In-Service Training at Federal Government Educational Institutions (Cantts/ Garrisons): Investigating Trainees’ Perspectives about Trainers’ Practices

1. Assistant Professor, Department of Education, University of Education, Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan, Pakistan, 2. Lecturer Department of Education, University of Education, Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan, Pakistan 3. Ph. D Scholar, Department of Education, University of Education, Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan, Pakistan PAPER INFO ABSTRACT Received: September 21, 2019 Accepted: December 25, 2019 Online: December 31, 2019 This study aimed to investigate the “trainees’ perspectives about the teacher trainers’ practices at Federal Government Educational Institutions (Cantts/ Garrisons)”. The survey was conducted for this study. The sample consisted of 94 Elementary School Teachers from 23 schools of FGEI’s (C/G) Lahore region. The instrument for data collection was developed by the researcher which was consisted of four point Likert rating scale with 36 items. The results showed that the “trainees’ reaction” was not satisfactory as most of the trainers were not well trained. So, the trainers conducted training sessions autocratically and did not carry out the variety of activities. However, due to the trainees’ socialization with each other during training sessions, they learnt different activities, strategies, techniques and tactics to cope with the problems being faced during teaching. Their interaction with each other during the training session not only improved their teaching skills but also students’ learning out comes. Whereas, there was no significant difference found between trainees’ perceptions on the basis of gender and experience. So, the Directorate of FGEI’s (C/G) may hire the subject specialist trainers along with the provision of training related material, strict directions to follow the agenda and execution of activities in order to make the training sessions fruitful.


Introduction
Education is the basic right of each individual and it is the education with the help of which the individuals become such beneficial and useful persons for the society. The education is such a crucial process as the nation's achievements and thinking is the output of education n (Lu, et al., 2017). Education refines the individual's abilities and increase his intellect so he may be well adjusted in the society and hence the individual is admitted to the school (Loyalka, Popova, Li, & Shi, 2018;Shakir, 2016). So, the schools are responsible to enable the children to become the able persons of the society and make progress. Such schools are called the effective schools (Sedega, Mishiwo, Seddoh, & Dorkenoo, 2019;Bompa & Haff, 2009). The effective schools supports the students' education at its concentrated level in such a way that they make progress and become able to adjust in society in a better way (Kuluo, 2018;Lu, et al., 2017;Michael, 2017;Tatlah, 2015). Well! It's a quite common thing that these are the teachers who execute this holy duty of forming the nation's character and personality there as Ogunrin (2011)referred that educators possess the pivotal point in the attainment of educational goals and regulating the educational system in a right way so it may survives. Slavin(2006) also stated that teachers are not mere tutors but they shape the society's future with their teaching. It shows that teachers must be skillful and competent in their profession as Ogunrin(2011) referred that teachers should be the fine products of the effective teacher education programs, lest it would be only the depletion of their time during their education programs if they are not skillful in their field. Lingam(2012)also referred that the teachers' excellence depends upon how much they are well-found to teach and mainly upon the pre-service training programs they have attended, more those programs are relevant to the duties of teachers, more the excellence is possessed by them.
So, whatever a state wants to instruct the students, that should instruct the teachers because refining the teachers is actually refining the students as Gianina-Ana (2012)has said, "It is well-known the axis that improving teachers would improve the teaching and learning in school, which in turn would improve the quality of education at national level". This study explored the teachers' perception about in service training in FGEI's C/G. This topic possesses the great importance as the perceptions effects the teachers' development process as Gianina-Ana (2012) referred, "perceptions play a critical role in how teachers learn and make changes in their teaching practice". Glover & Law(2005) has stated that she believes in exploring the teachers' perception so that the educational planners and curriculum designers could get their insights and perception in designing the effective teachers' training programs. Kosko & Wilkins(2009) also indicated "the perceptions of the teachers play a vital role in the teaching learning process. What they perceive, gives rise to their concepts, knowledge and beliefs and these concepts direct them in their teaching methods".
The aim of FGEI's is to provide quality education to the pupils of armed personnel as well as of the civilians in order to make them the useful citizens of the mother land (FGEI's, 2015). For the maximum results, the teachers of FGEI's are given the in-service training. So, they could cope and deliver in a best way. As the teachers are the target/ central figure in the betterment of quality of education and hence they are being trained. So this study aimed at exploring the "teachers' perception about in-service training in FGEI's C/G". Their perceptions were collected on the basis of their gender and teaching experience.

Material and Methods
The survey was conducted for this study. The sample consisted of 94 Elementary School Teachers from 23 schools where there were 8 primary schools, 4 middle/ elementary schools and 11 high schools. The census sampling technique was used to select the sample which consisted of ESTs of FGEI's (C/G) Lahore region on the basis of gender (male=37%, female=63%) and experience (less experienced/ novice= 27%, experienced= 73%).

Research Instrument
The instrument for data collection was developed by the researcher which was consisted of four point Likert rating scale with 36 items. The 36 items were categorized under 5 categories as participants' reaction, participants' learning, organization support and change, participants' use of new knowledge and skill, students' learning outcomes. The data were collected by the researcher himself and coresearchers through personal visits to schools.

