|
In accordance with the strategic plan of
1995 and 2006, the Trusts have given great
importance to education as part of its grant
making. Over the past nine years, the Trusts'
portfolio in this thematic area has been
balanced between promoting innovative pedagogic
initiatives, while enhancing the quality
of service in government schools and supporting
institutes of higher learning.
Towards this, a focused approach has been
followed by the Trusts towards:
|
|
Enhancing the
quality of service delivery and value
additions in government schools |
|
|
Promoting initiatives
to educate out-of-school children |
|
|
Education management
and research |
|
|
Supporting institutes
of higher education for strategic support |
During the first half of 2004, the Trusts
decided to review the focus areas in education
grants, whilst identifying the gap areas and
seeking directions for future grant making.
The objective of the exercise was two-fold:
|
|
Reviewing
the current structure and design of
Trust’s education portfolio in
order to evaluate the effectiveness
of specific projects, their larger contribution
to the sector, and relevance of the
approach adopted. |
|
|
Give
recommendations to the Trusts to strengthen
the education portfolio by |
|
|
|
Mapping
the needs and present strategies of
the education sector at large |
| |
|
Identify
grey areas |
| |
|
Suggest
high-priority areas for the Trusts'
investments. |
To conduct this exercise, the Trusts-appointed
a team of three esteemed educationists,
each an authority in his field. Headed by
Professor Krishna Kumar, the team consisted
of Dr Govinda Rao Marapalli and Dr S Anandalakshmy.
Over a period of six months, the team travelled
extensively, reviewing past and present
partners of the Trusts in education, before
preparing their report that suggested the
way forward in the Trusts' grant-making
in education.
The key recommendations of the team were:
|
|
The
review stressed that education is a
poorly defined area of study, thereby
resulting in unproductive investments
in the sector. Hence, the review recommends
that the Trusts invest in the development
of the field itself, by supporting research
on systemic issues, with a special focus
on comparative studies across regions.
Such studies would have the potential
to bring out systemic insights, which
can be useful in choosing alternative
reform strategies. |
|
|
The
review recommended that the Trusts focus
on supporting some of the key, neglected
areas within education, such as early
childhood, production and sale of toys
and children’s literature, and
professional development of teachers.
It was suggested that the Trusts should
work with the State, wherever possible,
by identifying points of entry for supporting
systemic reforms. |
|
|
The
review team also recommended that the
Trusts focus on institution building
in elementary and higher education,
by continuing and expanding its support
for innovative institutions. Thrust
areas suggested include: |
|
|
|
Small,
non-commercial schools, attempting to
build a strong, local, institutional
base |
| |
|
Focused
support to expose average institutions
to those known for quality |
| |
The
review also made specific recommendations
to improve the Trusts' grant making
strategy, which included: |
| |
|
Establishing
linkages between different portfolios
|
| |
|
Floating
pre-designed proposals in order to make
its concerns understood better by potential
grantees |
| |
|
Closer
monitoring of the recipients of endowment
grants with the help of experts empanelled
for this purpose |
Accordingly, the education portfolio was re-classified,
and now consists of three major sub-themes:
|
|
Reforming elementary
education |
|
|
Nurturing education
as a discipline |
|
|
Building institutional
resource in education |
During a meeting with the Trustees in February
2005, Professor Krishna Kumar presented
his vision of the Trusts' education strategy,
which would form the basis of grants to
be made within this theme over the next
few years.
|
