Digital Equalizer Program - Orissa

Digital Equalizer Program - Orissa

American India Foundation, through its flagship “Digital Equalizer (DE)” program has been working in the underprivileged government schools of Orissa, in association waith the School and Mass Education Department, Govt. of Orissa (S&ME) and Orissa Primary Education Programme Authority (OPEPA). Orissa being one of the most backward states of India in terms of resources and availability of basic infrastructure, posed peculiar challenges as far as the implementation of the Digital Equalizer program is concerned, which started in November, 2004 in a pilot scale covering 10 schools spread over two clusters – Bhubaneshwar having six schools and Angul having 4 schools respectively. The large scale model was formally launched in July 2006 and as of now we have covered a total of 160 High Schools, spread over 20 districts.

As we shifted gears to a large scale mode from 2006 onwards we faced a number of problems which while on the face of it appears to be generic are in fact to a large extent context specific. These have been summarized below:

1. Based as it is on onsite training of teachers we found that at the school level the normal flow of training was hampered due to various types of distractions starting from extra classes due to teacher absenteeism to teacher shortages as a result of vacant posts, school holidays, lack of understanding on the part of the headmasters who were mostly computer illiterate and avoid learning computers by giving the excuse of administrative work, moods, whims and caprices on the part of the teachers.
2. Lack of knowledge of computers and availability of the same to a great extent as far as the district education authorities were concerned.
3. Lack of understanding of issues which are often complex in nature as far as effective integration of technology in teaching is concerned, at the departmental level.
4. Absence of an overarching ICT for Education policy at the state level where the focus was more on a procurement model rather than on an output oriented model. In such a case as is common the learning component is completely missing.
5. Absence of a well thought out technology deployment model taking into account the total cost of ownership.[1]
6. Absence of a joint monitoring and evaluation mechanism in the absence of which it became a solo exercise on the part of AIF only. In a word there were serious problems of mainstreaming due to lack of institutionalization.
7. As far as training was concerned there were a number of issues the most critical of which was that adequate stress on the pedagogy component was missing which needed to be urgently fixed on the part of AIF.
8. More rigorous training of the DE master trainers based on well designed, training materials as well as capacity building of the master trainers on strategic management skills was required on the part of AIF, so as to cut down on the transmission loss at the school level.
9. A baseline, mid-line and end line study based on indicators which were rigorously worked out backed with a sturdy MIS was required to track the learning outcomes. In our experience the impact on Students, Teachers and Schools cannot be attributed directly to the ICT intervention per se as there are lot of other factors like presence of an exceptional teacher or “champion “ which could have contributed to the motivation level, arrest in the absenteeism, retention of concepts, increased communication and confidence amongst the student-teaching community.

Mutatis mutandis a strategically designed model well embedded within the government system was the need of the day and in order to take the program to the next level this was the way to do it – a system wide approach[2] was imperative. A system wide approach is designed to extract the full impact of deploying ICT in schools.

The points summarized above, provides the rationale behind adopting the “Resource Centre Training Model.”

Taking the program to a qualitatively higher level and building up on the work done so far, AIF and the School and mass Education Department (SME) Govt. of Orissa, has worked out the DE - Resource Centre Training Model, to be implemented in 104 schools of Orissa, spread over 6 geographically contiguous districts, consisting of 52 Secondary Schools and 52 Upper Primary Schools for the academic year 2010-12.

As part of this model AIF, in association with the SME Department has set up an Apex Level Resource-Cum-Training Centre in SCERT located in the state capital. This serves as a feeder centre to the Six Zonal Level Resource-Cum-Training Centre’s set up by SCERT in all the three Institute of Advanced Studies in Education (IASEs) and three corresponding District Institute of Education and Training (DIETs), spread over three revenue divisions.  The SCERT Resource-Cum-Training Centre will work for the capacity building of teacher educators, SCERT staff, and administrators of the State Education department. The six centres comprising the three IASEs and three DIET level centres will serve as teacher training centres, for the respective schools (one hundred and four schools) within their catchment area.

---

[1] Budgets only consider the immediate costs and seldom, if ever, consider the long term costs of purchasing, deploying and maintaining ICTs. For example, costs for replacements, disposal or even operating costs for refresher training, maintenance and technical support are often ignored. The sum of all this costs is called the TCO (Total Cost of Ownership).

[2] The Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) as discussed above captures all the components of a system wide approach. 

A two day Visit to Bangalore

I was in Bangalore on the 2nd and 3rd of December 2011, in connection with a meeting, related to the "DE Induction Training Manual," and visited three DE Schools - two in Bangalore City and the other one in Kolar and had the opportunity to interact with teachers, students, DE Karnataka team members. I was very impressed with the presentations made by the teachers in Kolar on a selected topic - an example of "micro teaching," we're by a particular period of 45 minutes duration was meticulously planned out/sliced, minute by minute with considerable detailing on the pedagogy part - where technology will be used, where chalk and talk will be used etc. which I feel is the core of effective integration of technology in teaching. In each of the DE schools of Karnataka, one such period is planned out by selected teachers in consultation with the Coordinators, every month.

The other thing which impressed me was that "Balmela" is now system embedded and every year between November and December such activities are carried out in all the DE Schools with great fun and fervour.

Subrat Sarkar

State Program manager

DE Odisha Team

American India Foundation Trust

One Day Resource Group Meeting - RNIASE Cuttack

I attended a one day resource group meeting for selected teachers of Cuttack district, held in RNIASE Cuttack on the 17th of December 2011. A total of 7 teachers participated in the one day meeting/workshop. I was able to have a very meaningful interaction with the group, who felt very positive about the training being conducted in the respective centres.
The following lesson plans/designs were prepared and presented as part of the meeting:

1. Structure of Atom

2. Know about Earth

3. Plant Cell

4. Structure and Function of Blood Cell

5. Poem - Nobody's Friend

6. Function of Eye

7. Thallophyta Plants

I really enjoyed each of the presentations and yes some of them - notably the "structure of the atom," "Structure and function of the plant cell"  and the one on "Thallophyta Plants," were worked in considerable detail and presented extremely well by the respective teachers. I personally feel that such workshops and sharing meetings are very fruitful in bringing about effective integration of technology in teaching.

