Michigan State University
“Educational development in India:
The role of the Azim Premji Foundation”
Azim Premji Foundation
November 22, 2010
The context
2
The three global issues
Inequity
Injustice
Human
Lack of Care
Environmental
Our work arises out of our intense to desire to make this world better
3
India performance on key indicators (illustrative)
1.
16% of world’s population contributes to 5% of world’s GDP
2.
134 rank in Human Development Index out of 182 ranked
3.
44% of children under 4 malnourished, 56% women anemic
4.
130 Mln. without basic health – IMR much above the world average
5.
48% do not get electricity
6.
Majority have either no or unsafe drinking water, 75% no tap water
7.
Over 70% people have an income < US 1.5 per day
Loss due to wasted personpower – US# 3 Trillion
4
India - Education Policy Promise
1.
Acculturate
2.
Refine sensitivities and perceptions that contribute to national cohesion
3.
Develop scientific temper
4.
Independence of mind
5.
Furthering the goals enshrined in the constitution of India
6.
Develop manpower for different levels and purposes of economy
5
India – education reality - illustrative
• 1.3 Mln schools, 220 Mln children, 6
Mln teachers
• 97% villages have a primary school
within one kilometer
• Literacy 65% (M – 76%, F – 54%)
– Global literacy – 80%
• Girls and socially disadvantaged
backgrounds are 20 percentage
points behind on literacy and drop
out ratios
Over 75% schools have
unplanned multigrade
teaching
Only 10% schools have
children learning as per
expectations
Quality of education: A serious concern!
1 out of 3 children in
class 5 cannot read and
write
6
100 Children
Enroll in 1st Standard
52 Children
Reach 8th Std
39 Children
Reach 10th Std
19 Pass
10th
12% Efficiency of Education Funnel
The inefficient school education funnel
12 Children pursue higher education
7
Our work of about 8 years
1.
Approach of engaging with the Government to contribute to systemic change
2.
Team of about 300 professionals: work focussed on
•
Teacher development
•
Education Leadership Development
•
Examination reforms
•
Research
•
Education Technology
3.
An outreach of 15 states, 25,000 schools, 50,000 teachers, 2.5 Mln children using
digital learning resources, 4 Mln children assessed for learning competencies,
6000 education administrators engaged for development
4.
Largest developer of digital learning resources for school education in India – 18
languages including 4 tribal languages
5.
State governments willing to assign significant budgets for joint programs with
the Foundation – several states have reformed their examination system
8
Critical learning
1.
Acute shortage of education professionals - absence of schools of education
2.
Quality institutions of in-service education for education professionals
3.
Quality research in education
4.
Alternative and continued support to dysfunctional Government institutions
5.
Demonstration of model schools at scale
6.
Independent assessment and accreditation of educational institutions
7.
Awareness of stakeholders on critical education issues
8.
Concerted action by the players in education (Govt. + Non Govt.)
9
Azim Premji Foundation Response
10
Vision, Purpose, Mission
Vision
Facilitate a just, equitable, humane and sustainable society
Over-arching
purpose
Societal Change
Enablers
Education - both direct
impact and a large
positive multiplier
Mission
Have deep, at-scale
and institutionalized
impact on the quality
of education in India
11
A comprehensive “end to end” strategy
1.
Talent creation – Azim Premji University – Teaching programs + Continuing Ed
2.
Knowledge creation– Research - well resourced, ground driven, well monitored
3.
Ground level field Institutions - Continuing education + specific programs
4.
Building bottom up pressure for better quality
a.
Own Schools – demonstration of good quality at reasonable cost
b. Creation and Accreditation of Education standards – create a pull
c.
