TEACHERS ABSENCE IN PRIMARY AND UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOLS

(Synthesis Report of study conducted in Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh)

Research, Evaluation and Studies Unit Technical Support Group EdCil (India) Limited 10-B, I.P. Estate, New Delhi - 110002 (A Government of India Enterprise)

2009

ii Published by EdCIL (India) Limited

Project Team
(a) Consultants Prof. ABL Srivastava, Chief Consultant Prof. R. R. Saxena, Sr. Consultant Shri O. P. Arora, Sr. Consultant Dr. (Ms) Neeru Bala, Consultant (b) Support Staff Ms. Babita Rai, SS Ms. Nidhi Bali, Exec. Asstt. Ms. Preeti Singh, SS

(c) Synthesis report prepared by Prof. Snehlata Shukla

(d) Principal Investigators in different states

State Andhra Pradesh Principal Investigator Ms. Sridevi Agency MARCH Market Consultancy & Research, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh Madhya Pradesh Institute of Social Science Research, Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh Institute of Advanced Studies in Education (IASE) Faculty of Education, Lucknow University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh

Dr. Sandeep Joshi

Uttar Pradesh

Prof. Anil Shukla

Printed at ess arr printers, 267, G.F., Prakash Mohalla, East of Kailash, New Delhi - 65

iii

iv

Preface
Availability of learning material and teacher in the classroom is an important minimum requirement for providing quality education to children. In the recent years a large number of teachers have been recruited to meet the demand of increasing enrolment and to improve the pupil-teacher ratio in schools. However, there was concern about non-availability of teachers in classrooms after a study on Teacher Absence in India conducted jointly by the Department of Economics, Harvard University and Development Economics Research Group, World Bank in 2003-04, reported that 25% teachers in government primary schools are found absent from school on a typical day. The present study was designed not only to re-check the information on the extent of teacher absence, but also to find out which factors kept teachers away from schools and classrooms and what was the impact of their absence on students retention, dropout and learning. The study included teachers of upper primary schools as well. Conducted only in three states it does not provide an all India picture, but it does indicate areas where action needs to be taken by the administration. Absence of a strong relationship between availability of teachers and pupil learning point out the need for better understanding of conditions that have impact on learning. Contribution of Research Evaluation & Studies Unit of Technical Support Group for Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan in development of tools and data analysis has given depth to the study. I gratefully acknowledge the help provided by RESU and in particular by Prof. ABL Srivastava and Prof. R. R. Saxena in bringing the report to its present form.

Snehlata Shukla

Abbreviations used in the report

Abbreviation AP BEO BRC CRC CRCC F FGD HLM M MP OBC P Para PTR RESU R SC SCR SD SMC ST TLM U U Pr UP VEC Full Form Andhra Pradesh Block Education Officer Block Resource Coordinator Cluster Resource Coordinator Cluster Resource Centre Coordinator Female Focused Group Discussion Hierarchical Linear Model Male Madhya Pradesh Other Backward Classes Primary Para Teacher Parent Teacher Ratio Research Evaluation and Studies Unit Rural Scheduled Caste Socio Cultural Region Standard Deviation School Management Committee Scheduled Tribe Traditional Linear Model Urban Upper Primary Uttar Pradesh Village Education Committee

vi

Status of Elementary Education in the Three States

AP 1. Population (2001) Total (in 000's) % Rural %SC %ST 2. Literacy (2001) Overall Female 3. Children between 6- below 14 (2001) (in 000's) Total Girls Rural 4. Number of primary schools and upper primary schools (DISE) (2005-06) Total Rural 5. Number of Teachers in Primary & Upper Primary Schools (DISE 2005-06) Total Women 6. Enrolment in classes I- V (DISE 2005-06) Total Girls 7. Enrolment in classes VI-VIII (DISE 2005-06) Total Girls 8. PTR (DISE 2005-06) Primary Schools Upper Primary schools 14416 7034 10740 12804 617 9704 17346 8360 13276 60.5 50.4 63.7 50.3 56.3 42.2 76210 72.7 16.2 6.6 60348 73.5 15.2 20.3 166198 79.2 21.1 0.1 MP UP

79449 68432

100393 89053

124279 112069

306006 133810 7391922 3649224 3731018 1782601 27 25

291547 93794 10190213 4977580 3345216 1479367 41 31

410913 144738 24342931 11629744 5831921 2642715 60 63

vii

Samples at a Glance Number of Districts, Schools, Teachers and Pupil in the Study

Districts Schools: Total Primary Upper Primary Government Private Aided Rural Urban Teachers: Total % Male % Female Rural Urban %SC %ST %OBC %Muslims %Others Pupils (Enrolled): Total SC ST OBC Muslims

AP 400 292 108 392 8 325 75 2166 58.36 41.64 1680 486 16.71 13.53 39.47 4.8 25.48 43181 9847 5081 22450 2457

MP 390 245 145 368 22 318 72 1136 61.44 38.56 824 312 12.85 12.06 25.7 4.49 44.89 41550 11324 9095 18161 2206

UP 400 312 88 380 20 345 55 1385 53.14 46.86 1195 190 17.55 1.08 34.01 8.45 38.92 63487 23220 278 32442 8541

viii

Executive Summary
1. The study was conducted to (i) assess percentage of teaching days lost due to teachers remaining absent from school for different reasons (ii) the factors that contribute to teacher absence and (iii) to understand the effect of teacher absence on attendance and achievement of students. The data were studied for different categories of teachers such as those working in rural or urban area, men or women teachers and regular or para teachers. The study was conducted in primary and upper primary schools. 2. Three states namely Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh participated in the study, MARCH Market Consultant & Research in Hyderabad, Madhya Pradesh Institute of Social Science Research, Ujjain and Faculty of Education, Lucknow University, conducted the study in Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh respectively. 3. Sample design was worked out by Research Evaluation & Studies Unit (RESU). Each state was divided in Social Cultural Regions (SCRs). A predetermined number of subdistricts to be included in the sample were selected in proportion to the number of subdistricts in the SCR. For a total target of 400 schools in the state the number of primary and upper primary schools were pre-decided, so was their distribution over rural and urban schools. Urban area was divided in two strata, (urban 1 and urban 2) namely, small towns and big cities. For each of the three strata, i.e. rural, urban -1 and urban-2 schools were arranged according to the number of teachers and selected by using simple circular systematic sampling procedure. Sample size for each sub-district was so fixed that in each sub-district about 10 schools were selected. The exercise was carried out separately for primary and upper primary schools. In the final sample division of schools as primary and upper primary was 288/112 in Andhra Pradesh, 243/167 in Madhya Pradesh, 304/96 in Uttar Pradesh. The divide was 336/64 in Andhra Pradesh, 320/80 in Madhya Pradesh and 345/55 in Uttar Pradesh over rural and urban areas. Schools were selected by RESU and the lists given to the state coordinators. Any unaided private school that got included in the sample was to be replaced by a government/private aided school in the vicinity. Target populations in the study were all primary and upper primary schools managed or aided by government including local bodies. All teachers teaching in the schools in the sample were included in the study. Twenty children from class V of all schools and 20 from class VII/VIII were selected randomly for studying impact on achievement. 4. Several Schedules were developed to collect relevant data. Information regarding infrastructure, physical facilities, enrolment and attendance of pupils, number and type of teachers i.e. regular or para, absenteeism of teachers, support from administration and community etc were obtained from the head teachers with the help of School Schedule. The Teacher Schedule was used to collect information about teacherstheir academic and professional qualifications, number of students/classes taught, time required to travel to school, number of days the teacher was absent from school on duty outside or for personal reasons. The questionnaire also had a section on job satisfaction. The field staff used a structured and detailed Schedule to observe and record information about teachers attendance & the activities they were engaged in and enrolment and attendance of children. Attendance of students and teachers and latters activity were recorded for both the first and the last period in the school. Each school was visited on two days, the second visit was made at an interval of approximately 30 days by a

VII in Andhra Pradesh and VIII in Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh

ix

5.

6.

7.

8.

different team. Both the visits were unannounced. Teachers attendance on the day school was visited by supervisory staff was also noted. Three Interview Schedules were used to collect information from CRC coordinators, VEC chairmen and BEOs on teacher absence and its effect on functioning of the schools. Student related data were collected on Students Record Sheet. Guidelines for moderators of Focused Group Discussions were also made available to the state level agencies. Achievement tests in language and mathematics, as available in the state were used to assess learning levels of students of class V. Scores on common tests conducted by the state/district authorities for the terminal class of elementary level were used in the analysis at class VII/VIII level. On the infrastructure, Uttar Pradesh had higher percentage of pucca school buildings, facilities like toilets and drinking water too were available in more schools in Uttar Pradesh than in the two other states. But with large enrolments in the state only 57% of students sat in rooms and 6% had only open space as their classrooms. Over all the three states 8-9% teachers did not have chairs / tables (it could be tables mostly) and 15% did not have almirahas to keep their teaching learning material. Percentage of female teachers varied between 38 (Madhya Pradesh) to 47 (Uttar Pradesh). Para teachers were a high 42% in Madhya Pradesh and low 23% in Andhra Pradesh. Percentage of untrained teachers was high (32) in Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh, more women teachers were untrained than men. A very high percentage (87) of para teachers were untrained in Andhra Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh. Attendance rates of pupils were low varying around 70%, these were lowest in Madhya Pradesh and highest in Andhra Pradesh. Average attendance was lower in primary classes as compared to upper primary classes differences were small. In all the three states attendance improved only marginally from grades I to IV but declined in grade V. Dropout rates were also highest in class V in all the three states. In Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh, enrolments too decreased from class IV to V, thus there were a fair number of pupils who either discontinued or moved to another school in the terminal class. Approximately 2-5% pupils left school before it ended formally. In Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh, attendance of girls was higher than that of the boys both at the beginning of the school and in the last period, in Uttar Pradesh there were no differences. On the basis of some common examination (may be at the district level) conducted at the end of class V, Andhra Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh reported close to 75% students scoring more than 50% marks. In Madhya Pradesh only 30% students achieved this high. Picture was similar for class VII/VIII. High percentages of pupils getting more than 50% score in the terminal examinations do not compare well with the low scores in the national surveys. The state level tests are likely to represent what is taught in the classrooms more closely. Achievements need to be seen in light of percentage of enroled children who sit for the examinations. While in Andhra Pradesh more students than were enroled sat for the examination at the end of class V, in MP and UP, close to 20% did not take the examination. Low attendance rates too had been recorded, thus, some of the children might have been on the register but not really attending school. In Uttar Pradesh, 28% of class VIII students did not appear for the terminal examination, most of these are likely to be frequent absentees or poor achievers. Percentage of 72.4 scoring 50% should be seen in this light. Pupil achievement was better in Andhra Pradesh than in the two other states i.e. by the standards set by the states for themselves.

9. Teachers could not teach for a total of 33 days out of 168 in Andhra Pradesh, 28 out of 229 Madhya Pradesh and 22 out of 214 working days in Uttar Pradesh. Some of the nonteaching days were spent in duty outside school and necessary administrative work and some were taken off by the teachers for personal needs. For personal reasons teachers were absent for 17.6 days in Andhra Pradesh, 13.5 in Madhya Pradesh and only 8.3 in Uttar Pradesh. Andhra Pradesh is also liberal with permissible casual leave as compared to the other two states. Head teachers, BEOs, CRCCs and VEC chairmen mentioned family problems and health of the teacher as the two main reasons for teachers taking leave. Residence at a distance and transport not being available were also mentioned by quite a few, particularly in Andhra Pradesh. For Uttar Pradesh political/social activity too was given as a reason for teachers being absent. Management Committees made some efforts towards restraining teacher absenteeism by checking teachers attendance from time to time and by talking to them individually or as a group. Absenteeism was also reported to authorities by 23% of MCs in Andhra Pradesh 20% in Madhya Pradesh and 33% of them in Uttar Pradesh. In Andhra Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh more attention was paid by management committees of primary and rural schools to teacher attendance. Fewer teachers and greater concern of the community about the education of their children could be contributing to it. Only 3-4% of VEC chairmen reported regularity not good and a slightly higher percentage commented adversely on punctuality. More teachers of primary schools as compared to upper primary were reported to be not very punctual in Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh, situation was reverse in Uttar Pradesh. The data from VEC chairmen could be based on few observations. Teachers attendance got more attention in the meetings of VECs in Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh; students attendance too was discussed often in these meetings. 10. Out of the total number of days the teachers were not in school, nearly 50% were spent on some work assigned away from school in Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh, this percentage was higher 61 in Uttar Pradesh. Rest of the time teachers were on leave for personal reasons. Women teachers spent fewer days on duty away from school but took more leave for personal reasons. Differences in quantum or reasons for the same were not marked when seen over rural and urban divide. Only in Uttar Pradesh, a higher percentage of teachers from rural areas were absent due to being on school duty. More days were spent in Uttar Pradesh by primary school teachers on school related duty whereas teachers in upper primary schools availed more casual leave but total number of days away from classrooms remained the same. The differences in absenteeism of teachers divided over castes were small. There was a marked difference between regular and para teachers in respect of absence from school. It was maximum in Andhra Pradesh (18 days) and minimum in Madhya Pradesh (only 2 days) with para teachers being less absent. Service conditions of para teachers are likely to be responsible for differences; stringent the contracts, more cautious would be the employees not to cause any dissatisfaction to the authorities concerned. 11. Although about 83% teachers were present on the day the schools were visited, only 72% were teaching. Thus over the three states 28% teachers were not in the classrooms at least part of the day; the statistics was highest in Andhra Pradesh (34%) and smallest in Madhya Pradesh. Close to 4% teachers left school before the formal closing time. More women teachers were in classrooms with men engaged in other activities. Training took away teachers from schools for 12 days on the average in Madhya Pradesh, followed by Uttar Pradesh 7 days and Andhra Pradesh for 5 days.

xi

Six to 15% teachers were seen engaged in administrative work at the beginning of a working day. Teachers perception was that they spend more than 4 hours per week on this type of work which amounts to almost one teaching day per week. 12. By and large teachers were satisfied with their working conditions. Maximum dissatisfaction was with assignment of non-teaching duties, and to a lesser extent with lack of physical facilities in schools and interference by VECs. 13. For studying factors contributing to teacher absenteeism and impact of teacher absence on attendance and achievement of pupils regression analysis based on Hierarchical Linear Model was used. The Teacher-absence was defined as percentage of days on which a teacher was not present during his/her posting in the school in the academic sessions 2005-06. The absence could be for any reason being deputed for work outside school, attending some training or being on leave for personal needs. This variable was taken as the dependent variable for exploring its relationship with a set of 12 independent variables pertaining to teachers personal characteristics and six variables pertaining to school conditions. 14 Inadequate facilities in school i.e., congeniality of work place and time taken to commute contributed to teacher absenteeism in all the states. Both the variables being related to physical comforts would discourage teachers to come to school when there is mild physical discomfort or the weather is foul. Missing scheduled mode of travel (e.g. regular bus) would also keep a teacher away from school. It may be mentioned that close to 28% teachers reported a distance of 10 km between their residence and school. Another 18% lived 5 but less than 10 km away. Supervision or visits by the senior officers or members of the management committees had a positive impact on teacher attendance. Status of the teacher (whether regular or para) made substantial difference in Andhra Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh. Contracts are more unfavourable in Andhra Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh with tenure of service being 10 and 11 months respectively; it is 36 months in Madhya Pradesh. Emoluments wise too Andhra Pradesh has some para teachers starting at a salary Rs. 1500 per month, the lowest grade in Madhya Pradesh starts at Rs. 2,500 and in Uttar Pradesh it is Rs. 3000 per month. The analysis showed that teacher absence was not related to pupil attendance. Weak relationship was seen between teacher absence and repetition rate. It had some impact on dropout rate in Uttar Pradesh PTR is very high in Uttar Pradesh, it too could contribute to drop out rate. 15. Students score on tests in language and mathematics were taken as criteria for achievement. Analysis was carried out separately for two sets of scores. To the 19 independent variables : teacher absence rate, 6 school related and 12 teacher related variables, 5 variables related to pupils namely, gender, caste, fathers education, mothers education and fathers occupation were added. The analysis revealed that (i) students achievement, in general did not get affected by teachers absence (ii) caste of the teacher had some bearing on pupil achievement, (iii) among the school variables, only the private management made some difference. Except gender, all other pupil related variables used in this study had on impact on pupil achievement; children of educated parents tended to do better at grade V level but the impact of home background almost disappeared at grade VII/VIII.

Contents
Project team Foreword Preface Abbreviations used in the report Status of Elementary Education in the Three States Samples at a Glance Executive Summary Chapter 1: Introduction Chapter 2 : Sample Design of the Study Chapter 3: Tools and Collection of Data Chapter 4: Profile of Schools in the Sample Chapter 5: Attendance Rate of Pupils and Their Achievement level Chapter 6: Absenteeism of Teachers Chapter 7: Factors Affecting Teachers Absence Chapter 8: Effect of Teachers Absence on Students Attendance, Repeater Rate, Dropout Rate and Achievement Chapter 9 : Findings and Recommendations Appendix A . ... . ... List of Tables . ... . ... Additional Tables. ... . . Appendix B TS- 1 School Schedule .. .. .. .. TS-2 Teacher Schedule . . . ... TS-3 Schedule for Investigators Visit . ... TS-4 Interview schedule for CRC Coordinator . TS-5 Interview schedule for Chairman of VEC/SMC/SMDC TS-6 Interview schedule for Block Education Officer. TS-7 Students' Record Sheet. ... TS-8 Focussed Group Discussions . ... .. Summary of FGD . ... . ... .. ii iii v vi vii viii ix 1 3 7 9 15 19 39 45 53 57 - 66 57 58-66 67 - 85 67 73 76 78 79 81 83 84 85

Chapter 1 Introduction
1.1 Background

Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan aims at good quality education for all children in the age group 614. Efforts made to achieve the objective included increasing number of schools and teachers, improving physical infrastructure of the schools and ensuring availability of teaching-learning material to teachers. Enrolment drives are conducted at regular intervals to bring to school the children who do not enrol or leave school prematurely. Enrolment and retention of children in schools was the first necessary step. Due attention was also paid to improve the quality of education. Improved text books, continuous in-service teacher training and greater support through supervision and guidance is built into the system. Periodic surveys conducted for assessing learning levels of children leave administrators and professionals dissatisfied with achievements. Efforts to improve the situation on all fronts are continued. While more teachers have been deployed in all states, there have been complaints regarding their absence from schools for a variety of reasons. A study on Teacher Absence in India conducted jointly by the Department of Economics, Harvard University and Development Economics Research Group, World Bank in 2003-04, highlighted the issue. They reported that 25% of teachers in government primary schools are absent on a typical day. According to the study absence rates varied from 15% to 42% in different states. There are not many studies on the factors associated with teachers absence and on how their absence affects children attending school and their levels of learning. The present study was undertaken to provide more insight on the problem and its impact. The study was conducted in three states namely Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh. According to Harvard-World Bank study, the absence rates ranged from medium to high in these states.

