V. Jaisee Suvetha Dr. Selwyn Stanley

A Thesis submitted to the BHARATHIDASAN UNIVERSITY in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the award of the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN SOCIAL WORK

By V. Jaisee Suvetha

Under the Supervision and Guidance of Dr. Selwyn Stanley

P.G AND RESEARCH DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL WORK BISHOP HEBER COLLEGE (Autonomous and Nationally Accredited by NAAC with A+) Affiliated to Bharathidasan University, Tiruchirappalli, Tamil Nadu, India – 620 017

2011

DR. SELWYN STANLEY Head, Department of Social Work Bishop Heber College (Retired) Tiruchirappilli, Tamil Nadu, India & Lecturer, University of Plymouth, United Kingdom

CERTIFICATE OF THE SUPERVISOR

This is to certify that the thesis entitled „CHILDREN OUT OF SCHOOL IN

TIRUCHIRAPPALLI DISTRICT – A SITUATIONAL ANALYSIS‟ submitted

by V. JAISEE SUVETHA in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of

the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN SOCIAL WOK, at

BHARATHIDASAN UNIVERSITY, TIRUCHIRAPPALLI is a bonafide work

done by her under my supervision during the year 2005 - 2011. This thesis has not

previously formed the basis for the award of any degree, diploma, fellowship or any

other similar title to anyone and that the thesis represents entirely an independent

work on the part of the candidate.

Dr. Selwyn Stanley Research Supervisor

Place: Tiruchirappalli

V. Jaisee Suvetha Department of Social Work Bishop Heber College Tiruchirappilli.

DECLARATION OF THE CANDITATE

I, V. JAISEE SUVETHA hereby declare that the thesis entitled CHILDREN

OUT OF SCHOOL IN TIRUCHIRAPPALLI DISTRICT – A

SITUATIONAL ANALYSIS is a original work done by me for the award of degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Social work of Bharathidasan University,

Tiruchirappalli. The work has not been submitted by anybody to any university for the award of any degree, diploma, etc.

V. Jaisee Suvetha Candidate

Place: Tiruchirappalli

______

“I bow my head in gratitude to the GOD, who has given the strength for my work”

The performance of prescribed duties is obligatory for everyone. Lord Krishna categorically and comprehensively explains how it is the duty of each and every member of society to carry out their functions and responsibilities in their respective stage of life according to the rules and regulations of the society in which one lives. Further the Lord explains why such duties must be performed, what benefit is gained by performing them, what harm is caused by not performing them. Plus what actions lead to bondage and what actions lead to salvation. Chapter 3: The Eternal Duties of Human Beings –“The Bhagavad-Gita”

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

“All thanks to the Lord Almighty for His showers of blessings on me at all times”

I am sincerely thankful to Mr.M.P. Vijayakumar,I.A.S, State Project Director Tamil Nadu State Mission of Education for All - Sarva Shiksha Abhiya (Retired), Chennai and the District Administration, Tiruchirappalli (Government of Tamilnadu), for granting me the permission to do my research work on Children Out-of-School in Tirucirappalli.

I am highly thankful to Dr.(Mrs). K. Meena, Vice-Chancellor, Bharathidasan University, Tiruchirappalli, Taminadu for granting me the permission to pursue my research under the Bharathidasan University, Tiruchirappalli.

I am immensely thankful to Rev.Dr. P. Monoharan, Principal, Bishop Heber College, Tiruchirappalli, Taminadu, for permitting me to carry out my research work in the esteemed institution (Bishop Heber College).

I am extremely grateful for the opportunity to have had Dr. Selwyn Stanley, Head, Department of Social Work, Bishop Heber College (Retired), Tiruchirappilli, Tamil Nadu, India & Lecturer, University of Plymouth, U.K. as a Research Advisor / Supervisor. He has been an inspiration to me in my research progression, as he was the one who constantly advised me to get the Ph.D early. His most valuable guidance and advice had facilitated me to think, analyze and interpret the data. During the past years, I realize the incredible experience to understand not only his insights into the specifics of my work, but his fundamental move toward research that emphasizes rigorousness and ethics. I submit my sincere thankfulness to him for his intellectual academic input contributed for me to complete my research work successfully.

I am deeply indebted to Dr. A. Relton, Head, Department of Social Work, Bishop Heber College, Tirucirappalli, Tamilnadu for his constant encouragement and motivation that forced me to complete the research work fruitfully under the PG and Research Department of Social Work, Bishop Heber College, Tiruchirappalli.

I am greatly thankful to Dr.V. Sethuramalingam, Assistant Professor, Department of Social Work, Bharathidasan University, Tiruchirappali, Taminadu, for his continuous timely support and motivation, enthusiasm in providing appropriate information and valuable suggestions that have helped me to proceed further in the precise way for completion of my thesis.

I have great pleasure in expressing my heartfelt thanks to my Professor, Dr. (Mrs). Shankari Santhanam, Vice Principal, Head, Department of Social Work, Cauvery College for Women (Retired), Tiruchirappalli, Tamilnadu, for her genuine review of my thesis and consistent support that have helped me a lot to complete my thesis perfectly.

I am bound to thank my Well-wisher, Mrs. Sheeba Selwyn, Former City Coordinator, Child Line, Tiruchirappalli, for her stable encouragement behind my work and her constant advise that have steered up me to finish the research in a successful manner.

I owe my special thanks to Dr. R. Ravanan, Reader in Statistics, Presidency College, Chennai for his valuable help and support in the statistical tests application of my research work.

I would like to express my deep thanks to Dr. (Mrs). N. Kalamani, Head, Dept.of English, Bharathidasan University, Tiruchirappallli, Mr. R. Victor Lazarus, Senior Zonal Trainer, Southern Railway, Tiruchirappalli and Dr.(Mrs.) B.S. Prameela Priadersini, Assistant Professor, Dept. of English, Govt. Arts College for Women, Pudhukottai for their continuous timely help, having proof read the manuscripts / thesis and providing comments.

I will be failing in my duty if I do not express special thanks to the Officials of Department of School Education and Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (Government of Tamil Nadu) in Chennai and Tiruchirappalli for their constant help in providing me the relevant basic details and reference materials for my research work.

I extend my special thanks to the Teachers of Regular Government School, Tirucirappalli and also I acknowledge and appreciate the Teachers of Special Schools, National Child Labour Project (CHEERS),Tiruchirappalli for the facilities provided and cooperation extended during the collection of data for my research in the whole district.

I find no words to thank the assets of the Nation, young Children, who were out of school and their Parents / Guardian and also the local Community people in Tiruchirappalli district, for their good responsiveness, patience and kind cooperation exposed during the collection of data for my research in the district.

I am very much pleased to thank all my Colleagues in the Office of Tamil Nadu Health Systems Project, Chennai for their encouragement and appreciation shown towards me to finish my work.

My special thanks are also due to my beloved friends Ms. Zarina Parveen, Mr. Rajendran, Mr.Pradeep, Dr.Anand Jerald, Dr.Saleel Kumar & Mr.Saravanan, for their genuine and great help continuously that have motivated me to speed up my process.

I place on record my profound sense of gratitude to my family friend, Mr. I.M. Christudoss, Office Superintendent, Directorate of Medical & Rural Health Services (Retired), Chennai for his worthy motivation and being concerned that have supported me in a great way towards executing my research work in time.

I deem it a great privilege to acknowledge the loving efforts and emotional support of my Father Mr. S. Vadivel and Mother Mrs.V. Rajeswari that have geared me to accomplish this arduous work in an excellent manner.

A very special word of appreciation and thankfulness to my Cheerful Aunty (Chitthi) Smt.N. Saroja, Sweet Sister Dr.V. Jaisee Geetha and Lovely Brother Er.V. Vijay for believing in me and supporting me in shouldering additional responsibilities on my behalf, which paved a smooth way for me to go forward and conclude my research confidently.

I would prefer dedicating this thesis to the revered and fond memory of my Uncle (Chitthappa) Late S. Natarajan, who was source of inspiration always to me.

V. Jaisee Suvetha

iii

LIST OF CONTENTS

S. No. Particulars Page No.

1. Title Page

2. Certificate

3. Declaration

4. Acknowledgement i

5. List of Contents iv

6. List of Tables v

7. List of Figures vii

S. No. Title Page No.

1. Chapter-I Introduction 1

2. Chapter-II Review of Literature 30

3. Chapter-III Research Methodology 67

4. Chapter-IV Data Analysis and Interpretation 89

o Interview Schedule 89 o Case Study 128 o Focus Group Discussion 135

5. Chapter-V Findings, Suggestions and 197 Conclusion 6. Bibliography 260

7. Appendix 272

o Interview Schedule 272 o Interview Guide 289

LIST OF TABLES Table Title Page No. No.

1. DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS’ BY THEIR SOCIO- 89 DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS

2. DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS’ BY THEIR SOCIO-ECONOMIC 91 CHARACTERISTICS

3. DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS’ BY THEIR SCHOOL LAST 92 ATTENDED

4. DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS’ BY THEIR INCIDENCE OF OUT 93 OF SCHOOL

5. SCHOOL RELATED FACTORS INFLUENCING RESPONDENTS TO BE 93 OUT OF SCHOOL

6. PSYCHOLOGICAL FACTORS INFLUENCING RESPONDENTS TO BE 96 OUT OF SCHOOL

7. SOCIAL FACTORS INFLUENCING RESPONDENTS TO BE OUT 98 SCHOOL

8. DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS ACCORDING TO THEIR 101 EXPERIENCES OF ABUSE

9. DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS ACCORDING TO THEIR 101 EXPERIENCE OF BULLYING

10. IMPLICATIONS OF BEING OUT OF SCHOOL FOR THE CHILDREN 102 AND THEIR FAMILY

11. DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY THEIR FUTURE ASPIRATION 103

12. DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS ACCORDING TO THEIR 104 SITUATION BEING OUT OF SCHOOL

13. RESPONDENTS’ OPINION OF THEIR ACTIVITIES WHEN OUT OF 107 SCHOOL

14. DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY PARENTS’ OPINION ON 108 CHILDREN ENGAGED IN WORK / OTHER ACTIVITIES

15. DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS’ BY PARENTS PERCEPTION ON 109 CHILDREN’S NON-SCHOOLING

Table Title Page No. No.

16. PARENTS’ PERCEPTION OF CHILDREN’S WORRIES 111

17. PARENTS’ PERCEPTION OF SCHOLASTIC DIFFICULTIES 112

18. PARENTS’ PERCEPTION ON MONITORING THEIR OUT OF SCHOOL 112 CHILDREN’S ACHIEVEMENT

19. DISTRIBUTION OF PARENTS’ PERCEPTION BY PERSON 113 RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CHILD’S EDUCATION 20. PARENTS’ AWARENESS OF GOVERNMENT SCHEMES FOR 114 CHILDREN OUT OF SCHOOL AND THEIR FAMILY

21. PARENTS’ ACCESS TO GOVERNMENT SCHEMES FOR CHILDREN 115 OUT OF SCHOOL AND THEIR FAMILY

22. DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY COMMUNITY CONTRIBUTION 116 AND SUGGESTIONS TO ATTEND SCHOOL

23. CORRELATION AMONG VARIOUS DIMENSIONS OF FACTORS 117 CONTRIBUTING TO CHILDREN REMAINING OUT OF SCHOOL

24. CORRELATION AMONG VARIOUS DIMENSIONS OF CHILDREN 118 BEING OUT OF SCHOOL

25. ANOVA FOR SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LOCALITY WITH 120 RESPECT TO FACTORS RESPONSIBLE FOR CHILDREN OUT OF SCHOOL

26. ANOVA FOR SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CASTE WITH 121 RESPECT TO REACHABILITY OF GOVERNMENT SCHEMES

27. ANOVA FOR SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MONTHLY 122 FAMILY INCOME WITH RESPECT TO FACTORS RESPONSIBLE FOR CHILDREN OUT OF SCHOOL

28. CHI SQUARE TEST FOR ASSOCIATION BETWEEN SIZE OF FAMILY 124 AND LEVEL OF IMPLICATION OF CHILDREN OUT OF SCHOOL

29. CHI SQUARE TEST FOR ASSOCIATION BETWEEN MIGRATION OF 126 FAMILY WITH REGARD TO RESPONDENTS’ SEX

30. CHI SQUARE TEST FOR ASSOCIATION BETWEEN LEVEL OF 127 INCIDENCE OF OUT OF SCHOOL AND LEVEL OF PARENTS PERCEPTION

LIST OF FIGURES Figure Title Page No. No.

1. DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS’ BY THEIR AGE 90 (a)

2. DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS’ BY THEIR SEX 90 (b)

3. DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS’ BY THEIR LOCALITY 90 (c)

4. DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS’ BY THEIR FAMILY’S 91 (a) MONTHLY INCOME

5. DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS’ BY THEIR SCHOOL LAST 92 (a) ATTENDED

6. SCHOOL RELATED FACTORS INFLUENCING RESPONDENTS TO 95 (a) BE OUT OF SCHOOL

7. PSYCHOLOGICAL FACTORS INFLUENCING RESPONDENTS TO BE 97 (a) OUT OF SCHOOL

8. SOCIAL FACTORS INFLUENCING RESPONDENTS TO BE OUT 100 (a) SCHOOL

9. DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS ACCORDING TO THEIR 105 (a) SITUATION BEING OUT OF SCHOOL

10. PARENTS’ PERCEPTION ON MONITORING THEIR OUT OF 112 (a) SCHOOL CHILDREN’S ACHIEVEMENT

11. CONVERGENT FINDINGS ON SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC AND 246 (a) ECONOMIC PROFILE OF CHILDREN OUT OF SCHOOL (1)

12. CONVERGENT FINDINGS ON VARIOUS FACTORS RESPONSIBLE 246 (b,c) FOR CHILDREN OUT OF SCHOOL (2 a) and (2b)

13. CONVERGENT FINDINGS ON IMPLICATION OF CHILDREN NOT 246 (d) GOING TO SCHOOL FOR THE CHILDREN AND FAMILY (3)

14. CONVERGENT FINDINGS ON SITUATION OF CHILDREN OUT OF 246 (e,f) SCHOOL AND THEIR PARENTS’ PERCEPTION ABOUT THEIR STATUS (4 a) and (4 b)

15. CONVERGENT FINDINGS ON FEED BACK ON GOVERNMENT 246 (g) PROGRAMME AND ITS BENEFITS TO CHILDREN OUT OF SCHOOL AND THEIR FAMILY (5)

16. CONVERGENT FINDINGS ON COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION AND 246 (h) SUGGESTIONS RELATING TO CHILDREN OUT OF SCHOOL (6)

17. FEW ASPECTS OF DIVERGENT FINDINGS RELATING TO 246 (i) CHILDREN OUT OF SCHOOL (7)

vii

INTRODUCTION

In the words of Pam Schiller and Tamera Bryant ―The values we impart to our children today, consciously and unconsciously, will have a major impact on society tomorrow. If we continue to leave the teaching of values to chance, we, as a nation, risk losing an integral piece of our culture altogether‘ and so considered are our children the most important asset to our Society‖.

Creating a safe and healthy world for young children is as important a task like anything else that exists on earth. Children and childhood across the world, have broadly been interpreted in terms of a ‗golden age‘ that is synonymous with innocence, freedom, joy, play and the likings. Yet millions of children around the world remain out of school tossed between poverty, illness, armed conflict, delinquency and exploitative labour. The reasons for exclusion from mainstream education are diversified and may include economic, socio-cultural barriers, ill health, religion, inaccessibility, political-conflict and gender discrimination. Children out of school contribute to major loss to our national development. The Development Personnel and Social Work Researchers believe that any child of school age who is not in school is the most disadvantaged and most vulnerable (Dr. Alicia Fentiman (2004)).

This study is an attempt to understand the situation of children who are out of school in Tiruchirappalli District in Tamil Nadu state, India. In this chapter, the researcher presents the existing situation of children, children‘s status at the global, national, state and district level, importance of education, rights of children, government policies and programmes, parent and community involvement in children‘s education and rationale for selecting the area of the study.

CHILDREN

The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child defines ―Children as persons below the age of 18‖. However, in India there are several different definitions of the child. The Census of India defines ―children as those below the age of 14‖.

CHILDREN OUT OF SCHOOL

According to the online dictionary - thefreedictionary.com website, out-of- school means not attending school and therefore free to work.

United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization‘s (UNESCO) Institute of Statistic considered a child to be out of school if he or she was of primary school age (usually between the ages of 6 and 11 years) and not enrolled in primary school. The standard definition changed in 2005 to include all primary school age children not enrolled in either primary or secondary school.

The Constitution (Eighty-sixth Amendment) Act, 2002 inserted Article 21-A in the Constitution of India to provide free and compulsory education of all children in the age group of six to fourteen years as a Fundamental Right in such a manner as the State may, by law, determine. According to the Constitution of India (Article 23), no child below the age of 14 must be employed in a factory or mine or engaged in any other hazardous employment. Article 45 says that the State will provide free and compulsory education to all children up to the age of 14.

POPULATION OF CHILDREN

A report by UNICEF (2005) on the State of the World‘s children under the title ―Childhood under Threat‖ said that over a billion children i.e, half of the world‘s population of children, have been denied their childhood. The report also highlighted that millions of Indian children were equally deprived for their rights to survival, health, nutrition, education and care. In India, the 2001 Census shows the total population of children in the age group of 0-14 years is 1,028.7 million. Millions of children hail from socio-economically weaker families and are compelled in a way or the other to socially get excluded from the mainstream society.

STATUS OF CHILDREN OUT OF SCHOOL

Global Status

In the year 2005, 72 million children of primary school age were out of school around the world as per the estimation of UNESCO. In the year 2010, according to UNESCO‘s, there are still 69 million children out of school worldwide despite the acceleration in enrolments. Current trends will still leave 56 million children out-of- school in 2015 and the rate of progress may be slow. Regional progress has been uneven. Out-of-school numbers have fallen more rapidly in South Asia, driven by advances in India, than in sub-Saharan Africa. While enrolment ratios are rising, millions of children enter primary school only to drop out before completing a full primary cycle. Some 28 million pupils in sub-Saharan Africa drop out each year, and 13% of children entering school in South and West Asia drop out in the first grade. Enrolments in countries affected by conflict and fragility are stagnating and these countries account for more than half of all children who are out-of-school. In addition, even in well-performing countries particular groups of children remain at risk including indigenous and minority ethnic/language populations, those living in slums and in very sparsely populated areas, migrants, nomadic populations, individuals with diverse learning needs, children with disabilities and the poor in general. Within each of these categories, girls‘ participation tends to be lower than that of boys.

Status in India

According to the Ministry of Human Resource Development, the number of out-of-school (OOS) children in the 6-14 age group during the year 2005 is 1.34 crore . As per the report of Right to Education (RTE) Act in India (2010), based on analysis of annual status of education by the Ministry of Human Resource Development, the number of children in the age group of six to 14 are still out of school is 81,50,619. According to the report, "Access to education is no longer the real problem now, its quality of education and for which parameters have been set under the RTE Act like infrastructure in schools, pupil-teacher ratio and professionally qualified teachers." Some of the not so encouraging figures came as 3 far as the notification of rules in the states was concerned. In percentage terms, 4.22% of the total children in this age group are not going to school as per the latest figures.

Status in Tamil Nadu State and Tirucirappalli District

As per Household Survey 2001, 5.74 lakh out-of-school children were identified. During the year 2005 another Household survey was conducted and 2.79 lakh out of school children in the age group of 6-14 years were identified covering all the habitations of the State. According to General Educational Statistics of Tamil Nadu, the total number of out-of-school children during 2006 has been estimated to be 1,11,989 in all the districts in the State, out of which 4098 children (who were out of school) belong to Tiruchirappalli district. The district wise survey conducted by the "Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA)", Education Department, Tiruchirappalli district reveals that during the year 2006-2007, 1828 children, who are remaining out of school, were identified and shortlisted for enrollment by the District Authorities. According to the survey figures, though the target of out-of-school children has been reduced to some extent, after intensive drive for coverage of all out of school children during the past years, still there are many children remaining out of school on streets and work spots. The problems of children out of school are not addressed completely and its outcome is gradually distressing the future generation and the whole society.

Undoubtedly, the problem of children out of school is almost common at the global, national and state level but differs according to the circumstances and culture. The issues around the associations between social exclusion, hidden children and drop out and completion rates from primary school still remain to be solved. Particularly the marginalised groups are most seriously at risk of dropping out. Only very few issues are recorded while many such issues in different children goes as a hidden agenda. Children who do not have the capacity to bear such problems absorb them in their mind and brood over it without knowing the alternatives for the problems. In addition as these children are out of school there is no possibility of knowing about their rights or to claim their rights. This completely barrens their life and they lose the opportunity of having a bright future.

DETERMINANTS FOR CHILDREN OUT OF SCHOOL

There are many reasons for children to stay out of school in India. These reasons are unique for each child depending upon the circumstance in which the child is born. Some of the major determinants that lead children to stay out of school in India are given as follows.

 Poverty is one of the key determinants for children to stay out of school. Poverty situation in families affects and worsens the life situation of young children. Extreme poverty in family may increase vulnerability. Poverty contributes to various social issues which ultimately forces the child to stay out of school or become drop out from school education.

 There is gender discrimination among children out of school. A girl has a lower status in India and enjoys fewer rights, opportunities and benefits of childhood as compared to a boy. The boy has rights on family and community resources. The girl-child is also neglected in matters of feeding, health care and education.

 Lack of interest towards education also can be a determinant for some children to remain out of school. This may stem out from reasons such as illiteracy in the family or absence of motivation to attend school education. Hence lack of interest prevents many children to remain out of school.

 Lack of motivation or encouragement to participate in the school education during the very early stages of life in children can make children to neglect school environment and continue to remain out of school thus losing the career prospects in life.

 School as such intending to cater education to the children does need to be more child friendly that create interest among children to learn appropriate skills. These facilities may also include teaching aids, approach of teachers, care provided by teachers, techniques adopted to develop skill, knowledge among the children

should always be conducive and child friendly. Inadequate conducive learning environment can always make children to remain out of school.

 Schools which are meant to provide education to the children does require being equipped with adequate infrastructure facilities. Infrastructure facilities such as child friendly class rooms, furniture, transport facilities, distance between school and home, sanitation facilities need to be well maintained suiting to the taste of children. Lack of infrastructure facilities such as sanitary latrine, safe drinking water can disappoint children and their parents. It can also affect the health of the children. Hence lack of appropriate infrastructure facilities in school can always make children to remain out of school.

 Children of migrant labourers and construction workers are deprived of health, nutrition and education facilities. Day care facilities or educational institutions, which provide care needs of these children, are negligible for these children in the places wherever they migrate for the purpose of work. Hence the children belonging to the migrant workers always stay away from school. Many children do not even get the chances for getting enrolled in education due to frequent migration.

 Official agencies estimate that only one per cent of children with disability have access to education. Some of the person with profound form of disabilities does not have any mobility access or learning capacities required to attend to school education. Hence these children always continue to remain out of school due to their profound nature of disability and lack of adequate facilities for their rehabilitation.

 Chronic illness may be a determinant factor for children to remain out of school. Certain chronic illness such as Small Pox, Cancer, Cardiovascular diseases, Tuberculosis, Hepatitis B, HIV / AIDS can cause disturbances to children‘s education and overall development. Many children affected with these diseases continue to stay out of school.

IMPLICATIONS OF CHILDREN BEING OUT OF SCHOOL

Though the Government is taking enormous steps to integrate the socially excluded children, it is still found that many children continue to be out of school and contribute to great loss to their own living as well as the society. The major implications of children being out of school to the child and their family in India are given below.

 According to the National Labour Institute in India, the children who are neither enrolled in schools nor accountable for in the labour force are all potential child labourers. Children who stay away from school environment are forced or attracted towards labour in unorganized sector. Out-of-School Children are also the main target of the labour market. They can be hired at much lower wages than adults. The meager earning generated at the end of the day encourages these children to involve them in the labour force. Ultimately they lose their career prospects and tend to lead ignorant lives as their parents did. Hence child labour is one of the major implications of children being out of school.

 India has the dubious distinction of having the population of street children. Street children suffer from destitution, neglect, abuse and exploitation. Education catering to the needs of street children is inadequate. These children find it difficult to stay with the mainstream society as their way of life is socially excluded. Hence street children always tend to stay away from the school environment.

 A number of children in prostitution are children of prostitutes. Children entering in to the prostitution industry learn to make easy money and develop business contacts which ultimately force them to neglect studies. Educational services catering to these children at the brothel houses such as open schooling are not available in India. Hence these children tend to stay as out of school children and ruin their career prospects. Many of these child prostitutes have never been enrolled in any forms of school for education.

 Children remaining out of school develop antisocial behavior and engage themselves in committing law breaking activities in their early stages in life and may become social deviants. These children tend to be socially excluded from the mainstream society. As a means of social exclusion these children ruin their life and develop negative attitude and behavior in their life.

 Children out of school many times tend to engage themselves in the easy money making ventures. Begging is one among the easy money making venture. The parents, who are able bodied beggars, force their children to beg and earn income. These children stay away from school. The hunger felt by them forces these children to accept left over and thrown out food from hotels. This affects the health of the child and causes mental health problems.

 Children out of school often are exposed to child abuse and develop negative attitude towards the society. Child abuse causes physical, sexual or emotional imbalances in children. As these children are out of school many times they are abused verbally, physically, orally and sexually either in their own family or the neighborhood. Most incidences of child abuse occur in the child‘s home and then in the community.

 Children out of school lack guidance, adult support, social skills and life skills required for socialization. These skills are developed in children from the school environment by the teachers and parents at home. Most children hail from illiterate families and as a result the parents do not understand the children‘s abilities and they do not make any attempt to teach them such required skill for effective socialization. As these children are out of school they also do not get opportunity to acquire such skills through their teachers. Hence these children are susceptible to child trafficking and easily trapped by pimps and other traffickers.

 As the children who remain out of school do not attend school or get dropped out in the middle of their education, they continue the remaining part of their life as illiterate. They live in meager ignorance and ruin their life without being useful to the society. The human power these children possess is lost and is never

contributed for family development as well as community development. Illiteracy prevents these children to understand the human rights and these children ultimately lead life without having the access to exercise their rights. These children are becoming disadvantaged day by day and do not cooperate in the development process of our nation. Poverty and illiteracy make these children marginalized and worsen their life situation. They grow as unproductive citizens to our nation. The presence of these children is in millions. Every child‘s situation is different and has unique ways of dealing with the consequences of being out of school.

UN CONVENTION ON THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD

The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on November 20, 1989, spells out the basic human rights to which children everywhere are entitled. It came into force on September 2, 1990 with 20 ratifications. It covers all children under the age of 18 years, regardless of sex, colour, language, religion or race. India ratified the CRC in 1992. It has since been ratified by all governments except the richest, the United States of America, and one of the poorest, Somalia. The UN Charter sets international standards for the rights of children and confers the following basic rights to children across the world.

 right to survival - to life, health, nutrition, name and nationality

 right to development - to education, care, leisure, recreation

 right to protection - from exploitation, abuse, neglect

 right to participation - to expression, information, thought and religion

The following sections of the Convention are of particular interest to anyone concerned about the relationship between children, young people and the media.

- Article 12 refers to children's rights to express their own opinions and to have them taken into account in any matter affecting them.

- Child's right to freedom of expression is defined in Article 13, which also says that they have a right to receive and disseminate information.

- Article 17 recognizes "the important function performed by the mass media," and calls on those governments who have signed up to the Convention to "ensure that the child has access to information and material from a diversity of national and international sources

- Articles 28 and 29 (the right to education), Article 31 (the right to participate in leisure, cultural and artistic activities), and Articles 34 and 36 (which require that children should be protected from sexual and other forms of exploitation, including pornography) are also relevant.

The Committee on the Rights of the Child, based in Switzerland, monitors the progress of the Convention receiving reports from individual countries and recommending how each country could further improve the lives of children.

MILLENNIUM REPORT – VITAL STATISTICS

 East Asia, the Pacific, Latin America and the Caribbean are now close to achieving universal primary education.

 1948 - The Universal Declaration of Human Rights proclaimed by the United Nations. Education is declared a basic right of all people.

 1959 - The Declaration on the Rights of the Child. Education is declared a right of every child.

 1966 - The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination proclaimed the right of all to education, regardless of race or ethnicity.

 1981 - The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women called for the elimination of discriminating against women and for equal rights in education.

 1990 - The World Declaration on Education for All, adopted at the World Conference on Education for All in Jomtien, Thailand, defined a bold new 10

direction in education, declaring that "Every person – child, youth and adult – shall be able to benefit from educational opportunities designed to meet their basic learning needs".

 1993 - The E-9 Education Summit where governments from the world's nine high-population countries pledged to universalize primary education and significantly reduce illiteracy in their respective countries by the year 2000.

 1996 - The Amman Affirmation adopted at the Mid-decade Meeting of the International Consultative Forum on Education for All, called for accelerated efforts to meet the goals of Education for All set in 1990.

 1996 - The report to UNESCO of the International Commission on Education for the Twenty-first Century promoted a holistic view of education consisting of four "pillars": learning to know, learning to do, learning to be and learning to live together. The text was widely adopted.

 2000 - The Dakar Framework for Action, adopted at the World Education Forum (26-28 April 2000, Dakar, Senegal) commits governments to achieve quality basic education for all by 2015.

The set of Millennium Development Goals (MDGs given below) formulated in 2000 with targets for 2015 crystallized the growing consensus which emerged during the 1990s, namely, that poverty reduction and the provision of basic social services need to be at the centre of development policy.

 MDG 1 - Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger

 MDG 2 - Achieve universal primary education

 MDG 3 - Promote gender equality and empower women

 MDG 4 - Reduce child mortality

 MDG 5 - Improve maternal health

 MDG 6 - Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases

 MDG 7 - Ensure environmental sustainability

 MDG 8 - Develop a global partnership for development

Of the eight MDGs, two are directly related to education systems. MDG 2 calls for the achievement of universal primary education by 2015 whereby every child will complete a full course of primary education. MDG 3 calls for the promotion of gender equality and the empowerment of women with, specifically, the elimination of gender disparities at primary and secondary school levels by 2005 and across all education levels by 2015. The remaining MDGs focus on other interrelated development areas that are greatly influenced by the progress made towards MDGs 2 and 3.

RIGHTS OF CHILDREN IN INDIA

The Constitution of India, which came into force in January 1950, contains provisions for survival, development and protection of children. These are included both in Part III and Part IV of the Constitution pertaining to ‗Fundamental Rights‘ and ‗Directive Principles of State Policy‘. The Major constitutional provisions relating to children are given below,

Fundamental Rights

Article 14 states that State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India. Article 15 affirms that nothing shall discriminate any citizen, prevent special provision for women, children and any socially / educationally backward classes or Scheduled Castes / Scheduled Tribes. Article 17 emphasize that ―Untouchability‖ is abolished and its practice in any form is forbidden. Article 19 says that all citizens shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression, form associations or unions, move freely throughout India, reside and settle in any part of the territory of India. Article 21 states that no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law. Article 21 A declares that State shall provide free and compulsory education to all children of the age of six to fourteen years. Article 23 states that traffic in human beings and beggar and other similar forms of forced labour are prohibited. Article 24 assert that no child below the age of fourteen years shall be employed to work in any factory or mine or engage in any other hazardous employment.

Directive Principles of State Policy

Article 39 highlights that the tender age of children should not be abused and they should not be forced by economic necessity to enter a vocation and are given opportunities and facilities to develop in a healthy manner and in conditions of freedom and dignity and that childhood is protected against exploitation and abandonment. Article 45 provides early childhood care and education for all children until they complete the age of six years. Article 46 declares that State shall promote with special care the educational and economic interests of the weaker sections of the people, and, in particular, of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes. Article 47 emphasizes the raising level of nutrition and the standard of living of its people and the improvement of public health. Article 51 asserts that the State shall endeavour to foster respect for international law and treaty obligations and Article 51A stresses the parent or guardian to provide opportunities for education to his child or ward between the age of six and fourteen years.

Salient Features of the “Right To Education Act”

The ―Right To Education Act‖ (RTE), 2009 provides for:

i. The right of children to free and compulsory education till completion of elementary education in a neighbourhood school.

ii. It clarifies that ‗compulsory education‘ means obligation of the appropriate government to provide free elementary education and ensure compulsory admission, attendance and completion of elementary education to every child in the six to fourteen age group. ‗Free‘ means that no child shall be liable to pay any kind of fee or charges or expenses which may prevent him or her from pursuing and completing elementary education. iii. It makes provisions for a non-admitted child to be admitted to an age appropriate class.

iv. It specifies the duties and responsibilities of appropriate Governments, local authority and parents in providing free and compulsory education, and sharing of financial and other responsibilities between the Central and State Governments.

v. It lays down the norms and standards relating inter alia to Pupil Teacher Ratios (PTRs), buildings and infrastructure, school-working days, teacher-working hours.

vi. It provides for rational deployment of teachers by ensuring that the specified pupil teacher ratio is maintained for each school, rather than just as an average for the State or District or Block, thus ensuring that there is no urban-rural imbalance in teacher postings. It also provides for prohibition of deployment of teachers for non-educational work, other than decennial census, elections to local authority, state legislatures and parliament, and disaster relief.

vii. It provides for appointment of appropriately trained teachers, i.e. teachers with the requisite entry and academic qualifications. viii. It prohibits (a) physical punishment and mental harassment; (b) screening procedures for admission of children; (c) capitation fee; (d) private tuition by teachers and (e) running of schools without recognition.

ix. It provides for development of curriculum in consonance with the values enshrined in the Constitution, and which would ensure the all-round development of the child, building on the child‘s knowledge, potentiality and talent and making the child free of fear, trauma and anxiety through a system of child friendly and child centred learning.

GOVERNMENT POLICIES AND PROGRAMMES FOR THE CHILDREN UNDER FIVE YEAR PLANS (1951 – 2012)

Development programmes in India, including those for children, are carried out within the framework of the Five-Year Plans. Some of these programmes are wholly funded by the Central Government, some by both Central and State Governments, and some entirely by the State Government, depending on whether the programmes are classified as Central, centrally sponsored or State sector schemes. In addition, wide range of programmes are also being implemented in collaboration with international organisations and non-governmental organisations, which are now growing as a vibrant sector in the development and empowerment of children. The milestones achieved by India on the whole ever since it achieved independence with regard to survival, development, protection and participation of children both at the national and international level are given below,

The first five year plan (1951-56) identified health, nutrition and education as major areas of concern with regard to children. In 1953 the Central Social Welfare Board was set up to address the needs of children, women and persons with disabilities.

The second five year plan (1956-61) aimed at strengthening the child welfare systems. Welfare projects were extended to become the Coordinated Welfare Extension Projects in 1958 and the Children's Act was passed in 1960. Internationally the Declaration of the Rights of the Child came into being on the 20th of November 1959.

During the third five year plan (1961-66) the child was recognised as a human being with special needs and special efforts were made to coordinate between sectors to ensure these needs. Nutrition programmes were set up and the Kothari Education Commission was set up in search of solutions to the lack of universal education for children.

The fourth five year plan (1969-74) focused on getting basic services to children. Two major policies for children came into existence, The National Education policy in 1968 (as recommended by the Kothari Education Commission)

15 and the National Policy for Children in 1974. The Policy Resolution recognised children as the nation‘s supremely important asset and declared that it is the responsibility of the State to nurture them. It further emphasised that it shall be the duty of the State to ―provide adequate services to children, both before and after birth and through the period of growth, to ensure their full physical, mental and social development.‖ And that the ―State shall progressively increase the scope of such services so that within a reasonable time, all children in the country enjoy optimum conditions for their balanced growth.‖ To achieve these objectives, it called for the adoption of the following measures – comprehensive health programme; provision of nutritional services, nutrition and nutritional education to expectant and nursing mothers; free and compulsory education to all children up to the age of 14 years; provision of non-formal education, promotion of physical education and other types of recreational as well as cultural and scientific activities in schools and community centres; provision of special assistance to children belonging to the weaker sections of society; upliftment of children in distress; protection against neglect, cruelty and exploitation of children; protection against child labour; provision of special facilities for children ailing from various kinds of disabilities and encouragement and assistance to children especially those belonging to the weaker sections of the society. In achieving the above, the Policy gave special recognition to the role of voluntary organisations. The fourth five year plan also saw the establishment of the following schemes: The Special Nutrition Programme, Balwadi Nutrition Programme and Prophylaxis Scheme against Blindness due to Vitamin A Deficiency among Children.

The fifth five year plan (1974-79) saw a shift from child welfare to child development where again coordination of services was the main agenda. A major accomplishment in 1975, which was a result of all plans so far, was the launching of the Integrated Child Development Scheme. 1975 also saw the start of the Scheme of Crèches/Day Care Centres for Children of Working and Ailing Mothers. Another major achievement was the setting up of the National Children's Fund in 1979. The year 1979 designated as the International Year of the Child (IYC) by the United Nations General Assembly and number of activities and programmes were

16 undertaken. In India, a National Plan of Action was prepared to observe the IYC with the main theme of ‗Reaching the Deprived Children‘.

