International Conference on Education, Psychology, and Social Sciences 2014,

Evaluating the Indian Governments Policy for Primary Education in Rural India on the Basis of students attainment in State Primary Schools.
Sajida Saleem Khan

Education Track - Current issues in Education

Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 2 Educational policies for Primary Education: The Indian Context ............................................. 4 Literature Review....................................................................................................................... 6 Level of students attainment in state schools in rural India .................................................. 7 Factors affecting the students attainment and students retention in state schools in rural India ...................................................................................................................................... 12 1. Low enrolment in state schools .................................................................................... 13 2. Location of state schools in rural India ........................................................................ 14 3. Teacher Absenteeism .................................................................................................... 15 4. Gender Disparity, Low Attendance and Dropouts ....................................................... 16 5. Poverty, Low Attendance and Dropout ........................................................................ 18 6. Inadequate Infrastructure .............................................................................................. 20 Effectiveness of Indian governments education policy for primary education in state primary schools and recommendations ................................................................................................. 21 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................... 25 Appendix 1 ............................................................................................................................ 28 Appendix - 2 ............................................................................................................................ 29 References ................................................................................................................................ 30

Page 1 of 33

Introduction

It is more than six decades since India gained independence. The condition of primary education has not yet reached the satisfactory level in state schools (state schools in this assignment refers to state primary school from classes 1st to 5th) (Kaushik, 2010). In 1964 government of India appointed Education Commission to advise government about the national pattern of education in the country and the policies and plans for the holistic development of education at all stages (MHRD, 1968). In National Policy on Education (NPE) 1968, provisions were made for free and compulsory education for all the children till the age of 14 years, after the recommendation of Education Commission (ibid). However it was only 1st April 2010 when the Right to Education (RTE) Act was enforced in India, which made elementary education compulsory for the children from 6-14 age groups (Sengupta, 2010). During this period Indian government made several efforts to ensure the quality and accessibility of primary education throughout the country by introducing NPE 1968, NPE 1986 and programmes such as Operation Blackboard (OB) in 1980s, establishment of District Institute of Education and Training (DIET), District Primary Education Plan (DPEP) in 1990s, Education For All (EFA) popularly known as Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) in 2000s and many others (Babu, 2009; Little, 2010). However, the above mentioned efforts of Indian government do not seem to achieve their aim of UEE in India. Consortium for Research on Education, Access, transitions and Equity (CREATE), 2009, an educational researching agency, found that the level of learning of students is very miserable in state schools in rural India. The rate of attendance is very low and the children from poor and disadvantaged families have less access or access to poor

Page 2 of 33

quality of education. The 2008 Annual Status of Education Report (ASER, 2008) found that nationally 44% of pupils in class 5 cannot fluently read the text of class 2 level nor can divide a number of three digits by one digit (Kingdon and Benerji, 2009). It is alarming that even after several efforts of Indian government to make primary education universal and accessible throughout the country the level of student attainment in state schools is very low. This raises a question on the effectiveness on the Indian governments education policy for primary education in rural India.

This assignment seeks to evaluate the Indian governments policy for primary education in rural India by taking in account the students attainment in state schools. It also takes account of factors that obstruct the aim of UEE in India by affecting the performance of state schools and students retention. These two objectives are explored in the following three questions. 1. What is the level of student attainment in state schools in rural India? 2. What are the factors affecting the students attainment and students retention in state schools in rural India? 3. How effective is India governments policy for primary education in providing universal elementary education to the students in state schools? Lastly, this assignment will recommend possible solutions to the problems encountered and try to find how the gaps in policy and policy implementation can be filled.

Page 3 of 33

Educational policies for Primary Education: the Indian Context

Indian government made a Constitutional commitment for providing free and compulsory education to the children up to 14 years of age in 1950 (CREATE, 2009). However it was added as a Directive Principal under Article 45 of the Constitution only after the recommendation of Education Commission (1964-1966) (MHRD, 1968). NPE 1968 officially declared that it is an aim of the Indian government to provide free and compulsory education to all children till the age of 14 years (ibid). However, it did not threw much light on the strategies and plans for achieving this aim, nor did it set any time period. In 1986, NPE 1968 was revised and NPE 1986 came into existence. It gives emphasis on three prospects to achieve UEE which are as under: (1) Universal access and enrolment. (2) Universal retention of children up to 14 years of age. (3) A substantial improvement in the quality of education to enable all children to achieve essential levels of learning. (MHRD, 1986).

It also give emphasis on strategies to fulfil its aim of UEE by making education child centred and providing minimum required facilities like three rooms, three teachers and essential teaching learning aids in every state school. It advocates non-formal approach for

Page 4 of 33

working children, dropouts and children from the area with no school. Priority is to stop children from dropping out.

