Online Learning (Education) in India: Are we Ready?

On-Line Learning: Are We Ready?

A Note by Prof. Arun C Mehta, Former Professor, NIEPA, New Delhi (INDIA)

 Background

Because of the COVID-19 outbreak, since the third week of March 2020, the entire Country is under lockdown. Schools are closed down because of which students are offered online content but many are facing difficulty in getting access to contents because of lack of digital devices. In this note, an attempt has been made to assess readiness to receive online content.

Rather than students as a unit of on-line education, better to make household as a unit of online education because of the availability of the digital platform, on-line education must be provided. A few households may not have got access to any digital device but may have Radio and/or mobile phone with FM receiving facility. A few others may have got only Television Sets with or without DTH facility. Besides, few households might have got access to a smartphone with limited or no internet facility. Few others maybe only a few households, especially in the rural areas might have got access to a smartphone with 4G connectivity. Contrary to which a few households might have got access to a computer or laptop and/or smartphone with data plans and/or Radio and TV with DTH connection. Depending upon the availability of the digital platform, the household may be categorized into those who can access (i) on-line (ii) off-line or (iii) partially online content.

 

Computer & Internet Facility in India

To know more about the availability of digital mode at household, it is important to analyze NSSO 75^th Round of data on education conducted during the period July 2017 to June 2018. During this round, information on ICT in general and (i) whether the household had a computer and (ii) internet facility while for each person age 5 years and above was collected. Also, HH's ability to operate  (i) computer, (ii) use the internet, and (iii) whether the HH used the internet during the last 30 days was also collected. Unfortunately, information on the availability of all devices such as, desktop computer, laptop computer, notebook, notebook, palmtop, tablet, etc. was collected but one of the most easily accessible devices these days, namely Smart Phone, no information was collected in view of which the NSSO 2017-18 data may be considered as revealing incomplete information about the availability of devices in Households. Still, it provides useful information about the availability and use of ICT devices in both rural as well as urban areas which is briefly analyzed below:

Available information reveals that only 10.7 percent of the total households in India have got a computer and another 23.8 percent have got access to internet facilities. But the same in the rural areas is as low as 4.4 and 14.9 percent respectively as against 23.4 and 42 percent in the urban areas; thus showing a wide gap in the availability of computers and access to internet facility between rural and urban areas.

 State-specific availability of computers and access to internet facilities further reveals a wide-spread gap between states. On the one hand, Delhi reported having the computer in its 34.7 percent of the total Households and another 55.7 percent has got access to the internet as against only 4.6 and 15.4 percent households respectively in one of the largest states, namely Bihar. However, the same in the case of Odisha concerning the availability of computers is as low as 4.2 percent which has also got the lowest percentage (10 percent) of households have got access to internet facility. One can easily understand, how households in India in general and located in the rural areas would have got access to online content offered to their children during COVID19. In the rural areas, Jharkhand has got the lowest percentage of HHs having a computer (1.3 percent) as against 5.8 percent of households in Odisha having got access to internet facility.

Ability to use Computer & Internet Facility: India, Population 5 year & above

The percentage use of Computer and Internet Facilities for the population 5 years and above reveals that only 16.5 percent of people in this age group can use the computer as against 20.1 percent use internet out of which 17.6 percent used the internet during the last 30 days from the day of the survey. The percentage is as low as 9.9, 13.0 and 10.8 percent respectively in the rural areas compared to which percentage in the urban areas is much higher at 32.4, 37.1 and 33.8 percent respectively but still a majority of population both in the rural and urban areas do not know how to operate both computer and internet. Further, a wide-gap has also been observed between males and females using the computer and internet which is true for both the rural and urban areas. In rural areas, only 7 percent of females reported having the ability to operate computers as against 12.6 percent internet facility. The corresponding percentages for the ability to use the internet are 17.1 (male) and 8.5 percent (female) in the rural areas against 37.5 (male) and 26.9 (female) percentage population know computer operation and 43.5 (male) and 30.1 (female) percent know internet operation in the urban areas.

A state-wise percentage of 5+ population having the ability to operate a computer and use internet facility separately in the rural and urban areas also reveals wide-spread variation across states. Bihar with 8 percent, Jharkhand with 8.2 percent and Odisha with 8.5 percent has the lowest percentage of the population who can operate computer against 42.8 percent population in Delhi and 41.5 percent in Kerala know computer operation incidentally which is the highest amongst major states.  In the rural areas, the percentage is even further low as only 6.3 percent of 5+ population know computer operation in Bihar against 39.2 percent in Kerala.  Further, significant variation is observed in the case of male and female operating computers and internet facilities. It may also be of interest to observe that male-female variation both in the case of a population of 5+ who can operation both computers and the internet is more in urban areas than the same in the rural areas.

The above analysis of NSSO 75 Round data (2017-18) reveals that all households are not yet fully equipped to receive online content. Even if they can receive, most of them are not able to use it which is reflected in the NSSO 5+ population able to use the computer as well as the internet all which raises serious issues about the reach and use of on-line contents made available in different forms across the country. The above analysis of available data is presented because of users but are our teachers equipped to handle the task efficiently concerning the development of contents and conduct on-line classes? or they are supposed to use the contents developed and made available by other agencies?  How teachers are equipped about imparting online classes is also indirectly reflected in schools having got access to computer and internet connectivity which is latest available for the year 2017-18 in the public domain through U-DISE which is briefly analyzed below. It may also be of interest to know that of the total 9.24 million teachers who impart school education, about 20 percent of teachers are not professionally trained. Incidentally, more than 85 percent of teachers in government schools are professionally qualified but the percentage of untrained teachers in the case of private and aided schools is as high as 27.43 percent.  On the other hand, the qualification of a few teachers is below secondary (0.49 percent) and 5.83 percent Higher Secondary level but good to know that majority of teachers are graduates and postgraduates (76.16 percent). Even 1.08 percent of teachers are having M.Phil degree holders as against -.46 percent teachers having acquired a P.Hd degree. Besides, the percentage of contractual teachers is high which has increased during the recent past as many states have discontinued the recruitment of regular teachers. In addition to about 20 percent of teachers not having adequate professional qualification, about 6.74 percent of schools are single-teacher and 2.51 percent government schools, single-classroom school; how they manage schools even on normal days is a moot question forget about on-line learning during COVID days all which raises serious issues about the real implementation and impact of online learning. It is disappointed to further know that only 59.18 percent of the total 1.5 million schools (all) have regular HMs posted in schools compared to which the same in case of primary-only school is only 45.54 percent indicating no leadership[p available in case of about 54  percent primary schools in the country in 2017-18.

