Improving Educational Quality (IEQ) Project AN EVALUATION OF THE EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION AND PRESCHOOL PROGRAM IMPLEMENTED BY NIÑOS REFUGIADOS DEL MUNDO: CLASSROOM IMPLEMENTATION AND COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION FINAL REPORT IEQ undertaken by: American Institutes for Research in collaboration with The Academy for Educational Development Education Development Center, Inc. Juárez and Associates, Inc. The University of Pittsburgh Report prepared by: Fernando E. Rubio F. Juárez and Associates, Inc. June 2001 Contract #HNE-I-00-97-00029-00 i Executive Summary An Evaluation of the Early Childhood Education and Preschool Program Implemented by Niños Refugiados del Mundo: Classroom Implementation and Community Participation An evaluation of the NRM preschool programs in the Nebaj was conducted to examine the impact of the program on children’s development as well as to assess the program’s progress in incorporating parents in the program, in using local culture in the classroom and to characterize classroom teaching and learning processes. Thirteen (13) NRM preschool classrooms were compared to eight (9) DIGEBI and three (3) Ministry of Education preschools. Information was obtained through observations of classrooms, interviews with teachers, parents, board members and community members and reviews of center documentation. Major findings are provided below. Attendance and Dropouts ÿ Attendance at the NRM preschools was high usually fluctuating close to 90 percent for all age groups. Enrollment was also high with close to 9 out of 10 children attending the NRM centers. Boys tended to drop out at earlier ages than girls. Classroom Processes ÿ Interaction In Preschool Contexts: The programs were noted to have similar contexts during the preschool day: free play; large groups; and small groups. While some contexts did appear across all programs, the manner in which these were organized differed. Also, MOE programs were found to have no Individual Work contexts. NRM preschools were seen to include a greater variety of contexts in their preschool day. While most interactions were found to occur during Large Group 1, more interactions for children in the NRM programs were noted during free play than for either of the other two programs. NRM preschool children, though, were found to initiate more interactions during those contexts that foster practice with language and other skills (Free Play and Individual Work) as well as in settings outside of the classroom. ÿ Target of Interaction: Children tend to initiate most of their interactions with the teacher, regardless of the program. More children in DIGEBI and NRM classrooms, though, tend to initiate interactions with individuals other than the teacher. ÿ Use of Language: Both NRM and DIGEBI preschools made frequent use of Mayan languages. Most of the interactions initiated by children in these two programs were in a Mayan language. When considering interactions that included both languages, nearly three in four interactions included a Mayan language element. ÿ Task Involvement: Children in all programs were generally involved in some task when they were observed initiating an interaction. Additionally, children were observed usually following instructions during an interaction. ii Teacher Findings ÿ Background: The teachers in all programs shared similar backgrounds. Most were bilingual teachers who lived close to the preschool centers where they worked. There were some notable differences. As expected, teachers in NRM preschools were found to have been working in their centers much less time than their MOE and DIGEBI counterparts. Additionally, they had experienced less either pre-service training than MOE and DIGEBI teachers, given that the latter tended to be certified preschool teachers. ÿ Preschool Day Activities: Teachers in NRM centers reported structuring more activities related to practice (trial and error) while DIGEBI and MOE teachers reported using more activities of a school-readiness type focused on language development and readying/writing events. From the school observation form, it was found that children were following hygienic procedures with washing hands, brushing teeth and combing their hair. Fewer events related to the brushing of teeth and combing of hair were found for NRM preschools than for the other programs. ÿ Organization and Materials: Planning is a key aspect in organizing the preschool-day activities for all teachers. Also, teachers reported using materials in carrying out their daily activities. Their parent organizations appear to be an important source of materials although DIGEBI and MOE teachers use a greater variety of traditional classroom materials than NRM teachers. NRM teachers, though, have a greater variety of sources for their materials and make greater use of the local resources easily found around their environment. ÿ Teachers were seen to usually follow the posted schedules starting and ending the preschool day at the appointed times. NRM programs were extended their preschool day schedule by an average of 30 minutes daily while teachers in the other programs had preschool days slightly less than the scheduled time. ÿ Training: All teachers reported that they had received some type of training prior to becoming teachers, and that they have applied the information in their classrooms. NRM teachers have received training in a greater variety of issues than have their DIGEBI and MOE counterparts. ÿ Teaching and Learning Strategies: All teachers mentioned a variety of teaching strategies although use of games and use of examples appeared to be used by more of the teachers regardless of the program. There was little difference in the importance given to the various teaching strategies except for the involvement of parents and the community in the classroom. NRM teachers gave more value to the use of parents and the community in the center than did their counterparts. NRM teachers perceived the physical needs of children and factors that influence their intellectual and social development as more important in child development. MOE and DIGEBI teachers gave greater emphasis to the need for children to socialize and to parental involvement. However, there was little socialization noted in MOE and DIGEBI classrooms noted in the interactions while more child-teachers and child-child interactions were reported in NRM preschools. ÿ Concerns: All teachers were concerned principally about the children’s difficulties in acquiring and using the Spanish language. Another important concern was assuring that iii children knew how to use a pencil. It seems then that the focus of the educational effort across all programs is on ‘school readiness’ factors. ÿ Parental Participation: Teachers value parental participation in the center and tend to use personal approaches (visits; invitations) as a means of getting them involved with the center. NRM teachers appeared to embrace the concept more than those in the other programs. Parents in NRM programs reported participating more frequently and in a greater variety of activities than those in the other programs. ÿ Use of Culture: Teachers give importance to the use of the local culture in the center and the classroom. They noted that use of the local culture demonstrates the value they give it. Also, use of the local culture contributes to its maintenance. They seem to incorporate deeper elements of the culture (language, customs and dress) in the center as well as the classroom rather than just symbolic elements (e.g., pictures, celebration of holidays). Parent Findings ÿ Background: Parents in NRM and DIGEBI schools were similar in terms of occupation, ethnicity and educational levels. MOE respondents tended to be different as more of them identified themselves as non-indigenous and reported having higher levels of education. ÿ Parent Participation: Parents in all programs reported having participated in some activity, usually a meeting, in an NRM center while more parents in the other programs reported never having participated in a preschool event. NRM parents did note that their major difficulty in participating in the center activities was due to work. More parents were observed in NRM and MOE than DIGEBI locations on the days the evaluators visited the preschools. Additionally, more parents were seen working in the centers than meeting with teachers on the days of the school visits. Also, more mothers than fathers were observed either working in the preschools or meeting with the teachers. ÿ Benefits of Preschool: Parents in all programs saw their child having benefited from their preschool experience. Many saw them as having developed their intellectual capacity as well as their social skills and thus having prepared the child for entering the primary grades. There appears to be little value given to the socio-emotional aspect of child development ÿ Satisfaction with Preschools: Parents rated the various aspects of their programs highly. NRM parents generally rated all aspects of their program higher than did parents from the other two programs. Also, they gave fewer negatives ratings than did the parents from DIGEBI and MOE centers. Board of Directors ÿ Background: Board members were overwhelmingly men. NRM members tended to have lower levels of education and less of them reported reading and writing capabilities. Board members in NRM and DIGEBI centers had children attending the centers. ÿ Participation in Classroom: Board members had participated in the preschool activities. They reported attending parent meetings and visiting the center to monitor children’s progress or iv at the request of teachers. NRM and DIGEBI members also indicated that they had attended workshops in center management, health and nutrition. ÿ Satisfaction with Program: Board members in all programs appear to be pleased with the teacher’s attendance, punctuality and dedication. However, they do not appear to be as satisfied with their capabilities, although NRM members appear to be less critical than those of the other programs. ÿ Benefits: Board members in all programs held that the centers had prepared their children for the primary level by teaching them to read or write, by helping them to lose their fears (socio-emotionally) or by just getting them ready for school. Like parents, board members seem to see the preschools as a means to get their child prepared for the primary levels and want to see the child gain the skills needed to succeed in the later schooling. Community Interviews ÿ Awareness of Preschools: Community members in NRM and DIGEBI communities were aware of the centers in their locations. They generally saw that the centers were beneficial to their communities noting that the preschools prepared children for their educational careers by serving as places where children are taught to acquire reading and writing skills at an early age. NRM and MOE community members more than DIGEBI ones were supportive of the idea that children should attend preschool prior to their entering a formal school setting. Generally, respondents across all programs note that the preschools provide the school￾readiness skills necessary for preparing the child for primary level work (lose fears, study skills, use of materials; serve as the base for 1 st grade). For NRM and DIGEBI parents, though, the preschools also served as a place to acquire Spanish-language capabilities. ÿ Participation: Less NRM community members attend meetings at these centers than do DIGEBI or MOE members. Additionally, the latter attend more meetings and on a more frequent basis than do NRM residents. Installations ÿ Generally, the preschools were constructed of similar materials with blocks for walls, tiles for floors, a variety of materials (fiberglass, tiles, or tin) for roofs. They also had separate bathrooms and kitchens and an outside play area. Water was available from a tap and electric energy was also available. General Conclusions ÿ NRM centers were characterized by the use of a greater variety of contexts and by more child-initiated interactions. Although NRM children interacted mainly with the teacher, there were more interactions with other children in NRM classrooms than in those of the other programs. Additionally, use of the home language appears to help in creating an environment that fosters interaction. Thus, it appears that NRM children may be experiencing more of the types of learning opportunities that may allow them to practice their language and other social skills. Also, while this may mean that there is still a reliance on a traditional classroom management style with the teacher as the focus of the learning environment, it appears that there is more of a child-centered atmosphere in NRM v classrooms than in those of the other preschools programs. NRM staff may want to consider providing further training that will help teachers learn other strategies for making the classroom a more active-learning environment. ÿ NRM teachers appear to be more receptive to parental participation in the preschools. Their attitudes reflect a more positive attitude toward the concept, and more parents from NRM preschools reported participating in these centers. Also, parents in NRM centers appear to participate more frequently and in a greater variety of activities than do those of the other programs. It appears that NRM preschools have embraced the parental participation concept wholeheartedly and are implementing better than their counterparts. Unfortunately, parental participation seems to be focused on assistance with maintenance of the facilities and food preparations rather than on decision-making activities for the preschool as a whole. This is true for all programs. ÿ There appeared to be high levels of satisfaction with the NRM teachers among parents, Board members and community residents. This was especially the case with issues related to teacher’s attendance, punctuality and dedication to the child. Lower levels of satisfaction were voiced with regard to the physical installations and the food in all programs. An Evaluation of the Early Childhood Education and Preschool Program Implemented by Niños Refugiados del Mundo: Classroom Implementation and Community Participation I. Introducción A. Background The Jardines Infantiles were intiatied by Niños Refugiados del Mundo (NRM) in 987 in Nebaj, Guatemala as a response to the need for attention among the population victimized by the internal conflict, and especially in response to the educational needs of the children in the area. The early childhood education program developed by NRM in the area of El Quiché and in the Ixil triangle area, have been considered by many in the country as a successful model for educating indigenous and rural preschool-aged children. Among the more elements considered successful are parental participation, the development of a curriculum based on local needs, the use of local teachers, the close relationship with the communities where the centers are located and a high involvement and participation of the NRM technical teams with the local programs. Given these impressions, NRM management considers it important to conduct a formal evaluation of the program to learn as much as possible about the preschool centers and the educational processes which unfold in them. The final purpose of the evaluation is to contribute to plans to expand the program beyond the Ixil area in Guatemala. One of the MEDIR project’s responsibilities is to develop an educational research agenda that will permit the stakeholders in the educational community to design, develop and implement improvements in educational policy and work strategies associated with them. B. Evaluation Objectives This report presents findings from the first component of the evaluation of the NRM preschool and early childhood education program. The evaluation has the following objectives: ÿ To establish the impact of the preschool implemented by NRM on the children in the areas of their cognitive and socio-emotional development as well as on the primary level work of those who have already experienced the program; ÿ To establish the nature and level of implementation of the preschool program, including the implementation at the level of curriculum, training for teachers, the teaching-learning process in the classroom and the participation of the community; 2 ÿ To determine levels of self-sufficiency and replicability of the program; and ÿ To identify lessons learned in the program, including those related to development of relevant curriculum, training of teachers, community participation, implementation of the program at the classroom level, and the institutional collaboration (perceptions, participation of other organizations, etc.) This report will address only the second component of the study as only results from the teaching process and community participation efforts are presented. Among the questions that guided the evaluation are the following: What is the impact of the NRM preschool program on the development of the children? How do the NRM children compare with those attending other preschool programs? Which aspects of the program are the strongest ones? Which can be improved? How do the programs integrate aspects of the local culture in the curriculum? What makes the curriculum relevant? What curriculum elements can best explain the development of the children (if results clearly show a difference between those children in the NRM program and those in other programs)? What have been the parents’ roles in the preschool? How has parental participation influenced the development of the program? It’s operations? Children’s progress? What lessons can we learn from the NRM preschool program? 