The sixth five year plan (1980-85) was that the first time planners took into consideration the needs of working children. Programmes were undertaken to improve the health, nutrition and educational status of working children. Health concerns of children also took priority in these plan years with the introduction of the National Health Policy and the formulation of the Indian National Code for Protection and Promotion of Breast Feeding.

The seventh five year plan (1985-90) saw the establishment of the Department of Women and Child Development in the Ministry of Human Resource Development. In 1986 the Government of India repealed the Children's Act and passed the Juvenile Justice Act instead and updated the National Education Policy. The enforcement of Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 was also strengthened. In pursuance of the National Policy on Child Labour, National Child Labour projects (1987) were undertaken in industries where the incidents of child labour were found to be very high. Measures were taken to cover families of child labourers under income generation schemes. Public opinion on the evils of child labour was mobilised through investigative journalism, use of electronic media and the support of activists‘ groups. Finally in 1990 the government set up the Central Adoption Resource Agency (CARA), to handle all concerns and issues regarding adoption. Internationally this period was a witness to the first comprehensive convention for child rights, the UNCRC.

During the eighth five year plan (1992-97) India ratified the UNCRC there by making it a legal binding document. There was continued work in areas of day care, education, health, etc. But this plan pays special focus also to the needs of the girl child. In 1992 the government adopted the National Plan of Action for the Girl Child. Some states also prepared similar documents and schemes for the girl child, for example, Haryana instituted the 'Apni Beti Apna Dhan' Scheme, Tamil Nadu initiated the 'Cradle Scheme', and Rajasthan introduced the 'Raj Lakshmi Scheme'. In the education sector, the main strategy for achieving the target of ―Education for All by

2000 A.D.‖ was adoption of a decentralised approach to planning. In pursuance of the revised National Policy on Education, 1992 and the Programme of Action, various steps were taken to expand early childhood care and education activities, and universalise elementary education. An NGO Cell was specifically set-up in 1994 to facilitate on varied issues concerning children. In the year 1994, District Primary Education Programme (DPEP) was launched as a centrally sponsored scheme in adopting a holistic approach, emphasis on converting existent programmes and services, and encouraging community participation.

The ninth five year plan (1997-2002) continued to address the plight of the girl child, concentrating on addressing the problem of the declining sex-ratio as well as female foeticide and infanticide. Concerted efforts were made to eliminate all forms of discrimination and to provide special incentives to the mother and the girl child so that the birth of a girl child in a family was appreciated. In 1998, the Government with the support of UNICEF launched a special service for children called Childline. This is a free telephone service that can be accessed by a child or anyone on his/her behalf simply by dialing the number 1098. In the field of health the government introduced the Reproductive and Child Health programme (RCH). In 2001-02, the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) was launched with the aim of providing quality elementary education to all children in the 6-14 age groups by 2010, besides bridging all gender and social category gaps at primary stage by 2007. 2000 also saw the adoption of the new Juvenile Justice (care and protection of children) Act.

The approach of the tenth five year plan (2002-07) has shifted to a right-based one, insuring the survival, development and protection of children. The Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Regulation and Prevention of Misuse) Act was amended in 2003 to further address the problems of female foeticide and infanticide. Many other goals were set out such as reduction of Infant Mortality Rate (IMR) to 45 per 1000 live births by 2007 and reduction of Maternal Mortality Rate (MMR) to 2 per 1000 live births by 2007. These goals were to be accomplished by expanding existing scheme such as ICDS, universal immunization, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, etc. Major accomplishments have been a constitutional amendment making the Right to education a fundamental right, the revision of the National Health Policy to take into consideration more recent health concerns like HIV/AIDS, the amendment of the 18

Juvenile Justice act, the amendment of Child Labour Prevention Act on 10th of October 2006 banned children under 14 working as domestic servants and the adoption of the Goa Children's Act of 2003. In its quest to guarantee quality basic education through-out the country, the Government of India, in the year 2004, imposed an Education Cess @ 2 per cent on direct and indirect Central Taxes. At the international level, it adopted the Dakar Framework for Action on Education for All. The Framework identifies six goals, which includes, inter alia, progressive expansion of Early Childhood Care and Education, Universalization of Elementary Education by 2015, achieving Gender Equality in Education by 2015, and improvement in the quality of education.

The current plan, the eleventh five year plan (2007-12) clearly states "Development of the child is at the centre of the Eleventh Plan". According to the MWCD (Ministry of Women and Child Development) working group report the plan outlines its work based on the National Plan of Action for Children (NPAC). There are four key areas addressed by the plan such as ICDS, Early Childhood Education, Girl child and Child Protection. The plan calls for further expansions of the ICDS services and reiteration of major concerns about infrastructure, training of workers, quality of services, etc. Early childhood education needs a boost with regards to access, day care services, infrastructure, training, minimum standards and regulatory mechanisms, and revamping curriculum. With regard to Girl child the plan reiterates the goals set out in NPAC. Age specific and setting specific interventions are needed for girls. This eleventh plan recognizes the need for Child protection programmes and initiatives. It specially addresses the need of those children that have fallen out of the purview of previous interventions and hence fallen on difficult times. According to the Ministry of Women and Child Development (MWCD) report the eleventh plans‘ idea of child protection is very limited and does not cover all commitments of NPAC. An important change recommended by the MWCD which was not included in the previous five year plans is the introduction and adoption of the Integrated Child Protection Scheme (ICPS) in the protection agenda of the XIth Plan. India has moved forward to a rights based framework that casts a legal obligation on the Central and State Governments to implement this fundamental child right as enshrined in the Article 21A of the Constitution, in accordance with the provisions of the Right To

Education (RTE) Act. But despite these laws, policies and commitments, what is the actual situation of India's children vis-à-vis health, early child hood care, education, and protection?

Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (Education For All Scheme)

Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) or ―Anaivarukkum Kalvi Thittam‖ is a comprehensive and integrated flagship programme of Government of India, to attain Universal Elementary Education (UEE) in the country (India) in a mission mode. Launched in partnership with the State Governments, SSA aims to provide useful and relevant education to all children in the age group of 6-14 ages by 2010. It is an initiative to universalise and improve the quality of education through decentralised and context specific planning and a process-based, time-bound implementation strategy. Its goal is consistent with the 86th Constitutional Amendment (2002), making elementary education a fundamental right of every child and with the Millenium Development Goal (MDG) of universalising primary education by 2015.

The three development objectives of the SSA project are as follows:

1. To reduce out of school children by at least 9 million in the 6-14 age group, with an increase in enrolment, in the process of universalising elementary education by 2007. 2. To narrow existing gender and social gaps so that enrolment of girls will be near parity with boys, enrolment of children of SC and ST will be near parity with that of other groups; and enrolment of children with disability will increase. 3. To increase the quality of education of all elementary school students so that learning will be improved and transition rates from primary education to upper primary education will increase.

SSA is a national programme largely resourced through national resources, supplemented by external funding from the World Bank‘s International Development Association (IDA), United Kingdom‘s Department for International Development (DFID) and the European Commission (EC). As per the Agreements, the GOI

(Government of India) and Development Partners (DP) will carry out a Joint Review Mission (JRM) twice a year.

The program has generated considerable interest and commitment in all the States of the Country. Enrolment drives, learning achievement surveys, opening of new schools, education guarantee scheme centres, ECE facilities and alternative learning situations like Bridge Courses. Whether it is positioning additional teachers, or building better and bigger school buildings or adding teaching - learning materials or participating in PTA meetings, the community participation in school development has quite visibly increased. The Pupil-Teacher ratios are approaching a manageable level of 40 students per teacher. The SSA framework has enabled existing teacher training institutions to be strengthened and new resource institutions like Block Resource Centre (BRC) and Cluster Resource Center (CRC) to be set up.

SSA has also brought in greater convergence between various programmes and the states are beginning to view schemes like Integrated Child Development Scheme (ICDS), total sanitation and water supply as crucial inputs to the larger Mission of Education For All (EFA). SSA has brought together an increasing number of NGOs and civil society partners into a collaborative relationship. Data collection, data analysis and data use are crucial for measuring progress and in lending the mission a sense of direction.

In Tamilnadu, the state government has made steady progress in achieving the goals of universal access and enrollment. During the year 2001, out of 574,069 children, who were out of school in the State, 108,000 children were enrolled in regular schools during the year 2002 – 2003 and 255,144 children enrolled in SSA Schools / centres. At the beginning of the academic year 2004-2005, the State estimates that 210,925 children are yet to be enrolled and 68,533 children had dropped out of the school system. Thus, the total number of out-of-school children in the state remains as 279,458. Of these, approximately 42,000 children are those who are working. The State has also been able to network non-governmental organizations and Civil Society partners into a synergistic relationship. This is likely to help in accelerating the pace and quality of implementation of the scheme. As envisioned in the RTE Act, Universal Enrolment is one of the aims of Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan

21 mission. The State has taken persistent efforts to enroll and mainstream the out-of- school children and to reduce the target of out-of-school children.

EDUCATION AN INSTRUMENT TO MENTOR CHILDREN

Absence of primary schooling in the life of a poor child has a permanently debilitating impact on a child‘s ability to develop capabilities. In a hierarchical and stratified society like India, the primary school emerges as a progressive social institution that questions status by ascription or accidents of birth and promotes status by achievement. Therefore, children also need to be made capable like parents. Hopefully, it is this remedy, which will ultimately reduce the causal factors of economic disparities and social inequalities.

In a modern society education is as essential as the basic needs such as food, clothing and shelter. It is one of the essential ingredients of the quality of life. That is why basic education has been recognized as an inalienable human right and forms an essential component of Human Development Index (HDI) representing developmental level of nations. Education is also the most important factor in achieving rapid progress in all spheres of life and in creating a social order discovered on the values of freedom, social justice and equal opportunity. Programmes of education lie at the base of the efforts to forge the bonds of common citizenship, and are essential to harness the energies of the people and to develop the human resources of every segment of the society.

Basic education encompasses a broad sense of learning which includes formal, non-formal and informal at any stage of life. Learning takes place in and out of school, in the home, in the community, the workplace, and in recreational and other settings. Basic education is always the key to freedom from subjugation, fear and want. Education is an effective weapon to fight poverty. It saves lives and gives people the chance to improve their lives. It gives people a voice to raise their thoughts. Basic education encompasses competencies, knowledge, attitudes, values and motivations that are necessary in order to become fully literate. Education also increases a nation‘s productivity and is instrumental for social progress and human

22 freedom. Children who do not get education tend to lead a miserable life and ultimately find it difficult to adjust to the social environment.

PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT IN EDUCATION FOR THE SCHOOL AGE CHILDREN

During their elementary school years, children undergo important developmental changes. Their reasoning becomes more logical, their attention gets more adaptable, their perspective taking grows more sophisticated, and their reading and math skills blossom. With entry into formal schooling, children spend more time away from their families. Often, this time includes many hours spent in schools and out-of-school time programs. Throughout elementary school, children begin to integrate knowledge from their interactions with teachers, peers, and families in order to construct identities based on their understanding of what they are good at and capable of doing.

During early childhood, family involvement is critical for school-age children's learning and development. However, in elementary school, the specific activities and nature of these processes change. The quality of the parent–child relationship influences how well children do in school. Child development experts characterize a positive parent–child relationship in terms of support, whereby the parent conveys warmth, sensitivity, and encouragement; appropriate instruction based on the child's development and characteristics; and respect for the child's growing autonomy. Through interactions with parents and other caregivers, children learn to develop social skills that they transfer from the home to the school context. One study of kindergardeners found that a positive mother–child interaction—one that is sensitive and elicits pro-social behavior is associated with children's social and academic performance in middle school. Parents impart the self-regulation skills that have a lasting effect on their child's ability to relate positively with their peers and to attend and participate in class activities.

The nature of the parent involvement in the development of disadvantaged children is found to be poor in research reports. The minority or low-income parents are often underrepresented among the ranks of parents involved with the schools.

There are numerous reasons for this: lack of time or energy (due to long hours of heavy physical labor, for example), embarrassment or shyness about one's own educational level or linguistic abilities, lack of understanding or information about the structure of the school and accepted communication channels, perceived lack of motivation by teachers and administrators, assumptions of teachers and administrators on parents' disinterest or inability to help with children's schooling.

Perhaps one of the most important findings of research, however, is that parents of disadvantaged and minority children can make a positive contribution to their children's achievement in school if they receive adequate training and encouragement. Even more significant, the research dispels a popular myth by revealing, as noted above, that parents can make a difference regardless of their own levels of education. Indeed, disadvantaged children have the most to gain from parent involvement programs.

COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT IN SCHOOLING AND TO PREVENT NON-SCHOOLING

Instead of flaying the state for its failures there is a need to understand that quality education needs autonomy from the state. The reform of education in countries like India has to begin necessarily with the conviction that schools have to become accountable to parents and neighborhood than to bureaucrats. A far-away central authority cannot ensure accountability. Jan Shiksha Act, however, provides a legal space to the parents to come forward and get involved in PTAs. Hence enhancing the capabilities of the stakeholders in effective management of school is being considered as a key to ensure quality education.

With the strong push towards decentralization under the newly launched SSA scheme, the education system is looking to the community for participation in the functioning and monitoring of their schools. The community ownership is central to the SSA programme. However, it seems the districts are as yet unclear how SSA will actually become a movement and will be different than other programmes of similar nature implemented in the past. But there are several caveats to the successful implementation of such an initiative. For effective local-

24 level planning and administration, capacity at the grassroots level needs to be built up. There is a lack of organizational mechanism to institutionalize the capacity that is created. In the absence of such mechanisms, the local level units will continue to depend on higher-level institutions. Therefore, to sustain the efforts made towards decentralization, there is a need to institutionalize local level planning competencies and withdrawal of central and state government initiatives in a planned manner. This involves a sea change in the cultural landscape and that the process is bound to be slow. There are also some practical preconditions that must be satisfied before a society can claim to be ready for decentralization. Such civic capacities and capabilities include among other things basic literacy and numeracy, basic organizational and management skills within the community and an active acceptance of public accountability applied to civic associations, demonstrated by the creation of transparent reporting systems with implementing structures, and training citizens in the use of these systems.

Enhancing capabilities within local communities is thus a pre-requisite to effective decentralization. Communities need to be made aware of how they can and must hold schools and teachers accountable. It must be impressed on them that teachers and HMs (Head Masters) are government servants placed in schools to serve the community, their job being to teach and train the children belonging to that community. They should be trained about the basic qualities exhibited by an effective school, the meaning of quality education and their constitutional right to demand it for their children. The importance of setting expectations of teachers, HMs, schools and students learning must also be stressed. Strong expectations can influence and shape what a teacher or administrator feels responsible for in his or her work.

When the community understands the importance of simple concepts such as the effect of time for learning in children‘s education, they can perform informal supervision of the school. Monitoring could be done on a daily or weekly basis in small, informal measures such as keeping track of the time the school starts and closes, the lunch break time and other types of recess breaks, the punctuality of teachers and teacher absenteeism. This monitoring needs to be conducted in an open, guilt-free and transparent manner.

CRITICS ON RIGHTS OF CHILDREN

Resource Allocation for Children

Legal and programmatic commitments have to be matched by financial commitments, as reflected in the national and provincial budgets. The allocation and spending of adequate financial resources on children, although not the only an indicator, is an important reflection of the government's commitment. Though the percentage share of children in the Union budget has gone up from 1.2% in the 1990s to 4.91% in 2006-07, there is still quite a gap between need and allocation, and allocation and actual spending. The disparities in India are stark. Thirty-five per cent of Indians are illiterate and yet India produces millions of highly-skilled global knowledge professionals. The government is celebrating India‘s ―unprecedented high rate of economic growth‖, huge Foreign Direct Investments (FDIs) and Foreign Institutional Investments (FIIs), and yet thousands of our children are dying of hunger. Their rights continue to be neglected. As the children do not even have a voice and the right to be heard, the Government should develop ways to assess the impact of budgetary allocations on the implementation of children‘s rights, and thereby to mainstream the children not in school.

Child Survival and Health

Right to health is a basic human right that cascades from the right to life. The Constitution of India under Article 21 makes right to life a Fundamental Right. Health being a key factor in a nation‘s growth and development, has been a subject of Government intervention through public health programmes for several decades to control and eradicate the major diseases. While there has been success in some areas, in general, yet the burden of disease has fallen disproportionately heavily on the poor, the worst affected being children, which has not only caused pain and suffering to them, but also affected their growth and influenced performance in school. So it is essential to concentrate on child‘s health in order to prevent them being out of school in the long run.

Early Childhood Care

Provision of early childhood care and education for all children until they complete the age of six years by the State is emphasized in Article 45 of the Indian Constitution. Since the initial six years in a child's life are crucial, the government has launched several programmes, the most important being the Integrated Child Development Services programme. The early childhood care and education also includes comprehensive maternal care and entitlements; provision of crèches, child care, nutrition; immunization and health care; pre-school education; protection and care to children; and creating child care services to release girls from sibling care responsibilities, so that these girls can get education in schools available for them. Yet many girls are forced to look after their younger sibling at home, which reflects that the access to early childhood programmes to the under six years need to be reinforced.

Education and Development of Children

The development of children is integrally linked to their right to education as per Article 21A of Indian constitution. This is to be achieved on the basis of equal opportunities, free compulsory education to all between 6 to 14 years, higher education accessible to all children, educational and vocational information and guidance, measures to encourage regular attendance at schools and to reduce the dropout rates. The main causes of school drop-out are school related factors and factors concerning family and home. Of late, there seems to be some improvement in the children‘s enrolment in education but, by and large, they are still deficient, particularly in rural areas where the children do not get a fair deal due to the indifference of teachers, influence of caste, poor functioning of schools and no academic support at home, as their family members have very low level of education. Access and quality are the issues which need to be seriously addressed by the Government along with other stakeholders in order to reduce dropout rates.

Protection for Children

Despite implementation of various laws and programmes in accordance to the Article 39 the right to protect children, there are a large number of children still

27 living in difficult circumstances such as the physically and mentally challenged, those affected by drugs, victims of natural disasters, street and migrant children, orphans, beggars, children with HIV/AIDS, children of parents with HIV/AIDS, trafficked children, children of prostitutes and children forced into prostitution, children in conflict with law and children whose labour is being exploited. These categories of children are increasing day by day and because of their dispersed character they have escaped the attention of policy makers. The present programmes need to be strengthened in such a way that these hidden group of children are identified, their problems studied and programmes developed whereby they could be rescued and rehabilitated effectively so as to protect them from out of school environment and prevent them from becoming non school goers.

RATIONALE FOR SELECTING THE AREA OF THE STUDY

Tiruchirappalli lies 320 km to the South of Chennai on the bank of the river Cauvery and located in the center region of Tamil Nadu State in India. The town is a place of tourist attraction with important tourist spots like Rockfort temple which perched on a massive rock that stands 83 meters upwards from the flat surrounding plains. Some of the inscriptions in the caves are have been from the days of Mahendra verma I (600 to 630 A.D.). Tiruchirappalli is predominantly characterized by wet farming. Bharat Heavy Electrical Limited (BHEL) has brought Tiruchirappalli town in the Industrial map of India. It is a leading educational center. It has many recreational centers, with a number of cinema halls and music sabhas.

The profile of Tiruchirappalli district would give the impression that it is a fast developing city. It indeed is true. But, there is sizeable number of children who are out of school including street children, beggars, child labourers in cigarette industry, gem cutting, quarry, agriculture sector, etc. Besides existing welfare measures, there are thousands of children who are deprived of the basic rights and pushed into a vulnerable situation. Extreme poor quality of life is one of the commonest among all the problems faced by out of school children. The exposure to this problem might even happen in their early childhood. It paves way for becoming drop out or even non enrollment in schools at an earlier stage. Poverty in the family

28 leads to poor parenting among children. Various dimensions of poverty such as lack of livelihood opportunities, inaccessibility to resources, feelings of insecurity, frustration and inability to maintain social relationship with others among the adults in the community tends to affect the well being of the younger generation. On account of these issues existing among the adults the ignorant children are exposed to different social evils such as child labour, street children, juvenile delinquency, child abuse and violence. The exposure to such social issues causes imbalance to the physical, social psychological well being of the child. It also hampers the holistic development of the child, their family and the community in general.

To accomplish the mandate of the Constitution, the Government and Non- Governmental Organizations are taking onerous efforts towards improving the interventions for these children, who are out of school and many programmes at the micro and macro levels have been undertaken in this direction. As a result, according to the Government statistics, the children‘s right to enter at the primary stage of education has reached the universal levels and the incidence of out-of-school children has reduced to some extent. But, on the other hand, students‘ accomplishment stages have been generally low and there are extensive differences in students‘ attendance and completion of education levels. The indicators for child development need to be further progressed towards more positive life promotion. As the district is still lagging behind on social as well as economic development indicators, it will continue to make children more vulnerable especially those living in the rural and urban slums.

These children need to be taken care of and prevention measures need to be sought out vigorously to reduce the incidence of out-of-school children as well as to get rid of children being out of school. The vicious cycle of illiteracy, unemployment in adults, poverty and child labour are interrelated with each other and this cycle can only be broken by ensuring education for all and by creating more and more Child Friendly Zones as well as improving the living status of the families of out of school children throughout the country. This study helps to find out the situation of out-of- school children in Tiruchirappalli district and the existing gaps, which have to be reviewed for safeguarding the rights of children.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

In this present chapter, the researcher attempts to analyze the already existing pieces of documented knowledge regarding out of school children available through various sources such as books, journals, agency reports, news paper, magazines and internet. This chapter includes the review on main categories such as demographic status of out of school children, determining factors contributing children to be out of school, implications of children being out of school, current situation of children out of school, parents‘ perception on situation of children out of school, effectiveness of government schemes relating to welfare of disadvantaged children and their family, extent of community participation in mainstreaming out of school children and measures available to promote well being among such children are culled out from different sources of various literatures and documents to arrive at the shortcomings existing in the current context for this present research study to augment.

DEMOGRAPHIC STATUS OF OUT OF SCHOOL CHILDREN

Recognizing the family as the basic socializing and nurturing institution for children is intuitive. General view points out that the love and attention that babies and children receive, their sense of security, the encouragement they are given to learn, the intellectual richness of their home environment, and the attention that is devoted to their health and welfare are all critical elements in the development of children who are able and motivated to learn. In order to act out the role of effective socializing and nurturing institution for children it is important that every family need to have a balanced environment in all aspects of socio-demographic characteristics relating the personal, social, economic and emotional.

Akshaya Mukul (2009): ―Out of School Children in India‖, a recent survey conducted by Social Research Institute of Indian Market Research Bureau (2009) for the Ministry of Human Resource Department (HRD) reveals the presence of 80.4 lakh children out of school in the age group 6 to 14 years in India. In percentage terms, 4.22% of the total children in this age group are not going to school as per the latest figures. The major reason for a sizable children being out of school in

India is due to the imbalances that exist within the basic institution of family affected by the socio-demographic characteristics. Hence it is important that the demographic characteristics need to be analyzed in reference to the already existing pieces of knowledge so as to find out the current status of children being out of school.

UNESCO (2001): A study conducted by the UNESCO (2001) reveals the circumstances of children who are not in school as a reason of gender disparities. Gender disparity being an imbalance in the socio-demographic characteristics does contribute children to stay out of school. This study concludes with the salient findings that 113 million children of school age were not enrolled in school in 1998. One child out of every five in the group of 6 to11 year old children are out of school among which 60% of the total children out of school are girls. Nearly 87% of the total lived in three regions: Sub-Saharan Africa, South and West Asia and the Arab States and North Africa. This reveals that a sizable segment of girl children are still remaining out of school due to the gender disparities exercised in the community. It is widely accepted that between four and six years of schooling are needed if the key skills of literacy and numeracy are to be retained and to provide the basis for further learning. But in many countries even with high initial enrolment rates, only a much smaller proportion actually complete five years of primary education. Furthermore, completion rates are typically lower for girls, for children in poor households, and for those living in rural areas. UNESCO designed this paper to provide a clear understanding of the background for a step change in national and international efforts to make progress against the international development goals of Universal Primary Education by 2015 and the elimination of gender disparities in primary and secondary schooling by 2005. Similarly gender disparities are still a practice in India and it is important to understand the extent of gender disparities as a demographic variable affecting the children out of school.

B.R.Patil (1986): Yet another research study conducted among the working children in Bangalore city by B.R.Patil (1986) concluded with the salient finding that the female working children have a relatively poor education background compared to the boys. This is primarily because the girls start working at an early age and poorer families do not give much importance to the education of girls. This study

31 found that a larger number of girls are sent to earn an income, while boys more often than not go to work partly at least to learn the trade. Likewise in rural areas and semi urban areas in Tamil Nadu state the disparity shown among the male and female is high. Girl children are many times deprived of education and nutrition. This deprivation does affect girl children to remain out of school.

Li and Tsang (2002): In many Asian countries, such as China and Vietnam, boys have higher educational expectation than girls. In the study on ―Household Education Decisions and Implications for Gender Inequality in Education in Rural China‖ D. Li and Tsang (2002) has pointed out that the decision to continue schooling has been gender differentiated in China. This study examines economic, social, and cultural factors in household education decisions and their implications for gender inequality in education in rural China. It is guided by a multidisciplinary approach that takes into account the insights from both the literature on gender studies and disciplinary analyses. Data from this study come from two sources: a survey of four hundred households from four poor rural counties in Gansu and Hebei, and a literature search of local accounts and studies, around the 1993-95 periods. This study reveals that a gender hierarchy existed in household education decisions in the four poor rural counties in China. It shows that parents had higher educational expectations for boys than for girls. Girls were typically required to perform more housework than boys, especially in rural areas. Given this attitude, the marginal cost of girls‘ time will be higher than boys‘. Therefore, demand for education for girls will be lower, and girls will face a higher chance of being withdrawn from school. It demonstrates that household education spending was a heavy economic burden for a significant number of poor rural households. The study also finds that school non-attendance rates were higher for girls than for boys in the majority of the counties. Multivariate analysis indicates school attendance was related to a number of factors including economic burden of education spending and gender; but the relationship appeared to differ across the counties.

UNESCO (2005): While gender disparity being a demographic variable in making children to be out of school still reasons such as children‘s location of residence and household wealth also contributes for children remaining out of school

32 in the Indian context. A study conducted by UNESCO (2005) reveals that one hundred and fifteen million primary school age children are out of school. This number equals 18% or almost one in five of the children worldwide in this age group. This study aims to improve our understanding of how many children are out of school and who they are. It presents a new methodology for counting the number of children who are out of school and explores the link between participation and the characteristics of children and the households in which they live. Data from across a large number of less developed countries reflect disadvantage in terms of participation in primary schooling by gender, location of residence and household wealth.

Despite the demographic characteristics affecting the children in participating in the mainstream school education, there are many other direct or indirect factors which contribute to children being out of school.

FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO CHILDREN REAMINING OUT OF SCHOOL

Aloysius Xavier Lopez (2011): Lack of interest in school and difficulty in learning has been found to be a factor for children being out of school. An article (―Survey Finds over 3,000 Children Out of School in Chennai City‖) published in the daily ‗The Hindu‘ dated June 12, 2011 extracted from the survey conducted by the Sharva Shiksha Abhiyan at Chennai city revealed the presence of 3,282 children out of school in the age group 5 years to 16 years. The survey revealed that the male children constitute a major chunk of that number with 2046 of them being out of school. The survey included a total of 1166 habitations in Chennai city. A majority of the children as many as 1491 pointed to lack of interest in going to school as reason for dropping out, 251 children in the city reported that they dropped out of school because of difficulty in learning. Some of the other reasons cited include child labour, lack of guidance and awareness, sibling care, natural calamity and the need to be an additional earning member of the family. The category of out of school children includes drop outs and children from migrant families here in search of jobs. The mother tongue of 3007 children is Tamil. A total of 113 children speak Urudhu and 106 have Telughu as their mother tongue. With regard to drop outs, atleast 2796 of

33 children have dropped out of school in the city. This includes 1050 students of Chennai schools. As many as 427 children, the highest in age group, have dropped out at the age of 12 years. A total of 418 children, the highest in a class have dropped out while they were in class III and 361 children had dropped out in class I. Some children dropped out soon after joining school, the study has observed. As many as 2272 of the children out of school belong to the Scheduled Caste, 593 Backward Caste, 368 Most Backward Caste and 35 Scheduled Tribe. Hence this recent survey reveals that factors such as lack of interest in school and difficulty in learning too have significantly contributed to children being out of school.

UNESCO (2001): Quality of education imparted at school does have impact on children. Research study conducted by UNESCO (2001) reveals the circumstances of children who are not in school as a reason of quality teaching and learning in schools. It is equally important to underline that enrolment figures understate the extent of the deficit in providing a basic education of good quality. Even where children complete a full primary cycle, international evidence suggests that the quality of teaching and learning in the schools of many developing countries is of a very low standard. Further the study also suggests how to make a reality of the international pledge at the World Education Forum at Dakar (2000) that no country seriously committed to education for all will be thwarted in their achievement of this goal by lack of resources. Hence quality of teaching learning processes at school directly or indirectly forces children to remain out of school.

Endya B. Stewart (2008): Turning to the school structural predictors, school cohesion was found to be significantly related to academic achievement. Students who attend schools with a supportive and inviting environment have significantly higher academic achievement, as believed by students, their parents, teachers, and school administrators (Anderson, 1982; Freiberg, 1999; Shields, 1991; Welsh et al., 2001). Furthermore, once individual-level predictors such as ethnicity and SES are taken into account, the concentration of social problems, proportion non- White, and poverty in a school, as well as the school‘s location and size, do not significantly relate to average achievement. The study suggests that the educational ills commonly associated with large, urban, minority schools are mitigated by a

34 cohesive school environment. In other words, school contexts in which there was a great deal of cooperation among teachers and administrators, support for students, and clear expectations about the school‘s mission appeared to translate into higher levels of 198 Education and Urban Society achievement, irrespective of school social ills. The current findings, coupled with other findings, suggest that the school‘s climate is extremely important to successful student outcomes (Anderson, 1982; Carbonaro, 2005; Johnson et al., 2001; Shields, 1991; Welsh et al., 2001). This study has attempted to address the individual-level and school structural predictors that significantly affect students‘ academic achievement. In short, the results of the study suggest that individual-level predictors, such as student effort, parent–child discussion, and associations with positive peers, are substantially associated with a student‘s achievement level. Policy aimed at the improvement of students‘ achievement needs to consider the impact of individual and school factors on achievement to reach desired outcomes.

Hanushek et al. (2006): School quality was shown to be an important factor in making educational policies in the third-world countries (Hanushek et al., 2006). A panel data on Egyptian children in primary school showed that low education quality makes student less motivated to remain in school. The explanation was that children who achieve higher skills from school will have more incentives to stay in school while lower skilled students are more likely to leave school early. Hanushek et al. also looked at the trade-off between quality and access to schooling. The return on education is always overestimated if the school quality is ignored. This means expanding the number of poor schools will never attain the desired return on education.

McCaul, (1989): The reasons for leaving school are reported to be different for urban, suburban, and rural areas (McCaul, 1989). Students from urban areas withdrew from school because of poor grades or having moved to other areas, while students from suburban areas stated that they were expelled from school or simply that they did not get into the program. For those students living in rural areas, the common reasons for them to leave school were supporting their families or getting married and pregnancy.

Atasi Nanda Goswami (2009): A study conducted by Atasi Nanda Goswami (2009) found that the identified low / lack of income for mothers, family related problems, love / romantic relationships, drug addictions and peer group influence as the main reasons for dropping out, which are most important problems for the older children. The bad influence of family environment, excessive disciplining by parents and fear of teachers were the main causes for dropping out for the younger children. Mothers expressed that children are falling in love at a very young age and getting married. The mothers also expressed that environment in the school should also be improved to achieve better retention rate.

Jeyaraj. D and S. Subramanian (2005): Poverty is yet another major issue posing threat to the education of Indian children. Though the Government of India is implementing the education for all interventions, still poverty among the family forces children to become child labour and ultimately become out of school child. A research study conducted by D. Jeyaraj and S. Subramanian (2005) concludes with the findings that the phenomenon of child labour is explicable in terms of poverty that compels a household to keep its children out of school and put them to work in the cause of the household‘s survival. In exploring the link between child labour and poverty in the Indian context, this research finding advances the view that the nature of the connection is more readily apprehended if both the variables under study are defined more expansively and inclusively than is customarily the case. Specifically, the suggestion is that it may be realistic to include those children who are conventionally categorized as ‗non-workers not attending school‘ within the count of child labourers. It is also suggested that poverty is meaningfully measured in terms of a multi-dimensional approach to the problem, wherein the aim is to assess generalized capability failure arising from want of access to elementary infrastructural facilities and essential amenities with respect to a number of basic human functioning. This research focused on child labour and deprivation and the issues emerging from it in the Indian context with the support of both primary and secondary data. This research on Indian children indicates that poverty among the family forces children to become out of school and probably at work for household survival.

Cockburn (2000): The composition of household asset portfolios is usually an important factor on the demand side of child labour. Cockburn (2000) shows that an explicit integration of the role of household asset profiles provides a fuller and more nuanced explanation of child labour and schooling decisions. The author uses a simple agricultural household model with a missing labour market to show how the extent and composition of household asset portfolios simultaneously determine household income and the shadow wage of, and demand for child labour. Child labour increasing (-decreasing) assets are characterized by a dominant wage (income) effect. An empirical analysis of data on rural Ethiopian households shows that both poverty constraints and income opportunities play important roles in the decision to send children to school or to work. It is also shown that both work and school conflict substantially but not entirely. The study find strong evidence that the returns to and demand for child work vary between households according to their asset profiles and demographic composition. These results imply that, in pursuing asset accumulation- based poverty alleviation policies, attention should be paid to the possibility that this will encourage households to withdraw their children from school in order to take advantage of the increased returns.

Ermisch et al. (2001): The mother‘s and the father‘s educational attainment strongly affect their offspring‘s educational achievement (Ermisch et al., 2001). In particular, if the father‘s education is at O-level, which means he has no qualification or his qualification is lower than the General Certificate of Secondary Education, the chance of a child obtaining more education than his father is only 48%. An increase in the father‘s education, however, will likely enhance the educational attainment of his child. Moreover, the paper explains how a young adult‘s educational attainment is affected by family and economic situation. According to Ermisch et al., children who are raised by single parents and who come from families in the bottom income quartile are less likely to be successful at school. Those whose parents are homeowners, however, are more likely to succeed.

Neeti Mehanti (1993): Parental pressure and peer pressure can be considered an important factor for children being out of school and engaged in child labour. A study conducted by the Child In Need Institute, (1993) titled ‗Towards

Child Labour Free Zones in Calcutta‘, involved 195 children including those working in urban formal sectors, school drop outs and children in hazardous jobs in the age group of 5-14, their parents, local youth leader and the community as a whole. The survey revealed that only 6 percent of the parents felt education was important for development. It also revealed that 30 percent of the working children work due to parental pressure, 34 percent work due to peer pressure and 64 percent work as they have nothing else to do and the schools are not attractive and teaching conditions are poor. Hence it is important to note that parental pressure, peer group influence does have significant effect for children being out of school.

Becker GS (1964): The cost of education has become a core factor in household‘s decision to maintain schooling. In Becker‘s human capital model (1964), a relationship between earnings, investment cost, and rates of returns to education was derived. The decision to leave school depends on how a household compare the cost of schooling to the return on education. According to the human capital model, the expected return on education is measured by future earnings while the cost of schooling includes the opportunity cost of schooling and the direct cost for tuition and learning materials. A decision about enrolling a child in school will be made if the present value of expected return on education outweighs the current cost of schooling. However, an emerging question is why young people enroll school and then drop out from school.

Russell W. Rumberger (2001): Identifying the causes of dropping out is extremely difficult to do because, like other forms of educational achievement (e.g., test scores), it is influenced by an array of proximal and distal factors related to both the individual student and to the family, school, and community settings in which the student lives (Russell W. Rumberger -2001). Dropping out is not simply a result of academic failure, but rather often results from both social and academic problems in school. These problems are influenced by a lack of support and resources in families, schools, and communities. This suggests that reducing dropout rates will require comprehensive approaches both to improve the at-risk settings in which potential dropouts live and to help them address the social and academic problems that they face in their lives. In addition to families and schools, communities and peer groups

38 can influence students‘ withdrawal from school. There is at least some empirical evidence that differences in neighborhood characteristics can help explain differences in dropout rates among communities apart from the influence of families (Gunn et al., 1993; Clark, 1992; Crane, 1991). Crane (1991) further argues that there is a threshold or tipping point on the quality of neighborhoods that result in particularly high dropout rates in the lowest quality neighborhoods. This paper reviews the theoretical and empirical research that attempts to explain why students drop out of school based on two perspectives, one that focuses on individual factors and one that focuses on institutional and contextual factors. Finally, the paper also examines disparities in dropout rates among racial and ethnic groups. It has been analysed as two different perspectives, one focusing on socioeconomic factors and one focusing on socio- cultural factors, can both offer insights into understanding racial and ethnic differences in dropout rates. This analysis also suggests that eliminating disparities in dropout rates among major racial and ethnic groups in the U.S. may be an unattainable goal because it would involve eliminating disparities in the resources of families, schools, and communities that contribute to them. May be that is why the national education objective of reducing such disparities is no longer discussed.

