Community Mobilization: Support for the Implementation of a Complementary Reading Program

1. Community Mobilization: Support for the Implementation of a Complementary Reading Program Misty Sailors The University of Texas at San Antonio James V. Hoffman The University of Texas at Austin P. David Pearson University of California - Berkeley Madalo Samati Center for Creative Community Mobilization Poster presented at the annual meeting of the Literacy Research Association, Dallas, Texas

2. Purpose of study To explore the role of the community in the implementation of a large-scale, complementary reading program.

3. Read Malawi Assist the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology in addressing one of its priorities– to instill a culture of reading into its public schools • Designed, developed and printed over 5,200,000 books and teacher’s guides • Implemented in over 1,200 educational sites • Reached 8,000 teachers and 700,000 young children

4. Research Questions • What seem to be the most prevalent ways that communities in Malawi mobilize around their schools during a reading intervention? • Are teachers’ attitudes and perceptions of their community associated with implementation levels of community mobilization? • Are head teachers’ attitudes and perceptions of their community associated with implementation levels of community mobilization? • What specific aspects of community mobilization can be attributed to the improvement in instructional reading practices of classroom teachers? • What impact does community mobilization have on the improvement of reading achievement of learners in grades 1, 2 and 3 in those communities?

5. Malawi Tunisia Morocco Algeria Libya Western Sahara Egypt Mauritania Mali Niger Chad Senegal Sudan Burkina Faso The Gambia Guinea- Bissau Guinea Nigeria Somalia Ethiopia Sierra Leone Côte D'Ivoire Central African Republic Liberia Cameroon Rwanda Uganda Kenya Democratic Republic of Congo Gabon Rep. of Congo Burundi Tanzania Malawi Angola Zambia Zimbabwe Madagascar Namibia Botswana Mozambique South Africa

6. Primary education (infant phase) • Entry age = 6 years • Grades 1-3 • National primary curriculum • Core textbooks Challenges! • Large class sizes (80:1) • Lack of resources • Free, but not compulsory

7. Community participation(Rose, 2003) • Genuine participation is voluntary and spontaneous. • Pseudo-participation is (at best) a consultative process. The community is kept informed of <school> developments and are expected to accept decisions that have already been made (“sold” and “told”). Participation: Implies the ability to take part in the governance and decision making processes <of a school>. All members have “equal power to determine the outcome of decisions and share in a joint activity” (p. 47).

8. Objective of partnership with CRECCOM Strengthen community involvement and participation towards promotion of a reading culture • Served 52 schools • Reached over 393,000 community members • Created over 1,700 Community-based Reading Centers (served over 72,000 young children)

9. Methods • Data sources: • Community mobilization implementation rubric • Teacher questionnaire • Head Teacher questionnaire • Student assessment

10. What seem to be the most prevalent ways that communities in Malawi mobilize around their schools during a reading intervention? • Theater for Development • Change Agent Training • Mother Groups • Reading Centers • Volunteer Readers • School Tracking Initiative • Role Models

11. Community Based Interventions: Open Days • Celebratory • Accountability • Competitions

12. Success Stories: Taking it and Running with It! • Open Day Celebrations • Adult Literacy Centers • Bookshelves

13. Are teachers’ attitudes and perceptions of their community associated with implementation levels of community mobilization? • Survey questions: • (#43) There is a strong culture of reading in the community in which I teach. • (#44) Parents in my community support their children in reading at home. • (#45) Parents of children in this school read often and widely. • (Collapsed variable: Community)-- Row means of reading_culture, homesupport, and parentsread

18. Are head teachers’ attitudes and perceptions of their community associated with implementation levels of community mobilization? • Survey questions: • Estimate the highest level of education completed by most adult members of the community • Area of need: Involving the community in supporting the school… • To what extent is lack of cooperation from the community a problem in your school? • Area of need: Motivating teachers • Area of need: using locally available materials to support learning

24. What specific aspects of community mobilization can be attributed to the improvement in instructional reading practices of classroom teachers? • OBJECTIVE 1: improve literacy achievement of girls improved • OBJECTIVE 2: community mobilized towards successful implementation in schools • OBJECTIVE 3: schools strengthened through community mobilization • Functionality of mother group • Functionality of SMC/PTA • Functionality of village head

31. What impact does community mobilization have on the improvement of reading achievement of learners in grades 1, 2 and 3 in those communities? • No measurable impact, however lots and lots of anecdotal evidence (e.g. Sailors, Hoffman, Wilson, Villarreal, Peterson & Chilora, 2013)

32. Discussion • Communities implement! • Communities implement because they want what is best for their children! • Why did we not have stronger findings related to community? • Sensitivity of instrumentation? • More time for implementation? • More funding to strengthen the implementation?