Network of like minded partners – impact at scale
d. Communication and engagement with stake-holders
12
Details of Strategy
What we will do …
▪
1
1A
University
What we will NOT do
Contribute significantly to social change in the near and long term, adopting a
▪ Train quality teachers at
multidisciplinary approach combining teaching, research and practice
scale
▪
Have Degree programs primarily focus on change leaders and teacher
1B educators, with a small batch of high quality teachers only as a model
▪
▪
Conduct research with
no line-of-sight to
application in India
▪
Adopt a service provider
mindset, i.e. provide only
select services in the
district
Not coordinate across
SRC, DRC and Schools
Enter a state “only” if the
government agrees to
holistic improvement
Build high quality research that can impact policy/ classroom practices
1C
▪
1D
2
Field
Resource
Centers
Run in-service training as a multiplier of social change by building strong
capabilities in current education and development sector professionals
2A
▪ Adopt an “architect mindset” of improving education in the district
– Integrated improvement, with a holistic view of district needs
– Strong role in overall program management, with depth in specific services
and leveraging partners for others
▪
Ensure that the SRC, DRCs and Schools work together with a common
2B state/district strategy, bringing unique and complementary roles
▪ Strive for strong, holistic engagement with the government; however, be
open to entering the state with specific services with gradual increase in
2C government support for holistic improvement
▪
▪
13
Details of Strategy
What we will do …
3
What we will NOT do
▪ The Schools strategy will be in line with the overall district
3A
Schools
4
Assessment &
Accreditation
5
strategy
3B
▪ Set up a small number of own and adopted schools as
models, and a much larger number of affiliated schools
3C
▪ The affiliated schools will have different levels of support,
based on need, with the ADC playing a strong role in
determining this
& Engagement
▪
independent of
district strategy
(there could be a few
exceptional cases)
Set up own schools
at scale
▪ Focus excessively on
▪ Help establish standards of excellence in education, and provide
4A
an objective view of status, but with the mindset of improvement individual (student,
teacher) assessments
▪ Focus primarily on system and institution assessment, with
4B individual assessment being done more through partners
5A
▪ Work on three objectives: drive change in broader mindsets
Communication
▪ Think of schools
▪
and behaviors related to key issues in education; influence specific
stakeholders for relevant policy change; create awareness about
▪
the Foundation’s work
5B
▪ Adopt a stance of “fact-based impact-focused advocacy”, on
a select set of themes, based on the Foundation’s work
Be narrowly focused
on policy change
alone
Be involved in factless propaganda
14
Integration of teaching, research, practice
Elements of
distinction
Multidisciplinarity
Description
▪ Equal emphasis of degree programs in the fields of education and
development, which are inherently multidisciplinary in nature
▪ Therefore, faculty for the university recruited from a wide range of
backgrounds (e.g. humanities, basic sciences, social sciences, leadership and
management, technical subjects etc)
Integration of
teaching,
research and
practice
▪ Degree programs, research and in-service training as three important parts
of the University
▪ Research and degree programs both having significant emphasis on practical
application
▪ All faculty required to choose one of three tracks combining teaching,
research and practice, with different levels of emphasis:
– Teaching track (65% teaching, 20% research, 15% practice)
– Research track (75% research, 15% teaching, 10% practice)
– Practice track (65% practice, 20% research, 15% teaching)
15
Five year ramp-up plan (2011 – 2016)
University Degree Programs
University Research Centre
University Resource Centre
Field Resource Centres
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
Intake of 2500 students per year
250 faculty
Nationally reputed for research in key thrust areas
Some international acknowledgement
500,000 in-service functionaries covered
▪ 8 State Resource Centers
▪ 50 District Resource Centers
▪ 8-10 districts with “holistic improvement” in progress;
75% coverage of these districts
Schools
Communication & Engagement
Accreditation Centre
▪ 100+ own/adopted schools + 1500 affiliated schools
across 8-10 districts
▪ Channels for communication identified and operational
▪ 2-3 state systems
▪ 70-100 significant institutions (in 8-10 districts with
depth)
▪ 1000-2000 schools
▪ Robust framework in place
16
A Dream of a Just, Equitable, Humane and Sustainable Society
Thank You