When Is It GOOD To Get Angry?

Have you ever noticed that we get angry (or at least show it) only with those who we think are weaker than us? Thus it seems OK for parents or teachers to be angry with children, for officers and trainers to shout at teachers. But if children are angry with adults, even if they are in the right and the adult is in the wrong, it is considered NOT OK! And teachers, when upset with their so-called 'superiors' either keep quiet or make some sort of mild protest. Only occasionally does it boil over, and when it does, it is again considered NOT OK!

So what is the view we should take? Is it a good idea not to get angry at all? This is the advocated position of many. In fact there are training programmes (including those for teachers) on anger management (i.e., about managing the anger we show to those who we consider our 'inferiors'). These include things called 'positive discipline' and 'emotional punishment' – as if it is OK to do the same old thing in another way.

 In case this is not clear, the 'same old thing' means the belief that it is OK for adults to have power over children, or for some to be considered 'superiors' of others. The 'anger management' and 'positive' approach does not question this right to discipline or punish – it only says 'do it less violently please, but do it because you have a right to do it.' Something wrong there, isn't it?

The other approach would be – get angry wherever you should! That is, if you are in the right, get angry with your boss or with the adult (if you are a child or an adolescent), if they are in the wrong. Do I hear you clicking your tongue again? Something doesn't sound QUITE OK about this, isn't it? How can those who are 'below' scream at those who are 'above'? You fear it will lead to conflict, division and general breakdown of order (i.e. of who should listen to whom).

Hmm, perhaps this kind of all-round getting angry business won't really help. We're too scared of it anyway.

But it also seems there are areas where we SHOULD GET ANGRY – and we don't. When a child is molested or deprived or hurt or demeaned – we don't see much anger. When teachers who really want to teach better and teach differently are ridiculed to the extent that they give up trying to improve – we see NO anger. When a girl is brutalized (or even killed) because she refused to get married at 14, we don't seethe with anger! When an education system is run year after year and the children who've invested their entire childhood in it, emerge without any learning to show for it – we are simply not consumed with anger!

IT – IS – NOT – OK.

WE MUST – REPEAT, MUST –

GET ANGRY!

Go out. Get angry. Preserve this anger. Don't let it dry up. Spend it - drop by drop. Keep at it. And at it. Till that which makes you angry is snuffed out. Totally.

Work Smart, Not Hard!

Whenever teachers are being trained, they are bombarded with the same tired old phrases. 'You are the future of the country,' they are told. 'There's a great responsibility on your shoulders; you must work very hard to fulfil this responsibility.' This is what we hear every time, isn't it? And aren't you fed up of listening to this over the years?
     The problem is that this is such a naive notion. As if working hard makes everything OK. No, you have to use your head! Even those whose work is seen as involving nothing but hard work, they too can do their work well only if they use their head. For instance, the labourers who unload a truck, the farmer working in the field, those who dig pits or carry head loads of debris... If they do their work without thinking and being alert, they can get hurt, face a loss, be shouted at or even fired. In the case of a teacher, therefore, this is bound to be even more crucial!
     A thinking teacher - i.e. a smart teacher - is one who greatly increases children's role in the classroom. And not just in keeping things clean and organized, but in the in the learning process itself. For instance, the class 4 teacher said to the children: 'You know, in this story, when the lion woke up one morning, he found that he had no hair on his head! His mane - totally gone! So guess what he did in order to get it back? Well, read the story and find out!'
     When children started to read the story, the teacher went and sat with those who were in danger of falling behind others. After a little while she said: 'If there are any words you're not able to understand, circle them with your pencil. Then ask the children around you if they know.' When everyone had finished this, she asked groups of children to look at each other's circled words and see if they could find out the meaning. 'If there are still some words that you don't know, I'll tell you the meaning,' she said.
     You can guess what this smart teacher did next. For the entire duration that she was in her class, each child was engaged in work, was learning and helping others learn too. All this while she herself was totally relaxed!


So what are the ways in which we too can be a little more lazy, and a little smarter?

7 Ways to Retain Optimism (Even If You Work In Improving Elementary Education!)

Got you, didn't it! Sooner or later, you hit a wall. There's a feeling that nothing works. That the system is so overwhelming that hardly anything can be done. Eventually, if you're someone trying to improve elementary education – whether as a teacher or resource person or administrator – you find yourself unwillingly accepting that the poor quality of education will continue to prevail in hundreds of thousands of classrooms.

Ok, so that's stated a little too strongly. But there is grain of truth there! Which is why, in the interest of millions of children, we need to look at how to retain the enthusiasm and optimism we started out with. So here are some ways to preserve your cheer, mental health and youthful looks despite the years you've put in.

1. Think 'how', not 'should'

Much too often we find ourselves talking about what 'should' be happening. Slowly the discussion slides into a list of things we are dissatisfied with – teachers not working, infrastructure remaining poor, lack of leadership, absence of commitment…. You can hear the pitch rising, can't you? Keep the pitch raised and you're bound to have a stressed heart!

