Human Development

The invisible and urgent challenge of learning

  • Blog Post Date 20 May, 2013
  • Print Page

While almost all six to fourteen year olds in India are enrolled in school, their performance is far below expected levels. The common view is that the problem can be addressed by filling gaps in the system such as inadequate infrastructure or teacher shortage. This column argues that these inputs can ensure “schooling for all” but not “learning for all”, and suggests teaching by level rather than by grade to improve learning outcomes.



In many states across India, children have just moved into a new class. The excitement of a new school year is still in the air. New textbooks are being distributed; notebooks and stationery are being bought. Soon summer vacations will begin. On the eve of these new beginnings, hopes run high for all that children will learn in another year of school. But how much can we expect that they’ll actually learn?

All current available data on student achievement suggest children are performing far below the level that is expected of them. Take a typical Standard V class. The estimates from the oft quoted Annual Status of Education Report (ASER) 2012 suggests that of all rural children enrolled in Standard V, only half can fluently read text from a Standard II textbook. In arithmetic, only half of all Standard V children can do a basic 2-digit subtraction problem with borrowing - a skill that is expected in Standard II. Of the children who have these basic skills, many have higher-level capabilities too. But for the half who have reached Standard V and do not have the fundamental skills of reading or arithmetic, there are very serious risks of not gaining much from continuing in school and completing eight years of schooling. Using ASER figures, we estimate that over 100 million children in India are two or more years below their grade level. Under the current circumstances, such children are very unlikely to reach the levels of capability expected of children after eight years of schooling, as mandated by the Right to Education (RTE) Act.

The visible challenge: Inadequate inputs

If you ask teachers or officials about the biggest challenge for improving learning outcomes they will probably point to the numerous gaps in the system. Some schools continue to lack adequate infrastructure; several states still face a severe shortage of teachers. Many will complain about the poor quality of institutional support for teachers’ professional development. These commonly identified challenges related to inputs and institutions are visible even to the common man. The usual assumption is that if these gaps are filled, children will learn and learn well. This “theory of change” explains the push from within the government as well as from outside to ensure the timely provision of adequate inputs, and to point out the urgent need to build institutions that support schools and teachers.

The invisible challenge: Children falling behind

But there is another less visible, but dangerously debilitating and potentially worsening problem that plagues Indian classrooms. This may be at the root of why children are not learning. Going back to the typical Standard V classroom, try to imagine the challenge for the teacher. In our typical school, the Standard V teacher uses the Standard V textbook, trying to cover the material and activities that the textbook lays out. But whom should she teach? And how should she do it? Should she focus on those children who have basic skills, who are more likely to attend school regularly and are therefore easier to teach? What should she do with the other half of the class who are not even at Standard I or II level? This is a problem faced by almost all primary school teachers. Try to imagine the daily challenge for the teacher in her classroom. Try to imagine what this “low learning trap” does to children.

Sadly, it appears as though educated citizens, education experts, planners and policymakers, central, state and local governments do not see this problem. A typical Indian school (government or private) focuses on completing curriculum and is not structured to provide extra help to children who are not moving ahead at the expected pace or to those who are falling behind. Without the learning support that is critical, a large fraction of Indian children slip through the cracks. The problem is made worse by textbooks and curriculum whose pace and content accelerates through the primary school years. An excellent paper by Pritchett-Beatty in 2012, titled “The Negative Consequences of Overambitious Curricula”1lays out the issue very well - “If the official school curriculum covers too much, goes too fast and is too hard compared to the initial skill of the students and the ability of the schools to teach this can produce disastrous results. An overambitious curriculum causes more and more students to get left behind early and stay behind forever”. Unlike the problems of access and inputs that are visible, the situation of low learning worsens quietly within classrooms and schools and is invisible to the world outside.

Teaching by level

What has been done so far to tackle this less visible problem? During the last century, schools all over the world have been organised by age and grade. According to their progression in age, children move from one grade to the next, regardless of the underlying learning composition of students. What if we were to tweak this organisational principle of schools, and group children by level of learning rather than by grade? Would these changes in grouping accompanied by appropriate changes in instruction lead to more effective teaching situations and better learning outcomes?

Using the principle of “teaching by level”, several large-scale experiments have been tried in recent years in India with promising results. In June 2008, the Bihar government conducted month long “summer camps”. Children enrolled in Standards III, IV and V who were not yet at Standard II level were targeted for the camps. At camp, children sat in groups with other children at the same ability level, regardless of their age or grade. Each instructor had children who were at the same learning level and used appropriate materials and methods for children at that level. The idea was to start with where the children were and utilise the free time in the summer holidays to move children towards where they needed to be. The modest goal for the summer camp was to bring all these children who had fallen behind to at least a Standard II level. Although the camps were hurriedly organised, an external, randomised, evaluation by MIT’s Poverty Action Lab showed significant improvements in learning for the targeted children who attended summer camp. Even more noteworthy is the fact that the gains that the summer camp children made were sustained even two years later.

