The Seven Myths That Make Education Difficult To Improve

Listening is seriously valued – you must listen to your elders, pay attention to your teachers… as if major wisdom is dangling on their lips and will be lost if not caught by the ears that very instant. Now that you can not only look up information but actually hear lectures on all conceivable topics on the internet, this is one notion that is already past its sell-by date. In fact, it should never even have been available in the ‘sell’ category. Ultimately, it is what we reflect on, try out, adapt and work into our own understanding that emerges as learning, something the ‘constructivist’ thrust of the current NCF keeps emphasizing. By continuing to practice ‘listening-to-teacher-explaining’ as the core pedagogy, we ensure our students don’t get around to learning in the manner and at the level they are capable of.
One reason why this continues to prevail is due to the notion that teacher must ‘control’ the class – and the class can be controlled only if the teacher has something to offer that can be held back at will – namely, explanation-giving talk. By treating themselves as the ‘source’ of learning, adults in general, and teachers in particular, manage to hold themselves in a position of power vis-à-vis children, choosing what and when to offer – and emaciate children (mentally). All this talk of ‘developing our human resource’ and the ‘demographic dividend’ will bear fruit only if adults seriously make an effort to give up this kind of ‘power’.
In many ways, therefore, this myth is a bigger blockage than you might anticipate, since it operates to defeat the purpose of our efforts after we have succeeded in bringing the teacher and the student into school for a duration that is long enough to enable learning. This is the hole in the bucket, or one big explanation of the continuing low levels of learning across the board.
Unfortunately, it is proving really difficult to deal with. Despite the enormous amount of resources and effort spent on teacher development, practice continues to revert to the listening mode. Part of the reason may be cultural – after all the concept of the guru \’giving\’ his knowledge to the disciple orally is three thousand years old, runs in our blood and makes it difficult for us to believe that teaching can be anything else. 
One of the ways to address this might therefore be societally – it is only when parents, communities, society itself start expecting teachers to something different that it might happen…

What does \’taking pride in being an Indian\’ mean?

Anyone working on curriculum or materials or education in general, ends up wanting children to take pride in being an Indian. But what does \’taking pride in being an Indian\’ mean? Though the idea of \’taking pride\’ can be questioned, here are some things a person \’proud of being an Indian\’ would do / not do (not in any particular order):

  • celebrate the uniqueness and successes of those who are \’different\’ from us – whether belonging to different religion, ethnicity, language, region, profession…
  • not spit out in the open anywhere (surprised? well, this is a leading cause of diseases like TB still being active and killing people)
  • stop complaining about what is wrong (hoping someone else will do something about it) and start taking small steps to make things better, and also urging others to do the same (there\’s power in numbers!)
  • not restrict their sense of identity to a state or a region or a sub-set of India…
  • taking the responsibility of being at one\’s best (whether in health, or talent or work or socializing) so that one can ADD to what is already good in India 
  • taking responsibility of keeping one\’s immediate surroundings at the best we can (in terms of things being well-organized and clean/hygienic as well as in an \’ecological\’ sense) 
  • not simply keep harping on the \’golden days\’ of India\’s past but be aware of what we are at present… and hence 
  • not be afraid to face what is really wrong, accept it and work to changing it (e.g. recognize the \’ugly Indian\’ who jumps lines, is rude and selfish, flouts rules and grins when he gets away with it. Or, of course, the bigger issues of poverty, security, discrimination…)



So what does it mean for you, to be a \’proud Indian\’?


And once we\’ve sorted it out, how should it reflect in our curriculum, materials, textbooks and classroom processes?

What does \’taking pride in being an Indian\’ mean?