To retain your desire to make things better (and keep your heart healthy), it would be so much better to talk of the how. What ordinary things can a teacher do? E.g. smile at children, read the textbook before the class, solve a puzzle herself to find out how much fun it is, read aloud a book to children once in a while – nothing that requires an 'order' or funding or special mandate or skill or training. Similarly, what can a head teacher do, burdened as she is with administrative tasks made difficult by lack of support? Share and delegate (e.g. make it fun for other teachers to participate and work as a group), discuss some of the records maintained in the school (e.g. connect children's attendance rates and test performance), and so on.

As you can see, you would have something doable to share. Chances are, some of the ideas might actually get picked up – in which case don't forget to really appreciate the person implementing them.

2. Focus on outcomes, not inputs

This is much more if you're a planner, administrator, supervisor, programme leader. Very often we're so focused on the inputs flowing from our side that we ignore what these are for. Thus it seems important to see whether material is supplied or not, the number of days of in-service training covered, physical targets fulfilled – and then one day it suddenly turns out that all this has not had much impact. We're left feeling that all our effort didn't amount to much, and a sinking feeling starts to grow. Of course we don't tell anyone else about it but we're aware it's there, isn't it?

How to overcome this situation? After all, inputs have to be provided. Sure they have – but for a purpose. It might be more useful to take a look at what all this is meant to bring about. For instance, the issue is not whether material is supplied or not but whether it is used as intended by children. This suddenly makes us see that we need to focus on training, incorporate this into the monitoring and academic support, share examples with teachers, encourage children and parents to lose inhibitions and start using material in school and at home… All of which, if done even on a small scale and only partially successful, has the wonderful effect of making you feel giddy with success. Pessimism – gone!

3. Be incremental

This point is so commonsensical and obvious that it gets ignored. Don't try to do everything or too much in one go (especially if you are at the district / sub-district level). For instance, for any teacher to make a real change in the classroom processes, some 40 different practices are likely to change. Try doing a full 'training' and expect all these changes – there's only chaos. Teachers do try but fail – no one's sure what to start with, the sequence in which to implement these changes, the steps to be taken. All it takes is one or two failures for teachers and schools to feel that nothing much can be done, that it's all too difficult, and doesn't work and is therefore not worth the effort. Soon, you begin to feel the same and are a pale shadow of the enthusiastic person who set out on a journey of change.

To get back on track on this journey, scale things down a little. Expect only a few changes at a time. E.g.

• Give teachers a list of 6-8 possible changes (ranging from calling each child by the name, to making use of activities given in the textbooks to encouraging children to ask questions).
• Ask them to select only 3-4 from this list (making a choice generates ownership and commitment); discuss the steps they need to take in order to bring about these changes.
• Encourage them to make a 2-3 month implementation plan around these steps and help them monitor themselves and each other to see if the changes are actually happening.
• Extend this cycle at the end of each 2-3 month period. Over a year or two, a dramatic change would occur – only it would have been less noticed as it happened, more successful, and breeding optimism rather than pessimism.

For those in the know, this is precisely what ADEPTS is all about and has made a positive change happen in over 22,000 (that's right, 22 thousand) schools in Gujarat.

4. Enter with questions, leave with (people's) ideas

Trainers, facilitators and academics trying to communicate with teachers end up being frustrated very soon – 'they don't pay any attention to whatever we say' is a common complaint. To which the reply is – why should they? The days are over when someone followed your ideas / views / instructions simply because you came from a so-called 'superior' level such as a university or senior position in the hierarchy. No, people will do things differently only if they are convinced and feel like doing it from inside. Our role is to touch people's hearts and minds rather than trying to shape them or fill them with our views.

How can one do this? It's so simple that I'm almost ashamed to mention it! Don't enter a training session or a meeting with a list of things to tell. Instead, concentrate on a few key questions to ask. Questions that will generate response, reflection, and provoke people into coming out with their own views and ideas. For instance, ask questions such as:

• If material is so easy to generate, why should we supply anything? What do you think?
• Suggest ways in which you can use a library along with the textbook?
• Shouldn't we trust children and get them to mark their own attendance instead of the teacher spending time on it?
• When children don't understand decimals, exactly where do you think the problem lies?

Don't believe me, try it out and see what happens. At any rate, the tired old complaint will not be heard any more.

5. Don't see people as they are but as they're going to be…

Anyone who's responsible for helping people be different usually ends up using phrases such as 'dog's tail that can never be straightened'. But that's because they see people as they actually are rather than what they can be like. Try this out the next time you're in such a situation – 

• Look at your students / participants / team members and visualise them as being different. 
• What qualities can you visualise them as having? 
• What ways do you seem them adopting to make good use of the capabilities they already have? 
• And what do you see yourself learning from them?

Gives you a different perspective, doesn't it? Every time I've worked with a group that has been called 'difficult', this is what has helped me make good friends with the participants and support them in changing themselves. Not exactly rocket science, and works very well too. End result? You can imagine...

6. The system is people too

When you work on an impersonal, solid thing called a 'system', it's hard to see it changing. Indeed, it has an inertia of its own because it has usually arrived at some degree of stability over the years – and here you are, trying to destabilise it for reasons of your own! Why on earth would it meekly go along?

