Observations on Samagra Shiksha

Free and compulsory education to all children up to the age of fourteen is the constitutional commitment in India. Despite spectacular quantitative expansion in every sphere of elementary education, the goal to achieve universal enrolment is still a far distant dream in a real sense.  While adopting the constitution in 1950, the goal of UEE was to be achieved in ten years i.e. 1960.  Keeping in view the educational facilities available in the country at that time, the goal of UEE was far too ambitious to achieve in a short span of ten years.  Hence, the target date was revised several times.  During the decade 1991-2001, a number of Centrally Sponsored Schemes, as well as, new programmes and projects were initiated across the country.  The Operation Blackboard scheme initiated in 1987 also got momentum during this period so as the large number of District Institutes of Educational Training (DIETs) established across the country. 

The Andhra Pradesh Primary Education Project, Bihar Education Project, UP Basic Education Project, Lok Jumbish and Shiksha Karmi projects of Rajasthan and District Primary Education Programme (DPEP) were the main state-specific programmes initiated during 1991-2001. The mid-day meal scheme was also initiated during this period. Primary education remained the focus of all these programmes. The DPEP which came to an end in 2000 was implemented in 272 districts across 18 states. 

The most recent ambitious programme, namely Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) was launched by the Government of India in 2001envisaged covering all non-DPEP districts before the end of the Ninth Five-Year Plan with a focus on the entire elementary level of education. 

Initially, the focus of SSA was to further strengthen infrastructure in schools which was later shifted initially to increase enrolment (in terms of enrolment ratio, drop-out, and transition rate) and later focused more on improving quality of education. Under the aegis of SSA, a number of programmes were launched and several studies were conducted (mostly by the Technical Support Group of SSA) in the beginning but later the momentum couldn’t be maintained. One of the significant visible achievements of SSA was strengthening the Educational Management Information System through DISE/U-DISE initiatives which had later acquired the status of the Official Statistics in 2012-13.

Initially, the aim of SSA was to bring all the out-of-school, never enrolled, and dropped-out children back to school by 2003, achieve UPE by 2007, and UEE with satisfactorily quality of education by 2010 but nobody knows what had happened to all these targets. Targets of 2003, 2005, and 2010 show national commitment but no state-specific targets were set down in the process of which all states including Kerala and Bihar was given the same year to achieve the objectives of SSA. Neither district-specific target was set down.

A thorough diagnosis exercise would have revel how many years a state and district would take to achieve the goal of UPE and UEE but the momentum of data analysis couldn’t be maintained barring an initial period of SSA. Later the concept of participatory planning lost focus so as the development of district plans in a decentralized mode. 

A number of capacity building programmes with an emphasis on the data analysis and use of indicators in planning were conducted across the county.  Barring the initial period, later district plans started formulating at the State level and planning teams remained on paper.  In most cases, Block development plans as envisaged in SSA couldn’t be developed so as the School Development plans based on which District plans were envisaged to be developed. 

In 2007, SSA extended to the secondary level of education in the form of RMSA. In 2009, Right to Education was enacted ensuring that every child of age 6 to 14 years is enrolled because of which there is no target year by which UPE and UEE are to be achieved which is continued. The local authorities are supposed to identify out-of-school children at the beginning of an academic year which is then to provide special training of 2 months to 3 years and then to make them sit in the age-appropriate class. No data is available as to how many such students were made to sit in a class and how many of them continued and have completed Grade V and VIII. Change in the planning methodology because RTE is also not available in the public domain but district plans continued to be developed based on the EXCEL Tables.

SSA inherited a legacy of rich experience of DPEP but it couldn’t sustain many of the best practices of the DPEP and it had become a routine and mechanical exercise year after year and lost focus. During the entire period of SSA, 2001 to 2018, it was never externally reviewed barring annual review by the Joint Review Mission even though there was a change in the federal government.   For about 15 years, SSA plans were being formulated, appraised, approved and money released based on the 50+ Excel Tables provided by the Technical Support Group of SSA.  

In the initial years of SSA, the process of plan formulation was a bit scientific but later everything gained over the previous such programmes lost and plans lack academic flavour.  NIEPA is said to be known as an apex body in the areas of capacity building and planning and had played an important role during DPEP implementation. But so far as the SSA is concerned its planning methodology, barring an initial period is not in the public domain.
It never took up the issue of plans being formulated based on EXCEL Sheets with the Ministry of HRD in the absence of which the outcome of the capacity building programmes which it had conducted is not reflected in the plans being formulated. But such programmes conducted by the NIEPA have contributed immensely to developing an understanding of both the district and state-level officers in the areas of MIS, indicators of educational development, planning methodology, and data analysis which is true for both SSA and RMSA. In each state, one person well versed engaged in planning over years and have a good understanding of SSA and RMSA parameters, use of indicators, and its implication for planning can be identified but such officers are not large in number. 

