ನಿರಂತರ ವ್ಯಾಪಕ ಮೌಲ್ಯಮಾಪನ (ಸಿ ಸಿ ಇ) - Continuous Comprehensive Evaluation (CCE)

ಆತ್ಮೀಯ ಶಿಕ್ಷಕರು
ದಯವಿಟ್ಟು,  ನಿಮ್ಮ ಆಲೋಚನೆಗಳನ್ನು, ಸಲಹೆಗಳನ್ನು, ಪ್ರತಿಕ್ರಿಯೆಯನ್ನು, CCE ಚರ್ಚಾ ವೇದಿಕೆ ರಲ್ಲಿ ಹಂಚಿಕೊಳ್ಳಬಹುದು . ಇದು ಇತರರಿಗೆ ಸಹಾಯವಾಗುತ್ತದೆ
ಇದು ಮಾಡಬೇಕಾದರೆ, ದಯವಿಟ್ಟು  ಲಾಗಿನ್ ಮಾದಿ - ಐಡಿ 'stfteacher' ಮತ್ತು ಪಾಸ್ವರ್ಡ್  . ನಂತರ ಸಂದೇಶಕ್ಕೆ ಪ್ರತ್ಯುತ್ತರಿಸಿ  - ನಿಮ್ಮ ಪಠ್ಯವನ್ನು ನಮೂದಿಸಿ ಮತ್ತು ಸೇವ್ ಮಾದಿ
ಗುರು

Dear teachers

Please share your ideas, suggestions, feedback on CCE in this discussion forum. It will help others

To do this, please login with the id 'stfteacher' and password. then click on REPLY to this message and enter your text and then save

regards

Guru

        District rankings tend to generate intense pressures to 'perform', which lead to multiple preparatory exams.

        “Udupi tops”, “Gadag slides to bottom” are two headlines for this year’s SSLC results in Karnataka. Every year, a key media highlight is the ranking of districts from top to bottom, based on the percentage of students who pass in SSLC examinations from the districts.

        The education head of Gadag is quoted as saying woefully, “In 2012-13 Gadag stood at 18th place and this year we expected to be within the 10th place”. Whereas Udupi is delighted at having moved up from ninth rank last year to first this year. The business of ranking leaves one wondering how all districts can hope to improve theirs. If some districts ‘go up’, others have to ‘go down’.

        The district pass percentage figure by itself, does not give any analytical insight on what needs to be done. Two out of three students from Gadag have passed; what needs to be done for the remaining one-third? More resources for students? More teacher training? More testing?  Or less? The pass percentage reveals no answer to these questions. But what does it hide?

        Take Bangalore South district, which is ranked at 29th out of 34 places. A total of 139 schools with 100 per cent results are from here; Bangalore South is in fact in the third place for this statistic in the state. This suggests that the average pass percentage can hide a stark variation in the results.

        There are some ‘high performing’ schools and some ‘very poorly performing’ schools and the average of these has placed Bangalore South in the ‘not too bad’ 29th position, which is quite misleading. So at the least, disaggregating results by management (private, aided and government schools) is necessary.

        District rankings tend to generate intense pressures among districts to “perform”, which lead to multiple preparatory examinations, encouraging or turning a blind eye to copying, creating guides and answer keys, and conducting coaching classes.

        A significant part of teacher energies is devoted to “Mission 40” in which the focus is on drilling students to get the “right answer” to ‘likely questions’ so that they get the minimum 40 per cent pass marks, this may not be associated with any actual learning. Udupi credits its “Mission 40” for its number one position.

        While the SSLC pass percentage is only a proxy for school quality, yet, it can give some idea of performance, especially in identifying outliers (schools with very high or very low pass percentages). So what analyses should be done, to drive school improvement as well as policy and programmatic correction?