Anyone working on curriculum or materials or education in general, ends up wanting children to take pride in being an Indian. But what does \’taking pride in being an Indian\’ mean? Though the idea of \’taking pride\’ can be questioned, here are some things a person \’proud of being an Indian\’ would do / not do (not in any particular order):

  • celebrate the uniqueness and successes of those who are \’different\’ from us – whether belonging to different religion, ethnicity, language, region, profession…
  • not spit out in the open anywhere (surprised? well, this is a leading cause of diseases like TB still being active and killing people)
  • stop complaining about what is wrong (hoping someone else will do something about it) and start taking small steps to make things better, and also urging others to do the same (there\’s power in numbers!)
  • not restrict their sense of identity to a state or a region or a sub-set of India…
  • taking the responsibility of being at one\’s best (whether in health, or talent or work or socializing) so that one can ADD to what is already good in India 
  • taking responsibility of keeping one\’s immediate surroundings at the best we can (in terms of things being well-organized and clean/hygienic as well as in an \’ecological\’ sense) 
  • not simply keep harping on the \’golden days\’ of India\’s past but be aware of what we are at present… and hence 
  • not be afraid to face what is really wrong, accept it and work to changing it (e.g. recognize the \’ugly Indian\’ who jumps lines, is rude and selfish, flouts rules and grins when he gets away with it. Or, of course, the bigger issues of poverty, security, discrimination…)



So what does it mean for you, to be a \’proud Indian\’?


And once we\’ve sorted it out, how should it reflect in our curriculum, materials, textbooks and classroom processes?

What does \’taking pride in being an Indian\’ mean?

Anyone working on curriculum or materials or education in general, ends up wanting children to take pride in being an Indian. But what does \’taking pride in being an Indian\’ mean? Though the idea of \’taking pride\’ can be questioned, here are some things a person \’proud of being an Indian\’ would do / not do (not in any particular order):

  • celebrate the uniqueness and successes of those who are \’different\’ from us – whether belonging to different religion, ethnicity, language, region, profession…
  • not spit out in the open anywhere (surprised? well, this is a leading cause of diseases like TB still being active and killing people)
  • stop complaining about what is wrong (hoping someone else will do something about it) and start taking small steps to make things better, and also urging others to do the same (there\’s power in numbers!)
  • not restrict their sense of identity to a state or a region or a sub-set of India…
  • taking the responsibility of being at one\’s best (whether in health, or talent or work or socializing) so that one can ADD to what is already good in India 
  • taking responsibility of keeping one\’s immediate surroundings at the best we can (in terms of things being well-organized and clean/hygienic as well as in an \’ecological\’ sense) 
  • not simply keep harping on the \’golden days\’ of India\’s past but be aware of what we are at present… and hence 
  • not be afraid to face what is really wrong, accept it and work to changing it (e.g. recognize the \’ugly Indian\’ who jumps lines, is rude and selfish, flouts rules and grins when he gets away with it. Or, of course, the bigger issues of poverty, security, discrimination…)



So what does it mean for you, to be a \’proud Indian\’?


And once we\’ve sorted it out, how should it reflect in our curriculum, materials, textbooks and classroom processes?

What does \’taking pride in being an Indian\’ mean?

Anyone working on curriculum or materials or education in general, ends up wanting children to take pride in being an Indian. But what does \’taking pride in being an Indian\’ mean? Though the idea of \’taking pride\’ can be questioned, here are some things a person \’proud of being an Indian\’ would do / not do (not in any particular order):

  • celebrate the uniqueness and successes of those who are \’different\’ from us – whether belonging to different religion, ethnicity, language, region, profession…
  • not spit out in the open anywhere (surprised? well, this is a leading cause of diseases like TB still being active and killing people)
  • stop complaining about what is wrong (hoping someone else will do something about it) and start taking small steps to make things better, and also urging others to do the same (there\’s power in numbers!)
  • not restrict their sense of identity to a state or a region or a sub-set of India…
  • taking the responsibility of being at one\’s best (whether in health, or talent or work or socializing) so that one can ADD to what is already good in India 
  • taking responsibility of keeping one\’s immediate surroundings at the best we can (in terms of things being well-organized and clean/hygienic as well as in an \’ecological\’ sense) 
  • not simply keep harping on the \’golden days\’ of India\’s past but be aware of what we are at present… and hence 
  • not be afraid to face what is really wrong, accept it and work to changing it (e.g. recognize the \’ugly Indian\’ who jumps lines, is rude and selfish, flouts rules and grins when he gets away with it. Or, of course, the bigger issues of poverty, security, discrimination…)



So what does it mean for you, to be a \’proud Indian\’?