1.2 Objectives

The objectives of the study were (i) (ii) to assess the number and percentage of teacher-days lost due to teachers remaining absent from school because of different reasons; to find out the difference between absence rate of male and female teachers, regular teachers and para-teachers, primary and upper primary stage teachers, and teachers belonging to different social groups in primary and upper primary schools; to validate the data on teachers absence collected from schools by checking with Cluster, Block and District level functionaries and community; to find out the average number of teachers present on a typical working day in relation to the number of teachers in position in school according to the norms;

(iii) (iv)

(v) (vi)

(vii)

to find out the extent to which the school-related and personal factors contribute to teacher absence; to assess the effect of teachers absence on attendance and achievement of students of class V in primary schools and of class VII/VIII in upper primary schools as well as on their grade repetition and dropping out from school; and to find out reasons of absence separately for teachers belonging to different sub-groups (male/female, rural/urban, primary/upper primary, regular/para-teacher) from the community, VECs, CRCs, BEOs, etc.

Chapter 2 Sample Design of the Study

2.1 Target Populations
The target populations were all teachers teaching in government, local body, and private aided primary and upper primary schools in the states of Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh. For assessing achievements of students, target populations were the students of class V and VII/VIII1 of all the schools specified above. The 7th All India School Education Survey2, with date of reference as 30.09.2002, was conducted on census basis in all the states and UTs by National Council of Educational Research and Training, Delhi. The data base of the survey was used as sampling frame for the purpose of selection of schools.

2.2

Stratification of Schools

Three levels of stratification were used in each state. (a) Level 1: School category Primary schools Upper primary schools Level 2: School location Urban1: Cities with 1 million or more population Urban2: Towns/ cities with< 1 million population Rural. Level 3: Sub-strata Urban-2 and Rural area were further stratified according to the Socio-Cultural Regions ( SCR) in a state.

(b)

(c)

2.3 a)

Allocation of Sample Size to Different Strata in a State. In the case of rural schools a sample of sub-districts (for example, 15 sub-districts in UP) were selected using the selection procedure described below. Allocation of subdistricts to each SCR was done in proportion to the sub districts in the SCR. Number of sub-districts and number of primary and upper primary schools selected per subdistrict for each state are given in Table 2.1. From each sampled sub-district a fixed sample of primary and upper primary schools (e.g.,18 primary and 5 upper primary schools in U.P.) were selected. All the schools belonging to the cities in each state having one or more than one million population form urban-1 stratum. No further stratification was required in this case.

b) c)

1 2

Class VII in Andhra Pradesh and VIII in Madhya Pradesh & Uttar Pradesh. Hence forth referred as 7th Survey.

d)

In the case of Urban-2 stratum, number of schools were allocated to a SCR in proportion to the number of primary or upper primary schools in the region. It was ensured that at least one primary and one upper primary school is allocated from each region. Number of schools allocated to each stratum are given in Table 2.2. Table 2.2: Number of Schools in the Sample
Primary AP Rural Urban-total Urban-metro Urban-other than metro Total Rural Urban-total Urban-metro Urban-other than metro Total Rural Urban-total Urban-metro Urban-other than metro Total 240 48 7 41 288 MP 200 43 8 35 43 UP 270 34 9 25 304 75 21 8 13 96 345 55 17 38 400 120 37 9 28 157 320 80 17 63 400 96 16 2 14 112 336 64 9 55 400 Upper Primary Total

2.4. Selection Procedure

(i) The following procedure was adopted in the selection of urban schools (a) All primary and upper primary schools of Urban-1 stratum were arranged separately in increasing order of number of teachers and simple circular systematic sampling was used for selection of required number of schools. For the Urban-2 stratum all primary and upper primary schools in the urban area of those districts, which contained sub-districts selected for sample of rural schools were arranged in increasing order of teachers in them, and the sample of schools was selected by using simple circular systematic sampling. The exercise was carried out separately for primary and upper primary schools.

(b)

(ii) As far as sampling of rural schools is concerned, first stage sampling unit was the subdistrict; (a) Amongst those sub-districts in a SCR, which had rural area, a sample of sub-districts was selected by using probability proportion to number of rural primary schools in the sub-district. (b) Selection of primary schools of fixed sample size from each of the sampled subdistricts was done by using simple circular systematic sampling procedure after arranging schools according to the number of teachers in them. (c) The selection procedure given at (b) above was used for selection of rural upper primary schools from already sampled sub-districts.

The private unaided schools, if any in the list were excluded. Such schools were replaced by a government/private aided school in the vicinity. The selection of schools was done by RESU, Ed.CILs Technical Support Group and the list of schools provided to the state level agencies. Allocation of primary and upper primary (both rural and urban) was proportional to number of these schools in the SCR. The requisite numbers of schools were as given in the table below.

Table 2.1: State Wise Allocation of Samples

No. of Sub-Districts State AP MP UP Total 1125 259 300 Sample 24 20 15 Schools per Sub-District Primary 10 10 18 Upper Primary 4 6 5

Information about teachers was collected from all teachers in the schools in the sample. For testing the students, a sample of 20 students of class V was selected at random from each primary school. If a school had more than one section in class V, one section was selected at random and sampling of students was done from that section. If there were 20 or less students in a class, all of them were tested. The sampling procedure for selecting students in class VII/VIII was the same as that for class V. Table 2.3 shows the number of respondents of different categories (head teachers, teachers, VEC members) in each state. Number of respondents in each category are summarized in the following table. Table 2.2: Number of Respondents
Respondents Head teachers Teachers VEC chairmen AP 400 2166 400 MP 390 1136 390 UP 400 1385 400

Chapter 3 Tools and Collection of Data

3.1 Research Questions and Tools

The study was to address the following questions What is the teachers' absence rate for different groups, such as men/women, regular and para-teachers? (ii) How often do the functionaries from CRC, BRC and BEO visit the school? (iii) Do the visits by members of CRCs, BRCs, BEO and management affect teachers absence? (iv) What is the absence rate of teachers according to the records of BRCs & CRCs? (v) Which are the personal factors contributing to teachers absence ? (vi) Which are the school level factors contributing to the variation in teachers absence? (vii) Does teachers absence affect students attendance? (viii) Is repetition rate in schools affected by teachers' absence? (ix) Is variation in dropout rates explained by variation in teachers' absence? (x) Does teachers' absence affect students' achievement in mathematics and language? (xi) What is the opinion of SMCs, VECs, BEOs, CRCCs, about reasons and effect of teachers' absence on students learning? (xii) What are the activities of teachers in school when they are present? Details of tools designed/ used to collect relevant information are given below.
(i) School Schedule: It was meant for collecting information on infrastructure, physical facilities, enrolment and attendance of pupils, number and type of teachers i.e. regular or para, absence of teachers, support from administration and community etc. The head teacher of the school provided the information. (ii) Teacher Schedule: The questionnaire was used to collect information about teachers their academic and professional qualifications, in-service training, time required to travel to school, number of classes/students taught, number of days the teacher was absent for personal reasons or was on duty away from school. The questionnaire also included a section on job satisfaction. All teachers in the sampled schools had to respond to the questionnaire.

(i)

(iii) Schedule for the Investigators: The field staff was to observe and record information on a structured schedule during their two visits to the school. They recorded teachers attendance during first and the last hour of the school, type of activity the teachers were engaged in, enrolment and attendance of students during

8 the first and last hour of the school. They also checked teacher-attendance on the day school was visited by CRCC or BEO from school records.

(iv) Three interview schedules were prepared to collect information from (a) CRC Coordinator, (b) VEC (President/Chairman), (c) BEO or equivalent, regarding teacher absence and punctuality. Some of it could be based on their perceptions. (v) Achievement tests in language and mathematics as available in the state for class V and annual examination results for class VII/VIII students were used for evaluating pupil learning.

(vi) Focus Group Discussions with community members were conducted to get their views on and estimates of teacher absence. Except the achievement tests, all the tools of data collection were developed centrally at RESU; the same were tried out and some modifications were made before using them to collect data. The tools were translated in Hindi at RESU and in Telugu by the concerned agency without changing the format. English version of tools (except achievement tests) can be seen in Appendix- B. 3.2 Data Collection The sampled schools were visited twice without prior intimation by a team of two investigators. Second visit was made at an interval of about one month. Both the visits were unannounced. The teams were different in the two visits to maintain high degree of data reliability. Both the teams collected data on attendance of students and teachers and recorded activities of teachers who were present in the school. The second team administered the tests in mathematics and language to students of class V and scored the same. In the case of upper primary schools, the results of common state level examination at the end of class VII/VIII were taken into account. All the filled-in schedules were scrutinised by the investigators for completeness and consistency of information.

Chapter 4 Profile of Schools in the Sample

4.1 Facilities in Schools Data regarding infrastructural facilities were collected from the head teacher of the schools in the sample. Absence of minimum facilities is likely to add to absenteeism of both teachers and pupils; it would also have an impact on teaching-learning. Figure 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3 show availability of physical facilities in schools.
Fig. 4.1 School Building
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 Open space Partly pucca Pucca AP 1.3 9.0 87.0 MP 2.1 11.3 85.4 UP 1.3 4.3 94.5

10
Fig. 4.2 Availability of Physical Facilities
100 80 60 40 20 0 Usable toilet Drinking water Tables & chairs for teachers Almirahs & cupboards

AP 55.3 56.8 91.3 85.8

MP 52.3 74.9 90.8 81.3

UP 65.5 85.0 91.8 82.5

Fig. 4.3 Space Where Students Sit 100 80 60 40 20 0 Open space Veranda Rooms

AP 2.5 17.5 80.0

MP 3.2 16.0 80.8

UP 5.9 36.9 57.2

Nearly 95% of schools in Uttar Pradesh had pucca buildings, Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh lagged behind by 7 to 9%. Buildings were inadequate even in Uttar Pradesh with only 57% pupils finding place in rooms and approximately 6% having to sit in the open.

11

Uttar Pradesh had provision of toilets and drinking water in higher percentage of schools. In all the three states 8-9% schools did not have chairs/tables3 for the teachers and 13 to 18% had no almirahas to keep their teaching -learning aids.

Uttar Pradesh had more classrooms (4.2 including verandas per school) for primary grades as compared to Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh. But enrolments were also very large in Uttar Pradesh.

It may be mainly tables

12

4.2 Enrolments Table 4.1 shows the position of enrolment in different classes in the sampled schools of the three states. Table 4.1: Class-wise Average Enrolment of Social Groups
Social Group Class I II III IV V VI VII VIII I II III IV V VI VII VIII I II III IV V VI VII VIII I II III IV V VI VII VIII I II III IV V VI VII VIII Andhra Pradesh 21.1 17.9 17.8 18.8 20.4 32.3 25.9 23.2 23.5 23.7 22.6 23.3 18.7 21.9 13.4 11.8 12.2 10.2 10.8 13.4 10.3 50.8 51.9 51.9 53.7 52.0 50.3 54.1 5.9 6.2 5.2 5.6 5.8 5.1 5.5 Madhya Pradesh 26.9 23.5 21.5 18.7 17.5 36.2 30.6 32.8 26.8 27.6 26.4 26.2 29.1 28.3 26.0 27.8 27.7 26.3 22.8 21.8 17.8 21.0 16.5 16.9 41.5 43.7 43.5 44.4 47.6 41.2 43.3 46.1 3.6 4.8 5.4 5.6 5.3 6.3 6.3 6.0 Uttar Pradesh 39.7 38.7 35.0 33.4 27.5 36.9 35.9 34.8 31.2 34.3 36.6 36.6 36.2 49.0 49.2 41.8 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 1.1 0.4 0.3 52.8 52.3 51.8 47.7 44.2 55.5 58.7 55.3 11.6 13.3 14.4 12.9 11.7 18.3 17.0 15.9

All Pupils

%SC

%ST

%OBC

% Muslim

Enrolments decreased from class I to V in all the three states but more sharply-by 35% in Madhya Pradesh followed by Uttar Pradesh (31%). Percentage of ST students from class I to V dropped by 10 percentage points in Madhya Pradesh. The same were more stable over classes VI to VIII in Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh but the decrease in Andhra Pradesh was high 20%

13

from VI to VII. This was so because upper primary stage ends in class VII in Andhra Pradesh. In addition there may be students not joining the first year of upper primary class. 4.3 Teachers Distribution of teachers by gender, status, academic and professional qualifications in the three states is given in figures 4.4 to 4.6.
Fig 4.4 Teachers by Gender And Employment Status
50

40

30

20

10

AP 41.6 23.4

MP 38.5 42.0

UP 42.5 31.2

Female Para

Percentage of para teachers in Madhya Pradesh was highest among the three states but they had the highest percentage of graduates (76%) too. Only a small percentage of all teachers had studied upto class X or less but in Andhra Pradesh the percentage was high for para teachers. Percentage of para teachers being untrained was also high in Andhra Pradesh. It may mean that persons having studied upto class X without any pre-service training were employed to meet the demands generated by increased enrolments. In Uttar Pradesh too, most of the para teachers were untrained.

14
Fig. 4.5 : Academic Qualifications of Teachers
100 80 60 40 20 0 All AP Post graduate Graduate Higher secondary High school 20.7 47.8 24.9 6.6 2.6 30.4 49.2 17.8 Para All MP 34.1 40.0 23.2 2.6 33.8 42.4 22.7 1.0 Para All Para UP 26.7 34.7 32.4 6.1 23.1 40.0 35.4 1.4

In Madhya Pradesh, teachers recruited initially as para-teachers have been given pay scale which is different from that of regular teachers. They are no longer treated as para teachers by the state.
Fig 4.6 Professional Qualifications of Teachers
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

All

F All

All AP

F Para

All

F All MP

All

F Para

All

F All UP

All

F Para

B.Ed/M .Ed JBT Nursery Untrained

49.0 27.6 1.8 21.6

48.7 23.7 1.4 26.2

5.9 5.7 1.8 86.6

2.4 5.7 0.4 91.5

23.8 43.0 0.6 32.6

28.8 35.6 1.1 34.5

17.4 35.9 0.4 46.2

21.6 36.5 4.8 37.1

18.0 45.4 4.6 32.0

21.6 36.5 4.8 37.1

6.2 3.2 3.7 86.8

3.1 3.9 5.8 87.2

Percentage of untrained teachers was high in Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh, more women teachers were untrained than men. There is need to understand effect of absence of training on pupil learning. In the most common 2-year pre service teacher training for primary teachers, knowledge of subject matter is built upon that attained at senior secondary level and critical spots/concepts of the primary curriculum are specifically dealt with for appropriate pedagogy.

15

Chapter 5 Attendance Rate of Pupils and Their Achievement Level

5.1 Attendance of Pupils Enrolment figures are frequently seen with suspicion. Teachers are expected to enrol all children of age group 6-14 in the schools. It is also said that poorer families send their children to school for the mid-day meal and the children often go away after the meals. Data with regard to attendance were collected on two different days through unannounced visits by the research teams. Attendance was noted both for the first and the last period of the school. Following table gives average attendance for each case. Table 5.1: Percentage of Students Present in the Class
Grade I II III IV V VI VII VIII AP 67.5 70.0 73.6 74.6 72.8 76.5 79.7 First period MP 61.4 63.7 64.6 64.7 60.7 69.6 71.3 70.8 UP 68.5 72.3 72.5 71.7 67.8 71.5 73.2 68.3 AP 66.1 68.5 69.7 73.5 71.0 82.5 76.9 Last period MP 58.5 60.9 61.6 61.9 58.8 68.7 69.8 69.5 UP 66.9 70.5 71.3 70.7 67.0 71.0 72.5 67.4

Attendance rates, in general, were quite low varying around 70%. These were lowest in Madhya Pradesh and highest in Andhra Pradesh. Average attendance was lower in primary classes as compared to upper primary classes. In all the three states attendance improved only marginally-from grades I to IV but declined in grade V. It could be due to fear of the examination at the end of class V. Dropout rates were also highest in class V in all the three states. Older children could be withdrawn by the parents for use of their help at home including family occupation or engagement in income generating activities. Attendance also declined from grade VII to VIII in Uttar Pradesh (by 5%) In Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh enrolment too decreased from class IV to V. Thus there were a fair number of pupils who either discontinued or moved to another school in the terminal class. It cannot be concluded that they left the system. Approximately 2 to 5% pupils left school before its closing time. They might have left after the mid-day meal. Was there any difference between boys and girls, so far as attendance in general, coming late or leaving early was concerned? Data were seen separately for boys and girls.

16

Table 5.2 Percentage of Boys and Girls Present in the Class

Grade I II III IV V VI VII VIII Boys 66.9 69.3 70.2 73.2 72.2 75.2 78.9 AP Girls 68.2 70.5 76.8 75.9 73.4 77.8 79.7 First period MP Boys Girls 60.9 61.8 61.6 65.8 62.2 66.9 63.4 66.1 59.9 61.5 70.15 71.3 70.2 69.0 71.2 71.5 UP Boys 67.9 73.1 72.9 71.8 68.1 70.0 71.5 67.1 Girls 69.1 71.6 72.1 71.6 67.8 73.1 74.7 69.3 Boys 65.4 68.0 68.4 72.4 70.5 73.8 77.4 AP Girls 66.7 68.9 71.0 74.5 71.4 76.2 79.0 Last period MP Boys Girls 57.5 59.3 58.9 62.9 59.5 63.8 60.6 63.4 58.3 59.4 69.1 69.6 68.8 68.2 70.1 70.4 UP Boys 66.9 71.9 72.7 71.3 67.3 69.6 71.1 66.3 Girls 66.8 69.2 70.9 70.1 66.7 72.3 73.8 68.3

In Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh, attendance of girls was higher than that of the boys both at the beginning of the school and in the last period. In Uttar Pradesh, there were no differences. A small percentage of both boys and girls left school early4. Once the girls join school, the families do not seem to discriminate between boys and girls in sending them to school. It is also likely, that some boys even when sent to school by the parents wander away while the girls do not play truant. 5.2 Achievement Level When 30% of students miss school on an average how are their achievements affected? Some kind of common examination is conducted in most states at the end of primary and upper primary level.
Table 5.3 A Percentage of Students Who Scored 50% or More Marks in the Terminal

Examination of Primary and Upper Primary Stage

Terminal Class of P Students No. appeared % scoring 50% or more No. appeared % scoring 50% or more Rural 4736 76.1 1952 79.5 AP Urban 2419 73.5 588 85.0 All 7155 75.2 2540 80.7 Rural 2905 29.6 3323 26.9 MP Urban 923 30.6 1013 29.2 All 3828 29.8 4336 27.4 Rural 7135 76.9 2477 74.5 UP Urban 688 82.0 583 76.2 All 7823 77.3 3060 74.8

U. Pr

Table 5.3 B

Percentage of Students Who Scored 50% or More Marks in the Examination of Terminal Class of Primary and Upper Primary Stage
Students No. appeared % scoring 50% or more No. appeared % scoring 50% or more Andhra Pradesh Upper Primary primary 4590 2565 74.2 77.1 2540 80.8 Madhya Pradesh Upper Primary primary 3743 85 29.7 38.8 4336 27.5 Uttar Pradesh Upper Primary primary 7818 5 77.3 100.0 2990 74.2

Terminal Class of P U. Pr.