3 II. Methodology A. Sample The sample included children, their parents, their teachers, members of the board of directors, and residents of the respective communities where the centers were located. The exhibit below provides a summary of the number of participants in the study. Overall, thirteen of 18 NRM centers were used for the study. Exhibit A. Evaluation Sample Components Preschool Centers NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschools MOE Preschools 13 9 3 Children observed 62 39 12 Teachers 11 9 3 Parents 52 34 12 Board Members 30 18 6 Community residents 30 18 6 The centers were different in terms of the types of children they served. NRM centers served children of different ages and who had been in the center for different lengths of time since 1997. MOE centers solely served children who had enrolled in the center since 1999. DIGEBI preschools were similar to NRM although they had no children who enrolled in that program in 1998. Additionally, MOE centers had an equal number of boys and girls while NRM and DIGEBI preschools served slightly more girls than boys. Exhibit B. Children in the Evaluation Sample Length of Time in Preschool Centers Preschool NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschools MOE Preschools 1997 8% 3% 0% 1998 24 0 0 1999 44 31 100 2000 24 66 0 TOTAL 100% (62) 100% (39) (100%) (12) 4 Exhibit C. Gender of Children in the Evaluation Sample Gender Preschool Centers NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschools MOE Preschools Females 52% 54% 50% Males 48 46 50% TOTAL 100% (62) 100% (39) (100%) (12) B. Instruments Four instruments were used for data collection purposes during the implementation of this component of the study. The evaluation incorporated multiple strategies for collecting data on the educational processes that take place in the centers. Among the instruments developed for the study were a materials/inventory checklist, interview protocols, and an observation checklist. All instruments were designed to collect information to respond to the needs and purposes of this evaluation. Observation Checklist An observation checklist was developed to examine classroom processes in the preschools. Based on child interactions, observers recorded child behaviors at 15 minutes intervals thoughout the preschool day. A maximun of 12 observations per child were programmed. The checklist recorded the number of interactions initiated by a child, the context in which the interaction occurred, whether it involved use of language, the type of language used and the nature of the interaction. Materials Inventory Checklist An inventory checklist served to permit the observer to record materials contained in each of the preschool classrooms where the observations occurred. The inventory permits couting objects and the conditions of the material found in the classroom. The inventory was used once per preschool classroom. Interviews Four distinct interview protocols were developed for use in the evaluation. A teacher interview was used to record information from the teachers regarding background factors, preschool day activities, their training, teaching and learning strategies, their use of the local culture, and their attitudes and stratetegies regarding parental involvement. A parent interview protocol was developed for use in recording information from parents of the children observed. This instrument permitted collection of background information on the parents as well as their perceptions of parental participation, knowledge of the preschool, and their impressions of the benefits of the preschool experience for their child. A Parent Association interview protocol was used to collect data from members of the governing bodies of the different centers. This instrument also allowed for recording 5 information on the background of members, their participation in the centers and in the classrooms, their satisfaction with selected aspects of their programs and their perceptions of the benefits of the centers to their communities. Finally, a general interview protocol was developed and used to collect information from community residents. The purpose of this instrument was to asses the extent to which the center was known outside the immediate school community. This instrument permitted collecting information regarding the background of community residents. Like the Board member interview, this instrument also provided for collecting data on the residents’ participation in the centers and in the classrooms, their satisfaction with selected aspects of their programs and their perceptions of the benefits of the centers to their communities. 6 II. Findings This section of the report presents the findings from the observations of children in the schools as well as from the interviews with school staff, parents and other community members. The section is organized in the following manner: results of observations of children’s interactions in the preschool settings; results from the interviews with teachers, with parents, with board members, and with community residents; and findings from interviews with community members. Appendix A includes all the tables with data for this section of the report. Readers are referred to that section if they would like to examine the data. Information on attendance and dropout rates for the NRM preschools only was calculated from the attendance and enrollment records at the different preschools in the study. Exhibit B below provides information comparing the attendance and dropout rates by gender and age of the children. Note that attendance is high and almost identical for both boys and girls who are under four years of age. However, as they grow older, dropout rates increase, first for boys then for girls. Where rates can be compared, Attendance among boys is higher in NRM programs than in either of the other two. However, attendance among girls is very high in MOE programs. Exhibit D. Attendance and Dropout Rates in NRM Preschools for Boys and Girls NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschools MOE Rates Preschools Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Attendance of children less than 4 years old 91% 92% na na na Na Dropout of children less than 4 years old 13% 4% na na na Na Attendance of children 4-5 years old 89% 95% na na na Na Dropout of children 4-5 years old 17% 7% na na na na Attendance of children 5 – 6 years old 95% 85% 90.0% 81.3% 91.9% 97.4% Dropout for children 5-6 years old 5% 13% 10.0% 18.8% 8.1% 2.6% Attendance of children 6 – 7 years old na Na 96.0% 92.9% 91.3% 94.1% Dropout for children 6-7 years old Na Na 4.0% 7.1% 8.7% 5.9% Attendance of children more than 7 years old Na Na 95.0% 96.8% Na Na Dropout for children more than 7 years old na Na 5.0% 3.2% Na na A. Classroom Observations Observations were conducted in the classrooms for each of 24 preschools that participated in the study. Four children in each of the preschools were observed on at least two different days. Time samples were carried out with each observed child throughout the ‘preschool’ day during the course of the two-day visit. This sub-section of the report presents results from the observations of interactions initiated by the children during the preschool days. Results are presented by use of learning contexts, use of classrooms, objects of the interactions, language use and the nature of the task during the interaction. 7 1. Interactions in the Learning Contexts Use of different contexts in the classrooms contributes to providing for a stimulating environment for the children in an early childhood education setting. Use of some contexts such as free play, large groups, small groups and individual work provides situations in which children can practice their language and develop other skills needed for learning. Observations of the children were carried during the course of the preschool day. During the course of observing the day, a variety of contexts were observed in use in the different programs. Also, more large group contexts were observed than others. However, NRM and the DIGEBI preschool programs were found to use two Large Group contexts during the course of the preschool day. Finally, no Individual Work contexts were observed in the MOE preschools during their preschool day. The structure of the contexts was found to differ for the programs, as well. Under the NRM program, Large Group 1 refers to children of all ages working together while Large Group 2 refers to children under five working together but separate from children five and older, who also work together as a group. In other programs, Large group 1 refers to the whole class whereas Large Group two refers to children of any age working in groups of 8 or more, but less than the whole class Differences were found among the number of interactions observed during the distinct contexts. Across all programs, more interactions were recorded during the Large Group 1 context. Additionally, more child-initiated interactions occur in the NRM program during Free Play while more of them were found in Large Group 1 contexts for DIGEBI and MOE programs. The pattern held for both boys and girls; that is, more child-initiated interactions were observed during Free Play for NRM programs while these occur more frequently in Large Group 1 in the other two programs. (See Table 2 in Appendix.) Table 1. Comparison of Interactions Observed During the Preschool Day by Contexts and Type of Preschools Contexts NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschools MOE Preschools Free Play 20 % 7 % 14 % Large Group 1 45 62 54 Large Group 2 12 4 N/A Small Group 7 3 11 Individual work 8 23 0 Undefined task 8 1 0 TOTAL 100% (1197) 100% (852) 100% (280) 2. Use of Classrooms and Schools Programs can make use of different learning environments whether these were classrooms, the community or some other locations. To explore the learning environments that children used in initiating an interaction, they were observed in the classroom as well as in situations 8 outside of the classroom. Across all programs, children were found to initiate the great majority of their interactions in classroom settings (See Table 3). More NRM children (30%) were observed initiating interactions in settings outside the classroom than those in the other two programs. 3. With Whom the Children Interact Of interest was determining who was the object of the interaction initiated by a child. Across all programs, the teacher was the person with whom the children initiated more interactions. In fact, the majority of the interactions were with the teacher for both the NRM (51%) and the MOE (67%) children (See Table 4). DIGEBI children show interactions in more diverse actors than those in the other programs. Children in NRM programs display more interactions with teachers than those in DIGEBI programs but not as high as those in MOE Preschools. When examined by gender, little differences are apparent except for the finding that girls tend to interact with girls while boys do so with other boys. However, there were no observations of boys interacting with girls in the MOE preschools. 4. Use of Language in Interactions As can be seen in Table 6 below, there was diversity in the use of language in two of the three types of preschools. A Mayan language was the predominant language of interaction in both NRM and DIGEBI preschool settings while Spanish was the dominant language of interactions in MOE preschools. This situation is of concern given that many of the children in MOE preschools are dominant in a Mayan language. Additionally, use of both languages in interactions was used in 1 in 5 interactions in NRM classrooms while it was evident in 1 of 4 interactions in MOE classrooms. Table 6. Use of Language in Interactions by Type of Preschool Language Used During Interaction NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschools MOE Preschools Maya 57 % 62 % 3 % Spanish 12 15 68 Both 20 14 25 Non-verbal 11 9 4 TOTAL 100% (947) 100% (650) 100% (278) 5. Task Involvement In the great majority of interactions, the children were involved in a task. This was especially the case in MOE preschools where almost all interactions observed had children involved in some task. On the contrary children in the other programs had higher than expected rates of off-task behavior. (See Table 7.) 9 6. Nature of Interactions Each interaction was classified by what the child was doing at the time the interaction was noted. Overall, children were engaged in similar activities when they initiated interactions. (See Tables 7 and 8.) Tables 9 presents information for categories of socio-emotional behaviors. There is much similarity across all programs in terms of the behaviors observed. For example, children were either following instructions, observing others, or listening to the teacher when they initiated their interactions. However, within these categorizations, more DIGEBI and MOE preschool program children were engaged in those types of activities than NRM preschoolers. That is, 70 percent of the NRM children were following instructions while 74 percent of DIGEBI children and 98 percent of MOE children did so. This pattern is consistent across the most frequently occurring categories. Table 9. Type of Activity – Socio-emotional Activity NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschools MOE Preschools Follows instruction 70% 74% 98% Cries .2% .5% .4% Greets 1% .7% 5% Says Goodbye .7% .2% 6% Observes others 47% 53% 62% Imitates teacher 6% 1% 16% Models 1% .6% 6% Observations were also classified for information on the nature of the interactions as well. More of the clearly defined interactions are occurring in the MOE preschools. Among the types of interactions prevalent in MOE preschools than in the other programs are the following: children’s repetition of teachers and children listening to the teacher; exercising; counting type of activities; identification activities; and prewriting activities. (See Tables 10- 13.) B. Teacher Findings To explore issues related to the programs and the classroom practices, interviews with the teachers whose classrooms were observed were carried out. A total of 26 teachers in NRM centers were interviewed while a total of 11 teachers from the DIGEBI and MOE programs were included in the sample; of these, eight were from DIGEBI preschools and three were from MOE settings. Because of the small number of MOE teachers included in the sample, their responses were aggregated with those of the DIGEBI program. This section of the report addresses findings regarding background of the teachers, activities and materials, issues related to teaching and learning and aspects of professional development. 