Since then several programmes like OB, DPEP, Programme of Action (POA), The National Programme for Education of Girls at Elementary Level (NEPGEL) and Education Guarantee Scheme (EGS) have been run by the Indian government to provide access to quality primary education to all the children of 6-14 age groups (CREATE, 2009). However, it is worth looking to the most extensive programme known as SSA which Indian government is running to achieve the aim of UEE by the end of 2010 (MHRD, 2004).

SSA was launched in India in the partnership of central and state government in 2001-2002 with a mission to provide elementary education to each and every child of 6-14 years of age (Memoire, 2009). The main aims of this programme are to enrol all children in schools by 2005 by doing Back to School campaign and ensure their retention up to upper primary level; that is up to class 8th (ibid). Indian government believes that education play a major role in strengthening national integrity, promoting national progress and sense of citizenship (MHRD, 1968). That is why one of the aims of SSA is to bridge the gap between social categories and gender whiles the process of enrolment, retention and learning. And above all to make sure the enhancement in the level of students attainment at primary as well as upper primary level (Memoire, 2009).

Page 5 of 33

Literature Review

To evaluate a policy it is important to understand that how policy is made and what it seeks to achieve. Trowler (2003) explains that identification of problem, starting of policy making and the beginnings of political process are the three steps that take place whenever a national level policy is being made. In the context of Indian policy for primary education problems were identified as low quality of education and dropouts of children in state schools (MHRD, 1986). Therefore NPE 1968 was revised and NPE 1986 was formulated. However, only policy formation and its adoption in paper and ink are not sufficient to achieve the aims stated in the policy, it should also be implemented in a proper way to get the desired results. Trowler (2003) argues that policy implementation is as important as its formation. Thus policy analysis comprise of what governments do, what are its reasons and what are its effect (Taylor et al 1997 quoted in Bell and Stevenson 2006 p. 11)

The main aim of NPE 1986 is to provide free and compulsory primary education to all children (MHRD, 1986). It also aims to provide other facilities like school building, teachers and adequate infrastructure for primary education however; these all provisions are made to achieve the aim of universal access to primary education and provide children with essential level of learning (ibid). Therefor the literature review given here focuses on the level of students attainment in state schools in rural India to evaluate the effectiveness of Indian governments education policy for primary education in rural India.

Page 6 of 33

Level of students attainment in state schools in rural India

10th Joint Review Mission of Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, Government of India by Memoire (2009) claims that the mission of better learning outcomes in state schools has not only sustained but also enhanced under SSA programme.

However, in its Global Monitoring Report 2007, UNESCO declared that India has sufficient reasons to worry about its education. Indias education is somewhat comparable to its neighbours Pakistan and Bangladesh however; it is far behind other developing countries in Asia and South America (UNESCO, 2006).

The Annual Status of Education Report (Rural) 2007 published in 2008 (ASER, 2008) claims that, India wide, only 50% children studying in class 3rd can read class 1st text. Only 40% students in class 4th can read class 2nd text. The charts below show the expectation of what proportion of children should read class 1 and class 2 texts and a comparison of situation in years 2006 and 2007.

Page 7 of 33

Figure 1: Reading ability of students in state schools in India.

Y axis - % of students X axis -classes (Source: Annual status of education report (rural) 2007: provisional)

The charts demonstrate clearly that the ability of children was far behind the expected level of reading class I and class 2 texts in 2006 and 2007. When observed closely the graph of ability of reading class 1 texts has fallen down in 2007. The graph of reading ability of class 2 texts has shown a bit improvement in 2007 however; in neither case students achieved the desired level. Even at class 7th level all the students were not able to read class 1 and class 2 texts fluently.

Page 8 of 33

Another example of poor level of students attainment is given in the table below which shows the percentage of the children able to solve the arithmetical problems like subtraction and division at primary as well as upper primary level.

Table 1- Arithmetic ability of students in state schools in India

(Source: Annual status of education report (rural) 2007: provisional)

The above records reveal the poor condition of students attainment in Mathematics at primary and upper primary level. Lets take class 4, for example, to analyse the condition. 3.3% of children in class 4 know nothing in Arithmetics. Only 10.4% can recognise numbers from 1 to 9 and 24.1% can recognise from 10 to 99. Only 34.7% can do subtraction and 27.6% can do division. Similarly there are students in class 5 who cannot even recognise

Page 9 of 33

numbers; however some of them can recognise numbers or do subtraction or division. The big question here is that how these students are promoted up to the level of class 4 or class 5? This arise a serious question on the standards of education being provided in state schools in India.

