Skip to main content
Log in

The deployment and training of teachers for remote rural schools in less-developed countries

  • Articles
  • Published:
International Review of Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In less-developed countries schools in remote rural areas are likely to be poor in quality. One important aspect of this in certain contexts is the comparatively low quality of teachers and the high rate of teacher turnover in rural schools in these areas.

It is likely that contributory factors are the ways in which posting and transfer procedures operate, inadequate preparation and support for teachers, and their own characteristics, values and interests. For purposes of analysis, two models are suggested which illuminate the policy assumptions behind different strategies used to try to remedy the situation. The rural deficit model tends to encourage the use of compulsory posting and incentives while the rural challenge model searches for better ways of preparing teachers for service in remote rural schools.

From analysis of the literature, the author suggests that there are four inter-related features of contemporary teacher-education programmes which have potential and should be developed if good teachers are to be attracted to and retained in remote rural schools. These are field-based preparation, teamwork in training, community support of training and the recruitment and preparation of local teachers. A few examples of schemes employing these principles are described briefly.

Zusammenfassung

In weniger entwickelten Ländern sind die Schulen in abgelegenen ländlichen Gebieten oft von minderwertiger Qualität. Einen wichtigen Aspekt davon bildet die Unzulänglichkeit der Lehrer und der häufige Lehrerwechsel.

Zu den verantwortlichen Faktoren gehören wahrscheinlich die Einstellungs- und Versetzungsverfahren (unzureichende oder unangemessene Vorbereitung und Unterstützung der Lehrer) und deren eigene Charakteristiken, Werte und Interessen. Zu Analysezwecken werden zwei Modelle vorgeschlagen, welche die den verschiedenen Strategien zur Verbesserung dieser Situation zugrundeliegenden Annahmen beleuchten. Das ‘ländliche Mangel-Modell’ soll die Anwendung von Zwangsversetzungen und Anreizen fördern, während das ‘ländliche Herausforderungs-Modell’ nach besseren Vorbereitungsmethoden für Lehrer in entlegenen Landschulen sucht.

Aus einer Analyse der einschlägigen Literatur folgert der Verfasser, daß es vier miteinander verknüpfte Eigenschaften von Lehrerbildungsprogrammen gibt, die Potential haben und entwickelt werden sollten, wenn Landschulen gute Lehrer anziehen und behalten sollen. Diese Eigenschaften sind feldbezogene Ausbildung, Teamwork in der Ausbildung, Unterstützung der Ausbildung durch das Gemeinwesen und Anwerbung sowie Ausbildung örtlicher Lehrer. Ein paar Beispiele von Programmen, in denen diese Prinzipien zur Anwendung kommen, werden kurz beschrieben.

Résumé

Dans les pays les moins développés, les écoles des campagnes reculées sont généralement d'une qualité inférieure. L'un des aspects importants de cette situation est, dans certains contextes, la qualité médiocre des enseignants et le taux élevé des mutations dans le personnel enseignant de ces écoles rurales éloignées et isolées.

Il est probable que les facteurs contribuant à cet état de choses sont les procédés de nomination et de transfert (préparation inadéquate, soutien insuffisant des enseignants) et leurs propres caractéristiques, valeurs et intérêts. Deux modèles sont proposés à l'analyse et éclairent les assumptions gouvernementales par les diverses stratégies mises en oeuvre pour tenter de remédier à la situation. Dans le cas de la carence rurale on a tendance à encourager les nominations coercives et les mesures d'incitation, tandis que dans le cas du challenge rural on recherche de meilleurs moyens de préparation des enseignants au service dans les écoles des campagnes reculées.

En s'appuyant sur l'analyse des écrits inspirés par ce sujet, l'auteur avance qu'il existe quatre caractéristiques corrélatives des programmes de formation actuelle de l'enseignant présentant un potentiel et qui doivent être développées si l'on veut attirer les bons enseignants et les retenir dans ces écoles rurales. Ce sont: la préparation sur le terrain, le travail en équipe pendant la période de formation, le soutien de la communauté apporté à cette formation, le recrutement local et la préparation locale des enseignants. Quelques exemples de systèmes mettant ces principes en pratique sont brièvement décrits.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Buckland, R.V.Rural School Improvement Project: 1953–1957 Report. Berea, Kentucky: Berea College, 1958. ED 15801.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bagley, W.C. ‘Nature and extent of curriculum differentiation in the training of rural school teachers’. InProfessional Preparation of Teachers for Rural Schools. Boston: Department of the Interior Bureau of Education, 1928, pp. 16–21. Bulletin No. 6. Report of a conference called by the United States Commissioner of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Tigert, J.J. ‘The purpose of the conference’. ‘, p. 3.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Pankratz, R. ‘Teacher education today: a case for the rural minority’.Journal of Teacher Education. 26 (1975), No. 2, pp. 167–168.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Orvick, J.M.Teacher Survival in an Extreme Environment. Fairbanks, Alaska: Alaska University College, 1970. EDO48972.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Burlingame, M. ‘Win some, Lose some: Small Rural District Superintendents’. Paper presented to the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, April 1979.