But if you look upon a system as a number of people bound in a set of relationships, you have several entry points where there didn't seem to be any in the beginning. There are bound to be persons in the system trying to make good things happen (if nothing else, just the law of averages determines that there have to be at least a few of these). Can you locate such persons? Is there a way of interacting with them, perhaps even bringing together a few of them? Can you change a few persons at a time? Is there an activity that would support or recognize their efforts, and given them the feeling that they're not alone? And when success (even small success) happens and is recognized, the circle of those willing to engage and dialogue, grows. With it grows the possibility of real change happening, thus reducing the chances of your growing old before your time out of sheer frustration and pessimism.

7. This is where I need your help

Please be so kind as to let me know the 7^th (and 8^th, and 9^th) way…

Has Anyone Asked Teachers This Yet?

Over the last two decades, as the number of teachers has grown, so too has a certain attitude towards them. This comes up in different ways in the various interactions we have – during school visits, meetings at cluster or block level, workshops and training programmes for different groups of personnel, and informal interaction at all levels. Somehow, the discussion ends up at the teacher's door. And the following statement springs forth: 'Teacher is at the heart of the matter sir; only when teacher improves can anything improve.'

This is then followed by a long list of what teachers are not good at, including examples such as (this is a mild list!):

• Teachers don't practice Quality Teaching
• Are not able to 'go according to the level of children'
• Don't make use of psychology (I assume this means something called 'child psychology')
• Application is missing – teachers are not linking concepts to practical life.
• They show a lack of Social Awareness
• Don't go for innovative activities
• Don't do voluntary service
• Don’t give examples while teaching
• Don't pin accountability for the task given (i.e. don't take responsibility themselves)
• Fail to develop or revive the interest to teach
• Are not flexible to change their mentality
• Don't give individual attention to children
• Are not patient
• Don’t make use of case study
• Don't take a friendly approach
• Are poor listeners
• Have no tolerance
• Are partial
• Reluctant
• Lazy
• Lack in adaptation, and don't update their knowledge
• Are in a hurry to get the product rather than being bothered about the process
• Expect more with little effort!

Believe it or not, this is an actual list produced by participants in a workshop (which also included teachers!) and is also typical of most parts of the country.

But when asked to name any strengths that teachers have, what you usually get are blank stares or a scrawny, reluctant list of maybe four points, such as:

• Covers syllabus in time
• Preparing children for getting marks.
• Good in lecturing (encouraging rote learning)
• Conducting special coaching for those falling behind

As you can see, no shortage of left-handed compliments here!

Typically, when asked if they've actually asked teachers what they're good at, or what they feel they're not good at, the people who make the above statements tend to draw a blank! However, when teachers themselves are asked what they're not good at, their statements include points such as these:

• In trying to address the average student, I'm unable to take care of those who are falling behind
• I find it difficult to make the subject interesting for some students
• If parents can't help children with their homework, I find it difficult to help the child in class

Clearly, there's a perception mismatch between teachers and those tasked with appointing, deploying, orienting, developing, mentoring and monitoring teachers. It might be a little too much to ask, but the following seem clearly required;

• There's a need to listen to teachers before coming to the kind of conclusions we have come to
• In order to go beyond impressions, systematic observation and research are required
• How about finding out the strengths teachers have and how to build on them
• Finally, what is the system doing to make some of its own dire predictions about teachers become true?

Time, it seems, to make a course correction here.

Contesting Cribbing

If you're a person working to improve the educational system in a country like ours, here's something you'll recognize: whether it's journalists or academics, colleagues from NGOs or 'well-wishers' of children, everyone is pretty good at 'problem pointing'. They're really good at telling us exactly how BAD things are. Numerous articles, speeches, social media entries, research pieces, presentations, and even protests, copiously crib about a range of ills affecting education : how the system is dysfunctional, teachers are absent, accountability is missing, children aren't learning, process is dated, children are oppressed, administration is rigid, policies are rich but unimplemented, how the disadvantaged continue to get a raw deal right through... Recognize it? I do, for some of this is what I do as well!


But here's the rub - all this elaboration on what is wrong (some of it is serious research that is credible as well), how far has it helped find exactly what to do. That is, what to do which would help us get rid of the problems being pointed out. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for the growing numbers of those who are able to detail their dissatisfaction at the continued limitations of our education system. It's just that I'm unable to learn enough from it to know what needs to be done.


Because when one gets down to the doing, a whole lot of other things unfold that you were not quite prepared for. Turns out dealing with diversity is not exactly easy, and most of the pat suggestions don't really hold in face of the actual ground realities. Turns out that poor (or even exploitative) governance is such an all-pervading reality that what we can do in / through education just pales in front of it (try sitting in a district education office for a day if you don't believe me). Turns out that our 'log frames', strategies, plans and spreadsheets capture something in our mind but all of it simply crumbles when the actual implementation takes place. It's often noticed that some of the best experts, especially those from the universities, are usually eager to help in the planning and the evaluation - but not the part that comes in between, i.e. the implementation!


So I've come to the unfortunate conclusion that a great proportion of those involved tend to complain mainly because it is the easiest thing to do. Just like many newspaper sections talk of potholes on the roads, delayed or poor services, or lack of facilities (usually in a self-righteous tone that includes phrases such as 'even 60 years after independence' - you get the picture). All this in the hope that saying what is wrong will somehow make it go away. As if it really does! 