Schools having Electricity & Computer Facility: 2017-18

 Schools having electricity connection, computer, functional computer, and internet connection presented at the all-India level for the year 2017-18 and in a few selected states reveal that our schools are not equipped to meet challenges paused by the pandemic. Even the basic requirement such as, the electricity connection is yet to be provided to the majority of schools which is true for both the rural and urban areas. A glance at the available information  reveals that of the total 1.5 million schools engaged in school education in the country; only 63.14 percent of schools have got the electricity connection compared to a little more than 50 percent of such primary schools. It is also true that just schools having electricity connections don’t necessarily mean that schools get an uninterrupted power supply. It has also been observed in the past that schools generally do not have separate funds to pay electricity bills because of which generally observed that even schools have a connection but they do not have in real power in school. May be The Saubhagya Scheme or Pradhan Mantri Sahaj Bijli Har Ghar Yojana launched by the Prime Minister will help electricity reach our remaining schools.

Percent of Schools having Electricity, Computer and Internet Connectivity in School: 2017-18

Facility	Primary Only Schools	All Schools
Electricity Connection	51.85	63.14
Computer	12.20	29.57
Internet Connection	3.54	13.61
Functional Computer	4.19	13.07
Computer Laboratory (Hr. Secondary Schools)	-	45.17

            Source: U-DISE

Another crucial indicator is the availability of computers and internet connection in schools both of which are yet to be provided in the majority of schools in India. Of the total 1.5 million schools, only about 20 percent of schools have got a computer as against 12.20 percent such primary schools. Unfortunately, the percentage of working/functional computers in schools is as low as 13.07 percent (all schools) and 4.19 percent (primary only schools. The state-wise percentage of schools with working computers further reveals that the same in Bihar is as low as 0.51 percent compared to 3 percent in Uttar Pradesh, about 5 percent in Jharkhand, 4 percent in Assam, 5 percent in Madhya Pradesh, and 3 percent in Odisha. On the other hand, schools in a few states such as Andhra Pradesh, Delhi, and Gujarat have got electricity connections in schools but the percentage of schools with a working computer, except Delhi (68.25 percent) is still very low. Schools with working computers need not have internet connection as only about 14 percent of schools have internet connection compared to only about 4 percent of primary schools. 

          Schools having Electricity, Computer and Internet Connectivity in Schools (All) in Selected States: 2017-18

Facility	Assam	Bihar	Jharkhand	Odisha	UP	MP	Andhra Pradesh	Delhi	Gujarat	All India
Electricity Connection	24.28	45.82	47.46	36.50	44.76	32.58	92.80	99.93	99.91	63.14
Functional Computer	3.98	0.51	4.84	3.22	3.17	5.99	24.03	68.25	38.65	13.07

Source: U-DISE

Despite the lack of digital devices to receive on-line content, both in the households and also in schools, online education in different modes was launched during COVID19 which may have further widened the inequalities across the country. Time Education in different modes, such as audio, video multi-media, etc. is being widely used across the country. Are the deprived further at the disadvantage stages? Limited information available on this aspect suggests so, see the box below. It may be recalled that the Government of India announced the nation-wide lockdown on March 23, 2020, following which both the Central as well as State Governments promptly made available online resources on different platforms (laptops, desktops, and mobile phones and also through Radio and Television Sets) most of which were already available in the public domain but altogether were made available at one place some of which are mentioned below. Despite all efforts, the limited available information all suggest that the contents are yet to reach all segments of the population (about 240 million students) because of the adequate device at household/home and those who could get access all of them couldn’t use the resources because of the one or the other reason. The government of India has also specified its e-learning priorities with Grades 9 to 12 having an enrolment of 63 million is given the top priority followed by Grades 6 to 8 (64 million enrolment) with the next priority and Grades 1 to 5 (120 million enrolment), the last priority.  But it is a fact that households having got access to devices has improved significantly since the year 2018. Pratham’s recent study reveals that about 62 percent of the total families in India now have got access to a smartphone. Besides, the proportion of boys enrolled in government schools having smartphone increased from 62.8% in 2018 to 66.4% in 2020 against an increase from 70% to 73% in the case of the household having girls during the same period all of which suggests that our households though slowly but surely gearing up to have smart devices at home which shall eventually help us in taking contents to more and more households. However, in the absence of electricity in households, charging smartphones is another hurdle in accessing contents online. Lack of digital skills amongst parents, especially in the rural areas in the case of students at primary level is another major hurdle children accessing digital content at home. In addition, children are also engaged in helping their parents in their work. More children from the general class are seen using online content than children from the socially deprived section of the society. The study conducted by the UNICEF in collaboration with the Maharashtra SCERT also reveals that only half of students of Grades I to VIII in government schools in Maharashtra have got access to online learning. The study also reveals that 72 percent of families in Maharashtra lack digital skills and only 66 families do not have access to smartphone as compared to 57 percent of students have got access to internet connectivity. All the available evidence indicates the digital divide between rural and urban areas and also between general and ST/ST students. In addition, government schools are also required to be geared up to take care of additional students who have migrated from the private schools many of which now during the pandemic have closed down or simply the parents are not in opposition to pay the fee. Efforts must be initiated to ensure that after the COVID is over, more jobs are available or salaries are restored these children are not migrated back to private schools.