My own experience during my job as an In-charge Head Teacher in a state school in rural area of India during December 2005 to 29th July 2010 is quite similar to the above findings. The level of students attainment in state schools in rural India is very low due to several reasons like low students attendance, involvement of teachers in other works then teaching, high students teacher ratio, lack of infrastructure and lack of interest in teaching and learning in students as well as teachers.

To have a closer look at the attainment level of students in a state school Kaushiks (2010) research in the Mathura district of Uttar Pradesh, a state in India can be analysed. He calculated the value of composite z-score (CS) in all the ten blocks of Mathura (Block is an administrative unit within a district).

Page 10 of 33

The chart below shows the composite z-score (CS) of every block in the Mathura district. Table 2. Mathura district: Value of composite z-score

(Source: Kaushik, 2010)

The districts were divided into three categories on the basis of their CS values of students attainment in state schools as under: CS> 0.461 is high, CS= 0.461 is medium and CS< 0.461 is low. The results are shown in the table 3. Table 3. Mathura district: level of attainment in Primary school

(Source: Kaushik, 2010)

Page 11 of 33

Thus the level of students attainment in state schools in Mathura was found not to be satisfactory in seven out of ten blocks. It implies that only 30% of children in state schools in Mathura are getting the desired level of education. Referring back to the ASERs (2007) report it can be observed that only 34.7% cent of class 4 students can subtract and 27.6 % can divide. While in class 5 only 31.9 % of students can subtract and only 42.4 % can divide. The level of reading was reported worst as most of the children studying in class third or fourth cannot read class 1 or class 2 texts.

When compared internationally India does not stand even with its neighbouring Asian countries leaving Pakistan and Bangladesh. It is also far behind in the BRIC group (Brazil, Russian Federation, India and China), with which it is often compared and other average developing countries in the world (Iyer, 2009).

Factors affecting the students attainment and students retention in state schools in rural India

Several factors have been recognised by different researchers for low students attainment and dropouts of students resulting in low retention in state schools. However, the most recent ones are poverty, low enrolment, location of schools, inadequate infrastructure, teacher absenteeism, gender, low rate of students attendance, dropout and students teachers ratio (which lead to mixed class group) (Iyer 2009; Sayed et al., 2007; Pritchett and Pande, 2006; Kingdon and Benerji, 2009, CREATE, 2009; Rena, 2007). While working at a state school I

Page 12 of 33

too recognised all of the above mentioned reasons except low enrolment and location of schools which are affecting the students attainment in state schools in rural India. These reasons are evaluated one by one starting with the two least convincing one in the next section.

However, few less important reasons like illness of students, no interest in studies and teachers competence to teach reported by the some researchers are not covered in this assignment due to limitation of the words. 1. Low enrolment in state schools

Enrolment of all the students of school going age is one of the main aims focused by NPE 1986. Indian government has almost attained the aim of universal enrolment. In 2007 about 97% students were enrolled in state schools. ASER (2007) in its survey found that the only 3 per cent of children (both boys and girls) in primary school going age (7 to 10 years) were out of school in 2007. 10th Joint Review Mission of SSA, Government of India, (2009) published the table given below showing the tremendous increase of about 9 million students in state schools between sessions 2005-06 to 2008-09 (Memoire, 2009).

Page 13 of 33

Table 4. UEE: Access and Enrolment

2005-06 Primary Enrolment Upper Primary enrolment Elementary Enrolment GER Primary NER Primary GER Upper primary NER Upper Primary Out of School Children+ 125 million 43.7 million 2006-07 132 million 47.5 million 2007-08 134 million 50.9 million 2008-09 134 million* 52.5 million** *Includes 2 million from Haryana, from 2007-08 DISE **Includes 100,000 from Haryana, from 2007-08 DISE + Based on household surveys conducted by teachers and community, not independent survey.

168.7 million 104 84.5 59 43 7 million

179.5 million 111 92.8 64.7 48.4 7.6 million

184.9 million 114 95.9 69.9 52.6 4.5 million

186.3 million 113 97.0 71.6 54.5 2.8 million

Source: (Memoire, 2009)

My personal experience on this issue is quite similar to the data given above. The enrolment of children has doubtlessly increased close to the desired level, however the important question is whether all these children attend school regularly or they just get enrolled to be benefited by the incentives like Mid- Day Meal, scholarship, free books and free school uniform for girls provided by the governments ? Further discussion on this topic will be done in this assignment while evaluating the problem of low attendance in state schools.