Thi Nhat Phuong Le (2008): Recognizing the role of education in the process of reducing poverty, the Government of Vietnam has put much effort to develop its education system. In this spirit, Vietnam has successfully achieved the universalization of primary education and is working towards the goal of having universal lower secondary education by 2010 and universal upper secondary education by 2015. Nevertheless, these gains have not been consistent in all regions and among all socio-economic and cultural groups. High dropout rates among different ages, regions, and ethnic communities are still a major challenge for the Government of Vietnam. To address this concern, Thi Nhat Phuong Le (2008) examines numerous determinants of the probability of dropping out of school in 2004 and 2006 for Vietnamese children aged 11-18. The paper applies a probit model to address the impacts of a child‘s characteristics and his or her family‘s background on the probability of dropping out of school during the lower and upper secondary school years. The probability of dropping out of school increases with age since children‘s participation in the labor force increased. The paper also documents the

39 negative effect of the number of children in household on children‘s educational outcomes. The significant interaction between gender and ethnicity indicates that the gender gap in dropout rates is expanding and girls from ethnic minority groups have higher probability of dropping out of school. Development disparities between rural and urban areas are another determinant of the decision to drop out of school. The growing gap in income between rural and urban areas has contributed to the difference in educational achievement among children. A household‘s income and the cost of schooling and their interaction effect are found to be strong factors which put economically disadvantaged children at risk for having their schooling interrupted at a young age. When the cost of education increases, poor children is disproportionately affected compared to children from wealthier families. Such diversity in the causes of dropping out of school indicates the need for similar diversity in the policy interventions.

Elizabeth Stearns and Elizabeth J. Glennie (2008): Dropouts may leave school because of a variety of individual and school based factors. A number of theories have been advanced to explain the reasons for students to leave school. ―Pull-out‖ theories assume that students make a cost-benefit analysis of their economic interest to remain in or leave school (McNeal, 1997; Mihalic & Elliott, 1997). These theories view the adolescent in a contextual sense, in that schooling is only one important part of the adolescent‘s life, along with family, the labor market, peers, and churches and other organizations. Out-of-school employment or family responsibilities, for example, might serve to pull these adolescents out of school. According to pull-out theorists, in the context of a low unemployment rate, students are more likely to leave school because their likelihood of finding employment is high. In 2001, the Bureau of Labor Statistics projected that most new jobs were expected to arise in occupations that only require work-related training, as opposed to postsecondary degrees (Hecker, 2001). Furthermore, the youth labor force (aged 16 to 24) would grow more rapidly than the overall labor force from 2000 to 2010 (Fullerton & Toosi, 2001). These kinds of jobs may be more attractive to teens than to older workers. The perceived opportunity cost for staying in school is high as well because they are forgoing present earning potential to stay in school. Pull-out theories also focus on family responsibilities, including family formation and care of siblings

40 and elders, which may have a greater influence on female students and students of color. In contrast, factors internal to the school, such as disciplinary policies or conflicts with students or teachers, might serve to push students out of school. ―Push- out‖ theories concentrate on the school factors that discourage students from continuing with their education. Push-out theorists argue that students leave school not only because of their individual attributes but also because of school structure (Fine, 1986, 1991). Jordan, Lara, and McPartland (1996) define push effects as ―factors located within the school itself that negatively impact the connection adolescents make with the school‘s environment and cause them to reject the context of schooling.‖ These factors can be ―structural, contextual, climate-related, or individualized‖ (p. 64) and can influence certain students to view school as an unwelcoming place. For instance, school policies that dictate suspensions and expulsions for students who miss certain number of days and then push the student out of school are one notable example. The influence of these push-out factors and pull-out factors may depend in part on the ethnicity and/or gender of the students. For example, female students may be more expected to drop out to care for family, whereas male students may also be more likely to be pushed out of school by disciplinary problems (Jordan et al., 1996). In sum, the study on ―When and Why Dropouts Leave High School‖ shows that the concept of a dropout process is inaccurate, as students of different gender and ethnic groups are affected by different push and pull factors at various ages and to varying extents. This realization can serve to help those who design intervention and dropout prevention programs for at- risk youth, as well as concerned school administrators who might like to keep these students enrolled in school.

El Daw A. Suliman and Safaa E. El-Kogali (2002): This study investigates factors affecting children‘s education at the basic stage level in Egypt using data collected by the Egypt Demographic and Health Survey (EGDH) 2000. Despite the spectacular increase in basic education enrollments in Egypt, yet there are still challenges ahead before Egypt can achieve universal basic education, particularly for girls. Much need to be done in Upper Egypt and the Frontier governorates. In Matrou and Beni Suef, for example about 40 percent of girls never attended school, and in Fayoum and Assuit more than a quarter of girls never

41 attended school. Whereas in Lower Egypt, Behera governorate is lagging behind where more than 15% of girls have never attended school. Data on mothers‘ reported reasons for school never attendance and dropout reveals that direct costs of education, the opportunity cost of child time, child disinterest in school, school proximity, customs and traditions, and poor academic performance are significant reasons or barriers to children‘s education. The analysis of work and schooling reveals that children of poor households are significantly more likely to do work only or do work while attending school as compared to children of non-poor households. Link between quality and dropout reveals that quality matter and that quality of education in private schools is much better than in public and religious schools. Access to private lessons significantly reduces the likelihood of failure and repetition. However, it is only the students of the rich who have the privilege of attending private schools and they are more likely to have access to private lessons. Given the binary nature of the dependent variables (school never attendance and school dropout) a three-level logistic model has been applied with random effects for households and community to control for the observed and unobserved heterogeneity at both levels. Thus the results show that, among the significant predictors of girls‘ never attendance are age, household level of wealth, mother‘s autonomy, parents‘ education, and household ownership of farm/land and the percentage of fathers in white-collar jobs in the community. Whereas the most significant predictor of children‘s dropout is the grade failure/repetition, in 29 addition to age, household level of wealth, mother‘s autonomy (for girls only), parents‘ education, percentage of mothers in white-collar jobs (for girls only) and cost of education per pupil in the community (for boys only).

Factors responsible for children remaining out of school affect the child, family and the society to a greater extent. The implications of children being out of school still worsen the status of these children. Hence reviews related to the implications of children being out of school are very important and considered for examining them.

IMPLICATIONS OF CHILDREN BEING OUT OF SCHOOL

Shanta Sinha (2000): Among many other implications of children being out of school child labor is one important implication that virtually affects children out of school. A research study conducted by Shanta Sinha (2000) advocates of elimination of Child Labor rightly argue that making universal elementary education compulsory and enforcing it through mass mobilization to sensitize parents, punishing those who employ children at exploitative wages, and introducing an effective and functioning network of primary schools fully funded by the state is the only means of eliminating child labour. Further the study confidently documents that every non-school-going child as child labour. Further it is reported that children who are not in school are engaged in some form of work, and this is particularly so of girls. This study further concludes that the most effective ally in the elimination of child labour are the children themselves, good quality and meaningful education is the means of achieving this. The implication of child labour can be more deteriorating to any child‘s personality.

Gulati, Leela, (1986): Illiteracy is considered as a serious implication of children being out of school. A study conducted by Gulati, Leela, (1986) in the coir industry of Kerala where 19 per cent of working children have never been to school, concludes with the salient findings that a higher proportion of girls than boys are illiterate, the percentages being 21 percent and 15 percent for girls and boys respectively. But the percentage of school drop outs is higher among boys than girls. This can be taken to mean that a larger proportion of working girls than boys are not sent to school at all but of the girls who start going to school the proportion of those who drop out works out to be less than the proportion of similar boys. An interesting finding of Leela Gulati‘s study on child labour in the coir industry of Kerala is that while the proportion of illiterates is higher amongst girls than boys, the percentage of school drop outs is higher among boys than girls.

Zhang et al., 2007: Since education takes longer to produce a return on investment, only better educated parents are able to perceive the value of education. Therefore, parents‘ attitudes regarding an expectation for return on investment affect children‘s school attendance and persistence in school (Zhang et al., 2007). Minority 43 parents, who generally have less education than Kinh (ethnic group in Vietnam) parents, do not perceive lower secondary education as necessary for girls because the number of jobs for girls is limited and because girls will marry out of the family eventually (MOET, UNICEF, and UNESCO, 2005). The traditional attitude that a girl‘s job is to help her husband by doing the housework and to take care of the family remains an obstacle for girls attaining higher levels of education. In some rural areas where agricultural production with simple technology still dominates, higher levels of education become less meaningful and there is no motivation for children to stay in school.

Bhalotra (2001): Bhalotra (2001) offers a new approach to analyzing a household‘s motivation behind sending a child to school or to work. The author suggests studying the wage elasticity of child labour supply. Incorporating subsistence constraints into a model of labour supply, it is demonstrated that negative wage elasticity favours the hypothesis that poverty compels children to work, whereas positive wage elasticity would favour the alternative view that children work because the relative returns to school are low. This paper investigates the hypothesis that children work because their income contribution is necessary for the household to meet subsistence expenditures. A testable implication of this hypothesis, which is used in the paper, is that the wage elasticity of child labour supply is negative. Labour supply models for boys and girls in wage work are estimated. On conditioning for full income, a forward falling labour supply curve for boys is identified. This is consistent with the view that boys work on account of the compulsions of poverty. It is also shown that this finding is much less clear for the case of girls. Most of the existing literature has concentrated on modeling child labour as a result of household poverty. In this regard an interesting point is provided by Blunch, Canagarajah and Goyal (2002) who observe that there are asymmetries in the child labour-poverty link, as well as quite complex dynamics in the evolution of child labour and schooling and their determinants over time. The econometric findings suggest that child labour is responsive to poverty in the short run, but not in the long run, while child schooling is unaffected by poverty in the short run but responds in the medium- to long run.

Anker (2000): The author notes that it is important to realize that there are limits to parental altruism, especially for many poor families in poor countries. The author identifies six reasons for making such a remark. First, family survival for poor households may require income from child labour. Second, poor families benefit from having several different income sources as this helps ensure an income flow at all times. Third, some parents irrespective of income level are not completely altruistic towards their children. Fourth, family crises can cause children to drop out of school in order to work and help ensure family survival. Fifth, an important economic benefit that parents might receive from educated children – old age support – is highly uncertain (also expounded in Rosati and Tzannatos, 2003). Sixth, work and school are often combined.

Nelson Acquilano (2009): The author has written an article ―Dropping Out of School Affects Entire Community - Each Time a Youth Fails to Graduate, the Impact Affects Everyone‖. Dropping out of school has always been a problem that educators understood and tried to prevent. Most people though - even parents, do not realize the full repercussions. Graduation from high school is a real accomplishment. It is the culmination of years of study and responsibility, and is a yardstick for fulfilling future potential. When a youth drops out of school he or she limits his or her future quality of life. What people do not understand, however, is the degree of that limitation, as well as the degree to which it impacts upon their family and community. According to ―The High Cost of High School Dropouts, What the Nation Pays for Inadequate High Schools‖, Issue Brief, Alliance for Excellent Education, October 2007, almost seven thousand students dropout from school every day. Annually, it is estimated that up to 1.2 million students will not graduate from high school with their peers. Nearly one-third of all public high school students, and nearly one half of all African Americans, Hispanics and Native Americans, fail to graduate from public high school with their class. A student who fails to graduate from high school experiences a tremendous loss of income over a lifetime. According to ―Grad Nation, A Guidebook to Help Communities Solve the Dropout Problem‖ (commissioned by America‘s Promise Alliance, February 2009), their estimate places this at $250,000 less than a high school graduate would make, and $1 million less than a college graduate makes. Drop outs have a more difficult time finding a job,

45 and a greater tendency for unemployment and chronic and cyclical unemployment. Because of significantly lower earning potential, they have a higher incidence of living in poverty than graduates. They may live in poor neighborhoods, neighborhoods with poor schools, with high crime rates, and a lower quality of housing. They may have less medical and dental care. Those who drop out may also tend to have children who have less aspiration for education, or drop out themselves. The community is also negatively affected by drop outs, especially when the rates are high. Such a community sees higher crime rates, especially delinquency and drug related crime. They may experience other high risk behaviors such as alcohol abuse, drug use, and sexual activity. Specific communities may also see a decrease in property values, which can ultimately lead to homes which are poorly maintained, urban blight, and a transient neighborhood. Businesses need skilled workers. If drop outs are unprepared for the demands of 21st century jobs, businesses lose their most important resource – skilled labor. Businesses have to invest additional money for training or for replacement costs due to high attrition, and even higher property tax rates in these areas to compensate for decreasing home values. These businesses may have higher costs, suffer lower profit margins, and ultimately relocate outside that region – denying an important job resource to that community. Dropping out of school results in a loss of income taxes to government as high as $60,000 per drop out (―Labor Market Consequences of an Inadequate Education‖, Symposium on the Social Costs of Inadequate Education, Cecilia E. Rouse, Teachers College Columbia University, October 2005.) It results in increased social service expenditures and increased public safety costs. One estimate shows that improved graduation rates would yield a savings of approximately 10 billion dollars for food stamps, housing assistance and aid to the needy, and up to 17 billion dollars for Medicaid and health care expenses. According to the American Council on Education, more than 17 million people have earned their General Equivalency Diploma (GED) since the program began in 1942. A GED is a viable option in lieu of high school graduation, however, GED recipients do not earn as much as high school graduates – although they do earn more than those without the credential. But the GED does have ―secondary‖ status. Given two job applicants, one with a high school diploma and one with a GED, an employer tend to hire the graduate. Graduation from high school is a projection of the measure of future success for a youth. It is an accomplishment

46 and prepares one for a ―coming of age‖ into adulthood with adult responsibilities. Dropping out of school has negative repercussions for the student, his or her family, the business sector, and the entire community. Just a 5 percent rise in the graduation rate would save about 5 billion dollars annually by reducing government services (―Saving Futures, Saving Dollars: The Impact of Education on Crime Reduction and Earnings‖, Alliance for Excellent Education, Washington, DC, 2006.) In this regard it is incumbent upon the entire community, not just parents, to strive together to keep students in school and help them graduate. This is critical to help improve the quality of life for thousands of youth and families as well as for all of society.

Antonyraj (2003): A survey was done in two villages, Achamangalam and Kadirampatti, located in Tirupattur taluk of Vellore district in the southern Indian state of Tamil Nadu. The survey was conducted in two stages in 2001. In the first stage, a census of house listing schedule, seeking household-level information on demographic characteristics and the labour market participation of all (adult and child) members of each household, was canvassed in both villages. The respondent who was generally the head of the household was asked to classify each child in the household as student, worker, or ‗idle‘ (i.e. NWNAS). The classification was based on the respondent‘s perception of how the child had spent her/his time over the major part of the preceding year. Child Labour in India is ‗Visible School-less-ness‘ and ‗Invisible Work‘. This is corroborated by some evidence available at the macro level. All of this suggests that children in India begin to contribute to family income at an early age, and also that liberal estimates of child labour in the country may not be wide off the mark.

Further to reviewing the already existing pieces of knowledge about the implications of children being out of school, the researcher also analyzed to pin point the current scenario of children remaining out of school from various sources of available literature.

SITUATION OF CHILDREN OUT OF SCHOOL AND THEIR PARENTS‟ PERCEPTION ABOUT THEIR STATUS

The present context of Out of School Children in India is characterized by severe forms of exploitations, child labour, humiliations, loss of career prospects, illiteracy, poverty, abuse and vulnerability. The out of school children‘s parents perceive the situation of their children in their own way based on their experiences. Literate parents may be well aware of the situation of their child while the illiterate parents are ignorant about the forms of exploitation their children encounter. Few research studies have been reviewed in order to explore the current scenario of children out of school and also the researcher attempts to gather secondary data available relating to parents perception on situation of children out of school.

Jayaraj and Subramanian (2002): This paper looks at secondary data sources with a view towards presenting certain broad descriptive features of the phenomenon of child labour in Tamil Nadu, its distribution across well-defined socio-economic groups (classified by gender, sector of origin, caste), and its dispersal across space. An attempt is made to circumvent the definitional inadequacy of the existing child labour estimates by estimating the numbers of children who constitute the (statistically) ‗invisible‘ workers. This is done by counting the numbers of children in the school-going age group who are listed as neither workers nor attending school. Workforce Participation Rate (WPR) – is defined as the ratio of the number of workers in the age group 5-14. The estimate of the WPR under the restrictive definition understates the incidence of child labour under the liberal definition by around 60 per cent. Moreover, the categories of invisible workers and the distribution of children by sex across the categories provide a harsh commentary on gender discrimination. These various categories are children perceived to be too young to work or to attend school, children reporting disability and children involved in domestic duties and free collection of goods. On calculating the index of relative disadvantage for sub-groups within groups, the authors find that girls are more disadvantaged than boys, rural children are more disadvantaged than their urban counterparts, and children from Scheduled Castes and Schedules Tribes (SCST) are more disadvantaged than the non-SCST children.

Wu Zeng et al. (2007): Additional elder siblings erode resources for younger siblings to accumulate modern human capital, lowering the probability of being ever educated at school and reducing education attainment. By lowering the probability of attending school, elder siblings undermine a child‘s academic skills. The study underscores the importance of measuring sib composition in studies of human capital returns, a cross cultural approach in such studies, and the use of different indicators of modern human capital to obtain a comprehensive view of sib composition‘s effect on well-being.

Neera Burra, (2003): A study done by Neera Burra, (2003) at the Interdisciplinary group of the Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) revealed that while there is a demand for child labour, there is also high adult unemployment and underemployment. This study was concentrated in thirty residential localities of the upper Kote area where 46 per cent of the Muslim population was engaged in lock manufacture. The sample used was rather large. They did a preliminary house listing of 4166 households with a total Muslim population of 24,657. Later, an in-depth study was done on 562 households, i.e. 5 percent of the total number of households listed in the area by the Aligarh Municipal Board. In the course of this study, it was observed that there are many children who are earning and many adults who are not able to find remunerative work.

ECLT Project (2006): A baseline survey was conducted by ECLT (Eliminating Child Labour in Tobacco) Project (2006) to determine the nature and magnitude of child labour, the context and factors surrounding the problem, the perceptions of parents and children, and the possible solutions to this problem. The study covered 280 tobacco-farming families (132 in Angónia, 75 in Chifunde and 73 in Niassa) and 141 children from these same households (58 in Angónia, 22 in Chifunde and 61 in Niassa) in various districts of Mozambique. Findings of the survey summarizes that 80% of the tobacco-growing households had their children working on the tobacco farms. This represents 68% of the children aged 6 to 14 years old. The list of reasons given for not sending children to school was the distance from school (40.0%) followed by the failure of meeting cost requirements (20.7%) and early marriage and pregnancy (20%). Indeed, destitution was found to be a major

49 cause for non-schooled children. Unsuccessful tobacco-growing households (those who did not make a benefit or even had a debt with the tobacco companies in 2005) were more likely to have their children aged 6 to 14 out of school than successful farmers (39.6% vs. 17.7%). The perception of parents was that combining school with work was a more productive way for children to spend their day. The main reasons given by parents for putting their children to work were: ―to help/increase the work force‖ (39%) and ―to learn‖ (23%). In general, they genuinely believed that they were doing the best for their children by putting them to work, claiming it was the children‘s‘ ―duty‖ to help the family. Children obey out of a sense of obligation to the family. It seemed that a sort of cultural value had been established for children to participate in all family activities in order to gain knowledge and be prepared for their future life. Parents and their children were not at all aware of the hazards that the work involved. Besides the role culture plays in justifying child work on small- scale tobacco-growing, it was clear that some parents also wanted their children to work on the farm because they could save up on hiring non-family workers. While the parents might be aware of the benefits of schooling, it appeared that they made little effort in encouraging the children to attend school as indicated by school teachers. Limited access to primary school and poverty seemed to aggravate the non- attendance and favour child work.

Chriartle Christine A. (2005): Delinquency is observed as a common issue among the children out of school. A study conducted by Chriartle Christine A. (2005) Breaking the school to prison pipeline, identifies school risk and protective factors for youth delinquency. Academic failure, exclusionary discipline practices, and dropout have been identified as key elements in a ―school to prison pipeline‖. Although a strong body of research exists on the risks for delinquency, few studies have attempted to understand the variables within schools that exacerbate or counteract these risks. They conducted three multi method studies that examined three school characteristics related to delinquency like academic failure, suspension, and dropout at the elementary, middle and high school levels respectively. They compared schools that were high performing with respect to each of these characteristics. Results suggest that school level characteristics can help minimize the risks for youth delinquency. The majority of youth involved in court have

50 experienced academic failure, school exclusion, and dropout. Their findings had conjunction with those of their researchers, identified school based policies and practices that may exacerbate or mitigate the risks for court involvement among youth. The results of the studies suggest that such school level characteristics as supportive leadership, dedicated and congenial staff, school behaviour management and effective academic instruction can help minimize the risks for youth delinquency.

Frick, Paul, J. (2002): A study conducted by Frick, Paul, J. (2002), to understand the association between parent and child antisocial disorders, including antisocial personality disorder and conduct disorder. Sex specific differences have been found with mothers of children (with conduct disorder) often showing antisocial behaviour that is below a diagnostic threshold or showing high rates of somatization symptoms. The study then focuses on the theoretical models to explain the mechanisms involved in the intergenerational link between parent and child antisocial disorders and on data that are either consistent or inconsistent with these explanations. The study also reveals potential role of heredity and on predispositions that place a person at risk for showing severe antisocial behaviours passed from parent to child through genetic mechanisms. The second model emphasizes the role of observation learning in the development of aggression and antisocial behaviour. A third model emphasizes the disruptive effects that an antisocial parent can have on the family environment and socialization of the children.

Singh, A. (1984): An attempt has been made by Singh, A. (1984) to study the home situation, the parent child relationship and the personality pattern, in terms of extraversion, neuroticism and manifest aggression, value orientation and social adjustment of runaway girls in the Indian setting. The sample comprised of 100 female subjects divided into two groups. One group consisted of 50 girls who had run away from home at least once, and were residents of a delinquent girls‘ home. The other group of 50 girls who had never run away from home was selected from the local government schools. The two groups were matched on age, education, and family size. The subjects were given the following tests: EPI (Eysenck and Eysenck, 1968), NSQ (Scheier and Cattell, 1961) and an inventory to evaluate value orientation, manifest aggression and social maladjustment. Results suggested that run

51 away girls seem to have a personality pattern distinct from non-run away girls, and strikingly similar to that of delinquents. Their home situation was found to be grossly unsatisfying. Also revealed, was a clear cut disturbance in the parent child relationship.

Singh, O.P., and Agrawal, P. (1986): A study conducted by Singh, O.P., and Agrawal, P. (1986) some important familial factors in the home environment that lead a child to delinquency is examined. The sample comprised 150 delinquents and 150 delinquent adolescent boys in the age group 11 to 16 years. The delinquents were from an approved school of Varanasi. Both the groups were matched for age, gender, education, socio-economic status, and place of habitation. A Semi-structured interview schedule (Agrawal and Singh, 1982) the Rorschach Test and an adaptation of Offer‘s Self-image Questionnaire (Agrawal and Mishra, 1982), were the tools used. The data was analyzed using the chi-square test. The results for the family demographic variables indicated that a significant association existed for birth order and delinquency (higher proportion of delinquents were first and second born as compared to the non-delinquents). Further, the percentage of delinquents who experienced parental loss due to death or separation was higher as compared to the non delinquents. The delinquents also reported experiencing severe to moderate disciplinary practices at their homes. The results regarding interpersonal relationships indicated that a significantly higher percentage of delinquents reported poor or indifferent relationships between their parents, poor relations with their parents, and experienced the feeling of rejection from their parents as compared to their non- delinquent counterparts. The need for family counseling and appropriate rehabilitation of the delinquents is discussed.

Dassi, A.,and Khan, M.Z. (2000): In one study conducted by Dassi, A.,and Khan, M.Z. (2000), family is considered as the most important agent for social control of children that transmits societal values. However, slum families need not necessarily conform to these. The study considered the socio-economic characteristics of slum households, nature and extent of anti-social, pre-delinquent, and delinquent behaviour among children, and examined corresponding reaction of parents. The eldest male child (8-16) and one of the parents from 100 randomly

52 selected households in a slum neighborhood were interviewed using a pre-tested, vernacular schedule. Results using percentages and chi-square revealed that juveniles were between 8 and 13 to 5 and 16 years, belonging mainly to Muslim families followed by Hindus. Their parents were mostly illiterate and involved in daily wage jobs. The children were either studying in primary / middle level or were dropouts with a large proportion of children supplementing the family income. Anti-social behaviour such as use of abusive language, fighting with siblings, and returning home late was most prevalent (13-15 years), followed by pre-delinquent behaviour such as testing, group fights, tobacco use, and pick-pocketing. Gambling and stealing were more prevalent in the younger children (8-13 years). Reaction to anti-social and pre-delinquent behaviour by parents was strong but was tolerant regarding delinquent behaviour. The author highlights the need for sensitizing parents on social / antisocial behaviour and providing proactive guidance for children.

Thi Nhat Phuong Le (2008): The parents‘ perception of the value of education may increase the child‘s probability of school retention. Thi Nhat Phuong Le (2008) has documented that since it is difficult to measure parental attitude to schooling, his paper uses parents‘ education level instead, assuming that parents who have more education will appreciate education more. Since education takes longer to produce a return on investment, only better educated parents are able to perceive the value of education. Since some parents do not recognize the returns on education, they believe that letting their children work brings more benefit than schooling. Although people in difficult living conditions are provided free-of-charge textbooks and study aids by the government, the limited perception of the value of education prohibits children from continuing their schooling.

Charles Desforges with Alberto Abouchaar (2003): Research also establishes that parental involvement has a significant effect on children‘s achievement and adjustment even after all other factors(such as social class, maternal education and poverty) have been take out of the equation between children‘s aptitudes and their achievement. Professor Charles Desforges with Alberto Abouchaar (2003) have reviewed the differences in parental involvement have a much bigger impact on achievement than differences associated with the effects of

53 school in the primary age range. Parental involvement continues to have a significant effect through the age range although the impact for older children becomes more evident in staying on rates and educational aspirations than as measured achievement. Of the many forms of parental involvement, it is the ‗at-home‘ relationships and modeling of aspirations which play the major part in impact on school outcomes. Involvement works indirectly on school outcomes by helping the child build a pro- social, pro-learning self concept and high educational aspirations. Research reveals large differences between parents in their levels of involvement. Some of the dimensions of these differences were associated with social class or aspects of poverty or health. Other differences are associated with the parents‘ values or feelings of self confidence or effectiveness. Some parents do not see it as the part of their ‗role‘ to be a partner in education. Others would like to participate but do not feel up to it. Yet others are put off involvement by memories of their own school experience or by their interactions with their children‘s teachers or by a combination of both. The scale of the impact of parental involvement is evident across all social classes and all ethnic groups‘ studies. There are however, important differences across ethnic groups in how parents model values and support their children. The research suggests a clear model of the impact of parental involvement on children‘s educational achievement. Every element of the model is open in principle to educational influence. On the surface it would appear that parental involvement could be developed through educational processes to effect radical enhancements of school outcomes.

Hoover-Dempsey et al (2001): The author took a different approach to explaining why some parents get involved in their child‘s education more than others. They reviewed psychological theory and related educational research on role construction. Hoover-Dempsey and Sandler suggest that parents are likely to get involved in their child‘s education to the extent that they see it as part of their role or ‗job‘ as it were. In regard to parents in England, Williams et al (2002) found that 2% of parents felt the responsibility for education belonged wholly to the school whilst 58% believed that they had at least equal responsibility. Presumably the remaining 40% were distributed somewhere between these values. The attribution of responsibility for education is a key factor in shaping parents‘ views about what they

54 feel is important or necessary or even permissible for them to do. Role definitions are complexly shaped by family and cultural experiences and are subject to potential internal conflict (is the parent a housekeeper/breadwinner/nurse/teacher for example). Sub-cultural differences (in terms of socio-economic class) are also evident (Hoover- Dempsey and Sandler, 1997, p. 13). Parental role construction in regard to their child‘s education is not the only determinant of their involvement. Their ‗sense of personal efficacy‘ is also implicated. This refers to the degree to which one feels able to make a difference. This in turn depends on a number of related beliefs, attitudes and skills. If it is believed that achievement is a matter of luck or innate ability there would seem little sense in expending effort in promoting it. Again, if it were felt that achievement were determined by ‗who you know‘ rather than ‗what you do‘, efforts to promote it would be worthwhile only to the degree that one‘s child could be put in the way of useful relationships. Lacking such connections but holding such beliefs, parents would hardly bother to be involved. Beliefs about achievement, ability, luck, intelligence and social interaction are all implicated in one‘s sense of efficacy. This foundation of beliefs interacts with a sense of personal competence. It could be that parents believe that coaching is a crucial teaching process but feel wholly incompetent to engage in this practice. If they have the resources they might buy coaching. If not, their involvement is materially truncated at least in this respect. Parental involvement, argue Hoover-Dempsey and Sandler, varies to the degree that such beliefs and competences are distributed as individual differences amongst parents. Those who have ‗can do‘ attitudes and beliefs that personal efforts create abilities will, at least potentially, be at the forefront in parental involvement. Those parents who hold contrary beliefs might be expected to be fatalistic about their child‘s educational progress.

When parents are involved in children‘s schools and education, children have higher grades and standardized test scores, improved behavior at home and school, and better social skills and adaptation to school. The cultural bonds largely affect effective community participation as a contributory factor in reinstating the children out of school with mainstream education. Therefore, community participation is very essential in the process of mainstreaming the children out of school. Without the involvement of the community mainstream process of any target population will not

55 be comprehended. Apart from the community participation, the awareness and accessibility of government progrmames to the disadvantaged section need to be monitored. Though there are various schemes being implemented by the Government of India, the reachability still remains slow. Various reasons such as migration, poverty and desire to earn income do affect the out of school children in getting covered under the schemes implemented by the Government of India. Hence the literature available regarding the community participation in mainstreaming the out of school children and also previous literatures having information about the reachability of existing schemes have been reviewed by the researcher and given below.

COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION, REACHABILITY OF EXISTING SCHEMES AND SUGGESTIONS RELATING TO CHILDREN OUT OF SCHOOL

Dr. Saeed-ul-Hasan Chishti et al (2010): The weaknesses and flaws in planning, organizing, staffing and controlling public sector education is responsible for a great number of children to either remain away to enter the schools or leave the schools in the mid way. In this regard, a study is conducted by Dr. Saeed-ul-Hasan Chishti et al (2010). The tools for the data collection include views of teachers and parents. The sample of the study was the teachers of public schools and parents of children studying in the private schools. The researchers themselves interviewed 25 teachers and 10 parents for knowing their views about public and private schools, and the reasons due to which they send their children to private schools. The sample of study had teaching experience of rural and urban schools. The researchers discussed with teachers and parents about different reasons of dropouts from schools, problems in private and public sector institutions. Pakistan is one of the most populated country in the world. Its 70 % population is living in rural areas. Poverty is the main problem of its people and this directly affects education. In addition, people see that younger generation is unemployed after getting education, this situation affects their mind and they tend to drop their children from schools. Quality education is the right of every child, but how it is possible to educate every child? It is the major concern of government. Government is trying to provide more and more facilities to the education sector, but there is a lot to be done. There are some more 56 issues about quality education. One of them is teachers‘ knowledge. Teacher‘s knowledge has a direct relation with the performance of the students. Government arranges different refresher courses and in-service training, but all these efforts remain ineffective due to management issues. It is a common view that private sector schools are imparting quality education. Teachers think that private sector provides more facilities due to which the children perform better, while the parents think that the schools charging huge fee that‘s why the children performing well, but these schools are only for elite class and out of reach for a common man. Parents are also in the view that private schools put extra burden on students and little kids spend more time in finishing their home work. In public sector, administration does not pay much attention to the enrollment. Public sector institutions do not campaign for increasing the number of students because the school management thinks they are not accountable for it.

Julia Modern et. al. 2010: Over the last few years, Save the Children‘s programmes in India, Brazil and Peru have been developing tools to help cost out the delivery of quality inclusive education. The resulting budgets and plans have been used to act as advocacy tools helping local communities to hold governments to account on delivering quality education. The tools rely on community consultation, which is used to identify what community members consider to be a quality education, what inputs are needed to provide this and how much these will cost. Inputs identified include children having enough to eat, allowing them to develop the cognitive ability to do their best at school, good teachers who are paid sufficient wages to keep them in the classroom, school buildings that are safe and comfortable, etc. Community consultations also allow Save the Children‘s team to identify which children are out of school and what they need to get into and achieve at school. In all three countries‘ communities identified children with disabilities as a major group of out-of-school children, and explained what they needed to get into school. The tools deliver not only a budget for quality education but also critical data about children who remain excluded from school. The Department for International Development (DFID) supported Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA), National Education for All Programme, has helped reach over 1 million children with special needs since 2005-

06. The programme has spent over £78 million of which is estimated approximately

£2.3 million supported special needs children. Although there are a number of examples of good practice in DFID countries, it is apparent that there is still a severe implementation gap between policy and practice in DFID‘s work on disability and education. In order to reach the Education for All goals and the Millennium Development Goal of universal primary education by 2015 it is crucial that a step change occurs in international efforts to develop education systems that are inclusive for children with disabilities. DFID can and should be a leader in this effort.

Alika, I. H. & Egbochuku, E. O. (2009): Drop out from school among girls is a global phenomenon. In Nigeria, girl‘s dropout from school for various reasons like early marriage, pregnancy, religious factors, socio-economic factors, school related factors and ill health. The focus of this paper is to investigate why girls dropout from school in Edo State. The descriptive survey method was adopted for this study. A checklist on reasons for drop out was used in gathering information from the respondents. From a pool of primary schools, secondary schools and skill acquisition centres in Benin City, four primary schools, four secondary and four skills acquisition schools were randomly selected for the study. Data was analysed using percentages. Poverty had the highest percentage (53%), while death of parents, pregnancy, ill health, inadequate teaching had the least percentage of 1%. It is recommended that counsellors should identify indigent students, who are likely to drop out of school as a result of poverty, and help negotiate some form of scholarship or financial assistance for them.

Annababette Wils, et. al, (2006): The international discussion about Education For All (EFA) focuses largely on national policies to get children into school. Many studies have shown that out-of-school children are disproportionately girls from poor rural areas and households (UNESCO, 2002, 2004, 2005). The regional disparities in education equality have been however largely overlooked, however. This study examines the data from 30 countries and suggests the importance of the sub-national inequalities in education distribution, particularly for designing education policies. In an ongoing study employing a regression model that includes region, income, gender, and urban/rural location, the Education Programme for Developed Countries has found there are independent regional effects on a child‘s

58 likelihood to be in school. The fact that geographical education differentials differ from income patterns suggests that there are independent, regional effects. These may have to do with different cultural preferences for school, or different lifestyles, but may also be the result of variations in the supply or quality of schools. The international discussion on ―Education For All‖ has paid too little attention to regional disparities that suggest that policies and programs should be designed for sub-national areas with sizeable underserved populations. This need is all the greater if poverty is disproportionately concentrated in particular regions. To make effective policies and programs requires understanding the characteristics of the underserved populations. Hence it is observed that the schemes are many times not matching with the current needs of the children out of school.

UNICEF (2008): The out-of-school study was commissioned by the UNICEF, Sierra Leone from February to July 2008 in response to the recommendation of in-country donors. In the Appraisal Report for the Fast Track Initiative (FTI) Endorsement, in-country donors urged the Government of Sierra Leone to strengthen their plan of tackling the issue of out- of-school children. This study is the first step in responding to this request. To reflect the diversity of Sierra Leone as well as the plight of the exclusion of primary school aged children in all four regions, 9 pilot districts were selected representing 54 communities throughout the country. The selected pilot sites represented both rural and urban communities embodying a broad range of possible scenarios found within the country. The out-of- school study was conducted to establish baseline information on the broad and complex factors resulting in primary school aged out-of-school children. It further delves into ways of increasing children‘s access to safe, child friendly schools, which provides quality education and looks at other opportunities to help improve the lives of ―older‖ non-schooling children. The out-of-school study endeavours to support the Government of Sierra Leone (GOSL) in its thrust to achieve the Universal Primary Education (UPE) goal while shedding light on the lives of an estimated 300,000 primary school aged out-of-school children throughout Sierra Leone. As a result, this study has shown that poverty is the leading factor in excluding children from education, something which perpetuates the cycle of marginalization and hardship. Innovative ways of reaching out to the last 30% of primary school aged, out-of-

59 school children, must be a major priority for all stakeholders. A two-pronged approach, providing immediate and long-term solutions is necessary to assist the most vulnerable families. The overlapping and complex problems associated with the dropping out of primary school aged children, may in reality require a combination of various approaches. Inter-sectoral cooperation from key actors, community ownership and the promotion of social responsibility through the creation of social protection schemes are all vital in ensuring education reaches the most marginalised households. This is something, which if performed correctly, will enable those living below the poverty line to send their children to school and fully participate in the education process for the duration of the primary school education cycle.