Where does all this leave us? To my mind, it leaves us with a lot of cribbing all around us. Every day we continue to read, hear, powerpoint and wordprocess an overdose of shortcomings. Such solutions as are offered are usually: 

• trite ('there should be accountability' - which is easy to say, of course) or 
• platitudinous  ('teachers should be dedicated to their vocation') or 
• superficial ('implement play way method!' - makes one's skin crawl) or 
• autocratic ('strictly monitor these damned teachers, don't let them get away' ) or 
• misguided ('pay teachers more / less if their students learn more / less' - you can see how this will favour the already advantaged, isn't it) or 
• even desperate and daft ('put a web cam in every class').

I'm doing the same, of course, cribbing. But let me try to redeem myself by making a few (hopefully) concrete suggestions:

• The first thing is to recognize the huge potential of all this cribbing. It represents an enormous and growing 'cognitive surplus' that can be put to better use to further what the 'cribber' is interested in - actual improvement.
• Along the lines of wikipedia, bring out a collective, well-organised and evolving situational analysis to which people can keep contributing. This will help generate a more structured, well-rounded understanding that might increase the likelihood of finding effective strategies.This should include a critique of the kind of superficial solutions mentioned earlier, with case studies of the difficulties they landed in or the actual improvement they brought about. An analysis of serious efforts and the difficulties faced would help bring about a nuanced problematization.
• Those involved in change efforts could find ways of identifying any 'cribber' who shows potential, and involve her/him in actual improvement processes - either the process would improve or the cribbing would be contained.
• Publicize and set standards for the kind of writing that is deemed as being helpful. This is not easy at all - but the degree to which the social discourse on education is getting overwhelmed by this collective bemoaning (and the resultant diversion from / inability to actually address the issues) is now making it imperative that we find a way out. Any news channel / newspaper could initiate this by developing a policy paper on how to cover the social sector and then actually following it. Once an example is set, others would follow suit (simply because the initiating body would come out looking better, and therefore be likely to grab a bigger share of sensible eyeballs). 

You might feel that I've totally mis-read the situation, that we need more people to actually be pointing out what is going wrong. Well, point away - but that's no guarantee it will make the problem go away!

If there were just three things you could change in elementary education, what would they be?

We're now at a point where we probably have far too many ideas of what needs to be changed in order to bring about real and lasting improvement in elementary education in India. It's a confusing, mammoth list of to-do items! We need to prioritize, both on basis of what is important and what is easy to start with. Hence this request - if there were just three things you could change, what would they be?

Pseudo Solutions for Real Educational Problems

Ask an intelligent question and get a ________ reply!

Here's an experiment. It seems to work well with functionaries from educational systems in India, Bangladesh and several other countries in South Asia and beyond.

Bring together a group of educational personnel such as academic supervisors, district and state / provincial educational officials. Pose a critical educational problem before them. Of the kind that they probably deal with on a daily basis, such as:

• How to improve learning among children? Or
• What action to take so that classroom processes become more interactive than they are at present? Or
• How to enable children to enjoy learning mathematics (rather than being afraid of it)? Or
• How to ensure and increase teacher attendance?

 Now, monitor the responses you get. They will usually include answers such as:

Teachers must be dedicated / devoted to the profession.

• We must ensure that the system functions well.
• We must increase monitoring and do it properly.
• Teachers must be made aware of their responsibilities.

That didn't surprise you, did it? These are the typical answers one hears (you can probably increase the list greatly). But why should these answers worry us?

Because these answers are positively dangerous!

Either they reveal that our education system is in the hands of people who don't know what to do. Or, what is worse, it is in the hands of those who know what to do but are trying to hide behind these kinds of answers.

You can decide for yourself – after taking a look at the explanation below.

THE RICH VARIETY OF PSEUDO SOLUTIONS

The key issue is that instead of actions and concrete steps, those responsible come up with other things instead. From an educational planning point of view, a step or an action is something that you have to do, that you can set in a clear time-frame, that can be budgeted, broken down into clear parts to be implemented. It is not a vague statement of good intent.

And by coming up with statements that are not actions or steps, those making these statements are actually preventing solutions from really coming about. Here's how.

Give a quality instead of an action

A commonly offered 'solution' – 'teacher must be dedicated to his profession' – is not an action but a quality, the outcome of many other steps that we would have to take. Since those talking are often even responsible for recruiting teachers (and they did not take into account whether the potential teacher had a sense of 'dedication' or not), they need to discuss exactly how this dedication will now be ensured. E.g. by conveying to teacher that they matter, are valued, by visiting them, developing and disseminating performance standards (and using them to identify good performance, in an objective manner), or by setting role models in the form of the seniors themselves following a code of conduct, or a thousand other activities…. But instead of concrete action, we are presented sermons. Basically, offering a quality instead of a step merely looks like a ploy to avoid the necessary!

Defer the solution through 'action' that keeps on requiring further action

Do you remember those little 'Russian' dolls we used to get long ago – you lifted one and found another doll inside it, and another one inside, and so on. This variety of 'pseudo-solution' is just like those dolls. Here, the proposed solution is nothing but a guise to postpone committing oneself to actual action. For instance, you commonly hear suggestions such as 'Teachers must be trained properly', which begs the question: 'What should we do to ensure that teachers are trained properly?' Answer: 'We must have proper trainers.' But: 'How will we get proper trainers?' Answer: 'By recruiting them properly.' And so on. The solution is never really in your grasp; it keeps on evading you because it contains in itself yet another question, the answer to which contains another one…. Even Socrates with his Socratic Method would have had a tough time pinning down the actual action required. Lesser mortals like us just go mad and give up!

