THE VOICES OF OUT OF SCHOOL CHILDREN AND THEIR PARENTS: IMPLICATIONS FOR EDUCATION POLICY
Farzana Nazir ID# 12013093002
Supervisor Name: Prof. Dr. Abdul Hameed
Department of Education School of Social Sciences and Humanities University of Management and Technology, Lahore 2019
THE VOICES OF OUT OF SCHOOL CHILDREN AND THEIR PARENTS: IMPLICATIONS FOR EDUCATION POLICY
Farzana Nazir
ID# 12013093002
A DISSERTATION
Submitted
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Philosophy in Education
Department of Education School of Social Sciences and Humanities University of Management and Technology, Lahore 2019
i
Acknowledgement
Firstly, I would like to praise God for the gift to me of the ability to engage in research, for His love and for all He has done for me. Secondly, I would like to thank my parents for bringing me into the world, raising me and for all their support. My brother Mohsin Abbas, and my sisters, thanks for all the support.
Prof. Dr. Abdul Hameed, my supervisor, thank you for the support, encouragement, patience; and thank you for introducing me to the world of research. I would also like to thank my friend Komal Razzaq, thanks for all the support for walking me into this phase, for all the editing and for his critical comments relating to the content of the research.
Thanks to Dr. Shugufta Andleeb who, from the start, encouraged excellence, role-modelled positivity and gave me confidence to believe this was all possible.
Thanks for Dr Sadia Shoukat, Dr. Ghazal Khalid, Ms Saima Bibi, Ms. Naheed
Akhtar, Ms. Samreen Jalal, Ms. Tanzeela Akram, Ms. Sumera Rashid and Ms. Sajida
Saif, as you all were encouraging, supportive, interested and involved. I am so grateful to you for your friendship, your commitment and your open-mindedness. I place on record, my sincere gratitude to the participants of the research who described their personal information and appreciated me for choosing such topic. Their support means a lot for me otherwise it wasn’t possible to do.
Farzana Nazir
v
Dedication
This thesis is dedicated to my husband Muhammad Yousaf and our lovely daughters
Rida Fatima, Noor Fatima and Zarnain Fatima, who had to endure my long absence while I pursued this research. I am very grateful for their love, patience, support and motivation while I pursued this research.
vi
Abstract
This study was aimed to investigate and document the voices of Out of School
Children and their Parents in order to identify some implications for education policy.
This study identified major causes for being out of school such as policy barriers because of poor legislation, psychological and cultural constraints, demographic changes, and socioeconomic disparities. Qualitative research approach with a case study design and the ethnographic method was used to explore the views for being out of school for children and their parents in-depth and to get a clear picture of their problems which were the main causes of being out of school. For this purpose
Thematic analysis of interviews of both children and parents regarding out of school and drop out children, focus group discussion of children, focus group discussion of parents, reasons for out of school Facebook data and reasons for dropout Facebook data was conducted. This process was done with the help of NVivo 11 plus software.
The population comprised of Out of School Children and their parents in Punjab. The sample was selected on the base of the multistage sampling technique and in the last stage IV researcher used the purposive sampling technique for the selection of out of school children and one of their parents from rural and urban union councils of selected Tehsils. Total interviews of 216 out of school children and their 103 parents, and 108 dropout children and their 75 parents were conducted for this study. Two types of interview schedules were scheduled that sought information related to being out of school; one for Out of School Children and the other for their parents in which questions for Out of School and for Dropout were included. Focus group of children had 08 participants while focus group of parents had 07 participants. The thematic analysis of interviews, focus group discussion and Facebook data highlighted the many reasons of out of school in the form of codes and then to sub themes and
vii
themes. The qualitative results explored four same themes for Out of School Children and their Parents: Socioeconomic Factors (poverty, unemployment, family problems and parents’ occupation), Cultural Factors (area’s environment, the literacy rate in that area, female problems, and teachers’ behaviour), Demographic Factors (family size, living area status and distance to school) and Psychological Factors(adjustment problems, future dreams, parents and children’s relationship and subject problems) that make unable children go to school and the fifth theme was identified only by parents, i.e. Policy Barriers (organizational and structural). Overall, the findings of this study reveal that poverty, hopeless parents, parent’s ignorance, parents' lack of concern towards education of their children, lack of awareness as they don’t know the importance of education, focus on basic needs for survival, underprivileged, distance to school, give importance to boys, and large family size were the main causes for being out of school. Parents’ sudden death, drugs, separation, abuses and less income emotionally distress the children and they think about their survival rather than for their education. Some reasons for dropout were also found from this study, e.g. teacher behavior, distance to school, unproductive or boring curriculum, change in curriculum, no support from parents in studies, lack of equipment, schooling is a business, children’s domestic and earning responsibilities leave no time for studies and homework, own diversity is ignored, pushed to meet the standard of the school, lack of motivation, earning member of the home and preferred to do some kind of job, lack of future guidance, unattractive classroom, and sudden changes in the education system. Sudden domestic problems, such as father’s death, parent’s illness, parent’s divorce, take care of sibling, parent’s discouragement and parent’s conflicts become the causes of drop out.
viii
Overall the data reflect that since majority of classmates of dropouts are studying further whereas dropouts are now busy in child labour and feel jealous for their fellows. Sometimes peer’s influence and drugs’ addiction become the cause to leave the school. Preference to religious education and early marriage increases the rate of dropouts.
Furthermore, some implications of core results were suggested for education policy.
ix
Table of Contents
Chapters Contents Page No. Title Page i Author’s Declaration ii Plagiarism Undertaking iii Certificate of Approval iv Acknowledgement v Dedication vi Abstract vii Table of Contents x List of Tables xii List of Figures xiii Chapter I Introduction 1 Problem Statement 11 Objectives of Study 12 Questions of the Study 12 Significance of the Study 13 Operational Definition of Terms 13 Chapter II Review of Literature 15 Out of School Children Conceptual Framework 19 Approaches for Policy Implication 40 Universal Declaration of Human Rights 41 Education for All (EFA) 42 Education in Pakistan 45 Policies and Plans for improving Education in 47 Pakistan Causes or Barrier for Out of School Children 48 Rationale of the study 65 Chapter III Methodology and Procedure 68 Theoretical Perspective of the Study 68 Case Study Design and Ethnographic Methods 74 Sample of Study 75 Instruments of study 77 Ethical Issues 82 Procedure of Study 83 Delimitations of the Study 85 Limitations 85 Chapter IV Results 86 Thematic Analysis 86 Interviews 87 Focused Group Discussion 172 Facebook Data 179 Comparisons of Voices 185 Theoretical Model 196 Summary of Thematic Analysis 197 Chapter V Findings, Discussion, Conclusion, Implications for 200 Education Policy , and Future Recommendations Findings of Data 200 Discussion 224
x
Conclusion 246 Implications for Education Policy 254 Future Recommendations 259 References 260 Appendix A Interview Schedule for Children 276 Appendix B Interview Schedule for Parents 282 Appendix C Voices of Out of School Children (Find it in CD) 288 Appendix D Voices of Out of School Children's Parents (Find it in 391 CD) Appendix E Voice of Dropout Children (Find it in CD) 434 Appendix F Voices of Dropout Children's Parents (Find it in CD) 480 Appendix G Focused Group Discussion for Children (Find it in 514 CD) Appendix H Focused Group Discussion for Parents (Find it in CD) 517 Appendix I Reasons for Out of School (Facebook Data) (Find it 520 in CD) Appendix J Reasons for Dropout (Facebook Data) (Find it in CD) 521 Appendix K Date wise Data Collection From Union Councils 522 (Find it in CD) Appendix L Descriptive Results of Interviews in the form of 523 Frequency Counts Appendix M List of Panel of Experts 549 Similarity Report 550
xi
List of Tables
Table Title Page 1.1 Why are Children not in School? 9 2.1 Zones of Exclusion related to types of children 20 2.2 Visibility Model and the 5DE 31 2.3 Types of Dropout 32 2.4 Characteristics of Out of School Children 34 2.5 Profiles of Excluded Children in Pakistan 35 2.6 Policies and Strategies for Out of School Children in Pakistan 47 2.7 Reasons for being Out of School 60 3.1 The Research Paradigms 70 3.2 No. of Children and Parents in Selected Union Councils of 9 76 Divisions 3.3 Frequencies and Percentages of Age of All Out of School 76 Children 4.1 Summary of Discourse Analysis of Interviews of Out of School 198 Children and Dropout Children 5.1 Results and Policy Implications 256
xii
List of Figures
Figure Title Page 1.1 Countries with more than 0.5 million out of school children, 2010 4 1.2 Primary school age out of school children in different region, 5 2010 2.1 CREATE Zones of Exclusion 22 2.2 Classification of the out-of-school population, by school exposure 24 2.3 Five Dimensions of Exclusion 25 2.4 Categories of Dimension 2 & 3. 26 2.5 5DE Model (Out of School) 27 2.6 5DE Model (In School) 27 2.7 Out of School Children Visibility Model. 28 2.8 Visible, Semi-invisible and Invisible out-of-school children 29 (OOSC) 2.9 Flow between the Five Dimensions of Exclusion 33 2.10 Dakar Framework for Action – Goals 43 2.11 Factors influencing the numbers of out-of-school children 50 2.12 Word Frequency Cloud of most Repeating Words in Literature 66 regarding Out of School Children 3.1 Hierarchal Presentation of Sample Selection 77 3.2 Procedure of Study 84 4.1 Word Frequency Cloud of most Repeating Words in Interviews of 88 Out of School Children. 4.2 Hierarchy of Identified Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in 88 NVivo11 for Out of School Children 4.3 Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in 90 NVivo11 for Cultural Factors. 4.4 Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in 94 NVivo11 for Demographic Factors 4.5 Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in 96 NVivo11 for Psychological Factors 4.6 Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in 100 NVivo11 for Socioeconomic Factors 4.7 Hierarchy of Identified Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in 108 NVivo11 for Out of School Children’s Parents 4.8 Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in 109 NVivo11 for Cultural Factors 4.9 Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in 113 NVivo11 for Demographic Factors 4.10 Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in 116 NVivo11 for Psychological Factors 4.11 Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in 121 NVivo11 for Socioeconomic Factors 4.12 Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in 127 NVivo11 for Policy Barriers 4.13 Hierarchy of Identified Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in 130 NVivo11 for Dropout Children 4.14 Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in 131 NVivo11 for Cultural Factors
xiii
4.15 Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in 135 NVivo11 for Demographic Factors 4.16 Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in 138 NVivo11 for Psychological Factors 4.17 Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in 143 NVivo11 for Socioeconomic Factors 4.18 Hierarchy of Identified Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in 148 NVivo11 for Dropout Children’s Parents 4.19 Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in 150 NVivo11 for Cultural Factors 4.20 Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in 154 NVivo11 for Demographic Factors 4.21 Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in 157 NVivo11 for Psychological Factor 4.22 Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in 164 NVivo11 for Socioeconomic Factors 4.23 Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in 169 NVivo11 for Policy Barriers 4.24 Word Frequency Cloud of most Repeating Words in Focus Group 172 Discussion of Out of School Children 4.25 Hierarchy of Identified Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in 173 NVivo11 for Out of School Children’s Focus Group 4.26 Hierarchy of Identified Detailed Themes Map of Thematic 174 Analysis in NVivo11 for Out of School Children’s Focus Group 4.27 Hierarchy of Identified Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in 176 NVivo11 for Out of School Children’s Parents Focus Group 4.28 Hierarchy of Identified Detailed Themes Map of Thematic 177 Analysis in NVivo11 for Out of School Children’s Parents Focus Group 4.29 Word Frequency Cloud of most Repeating Words in Face book 179 Data of Out of School Children 4.30 Hierarchy of Identified Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in 180 NVivo11 for Facebook Data (Reasons for Out of School) 4.31 Hierarchy of Identified Detailed Themes Map of Thematic 181 Analysis in NVivo11 for Facebook Data (Reasons for Out of School) 4.32 Hierarchy of Identified Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in 182 NVivo11 for Facebook Data (Reasons for Dropout) 4.33 Hierarchy of Identified Detailed Themes Map of Thematic 183 Analysis in NVivo11 for Facebook Data (Reasons for Dropout) 4.34 Hierarchy of Comparison of Identified Theme Map of Thematic 185 Analysis in NVivo11 for Focus Groups discussion 4.35 Hierarchy of Identified Comparison of Sub Themes Map of 187 Thematic Analysis in NVivo11 for interviews of Out of School Children and their Parents. 4.36 Hierarchy of Identified Comparison of Sub Themes Map of 189 Thematic Analysis in NVivo11 for interviews of Dropout Children and their Parents
xiv
4.37 Hierarchy of Identified Comparison of Sub Themes Map of 191 Thematic Analysis in NVivo11 for interviews of Out of School Children and Dropout Children 4.38 Hierarchy of Identified Comparison of Sub Themes Map of 193 Thematic Analysis in NVivo11 for interviews of Out of School Children’s Parents and Dropout Children’s Parents 4.39 Hierarchy of Identified Comparison of Themes Map of Thematic 195 Analysis in NVivo11 for Reasons for Out of School and Reasons for Dropout Facebook Data 4.40 Hierarchy of Identified Themes of Thematic Analysis in NVivo11 196 for representing Theoretical Model
xv 1
Chapter I
Introduction
Pakistan has seen an education dilemma for 70 years since its birth. This may be a long time in the life of an individual, but very short in the history of a nation.
During this short time, considerable development has been made in education. The development of a nation follows the development of the human resource. Education plays an important part in the growth of a person‘s potential and also in the socio- economic development of any society through improving human capital. Education empowers individuals by imparting essential information, desirable attitude, and modern skills to analyze the situation and cope with it. The improvement in health, protection of rights, and informed decisions affect the social, economic, and political life of an individual which cannot be possible without the right kind of education.
The government of Pakistan reiterates the importance of education in the
Economic Survey 2018-2019 as for equitable quality education and lifelong learning opportunities for all citizens can be achieved through real development in education.
Therefore, for human capital and sustainable socioeconomic development education has a pivotal role. Only one source that increases political socialization and cultural strength, defeats unemployment, improves awareness, self-esteem, and tolerance, and builds social equity is education. The socioeconomic and technical development of a country depends upon a high literacy rate. So each country should enhance the literacy rate of its people.
Education is the only why which sharpens the outlook and intellect of a person.so it is necessary for both males and females. It is a fundamental human right that builds and models the character and future of one‘s life. Latif (2015) also explored that education is a key component of economic growth. 2
Education is the right of everyone in a society just as Pildat Back Ground
Paper (2011) explained that according to 18th Constitutional Amendment, education is the responsibility of provincial government while Article 25-A in the Constitution of Pakistan assures the right to free and compulsory education to all children of age 5 to 16 years in Pakistan and this education is provided by the State; both federal and provincial Government (p. 6). Similarly, article 37-B of the constitution makes it the responsibility of the government to eliminate illiteracy and within the least amount of feasible time, and grants free and compulsory secondary education for all. Article 26 of the universal declaration of human rights strengthens the above-said articles by saying that it is the basic human right of every person of society to get a free and compulsory basic education. Khan (2010) found that universalization of primary education is not achieved due to poverty, less awareness about the value of education among people of Pakistan, and cultural values.
Brown (2011) supported the above said human rights by explaining that education is the birthright of every child so there is an emergency of education in the world and this emergency is caused by some terrible human and socioeconomic consequences. A media campaign is not the only way to show an emergency. He told that at the beginning of the 21st century, in the world primary aged Out of School
Children were 67 million. However, other children are in schools, but receiving an abysmal quality of education due to those classrooms which are overcrowded, without textbooks, and taught by untrained teachers. Their children have gained that type of education which is without understanding, proficiencies, and abilities. They have found only access to education but have no learning.
Primary education is necessary for every child, so government has to make efforts to offer education to all children with the help of different programs to attain 3 the target of universalization of education in Pakistan. But a report of the Save the
Children and Society for the Protection of the Rights of the Child (2009) explored the aim to make free education by using four percent of GDP on education is still unfulfilled in Pakistan. The enhancement in educational expenditure has not been spent efficiently in Pakistan.
UNESCO (2012), explained that Pakistan has some drawbacks in education as compared to global education; in 2010, out of school children were 5.1 million, i.e. 1 in 12 of the children in the world are out of school in which 3 million are the girls.
From 1999 to 2010, the net enrollment ratio at the primary level exceeded only from
58% to 74%. However, the girls‘ enrolment ratio is 14% less than the boys‘
rd enrollment ratio. Pakistan is the 3 largest country in the world in the number of illiterate people, i.e. 49.5 million people are illiterate that would be increased by 51 million illiterate people in 2015. The Education Development Index shows that
Pakistan ranks 113 out of 120 countries. This is all due to low (GNP) allocation for education that was 2.6 percent in 1999 and reduced to 2.3 percent in 2010. The same is the situation in education equalities as ¼ of 7 to 16 years old population were out of school in 2007. This condition is most horrible in female education, e.g. out of three girls, one is in school in District Sawat.
Ministry of Planning of Pakistan (2013) explained the second MDG goal was related to Universal Primary Education. For this purpose, Pakistan has set some targets such as 100% primary school enrollment, 88% literacy rate, and 100% completion of education from one of five grades. Before the mid-2000s net primary enrollment rate and completion rate were increased, but after that, these decreased and vary as in 2011-12 in which these were 57% and 50%. Now the literacy rate is 58%
(70% males + 47% females). ). On the other hand, According to the Ministry of 4
Education (2015), the numbers of Out of School Children are 6.7 million; of which
55% are girls.
The Economic Survey of Pakistan 2017-18 showed that Pakistan had 169.6 million primary schools in 2016-17 with 22,521 thousand children and 475.2 thousand teachers. It exceeded in the next year. Pakistan Economic Survey 2018-19 found that in 2017-18 Pakistan had a total of around 172.2 million primary schools in
2017-18 with an enrollment of around 22.9 million pupils and 519.0 thousand teachers. Unfortunately, Pakistan has been lagging in a global context.
Here in figure 1.1 researcher highlighted the international comparison of children out of schools. According to Policy Paper 04 on Education for All Global
Monitoring Report (2012a), after Nigeria, Pakistan is the second world's largest country without school children.
12000 10,542 10000
8000
6000 5,125
4000 2,278 2,390 1,460 2000 1,010 1,086 1,128 1,161 857 611 567 623 679 858 0
Out Of School Children in million
Figure 1.1: Countries with more than 0.5 M Out of School Children, 2010.
India and Ethiopia have more than two million out of school children but
Ethiopia has 0.1M out of school children greater than India. Philippines, Kenya, 5
Niger, Burkina Faso and, cote d'Ivoire have more than 1 M Out of School Children but, the Philippines has a greater number of out of school children than all of them.
Yemen, Thailand, Ghana, Uganda, South Africa and, Mali have out of school children more than 0.5 M but, Mali has a greater number of out of school children than these countries.
Figure 1.2 represents that between 60.7 million children out of school 30.6 million are from Sub−Saharan Africa. After that South and West, Asia is the area that has the second-highest amount of out of school children and Pakistan is present in this area.
70 60.7 60 50 40 30.6 30 20 13.3 6.6 5 10 2.7 1.3 0.9 0.3 0
Out Of School Children in million
Figure 1.2: Primary School Age Out of School Children in different Regions, 2010.
Pakistan has the highest dropout rate in the world and also there is a low enrollment ratio in this country. The Nation (2014, February 28) showed that 21 percent of children are still out of school. Pakistan‘s government is working hard to enhance the number of students at the primary level.
A universal agenda was setting for the accomplishment of MGDs (Millennium
Development Goals) in a report entitled ―A Life of Dignity for All‖ presented by the 6
United Nations Secretary-General (UN, 2013). Rena (2009) explained that improved educational and welfare programs become helpful and they also reduce child labour.
Pakistan took many steps for the improvement of enrollment in schools e.g.
UNESCO (2012) showed that the Pakistan Government gives importance to basic education, especially on primary education. To accelerate literacy, Government form centers of Non-Formal Basic Education and the objectives of these centers were to educate that unlucky population who has no access to formal education and have no opportunity to register informal primary schools at a suitable occasion. By some cost- effective and supple approaches, NFBE Centers provide the learning opportunities to the out of school population. Local community helps in the formation of classes at any available place where one or more educated person of that community teaches the out of school children. After completing the primary level‘s set of courses, students can enroll in the next level. It provides an alternate form of education.
For the achievement of aims and objectives which were recognized in Million
Development Goals for 2015-16, a National Plan of Action for MDGs Acceleration
Framework (MAF) 2013-16 was designed (Ministry of Education, 2013). The main objective of this plan was to increase the primary enrolment ratio to 91 percent by
2015-16. For this purpose, the main focus was not only upon the retention of existing students by cash stipends and other quality measures but also upon the increase in enrollment of 5.06 million new students with the cost of Rs. 189 billion over the three years. The minimum expectation of this plan was to enroll 5.1 million children by
2015-16.
Haddad (1995) defined policy as: ―An explicit and implicit single decision or group of decisions which may set out directives for guiding future decisions, initiate or retarded action, or guide implementation of previous decisions‖ (p. 18). Basic 7
Education is compulsory in Pakistan by law and all the education policies from the birth of Pakistan endorse free basic education as Shami (2010) said that in every announced education policy, the government has a great emphasis on literacy and universal enrollment. In the All Pakistan Education Conference (1947) the Education
Minister said that our first concern is to determine the problem of illiteracy and its evil consequences. Again in the Commission on National Education (1959), the issue of illiteracy has been highlighted. The portion of this report related to this issue is as under; Education must be available for all but due to limited resources it will not be possible to provide universal education at once.
The relevant objective which highlights the problem of illiteracy and universalization of elementary education in the Education Policy 1972-80 is that education must be provided to everyone without any difference of faith, caste, and creed.
The 1979 Education Policy the Mosque and Mohallahs schools had been used to increase the universal enrollment. For the eradication of illiteracy of adults, women, mentally retarded and physically handicapped children and underprivileged groups in all areas of Pakistan, the government provides elementary education. The relevant policy objective of the Education Policy 1992-2002 appears below:
Universalization of education must be insured by the year 2002 and female education will be increased.
In the shortest period, the removal of illiteracy and arrangement for compulsory education are the main objectives of Education Policy 1998-2010, which is also mentioned in the article of the constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
For this purpose, this policy asserts to accomplish the following objectives (a) to establish basic education community schools for achieving universal primary 8 education by formal and non-formal educational approaches for the school dropouts in all over the country, (b) to provide learning content and tool for every child, and (c)
To provide free access of education to every child by increasing the middle and secondary schools with the removal of imbalances and disparities in the education system of Pakistan. The Ministry of Education of Pakistan has developed the following objectives in the National Education Policy 2009 to overcome the illiteracy:
(a) to universalize quality primary education with the help of adult literacy programs within minimum possible time and (b) to attain universal objectives of Millennium
Development goals and Dakar Framework of Action Goals for education. However, all these policies are rhetorically drafted for Universal Primary Education and make possible Education for All in actual but no action has done. Now the question is that, can they attain their objectives in time?
Instead of taking many initiatives by the government, Pakistan has the second- highest number of out of school children in the world. Bajwa (2011) elucidated in the
Annual Status of Education Report- ASER some types of Out of School Children. He said that UN defined three types of out of school children which are (a) those who have attended classes in the past, but now they are not present in schools, (b) children who now are not in schools but in future they will get admission in schools, and (c) those who will never attend any school.
Haq (2013) showed that over 27 million children are being out of school in
Pakistan and the literacy rate is 54% in which males are 66.25% and females are
41.75%. In which 23 % of children aged 6-16 of the villages and 7% children of aged
6-16 of the cities are out of school. While, in Punjab 50%, in Balochistan 78%, in
Sindh, 61%, and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa 65% of children age 3-5 are being out of school. This is a very alarming situation for educationists and policymakers. 9
Kakoli & Sayeed (2013) found that in poor urban areas low enrollment is increased in the presence of illiterate women at home. They said that the economic condition of families increased the probability of out of school children. They also observed that boys and girls have different reasons for being out of school. Habib
(2013) explained that educational devolution has become the most crucial challenge for Pakistan. More funds, the involvement of the community, and parent‘s demand for quality education can build an improved educational system.
UN (2014) showed that the main reasons for children either dropping out or not attending schools are poverty, gender, and location. Other categories of out of school children are conflict-affected areas‘ children, poor rural areas‘, household‘s girls, and disable children. An Indian Government Programme, Sarva Shiksha
Abhiyan (The Education for All Movement) worked for the universalization of education. Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan explored some reasons which are responsible for children being out of school in India. For this purpose, Kulkarni has written in The
Hindu (2014, February 23) some other reasons which are accountable for out of school children in Karnataka, India.
Table 1.1
Why are Children not in School?
Reason Number Percentage Severe physical disability 3,445 2.02% Migration 29,491 17.29% Street child or rag picker 216 0.12% Unattractive school environment 223 0.139% Household work 27,808 16.3% Married 1,365 0.8% Fear of teacher 151 0.08% Puberty 5,238 3.07% 10
School far away 5,441 3.19% Work in other households 1,182 0.69% Engaged in other work 9,488 5.56% Other reasons related to girls 2,858 1.67% Runaway children 364 0.21% Death 1,904 1.18% Other 81,351 47.7% Total: 1,70,525
Andrew and Orodho (2014) concluded that socioeconomic factors such as parents‘ educational level, the income of a family, and the school‘s physical facilities which enhance teaching and learning processes affect access to school.
Pakistan is facing the problems of poverty, health, nutrition, terrorism, environment conservation, water and sanitation, gender equality, and socioeconomic development.
The only one and the actual cause of all these problems are that most of the children are being out of school.
There is no context-specific research has been done to document the voices of out of school children and their parents as well as to map out some plans to solve the problems of out of school children. The government of Pakistan has focused to increase and sustain the rate of enrollment by spending many resources to persuade children and their parents, but all in vain because these efforts may not be integrated with the aims of our educational policy. The researcher found from different countries studies that all reasons that hinder the education of children were the part of five basic factors either they are demand side or supply side and these factors are policy barrier, socioeconomic factors, cultural factors, psychological factors and demographic factors (UNICEF, 2012; 2012a; 2012b; 2012c; 2012d; 2013; 2014; Ababa, 2012;
Assessment Capacities Project, 2012). This study is unique on its own as it takes and compares voices of both i.e. out of school children and their parents‘ further focus 11 group discussion and views from social media also strengthen these voices.
Previously, most of the studies used a quantitative approach to find the reasons for being out of school. Qualitative approaches used only to find out the reasons for dropouts. The researcher used the interpretive paradigm to elaborate the voices of out of school children and their parents.
Here one important point is not to forget the role of parents‘ who motivate their children. Parents‘ interest and motivation involve them in their children‘s schooling. If they have no interest in their children‘s education, then the result is that
Pakistan will be lagged to other countries in the Human Development Index. The thinking, attitudes, and ideas of children and their parents who are being out of schools will help the government to pay attention to out of school children. It will also useful for teacher educators, policymakers, and planners to identify its implications for education. The researcher hopes that this study will be interpreted not only as a basis for change but as a call to action.
Problem Statement
Pakistan is facing many critical challenges today, but most important among them is our education which should be improved and expanded. Over the years, the ratio of Out of School Children becomes a very common problem. UNICEF (2018) defined Out of school Children as ―a group of children in one or more of the 5DE
(Five Dimensions of Exclusion) with certain shared characteristics‖ p.6. Factors such as policy barriers because of poor legislation, psychological and cultural constraints, demographic changes, and socioeconomic disparities have been identified as the major causes of out of school children. However, the slight emphasis has been put upon towards the attitude of out of school children and their parents. There is a need 12 to document the voices of Out of School Children and their parents to assess implications for education policy.
Objectives of Study
The core objective of this study was to find out the voices of out of school children and their parents. This research also explored the implications for education policy in order to improve it for the reduction of out of school children. More specifically, this study aimed to:
1. Document the voices of out of school children and their parents.
2. Find out the socioeconomic factors which are responsible for keeping children
out of schools especially girls.
3. Identify policy barriers limiting access to primary education for all as a result
of poor legislation.
4. Explore the cultural factors that affect the psyche of out of school children and
their parents.
5. Identify the demographic factors which reduce access to education.
6. Explore implications for education policy to expand the access to education.
Questions of the Study
Following questions were answered in this study.
1. What reasons the out of school children and their parents attach to the
condition being out of school?
2. What socioeconomic causes are responsible for keeping children out of
schools especially girls?
3. What policy barriers are limiting the access to primary education as a result of
their poor legislation? 13
4. What cultural factors affect the psyche of out of school children and their
parents?
5. What are the demographic factors, which may reduce access to education?
6. In what way the education policy can be improved to expand access to
education?
Significance of the Study
The results of the study may be supportive of children and parents‘ to find better access to education of their out of school children. This study may provide the scientific evidence which may inform the educational decisionmakers and policymakers to develop and reframe the education policy for the enhancement of out of school children. The study results may explore the actual problems of out of school children which would lead to giving some suggestions for the revamping of the existing education system. The study results may provide the basis for further research in this area and scientific basis for improving the existing system of education.
Operational Definition of Terms
Out Of School Children: Children who never attend any school and who
dropped out.
Out of School Rate: It is the quantity of school aged children who are not in
schools.
The number of children out of school: It is the estimated proportion of out
of school children applied to the estimated population of school age.
Enrollment: Student name in the school register.
Dropout: A child who left school due to some reasons.
School Entrance Age: The age at which the child began schooling. 14
Non-Enrollment: A child who has never attended school.
Basic Education: A necessary knowledge required by the people to sustain
their daily lives. But, the scope of basic education varies by individual
countries.
School participation: It represents the school enrollment and school
attendance of school going children.
15
Chapter II
Review of Literature
This chapter consists of a conceptual framework and review of the literature. It starts with the importance of education for human and after the conceptual framework for out of school children; it has empirical discussions on the approaches for policy implication, education in Pakistan, policies, and plans for improving education in
Pakistan, and causes and barriers that limit the education for out of school children.
The researcher also presents the rationale of the study at the end of this chapter.
In each society, education plays an important role and becomes the foundation of this society. In another term, it changes the life of an individual. It brings prosperity, wealth, knowledge, advancements, technology, and stability. It improves the lifestyles of people by maintaining their health, wealth, and knowledge. Societies grow fast with their educated people as they know how to live in society and how to improve their country‘s progress. It yields strong families, communities, and countries. Today‘s an educated child can become tomorrow‘s a great leader. If you want success in your country you should educate your generation to achieve ultimate success in life. These people respect their elders, their neighbours, their colleagues, and their partners.
Education also helps people to play a key role in handling environmental problems through traditional and contemporary approaches to learning. Education increases the decision making power of women in selecting the birth of one or more babies and the timing of pregnancies. Any country which has a deficit of educated people should forget its progress. Societies whose new generation is an expert in reading, writing, and learning can progress more than the other societies. So, a regular system of education formal, informal, or nonformal requires for imparting education. 16
Schools play an important role in getting an education. So, the government should increase the enrolment rate and parents should motivate their children for learning to gain success in their lives.
Quran is a guide for the whole world and people admit its rightness. In the first revelation of Allah Almighty to his Holy Prophet (Peace Be Upon Him), He ordered him as: ―Read in the name of your Lord, Who created, the man from a clot.
Read, for your Lord is most Generous, Who teaches through the pen, teaches man what he does not know. [96:1-5]
All prophets and intellectuals showed the right path of life to people by educating them. Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be upon Him) preached many times about the importance of education. He said it is the core responsibility of every man and woman to get an education. Henceforth, education becomes a key to success; the success of people, the success of a country, and the success of a nation.
The addition of Article 25 A of the 18th Constitutional Amendment in the
Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, showed the importance of education as education is the fundamental right of every person. The said Article reads as under:
―The State shall provide free and compulsory education to all children of the age of five to sixteen years in such manner as may be determined by law‖.
We have many examples of countries where education is free of cost, especially developed countries. Education is free in most of the Nordic Countries. No fee has been charged from students even from foreign students in Norway and
Finland. Greece and Argentina, Brazil, and Sri Lanka provide free education at all levels. In all these countries the government provides funds for education. Educated people who are human resources become a green economy of any country. Our government also speaks loudly about the free of cost education, but the political 17 situation of our country has become a hurdle against the number of educated people and becomes a cause to decline the quality of education. Now Pakistan is amongst the countries which have the lowest literacy rate. To keep pace with the developed nations of the world Pakistan should increase its literacy rate. So the literate people play an active part in the prosperity and development of society.
We can say that education acts as the foundation of any society in the sense of economic, social, psychological, cultural, and demographic development of that society. The deficiency of educated people stops further development of society.
Educated people enhance the development of society by discovering new inventions.
Education generates leaders in the next generation and becomes the main source to make strong families and society. Henceforth, to receive an education is the main source to achieve success in all communities. It helps individuals to move forward and gain success in life. Knowledge, understanding, wisdom, and preparation for the next life in children can only be generated with the help of learning experiences.
UNESCO (2012 c) explored some worst education indicators in Pakistan, which became the cause of the huge skills deficit in Pakistan. 12 million young people of Pakistan, over 1 in 3 have not basic skills for work due to the incompletion of primary education. Pakistan is the second country with the most unskilled people in developing countries. In Pakistan, the completion ratio of lower secondary education is 70% richest young men and women, 16% poorest young men, and 11% poorest young women. 50% of rural young women as compared to 14% of urban young women never go to school. If the same situation will prevail a long time, then progress would be frozen, and fatalities of future disasters would be increased by 20% after 10 years. 18
The world knows about the importance of education just as In 2013, country progress report of South Africa showed the marvelous effects of education on individuals and societies in such a way that women and girls empowerment was increased and they had been contributed in improving baby and mom survival and health, preparing people to combat with HIV/AIDS, fighting against poverty and encouraging to participate in economic development, and giving support for constructing peace (Department of Basic Education, 2013).
UNICEF (2013) wrote the message of Hon. Mohan Lal Grero the Monitoring
MP of Education, in out of school children country study of Sri Lanka by these words
―When people possess the advantage of literacy they become empowered; they are open to the world and will be encouraged to be vigilant about their fundamental rights. At the same time, a high literacy rate reflects the progress achieved in the country‘s development process‖.
MDG Achievement Fund (2011) found that for all children primary education is free in Bosnia and Herzegovina but all children have not an equal opportunity of getting the education to complete primary education. We know that education is very important and long-lasting effects on the mind, personality, physique, and talent.
Children become familiar and take respect to parents, values of oneself and other- selves, values of a country, human rights, cultural identity, language, and fundamental freedoms. Children know about the civilization of their country. So, education is necessary for the growth of any country. Universal primary education is a paved path for the progress of any country which leads to the height of success. Education for all has been connected to human rights for a long time.
UNICEF and UIS (2010) initiated global initiatives in different countries of the world to know the problems of children being out of school. These countries are 19 present in different regions of the world such as South Asia, Middle East, and North
Africa, Eastern and Central Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States
(CEE-CIS), West and Central Africa, East Asia and the Pacific, Latin America and the Caribbean, and Eastern and Southern Africa. Achievement of universal primary education and removal of problems of out of school children all over the world are the main aims of initiatives.
Out of School Children Conceptual Framework
Out of School Children were defined by Ministry of Education of Pakistan
(2013) in National Plan of Action 2013-16 in such a way that there are two types of
OOSC (Out of School Children).
1. Who never attended school till that age?
2. Who dropped out before completing primary school?
Although the actual participation in pre-primary education is increasing, yet it remains low. If we want to monitor the condition of out of school children, we should profile excluded children, determine the range and intricacy of out of school children‘s exclusion, find out inequalities in schooling and look at the improvement towards primary education.
In Consortium for Research on Educational Access, Transitions, and Equity
(CREATE), Lewin (2007) drawn an idea for Zones of Exclusion. CREATE identified six zones of exclusion in table 2.1. A cross-sectional hypothetical model of exclusion can be seen in figure 2.1. This model separates children into two categories based on their access to formal education by their grade of participation. It has children who are being excluded from this formal education system and children who have no access to formal education. This model explores the rate of decline of enrollment in primary 20 grades over time in countries that have a low enrollment rate. It also highlights those children who attend school irregularly and get low scores in schools to fall in ―at-risk‖ zones of exclusion. This model also shows that more than half of all children in conventional education system leave before completing primary school, and about half of the primary school completers are selected into lower secondary school where slow destruction continues.
Table 2.1
Zones of Exclusion related to types of children 21
These Zones of Exclusion can be seen in the figure 2.1 below. 22
Figure 2.1: CREATE Zones of Exclusion
3DE Model
The Philippine country study for the global initiative on out of school children
UNICEF (2011) reported that the Annual Poverty Indicatory Survey (APIS) (2008) estimated three dimensions of exclusion. These are a) (Dimension 1) Pre-primary school-age OOSC b) (Dimension 2) Primary school age OOSC c) (Dimension 3) Secondary school age OOSC
It also informed us as these dimensions are important, it is also important to tell SARDOs which means students at risk of dropping out.