        Analysing performance by school, by subject, by medium of instruction, and across time, can help identify 'schools with challenges', but this needs to be done at the block level, the lowest tier in the high school system. If there are schools with a pass percentage much lower than the average for that block, there is a need to investigate.
        It is important to guard against a premature conclusion that ‘the teacher is not doing her job’, but begin a mutually respectful dialogue with the teachers and the school administration to assess and understand the causes for the quality of education.
        The key here is the keenness to understand through ‘investigation’ what can help the schools, and provide the required support, in terms of students resources, teacher training or school infrastructure, rather than in ‘punishment’.

        Analyse own performance

        Also schools should analyse their own performance. The assessment data is ‘computerised’ but is usually available only with the state examination board. Schools do not hold the data of individual students. Since the data is held in digital form, it is eminently possible to provide student-wise marks to every school, in simple spreadsheet format.

        Teachers need to be trained and empowered to use spreadsheets (software available on any computer), to analyse marks by subject and across years, the ranges of student marks and so on to identify and understand patterns. Similarly, block level analyses and data visualisation of schools by subjects, medium of instruction, and across years can be done using spreadsheets.

        In the absence of such deeper analyses, district ranking seems simply a game played to identify ‘top ranking districts’ and feel good about them, and in the process condemn ‘bottom districts’ as no good, effectively obscuring the need to study and provide the resources for tackling the real challenges of school improvement.

        Ranking students in itself is problematic, yet it can be justified as being the ‘objective’ basis for deciding admission to higher education. In the case of districts, there is no such compulsion. Education authorities, non governmental actors, academic institutions and media would be well-placed to ignore this meaningless statistic and instead, creatively collaborate at the micro-local level, to improve the quality of education.

        (The writer is the Director, IT for Change, (www.ItforChange.net) an NGO which is working with  government high schools across Karnataka)
 

thanks for the responses. I agree with all your comments.

We are in a crossroads as far as assessment is concerned. While NCF 2005, RTE and similar documents want us to move towards a meaningful assessment that is continuous and comprehensive (moving out of narrow focus on very few areas, to finding the childs capacities/interests in many areas), this conflicts with our old habits of ranking.

However this movement cannot happen only by exhortations, we have to take up the difficult job of helping teachers understand how to do CCE. Also department can help by reducing the record maintenance (which has become the main focus, and which many HS teachers insist takes away a lot of time). this means our teacher educators (DIET, SI, BRC, CRC) themselves need lot of capacity building on how to do CCE and how to help teachers with it. In our visits if we can focus on the qualitative aspects of CCE instead of 'show me your records' we can help teachers....

I had opened a discussion forum on CCE sometime back (http://karnatakaeducation.org.in/node/303), we could use that forum to share our ideas on CCE.  I have put our comments in this mail on that forum now

If teachers and teacher educators share their views on http://karnatakaeducation.org.in/node/303, we will summarise and share with DSERT/KSEEB.

regards
Guru

***************
Thanks for sharing this timely article.  I feel ranking is not necessary even for students.  We need to find some other mechanism to admit students.  Personal reflections are more important than public shows.

Kumara Swamy


***************
On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 9:59 AM, aravind navalli <aravindnavalli@gmail.com> wrote:

    Dear guru sir,

    I completely agree with ur analysis of this ranking, but one thing I want to mention here is  where are heading to? Is it toward the quality or the Quantity of education. nobody is worried about the childs development. u can see many of the schools with 100% results have average individual scores. this shows we are striving to get overall result and not worried about the indivdual scores. I think dept should look in to this to keep quality of education alive in Govt schools.  

***************
hello sir,  every year I calculate passing % with quality  % .  I add all students my sub marks , and divide by no. of students, I got my subject  quality position . all pass with 40 to 50  marks . subject  passing % is 100. quality % is below 50. no use.   i think this is related to above article also.    Gururaja GK  GCJC  Channagiri  577213.    Davanagere  9740348234.





    On Friday, 22 May 2015 14:24:47 UTC+5:30, ranjani.itfc wrote:


        Dear teachers,

        Please see below an article in Deccan Herald on SSLC district rankings.  The article examines the usefulness of district rankings and discusses what analysis needs to be done with SSLC results for improving educational outcomes.

        http://www.deccanherald.com/content/478971/sslc-district-rankings-game.html

        The full article is available on http://www.itforchange.net/node/1196

        Please share your comments and feedback.