Other states have incorporated the “teaching-by-level” concept into the normal working of the school during the school year. In 2009-2011, the Punjab government implemented a state-wide programme to improve basic learning outcomes.2Two hours during the school day were set aside for this purpose. During this time, children from Standard I to V were grouped by their learning level and existing teachers were assigned to the groups. Teachers were trained to use appropriate methods and materials with each group. As each child progressed, she or he could move into the next group. Clear goals, strong training, mentoring and monitoring for teachers, systematic assessment and periodic review helped to ensure that the programme delivered good results.

During the last school year, in two districts in Bihar (Jehanabad and East Champaran) and another two districts in Haryana (Kurukshetra and Mahendragarh), similar interventions were implemented by the district administrations.3 For example, in Jehanabad, in August 2012, of the 16,000 children who were assessed, only 30% of children in Standards III, IV and V could read simple paragraphs or short stories. An evaluation showed that the number rose to 72% by the end of February 2013, despite many discontinuities due to holidays in that period.4 Further, the Jehanabad effort also led to increased attendance in schools, increased parent awareness not just about schooling but also about learning, a visible energising of the entire school system, and improved school functioning. These district-level experiments have led the Bihar state government to think seriously about a scale up in the 2013-2014 school year.

Achieving learning for all

To address the challenge of teaching-learning in primary grades we must make concerted efforts to tackle three issues. To help all children in Standards III, IV and V reach the level expected of them at their grade, there is a dual challenge: first, basic skills need to be built, and built fast and in a durable way. Second, these children have to be enabled to be able to cope with what is required of them for the grade in which they are studying. Finally, to alleviate this dual challenge in the future, by the end of Standard II children need to have developed foundational skills of reading, writing, critical thinking, arithmetic and problem solving. Of course it can be argued that grade level expectations need to be reviewed so that the “negative consequences of overambitious curricula” can be minimised, but curriculum reform is a long drawn out and complicated process. In the meanwhile, we should not allow children to finish Standard V without the very basic skills that will enable them to go forward in the education system and in life.

The education chapter in the 12th Five Year Plan document places children’s learning outcomes at the centre of the stage. The spirit of the RTE Act also is to “guarantee” that by the time children complete eight years of schooling, they become capable of dealing with whatever lies ahead for them. The prevailing belief among decision-makers is that increasing inputs, improving infrastructure and “tightening systems” will lead to the change we desire. While the input based and “business as usual” “theory of change” may be necessary to achieve “schooling for all”, it will not enable India to reach the goals of “learning for all”. Like the cases described above, it is essential that we take a close look at solutions that have been implemented and found to be effective and successful. In each of these cases, a fundamental departure from “business as usual” was needed along with a major shift in the usual mindset of the decision-makers and implementers. Setting of clear and achievable goals, grouping children by ability instead of age/ grade, supporting teachers, conducting systematic basic assessment, and steadfast leadership have enabled government school teachers (and their cluster coordinators, block and district officials) to achieve results in six months that they had not been able to catalyse in the last 4-5 years!

The way forward

Almost all children in the 6-14 age group in India are enrolled in school. In the coming school year, we must undertake concrete steps for putting India’s children on the path of achieving the full potential of their capabilities. Each state must publicly declare their learning goals and articulate concretely their plans for achieving higher learning outcomes for at least the next two to three years. It is urgent that we face our realities squarely to fulfill children’s hopes for the coming school year and enable India to reach its national goals for growth and equity.

Watch Rukmini Banerji and Madhav Chavan of Pratham on PBS News Hour (aired in the US on 14 May 2013): http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/world/jan-june13/india_05-14.html

This is the first in a series of columns on the Right to Education that will be posted on I4I over the next few weeks.

Notes:

  1. http://www.cgdev.org/files/1426129_file_Pritchett_Beatty_Overambitious_FINAL.pdf
  2. Purrho Punjab was conducted in collaboration between the state government and Pratham, an educational NGO in India
  3. In all of these cases, Pratham provided training, monitoring, material and review support to the district administrations. All of these were done in a joint team, mostly by the district and sub-district officers with a few Pratham team members.
  4. For a video clip of the Jehanabad work see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XB5Wih-Ng8Y&feature=youtu.be
Tags:
No comments yet
Join the conversation
Captcha Captcha Reload

Comments will be held for moderation. Your contact information will not be made public.

Related content

Sign up to our newsletter