Endline Knowledge, Attitude and Practice Survey in Kathmandu District Under Community-Based Alternative Schooling Programme (CASP)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Final Report Endline Knowledge, Attitude and Practice Survey in Kathmandu District under Community-Based Alternative Schooling Programme (CASP) Submitted to Community-based Alternative Schooling Project (CASP) Non-formal Education Centre (NFEC) Sano Thimi, Bhaktapur, Nepal By Institute for Integrated Development Studies (IIDS) P O Box 2254, Kathmandu Phone: 00977-1-4371006/4378831 Fax: 00977-1-4378809 E-mail: [email protected] August 2009 Acknowledgements Children constitute the future of any country. Therefore, enhancing their access to education is a moral obligation of the state. Unfortunately, many children do not have such access since their parents and guardians either do not realise the value of education or cannot afford their education, or both. This survey captures the knowledge, attitude and practices (KAP) of parents and guardians in relation to their children’s education after the completion of pilot activities on operational models of community mobilization by Community-based Alternative Schooling Programme (CASP). The Institute for Integrated Development Studies (IIDS) wishes to express its gratitude to the Community-based Alternative Schooling Project (CASP) for entrusting this survey to it. It also wishes to express its thankful to Mr. Sushil Pandey, Mr. Laxman Khanal, Mr. Diwakar Awasti and Mr. Pramod Sharma, the Director, Deputy Director, Deputy Director, and Section Officer, respectively, of Non-formal Education Centre (NFEC) for providing the IIDS research team with the overall guidance to accomplish this study. Mr. Shigenobu Handa of CASP provided very intensive guidance in all phases of this study and, therefore, the team gratefully acknowledges his help. Ms. Yasuko Oda, Mr. Madhav Raj Dahal, and Ms. Radha Pradhananga provided support to the study team in many forms. The team is, therefore, very thankful to all of them. Finally, the team wishes to thank Mr. Gyanee Yadav, the District Education Officer of Kathmandu district, for providing comments on research tools and for providing field surveyors. IIDS Research Team September 2009 i Contents Acknowledgements i Contents ii List of Tables iv Acronyms and Abbreviations vi Survey Team Members vii Executive Summary viii Chapter 1: Introduction 1 1.1 Background 1 1.2 Objectives of the survey 2 1.3 Key definitions 2 1.4 Assumptions of the survey 2 1.5 Methodology of the survey 3 1.6 Analysis 4 1.7 Limitations of the study 4 1.8 Organization of the report 5 Chapter 2: Summary of Past KAP Surveys under CASP 6 2.1 Summary of baseline KAP survey in Dhading and Siraha 6 2.2 Summary of baseline KAP survey in Kathmandu 8 2.3 Summary of endline KAP survey in Dhading and Siraha 10 Chapter 3: Characteristics of Study Communities and Households Surveyed 13 3.1 Social characteristics 13 3.2 Economic characteristics 15 3.3 Priorities to community development 17 Chapter 4: Schooling of Children 18 4.1 Average number of children 18 4.2 Birth registration 18 4.3 Children attending SOP/FSP 19 4.4 Children completing SOP/FSP 19 4.5 Reason for sending children to SOP/FSP 21 4.6 Provision of information about SOP/FSP 21 ii Chapter 5: Selected Characteristics of Partner NGOs 24 5.1 Clarity in the Terms of Reference 24 5.2 Duration of involvement of partner NGOs 24 5.3 Activities implemented by partner NGOs 24 5.4 Other NGOs working in the programme community 24 5.5 Willing to run SOP/FSP in the future with own resources 25 5.6 Efforts made to institutionalise SOP/FSP 25 5.7 Perceptions of their role in the future 25 Chapter 6: Knowledge of Respondents on Child Education 28 6.1 Knowledge of SOP/FSP activities 28 6.2 Knowledge of child rights issues 28 Chapter 7: Attitude of Respondents on Child Education 35 7.1 Agreement with the child rights issues 35 7.2 Responsibility to make children educated 36 7.3 Willingness to participate in SOP/FSP activities 38 7.4 Willingness to send children to SOP/FSP classes 42 7.5 Willingness to send children to formal school 43 Chapter 8: Practice of Respondents Regarding Child Education 49 8.1 Participation in SOP/FSP activities 49 8.2 Encouragement to children to become educated 53 8.3 Discussions with children about child education 57 8.4 Discussions with family members about child education 61 8.5 Discussions with neighbours about child education 65 8.6 Sources of inspiration to make positive attitude and behaviour about child education 69 Chapter 9: Other Relevant Issues 71 9.1 Invitation in CMC meeting 71 9.2 Issues discussed in CMC meeting 72 9.3 Decision making process in CMC meeting 72 9.4 Institutionalisation of SOP/FSP 73 9.5 Usefulness of NGO activities 74 Chapter 10: Suggestions of Respondents on Improving KAP of Parents 77 10.1 