And once we\’ve sorted it out, how should it reflect in our curriculum, materials, textbooks and classroom processes?

What does \’taking pride in being an Indian\’ mean?

Anyone working on curriculum or materials or education in general, ends up wanting children to take pride in being an Indian. But what does \’taking pride in being an Indian\’ mean? Though the idea of \’taking pride\’ can be questioned, here are some things a person \’proud of being an Indian\’ would do / not do (not in any particular order):

  • celebrate the uniqueness and successes of those who are \’different\’ from us – whether belonging to different religion, ethnicity, language, region, profession…
  • not spit out in the open anywhere (surprised? well, this is a leading cause of diseases like TB still being active and killing people)
  • stop complaining about what is wrong (hoping someone else will do something about it) and start taking small steps to make things better, and also urging others to do the same (there\’s power in numbers!)
  • not restrict their sense of identity to a state or a region or a sub-set of India…
  • taking the responsibility of being at one\’s best (whether in health, or talent or work or socializing) so that one can ADD to what is already good in India 
  • taking responsibility of keeping one\’s immediate surroundings at the best we can (in terms of things being well-organized and clean/hygienic as well as in an \’ecological\’ sense) 
  • not simply keep harping on the \’golden days\’ of India\’s past but be aware of what we are at present… and hence 
  • not be afraid to face what is really wrong, accept it and work to changing it (e.g. recognize the \’ugly Indian\’ who jumps lines, is rude and selfish, flouts rules and grins when he gets away with it. Or, of course, the bigger issues of poverty, security, discrimination…)



So what does it mean for you, to be a \’proud Indian\’?


And once we\’ve sorted it out, how should it reflect in our curriculum, materials, textbooks and classroom processes?

What does \’taking pride in being an Indian\’ mean?

Anyone working on curriculum or materials or education in general, ends up wanting children to take pride in being an Indian. But what does \’taking pride in being an Indian\’ mean? Though the idea of \’taking pride\’ can be questioned, here are some things a person \’proud of being an Indian\’ would do / not do (not in any particular order):

  • celebrate the uniqueness and successes of those who are \’different\’ from us – whether belonging to different religion, ethnicity, language, region, profession…
  • not spit out in the open anywhere (surprised? well, this is a leading cause of diseases like TB still being active and killing people)
  • stop complaining about what is wrong (hoping someone else will do something about it) and start taking small steps to make things better, and also urging others to do the same (there\’s power in numbers!)
  • not restrict their sense of identity to a state or a region or a sub-set of India…
  • taking the responsibility of being at one\’s best (whether in health, or talent or work or socializing) so that one can ADD to what is already good in India 
  • taking responsibility of keeping one\’s immediate surroundings at the best we can (in terms of things being well-organized and clean/hygienic as well as in an \’ecological\’ sense) 
  • not simply keep harping on the \’golden days\’ of India\’s past but be aware of what we are at present… and hence 
  • not be afraid to face what is really wrong, accept it and work to changing it (e.g. recognize the \’ugly Indian\’ who jumps lines, is rude and selfish, flouts rules and grins when he gets away with it. Or, of course, the bigger issues of poverty, security, discrimination…)



So what does it mean for you, to be a \’proud Indian\’?


And once we\’ve sorted it out, how should it reflect in our curriculum, materials, textbooks and classroom processes?

Indigenous Production by DRDO

There are 56 ongoing Mission Mode (MM) Projects with a cost of Rs 49424.54 cr. and 218 ongoing Technology Demonstration (TD) mode projects with a cost of Rs 13427.45 cr.

Above projects are directed for 100 percent indigenous productions, however a few projects have collaboration with foreign countries during development phase.

This information was given by Raksha Rajya Mantri Shri Shripad Naik in a written reply to Shri Tiruchi Siva in Rajya Sabha today.

We have to leave the teacher in the classroom, isn\’t it?

Parimal Patel
Two days ago, I had a discussion in my cluster to make school history and to make school bio-data (which was made by me for my school by spending extra time in the school). Teachers liked  my idea but said that that in which time they would make it? They have had a lot of work since June. I\’m asking this question because this is only one example – but there are so many policy-makers and the worker is only one. If we want quality we have to leave teacher in the classroom, isn\’t it? Please think about it – this is a more difficult question in primary education than any other.