 Government’s Online Learning Resources

 DIKSHA: Online platform for school education for teachers, parents and students (Grades I to     XII)

e-PATHSHALA: NCERT’s Web portal and mobile app which  has audios, videos, e- e-books and Flip Books for Grades I to XII.

NATIONAL REPOSITORY OF OPEN EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES (NROER): A portal dedicated to quality contents.

SWAYAM: National online education platform hosting courses for both school (class IX to XII) &  Higher Education (both UG and PG) in all subjects which are made available free of cost to any learner in the country.

SWAYAM PRABHA: Has DTH TV channels transmitting educational contents for both school and higher education on 24/7 basis which is being received across the country by using DD free Dish set top box and antenna.

NISHTHA: An integrated Teacher Training Portal & Moblie Applications.

UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION (UGC): College & Higher Education learning

NATIONAL DIGITAL LIBRARY: This is a digital repository of a vast amount of academic content in different formats.

NIOS: For students enrolled with NIOS

Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU): Online contents for all levels of higher education

 In view of serious loss of learning because of the pandemic, UNESCO’s session on October 22 was convened to protect and promote education at a time when education financing is at considerable risk of being left behind in the governments’ domestic budgets, stimulus packages, and international aid, the UN agency said (HT, 25^th September 2020) all which shows the situation of learning because of the pandemic is serious. However, online education has opened up a lot of opportunities for both educators/teachers and learners/students. With experience and proper policy and honest efforts may result in India march-ahead which may become an example for other countries as well.

School Educational Quality Index: A Few Observations

 School Educational Quality Index: A Few Observations Arun C Mehta

 Exclusively based on U-DISE Data, National Institute of Educational Planning and Administration (NIEPA) initiated computing Educational Development Index (EDI) based on a set of 24 parameters in 2005-06 which continued up to the year 2014-15. It was annual practice to compute EDI separately for Primary and Upper Primary levels of education and also a composite index for the entire Elementary level of education. A set of 24 indicators were being used in computing EDI which were re-grouped into the four sub-groups, namely Access, Infrastructure, Teachers and Outcome indicators.

 

Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was applied to decide the factor loading and weights. In the case of a few variables, policy options were explored to identify the best values instead of based on the observed values. The EDI in its new avatar, namely School Education Quality Index (SEQI) is computed for the base year 2015-16. The latest document, namely SEQI: The Success of Our Schools was released by NITI Aayog on 30th September 2019 is based on 2016-17 data i.e. reference year which was collected mostly as on 30th September 2016. SEQI is an improved version of EDI as it is more comprehensive in nature and is based on more sets of indicators and unlike EDI; is not confined only to U-DISE data; however, U-DISE still remained the main source of data. In addition to U-DISE data, SEQI has also extensively used learning outcomes data of the National Achievement Survey’s (NAS) conducted by the NCERT on November 13, 2017, apart from a few other data-sets provided by the States & UTs.

While the total number of indicators and sectors which have been used in SEQI is comprehensive but a few of the crucial indicators, like retention rate, ratio of primary to upper primary and upper primary to secondary schools/sections and percentage of schools with female teachers, and a few others, such as, average annual drop-out rate at primary level of education has not been considered which has got significant implications for the Country to achieve the goal of universal school education.

 

It may also be of high importance to observe that enrolment in school education in India during 2015-16 and 2016-17 has shown a decline of about 9 million enrolment of which 6.8 million (Primary, 5.32 million & Upper Primary, 1.51 million) alone declined in case of elementary level of education i.e. Classes 1 to 8 which has got serious implications for the country to achieve the goal of universal elementary level of education but declining enrolment has not been considered as one of the indicators in computing SEQI. It was perhaps for the first time that enrolment at the Upper Primary level of education (Classes VI to VIII) had also declined in 2016-17 from its previous level i.e. 2015-16. Individually also, Class I, V, VI & VII and Class X, XI & XII all declined in 2016-17 which has got serious implications for enrolment at other higher levels of education to grow in years that follow. At least, Net Apparent Entry Rate which is considered crucial for achieving universal enrolment should have been used. Needless to mention that even enrolment in Class I had also declined to 25.29 million in 2016-17 from its previous level, i.e. 27.17 million in 2015-16. 

As many as 30 indicators have been used in computing 2016-17 SEQI which are classified under two categories, namely Outcomes and Governance Processes Aiding Outcomes. Category one Outcome is further divided into four domains, namely Learning, Access, Infrastructure and Equity outcomes which has as many as 16 indicators as against 14 indicators including student and teacher attendance, teacher availability, training, accountability and transparency all which are not part of the regular collection of administrative data but provided by the states and is not available in the public domain and not an easy task to examine the validity of such data sets. Limited information has been provided on how such data set as stated by the States & UTs was validated. On the other hand, as many as 10 indicators from NAS have been used as compared to 9 indicators from the U-DISE sources.

 

The rest of the indicators are either obtained from the GoI portal, namely ShaGun or have been reported by the States & UTs. Depending upon the nature of an indicator, a few indicators have been used for all the schools including Private Aided & Unaided managements while a few others have been used only for Government and Government aided schools/management. Few indicators used in computing 2016-17 SEQI are worth to describe. Over a period of time, it has been observed that percentage of out-of-school children identified and mainstreamed has always been incomplete because of which the same had never been reported in U-DISE publications which is now under SEQI is used but is reported by the States & UTs and is not easy to validate the same. This indicator might have avoided as it has already been captured indirectly in the Adjusted-NER at Elementary and Secondary level of education used in computing SEQI. 

