Master Coach for Teachers (MCT): Building 21st Century Skills Environment in Government schools in Narmada District, Gujarat, India"

The "Master Coach for Teachers" (MCT) intervention was implemented by Quest Alliance, an Indian non-profit focused on equipping educators and students with 21st-century skills through technology and innovative pedagogy. At the heart of the intervention was the Quest App, a mobile-based learning platform developed in-house by Quest Alliance. This app served as the main channel for delivering structured course modules, toolkits, progress tracking, and interactive exercises that helped teachers incorporate new skills into their classroom practices.

For the intervention, two teachers were selected from each participating school, covering grades 7 to 10. The initiative began with a two-day in-person orientation workshop, which introduced teachers to the program’s goals, structure, and methodology. They were trained to use the Quest App, understand its features, and navigate its functions to fully participate in the online course and related activities. The workshop also emphasized learner-centered teaching and practical strategies for integrating 21st-century skills into everyday instruction.

Throughout the 24-week intervention, facilitators provided continuous support while ensuring that teachers remained the central drivers of the program. Each facilitator oversaw about nine schools and offered regular mentoring through classroom visits, phone calls, and technical assistance. They assisted in planning and executing ideathons and hackathons, resolved issues related to the app, monitored teacher progress via dashboard analytics, and documented both challenges and successes.

The intervention unfolded in two phases. Phase one (weeks 1–16) involved course delivery through the Quest App, focusing on comprehensive training in 21st-century skills and computational thinking. Weekly modules covered themes such as the relevance of these skills, the nature of evolving job roles, and their classroom application. Later modules introduced computational thinking components like problem identification, algorithms, flowcharts, and solution design. Phase two (weeks 17–24) shifted to the practical application of learning through reflective activities and student engagement. Teachers were encouraged to adapt their classroom practices using experiential learning techniques.
A central feature of this phase was the implementation of ideathons and hackathons, student-led events that emphasized real-world problem-solving, collaboration, and innovation. In ideathons, students explored issues relevant to their communities, developing analytical and critical thinking skills. Hackathons went further, guiding students to design and build prototypes using tools like sensors, Scratch, or PictoBlox—allowing them to apply computational thinking to real-world challenges.

The "Master Coach for Teachers" (MCT) intervention was structured as a comprehensive 24-week program divided into two distinct phases. The first phase, spanning Weeks 1 to 16, focused on delivering structured course content through the Quest App, while the second phase, Weeks 17 to 24, emphasized practical application and reflection in real-world school environments.

Phase 1: Structured Learning (Weeks 1–16)
The initial weeks introduced teachers to the foundational concepts of 21st-century skills. Weeks 1 and 2 provided an overview of these skills, their relevance, and their broader context. Teachers explored the nature of job roles in the 21st century during Weeks 3 and 4, followed by an examination of why these skills are essential in Weeks 5 and 6. Weeks 7 and 8 shifted focus to applying these skills in learning spaces, emphasizing hands-on activities and offline tasks.

From Week 9 onward, the program delved into the role of educators in fostering 21st-century skills. Week 9 covered educator practices, while Week 10 focused on cultivating a 21st-century educator mindset. The subsequent weeks (11–16) transitioned to computational thinking, starting with computing and STEM mindsets (Week 11), an introduction to computational thinking (Week 12), and problem identification and presentation (Week 13). Weeks 14 and 15 explored algorithms, flowcharts, and designing solutions, culminating in Week 16 with prototyping and hackathon processes, equipping teachers to guide students in creating tangible solutions.

Phase 2: Practical Application (Weeks 17–24)
The latter part of the intervention encouraged teachers to step away from structured lessons and apply their learning in real-world classroom settings. This phase was designed to reinforce skills through experiential activities. Teachers integrated learner-centric and constructivist approaches into their daily teaching, organized hackathons and ideathons to foster student collaboration and problem-solving, and engaged in reflective practices to document successes and challenges.

A key highlight of this phase was the emphasis on student-led events. Ideathons encouraged students to identify and analyze community issues, while hackathons challenged them to design and build prototypes using tools like Scratch or PictoBlox, applying computational thinking to real-world problems. Throughout this period, facilitators provided ongoing support, mentoring teachers and helping them refine their facilitation techniques.