1. Background 10 Teachers were asked about their educational achievements and teaching experiences. The table below compares backgrounds for teachers from NRM and the other two programs. In addition, NRM teachers were asked whether they had had an opportunity to improve their education. All teachers responded that they had had such opportunities. Of those who specified what actions they had taken to improve their education, 33 percent indicated that they had attended the IGER; another 11 percent reported that they had attended school during weekends. NRM teachers were also asked what was their educational level when they initiated their careers as preschool teachers. The great majority of the teachers (89%) reported that they had begun as preschool teachers with a high school education or less (tercero básico) with 38 percent indicating that they had had a sixth grade education or less. In contrast, 54 percent of the teachers in the other programs reported that they were certified preschool teachers when they had started their careers. Teachers were also asked about their linguistic capabilities. The majority of teachers reported that they could speak and read Ixil and Spanish or K’iché and Spanish; more teachers in NRM centers reported being able to speak and read all three languages than those in DIGEBI/MOE programs. (See Tables 14 and 15.) Teachers were also asked about their backgrounds. As can be seen in the table below, NRM teachers had an average of 5 years working at their centers whereas DIGEBI and MOE teachers had over 14 years of experience teaching at those preschools. Data collected for NRM teachers only shows that the average grade level of these teachers upon initiating their careers was over a 7 th grade education. Finally, teachers were asked how long they travel from their homes to their preschools. Note that the average travel time for NRM teachers is 15 minutes while the average time for teachers in the other programs is 23 minutes. (See Table 16.) 2. Preschool Classroom Activities Teachers were asked to cite the activities that they carry out during the course of the preschool day. As can be seen in the table below, teachers in NRM preschools noted that the primary activities they carry out are related to those involving trial and error events (42%) and hygiene and group recitals (46%). Teachers in the DIGEBI and MOE classrooms, however, noted that they spend more of their preschool day on language development activities, reading and writing activities and in preparation for such activities. Table 17. Activities Carried out During the Preschool Day Activities Reported NRM Teachers DIGEBI & MOE Teachers Preparation (reading, math, writing) 4% 18% Games 4% 0 Reading & writing 0 18 Trial and observation (Practice) 42 0 11 Hygiene & group recital 46 0 Repeat in group 4 0 Language development (Maya & Spanish) 0 55 Art 0 9 TOTAL 100% (26) 100% (11) Teachers were asked how they prepare or organize the activities for their classes. Across all programs, the majority of teachers use planning as the major means to organize activities. (See Table 18.) When asked what materials they use during lessons, NRM teachers reported that they used posters and local resources (54%) in carrying out their daily activities as well as classroom materials such as chalk (23%). DIGEBI and MOE teachers reported a greater variety of materials that they used in teaching. (See Table 19.) Teachers were asked for the sources of their classroom materials. Teachers tend to rely on their organizations to provide the materials (NRM- 60%; MOE- 37%; DIGEBI- 9%). They were asked for a second important source of materials. As can be seen in Table 21, this list of secondary sources of materials reflects a high use of local resources by NRM teachers vs. those in the other programs. Additionally, NRM teachers identified more sources for materials than did those from the other programs. DIGEBI and MOE teachers tend to rely on the local institution (37%) and the parents and community support as well. (See Table 20-21.) 3. Training Teachers were asked about their pre-service background including the types of training courses they have received and the usefulness of the training. All teachers in both groups reported that they had received some type of training to enable them to teach in the preschool setting. All of the teachers who responded to the question reported having received training after having become a teacher. In addition, NRM teachers reported a greater variety of training courses received than did those in the other program. More NRM teachers reported having received training in child development (27%); planning (15%); and in health and children’s rights. Table 22. Training Courses Received Before Becoming a Preschool Teacher Training Courses Received NRM Teachers DIGEBI & MOE Teachers Motivation 4% 10% Child development 27 10 Learning areas 8 0 Planning 15 0 12 Language or bilingualism 0 20 Health and nutrition 11 0 Children’s rights 4 0 Reading & writing 0 10 Material development 0 10 Community organizing 4 0 Resource Management 0 10 Physical development of children 0 10 Learning about the home 0 10 Teacher’s role & functions 4 0 No response 23 10 TOTAL 100% (26) 100% (10) DIGEBI and MOE teachers were asked to identify the actual types of training courses that they have had after becoming teachers. More teachers in all programs reported having received training in quality circles (37%) and self-esteem (27%) than in any other aspect of teaching. In identifying other training courses they have had, the teachers identified a variety of training courses in a number of areas. (See Tables 23 and 24.) Teachers were also asked to cite what information from their training course they have actually applied in the classroom. NRM teachers pointed out that they have implemented issues around children’s rights (40%) and hygiene (16%) more than any others. DIGEBI and MOE teachers reported implementing information related to how to improve their work (19%) more than other types of information. (See Table 25.) 4. Teaching Strategies Teachers were asked to identify what children in their classrooms might have difficulty doing. NRM teachers as well as those in the other programs mentioned that children had difficulty with reading, writing and expression in the Spanish language and in using pencils. When asked how they helped their children overcome these difficulties, teachers pointed to a number of teaching strategies. The majority of NRM teachers reported that they used learning exercises (53%) as a means to help children overcome the challenge; another 17 percent pointed to reviews as another strategy that they use. Teachers from the other program also rely on learning exercises (30%) but mentioned use of a variety of other strategies as well. (See Tables 26-27.) Teachers in the study were asked to identify the types of teaching strategies they use in their classrooms. Teachers in all programs reported using a variety of strategies. Across all programs, the more frequently reported strategies were use of games, songs and dances and use of examples. (See Table 28.) Teachers were also sked to rate the importance of a variety of strategies for teaching and learning. Reported below are the ratings only for the category “Very Important” as most teachers rated the distinct strategies as either ‘Very Important’ or ‘Of Little Importance’. There was much similarity across programs on the importance given to the different 13 strategies except three. More NRM teachers rated use of parents, the community and use of extracurricular activities as ‘very important’ than did their counterparts. (See Table 29.) The teachers were also asked to identify factors that support child development. Among those identified by NRM teachers as factors that support development in children were those related to nutrition, use of games, and those involved with the teaching/learning context. More DIGEBI and MOE teachers noted that socialization with other children and parental involvement were factors that they considered as supporting child development. (See Table 30.) 5. Family Participation Teachers were asked about parental participation in the center. The great majority of teachers had asked for the participation of their parents in the center. Less DIGEBI/MOE teachers had done so, though. When asked how they actually get parents to participate, a number of strategies were identified. NRM teachers reported that they relied on invitations to meetings (35%), meetings to discuss children’s progress (27%); and invitations as their primary strategies. DIGEBI/MOE teachers relied on two: invitations to meetings (46%) and home visits (27%). (See Table 31-32.) When asked what were the more common familial problems, NRM teachers pointed to illness (35%), and lack of economic resources (19%) as those affecting their families. DIGEBI/MOE teachers noted that familial disintegration (18%), familial arguments (18%) and lack of economic resources (18%) as the major problems for their parents. When asked which of the problems they had cited most affected the children in their centers, NRM teachers viewed poverty (31%) and illness (23%) as the important problems affecting their kids. DIGEBI/MOE teachers pointed out that familial disintegration (37%) and malnutrition (27%) were those that most influenced children in their centers. (See Tables 33-34.) Teachers were asked to describe how they help the children with these problems. For many of the NRM teachers, the solution lay in motivating the child (38%) or in talking with the parents (27%). Their counterparts relied on a number of varied strategies including talking to the parents (30%), advising the children (20%), and asking other institutions for help. (Table 35.) All teachers were asked about their perception of student retention in their centers. The majority of teachers acknowledged that some of their center’s children had left before completing the preschool year. More DIGEBI and MOE teachers, though, reported child desertions. (See Table 36.) The reasons provided for children having left the center differed by program. NRM teachers noted a variety of reasons including the family migrant lifestyle (25%) and the need for a child to contribute to the household economic resources (10%); others included the inability of the child to adapt to the preschool context. More DIGEBI/MOE teachers 14 pointed to work barriers as the main reason for the children dropping out of the centers. (See Table 37.) Teachers were also asked for the reasons parents gave for having to leave the center. NRM teachers reported that among the more frequently mentioned reasons parents provided for their child having to leave the childcare center were to help parents with their work (27%); due to an illness (23%) and because the child did not want to attend school (19%). DIGEBI and MOE teachers also mentioned the same first two responses (parental work￾36%) (child’s illness -36%) but also added the lack of economic resources (18%) as another frequently mentioned response given by their parents. Teachers across all programs strongly believed that it is important to use the local culture in the classroom. They were also asked how they incorporate the local culture in their classroom. Table 38 below notes the reasons teachers provided for using local culture. For the majority (58%) of the NRM teachers, use of the local culture demonstrates a value for the indigenous culture. DIGEBI/MOE teachers were more varied in their responses. They added that in addition to acknowledging it’s value (37%), use of the local culture leads to an understanding of the culture (27%) and ease of learning (18%). Table 38. Reasons Provided by Teachers for Using Local Culture in the Classroom Reasons for Use of Local Culture NRM Teachers DIGEBI & MOE Teachers Helps to value and maintain local culture 58% 37% Children want to learn 4 9 Facilitates learning 8 18 So they will not feel shame 4 9 To learn & understand their culture 15 27 To learn respect for customs & language 8 0 To prevent their becoming racist 3 0 TOTAL 100% (26) 100% (11) All teachers in all programs claimed to use some aspect of the local culture in their centers. The majority (54%) of the NRM teachers cited use of language, food and dress as the more common manner of incorporating the local culture into their center. Teachers from DIGEBI/MOE also mentioned that they use Quiché in the classroom in addition to using food, customs and dress. (See Table 39.) Teachers were also asked if they make use of the local cultures in their classrooms. Again, the more frequently reported manner of use of the local culture in the NRM classroom was by incorporating use of dress and home language (26%) and speaking about the customs (18%). DIGEBI/MOE teachers reported that they talk about the customs (28%), use of dress and use the home language in the classroom (18%). (See Table 40.) NRM teachers were asked if they were also members of APEDIBIMI. All teachers noted that they did belong to the organization and that they attend the organization’s meetings. When asked what they saw as the objectives of the organization, the more frequent 15 responses provided by teachers were that APEDIBIMI functioned to strengthen early childhood education (28%); to promote rural education (24%); to monitor the quality of teaching (16%) as well as to create a more professional cadre of teachers (16%). NRM teachers were asked for the frequency of meetings of the organization. Most (56%) mentioned that the organization met once or twice per month. Finally, NRM teachers were asked to how they participated in the organization. The three most mentioned participatory strategies were that they voiced their opinions (23%); they attend the meetings (19%); and they voice opinions and give it support (11%). NRM teachers were also asked if they were members of the center’s Board of Directors. The majority of the teachers reported that they were not on the Board (77%). When asked what were the functions of the Board of Directors, the more frequent response among the NRM teachers was that the Board served as coordinator with other institutions and took measures to acquire resources (37%). C. Parent Interviews Interviews were also conducted with parents of children in the different centers. Interviews were conducted with 52 parents in NRM locations; 34 parents in DIGEBI locations and 12 parents in MOE locations. This section of the report addresses findings regarding background of the parents, their participation in the center, their perception of knowledge of decision-making mechanism in the center, and their perceptions of the achievements. 2. Background Parents were asked about their educational achievements and reading and writing skills. A slight majority of the interviewees were female except for the MOE centers. Additionally, the great majority of the respondents in NRM and DIGEBI locations self-identified as Indigenous while half of those in MOE communities saw themselves as being Indigenous; one third of MOE respondents reported a dual ethnicity while 17% identified themselves as Non-Indigenous. (See Tables 41-43.) Parents were asked about their educational careers. Most of the parents in NRM locations (52%) and many (47%) in DIGEBI schools reported not having attended school. More of the MOE parents had higher levels of education than those in the other programs. Though many had low levels of formal schooling, many of the NRM (50%) respondents and the majority in the other locations reported an ability to read and write. The majority in NRM and MOE locations also noted that their spouses could read and write. This was not the case for DIGEBI locations where only 36 percent of the respondents reported that their spouses had reading and writing capabilities. (See Tables 44-45.) Parents were asked for their occupation as well. Many housewives were found among the interviewees. NRM and DIGEBI center also had numerous respondents who were farm 16 laborers and house cleaners. More MOE respondents described their occupations as business people or some other unspecified category. (See Table 46.) 2. Parent Participation in the Centers Parents were asked if they participated in the preschool center activities. All the parents in the NRM centers reported having participated at some point during the year. Although more DIGEBI and MOE location parents reported participating more frequently, more of them also noted that they had never participated in the center activities. (See Table 47.) Parents were asked for the reasons why they might have difficulty participating in activities at a center. NRM parents noted that work was the major factor making participation difficult. Parents in the other two programs were not specific about what made it difficult for them to participate. (See Table 48.) When asked for the type of activity in which they had participated, the majority of parents in all the programs reported that they had attended a meeting at the center. Additionally, the majority of NRM (64%) and DIGEBI (59%) parents also reported that they had attended a workshop at the center. (See Table 49.) An additional question probed for specific types of parental participation in the centers. As demonstrated in the table below, the majority of NRM parents reported that they had taken part in activities such as making decisions about the center and in food preparation. Some differences are apparent across the programs. For example, more MOE parents than those in the other programs serve as members in committees; and more MOE and DIGEBI parents contribute economic support. However, more NRM parents than those in the other programs reported taking part in extracurricular activities, in center improvements, and in food preparation. Table 50. Specific Types of Activities Where the Parent has Participated - Aided Type of Activity Where Parent Participated NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Member of committee 17% 12% 45%% Decisions about center 63% 30% 54% Construction or repairs 73% 55% 73% Academic activities 4% 3% 9% Extracurricular activities 67% 36% 54% Other improvements 77% 36% 73% Economic support 89% 97% 100% Food preparation 94% 64% 0 Program evaluation 19% 12% 18% Parents were also asked whether they had participated in workshops, as noted previously. More parents in all programs reported having attended workshops on health and nutrition 17 than for any other topics. In fact, the majority of NRM parents (71%) and all MOE ones reported that they had attended workshops related to health issues. (See Table 51.) Parents were asked why they had visited his/her child’s classroom at the center, and they provided a number of reasons. The major reason across all programs was to learn about their child’s progress in the center. Another important reason for having visited a child’s room was due to the teacher having requested a meeting. (Table 52.) 