NIEPA faculty played important role at the beginning of SSA and conducted a good number of programmes on planning methodology and have also played important role in Appraisal Missions constituted by the Ministry but this exercise which was found useful by both the members of appraisal as well states discontinued for unknown reasons; instead, the concept of internal appraisal was introduced which was never found effective.  Whatever one wants to achieve can only be achieved through the active participation of teachers for which provision of in-service was made in SSA. During SSA the focus of capacity building of teachers was transferred from DIET to Block Resource Centres across the County. By and large, DIET continues to engage in B.Ed and Diploma programmes and few programmes it used to conduct were also decided at the State level (generally SCERT) which is generally not found need-based and as per the requirement of teachers but the same was an easy tool to spend a good amount of money allotted. The quality of school education was also badly reflected by the provisions of RTE, namely no detention and no exam policy at the elementary level of education which resulted in demand by the states to scrap the same which was later approved by the parliament through amendment in the Constitution. Even though SSA was extended to the Secondary level through RMSA but the same was limited only to Government schools and even aided schools were not covered. 

One of the other limitations of the programme was the issue of prioritization because of which during the initial period of SSA schools were opened where they were not viable to be opened which were later merged with other schools or a few of them were even closed down. This was also true for the construction of additional classrooms and other facilities. Despite all these limitations, significant progress was made during the SSA period but the same was focused more on to further strengthen infrastructure in schools or on input variables. At the end of SSA, the following set of data reveals the progress made and the size of the unfinished task.

Status of School Education: Year 2017-18

·       Number of Schools: 15,58,903

·       Percentage of Private Schools: 20.67%

·       Total Teachers, Grades I to XII: 92,47,361

·       Percentage of Trained Teachers : 81.39%

·       Percentage of Single-Teacher Schools (Government): 7.82%

·       Percentage of Single-Classroom Schools (Government): 3.99%

·       Percentage of Schools with Computer(s): 29.57%

·       Percentage of Schools with Functional Computer(s): 13.07%

·       Percentage of Schools with Electricity: 63.14%

·       Percentage of Schools with Internet Connection: 13.61%

·       Total I to XII Enrolment: 25,09,89,193

·       Enrolment in Grades I to V & NER: 12,23,78,400, 82.53%

·       Enrolment in Grades VI to VII & NER: 6,54,48,222, 72.62%

·       Enrolment in Grades I to VII & NER: 18,78,26,622, 85.18%

·       Enrolment in Grades IX to X & NER: 3,84,80,023, 52,14%

·       Enrolment in XI & XII & NER: 2,46,82,548, 32.60%

·       Enrolment in Grade I: 1,31,37,951 Boys & 1,19,49,359 Girls

·       Average Annual Drop-out Rate, Primary level: 3.51%

·       Average Annual Drop-out Rate, Upper Primary level: 5.02%

·       Average Annual Drop-out Rate, Elementary level: 4.03%

·       Average Annual Drop-out Rate, Secondary level: 18.51%

·       Average Annual Drop-out Rate, Primary level: 2.77%

·       Retention Rate at Primary level: 86.11%

·       Retention Rate at Elementary level: 71.06%%

·       Retention Rate at Secondary level: 57.72%

·       Transition Rate from primary to Upper Primary level: 90.78%

·       Transition Rate from Upper Primary to Secondary level: 89.23%

·       Transition Rate from Secondary Higher to Secondary level: 68.05%

·       Gender Parity Index, Primary Grades: 1.02

·       Gender Parity Index, Upper Primary Grades: 1.11

·       Gender parity Index, Secondary Grades: 1.03

·       Gender parity Index, Higher Secondary Grades: 1.02

·       Completion Rate at Secondary Level: 64.97%

 As it seems that most of the indicators have improved over a period of time but the drop-out rate remained high which would significantly influence the objective of universal school enrolment. Another important issue is the decline in enrolment across school levels over a period of time is a major area of concern that must be thoroughly examined to find out the exact causes of decline which is across the country.  Net Enrolment Ratio is 85 percent which if not further improve to significant effect, enrolment in other higher levels cannot improve. Needless to mention that enrolment in upper primary and other higher levels can only improve if enrolment in primary classes is further improved which would happen only if the efficiency of the primary level of education is improved. This is also true for Higher Education which unless received an adequate number of Higher Secondary graduates, cannot increase on its own. 

