Rural teacher training institutes : Liberia impact study

Impact evaluation covers the period 1958-1971. No methodology is indicated. Although having a positive impact, the project was only a partial success due to flaws in design, implementation, and follow-up. Three Rural Teacher Training Institutes (RTTI) were constructed and equipped and two -- in Zorzor (opened in 1965) and in Kakata (opened in 1968) -- became and are still operational; 2,956 primary school teachers and 35 administrators were trained; an RTTI curriculum was developed; teacher certification standards were established; rural women were afforded opportunity for advancement; and a large number of rural children were able to attend primary schools. Nevertheless, the project was hastily and poorly prepared by A.I.D. which is faulted for: concentrating on making Liberia a foreign aid showplace; insisting its own views prevail; overestimating local absorptive capacity; attempting to use teachers as rural development workers when teachers could not -- because their low salaries often necessitated second jobs -- afford to direct such efforts; developing an RTTI curriculum based on U.S. models and not coordinated with the primary school curriculum; allowing inadequate time to institutionalize the RTTI"s; and failing to maintain contact with involved institutions or individuals after project termination. Except for the party chief, personnel assigned by the contractor, Tuskeegee Institute, were of fair to poor quality. After project termination, the Government of Liberia was unable to sustain prior RTTI funding levels (e.g., the Webbo RTTI remained unused until an access road was built years after the project). Most RTTI graduates remained at their rural posts for the required 1-2 years, but afterward many moved to other, often urban, areas and jobs. Thus, the project taught that A.I.D. must: (1) be realistic in designing and planning projects and allow for an adequate gestation period; (2) select a contractor capable of providing all needed services; (3) conduct regular evaluations and assessments and not rely solely on contractor reports; (4) be prepared for mid-course correction or even major revision or termination of a project; and (5) above all, develop projects with, not for, a host country.