Show resolve, not necessarily solve!

Here, the answer to the critical problem is in the form of some very resolute-sounding statement. It gives the feeling that people are 'very serious' about doing something (never mind if scratching the surface shows that it can't really be converted into action). Pseudo-solutions of this category sound like this: 'We must ensure discipline.' Or 'We have to cover every single school.' Or 'The inputs must be made regularly.'

Nothing wrong with these statements, except that they are only resolutions and not clear steps or concrete action. They don't take into account that the present action, which is so strongly being proposed to be improved, may itself not be the right action to start with. Or may not even have anything wrong to begin with. For instance, before concluding that inputs must be made regularly, we need to take into account that perhaps the inputs may be inappropriate, and making them regular will not help. Also, the feeling is that having said that they will be regular, what are the steps to make them regular? (E.g. use of scheduling software and training everyone it its use, or interactions to discuss the needs of the different components of our programme in terms of regularity as well as the nature of inputs needed, and exploring whether more than just regularity it is how well they are implemented that needs to be improved…)

Once again, the feeling is that having declared something solemnly, it will now happen. Unfortunately, it doesn't.

Everyone except us!

This is encapsulated in statements that exhort everyone to pull up their socks (or equivalent), except the people making these statements. Hence in a discussion on the kind of improvements required to increase the effectiveness of an educational system or a programme, it will be said that teachers must be devoted / dedicated, that supervisory staff must be capable, that managers must be professional and administrators sensitive and flexible apart from being committed. Such statements will be made about categories other than that of the solution givers, of course! And of course it is still not clear as to how the suggested change will be brought about.

The monitoring myth

For some reason as yet not very clear, a lot of proposed solutions have to do with monitoring – it is pointed out that monitoring is very poor, ineffective, irregular, and several other words that I'm sure you can reel off. Well, excuse me, but monitoring is extremely limited as a solution. A commonly used example: I'm monitoring the weight of a child regularly and it keeps on decreasing – all this regular monitoring does not help me if I don’t know what to do – the kind of nutrition to ensure, how to obtain / procure and prepare the required nutrients and enable the child to ingest these in an appropriate manner over the required period… I can keep monitoring without necessarily bringing about any improvement.

The dangerous part is the feeling that programmes and systems work only if they are monitored. Not necessarily – in order to work well, those involved need to feel that they are doing something worthwhile, that someone cares that they are there, that the task is challenging yet doable and enjoyable, that they are equipped to do it, enjoy doing it and are supported in their actions. Under these circumstances monitoring can indeed play a role to enhance effectiveness, but it is no substitute for the basics that need to be in place. It's a little bit like a car that has a very good speedometer and odometer (monitoring devices), but no engine (implementation requirement)! Good monitoring is not necessarily equal to good implementation.

An accompanying myth is that better planning is the solution. In fact, if you look at the kind of technical professionals brought in by donor agencies, multilaterals, development partners and even governments, there seems to a far greater concentration on the planning and the monitoring/evaluation parts, but very little on the stuff that comes in between the two – i.e., implementation! And that is why, when educational functionaries are asked to come up with solutions or steps that will lead to specific outcomes, they tend to suggest action related to better planning and monitoring, rather than improved implementation.

The thesis, and a question

So that's the thesis – that when asked to identify actions / steps / solutions to address critical educational issues, those responsible come up with things that might look like them but are not the real thing. And it is this that has kept us back, preventing the huge amounts of money and effort being invested from translating into reality.

But if this is actually the case, is it due to sheer incompetence, or is it a deliberate ploy to ensure that real change does not happen (because behind it all, people are very uncomfortable with an education system that actually works). If you're a conspiracy theorist too, let me know!

The Qualities of a Change-Maker

Improving educational quality ends up being about change rather than tinkering with some elements. 

What then are the qualities of those involved in bringing about this change? 

Here are my guesses. As can be expected, this is a long wish-list! I need your help to identify which ones are really important. And suggestions, too, about how to generate these qualities in the people we work with.

A change-maker:

1. is sharp, can quickly see what needs to be changed, and has effective ways of helping others see this too, but without getting into a conflict!
2. can spot opportunities for introducing change
3. does not have a sense of hierarchy; does not discriminate
4. has a sense of humour, which gives her/him the ability to live with the difficulties and slow pace of change
5. at the same time, s/he can take quick decisions and act fast if needed
6. is aware that he may himself by a victim of the old ways of thinking and living; so is constantly examining himself and trying to improve himself
7. can help a person see what is wrong without feeling bad or without that person feeling he is being disliked.
8. has a sense of strategy – that is, of actions that will slowly, perhaps indirectly, bring about the change desired, in stages
9. is honest and has the greatest accountability to herself, on behalf of those she works for
10. is aware that there will be some conflicts, and has a plan and ability to deal with this; if necessary, generates conflict, though in a calibrated manner
11. is aware that his role is that of enabling others to deliver rather than deliver on their behalf
12. knows how long change takes, and does not give up
13. Can work as a team member, and also get others to work as a team – for which, helps by:

• Sharing goals

• Sharing information

• Recognizing, utilizing and balancing the strengths and weaknesses of the group

• Ensuring recognition as a team

What kind of process would help develop these qualities? 

