural Research and Development, Department of Education and Culture,

Republic of Indonesia

O n behalf of the Department of Education and Culture, Republic of Indonesia,

I have the honour and pleasure to welcome you all to this Cipanas mountain resort where

problems pertaining to school and community collaboration for educational change can

be discussed by educators, academics and administrators without being bothered by the

daily affairs of their respective offices.

I most warmly welcome the participants w h o have come from outside Indonesia:

from Bangladesh, India, Japan, Laos, Malaysia, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand and

Vietnam, and our supporters from Germany, and France (the site of the International

Institute for Educational Planning).

Everywhere in the world, and also in our o w n countries, there is pressure ~

constant and at times heavy - to bring about change in education. There is a recurrent if

not unceasing demand for change in the school curricula and in the textbooks which are

considered out of date or inadequate, in the teaching methods which are presently

considered too traditional and not sufficiently adapted to the advancement in educational

science and educational technology, in the competence of the teachers w h o apparently do

not perform in accordance with the demands of the times and whose skills therefore

require upgrading, and change in many other things presently considered unsatisfactory.

O n the other hand, when in response to these demands endeavours are undertaken

to bring about change in school education, these constructive endeavours are regarded as

a menace to the smooth functioning of the educational system. Ministers of Education

m a y be criticized for creating new policies rather than continuing to implement those of

their predecessors; and where they do not introduce new policies, they m a y be accused of

inaction as it seems so obvious that the entire educational system requires change.

The education system is expected to respond to the demands of a rapidly changing

society; a rapidly developing economy; a rapidly changing political culture; and a rapidly

developing information and mass communication system. At the same time, it is

expected to produce leaders and workers capable of building a better future - cohorts of

effective agents of change.

92

Speeches delivered at the seminar

Educational change can, of course, occur at different stages of the

decision-making process, and at different levels or in different sectors of the educational

system, involving different groups of civil servants in each case, thereby implying

different problems of collaboration.

Furthermore, the cultures of our countries, — and I refer here to the societal

symbolic systems which encompass beliefs, knowledge, values and norms, as well as

expressive symbols — the social and political structures, the levels of economic and

technological development, and a host of other things, are quite different.

In fact, within the territory of our Indonesian archipelagic republic, w e have more

than 400 different territorially-based ethnic societies, each with its o w n language, culture,

social structure, stage of economic development, and a lot of other things which are

manifestations of our diversity.

However , a number of very significant things unite all of us in Indonesia as one

nation. These include our unifying national language, Indonesian; a unifying national

culture; a unifying political ideology, the Pancasila; a unifying Constitution; a unifying

stable national Government, consisting of a combination of technocrats and military

officers; a unified government bureaucracy; unified A r m e d Forces; one c o m m o n national

territory; and not the least important of all, one national educational system.

A year ago in Indonesia w e adopted a comprehensive L a w on the National

Educational System. This law prescribes a number of radical changes. Specifically, it

recognizes the existence of two educational tracks as part of the national education

system, namely the school education and out-of-school education tracks. In the school

education track, three educational levels are recognized: namely,

• the basic educational level, comprising six years of education offered by primary schools, plus a three-year programme offered by what are n o w still generally k n o w n as junior secondary schools;

• the secondary education level, n o w limited to the three-year education offered by senior secondary schools and vocational schools;

• the tertiary education level, consisting of programs offered by universities, institutes, higher schools, and polytechnics.

The law also emphatically states that education is not the responsibility of the Government

alone, but of the relevant families, the Government and the community — a prescription

which is of m u c h relevance to the focus of the present workshop.

93


W e are n o w embarking upon changing the existing realities of our education to

conform to the newly adopted legal prescriptions which will have an important bearing on

our problems of school and community collaboration for educational change. These changes

m a y also highlight that a particular pattern of collaboration, such as I hope you will have a

chance to see at Cianjur ~ the A L P S project — m a y be effective for one level of

decision-making, at one level and in one sector of the national education system, relating to a

given community in a specified locality; but that this collaborative style m a y be effective

neither at other levels of the decision-making hierarchy, at other levels or in other sectors of

the educational system, nor in communities where the local language is different, or where

the local cultural tradition, religion and social structures, and m a n y other things, are distinct.

