Evaluation Report - IRI (Interactive Radio Instruction) Program

EvaluationReport
Of
IRI(InteractiveRadioInstruction)Program
(EnglishIsFun,Level1)
(20072008)
In
BIHAR
Submittedto:
EducationDevelopmentCenter,Bangaluru
Submittedby:
GrihiniKendra
ExecutiveSummary
Since its inception in India in 2002, Education Development Center (EDC) has
introduced an Interactive Radio Instruction Program in five states including Bihar in
collaboration with the Education Department in the flagship of Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan. It
aims at developing the skills of teachers for an interactive activity based teaching
learning process using an experiential pedagogy based on technology.
The IRI programme English is Fun, Level-1 was launched in Bihar on November 20, 2007
across all 56,000 Primary Schools throughout the state. The programme covers 3500516
students in class 1 and 2672876 class 2. Hence, a total of 61,73,392 students as per
academic year 2007-2008 are benefiting through this programme in Bihar in classes 1
and 2.
A pre and post baseline survey was proposed by EDC to BEP to be conducted across 6
selected districts Nawada, Kishanganj, Bhojpur, East Champaran, Banka and
Madhubani. A third party Grihini Kendra was assigned with the task of conducting the
survey. A total of 2158 students of classes 1 and 2 from 117 schools (approximately 20
schools each in 6 districts) were randomly selected to conduct the survey tests.
The impact assessment of IRI programme was measured through various variables
gender-wise, grade-wise, caste-wise, parents literacy wise and socio-economic status
wise.
The tests were divided into two categories, Production and Reception.
Production and Reception comprised of 7 and 10 questions respectively.
1088 no of students participated in reception and 1070 in production during Pre
test in all the districts. Whereas, 1094 students participated in reception and 1056
in production during Post test in all six districts.
72.6% students have performed with fair and 18.8% students are with good
reception ability: whereas 38.9% students have fair production ability and 2.4%
with good production ability. Grade 2 students are mastered more in production
ability.
Performance of boys is slightly better than girls in both reception and production
tests.
There is large percentage increase in performance of students in reception than
production.
There is a slight difference (approx. 1%-3%) in performance on both reception
and production tests for different caste groups.
Performance of general caste in both reception and production is better than
(approx 5%) OBC and ST/SC. But in one district, Kishanganj, performance of ST/SC
and OBC is encouraging. Whereas the performance level of OBC and ST/SC in
both reception and production is nearly same.
There is less coverage of excellent and good mothers in terms of literacy levels; it
indicates number of illiterate mothers is very high. Meanwhile Mothers literacy
levels effects the performance of students in both reception and production. This
effect is low in case of fathers literacy levels. In Kishanganj performance of
students with illiterate father and mother is satisfactory.
There is sizeable variation in performances on both reception and production in the
districts. The performance of Nawada (in reception) and Kishanganj and Banka district
(in production) is high, whereas performance of Bhojpur district is poor.
Acknowledgement
Grihini Kendra expresses its deep gratitude to Education Development Center for
extending this opportunity of conducting Pre and post test survey of its programme. We
are also grateful to the State Project Director-Bihar Education Project, Mr. Rajesh
Bhushan and all the officials of Bihar Education Project both at State and Districts level
for their untiring support to accomplish the survey successfully. We also thank Dr. Phala
chandra for his invaluable guidance and orientation.
Abbreviations
IRI Interactive Radio Instructions
EDC - Education Development Center
BEP Bihar Education Project
AIR All India Radio
Contents
1.
INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................. 8
1.1.
1.2.
2.
METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................................... 8
2.1.
2.2.
2.3.
2.4.
2.5.
3.
BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................ 8
OBJECTIVES .................................................................................................................................... 8
FRAMEWORK OF BASELINE STUDY ...................................................................................................... 8
PROJECT DESCRIPTION ..................................................................................................................... 9
TEST ............................................................................................................................................... 9
SAMPLING ...................................................................................................................................... 9
TEST SCORING ............................................................................................................................... 10
TABULATED AND GRAPHICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE STUDIES ........................................................ 10

3.1.
COVERAGE OF STUDENTS ACCORDING TO DISTRICT AND GENDER ....................................................... 10
3.2.
COVERAGE OF STUDENTS ACCORDING TO GRADE ............................................................................ 11
3.3.
ASSESSMENT OF KNOWLEDGE OF GRADE 1 BOYS AND GIRLS ACCORDING TO THEIR CASTE ..................... 14
3.4.
ASSESSMENT OF KNOWLEDGE OF GRADE 2 BOYS AND GIRLS ACCORDING TO THEIR CASTE ..................... 15
3.5.
PRE-POST COMPARATIVE ASSESSMENT OF KNOWLEDGE OF ALL BOYS AND GIRLS ACCORDING TO THEIR
CASTE 16
3.6.
MOTHERS EDUCATION ............................................................................................................................... 17
3.6.1. Assessment of knowledge of Grade 1 boys and girls according to their mothers
education ...................................................................................................................................... 18
3.6.2. Assessment of knowledge of Grade 2 boys and girls according to their mothers
education ...................................................................................................................................... 19
3.6.3. Pre-Post Comparative assessment of all boys and girls according to their mothers
education ...................................................................................................................................... 20
3.7.
FATHERS EDUCATION ................................................................................................................................. 21
3.7.1. Assessment of knowledge of Grade 1 boys and girls according to their fathers
education ...................................................................................................................................... 21
3.7.2. Assessment of knowledge of Grade 2 boys and girls according to their fathers
education ...................................................................................................................................... 23
3.7.3. Pre-Post assessment of all boys and girls according to their fathers education....... 24
3.8.
ASSESSMENT OF KNOWLEDGE AS PER PARENTS OCCUPATION ............................................................. 25
3.8.1. Assessment of knowledge of boys as per mothers occupation ................................. 25
3.9.
ASSESSMENT OF KNOWLEDGE OF GIRLS AS PER MOTHERS OCCUPATION............................................... 26
3.10. ASSESSMENT OF KNOWLEDGE OF BOYS AS PER FATHERS OCCUPATION................................................. 27
3.11. ASSESSMENT OF KNOWLEDGE OF GIRLS AS PER FATHERS OCCUPATION ................................................ 28
3.12. PRE-POST COMPARATIVE ASSESSMENT OF MEAN KNOWLEDGE OF ALL BOYS AND GIRLS ......................... 29
3.12.1.
Assessment of mean knowledge of grade 1 students .............................................. 29
3.13. ASSESSMENT OF MEAN KNOWLEDGE OF GRADE 2 STUDENTS ............................................................... 29
3.14. ASSESSMENT OF MEAN KNOWLEDGE OF ALL BOYS AND GIRLS .............................................................. 30
4.
TEACHERS FEEDBACK .................................................................................................................... 30
5.
LOWLIGHTS AND SUGGESTED RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................... 33
6.
KEY INDICATORS ............................................................................................................................ 33
7.
CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................. 33
Tables
TABLE 1 - PRE TEST........................................................................................................................................... 10
TABLE 2 - POST TEST ......................................................................................................................................... 10
TABLE 3 (% CHANGE REFERS TO THE DIFFERENCE IN PERFORMANCE IN PRE AND POST) ............................................. 11
TABLE 4 ......................................................................................................................................................... 14
TABLE 5 ......................................................................................................................................................... 15
TABLE 6 ......................................................................................................................................................... 16
TABLE 7 ......................................................................................................................................................... 18
TABLE 8 ......................................................................................................................................................... 19
TABLE 9 ......................................................................................................................................................... 20
TABLE 10 ....................................................................................................................................................... 22
TABLE 11 ....................................................................................................................................................... 23
TABLE 12 ....................................................................................................................................................... 24
TABLE 13 ....................................................................................................................................................... 29
TABLE 14 ....................................................................................................................................................... 29
TABLE 15 ....................................................................................................................................................... 30
Graphs
GRAPH 1....................................................................................................................................................... 12
GRAPH 2....................................................................................................................................................... 12
GRAPH 3....................................................................................................................................................... 12
GRAPH 4....................................................................................................................................................... 13
GRAPH 5....................................................................................................................................................... 13
GRAPH 6....................................................................................................................................................... 13
GRAPH 7....................................................................................................................................................... 15
GRAPH 8....................................................................................................................................................... 15
GRAPH 9....................................................................................................................................................... 16
GRAPH 10..................................................................................................................................................... 16
GRAPH 11..................................................................................................................................................... 17
GRAPH 12..................................................................................................................................................... 17
GRAPH 13..................................................................................................................................................... 18
GRAPH 14..................................................................................................................................................... 18
GRAPH 15..................................................................................................................................................... 19
GRAPH 16..................................................................................................................................................... 20
GRAPH 17..................................................................................................................................................... 21
GRAPH 18..................................................................................................................................................... 21
GRAPH 19..................................................................................................................................................... 22
GRAPH 20..................................................................................................................................................... 22
GRAPH 21..................................................................................................................................................... 23
GRAPH 22..................................................................................................................................................... 23
GRAPH 23..................................................................................................................................................... 24
GRAPH 24..................................................................................................................................................... 25
ANNEXURES:
District wise coverage of Schools