The difference between attendance in the last and the first period could have got affected because of the presence of an outside observer.

17

High percentage of pupils getting more than 50% score in the terminal examinations does not compare well with the low scores in national surveys. These tests are likely to represent more closely what is taught in the classrooms. Help from the teachers may also be interfering with the true picture. By its own standards children were not learning at the expected levels in Madhya Pradesh. Only Andhra Pradesh had a sizable sample of grade V children from upper primary schools. More children in these schools scored more than 50% marks. The trend is supported in Madhya Pradesh. Upper primary schools are likely to have more teachers and better facilities. Achievement of children also needs to be looked at in light of the percentage of enrolled children who sit for the examinations. While some students may not face the examination on their own, some may be prevented by the schools to show higher pass percentages or higher average score. The practice in not unknown. Table 5.4 Percentage of Enrolled Children Who Appeared for Terminal Examination
AP Total enrolment No appeared Percent appeared Percent scoring 50% V 6778 7155 105.6 75.2 VII 2660 2540 95.5 80.7 V 4685 3828 81.7 29.8 MP VIII 4947 4336 87.6 27.4 V 9777 7823 80.0 77.3 UP VIII 4228 3060 72.4 74.8

In Andhra Pradesh, more children than the ones enrolled at the time of data collection sat for the terminal examination at the end of class V. Children could be shifting from unrecognized private schools to be able to take the examination. Both in Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh, close to 20% did not sit for the examination at the end of class V. Low attendance rates have also been recorded, thus, some of the children might have been on the register but not really attending school. In Uttar Pradesh, 28% of class VIII students did not appear for the terminal examination, most of them were either poor achievers or their attendance was low. Pupil achievement in Andhra Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh is better than that in Madhya Pradesh, assuming that the examinations at the end of class V or VII/ VIII are of same standard in the three states.

18

19

Chapter 6 Absence Rate of Teachers

6.1 Absence Rate of Teachers during 2005-06 Teachers could not teach for a total of 33 days out of 168 in Andhra Pradesh, 28 days out of 229 in Madhya Pradesh and 22 days out of 214 working days in Uttar Pradesh. Average number of working days in Andhra Pradesh are low as the statistics is derived from teachers working days in the schools in the sample and a fairly large number of new teachers were recruited during the academic year. The statistics of 33 days that they could not teach may also be high due to new appointees being required to visit various offices before setting down. Number of working days in Uttar Pradesh are fewer than in Madhya Pradesh.
Fig. 6.1 Teaching Days Lost
250 200 150 100 50 0 Total working days No. of teaching days lost

AP 168 33

MP 228.8 28.2

UP 213.9 21.5

As per data made available by the state studies, Andhra Pradesh had maximum nonteaching days reducing instructional days to 135 as compared to 168 days of teacher presence in the state. Comparable statistics in Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh were 200 and 191 days respectively. Out of the total number of days the teachers were not in school, nearly 50% were spent on some work assigned away from school in Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh; percentage was still higher (61%) in Uttar Pradesh. Rest of the time teachers were on leave for personal reasons.

20

Fig. 6.2 Reasons for Teaching Days Lost

35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
Medical leave Casual leave Duty outside school not related to education Education related duty out of school A.P. 3.5 14.0 10.2 5.2 M.P. 4.9 8.6 8.8 5.8 U.P. 2.2 6.2 7.3 5.9

Some of the non-teaching days were spent on duty outside school and attending to some administrative work but few days were taken off by the teachers for personal reasons, such as sickness of self or a member of the family, special occasions, etc. In Andhra Pradesh, teachers took leave for 17.6 days, in Madhya Pradesh for 13.5 days and only for 8.3 days in Uttar Pradesh for personal needs. In government schools in Andhra Pradesh, 15 days of casual leave is permissible with another 7 days as special leave. Women teachers are allowed 5 more days. In Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh 13 and 14 days respectively are permissible as casual leave. The system allows teachers to remain off duty for close to 15 days in general for their personal needs. 6.2 Accounting Teacher Time for Different Categories of Teachers It is important to understand why teachers remain absent from classrooms so that the issue may be addressed appropriately. Women teachers spent fewer days on duty away from school but took more leave for personal reasons. It may be noticed that number of days of medical leave taken by women were more than double than that of men. It is not clear whether maternity leave has got included in the medical leave. Women are likely to take more leave to look after the young children, Andhra Pradesh allows 5 days of extra leave for women teachers.

21
Fig. 6.3 Teaching Days Lost by Reasons for Male & Female Teachers 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 M F M F M F AP Medical leave Casual leave Duty outside school not related to education Education related duty out of school 2.2 12.7 11.3 5.6 5.4 16 8.6 4.6 MP 3.4 8 10 5.9 7.4 9.7 6.9 5.6 1.2 5.8 8.6 5.9 UP 3.4 6.7 5.6 5.8

Teachers reported more working days in urban areas (Andhra Pradesh-16 days more, Uttar Pradesh-10 days more). Differences were not marked when seen over rural and urban areas. Only in Uttar Pradesh, a higher percentage of teachers from rural areas were absent due to being on duty elsewhere.
Fig.6.4 Reasons for Teachers' Absence in Urban and Rural Areas 40

30

20

10

Urban Rural

Urban Rural

Urban Rural UP

AP
Le av e Days on non-school duty Days on school duty 18.4 10.5 5.2 17.4 10.1 5.2 6.8 6.1

MP
16.3 12.4 9.7 5.7 12.0 6.0 3.2

7.8 7.5 6.4

Some differences were seen between teachers of primary and upper primary schools. More days were spent in Uttar Pradesh by primary school teachers on school related duty whereas teachers in upper primary schools availed more casual leave but total number of days

22

teachers were absent from school remained the same for both primary and upper primary schools in Uttar Pradesh. The absence rate was a little higher in upper primary schools in Andhra Pradesh and lower in Madhya Pradesh, compared to that in primary schools.
Fig 6.5 Reasons for Teachers' Absence at Primary and Upper Primary Levels 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 U.Pr P AP 17.5 11.2 5.4 17.7 9.4 5.0 U.Pr. P MP 12.8 7.8 5.9 14.1 9.6 5.7 U.Pr P UP 11.7 6.4 3.9 7.4 7.6 6.5

Leave Days on non-school duty Days on school duty

Absence rate of teachers was also studied for differences if any among teachers belonging to different castes and their status as teachers i.e. regular or contract teachers.
Fig 6.6 Percentage of Teaching Days Lost by Social Groups of Teachers
35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 SC ST OBC Muslims Others AP 31.1 29.8 29.8 27.9 32.9 MP 21.2 19.3 19.3 19.7 23.0 UP 17.2 18.3 18.3 20.5 19.1

23

The differences were small with maximum of 5 days between Others and Muslims in Andhra Pradesh, 3.8 days between Others and STs in Madhya Pradesh and 3.3 days between Muslims and SCs in Uttar Pradesh. It may have some relationship with social or political power of the group in general.

Fig 6.7 Percentage of Teaching Days Lost for Regular and Para Teachers
35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Regular Para AP 34.3 16.4 MP 22.6 20.4 UP 21.2 11.9

There was a marked difference between regular and para teachers on the extents of being absent from school. It was maximum in Andhra Pradesh (18 days) and minimum in Madhya Pradesh (only 2 days). Service conditions of para teachers are likely to contribute to the difference; the more stringent the contracts, the more cautious would be the employees not to cause any dissatisfaction to the authorities concerned.

6.3 Teacher Engagement in School

What were the teachers engaged in when present in school? Whereas about 85% of the teachers were present in school in Madhya Pradesh 76% in Andhra Pradesh and 89% in Uttar Pradesh. Thus, the percentage of those found to be engaged in teaching was only 72% in UP, 76.4% in MP and 65.6% in AP. Thus over the three states, about 28% teachers were not in the classrooms at least part of the day (It may be only one period). Thus out of the total teachers posted in schools, the percentage of those who were absent or not engaged in teaching even when present was as high as 34.4% in AP, 23.6% in MP and 27.6% in UP.

24

Fig 6.8 Teacher Engagement in School in Percentages

100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Percentage of teachers present Present & teaching Present but doing other work AP 76.0 65.6 10.4 MP 84.6 76.4 8.2 UP 89 72.4 16.6

The investigators observed teachers attendance during the first hour of starting and last hour of the closing of the school during their two unannounced visits to each school. About 7% to their 10% teachers came late to school in the three states. Incidence of teacher leaving early i.e before the school time ended varied between 1.5% and 5.9%.
Fig. 6.9 Percentage of Teachers Who Came Late or Left Early

12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Late AP All Teachers Male Female 7.2 6.9 7.5 1.5 1.5 1.4 8.6 10.1 6.8 Early Late Early MP 5.9 6.5 5.4 9.4 8.5 11.2 Late Early UP 4.1 4.1 4.1

25

Fig 6.10 (A) Teacher Engagement in School by Gender During First Hour
(in percentages)

100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 M F AP Present as per register Teaching 75.9 62.1 77.0 69.1 87.5 77.6 M F MP 88.7 81.5 94.5 70.7 M F UP 94.0 74.6

Fig 6.10 (B) Teacher Engagement in School by Gender During Last Hour (in percentages)
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 M F AP Present as per register Teaching 74.4 64.8 77.0 68.2 87.5 78.6 M F MP 88.9 81.6 94.3 77.5 M F UP 93.7 86.6

More women teachers were present during the first period difference being small but more of those present were teaching, while men teachers were engaged in other work. The picture remained the same in the last period; relatively more women teachers were found to be present and teaching compared to men teachers in all the three states.

26

Fig 6.11 (A) Engagement of Primary and Upper Primary Teachers During Ist Hour (in percentage)
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 P UP AP Present as per register Teaching 78.5 65.6 73.7 64.6 85.2 77.7 P UP MP 83.8 74.1 90.2 70.2 P UP UP 88.4 65.4

Fig 6.11 (B) Engagement of Primary and Upper Primary Teachers During Last Hour (in percentages)
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 P UP AP Present as per register Teaching 78.1 67.6 72.7 64.7 85.3 78.3 P UP MP 83.8 74.8 89.8 76.6 P UP UP 88.7 72.2

More teachers were present during the first period in primary schools than in upper primary schools with difference ranging from 1.3% in Madhya Pradesh to 4.8% in Andhra Pradesh and more of them were teaching too. The picture was similar at the end of the school day.

27

The Investigators noted the percentage of teachers present reported by the head teacher and the visiting member on the last such visit. Percentage of teachers present as observed was lower by 6% (Uttar Pradesh) to 11% (Andhra Pradesh) when compared to those recorded on a day when a member of supervisory staff visited the school.
Fig 6.12 Percentage of Teachers Present on the Day of Visit by CRC and BEO
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 CRC BEO AP School record Inspection report. 87.3 87.9 88.1 86.5 95.1 94.6 CRC BEO MP 88.8 93.5 94.8 94.7 CRC BEO UP 94.5 93.2

Where teachers attendance recorded in school register was compared with that reported by CRC/ BRC Coordinator on the day of his/ her visit to school, not much difference is formed between the two. But the attendance rate of teachers during such visits is much higher than that found by the investigator in his/ her visit to schools (see fir 6.8). 6.4 Teacher Time in Training All teachers are expected to attend monthly meetings at CRCs and other training programmes as organized by BRCs or DIET. Teachers provided information about the total number of days spent in these meetings/training programmes.

28

15

Fig 6.13 Average Number of Days Spent in Meetings/ Training by School Location

10

U AP

U MP

U UP

All Teachers M ale Female

4.7 5.2 3.9

4.7 4.9 4.5

12.0 12.4 10.8

10.9 9.9 11.3

7.8 7.5 8.1

4.3 5.0 3.9

In Andhra Pradesh, teachers spent less than 5 days attending meetings. Teachers in urban schools in Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh spent fewer days in these programmes, difference in Uttar Pradesh was large. Fewer women teachers in Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh attended such meetings, the difference was small one percent.
Fig 6.14 Average Number of Days Spent in Meetings/ Training by School Category
14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0

UP AP

UP MP

UP UP

All Teachers Male Female

4.7 5.1 4.1

4.8 5.2 4.1

12.4 12.6 12

10.8 11.4 9.8

8 8 8

4.8 5.2 3.9

Teachers of primary schools in Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh attended more meetings probably at CRCs than the teachers of upper primary schools. The difference was close to 3 days, on the average, in Uttar Pradesh. Women teachers from upper primary schools in Uttar Pradesh spent least number of days (3.9) in attending such meetings. Teachers in Madhya Pradesh spent maximum number of days (11 to 12) in attending meetings/training programmes.

29

Fig 6.15 Percentage of Teachers Engaged in Admn. And Other Work During First Hour
25 20 15 10 5 0

All

F AP

All

F MP

All

M UP

Other work Adm. Work

4.4 6.7

5.0 8.5

3.6 4.2

1.2 7.4

1.0 8.9

1.6 5.6

4.6 15.4

4.9 18.0

4.7 14.1

Between 6 to 15% teachers were seen engaged in administrative work at the beginning of a working day; teachers were asked to estimate the amount of time spent by them per week on administrative work. Maximum hours (4.4 hours) were reported from Uttar Pradesh which is equivalent to almost a day per week, Madhya Pradesh came very close to it. Men spent more time on it than women, so did the upper primary teachers in Uttar Pradesh than the primary teachers.
Fig 6.16 Average Number of Hours in a Week Spent on Attending Administrative Work
6 5 4 3 2 1 0

U.Pr AP

All

U.Pr MP

All

P UP 4.1 4.2 3.9 4.2 4.8 3.7

U.Pr UP 5.2 5.7 4.0

All ALL 4.4 5.0 3.8

All teachers M ale Female

1.8 1.9 1.6

1.6 1.8 1.3

1.7 1.9 1.5

4.4 4.6 4.0

3.8 3.8 3.8

30

6.5 Reasons of Absence

What are the main reasons for teachers taking occasional leave? Head masters, BEOs, CRCCs and VEC chairmen were asked to choose 3 reasons in order of importance out of 8 listed. Responses for the most frequent reason are recorded in the following figure.

Family problems and health of the teacher were the two most common reasons for teachers being absent. Family problems have been reported very prominently in Uttar Pradesh. Distance of residence from school and non availability of transport or unsuitable timing of the same also contributed to the problem. Only in Andhra Pradesh, participation in festivals and religious functions has been mentioned as a reason for teachers taking leave. Political/ social activities take some toll in Uttar Pradesh.
Fig 6.17 Prominent Reasons of Teachers' Absence according to Head teachers, BEOs and CRCCs 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Head BEO AP Family problems Health of the teacher Residence at a distance Transport not available 39.3 45.3 3.4 11.1 17.2 37.2 9.2 26.1 34.3 41.2 4.5 9.7 43.4 41.6 8.5 5.0 CRCC Head BEO MP 28.4 63 2.4 3.1 36.8 52.1 5.0 4.7 78.6 7.8 4.3 2.5 CRCC Head BEO UP 78.0 12.7 4.7 0.8 75.9 14.2 2.9 0.5 CRCC

Absenteeism due to sickness or family problems would be common for all employees. It is being noticed because of the nature of the job and shortage of teachers in the system. 6.6 Managing Teacher Absence in Schools

How do head teachers cope with teacher absenteeism? They were asked to respond to two categories of absence a short period of 1-3 days which could occur in several cases without prior information to the authority or a period of 4 or more days which, in most cases, could be known in advance. Six alternatives that could be adopted to manage the class for the two types of absence of absent teacher were presented. The head teachers pointed the one practiced by them most frequently. The data have been analysed separately for schools divided as rural/urban and primary/upper primary. The tables for rural/urban schools are given here. The data segregated for primary and upper primary schools can be seen in Appendix A.

31
Fig.6.18 Strategies Adopted by Schools when a Teacher is Absent for 1-3 Days 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
R AP U R MP U R

. UP

Students play or go home Class monitor handles the class Students study on their own Community member takes the class Teacher looks after the class in addition to own class Other teacher is assigned the class

1.2 2.2 3.4 4.0 36.9 52.0

0.0 1.3 1.3 2.7 52.0 42.7

4.1 9.1 6.0 6.3 37.4 36.5

0.0 5.6 0.0 4.2 46.5 42.2

1.4 18.3 6.1 3.2 56.8 14.2

5.6 20.4 7.4 3.7 40.7 22.2

Interestingly, in Andhra Pradesh, in the case of rural schools the maximum response was on another teacher is assigned to the class. How it is managed is not clear. This response has maximum frequency for primary schools which had only 3.1 teachers per school in 2005-06,5 80% schools in the sample are primary schools. Could it be what should be done response? Respondents from Uttar Pradesh were more candid with 57% opting for another teacher looks after the class in addition to his/her own class. Another practice adopted by schools for brief absence (1-3 days) of teachers was use of class monitor. More than 18% of classes in Uttar Pradesh were looked after by the class monitors followed by 9% in Madhya Pradesh. Young monitors, particularly in primary classes may be able to make the children sit in the class room and make less noise. Help from the community was higher in rural areas in Madhya Pradesh and in urban area in Uttar Pradesh. In Madhya Pradesh, 10% schools in rural area let the children study on their own or go home. In Uttar Pradesh too 7.2% (rural) to 13% (urban) of the schools left the students alone. In teacher starved schools, teacher absenteeism is hard to manage.