Another important indicator used in SEQI is the percentage of children whose unique Id is seeded in SDMIS. It is mentioned that “States and UTs are encouraged to track their students through the SDMIS as a way to inform UDISE. UDISE is meant to serve as a longitudinal database for tracking the schooling status of students to provide a foundation for evidence-based policy responses”. It is heartening to observe SEQI document mentioning “that all States and UTs have successfully migrated from their existing Management Information Systems (MIS) to the SDMIS”. However, it is unfortunate that SDMIS in-sync with U-DISE launched during the 2016-17 data collection was discontinued in the following year for unknown reasons through which detailed individual student records on 35 parameters in case of 210 million students were recorded the majority of which also had the Unique Ids.

 

Had it been continued, the same would have eventually helped in improving enrolment statistics generated through the U-DISE which would have lead India towards developing a Child-tracking system in view of which the next SEQI, if computed this indicator would have to be dropped. Another indicator that was planned but dropped in the final calculation is GER of CWSN Children (age-group 6 to 18 years) because of unavailability of the published data which at the very first place shouldn’t have been included in the initial list of indicators because of its very definition. Where do we get the CWSN population of age-group 6 to 18 years in 2016-17 whereas the reliable child population in the school age-groups is even not available?

 

The percentage of average daily attendance of teachers recorded in the electronics attendance system is another indicator that has been used instead of indicators that focuses more on what teachers do in the school. Instead of 10 RTE facility indicators, the percentage of schools meeting teacher norms as per the RTE Act has only been used. Instead of using the percentage of teachers provided with the sanctioned number of days of training/in-service training, emphasis should have been given to indicators that capture whether the training provided meets the teacher’s requirement and is need-based?

It is common practice across the Country that DIET receives themes (along with a number of programs to be conducted, program days & number of participants, etc. in each program) of the capacity building programs identified by the SCERT which is generally common to all the districts across the state? It is of interest to observe that many states have reported the percentage of schools that have made school development plans a hundred which is contrary to the situation at the grassroots level across the Country. Rather percentage of blocks and districts used school development plans in the formulation of district elementary/secondary education plans as envisaged in SSA must have been used. One of another interesting indicators used in computing SEQI is average number of days taken by State/UT to release Central/State share to State Societies but it is silent on a number of months delayed by the Central agencies to release the funds to states. Rather, in the case of 9 UTs, there is no provision to release the state share. A total 20 weight-age points have been assigned to states recruited new teachers through online system, but the SEQI is totally silent on the percentage of para/contractual-teachers to total teachers which has grown many-fold in the recent past which is evident in the percentage of contractual teachers being disseminated through U-DISE. In fact, many states have discontinued recruiting regular teachers and instead recruit only para-teachers. It has also been observed that indicators not showing large variations across States & UTs, such as percentage of schools with girls’ toilets, would not have been used in computing SEQI as all the states, small medium and large ones have reported this percentage to be 100. Seeding of UIDs in SDMIS in 2016-17 is another such indicator that also didn’t have any variation in addition, to a few other such indicators. One of the other important points which have been observed is that SEQI is computed for the entire school education as one entity whereas in 2016- 17, SSA and RMSA were two separate programs as Samagra came into the picture during 2018- 19 in view of which there must have been two separate indices, one for elementary (also for primary and upper primary levels) and another for secondary and higher secondary level of education. School Education Quality Index is based on U-DISE 2016-17 data which was collected as on 30th September 2016 has now become almost 3 years old; therefore data used in computing SEQI is termed outdated. The process of data entry of SEQI indicators and submission by the States & UTs began in April 2018 and ended on December 2018 during which the unpublished 2017-18 UDISE data was also available with the States & UTs but the most recent data was not used in computing SEQI. It is hoped that the next SEQI will be based on the latest data i.e. 2019- 20 (30th September 2019 as date of reference) being collected through U-DISE+ which is supposed to be the real-time data but the same is still being collected. It is hoped that the next SEQI data will directly be obtained from the U-DISE+ portal and states will not be required to upload the data on ShaGun or other portal as has been the case with the SEQI 2016-17. It may be observed that the Educational Development Index being computed by MHRD and NIEPA during the period 2005-06 to 2014-15 was more scientific as weights to each indicator was assigned based on Principal Component Analysis and as such no human element was involved in assigning the weights whereas in SEQI weights have been assigned manually in consultation with the MHRD, Sector Experts and even stakeholders, namely States and UTs which may change if different set of experts are engaged in assigning the weights which may dramatically change the SEQI index.

SEQI document mentioned that because of the lack of timeseries information, it was not possible to assign weight-age but EDI which was also based on 4 cross-sectional data used to assign weights which were more scientific than the procedure adopted in computing SEQI. One of the important indicators used is Adjusted-NER which describes children's participation of an age group in the corresponding education level which is based on enrolment and age-specific population. Though enrolment is available from the UDISE but the same is not true for corresponding child population in the absence of which projected population has been used but the same based on 2011 Census is not available in the absence of which all enrolment based indicators such as Adjusted-NER may be treated as provisional and may change once more recent child projected population is available. It is hoped that the NITI Aayog will quickly get the age-specific child population immediately after the 2021 Census is released state and district-specific.