2. Location of state schools in rural India

Second reason for low students attainment which does not convince me a lot is the location of schools. Often it is blamed that the distance of school from the village keep the children away from the school. However, the government records and my personal experience do not

Page 14 of 33

match with this statement. According to the Planning Commission (2008) SSA has almost achieved the aim of universal access to primary education in India. It has brought primary education to the doorstep of children by opening 1.32 lakh (hundred thousand) state schools (data in 2008). 87% of habitation had state schools within the radius of 1 km and remaining 13% were covered by opening Education Guarantee Centres (EGC) and Alternate and Innovative Education Centres (AIE) by the end of 10th Five Year Plan (2002 2007). As the 11th Five Year Plan (2008 - 2012) is currently running the data for the year 2009 and 2010 are not published. However, the findings from the researchers approve the above assertion of Indian government. Dholakia and Iyengar (2008), for example, claim that during their survey they found that most of the villages have state schools. In some exceptional cases schools were somewhat far from the village. However, this does not raise the question on access to primary education as children can easily walk to the schools even if situated out of Village within the radius of 1 km.

3. Teacher Absenteeism

Teacher absenteeism in state schools has become a major problem in developing countries like India. A World Bank report reveals that 19 per cent teachers, on an average, were absent from their schools in Bangladesh, India, Indonesia, Peru, Ecuador, and Uganda (Chaudhary et al., 2006). Kremer et al., (2005) claim that one out of every four teachers in state schools, in India, was found absent during the survey, making it a total of 25 %. Nevertheless, only 45% of present teachers were found actively involved in teaching. There are many reasons for teachers being absent from the school. Sometimes they go on an unauthorised leave without a valid permission. The SSA study in Karnataka Education Office found it to be 0.6% (Sen

Page 15 of 33

and Merchant, 2009). However, I found it to be a regular practice in the state of Uttar Pradesh in India. Corrupt education officers play a major role in making the situation worst as they are bribed by some teachers to be remain absent in the schools. Apart from this there are many valid reasons too for teachers absenteeism. Eswaran and Singh (2008) undertook a survey under The All India Primary Teachers Federation (AIPTF) in the states of Orrisa, Uttarakhand and Tamil Nadu and found that the teacher absence rate in these states was 33.8%, 11.5% and 21.0% respectively. AIPTF claims that the reasons for these absentees were personal as well as official. Teachers are entitled to take casual leave for their personal reasons like illness, marriage party or other domestic works on one hand. On the other hand teachers have to participate in orientation courses and seminars and other non-professional works like preparation of voter list, survey for different purposes, campaign against disease like polio and other official works given by their superior authorities. These arguments prove that, whatever are the reasons, the problem of teacher absenteeism is doubtlessly affecting the performance of students in state schools in India. 4. Gender Disparity, Low Attendance and Dropouts

Gender disparity, low attendance and dropout in state schools are linked to each other. Girls from poor families in rural India do not attend school due to several reasons like house hold work and discrimination by the parents even after getting enrolled. Consequently they lose interest and do not return to school resulting in dropping out. UNESCO 2004 claims that girls are rather more likely than boys to continue their education even after getting enrolled.

Page 16 of 33

Though the rate of girls attending schools in rural as well as urban India has improved considerably in last decade yet the gender gap persist in education in India. The Gross Enrolment Ratios of census 2001 shows that only 72.4 % of girls were enrolled in elementary education against 90.3% of boys (Azim Premji Foundation, 2004).

Rena (2007) conducted a village level survey in the state of Andhra Pradesh in India and found that parents discriminate against their girls. They not only find their girls helpful in their household activities but they also take care of young ones when parents are out to work. Moreover, they are worried about the marriage of their girls; they argue that girls may face problems in their married life if they do not know house hold activities hence they prefer them to be at home. Insecurity of sexual harassment and violence, also prevent parents to send their girls to schools. These gender disparities can easily be seen in the rural part of India especially with the girls of scheduled casts (SC) and scheduled tribes (ST). The gender gap in education of SC and ST girls is almost 30% at primary level. Even if the variables as cast and religion are controlled the probability of girls getting primary education is 42% less than the boys (Desai, 2007).