3. Center Administration Parents were asked about the administration of the center, especially about how the local Parent’s Committee functions. In Table 53 below, it is evident that the majority of NRM (62%) and MOE (92%) parents believe that the Parent Committee is elected by them. DIGEBI parents displayed some confusion as to how this committee is chosen. Table 53. Knows how the Education Committee is Chosen Knows How Ed Committee is Chosen NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Elected by parents 62% 35% 92% Appointed by community 19 35 0 Don’t know 19 30 8 Total 100% (52) 100% (34) 100% (12) When asked what they perceive as the function of the Parent Committee, some of the NRM (28%) and DIGEBI (24%) parents reported that they did not know its function. More MOE (59%) and DIGEBI (35%) parents saw it as assuring the operation of the center. (See Table 54.) 3. Perception of Child Gains Parents were asked if they saw their children acquiring skills or exhibiting developmental growth as a result of their being in the center. Additionally, they were asked what, if any, benefits their child had received from their attending the preschool. The overwhelming majority of parents in all programs perceived gains in their children as a consequence of their attending a preschool. (See Table 55.) Parents were also asked why they believe that their child has benefited from the preschool experience. For the most part, parents in all programs reported benefits related to improvements in the child’s abilities to read, write, count, to express himself/herself and in terms of intellectual growth. NRM parents reported a greater variety of benefits than parents in the other programs. When asked which of these was the most important benefit, again parents reported benefits related to preparing the child for the basic grades. More DIGEBI and MOE parents reported that everything about the preschool experience was beneficial. (See Tables 56 and 57.) 18 4. Parental Ratings of Centers Parents were asked to rate different aspects of their respective centers including the teacher’s attendance, punctuality and dedication; the infrastructure, and the food. The majority of parents in all programs rated a teacher’s attendance, punctuality and dedication as “Good”. However, a greater majority of NRM parents gave their programs a “Good” rating than did those from the other two programs. (See Table 58 to 60.) Across all programs, the majority of parents also rated their teacher’s level of education as “Good”. Although the majority of parents also perceived their teacher’s knowledge of child development as “good”, nearly 1 in 4 saw it as ‘regular’. (See Tables 61 and 62.) Finally, parents were asked to rate the food served to the children as well as the physical site where the children were housed. Again, the majority of NRM parents rated both aspects of the program as ‘good’. However, more negative ratings were noted for these aspects, as well. As is evident in Tables 63 and 64, Snacks and the Installations were perceived by some parents as ‘bad’. This was especially the case for DIGEBI and MOE program snacks. Table 63. Parent’s Perceptions of Snacks Rating of Snacks/Food NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Good 69% 59% 42% Regular 25 23 50 Bad 6 18 8 TOTAL 100% (52) 100% (34) 100% (12) Table 64. Parent’s Perceptions of Preschool Installations Rating of Physical Installations NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Good 62% 38% 33% Regular 36 41 67 Bad 2 21 0 TOTAL 100% (52) 100% (34) 100% (12) Finally, parents were asked how they perceived the teacher’s relationship with their respective child. NRM parents were positive in their responses; they rated the teacher’s relationship as ‘very good’ (17%) or ‘good’ (75%). The majority of parents in the other programs rated it as “good”. Table 65. Parent’s Perceptions of Teacher’s Relationship with His/Her Child Rating of Teacher’s Relationship with child NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Very Good 17% 0% 0% Good 75 91 100 Regular 2 6 0 19 Bad 2 3 0 Don’t Know 4 0 0 TOTAL 100% (52) 100% (34) 100% (12) D. Board of Directors Interviews Interviews were also conducted with members of the Board of Directors of the different centers. Interviews were conducted with 26 Board members in NRM locations; with 14 in DIGEBI locations and with 6 in MOE locations. This section of the report addresses findings regarding background of the members, their participation in the center, their perception of knowledge of decision-making mechanisms in the center, and their perceptions of the achievements. 1. Background Background information was collected on all members of the Board of Directors interviewed for the study. As is evident in the table below, most of the respondents were men with more of the DIGEBI respondents having been men. As with the previous respondents, the majority of the NRM and DIGEBI respondents identified themselves as of Indigenous ethnicity while MOE Board members reported their ethnicities as either Non￾Indigenous or as being both. (See Tables 66 & 67.) Respondents were also asked about the highest levels of education that they had completed as well as about their reading and writing capabilities. NRM board members reported lower levels of education than those in the other programs. MOE Directors reported having completed higher levels of primary school than members of either of the other two programs. Additionally, it was found that the majority of Board members have reading and writing capabilities although less of the NRM members reported such capabilities. Interestingly, more NRM spouses were reported to have reading and writing capabilities than those from the DIGEBI programs. (See Tables 68 and 69.) Table 71 presents information on the occupation of the respondents. The category of occupation reported most frequently across all programs was farm laborer. They were the majority (54%) of respondents in the NRM program. More MOE board members described their occupation as housewife than did those in the other programs. Finally, DIGEBI board members had the greatest variety occupations. (See Table 70.) 2. Roles and Responsibilities Board members were asked about their participation in the centers, including their functions and responsibilities on the board was well as about those of the parent committees. Respondents represented the gamut of officers on the board of directors. When asked about their responsibilities, most board members saw their duties encompassing a variety of tasks. Three frequently mentioned duties across all programs were the management of funds, the 20 need to work with other board members, and the general management of the center. There were some differences in the emphasis placed across programs as DIGEBI board members also reported that improving the learning experience was one of their functions. MOE members reported orienting other board members as another responsibility. (See Tables 71 & 72.) When asked to identify the functions of the Centers’ Education Committees, board members frequently mentioned that these serve to monitor the center’s needs; in fact, this was the majority response among DIGEBI and MOE members. Another common response for NRM board members was that the committees assured the functioning of the preschool (27%). Another function attributed to the committees by NRM and MOE board members was that they were there to support the teachers. The majority of DIGEBI and MOE members stated that the committees were there to monitor center needs and meet with the teachers. (See Table 73.) When asked if they knew how the education committees were chosen, the majority of NRM and DIGEBI members reported that the committee was appointed by the community. All MOE members noted that committees were elected by a center’s parents. (See Table 74.) 3. Board Participation in the Centers Board members were asked about their participation in the activities in the preschools. Members reported that they had participated in some type of activity. All NRM and MOE board members reported that they had visited the classrooms, and the majority in all programs noted that they attended a parent meeting. More NRM and DIGEBI respondents, though, indicated that they had never participated in a parent meeting. Additionally, board members were asked if they had difficulties participating in their centers’ activities. The majority of NRM and MOE respondents indicated that they had no difficulties participating. Half of the DIGEBI members indicated that there were difficulties for them. (See Tables 75 & 77.) Those who mentioned that they had difficulties participating were asked to identify the major barriers to their participation. Work was the most frequently cited barrier across all programs. (See Table 78.) All board members were asked to identify activities where other members of the community are engaged in at the centers. Among the clearly specified activities mentioned were that community members help with their economic contributions to the center. DIGEBI members, though, cited the community member’s attendance at meetings as the more frequent response. (See Table 79.) They were also asked if they knew of the various workshops that had taken place at the centers and if they had attended any workshop. The majority of NRM (85%) and DIGEBI (71%) board members reported knowing about the workshops. None of the MOE member knew of workshops at their centers. Additionally, the great majority of NRM (91%) and DIGEBI (90%) had attended a workshop. (See Tables 80 and 81.) 21 Board members were asked which workshops they had attended. NRM members attended a greater variety of workshops and more NRM members attended workshops than did those in the other programs. Among the workshops board members reported attending are those related to health and center management. More DIGEBI members reported attending nutrition and health workshops. (See Table 82.) Board members were asked for their reasons for visiting the various centers. Of the clearly￾stated reasons, the one mentioned more frequently across all programs was to know about a child’s progress in the center. Another frequent reason given by members in all programs was to meet a teacher’s request. NRM and DIGEBI board members also mentioned that they visit their respective centers to demonstrate support for the teacher. (See Table 83.) 4. Perceptions of Achievements Board members were asked for their perceptions regarding the teachers at the centers and for their general impressions of the preschool. The majority of members in all programs rated the attendance of the teachers at the center as “good”. More of those in DIGEBI centers rated teacher attendance this way. Also, the majority in all programs also rated teacher punctuality and their dedication “good” as well. (See Tables 84 to 86.) Board members were asked for their perceptions of the teachers’ levels of education at their respective centers. Again, the majority rated them as “good” although less DIGEBI members rated them as high. When asked to rate them on their knowledge of child development, a change is noted. Although the majority rates the knowledge as “good”, less of them do so. Additionally, some DIGEBI members rated such knowledge as “bad”. (See Tables 87-88.) Board members were asked to rate the food provided to children as well as the center installations. Though the majority of NRM and DIGEBI members rated the food as “good”, there were some DIGEBI members who classified it as “bad”. The majority of MOE members scored the food as ‘regular’. (See Table 89.) Respondents were asked about the installations as well. The physical sites were generally rated as ‘regular’ with 29 percent of DIGEBI members classifying their facilities as ‘bad’. (See Table 90.) 5. Benefits of the Center Board members were asked if they presently had children at the preschool or if they had ever enrolled one of their children in the center. Also, they were asked if the child was presently enrolled in a school. Finally, members were asked to cite if and how the child had benefited from the preschool experience. The majority of members of NRM (81%) and DIGEBI (71%) members had children at the center where they served as a board member. Only half of the MOE respondents had 22 children at their centers. Also, those who had had children at the center reported that their child was enrolled in school. Only a few NRM members indicated that their child was no longer in school. (See Table 91-92.) All members who reported having children enrolled in school noted that the preparation received in the preschool had helped the child. NRM members reported that the program had helped their child as s/he had learned to read/write/count (39%), had overcome shyness (33%) or was made ready for school (17%). (See Tables 93-94.) Board members were also asked whether they saw any improvements in their community due to the existence of the center. All members in the NRM and DIGEBI programs and the majority of the MOE members reported that they had noted improvements. The more frequent response in terms of the community improvements reported as a consequence of the center was that the children were getting good results in the primary school levels. Another frequent response was that the center had stimulated learning and the children’s development. (See Tables 95-96.) Members were asked if they would send another child to the center. All members in all programs responded positively to the query. Among the reasons provided for wanting another child in a center was that the children learn many things. NRM members also stressed that the children receive an early education (17%) and learn to socialize (17%). DIGEBI board members noted that children would learn to read and write (38%) and would gain problem-solving skills (15%); MOE members also noted that the child would gain an early education (32%). (See Tables 97-98.) Very few responses were noted regarding negative aspects of the Center. For example, only 8 responses for NRM centers, 9 for DIGEBI and 1 for MOE centers were about something that the Board member did not like. The more commonly mentioned aspects that were not liked according to Board members were as follows: the maintenance and cleanliness of the NRM centers; for DIGEBI, classrooms in poor conditions, poor maintenance and cleanliness of the centers, and that younger children played with the older ones; and MOE responses were limited to the poor maintenance and cleanliness of the site. (See Tables 99- 100.) E. Community Member Findings Interviews were also conducted with members of the respective communities where the local centers were located. Interviews were conducted with 30 community members in NRM locations; 18 DIGEBI locations and 6 MOE locations. This section of the report addresses findings regarding background of the community members, the nature of their participation in the center and their view on the influence of the center on the community. 1. Background Community members were asked about their educational achievements and reading and writing skills. The tables below compare backgrounds for community respondents from 23 NRM and the other two programs. The majority of interviewees in all programs were male. Most of the respondents in NRM and DIGEBI locations self-identified as Indigenous while half of those in MOE communities saw themselves as being of both Non-Indigenous and Indigenous ethnicity. (See Tables 101-102.) Community residents also reported their educational backgrounds. Note that across NRM and DIGEBI communities in the study, the majority of the respondents reported that they had not attended school. Another large number had less than a third grade education. MOE respondents were different in this regard; 50 percent reported that they had beyond a primary level education. In terms of reading and writing capabilities, the majority of respondents in NRM and MOE locations and only 50 percent of the DIGEBI ones indicated that they can read and write. Except for MOE preschool community respondents, less than one in four of respondents’ spouses were noted as being able to read and write. The majority (65%) of spouses in MOE locations were reported as being able to read and write. (See Tables 103-104.) Community residents also reported on their occupational categories. Respondent occupations are similar for the NRM and DIGEBI locations with the more frequently reported category of occupations being farm laborer and housewife. Other types of jobs noted were day laborer (11%) and house cleaner (10%) in NRM communities and house cleaner (17%) in DIGEBI locations. MOE communities had a greater variety of occupations reported. (See Table 105.) 2. Knowledge about the Centers Respondents were asked if they were aware of the centers in their respective communities and what they might know about the centers. They were also asked about their participation in the centers. the majority of NRM (77%) and DIGEBI (89%) respondents reported that they knew about the preschools in their communities while only 33 percent of the MOE respondents reported knowing about their centers. When asked what they knew about their centers, respondents in all groups provided a number of different responses. NRM community members provided a greater variety of responses than did respondents from either of the other two programs. More of the specific responses provided by the NRM (20%) and DIGEBI (28%) community respondents noted that the preschools provided a place where the children are able to gain early reading and writing skills. DIGEBI and MOE respondents also noted that preschools prepare children for entering the first grade. (See Tables 106-107.) 3. Perception of the Value of Early Childhood Education Community residents were asked if they believed children should attend an educational center prior to entering first grade. Almost all of the respondents in NRM and all of the MOE ones believe that all children should attend school prior to enrolling in first grade. The majority (67%) of community respondents in DIGEBI locations also reported this opinion. Close to half of the NRM respondents reported that a child should go to school prior to first grade since this experience will serve as the base for first grade and/or will 24 permit the child to learn to read, write and study. Additionally, NRM respondents also believe that preschools help children lose their fears prior to entering the primary grades. DIGEBI and MOE respondents also note that the preschools prepare the children for first grade by providing the needed reading, writing and studying skills. (See Tables 108-109) 4. Participation in the Centers Community residents were asked about their participation in their respective centers. The majority of DIGEBI (61%) and more MOE (50%) community respondents than NRM (48%) indicated that they do participate in their preschool centers. (See Tables 110.) They were also asked for the types of activities they have been involved in at their respective centers. NRM community members mentioned a wider range of activities in which they have been involved. More (31%) reported having been involved in sports activities than any others. More respondents from the DIGEBI (72%) and MOE (67%) reported having attended fiestas. (See Table 111.) Respondents were asked if they attend meetings at the Center. More MOE (67%) than those in either of the other two programs reported doing so. Also, when asked how often they attend meetings, DIGEBI and MOE respondents reported that they usually attend meetings on a monthly or more than monthly basis. NRM respondents indicated that they attend on a quarterly or bi-annual basis. (See Tables 112-113.) 5. Benefits of the Center Respondents were asked whether they perceived that the community had improved as a consequence of the presence of the center. The overwhelming majority of community members across all programs reported that their community was better due to the center. When asked how they perceived that the community had improved, NRM respondents reported that children were more alert (26%) or had learned to read and write (26%). A slight majority of DIGEBI respondents related the benefit to children having learned to read and write. MOE respondents reported that the mere presence of the center was a benefit to the community as there had been no preschool in the community prior to this one. (See Tables 114-115.) E. Preschool Installations A separate observation form was developed to record the characteristics of the physical site including the type of materials used to construct the preschool, the availability of water, electric energy, and to explore the presence of specific events at the preschool. The subsections that follow present information on these aspects of the evaluation. The preschools did differ in the materials used for their construction. The majority of NRM preschools had fiberglass roofs and tile flooring. DIGEBI preschools varied more than the others in the types of roofs they had, whereas most (67%) MOE locations had corrugated 25 sheet metal roofs. Also, all MOE preschools and the majority of the others were constructed of cinder blocks although there was more variation in the construction materials used in NRM and DIGEBI settings. (See Tables 116-118.) All locations had a bathroom and the great majority also had separate kitchens and outside play areas. Less NRM locations were reported with these two elements. The majority of all locations also were noted to have tap water although a few NRM (8%) and DIGEBI (13%) locations were reported to have no water at all. When examined for the availability of electric energy, most NRM (85%) and all DIGEBI and MOE communities where the preschools were located were noted to have electric energy. Also, the majority of preschools were also reported to have electric energy. However, less NRM preschools than those of the other programs were reported as having electricity. (See Tables 119-121.) The School Observation Form also permitted recording of selected school processes such as when the preschool day began and ended, and on the presence of parents in the preschool. Class starting and ending times were compared. The actual starting and ending times were compared to the posted schedules and those times when the teacher initiated a task with the children and ended the tasks for the day. As is evident in Table 122, the majority of preschools were seen to start and end classes on schedule. Less NRM classrooms than those in other programs started and ended on the scheduled times. Table 122. Characteristics of Preschool Processes Observed in Preschool NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Class starts on scheduled time 92% 100% 100% Class ends on scheduled time 92% 100% 100% Number of Preschools (13) (8) (3) The form also allowed for collecting information on the presence of parents in the preschool. The majority of MOE preschools were seen to have a father working in the preschool on the day the observer visited the site where only 23 percent of NRM and no DIGEBI fathers were observed working at the preschool. Mothers working at the site were observed in the majority of NRM (77%) and MOE (67%) preschools. (See Table 123.) The form permitted distinguishing between parents involved in work and parents involved in meetings with the teachers. Again, as is evident in the table, few fathers were observed meeting with teachers. More of them, though, were noticed in MOE and NRM preschools than DIGEBI locations. Few incidents of mothers meeting with teachers were recorded across all the locations. More NRM mothers meeting with teachers were recorded for NRM than DIGEBI preschools. Overall, more mothers than fathers were noted participating in NRM and DIGEBI preschools. (See Table 123.) The form permitted documenting the hygiene practices at the different sites. All children in NRM classrooms were observed washing hands while the majority in each of the other two 26 programs also engaged in this behavior. All children in DIGEBI programs were observed brushing their teeth where the majority in either the NRM or the MOE programs were not observed in this activity. Finally, all children in the DIGEBI and MOE programs and the majority in NRM locations were recorded combing their hair. (See Table 124.) The School Observation Form allowed establishing the average length of the preschool day. As Table 126 demonstrates, NRM preschools had the shortest preschool day with the average day being 3 ½ hours. The other programs averaged over 30 minutes more in their preschool day. Table 125. Characteristics of Preschool Day* Observed in Preschool NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Average length of observed time on task 3 hours 30 minutes 4 hours 40 minutes 4 hours 5 minutes * Recording was initiated when the teacher began a task with the children. 27 III. Conclusions This section of the report some conclusions specific to aspects of the program examined in the evaluation project as well as more general conclusions about the NRM preschool program. The evaluation examined selected components of the NRM program and compared these to programs in DIGEBI and MOE preschools although some aspects of the early childhood education program were examined solely for the NRM preschools. A. Specific Conclusions 1. Attendance and Dropouts It was seen that attendance at the NRM preschools was high usually fluctuating close to 90 percent for all age groups. Enrollment was also high with close to 9 out of 10 children attending the NRM centers. However, there appeared a tendency for boys to drop out of the preschools at an earlier age than girls. 2. Classroom Processes Interactions in Learning Contexts: All programs made use of different contexts during the preschool day however, there were only three contexts that appeared across all programs: free play, large groups and small groups. NRM preschools, though, were seen to include a greater variety of contexts in their preschool day. Also, more child-initiated interactions were noted during a large group activity in all programs. NRM preschool children, though, were found to initiate more interactions during free play and individual as well as in settings outside of the classroom. Target of Interaction: Children tend to initiate most of their interactions with the teacher, regardless of the program. More children in DIGEBI and NRM classrooms, though, tend to initiate interactions with individuals other than the teacher. This may mean that there is less focus on the teacher as the focal point of learning. Use of Language: It was evident that both NRM and DIGEBI preschools made frequent use of Mayan languages. Most of the interactions initiated by children in these two programs were in a Mayan language. When considering interactions that included both languages, nearly three in four interactions included a Mayan language element. This contributes to creating a friendly and welcoming environment that fosters learning. Task Involvement: Children were generally involved in some task when they were observed initiating an interaction. Additionally, children were observed usually following instructions during an interaction. These findings coupled with the reliance on Large Group contexts for managing the preschool day support the notion that the classrooms still tend to be teacher￾centered rather than learner centered. This may imply a need for further training of NRM preschool teachers to assure that they understand the concept of making a classroom learner-centered, and that they are comfortable implementing the different activities to focus the preschool classroom on the child. 28 B. Teacher Findings Background: The teachers in the study shared similar backgrounds. For example, most were bilingual teachers who lived close to the preschool centers where they worked. There were some notable differences. Teachers in NRM preschools were found to have been working in their centers much less time than their MOE and DIGEBI counterparts. Additionally, their professional development was less than MOE and DIGEBI teachers given that the latter tended to be certified preschool teachers. Given the lower levels of experience and training among NRM teachers, they appear to have equaled their counterpart teachers in the other two programs and bested them in some instances with regard to how they manage the children. Preschool Day Activities: Teachers in NRM centers appear to structure more activities related to practice (trial and error); these types of events tend to foster interactions, free expression and discovery-type of knowledge (active learning). DIGEBI and MOE centers appear more traditional as interactions reflected more activities of a school-readiness type focused on language development and readying/writing events. Planning is a key aspect in organizing the preschool-day activities for all teachers. Also, teachers reported using materials in carrying out their daily activities. Their parent organizations appear to be an important source of materials although DIGEBI and MOE teachers, perhaps reflecting greater access to resources, appear to use a greater variety of traditional classroom materials than NRM teachers. NRM teachers, though, appear to have a greater variety of sources for their materials and seem to make greater use of the local resources easily found around their environment. This may mean that NRM teachers have learned to become more resourceful than their counterparts in acquiring materials for classroom use. From the school observation form, it was found that children were following hygienic procedures as observed events included the washing of hands, brushing of teeth and combing of hair. Less events related to the brushing of teeth and combing of hair were found for NRM preschools than for the other programs. Training: All teachers reported that they had received some type of training prior to becoming teachers, and they have applied the information in their classrooms. Despite the fact that NRM teachers had been at their position less time than their counterparts, they have received training in a greater variety of issues than have their DIGEBI and MOE counterparts. Teaching and Learning Strategies: Teachers were concerned principally about the children’s difficulties in acquiring and using the Spanish language. Another important concern was assuring that children knew how to use a pencil. It seems then that the focus of the educational effort across all programs is on ‘school readiness’ factors. Teachers mentioned a variety of teaching strategies although use of games and use of examples appeared to be used by more of the teachers regardless of the program. There was little difference in the importance given to the various teaching strategies except for the 29 involvement of parents and the community in the classroom. NRM teachers gave more value to the use of parents and the community in the center than did their counterparts. Additionally, the use of extracurricular activities as a teaching strategy was also rated low by non-NRM teachers. Finally, there was a difference in emphasis given to which factors play a role in the development of children. NRM teachers focused their views equally on those factors that provide for the physical needs of children as well as those that influence their intellectual and social development. MOE and DIGEBI teachers gave greater emphasis to the need for children to socialize and to parental involvement. However, there was little socialization noted in MOE and DIGEBI classrooms noted in the interactions while more child-teacher and child-child interactions were reported in NRM preschools. This may indicate a difference in fundamental perspectives among the teachers in the various programs. That is, NRM teachers may be led toward a more holistic view of child development given their emphasis on creativity, learning as fun and as an active process through games and interaction. Although there was a difference in the nature of the interactions and the contexts in which these occurred, there was little difference in the types of strategies used by the teachers in the different programs. Thus, we would not expect to find much difference in the nature of the classroom interactions. Also, this may indicate a need for further training to permit teachers to gain a better understanding of how to translate the teaching concepts into practice. Parental Participation: Teachers value parental participation in the center and tend to use personal approaches (visits; invitations) as a means of getting them involved with the center. Familial problems perceived by teachers differed across the programs. Poverty and illness were more frequently mentioned as those factors that most affected the children and their families. DIGEBI/MOE teachers cited familial disintegration as the big factor for their families. NRM teachers took a more individualistic approach to assistance preferring to talk with the families or provide emotional support for a child. DIGEBI/MOE teachers also talked with families; along with that they also attempted to enlist assistance through other institutions. More parents were observed in Teachers acknowledged that children had left the center. The main reason given for the situation was an economic one: children had to help their parents with some form of economic resources. Use of Culture: Teachers give importance to the use of the local culture in the center and the classroom. They noted that use of the local culture demonstrates the value they give it. Also, use of the local culture contributes to its maintenance. They seem to incorporate deeper elements of the culture (language, customs and dress) in the center as well as the classroom rather than just symbolic elements (e.g., pictures, celebration of holidays). Decision-making: Most NRM teachers did were not members of the Board of Directors for the centers where they worked. Networks: Most NRM teachers were members of APEDIBIMI and attended meetings of the organization. 