Till recently plans were being developed separately for the elementary and secondary level of education, which now under Samagra Shiksha, are supposed to be developed for the entire School education level as one entity by one planning team but as of now the same old model of developing plans based on EXCEL Sheets is still going on. The only difference is that the entire set of EXCEL Tables are divided into three parts, elementary and RTE, Teacher education, and Secondary and higher secondary levels of education which are then provided to the person-in-charge looking after these components under the aegis of Samagra Shiksha. Hardly any research studies have been undertaken to see the impact of SSA and RMSA and whether its objectives have been achieved and if not, what are the reasons for non-achievement.

It may also be of interest to know that two separate district plans were used to be developed one each for elementary under SSA and another secondary level of education under RMSA by the two different agencies. In the initial years of RMSA, even there were two separate JRMs as well as PAB to approve annual plans. Till 2011-12, even DISE was also separately been managed by the Office of SSA and RMSA with a provision of two Data Capture Formats, one online application for SEMIS and another off-line software for SSA, two Nodal officers, one each for SSA an RMSA but there was only one data entry point because of which there was a lot of duplicity of efforts being made towards achieving the goal of school education in India. Maybe because of these reasons, Samagra Shiksha was launched in 2018-19 to meet the challenges of unfinished tasks of school education in India.

Universalisation in the Context of the National Policy on Education 2020

By 

Prof. Arun C Mehta

Formally Professor & Head of the EMIS Department

NIEPA, New Delhi (India)

The National Educational Policy (2020) adopted a number of suggestions for school education which, if adopted has got far reaching implications one of which is restructuring the composition of school education. At present in India Primary education level consists of Grade I to V (corresponding age-group 6+ to 10+ years), Upper Primary level consists of Grades VI to VIII (age-group 11+ to 13+ years), Secondary (Grades IX & X/14+ to 15+ years) and Higher Secondary Level of education (XI & XII/16+ to 17+ years). Universalisation in India means universal access (school facilities to all), universal participation (all relevant age group children enrolled), universal retention (meaning all those who enter in to the system retain and transit from one level of education to another) and universal quality of education (satisfying criteria of minimum levels of learning).

Instead of present levels, the NPE (2020) proposed (i) Foundational Stage of School Education (3 years of Pre-primary education including Grades 1 and 2 with corresponding age-group 3 to 8 years) (ii) Preparatory phase consisting of 3 years i.e. Grades 3, 4 and 5 (iii) Middle School Education of 3 years (Grades 6, 7 and 8) and (iv) Secondary Education phase of 4 years consisting Grades 9, 10, 11 and 12. The corresponding clientele age-groups of these phases would be: Phase I (3+ to 7+ years), Phase II (8+ to 10+years), Phase III (11+ to 13+ years) and Phase IV (14+ to 17+ years).

New phases, if adopted, would change the meaning of universal primary education.  A new set of indicators would be required to be developed and adopted. At present universalisation in India at an educational level is viewed through a set of indicators such as, Gross and Net Enrolment Ratio, Age-specific & Adjusted Net Enrolment Ratio, Grade-to-Grade drop out, promotion and repetition rate, average annual dropout rate, retention & transition rates and a set of quality of education related indicators to view learners ability to read and write.

In case if the proposed structure is adopted, meaning of the most of the indicators and its implication for planning universalisation will change. Instead of present 6+ to 18+ years age group, the new system would have 3+ to 18+ as its clientele; thus meaning school education would have 17 years instead of present 14 years.

New indicators for Foundation and Preparatory Phase would need to be developed on the line of existing set of indicators. However, there would not be any implication for third phase i.e. Middle School education which consists of Grades 6, 7 and 8 which is similar to the existing Upper Primary level of Education and Phase 4th which is combination of the existing Secondary and Higher Secondary levels of education. For Universal foundational Stage, one would be required to compute Gross, Net and other enrolment based indicators for the corresponding 3 to 8 years clientele population. To attain universalisation at this phase of education means enrolling all children of age-group 3 to 8 years in the corresponding classes i.e. Pre-primary to Grade 1 and 2 will be the sufficient condition but that itself will not serve the purpose unless all those who enter into the system through first year of 3 years of Pre-primary education retain in the system, move from one grade to another and finally reach and complete Grade 2. To achieve goal of universalisation, the basic condition would be to enroll all children of age 3 for which entry rate would be required to be computed. A 100 percent entry rate (net) will be required to achieve the goal of universal foundation.