District wise Pre test tables
District wise Post Test Tables
Pre and Post Test comparative tables of Banka
Pre and Post Test comparative tables of Bhojpur

Pre and Post Test comparative tables of East Champaran
Pre and Post Test comparative tables of Kishanganj
Pre and Post Test comparative tables of Madhubani
Pre and Post Test comparative tables of Nawada
Pre and Post comparative graphs of Banka
Pre and Post comparative graphs of Bhojpur
Pre and Post comparative graphs of East Champaran
Pre and Post comparative graphs of Kishanganj
Pre and Post comparative graphs of Madhubani
Pre and Post comparative graphs of Nawada
District wise comparative graphs of teachers qualifications and experience
Formats of IRI Survey
1. Introduction
1.1. Background
IRI (Interactive Radio Instruction) Program ENGLISH IS FUN Level - 1 is
implemented across all 56,000 primary schools in all 38 districts of Bihar in
collaboration with EDC and Bihar Education Project. The programme was
initiated from November 20, 2007 from all AIR stations Patna, Bhagalpur,
Darbhanga and Purnea. The program emphasizes on improving English
competencies among grade 1 and grade 2 students, as English is introduced
as a second language from the academic year 2007-08 in Bihar for classes 1
and 2.
It was decided to conduct a Pre and Post study of IRI program in Bihar, which
aims to determine the competencies of students of classes 1 and 2 in English
Language and receiving Interactive Radio Instruction (IRI).
1.2. Objectives
The major objectives of this study are:
1. To assess how familiar the students are with English language at the first
and second grade across the state and collect a sample data
2. To assess the impact of IRI English language programme in developing
English language competencies.
The evaluation efforts involved an examination of performance on a test that
measured two forms of English Language competencies: the ability to
comprehend a concept and ability to comprehend and express as and
when asked to do so.
The report explains the activities associated with developing and
administrating the tests and it expresses the learning outcomes of the tests
with a particular emphasis on addressing the question whether students
exposed to IRI benefits from that exposure.
2. Methodology
2.1. FrameworkofBaselineStudy
In the study reception and production competencies of grade 1 and grade 2
students are tested. The study covers Pre-Test and Post-Test within a time
period of one month of the broadcast.
Under reception, following four competencies of students are tested:
Vocabulary
Numbers
Actions
Colours
Reception test included 10 questions each having 1 mark. Each question
comprised of 3 items out of which the students had to choose one.
Whereas six competencies of students are tested under production:
Expression actions in sentences.
Identifying an object and stating it in full sentences.

Simple commands.
Introducing Oneself, identifying the parts of body
Identifying objects and stating it in full sentences, with particular
reference to number.
Prepositions.
Production test comprises of 7 questions. Question 1 to 4 having 1 mark each

and question 5 to 7 having 2 marks each.
2.2. Projectdescription
The IRI intervention in Bihar provides audio input, exposures and instruction
in English language to Grade 1 and 2 students targeted at improving in
English language.
The evaluation design allowed an examination of the learning
performance of participating children as a function of the following
factors:
Gender of student
Grade
Caste
Mothers literacy
Fathers literacy
Geographical area
Parents Occupation
class and
and poor if
Mother and father are considered excellent if they have education of 10th
above, good if their education is (7th to 10th), fair if education is (4th to 6th)
education is (0 to 3rd) standard.
2.3. Test
The tests were designed to measure the mastery of grade 1 and 2 students
in English language. The tests are age specific and based on English
language competency. These were designed by experts and finalized
after field testing. Test design measures 11 competencies, 6 measured
English comprehension skills, whereas 5 measured English speaking skills.
Each competency was measured by 3 items.
The speaking components were scored as, 0 (if no answer or incorrect
answer), 1 (Single word answer), or 2 (if complete sentence answer). It is
as, if, a question is Are you a boy or girl?, a student responded girl
correctly, scored mark was 1, whereas, if a student responded, I am a
girl, scored as 2.
2.4. Sampling
Sampling process is based on to balance out the demographic and
treatment factors in the evaluation design. Selected 6 districts as
suggested by BEP,
Nawada
East Champaran
Madhubani
Banka
Kishanganj
Bhojpur
20 schools are randomly selected from one district each totaling to 120
schools and covered 2158 students in the exercise. In a school completed
exercise with 18 students as,
Grade 1: Reception: 3 girls & 2 Boys
Grade 2: Reception 2 girls & 3 boys
Production: 2 Boys & 2 girls

Production: 2 girls & 2 boys
This is reversed in the next school, i.e.

