##common.pageHeaderLogo.altText##
Top Journal of Educational Technology
Vol. 9 No. 5 (2024): September-October
Original Articles

TRANSFORMING EDUCATION: ASSESSING LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS WITH UEI-PDP

Download
  • Amina Yasmeen Qureshi
Amina Yasmeen Qureshi
Notre Dame Institute of Education (NDIE), Karachi, Pakistan, 3United Education Initiative, Karachi, Pakistan
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14417228%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20

Published 2024-12-12

Keywords

  • Quality, monitoring, positive change, professional development.

Copyright (c) 2024 Top Journal of Educational Technology

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Abstract

A positive change in the learning environment in schools is visible through ongoing professional development of teachers and administrators. Monitoring the professional development program and providing support to teachers and administrators to transfer their learnings into the school environment ensures some measures of quality. Quality issues led to the launching of the Professional Development Program (PDP) for Primary School Teachers (PSTs) of Sindh by the United Educational Initiative (UEI), a consortium of five Governmental and Non-Governmental Organizations, working under the supervision of Education Sector Reform Assistance (ESRA). Implementation of the UEI-PDP in four districts of Sindh, is ensured by a team of professionals in each district. Recognising that capacity building of district education employees would improve the educational system in the country, 130 Master Trainers were selected, on merit, from the District Education Office for the training of 17,000 teachers and 3000 Head teachers/administrators over a period of two years. This paper developed the design of a Monitoring Process for a Professional Development Program for Primary School Teachers and Administrators. Data was collected through Pre/Post-observations, Interviews, Questionnaires and Reports. Such tools make it possible for the monitoring teams to observe, to inquire further, and, along with the Managers, Master Trainers and School Support Team, seek to explain the progress of the program and take corrective action where indicated. Both formative evaluations as well as summative evaluation techniques are utilized for evaluating the program. The monitoring process that assisted in formative evaluations is described. In order to assist in summative evaluation, data collected through the monitoring process was further developed to categorize the schools where teachers and head teachers are trained. It is hoped that the categorization of the schools may lead to further improvements in those schools which fall in the group for need improvement. It may also initiate further research as to reasons behind why some schools are in the good category and why others fall in the average category.