It has rightly been said that SEQI has been developed to provide insights and data-based feedback on the success of school education in India which shall help India achieving SDG by 2030 which cannot be achieved unless SEQI is computed district and within the district block-wise. A state may have high SEQI but all of its districts may not be at par as a few of which may take more years to achieve goals of school education while a few others may be in a position to achieve the same in the near future. From the document, it is not clear whether there is any planning to bring out district-wise SEQI and within the district, block specific SEQIs? It may be recalled that many states attempted computing EDI at the state level and identified districts & blocks which need more attention while formulating district education plans. But because of the lake of expertise at the state and district level, the same could not be attempted across the Country and sustained. District level Planning & MIS Officials must be oriented to ensure that SEQI is computed at the district level, block-wise by the district officers. They are also required to be trained to provide inputs in district plans based on the outcome of district-specific SEQI. Computing SEQI may not be an issue as every bit of information used in computing SEQI must be available online interactive portal at all the disaggregated levels, such as school, cluster, block, district, state, and national level. Rather, the same should have been taken up along with the computation of the State-specific SEQI.

The index attempts to provide a platform for promoting evidence-based policymaking and highlights possible course-corrections in the education sector. It is mentioned in the document that SEQI will be used in formulation of education policy but form the SEQI document one fails to get the information whether the same was shared with the Kasturi Ranjan Committee report of which is now available in the public domain in the form of Draft National Policy of Education 2019. Needless to mention that SEQI is largely based on published data been provided by national institutions such as NCERT (NAS) and NIEPA (U-DISE) but they failed even to get the acknowledgment or even mentioned in the SEQI document. From the document, one gets the impression that these institutions did not play any role or were not engaged in the process of computing SEQI except at the initial stage of identification of indicators.

A close look at the roles and responsibilities reveals that major role is played by the development partner and private parties and the apex national institutions which has got in-house expertise and were engaged in similar exercises in the form of computing EDI which were used to be published by the MHRD through the Elementary Education in India: Flash Statistics were not engaged. Data provided by NCERT & NIEPA were validated by a private agency and the World Bank was the lead agency. However, limited information is provided as to how the data was validated and what was the 5 process of validation. One fails to understand importance being given to these parties rather than its own institutions especially when expertise to undertake such exercises is available in-house. Better would have been if the apex MHRD institutions could have played a leading role but for the unknown reasons they were not involved in the whole exercise. It is hoped that apex institutions will be given a bigger role and SEQI will be institutionalized in years that follow. Even the Interactive SEQI portal was developed by the private developer.

While launching UDISE+, MHRD in its booklet (April 2019) has raised serious concerns about the quality and validity of U-DISE data and mentioned that “there was a big question mark on the quality and reliability of the data, especially on enrolment and infrastructure”, which if true, the entire efforts of computing SEQI may be treated as futile, as SEQI is largely based on UDISE data!! Maybe because of these limitations, U-DISE was dislocated from NIEPA to NICMHRD from the year 2018-19? Even though 2015-16 SEQI is not directly comparable with the 2016-17 SEQI as about 10 indicators were either merged/dropped or modified in 2016-17 because of the issues concerning data, still results reveal an interesting picture.

On the one hand, few states have shown improvement in overall percentage points on the other hand a few others shown declines over the previous year i.e. 2015-16. Improvement both in case of percentage points and rank of Haryana is impressive which needs further analysis as what the state has done in a short period of a year so that other State & UTs may also learn from its experience. Ranking of Haryana amongst major states increased from 8th (51%) to 3rd (69.5%) in 2016-17. An increase of 18.5 percentage points is unexplainable as the information available in the public domain doesn’t specify any major development in the state between 2015-16 and 2016-17. On the other hand, Karnataka has shown a decline in both percentage points and rank as it has gone down from a high rank of 5 (56.6%) in 2015-16 to 13 (52.9%) in 2016-17 which also needs further explanation. Needless to mention that Karnataka is considered as one of the advanced states of the Country and had initiated many state-specific programs towards achieving the goal of school education including enhancing the quality of education which also includes a host of technology-related interventions. In addition to Haryana, states may also like to be benefited based on the experience of two top-ranked states, namely Kerala (1st, 82.2%) and Tamil Nadu (2nd, 73.4%) but the same though on the top of the list are still not the perfect ones in relation to the indicators used in computing SEQI. Needless to mention that until the bottom-ranked states, such as Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, etc. are improve, India cannot afford to achieve the goal of school education for which district-specific SEQIs and within the district, block-specific SEQIs may reveal interesting picture with regard to the status of universalization and target year of likely realization of goals. For more write-ups please visit Education For All In India

Web Link

Status of mid-decade EFA Assessment undertaken in India

Please let me know the status of mid-decade EFA Assessment undertaken in India the status of mid-decade EFA Assessment undertaken in India in reference to: Education for all in India (view on Google Sidewiki)

Government's various initiatives for minorities seem to be paying

NEW DELHI: Government's various initiatives for minorities seem to be paying The latest figures, part of National University of Educational Planning and Education's statistics, to be released shortly, shows that both in primary and upper primary level, Muslim enrolment has improved. Though it is early, a definite improvement can be seen in north Indian states.

Data collected from 1.29 million recognised elementary schools in 633 districts revealed a total enrolment of 14.83 million Muslim children in primary classes in 2008-09, which is 11.03% of the total 134.38 million enrolment in primary (I to V) classes. During the pervious year, the same was 10.49% and in 2006-07, it was 9.39%. Of the total Muslim enrolment in primary classes, the percentage of Muslim girls was 48.93%, similar to the share of girls in overall primary enrolment (48.38%).
Bihar continued to be among the performing states while Karnataka showed slow decline in Muslim enrolment, both at primary and upper primary level. Kerala remained the undisputed leader as it showed big improvement in enrolment both at primary and upper primary level.