What kind of reflection, debate and conversation do you think is needed? 

And can it be done in the kind of time-frames we usually have?

Are teachers villains or victims?

At some point or the other in their lives, almost everyone has held the view: 'If only teachers did their work better, so many problems would be solved...'  Schools would be so much better off, isn't it? Education would be great and our lives very different as a result; in fact, society itself would change, if only teachers did their work better.

People who think thus are, of course, only being 'nice'. Because there are any number of others who have less 'nice' ways of putting it. 'Bloody teachers, curse them, they don't work at all. They're never there in school, and when they're there they don't teach. And if they teach, they don't teach properly, beat children, and don't even know themselves what they're supposed to teach. All they're interested in is their salaries, and making money from the grants that flow to the school.'

In fact, this is unfortunately a very widely held view, especially among officials, supervisors, trainers and others who are in any way responsible for and towards teachers. Condemn them, point out all their flaws (exaggerate where it helps) and hold them accountable for all the ills of the education system. Teacher condemnation remains the starting point of many discussions related to improving education.

Anyone who spends time in school trying to implement what teachers are asked do on a daily basis soon finds that motivation has a way of evaporating rather rapidly. You're supposed to teach children of one class, but you find yourself teaching more than one class, of children at different ages, with huge variations among them.  Often, you don't know their language, and whatever you do, so many of them seem not to be getting it at all (partly also because they cannot attend regularly). Far from support, you get indifference (often derision) from those who are supposed to support you (head teachers, community representatives, supervisors, officials). Soon, if you happen to be from another area than your posting, you start trying to get yourself transferred.

Those 'above' them are not immune to exploiting teachers either - using their services to support their own administrative tasks, or even asking them to pay bribes for getting their travel allowance or even school grants (I came across a state where teachers used to be paid only Rs.400 as the TLM grant, with someone siphoning off Rs.100!).

But this doesn't mean teachers should absent themselves from school or beat children up, you would say. It's true, they shouldn't. It's just that it's so hard (and rare) to experience success as a teacher that it's not so surprising. Perhaps our system is victimizing teachers such that they're becoming villains? Or do you think they're only victims? Or are they really villains?

'What We Learn Cannot Be Burnt - 'An Afghan Neo-Literate Woman

As we work in education, it often tends to get too 'sanitized' - as if it is not about real people in real situations, where education has a meaning that's almost impossible to comprehend. Here's a story from Afghanistan, from a programme called Learning for Life that sought to provide initial literacy and health awareness to enable women to become CHWs (community health workers, sorely needed in the country). This story was documented in June 2005, by Judie Schiffbauer, and shared by Katy Anis.

Each morning, six days a week, 40 year old Zeba Gul wraps a light gray shawl around her head and shoulders and leaves her family’s mud-walled compound in the Afghan village of BegToot.  She follows a path that winds through dusty alleyways and then along green fields to arrive at a two-story building constructed of unbaked brick made from mud and straw.  Inside, a set of narrow stairs leads to the Learning for Life classroom, where other women are already gathered.  Removing her shoes at the doorway, she enters and lowers herself to the mat-covered floor, tucking her long legs beneath her.  

In December 2004, when the LfL health-based literacy program began in BegToot, wind whipped snow against the classroom windows, but on this fine summer day, the windows are open to admit a pleasant breeze.  The room looks out over groves of mulberry trees, for which the village is named.  Tall, creviced mountains rise high in the distance, still bearing traces of winter snow.

But the 26 women in the class are not admiring the view.  Instead, each attends to Qotsia, their 21-year-old teacher, who stands beside a small blackboard at the front of the room.  One of millions of Afghans who fled the war-torn country, Qotsia grew up as a refugee in Iran, where she received 12 years of formal education.  Now she has returned to BegToot, and the women are grateful.

 Dressed and coifed in black, Qotsia begins to write with a piece of chalk.  Carefully demonstrating each stroke, she writes a word in Dari composed of several letters from the alphabet displayed on a poster on the wall.  The dark black letters on the poster are easy to see, but six months ago, no woman in the class could have named or written a single one.  Today, hands shoot up when Qotsea asks someone to spell out and then read what she has written.  One woman rises and comes forward:  k a r u m (worm).  “Very good, Pashtoon Jan!” says Qotsia.  Pashtoon Jan smiles as her fellow learners sound out the word, repeat it in unison, and write it in their notebooks:   k a r u m.  Worms are the topic of today’s lesson.  

To the left of the blackboard, a series of drawings depicts women busy with women’s chores:  one is cleaning vegetables; one is boiling water to be stored in an earthenware jar; another is feeding a sick baby; and one is washing a child’s dirty hands.  Now the women in this Level One literacy class are going to learn how worms and a child’s dirty hands are related. 

As one of six Community Health Workers enrolled in the class, Zeba Gul already knows a lot about worms.  Their life cycle and method of transmission were explained to her when BRAC, a REACH NGO-grantee, trained her as a CHW.  But until now, Zeba Gul has never known how to spell, read or write the names of the parasites-- roundworm, tapeworm, and pinworm—that sicken so many children and adults in the village. 