W e are therefore faced with the problem of which patterns of school and community

collaboration for educational change can be considered to be of general applicability and

which should be considered to be effective only in particular conditions.

I do not wish to introduce more problems nor to take up any more of your precious

time. Y o u have c o m e to hear from each other, to learn from each other, in our collective

effort to provide better education for our children in this Asian region. I n o w have the

honour of declaring this Regional Workshop on School and Community Collaboration in

Educational Change officially opened.

94


H . E . D r Isidro D . Cariño

Secretary (Minister) of Education, Culture and Sports and S E A M E O President

Philippines

Environmental change all over the world has greatly affected people's lives, bringing

about changes in values, traditions, customs and even culture, so that the development of

individuals and societies all over the world faces serious challenges. Changes in our

educational system will have to be implemented also if education is to be relevant to the

present and future needs of our societies.

M a n y nations have been confronted with environmental degradation and dislocation

as a result of civil strife. These conditions have caused further widening of disparities, and,

to the detriment of marginalized populations, have rendered even more scarce the resources

which are so vitally needed for social development.

Today, w e are witness also to the breaking up of unity at the most fundamental of

levels: the family unit. N e w phenomena, such as the increased use of drugs, are issues of

critical social importance which contribute to the deterioration and weakening of family and

social ties.

In the Philippines, radical measures m a y need to be enforced, as the country finds

itself faced with low cohort survival rates and achievement levels, a growing number of

out-of-school youth, and persistent illiteracy among certain pockets of the population.

Educational resources, which have remained inadequate and inequitably distributed using

conventional approaches, must be augmented through additional input from non-traditional

sources; and non-traditional as well as innovative delivery mechanisms shall have to be

implemented in order to reach the marginalized population. S o m e approaches of this type

have been effectively implemented such as the Inter-active Radio Learning developed by the

U S A I D and the Integrative Learning or Accelerated Learning systems developed in the

United States. Like all other approaches which have been developed in more advanced

countries of the world, these need to be adapted to local conditions before they can be

effective and relevant.

M a n y of you m a y be surprised that, as Secretary of Education, Culture and Sports in

the Philippines and President of S E A M E O , I have come to be present among you today,

rather than nominate a delegate from the Ministry to attend. I have come to hear your

discussion and the outcomes of your exchange on issues relating to the project of School and

95


Community Collaboration for Educational Change which is one of the important thrusts of

our Department. I a m here also so that I m a y better understand what the nations in Southeast

Asia and other parts of the world are doing in this area so that S E A M E O can perform as

effectively as possible in the region as an organization for educational change.

I take this opportunity to acquaint you with some of the educational changes n o w

taking place in the Philippines:

• M y country, like others, is struggling with the changes forced upon it through

advancement and progress. W e hold very strongly that the age-old traditions of our

society should not be erased in order to make room for development but should

remain an integral part of the value system which will develop through change.

Filipino students are encouraged to be assertive of their rights, while being always

conscious of their responsibilities as citizens. It is our aim that education should

contribute also to redressing the inequalities which m a y have existed in the past and

which led to feelings of inferiority and superiority among different ethnic groups of

the population. Our educational system should produce citizens w h o are honest,

confident and resourceful.

• W e have developed an educational philosophy, Edukasiong Filipino, sa hip, sa

Salita, sa Gawa. In English, this means "Education for Filipinos in mind, spirit,

words and deeds". Educated Filipino youth should be able to say with confidence

that they are proud to be Filipino.

• A national movement called K A B I S I G (meaning "working together" or "working

hand in hand") has recently been initiated by the Department of Education, Culture

and Sports ( D E C S ) , with the full support and motivation of President Corazón С .

Aquino. The movement operates with the collaboration and assistance of the Parent Teachers' Association (PTA). In 1990, in co-operation with the P T A and within the

framework of the project, the D E C S managed to repair more classrooms than had

originally been planned. In instances where m o n e y was not immediately available

due to bureaucratic red tape, the classrooms were repaired with the help of the P T A s

~ some borrowing m o n e y or using their o w n resources while waiting for the funds to

be granted or released by the Department of Public W o r k s and Highways.

The P T A has been a very good D E C S partner, and through its collaboration

and participation, the project in 1990 was a success. In 1991, the Ministry is n o w in

a position to handle not only repair work, but also the construction of n e w school

96


buildings. Through the assistance of the P T A s , civic organizations and religious

community groups, the construction of these buildings is likely to reach completion

before classes begin this year ~ this could not have been achieved without their

assistance.

