GYAN SHALA(School of learning)India www.gyanshala.org • Ensure high quality school education • Bringing poor children on par with those studying in best schools • Highly cost effective
Trigger and Initiation • Envy-surprise that Bangladesh had pulled ahead of India in poor girl’s education, and China was far ahead in school education, both even with lower spending. • Failure of a (i) well designed, (ii) well funded, & (iii) well implemented APPEP in raising learning levels. • Universal enrolment was on the horizon even in ’95 • Problem area was “quality on scale” & “cost” • Presence of very good ‘boutique solutions’, or ‘large scale supplementary education programs. • Gyan Shala- Quality on Scale, Accountability of Outcome, Appropriate low cost, Futuristic Curriculum
Current Profile of Activities and Programs • Around 12,000 out-of-school children in 450 slum classes • in Ahmedabad, covering grades 1-7. • Around 7000 children in 68 Govt./ municipal schools in • quality improvement pilots. • Program replication in Patna and Nalanda dist. in Bihar, • Having around 11000 children in grades 1-3. • Replication started in Kolkata. • A new 3 yrs. program for adolescent girls. • Proposal to start bi-lingual low cost high schools for lower • income groups. • Research based policy advocacy and client education to • promote socially accountable public-private partnership in • the school educationfor poor • Our total program cost, including room rental, and all learning • material is < Rs. 2800/ (elementary) and < Rs. 3600/- (middle)
% Gyan Shala shows a way out Gyan Shala students tend to perform better than government school students, even though itscost is less than 1/4th. Also, students taught by Gyan Shala trained teachers in AMC schools perform better than the other students at AMC schools. Compatible with SSA framework. Learning Outcomes – Gyan Shala trained AMC Schools vs. Other AMC Schools – Grade II (Study by Independent researcher from Baroda & Education Initiatives) Learning Outcomes- Gyan Shala Students vs. Public Schools (MIT study) Representative GS Class III Representative Control Schools Public, Gr. III Treatment Schools Public, Gr. IV % Marks Scored % Marks Scored Language Maths Overall Language Mathematics Source: GS Annual Report, Linden Complement of Substitute? Effect of Technology on Student Achievement(2008), Gyan Shala documents and internal reports Secondary Research, Monitor Analysis
Determinants of Learning outcome • Learning Outcomes = F (learning capability, teaching effectiveness, curriculum plan and material, pedagogy and class atmosphere). • Learning Capability = F (natural talent, parental support-push, child’s motivation) • Teaching effectiveness= F (pre-service education, ongoing training, academic support, supervision, curriculum material) • Gyan Shala focus: • Ongoing teacher training-support. • Budget allocation for all determinants of LO.
Major design Innovations • A large reliance on ‘children’s capacity to learn’ then on ‘teaching effectiveness’, backed up by investment in high quality detailed curriculum and learning materials. • Replace highly skilled Principal-Teacher combination with a front end of modest skill two level teacher team and back-end of very high caliber design-training-management team, which assures quick scaling up and sustainable high quality at large scale with mostly modest skill teachers/staff. • Design of class processes to maximize children’s and teachers’ time on learning tasks, and learning through interaction. • Recruitment strategy that selects not the established experts but those on learning phase, so an internal learning culture is established. • Suitable decentralization of power, linked to accountability. • Standardization to minimize management complexity.
Key Program Norms • Conform to State and National Curriculum norms, informed • by international emerging trends. • State Text book are used, along with other books and • learning aids. • 3-4 hour of high-intensity academic work followed by • other activities each day, so girl children can attend the • classes even with home pressure. • Classes are held close to children’s home so they do not • have to cross street to reach school, which eliminates a • major schooling barrier in urban areas. • Total learning hours in a year would be more than in other • full day Government-municipal or private schools. • Children are mainstreamed in other recognized schools on • completion of three years Gyan Shala module
Some other features of Gyan Shala • Good Class Facilities- Furniture, lighting, & ventilation • Lots of learning material: (30% of program cost) • Daily worksheets for each subject, 660/yr./class • Learning aids and activities for group work • In-class library, wall display and toys • Assignments and exercises on all subjects daily within the • class, so no need of homework. • Daily group learning activities and repetition of concepts for • reinforcement • Each child gets individual help from the teacher daily, so no • need of any tuition support • Use of Newspaper daily in Grade 3 as additional text
A Model for Bringing Change in Govt. Policy • Demonstrate a replicable model to provide high quality, • low cost, primary education for poor children • 2. Conform to state curriculum but aim for international • benchmarks of quality • 3. Independent verification of program performance • Offer to replicate the package in government schools to • build support and affect larger numbers. • 5. Make an irrefutable case for the low cost high quality • school system solution which is accountable • 6. Seek policy change for allocation of no more than 5% • of government budget for accountable public-private • partnership, and larger budget for learning material.#
Quality Assurance Mechanisms • Abundance of books, learning material/ aids & worksheets. • State of the art design of class processes-transactions. • Ongoing contextually rooted design improvements, direct contact • between designers-cum-managers and class rooms. • Child centered pedagogy and positive class environment. • Continuous teacher training; annual, bi-annual, monthly, weekly and • daily components. Daily teacher guides. • Extensive support and supervision for teachers, for error correction • and backup support. New teachers development. • Internal staff development cycle & management discipline. • Institutional accountability through formal measurement of learning • attainments & total unit cost targets and linking budget to performance. • Conform to National Curriculum Framework. • Neutralize socio-economic constraints on class attendance.#
Why Scalable- Replicable • Reliance of such manpower for all hierarchical levels, • that is easily available on a mass scale. • Internal systems for staff and processes development. • Standard model of self contained total system with limited • external contingencies and dependence, for ~450 classes. • Carefully charted growth/ evolution path. • A suitable mix of standardization with annual redesign/ • review of the total package. • Keeping the same team for design and management. • Reliance on systems tested in large organizations. • System of accountability to dominant outsiders/ funders.#
Why Institutional Sustainability • Scalable (through replication) on a mass scale. • Competitive/ socially acceptable low level of total cost. • Assured measurable quality, as per Indian national • curriculum and widely accepted social norms. • Fits into the existing system enabling the mainstreaming • of the children after completion of Gyan Shala module. • Funding on the basis of measured results/regulatory • norms • Works well even with first generation learners. • Suitable for addressing the emerging demographic • challenge of fast expanding urban (slum) population. • Corresponds to the world class school/class processes. • Inbuilt mechanism of quality assurance and human • resource development.