Download

References

  1. Academics concerned at poor state of education (2005, December 30). Dawn, p. 19.
  2. Academy for Educational Development (2005). Improving teaching practices in Pakistan.
  3. Published conference proceedings. Retrieved January 6, 2006, from http://www.aed.org/Education/International/Teaching-Practices-inPakistan.cfm
  4. Ali MA (1998). Supervision for teacher development: an alternative model for Pakistan. Int. J. Edu. Dev. 20(3), 177-188. Arcaro J (1995). Creating quality in the classroom. London. Kogan Page Ltd.
  5. Bregman J, Mohammad N (1998). Primary and secondary education structural issues. In Hoodbhoy, P. (Ed), Education and the state: fifty years of Pakistan. Karachi: Oxford University Press.
  6. Calderhead J (2001). International experiences of teaching reform. In V.
  7. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching. Washington: American Research Association. pp. 777-802.
  8. Darling-Hammond L (2001). Standard setting in teaching: Changes in licensing, certification and assessment. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching. Washington: American Research Association. pp. 751-776.
  9. Del Cotto-Kaminski L (n.d.). Leadership, change and organizational learning Canadian CEO's Perspective. Retrieved Dec 28, 2005 from http://www.vink.helsinki.fi/files/Theoria_leadership.html
  10. Farah I (1996). Roads to success: self-sustaining primary school change in rural Pakistan. Washington DC: World Bank.
  11. Fullan M (1998). Change forces: probing the depths of educational reform. London: The Falmer Press.
  12. Fullan M (2001). Leading in a culture of change. San Francisco: JoseyBass. Gap widens in male, female literacy rate: Pakistan Education and School Atlas. (2003, June11). Dawn, Retrieved Jan 6, 2006, from http://lists.isb.sdnpk.org/pipermail/gsdlist/2003June/001127.html.
  13. Hashim F (1999). An investigation of factors affecting teachers’ use of a variety of teaching methods in the classroom. Unpublished Masters’ Thesis, University of Karachi, Karachi, Sindh, Pakistan.
  14. Hayes D (2003). A student teacher’s guide to primary school placement: learning to survive and prosper. London: Routledge Falmer. Hoodbhoy P (Ed.) (1998). Education and the state: Fifty years of Pakistan. Karachi: Oxford University.
  15. Hoodbhoy P (2004). Pakistan’s education system its greatest threat.
  16. Pakistan Facts. Retrieved Jan 10, 2006, from http://www.Pakistan-facts.com/article.php/20041017195851719 Hussain MA (2005). Development in educational practices. UNESCO. Retrieved Jan 12, 2006, from http://portal.unesco.org/education/en/file_download.php
  17. Jalal Z (2003). A change in attitudes about education in Pakistan. Education Today newsletter. July- September 2003, UNESCO
  18. Jalalzai MK (2005). The crisis of education in Pakistan: state education and the text-books. Lahore: Al-Abbas international.
  19. Kazilibash HH (1998). Teaching teachers to teach. In Hoodbhoy, P. (Ed), Education and the state: fifty years of Pakistan. Karachi: Oxford University Press
  20. Kent AM (2005). Acknowledging the need facing teacher preparation programs responding to make a difference. Education, 125(3), 343348.
  21. Khan T (2003, Feb. 9). Scratching beneath the surface. Dawn, p. 20. Malik SR (1992). The system of education in Pakistan. National Book Foundation, Islamabad.
  22. Martin M (2005). Reflections in teacher education: How can it be supported? Edu. Action Res. 13(4), 525-541.
  23. Memon M (1998). The future of head teachers as educational leaders in Pakistan: Implications for pedagogical leadership. Education 2000, 3(3), 17-21.
  24. Minhas S (2003, Feb. 16). Banish the teacher blues. Dawn, p. 23.
  25. Mohammed, RF (2004). Practical constraints upon teacher development in Pakistani schools. J. In-service Edu., 30(1), 101-114.
  26. Ministry of Education Pakistan (2000). National Education Policy 19982010, Retrieved Jan 8, 2006, from http://www.pakistan.gov.pk/education-ministry/highlights/highlight-three1.jsp
  27. Ministry of Education (2002). Facts and figures Pakistan: Education for all wing. UNICEF. Islamabad.
  28. Ministry of Education Pakistan (2003). Education Sector Reforms: Action Plan 2001-2005. Islamabad.
  29. Ministry of Education Pakistan (2003). National Plan of Action on Education for All (2001-2015): Islamabad.
  30. O'Sullivan M (2002). Effective follow-up strategies for professional development for primary teachers in Namibia. Teacher Development, 6(2), 181-203.
  31. O'Sullivan M (2005). What is happening in the classroom? A common-sense approach to improving the quality of primary education in developing countries. Teacher Development, 9(3), 301-314.
  32. Patton MQ (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). London: Sage Publications.
  33. Quddus NJ (1990). Problems of education in Pakistan. Karachi: Royal Book Company.
  34. Rampal A (2000). Education for human development in South Asia. Economic and Political Weekly. July 22. p. 2523-2531.
  35. Ranis G, Stewart F (n.d.) (2000). Strategies for success in human development. Retrieved on 9th January from http://hdr.undp.org/docs/training/oxford/readings/Ranis%20and%20-
  36. Stewart.pdf
  37. Rarieya JFA (2005). Reflective dialogue: what’s in it for teachers? A Pakistani case. J. In-service Edu. 31(2), 313-335.
  38. Rizvi M (1999). A study of attitudes towards teacher effectiveness amongst selected educators in Karachi, Pakistan. Unpublished Masters’ Thesis, University of Karachi, Karachi, Sindh, Pakistan.
  39. Rossi P, Lipsey MW, Freeman HE (2004). Evaluation: a systematic approach (7th ed.). London: Sage Publications.
  40. Saleem M (1999). Education for all: the year 2000 assessment. Pakistan Country Report. Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Education, Islamabad.
  41. Shah D (2003). Decentralization in the Education System of Pakistan: Policies and Strategies. Academy of Educational Planning and Management Ministry of Education, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad.
  42. Siddiqui S (2003, March 18). Why teachers don’t change. Dawn, p. 23.
  43. Simkins T, Sisum C, Memon M (2003). School leadership in Pakistan: exploring the head teacher’s role. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 14(3), 275-291.
  44. Simkins T, Garrett V, Memon M, NazirAli R (1998). The perception of government and non-government head teachers in Pakistan.
  45. Educational Management and Administration, 26(2), 131-146 managers and researcher. Washington: World Bank.
  46. Valadez J, Bamberger M (1997). Monitoring and evaluating social Winch C (1996). Quality and education. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. programs in developing countries: a handbook for policy makers,