When teachers were absent for 4 or more days, the situation was managed more efficiently by deploying another teacher for the class. Percentage of respondents reporting this varied from 54% (Madhya Pradesh) to 65.5% (Uttar Pradesh) in rural area. Percentages were even higher for urban area. It is possible that help can be sought from CRPs or the DEO when the time to manage the situation is available.
5

DISE 2005-06

32
Fig.6.19 Strategies Adopted by Schools When a Teacher is Absent for More than 4 Days
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

R AP

R MP 0.0 1.3 0.0 4.0 28.0 66.7 3.1 4.4 4.1 7.2 25.5 54.1

U UP

Students play or go home Class monitor handles the class Students study of their own Community member takes the class Teacher looks after the class in addition to own class Other teacher is assigned the

1.0 2.2 2.2 5.0 28.6 61.2

0.0 0.0 2.8 4.2 29.6 62.0

1.4 3.2 1.4 1.4 27.0 65.5

5.6 1.8 3.7 3.7 11.1 74.1

6.7 Efforts to Contain Absenteeism Management committees are expected to supervise teachers attendance. Headmasters were asked to report efforts made by the management committees to contain teacher absence; their responses are summarized in fig 6.20.
Fig 6.20 Efforts of Management Committees in Respect of Teachers' Absence 100 80 60 40 20 0

All

R AP

All

R MP

All

R UP

Checking of Attendance from time to time Discussion with individual teachers who were not regular Convening meetings to discuss teacher's regularity / punctuality Reporting to authorities about irregular teachers No activity related to teachers attendance was undertaken

63.2 48.0 46.2 23.0 31.5

64.3 47.7 45.8 22.5 32.0

64.4 47.9 47.6 25.3 31.2

93.8 54.6 76.7 20.5 4.4

94.6 54.4 78.0 20.1 3.5

95.5 53.7 74.2 20.9 2.9

71.3 50.8 57.2 33.2 25.0

71.9 51.9 58.8 35.4 24.1

71.5 53.5 58.0 34.6 24.7

R- rural; P- primary

33

The most popular practice followed by the management committees (MCs) was to check the attendance from time to time. MCs were most active in Madhya Pradesh 94% head teachers reporting checking of attendance by MC members. Meetings with teachers to discuss the issue were also more frequent in Madhya Pradesh. Percent of cases where no action was taken was highest in Andhra Pradesh followed by Uttar Pradesh; these were negligible in Madhya Pradesh. It can be said that Madhya Pradesh has involved the community in a big way to ensure that teachers come to school.

In Andhra Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh, more attention was paid by the management committees of primary and rural schools to ensure teacher attendance. It is likely that rural primary schools with fewer teachers were paid more attention. Communities may be getting more concerned about the education of their children.

Frequent supervision and guidance from the seniors would not only improve teaching, it would motivate teachers and improve their commitment towards their work. Number of visits made by CRCCs, BRCCs and BEOs were obtained from the school records for the year 2005-06.

Schools were visited by supervisory group for a maximum of 14 days in Uttar Pradesh. Teacher attendance rates were highest in Uttar Pradesh. Such visits were lowest 7.5 days only in Andhra Pradesh. Both in Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh, maximum number of visits were made by CRC Coordinators, but in Andhra Pradesh, BRCCs visited schools more often. BEOs too supervised schools more frequently in Andhra Pradesh than in the other two states. In Uttar Pradesh rural and primary schools were supervised/guided more frequently than schools in urban area or upper primary schools. The differences could probably be as per the needs in the system.

6.8 Regularity and Punctuality in Attendance

VEC chairmen were asked to rate teachers regularity and punctuality as very good, good and not good. Non-response by VEC chairmen was high in Andhra Pradesh, nil in Madhya Pradesh and very small in Uttar Pradesh, that too was concentrated in urban (55 schools) or upper primary schools (88 schools). It reflects successful involvement of the community in universalisation of elementary education in these states.

34
Fig 6.21 Rating About Teachers' Regularity by VEC
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
All R P All R P All R

AP Not good Good Very good No reply 4.0 35.0 36.0 25.0 4.3 37.8 33.8 24.0 4.1 35.6 37.7 22.6 3.1 72.8 24.1 0.0 3.5

MP 3.3 74.2 22.5 0.0 2.7 68.7 23.5 5.0

UP 3.2 73.3 22.9 0.6 2.2 69.5 24.4 3.8

73.3 23.3 0.0

R- rural; P- primary

Although Regularity not good was reported by only 3-4% of the VEC chairmen, high non-response in Andhra Pradesh6 may be affecting the value for the state. There were small differences in rural and urban schools in all the three states with teachers in rural area being less regular. Elsewhere in the report it is pointed out that absenteeism is related to distance between residence and school as also with availability of transport. Reaching school may be more difficult in rural area for some teachers i.e. for those posted at a distance from their residence.
Fig 6.22 Rating About Teachers' Punctuality By VEC
100 80 60 40 20 0

All

P AP

All

P MP

All

R UP

Not good Good Very good No reply

6.2 42.7 26.0 25.0

6.5 44.9 24.6 24.0

7.2 42.5 27.7 22.6

4.4 73.8 21.8 0.0

4.7 74.8 20.4 0.0

4.9 73.4 21.7 0.0

3.0 69.7 22.2 5.0

3.5 73.6 22.3 0.6

2.2 70.8 23.1 3.8

R- rural; P- primary
6

High non-response can be genuine or due to slackness in data collection.

35

Punctuality was rated in about the same manner as regularity. Adverse percentages varied between 3.5 to 6.5 for rural schools and 0 to 5.3% in urban schools; zero percent was recorded in Uttar Pradesh which also had the highest no response for this category of schools. More teachers in primary schools, as compared to upper primary were reported to be not very punctual in Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh, situation was reverse in Uttar Pradesh. In Madhya Pradesh the difference on punctuality between the two categories of schools was small and favourable to upper primary schools. It may be added that data from VEC chairmen could be based on few observations and may also be biased because of other variables. 6.9 Teacher Absenteeism and Non-Punctuality as Seen by the Community.

In addition to the information sought form the VEC Chairman, views of the community at large were sought about teachers attending to their main duty i.e. teaching regularly. Each of the three states organized Focus Group Discussions at a few places-close to 20 in each state in various districts in the sample. The groups generally had six to ten members and an appropriate mix of parents whose children were in school, men, women and different social groups of the community. It has been pointed out in the state studies that several members were not literate and the education level of the participants was quite low. The discussions were conducted by the supervisors or some experienced persons who explained the objectives of SSA briefly and guided the discussions toward the main objective, namely, teacher absence from the classrooms. The discussions seemed to have remained focused in Uttar Pradesh but wavered over general issues in Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh. In all the three states distance of residence form school was pointed out as a major factor contributing to teachers not coming to school on time, leaving early or even missing school. It was also expressed as transport not being available at appropriate timings or teachers not staying in the villages where they were posted. Another reason for teachers not being in the classrooms, reported by the communities in all the three states was non-teaching duties assigned to the teachers. None of the states mentioned caste/ social group as a variable related to absenteeism but higher incidence of absence of women teachers was pointed out in Uttar Pradesh. As per the data available in the study, there was not much difference between men and women teachers being absent from class rooms but the reasons were different. Women were absent more often for personal or family related problems and men for being on duty outside schools. The latter will not be considered absenteeism by the administration or may be even by the community. Some other reasons mentioned in Uttar Pradesh where the discussion seemed to have remained more focused were: time spent in other income generating activities including private tuition, pursuance of higher studies for improving academic qualifications and participation in political activities. The groups made some suggestions to improve the situation such as better emoluments, improved infrastructural facilities and more teachers in the schools.

36

6.10 Role Played by VECs VECs meet from time to time to discuss issues/problems related to successful functioning of schools. Attendance of teachers was to be supervised by the VECs as were the enrolment, attendance and achievements of children. How much attention did this particular aspect got from the VECs? The chairmen were asked to identify the issues that were discussed frequently during the previous year. In all seven issues were presented. The responses are summarised in fig 6.23.
Fig. 6.23 School Problems Discussed in VEC Meetings
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Financial Inadequate facilities Student attendance Non-enrolment Low achievement Teacher attendance Dropout

AP 45.5 38.2 34.7 32.2 30.0 28.7 27.5

MP 90.0 76.4 87.7 44.4 77.2 76.7 46.7

UP 77.7 68.0 71.5 67.2 64.0 73.2 50.2

After Finance teachers attendance received most attention of VECs in Uttar Pradesh; in this study teacher attendance rate was highest in Uttar Pradesh. It could be due to support from the community. Finance and students attendance are the two problems discussed most frequently in all the three states. Finance in the questionnaire may mean looking into accounts rather than problems of insufficiency of funds etc. It is heartening to note that students attendance (nonattendance) gets attention of the community. Across the states, dropout i.e. students giving up studies is not paid the attention that it deserves. Low achievements of students were discussed in the VEC meetings more frequently in Madhya Pradesh - low percentage of students score 50% or more marks in the terminal examinations. Although statistics reported in Uttar Pradesh for 50% marks were high, achievement of pupils was still a matter of discussions in the VEC committees. Over all the managing committees seemed less involved in Andhra Pradesh and most active in Madhya Pradesh. Nature of problems getting attention of VECs in rural and urban areas in a state were not different. Non enrolment and dropout in primary classes was discussed more frequently than with reference to upper primary classes in all the three states. It could be due to earlier emphasis on univeralisation of primary education.

37

6.11 Satisfaction with Working Conditions Unsatisfactory working conditions can also contribute to absenteeism. Teachers were asked to indicate extent of their satisfaction with the situation in which they work. Various aspects were covered such as facilities in schools, support from groups concerned, working conditions, etc. The data were obtained on a five point scale from very satisfied to very dissatisfied, it is summarized in the table below where in positive and negative responses have been collapsed and the middle one i.e. somewhat satisfied is not shown. Table 6.1: Teacher Satisfaction Percentage of Teachers
1. Physical facilities for trs. 2. Relationship with colleagues 3. Support from parents 4. Support from head teacher 5. Support from CRC 6. Students regularity in attendance 7. Students learning capability 8. Progress of students in class 9. Participation by VEC/SMC 10. Involvement of students in co-curricular activities 11. Posting in the present school 12. Emoluments 13. Number of students in your class 14. Class(es) assigned to you 15. Teaching work-load 16. Redressal of grievances 17. School timetable 18. Non teaching work / duties Average Andhra Pradesh Dis-sat. Sat. 19.9 59.2 1.0 95.7 14.3 59.8 2.1 92.9 13.4 69.3 6.2 71.3 4.1 63.7 3.8 67.1 18.5 56.9 6.1 74.5 6.3 85.0 13.3 70.9 11.3 70.8 5.7 83.2 8.2 74.5 8.6 70.1 2.6 91.8 34.9 47.4 10.0 72.4 Madhya Pradesh Dis-sat. Sat. 12.3 69.3 1.2 94.1 12.7 61.6 1.0 88.7 3.6 84.2 8.4 62.4 7.4 54.2 3.8 61.2 6.0 68.9 2.8 72.7 5.7 84.7 5.0 51.4 5.7 78.3 5.0 87.8 6.9 82.4 10.9 69.3 2.2 93.8 5.8 30.1 7.5 71.9 Uttar Pradesh Dis-sat. Sat. 10.4 77.1 2.4 88.9 7.4 72.2 2.9 74.9 4.0 71.9 6.6 65.8 7.4 65.8 7.4 64.3 6.9 71.6 3.7 77.1 3.7 83.2 5.3 54.7 5.8 77.4 3.6 82.7 5.5 77.4 12.5 68.0 7.1 77.9 29.1 57.5 11.6 72.7

There was fair amount of similarity in teachers responses in all the three states. Teachers have good interpersonal relationships, approximately 85% were satisfied with their postings and classes allotted to them. In Uttar Pradesh a larger percentage of teachers were only somewhat satisfied with support from head teachers. Only a small percentage of teachers in Madhya Pradesh were dissatisfied with nonteaching duties but in Andhra Pradesh, more than a third did not like them. Close to 68% teachers were happy with infrastructural facilities with only 14% remaining dissatisfied which could be due to poorer facilities in some schools. A much higher percentage of teachers (35%) in Madhya Pradesh were not happy with the emoluments that they receive. Percentage of para teachers among respondent teachers was highest in Madhya Pradesh (40.1%) it was more than 30% in Uttar Pradesh too but the differences in emoluments of two categories of teachers may be responsible for greater dis-satisfaction in Madhya Pradesh. In Andhra Pradesh, more teachers were dissatisfied with contribution of VEC/SMC and CRC. Lack of support from parents was also reported by more teachers in Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh; more of them found physical facilities unsatisfactory. More teachers in Uttar Pradesh expressed their unhappiness with Redressal of teachers grievances. Overall, teachers in all the three states were reasonably satisfied with their working conditions. An overall score was worked out for the teachers and used in analyses.

38

Chapter 7 Factors Affecting Teachers Absence

This chapter explores the extent to which the school related and personal factors contribute to teacher absence. 7.1 Impact of School Related Variables on Teacher Absence Data was collected on number of days a school functioned during the teachers posting in that school and the number of days the teacher was present during 2005-06. Teachers presence during two unannounced visits of investigators to schools was also obtained but information available for the full academic year was used for analyses. The variable teachers absence has been defined as percentage of days on which a teacher was not present during his/her posting in the school in the academic session 2005-06. The absence could be for any reasonbeing deputed for work outside school, attending some training or being on leave for personal needs. This variable was taken as dependent variable for exploring its relationship with a set of twelve independent variables pertaining to teachers personal characteristics, such as gender, social group, age, distance of school from residence, time taken to reach school, academic & professional qualifications, employment status, etc and six independent variables related to school, such as location, management, physical facilities in school, visits of school functionaries, etc. To identify teacher and school level factors affecting teachers absence, two statistical techniques based on linear model are available. These are (2) Traditional Linear Model (TLM) and (b) Hierarchical Linear Model (HLM) that is also known as multi level cross-sectional design. The HLM takes into account the nesting of teacher and school level variables whereas TLM does not. This type of nesting or hierarchy in teacher and school level data arises from the fact that each school consists of a number of teachers, which are grouped in a school. Thus, the data set chosen to describe teachers and schools are hierarchical or nested in the above sense. The suitability of each of the said techniques is examined below in the light of the studys objective under reference. In the TLM technique, school level variables are disaggregated at the teacher level, i.e. same value of a given school variable is assigned to all teachers of the school. In this case, the assumption of independence of predictor variables made in the classical statistical theory is flouted. Therefore, use of TLM in this case is unsatisfactory, whereas the above-mentioned assumption of classical statistical theory is not violated in the case of HLM technique that is briefly described below. The HLM analysis was undertaken to answer the following questions: (a) To what extent teachers absence (TAR-05) varies between and within schools. (b) To what extent TAR-05 varies for teachers of differing status. (c) Are the teacher variables responsible for making statistically significant contribution to TAR-o5? (d) What are the school level variables responsible for making statistically significant contribution to adjusted school mean of teachers absence?

39

The research question at (a) was addressed by undertaking simple analysis of variance of TAR-05 labeled as Null model. The statistical test of significance for between school variations provided the basis for modeling of regression equation. The remaining questions were attempted in two stages. The first stage of analysis was conducted by including all teacher variables and then school level variables to present over all relationships of individual variables with the TAR-05. This model is referred as All Variables Model. Results of this analysis were used in the second stage of analysis which involved fitting the fist level (i.e. teacher level) model. The variable that made the most significant contribution (that is, for which the probability (p) of significance of regression coefficient () was lowest) in All Variables Model was entered and then the variable having next higher p-value was entered. If any of the entered variables indicated p-value more than 0.05, that variable was taken out from the model; otherwise, both the variables were retained. Next, the variable with the next higher value of p was entered into the model. If p-values of all the entered level-1 variables were 0.05 or less, all the variables were retained. This process of including one variable at a time, whose pvalue was 0.05 or less, continued till all the level-1 variables were tried. The level-1 variables retained finally in the model were used to regress level-2 variables (school level). The procedure of selection of level-2 variables was the same as the one adopted for level-1 variables. The variables of both the levels thus retained are presented in the final model. Major part of the above mentioned analysis was undertaken by using HLM6 software of Scientific Software International except computation of some basic statistics such as mean, variance and correlation. Number of cases entered in the above mentioned analyses are given in Table 7.1.
Table 7.1: Number of Teachers and Schools in the Analyses
Number Teachers Schools Andhra Pradesh 1843 397 Madhya Pradesh 860 351 Uttar Pradesh 1135 371

Mean and standard deviation of teacher and school level variables are given in Table 7.2.
Table 7.2: Mean and Standard Deviation of the Variables in the Analysis
Variable Teacher level Gender Age Caste Distance Time trs. Academic qualification Professional qualification Total experience Regular Total students Multi-grade Attitude TAR05 0.7 34.8 0.7 8.6 0.7 14.5 1.4 9.6 .8 44.9 .5 63.2 19.4 0.5 9.4 0.5 11.5 0.4 2.0 0.7 7.9 0.4 40.9 0.5 8.8 13.1 0.6 41.4 0.8 7.5 0.7 14.9 0.9 16.7 0.6 72.8 0.6 65.1 12.7 0.5 10.1 0.4 10.1 0.4 2.0 0.7 10.2 0.5 54.8 0.5 6.7 9.8 0.6 40.4 .8 8.1 .8 14.2 0.9 13.6 0.7 84.9 0.5 66.7 9.6 0.2 12.7 0.4 12.2 0.5 2.2 0.7 12.5 0.4 78.1 0.5 7.3 10.9 Andhra Pradesh Mean SD Madhya Pradesh Mean SD Uttar Pradesh Mean SD

40 Variable School level Rural Government FACSCH Visit Management SCHCONAL Andhra Pradesh Mean SD 0.9 1.0 2.9 7.5 1.8 41.6 0.4 0.1 1.1 5.6 1.5 36.1 Madhya Pradesh Mean .9 .9 3.0 8.5 2.4 46.7 SD 0.5 0.2 1.0 6.8 1.0 29.2 Uttar Pradesh Mean 1.0 0.9 3.2 13.5 2.1 33.5 SD 0.5 0.2 1.1 9.6 1.6 21.1

For explanation of the codes used for the values of the variables shown in Table 7.2, refer to Table 8.6 of Chapter 8.
Table 7.3: Percentage of Days Teachers Remained Absent
Category Gender male Caste others Category regular Multi grade teaching All Andhra Pradesh Mean SD 19.2 12.4 19.7 13.2 21.9 12.2 19.4 12.4 19.5 13.1 Madhya Pradesh Mean SD 12.2 9.3 12.9 10.2 12.7 9.8 12.6 9.4 12.7 9.8 Uttar Pradesh Mean SD 9.7 10.4 9.8 11.2 11.7 11.4 9.4 9.7 9.6 10.9

Percentage of days teachers remained absent is twice as high in Andhra Pradesh as in Uttar Pradesh. The regular teachers tend to remain absent more frequently in Andhra Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh; they may be required to participate more in other activities. Standard deviations are large in all the three states pointing to high variability in the absence rates. Simple correlations were worked out of all teacher variables with TAR05. Following table summarises them for the three states.
Table 7.4: Correlations TAR-05 with Teacher Variables
Variable Gender Age Caste Distance Time to travel. Academic qualifications Professional qualifications Teaching experience Regular No. of students taught Multi-grade teaching Satisfaction with facilities
(* Significant at 5%; ** Significant at 1%)

Andhra Pradesh -.02 .24** .03 .15** .13* .215** .35** .23** .43** -.015 .005 .035

Madhya Pradesh -.06 .09** .04 .06 .04 .05 .09** .09** .01 -.01 -.01 -.04

Uttar Pradesh .00 .22** .04 .18** .23** -.03 .23** .19** .29** -.01 -.02 .12**

Significant correlations of absenteeism with age, professional qualifications and teaching experience of teachers were seen in all the three states. distance of the residence and time taken to travel to school, have significant correlations in Andhra Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh. Distance and time to travel are highly correlated, correlations in all the three states were above .70. It can be said that older and better qualified teachers tend to miss school more often.