2023-09-01

2024-02-29

1. Overall subjective well-being or life satisfaction, measured on a scale from 1 to 10 (10 representing the best possible life) through a Cantril ladder (Cantril, 1965). The Cantril ladder has been a part of the Gallup World Poll, which is used to estimate the country level well-being measures in the World Happiness Report.
Cantril, H. (1965). The Pattern of Human Concerns. New Brunswick NJ: Rutgers University Press.
2. Mental well-being: scale taken from https://www.acqol.com.au/uploads/pwi-sc/PWI-SC-english-4th%20Ed_Final..pdf
https://www.corc.uk.net/outcome-experience-measures/personal-wellbeing-index-school-children-pwi-sc/

For 1, we use two questions:

Present Well-Being:
"On a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 represents the worst possible life for you and 10 represents the best possible life, where do you feel you stand at this time?"
Future Well-Being:
"On the same scale, where do you think you will stand about five years from now?"

2. To measure students’ perceptions of 21st-century pedagogy in their classrooms, this study employed the *Students’ Perceptions of Pedagogy for 21st-Century Learning Instrument (S-POP-21)*, developed by Bray et al. (2023). The S-POP-21 index provides a structured framework for evaluating how frequently students experience teaching practices that foster 21st-century skills, including collaboration, communication, critical thinking, creativity, and technology integration.

Students responded to survey items assessing their classroom experiences with pedagogical approaches aligned with 21st-century learning. Each item captured the frequency with which teachers employed interactive, student-centered, and skill-based instructional methods. Responses were recorded on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (Never) to 5 (Always).

For analytical purposes, responses were recoded into a binary variable:

0 (Disagreeing): Combined responses of 1 (Strongly Disagree), 2 (Disagree), and 3 (Neutral).

1 (Agreeing): Combined responses of 4 (Agree) and 5 (Strongly Agree).

Following Anderson (2008), an inverse covariance-weighted S-POP index was constructed to aggregate and analyze the data, ensuring a robust measure of students’ perceptions of 21st-century teaching practices.

3. The indices and sub-indices used to assess 21st-century skills were adapted from Bray (2020) and encompass six core competencies: Collaboration, Communication, Creativity, Self-Direction, Critical Thinking, and Technology. Each index represents a distinct dimension of students' skill development and is further broken down into sub-indices that measure specific facets of the respective skill.

Students self-reported their proficiency in these skills using a Likert scale (e.g., 1 = Strongly Disagree to 5 = Strongly Agree). For analytical clarity, responses were recoded into a binary variable:

0 (Disagreeing): Combined responses of 1 (Strongly Disagree), 2 (Disagree), and 3 (Neutral).

1 (Agreeing): Combined responses of 4 (Agree) and 5 (Strongly Agree).

Following Anderson (2008), an inverse covariance-weighted index was constructed for each sub-category within the six skill components to ensure robust measurement.

4. The Teacher Support Index (TSI) measures students’ perceptions of the support they receive from their teachers across key dimensions, including academic assistance, approachability, and classroom comfort. Higher scores on this index reflect stronger perceived teacher support.

Students rated each statement using a five-point Likert scale:
1 = Strongly Disagree
2 = Disagree
3 = Neutral
4 = Agree
5 = Strongly Agree

For analytical purposes, responses were recoded into a binary variable:

0 (Disagreeing): Responses of 1 (Strongly Disagree), 2 (Disagree), or 3 (Neutral).

1 (Agreeing): Responses of 4 (Agree) or 5 (Strongly Agree).

Following Anderson (2008), an inverse covariance-weighted TSI index was constructed to ensure a robust and reliable measure of teacher support.

1. To capture perception among students about pedagogy, we use the S-POP-21 instrument developed and validated by Bray et al. (2023).
2. To study confidence in 21st century skills and learning, we use an instrument developed by Bray et al. (2020) titled “Students' Confidence with ‘Key Skills' (SICKS)”.

3. Support from teachers

Bray, A., Byrne, P. and O’Kelly, M. (2020). ‘A short instrument for measuring students'
confidence with “key skills” (SICKS): development, validation and initial results’. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 37.

Bray, A., Girvan, C. and Ní Chorcora, E. (2023). ‘Students’ perceptions of pedagogy for 21st-century learning instrument (S-POP-21)’. Thinking Skills and Creativity 49.

