Teacher Education, Educational Leadership & Policy ETDs

Publication Date

5-31-1968

Abstract

The Directorate of Extension Programmes for Secondary Education (DEPSE) gives financial assistance to schools for conducting experiments in education to try out and to evaluate new practices intended to bring about innovations in classroom instruction, administrative practices, and organizational set-up. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the objectives of the experimental projects programme. The aspects included in the study were: variety of projects in various areas, extent of experimentation in different regions of India, turnover of participating schools, types and sizes of schools involved, qualifications of teachers conducting projects, nature of budget approved by the DEPSE, the effect of the programme on schools, importance assigned to the programme by participating schools, adequacy of guidance provided to schools, suggestions for improvement of the programme, quality of projects conducted, and reasons for rejection of certain project proposals. The investigator prepared a questionnaire covering all aspects of inquiry and mailed it to the 215 schools undertaking projects in 1964-65. Eighty-five respondents formed the sample for the study. A few aspects were studied through DEPSE records. The concept of experimental projects covered three categories: experiments, action researches, and projects. Projects were classified into six areas: curriculum; examinations and evaluation; guidance; improved classroom practices; school organization and administration; and special. Gujarat, Maharashtra and Rajasthan, in that order, were leaders in the extent of participation. Thirty-six schools out of eighty-five conducted two or more projects during the five year period 1960-61 through 1964-65. The types of schools involved were: inter colleges, higher secondary schools, multipurpose high schools, high schools, middle schools, and basic schools. Sixteen boys' schools, eight girls' schools, and sixty-one coeducational schools formed the sample. The range of enrollment was from 93 to 2,616 pupils with the median at 607. The sample had higher average of trained teachers than the national average. In practically all schools trained teachers conducted the projects. The DEPSE approved requested budgets for only sixteen projects, approved no money for five projects, and financed partially seventy-three projects. Most of the schools supplemented the budget deficit either fully or partially. The schools felt that the programme had helped them in solving their day-to-day problems of classroom teaching, that the results of their projects could help improve the quality of teaching, and that the projects gave some insight into the teaching learning process and helped to reconstruct teaching techniques. Even though a few schools had to disrupt their routine work, the majority conducted their projects during normal school hours. Some schools gave released time to teachers conducting projects; many others felt it should be done. A large majority of schools felt that the guidance provided through workshops/seminars was useful; however, more intensive guidance was expected from the extension centres. The schools made varying and constructive suggestions for the improvement of the programme. The suggestions referred to administrative and financial matters and to the roles of extension centres and schools. The sample schools had conducted 157 projects over the five year period. Some of the projects seem to have good experimental designs, others not. The major reasons for rejection of projects were: failure to understand the concept of experimental projects, lack of technical knowhow in projects, and inadmissible expenditures. Several suggestions for the improvement of the programme have been made by the investigator. Based on the results of the study, an evaluation instrument containing certain criteria for evaluating project proposals was also developed by the investigator. This was the first study on India's experimental projects programme. Major problems for further investigation have been suggested.

Document Type

Dissertation

Language

English

Degree Name

Educational Leadership

Level of Degree

Doctoral

Department Name

Teacher Education, Educational Leadership & Policy

First Committee Member (Chair)

John Thomas Zepper

Second Committee Member

Albert W. Vogel

Third Committee Member

Miles Vernon Zintz

Fourth Committee Member

Ralph David Norman

Download

Share

COinS