In-Service
Education and Training of
Teachers
In-service
education can play a significant role in the
professional
growth of teachers and function as an
agent for
change in school-related practices. It helps
teachers
gain confidence by engaging with their
practices
and reaffirming their experiences. It provides
opportunities
to engage with other teachers
professionally
and to update knowledge. The Education
Commission
(1964–66) recommended that in-service
education
for teachers should be organised by
universities
and teacher organisations to enable every
teacher to
receive two or three months of in-service
education
once in five years; that such programmes
should be
based on research inputs; that training
institutions
should work on a 12-month basis and
organise
programmes like refresher courses, seminars,
workshops
and summer institutes. The Report of the
National
Commission on Teachers (1983–85) mooted
the idea
of Teachers' Centres that could serve as meeting
places,
where talent could be pooled and teaching
experiences
shared. It suggested that teachers could go
to centres
of learning on study leave. The NPE (1986)
linked
in-service and pre-service teacher education on
Institutes
of Education and Training (DIETs) in each
district,
upgradation of 250 colleges of education as
Colleges
of Teacher Education (CTEs), and
establishment
of 50 Institutes of Advanced Studies in
Education
(IASEs), and strengthening of the State
Councils
of Educational Research and Training
(SCERTs).
The Acharya Ramamurthi Review
Committee
(1990) recommended that in-service and
refresher
courses should be related to the specific needs
of
teachers, and that evaluation and follow-up should
be part of
the scheme.
In places
where multigrade schools have been
established
in order to facilitate access to primary
schooling,
teachers need special training in managing
such
classrooms, which must be conducted by those
who have
experience in classroom management and
organisation
for these classes. Prescriptions on how to
manage,
without the support of appropriate materials,
or
guidance in planning units and topics, does little to
assist
teachers whose experience and imagination is
completely
oriented to the monograde setting. Instead
of being
merely told what to do, detailed unit planning
exercises,
along with direct practical experiences in
places
where multigrade class teaching practices have
become
established, and films depicting such situations,
need to be
used in training and for helping teachers
overcome
their lack of confidence.
Initiatives
and Strategies for In-Service
Education
Following
NPE 1986, efforts have been made to
develop
institutions like DIETs, IASEs and CTEs for
providing
in-service education to primary and
secondary schoolteachers;
500 DIETs, 87 CTEs, 38
IASEs, and
30 SCERTs, have been set up, although
many of
them have yet to function as resource centres.
DPEP also
brought in the block and cluster resource
centres
and made in-service teacher education and
cluster-level
schools as the follow-up for the main
strategies
for pedagogic renewal. In spite of the
widespread
efforts and specific geographical areas
which have
shown improvements, by and large the
in-service
inputs have not had any noticeable impact
on teacher
practice.
A major
indicator of quality of training is its
relevance
to teachers' needs. But most such programmes
are not
organised according to actual needs. The
approach
adopted has remained lecture based, with
little
opportunity for trainees to actively participate.
Ironically,
concepts such as activity-based teaching,
classroom
management of large classes, multigrade
teaching,
team teaching, and cooperative and
collaborative
learning, which require active
demonstration,
are often taught through lectures.
School
follow-up has also failed to take off, and
cluster-level
meetings have not been able to develop
into
professional fora for teachers to reflect and plan
together.
Any
curriculum renewal effort needs to be
supported
with a well thought-out and systematic
programme
of in-service education and school-based
teacher
support. In-service education cannot be an
event but
rather is a process, which includes knowledge,
development
and changes in attitudes, skills, disposition
and
practice — through interactions both in workshop
settings
and in the school. It does not consist only of
receiving
knowledge from experts; promotion of
experiential
learning, incorporating teachers as active
learners,
and peer group-based review of practice can
also
become a part of the overall strategy. Self-reflection
needs to
be acknowledged as a vital component of
such
programmes. A training policy needs to be worked
out,
defining parameters such as the periodicity, context
and
methodology of programmes. But efforts to
strengthen
quality and ensure vibrant rather than
routinised
interactions would require far more
decentralised
planning with clarity on goals and methods
for
training and transfer. 'Mass training using’ new
technologies
may be of use in some aspects of training,
but much
greater honesty and bold creativity are required
for
addressing the concerns of practising teachers
directly,
including the deprofessionalised environments
in which
they work, their lack of agency, and their
alienation.
Dissemination
technologies can serve to build a
positive
ethos for curricular reforms if they are used
as sites
of discussion and debates in which teachers,
training
personnel and community members can
participate.
Teachers require first-hand experience of
making
programmes themselves in order to develop
an
interest in the new technology. The availability of
computers
and linkage facilities remains quite inadequate
in
training institutes. This is one reason why the potential
of the new
communication technology for changing
the ethos
of schools and training institutions has
remained
inadequately tapped.
Pre-service
teacher educationas well as in-service training must
build the
necessary orientation andcapacities in teachers so that they
can
appreciate, understand and meet the challenges of the
curriculum
framework. In-servicetraining, in particular, must be
situated
within the context of theclassroom experiences of teachers.
DIETs,
which have theresponsibility of organising such
training,
should do so in a mannerin which both teachers and their
schools
benefit from such training.For instance, instead of the ad hoc
manner in
which teacher traineesare sent for in-service training by
the
educational administration, itwould be better for a cluster of
schools to
be identified and aminimum number of trainees (at
least two,
to enable some peersharing and reflection) invited
from each
school to participate inan in-service training programme.
DIETs, in
coordination withBRCs, could identify the schools
for this
purpose. In order that teaching time is not unduly
affected,
and teacher trainees are able to make the link between
theory and
practice, the mandatory days for training could be split up
over the
course of the year to include on-site work in their own
classrooms
as well.
Training
could comprise a variety of activities in
addition
to contact lectures and discussions in the teacher
training
institutions and include workshops in schools
in the
cluster, projects and other assignments for teachers
in their
classrooms. To link pre-service and in-service
training,
the same schools can become sites for preser
vice
internship, and student teachers can be asked to
observe
classroom transaction in these schools. This
could
serve not only as feedback to teacher educators
for
strengthening the training programme but can also
become the
basis of critical reflection by teacher trainees
during the
latter part of the training programme. To
take the
process forward, there could be interactive
sessions
with headmasters from the concerned schools
so that
they can play the role of a facilitator in the
changes in
classroom practices that the teacher trainees
may like
to make. Systems for monitoring and feedback
must
include SCERTs/DIETs /BRCs and CRCs so
that
academic support can be envisaged in follow ups',
documentation and research.
No comments:
Post a Comment