• W e are introducing changes in our curricula also. The present curriculum is a very

academic and theoretical one. T o respond to the needs of society, w e have embarked

on a more work-oriented curriculum, where the development of vocational technical

skills a m o n g youth — through both formal and non-formal education systems - is an

important thrust.

O f course, the issues of resources and additional material inputs in education are

crucial ones. Traditionally, schools have been very dependent upon government support.

N o w , in view of the inadequacy of support available through government sources, w e are

requesting schools to seek other sources of funding beyond government ones.

M a n y changes are presently being pursued in schools and educational institutions in

the Philippines, but these are the major ones. It is our hope that our actions - and the seeds

w e have planted - will germinate and grow to provide the necessary ingredients for further

development in our country.

97


D r U d o K . Bude

G e r m a n Foundation for International Development

D S E — the German Foundation for International Development — is one of the major

German organizations of development assistance. Its mandate is to carry out specialized

training and to assist in organizing the exchange of experiences on development issues.

Despite the term "foundation", D S E is not really a funding organization. The foundation's

training activities and seminars are conducted in various areas through its Centres for

Agriculture, Public Administration, Economic and Social Development, Health, and through

the Education, Science and Documentation Centre. The D S E carries out these activities by

associating itself with competent professional bodies, such as the International Institute for

Educational Planning (IIEP).

The main concern in this seminar is the problem of improving the quality of primary

education. The lack of primary education (or, in broader terms, of basic education) for large

sections of the population in developing countries is increasingly impeding development

policy efforts and contributing to ecological destruction. Furthermore, the lack of basic

education makes people more prone to accept blindly fundamentalist ideologies which

detract attention from their privations. The educational situation in the developing world is

deteriorating dramatically. A growing number of these countries are spending less and less

on education, especially on basic education. At the same time, the quality of education

imparted in the institutions is worsening to a shocking degree. Schools in the Third World

are often open for only 500 hours or less in the year (the figures for the industrialized

countries are almost double). Public spending in the developing countries on education

dropped by 25 per cent between 1970 and 1980, while it rose sizeably in the industrialized

countries.

Until a couple of years ago expert opinion was still divided on whether or not

education was a development constraint in the Third World. Today, there is basic agreement

that education is vital to self-sustaining development in the Third World. Within this

context, the primary school — defined here as school facilities for classes 1-6 or 1-8 ~ plays

a key role since it affords a relatively economic way to provide the majority of children in a

country with a standardized and equal education.

Although the advantages of basic education have now been generally acknowledged,

in particular the direct and positive impact of a minimum education of four to six years on

income, farming productivity, family planning, nutrition, health and upbringing, support for

98


basic education is still a neglected area in G e r m a n development aid. In recent years less than

three per cent of all educational funds disbursed by the Ministry for Economic Cooperation

has been allocated to basic education. The W o r d Conference on Education for All in

Thailand in 1990, where donors were urged to redouble and coordinate their efforts in

supporting basic education in Third World countries, has changed the situation also in the

Federal Republic of Germany. A national initiative called Basic Education in the Third

World has endeavoured — via hearings of a Bundestag Committee, press conferences with

the Ministry for Economic Cooperation, and talks with those responsible for educational

cooperation ~ to build up a lobby for greater funding to sponsor basic education as part of

development aid. N o w a resolution has been passed by the G e r m a n Bundestag on basic

education in Third World countries, which calls on the government to engage itself more

actively than hitherto in this field. The n e w Minister for Economic Co-operation has several

times stressed the importance of basic education in the development process. Requests from

developing countries for support of basic education projects in their countries nowadays

stand a good chance of being carried out in joint ventures.

This seminar is looking into the possibilities of greater collaboration between

primary schools and the community for improving the quality of education. D S E supports

this seminar because:

(1) w e are interested in ways and means to improve the quality of education in primary

schools; and

(2) w e are looking specifically for alternative strategies to provide a qualitatively better

education.

Over the years, D S E has supported activities in curriculum development, the

development of materials for schools, teachers, and trainers, and the improvement of

classroom teaching, mainly in anglophone Africa. However, w e are also seeking experience

from Southeast Asian countries in these different fields, because there are still major

deficiencies in our knowledge concerning the improvement of the quality of education.