Grade 1: Reception: 2 girls & 2 boys
Grade 2: Reception: 2 girls & 2 boys

The number of grade 1 and grade 2 students tested are about same, as
same number of students tested in each of the geographical regions. In
the same time the number of boys and girls tested are very similar.
2.5. TestScoring
The scoring in reception test is different from scoring in production ability
tests. The items are scored either as 1 for correct or 0 for incorrect.
Whereas in speaking ability, complete correct answer is marked as 2 and
half correct answer as 1 and
absolute incorrect answer is marked as
0. The answers are further transformed into
percent correct score,
which have been reported in the result section. Three categories of poor
(Scoring 0 30%), fair (Scoring 31-60%) and good (Scoring 61%
and
above) were allotted to the score of the students. This range has been
kept to
compare the knowledge levels and to assess the
comparative value shift in the Prepost study.
3. TabulatedandGraphicalAssessmentoftheStudies
3.1. CoverageofstudentsaccordingtodistrictandGender
Table 1 - Pre Test
Boys
District
n
Reception
Girls
Production
Reception
All
Production
Reception
Production
Nawada
182
87
47.8
95
52.2
176
91
51.7
85
48.3
358
178
49.7
180
50.3
East
Champaran
190
98
51.6
92
48.4
188
90
47.9
98
52.1
378
188
49.7
190
50.3
Madhubani
182
95
52.2
87
47.8
178
85
47.8
93
52.2
360
180
50.0
180
50.0
Banka
164
82
50.0
82
50.0
177
98
55.4
79
44.6
341
180
52.8
161
47.2
Kishanganj
180
86
47.8
94
52.2
181
93
51.4
88
48.6
361
179
49.6
182
50.4
Bhojpur
181
91
50.3
90
49.7
179
92
51.4
87
48.6
360
183
50.8
177
49.2
Total District
1079
539
50.0
540
50.0
1079
549
50.9
530
49.1
2158
1088
50.4
1070
49.6
Table 2 - Post Test
10
Boys
District
N
Girls
Reception
Production
All
Reception
Production
Reception
Production
Nawada
175
86
49.1
89
50.9
176
88
50.0
88
50.0
351
174
49.6
177
50.4
East
Champaran
179
96
53.6
83
46.4
180
91
50.6
89
49.4
359
187
52.1
172
47.9
Madhubani
183
100
54.6
83
45.4
177
85
48.0
92
52.0
360
185
51.4
175
48.6
Banka
179
93
52.0
86
48.0
181
92
50.8
89
49.2
360
185
51.4
175
48.6
Kishanganj
180
89
49.4
91
50.6
180
92
51.1
88
48.9
360
181
50.3
179
49.7
Bhojpur
179
91
50.8
88
49.2
181
91
50.3
90
49.7
360
182
50.6
178
49.4
Total District
1075
555
51.6
520
48.4
1075
539
50.1
536
49.9
2150
1094
50.9
1056
49.1
Table 1 and Table 2, shows number of grade 1 and grade 2 students (boys
and girls) participated in reception and production Pre Test and Post Test
exercises from different sample districts. There is almost equitable coverage of
students from every district ranging from (340 to 380) in Pre test and (350 to
360) in Post test. The range of coverage of students is much constant in Post
Test. whereas percentage coverage of boys and girls in Pre Test is almost
same as in Post Test. In the same time coverage of male and female in
Reception and Production in both Pre Test and Post Test is also almost the
same.
3.2. CoverageofstudentsaccordingtoGrade
Table 3 (% change refers to the difference in performance in pre and post)
Knowledge
level
Grade I
Pre Test
Post Test
No.
%
No.
%
%
Change
Grade II
Pre Test
Post Test
No.
%
No.
%
%
Change
All
Pre Test
No.
%
Post Test
No.
%
465
42.7
94
%
Change
Reception
Poor
263
47.0
66
11.3
-76.0
202
38.3
28
5.5
-85.6
8.6
-79.9
Fair
258
46.0
435
74.2
61.1
263
49.8
359
70.7
41.9
521
47.9
794
72.6
51.6
Good
39
7.0
85
14.5
108.3
63
11.9
121
23.8
99.6
102
9.4
206
18.8
100.9
Total
560
100.0
586
100.0
528
100.0
508
100.0
1088
100.0
1094
100.0
Poor
443
85.5
319
62.3
-27.1
465
84.2
301
55.3
-34.3
908
84.9
620
58.7
-30.8
Fair
68
13.1
184
35.9
173.8
79
14.3
227
41.8
191.6
147
13.7
411
38.9
183.3
30.1
102.9
68.9
Production
Good
1.4
1.8
Total
518
100.0
512
100.0
1.5
16
2.9
552
100.0
544
100.0
15
1.4
25
2.4
1070
100.0
1056
100.0
11
Pre & post test of Grade I Boys and Girls

Knowledge distribution of reception test
100.0
90.0
Percentage
80.0
74.2
70.0
60.0
50.0
47.0
Pre-test
46.0
Post-test
40.0
30.0
20.0
14.5
11.3
7.0
10.0
0.0
Poor
Fair
Good
Knowledge level
Graph 1
Pre - post test of Grade II Boys and Girls

knowledge distribution of reception test
100.0
90.0
Percentage
80.0
70.7
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
49.8
Pre-test
38.3
Post-test
30.0
23.8
20.0
11.9
5.5
10.0
0.0
Poor
Fair
Good
Knowledge level
Graph 2
Pre-post test of all boys and girls

knowledge distribution of reception test
100.0
90.0
Percentage
80.0
72.6
70.0
60.0
50.0
Pre-test
Post-test
47.9
42.7
40.0
30.0
18.8
20.0
9.4
8.6
10.0
0.0
Poor
Fair
Good
Knowledge level
Graph 3
12
Pre-post of Grade I boys and girls

knowledge distribution of Production test
100.0
90.0
85.5
Percentage
80.0
70.0
62.3
60.0
Pre-test
50.0
Post-test
35.9
40.0
30.0
20.0
13.1
10.0
1.8
1.4
0.0
Poor
Fair
Good
Knowledge level
Graph 4
Pre-post test of grade II boys and girls