Results and Discussion
The collected data were analyzed by utilizing the descriptive statistics percentage and Mann-Whitney U test in SPSS 15.0. The male EST's are 37% whereas female EST's were 63% and those EST's who have less/ equal to 5 years of teaching experience were27% whereas 73% have more than 5 years' experience. Those teachers who strongly agreed with "trainers are not well trained for teachers' training" were 21.3% whereas 36.2% agreed, 28.7% disagreed and 13.8% strongly disagree and those who strongly agreed with "trainers are trained but not well prepared for their session" were 14.9% whereas 34.0% agreed, 40.4% disagreed and 10.6% strongly disagreed whereas those who strongly agreed with "trainers do not have sufficient knowledge about the activities and strategies for other classes in which they do not teach" were 24.5% whereas 40.4% agreed, 23.4% disagreed and 11.7% strongly disagreed. The results shows that those teachers who strongly agreed with "trainers do not have sufficient knowledge of subject matter they have to teach." were 18.1% whereas 37.2% agreed, 30.9% disagreed and 13.8% strongly disagreed and those teachers who strongly agreed with "training programs can be fruitful if teachers are referred to training programs according to their subjects" were 64.9% whereas 21.3% agreed, 7.4% disagreed and 6.4% strongly disagreed. Those teachers who strongly agreed with "training programs are more formal rather than practical" were 37.2% whereas 47.9% agreed, 12.8% disagreed and 2.1% strongly disagreed and those who strongly agreed with "training programs possess the irrelevant content to teaching/subject" were 7.4% whereas 46.8% agreed, 36.2% disagreed and 9.6% strongly disagreed. Those teachers who strongly agreed with "training is not pre-planned but trainers start it haphazardly" were 21.3% whereas 34.0% agreed, 30.9% disagreed and 12.8% strongly disagreed whereas those teachers who strongly agreed with "trainers just pass the time and do not execute the activities" were 30.9% whereas 20.2% agreed, 34.0% disagreed and 14.9% strongly disagreed. Those teachers who strongly agreed with "trainers do not have preplanned activities" were 29.8% whereas 33.0% agreed, 30.9% disagreed and 6.4% strongly disagreed and those teachers who strongly agreed with "trainers do not execute the activities because sitting arrangement is a hurdle in the execution of activities" were 9.6% whereas 38.3% agreed, 38.3% disagreed and 13.8% strongly disagreed. Those teachers who strongly agreed with "trainers carry out the session autocratically" were 14.9% whereas 51.1% agreed, 29.8% disagreed and 4.3% strongly disagreed and those who strongly agreed with "mostly subject specialist trainers are not hired for specific subjects' training" were 52.1% whereas 35.1% agreed, 8.5% disagreed and 4.3% strongly disagreed whereas those teachers who strongly agreed with "trainers do not follow the agenda/ subject of training" were 23.4% whereas 36.2% agreed, 28.7% disagreed and 11.7% strongly disagreed. Those teachers who strongly agreed with "trainees neither take interest nor participate actively as they receive no incentive for training session" were 31.9% whereas 27.7% agreed, 26.6% disagreed and 13.8% strongly disagreed and those teachers who strongly agreed with "long duration of training session distracts the teachers' attention towards domestic chore" were 48.9% whereas 37.2% agreed, 12.8% disagreed and 1.1% strongly disagreed whereas those teachers who strongly agreed with "trainees appear willingly in training because they want improvement in their teaching skills" were 19.1% whereas 38.3% agreed, 31.9% disagreed and 10.6% strongly disagreed. Those teachers who strongly agreed with "training programs are supportive in teaching practices" were 33% whereas 53.2% agreed, 11.7% disagreed and 2.1% strongly disagreed and those teachers who strongly agreed with "training programs provide teachers the opportunity for socialization, sharing of ideas and experiences about teaching" were 41.5% whereas 48.9% agreed, 9.6% disagreed whereas those teachers who strongly agreed with "training sessions enhance your teaching skill" were 30.9% whereas 51.1% agreed, 18.1% disagreed. Those teachers who strongly agreed with "mostly teachers do not learn because they are forcefully sent to irrelevant training programs" were 37.2% whereas 42.6% agreed, 11.7% disagreed and 8.5% strongly disagreed and those teachers who strongly agreed with "trainees do not learn because they assume that training makes no betterment for their professional profile" were 17 % whereas 40.4% agreed, 36.2% disagreed and 6.4% strongly disagreed whereas those teachers who strongly agreed with "teachers sent for training frequently feel it punishment instead of learning" were 28.7% whereas 41.5% agreed, 19.1% disagreed and 10.6% strongly disagreed. Those teachers who strongly agreed with "I do not practice the learnt methodology because the school principal doesn't allow for experimentation" were 7.4% whereas 12.8% agreed, 56.4% disagreed and 23.4% strongly disagreed and those teachers who strongly agreed with "I could not deploy the learnt activities in class room due to the lack of material/ resources in school" were 30.9% whereas 39.4% agreed, 25.5% disagreed and 4.3% strongly disagreed whereas those teachers who strongly agreed with "my learnt knowledge has a positive impact on school environment" were 39.4% whereas 57.4% agreed and 3.2% strongly disagreed. Those teachers who strongly agreed with "I help my colleagues if they need for the implementation of new methodology to their class room" were 38.3% whereas 51.1% agreed, 5.3% disagreed and 5.3% strongly disagreed and those who strongly agreed with "for the sake of indiscipline the school principal does not allow the new activities" were 8.5% whereas 20.2% agreed, 51.1% disagreed and 20.2% strongly disagreed whereas those teachers who strongly agreed with "frequent nomination of teachers for training, disturbs the teaching plan/ activities of school" were 40.4% whereas 39.4% agreed, 12.8% disagreed and 7.4% strongly disagreed. Those teachers who strongly agreed with "frequent training programs put those schools in trouble which do not have the surplus staff" were 48.9% whereas 33 % agreed, 12.8% disagreed and 5.3% strongly disagreed. Those teachers who strongly agreed with "I use the learnt class room management techniques to manage my class pro-actively" were 24.5% whereas 68.3% agreed, 4.3% disagreed and 3.2% strongly disagreed and those teachers who strongly agreed with "I do not use the taught activities because they affect the completion of syllabus negatively" were 12.8% whereas 31.9% agreed, 46.8% disagreed and 8.5% strongly disagreed whereas those who strongly agreed with "I do not employee learnt methodology while teaching because I feel uneasy" were 7.4% whereas 20.2% agreed, 54.3% disagreed and 18.1% strongly disagreed. Those teachers who strongly agreed with "my experimentation regarding learnt methodology and strategies have positive impact on students' performance" were 38.3% whereas 61.7% agreed and those teachers who strongly agreed with "my students became more confident since they participate in the activities I carry out during my teaching" were 37.2% whereas 57.4% agreed and5.3% disagreed and those who strongly agreed with "students take more interest when I equip my teaching with activities" were 48.9% whereas 45.7% agreed, 4.3% disagreed and 1.1% strongly disagreed. From the above mentioned data, it is concluded that mean score of male ESTs (M=48.71) is not statistically significantly higher than the mean score of female (M=46.78) ESTs (U = 990, p = .739). As p>0.05, so it is concluded that there is no significant difference between the male and female EST's perception about in-service training. From the above mentioned data, it is concluded that mean score of experienced ESTs (M=49.01) is not statistically significantly higher than the mean score of experienced ESTs (M=43.34) and (U = 758, p = .373). As p>0.05, so it is concluded that there is no significant difference between the less experienced and experienced EST's perception about in-service training.