Dr. J.N.S. Mutanyatta: The study provides baseline data on out-of-school children in Zanzibar, categorized into those who never attended formal school and those who dropped out of school at almost any level from standard one to form two. In both cases, specific reasons for never attending school and dropping out of school are provided. The study looks at underlying factors, such as parents' level of education, the contrast between urban and rural areas, the gender issue, etc., and puts forward some alternatives. The author, Dr. J.N.S. Mutanyatta describes the Learning Skills Development Project, which has developed alternative teaching content and methods related to real life and providing preparation for subsequent employment. At the centre of the debate is the problem of widespread abject poverty for the majority of Zanzibaris, with income below 1,000/ = Tanzania shillings per day (below one US dollar). The worst affected are peasants engaged in agriculture and fishing. Thus, poverty and lack of access to educational opportunities are linked in Zanzibar. Poverty has its inherent historical socio-economic structure, originating in the slave trade and colonialism. Visible hardship and apparent deprivation reveal astonishingly widespread illiteracy among parents of out-of-school children, especially among mothers (i.e. women). An integrated curriculum, characterized by competence-based modules in a variety of vocational skills/trades to fit the basic learning needs of out- of-school children, is proposed by the study. Essentially, the integrated curriculum proposes that skills development, literacy and numeracy should start concurrently, with the content of literacy and numeracy being derived from or influenced by the trades/businesses or skills inherent in income-generating and economic activities. The

60 provision of an alternative learning skills development project for out-of-school children, though viable, poses enormous challenges for the Government of Zanzibar, not only in terms of the poverty of its citizens but also due to a fragile national economy and widespread illiteracy among the majority of adults; Education For All (EFA) is still a distant dream in Zanzibar. Both the formal and non-formal education sectors need to open their doors freely so as to meet the basic learning needs of out- of-school children. Africa lags far behind in achieving EFA. Both political will and equitable allocation of resources for EFA - financial and material - are mandatory.

Khalid Massa et. al. (2008): The school system provides an opportunity for health services to reach children in a cost-efficient way. However, it may be difficult to reach all children through schools. In schistosomiasis (infection), TDR (a special programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases under WHO) has placed emphasis on reaching non-enrolled, out-of-school children, who often have higher infection levels than children who attend school regularly. Results from a study in Egypt show that out-of-school children can be reached through schools. A very high proportion (88.5%) of children not enrolled in school was willing to visit a school to get free treatment for schistosomiasis. Children living near the school were more likely to visit for treatment than those living farther away and younger children were more likely to visit than older children. Mass chemotherapy is the most cost- effective way to treat out-of-school children through schools. If the government were to implement a programme for treating out-of-school children through the school system, results suggest that it would be more efficient and cost-effective to offer mass chemotherapy (treating all children) rather than selective treatment (treating infected children only, identified by prior screening) in areas of moderate to high prevalence. The Egyptian Ministry of Health and Population has, for some time, been implementing a school-based treatment programme for schistosomiasis based on selective treatment of children. Previous studies have shown that between 15-60% of children miss this treatment through not being enrolled in school. Results from the recent study suggest that implementing a programme based on mass chemotherapy would result in fewer children missing treatment. Thus, combining a school-based approach and a Treatment approach in the control of schistosomiasis and STH (Soil- Transmitted-Helminthia) could be a more comprehensive approach. The same

61 practice can be applicable for implementation of any other welfare programme for the poor children and their family through the schools which will be helpful to motivate the out of school children to attend school regularly.

Pratham (2006): The present study (Annual status of education report [ASER]) was conducted to investigate the status of education in rural India. The objective of the study was to analyze learning level of children, enrollment and dropout trends in school, gender differences and school functioning. Data was collected through household level interviews, testing of children to assess their ability to read and do simple arithmetic at Class 2 level, and assess the status of government schools. Information related to children attending school was collected from National Sample Survey and National Family Health Survey 1998-99. 509 rural districts were covered in ASER 2005; and data from 485 districts was used in preparing this report. More than 9521 villages were visited. A total of 33,2971 children in the age group of 6-14 years were examined out of whom 18,2671 were boys and 15,0261 were girls. ASER recorded that 93.4% children in the 6-14 years age group were enrolled, out of whom 75.1% were in government schools, 16.4% in private schools, and a very small proportion around 1% were enrolled in Madrasas, EGS and alternate schools. 6.6% children were not in school. 60% of the students in private schools were boys, and 52.8% of the out-of-school children were girls. Some basic reading and arithmetic tasks were given to children to check their learning levels. 35% of all children could not read simple paragraphs and close to 50% could not read a simple short story. 65.3% in government schools and 52.4% in private schools could not read short texts. The proportion of children unable to read was substantially higher in Uttar Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Gujarat, Karnataka and Madhya Pradesh, whereas Bihar featured in the top five states when ranked by Standard V children‘s ability to read. The big surprises were found in southern states where Tamil Nadu and Karnataka recorded high percentages of children who could not do the division problem that was given to them. ASER 2005 showed that enrollment levels in schools were very high in almost all states, however basic reading and arithmetic skills needed to be improved. A solid foundation in elementary classes was essential to build up a base for learning.

Margaret Caspe et. al. (2007): Over the elementary school years, children become more autonomous than in early childhood and develop relationships with a wider array of people, including peers and teachers. Children also begin to establish competence in a variety of domains. The three family involvement processes of parenting, home–school relationships, and responsibility for learning are critical to these developmental milestones. Elementary schools have responsibilities to encourage these family involvement processes, and when they do, schools can benefit from their outcomes. For example, parenting that is warm and supported by diverse social networks promotes children‘s social skills and appropriate classroom behaviors. Home–school relationships characterized by bilateral communication and opportunities for participation in school events and formal parent involvement programs are predictive of children‘s interest in reading and math, as well as improvements in reading and math achievement. Lastly, when parents take responsibility for children‘s learning outcomes—including by supporting literacy and homework, managing children‘s education, and maintaining high expectations— children‘s motivation and academic competence improves. This review underscores the importance of considering these three family involvement processes as policymakers, practitioners, and researchers endeavor to create systematic, developmental, and comprehensive programs for family involvement. With family involvement processes in place during the elementary school years, children will be poised for smooth transitions to middle and high school and for success in these even more complex educational settings.

S.S. Rajagopalan (2006): Review on ―Elementary Education in India, Where Do We Stand?‖ two volumes report edited by Arun C. Mehta, National Institute of Educational Planning and Administration. The report under review is a compendium of the District Report Cards (DRC), prepared by the District Primary Education (DPEP) and later Sarva Shikshan Abhiyan (SSA) administrators of the various states. This is a part of the Educational Management Information System (EMIS) which has been in vogue since the implementation of the Education for All (EFA) Programme. The DRCs are intended not only to take stock of achievements but also to identify areas of weaknesses and shortcomings so that necessary remedial and corrective interventions are undertaken to keep SSA on a sound track. The format

63 of the DRC has been well-drawn with all details of census data as well as other indicators to study the status of SSA. The report provides insight into the educational scene in the whole country. While there are positive achievements like provision of at least two classrooms for every primary school, the report also reveals the various failures in achieving the SSA targets. Single-teacher schools continue to exist in substantial numbers and it is not difficult to surmise that they cater to the poorest of the poor. The introduction to the report admits that many district reports suffer from incompleteness. A cursory glance will show that most district-level officers have not taken care to furnish correct and complete details. There are sufficient indications that many investigators had not fully understood the terms and nomenclatures used in the report. For example, the common term `medium of instruction' has been interpreted differently. Some appear to have taken it for mother tongue while some others have given details of languages taught. Sanskrit is given as medium of instruction by several districts, especially in Rajasthan and in Uttar Pradesh. It was strange to find, among other medium of instruction, Kashmir, Manipuri, Assamese and Marathi mentioned as medium of instruction in the rural parts of Tamil Nadu! The reviewer wonders whether any of these languages are taught at all in any of the primary schools in Tamil Nadu. Likewise, while some districts have furnished the absolute number of students studying the languages, a few had given it as percentages. Many districts had left it blank or given 0 as the number of students learning their own mother tongue or state language. Some districts have given figures for a five-year period commencing from 2000-01. Many had confined themselves to three years or less, thereby making it difficult to find out the growth pattern. In the absence of definition of terms, it is very difficult to subject the data to any meaningful analysis. The three primary objectives of EFA and SSA are 100 per cent access, 100 per cent retention and 100 per cent attainment of minimum standards. The report reveals that we are far, far away from achieving any of these objectives, for the data furnished reveal that not all those enrolled in standard I enter even standard II and most children do not complete primary education. If such be the case, it is to be wondered whether the constitutional Right to Education up to the age of 14 years will ever be realized in the near future. The DRC also points out that all the states offer one or more incentives to children in the form of free textbooks and noon

64 meals. It is a moot question why these incentives have failed to retain the children in the system.

Govinda. R (2011): As a result of the boom in private-sector education and the attempts to universalize elementary education, there has been an unprecedented increase in school enrolment in India. Still, large numbers of children, especially from disadvantaged communities, are deprived of quality education, which has thwarted the equitable access to basic education. The book looks at the problem of access to education in its varied dimensions, makes two things clear. One, that there are still a large number of children with little or no access to schooling, and two, that such children are concentrated in certain specific segments of society. This book explores such exclusion and the policies and actions required to develop an inclusive education system. It focuses on aspects ranging from malnutrition, gender and social equity, migration, drop out, and differentiation in schooling provisions to matters of teaching and governance. Combining statistical analysis and reviews, it explains patterns of access and exclusion. Outlining policy and legislation on access to education, the book analyses the way in which educational access is conceptualized and identifies areas for future research.

EXISTING SHORTCOMING IDENTIFIED TO THE BODY OF KNOWLEDGE

There are studies and interventions related to out of school children on various aspects such as factors affecting children‘s education, dropout children from school due to managerial flaws, children missing out on education, parents involvement in children‘s education, parents‘ perception on children‘s education, children at risk, etc. On reviewing these studies, it gives a clear understanding that focus is given on single and supplementary issue to understand the status of non school goers. The already existing pieces of knowledge is in bits and pieces and are found inadequate to give clear picture to the policy makers, programme planners and all concerned with promoting welfare among the out of school children. It is hard to find the comprehensive studies exclusively on situation of children out of school in order to hunt for integrated interventions.

Tiruchirappalli district is surmounted with the issue of children being out of school. Children are often found being engaged into child labour in the unorganized sector and also they are exposed to worst forms of child servitude, exploitation and abuse. Hence the general situation of children remaining out of school is found very pathetic and required to be addressed to protect lives of such children. Moreover research pertaining to the out of school children is too limited especially from the Tamil Nadu state. As there was lack of adequate comprehensively knowledge about the current situation of these children (at grass root level), the programmes available are not matching with the needs and demands of such out of school children. This has provoked an idea for researcher to sketch up this study on Children out of School in Tiruchirappalli, This situational analysis is an attempt to fill up the gaps existing in the previous researches and body of knowledge.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Children require adequate knowledge and skill gained from experiences in life obtained through continuous process of learning both in the formal or informal setting. School as a basic setting for individual development stimulates the process of socialization and integrated development through learning. Very often children tend to stay away from this basic set-up in which the process of physical, psychological and social development is affected. The reasons for such children being out-of-school stem out from variety of causes and prevailing situations encountered by children. The problem of ―Children Out-Of-School" is a social phenomenon that has a negative effect on the development of children and society as a whole, as said in the previous chapters.

In this chapter, the researcher has documented the methodology adopted to carry out the study. It includes the statement of the problem, significance and scope of the study, aim and objectives, variables, research hypothesis, conceptual and operational definitions, research design, universe and sample, tools and methods of data collection, pilot study, pre-test statistical analysis, problems encountered limitation of the study and the outline of presentation of the various chapters of the research report.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

In the last decade, a number of promises and commitments have been made by governments and the international community to protect the fundamental rights of the child, to end child labour and to provide all children with a free, quality education. In the year 2006-2007, the Sarva Shiksha Abiyan survey reveals that about 1828 children, who are remaining out of school, are shortlisted for enrollment in regular schools. Though the State has made steady progress in achieving the goals of universal access and enrollment but still incidence of non-schooling among children exists due to multifarious reasons.

Children remaining out of school knowingly or unknowingly are exposed to the dangers of exploitation, trafficking, health problems, poverty, abuse and violence. The female children (especially) are exposed to the threats of sexual abuse, unwanted births, torture, induced unsafe abortion, etc. These issues are very dangerous for children at tender age. Their future prospects are threatened to a greater extent which forces them to undergo severe consequences and vulnerable situations. This not only becomes a problem to the children themselves but also to all those around them by creating vicious cycle of imbalance life style.

Out of school children have greater likelihood to lead undisciplined lifestyles, addicted to tobacco smoking, engaging in anti-social activities / law breaking activities, exhibiting high risk behaviours, suicide and other similar evils in their future. They get drowned into unorganized labour early and are usually matured by the age of 11 to 12 years. They face a life of hardship and a sense of displacement. They are subjected to hazardous travel between villages and work sites and a life of severe deprivations. It is well known that they receive less nutrition and less care. The migrant girls encountered with unprotected work environments and they often have to do double the work at work sites as well as at home, as domestic labour. Apart from these, there are extremely vulnerable categories of children such as street children, begging children and children of sex workers who are leading a terrific lifestyle with socio-economic and psychological problem. There are also large number of out of school children who are not working and are commonly referred to as the ―nowhere‖ children. As a result, the children out of school are a disadvantaged group facing multiple issues with their family remaining underdeveloped not even to meet their basic needs or rights.

Although there are many government schemes and programmes available to promote education among children, it is seen that the availability of the benefits of schemes / programmes is poor among the general public. On the other hand, lack of involvement of the community in education has been one of the main problems for children remaining out of school. There is too little interaction between the schools and the communities. Unlike other social institution in the village, the school is not integrated with the local community in the present situation. Poorly maintained dilapidated school building, sanitation facilities, dirty school premises and ignorance 68 of issues relating to out of school children are some examples, which show that the community remains unconcerned about this problem. Community role is vital in facilitating the availability and reach of government assistance to the families of children out of school and thereby encourage them to send their children to join the mainstream education.

The present study is an endeavor to study the current situation of the ―Children Out-Of School‖. The eligible male and female children are out of school from the age of 8 years. They are mostly belonging to below poverty line family and disadvantaged groups. The factors that contribute to the situation of children to remain out of school are many such as ignorance and lack of responsibility of parents to take care of the children, fear of the school environment, examination fear, fear of teachers, absence of proper sanitation in schools, non availability of user friendly teaching and learning environments for children with disabilities, bullying by older students in school, battering by teachers, punishment, sexual exploitation, cruelty, voluminous work load and home work, failure in examination, poor interest towards education, absence of recreational activities in school, disability, developing interest in adult lives, fantasy, experiencing the pleasure of money earned out of labour and spending. Gradually, the children try to involve in unhealthy antisocial activities, when they are out of school. This has high negative implication towards the development of children and family on the whole. The parents perceive that in spite of their willingness to send their child to school the acute poverty, inability of parents to mentor the child and Childs‘ expectation on friendly school are some of the major kindling issues to be sorted out to combat the situation of children out of school. Thus, the researcher has made an attempt to describe the socio-economic demography of the ―Children Out-Of School‖, causal factors responsible for ―Children Out of School‖, its implications on the children and their family, programmes and interventions which have created an impact on them and the community‘s perception towards the issues of ―Children Out-Of School‖.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

Every human being has the capacity to contribute in one way or the other towards the National Development. Out-of School Children lack the opportunity for such institutional building. Research studies pertaining to out of school children are limited. Therefore, the efforts of inclusion of these children and their family in welfare measures still remain unmet. This research study intends to bring to light the various issues affecting the lives of ―Children Out-of School‖ and also the unmet needs of every out of school child.

This research study will facilitate to understand the information pertaining to socio- economic and family background of children out of school, physical, psychological and social aspects responsible for children being out of school, its implication towards them and their present circumstances besides the welfare measures available for them. This will help the Government to plan and apply user friendly interventions by which the out of school children enter the mainstream education. The study could be of immense value to the social workers and rehabilitation professionals in developing and strengthening innovative psycho-social models of treatment that would benefit the children at difficult circumstances.

By analyzing the situation of out of school children, the needs and demands of these children will be brought to light to help the policy level decision makers to understand the problems of out of school children better and to device appropriate remedial measures. This study will analyse the various government programmes available for these out of school children and help to understand the extent of utility of such programmes. Such understanding will contribute to designing programmes and developing protocols, which will match with the current needs and its reach to the out of school children and their family. This study will also provide an ample opportunity to develop a strong base for the children‘s personality and ultimately the quality of life of Out-of School Children will be improved. Consequently, the Out-of School Children will exercise child rights, inclusive education, enjoy the child friendly services, etc. It will provoke thoughts for imparting comprehensive education to these children, which would pave way to break the elements of vicious cycle and thereby it will help families to achieve self realization in the near future. 70

The study will additionally instigate the stimulation that can be given to parents for acquiring, developing and utilizing skills / potentials to resolve their evils and to take care of their children rights.

The findings obtained through this research will help the academicians to comprehend the reasons for not attending school, implications of not attending school for the child and the family, availability of government schemes to the families of Out-of School Children. It will kindle the vision of teachers towards adopting child friendly teaching and learning methodologies. It possibly will focus on motivation and encouragement that can be given to the community to improve their participation level towards tackling the issue of Out-of School Children and facilitating optimum utilization of the welfare schemes available for these children. This study would seek to contribute the programme implementers to understand the scenario of these children in a broader perspective and execute programmes appropriately on a humanitarian ground. Further, this could be helpful for the ongoing programmes of the government and private institutions to reach out to fulfill the needs of every out of school child and its family. It will moreover help out in sensitizing the general public about the issues, potentialities of the Out-of School Children as well as stimulating steps to combat this problem.

SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The study was based on the sample derived from the survey figures on children out of school declared by Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan scheme, Education Department, Government of Tamil Nadu. This study was conducted in all blocks of Tiruchirappalli district. It includes children out of school ranging in the age of 6 to 14 years (both male and female children) and their parents (either father or mother).

The major areas covered in this study were socio-demography particulars, economic and family status of children out of school, factors contributing towards children being out of school and its implication to the child and the family, perception of parents about the situation of children out of school, government welfare schemes that have reached the children and their family and the community‘s perception and their participation relating to the children out of school. Scope for the 71 present study was further enhanced since it has been dealt with the current situations prevailing in the life of street children, child labourer and migrated children. Inclusion of these children in this research paved way for getting better insight about the issues of the most vulnerable section of the society and developing definite measures corresponding with the needs of these children. The district administration may recognize this study, as it may give a clear and comprehensive picture on children out of school and their present condition. Accordingly, rigorous steps may be taken for inclusion of all such children in the district and to sustain action towards stopping the occurrence of children remaining out of school. The results obtained from the study might be a revelation for the Education Department about the present situation of children out of school, necessary modification that may be carried out to the already existing programme and viability for the out of school children to be integrated in the mainstreaming process.

The related areas such as out of school children with severe disability were not covered in the direct interview conducted with children due to their inability to respond to the interview. Further, the parents of disabled children, who were out of school, were covered in the Focus Group discussion in order to discover their problems relating to education / rehabilitation of their children.

This study was undertaken in Tiruchirappali district of Tamil Nadu State, the geographical area covers the center of Tamil Nadu where the possibility of children from south and northern region found due to migration for work, etc. The children and their parents of this study were from different backgrounds as seen in the entire country. The socio-demography and economic profile of the poor people dwelling in these areas were also similar to other region. The children out of school covered in this study have lot of similarities with the children out of school all over the country. Therefore, the study has the scope for generalization in other districts / states having the issues of out of school children other than the culture and beliefs, which may have variations. Further this study may be used as a resource material to understand the plight of these children. The findings and suggestions obtained through this study becomes the empirical data for the future researchers to pursue their research about out of school children. This present study also has tried towards motivating young researchers to conduct updated research work pertaining to out of school children. 72

The findings and suggestions obtained from this research put forth ideas for devising appropriate programmes, generating awareness and paving way for human development.

AIM OF THE STUDY

To analyze and understand the current situation of children out of school in Tiruchirappalli District.

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

1. To study the socio-demographic and economic profile of ―Children currently out of School‖.

2. To understand the various factors that contributes to ―Children remaining out of School‖.

3. To examine the implications of ―Children not going to School‖ for the child and his (or) her family.

4. To find out the situation of children below 14 years, who are out of school and their parents‘ perception about their status.

5. To obtain feedback on existing government schemes and programmes, and its benefits for ―Out of School Children‖ and their families.

6. To explore the perception and participation of the community (Parents, Teachers, Community leaders, Officials and NGOs) relating to children who are out of school.

7. To suggest suitable measures to prevent the children being out of school and mainstreaming the children, who are currently out of school.

DEFINITION OF TERMS

Child

According to Indian Constitution - Article 24, the term Child refers to ―any one below the age of fourteen years of age‖. According to UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, the term Child refers to ―any one below the age of Eighteen years‖. In this study, a person within the age group of 6 to 14 years is considered as ―Child‖.

Out of School Children

According to UNESCO (2005), concept of out-of-school children implies that there is a group of children that should be in school but is not. This group is recognized both nationally and internationally as primary school-age children (age of 6 to 11 years). This provides the basis for determining which children are excluded from education.

In this study the term ―Out-of-School Children‖ or ―Children Out of School‖ is referred to as the children in the age group of 6 to 14 years remaining out of school, who may be never enrolled (yet to start school), pushed out or dropped out / pulled out (stopped schooling before reaching the theoretical completion age for primary school) due to various reasons.

Sarva Shiksha Abiyan

According to the Education Department of Government of Tamil Nadu, Sarva Shiksha Abiyan (SSA) is a Scheme launched by Government of India with the support of State Government in order to work towards achieving universalization of elementary education through the initiation of innovative and alternative education programmes for the children out of school.

For this study, ―Sarva Shiksha Abiyan‖ (SSA) Scheme under Education Department in Tamil Nadu is a primary source provided preliminary survey details relating to population of school age children in Tamil Nadu.

Physical Factor (School Related Factor)

A Physical factor is a property that pertains to a physical trait.

In the present study, ―Physical Factor‖ refers to ―School Related Factor‖ of Out of School children, the problems faced in school, distance of school, transport facility, interest in studies, likeness towards school, etc.

Psychological Factors

SCF – Sweden and EPOCH (1993) – Children subjected to repeated violence may exhibit dysfunctional behaviour such as poor communication and they may as well display aggressive behaviour towards themselves and others. Child abuse and physical punishment can produce feelings of guilt, violation, loss of control and lowered self-esteem. Psychological factors are those that develop as defense mechanisms, created when there are dynamics in the individuals‘ family environment that are abusive, restrictive, neglectful, lack structure continuity, and create feelings of fear in the individual.

In the study, ―Psychological Factors‖ refers to Out of School Children‘s fear in life, deprivation in life, separation from parents, parents‘ motivation, incidence of abuse, etc.

Social Factors

Social factor means influences on individual behaviour attributable to the social values and/or behaviour of the groups to which an individual belongs or aspires to belong.

In the study, ―Social Factors‖ refers to Out of School Children‘s parental pressure to quit the school, activities while truant, problems faced in family, parents‘ migration forced to stop going to school, community discourage to stop studies, etc.

Anti Social Behaviour

Anti-social behaviour is behaviour that lacks consideration for others and that may cause damage to society, whether intentionally or through negligence, as opposed to pro-social behaviour, behaviour that helps or benefits society (Berger 2003, p. 302).

In the study, ―Anti Social Behaviour‖ means that Children out of school gradually estranged from the social institution like school and family, has low self- respect and are prone to absorb in self destructive behavior. They tend to be mess up their psychological growth and extend antisocial behavior even being dishonest and fear of life situation.

Life Situation

In the study, ―Life Situation‖ refers to the living state of children out of school. Girl children may be looking after their siblings, engaged in household work, etc. and boys are engaged in some kind of work; under-employed or unemployed, etc. Both the boys and girls do not have the knowledge, skills or confidence to seek new avenues for employment or self-employment, exploited in working area, etc.

Parental Perception

In the study, ―Parents perception‖ refers to the opinion of out of school children‘s parents on the steps taken or active role played by them to send back their children to schools, their children‘s reaction towards them, difficulties faced by them to send their children to schools, their children‘s unhealthy activities, barriers for parental support, worries, achievements monitored by them, etc.

Migration of Parents

In the study, ―Migration of Parents‖ refers to the Parents of Out of school children, who migrate from one place to another place for work or to stay in relatives house or change of residence and they may not know how long they would be in a particular place and lead a wandering life.

Village Panchayats

Village Panchayats or Gram Panchayats are the local self-governments at the village or small town level in India. As of 2002 there were about 265,000 Village Panchayats in India. In this study, the rural area covers 408 Village Panchayats. The Village Panchayat is the foundation of the Panchayat Raj. A Village Panchayat can be set up in villages with minimum population of 300. Sometimes two or more villages are clubbed together to form group-Village Panchayat when the population of the individual villages is less than 300.

In the study the term ―Village Panchayats‖ refers to the villages in Tiruchirappalli district. The universe of the study includes the status of children out of school in 408 ―Villages Panchayats‖ (Rural Area) in Tiruchirappalli district.

Block / Panchayat Union

―Panchayat Union‖ / Block or Panchayat Samiti is a local government body at the Taluka level area in India. It works for the villages of the Taluka that together are called a Development Block. The Panchayat Union is the link between the Village Panchayat and the District Administration. There are a number of variations of this institution in various States.

In the study, the term ―Pahchayat Union‖ referred as the blocks, which covers the 408 Village Panchayats in the District. There were 14 blocks in the district.

Corporation

A corporation is a legal entity that is created under the laws of a state designed to establish the entity as a separate legal entity having its own privileges and liabilities distinct from those of its members (According to Reference.com).

In the study, the term ―Corporation‖ refers to the city / town area in Tirudhirappalli district, which consists of two divisions i.e. Tiruchirappalli Urban and

Tirucihirappalli West. The universe of the study includes the status of children out of school in two divisions of the ―Corporation‖ (Urban Area) in Tiruchirappalli district.

District

District is a type of administrative division, in some countries managed by a local government. They vary greatly in size, spanning entire regions or several municipalities or subdivisions of municipalities. In the district level of the panchayati raj system (―zilla parishad‖) looks after the administration of the rural area of the district. The Hindi word Parishad means Council and Zilla Parishad translates to District Council. It is headed by the ―District Collector‖ or the ―District Magistrate‖. It is the link between the state government and the panchayat union (local held government at the block level).

The area of the study is ―Tiruchirappalli District‖ located in the centre of Tamilnadu State in India. The district includes 62 wards (as two divisions) in the Corporation (Urban) and 408 Villages Panchayats in fourteen Panchayat Unions / Blocks (Rural).

RESEARCH DESIGN

To accomplish the objectives of this study and arrive at better results, the researcher applied Descriptive Design with Mixed Method (Qualitative and Quantitative method). Consecutively to articulate better inference, the researcher exercised the triangulation technique to combine findings from different sources.

James P. Key (1997), Descriptive research is used to obtain information concerning the current status of the phenomena to describe "what exists" with respect to variables or conditions in a situation. The methods involved range from the survey which describes the status quo, the correlation study which investigates the relationship between variables, to developmental studies which seek to determine changes over time.

Newman et.al (2003), defines Mixed method research as a set of procedure used when integrating qualitative and quantitative procedures reflects the research questions better than each can independently address. Hence, both the quantitative and qualitative methods within a single study has its own strengths and limitations and it appears to offer a more comprehensive approach to find answers to research questions for the researcher in this study since many questions cannot be answered by a single method. Johnson and Onwuegbuzie (2004), define mixed methods research as the class of research where the researcher mixes or combines quantitative and qualitative research techniques, methods, approaches, concepts or language in to a single study. The focus on a single study is critical to mixed methods research. Therefore, the mixed method is applied in this study so as to arrive at better conclusions.

Qualitative research is a generic term for investigative methodologies described as ethnographic, naturalistic, anthropological, field, or participant observer research. It emphasizes the importance of looking at variables in the natural setting in which they are found. Interaction between variables is important. Detailed data is gathered through open ended questions that provide direct quotations. The interviewer is an integral part of the investigation (Jacob, 1988). This differs from quantitative research which attempts to gather data by objective methods to provide information about relations, comparisons, and predictions and attempts to remove the investigator from the investigation (Smith, 1983).

Triangulation or the use of multiple methods is a plan of action that will raise sociologists above the personality biases that stem out from single methodologies. By combining methods and investigations in the same study, observers can partially overcome the deficiencies that flow from one investigator and or one method (Denzin, 1970). Mathison (1988) suggests that all the outcome of triangulation, convergent, inconsistent and contradictory need to be explained if divergence is no more informative than convergence. Mitchell (1986) suggests that the widespread belief that answers from different methods or data sources can converge, diverge or deviate from social trust.

One process involved in corroboration is triangulation. Denzin (1978) has identified several types of triangulation. One type involves the convergence of multiple data sources. Another type is methodological triangulation, which involves the convergence of data from multiple data collection sources. A third triangulation procedure is investigator triangulation, in which multiple researchers are involved in an investigation. Related to investigator triangulation is researcher-participant corroboration, which has also been referred to as cross-examination.

By using the descriptive design in the present study, the researcher intends to describe respondent‘s socio-demographic status, factors contributing for children to be out of school, implications of children not going to school, parents perception on children not going to school, community participation with regard to children out of school, parents understanding about government schemes for out of school children and suggests suitable measures to safeguard the rights of out of school children in a clear cut manner.

In this study, both quantitative and qualitative methods were useful to address the research questions, as mixed method. Hence the quantitative research and qualitative research extremes were mixed together to generate a better viewpoint seeking a workable solution for the research problem pertaining to out of school children. The quantitative data were derived through the survey method. The survey method included 274 out of school children from both sex and their parents. The qualitative data was obtained by conducting case studies with five respondents and focus group discussions were conducted with 16 groups located in different places.

The data thus obtained was triangulated and the findings obtained from different sources such as survey, case study and focus group discussion were presented in the form of convergent and divergent findings.

UNIVERSE AND SAMPLING

The universe of the study comprised of 1828 ―Out of School Children‖, who were listed out to join up the mainstream education throughout the Trichirappalli district as reported by the Sarva Shiksha Abiyan Scheme (2006 – 2007). At the

80 period of conduct of study, the District includes 62 wards in the Corporation division (division 1 and 2), 3 Municipalities, 8 Taluks, 14 Panchayat Unions / Blocks and 408 Villages Panchayats.

For the purpose of drawing samples, which gave equal opportunity to all items in the universe, the universe was divided into different strata such as blocks in the district and sex of the population. The categorization of universe and sample is given as below:

Tiruchirappalli Name of the Panchayat Unions Male / Universe Sample District / Blocks (PU) and Corporation Femal (N=1828) (15%) division (Corpn. d) e

1. Lalgudi (PU) Male 40 6 Female 52 8 2. Musiri (PU) Male 18 3 Female 15 2 3. Thathaingarpet (T.Pet) (PU) Male 38 6 Female 26 4 4. Thuraiyur (PU) Male 27 4 Female 24 4 5. Manachanalloor (PU) Male 84 13 Female 67 10 6. Marungapuri (PU) Male 96 14 Female 123 18 7. Uppiliapuram (PU) Male 28 4 Female 33 5 8. Thottiyam (PU) Male 38 6 Female 41 6 9. Manikandam (PU) Male 108 16 Female 91 14 10. Anthanalloor (PU) Male 95 14 Female 47 7

11. Pullambadi (PU) Male 88 9 Female 67 10 12. Manapparrai (PU) Male 56 8 Female 60 9 13. Thiruvarambur (PU) Male 115 17 Female 105 16 14. Vaiyampatty (PU) Male 24 3 Female 58 9 15. Tiruchirappalli Urban (Corpn. Male 47 7 division -1 ) Female 27 4 16. Tiruchirappalli West (Corpn. Male 53 8 division - 2) Female 33 5 Total Male 955 143 Femal 873 131 Grand Total e 1828 274

The sample (No. 274) was taken by selecting an equal proposition of 15% representing the universe from the stratification was made thus giving equal opportunity to all items in the universe. The 15% was selected from different strata randomly using systematic sampling technique by taking every 5th item from the list as given by SSA Scheme. Hence, this method ensures there is no bias.

Proportionate Stratified Random sampling technique under the Probability Sampling Method was used to draw samples from the universe.

SOURCES OF DATA COLLECTION

The primary sources of data were collected directly from the respondents by using both the qualitative and quantitative methods. Self prepared interview schedule was used to collect quantitative data from the Children, who were out of school and their Parents / Guardian. Qualitative tools such as case study and focus group discussions were applied so as to elicit primary data from the children and key informants such as Parents, Panchayat President, Teachers, Officials, representatives from Parents Teachers association and Non-Governmental Organizations. The secondary sources of data were obtained from the existing pieces of literature. 82

METHODS AND TOOLS OF DATA COLLECTION

QUANTITATIVE DATA

For collecting the quantitative data, the researcher used quantitative methods such as interview schedule as the tool

Interview Schedule

Self-prepared interview schedule was used to collect the quantitative data from the primary targets, the out of school children. The interview schedule was developed in consultation with the experts, who were educationist, researchers, field officers and academicians involved in the planning and implementation of the projects and programmes related to Children Out-of-School. This interview schedule contains 150 questions, in which 85 questions were aimed in gathering information directly from the children of out of school about their socio-demographic status, factors contributing for them to be out of school, implications of children not going to school to them and their family and the rest 65 questions were intended in collecting information directly from parents of children out of school about their perception on their children not going to school and life situation, government schemes available for their families and benefits attained.

QUALITATIVE DATA

For collecting qualitative data the researcher used the qualitative methods such as case study and focus group discussions.

Case Study

Case study as a qualitative method in research excels at bringing an understanding of a complex issue or object and can extend experience or add strength to what is already known through previous research. Case studies emphasize detailed contextual analysis of a limited number of events or conditions and their relationships.

Yin (1984) defines the case study research method as an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context; when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident; and in which multiple sources of evidence are used. Case Study method gives a careful and complete observation of an individual or a situation or an institution. Efforts are made to study each aspect of the concerning unit in minute details and then from case data, generalization and inferences are drawn.

In this present study, the researcher conducted five in-depth case studies to analyze and understand the current situation of children out of school in Tiruchirappalli District. The case study was done only with the acceptance of the members. The purpose of conducting the case study is to understand the scenario of children out of school. The Case study was conducted in a separate room that helped to make the client understand the confidentiality maintained with regard to data given by them. Each case study took about forty-five minutes. Prior permission, self introduction, confidentiality building, rapport establishment and the purpose of conducting the case study was revealed to the client well in advance. The session started with a general discussion and then about the current situation of being out of school.

Focus Group Discussion

Focus Groups were originally called ―Focused Interviews‖ or ―Group Depth Interview‖. The technique was developed after World War II to evaluate audience response to radio programmes (Stewart and Shamdasani, 1990) Since then social scientist and program evaluator have found focus groups to be useful in understanding how or why people hold certain beliefs about a topic or a program of interest.

A focus group could be defined as a group of interesting individuals having same common interests or characteristics, brought together by a moderator, who uses the group and its interaction as a means to gain information about a focused issue.

A focus group is typically made up of 8-12 people. These participants were selected since they had certain characteristics in common that related to the topic of the focus group. The moderator or interviewer creates a permissive and nurturing environment that encourages different perceptions and points of view, without pressurizing participants to vote, plan or reach consensus (Krueger, 1998). The group discussion is conducted several times with similar types of participants to identity trends and patterns in perceptions. Careful and systematic analysis of the discussions provides clues and insights to how a product, service, or opportunity is perceived by the group.

The researcher identified the focused group discussion method so useful in anlysing the life situations of ―Children out of School‖. Pertinent qualitative information regarding socio-demographic status, factors contributing for children to be out of school, implications of children not going to school, parents perception on children not going to school, community participation with regard to children out of school, parents understanding on government schemes for out of school children was obtained through application of focus group discussion.

Sixteen Focus Group Discussions were conducted to collect qualitative data. Each focused group discussion had 8 to 12 members and was conducted in fourteen panchayat (rural) blocks and two urban wards. The members included in the Focused Group Discussion were Parents, Teachers (regular government school), Teachers (Special Schools for rescued Childlabourers), Panchayat President (local community), Field Officers (for Childlaour Rehabilitation Project), School Head Master (regular government school), Representatives from Parents-Teacher Association, and Representatives from non-governmental organizations / clubs in the concerned blocks. The members of the focus groups were in close contact with the Children out of school and they were from different localities of each block. Each of the group members were informed and gathered in a room (in each of the 14 Panhayat union and 2 Corporation division) that was absolutely free from any noise. The group members were welcomed and the purpose of the group discussion was explained. The moderator began discussion with a general and open-ended question about the topic. As the participants were allowed to open up their thoughts, they actively participated in the discussion and answered for all the probing questions then 85 and there. Then, a series of questions were asked by using the interview guide. Answers were collected from the members one by one thus giving equal opportunity to all. A separate person documented the entire process and recorded the minutes of the discussion. Each session was covered in an hour‘s time in a purposeful manner. All the participants were provided with refreshments (a cup of tea and biscuits) for their active involvement in the focus group discussion. Towards the end of the session all the members were thanked for their sincere presence, time and contribution.