100.0
90.0
84.2
Percentage
80.0
70.0
60.0
55.3
Pre-test
50.0
41.8
Post-test
40.0
30.0
20.0
14.3
10.0
2.9
1.5
0.0
Poor
Fair
Good
Knowledge level
Graph 5
Pre-post test of all boys and girls
100.0
90.0
84.9
Percentage
80.0
70.0
58.7
60.0
Pre-test
Post-test
50.0
38.9
40.0
30.0
20.0
13.7
10.0
2.4
1.4
0.0
Poor
Fair
Knowledge level
Good
Graph 6
13
The tables and graphs are the examination of overall performance of the grade
1 and grade 2 students on reception and production tests. It depicts the percent
of objectives mastered as a function of grade. As per the table, grade 2 students
mastered a higher percentage of objectives in comparison to grade 1 students
and the students performed better in Reception than production.
3.3. AssessmentofknowledgeofGrade1boysandgirlsaccordingtotheircaste
The analyses examined student performance as a function of caste
membership. Caste membership is coded in the files in the following way:
SC: Scheduled Caste. This classification refers to caste groups that have
received formal legal protection in the constitution
ST: Scheduled Tribe. This classification refers to tribal groups that have
received formal legal protection in the constitution
OBC: Other Backward Classes. This classification contains members of
lower castes that have not received formal protection in the constitution.
General: These are members of caste groups that typically are more
advantaged than lower castes groups
Table 4
Knowledge
level
SC/ST
Pre Test
Post Test
%
No.
%
No.
Pre Test
No.
%
OBC
Post Test
No.
%
General
Pre Test
Post Test
No.
%
No.
%
70
56
8
134
52.2
41.8
6.0
100.0
17
106
18
141
12.1
75.2
12.8
100.0
158
164
26
348
45.4
47.1
7.5
100.0
41
259
53
353
11.6
73.4
15.0
100.0
35
38
5
78
44.9
48.7
6.4
100.0
8
70
14
92
8.7
76.1
15.2
100.0
104
14
1
119
87.4
11.8
0.8
100.0
77
59
1
137
56.2
43.1
0.7
100.0
289
41
5
335
86.3
12.2
1.5
100.0
201
88
5
294
68.4
29.9
1.7
100.0
50
13
1
64
78.1
20.3
1.6
100.0
41
37
3
81
50.6
45.7
3.7
100.0
Reception
Poor
Fair
Good
Total
Production
Poor
Fair
Good
Total
Pre and post assessment of knowledge level of Grade I boys and

girls according to their caste in Reception test
100
90
80
70
Percentage60
Poor
50
Fair
40
Good
30
20
10
0
Post
Pre
SC/ST
Pre
Post
OBC
Pre
Post
General
14
Graph 7

Girls according to their caste in Production test
100
90
80
Percentage
70
60
Poor
50
Fair
40
Good
30
20
10
0
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
SC/ST
Pre
OBC
Post
General
Graph 8
This analysis examines the performance of grade 1 boys and girls on

reception and production by caste. As can be seen in the table, the
performance of the students on both reception and production vary by
caste. The general is highest and ST/SC is lowest in both comprehension as
well as speaking ability tests.
3.4. AssessmentofknowledgeofGrade2boysandgirlsaccordingtotheircaste
Table 5
Knowledge
level
SC/ST
Pre Test
OBC
Post Test
Pre Test
General
Post Test
Pre Test
Post Test
No.
No.
No.
No.
No.
No.
Poor
28
28.3
7.8
137
39.6
16
4.7
37
44.6
6.8
Fair
63
63.6
65
72.2
161
46.5
248
72.1
39
47.0
46
62.2
Good
8.1
18
20.0
48
13.9
80
23.3
8.4
23
31.1
Total
99
100.0
90
100.0
346
100.0
344
100.0
83
100.0
74
100.0
Poor
100
87.7
59
57.3
296
84.1
202
58.0
69
80.2
40
43.0
Fair
13
11.4
41
39.8
50
14.2
137
39.4
16
18.6
49
52.7
Good
0.9
2.9
1.7
2.6
1.2
4.3
Total
114
100.0
103
100.0
352
100.0
348
100.0
86
100.0
93
100.0
Reception
Production
15
Pre and post assessment of knowledge level of Grade II boys and

Girls according to their caste in reception test
100
90
Percentage
80
70
60
Poor
50
Fair
40
Good
30
20
10
0
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
SC/ST
Pre
Post
OBC
General
Graph 9
Girls according to their caste in production test
100
90
80
Percentage
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Poor
Fair
Good
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
OBC
SC/ST
Post
General
Graph 10
The tables and graphs analyze the performance of grade 2 boys and girls
on reception and production by caste. As can be seen in the table, the
performance on both reception and production vary by caste. The
general is highest in both Reception and production, whereas ST/SC is
lowest in Reception and OBC in Production. Performance of ST/SC and
OBC in both production and reception is very close.
3.5. PrePostComparativeAssessmentofknowledgeofallboysandgirlsaccording
totheirCaste
Table 6
Knowledge
level
SC/ST
Pre Test
Post Test
No.
%
No.
%
OBC
Pre Test
No.
%
Post Test
No.
%
General
Pre Test
Post Test
No.
%
No.
%
Reception
Poor
98
42.1
24
10.4
295
42.5
57
8.2
72
44.7
13
7.8
Fair
119
51.1
171
74.0
325
46.8
507
72.7
77
47.8
116
69.9
Good
16
6.9
36
15.6
74
10.7
133
19.1
12
7.5
37
22.3
16
Total
233
100.0
231
100.0
694
100.0
697
100.0
161
100.0
166
100.0
Production
Poor
204
87.6
136
56.7
585
85.2
403
62.8
119
79.3
81
46.6
Fair
27
11.6
100
41.7
91
13.2
225
35.0
29
19.3
86
49.4
Good
0.9
1.7
11
1.6
14
2.2
1.3
4.0
Total
233
100.0
240
100.0
687
100.0
642
100.0
150
100.0
174
100.0
Pre and post assessment of knowledge level of all boys and girls
according to their caste in reception test
100
90
Percentage
80
70
60
Poor
Fair
Good
50
40
30
20
10
0
Post
Pre
Pre
SC/ST
Post
Pre
OBC
Post
General
Graph 11
according to their caste in production test
100
90
Percentage
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Poor
Fair
Good
Pre
SC/ST
Post
OBC
Pre
Post
General
Pre
Post
Graph 12
The tables and graphs depict the evaluation by caste. Table 6 shows the
performance of the caste groups as a function of grade. As can be
seen in the table, the caste groups do vary in performance. The general
is highest and ST/SC is lowest in both comprehension test as well as
speaking ability tests. In the same time competency gap is higher
between general and ST/SC castes.
Whereas Performance of OBC and ST/SC on production in Banka, OBC in
Madhubani is good and in reception performance of ST/SC in E.
Champaran, ST/SC and OBC in Kishanganj and ST/SC and OBC in
Nawada is good. Refer district tables
totheirMothersEducation
17
3.6.1. Assessment of knowledge of Grade 1 boys and girls according to

their
mothers education
Excellent
Pre
Post
Table 7
Good
Literate
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Illiterate
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Poor
62.5
0.0
36.1
18.8
38.7
9.0
44.8
10.9
58.5
13.8
Fair
37.5
100.0
61.1
68.8
48.4
76.4
48.4
72.3
36.6
86.2
Good
0.0
0.0
2.8
12.5
12.9
14.6
6.8
16.8
4.9
0.0
Total
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Poor
100.0
66.7
80.0
64.5
68.5
61.0
85.7
58.8
100.0
94.9
Fair
0.0
33.3
17.5
35.5
27.2
36.4
13.5
39.2
0.0
5.1
Good
0.0
0.0
2.5
0.0
4.3
2.6
0.8
1.9
0.0
0.0
Total
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Knowledge
level
NA
Reception
Production

girls according to their Mother education in Reception test
100
90
80
Percentage
70
60
Poor
50
Fair
40
Good
30
20
10
0
Pre
Post
Excellent
Pre
Post
Pre
Good
Post
Literate
Pre
Post
Illiterate
Post
Pre
NA
Graph 13
girls according to their Mother education in production test
100
90
Percentage
80
70
60
Poor
50
Fair
40
Good
30
20
10
0
Pre
Post
Excellent
Pre
Post
Good
Pre
Post
Literate
Pre
Post
Illiterate
Pre
Post
NA
Graph 14
18
The tables and graphs analyze the performance of grade 1 boys and girls
on reception and production by their mothers education. As can be seen
in the table, the performance of students on both reception and
production increases with their mothers competency. In the meanwhile
number of students with illiterate and literate mother is very high. There is
significant impact of mothers education on the performance of students.