Rena (2007) claims that parents perform marriages of the girls in the early age to get rid of their responsibilities. This leads to low attendance and dropout of the girl child. However, the statistics and my personal experience do not match this argument. According the Household Survey 2005, 2006 and 2007 quoted by Dholahia and Iyengar (2008) the percentage of girls got married during school going age was as low as 1.98% in Chittradurga (Karnataka) and 6.25% in Nalagonda (Andhra Pradesh) whereas it was 0% in Raisen

Page 17 of 33

(Madhya Pradesh), Unnao (Uttar Pradesh), Jalore (Rajasthan) and Chittaurgarh (Rajasthan). During the four years of my career in a state school in district Lakhimpur- Kheri (Uttar Pradesh) I came across only one such incident when a girl named Rekha, a student of class 4, in my school got married under her parents pressure. She became irregular in attending school and eventually stopped coming to school. It indicates that the dropouts due to marriages of girl students are rare case in rural India. It is not one of the major causes affecting the students attainment in state schools as the percentage was found to be very less. 5. Poverty, Low Attendance and Dropout

As gender disparity plays its role in low attendance and dropping out of girls, poverty plays the same role for both, boys and girls. The main cause for the lack of education in India is poverty. As children do not even have access to food, possibility of their education is very low. Hunger is the root cause for the poor results in education in India (Madhu Pandit Dasa, the Chairman of The Akshaya Patra Foundation, one of Indias leading non-profits) quoted by Venkat (2010).

Though Indian government has made the provision for free school meals (under Mid-Day Meal Scheme) for students in state schools (Kingdon and Banerji, 2009) yet the implementation of Mid-Day Meal (MDM) Scheme is uneven across the country (Sood, 2010). The graph below shows that MDM scheme covered less than 60% of students enrolled in state schools in Bihar, Punjab, Gujarat, Rajasthan and Jammu and Kashmir in 2005-2006 (the latest data available at the Commissioners office) (Sood, 2010).

Page 18 of 33

Figure 2. Percentage of enrolled children receiving food as part of MDM programme

(Source: Sood, 2010).

Thus MDM scheme is not successfully supporting the children in poor families to fight the problem of hunger in many of the Indian states. Poverty hampers the attendance of state schools as children do not go to school due to several factors related to poverty (Jha et al., 2003 CREATE, 2009). Parents, in such a worst condition, prefer their children to go to work in order to earn money instead of going school (Rena, 2007). According to the house hold survey (2005, 2006, 2007) the percentage of children employment (including boys and girls) is as high as 77.97% in Nalagonda (Andhra Pradesh) and 50.29% in Chittradurg (Karnataka) (see appendix 1). These children either attend school very less or do not attend schools at all even if they are enrolled in schools. Similarly, only 44% of enrolled children attend state schools in Uttar Pradesh and only 26% in Bihar (Kingdon and Banerji, 2009).

Rena (2007) claims that these children are stopped by their parents to go to school as they help them in earning money. Many times these children themselves are involved in money

Page 19 of 33

earning activities. According to Dholakia and Iyengar (2008), Sacrificing school for employment is a clear indicator of the poor economic condition of the family.

6. Inadequate Infrastructure

Indian government is trying to ensure minimum essential facilities in state schools to ensure appropriate level of education since 1986, the time when NPE was revised (Dyer, 2000). However, the infrastructures in state schools do not seem to be adequate. CREATE (2009) claims that rural state schools have poor resources like school infrastructure, less teachers and inadequate teaching-learning material. Dholakia and Iyengar (2008), during their survey, found that classrooms in some state schools were not in usable condition especially in Northern India. Therefore students were made to sit in varandahs (yard) and sometime out of schools on the ground. They claimed that they found a state school in Rajasthan even with no building at all.

This condition can be understood by observing the data published by MHRD (updated by 30th March 2009) (see appendix 2). These data reveals the poor condition of buildings in primary education department in India. The ratio of completed state schools building is as low as 17% in Dadra Nagar Haveli, 21% in Bihar, 50% in Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) and Chandigarh and 60% in Delhi and Kerala (Memoire, 2009). Lack of building or unusable classrooms hinders the process of teaching and learning as the classes cannot run in allweather conditions, particularly in India that experiences a long rainy season, very hot summer and chilling winter.

Page 20 of 33

Apart from school buildings number of teachers in state schools is also a reason of their poor performance. Many states like Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka lack adequate numbers of teachers in state schools. Some state schools are functioning only with single teacher and a single classroom (Dholakia and Iyengar, 2008). However, the concept of para-teacher (PT) (contract teachers) in state schools has somewhat increased the numbers of teachers in state schools, yet the results are not satisfactory due to several reasons like low qualification and lack of professional training of PT (Kingdon and Rao, 2010).

Lack of classrooms and teachers often results in multiclass teaching that hampers the quality of teaching and learning (Dholakia and Igyengar, 2008; Kingdon and Banerji, 2009). Facilities like drinking water, separate toilets for boys and girls and furniture also lack in state schools in India. According to the data published in 10th Joint Review Mission of SSA, the infrastructure gap of drinking water facility is 12%, common toilets is 34% and girls toilet is 47% (Memoire, 2009). Lack of such facilities discourages the students, especially the girls, to attend the school.