30 C. Parent Findings Parents in NRM and DIGEBI schools were similar in terms of occupation, ethnicity and educational levels. MOE respondents tended to be different as more of them identified themselves as non-indigenous and reported having higher levels of education. NRM centers appear to foster greater parent participation than either of the other two programs. All parents reported having participated in some activity, usually a meeting, in an NRM center while more parents in the other programs reported never having participated in a preschool event. NRM parents did note that their major difficulty in participating in the center activities was due to work. NRM staff may want to review the scheduling of activities to identify times and days that may be more amenable to parental participation. Unfortunately, parental participation is still mired in the care and upkeep of the center rather in decision-making. NRM centers, though, appear to facilitate parental participation in this aspect more than the other programs. Parents in all programs saw their child having benefited from their preschool experience. Many saw them as having developed their intellectual capacity as well as their social skills and thus having prepared the child for entering the primary grades. Parents, then, may be a good source of support for advocacy in efforts to acquire more public resources for early childhood education given their positive attitudes toward the programs. Parents rated the various aspects of their programs highly. NRM parents generally rated all aspects of their program higher than did parents from the other two programs. Also, they gave fewer negatives ratings than did the parents from DIGEBI and MOE centers. This indicates that NRM parents are satisfied with those aspects of the program that were examined in this study including the teachers and the physical setting. NRM staff, though, may want to look at the physical sites and food to examine why parents gave these two program aspects less than glowing support. D. Board of Directors Board members were overwhelmingly men. NRM members tended to have lower levels of education and less of them reported reading and writing capabilities. Given the background of the parents, NRM Board members appear to reflect more closely their communities and their constituents in the schools than do Board members from either of the other two programs. Board members saw their responsibilities as assuring the functioning of the centers. In carrying out this duty, they noted that they supported the teachers and monitored the funding for the center. Little difference was noted across programs on the perceived roles and responsibilities. Board members had participated in the preschool activities. They reported attending parent meetings and visiting the center to monitor children’s progress or at the request of teachers. 31 NRM and DIGEBI members also indicated that they had attended workshops in center management, health and nutrition. Board members appear to be pleased with the teacher’s attendance, punctuality and dedication. However, they do not appear to be as satisfied with their capabilities, although NRM members appear to be less critical than those of the other programs. This may indicate a need to review board members perceptions to identify how these were shaped and to rectify through additional training any negative perceptions or actual teacher deficiency. Finally, all members are more critical of the food and installations than of any other aspect of the program. This is especially evident in the MOE programs. Board members in NRM and DIGEBI centers had children attending the centers. For the most part, they believed that the centers had prepared their children for the primary level by teaching them to read or write, by helping them to lose their fears (socio-emotionally) or by just getting them ready for school. Like parents, board members seem to see the preschools as a means to get their child prepared for the primary levels and want to see the child gain the skills needed to succeed in the later schooling. They appear supportive of the early childhood education concept as they note they are willing to send their other children to the centers and have few negative things to say about the preschools. E. Community Interviews Community members in NRM and DIGEBI communities were aware of the centers in their locations. They generally saw that the centers were beneficial to their communities noting that the preschools prepared children for their educational careers by serving as places where children are taught to acquire reading and writing skills at an early age. NRM and MOE community members more than DIGEBI ones were supportive of the idea that children should attend preschool prior to their entering a formal school setting. Generally, respondents across all programs note that the preschools provide the school- readiness skills necessary for preparing the child for primary level work (lose fears, study skills, use of materials; serve as the base for 1 st grade). For NRM and DIGEBI parents, though, the preschools also served as a place to acquire Spanish-language capabilities. Less NRM community members attend meetings at these centers than do DIGEBI or MOE members. Additionally, the latter attend more meetings and on a more frequent basis than do NRM residents. All respondents saw community benefits due to the preschool. NRM respondents linked the community improvements to improvements for the children themselves (alertness; acquiring skills) as did the DIGEBI respondents. MOE respondents were simply happy to have a center for the community where none had existed before. F. Installations The buildings were constructed of similar materials. NRM preschools tended to have fiberglass roofs and tile floors while the other programs use a variety of materials. Walls 32 tended to be of cinderblocks although lumber and adobe were also used in NRM and DIGEBI sites. Preschools tended to have separate kitchen and bathroom facilities and outside play areas. Generally, tap water and electricity were available. General Conclusions ÿ NRM centers were characterized by the use of a greater variety of contexts and by more child-initiated interactions. Although NRM children interacted mainly with the teacher, there were more interactions with other children in NRM classrooms than in those of the other programs. Additionally, use of the home language appears to help in creating an environment that fosters interaction. Thus, it appears that NRM children may be experiencing more of the types of learning opportunities that may allow them to practice their language and other social skills. Also, while this may mean that there is still a reliance on a traditional classroom management style with the teacher as the focus of the learning environment, it appears that there is more of a child-centered atmosphere in NRM classrooms than in those of the other preschools programs. NRM staff may want to consider providing further training that will help teachers learn other strategies for making the classroom a more active￾learning environment. ÿ NRM teachers appear to be more receptive to parental participation in the preschools. Their attitudes reflect a more positive attitude toward the concept, and more parents from NRM preschools reported participating in these centers. Also, parents in NRM centers appear to participate more frequently and in a greater variety of activities than do those of the other programs. It appears that NRM preschools have embraced the parental participation concept wholeheartedly and are implementing better than their counterparts. Unfortunately, parental participation seems to be focused on assistance with maintenance of the facilities and food preparations rather than on decision-making activities for the preschool as a whole. This is true for all programs. ÿ There appeared to be high levels of satisfaction with the NRM teachers among parents, Board members and community residents. This was especially the case with issues related to teacher’s attendance, punctuality and dedication to the child. Lower levels of satisfaction were voiced with regard to the physical installations and the food in all programs. ÿ Parents in general appeal to see benefits to early childhood education. However, these benefits are restricted to ‘school readiness’ issues such as preparing the child for reading, mathematics and writing. There appears to be little value given to the socio-emotional aspect of child development. 33 Data Tables An Evaluation of the Early Childhood Education and Preschool Program Implemented by Niños Refugiados del Mundo: Classroom Implementation and Community Participation Final Report June 14, 2001 An Evaluation of the Early Childhood Education and Preschool Program Implemented by Niños Refugiados del Mundo: Classroom Implementation and Community Participation Findings Exhibit D. Attendance and Dropout Rates in NRM Preschools for Boys and Girls NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschools MOE Rates Preschools Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Attendance of children less than 4 years old 91% 92% na na na Na Dropout of children less than 4 years old 13% 4% na na na Na Attendance of children 4-5 years old 89% 95% na na na Na Dropout of children 4-5 years old 17% 7% na na na na Attendance of children 5 – 6 years old 95% 85% 90.0% 81.3% 91.9% 97.4% Dropout for children 5-6 years old 5% 13% 10.0% 18.8% 8.1% 2.6% Attendance of children 6 – 7 years old na Na 96.0% 92.9% 91.3% 94.1% Dropout for children 6-7 years old Na Na 4.0% 7.1% 8.7% 5.9% Attendance of children more than 7 years old Na Na 95.0% 96.8% Na Na Dropout for children more than 7 years old na Na 5.0% 3.2% Na na Classroom Observations Table 1. Comparison of Interactions Observed During the Preschool Day by Contexts and Type of Preschools Contexts NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschools MOE Preschools Free Play 20 % 7 % 14 % Large Group 1 45 62 54 Large Group 2 12 4 N/A Small Group 7 3 11 Individual work 8 23 0 Undefined task 8 1 0 TOTAL 100% (1197) 100% (852) 100% (280) Table 2. Comparison of Interactions Occurring During the Preschool Day within Contexts by Type of Preschools and Gender of Child 2 NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschools MOE Preschool Contexts Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Free Play 20% 21% 6% 7% 14% 15% Large Group 1 45 46 63 61 76 73 Large Group 2 14 9 4 4 N/A N/A Small Group 6 8 4 2 10 12 Individual work 8 7 22 24 0 0 Undefined task 7 9 1 2 0 0 TOTAL 100% (614) 100% (583) 100% (397) 100% (455) 100% (140) 100% (140) 2. Use of Classrooms and Schools Table 3. Location of Student when Observed by Type of School Location NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschools MOE Preschools In classroom 70 % 85 % 75 % Outside classroom 30 15 25 TOTAL 100% (1153) 100% (830) 100% (276) 3. With Whom the Children Interact Table 4. Focus of Interaction by Type of Preschool Subject of Interaction NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschools MOE Preschools Teacher 51 % 40 % 67 % Female student 8 15 3 Male student 10 16 8 Group 9 4 21 No one in particular 22 25 1 TOTAL 100% (1170) 100% (848) 100% (277) Table 5. Focus of Interaction by Type of Preschool and Gender of Child NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschools MOE Preschools Subject of Interaction Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Teacher 51 % 52% 40% 39% 71% 63% Female student 13 4 24 8 6 0 Male student 5 15 10 21 4 13 3 Group 9 8 4 3 18 23 No one in particular 22 21 22 29 1 1 TOTAL 100% (605) 100% (565) 100% (394) 100% (454) 100% (138) 100% (139) 4. Use of Language in Interactions Table 6. Use of Language in Interactions by Type of Preschool Language Used During Interaction NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschools MOE Preschools Maya 57 % 62 % 3 % Spanish 12 15 68 Both 20 14 25 Non-verbal 11 9 4 TOTAL 100% (947) 100% (650) 100% (278) 5. Task Involvement Table 6. Task Involvement by Type of Preschool Involvement in task NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschools MOE Preschool Involved 82 % 86% 99.6% Uninvolved 18 14 .4 TOTAL 100% (1129) 100% (819) 100% (279) 6. Nature of Interactions Table 7. Type of Activity during an Interaction by Type of Preschool - ART Activity NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschools MOE Preschools Paints 2% 3% 8% Free drawing 3% 3% 7% Table 8. Type of Activity - Music Activity NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschools MOE Preschools Sings 11% 4% 24% Plays musical instrument .3% 0% .4% Follows rhythm 2% .4% .4% Table 9. Type of Activity - Socioemotional 4 Activity NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschools MOE Preschools Follows instruction 70% 74% 98% Cries .2% .5% .4% Greets 1% .7% 5% Says Goodbye .7% .2% 6% Observes others 47% 53% 62% Imitates teacher 6% 1% 16% Models 1% .6% 6% Table 10. Type of Activity – Language Development Activity NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschools MOE Preschools Repeats teacher 12% 11% 44% Repeats other student 2% 1% 5% Narrates 1% 5% 0% Asks 3% 5% 0% Listens to teacher 36% 35% 78% Listens to other child 12% 17% 9% Table 11. Type of Activity – Fine and Gross Motor Skills Activity NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschools MOE Preschools Plays 17% 7% 19% Dances 2% .2% 3% Jumps 2% 3% 13% Exercises 2% 2% 41% Table 12. Type of Activity – Pre-mathematics and Cognitive Tasks Activity NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschools MOE Preschools Counts 6% 3% 14% Plays puzzles .1% .1% 1% Groups objects 2% 3% 0% Compares objects 1% 1% 0% Draws geometric figures 3% 3% 6% Identifies 5% 2% 30% Table 13. Type of Activity – Pre-Reading/Writing Activity NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschools MOE Preschools Traces 1% 2% .4% Writes 8% 19% 11% B. Teacher Findings Background Table 14. Languages Reported as Spoken by Teachers Languages Teachers NRM Teachers DIGEBI & MOE 5 Speak Teachers Ixil & Spanish 65% 82% K’iche & Spanish 4 9 Ixil, K’iche & Spanish 31 0 Spanish N/A 9 TOTAL 100% (26) 100% (11) Table 15. Written Language Capabilities reported by the Teachers Language Teachers Write NRM Teachers DIGEBI & MOE Teachers Ixil & Spanish 65% 82% K’iche & Spanish 0 0 Ixil, K’iche & Spanish 8 0 Spanish 27 18 TOTAL 100% (26) 100% (11) Table 16. Teacher Experience and Characteristics Language Teachers Write NRM Teachers DIGEBI & MOE Teachers Mean of years working at the Center 5.08 years 14.45 years Mean of education level when started work as teacher 7.62 N/A Mean of time to