their mothers education
Excellent
Pre
Post
Table 8
Good
Literate
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Illiterate
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Poor
0.0
0.0
44.4
15.8
40.0
3.5
36.4
4.9
41.1
9.1
Fair
100.0
66.7
51.9
68.4
52.9
67.1
51.0
69.1
43.0
87.3
Good
0.0
33.3
3.7
15.8
7.1
29.4
12.7
26.0
15.9
3.6
Total
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Poor
100.0
66.7
87.5
45.5
64.0
51.1
86.0
52.4
94.1
95.5
Fair
0.0
33.3
10.0
42.4
30.3
45.7
13.4
45.1
5.9
4.5
Good
0.0
0.0
2.5
12.1
5.6
3.2
0.6
2.4
0.0
0.0
Total
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Knowledge
level
NA
Reception
Production

girls according to their Mother education in Reception test
100
90
Percentage
80
70
60
Poor
50
Fair
40
Good
30
20
10
0
Pre
Post
Excellent
Pre
Post
Good
Pre
Post
Literate
Pre
Post
Illiterate
Pre
Post
NA
Graph 15
19

girls according to their Mother education in production test
100
90
Percentage
80
70
60
Poor
50
Fair
40
Good
30
20
10
0
Pre
Post
Excellent
Pre
Pre
Post
Good
Post
Literate
Post
Pre
Illiterate
Pre
Post
NA
Graph 16
The tables and graphs analyze of the performance of grade 2 boys and girls on
reception and production test according to their mothers education. As per the
table, the performance of students on both comprehension and speaking ability
increases with their mothers competency. In the meanwhile number of students
with illiterate and literate mother is very high. The impact of mothers education
on the performance of student is very high.
3.6.3. Pre-Post Comparative assessment of all boys and girls according to

their mothers education
Table 9
Knowledge
level
Excellent
Good
Literate
Illiterate
NA
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Poor
55.6
0.0
39.7
17.6
39.3
6.3
40.4
8.1
51.0
11.5
Fair
44.4
80.0
57.1
68.6
50.6
71.8
49.7
70.8
39.4
86.7
Good
0.0
20.0
3.2
13.7
10.1
21.8
9.8
21.0
9.6
1.8
Total
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Poor
100.0
66.7
83.8
54.7
66.3
55.6
85.9
55.6
97.2
95.2
Fair
0.0
33.3
13.8
39.1
28.7
41.5
13.4
42.2
2.8
4.8
Good
0.0
0.0
2.5
6.3
5.0
2.9
0.7
2.2
0.0
0.0
Total
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Reception
Production
20
according to their Mother education in Reception test
100
90
Percentage
80
70
60
Poor
50
Fair
40
Good
30
20
10
0
Pre
Post
Excellent
Pre
Post
Good
Pre
Post
Literate
Pre
Post
Illiterate
Pre
Post
NA
Graph 17
according to their Mother education In production test
100
90
80
Percentage
70
60
Poor
50
Fair
40
Good
30
20
10
0
Pre
Post
Excellent
Pre
Post
Good
Post
Pre
Literate
Pre
Post
Illiterate
Pre
Post
NA
Graph 18
The tables and graphs evaluate the performance of all students by their
mothers education. Table 9 shows the performance of the groups as a
function of mothers
education. As can be seen in the table, the
performance of students on both reception and production tests
increases with their mothers education. The impact of
mother
education on performance of students is high.
Whereas performance of student with illiterate mothers on reception in
Madhubani and Banka districts and on production in Nawada district is
appreciable. (Refer district tables).
totheirFathersEducation
their
fathers education
21
Excellent
Pre
Post
Table 10
Good
Literate
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Illiterate
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Poor
50.0
7.7
45.7
11.8
40.6
11.2
44.6
10.5
62.4
20.8
Knowledge
level
NA
Reception
Fair
50.0
69.2
48.0
72.5
52.4
77.2
47.3
72.4
30.7
79.2
Good
0.0
23.1
6.3
15.7
7.1
11.7
8.1
17.1
6.9
0.0
Total
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Poor
92.3
50.0
88.6
64.0
76.8
65.6
87.1
55.6
96.1
100.0
Fair
7.7
38.9
8.6
31.4
21.4
33.9
12.3
43.4
3.9
0.0
Good
0.0
11.1
2.9
4.7
1.8
0.5
0.6
1.0
0.0
0.0
Total
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Production

girls according to their father education in Reception test
100
90
80
Percentage
70
60
Poor
50
Fair
40
Good
30
20
10
0
Pre
Post
Excellent
Pre
Post
Good
Pre
Post
Literate
Pre
Post
Illiterate
Pre
Post
NA
Graph 19

girls according to their father education in Production Test
100
90
Percentage
80
70
60
Poor
50
Fair
40
Good
30
20
10
0
Pre
Post
Excellent
Pre
Post
Good
Pre
Post
Literate
Pre
Post
Illiterate
Pre
Post
NA
Graph 20
It is the analysis of the performance of grade 1 boys and girls on reception and
production by their fathers education. As can be seen in the table, the
performance of students on
both reception and production increases with
22
their fathers education. In the meanwhile number of students with illiterate and
literate father is very high.

their
fathers education
Knowledge
level
Table 11
Good
Literate
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Excellent
Pre
Post
Illiterate
Pre
Post
NA
Pre
Post
Reception
Poor
Fair
Good
Total
30.0
70.0
0.0
100.0
8.3
45.8
45.8
100.0
42.9
42.0
15.1
100.0
7.7
69.2
23.1
100.0
31.1
54.7
14.3
100.0
4.6
73.7
21.7
100.0
41.7
50.9
7.4
100.0
3.3
69.0
27.7
100.0
41.5
43.1
15.4
100.0
14.7
85.3
0.0
100.0
Poor
Fair
Good
93.3
6.7
0.0
30.8
46.2
23.1
79.5
16.4
4.1
57.1
39.8
3.1
80.4
19.6
0.0
61.1
38.4
0.5
86.0
12.4
1.7
47.8
49.3
3.0
95.7
4.3
0.0
88.9
11.1
0.0
Total
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Production