These include the following:

99


(1) our knowledge of what goes on inside the average classroom in developing countries

is rather deficient;

(2) there is little systematic evidence on h o w parents in developing countries react to

shortfalls in the quality of education services; and

(3) w e k n o w little about h o w far parents are prepared to assist and contribute to schools

that no longer guarantee economic advantages to graduates of the system because of

the lack of job opportunities.

W e hope that this seminar will shed some light on these important questions and that

the case studies and country reports will help us to clarify further the role and possibilities of

a closer collaboration between schools and communities for educational change.

100

AGENDA

Agenda

Wednesday, 29 May

09:00 Official opening

Dr Harsja Bachtiar, Ministry of Education and Culture, Indonesia

Dr U d o Bude, German Foundation for International Development

10:30 Coffee break

11:00 Dr Sheldon Shaeffer, International Institute for Educational Planning A framework for educational change through collaboration

12:00 Lunch

13:30 Presentation on school clusters

• Indonesia: CBSAISPP "Cianjur" project (ALPS)

15:00 Coffee break

15:30 • Thailand: School cluster program

17:00 Presentation on pupil collaboration

• Uganda: MINDSACROSS project

18:30 Dinner

20:00 Videos on innovations in education

Thursday, 30 May

Morning Field visit to Cianjur schools

12:30 Lunch

14:00 Presentations on government, school, and community interactions

• India: Promoting primary and elementary education (PROPEL)

15:30 Coffee break

16:00 • Bangladesh: Facilitation assistance programme on education (FAPE)

18:30 Dinner

20:00 Presentation on parent involvement

• Philippines: Parent learning support system (PLSS)

101


Friday, 31 íMay

08:00 Presentations on Indonesian school and community collaboration

• Research and Development Centre (Balitbang): Experiences in school and community collaboration

09:30 Coffee break

10:00 • Planning Bureau: Community Participation in the Planning and Management of Educational Resources (COPLANER)

12:30 Lunch

14:00 Presentations on national policies regarding parent and community participation

• Laos, Malaysia, Thailand, Vietnam

15:30 Coffee break

16:00 Small group work on factors and conditions required for more effective partnerships in education

18:30 Dinner

20:00 Presentation and video on the Field-Based Teacher Development Program (Pakistan)

Saturday, 1 June

08:30 Reports of small groups

10:00 Coffee break

10:30 Conclusions and recommendations

12:00 Closing

102

Agenda

íMonday, 3 June

Morning Reports of relevant training activities in the region

Indonesia • Pusdiklat: Centre for Personnel Education and Training • Planning Bureau:

Strengthening the Planning and Management Capabilities of the Provinces in the Education Sector (STEPPES)

Noon Lunch

Afternoon Malaysia: Aminuddin Baki Institute

Tuesdayj 4 June

Morning Thailand: Institute for the Development of Educational Administrators (IDEA) Philippines: SEAMEOINNOTECH

Noon Lunch

Afternoon India: National Institute of Educational Planning and Administration (NIEPA)

Discussion of assignments and formation of working groups

Reading of available course outlines and activities

"Wednesday, 5 June

W o r k in small groups on training guidelines, syllabi, and activities

4hursday, 6 June

Morning W o r k in small groups continued

Afternoon Reports of small groups

Closing

103

List of participants


Osâmes Addresses

Authors

Prof D r Moegiadi Secretary Office of Educational Research and Development Ministry of Education and Culture Senayan, Jakarta Indonesia

D r Jiyono Head Division of Research Network Development Research Centre (same address)

D r Pragob Kunarak Lecturer Faculty of Education Silpakorn University Sanamchan Palace C a m p u s Nakhon Pathom 73000 Thailand

D r A b u H a m i d Latif

D r Dj a m ' an S atori

Professor Institute of Educational Research Dhaka University 31/E University Staff Quarters Issa K h a n Road, Dhaka 1000 Bangladesh

Deptartment of Educational Administration IKIP Bandung Bandung, West Java Indonesia

D r M o n a Valisno Director National Educational Research and Testing Centre D E C S Complex Meralco Ave., Pasig Metro Manila Philippines

104


Government agencies

Laos M r Bounthong Vixaysakd Director-General Education Department Ministry of Education, Sports and Culture Vientiane

