Singh, D P. (2002). COMPARATIVE STUDY OF IMPLEMENTATION OF GENERAL FOUNDATION COURSE IN CERTAIN STATES. Unpublished. ERIC, Education

Objectives of the study:

• Prepare present status of GFC by collecting data about course contents, relevance of GFC, instructional materials, teachers, mode of teaching, examination pattern, etc.

• Analyze the collected data and prepare a comparative status of implementation of GFC in certain states.

• Find out reasons for non or improper implementation of GFC in states.

• Suggest corrective measures and line of action for effective implementation of GFC in the States.

Sample:

The responses were received from 16 Directorates, 9SCERTs/SIVEs/SIERT and 8 boards covering 20 states/UTs.

Tools:

• Questionnaire for CERTs/SIVEs/SIERT

• Questionnaire for Directorates of Education/ Directorates of Vocational Education

• Questionnaire for Boards of Higher Secondary Education/Council of Higher Secondary Education/ Council of Intermediate Education

• Questionnaire for Principals of Vocational Schools

• Questionnaire for Teachers teaching GFC

• Questionnaire for Vocational Students

Method of the study:

Survey Method

Statistical Techniques:

Percentage Analysis, Chi-square test

Findings:

• In most of the States/UTs participated in the study, the General Foundation Course (GFC) was offered as compulsory with vocational courses having three components - environmental education, rural development and entrepreneurship development as suggested in the national curriculum design for the vocational stream at higher secondary level. There were exceptions in certain states to this.

• Teachers and students view GFC as relevant to vocational education. In the opinion of teachers, the students have positive attitude towards GFC.

• Teachers for teaching GFC exclusively were not appointed in the States/UTs except Haryana and Kerala. Arrangement for GFC teaching was made by engaging either part-time vocational teachers or full-time vocational teachers or general stream (academic) teachers or guest lecturers/resource persons or a combination of these. GFC teaching had suffered due to non-availability of regular GFC teachers.

• Arrangements for training/orientation of available GFC teachers were insufficient.

• In mode of GFC teaching, class room lectures were the most preferred instructional method. Field visits and other activities for giving practical exposure to the students were not frequently organized.

• Instructional materials were found inadequate in most of the cases. Although, text books were found available in about 50 per cent of the States/UTs but practical manuals, teacher's guides and question banks were mostly not available. Regarding, text books, it was found that only in a few cases single book on GFC was available, in most of the cases, separate books on different components of GFC (environmental education, rural development and entrepreneurship development) were found to be consulted. Many teachers revealed that they had prepared notes for each GFC component.

• Weight-age given to GFC was not uniform, it varied from 10 to 16 per cent.

• There was variation in allocation of marks to GFC in class XII Board Examination, which range from 50 to 150. In seven States, marks were counted towards percentage/grade/division in class XII. In few states, GFC was internally evaluated and in Punjab grading on 7 point scale was applied.

• GFC Curriculum revision and evaluation of its implementation was not undertaken by most of the States/UTs.

Keyword(s): General Foundation Course (GFC),