PRE-TEST

A pre test was conducted with 30 respondents (including children and parents) so as to ensure the efficacy of the tools prepared for conducting the interview. Based on the pre-test results a few questions which were difficult to extract information from the respondents were modified and kept ready for data collection process. Similarly the interview guide (prepared for the conduct of focus group discussion) was also tested with the targeted group members in 3 localities (2 panchayat union and 1 corporation division) and necessary modifications were made.

DATA COLLECTION

The researcher visited the addresses of 274 respondents individually and was only able to identify 208 respondents available for the study from the survey of SSA. Thus, 208 respondents were included in the study. The researcher collected relevant quantitative data from 208 Children, who were out of school and their Parents / Guardian in Tiruchirappalli covering fourteen panchayat union / blocks and two divisions of the corporation. In order to collect qualitative data the researcher conducted Case Study with 5 Children, who were out of school and 16 Focus Group Discussions with its respective target members. The entire data collection process was carried out between June 2007 and December 2008.

DATA ANALYSIS

The collected data was entered, coded and analysed using the computer software. Tests such as Correlation, Chi-square, ANOVA were used to draw relevant

86 inferences. The qualitative and quantitative data were combined to bring out effective result using triangulation method. The analyzed data was interpreted accordingly and research findings were drawn.

LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

1. The study targets the children out of school based on report of ―SSA – Education for All‖ scheme 2006-2007, wherein the category of hidden child labourer, who are also out of school is excluded.

2. The out of school children with prolonged and severe physical or mental disability were unable to interview intensely due to their unhealthy status, which is also a prime factor for them to be out of school and it has different perspectives.

PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED BY THE RESEARCHER

1. The researcher had to travel in and around the Tiruchirappalli district to reach the respondents‘ residence mostly located in interior places.

2. As the respondents were children and their parents having poor educational background, all the questions had to be translated into Tamil. With the help of Tamil language teachers and friends, the researcher prepared an appropriate version in Tamil.

3. Interviewing with children and their parents for more time (ie. for each

respondent it took more than 11/2 hours) had made them to feel uncomfortable and uneasiness. Thus, researcher had to establish an affable conversation with the respondents before conducting the interview with them. Few of the children and parents / guardian took a longer time to answer the questionnaire, as it was very lengthy.

4. Though the sample size arrived for data collection was 274 in number, the researcher found difficulty in interviewing them. The reason ranges between demise of the child, migration of the family, age of the child over aged from the 87

date of survey conducted by SSA. During the conduction of this present research, the researcher was only able to identify 208 respondents fit /available for the study from the survey of SSA. Thus, only 208 respondents were included in the study.

5. The researcher had conducted the Focus Group Discussion directly in person in 16 blocks covering the entire Tiruchirappalli district. It was very difficult for travelling to the villages and organizing the stakeholders concerned at block level at their convenient time.

CHAPTERIZATION

The present descriptive study is divided into five chapters,

1. The first chapter deals with the introduction about ―Children Out of School‖.

2. The second chapter describes the related studies and literature.

3. The third chapter discusses with the research methodology adopted for the study.

4. The fourth chapter deals with the results and interpretation of data based on statistical measures to draw meaningful inferences and conclusions.

5. The fifth chapter presents the findings of the present study. The suggestions and conclusion are also presented in this chapter.

DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

In this chapter the researcher has analysed the data collected in order to fulfill the objectives of the study. The data has been presented in tabular form. The researcher has attempted to describe the distribution of respondents with reference to different aspects of the study. Various statistical tests such as Correlation, ANOVA and Chi-square have also been used.

TABLE NO.1: DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS‟ BY THEIR SOCIO- DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS

Table 1 presents the socio-demographic status of the respondents such as age, sex, education, incidence of non schooling, residential locality and community

Socio-demographic Characteristics No. of Respondents (n:208) Percentage

Age 7-8 3 1.4 9-10 8 3.8 11-12 25 12.0 13-14 172 82.7 Sex Male 114 54.8 Female 94 45.2 Education Illiterate 6 2.9 Standard I - III 34 16.3 Standard IV - VI 117 56.3 Standard VII - IX 51 24.5 Locality Urban 34 16.3 Semi-Urban 17 8.2 Slum 14 6.7 Rural 143 68.8

Caste Scheduled Caste (SC) / Scheduled Tribe (ST) 71 34.1 Most Backward Caste (MBC) 81 38.9 Backward Caste (BC) 56 26.9

It is observed (Table 1) that a majority of the respondents (94.7%) are in the age group of 11-14 years while only 1.4% of the respondents are in the age group of 7-8 years. This reveals that majority of the children were out of school during the period of their late childhood. More than half (54.8%) of the eligible boys were out of school compared to 45.2% of the eligible girls.

With regard to the education of the children, more than half of the respondents (56.3%) have completed their school education between 4th -6th standard. and 2.9% of the respondents were illiterate and have never been to school. Article No. 28 and No. 29 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child recognizes the right of children to education. Article No. 21A of the Indian constitution declares that State shall provide free and compulsory education to all children of the age of six to fourteen years. Though the Government lays stress on education as a child right, it is evident from this present study that still Government programmes are yet to reach many children.

It is seen that, a significant percentage (68.8%) of the respondents reside in rural areas, and that children dropping out of school are more common in the rural population. More than one third of the respondents (38.9%) belong to the Most Backward Caste (MBC) while 34.1% belong to the Scheduled Caste / Scheduled Tribes community and the remaining 26.9% belong to the Backward Caste (BC).

1 90 (a)

902 (b)

903 (c)

TABLE NO.2: DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS‟ BY THEIR SOCIO- ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS

Socio-economic characteristics No. of Respondents (n:208) Percentage

Monthly Income Below Rs.2000 64 30.8 Rs.2001 - 3000 83 39.9 Rs.3001 - 4000 48 23.0 Above Rs.4001 13 6.3

Type of Family Joint family 40 19.2 Nuclear family 168 80.8

Size of family

4 and below 21 10.1 5 - 6 121 58.2 7 - 8 45 21.6 9 and above 21 10.1

Care Provider 123 59.1 Both Parents 32 15.4 Father only 45 21.6 Mother only 8 3.8 Other Guardian

Parents‟ Marital Status Living together 128 61.5 Separated 43 20.7 Widow / widower 37 17.8

It is inferred (Table 2) that more than one third (39.9%) of the respondents earn a family monthly income of Rs. 2001 – Rs. 3000 while 30.8% earn below Rs. 2000 a month. 23.0 % and 6.3 % of the respondents earn a monthly income between 91

9911 (a)

Rs. 3001-4000 and Rs. 4001-5000 respectively. According to the new standards of the Tendulkar Committee (2008), the poverty line income for urban and rural areas has been fixed at Rs.3000 and Rs. 2250 per month respectively. As per this criteria, majority of the respondents in the study fall below this income.

A majority (80.8%) of the respondents belong to nuclear families while the remaining 19.2% belong to the joint family system. This reveals that the numbers of nuclear families are increasing and there is a decline in the joint family system. More than half (58.2%) of the respondents‘ family size consists of 5-6 members, 21.6% of them have 7-8 members in their family and 10.1% have 9 and more members in their family.

More than half (59.1%) of the respondents live with their parents and 3.8 % of the respondents do not have parents and hence live with their guardian. Regarding the parent‘s marital status a significant percentage (61.5%) of the respondents‘ parents are living together, but 20.7% of the parents have been separated and 17.8% of the respondents‘ parents were widowed.

TABLE NO.3: DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS‟ BY THEIR SCHOOL LAST ATTENDED

School Last Attended No. of Respondents (n:208) Percentage

Government School 153 73.6 Government Aided School 20 9.6 Private School 17 8.2 SSA Mainstreaming school 3 1.4 NCLP-CHEERS School 9 4.3 Never Enrolled 6 2.9

It is apparent (Table 3) that a considerable percentage (73.6%) of the respondents, attended Government school before they discontinued their studies, while 9.6% of them attended Government Aided schools. This shows that the majority of children in rural areas benefit from Government funded education.

92 (a) 91

TABLE NO.4: DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS‟ BY THEIR INCIDENCE OF OUT OF SCHOOL

Incidence of Out of School No. of Respondents Percentage (n:208)

Dropped / Pulled out – (Child in itself and Family reasons) 187 89.9 Pushed out – (School and Teacher reasons) 15 7.2 Never Enrolled 6 2.9

Regarding the incidence of Out of School (Table 4), majority of the respondents (89.9%) have dropped out from school. 2.9% of the respondents have not enrolled for education in spite of various programmes that are available in the Government and Private Sector to reduce the incidence of children being out of school. Table no. 5 provides information regarding the previous schooling of the respondents to identify factors directly or indirectly influencing the respondents to remain out of school.

TABLE NO.5: SCHOOL RELATED FACTORS INFLUENCING RESPONDENTS TO BE OUT OF SCHOOL

School related Factors No. of Respondents (n:208) Percentage

Problems faced in School Inadequate infrastructure* 65 31.3 Failure in exams* 81 38.9 Irresponsible teachers* 36 17.3 Inadequate care for Learning* 122 58.6 Drug use among schoolmates* 10 4.8 Long School hours* 5 2.4 Don‘t Know 6 2.9

Distance (home and school) Less than 2 kms 62 29.8 3 to 4 kms 74 35.6 5 to 6 kms 45 21.6 7 kms and above 27 13.0

Transport Access

Yes 77 37.0 No 125 60.1 Don't Know 6 2.9

Liking for School

Yes 144 69.2 No 58 27.9 Don‘t Know 6 2.9

Interest in Studies

Yes 99 47.6 No 103 49.5 Don‘t Know 6 2.9

Health - hindrance for schooling

Yes 44 21.2 No 164 78.8 *Multiple answers are reported by respondents

When asked about problems faced in school (Table 5), more than half of the responses (58.6%) said that the children felt that in the school there is inadequate attention to their learning, while 38.9% of the children met failure in exams. Nearly one third (31.3%) of the responses indicate that children were not happy with the infrastructure in the school and 17.3% articulated about irresponsible teachers in school. Most of the children from uneducated families and a poor background are accommodated in schools, which do not provide individual attention, attractive setting and friendly ambience and this is another reason which gradually puts them out of school. 94

More than one third (35.6%) of the respondents have attended school at a distance between 3km and 4km from their home. A significant percentage of the respondents (64.5%) had to travel for a distance of more than 4 km to reach their school. In the absence of transportation facilities, 60% of these children had to walk this distance to reach their school in the hot summer and during rains, which made the children to gradually drop out from school.

However, a sizeable 69.2% of the children said that they enjoyed the experience of going to school. This shows that though children have interest in school, there are other factors which contribute to their staying out of school. With regard to interest in studies, almost half of the respondents (49.5%) said that they were not interested. Some of the reasons for this could be that their parents were mostly uneducated and unable to supervise and monitor the education of their children regularly.

When asked about health issues posed a hindrance for schooling, it is observed that a considerable percentage (78.8%) of the respondents did not have any health issues, while remaining 21.2% of the respondents reported that health issues prevented them from attending school.

9965 (a)

TABLE NO.6: PSYCHOLOGICAL FACTORS INFLUENCING RESPONDENTS TO BE OUT OF SCHOOL

Psychological Factors No. of Respondents (n:208) Percentage

Fear School * 7 3.3 Exam* 138 66.3 Teacher* 75 36.0 Friends* 31 14.9 Way to school* 12 5.8 No fear 63 30.2

Deprivation* Love and care* 107 51.4 Food* 42 20.1 Shelter* 39 18.8 Health * 45 21.6 Education support* 88 42.3 No deprivation 30 14.4

Separation Anxiety Yes 45 21.6 No 163 78.4

Parents‟ Motivation Continuing education 104 50.0 No care for schooling 59 28.4 To stop education 45 21.6 *Multiple answers are reported by respondents

Psychological factors influencing respondents to be out of school such as feelings of fear, deprivation, adjustment problem, separation anxiety and parent‘s motivation are reported in Table 6.

A significant percentage (66.3%) of the responses indicates that these children had a fear of examination, while 36% of the responses obtained show that these children feared the teacher. It is very common in rural areas for teachers to be very strict and to use harsh physical punishment and this could have contributed to the fear experienced by these children. Further, the absence of pre-primary centres and coaching centres in villages do not provide extra support for these children in preparing for examinations.

More than half of the responses (51.4%) signify that these children felt that they were deprived of love and care from parents, while 42.3% of the responses avowed that they were deprived of adequate support for education. More than one fifth (21.6%) of the responses confirm that children out of school were deprived of adequate health care. Consequently, it is evident that a sizeable percentage (75%) of the respondents had encountered one or multifaceted deprivation, as these children live below the poverty line and did not benefit from the welfare measures of the Government.

When they were enquired about separation anxiety, more than one fifth (21.6%) of the respondents said they experienced this when their parents were away at work. A considerable percentage (78.4%) of the respondents however was not disturbed about separation from their parents.

Exactly half of the respondents‘ (50%) parents have motivated their children to go to school in spite of their poor family background but their children have been adamant to not to go to school. Some schools are not child friendly, and children keep away and find this to be a reason to be out of school. While more than one fourth (28.4%) of the parents did not give any encouragement or motivation to their children to attend school, the remaining 21.63% of the respondents‘ parents compelled their children to stop education.

9967 (a)

TABLE NO.7: SOCIAL FACTORS INFLUENCING RESPONDENTS TO BE OUT SCHOOL

Social Factors No. of Respondents Percentage (n:208)

Parental pressure to quit school Yes 49 23.6 No 159 76.4

Activities while truant Part time work* 109 52.4 Assisting parents in work* 46 22.1 Fun / Play with friends* 70 33.7 Unsociable doings and hide somewhere* 31 14.9 Watching Movies* 25 12.0

Problems faced in family* Household work / Siblings Care* 35 16.7 Mother or father not alive* 37 17.8 Parents‘ quarrel and cruelty* 45 21.6 Irresponsible Family* 32 15.3 Poor family income* 117 56.2 Disorganized Family* 40 19.2

Parents‟ Migration affecting Education Yes 44 21.1 No 164 78.8

Reason for Parents‟ Migration (n:44) Search of work 18 8.7 Engaged in work 22 10.6 Going to relative place 2 1.0 Begging 2 1.0

Discouragement from Community Yes 41 19.7 No 167 80.3 *Multiple answers are reported by respondents

From Table 7, the social factors that influence children to remain out of school have been analysed. Regarding parental pressure, it is apparent that a sizeable percentage, (76.4%) of the respondents did not experience any coercion from parents to quit school while the remaining 23.6% of them reported that their parents forced them to quit the school. This shows that, though most of the parents are not objecting to their children to continue schooling, other factors such as poverty, disinterest of children, inadequate educational support are influencing the children for being out of school.

With regard to activities of children at times of truancy, a little more than half (52.4%) of the responses reported that the children were engaged in working for wages, while 33.7% of the responses say that the children have spent their time on playing and having fun with friends. Nearly one fourth (22.1%) of the responses explain that they were assisting their parents at work. During the summer vacation, the children start to go to work for wages for some days. After reopening of schools, the children used to skip classes, as they are exposed to work and earning. If the school is ineffective in practicing child-centered education and child-friendly counseling, then this type of cutting classes will also continue among children, who are good in education.

In view of the problems faced by the families of the respondents, it was seen that more than half of the responses (56.2%) reported that their family income was insufficient to meet every day expenses. While 21.6% of the replies indicate that the respondents faced problems like parents quarrelling and cruelty and 19.2% of them said their family was disorganised. A little less than one fifth (17.8%) of the responses of the children shows that they had lost either father or mother and were deprived of parental care. 16.7% of the responses show that the children have stopped school due to house hold work or to take care of their siblings, whereas 15.3% of the

99 responses received was indicated that children have stopped schooling due to the irresponsibility shown by their family. 21.1% of the respondents reported that they stopped education due to frequent migration of parents due to work, begging, etc. Migration of parents is a key factor that affects children‘s schooling and forces them to remain out of school and get exposed to difficult situations.

It is also observed that a considerable majority of the respondents (80.3%) reported that their community was not a discouragement to stop schooling while 19.7% of the respondents stated that the community was discouraging them to stop schooling. The caste system like bomma naicker (upper caste) is keen to stop their children going to schools, which are situated outside their village, and they avoid school meals prepared by a cook belonging to a backward caste. Even if they send their children to that school they do not permit them to take food there. Girl children in particular after attending puberty are stopped from going to outside schools. These children simply keep wandering and their parents do not care about them, especially when parents are away for out-door and outstation work. Few of them are engaged in fortune telling and begging, like their parents.

100

100 (a) 98

TABLE NO.8: DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS ACCORDING TO THEIR EXPERIENCES OF ABUSE

Abusive Experiences No. of Respondents (n:208) Percentage

Abusive words by family* 32 15.4 Beaten and cruelty by family* 29 13.9 Scolding by teachers* 44 21.1 Beaten by teachers * 41 19.7 Rude behavior by stranger / employer* 55 26.4 Not abused 101 48.6 *Multiple answers are reported by respondents

Table 8 shows the adverse experiences of children which could have contributed to their being out of school. It is observed that half of the respondents (51.4%) reported that they have been abused in one or many ways. Among the responses received, 26.4% have experienced rude behaviour from their employer / stranger at work, 21.1% and 19.7% have been scolded and beaten by teachers, 15.4% have experienced the use of abusive words from their family and 13.9% have been beaten and brutally treated by their family. About half (48.6%) the respondents revealed that they have never faced any incidence of abuse.

TABLE NO.9: DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS ACCORDING TO THEIR EXPERIENCE OF BULLYING

Bullying Experience No. of Respondents (n:208) Percentage

Teasing for not Playing* 49 23.5 Fun about Physique * 32 15.4 Comment on Parents Behaviour* 22 10.5 Not bullied 124 59.6 *Multiple answers are reported by respondents

With regard to bullying experiences of the respondents it is observed (Table 9) that more than one third (40.3%) of the respondents have been bullied for several 101 reasons of which 23.5% of the responses state that the peers teased the respondents for not playing with them and 15.4% of the responses show that the respondents have been ridiculed about their physical appearance and the remaining 10.5% of the responses disclose that the children have been a source of entertainment for others who keep commenting on the behavior of their parents. More than half (59.6%) of the responses however, have not experienced bullying incidents at school.

TABLE NO.10: IMPLICATIONS OF BEING OUT OF SCHOOL FOR THE CHILDREN AND THEIR FAMILY

No. of Respondents (n:208) Implications Yes No n % n % Implication to Child Lack of knowledge to Read & Write 95 45.7 113 54.3 Disobedient and inferior 61 29.3 147 70. 7 Isolated and poor health 88 42.3 120 57.7 Networking with Non-School Goers 26 12.5 182 87.5 Family burden 139 66.8 69 33.2 Espouse Antisocial Behaviour 5 2.4 203 97.6 Loss of Childhood freedom and Self esteem 42 20.1 166 79.8

Implication to Family Complexity to continue schooling 23 11.0 185 88.9 Poor monitoring practice 186 89.4 22 10.6 Negative perception on education 59 28.4 149 71.6 Dependency on government assistants 33 15.8 175 84.1 Uneducated generation 108 51.9 100 48.0 Less progressive to manage cost of living 146 70.2 62 29.8 Lack of Identity / recognition 133 63.9 75 36.0

Table 10 shows the consequences which children and the family have experienced because of their being out of school. It is seen that a significant 66.8% of the children experiencing family burden, as they had to bring in additional income to support domestic expenses and 45.7% did not have skills of literacy. With regard to 102 the family, the majority (89.4%) felt that the families have poor monitoring practice towards development of children and thus a considerable 70.2 % opine that the families are becoming less progressive to manage the cost of living and 63.9 % of the families do not have proper recognition in the society.

TABLE NO.11: DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY THEIR FUTURE ASPIRATION

No. of Respondents‟ Future Aspiration Respondents Percentage (n:208)

Good person 19 9.1 Educated person 5 2.4 Professionals like Teacher, Police, Doctor, etc. 40 19.2 Workers like Driver, Mechanic, Self employer, etc 54 25.9 Married / Family Person 30 14.4 None / Have not thought 60 28.8

Table 11 presents the respondents‘ future aspiration. Nearly one fifth (19.2%) of the respondents aspired to become professionals like teacher, police, doctor, etc. More than one fourth (25.9%) of the respondents expressed their wish to become drivers, mechanic, etc. 14.4% of the respondents preferred to get married and settle down as a family. Nearly one third (28.8%) of the respondents had not decided anything about their future plan because they were struggling to satisfy even their basic needs at this young age.

103

TABLE NO.12: DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS ACCORDING TO THEIR SITUATION BEING OUT OF SCHOOL

Situations No. of Respondents Percentage (n:208)

Unhealthy non-school Activities Child Labour 137 65.9 Begging 3 1.4 Wandering or street child 29 13.9 Juvenile delinquent 2 1.0 Domestic Servitude at own house 30 14.4 Idle and Inactive 7 3.4

Nature of Work (Child Labour) (n:137) Goat or Pig rearing 20 9.6 Gem Cutting 5 2.4 Coolie 61 29.3 Quarry work 2 1.0 Beedi rolling (cheap cigarette) 5 2.4 Match box making 2 1.0 Domestic work 13 6.2 Brick kiln work 2 1.0 Construction work 3 1.4 Agriculture work 11 5.3 Catering and Hotel 7 3.4 Rice mill work 2 1.0 Automobile work 3 1.4 Work in Small scale industry 1 0.4 Other unhealthy non-school activities 71 34.1 (n:71)

104

Age when unhealthy activities initiated

6-8 5 2.4 9 - 11 62 29.8 12 – 14 141 67.8

Hours of work per day Below 2 Hours 11 5.3 3 - 5 Hours 26 12.5 6 - 8 Hours 60 28.8 8 - 12 Hours 111 53.4

Effect on Health Health Affected 159 76.4 Not Affected 49 23.5

Implications of childhood work Exposed to unprotected work environment* 109 52.4 Experiencing adult behaviour* 125 60.1 Undisciplined behaviour* 46 22.1 Insecured* 33 15.9 Exploited * 52 25.0 Starvation* 62 29.8 *Multiple answers are reported by respondents

Table 12 distributes the respondents by their current situation after being out of school. As per the information on current activities obtained from these children, a significant percentage of the respondents (65.9%) were engaged in child labour. 14.4% of the respondents were in domestic work, 13.9% of them were living on the streets, and 1.4% of the respondents were engaged in begging. It is seen that most of these children have become child labourers and antisocial elements, as a result of their discontinued education.

With regard to the nature of work done by the child labourers, it is seen that 29.3% of the respondents were working for daily wages, while 9.6% of the

105

105101 (a) respondents were engaged in goat or pig rearing, 6.2% of the respondents were working as domestic servants and the remaining 19.7% of the children were engaged in other occupations such as Gem Cutting (2.4%), Quarry work (1.0), Beedi rolling (2.4%), Match box making (1.0), Brick kilns (1.0), Construction work (1.4), Agriculture work (5.3%), Catering and Hotel (3.4%), Rice mill work (1.0%), Automobile (1.4%)and Small scale industry (0.4%). This shows that many of the working children were engaged in occupations that are risky and involve hard manual labour. Engagement of these children who are out of school in these unorganized sectors will affect both the physical and mental health status of these children.

It was reported that a significant percentage (67.8%) of the respondents was first engaged in these unhealthy activities at the age of 12 to 14 years while 29.8% of the respondents started these activities between 9 and 11 years and the remaining 2.4% of them at a very early age of 6 to 8 years.

It is also noted that more than half (53.4%) of the respondents worked for 8 to 12 hours, while 28.8% of them worked for 6-8 hours a day and only 5.3 % of the respondents said they worked for less than 2 hours. This shows that these out of school children are exploited and are made to work for long hours with minimal wages. It is also observed that a sizeable 76.4% of the respondents said that their health was affected because of their work

On analyzing the implications of childhood work for these children, more than half (60.1%) of the responses indicate that these children experience adult behaviour even from their early childhood, while 52.4% of the responses show that they were exposed to unprotected work environment. It was also observed that more than one fourth (29%) of the respondents experienced starvation or hunger which could impact their health, while 25% of the responses report that they were being exploited by others. This shows that being out of school creates a vulnerable situation for children. Children learn the behaviour of their culture from the instant they are born by means of the socialization process, which can be primary, secondary or tertiary. Primary socialization is perhaps the most powerful societal influence to be experienced throughout an individual‘s lifetime and is basically the process of being taught, through parental guidance, the rules and expected behaviour of society (Fulcher &

106

Scott, 1999). Further, secondary socialization occurs when children begin school and receive guidance from both peers and teachers. Finally, tertiary socialization occurs much later and incorporates the way individual learn the norms and rules within their workplace for example (Fulcher & Scott, 1999). Because of this process, it would hardly seem surprising that the socialization process may have a profound effect on the type of adult an individual becomes. Exposure of these children to work at such an young age and to adult forms of behavior thus would have adverse implications for their socialization.

Table 13 presents information relating to the respondents‘ opinion of engaging in activities, which have made them to stay out of school.

TABLE NO.13: RESPONDENTS‟ OPINION OF THEIR ACTIVITIES WHEN OUT OF SCHOOL

Attributes No. of Respondents (n:208) Percentage

Person responsible Parents 55 26.4 Child itself 109 52.4 Guardian 3 1.4 Friends 41 19.7

Initiation of these activities After stopping school 156 75.0 Before stopping school 46 22.1 Never enrolled 6 2.9

If feels activities are Acceptable 98 47 Not Acceptable 110 53

It is observed (Table 13) that, more than half (52.4%) of the respondents opined that they themselves were responsible for their activities when out of school. More than one fourth (26.4%) of the respondents, held their parents to be responsible

107 for their activities. Nearly one fifth (19.7%) of the respondents responded that their friends had influenced them to involve in these activities.

A considerable percentage (75%) of the respondents had started engaging in these activities after discontinuing school and 22.1% of the respondents were first engaged in them even before stopping school.

On questioning the respondents about whether the present activities were acceptable to them, more than half (53%) of them said it was not acceptable to them and that they were struggling every day. The Remaining 47% of the respondents said that it was acceptable, as there was no other alternative for them to lead their daily life.

TABLE NO.14: DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY PARENTS‟ OPINION ON CHILDREN ENGAGED IN WORK / OTHER ACTIVITIES

Parents‟ Opinion No. of Respondents (n:208) Percentage

Parents‟ Forced to work / other activities Yes 64 30.8 No 144 69.2

Parents‟ benefited by child‟s work / other activities Yes 130 62.5 No 78 37.5

Bad habits developed by child due to work / other activities Yes 81 38.9 No 127 61.0

The researcher has tried to elicit the respondents‘ parents‘ opinion regarding the activities of their children in Table 14. It is seen that a little less than one third of the respondents (30.8%) were forcing their child to work. Majority (69.2%) of the 108 respondents revealed that they did not force their child to work but that their children were influenced by other factors for going to work. Regarding benefits received by the parents from their child‘s work, it is seen that a significant percentage (62.5%) of the parents confirmed that their family had benefitted by their child‘s earning and the remaining 37.5% of the parents said that they did not receive any benefit from their child‘s activities other than the troubled behavior of their child. Thus, it is seen that more than one third (38.9%) of the respondents opined that their children had developed bad habits such as using bad verbal communication, behaving antagonistically, obliterate property, dishonest, stealing, refusing to cooperate, chewing betel nuts, smoking tobacco, drinking alcohol, etc. which parents were unable to control.

TABLE NO.15: DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS‟ BY PARENTS PERCEPTION ON CHILDREN‟S UN-SCHOOLING

Attributes No. of Respondents (n:208) Percentage

Parents‟ Reason for their children being out of school Inability to mentor child* 73 35.0 Generating income* 105 50.4 Negative behavior of Parents* 21 10.1 Unable to spend for future Education* 52 25.0 Influenced by unhealthy habits - Child* 7 3.4 Negative attitude of Teachers* 9 4.3 Lack of self interest (Child)* 103 49.5 Active Steps taken for Children‟s education Not bothered about Child‘s education 67 32.2 Fulfilled the basic needs of child 15 7.2 Have Taken the child to school daily 26 12.5 Attended parents meeting at school 13 6.2 Purchased study material for the child 38 18.3 Child is responsible to sit and study 49 23.5

109

Barriers for Parental support Child adamant to discontinue school* 59 28.4 Puberty prevented schooling* 7 3.4 Chronic illness / Disability * 13 6.3 Inadequate resources in family* 74 35.5 Caste prevented schooling* 8 3.9 Parents cannot support* 85 40.9 *Multiple answers are reported by respondents

From Table 15, it is seen that regarding parents‘ reasons for their children to be out of school, more than half (50.4%) of the responses show that the parents need their children to generate income for the family and so their children have dropped schooling. Slightly less than half (49.5%) of the responses reveal that parents feel that their children lacked interest in education, and more than one third (35%) of the responses seems to indicate parents‘ inability to be a mentor for their children as a reason for the non-schooling of their children.

When asked about the active steps taken for children‘s education, almost one third (32.2 %) of the parents expressed that they haven‘t bothered about their child‘s education and 23.5% said that they expected their child to sit and study even if they were playful.

More than one third (40.9%) of the parents said that they can not provide full support for their children to continue education. A little more than one fourth (28.4%) of the responses received from parents reveals that children were adamant to discontinue school and sometimes they used to threaten to commit suicide if the teacher compels them to attend school. 35.5% of the responses obtained from parents show that their children could not continue school education due to inadequate resources in the family and 6.3% of the responses reveal that parents perceived chronic illness / disability as an obstacle for their children to attend school.

110

TABLE NO.16: PARENTS‟ PERCEPTION OF CHILDREN‟S WORRIES

No. of Respondents (n:208) Children‟s Worries Yes No n % n % Death of Parents / Siblings 11 5.2 197 94.7 Family conflict 45 21.6 163 78.3 Parents‘ anti-social behaviour 19 9.1 189 90.8 Self inability 102 49.0 106 50.9 Incapable parents 178 85.5 30 14.4 Ailing Parents 18 8.7 190 91.3 Teachers‘ neglect 24 11.5 184 88.5

Table 16 presents the perception of parents about their Children‘s Worries. On analyzing the children‘s worries in their life, a majority (85.5 %) of the responses obtained from parents show that their children are worried about their parents‘ incapability, which affects them to struggle for their daily life. Nearly half (49%) of the responses of parents confirm that their children are worried due to their self inability to cope up with life situation.

Remaining percentage of the responses i.e. 21.6% of the parents revealed that their children are worried about family conflict, 11.5% said that the teachers‘ neglect led their children to face painful state, 9.1% of the parents‘ felt that their children are worried about their father or mother‘s anti-social behaviour, 8.7% parents revealed that their children are worried of ailing parents and 5.2% of the responses disclosed that death of father or mother or siblings have made the children to be too worried.

111

TABLE NO.17: PARENTS‟ PERCEPTION OF SCHOLASTIC DIFFICULTIES

Scholastic difficulties No. of Respondents (n:208) Percentage

Speech problem 5 2.4 Writing difficulty 6 2.9 Lethargic and slow learner 32 15.4 Disappear from school 14 6.7 Restless between work and study 2 1.0 Difficulty in getting along with others 127 61.0 Never Enrolled 6 2.9

It is apparent from the Table 17 with regard to scholastic difficulties, 61% of the parents responded that their children found it difficult to get along with others while 15.4% of them stated that their children were lethargic and slow learners. Other difficulties were fear of subjects, speech and writing problems.

TABLE NO.18: PARENTS‟ PERCEPTION ON MONITORING THEIR OUT OF SCHOOL CHILDREN‟S ACHIEVEMENT

No. of Respondents (n:208) Perception on Monitoring Child‟s Achievement Yes No n % n % Acquire skills by earning 47 22.6 161 77.4 Able to complete all household works 32 15.4 176 84.6 Supporting parents in work spot 10 4.8 198 95.1 Read at home in evenings with his friends 1 0.5 207 99.5 Handling deplorable state, as grown up obedient 3 1.4 205 98.5 person Perform well in cultural or fine arts at community 23 11.0 185 88.9 level Not aware of child‘s achievement 106 50.9 102 49.0 Don‘t know 4 1.9 204 98.0

112

112106 (a)

In an attempt (Table 18) to find out whether the parents were monitoring the achievement of their children after they became non-school goers, it was noticed that more than half (50.9%) of the parents were unaware about their child‘s achievement, as these children have missed the opportunities provided at school. More than one fifth (22.6%) of the parents felt that they (children) had acquired certain work skills. Likewise, some 15.4% of the parents said that their children were good in carrying out household work, and had acquired skills relating to family life. 11.0% of the parents felt that their children were performing well in cultural and fine arts at the community level and that they were able to see their child‘s talents. 1.4% of parents felt that their children were very responsive and obedient towards them at home and was a good sign of development.

TABLE NO.19: DISTRIBUTION OF PARENTS‟ PERCEPTION BY PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CHILD‟S EDUCATION

No. of Respondents (n:208) Person Responsible for child‟s education Yes No n % n % Child in itself 127 61.1 81 38.9 Parents / Family 131 63.0 77 37.0 Friends / Relative 13 6.3 195 93.6 School 90 43.2 118 56.7 Society / Local Community 59 28.3 149 71.6 Government 21 10.0 187 89.9 Nothing. It‘s a fate / health condition is bad 9 4.3 199 95.6

With respect to persons responsible for children‘s education as per Table 19, a significant percentage (63%) of the responses feel that either parents or family is responsible for their children to continue education in school, while 61.1% of the responses say that the child itself is being responsible and a little less than half (43.2) of the responses state that the school is responsible. More than one fourth of the responses (28.3%) say that the Society / Local Community are responsible for the children to continue school education.

113

TABLE NO.20: PARENTS‟ AWARENESS OF GOVERNMENT SCHEMES FOR CHILDREN OUT OF SCHOOL AND THEIR FAMILY

No. of Respondents (n:208) Awareness of Government Schemes Yes No n % n % SSA education for all schemes schools 69 33.1 139 66.8

NCLP child labour special schools 83 39.9 125 60.0

Scholarship / Stipend for education 132 63.4 76 36.5

Swarnjayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojana (SGSY) and 2 1.0 206 99.0 Swarna Jayanti Shahari Rozgar Yojana (SJSRY)

Tamilnadu Adi Dravidar Housing and Development 8 3.8 200 96.1 Corporation (THADCO)

Prime Minister Rozgar Yojna (PMRY) 12 5.7 196 94.2

Housing patta (Land Schemes) 48 23.1 160 76.9

Group house (Housing Schemes) 18 8.6 190 91.3

National Bank for Agriculture and Rural 6 2.9 202 97.1 Development (NABARD)

Self help group activities 129 62.0 79 37.9

Not aware of major Government schemes 62 29.8 146 70.1

Table 20 presents data regarding parents‘ knowledge and access to government schemes for children out of school and their family. On the basis of the responses received it is observed that a significant percentage (62.7%) of the parents had awareness about Scholarship programmes and Self-Help Groups. More than one third of the parents (39.9%) were aware about National child Labour Project Schools, 33.1% were aware about Sarva Shiksha Abiyan and 23.1% had knowledge of Housing Patta scheme. A little less than one fourth (22%) of the responses of parents indicate that they had knowledge about Government Schemes such as Swarnjayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojana (SGSY) and Swarna Jayanti Shahari Rozgar Yojana 114

(SJSRY) (1.0 %), Tamilnadu Adi Dravidar Housing and Development Corporation (THADCO) (3.8%), Prime Minister Rozgar Yojna (PMRY) (5.7%), Group house (8.6%), and National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD) (2.9%). Around one third (29.8%) of the parents are unaware of the government programmes.

TABLE NO.21: PARENTS‟ ACCESS TO GOVERNMENT SCHEMES FOR CHILDREN OUT OF SCHOOL AND THEIR FAMILY

No. of Respondents (n:208) Access to Government Schemes Yes No n % n % SSA – ―Education for all scheme‖ Schools 4 1.9 204 98.1 NCLP Child Labour Special Schools 5 2.4 203 97.6 Scholarship / Stipend for education 111 53.3 97 46.6 Housing patta (Land Schemes) 10 4.8 198 95.1 Group house (Housing Schemes) 5 2.4 203 97.5 Cooperative department and Nationalized Bank loans 4 1.9 204 98.0 Self-Help Group Activities 72 34.6 136 65.4 Flood relief assistance and Accident relief assistance 26 12.5 182 87.5 Not received any help under major Government 93 44.7 115 55.2 programmes

With regard to availing (benefits) government schemes it is observed (Table 21) from the data obtained that more than one third (44.7%) of the respondents‘ parents revealed that they had not received any assistance under major Government schemes. More than half (53.3%) of the responses indicate that these families had availed scholarship / stipend programme for education, while more than one fourth (34.6%) of the families had benefitted from Self Help Group schemes. Other families had benefitted from schemes like SSA–―Education for all scheme‖ Schools (1.9%), NCLP Child Labour Special Schools (2.4%), Housing patta (4.8%), Group house (2.4%), Cooperative department and Nationalized Bank loans (1.9%), Self Help Group activities (34.6%), Flood relief assistance and Accident relief assistance (12.5%).

