Draft Report

Public Investment for Elementary Education in

By

(Pathey Trust) Pathey Budget Center

for

UNICEF state office Gujarat

Contributor

Mahender Jethmalani

Pathey Trust (Pathey Budget Center) Last Tenement, Prabha Colony, Vidyanagr High School Road Near Usmanpura under Bridge, -380014 Email:[email protected], [email protected] Website: www.pathey.in

For Detailed paper contact: [email protected] / [email protected]

Agenda for Education The goal of Education for All has been high on the agenda of the Government of since the adoption of the Constitution of India in 1950. It is reflected in the process of development planning, which was initiated in 1951. This goal is pursued through successive five-year plans. As a result substantial progress has been achieved.

Education is one of the major components of development. This is one of the four main constituents of UNDP’s Human Development Index (HDI). Raising the educational achievement of people is an important development goal. The Indian Constitution has provisions to ensure that the State provides elementary education to all its citizens.

In 2009, the Government of India amended the Constitution to make primary education a fundamental right of every child between the age group 6-14 years. This implies that the State must provide free and compulsory primary education to all the children in this age group. Before this, under the Directive Principles of State Policy of the Constitution, the government was not obliged to provide education to all the children.

With elementary education becoming a fundamental right for the age group 6-14, making up around 1.07 crore of Gujarat’s population, the Right to Education (RTE) Act began being implemented in the state in 2010. While there has been considerable progress in implementing RTE, there is a huge work that needs to be accomplished.

Improving indicators

No doubt, the net enrolment rate in primary education has increased and the annual drop-out rate in primary education has shown a declining trend in Gujarat. The drop-out level at from standards I to V decreased from 22.30 percent in 1999-00 to 1.97 percent in 2014-15, while that of standards I to VII has also decreased from 41.48 percent in 1999-00 to 6.61 percent in 2014-15.

Dropout Rate in Primary Education in select years (Gujarat) Std I to V Std I TO VII year Boys Girls Total Boys Girls Total 1999-00 23.77 20.83 22.30 42.76 39.90 41.48 2000-01 21.05 20.81 20.93 40.53 36.90 38.92 2001-02 20.46 20.53 20.50 39.16 35.28 37.22 2002-03 19.08 19.14 19.12 37.80 33.17 35.46 2003-04 17.79 17.84 17.83 36.59 31.49 33.73 2004-05 8.72 11.77 10.16 15.33 22.80 18.79 2005-06 4.53 5.79 5.13 9.97 14.02 11.82 2006-07 2.84 3.68 3.24 9.13 11.64 10.29 2009-10 2.18 2.23 2.20 8.33 8.97 8.66 2010-11 2.08 2.11 2.09 7.87 8.12 7.95 2011-12 2.05 2.08 2.07 7.35 7.82 7.56 2012-13 2.02 2.06 2.04 6.87 7.37 7.08 2013-14 1.97 2.02 2.00 6.53 7.28 6.91 2014-15 1.94 2.00 1.97 6.19 7.03 6.61

School facility indicators have improved drastically between 2005-06 and 2014-15. The state government has also putlot of efforts in improving the facilities. As per the report “Elementary : Trends 2014-15”, Gujarat has improved the Student Classroom Ratio (SCR) to 29 in 2014-15 from 38 in 2005-06,an improvement of 9 points. Similarly, the percentage of schools with boys’ and girls’ toilets is 99.9% and 98.5% respectively. Further, 99.9 Percentage schools are having drinking water facilities. The percentage of schools with ramp is 90.6% in 2014-15, with electricity 99.7%, with boundary wall 94%. Around 70.7% upper primary schools sections have computer aided learning lab. Gaps Yet, inadequacies remain. There are still 1.2 percent single classrooms , 1.7 percent single teacher schools, 2.9 percent schools need to be made accessible/approachable in all weather, 23.7 percent schools needs play grounds, 1.5 percent schools needs separate toilet facility for girls students, 25% schools need computers, 10% schools need ramp and 7% schools need boundary walls. While the budgetary expenditure for education has increased, there is scope for improvement. The state government spent Rs 4,823 crore (11.91%) for education in 2006-07out of the state’s total consolidated fund of Rs 40,488 crore. As proportion to the total budget, the expenditure increased thereafter, but marginally, except a big jump of 15.20 percent in 2010-11, the year RTE began being implemented. Figure 1: Investment for Education in Gujarat in percentage share in the total budget Investment for education Revenue Capital Combined

15.20 14.96 14.89 14.61 14.43 14.65 14.15 14.12 13.96 13.83 13.52 13.30 13.41 13.03 13.18 12.43 12.6 12.48 12.54 12.46 11.91 11.78 11.91 11.27 11.08 10.61 10.84 10.35

