(1) There always seem to have been good programs by
the government, but for various reasons they fail at
the implementation level. In this particular case, the
CRC and BRC structures exist, but are just empty
shells and not utilized. Your observation is that
there have been no models for how these structures
should be used and that there are no models for the
CRPs and BRPs as well. So they question is, why
didn't this happen as part of the DPEP program? Why
did they build the structures (the goals are laudable)
but did not follow up with ways to use them?
Basically, why did the DPEP programs fail?
Programmes such as DPEP, do not lend themselves easily to lables such as ‘failure’ or even of ‘success’. They are too large and multifaceted to lend themselves to such judgment. The reason why DPEP did not provide models for the BRC and CRC is because at least while the DPEP was on, they were busy implementing centrally designed training programmes; but there was no focus on the institution itself, or what its role should be within the system or in the long term. post DPEP this situatio is exacerbated. further more, although planning etc is supposed to take place at the district level, they continue to be only implementation points and all the planning happens at the state level.
(2) Mr. Jayadev
and his team's experience has been
that the teachers are truly interested in improving
the schools, but they hit a wall when it came to CRPs.
It partly seemed to be because the CRPs tended to be
senior teachers, with 2 decades or more of service,
leading them to be much less flexible than younger
teachers. They basically did not the seem to the see
the point of changing the way things are done today.
Have you faced that? If so, will their attitude
change when there are actually models to illustrate
the goals of DPEP?
You seem to be asking why do CRPs not want to change their attitude..... well, we have found that they are quite willing to, provided they feel you are serious about what you say, and that you also have the credibility. There has been too much superficial and ‘easy’ talk, which has added to their cynicism. They also need to feel that the system gives them space for initiative taking. In the absence of that, cynacism seems to be a good protective cover. We now know of many committed CRPs very wlling to implement new ideas.
(3) Do the CRPs only work in the CRCs, do they
continue teaching as well?
They do not continue with teaching, for the period that they are CRPs. it is a full time job.
(4) The proposal says the CRP Handbook was redefined.
So there existed one made by the DPEP program before?
Is it possible to get a copy of both the old and the
new? (the old is strictly for us to learn - we are
curious to know what it looked like and what changes
were needed. We have seen some govt. material from
other states and would like to compare). Is it
possible send us any other material you have related
to the certificate course for CRPs? Have the CRPs
shown interest in taking these courses?
we have a lot of materials, but it would not be convenient to send as it is quite bulky. your colleagues are welcome to come into our office to take a look.
(5) Do you have some more details on the materials and
books (list of books if any) that will be placed in
the CRC and BRC?
yes we do.
(6) Do you have sense of how the teachers will use
this space? My feeling on interacting with teachers
through Mr. Jayadev's program is that there are some
who are quite keen, and are quite keen on learning.
They come to meetings organized by Mr. Jayadev and ask
some excellent questions. But they come mostly during
the school day. Is it your expecation that that will
be same here - teachers will come during the school
hours, or will they come during out of school hours?
we wouldlike the CRC to become a reference space for teachers, and for the space to become a ‘library’ from where materials are borrowed, used in schools and returned. The space would also be used for monthlyplanning for teaching for teachers.
(7) Could you send us a copy of the parents handbook
we should be able to send you a soft versio from tehprinter.
(8) The proposal mentions Kollegal. Ideally we would
like to coordinate any support from us for this work
with the ongoing program Mr. Jayadev coordinates. Is
that possible? I am not sure whether there was an
overlap between the 72 schools we adopted and the 36
schools you worked with. Are you working with the
CRCs that the 72 schools come under? Ideally we would
like to work with a CRC/BRC that the 72 schools come
under. Similarly would it be possible to consider the
parents handbook from that point of view as well (use
in the schools we also work with)?
Our proposal is to start with Kolleagal, and to move to other blocks also. Chamarajangar where Mr. Jayadev is, is the next block. The hand book etc. can definitely be used widely across all the block ans in all the schools (both Mr. Jayadev’s and ours).
(9) Another question unrelated to the proposal - did the
textbooks ever arrive for the children? Do you have
any thoughts on how Asha can help lobby for more
timely distribution of textbooks?
Textbooks have reached many schools. I don’t think there is much role for Asha to lobby for in the textbook front. There is considerable media attention on the issue and a committment to distribute in time in this year. We can only provide feedback from the ‘ground’ on teh status when the new year begins.
(10) And what is the status of the politicization of the
SDMC committees ? (MLA having a say in the formation
of the committees?)
This continues and also continues to be contested. In addition there is now a move for the SDMC to be linked with the ZP-gram panchayat structure.