Subir\’s response

Parimal (and many other friends struggling with the same problem) – you are right that the worker is one and policy makers are many, and all of them are trying to get the worker to do something or the other! So what can be done? Here are a few points for you all to consider:
  • The curriculum development process is one very important way to create a framework and common understanding so that the different decision-makers and policy-makers can think in a coordinated way. In the next few months this will be shared across the state and a process to coordinate accordingly will start. In the beginning, though, you can expect a lot of struggle, since everyone will not agree on what the SRG has developed! Be prepared for different ideas all trying to occupy the same place. 
  • When we work in the field, we do have to keep in mind specific actions. At the same time, don\’t worry if the teacher does not do what you are asking for – AS LONG AS HE/SHE IS WORKING TOWARDS THE SAME OBJECTIVE. The problem arises when the objectives themselves are different (as will happen this year in the Gunotsav). 
  • The need to leave the teacher to work in the classroom is really important. We have opposite views about what is happening: some claim the teacher has got too many non-teaching tasks, and some say that the teacher is simply not spending the time in the class. Which view is the correct one? I think both are. People like me will keep on working with policy makers to ensure that non-teaching tasks are reduced, and other colleagues at field level will have to keep on working to ensure that teachers do spend the time available in the classroom. 
  • I like the idea of the school bio-data. Maybe it does not have to be done in one go. How about putting up a chart or board, and letting teachers, children, even community members add things to it when they have the time. Then, perhaps after a month, in the morning assembly this can be shared (it is not necessary to keep doing the same things in morning assembly every day!). Different classes could be given the tasks in different subjects, related to the school bio-data (in language – do the writing work; in maths – make maps, tables with data; in social studies – trace the history; in drawing – make pictures of different aspects of the school, etc.). So making it a project, spreading it over time, and connecting it with ongoing processes might help. This has to do with how we imagine different things being done. 
  • Finally, pl also read the post on \’How Teachers Change\’, and also \’How Teachers Learn\’ in my blog.

We have to leave the teacher in the classroom, isn\’t it?

Parimal Patel
Two days ago, I had a discussion in my cluster to make school history and to make school bio-data (which was made by me for my school by spending extra time in the school). Teachers liked  my idea but said that that in which time they would make it? They have had a lot of work since June. I\’m asking this question because this is only one example – but there are so many policy-makers and the worker is only one. If we want quality we have to leave teacher in the classroom, isn\’t it? Please think about it – this is a more difficult question in primary education than any other.

Subir\’s response

Parimal (and many other friends struggling with the same problem) – you are right that the worker is one and policy makers are many, and all of them are trying to get the worker to do something or the other! So what can be done? Here are a few points for you all to consider:
  • The curriculum development process is one very important way to create a framework and common understanding so that the different decision-makers and policy-makers can think in a coordinated way. In the next few months this will be shared across the state and a process to coordinate accordingly will start. In the beginning, though, you can expect a lot of struggle, since everyone will not agree on what the SRG has developed! Be prepared for different ideas all trying to occupy the same place. 
  • When we work in the field, we do have to keep in mind specific actions. At the same time, don\’t worry if the teacher does not do what you are asking for – AS LONG AS HE/SHE IS WORKING TOWARDS THE SAME OBJECTIVE. The problem arises when the objectives themselves are different (as will happen this year in the Gunotsav). 
  • The need to leave the teacher to work in the classroom is really important. We have opposite views about what is happening: some claim the teacher has got too many non-teaching tasks, and some say that the teacher is simply not spending the time in the class. Which view is the correct one? I think both are. People like me will keep on working with policy makers to ensure that non-teaching tasks are reduced, and other colleagues at field level will have to keep on working to ensure that teachers do spend the time available in the classroom. 
  • I like the idea of the school bio-data. Maybe it does not have to be done in one go. How about putting up a chart or board, and letting teachers, children, even community members add things to it when they have the time. Then, perhaps after a month, in the morning assembly this can be shared (it is not necessary to keep doing the same things in morning assembly every day!). Different classes could be given the tasks in different subjects, related to the school bio-data (in language – do the writing work; in maths – make maps, tables with data; in social studies – trace the history; in drawing – make pictures of different aspects of the school, etc.). So making it a project, spreading it over time, and connecting it with ongoing processes might help. This has to do with how we imagine different things being done. 
  • Finally, pl also read the post on \’How Teachers Change\’, and also \’How Teachers Learn\’ in my blog.