        Regards
        Ranjani
 

ಆತ್ಮೀಯ ಗುರುವೃಂದವೇ 

ಶುಭಸಂಜೆಯ ನಮಸ್ಕಾರಗಳು 

ಈಗಾಗಲೇ ನಾವು ನಿರಂತರ ವ್ಯಾಪಕ ಮೌಲ್ಯಮಾಪನ ಪ್ರವಾಹದ ಸುಳಿಯಲ್ಲಿ  ಸಾಗುತ್ತಿದ್ದೇವೆ .ಏಕೆಂದರೆ ನಾವು ಬೆಳೆದ ಬಂದ ಶಿಕ್ಷಣ ಪದ್ಧತಿ  ಹಾಗೂ  ಕ್ರಿಪ್ರವಾಗಿ ಬದಲಾಗುತ್ತಿರುವ ಆಧುನಿಕ ಶಿಕ್ಷಣ ಪದ್ಧತಿಗೆ  ಹೊಂದಿಕೊಳ್ಳಲು  ಅನೇಕ ತರಬೇತಿ ,ಸಂಪನ್ಮೂಲ ಸಾಹಿತ್ಯಗಳ ಮೂಲಕ  ಒಗ್ಗಿಕೊಳ್ಳಬೇಕಾಗಿದೆ.ಇದು ಜಲವಾಸಿಗಳಾಗಿದ್ದ ನಮಗೆ (ಹಳೆಯ ಶಿಕ್ಷಣ ಪದ್ಧತಿ) ಈಗ ಉಭಯವಾಸಿಗಳಾಗಿ ಆಧುನಿಕ ಶಿಕ್ಷಣ ಪದ್ಧತಿಗೆ ಹೊಂದಿಕೊಳ್ಳವುದು ಅನಿವಾರ್ಯವಾಗುತ್ತಿದೆ.ಮುಂದೆ ಜೀವವಿಕಾಸದಂತೆ ಉನ್ನತ ವರ್ಗದ ಜೀವಿಗಳಾಗಿ ವಿಕಾಸ ಹೊಂದುವ ಕಾಲ ಬಹಳ ದೂರವಿಲ್ಲ.ಒಮ್ಮೇಲೆ ಸಂಕೀರ್ಣ ಜೀವಿಗಳು ಭೂಮಿಯ ಮೇಲೆ ಜನ್ಮ ತಾಳಿಲ್ಲ.ಹಾಗೆಯೇ ಒಮ್ಮೆಲೆ  ಸಿಸಿಇ  ಅಳವಡಿಸಿಕೊಂಡು ಸಾಗುವುದು ನಿರಂತರವಾದ ನಿಧಾನವಾದ ಪ್ರಕ್ರಿಯೆ.ಸಿ.ಸಿ.ಇ ಯೇ ಹೇಳುವಂತೆ ನಿರಂತರ ಹಾಗೂ ವ್ಯಾಪಕ ಇದು ಸ್ವಲ್ಪು  ಕಷ್ಟ .ಏಕೆಂದರೆ ಒಬ್ಬನೇ ಎಲ್ಲ ಕ್ಷೇತ್ರಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಪರಿಣತನಾಗಲೂ ಸಾಧ್ಯವಿಲ್ಲ.ವರ್ಗದ ಶಿಕ್ಷಕನಾಗಿ ಕಾರ್ಯ ನಿರ್ವಿಸುವುದಕ್ಕೆ ಹಾಗೂ ಸಹ ಶಿಕ್ಷಕನಾಗಿ ಬೋಧನೆ ಮಾಡುವುದು  ಬಹಳ ವ್ಯತ್ಯಾಸವಿದೆ.ಆ ಇಡಿ ತರಗತಿಯ ಎಲ್ಲ ಮಾಹಿತಿಯು ಹಾಗೂ ಅಂಕಗಳ ಕ್ರೋಢೀಕೃತ ವಹಿ ತುಂಬುವರೆಗೂ ಹೆಣಗಾಡಬೇಕು.ಉಳಿದವರು ಆ ವರ್ಗ ಶಿಕ್ಷಕನಿಗೆ ಸಹಕಾರ ತೋರುವ ಮನೋಭಾವನೆ ತುಂಬಾ ಕಡಿಮೆಯಾಗಿ ತೋರುತ್ತದೆ. ಕೊನೆಗೆ  ಆ ವರ್ಗ ಶಿಕ್ಷಕನಿಗೆ ಇದೆಂಥಹ ಪರಿಸ್ಥಿತಿ ಎಂದು ಅವನು ಮನದಲ್ಲಿ ಗೊಣಗಾಡಬೇಕು.. ದಾಖಲೆಗಳನ್ನು  ಅನುಬಂಧವಾಗಿ  ಕ್ರಮವಾಗಿ ಪ್ರತಿ ವಿದ್ಯಾರ್ಥಿಯ ಪ್ರತ್ಯೇಕವಾಗಿ ವೈಯುಕ್ತಿಕ ಫೈಲ್ ಇಡಬೇಕು.