41

Teaching experience being highly correlated with age (r being >.83 in all the three states) represents the same variable. Simple analysis of variance was carried out to study between school variability of teacher absence. If between school variation was statistically significant, the level-2 regression analysis was undertaken. Table 7.5 indicated that between school variation was significant for the three states, the level-2 regression analysis was undertaken.
Table 7.5: Within and Between Sum of Squares
Model Null Final variables Percent decrease Andhra Pradesh Within Between .846 .151** .691 .102** 18.322 32.450 Madhya Pradesh Within Between .714 .278** .717 .254** .371 .357 Uttar Pradesh Within Between .852 .142** .737 .120** 13.584 15.587

(* Significant at 5%; ** Significant at 1%)

The simple analysis of variance (Null model) indicated that the mean of teacher absence varied from one school to another in all the three states, it accounted for maximum variance in Madhya Pradesh. The variation is subsequently reduced when effect of other independent variables are taken into account in the final model (the reduction is minimum in Madhya Pradesh); between school variation gets reduced but remains significant. Some of the school level variables that can contribute to these differences could be the control and guidance of the head teachers, extent of his/her absence from work and the social and educational status of the community the school is serving. Several variables both teachers and school related were found not to be contributing to teacher absence at the first level of analysis. The ones with significant contributions were entered for the second stage of analysis and strength of their contribution is recorded in the table 7.6. The variables that did not contribute to achievement are: teacher's gender, teacher social group, academic qualification of teacher, students of different grades taught together, school location (rual /urban)
Table 7.6: Regression Coefficients for Teachers Absence
Variables RURAL GOVT FACSCH VISIT MANAGE SCHCONAL GENDER_T AGE CASTE DISTANCE TIME_TRS ACADQUAL PROFQUAL Description of variables Location of school : Rural -1; Urban -0 Management of school: Govt/LB -1 ; Private 0 Physical facilities in school(max. value 4) Total Number of visits by BEO, BRC, CRC officials Monitoring of teachers absence by SMC (max. value 4) % of SC/ST students in the school Gender of the teacher:: :Male -1; Female -0 Age of teacher (in years) Social group of the teacher: SC/ST -0; Others -1 Distance of school from the residence of teacher ( in km) Time taken by teacher in reaching the school: <half hr -0.5; Half to 1 hr -1; 1hr to 2 hr -2; > 2 hr -3 <=high school=10, Hr. Sec+12, Graduate= 15, post graduate= 17 Untrained=0, NTT=1, JBT=2, 0.390** 0.087** -0.088* 0.077* 0.076* 0.010** -0.077** 0.004** Final Variable Model Andhra Madhya Uttar Pradesh Pradesh Pradesh

0.010** 0.008* 0.199** 0.183**

0.105**

42
Variables Description of variables Final Variable Model Andhra Madhya Uttar Pradesh Pradesh Pradesh 0.006 0.852** 0.618**

B.Ed or above =3 Total teaching experience of the teacher in years TOTALEXP Tenure of service : Regular -1; Para -0 REGULAR Total number of students taught in all the classes TOTALSTU Multi-grade teaching: Yes -1; No -0 MGRADE Job satisfaction of teacher 5-pt scale for 18 items( 18 to 90) ATTITUDE (* Significant at 5%; ** Significant at 1%)

The school related variables that contribute towards teacher absence are Facilities and Time taken to travel i.e. if distance from residence and time taken to travel are seen to represent the same. It may be noticed that 30% teachers in Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh live at a distance of 10 kms or more. Only 50% teachers live within walking distance of less than 5 kms. Missing limited services of public transport as is often the case in rural area as or small towns can contribute to unintended absenteeism.
Table 7.7: Percentage of Teachers Living at a Distance from School
Andhra Pradesh
Primary Upper primary

Madhya Pradesh
Primary Upper primary

Uttar Pradesh
Primary Upper primary Andhra Pradesh

All
Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh

N < 1km 1km <5km 5km <10km > 10km

1071 17.2 34.4 17.7 30.6

963 22.7 31.0 18.2 28.0

579 11.6 39.7 19.2 29.5

482 12.0 38.8 19.5 29.7

1036 12.8 50.4 14.3 22.5

266 1.9 35.3 26.3 36.5

2034 19.8 32.8 17.9 29.4

061 11.8 39.3 19.3 29.6

1302 10.6 47.3 16.7 25.3

Facilities used composite score including availability of toilets, drinking water, tables, chairs and almirahs for the teachers, number of classrooms and the status of school building. The score represents congeniality of the work place. Supervision by the senior officers or members of the management committee too had some effect on teacher absence. Amongst the teacher related variables, status of employment whether regular or para stands out prominently in Andhra Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh. Contract teachers would be more cautious in absenting themselves from school frequently while regular (read permanent) teachers do not fear any adverse impact on their jobs. They may also be entitled to more leave, or be deputed more frequently for training and official work. In Andhra Pradesh, schools being government or private is a significant variable. To some extent it is akin to teachers being regular or para.

43

Chapter 8 Effect of Teachers Absence on Students Attendance, Repeater Rate, Dropout Rate and Achievement
This chapter deals with the second major objective, namely, impact of teacher absence on pupils attendance, retention and achievement. Teachers absence has been defined earlier in the study. The Students Attendance rate is the average of students present in first and last hour during the two visits. The repeater rate for each class is the percentage of repeaters with respect to total enrolment in corresponding class. In the same way dropout rate for each class is the percentage of students who discontinued studies with respect to total enrolment of the class. Students attendance rate, repetition rate and dropout rate are computed at the school level. 8.1 Effect of Teacher Absence on Student Attendance The analysis involved computation of correlations of students attendance with teachers absence for terminal classes of primary and upper primary stages, namely class V and class VII/VIII respectively. Obtained correlations, along with mean and SD of the variables are recorded in table 8.1.
Table 8.1: Mean, Standard Deviations and Correlations
Teachers absence Mean SD 15.7 12.0 9.1 12.5 7.9 13.0 19.7 14.4 9.8 11.6 6.0 7.0 Students attendance Mean SD 74.2 19.7 64.3 19.4 70.6 17.2 79.0 16.0 72.2 19.0 67.3 16.1 Correlation R p .017 .70 .04 .49 -0.09 .06 -.09 .10 -0.03 .49 -0.16** .01

V VII/ VIII

AP MP UP AP MP UP

It can be said that there is no correlation between teachers absence and students attending school. Only one of the six correlations is significant it is small and negative. Children are sent to school by the parents unless the problem, namely teacher absence is, very persistent in a school, it may not affect pupil attendance. It was said by several head teachers that alternative arrangements are made, also the children may not know in advance that the teacher is going to be absent. In class VII/VIII, which are taught by subject teachers i.e. several teachers, any one teacher being absent on a particular day is not likely to have any impact on pupils coming to school. 8.2 Impact of Teacher Absence on Dropout and Repetition Rate Generally, in primary classes one teacher teaches all the subjects whereas in upper primary classes there are subject teachers teaching specific subjects, that is, students of upper primary classes are taught by more than one teacher. Absence/presence and other significant variables such as quality of teaching of a group of teachers may tend to pull the indicators close to averages. It was considered more meaningful to analyse these relationships for class V where one teacher is more likely to be looking after the group of children.

44

Table 8.2 presents mean and S.D. of teachers absence, dropout rate and repeater rate for each of classes I to V of all the sampled schools. The data were obtained from school records. The class-wise repeater rate and dropout rate were calculated by taking the percentage of number of repeaters and dropouts with respect to enrolment in the corresponding class.
Table 8.2: Class wise Mean, Standard Deviation & Correlation for Teachers Absence, Dropout and Repeater Rate
Teacher' Absence AP MP UP AP MP UP AP MP UP AP MP UP AP MP UP M 19.7 11.5 8.3 18.7 11.5 8.1 18.1 11.7 8.7 18.9 12.6 10.4 20.5 13.1 11.7 SD 12.0 8.4 9.7 13.0 8.7 11.5 12.9 8.9 8.9 12.3 8.7 9.2 13.5 9.5 11.0 M 1.2 1.0 2.8 1.4 0.9 3.3 2.2 0.6 3.6 1.6 0.9 3.9 2.3 2.8 4.3 Dropout Rate SD 5.3 4.7 6.8 6.5 4.4 8.2 8.7 3.3 8.4 5.9 3.7 9.3 7.6 7.2 10.5 r .09 .05 .26** -.02 0.0 .24** -.05 .05 .24** -.07 .05 .13* .00 .07 .12* p .03 .42 .00 .57 .97 .00 .22 .42 .00 .11 .47 .03 1.0 .29 .04 M 6.7 20.8 2.0 2.9 17.1 2.0 2.3 20.0 1.5 2.0 21.3 1.4 1.9 25.4 1.5 Repeater Rate SD 14.7 18.8 6.0 8.2 15.7 6.2 7.5 17.8 4.5 7.2 18.5 4.4 8.3 22.4 5.5 r .02 .06 .19** .085* .10 .06 .10* -.07 .1 .02 .14* .07 -.00 -.01 .06 p 0.64 0.32 0.003 0.05 0.13 0.34 0.02 0.31 0.12 .67 .04 .22 .95 .89 .32

II

III

IV

There is a clear relationship between teacher absence and rate of dropout in Uttar Pradesh. All the five correlations are significant. In Uttar Pradesh, PTR too is very high, crowded classrooms without teachers would discourage parents to send children to school. There is a small correlation in class I in Andhra Pradesh too. Dropout rates are also highest in class V in all the three states. In class V, attendance rates were also lower than in classes I-IV. There is some indication of a relationship between teacher absence and repeater rate, correlations are small. High repeater rate in Madhya Pradesh is noticeable. The state is trying to retain the children in the system among the three states the dropout rate is lowest in Madhya Pradesh. Inspite of high repeater rates achievement levels were low (see Table 5.3). Retaining children in the system without helping them to learn at the expected levels only adds to targeted statistics not to Education for All. 8.3 Teacher Absence and Achievements To study effect of teachers absence on students achievement, the analysis was undertaken for class V and class VII/VIII. Marks in language and mathematics were taken as two dependent variables of the sampled students in each of these two classes. The variables are labeled as PERLANG and PERMATH respectively. Thus, there are two sets of analyses each for class V and VII/VIII namely (1) language and (2) mathematics. As already stated in methodology section, 20 students of class V were selected from every primary school for administering the language and mathematics achievement tests. The tests available to the agency in the state were used for assessing achievement. As far as class VII/VIII of upper primary schools is concerned, 20 students were selected randomly from each

45

school. Marks in language and mathematics of these students in the common examination conducted in the state were used for this purpose. For each set, the independent variables consisted of 5 student level variables and 19 school level variables. Of the 19 school level variables, 6 variables defined the school characteristics and the remaining 13 defined teacher characteristics. The teachers characteristics are of the teachers who taught the language or mathematics to the sampled students. Definition of variables is presented in table 8.6. Tables A.19 to A.24 in Appendix - A contain values of inter-correlations. In the study, we have a sample of schools and a sample of students within each school. Student variables, consisting of their achievement scores and personal characteristics vary within each school and also across schools. Hierarchical Linear Model (HLM) was adopted for estimation of contribution of teachers absence to the achievement of students. The HLM technique consists of the following steps: (i) Examination of level-2 (school) means of the dependent variable by computing between and within sum of squares (Null model). When none of the dependent variables is regressed, it is the same as simple analysis of variance. If between schools sum of squares is statistically significant, then the dependent variable is regressed by considering all the level 1 (student characteristics) variables and then all the level 2 variables i.e. school level variables (All variables). The All variables model is used for selection of Level -1 and Level -2 variables to be finally retained with teachers absence rate (TAR 05), which is the main variable in this study. For arriving at final selection of level-1 variables, the variable was first taken out from all variable model (that had very low correlation with the dependent variable and very high value of the probability (p) of significance of its regression coefficient). Then the second one with low correlation and high p for significance of its regression coefficient. This process continued until each of the variables retained in the model had the value of p not more than 0.05 for the regression coefficient. The variable TAR_05 was retained throughout the process of selection of level-2 variables. The second level analysis used two criteria for deletion of a variable from the All variable model. The first criterion was the p value should not only be greater than 0.05 but very high. The second criterion used was increased probability p of significance of regression coefficient for TAR_05 when the variable was deleted from the model. The list of those independent variables was prepared, which contained their p value and the amount of reduction in the p value of TAR_05. The variable which had the smallest reduction in the p value of TAR_05 and also high value of p for its regression coefficient was excluded from the model. This process continued until the value of p of regression coefficients of each variable remained 0.05 or below. Impact of Teacher Absence on Achievement in Language and Mathematics in Class V

(ii)

(iii)

(iv)

8.4

Mean achievements of students in language & mathematics and their correlations with pupil related variables are given in tables 8.3 A to 8.3 C.

46

Table 8.3 A: Mean Achievement of Students in Class V in Language

Andhra Pradesh Mean SD 21.9 12.3 61.9 18.7 296 2800 Madhya Pradesh Mean SD 12.5 8.7 44.5 22.9 198 1968 Uttar Pradesh Mean SD 12.6 9.0 47.6 22.7 241 3410

Teacher Absence (% of days) Score in Language Number of schools Number of students

Table 8.3 B: Mean Achievement of Students in Class V in Mathematics

Andhra Pradesh Mean SD N 22.7 14.3 Madhya Pradesh Mean SD N 12.6 8.9 Uttar Pradesh Mean SD N 13.1 10.3

Teacher Absence (% of days) Score in Language Number of schools Number of students

62.0

18.7 288 2785

40.6

18.6 195 1944

44.0

21.4 227 3218

Table 8.3 C. Correlations of Achievement in Class V with Pupil Variables

Andhra Pradesh Lang. Maths -.03 .01 .08** .04* .13** .06** .14** .08** .08** .045* Madhya Pradesh Lang. Maths -.02 -.01 -.01 -.01 .07** .03 .09** .09** .03 .02 Uttar Pradesh Lang. Maths .00 .01 .10** .09** .01 -.00 .08** .01 .04* .05**

Gender Caste (Others) DADED MUMED DADOCC

(* Significant at 5%; ** Significant at 1%)

In Andhra Pradesh, except for gender, all other variables are correlated significantly with pupils achievement in both language and mathematics; home variables are important. In Madhya Pradesh, Mothers education has significant (but small) correlations with achievements. In Uttar Pradesh, caste and fathers education & occupation were found to be correlated. Over all, at this level, gender is not related to achievement, other pupil related variables do influence pupil achievement particularly the caste. Out of the six correlations with caste in the table four are significant. In all the three states caste has significant correlations with DADED, MUMED and DADOCC7. Continued attention to SC/ST students, many of whom may still be first generation learners is called for.

The variables retained finally along with the value of regression coefficients are given in table 8.4.

Not shown in this table, see tables in Appendix A - A.21 to A.26.

47

Table 8.4 Regression Coefficients for Achievement in class V

Variable GENDER_T AGE CASTE DISTANCE TIME_TRS ACADQUAL PROFQUAL TOTALEXP REGULAR TOTALSTU MGRADE ATTITUDE TAR05 RURAL GOVT FACSCH VISIT MANAGE SCHCONAL GENDER OTHER DADED MUMED DADOCC Variable values Teacher's sex Male-1;Female-0 No. of years SC/ ST-0 and all others-1 0.342** Actual value of distance from residence to school Time to reach school. Academic Qualification Professional Qualification Total teaching experience Employment status:Regular-1; para-0 Total students taught in different classes 2005-06 Multi grade teaching:Yes-1;No-0 Job satisfaction score Max-90 % of days to total working days. Rural -1; Urban-0 Govt/ LB-1; PA=0 Facilities available-1; Not available-0; Total score- 0 to4. No. of visits by functionaries Role of SMC for teachers' absence. Total score- 0 to 4 School context: % of SC/ ST students in the school. Students sex :Boy -1; Girl -0 SC/ ST-0 and all others-1 Fathers Qualification Mothers Qualification Fathers Occupation Andhra Pradesh Lang. Maths Madhya Pradesh Lang. Maths Uttar Pradesh Lang. Maths

.356*

.245

.391**

0.098**

.002**

0.002 -0.208*

-0.002

.005

-.002

.017* -.010

.020* -008 .683*

0.057* 0.095* 0.053** 0.053** 0.130** 0.036** 0.036**

.092**

-049* 057** .037** .026**

.022**

(* Significant at 5%; ** Significant at 1%)

Students achievement in general does not seem to get affected by teachers absence. Among other teacher related variables, the caste of the teacher has some relationship with achievement particularly in language. Teachers coming from groups other than SC/ST could be speaking standard language and demanding the same of their pupils. Because of reservation policy, the teachers from amongst SC/ST group may be less qualified or may have had lower achievement levels themselves. School level variables also proved ineffective with the exception of private management which seems to have an impact on learning of mathematics. It is the variables describing the students or their home background that contribute to differences in achievement. Boys tend to do better in mathematics in Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh. Children of educated parents, in general tend to do better. One may conclude that teachers can help but motivation comes mainly from the families. The uneducated parents, particularly in rural areas weigh education in terms of jobs that these children may be able to get and the future does not look very bright to them. Improved quality of life or being able to do better in the family occupation does not seem to be grasped well. May be the home circumstance itself does not support studies.

48

8.5 Impact of Teacher Absence on Achievement in Language and Mathematics in class VII/VIII As most states have a common examination (state or district level) the scores obtained by students in language and mathematics were used as the criterion variable. As in case of class V, 20 pupils were chosen randomly from each school and their scores provided the means in the two subjects. Number of students and their mean achievement in Language in Class VII/VIII are recorded in the following tables.
Table 8.5A: Mean Achievements in Language
Andhra Pradesh (VII) Mean SD 21.3 12.8 62.2 16.2 74 1277 Madhya Pradesh (VIII) Mean SD 12.4 9.6 44.6 14.4 116 2025 Uttar Pradesh (VIII) Mean SD 11.4 6.8 49.0 21.1 72 1145

Teacher Absence (% of days) Score in Language Number of schools Number of students

Table 8.5B: Mean Achievements in Mathematics

Andhra Pradesh (VII) Mean SD 22.7 14.3 61.3 18.5 74 1283 Madhya Pradesh (VIII) Mean SD 11.8 8.6 44.7 16.9 123 2197 Uttar Pradesh (VIII) Mean SD 10.2 6.8 47.2 21.4 66 1060

Teacher Absence (% of days) Score in Language Number of schools Number of students

Table 8.5C: Correlation of Achievement of Pupils with Background Variables Class VII/VIII
Andhra Pradesh (VII) Lang. Maths -02 -03 -065* .03 .02 .00 -00 -.05 .09** .05 Madhya Pradesh (VIII) Lang. Maths -.01 .04 .015 -.043** .09* .036 .08** .07** .07** .07** Uttar Pradesh (VIII) Lang. Maths .04 .02 -.03 .01 .14** .07* .05 .03 .005 -.01

Gender Caste (Others) DADED MUMED DADOCC

(* Significant at 5%; ** Significant at 1%)

Home variables are somewhat important in Madhya Pradesh, fathers education has small significant correlation in Uttar Pradesh. In Andhra Pradesh most of the home background variables had significant correlation with achievement in class V; most of it disappeared by class VII. Either the parents cannot provide support at this level or they are disheartened by childs achievement. With elimination of children from entry in grade VI, variability in lower related variables might have got reduced significantly. In Madhya Pradesh, educated parents seem to be supporting children to study.