Malaysia Dato' Asiah A b u S amah Deputy Director-General of Education Ministry of Education Pusat Bandara Damansara 50604 Kuala Lumpur

Philippines H . E . Isidro D . Cariño Secretary Department of Education, Culture and Sports U . L . Complex Pasig Metro Manila

Thailand M r Punya Kaewkeewoon Supervisory Unit Office of the National Primary

Education Committee ( O N P E C ) Bangkok 10300

Vietnam M r Bui Gia Thinh National Institute of Educational Science 101 Tran Hang Dao St. Hanoï

Research and training institutions

Aminuddin Baki Institute Dr M o h d . Idris Jusi Sri Layang Genting Highlands Malaysia

IDEA M r Somsak Tuntisuntarodom Director Institute for the Development of

Educational Administrators Sampran Nakornpathom 73160 Thailand

INNOTECH Dr Efrain Abracia Director, Training Unit D o n Mariano Marcos Ave. Box 207, U . P . Diliman Quezon City, Metro Manila Philippines

NIEPA Dr Pramila M e n o n National Institute of Educational

Planning and Administration 17-B Sri Aurobindo Marg N e w Delhi, 110016 India

SEARRAG Dr Arfah Aziz Co-Coordinator Southeast Asian Research Review

and Advisory Group Principal, Language Institute Jalan Pantai Baru 59990 Kuala Lumpur Malaysia

106


Indonesia

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND CULTURE:

Directorate General of Primary and Secondary Education Dr Sardjono Sigit

Director Private Schools Jalan R S Fatmawati Cepete Jakarta Selatan

M r Wahjo Sumidjo Director School Students Affairs (same address)

M r Syahrul Abubakar Head Sub-Directorate of Primary Schools Directorate of Primary Education Jalan Hang Lekir П/16 Jakarta Selatan

Centre for Personnel Education and Training Dr N y o m a n Dekker

Director Jalan Raya Cinangka K M 19, Sawangan Jakarta

Planning Bureau Dr Axis Pongtuluran, dr., M P H Director Jalan Jenderal Sudirman Senayan Jakarta

M r A . Simanungkalit, M . A . Director, C O P L A N E R Project (same address)

Dr Colin Moyle Consultant C O P L A N E R Project (same address)

Indonesia contd.

East Java (Regional Office) M r A c h m a d D S Head Primary Education Division Jalan Gentengkali 33 Surabaya

West Nusa Tenggara (Regional Office) M r H . Dirawat

Head Primary Education Division Jalan Pendidikan 19 A Mataram

Office of Educational Research and Development Dr Anwar Jasin, M . E d .

Head Curriculum Development Centre Jalan Gunung Saharil Raya n°. 4 Jakarta

Drs Agus Tangyong Head Pre-School, Primary School and

Special School Curricula Curriculum Development Centre (same address)

Dr R . Soemardi Hs. Head Research Centre Jalan Jenderal Sudirman Senayan Jakarta

Dr Hardjono Notodihardjo Senior Researcher Research Centre (same address)

108


Indonesia contd.

Universities/IKIPS Dr Hans Mudjiman Head, Research Centre University of Sebelas Maret Jalan Ir. Sutami 36 A Kentingan Surakarta, Central Java

Dr H . R . Fakri Gaffar, M . E d . Vice Rector I IKIP Bandung Jalan Dr Setiabudi 229 Bandung, West Java

Dr Nana Syaodih Head Primary School Teacher IKIP Bandung Education Programme Jalan Dr Setiabudi 229 Bandung, West Java

MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS M r S.E. Mangiri Director Regional Development Program Jalan Kramat Raya n°. 132 Jakarta Pusat

MINISTRY OF RELIGIOUS AFFAIRS Dr Zarakhsayari Dhofie

Director Islamic Learning Institution Development Directorate General of Islamic

Institutional Development Ministry of Religion Jalan Lapangan Banteng Barat n°. 3-4 Jakarta Pusat

BAPPENAS ProfDrH.A.R. Tilaar Assistant to State Minister of the

National Development Planning Board Head, Education and Culture Bureau Jalan Taman Suropati n \ 2 Jakarta Pusat

Others


ACCU M r Shinji Tajima Chief Book Development Section Asian Cultural Centre for Unesco № . 6, Fukuromachi Shinjuku-Ku Tokyo, Japan