Effectiveness of Indian governments education policy for primary education in state primary schools and recommendations

Indian governments efforts regarding the implementation of their primary education policy in term of achieving enrolment targets have been quite effective. 93.4% children in school going age are already enrolled in state schools (Kingdon, 2007). Indian government has also

Page 21 of 33

made all possible efforts to provide minimum prescribed numbers of teachers in every state school to provide quality education. Indian government appointed 986 thousand teachers in primary education against the target of 12.27 thousand till March 2009 (Memoire, 2009). However, there are many inconsistencies in the policy implementation. Little (2010), claim that OB, for example, made provision of at least two teachers in every state school and appointed 200,000 teachers across the country. However 50% teachers were posted in schools where there were already two teachers as nobody wanted to go to rural areas. This demonstrates the lack of determination in government officials and left many schools without minimum numbers of teachers prescribed in policy. Memoire (2009) claims that even now 10 % state school are run by single teacher. The aim of three teachers in every state primary school is still to be achieved.

Moreover, it has failed to make teachers teach in state schools to attain the aim of essential level of learning by the students as teacher absenteeism is found to be a major problem in state schools in India. Department of education is not able to inspect the schools regularly (Kremer et al., 2005) which makes the teachers careless and results in teacher absenteeism. Moreover the non-professional and out of the profile duties given to the teachers by the education department contribute to the increasing problem of absenteeism. Kingdon and Rao (2010), claim that lack of finance does not allow Indian government to provide five teachers in every state school.

Page 22 of 33

On the basis of the evidence, it is strongly recommended that, firstly Indian government should ensure five teachers in every state school to avoid problems of multi classes and high student-teacher ratio. In the lack of fund it should appoint four PT and only one government employed teacher (GET), who will be the head teacher. It will lower the cost of hiring teachers (Kingdon and Rao, 2010). Head teacher should be given the power to appoint and fire the PT in case of dissatisfaction. While appointing PT, preference should be given to experienced and trained teacher. Else PT should be given in-service training at DIETs during vacations. Secondly local authorities like village head and head of village education council should be entitled to put absent mark on the teachers attendance register if he or she is absent without proper leave application. Local communities can provide an option for monitoring of the teachers (Kremer et al, 2005). Thus, even if head teacher is send on non-professional duty the process of teaching-learning will not suffer in state schools.

Education policy has achieved a huge success in bridging the gender gap with 64 million girls enrolled in state schools by 2009 which is 48.8 % of enrolment in primary education (Memoire, 2009). However, their retention is not as good success as enrolment. They do not attend or retain in schools due to reasons discussed in above section. To ensure their retention Head teacher along with PT should visit the parents frequently to make them aware about the importance of education and encourage them to send their girls too, to school regularly. There should be at least two lady teachers in every state school to deter gender issue. These teachers should trace the irregular girls and visit their parents regularly and motivate them to send their girls to school regularly.

Page 23 of 33

There is a big gap in policy and its implementation to fight against poverty. The incentives like MDM, scholarships, free books and free school uniform to girls are not timely distributed. Textbooks do not reach schools in time (Sayed et al., 2007) and MDM provided in schools is of poor quality (Memoire, 2009; Sayed et al., 2007). In my block I experienced that village heads use the money of scholarship for their personal interest for a considerable period of time and then distribute it among the students. Similarly, free uniforms were distributed to the girls almost in the middle of the session. Such incidents reduce the outcomes of the efforts made by the government to provide UEE.

To recognize the gaps in policy implementation further researches are strongly recommended. However, following actions could improve the situation a bit for the time being. In India, state schools have summer vacation from 20th of May to 30th of June every year. The arrangement of textbooks and free uniform should be made within the vacations so that it should be distributed on the beginning of new session on 1st of July. For new admissions second round of distribution should take place time to time as convenient till October as admissions are open from July to September. To control the monopoly of village heads strict deadlines should be made for the distribution of scholarships. To assure the quality of MDM Head Teacher and cooks should be collectively made responsible. Failing to that, strict action against both should be taken immediately.

Taking infrastructure in consideration, the problems of lack of teachers and improper distribution of incentives has already been discussed. Now the major problem of

Page 24 of 33

infrastructure to discuss is school buildings, furniture, drinking water and separate toilets for boys and girls. NEP 1986 promised to provide minimum required facility in every state school yet the goal does not seems to be attained (Rena, 2007; Dholakia and Iyengar 2008; CREATE 2009). As ensuring these infrastructure needs a lot of financial resources Indian government should first ensure basic facilities like drinking water and separate toilets and then gradually move towards providing more number of classrooms. However, an immediate action is required to repair the buildings those already exist.