As Qotsia begins the lesson, Zeba Gul leans forward and points to a young woman sitting nearby: “That’s my daughter,” she whispers. “Because of this class, she is learning to read and write before her hair turns gray.”

Later, the class at an end and women lingering to talk, Zeba Gul told her story.  She was born in Paghman, but she has not always lived there.  When she was sixteen, she married and moved to Kabul with her husband to live with his family. Her daughter and several other children were born in the city.

“It was good,” says Zeba Gul.  “My husband had a small shop.  He worked hard.  In the morning, he opened the shop.  In the afternoon, he had a second job in a government building.”

Even during the dark days of war, the family chose not to leave Afghanistan for sanctuary in Pakistan or Iran.  “We stayed,” she says, remembering their struggles with a hint of pride in her voice.  “We were hard workers, and we stayed.” 

For a time after the Russians left, Zeba Gul thought the worst was behind them.  But peace did not last long.  “After that,” she said, “I wasn’t sure what the fighting was about; I know only that it did not stop.  So much fighting.”

When Zeba Gul explains that both the family’s shop and home were near Damazang in Karte Seh, the room grows very quiet.  Everyone knows that Karte Seh was virtually destroyed during the civil war.  “Ay, Khoda!” the women whisper, as Zeba Gul continues her story:

“One night, our shop was ablaze. How it burned!  And our house burned too.  Everything we had was swallowed in fire.  Oh, God.  What could we do?  We had nothing left!  So we returned to Paghman.  It was more than ten years ago.  Here, my husband is a farmer.  Thanks to Allah, he is alive.” 

Many of her listeners have been less fortunate, and the widows nod in agreement as Zeba Gul utters her prayer of gratitude.  The women in the room have known great sorrows, but it is resilience that binds them. 

“Now,” continues Zeba Gul, “I am a CHW.  And I am learning to read and write in this class.  See there: my daughter is also here! Faz l’Khoda--Give thanks to God.  What we learn cannot be burned.”  

The Case for Children's News Programmes

Imagine regular news programmes for children
While advertising and entertainment programmes have begun to cater to children's needs, for some reason news channels have ignored children altogether! Imagine a regular children's news programme, at a fixed time, presented in a lively way, as something for children to look forward to daily. It could be on radio and better still, on TV.

What such programmes could contain
While national and international events would figure in it, children's news would focus on the world as seen by children. Background information would make the news more accessible, along with activities that can be done at home or school. There might even be discussions and debates on issues that children have views and opinions on, along with scope to engage with the channel through phone calls / sms / email.

Newspapers too
And perhaps newspapers would follow with some space for children's news, based on what came on TV the previous night. This would not only enable greater understanding of the news itself, it would greatly boost higher order literacy (apart from newspaper circulation). This would also provide teachers with more current material for use in different classes across a range of subjects!

Many benefits
The immediate benefits for the channels themselves would be in terms of developing loyal viewers for the future (and perhaps an expanded revenue source through increased advertising range).

However, the longer term implications for children themselves, for society and the country would be enormous.

• Children who have had the opportunity to engage with a world beyond their immediate environment would develop cognitively and socially (well exceeding the abysmal levels attained at present!) 
• Focusing the programming at special groups (e.g. girls, or children with disabilities or the rural poor or those who need help to learn the state language - such as tribal children - or English) would dramatically increase learning opportunities for the marginalized and the disadvantaged.
• Wide spread use of such programmes would also help harness the demographic dividend India has at the present.

If handled sensitively, this could help create a nation where plurality is cherished and the narrow confines of identity are not allowed to become a source of conflict.

D for Discipline, D for Democracy!

The moment the word 'discipline' is mentioned in a gathering of teachers or educational functionaries (or even parents or community members), it acquires a special meaning, as in 'children have to be kept in discipline'. Here, the quintessential role of the teacher is that of the 'shepherd' (with stick and all), and children are seen as unruly sheep that have no mind of their own and need 'order' in their lives. I hope this sounds as dated in the reading as it does in the writing!

Perhaps this is more the case in Asian societies. Apart from most Indian states, I've found myself caught in this discussion  in Bangladesh, Afghanistan, China, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Cambodia, Laos... and there's an amazing unity of thought across these varying geographies and cultures! Children need to be guided and taught -- if their errors are not corrected as soon as the occur, it will be too late to correct them later on! (All this is said in a deep, sonorous tone to emphasize its seriousness.)

Interestingly, these are also cultures that teach you to respect your elders (whether they have any quality other than age or not!). In short, in societies where control has a role to play, 'discipline' comes to mean doing the will of the powerful (because they are adult, or older or richer or occupy a 'position'). These are also the same places where the guru or the master or the preceptor is venerated (i.e. given a status next to God herself).

This sits a little uneasily with the clamor for greater democracy in the classroom. Active / joyful learning is now advocated in most of the countries mentioned. In India, the recently enacted Right to Education actually mandates activity-based classrooms where children will construct their own knowledge. The National Curriculum Framework 2005 makes an eloquent plea for 'democracy in the classroom', where collaboration and partnership with children (rather than their 'sincerity and obedience') will be the hallmark of quality.