ASPBAE Dr W . M . K . Wijetunga Secretary-General Asian and South Pacific Bureau

for Adult Education 30/63A, Longden Place Colombo 7 Sri Lanka

DSE Dr U d o Bude Deutsche Stiftung für Internationale Entwicklung Hans-Böckler-Str.5 5300 Bonn 3 Germany

M s . Elizabeth Steiner Deutsche Stiftung für Internationale Entwicklung (same address)

IIE Dr Savitri Shahani Director Indian Institute of Education 128/2 J.P. Naik Road Kothrud Pune 411029 India

ПЕР Dr Sheldon Shaeffer International Institute for Educational Planning 7-9 rue Eugène Delacroix 75116 Paris France


Indonesian Teachers' Association M s . Mien S. Warnaen

Chairperson Jalan Tanah Abang III, ne

Jakarta 24

National Council for Catholic Education M r F. Darmanto

Secretary Jalan T . Cut Meutia n° Jakarta

10

UNDP Dr Doran Bernard Consultant 160/14 Soi Thonglor 6 Sukhumvit 55 Bangkok 10110 Thailand

UNESCOIPROAP M r T . M . Sakya Darakarn Building 920 Sukhumvit Road (Soi 40) P . O . Box N o . 1425 Bangkok 11 Thailand

M r Tun Lwin (same address)

111

П Е Р publications and documents

More than 650 titles on all aspects of educational planning have been published by the International Institute for Educational Planning. A comprehensive catalogue, giving details of their availability, includes research reports, case studies, seminar documents, training materials, occasional papers and reference books in the following subject categories:

Economics of education, costs and financing.

Manpower and employment.

Demographic studies.

The location of schools (school map) and sub-national planning.

Administration and management.

Curriculum development and evaluation.

Educational technology.

Primary, secondary and higher education.

Vocational and technical education.

Non-formal, out-of-school, adult and rural education.

Copies of the catalogue m a y be obtained from the H E P on request.

The International Institute for Educational Planning

The International Institute for Educational Planning (1ШР) is an international centre for advanced training and research in the field of educational planning. It was established by U N E S C O in 1963 and is financed by U N E S C O and by voluntary contributions from M e m b e r States. In recent years the following M e m b e r States have provided voluntary contributions to the Institute: Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, India, Ireland, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland.

The Institute's aim is to contribute to the development of education throughout the world, by expanding both knowledge and the supply of competent professionals in the field of educational planning. In this endeavour the Institute co-operates with interested training and research organizations in M e m b e r States. The Governing Board of the IIEP, which approves the Institute's programme and budget, consists of eight elected members and four members designated by the United Nations Organization and certain of its specialized agencies and institutes.

Chairman: Victor L. Urquidi, (Mexico) Research Professor Emeritus, El Colegio de México, Mexico, D . F .

Designated Members: Goran Ohlin, Assistant Secretary-General, Office for Development, Research and Policy Analysis, Department of International Economic and Social Affairs, United Nations. Visvanathan Rajagopalan, Vice President, Sector Policy and Research, Policy, Planning and Research, The World Bank. Allan F. Salt, Director, Training Department, International Labour Office, Geneva. Jeggan C. Senghor, Director, African Institute for Economic Development and Planning.

Elected Members * : Isao Amagi, (Japan), Special Advisor to the Minister of Education, Science and Culture, Ministry of Education, Science and Culture, Tokyo. Henri Bartoli, (France), Professor, University of Paris I, Pantheon-Sorbonne. Paris. Mohamed Dowidar, (Egypt), Professor and President of the Department of Economics, L a w Faculty, University of Alexandria. Kabiru Kinyanjui, (Kenya), Senior Programme Officer, Social Sciences Division, International Development Research Centre, Nairobi. Alexandre P. Vladislavlev, (USSR) , First Secretary, All-Union Council of Scientific and Engineering Societies of the U S S R , M o s c o w . Lennart Wohlgemuth, (Sweden), Assistant Director-General, Swedish International Development Authority, Stockholm.

* (one vacancy)

Inquiries about the Institute should be addressed to: The Office of the Director, International Institute for Educational Planning, 7-9 rue Eugène-Delacroix, 75116 Paris

school and community collaboration - unesdoc...

Documents