The operational manual of UNICEF (2015) has a lead role in a global initiative on OOSC as; all countries planned their initiatives on the base of it. This manual categorized OOSC (Out of School Children) in terms of out of school children in formal education and also described the most popular model, i.e. The Five
Dimensions of Exclusion Model. This model helps to generate the profiles of out of 23
school children and at risk of out of school children. It also explored a Visibility
Model that reflects the data gapes in the profiles of out of school children and
suggests some ways to resolve these problems.
Exposure to education
Figure 2.2 showed that there are two types of groups of OOSC (out of school
children), i.e. (a) dropped out children and (b) children who had not entered in any
school.
Children of group (b) further divided into two subgroups i.e, i. Small children who will enter into formal schooling system in the upcoming
years and ii. Those who will never enter school; it means they have not exposure to formal
schooling.
And the relative size of these groups varies from country to country.
Theoretically, all the children who dropped out may be get admission in school in
their near future; however, the probability chance to get education is low for these
children due to many reasons.
24
Figure 2.2: Classification of the Out of School Children by School Exposure.
Delay towards primary school enrollment is directly proportional to the increased risk of dropping out of school and low academic performance. Late entered children into school at primary level can be further categorized into two groups, i.e.
1. Carried over (children who get late admission in primary education level due
to delayed completion of pre-primary education)
2. Pure (late entry)
In Nigeria‘s country study of global initiatives UNICEF (2012a) explained that this framework does not only show the magnitude of OOSC other than, but it also gives a nomenclature that illustrates the children who are currently not in school and their actual school exposure. It classifies out of school children on the base of exposure into three types, i.e. a) Children who are expected to never enter school b) Children who are expected to enter in school by age 17 c) Children who are dropped out
Five Dimensions of Exclusion
Excluded children are of two different population groups; out of school children who are excluded from education and in school, but at risk of dropping out 25 children who may be excluded within education. Figure 2.3 shows that five different dimensions of children in which dimensions 1, 2, and 3 create to specific age groups, while dimensions 4 and 5 relate to the level of education.
Figure 2.3: Five Dimensions of Exclusion
Source: UNICEF & UIS, 2015
There is confusion in the definition of out of school children by exposure to formal education. Some countries where is not compulsory pre-primary education.
How can it be possible to enter children of lacking school readiness and not in school into the Dimension 1 category? On the other hand, we can be considered children of primary school age who are still in pre-primary classes or homes into out of school children as pre-primary classes are not the part of universal primary education. But in 26 other countries where compulsory pre-primary education exists there, you can consider and give admission to primary and lower secondary aged children into the pre-primary level. Figure 2.4 showed that dimensions 2 and 3 are divided into three categories on the base of formal school exposure.
Figure 2.4: Categories of Dimension 2 & 3.
Another thing that is very important to note down is that children of two different populations and ages of out of school and in school but at risk of exclusion cannot be summed up. For example, you cannot add children of dimension 2 who are primary school age out of school children into children of dimension 4 who are primary school age but, at risk of dropping out children because they represent different populations and ages and cannot be summed into total out of school population or total at-risk population. So, you can add one age group of children in one category. For example, if the analysis is limited to children of primary school age, it is possible to add the number of children in Dimension 2 to the number of primary- age children in Dimension 4 to arrive at an estimate of the total number of children of 27 primary school age who are excluded from education (Dimension 2) or at risk of exclusion (Dimension 4).
Figure 2.5: 5DE Model (Out of School)
Figure 2.6: 5DE Model (In School)
Out of School Children Visibility Model
The Out of School Children Visibility Model is an additional and complementary to the 5DE model because it highlights gaps in data on out-of-school children and children at risk of dropping out and it provides actual information on 28 children ‗invisible‘ in data. There are three groups of out of school children relate to their visibility as shown in figure 2.7.
Figure 2.7: Out of School Children Visibility Model.
The further explanation of these three groups Visible, Semi-invisible, and
Invisible elaborated in figure 2.8 below. 29
Figure 2.8: Visible, Semi-invisible and Invisible out-of-school children (OOSC)
In Liberia's country study, UNICEF (2012b) employed a 5DE conceptual and methodological framework. This study represented 5 target groups according to five dimensions of exclusion. These groups fall in three educational levels, i.e. First level was Kindergarten (Pre-primary level), Second was Primary (Primary level), and third was Junior high school (Lower secondary level). Furthermore, within these levels, two groups of children fall and these are the first group of children (those who were actually out of school), and another group of children (those who were at risk of dropping out of school).
Ababa (2012) also used the 5DE Model to study the condition of OOSC (Out of School Children) in Ethiopia.
UNICEF (2013a) used 5DE model in Sri Lanka Country Study, to examine the problems faced by children who were not in school. For this purpose, two types of 30 studies were conducted. First type used to determine the number of OOSC and at risk of dropping out children. This was a macro-level study. While, the other was the micro-level study, whose purpose was to explain the profiles of Out of School
Children and barrier and bottlenecks which were responsible for exclusion and drop out. The result of this study explored that percentage of Sri Lankan Tamil children in out of school children was relatively high due to the armed conflict in that area.
Visibility and the 5DE
Table 2.2 showed the association of the 5DE model with a visibility model classified into different levels. According to this relation, the dimension 1of pre- primary age out of school children have not entered in schools. They become semi- invisible or invisible out of school children. Children of dimension 2 who are of primary age out of school children and children of dimension 3 who are lower secondary age out of school children may be dropped out, unregistered dropouts, and have not entered in school. Only dropped out children of both dimensions are visible out of school children. Unregistered dropouts of both dimensions are semi-invisible out of school children while those who have not entered from both dimensions are semi-invisible and invisible out of school children. Children who are in school belong to dimension 4, i.e. at risk of dropping out from primary school or dimension 5, i.e. at risk of dropping out from lower secondary school. These children may be visible at the school level if school checks the entrance of these children in classes but, invisible at regional, and national levels because schools don‘t display their data to government personnel.
31
Table 2.2 Visibility Model and the 5D
Ananga (2011) explained the types of dropout in his report. There are five types of dropout. 32
Table 2.3 Types of Dropout
He also adopted six-zone of exclusion from CREATE by Lewin.
Ababa (2012) also wrote three types of dropout‘s children, i.e. dropped out in early grades; dropped out after completing the primary; and dropped out before or after completing lower-secondary school.
Relationship between 5DE and 6Zones of Exclusion
In 2014, UNICEF wrote a report of Eastern and Southern Africa on a global initiative. This report shows a relationship between 5DE and 6Zones of Exclusion
(CREATE Model). It tells us that both exclusion models gave a clear picture of children at the same points. At the same time, both models differentiate children into 33 two categories, i.e. those who are studying and the children who are not studying. On the other hand, both models tell that even during school participation, some of the children are at a higher risk of dropping out.
Several factors can become the push and pull factors for children to push out of school or to pull into the school. These are the rights of entry to primary school; anticipated to enroll in school on time; grade repetition; enough spaces in lower secondary schools after primary education; and so on. So, both models have an association between the dimensions of exclusion and the qualities of an educational system.
Figure 2.9: Flow between the Five Dimensions of Exclusion
Source: UNICEF & UIS, 2011
In 2012, Assessment Capacities Project Kenya assessed the Dadaab refugee camps to find out school from the causes for not going to children. UNICEF (2012b) again employed five dimensions of exclusion for studying the profiles of out of school 34 children in Liberia in such a way that each dimension is related to the particular profile in the fields. It can be seen in Table 2.4 below.
Table 2.4
Characteristics of Out of School Children
UNICEF (2013) also gave the same idea of profiles of out of school children related to the Dimensions of exclusion and levels of education in the country study of
Sri Lanka.
UNICEF (2013b) again showed the same theme in a study of four provinces of
Pakistan. This study explained that these five dimensions of exclusion are used to 35 find out the problems of Out Of School Children and detailed profiles of out of school children. Table 2.5 showed the detailed profiles of excluded children in Pakistan.
Table 2.5 Profiles of Excluded Children in Pakistan
36
37
38
39
40
Approaches for Policy Implication
UNICEF (2013) explained the four approaches for policy implications related to universal primary education by combining the 5DE Model that was already described in the Conceptual and Methodological Framework for Global Initiative on
Out-of-School Children (UNICEF & UIS, 2011a). These approaches are as follows; a) Life cycle approach
This approach focused on lifelong skills and knowledge. Which should be given to the children in their different development stages? Learning of this knowledge and skills are helpful in the development of a child. By this, children know the development of their country and society. b) Patterns and forms of exposure to schooling
This approach is helpful in the recognition of children who leave their schools in early age, children who will take admission in schools in their future, and due to some consequences children who will never get admission in school. This approach is also helpful to find the participation of non-formal, and community-based schools that are not part of the formal education system but their services are valuable. These institutions cannot be captured by simple statistical tools.
41 c) Disparity analysis
Disparity analysis helps in measuring the visibility of marginalized groups, for accessing disadvantaged groups and areas, and this analysis is useful for making association among educational policies and social protection systems. d) Identifying at-risk groups
This approach recognizes at risk of leaving students who are currently in schools but maybe left schools due to their no interest in education. Thus, it helps in improving the policies of quality education, demand-side policies, supply-side policies, and policies for children in school.
Two types of data were used in this study secondary data at the macro level and field study at the micro-level. This study also classified out of school children on the base of their exposure to education into three groups.
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Early school leaving has drastic effects on economic growth, thus children enroll in school is one side of a fact, while completion of their schooling is another serious side of a fact. To achieve universal primary education our main focus is on the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, MDG (Millennium Development Goals), and
Education for All (EFA) initiatives. Ministry of Education Pakistan (2013) said in the
National Plan of Action 2013-16 that the UN General Assembly on 10 December
1948 put special emphasis on the provision of free and compulsory elementary education for all children by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. According to Article 26 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:
1. Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the
elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be
compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally 42
available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all based on
merit.
2. Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality
and the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.
It shall promote understanding, tolerance, and friendship among all nations,
racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations
for the maintenance of peace.
3. Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to
their children.
Education for All (EFA)
Ministry of Education Brazil in its Education for All 2015 National Review
Report (2014) gave a detailed description of Education for All. According to this, the
EFA report was made in Incheon, Republic of Korea, on 19‐22 May 2015 by the same personnel present in the World Education Forum. To assess development made since
2000 towards achieving Education for All (EFA), UNESCO sent an invitation to its
Member States to submit their progress reports in that period and to show the challenges remaining in the period post-2015. There are six goals to be pursued by
2015 by all the countries that signed the Dakar Commitment.
According to Global Monitoring Report 2013/14, UNESCO (2014) summarized these goals as: 43
Figure 2.10: Dakar Framework for Action – Goals
Source: Developed from the Education for All goals
The basic Education department of South Africa (2013) in its Country
Progress Report also explored six EFA goals. Brazil also adopted theses goals of commitment. In Pakistan, the National Plan of Action 2013-16 in 2013 also wrote these goals. The main aim of Education for All is universal primary education while worldwide poverty reduction is the main aim of MDGs (Millennium Development
Goals).
Millennium Development Goals Achievement Fund (2011) in Bosnia and
Herzegovina wrote Global Millennium Development Goals as follows:
To eradicate extreme poverty and hunger;
To achieve universal primary education;
To promote gender equality and empower women; 44
To reduce child mortality;
To improve maternal health;
To combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases;
To ensure environmental sustainability;
To develop a global partnership for development.
National Plan of Action 2013-16, Pakistan (2013) explained that second and third MDGs are related to the improvement of education. These are universal primary education and reduction in gender disparity, especially in education. EFA and MDGs have same education indicators which are as follow:
1) Net Primary Enrolment Rate
2) Completion Rate
3) Literacy Rate
4) Gender Parity in Primary and Secondary Education
5) Youth Literacy Gender Parity
Liberia is a signatory to the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) of the
United Nations. In Liberia Country Study, UNICEF (2012b, p9) focused on these two goals by ensuring that ―all primary school-age children (girls and boys) can complete a full course of primary schooling by the year 2015, and to eliminate gender disparity in primary and secondary education preferably by 2005, and in all levels of education not later than 2015‖. Recently National Plan of Action 2013-16 (NPA) aimed to achieve the second Millennium Development Goal by bringing 5.06 million out of school children back into the school (GoP, 2013).
Despite significant efforts, Pakistan can‘t achieve second MDG and second and third Education for All goals. Pakistan still has approximately 25 million out of school children, which is the second-largest out of the school child population in the 45 world after Nigeria. In this respect, Pakistan has initiated many strategies to enhance the number of out of school children that are National Education Policies of 1998-
2010 and 2009, 18th Amendment to the Constitution, specifically Article 25A, and
Sindh, Balochistan, and most recently Punjab (April 2014) Education Act. The aim of the National Plan of Action 2013-16 (NPA) is to Achieve MDG 2 by bringing 5.06 million out of school children back in school (GOP, 2013).
Education in Pakistan
According to a review of Alternative Learning Programmes in Pakistan,
UNICEF (2015a) said that Pakistan has 72% of enrollment in schools and the NEMIS data scale showed that the number of OOSC is nearly three times larger than previous.
Despite some progress, such as national primary NER is 68% (GoP, 2013, p11), 50% is the completion rate to grade five and Literacy rate of age fifteen to twenty-four- year-olds is 58% ( GoP, 2013) Pakistan is not going to be able to achieve MDG2. On the other hand, Pakistan has the largest percentage of OOSC in the region of primary level (34%), whereas Bangladesh has a considerably highest rate (31%) of lower secondary OOSC (UNDP (2013); UNICEF (2014a). The ultimate goal of the education system is to provide children with life skills and quality education to broaden their horizons so that they can contribute to the development and growth of the country through their social, political, and economic participation. While, the findings tell us a different story of the current education system, which is failing to provide an environment and opportunity for every child to become effective participants in her/his growth and learning and towards the country‘s development.
One of the major expected outcomes of the education system is to achieve the goal of quality education, but the information from the focus groups and data collection depict a different situation. The insufficient training of teachers results in lower 46 learning achievements of students. One of the EFA goals is to increase enrollment at the secondary school level. It is also a part of the Dakar commitment (2000). There is a need to integrate students into secondary level who complete their primary level and increase OOSC in number at the secondary level, but larger inequalities exist between the rich and poor communities as a greater number of students drop out due to poverty and related reasons. According to the Constitution of Pakistan, Article 38 (d), Article
37 (b), and Article 25-A, it is the responsibility of the state to provide all necessities of life including free and compulsory education without the difference of creeds and caste. But, we find all this only on pages. While, actually Pakistan has spent 1.5-2.1% of GDP on education between 2001 and 2012/13 (GoP, 2014). Whereas in 2013 spending on education stands at an estimated 2.0% of GDP (GoP, 2013), although
UNESCO has recommended 6% of GDP on education (UNESCO, 2014). The
Pakistan NEP 2009 recommended 7% GDP on education. The government should work strategically to improve enrollment, retention, and achievement, by improving quality, and reducing inequalities which are the key objectives of MAF (MDG
Acceleration Framework) National Plan of Action (MoE, 2013). The expected targets of this plan of action are as follows; Enrollment of 5.1 million out-of-school children during 2013-16 (KP (81%) has the highest net enrollment rate, followed by Punjab and ICT (70%) while Balochistan has the lowest enrollment rate (51%). It means declination of OOSC from 6.7 million in 2011/12 to 2.1 million by 2015/16. In the end, Punjab expects to achieve universal primary enrollment by 2015/16 while ICT has set a target of 97% and KP of 95% while Balochistan and FATA may not exceed
66%.
47
Policies and Plans for improving Education in Pakistan
Pakistan education system has faced both military and civil governments since independence in 1947. Policies and strategies to address the problem of out-of-school children in Pakistan can be refined and strengthened to ensure the most equitable targeting of excluded groups of children, both by programmers within the education sector and more widely through targeted social protection measures. To overcome the problem of out of school children, the government has developed several policies and strategies to reach these children (UNICEF, 2015; UNICEF, 2013b) in table 2.6.
Table 2.6 Policies and Strategies for Out of School Children in Pakistan 48
Causes or Barrier for Out of School Children
In the previous part of this chapter, the researcher introduced the importance of education, a conceptual framework for out of school children, approaches for policy implication, education in Pakistan, and policies and plans for improving education in Pakistan. Thus, at this part, the researcher reviews the literature on the factors that are responsible for children being out of school. First, the researcher discusses international studies of different countries relating to the causes and barriers 49 that limit the education for out of school children. Second, the researcher introduces the factors barriers that become the cause of not going to school in the Pakistani context. Finally, the researcher draws a rationale for this study on the base of a review of the literature.
Yet, the identification of causes why children are out of school is extremely difficult because this phenomenon has a wide range of proximal and distal factors. A literature search on the causes of out of school prompted my exploration of reasons why children are out of school and, my subsequent inquiry being based on the research questions. Literature showed many reasons for out of school; they may be either why children have never attended school or what are the reasons for dropout?
Most of the literature explored barriers to education as Demand-side socio-cultural barriers, demand-side economic barriers, supply-side barriers, and political barriers.
Causes of exclusion also separated on the base of five dimensions of exclusion.
Empirical research in Nigeria country global initiative on out of school children study (UNICEF, 2012a), Ministry of Education showed that Nigeria has the highest number of out of school children in the world. It is because this country faced dreadful constraints in its efforts to enroll in school. These constraints also influence the children to attend school irregularly, perform badly, and ultimately drop out of school, and to become Out-Of-School Children (OOSC). Overall, these constraints are:
1) Socio-cultural environment
2) Family socioeconomic status
3) Quality of education offered by the school
4) Safe school environmental considerations
5) Political dimensions of education 50
6) Economic values placed on education by parents and their children
7) School governance
8) Funding for education.
MDG Achievement Fund (2011) described causes for non-attendance in
Bosnia and Herzegovina. These are economic situation, limited access to school, lack of awareness and information, disable children, language, overage, and Roma children of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Another research showed that school, children and governance are the main causes of the production of out of school children e.g. in
Eastern and Southern Africa regional report on a global initiative on out of school children, UNICEF (2014) explained some reasons of accessing, completing, transitioning and dropping out of school. These are shown in figure 2.11.
Figure 2.11: Factors influencing the numbers of out-of-school children
It means these are the government‘s educational support (policy frameworks, targeted strategies, funding, infrastructure, and resources), child (who may be in poor health, undernourished or lacking the motivation to learn), and school level 51
(infrastructure, school environment, class size, teacher absenteeism, disciplinary sanctions, and teacher-student relations).
Children who have never attended school and who dropouts face many hurdles to their education. Mpyangu et al. (2014) said that firstly Uganda was introduced UPE
(Universal Primary Education) in African countries. As many reforms were introduced in Uganda such as more additional schools were built, teachers trained and tuition fees abolished. But, out of 20 school-aged children, one has never enrolled in school, and it also has the highest rate of dropout at the primary level in the world.
They explained the reasons why children have never attended school, by region, the gender of household head, and refugee status in Uganda. These reasons are; children needed to work/help at home, school is too far away, Children are not interested in attending school, they do not want, they are physically or mentally disabled, unsafe to travel to school, Classrooms are too crowded, unsafe at school, family trend, School graduates cannot find good jobs, got Married, teachers do not perform, schooling is not important, would not be able to find a permanent job, work at home such as cooking, cleaning, fetching water or wood, etc., the school building is unsafe, became pregnant, tend animals, or work on the family farm or in the family business, sexual harassment, poor parenting, and domestic violence. While, Reason for drop out of school by refugee status, region and occupation in Uganda are; inadequate funding to pay the costs of school, work at home such cooking or cleaning, fetching water or wood, children no longer wanted to attend a school or had enough, they tend animals, or work on the family farm or in the family business, classrooms were too crowded, drop outage, failed in examinations or had to repeat class, got married or made someone pregnant, teachers did not perform well, unlikely to find a place in secondary, school buildings or facilities were poor or had problems, the needed class 52 was far away, work for an employer, traveling to school was unsafe, unsafe at school, school graduates cannot find good jobs, became refugees, the security of the child was being compromised and they did not know that they can be allowed to study in a foreign country.
Most of the researches showed only reasons for out of school and these are not categorized into different factors such as in Philippine Country study on Global
Initiative on Out-of-School Children, UNICEF (2012) gave some reasons of being out of school. So the reasons for nonattendance are; lack of personal interest, high cost of education, too young to go to school, illness/disability, lack of nearby schools, employment, and other reasons (e.g., school records, marriage, and housekeeping).
Again in a country study of South Africa, the Department of Basic Education
(2013) focused on reasons for not attending school for 7 to 18 years old children.
These are no money for a fee, education is useless, unable to perform at school, family commitment, work at home, complete education, pregnancy, illness, disability, failed exams, not accepted for enrollment, too old/young, too busy, got married, education at home, difficulties to get to school, school is too far, and violence at school. The Assessment Capacities Project (2012) also found some reasons for children being out of school in Dadaab Refugee Camp, Kenya was; interested in religious education, parents don‘t think school is important, school is too far, the language of study, work for family members, do care for family members, don‘t feel safe walking to school or at school, don‘t think school is important, other siblings have been sent to school so I couldn‘t achieve the required result, disability, too young, no previous school experience, poor quality of teaching, married or pregnant, poor infrastructure, low quality of education, lack of materials, arrived in Dadaab within the last year, and overage. 53
Factors that affect the education of a child also divided on the base of five dimensions of exclusion just as UNICEF (2012c) had written some reasons for being out of school in the Kyrgyzstan Country Study. These are categorized by a dimension of exclusion. In dimension 1 the reasons behind out of school children are geographic location, poverty, living without one or both parents and children in new settlements with poor infrastructure. In dimension 2 the reasons are rural areas, poor families, non-Kyrgyz speaking families, street children, children without registration documents, disable children, migrants, and children with ethnic conflicts. In dimension 4 and 5 risk of dropping out increased due to lack of pre-primary experience, late entry, overage, frequent absenteeism, and poor performance. While in
Kyrgyzstan children of Lyuli ethnic minority community are being out of school due to poverty, stigma and discrimination, marginalization, cultural attitudes towards education, lack of job opportunities, and child labour.
Despite the previous categorization of issues of children that become the causes for being out of school, demand-side socio-cultural barriers, demand-side economic barriers, supply-side socio-cultural barriers are the key determinant of out of school. Ababa (2012) expressed some educational barriers in a study on the situation of Out of School Children in Ethiopia. In demand-side barriers some socio- cultural barriers are violence against children (VAC) and gender-based violence
(GBV) in and out of school, early marriage and teenage pregnancy, female genital mutilation, lack of parental awareness regarding the benefit of education, wrong attitude towards children with disabilities, wrong attitude towards the education of girls. On the other hand, some economic demand-side barriers are; household poverty, cost-benefit of education, being orphaned, seasonal factor and migration, indirect and opportunity costs of education, and child labour. The supply-side barrier that becomes 54 the cause of non-attendance and non-enrollment are; distance to school, insufficient sitting and writing place, poor conditions of school facilities, lack of drinking water and sanitation facilities, lack of appropriate infrastructure for children with disabilities, shortage of textbooks and a shortage of human resources. As far as the
Governance, Capacity, and Financing of Government of Ethiopia is concerned,
Government has shown its interest towards the fulfillment of its educational goals, while Inadequate partnership with CSOs to address the problems of OOSC, Education policy tensions between expansion and quality improvement, Absence of comprehensive data on the profiles of OOSC, Weak school management committees, and Inequitable resource allocation are the main hurdles towards the fulfillment of these goals. He also showed some causes of early marriage that are; seeking bride price, Improvement for the boys‘ family, Interest to affiliate with families of high status, assume that an unmarried girl is helpless and unprotected, Fear of pre- marriage sexual activity, and abduction. Some factors behind girl‘s abduction are; family can‘t afford the bride price, rejection of the boy by the girl‘s family, and male dominance.
Again UNICEF (2012b) in the Liberia country study expressed any demand side, supply-side, and governance side barriers to being out of school. The demand- side consists of Socio-Cultural and economic factors while the supply side is related to schools related factors. So, sociocultural problems are; traditional practices of education for boys (poro) and girls (sande), parental awareness about the importance of education and Early Childhood Development, too many children, refusal to go to school, early marriage, or pregnancy, poor health, and disability. Whereas economic problems are; poverty, hunger, loss of parents, and child labour. The school-related barriers are; poor quality of school (lack of books, high school fees, inadequate 55 number of teachers, poor facilities, long distance to school, poor teaching, inadequate space, and teachers being absent frequently), lack of schools or teachers, teachers selling grades, sexual harassment at school, bullying, punishment and children‘s refusal to accept discipline, and distance to school. Political barriers are; nonimplementation of educational policies, lacks the capacity and resources, and lack of finance.
In Ghana country global initiative on out of school children study (UNICEF,
2012d), the Ministry of Education looked causes of exclusion that are related to out of school children. These socio-cultural demand-side causes are lack of the child‘s interest in schooling, lack of parental awareness, and other parental factors negative beliefs and values towards girls‘ education, fosterage, early marriage, teenage pregnancy, negative attitudes towards children with disabilities, and verbal, physical and sexual abuse of children at school and in the community. The demand side economic causes are poverty profile in Ghana, family size and affordability of schooling, direct costs of schooling, the opportunity costs of schooling for the family, child labor, household migration, and other economic /agricultural factors, child hunger in the classroom and lack of attention in class, and loss of economic earning of a parent. As well as, supply-side causes are distance to school, inadequate school infrastructure, seating and writing places in schools, lack of basic water and sanitation facilities, inadequate teaching and learning materials, inefficient teacher supply, allocation and deployment, child-friendly instructional practice and classroom management and the language of instruction. While barrier related to political governance, capacity and financing are inadequate decision making and slow pace of policy implementation, inadequate partnerships with CSOs to address OOSC challenges, lack of voice of marginalized groups, educational policy tensions between 56 expansion and quality improvements, weak monitoring and evaluation capacity, weak district and regional oversight to OOSC, weak school management committees, inadequate sector-wide coordination and collaboration, financial bottlenecks overview, inequitable resource distribution, and inadequate, untimely and inequitable allocation of capitation grants.
In a Nigerian global initiative on out of school children, UNICEF (2012a) stated socio-cultural barriers and bottlenecks as too young to attend school, early marriage, Western education perceived as incompatible with Islamic Education, large family size, the lower status accorded the girl-child in the family, peer pressure and children with special needs. The economic demand-side barriers are poverty of the family, residence or location, child labor, pursuit of material wealth by youth, and limited employment opportunities for school leavers. Some supply-side barriers of
Nigeria are the inadequate implementation of pre-primary articulation policy to public primary schools, shortage of teachers and caregivers at all levels of basic education schools, safety/security of the children, incessant and prolonged teachers‘ strike actions and low teacher commitment, learner unfriendly school environment (most pronounced is inadequate school infrastructure), lack of provision for the education of special needs learners in basic education, weak or non-existent social protection of vulnerable children, and non-availability of schools in some communities. Politics and governance have become a critical factor for out of school children. The capacity of government is reduced due to the low level of political will, the politicization of basic education, weak school level governance, and poor financing of education in Nigeria.
In Sri Lanka country study UNICEF (2013) identified the main reasons for being out of school, which are poverty, illiterate parents, distance, and physical or mental disabilities. Demand-side socio-cultural barriers which become the major 57 causes of being out of school are family poverty, poor health, and disabilities, inability to spend on clothing, stationery, private coaching, and books, to look after younger siblings, to seek employment to support the family, to assist parents‘ activities such as farming, fishing and small businesses, conducive home environment, lack of study space and facilities, lack of parental encouragement, migration of mothers for temporary employment overseas, fathers‘ alcoholism, neglect of children, and consequent emotional distress. On the other hand, supply-side barriers are a lack of provision of education for children with disabilities, lack of access for children in detention, disparities among provinces, districts, and sectors in basic facilities, services, teacher availability, and quality. Children in areas such as having a lack of transport, lack of basic facilities and lack of access to schools with good educational facilities were more in number in non-enrollment and drop out. The armed conflict in Sri Lanka had caused a serious disturbance in people‘s lives, school closure, less teacher‘s deployment, and less teacher attendance, irregular school attendance, low performance and drop out, and also children being recruited as child soldiers by rebel groups. Some other factors are negative attitudes of teachers, uninteresting lessons, and harassment by teachers and peers. As gender is not important among the main reasons for being out of school, but in some ethnic groups and communities, girls pull out of school and into work especially low-income
Muslim girls who dropped out of school after menarche.
In the regional report of Eastern and Southern Africa on Global Initiative on
Out-of-School Children, UNICEF (2014) described the demand side multiple barriers as; hidden (indirect) and opportunity costs, Traditional social hierarchies, barriers to girls‘ education, corporal punishment, gender violence, safe schools, quality teaching, access to education (girls, children with disabilities, children affected by HIV, 58 migrants, nomadic people, and racial, ethnic and linguistic minorities), and disasters or conflict communities. Supply-side barriers are; quality schools (school buildings, teaching, and learning resources, trained teachers and management, suitable pedagogy and school safety), adequate infrastructure (water, toilets, books, pencils, pens, furniture, and other basic equipment), provision of basic education, a safe walking distance from homes, incompatibility of livelihood rhythms with school timetables, as learner-friendly pedagogies, overage, trained and qualified teachers, deployment of female teachers, and teacher‘s attitudes, discipline, and absenteeism. To educate out of school children,'s government should involve private providers, show political sensitivities to certain population subgroups, decentralized educational systems, coordinate among education, health, and social protection ministries, increase limited data, and funding.
In Sri Lanka country study UNICEF (2013) identified the main reasons for being out of school, which are poverty, illiterate parents, distance, and physical or mental disabilities. Demand-side socio-cultural barriers which become the major causes of being out of school are family poverty, poor health, and disabilities, inability to spend on clothing, stationery, private coaching, and books, to look after younger siblings, to seek employment to support the family, to assist parents‘ activities such as farming, fishing and small businesses, conducive home environment, lack of study space and facilities, lack of parental encouragement, migration of mothers for temporary employment overseas, fathers‘ alcoholism, neglect of children, and consequent emotional distress. On the other hand, supply side barriers are a lack of provision of education for children with disabilities, lack of access for children in detention, disparities among provinces, districts, and sectors in basic facilities, services, teacher availability, and quality. Children in areas such as 59 having a lack of transport, lack of basic facilities and lack of access to schools with good educational facilities were more in number in non-enrollment and drop out. The armed conflict in Sri Lanka had caused a serious disturbance in people‘s lives, school closure, less teacher‘s deployment, and less teacher attendance, irregular school attendance, low performance and drop out, and also children being recruited as child soldiers by rebel groups. Some other factors are negative attitudes of teachers, uninteresting lessons, and harassment by teachers and peers. As gender is not important among the main reasons for being out of school, but in some ethnic groups and communities, girls pull out of school and into work especially low-income
Muslim girls who dropped out of school after menarche.
In the regional report of Eastern and Southern Africa on Global Initiative on
Out-of-School Children, UNICEF (2014) described the demand side multiple barriers as; hidden (indirect) and opportunity costs, Traditional social hierarchies, barriers to girls‘ education, corporal punishment, gender violence, safe schools, quality teaching, access to education (girls, children with disabilities, children affected by HIV, migrants, nomadic people, and racial, ethnic and linguistic minorities), and disasters or conflict communities. Supply side barriers are; quality schools (school buildings, teaching, and learning resources, trained teachers and management, suitable pedagogy and school safety), adequate infrastructure (water, toilets, books, pencils, pens, furniture, and other basic equipment), provision of basic education, a safe walking distance from homes, incompatibility of livelihood rhythms with school timetables, as learner-friendly pedagogies, overage, trained and qualified teachers, deployment of female teachers, and teacher‘s attitudes, discipline, and absenteeism. To educate out of school children, government should involve private providers, show political sensitivities to certain population subgroups, decentralized educational systems, 60 coordinate among education, health, and social protection ministries, increase limited data, and funding.
Most of the researches on the reasons for being out of school emphasis on the effects of a series of interrelated environment, supply, demand, and quality factors that interact in a complex way to spur children out of school. In the operational manual of global out-of-school children Initiative UNICEF (2015) showed some reasons for being out of school on the base of four domains i.e. enabling environment, supply, demand, and quality. Enabling the environment has three categories which are legislation/policy, budget/ expenditure, and management/coordination. Whereas, supply has two categories, e.g. availability of essential inputs and Access to adequate staffed services, facilities, and information. The third domain demand has four categories which are financial access, social and cultural practices and beliefs, social norms and timing, and continuity of use. The last domain is categorized by quality.
These domains categorized some reasons for being out of school. These reasons are shown in Table 2.7.
Table 2.7
Reasons for being Out of School 61
62
Source: UNICEF, 2015
Finally, the researcher presented the causes that are responsible to hinder the education of out of school children in Pakistan. For example, In Education Progress in
South Asia, Weil (2013) described that in 2010 South Asia has the highest number of children enrolled in primary schools worldwide, i.e. 188 million (27.3% of global enrollment) and among them, nearly half are girls (48%). In South Asia millions of children cannot be able to complete primary education, e.g. In Pakistan, the number of primary school entry age pupils is 100% and the Net Intake rate is 95%, while the net completion rate is only 45%. Among these primary age children, 34.4% are in schools, whereas 65.6 are out of school children. These out of school children are from the poorest households, sometimes these are girls, Children in rural areas, 63 children in child labour, and children from ethnic and religious minorities, scheduled caste and tribes. According to the National Plan of Action 2013-16, the Ministry of
Education (2013) explained different factors which are the main causes of the deterioration of the education system of Pakistan.
1. It faces inequalities and has a distinct division in parallel streams of primary
and secondary schooling
2. Public and private arrangements, catering to different socioeconomic classes
in the country.
3. A series of natural disasters.
4. Political events
Government of Pakistan (2013) identified in NEMIS data for 2012-13 that 25 million (42%) school-age children are not enrolled in schools. It places Pakistan second-most in the world and the highest one in South Asia in out of school children.
So the Government of Pakistan (2013) explained some reasons of never attending school e.g. parents didn‘t allow, too expensive, too far, education not useful, help at work, help at home, the child not willing, and others while some reasons of leaving school before completion, e.g. parents didn‘t allow, too expensive, too far, education not useful, help at work, help at home, completed desired education, the child not willing, and others, in the National Plan of Action 2013-16.
Bajwa (2011) linked the number of out of school children in Sindh with religion, earnings of people, migration and displacement, poverty, the language of instruction, cultural clashes, caste, child labor, natural disasters, disability, ethnicity, gender, and location. In the end, UNICEF (2013b) expressed the main reasons for being out of school in its study of out-of-School children in Balochistan, Khyber
Pakhtunkhwa, Punjab, and Sindh provinces of Pakistan. These are: 64
1) Gender biases
2) Income poverty
3) Child labour
4) Inadequacies in the supply of schools and teachers, especially in rural and
remote areas
5) Lack of infrastructure and school facilities, especially for girls
6) Deficiencies in the teaching-learning process
7) Problems with the processes of devolution and decentralization
8) Incapacities in school management committees
9) Weak coordination between the public, private and non-profit sectors
10) Inadequate budget allocations
11) Inadequate resource distribution
One type of out of school children is street children; who work or begging on the street. Ozbas (2015) determined the personal traits and socioeconomic variables of
Street Children resulting from their families by a multi-dimensional approach. He found that continuous absenteeism is the main reason for withdrawal from school and they have an insufficient schooling ratio. They have not accessed to education; their educational needs are not fulfilled and have inequality in their lives. Migration is the main cause of their problems. Their families have not right of employment in the base of their education; they live in bottom strata and have not any social insurance.
Rana and Chaudhry (2011) depicted street children‘s life and their experience.
He found that due to the bad effects of management, environment, social values, genetics, and culture; human development and street life influence each other. Their mistrust retarded their development as a human and ultimately they become social 65 evils. They accept dishonesty and double-dealing and start learning the art of lying, deceiving fabricating stories, and distorting facts.
The Rationale of the Study
UNICEF and the UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS) (2010) launched global initiatives on out of school children, and the main objectives of it were to analyze the profile of out of school children. Another objective of this initiative was to analyze the factors of exclusion from schooling including the policies and to understand the problems of out of school children. Out of school children, initiative studies examine the issues of out-of-school children. Up to 2014, twenty-four countries from seven regions of the world had launched OOSCI (Out of School
Children Initiatives) study and many other countries are showing interest to carry out
OOSC Initiatives studies. These studies helped to find out the factors that are becoming the reasons for being out of school and also guide policymakers to develop strategies for reaching out to school children. The Global Out-of-School Initiative
Operational Manual (2015) has three steps. These are who and where excluded children are; the barriers and causes for exclusion; and policies and strategies to remove these barriers. The researcher used Global Out-of-School Initiative
Operational Manual (2015) as a guide and explained the first two steps i.e. who and where excluded children are; the barriers and causes for exclusion in this chapter and implications for policy in the last chapter. The researcher extracted five basic factors for exclusion from literature.
The above indigenous and international literature described the detailed Out of
School Children's conceptual framework and also described the dimensions of exclusion and the reasons of out of school children which associated it with the voices 66 of out of school children and their parents. After the critical review of different reasons of children for being out of school, researchers concluded that basically, four are the main barriers against enrollment. These are socio-economic causes, psycho- cultural causes, political causes, and demographic causes. On the base of these causes researcher had developed research tools that were discussed in Chapter III and instruments were produced in APPENDIX A and B.