1. To measure students’ perceptions of 21st-century pedagogy in their classrooms, this study employed the *Students’ Perceptions of Pedagogy for 21st-Century Learning Instrument (S-POP-21)*, developed by Bray et al. (2023). The S-POP-21 index provides a structured framework for evaluating how frequently students experience teaching practices that foster 21st-century skills, including collaboration, communication, critical thinking, creativity, and technology integration.

Students responded to survey items assessing their classroom experiences with pedagogical approaches aligned with 21st-century learning. Each item captured the frequency with which teachers employed interactive, student-centered, and skill-based instructional methods. Responses were recorded on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (Never) to 5 (Always).

For analytical purposes, responses were recoded into a binary variable:

0 (Disagreeing): Combined responses of 1 (Strongly Disagree), 2 (Disagree), and 3 (Neutral).

1 (Agreeing): Combined responses of 4 (Agree) and 5 (Strongly Agree).

Following Anderson (2008), an inverse covariance-weighted S-POP index was constructed to aggregate and analyze the data, ensuring a robust measure of students’ perceptions of 21st-century teaching practices.

2. The indices and sub-indices used to assess 21st-century skills were adapted from Bray (2020) and encompass six core competencies: Collaboration, Communication, Creativity, Self-Direction, Critical Thinking, and Technology. Each index represents a distinct dimension of students' skill development and is further broken down into sub-indices that measure specific facets of the respective skill.

Students self-reported their proficiency in these skills using a Likert scale (e.g., 1 = Strongly Disagree to 5 = Strongly Agree). For analytical clarity, responses were recoded into a binary variable:

0 (Disagreeing): Combined responses of 1 (Strongly Disagree), 2 (Disagree), and 3 (Neutral).

1 (Agreeing): Combined responses of 4 (Agree) and 5 (Strongly Agree).

Following Anderson (2008), an inverse covariance-weighted index was constructed for each sub-category within the six skill components to ensure robust measurement.

3. The Teacher Support Index (TSI) measures students’ perceptions of the support they receive from their teachers across key dimensions, including academic assistance, approachability, and classroom comfort. Higher scores on this index reflect stronger perceived teacher support.

Students rated each statement using a five-point Likert scale:
1 = Strongly Disagree
2 = Disagree
3 = Neutral
4 = Agree
5 = Strongly Agree

For analytical purposes, responses were recoded into a binary variable:

0 (Disagreeing): Responses of 1 (Strongly Disagree), 2 (Disagree), or 3 (Neutral).

1 (Agreeing): Responses of 4 (Agree) or 5 (Strongly Agree).

Following Anderson (2008), an inverse covariance-weighted TSI index was constructed to ensure a robust and reliable measure of teacher support.

Anderson, M.L. (2008). ‘Multiple inference and gender differences in the effects of early intervention: a re-evaluation of the Abecedarian, Perry Preschool, and Early Training projects’. Journal of the American Statistical Association 103, 1481–1495.
https://doi.org/10.1198/016214508000000841.

In July 2023, the randomization process was initiated, assigning 55 schools across five blocks of the Narmada district into 27 treatment schools and 28 control schools (see Figure 3 for geographic distribution). The study sample included students from grades 7 to 10, covering both upper primary (grades 7–8) and higher secondary (grades 9–10) levels. The treatment and control groups were balanced, with 20 upper primary and 7 higher secondary schools in the intervention group, and 20 upper primary and 8 higher secondary schools in the control group (see Section 5.1 for further details).

The baseline survey was conducted in August 2023, collecting pre-intervention data from students and teachers. The program officially launched in September 2023 with an orientation workshop, where teachers were introduced to the curriculum and registered on the Quest App platform. The intervention phase ran from September 2023 to February 2024, during which teachers engaged in the online course and implemented reflective and practical activities in their classrooms.

In March 2024, a follow-up survey was administered to assess the intervention’s impact, focusing on:

Student well-being,

Learning outcomes,

Acquisition of 21st-century skills, and

Perceptions of classroom pedagogy.

Randomization done in office by a computer

The primary unit of randomization is schools. Narmada district has five blocks; within each block, schools were randomly assigned into treatment and control

Yes

55 schools

1092 students

27 schools treatment; 28 schools control