Stage 2: Is IRI feasible?

Publication: Improving Educational Quality through Interactive Radio Instruction

Main Points

Educational goals. Most IRI programs are intended to improve instruc-tion in primary schools, and their focus is on student achievement. IRIprograms actively involve teachers and help standardize instructional quality. They entail annual evaluations of student progress.

Audience. Successful IRI programs identify audience needs, abilities, and interests through research and formative evaluation—that is, early testingof materials as they are used. One-size-fits-all distance education such as IRI has generally worked best with younger audiences. Informal learning on the part of unintended shadow audiences such as parents and out-of-school youths can add to the returns on IRI investments.

Content. IRI has proved versatile in teaching most academic primary school subjects; it has not been as successful with subjects requiring a strong visual demonstration component or face-to-face guidance. IRI could, however, assist in hands-on subjects such as science and life skills, including health practices. IRI produces the best results when designed as a single subject taught in a daily, year-long program, and this is its most common form. Although most IRI programs have been developed for the early primary school years, the method can work for later primary school grades. Adaptation of existing IRI programs for other audiences can simplify development and save money and time, but a number of constraints have to be overcome. No research has determined how much of the school curriculum can be handled by IRI or for how long a period students can be effectively engaged.

Program development. Specific personnel should handle program design and management, curriculum design, scriptwriting and supportmaterials, radio production, research and evaluation, and marketing.Successful IRI programs are led by an institution with authority, techni-cal competence, and a commitment to nurturing effective alliances withstakeholders. Planners must decide on technical assistance and capacity building, the most cost-effective approach to delivery of the IRI program, and the scope and duration of pilot projects. Adequate training should be provided early in the process to ensure quality in design, pro-duction, and delivery.

Cost and finance. Because of economies of scale, IRI offers a relatively low-cost means of improving educational quality in primary schools. It is important, however, to plan for and contain recurrent costs—of broadcasting, radios and batteries, print materials, and teacher trainingand support—and to be realistic about the long-term implications of these costs for governmental and nongovernmental funding. IRI programs cover recurrent costs through such means as taxes, funds already budgeted, cost-sharing, fees for service, and marketing of products such as calendars.

Planning for institutionalization and sustainability. Plans to integrate IRI into existing institutions vary according to the degree of decentralizationin the ministries of education and communication and in other agencies involved in IRI broadcasts. Planners should consider a role for government agencies, colleges of education and other tertiary institutions, and NGOs with an interest or institutional investment in an IRI program. Planning for the sustainability of the program should be considered at the outset of the project. Sustainability depends on the educational benefits documented, the affordability of recurrent costs, successful institutionalization, and strong leadership in adapting the program and in troubleshooting. Creating appropriate policy frameworks is essential to ensuring sustainability, as are cooperation among relevant agencies and the annual commitment of budgetary funds.