We have to leave the teacher in the classroom, isn\’t it?

Parimal Patel
Two days ago, I had a discussion in my cluster to make school history and to make school bio-data (which was made by me for my school by spending extra time in the school). Teachers liked  my idea but said that that in which time they would make it? They have had a lot of work since June. I\’m asking this question because this is only one example – but there are so many policy-makers and the worker is only one. If we want quality we have to leave teacher in the classroom, isn\’t it? Please think about it – this is a more difficult question in primary education than any other.

Subir\’s response

Parimal (and many other friends struggling with the same problem) – you are right that the worker is one and policy makers are many, and all of them are trying to get the worker to do something or the other! So what can be done? Here are a few points for you all to consider:
  • The curriculum development process is one very important way to create a framework and common understanding so that the different decision-makers and policy-makers can think in a coordinated way. In the next few months this will be shared across the state and a process to coordinate accordingly will start. In the beginning, though, you can expect a lot of struggle, since everyone will not agree on what the SRG has developed! Be prepared for different ideas all trying to occupy the same place. 
  • When we work in the field, we do have to keep in mind specific actions. At the same time, don\’t worry if the teacher does not do what you are asking for – AS LONG AS HE/SHE IS WORKING TOWARDS THE SAME OBJECTIVE. The problem arises when the objectives themselves are different (as will happen this year in the Gunotsav). 
  • The need to leave the teacher to work in the classroom is really important. We have opposite views about what is happening: some claim the teacher has got too many non-teaching tasks, and some say that the teacher is simply not spending the time in the class. Which view is the correct one? I think both are. People like me will keep on working with policy makers to ensure that non-teaching tasks are reduced, and other colleagues at field level will have to keep on working to ensure that teachers do spend the time available in the classroom. 
  • I like the idea of the school bio-data. Maybe it does not have to be done in one go. How about putting up a chart or board, and letting teachers, children, even community members add things to it when they have the time. Then, perhaps after a month, in the morning assembly this can be shared (it is not necessary to keep doing the same things in morning assembly every day!). Different classes could be given the tasks in different subjects, related to the school bio-data (in language – do the writing work; in maths – make maps, tables with data; in social studies – trace the history; in drawing – make pictures of different aspects of the school, etc.). So making it a project, spreading it over time, and connecting it with ongoing processes might help. This has to do with how we imagine different things being done. 
  • Finally, pl also read the post on \’How Teachers Change\’, and also \’How Teachers Learn\’ in my blog.

We have to leave the teacher in the classroom, isn\’t it?

Parimal Patel
Two days ago, I had a discussion in my cluster to make school history and to make school bio-data (which was made by me for my school by spending extra time in the school). Teachers liked  my idea but said that that in which time they would make it? They have had a lot of work since June. I\’m asking this question because this is only one example – but there are so many policy-makers and the worker is only one. If we want quality we have to leave teacher in the classroom, isn\’t it? Please think about it – this is a more difficult question in primary education than any other.