Grade-to-grade dropout, promotion and repetition, if any will be required to compute between each of 5 years of foundation stage. In addition, transition rate from Foundational stage to Preparatory phase, Preparatory to Middle school education phase and from Middle school education phase to Secondary education phase as well as retention rate at all these phases will be required to be computed. Retention rate presents information about the retaining capacity of the system which is unless brought to 100; the dream of universalisation may not be cherished.

Similarly, enrolment ratios at Preparatory phase consisting Grades 3, 4 & 5 with the corresponding clientele age group 8+to 10+ years would be required to be worked out. Universalisation at this phase mean all children of age group 8 to 10 years are enrolled in corresponding grades i.e. Grades 3, 4 & 5 but that would depends upon how many phase one graduates (those who successfully reach Grade 2) system will be producing and transit to the first grade i.e. Grade 3 of next phase i.e. Phase 2, Preparatory phase. It may also be of interest to know that to compute enrolment based indicators enrolment in absolute form and relevant age-specific child population is required.

Though enrolment in the latest year is available from the U-DISE but the age-specific population is available only from the Census of India which is latest available for 2011. Until 2001 Census, the Office of the Registrar General of India used to provide projected population annually but the same based up to the 2011 Census population was never provided in the absence of which enrolment ratio at different levels of education may be termed as indicative (GER at Primary 95.12 percent & Upper Primary level, 90.73 percent) as the child population used in computing GER & NER is estimated based on the projected population based on up to the 2001 Census. All through 2012 to current year, enrolment ratios at all levels of education are based on provisional set of child population. Once the actual child population is available, the enrolment ratio may dramatically change. At disaggregated levels such as, district and block levels, official population projections are rarely available in the absence of which it is not an easy task to compute enrolment based indicators at these levels.

School Education Department of the MHRD must approach the Office of the Registrar General of India to ensure timely availability of 2021 Census child population both at the all-India and State and district levels and in subsequent years in the absence of which it is not possible to reliably compute enrolment ratio indicators which has got serious implications for planning universalisation.

The policy document also envisage increasing GER at Higher Education level from present 25 percent to 50 percent by 2035 meaning doubling enrolment during the period 2017 to 2035 which may not be realized unless the efficiently of school education system is improved to significant effect as enrolment in higher education level is not only a function of 18 to 22 population but would largely depends upon number of higher secondary graduates the system will be producing.

Needless to mention that of the total 123.8 million enrolment in Primary classes, about 6 percent children dropped out form the system before completion of Primary level thus influencing enrolment in subsequent levels of education i.e. upper primary and secondary and higher secondary levels of education all which will eventually affect number of secondary graduates that would be available for higher education.

In view of this, the National Policy 2020 emphasized the need to achieve access and participation in free and compulsory quality school education for all children in the age group of 3 to 18 years by 2030 for which it envisaged all out of school, never enrolled and dropped out children back to school as early as possible and to further prevent all them from dropping out. To achieve this, the policy suggested (i) sufficient infrastructure at all levels from pre-primary school through Grade 12; and (ii) to achieve universal participation in schools by carefully tracking students to ensure that they are enrolled in and attending schools.

The Policy (2019) also advocates that the Free and Compulsory aspects of Right to Education (RTE) Act must be enforced and extended through Grade 12 to all children up to the age of 18 is termed welcome and timely suggestion but the moot question one may ask is whether RTE Act enacted in 2009 has been truly implemented in its spirits?. U-DISE data suggest that only 12 percent of the 1.5 million schools imparting school education in the Country have all the 10 facilities as was envisaged in the Right to Free and Compulsory Education 2009 Act majority of schools without such facilities are the Government run schools. In addition, though declined but still a good number of unrecognized schools are functioning across the country which is evident from the U-DISE data.

As per the RTE Act, all un-enrolled, never enrolled and dropped out children are to be identified by the local authorities annually and train them (3 months to 2 years) to make them to sit in the age appropriate grade in view of which in the recent years there are no target date/year to achieve the goal of Universal Primary/School education. The Student Database Management in-sync with U-DISE launched in 2016-17 could have helped, as proposed in the policy, in moving towards developing a Child-Tracking System but unfortunately for unknown reasons, the same despite successfully collecting individual student records of more than 210 million students discontinued abruptly in the following years.

Once the modifications as suggested in the NPE 2020 is adopted,  Officers those who are engaged in data analysis and district plans will be required to understand meaning of universalisation in the changed scenario for which adequate modifications will be required in the planning strategies, if any under the Government of India’s flagship programme i.e. Samagra Shiksha!!