  7. Beal, W.Colorado accepts the Challenge: the Rocky Mountain Area Project for small High Schools. Denver, Colorado: Colorado State Department of Education, 1961.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Heldman, L.J.A Study of Professional Staff Turnover in Catskill Area Schools for the Year ending 1968. Oneonta, New York: Catskill Area School Study Council, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Russell, D.E.Teacher Mobility in Wisconsin Public Schools. Madison: Wisconsin State Department of Public Instruction, Bureau for Career and Manpower Development, March 1979.

  10. Sher, J. (ed.)Education in Rural America: a Reassessment of Conventional Wisdom. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, 1977, p. 107.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Tainton, B.E. and Turner, T.J.Transfer Systems: the Opinions of Queensland Teachers. Brisbane, Queensland: Research Branch, Department of Education, 1976, p. 4.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Beers, D.C.It happens when we get there: Conversations with Teachers in Alaskan Villages. Juneau: Alaska State Department of Education, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Croft, J.C.Misassignment of Teachers in Oregon. Eugene, Oregon: Bureau of Educational Research, 1967. A study commissioned by the Teacher Standards and Practices Commission of the State of Oregon.

  14. Dove, L.A. ‘The role of the community school in rural transformation in developing countries’.Comparative Education. 16 (1980), No. 1, pp. 67–79.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Pedersen, K.G. ‘Teacher migration and attrition’.Administrators Notebook. 18 (April 1970), No. 8.

  16. Dove, L.A. ‘Teachers in politics in ex-colonial countries’.Journal of Commonwealth and Comparative Politics. 17 (1979), No. 2, pp. 183–184.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Walberg, H.J. (ed.)Evaluating Educational Performance. Berkeley, California: McCutchan, 1974, pp. 294–318.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Simmons, J. (ed.)The Educational Dilemma: Policy Issues for Developing Countries in the 1980's. Oxford: Pergamon, 1980, pp. 84–88, 90–91.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Husén, T. et al.Teacher Training and Student Achievement in Less Developed Countries. Washington, DC: World Bank, 1978, pp. 21–25. World Bank Staff Working Paper, No. 310.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Avalos, B. and Haddad, W.A Review of Teacher Effectiveness Research in Africa, India, Latin America, Middle East, Malaysia, Philippines and Thailand: Synthesis of Results. Ottawa: IDRC, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  21. de Landesheere, G. ‘Teacher selection’.Prospects. 10 (1980), No. 3, pp. 265–286.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Hull, R. and Hegtvedt, K.A Model for a Rural School Field Experience. Eugene, Oregon: University of Oregon, 1979. ED175598.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Hawkes, G. et al.Evaluation of Outward Bound Teachers' Practica. Greenwich, USA: Outward Bound Inc., 1963. ED153759.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Bruce, W.C. et al. ‘Decentralizing graduate education: a case for the field-based professor’.Phi Delta Kappan. 57 (1976), No. 7, pp. 452–454.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Murphy, D.M.Field-Centred Teacher Preparation: Final Report Cycle 5, 1970–1972. Anchorage: Alaska Rural Teacher Training Corps, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Hubright, R.L. et al.Teacher Training in a Rural Georgia Community. Statesborough: Georgia Southern College, 1974. EDO98213.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Nash, R.Schooling in Rural Communities. London: Methuen, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  28. OECD/CERI.Basic Education and Teacher Support in Sparsely-Populated Areas. Paris: OECD, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Vivian, S. ‘Alternative approaches to teacher education’. InRural Teacher Education. Huddersfield: Centre for Overseas Education, The Polytechnic, April 1979. Report of the 18th Conference of Tutors to Overseas Students of Education. Also, private communication with Tanzanian Ministry personnel.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Vivian, S.A Handbook on In-Service Teacher Training in Developing Countries of the Commonwealth. London: Commonwealth Secretariat, 1977, pp. 103–109.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Lallez, R.An Experiment in the Ruralization of Education: IPAR and the Cameroonian Reform. Paris: Unesco, 1974. Experiments and Innovations in Education, No. 8.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Hawes, H.W.R.Curriculum and Reality in African Primary Schools. London: Longman, 1979, pp. 167–169.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Robertson, D.A. and Loughton, A.J.BUNTEP: the Profile of a Teacher Education Project. Brandon, Manitoba: Faculty of Education, Brandon University, 1976, p. 7.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Valadian, M. and Randall, A. ‘Aboriginal and Islander Teacher Aide Inservice Program’.The Aboriginal Child at School: A National Journal for Teachers of Aboriginals. 8 (1980), No. 2, pp. 22–35. Report on the QAITAD Project, 1977–1978.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Sattar, E.Universal Primary Education in Meher Union, Comilla. Dacca: Bangladesh Association for Community Education, 1980. Fourth Annual Report.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Personal research by the author in Malaysia, August 1980.

  37. Cropley, A.J. and Dave, R.H.Lifelong Education and the Training of Teachers. Oxford: Pergamon/Hamburg: Unesco Institute for Education, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ankrah-Dove, L. The deployment and training of teachers for remote rural schools in less-developed countries. Int Rev Educ 28, 3–27 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00597756

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00597756

Keywords

Navigation