49

Table 8.6: Regression Co-efficients for Achievement in Class VII/VIII

Variable GENDER_T AGE CASTE DISTANCE TIME_TRS ACADQUAL PROFQUAL TOTALEXP REGULAR TOTALSTU MGRADE ATTITUDE TAR05 RURAL GOVT FACSCH VISIT MANAGE SCHCONAL GENDER OTHER DADED MUMED DADOCC Variable values Teacher's sex Male-1;Female-0 No. of years SC/ ST-0 and all others-1 Actual value of distance from residence to school Time to reach school. Academic Qualification Professional Qualification Total teaching experience Employment status:Regular-1; para-0 Total students taught in different classes 2005-06 Multi grade teaching:Yes-1;No-0 Job satisfaction score Max-90 % of days to total working days. Rural -1; Urban-0 Govt./ LB-1; PA=0 Facilities available-1; Not available-0; Total score0 to4. No. of visits by functionaries Role of SMC for teachers' absence. Total score- 0 to 4 School context: % of SC/ ST students in the school. Students sex :Boy -1; Girl -0 SC/ ST-0 and all others-1 Fathers Qualification Mothers Qualification Fathers Occupation Andhra Pradesh Lang Maths Madhya Pradesh Lang Maths Uttar Pradesh Lang Maths

-.023* .122* -.714** .966** .001 -.014* -.011*

-.490*

-.021**

.005

.008

.016

-.031*

-090* .007* .074* .063** .106 .035* .049** .038** .038** .024* .024* .090* .034** .035**

(* Significant at 5%; ** Significant at 1%)

The variables that did not contribute to achievement are: teacher's gender, age, and social group, time taken to commute between residence and school, total teaching experience, multigrade class, school management, school location (rual/urban) physical facilities, number of visits by BEO, CRCC, BRCC, and mothers education level. As a group, home background of the pupils seems to have more impact on pupil learning than the teacher or school related variables. The latter seem to be contributing very little. Most of the schools in the sample were government (including local government) managed and from rural areas. It is likely that conditions in these schools are very similar one exception can be the leadership of the head teacher. Same can be said about the teachers in these schools. Professional qualifications and the employment status make some difference in Uttar Pradesh and Andhra Pradesh respectively; the two are likely to be correlated. Teacher absence has limited impact but a bit more in class VIII than in class V.

50

51

Chapter 9 Findings and Recommendations

Findings I. FACILITIES AND TEACHERS

1. From the pooled data of the three states, it is found that approximately 1.5% schools were without building, 42% without toilets, 27% without drinking water, 9% without chairs and tables for the teachers and 17% without almirahas /cupboards. About four percent children sit in the open; the percentage is highest in Uttar Pradesh and lowest in Andhra Pradesh. 2. Enrolments decrease from class I to V in all states but more sharply in Madhya Pradesh. Only 66% of enroled children were present in schools during the first period, the percentage declined by 3 points in the last period. Maximum decline was in Madhya Pradesh. A higher percentage of girls were present as compared to boys. 3. By the standards set by the states, achievements of children were satisfactory in Andhra Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh with more than 75% children getting a score of 50%. The comparable percentages were low in Madhya Pradesh (30%). 4. Thirty percent teachers in the schools were para teachers; percentage was high (42.2) in Madhya Pradesh and low (23.4) in Andhra Pradesh. 5. Only 5% of teachers had less than 12 years of schooling; 68% were graduates/post graduates. Close to 29% of teachers were without pre-service training, more women teachers were untrained than men. There was some evidence that students of class V from upper primary schools achieve better as compared to children from primary only schools. It could be due to better availability of teachers and other facilities. In Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh close to 20% of the enroled children did not sit for the terminal examination. These could be frequent or permanent absentees. II. TEACHER ABSENCE IN A YEAR

6. Teachers were not in schools, on the average for 28 days during the academic year. In addition they mentioned more than 4 hours per week of administrative work in the school which would amount to almost a school day and would keep the teacher out of classrooms for another 35-36 days. For a 220 days school year, a teacher may not be with the students for close to 63-64 days. 7. Health of the teacher and the family problems were cited as the most common reasons for teachers taking leave. Distance of school from the residence along with non-availability of transport also contributed to teacher absence. 8. As per head teacher, in case of short term absence of a teacher i.e. 1 to 3 days, another teacher looked after the class in addition to his/her own class (R-43.7, U-46.4) in most cases followed by another teacher is assigned the class (R-34.2, U-35.7). Over all close to 80% of class groups of absent teachers were looked after by the teachers. For the rest, the classes were managed by members of the community, monitors of the classes or children were left to themselves to study, play or go home. High percentage of another teacher is assigned the class in teacher starved schools is not comprehensible. Situation was better managed when the teacher was absent for four or more days. Another teacher was assigned in 64% of the schools and a teacher looked after the class

52

in addition to his/her own class in another 25% of the cases. Only 11-12% of classes remained deprived of assistance from teachers. More assistance from teachers was available in urban schools. 9. Absence rates of teachers varied over the states from 10% of the working days in to Uttar Pradesh to 12.3% in Madhya Pradesh and 19.6% in Andhra Pradesh. As compared to Uttar Pradesh, absenteeism was twice as high in Andhra Pradesh. Differences in degree of or reasons for absenteeism were not marked between rural and urban areas. Some differences were seen between primary and upper primary schools but the pattern was not consistent over the states. 10. Regular teachers were absent more often than the para teachers. Difference was maximum in Andhra Pradesh (18 days) and minimum in Madhya Pradesh (only 2 days). 11. More teaching days were lost for being on duty away from school than being on leave in Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh. In Uttar Pradesh, leave availed by teachers was limited to 8.4 days only, in contrast teachers were on leave for 17.5 days in Andhra Pradesh and 13.5 in Madhya Pradesh. Women teachers spent fewer days on duty away from school but took more leave for personal reasons. 12. Overall the three states teachers spent 8 days in attending meeting at CRC/BRC/DIET. The statistics varied from 5 days in Andhra Pradesh to 12 days in Madhya Pradesh. Teachers from primary schools attended more meetings. Women teachers from upper primary schools in Uttar Pradesh spent least number of days (only 4) in attending such meetings.

III.

ROLE OF VECS/MCS

13. Management Committees helped in containing teacher absence by checking their attendance from time to time, talking to teachers who were not regular, convening meetings with teachers and even by reporting to authorities, the latter was resorted in very few cases. Managing Committees were most active in Madhya Pradesh. Teacher absence was discussed frequently in the VEC meetings in Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh. More attention was paid by the management committees to teacher attendance in primary and rural schools (Andhra Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh). Only 3-4% VEC chairmen said teachers were not very regular or punctual. IV. TEACHERS ABSENCE RATE (BASED ON HEADCOUNT)

14. Overall about 83% of the teachers were present in schools but only 72% were teaching as per observations during the first or the last period. Thus over the three states, 28% teachers were not in the classrooms at least part of the day. The percentage was highest in Andhra Pradesh 34%. More women teachers were present during the first period and in comparison to men teachers more of those present were teaching. More teachers in primary schools were present at the beginning of the school than in upper primary schools; more of them were teaching too.

53

VARIABLES RELATED WITH TEACHERS ABSENCE

15. Significant zero-order positive correlations of absenteeism with age, experience and professional qualifications of teachers were seen in all the three states. Distance between school and residence and time taken to travel too had significant correlations with rate of absence in Andhra Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh. 16. In the final analysis the variables that had impact on teacher-absence more consistently were Facilities in school i.e. congeniality of work place and time taken to travel. Supervision by senior officers or members of the management committees too had some effect on absenteeism. Status of teacher whether regular or para made a substantial difference in Andhra Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh. In Andhra Pradesh schools being government or private also made some difference to absenteeism. VI IMPACT OF TEACHER ABSENCE ON DROPOUT ACHIEVEMENT

17. Teacher absence had significant zero order correlations with dropout in Uttar Pradesh (PTR is very high in Uttar Pradesh). There was some indication of its impact on repeater rate, though correlations were very small. 18. Students achievement, in general, did not seem to get affected by teacher absence. Students home background plays a prominent role in pupil learning. (more in class V than in VII/VIII). Children of educated parents tend to do better. Gender of the student did no bearings on achievement. 19. Caste of the teacher seems to have some impact on pupil achievement. Recommendations Two variables that have emerged as having some impact on teacher absence, namely, distance of residence from school and poor physical facilities at place of work can be managed by administration to reduce incidence of absence of teachers. Long distances to travel and absence of minimum facilities discourage persons with mild discomfort to come to place of work. While provision of physical facilities for teachers can take some time and money, postings can be rescheduled to reduce the problem. Only part of it may be unavoidable. Teacher absence not having any visible impact on pupil learning needs more thorough investigation. For last several years, one may say decades, availability of teachers has been seen as an important variable to improve retention, reduce dropout and most important of all, improve learning at primary level. Rationally, it makes a lot of sense. In this study, teacher presence did not seem to have an impact on achievement of children. Learning in classes I and II is most crucial as basic skills are acquired during these two years. High PTR and multi grade teaching could be two variables affecting learning at this level. Pedagogy may also be looked into more thoroughly. Reciting alphabets or numbers, seen frequently in class rooms, may not lead to the needed skills. More intensive observation of what goes on in classrooms may help in understanding the problem. Some experimental work may throw more light on it. This study had the limitation of not being able to assess students achievement with the help of well designed achievement tests. Further the attendance rate derived from the recorded attendance data for the whole year is not very reliable. In any case for long absence of teachers, schools make some arrangement for teaching in their classes and hence teaching in class does not

54

suffer to a great extent. As such, even when there is some impact of teacher absence on Students achievement, it is not clearly brought out from the data of this study. Low pupil attendance is another variable that needs better understanding. Low averages can result from (i) non-attendance or enrolment on register only or (ii) frequent absence of large number of enroled students. The two situations would need different approaches to sort out the problem.

55

Appendix A

List of Tables
Table No. A.1 A.2 A.3 A.4 A.5 A.6 A.7 A.8 A.9 A.10 A.11 A.12 A.13 A.14 A.15 A.16 Title Average Number of Teaching Days Lost (2005-06) Level wise Average Number of Teaching Days Lost (2005-06) (Male) Average Number of Teaching Days lost (2005-06) (Female) Average Number of Teaching Days Lost (2005-06) Area wise Average Number of Teaching Days lost (2005-06) (Male) Average Number of Teaching Days lost (2005-06) (Female) Teachers by Academic Qualifications Teachers by Professional Qualifications and Experience Strategies Adopted by the Head Teacher when a Teacher is Absent for 1-3 days or More than 4 Days in Primary Schools Strategies Adopted by the Head Teacher when a Teacher is Absent for 1-3 days or More than 4 Days in Upper Primary Schools Average Number of Visits by BEOs, BRCCs and CRCCs in Rural and Urban Schools Average Number of Visits by BEOs, BRCCs and CRCCs in Primary and Upper Primary Schools Percentage of Teaching Days Lost by Different Categories Of Teachers (2005-06) Percentage of Teaching Days Lost by Different Categories of Teachers (2005-06) Teachers Presence and Engagement in Primary School VEC Chairman's Response About Major Problems of The Schools Discussed in The Committee During 2005 06 According to Rural and Urban Schools. VEC Chairman's Response About Major Problems Of The Schools Discussed In The Committee During 2005 06 According to Primary and Upper Primary Schools. Teachers Presence and Engagement in Upper Primary Schools Correlations of Teacher Level Variables (Andhra Pradesh) Correlations of School Level Variables (Andhra Pradesh) Correlations Teacher Variables (Madhya Pradesh) Correlations of school level variables (Madhya Pradesh) Correlations Teacher Variables (Uttar Pradesh) Correlations of school level variables (Uttar Pradesh) Page No. 58 58 58 58 59 59 59 60 60 61 61 61 61 62 62 63

A.17

63

A.18 A.19 A.20 A.21 A.22 A.23 A.24

63 64 65 65 65 66 66

56

Table A.1 Average Number of Teaching Days Lost (2005-06) Level Wise
Andhra Pradesh P UP No. of working days Average No. of working days lost Schools related duty Non-school duty Casual leave Medical leave 167.7 32.0 5.0 9.3 14.0 3.7 168.4 34.1 5.4 11.2 14.1 3.4 Madhya Pradesh P UP 228.9 29.5 5.7 9.6 8.1 5.9 228.7 26.5 5.9 7.8 9.2 3.6 Uttar Pradesh P UP 211.4 21.4 6.5 7.5 5.2 2.1 222.6 22.0 3.9 6.3 9.5 2.2

Table A.2 Average Number of Teaching Days Lost (2005-06) (Male)

Andhra Pradesh P UP No. of working days Average No. of working days lost Schools related duty Non-school duty Casual leave Medical leave 164.6 30.9 5.4 10.5 12.6 2.4 165.0 32.9 5.8 12.2 12.9 2.1 Madhya Pradesh P UP 228.5 28.7 6.2 11.1 7.4 4.0 228.7 25.6 5.6 8.7 8.6 2.7 Uttar Pradesh P UP 214.9 21.7 6.7 9.2 4.8 0.9 225.3 21.1 4.0 6.9 8.4 1.8

Table A.3 Average Number of Teaching Days lost (2005-06) (Female)

Andhra Pradesh P UP 172.16 173.97 33.63 36.05 4.4251 4.7939 7.7763 9.7606 15.971 16.045 5.4586 5.4545 Madhya Pradesh P UP 229.54 228.86 30.62 28.11 5.00 6.42 7.35 6.21 9.30 10.15 8.96 5.32 Uttar Pradesh P UP 207.59 217.25 21.17 23.59 6.24 3.79 5.71 5.27 5.73 11.49 3.48 3.03

No. of working days Average No. of working days lost Schools related duty Non-school duty Casual leave Medical leave

Table A.4 Average Number of Teaching Days Lost (2005-06) - Area Wise
Andhra Pradesh R U All No. of working days Average No. of working days lost Schools related duty Non-school duty Casual leave Medical leave 164.8 32.7 5.2 10.1 13.8 3.6 181.1 34.0 5.2 10.4 15.2 3.1 168.0 33.0 5.2 10.2 14.0 3.5 Madhya Pradesh R U All 229.9 27.7 5.7 9.7 8.0 4.3 226.3 29.2 6.1 6.8 9.9 6.4 228.8 28.2 5.8 8.8 8.6 4.9 R 212.4 21.6 6.3 7.5 5.6 2.1 Uttar Pradesh U All 222.5 21.2 3.2 6.0 9.4 2.6 213.9 21.5 5.9 7.3 6.2 2.2

57

Table A.5 Average Number of Teaching Days lost (2005-06) (Male)

Andhra Pradesh R U All No. of working days Average No. of working days lost Schools related duty Non-school duty Casual leave Medical leave 163.1 31.9 5.7 11.2 12.7 2.4 175.5 31.3 5.2 11.7 13.1 1.4 164.8 31.8 5.6 11.3 12.7 2.2 R Madhya Pradesh U All 226.1 30.5 5.9 9.7 9.3 5.5 228.6 27.3 5.9 10.0 8.1 3.4 R 217.2 21.5 6.3 8.6 5.6 1.0 Uttar Pradesh U All 222.1 22.1 2.7 9.1 7.9 2.4 217.7 21.5 5.9 8.6 5.8 1.2

229.1 26.8 5.9 10.1 7.7 3.1

Table A.6 Average Number of Teaching Days lost (2005-06) (Female)

R No. of working days Average No. of working days lost Schools related duty Non-school duty Casual leave Medical leave Andhra Pradesh U All 185.0 35.7 5.1 9.6 16.6 4.4 172.9 34.7 4.582 8.62 16.00 5.457 R Madhya Pradesh U All 226.35 28.66 6.17 5.59 10.17 6.74 229.25 29.56 5.60 6.87 9.66 7.43 R Uttar Pradesh U All 222.67 20.72 3.48 4.28 10.28 2.68 209.22 21.58 5.83 5.64 6.70 3.41

167.9 34.2 4.3 8.2 15.7 5.9

232.90 30.69 4.88 8.49 9.02 8.30

205.67 21.80 6.44 6.00 5.76 3.60

Table A.7 Teachers by Academic Qualifications

Academic qualification All (Male+Female) N High school Higher secondary Graduate Post graduate Male N High school Higher secondary Graduate Post graduate Female N High school Higher secondary Graduate Post graduate Andhra Pradesh All Para 2166 6.6 24.9 47.8 20.7 1264 6.0 22.7 49.2 22.1 902 8.0 27.9 45.8 18.7 506 17.8 49.2 30.4 2.6 260 16.9 40.8 38.1 4.2 246 18.7 58.1 22.4 0.8 Madhya Pradesh All Para 1136 2.6 23.2 40.0 34.1 698 3.0 23.8 41.8 31.1 438 2.0 22.4 37.0 39.0 476 1.0 22.7 42.4 33.8 273 0.7 24.5 46.5 28.2 203 1.5 20.2 36.9 41.4 Uttar Pradesh All Para 1385 6.1 32.4 34.7 26.7 736 6.0 38.7 34.5 20.8 649 6.0 25.3 35.0 33.4 432 1.4 35.4 40.0 23.1 176 0.6 36.6 39.4 23.4 258 1.9 34.6 40.5 23.0