Suggestions of the respondents to implement SOP 77 10.2 Suggestions of the respondents to implement FSP 78 iii 10.3 Summary of suggestions to implement SOP and FSP 79 Chapter 11: Conclusion and Recommendations 80 11.1 Key conclusions 80 11.2 Key Recommendations 81 References Annexes Annex 1: Questionnaires for parents Annex 2: Questionnaires for partner NGOs Annex 3: Changes in KAP indicators by programme and community Annex 4: Methodology for estimating odds ratio Annex 5: Odds ratios for selected KAP indicators by programme type (SOP vs FSP) Annex 6: Odds ratios for selected KAP indicators by NGO term of implementation (full vs partial) Annex 7: Odds ratio for selected KAP indicators by package of activities implemented by partner NGO (comprehensive vs partial) Annex 8: Odds ratios for selected KAP indicators by the presence or absence of other NGOs Annex 9: Matrix of correlation coefficients based on odds ratio of selected KAP indicators by programme type (SOP vs. FSP) Annex 10: Matrix of correlation coefficients based on odds ratios for selected KAP indicators by NGO term of implementation (full vs. partial) Annex 11: Matrix of correlation coefficients based on odds ratio for selected KAP indicators by package of activities implemented by partner NGO (comprehensive vs. partial) Annex 12: Matrix of correlation coefficients based on odds ratios for selected KAP indicators by the presence or absence of other NGOs Annex 13: Usefulness of activities implemented by partner NGOs Annex 14: Situations of Sangla by selected indicators/questions iv List of Tables Table 1.1 Sample size of the survey 4 Table 3.1 Caste/ethnicity distribution of respondents 13 Table 3.2 Percentage distribution of respondents by caste and ethnicity 13 Table 3.3 Literacy of respondents (in percentage) 14 Table 3.4 Interrelationship between literacy and social status of respondents (in percentage) 14 Table 3.5 Residential status of respondents (in percentage) 14 Table 3.6 Duration of residence among temporarily residents 15 Table 3.7 Time distance to reach mother school (in minutes) 15 Table 3.8 Time distance to reach SOP/FSP classes (in minutes) 15 Table 3.9 Sources of livelihood (in percentage) 16 Table 3.10 Ability of the respondents to support family by background characteristics (in percentage) 16 Table 3.11 First priorities of respondents in community development (in percentage) 17 Table 4.1 Average number of children per household by programme type 18 Table 4.2 Birth registration (in percentage) 18 Table 4.3 Children attending SOP/FSP by selected background characteristics (in percentage) 19 Table 4 .4 Children completing SOP/FSP (in percentage) 20 Table 4.5 Reasons for not completing SOP/FSP (dropout) in percentage 20 Table 4.6 Reasons for sending children to alternative school (in percentage) 21 Table 4.7 Provision of information to respondents to send children to SOP/FSP at first time (in percentage) 22 Table 4.8 Persons informing respondents to send children to SOP/FSP at first time (in percentage) 22 Table 5.1 Summary of findings from NGO’s survey 26 Table 6.1 Percentage of respondents having knowledge of SOP/FSP activities (in percentage) 28 Table 6.2 Percentage of respondents with the knowledge of key rights issues (in percentage) 31 Table 6.3 Comparison of baseline and end line data on knowledge of key child rights issues (in percentage) 33 Table 6.4 Source of knowledge of child rights issues (in percentage) 33 Table 7.1 Percentage of respondents agreeing very much with key rights issues (in percentage) 35 Table 7.2 Responsible person to make children educated (in percentage) 37 Table 7.3 Willingness to participate in SOP/FSP activities (yes only) in percentage 39 Table 7.4 Willingness to send children to SOP/FSP classes 41 Table 7.5 Willingness of respondents to send children to formal school after the completion of SOP/FSP (in percentage) 43 Table 7.6 Degree of willingness to send children to formal school after the completion of SOP/FSP (in percentage) 44 Table 7.7 Willingness to send children to formal school (very much) in percentage by activity 46 Table 7.8 Comparison of baseline and end line data on the percentage of respondents with their perception on selected issues 48 Table 8.1 Participation in SOP/FSP activities (in percentage) 49 Table 8.2 Participation in SOP/FSP activities by type of activity (in percentage) 51 Table 8.3 Encouragement to children to become educated 53 Table 8.4 Comparison of baseline and end line data on the level of encouragement provided to child about education (in percentage) 54 Table 8.5 Activities influential in motivating respondents to encourage children to become educated (in percentage) 55 v Table 8.6 Discussions with children about child education (in percentage) 57 Table 8.7 Comparison of baseline and end line data on the level of discussion with children about child education