Remarkably, the percentage of Muslim girls to total Muslim enrolment in upper primary classes is 50.03%, which is above the national average of 47.58%. The highest percentage of Muslim enrolment was observed in Lakshadweep (99.73%) mainly due to the fact that the percentage of Muslim population to total population in the Union Territory in 2001 was as high as 95.47%. In Bihar, Muslim enrolment at primary level improved from 11.27% in 2007-08 to 12.96% in 2008-09. Even Assam showed a big improvement: from 31.94% in 2007-08 to 35.08% in 2008-09. Decline was most evident in Karnataka: from 15.06% to 14.67%. In Kerala, enrolment went up to 26.22% from 21.49% in 2007-08.
Enrolment in upper primary classes also improved to 9.13% in 2008-09 from 8.54% in 2007-08 and 7.52% in 2006-07. Of the total 53.35 million enrolment in upper primary classes in the country in 2008-09, Muslim enrolment was 4.87 million. In Bihar, upper primary enrolment of Muslims improved from 8.22% in 2007-08 to 10.35% in 2008-09. Decline in Karnataka was more perceptible: from 16.73% to 13.81%.

The data also revealed a share of 10.49% Muslim enrolment in elementary classes (I to VIII) of which 49.20% were Muslim girls (to total Muslim enrolment). Preliminary enrolment data for the year 2008-09 also revealed that there were certain pockets in the country with high percentage of Muslim enrolment. There were about 87,690 schools with more than 25% Muslim enrolment (to total enrolment in elementary classes) which was 6.84% of the total schools that imparted elementary education in the country. Similarly, 62,534 (4.88%) schools had above 50% Muslim enrolment as compared to 48,946 schools (3.82%) having 75% and above and 41,300 schools (3.22%) even having a share of 90% and above Muslim enrolment to total enrolment.

Because of the high share of Muslim population to total population in J&K, 12 districts of the state had above 90% Muslim enrolment in 2008-09 in primary classes which was also true for enrolment in upper primary classes. On the other hand, 25 districts in the country had more than 50% Muslim enrolment in primary classes in 2008-09 compared to 20 such districts in case of upper primary enrolment. Fifteen districts of J&K, one each in Bihar, West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh, Lakshadweep and Kerala and five districts of Assam had more than 50% Muslim enrolment in primary classes.
Akshaya Mukul Times of India, January 09, 2010

A very English Affair

 Rema Nagarajan, 5 December 2009

Dinesh Kumar, a migrant from Vaishali district in Bihar, is an electrician in Delhi. Though making ends meet is a challenge, he is not willing to AT A SCHOOL NEAR YOU: Even small neighbourhood schools such as East Delhi’s Modern Happy (left) and New Titiksha Public (above) teach in both Hindi and English send his two children to a Hindi medium government school where education is free. The school fees and related expenditure exceed Rs 2,000 per month and form a quarter of the roughly Rs 8,000 that Kumar earns each month. But he is happy to foot the expense. "I want my kids to study in an English medium school. If they don't know English, what future will they have?" asks Kumar. It is such reasoning that helps explain the huge increase in enrolment in English medium schools, making it now the second largest medium of instruction in schools across the country. According to estimates, just over 10 per cent of the Indian population speaks English. But, it is a growing number and the rate of growth outpaces most vernacular languages. 

The big exception is Hindi, which, of course, is in a different league with 41 per cent of the country's population speaking in that tongue. KING OF QUEEN'S The English numbers are grossly underestimated , according to Professor Arun Mehta of the National University of Education Planning and Administration (NUEPA) that collects data on children enrolled in schools across the country. "Lakhs of children studying in unrecognised English medium schools are not counted in most official data as that only includes recognised schools. So, the numbers could actually be much higher," says Mehta. As many countries enter an 'educational arms race' to acquire and maintain international competitiveness, English assumes even greater significance. 

A recent British Council report on the growth of English across the world says that Asia, especially India and China , will hold the key to the long-term future of English as a global language. The report warns that China could outdo India in English. China is said to add about 20 million English speakers each year with its new policy to make English compulsory in primary schools. The report observes: "India has been triumphantly playing the English card in establishing its global leadership in outsourcing and the BPO industry. 

Furthermore, the capital of the new economy in India, Bangalore, lies in the south where regional languages are, in linguistic terms, more remote from Hindi than English, and where use of English has long represented a political challenge to the linguistic hegemony of the north." In the southern states in particular - and outside the Hindi belt in general - English has always found greater acceptance. Education is almost entirely in English in Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh and Sikkim. Over half the enrolment in the other north eastern states, barring Tripura, is in English medium. Hindi does not figure at all in this part of the country. 

LIP SERVICE Some 60 years after Hindi was adopted as the official language - along with English - it has not quite become the country's link language as was envisaged. This is despite the crores that the central government spends every year on promoting the "raj bhasha" . The resistance to Hindi in non-Hindi speaking states, which took the form of language riots during the sixties, is still far from blunted, as many recent events have demonstrated. 

Even today, any suggestion that Hindi is the "national language" or "rashtra bhasha" is met with stiff opposition and those who advocate its cause are likely to be given a frosty look and the riposte that India being a multilingual country has no single "national language" . The point was made succinctly when in the early '90s Mulayam Singh Yadav, then chief minister of Uttar Pradesh, wrote a letter in Hindi to his counterpart in Kerala, E K Nayanar. Nayanar gave a telling response by sending a reply in his language, Malayalam. While Hindi was not widely spoken in Thiruvananthapuram, in Lucknow, hardly anyone knew Malayalam! That linguistic feelings run deep became evident recently when Union Railway minister Mamata Bannerjee bowed to pressure from various states, especially Maharashtra, to hold the railway recruitment exams in local languages. Earlier, these exams were administered only in English and Hindi, which non-Hindi speaking states argued, with some justification, gave an unfair advantage to those from Hindi-speaking states. 

A few years back, Tamil Nadu and West Bengal requested that Tamil and Bengali be allowed in their respective high courts. They quoted Article 348(2) of the constitution and relevant sections of the Official Languages Act 1963 that entitle Hindi-speaking states like Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan to use their official language - Hindi - in their respective high courts. The request was rejected. LINGUISTIC LINK In 2006, when India asked for Hindi to be included as one of the languages used in the United Nations, saying it was spoken by a substantial proportion of the world population, the biggest opposition to this move ironically came from within India, from the non-Hindi speaking states. There couldn't be clearer evidence of the fact that Hindi is not yet accepted as a pan-Indian "link language" . 

Robert Bellarmine, former English Studies Officer of the British Council, South India, feels that in India, which is more like a group of nations, one local language being privileged over another would never be acceptable. "Hence, English is useful, as there is wider political acceptability. It is also the most preferred language for education and in the job market. For the integrity of the nation too, it might be better if English is a link language," says Bellarmine, who is also a fellow at the Center for English and Foreign Language Studies in Hyderabad. It's a logic many Indians would find difficult to refute. 

Times Insight Group

In 3 yrs, English rises to No. 2 medium

Rema Nagarajan, TNN 5 December 2009, 05:03am IST

While the Marathi manoos and various others fight over the supremacy of languages, English has quietly marched on and become the second largest

Twitter Facebook Share
Email Print Save Comment
medium in India's primary schools, after Hindi.

In 2006, English as a medium of instruction was fourth -- behind Hindi, Bengali and Marathi in that order -- but by 2007 it had climbed to second place and grew even further in 2008, beginning to eat into the Hindi numbers too (see detailed report in the latest edition of TOI-Crest).

Regional language medium schools have witnessed steady erosion in their share over the years, and in some cases even in the absolute numbers, as parents seem to have decided that English is the passport to a bright future for their children.

Data collected by the National University for Education Planning and Administration (NUEPA) as a part of DISE, the monitoring system developed for the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan programme, shows that the number of those opting for English medium from class I-VIII has grown by 150% between 2003 and 2008, while the number of students opting for Hindi grew by just 32%.

The count for 2008 is more robust than in previous years, says NUEPA. Of the total number of students surveyed by DISE, about 18.8 crore, data on the medium of instruction was available for over 92%. "The quality of data and its collection has vastly improved. However, the data pertains only to recognized schools. In most states, there are thousands of unrecognized schools, most of which are English-medium schools. Hence, the number of those studying in English-medium schools could actually be even higher," says Prof Arun Mehta of NUEPA.

The states with the highest number of students in English-medium schools have remained unchanged from 2004 till 2008 -- Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra. In the two top states, almost a fifth of all enrolled students are studying in English-medium schools. The top three are followed by Jammu & Kashmir, Karnataka and Kerala in that order. Madhya Pradesh is the lone Hindi-speaking state in the list of the top 10 states in terms of enrolment in English medium.

The highest jump in the number of English-medium students between 2004 and 2008 was in Maharashtra, about 11 lakh, followed by Andhra Pradesh (9.7 lakh), Tamil Nadu (9.6 lakh), Delhi (5.5 lakh) and Jammu and Kashmir about 5 lakh.

Earlier, in 2006, most of the growth in English was in the southern states, barring Punjab and Gujarat, which also showed a jump in numbers. However, by 2008, many of the northern states too have joined the rush for English schooling. For instance, Haryana has recorded the highest growth, with the number of children in English-medium schools going up more than seven times between 2004 and 2008, from over 20,000 to 1.6 lakh.

Similarly, in Rajasthan, students opting for English schooling increased more than three times, from over 60,000 in 2004 to nearly 2.2 lakh by 2008. The growth between 2007 and 2008 alone was 130%.

Again, in Madhya Pradesh, the number of students opting for English schooling almost trebled from 1.6 lakh to 4.8 lakh. In Delhi, well over a third (37%) of all enrolled children are in English-medium schools while the proportion of those in Hindi medium has fallen from 76% to 61% between 2004 and 2008. As before, Punjab and Gujarat show substantial growth in English schooling with the number doubling in Punjab and going up more than three times in Gujarat.

Right to Eduation

Right to Education Act 2009 Estimations: A Few Points for Consideration

Arun C. Mehta

November 2009

After long, the mush awaited Right to Education Bill (RTE) has just been passed by the Parliament which would play an important role in achieving Universal Elementary Education in India. The success or failure of RTE would largely depend upon how effectively the act is implemented and whether sufficient funds are allocated for the implementation of the Act.

In this direction, the first major exercise is to reliably estimate funds that would be required for successful implementation of Right to Education Act. Needless to mention that the RTE-estimation should be based upon the latest available data. One such source or rather the only source of information which provides requisite set of data is the District Information System for Education (DISE is jointly developed by the MHRD, UNICEF and NUEPA) which is latest available for the year 2008-09 with 30^th September 2008 as its date of reference. Through DISE, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan activities are being monitored and District Elementary Education Plans across the country are being developed annually which is largely based on this rich data-set. The beauty of DISE is that it provides unit-wide/school-specific data in case of all the 1.28 million schools imparting elementary education in the country. These schools are located in about 70,000 clusters in 7,000 blocks spread over 633 districts in 35 States and UTs of the country.

One of the other important considerations is that the RTE-estimation should be attempted at the national as well as for the individual State/UT level in case of all the 35 States and UTs of the country.

Perhaps the most important factor on which RTE-estimation should base upon is the child population of the age group of 6 to 14 years (5+ to 13+ years). Care should be taken in correctly considering the relevant age group child population in RTE-estimation.

Second most important task is projection of 6-14 year age population in 2009 i.e. 2008-09. The latest Census figures are available for the year 2001 but projected population made available by the Office of the Registrar General of India is available up to the year 2016 which is likely to be revised once the actual 2011Census figures are available in the light of which the existing RTE-estimates will also be required to re-look into. The RTE-estimates should not be considered as a one time affair; rather the exercise be repeated when more recent data is available.

As per the available projections, the 6-14 years children show a declining trend over a period of time. Between 2007-08 and 2008-09, 6-14 years age population in India declined to 188 million from 193 million which has got serious implications for RTE. In view of this, one has to ensure that the RTE-estimates are based on the current year’s child population i.e. 2009-10 (if not, it may significantly affect the total funds for RTE implementation). The decline in the child population is also reflected in the GER and NER as well as in the out-of-school children. Since the RTE-estimation may be primarily based on the child population, utter care should be taken in considering the current child population. The RGI projections are available by single-age population and that too in benchmark years such as 2001, 2006, 2011, 2016 etc. which should be carefully used to project child population (6-14 years) in the current year (2009-10) for which RTE-estimates are being made. Compound Growth Rate can be used in projecting population in intermediary years.

The other important issue is the source of information that is been used in estimating funds. So far possible, same source of information should be used in estimating all aspects of RTE Act. One set of estimation can be based upon one source of data. There may be more than one source of information and hence there may be more than one sets of RTE-estimation. The most appropriate one can be retained out of a number of alternatives.

Preliminary estimates based on 2007-08 data suggests that the total funds for RTE implementation during the next 5 years period would be in the tune of Rs. 1.80 lakh crores (1 crore = 10 million, as reported in the Times of India). The same if estimated based on 2008-09 data, would be a little less than what is estimated based on 2007-08 data. Because of the ongoing Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan programme, a lot of improvement has taken place since 2007-08 especially in case of infrastructure in schools which is quite visible if DISE 2008-09 data is carefully analysed. More schools imparting elementary education in the country now have drinking water, toilet and other such facilities in school. Together with this drop out has also declined slightly so as the out-of-school children all which may change the RTE-estimation significantly if the same is workout based on 2008-09 data.

RTE-estimation can be worked out in a number of ways. To begin with 6 to 14 years child population in the current year may be the starting point which should either be link to current enrolment in elementary classes (I to VIII) or be divided by the pupil-teacher ratio as specified in the RTE Act to workout number of classrooms that would be required. Needless to mention that there are a large number of unrecognised schools across the country all which will be closed down (if not recognised). In Andhra Pradesh alone there are about 6,000 unrecognised schools compared to around 7,000 such schools in Punjab. In view of there been a large number of children in all such schools special efforts would be required to make so as to ensure that all these children transit from unrecognised to recognised schools; new schools can be planned in all such locations.

If number of classrooms based on 30:1 PTR is estimated, the same would take care of all children of age 6 to 14 year irrespective of whether they are in the recognised or unrecognised schools. Just projecting number of classrooms that would be required will not serve the purpose unless the distribution of schools by number of classrooms in the existing 1.28 million schools imparting elementary education is carefully analysed details of which is available from the DISE sources for the year 2008-09 in a ready to use form. The number of classrooms so projected can be used to project number of teachers that would be required which can be worked out as per the provisions specified in the RTE Act. Since the number of teachers under RTE Act is linked to number of students in a school, which vary from Primary to Upper Primary school, careful analysis of distribution of teachers in the exiting schools would be of great help in correctly estimating the additional requirement of teachers on account of RTE Act. In a number of states, a good number of teachers’ positions are lying vacant all which should be filled-up (by the states) before the enactment of RTE Act else they be subtracted from the estimated number of total additional teachers.

Like number of schools and enrolment, number of para-teachers has also grown significantly (5.19 lakh para-teachers). The estimated number of additional teachers should be adjusted to the number of para-teachers a state has. Para-teachers with adequate academic and professional qualification may be considered as teacher, others those who don’t fulfill the criteria can be treated as schools without such number of teachers.

By just projecting number of additional classrooms that would be required will serve only the limited purpose. The additional classrooms may be in the exiting schools or new schools would be required to open in view of the projected additional classrooms. RTE Act has specified minimum infrastructure in each school all which would be required to provide to all such new schools. In addition, a good number of exiting schools imparting elementary education lack minimum facilities all which should also be made available by the state before the enactment of the RTE Act or the states be given sufficient time to provide all such facilities in the school. Minimum infrastructure (as per RTE Act) to all exiting schools is the responsibility of the states and the same should not be accounted in the RTE-estimation.

As has already been suggested above that to begin with the RTE-estimation may be based on 6-14 age years’ child population. Though Government’s commitment is of 6-14 years children but a good number of under-age and over-age children are getting enrolled each year in both Primary as well as Upper Primary classes’ provisions for which would also be required to make in the RTE-estimation. Especially Government and Aided schools cannot afford to deny admission to whosoever approach for admission.

A number of provisions have been made in the RTE Act with regard to teachers and infrastructure in schools. Minimum academic and professional qualifications of teachers under RTE Act will also be specified. A careful analysis of information would reveal that a good number of teachers do not fulfill minimum requirements. What would happen to all such teachers and also schools those are lacking in infrastructure. Will all such schools be closed down, naturally not or how much time would be given to all such schools to match the RET requirements. Whether teachers recruited are as per the qualifications laid down. Which body would monitor and decide upon all such aspects of RTE Act. Definitely, an independent body, if created can monitor all aspects of RTE Act on long term regular basis for which the exiting information system would also be required to further strengthened. Making available information concerning RTE Act under the public domain will also be of great help.