The present study also explores the voices of out of school children and their parents to find out policy implications. The current study is an initial step in Pakistan to see the issues of out of school children in detail by the views of both children and parents. As, the focus of the study is to investigate the cultural, demographic, socioeconomic, psychological factors and policy barriers that are responsible for being out of school, and from these factors some policy implications were identified.
A word frequency cloud was generated from the most repeating words regarding Out of School Children in the literature shown in figure 2.12.
67
Figure 2.12: Word Frequency Cloud of most Repeating Words in Literature regarding
Out of School Children.
UNESCO (2016) reported in the Global Education Monitoring Report that numbers of Out of School Children in Pakistan are slightly reducing during the last two years. According to it currently, 24 Million Out of School Children are present in
Pakistan which was 1million less than the previous year. But if Pakistan wants to achieve educational targets in the new 2030 Agenda and Sustainable Development
Goals framework, it requires concentration and support from parents, policymakers, media, and general public nationally and internationally to overcome the ratio of Out of School Children in Pakistan.
The problems of Out of School Children can be identified from cultural, demographic, socioeconomic, psychological factors, and policy barriers. So, there is a need to find out issues that the Out of School Children face due to these factors by documenting the voices of Out of School Children and their parents.
68
Chapter III
Methodology and Procedure
The purpose of this study was to document the voices of out-of-school children and their parents and suggest concrete education reforms for policy reforms.
For this purpose, the researcher attempted to document the voices of out of school children and their parents for various issues and problems that influenced children‘s and their parents‘ attitudes, perceptions, and thoughts towards schooling. This study focuses on socioeconomic, psycho-cultural, political, and demographic barriers that influence children for being out of school.
Data were gathered through semi-structured interviews of children and their parents. Focus group discussions were conducted to seek further details of issues popped up in the analysis of interview data and views from social media (Face book) were collected for the reasons behind Out of School Children. This chapter explains the research methodology used in this research study.
The qualitative study begins with a description of the research design, sampling, and sample size; it also elaborates on research instruments and how their validity and reliability were assessed. This study employed qualitative techniques. A qualitative design is a research that uses words (Cropley, 2002; Somekh & Lewin,
2005; and Braun & Clarke, 2013). The purpose of this method designs to bring flexibility to deal with diversified respondents and the cultural realities that shape up the meanings of their actions.
Theoretical Perspective of the Study
The researcher adopted a qualitative research design. A qualitative design is more open and responsive to its subject and aims to gather an in-depth understanding of human behavior and the reasons that govern such behavior. Braun & Clarke 69
(2013) said that qualitative data is collected in the form of words, and in this research, the researcher seeks to understand and interpret data in more local meaning. It means this research produces knowledge that contributes to more general understandings.
Therefore, qualitative research design generates narrow, but rich and illuminative data
(Bengtsson, 2016). Researcher choice of qualitative method is because the qualitative method examines the how and why of decision making, not only when, where, what.
However, to see the pattern of the voices of out of school children and their parent interviews have some descriptive part for frequency counts.
The fundamental purpose of this research is to develop new knowledge about the phenomenon of this study and to develop our confidence that a particular knowledge claim about educational phenomena is true or false. This is because the researcher attempted to design a study that will yield the strongest possible evidence to support or refute a knowledge claim.
There is no single accepted methodology used for all types of research problems. Schulze, (2003) said that it is not inevitably ideal as its selection necessarily involves gain as well as loss.
So, the selection of research methodology depends on the paradigm that guides the research activity, more specifically, beliefs about the study of being
(ontology) a way of understanding and explaining how we know what we know
(epistemology) as defined (Crotty: 2003:10), and a strategy or plan of action which lies behind the choice and use of particular methods (methodology) (Crotty, 1998. p.
3). Mostly, a paradigm has an ontology, epistemology, methodology, and, methods.
Different ontological and epistemological positions often lead to different research approaches towards the same phenomenon (Grix, 2004, p. 64) and every 70 research is incomplete without a clear picture of these positions. This can be seen in table 3.1.
Table 3.1
The Research Paradigms 71
Sourse: Patel, S. (2015). 72
It is assumed that there are two paradigms in social science research. First is the positivist paradigm that includes objectivist ontology and the positivist epistemology, and the second is the interpretive paradigm that includes constructionist ontology and interpretive epistemology. The ontological assumptions give rise to epistemological assumptions which further give rise to methodological considerations and finally, these considerations give rise to instrumentation and data collection
(Cohen, et al, 2007: 3).
According to Cohen et al. (2000), and Grix (2004) from an interpretive point of view, the reality is a complex social construction of meanings, values, and lived experience. Interpretivist paradigm developed as a reaction of positivism, so it is also called an anti-positivist paradigm. It is a sense-making activity and in its knowledge is constructed through the social construction of the world, henceforth it is also known as constructivism.
Mainly Interpretivist thinks that research can always be observed from inside through the direct experiences of people and he or she understands, explains, and demystifies social reality through the eyes of different participants (Cohen et al, 2007, p. 19). The preferred research methods of interpretivism are case study, ethnographic study, phenomenography study, and ethnomethodological study and for these methods, he or she collects data through observation, interviews, documents, and audio-visual materials that generate information mostly in the form of words
(Creswell, 2003). Interpretivist tests his or her research assumption on qualitative research (Bryman, 2001). He or she uses a naturalistic approach to understand any phenomena in a context-specific setting, a ―real world setting and the researcher does not attempt to manipulate the phenomenon of interest‖ (Patton, 2001: 39) and uses those data collection methods that are flexible and sensitive to the social context in 73 which the data are being produced (Grix, 2004). Hughes (1990) said that research that is not resulted in employing statistical procedures or other means of quantification is known as qualitative research. Case study and social context is the main focus of qualitative research, therefore ―qualitative research involves the interpretation of data whereby the researcher analyses cases in their social and cultural context over a specific period and may develop theories that emphasize tracing processes and sequences of events in specific settings‖ (Grix, 2004).
The main objective of this study was to document the voices of out of school children and their parents. This study was designed to explore the experiences of children and their parents to find out different factors that stop their schooling. A qualitative approach is helpful in this study as this approach sees the social world and the events that take place in it through the eyes of the research participant.
Creswell (2003) explained that new knowledge is based on constructivist perspectives with multiple interpretations of participants, to construct a theory, pattern, or advocacy/participatory perspectives; political, issue-oriented, collaborative, change-oriented, or both. As this study seeks to explore the voices of out of school children and their parents, the researcher argues a case for qualitative research due to its exploratory nature and in the exploratory study, researchers need to listen to participants to construct an understanding based on their ideas (Creswell, 2003).
74
The available literature of different countries on out of school children studies focuses predominantly on quantitative characteristics (UNICEF, 2012; 2012a; 2012b;
2012c; 2012d; 2013; 2013a; 2013b; 2014; 2015b; 2018).
Indeed, any new qualitative contribution to the out of school children phenomenon is invaluable and could serve as a precursor to policy and program development targeting out of school children in Pakistan that is the second-largest out of school children in the world.
The Case Study Design and Ethnographic Methods for the Study
This study provided the answers to the question as written in chapter I, by interpreting the understanding of children and their parents about different factors that are responsible for being out of school. The researcher employed a case study design and ethnographic methods for this research. It is a bounded study of out of school children; henceforth it adopted different techniques of ethnographic method including semi-structured interviews from out of school children and their parents, focused group discussion of out of school children and their parents and views from Facebook to find out different factors that influence their education. A ‗case‘ may be theoretical, or empirical, or both; it may be a relatively bounded object or a process; and it may be generic and universal or specific in some way (Ragin and Becker, 1992; Yin, 2009).
Therefore researcher designed this study as a case study as this research work has an intensive and detailed analysis of a single case that is the phenomenon of out of school in Pakistan and at the same time used multiple cases means semi- structures interviews of 324 children and their 178 parents. The reason to use multiple cases is that these allowed comparative analyses (Bryman, 2004) and in-depth inquiry into the out of school phenomenon. Multiple cases help in a comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon and its contextual dimensions. Ethnographic methods used in this 75 study helped the researcher to find out culture sharing behavior of both individuals and groups in a natural setting over a while and also to see things through the eyes of research participants. This helped the researcher to capture the holistic picture of the voices of out of school children and their parents.
Sample of Study
According to Census (2017), Punjab is home to 110 million people out of whom 38% were illiterates (Ministry of Finance, 2018).
The population comprised of Out of School Children and their parents in
Punjab. A research population includes all members or elements, be they human beings, animals, objects, events, trees, etc., of a well-defined group and also defines the limits within which the research findings are applicable (Krieger, 2012).
A target population is classified as all the members of a given group to which end the investigation is related, whereas the accessible population is looked at in terms of those elements in the target population within the reach of the researcher
(Pole & Lampard, 2002). The research population for this study is drawn from 9
Tehsils (accessible) of Punjab (target).
The sample was selected on the base of the multistage sampling technique
(Figure 3.1). On stage, I researcher preferred a simple random sampling technique for the selection of Districts from each Division of Punjab. From these Districts, researchers selected one Tehsil by random sampling at stage II. At stage III two rural and one urban union council was selected with the help of a simple random technique.
The researcher used this pattern as the possibility of out of school children is more in rural areas. At last in stage IV researcher used the purposive sampling technique for the selection of out of school children and one of their parents from rural and urban 76
union councils of these Tehsils. For this purpose, the researcher selected 12 children
in the urban union council and the same numbers of children were selected from two
rural union councils. So the actual size of the sample from 9 Districts of Punjab as
shown in Table 3.2 was 324 children and one of their parents either mother or father
at the base of their availability.
Table 3.2
No. of Children and Parents in Selected Union Councils of 9 Divisions
Union Councils Children Parents Total 1. Urban 12 12 24 2. Rural 12 12 24 3. Rural 12 12 24 Total 36 36 Grand Total= 72*9=648 interviews
According to NEMIS (National Education Management Information Systems)
2012-13, out of school children in Punjab were 12,828,461 (NEMIS, 2013).
Table 3.3
Frequencies and Percentages of Age of All Out of School Children
Age Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent 6 1 .3 .3 .3 7 4 1.2 1.2 1.5 8 23 7.1 7.1 8.6 9 22 6.8 6.8 15.4 10 49 15.1 15.1 30.6 11 20 6.2 6.2 36.7 Valid 12 43 13.3 13.3 50.0 13 30 9.3 9.3 59.3 14 49 15.1 15.1 74.4 15 44 13.6 13.6 88.0 16 39 12.0 12.0 100.0 Total 324 100.0 100.0
77
Figure 3.1: Hierarchal Presentation of Sample Selection
During the conduction of interviews, the researcher found more than one child of one parent who was out of school. So, the researcher considers parents as a family and now the number of parents reduced to 178 instead of 324.
Instruments of study
Interview Schedules
The researcher developed a semi-structured interview schedule on the base of a literature review for assessing the feelings and attitudes of out of school children and their parents. As interviewees may provide personal and confidential information 78 which they cannot provide in writing on paper and interviews are the most extensively used media that involves direct verbal communication among interviewee and interviewer (Braun, Clarke, & Rance, 2014). These schedules comprised of items that reflect the ideas of out of school children and their parents about the political, cultural, financial, psychological, and demographic factors which may become the actual cause for being out of school as this study was designed to document the voices of out of school children and their parents and also suggest some policy implications.
Two types of interview schedules were conducted that sought information related to being out of school; one for Out of School Children and the other for their
Parents in which questions for Out of School and Dropout were included. These scheduled interviews had a directive framework that helped the out of school children and their parents to give their views about their problems. These problems relate to the socioeconomic factors which are responsible for keeping children out of schools, policy barriers that limiting the access to primary education, cultural and psychological factors that affect the psyche of out of school children and their parents and the demographic factors which reduce the access to education.
UNICEF and UIS (2011) 5DE (Five Dimensions of Exclusion) model showed five different groups of children for 3 levels of education, i.e. pre-primary, primary and lower secondary with two different population groups i.e. children who were out of school, and those who attended school but dropped out. So the interview schedule had two types of statements: one for those children who never went to school and one for those who ever went to school.
The content validity of this schedule was done by expert opinion. This process helped the researcher to determine that questions were clear and related to the objectives of the study. A pilot study of the instrument increased the content 79 reliability and so the researcher conducted a Mini Pilot Study and measured the consistency of question by using a video recorder and also trained a research assistant who was also a PhD scholar. Changes were made after this process.
To assess the validity of the instrument the proposed interview schedule was sent to a panel of experts (APPENDIX M) who commented on this interview schedule. The pilot-testing of the interview schedule was conducted before the actual data collection. The researcher developed a date wise plan and personally visited the rural and urban areas of two districts of Punjab and administrated interviews to children and their parents. This date wise data collection program can find in
APPENDIX K. The answers to the questions provided room to give their opinion about the items which were not clear and need further improvement. Keeping given the suggestions of the children and their parents, the researcher refined the schedule.
These interview schedules could be seen in APPENDIX A and B. APPENDIX
A is based on the interview schedule for children that comprises socioeconomic causes, psychological factors, cultural factors, and demographic factors. The questions relate to policy barriers are not asked from children because they are the most disadvantaged children who have not any knowledge about policies. But,
APPENDIX B which is based on the interview schedule for parents has questions relating to socioeconomic causes, psychological factors, cultural factors, demographic factors, and policy barriers. The APPENDIX C, APPENDIX D, APPENDIX E, and
APPENDIX F showed the responses of interviewees in the form of their voices. All children of many families were out of school, but not available in the home during the conduction of interviews. So, the researcher conducted interviews with available children on the base of purpose of this study.
80
Focus Group Discussion
It is a method for generating information and meaning on collective views to judge the participant‘s attitude and belief. So, it is an identification of participants‘ interests, beliefs, attitudes, and experiences, and peer commentary on these opinions expressed by participants and others is known as focus group discussion. It helps the researcher to give meaning to discussion with the help of personal interaction and cooperation among the researcher and participants.
Einarsdottir (2005) recommended that children‘s interviews should be in pairs or groups. Henceforth, a group of 6-10 people with a moderator comprises a focus group. A non-directive style of discussion produces a variety of viewpoints on a specific topic in a formal and facilitative way. During the conduction of individual interviews, the researcher found that focus group discussion of both out of school children and their parents is as important and comprehensive as to find out the objectives of this study from interviews. The researcher requested a respectable representative of a small village from a remote area of Lahore to gather out of school children and their parents in a particular open place of this village. The researcher selected only those children and their parents who showed interest in discussion and did not hesitate to be video recorded. It was a difficult task for the researcher to focus on the main questions of this study. The researcher also served them with samosas and coke. This focus group discussion held to gather the views of both out of school children and their parents separately. A group of children had 08 participants while a group of parents had 07 participants. The main question for children's focus group was ―Why didn‘t you go to school?‖ and for the patents' focus group was ―Why your children could not go to school‖? The interviewer kept the discussion to revolve around the main objectives of the study and was found many views towards being out 81 of school for children and their parents. The researcher made video recordings of participants. The responses of focus group discussion were found in APPENDIX G, and APPENDIX H.
Social Media
The main agenda of using social media (Facebook) was to explore unbiased and fair views of people (Snelson; Social Media Research Group, 2016) as people join groups of their own choice and also share pieces of information of their own choice. It is a powerful tool used in many kinds of research (Kosinski, et al., 2015; Wilson, et al., 2012; and Chover-Sierra, & MartõÂnez-Sabater, 2018). Facebook produces richer data and its deeper analysis as Facebook offers an easy way to access and produce networks of family, friends, communities of interest, and professionals. People visit and join groups of their own choice and interest and it becomes a means of communication and sharing pieces of information. This user-generated material helps researchers to get the required data at a mere touch of a button by asking questions in the search bar or different groups of their choice. The major concern about this data is that either it is public or private. Every user agrees about the terms and conditions related to the access of data for others. Another important issue related to ethical consideration for the use of social media as a research tool is informed consent. In many types of research data is analyzed and accessed without the permission of participants as each participant participate upon her or her own will (Townsend &
Wallace, 2016). Repeated online and offline interaction on Facebook increased interpretative validity of research verifiable against a social theory, rather than a simple explanation of the phenomenon (Lunnay, et al., 2014).
In this research, Facebook data was used to find what people think about the actual causes of children being out of school. For this purpose, the researcher joined 82 some research scholar pages on Facebook in which this question was asked ―Why children are out of school in Pakistan?‖ The responses were captured from social media by Ncapture Software and organized in the form of word document. These responses were showed in APPENDIX I, and APPENDIX J. Researcher used
Facebook data due to its uniqueness, availability, and reliability and simplification of certain penetration issues. (Nelson, 2015 cited Blank, 2013).
Ethical Issues
For any empirical investigation, ethical considerations are important especially, when your participants are children who never attend a school or dropout from a school (Young & Barrett, 2001). Therefore, ―ethics in research is related to the application of the system of moral principles to prevent harming or wronging others, to be good, respectful and fair” (Morrow, 2008:51). Ethics are also dealt with the belief about proper or improper, good or bad, and right or wrong (McMillan and
Schumacher, 2006:142). According to Royce et al. (2010), researchers should be open to criticism and ideas, conduct research with care, and fair in report writing. This study requires some ethical considerations, just as consent, anonymity, confidentiality, privacy, and harm to respondents. The researcher informed both children and their parents about the brief description of this research and video recording of interviews and discussion. Only those participants‘ responded who were agreed. The researcher also ensured the identity of participants by caring for their confidentiality and also ensured them at the start of the interview that the pieces of information given by them kept being confidential. The researcher used code names of the respondents in the study to increase the anonymity as it is the responsibility of the researcher that participants should not be harmed or in danger due to research. All 83 possible measures were taken to reduce the involvement of adults during the interviews of children.
Procedure of Study
The researcher started the data collection process for interviews in five of the
Districts and administered interviews in person by visiting those areas where the possibility of out of school children was more. The data from the remaining sample were collected through research assistant, who had been trained during the pilot testing.
The researcher adopted a systematic process of analyzing and interpreting the data. The process including collection of data, organization of data, giving meaning to data, and writing a coherent story that helps others to grasp meaning which is required
(Braun, & Clarke, 2013a). The responses obtained through the above-mentioned research instruments were analyzed by the following software:
NVivo 11 plus Qualitative Data Analysis Software
Ncapture Software
SPSS Software
This study was using the qualitative research design so qualitative research analysis software was suitable for data analysis. While a little bit demographic part of the interviews was analyzed by SPSS for the measurement of frequency counts.
Thematic Analysis
The researcher used thematic analysis in an inductive, semantic and realistic way for coding and theme development (Alholjailan, 2012; Maguire, & Delahunt,
2017; and Nowell, et al., 2017). The interview schedules prepared for thematic analysis through a process of transcription which was followed by transliteration.
Regmi et al. (2010) explained transliteration as; it is a process of rephrasing, and 84 changing or harmonizing the meanings of words in one language with the meanings of words in another language. And transcription is the conversion of speech and sounds of interviewee into written statements from video or audio recording. After that researcher familiarized with data and labeled codes. Codes were the labels assigned to important information given by interviewees (Delaney, et al., 2011;
Davies, et al., 2014; Stead, et al., 2016; and Cassol, et al. 2018). Themes and sub- themes emerged from matching and reviewing codes and a thematic map was developed (Vaismoradi, et al., 2013; Costa, et al.; Javadi, & Zarea; and Vaismoradi, et al., 2016). On the base of this map, a narrative analysis of codes and analytical report writing was done.
Figure 3.2: Procedure of Study
85
Delimitations of the Study
This study was delimited for interviews with only one Tehsil from each division of Punjab. The study was further delimited data collection to one urban union council in contrast to two rural union councils from the same Tehsil.
Limitations
It is qualitative research and due to its subjectivity readers interpreted it differently. Although, a large number of participants and the sheer amount of data collected, lend a great deal of credibility to findings and these voices also provided excellent, solid, well-warranted answers to the list of objectives and questions. The evidence researcher provides is telling and should convince any critic that change is overdue in providing conditions that enable children to be in and stay in school.
Numbers say a great deal, but never enough. Qualitative interviewing is intended to add depth to information about the lived experiences of people. Focus group discussions and views from social media give strength to this study.
86
Chapter IV
Results
The following chapter unmasked the results of qualitative analysis with some basic descriptive results in the form of frequency counts (Appendix L). Two population groups of children can be extracted from 5 Dimensions of Exclusion model, i.e. one type of children who never went to school and others who ever went to school. So, this part contains the thematic analysis of interviews of both children and parents regarding out of school and drop out children, focus group discussion of children, focus group discussion of parents, reasons for out of school Facebook data, and reasons for dropout Facebook data. Literature showed many reasons for out of school; they may be either why children have never attended school or what are the reasons for dropout? Most of the literature explored barriers to education as Demand- side socio-cultural barriers, demand side economic barriers, supply side barriers, and political barriers. Causes of exclusion also separated on the base of five dimensions of exclusion. The researcher developed five categories of barriers after extensive reviews from literature and found that almost all types of barriers fall in these categories.
During the data, collection procedure the researcher found some reasons for being out of school that was not discussed in most of the studies. Another reason for developing these five categories is that most of the participants of the study are illiterate or less educated, therefore extraction of problems to children schooling from them is another problem. Views of focus groups and social media have strenghthened these reasons.
Thematic Analysis
Thematic analysis is a process of identifying and highlighting the ―Patterns‖ and ―Sequence‖ in a wide set of data. In this process firstly researcher should become familiar with the data followed by generating initial codes. After that, the process of 87 searching for subthemes and reviewing the subthemes should be done. The next step is defining and naming the themes and at last, is producing the report. The responses of children and parents were analyzed by the ―Coding Process‖. The words that come again and again were given certain codes so it becomes easy to handle a large number of responses and to understand data in a systematic way. For this purpose Firstly, the
―Transliteration‖ process of interviews, Focus group discussion, and Facebook data had been done. In this process respondents' speech described in the mother tongue in the English Alphabet. After that, the process of ―Translation‖ was done. The next step was ―Labeling Data‖ in which common similarities and differences of the responses, attributes, and characteristics of children and parents were grouped and labeled. This process was done with the help of NVivo 11 plus software. The next step was the development of ―Sub Themes‖ and sub themes are data-driven. In the end, after the process of initial coding, some ―Themes‖ emerged from the whole data. The theme is a concept, a description, an element, or an attribute. Themes can be organized from repeated words, concepts, and ideas of children and parents based on their interviews, focus the discussion, and Facebook data. Descriptive results in the form of frequency counts of the interviews were summarized with the help of SPSS.
Interviews
Voices of Out of School Children
The qualitative results regarding out of school children interviews that were processed by NVivo 11 plus. 88
Figure 4.1: Word Frequency Cloud of most Repeating Words in Interviews of Out of
School Children.
Themes
The process of initial coding was done by using NVivo 11 Plus in which four major Themes were formed regarding the reasons of being out of schools.
Figure 4.2: Hierarchy of Identified Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in NVivo11 for Out of School Children. 89
The figure 4.2 showed the four themes emerged after analyzing the results on
NVivo software 11 plus. The results indicated the four main factors are responsible for being out of school. According to the results of the children interviews regarding out of school children, themes emerged from the analysis of data themes were
―Socioeconomic Factors‖, ―Cultural Factors‖, ―Demographic Factors‖ and
―Psychological Factors‖ that restrain children from school. In 2013, Rozzi et al. edited chapter 24 ―Hierarchy Theory: An Overview‖ by Jianguo Wu defined hierarchy as ―a system structured in layers or levels that have asymmetric relations‖. Wu explained hierarchy in the words of Simon ( 1962 , p. 468) as ―a system that is composed of interrelated subsystems, each of the latter being, in turn, hierarchic in structure until we reach some lowest level of elementary subsystem.‖ He also said that maps are most useful way to explore the spatial hierarchies of different kinds.
Sub Themes
By using NVivo 11 plus software, the sub themes were generated in order to organize a group of data like repeated words, attributes, and ideas by emerging them into their corresponding themes. Each theme has some sub themes.
Cultural Factors
The first theme was ―Cultural Factors‖. It means children can‘t get their education due to some cultural factors that cause hindrance against their education. 90
Figure 4.3: Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in
NVivo11 for Cultural Factors.
Figure 4.3 indicated that ―Area‘s Environment‖, ―Literacy‖ and ―Female
Problems‖ are the main cultural hindrances. These sub themes have some codes that have been extracted from interviews of out of school children. Such as ―Children of my Caste‖, ―Sexual harassment‖, ―Send their mentally retarded children to school‖, and ―People in my area are poor‖ are the main cultural issues related to the area's environment. Interviewees reported first sub theme ―Area‘s Environment‖ as:
91
OC 24:
“I have no time to think about my puberty, but I have a fear of sexual harassment in school or on the school’s way. As I am only 13 years old, parents worried about our food more than our marriage”.
OC 130:
“I am not in school because of puberty and sexual harassment on the way to school. People of my area are dangerous for young and lonely children”.
OC 190:
“The people of my area, who can afford children’s school, send their mentally ill children to school as well as the normal ones. Children of my caste go to school too”.
OC 151:
“People of my caste and area are not sending mentally or physically retarded and normal children to school”.
OC 82:
“People of my area those who have money they send their mentally retarded children”.
Many children told that they have no fear of sexual harassment while actual reports show different shades, just as according to a monitoring report of online newspaper Pakistan Today; 3445 children were abused in Pakistan during the year of
2017 (Staff Reporter, 2018).
OC 84:
I have no time to think about my puberty and I have not the fear of sexual harassment in school or on the school’s way.
92
OC 67:
I am only 09 years old and not afraid of puberty and marriage. I also don’t feel fear of sexual harassment in school or in the school’s way.
But some children left their school due to the fear of sexual harassment.
The second sub theme to ―Cultural Factors‖ theme was ―Female Problems‖.
Children indicated that low rate of girls' literacy is due to a biased attitude of their family members towards female‘s education. Family discouragement towards girl‘s education and encouragement for boys dishearten girls. Early marriage also reduces the literacy rate of girls. This sub theme emerged from the coding process and indicated that ―Different attitude towards boys and girls‖, ―Grown up girl‖, ― Early marriage of girls‖, ―Give preference to boys‖, and ―Negative attitude towards girls education‖ was the main female problems. Interviewees indicated it as follow:
OC 70:
“My father doesn’t bother about my education. He does not drop me to school”. OC 215:
“If my school was near to my home and if there was no any other problem, then I could not go to school, as I am grown up and I can’t be able to adjust among small children of class”.
OC 124:
“My parents and relatives show negative attitude towards girls’ education, but people of my caste and area are sending mentally or physically retarded children to school”.
OC 216:
“My parents and relatives show negative attitude towards girls’ education, they support only boys’ education”. 93
But many parents showed the same attitudes towards their children.
OC 1:
“And my parents show the same attitude towards boys and girls”.
OC 4:
“My parents and relatives do not show negative attitude towards girls’ education and people of my caste and area send mentally or physically retarded children to school”.
The next sub theme was ―Literacy‖ which had been evolved from our cultural attributes, ideas, and interests. The issues of out of school children related to this sub theme were reflected as ―father is illiterate‖, ―Parents are illiterate‖ and ―I am illiterate‖ in the interviews of Out of School Children.
Illiterate parents don‘t know the importance and value of education. They think about their present not their children‘s future. Children were illiterate and their parents gave preference to earning rather than their education. Parents have no awareness regarding the education so they let their children earn with them in order to overcome poverty. So, children told about literacy as:
OC 40:
“My parents never went to school. I did not go to school, but my greatest desire is that I want to go to school”.
OC 28: “My father is illiterate. He never went to school. No one likes to go to school in our family. My mother was not going to school. I have never gone to school, as we can’t afford school”.
OC 52:
“I did not go to school myself, but my strongest wish is to study”.
94
Demographic Factors
Demographic factors also play an important role in the increase or decrease of school enrolment rate. Family size, distance and living area status can directly or indirectly affect education.
Figure 4.4: Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in
NVivo11 for Demographic Factors.
The above figure 4.4 showed that the sub themes emerged from coding of data were ―Family Size‖, ―Living Area‘s Status‖ and ―Distance‖ and these sub themes demographically affected the education of children. Large families have low educational resources. People living in disaster or barren areas move toward green and prosperous areas, this effect their child's education. Thoughts of daily long travelling and teachers‘ punishment annoyed them. Parents worry about their health and no participation in house chores. This indicated by interviewees as:
95
OC 102:
“We are fifteen in the family. I have eleven siblings. None of us go to school.
We are very poor and my family income is seven thousand”.
OC 56:
“There are 8 members in my family. I have 3 brothers and a sister and no one of us go to school, it is a large family”.
OC 75:
“We are nine in the family. I have six siblings. None of us are going to school.
OC 80:
“My mother is busy with house chores and father is busy in his work, so no one drops me to school. I contribute in my family earning to some extent and help my mother. Each one of us is busy in earning”.
OC 86:
“We also can’t afford any kind of transport for my education”.
OC 115:
“If I had no money for admission, then how can I get money for transport? My father doesn’t bother about my education. He does not drop me to school in my childhood”.
OC 116:
“We are living in green area, but we have not land and money”.
OC 117:
“People in my area are very rich”.
OC 22:
“People in my area are very poor. I can’t think about my future in those worse conditions of living”. 96
OC 55:
“We are living in barren area”.
OC 199:
“I don’t live in a disastrous area even if I’m poor”.
Psychological Factors
Psychology of children has long lasting effects on the mind and soul of children. Out of School Children have many psychological issues that become hurdles against their education. Out of School Children described many psychological factors that are shown in the figure 4.5 below.
97
Figure 4.5: Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in
NVivo11 for Psychological Factors.
There were four psychological problems that were faced by Out of School
Children. These were ―Adjustment Problems‖, ―Parents and Children‘s Relationship‖,
―Personal Problems‖, and ―Future Dreams‖, as shown in above figure 4.5. This figure is also highlighting the thematic pattern that comes under the theme of ―Psychological
Factors‖. It explores the common sub themes after an initial coding process of thematic analysis of voices of Out of School Children.
The first sub theme of theme ―Psychological Factors‖ was the ―Adjustment
Problems‖ of a child in society due to some psychological reasons. This map showed that adjustment problems of out of school children were; ―can‘t adjust‖ and ―Divide household work‖. This indicated by interviewees as:
OC 1:
“Sometimes I work for money. I help with house chores; I cut grass for my animals. No one will do house chores in my absence, as we have divided our household work”. “If my school was near to my home and if there was no any other problem, then I can’t go to school, as I am grown up and I can’t be able to adjust among small children of class”.
The other psychological reason is future dream and a future dream depends upon the psychology of a person. So everyone has his own dream without any difference of poor and rich. Interviewees discussed their future in this way:
OC 2:
“If I studied then my wish is to become doctor in future. But we are poor and my wish is only a wish”.
98
OC 3:
“I can’t think about my future in those worse conditions of living. I don’t think to become anything in the future if I have a chance to study”.
OC 8:
“If I studied then my wish is to become an army officer in future”.
OC 12:
“I think to become a successful person like doctor in future if I have a chance to study. Poverty is the main reason of not going to school”.
OC 14:
“If I studied then my wish is to become a police officer in the future. But we are poor and my wish is only a wish because of my mother health”.
The other psychological reason was ―Personal Problems‖ of out of school children. This sub theme generated from ―Likes to go to school‖, ―Like to study in my mother tongue‖, ―Can‘t go to school‖, and ―Puberty‖. Many times these problems become the main causes of being out of school. Interviewees discussed their personal problems in this way:
OC 16:
“No one likes to go to school in our family. I think my mother did not go to school. I have never gone to school, as we can’t afford school. But, I like to go to school”.
OC 18:
“I have never gone to school, as we can’t afford school. But, I like to go to school. I can’t able to go to school as I have no money for admission in school”.
OC 85:
“I want to get education in my mother tongue”. 99
OC 111:
“If someone will educate me, I would like to study in my mother tongue”.
OC 141:
“I have no time to think about my puberty and I have not the fear of sexual harassment in school or in school’s way”.
OC 178:
“I am 15 years old and afraid of puberty and marriage. I also feel the fear of sexual harassment in school or in school’s way”.
Another reason which many times moves forward to stop the education of children is their relation with parents. So the next sub theme was ―Parents and
Children‘s Relationship‖. Motivation of parents is necessary for children‘s education.
Children reported it as:
OC 141:
“My father doesn’t bother about my education. He does not drop me to school. I contribute in my family”.
OC 148:
“My parents have to go for labour work so they don’t even drop me to school”.
OC 42:
“My parents have to go for labour work so they don’t even drop me to school.
I help my parents in earning money and do all household work. Each of us is busy in earning. My siblings are little and no one will do my house chores, if I will start study”.
100
Socioeconomic Factors
The last theme of thematic analysis of Out of School Children was ―Socio
Economic Factors‖. The common sub themes that were originated after coding process of thematic analysis were ―Poverty‖, ―Occupation‖, ―Unemployment‖,
―Family Problems‖, and ―Help in Family‖.
Figure 4.6: Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in
NVivo11 for Socioeconomic Factors. 101
This figure 4.6 is highlighting the thematic pattern that comes under the theme of ―Socio economic Factors‖. It explores the common sub themes after an initial coding process of thematic analysis of voices of out of school children.
Figure 4.6 indicated that poverty, unemployment, family problems, parent‘s occupation and help in family were the main socioeconomic hindrances. These sub themes had some codes that had been extracted from interviews of out of school children. Such as ―my uncle is our guardian‖, ―My father do nothing and takes drugs‖,
―parents worried about our food not our marriage‖, ―My mother died‖, ―Parents quarrel with each other‖, and ―no one will do house chores in my absence‖ were the main socioeconomic issues related to ―Family Problems‖. As, the interviewees reported that;
OC 48:
“My mother died when I was very young”. “As I am only 12 years old, parents worried about our food not our marriage”.
OC 62:
“Each of us busy in earning, no one does my house chores, if I will start study”.
OC 15:
“My father does nothing. He takes drugs. My mother is a labourer on daily wages”.
OC 21:
“My father died. My mother is working in different houses to wash utensils and clothes and help in family earning. No one likes to go to school in our family”.
OC 29:
“My father quarrels with my mother on small house matters”.
102
OC 36:
“My father died. We collect some amount of money from my relatives. My mother is working in a factory. My father was illiterate. He never went to school. No one likes to go to school in our family. My mother is illiterate”.
OC 208:
“We are eight in the family. I have three sisters and a brother and my parents can’t afford our education. We are very poor. My father died. My mother is a house wife and my uncle is our guardian”.
The second sub theme of theme ―Socioeconomic Factor‖ was ―Poverty‖. Most of the participants were affected due to poverty and can‘t be able to get an education.
Poverty sub theme had emerged from twelve codes that were ―got relative help‖,
―can‘t afford school‖, ―no money for admission‖, ―no money for purchasing copies and books‖, ―not a single penny for buying a uniform‖, ―worried about our poverty‖,
―worse condition of living‖, ―my parents can‘t afford stationary and books‖, ―teachers will send me back to home if I have not uniform‖, ―can‘t afford any kind of transport‖, ―have not land and money‖, and ―no fee, stationery, uniform, shoes and transport‖. These codes were associated from interviews of out of school children.
OC 58:
“I also have never gone to school, but I like to go to school. I am not in school due to no Fee. I don’t have money for purchasing copies and books too. I also don’t have money for uniform and shoes. I don’t have money for this stuff so I don’t have money for transport and no one to drop. I contribute in earning with my family”.
OC 105:
“I do not go to school, as I have not fee for admission and my parents can’t afford stationary and books for my education. They are not able to purchase uniform 103 and shoes for me. School teachers will send me back to home if I have not uniform.
We also can’t afford any kind of transport for my education. My parents have to go for labour work so they don’t even drop me to school. I don’t help my parent in earning money but I do the household work”.
OC 37:
“I can’t able to go to school as I have no money for admission in the school. I have no money for purchasing copies and books. I have not a single penny for buying a uniform. If I had no money for admission, then how can I get money for transport?
My father does not drop me to school. I contribute in my family. Sometimes I work for money”.
OC 104:
“I am all time worried about our poverty. I have no time to think about my puberty and I have not the fear of sexual harassment in school or in school’s way”.
OC 7:
“My father does nothing. He is unemployed. We collect some amount of money from my relatives”.
OC 65:
“We are living in green area, but we have not land and money”.
OC 98:
“School teachers will send me back to home if I have not uniform”.
The next sub theme generated for ―Socio economic Factors‖ was
―Unemployment‖. When parents are unemployed or one family member works to supply all family needs, then survival becomes more important. This sub theme was emerging from ―He is unemployed‖, ―contribute in my family‖, ―wandering for 104 earning‖, ―family income‖, ―father does nothing as he is ill‖, and ―want to get an education for job‖. Out of school interviewees illustrated it as:
OC 14:
“My father is an unemployed person. My mother is working in a factory. She spends most of her time outside the home”.
OC 128:
“I contribute in my family. Sometimes I work for money. I help in house chores; I cut grass for my animals”.
OC 213:
“We are living in barren areas. I can’t think about my future in those worse conditions of living”.