Conclusion
The results were concluded under the five critical levels/ categories for the evaluation of in-service training by (Guskey, 2000). The results show that the teachers' perception about "participants' reaction" is not satisfactory and positive about the trainers. It is revealed through the results that the teachers' perception about "participants' learning" is positive and satisfactory than the previous reaction. It is also came into light that teachers' perception is quite positive about the "organization support and change". The results further exposed that the teachers' perception about the "participants' use of new knowledge and skill" is quite positive and satisfactory. It is also revealed that the teacher's perception about the "students' learning outcomes" is quite positive and they are very satisfied. Gianina-Ana (2012) conducted a quite similar study. The results of that study are very similar to the results of present study. Hustler (2003) has done a different and more innovative work than the others in this regard that he investigated not only the teachers' previous and current perceptions about CPD but also their future expectations. His findings also support the findings ofpresent study. Ogunrin (2011) included 93 teachers belongs to 90 secondary schools in his research. The results by his study also support the results of present research that in-service training has not been meeting the teachers' needs. So the training content should be revised according to the teachers' needs along with keeping in view the organizational objectives in order to attain the maximum level of capacity development.

Recommendations
The following recommendations have been made by the researcher on the grounds of findings, conclusion and discussion which are as under: The subject specialist trainers should be hired and those should be well trained with grip on their related knowledge and skills they have to share with the participants. They should be directed to carry out the training sessions democratically and in a participants' centered way. They should be well versed in the use of different training activities to involve the participants to provide them the environment of simulation.
The teachers should be referred/ sent to the training programs according to their subjects they teach in schools and the training programs should possess the suitable/ convenient duration.
The schools should be provided the teaching/ learning related material in order to facilitate the teachers in the utilization of learnt knowledge, methodologies and skills. Those schools where the surplus staff is not available, should not be bound to refer their teachers in the training programs irrelevant to their subjects in school (especially in case of primary schools where there is no subject of Bio, Physics or chemistry etc. but teachers are forcefully sent to attend them).
As in-service training has a positive impact on the school's productivity and students' achievement so the teachers should be motivated to attend with intensive interest while giving them the incentives for attending the training sessions.
The current study was a quantitative survey alone which remained unable to investigate the problem in depth. Therefore, a Mixed Methods study is suggested for in depth exploration so that a clear picture could be gotten.