ಹಿಮ್ಮಾಹಿತಿ ನೀಡಬೆಕು.ಸಾಂಧರ್ಭಿಕ ದಾಖಲೆ ,ಪ್ರಗತಿ ಪತ್ರ ತುಂಬುವುದು ,ಗೈರುಹಾಜರಿ ಬಗ್ಗೆ  ಗಮನಹರಿಸುವುದು , ಕಲಿಕೆಯಲ್ಲಿ  ಹಿಂದುಳಿದ ವಿದ್ಯಾರ್ಥಿಗಳ ಬಗ್ಗೆ  ಯೋಚನೆ ಹಾಗೂ ಯೋಜನೆ ಹಾಕಿಕೊಳ್ಳ ಬೇಕು , ಪಠ್ಯ ವಿಷಯದ ಕಡೆ ಗಮನಕೊಡಬೇಕು , ವಿದ್ಯಾರ್ಥಿಗಳಿಗೆ ಮಾತ್ರೆ ನೀಡುವುದು , ಇಕೋ ಕ್ಲಬ್ ಚಟುವಟಿಕೆಗಳು , ವಿಜ್ಞಾನ ವಸ್ತು ಪ್ರದರ್ಶನ ಹಾಜರಾಗುವುದು , ಎಸ್ ಎಸ್ ಎಲ್ ಸಿ ಫಲಿತಾಂಶ  ಸುಧಾರಿಸುವ ಕಡೆ ಗಮನ , ಸಿಸಿಇ  ಚಟುವಟಿಕೆಗಳು  ಯಾವುವು  ?  ಎಂದು ತಿಳಿದು ಕೊಳ್ಳುವುದು ,ಮೌಲ್ಯಮಾಪನ ವಿಧಾನ ಹೇಗೆ ? ಅವುಗಳ ಪಟ್ಟಿ ಮಾಡುವುದು  , ಪಾಠಗಳ ಪರಿಕಲ್ಪನೆಗೆ  ಸಂಬಂಧಿಸಿದ  ವಿಡಿಯೋಗಳನ್ನು  , ಪ್ರಸೆಂಟೆಶನ್ನಗಳನ್ನು  ತಯಾರಿಸುವುದು , ಪ್ರಯೋಗಗಳ ಪಟ್ಟಿ ಅವುಗಳ ಉಪಕರಣಗಳನ್ನು  ಸಜ್ಜುಗೊಳಿಸುವುದು , ಪ್ರಯೋಗಗಳನ್ನು  ಪ್ರಾತ್ಯಕ್ಷಿಕೆ ತೋರಿಸುವುದು , ಇವುಗಳ ನಡುವೆ ಅನೇಕ ಇಲಾಖಾ ತರಬೇತಿಗಳು , ಪ್ರತಿಭಾ ಕಾರಂಜಿಗಳು , ವಲಯಮಟ್ಟದ ಆಟಗಳು., ಅತಿ ನಿಧಾನ ಕಲಿಕೆಯ ವಿದ್ಯಾರ್ಥಿಗಳ  ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಹಾಗೂ ವಿದ್ಯಾರ್ಥಿಗಳ ಕಲಿತ ಜ್ಞಾನ  ಪರೀಕ್ಷಿಸಿಸಲು  ಸಾಕಷ್ಟು ಸಮಯ ಅವಕಾಶ ವಿಲ್ಲದಿರುವುದು , ಪಠ್ಯ ವಸ್ತು ಅಧಿಕವಾಗಿರುವುದು , ....... ಹೀಗೆ  ಪಟ್ಟಿ ಬೆಳೆಯುತ್ತಾ  ಹೋಗಿ  ದಾಖಲೆಗಳ ಸಂಗ್ರವಾಗುತ್ತಾ ಹೋಗಿ ನಿಜವಾದ ವಾಸ್ತವಿಕ ಕಲಿಕೆಯನ್ನು ನೋಡಿದಾಗ ಸಿಗುವ ಫಲಿತಾಂಶವು ಬೇರೆಯಾಗಿರುತ್ತದೆ.