OC 62:
“My parents don’t move from place to place for their earning”.
OC 90:
“I want to get job in the future if I have a chance to study. Poverty is the main reason of not going to school.
OC 93:
“We are nine in the family. I have six siblings. None of us are going to school.
We are very poor and my family income is seven thousand. My father is a labourer”.
OC 60:
“There are 10 members in my family. I have 3 sisters and 3 brothers. We don’t go to school. We earn 30000 thousand per month, but this money is not enough for a big family when inflation rates increase day by day. My parents are labourers in a factory”.
105
OC 188:
“My father does nothing and takes drugs. We collect some amount of money from my relatives and live with my uncle. My mother died”.
The next sub theme was parent‘s ―Occupation‖ because occupation identifies family income. All out of school children belong to those parents who have low income occupations. Their parents may be working with a constructor or works in a factory on daily wages. Some parents were labourer, tailor, driver, sells vegetables on cart, make homemade toys and work on brick furnace. Participants narrated it as:
OC 116:
“My father is a labourer. My mother is a house wife”.
OC 31:
“We are very poor and monthly income is nine to ten thousand. My father is working in a factory”.
OC 27:
“My father is a labourer on daily wages. My mother is a house wife and does not help in family earning”.
OC 200:
“My father has a cart and he sells homemade drinks. My mother is a house wife”.
OC 204:
“My father works in a shop. My mother is a house wife”.
OC 60:
“We earn 30000 thousand per month, but this money is not enough for a big family when inflation rates increase day by day. My parents are labourers in a factory”. 106
OC 202:
“My father sells homemade toys. My mother is a house wife”.
OC 61:
“My father works with a constructor. My mother is a house wife”.
Most of the parents were labourers and work on daily wages. The last sub theme of thematic analysis of ―Socio Economic Factors‖ theme was ―Help in
Family‖. This sub theme was emerging from coding the data by labeling same repeated patterns of the voices of out of school children. The codes extracted from labeling were ―I work for money‖, ―help in house chores‖, ―cut grass for animals‖,
―help my parents in earning money‖, help my mother in making food‖ and ―clean home and wash utensils‖. Participants described it as:
OC 87:
“I don’t help my parents in earning money but I do the household work. My parents are busy in earning, and my siblings are little no one will do my house chores, if I will start study”.
OC 61:
“I contribute in my family. Sometimes I work for money. I help in house chores; I make food and take care of our young ones. No one will do house chores in the absence of me, as we have divided our household work”.
OC 107:
“I contribute in my family earning to some extent and help my mother in making food and take care of my young siblings. Each of us busy in earning, no one does my house chores, if I will start study”.
107
OC 94:
“I help my parents in earning money for our better life. If I go to school, then none of my family members will do my house chores”.
OC 18:
“I don’t contribute to my family income. I help in house chores; I make food for my family and clean home”.
Voices of Out of School Children’s Parents
There are five themes were identified regarding views of Out of School
Children‘s Parents towards the reasons of not getting admission in schools in analysis by NVivo 11 plus.
Themes
The thematic analysis for extracting different themes was done by labeling common patterns, ideas, attributes and interest of out of school children‘s parents. So, different sub themes emerged from coding the data by labeling same repeated patterns of the Voices of Out of School Children‘s Parents.
The five main themes emerged from the interviews of out of School children‘s parents were shown in the figure 4.7 below. 108
Figure 4.7: Hierarchy of Identified Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in NVivo11 for Out of School Children‘s Parents.
The above figure 4.7 showed that according to out of school children‘s parents' point of view, five major factors, e.g. ―Socio Economic Factors‖, ―Policy barriers‖, ―Demographic Factors‖, ―Psychological Factors‖ and ―Cultural factors‖ were responsible for the illiteracy of their children. These themes except ―Policy
Barriers‖ were same as identified in interviews of out of school children. Out of school children cannot be able to identify policy barriers responsible for their illiteracy but parents have some knowledge about Government policies, and they can be able to define their problems related to Government policies.
Sub Themes
The above said themes which emerged after the data analysis process had done on NVivo 11 plus software from the interviews of Out of School Children‘s Parents 109 had some sub themes. These sub themes showed common similarities that parents associated with different themes and were described here one by one.
Cultural Factors
The first theme of thematic analysis of Out of School Children‘s Parents was
―Cultural Factors‖. The common sub themes that come after coding process of thematic analysis by labeling data were ―Area environment‖, ―Female Problems‖ and
―Literacy‖. These sub themes showed similarities that different parents associate with
―Cultural Factors‖. The below figure 4.8 elaborated it as follow:
Figure 4.8: Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in
NVivo11 for Cultural Factors. 110
The first sub theme generated by coding of data was ―Area environment‖.
Area environment makes culture of any area and reflects the way of living of people.
This sub theme was originated from some common repeated patterns such as ―Send mentally retarded children to school‖, Sexual Harassment‖, ―Children of my caste‖ and ―no labour work in our village‖ of parents‘ interviews. As participants reported that:
OCP 5:
“There was no labour work in our village, so we can’t adjust in that miserable condition of poverty”.
OCP 103:
“People of my caste and area send mentally or physically retarded children to school, but some of them harass our children sexually. So my relatives don’t like to send their girls to school”.
OCP 18 “My children have a great wish to get education and children of my caste go to school”. Many times females are the deprived persons of a society. The behavior towards girls is the reflection of the mindset of a society. So the next sub theme of this theme ―Cultural Factors‖ was ―Female Problems‖. Female problems had been explored by labeling common codes such as; ― Different attitude towards boys and girls‖, ―Early marriage of girls‖, ―Girls of my family don‘t go to school‖, ―Give preference to boys‖, ―Negative attitude towards girls‘ education‖, and ― Can‘t send my daughters due to long distance‖ in interviews. Interviewees reported it as:
OCP 18: “People of my area don’t send their mentally or physically retarded children to school but send their girls to school”. 111
OCP 48:
“People of my caste and area send mentally or physically retarded children to school, but some of them harass our children sexually. So my relatives don’t like to send their girls to school”.
OCP 5:
“My relatives don’t like to send their girls to school. Many of them are poor”.
OCP 96:
“A school is situated in the neighbouring village. It requires daily long travelling. I can’t send my daughters to school”.
OCP 97:
“People of my disaster area and cast send their normal and handicapped children to school, but they support only boys’ education”.
OCP 37:
“Some people of our area harass our children sexually. So my relatives don’t like to send their girls to school”.
OCP 85:
“I can’t send my daughters to school. My children had not educational accessories. I can’t afford all the educational expenses of my all children”.
Some people like to send their girls to school but they can‘t afford their transportation and educational expenses.
OCP 91:
“My family does not show negative attitude towards girls’ education and they are not worried about the sexual harassment of their children in school or in school’s way. Better people of our caste send their girls to school”.
112
OCP 33:
“People of our area and caste send their girls and mentally or physically retarded children to school. If I have not a problem of money, I send my children to school definitely”.
OCP 36:
“My family does not show negative attitude towards girls’ education and they are not worried about the sexual harassment of their children in school or in school’s way”.
The next common sub theme identified from coding process was ―Literacy‖.
Knowledgeable society becomes helpful in increase of literacy while ignorant society produces illiterates. Illiterates don‘t know the importance of education. They live in a dark hole of ignorance. Interviews of out of school parents reflected it as:
OCP 91:
“We are twelve family members. Now all of my ten children are not going to school”.
OCP 31:
“None of my children go to school. I had not studied”.
OCP 30:
“I never saw any school. My children had not educational accessories. I can’t afford all the educational expenses of my all children”.
OCP 50:
“I belong to a poor family and had not gone to school. My children can’t go to school because they have not books and copies, uniform and shoes, and any source of transport”.
113
OCP 82:
“My all children do not go to school. I was also never gone to school in my childhood”.
Demographic Factors
There are different demographic factors responsible for being out of school.
Parents‘ point of views were same as Out of School Children said that family size, distance and living area status can directly or indirectly affect education.
Figure 4.9: Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in
NVivo11 for Demographic Factors.
The following figure 4.9 indicated that ―Family Size‖, ―Distance‖, and
―Living Area‘s Status‖ were the main demographic hindrances against out of schools. 114
These sub themes had some codes that had been identified from interviews of out of school children‘s parents by labelling of data. These were ―Large family‖, ―Busy in earning‖, Disaster area‖, ―Green area‖, ―Poor area‖, ―Our area is not prosperous‖,
―Daily long travels‖, and ―School is situated in neighbouring village‖.
In our country only one family member works and the other family members eat in many large families. This member can‘t be able to fulfil all the needs of family.
Education is not the first priority, first priority is survival. As, the interviewees reported that:
OCP 77:
“We are thirteen; husband and wife with ten children and my mother. I am a labourer and works on daily wages. I earn four to five thousand per month. Now one of my children goes to school as we can’t afford their studies”.
OCP 84:
“We are fifteen; husband and wife with twelve children and my father. I make bricks on a brick furnace. I earn five to six thousand per month. Not a single child of my family goes to school as we can’t afford education of all. I am a poor, my father was a poor and my children will be poor. Due to high inflation rates I can’t afford the educational expenditures of my children”.
The next sub theme was ―Distance‖. This sub theme emerged from interviews of out of school children‘s parents. Parents don‘t like to send their children to school when school is far away especially girls. Participant narrated it as:
OCP 96:
“I never saw any school. A school is situated in the neighbouring village. It requires daily long travelling. I can’t send my daughters to school”.
115
OCP 88:
“Not a single child of my family goes to school as we can’t afford education of all and school’s travelling required two hours”.
The next demographical sub theme was ―Living Area‘s Status‖. It affected the way of living, earning of out of school children‘s parents people of their area. As participants described that:
OCP 51:
“We are living in a disaster area. People of my area want food not education”.
OCP 30:
“People of our area are not prosperous. Many of them are poor, but who have money sent their children to school”.
OCP 65:
“We live in green areas of country. If I have money and their school is near to our home then I will send my children to school”.
OCP 89:
“We are poor and moving place to place for earning”.
Psychological Factors
The ―Psychological Factors‖ theme emerged from the thematic analysis of out of school children‘s parents interviews had five sub themes that were identified by labeling the common patterns in interviews. These sub themes were ―Adjustment
Problems‖, ―Future Dream‖, ―Parents and Children‘s Relationship‖, and ―Personal
Problems‖. According to the parents point of views these problems become the main causes for being out of school. 116
Figure 4.10: Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in
NVivo11 for Psychological Factors.
According to out of school children‘s parents the sub theme ―Adjustment
Problems‖ can be originated from psychological upset of mind. Many times people are not adjusted in society due to attitude problems. And it becomes a chain of poor.
Due to adjustment problems in families, family members divide their house chores to avoid any fight. Interviewees described it as:
OCP 5:
“There was no labour work in our village, so we can’t adjust in that miserable condition of poverty”.
117
OCP 15:
“A labourer whose income is five to six thousand per month, can’t able to send his children to school. I did not go to school and my children also do not go to school. It is a chain for poorer”.
OCP 33:
“They did not contribute in family earning as they are young, but they helped in house chores. We divide our house chores”.
The next sub theme was ―Future dream‖ in this theme ―Psychological
Factors‖. Everyone has its own dreams, according to its own thinking, interest and ideas. Dreams require a consistent hard work. To see dream is the right of every person. Parents of out of school children said about the dreams of their love ones as they want to become ―Successful person‖, ―Doctor‖, ―Can‘t see dreams‖, ―Police officer‖, ―Think about their future to become something‖, ―Teacher‖, ―To get jobs‖,
―said nothing about their future‖, ―Dream is nothing‖, ―No dream‖, ―Lawyer‖, Wish to give education to my ward‖ and ―To get education‖. Parents identified this sub theme as:
OCP 1:
“I want education for my children. We are poor; my children have no dreams about their future. If they study, may be they become a lawyer. But, how it can be possible for poorer”?
OCP 6:
“You also note that it is my great wish to give education to my ward. If we are not poor, my children go to school too”.
118
OCP 2:
“You also note that the actual hurdle against the education of our children is their fee and money. They wanted to get jobs. If we are not poor, they go to school too”.
OCP 3:
“Poor becomes poorer day by day. The government asks nothing about our problems of fee and money. My child's dream is to have a good job. But, they failed to fulfill their dreams due to poverty”.
OCP 36:
“I want fee and money for my child's education. We are poor; my children don’t think about their future. If they studied, may be they get jobs”.
OCP 71:
“Poor people can’t see dreams, but my children told me that they want to become something. If they study, they will become successful persons”.
OCP 72:
“They said nothing about their future dreams. If they study, they want to become a politician. Other then poverty, we have not any reason for being out of school”.
OCP 8:
“I want resources for my children’s education. We are poor; my children always thinking about their future job just like army officer. If they studied, may be they become army officer. But, they have not a single penny for their studies”.
OCP 10:
“My child's dream is to become a successful person like a doctor after studying. But, they failed to fulfill their dreams as we can’t afford education”. 119
OCP 14:
“My children's dreams are to have a good education to become successful persons”.
OCP 37:
“If my children have a chance to get the education they want to get it in their mother tongue”.
OCP 59:
“Poor people can’t see dreams, but my children told me that they want to get a job and can become Govt. Officer, if they study”.
The next or third sub theme emerged after coding the common similarities in interviews of out of school children‘s parents was ―Parents and Children‘s
Relationship‖. Good relations support and motivate children to work hard for their future otherwise they were disheartened. This sub theme emerged from ―Helped in house chores‖, ―Did not contribute in family earning‖, and ―No time to pick and drop our children‖. Parents indicated that:
OCP 18:
“They have not any one to drop them into the school. My children don’t help us in our earning”.
OCP 44:
“And have no time to pick and drop our children to school. They did not contribute in family earning as they are young, but they helped in house chores”.
OCP 14:
“Our children contribute in family earning and stay busy in household works”. 120
The fourth sub theme generated from the common similarities was ―Personal
Problems‖. Interviewees described different personal problems of their children.
These problems step forward in the way to their children‘s education. The most common codes extracted from the interviews of out of school children‘s parents were
―like to study in mother tongue‖, ―I left my school‖, ―Puberty‖, ― stay busy in household works‖, and ― Quarrel‖. As interviewees narrated it:
OCP 54:
“Our children contribute in family earning and stay busy in household works”.
OCP 58:
“Poverty engulfs us. I quarrel with my wife on small matters”.
OCP 59:
“If my children have a chance to get the education they want to get it in their mother tongue”.
OCP 27:
“I was going to school in my childhood. I left my school in second class”.
Socioeconomic Factors
The fourth theme of thematic analysis of out of school children‘s parents was
―Socio Economic Factors‖. The common sub themes that come after coding process of thematic analysis by NVivo 11 plus were ―Poverty‖, ―Occupation‖,
―Unemployment‖, ―Family Problems‖, and ―Help in Family‖. These sub themes were same as out of school children‘s sub themes for socioeconomic factors. 121
Figure 4.11: Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in
NVivo11 for Socioeconomic Factors.
The first common sub theme of ―Socio Economic Factors‖ theme generated from the similarities of interviews of out of school children‘s parents was ―Family
Problems‖. Family problem many times become the main cause of illiteracy. Parents told that ―My husband is not with us‖, ―My wife died‖, and ―worried about food mot marriage‖ were some of family problems that can become the reasons of their children for being out of school. Interviewees narrated it as:
OCP 93:
“My husband is not with us. I am a teacher in a private school. My monthly income is 9000-10000. My all children are not going to school”.
122
OCP 90:
“There are five people in my family and I have three children. I work as a peon in a school. My husband died. My monthly income is 9000-10000. Only one of my children goes to school. I can’t compete against the inflation rate. I didn't study also”.
OCP 89:
“We have little money; by it, we only eat not study. We know about the importance of education”.
OCP 73:
“People of my area want food instead of education”.
The second important sub theme of ―Socio Economic Factors‖ theme was
―Poverty‖. Poverty is the main reason for out of school children. ―Work on daily wages‖, ―no fee, stationary, uniform, shoes, and transport‖, ―earn your to five thousand‖, ―can‘t afford their studies‖, ―no money for school expenditures‖, ―we are poor‖, ―can‘t be able to buy books and copies‖, ―where we find there we eat‖, ―cannot be possible for poor‖, ―living hand to mouth‖, ―had not those educational accessories‖. Poverty engulfs us‖, and ―can‘t afford the education of all children, reflected a poverty of a family. Parents described it in their own words as:
OCP 70:
“Eight people are in my home. I have six children. They are not going to school except one. We are making mud toys and after very hard work of all family, we earn three to four thousand. I never saw a school. My children always liked to go to school. My children have not fee, books and copies, uniform and shoes, and have not any source of transport to go to school. They helped me in my work”.
123
OCP 67:
“I have no money for their transport, uniforms, shoes, books, copies and fee.
My children always like to go to school. We are living hand to mouth. We can’t afford transport for school. My children help us in earning and household works. We are poor and moving place to place for earning”.
OCP 56:
“You also note that the actual hurdle against the education of our children is their fee and money. They wanted to get jobs. If we are not poor, they go to school too”.
OCP 35:
“None of my children go to school. I didn't study also. We are poor and can’t afford the fee. My children had not those educational accessories which are compulsory for students, i.e. books, copies, uniforms, shoes, and transport of pick and drop. Our children contribute in families earning and stay busy in household works”.
OCP 36:
“Now all of my five children do not go to school. My husband’s income is five to six thousand per month, and we can’t able to send our children to school. I am a house wife. I did not go to school and my children also do not go to school. It is a chain of poor. My children do not go to school as have not money for my children’s fee. I can’t able to purchase their school accessories, i.e. uniforms, copies, books, shoes and transport. My children do not help me in my and their mother’s work”.
OCP 25:
“Poverty engulfs us. I quarrel with my wife on small matters. If our conditions become better I will send my children to school”. 124
Next common sub theme was ―Unemployment‖ which is again a great hurdle in the way of getting an education. Unemployment causes many socioeconomic and psychological problems. Now a day without money there is no survival or life. It decreases the income of family and family is forced to work on daily wages and people move from place to place for earning. Parents told about this sub theme as:
OCP 9:
“I am working on daily wages and after very hard work I get five to six thousand. I never saw any school. My children had not educational accessories. I can’t afford all the educational expenses of my all children”.
OCP 22:
“I am a housewife and my husband works on daily wages. We earn four to five thousand per month. Now one of my children goes to school as we can’t afford their studies”.
OCP 45:
“We are poor and moving place to place for earning”.
The fourth common sub theme was ―Occupation‖. An occupation has an indirect effect on children‘s education. In our country some occupations have low levels of earnings or income. So, the people of those occupations can‘t afford the education of their children. In interviews, parents relate their occupation to the education of their children in such a way:
OCP 46:
“I am a labourer. My monthly income is 4000-5000. None of my children go to school. I didn't study too”.
125
OCP 92:
“I am making bricks and after very hard work of all family, we earn three to four thousand. I never saw a school. My children always liked to go to school. My children have not fee, books and copies, uniform and shoes, and have not any source of transport to go to school”.
OCP 82:
“My wife is not with us. I am washing clothes and utensils of people. My monthly income is 6000-7000. My all children are not going to school”.
OCP 73:
“I make bricks on a brick furnace. I earn five to six thousand per month. Not a single child of my family goes to school as we can’t afford education of all. I am a poor, my father was a poor and my children will be poor. Due to high inflation rates I can’t afford the educational expenditures of my children. We are poor so we are not able to encourage our children to go to school, while my other family members send their children to school”.
OCP 74:
“I am working on daily wages and after very hard work I get five to six thousand”.
OCP 64:
“My husband is a carpenter. I am a house wife. Our monthly income is 7000-
8000. None of my children go to school”.
OCP 66:
“I am a labourer and works on daily wages. I earn four to five thousand per month. Now one of my children goes to school as we can’t afford their studies”.
126
OCP 35:
“I have a cart on which I sell vegetables and fruits. My monthly income is
4000-5000. None of my children go to school”.
OCP 49:
“I am an Auto driver. My monthly income is 14000-15000. My all children are not going to school”.
OCP 54:
“I work in different houses. My family’s monthly income is 15000-16000.
None of my children go to school”.
OCP 57:
“Our whole family makes mud toys and sells them. My family monthly income is 4000-5000. None of my children go to school”.
The last sub theme of theme ―Socio Economic Factors‖ was ―Help in Family‖.
This theme emerged from the common codes such as ―children help us in earning‖,
―help in house chores‖, and ―they work for money‖ in interviews. Participants indicated it as:
OCP 68:
“Our children contribute in family earning and stay busy in household works”.
OCP 38: “My children always like to go to school. They helped me in my work”.
OCP 55:
“They did not contribute in family earning as they are young, but they helped in house chores”.
OCP 47:
“My children do not help me in my and their father’s work”. 127
Policy Barriers
The fifth and last theme of thematic analysis of Out of School Children‘s
Parents was ―Policy Barriers‖. The common sub themes that come after coding process of thematic analysis by NVivo 11 plus were ―Organizational‖, and
―Structural‖,. Organizational barriers originated before the implementation of policies while structural barriers originated after the implementation of policies. The questions relate to policy barriers were asked only from parents as children don‘t know about the policies. The below figure 4.12 showed these common sub themes by coding process.
Figure 4.12: Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in
NVivo11 for Policy Barriers. 128
The following figure 4.12 indicated that ―Organizational‖ and ―Structural‖ were the main policy barriers. These sub themes had some codes that had been extracted from interviews of out of school children‘s parents. These were ―Govt. tells free and compulsory education for all‖, ―to increase the literacy rate of country‖,
―some people wrote our problems on pages‖, the relationship between formulation and implementation of policy‖ and ―Government wrote thousands of pages for free and compulsory education for all‖ were the main policy barriers related to organizational barriers and the codes of ―Structural‖ sub theme that had been extracted from interviews of out of school children‘s parents were ―Govt. Do nothing‖, ―Poor becomes poorer day by day‖, ―I want resources‖, ―Give equal rights to rich and poor‖, ―Govt. Failed to fulfil their dreams‖, and ―writes big ideas, but implements nothing‖. As, the interviewees reported that:
OCP 16:
“I think this is due to unawareness of government; it writes big ideas but implements nothing. It tells free and compulsory education for all but does nothing for poor. It does not give equal rights to rich and poor. We have little money; by it, we only eat not study. We know about the importance of education. One day some people wrote our problems on pages, but did nothing for us. You also note that it is my great wish to give education to my ward”.
OCP 28:
“I think there is no relation between formulation and implementation of policy; it is only a written statement. I know that it is my children’s right that government should provide free and compulsory education to them. But, government is not promoting social justice for our children. I want to admit my children to school, but my conditions are not affordable. Not any single government personnel asked us 129 about our child's education. I want fee and money for my children’s future education”.
OCP 12:
“Our children are not getting education due to faults in formulation and implementation of policies. Our Government is sleeping and does not provide free and compulsory education to our children. It does not promote social justice for our children. I know about my responsibilities to admit my children to school, but if no one asks about my problems for admission. I want education for my children”.
OCP 42:
“Government wrote thousands of pages for free and compulsory education for all, but implementation is zero. Poor becomes poorer day by day. The government asks nothing about resources of education”.
OCP 11:
“I think our Government is unable to form a relationship between formulation and implementation of policy; and it becomes only a written statement. Government does not apply rules and regulations towards children’s rights and does not provide free and compulsory education to them. In that sense Government is not promoting social justice for our children. I know about my responsibilities towards sending of my children to school but I can’t. Not a single person of government or non- government institution asked about the education of our children. If they want to increase the literacy rate of the country, they should provide fee and money for the education of our children”.
Voices of Dropout Children
This described about the qualitative results regarding dropout school children interviews that were demonstrated by NVivo 11 plus. 130
Themes
The process of initial coding was done by using NVivo 11 Plus in which four major themes were formed regarding the reasons of being dropped out from schools.
Figure 4.13: Hierarchy of Identified Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in NVivo11 for Dropout Children.
The figure 4.13 showed the four themes emerged after analyzing the results on
NVivo software 11 plus. The results indicated the four main factors were responsible for dropouts. According to the results of the children‘s interviews regarding dropout children, there were ―Socio economic Factors‖, ―Cultural Factors‖, ―Demographic
Factors‖ and ―Psychological Factors‖ that make unable to students to prolong their education. In this way, the problems were related to poverty, area environments, gender biases, etc. that inhibited the students to educate.
Sub Themes
By using NVivo 11 plus software, the sub themes were generated in order to organize a group of data like repeated words, attributes, and ideas by emerging them into their corresponding themes. Each theme had some sub themes.
131
Cultural Factors
The children can‘t pursue their education due to some cultural factors that cause hindrance against their education.
Figure 4.14: Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in
NVivo11 for Cultural Factors.
The following figure 4.14 indicated that ―Area‘s Environment‖, ―Teacher‘s behaviour‖, ―Literacy‖ and ―Female Problems‖ that were related to gender biases are the main cultural hindrances. These sub themes had some codes that had been 132 extracted from interviews of dropout children. Such as caste behaviour, fear of sexual harassment, attitude towards handicapped or mentally and physically retarded and poor or rich area were the main cultural issues related to the area's environment. As, the interviewees reported that:
DC 41:
“People of my area those who have money they send their mentally retarded children to school and children of my caste go to school”.
DC 51:
“People of my area and caste who have afforded they send their handicapped children to school”.
Many children said that they are not worried about sexually harassing people of their area but actually danger is present.
DC 52:
“I also don’t feel fear of sexual harassment in school or in the school’s way.
My parents and relatives are showing negative attitude towards girls’ education and people of my caste and area are sending mentally or physically retarded children to school”.
DC 71:
“I have no time to think about my puberty and I have not the fear of sexual harassment in school or in school’s way”.
But some children left their school due to the fear of sexual harassment.
DC 94:
“My parents are poor so we are not able to encourage us to go to school. I am only 12 years old and afraid of puberty and marriage. I also feel the fear of sexual harassment in school or in school’s way”. 133
DC 64:
―My parents don’t move from place to place for their earning. I like to get an education in my mother tongue. We are living in green area, but we have not land and money”.
The second sub theme to cultural theme was ―Female problems‖. Figure 4.14 showed the problems related to females.
Children indicated that low rate of girls' literacy is biased attitude of their family members towards female‘s education. Family discouragement towards girl‘s education and encouragement for boys dishearten girls. Early marriage also reduces the literacy rate of girls. Interviewees indicated it as follow:
DC 17:
“As I am only 14 years old, parents worried about our food not our marriage.
And my parents show the same attitude towards boys and girls”.
DC 24:
“My parents and relatives are showing negative attitude towards girls’ education, but people of my caste and area are sending mentally or physically retarded children to school”.
DC 94:
―My parents are poor so we are not able to encourage us to go to school. I am only 12 years old and afraid of puberty and marriage. I also feel the fear of sexual harassment in school or on the school’s way. My parents and relatives are not showing negative attitude towards girls’ education and people of my caste and area are sending mentally or physically retarded children to school”.
Another two sub themes were ―Literacy‖ and ―Teachers‘ Bahaviour‖ which had been evolved from our culture. 134
Illiterate parents don‘t know the importance and value of education. They think about their present not their children‘s future. Parents of the children are illiterate that they give preference to earning rather than their education. Parents have no awareness regarding the education so they let their children earn with them in order to overcome their poverty. In this research interviewees indicated it as:
DC 7:
“I had gone to school, but left it as we can’t afford school and I started to hifz
Quran e Pak. I liked my school and have no problem in school”.
DC 9:
“My father is illiterate. He never went to school. No one likes to go to school in our family. I think my mother was not going to school”.
Teachers are role models. They can change society. Their behavior has drastic effects on the progress of children. In our society, many teachers teach in an autocratic way. Their behavior discourages children and they leave their studies. Just as:
DC 78:
“I felt discomfort in school due to my teacher’s bahaviour; they discourage my education. So, I left my school due to poverty and long distance to school”.
DC 11:
“My teachers punished me in class, but my parents provided me emotional support at that time. If my school was near to my home and if there was no any other problem, then I go to school, but now I am grown up and I can’t be able to adjust among small children of class”. 135
DC 12:
“I felt discomfort in school due to teachers’ harsh behavior and poverty and weak in study. At last I left my school and learned some skills to increase the income of family”.
Demographic Factors
Demographic factors also play an important role in the increase or decrease of education rate. Family size, distance and living area status can directly or indirectly affect education.
Figure 4.15: Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in
NVivo11 for Demographic Factors.
The above figure 4.15 showed that ―Family Size‖, ―Living Area‘s Status‖ and
―Distance‖ demographically affect the education of children. Large families have low educational resources. People living in disaster or barren areas move toward green 136 and prosperous areas, this effect their child's education. Daily long travelling make tired. Teachers punished those students who come late to school and parents worry about their health and no participation in house chores.
DC 1:
“I went to school, but I felt discomfort in school due to day long travelling that’s why my teachers beaten me or harshly behaved with me. So, I left my school due to long distance”.
DC 33:
“My parents are not wandering for earning. If someone will educate me, I like to study in my mother tongue. People in my area are very rich and prosperous”.
DC 77:
“We are not living in the disaster area and people of my area are rich”.
DC 80:
“We are living in green area, but we have not land and money”.
DC 69:
“We are fourteen family members. I have 7 sisters and four brothers. Only my youngest sister goes to school”.
DC 70:
“If my school was near to my home and if there was no problem, then I went to my school. My parents are not moving from place to place for their earning. I want to get an education in my mother tongue. I like Urdu, want to learn Urdu, and find no difficulty in any subject. We are living in green area, but we have not land and money”.
DC 75: “Where we find work we go there. Our mother tongue is different from
Instructional language. We are Punjabi and like to get education in Punjabi”. 137
DC 46:
“I felt discomfort in school due to long distance. My parents are poor so we are not able to encourage us to go to school”. "If my school was near to my home and if there was no problem, then I went to my school. My parents are not moving from place to place for their earning”. “We are living in green area, but we have not land and money”.
Psychological Factors
Psychology of children has long lasting effects on the mind and soul of children. Dropout children have many psychological issues that break their educational progress. Dropout children explain many psychological factors that were shown in the figure 4.16 below. 138
Figure 4.16: Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in
NVivo11 for Psychological Factors.
There were five psychological problems that were faced by dropout children.
These were ―Adjustment Problems‖, ―Relation with Parents‖, ―Personal Problems‖, 139
―Future Dreams‖ and ―Subject‘s Problem‖, as shown in above figure. This figure 4.16 highlighted the thematic pattern that come under the theme of ―Psychological
Factors‖. It explored the common sub themes after an initial coding process of thematic analysis of voices of dropout children.
The first sub theme of psychological factor was the adjustment problem of a child in class and society due to some psychological reasons.
This map showed that adjustment problems of dropout children were ―can‘t adjust among small children‖, ―attitude problems‖, ―can‘t adjust in school‖,
―discomfort in school‖, and ―personal attitude‖. This indicated by interviewees as:
DC 55:
“As I am grown up and I can’t be able to adjust among small children of class”.
DC 35:
“I always liked to go to school, but felt discomfort in class due to some attitude problems and no attraction in school”.
DC 11:
“I always liked to go to school, but felt discomfort in class due to my teachers’ attitude; they punished me and the lack of educational accessories”.
The other sub theme for psychological reason was ―Future dream‖ and future dream depends upon the psychology of a person. So everyone has his own dream without any difference of poor and rich. Interviewees discussed their future in such a way:
DC 17:
“My dream is to become a doctor. But, they failed to fulfill their dreams due to poverty”. 140
DC 2:
“We are poor; I think about my future and want to become a lawyer. So, if I studied, maybe I become a lawyer. But, how it can be possible for poorer”?
DC 91:
“My dream is to become a successful person. If I study, then I will become an army officer”.
DC 94:
“My dream is to get education. If I studied then my wish is to become an army officer in the future. But we are poor and I have no other wish”.
DC 95:
“I think about my future in those worse conditions of living. I think to become a teacher in the future if I have a chance to study”.
DC 8:
“We are poor; but I think about my future. If I studied, maybe I become army officer”.
The other sub theme for psychological reason was ―Personal Problems‖ of dropout children. Many times these problems become the main causes of out of school. ―Weak in study‖, ―puberty‖, ―no any other wish‖, ―my friend left school so I don‘t like school‖, ―grown up‖, ―disability‖, ―don‘t think about my future‖, and
―dislike studies‖ were the most common codes for personal problems. Interviewees discussed their personal problems in such a way:
DC 9:
“I have no time to think about my puberty and I have not the fear of sexual harassment in school or in school’s way”. “As I am grown up and I can’t be able to adjust among small children of class”. 141
DC 10:
“I am only 16 years old and not afraid of puberty and marriage”.
DC 13:
“I felt discomfort in school, when I was in school due to personal attitude and home problems”.
DC 15:
“I had gone to school, but left it as I dislike school and teachers harsh behavior”.
DC 16:
“I disliked to study and felt discomfort in school”.
DC 27:
“Only one reason that let me down is weak in studies”.
DC 28:
“I think after than poverty, weakness in the study is the main cause of not going to school”.
DC 29:
I don’t think about my future and have no dreams.
Another reason which many times move forward to stop the education of children was their ―Relation with parents‖. It described that when teachers beat students, their parents gave them a love hug, an emotional support and consoled in different ways.
DC 9:
“When my teachers punished me, my parents gave me love hugs”.
142
DC 67:
“My teachers punished me in class, but my parents provided me emotional support at that time”.
The last sub theme related to the theme of ―Psychological Factor‖ was
―Subject Problem‖. Different participants have faced difficulty and showed interest in different subject according to their choices. Participants‘ responses were as follows:
DC 43:
“Our mother tongue is different from Instructional language. We are Punjabi.
I like to get an education in Urdu. I also want to learn Urdu, and find difficulty in
English”.
DC 71:
“I also want to learn English and find some difficulty in reading and learning of Urdu”.
DC 85:
“I always wish to go to school and like to get an education in mother tongue. I also want to learn English but find some difficulty in reading and learning of
Science”.
DC 37:
“I like Urdu, want to learn Urdu, and find difficulty in Mathematics”.
DC 32:
“I want to like study in mother tongue Urdu but in learning of Urdu I have found some difficulties”.
143
Socioeconomic Factors
The last theme of thematic analysis of dropout children was ―Socio Economic
Factors‖. The common sub themes that come after coding process of thematic analysis were ―Poverty‖, ―Parent‘s Occupation‖, ―Unemployment‖ and ―Family
Problems‖.
Figure 4.17: Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in NVivo11 for Socioeconomic Factors. 144
The following figure 4.17 indicated that ―Poverty‖, ―Unemployment‖,
―Family Problems‖ and ―Parent‘s Occupation‖ were the main socioeconomic hindrances. These sub themes had some codes that had been extracted from interviews of dropout children. Such as ―parents quarrel with each other‖, ―parents have no relations‖, ―no time for lesson preparation‖, ―mother died‖, ―mother‘s illness‖, ―home problem‖, ―health problem‖, ―father died‖, ―parents discouragement‖,
―parents' problem‖ and ―brother‘s death‖ were the main socioeconomic issues related to family problems. As, the interviewees reported that:
DC 1: “My father does not quarrel with my mother and my parents have good relations”.
DC 2:
“I feel discomfort in school due to some health problems of my family and poverty so I left my school”.
DC 6:
“I felt discomfort in school due to my parent’s problems; they discourage my education. My parents are poor so we are not able to encourage us to go to school”.
DC 7:
“My father died. We collect some amount of money from my relatives. My mother is a house wife”.
DC 10:
“My mother died”. “My parents don’t quarrel with each other as my mother died”.
DC 17:
“My father died”. “I had not those accessories which are compulsory for students, but my all classmates are studying now a day”. 145
The second sub theme of theme ―Socio economic Factor‖ was ―Poverty‖.
Most of the participants were affected due to poverty and left their education. Poverty sub theme had twelve codes that werre ―worse condition of living‖, ―parents worry about our food not our marriage‖, ―beg from people‖, ―get help from relatives‖,
―poor‖, ―no money for school expenditures‖, ―monthly income is less to fulfill our needs‖, ―learn some skills to increase family income‖, ―live hand to mouth‖, ―high inflation rates‖, ―poor family condition‖, and ―low family income‖. These codes were associated from interviews of dropout children‘s as:
DC 1:
“We are nine in the family. I have six siblings. It’s a large family. My youngest brother is going to school. We are very poor because my family income is only ten thousand per month”. “Our relatives help us”. “My parents have not money for my marriage”. “I can’t think about my future in those worse conditions of living”.
DC 2:
“I feel discomfort in school due to some health problems of my family and poverty so I left my school”.
DC 3:
“My parents work in a factory and after very hard work of all family, we earn
30 thousand per month. This money is not enough in these days of high inflation rates.
I had learned in school, but left my education. I always liked to go to school, but felt discomfort in class due to some attitude problems and the lack of educational accessories”.
DC 4:
“Our monthly income is less to fulfill the needs of the whole family. I felt discomfort in school due to poverty and weak in study”. 146
DC 5:
“My father is a labourer and has not money for school expenditures. We live hand to mouth as in seven to eight thousands of my father’s salary. I belong to a poor family, but I had gone to school when I was a child”. “My future dream is to become a successful person like a police officer. I think only poverty is the main cause of not going to school”.