Conclusion

The Indian governments policy for primary education through state schools does not seem to be very effective in terms of providing UEE. It, however, has achieved the aim of universal enrolment of children in state schools and provided primary schools within the radius of 1km of the habitation in almost all the areas. However, the level of students attainment is very low in state schools in the rural parts of India and the level of education provided is at the worrying level. Researchers found that on an average only 30% of the students enrolled in state schools are able to learn the lessons. The majority of students in class 4 were not able to read the class 2nd text. They were not even able to do the basic calculations of Mathematics like subtraction and division. Low attainment of students indicates that education policy does not achieve its aim of providing essential level of learning to the students in state schools

The retention of students in state schools is also not up to the mark, especially in the case of girls. Gender disparity still prevails in rural India and parents prefer boys over girls to attend
Page 25 of 33

school. Thus gender becomes a major reason for dropping out of girls. Another major reason for dropouts is poverty. Students dropout either to help their parents in earning money or they themselves are involve in money earning activity. Many times students do not dropout but attend schools very irregularly. This results in low attendance and in low attainment. Though government has made provisions of incentives and MDM to help children attend school yet its implementation needs more attention.

The aim of minimum numbers of teachers in state schools is still to achieve. Though the provision of three teachers per school in education policy is not adequate as it increases students-teachers ratio and multi class teaching yet government should make them available as soon as possible and then move to achieve the aim of one teacher per class. Another teacher related problem is teacher absenteeism. Teachers are frequently absent from the schools for one or the other reasons like in-service trainings, workshops, non-professional duties given by the government and personal reasons. Sometimes teachers go on unauthorised leaves and do not care about their duty. Already less number of teachers and high students-teachers ratio worsens the situation.

Education policy announced to provide minimum required infrastructure in every school. However, it does not seem to achieve this aim too. Inadequate infrastructure like school buildings, teachers, drinking water and toilets also discourage the children to attend the school resulting in low attainment. Especially in India where summers, winters and rainy

Page 26 of 33

seasons are at their worst it is difficult for the students to cope with the situation with less numbers or bad condition of classrooms.

Thus education policy for primary education in India experiences many gap in its implementation. Government officials and teachers are not accountable for their duties and sometime village heads have monopoly on school related matters. To fill these gaps further research and more attention is needed. The recommendations given in the assignment may become useful, if applied.

Page 27 of 33

Appendix 1

Page 28 of 33

Appendix - 2

Page 29 of 33

References
ASER, 2008. Annual status of education report (rural] 2007: provisional, Mumbai: Pratham Resource Center. AZIM PREMJI FOUNDATION. 2004. The Social Context of Elementary Education in Rural India. Bangolore: Azim Premji Foundation. BABU, J. R. 2009. Universalization of Elementary Education: A Study of District Primary Education Programme from South India. [online]. [Accessed on 09 December 2010]. Available from: http://www.c-s-p.org/flyers/978-1-4438-0999-3-sample.pdf. CHAUDHARY, N., J. HAMMER, M. KREMER, K. MURLIDHARAN and H. ROGER. 2006. Missing in Action: Teacher and Medical Provider Absence in Developing Countries. [online] [Accessed on 01 December, 2010]. Available from: http://www.economics.harvard.edu/faculty/kremer/files/MissinginAction.pdf. CREATE. 2009. Educational Access in India: Country policy Brief. [online]. [Accessed on 11 November 2010]. Available from: http://www.createrpc.org/pdf_documents/policybriefindia.pdf. DESAI, S. 2007. Gender Disparity in Primary Education - The Experience in India. UN Chronicle. [online] 44(4], [Accessed 12 December 2010] Available from: http://www.un.org/wcm/content/site/chronicle/home/archive/issues2007/themdgsareweontrac k. DHOLAKIA, R.H. and S. IYENGAR. 2008. Access of Poor Households to Primary Education in Rural India. [online] [Accessed 11 November, 2010] Available from: http://www.iimahd.ernet.in/publications/data/2008-02-02RDholakia.pdf . DREZE, J., & GOYAL, A. (2003]. SPECIAL ARTICLES - Future of Mid-Day Meals. Economic and Political Weekly. 38, pp. 4673-4683. DYER, C. 1996. The Improvement of Primary School Quality in India: Success and Failure of Operation Blackboard. [online] [Accessed on 30 November 2010], available from: http://www.csas.ed.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/38169/WP04_DYER.pdf DYER, C. 2000. Operation blackboard: policy implementation in Indian elementary education. Monographs in international education. Oxford: Symposium Books. ESWARAN, S. and A. Singh. 2008. Teacher Absence in Primary Schools: A Study. New Delhi: All India Primary Teachers' Federation.