ಸಿಸಿಇ ಕ್ರಮದಲ್ಲಿ -- ಸರಳ ವಿಧಾನಗಳು , ಒಂದೇ  ಅನುಬಂಧದಲ್ಲಿ ಸರಳ ವಿಧಾನಗಳ ಮೂಲಕ ಪ್ರತಿ ಶಿಕ್ಷಕರು ಇದರಲ್ಲಿ ಪಾಲ್ಗೊಳ್ಳುವಂತೆ  ವಿದ್ಯಾರ್ಥಿಯ ಸಾಧನೆಯನ್ನು  ಕೆಲವು  ಮಾನಕಗಳ ಮೂಲಕ  ಶಿಕ್ಷಕರಿಗೆ ಹಾಗೂ ವಿದ್ಯಾರ್ಥಿಗಳಿಗೆ ಹೊರೆಯಾಗದೆ ಮಾಪನ ಮಾಡುವ ವಿಧಾನ ಅಭಿವೃದ್ಧಿಯಾದರೆ ಇನ್ನೂ  ಉತ್ತಮ ವಾಗುತ್ತದೆ. ಪಠ್ಯ ವಸ್ತು ಬಹಳ ಅಧ್ಯಾಯಗಳಿರದೆ  ಶೆ.೫೦ ರಷ್ಟು  ಜ್ಞಾನಕ್ಕೆ  ಉಳಿದ ಶೆ.೫೦ರಷ್ಟು  ತಾನು ಕಲಿತ ಜ್ಞಾನವನ್ನು ಸ್ವತಃ ತಾನೇ ಮರು ಪರೀಕ್ಷಿಸಿಕೊಳ್ಳಲು , ಪ್ರಯೋಗಕ್ಕೆ ಒಳಪಡಿಸಿ  ಕಲಿತ ಜ್ಞಾನ ಒರೆಗಲ್ಲಿಗೆ ಅಚ್ಚಲು , ವಾಸ್ತವಿಕ ಜೀವನದಲ್ಲಿ ಕಲಿತ ಜ್ಞಾನದ ಪರಿಶಿಲಿಸುವಿಕೆ , ಕಲಿಯಲು ಕಾಲಾವಕಾಶ ನೀಡುವ ,ಒತ್ತಡವಿರದ  ಅವರದೇ ಆದ ವೇಗ  ವಿಧಾನಗಳ ಮೂಲಕ ಕಲಿಯುವ ಶಿಕ್ಷಣ ಕ್ರಮ ಬಂದರೆ ಎಷ್ಟು ಚೆನ್ನ ? 

ಇದು ನನ್ನ ಸ್ವಂತ ಅನಿಸಿಕೆ .... ಸಲಹೆ ಸೂಚನೆಗಳಿಗೆ ತಮಗೆ ಆದರದ ಸ್ವಾಗತ 

kk