Subrat Sarkar

SPM, Digital Equalizer Program,

American India Foundation Trust

Bomikhal, Bhubaneswar

Two Day Retreat - Corbett National Park

Attending the two day retreat was a first in many ways for me. It was the first time that the DE team was included as part of the retreat. It was the first time that the DE team was made to feel that it was part of a larger AIF family and not the "oh the DE people." Many a times I have felt that we are not part of the AIF staff and this was reinforced time and again during the visits to the office as part of the core group meeting.This was the first time that I felt like belonging to a larger whole - the AIF team, working with others to bring about serious socio-economic changes at the ground level. That some of the interventions are working and some of them needs to be streamlined, some of them are at the pilot stage are a different issue, but this is true that all of us are trying hard and really hard to bring about some changes, in the lives of the people we touch, including ourselves.

I really got an opportunity to sit back, relax and take a close look at the various programs as the respective teams went about making their presentations and answering all sorts of questions, raised by the participants - some of which happened to be of a very fundamental nature. In fact in the very process of answering one could sense the clarity of the concepts and the underpinning issues that became clear both to the audience as well as the presenter - the informal setting and the beautiful backdrop did the trick.

I for one got a lot of clarity as far as funding is concerned. How are funds raised, pledge drives conducted, restricted and unrestricted funding, necessity of working out a synergy between the program requirements, translated into budgetary demands and how are fund drives conducted, on the basis of understanding these demands, the necessity of a dedicated fund raising officer, who works in close coordination with the program directors/teams etc.

I really got to understand our various intentions much much better. For instance I never knew the difficulties that the LAMP team was facing as far as meaningful implementation at the ground level is concerned. Asutosh was forthright in mentioning the lack of partners with expertise in education at the local level and add to this the inability of the established players to function in those areas. Similarly I got to understand our public health interventions a lot better, thanks to my room mate - Anupam.

All in all from the intricacies of partner selection to the ethics of being a donor agency as well as the technical support provider, as in case of the LAMP program to the modes operandi of funding et al, seemed to be very interesting. Last but not the least a number of close friendships and personal acquaintances were established as part of the two day retreat.

One day resource group meeting for Kendrapada district

A one day resource group meeting for Kendrapada district, was held on the 15th of December 2011, in Kakat Mangala UP School, located in Kendrapada town. 12 teachers attended this one day meeting, where they focused on preparing lesson plans - by working in groups. 3 lesson plans were prepared as part of this one day meeting and each of them were presented by a selected teacher from each group.

Te following lesson plans wee developed as part of the one day meeting:

Transpiration in plants - Biology (Life science)

Europe - Geography

Function - Mathematics

All the presentations were interesting but I personally liked the last one for the detailing. The teachers in fact enjoyed the day long hands on workshop/meeting. Some of them even told me that they Required some additional resources on air pollution and something on the historic Los Angeles smog. I was able to access the Internet and show them some of the interesting links.

The meeting concluded with a look at videos of some of the ideal lab transactions, shot over some of the schools, visited at different locations.

Subrat Sarkar

State Program Manager, 

Digital Equalizer Program,

American India Foundation Trust (AIFT)

Odisha

Monitoring & Evaluation Workshops for DE Orissa Team

This year, World AIDs Day was marked with a particular sense of crisis. The Global Fund, a major organization fighting AIDs, tuberculosis, and malaria, was forced to announce deep cuts impacting AIDs programs throughout the world. In a trend that seems to be on the rise, donors are unwilling to cough up enough money to sustain this important organization.

Scenarios like this are one of the major reasons I choose monitoring and evaluation as a career. Increasingly, donors have hardened their stance toward development initiatives due to a lack of proof that these initiatives will bring about positive change. However, despite the obvious need for evaluation, it is often feared if not downright loathed within non-profits.

Given the number of myths and misconceptions surrounding evaluation, I find it useful to engage front-line staff in the evaluation process by facilitating workshops. I’ve found that a healthy dose of training can go a long way in creating a more “evaluation-friendly” atmosphere.

My first two workshops, held in November, covered theory and were broken down into a simple “what,” “why,” “when,” and “how” approach. This past weekend, I facilitated a discussion about monitoring data use and trained the staff in basic M&E methods.

Toward the end of the workshop, I asked staff to apply what they had learned by designing evaluation tools. The activity had a few hiccups, but, on the whole, my colleagues were actively involved and interested in applying what they had learned. 

 Although I had initially planned on training staff in everything from logic modeling to quantitative analysis, I now realize that even a bit of training in basic “evaluation jargon” can help staff conceptualize their program more clearly. While I hope that the experience has been meaningful for my colleagues, it has been a true learning experience for me in terms of both facilitation and cross-cultural communication.

With national coffers drying up (or pretending to) left and right, I hope that development professionals in various fields continue to engage in evaluation and to empower their colleagues to do the same. If evaluation is to be taken seriously, it is has to start its rough, bumpy journey toward an outcome where all good aid initiatives start: at the grassroots level.

Marina Yakhnis

2011-2012 Clinton Fellow

Bargarh Resource Group Meeting

A resource group meeting was held in George High School, Bargarh on the 26th of November, 2011. 25 teachers selected for their lead role in integrating technology in teaching, at the school level, attended this meeting. 9 lesson plans were developed as part of this meeting by teachers working in groups.