[MLE] NCERT Evaluation Report on MLE Project Orissa
Dear Multilingual Education Friends,
The evaluation report by NCERT's Department of Elementary Education on the Orissa MultiLingual Education projects under SSA/OPEPA is now available on-line at the TCF-SSA website*. These are some highlights from the summary:
Download full report* | summary report* (The summary report is also copied below)
- Overall, results suggested that children in MLE schools (treatment group) received significantly higher achievement scores than children in non-MLE schools (comparison group). However, scores for several Tribal languages showed that students of non-MLE schools did as well or even slightly better than students of MLE schools.
- Other positive impacts noted by the stakeholders included: increased self-respect and self-confidence among children; increased interest in school; increased participation in learning; and increased use of the tribal languages. There were also perceived changes in enrolment, better retention rates, and lower drop-out rates in Multilingual Education programme schools due to the programme intervention; however, there were some variations according to tribal language.
- The positive unintended outcomes of the program identified included improved relationships among teachers and among students and increased motivation and eagerness among students.
- Unintended negative outcomes identified included increased drop-out rates for children from other castes, reduced participation of disabled children and a preference for the Oriya language over the mother-tongue.
- A systematic method of monitoring of schools needs to be developed. The monitoring and supervision needs to be an ongoing process from State/District/Block and Cluster Resource Centres.
Thanks to Dr Mahendra Mishra for the tip.
Regards,
Karsten
*UPDATE April 2019: The report has since been removed from that site. Please click here if you want to read the report.
--
Document
Education Consultant, LinkedIn Profile
SIL International, South Asia Group
All mailings since 2005 are posted on: www.mle-india.net.
Recommended sites: India: http://www.nmrc-jnu.org/; International: http://www.mlenetwork.org/
Disclaimer: This mailing list is an informal way to share mother tongue based multilingual education (MLE) related information. The sender neither claims credit or responsibility for the reports and events shared through this mailing list. Subscribing or unsubscribe by writing "[MLE] Subscribe" or "[MLE] Unsubscribe" in the subject-line and send a message to: karsten_van_riezen@sil.org. Any contributions or suggestions are welcome.
|
Programme evaluation of Multilingual Education Orissa
Summary Report
I. ABOUT MLE
The Multi-lingual Education (MLE) programme is an innovative programme launched by the Government of Orissa in selected schools in year 2006-07 with the goal to ensure equity and quality education to tribal children in the State. It aims to improve student learning through the use of their mother tongue in early classes. The programme is designed to develop reading and writing skills to acquire knowledge and information through the mother tongue at the early stages of learning for the children.
The programme is being implemented in a phased manner covering 10 tribal languages, namely, Bonda, Juang, Kissan, Koya, Kui, Kuvi, Munda, Oram, Santhali and Saura in 545 schools spread over 8 districts of the Orissa State.
II. EVALUATION DESIGN AND DATA SOURCES
The study aimed to answer the following three evaluation questions:
1. Is Multilingual Education programme implemented as intended? If not, why not?
2. To what extent have the intended objectives of the Multilingual Education programme been realized?
3. What are the unintended outcomes attributable to the programme?
A mixed method approach was used to answer the evaluation questions, using a number of methods and tools were used for data gathering such as questionnaires, achievement tests, interviews, observations and focus groups besides document reviews. Data was collected from stakeholders of 100 schools in which MLE programme had been implemented, covering all 10 tribal languages. Data was also collected from 100 schools in which Multilingual Education programme had not been implemented which were similar to MLE schools in terms of location, population, and size, and had at least 50% enrolment of Tribal children (compared to at least 90% Tribal children enrolment in schools that had been chosen by the state to participate in MLE). A nonequivalent control group design was also used to assess student achievement outcomes; mean scores for Class 2 students on an achievement test created for this evaluation study were compared for the MLE schools and non-MLE schools within each language and for the state as a whole.
The data was gathered from 1757 children, 364 teachers, 200 Head Masters, 534 community members, 75 administrators; and 396 classrooms were observed for the evaluation.