115

TABLE NO.22: DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY COMMUNITY CONTRIBUTION AND SUGGESTIONS TO ATTEND SCHOOL

Community contribution No. of Respondents Percentage and Suggestions (n:208)

Community Contribution Received

Yes 64 30.8 No 144 69.2

Suggestions

Scholarship and stipend amount to all socio- 123 59.1 economically backward students*

Adequate services for disabled children locally* 35 16.8

Approach of teachers to each individual‘s 157 75.4 (children) learning*

Monitor by local leaders in providing assistance 169 81.2 to be strict and transparent* *Multiple answers were reported by respondents

Table 22 presents the community contribution or help provided to the children out of school to attend school again. It was revealed by the parents that a significant percentage (69.2%) of them have never received any help from the community for their children to attend school continuously. A little less than one third (30.8%) of the respondents said that they have received help from the community in order to make their children attend school regularly.

More than half (59.1) of the members suggested that the scholarship and stipend amount can be given to all the socio-economically backward students in order to motivate the children at all levels of village / municipal administration irrespective of the community they belonged. While few (16.8%) of the parents felt that the services / schools for the differently abled (disabled) children to be available in their local areas. More than half (75.4%) of the members said that in order to know the student‘s insight on subject, approach of teachers to each individual (children) is 116 mandatory. Majority (81.2%) of the members stated that all the families of out of school children to be provided with necessary assistance under the government programmes, which has to be strictly and closely monitored by local community leaders.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF THE DATA

In addition to the descriptive analysis, inferential statistics of the data such as Correlation, ANOVA and Chi-square have been applied for the analysis of the data gathered for the present study, that is, descriptive analysis and inferential statistics. Based on the questions in the Interview Schedule, an index has been created. On the basis of this index score, quartiles (Q1, Q2 and Q3) are calculated. If the score is below first quartile is called low level and above third quartile is called high level and between first and third quartile is average level. Thus, based on the low, average and high level scores the statistical tests Correlation, ANOVA and Chi-square were applied and the data given below,

TABLE NO.23: CORRELATION AMONG VARIOUS DIMENSIONS OF FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO CHILDREN REMAINING OUT OF SCHOOL

Dimensions School related Psychological Social factors factors factors

School related factors 1.000 0.398** 0.502**

Psychological factors - 1.000 0.574**

Social factors 1.000 - -

** P < 0.01

In Table 23, Correlation analysis is seen among the factors contributing to Children remaining out of school. The Correlation between School related factors

117 and Psychological factors is 0.398 which indicates positive relationship between School related factors and Psychological factors at 1 % level of significance. This indicates that the School related factors of Out-of-School children such as the problems faced in school, distance between the school and the home, transport facilities to the school from the place of residence, interest in studies, likeness towards school, etc has correlation with the Psychological factors such as Out-of- School Children‘s fear, deprivation, separation from parents, parents‘ motivation, incidence of abuse, etc. It is also observed that there is a significant correlation between School related factors of children out of school and Social factors of children out of school such as Out of School Children‘s experiences of abuses, bullying, activities involved while truant, problems faced in family, parents‘ migration affecting education, discouragement from the community, etc.

TABLE NO. 24: CORRELATION AMONG VARIOUS DIMENSIONS OF CHILDREN BEING OUT OF SCHOOL

Parents‟ Implication Reachability Incidence Perception of Children of Dimensions of Out of about Status of out of Government School Children out of School Schemes School

Incidence of Out of 1.000 0.522** 0.398** 0.543** School

Implication of Children - 1.000 0.331** 0.475** out of School

Parents‟ Perception - - 1.000 0.500** about Status of Children out of School

Reachability of - - - 1.000 Government Schemes ** P < 0.01

From the above Table 24, Correlation analysis is observed between Incidence of Out of School, Implications of Children out of school, Parents‘ Perception on

118

Status of children out of school and Reachability (benefits) of Government Schemes for the children and their family.

The correlation between Incidence of Out of School and Implication of Children being out of school is 0.522 which indicates positive relationship between Incidence of Out of School and Implication of Children being out of school to the children as well as their family at 1% level of significance. This points out that the Incidence of Out of School such as dropped out, pulled out and never enrolled has correlation with the Implication of Children being out of school such as becoming illiterate, unhealthy, separation, burden, inferior, earning, complexity, negative perception, dependency, underachievement and lack of social identity. It is also observed that there is a significant correlation between Incidence of Out of School and Government Schemes accessibility among children out of school and their family. This indicates that poor Reachability of Government Schemes such as SGSY, SGSRY, THADCO, PMRY, Housing Patta, Group house, Nationalized Bank loans, etc has an impact on Incidence of Out of School. Likewise the Incidence of Out of School have significant relationship with Perception of Parents about the status of Children of out of school, who were engaged in child labour, beggary, stealing and other unsociable behaviour.

119

TABLE NO.25: ANOVA FOR SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LOCALITY WITH RESPECT TO FACTORS RESPONSIBLE FOR CHILDREN OUT OF SCHOOL

Locality Mean SD F value P value

School related factors Urban 53.15 3.79 Semi Urban 51.24 4.07 1.251 0.293 Slum 52.07 3.29 Rural 50.44 8.78 Psychological factors Urban 16.79 1.90 Semi Urban 16.88 2.08 2.239 0.085 Slum 15.57 1.45 Rural 15.89 2.53 Social factors Urban 37.74 2.15 Semi Urban 36.18 3.59 1.760 0.156 Slum 36.64 2.37 Rural 37.03 2.33

Table 25, shows the differences between the Locality with respect to Factors responsible for children out of school. With regard to the mean scores obtained between the Factors responsible for children out of school and the Locality of Children out of School they do have some difference. Since the p value is greater than 0.05, there is no statistical significance between Locality of Children out of school with respect to Factors responsible for children out of school.

120

TABLE NO.26: ANOVA FOR SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CASTE WITH RESPECT TO REACHABILITY OF GOVERNMENT SCHEMES

Caste Mean SD F value P value

Reachability of Government Schemes

Schedule Caste (SC) / a 30.69 2.56 Scheduled Tribe (ST)

9.661 0.000** Most Backward Caste a 31.25 2.58 (MBC)

b Backward Caste (BC) 32.64 2.41

1. Different alphabet between community denotes significant at 5% level using Duncan Multiple Range Test (DMRT) 2. ** P < 0.01

Table 26, reveals the significant differences between the Caste of Children out of School with respect to the Accessibility of Government Schemes. Since p value is less than the 0.01, it is concluded that there is a significant difference observed between Castes with respect to Reachability of Government Schemes. Based on Duncan Multiple Range test, the respondents belonging to the Backward Caste (BC) have significantly higher level of Reachability to Government Schemes than the respondents belonging to SC / ST and MBC Castes at 5% level of significance. Also there is no significant difference between MBC and SC/ST Castes statistically.

121

TABLE NO.27: ANOVA FOR SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MONTHLY FAMILY INCOME WITH RESPECT TO FACTORS RESPONSIBLE FOR CHILDREN OUT OF SCHOOL

Monthly Family Income Mean SD F value P value

School related Factors

Below Rs. 2000 51.45 9.39

Rs. 2001 - 3000 51.61 5.69 2.145 0.096

Rs. 3001 - 4000 48.83 8.50

Rs. 4001 – 5000 53.77 2.38

Psychological Factors

ab Below Rs. 2000 16.61 2.16 a Rs. 2001 - 3000 15.76 2.33 3.772 0.012* a Rs. 3001 - 4000 15.63 2.54 b Rs. 4001 - 5000 17.46 2.18

Social Factors

bc Below Rs. 2000 37.66 2.14 ab Rs. 2001 - 3000 36.83 2.55 4.946 0.002** a Rs. 3001 - 4000 36.25 2.26 c Rs. 4001 - 5000 38.46 2.72

** P < 0.01 * P < 0.05

This Table 27 shows the difference between Monthly Family Income of the respondents and various dimensions of Factors responsible for children out of school. With regard to the Social factors for children out of school, the p value is less than 0.01. Hence there is a significant difference between Monthly Family Income of Children out of school with respect to Social factors responsible for Children out of school statistically.

122

With regard to the Psychological factors of Children out of school, the p value is less than 0.05. Hence there is a significant difference between Monthly Family Income of Children out of school with respect to Psychological factors for children out of school statistically.

With regard to the Monthly Family Income of Children out of school on School related factors for children out of school the p value is greater than 0.05. Hence, it is observed that there is no significant differences are observed between Monthly Family Income of Children out of school and School related factors of Children out of school such as the problems faced in school, distance of school, transport facility, interest in studies, likeness towards school, etc.

123

TABLE NO.28: CHI SQUARE TEST FOR ASSOCIATION BETWEEN SIZE OF FAMILY AND LEVEL OF IMPLICATION OF CHILDREN OUT OF SCHOOL

Level of Implication of Size of Children out of school Total Chi-square P value Family Low Average High Value 3 12 6 21 4 and (14.3) (57.1) (28.6) below [5.9] [11.7] [11.1]

121 26 63 32

(21.5) (52.1) (26.4)

5 – 6 [51.0] [61.2] [59.3]

45 5.147 0.005** 15 18 12

(33.3) (40.0) (26.7) 7 - 8 [29.4] [17.5] [22.2]

7 10 4 21 9 and (33.3) (47.6) (19.0) above [13.7] [9.7] [7.4]

Total 51 103 54 208 Note: 1. The value within ( ) refers to Row Percentage 2. The value within [ ] refers to Column Percentage 3. ** P < 0.01

Table 28 shows the association between respondents‘ Family Size and Implication of Children being out of school. With regard to the low level of Implication of Children being out of school between the Size of Family, it is observed that 33.3% are equally distributed between the Family Size 7 - 8 and 9 and above. With regard to the average level of Implication experienced by out of school Children it is observed that 57.1% of the respondents belonging to the Family Size 4 and below constitute the majority. With regard to the higher level of Implications of children out of school, the Family Size ranging 4 and below constitutes 28.6%, as majority.

124

Since P value is less than 0.01, it is concluded that there is an association between Size of the Family and level of Implication of Children out of school. Based on the row and column percentage, the Family Size of 4 and below have 14.3% of low level implication, 57.1% have an average level, 28.7 % have high level of implication, whereas 33.3% who are 9 and above have low level of Implication. As the Size of the Family reduces the level of Implications on Children out of school and their family is found to be increasing. Similarly as the Size of the Family increases the level of Implication on Children out of school and their family is found to be decreasing. This explains that the Size of Family refers to number of the adults and the children existing in a family, so the Implication of being out of school on the Children and their family depends on the number of children existing in the family. Thus the Family Size of 4 and below have 2 to 4 children and when these 2 – 4 children were out of school the level of Implication of being out of school on the Children and their family will be high, as there are 1 or 2 earning persons in the family, the dependency of family members is high compared to other Size of Family, which have adult earning members and dependency of family members is managed results in variations in the level of Implication of Children being out of school on the Children and their family.

125

TABLE NO.29: CHI SQUARE TEST FOR ASSOCIATION BETWEEN MIGRATION OF FAMILY WITH REGARD TO RESPONDENTS‟ SEX

Sex Chi- Migration of Family Total square P value Male Female Value

21 23 44 Migrating Family (14.3) (57.1) [5.9] [11.7]

93 71 164 1.129 0.288 Non - Migrating (56.7) (43.3) Family [81.6] [75.5]

Total 114 94 208

Table 29 reveals the association between respondents‘ Migration of Family and their Sex. With regard to the Migrating Family, more than half of the Respondents (57.1%) are found to be females while among the Non - Migrating Family a highest majority of the respondents (56.7%) are males. However, since the p value is greater than 0.05, it is observed that there is no association between Migration of Family with regard to respondents‘ Sex.

126

TABLE NO.30: CHI SQUARE TEST FOR ASSOCIATION BETWEEN LEVEL OF INCIDENCE OF OUT OF SCHOOL AND LEVEL OF PARENTS PERCEPTION

Level of Level of Parents‟ perception Total Chi- P value Incidence about the status of Children Out square of Out of of School Value School Low Average High

Low 19 26 6 51 (37.3%) (51.0%) (11.8%) [34.5%] [27.4%] [10.3%]

Average 26 55 22 103

(25.2%) (53.4%) (21.4%) 67.774 0.000** [47.3%] [57.9%] [37.9%]

High 10 14 30 54 (18.5%) (25.9%) (55.6%) [18.2%] [14.7%] [51.7%]

Total 55 95 58 208 ** P < 0.01

The above Table 30 shows the association between the level of Incidence of Out of School and their Parents Perception about the status of the Children out of school. Since the p value is less than 0.01. It indicates that there is association between Level of Incidence of Out of School and Parents Perception about the status of children out of school at 1 % level of significance. Among the low level of Incidence of Out of School little above half of the respondents (51%) had an average negative level of Parents‘ Perception on the status of their children. Among the average negative level of Incidence of Out of School little above half of the respondents (53.4%) had an average negative level of Parents‘ Perception on the status of their child. Among the higher negative level of Incidence of Out of School little above half of the respondents (55.6%) had higher negative level of Parents‘ Perception on the status of their children.

127

CASE STUDY

The following are the information about the Case Studies of Five ―Out of School Children‖.

CASE STUDY – 1

Health Problem has made me deprived of my right to education – Gunaseeli, 11 years old

Gunaseeli is an 11 year old girl. She is located in Marungapuri Panchayat Union. Her family marginalized and belongs to the Scheduled Caste (SC) and Hindu community. Gunaseeli has 3 siblings and including her there were 4 children for her parents. She belongs to a nuclear family that had led to lack of attention by the parents on her schooling. Her parents were working for daily wages in the agricultural sector. She was admitted in Government School for basic education. Her school is 2 km away and transport facility is inadequate to attend school from her home. So, she avoided schooling due to long school hours and also long time taken to travel since her home was not close by. Caste system and cultural issues (as she attained puberty) had prevented her from attending school but she managed to go to school for few days. Suddenly one fine morning she was severely affected by stomach ache and because of which she was long absent in the school. Finally, her poor health condition was a barrier to continue her schooling.

As an implication, she was not covered in school welfare programmes since she was out of school. This has made her family to fully depend on government assistance during the health crisis situation. She faced the difficulty to read, write and concentrate, as her touch with the school was permanently cut. Of late, she felt lonely at home and used to fight with her parents frequently to get the attention of the parents towards her needs. Hence, she became dropped out from school during her 5th Standard education. After that she started to involve in goat rearing work

128 continuously, as motivated by her parents. Few days later she established the small livestock activity and started to engage her on full time basis. Now, she feels that the parents and local community leaders did not help her to find solution to her cultural as well as health issues. She also felt that she is deprived of education. She realized that she has lost her education due to poor health and lack of adult guidance to sustain her school education by resolving her health problem. She suggests that many poor children like her need to have free breakfast in the schools since they were unhealthy and often remained without any food in the morning.

CASE STUDY – 2

Sibling Care and Lack of Parental Support denied the right to education – Kasimbegam, 14 year old girl.

Kasimbegam was a 14 year old girl. She hails from a broken family and located in Jeeva nagar, (Tiruchirappalli Corporation). She belongs to Muslim community and now living along with her guardian. She has 3 (other) siblings younger than her. She was attending the school for 3 days in a week and for the next three days she was taking care of the siblings in the absence of her parents. Meanwhile, the sudden death of her mother had made her to be fretted of life. When she was 13 years old, she was doing her 8th Standard education in the Government aided middle school, with the help of stipend amount received from the Government. After that she had to discontinue her studies the next year, as she had not received stipend amount. Kasimbegam dropped out from school after completing her 8th standard education.

The sudden demise of Kasimbegam‘s mother forced her to take care of her younger siblings. On seeing the death of the mother, her father left the children and had quit the family. Then, she was engaged in household work and sibling care on full time basis under the custody of her aunty, as a guardian, who was her father‘s elder sister. Her guardian was not concerned about her education and also did not

129 even give good food or purchase study material for her. Thus, the reason for being drop out from school was owing to the death of her mother. She stopped schooling at the age of 13 years in order to take care of her siblings, as she was the first born female child. Her household work at a very younger stage in life made her tired and she could not continue her education. She also never finds time for any childhood entertainments. She reported that her guardian used to beat her to do the household work properly on full time basis without any leisure time.

Kasimbegam also added that there was no one to provide support for her to continue her education. She said that there were few of her friends, who were not going to school like her due to their own parents‘ discouragement to continue their study. She says that the Head Master and Teacher need to advise their poor illiterate parents and guardian for retaining her and also her friends in school to play and study in school. Though the school environment was not conducive to study, she used to play with her friends and sometimes the teacher used to tell stories or sing songs, which was interesting for her to attend school. Despite the fact that Kasimbegam was wishing for continuing her education, she was deprived of basic right to education owing to sibling care and absence of parental supervision. She feels that she has lost her childhood play, fun and also education due to sibling care and lack of parental support. Her few suggestions were that the school going poor children (like her) need two good quality uniforms per year (to be supplied by government), as the present supply of one set uniform was not in good quality and insufficient for daily wear. She also added that the stipend can be given to all the poor children equally till the completion of 12th standard.

CASE STUDY – 3

Migration in search for employment denied the right to education – Anchalai, 11 year old girl.

Anchalai was an 11 year old girl. She hails from a marginalized family and lives below the poverty line. She belongs to Most Backward Caste (MBC) community and now living along with her mother in Anthanalloor Panchayat Union. 130

Anchalai has 2 siblings younger than her. Anchalai was dropped out from school while she was studying 5th standard. The reason for being dropped out from school was owing to the increased frequency of migration in search for livelihood. She also felt insecured and was scared to be alone in the absence of parents during migration.

Three years back, Anchalai migrated along with her mother from Kerala State. During that time, she found difficulty in getting admission in regular school due to non availability of migration certificate, ration identity card, etc. Even the mother was unable to get welfare assistance from government without ration identity card and without her father, who had left the family due to extra marital relationship. When she went to school, she was a slow learner and secured very low grade in the examination. She revealed that the other students used to tease her by comparing with other personalities, which led her to avoid schooling. She also felt that the teacher was partial towards the children, who were performing well. She got offended, when the teacher compared her performance with their other fellow class mates. Later, she developed fear for her teachers and also feared of examinations in school, which forced her to remain out of school.

Anchalai persistently reported that her teacher often punished her through beatings and scolding in front of all other children. She felt herself humiliated before other students. She has developed fear about school and did not have any intention of continuing. Her mother often goes out to other villages and towns in search of work like daily labour in construction of building, roads, etc. Consequently, Anchalai stayed out of school and denied of right to education due to migration of parents and irresponsibility of her teachers. She feels that she has lost her education like other children due to migration and lack of skills possessed by the teacher to guide her in a child friendly manner. As there was lack of child friendly attitude among the teachers as well as the local community, she concluded with few suggestions stressing that all the teachers need to understand the poor condition of the child and they should be friendly in teaching the lessons.

131

CASE STUDY – 4

Child Labour in Quarry – Muthusamy, 12 year old boy.

Muthusamy is a 12 year old male child dropped out of school while studying 6th standard in Government School. He hails from a marginalized family and lives below the poverty line in Thiruvarambur Panchayat Union. Poor income generated by the family is insufficient to meet the commitments of the family. He belongs to the Most Backward Caste (MBC) community and now lives along with his parents. He has 6 (other) siblings among which 5 were elders and 1 was younger. Out of the five elder siblings, 4 were married and settled separately and another one (along with one younger sibling) was at home with the parents. His parents have crossed their middle age with some health problem, which have prevented them to go for daily work. As he was not interested in studies, he used to cut the class frequently and he was engaged in playing with his friends, watching movie, etc. Though there was a play area in the school, he was not allowed to play, since the school was on the road side and sports materials were not available. Further, he expressed that many of his school going friends, who pursued their studies in various schools had the opportunity to play daily in their schools. But in the school, where he was studying, there was no chance for the children to play, who have least interest in studies like him. Thus, in their area the role of local government and local leader to fulfill the expectation of the children is a must to make the child attend school. As a result, he plays with friends, who were elder than him and have discontinued school earlier. This results in adapting negative behaviour towards education and he regularly left the school. Parents and teachers when asked him to attend school, he had threatened that he will attempt suicide if any one forces him to go to school.

Finally, Muthusamy‘s life was engrossed in child labour practices once he was out of school. Extreme poverty situation forced him to become a child labourer taking up traditional occupation in hazardous quarry industry. There he was experiencing adult behavior by constantly mingling with adults in the work spot. Influence of adults resulted in developing unhealthy and immature habits of adults and this led him to develop no high expectations in life. 132

Quarry being the hazardous and unorganized sector Muthusamy encounters accident often and gets hurt frequently. Thus, as he had practiced this unskilled labour in the young age, he met with an accident and got injured in a finger while working. Health hazardous was perceived more in the life of Muthusamy. He had become anaemic, since there is no nutritious food available regularly at home like that of the food provided in school and also he was taken to hospital by his parents to improve his health condition. Thus, the implication of exclusion in school health programmes, since he was out of school, has made his family to fully depend on government assistance. Muthusamy was deprived of childhood formation due to poverty that led him to become a cheap child labourer. He expressed that though he was responsible for his life, which was ruined because of child labour as well as poverty, he wanted his parents to be economically balanced with the support of government in order to look after his younger sibling.

CASE STUDY – 5

Forced Begging affected my quality of life – Selvamani, 9 year old boy.

Selvamani is a 9 year old boy. He hails from a deprived family, which is below the poverty line. He was living with his parents, who were fortune tellers and earned a very little income that they were unable to meet the demands of the family. He was residing in Thathaingarpet (T. Pet) Panchayat Union. His parents were illiterate, leading an ignorant life and belong to Scheduled Caste (SC) community. His parents have 6 children including him. Among his 5 siblings, 3 were elder and 2 were younger than him.

Selvamani was never enrolled for education in any school and resided in rural area for many years. The root cause for not enrolling in school was the extreme poverty encountered by the family and the ignorant status of his parents. As he was leading life in the out of school environment from the beginning itself, the begging practices were easily motivated in him by the parents, who are traditional beggars. 133

On the other hand, as his parents had availed loan (to run the family for feeding, paying rent, etc.) he was engaged in begging for meager earnings in turn to pay back the loan availed. Further, this kind of indirect idleness of his parents resulted in him shouldering the family responsibilities.

Family circumstance has driven him to practice unhealthy activities in the young age. Parents want him to earn a living and they found to be inefficient to mend him and sort out his difficulties. At the same time, his lackadaisical attitude also was a hurdle to join school as well the parent not capable to deal with him. Thus, the child (Selavamai) felt that in their area some other poor parents have received help from government for their family well being but for his family there is inadequate support from government schemes and in turn his parents‘ poor care and support had made him to be never enrolled in school. Selvamani was forced in begging by his parents and by which he earned a minimum income at the end of each day. He is deprived of love and care and also the basic right to education because of extreme poverty. While begging, as he used to see rich and upper class people, he seems to be worried that he had no life like other healthy children, who were living in sophisticated family.

134

FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION

The following are the information about the Focus Group Discussion held at sixteen blocks / divisions relating to ―Out of School Children‖ in Tiruchirappalli.

FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION – 1

Number of Participants : 12 Place : Lalgudi Panchayat Union (PU)

1. Socio-demographic particulars of Focus Group Members (Lalgudi)

The focus group covers 5 male and 7 female members. The age of the members were distributed between 22 and 58 years. Majority of the members were residing in the same panchayat union but from different habitations. They were in that locality for more than 2 years. Among the members, two parents were illiterate and others were educated. Members were a mix of lower class, middle class and upper middle class group.

2. Socio-demographic and economic profile of “Children Out Of School” (Lalgudi)

Common view of the members was that there were more than 20 children below the age of 14 years found to be out of school in the entire block. Boys and girls were more or less equally distributed across the block. Particularly boys were dropped out for earnings in automobile workshops, agriculture field, etc. and girls were engaged in taking care of their sibling. Mostly, there were more than 3 children in a family in rural areas. Compared to the status of last three years there was improvement in elementary enrolment and reduction in never enrolled category. The families of out of school children were almost surviving with poor monthly income ranging from Rs. 500 and 4000.

135

3. Various Factors contributing to “Children remaining Out of School” (Lalgudi)

Members opined that the children, who were studying in government school, were found to be slow learners compared to children studying in private. Children who were residing in remote villages had to walk about 1 to 2 km to reach the school in the absence of bus facility, which were not frequently available. The girl children, who were scared to walk alone, used to walk as a group of 3 to 4 children to attend the school, which makes them to drop out of school very soon they attain puberty. Children with disability had not even enrolled in any schools due to lack of facilities and rehabilitation services in their area. Though few of the out of school children were with health problems they were interested to study. Majority of the members stated that the out of school children had fear for exams. They were found to have no recognition among their peer group and they felt ashamed when their teacher beat them or scolded them in front of others. As the parents were uneducated, the proper care to the children is lacking in general. The other factors responsible for the children being out of school were migration of parents, parent‘s illness and drug addiction, extreme poverty, difficult in reading English languages, etc. These factors gradually made the children not to have interest in education and in the long run they could not be forced to attend school.

4. Implications of “Children Not Going to School” for the Children and their Family (Lalgudi)

The fathers, who are addicted to alcohol, remained idle without work, used to force their children to go for work and earn for their daily life. The children with low level qualification after attaining the age of 14 years were not willing to study with the lower class students. Mothers used to go for work and they don‘t find time to monitor their children‘s schooling. In the beginning, these children were simply started wandering with other dropout children and at a later stage, they went for work. Both the mother and father failed to protect their children. As a result, there is lack of motivation for the children to continue schooling and they gradually left themselves out from the school and other health programmes available for them. On the other hand, the parents were more dependent on the government programmes to look after the welfare of their family. 136

5. Situation of Children Out of School and their Parents‟ Perception about their status (Lalgudi)

Majority of the children were found working in brick kilns, hotels, grocery and garment shops. These children earn wage between 20 and 50 rupees per day and they give their earnings to parents. Members witnessed that the local employers availed the human power of young children and exploited and abused them to the maximum. The members‘ perception was that children, who were not studying well, were gradually dropped out from school, as there was lack of supervision at home. These children, who were out of school, were easily exposed to bad behaviours. Parents were ignorant about the rights of the children and also were unskilled to look after their children‘s development as well as to sort out their school difficulties. Negative attitude towards education is found among parents and exercised on children. The majority of the members stated that the parents were very keen enough to preserve the lands, which they own but they don‘t have good opinion about their child‘s learning. They feel that education is a long term process to settle in life and employment opportunities are too little.

6. Feedback on Government Programme and its benefits for “Out of School Children” and their Families (Lalgudi)

Members viewed that, though major government programmes were available for the poor families in their block, it has not reached the majority of the families of children out of school practically. Further, the members reported that the family members of children out of school avail small benefits such as ration card, assistance for flood / accident compensation, assistants for antenatal mothers, government hospital assistance and loan exemption from bank loan, which they have got already from the bank.

7. Perception and Participation of Community relating to Children Out of School (Lalgudi)

Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) School teachers, Block Resource Teacher Educators (BRTEs of SSA) and village leaders discussed to meet and advise the parents of out of school children to understand the importance of education and provide help for them. Village Education Committee (VEC) is taking effort but the

137 outcome is poor. With the help of local non-government organizations, several children were identified and admitted in schools last year. Majority of the parents did not participate to get their effort for their child‘s education. Members recorded that the community themselves are responsible for the children to stay out of school and lose their career prosperity.

8. Suggestions to make the Children to attend School and prevent the Children becoming Out of School (Lalgudi)

Members revealed that the community should to be made aware of the child rights, importance of education through awareness generation programmes such as camps, cultural activity, etc. Scholarship amount can be given to all the community students in the entire district. Initiating tuition centres by utilizing the service of educated adults at the village level is needed. The capacity building of parents to mend their children to study through Self Help Group can be introduced. To manage families‘ crisis situation, financial assistance, educational assistance, free assistance to be given at school level and monitored. Village leaders, important persons should meet frequently to discuss about the out of school children issue and plan to sort it out. Parents, who are economically rich and stable, need to be punished for not sending their children to school regularly.

FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION – 2

Number of Participants : 8 Place : Musiri Panchayat Union (PU)

1. Socio-demographic particulars of Focus Group (Musiri)

Gender wise the members of the group constituted 3 males and 5 females. Their age group falls between 25 and 60 years. They were located in the surrounding villages of the same Panchayat union for more than 3 years. All the members were literates in the group. Participants were a combination of both lower class and upper middle class group.

138

2. Socio-demographic and economic profile of “Children Out of School” (Musiri)

Greater part of the members recorded their response in their area, the rate of children out of school is very low. Most of the members revealed that the boys and girls between 11-14 years dropped out from schools due to family and school reasons. Usually the girl children were forced to look after the small children at home in the absence of their parents. There were 3 to 4 children in a family and prevalence of nuclear family is high. They said that the parents believed that education is more important for boys than girls, but boys were engaged in out-station work in order to support their poor family. In general, the children‘s family economic condition seems to be awful.

3. Various Factors contributing to “Children remaining Out of School” (Musiri)

Majority of the members confessed that the children attending private schools were better performing than the children studying in government schools, who were lackadaisical in nature because of poor quality of life. These children, who were out of school, have fear to go by road due to inadequate transport facility. Some children were scared to attend the exams and afraid of the teachers, as they were unable to do the home work at home regularly when they attended the school. Parents were uneducated and they do not watch whether their children were going to school. The other vital factors determining children out of school were found to be mentally retarded, lack of awareness on education, parents migrating for work, broken family and poor income in the family respectively. In addition to that, the parents are unable to give the child what is required or needed from parents and also parents‘ don‘t have openings to educate their differently challenged children in special schools, as they were ignorant. Most part of the members said that parents‘ awareness is a must to reduce the rate of long absenteeism in school. School Management is unsuccessful to address the issues relating to inadequate learning care for each Child, who was slow learner. Parents addicted to drug were found to be the major concern for the children out of school to undertake risky work for wages.

139

4. Implications of “Children Not Going to School” for the Children and their Family (Musiri)

As the parents were engaged in 100 days work introduced by central government, they were not going for any other seasonal work like agriculture and remained idle for the rest of the other days and at the same time they desire that their children to earn, who have discontinued the work. When the parents (both mother and father) going for work in early morning they were unable to watch whether their children were attending the school regularly or cutting the classes. The children do not have supervision for their development. Their parents were not helping them to exercise their rights. After some time, these out of school children when they cross 13 years they find unhappy to sit and study with young children as per their qualification level. As an impact, these out of school children have no confidence to achieve big things or quality in life in future. Majority of the out of school children‘s health and personal hygiene and physical development were affected, as they were not included in the school health programmes and later they become burden for their parents to look after their illness.

5. Situation of Children Out of School and their Parents‟ Perception about their status (Musiri)

Members revealed that the children out of school were engaged as construction workers and agricultural workers. Majority of the children earn wages between 50 to 75 rupees per day. Members recorded that children out of school engaged into child labour are poorly paid and work long hours of time than others. Members observed that the children were exploited by local employers. Due to poor supervision of parents in remote rural areas, the children, who were weak in studies, were simply leaving the school and engage themselves in unhealthy activities as perceived by the members. Members reported of that the parents had received supplementary income through their child's work. Some children have faced difficult situation in their life like parents‘ death, uncared guardian, etc and they left the school and shifted to some other places. The absence of basic skills among parents resulted in training their children to lead a poor life.

140

6. Feedback on Government Programme and its benefits for “Out of School Children” and their Families (Musiri)

Members declared that the benefits of the major programmes of the government were not practically to the reach of the downtrodden families of out of school. The members reported that family members of children out of school availed very less benefits but the other parents are getting the benefits like assistance from Tamilnadu Adhi Dravidar Housing and Development Corporation Limited, Group house scheme, Swarnjayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojana (SGSY), etc.

7. Perception and Participation of Community relating to Children Out of School (Musiri)

In Block Resource centre of SSA, they were spending more money for school development and there was close monitoring in the village to indentify and mainstream the out of school children. Members of Musiri block recorded that in one or two villages, there was remarkable reduction in out of school children prevalence due to continuous monitoring of school authorities and community. Awareness done in Grama Shaba Meeting (village administration meeting) and Village Education Committee meeting about preventing children engaged in work, who were below 14 years. Village leader told that they along with the SSA teacher and the BRTE, were advising the parents of the out of school children about the importance of schooling, and the assistance they could receive from them.

8. Suggestions to make the Children to attend School and prevent the Children becoming Out of School (Musiri)

Members revealed that the local community leaders should create employment opportunities with the help of government assistance. Government may give the aid to the schools or village education committee to purchase the uniform in a good quality. Local administration should give continuous cooperation for school authorities to conduct awareness programmes for parents, motivate children for vocational education and monitor all the disadvantaged children in the schools through government welfare measures.

141

FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION – 3

Number of Participants : 11 Place : Thathaingarpet (T. Pet) Panchayat Union (PU)

1. Socio-demographic particulars of Focus Group (T. Pet)

The age groups of members were distributed between 29 and 61 years. Gender wise the members of the group constituted 7 males and 4 females. Majority of the members were residing in same locality for more than 2 to 20 years. Majority of the members are literate except their parents, whose education qualification is 2nd standard but unable to read or write. Members were one Head Master, one Teacher, one Block Resource Teacher Educator, one Teacher from Special Schools for rescued Child labourers, one Field Officer from National Child Labour Rehabilitation Project Office, one former Municipal Secretary, one Panchayat Chairman, one Representative from NGO, one Representative from Parent-Teacher Association and two parents of Children out of school. It was observed that all the members were the collection of lower to upper middle income group.

2. Socio-demographic and economic profile of “Children Out of School” (T. Pet)

Majority of the members stated that though there was gradual decrease in the rate of children out of school, still some 30 to 40 children were out of school at block level particularly in remote areas and this varied from one village to another. Members substantiated, that the out of school children, who have crossed the age of 11 years, were not attending school regularly school due to family situation. Subsequently the boys were going for work to get daily wages locally and girls were engaged in domestic work for take-home pay. Some girls were tightly kept on doing the household chores in their own house even to watch the baby, who might be their sibling. Members were mentioning that they have seen that in poor households there were more than 3 children due to want of boy child the parents were keep on give birth. The poor income level of the parents of out of school children was very common at the entire Panchayat Union.

142

3. Various Factors contributing to “Children remaining Out of School” (T. Pet)

Majority of the members have perceived that the children studying in private schools are gifted, as their parents were affordable to educate them in English medium school but the children studying in government schools were unable to study even Tamil language, due to poor motivation of their parent. The parents felt that the education for their children were out of their means. Even if the children were willing to study, the long hours of travel and sometimes going by road makes the children less interested to study. While attending the schools, the children have faced the psychological problems like neglected by teachers or peers, as they performed poor in exams and these children automatically pulled out from schools. Majority of the members felt that parents need to be responsible and caring for their children to continue schooling. Parents were not in good status, separated, having too many children, leaving the children at home and going for work, very low income and poverty in the out of school children‘s family, lack of love and care to these children, ignorance of disadvantage community, adamant and aggressive attitude of the children to discontinue schooling, children‘s negative response to attend school, unmanageable school system failed to concentrate on out of school children, parents‘ negative behaviour and bad habits were highly prejudiced the children to be away from school for long time. Children with chronic ill health and severe disability seemed to be dropped out and had not enrolled in schools due to inadequate special school facilities in their village. Children out of school in Thathiangarpet block were found to be mentally retarded hence they are not enrolled in regular schools. Due to absence of counseling facilities at school the teacher was unable to deal with children‘s problem. In few schools at Thathaigarpet block, children parliament was functioning with 5 representatives from five classes, who were well performing students, fixed with the responsibility to meet the out of school children and make them to rejoin the mainstream of education.

4. Implications of “Children Not Going to School” for the Children and their Family (T. Pet)

Majority of the members confirmed as parents going to job in early morning, they don‘t see that children have to go to school and their children usually cut the 143 class with the non-school going children either to play or work. The children after completing 4th standard, who have been out of school for more than 2 years, have the shyness to continue education with small children at school. The children seem to be wandering without any goal and not obeying or respecting the parents in later period. Parents felt bad about the children‘s poor status but they were not having the capacity to protect their children with basic needs. The exposure of the children to the work has made them to suffer with unhealthy living condition. Majority of the children out of school were malnourished. On the other hand, as these children were not covered in welfare programmes offered in schools, the attention of parents diverted towards their illness instead of going to work to run the family, which have resulted them to face financial crisis.

5. Situation of Children Out of School and their Parents‟ Perception about their status (T. Pet)

Members recorded that though the rate of child labour was reduced to an extent, majority of the children, who were out of school were engaged in child labour practices with poor wages (Rs.10 to 75 rupees per day) and had to work for long hours (more than 10 hours per day) than adults. Majority of the children, who were out of school were engaged in unskilled labour like beedi rolling, preparing match box, working in brick kilns / hotels / grocery shops, goat rearing, etc. Some children are wandering or going for fishing and girl children are engaged in household work in their own house. Beggary among children was prominent in Thathaingarpet block. Majority of children out of school were malnourished and exposed to infectious diseases. Child marriages have been controlled to a great extent. But, parents engaging their children in household works, goat rearing, mat weaving, work at company / shops at local level, etc. and they think that they can gain more money if their children also involved in assisting them in work. Gradually, the children show their interest to work when they start to see money in hand and also they support their parents who have very low earnings. Once they engage in work they start to adapt bad habits like cigarette smoking, taking alcohol, watching adult movies, etc. Parents have least knowledge about child rearing and the basic rights of the child. In some families, the children were found to be worried due to loss of either father or mother, poor care of parents, parents‘ illness, etc. and they were not covered under welfare

144 activities of the government. Owing to poor care of parents, the children‘s survival at school and community was pitiable. The overall opinion of the members for the disgraceful situation of children out of school and their parents was poor skill of parents to support their children.