The next sub theme of Socioeconomic Factors was ―Unemployment‖. When parents are unemployed or one family member works to supply all family needs, then education of children is destroyed. Father‘s bad moral habits also ruin the family economy. This was indicated in the figure 4.17 above. The same was illustrated by dropout interviewees.
DC 10:
“There are 8 members in my family. I have 3 brothers and a sister and no one of us go to school. We earn 4 to 5 thousand per month. My father is a Labourer. My mother died”.
DC 15:
“We are seven in a family. I have two siblings. No one goes to school. We are very poor and monthly income is four to five thousand. My father does nothing because he is ill. We collect some amount of money from my relatives. My mother is a house wife”.
DC 25:
“My father does nothing. He is unemployed. We collect some amount of money from my relatives”.
147
DC 26:
“My parents are unemployed, but we beg from people and after very hard work of all family, we earn 25 thousand per month”.
The last sub theme was ―Parent‘s Occupation‖ because occupation identified family income. All dropout children belong to those parents who had low income occupations. They may be worked with a constructor or works in a factory on daily wages. Some parents were labourer, tailor, sell vegetables on cart and work on brick furnace.
DC 92:
“My father works with a constructor. Our monthly income is 16000-17000”.
DC 23:
“We are very poor and monthly income is six to eight thousand. My father was an auto driver. My mother is a house wife. My parents are literate”.
DC 21:
“My father is a labourer and has not money for school expenditures. We lives hand to mouth as in seven to eight thousands of my father’s salary”.
DC 19:
“Now we are not going to school except one. My father works in a factory and after very hard work of all family we earn ten thousand per month. This money is not enough in these days of high inflation rates”.
DC 98:
“My father is working on daily wages. We collect some amount of money from my relatives. My mother is a house wife”.
148
DC 100:
“My father makes homemade articles and then sells them. He has not money for school expenditures. We live hand to mouth as in seven to eight thousands of my father’s income”.
Voices of Dropout Children’s Parents
There were five themes identified regarding views of Dropout children‘s parents towards the reasons of their children‘s drop out in analysis by NVivo 11 plus.
Themes
The five main Themes of dropout in parents‘ point of view were shown in the figure 4.18 below.
Figure 4.18: Hierarchy of Identified Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in NVivo11 for Dropout Children‘s Parents.
The above figure 4.18 showed that according to the parents‘ point of view five major factors, e.g. ―Socio economic Factors‖, ―Policy barriers‖, ―Demographical
Factors‖, ―Psychological Factors‖ and ―Cultural factors‖ were responsible of their children‘s dropout. These themes except ―Policy Barriers‖ were same as identified in 149 dropout children themes. Dropout children can‘t be able to identify policy barriers responsible for their dropout but parents have some knowledge about Government policies so, they are able to define their problems related to Government policies.
Sub Themes
The above said themes which emerged after the data analysis process had done on NVivo 11 plus software from the interviews of dropout children‘s parents have some sub themes. These sub themes showed common similarities that parents associate with different themes and were described here one by one.
Cultural Factors
This theme of thematic analysis of dropout children‘s parents was ―Cultural
Factors‖. The common sub themes that come after coding process of thematic analysis were ―Area environment‖, ―Teacher‘s behaviour‖, ―Female Problems‖ and
―Literacy‖. These sub themes showed common similarities that different parents associate with ―cultural Factors‖. The below figure 4.19 elaborated it as follow; 150
Figure 4.19: Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in
NVivo11 for Cultural Factors.
Area environment makes culture of any area and reflects the way of living of people. As participants reported that:
DP 2:
“Children of my caste go to school. My children’s class fellows are studying now a day, but they can’t. They always wish to go to school and like to get an education in their mother tongue”. 151
DP 4:
“People of our area are not prosperous. Many of them are poor. I think this is due to unawareness of government; it writes big ideas but implements nothing”.
DP 10:
“We are poor so we are not able to encourage our children to go to school, but people of our area send their mentally or physically retarded children to school”.
Teachers are the reflectors of any nation and culture. Their behavior modifies on the base of their culture‘s requirements. Many times the burden of society affects their teaching.
DP 10:
“Many times when teachers punished my children due to the lack of educational resources, I always stepped forward to give emotional support to my children”.
DP 55:
“My one youngest child went to school, but school staff sent them back to home as I am a labourer and I have not money for school expenditures”.
DP 18:
“My children felt discomfort in school due to their teacher’s behavior. They always became harsh with them, as my children had not educational accessories. Due to the afraid of teacher one day one of my children started pissing in classroom”.
DP 9:
“They don’t like school due to the afraid of their teachers. They have no attraction at school. On the other hand, no one help them with their homework as I have no time and my wife is illiterate”.
Many times females are the deprived persons of a society. Just as: 152
DP 43:
“People of my area send their special children in school, but give preference to boys”.
DP 59:
“In our family, people like the marriage of their girls in early age due to the fear of sexual harassment. The marriage of my two eldest daughters’ arranged in thirteen years old”.
DP 74:
“Children of my caste go to school. We don’t like to send our girls to school.
My children’s class fellows are studying now a day, but they can’t”.
Some people like to send their girls to school but they can‘t afford their transportation and educational expenses.
DP 72:
“I like to send my daughters to school as I am not worried about sexual harassment”.
Knowledgeable society becomes helpful in increase of literacy while ignorant society produces illiterates. Illiterates don‘t know the importance of education. They live in a dark hole of ignorance. Interviewees reflected it as:
DP 35:
“I had never learned in any school”.
DP 6:
“A labourer whose income is five to six thousand per month, can’t able to send their children to school. I did not go to school; my children do not go to school.
It is a chain for poorer”.
153
DP 37:
“I belong to a poor family and I never saw a school”.
DP 8:
“I sent my children to school, but now none of them go to school”. “If they want to increase the literacy rate of the country, they should provide fee and money for the education of our children”.
DP 9:
“On the other hand, no one help them in their homework as I have no time and my wife is illiterate”.
Demographic Factors
There were different demographic factors responsible for dropout of children.
Parent‘s point of views were same as dropout children said that family size, distance and living area status can directly or indirectly affect education.
154
Figure 4.20: Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in
NVivo11 for Demographic Factors.
The following figure 4.20 indicated that ―Family Size‖, ―Distance‖, and
―Living Area‘s Status‖ were the main demographic hindrances against dropouts.
These sub themes had some codes that had been extracted from interviews of dropout children‘s parents. Such as ―Large family‖, ―Busy in my work‖, ―Disaster area‖,
―Fear of sexual harassment‖, ―Wandering for earning‖ ―Daily long travelling‖,
―transport‖ and ―School in neighbouring village‖.
In our country only one family member work and the other family members eat in many large families. This member can‘t be able to fulfil all the needs of family. 155
Education is not the first priority, first priority is survival. As, the interviewees reported that:
DP 14:
“Thirteen people are in my home. I have nine children. It is a large family”.
DP 61:
“We are nine family members. Now all of my seven children are not going to school except one. I wash cloths and utensils in different houses. I am divorced. A labourer whose income is five to six thousand per month, can’t able to send their children to school”.
DP 53:
“Ten people are in my home. I have eight children. Now they are not going to school except one. I have a small grocery store and after very hard work of all family, we earn thirty thousand per month. This money is not enough for a big family”.
Distance was again a sub theme emerged from interviews of dropout children‘s parents. After a daily long travelling without any transport get tired of students and the results were increase in dropouts.
DP 34:
“My children could not go to school due to long distance to school. They could not go to school daily that’s why their teachers abused them. They became weak in studies. At last they left the school. I can’t angry with them in that situation”.
DP 14:
“My children always liked to go to school, but they felt discomfort in class due to attitude problems and their school was in neighbouring village”.
156
DP 8:
“When I sent my children into school they felt discomfort in school due to daily long travelling. At last they left their school and learned some skills to increase the income of family”.
The next demographical sub theme was ―Living Area‘s Status‖. It affected the way of living, earning and schooling. As participants described that:
DP 3:
“We change our places due to earning and labour. Where we find there we eat as we are living in disasters area”.
DP 35:
“My children always like to go to school, but our village in the disaster area.
Where we find work we go there. We are Punjabi. My children like to get education in
Punjabi. They also want to learn English, but don’t like Mathematics as it is a difficult subject for them. The people of our area are not prosperous. Many of them are poor”.
DP 45:
“If I have no problem of money, I send my children to school definitely as my children’s class fellows are studying further”.
DP 59:
“In our family, people like marriage of their girls in early age due to the fear of sexual harassment”.
Psychological Factors
The ―Psychological Factors‖ theme emerged from dropout children‘s parent interviews had five sub themes that were ―Adjustment Problems‖, ―Future Dream‖,
―Parents and Children‘s Relationship‖, ―Personal Problems‖, and ―Subject Problems‖. 157
Figure 4.21: Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in
NVivo11 for Psychological Factor.
According to drop out children‘s parents the sub theme ―Adjustment
Problems‖ can be originated from psychological upset of mind. If children are not adjusted in class, then the result is that they drop out of class. Many times people are not adjusted in society due to attitude problems. Interviewees narrated it that: 158
DP 3:
“My children have some attitude problem; they quarrel with their fellows that are why they feel discomfort in school. We are poor so we are not able to encourage our children to go to school. In these conditions many times we quarrel with each other”.
DP 7:
“If they study, they will become successful persons. There was no labour work in our village, so we can’t adjust”.
The next sub theme was ―Future dream‖. Everyone has its own dreams, according to its own thinking, interest and ideas. Dreams require a consistent hard work. To see dream is the right of every person. Parents of dropouts said about the dreams of their love ones as they want to become ―Successful person‖, ―Doctor‖,
Businessmen‖, ―Government officer‖, and ―To get education‖. Parents told that their children‘s class fellows were studying, but they did not. So, how poor people can see dreams? They can‘t think about their future.
DP 14:
“If we are not poor, my children go to school too. Poor people can’t see dreams, but my children told me that they want to become doctors. If they study, they will become successful persons”.
DP 25:
“If we are not poor, my children can go to school too, and get good jobs that is their dream”.
DP 28: “If we are not poor, my children go to school too. Otherwise, poor people can’t see dreams, so my children told me about their dream to become a doctor. If they study, they will become doctors”. 159
DP 29:
“My children want to become Engineers in the future. Only one reason that lets them down is poverty”.
DP 41:
“We are poor; my children think only about their education. If they studied, may be they become doctors. But, how it can be possible for poorer”?
DP 31:
“If they studied, may be they become successful persons. They liked to become a teacher”.
DP 32:
“If my children are not weak in studies, they get a good job as it is their dream”.
DP 30:
“They said nothing about their future dreams. But if they study, they want to become successful persons. Other then poverty the second reason of not going to school of my children is; the distance to school”.
DP 23:
“They told us about their future dream to become someone. But if they study, they want to become an army officer. But our poor conditions don’t give us permission to become prosperous”.
The next or third sub theme emerged after coding the common similarities in interviews of dropout children‘s parents was ―Parents and Children‘s Relationship‖.
Good relations support and motivate children to work hard for their future education otherwise they are disheartened. Parents indicated that:
160
DP 22:
“Sometimes they said that their teacher beats them. At that time I consoled them”.
DP 39:
“As we can’t manage our needs in little bit amount of rupees, so many times I quarrel with my husband”.
DP 19:
“My children had not those accessories which are compulsory for students.
Their teachers punished them and I provided emotional support”.
DP 20:
“When my children were studying I met my children’s teachers to get their progress report”.
DP 65:
“My children have no attraction at school due to poverty that’s why they feel discomfort in school. We are poor so we are not able to encourage our children to go to school”.
The fourth sub theme generated from the common similarities was ―Personal
Problems‖. Interviews described different personal problems of their children. These problems affected their education and they left their studies due to these problems.
Some of them felt discomfort in class and school. They had no attraction in studies, they were weak in studies, they had some health problems, they had some attitude problems and they felt shame at school due to lack of educational accessories. As interviewees narrated it:
161
DP 1:
“When I sent my children into school they feel discomfort in school due to poverty. At last they left their school due to poverty”.
DP 2:
“My children are weak in studies and their teachers were beaten them harshly. At that time I always gave a love hug to my beloved”.
DP 3:
“My children have some attitude problems; they quarrel with their fellows that are why they feel discomfort in school”.
DP 13:
“They feel discomfort in their lives and school, so they showed some attitude problems. I am training them for skills”.
DP 9:
“They don’t like school due to the afraid of their teachers. They have no attraction in school”.
DP 25:
“My children felt shame at school due to their poor condition. I have not money and time for their education”.
DP 55:
“They have no attraction in school as they have not books and uniforms”.
DP 52:
“They feel discomfort in their lives and school due to some health problems”.
DP 66:
“My children felt tension in school due to lack of educational resources. Their class fellows are studying”. 162
DP 64:
“I belong to a poor family and I never saw a school. My children are weak in study and they have no attraction in school”.
DP 60:
“My children don’t think about their puberty problem they think about only for food”.
The next and last sub theme was ―Subject Problems‖. Children liked different subjects and those subjects whom they don‘t like become difficult for them and many times these become the cause of their failure. Parents indicated the likes and dislikes of their children towards different subjects in their interviews just as:
DP 3:
“My children like to get an education in their mother tongue. They like Urdu, want to learn English, and find difficulty in Mathematics”.
DP 26:
“They always wish to go to school and like to get an education in their mother tongue i.e. Punjabi. My children like to learn in English, but they felt difficulty in
Mathematics”.
DP 31:
“They like Urdu, want to learn Urdu, and find difficulty in Urdu”.
DP 29:
“My children like to get an education in their mother tongue, i.e. Urdu as their instructional language is different from their mother tongue. They like to learn
English as they find difficulty in reading and learning of Science”.
163
DP 32:
“My children always like to go to school if they are not weak in studies. We are Punjabi. But my children like to get education in English. English is a difficult subject for them”.
DP 34:
“My children told me, they like to study in mother tongue and English, but in learning of Science they fine some difficulties”.
Socioeconomic Factors
The fourth theme of thematic analysis of dropout children‘s parents was
―Socio Economic Factors‖. The common sub themes that come after coding process of thematic analysis by NVivo 11 plus were ―Poverty‖, ―Occupation‖,
―Unemployment‖ and ―Family Problems‖. These sub themes were same as dropout children‘s sub themes. 164
Figure 4.22: Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in
NVivo11 for Socioeconomic Factors.
The first common sub theme of ―Socio Economic Factors‖ theme generated from the similarities of interviews of dropout children‘s parents was ―Family
Problems‖. Family problem many times become the main cause of dropout. Parents told that no one help in their homework, father died, parents was divorced, parents was not able to encourage their education and parents quarrel with each other were 165 some of family problems that can become the reasons for children‘s failure. As interviews of dropout children‘s parents narrated it as:
DP 20:
“A labourer whose income is thirty five thousand per month, can’t able to send their children to school as my wife is ill. She was an acid victim”.
DP 39:
“Marriage of my two eldest daughters’ arranged in thirteen years old. That’s why they left their education”.
DP 46:
“I am all time busy in my work, my children felt tension in school due to poverty. Their class fellows are studying”.
DP 41:
“I wash cloths and utensils in different houses. I am divorced”.
DP 37:
“I am a housewife, my husband died. I have no money for school expenditures.
We live hand to mouth as in four to five thousands which we collect by making some toys in home”.
DP 35:
“Twelve people are in my home. I have four children. My brother died and I am helping his family. Now they are not going to school”.
The second important sub theme of ―Socio Economic Factors‖ theme was
―Poverty‖. Poverty is the main reason for being out of school. ―Low income‖, ―Lack of educational resources‖, ―No money for school expenditure‖, ―Lives hand to mouth‖, ―Works on daily wages‖, ―We can only eat not study‖ and ―Unavailability of 166 educational resources‖ reflected poverty of a family. Parents described it in their own words as:
DP 36:
“When I sent my children into school they feel discomfort in school because we can’t afford their educational expenses. At last they left their school as we don’t like to send them to school”.
DP 3:
“I am a labourer and works on daily wages. I earn four to five thousand per month. Now, none of my children go to school as we can’t afford their studies”.
DP 16:
“My two younger children went to school, but school staff sent them back to home as I am a labourer and I have not money for school expenditures. We live hand to mouth as in four to five thousand of my salary”.
DP 24:
“Now none of my children go to school as we can’t afford their studies. I had gone to school. My children have no stationary, books and uniforms that’s why they felt discomfort and their teachers punished them in school. We are poor so we are not able to encourage our children to go to school”.
DP 17:
“Only one of my children goes to school as we can’t afford education of all. I did my graduation. Due to high inflation rates I can’t afford the educational expenditures of my children. My children were beaten by their teachers. That’s why they felt discomfort in school. We are poor so we are not able to encourage our children to go to school, while my other family members send their children to school”. 167
DP 25:
“My children felt shame at school due to their poor condition. I have not money and time for their education”.
DP 29:
“When I sent my children into school they feel discomfort in school due to poverty. At last they left their school due to poverty”.
Next common sub theme was ―Unemployment‖ which was again a great hurdle in the way of getting an education. Unemployment causes many socioeconomic and psychological problems. Now a day without money there is no survival or life. It decreases the income of family and children are forced to learn some skills for earning by stopping their education. Parents told about this sub theme as:
DP 7:
“I am an unemployed person and after very hard work of all family, we earn three to four thousand”.
DP 30:
“I am a labourer and I have not money for school expenditures. We live hand to mouth as in four to five thousand of my salary”.
The last common sub theme was ―Occupation‖. An occupation of parents determined level of children‘s education indirectly. In our country some occupations have low levels of earnings or income. In interviews parents related their occupation to the education of their children as:
DP 22:
“I work in a house as a cook. My monthly income is 11000-18000. I sent my children to school, but now none of them go to school”. 168
DP 23:
“My two younger children went to school, but school staff sent them back to home as I am a labourer and I have not money for school expenditures”.
DP 34:
“Now all of my three children do not go to school. A barber, whose income is five to six thousand per month, can’t able to send their children to school”.
DP 48:
“My two younger children went to school, but school staff sent them back to him as I am a driver and I have not money for school expenditures. Now only one of my children goes to school. We live hand to mouth as in four to five thousand of my salary”.
DP 40:
“I sew clothes. My monthly income is 6000-7000. I sent my children to school, but now none of them go to school. I have never seen a school. My children had not those accessories which are compulsory for students, but their all classmates are studying now a day. If I have not money problems, I send my children to school”.
Policy Barriers
The fifth and last theme of thematic analysis of dropout children‘s parents was
―Policy Barriers‖. The common sub themes ―Organizational‖, and ―Structural‖ were extracted after coding process of thematic analysis by NVivo 11 plus. Organizational barriers originate before the implementation of policies while structural barriers originate after the implementation of policies. The questions relate to policy barriers were asked only from parents as children don‘t know about the policies. The below figure 4.23 showed these common sub themes by coding process. 169
Figure 4.23: Hierarchy of Identified Sub Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in
NVivo11 for Policy Barriers.
The following figure 4.23 indicated that ―Organizational‖ and ―Structural‖ were the main policy barriers. These sub themes had some codes that had been extracted from interviews of dropout children‘s parents. Such as ―relation between 170 formulation and implementation of policy‖, ―Written statement‖, Children‘s right‖,
―Government does not apply rules and regulations‖, ―Government is not promoting social justice‖, ―My responsibilities, ―Not a single personnel asked about our children education, ―Education is not the right of poor‖, ―Unawareness of Government‖,
―Government is sleeping‖, ―Government should provide free and compulsory education‖ and ―Equal rights to rich and poor‖ were the main policy barriers related to organizational barriers and the codes of ―Structural‖ sub theme that had been extracted from interviews of dropout children‘s were ―Meet children‘s teachers‖,
―School inspection‖, ―Want fee and money for children education‖, ―Other educational accessories are necessary‖, ―School is just like mess‖, Classroom instructional and management practices‖, ―No implementation‖. As, the interviewees reported that:
DP 54:
“I think our Government is unable to form a relationship between formulation and implementation of policy; and it becomes only a written statement. Government does not apply rules and regulations towards children’s rights and does not provide free and compulsory education to all of them. In that sense Government is not promoting social justice for our children. I know about my responsibilities towards sending of my children to school but I can’t. Not a single person of government or non government institution asked about the education of our children. If they want to increase the literacy rate of the country, they should provide fee and money for the education of our children”.
DP 57:
“I know that it is my children’s right that government should provide free and compulsory education to them. But, I think government is promoting social justice for 171 our children. I want to send my children to school but my conditions are not affordable. Not any single government personnel asked us about our child's education. I want money and fees for my children’s future education”.
DP 31:
“Our children are not getting education due to faults in formulation and implementation of policies. Our Government is sleeping and does not provide free and compulsory education to our children. It does not promote social justice for our children. I know about my responsibilities of taking admission to my children to school, but if no one asks about my problems for admission. I want transport for my children education”.
DP 11:
“I think this is due to unawareness of government; it writes big ideas but implements nothing. It tells free and compulsory education for all but does nothing for poor. It does not give equal rights to rich and poor. We have little money; by it, we only eat not study. We know about the importance of education. One day some people wrote our problems on pages, but did nothing for us. You also note that the actual hurdle against the education of our children is their fee and money”.
DP 33:
“Government wrote thousands of pages for free and compulsory education for all, but implementation is zero. Poor becomes poorer day by day. The government asks nothing about our problems of fee and money”.
DP 34:
“When my children were studying I met my children’s teachers to get their progress report. I found there some personnel inspect the school, but instructional and management practices are poor”. 172
DP 37:
“When my children were in school, they told us that their school was inspected. That’s why we found good classroom instructional or management practices in our children’s school”.
DP 46:
“My children’s school was good as teachers gave us a monthly progress report of our children. My children told me about the inspection of the school. But, classroom instructional or management practices are not good”.
DP 44:
“When my children were in school, they told us that no one inspect our school.
That’s why we find poor classroom instructional or management practices in our children’s school”.
Focused Group Discussion
Figure 4.24: Word Frequency Cloud of most Repeating Words in Focus Group
Discussion of Out of School Children.
173
Children Focus Group Discussion
This part describes about the qualitative analysis regarding focus group discussion of Out of School Children that were demonstrated by NVivo 11 plus. The same process of discourse analysis had been adopted by labeling common patterns, attributes, ideas and interests of Out of School Children in a focus group to generate common themes. The themes of ―School‖, ―Daily wages‖, ―Poverty‖, ―Family problems‖, ―Behaviour‖, ―Education‖, ―Area‖, ―Future dream‖, ―Occupation‖, and
―house‖ emerged from Children Focus Group Discussion. The below figure 4.25 showed it as:
Figure 4.25: Hierarchy of Identified Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in NVivo11 for Out of School Children‘s Focus Group.
Each theme emerged from different codes which were developed by organizing a group of data like repeated words, attributes, and ideas by using the
NVivo 11 plus software. It can be seen in the figure 4.26 below: 174
Figure 4.26: Hierarchy of Identified Detailed Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in
NVivo11 for Out of School Children‘s Focus Group.
Two codes ―changed place‖ and ―negative people torture girls and boys‖ were generated the theme of ―Area‖. It means due the behavior of negative people, normal 175 public changed their place. Future dreams generated from ―good job‖, become a doctor‖, ―become a policeman‖, ―become a soldier‖, ―no change in our situation‖, and
―problematic situation. Good ―Education‖ depends upon ―becomes a better human being‖, ―can‘t calculate and read‖, ―can‘t read name and simple phone numbers‖,
―illiterate‖, and ―importance of education‖. The behaviour of out of school children emerged from ―busy in playing‖, ―helping hand‖, ―not happy‖, ―feel jealous to see educated children‖, and ―liked school‖. Next theme ―Occupation‖ was the occupation of out of school child‘s parent, which directly affected their education. This theme emerged from ―works in houses‖, ―wash utensils of people‖, ―sweeper‖, ―father is carpenter‖, and ―can‘t find work‖. Out of School Children group also identified some family problems that had a long lasting effect on their life and education. These family problems were ―father has no time‖, ―mother‘s illness and death‖, ―father‘s illness‖, ―sister's sickness‖, ―problems in their homes‖, ―sibling‘s take care‖, and ―no free time‖. Poverty is actually a most prominent cause of the education of out of school children. So out of school children focus group described some attributes that generate poverty. These were ―no fee for school‖, ―father‘s support‖, ―electricity bills‖, ―no transport‖, and ―inflation rate‖. Two codes ―house chores‖ and ―house rent‖ generated house related problems that also affect education. Children and parents who work on daily wages their income is not constant. Many times they live hand to mouth and their masters beat and spank them. School related problems also decrease the literacy of a country of family. So, ―school‘s admission‖, ―school‘s staff‖, ―homework‖ and ―liking‖ also engulfed the education even before getting it.
176
Parents’ Focus Group Discussion
Common labels to patterns, attributes, ideas and interests of Out of School
Children‘s parents in a focus group were generated common codes by thematic analysis in NVivo 11 plus. And these codes identified some themes of ―Daily wages‖,
―education‖, ―proper uniform‖, ―schools‖, ―Poverty‖, ―Occupation‖, ―Person‖,
―Teachers‘ behavior‖, ―Girls‖, ―House‖, and ―work‖ emerged from Children‘s Parents
Focus Group Discussion. The below figure 4.27 showed it as:
Figure 4.27: Hierarchy of Identified Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in NVivo11 for Out of School Children‘s Parents Focus Group.
Each theme emerged from different codes which were developed by organizing a group of data like repeated words, attributes, and ideas by using the
NVivo 11 plus software. It can be seen in the figure 4.28 below: 177
Figure 4.28: Hierarchy of Identified Detailed Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in
NVivo11 for Out of School Children‘s Parents Focus Group.
Girls are the most deprived members in a family, especially in poor families.
According to the parents' point of view they could not send their girls to school because of ―sexual harassment‖, ―afraid of bad happening with girls‖, ―current time and situations are not good for girls‖, and ―threatening about our girls kidnapping‖.
Parents told that many times teachers‘ behaviour stops education of their children by
―frightening behaviour of teachers‖, ―teachers send children back to home‖, ―teachers 178 abused‖, and ―teachers scold children‖. House problems such as ―house rent‖, electricity bill‖, feeds animals‖, and ―house chores‖ are the major problems for the poor. So, they either solve their house problems or send their children to schools. Out of school children‘s parents' occupations such as ―making bricks‖ and ―labourer‖ did not support them to educate their children. Again, according to the parents‘ point of view, poverty was the major or foremost problem in the life of the poor. It destroyed minds, heart and soul of the family. The codes reflected poverty in parents‘ focus group discussion were ―food for one time‖, ―less food‖, ―poor‖, ―no stationary‖,
―don‘t have copies, scarf, and shoes‖, ―no resources‖, ―getting insult‖, rent a vehicle for our girls schooling‖, ―can‘t afford the study‖, ―difficult to change our position‖,
―eat bread with red chilies and salt‖, and ―poor become poorer and die‖. Impacts of schools are drastic on the education and the codes emerged from out of school children‘s parents point of views were ―private schools‖, ―government schools‖, and
―want lunch in schools‖. The theme of ―work‖ was identified from the focus group discussion as ―child work‖, ―labour, work‖, ―work to fulfill family necessities‖, ―wife works in different houses‖, ―no free time for playing‖, and ―daughters help in cooking‖. Proper uniform is the basic requirement for school children. Those who have not proper and neat uniform are disliked in class. In this discussion the theme of
―person‖ was originated from two codes, i.e. ―illiterate person‖ and ―poor person‖.
Education is a basic right for each citizen, but many families can‘t afford education.
Many people think that only fee is the basic requirement for education and now in
Pakistan there is no tuition fee in schools and books are also provided to students by the Government but education is more enough than that‘s. So, the theme ―education‖ generated from codes ―getting education‖, ―good education‖, ―want our daughters to become bold and confident‖, ―education is important‖, ―illiterate person‖, ―good jobs 179 are not for illiterates‖, know about their selves‖, and ―literate speaks thoroughly‖ in the focus group discussion of out of school children‘s parents. The last theme of this discussion was ―daily wages‖ and it emerged from some codes as ―don‘t know to find work next time‖, ―daily wages‖, and ―tired after working all the day‖.
Facebook Data
Social Media Platform (Face book Data) was also used to explore the reasons for out of school and drop-out.
Figure 4.29: Word Frequency Cloud of most Repeating Words in Face book Data of
Out of School Children.
Reasons for Out of School
In order to identify some reasons for out of school the researcher joined some research scholar groups on Facebook, and asked a question ―Why children are out of school in Pakistan‖ on them. The attributes on which participants show their willingness were ―Parents‖, ―Education‖, ―Behaviour‖, ―Poverty‖, and ―Family size‖. 180
These attributes were identified by thematic analysis in NVivo 11 plus software. The below figure 4.30 showed it as:
Figure 4.30: Hierarchy of Identified Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in NVivo11 for Facebook Data (Reasons for Out of School).
Each theme emerged by the initial coding process to organize a group of data like repeated words, attributes, and ideas by using the NVivo 11 plus software. It can be seen in the figure 4.31 below. 181
Figure 4.31: Hierarchy of Identified Detailed Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in
NVivo11 for Facebook Data (Reasons for Out of School).
Participants explored that parents in many ways become the actual cause for being out of school. ―hope less parents‖, ―uneducated parents‖, ―parent‘s ignorance‖,
―illiteracy‖, ―Parent‘s earning‖, and ―parents' lack of concern‖ were the similarities in the Facebook data of participants that originated ―Parents‖ theme. Education is the 182 dream of every one. This theme ―education‖ was identified in data as ―good education‖, ―getting education‖, and ―uneducated parents‖. Behaviour of parents, children and even teachers is important for getting an education. So, ―Behaviour‖ was identified by similar codes such as ―lack of awareness‖, ―fear of the study‖, and
―don‘t know the importance of education‖. The process of initial coding by NVivo 11 plus identified some codes to explore the theme ―Poverty‖. These codes were ―No financial support‖, ―sacrificing basic needs‖, ―education is very expensive‖,
―underprivileged‖, ―unemployment‖, ―begging business‖, ―lack of facilities‖, and
―focus is more on survival‖. The theme ―family size‖ was also important in order to measure the reasons for being out of school.
Reasons for Dropout
NVivo 11 plus software was used to measure the reasons of dropout in
Facebook data. The below figure 4.32 showed it as:
Figure 4.32: Hierarchy of Identified Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in NVivo11 for Facebook Data (Reasons for Dropout). 183
Participants identified common themes by coding similar attributes, interest and ideas. The common themes for ―Reasons for Dropout‖ were ―work‖, ―school‖,
―teaching‖, ―environment‖, ―child‘s need‖, ―curriculum‖, ―language barrier‖,
―poverty‖, ―behaviour‖, and ―skills‖. It can be seen in the figure 4.33 below.
Figure 4.33: Hierarchy of Identified Detailed Themes Map of Thematic Analysis in
NVivo11 for Facebook Data (Reasons for Dropout). 184
Participant explored about dropout reasons. Initial coding of data generated the theme of ―curriculum‖ by labeling the codes ―unproductive or boring curriculum‖,
―change in curriculum‖, ―no attraction‖, and ―curriculum isn‘t impressive‖. School environment motivates or discourages children. The theme of ―School‖ was developed by ― lack of equipment‖, ―school work‖, ―school needs‖, ―teachers beat in school‖, ―impressive school environment‖, and ―schooling is a business‖. Many times the process of teaching becomes the main cause of failure. So, ―teaching style‖,
―teachers beat‖, ―favouritism of teachers‖, ―teaching skills‖, and ―memorization‖ generated the theme of ―teaching‖. Two codes ―bore work‖, and ―school work‖ identified theme ―work‖. In our country instructional and mother languages are different and this is another cause of failure. Teachers, school and parents forget the child‘s needs. Children have been educated forcefully. Their ―own diversity is ignored‖ and they ―pushed to meet the standard of school‖. Even they have a ―lack of motivation‖. These were the most common codes for the theme ―child‘s needs‖.
The next theme was ―behaviour‖ of students, which at last drop them out of class. ―Technical skills‖ and ―teaching skills‖ were the codes for the theme ―skills‖.
According to participants ―Poverty‖ was the main cause of failure. It is reflected as
―lack of educational support‖, ―expenditures of school‖, ―earning member of the home‖, ―materialism‖, ―preferred to do some kind of job‖, and ―unable to fulfill school needs‖. Just like the home environment, school environment is also important for educational success. So the theme ―environment‖ was developed from ―impressive school environment‖, ―home environment‖, ―unattractive classroom‖, ―lack of future guidance‖, ―life style‖, ―illiteracy‖, and ―sudden changes in education system‖.
185
Comparisons of Voices
Comparison of Children Focus Group Discussion vs. Parents Focus
Group Discussion
After the process of Auto coding by NVivo 11 plus, Children Focus Group
Discussion was compared with Parents Focus Group Discussion to find the similarities and differences in the viewpoints of children and parents.
Figure 4.34: Hierarchy of Comparison of Identified Theme Map of Thematic
Analysis in NVivo11 for Focus Groups discussion.
The above figure 4.34 represented the similarities and differences between the voices of out of school children and parents in focus group discussion. The middle line in the figure 4.34 showed the common voices of children and parents. So, both 186 were agreed upon the problems related with school, daily wages, chores (in house and out of house), girls, and uniform are the common reasons for children to be out of school.
The attributes that were highlighted by parents were labour work, getting education, good education, private schools, government schools, household chores, girls kidnapping, illiterate person, poor person, child work, proper uniform, work, education, and person.
While the attributes which were highlighted by only children were house chores, liked school, school‘s staff, house rent, girls dropout, bought uniform, and house
Comparison of Interviews of Out of School Children vs. Out of School
Children’s Parents
In order to find out the similarities and differences in the voices of out of school children and parent, the figure 4.35 below was developed by NVivo 11 plus. 187
188
Figure 4.35: Hierarchy of Identified Comparison of Sub Themes Map of Thematic
Analysis in NVivo11 for interviews of Out of School Children and their Parents.
Above figure 4.35 highlighted the similarities and differences in the voices of out of school children and parents in their interviews by using an auto coding process in NVivo 11 plus. Both were agreed upon the reasons for being out of school were house chores, retarded children, sexual harassment, children, area, and house. While the attributes which were highlighted by Out of School Children‘s Parents are school parents, getting education, army officer, actual problem, school expenditure, lesson preparation, compulsory education, social justice, written statement, great wish, disaster area, school, education, problem, Parents.
The attributes which were identified only by Out of School Children are small children, big family, negative attitude, rich area, family, attitude, and rate (Literacy rate).
Comparison of Interviews of Dropout Children vs. Dropout Children’s
Parents
The figure 4.36 below identified the similarities and differences of attributes in the voices of dropout children and parent, this figure was developed by NVivo 11 plus by auto coding process. 189
190
Figure 4.36: Hierarchy of Identified Comparison of Sub Themes Map of Thematic
Analysis in NVivo11 for interviews of Dropout Children and their Parents.
The common attributes on which both Dropout Children and Parents were agreed are educational accessories, sexual harassment, instructional language, school expenditures, lesson preparation, children, family, attitude and problem.
The attributes which were described only by Dropout Children‘s Parents in their interviews are attitude problem, school inspection, compulsory education, non government institutions, sense government, management practices, getting education, children education, social justice, dropout parents, written statement, great wish, disasters areas, education, poor family, future education, literacy rate, poor classroom, classroom instructional, school staff, single government personnel, army officer, attitude problem, rate, classroom, government, parents, and area.
While the attributes which were described by only Dropout Children are retarded children, small children, large family, family income, house wife, mother tongue, felt discomfort, positive attitude, personal problem, and house.
Comparison of Interviews of Out of School Children vs. Dropout
Children
Common and different attributes among Out of School and Dropout Children in interviews were also highlighted in the figure below. This figure 4.37 was developed by Nvivo 11 plus in thematic analysis. 191
Figure 4.37: Hierarchy of Identified Comparison of Sub Themes Map of Thematic
Analysis in NVivo11 for interviews of Out of School Children and Dropout Children.
The figure 4.37 above highlighted the common codes identified by Out of
School Children and Dropout Children in the middle line as retarded children, small children, sexual harassment, children, family, house, and attitude. 192
The attributes which were described by only Out of School Children as the reasons for their being out of school are big family, negative attitude, rich area, house chores, inflation rates, area, and rate.
Whereas the reasons which were identified by only dropout children are educational accessories, mother tongue, large family, felt discomfort, family income, positive attitude, house wife, personal problems, school expenditures, instructional language, lesson preparation, problem, school, and instructional.
Comparison of Interviews of Out of School Children’s Parents vs.
Dropout Children’s Parents
Common and different attributes among Out of School Children‘s Parents and
Dropout Children‘s Parents in interviews were also highlighted in the figure 4.38 below. This figure 4.38 was developed by Nvivo 11 plus in thematic analysis of interviews. 193
194
Figure 4.38: Hierarchy of Identified Comparison of Sub Themes Map of Thematic
Analysis in NVivo11 for interviews of Out of School Children‘s Parents and Dropout
Children‘s Parents.