girls according to their father education in Reception test
100
90
Percentage
80
70
60
Poor
50
Fair
40
Good
30
20
10
0
Pre
Post
Excellent
Pre
Post
Pre
Good
Post
Pre
Literate
Post
Pre
Illiterate
Post
NA
Graph 21
girls according to their father education in Production test
100
90
Percentage
80
70
60
Poor
50
Fair
40
Good
30
20
10
0
Pre
Post
Excellent
Pre
Post
Good
Pre
Post
Literate
Pre
Post
Illiterate
Pre
Post
NA
Graph 22
The variable examines the performance of grade 2 boys and girls on reception
and production test on the basis of their fathers education. As per the table, the
23
performance of students on both comprehension and speaking ability increases

with their father education.
3.7.3. Pre-Post assessment of all boys and girls according to their fathers
education
Knowledge
level
Table 12
Good
Literate
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Excellent
Pre
Post
Illiterate
Pre
Post
NA
Pre
Post
Reception
Poor
Fair
Good
Total
38.2
61.8
0.0
100.0
8.0
58.0
34.0
100.0
44.3
45.1
10.6
100.0
9.8
71.0
19.2
100.0
36.0
53.5
10.6
100.0
8.1
75.6
16.3
100.0
43.1
49.2
7.7
100.0
7.3
70.9
21.8
100.0
54.2
35.5
10.2
100.0
17.2
82.8
0.0
100.0
92.9
7.1
0.0
100.0
38.6
43.2
18.2
100.0
83.7
12.8
3.5
100.0
60.3
35.9
3.8
100.0
78.6
20.5
0.9
100.0
63.3
36.1
0.5
100.0
86.5
12.3
1.2
100.0
51.6
46.4
2.0
100.0
95.9
4.1
0.0
100.0
93.8
6.3
0.0
100.0
Production
Poor
Fair
Good
Total
according to their father education in reception test
100
90
80
Percentage
70
60
Poor
50
Fair
40
Good
30
20
10
0
Pre
Post
Excellent
Pre
Post
Good
Pre
Post
Literate
Pre
Post
Illiterate
Pre
Post
NA
Graph 23
according to their father education In Production test
100
90
80
70
Percentage
60
Poor
50
Fair
40
Good
30
20
10
0
Pre
Post
Excellent
Pre
Post
Good
Pre
Post
Literate
Pre
Post
Illiterate
Pre
Post
NA
24
Graph 24
The tables and graphs analyze the performance of all students on the
basis of their father education. Table shows the performance of the groups
as a function of
fathers education. As can be seen in the table, the
performance of students increases on both comprehension and speaking
ability with their father education. But the impact of mothers education
on performance of students is higher than fathers education. At the same
time number of illiterate and literate is high among mothers than fathers.
Whereas performance of students with illiterate fathers on