2.41 1.66 1.28 1.24 1.27 1.00 1.0 1.12 1.13 0.64 0.65 0.47 0.49 0.59

2006 - 07 2007 - 08 2008 - 09 2009 - 10 2010 - 11 2011 - 12 2012 - 13 2013 - 14 2014 - 15 BE 2014 - 2015 2014 - 15 - 2015 - 2016 2015 - 16 - RE 2016 - 17 - BE Acc Acc Acc Acc Acc Acc Acc Acc RE Acc BE

In fact, the budgetary outlay for education in percentage terms, in fact, showed a declining trend from 14.15 percent in 2013-14 to 13.18 percent in 2016-17. The result, the state is unable to meet several of its educational requirements. For instance, it has not been able to fill up teachers’ vacancies, which stood at 12,281 in 2014-15 at the elementary level. The shortage of teachers in was 11 percent and Kuchch district it was 24.70 percent. The shortage of science and mathematics subjects teacher at upper primary level as on 31st March, 2015 was 2,413, which is huge, affecting the quality of education and also building scientific temper among children. The Kothari Commission (1986) had suggested that we should spend at least 6% of our GDP on education. However, calculations show that the share of public provisioning for education in the Gross State Domestic Product (GSDP) in Gujarat has remained in the range of 1.58 percent to 1.99 percent. Only in the year 2010-11, the share of education expenditure in GSDP was 2.10 percent.

Gujarat State’s : % share of education expenditure in GSDP (Figure in Crore) 2010-11 2011- 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15- 2015-16- Acc 12 Acc Acc Acc Acc RE 2016-17-BE GSDP 521519 605456 712123 806745 895202 984971 1094303 General Education Budget 10964 11974 13370 14965 16961 19636 20013 Investment for education 2.10 1.98 1.88 1.85 1.89 1.99 1.83

Human resources Apart from physical infrastructural, recruitment of human resources is equally important and needs attention. Gujarat has progressed well in developing necessary infrastructure, but the improving in quality of education is a huge task. To address the shortage teachers,the government has adopted the policy of employing contractual teachers on a much lower salary than that of regular teachers. This has a demoralizing effect on contractual teachers, affecting the quality of education. Worse, many a time teachers need to engage in non-teaching activities. There is variation in quality of education and learning level across educational institutions. Presently, there are several types of institutions prevailing in the state for providing elementary education like Ashram shalas in Adivasi areas, state board, CBSE board, Kendriyavidyalaya, Navodiyayvidyalaya and International board etc. The result is, students are being not provided uniform set of opportunities. The average per capita expenditure in elementary education in Gujarat was Rs 11,534 in 2010-11, which went up toRs. 18,756 in 2014-15. However, each education providing unit had a different per capita expenditure –in 2014-15, for KendriyaVidhyalavya,it was Rs. 25898, while for NavodiyaVidyalayait was Rs. 85,000.

Per Capita Expenditure for Elementary Education in Gujarat 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 No of students in Gujarat Govt 5916978 5982181 6215390 6105605 5941473 schools Expenditure for 11144 Elementary 6825 crore 7569 crore 8574 crore 9803 crore crore education per capita expenditure for 11534 12652 13795 16056 18756 Elementary level

Gujarat’s per capita expenditure lags being several states. A study by the Accountability Initiative, “How Much Does India Spend per Student on Elementary Education”, showed that in year 2011-13 Gujarat, and Tamil Nandu spentRs. 13,377, Rs. 21,002 and Rs.15,042 respectively. As per a response to an unstarred question (No. 2420) in the Lok Sabha on 9th May, 2016, the unit cost claimed by the state governments under the RTE Act for the weaker sections for payment of fees to private unaided schools to provide education to weaker sections (25% quota under section 12(1)(c) of RTE Act)is Rs 10,000 per student in Gujarat,as against Karnataka’s Rs. 11,848, ’sRs 14,141 and Uttarakhand’sRs. 18311.Clearly, the Union Ministry of Human Resource Development has not fixed a uniform unit cost for admission of the poor children in private unaided schools. The number of private schools increased from 5,925 in 2007-08 to 9,880 in 2014-15. Pupil-teacher ratio PTR (Pupil Teacher Ratio) is one the indicators for quality education and also fulfillment of RTE norms. Although on an average Gujarat has achieved the PTR of 1:20 at primary level and PTR 1:13 at upper primary level, and it is better than Maharashtra (1:25), at the secondary level there is a scope for improvement. Gujarat’sat the secondary level is PTR is 1:34,as against Tamil Nadu’s and Maharashtra’s 1:21 and 1:23 respectively. Higher Secondary States Primary level Upper Primary Level Secondary Level level 2014- 2014- 2013-14 15 2013-14 2014-15 2013-14 15 2013-14 2014-15 Gujarat 21 20 13 13 34 34 33 31 Maharashtra 25 25 17 17 22 23 43 43 Tamil Nadu 19 18 17 15 23 21 28 26

