peers. Some principals dealt with changes unsystematically and created an
unproductive working atmosphere for these teachers who were trying to fulfill a new
vision of education.
Only during the past three years did the eco-schools network begin to require
the principal of the IPM Schools to attend a portion of the pre-service training along
with the teachers. In addition, TEF provided supplemental training to principals in the
areas of leadership, change management, conflict resolution, observation and
feedback and participatory planning process. This training has increased principal
support of the program goals, enabled principals to understand technical aspects of the
program, and offered ideas on how they can support implementation.
Follow-up visits. After the training, teachers received periodic follow-up
visits from TEF staff and in some cases from teacher supervisors. The follow-up visits
were designed to provide feedback to teachers and to trouble-shoot problems that had
occurred during implementation of the IPM curriculum.
The follow-up visits were usually planned with selected schools depending on
expressed needs. The visits usually occurred at least once or twice a season for a
school. These visits, as well as the Refresher Training, help create a closer
relationship between TEF support staff and the school teachers. The TEF staff were
also able to provide on-going support to those who were facing difficulties
implementing the unfamiliar curriculum. This kind of in-class observation and ongoing
support is seldom provided by official supervisors. When it does occur it tends
to be formalistic and geared towards evaluation rather than development and problemsolving.
With the aim of institutionalizing the follow-up visits and develop local
capacity for supporting the program, TEF began to include teacher supervisors in the