Subir\’s response

Parimal (and many other friends struggling with the same problem) – you are right that the worker is one and policy makers are many, and all of them are trying to get the worker to do something or the other! So what can be done? Here are a few points for you all to consider:
  • The curriculum development process is one very important way to create a framework and common understanding so that the different decision-makers and policy-makers can think in a coordinated way. In the next few months this will be shared across the state and a process to coordinate accordingly will start. In the beginning, though, you can expect a lot of struggle, since everyone will not agree on what the SRG has developed! Be prepared for different ideas all trying to occupy the same place. 
  • When we work in the field, we do have to keep in mind specific actions. At the same time, don\’t worry if the teacher does not do what you are asking for – AS LONG AS HE/SHE IS WORKING TOWARDS THE SAME OBJECTIVE. The problem arises when the objectives themselves are different (as will happen this year in the Gunotsav). 
  • The need to leave the teacher to work in the classroom is really important. We have opposite views about what is happening: some claim the teacher has got too many non-teaching tasks, and some say that the teacher is simply not spending the time in the class. Which view is the correct one? I think both are. People like me will keep on working with policy makers to ensure that non-teaching tasks are reduced, and other colleagues at field level will have to keep on working to ensure that teachers do spend the time available in the classroom. 
  • I like the idea of the school bio-data. Maybe it does not have to be done in one go. How about putting up a chart or board, and letting teachers, children, even community members add things to it when they have the time. Then, perhaps after a month, in the morning assembly this can be shared (it is not necessary to keep doing the same things in morning assembly every day!). Different classes could be given the tasks in different subjects, related to the school bio-data (in language – do the writing work; in maths – make maps, tables with data; in social studies – trace the history; in drawing – make pictures of different aspects of the school, etc.). So making it a project, spreading it over time, and connecting it with ongoing processes might help. This has to do with how we imagine different things being done. 
  • Finally, pl also read the post on \’How Teachers Change\’, and also \’How Teachers Learn\’ in my blog.

We have to leave the teacher in the classroom, isn\’t it?

Parimal Patel
Two days ago, I had a discussion in my cluster to make school history and to make school bio-data (which was made by me for my school by spending extra time in the school). Teachers liked  my idea but said that that in which time they would make it? They have had a lot of work since June. I\’m asking this question because this is only one example – but there are so many policy-makers and the worker is only one. If we want quality we have to leave teacher in the classroom, isn\’t it? Please think about it – this is a more difficult question in primary education than any other.

Subir\’s response

Parimal (and many other friends struggling with the same problem) – you are right that the worker is one and policy makers are many, and all of them are trying to get the worker to do something or the other! So what can be done? Here are a few points for you all to consider:
  • The curriculum development process is one very important way to create a framework and common understanding so that the different decision-makers and policy-makers can think in a coordinated way. In the next few months this will be shared across the state and a process to coordinate accordingly will start. In the beginning, though, you can expect a lot of struggle, since everyone will not agree on what the SRG has developed! Be prepared for different ideas all trying to occupy the same place. 
  • When we work in the field, we do have to keep in mind specific actions. At the same time, don\’t worry if the teacher does not do what you are asking for – AS LONG AS HE/SHE IS WORKING TOWARDS THE SAME OBJECTIVE. The problem arises when the objectives themselves are different (as will happen this year in the Gunotsav). 
  • The need to leave the teacher to work in the classroom is really important. We have opposite views about what is happening: some claim the teacher has got too many non-teaching tasks, and some say that the teacher is simply not spending the time in the class. Which view is the correct one? I think both are. People like me will keep on working with policy makers to ensure that non-teaching tasks are reduced, and other colleagues at field level will have to keep on working to ensure that teachers do spend the time available in the classroom. 
  • I like the idea of the school bio-data. Maybe it does not have to be done in one go. How about putting up a chart or board, and letting teachers, children, even community members add things to it when they have the time. Then, perhaps after a month, in the morning assembly this can be shared (it is not necessary to keep doing the same things in morning assembly every day!). Different classes could be given the tasks in different subjects, related to the school bio-data (in language – do the writing work; in maths – make maps, tables with data; in social studies – trace the history; in drawing – make pictures of different aspects of the school, etc.). So making it a project, spreading it over time, and connecting it with ongoing processes might help. This has to do with how we imagine different things being done. 
  • Finally, pl also read the post on \’How Teachers Change\’, and also \’How Teachers Learn\’ in my blog.

We have to leave the teacher in the classroom, isn\’t it?

Parimal Patel
Two days ago, I had a discussion in my cluster to make school history and to make school bio-data (which was made by me for my school by spending extra time in the school). Teachers liked  my idea but said that that in which time they would make it? They have had a lot of work since June. I\’m asking this question because this is only one example – but there are so many policy-makers and the worker is only one. If we want quality we have to leave teacher in the classroom, isn\’t it? Please think about it – this is a more difficult question in primary education than any other.

