CO-OPERATION: Asian training and reseach institutions meet to discuss the creation of a network
|
Several institutions in Asia are involved in training and research in educational planning and man-agement.
They have a long-standing experience in assisting government in strengthening planning and management
capacities. Some have been involved in organizing regional and international activities. However, the level
of communi-cation among the institutions is generally poor and there is no established mechanism for exchanging
experiences. The creation of synergy among the institutions through increased interaction and co-operation is
therefore necessary. One way of doing this is to bring those institutions together into a network. Such a network
could effectively harness the capacity-building potential available within the region at a moment when there is
an increasing demand for training education managers.
A concrete network proposal was first put forward during a workshop on Decentralized management of primary education, organized by IIEP in December 1994, in co-operation with UNICEF. One year later, the network's first meeting took place. It was hosted by the Indian National Institute of Educational Planning and Administration, based in New Delhi, from 5 to 9 December 1995. Assistance for the meeting's organization was provided by UNICEF and the United Kingdom's Overseas Development Administration. In addition to providing an opportunity for different institutions to get to know each other better, the meeting was planned as a technical capacity-building workshop and was thus organized around a central theme: decentralized management of primary education and capacity-building, a topical issue in the context of education in Asia, and one in which NIEPA has accumulated considerable experience. The programme therefore combined sessions related to the central theme and others related to the creation of the network. |
The meeting was attended by Directors and/or senior staff of eleven Asian training and/or research institutions,
from eight countries: the National Academy of Educational Management (NAEM) from Bangladesh; the Shanghai Institute
of Human Resource Development (SIHRD) from China; NIEPA, the National Council for Educational Research and Training
(NCERT) and the Uttar Pradesh State Institute of Educational Management and Training (SIEMAT) from India; the Centre for
Policy Research (Puslit Penelitian) from the Office for Educational and Cultural Research and Development from Indonesia;
the Korean Educational Development Institute (KEDI); the Research Centre for Educational Innovation and Development
(CERID) and National Centre for Educa-tional Development (NCED) from Nepal; the Academy of Educational Planning and
Management (AEPAM) from Pakistan; and the National Institute of Education (NIE) from Sri Lanka. Several NGOs involved
in the Bangladesh Campaign for Popular Education also took part in the meeting. IIEP was represented by three members
of staff, including the Director. A few resource persons from the region and represen-tatives from local UNICEF, the European
Union and UNESCO offices also attended.
The sessions on the workshop's theme, decentralization and capacity-building, focussed on three attempts to implement decentralization and strengthen capacities at lower levels of decision-making:
|
|
The network-related discussions illus-trated a wide variety between participating institutions. As regards status, some institutions
are an integral part of the Ministry and have very little autonomy. Others, such as NIEPA, have a fair degree of autonomy within
the government set-up or are semi-governmental, such as NIE and KEDI. One institution, CERID, forms part of a university.
The size of institutions varies as regards the number of staff employed. The Uttar Pradesh State Institute of Educational Management and Training which employs five professionals, or the NCED with ten staff, do not easily compare with organi-zations such as NCERT, with a total staff of 3,000, or even KEDI, with a staff of 300. A further distinction can be made as to their mandate. While all institutions are engaged in research and training, some, such as KEDI and SIHRD, focus clearly on the former, and others, such as AEPAM, more on the latter. NIE and NIEPA, on the other hand, seek to balance both. Fields of interest also differ. For institutions like NIEPA, educational planning and management is their raison d'ˆtre, while others like KEDI cover a much wider spectrum of education development issues. |
From the point of view of funding, various arrangements exist. NCED or NAEM, for instance, are mainly funded by donors,
but most of the institutions are government-funded. The somewhat exceptional case of the Shanghai Institute of Human Resources
Development can be noted: around 35 per cent of its budget comes from the profits of a high-tech company set up recently by the
institution itself.
Finally, some institutions have many well-developed contacts with partners, especially, although not exclusively, in the North. Others are fairly isolated. It is not surprising that, with such a variety, some institutions are considered strong and efficient while others are seen as weak, even by their own personnel. While it is impossible - and arguably not necessary - to portray the ideal institution, at least two elements were stressed as vital. First, institutions must have a clear mission and, second, they need some degree of autonomy. The latter does not necessarily imply that institutions have to be indepen-dent from government, but, when they are part of a government, they should have enough freedom to set their own agenda and at the same time be guaranteed sufficient funding, staff stability and professional leadership. |
| The discussions finally focussed on a more precise description of what the participants understood by networknetworknetwork and expected from this one, and on identifying areas of co-operation for the near future, until and including the network's next meeting. It was agreed that the network would be open to all Asian training and research institu-tions, which have an interest in educational planning and management. As the initiative is still in an early phase of development, its aim will mainly be to facilitate bilateral contacts between partners rather than to organize large-scale multilateral activities. Many bilateral contacts were made during the workshop itself and different ideas for joint actions between institutions were put forward. On a short-term basis, institutions proposed to exchange publications and information, in particular on their pro-grammes, and to examine possibilities of exchanging personnel and undertaking other joint activities. |
At the same time, some decisions were made regarding future activities, in particular the publication of a newsletter
and the organization of a second annual meeting. This second meeting will focus on the theme of Creating national institutions which
respond to training needs in educational planning and management and will be organized early 1997 in combination with a planned IIEP
meeting in the region. NIEPA will act as the network's focal point and will, in this capacity, stimulate interaction between network members
and publish a newsletter, at least twice a year.
Participants were enthusiastic about the idea of creating a network, but also conscious of the difficulties involved in such an
endeavour. They have proposed a realistic plan of activities for the near future, which should allow the network to grow naturally and
become self-sustained and self-directed in three to five years time.
|