As you can guess, change is a long way coming. Despite the fact that democratic classrooms are 'Official Policy' backed by law, and nearly a decade and a half of yearly rounds of in-service teacher training emphasizing the virtue of active learning,  classroom teaching tends to remain teacher-directed, instruction-based, with asking questions and offering one's opinions being considered almost a sin on the part of children.

When reports last came in, thus, D for Discipline was clearly winning over D for Democracy!

These teachers really need to learn how to teach - HELP!

These images capture the teachers' attempts to generate the appearance active learning without actually teaching in this way (on a daily, regular basis). At least this is my reading of the pictures. What do you think? Are these teachers really running active classrooms where children will learn well? And what would you do if you were on hand to help the teacher?

Image 1

Such large groups - is there any scope of getting any work done? 

And even the books cannot be opened fully. 

Surely this is 'whole-class' disguised as 'group-work'?

Image 2

What can these children do other than listening to the teacher? 

How can it be re-organized?

 And what kind of activities would be appropriate for this age group?

Image 3

This teacher has three different age groups and no real clue about 

what to do. What should he do? 

Suggestions desperately needed.

Image 4

These children have clearly never had any real engagement in learning. 

They are used to sitting like this for long durations, meekly doing nothing. 

What would you do if you were a

 CRC-BRC member visiting this school?

Image 5

This is the same school as in Image 4, only with a different and older group. 

Unfortunately this is a very, very common sight. 

If you had a hundred such schools in your block, 

what would you do?

Are You An 'Education Survivor'?

If you're reading this you obviously went through the education system. And maybe you are among those who are grateful that your school days were lovely. And that what you learnt is being put to use every day.

Or maybe not.

Conduct a group discussion with people (friends, colleagues, family members), around their school days. You will find a mix of smiles, frowns and giggles -- and the frowns will usually be about their experiences inside the classroom. Almost everyone has a story of how they were wrongly punished or discriminated against or didn't receive their just dues for something or the other. Around half the people will recall the oppression they felt at different times -- examinations, punishment being handed out, the subject/s they could make neither head nor tail of, the quiet acceptance by their families that they would be mediocre and their own realization that they would not be 'good enough' in a number of things.

Cut to the present, and many of them (now quite successful in life) will also be saying : "Why did we learn all those things? And even what I studied in college, what am I doing with it now?"

These are the symptoms of the 'education survivor'. Are you one of them? Are there really as many of them around as my dire prediction indicates? Is it only our tendency to wallow in self-pity? Or just the usual, superficial user-critique of education? Finally, is school education really something like a dreadful disease (or at least a dreadful experience) which leaves behind 'survivors'?

Listening Workshops - Or the Simplest Step to Educational Reform

Is 'bottom up' change really possible?
If you are an educational functionary, by now you must be  fed up of hearing how planning and change have to be 'bottom up'. By which is usually meant that those who are 'under' you must somehow begin to contribute, own and implement a range of actions. And you inwardly wonder if this is ever going to happen!

It was during a discussion on precisely such views that the idea of a listening workshop emerged. Colleagues in the Institute of Educational Development (IED) in BRAC University, Bangladesh felt that a 'listening workshop' might help them understand teachers and grassroots functionaries better.

Listening workshop - a straightforward structure
It was agreed that before forming any views, it is critical to simply listen to teachers and head teachers. Hence a straightforward meeting / interaction / workshop was designed around the following three questions that would be asked of teachers and head teachers:

• What do you really do? Exactly what does your work involve?
• What do you like doing?
• What do you find difficult or dislike doing?

It was also agreed that IED colleagues initiating the discussion would only listen, and not prompt or provide leading questions or offer any comment from their side. In other words, they really had to listen rather than talk!

So why is all this worth writing about? Because around ten such listen workshops were actually conducted, and most turned out to have  a very interesting pattern, followed by an unexpected twist.

What teachers felt
The listening workshops, it transpired, tended to proceed in the following stages.

• Teachers found it really difficult to believe that anyone could come down from the capital only to listen to them! There had to be a 'hidden conspiracy' or an 'agenda' they were not aware of... It would take anywhere from 40-60 minutes to convince the participants that the intention really was to listen to them. (What do you think this tells us about the functionaries that teachers usually deal with?)
• Once teachers believed the above, their initial reaction was that of giving vent to all their frustration and anger at 'you people who sit up there and form all kinds of views about us without ever visiting the field and observing the realities for yourself.'
• Finally, teachers would pour their hearts out on the three questions given above.

The teachers' replies have of course begun to inform the work of the institute in many ways. However, it was the completely unanticipated outcome below that left everyone (cautiously) elated.

The unexpected 'reform'
In the case of a large number of teachers who participated, a few days after the listening workshop it was found that they were implementing many new pedagogical actions in their classrooms! In the entire discussion, at no point had they been asked to make any improvement in their classrooms. So it was not as if teachers did not know improved methods - a large number of in-service interactions had ensured that they had had exposure. It's just that they were not using them. But for some reason the listening workshops triggered a change process in the classrooms!

What do you think this tells us about teachers, about their motivations, and about the kind of relationships they experience? If you can bear the initial first hour, isn't holding a listening workshop the simplest way to initiate educational reform at the local level?