Subir\’s response

Parimal (and many other friends struggling with the same problem) – you are right that the worker is one and policy makers are many, and all of them are trying to get the worker to do something or the other! So what can be done? Here are a few points for you all to consider:
  • The curriculum development process is one very important way to create a framework and common understanding so that the different decision-makers and policy-makers can think in a coordinated way. In the next few months this will be shared across the state and a process to coordinate accordingly will start. In the beginning, though, you can expect a lot of struggle, since everyone will not agree on what the SRG has developed! Be prepared for different ideas all trying to occupy the same place. 
  • When we work in the field, we do have to keep in mind specific actions. At the same time, don\’t worry if the teacher does not do what you are asking for – AS LONG AS HE/SHE IS WORKING TOWARDS THE SAME OBJECTIVE. The problem arises when the objectives themselves are different (as will happen this year in the Gunotsav). 
  • The need to leave the teacher to work in the classroom is really important. We have opposite views about what is happening: some claim the teacher has got too many non-teaching tasks, and some say that the teacher is simply not spending the time in the class. Which view is the correct one? I think both are. People like me will keep on working with policy makers to ensure that non-teaching tasks are reduced, and other colleagues at field level will have to keep on working to ensure that teachers do spend the time available in the classroom. 
  • I like the idea of the school bio-data. Maybe it does not have to be done in one go. How about putting up a chart or board, and letting teachers, children, even community members add things to it when they have the time. Then, perhaps after a month, in the morning assembly this can be shared (it is not necessary to keep doing the same things in morning assembly every day!). Different classes could be given the tasks in different subjects, related to the school bio-data (in language – do the writing work; in maths – make maps, tables with data; in social studies – trace the history; in drawing – make pictures of different aspects of the school, etc.). So making it a project, spreading it over time, and connecting it with ongoing processes might help. This has to do with how we imagine different things being done. 
  • Finally, pl also read the post on \’How Teachers Change\’, and also \’How Teachers Learn\’ in my blog.

An emerging mystery in education reform

Over the last two decades, the number of professionals / resource persons / researchers / academics has dramatically grown in two areas related to educational improvement / reform — planning and evaluation — but not so much in the part that comes in between: IMPLEMENTATION! We have more and more data on learning outcomes, provisioning or the lack of it, \’non-performance\’ of personnel, expenditure incurred and the like, but comparatively very little on, say, emotional incentives that help teachers change, or practices that enable diversity to become a resource rather than constraint, or ways in which debilitating hierarchies and lack of equity can be addressed in large scale, or how systems learn to be more responsive…

In particular, the ability to evaluate children\’s learning as well as programme \’outcomes\’ has seen the greatest degree of rigour and academic/professional depth. Suddenly, there is a large number of agencies undertaking research, assessment and evaluation, and \’data\’ related activities such as monitoring / tracking. And we have people who have studied in places such as Harvard / Cambridge etc. evaluating the work of those who went to somewhat less distinguished schools/universities, studied courses that didn\’t really prepare them to design or execute brilliant programmes…. And who, of course, are not really able to get teachers to be more committed or display innovation or even basic professional capabilities. Interestingly though, the various studies / data bases + analyses by the highly qualified minds come up with results that their less qualified counterparts can quite accurately predict beforehand!

So why are the highly qualified academics/professionals so involved with evaluation and planning rather than actually getting things done? I believe because it is EASIER – easier to point out what is going wrong than actually make it better, easier to give \’recommendations\’ than nitty-gritty details that might lead to improvement (and which you can learn only if you really dirty your hands and undergo the deep frustration that teaches you what works or doesn\’t).

Perhaps all this is doing a disservice – certainly more and more people in the system are coming to believe that whatever they do is not going to work, and will probably not stand up to the \’scrutiny\’ of these \’intelligent and knowledgeable\’ people. There is also a tendency to focus on what will \’please the researchers\’ – hence some states devalue all-round education to emphasize only reading and writing and numeracy; or are forever \’piloting\’ aspects that should be well-known after so many decades and therefore diverting energy from larger systemic reform that is required post-RTE. Looks like the law of unintended consequences is beginning to operate…

[At a later date I hope to write a more \’researched\’ and \’data/evidence-backed\’ piece elaborating on this – in the meantime, comments really welcome!]