6. Feedback on Government Programme and its benefits for “Out of School Children” and their Families (T. Pet)

The members reported that the efforts were taken to cover the children out of school under bridge course (preparing the students to join mainstream education from temporary school to regular school) arranged by National Child Labour Projects (NCLP) and Sarva Shakshi Abiyan (SSA) Programmes. The children were provided with eggs, bus pass, scholarship, note books, etc available for the disadvantaged children. Adhi dravida welfare department has provided stipend for all girl children in elementary school during 2005, but now the stipend is given to only limited children category in some schools. But the widespread opinion of the members was the poor families of out of school were unable to get the benefits from government schemes such as land for housing, construction of houses and improvement of business with the support of loans offered by nationalized banks, etc. Normally the poor families attach themselves to some local self-help group activities run by NGOs.

7. Perception and Participation of Community relating to Children Out of School (T. Pet)

The Block Resource Teacher Educators have conducted bridge courses to encourage the dropouts to join the mainstream school. The teaching assistants under SSA scheme and teachers of NCLP Special Schools have taken much pain to advise the poor parents of out of school children and also the students, who tend to drop out of school to attend the school continuously. The regular school teachers expressed that they have gone for home visits to all the children‘s house to educate them about the importance of education. The teachers said that they don‘t have idea to provide handhold support for the families of out of school children to get loans from government for their family welfare. As of now many children at primary level are promoted to higher standards so children are gradually not showing interest in education. However efforts were taken to all children were now enrolled in schools in

145 our area. Parents – Teachers Association (PTA) meeting in schools were conducted to improve the schooling, which have to be reinforced in all places.

8. Suggestions to make the Children to attend School and prevent the Children becoming Out of School (T. Pet)

Members revealed that everyone in the society should coordinate as a team for the poor children‘s education in their community. Continuous awareness should be created among the general public and students. Counseling to parents on child rearing, child rights and education should be done. The Government should take new initiatives to increase more teachers. Adequate assistance for the education and rehabilitation of differently abled children in villages should be given. The government‘s assistance for families should be monitored at the school itself by opening a separate wing under various welfare departments. Government should increase the benefits for continuous and permanent income for parents, which is the need of the hour to save the children from risk and dangerous life. Steps need to be taken for admitting the children who were physically challenged to continue their education in integrated schools. To bring changes in the education system including all private school, which may help students studying in government school not to discontinue the school and join in private school.

FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION – 4

Number of Participants : 9 Place : Thuraiyur Panchayat Union (PU)

1. Socio-demographic particulars of Focus Group (Thuraiyur)

The gender category of focus group covers 4 male and 5 female members. Their age was distributed between 25 and 57 years. Majority of the members were residing in the same panchayat union but from various rural communities. They revealed that they were in that locality for more than 3 years. Majority of the members were literate and one parent was an illiterate member. Generally, as the group was a diversified one, the members‘ occupation differ from one another like

146

Teachers, Head Master, Field Officers, Panchayat Chairman, Representatives from NGO and Parent-Teacher Association and poor parents of out of school Children. Thus, income status of the members was a mix up of lower class, middle class and upper middle class group.

2. Socio-demographic and economic profile of “Children Out of School” (Thuraiyur)

Widespread outlook of the members was that there were around 30 to 70 children below the age of 14 years were out of school across the Panchayat Union. Both boys and girls were more or less equally distributed among the out of school category. Boys were dropped out for earnings in automobile work shop, which were more in that locality and some of them migrate to nearby district such as Namakkal district, where the motor vehicle weld shops were highly prevalent and they easily absorb child labourers. Girls were engaged in taking care of their sibling. Mostly there were 3 to 4 children in a nuclear family in rural areas. Tribal people were most prevalent in this Panchayat union. The family units of out of school children approximately exist with low level income, which varies from Rs. 500 to 5000 per month based on the number of family members involved in work.

3. Various Factors contributing to “Children remaining Out of School” (Thuraiyur)

Majority of the members felt that the children, who were dropped out from government school have showed only moderate results in exams while the children dropped out from private school excelled, but not continuing education due to instability and crisis in their family. Children out of school were dwelling in rural areas and they had to travel about 1 to 2 km to reach the school, which was not comfortable for them. The girl children were dropped out of school immediately after attaining puberty period and they were held up in providing care for their youngest sibling, as their parents were at work. The differently challenged children had not even enrolled in any regular schools due to their prolonged stage of disability. A few children, who were dropped out from school due to ill health, were also willing to study, if they were restored from their illness. There were the children having difficulties in face the exams. Normally they try to avoid going to school, as the

147 teachers ask questions relating to the subjects. Out of school Children‘s parents were mostly illiterate and they show less interest in their children‘s education. . The other related causes for the children being out of school were migration of parents, parent‘s illness and drug addiction, extreme poverty, etc. Further, the functioning of the schools was imperfect, even children did not understand Tamil language, which was one of the subjects but children had the skills of questioning in the class room. For more number of children there are few teachers only. Student – teacher ratio is inappropriate. Poor sanitation and hygiene in the school environment has made the children to be out of school. This has also reflected in the decline in the enrollment rate of the school in Thuriayur block. Teachers were not available in schools located in remote village areas to cover the tribal children who were out of school. Members also stated that when there is no proper building, toilet facility, mats or chair in the school how the parents will send their children to the school.

4. Implications of “Children Not Going to School” for the Children and their Family (Thuraiyur)

Parents with laziness attitude remained idle without work and they force their children to go for work and earn for the family survival. Out of school children, having minimum primary level education were unwilling to admit themselves in the eligible class due to age factor and shyness to study with the small children. In remote villages, the ignorant father and mother don‘t show much interest in monitoring the children‘s schooling except their earnings from their work. Initially the children used to engage in some petty works as a part time and then they shift full time work by discontinuing the studies permanently. Parents of the children out of school did not care about the rights of the children. In the long run children were excluded from getting the benefits of health welfare measures at school level and consequently the parents suffer to take care of the children with poor health and seek for others help.

5. Situation of Children Out of School and their Parents‟ Perception about their status (Thuraiyur)

Members stated that it was evident in their Panchayat Union that young children were working in automobile shops, brick kilns, hotels / grocery shops, etc.

148

At the age of 11 years, children earn between 30 and 60 rupees per day and they spend on their own for eatables and also give the balance money to their parents. The employers were keen enough to catch the children for cheap labour. According to the perception of members, the children, who were below average in studies were pulled out as there was lack of supervision at school as well as the parents do not watch the status of children at school. These children, who were out of school, were likely to adapt adult behaviours in working environment. Unskilled parents were unable to monitor their children‘s growth. Members recorded that the Government was responsible for the children to stay out of school and lose their career prospects because of loopholes in existing welfare measures and thereby prevented the children from studying and attaining personal development.

6. Feedback on Government Programme and its benefits for “Out of School Children” and their Families (Thuraiyur)

Focus group members stated that very few selected families of children out of school were covered under major government schemes available for the welfare of disadvantaged group. The members also expressed that in general all the families of out of school children avail benefits such as ration card, assistance for flood / accident compensation, assistance for antenatal mothers, government hospital assistance, etc.

7. Perception and Participation of Community relating to Children Out of School (Thuraiyur)

School Teachers have been ensuring that the parents of out of school children were sensitized on importance of education. But at the same time they were unable to bring coordination among the community members to support the school to work for prevention of children being out of school. The efforts of Village Level Education Committee (VEC) seem to be ineffective. With the help of local non-government organization, few unreachable children were canvassed and admitted in schools last year in tribal areas. Parents show less involvement in their effort to their child‘s education. Community themselves were responsible for the children to stay out of school and misplace their better life.

149

8. Suggestions to make the Children to attend School and prevent the Children becoming Out of School (Thuraiyur)

Community needs to be made aware of the child rights, importance of education through awareness generation programmes. The welfare programmes for the families of out of school children can be supervised at school level in order to cover all the real poorest parents at the field level as well as tribal people, who were more prevalent in that union. The teachers pointed out that the students like schools if it is a good place for playing and the teachers narrate stories, songs, etc. Basic facilities and good ambiance should be available in schools. Adequate transport from their home to school and back to homes is needed. This can be monitored by the village level leaders at the community. In Thuraiyur block, there are well to do business people, they can come forward to discuss the issues with local leaders and teachers and to sort out the issue for reducing the rate of children becoming out of school as well as on its prevention aspects.

FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION – 5

Number of Participants : 12 Place : Manachanalloor Panchayat Union (PU)

1. Socio-demographic particulars of Focus Group (Manachanalloor)

The members of the group comprised of 7 male and 5 female members. Their age group falls between 30 and 62 years. They were residing in various places of Manachanalloor Panchayat union for more than 4 years. Among the members, twelve were well educated and the remaining two parents were uneducated and unskilled. The members were a mixture of all level of income group from lower to upper middle income group.

2. Socio-demographic and economic profile of “Children Out of School” (Manachanalloor)

Most of the members reported that in their surrounding places, the rate of children out of school is slowly decreasing for the past 10 years. Members revealed

150 that the boys and girls between 9 and 14 years of age remained out of schools, as they were assisting the parents in their traditional work. Some girl children were forced to look after the small siblings when their parents were not available. The family size was between 4 and 6 members and there were more than 2 children in a family. They believed that the education is more important for boys than girls, but both boys and girls were engaged in work for wages. Majority of the parents of out of school children were struggling for better living standards. The monthly income of the family of out of school children falls between Rs.500 and Rs. 5000. This unsteady monthly income of the family depends on either the earnings of father or mother or both or guardian, who works on daily basis.

3. Various Factors contributing to “Children remaining Out of School” (Manachanalloor)

The members have formed a general opinion that though the education system have been improved in government sector, the parents, irrespective of being poor or wealthy were fond of the English medium and private schools education for their children. These children, who were out of school, find it difficult in getting buses which were not frequent in remote places. Some of these children experienced failures in exams and they also fear the teachers who were strict. The other factors for children out of school were mental retardation, poor awareness on education, parents‘ migration, disorganized family and families without income. Further, the parents are not capable to give the required support to their child and don‘t have the skill to run the family efficiently. The responsibilities of the parents play a vital role in reducing the irregularities and continuous absence of their children at school. School authorities were struggling to provide individual attention to the children out of school. Drug addiction among the fathers was the major issue to push the children out from schools.

4. Implications of “Children Not Going to School” for the Children and their Family (Manachanalloor)

The parents were engaged in 100 days work introduced by central government and they were not going for any other seasonal works and remained idle for the rest of the other days concurrently they expect their children to earn, as they have 151 discontinued the school. The parents who were doing own business, they expect their children to involve in their work to assist them as family labour to gain money instead of engaging labours from outside. In some families, both the parents were going for work in early morning itself and they were unable to watch whether their children were attending the school regularly or cutting the classes. This makes the children to escape from the supervision of their parents, who were also not concerned about their child‘s rights. After some time, these out of school children when they cross 12 years find unhappy to sit and study with young children as per their qualification level. As an impact, these out of school children have no confidence to achieve big things or quality in life in future. Majority of the out of school children‘s health and personal hygiene and physical development were affected, as they were not included in the school health programmes. Later they become a burden for their parents to look after their illness because of which their parents‘ productivity to earn got disturbed.

5. Situation of Children Out of School and their Parents‟ Perception about their status (Manachanalloor)

Members revealed that the children out of school were engaged in artificial gem cutting unit, agriculture field, construction field, flower farms, rice mill, coolie, goat rearing, etc. Majority of the children earn wages between 50 and 75 rupees per day. Members recorded that most of the children out of school engaged as child labour in flower farms during a particular season. Members observed that these children were poorly paid and working for long hours than adults. Due to poor supervision of parents in remote rural areas, the children, who were weak in studies, were simply leaving the school and they engage themselves in unhealthy activities as perceived by the members. Members reported that the parents had received supplementary income through their child's work. Members reported that children were less interested to study and going for fishing when they don‘t have works to earn. The ignorant parents do not take much strain for the children to attend school. The children also voluntarily go for work to gain money and often support their families.

152

6. Feedback on Government Programme and its benefits for “Out of School Children” and their Families (Manachanalloor)

Members declared that the benefits of the major programmes of the government do not practically reach majority of the downtrodden families of out of school children. The members reported that family members of children out of school availed very less benefit but the other parents are getting the benefits like assistance from Tamilnadu Adhi Dravidar Housing and Development Corporation Limited, Group house scheme, Swarnjayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojana (SGSY), etc.

7. Perception and Participation of Community relating to Children Out of School (Manachanalloor)

Members recorded that constant awareness and motivation to be given to parents by the Village Education Committee (VEC) members regularly. Due to the continuous effort of the Block Resource Teacher Educator, Head Masters and teachers of the local schools and contribution of the local donors for the poor children‘s education, several difficult children between 6 and 14 years were identified and enrolled in schools to prevent those children becoming never enrolled or dropped out every year in that panchayat union. Local donors were encouraged to supply free note books, uniform, etc.

8. Suggestions to make the Children to attend School and prevent the Children becoming Out of School (Manachanalloor)

Members revealed that various employment opportunity with the help of government assistance as well as business development sector to be offered for poor parents. There should be a continuous cooperation of the local people to the school authorities for conducting awareness programmes, mobilizing and monitoring all the disadvantaged children to attend the schools and get the benefits through government welfare measures. Individual child learning supervision to be done at schools and Individual child monitoring to be done at micro level by the village level leaders at the community

153

FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION – 6

Number of Participants : 8 Place : Marungapuri Panchayat Union (PU)

1. Socio-demographic Particulars of Focus Group (Marungapuri)

There were 8 members and their age group falls between 33 and 58 years. Half of all members were males and half were females. Majority of them were located in same Panchayat Union for more than 5 years. The group is the mixture of literates and illiterates. The illiterates were parents and also the village leader. Other educated members were Head Master, Teachers, Field Officers from National Child Labour Rehabilitation Project Office, Panchayat Chairman, Representatives from NGO and Parent-Teacher Association. Regarding the economic status of the group members, all of them were from lower to upper middle income sections of the society.

2. Socio-demographic and economic profile of “Children Out of School” (Marungapuri)

Most of the members have declared that though there was slight awareness on children‘s education in their area, still it was a challenge that they need to prevent the drop out children, who were between 70 and 150 in the block. These children need to be motivated to attend school. Particularly girls who were out of school in village sides were long absentees in the schools. The members believed that the family background of out of school children was liable for all 6 to 14 years age group of children to stay out of school. Members confirmed that the girl children were high in their area and also the female illiteracy exists in all the villages. Usually the boys were going to school till primary level and then they were engaged in work for wages. Girls were also going for agriculture work. Most of the girls considered to be the care taker for siblings on full time basis, as their parents were daily labour. Parents never mind to give birth to more than 4 children even though they don‘t have the ability to feed the baby. More or less all the families of out of school children lead a poor quality of life.

154

3. Various Factors contributing to “Children remaining Out of School” (Marungapuri)

A sizeable part of the members view was that the out of school children find it not easy to study in government school and the private schools were not reachable to them. Marungapuri is a very big Panchayat. The secondary level schools were somewhat distant for the children to travel. So the parents decided that as they can not send their children for secondary level education to other villages, the present primary level education alone may not be a necessary one for their children. As parents do not encourage their children, the children also lack interest in learning. The emotional aspects like love and care, support for education, etc. were also contributed to pull the children from schools. All the children were invariably having the fear to write exams and answer the teacher for not completing the homework. Parents‘ incapability, below standard living, extramarital affairs, more uneducated girl children in one family, considering women‘s major role as giving birth, poor income, lack of knowledge about the ill effects of being uneducated, failure to cope up the wavering children, irresponsible attitude, schools‘ fewer initiative to bring back the children to school becoming ineffective, etc where the reasons for the children to be out of school besides several welfare programmes. The out of school children have developed bad habits in the work spot. Further, differently abled children, who were in the prolonged stage, were unable to attend the school available in some other villages.

4. Implications Of “Children Not Going to School” for the Children and their Family (Marungapuri)

Most of the members revealed that the parents in their villages leave to work in the morning itself and there was no one to take care of the children to follow up whether they attend the school or not. Children don‘t want to continue education if they have left the school in young age. When the children do not even complete primary education, they don‘t set any dreams or goals for their development. These children want to enjoy life. The parents also do not have knowledge to guide the children in correct direction. The children were exposed to the unhealthy living condition. As the children were not going to school, they were malnourished due to unhealthy food practice and also they were not covered in welfare programmes

155 offered in schools. Moreover, the parents concentrate towards their children‘s illness instead of going to work to earn living.

5. Situation of Children Out of School and their Parents‟ Perception about their status (Marungapuri)

The children, who were working, earn between Rs. 10 and 50. Members have noticed that the poor children were working in the local area. These out of school children were not in good health condition and adapted bad habits in young age. These children were engaged in household works, goat rearing, agricultural field, etc. Their parents think that they can earn more money if their children also involved in work. Initially, these children started their work with the parents and then after seeing the money they showed full interest in the work in order to support their family and they did not go to school. Majority of the members‘ perception was children, who were not clever become easily dropped out and engaged in unhealthy activities due to inadequate monitoring mechanism by the parents as well as the school at rural areas. This is because of the irresponsibility of the parents in rural areas. These children have adopted bad habits like taking alcohol, watching adult movies, etc. The basic rights of the child were not followed even by the parents due to their ignorance. Some children were worried due to loss of their parents, lack of love for parents, chronically ill parents, etc. and they were also not covered under welfare activities of the government. The parents did not care about their children‘s survival, which was pathetic. The members felt that the appalling situation of the children out of school can be changed only with the support of their parents.

6. Feedback on Government Programme and its benefits for “Out of School Children” and their Families (Marungapuri)

The members stated that the government has contributed a lot to cover the children out of school under bridge course (preparing the students to join mainstream education from temporary school to regular school), special schools [by National Child Labour Projects (NCLP)] and Alternative Schools [by Sarva Shakshi Abiyan (SSA) Programmes]. The children were provided with eggs, scholarship, note books, etc. Stipend for all children in elementary school was only to limited category. Members opined that poor families of out of school were unable to get the benefits

156 from government schemes such as land for housing, construction of houses and improvement of business with the support of loans offered by nationalized banks, etc. Some of the poor families by themselves have joined the local self-help groups.

7. Perception and Participation of Community relating to Children Out of School (Marungapuri)

The SSA – Education department teachers have motivated the dropouts to join mainstream school through camps and awareness activities. The teacher and the NCLP staff have taken a lot of efforts to sensitize the ignorant parents of out of school children and also advised the children, who were potential drop outs. The primary school teacher expressed that they have gone for home visits to meet the parents of out of school children and have educated them about the children rights. Generally the teachers‘ opinion was they don‘t have the basic information to guide the out of school children‘s parents to get the benefits from government welfare programmes relating to their family welfare. Members felt that many children at primary level were promoted to higher standards and were gradually not showing interest in education. Majority of members stated that imperfect functioning of the Village Education Committee (VEC) was often reported.

8. Suggestions to make the Children to attend School and prevent the Children becoming Out of School (Marungapuri)

Majority of the members revealed that the parents and children as well as the local community have the full responsibilities for the children to continue education. The Government may provide additional teachers to the school so that the children can get individual care for learning. Moreover, all the members have stated that the accountability to be fixed with School Management in order to meet the basic needs of parents, who were below the poverty line and the transparent measuring scale to be applied to track whether the government schemes reach the poor parents in need or not.

157

FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION – 7

Number of Participants : 11 Place : Uppiliapuram Panchayat Union (PU)

1. Socio-demographic particulars of Focus Group (Uppiliapuram)

The gender of focus group covers 5 male and 6 female members. The age groups of members were distributed between 25 and 60 years. Majority of the members were residing in the same panchayat union but from different villages. They were in that locality for more than 1 year. Among the members, two parents and one village leader were illiterate and others were educated. Members were a mix of lower class, middle class and upper middle class group.

2. Socio-demographic and economic profile of “Children Out of School” (Uppiliapuram)

General observation of the members was that there were more than 40 children below the age of 14 years found to be out of school in that Panchayat Union. Both the boys and girls were more or less equally distributed in the out of school category. Mostly the boys were dropped out for earnings and girls were engaged in taking care of their small siblings. There were around 3 to 4 children in a family in remote places. Though there was improvement in the enrolment status of the school there were still children out of school. Their families were leading a poor status of life with meager income.

3. Various Factors contributing to “Children remaining Out of School” (Uppiliapuram)

Majority of the members stated that the children, who studied in government school face difficulties to read compared to the children, who studied in private school. This was because of the poor support of parents to the children, who were studying in government school. Out of school children were residing in very remote villages and they avoid school as they have to travel for long time. Girls usually fear to go to school by road. The differently challenged children, who were in prolonged stage had not even enrolled in any schools due to lack of adequate facilities in that 158 locality. Children with health problems like to study in school. Fear of exams and teacher was common among the children who were out of school. Most of the parents were illiterate and so there was no proper concern to the children having learning difficulties. The other reasons for the children being out of school were lack of employment opportunity, migration, poverty have been reported by members as factor for children to be out of school. Sibling care has been reported as an issue to prevent child from attending school. Thus, there were multiple factors to make the children not to have interest in education and in the long run they leave the school permanently. . 4. Implications of “Children Not Going to School” for the Children and their Family (Uppiliapuram)

Both the parents were going for agriculture work in early morning as daily labour and they don‘t mind about the children‘s schooling, as they were struggling for day to day survival. Out of school children found difficult to continue their studies after a long gap with the students, who were younger than them. Parents do not generate any of the opportunity for the achievements of their children apart from their household chores. At first, these children were truant and they wander with other dropout children for fishing, etc. Then, they go for work to earn. Their mother and father do not bother for their children‘s poor schooling and the children become out of school element and not covered under school health programmes. Their parents become more dependent on the government programmes to look after their family for long term survival.

5. Situation of Children Out of School and their Parents‟ Perception about their status (Uppiliapuram)

Most of the children were found working in tea shop, automobile workshop, garment company and agricultural work. Majority of the children earn wage between 10 and 20 rupees per day. Development of unhealthy behavior such as stealing, robbing is reported among the children. Few children work as domestic labours without earning any wages. Members witnessed that local employers even physically abuse them to extract work. All the members‘ opined that the children were gradually drop out as there was lack of proper supervision and support at home. These children,

159 who were out of school, were easily exposed to bad behaviours. The ignorant parents were unknown about the rights of the children as well as their children‘s development.

6. Feedback on Government Programme and its benefits for “Out of School Children” and their Families (Uppiliapuram)

Members viewed that majority of the families of children out of school were not covered under major government schemes available for the welfare of disadvantaged group. Majority of the members felt that none of the families of children out of school were benefitted under major government schemes available for the welfare of disadvantaged group. Children received government support only in school and not at times out of school. The members reported that family members of children out of school avail benefits such as old age pension assistance, SHG Loan, widow pension assistant, ration card assistance, assistance for antenatal mothers and housing patta.

7. Perception and Participation of Community relating to Children Out of School (Uppiliapuram)

The village leaders and SSA teachers of local school discussed about meeting the parents of out of school children to make them understand the importance of education. The Village Level Education Committee was taking effort to prevent the children from going out of the school but unable to stop the children discontinuing their education. The teachers and the local non-government organization have taken effort to identify and admit many children in the nearby schools last year. Parents were not involved fully in the efforts being taken by government to provide education to their child‘s education. All the members stated that the community and the family are responsible for the children to continue education. Majority of the members stated that the Grievance day meet is not being conducted in all Panchayats, hence it was unable to look into the problems of the out of school children.

160

8. Suggestions to make the Children to attend School and prevent the Children becoming Out of School (Uppiliapuram)

Majority of the members revealed that the local community people need to be sensitized on continuous basis about the child rights, education, behaviour change communication, etc., which may be inculcated through various awareness generation projects. Teachers require special training to handle the issues of children. School counseling may be introduced to help children to effectively deal with their issues. The government may take the initiative to manage out of school children‘s families‘ welfare by providing the welfare measures like financial assistance, etc. at school level itself. The village leaders have to supervise the development of each of the out of school children as well as the potential drop out children so as to avoid the children becoming out of school category.

FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION – 8

Number of Participants : 8 Place : Thottiyam Panchayat Union (PU)

1. Socio-demographic particulars of Focus Group (Thottiyam)

Gender wise the members of the group constituted 3 males and 5 females. Their age group falls between 35 and 58 years. They were located in the surrounding villages of the same Panchayat union for more than 3 years. Majority of the members were literate. Participants were a combination of both lower class and upper middle class group.

2. Socio-demographic and economic profile of “Children Out of School” (Thottiyam)

Majority of the members recorded their response that in their area, there were more than 10 children out of school. Most of the members revealed that the boys and girls between 11 and 14 years of age remained dropped out from schools due to family circumstances. More often the girl children were forced to look after the small children in the absence of their parents. There were 3 to 4 children in a family and

161 prevalence of nuclear family is high. They said that the parents believe that education is more important for boys than girls, but boys were engaged in out-station work in order to support their poor family. In general, the children‘s family economic condition seems to be bad.

3. Various Factors contributing to “Children remaining Out of School” (Thottiyam)

Majority of the members recorded their response to factors determining children out of school as having too many children, inadequate Income, Parents carelessness, family circumstances, poverty, search for job, parents‘ illiteracy, ignorance and incapability to educate children. Parents are forced to send the children to work due to poverty and they were working in hotel, weaving, dying workshop, matchbox factory, catering contractor, agricultural fields and willing to go to any place for work. The other factors such as lack of awareness, number of members in the family being high, many students‘ understanding capacity is low, children were not interested in studies, no income to buy books, uniform, etc. Parents were worried about the children not obeying or responding to their advice. Examination was a burden for these children. Majority of members opined that the children studying in private schools were talented but children studying in government schools were careless and not interested in their studies. Majority of the members viewed that the out of school children have fear to go by road to school in the absence of a transport facility. Some children fear to attend the exams and afraid of the teachers, as they were unable to do the home work at home regularly when they attended the school. School Management is unsuccessful to address the issues relating to inadequate learning care for each individual. Parents addicted to drug were found to be the major concern for the children out of school to undertake risky work for wages.

4. Implications of “Children Not Going to School” for the Children and their Family (Thottiyam)

As the working opportunity for the parents were limited inside their villages, they were migrating for work. Parents were remaining idle for many days and they hardly searched for work, as their children were going out to earn and support the family. Children were not monitored properly by the parents. Their parents were not

162 helping them to exercise their rights. After some time, these out of school children when they cross 12 years they find unhappy to sit and study with young children as per their qualification level. As an impact, these out of school children have no confidence to achieve big things or quality in life in future. Majority of the out of school children‘s health and personal hygiene and physical development were affected, as they were not included in the school health programmes and later they become burden for their parents to look after their illness.

5. Situation of Children Out of School and their Parents‟ Perception about Their status (Thottiyam)

Majority of the children are found working in construction unit and agriculture field, mat weaving unit, hotels / grocery, etc. Majority of the children earn between Rs. 25 and 100 per day and they were spending for sweets, eatables and cinema. Some children were giving the amount for family‘s daily expenditure. They were working for low wages in a poor working environment. Children when they stop going to work they hesitate to continue education again. These out of school children when they were not going to work, they were engaged in fishing, goat rearing, cinema, gambling, having quarrels in villages, playing, following parents‘ instruction and work and taking care of the sibling and assisting to manage the home, cooking and doing all the household work. During free time the boys were wandering with other bad friends and the girl children engaged in tailoring and going to stationary shop, etc., The adamant and aggressive attitude of the children made to discontinue schooling, children have a lot of households work and worries. Other worries faced by the children were parents‘ death, uncared guardian, etc and they left the school and shifted to some other places.

6. Feedback on Government Programme and its benefits for “Out of School Children” and their Families (Thottiyam)

Under Sarva Shkshi Abiyan scheme the children out of school were motivated to join education in regular school, where activity based learning methodology is adopted. The parents of out of children were provided with loans for goat rearing business, ration card benefits and a very few have received free house benefits under housing scheme, roof house, old age pension, etc. The children have received stipend

163 from National Children Labour Project, scholarship from backward caste community programs, etc. Majority of the parents have not approached government offices for help as they don‘t have proper awareness about government schemes. Children who studied in National Child Laobur Project Special School during previous years were now continuing education in regular school and getting good marks. Members declared that the benefits of the major programmes of the government were not practical to the reach of downtrodden families of out of school children. The members reported that family members of children out of school availed very less benefits but the other parents are getting the benefits like assistance from Tamilnadu Adhi Dravidar Housing and Development Corporation Limited, Group house scheme, Swarnjayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojana (SGSY), etc.

7. Perception and Participation of Community relating to Children Out of School (Thottiyam)

The SSA school and NCLP special school have taken efforts to make the children to join regular school. They have motivated out of school children to join NCLP special school where they get Rs.100 per month as stipend and after completing 1 year education in special school they join mainstream education. The teachers with the help of NGOs have taken effort to counsel the parents and clarified the educational assistance provided for the children. Members recorded that the community themselves are not aware about child rights and importance of education. Parents should be motivated in village level education committee meeting regularly. The Block Resource Teacher Educator, Head Masters of the schools, teachers and donors have taken effort to identify children, who were deprived of education between 9 and 14 years and mainstreamed them in regular school Awareness created among the public to prevent the children becoming never enrolled in that area, as for the last few years, students enrolment in Government schools was found to be decreasing in Thotiam block.

8. Suggestions to make the Children to attend School and prevent the Children becoming Out of School (Thottiyam)

Members revealed that the community needs to be made aware of the child rights, importance of education through awareness generation programmes such as

164 camps, cultural activity. Vocational training for out of school children to be organized through local village administration and the village leader has to monitor the reach of government programmes to all the disadvantaged children through the local schools. The Strict enforcement of compulsory education and providing benefits for the families who were sending their children must be supervised properly. The parents who were taking effort to send the children continuously to schools should be appreciated. Firstly, the parents should be educated and given proper awareness. Teachers association can plan activities through government schemes for effective implementation. Parents should educate the child not to discontinue education, must approach the teachers without hesitation and gain knowledge to develop the children.

FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION – 9

Number of Participants : 11 Place : Manikandam Panchayat Union (PU)

1. Socio-demographic particulars of Focus Group (Manikandam)

The age groups of members were distributed between 32 and 54 years. Gender wise the members of the group constituted 7 males and 4 females. Majority of the members were residing in the same locality for more than 2 years. Majority of the members were literate except the parents, whose education qualification is 3rd standard but unable to read or write. Members were one Head Master, one Teacher, one Block Resource Teacher Educator, one Teacher from Special Schools for rescued Child labourers, one Field Officer from National Child Labour Rehabilitation Project Office, one Panchayat Chairman, two Representative from NGO, one Representative from Parent-Teacher Association and two parents of Children out of school. It was observed that all the members were from the collection of lower to upper middle income group people.

2. Socio-demographic and economic profile of “Children Out of School” (Manikandam)

Predominant part of the members stated that though there was slow decrease in the rate of children out of school, still some 20 to 100 children were out of school 165 at block level particularly in rural areas and this varied from one village to another. Members confirmed that the out of school children, who have crossed the age of 11 years, were not attending school regularly due to their poor family situation. Consequently the boys were going for work to get daily wages locally and girls were engaged in domestic work for take-home pay. Some girls were engaged in household chores in their own house even to supervise the babies, as their parents were unable to see their siblings due to daily labour. Most of the members revealed that in poor households there were around 3 to 4 children due to fond of getting male baby. Thus the parents keep on giving birth to female babies until they get a male baby. The poor income level of the parents of out of school children was very common at the entire Panchayat Union.

3. Various Factors contributing to “Children remaining Out of School” (Manikandam)

The largest part of the members have perceived that the children studying in government schools were unable to study even Tamil language, due to poor motivation of their parents, also the parents felt that the education for their children were out of their means. Children avoid going to school if it is not close to their home. Children like to play in schools, but they were not allowed to play, as the school situated on road side. Some schools were very strict in controlling the students shouting at play. Out of school children have faced the psychological problems such as parents negligence, neglected by teachers or peers, as they performed poor in exams and these children automatically pulled out from schools. There were children, who got pulled out from school if they were hurt by the teachers, who used to scold them in front of other students. Some children leave the school due to home work load. Parents do not purchase and give study material, negligent attitude of parents, poor income in family, parents separation, having too many children, leaving the children at home and going for work, deprivation of love and care to these children, ignorance of disadvantage community, adamant attitude of the children to discontinue schooling, teachers‘ ill-treatment, teachers‘ partiality toward students, bad condition of school building, teachers not coming to school regularly, students were forced to write exams frequently and not allowed to play, other students teasing the deprived children comparing with media people, fear of teacher, children‘s poor

166 health, etc. were the reasons responsible for the children to be away from school for a long time. The facilities available for the chronically ill children were not sufficient in rural areas and the parents hesitate to send their children to outside places for providing the rehabilitation services for their children.

4. Implications of “Children Not Going to School” for the Children and their Family (Manikandam)

Most of the members confirmed that as parents going to job in early morning, they don‘t see that children to go to school and their children usually cut the class with the non-school going children either to play or work. The children, who were out of school for more than 2 years without having touch in education, have the shyness to continue education with small children at school. The children out of school develop the inferiority complex. Most of the children seem to be wandering without any goal and not obeying or respecting the parents in later period. Though the parents realize the bad behaviour of their children they were not having the capacity to protect them with basic needs. The children were exposed to unhealthy living condition. Majority of the children out school were suffering due to ill health and malnourishment and as these children were not covered in welfare programmes offered in schools, the attention of parents diverted towards their illness. Therefore, the parents were held up in settling the health problem of their children instead of going to work to run the family, which have resulted them to face financial crisis.

5. Situation of Children Out of School and their Parents‟ Perception about their status (Manikandam)

Majority of the children, who were out of school were engaged in work and poorly paid between Rs. 10 and Rs. 60 for long hours of work. If the parents have got any loan, then the children were sent to work for wages to set right the interest and loan. Members have seen the young children spending their time in the work spots to receive a meager pay from the local employers. Parents engaged their children in agriculture field, goat rearing, automobile shops, hotels, etc. and they thought that they can gain more money if their children also involved in assisting them in work. The children show their interest to work when they start to see money. Members reported of that the parents had received supplementary income through their child's

167 work. Members of Manikandam block reported that children were less interested to study and going for fishing and other works to earn money in order to meet their own expenses. Poor performed children were out of school due to the deprivation of proper support from parents in rural areas. Once they engage in work they started to adapt bad habits like cigarette smoking, taking alcohol, watching adult movies, etc. The children out of school have frequent fights and quarrel with local dropped out students and they also have stealing behaviour. Parents were unaware about child rearing and the basic rights of the child. In some families, the children were found to be worried due to loss of either father or mother, poor care of parents, parents‘ illness, etc. and they were not covered under welfare activities of the government. The parents were not cared about the children‘s survival at school and community. Members opined that the disgraceful situation of children out of school was due to their parents poor skill to support their children and the school management not offering child friendly education.

6. Feedback on Government Programme and its benefits for “Out of School Children” and their Families (Manikandam)

Majority of the members stated that the efforts were taken to cover the children out of school under bridge course (preparing the students to join mainstream education from temporary school to regular school) arranged by National Child Labour Projects (NCLP) and Sarva Shakshi Abiyan (SSA) Programmes. The children were provided with eggs every week, bus pass, scholarship, note books, etc available for the disadvantaged children. But the common opinion of the members was the poor families of out of school children were unable to get the benefits from government schemes such as land for housing, construction of houses and improvement of business with the support of loans offered by nationalized banks, etc. Normally in the poor families they engage themselves in some local self-help group activities run by NGOs. Conducting awareness programmes to send the children to school, having close interaction, and counseling with father mother and motivated them to send their child to school. Giving punishment if not obeying and overburden the children, not fulfilling their needs including compulsory education.

168

7. Perception and Participation of Community relating to Children Out of School (Manikandam)

The Block Resource Teacher Educators have conducted bridge courses to encourage the dropouts to join mainstream school. The teaching assistants under SSA scheme and teachers of NCLP Special Schools have taken much pain to advise the poor parents of out of school children and also the students, who tend to drop out of school to attend the school continuously. The regular school teachers expressed that they visited all the children‘s house to educate them about the importance of education. They also added that the availability of counselors and family welfare officers at field level will help the poor parents to get the help immediately from government (to provide handhold support). As of now many children at primary level are promoted to higher standards so children are gradually not showing interest in education. However efforts were taken to enroll all children in schools in the village.

8. Suggestions to make the Children to attend School and prevent the Children becoming Out of School (Manikandam)

Members revealed that everyone in the society should coordinate as a team for the poor children‘s education in their community. Continuous awareness should be created among the general public and students. The government assistance for families should be monitored at the school itself with a help of opening a separate wing under various welfare departments. Government should increase the benefits for continuous and permanent income for parents, which is the need of the hour to protect the children from risk and dangerous life. Play facility in school was most essential in order to attract children to attend school regularly. The approach of teachers should be child friendly manner. The teachers can give rewards to the poor students, who were potential drop outs, for their small improvements in learning in order to encourage them to attend the school regularly. The National Child Labour Project Special Schools‘ Teachers have tried to give awareness about government schemes to their parents, but unable to follow the process with the government departments. In some villages the parents were very stubborn to not to send their children to schools. Government should provide assistance in order to develop poorest people in a limited time frame. This helps the children with poor academic performance to continue education without any fear.