Page 30 of 33

IYER, T. 2009. Is Public Expenditure on Primary Education Effective? Evidence from Districts Across India. [online]. [Accessed on 05 December 2010] available from: http://hdl.handle.net/10161/1390. JHA, J., K. RANA, A. RAFIQUE, and A. SENGUPTA. 2003. Primary Schools in West Bengal. Economic and Political Weekly. 38, 2839-2840. KAUSHIK, K. 2010. Problems and prospects of primary education in Mathura District: A Geographical Analysis. Journal of Geography and Regional Planning. 3(10], pp. 253-261. KINGDON, G. and R. BANERJI. 2009. Addressing school quality: Some policy pointers from rural north India [online]. [Accessed on 14 November 2010]. Available from: http://recoup.educ.cam.ac.uk/pb5.pdf. KINGDON, G. G., and RAO, V. S. 2010. Para-Teachers in India: Status and Impact. Economic and Political Weekly. 45, pp. 59-67 KINGDON, G.G. 2007. The progress of school education in India. [online] [Accessed 11 November, 2010] Available from: http://www.gprg.org/pubs/workingpapers/pdfs/gprg-wps071.pdf. KREMER, M., CHAUDHURY, N., ROGERS, F. H., MURLIDHARAN, K., and J HAMMER. 2005. Teacher Absence in India: A Snapshot. Journal of the European Economic Association. 3, 658-667. LITTLE, A. W. 2010. Access to Elementary Education in India: Politics, Policies and Progress. [online]. [Accessed on 29 November 2010], Available from: http://www.create-rpc.org/pdf_documents/PTA44.pdf MEMOIRE, A. 2009. Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA] 10th Joint Review Mission of Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan. [online] [Accessed on 01 December 2010], available from: http://www.educationforallinindia.com/10thJRM-SSA-July-2009.pdf MHRD. 1968. National policy on education: 1968. Faridabad, Govt. of India Press. MHRD. 2004. Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan: A Programme for Universal Elementary Education. [online]. [Accessed on 10 November 2010]. Available from: http://planipolis.iiep.unesco.org/upload/India/India%20Sarva%20Shiksha%20Abhiyan%20M anual%20financial%20management.pdf. PLANNING COMMISSION. 2008. Eleventh Five Year Plan - Volume 2, 2007-2012. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.

Page 31 of 33

PRITCHETT, L. and V. PANDE. 2006. Making Primary Education Work for Indias Rural Poor: A Proposal for Effective Decentralization. [online]. [Accessed on 22 November 2010]. Available from: http://www.rmportal.net/library/content/Primary_Education/sdp95-web.pdf. RENA, R. 2007. Factors Affecting the Enrolment and the Retention of Students at Primary Education in Andhra Pradesh- A Village Level Study. Essays in Education, 22 (Fall], pp. 102-112. SAYED, Y., R. SUBRAHMANIAN, C. SOUDIEN, N. CARRIM, S. BALGOPAL, F. NEKHWEVHA and M. SAMUEL. 2007. Education exclusion and inclusion: policy and implementation in South Africa and India. London: Department for International Development. SEN, A. and K. MERCHANT. 2009. Hey, Teachers Don't Leave Those Kids Alone. [online] [Accessed on 02 December 2010]. Available from: http://citizenmatters.in/articles/view/1063-Hey,-teacher,-dont-leave-those-kids-alone. SENGUPTA, A. K. (2010]. Right to Education: Towards an Educated India. [online] [Accessed on 10 December 2010]. Available from: www.highereduforem.org/hef3.pdf SOOD, N. 2010. Malnourishment Among Children in India: Linkages with Cognitive Development and School Participation. [online]. [Accessed on 20 December 2010]. Available from: http://www.create-rpc.org/pdf_documents/PTA25.pdf. TROWLER, P. 2003. Education Policy. Eastbourne: CPI Antony Rowe. UNESCO. 2004. Global education digest, 2004: comparing education statistics across the world. Montr al, Canada UNESCO Institute for Statistics. UNESCO. 2006. Education for All: Global monitoring report 2007. [online]. [Accessed on 14 December 2010]. Available from: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0014/001416/141639e.pdf. VENKAT, J. 2011. Poverty is the primary cause for lack of education: Madhu Pandit Dasa. [online] [Accessed 11 November, 2010] Available from: http://www.prabhupadanugas.eu/?p=14510.

Page 32 of 33