58

Table A.8: Teachers by Professional Qualifications and Experience

Professional qualification All (Male+Female) N Untrained Nursery training JBT B.Ed/M.Ed Average teaching experience Average teaching experience in this school Male N Untrained Nursery training JBT B.Ed/M.Ed Average teaching experience Average teaching experience in this school Female N Untrained Nursery training JBT B.Ed/M.Ed Average teaching experience Average teaching experience in this school Andhra Pradesh All Para 2166 21.6 1.8 27.6 49.0 9.0 3.2 1264 18.3 2.1 30.3 49.3 9.7 3.2 All 902 26.2 1.4 23.7 48.7 8.0 3.1 506 86.6 1.8 5.7 5.9 2.5 1.6 260 81.9 3.1 5.8 9.2 3.0 1.9 Para 246 91.5 0.4 5.7 2.4 2.0 1.3 Madhya Pradesh All Para 1136 32.6 0.6 43.0 23.8 15.9 8.0 698 31.4 0.3 47.7 20.6 17.0 7.9 All 438 34.5 1.1 35.6 28.8 14.3 8.2 476 46.2 0.4 35.9 17.4 7.1 5.0 273 45.8 0.0 37.7 16.5 7.4 5.3 Para 203 46.8 1.0 33.5 18.7 6.6 4.7 Uttar Pradesh All Para 1385 32.0 4.6 45.4 18.0 12.8 6.0 736 27.4 4.5 53.3 14.8 15.5 6.4 All 649 37.1 4.8 36.5 21.6 9.8 5.4 434 86.8 3.7 3.2 6.2 2.2 2.1 176 86.3 0.6 2.3 10.9 2.6 2.6 Para 258 87.2 5.8 3.9 3.1 2.0 1.9

Table: A.9 Strategies Adopted by the Head Teacher when a Teacher is Absent for 1-3 days or More than 4 Days in Primary Schools
Strategies Andhra Pradesh 1-3 days 292 48.6 40.0 4.1 3.4 2.4 1.4 > 4 days 292 60.7 28.6 5.5 2.4 1.7 1.0 Madhya Pradesh 1-3 days 244 38.3 32.9 7.8 6 9 5 > 4 days 244 53.1 27.2 6.6 3.3 3.7 4.1 Uttar Pradesh 1-3 days > 4 days 312 312 14.1 67.8 56.6 3.6 6.1 18.3 1.3 23.8 2.2 1.9 2.9 1.3

Total schools 1. Some other teacher is assigned the class 2. Another teacher look after the class in addition to his/her own class 3. Some community member take the class 4. Student of those classes remain in the classroom and study of their own 5. Class Monitor is asked to handle the class 6. Students of those classes are allowed to play or go home

59

Table: A.10 Strategies Adopted by the Head Teacher when a Teacher is Absent for 1-3 days or More than 4 Days in Upper Primary Schools
Strategies Andhra Pradesh 1-3 >4 days days 108 108 4.6 66.4 38.9 2.8 1.8 0.9 0.0 28.0 2.8 0.0 2.8 0.0 Madhya Pradesh >4 1-3 days days 146 146 36.3 59.6 49.3 2.7 3.4 6.8 1.4 24.7 6.8 4.8 3.4 0.0 Uttar Pradesh 1-3 >4 days days 88 88 19.3 62.5 47.7 2.3 6.8 19.3 4.5 28.4 0.0 1.1 3.4 4.5

Total schools 1. Some other teacher is assigned the class 2. Another teacher look after the class in addition to his/her own class 3. Some community member take the class 4. Student of those classes remain in the classroom and study of their own 5. Class Monitor is asked to handle the class 6. Students of those classes are allowed to play or go home

Table A.11: Average Number of Visits by BEOs, BRCCs and CRCCs in Rural and Urban Schools
Visits by BEOs BRCs CRCs Total R 2.5 4.4 0.5 7.4 Andhra Pradesh U Total 2.4 2.5 4.2 4.4 0.8 0.6 7.4 7.5 Madhya Pradesh R U Total 1.0 1.3 1.1 0.8 0.8 0.8 6.9 5.7 6.6 8.7 7.8 8.5 R 1.8 1.9 11.1 14.8 Uttar Pradesh U Total 1.9 1.8 1.5 1.8 2.2 9.9 5.6 13.5

Table A.12: Average Number of Visits by BEOs, BRCCs and CRCCs in Primary and Upper Primary Schools
Visits by BEOs BRCs CRCs Total Andhra Pradesh Upper Primary Primary 2.3 3.0 4.3 4.7 0.6 0.4 7.2 8.1 Madhya Pradesh Upper Primary Primary 1.0 1.3 0.7 1.1 7.2 5.7 8.9 8.1 Uttar Pradesh Upper Primary Primary 1.8 1.9 1.8 1.8 10.6 7.5 14.2 11.2

Table A.13: Percentage of Teaching Days Lost by Different Categories of Teachers (2005-06)
AP P Social group SC ST OBC Muslims Others Employment status Regular Para 32.7 15.1 36.6 17.3 22.2 21.3 23.1 19.3 21.0 11.9 21.5 0.0 30.1 29.0 29.7 26.4 32.6 32.5 30.9 32.9 29.0 33.2 19.6 20.5 22.0 19.9 22.9 22.9 17.8 20.8 19.6 23.0 16.4 18.7 16.8 18.8 18.2 20.1 12.7 20.5 23.5 22.0 UP P MP UP P UP UP

60

Table A.14: Percentage of Teaching Days Lost by Different Categories of Teachers (2005-06)
AP U 30.4 34.4 27.9 25.2 33.4 32.2 15.9 MP U 24.2 30.8 23.9 18.1 24.1 24.3 21.2 UP U 12.7 9.5 22.6 21.4 21.0 21.4 13.4

R Social group SC ST OBC Muslims Others Employment status Regular Para 35.0 16.5 31.3 29.4 32.2 29.7 32.7

All 31.1 29.8 31.1 27.9 32.9 34.3 16.4

R 20.8 18.1 20.9 21.1 22.1 21.4 20.3

All 21.2 19.3 21.5 19.7 23.0 22.6 20.4

R 17.4 19.0 17.0 20.0 18.7 21.1 11.8

All 17.2 18.3 17.5 20.5 19.1 21.2 11.9

Table A.15 : Teachers Presence and Engagement in Primary School

Andhra Pradesh 1st hr. Last hr. All teachers Teacher came late Present as per register Teaching Doing admn. work Doing other work Not present On duty On leave Absent without information Male Teacher came late Present as per register Teaching Doing admn. Work Doing other work Not present On duty On leave Absent without information Female Teacher came late Present as per register Teaching Doing admn. Work Doing other work Not present On duty On leave Absent without information 8.5 78.5 65.6 7.2 5.6 0.1 21.4 5.2 13.8 7.6 76.9 62.1 8.8 6.1 0.0 23.1 13.1 3.2 5.8 73.7 64.6 6.0 3.0 0.0 26.3 7.9 16.0 2.3. 1.5 78.1 67.6 5.4 3.6 1.4 21.9 5.9 13.8 1.5 75.8 65.0 5.6 3.7 1.5 24.2 13.8 2.8 1.3 72.7 64.7 4.1 2.5 1.4 27.3 8.7 16.2 2.4 Madhya Pradesh 1st hr. Last hr. 7.2 85.2 77.7 6.6 0.9 0.0 14.8 2.3 10.1 10.7 87.4 77.3 8.9 1.2 0.0 12.6 8.4 1.6 7.8 83.8 74.1 8.3 1.5 0.0 16.2 2.2 11.2 2.0 5.9 85.3 78.3 6.0 0.9 0.0 14.7 2.1 10.1 6.4 87.4 78.4 7.8 1.2 0.0 12.6 8.4 1.8 5.8 83.8 74.8 7.7 1.2 0.1 16.2 2.3 11.2 2.0 Uttar Pradesh 1st hr. Last hr. 10.2 90.2 70.2 14.6 4.5 0.9 9.7 2.8 4.4 8.7 94.4 70.0 18.0 5.2 1.2 5.6 1.9 1.7 6.5 88.4 65.4 18.1 4.9 0.0 11.6 3.8 5.4 0.8 4.1 89.8 76.6 9.2 3.1 0.9 10.2 3.0 4.6 3.9 94.2 77.2 11.8 3.8 1.3 5.8 2.0 1.6 3.2 88.7 72.2 12.2 3.8 0.5 11.3 3.3 5.6 0.8

61

Table A.16: VEC Chairman's Response About Major Problems of The Schools Discussed in The Committee During 2005 06 According to Rural and Urban Schools.
Issues No. Of schools Financial Non enrolment of some children Inadequate physical facilities Large number of students giving up studies Students attendance Teacher's attendance (regularity / punctuality) Low students achievement Andhra Pradesh R U All 325 75 400 44.6 49.3 45.5 34.8 21.3 32.3 39.4 33.3 38.3 28.6 36.9 29.5 30.8 22.7 25.3 25.3 26.7 27.5 34.8 28.8 30.0 Madhya Pradesh R U All 318 72 390 89.9 90.3 90.0 44.3 44.4 44.4 76.7 75.0 76.4 47.5 89.0 77.7 77.7 43.1 81.9 72.2 75.0 46.7 87.7 76.7 77.2 Uttar Pradesh R U All 345 55 400 80.9 58.2 77.8 69.9 50.9 67.3 70.7 50.9 68.0 51.3 73.9 75.9 65.8 43.6 56.4 56.4 52.7 50.3 71.5 73.3 64.0

Table A.17: VEC Chairman's Response About Major Problems Of The Schools Discussed In The Committee During 2005 06 According to Primary and Upper Primary Schools.
Andhra Pradesh P UP 292 108 45.9 44.4 34.6 25.9 38.7 37.0 28.1 25.9 35.3 33.3 27.4 32.4 30.5 28.7 Madhya Pradesh P UP 244 146 89.3 91.1 48.0 38.4 76.2 76.7 48.0 44.5 87.3 88.4 77.9 74.7 77.5 76.7 Uttar Pradesh P 312 76.9 68.3 67.9 52.2 70.5 73.4 65.4 UP 88 80.7 63.6 68.2 43.2 75.0 72.7 59.1

ISSUES No. of schools Financial Non enrolment of some children Inadequate physical facilities Large number of students giving up studies Students attendance Teacher's attendance ( regularity / punctuality) Low students achievement

Table A.18: Teachers Presence and Engagement in Upper Primary Schools

Andhra Pradesh First hr. Last hr. All teachers Teacher came late Present as per register Teaching Doing admn. work Doing other work Not present On duty On leave Absent without information 5.8 73.7 64.6 6.0 0.0 26.3 7.9 16.30 2.4 1.3 72.7 64.7 4.1 1.4 27.3 8.7 16.2 2.3 Madhya Pradesh First hr. Last hr. 7.8 83.8 74.1 8.3 0.0 16.2 2.2 11.2 2.8 5.8 83.8 74.8 7.7 0.1 16.2 2.3 11.2 2.7 Uttar Pradesh First hr. Last hr. 6.5 88.4 65.4 18.1 0.0 11.6 3.8 5.4 2.4 3.2 88.7 72.2 12.2 0.5 11.3 3.3 5.6 2.4

62 Andhra Pradesh First hr. Last hr. Male Teacher came late Present as per register Teaching Doing admn. Work Doing other work Not present On duty On leave Absent without information Female Teacher came late Present as per register Teaching Doing admn. Work Doing other work Not present On duty On leave Absent without information 6.2 74.3 62.2 8.3 3.8 0.0 26.7 9.4 13.9 2.3 9.6 80.6 70.0 5.3 5.1 0.1 19.4 3.3 14.6 1.5 1.4 72.9 64.5 4.8 2.1 1.5 27.1 10.0 14.6 2.4 1.3 72.4 65.0 3.0 3.0 1.3 27.6 6.9 18.5 2.2 Madhya Pradesh First hr. Last hr. 9.5 87.7 78.0 8.9 0.8 0.0 12.3 2.1 8.1 2.0 5.7 87.4 76.6 8.0 2.8 0.0 12.6 2.1 8.7 1.8 6.6 87.6 79.0 8.3 0.3 0.0 12.4 2.3 8.1 2.0 5.1 87.7 76.9 7.7 2.8 0.3 12.3 2.1 8.7 1.5 Uttar Pradesh First hr. Last hr. 7.9 94.9 72.6 18.3 4.1 0.0 5.1 2.0 2.3 0.8 5.2 92.2 63.5 21.9 6.8 0.0 7.8 1.6 4.7 1.6 4.3 94.7 78.2 12.9 2.8 0.8 5.3 2.3 2.3 0.8 1.0 93.2 74.5 13.5 5.2 0.0 6.8 0.0 5.2 1.6

Table A.19: Correlations of Teacher Level Variables (Andhra Pradesh)

GENDER_T AGE CASTE DISTANCE TIME_TRS ACADQUAL PROFQUAL TOTALEXP REGULAR TOTALSTU MGRADE ATTITUDE

GENDER_T AGE CASTE DISTANCE TIME_TRS ACADQUAL PROFQUAL TOTALEXP REGULAR TOTALSTU MGRADE ATTITUDE TAR05

1.0000 0.1269** -0.0212 -0.0222 -0.0789** 0.0526* 0.0063 0.0964** 0.0376 -0.0622** 0.0962** -0.0171 -0.0230 1.0000 0.1572** 0.0289 -0.0275 0.1535** 0.3197** 0.8333** 0.4113** 0.0585* -0.0596* 0.1146** 0.2425** 1.0000 0.0064 -0.0383 0.2527** 0.2074** 0.1106** 0.0542* 0.0371 -0.0513* 0.0316 0.0325 1.0000 0.7152** 0.0884** 0.1360** -0.0135 0.2065** -0.0011 0.0719** -0.0215 0.1519** 1.0000 0.0519* 0.0913** -0.0475 0.1482** 0.0346 0.0763** -0.0344 0.1306** 1.0000 0.6365** 0.0443 0.4000** 0.0883** 0.0303 0.0649** 0.2153** 1.0000 0.2186** 0.7111** 0.0629** 0.0573* 0.0510* 0.3497** 1.0000 0.3653** 0.0916** -0.0775** 0.1302** 0.2316** 1.0000 0.0556* 0.0624** 0.0856** 0.4277** 1.0000 -0.0735** 0.1637** -0.0150 1.0000 -0.0412 -0.0052 1.0000 0.0356

(** - Significant at 1%, *- Significant at 5% level)

63 Table A.20: Correlations of School Level Variables (Andhra Pradesh) RURAL GOVT 1.0000* RURAL 0.1243* 1.0000 GOVT 0.0064 -0.0635 FACSCH 0.0541 0.0250 VISIT 0.0771 0.0409 MANAGE 0.0725 -0.0036 SCHCONAL (** - Significant at 1%, *- Significant at 5% level) FACSCH VISIT MANAGE

1.0000 0.0688 -0.0510 -0.1727**

1.0000 0.0938 0.0876

1.0000 -0.0294

Table A.21: Correlations of Teacher Variables (Madhya Pradesh)

GENDER_T GENDER_T AGE CASTE DISTANCE TIME_TRS ACADQUAL PROFQUAL TOTALEXP REGULAR TOTALSTU MGRADE ATTITUDE TAR05 1.0000 0.0787* -0.0727* 0.0561 0.0046 -0.0691* -0.0537 0.0746* 0.0140 -0.0476 0.1967** -0.0408 -0.0612 1.0000 0.1666** -0.1374** -0.1727** -0.0520 0.3287* 0.8788** 0.6306** 0.0250 -0.0694* 0.0620 0.0895** 1.0000 -0.1207** -0.0717 0.1040** 0.1510** 0.1533** 0.1730** 0.0144 -0.0711* -0.0122 0.0362 1.0000 0.7246** -0.0095 -0.0629 -0.1609** -0.1900** 0.0498 0.0809* -0.0183 0.0572 1.0000 0.0282 -0.0967** -0.1760** -0.1831** 0.0143 0.0598 -0.0389 0.0379 1.0000 0.2773** -0.0412 -0.0088 0.0945** -0.1180** -0.0511 0.0529 1.0000 0.3078** 0.2502** 0.1508** -0.0425 -0.0303 0.0948** 1.0000 0.6711** 0.0355 -0.0875* 0.0846* 0.0880** 1.0000 0.0097 -0.1646** 0.1319** 0.0075 1.0000 -0.0508 -0.0523 -0.0121 1.0000 -0.0656 -0.0099 1.0000 -0.0411 AGE CASTE DISTANCE TIME_TRS ACADQUAL PROFQUAL TOTALEXP REGULAR TOTALSTU MGRADE ATTITUDE

(** - Significant at 1%, *- Significant at 5% level)

Table A.22: Correlations of School Level Variables (Madhya Pradesh)

RURAL 1.0000 0.1407** 0.1238* 0.0104 -0.0455 -0.0188 GOVT 1.0000 -0.1631** 0.1353* -0.0291 0.1896** FACSCH VISIT MANAGE

RURAL GOVT FACSCH VISIT MANAGE SCHCONAL

1.0000 0.0610 0.0724 -0.1222*

1.0000 0.0381 -0.0074

1.0000 0.0011

(** - Significant at 1%, *- Significant at 5% level)

64 Table A.23: Correlations of Teacher Variables (Uttar Pradesh)

GENDER_T AGE CASTE DISTANCE TIME_TRS ACADQUAL PROFQUAL TOTALEXP REGULAR TOTALSTU MGRADE ATTITUDE TAR05 GENDER_T 1.000 0.208** -0.131** -0.104** -0.085** -0.151** 0.009 0.188** 0.145** 0.131** 0.166** 0.065 0.002 AGE 1.000 0.060 0.093** 0.144** -0.315** 0.375** 0.850** 0.631** 0.033 0.105** -0.053 0.223** CASTE DISTANCE TIME_TRS ACAD QUAL PROF QUAL TOTALEXP REGULAR TOTALSTU MGRADE ATTITUDE

1.000 -0.074* -0.048 0.049 -0.003 0.050 0.036 -0.010 0.022 0.016 0.037

1.000 0.764** 0.095** 0.334** 0.031 0.347** -0.091** -0.029 -0.074* 0.180** 1.000 0.025 0.329** 0.079** 0.337** -0.091** -0.030 -0.104** 0.226** 1.000 0.251** -0.297** -0.023 0.023 -0.061 -0.020 -0.030 1.000 0.304** 0.642** -0.007 -0.029 -0.029 0.227** 1.000 0.552** 0.074* 0.126** -0.067 0.189** 1.000 -0.008 0.062 -0.030 0.292** 1.000 0.429** 0.176** -0.009 1.000 0.154** -0.023 1.000 -0.120**

Table A.24: Correlations of School Level Variables (Uttar Pradesh)

RURAL RURAL GOVT FACSCH VISIT MANAGE SCHCONAL 1.0000 -0.1000 0.0079 -0.0781 -0.0359 -0.0306 1.0000 0.0156 0.2783** -0.0687 0.1616 1.0000 0.0386 0.0216 0.0508 1.0000 0.0431 0.0335 1.0000 -0.0111 GOVT FACSCH VISIT MANAGE

65

APPEXDIX B

Survey of Teachers of Primary & Upper Primary Schools

SARVA SHIKSHA ABHIYAN School Schedule
TS-1

1 State__________

2. Region _______________ 5. Block

3.District __________ ___________________

4 Sub-district ____________________ 6. Village/Town __________________________

7. Name & address of school _______________________________________

Section 1: School Information 1

8. Classes taught: 9. Area: 10. Management:

From class

To class

Rural

Urban

Government / Local body

1

1 2 1

Private aided

11. School category: Primary

Upper Primary

12. Pre-primary section attached with school: Yes 13. Distance of school from Bus stop, Banks, etc. Place Bus stop Bank CRC BRC Distance from school (in km.)
<1 1 1 1 1 1-4.9 2 2 2 2 5-9.9 3 3 3 3 10 4 4 4 4

No 2

14. School functions in: Pucca building Kuchcha building

1 3

Partly pucca building Open space/tents, etc

2 4

66

TS-1 15. Facilities in school Facilities Usable toilet Drinking water Table & chair for teachers Almirah /cupboard for teachers Available and used
1 1 1 1

Not available
2 2 2 2

16. Number of class-rooms and verandah where classes are held 17. Number of students attending classes in rooms, verandah or open space Classes are held in Rooms Verandah Open space 18. Number of visits to school during 2005-06 by different functionaries Functionary (a) Block Education Officer* (b) BRC coordinator (c) CRC coordinators (* as per state nomenclature) 19. Attendance of teachers on the day of last visit during 2005-06 by BEO and BRC coordinators
( write 0 in all the columns for no visit during 2005-06)

No. of students

Number of visits

Functionary BEO* BRC Coordinator

* As per state nomenclature.