A long list of common attributes of Out of School Children‘s Parents and
Dropout Children‘s Parents were highlighted in the middle line of figure 4.38 above.
These were getting education, sexual harassment, army officer, school expenditures, lesson preparation, compulsory education, social justice, written statement, great wish, disaster area, children, education, school, problem, parents, and area.
The reasons which were identified only by Out of School Children‘s parents in their interviews are retarded children, school parents, house chores, actual problem, and house. While Dropout Children‘s Parents‘ identified reasons were children education, educational accessories, poor family, future education, literacy rate, management practices, poor classroom, classroom instructional, instructional language, school staff, single government personnel, attitude problem, school inspection, non government institutions, sense government, dropout parent, family, rate, classroom, instructional, government, and attitude.
Comparison of Reasons for Out of School vs. Reasons for Dropout
Facebook Data
In order to find out the similarities and differences of Facebook Data for the identification of reasons of out of school and reasons for dropout from school, a process of auto coding was done by NVivo 11 plus. 195
Figure 4.39: Hierarchy of Identified Comparison of Themes Map of Thematic
Analysis in NVivo11 for Reasons for Out of School and Reasons for Dropout
Facebook Data.
Facebook data identified some similarities in order to find out the reasons of out of school and drop outs. These similarities were family, school, and education.
The thematic analysis of Face book data highlighted some reasons of out of school were family size, getting education, school demands, good education, uneducated parents, hopeless parents, and parents. Whereas the highlighted reasons of dropout were family burden, teaching style, impressive school environment, home 196 environment, rather education, aggressive behaviour, school needs, rude behaviour, school work, bore work, teaching skills, teaching, technical skills, environment, work, behaviour, and skills.
Theoretical Model
A theoretical model of identified themes from the thematic analysis of voices of out of school children and their parents in NVivo 11 plus was developed in the figure 4.40 below.
Figure 4.40: Hierarchy of Identified Themes of Thematic Analysis in NVivo11 for representing Theoretical Model.
After analysis researcher developed a theoretical model. This model shows that out of school children (output) spring from the experiences, beliefs, interests, and attitudes towards events and processes leading to out of school (process) that develop from cultural factors, demographic factors, socio-economic factors, psychological factors, and policy barriers (Input). This model theorized that why, how and what of out of school children. 197
Cultural factors which are responsible for keeping children out of schools identified both children and parents are area‘s environment, the literacy rate in that area, and female problems, and teachers‘ behavior. The demographic factors which reduce the access to education are family size, living area status and distance to school. The psychological factors that affect the psyche of out of school children and their parents are adjustment problems, future dreams, parents and children‘s relationship. some socioeconomic factors that affect the educational attainment of out of school children are poverty, unemployment, family problems and parents‘ occupation. Instead of all these; out of school children and their parents also highlighted that children‘s help in the family also becomes a cause for not being in school. This study also identified those policy barriers that are limiting the access to primary education for all as a result of poor legislation. Parents highlighted these policy barriers in the form of organizational and structural problems of institutions that may hinder the progress of education. Other than all these factors, some other factors are responsible for the decrease in literacy. These reasons are females‘ problems, school environment, work on daily wages, wish to get education, house chores, provision of proper uniform, involvement of other persons, parents‘ behavior, teachers‘ teaching styles, child‘s needs, curriculum, language barriers and training of other technical skills. These all are the inputs that hinder the access of education.
Process is the interaction of these factors that lead to output (Out of school children). Input factors create a process that end to out of school children (output).
Summary of Thematic Analysis
Table 4.1 shows the summary of thematic analysis of interviews of Out of School Children and Dropout Children and their parents.
198
Table 4.1 Summary of Thematic Analysis of Interviews of Out of School Children and Dropout Children and their Parents
Sub Themes Out of School Dropout Comment Children (OC) Children (DC) and their and their Parents (OCP) Parents (DP) Cultural Factors Area‘s OC 24, 130, DC 41, 51, 52, Dropout children and their environment 190, 151, 82, 71, 94, 64 parents identified the same 84, 67. problems related to cultural OCP 5, 103, 18 DP 2, 4, 10 factors as described by out Literacy rate in OC 40, 28, 52, DC 7, 9, of school children and their that area OCP 91, 31, 30, DP 55, 6, 37, 8, parents except teacher‘s 50, 82 9 behaviours which become Female OC 70, 215, DC 17, 24, 94 the main reason of not problems 124, 216, 1, 4. attending the school for OCP 18, 48, 5, DP 43, 59, 74, dropout children. 96, 97, 37, 85, 72 91, 33, 36 Teachers‘ DC 78, 11, 12 behaviour
DP 10, 55, 18, 9
Demographic Factors Family size OC 102, 56, 75 DC 69, 70, 75 Out of school children and OCP 77, 84 DP 14, 61, 53 dropout children faced Living area OC 116, 117, DC 33, 77, 80 same demographic status 22, 55, 199 challenges and these OCP 51, 30, 65, DP 3, 35, 45, 59 challenges become a hurdle 89 against the education of Distance to OC 80, 86, 115 DC 1, 46 dropout children just like school out of school children.
OCP 96, 88 DP 34, 14, 8
Psychological Factors Adjustment OC 1 DC 55, 35, 11 Psychological problems problems OCP 5, 15, 33 DP 3, 7 faced by dropout children Future dreams OC 2, 3, 8, 12, DC 17, 2, 91, were same as that faced by 14 94, 95, 8 out of school children, OCP 1, 6, 2, 3, DP 14, 25, 28, except subject problems 36, 71, 72, 8, 29, 41, 31, 32, which were faced by only 10, 14, 37, 59 30, 23 drop out children. Children 199
Parents and OC 141, 148, DC 9, 67 like and dislike subjects on children‘s 42 the base of their individual relationship OCP 18, 44, 14 DP 22, 39, 19, differences. 20, 65 Subject DC 43, 71, 85, problems 37, 32 DP 3, 26, 31, 29, 32, 34 Personal OC 16, 18, 85, DC 9, 10, 13, Problems 111, 141, 178 15, 16, 27, 28, 29
OCP 54, 58, 59, DP 1, 2, 3, 13, 27 9, 25, 55, 52, 66, 64, 60 Socioeconomic Factors Poverty OC 58, 105, 37, DC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Same socioeconomic 104, 7, 65, 98, factors which were 62, 90, 93, 60, responsible of dropouts and 188 out of school children OCP 70, 67, 56, DP 36, 3, 16, except help with family. 35, 36, 25 24, 17, 25, 29 This reason was also a Unemployment OC 14, 128, DC 10, 15, 25, great hurdle for being out 213 26 of school. OCP 9, 22, 45 DP 7, 30 Family OC 48, 62, 15, DC 1, 2, 6, 7, problems 21, 29, 36, 208 10, 17 OCP 93, 90, 89, DP 20, 39, 46, 73 41, 37, 35 Parents‘ OC 116, 31, 27, DC 92, 23, 21, occupation 200, 204, 60, 19, 98, 100 202, 61 OCP 46, 92, 82, DP 22, 23, 34, 73, 74, 64, 66, 48, 40 35, 49, 54, 57 Help with OC 87, 61, 107, family 94, 18 OCP 68, 38, 55, 47 Policy Barriers Organizational OCP 16, 28, 12 DP 54, 57, 31, Parents of out of school 11, 33 and dropout children Structural OCP 42, 11 DP 34, 37, 46, informed more about the 44 organizational and structural problems of government for policy formulation and implementation than that of their children. 200
Chapter V
Finding, Discussion, Conclusion, Implications for Education Policy, and Future Recommendations
This study aimed to document the voices of out of school children and their parents to identify their implications for education policy. Qualitative research approach with a case study design and the ethnographic method was used to explore the views for being out of school for children and their parents in-depth and to get a clear picture of their problems which were the main causes of being out of school.
Three methods were used for this documentation. Firstly, semi-structured interviews were conducted from 324 children and their 178 parents. Secondly, focus group discussions were conducted from eight children and their seven parents. Lastly, views from social media (Face book) were collected. Illustration of qualitative results was drawn with the help of NVivo 11 plus while frequency counts of the interviews were calculated with the help of SPSS (Appendix L). The results of the three methods in the form of findings are presented here.
Findings of Data
In this study, the researcher found that most of the Out of School children were present in Union Council (UC 139) of Nishtar Town Tehsil of Lahore District of
Lahore Division and Union Council (UC Layyah -1) of Layyah Tehsil of District
Layyah of D G Khan Division while most of the dropout children were present at
Union Council UC 47 (Qabula) of Tehsil Arifwala, District Pakpattan of Sahiwal
Division. Most of the Out of School and Dropout Children who gave interviews were male and were present in the rural areas of Punjab. Out of school children of all ages were prevailing in the out of school category, while most of the elder children were in the dropout category. The distance to school for most of the Out of School Children 201 was 2 to 3 Km whereas for most of the dropout children it was 1 Km and the same type of frequency counts can be seen for Out of School and Dropout Children‘s
Parents. Less participation of girls in interviews is because of their parents‘ disliking for their participation in interviews and girls feel shy for taking participating in interviews. And Female parents don‘t like to give interviews in the presence of their husbands. Most of the out of school children are those who never go to school and parents think that they are little to go to school till at that age while dropout children are those who go to school and then left it so, their age is greater than that of out of school children.
After identifying and highlighting the ―Patterns‖ and ―Sequence‖ in the interviews of out of school children and dropout children the researcher found some themes and sub themes regarding the reasons for being out of schools.
According to the results of the children interviews regarding out of school children and dropout children, themes emerged from the analysis of data were
―Socioeconomic Factors‖, ―Cultural Factors‖, ―Demographic Factors‖ and
―Psychological Factors‖ that restrain children from school.
Five main themes emerged from the interviews of out of school and dropout children‘s parents. These were ―Cultural factors‖, ―Demographic Factors‖,
―Psychological Factors‖ ―Socio Economic Factors‖ and ―Policy barriers‖.
Cultural Factors
The theme ―Culture Factors‖ that was emerged from the voices of out of school children had three sub themes. These were ―Area‘s Environment‖, ―Literacy‖, and ―Female Problems‖. The sub theme ―Area‘s Environment‖ emerged from some codes. These codes were children of my caste, sexual harassment, send their mentally retarded children to school, and people in my area are poor. The sub theme ―Female 202
Problems‖ emerged from the codes that were different attitudes towards boys and girls, grown-up girls, early marriage of girls, give preference to boys, and negative attitude towards girls‘ education. The sub theme ―Literacy‖ emerged from the codes that were father is illiterate, parents are illiterate and I am illiterate.
The same theme was found from the thematic analysis of Out of School
Children‘s Parents ―Cultural Factors‖. The common sub themes that come after the coding process of thematic analysis by labeling data were ―Area environment‖,
―Female Problems‖ and ―Literacy‖. The sub theme ―Area‘s Environment‖ emerged from some codes. These codes were; send mentally retarded children to school, sexual harassment, children of my caste, and no labour work in our village. The sub theme
―Female Problems‖ emerged from the codes that were different attitude towards boys and girls, early marriage of girls, girls of my family don‘t go to school, give preference to boys, negative attitude towards girls‘ education, and can‘t send my daughters due to long distance. The sub theme ―Literacy‖ emerged from the codes that were not gone to school in my childhood, parents are illiterate, and none of my children go to school.
This theme ―Culture Factors‖ was also emerged from the voices of dropout children, and had four sub themes. These were ―Area‘s Environment‖, ―Teacher‘s behaviour‖, ―Literacy‖ and ―Female Problems‖. The sub theme ―Area‘s
Environment‖ emerged from some codes. These codes were children of my caste, fear of sexual harassment, handicapped children, send their mentally retarded children to school, and area are very rich. The sub theme ―Teacher‘s behaviour‖ emerged from the codes that were teachers‘ punished, afraid of teachers, and teachers beat me harshly. The sub theme ―Female Problems‖ emerged from the codes that were different attitudes towards boys and girls, the marriage of girls, a positive attitude 203 towards boys, and a negative attitude towards girls‘ education. The sub theme
―Literacy‖ emerged from the codes that were mother is illiterate, parents are illiterate, and started to hifz Quran e Pak.
The first theme of the thematic analysis of drop out children‘s parents again was ―Cultural Factors‖. The common sub themes that come after the coding process of thematic analysis by labeling data were ―Area environment‖, ―Female Problems‖,
―Literacy‖ and ―Teachers‘ Behaviour‖. The sub theme ―Area‘s Environment‖ emerged from some codes. These codes were area is not prosperous, people of our area are poor, children of my caste, and send their mentally retarded children to school. The sub theme ―Female Problems‖ emerged from the codes that were an early marriage of girls, give preference to boys, negative attitude towards girls‘ education, and don‘t like to send their girls. The sub theme ―Literacy‖ emerged from the codes that changed the literacy rate, parents are illiterate, never saw any school, children‘s mother is illiterate, and none of them go to school. The last sub theme ―Teachers‘
Behaviour‖ emerged from the codes that were school‘s staff sent them back, corporal punishment, afraid of the teacher, and teachers‘ attitude.
Demographic Factors
The second theme emerged from the voices of out of school children
―Demographic Factors‖ had three sub themes. These were ―Family Size‖, ―Living
Area‘s Status‖ and ―Distance‖. The sub theme ―Family size‖ emerged from some codes. These codes were large family, siblings, and each of us busy in earning. The sub theme ―distance‖ emerged from the codes that were money for transport, and does not drop me to school. The sub theme ―Living Area‘s Status‖ emerged from the codes that were rich area, green area, disaster area, and poor area. 204
The same theme ―Demographic Factors‖ had three subthemes that were emerged from the voices of out of school children‘s parents. These were ―Family
Size‖, ―Living Area‘s Status‖ and ―Distance‖. The sub theme ―Family size‖ emerged from some codes. These codes were large families, my ten children do not go to school, and each of us busy in earning. The sub theme ―Distance‖ emerged from the codes that were school is situated in the neighbouring village, and daily long travelling. The sub theme ―Living Area‘s Status‖ emerged from the codes that were green area, disaster area, poor area, and our area is not prosperous.
This theme ―Demographic Factors‖ that was found from the voices of dropouts had three sub themes. These were ―Family Size‖, ―Living Area‘s Status‖ and
―Distance‖. The sub theme ―Family size‖ emerged from some codes. These codes were large family, and lack of educational accessories. The sub theme ―Distance‖ emerged from the codes that were daily long traveling, and reaches in school late. The sub theme ―Living Area‘s Status‖ emerged from the codes that were living in the barren area, living in the green area, disaster area, Punjabi, where we find work we go there, and wandering for earning.
The voices of dropouts showed that the theme ―Demographic Factors‖ had three sub themes. These were ―Family Size‖, ―Living Area‘s Status‖ and ―Distance‖.
These sub themes had some codes that had been extracted from interviews of dropout children‘s parents. The sub theme ―Family size‖ emerged from some codes. These codes were; as large family, and busy in my work. The sub theme ―Distance‖ emerged from the codes that were school was in neighbouring village, no money for transport, and daily long traveling. The sub theme ―Living Area‘s Status‖ emerged from the codes that were disaster area, Punjabi, fear of sexual harassment, and wandering for earning. 205
Psychological Factors
The next theme ―Psychological Factors‖ had four sub themes emerged from the voices of out of school children. These were ―Adjustment Problems‖, ―Parents and
Children‘s Relationship‖, ―Personal Problems‖, and ―Future Dreams‖. The sub theme
―Adjustment Problems‖ emerged from some codes, i.e. can‘t adjust and divide household work. The sub theme ―Parents and Children‘s Relationship‖ emerged from the codes that did not bother about my education, and parents are busy with house chores. The sub theme ―Personal Problems‖ emerged from the codes that were like to go to school, like to study in my mother tongue, can‘t go to school, and puberty. The sub theme ―Future Dreams‖ emerged from some codes, i.e. can‘t think about my future, don‘t think to become anything in future, successful person, my strongest wish is to study, doctor, my dream will never come true, teacher, police officer, and my wish is only a wish.
The theme ―Psychological Factors‖ had four sub themes according to the voices of out of school children‘s parents. These were ―Adjustment Problems‖,
―Parents and Children‘s Relationship‖, ―Personal Problems‖, and ―Future Dreams‖.
The sub theme ―Adjustment Problems‖ emerged from some codes, i.e. can‘t adjust and divide household work. The sub theme ―Parents and Children‘s Relationship‖ emerged from the codes that were helped in house chores, did not contribute to the family earning, and no time to pick and drop our children. The sub theme ―Personal
Problems‖ emerged from the codes that were like to study in my mother tongue, I left my school, puberty, stay busy in household works, and quarrel. The sub theme
―Future Dreams‖ emerged from some codes, i.e. successful person, doctor, can‘t see dreams, police officer, think about their future to become something, teacher, to get 206 jobs, said nothing about their future, dream is nothing, no dream, lawyer, wish to give education to my ward and to get an education.
The dropout children also explored the next theme ―Psychological Factors‖ that had five sub themes. These were ―Adjustment Problems‖, ―Relation with
Parents‖, ―Personal Problems‖, ―Future Dreams‖ and ―Subject‘s Problem‖. The sub theme ―Adjustment Problems‖ emerged from some codes, i.e. can‘t adjust among small children, attitude problems, can‘t adjust in school, discomfort in school, and personal attitude. The sub theme ―Parents and Children‘s Relationship‖ emerged from the codes that were parents provided me emotional support, parents gave me love hug, and parents consoled after teachers‘ punishment. The sub theme ―Personal
Problems‖ emerged from the codes that were weak in the study, puberty, no other wish, my friend left school so I don‘t like school, grown-up, disability, don‘t think about my future, and dislike studies. The sub theme ―Future Dreams‖ emerged from some codes, i.e. think about my future, a future dream is to become businessman, failed to fulfill dreams, a dream is to get a job of an educationist, a dream is to become successful person, classmates are studying, a dream is to become police officer or doctor, become an army officer, become a doctor in future, and become an engineer. The last sub theme ―Subject Problems‖ emerged from some codes, i.e. study in the mother tongue, mother tongue is different from instructional language, like
Urdu, like to get an education in the mother tongue, learning of Urdu I have found some difficulties, learn Urdu, difficulty in all subjects, difficulty in reading and learning of Science, difficulty in reading and learning of Mathematics, and difficulty in instructional language.
According to the views of the dropout children‘s parents the theme
―Psychological Factors‖ had five sub themes. These were ―Adjustment Problems‖, 207
―Future Dream‖, ―Parents and Children‘s Relationship‖, ―Personal Problems‖, and
―Subject Problems‖. The sub theme ―Adjustment Problems‖ emerged from some codes, i.e. can‘t adjust and quarrel with their fellows. The sub theme ―Parents and
Children‘s Relationship‖ emerged from the codes that were; get their educational report, and gave a loving hug. The sub theme ―Personal Problems‖ emerged from the codes that were; feel discomfort, no attraction in school, weak in studies, health problems, felt shame in school, and attitude problems. The sub theme ―Future
Dreams‖ emerged from some codes, i.e. classmates are studying, businessman, poor people can‘t see dreams, government officers, successful people, think nothing about their future, doctor, and to get an education. The last sub theme ―Subject Problems‖ emerged from some codes, i.e. mother tongue, English, Urdu, Science, and
Mathematics.
Socio Economic Factors
The last theme of interviews of out of school children was ―Socio Economic
Factors‖. It had five sub themes. These were ―Poverty‖, ―Occupation‖,
―Unemployment‖, ―Family Problems‖, and ―Help in Family‖. The ―Poverty‖ sub theme had emerged from twelve codes that were got relative help, can‘t afford school, no money for admission, no money for purchasing copies and books, not a single penny for buying a uniform, worried about our poverty, worse condition of living, my parents can‘t afford stationery and books, teachers will send me back to home if I have not uniform, can‘t afford any kind of transport, have not land and money, and no fee, stationery, uniform, shoes, and transport. The sub theme ―Occupation‖ emerged from the codes that were father is a labourer, mother is a housewife, father has a cart and he sells homemade drinks, works in a shop on daily wages, father works in a shop, father sells homemade toys, and parents are working with a constructor. The 208 next sub theme was ―Unemployment‖. This sub theme emerged from he is unemployed, contribute in my family, wandering for earning, family income, father does nothing as he is ill, and wants to get an education for the job. The sub theme
―Family Problems‖ had some codes that had been extracted from interviews of out of school children. Such as my uncle is our guardian, my father does nothing and takes drugs, parents worried about our food, not our marriage, my mother died, parents quarrel with each other, and no one will do house chores in my absence. The last sub theme was ―Help in Family‖. The codes of this sub theme extracted from labeling were I work for money, help in house chores, cut grass for animals, help my parents in earning money, help my mother in making food and clean home and wash utensils.
The next theme of interviews of out of school children‘s parents was ―Socio
Economic Factors‖. It had five sub themes. These were ―Poverty‖, ―Occupation‖,
―Unemployment‖, ―Family Problems‖, and ―Help in Family‖. The ―Poverty‖ sub theme had emerged from twelve codes that were high inflation rates, work on daily wages, no fee, stationary, uniform, shoes, and transport, earn your to five thousand, can‘t afford their studies, no money for school expenditures, we are poor, can‘t be able to buy books and copies, where we find there we eat, cannot be possible for poor, living hand to mouth, had not those educational accessories, poverty engulfs us, and can‘t afford the education of all children. The sub theme ―Occupation‖ emerged from the codes that were I am a labourer, teacher in a private school, I am making bricks, washing clothes and utensils of people, works on daily wages, and mother is a housewife. The next sub theme was ―Unemployment‖. This sub theme emerged from moving place to place for earning, family income, and working on daily wages. The sub theme ―Family Problems‖ had some codes that had been extracted from interviews of out of school children‘s parents. Such as, my husband is not with us, my 209 wife died, and worried about food, not marriage. The last sub theme was ―Help in
Family‖. The codes of this sub theme extracted from labeling were children help us in earning, help in house chores, and they work for money.
The last theme of interviews of drop out children was also ―Socio Economic
Factors‖. It had four subthemes. These were ―Poverty‖, ―Occupation‖,
―Unemployment‖, and ―Family Problems‖. The ―Poverty‖ sub theme had emerged from twelve codes that were the worse condition of living, parents worry about our food, not our marriage, beg from people, get help from relatives, poor, no money for school expenditures, monthly income is less to fulfill our needs, learn some skills to increase family income, live hand to mouth, high inflation rates, poor family condition, and low family income. The sub theme ―Occupation‖ emerged from the codes that were father is tailor, works with a constructor, works in a brick furnace, and father sells vegetables. The next sub theme was ―Unemployment‖. This sub theme emerged from unemployed parents, one mother is working, parents work, and father does nothing and takes drugs. The last sub theme ―Family Problems‖ had some codes that had been extracted from interviews of drop out children. Such as parents quarrel with each other, parents have no relations, no time for lesson preparation, mother died, mother‘s illness, home problem, health problem, father died, parents discouragement, parents' problem, and brother‘s death.
The next theme of interviews of drop out children‘s parents was also ―Socio
Economic Factors‖. It had four subthemes. These were ―Poverty‖, ―Occupation‖,
―Unemployment‖, and ―Family Problems‖. The ―Poverty‖ sub theme had emerged from some codes that were low income, lack of educational resources, no money for school expenditure, lives hand to mouth, works on daily wages, we can only eat not study, and unavailability of educational resources. The sub theme ―Occupation‖ 210 emerged from the codes that were I am a labourer, I am a driver, and I sell vegetables and fruits. The next sub theme was ―Unemployment‖. This sub theme emerged from family income, and learned some skills. The last sub theme ―Family Problems‖ had some codes that had been extracted from interviews of drop out children‘s parents.
Such as no one help them in their homework, my husband died, not able to encourage our children, I am divorced, and quarrel with each other.
Policy Barriers
Policy barriers were only explored by parents. So, the last theme of interviews of out of school children‘s parents was ―Policy Barriers‖. It had two sub themes.
These were ―Organizational‖, and ―Structural‖. The ―Organizational‖ sub theme had emerged from codes that were Govt. tells free and compulsory education for all, to increase the literacy rate of the country, some people wrote our problems on pages, the relationship between formulation and implementation of policy and Government wrote thousands of pages for free and compulsory education for all. The sub theme
―Structural‖ emerged from the codes that were Govt. do nothing, poor becomes poorer day by day, I want resources, give equal rights to rich and poor, Govt. failed to fulfill their dreams, and writes big ideas, but implements nothing.
The last theme of interviews of drop out children‘s parents was ―Policy
Barriers‖. It had two subthemes. These were ―Organizational‖, and ―Structural‖. The
―Organizational‖ sub theme had emerged from codes that were; the relation between formulation and implementation of policy, written statement, children‘s right,
Government does not apply rules and regulations, Government is not promoting social justice, my responsibilities, not a single personnel asked about our children education, education is not the right of poor, unawareness of Government, Government is sleeping, Government should provide free and compulsory education, and equal rights 211 to rich and poor. The sub theme ―Structural‖ emerged from the codes that were meet children‘s teachers, school inspection, want fees and money for children's education, other educational accessories are necessary, school is just like a mess, Classroom instructional and management practices, and no implementation.
Children Focus Group Discussion
The qualitative analysis regarding focus group discussion of Out of School
Children had been adopted the same process of thematic analysis by labeling common patterns, attributes, ideas and interests of out of school children in a focus group to generate common themes. The themes emerged from focus group discussion of out of school children were ―School‖, ―Daily wages‖, ―Poverty‖, ―Family problems‖,
―Behaviour‖, ―Education‖, ―Area‖, ―Future dream‖, ―Occupation‖, and ―house‖.
Two codes changed place, and negative people torture girls and boys were generated the theme of ―Area‖. Future dreams generated from a good job, become a doctor, become a policeman, become a soldier, no change in our situation, and problematic situation. Good ―Education‖ depends upon becomes a better human being, can‘t calculate and read, can‘t read the name and simple phone numbers, illiterate, and importance of education. The behaviour of out of school children emerged from busy in playing, helping hand, not happy, feel jealous to see educated children, and liked school. The next theme ―Occupation‖ emerged from works in houses, wash utensils of people, sweeper, father is carpenter, and can‘t find work.
Family problems were generated from; father has no time, mother‘s illness and death, father‘s illness, sister's sickness, problems in their homes, sibling‘s take care, and no free time. Some attributes that generate poverty were no fee for school, father‘s support, electricity bills, no transport, and inflation rate. Two codes house chores, and house rent generated house-related problems that also affect education. Children and 212 parents who work on daily wages their income is not constant. School-related problems such as school‘s admission, school‘s staff, homework, and liking also decrease the literacy of a country.
Parents’ Focus Group Discussion
Common labels to patterns, attributes, ideas, and interests of out of school children‘s parents in a focus group were generated common codes by thematic analysis in NVivo 11 plus. And these codes identified some themes of ―Daily wages‖,
―education‖, ―proper uniform‖, ―schools‖, ―Poverty‖, ―Occupation‖, ―Person‖,
―Teachers‘ behavior‖, ―Girls‖, ―House‖, and ―work‖.
According to the parents' point of view, they could not send their girls to school because of sexual harassment, afraid of bad happening with girls, current time and situations are not good for girls and threatening about our girls' kidnapping.
Parents told that many times teachers‘ behaviour stops the education of their children by frightening behaviour of teachers, teachers send children back to home, teachers abused, and teachers scold children. House problems such as house rent, electricity bills, feeds animals, and house chores are the major problems for the poor. Out of school children‘s parents' occupations such as making bricks and labourer did not support them to educate their children. The codes reflected poverty in parents‘ focus group discussion were food for one time, less food, poor, no stationery, don‘t have copies, scarf, and shoes, no resources, getting insulted, rent a vehicle for our girls' schooling, can‘t afford the study, difficult to change our position, eat bread with red chilies and salt, and poor become poorer and die. The codes that emerged from out of school children‘s parents' points of view were private schools, government schools, and want lunch in schools for the theme ―school‖. The theme of ―work‖ was identified from the focus group discussion as child work, labour, work, work to fulfill 213 family necessities, wife works in different houses, no free time for playing, and daughters' help in cooking. The proper uniform is the basic requirement for school children. Those who have not proper and neat uniforms are disliked in class. In this discussion, the theme of ―person‖ was originated from two codes, i.e. illiterate person, and poor person. The theme ―education‖ generated from codes getting an education, good education, want our daughters to become bold and confident, education is important, illiterate person, good jobs are not for illiterates, know about their selves, and literate speaks thoroughly in the focus group discussion of out of school children‘s parents. The last theme of this discussion was ―daily wages‖ and it emerged from some codes as don‘t know to find work next time, daily wages, and tired after working all day.
Reasons for Out of School (Facebook Data)
The themes on which participants show their willingness were ―Parents‖,
―Education‖, ―Behaviour‖, ―Poverty‖, and ―Family size‖. These themes were identified by thematic analysis in NVivo 11 plus software for Facebook Data.
Hopeless parents, uneducated parents, parent‘s ignorance, illiteracy, Parent‘s earning, and parents' lack of concern were the similarities in the Facebook data of participants that originated the ―Parents‖ theme. The theme ―education‖ was identified in data as a good education, getting an education, and uneducated parents.
―Behaviour‖ was identified by similar codes such as lack of awareness, fear of the study, and don‘t know the importance of education. The theme ―Poverty‖ emerged from some codes. These codes were no financial support, sacrificing basic needs, education is very expensive, underprivileged, unemployment, begging business, lack of facilities, and focus is more on survival. The theme ―family size‖ was also important to measure the reasons for being out of school. 214
Reasons for Dropout (Facebook Data)
The common themes for ―Reasons for Dropout‖ were ―work‖, ―school‖,
―teaching‖, ―environment‖, ―child‘s need‖, ―curriculum‖, ―language barrier‖,
―poverty‖, ―behaviour‖, and ―skills‖.
Initial coding of data generated the theme of ―curriculum‖ by labeling the codes unproductive or boring curriculum, change in curriculum, no attraction, and curriculum isn‘t impressive. The theme of ―School‖ was developed by lack of equipment, school work, school needs, teachers beat in school, an impressive school environment, and schooling is a business. Teaching style, teachers beat, favouritism of teachers, teaching skills, and memorization generated the theme of ―teaching‖. Two codes bore work, and school work identified theme ―work‖. The most common codes for the theme ―child‘s needs‖ were own diversity is ignored, pushed to meet the standard of the school, and lack of motivation.
The next theme was ―behaviour‖ of students, which at last drop them out of class. Technical skills and teaching skills were the codes for the theme ―skills‖.
According to participants ―Poverty‖ was the main cause of failure. It is reflected as a lack of educational support, expenditures of school, earning members of the home, materialism, preferred to do some kind of job, and unable to fulfill school needs. The theme ―environment‖ was developed from an impressive school environment, home environment, unattractive classroom, lack of future guidance, lifestyle, illiteracy, and sudden changes in the education system.
Comparisons of Voices
Comparison of Children Focus Group Discussion vs. Parents Focus Group
Discussion 215
The similarities and differences between the voices of out of school children and parents in focus group discussions showed that both were agreed upon the problems related to school, daily wages, chores (in house and out of the house), girls, and uniforms. The attributes that were highlighted by parents were labour work, getting an education, good education, private schools, government schools, household chores, girls' kidnapping, illiterate person, poor person, child work, proper uniform, work, education, and person. While the attributes which were highlighted by only children were house chores, liked school, school‘s staff, house rent, girls dropout, bought the uniform, and house.
Comparison of Interviews of Out of School Children vs. Out of School
Children’s Parents
The similarities and differences in the voices of out of school children and parents demonstrated that both were agreed upon the reasons for being out of school are house chores, retarded children, sexual harassment, children, area, and house.
While the attributes which were highlighted by Out of School Children‘s Parents are school parents, getting an education, army officer, actual problem, school expenditure, lesson preparation, compulsory education, social justice, written statement, great wish, disaster area, school, education, problem, Parents.
The attributes which were identified only by Out of School Children are small children, big family, negative attitude, rich area, family, attitude, and rate (Literacy rate).
Comparison of Interviews of Dropout Children vs. Dropout Children’s
Parents
The similarities and differences of attributes in the voices of dropout children and parents illustrated that both were agreed upon educational accessories, sexual 216 harassment, instructional language, school expenditures, lesson preparation, children, family, attitude, and problem.
The attributes which were described only by Dropout Children‘s Parents in their interviews are attitude problem, school inspection, compulsory education, nongovernment institutions, sense government, management practices, getting an education, children education, social justice, dropout parents, written statement, great wish, disasters areas, education, poor family, future education, literacy rate, poor classroom, classroom instructional, school staff, single government personnel, army officer, attitude problem, rate, classroom, government, parents, and area.
While the attributes which were described by only Dropout Children are retarded children, small children, large family, family income, housewife, mother tongue, felt discomfort, positive attitude, personal problem, and house.
Comparison of Interviews of Out of School Children vs. Dropout Children
The common codes identified by Out of School Children and Dropout
Children were retarded children, small children, sexual harassment, children, family, house, and attitude.
The attributes which were described by only Out of School Children as the reasons for their being out of school are big family, negative attitude, rich area, house chores, inflation rates, area, and rate.
Whereas the reasons which were identified by only dropout children are educational accessories, mother tongue, large family, felt discomfort, family income, positive attitude, housewife, personal problems, school expenditures, instructional language, lesson preparation, problem, school, and instructional.
Comparison of Interviews of Out of School Children’s Parents vs. Dropout
Children’s Parents 217
A long list of common attributes of Out of School Children‘s Parents and
Dropout Children‘s Parents were getting an education, sexual harassment, army officer, school expenditures, lesson preparation, compulsory education, social justice, written statement, great wish, disaster area, children, education, school, problem, parents, and area.
The reasons which were identified only by Out of School Children‘s parents in their interviews are retarded children, school parents, house chores, actual problems, and house. While Dropout Children‘s Parents‘ identified reasons were children education, educational accessories, poor family, future education, literacy rate, management practices, poor classroom, classroom instructional, instructional language, school staff, single government personnel, attitude problem, school inspection, nongovernment institutions, sense government, dropout parent, family, rate, classroom, instructional, government, and attitude.
Comparison of Reasons for Out of School vs. Reasons for Dropout
Facebook Data
Facebook data identified some similarities to find out the reasons for out of school and dropouts. These similarities were family, school, and education. The discourse analysis of Face book data highlighted some reasons for out of school were family size, getting an education, school demands, good education, uneducated parents, hopeless parents, and only the parents. Whereas the highlighted reasons for dropout were a family burden, teaching style, impressive school environment, home environment, rather education, aggressive behaviour, school needs, rude behaviour, school work, bore work, teaching skills, teaching, technical skills, environment, work, behaviour, and skills.
218
Analytical Review of Findings
This study sought to conceptualize the factors which hinder the education of out of school children and seeking some policy implications for improvement in literacy. The researcher's premise was to find out those invisible barriers that affect out of school children‘s lives in terms of their perceptions and their parents‘ perceptions. The methodology of this research was exploratory in nature and qualitative thematic analysis was used. Interviewees‘ responses encouraged the researcher to develop themes in creative ways by using a continuous procedure of study and made connections among the responses of children and parents. The process of coding and recoding helped the researcher to look at data in a new way and made connections among themes. Findings of the thematic analysis showed that four major themes emerged from the data of out of school and dropout children whereas; five themes emerged from the data of parents of out of school and dropout children.
The themes extracted from the data of children were cultural factors, demographic factors, psychological factors, and socioeconomic factors. The first four themes extracted from the data of parents were the same to the children while; the fifth theme i.e. policy barriers were different from children‘s themes. As participants of this research came from different perspectives, so researchers found several perceptions about one thing from different participants that distracted the researcher. In this regard researcher‘s subjectivity during step by step method of theme development enhanced the validity of this research. Thematic maps developed by NVivo 11 plus help the researcher in a more analytical interpretation of the perceptions of children and parents.
After the thematic analysis; the researcher concluded that most of them out of school children and their parents said that the school was on distance. Their families 219 were large and mostly all the children at home did not go to school. Low income and poverty lagged them behind with other children of their age. Only one child said that their family income is above than 27000 but his father did not admit about family income and at that situation researcher should note the socioeconomic condition of the family. Most of the parents were labourers, but the analysis also showed that unemployed, died and works other than labour were also reflected in the analysis.
Most of the parents of out of school children were illiterates, but some fathers had gone to school in their childhood. Results of interviews of out of school children and their parents showed that most children liked to go to school, but they had not a fee, books, and copies, uniforms, and shoes, no one to drop them. Out of school children of ages, more than 12 years contributed to house chores and in the family's earning.
They did different works in homes, for instance, girls helped their mothers in cooking, cleaning, and washing while boys helped their fathers in cutting grass for animals.
Most of the children and parents thought that the mother will do house chores if they will start study. Whereas, many thought that no one does their house chores in their absence. Parents were busy in and out of the home so they had not timed for their children‘s education.
From the viewpoint of out of school children and their parents; puberty did not come against their education while some teenagers were worried about their puberty.