travel from home to center 15 minutes 23 minutes 2. Preschool Classroom Activities Table 17. Activities Carried out During the Preschool Day Activities Reported NRM Teachers DIGEBI & MOE Teachers Preparation (reading, math, writing) 4% 18% Games 4% 0 Reading & writing 0 18 Trial and observation (Practice) 42 0 Hygiene & group recital 46 0 Repeat in group 4 0 Language development (Maya & Spanish) 0 55 Art 0 9 TOTAL 100% (26) 100% (11) Table 18. Class Preparation 6 Activities Reported NRM Teachers DIGEBI & MOE Teachers Planning 76% 73% Planning & materials development 24 9 Use of dynamics 0 9 Unit planning 0 9 TOTAL 100% (25) 100% (11) Table 19. Materials Used in Implementing Daily Activities Materials Used NRM Teachers DIGEBI & MOE Teachers Posters & brochures 4% 9% Classroom materials (chalk, etc.) 23 27 Posters and educational materials 11 18 Posters & Local resources (beans, rocks, plants, etc.) 54 28 Posters, blackboard, & ed materials 8 0 Posters & textbooks 0 9 Textbooks 0 9 TOTAL 100% (26) 100% (11) Table 20. How they Obtain Classroom Materials – First Mention Source of Materials NRM Teachers DIGEBI & MOE Teachers Parents & Teachers provide 4% 9% Community provides 8 0 NRM 60 9 Board of Directors 8 Local institution (APEDIBIMI; SENASEP) 12 9 NRM & Teacher 4 0 NRM & parents 4 0 MOE 0 37 DIGEBI 0 9 Teacher makes materials 0 18 NGO donation 0 9 TOTAL 100% (26) 100% (11) Table 21. How they Obtain Classroom Materials – Second Mention Source of Materials NRM Teachers DIGEBI & MOE Teachers Local institution 15% 37% 7 NRM 4 9 Parents & community support 12 18 Teacher makes materials 7 9 MOE 8 0 Uses local resources 39 0 Board of Directors 11 0 Teacher purchases materials 4 0 Rations materials 0 9 No other mention 0 18 TOTAL 100% (26) 100% (11) 3. Training Table 22. Training Courses Received Before Becoming a Preschool Teacher Training Courses Received NRM Teachers DIGEBI & MOE Teachers Motivation 4% 10% Child development 27 10 Learning areas 8 0 Planning 15 0 Language or bilingualism 0 20 Health and nutrition 11 0 Children’s rights 4 0 Reading & writing 0 10 Material development 0 10 Community organizing 4 0 Resource Management 0 10 Physical development of children 0 10 Learning about the home 0 10 Teacher’s role & functions 4 0 No response 23 10 TOTAL 100% (26) 100% (10) Table 23. Training Courses Received After Becoming a Preschool Teacher – First Mention Courses Received DIGEBI & MOE Teachers Self-esteem 27% Reading & writing in Quiché 9 Quality circles in teaching 37 Human relations 9 Planning 9 Working in teams 9 TOTAL 100% (11) 8 Table 24. Training Courses Received After Becoming a Preschool Teacher – Second Mention Courses Received DIGEBI & MOE Teachers Teaching & learning strategies 10% Girl’s education 10 Planning 20 Mental health 20 Quality circles 10 Deforestation 20 Human rights 10 TOTAL 100% (11) Table 25. What Information from Training is Applied in the Classroom Information Applied NRM Teachers DIGEBI & MOE Teachers Improving one’s work 8% 19 Games 8 9 Children’s rights 40 9 Teaching strategies 8 0 Health themes 4 0 Planning strategies 4 0 Psychomotor activities & use of pencil 4 0 Carries out activities in line with what was learned 0 9 Importance of plants 0 9 Reading & writing in home language 0 9 Pre-reading 0 9 Puzzles & skills 0 9 Communication 4 9 Self-esteem 0 9 Courtesy rules 4 0 Personal hygiene 16 0 TOTAL 100% (25) 100% (11) 4. Teaching Strategies Table 26. Teacher Perceptions of What is Difficult for the Children to Do Difficult for Children to Do NRM Teachers DIGEBI & MOE Teachers Reading, writing & manipulation 8% 9% Reading, writing & expression in Spanish 24 18 9 Use of pencil 20 19 Personal hygiene 4 9 Cutting 4 0 Numbers & drawing 8 0 Copy & counting 4 0 Reading, moving & expression 8 0 Writing, speaking & reading 4 0 Writing & comprehension 8 0 Drawing 4 0 Reading/Writing & hygiene 4 0 Follow instructions 0 9 Speaking & counting in Spanish 0 9 Spanish Interpretation & comprehension 0 9 Object manipulation 0 9 Spanish pronunciation 0 9 TOTAL 100% (25) 100% (11) Table 27. How Teacher Reports Helping the Children Ways to Help Children NRM Teachers DIGEBI & MOE Teachers Learning Exercises 53% 30% Reviews 17 10 Practices & examples 4 20 Explains again 13 20 Practices patience 9 0 Use home language to explain 4 0 Objects & games 0 10 Makes parents aware 0 10 TOTAL 100% (23) 100% (10) Table 28. Teaching Strategies Teachers Reported Using Teaching Strategies Reported NRM Teachers DIGEBI & MOE Teachers Questions 4% 9% Drawings 9 9 Examples 30 18 Games, songs, dances 36 28 Posters & experiences 4 0 Drama & slides 9 0 Dual language use 4 9 Socialization 4 0 Audiovisuals 0 9 10 Storytelling 0 9 Participatory techniques for teams 0 9 TOTAL 100% (26) 100% (11) Table 29. Importance Given to Different Teaching Strategies Teaching Strategies Rated as Very Important NRM Teachers DIGEBI & MOE Teachers Use of games 100% 100% Use of group work 92% 82% Parental participation 100% 64% Community & school participation 100% 64% Use of discussion in teaching 100% 91% Use of trial & error 96% 82% Child participation in classroom decisions 96% 91% Training for teachers 96% 91% Extracurricular activities 96% 64% Monitoring visits for teachers 96% 82% Table 30. Factors Viewed as Supporting Child Development Factors that Support Child Development NRM Teachers DIGEBI & MOE Teachers Sports 4% 9% Snack, Food, Nutrition 23 9 Teaching/Learning 15 9 Parental support 4 18 Timeliness 4 9 Personal hygiene 4 0 Comprehension 4 0 Socializing with other children 4 28 Games & active events (dinámicas) 23 0 Use of local resources 4 0 Early childhood programs 4 0 Develop fine & gross motor skills 4 0 Free expression 0 9 Established environment 0 9 No response 3 0 TOTAL 100% (26) 100% (11) 5. Family Participation Table 31. Asks for Parental Participation in Center Asks for Parent Involvement NRM Teachers DIGEBI & MOE 11 Teachers Yes 100% 91% TOTAL 100% (26) 100% (11) Table 32. How Teacher gets Parental Participation Strategies for getting Parents Involved NRM Teachers DIGEBI & MOE Teachers Notice through children 8% 9% Home visits 11 27 Invitation to meetings 35 46 Invitation to participate 15 9 Meetings to discuss child progress 27 0 Has parents send their child 4 0 No response 0 9 TOTAL 100% (26) 100% (11) Table 33. Teacher-perceived Familial Problems Teachers’ Most frequently reported Familial Problem NRM Teachers DIGEBI & MOE Teachers Lack of economic resources 19% 18% Familial arguments 11 18 Illness 35 0 Migration to the coast 4 0 Malnutrition, lack of clothing or hygiene 4 0 Absenteeism 4 0 Will not send child to school 4 0 Alcoholism among parents 0 9 Abuse 0 9 Familial disintegration 0 18 Delay in learning 0 9 No problems perceived 15 0 No response 4 19 TOTAL 100% (26) 100% (11) Table 34. Problems Teachers Report as Most Affecting the Child Teachers’ Perceptions of Problems that Most Affect the Child NRM Teachers DIGEBI & MOE Teachers Malnutrition 4% 27% Child not sent to school 8 9 Alcoholism 3 9 Illness 23 0 12 Lack of parental education 8 0 Poverty 31 0 Familial disintegration 0 37 Absenteeism 8 0 No problems perceived 11 0 No response 4 18 TOTAL 100% (26) 100% (11) Table 35. How the Teacher Helps the Child Teacher reported Strategies for Helping the Child NRM Teachers DIGEBI & MOE Teachers Visits or talks with parents 27% 30 Motivates child 38 10 Advises them 8 20 Calms them 4 10 Has nurse examine child 4 0 Has affordable medicine 4 0 Sends to hospital 4 0 Asks institutions for help 0 20 No response 11 10 TOTAL 100% (26) 100% (10) Table 36. Teacher Perception of Center’s Retention Knowledge of Dropouts during this Year NRM Teachers DIGEBI & MOE Teachers Children have left the center 76% 82% Children have not left the center 24 18 TOTAL 100% (25) 100% (9) Table 37. Reasons Provided by Teachers for Children Having Left the Center Reasons for Children Leaving NRM Teachers DIGEBI & MOE Teachers Help parents with work 10% 37% Migrants 25 0 Lack of economic resources 5 9 Child was too young 15 9 Distance to center 5 0 Cannot adapt to center 15 0 Discouragement 5 0 Illness 10 0 Changed schools 0 9 Lack of space in center 0 9 13 Death of child 0 9 No response 10 18 TOTAL 100% (20) 100% (10) Table 38. Reasons Provided by Teachers for Using Local Culture in the Classroom Reasons for Use of Local Culture NRM Teachers DIGEBI & MOE Teachers Helps to value and maintain local culture 58% 37% Children want to learn 4 9 Facilitates learning 8 18 So they will not feel shame 4 9 To learn & understand their culture 15 27 To learn respect for customs & language 8 0 To prevent their becoming racist 3 0 TOTAL 100% (26) 100% (11) Table 39. Use of local Culture in the Center Aspects of Local Culture Used in the Classroom NRM Teachers DIGEBI & MOE Teachers Ixil language and mathematics 8% 9% Language, food, customs & dress 54 46 Dances 4 9 Musical instruments 15 0 Natural medicine 3 0 Dramas 12 0 Games 4 0 Indigenous name for each child 0 9 Quiché & name for items 0 18 Respect and sharing 0 9 TOTAL 100% (26) 100% (11) Table 40. Teachers’ Reports of how Local Culture is Used in the Classroom How Aspects of Local Culture are Used NRM Teachers DIGEBI & MOE Teachers Always used 4% 9% Participate in fiestas & customs 8 9 Speaking & writing 8 9 Use of dress 4 18 Speaking of & explaining customs 18 28 Use of dress & home language 26 0 Seniors come to tell stories 4 0 Use of traditional dance & dress 8 0 Traditional language & foods 8 0 14 Instruments 8 0 Use of Quiché 0 18 Use of Mayan calendar 0 9 No response 4 0 TOTAL 100% (24) 100% (11) C. Parent Interviews 4. Background Table 41. Gender of Parental Respondents Gender of Respondent NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Females 56% 53% 50% Males 44 47 50 TOTAL 100% (52) 100% (34) 100% (12) Table 42. Relationship of Interviewee to the Child Relationship to Child NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Mother 50% 44% 58% Father 48 50 42 Aunt 2 6 0 TOTAL 100% (52) 100% (34) 100% (12) Table 43. Self-Identification of Ethnicity of Parents Gender NRM Preschools DIBEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Indigenous 96% 100% 50% Non-indigenous 2 0 17 Both 2 0 33 Total 100% (52) 100% (34) 100% (12) Table 44. Highest Level of Education Completed Reported by Parents Educational Level NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Did not attend school 52% 47% 17% First 11 17 0 15 Second 8 0 0 Third 19 12 25 Fourth 4 3 17 Sixth 2 9 8 Basic primary 4 9 0 Beyond primary 0 3 33 Total 100% (52) 100% (34) 100% (12) Table 45. Capacities to Read & Write Can Read & Write NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Respondent 50% 53% 83% Spouse 51% 36% 75% Table 46. Occupation of Parents Occupation NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Housewife 38% 32% 42% Farm laborer 30 29 0 Day laborer 8 0 8 Carpenter 2 6 0 House cleaner 10 18 0 Education promoter 0 3 0 Bricklayer 2 0 0 Weaver 6 3 0 Businessperson 2 3 25 Nurse 0 3 0 Other 2 3 25 Total 100% (52) 100% (34) 100% (12) 2. Parent Participation in the Centers Table 47. Participation in Center Has Respondent Participated in the Center? NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool 1 or 2 times monthly 69% 78% 75% 3 or 4 times monthly 2 4 17 More than 4 monthly 29 6 0 Never participated 0 12 8 TOTAL 100% (52) 100% (33) 100% () 16 Table 48. Difficulties Mentioned for Participating in Center Activities Difficulty Mentioned NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool No time 0% 0% 20% Not a habit 20 0 0 Work 67 0 0 Not given enough notice 7 0 0 Unspecified 6 100 80 Total 100% (15) 100% (11) 100% (5) Table 49. Type of Activity Where the Parent has Participated - Unaided Type of Activity Where Parent Participated NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Meetings 81% 79% 100% Workshop 64% 59% 25% Table 50. Specific Types of Activities Where the Parent has Participated - Aided Type of Activity Where Parent Participated NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Member of committee 17% 12% 45%% Decisions about center 63% 30% 54% Construction or repairs 73% 55% 73% Academic activities 4% 3% 9% Extracurricular activities 67% 36% 54% Other improvements 77% 36% 73% Economic support 89% 97% 100% Food preparation 94% 64% 0 Program evaluation 19% 12% 18% Table 51. Workshops Where the Parent has Participated Type of Workshop Where Parent Participated NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Nutrition 39% 44% 0 Health 71% 50% 100% Center’s program 29% 6% 0 Changes to program 14% 11% 0 Center management 11% 33% 0 Other 21% 67% 0 Table 52. Reasons for Parental Visits to the Preschool Reason for Visiting the Preschool NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool To learn child’s progress 97% 81% 83% Request of teacher 54% 31% 50% Review child’s report 14% 8% 8% 17 To support teacher 14% 11% 0 5. Center Administration Table 53. Knows how the Education Committee is Chosen Knows How Ed Committee is Chosen NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Elected by parents 62% 35% 92% Appointed by community 19 35 0 Don’t know 19 30 8 Total 100% (52) 100% (34) 100% (12) Table 54. Perceived Functions of the Parent Committee at the Center Function of Committee NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Assure operation of center 6% 35% 59% Preparing food 12 9 0 Monitor needs & meet with teacher 8 0 0 Call for meetings 8 9 8 Deal with construction or maintenance 4 7 8 Monitor child’s rights 4 7 0 Monitor educational quality 8 0 0 Fundraising 6 0 17 Monitory security 8 2 8 Monitor teacher 2 7 0 Unspecified 2 0 0 Doesn’t attend meetings 4 0 0 Don’t know/No response 28 24 0 Total 100% (52) 100% (34) 100% (12) 3. Perception of Child Gains Table 55. Parental Perception of Skills Developed in Child Parent Perceives Skill Gains NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Yes 96% 97% 100% No 4 3 0 Total 100% (52) 100% (34) 100% (12) Table 56. Why Perceive a Gain in Child 18 Why Perceive Gain NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Better able to express self 11% 0% 0% Draws, sings, writes 19 12 17 Writes 9 29 17 Learn a lot 4 14 0 Knows about personal hygiene 2 0 0 Reads 2 3 0 Mental development 10 0 0 Learning Spanish 4 3 8 Receives meals 2 0 0 Sings only 10 0 8 Reads & sings 2 0 0 Speaks Spanish, writes numbers, knows songs 4 0 0 Counts mentally 6 0 0 Counts & writes numbers 7 18 33 Develops ideas & shares 4 0 0 Goes to store alone 2 0 0 Only plays 2 0 0 Can tell time 0 3 0 Reads & writes 0 18 0 Other 0 0 17 Total 100% (52) 100% (34) 100% (12) Table 57. Parent Perception of Center’s Most Important Benefit for Child Most Important Benefit NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Intellectual development 11% 3% 8% Personal hygiene 11 0 0 Doing homework 2 0 0 Receives meals 11 29 8 Learned to sing, read, count 10 6 0 Learned to write 8 6 8 Learned Spanish 6 3 8 Learned to read & write 8 15 8 Socio-emotional development 15 9 0 Shares 2 0 8 Self-expression 4 3 Motivated to learn 0 3 8 Active & alert 0 0 8 All is beneficial 6 23 33 19 Unspecified 4 0 0 No benefits 2 0 0 Total 100% (52) 100% (34) 97% (12) 4. Parental Ratings of Centers Table 58. Parent’s Perceptions of Teacher’s Attendance Rating of Teacher’s Attendance NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Good 96% 74% 92% Regular 4 26 8 TOTAL 100% (52) 100% (34) 100% (12) Table 59. Parent’s Perceptions of Teacher’s Punctuality Rating of Teacher’s Punctuality NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Good 94% 94% 83% Regular 6 6 17 TOTAL 100% (51) 100% (34) 100% (12) Table 60. Parent’s Perceptions of Teacher’s Dedication Rating of Teacher’s Dedication NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Good 98% 88% 75% Regular 2 12 25 TOTAL 100% (52) 100% (34) 100% (12) Table 61. Parent’s Perceptions of Teacher’s Level of Education Rating of Teacher’s Attendance NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Good 86% 76% 92% Regular 14 24 8 TOTAL 100% (51) 100% (34) 100% (12) Table 62. Parent’s Perceptions of Teacher’s Knowledge of Child Development Rating of Teacher’s Attendance NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Good 75% 76% 75% Regular 25 24 25 TOTAL 100% (52) 100% (34) 100% (12) 20 Table 63. Parent’s Perceptions of Snacks Rating of Snacks/Food NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Good 69% 59% 42% Regular 25 23 50 Bad 6 18 8 TOTAL 100% (52) 100% (34) 100% (12) Table 64. Parent’s Perceptions of Preschool Installations Rating of Physical Installations NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Good 62% 38% 33% Regular 36 41 67 Bad 2 21 0 TOTAL 100% (52) 100% (34) 100% (12) Table 65. Parent’s Perceptions of Teacher’s Relationship with His/Her Child