production in Nawada and E. Champaran districts and on
production Kishanganj and Madhubani districts is of high-quality.
Refer district tables.
3.8. Assessmentofknowledgeasperparentsoccupation
3.8.1. Assessment of knowledge of boys as per mothers occupation
Reception
Gender
Mother's
Occupation
Boy
Agriculture
Self
Employed
Skilled
Unskilled
Data
Pre
N
Mean
Std.
Dev.
Marks
Obt.
Out of
%
N
Mean
Std.
Dev.
Marks
Obt.
Out of
%
N
Mean
Std.
Dev.
Marks
Obt.
Out of
%
N
Mean
Std.
Dev.
7
7.29
5
7.20
7
1.43
6
4.33
2.31
2.04
1.18
1.37
51
70
72.86
2
3.00
36
50
72.00
2
8.00
10
70
14.29
2
2.00
26
60
43.33
1
1.00
1.00
0.00
2.00
0.00
6
20
30.00
6
4.17
16
20
80.00
2
6.50
4
20
20.00
5
2.60
1
10
10.00
6
5.00
2.73
1.50
2.06
1.53
25
60
41.67
45
3.42
13
20
65.00
32
5.56
13
50
26.00
40
1.15
30
60
50.00
31
2.65
2.17
1.69
1.22
1.49
154
178
46
82
Marks
Post
Production
Pre
Post
25
Unemployed
Obt.
Out of
%
N
Mean
Std.
Dev.
Marks
Obt.
Out of
%
450
34.22
479
4.41
320
55.63
514
5.95
400
11.50
486
1.29
310
26.45
476
3.31
2.27
1.79
1.60
2.00
2112
4790
44.09
3060
5140
59.53
628
4860
12.92
1576
4760
33.11
3.9. Assessmentofknowledgeofgirlsaspermothersoccupation
Reception
Gender
Mother's
Occupation
Girl
Agriculture
Self
Employed
Skilled
Unskilled
Unemployed
Data
N
Mean
Std.
Dev.
Marks
Obt.
Out of
%
N
Mean
Std.
Dev.
Marks
Obt.
Out of
%
N
Mean
Std.
Dev.
Marks
Obt.
Out of
%
N
Mean
Std.
Dev.
Marks
Obt.
Out of
%
N
Mean
Pre
Post
Production
Pre
Post
7
6.29
6
6.83
4
1.75
3
4.67
1.91
2.54
1.09
1.70
44
70
62.86
2
4.50
41
60
68.33
3
5.33
7
40
17.50
4
0.75
14
30
46.67
1
2.00
0.50
0.47
1.30
0.00
9
20
45.00
3
3.33
16
30
53.33
5
5.00
3
40
7.50
6
1.50
2
10
20.00
4
2.50
1.25
2.00
1.80
1.80
10
30
33.33
32
2.75
25
50
50.00
27
5.63
9
60
15.00
32
1.00
10
40
25.00
29
2.72
2.09
1.95
1.30
1.55
88
320
27.50
505
4.37
152
270
56.30
498
5.75
32
320
10.00
484
1.34
79
290
27.24
499
3.16
26
Std.
Dev.
Marks
Obt.
Out of
%
2.38
1.89
1.63
1.97
2206
5050
43.68
2863
4980
57.49
649
4840
13.41
1578
4990
31.62
The tables depict that more than 90% of mothers are unemployed which
reflects negligible result when assessed according to occupation wise.
3.10.
Assessmentofknowledgeofboysasperfathersoccupation
Reception
Gender
Father's
Occupation
Boy
Agriculture
Self
Employed
Skilled
Unskilled
Unemployed
Data
Pre
N
Mean
Std.
Dev.
Marks
Obt.
Out of
%
N
Mean
Std.
Dev.
Marks
Obt.
Out of
%
N
Mean
Std.
Dev.
Marks
Obt.
Out of
%
N
Mean
Std.
Dev.
Marks
Obt.
Out of
%
N
Mean
147
5.07
148
6.24
137
1.32
134
3.69
2.32
1.78
1.48
1.96
746
1470
50.75
64
4.36
924
1480
62.43
63
6.25
181
1370
13.21
72
1.49
494
1340
36.87
67
3.37
2.56
1.92
1.81
2.05
279
640
43.59
36
4.08
394
630
62.54
28
6.18
107
720
14.86
47
1.23
226
670
33.73
16
4.69
1.92
1.95
1.81
2.23
147
360
40.83
285
4.02
173
280
61.79
305
5.73
58
470
12.34
273
1.27
75
160
46.88
295
3.02
2.18
1.74
1.54
1.91
1147
2850
40.25
7
4.14
1747
3050
57.28
11
5.91
348
2730
12.75
11
0.64
892
2950
30.24
8
3.50
2.80
1.50
0.77
1.32
Std.
Post
Production
Pre
Post
27
Dev.
Marks
Obt.
Out of
%
3.11.
29
70
41.43
65
110
59.09
7
110
6.36
28
80
35.00
Assessmentofknowledgeofgirlsasperfathersoccupation
Reception
Gender
Father's
Occupation
Agriculture
Self
Employed
Girl
Skilled
Unskilled
Unemployed
Data
N
Mean
Std.
Dev.
Marks
Obt.
Out of
%
N
Mean
Std.
Dev.
Marks
Obt.
Out of
%
N
Mean
Std.
Dev.
Marks
Obt.
Out of
%
N
Mean
Std.
Dev.
Marks
Obt.
Out of
%
N
Mean
Std.
Dev.
Marks
Obt.
Out of
%
Pre
Post
Production
Pre
Post
150
4.78
127
5.91
132
1.27
141
3.59
2.32
1.93
1.50
2.06
717
1500
47.80
72
4.81
750
1270
59.06
80
6.23
167
1320
12.65
84
1.67
506
1410
35.89
69
3.38
2.23
2.12
2.05
2.00
346
720
48.06
49
3.92
498
800
62.25
27
5.44
140
840
16.67
62
1.35
233
690
33.77
19
3.26
2.19
1.50
1.64
2.53
192
490
39.18
273
3.95
147
270
54.44
300
5.58
84
620
13.55
249
1.24
62
190
32.63
302
2.88
2.40
1.84
1.48
1.81
1079
2730
39.52
5
4.60
1675
3000
55.83
5
5.40
308
2490
12.37
3
0.33
869
3020
28.77
5
2.60
3.67
0.80
0.47
1.36
23
50
46.00
27
50
54.00
1
30
3.33
13
50
26.00
28
The tables depicts that the economic status of the father does not affect the
mean knowledge of their children.
3.12.
PrePostComparativeAssessmentofmeanknowledgeofallboysand
girls
3.12.1.
Assessment of mean knowledge of grade 1 students
Table 13
Boys
Type
Reception
Pre
test
Post
test
Production
Total
Mean
Std.
Deviation
Mean
Std.
Deviation
Std.
Error
of
Mean
Mean
287
3.94
2.30
0.14
273
3.99
2.34
0.14
560
3.96
2.32
0.10
293
5.64
1.80
0.11
293
5.56
1.87
0.11
586
5.60
1.84
0.08
43.1
39.4
41.3
267
1.06
1.45
0.09
251
1.14
1.57
0.10
518
1.09
1.51
0.07
254
3.06
1.97
0.12
258
3.01
1.90
0.12
512
3.04
1.93
0.09
% Change
Pre
test
Post
test
All
Std.
Error
of
Mean
Std.
Deviation
% Change
Pre
test
Post
test
Girls
Std.
Error
of
Mean
190.0
165.2
177.5
554
2.55
2.41
0.10
524
2.62
2.46
0.11
1078
2.58
2.44
0.07
547
4.44
2.28
0.10
551
4.36
2.27
0.10
1098
4.40
2.27
0.07
% Change
74.2
66.6
70.4
This table analyzes the mean knowledge of grade 1 students as per performance
on both reception and production. As can be seen in the table, there is increase
in mean knowledge of boys and girls in both reception and production and the
increasing rate is about same in boys and girls.
The percentage changes of 126, 119, and 122 are the percent increase in mean
difference in percentage between post and pre scores. (Post Mean score/Pre Mean
Score) * 100 - 100
3.13.
AssessmentofmeanKnowledgeofgrade2students
Table 14
Post
test
266
3.52
525
Mean
528
252
4.90
4.83
262
6.30
% Change
Type
Pre
test
Total
Post
Pre
test
test
Reception
% Change
Post
test
3.13
% Change
Production
Pre
test
1.97
0.12
278
3.26
126.8
Std.
Error
0.11
of
Mean
555
Mean
0.10
0.14
524
276
4.53
4.60
0.11
246
Boys
Std.
2.56
Deviation
2.32
2.23
56.8
1.73
119.1
3.03
1.55
1.69
Std.
2.58
Deviation
2.38
2.41
49.4
5.97
1.91
30.5
273
2.00
Girls
0.12
544
3.39
Std.
Error
0.11
of
Mean
1080
Mean
0.10
0.15
1052
528
4.72
4.71
0.12
508
279
1.49
1.64
1.99
0.09
122.9
3.08
Std.
2.57
Deviation
2.36
2.33
53.2
6.14
1.83
29.9
0.10
All
Std.
Error
0.08
of
Mean
0.07
0.10
0.08
30.4
0.10
552
1.52
1.66
0.07
29
This table analyzes the mean knowledge of grade 2 students on both reception and
production performances. As can be seen in the table, there is increase in mean
knowledge of boys and girls in both reception and production and the increasing rate is
about same among boys and girls.
3.14.
Assessmentofmeanknowledgeofallboysandgirls
Table 15
Boys
Type
Reception
Pre
test
Post
test
Production
Total
Mean
Std.
Deviation
Mean
Std.
Deviation
Std.
Error
of
Mean
Mean
539
4.36
2.31
0.10
549
4.29
2.39
0.10
1088
4.32
2.35
0.07
555
5.95
1.80
0.08
539
5.75
1.90
0.08
1094
5.85
1.85
0.06
36.6
33.8
35.3
540
1.31
1.59
0.07
530
1.32
1.61
0.07
1070
1.31
1.60
0.05
520
3.30
1.98
0.09
536
3.14
1.95
0.08
1056
3.22
1.97
0.06
% Change
Pre
test
Post
test
All
Std.
Error
of
Mean
Std.
Deviation
% Change
Pre
test
Post
test
Girls
Std.
Error
of
Mean
152.3
137.7
144.9
1079
2.83
2.50
0.08
1079
2.83
2.53
0.08
2158
2.83
2.51
0.05
1075
4.67
2.31
0.07
1075
4.45
2.33
0.07
2150
4.56
2.32
0.05
% Change
64.9
56.9
60.9
This table analyzes the performance of all students in mean knowledge. Table shows the
performance of the groups as a function of mean knowledge as can be seen in the
table, there is increase in mean knowledge of students in both reception as well as
production tests and the increasing trend is almost same among boys and girls.
4. Teachersfeedback
Teachers from 117 schools (approx. 20 schools from each district) conducting IRI in
their respective schools were handed over a questionnaire to receive their
feedback about the programme and its implementation. The available data of
teachers qualifications ranged from:
Matriculatio
n
Intermediat
e
Graduate
B.Ed.
Post
Graduate
14%
23%
38.5
%
4.4%
13%
1%
5% 1%
14%
13%
Matric
Intermediate
Graduate
4%
23%
B.Ed.
Post Graduate
30
Post
graduate +
B.Ed.
M.Ed.
Graduate +
LLB
5.1%
1%
1%
Years of experience in teaching of these teachers is expressed as follows:

