USAID T4 Final Project Report

1.

CA 386-A-00-06-00148-00

F i n a l Pro j e c t R e p o r t Technology Tools for Teaching and Training (T4)

in India - Phase II 2006-2011

T4 Final Project Report Phase 2 2006-2011

Table of Contents

Acknowledgements 4

List of Acronyms 6

Execu;ve Summary 7

Chapter One -‐ T4 Overview 10

Chapter Two -‐ T4 Products and Deliverables 22

Chapter Three -‐ Analysis of T4 72

Chapter Four -‐ Lessons Learned and Challenges 92

Chapter Five -‐ Finance 105

Conclusion 106

Annex 1: Staff List

Annex 2: Sample Executive Summaries

Annex 3: T4 Compendium of Communications Materials

T4 Final Project Report Phase 2 2006-2011

T4 Final Project Report Phase 2 2006-2011 Page 9

1. Overview

In its 2006 proposal submission for dot-‐EDU T4 Phase II, EDC set out to achieve its five-‐year objecDves through the following core strategies:

• Create applicaDons for upper primary classes based on quality instrucDonal design that use a variety of ICT-‐based content delivery mechanisms

• Build on the dot-‐EDU T4 Phase I approach to technology-‐based tools by focusing on the concept of ‘technology as a process’, and ensure that at every level of the educaDon system parDcipants gain skills based on their roles and responsibiliDes as educators, managers and advocates through a “learning by doing” professional development program

• Target the middle levels of the educaDon system and below to support decentralizaDon and acDvaDon of teachers and communiDes whose parDcipaDon is criDcal to long-‐term success and sustainability

• Empower educaDon system actors tradiDonally seen as “end users” or “beneficiaries” to become trainers so that they strengthen their own capaciDes, while also learning how to build others’ capaciDes

• Involve local NGOs and private sector enDDes (including QUEST Alliance partners) to promote sustainability and create substanDve linkages from which government and other stakeholders can draw

• ConDnue the dot-‐EDU T4 Phase I established paXern of tesDng new intervenDons and products, formaDvely evaluaDng the results, sharing outcomes and impacts and obtaining stakeholder (GoI) buy-‐in and cost-‐share for scale up and/or expansion

• Monitor regularly and comprehensively by using quanDtaDve and qualitaDve methods to track inputs and acDviDes against indicators that are verifiable by stakeholders at any level of the educaDon system

1.1 Funding Challenges and Changes to the T4 Phase II Timeline

When dot-‐EDU Phase II (for $7.3 million over 5 years) was awarded in September 2006, the project team matched its proposed objecDves to equally ambiDous targets (such as 200 new programs for middle school students, 40 new mulDmedia programs for teachers, 200 Block and 1,500 Cluster resource persons trained etc). Ten months later, acer an extended period of uncertainty that began during the second quarter of the new award, USAID/India officially informed EDC in July 2007 that because of changes resulDng from Congressional budget cuts around educaDon sector funding for India, the value of the Phase II award would be reduced to $1.32 million. At the same Dme, Mission leadership indicated that they remained hopeful of reinstaDng some porDon of the award. Therefore, ModificaDon 2 neither decreased the total esDmated cost nor the duraDon of the cooperaDve agreement.

In response to this noDce, EDC was requested to adjust its focus to a set of smaller targets achievable within the limited Dmeframe. As a result, dot-‐EDU Phase II re-‐framed its objecDves to be:

• Expansion into new states using the 'target of opportunity'1 approach;

• CreaDon of a smaller sub-‐set of content for middle school students;

• Provision of professional development services for teachers and educaDon administrators; and

• A robust monitoring and evaluaDon component.

Between 2007 and 2008, two further modificaDons followed for addiDonal amounts of funding. Curiously, neither modificaDon changed the total award amount or end-‐date. In January 2008 EDC submiXed a revised budget, budget narraDve, work plan and program descripDon in response to the addiDonal $2.65 million in funds received. In September 2009, EDC received ModificaDon 5, which increased the overall obligaDon to $5,520,180 and added yet another work plan for the incremental funds. ModificaDon 5 was to have lasted unDl May 2010—by which Dme both the T4 team and

Page 8Harnessing ICT for Education Policy Institute T4 Final Project Report Phase 2 2006-2011 Page 10

Chapter One

1 The Target of Opportunity Approach was defined as a way of working with partners that were ready and willing to work with T4. It allowed EDC to bring on board states that had not been idenGfied in our proposal or work-‐plan, but whose educaGon departments would approach the project and demonstrate interest in launching T4 acGviGes. The 'target of opportunity' approach was created in coordinaGon with the AOTR -‐ and it served the project well parGcularly given the uncertainGes around funding and strategy in the early years of Phase II. For an in-‐depth analysis on the impact of this unique approach, please refer to Chapter 3.

1.1 Funding Challenges and Changes to the T4 Phase II Timeline (cont.)

USAID/India projected that funds would finally run out. SDll, the Mission elected to 'keep opDons open' and not change either the original award amount or the end date.

Throughout the mulDple modificaDons the project remained focused on the core components of inter-‐ and intra-‐state expansion, quality middle-‐school products, professional development of teachers and administrators and monitoring and evaluaDon. With addiDonal modificaDons, EDC added on acDviDes such as state-‐level sustainability planning—specifically... plans. It also added on a more comprehensive communicaDons strategy. EDC submiXed another modificaDon request in 2010 which included the addiDonal acDvity of state-‐level sustainability planning. By late Q2 FY2011, it was obvious that the judicious use of project funds (a remnant of the on-‐again/off-‐again nature of funding), coupled with delays in state-‐level implementaDon and savings from the exchange rate had resulted in sufficient fiscal resources for a no-‐cost extension that would see us through the original project end-‐date.

Perhaps one of the biggest drawbacks of the ups, downs and uncertainDes around levels of funding and project duraDon was that EDC started, stopped, and then sought to rapidly accelerate acDviDes acer having lost considerable momentum and key staff. The project team had to reconfigure themselves as a leaner organizaDon, simultaneously ramp up the burn-‐rate, and not lose perspecDve of the project’s core competencies—quality products that consistently deliver learning gains. Through it all, the T4 team demonstrated poise, paDence, creaDvity and flexibility—qualiDes that were matched by our counterparts at USAID/India. The knowledge that the

Mission was resolutely behind the T4 project was perhaps the glue that helped the team cover so much ground even when the path ahead was uncertain. The trust and faith that both groups displayed in each other is not common in the donor-‐grantee relaDonship: we joined forces to peDDon for conDnued support and to garner state backing as well.

UlDmately, the second phase of T4 was successful in creaDng a shic in three key areas that won accolades for both USAID and EDC:

1) The project extended its product range to encompass Classes 1-‐8 successfully, transiDoning from primary to middle school levels, and produced impressive student learning gains;

2) it achieved its aim to build capacity on a variety of levels, from program creaDon (as in Andhra Pradesh) to evaluaDon (Bihar, Rajasthan and Delhi), and demonstrated a unique approach to professional development for teachers and administrators (Chhapsgarh and Karnataka); and

3) it expanded its overall reach into four new states and provided access to over 44 million children. In Phase II, T4 also proved that it could conduct a savvy communicaDons campaign and surpass expectaDons by garnering over $9 million in state funds.

Although there are a myriad of project documents that chronicle T4 Phase II’s evoluDon and results, the following secDons provide a concise snapshot of the project’s deliverables and targets.


1.2 Project Achievements


Indicator Program Results

Number of learners enrolled in USG-‐supported primary schools or equivalent non-‐school based seWngs (across all T4 products)

Boys: 23,024,318

Girls: 21,647,688

Total: 44,672,006

Number of teachers/educators trained with USG support (across all T4 products)

Male: 94,243

Female: 100,213

Total: 294,456

Group Teaching and Learning CDs for middle school classes 2 – Physics in Ac@on and Fun with Geometry

MulGmedia Math and Science Kits for middle-‐school classes 15 Topics (10 in Hindi; 5 in Kannada; 98 products in total, 4,000 minutes of audio and video programming)

Life skills video series 10 episode series (5 hours of video programming) along with facilitator guide for 10 weeks of acGviGes

Life skills audio series 25 episodes (550 minutes of programming) along with facilitator guides in Kannada and Hindi

AddiGonal IAI/IRI/Ed TV programs adapted/re-‐produced 50 Karnataka (IRI for ESL)

80 Andhra Pradesh (IRI for ESL and Awaz-‐e-‐Ilm Urdu)

10 Maths videos adapted (Hindi)

IRI for ESL series reproduced for Rajasthan

NaGonal-‐level disseminaGon events/T4 Policy InsGtutes 4

Administrator Professional Development 380 government officials trained (over 50 hours of professional development)

ChhaWsgarh: 204

Jharkhand: 82

Madhya Pradesh: 94

Master Trainers 396 (across all T4 acGviGes, IRI, GTL, TPD, life skills etc.)

Teacher Professional Development 146 teachers (120 hours of professional development)

M&E Reports 54,373 students tested across evaluaGons

28 reports compiled

Amount leveraged from GoI and other partner $13.65 million

Number of NGO partners 30+ NGOs (state and naGonal-‐level organizaGons)

States expanded to during Phase II 4 -‐ Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Delhi and Rajasthan

Table A: T4 Phase II Achievements At a Glance


1.3 T4 Technical Areas and Deliverables (cont.)

Objec;ve 2: School-‐based Professional Development (Capacity Building for Teachers and Administrators)In its 2006 Phase II proposal document for Phase, EDC prepared to undertake teacher professional development (TPD) acDviDes for teachers and administrators in a more holisDc manner. The proposed mentoring/coaching model was mulDdimensional. It would extend instrucDonal support, field-‐based observaDon and feedback; it was also meant to demonstrate new techniques and approaches to state governments. The model would be needs based, and bring about greater change in the quality of teaching than was possible with the tradiDonal one-‐off, 10 to 20-‐day trainings that states typically offered their teachers.

The 2006 design advocated the use of teacher peer networks, teacher resource centers and a set of self-‐study professional development modules for teachers and administrators. EDC had to shic gears on these plans in the face of other prioriDes given the funding uncertainDes that followed. Of all the proposed acDviDes, the TPD effort required significant upfront investment and would likely yield results only along a much longer Dme horizon.

When funds became available in 2008-‐2009, EDC decided to iniDate a modified version of the acDvity, and by 2010 had successfully demonstrated the core concepts that were at the heart of its original design. These concepts included tapping into personal moDvaDon, raising self-‐esteem, recognizing hidden leadership skills, and offering parDcipants intensive, tangible experiences and specific skills. When applied, these concepts would enable teachers to ascertain the change in their classrooms or administraDve funcDons. By the end of 2010, T4 implemented a proof of concept of professional development for both teachers and educaDon administrators, with growing and visible impacts in pracDce at the middle school level and at the Block Resource Center (BRC)/Cluster Resource Center (CRC) level (among parDcipants). The State of Chhapsgarh requested that EDC take up addiDonal rounds of training and pitched in with funding support. Karnataka sought to extend the teacher professional development acDvity by locaDng co-‐funding opportuniDes through other donor (UNICEF and World Bank) iniDaDves. By reducing the scale and working more closely with state-‐level authoriDes, T4 was able, in a short duraDon, to successfully gain the interest and support of officials at pre-‐service insDtuDons in Karnataka and Chhapsgarh and within the SSA for conDnued replicaDon.


2.2 Interac@ve Radio Instruc@on (IRI)

IRI is a combinaDon of tradiDonal media (radio) and research-‐based teaching and learning techniques derived from acDve learning pedagogy. IRI is especially suited to improve quality and access in environments where student achievement is low, where access is limited (parDcularly for marginalized groups) and where teachers require greater training and support. With an implementaDon history spanning over thirty years, IRI has repeatedly proven to be an appropriate and cost-‐effecDve methodology for reaching learners of all ages and achievement levels, especially in resource-‐poor environments. EvaluaDons of IRI programs globally have consistently demonstrated that IRI improves achievement and decreases equity gaps (gender, urban/rural, etc).

IRI programs are disDnct from tradiDonal distance educaDon programs primarily because they involve unique mode of interacDve learning. During a typical IRI lesson, students and teachers listen to a cast of characters that guide them through specific acDviDes designed to improve learning on curriculum-‐derived topics. InteracDvity is both simulated and actual; learners may respond directly to direcDons given by a radio facilitator, by their teachers, or by their peers during designated pauses incorporated into the flow of the program.

What is Interactive Radio Instruction?

Over the past 30 years, and in as many countries, IRI has helped facilitate learning for in- and out-of-school youth and adults. In India, because the T4 series were often adapted for use in multiple states, the cost-per-student for an IRI intervention is less than 50 cents per year (inclusive of teacher training, print materials, and broadcast costs). IRI’s longevity and success under T4 and worldwide, can be attributed to the following key characteristics:

• Low-cost digitally produced content for delivery via broadcast to a large audience

• Designed and adapted locally with stories, games, and songs appropriate to the cultural context

• Supports teachers and students with pedagogical practices and content knowledge

• Facilitates gender equity in the learning process

• Provides structure and classroom management support to teachers implementing new

• Pauses allow for students and teachers to respond to instructions by ‘doing’ something, and not just being passive listeners

• Applies a multichannel approach – segments allow for distributed learning, and the application of different methods

USAID T4 Final Project Report

Documents

Transcript of USAID T4 Final Project Report