Most of the out of school children did not feel fear of sexual harassment, but parents were worried about their children especially female children. They thought that the people in their area were not good. Early marriage was not the actual problem of being out of school. Mostly they denied their marriage related problems, but they said about the early marriage of girls in their caste and area. Both, out of school children and their parents refuted the negative attitude towards girls' education, but some 220 reflected the negative attitude of the people of their caste towards girls‘ education.
Mostly, People of their area did not like to send their mentally or physically retarded children to school as they did not bother about their education and they have no money and resources for those children. Many parents of out of school children narrated the positivistic approach of the people of their caste about their children‘s education, but some children had the same point of view in this regard and others did not agree. Mostly, parents of out of school children did not quarrel with each other, whereas some admitted that due to the high inflation rate they were worried and they quarrel with each other on little matters. Most of the out of school children and their parents thought that if they had not any problem they want to go to school. Mostly, out of school children thought that their parents did not change their living place for earning but, some parents said that they change their living place many times for earning. If opportunities were provided to them, out of school children want to get an education in their mother tongue.
Most of the area of Punjab is a green plain area so most of them out of school children and their parents said that their area was not a disaster area. But, who identified it as poor and disaster area had related it with their poor family condition and thought that all area was poor or disaster. Most of the out of school children‘s parents thought that there is no relation between formulation and implementation of policy; it is only a written statement and they also know about their children‘s rights that the government should provide free and compulsory education to them. Parents identified that the government is not promoting social justice for their children and it is their responsibility to admit their children to school, but some thought that they have no time so it is the responsibility of the government to admit their children to schools. Parents were disappointed about the duties of government or nongovernment 221 persons as no one asked from them about their children‘s education. They said that the only fee is not the actual cause of being out of school; they required all educational resources for their children. Most of out of school children and their parents were hopeless about children‘s future and thought nothing about it. But, some said about their future wishes, i.e. doctor, teacher, etc. On the whole, poverty was the actual reason for being out of school.
Thematic analysis of interviews of dropout children and their parents was identified some same problems which were identified by out of school children and their parents. Most of the dropout children and their parents said that school was situated in the range of 1 Km which was less than most of the views of out of school children and their parents, i.e. 2 to 3 Km. It means distance was the problem but did not the real problem for dropout. Again, just like out of school children; large family and its necessities becomes a great hurdle against the education of children. Children left their school as parents can‘t afford the education of all children, so mostly they left schools after primary education but researcher observe during the interviews that if the number of family members is more than 8 then it causes problem to the education of children. Low family income destroys the educational future of the majority of the children. A large number of dropout children and parents clarified that their father‘s occupation was labour and most of them were worked on daily wages while most of the mothers‘ were housewives. That was the actual reason for the low income and poverty of dropout‘s family. Mothers of dropout children were illiterate whereas, fathers were literate to some extent. Dropout children and their parents said that majority of children felt discomfort in school due to poverty, but some were unhappy due to their attitude or they were weak in their studies. Some children explored that teachers beat them, but others did not. Parents said that teachers did not 222 punish them. This time, it is very difficult to understand who speak truth. It would be better for the researcher to ask from peers about the actual situation. Teachers‘ behavior was one of the causes to leave school and it is not the supreme cause to dropout. Thematic analysis of interviews of some dropout children and their parents identified some other reasons for dropouts, e.g. long school timing, feel the hunger in school, no water and washroom in schools, parents discouragement, no attraction at school, no one help in homework task, no time for lesson preparation, health issues, weak in the study, and fear of others. Only a small number of children and their parents explored these reasons for dropouts. The age of most dropout children was more than 12 years. So most of the children identified puberty related problems while some parents also explored this problem. These children mostly felt fear of sexual harassment in school or on the way to school. Some of the young girls did not in school due to early marriage and girls‘ education was in threat due to the negative attitude towards girls‘ education. Most of the parents of dropouts said that their relatives send their mentally or physically retarded children to school, but children did not think so or some thought it a little bit. Dropout children identified that people of their caste send their children to school and their parents did not quarrel with each other. Mostly dropout children recognized that their teachers punished them and their parents gave them emotional support at that time, while parents identified it to some extent. These dropouts felt sorry, as they lagged to their classmates and their classmates were studying further. The majority of these dropouts wanted to start their studies again in their mother tongue, but parents did not like to start their studies.
Dropout children thought that their parents changed their living places, but parents did not agree. Again, there was a conflict among dropout children and their parents. Most of the children said that they were living in a disaster area, whereas most of the 223 parents did not agree about the status of their area. Dropout children identified that their mother tongue was different from the instructional language, but parents did not think so. They wanted to get an education in Urdu language and found difficulties in learning English. Most of the dropouts wished to become army officers. Parents identified the same policy barriers just as out of school children‘s parents and mostly they meet their children‘s teachers to get their progress report. Dropouts‘ parents said that mostly their children‘s school was inspected, but sometimes they found good instructional and management practices in school and sometimes did not. The biggest problem for dropout was poverty.
Similar types of problems were found from focus group discussion of children and parents, but children also identified some different problems, e.g. negative people torture girls and boys, becomes a better human being, can‘t calculate and read, can‘t read name and simple phone numbers, feel jealous to see educated children, busy in playing, electricity bills, and house rent. Parents of focus group also identified some problems different than interviews, e.g. afraid of bad happening with girls, current time and situations are not good for girls, threatening about our girls' kidnapping, food for one time, rent a vehicle for our girls' schooling, eat bread with red chilies and salt, private schools, government schools, want lunch in schools, want our daughters to become bold and confident, know about their selves, and literate speaks thoroughly.
Some reasons for out of school identified from Facebook data were different from interviews, e.g. hopeless parents, parent‘s ignorance, parents' lack of concern, lack of awareness, don‘t know the importance of education, sacrificing basic needs, underprivileged, begging business, and focus is more on survival. Some different reasons for dropout other than interviews were also found from Facebook data, e.g. unproductive or boring curriculum, change in curriculum, no attraction, the 224 curriculum isn‘t impressive, lack of equipment, schooling is a business, teaching style, favouritism of teachers, teaching skills, memorization, bore work, own diversity is ignored, pushed to meet the standard of the school, lack of motivation, earning member of the home, materialism, preferred to do some kind of job, lack of future guidance, unattractive classroom, and sudden changes in the education system.
So these were the reasons which found after the thematic analysis of interviews of out of school children and their parents, and dropout children and their parents, focus group discussion of out of school children and their parents, and identified reasons from Facebook data for out of school and dropouts.
Discussion
The qualitative results of interviews of 216 out of school children explored four major themes which become the actual reasons for being out of school. These themes were Cultural Factors, Psychological Factors, Demographic Factors, and
Socioeconomic Factors. The same themes were identified by their 103 parents except for Policy Barriers as children did not know the basics of education, so they can‘t be able to define educational policies and the problems related to policies. UNICEF
(2015b) country report on Out of School Children in the Middle East and North
Africa explained the main reasons for dropout. These reasons are health problems, cultural reasons, poor achievement, physical punishment, not interested to continue, father doesn‘t approve, all teachers are males, assisting in the family business, need to work, home duties, school is far, the cost of private tutoring, and school fees and uniform. According to it, some psychological factors are also responsible for the discontinuing of education and these are lack of self-confidence and dependency, feelings of inferiority or persecution, bad health, the difficulty of memorizing, ease of 225 straying from school, hyperactivity and difficulty focusing, and difficulty carrying out certain activities.
The present study reflected that culture develops from the people and living patterns of people in any area. Both; Out of School Children and their Parents agreed upon the point that mind set up originate from any culture and cultural problems.
Habitual performances of people in areas‘ where the ratio of out of school children was high showed that these people send their mentally retarded children to school to some extent. In Pakistan, each caste has its own culture, and the poor have only one caste i.e. poverty. Many times their children feel sexual harassment. Out of school children told me that the people of their area are poor while parents told me that they find no labour work in their village. Just as some problems of out of school children were identified by Stromquist (2014), who presented a paper ―Out of School
Children: Why Gender Matters‖? In his paper, he identified reasons for being out of school for girls. He told that cultural norms, poverty, gender and ethnicity, orphan children, living in conflict and post-conflict areas, street children, disability, and school climate are the root causes for out of school girls.
Knowledge blooms the good qualities of any culture. In any family where no one goes to school, there is no progress. That family has not its own culture; they adopt the ideas, interests, and habits of others. Mostly, the interviews of both children and parents reflected that all family members were illiterate.
Girls‘ education always faces opposition all around the World. Out of School
Children and their parents' probe question of a different attitude towards boys and girls, early marriage of girls, preference for boys, and negative attitude toward girls‘ education. Children also informed that their families don‘t like to send their grown up girls to school and these grown up girls also don‘t like to go to school as they can‘t 226 adjust in class among young boys while parents told that girls of their family do not go to school and they can‘t send their daughters to school due to long distance. Just like Khan et al (2011) also found causes of primary school dropout among rural girls in Pakistan. They collected the responses of parents in order to find out the reasons of drop out of girls. Responses showed that poverty, girls‘ child security, lack of the child‘s interest, parents‘ death, household chores, school at a distance, teacher attitude, lack of free education, migration and lack of school are the main reasons of girls‘ dropout.
Family size, distance, and living area‘s status affect the education of children demographically. Reflection of family size in interviews of Out of School Children and their parents can be seen as a large family, many siblings, big digit of children and all family members are busy in earning to fulfill the necessities of the whole family. Family size is a prominent reason for being out of school. Education of not only poor but average income families also suppressed due to the heavy necessities of a large family.
Another important factor which hinders the education of children is the distance to school. Most parents of Out of School children don‘t like to send their children to school due to daily long travelling or school was situated in the neighbouring village. Parents have no money for transport and no time to drop their children to school as they are busy with their earning. Many Out of School Children‘s
Parents told that they don‘t like to send their daughters to school lonely; on the other hand, they can‘t afford their travelling. So, the result is that most girls are in homes not in schools. This distance becomes longer for disabled children as their schools were situated up to 12Km distance in Pakistan (Manzoor et al. 2016). 227
A living area many times reflects the living status and education of people in that area. Poor, disaster, and area are not prosperous explored that people of that area hardly earn their livings, but rich and green areas are better for living. In interviews children and their parents told that their area is better for living, but they don‘t have land and money.
This study revealed that psychological problems of Out of School Children and their parents were related to children‘s adjustment problems, personal problems, future dreams, and parents' and children‘s relationship. Out of school children think that they lost the actual admission time and now it will be difficult for them to adjust in class with small children. Many of the out of school children belong to poor and large families and everyone is busy in earning their survival, so they have divided their household works. Out of School Children and their parents can‘t adjust in society in a normal way. As these families are not interested in getting an education that‘s why, poor remained a poor; generation after generation. Just as, Vayachuta et al
(2015) also recognized three main problems of Out of School Children and Youth and three other main problems of dropouts in their study of ‗out-of-school‘ children and youth situations. The three reasons for being out of school were the low quality of life, lack of life and social skills and likeness to be engaged in illegal and risky activities while three reasons for dropout were poverty, low achievement in school, and risky behavior.
We can‘t stop anyone to see the dream. Rich, poor, elder, younger and even a little child has a right to see dreams. So, Out of School Children also have some dreams as described in their interviews. They become optimistic when they said they want to become teachers, doctors, police officers, successful people, to get jobs, lawyer, and to get an education. On the other hand, many children showed their 228 pessimistic approach by saying that they can‘t think about their future, don‘t think to become anything in future, my dream will never come true, my wish; is only a wish, can‘t see a dream, can tell nothing to their parents about their future, and told to their parents that dream is nothing.
Personal problems again stand ahead of Out of School Children‘s education.
These may be related to their interests, behavior, and attitude. Out of School Children and their parents explored some problems of children in their interviews as some children like to get an education in their mother tongue, sometimes their puberty stops them to get an education, sometimes they like and sometimes they don‘t like to go to school. Parents identified that family conflicts spoiled the education of their children.
Their children also stay busy in household works and have no time for their education. Children and parents identified some problems related to their relationships. Many Out of School Children were not satisfied with their relationships with their parents. They think that their parents were busy with house chores and work, and did not bother about their education. Some parents were satisfied with their children as their children help them in earning and house chores. MDG Achievement
Fund (2011) found different reasons for non-enrollment and school dropout in Bosnia and Herzegovina. It mentioned that poor financial standing of the family, lack of parental support and the distance from the school, marriage or common-law marriage, dysfunctional family, bad company, conduct and poor academic achievement, family situation, need for additional income, lack of interest, and inadequate approach of the school were the main causes of non-enrollment.
Impacts of socioeconomic conditions of anyone are long-lasting on the education of that one. Socioeconomic barriers are at the top of all the barriers of being out of school. This study revealed that poverty, occupation, unemployment, help in 229 family and family problems were the main socioeconomic factors discussed by out of school children and their parents. All parents of Out of School Children adopted low salary occupations. Parents may be labourer, work in a shop, sell homemade toys, work with a constructor, sell vegetables or drinks on cart, wash clothes and utensils of people, my mother is a housewife, etc. or teacher in a private school; where school owners buy the dreams of teachers with little bit amount. These low salaried parents can‘t be able to purchase the dreams of their children.
Unemployment increases the rate of out of school children. Families; where unemployment is prevailing are forced to work on daily wages, or they move from place to place for their earning but their income is very low. Many times the sickness of the main family member becomes the cause of unemployment and their children become involved in child labour. These out of school children help their family in earning with their will or forcefully. They also help in house chores, for example, cut grass for animals and make food for the family.
All out of school children and their parents said that the main reason for being out of school is poverty. Their words and appearance both showed their poor condition. Some parents said loudly and some hopelessly about their miserable condition of poverty. Out of School Children and their Parents informed that they can‘t afford the educational expenses and get economical help from their relatives.
Children worried about their living conditions and thought that if they go to school without educational accessories like uniforms, books, copies, and shoes; teachers will send them back home. Mostly, they have no land and money. They lived on rent and worried about house rent and electricity bills. Parents said that poverty engulfs us and we can only eat not study. There is less increase in their salaries after year, while inflation rates increase day by day. 230
Parents‘ death always ruins the lives of children. Parental death affects the education of boys and maternal death affects the education of girls.
Children of divorced parents have economical and psychological issues. In our country earning is the responsibility of the father, and if the father takes drugs then we can think about the miserable condition of children. Many times these children live with their relatives and some other social and cultural issues can be generated.
There are two types of policy barriers, i.e. organizational and structural, and these were identified only by parents. Parents informed about the organizational problems of government as; if the government wants to increase the literacy rate of the country, it should develop a relationship between the formulation and implementation of policies. The government tells and writes about free and compulsory education for all but implements nothing. UNESCO (2018) South Sudan country study elucidated some environmental, supply side, demand side, and quality side barrier for Out of School Children. These barriers were legislation and policy, budget and expenditure, management and coordination, high Pupil-Teacher Ratios
(PTRs), lack of learning spaces during emergencies, shortage of textbooks and learning materials, distance to school, the prevalence of incomplete, poorly constructed, or congested schools, poor nutrition, and hunger, lack of support services for children with disabilities, unsafe schools, opportunity costs and support for household subsistence, psychological Trauma, socio-cultural traditions; pregnancy, marriage, and domestic responsibilities, pastoralist traditions, teacher qualifications, teacher absenteeism, curriculum and language of instruction.
The government has failed to fulfill the dreams of the poor as it writes big ideas but implements nothing and the poor become poorer day by day. The government does not give equal opportunities to rich and poor and the poor want 231 resources for their better living. Parents said that the Government should ask us about our situations, and then take decisions in parliament. King et al (2015) also measured the determinants of nonenrollment and absenteeism. These determinants are financial reasons, guardians don't value education, careless guardians, health reasons, children unwilling, peer influence, and alcoholic guardians.
The qualitative results of interviews of 108 dropout children also identified four major themes which become the actual reasons for their not attending the school.
These themes were Cultural Factors, Psychological Factors, Demographic Factors, and Socioeconomic Factors. The same themes were identified by their 75 parents except for Policy Barriers. Shadreck (2013), explained school-based factors of dropout and explained some causes of dropouts that were poverty, poor academic performance, early marriage, financial constraints, lack of parental interest, parent‘s death, and taking on parenting jobs and responsibilities. He also explored teacher- student relationships, curriculum affects, and school physical environments that affect students‘ decision to drop out of school.
The thematic analysis of this study showed that the dropout children and their parents identified the same problems related to cultural factors as described by out of school children and their parents except for teacher‘s behaviours which become the main reason for not attending the school for dropout children. Just like, Shah et al
(2015) identified the causes of dropout at the primary level. These were unawareness of the parents about the importance of education, poverty of the parents, heavy workload at home, teachers‘ absenteeism, unskilled and untrained teachers, frequent absenteeism of students, failure or repetition of grades, shortage of teachers, corporal punishment by the teachers, and migration of parents. 232
Children stop their education due to teacher‘s harsh attitudes. Mostly, teachers punish them in class as they have not educational accessories and due to the afraid of teachers children drop their education. Dropout children and their parents said that their area was not prosperous but the people of their area send their mentally retarded and handicapped children to school. Most of the children of their caste went to school, but many faced the fear of sexual harassment in school or on the way to school.
Children and parents told that their family was illiterate and children stop their education as they started Holy education. Shadreck (2013) explained that the level of education of most of the parents in rural areas is very low to such an extent that they can be termed illiterates who do not know the value of education hence do not see the need of sending their children to school. Female problems again set ahead against their education. Parents did not like to continue girls‘ education as they had a different attitude towards boys and girls and mostly it was negative. Girls‘ early marriage stopped their education. Most parents thought that there is no need to continue their education as girls move to other families after their marriage. Some studies just as,
Khanam et al (2016) informed the reasons and implications of the dropout phenomenon in women by revealing that personal, domestic, social, emotional, academic, and financial factors were responsible for dropout. They also explained that poverty, the opposition of male members‘, household and domestic responsibilities, girls‘ personality traits and intentions, and institutional deficiencies were the major factors of dropout.
Out of school children and dropout, children face the same demographic challenges and these challenges become a hurdle against the education of dropout children just like out of school children. Children explained that in a large family it is difficult for parents to fulfill all the educational accessories require in the classroom. 233
One member is not enough to earn for the whole family so everyone busy in works for earning. One other reason was living area status. Both dropout children and parents defined their living areas as disaster areas, barren area, green area, they are Punjabi, wandering for earning, and where they find work they went there. This thematic analysis reflected that they were not earning better in these areas. Distance is another important demographic factor which influenced the education of dropout children more than other demographic factors. Dropout children told that due to daily long travelling they reached school late and teachers punished them. Parents also identified that they stop the education of their children as they can‘t afford the travelling expenses because school was in the neighbouring village and their children daily reached school after long travelling.
The thematic analysis of this study revealed that psychological problems faced by dropout children were the same as that faced by out of school children, except subject problems which were faced by the only drop out children. Children liked and disliked subjects on the base of their individual differences. Some said that they like and learn Urdu as they want to study in their mother tongue while others said they found some difficulties in reading and learning of Urdu. Some like English and
Science and some like Mathematics. On the other hand, some find difficulties in
Science, Mathematics, and English. They failed in those subjects in which they find difficulties. Some dropout children explored that they find difficulties in all subjects so they drop their studies in the way. Gouda et al (2014) defined the main factors leading to school dropout and observed some main reasons of dropouts i.e. not interested in studies, costs too much, required for household work, required for outside work for payment in cash/kind, repeated failures, required for work on farm/family business, school too far away, further education not considered 234 necessary, got married, did not get admission, not safe to send girls, no proper school facilities for girls, transport not available, required for the care of siblings and no female teacher.
Their personal problems also became the causes of their dropout. Children told different causes of their dropout which link to their Psyche. Such as they told; they were weak in studies or disliked to study. Children explored that due to puberty they stopped their education and one other reason was that they were grown up, so they would not adjust among small children. Some children were hopeless and they said that they had no wish to study and some said they did not think about their future or dreams of the future. One child identified an interesting reason for his dropout. He said as my friend left school so I don‘t like to go to school. One said that he can‘t be able to continue his education due to his disability. Parents identified that their children felt discomfort in school and they had no attraction at school so, they become dropouts. Their children‘s health problems, attitude problems, weak in studies, and felt shame at school were some other psychological problems.
Parents of dropout children informed that their children faced some adjustment problems in class, i.e. they quarreled with their fellows and could not adjust in school and society, so they were in homes not in schools. Children also said that due to their attitude they could not adjust in school and felt discomfort so, they discontinued their education. Burrus et al (2012) identified prevalence, risk factors, and remediation strategies for dropouts. They explained reasons of dropout children‘s are low-income family, lack of credits earned, male poor attendance, minority groups‘ poor grades in core courses, older than the average student in their grade, class not interesting, adults did not expect them to perform in school, lack of engagement with school, parents not 235 involved in education, tests; too difficult, teachers did not seem interested in school, and poor attendance.
Dropout children and their parents‘ relations also important as these relationships sometimes encourage and sometimes discourage children to pursue their education. Thematic analysis of interviews of dropout children and their parents reflected this relationship in these words, i.e., parents provide me emotional support, parents gave me love hugs, parents consoled me after teacher‘s punishment, parents got progress report of their children. Sometimes parents did not bother about their children‘s education. Torres et al (2016) explored reasons behind dropout and these reasons are hostility in the family, adversities at home, peer influence, learning difficulty, low self-esteem, and poor disposition, and negative social interaction.
The dropout children and their parents also had some future dreams. It‘s quite right, they had stopped their education, but they have a right to see dreams. So, children and parents showed their dream‘s passion as children want to become a successful person, a doctor, a businessman, a government officer, a police officer, an engineer, and an army officer. Some hopeless parents and children explained that poor people can‘t see dreams, think nothing about the future, their classmates are studying, and failed to fulfill dreams.
The Thematic analysis of this study revealed the same socioeconomic factors which were responsible for dropouts and out of school children. These factors were unemployment, poverty, family problems and occupation of parents as identified by
Latif et al (2015) found economic effects of student dropout and also explained that financial problems, parents‘ unwillingness, distance and lack of basic facilities, bad quality of the education, inadequate school environment, and building, overloaded classrooms, improper languages of teaching, carelessness of teachers and security 236 problem in girls‘ school are found as major causes of student dropouts in different countries.
Dropout children‘s parents said about unemployment as their family income was very low so, their children were learning some skills for earning. While dropout children explored the unemployment of their family as one member is working, unemployed parents, my father does nothing and takes drugs.
Parent‘s occupation also becomes a socioeconomic barrier against the education of dropout children. The researcher found that mostly the dropout children belong to low-income families. Children identified their parents‘ occupations as; father is a tailor, works with a constructor, parents work in a brick furnace and labourer. Parents also told that they are labourers, drivers or sell vegetables and fruits, etc.
Dropout children‘s problems relate to some extent without school children‘s family problems. Dropouts told about their family problems as; parents quarrel with each other, mother died, father died, mother‘s illness, parents have no relations, have no time for lesson preparation, brother‘s death, home problems, health problems, parents‘ discouragement while dropout‘s parents said that no one helps them in their homework, not able to encourage our children, the husband died and I am divorced.
Now the last and most important socioeconomic factor is poverty. Shadreck
(2013) showed that poverty and financial constraints are the major reasons for dropout and in rural areas, there is a high poverty rate among parents and this may have influenced their inability to meet the financial demands for their children‘s schooling.
Our society is the society of rich and they grind the lives of the poor.
Education becomes a business. Poor‘s think their child got a better education. For this purpose, they send their child to private street schools. After two or three classes, 237 parents can‘t afford children‘s educational expenses and children discontinue their education. One thing which the researcher found is that some parents are worried about the tuition of their children after school as they can‘t be able to teach their children in homes or help in homework. The result of dropout children and parents revealed the poverty of the family in these words such as; worse condition of living, parents worried about our food, not our marriage, monthly income is less to fulfill the needs, I learned some skills to increase the income, we beg from people, relative help, live hand to mouth, high inflation rate, poor, no money for school expenditures, family poor condition, low family income, lack of educational resources, only eat not study, etc.
Dropout‘s parents also discussed some policy barriers that stand against the education of their children. They may be either organizational or structural. Policies formulation and implementation are the responsibility of the government. The government should involve its institutions in the management and administration of education. Dropout parents also highlighted some organizational problems related to policy barriers. Parents told that there is no relationship between the formulation and implementation of policies. These policies are only written statements and there is no rule and regulation. They identified that govern is not promoting social justice and equal rights of rich and poor. Now the poor think that education is not their right. The government is sleeping and no personnel asks us about our situation. This is the unawareness of government otherwise the government should provide free and compulsory education to all. Parents also highlighted the structural problems of government institutions. They said that sometimes their children‘s school was inspected sometimes not. They also found poor classroom instructional and management practices in schools and some schools are just like the mess. They said; 238 they want fees and resources for their children as the only fee is not required for education, other educational accessories are necessary. Government personnel wrote their problems on pages, but do nothing for them.
Qualitative results of eight out of children and seven out of school children‘s parents‘ focus group discussion disclosed some important causes of being out of school and these results strengthen the viewpoints of interviews of children and their parents. Farooq (2013) made an inclusive schooling model for the prevention of dropout and found some major causes of school dropout. These causes are parental carelessness, poor parental economic condition, grade retention, student‘s out of school companionship, truancy, difficulty in learning, student's preference for child labour overstudies, inability to continue learning, psychological problems, illiteracy of parents, and student‘s poor health.
Children said that their area, their future dreams, their education, children and parent‘s bahaviour, parents‘ occupation, family problems, poverty, house chores, work on daily wages, and school-related problems become main hurdles against their education. In focus groups, out of school children exposed that their area where negative people torture girls, and boys and parents are changing the place of living to affect their education. They have some dreams. They said optimistically that they want to become a teacher, a businessman, a doctor, a policeman, want to get a good job, but in a pessimistic manner, they said that their situation will not be changed and they live in a very problematic situation. Out of school children declared that as they are not educated; they can‘t calculate and read and they can‘t read the names and simple phone numbers. They know the importance of education as they want to become a good human being. Out of school children‘s behavior reflected their intentions. They said they feel jealous to see educated children. These out of school 239 children like to go to school, but those who failed were always busy in playing. They are not happy with their life as they are the helping hand of their families.
Their parent‘s occupations don‘t support their education. They stated that their father is a carpenter, their mother works in different houses and wash the utensils.
One told me that we can‘t find work and the other told me that maybe illiterates become sweepers. The Focus group also mentions their family problem that may become one reason for their being out of school. These reasons are their father has no time for their education, mother‘s illness and death, father‘s illness, problems in their homes, sister‘s sickness, and take care of her, siblings take care and no free time other than house chores and labour work. Demir et al (2016) found factors associated with absenteeism. House chores and house rent and electricity bills spoiled much of children‘s education. These children and their parents work on daily wages so many times their masters ran away without giving them a salary and sometimes their masters beat and spank them. Thematic analysis of out of school children focus group revealed that poverty ruined their lives in such a manner that they have no fee for school, no transport for school, no parental support, but high inflation rates. They like to go to school and get admission, but they think as they have not proper uniforms and educational accessories, teachers send them back home. These children feel the burden of the family, on the other hand, they want to get an education.
A focus group of out of school children‘s parents reinforces the viewpoints of parents in interviews. The thematic analysis of the parent focus group highlighted some reasons for being out of school. These reasons are their low income as they work on daily wages, child‘s likeness or dislike ness towards education and school, they can‘t afford a proper uniform, their least attractive jobs, teacher‘s behavior toward their children, they want to send their girls to school but can‘t afford, types of 240 works they and their children do, their house rent, electricity bill, etc. Kamran et al
(2017) found causes behind primary dropout. Poverty, school environment, attitudes of the parents, social behaviors are the main reasons for the discontinuity of school.
According to them, these reasons were; the parent-teacher interaction, previous school
Coeducation, nonflexible timings in the previous school, corporal punishment, prolonged absence due to health issues, become Hafiz Quran and shifted to Deeni
Madrassa, girls should not leave, prefer to follow spiritual education, sexual harassment, unapproved friendships, fear of influence by peers, stigma attached to girls.
A focus group of parents discussed that they want to send their girls to school but due to the fear of sexual harassment and bad happening with girls, they don‘t do this. They said that current time and situations are not good for girls. One of them said that we are threatened by a landlord about our girl‘s kidnapping that why we don‘t send our girls to school. Khatoon et al (2016) revealed the most underlying factors for
Out of School Children belonging to marginalized communities.
Those children who discontinue their education, their parents said that teachers‘ behavior was not good with our children. Their teachers abused and scold them and due to their frightening behavior children drop their education in the way.
Parents also told that they are labourers and making bricks so, it becomes too much difficult to pay house rent, bills and provide food for their children.
According to the parents‘ point of view quality of government, school is not good. So, they like to send their children to street private schools. They also want a free lunch in schools. They are poor and poverty is reflected in their words as they have only one-time food or less food, they make bricks on a furnace. Their children like to get an education, but they can‘t afford stationary, copies, scarf and shoes. They 241 have no vehicle and other resources for their girls. They are so poor that it becomes too difficult to change their position. One mother said that they eat bread with red chilies and salt, then how it can be possible for them to send their children to school.
They said the poor becomes poorer day by day. The whole family works for food and living. Their work, their children work, their wife work, and their daughter work and after that, they can only buy food. They are illiterate and poor people so can‘t buy neat and proper uniforms for children. Their children always wish to get a good education. They think that literates speak thoroughly, know about their selves, get good jobs, become bold and confident. So, according to them, education is important for human beings. Farooq (2016) documented the voices of primary school dropouts about their decision to leave school. These children identified some factors which are accountable for their dropout and among them are the school-related factors
(unfriendly school, corporal punishment, lack of cocurricular activities, the harsh attitude of teachers, disturbing attitude of class fellows, corporal punishment, inappropriate curricula), the family-related factors (family crises/ broken homes, financial burden, child labor), the individual related factors (difficulty in learning, lack of interest in studies, class repetition, mental dullness, poor health) and the community-related factors (friendship with out of school children, truancy).
To strengthen the views of children and parents about the reasons for being out of school, the researcher captured the views of the public on social media (Face book) about the reasons related to children for being out of school in Pakistan.
UNESCO (2015) examined the obstacles of out-of-school children and adolescents and identified practical, financial, and social barriers. There are practical barriers, such as the distance to the nearest school and school infrastructure; financial barriers, such as school fees and the opportunity cost of schooling (particularly the need for 242 them to contribute to household incomes); and social barriers, such as discrimination against girls and children with disabilities.
The Facebook data identified some reasons for out of school and some for dropout children. Results of the thematic analysis of data showed that children are not in school due to their parents‘ attitude, their wish to get an education, children's and parents‘ behavior, poverty, and family size. Parents‘ attitudes, interests, and ideas about their children‘s education encourage or discourage their children to go to school. Many parents of out of school children are hopeless, uneducated, and illiterate. They have no concern about the education of their children due to their ignorance and their earning is also not to feed them. Some uneducated parents have a great wish to send their children to school to get a good education.
Some children are being out of school due to the fear of studies. They and their parents don‘t know the importance of education. In our country now education is free, but parents are unaware of this. In order to provide education to children does not mean sending them to school, but to send them with all accessories to school. So, it becomes difficult for the poor whose actual focus is on their survival, not to provide education to their children. Now a day, education becomes expensive and people who are underprivileged and unemployed can‘t afford educational expenses. Results of
Facebook data reflected that children have no financial support, they have a lack of basic facilities, their business is begging, they are sacrificing basic needs and they belong to large families. Hence, these reasons don‘t support their education.
The views of people on Facebook also highlighted some reasons for children‘s dropout. They said that children and parents‘ work, they wish to go to school, teacher‘s teaching styles, home, school and society, environment, children‘s needs, curriculum, language barriers, poverty; children, teachers and parents‘ behavior, and 243 learning of different skills become causes of dropout in Pakistan. UNICEF (2018) identified some demand side (sociocultural and economic), supply side and political, governance, capacity, and financial barriers in the Afghanistan country study. These barriers are social expectations, gender and education, parents‘ level of education, language/ethnicity-based exclusion, violence/harassment/bullying, general poverty/low household income, lack of guardianship for vulnerable children, opportunity costs and child labour, ancillary costs, lack of employment opportunities, lack of provision for nomadic ways of life, lack of effective displacement-related solutions, lack of early childhood education, pedagogy and quality/quantity of teachers, content of learning curriculum, quality/quantity of infrastructure, stigma against overage children, additional access constraints for disabled children, Ministry of Education related, lack of verified data on education, public sector financial constraints/mismanagements, broader issues like security and conflict-related.
Results of the thematic analysis of people showed that the environment becomes a barrier in the way of dropouts as; unattractive classroom, home environment, lack of future guidance, impressive school environment, lifestyle, pressure on families, and illiteracy are affecting the education of children.
Unproductive and unimpressive curriculum, no attraction in the curriculum, and frequent changes in curriculum make education as a difficult one for children.
School‘s environment, corporal punishment, school‘s needs, school work, schooling as a business, and lack of equipment in the school or school-related problems which were discussed by people on Facebook.
Teachers‘ ways of teaching impress some of the depressed children. Some teachers are in favour of some students while others punish students. Some use the way of memorization and some have no teaching skills. Due to these teaching styles, 244 some children stop their education. School‘s bore work also detracted some children.
Doll et al (2013) reported that students‘ dropout is due to some push, pull, and falling out factors. They analysed seven studies from 1955-2002 and identified these factors from these studies. According to them; attendance and discipline are push factors. Out of school enticements like jobs and family are pull factors and disengagement in students is a falling out factor.
People said that educational language should be to mother tongue as different instructional languages decrease the rate of success. Parents and teachers ignore the needs of individual children. They pushed them to meet the standards of the school and don‘t provide motivation to their children. Children‘s diversity is ignored and forced them to work for parents‘ interests. Sometimes children‘s behavior becomes the cause of their failure. Children's aggressive and rude behaviour, their interest in other things, their lack of interest in studies drop them out of school. Sometimes they faced bullying and punishment from teachers that ruined their lives. Teachers help them by using their teaching and technical skills. Facebook data also explored that poverty becomes the main cause of dropout. They identified that lack of educational support, high expenditures of school, children are the earning member in their homes, materialism, preferred to do the job and unable to fulfill school needs are dropping them out of school. Chirtes (2010) emphasized four reasons for dropout i.e. family factors, school related factors, social environment, and personal factors. He also noticed that there is an increase in school adjustment problems for students. Family related factors are parents‘ lack of interest, parents‘ neglect, separation, divorce, second marriage, parents‘ detention, conflicts, hostile environment, parents‘ abandonment, excessive consumption of alcohol, parents forcing children to work, parents‘ death, single parenting, chronicle illness within the family, parents‘ inability 245 to raise children, one parent (or both) concubinage, incorrect educational methods used by parents, negative examples offered by family members (brothers and sisters, other distant relatives), low family income, improper environment for attending school, absence of a stable family environment. Personal factors are attention deficiency disorder, memory deficiency, visually impaired, low learning abilities, misbehavior, low motivation, and lack of interest. School environment-related factors are school adjustment failure, not promoting school, discipline problems, school phobia, school violence, conflicts (with teachers, school mates), and ethnic discrimination.
The comparison of Children Focus Group Discussion with Parents Focus
Group Discussion showed that both parents and children thought that no proper occupation, school-related problems, low access to girls‘ education, less educational resources, home responsibilities are the main causes for being out of school. Out of
School Children and Out of School Children‘s Parents were agreed upon that home responsibility, sexual harassment; attitudes of children, parents, and people of those areas towards normal children and retarded children were responsible for being out of school. The comparison of interviews of Dropout Children with Dropout Children‘s
Parents described that less educational accessory, sexual harassment, no proper instructional language, high school expenditures, no help in lesson preparation, children and family‘s problems are the main factors of being out of school while the comparison of interviews of Out of School Children vs. Dropout Children explored the common reasons for being out of school are accessed for education for retarded children, adjustment problems with small children, fear of sexual harassment, home responsibilities, and attitude problems. 246
Out of School Children‘s Parents and Dropout Children‘s Parents were agreed upon some reasons for the exclusion of children from school. These are no wish for getting an education, fear of sexual harassment, wish to become an army officer, a lot of school expenditures, no help in lesson preparation, unawareness towards compulsory education, no social justice, policies are written statement, great wish to get an education, live in a disaster area, and problems related to children, education, school, parents and area. While Comparison of reasons for Out of School and reasons for Dropout Facebook Data showed some common factors responsible for being out of school. These are family, school, and education-related problems.
Conclusion
Pakistan‘s agenda of development is based on the 18th Amendment of the
Constitution of Pakistan in which Article 25 (a) showed that free and compulsory education for all between aged 5–16 (up to matric) became a fundamental right and state responsibility and UN‘s Sustainable Development goals. The basic emphasis on the voices of out of school children and their parents is providing indepth insight into the understating and interpretation of them and also illuminates the actual problems of out of school children.
Regardless of this fact of right to education, many children are unable to exercise this right due to several obstructions and hurdles. Dropout children are mainly the focus of previous studies; whenever these used the word out of school, it means these studies were considering only dropouts. This study focuses on both out of school and the dropouts and gathers data from children and parents while strengthening their viewpoints; the researcher also collected data of common people from Facebook. 247
The results of this study exposed the objectives of the study. The present study documented the voices of school children and their parents from the interviews of out of school children and dropout children and their parents, focus group discussions of out of school children and parents, and Facebook data about the reasons behind out of school and the dropouts.