Rating of Teacher’s Relationship with child NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Very Good 17% 0% 0% Good 75 91 100 Regular 2 6 0 Bad 2 3 0 Don’t Know 4 0 0 TOTAL 100% (52) 100% (34) 100% (12) D. Board of Directors Interviews 2. Background Table 66. Gender of Board Members Gender of Respondent NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Females 23% 7% 33% Males 77 93 67 TOTAL 100% (26) 100% (14) 100% (6) Table 67. Self-Identification of Ethnicity of Board Members Gender NRM DIBEBI MOE 21 Preschools Preschool Preschool Indigenous 96% 86% 33% Non-indigenous 4 7 17 Both 0 7 50 Total 100% (26) 100% (14) 100% (6) Table 68. Highest Level of Education Completed Reported by Board Member Educational Level NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Did not attend school 39% 0% 0% First 11 15 0 Second 11 23 0 Third 8 8 0 Fourth 4 0 0 Sixth 15 38 50 Basic primary 4 8 17 Beyond primary 8 8 33 Total 100% (26) 100% (13) 100% (6) Table 69. Capacities to Read & Write Can Read & Write NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Respondent 73% 100% 100% Spouse 40% 29% 67% Table 70. Occupation of Board Member Occupation NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Housewife 19% 7% 33% Farm laborer 54 37 17 Day laborer 4 0 0 Carpenter 8 7 17 Education promoter 4 7 0 Businessperson 0 7 17 Teacher 11 14 0 Other 0 21 16 Total 100% (26) 100% (14) 100% (6) 2. Roles and Responsibilities Table 71. Position on Board of Directors Position NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool 22 President 27% 50% 17% Vice-President 27 0 17 Secretary 11 14 17 Treasurer 19 22 33 Member 15 14 16 TOTAL 100% (26) 100% (14) 100% (6) Table 72. Perceived Responsibilities of the Member Member Responsibilities NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Call parent meetings 8% 7% 0% Work with other members 19 29 17 Orient group 4 0 33 Control teachers 8 7 0 Management 15 21 17 Participate in meetings 8 0 0 Assure kids study & teachers teach 8 0 0 Improve learning experience 8 15 0 Manage funds 19 21 33 Hold center accountable 8 0 0 Total 100% (26) 100% (14) 100% (6) Table 73. Perceived Functions of the Center’s Education Committee Function of Committee NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Assure functioning of center 27% 0% 0% Preparing food 11 0 0 Monitor needs & meet with teacher 35 72 68 Call for meetings 4 7 17 Monitor educational quality 8 14 0 Fundraising 0 7 0 Support teacher 15 0 17 Total 100% (26) 100% (14) 100% (6) Table 74. Knows how the Education Committee is Chosen Knows How Ed Committee is Chosen NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Elected by parents 26% 46% 100% Appointed by community 69 54 0 Other 5 0 0 Total 100% 100% 100% 23 (19) (13) (6) 3. Board Participation in the Centers Table 75. Has Visited a Classroom at the Center Visited Classroom at the Center? NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Yes 100% 86% 100% No 0 14 0 TOTAL 100% (25) 100% (12) 100% (6) Table 76. Has attended Parent Meetings in Center Attended Parent Meetings at the Center? NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool 1 or 2 times monthly 71% 92% 67% 3 or 4 times monthly 23 0 33 Never participated 6 8 0 TOTAL 100% (17) 100% (12) 100% (6) Table 77. Has Difficulties Participating in Center Activities Attended Workshop NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Yes 27% 50% 17% No 73 50 83 TOTAL 100% (26) 100% (14) 100% (6) Table 78. Difficulties Mentioned in Participating in Center Activities Difficulty Mentioned NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool No childcare 0% 12% 0% Due to special activity 17 0 0 Work 33 50 25 Not given enough notice 17 0 0 Inconvenient time 17 0 0 Other 16 13 0 No response 0 25 75 Total 100% (6) 100% (7) 100% () Table 79. Activities Where Community Members Participate Type of Activity Where Community Participates NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool 24 Attend Meetings 4% 29% 0% Materials & breakfast 4 7 0 Cleaning site 7 0 17 Economic contribution 19 7 33 Contribute labor 8 7 0 Work prevents participation 8 0 0 Always participate 23 36 17 Other 27 14 33 TOTAL 100% (26) 100% (14) 100% (6) Table 80. Knows of Workshops Provided at the Center Gave Workshop at the Center? NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Yes 85% 71% 0% No 15 29 100 TOTAL 100% (26) 100% (14) 100% (6) Table 81. Has Attended Workshops Provided at the Center Attended Workshop NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Yes 91% 90% N/A No 9 10 N/A TOTAL 100% (22) 100% (10) N/A Table 82. Workshops Where the Member Participated Type of Workshop Where Participated NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Nutrition 27% 100% 0% Health 60% 44% 0% Center’s program 27% 33% 0% Changes to program 20% 0% 0% Center management 40% 5% 0% Table 83. Reasons for Board Member Visits to Center Reason for Visiting the Preschool NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Know about child’s progress 61% 33% 100% Request of teacher 27% 25% 50% Review report 15% 0% 0% Support teacher 35% 8% 0% Other 58% 92% 17% 25 4. Perceptions of Achievements Table 84. Perceptions of Teacher’s Attendance Rating of Teacher’s Attendance NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Good 89% 93% 83% Regular 11 7 17 TOTAL 100% (26) 100% (14) 100% (6) Table 85. Perceptions of Teacher’s Punctuality Rating of Teacher’s Punctuality NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Good 81% 79% 100% Regular 18 21 0 TOTAL 100% (26) 100% (14) 100% (6) Table 86. Perceptions of Teacher’s Dedication Rating of Teacher’s Dedication NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Good 85% 86% 83% Regular 15 14 17 TOTAL 100% (26) 100% (14) 100% (6) Table 87. Perceptions of Teacher’s Level of Education Rating of Teacher’s Attendance NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Good 85% 57% 83% Regular 15 43 17 TOTAL 100% (26) 100% (14) 100% (6) Table 88. Perceptions of Teacher’s Knowledge of Child Development Rating of Teacher’s Attendance NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Good 77% 57% 83% Regular 23 36 17 Bad 0 7 0 TOTAL 100% (26) 100% (14) 100% (6) Table 89. Perceptions of Snacks 26 Rating of Snacks/Food NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Good 69% 57% 33% Regular 31 29 67 Bad 0 14 0 TOTAL 100% (26) 100% (14) 100% (6) Table 90. Perceptions of Preschool Installations Rating of Physical Installations NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Good 42% 7% 50% Regular 50 64 50 Bad 8 29 0 TOTAL 100% (26) 100% (14) 100% (6) 5. Benefits of the Center Table 91. Board Member has/had child in Center Member’s Child Attends/Attended Center NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Yes 81% 71% 50% No 19 29 50 TOTAL 100% (26) 100% (14) 100% (6) Table 92. Board Member’s Child is Presently Enrolled in a School Member’s Child Attends A School NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Yes 85% 100% 100% No 15 0 0 TOTAL 100% (20) 100% (10) 100% (3) Table 93. For those with Child in School, Preparation Helped Child in School Member’s Child Benefits from Center Preparation NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Yes 100% 100% 100% No 0 0 0 TOTAL 100% (21) 100% (10) 100% (3) Table 94. How Member Feels Child Benefits from Preparation at Center 27 Perception of How Child Benefits from Preparation in Center NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Ready for school 17% 22% 67% Good results in primary level 11 22 0 Learned to read/write/count 39 22 0 Lost shyness 33 22 0 Developed skills 0 12 33 TOTAL 100% (18) 100% (9) 100% (3) Table 95. Perceptions of Whether the Community has Improved due to the Center Has Community Improved due to Center? NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Yes 100% 100% 83% No 0 0 17 TOTAL 100% (26) 100% (14) 100% (6) Table 96. Perception of How the Community has Improved due to the Center How the Community Has Improved NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Good results in primary levels 54% 43% 33% Led to learning & child’s development 34 29 17 Child’s health & nutrition 4 0 0 Center families changed 4 0 0 Community improved 0 21 50 Unspecified 4 7 Total 100% (26) 100% (14) 100% (6) Table 97. Would Member Send Other Children to Center Would Member send Others to Center? NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Yes 100% 100% 100% No 0 0 0 TOTAL 100% (23) 100% (13) 100% (6) Table 98. Reasons Why Member Would Send Other Children to Center Why Send Other Children to Center NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Develops thinking skills 13% 8% 0% 28 Notes improvement in others 4 0 17 Learn many things 22 23 17 To receive early education 17 8 32 Learn to read/write 9 38 17 Learn problem-solving 13 15 0 Learn to socialize 17 0 0 Learn Spanish 5 0 17 Learn to work 0 8 0 Total 100% (23) 100% (14) 100% (6) Table 99. Aspects of the Center Board Member Does Not Like Aspects Not Liked NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool All is good 69% 36% 80% Parents do not like something 31 64 20 Total 100% (26) 100% (14) 100% (5) Table 100. Aspect in Need of Improvement Aspects Needing Improvement NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Infrastructure 50% 92% 80% Food 17 0 0 Materials 13 0 0 Group children by age 4 0 0 Plant a garden 4 0 0 Improve teacher salaries 4 0 0 Teacher related issues 4 8 0 Improve teaching 0 0 20 Others 4 0 0 Total 100% (24) 100% (13) 100% (5) E. Community Member Findings 2. Background Table 101. Gender of Community Respondents Gender NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Male 70% 61% 83% Female 30 39 17 Total 100% (30) 100% (18) 100% (6) 29 Table 102. Self-Identification of Ethnicity of Community Respondents Gender NRM Preschools DIBEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Indigenous 94% 94% 33% Non-indigenous 3 0 17 Both 3 6 50 Total 100% (29) 100% (18) 100% (6) Table 103. Highest Level of Education Completed Reported by Community Members Educational Level NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Did not attend school 53% 56% 17% First 12 0 17 Second 17 6 Third 12 6 Sixth 6 Other primary 0 16 16 Beyond primary 0 16 50 Total 100% (17) 100% (18) 100% (6) Table 104. Capacities to Read & Write Can Read & Write NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Respondent 55% 50% 67% Spouse 23% 23% 67% Table 105. Occupation of Community Members Occupation NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Housewife 21% 18% 0% Farm laborer 35 45 17 Day laborer 11 5 0 Carpenter 7 5 0 House cleaner 10 17 0 Farm/Day laborer 7 0 0 Nurse’s aide 3 0 0 Education promoter 3 0 0 Teacher 0 5 0 Bricklayer 0 5 0 Health promoter 3 0 0 Weaver 0 0 17 Businessperson 0 0 33 30 Driver 0 0 16 Nurse 0 0 17 Total 100% (29) 100% (18) 100% (6) 2. Knowledge about the Centers Table 106. Knowledge of the Centers in the Area Knows about Program NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Does have knowledge 77% 89% 33% Table 107. What Respondents Know about the Center What the Respondents Report Knowing NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Teaches young children 17% 28% 0% Gains early reading & writing skills 20 28 0 Prepares child for 1st grade 3 16 17 Provide breakfast 3 5 0 Study and eat 7 0 0 Learn to sing & play 7 0 0 Benefits children 3 0 0 Are clean 10 0 0 No water available 0 7 0 Have large space 0 0 0 Don’t know/No Response 30 16 83 Total 100% (29) 100% (18) 100% (6) 3. Knowledge about the Centers Table 108. Believes that Children Should Attend Preschool Before Enrolling in First Grade Should A Child Attend School Prior to 1st? NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Yes 96% 65% 100% Table 109. Reasons for Believing a Child Should Attend School Before 1st Grade Why a Child Should Attend School Before 1st NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Start with preschool 7% 19% 0% Facilitates study & work 11 13 0 Learn to read, write & study 15 25 17 31 Base for 1st grade 29 13 83 Learns to study in youth 4 6 0 Learn to use materials, social skills & future preparation 4 12 0 Lose fears 15 0 0 Learn Spanish 7 6 0 Teachers show preferences 4 0 0 Don’t know/No Response 4 6 0 Total 100% (27) 100% (16) 100% (6) 4. Participation in the Centers Table 110. Participation in Center Has Respondent Participated in the Center? NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Yes 48% 61% 50% No 52 39 50 TOTAL 100% (27) 100% (13) 100% (6) Table 111. Activities in Center Where Respondents Participated Center Activities NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Fiestas 15% 72% 67% Sports at request of teacher 31 14 0 School committee 8 0 0 Fiestas & school committee 8 0 33 Construction 15 0 0 Food preparation 8 0 0 Discussions 15 0 0 Other 0 14 0 Total 100% (13) 100% (7) 100% (3) Table 112. Attends Meetings at the Center Has Respondent Attended Meetings at the Center? NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Yes 46% 46% 67% No 54 54 33 TOTAL 100% (26) 100% (13) 100% (6) 32 Table 113. How many times Respondent has Attended Meetings at the Center Number of Times Attended Meetings NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool 1 per month 33% 40% 0% 3 or more per month 9 40 50 2 per year 25 0 25 More than 4 per year 33 20 25 Total 100% (12) 100% (5) 100% (4) 5. Benefits of the Center Table 114. Perception of Whether the Community has Improved due to the Center Has Community Improved due to Center? NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Yes 93% 93% 100% No 7 7 0 TOTAL 100% (27) 100% (14) 100% (6) Table 115. Perception of How the Community has Improved due to the Center How the Community Has Improved NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Children learn to read & write 26% 51% 17% No preschool existed before 4 7 66 More children learning 7 6 17 Children speak Spanish 4 6 0 Led to community development 11 0 0 Children are cleaner 4 0 0 Children are more alert 26 0 0 No repetition of 1st grade 7 0 0 Lowered malnutrition 4 0 0 More children finish primary level 0 6 0 New leaders 0 6 0 No change 7 0 0 Don’t know/Unspecified 0 18 0 Total 100% (27) 100% (16) 100% (6) F. Preschool Installations 33 Table 116. Material for Preschool Roof Type of Roofing Material NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Fiberglass (Duralita) 92% 8% 33% Tile 0 42 0 Corrugated sheet metal 31 50 67 TOTAL 100% (13) 100% (8) 100% (3) Table 117. Materials Used for Wall Construction of Preschools* Materials for Walls NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Adobe 15% 25% 0% Lumber 23% 12% 0% Cinder blocks 69% 88% 100% * Some installations has a mix of materials Table 118. Materials Used for Flooring in Preschools* Floors NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Tiles 92% 88% 100% Dirt floor 0% 12% 0% Other 8% 12% 0% * Some installations has a mix of materials Table 119. Facilities Available at Preschools Does have Separate Kitchen Facility NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Has separate kitchen 87% 100% 100% Has bathroom 100% 100% 100% Has area for play 92% 100% 100% Table 120. Availability of Water How Water is Available NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Tap water 92% 87% 100% Available via well 0 0 0 No water available 8 13 0 TOTAL 100% (13) 100% (8) 100% (3) Table 121. Availability of Electric Energy Electric Energy is Available in: NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Community 85% 100% 100% Preschool 69% 87% 100% 34 Table 122. Characteristics of Preschool Processes Observed in Preschool NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Class starts on scheduled time 92% 100% 100% Class ends on scheduled time 92% 100% 100% Number of Preschools (13) (8) (3) Table 123. Observation of Parents in the Preschool Observed in Preschool NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Fathers observed working in Preschool on day of visit 23% 0% 67% Mothers observed working in Preschool on day of visit 77% 50% 67% Fathers meeting with teacher 23% 12% 33% Mothers meeting with teacher 33% 12% 33% Number of Preschools (13) (8) (3) Table 124. Characteristics of Preschool Hygiene Procedures Observed in Preschool NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Children washing hands 100% 62% 67% Children brushing teeth 38% 100% 33% Children combing hair 61% 100% 100% Number of Preschools (13) (8) (3) Table 125. Characteristics of Preschool Day* Observed in Preschool NRM Preschools DIGEBI Preschool MOE Preschool Average length of observed time on task 3 hours 30 minutes 4 hours 40 minutes 4 hours 5 minutes * Recording was initiated when the teacher began a task with the children.