Planning under Samagra Shiksha (School Education, INDIA)

By
 Arun C Mehta[1]
Formerly Professor & Head
Department of Educational Management Information System
National University of Educational Planning & Administration (NIEPA), New Delhi
(E-mail: acmehta100@gmail.com)

  Background

Since the inception of the District Primary Education Programme in 1994, there is a provision of developing district plans initially for the primary level of education which was later extended to the entire elementary level of education when Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan programme was launched in 2000-01. At the end of DPEP in 2000, the development of district primary education plans could reach 272 districts across 18 States of the Country but still confined to DPEP states and districts only. Special planning modules developed were extensively been used in developing district plans and the whole exercise is termed as rigorous. Intensive capacity building programmes were conducted by the apex institutions, such as NIEPA, New Delhi on planning methodology with a focus on hands-on training and data analysis, and use of indicators. There was also a provision of pre-plan activities each of the districts covered under DPEP was supposed to carry out each of the activities proposed in the DPEP framework most of which were followed rigorously. District, as well as State planning teams with representations from all the main streams departments, were constituted both of which used to have intensive discussions on each of the plan components. Also, several research studies were initiated both at the district and state level for which a substantial amount was made available findings of which were the important inputs for the plan formulation.  Plans developed under DPEP were used to be first appraised internally at the state level followed by an intensive filed-based appraisal by the appraisal mission, having 10 to 12 experts representing different components of plan formulation, constituted by the authorities at the national level findings of which were used to be discussed at the national level in a meeting chaired by the Education Secretary (School Education) and attended by the Mission members in the presence of the State Project Director and his/her entire team. Every recommendation used to have had heated arguments and consensus arrived on which used to was the basis of approval state as well as district plans and was termed as a learning activity not only for the state officers but also for the appraisal team members.

The entire planning process as prescribed was rigorously followed all through the DPEP but couldn’t be sustained the momentum except during the initial period of the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) programme launched in 2001 to achieve the goal of the universal elementary level of education.  During the initial period of SSA, both the plan formulation as well as plan appraisal were rigorous but during the later years, the whole exercise becomes more or less monotonous. Appraisal Mission was taken over by the Joint Review Mission members of which used to visit states for a couple of days based on which reports were submitted to the Government of India. Intensive plan formulation was taken over by plans being formulated based on EXCEL Tables provided by the Technical Support Group (TSG) of Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan. Even though SSA was to take care needs of the entire elementary level of education but district plans were still centered on the primary level of education. Research studies were rarely undertaken by the districts and states even though enough funds were made available for the same. Whatever little studies were undertaken all were undertaken by the TSG of SSA for which a separate unit was created within the TSG. State Officers including MIS In-charge used to come to Delhi and fill-up EXCEL Tables which is being followed by a pre-appraisal discussion with the TSG Consultants outcome of which is presented before the Project Approval Board for its consideration and approval. Initially, separate plans were being formulated for SSA and RMSA which was launched in 2009 along with RTE which was also enacted in 2009.  Modifications were made both in the Data Capture Format of DISE as well EXCEL planning Tables initially separately for the elementary and secondary level of education but later the same set of tables was merged into one package under the banner of school education plan. DISE has also become the Unified DISE since 2012-13 when one Data Capture Format was initiated to collect data from the entire school level of education. Formulation of plans through EXCEL Tables continued till the launch of Samagra Shiksha in the year 2018. The previously used EXCEL Tables are now re-distributed under the headings, Right-to-Education, School and Teacher education but still, the academic flavor is continued to be missing.  As it seems that experience of plan formulation under DPEP, SSA & RMSA, its short-comings have not adequately utilized and is also not visible in the on-going Samagra Shiksha so far as the district plan formulation is concerned as the same practice of plan formulation is continued. 

The Tables being used are comprehensive covering all aspects of school education including RTE and Teacher education and are largely based on U-DISE data and data from internal sources which is difficult to verify. A few sets of data, such as on out-of-school children and a few other such variables may not be available annually. Because of the changes proposed in the NPE 2020 concerning school structure, the computation and meaning of enrolment-based indicators, as well as meaning of universalization, will completely be changed.  The current structure of 10+2 schooling will be changed to five years of foundational education (age 3 to 7 years), three years of preparatory (age 8 to 10+ years), three years of the middle (upper primary/age 11 to 13+ years) and four years of secondary education (age 14 to 18+ years). Because of the changes, district planning tables under Samagra Shiksha may also eventually require to be modified to meet the changed requirement. 

It is hoped that the district planning module developed by NIEPA will be implemented in the real sense, for sure not only based on EXCEL tables which may be resulted only if all those who are engaged in planning shake hands.

Visit

Education For All in India

 

 

 

---

[1] Article is has been written after superannuation from NIEPA in August 2019.