0-3
years
4-7
years
8-11
12-15
years
Abov
e 15
years
25.8
%
11.2
%
7.8%
13.8
%
41.4
%
26%
0-3 years
41%
4-7 years
8-11 years
12-15 years
11%
Above 15 years
8%
14%
The teachers also shared the problems, advantages, limitations and suggestions of IRI.
Problems
1. Refresher trainings are not planned.
2. Too many children in one classroom restrict the reach of the voice of radio to up to
the last benchers.
3. There is no pre information about next broadcast if that day's programme is not
broadcasted due to some other national programme
4. Poor broadcast (particularly in Kishanganj)
Advantages
1. Activity based with games and use of simple language enables the child to pick up
words and sentences with great ease.
2. Wider accessibility of radio reaches the programme to the remotest areas.
3. Improvement in quality education is observed as the lessons move ahead.
4. Will be useful for the child lifelong as it is observed that the children have started
practicing the functional English (like they have started wishing Good Morning).
31
5. Children are interested because it is in both dialects-Hindi & English and also easier for
the teachers to express in their regional language to the children.
6. Children try to implement the learnings not only in school but also in their day-to-day
life.
7. Both the teachers and students actively participate when the programme is
conducted
8. Attendance of the students is now satisfactory in the classrooms.
Limitations
1. Lesser time is allotted for practicing pronunciations.
2. Due to broadcast on Friday Muslim schools are closed and their children are unable
to benefit through the day's lesson.
3. The broadcast timing clashes with the mid day meal.
Suggestions
1. Guidebook should be made available to prepare for next days lesson.
2. More time is required for training to gain confidence to conduct the lessons with the
children.
3. Programme should be extended for upper classes also so that the students learn and
excel in English.
4. Regular monitoring of the programme and instruments is imperative for smooth and
uninterrupted implementation of the programme.
5. A simultaneous introduction of similar simple text book also should be done for the
students to practice on non-broadcast days.
6. Pictorial representation of some lessons like animal identification will make the
students comprehend the lessons better.
7. The programme should be sustained since there is an obvious improvement in English
Language comprehension and expression among the children.
8. Broadcast schedule should be provided so that teachers are ready with prior
preparations.
9. Need for more than one radio/sound box is necessary for classes having too many
children.
10. More time should be allotted for per day lesson since IRI catches attention of both
teachers and students immensely.
Spots teachers like the most
The teachers also shared the spots they like most in the lessons:
1. Good morning song
2. Activities and songs
3. Conversations of Raju & Chanda
4. Sit down/stand up activity
5. Speaking skill of the narrators
6. Identification of the animals' names through their Voices
7. Counting activity
8. Learning names of parts of body
9. Goodbye song
10. Reinforcements of previous lessons
11. Drill activities
12. Lessons (1, 2, 7, 12, 21)
13. Pre broadcast instructions
32
5. Lowlightsandsuggestedrecommendations
Lowlights in programme
implementation in schools
Suggested recommendations
Absence of the teacher conducting

the programme on the broadcast day
deprives the students to learn the
particular days lesson.
Overcrowding of students of both
classes 1 and 2 together is difficult for
one teacher to manage.
Children of Urdu Schools cannot study
the lessons broadcasted on Fridays
due to closure of their schools on that
day.
Broadcast at Kishanganj is from Purnea
FM station that has poor reception.
The timing of the broadcast clashes
with midday meal in the schools
leaving the teachers in a dilemma to
conduct the sessions.
Training of additional teacher per

school
Broadcast to be run on other working

days except Fridays
Discussions with AIR

Directives to schools to shift the timings
of mid day meal
6. KeyIndicators
The IRI programme is an activity based with games and drills and use of simple
language. This enables the child to pick up words and sentences in English with great
ease: the dialects are both in Hindi as well as in English; it becomes easier for the
teachers to follow the instructions of the radio and deliver to the students effectively.
Radio is the most accessible and affordable means of communication and reaches the
remotest and most unreached areas.
The lessons in the programme are reinforced continuously; as for instance if in one lesson
sit down/stand up sessions are practiced, in the next lesson some another drill is done
directing the students to practice once by sitting down and then by standing up and so
on. These reinforcements facilitate the child to practice functional English even during
off hours.
The fascination of this innovative pedagogy method has also improved the classroom
attendance and hence more and more children are now benefiting.
Observing the pace of knowledge enrichment among students through IRI, similar
programmes for children of upper grades can also be implemented to maintain the
continuity of interactive and participatory mode of teaching and learning.
7. Conclusion
The IRI programme is a landmark in the education system of Bihar for enhancing English
Language competencies among children. A large majority of the schools are following
classroom practices that are consistent with positive learning environments. When
strongly supported with monitoring and assessments, the programme can go miles
reflecting sustainable results in the years to come. This will definitely benefit the first
generation learners of English in our state.
33

Evaluation Report - IRI (Interactive Radio Instruction) Program

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Evaluation Report - IRI (Interactive Radio Instruction) Program

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

EvaluationReport

TABULATED AND GRAPHICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE STUDIES ........................................................ 10

TEACHERS FEEDBACK .................................................................................................................... 30

LOWLIGHTS AND SUGGESTED RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................... 33

KEY INDICATORS ............................................................................................................................ 33

District wise coverage of Schools

Pre and Post Test comparative tables of Bhojpur

Identifying an object and stating it in full sentences.

Production test comprises of 7 questions. Question 1 to 4 having 1 mark each

Production: 2 Boys & 2 girls

This is reversed in the next school, i.e.

Production: 2 girls & 3 boys

Table 2 - Post Test

Pre & post test of Grade I Boys and Girls

Pre - post test of Grade II Boys and Girls

Pre-post test of all boys and girls

Pre-post of Grade I boys and girls

Pre-post test of grade II boys and girls

Pre and post assessment of knowledge level of Grade I boys and

Pre and post assessment of knowledge level of Grade I boys and

This analysis examines the performance of grade 1 boys and girls on

Pre and post assessment of knowledge level of Grade II boys and

3.6.1. Assessment of knowledge of Grade 1 boys and girls according to

Pre and post assessment of knowledge level of Grade I boys and

3.6.2. Assessment of knowledge of Grade 2 boys and girls according to

Pre and post assessment of knowledge level of Grade II boys and

Pre and post assessment of knowledge level of Grade II boys and

3.6.3. Pre-Post Comparative assessment of all boys and girls according to

Pre and post assessment of knowledge level of Grade I boys and

Pre and post assessment of knowledge level of Grade I boys and

3.7.2. Assessment of knowledge of Grade 2 boys and girls according to

Pre and post assessment of knowledge level of Grade II boys and

performance of students on both comprehension and speaking ability increases

Whereas performance of students with illiterate fathers on

Years of experience in teaching of these teachers is expressed as follows:

Absence of the teacher conducting

Training of additional teacher per

Broadcast to be run on other working

Discussions with AIR

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi