Report No. 1 37832 South Asia Human Development Sector A Review of Educational Progress and Reform in The District Primary Education Program (Phases I & II) September 1, 2003 Discussion Paper Series A REVIEW OF EDUCATIONAL PROGRESS AND REFORM IN THE DISTRICT PRIMARY EDUCATION PROGRAM (Phases I and II) September 1, 2003 Human Development Sector South Asia Region The World Bank 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This report was jointly task managed by Vandana Sipahimalani-Rao and Prema Clarke. It was collaboratively written by the task managers with Vandana Sipahimalani-Rao focusing on the section on project outcomes and Prema Clarke on the section on project interventions. Renu Gupta provided editorial and logistical support. This report is based primarily on a literature review of studies on DPEP I and II. An annotated bibliography of the studies was done by two consultants: Kamal Gaur and Vijayalakshmi Hebbare. The report also draws on a quantitative study using available household data done by Jyotsna Jalan and Elena Glinskaya. Theauthorsaregratefulforextensivecommentsprovided by the peer reviewers, Robert Prouty and Vicente Paqueo. The report also benefited from detailed comments given by Michelle Riboud, Sajitha Bashir, Elena Glinskaya, Venita Kaul, Anil Deolalikar, N.K. Jangira and from guidance provided at various stages by Charles Griffin, Emmanuel Y. Jimenez, Edward Heneveld, Barbara Bruns and Keith Hinchliffe. It has further benefited from discussions with officers from the Ministry of Human Resource Development at a presentation based on an earlier draft. 3 4 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS APPEP - Andhra Pradesh Primary Education NCERT - National Council for Educational Programme Research and Training AS - Alternative School NER - Net Enrolment Ratio AWPB - Annual Work Plans and Budget NET - National Evaluation Team BAS - Baseline Achievement Survey NFE - Non Formal Education BEP - Bihar Education Program NGO - Non Government Organisation BRC - Block Resource Center NPE - National Policy for Education CAG - Comptroller and Auditor General NSS - National Sample Survey CEO - Chief Executive Officer OBC - Other Backward Classes CDR - Cohort Dropout Rate POA - Programme of Action CRC - Cluster Resource Center PRI - Panchayati Raj Institutions DFID - Department for International PTA/MTA - Parent/Mother Teacher Association Development PTR - Pupil Teacher Ratio DIET - District Institute of Education and Training SAR - South Asia Region DOE - Department of Education SC/ ST - Schedule Castes/ Schedule Tribes DPEP - District Primary Education Program SCERT - State Council of Education Research and Training EC - European Commission SDMC - School Development and Management ECE - Early Childhood Education Committee Ed. Cil - Education Consultants India Limited SIEMAT - State Institution of Educational EGS - Education Guarantee School Management and Training EMIS - Education Monitoring Information SIS - State Implementation Society System SMC - School Management Committee GER - Gross Enrolment Ratio SPO - State Project Office GOI - Government of India TAS - Terminal Assessment Survey GOUP - Government of Uttar Pradesh TLM - Teaching Learning Material ICDS - Integrated Child Development Scheme IGE - Index of Gender Equity TSG - Technical Support Group IIM - Indian Institutes of Management UEE - Universalization of Elementary MAS - Midterm Assessment Survey Education MHRD - Ministry of Human Resource UPBEP - Uttar Pradesh Basic Education Program Development VEC - Village Education Committee MLL - Minimum Levels of Learning 5 6 CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7 I. INTRODUCTION 10 II. ASSESSMENT OF THE PROGRESS TOWARDS OUTCOMES 14 A. Progress in enrolment 14 B. Progress in reducing repetition/ dropout and improving retention/completion 23 C. Progress in improving learning achievement 26 III. THE STATUS AND EFFECTIVENESS OF DPEP INTERVENTIONS 37 A. Community mobilization and participation 37 B. Access and classroom space and size 41 C. Textbook recreation 44 D. The professional development of teachers 47 E. Classroom processes 52 F. Early Childhood Education 55 G. Management of the program 55 IV. CONCLUSION 61 A. Project Outcomes 66 B. Project Interventions 68 C. Critical aspects to be considered in Future Programs 72 REFERENCES 78 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: DPEP I : Enrolment Trends 16 Table 2: DPEP II : Enrolment Trends 17 Table 3: Changes in CDR: 1997-98 TO 1998-99 24 Table 4: Status of VEC, SMC, MTA and PTA in the DPEP States 39 Table 5: Civil Works 42 Table 6: Alternative Schools in the DPEP I and II states 44 Table 7: Participation in textbook renewal 46 Table 8: Teacher training provided 48 Table 9: Distribution of studies done by states across themes 60 7 Table 10: Summary of progress: Project Outcomes and Interventions 63 LIST OF FIGURES Figure I: Enrolment Trends: DPEP I 17 Figure II: Enrolment Trends: DPEP II 18 Figure III: Trends On Total Enrolment: DPEP I 20 Figure IV: Trends In Total Enrolment: DPEP II 21 Figure V: Frequency Distribution Of Achievement Scores: Class I Mathematics: DPEP I (TAS) 28 Figure VI: Frequency Distribution Of Achievement Scores: Class I Language: DPEP I (TAS) 28 Figure VII: Frequency Distribution Of Achievement Scores: Class III/IV Language: DPEP I (TAS) 29 Figure VIII: Frequency Distribution Of Achievement Scores: Class III/IV Mathematics: DPEP I (TAS) 29 Figure IX: Percent Change In Achievement Scores: DPEP I: Class I Language (Proportion of Districts) 31 Figure X: Percent Change In Achievement Scores: DPEP I: Class I Mathematics (Percent of districts) 31 Figure XI: Percent Change In Achievement Scores: DPEP I: Class III/IV Language (Percent of districts) 32 Figure XII: Percent Change In Achievement Scores: DPEP I: Class III/IV Mathematics (Percent of districts) 32 Figure XIII: Percent Change In Achievement Scores: DPEP II: Class I Language (Percent of districts) 34 Figure XIV: Percent Change In Achievement Scores: DPEP II: 35 Class I Mathematics (Percent of districts) 35 Figure XV: Percent Change In Achievement Scores: DPEP II: Class III/IV Language (Percent of districts) 35 Figure XVI: Percent Change In Achievement Scores: DPEP II: Class III/IV Mathematics (Percent of districts) 36 ANNEXURE 1 75 ANNEXURE II 77 8 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (i) The District Primary Education Program (DPEP) project outcomes and interventions. Future is a centrally sponsored scheme launched by programs will need to be designed with a stronger the Government of India in partnership with the monitoring and evaluation component so as to state governments and external donor agencies enable better evaluation studies to be done. seeking to expand the opportunities for poor and disadvantaged children to receive quality primary (v) Project data make universal access, defined as education. The program interventions ranged universal enrolment, difficult to measure. from enrolment drives, community mobilization However, it is clear that universal access has not campaigns, establishing academic resource been achieved for DPEP I and II as a whole, centers, to inservice teacher training, school and although substantial progress has been made classroom construction, textbook and curriculum in terms of increasing enrolment, particularly in renewal, and decentralized planning and thestatesofKarnataka,Gujarat,MadhyaPradesh monitoring. This report assesses the progress and Uttar Pradesh. Most districts achieved the made in terms of outcomes and processes in the DPEP goal of reducing gender differences in first two DPEP programs: The District Primary enrolment to less than five percent. However, Education Project I (DPEP I) and the Districts many districts did not achieve the second goal Primary Education Project II (DPEP II). of reducing social disparities, particularly in the case of scheduled tribe children. (ii) The salient objectives of both projects were to: (vi) In addition, a rigorous impact evaluation of DPEP I using household data done by Jalan and u Reduce differences in enrolment, dropout and learning achievement between boys Glinskaya (2002) concluded that the projects net and girls and between the general category impactonenrolmentusingthepropensitymatching and SC/ST children to less than five percent1 technique for impact evaluation was positive, but much smaller than its gross impact. While more u Reduce primary dropout rates to less than impact evaluations of this kind need to be done to 10 percent the extent possible ex-post, it must be kept in mind u Increase average learning achievement that it is difficult to isolate the impact of DPEP levels by over 25 percent above the baseline sincetheprogramwasintendedtoactasacatalyst in introducing reforms in primary education and u Provide access to all children for formal or equivalentnon-formalprimaryschooling;and several ofitsinterventionswereintroducedin non- project districts as well. u Establish capacity at the district, state and national level to plan, manage and monitor (vii) The DPEP goal of having a cohort dropout rate, the program which is less than 10 percent has been achieved in very few districts (except in Kerala where 5 of (iii) For this report, a comprehensive literature review 6 districts have achieved this goal). Gender wasundertakentoconsolidateavailableevidence disparities in dropout rates have been successfully on both projects. The literature review is reduced in about three quarters of DPEP I and II complemented by a limited quantitative study districts. In addition, future programs will need using available household data on the impact to build much better data systems (cohort studies of DPEP I on select outcome variables i.e. and household data based systems) in order to enrolment and primary school completion. compute dropout rates and completion rates (iv) The original intent of this report was to evaluate which are currently not available, for the most the impact of DPEP I and II based on an part. It will also be important for future programs exhaustive literature review of the many studies to identify differential targets for the various Indian conducted under the aegis of the program. states. It is likely that some of the objectives of Unfortunately, however, this review revealed that, DPEP I and II, such as reducing the dropout with the exception of Jalan and Glinskaya, none rate to less than 10 percent across the board for of the studies could qualify as true impact all districts was too ambitious to begin with. evaluations. It has thus evolved to become an 1Differences in enrolment implies differences in enrolment rates but this assessment of the progress made with regard to was not clear in the original guidelines. 9 (viii) The achievement surveys conducted in the project use in classrooms has only been done in a few districts reveal that the DPEP goal of attaining a states and these evaluations are positive. minimum of 40 percent score was achieved in Grade I in most DPEP I and II districts. However, (xii) Second, a large number of teachers have been less than five percent of the districts achieved provided systematic inservice training in DPEP. this goal for grades III/IV. Only one half to three The analyses of the training itself are unavailable. quarters of the districts achieved the second However, the several studies available on objective of raising achievement levels by at least classroom process indicate the limited impact of 25 percent over baseline figures for Class I. A training in classrooms instruction in negligible proportion of districts achieved this classrooms, by and large, remain traditional. goal for the higher classes. The third DPEP However, changes are evident in two areas: in objective of reducing gender differences in the limited use of activities to aid teaching and achievement levels to less than five percent has in the relationship between teachers and students been attained in most districts. The success has becoming more nurturing and supportive. been more limited in reducing differences in (xiii) State Implementation Societies and the councils achievement levels between the general and resource groups that support its activities category of students and SC students and the have been crucial for implementation. The gaps in achievement remain quite substantial planning process has clearly improved through in the case of ST children. Here again, the the process of conceptualizing AWPBs, though question of whether the original targets were the role and effectiveness of the AWPBs in achievable can be raised. For many of the achieving project outcomes is unclear. States districts, achieving a 25 percent increase in are now focusing on the development of achievement levels was too ambitious. institutions at the state level (SCERT and SIEMATs) (ix) The project interventions in DPEP have been to support the management and planning of numerous and complex involving a variety of education in the state. Sub-district level structures institutions and governments (center, state, district such as the District Institutes of Education and and local). While no analysis has been done Training (DIETs), have been revitalized to some linking specific interventions with outcomes, the extent and Block Resource Centers (BRCs) and connections are discernable between the Cluster Resource Centers (CRCs) are in place. performance on project outcomes described However, the future of BRCs and CRCs will above and the unevenness in project depend upon understanding their impact on implementation discussed below. inservice training and improving classroom practice. (x) Community involvement in DPEP has had two (xiv) The financial performance of the projects has dimensions. The first dimension, namely the been fairly satisfactory though a more detailed mobilization of the community has been analysisofbudgetsandexpendituresarerequired. successful and could explain the increase in The introduction of the Education Monitoring enrolment in the initial years of the project. The and Information System (EMIS) certainly marks second dimension is the establishment of Village an important step towards building data systems Education Committees or user groups. On the for planning and monitoring, though it will be one hand, the involvement of these groups in critical to strengthen this system which has many school construction has been successful and on limitations and also incorporate household data the other hand, their participation and effect on in the future. Research and evaluation, has been improving school quality limited.. weak in project districts and at the state levels, (xi) The quality component in DPEP consisted of and relatively stronger at the national level. several aspects. First, the textbooks were revised However, the literature review reveals that very across DPEP states and this has been a fairly little impact evaluation has been done. successful intervention putting in place a rigorous (xv) Based on the lessons learned from the DPEP I process and involving various levels of society. and II, five aspects critical to the implementation Theeliminationofgenderstereotypesintextbooks of future programs in elementary education are is documented. However, it is not clear whether identified better targeting, improved flexibility, this is the case with stereotyping of SC and ST focus on accountability, stronger linkages and children. Evaluation of textbook content and its evaluative research and monitoring. 10 INTRODUCTION 1.1 The District Primary Education Program (DPEP) is programs: The District Primary Education Project a centrally sponsored scheme launched by the I (DPEP I) and the District Primary Education GovernmentofIndiaincollaborationwithexternal Project II (DPEP II). The first phase of the donor agencies seeking to expand the program, DPEP I, was a multi-state project opportunitiesforpooranddisadvantagedchildren launched in 1994 and made effective in 1995. toreceivequalityprimaryeducation.2 Theprogram This included forty two selected districts in the was developed in the early 1990s in response to states of Assam, Haryana, Karnataka, Kerala, both global and national attention and concern Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, and Tamil Nadu. for the countrys level of literacy. The global Twenty three of these districts were funded by the compulsions converged at Jomtiens World World Bank. Nineteen districts in Madhya Conference on Education for All held in March Pradesh were funded by the EC. The second 1990. National pressure for the Government of phase of the program, DPEP II, was also a multi- India to raise literacy is represented at the policy stateprojectmadeeffectivein1996. Thisincluded level and in the numerous innovative programs in expansion districts in these states as well as education across the country. The guidelines for selected districts in the states of Gujarat (funded theprogramweredevelopedbasedontheNational by the Netherlands Government), Himachal Policy of Education (NPE), 1986, and the Pradesh, Orissa, Uttar Pradesh, and West Bengal accompanying Programme of Action (POA), (funded by the DFID). The current program has 1992, focusing on Indias commitment to the seven projects including several single state ones Universalization of Elementary Education (UEE). in Bihar, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh that were The experiences gained in small-scale initiatives initiated after DPEP I and II. DPEP is now within the country such as the Lok Jumbush and operational in 272 districts in 18 states, serving Shiksha Karmi programs in Rajasthan, the APPEP over 30 million children. World Bank funds program in Andhra and the BEP program in Bihar invested in the program (for all the different coalesced in designing DPEP. projects including the state specific credits) amount to US dollars 1.3 billion. 1.2 DPEP represents a partnership between the Government of India and several state 1.4 The salient objectives of both projects were to: governments, aided by external agencies. In fact, DPEPinIndiaisoneofthelargestdonor-supported u Reduce differences in enrolment, dropout programs in the world. Financing of the program and learning achievement between boys wasbasedona85:15ratiowith85percentpassed and girls and between the general category onasgranttothestatesbytheCentralgovernment and SC/ST children to less than five percent3 and15percentprovidedbythestategovernments. u Reduce primary dropout rates to less than Districts were chosen on the basis of low female 10 percent literacy and participation in the Total Literacy Campaign. The programs interventions ranged u Increase average learning achievement from enrolment drives, community mobilization levels by over 25 percent above the baseline campaigns, activating Village Education u Provide access to all children for formal or Committees, establishing block and cluster equivalent non-formal primary schooling; academic resource centers, to inservice teacher and training, school and classroom construction, textbook and curriculum renewal, and u Establish capacity at the district, state and decentralized planning and monitoring. Ceilings national level to plan, manage and monitor were place on civil works funding (24 percent) the program. and management costs (6 percent). The first pilot program was launched in 17 districts of Uttar Pradesh as a state project (UPBEP I). 2Donors supporting this program include the World Bank, the European Commission (EC), the U.K. Department for International Development 1.3 This report assesses the progress made in terms (DFID), UNICEF, and the Royal Government of the Netherlands. 3 of outcomes and processes in the first two DPEP Differences in enrolment implies differences in enrolment rates but this was not clear in the original guidelines. 11 1.5 The total project costs for DPEP I were US Dollars revealed that, with the exception of Jalan and 310.5 million and for DPEP II were US dollars Glinskaya, none of the studies could qualify as 534.4 million; both over a seven year period. true impact evaluations. The literature review DPEP I was subsequently extended by a year. suggests that DPEP has certainly inculcated a spirit of doing research on primary education, 1.6 This report assesses, on the basis of available which did not exist in the country prior to the project data and studies conducted on DPEP I program. However, most studies are limited to and II, the progress made by these projects in studying trends in processes and outcomes in providing access and good quality primary DPEP districts. A few studies do compare DPEP education. A comprehensive literature review and non-DPEP districts in terms of achievement was undertaken to consolidate available against outcomes (for example, Agarwal, 2000). evidence for this purpose. The literature review However, even these studies are not impact included studies done and commissioned by the evaluations since they do not statistically control Ministry of Human Resource Development for non-project related factors when comparing (MHRD), studies conducted at the state level outcomes across project and non-project districts. and commissioned by State project offices, and Thus, this report is unable to measure accurately the few studies done by independent researchers the magnitude of the net impact of DPEP based and donor agencies. Later in this section a on this literature review, except to a limited extent summary critique of the studies reviewed is for DPEP I based on Jalan and Glinskaya. It provided and the basis for including evidence has thus evolved to become an assessment of from select studies in this report is explained. the progress made by DPEP I and II in achieving The literature review is complemented by a its objectives and understanding the successes quantitative study (Jalan and Glinskaya, 2002) and limitations of its program of interventions in using available household data evaluating the order to inform future initiatives in educational impact of DPEP I on select outcome variables reform. i.e. enrolment and primary school completion, targeting which were among the key objectives 1.8 Nevertheless, it must be kept in mind that the of the program. 1990s was a period of considerable progress in educational indicators for India. The net primary 1.7 The original intent of this report was to evaluate enrolment ratio, for example, rose from 72 the impact of DPEP I and II based on an percent in 1992-93 to 83 percent in 1998-99 exhaustive literature review of the many studies (National Family Health Surveys). The primary conducted under the aegis of the program. A school completion rate also rose from 55 percent genuine impact evaluation would assess the in 1992-93 to 60 percent in 1998-99. DPEP magnitude of the change in development was one of the few programs that undertook objectives of the project that can be clearly major non-recurrent expenditure on and a wide attributed to the project itself, net of the effect of range of interventions in primary education. This other programs and external factors. Such an allowed educational administrators to innovate evaluation study would attempt to construct a and focus on improving education in a context counterfactual to answer the question, What where 95 percent of states expenditures on would have happened if DPEP had not been education were and continue to be on salaries. implemented? Typical impact evaluation The only other major centrally sponsored scheme studies, for programs such as DPEP, which are for this sector was the Midday Meal Program, not nation wide but have partial coverage, and which in most states was a dry grains distribution where certain pre-determined criteria were used scheme, and in a few states, was a cooked noon to select the project districts (i.e. selection was meal scheme which would probably have had non-random), use statistical methodologies some impact on enrolment as well. Given this (quasi-experimental or non-experimental context, and the progress made in educational designs) to compare project and non-project indicators during the 1990s, DPEP did contribute districts. These statistical techniques attempt to to this progress. In addition, it has played an control for other factors that could affect project important role in changing processes such as outcomes. This report is, however, limited to community mobilization and textbook revision research already done as evident in the literature that would have longer term impact on review. Unfortunately, however, this review educational indicators. 12 1.9 The concluding section of this report discusses a are used depends on the type of study. For few possible impact evaluation studies that could instance, the results from national studies, bedonetobeabletoget,ex-post,furtherevidence particularly those that are quantitative and on the net impact of DPEP. However, it is clear evaluative, are generalized for the projects. In fromavailableprojectdataandtheliteraturereview the section on project interventions since most that a better monitoring and evaluation design of of the studies are qualitative, the cumulative the projects ex-ante would have certainly enabled evidence is used to indicate the impact of project them to be evaluated more effectively. The major interventions. Some state level studies, both limitationindoingexpostevaluationstudieswhen quantitative and qualitative, are used to draw these were not kept in mind while designing the out inter-state differences. projectarethattheyhavetobebasedonavailable data. There are no comparable quantitative or 1.11 The financial design of the program was that qualitativedata/studies,eitherbaselineorendterm, state governments were supposed to contribute forexample,acrossprojectandnon-projectdistricts 15 percent of the cost of the project for their on learning achievement, classroom practices, or state to the pool of resources allocated to the planning and management systems, improving project. The remaining 85 percent has been all of which were objectives of DPEP I and II. For funds from external funding agencies routed via the other objectives on improving and reducing the Government of India (as a centrally gender and social disparities in enrolment and sponsored scheme). The total amount of funding completion rates, household data may be used to under DPEP is on the order of two percent relative compare across project and non-project districts to the total elementary education spending by as done for DPEP I in Jalan and Glinskaya. Even the central and state governments. However, to be able to do systematic evaluations of the DPEP is different from other centrally sponsored impact of specific components such as a study on schemes in elementary education in that it has the impact of teacher training on classroom allowed far more flexible allocation of financial processes within DPEP districts, baseline data on resources across the components of the projects, classroom processes would need to be available within the overall upper limit of Rs. 40 crores at and these are not. Lessons learnt for designing the district level (Bashir, 2000). An important themonitoringandevaluationcomponentoffuture featureofthedesignofDPEPwasthatitattempted programs are also discussed in the concluding to enhance the financial allocations to elementary section of this report. education by the government. DPEP project 1.10 Since there is considerable variation in the quality funds increased the allocation for elementary of the studies and therefore the reliability of their education by about 17.5 to 20 percent (Pandey, conclusions, the report draws on those studies 2000). In addition, the legal agreements of the that the authors felt were to some extent rigorous. projects specified that the state governments had These studies are explicitly mentioned in the text to maintain at least their existing levels of of this report. Most of the studies that are not expenditure on elementary education. Bashir explicitly drawn upon and mentioned in the report and Ayyar (2001) comment on whether this has were found to be methodologically unsound and occurred in reality. They conclude that, in therefore unreliable.4 Most of the quantitative general, state governments have fulfilled this studies, for example, use descriptive statistics to condition. Real elementary expenditures have report on findings, making their interpretation increased relative to the first year of the projects. very limited. In other cases, findings and policy However, they also find that plan expenditures recommendations in some studies are not linked on elementary education by state governments clearly to the analysis undertaken and seem to have fluctuated considerably over the project be based on the authors personal biases. For period. Thus, state governments continue, by most of the qualitative studies that have not been and large, to depend on centrally sponsored directly used in this report, the methodologies schemes to fund investments in improving the used are not clear. The report also tends to quality of primary education. State governments focus on the findings of more recent studies, expenditures fund primarily teachers salaries. indicative of the current performance of the project, rather than studies done earlier on during 4All studies that were reviewed are, however, mentioned in the the project period. The way in which the studies references 13 1.12 This report first assesses progress made towards section of the report brings together the project outcomes in DPEP I and II, namely outcomes, the inputs and the processes and enrolment, retention and learning achievement. summarizes important dimensions to be Next it discusses the inputs and processes in the considered in future programs. In addition it program and the extent to which they were outlines the areas, which require further analysis successfully implemented. The concluding and research. II. ASSESSMENT OF THE PROGRESS TOWARDS OUTCOMES A. Progress in enrolment in his report, Progress towards Universal Access 2.1 A key objective of DPEP was to increase the and Retention. This section draws on his analysis enrolment of six to eleven year old children in as well as other studies done at the national and primary school. While no specific targets were state level on enrolment. However, it was felt set for the increase in enrolment for DPEP I and that it would be useful to get raw data from the II (besides stating that universal access would states so as to directly compute updated be provided), the guidelines and the Staff enrolment trends as well as analyze the raw data Appraisal Reports emphasized reducing gender directly in addition to reviewing existing analyses. and social disparities in enrolment rates and This section first studies the trends in total specified that these differences would be reduced enrolment as a whole and for the target groups to less than 5 percent in project districts. It is in DPEP I and II. Next, the differences amongst unclear what is meant by providing universal states are highlighted drawing on data and a access. An Education Monitoring Information few existing studies that were reviewed. Finally, System (EMIS) was set in place in all project this section draws upon a study by Jalan and districts to enable states to collect fairly reliable Glinskaya (2002) to illustrate the net impact of data on enrolment and related parameters. DPEP I on enrolment outcomes. These data are collected annually from schools 2.3 How successful were DPEP I and II in raising in September. As mentioned earlier, a critical enrolments and reducing gender and social limitation of these data is that they were collected enrolment gaps? The data reveal that total only for project districts making any comparison enrolments have risen considerably in both DPEP with non-DPEP districts based on these data not I and II. The total enrolment in DPEP I states (for possible. For enrolment, available household which EMIS data were available from states) rose data could be used to do such impact by about 6 percent between 1996-97 and 2001- evaluations. However, while a few of the studies 02 excluding MP since MP Phase I data were reviewed do draw interesting conclusions about not available from the state. Agarwal (2002) reasons for increasing or declining enrolment, finds an overall increase of almost 13 percent in they do not compare and evaluate the changes total enrolment in DPEP I districts when Madhya in educational outcomes within DPEP districts to Pradesh was included. The corresponding rise those in non-project districts. The analysis in in DPEP II states (for which EMIS data were this section is thus limited to assessing the available from states) was higher at almost 19 progressmadetowardsincreasingenrolmentand percent between 1997-98 and 2001-02.5 reducing gender and social differences in Figures 1.1 and 1.2 illustrate the rise in total enrolment in project districts. Only one study by enrolment in DPEP I and DPEP II over the project Jalan and Glinskaya (2002) uses household data period using data obtained from the states. for DPEP I districts to do a rigorous impact However, the rise has been concentrated heavily evaluation. Results from this study are discussed in a few states: Gujarat, Karnataka, Madhya later in this section. Pradesh, and Uttar Pradesh. 5 2.2 The analysis in this section is based on EMIS DPEP II does not include Bihar and Jharkhand which was a separate project. Agarwals reports include districts from Bihar and Jharkhand in data received directly from the states. These data DPEP II. Thus he finds a lower increase in enrolment for DPEP II than (upto 2001) have also been analyzed by Agarwal what is reported here since enrolments in Bihar and Jharkhand actually fell during the project period. 14 Table 1: DPEP I : Enrolment Trends but asks the reader to treat these with (in thousands) extreme caution 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999- 2000-01 2001-02 Percentage keeping the 2000 increase limitations of not Total Enrolment 4882.4 5227.4 5408.8 5362.9 5253.4 5166.7 5.82 having data on Boys enrolment 2548.9 2715.1 2805.6 2779.4 2716.9 2679.4 5.12 p r i v a t e Girls enrolment 2333.5 2512.3 2603.2 2583.5 2536.5 2487.3 6.59 u n r e c o g n i z e d schools and SC enrolment 1055.5 1127.1 1152.6 1149.3 1101.6 1117.1 5.83 u p d a t e d ST enrolment 483.0 613.9 663.0 669.4 594.2 610.3 26.35 p o p u l a t i o n 2.4 Total enrolment for all categories except numbers in mind. Scheduled Tribes (ST) for DPEP I i.e. total, boys, For DPEP I districts, the GER increased from girls and Scheduled Castes (SC) rose for the first 92.5 percent for recognized schools to 98.2 three years of the project (i.e. until 1998-99), percent for recognized plus alternative schools but then stagnated and declined. For the ST over the project period. For DPEP II, however, children in DPEP I enrolment rose until 1999- except for Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh, the 2000 and then declined. In DPEP II districts, as GER did not increase significantly over the project a whole, total overall enrolment, boys enrolment, period and was about 85.5 percent in 2000-01 and girls enrolment rose until 2000-01 but (In UP, the other state where enrolments rose declined in the last year, 2001-02. For SC and considerably,however,onlythreedistrictsreported ST children in DPEP II, total enrolment rose until these data). 1999-2000 quite substantially, but declined after that. Also, the ST enrolment in many districts 2.6 There was higher growth in girls enrolment on still remains low compared to their share of the the order of 6.6 percent (excluding MP for Phase population, particularly due to the stagnation/ I) and as high as 25 percent in DPEP I and decline in enrolment over the last three years DPEP II respectively. Agarwal (2002) also (Agarwal, 2001). demonstrates that the share of girls enrolment to total enrolment increased from 45.6 percent 2.5 Absoluteincreasesinenrolmentdonot,ofcourse, in1995-96to47.8percentin2001-02forPhase capture the growth in enrolment relative to I districts. For Phase II districts this increase was population growth. Unfortunately, age from 43.6 percent in 1996-97 to 46.1 percent disaggregated population numbers are not in 2001-02. The trends for girls enrolment in available as yet from the 2001 census in order both DPEP I and II districts in the various states to compute updated gross and net enrolment has followed the same pattern as overall figures. While the objectives of DPEP I and II enrolment described above. In states where had universal access as an objective, it is not enrolment increased, girls enrolment increased clear what is meant by this term. A benchmark faster (except in Phase I districts in Karnataka). to judge against would be universal enrolment. Similarly in states where enrolment decreased, From National Family Health Survey household girls enrolment decreased less (except in Phase data of 1998-99 (latest available education I districts in Maharashtra and Phase II districts related household in Haryana and Kerala). Since girls were a data), the net enrolmentratiowas83 Table 2: DPEP II : Enrolment Trends percent. However, (in thousands) these numbers are not available for the DPEP 1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 2000-01 2001-02 Percentage increase I and II districts Total Enrolment 11531.7 12493.5 13913.4 14272.8 13714.7 18.93 s e p a r a t e l y . N e v e r t h e l e s s , Boys enrolment 6447.9 6932.1 7639.8 7843.8 7366.3 14.24 Aggarwal (2001) does Girls enrolment 5083.8 5561.4 6273.5 6429.1 6348.4 24.88 compute GERs and SC enrolment 2465.0 2713.6 3124.5 3086.8 2936.8 19.14 NERs for DPEP districts ST enrolment 1343.5 1449.3 1551.5 1512.1 1617.7 20.42 15 Figure 1 : Enrolment Trends: DPEP I Figure II : Enrolment Trends: DPEP II 16000000 6000000 14000000 5000000 12000000 d edllor 4000000 en lleornE 10000000 erb 3000000 reb 8000000 mu mu 6000000 N 2000000 N 4000000 1000000 2000000 0 0 Total Boys' Girls' SC ST Total Boys' Girls' SC ST enrollment enrollment enrollment enrollment enrollment enrollment enrollment enrollment enrollment enrollment 1997-98 1996-97 2001-02 2001-02 Source: EMIS data obtained from states.7 Source: EMIS data obtained from states.8 specific target group in both projects, it is Figures III and IV below). Enrolments rose encouraging that their enrolment, for the most substantially in Karnataka in Phase I districts by part, increased by a greater percentage than that as much as 24 percent and Phase II districts by of boys. A study by Ed.Cil (2002) on strategies 11.5percent. TheIndianInstituteofManagement to increase girls participation in primary school (IIM) study on DPEP, Karnataka, concludes that in DPEP I and II also concludes that DPEP has the total non enrolled population in DPEP I been, in general, successful in this regard as the districts in Karnataka is below 5 percent numbers indicate. Pandey states that over 95 indicating that universal access has almost been percent of Phase I districts have achieved an achieved here. (Sherry Chand, 2002). The slight Index of Gender Equity of over 95 percent thus decline in Class I enrolment after 1998 is reaching the stated DPEP goal.6 attributed in the IIM study to falling child 2.7 Children with mild to moderate disabilities were population. In DPEP II, Gujarat also had a also a target group in DPEP I and II. Guidelines significant increase in enrolments of almost 25 for their integrated education were developed percent. Both Madhya Pradesh and Uttar three years after DPEP I began and, initially, Pradesh (DPEP II) had a sizeable surge in efforts were concentrated in one or two blocks in enrolments not only for the overall child each district. Funds were available to hire and population but also for all the target groups (boys, train three teachers per block in three different girls, SC and ST). The study on DPEP I in Madhya disabilities (Pandey, 2000). Some states, such Pradesh conducted by IIM (Singh, Sridhar, and as Haryana, have made better progress in this Bhargave, 2002) also concludes that M.P. has area but much still needs to be done. Disabled done commendable work as far as access and students currently constitute 1 percent of total enrolment is concerned. M.P. also launched enrolment in all DPEP projects put together. Of the Education Guarantee Scheme in 1997 these almost half are orthopaedically disabled, where communities from habitations without another 14 percent are blind, about 13 percent schools within a one kilometer radius and with are dumb, another 13 percent are mentally 40 children in the 6-11 year old age group have challenged, about 9 percent are deaf, and the the right to demand a school and this demand remaining 7 percent have other kinds of has to be met in 90 days. This is the form that disabilities (Agarwal, 2002). However, there is 6 very little information and only a handful of Index of Gender Equity (IGE) is the proportion of girls enrolled relative to the proportion of girls in the relevant population, expressed in studies that focus on disabled children in DPEP. percentage terms. The Index of Social Equity for SC and ST children is Much more work needs to be done to gauge the used. However the meaning of this index is questionable since this index represent the proportion of students enrolled rather than the success of the program in reaching out to proportion of students from these communities in the population. For disabled children and providing integrated example, the index could be very high for SC but this could indicate that most non-SC students are going to private schools rather than the education. enrolment of SC students in the population. 7EMIS data for Chattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh were not available at 2.8 There were wide variations across states in this time. 8EMIS data for Chattisgarh, Orissa, and West Bengal were not available enrolment trends during the project period (see at this time. 16 alternative schooling has taken in M.P. and this study also found that there was a spurt in has been a major success in terms of increasing enrolment in several districts in UP, Maharashtra enrolment and reaching out to the DPEP target and Tamil Nadu in 1997 which included a large groups. number of underage children. The study asserts that this explained some of the decline in the 2.9 In contrast, total enrolments fell in Kerala (Phase following years in these states. Another study I and II), Maharashtra (Phase I) and slightly in (Panneerselvam, 2002) in two districts of Tamil Haryana (Phase II). While in Kerala this decline Nadu found that in the years that Class I is explained by declining child population, there enrolment fell in government and aided schools, were no available studies that correlated the child enrolment rose in private unaided schools, population decline with declining enrolment. indicating that this is the reason for declining Aggarwal (2001) does explain that states like enrolment in the EMIS data. Kerala and Tamil Nadu have reported decline in age specific population. In Maharashtra, this 2.11 The 20 percent decline in Phase II districts of decline is more puzzling though it may be Assam, however, is not easily explained. A explained partly by less successful implementation possible explanation is the movement from of some project components (discussed in more government to private schools since enrolment detail in Section III on project interventions). One in private schools was not captured by EMIS data. study (Pillai, 1999) does record declining An analysis of the data from individual districts enrolments in DPEP I districts in a sample she reveals that the decline occurred in all of the studies. However, the study does not attempt to Phase II districts in Assam. In addition, the explain the reasons for the decline. In Haryana, decline was primarily in Class I i.e. in intake a study by Aggarwal (2000) found that a key rather than due to falling number of repeaters or reason for the declining enrolment in government higher dropouts. In some districts in Assam, schools was the mushrooming of private numbers of venture schools (a type of alternative unrecognized schools, data from which were not school) have increased rapidly. Since these data included in EMIS. are not systematically included in EMIS, some studies (Meridian Consultancy, 1999) indicate 2.10 In Assam and Tamil Nadu, enrolments rose in that this is one of the reasons for apparently Phase I districts but fell in Phase II districts. This declining enrolment in Assam in EMIS data. is particularly surprising since Phase II districts, Sarma (2001) finds that the declining enrolment were, in general, more advanced districts. Once is due to an increase in the number of private again in Tamil Nadu this may be explained by schools in DPEP II districts. declining child population. One study by Ed.Cil (Ed.Cil, 2000) found that there was evidence of a declining child population in Tamil Nadu. Figure IV: Trends In Total Enrolment: DPEP II However, a statistical analysis of the extent of population and enrolment decline and the 6150000 correlation between these was not done. This M.P. 5150000 U.P. Figure III: Trends On Total Enrolment: DPEP I d Haryana lleorne 4150000 Orissa HP reb 3150000 Assam 1850000 mu Kerala 1650000 N 2150000 Maharashtra d M.P. Karnataka 1450000 lleorne Haryana Tamil Nadu 1250000 1150000 Assam Gujarat reb 1050000 Kerala 150000 m 850000 Maharashtra 1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 2000-01 2001-02 Nu 650000 Karnataka Year 450000 Tamil Nadu 250000 Source: EMIS data obtained from states.10 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999- 2000-01 2001-02 2000 9 EMIS data for Chattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh were not available at Year this time. Source: EMIS data obtained from states. 9 10EMIS data for Chattisgarh, Orissa, and West Bengal were not available at this time 17 2.12 In Himachal Pradesh (Phase II), total enrolment increase of enrolment of the 6-10 year olds was rose by 2.5 percent although it has remained higher amongst girls than amongst boys. In almost stagnant for the last three years. Dev et addition, NSS data reveal that the rate of al (2000) found that the declining enrolment in enrolment increase for SC children was much Class I in some districts was due to large numbers higher in DPEP when compared with non-DPEP of underage children enrolled in the first few years districts. For ST children, however, this was not of the project. In addition, there was a slight the case. Some figures from their analysis are decline in the child population in the villages included in the annex to this report. These results sampled. change substantially, however, once they use statistical methods to control for the impact of 2.13 The analysis above reveals that universal access, other factors on outcomes. defined as universal enrolment, has not been achieved for DPEP I and II as a whole, although substantial progress has been made in terms of 2.15 It is important, however, to assess the marginal increasing enrolment, particularly in the states impact of DPEP i.e. the additional impact on of Karnataka, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and enrolment compared to the counterfactual Uttar Pradesh. Some anomalies remain hypothetical situation where the program was unexplained in terms of declining enrolment in not implemented in the district. Jalan and states like Assam (DPEP II districts). The DPEP Glinskaya (2002) attempt to measure the net goal of achieving less than five percent impact of DPEP I on several educational difference in enrolment rates between boys and outcomes including enrolment i.e. they attempt girls was achieved for 95 percent of the districts. to answer the hypothetical question What However, the goal of reducing the social would have happened in a district in the absence differences to less than five percent was not of DPEP? Obviously there might have been achieved for most districts For measuring the some improvement in enrolment and other latter, the Index of Social Equity for SC and ST educational indicators even in the absence of children is used. However, as explained earlier, DPEP. However, as the authors explain, one the meaning of this index is questionable since it cannot just compare the average outcomes in represent the proportion of students enrolled project and non-project districts. However, since rather than the proportion of students from these districts were selected for DPEP in a non-random communities in the population. The analysis manner (based mainly on the criteria of them also raises the issue that it is not appropriate to having below average female literacy rates), this set uniform national targets in a large country methodology would not yield accurate results. like India, with wide inter-state and inter-district variations in terms of baseline enrolment and 2.16 Themethodologyofthepropensityscorematching baseline gender and social differences in technique used by the authors allows them to enrolment. The concluding section of this report attempt to estimate the additional impact of talks more about the need for differential targets DPEP. This methodology matches districts within which are more realistic for different Indian states. a state based on certain characteristics which would have made their probabilities of being 2.14 All the studies reviewed above and project data selected for the program very similar. These used here focus the analysis on what has include factors such as female literacy rate, happened within the project districts. Jalan and population density, SC/ST concentration, village Glinskaya (2002) use household data from the and household infrastructure characteristics and National Sample Survey (Round 50, 1993-94 educational facilities available. The propensity and Round 55, 1999-2000) for DPEP I districts score matching estimator pairs each program to evaluate the net impact of DPEP I on participant with an observably equivalent non- enrolment and completion. They find that participant and then interprets the difference in average school enrolment for children aged 6- their outcomes as the mean effect of the program 10 years increased from less than 75 percent to on the treated (p.10, Jalan and Glinskaya). about 80 percent in DPEP I districts. They confirm Further, they use a difference in difference (DID) Aggarwals finding that the rate of change was matchingestimatorwhichcomputesthedifference higher in DPEP I versus non DPEP districts. They in outcomes before and after the program in also find that, within DPEP districts, the rate of project and non-project districts. 18 2.17 The authors conclude that DPEP I had a small estimate of its contribution. Indeed in many positive net impact on enrolment (defined as states, DPEP interventions such as inservice enrolment rate) of 6-10 year old children, once teacher training and textbook revision have been other factors are controlled for. Thus they undertaken in non-DPEP districts. In some states, conclude that the net impact of the program is institutional structures like village education much smaller than the gross impact. In their committees and academic support structures analysis Madhya Pradesh stands out as the state such as block and cluster resource centers were where the program had the most dramatic also set up in non-DPEP districts in the later impact. The net impact on all childrens years of the projects. These state-wide enrolment rate is estimated to be about 1.32 interventions which were a result of states percent overall and 3.03 percent for Madhya consciously adopting policies of initiating DPEP Pradesh alone. They find a larger positive impact interventions in non-DPEP districts, make it for SC children as well and substantial impact difficult to compare project and non-project for ST children in MP (sample sizes for ST children districts. While the authors acknowledge this in other states were too small) and almost limitation, the magnitude of the implication of negligible impact for 6-10 year old girl children. this on their results cannot be assessed. In many The study does conclude, however, that there ways, the catalytic effect it has had might be the was greater net impact of DPEP I on older girls most important contribution of DPEP to and boys (11-13 year olds). This is interesting elementary education in the country. as it could indicate that there might be a higher proportion of overage children in DPEP I districts 2.19 Nevertheless, it is important to understand the as compared with non-DPEP districts. This could net impact to understand the additional direct be particularly relevant for the finding that DPEP impact of the program in the treatment districts. has not had any net impact on younger girls. It would also be useful to study the impact of This could be either because girls start school DPEP separately for the six DPEP I states since late or there are higher repetition rates amongst states such as Kerala, Tamil Nadu and girls in project districts as compared with non- Maharashtra where enrolment was already high project districts. This needs further investigation (and where project data also indicate stagnating/ to understand the implications of DPEPs impact declining enrolments largely due to declining on girls enrolment. The index of gender equity child population or very hard to reach children from project EMIS data, as described earlier, left out of school) should ideally be separated reveals that striking progress has been made with from Haryana, Karnataka, Assam and MP. respect to increasing girls enrolment in DPEP. However, due to limitations of sample size, the Jalan and Glinskaya do not find this in terms of authors are unable to do this analysis. The net impact for 6-10 year old girls. However, it is concluding section of this report discusses important to further investigate whether this is possible extensions of this kind of impact because the marginal impact has been mainly evaluation. on older girls. Along the same lines, there are a large number of underage children who are B. Progress in reducing repetition/ drop- enrolled in school (as we see from EMIS data) out and improving retention/comple- and the data used by Jalan and Glinskaya do tion. not include five year olds. The authors conclude that while they do find positive net impacts of 2.20 Another central objective of both DPEP I and II DPEP I on enrolment rates, these impacts are was to reduce dropout rates to less than 10 not as substantial as expected apriori. They also percent i.e. increase completion rates to over 90 study the net impact of DPEP I on completion percent of all children enrolled. Further, a second rates. This is discussed in the next section on objective was to reduce gender and social dropout and completion. disparities in the dropout rates to less than 5 percent. In recent years some studies have been 2.18 It is difficult, of course, to isolate the impact of done both at the national level using EMIS data DPEP relative to other programs. To the extent (Shrivastava, 2001; 1999) and in various states that DPEP was supposed to act as a catalyst such as Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, Karnataka and complement other efforts to achieve its goals, using household data, to compute the cohort the net impact of the program is not a true dropout rate and the retention/completion rates 19 by using the reconstructed cohort method. The some possible reasons why the dropout rate has retention rate is defined in these studies as the not fallen in some states, particularly in Assam, percentage of children who, after entering Grade UP and some districts of Orissa. One reason 1, complete the full cycle of primary school could be the enrolment of many underage (Grade 5 in most states and Grade 4 in some). children. Secondly, the EMIS data does not The cohort dropout rate (CDR) is 100 minus the include data from private unrecognized and retention rate. The intake in Grade 1, grade- some alternate schools. It is possible that some wiserepetitionandcrudedropoutratesfromEMIS of the dropouts actually attend one of these data are used to compute the CDR/retention rate. schools. There have been a few studies investigating the reasons for persistently high 2.21 Shrivastava (2001) concludes that in 1998-99, dropout and repetition rates in some districts/ the DPEP goal of achieving a CDR less than 10 states and the improvement in dropout rates in percent was achieved in very few districts (except others. The variation in implementation of in Kerala where five of the six districts had various interventions, particularly the extent of achieved this target). About 27 percent or 11 community mobilization, explains some of the districts in Phase I had achieved this target by variations across states and districts. These 1998-99. For Phase II districts, the study studies are discussed in the next section on project concludes that about 16 percent or 12 districts interventions. (of those for which data were available) achieved the target of a CDR below 10 percent. Of course 2.24 There have, however, been problems with in 1998-99 there were still four years left for DPEP measuring dropouts and completion rates using II to close. EMIS data. Repetition data, in particular, from the EMIS, has been of variable quality and some of these results may not be very credible. A few Table 3: states have therefore undertaken cohort studies Changes in CDR: 1997-98 To 1998-99 using the true cohort method where the actual progression of students was followed in an No. of districts CDR fell CDR remained CDR rose attempt to develop alternative estimates of cohort the same dropout and completion rates. Agarwal (2001) DPEP I 16 10 14 summarizes the results from these studies in the DPEP II 46 12 21 states of Karnataka, Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu. In Maharashtra, the cohort study 2.22 Shrivastava also examines the trends in the CDR conducted in 1999-2000 found cohort dropout between 1997-98 and 1998-99 (see Table 3 rates which were even higher than those below). It is a real matter of concern that the calculated from the EMIS data (except in one dropout rate actually rose between the two years district). The results from the cohort study in in as many as 14 districts in DPEP I and 21 Karnataka conducted in the same year found districts in DPEP II. The reasons for this are not more mixed results, where the cohort dropout well understood/documented. rate was higher than that calculated from EMIS 2.23 The CDR was still very high in some districts, data for some of the districts but lower for others. particularly in Assam and Uttar Pradesh. In these The Tamil Nadu cohort studies in 1999-2000 states, over fifty percent of the districts have CDR also found cohort dropout rates higher than those greater than 50 percent, indicating that more calculated from the EMIS data. than half the children enrolled in Grade 1 in 2.25 Districts in both phases I and II performed better these districts do not complete primary school. in terms of achieving the second goal of reducing Using latest available EMIS data from 2001-02, gender differences in dropout rates to less than CDRs were calculated by Shrivastava for a few 5 percent. 76 percent of Phase I districts and 73 states. The CDRs seem to have risen even higher percent of Phase II districts had achieved this in several districts in UP and Assam. Overall, target by 1998-99 for the difference in the CDR the number of districts that have achieved the between boys and girls (Phase I became effective 10 percent CDR goal of the program in both Phase I and II seems to have actually fallen 11These data will be updated with newer data once the report for 2001- relative to earlier years. Shrivastava proposes 02 is finalized. 20 in 1994-95 and Phase II in 1996). Similar 2.29 In conclusion, the evidence reveals that the information is not available in the studies on the majority of districts have not been successful in difference in the CDR between the general attaining the DPEP goal of reducing the dropout category of students and SC and ST students. rate from primary school to less than 10 percent whether EMIS data calculations are used or the 2.26 In some states, completion rates i.e. the few cohort studies that are available are used. percentage of children enrolled in Grade 1 who A related question that arises is whether the complete primary school in five years (where objective of reducing dropout rates to less than Grade 5 is the terminal primary grade) and four 10 percent across all states and districts was a years (where Grade 4 is the terminal primary realistic one. As with other outcome targets, grade) were also analyzed. In Maharashtra, 35 the differing results across states indicate that it percent of the schools had a completion rate of would be more reasonable for future programs more than 75 percent. However about 15 to set differential targets based on baselines. percent of DPEP schools had less than 30 Over three quarters of the districts in both percent i.e. very poor completion rates. In projects did achieve the second objective of Karnataka the completion rate for DPEP I and II reducing gender differences in dropout rates to was about 68 percent. In Tamil Nadu, the less than 5 percent. completion rate for Phase I districts was about 56 percent and for Phase 2 districts it was about C. Progress in improving learning 53 percent (Aggarwal, 2001). Thus there is considerable room for improvement in this area achievement and repetition rates are generally still quite high 2.30 The focus of both DPEP I and II has been on in DPEP. quality improvement particularly in terms of textbook revision, teacher training, and academic 2.27 Continued effort is certainly needed, however, in support to teachers. The impact of the inputs computing more accurate cohort dropout rates and processes initiated under the program should and completion rates using household data and ideally be reflected in improved learning cohort studies and analyzing the reasons for achievement of the students. In order to measure persistently high dropout rates in many areas. learning achievements, baseline achievement surveys (BAS) were conducted for both DPEP I 2.28 Despite project data and studies reporting and II. Midterm assessment surveys (MAS) were persistent problems in reducing dropout rates conducted for both projects - in 1997 for DPEP and improving completion rates in some states/ I and 2000 for DPEP II. For DPEP I the terminal districts, Jalan and Glinskaya (2002) conclude assessment survey (TAS) was also conducted in that the net impact of DPEP I on retention has 2002. The surveys measure the average been higher than its impact on enrolment. While performance of students on competency based there are no studies rigorously analyzing the link tests in mathematics and language at the end of betweentheseactivities/componentsoftheproject Class I and in the penultimate grade of primary and outcomes such as reduced dropout rates, school (Grade IV in most states and Grade III in Jalan and Glinskayas study reveals that the net a few states).12 impact of DPEP on these outcomes was visible. Their definition of retention is cohort progression 2.31 DPEPs objectives with respect to learning i.e. the proportion of 6-7 year olds attending achievement were threefold: primary school in 1993-94 who progressed to middle school by 1999-00. In fact this estimate 1. All children should achieve a minimum is probably a lower bound on the real impact of average score of 40 percent the program on retention since it does not include 2. Average achievement levels should improve the children who may still be in primary school by 25 percent over the life of the projects in 1999-00 i.e. repeaters who had not dropped out of the system but not progressed to middle 3. Gender and social differences in school by 1999-00. Nevertheless, the project 12 data still indicate that even DPEP districts have The sample sizes for the mid-term and terminal assessments were about 42,000 students from Grade I and Grades III/IV. About 25 percent alongwaytogobeforeareasonablylowdropout of the sample, corresponding to their share of population, were from the rate is achieved. SC community and about 8 percent from the ST community. All states were included. 21 Figure V: Frequency Distribution Of Achievement Figure VI: Frequency Distribution Of Achievement Scores: Class I Mathematics: DPEP I (TAS) Scores: Class I Language: DPEP I (TAS) 50 45 60 Assam Assam 40 tsned Haryana 50 Haryana tsned 35 Chattisgarh tus Chattisgarh 40 30 fo Karnataka tusfo Karnataka eg 30 Kerala Kerala eg 25 20 tanecreP 20 Madhya Pradesh Madhya Pradesh 15 Maharashtra 10 Maharashtra tanecreP 10 Tamil Nadu Tamil Nadu 0 0-10 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 5 -20 -30 -40 -50 -60 -70 -80 -90 -100 0 0-10 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Achievement level ( on total of 100) -20 -30 -40 -50 -60 -70 -80 -90 -100 Achievement level (on total of 100) achievement levels should be reduced to still had not achieved the 40 percent target in less than 5 percent. language fell to only three for language and seventeen for mathematics (NCERT, 2002). 2.32 In DPEP I districts, the average score for all forty two districts in which the MAS was conducted 2.33 The figures V, VI, VII and VIII below illustrate the reveals that all districts had achieved the frequency distribution of students in terms of their minimum target score of 40 percent by 1998 for achievement scores for Class I and Classes III/IV language and mathematics in Class I (except in language and mathematics on the terminal one district in Madhya Pradesh in mathematics). assessment survey for DPEP I. Unfortunately These results were sustained in 2002 in the TAS comparable figures are not available on student as well for all districts (NCERT, 2002). For the distribution from the baseline survey. The range penultimate grade in primary school (Grade III of scores in most states was very wide. States for some states and Grade IV for others), much which had only about a quarter or less of students fewer districts achieved this minimum score, and in the 90 to 100 percent range in both language alarmingly few districts achieved this in and mathematics for Class I were Chattisgarh mathematics in particular. Sixteen of forty two and Madhya Pradesh. Karnataka had as many districts did not achieve the 40 percent target in as 20.2 percent of its students in the less than language while thirty one of forty two districts 40 percent range for language and 20.5 percent did not achieve the target in mathematics. In of its students in this range for mathematics (Class Madhya Pradesh and Kerala all districts in which I). These results are revealing since they reflect the test was administered had an average score the performance of individual students rather than of less than 40 percent on mathematics in Class averages for the district. States which had about III/IV (NCERT, 1998). In 2002 when the TAS 60 percent of the students in approximately the was administered, the number of districts which 80 percent and above range in Class I were Figure VII: Frequency Distribution Of Figure VIII: Frequency Distribution Of Achievement Scores: Class III/IV Language: Achievement Scores: Class III/IV Mathematics: DPEP I (TAS) DPEP I (TAS) 35 Assam 40 ts s n 30 e Haryana nt 35 Assam d tus 25 Chattisgarh 30 Haryana udets f 25 Chattisgarh o 20 Karnataka of Karnataka e 20 g 15 Kerala gea Kerala ta 15 n 10 Madhya Pradesh ntecreP Madhya Pradesh 10 ecr Maharashtra Maharashtra eP 5 5 Tamil Nadu Tamil Nadu 0 0 0-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 60-70 70-80 80-90 90-100 0-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 60-70 70-80 80-90 90-100 Achievement level (on total of 100) Achievement level (on total of 100) 22 Figure IX: Percent Change In Achievement Scores: Figure X: Percent Change In Achievement Scores: DPEP I: Class I Language (Proportion of Districts) DPEP I: Class I Mathematics (Percent of districts) 14% 8% 10% 12% < 0 6% < 0 5-15 10-15 15-25 53% 15-25 25+ 25+ 21% 76 SOURCE: NCERT (2002) SOURCE: NCERT (2002) Assam, Kerala, Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu achievement levels in Class I language for language and Assam, Maharashtra, and (NCERT, 1998). However, TAS results reveal Tamil Nadu for mathematics. As can be seen that twenty three of forty nine districts had from the figures, results are dramatically different achieved the target of raising achieving levels for the higher grades. For most states, most by 25 percent over the baseline by 2002 students scored in the 30 to 70 percent range in (NCERT, 2002).13 The real cause for concern Classes III or IV when compared to most students is that in fourteen or 34 percent of districts scoring in the above 70 percent range in Class Class I language levels actually fell between I. Results were much poorer in the higher grades the BAS and MAS. By the TAS in 2002, there and this is revealed by the district averages as were six districts in which achievement levels well. However, part of the reason why scores in Class I language had declined. For Class were high in Grade I is because Grade II students I Mathematics, the results were better with 21 were tested on Grade I material. percent of districts or nine districts achieving the target of levels increased by 25 percent 2.34 It is difficult to assess the performance of DPEP over the baseline by 1998. By 2002 this I districts in terms of achieving the second number had increased to thirty eight of forty objective regarding learning achievement i.e. nine districts. In nine districts the achievement raising average achievement levels by at least levels fell compared to the baseline in 1998 25 percent over the baseline scores. This is but by 2002 there were four districts where because different instruments were used in the BAS and MAS and TAS since there was a change in the curriculum with new competency Figure XI: Percent Change In Achievement Scores: levels defined as the Minimum Levels of DPEP I: Class III/IV Language (Percent of districts) Learning. In order to be able to do some comparative analysis, the BAS was re- 5% administered to a small sample of only five 26% schools per district in DPEP I districts. While this is a very small sample, it is the only possible comparison that can be made < 0 33% between the BAS and MAS. Only about 14 5-15 percent or six districts achieved the targeted 15-25 increase of 25 percent over baseline 25+ 13Levels rose by between 10 and 25 percent in another ten districts (24 percent of total districts) by 1998 and between 15 and 25 percent in nine districts by 2002. In another twelve districts (29 percent of total districts), levels rose by between 0 and 10 percent by 1998 and in five districts SOURCE: NCERT (2002) between 0 and 15 percent by 2002. 36% 23 Figure XII: Percent Change In Achievement and 33 of 45 districts achieved the target with Scores: DPEP I: Class III/IV Mathematics respect to ST children. For the higher classes, the (Percent of districts) results were better with 39 of 49 districts achieving the target for SC children in language and 43 of 2% 45 districts in mathematics. Of course, due to the high dropout rates it is possible that children who 21% 31% mightbeacademicallyweakermayhavedropped out making it easier to achieve the target in higher classes. TheresultsforSTchildrenweresomewhat < 0 5-15 worse. Thus the gender gaps were successfully 15-25 reduced in most districts. For SC children 25+ substantial progress has been made in many districts. ST children, for the most part, fared a little lower in terms of achievement levels. 2.37 In DPEP II districts, the average score for all 56 SOURCE: NCERT (2002) 46% districts in which the MAS was administered reveals that all had achieved the minimum target achievement levels fell compared to the score of 40 percent by 2000 for language and baseline. See the pie charts below for changes mathematics in Class I. For the penultimate in achievement levels over the project periods. grade in primary school (Grade III for some states and Grade IV for others), as in DPEP I, much 2.35 For Classes III and IV, very few districts achieved fewer districts achieved the minimum target score. the intended 25 percent increase over the Nine of fifty six or 16 percent of districts did not baseline in 1998. Only 2 districts for language achieve the 40 percent target in language. In and 1 for mathematics achieved the intended mathematics, twenty six of the fifty six or as high 25 percent increase by 1998 and achievement as 46 percent of districts where the test was levels fell in 11 districts for language and 13 administered did not even make the 40 percent districts for mathematics. The situation had target average score. In Madhya Pradesh as improved significantly by 2002 with 46 districts many as twelve of the fifteen districts did not make having achieved the 25 percent increase in this minimum target for Class IV mathematics language and 27 in mathematics. Achievement (NCERT, 2000). The results of the TAS for DPEP levels fell compared to the baseline in 4 districts II districts are still awaited. in language and 5 districts in mathematics. 2.38 AswithDPEPI,assessingtheperformanceofDPEP 2.36 DPEP I was successful in reducing the differences IIdistrictsintermsofachievingthesecondobjective inlearningachievement(althoughinmanydistricts, i.e. raising average achievement levels by at least these differences were less than 5 percent even at 25 percent over the baseline scores, is difficult as thebeginningoftheprojectperiod)-betweenboys different instruments were used in the BAS and andgirls;andbetweenSC/STandgeneralcategory MAS. Inordertobeabletodosomecomparative ofstudents. ForClassIlanguage,44of49districts analysis, the BAS was re-administered to a small achieved the DPEP target of reducing gender sampleoftenschoolsperdistrictinDPEPIIdistricts. differences in achievement levels to less than 5 While this is a very small sample, it is the only percent by 2002. For Class I mathematics 40 of valid comparison that can be made. About 18 49 districts achieved this target. For the higher percent or ten districts achieved the targeted grades, 45 of 49 districts for language and 46 of increase of 25 percent over baseline achievement 49 districts for mathematics achieved the target. levels in Class I language (NCERT, 2000).14 The Theresultswereslightlyworseforsocialdisparities. real cause for concern is that in ten or 18 percent For Class I language, 38 of 49 districts achieved of districts Class I language levels actually fell. thetargetwithrespecttoSCchildrenand29of45 For Class I Mathematics, the results were better districts achieved the target with respect to ST children. ForClassImathematics,39of49districts 14Levels rose by between 10 and 25 percent in another twenty districts (36 percent of total districts). In another sixteen districts (29 percent of achieved the target with respect to SC children total districts), levels rose by between 0 and 10 percent. 24 Figure XIII: Percent Change In Achievement Figure XIV: Percent Change In Achievement Scores: DPEP II: Class I Language Scores: DPEP II: Class I Mathematics (Percent of districts) (Percent of districts) 9% 18% 18% 34% 16% < 0 0-10 < 0 10-25 0-10 25+ 10-25 25+ 29% 35% 41% SOURCE: NCERT (2000) SOURCE: NCERT (2000) with 34 percent of districts of nineteen districts differences in achievement levels to less than 5 achieving the target of levels increased by 25 percent. ForClassImathematics43of56districts percent over the baseline. In five districts the achieved this target. For the higher grades, 53 of achievement levels fell compared to the baseline. 56 districts for language and 55 of 56 districts for ForClassesIIIandIV,theresultsweremuchpoorer mathematics achieved the target. As in DPEP I, whencomparedwiththebaseline. Onlyfivedistricts the results were slightly worse for social disparities. for language and four for mathematics achieved For Class I language, 41 of 56 districts achieved theintended25percentincreaseandachievement thetargetwithrespecttoSCchildrenand40of56 levels actually fell in fourteen districts for language districts achieved the target with respect to ST and thirteen districts for mathematics. children. The results were slightly worse for mathematics. For the higher classes, the results 2.39 DPEP II was quite successful in reducing the were better with 49 of 56 districts achieving the differences in learning achievement between boys target for SC children in language and 51 of 56 andgirls;andbetweenSC/STandgeneralcategory districtsinmathematics. TheresultsforSTchildren ofstudents. ForClassIlanguage,50of56districts werelower. Thusthegendergapsweresuccessfully achieved the DPEP target of reducing gender reduced in most districts. For SC children, distinct Figure XV: Percent Change In Achievement Figure XVI: Percent Change In Achievement Scores: DPEP II: Class III/IV Language Scores: DPEP II: Class III/IV Mathematics (Percent of districts) (Percent of districts) 9% 7% 25% 23% 16% 18% < 0 0-10 < 0 10-25 0-10 25+ 10-25 25+ 54% SOURCE: NCERT (2000) 48% SOURCE: NCERT (2000) 25 progress has been made in many districts. As in baseline levels seems to be too ambitious in the DPEP I districts, ST children, for the most part, limited time period of seven years. fared a little lower in terms of achievement levels. 2.41 There are very few studies, however, that attempt 2.40 In conclusion, most districts in DPEP have to understand the reasons why some districts/ achieved the first objective of a minimum average schools did better than others in raising learning score of 40 percent in Class I but very few have achievement and reducing gender and social achieved this in Classes III/IV. For the second gaps. Rampals study on Curriculum Change objective on learning achievement, 50 to 75 for Quality Education (Rampal, 2001), is one percentofdistrictsachievedthe25percentincrease of the few studies that undertakes classroom in learning over baseline levels for Class I. observation as well as administers some basic However, less than 5 percent of districts achieved achievement tests to students in select DPEP and this increase in Classes III/IV. Thus, DPEP was non-DPEP districts. The results of this study certainly not successfully in reaching this second clearly demonstrated that students in Class IV in objective for either lower or higher grades. Both DPEP districts performed significantly better on DPEP I and II have been successful in reducing all competencies on which they were tested gender gaps in learning achievement and relative to students in non-DPEP districts. While moderatelysuccessfulinreducingsocialdisparities this study is not strictly an impact evaluation in inachievement. Areviewoftheresultsonlearning the sense that it does not control for other factors achievement once again indicates that having that could account for the achievement level fixed,nation-widetargetsforraisinglearninglevels differences between project and non-project is not appropriate in India. In fact, the 25 percent districts, it is indicative of the impact of the DPEP targeted increase in learning achievement over on learning. III. THE STATUS AND EFFECTIVENESS OF DPEP INTERVENTIONS 3.1 While the impact of DPEP on development activities intended to communicate the objectives is mixed, the breadth of outcomes can importance of education and the role of parents be attributed to a similar pattern of uneven and communities in this process. Across the states implementation of interventions intended to a variety of activities rallies, campaigns, short achieve these objectives. The major interventions programs, fairs or melas and puppet shows can be identified as those dealing with (i) have been conducted to motivate communities community mobilization and participation; (ii) to send their wards to school. The media has the provision of adequate space and appropriate also been extensively used in states to class sizes; (iii) textbook recreation; (iv) the communicate the value of education and to professional development of teachers; (v) encourage communities to get involved. In the improved classroom practice; and (v) reform in print media, brochures, pamphlets, posters, educational planning and management. Though comic books, guidebooks and magazines have variation characterizes the conceptualization and been produced in addition to a variety of video implementation of these interventions across and audio material. Communities and parents states, all of these areas have received concerted who were earlier considered irrelevant to the and consistent attention over the project period effectiveness of education provided by the in all DPEP I and II states. government were through these activities drawn into becoming involved and to some extent A. Community mobilization and participa- responsible for the education of their wards. The tion effectiveness of this intervention could explain the increase in enrolment in the early years of 3.2 The mobilization of local communities for their the project. support and participation in primary education hasbeencentraltoDPEP. Theprojectencouraged 3.3 Second, the mobilization of the community has the participation of parents and communities in takenontheformofrevitalizingexistingstructures, two ways. First, the project organized a set of if available, in addition to establishing formal 26 structures at the village level, directly concerned 3.6 The level of participation and empowerment of with education. DPEP was successful in VEC members is an indication of whether this formulating the Village Education Committees structure is effective and can perform according (VECs) to support school activities and organize a to expectations. VECs were supposed to meet variety of programs to motivate and build the once a month and discuss issues relevant to the capacities of communities. Importance is given to functioning of the school. About half the VECs, communities as partners in providing education according to the Indian Institutes of Management both in terms of resource mobilization and in the (IIM) studies done on DPEP I districts, would monitoring of educational quality. As Reddy and meet once a month, while the other half would Chattopadhyay (2002) remark the Village meet once in two or three months or not at all. EducationCommitteehasrestoredthecommunitys The teacher often takes the lead in organizing confidence and involvement in the primary these meetings.2 Reasons for the irregularity in education system (p.xiii). The VEC has been meetings include lack of time, social established in all project districts with the number segregations, cultural inhibitions, and political of members constituting a VEC and the method interferences. The irregularity in conducting by which they become members decided upon by meetings indicates the limited involvement of each state. There is variation across states as to communities in educational affairs. The second whether members in these committees were area is the limited empowerment of its members legislated, elected or nominated (Table 5). In all especially those from SC/ST communities and VECs,membershipwasassignedtorepresentatives women. Studies such as Vasuvi and Chamarajs of major social groups in addition to parents of (2001) indicates that even micro planning disabled students and women. identifying the status of non-enrolled students in the village is often not inclusive of the SC/ST 3.4 The program was also successful in imparting communities.3 Furthermore, though members training (between one to three days) in all from the SC/ST community and women might DPEP districts to VEC members on various be present at meetings, they were often silent aspects including the purpose of education, and passive. In Reddy and Chattopadhyay micro-planning, monitoring dropout and (2002), about a quarter of the SC/ST and women student attendance. However, studies on the members participated satisfactorily. Often impact of this training are inconclusive teachers rather than the community members (Ed.Cil, 1999).15 Based on the available appear to play an important role in the literature this evaluation assesses the impact functioningofVECsandmostoftenteachersmake of VECs in three areas: impact on school all the important decisions and communities construction, participation and empowerment, support these decisions and act on them. school processes, and the monitoring of VEC involvement by DPEP staff. 3.7 The VECs impact on school processes is not clear 3.5 School construction is one of the areas in which the continued dropout and limited learning VEC involvement has been fairly successful and suggests need for further improvement in this this will be dealt with later in the report. The area. A significant task for the VECs in this areas grant of Rs. 2000 is given once during the is to monitor school functioning especially teacher project period to VECs for the school. This grant absenteeism. It is unclear as to whether VECs has empowered communities to some extent. have been able to carry out this task. A possible According to ED.CIL (1999) and Reddy and reason for this could be, on the one hand, while Chattopadhyay (2002), the VECs were able to, VECmembersmayhaveconsiderableinformation by and large, make use of this money on school functioning, the channels through appropriately, though often at the behest of the 15 headmaster rather than through genuine This study by ED.CIL uses quantitative analysis. This study examines community processes in 10 villages from two districts each in Assam, community decision-making. The school Bihar, Gujarat, Karnataka, HP and UP. 16 environment, furniture and blackboards and so The IIMs in preparation for the Implementation Completion Report for DPEP I have done evaluative studies on all the DPEP I states. The on are some of the common items supported by method included an analysis of secondary sources (household surveys) this fund. In a few cases, for instance in Kerala and primary data. The primary data is based on interviews and observations of 15 villages (stratified circular systematic sampling) in two and Assam, the VECs are involved in fund raising districts in each state. 17Vasuvi and Chamarajs qualitative study of in order to provide more facilities for the school. primary education in 22 villages in one district in DPEP I districts and four districts in DPEP II in Karnataka. 27 Community Mobilization and Participation Table 4: Status of VEC, SMC, MTA and PTA in the DPEP States State VECs SMC/SDMC PTAs/MTAs M N E Reservation W SC ST Assam 9384 600 4050 13-17 5-7 8 1/3 Chhattisgarh 20728 5720 12507 10 10 2 Gujarat 3043 5699 9 9 2 Haryana 3824 5599 12 12 3 Himachal Pradesh 2944 5888 7-15 7-15 1/3 1 1 Karnataka 59681 28727 18+ 9+ 9 3 1 1 Kerala 209 325 3556 Madhya Pradesh@ 53460 26094 103546 12 1/3 Maharashtra 15001 13430 5-7 5-7 1 1 1 Orissa 12683 Tamil Nadu 10730 10670 12-15 12-15 2 Uttar Pradesh* 40826 9711 5 5 1 Total 232513 61466 174656 @ Includes DPEP I; *Includes UP DPEP III. Source: 16th Progress Overview SMC: School Management Committees; SDMC: School Development and Management Committees; PTA & MTA: Parent or Mother Teacher Associations M: Number of members; N: Nominated members; E: Elected members. which this information can be fed back into the in other cases the role and responsibilities of system are limited. VECs are often only in contact VECs vis-a-vis PRIs have not been defined and with the teachers and have no systematic access VECs continue to exist as parallel organizations. to CRC (Cluster Resource Center) or BRC (Block In most states the limitations of the VEC in actually Resource Center) coordinators to file complaints. effecting improvement at the school level have On the other hand, the IIM studies on Assam precipitated the formation of user groups. For and Karnataka indicate the regular participation example, Assam, Karnataka, Gujarat, Madhya of CRC and BRC coordinators in VEC meetings, Pradesh and Chattisgarh have addressed the however, it is not clear whether teacher limited effectiveness of VECs by establishing absenteeism has improved through this process. school development committees. An evaluation Furthermore, the sharing of student performance of whether such user groups are more effective with the VEC and parents, which would facilitate than VECs is yet to be done. In Himachal accountability in the system, does not appear to Pradesh, user groups are helping to improve be widespread. Kerala and Assam provide some quality and address teacher absenteeism. It is other examples of VEC involvement - parents possible that the School Development and substitute for teachers when they are absent or ManagementCommitteeinKarnatakaandParent in instructing students in their own particular local Teacher Associations (PTAs) and Mother Teacher skill and knowledge. Associations (MTAs) in other states are more effective; however, the absence of political 3.8 The VEC as an institution has been effected by connections could affect the extent to which they the recent amendment to the constitution dealing are able to garner resources available at the with decentralization. The 73rd and 74th Panchayat (local) level. amendment to the Constitution of India established local governments called Panchayat 3.9 The VECs attached to Education Guarantee Raj, which are elected institutions. In several Schools (EGS) or Alternative Schools (AS) started states the Panchayati Raj elections have been in DPEP and described above are much more completed but the relationship between the VECs and the PRI institutions are still to be defined.18 18In Kerala (Mercer, 2001), effective school level planning is taking In some cases, VECs were dissolved and place. Peoples Planning campaign have trained Panchayats in planning, conceptualizing projects and strategies to address issues in the reconstituted as one of the PRI institutions, while Panchayat. 28 effective than VECs attached to regular primary box design without verandahs with uneven and schools. One of the reasons for this is that harsh flooring. The National Cross Sharing communities in which these schools are located Workshops enabled a sharing of information are in general homogenous and smaller and, and ideas on low cost and creative designs and therefore, user groups formed for these schools construction, in addition to the availability of an are active and consistent in their participation in innovation fund to facilitate the design of creative, school activities. The process of establishing child friendly classrooms. The civil works the EGS school also involves communities in a program in DPEP I and II can be considered very significant way communities must request from a variety of aspects including, planning, a school, nominate the teacher and provide design and quality of implementation, initially, the space for the school; the state then involvement of beneficiaries in the process, pace provides the remuneration for the teacher, which of implementation, use of the new civil works is handled by the community. This process has and extent to which the overall need for new strengthened community participation and buildings has been met within the context of the ownership by allocating roles and responsibilities project. Though there is variation across states, unavailable in the regular primary schools. overall the involvement of the VECs in school construction has been one of the successes in 3.10 To conclude, the community mobilization in the project. VECs were trained in construction DPEP has had two dimensions. The first and their activities monitored by a team of dimension was the mobilization of communities engineers employed by the state project office. to understand the importance of primary education and persuade them to send their 3.12 The National Evaluation Teams report (NET) is children to school. The initial increase of available in draft form for Assam and HP and enrolment in the DPEP states could be connected final reports for Karnataka and Tamil Nadu to the success of this component. The second (2002). Reports on Assam and HP suggest that dimension was to establish or revive existing community construction was very effective and community level structures. These structures, construction quality good in these two states. namely VECs, have been established across However, in Karnataka and Tamil Nadu the DPEP. School construction and use of grant process improved over the course of the project. money were fairly successful activities, though, According to the Tamil Nadu study, the planning except in the case of AS and EGS schools, was not too efficient in that classroom sizes often consistent participation and empowerment, did not correspond with the number of students especially of the representatives from enrolled, similarly in Karnataka. The implications disadvantaged groups are weak. Thus, the of this is that the standardization inherent in impact of VECs on school activities and DPEP disallowed the construction of classrooms facilitation of student learning has been limited. that were appropriate for the size of the school The limited sustained involvement of VECs could population. Initially, because villagers were not also explain the decline in enrolment after the adequately trained and supported for the task, initial surge. There is now a move by states to village level involvement in construction was not establish user groups such as MTAs and SMCs very satisfactory, for instance in Tamil Nadu, this whose effectiveness is not known. There is clearly has been refined over the project period. The a need to clarify VEC or user groups roles and study describes the dominance of the more responsibilities in relation to the local government wealthy in the community in the practice of or Panchayats in the future and to consistently allowing the VEC to construct the school till plinth encourage participation and empowerment of level with their own funds and then releasing these groups, perhaps through the use of non- money to the VEC to construct the rest of the government organizations. school. Most states used cost effective technology, Karnataka was one of the states that B. Access and classroom space and size did not make use of such technology. There is little information on the impact of the new 3.11 School construction is an important contribution construction on facilitating the participation of of DPEP. As the Ed.Cil study states, the civil students from the SC or OBC communities who works program in DPEP has transformed live in separate habitations located in the outskirts classrooms and schoolrooms with the traditional of villages (Jha and Jhingran, 2002). 29 3.13 Taking both DPEP I and II together, only about storage, mats to sit on and with leaky roof. 20 percent of these schools have separate toilets Active schools in Maharashtra and Nalli Kali for girls and an additional 10 percent have toilet classrooms in Karnataka, and EGS schools, facilities shared by both boys and girls. Drinking though, were more adequate. Nevertheless, the water facilities have increased by about 20 number of classrooms with minimum conditions percent in both DPEP I and II districts. Though for supporting teaching and learning with, for these facilities represent a doubling of the facilities example, adequate space, usable blackboards, available since project commencement, the and so on is a crucial piece of information that insufficiency in toilets (critical for girls is unavailable. participation), drinking water, and general infrastructure in schools is clearly evident. The 3.15 To maintain appropriate pupil-teacher ratios of Gender and Social Equity study reports that 5 of 40:1 DPEP funding was used for hiring the 10 schools observed in Maharashtra and additional teachers for increased enrolment and Haryana had no drinking water, electricity, usable for new schools and classrooms. The average toilets and storage for instructional aids.19 The Pupil Teacher Ratio (PTR) in the DPEP I states is study done by the Women Empowerment and 38:1 and this has not changed much over the Human Resource Development Center, based project period. The average for the DPEP II states on a random sample five schools in six districts is 49:1 implying that the number of teachers in (2001) in Kerala, also suggests that schools position and newly hired is not sufficient for the lacked basic infrastructure such as toilets, numberofstudentsinthesedistricts. Moreserious furniture, and space and in two district is the number of schools in both DPEP I and II (Kasergode and Waynad) playgrounds, water districts that have very high PTRs. Aggrawal facilities and libraries were insufficient.20 In (2002) identifies the average percent of schools Assam on the other hand (Kaur et al. 2000), with PTRs >90 as 3.4 percent in DPEP I and infrastructure facilities were in place.21 The NET 13.6 in DPEP II. Except for Kerala, PTRs with study found that in Tamil Nadu with reference to over60studentsrangesbetween10to20percent new construction, the provision of water and in DPEP I and from 5 to 65 percent in DPEP II. toilets were not effectively distributed across PTRs are dependent on the number of teachers schools. available. According to the 16th GOI Progress Overview, teacher vacancies in DPEP I districts 3.14 The number of classrooms in good condition are less that 7 percent. Gujarat, Karnataka and has increased by about 5 percent and the number Madhya Pradesh hired a large number of requiring minor and major repairs reduced by teachers, keeping their pupil teacher ratios about 3 percent over the project period for both constant/declining. However, in the DPEP II, projects. The ED.Cil study on classrooms (2001) teacher vacancies are fairly substantial in Assam however, describes the inadequacy of classrooms (30 percent), UP (26 percent), Gujarat (20 in several states. Classrooms were without percent), and in Himachal Pradesh (13 percent). partitions (thus noisy and distracting), adequate The increase in the share of female teachers is on average 5 percent across states. The Table 5: Civil Works Civil Works DPEP I DPEP II 19 This study was qualitative, based on one district with a high SC and ST population from each of the Target Completed Target Completed DPEP I districts and Andhra Pradesh. Similar criteria BRCs 223 200 771 619 were used for choosing one block from each district. Demographic data on the district were collected, CRCs 1032 979 5212 4591 focus group discussions were held, four teachers (two regular, one alternative and one private school) Addl. Classrooms 5183 3976 13503 9848 were interviewed and classrooms observed. Cohort School Bldgs studies were done in one regular and one EGS school. (New & Bldg.less) 2183 1813 18173 13003 20 This study, in addition to using descriptive statistics, Toilets 10004 7968 28845 24875 is a qualitative evaluation covering six districts in DPEP I and II districts based on a random selection of Drinking Water 7368 5645 13325 11793 10 percent of the schools. 21 Two DPEP-I districts of Assam were covered Repairs 4076 2073 9683 6342 (Darrang and Morigaon) in this quantitative and Source: 16th Progress Overview qualitative study, based on data collected from 63 schools in 10 blocks. 30 share of SC has not increased while the share of C. Textbook recreation ST teachers in states with large ST populations has increased. 3.18 Textbooks are often considered to be the icon of the India classroom. Students and teachers treat 3.16 The number of EGS and AS schools in some of the textbook with great respect and as other the DPEP I and II states has increased dramatically instructional material is generally unavailable it over the project period (Table 7). Such schools symbolizes the object of all learning. Several were established in DPEP, first by the state of MP, shortcomings with the content and appearance in order to bring children from smaller pockets oftextbookswereidentifiedatthecommencement that were remote or extremely disadvantaged due of DPEP. Inappropriate and irrelevant content, to child labor and migration practices into the gender stereotypes and social exclusions (for schoolsystem. Remotehabitationswerethosethat example, the exclusion of all references to the fell below the population norm of 300 or distance tribal community) characterized the content of norm of 1 kilometer radius. EGS and AS schools textbooks. In addition, the quality of paper, the employ para teachers, which are teachers without illustrations and the font size often made a teaching certificate and could be 12th or 10th textbooks unusable and unattractive for students. grade graduates. Para teachers are paid by the In this context, the DPEP intervention of textbook local Panchayat and the salaries range from a renewal in all DPEP I and II was very important fifth to half of the regular teachers salary. and beneficial. 3.17 While the establishment of the EGS and AS 3.19 DPEP revised the whole process of textbook scheme help address the provision of access and production.22 A series of national workshops classroom space, these issues continue to require attended by state officials, NGOs and others attention in the project districts. Though school helped the states to set in place a process of construction was adequately taken care of by textbook revision, first in project districts and the VEC, many schools continue to lack toilets, then throughout the state. These workshops and water supply. In addition, the extent to which provided a forum for defining standards for classrooms and schools possess the minimum textbook content, the quality of paper, font sizes conditions for teaching and learning is unclear. and the type of illustrations to be used. The High PTRs are evident in some states and there revision of textbooks was to be guided by the are not enough teachers in HP, Assam, Gujarat introduction of the new curriculum entitled the and UP in particular. Minimum Levels of Learning (MLLs) and the concept of activity based learning. MLLs, Table 6: Alternative Schools in the while lacking a theoretical framework, DPEP I and II states defined a set of basic skills to be acquired by students in mathematics, language and State Centers Enrolment Percentage of total enrolment environmental studies. States were encouraged to rid textbooks of gender Assam 3138 129622 13.5 stereotyping and include the life experiences Chhattisgarh 5720 304051 Not available of the different social groups of rural India. Gujarat 2282 49422 5.3 Checklists were developed to facilitate Haryana 1080 26318 3.2 writers and illustrators avoid gender Himachal Pradesh 50 690 Negligible stereotyping and bias. Other aspects of Karnataka Bridge courses only Not applicable textbook revision focused upon the Kerala 307 6514 Negligible integration of disciplines, the use of simpler Madhya Pradesh@ 26510 1230190 24.3 language and the reduction of subject content. The importance of involving Maharashtra 4371 105426 3.8 teachers, soliciting public opinion on Orissa 8033 113462 Not available textbook content, field trials of textbooks Tamil Nadu 0 0 0 before the final revisions took place was Uttar Pradesh* 7074 252250 Not available also communicated during workshops. In Total 58565 2217945 10.3 (approx) 22 @ Includes DPEP I; *Includes UP DPEP III. Source: 16th Progress Overview, Agarwal (2001) and DPEP supported the cost of producing a camera EMIS enrolment total data received from states where available. reading copy of revised textbooks. The cost of producing textbooks for students was not underwritten by DPEP. 31 addition to textbooks, the usefulness of teacher handbooks and student workbooks was also Table 7: Participation in textbook renewal highlighted. Teachers NGOs Government Institutions 3.20 States adapted this process discussed at national Assam Low ü workshops in different ways. While the content, Gujarat High ü which had always been decided upon by Haryana High academics disconnected with instruction in Himachal Pradesh Low ü primary education, was now decided upon using a much more collaborative and consultative Karnataka Low ü process, the extent to which states made use of Kerala High government institutions, teachers, and NGOs Maharashtra Low ü in writing and producing textbooks differed across Madhya Pradesh Low ü ü states (Table 8). The point here is that states Orissa Moderate realized the importance of having a cadre of Tamilnadu Low ü people at the state level visualize and undergo Uttar Pradesh High ü training in textbook production. The sample trials Source: Shukla.2001 of textbooks before final production is also now seen as important to the process of textbook Mathematics textbooks highlight the importance creation. The MLL and activity based learning given to conceptual learning, for example, approachpredominatedinsomestatesmorethan recognizing patterns in learning multiplication others, though, over the course of the projects, rather than the rote learning of multiplication all states have revised the MLL approach. For tables and the framing of more practical and example, textbooks in Karnataka, Maharashtra meaningful problems (Rampal, p. 38). Similarly and Tamil Nadu were first based completely on in science, the textbook focuses on the MLL. Criticism regarding the inflexibility of MLL development of a variety of skills such as oral has persuaded states to rethink the MLL skills, hypothesis formation and creativity. An methodology. Emphasis is put in varying degrees attempt has also been made in Kerala to displace across DPEP I and II states on more appropriate the primacy of the textbook by encouraging size, content, color and illustrations, clearer print, teachers to only use textbooks a third of the time better quality paper and the correspondence in the classroom. Discussion of textbooks in between textbook content and age/grade level. Madhya Pradesh (Kothari et al. 2000) suggests The report will now discuss the evaluation of that although Sikna Seekhana textbooks used textbooks.23 were more standardized than in Kerala, they still representedamajorimprovementtothetextbooks 3.21 Though the parameters used in the analysis are existing prior to DPEP.25 Based on this study the not similar, three states, Karnataka, Kerala and textbooks have been recently revised in MP, and Madhya Pradesh, have undertaken evaluations the analysis of its effectiveness has not yet been of the content of the newly produced textbooks done. in DPEP. According to the study done by RV Educational Consortium (1997), Class III 3.23 There is considerable information (Ed.Cil, 2000) textbooks in Karnataka, full of color and humor, on the process used by states to eliminate gender were appreciated by the majority of teachers and bias in textbooks and GOI has recently facilitated a more student-centered approach to undertaken an analysis of the extent to which instruction. However, the age-appropriateness, the print and layout could be further improved 23There is little information on the physical characteristics of new textbooks except in Cohens reflection paper. According to Cohen (EC and, in addition, the textbook was not completely 2001), offset printing and computerized typesetting facilitated this process rid of mistakes. of improving the quality of textbooks enormously. The binding of textbooks, however, requires further improvement. 24Hussok did a case study of DPEP in Kerala; Rampals study was a 3.22 Hussok (2000), Rampal (2000) and Manual comparison of DPEP and non-DPEP districts in the same state; and (2001) comment on textbooks used in Kerala. Manuals study focuses on Class I and II textbook content, in addition to the use of the textbook in classrooms. The transformation of textbooks has indeed been 25Kothari et al (2000) have compared three packages used in MP (AS, revolutionary in its attempt to integrally move Eklavya and Seekhana Sikhana). Based on their review, MP has produced new textbooks integrating the three approaches and an away from the spectra of rote learning.24 evaluation has not yet been done. 32 textbooks across the states have succeeded in the lack of systematic analysis of issues related eliminating gender bias (the results are awaited). to this process. It can be said that the process Though there has been an evaluation of gender has been considerably revitalized across the stereotypes in textbook content, information is states, however, studies need to be conducted unavailable on the elimination of SC and ST on its timely distribution, the extent to which bias in textbooks. Since this issue was not standards regarding the content, quality of graphically apparent before textbook revisions paper, printing and binding were maintained took place and it is likely therefore, that the need and how textbooks are used in classrooms. to eliminate may not have been significant. While the Kerala textbooks allude to the In addition, it is possible the states have taken effectiveness of content, information on other steps to ensure the absence of caste aspects of the process are unavailable. discrimination in textbooks. However due to Teacher handbooks and student workbooks lack of information, it is difficult for this report also need to be examined. to capture this aspect. It will be important for states to examine textbooks in this regard since, D. The professional development of similar to gender, the extent to which the teachers experiences and lifestyles of SC and STs and other lower caste ostracized communities are validated 3.26 The importance of in-service training is in textbooks is critical to the inclusion and consistently highlighted as critical for reform in empowerment of these students in the teaching and learning. Except for para teachers educational system. most teachers in DPEP possessed a one-year pre-service teacher certification degree for 3.24 Most states have produced material to instruction in elementary education. accompany the textbook for assisting teachers Government run inservice training in India, in everyday planning and instruction. This before DPEP, was in general, unsystematic and has taken different forms in the states. For sporadic in nature.26 DPEP introduced regular example, in Assam resource materials, in inservice training for large numbers of teachers. Maharashtra and Haryana, teachers Again, a national workshop on teacher training handbooks which contain material that is for set the trend for facilitating states to develop teachers use and in Karnataka, more their own inservice training programs.27 The elaborate teachers guides have been workshop (Ed.Cil, 1995) discussed relevant developed. A few states such as Karnataka issues such as the content to be included in and Assam have also produced student training, the processes to be used, methods of workbooks. Information is unavailable as to instruction and the creation of appropriate the usefulness of the teachers guides or the support materials. Due to lack of any other consistent use of workbooks by students and model meant for training large numbers of its support for learning. States with large teachers the cascade model was adopted by populations of tribal students have produced all states. The cascade model is top down with additional material in tribal languages such master trainers training block officers at BRCs as glossaries in tribal dialects and additional and they in turn training teachers in the block. literature based on tribal myths and stories. Uniformity across states ended here - when states Interestingly, in Kerala, handbooks for parents conceptualized their own program of teacher have also been produced to help parents training there was considerable variation in the understand and support the pedagogic emphasis and moreover, the amount of time experience of their children. given to the different aspects highlighted at the national workshop. As Table 8 illustrates, few 3.25 The textbooks produced for the EGS and AS states are alike in their focus, in the length of schools are non-graded material appropriate training, or spacing of training for teachers. for self-paced learning. The assessment of AS material used in MP done by Kothari et al 26 The absence of any comprehensive and large-scale inservice training (2000) affirms the effectiveness of this material programs in India can also be attributed to the fact that large scale pedagogical reform has not been undertaken in India since the for promoting learning for students in this introduction of Gandhis Basic Education in the mid 1900s (Clarke 2001) group. To summarize this section on textbook 27 The workshop included the NGO Lok Jumbish, UNICEF supported projects, the Shikshak Samakhya in UP, the Basic Education Project in recreation in DPEP, the analysis is limited by Bihar, national and state institutions and project officials. 33 Table 8: Teacher Training Provided STATE Total teachers Available information on length, coverage and spacing of teacher training. Assam 31936 u 4 days training given to all teachers; · u 10537 teachers provided need based training; · u 195621 teachers given 7-9 days training on the whole school approach. Haryana 18000 u 17000 teachers trained for 7 days; u 18000 teachers trained for 5 days; u 14202 Class I&II teachers and 9000 Class III, IV &V teachers trained for 10 days; u 20,000 for 8 days on competencies and skills. Karnataka 58041 u 4152 in DPEP I and 6616 in DPEP II teachers trained in Nali Kali; u 35700 in DPEP I and 59246 in DPEP II teachers undergo 6 days training; u 12708 in DPEP I and 22402 in DPEP II teachers given 3 days training using films. Kerala 14149 u 30,000 provided training for 6 days Madhya Pradesh 59345 u 40459 teachers receive need based training; u 162868 on integrated learning material; u 23246 EGS teachers trained. Maharashtra 51241 u 30631 teachers receive12 days SMART training Tamil Nadu 31601 u 3 days Class I training for 3632 DPEP I and 672 DPEP II teachers; u 5 days Class III, IV and V English training for 2806 DPEP I and 239 DPEP II teachers; u 5 days booster training for Class II given to 2378 DPEP I teachers; u Activity based training given to 195 DPEP I and 802 DPEP II teachers Orissa 28139 u 1st round of training 23602 teachers; u 2nd round of training 28243 teachers; u 3rd round of training 29530 teachers; u 4th round of training 24530 teachers. Himachal Pradesh 7430 u 1643 teachers trained on school readiness and use of library books; u 7500 teachers have undergone 15 days training. Uttar Pradesh 53203 u 51236 teachers given motivational training; u 53160 teachers given training in pedagogy; u 106324 teachers given training in various aspects; u 35932 given a one day training. Gujarat 19,800 u 248 teachers trained on subject content u 120 teachers on multi-grade u 4786 Class V teachers trained in English u Para teachers trained for four months Source: Agarwal (2002), 15th and 16th Progress Overview 3.27 Inservice training ranged from three to twenty the case with developing sensitivity toward SC days and included a range of topics. Developing and ST students during instruction.28 The primary teachers motivation and competencies in MLL objective of the gender sensitization modules was are central themes across training programs. the understanding (of the communities) mental Joyful learning, child centered instruction, the resistance (Ed.Cil, 2000, p.73) to sending girls use of instructional aids, subject content training to school and listing activities to be done in order according to the textbook, gender sensitization, to improve girls participation in education. and multi-grade instruction are some of the other These activities included seating boys and girls important themes nurtured during teacher training. Most training programs have separate 28 Karnataka has developed video material on developing teachers modules on gender sensitization, which is rarely sensitivity to students from SC and ST communities. 34 together, calling upon girls as often as boys in when CRC coordinators visit include the classroom, the inclusion of both boys and demonstration lessons, instructing students girls equally in leadership activities and the because their teacher is absent, checking on allotment of tasks traditionally limited to girls to targets set by the teacher, and holding meetings boys such as sweeping the classroom, and between teachers and headmaster. The visits in fetching water. In addition to training provided Kerala appear to be most appropriate for at a central location, regular teacher support developing teachers skills coordinators share was initiated at the Cluster Resource Centers and the task of teaching with the teacher and this at the school site. CRCs were responsible for experience is deconstructed and discussed. organizing training, usually one day each month, Records of these visits are maintained at the at the Center. CRC visits to school were supposed school and cluster level. The IIM studies on to involve observations of teachers to help them Karnataka and Assam (2002) are more large internalize and implement the new instructional scale and indicate that while it is not uniform the model. The team that supports teachers in the BRCs and CRCs do visit schools and classrooms classroom is much larger in Kerala and Assam regularly. Karnataka has a set of criteria by which (15 17 trainers, Ed.Cil 2001), than in the other the BRC rates the CRC functioning. According states where there would be about 3 to 5 people to this report about 50% of the CRC are including Block and Cluster personnel. In functioning well, 10% are poor, and the Karnataka the number of schools that cluster remaining average. coordinators are responsible for is large and this curtails their effectiveness. 3.30 The training of teachers is a very significant part of DPEP. Teachers that hitherto have had few 3.28 Therearefewimpactevaluationsoftheusefulness professional development opportunities over the of the cascade model of training for teachers. course of their whole teaching career were now Two studies (Clarke, 1998; EC, 2002) indicate undergoing at least one round of training per that most teachers in Karnataka seem to have year (MHRD 2001).31 Supported by State undergone some form of inservice training and Resource Groups (discussed later), states appear are verbally positive about the significance and to have had fairly comprehensive plans for impact of the new methodology. Rampal (2000) teacher training. However, there are several briefly refers to the success of the training in issues related to coverage and content of the Kerala in DPEP districts, helping teachers training program, which can be highlighted. internalizethenewpedagogythroughexperiential Firstly, though most states appear to have given learning and following this with hands-on- teacherssomekindoftrainingitisunclearwhether training at the school.29 The experience in Tamil all teachers in the state were provided the same Nadu is not so positive. In the Tamil Nadu case training or whether the same teachers went study, in the Gender and Social Equity report through several rounds of training. For example, (EC 2002), of the seven teachers interviewed, most teachers appear to have undergone similar three teachers found inservice helpful while the training in Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala and remaining had never attended any program or Orissa while in some of the other states such as had not found the programs particularly useful. Himachal Pradesh and Tamil Nadu, a smaller In general, the positive effect of including gender proportion of teachers appear to have been issues in training are alluded to in the above trained. The reason for the smaller proportion is studies. not quite clear. Furthermore, the educational 3.29 Similar to the overall training, the support backgroundandexperienceofteachersarerarely extended to teachers in the context of the Block Resource Centres (BRCs) and the Cluster 29 Rampal also refers to the training in non-DPEP districts run by the SCERT as not having achieved its intention of helping teachers Resource Centers (CRCs) has not been understand the new method. systematically evaluated until recently. The 30 Bihar which is not a DPEP I or II state is included in this study. The other four states are Karnataka, Kerala, MP and Assam. synthesis report entitled Glimpses from the 31This study was based on one pedagogically advanced district in the Grassroots (Ed.Cil, 2001) describes best seven DPEP I states. One block, also functioning well pedagogically, from each district was selected and two schools each from good and average practices of 20 and 15 active and functional schools, respectively, would be selected. The 14 good schools were (p. 2) BRCs and CRCs respectively in five observed for 2-3 days and the 14 average schools for one day. Discussions were also held with officials at district, block and cluster states.30 Across states, activities taking place levels. 35 considered when deciding which teachers would training was in fact empowering teachers in their be trained first. For instance, in the study done task in the classroom.32 Information on by the Media Research Group in Haryana in evaluation of teacher training in the eleven DPEP 1996 the group of teachers trained came with a I and II states is fragmented and imprecise. In range of qualifications (from high school to post- sum, the cross state variation and within state graduates) and experience. It is not clear whether and district variation has not been captured and this variation in teacher backgrounds was therefore, experimentation remains uninformed considered when organizing training. by lack of information and analysis. 3.31 Secondly, earlier on in the program states E. Classroom processes rationale for the inclusion or exclusion of particular content areas in training and the 3.33 While the direct impact of training on teachers connections between inservice (one time and has not been systematically evaluated, there is a continuous) and onsite professional development relatively large amount of data available on were sketchy and lacked clarity. Most states classroom processes. Since the classroom adaptedtheexistingNCERTsSpecialOrientation represents the location of the transfer of training for Primary Teachers, which was mainly to practice, an analysis of classroom practice motivational to include activity preparation. As provides, to some extent, information on the a result, for example, important areas, which impact of training. Studies conducted on should have received considerable attention early classroom processes in DPEP schools are largely on in the program, namely, the development of qualitative and small sample based. Therefore, teachers conceptual understanding of subject though variation is described, this variation may content and multi-grade instruction, have not be considered representative or indicative of become areas of focus towards the end of the the magnitude of the change in classroom program. Thirdly, another outcome of the practice. In other words, studies dealing with inadequate framework for inservice is the the magnitude of the impact in terms of whether oscillation between top down and need based 25 percent or 50 percent or 75 percent of the training. When a centralized determination of teaching force utilizes this new method of training or the cascade model was found to be instruction are not available. Furthermore, the inadequate, the shift toward need based training analysis of classroom practice can only allude left the full responsibility of identifying suitable to shortcomings in training and more direct training to district and block officials and teachers impact analysis of training itself is needed to who lacked sufficient skills to frame their own capture how training would need to be professional development. In Kerala (Ed.Cil, restructured so as to have higher impact on 2001) the cascade model has been better classroom practice. adapted to meet local needs. BRC coordinators decide on the training based on their visits to 3.34 In order to understand the changes brought schools and programs are organized with about by DPEP in classrooms it will be useful to considerable expert assistance. capture teaching and learning in classrooms before the program began. There is limited 3.32 In conclusion, the organization of training descriptive information on the state of classrooms indicates that states unaccustomed to the notion at project commencement in the project of systematic inservice training have embarked documents. The dependence of teachers and on considerable experimentation and continue the entire schooling system on textbooks and the to wrestle with how long teacher training should importance of textual learning is well documented be, what the content of the training should be elsewhere. References are often made to the and the practicalities of training thousands of prevalence of rote and memorization as a tool teacher within a short period. Experimentation for learning. Memorization and repetition were by states was not facilitated by the fact that few studies and surveys were undertaken to understand the relative emphasis given by 32 Three studies done in Haryana in 96 by Media Research Group, 97 by Chutani and Lal and 99 by Dang provide some information on the different states to the areas outlined above (except training, however, since they are fairly dated, the results have not been with reference to gender: Ed.Cil, 2000); whether included in the main text of this report. These studies indicate the predominance of traditional methods, such as lecture and training programs were taking place and whether demonstration, used by teacher trainers during the training. 36 in fact the hallmarks of Indian education. This is clarifications of doubts. In general, in classrooms especially evident in the teachers explanation in other DPEP states traditional style learning of content using the lecture method for the most and activity coexist with an activity peeping in, part, in the questioning of student knowledge off and on, to relieve the monotony of [what and in the criteria used by teachers in correcting teachers feel is] real learning (MHRD 2001, students work. Explanation was confined to the p. 15). Clarkes finding in 1998 of the integration textbook and students power to memorize was of the new methodology with rote and repetition tested. Integration of experience, conceptual in Karnataka is reiterated by more recent understanding, meaning, interpretation and studies.34 This integration is evident, for example, complexity were not valued, and even in a mathematics class when an activity would discouraged. Distance was maintained in the be repeated many times over, portraying the classroom between teachers and students. importance given to rote learning. And in the morewidespreadphenomenonofintegrationinto 3.35 According to the EC (2002) report: DPEP has traditional practice, student learning is regulated brought with it a sea change in the teaching and defined students rarely ask questions and patterns and classroom situationStudents interact extensively in the classroom. across DPEP classrooms are clearly less fearful accompanied by a friendlier teacher-student 3.37 Traditional pedagogy is also reflected in the use relationship and a reduced use of corporal of the Rs.500 grant given to each teacher to punishment by the teacher. (p.100). prepare instructional aids to support activity According to the synthesis report of classroom based instruction. A few studies deal with the practices in DPEP states33 done by the effective distribution and use of this grant such Government of India, certain common elements as Clarkes study (1998) and Vasuvi and representing dimensions of reform in teaching Chamarajs study (2001) found extensive use of and learning characterize instruction in the DPEP teaching aids prepared with this money in classroom. These elements in the best case classrooms in Karnataka. However, other studies scenario include during instruction the use of a indicate the limited use of the grant money and variety of aids in addition to the textbook, the use of Teaching Learning Materials (TLMs) in use of local context as examples, organizing the classrooms. According to Guleria et al. (2001) class into groups, and increased students verbal the grant was not being used to make useful participation. TLMs by the teachers in the 108 sample primary schools in Himachal Pradesh. Furthermore, 3.36 Having said this, however, the degree to which TLMs created by teachers were used in Class I teachers use these best practices to bring about and II but in Class III and IV they were stored student learning varies across states and a away and rarely used. This finding is reiterated continuum of sorts is evident. Teachers in Kerala by Swains (2001) study of 40 teachers in Orissa. (Hussock, 2000; Rampal, 2000; MHRD, 2001) 95 percent of the teachers in this study had no happen to be the most sophisticated in the use interest in preparing TLMs and resorted to of instructional aids, and teachers and students traditional methods of instruction. In Bariks and experiences in bringing about learning. They Mishras studies (2001) of 30 teachers, 80 are creative and use activities skillfully, in a timely percent of the teachers perceived themselves as and appropriate fashion: activity forms the using instructional aids efficiently, however, core of the learning process .(MHRD 2001, during actual observation of classroom practice p. 1). In the Kerala classrooms, space and only 30 percent were using TLMs. Kaur et als freedom is given to students to nurture their own and Bhattacharjees studies in Assam (2000) learning. The study done by Women maintains that teachers rarely used instructional Empowerment and Human Resource aids during instruction. Instead, the traditional Development Center (2001) is based on a random sample of five schools in six districts in 33The study was focusing on teaching and learning in classrooms conducted in eight DPEP I states in addition to Andhra Pradesh. The Kerala. Of the 210 teachers in the study, 92 research was based on observations, interviews and focus group percent of the teachers used teaching tools such discussions in two well performing and two average type schools in the state. as manuals and instructional aids. Classes 34This study of 220 classroom sessions in Kolar, Karnataka, was evidenced the consistent interaction of students completed in 1998. It involved the qualitative analysis of teachers perceptions of the new method of instruction, analysis of classroom engaging the teacher in discussion and practice and multivariate analysis of student achievement. 37 lecture method is used and the sole reliance on their learning more. Occasionally, SC or dalit textbooks is clearly evident. students receive more corporal punishment and are asked to run more errands for the teachers 3.38 Across classrooms in the DPEP I and II states than other students (Jha and Jhingran, 2002). student evaluation and multi-grade instruction Separate seating for girls and SC and ST students are very weak. Accounts of evaluation in are reported in some schools. Kerala, Maharashtra, MP, Karnataka and UP (Ed.Cil, 2002), though based on a qualitative 3.40 The picture of teaching and learning in EGS analysis of a very small sample, suggest that and AS schools across districts appear to be more evaluation, except in Kerala, cements aligned with the situation in Keralas regular traditional learning by confining test questions classroom (EC, 2002). Students learn in groups to recall and structured type answers.35 and there is considerable informality in the Though textbooks have been revised, the organization of and instructional pattern in content and structure of examinations has not classrooms (MHRD, 2001 p.45; EC, 2002). changed. The focus appears to be on marks Instructional aids are fairly extensively used by obtained and teachers keen to show results AS teachers. To summarize, the impact of DPEP sometimes assist students in answering test on classroom practice, across DPEP classrooms questions. Evaluation in Kerala on the other the relationship between teachers and students hand, has begun to promote skills of enquiry has clearly been transformed into one that is and critical analysis (p.23). According to friendlier and less intimidating. However, the this report, most states continue to focus on reform of traditional practice in terms of formal summative evaluation rather than on nurturing student skills and creativity, the use of formative evaluation, which can then inform TLMs and evaluation of student learning while the instructional process. Continuous varying across states is limited. Teachers appear evaluation in classroom appear to focus on to be more sensitive to girls in the classroom better performing students and less on the than students from SC and ST communities. others. The sharing of student performance Instructional practices in EGS and AS classrooms with parents is now being practiced across appear to be more effective. states, though the questions of whether this is actually done systematically and extensively F. Early Childhood Education are not clear. 3.41 Both DPEP I and II had early childhood education 3.39 The removal of gender and social discrimination (ECE) as a component. The SAR for DPEP II in classrooms is an important objective of DPEP states, ECE is an important DPEP strategy to to ensure adequate completion and learning for improve readiness to learn.ECE is also girls and children from SC and ST backgrounds. expected to contribute to enrolment and retention Gender bias from the available literature appears for girls by providing an alternative source of to be less stark and pervasive than the caste sibling care during school hours. The strategy bias. A reason could be that as mentioned adopted by DPEP I and II was one of above, while there is a separate module to convergence with the Integrated Child eliminate gender bias, similar training is not Development Scheme (ICDS) which is the major providedtoaddressissuesofcastediscrimination. program used by the project states for early In some states where there is a larger or childhood development. A key limitation of the sometimes predominant population of children ICDS scheme is that its centers (anganwadi from lower caste communities, the inadequacy centers) timings are not coordinated with school of resources is evident in the condition of these hours, making it difficult for girls who take care schools. The perception of teachers and of younger siblings to attend school. DPEP administrators that children from these provided funding to extend the hours at these communities find it difficult to learn is widespread centers so that the timings of these centers were and more gravely, taken-for-granted ( NCERT, better coordinated with school hours. In addition, 2000; EC, 2002; Jha and Jhingran, 2002). Teachers tend to provide preferential treatment 35Active schools in Maharashtra and Nalli Kalli schools in Karnataka to students from upper caste communities by represented innovative pedagogy, however, since there were no studies done by DPEP on the effectiveness of these methods in the states praising them more and by paying attention to respectively, it is difficult to include them in this analysis. 38 where ICDS did not reach a village, DPEP innovative management structures organically provides for setting up an ECE program. linked to, but autonomous from state education departments and the adoption of new 3.42 This is an area within DPEP, which has not management practices that combineflexibility, receivedmuchattention. Thereislittleinformation decentralization and professional rigor and very few studies that focus on ECE and the (p.9). Structures were set up at the national level impact of ECE within DPEP. One study in DPEP to oversee the program being implemented in I districts in Haryana concluded that DPEP had the states. The structures at the National level provided useful teaching-learning material to include the National Literacy and Elementary anganwadi centers. However, the study found Education Mission; General Council, DPEP that more training of the anganwadi workers in project board and the DPEP Bureau. The Bureau ECE was needed (Santek Consultants, 1997). was to be the financial-cum-technical The IIM study on Haryana suggests that CRCs intermediary and perform the functions of and primary schools need to be provided training appraisal, supervision, monitoring and in order to be able to support anganwadi evaluation (p.17, Ed.Cil, 1996), these functions workers. Kaul et als (2002) study indicates that in earlier projects lay with the donor agencies.36 the ECE model under DPEP worked better than the ICDS model for 3-5 year old children. Das et 3.46 State Implementation Societies (SIS), semi- al also found this for ECE in UPDPEP III (Das et autonomousregisteredsocietiesestablishedatthe al, 2002). state level on the one hand, can be identified as oneofthesuccessesofDPEP. The SIS has allowed G. Management of the program efficient decision-making and fund-flows to assist 3.43 In both DPEP I and II, the building of capacity implementation. These societies were supported to plan and manage education was a specific by a General Council (chaired by the Chief objective of the project. The focus of building Minister) and an Executive Council (chaired by capacity according to the SAR was to make the theChiefSecretaryandEducationSecretary). The project teams at the state and district level fully State Project Director is the CEO of the Executive functional (p.17). In addition, the development Council. Executive committees comprise of of supporting institutions was very important. educators, school officials, teachers, NGOs and These institutions included those at both national community members. Sub committees dealing and states levels. In the states, the project mainly with financial areas and resource groups undertook improvements in the role and that are theme based and under the Executive functioning of DIETs. council support the SPO and the implementation of the project. Resource Groups, which included 3.44 The entire focus of planning and management academicians and civil society, have played an in DPEP according to the Progress Overview has important role in DPEP, especially in the quality been the adequate staffing of state project and interventions described above. At the district level district offices, the conceptualization of Annual the District Project Office is supported by an Work Plans and Budgets and what is termed as advisory team and/or executive council (chaired micro planning (p.7) or school level planning. by the Collector). However, on the other hand, a If one summarizes planning and management parallel structure has emerged, which many states in the project more comprehensively, additional arenowconcernedwithreintegratingorredefining. aspects include setting up and strengthening The SIS coexists with state departments of existing structures; setting up information education. DOE retains the power to recruit, monitoring systems; financial management; and transfer and pay teachers salaries. The existence researchandevaluation.Thefollowingdiscussion of a dual structure has affected the monitoring will deal with the above areas and related issues. andevaluation,especiallyofteacherperformance. The constant turnover of staff in state and district i. Structures 3.45 Ed.Cil (1996) summarizes the objective of 36 The role of the national level structure in implementing DPEP will not be dealt with in this report due to the lack of written information in the establishing structures in DPEP: A central area. Perceptions are that the national level involvement was much concern of the program is to introduce stronger and more effective earlier on in the program and as states began to take control the involvement of the national level was never management reform through the creation of redefined. 39 project offices have been identified by the IIM District and state level data and information studiesasanissueeffectingimplementationofthe informs these plans and according to Ed.Cil, project. 1996, perspective plans are reflective of the participatory process at both state and districts 3.47 Though the establishment of sub-district structures levels. Annual work plans and budgets (AWPBs) were left to the decision of states, all DPEP I and II are prepared on the basis of these plans. The stateshaveestablishedbothblockandclusterlevel preparation of AWPBs is based also on resourcecenterssupportedbyBlockleveladvisory household surveys, EMIS and local planning at groups for assisting pedagogical renewal in the village, cluster, block and district levels. project districts. Most of the Block and Cluster Madhumitas study (Ed.Cil, 2000) of seven Resources centers across the states have states explores local level planning. She argues coordinators and staff in place. Across the levels that by establishing local level committees at including the states, resource groups made up various levels, the participatory process is in of a variety of individuals support the program on place in Maharashtra, Karnataka, Himachal substantive issues. The functioning and Pradesh and Tamil Nadu but not as strong in involvement of DIETs has improved considerably Gujarat. The 15th Progress Overview of MHRD, overtheprojectperiod. GOIrecentlyenteredinto GOI, identifies Kerala, Tamil Nadu and a Memorandum of Understanding with states to Himachal Pradesh as having particularly strong develop DIET institutions. SCERTs (State Council school development planning in place. of Education Research and Training) and SIEMATs (State Institution of Educational Management and 3.49 Though local level capacity to plan and manage Training) development in DPEP is mixed. The role hasimprovedovertheprojectperiod,theextentto and function of SCERTs have been fairly which this planning is reflected in the AWPBs is systematized across states in that they have been unclear. Jha et al (2001) examine this process in directlyinvolvedwithtrainingandtextbookrevision. MP and Karnataka and indicate that the process The role and function of SIEMATs, however, are is not very participatory or reflective of ground less clear. SIEMAT has been conceptualized as realities. Two issues can be identified to suggest an independent autonomous institution in Uttar that these plans have not moved much beyond Pradesh, as an institution under the government what was identified in 1996 as a list of activities umbrella in Maharashtra, Haryana, Assam and and associated budget (p.11). Firstly, on the Orissa, and a unit of planning and management one hand, the committee or teams established do in the SPO or SCERT in other states. Except in not appear to include beneficiaries at the school UttarPradeshwheretheGOUPhasformallytaken levelsuchasparentsandteachers. Infact,mother- the responsibility of providing staff salaries, the teacher and parent-teacher associations at local staffingintheotherSIEMATsisunsatisfactory. DIETs levels in some schools are initiating change and and SCERTs involvement in DPEP suggests that ensuringthatenrolmentandattendanceobjectives these institutions need to be strengthened. With aremet,forexample,inHimachalPradesh. These reference to SIEMAT, the need for establishing this activities do not seem to inform the planning institution as a separate entity is not entirely clear. process. Secondly, critical school level data, for Though the need for some unit to support example, crowded classrooms and teacher educationalplanningandmanagementatthestate absenteeism graphically described in studies on levels seems crucial. The future of BRC and CRC classroom activity do not seem to be highlighted needs to be considered based on further research in the AWPBs planning and conceptualization. on it role in training and monitoring at sub district It is possible that the process followed in DPEP for levels. producing AWPBs in addition to the lack of collated quantitative and qualitative data on ii Planning schoolspreemptstheAWPBsfrombecomingmore than lists and budgets, already prescribed in the 3.48 Planning in DPEP began with the perspective perspective plans.37 It seems that the production plan that covered the whole project period, seven years for DPEP I and six years for DPEP II. Such 37 plans either for the year or for short periods of In fact, with reference to the former, the listing and budgeting prevents actual knowledge sharing and local construction of AWPBs by imposing time were not commonplace in DPEP districts the demand that leadership of the incipient effort act as if it knew what it prior to the commencement of the project. was doing before there was an opportunity for learning to occur (in Mercer, p. 61). 40 of AWPBs, which should have represented the iv Supervision, Monitoring, Research and confluence of community/decentralization and Evaluation official structures has not become what it was intended to become, thus making the program 3.53 The implementation of the AWPBs, the lesseffective. implementation of project interventions and the achievement of project outcomes have to be monitored and evaluated in order to sharpen and iii Financial Management and the impact of DPEP on Financing of Primary Education developtheprojectasawhole. Thoughnostudies areavailable,theinitialmodelofmonitoringupheld 3.50 Funds from the central government (external the responsibilities and activities of state project aid) and state governments contribution of offices. This model has evolved over the project 15 percent are sent to the society on a periodwithdistrictofficesbecomingmoreinvolved regular basis. The contribution by state as the project progressed. The EMIS data on governments has been fairly on schedule. project outcomes formed an important part of the There are very few studies that comment on monitoring process, first at the state level and financial management and fund flow in increasingly now at the district and sub-district DPEP. However, various joint review mission levels as collation and analysis become more and reports reveal that the experience with fund more decentralized. The monitoring of flows has been mixed. The IIM study on implementation progress, however, has not been DPEP in Karnataka reports that the flow of developed as much as monitoring the progress funds to the project was timely and made on project outcomes. Even the monitoring adequate, particularly at the district level. ofoutcomeswasbasedlargelyonEMISdata. The In sharp contrast, however, the IIM study limitationsofthesedatahavebeendiscussedearlier on DPEP in Assam finds that the flow of in the section on outcomes. The monitoring funds from the state to the district was mechanisms used consisted mainly of visits and neither timely nor adequate. interactions with local communities and schools by project officials. There is no clear system of 3.51 One study (Ed.Cil, no date), examined trends quality monitoring and ensuring that services are in spending on various components of the being provided at an optimum level. Processes program in DPEP I districts and states. It such a teacher training, community participation, concluded that there were wide inter-state textbook renewal etc, which forms the critical part variations in the proportion of spending on of DPEP are rarely examined. Most importantly, civil works, management, and quality. In there is no performance monitoring structure in terms of expenditure other than that on civil place for teachers or schools. While CRC works and management, the highest amounts coordinatorsandVECsinformallymonitorschools were spent on the category entitled formal and teachers, a formal system and collated schools followed by on academic resource information are unavailable. Some states are in support. While the study details some patterns the process of conceptualizing and administering of expenditure for the different states, it is not quality monitoring instruments, however, very revealing since the categories used are information is not yet available. very broad. 3.54 One important way in which to analyze the monitoring of project implementation are the 3.52 There is no study, however, analyzing the numberandqualityofstudiesdoneinprojectstates spending on various components across based on acceptable sample sizes and analysis. different states and districts and linking this The volume of studies on primary education, a to outcomes/performance of the project. This subjectwhichwasgenerallyignoredbyacademics, is a crucial area for further research. Is it and the fact that, in most states, studies have been possible, for example, that the ceiling on civil done at the state, district as well as in some cases works may be a reason for stagnating block level, indicates that a culture of research on enrolments in states where overcrowding of primaryeducationatalllevelshascertainlyspread classrooms occurred. These kinds of linkages due to DPEP. Nevertheless, there is considerable need to be explored further to help design variation across states as to the number of studies future projects/programs. doneovertheprojectperiod. StatessuchasKerala, 41 Orissa and Assam have done a larger number of not stem directly from the analysis. As discussed studies when compared to the other states. The earlier, none of the studies reviewed, except Jalan largestnumberofstudiesseemtohavebeendone and Ginskaya, are rigorous impact evaluations on the most problematic areas namely classroom of the projects or project interventions. It is also processes (43), followed by enrolment (27) and clear that contributions of accepted research general studies on schools or schooling (23). institutions and researchers were not solicited to Studies done by Kerala, Orissa and Assam are understand the impact and effectiveness of DPEP distributed across categories, while in the studies at the state level. in the other states information is unavailable on most of the areas of implementation. In addition, 3.55 The33studiesdoneatthenationallevelaremuch except for a few studies, which have been referred morerigorousandthefindingshaveleadtouseful to in this paper, the methodology used and the assessmentsofprojectinterventions. However,the academic rigor of the analysis are questionable. extenttowhichstatesareawareoftheconclusions The quantitative methodologies used rarely go madebynationalreportsandstudiesandtheextent beyond descriptive statistics and the qualitative to which they are used are unclear. methodologies used are often unclear. For this 3.56 To summarize this section on improving reason, the findings are often impressionistic and management and planning capacity in DPEP unreliable - most of the reasons postulated are project districts, several areas in which the project educated guesses rather than proven evidence. has made substantial improvements can be Almost all studies do not analyze the linkages identified. States are now focusing on the between components, inputs, and processes and development of institutions at the state level to outcomes. An evaluation of the reasons as to support the management and planning of why outcomes have improved or declined and education in the state. Sub-district level structures linking these reasons to inputs and existing such as the DIETs, have been revitalized to some processes is completely lacking. Further, in most extent and BRCs and CRCs are in place. The studies, the policy recommendations, if any, do planning process has clearly improved through Table 9: Distribution of studies done by states across themes State (years in which studies were conducted) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Assam (96-01) 40 1 15 8 1 5 2 6 1 Gujarat (98-99) 2 1 1 Haryana (96-98) 9 1 1 4 1 1 1 Himachal Pradesh (99-01) 12 1 3 5 2 1 Karnataka (97-01) 5 1 4 1 Kerala (97-01) 22 2 12 2 3 1 1 1 Madhya Pradesh (97-98)@ 5 1 4 Maharashtra (99-01) 3 1 1 1 Orissa (98-01) 41 11 10 2 7 6 2 1 2 Tamil Nadu (99-00) 5 3 1 1 Uttar Pradesh* (01-02) 3 1 1 1 Total 147 5 43 27 5 23 14 12 6 4 1 5 2 National 33 2 8 3 6 2 1 9 1 @Includes DPEP I; *Includes UPDPEP III. Themes: 1-Textbooks 2-Classroom processes 3-Enrolment/dropout/repetition 4-Achievement 5-Schools 6-Teachers & Training 7-Community 8-Early childhood 9-Administration 10-Civil works 11-AS/NFE/EGS 12-Disabilties 42 the process of conceptualizing AWPBs. However, been fairly satisfactory while issues have been AWPBs do not appear to have gone beyond a raised with the fund flow from the center to the mere list of activities to making connections with state. Inordertounderstandexpenditurepatterns, project interventions and outcomes. State budget and expenditure analysis of the project still Implementation Societies and the councils and needstobedone. Researchandevaluation,which resourcegroupsthatsupportitsactivitieshavebeen has been weak in project districts and at the state crucial for implementation. However, the limited levels, has not been able to support project staff in outcomes achieved also suggest that this structure sharpening and fine-tuning implementation. needs to be rethought especially in the area of teacher management. Counterpart funding has IV. CONCLUSION 4.1 The District Primary Education Program in India, from a brick and mortar approach to primary as the discussion in the last two sections indicate, education,frommerelyprovidingaschoolbuilding has been a comprehensive but complex program and teachers to the questions of what children toimplement. Inresponsetothecalltouniversalize learn and how they learn (p. 5). primaryeducationbytheinternationalcommunity, the Indian leaders and the individual citizen, this 4.3 It is clear from the discussion above that DPEP project has been in place for eight years in some was successful in implementing some key project districts and seven years in other districts in eleven interventions, particularly revising textbooks, states in India. Dedicated teams and individuals spreadofinserviceteachertrainingandmobilizing across these states, districts and sub-districts communities. In fact, in any states, these working in the DPEP program have initiated and interventions were catalytic in nature and spread provided momentum to the efforts of the to non-project districts as well. To the extent that Government ofIndia to provide five years ofgood manyeducationalprocesseshavechanged,DPEP quality education to all the countrys young. In has been a harbinger of change in primary thisconcludingsectionwesummarizethefinancial education in the country. Both projects were also implications of the program and then assess the partially successful in increasing enrolments, progress made in the first two phases of the reducinggendergapsinenrolment,dropoutrates program dealing first with project outcomes and achievement levels, and ensuring minimum followedbyprojectinterventions. Wealsoattempt 40 percent achievement scores in Class I. to outline certain overarching aspects to be However,manyofthekeyobjectivesoftheprogram considered during the implementation of the ofprovidinguniversalaccess/enrolment,reducing successor of this program based on the strengths social disparities to less than 5 percent and and weaknesses of DPEP. increasing achievement levels by 25 percent were 4.2 Bashir and Ayyar (2000) reviewed DPEP by notachieved. Inaddition,therewaslimitedscope focusing more on the overall strategy of the in the design of the projects to address systemic program. They capture the essential contribution issues such as teacher management. Monitoring of the design and strategy of the program in the and evaluation, though improved from before the following quote: DPEP has ensured that funds project period, continued to be weak. Table 10 do reach teachers, schools and villages, that the below summarizes the progress made on the isolation of the primary school teacher has been variousobjectivesandcomponentsoftheprojects. ended, that the periodic visits of state, national This raises the question of how realistic were the andexternalagenciestoruralschoolshasimparted quantitative targets that were set. In particular, a new dignity to primary education and that reducing dropout rates to less than 10 percent changes are apparent in classrooms and in and increasing achievement levels by at least 25 teaching-learningprocesses.DPEPhastakensome percent for all project districts seem particularly steps towards promoting holistic planning for ambitious in retrospect. Future programs would primary education. It has brought more financial needtoprovidemorerealistictargets,differentiated and technical resources and new perspectives to across states (if not districts) to make them primary education. Above all, it has ensured that achievable as DPEP success was very uneven the attention of policy makers has shifted away across states. 43 Table 10: Summary of progress: Project Outcomes and Interventions Objectives (Outcomes and Progress made Future challenges Nature and quality of components) evidence reviewed Provide primary school Enrolment increases and Will need to reach out to harder Household data; project EMIS access to all children. progress towards EFA but to reach population groups, data; national and state level concentrated in few states. particularly in the lagging studies. Difficulttojudgeoutcome Universal enrolment not states, to achieve universal based on project data. Only achieved. enrolment. impact evaluation (Jalan and Glinskaya,2002)foundsmall positivenetimpactbutdifficultto isolate impact due to several DPEPinterventionsundertakenin non-projectdistricts. Reduce gender disparity in Target achieved in 95 percent Reaching 100 percent gender Same as above. However, enrolment rates to less than 5 of DPEP I and II districts. equity at the village and school Jalan and Glinskaya found no percent. level. positive net impact of DPEP for 6-10 year olds; found greater net impact for older girls. Reduce social disparity in Not achieved for most districts, Focus particularly on ST Project data and studies enrolment rates to less than 5 particularly for ST children. children and targeted strategies reviewed. Social equity percent. Moderate to substantial to reach them. indices constructed in studies increases in SC enrolment in from project data not very different states. useful. Reduce cohort dropout rates Target not achieved in most Fixed target across the country Studies mainly by Shrivastava to less than 10 percent. districts, except in Kerala. not appropriate and probably and a few others; some cohort too ambitious. Much effort will dropout studies. Effort needed be needed to target strategies to compute more accurate to improve completion. cohort dropout rates based on household data in future programs. Nevertheless, Jalan and Glinskaya find positive net impact Reduce gender disparity in Target achieved in over 75 Move towards 100 percent Same as above dropout rates to less than 5 percent of districts equity. percent. Reduce social disparity in No information available from Needtocomputedisaggregated dropout rates to less than 5 project data/studies. dropout and completion rates percent. from household data. Achieve minimum 40 percent Target achieved by all districts Focus on improving learning Baseline and midterm assess- average achievement scores for Class I but fewer districts for in higher grades. ment surveys for DPEP I and II in all districts. Classes III/IV. andterminalassessmentsurvey for DPEP I. More analysis is required looking at distribution ofscoresbystudentsratherthan district averages. "" Increase achievement levels by Target achieved by only 50 to Target was probably too Baseline and midterm 25 percent over baseline. 75 percent of districts in Class ambitious and not appropriate assessment surveys for DPEP I I but less than 5 percent districts to have all India target. and II and terminal assessment in Classes III/IV. Improving learning achieve- survey for DPEP I. More ment will have to be the focus analysis is required looking at of future programs. distribution of scores by students rather than district averages. Reduce gender disparity in Target achieved by most districts achievement levels to less than (though differences were less Same as above. 5 percent. than 5 percent in many districts at baseline). Reduce social disparity in Not achieved by some districts. Focus on ST children. achievement levels to less than Same as above. 5 percent. Community mobilization. VECs formulated and trained Empowering members from Progress overview documents in all districts. Successful in disadvantaged communities; by GOI; few studies done at community construction, micro fullerinvolvementinschoolfunc- national and state levels; few planning and use of school tioning; evaluating effectiveness donor sponsored studies. grant. of VECs vis-à-vis user groups. Textbook recreation. Successful intervention using Removal of caste bias. Same as above participatory approach. Teacher professional Large numbers of teachers Systematic evaluation of impact Progress overview documents development and classroom received inservice training of training and formulating by GOI; Very few studies on processes. compared with earlier; Success long term strategic plans for teachers professional in setting up BRCs/CRCs/State professional development; development and a large resource groups; In the Focus on improving teaching numberofstudiesonclassroom classroom some teachers use and learning using a variety of processes done at national, instructional aids and learning methods rather than state levels and by donors - supportive relationship between lecture and rote; Improvement mostlyqualitativeandsinceonly teacher and student in instruction in higher grades; few of reasonable quality they Removal of caste bias. are not easy to generalize. Early childhood education. Limited success where ECE Scaling up and convergence Very few studies in this area. centers set up. with ICDS. Planning and management. Successofstateimplementation More strategic planning based Few studies done at national societies; limited success in on systematic use of data and and state levels; few donor involving SIEMAT/SCERT. information; Setting in place sponsored studies. accountabliity systems; Effecting systemic reforms in teacher management and other areas. Monitoring and evaluation Improved as compared with Effectively using household and Project data; learning pre-project period; more school data bases for assessment surveys; studies research on primary education monitoring and evaluation; done at all levels. Variable than before.Overall, continues building research capacity; quality and most studies not to be a weak area. doing impact evaluations methodologically rigorous. "# 4.4 Since the literature review has revealed only one interventions. Several studies reveal that impact evaluation study (Jalan and Glinskaya), interventions such as enrolment drives/ it is important to identify some further evaluations campaigns, promotion of primary education via that can be done for DPEP, ex-post. First, a the media, and micro-planning by Village similar study could be done for DPEP II districts. Education Committees to locate out of school Second, the same methodology could be children were successful in raising enrolments. employed using 2001 census data when they A few studies indicate the reasons for particular are available. The advantage of these data, success in the states cited above the location unlike household data, are that they cover the of schools in tribal areas and successful bridge whole population and are not based on a course programs in Karnataka; the success of sample. Further, they are representative at the alternative schools in MP and UP; and greater district level. Another evaluative study that could community participation in these states. The IIM be undertaken would be to link financing of study on DPEP I, Karnataka (Sherry Chand, 2002) certain components with outcomes at the district cites setting up of new schools, particularly in level. This could be done only for project districts tribal areas or exclusive schools for girls, and but would enable some linking of project the successful bridge course program (Chinnara interventions (with spending as a proxy indicator) Angala), as key reasons for the success in to outcomes. Financial data are available for improving enrolment substantially. Studies on most project districts. However, their reliability alternative schooling in M.P. (Rajiv Gandhi would need to be validated since they have not Prathmic Shiksha Mission, 1997a; 1997b) found been used for much analysis thus far. Since that the availability of these schools increased baseline studies on the status of teacher training, enrolment and reduced dropout in the districts community mobilization, teacher training, or studied. They also concluded that the community, other such interventions were not done and especially VEC members, were actively systematically in project and non-project districts, involved in the schools. Pandey (2000) cites the it is not possible to compare, ex-post, the impact contribution of EGS schools in reaching out to of changes in these components to outcomes marginalized children in MP. Shrivastava et al across project and non-project districts. (2002) came to similar conclusions about However, it would be useful to undertake some alternative schools in UP DPEP II districts. comparative studies across states on the different models adopted for community mobilization 4.7 On the second objective of reducing gender (VECs versus school management committees differences in enrolment rates to less than five or other user groups). It would similarly be useful percent, 95 percent of DPEP I and II districts to do such comparative studies of the relative achieved this goal. Participation of SC children success of various models adopted by different also increased but information on the disparity states for bridge courses and alternative between SC enrolment ratios as compared to schooling. overall enrolment ratios was not available for project states and districts. While enrolments of A. Project Outcomes ST children also grew, there were still many districts in which their share in enrolments was 4.5 Project EMIS data reveal that enrolments rose small relative to their share of the population. substantially in DPEP I and II. However, universal While the information on increasing the access/enrolment was not achieved in most participation of disabled children in school is project districts since household data do not limited,onlyaboutonepercentofthetotalstudents reveal 100 percent NERs and even project data enrolled in DPEP districts are disabled. A few reveal that the enrolment rise was concentrated states such as Haryana have made more in a few states. An impact evaluation study done progress in this area and lessons need to be by Jalan and Glinskaya (2002) reveals only a learned from the strategies adopted there for small positive net impact of DPEP I on enrolment future programs. when other factors are controlled for. 4.8 The DPEP goal of having a cohort dropout rate, 4.6 Nevertheless, substantial progress was made which is less than 10 percent has been achieved during the decade in terms of increasing in very few districts (except in Kerala where five enrolment due to DPEP, and possibly other of six districts have achieved this goal). The "$ dropout rates are still very high in Assam and The success has been more limited in reducing Uttar Pradesh in particular. In contrast, the goal differences in achievement levels between the of reducing the gender gap in the dropout rate general category of students and SC students to less than five percent has been achieved in and the gaps in achievement remain quite about three quarters of districts in both DPEP I substantial in the case of ST children. The lower and II. Some studies indicate that in areas where impact on ST children could be potentially VECs, mother and parent teacher associations related to various findings in studies on DPEP were more active, dropout rates were lower. interventions such as low levels of active Similarly, the impact of coordinating timings of participation by SC and ST population in VECs, the early childhood education centers with little emphasis in removing biases against these schools on reducing the likelihood that girls will castes/tribes during the process of textbook drop out of school has been acknowledged in a revision process and in inservice training (both few studies. Jalan and Glinskaya (2002) still of which had significant emphasis on gender find that the net impact of DPEP I on primary sensitization). Some classroom process studies school completion was higher relative to DPEPs do indicate that teachers perceptions regarding impact on enrolment, suggesting that dropout these communities continues to be biased and rates have improved less in non-project districts. that in some schools children from these Since the focus on the project has been on quality communities were seated separately. Once improvement (via improving the teaching again, however, these connections between learning process, textbook and pedagogical inputs/processes and achievement outcomes are renewal and provision of academic support to speculative since studies have not been done to teachers), and on community mobilization (via explore these linkages. the village education committees and other community mobilization activities), the impact B. Project Interventions on retention relative to non-project districts is encouraging. 4.10 The project interventions in DPEP have been 4.9 The achievement surveys conducted in the project numerous and complex involving a variety of districts reveal that the DPEP goal of attaining a institutions and governments (center, state, district minimum of 40 percent score was achieved in and local). Decentralization, educational quality Grade I in most DPEP I and II districts. However, improvement and institutional reform could be many districts did not achieve this minimum score identified as the three main areas in which DPEP in Grade III/IV. The target of increasing has tried to introduce change. The discussion achievement levels over the baseline by 25 below, dealing with the question of whether percent was achieved for half to three quarters interventions should be continued, revised or of the districts in Grade I but for less than 5 discarded, is limited in that there are no definitive percent of districts in Grades III/IV. Various studies examining the impact of the interventions studies on classroom processes indicate that on project outcomes. In addition, the information there have been major changes in the classroom as is evident from the previous sections is sketchy teaching learning process in project districts, and does not capture the extent of the making classrooms more child friendly. These implementation of the interventions within a state studies also reveal that activity based and or a district, either individually or holistically. In creative teaching methods are used less other words, based on the literature review, for extensively in higher grades, again pointing to example, it is impossible to fully understand, on a possible connection with poorer achievement the one hand, how teacher training was levels in Grades III and IV. There are, however, implemented in Kerala as opposed to no rigorous impact evaluations examining the Maharashtra and, on the other hand, whether effect of certain interventions such as teacher all the DPEP interventions (decentralization, civil training on learning achievement. Studies doing works etc) were equally successfully implemented this kind of analysis would be useful to the extent in a single state or in all states. Furthermore, the they are possible to do with available data. The impact of a set of interventions at varying levels third DPEP objective of reducing gender of implementation on project outcomes is differences in achievement levels to less than unavailable. Therefore, it is with caution and five percent has been attained in most districts. underlining the necessity for further research that "% this report discusses the future directions for each difficult for governments to sustain such activities component of the project. and the involvement of NGOs in this area is critical. Furthermore, NGOs could be involved 4.11 Decentralization: DPEP is based on the premise in developing the planning and management thattheroleofcommunityisintegraltothesuccess skills at the community level and especially of of this program. The program has as one of its Panchayat personnel. goals, on the one hand, the understanding of parents and local communities of the importance 4.13 Third, it will be important to establish structured of primary education, and on the other hand, it systems of local level planning and a system of questions the assumption of parents and quality monitoring. If schools are single teacher communities that governments can ensure, single schools, perhaps this level of planning, handedly, the provision of good quality education management and monitoring could be located without their assistance. The latter focused on either at the cluster or Gram Panchayat level. If the capacity building of communities to assist schools are large, especially those with upper governments in the provision of education. primary sections, a system of school level Overall, the community mobilization component planning and quality control will be important. in DPEP has certainly begun to achieve both Activities and plans at this level should inform these goals. However, this report would like to the next level of planning. Fourth, to provide emphasize that it has only begun to do so incentives to families, financial transfers to families considering the partial success in achieving to defray indirect costs and encourage regular enrolment, completion and achievement attendance at school could also be explored. outcomes outlined above. The study suggests the importance of the continued strengthening 4.14 Quality interventions: The structures and of user groups and/or VECs at the school level. processes in place with regard to pedagogical One area that needs to be clarified first, before renewal, considering the absolute dearth of such charting the direction of this component, is the activities before DPEP, is indeed noteworthy. The Panchayati Raj system in many states and the process of textbook revision, undertaken across interface of this institution with user groups or states, represents one of the early successes of school management committees. When this set this program. However, it is not clear from the of arrangements are clarified, and the roles and studies available whether the content of textbooks responsibilities defined for each level with regard is appropriate across states. In addition, the to education, the direction for this component physical quality of the textbooks, especially will become clearer. In some states where this binding, has been an issue raised in addition to has been done such as MP, Jha et al (2001) the timely delivery of textbooks before the school indicate that the Panchayats have no real power year. The extent to which the process of textbook with reference to education, which again book revision and creation has been becomes an issue. Clearly, the Panchayats and institutionalized and is informing the renewal of School Management Committees will have to upper primary textbooks would be important to play an important role in the monitoring of monitor. Libraries are important for improving teacher absenteeism and the provision of good student learning. This is an area that has not quality elementary education. received much attention in DPEP. 4.12 The second area is the attention given to 4.15 DPEP has clearly been successful in introducing processes of capacity building and inservice training as the norm rather than the empowerment. Again the project has completed exception, in many cases in non-project districts several rounds of training. Nevertheless, while as well. Though the impact of inservice training the capacity of communities to be involved in and reform in classroom practices is clearly less civil construction is indeed commendable, the dramatic and robust. The high dropout, involvement of communities, especially those that repetition and performance of students in the are illiterate and socially disadvantaged, in the achievement tests conducted in DPEP indicate functioning of the school and in learning activities that inservice must continue and much thought will have to be nurtured and developed. In this needs to be given to this area in the future. The regard, this report maintains that it is indeed following aspects require attention. (i) The limited "& reform in teaching and learning has clearly been intended. Thirdly, when planning for the impacted by the lack of physical infrastructure in coverage of all teachers in the district, a particular classrooms. Classrooms did not have the teachers academic background and experience prerequisites for effective learning to happen. For will need to be considered. Long term strategies example, many classrooms lacked blackboards, of teachers professional development would notebooks, writing instruments and adequate need to be articulated to enable all these space. In addition, the absence of an adequate objectives to be achieved. number of teachers and appropriate class sizes have restricted student learning. (ii) Limitations 4.16 Institutional reform: While the structures put in in this area are a reflection, to some extent, of place in DPEP at the state and sub-state levels the dearth of academic discourse in this area werenecessaryandintegraltotheimplementation within the country. Clearly, the MLL, the joyful of the project, setting up these structures also and activity-centered approaches require entailed establishing a dual system and the rethinking, and instead a focus on developing associated disconnect with the mainline system. the articulation, creativity and reasoning skills As mentioned earlier, the dual system has limited among students will be important. In the extent to which teacher absenteeism and conceptualizing models of inservice in the future, accountability are addressed in project districts. it will be important to ensure the involvement of Clearly, this dual system and its effect on project the academic community and possibly the implementation must be addressed expeditiously participation of Indian nationals in the in order to ensure quality education. international discourse on inservice training. In this respect it will also be critical to ensure parallel 4.17 The program involved setting up sub-district level reform of preservice training (which was outside structures including the BRCs and CRCs, which the purview of DPEP) to support reform in has been fairly successful. The question of inservice. (iii) One of the main reasons for the whether the BRCs and CRCs should continue limited impact of inservice training is that the after the project period is difficult to address due objectives of training in terms of classroom to lack of information on its roles and functions processes and student behaviors were never across states. DIETs clearly are integral to the articulated. This made it difficult to measure the functioning of the education system at the district effectiveness of training and classroom processes. level. It is possible that, if the DIETs become fully Thus in the future generation of programs, it will functional, either BRC or CRC may be sufficient be important to describe the objectives of training as sub-district level structures. Having one in terms of desirable behaviors in class, quality institution could also serve as the academic and of written work, class participation and use of administrative body that is parallel to the materials over the course of the school year. (iv) administrative structure at that level, the Janpad The content and the how of training, which or Block Panchayat. Again, the model of are at present diffuse and unclear need to be inservice, quality monitoring and magnitude of clarified. Three dimensions need attention when the task responsibilities should be examined first planning inservice for primary and upper primary before this decision can be made. In any case, teachers. Firstly, the question of how much of whether it is both BRC and CRC or just one these the content of inservice programs will be centrally structures, most critical is the systematic capacity defined and how much will be need based will building of CRC personnel (possibly a group of need to be decided upon. Technical assistance individuals) both in terms of planning, from the state and national levels in terms of implementing and monitoring the program. curricular material, guides and manuals and monitoring systems would be critical. Secondly, 4.18 Revitalizing and ensuring the effectiveness of the areas of multi-grade, subject content existing institutions such as the DIETs and the knowledge, evaluation and equity are important SCERTs has been much more difficult and it is and judgments on the proportion of time spent unclear whether this has been achieved across on each of these will have to be made. Alexander states. The involvement of these institutions, (2001) discusses the importance of training especially the technical assistance provided to teachers in DPEP to be able to use a variety of districts, is critical and will require concerted instructional methods appropriate for the learning capacity building and development in future "' programs. The increasing decentralization where elementary, education is achieved. Out of school states are assuming direct responsibility for the children in many states now belong to the hardest planning and management of education in the to reach groups such as children from ST state suggests the need for a policy support and communities, disabled children and working implementation analysis unit (such as the SIEMAT) children. More work needs to be done to located at the state level. Since, most understand the reasons for the limited impact of governments are reluctant to take on the burden DPEP on children from ST communities and of providing additional posts etc and creating disabledchildreninparticulartobettertargetfuture another institution, the establishment of smaller interventions. The increased role of communities units with specific tasks defined to support policy through user groups and VECs in helping better implementation within the Ministry of Education targeting would need to be thought through could be useful to explore. carefully. Improving completion rates will certainly need to be the focus of any future programs with 4.19 Planning in DPEP has become standardized and appropriate, well thought out strategies designed in order to reform this process it will be critical to to target particular groups. The limited success in consider project outcomes and to include raising achievement levels and, in particular, beneficiaries in the process. The setting in place reducing the gaps in achievement between the of a quality monitoring system that captures the general category and ST students also deserve effectiveness of processes is also imperative in any particular attention in teacher training modules futureprogramofeducationalreform.Monitoring, and future textbook/curriculum revisions. The research and evaluation has been one of the success of these initiatives in gender sensitization weakest areas in DPEP as indicated by the number can perhaps be used as inspiration. andqualityofstudiesconductedwithintheproject. Anditwouldnotbeinaccuratetoidentifylimitations 4.22 Increased flexibility: Flexibility relates to several in this area as directly effecting the restricted areas including financial and programmatic. The implementation of the quality components of the program defined so clearly at the central level project. The use of institutions and individuals and then at the state and district levels limit the withtechnicalknowledgeofresearchmethodology extent to which the reality and needs of the or the capacity building of individuals in this area individual school, community, teacher and child at state level would be crucial. While the are considered. Structures and procedures have introduction of EMIS certainly marks an important been initiated and the extent to which these step towards building data systems for planning structures and procedures impact the life of each and monitoring, the limitations of these data have school is what will need to be monitored and alreadybeendiscussed. Futureprogramswillneed measured. In order to monitor and measure to restructure this system as well as systemize each school, flexibility in financial planning and household surveys and build capacity at all levels program implementation is necessary. For to use data for planning and monitoring where example, one school may need more physical appropriate. infrastructure before qualitative transformation in teaching and learning can begin to happen. C. Critical aspects to be considered in Another school in contrast might have all its Future Programs physical infrastructure in place and will instead require teachers to be trained more effectively. 4.20 Based on the lessons learned from the DPEP I Flexibility must accompany all aspects of the and II, five aspects critical to the implementation project such as financial allocation, teacher of future programs in elementary education can training, support programs such as bridge be identified better targeting, improved courses, community support and training. In flexibility, focus on accountability, stronger addition, future programs will need to explore linkages and evaluative research and monitoring. the links between spending on various components and the impact of that spending to 4.21 Better targeting: While the program has been enable better designs that allow more flexibility partially successful in meeting some of the across states and districts. developmentobjectivesregardingoutcomes,there is a considerable distance to go before 4.23 Focus on accountability: Accompanying this universalization of primary, and certainly flexibility has to be accountability at all levels. In # order to ensure accountability, what each level is been the lack of mutual feedback between accountable for has to be defined clearly. research and program design and Management has to be made accountable for implementation. Similarly, research topics seem project outcomes as well as implementation of to have been chosen in an unsystematic manner project interventions. The same is true for the without programmatic goals in mind. A few key academic institutions such as the SCERTs,SIEMATs areas of research such as an impact analysis and DIETs, whose involvement at the present time linking inputs, financing and processes to is at best peripheral to implementation. The BRC outcomes of the projects and a comparative and CRC coordinator would need to be held evaluation of the successes and failures of responsible for vitalizing the teacher community; strategies used in various states need to be each individual teacher would be responsible for undertaken. ensuring classrooms that are vibrant and active. The teacher must be held accountable for the 4.26 A few studies, particularly done by national learning of each of her students. Equity is an institutions do compare DPEP with non DPEP important part of accountability. For example, if districts. Nevertheless, as explained earlier in the an additional classroom is built in schools which report, these are not impact evaluations in the does not need it as much as the school in a nearby sense that counterfactuals are not controlled for tribalhabitationburstingatitsseams,thisbecomes as in Jalan and Glinskaya (2002). This indicates an issue regarding accountability and equity. In the need for research capacity to be further addition, it involves setting in place a system of developed and strengthened, particularly at the regular monitoring and sample monitoring and state and district levels. In addition, future evaluation that has to be systematically built into programswillneedtobedesignedkeepinginmind theprogram. Finally,futureprogramswillcertainly the need for impact evaluations. For instance, have to address more systemic issues such as baseline data on outcomes and studies on the teacher vacancies, teacher absenteeism, and status of processes such as teacher training or teacher deployment that DPEP has not been able community structures should be collected in future to address to a large extent. This essentially would projects for project and non-project districts to involve Departments of Education, which hitherto facilitate future comparisons. For future programs have not been held accountable, becoming part that are nation-wide and not limited to specific of the mission to achieve universal elementary districts (as planned in the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan education with clear standards for performance. program for elementary education), impact evaluationscouldbedonebyundertakingreflexive 4.24 Stronger linkages: The linkages between the comparisonsi.e.comparingthestatusofoutcomes different components in the program on the one and processes before and after the program. In hand and project outcomes and financing on this case, it would be critical to collect good the other have received limited attention. For baseline data on all outcomes and processes. example, the financing of the list of activities in Equallycriticalwillbethecollectionofgoodquality AWPBs are rarely linked to project impact and end of project data on the same outcomes and outcomes. Similarly, the changes in classroom processes which are comparable with the baseline and teaching and learning processes have not data. As discussed earlier, better data systems will been studied in conjunction with achievement need to be developed which are based on levels to understand the links between teacher household surveys to complement the EMIS. training and textbook revision with student Different levels of aggregation could be used to learning. The associations made between facilitate monitoring and use of data for planning expenditure, project implementation and project at the different levels of administration. It is critical outcomes should be expected of personnel at that capacity for use of data and research be built different levels of administration. This would at all levels. Again, as discussed earlier in the enhance the effectiveness of future programs. report, it will be important in future programs to setdifferentiatedtargetsacrossIndianstatestoallow 4.25 Evaluative research and monitoring: While DPEP for differences in the baselines and allow for has introduced a culture of research at all levels contextual planning and monitoring. of the system, this culture needs to be further cultivated and strengthened. The lacuna in most 4.27 The use of EMIS and achievement data for research studies undertaken under DPEP has planning, monitoring and management will only # improve once this capacity has been established. implementation is uneven, an inevitable part of It also indicates the need to involve the larger reform in the human development sectors, which research community such as universities on an essentially deals with either introducing new interactive and continuous basis. The studies culture or change in the existing culture of done by the Indian Institutes of Management are institutions including the school, community, an example. It is unlikely, due to the magnitude district and states offices of education and of the task involved and the imperative to provide institutions, which assist in the administration of quality education in remote areas and hard to education and do research in education. reach populations, that the dimensions discussed Because the different dimensions of this kind of above can be nurtured and developed solely at change are often diffuse and lacking in clarity, the center. Therefore, it will be critical to provide the reform process requires continuous and an enabling environment for states to develop deliberate rethinking in terms of strategies and these capacities at the state level. The capacities interventions. This redefining and recreating must for policy analysis and research and evaluation be based on technical evaluations of both micro- would have to be developed at the state level in processes and institutional structures. It will be order to support a theoretical and practically well critical for the future generation of programs to thought through program of project continue to focus on quality improvement; to implementation. continuously evaluate the magnitude and depth of quality interventions; and to be able to discard 4.28 To conclude, DPEP has catalyzed a generation interventions that have had little impact while of reforms, which have brought primary fine tuning and sustaining interventions that have education center stage. However, it seems that had some impact on development objectives. # ANNEXURE 1 Figure 1 1993-1999 : School Attendance Rate of 6-10 year old (percent of all children in 6-10 group) by DPEP status 100.00 95.00 90.00 1999 1999 85.00 1993 80.00 1993 1999 75.00 1993 70.00 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 1993 1999 1993 1999 1993 1999 All children Male Female DPEP nonDPEP nonDPEP (with below national average female literacy level) Figure 2 1993-1999 : Primary School Attendance Rate of 11-13 year old (percent of all children in 11-13 group) by DPEP status by DPEP status 30.00 25.00 1999 1999 1999 20.00 1993 1993 1993 15.00 10.00 5.00 0.00 1993 1999 1993 1999 1993 1999 All children Male Female DPEP nonDPEP nonDPEP (with below national average female literacy level) Source: Jalan and Glinskaya (2002) p.36 #! Figure 3 1993-1999 : School Attendance Rate of 6-10 year old (percent of all children in 6-10 group) by DPEP status 100.0 90.0 1999 80.0 1993 70.0 1999 60.0 1993 50.0 40.0 1993 1999 1993 1999 SC ST DPEP nonDPEP nonDPEP (with below national average female literacy level) Source: Jalan and Glinskaya (2002) p.37 #" nisolC etaD 3/31/20 extended 6/30/2000 06/30/2000 09/30/2000 3/31/2000 9/30/2000 12/31/2000 12/31/2002 etaD 3/28/1995 10/13/1996 3/30/1998 2/26/1999 4/25/2000 9/30/1999 9/5/2001 Effecttiveness gningiS etaD 12/22/1994 07/17/1996 02/23/1998 2/4/1999 2/23/2000 7/6/1999 7/27/2001 Date Board 11/22/1994 06/06/1996 12/4/1997 6/25/1998 12/17/1999 6/8/1999 6/21/2001 M GEMENT) equivalent) eqivalent) M 25.8$ M M M M M M M M US M(eauivalent) equivalent) equivalent equivalent) equivalent) MANA 180M 50.2$ 291.7M 83.4$ 111.8 37.7M 10.0$ 1M 32.3 93.5: M 31. M 132.3 63M: M M US$ 58.5: II US SDR US US 15.6 13,.10: TFOLIO TFOLIO POR ountmA SDR 260.3$ 425.2$ SDR 1522.0 DA:I US( GOI: IDA: (US GOI: Netherlands: IDA: US$( US$:IOG SDR 137.4 Unicef: IDA: US$( US$:IOG SDR: 182.4 SDR: 85.7 SDR 74.4 IDA: US$( GOUP: IDA (US$ GOR: IDA: (US$ GOR (POR Supervision 3; TION under ;5 (EC); Nadu: 6; 3; EDUCA 17 SUMMARY milaT 16; (DFID); 5 ANNEXURE Projects Districts Kerala: Covered/ Kerala: 6; 5: 4; INDIA Chhatisgarh:9; Chhatisgarh: 7 Pradesh: 7 15, OJECT 5; Pradesh: Pradesh PR Nadu: 22 88 20 istrictsD Expansion Assam:4; Haryana:4; Karnataka:5, Madhya aharashtra:M otal:53T Assam: Haryana: Karnataka: Madhya Maharashtra amilT Andhra UP: otal:T Bihar: Jharkhand: 72:latoT 41 23 01 9 AILED DET ,PM and Govts. Assam,fO Bihar (SIS) erala,K and Gujarat, of DFID Up (DFID); by arishattuP Pradesh GOI Haryana, EC, Govts. TN, AP Govt. UNICEF and and and Kerala,Maharashtra Nadu Districts) (EC); Govt. Vidya PUfo ndia,I Karnataka, financed India, harkhandj ndhraA ndiaI ndiaI Rajasthan ndiaI Rajasthan Assam, amilT of Bengal of of of Beneficiaries/ Cofinanciers Beneficiaries: Of Karnataka, and Cofinanciers: Govt. Haryana, Maharashtra, (Expansion Cofinanciers: estW Gujarat Netherlands Govt. Govt. Cofinanviers: Govt.. rathmikPPA of of of of of (APPVP) Govt. Government Govt. Govt. Govt. Govt. No. Fund N044-IN ./Ln.rC .26610-INrC .2876-INrC 3012-IN.rC .3012-INrC 4360-IN.nL 3307-IN.Cr miretnI Credit 3529-IN.rC tcejorP 1 III PEPD Pradesh DPEP DPEP DPEPII DPEP APERP(Ed. Component Uttar Third Rajasthan PEPD Rajasthan Second ## #$ REFERENCES NATIONAL/MULTI-STATE STUDIES Aggarwal, Yash. (1998). Access and retention under Ed. CIL.(1995). National Sharing Workshop on Teacher DPEP, a trend analysis (1995-96 to 1997-98). New Training (21-23 November, 1995). New Delhi: District Delhi: National Institute of Educational Planning and Primary Education Program, Government of India. Administration. Ed. CIL.(1996). Evaluation of Managerial Structure and Aggarwal, Yash. (1999). Trends in Access and Processes under DPEP- A Synthesis study. New Delhi: Retention, A study of primary schools in DPEP districts. Research Evaluation and Studies Unit, Technical Support New Delhi: NIEPA. Group, Ed. CIL. Aggarwal, Yash. (2000). Primary Education in Unrecognized Schools in Haryana, A study of DPEP Ed. CIL.(1997). Study on Access and Implications for districts. New Delhi: NIEPA. Guidelinesin Assam, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh and Tamil Nadu. New Delhi: Ed.CIL. Aggarwal, Yash. (2001). Progress towards Universal Access and Retention. New Delhi: NIEPA. Ed. CIL. (1999). A study on Community Mobilization and Empowerment for Universalization of Primary Alexander, R. (2001). Reflections on Equity, Quality Education A Synthesis Report. New Delhi: Community and Local Planning in the District Primary Education Mobilization and VEC Unit, Ed. CIL. Program. New Delhi: European Commission. Ed. CIL. (1999). Expenditure analysis, DPEP: Phase I. Arora, Poonam. (1999). A report for DPEP integrated New Delhi: MIS, TSG, Ed. CIL. studies for moderately hearing impaired children. Sponsored by Ed.CIL. Ed. CIL. (1999). Glimpses from the grassroots, A synthesis based on case studies of successful practices Bashir, S. and Ayyar, V. (2001). District Primary at local resource centres in Assam, Bihar, Kerala, Education Programme, Encyclopedia of Indian Karnataka and Madhya Pradesh. New Delhi: Education, New Delhi: National Council of Educational Pedagogical Improvement Unit, TSG, Ed. CIL. Research and Training. Ed. CIL. (1999). Meeting challenges, Documentation Bashir, Sajitha (2000). Government Expenditure on of positive practices in four DIETs. New Delhi: Elementary Education in the Nineties. New Delhi: Pedagogical Improvement Unit, TSG, Ed. CIL. The European Commission. Batra, Sunil. (1998). Problems and prospects of double Ed. CIL. (2000). Bringing girls Centrestage, Strategies shift schools: A study of Assam and Madhya Pradesh. and interventions for girls education in DPEP. New New Delhi: Centre for Education, Action and Research. Delhi: Gender Unit, TSG, Ed. CIL. CFAR. (1999). A basic communication strategy for Ed. CIL. (2000). Study of Declining Enrolment in Class DPEP. New Delhi: Centre for Advocacy and Research. I in Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu-A Synthesis Report. New Delhi: Research Evaluation and Clarke, Prema (2001). Teaching and Learning: The Studies Unit, TSG, Ed. CIL. Culture of Pedagogy. New Delhi: Sage Publications. Ed. CIL.(2001). Inside the school-a synthesis of case Daya Ram (2000). Para teachers in Primary Education- studies of classroom processes. New Delhi: Pedagogy A Status Report. New Delhi: Alternative Schooling Unit, Unit, Ed. CIL. TSG, Ed.CIL. Ed. CIL. (2001). Repetition and Dropout Rates in DPEP DRS. (1999). Teacher Absenteeism In Primary Schools- districts for 1997/98-1998/99 and 1998/99-1999/ A field study in select districts of MP and UP. New 2000. New Delhi: Research Evaluation and Studies Unit, Delhi: Development and Research Services (DRS). TSG, Ed. CIL. #% Ed. CIL. (2001). Glimpses from the Grassroots, Delhi: MHRD (2001). Inside Classrooms: A Synthesis of Case Government of India. Studies of Classroom Processes. New Delhi: Government of India. Hussock, Howard. (2000). Implementing Education Reform in India: The Primary School Textbook Debate Panchamukhi, P.R. and Debi, Sailabala. (1999). and Resistance to Change in Kerala. Cambridge, MA: Costliness of primary education: An enquiry into the Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University. private and social cost of primary education. Dharwad, Karnataka: Centre for Multi-disciplinary Development Jalan, Jyotsna and Elena Glinskaya. (2003). Improving Research. Primary School Education in India: An Impact Assessment of DPEP-Phase I (DRAFT). New Delhi/ Pandey, Raghaw.(2000). Going to scale with education Washington D.C. reform: Indias District Primary Education Reform, 1995-99. New Delhi: The World Bank. Jha, J., and Jhingran, D. (2002). Elementary Education for the Poorest and other Deprived Groups: The Real Ramachandran, Vimala. (2001). Gender and Equity Challenge of Universalisation. New Delhi: Centre for in Primary Education. New Delhi: European Policy Research. Commission. Jha, Jyotsana, Baxi, C.B and Saxsena, K.B.C. (2001). Shukla, Snehlata. (1998). Efforts Made In Inservice Management Processes in Elementary Education-A Training Of Teachers In DPEP. New Delhi: Research, study of existing practices in selected states in India. Evaluation and Studies Unit (RESU), Ed. CIL. New Delhi: The European Commission. Sipahimalani, Vandana (2000). Financing of Joshi, J.N. (1999). Assessment of teacher knowledge Elementary Education in India in the 1990s. New of content area and pedagogy in mathematics at the Delhi: South Asia Education Sector, Technical Working primary school stage. Chandigarh, Haryana: Institute Paper No. 2, The World Bank. for Development and Communication. Srivastava, A.B.L et al.(1999). Study of the support Kaul, V., Gupta, D., Gupta, V. P., Varma, Savita, and systems and processes which underpin DPEPs Bala, Neeru (1998). Text Books with a Difference: A pedagogical strategy in six states A synthesis report. Study of Two DPEP Experiments. New Delhi: New Delhi: Research, Evaluation and Studies Unit, TSG, Department of Pre-school and Elementary Education, Ed.Cil. National Council of Educational Research and Training. Srivastava, A.B.L. (1999). Internal efficiency and cohort Kaul V. (1997). Early Childhood Education in DPEP. drop-out rates primary level of education in phase I New Delhi: Department of Pre-school and Elementary DPEP districts for 1996 and 1997. New Delhi: Research, Education, National Council of Educational Research Evaluation and Studies Unit, TSG, Ed.Cil. and Training. Srivastava, A.B.L. (2001). Internal Efficiency of Primary Kumar, K., Priyam, M., and Saxena, S. (2001). Looking Education in Phase I DPEP Districts. New Delhi: beyond the Smokescreen: DPEP and Primary Education Research, Evaluation and Studies Unit (RESU), Ed.Cil. in India. Economic and Political Weekly. February: p. 560-568. Yogendra, singh. (1999). Reaching out further, Para Teachers in primary education, An in-depth study of Mali, M.G. (1999). Development of effective teaching selectedschemes.Jaipur,Rajasthan:BodhShikshaSamiti. methods with the help of mini teachers (pupil teachers) The World Bank (1997). Primary Education in India. in multi-grade schools: An experiment. Kolhapur, Washington, D.C.: The World Bank. Maharashtra: MJP Vishwabharati Research and Cultural Institute. ASSAM Mercer, M. (2001). The Happy Warrior-Reflections on Ahmed, Ayubddin and Keot, Narendra Nath. (1999). Local Specific Planning. In Reflections on Equity, Impact of intervention of DPEP on community Quality and Local Planning in the District Primary participation. Morigaon, Assam: Assam Prathamik Education Programme: The European Commission. Shiksha Achani Parishad. #& Ali, A.N., M. Irshad and Ahmed, Semima Yasmim Ara. Kakoty, Suchitra. (1997). A comprehensive study of (1997). A study on the influence of social, cultural teacher training and motivation in the districts of and economic condition on primary education in the Darrang & Morigaon with a special reference to Sipajhar Chars in Mangaldoi area, Darrang District. Guwahati, block of Morigaon district. Guwahati, Assam: Assam: Department of Anthropology, Guwahati Department of Education, Pragjyotish College. University. Kalita, D.K. (1998). Improvement of standard of Bharali, Ranjan Kumar. (2000). Report on study of low teaching language in primary classes. DIET, Darrang, Enrolment of students in L.P. Schools of Darrang District. Assam: Assam Prathamik Shiksha Achani Parishad. Guwahati, Assam: Assam Prathmik Shiksha Achani Parishad. Kalita, Jagannath and Saharia, Kamal kanata. (1999). Bora, Haren Kumar. (2000). Study on the effect of A study on the poor Girls Enrolment in the primary environmental approach in teaching E.V.S. Morigaon, schools of Darrang District in Assam . Guwahati, Assam: DIET. Assam: Department of Extension Education, Assam Agricultural University. Bora, Sebika. (2000). A Study on Assamese Alphabet Writing. DIET Morigaon, Assam: Assam Prathamik Kaur, Randeep and Deka, U. (2000). A research study Shiksha Achani Parishad. on DPEPs Interventions in the classroom of Darrang and Morigaon Districts. Assam: DPEP. Borgohain, Atul and Hazarika, Pulin. (1999). A study of LP schools with the enrolment of students below 40 Khan, S.A. (2000). Impact of drill and practice develop in Morigaon District. Morigaon, Assam: DPEP. the drawing ability of Students (geometric shapes). Bongaigaon, Assam: District Resource Center. Brahma Kameswar. (2001). Report on the evaluation study on the effectiveness in the Districts of Kokrajhar Mahanta, Upendrajit. (1998). Investigating the role of and Bongaigaon under DPEP. Kokrajhar, Assam: community and village education committees (VECs) Gossaigaon College. in strengthening the management of primary schools of Darrang districts with special reference to Sipajhar Das, Nareswar. (2000). High repetition rate in Class-I block: a few suggestions for future acceleration. Jorhat, (A sample study in Bongaigaon district). Bongaigaon, Assam: State Institute of Education. Assam: Assam Prathmik Shiksha Achani Parishad. Meridian Consultancy Co-Operative Society Limited. Deka, Gauri. (1998). A comparative study of early (1999). A study of LP schools with Enrolment below 40 childhood education under DPEP and anganwadi in Dhubri. Guwahati, Assam. programme of ICDS in the district of Morigaon, Assam with regard to their effect on the development of children. Prodhan, Nilimoy; Prasanta Chakrabarty and Prodhani, Guwahati, Assam: District Primary Education Project. Jyotirmoy. (1998). A study of the socio-economic and culture conjectures in the Char areas and their impact Economic and Development Collaborative (India) Pvt. upon primary education in general education LTD and Gyan Vigyan Samiti. (2002). The factors backwardness and its remedies. Assam: NGO. affecting the process of language learning and achieving minimum level of learning in case of children Reddy, V.N and Chattopadhyay, Raghabendra. (2002). having difference in home and school language External evaluation of DPEP in Assam State. Calcutta: (medium of instruction) in formal primary education. W. Bengal, Indian Institute of Management. Guwahati, Assam: Economic and Development Collaborative (India) Pvt. Ltd. and Gyan Vigyan Samiti. Saharia, Kamala Kanta. (2001). An assessment of educational needs, TLMs, and suitable teaching Jafar, Ali Ahmed. (1999). Effect of Teachers Training learning approach in the relief camp primary schools Learning Process Schools of Bongaigaon District. District of Assam. Guwahati, Assam: Department of Extension Resource Centre, Bongaigaon, Assam: Assam Prathamik Education, Assam Agricultural University. Shiksha Achani Parishad. Saikia, B. (1996). Evaluation of classroom transaction Jafar, Ahmed. (2000). A Study on the Assessment of with special focus on 40-days training package in lower Learners Achievement of Primary Schools of primary schools of Darrang and Dhubri districts. Dhubri, Bongaigaon District. Bongaigaon, Assam. Assam: B.N. College. #' Saikia, Tuladhar. (1999). Impact of intervention of GUJARAT DPEP on enrolment and attendance. Dalgaon (Basic Training Centre), Darrang, Assam: Assam Prathamik Chand, Vijay Sherry and Choudhary, Geeta Amin. Shiksha Achani Parishad. (1999). A review of class one Language and mathematics textbooks. Ahemdabad, Gujarat: R.J. Sarma, J.N. (2000). Development of sustainability plan Matthai Center for Educational Innovation, Indian for DPEP Assam. Guwahati, Assam: COMP-aid CS. Institute of Management. Sarma, Jayanta Kumar and Bordoloi, Ajanta Dutta. Mohite, Prerna and Desai, Deval. (1999). Evaluation (1998). Review of DPEP programme with special of MLL in two districts of Gujarat. Vadodara, Gujarat: reference to girls education and women awareness Department of Human Development and Family Studies, programme in Morigaon district. Morigaon, Assam: M.S. University of Baroda. Department of Geography and Education, Nowgaon Girls College. Sahu, Nibedita. (1998). Study of Educational Problems of Migrating Tribes in District. Dahod, Gujarat. Sarma, M. (1999). A study report on improvement of teaching mathematics in primary classes. DIET- HARYANA Dalgaon, Darrang, Assam: Assam Prathamik Shiksha Chutani, M.C. and Lal, Rattan (1997). A study on Achani Parishad. identification of training needs of primary school teachers in mathematics. Gurgaon, Haryana: State Sarma, Nirmala. (2001). A study on declining Council of Education Research and Training. enrolment in class I in the DPEP districts of Assam. Jorhat, Assam: State Institute of Education. Dang, Hari. (1999). Evaluation of on-going inservice teacher training programme for demystifying DPEP/ Sarma, Nirmala, Bhattacharya, Atul Chandra and HPSPP (Hanste Gaate and Antarang) in Seven districts Sarma, Dipti. (1998). A Critical Analysis of the Utilization of Haryana (Jind, Kaithal, Sirsa, Hissar, Bhiwani, of the Educational Facilities of Primary level available Gurgaon and Mahindergarh). Gurgaon, Haryana: to the Tea Tribe of Assam with special reference to Haryana Prathmik Shiksha Pariyojna Parishad. Darrang district. Jorhat, Assam: State Institute of Education. Dutt, Sarla, Singh, R.P. and Lal, Rattan. A study on teacher education in Haryana: current status issues Sharma, Anupam and Das, Nareshwar.(2000). A study and future projections. Gurgaon, Haryana: Department on drop-out and non-enrolment in Bongaigaon district. of Teacher Education, State Council of Education Bongaigaon, Assam: Assam Prathmik Shiksha Achani Research and Training. Parishad. Media Research Group (MRG). (1996). An evaluation Sharma, Minati. (2000). Sample Monitoring on Impact of teachers training to improve competencies in Hindi of Training on Multigrade Teaching. DIET Morigaon, Language. New Delhi: Media Research Group (MRG). Assam: Assam Prathamik Shiksha Achani Parishad. Participatory Research in Asia (PRIA). (1997). A study Singh, A.K.Khan, H.W. and Negi, Madhuri. (1999). on community mobilization and participation in DPEP. Evaluation of alternative schooling through moktab in New Delhi: PRIA. Assam. Mussoorie, Uttar Pradesh. National Society for promotion of Development, Administration, Research Prabha, Sneh. (1998). A comparative study of and Training (NSDART). enrolment and retention in DPEP block and non-DPEP block of Haryana. Haryana: DPEP Cell, SCERT. SRISTEE. (2001). Overall achievement level of the children using language book in mother tongue in Sandhir, S.Lal, Rattan and Chaudhary, Mamta. (1998). class I & II and medium of instruction in Assamese or Developing status-cum-trend report on research in English in SFG areas of Dhubri and Karbi Anglong. elementary education in Haryana. Gurgaon, Haryana: Jorhat, Assam: SRISTEE, Sonari Gaon. Department of Teacher Education, State Council of Education Research and Training. Zaman, R. (1998). Classroom transaction impact of DPEP intervention. Guwahati, Assam: Institute of Santek Consultants. (1997). Study on Early childhood Research for Tribals and Scheduled Castes. care and education (ECCE). New Delhi and Gurgaon, $ Delhi and Haryana: Department of Teacher Education, district primary education programme in four districts National Council of Education Research and Training of Himachal Pradesh ( Chamba, Kullu, Lahaul and and State Council of Education Research and Training. Spiti and Sirmour). Shimla, Himachal Pradesh: Department of Education, Himachal Pradesh University. Singh, Shailender, Sridhar, K.S and Bhargave , Shivganesh. (2002). External evaluation of DPEP in Lohumi, Manju. (2000). Media Support in Promoting Haryana State. Lucknow: Uttar Pradesh. Indian Institute Literacy and Education. Shimla, Himachal Pradesh: of Management. International Center for Distance Education and Open Learning, Himachal Pradesh University, Summer Hill. Srivastava, A.B.L. (1998). Study of lateral entry in DPEP districts of Haryana. New Delhi: Research, Evaluation Ohri, Renu. (2000). Gender Sensitization in Primary and Studies Unit (RESU), Ed.Cil. Schools in Himachal Pradesh : Towards New Curriculum Structures. Shimla, Himachal Pradesh: Yadav, Kanta and Prabha, Sneh. (1996). A study of District Primary Education Programme. role preferences of district educational administrators of Haryana. Gurgaon, Haryana: State Council of Panwar D.S and Dutt, Guru (2001). Study of the internal Education Research and Training. Efficiency of the Primary Education System Cohort Analysis (1994-95 to 2001-02) Education Block Sarhan, Yadav, Kanta and Prabha, Sneh. (1996). Role District Sirmour. State Project Office, Shimla, Himachal preferences, perceptions and attitudes-A study of district Pradesh. level educational administrators (DPEOs) of Haryana. Gurgaon, Haryana: State Council of Education Sharma, Satish. Universalization of Primary Education Research and Training. In Himachal Pradesh, The problem and Strategies - A case study of Chamba block in Himachal Pradesh. HIMACHAL PRADESH Shimla: Mission Director, Himachal Pradesh. Archana. (2000). Educational problems of the children Support Initiatives in Development. (1999). Community with special reference to girl child in rural areas of Participation in DPEP. Shimla, Himachal Pradesh: district Kullu at primary level. Shimla, Himachal Support Initiatives in Development. Pradesh: National Institute of Computer Education Environmental Research and Assessment. Thakur T.R, and Dutt, Guru. (2001). Study of the internal Efficiency of the Primary Education System Chand, Romesh. (Year unknown). Utilization Of Non Cohort Analysis (1994-95 to 2001-02) Education Block Human Resources At Primary Stage Of Education. Banjar, District Kullu. Shimla, Himachal Pradesh: State Shimla, Himachal Pradesh: Department of Education, Project Office, Himachal Pradesh. Himachal Pradesh University. Thakur, Sunder Lal. (Year unknown). Parental Dev Amar, Gautam, Ashok and Gupta Sanjay. (2000). Preferences For Quality Education At Primary Stage: Enrolment Trends in Class I for UPE in DPEP districts of Comparison of Public And Government Schools. Himachal Pradesh: A Status Survey (1996-1999). Mandi, Himachal Pradesh: Department of Sociology, Solan, Himachal Pradesh: State Council of Educational Basa College. Research and Training. KARNATAKA Guleria, O.C., Rana, B.R., Kamal Kant, Ram Pal. (2001). Sample Study of Library Books and Impact of Clarke, Prema. (1998). Evaluation of Pedagogy: District Teacher Training in District Sirmour. Shimla, Himachal Primary Education Project, Kolar District, Karnataka. Pradesh: District Primary Education Programme. Bangalore, Karnataka: District Primary Education Project. Kaistha, R.K. and Sharma, Gopal. Problem Of Unwillingness Among The Teachers To Serve In Rural Indian Institute of Management (2002). External Areas: A Case Study Of Chamba Block In Himachal Evaluation of DPEP I in Karnataka. Bangalore: Pradesh. Shimla, Himachal Pradesh: District Primary Government of India. Education Program. Kashinath. (1997). Achievement of MLL competencies Kaul, Sharma, Lokesh, Singh, Kulvinder, Singh, Y. K. by students studying in MLL schools and non-MLL and Harbans. (2000). Mid term assessment survey of schools of Dharwad District a comparative study. $ Dharwad, Karnataka: Department of Education, Chandran, Pradeep (1998). Comparative study of Karnataka University. achievement of primary school pupils in DPEP and non-DPEP districts of Kerala. Thiruvananthapuram, National Evaluation Team (2002). National Evaluation Kerala: University of Kerala. of Civil Works in District Primary Education Programme: Karnataka DPEP Civil Works in Phase I and II Indian Institute of Management (2002). External (Expansion) Districts. New Delhi: National Evaluation Evaluation of DPEP I in Kerala. Government of India. Team. R.V. Educational Consortium. (1997). Concurrent Kunju Achan Ancy. (1999). Suitability of learning evaluation of III standard MLL books. Bangalore, experiences included in textbook and teachers Karnataka: Rashtreeya Sikshana Samithi Trust, handbook in environmental studies for standard IV to Karnataka. develop prescribed competences in students. Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala: University of Kerala. R.V Educational Consortium. (1998). Evaluation study of MLL based Curriculum in Classes I and II of DPEP Lidson Raj. (1997). A study of the levels of attainment schools in Karnataka. Bangalore, Karnataka: Rashtreya of competencies in mathematics of first standard pupils Sikshana Samithi Trust, Karnataka. in relation to intelligence and socio economic status. Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala: University of Kerala.. Sherry Chand, Vijay P.G. (2002). External evaluation of DPEP I in Karnataka State. Ahmedabad. Indian Manuel, Vedamani. (2001). Integrative approaches in Institute of Management. classroom transactions of poothiri texts, subtexts, inter texts and contexts problems, solutions, relevant Vasavi, A.R. & Chamaraj, Kathyayini. (2001). functional theory illustrated with practical models. Community School Interlinks: Report of a Socio- Trivandrum, Kerala: DPEP State Project Office. Anthropological Study of Primary Education in Five Districts in Karnataka. Bangalore, Karnataka: National Mathew, P. M. and Nair, Sukumaran, M. K. (2001). Institute of Advanced Studies, Indian Institute of Science Community Participation in the Development of Primary Campus. Education: Recent Experience and Emerging Issues. Trivandrum, Kerala: District Primary Education Office. KERALA Mohan Das. (1997). State finance study. Trivandrum, Anitha. (1999). A study of the difficulties experienced Kerala: Finance Department, Government of Kerala. by teachers in teaching Malayalam in Standard III. Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala: University of Kerala. Mohan, Nanda. (1997). Baseline assessment study (1996-97). Trivandrum, Kerala: Consultancy Group for Babu, Balakrishnan. (2001). Time management Research and Forecasting (C-GRAF), Department of practices of primary school headmasters in Kerala. Future Studies (DFS), University of Kerala. Trivandrum, Kerala: DIET. Mohan, Nanda. (1997). Social assessment study Bindu, (2000). A study of abstract pattern between (1996-97). Trivandrum: Consultancy Group for teachers & elementary school children in DPEP, non- Research and Forecasting (C-GRAF), Department of DPEP and its impact on mathematics problem solving Future Studies (DFS), University of Kerala. Kerala. ability. Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala: University of Mohan, V. Nanda. (1997). Study on utilization of school Kerala. grant and teacher grant. Trivandrum, Kerala: Bindu, B. (2000). A study of abstract patterns between Consultancy Group for Research and Forecasting, teachers & elementary school children in DPEP, non- Department of Future Studies, University of Kerala. DPEP and its impact on mathematics problem solving Nair, Brinda. (1998). Study of the opinion of teachers ability. Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala: University of regarding the DPEP Mathematics curriculum in Kerala. Standard III. Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala: University Bindu, B. (2001). Impact of DPEP interventions on Tribal of Kerala. Education Progress - DPEP, Kerala. Palayad, Kerala: Nisha. (1999). Suitability of learning experiences Department of Anthropology, Kannur University included in Malayalam textbook and teachers Campus. handbook for standard IV to develop prescribed $ competencies in students. Thiruvananthapuram, State Project Office. (2001). Mid Assessment Survey in Kerala: University of Kerala. the districts under DPEP II. Kerala: State Project Office. Nisha. (1999). Suitability of learning experiences State Project Office. (2001). Terminal Assessment Survey included in Malayalam textbook and teachers in the districts under DPEP I. Kerala: State Project Office, handbook for standard IV to develop prescribed DPEP. competencies in students. Thiruvananthapuram: University of Kerala. Kerala. Swamy, Celine. A study on redesigning the Anganwadis Ponbala, J. Gladis. Learning environment provided to in Kerala. Kalamassery, Kerala: The Research Institute, develop process skills through environmental science Rajagiri College of Social Sciences. in primary classes. Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala: State Project office. Women Empowerment and Human Resource Development Center. (2001). Functional efficiency of Rajashree, (1999). A study of the opinions of the primary DPEP schools in Kerala. Trivandrum, Kerala: District school teachers regarding DPEP implemented in primary Education Program, State Project Office. Munnar Educational sub-district. Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala.: University of Kerala. MAHARASHTRA Rajashree, (1999). A study of the opinions of the primary Borade, Pratap. (2001). Third Party Evaluation of Civil school teachers regarding DPEP implemented in Works under DPEP I. Pune, Maharashtra: Jawaharlal Munnar Educational sub-district. Thiruvananthapuram, Nehru Engineering College. Kerala: University of Kerala. Pillai, Vidya. (1999). Study of enrolment, attendance Ramkumar, Vasantha. (1998). Mid-term assessment and retention of primary school children in 5 DPEP survey in the districts under DPEP I. Trivandrum: Kerala. Phase I districts. Pune, Maharashtra: Research and Development Cell, Karve Institute of Social Service. Ramkumar, Vasantha. (1998). Study on the present status of classroom practices in the districts under DPEP Prabodhini, Jnana. (2001). Evaluation of NFE Centres II. Trivandrum, Kerala. established under DPEP Phase I districts of Maharashtra. Mumbai, Maharashtra: Maharashtra Rampal, Anita (2001). Currículum Change for Quality Prathamik Shikshan Parishad. Education: A Study of Schools in DPEP and non-DPEP Districts in Kerala. Trivandrum, Kerala: Primary Sharma, R. (2002). External evaluation of DPEP I in Education Development Society. Maharashtra State. Ahmedabad: Indian Institute of Management. Reja. (1999). Effectiveness of two methods of instruction DPEP and non-DPEP methods for teaching MADHYA PRADESH environmental studies in primary classes. Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala: University of Kerala. Jha, Jyostna. (1998). Education Guarantee Scheme and Alternative Schooling - Community based initiatives Reeja, (1999). Effectiveness of two methods of in Primary Education, Madhya Pradesh. Bhopal: Rajiv instruction DPEP and non-DPEP methods for teaching Gandhi Prathmik Shiksha Mission. environmental studies in primary classes. Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala: University of Kerala. Kothari, Brij, Sharma, Rajeev and Chand, Vijay Sherry. (2000). A Review of the Primary Education Package Sarathchandra, Raj. (1999). Classroom climate and in Madhya Pradesh. Ahmedabad: Indian Institute of selected student behaviour outcomes: A comparative Management. study of classrooms under DPEP and non-DPEP districts in Kerala. Changanachery, Kerala: N.S.S. Training NCERT. (1997). An Evaluation of Shishu Shikshan College. Kendras. Madhya Pradesh: NCERT Sheeja Rani, (1999). A study of the difficulties of Rajiv Gandhi Prathmik Shiksha Mission. (1997). An teachers in teaching mathematics in standard III. Evaluative Study of Alternative Schooling Programme Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala: University of Kerala. In Madhya Pradesh - Bilaspur, Raigarh, Rajnandgaon, $! Sarguja, Shadol districts. Bhopal: M.P. State Council study of DPEP interventions in Bijepur block of Baragarh Of Educational Research & Training. District. DIET-Sambalpur, Orissa: Orissa Primary Education Programme Authority. Rajiv Gandhi Prathmik Shiksha Mission. (1997). Evaluation of Alternative Schooling (AS) Project of Rajiv Barik, Akshaya Kumar and Mishra, Niranjan. (1998). Gandhi Prathmik Shiksha Mission (RGPSM) in six An evaluation of MLL-based language teaching districts - Betul, Dhar, Raisen, Rajgarh, Rewa and programme in class I. DIET Sambalpur, Orissa: Orissa Sehore of Madhya Pradesh. Bhopal: Regional Institute Primary Education Programme Authority. of Education, NCERT. Begum, Kurshida. (2001). A study on the problems Srivastava, Ranjana. (? ). Evaluation of Community and difficulties of first generation learners both inside Based Primary Schooling Initiatives in Madhya Pradesh: the classroom and outside the schools in Dhenkanal Education Guarantee Scheme And Alternative Schools block and Dhenkanal municipality. Dhenkanal sadar - Bilaspur and Dhar. New Delhi: Centre For Educational block, Orissa: Orissa Primary Education Programme Research & Development. Authority. Singh, Shailender, Sridhar, K.S and Bhargave , Behera, Ghanashyam and Mahapatra, Dibakar. Shivganesh. (2002). External evaluation of DPEP I (1998). Effectiveness of interventional strategies for States in Chhattisgarh State. Lucknow: Uttar Pradesh. improving enrolment and retention of girls. DIET Indian Institute of Management. Sambalpur, Orissa: Orissa Primary Education Programme Authority. Singh, Shailender; Sridhar, K.S and Bhargave , Shivganesh.(2002). External evaluation of DPEP I in Chhuria, Jagadananda and Mohanty, Aradhana. Madhya Pradesh State. Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh: Indian (1998). Effectiveness of interventional strategy for Institute of Management. improving enrolment and retention of girl child. DIET Bolangir, Orissa: Orissa Primary Education Programme State Council Of Educational Research and Training. Authority. (1997). Mid Term Assessment Survey A Report of Eight DPEP Districts of Malwa Region of Madhya Data, Binodini and Khan, Ekram Ali. (1998). Influence Pradesh. Bhopal: State Council of Educational of monitoring of academic inputs by DIETs on academic Research and Training. performance of primary school teachers. DIET Bolangir, Orissa: Orissa Primary Education Programme Authority. State Council Of Educational Research and Training. (1997). Mid Term Assessment Survey A Report of Six Harpal, J.K. (2001). Study on the causes of low DPEP Districts of Bundelkhand Region of Madhya achievement in Mathematics of Class IV students in Pradesh. Bhopal: State Council Of Educational Bolangir District. DIET Bolangir, Orissa: Orissa Primary Research and Training. Education Programme Authority. Yadav, S. K. (1994). Learning Achievement Of Primary Jena, Vidyadhar. (2001). A study on the causes of the School Children in Reading and Mathematics- Baseline dropping out of girl children in Morada block and Assessment Study of Eight Districts of Malwa Region of Rasgovindpur block. DIET- Keonjhar, Orissa: Orissa Madhya Pradesh. New Delhi: Department Of Teacher Primary Education Programme Authority. Education And Special Education, National Council Of Educational Research And Training. Mahapatro, P.C. (2001). An investigation to identify the factors contributing towards dropping out of Scheduled tribe boys in Borigumma block of Koraput ORISSA district. Orissa: Council of Analytical Tribal studies Baghar, R.N. and Pradhan, B.B. (1998). Effectiveness (COATS-Koraput). of organizing faculty meetings on functioning of primary schools. DIET Bolangir, Orissa: Orissa Primary Mishra, Bhaskar and Harpal, J.K. (1998). The impact Education Programme Authority. of Anandamaya Sikhya on enrolment, retention and attendance in sub-urban area of Bolangir town. DIET Barik, Akshay Kumar. (2001). Evaluation of teacher Bolangir, Orissa: Orissa Primary Education Programme training imparted on classroom transaction An impact Authority. $" Mishra, Gouri Shankar. (2001). Study on the socio- Padhi, Sailabala and Khamari, Lalit Mohan. (1998). A economic lives of tribals in Sinapali block. DIET- study on the effective use of OB and other teaching- Kalahandi, Orissa:,Orissa Primary Education learning materials for adopting joyful and activity- Programme Authority. centred learning science in class III. DIET Sambalpur, Orissa: Orissa Primary Education Programme Authority. Mishra, Jagbandhu. (2000). Case study of effective Village Education committee in Keonjhar district. DIET- Patel, Pramod and Das, Bidyut Prava. (1999). Analysis Keonjhar, Orissa: Orissa Primary Education of problems in the enrolment and retention of girls Programme Authority. from weaker sections. DIET Kalahandi, Orissa : Orissa Primary Education Programme Authority. Mishra, Niranjan. (2001). Evaluation of teacher training imparted on classroom transaction An impact Patra, Bishnu Charan. (1998). Impact of special study of DPEP interventions in Kuchinda block of orientation of primary teacher (SOPT) on development Sambalpur District. DIET-Sambalpur, Orissa: Orissa of awareness and teaching competence in teachers Primary Education Programme Authority. of primary schools. Dhenkanal, Orissa: Orissa Primary Education Programme Authority. Mishra, Sachidananda. (1998). A study on the effective use of the OB materials and other TLM to adopt joyful Patra, Chandraprakash and Mohapatra, Manoranjan. and activity-centred learning in mathematics in classes (2001). Study of participation and perception of the I to III. DIET Keonjhar, Orissa: Orissa Primary Education tribal community in the primary education programme Programme Authority. in Boudh block in district Boudh. DIET-Tikabali, Orissa: Orissa Primary Education Programme Authority. Mishra, Sachidanand. (2001). Causes of low enrolment and retention of S.C. and S.T. girls in Primary schools Pattanaik, Atulya Kumar and Sahu, Lipika. (1998). of Keonjhar district. DIET-Keonjhar, Orissa: Orissa Community participation in the functioning of the Primary Education Programme Authority. primary school. DIET Klahanie, Orissa : Orissa Primary Education Programme Authority. Mishra, Sachinanda. (2001). A study on socio- economic status and cultural lives in Banaspal block Pradhan, Nityanand. (2001). An investigation to identify and their impact on primary education. DIET-Keonjhar, the factors contributing towards dropping out of Orissa: Orissa Primary Education Programme Authority. Scheduled tribe girls in Nandpur block of Koraput district. Orissa: Council of Analytical Tribal studies Mohanty, Susandhya and Mishra, Basanta Kumar. (COATS-Koraput). (1998). Analysis of spelling errors in Oriya of class V children of primary schools in and around Sambalpur Rana, Akshay Kumar. (2000). Impact of teacher training town. DIET Sambalpur, Orissa: Orissa Primary on activity based participatory teaching learning process Education Programme Authority. in the classroom transaction. DIET-Keonjhar, Orissa: Orissa Primary Education Programme Authority. Mund, Lalit Mohan and Mohapatra, Shenaprava. Rana, Akshaya Kumar and Soreh, Rupachand. (1998). (1999). A study of the effectiveness of the activity A comparative study of the Oriya language proficiency approach of teaching in the multilevel context in NFE of tribal children in tribal schools and schools with system. DIET- Kalahandi, Orissa: Orissa Primary mixed groups of tribal and non-tribal children. DIET Education Programme Authority. Keonjhar, Orissa: Orissa Primary Education Programme Authority. Naik, Kunja Bihari and Pujari, Meenakshi. (1998). Problem in improvement of enrolment and retention Rath, Prasanta Kumar, Mohanty, Mohit Mohan and of schedule caste (SC) children in slum area of Biswal, Chakradhar. (1998). A study on effectiveness Bolangir town. DIET Bolangir, Orissa: Orissa Primary of cooperative learning approach (activity based Education Programme Authority. learning situation) in learning mother tongue (Oriya) by class III students. DIET Dhenkanal, Orissa: Orissa National Institute for Peoples Development, Investigation Primary Education Programme Authority. and Training. (2001). Learning difficulties faced by Kandha Children of Kotagarh block. Kandhamal, Rath, Ram Chandra and Pujapanda, Balabhadra. Orissa: Orissa Primary Education Programme Authority. (1999). Developing a strategy for teaching language $# to tribal children of classI and study of the effectiveness Swain, Trilochan. (2001). An evaluation of teacher of the strategy. DIET Kalahandi, Orissa: Orissa Primary training imparted and classroom transaction impact of Education Programme Authority. DPEP intervention in Ghatagaon block of Keonjhar district. DIET-Keonjhar, Orissa: Orissa Primary Education Rout, Kartikeshwar and Sethy, Mahendranath. (1998). Programme Authority. Development of strategy for motivating tribal girls for schooling and study of its effectiveness. DIET Keonjhar, TAMIL NADU Orissa : Orissa Primary Education Programme Authority. Aggarwal, Yash (2000). How Many Pupils Complete Rout, Kartikeshwar. (2000). An investigation into the Primary Education in Five Years?: Evidence from reasons of non-enrolment and dropout of Juang Selected DPEP Districts of Tamil Nadu. New Delhi: children and performance of schools in Juang area. NIEPA. DIET-Keonjhar, Orissa: Orissa Primary Education Programme Authority. Alavandar, R. (2000). A study of the Problems of Dropouts from Primary Schools in Kalrayan Hills. Sarangi, Siba Shankar and Ghose, Ashis Kumar. (1998). Villupuram, Tamil Nadu: District Project Office, DPEP. A study of the problems faced by the slum dwellers in National Evaluation Team (2002). National Evaluation the education of their children. Sambalpur, DIET of Civil Works: District Primary Education Programme: Kalahandi, Orissa: Orissa Primary Education Tamil Nadu DPEP Civil Works in Phase I and II Districts. Programme Authority. New Delhi: National Evaluation Team. Satapathy, Baijayanitimala. (1998). An investigation Nayantara, S and Nagadevara, V.(2002). External into the academic and adjustment problems faced by evaluation of DPEP in Tamil Nadu State. Bangalore, the handicapped children in integrated schools. DIET Karnataka: Indian Institute of Management. Dhenkanal, Orissa: Orissa Primary Education Programme Authority. Paneerselvan A. ( 2000). Study of Declining Enrolment in Standard I. Chennai, Tamil Nadu: DPEP. Satapathy, M.K. (1997). Development of local specific and activity-oriented resource materials for promoting Santhanam, M.R. (1998). Report of the Mid term learner-centred MLL-based teaching of EVS II in class assessment survey in phase one districts of DPEP in III. Bhubaneshwar ,Orissa: Regional Institute of Tamil Nadu. Chennai: State Project Directorate, DPEP. Education. Santhanam, M.R. (1999). Workshop on Continuous and Comprehensive Evaluation A report. Chennai: Senapati, Anang. (2001). A study on identification of Education Research Evaluation and Monitoring Wing, issues and problems in Joshipur block. DIET District Primary Education Programme. Mayurbhanj, Orissa: Orissa Primary Education Programme Authority. Santhanam, M R. (1999). An Evaluation Study of the Local Escort System. Chennai: Educational Research, Shukla, Ramakanta and Nayak, Chandrika. (1998). A Evaluation and Monitoring Wing, State Project study of differences in school readiness of tribal children Directorate. with and without ICDS background. DIET Kalahandi, Orissa: Orissa Primary Education Programme Authority. Santhanam, M R. (2000). Achievement Levels among the Disabled Children with Special Reference to Swain, Trilochan and Giri, Nabakishore. (1998). The Dharmapuri. Chennai: EREM wing, DPEP. impact of oral preparatory programmes in teaching English as the second language to beginners. DIET Santhanam, M R. (2000). Report of the Mid-Term Keonjhar, Orissa: Orissa Primary Education Assessment Survey in Phase II Districts of DPEP in Tamil Programme Authority. Nadu. Chennai: Educational Research Evaluation and Monitoring Wing, State Project Directorate, DPEP. Swain, Trilochan and Panda, Debadatta. (1998). A study of effectiveness of parent-teacher association Santhanam, M.R. (2000). Item Bank Establishment (PTA) in achieving universalization of elementary Project for Classes I to IV An Approach Document. education (UEE) in primary schools. DIET Keonjhar, Tamil Nadu: EREM and EMIS Wings, State Project Orissa: Orissa Primary Education Programme Authority. Directorate, District primary Education Programme. $$ Santhanam, M.R. (2000). Research Methodology Vinaitheerthan V., Subramanian M.K., Natarajan K, Course: Level 1 - A Report, Chennai: Educational and Santhanam M.R. (1997). Report of the Baseline Research Evaluation and Monitoring Wing, State Project Assessment Study in Phase II districts of DPEP in Tamil Directorate, District Primary Education Programme. Nadu, Chennai: State project directorate, District Primary Development Programme and Directorate of Santhanam, M.R. (2000). Towards Data-driven Teacher Education Research and Training. Interventions in DEEP, Tamil Nadu, Report of a workshop on DISE data analysis. Chennai: EREM and EMIS UTTAR PRADESH Wings, State Project Directorate, District primary Education Programme. Das, Deepa., Sushma Singh, Sushma Vinayak and Amal Seth. (2002). On the threshold of primary education: Santhanam, M R. (2001). Report of the Terminal Evaluation of the ECCE programme in the DPEP II Assessment Survey in phase I Districts of DPEP in Tamil districts of UP. Allahabad, UP: State Institute of Nadu. Chennai: State Project Directorate District Primary Educational Management and Training. Education Programme. Dave, Anjali, Mehrotra,Nishi,Rastogi, Radha and Santhanam, M.R. (2001). Scholastic attainment under Bhatnagar, Suman. (2001). Model Cluster Evaluation MAS in Phase II Districts A Critical Appraisal (Material Study-Badaun, Gonda and Barabanki districts. Lucknow, for sharing workshops). Chennai: EREM and EMIS Uttar Pradesh: DPEP. Wings, State Project Directorate, District primary Education Programme. DRS. (1999). Study on participation of children in primary education in two districts of UP. New Delhi: Shantanam, M.R. ( 2001). Item Bank establishment Development and Research Services (DRS). Project for Class V - Handbook for Resource persons and Field Investigators. Chennai: Education Research Srivastava, T. K.; Ahuja, Sunisha;. Dasgupta, P. and Evaluation and Monitoring Wing, District Primary Jha, Prabhat. (2002). Evaluation of Alternative Education Programme. Schooling Programme in DPEP - II Districts - U.P. Lucknow: Uttar Pradesh, DPEP. State Project Director. (1999). Report of Activities. Chennai: District Primary Education Programme. The New Concept Consultancy Services. (1994). Baseline Survey Report Volume I. New Delhi: The New Concept Consultancy Service. n $%