Date of visit In Position

Number of teachers Present

20. Which one of the following agencies play prominent role in management of the school? VEC
1

SMC/SMDC

PTA/MTA 3

21. Were the following activities undertaken during the year 2005-06 by the agency managing the school? (a) Checked teachers attendance from time to time: Yes
1

No 2

67

TS-1 (b) Discussed the matter with individual teachers who were not regular: Yes 1 No
2

(c) Convened meeting of teachers to discuss problem of teachers regularity/ punctuality during school visit: (d) Reported to the authorities about irregular teachers: Yes Yes
1 1

No No

2 2

22. Give the following information about the examination for the terminal class of primary and upper primary stages for year 2005-06 Terminal Class No. of students appeared No. of students secured 50% or more marks

IV/V* VII/VIII* (* retain as per state pattern) 23. Class-wise number of sections and enrolment as on 30.9.2005. Class No. of sections Total enrolment Enrolment of OBC Minority - Muslims

SC ST

Others

I II III IV V VI VII VIII 24. Number of teachers (including Head teacher) required as per state norms during (a) Year 2005-06 (b) Year 2006-07 25. Number of teachers (including Head teacher) actually working as on 30.9.05 and 30.9.06 Teachers Male Regular teachers Para teachers 30.09.05 Female 30.09.06 Female

Male

68

TS-1 26. The following is the list of reasons for teachers being frequently absent or not punctual. Sl.No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6 7. 8. Reasons Family problems such as illness of a family member Health reason of the teacher Residence far away from school Lack of transport suited to school timing Busy in other economic activities (e.g. agriculture, business, tuitions, etc.) Posting in this school, not of the teachers liking Participation in political /social activities Involvement in festivals/ religious functions

Select three main reasons from the above list in order of their occurrence in your school and write their serial number in the space provided for the purpose. Teacher category
Regular teacher

Main reasons (write Sl. No.) First Second Third

Para teacher Male Female 27. The following are the strategies generally adopted when a teacher is not present in school for some reason Sl.No 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Strategy Some other teacher is assigned the class. Another teacher is requested to look after the class in addition to his/her own class. Some community member takes the class Students of those classes are asked to remain in the class and study on their own. Class monitor is asked to handle the class Students of those classes are allowed to play or go home.

Out of above listed strategies, select the most common strategy that you adopt in your school when a teacher is absent and write the serial number of the strategy in space provided for the purpose. Duration of teachers absence a) **More than 3 days at a stretch b) only 1 to 3 days Sl. No. of most common strategy adopted

69

TS-1 28(a) Was there any case of irregularity in attendance (e.g. frequent absence without intimation) of any teacher in your school during 2005-06?
Yes 1 No 2

28(b) If yes 28(a), what action was taken? i) ii) iii) iv) v) No action was warranted Provided advice personally Issued Warning Reported to higher authorities Any other/Specify
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 1 1 1 1 1 No No No No No 2 2 2 2 2

29. Number of days, a teacher was present in school, on teaching and non-teaching duty out of school, and on leave during 2005-06 and 2006-07
Code Teachers Name Present Number of days (2005-06) Teaching NonLeave related teaching Casual Medical duties duty leave and other leave Present Number of days (2006-07) Teaching NonLeave related teaching Casual Medical duties duty leave and other leave

70

TS-1 30. Class-wise and teacher-wise students' retention at primary stage during 2005-06.
Class Teacher who taught in 2005-06 Code Name Enrolment as on 30.9.05 Number of students out of those enrolled as on 30.9.2005 who Were Repeated Discontinued Transferred promoted to the same studies to another next class class during 2005school 06

31. Class-wise, teacher-wise and subject wise students' performance at upper primary stage during 2005-06 (Subject code: Language 1 Mathematics-2, Science-3, Social science -4, English-5)
Class Teacher who taught in 200506 Code Name Subject taught (write subject code) Enrolme nt as on 30.9.05 Number of students who Scored 50% Failed or more in the marks in subject the subject Discontinue d studies during 2005-06 Transferred to another school

Name Head Master Investigator

Signature

71

Survey of Teachers of Primary & Upper Primary Schools

SARVA SHIKSHA ABHIYAN
Teacher Schedule
(Teacher includes Head teacher)

TS-2

1 State__________

2. Region _______________ 5. Block

3.District ______________ ___________________

4 Sub-district ____________________ 6. Village/Town __________________________

7. Name & address of school _______________________________________ 8. Teacher Name & Code _________________________________
9. Gender: Male 1 1 Female 2 2 **10. Age (in completed years)

11. Social Group: SC

ST

OBC

Minority - Muslim Yes

1

Others 5
2

12. Do you belong to the district in which you are posted? 13. Distance of residence from school (in km) 14. Approximate time taken to reach school from residence. Less than hour More than 2 hours
1 4

No

to 1 hour 2

More than 1 to 2 hours

15. Is public transport timing between residence and school convenient? Yes
1

No

Public Transport not required

16. Academic Qualification : High School or below 1 Higher Secondary 2 Graduate 3 Post graduate 4

17. Professional Qualification : Untrained

1

NTT

JBT 3

B.Ed. or above 4

18.Total teaching experience (in complete years): 19. Teaching experience in this school (in complete years): 20. Present employment status: Regular full-time 1 Leave vacancy 2 Para teacher 3

72

TS-2 21. Class(es) taught during 2005-06 and 2006-07 : 2005-06 No. of Students 2006-07 Class(es)

Class(es)

No. of Students

22. Did you do multiple class teaching (teaching 2 or more classes together) during (a) 2005-06? Yes 1 1 2 No

(b) 2006-07?

Yes

No

23. No. of days spent in attending the training programmes and meetings at the CRC/BRC/DIET during 2005-06: 24. On how many days was the school open last year (2005-06)?

25. How many working days did you spend last year (2005-06) on the following activities?
(i) Examination related work of your school (ii) Sports, co-curricular activities and school functions (iii) Participation in training, meetings, etc.

(iv) Non-teaching duties out of school

(v) Being on leave for personal reasons

26. How many hours in a week do you generally spend on administrative work?

73

TS-2 27. How much are you satisfied with respect to the following? ( Write 5 for Very satisfied; 4 for Satisfied; 3 for Some what satisfied; 2 for Not satisfied; and 1 for Very dissatisfied) (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) (vii) Physical facilities available for teachers in your school Relationship with fellow teachers Support from parents Support from head teacher (supervisor in the case of Head teacher) Support from members of CRC Students regularity of attendance Students learning capability

(viii) Progress of students in class (ix) (x) (xi) (xii) Participation in school affairs by the agency (VEC, SMC, etc.) responsible for school management Involvement of students in co-curricular activities Posting in the present school Your emoluments

(xiii) Number of students in your class (xiv) (xv) (xvi) (xvii) Class(es) assigned to you for teaching Teaching work load Redressal of service related grievances School time table

(xviii) Assignment of non-teaching work/ duties

Signature _____________________________ Investigators Name____________________

Signature ______________________ Teachers Name _________________

74

Survey of Teachers of Primary & Upper Primary Schools

SARVA SHIKSHA ABHIYAN Schedule for Investigators Visit
1 State________________ 2. Region _______________ TS-3

3.District _________________

4 Sub-district _________________ 5. Block _______________ 6. Village/Town ________ 7. Name & address of school ___________________________________ 8. Visit No. : First
1

Second

9. Visit Date

10.Time of arrival in school:

11. Teachers attendance and their activities when investigator arrived in school and in the last hour {* Teacher Code should be the same as given in the Teacher schedule; (** Attendance Status codes: Present arrived within 15 minutes of opening of school 1; Arrived after 15 minutes of opening of school/left early 2;Not present in school but on duty-3; On leave with application 4; Absent without intimation-5)} Teacher's Name Attendance status (write code**) Attendance during first hour Attendance status (write code**) Activities when present Other than teaching and administrative work Administrativ e work Teaching Not present Attendance during last hour Activities when present Administrativ e Work Other than teaching and administrative work
3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Not present

Code*

1 1 1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3 3 3 3

4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Teaching
1 1 1 1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2 2 2 2

4 4 4 4 4 4 4

12. Class-wise enrolment and no. of students present when investigator arrived in school and the last hour.
Class Enrolment Boys I II III IV V VI VII VIII Girls No. present in Ist hour Boys Girls Number present in last hour Boys Girls

75

TS-3 13. Attendance of teachers on the day of last visit of CRC coordinator and BEO during 2005-06 ( to be recorded during Ist visit of investigator) Functionary
(i) CRC Coordinator

Date of visit

Number of teachers In position Present

(ii) BEO* (* Please change as per state nomenclature)

Signature of Investigator ____________________________________ Name of Investigator _______________________________________

76

Survey of Teachers of Primary & Upper Primary Schools

SARVA SHIKSHA ABHIYAN
Interview Schedule for

CRC Coordinator
1 State________________ 2. Region _______________ 5. Block 4 Sub-district _________________

TS-4 3.District _________________ __________________

6. Village/Town _____________________________________ 7. Name & address of school _______________________________________

8. Coordinator's name_________________ 9. Gender : Male 1 Female 2

10. Total number of years worked as CRC Coordinator : 11. Number of years in the present CRC 12. Total number of schools under charge of this CRC 13. No. of visits to the school during 2005-06 14. How many times Head teacher of the school attended meetings at CRC during 2005-06 15 The following is the list of reasons for teachers not being in the school Sl.No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Reasons Family problems such as illness of the family member Health reason of the teacher Residence far away from school Lack of transport suited to school timing Busy in other economic activities (e.g. agriculture, business, tuitions, etc.) Posting in school not of liking Participation in political /social activities Involvement in festivals/ religious functions

Select three main reasons from the above list in order of prevalence in the school and write their serial number in the boxes provided below for the purpose. . (i) First (ii) Second (iii) Third 16. Teachers attendance on the day of last visit to the school during 2005-06 a) Date of visit b) Total teachers posted in school Names (1) CRC Coordinator (2) Investigator c) No. of teachers present Signature

77

Survey of Teachers of Primary & Upper Primary Schools

SARVA SHIKSHA ABHIYAN
Interview Schedule for

Chairman of VEC/SMC/SMDC
1 State________________ 2. Region _______________

TS-5

3.District _________________ 5. Block __________________

4 Sub-district _________________

6. Village/Town _____________________________________ 7. Name & address of school _______________________________________

8. Name __________________ 9 No. of years you are associated with the school;

10. Did VEC discuss the following issues during 2005-06 as major problem the school is facing? Major Problem Yes (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) (vii) Financial Non-enrolment of some children Inadequate physical Facilities Large no. of children giving up studies Students attendance Teachers attendance (regularity/punctuality) Low students achievement
1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Response No
2 2 2 2 2 2 2

11. How do you rate the school in respect of teachers a) Regularity ? Very Good b) Punctuality? Very Good
1 1

Good Good

2 2

Not Good 3 Not Good

3

12. The following is the list of reasons for teachers not being in the school Sl.No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Reasons Family problems such as illness of the family member Health reason of the teacher Residence far away from school Lack of transport suited to school timing Busy in other economic activities (e.g. agriculture, business, tuitions, etc.) Posting in school not of liking Participation in political /social activities Involvement in festivals/ religious functions

Select three main reasons from the above list in order of prevalence in the school and write their serial number in boxes provided below for the purpose. First Second Third

78

TS-5 13. (a) Have you received any complaint during 2005-06 about a teacher of the school who remained irregular (e.g. frequently absent without intimation)? Yes 1 No 2 13. (b) If yes to 13(a), which of the following action was taken? (i) No action was warranted (ii) Provided advice personally
(iii) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 1 1 1 1 1 No No No No No 2 2 2 2 2

Issued warning

(iv) Reported to higher authorities (v) Any other (Specify__________________________) Names (1) VEC Chairman (2) Investigator

Signature

79

Survey of Teachers of Primary & Upper Primary Schools

SARVA SHIKSHA ABHIYAN
Interview Schedule for

Block Education Officer TS-6

1 State_______________ 2. Region _______________ 3.District _________________ 4 Sub-district _________________ 5. Block __________________

6. Village/Town _____________________________________ 7. Name & address of school _______________________________________ 8. No. of schools under your charge 9. Total number of years of service : 10. No. of years holding the current posting 11. No. of schools inspected during 2005-06 12. No. of schools visited on specific reason 13. (a) Have you visited the school during 2005-06? Yes
1

No

13. (b) If yes to 13 (a), give the date of last visit during 2005-06, number of teachers in position and present on the day of visit (i) Date of last visit

(ii) No. of teachers in position (ii) No. of teachers present 14. The following is the list of reasons for teachers not being in the school Reasons Sl.No. 1 Family problems such as illness of the family member Health reason of the teacher 2 3 Residence far away from school 4 Lack of transport suited to school timing 5 Busy in other economic activities (e.g. agriculture, business, tuitions, etc.) 6 Posting in school not of liking 7 Participation in political /social activities 8 Involvement in festivals/ religious functions Select three main reasons from the above list in order of prevalence in the school and write their serial number in boxes provided below for the purpose. (i) First (ii) Second (iii) Third

80

TS-6 15. (a) Have you received any complaint about a teacher of this school regarding regularity/punctuality during 2005-06? Yes 1 No 2
15 (b) If yes to 15(a), what action was taken?

(i) No action was taken (ii) Reprimanded the teacher (iii) Issued Warning (iv) Disciplinary action proposed/taken (v) Any other (Specify________________________________)

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

1 1 1 1 1

No No No No No

2 2 2 2 2

16. Which steps do you suggest to improve teachers' regularity & punctuality in schools. Mention 3 such steps that you consider important. ___________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________

Name

Signature

Investigator

81

Survey of Teachers of Primary & Upper Primary Schools SARVA SHIKSHA ABHIYAN Students' Record Sheet TS-7
(For class IV/V of Primary school or Class VII/VIII of Upper Primary School)

1 State_______________ 2. Region _______________ 3.District _________________ 4 Sub-district _________________ 5. Block __________________

6. Village/Town _____________________________________ 7. Name & address of school _______________________________________ 8. Class 9. No. of students whose results are given: 10 Name of teacher who taught: language in 2005-06________________Teacher code
( Same as given in TS - 2)
+ +

11 Name of teacher who taught: mathematics in 2005-06 ____________Teacher code

( Same as given in TS -2)
+

12. Maximum Marks: (i) Language

(ii) Mathematics

13. Students' performance in language and mathematics

(Gender : $ : Boy 1 ; Girl 2
Social Group : * : SC-1, ST-2,OBC-3, Minority-Muslims-4, Others-5; Educational Level : ** : Illiterate-1,Literate-2, Primary-3, Upper primary-4, Sec 5 College or above-6; Occupation : @ : Unskilled worker -1, Poultry farming 2, Picking forests produce-3, Agriculture labourer -4, Farmer-5, Skilled worker-6, Street vendor-7; Other workers-8, Self employed worker-9, Domestic servant-10, Household-11, Clerk-12, Employer-13, SeniorOfficer-14)

Student Code 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Name

Gender (Write Code$)

Social Group (write code*)

Education Level Occupation of (write Code**) Father (write Code @) Father Mother

Marks Obtained Language Mathematics

82

Survey of Teachers of Primary & Upper Primary Schools

SARVA SHIKSHA ABHIYAN Focused Group Discussions
**1: Guidelines for Moderator

TS- 8

FGDs are to be conducted by supervisors or experienced persons. Their role is that of a moderator of the discussions. The major issues on which discussions to be centered are teachers' attendance, their regularity and punctuality. Dimensions of each of the stated issues are incidence, intensity and reasons separately for different gender, social groups and parateacher/regular teacher. Besides these, some other related issues (like proxy teacher) might emerge during discussions. These are to be recorded. Direct questions should neither be asked nor suggestions made on these issues. Care should be taken to ensure that opinions on that these issues come from the participants on their own. ii) FGD is to be conducted at place preferably not in school. Help of chairman of VEC or Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRI) should be taken to find a suitable place. 2. Introduction (10 minutes) (i) Namaskar, I am_________________ (name of moderator) from ____________(agency's name). Before we proceed further, let us introduce ourselves. Please write your name and supply other required information in the sheet that is being circulated. (ii) We are meeting here in connection with a research project under Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA), an effort to universalise elementary education by community ownership of school system to provide useful and relevant elementary education for all children in the age group 6 to below 14 years by 2010. There is also another goal to bridge social, regional and gender gaps with the active participation of the community in the management of schools. SSA recognizes critical and central role of teachers. It advocates a focus on their development needs. Several interventions are envisaged in this context. These include 20 days in-service training each year for all teachers and provide funds to teachers and schools for development of teaching and learning material. iii) With this background of SSA, I invite all of you to be free and frank in discussing the ground situation in your area in respect of teachers role in enhancing the objectives of SSA so that teaching and learning take place effectively.

i)

83

B. Summary of FGD

1 State__________

2. Region _____________ 5. Block

3.District ______________ ___________________

4 Sub-district _____________

6. Village/Town ________________________ 7. Name & address of school _______________________________________ 8. Start time____________ 9. Profile of the group (i) No. of members in the group: Male ________ Female ________ End time____________

(ii) Education qualification of (a) Majority in the group ________ (b) Highest qualification __________of _________ members (iii) Occupation of majority of members _______________________ 10. Out come of discussion: (brief description component and point wise)