The RTE norm related to teachers’ training is that the ‘existing teachers not possessing prescribed qualifications mentioned in the Act would be required to acquire that qualification within a period of 5 years’. Yet, according to Elementary Education Report Card-2014-15, there were 3.89 percent teachers in education system having below secondary education, 26.7 percent teachers having only secondary education and 24.43 percent teachers having higher secondary qualification, while 50 percent teachers having graduate degree or higher. Most of these teachers served in private, unaided schools. Gunotsav outcome In 2009, the launched a programme called Gunotsav, or 'Celebrating Quality ‘with the objective of creating awareness among the stake holders (teachers, students, parents and administration), ensuring the enhancement of reading, writing, numerical skills for all children in primary schools. It has been holding the Gunotsav programmefor the last five years. Having institutionalized the mechanism for enrolment and retention, the government has now focused on quality of education. A team of Hon’ble Ministers and Government officers of all Departments are deployed to schools for the evaluation. A comparison of Gunotsav 5 and Gunnoutsav 1 suggests a marked improvement of schools graded in C and D grading in the 1stGunoutsav. The number of D grade schools have improved and their number has declined from 14,582 (46.20%) to just 1706 (4.98%) in 2014. The schools, graded in C category in 1st Gunoutsav have declined from 12,887(40.83%) to 4,763 (13.91%). The biggest change has also noticed in Grade A and Grade B schools, as the number of school in A grade has increased to from 265 (0.84%) to 11,132 (32.51%) and B grade’s schools has increased to 15,778 from 3,823. The A+ grade schools have also increased to 858 from 5 in 1st Gunnoutsav. As per the Gunnotsav -5, still there are 6,469 schools (19%) schools are in Grade C and D Category; While, the schools in A+ category are just 858 (2.51%) only. The process of evaluation of Gunotsav is by the government’s officials but not by an external agency.

Grading Result of Gunoutsav 1 to 5

Gunotsav Trends (Gunoutsav 1 to 5) Grade wise schools in percentage Grade wise schools (Gunnoutsav 1 to 5) A+ A B C D Total A+ A B C D Total

Gun‐1 5 265 3823 12887 14582 31562 Gun‐1 0.02 0.84 12.11 40.83 46.20 100

Gun‐2 13 1016 10401 15373 6718 33521 Gun‐2 0.04 3.03 31.03 45.86 20.04 100

Gun‐3 154 7071 18237 7220 1285 33967 Gun‐3 0.45 20.82 53.69 21.26 3.78 100

113 6336 20241 5452 2035 34177 0.33 18.54 59.22 15.95 5.95 100 Gun‐4 Gun‐4 858 11132 15778 4763 1706 34237 2.51 32.51 46.08 13.91 4.98 100 Gun‐5 Gun‐5

However, other sources suggest provide a different picture. As per the Annual Status of Education Report (ASER) 2014,the learning outcomes of standard 2 students the percentage of children in standard II, who can read at least letters in government schools is on decline trends from 90.6 percent in 2010 to 74.2 percent in 2014. The ASER report also reveals that learning outcomes in private schools is better than in government schools. SarvaShikshaAbhiyan (SSA) is a flagship program of the Government of India, which in partnership with state governments implements universalizing elementary education (UEE) in India. SSA aims at providing relevant education to all children in the 6-14 years age group. SSA norms were revised to correspond with the provisions of the RTE Act.SSA is a national program largely funded through national resources with limited external funding by Development Partners (DPs) – the World Bank’s International Development Association (IDA) and European Commission (EC). Yet, the budgetary expenditure against the allocation under SSA in Gujarat is the last two years, 2013-14 and 2014-15 was 80.69 percent and 89.74 percent respectively. Gujarat state had an unspent amount of Rs. 265.30 crore and Rs. 144.55 crore respectively during the two years.

Suggestions • Need to plug gaps in quality human resources across the state by recruitment of teachers. • Efforts should be made to overcome shortage of classrooms and schools in interior areas. • Ratio of primary school to secondary school is 4:1, which needs to be sharply overcome. • The transition of students from upper primary to secondary level 85.16 percent and to Higher secondary level is just 62.74 percent, which is very low compare to peer states Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra. This needs to be plugged. • Quality of education with equity and social inclusion needs substantial change, alongside improving teachers’ skills. • Teachers should not be burdened with non-teaching activities. • There should be sharing of educational information in public domain so that there is discussion for improving the education system.

For Detailed paper contact: [email protected] / [email protected]