Cultural factors that are responsible for keeping children out of schools identified both children and parents are the area‘s environment, the literacy rate in that area, and female problems, while other than these factors one other factor i.e. teachers‘ behavior is also responsible for dropout. It also identified the demographic factors which reduce access to education. These demographic factors are family size, living area status, and distance to school. The psychological factors that affect the psyche of out of school children and their parents are adjustment problems, future dreams, parents and children‘s relationship whereas subject problems were identified by dropout children and their parents. It also explored the socioeconomic factors that affect the educational attainment of out of school children; these are poverty, unemployment, family problems, and parents‘ occupation. Instead of all these; out of school children and their parents also highlighted that children‘s help in the family also becomes a cause for not being in school. This study also identified those policy barriers that are limiting the access to primary education for all as a result of poor legislation. Parents highlighted these policy barriers in the form of organizational and structural problems of institutions that may hinder the progress of education. Other than all these factors, some other factors are responsible for the decrease in literacy.
These reasons are females‘ problems, school environment, work on daily wages, wish to get an education, house chores, provision of proper uniform, the involvement of 248 other persons, parents‘ behavior, teachers‘ teaching styles, child‘s needs, curriculum, language barriers and training of other technical skills.
Outcomes of Study
Problems of out of school children are significant in developing countries.
These problems relate to individuals, home, and society. In the scenario of this study, the researcher explored a long list of factors in the forms of sub themes and themes which are responsible to be out of school, but poverty is the main cause that hinders the education of children. Most people don‘t know the importance of education. They think that education is only the source of employment, but actually, education is not the guarantee of employment. Education enhances the personal capabilities and awareness about oneself. This study also found that the uninterested attitude of parents towards their children‘s education and parents‘ ignorance are the reasons for being out of school. Parents are busy in their earnings and think that who will do the house chores in the absence of their children; especially those families where the number of siblings is greater, their education of girls is affected.
At the macro level, child‘s education is the responsibility of the state and the government of Pakistan is taking new steps for the enhancement of literacy, e.g. no fee and availability of books at the secondary level, but at the micro-level, it is the responsibility of parents to educate their children, and researcher found that out of school children‘s parents don‘t opt this responsibility. Distance to school in rural and urban areas becomes another problem for illiterate parents; they don‘t like to take this responsibility on their shoulders to drop daily their children to school. The researcher found that most of out of school children are involved in income-generating activities.
They think that they earn a lot, but school-going children earn nothing and feel strong to help their families. Another dilemma which the researcher observed during the 249 interviews‘ conduction was that the poor who take a step to enroll their children into schools; they prefer private schools instead of government schools. They think that the education of private schools is better than government school, but most of these parents are illiterates and can‘t be able to help their children in studies. These parents start tuition for their children and one day they can‘t be able to afford the educational expenses of their children and the result is that their children leave their studies. The low academic achievement is another cause of dropout and children leave their studies as they feel shame in school due to their peer‘s attitude. After studying 5 to 7 years they can‘t be able to get a reasonable job and the result will be unemployment.
All the problems which were discussed in this study were interlinked with each other. Culture and policy barriers are the cause of socioeconomic problems and psychological problems emerged from these all. The same is the improvement in one type of problem that may lead to an improvement in the interlinked problem. We have to resolve these problems; otherwise, these raise the illiteracy and ignorance in the society.
There are many studies on the problems of out of school children, and the main focus was only on the problems of dropouts (Ananga, 2011; Bongani, 2014;
Kalinga, 2013; Moore, 2017; & Wagle, 2012). But, the current study focuses on all the five dimensions of exclusion. In this study, many innovative approaches are used which increase the credibility of this research. Firstly, it is a first study for the documentation of voices of both out of school children and their parents. Secondly, qualitative thematic analysis by NVivo 11 plus for data analysis has been used.
Thirdly, three different sources for data collection have been used, i.e. interview schedules, focus group discussion, and social media (Facebook) and this is a first study in which Facebook data is used to explore the reason for being out of school. 250
Fourthly, a long list of reasons for out of school generated in the form of sub themes and themes from the interviews, focus group discussion, and Facebook data and it can be revealed that it is a summation of all previous studies. Lastly, interviews of a large sample (324 children and 178 parents) for data collection. Mason (2010) suggested that 20 to 30 interviews are sufficient for thematic analysis as after that saturation of themes would be started it means no new themes generate from data. This research documents the voices of illiterate, ignorant, and unaware people who can‘t be able to interpret their perceptions, so to enhance the trustworthiness and quality of this research, the researcher had conducted the interviews of large samples as multiple cases. The sample of this study was representative of all out of school children and their parents, but there was less participation of female interviewees in this study.
Considering the main objectives of this study, the first objective stated to document the voices of out of school children and their parents. Data from all the sources, i.e. interviews, discussion, and social media explored and explained the voices of out of school children and their parents extensively and it can be seen in
Appendix L. Moreover, it has been found that most of the problems for being out of school identified by children and parents are the same, but sometimes they explained the same factor in different manners. The other objectives of this study were to find out the socioeconomic factors which are responsible for keeping children out of schools, especially girls, policy barriers limiting the access to primary education for all as a result of poor legislation, cultural factors that affect the psyche of out of school children and their parents, and the demographic factors which reduce the access to education. This research argued that being out of school can rarely be put down to one factor, but it is influenced by several relating factors. So, being out of school is a product rather than an individual tale. As each tale is different, the 251 thematic analysis in this study would explore how these tales are different. The result of this study would provide insight, how some children are being out of school, while others are going to school.
Overall, the findings of this study reveal that girls face more problems in coming to a school than boys. The girls complain that their education is not valued at home. The possible reason for this attitude may be illiteracy and poverty. Fathers are jobless and they can hardly afford the burden of education, especially for their daughters where the return is not visible or delayed. The fear of sexual harassment seems quite widespread and probably because of the long distance and incidents of girl child rape. Moreover, the state looks quite helpless in providing protected free transport to a girl child. In order to overcome this fear, parents tend to marry their girls at an early age, which eventually eliminates all possibilities of attending schools.
Moreover, the unfriendly environment of teachers threatens children's desire to engage in their studies in an unfriendly place.
Data reflects that it is difficult for poor large size families to send their children to school due to low income with no savings after meeting other needs such as food and health care. In some cases, the whole family is busy in earning for their survival so they cannot afford to spare even a child to leave for education. In these families, children are compelled to support their parents in earning and households.
Most of the participants of this study come from the vulnerable and disadvantaged family background. People general perceptions show that people who live in barren or less prosperous areas can‘t afford the education of their children. However, those who live in green areas, even with vulnerable and disadvantaged backgrounds, can afford the education of their children because of better opportunities for earnings. The long distance discourages children to join the school for their education, especially in rural 252 areas where people live in small scattered communities and school is situated 2 to 3
Km away from their homes. Children are particularly scared of corporal punishment for going to school late because of long distance.
The likelihood of out of school children attending school becomes lesser with an increase in their age as it becomes difficult for grown-up children to adjust with younger children. Some attitudinal problems are also seen in these children, e.g. they quarrel with their peers in school and with their siblings at home. As a result, they leave or drop out of school. The low social value of education, economic condition, and parental low motivation end up in optimistic or pessimistic attitudes among out of school children. So, these children thought dream to become an educated and successful person in the future, but fail to act accordingly due to their circumstances.
Many times children dropped out due to other languages as medium of instruction than their mother tongue. They feel difficulty in the development of cognition because of a different language. Parents have no time to provide additional instructional support for their children‘s education. Moreover, they require their children‘s participation in the family earning. As a result of this language difficulty and less educational support from parents, these children tend to lose their interest in education and drop out immaturely.
Data indicate that financial problems and domestic conflicts greatly affect the life of out of school children. The low income families cannot resilient the fluctuation of income and sudden external economical stress. Parents cannot afford the burden of educational accessories if they want to send their children to school or to continue to support their studies. Due to the high inflation rate, their economic condition becomes worse day by day and they only live hand to mouth. So they borrow money on a high interest rate, which in turn worsens their financial condition. For better earnings, 253 people tend to migrate from their place of living, which on the other hand, becomes the cause of additional financial stress and increases the risk of being out of school or drop out. Parental attitudes, poverty, and natural catastrophic increase the liability of out of school children in earning for house chores. Parents‘ sudden death, drugs, separation, abuses, and less income emotionally distress the children and they think about their survival rather than for their education.
Provision of economic relief from the state in household and school stimulate the motivation of out of school children for getting an education, but data reflect that state initiatives to spread literacy have not been effective (Govt. of Punjab, 2014a).
Parents require compensation for their children engaged in the family earning. Parents think that child‘s education is not a profitable investment. On the other hand, this attitude violates the educational rights of children in article 25A as articulated in the
Constitution of Pakistan. So, hopeless and uneducated parents expect that the government should step forward for the education of their wards in school and out of school. Data showed that participants wish to get an education to become a better human being, want to read, calculate and write, become bold and confident, know about their selves, and speak thoroughly if government provide financial and quality child-friendly education in school.
Data of this study shows that most of the mothers of dropouts are illiterate and housewives. The egocentric unawareness becomes hazardous for the education of a child especially girls. We can‘t forget the tyranny of distance against the retention of education. The long distance and fear of sexual harassment increase the rate of dropouts. Girls are more underprivileged as they require transport or parents' time to drop in school. Parents invest more for boys than for girls. Sudden domestic 254 problems, such as father‘s death, parent‘s illness, parent‘s divorce, take care of siblings, parent‘s discouragement, and parent conflicts become the causes of drop out.
Data reflects that drop out children‘s domestic and earning responsibilities leave no time for studies and homework. Similarly, no support from parents in studies leaves them weak in studies and they can‘t pay full attention to their studies. They are the earning member of their family, lack educational support, and are forced to do some kind of job instead of pursuing their education.
Generally, teachers make the nation but their harsh and unfriendly attitude spoils the future of buds of the nation. Data of this study show that children who are weak in studies or have some other attitude problems face teacher‘s dislike and hate.
Actually, teachers fail to judge the hidden qualities in these children and ignore their diversity. Teachers‘ favoritism, unprofessional teaching style, unproductive or boring curriculum, lack of motivation, and forced to memorize the lesson make children hate studies. Parents‘ support and classroom instructional and management practices improve the quality of education, school environment, and literacy.
Overall the data reflect that since the majority of classmates of dropouts are studying further whereas dropouts are now busy in child labour and feel jealous for their fellows. Sometimes peer influence and drug addiction become the cause to leave the school. Preference for religious education and early marriage increases the rate of dropouts.
The description of out of school children and their parents towards their problems helped the researcher to design new interventions in the form of policy implications, which would keep up the literacy rate, retention of children in schools and quality of education.
Implications for Education Policy 255
We are living in the era of automation and education has become the key to solve all problems related to culture, society, human psychology, demography, and economy. A strategic program of the Philippine for the reduction of out of school children developed by UNICEF (2012), in its Global Initiative on Out of School
Children. It is known as 8E‘s of an Out of School Children reduction strategy. The recommendations of this strategy are
Enhance school readiness
Enforce the universal kindergarten policy
Educate parents (toward on-time enrollment, the value of ECE) and teachers (how
to keep boys in school)
Encourage on-time enrollment
Expand, enhance, and sustain the School Health and Nutrition Program
Early detection and quick action on OOSC at the school level
Establish an accountability mechanism for OOSC reduction at the school level
Economic empowerment of families and households through CCT and
linkages/referral to antipoverty programs (i.e., microfinance, livelihood, and
employment promotion, etc.)
Pakistan is the victim of political forces so educational planners and administrators should prepare short and long term plans to cope with these challenges to increase educational development. The new National Education Policy (2017) has been designed to solve the educational problem of society. On the other hand, this policy is not designed to stop the strength of out of school children. The government full focus is only on finding out of school children not to decrease the ratio of out of school children. Here the researcher discusses the implications of the results of this study for education policy in Pakistan. The thematic analysis of interviews, focus 256 group discussion and Facebook data highlighted the many reasons for out of school in the form of codes and then to themes and categories. Here out of school means out of school children and dropout children and some implications of core results were suggested for education policy.
The below table 5.1 arranged the core results and their corresponding policy implications.
Table 5.1
Results and Policy Implications
257
258
259
Future Recommendations
1. One of the strengths of this investigation was that questions were indigenous and
were related to the problems of Out of School Children but if the sample was
selected throughout the country; validity and reliability of study may be improved.
2. Administration of the observational and case studies in all five dimensions of Out
of School Children find out more case specific solution of all strategic plans used
to decrease the number of the Out of School Children.
3. The Process and the Product evaluation of interventions that have been already
run in the country in diminishing the number of Out of School Children can be
administered with the help of long term experimental design.
260
References
Ababa. A. (2012). Study on Situation of Out of School Children (OOSC) in Ethiopia.
MoE and UNICEF.
Alholjailan, M. I. (2012). Thematic Analysis: A Critical Review of its Process and
Evaluation. West East Journal of Social Sciences, 1(1), 39-47.
Alif Ailaan. (2014). 25 Million Broken Promises: The Crisis of Pakistan‘s Out-of-
School Children. Islamabad: Alif Ailaan.
Ananga, E. (2011). Dropping Out of School in Southern Ghana: The Push-out and
Pull-out Factors. Published in Pathways to Access: Reseach Monograph No
55, CREATE, Centre for International Education, University of Sussex.
Andrew, S. L., & Orodho, J. A. (2014). Socio-Economic Factors Influencing Pupils‘
Access to Education in Informal Settlements: A Case of Kibera, Nairobi
County, Kenya. International Journal of Education and Research, 2(3), 11
Assessment Capacities Project. (2012). Why are Children not in School? Multi-
Agency Assessment of Out-Of-School children in Dadaab Refugee Camp,
Kenya. Norwegian Refugee Council.
Bajwa, A. (2011). Out of school children in Sindh: looking at access &quality.
Annual Status of Education Report.
Bengtsson, M. (2016). How to Plan and Perform a Qualitative Study using Content
Analysis. Nursing Plus Open, 2, 8–14.
Blank, G. (2013). Blurring the Boundaries: New Social Media, New Social Science
(NSMNSS).International Journal of Market Research, 55, 461–464. Warc
LTD. 261
Bongani, M. I. (2014). Investigating the Causes of Learner Dropout at Secondary
School in Johannesburg South, Gauteng. Published Master Dissertation.
University of South Africa.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2013). Successful Qualitative Research: A Practical Guide
for Beginners. London: Sage. ISBN 9781847875815 Retrieved from:
http://eprints.uwe.ac.uk/21156
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2013a). Teaching Thematic Analysis: Overcoming
Challenges and Developing Strategies for Effective Learning. The
Psychologist, 26(2). 120-123. ISSN 0952-8229 Available from:
http://eprints.uwe.ac.uk/21155
Braun, V., Clarke, V., & Rance, N. (2014). How to Use Thematic Analysis with
Interview Data. The Counselling & Psychotherapy Research Handbook , 183-
197. London: Sage.
Brown, G. (2011). Education for All: beating poverty, unlocking prosperity.
Retrieved from www.gordonandsarahbrown.com
Bryman, A. (2001). Social Research Methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Burrus, J., & Roberts, R. D. (2012). Dropping Out of High School: Prevalence, Risk
Factors, and Remediation Strategies. R&D Connections, ETS Research &
Development Educational Testing Service. Princeton.
Cassol, H., PeÂtreÂ, B., Degrange, S., Martial, C., Charland-Verville, V., Lallier, F.,
Bragard, I., Michèle Guillaume, M., & Laureys, S. (2018). Qualitative
Thematic Analysis of the Phenomenology of Near-death Experiences. PLoS
ONE, 13(2): e0193001. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193001.
Chirtes, G. (2010). A Case Study into the Causes of School Dropout. Acta Didactica
Napocensia, 3 (4), 25-34. 262
Chover-Sierra, E., & MartõÂnez-Sabater, A. (2018). Utility of Social Networks and
Online Data Collection in Nursing Research: Analysis of Spanish Nurses'
Level of Knowledge about Palliative Care. PLoS ONE, 13(5): e0197377.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0197377
Cohen, L., Manion, L. and Morrison, K. (2007). Research Methods in Education (6th
Ed.) Abingdon: Routledge.
Costa, C., Breda, Z., Pinho, I., Bakas, F., & Durão, M. (2016). Performing a Thematic
Analysis: An Exploratory Study about Managers‘ Perceptions on Gender
Equality. The Qualitative Report, 21(13), 34-47. Retrieved from
https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol21/iss13/4
Creswell, J.W. (2003). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed
Methods Approaches (2nd Edition). London: Sage.
Cropley, A. J. (2002). Qualitative Research Methods: A Practice Oriented
Introduction for Students of Psychology and Education. Riga, Latvia: Zinātne.
Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research. London: Sage.
Crotty, M. (2003): The Foundations of Social Research: Meaning and Perspectives in
the Research Process. London: Sage Publications, 3rd edition, 10.
Davies, C, R., Knuiman, M., Wright, P., & Rosenberg, M. (2014). The Art of Being
Healthy: A Qualitative Study to Develop a Thematic Framework for
Understanding the Relationship between Health and the Arts. BMJ Open, 4:
e004790. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2014- 004790.
Delaney, L., Egan, M., & O‘Connell, N. (2011). The Experience of Unemployment in
Ireland: A Thematic Analysis. UCD Geary Institute Discussion Paper Series. 263
Demir, K., & Akman, K. Y. (2015). Factors associated with absenteeism in high
schools. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 62, 37-56. Retrieved from
http://dx.doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2016.62.4
Department of Basic Education. (2013). Education for All (EFA) 2013 Country
Progress Report: South Africa.
Doll, J. J., Eslami, Z., & Walters, L. (2013). Understanding Why Students Drop Out
of High School, According to Their Own Reports: Are They Pushed or Pulled,
or Do They Fall Out? A Comparative Analysis of Seven Nationally
Representative Studies. SAGE Open, pp 1- 5.
Farooq, M. S. (2013). An inclusive schooling model for the prevention of dropout in
primary schools in Pakistan. Bulletin of Education and Research, 35 (1), 47-
74.
Farooq, M. S. (2016). Voices of Primary School Dropouts‘ about their Decision to
Leave School. Journal of Elementary Education, 26 (2), 95-113. fromhttp://www.finance.gov.pk/survey/chapters_15/10_Education.pdf
Gouda. M. S, & Sekher, T.V. (2014). Factors Leading to School Dropouts in India:
An Analysis of National Family Health Survey-3 Data. IOSR Journal of
Research & Method in Education, 4 (6), 75-83.
Government of Pakistan. (1973). The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
Government of Pakistan. (2017). National Education Policy 2017-2025. Ministry of
Federal Education and Professional Training. Islamabad, Pakistan.
Government of Punjab. (2013). Annual Report of Literacy & Non-Formal Basic
Education Department, 2012-13. Lahore, Pakistan.
Government of Punjab. (2014). Punjab School Education Sector Plan. School
Education Department, Lahore, Pakistan. 264
Government of Punjab. (2014a). The Punjab Free and Compulsory Education
Ordinance 2014. Lahore, Pakistan.
Grix, J. (2004). The foundations of research. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Habib, M. (2013). Education in Pakistan‘s Punjab: Outcomes and Interventions. The
Lahore Journal of Economics, 18, 21-48.
Haddad, W. D. (1995). Education Policy-Planning Process: an Applied Framework.
UNESCO, Paris.
Haq, R. (2013). Over 27 million children out of school. The Express Tribune.
Retrieved from http://tribune.com.pk/story/550993/over-27-million-children-
out-of-school/
Hughes, G. (1990). The Philosophy of Social Research, 2nd Edition. Harlow:
Longman.
Javadi, M., & Zarea, M. (2016). Understanding Thematic Analysis and its Pitfalls.
Journal Of Client Care, 1(1), 33-39.
Kakoli, B., & Sayeed, U. (2013). Educational Progress in India in the Context of Out-
of-School Children. International Research Journal of Social Sciences, 2(5),
6-14.
Kalinga, T. S. (2013). Causes of Drop-Out Secondary Schools in Tanzania: The Case
Study of Mbeya, Dar es Salaam and Kilimanjaro Region. Published Master
Dissertation. The Open University of Tanzania.
Kamran, R., & Deen. (2017). Out of School Children: Causes behind Primary
Dropout. Journal of Inclusive Education, 1, 35–51.
Khan, G. A., Azhar, M., & Shah, S. A. (2011). Causes of Primary School Drop out
Among Rural Girls in Pakistan. Working Paper Series # 119. Sustainable
Development Policy Institute (SDPI). 265
Khan, S. B. (2010). Problems in Universalization of Primary Education in Pakistan.
Pakistan Journal of Commerce and Social Sciences, 4(2), 147-155.
Khanam, A., Quraishi, U., & Nazir, H. (2016). A Study of Reasons and Implications
of the Dropout Phenomenon in Women at University. Journal of Research and
Reflections in Education, 10(2), 159- 172.
Khatoon, Z., Khowaja, M., & Buriro, A. A. ( 2016). Underlying Factors for Out-Of-
School Children belonging to Marginalized Communities (A Case Study of
Taluka Hala, District Matiari, Sindh). The Sindh University Journal of
Education, 45 (2), 61-80.
King, N., Dewey, C., & Borish, D. (2015). Determinants of Primary School Non-
Enrollment and Absenteeism: Results from a Retrospective, Convergent
Mixed Methods, Cohort Study in Rural Western Kenya. PLoS ONE, 10 (9),
e0138362. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0138362
Kosinski, M., Matz, S. C., Gosling, S. D., & Stillwell, D. (2015). Facebook as a
Research Tool for the Social Sciences. American Psychologist, 70(6), 543-
556. DOI: 10.1037/a0039210
Krieger, N. (2012). Who and What Is a ―Population‖? Historical Debates, Current
Controversies, and Implications for Understanding ―Population Health‖ and
Rectifying Health Inequities. The Milbank Quarterly, 90(4), 634–681.
Kulkarni, T. (2014). What‘s this ‗other‘ reason for out-of-school children in
Karnataka? The Hindu. Retrieved from
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/karnataka/whats-this-other-reason-
for-outofschool-children-in-karnataka/article5718914.ece 266
Latif, A., Choudhary, A. I., & Hammayun, A. A. (2015). Economic Effects of
Student Dropouts: A Comparative Study. Journal of Global Economics, 3:
137. doi:10.4172/2375-4389.1000137
Lewin, K. M. (2007). Improving Access, Equity and Transitions in Education:
Creating a Research Agenda. Published in Pathways to Access: Reseach
Monograph No 1, CREATE, Centre for International Education, University of
Sussex.
Lunnay, B., Borlagdan, J., McNaughton, D., & Ward, P. (2014). Ethical Use of Social
Media to Facilitate Qualitative Research. Qualitative Health Research, 1–11.
DOI: 10.1177/1049732314549031
Maguire, M., & Delahunt, B. (2017). Doing a Thematic Analysis: A Practical, Step-
by-Step Guide for Learning and Teaching Scholars. All Ireland Journal of
Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (AISHE-J), 8(3), 33501-33514.
Manzoor, A., Hameed, A., & Nabeel, T. (2016). Voices of Out of School Children
With Disabilities in Paistan. Journal of Research in Special Educational
Needs, 16(1), 1099–1103.
Mason, M. (2010). Sample Size and Saturation in PhD Studies Using Qualitative
Interviews [63 paragraphs]. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum:
Qualitative Social Research, 11(3), Art. 8, http://nbn-
resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs100387.
McMillan, J. H. & Schumacher, S. (2006). Research in education: Evidence-based
inquiry. 6th edition. Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.
MDG Achievement Fund. (2011). Non–Enrolment and School Dropout: A Study
based on a Survey of Children and Youths Who do not Enroll in or Drop out of
Primary and Secondary Education. YERP, Bosnia and Herzegovina. 267
Ministry of Education. (1960). Report of the Commission on National Education
January-August 1959. Karachi.
Ministry of Education. (1972). The Education Policy 1972-80. Islamabad: Curriculum
Wing.
Ministry of Education. (1979). National Education Policy and Implementation
Programme 1979. Islamabad: Curriculum Wing.
Ministry of Education. (1992). National Education Policy 1992-2002. Islamabad:
Government of Pakistan.
Ministry of Education. (1998). National Education Policy 1998-2010. Islamabad:
Government of Pakistan.
Ministry of Education. (2009). National Education Policy 2009. Islamabad:
Government of Pakistan.
Ministry of Education, Brazil. (2014). Education for All 2015 National Review
Report: Brazil.
Ministry of Education., UNICEF., Samuel Hall., and USAID. (2018). All in School
and Learning: Global Initiative on Out-Of-School Children– Afghanistan
Country Study. Kabul.
Ministry of Education. (2013). National Plan of Action to Accelerate Education-
Related MDGs 2013-16: Achieving Universal Quality Primary Education in
Pakistan. Trainings and Standards in Higher Education, Government of
Pakistan, Islamabad.
Ministry of Education. (2015). Pakistan Education for All Review Report 2015.
Trainings and Standards in Higher Education, Government of Pakistan,
Islamabad. 268
Ministry of Finance. (2018). Economic Survey of Pakistan2017-18. Islamabad,
Government of Pakistan. Retrieved from
http://www.finance.gov.pk/survey_1718.html
Ministry of Finance. (2019). Pakistan Economic Survey 2018-19. Islamabad,
Government of Pakistan. Retrieved from
http://www.finance.gov.pk/Supplement_2018_19.pdf
Ministry of Finance. (2014). Pakistan Economic Survey 2013-14. Islamabad,
Government of Pakistan. Retrieved
fromhttp://www.finance.gov.pk/survey/chapters_14/10_Education.pdf
Ministry of interior. (1947). Proceedings of the Pakistan Educational Conference
1947. Karachi, Education Division.
Ministry of Planning. (2013). Pakistan’s Millennium Development Goals Report
2013: Development and Reform. Islamabad, Government of Pakistan.
Moore, A. K. P. (2017). Dropped Out: Factors that Cause Students to Leave Before
Graduation. Published doctoral dissertation. The Faculty of the Education
Department, Carson-Newman University.
Morrow, V. (2008). Ethical Dilemmas in Research with Children and Young People
about their Social Environments. Children’s Geographie, 6(1), 49−61.
Mpyangu, C. M., Ochen, E. A., Onyango, E. O., & Lubaale, Y. A. M. (2014). Out Of
School Children Study in Uganda. The Republic of Uganda, UNICEF, ERIKS,
Save the Children, UNHCR, Stromme Foundation.
National Education Management Information System (NEMIS). (2013). Pakistan
Education Statistics 2011-12. Islamabad, Academy of Educational Planning
and Management (AEPAM), Ministry of Education, Trainings & Standards in
Higher Education Government of Pakistan. Retrieved from 269
http://unesco.org.pk/education/documents/2013/pslm/Pakistan_Education_
Statistics.pdf.
Nelson, G. C. (2015). Power of the People: A case Study Using Facebook as a Data
Source in Qualitative research. Issues in Information Systems, 16(4), 232-238.
Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic Analysis:
Striving to Meet the Trustworthiness Criteria. International Journal of
Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1-13.
Ozbas, M. (2015). Personal and Familial Properties of Street Children—Street
Children: The Forgotten or Not Remembered Ones. Journal of Education and
Learning, 4(1), 97-107. Canadian Center of Science and Education.
doi:10.5539/jel.v4n1p97
Pakistan Bureau of Statistics. (2017). 2017 Census of Pakistan. Islamabad, Pakistan.
Patel, S. (2015). The research paradigm – methodology, epistemology and ontology –
explained in simple language. Retrieved from
http://salmapatel.co.uk/academia/the-research-paradigm-methodology-
epistemology-and-ontology-explained-in-simple-language
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods (3rd ed.). CA:
Sage.
Pildat Background Paper. (2011). Right to Free and Compulsory Education in
Pakistan: Enforcement of Article 25-A of the Constitution of Pakistan.
Islamabad.
Quran. [96:1-5]
Rana, H., & Chaudhry, H. (2011). Street Children: A Great Loss to Human Resource
Development in Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Social Sciences, 31(1), 15-27. 270
Regmi, K., Naidoo, J., & Pilkington, P. (2010). Understanding the processes of
translation and transliteration in qualitative research. International Journal of
Qualitative Methods, 9(1), 16-26.
Rena, R. (2009). The Child Labor in Developing Countries: A Challenge to
Millennium Development Goals. Indus Journal of Management & Social
Sciences, 3(1): 1-8.
Rozzi, R., Pickett, S. T. A., Palmer, C., Armesto, J. J., & Callicott, B. (2013). Linking
Ecology and Ethics for a Changing World: Values, Philosophy, and Action,
Ecology and Ethics, 1. Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht. DOI
10.1007/978-94-007-7470-4_24.
Save the Children & Society for the Protection of the Rights of the Child. (2009).
Alternative report on the state of child rights in Pakistan by civil society of
Pakistan. Retrieved from
http://www.savethechildren.org.uk/sites/default/files/docs/Alternative_Report_
on_the_state_of_child_rights_in_pakistan_1.pdf
Schulze, S. (2003). Views on the Combination of Quantitative and Qualitative
Research Approaches. University of South Africa. Progressio 25(2):8-20.
Shadreck, M. (2013). School Based Factors and the Dropout Phenomenon: A Study of
Zhomba Cluster Secondary Schools in Gokwe District of Zimbabwe. Journal
of Educational and Social Research, 3(1). Doi: 10.5901/jesr.2013.v3n1p51
Shah, R., Shah, I. A., Noor, A., & Ayaz, M. (2015). Causes of Dropout at Primary
Level in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Gomal University Journal of Research
[GUJR], 31 (1). 165-173.
Shami, P. A. (2010). Education in Pakistan: Policies and Policy Formulation.
National Book Foundation, Islamabad. 271
Simon, H. A. (1962). The Architecture of Complexity. Proc Am Philos Soc, 106, 467–
482.
Snelson, C. L. (2016). Qualitative and Mixed Methods Social Media Research: A
Review of the Literature. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1–15.
DOI: 10.1177/1609406915624574 Retrieved from
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1609406915624574
Social Media Research Group. (2016). Using Social Media for Social Research:
An Introduction. Government Social Research.
Somekh, B., & Lewin, C. (2005). Research Methods in the Social Sciences. SAGE
Publications Ltd
Staff Reporter. (2014). 21 pc Children Still Out of School. The Nation. Retrieved
from http://www.nation.com.pk/E-Paper/islamabad/2014-02-28/page-13
Staff Reporter. (2018). 3,445 Children Sexually Abused in Pakistan in 2017: Report.
Pakistan Today. Retrieved from
https://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2018/04/19/3445-children-sexually-
abused-in-pakistan-in-2017-report/
Stead, M., Dobbie, F., Angus, K., Purves, R. I., Reith, G., & Macdonald, L. (2016).
The Online Bingo Boom in the UK: A Qualitative Examination of Its Appeal.
PLoS ONE, 11(5): e0154763. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0154763.
Stromquist, N. P. (2014). Out of School Children: Why Gender Matters. Paper
commissioned for Fixing the Broken Promise of Education for All: Findings
from the Global Initiative on Out-of-School Children (UIS/UNICEF, 2015).
Montreal, UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS). 272
Torres, L. B., & Saromines, L. C. (2016). Students at Risk of Dropping Out of
School: Children‘s Voices. International Journal of Advancements in
Research & Technology, 5(6).
Townsend, L. & Wallace, C. (2016). Social Media Research: A Guide to Ethics. The
University of Aberdeen: UK.
UN. (2013). A life of dignity for all: accelerating progress towards the Millennium
Development Goals and advancing the United Nations development agenda
beyond 2015.Report of the Secretary-General.A/68/202.
UN. (2014). We can end poverty: 2015 Millennium Development Goals. UN: New
York. Retrieved from
http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/2014%20MDG%20report/MDG%202014
%20English%20web.pdf
UNDP. (2013). The 2013 Human Development Report – The Rise of the South:
Human progress in a diverse world. UNDP, New York, USA.
UNESCO. (2000). The Dakar Framework for Action: Education for All: meeting our
collective commitments (including six regional frameworks for action).
France.
UNESCO. (2012). EFA Global Monitoring Report: Education in Pakistan.
Islamabab. Retrieved from
http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/ED/pdf/EDUCATI
ON_IN_PAKISTAN__A_FACT_SHEET.pdf
UNESCO. (2012a). Education for All Global Monitoring Report: Policy Paper 04.
UNESCO, Paris.
UNESCO. (2012b). Why Pakistan needs a literacy movement. Islamabad. 273
UNESCO. (2012c). Education in Pakistan. Fact Sheet Education for All Global
Monitoring Report. Paris, France.
UNESCO. (2014). EFA Global Monitoring Report 2013/14. Teaching and Learning:
Achieving quality for all. Paris, France.
UNESCO. (2015). Out-of-School Children and Adolescents in Asia and the Pacific:
Left Behind on the Road to Learning Opportunities for All. Bangkok.
UNESCO. (2016). Global Education Monitoring Report, Place: inclusive and
sustainable cities. Paris, France.
UNESCO. (2018). One in Five Children, Adolescents and Youth is Out of School. UIS
fact sheet No. 48. Montreal: UIS.
UNICEF and UIS. (2011). Global Initiative on Out-of-School Children: All Children
In School By 2015. New York.
UNICEF and UIS. (2011a). Global Initiative on Out-of-School Children: Conceptual
and Methodological Framework (CMF). New York.
UNICEF. (2012). Global Initiative on Out-of-School Children: Philippine Country
Study. New York.
UNICEF. (2012a). Global Initiative on Out-of-School Children: Nigeria Country
Study. Conducted within the Conceptual and Methodological Framework
(CMF).
UNICEF. (2012b). Global Initiative on Out-of-School Children: Liberia Country
Study, Profiles of Children Out of School.
UNICEF. (2012c). Global Initiative on Out-of-School Children: Kyrgyzstan Country
Study. 117p.
UNICEF. (2012d). Global Initiative on Out-of-School Children: Ghana Country
Study. 274
UNICEF. (2013). Out-of-School Children in Sri Lanka: Country Study.
UNICEF. (2013a). Country Study: Out of School Children in Sri Lanka, Summary
Report.
UNICEF. (2013b). Out-of-School Children in the Balochistan, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa,
Punjab and Sindh Provinces of Pakistan.
UNICEF. (2014). Global Initiative on Out-of-School Children: Eastern and Southern
Africa Regional Report.
UNICEF. (2015). Global Out-of-School Children Initiative Operational Manual. New
York.
UNICEF. (2015a). A review of Alternative Learning Programmes in Pakistan.
UNICEF Pakistan, Islamabad, Pakistan.
UNICEF. (2015b). Middle East and North Africa Out-Of-School Children Initiative:
Egypt Country Report on Out-Of-School Children.
UNICEF. (2018). Formative Evaluation of The Out-of-School Children Initiative
(OOSCI). United Nations Children‘s Fund: New York. Retrieved from
https://www.unicef.org/evaldatabase/files/Formative_Evaluation_of_the_Out-
of-School_Children_Initiative_OOSCI.pdf
UNICEF. (2018). Global Initiative on Out-of-School Children: South Sudan Country
Study.
Vaismoradi, M., Turunen, H. & Bondas, T. (2013). Content Analysis and Thematic
Analysis: Implications for Conducting a Qualitative Descriptive Study.
Nursing and Health Sciences, 15(3), 398-405.
Vaismoradi, M., Jones, J., Turunen, H., & Snelgrove, S. (2016). Theme Development
in Qualitative Content Analysis and Thematic analysis. Journal of Nursing
Education and Practice, 6(5), 100–110. 275
Vayachuta, P., Ratana-Ubol, A., & Soopanyo, W. (2016). The study of ‗out-of-
school‘ children and youth situations for developing a lifelong education
model for ‗out-of-school‘ children and youth. ERPA, SHS Web of
Conferences, 26. 01015. Bangkok, Thailand. D OI:
10.1051/shsconf/20162601015
Wagle, D. (2012). Dropout of Children from schools in Nepal. Published doctoral
dissertation, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Faculty of
Social Sciences and Technology Management. Norwegian Centre for Child
Research (NOSEB).
Weil, L. (2013). Education Progress in South Asia: The dynamics between access,
equity and learning. UNICEF.
Wilson, R. E., Gosling, S. D., & Graham, L. T. (2012). A Review of Facebook
Research in the Social Sciences. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(3),
203–220.
Young, A.P. & Chavez, E. L. (2002). Not All School Dropouts are the Same: Ethnic
Differences in the Relation Between Reasons for Leaving School and
Adolescent Substance Use. Psychology in the Schools, (39), 539–547.
276
APPENDIX A
Interview Schedule for the study of “THE VOICES OF OUT OF SCHOOL CHILDREN AND THEIR PARENTS: IMPLICATIONS FOR EDUCATION POLICY”
Interview Schedule for Children چوں کے لیے ٹ ویو شیڈول