III. MAJOR FINDINGS
• Programme implementation
(i) The majority of stakeholders were well aware of the MLE programme, and its objectives.
(ii) A large percentage of teachers, students and community members participated in the development of textbooks and teaching learning materials. The textbooks and TLMs were available in most of the schools. The learning materials were found to be interesting and useful by the teachers and students. The content of textbooks was age appropriate and contextual to tribal cultures.
(iii) Most MLE programme teachers expressed that changes were required in the teachers’ training programme, including quality, duration, and number of resource persons.
(iv) There was evidence that the language and curricular relevance of materials needed to be addressed, that materials were not always delivered on time, and that at times there were not sufficient materials available.
(v) While almost all the MLE schools had one tribal language teacher, this number was not adequate to teach all the classes in the school. It was also observed that Oriya was being used in classrooms in some Tribal areas instead of the Tribal language.
(vi) There was evidence that many language groups ware lacking in basic facilities such as running water, toilets, and electricity and that there was language groups varied with regard to availability of academic support facilities such as learning corners, wall hangings/magazines, libraries, and play materials.
(vii) The level of monitoring and academic support provided by Block Resource Center Coordinators and Cluster Resource Centre Coordinators varied from district to district, and many Head Teachers indicated that they needed more academic support.
• Impact on student learning and realization of Objectives of MLE
(i) Overall, results suggested that children in MLE schools (treatment group) received significantly higher achievement scores than children in non-MLE schools (comparison group). However, scores for several Tribal languages showed that students of non-MLE schools did as well or even slightly better than students of MLE schools.
(ii) Other positive impacts noted by the stakeholders included: increased self-respect and self-confidence among children; increased interest in school; increased participation in learning; and increased use of the tribal languages. There were also perceived changes in enrolment, better retention rates, and lower drop-out rates in Multilingual Education programme schools due to the programme intervention; however, there were some variations according to tribal language.
• Unintended Outcomes
(i) The positive unintended outcomes of the program identified included improved relationships among teachers and among students and increased motivation and eagerness among students.
(ii) Unintended negative outcomes identified included increased drop-out rates for children from other castes, reduced participation of disabled children and a preference for the Oriya language over the mother-tongue.
IV. RECOMMENDATIONS
• Continue to offer the program in the existing MLE schools, and consider up-scaling the program to additional languages and districts.
• Address the vast variability amongst the 10 language groups in terms of implementation and outcomes. Case studies of higher and lower performing language groups may be helpful in identifying the sources of variations.
• A systematic method of monitoring of schools needs to be developed. The monitoring and supervision needs to be an ongoing process from State/District/Block and Cluster Resource Centres.
• All aspects of the teacher training process need to be reviewed for all tribal languages in order to make the training more useful for teachers. Training duration should be increased and include more hands-on experiences. Training needs to incorporate more cultural components and information regarding equitable, quality education, classroom management.
Consistent administration of pre- and post-training evaluations and feedback is also recommended in order to encourage ongoing improvement of training sessions.
• Make changes to staffing as recommended by stakeholders, including: appoint language teachers for each Class, appoint teachers and head teachers from the locality, engage language resource persons at block and cluster levels, increase the salary levels of tribal teachers, and form management committees using people with appropriate levels of work experience.
• Undertake a systematic review of the programme materials to ensure appropriate cultural context in each tribal language. Improve materials with clarity for ease of use for the teachers. Make teaching materials and students’ textbooks readily available in time to all the participating schools in programme.
• Address negative unintended outcomes identified by stakeholders, including drop out of children of other castes from Multilingual Education programme schools, and preference for the Oriya language over the mother tongue of even the tribal children.
• Work with SSA to ensure all schools have adequate resources such as running water, toilets, and electricity, as well as well as school boundaries, playgrounds, and ramps. Within the MLE program specifically, all schools should also be supported and provided with resources and academic support facilities such as learning corners, wall hangings/magazines, libraries, and play materials.
• Although results suggest a fairly high level of community involvement and awareness, it would be beneficial to encourage more community participation in material development and school activities such as traditional games, arts and crafts music and dance, in all language groups.