169

FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION – 10

Number of Participants : 9 Place : Anthanalloor Panchayat Union (PU)

1. Socio-demographic particulars of Focus Group (Anthanalloor)

The gender of focus group covers 6 male and 3 female members. The age groups of members were distributed between 26 to 49 years. Majority of the members were residing in same panchayat union for more than 2 years but they were from different villages. Among the members, except two parents all the others were educated. Members were a mix of lower class, middle class and upper middle class group.

2. Socio-demographic and economic profile of “Children Out of School” (Anthanalloor)

Most of the members view was that there were more than 30 children below the age of 14 years, who were out of school in the entire block. Gender wise female and male children were equally distributed across the block. The boys were dropped out from school to work for daily wages and girls were responsible in taking care of their siblings. There were 2 -3 children in one family in rural areas. The status of last three years shows that there was improvement in elementary enrolment as well as the reduction in the rate of never enrolled group of children. The parents of out of school children were almost surviving with low level earnings.

3. Various Factors contributing to “Children remaining Out of School” (Anthanalloor)

Majority of the members opined that the children, who were studying in government school, were found to be easily dropping out from school compared to the children studying in private. The out of school children who were residing in very remote villages had to walk for few distance due to lack of frequency of buses. Girl children, who were not comfortable to walk alone, used to cut the classes. The children with severe disability had not even enrolled in any schools due to non availability of required services in their locality. Few children, who were not going to

170 school due to health problems were very much interested to continue their study. The parents were uneducated and they were not providing proper care to the children. Various other factors responsible for the children to be out of school were migration of parents, parent‘s illness, drug addiction, extreme poverty, children finding it difficult to read English language, etc., which makes the children to not to have interest in education.

4. Implications of “Children Not Going to School” for the Children and their Family (Anthanalloor)

Majority of the members stated, normally the fathers, who were alcohol addicted remained idle without work, used to compel the children to go for work for daily life. As the children, who have minimum qualification to their age, after attaining the age of 14 years don‘t have the willingness to study with the young age students. The mothers also used to go for work and they allotted time to see the needs of their children for their proper schooling. Sometimes these out of school children were simply wandering with other dropout children and at a later stage, they were engaged in work for wages. The mother and father were not capable to provide safe living condition for their children. Consequently, there was lack of encouragement for the children to continue school and they discontinued the school slowly. The school health pragrammes were out of reach for the poor children who were dropped out from school, which leads them to depend upon their parents. In turn, the parents were unable to go for work and they depend for the government assistance. Quarrel is reported between parents at times when children are at home not attending school. Children are harassed and abused often directly or indirectly.

5. Situation of Children Out of School and their Parents‟ Perception about their status (Anthanalloor)

A considerable number of the children were found working in agriculture, hotels, grocery and garment shops. They earn wages between 50 and 60 rupees per day and they give their earnings to the father or mother, as an additional income for the family. The members have witnessed that the young children were exploited in the work spot. Majority of the members‘ perception was that due to parents‘ poor supervision, the children, who were not studying well easily dropped out from school

171 and they became adapted to bad behaviours from others. Majority of the parents did not contribute to their child‘s education. The rights of the children were ignored by the parents and their children‘s difficulties were unattended.

6. Feedback on Government Programme and its benefits for “Out of School Children” and their Families (Anthanalloor)

Majority of the members viewed that the major government programmes were not accessed by the families of children out of school. However, the members recorded that the family members of children out of school have received the assistants like ration Card, natural calamity / disaster / accident compensation, stipend for antenatal mothers, free health check up in government hospital and loan exemption from bank loan.

7. Perception and Participation of Community relating to Children Out of School (Anthanalloor)

SSA teacher and village leaders used to discuss the issue of the out of school children in order to create awareness about the importance of education among the poor and disadvantaged sections. The field level Village Education Committee was functioning ineffectively to address the issues relating to the children out of school. But the teachers of SSA and NCLP have taken steps along with the non-government organizations to motivate and admit lot of children to join regular schools in their locality. The parents don‘t take part in supporting the initiatives effort of the education department, as they were not provided with government measure for their family. The members recorded that the community themselves were responsible for the children to not to enter the mainstream of education.

8. Suggestions to make the Children to attend School and prevent the Children becoming Out of School (Anthanalloor)

Majority of the members‘ opinion was that the continuous awareness to community people is needed in their panchayat union. Further, the families of the out of school have to become under the supervision of the school managements so that the Head Master of the school can demand the parents not to escape from sending their children to school even after receiving the assistance from the government.

172

FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION – 11

Number of Participants : 12 Place : Pullambadi Panchayat Union (PU)

1. Socio-demographic particulars of Focus Group (Pullambadi)

The gender of focus group covers 7 male and 5 female members. The age groups of members were distributed between 29 and 48 years. Most of the members of the focus group were residing in the same panchayat union but from various localities. They were in that panchayat for more than 2 years. One parent and one village leader were illiterates and others were educated. Members were a mix of lower class, middle class and upper middle class group.

2. Socio-demographic and economic profile of “Children Out of School” (Pullambadi)

In general all the members were of the opinion that there were about 30 children below the age of 14 years, who were out of school in the entire block. The children of both the sexes were more or less equally distributed across the panchayat. These children were either pulled out or pushed out from school due to either school problem or family problem respectively. It is well known fact that the male were involved in work for wages and the female children were answerable to look after their siblings at home in the absence of their patents. There were more than 3 children in one family in remote villages. Though there is considerable number of children enrolled in primary level education, still there were children out of school due to parents‘ carelessness and their poor unsteady income, which starts from Rs. 500 and goes up to Rs. 3000 per month.

3. Various Factors contributing to “Children remaining Out of School” (Pullambadi)

Most of the members perceived that the children from socio-economically poor background were studying in government school and they have poor learning capacity due to inadequate support and care from parents. The out of school children were facing difficulties in going to school regularly by travelling. Differently

173 challenged children find difficulty in studying with normal children. If the children have health problem they find difficulty in studying even though they were willing to study. Attending examination is the general fear for all the out of school children. As the teachers were very strict, the children out of school were not comfortable to study there in the school. The parents were uneducated and they fail to give adequate care to the children. The other causes like parent‘s illness, drug addiction, extreme poverty, children‘s learning difficulties, etc. were also liable for the children out of school.

4. Implications of “Children Not Going to School” for the Children and their Family (Pullambadi)

The drug addict fathers were remaining idle without work and they were forcing their children to go for work for daily living. 14 year old children, who have below the level of qualification disliked to learn with other regular students owing to their low level of confidence to study further. As the mothers were going to work early in the morning, they don‘t have time to look after their children‘s education. Truancy was common among the children out of school and they were going for work to earn. These children were not protected by both the mother and father. This resulted as lack of motivation for the children to continue schooling and ultimately they were not covered under school health programmes available for them. On the other side, the parents were taking care of their unhealthy children. They become more dependent, as a result of their inability to go to work.

5. Situation of Children Out of School and their Parents‟ Perception about their status (Pullambadi)

The members stated that the children were found working in brick kilns, quarry and construction works. These children earn wages between 30 to 50 rupees per day and they give their earnings to parents. All the members have witnessed the young children working in an unsafe environment. The members‘ perception was the children, who were not studying well were gradually drop out as there was lack of supervision at home. These children, who were out of school, were easily exposed to bad behaviours. Parents were unaware about child rearing and the rights of the children, since they were struggling for their day to day living. Children, who were

174 out of school, faced crisis situation like death of their parents, broken family, uncared guardian, etc. The support rendered to recover these children was found to be inadequate. Majority of the children left their schools, when they faced adjustment difficulties in their school. Members reported lack of skill among parents to support their children, who were out of school, to accomplish good education as they themselves were becoming unskilled labourers.

6. Feedback on Government Programme and its benefits for “Out of School Children” and their Families (Pullambadi)

Majority of the members reported that family members of children out of school availed benefits such as ration card, assistance for flood / accident compensation, assistants for antenatal mothers, government hospital assistance, exemption from bank loan, etc. However, the equal preferences were not given for all families of out of school children in major welfare programmes such as Tamilnadu Adhi Dravidar Housing and Development Corporation Limited, Group house, Swarnjayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojana (SGSY), etc. As a result of this, the people who are below poverty line did not receive the required welfare packages and were unaware about the details of various government programmes.

7. Perception and Participation of Community relating to Children Out of School (Pullambadi)

At village level, the activity of Village Education Committees seems to be ineffective. However, the SSA teachers and village leaders have taken action to sensitize the ignorant parents of out of school children to understand the importance of education and to send their children to schools. The members of the Village Education Committee (VEC) were not much involved in tackling the issues of out of school children. The VEC was always concerned about building schools, expenditure of government funds, etc. rather than taking innovative steps to help the out of school children and their family. The efforts of SSA team have resulted in making several innocent children to join the mainstream education. Majority of the parents did not participate in their effort to get their child‘s educated. .

175

8. Suggestions to make the Children to attend School and prevent the Children becoming Out of School (Pullambadi)

Most of the members revealed that the community needs to be made aware of the child rights, importance of education through awareness generation programmes such as camps, cultural activity, etc. In order to make the parents to manage families‘ crisis situation, the major financial assistance have to be given at school level. Village leaders, important persons have to sort out the issue of children out of school at least once in a fortnight.

FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION – 12

Number of Participants : 10 Place : Manapparrai Panchayat Union (PU)

1. Socio-demographic particulars of Focus Group (Manapparrai)

Gender wise the members of the group constituted 8 males and 2 females. Their age group falls between 30 and 55 years. They were located in the surrounding villages of the same Panchayat union for more than 2 years. Except three members, all the other members were literates in the group. All the members were a combination of both lower class and upper middle class group.

2. Socio-demographic and economic profile of “Children Out of School” (Manapparrai)

Majority of the members recorded their response that in their area, the existence of children out of school was there but reduced to some extent. Members revealed that the boys and girls between the ages of 11 and 14 years remained dropped out from schools due to parents‘ migration. Frequently the girl children were forced to look after the small children in the absence of their parents. There were 2-4 children in one family and prevalence of nuclear family is high. The members perceived that the parents believe that education is more important for boys than girls, but boys were engaged in out-station work in order to support their poor family. The economic condition of these children was found to be in low level.

176

3. Various Factors contributing to “Children remaining Out of School” (Manapparrai)

Addiction to alcohol and drug use by parents was reported as a reason for their children to be out of school. Addicted fathers used to beat and prevent their children from going to school and forced them to earn. Majority of Members reported that there were lots of wine shops, which had been opened in recent years. Members‘ opinion about the children‘s capacity was that those who were attending private schools were quickly understanding than the children studying in government schools, who were uncared by parents. Children, who were out of school, have feared to go by road to attend school. Children were scared of their examinations and their teachers as well and they were unable to do the home work regularly. Other major reasons that leads the children to be out of school were found to be mentally retarded, lack of awareness, parents were migrating for work, broken family and poor income in the family, etc. Further, the parents were unable to give the child the required care and also parents did not have the basic skill to educate their differently abled children at home. The most essential thing was that parents responsiveness towards the children‘s attendants in school was lacking. The issues relating to inadequate learning care for each individual in schools were not fully achieved by the management of the schools. Members opined that the children out of school may be supported by employing a special person to monitor the performances.

4. Implications of “Children Not Going to School” for the Children and their Family (Manapparrai)

Both the mother and father were working for particular season of six months and remained idle for the rest of the days. As the parents were going for work in early morning they were unable to watch whether their children were attending the school regularly or cutting the classes. Thus, the children have to face no supervision for their development and their parents also not helping them to exercise their rights. These out of school children, who were over aged, were unhappy to sit and study with young children as their age and qualification level varies. As an outcome, these out of school children don‘t have the confidence to achieve big things or quality in life in future. Most of the out of school children‘s health and personal hygiene and

177 physical development were affected, as they were not included in the school health programmes and later they become burden for their parents to look after their illness.

5. Situation of Children Out of School and their Parents‟ Perception about their status (Manapparrai)

Majority of the members stated that the children out of school were involved in agriculture field, construction unit, automobile shops, grocery shops, garment business, goat rearing, etc. A considerable number of the children earn wages between 40 to 70 rupees per day. The members reported that the children out of school were found to be cheap child labourers and also they have observed that the children were exploited by local employers. The failure of supervision of parents resulted in the children to perform poor in schools and they adapt the unhealthy activities. Further, members stated that the parents were receiving supplementary income through their child's work. The members also added that the children, who were less interested to studies, were going for fishing and other works to earn money in order to meet their own expenses. Parents were ignorant to provide proper care for the children to attend school. Sometimes these children also voluntarily go for work on full time basis to gain money and they often support their families. These children have faced difficult situation in their life like parents‘ extramarital relationship, parents‘ death, uncared guardian, etc and they left the school and got themselves shifted to some other places.

6. Feedback on Government Programme and its benefits for “Out of School Children” and their Families (Manapparrai)

Majority of the members declared that the benefits of the major programmes of the government were not practically reaching the weaker section families of out of school children. The members reported that family members of children out of school availed very less benefits but the other parents are getting the benefits like assistance from Tamilnadu Adhi Dravidar Housing and Development Corporation Limited, Group house scheme, Swarnjayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojana (SGSY), etc.

178

7. Perception and Participation of Community relating to Children Out of School (Manapparrai)

Members recorded that the community themselves were unaware about the child rights and importance of education. The village level education committee members should take initiative to motivate the parents regularly and to address the issues relating to out of school children. As a result of the continuous effort of the Block Resource Teacher Educator, Head Masters and Teachers of the schools, several children were identified and enrolled in schools to prevent the children becoming never enrolled every year in that block. Members recorded that the Government was responsible for the children to stay out of school and lose their career prospects because of loopholes in existing welfare measures and thereby prevented the children from studying and attaining personal development.

8. Suggestions to make the Children to attend School and prevent the Children becoming Out of School (Manapparrai)

Most of the members revealed that the community required more jobs opportunities with the help of government assistance. The community people should continuously cooperates with the school authorities in conducting awareness programmes for parents, motivating children for vocational education and monitoring all the disadvantaged children in the schools through government welfare measures. Members realized the need for special care to slow learners so as to complete the basic minimum education required for specific vocational training. De-addiction Centre at panchayat / ward level was needed for treating addicted Parents. One stable earning adult in a poor family should be monitored by government.

FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION – 13

Number of Participants :12 Place : Thiruvarambur Panchayat Union (PU)

1. Socio-demographic particulars of Focus Group (Thiruvarambur)

The gender of focus group includes 6 male and 6 female members. The age groups of members were distributed between 25 and 47 years. Majority of the

179 members were residing in the same panchayat union but from different villages. They were in that locality for more than 2 years. Among the members, two parents were only uneducated and others were educated persons. The members were a mix of lower class, middle class and upper middle class group.

2. Socio-demographic and economic profile of “Children Out of School” (Thiruvarambur)

General opinion of the members was that there were around 100 children below the age of 14 years were out of school in the entire block. Both boys and girls were more or less equally distributed among the out of school category. Predominantly boys were dropped out for earnings in quarry field, automobile work shop, hotels / tea shops, etc and girls were engaged in domestic work for wages or engaged in sibling care. In most of the families, there were around 3 or 4 children. There was little improvement in the enrolment of primary school and reduction in never enrolled category. But there were out of school children being dropped out before entering the secondary school education, as their families were surviving with poor income, which is from Rs. 500 to Rs. 4000 per month.

3. Various Factors contributing to “Children remaining Out of School” (Thiruvarambur)

Majority of the members opined that the children, who were studying in government school, were found to be slow learners. The children who were residing in very remote villages had to walk about 1 to 2 km to reach the school in the absence of transport facility. Girl children were scared to walk alone to school after they attain puberty. The children, who were differently challenged, have not enrolled in any special schools due to ignorance of parents. Some children with health problems like to study in school but they were unable to attend school. Children feared of examinations and strict teachers. The uneducated parents were unable to provide proper care to the children in general. Majority of the members viewed that though the parents had to face difficulty in admitting their children in school since they had to submit particulars like age proof, ration card etc., which were not available during migration to other places, they were unable to get welfare assistance from government without ration card identity. The other factors responsible for the

180 children being out of school were migration of parents, parent‘s illness and drug addiction, extreme poverty, children finding difficult in reading English languages, etc. These factors gradually make the children not to have interest in education and in the long run they cannot be forced to attend school.

4. Implications of “Children Not Going to School” for the Children and their Family (Thiruvarambur)

The fathers of out of school children were alcohol addicts and they were remaining idle without work most of the days. The mothers used to go for work and their poor monitoring towards their children‘s schooling have made the children to quit the school. The children out of school with primary level qualification after crossing the age of 13 years were not willing to study with the lower class students. The children usually join the work with disinterest and later after seeing few earnings they get involvement in work for wages on full time basis. The parents (both the mother and father) failed to protect and safeguard their children. Therefore, there was lack of motivation for the children to continue schooling and they gradually left out from school health programmes available for them. Conversely, the parents were more dependent on the government programmes to look after the welfare of their family.

5. Situation of Children Out of School and their Parents‟ Perception about their status (Thiruvarambur)

Most of the children were found working in quarry industries, automobile work shop, hotels / tea shops, goat or pig rearing, coolie, etc. These children earn wages between 20 and 50 rupees per day and they give their earnings to parents and some children spend the money on their own happily. Members observed that these children also work in a pitiable condition suffer due to over workloads and get low wages. Most of the members‘ perception was children, who were not studying well were step by step dropped out from school, as there was lack of supervision at home. Later, these children who were out of school learnt and adapted unhealthy practices like watching movie, moving with bad friends and developing bad habits. Parents were ignorant about the rights of the children and also equally unskilled to look after their children‘s development as well as to sort out their school difficulties.

181

6. Feedback on Government Programme and its benefits for “Out of School Children” and their Families (Thiruvarambur)

Nearly every one of the members viewed that the families of children out of school availed only the small benefits such as ration card, assistance for flood / accident, assistance for antenatal mothers, government hospital assistance, etc. and the majority of the families were not benefitted under major government schemes available for the welfare of disadvantaged group. Most of the children out of school were motivated to join the special schools run by the National Child Labour Project.

7. Perception and Participation of Community relating to Children Out of School (Thiruvarambur)

The SSA teacher and village leaders have taken steps in visiting the homes of out of school children and advised the parents of out of school children to understand the importance of education so that they can provide help for them. Village Level Education Committee is taking effort but the outcome is poor. With the help of local non-government organizations, many children were admitted in schools last year and also provided cash assistance for the students‘ education. Majority of the parents did not participate in their effort for their child‘s education. Members recorded that the community themselves are responsible for the children to stay out of school and lose their career prosperity.

8. Suggestions to make the Children to attend School and prevent the Children becoming Out of School (Thiruvarambur)

Most of the members revealed that the community should be made aware of the child rights, importance of education through awareness generation programmes such as drama, literary activity, etc. As the children were deprived of proper clothing, food, shelter they were unable to concentrate in education by attending the school regularly, for which counseling services can be introduced. Further, to improve the income of the families, the financial benefits to the poor families of out of school children to be monitored at school level. Village leaders shall have frequent meetings to discuss the out of school children issue and plan to send all out of school children to schools at regular basis.

182

FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION – 14

Number of Participants : 8 Place : Vaiyampatty Panchayat Union (PU)

1. Socio-demographic particulars of Focus Group (Vaiyampatty)

The gender category of focus group covers 3 male and 5 female members. Their age was distributed between 31 and 56 years. Most of the members are residing in same panchayat union but from various hamlets. The members stated that they were in that panchayat union for more than 3 years. Majority of the members were educated. By and large, as the group was a diversified one, the members‘ occupation differ from one another like Teachers, Head Master, Field Officers, Panchayat Chairman, Representatives from NGO and Parent-Teacher Association and poor parents of out of school Children. Thus, income status of the members was a mix up of lower class, middle class and upper middle class group.

2. Socio-demographic and economic profile of “Children Out of School” (Vaiyampatty)

Common observation of the members was that there were around 20 to 100 children below the age of 14 years were out of school across the Panchayat Union. The gender of the children was equally distributed among the out of school category. Always the boys were dropped out for earnings in the same locality in automobile work shop, agriculture field, etc. or they go outside the district to work in garment companies. Likewise, girls were also engaged in work for wages to support the family and few were taking care of their siblings. Mostly there were 3 to 5 children in one nuclear family in remote areas. Most of the families of out of school children were surviving with low level income.

3. Various Factors contributing to “Children remaining Out of School” (Vaiyampatty)

Most of the members opined that the children, who were dropped out from government school have performed moderately compared to private school. The children out of school were the occupants of rural areas and they had to travel to

183 schools, which was not liked by them. Girl children were dropped out of school after attaining puberty and they were held up in providing care for their youngest sibling, as their parents were at work. The children, who were differently abled, have not even enrolled in any regular schools due to their severity of disability. Members reported that children out of school suffered from extreme poverty. Only few children, who stopped schooling due to ill health, were willing to study. There were children with difficulties to face the examinations. In general, the out of school children try to avoid going to school, as the teachers ask questions relating to the subjects. Their parents were mostly illiterate and they show less interest in their children‘s education. Other factors for the children being out of school were migration of parents, parent‘s illness and drug addiction, extreme poverty, parents‘ illegal relations, irresponsibility of parents with addiction to alcohol and drug, children find it difficult to read English languages, etc. These children do not have interest in education and in the long run they cannot be forced to attend school. There were out of school children, whose parents were bed ridden or ran away due to illegal affairs or not alive, were deprived support of their parents. Ignorance of parents and villagers about child rights is found to be a key factor leading children to be out school. Negative attitude towards education is conceived among parents and exercised on children.

4. Implications of “Children Not Going to School” for the Children and their Family (Vaiyampatty)

As parents had to leave for their job early in the morning, they do not monitor whether their children were going to school or not. These children often went to work or to play other than to school. Members revealed that majority of the family members did not involve in helping the child to exercise their rights. Majority of the members stated that the parents with laziness attitude remained idle without work and they forced their children to go for work and earn for their daily living. The out of school children having minimum primary level education don‘t want to be admitted in the eligible class due to age factor and shyness to study with the small children. The ignorant and irresponsible father and mother do not show much interest in motoring the children‘s schooling except their earnings from their work. In the beginning, the children used to cut the class and engage in some petty works as a part

184 time and then they shift to full time work by discontinuing their studies permanently. Out of school children‘s parents do not cared about the rights of the children. After a long gap, majority of the out of school children were not covered under health checkup regularly. This had resulted in parents to look after their unhealthy children and this in turn prevented them from attending work for their daily living.

5. Situation of Children Out of School and their Parents‟ Perception about their status (Vaiyampatty)

A wide majority of members stated that it was evident in their Panchayat Union that young children were working in agriculture field, gem cutting unit, automobile shops, hotels / grocery shops, etc. Between the age of 11 and 14 years, the children earn around Rs. 50 per day and they spend on their own for eatables and also they give the balance money to their parents. Locally, the employers were eager to catch the children for economical labour. Members witnessed that local employers at industries and other work places exploited children by engaging them to work in their work places. As per the perception of all the members, the children, who were below average in studies were pulled out as there was lack of supervision by teachers at school as well as the parents do not watch the status of children at home. Later, these children, who were out of school, were likely to adapt adult behaviours as well as bad habits in the working environment. The unskilled parents were unable to monitor and provide necessary support to their children‘s for healthy condition.

6. Feedback on Government Programme and its benefits for “Out of School Children” and their Families (Vaiyampatty)

The members of the Focus Group revealed that majority of the families of children out of school were not covered under the major government schemes available for the poor and weaker sections. At the same time, the members stressed that the family members of children out of school have accessed the benefits such as Ration Card, assistance for flood / accident compensation, assistance for antenatal mothers, government hospital assistance and loan exemption from bank loan, which were so common among all category of people. Members reported that government schemes are available only to those belonging to Scheduled caste and tribe in some

185 areas and the general socio-economically backward groups were excluded irrespective of the caste.

7. Perception and Participation of Community relating to Children Out of School (Vaiyampatty)

The school teachers were ensuring that the parents of out of school children being sensitized on importance of education and the facilities available in schools. However, the teachers were unable to bring coordination among the community members to support the school to work for prevention of children being out of school. Initiatives of Village Level Education Committee were not up to the mark to safeguard the child rights. The National Children Labour Project and also the SSA Scheme along with the local non-government organization have admitted several children in schools last year in two villages. Generally the parents were adamant and it was not easy to convince them to show interest in their children‘s schooling. The family and community were responsible for the children to stay out of school and not getting covered under welfare measures.

8. Suggestions to make the Children to attend School and prevent the Children becoming Out of School (Vaiyampatty)

The members stated that there should be a continuous awareness among the general public about the child rights, importance of education through awareness generation programmes, etc. Based on the child's interest in nature of work, vocational training can be given as a motivation to gain skillful training and education. The major welfare programmes for the families of out of school children can be supervised at school level in order to cover all the real poorest parents in the villages. The people, who were well off should come forward to discuss the issues with local leaders and cooperation to be given for school activities like conduct of awareness program for parents, motivating children for vocational education, etc.

186

FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION – 15

Number of Participants : 8 Place :Tiruchirappalli Urban (Corporation division -1)

1. Socio-demographic particulars of Focus Group (Urban- Corporation division-1)

Gender wise the members of the group constituted 3 male and 5 female members. Their age group falls between 29 and 53 years. They were located in the surrounding of the town, urban area (covering Moovendarnagar, Thookumedainagar, Ezhilnagar, Wouraiyur, Thillainagar, Pandamangalam, Kottai station road, Valluvarnarnagar and Netharshapallivasal) under the Corporation of Tirucirappalli. They were living in these areas for more than 2 years. All the members were educated except one parent, who was illiterate in the group. Members were a combination of both lower class and upper middle class group.

2. Socio-demographic and economic profile of “Children Out of School” (Urban- Corporation division-1)

Majority of the members recorded their response that in their area, the rate of children out of school was gradually decreasing. But still most of the children in the city life were easily be fond of fantasy life, as they were habitually watching cinema films. Greater part of the members stated that both the male and female children between the age of 11 and 14 years remained dropped out from schools due to poor family situations. Habitually, the female children were forced to look after the household works in the absence of their parents and the male children easily absorbed in the work spot in town area. There were 2 to 4 children in one family, particularly among the community of Muslim religion. The prevalence of nuclear family is high. The members revealed that the parents have some negative attitude about education, as it is a long term process. Most importantly, the boys than girls were engaged in out-station work in order to support their poor family. The economic condition of the out of school children‘s family was at a very lower level to run the family in the city.

187

3. Various Factors contributing to “Children remaining Out of School” (Urban- Corporation division-1)

Most of the members conversed that the children, who studied in government schools, were not learning and writing properly than the children, as the learning atmosphere at home was found to be poor. Female children, who were out of school, were feared to go by road, as the schools were situated in the inner streets. Children feared about the examinations and the strictness of teachers. While attending school, most of the children were afraid of the teachers, as they were unable to do the home work regularly due to poor household structure. The other reasons that influence the children being out of school in corporation area were the lack of awareness on education among the parents, lack of attraction in the schools to retain the children in schools, parents migrating for work, disorganized family and insufficient income to run the family in urban area. Besides, the parents were unable to look after the basic needs of their children, which were the prerequisites for the children to continue education. Some children found to be mentally retarded and their poor parents were not willing to admit their children in the residential special schools available for them in the city. In spite of advising the parents to send their children to school regularly, absenteeism was found in schools. The irresponsive attitude of the parents was the main reason for the long absenteeism in school. Moreover, the school management was unsuccessful to address the issues relating to inadequate learning care for each individual in the urban schools. The parents addicted to drug and alcohols were found to be common in urban area for the children out of school to employ in hazardous works for wages.

4. Implications of “Children Not Going to School” for the Children and their Family (Urban- Corporation division-1)

Widely the parents were working for daily wages. Most of the fathers were alcohol addicts and they go for work on alternative days. Some days they were remaining idle without any work. When the parents (bother mother and father) going for work they were unable to watch their children‘s schooling. Due to which the children lack supervision at home, which is must for development and their parents also not support them to exercise their rights. When these out of school children cross 12 years of age, they were unhappy to sit and study with young children as per their

188 qualification level, which is not equal to that regularly school attending children. This results in the decrease of self confidence level among the out of school children to have better life. Most of the out of school children‘s health and personal hygiene and physical development were also affected, as they were not included in the school health programmes and later they become a burden for their parents to look after their illness. As their parents were unable to go for daily work and in turn it affects the income productivity of the family.

5. Situation of Children Out of School and their Parents‟ Perception about their status (Urban- Corporation division-1)

Majority of the members stated that the children, who were out of school, were engaged in tea shops, hotels / grocery shops / markets, garment shops, construction units, automobile shops, cheap rated cigarette rolling unit, domestic work, etc. Majority of the children earn wages between 30 and 75 rupees per day. Members reported that the children out of school were found to be a cheap labourer for long hours of work. Also, the members noticed that, the local employers were exploiting the children in order to extract more work from them. Since the monitoring capacity of parents is poor, the children, who were weak in studies while studying, were simply leaving the school and they engaged themselves in unhealthy activities, particularly the male children were easily engaging in the anti social activities, as perceived by the members. Further, the members reported that the parents were receiving the supplementary income through their child's work. These children were less interested to study and going for fishing and other works to earn money in order to meet their own expenses. The uneducated parents don‘t take much effort for the children to attend school. Out of school children also voluntarily go for work to gain money and often support their families. Some children have faced difficult situation in their life like parents death, uncared guardian, etc and they left the school and shifted to some other places. The absence of basic life skills among the parents resulted in leading their children to poor and unsafe life.

189

6. Feedback on Government Programme and its benefits for “Out Of School Children” and their Families (Urban- Corporation division-1)

Majority of the members disclosed that the benefits of the major programmes of the government were not practically to the reach of actually suffering families of out of school chidlren. The members reported that family members of children out of school accessed very less benefits but the other parents were getting the benefits like assistance from Tamilnadu Adhi Dravidar Housing and Development Corporation Limited, Group house scheme, Swarnjayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojana (SGSY), etc. as they have the influenced the local political leader.

7. Perception and Participation of Community relating to Children Out of School (Urban- Corporation division-1)

Most of the members stated that the community themselves were not attentive about child rights and the importance of education. The parents should be motivated by the school management regularly. All the parents need to be responsible and caring for children to continue schooling. The constant attempt of the Head Masters and teachers of the National Child Labour Project and the contribution of local city donors for poor children‘s education, many children were identified and enrolled in schools to prevent the children becoming never enrolled in the city.

8. Suggestions to make the Children to attend School and prevent the Children becoming Out of School (Urban- Corporation division-1)

Majority of the members revealed that the local political leader should give cooperation to the school authorities for conducting awareness programmes to the parents, motivating children to undergo vocational education and monitoring all the disadvantaged children in the schools through government welfare measures. Teachers require special training to handle the children with problems and problematic children. Counseling in school may be introduced to help children to effectively deal with their problems. Restrict the provision of ration cards to the parents, who send their children to school regularly.

190

FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION – 16

Number of Participants : 11 Place :Tiruchirappalli West (Corporation division -2)

1. Socio-demographic particulars of Focus Group (West- Corporation division-2)

The age groups of members were distributed between 25 and 46 years. Gender wise the members of the group constituted 3 males and 8females. Majority of the members were residing in same locality for more than 2 to 30 years. The locality includes in the surrounding of the west corporation area (Milaguparai, Valluvarnagar, Ramamoorthinagar, Bagahvathi Ammanstreet, Varaganeri, Senthanirpuram, etc.) under the Corporation of Tirucirappalli. Majority of the members were literate. Members were Head Master, Teachers from regular schools, Block Resource Teacher Educator, Teachers from Special Schools for rescued Child labourers, Field Officers from National Child Labour Rehabilitation Project Office, Ward Member / Chairman, Representatives from NGO and Parent-Teachers Association and parents of Children out of school. All the members were the collection of lower to upper middle income group people.

2. Socio-demographic and economic profile of “Children Out of School” (West- Corporation division-2)

Majority of the members stated that though there was gradual decrease in the rate of children out of school, still some 30 to 40 children were out of school in their areas and this varied from one ward to another. Members revealed that the out of school children, who have crossed the age of 11 years, were not attending school regularly due to their family circumstances. The male and female children were either at work for wages or simply at home or wandering on streets. Generally girls were fully engaged in their own household works including care of their siblings. The parents were worried due to their daily labour earnings. Members revealed that there were around 3 children in poor households, where the income level is very low to lead their life in the city. The poor income group spends nearly all their income on food and they were struggling to pay even their rent for the house, etc., since most of

191 their monthly income between ranges between Rs. 1000/- and 5000/-, (depends on the number of person working in the family). Majority of the members recorded that children remained out of school due to very poor income in the family and lack of awareness on education.

3. Various Factors contributing to “Children remaining Out of School” (West- Corporation division-2)

Poverty among the out of school children‘s family seem to be traditional. Yet, many children were deprived of education, love and care, playing, food, dress, school, protection, happy life, etc. were unable to go to school and forced to work. Majority of the members have perceived that the children studying in private schools were fortunate, as they were able to learn English language than the Government school children. The parents of out of school children were not efficient to take care of their children. As they were uneducated, they have negatively believed that the education system not providing employment opportunities for many, who have completed higher education in their area. Moreover, for the routine life, they were suffering with insufficient income and unable to provide proper basic needs like food and care for their children. On the other side, the children were not happy to study due to poverty. Some children do not like to attend the school even to the one situated near to their residence. The female children around 14 years felt uneasy to reach the school by road due to teasing by matured boys in their area. Children, who were out of school, used to face problems such as teachers‘ partiality towards the other well performing children in examinations, strictness, etc. that made the children to be pulled out from schools. The parents were not favourable towards providing good education for the children because of various issues such as separated parents, having too many children, leaving the children at home and going for work, very low income for the family, adamant and aggressive attitude of the children to stop schooling, children‘s fear of teacher and exams, school authorities‘ poor encouragement for the disadvantaged children, fathers‘ negative behaviour and illegal affairs, etc. highly discriminated the children to be away from school for a long time. The children who were chronically ill unable to continue education in the normal school and the facilities available were not fully utilized by the parents.

192

4. Implications of “Children Not Going to School” for the Children and their Family (West- Corporation division-2)

Majority of the children do not have the interest in education and do not understand the subject and are even unable to write or read. Greater part of the members viewed that as the parents were keen to earn for daily living, they don‘t see that their children prepare themselves to attend school. This has made their children to cut the class and engage with the non-school going children either to play or wander. After completing 4th or 5th standard, the children who have been out of school for more than 2 years, have the bashfulness to attend the class with small children at school. Children out of school appeared to be wandering without any aspiration and not respecting the parents in later period. Children were found to be with low self- esteem and motivation, resulting in no positive goals in life. Parents were distressed about their children‘s poor condition and they don‘t have the ability to care for their children to attend the school. The working children were exposed to unhealthy living condition. Majority of children out school were anemic and malnourished. Obviously, these unhealthy children were not included in welfare programmes accessible in schools. Hence, the concentration of parents diverted to set right their children‘s illness instead of going to work to run the family. This kind of missing out the daily income has made the parents to face unproductive life.

5. Situation of Children Out of School and their Parents‟ Perception about their status (West- Corporation division-2)

Majority of the children while attending the school used to study for half a day in school and the next half a day they leave the school to play or to involve in household works and also engage in work for wages or simply wandering with bad friends. Some children going for work were vexed because of their inability to gain education, no identity in society and even no support in family. Some children were even committing suicide for not studying and getting poor marks in examinations. The differently challenged children‘s condition is worst, as they don‘t have happiness in life. The family situation makes the poor parents to struggle to manage the day to day life without their working children‘s wages. Children out of school were engaged in work (cheap cigarette (beedi) rolling, rice mill work, small scale industry, domestic work, catering and hotel, etc.) for even less than Rs. 20 per day. Members

193 have observed the little children spending more time in the work spots to receive a meager pay from the employers, who were exploitative in nature. The majority of out of school children were exposed to infectious diseases. Some children were tightly engaged in household work by their parents. Progressively, the children show their disinterest towards education, they start to involve in unhealthy activities for their survival and also they start to adapt bad habits like cigarette smoking, taking alcohol, watching adult movies, etc. Even the parents who have little knowledge about the importance of education were unable to support for their children‘s schooling. Most of the children were found to be troubled due to parents‘ illness, loss of either father or mother, poor care of parents, negative behavior and bad habits of parents, etc. and they were not benefitted under welfare activities in the school. By and large the members opined that the situation of children out of school in urban was most horrible, as they were easily engrossed in anti-social behaviours.

6. Feedback on Government Programme and its benefits for “Out of School Children” and their Families (West- Corporation division-2)

Majority of the members reported that the efforts were taken to include the children out of school under bridge course (preparing the students to join mainstream education from temporary school to regular school) arranged by National Child Labour Projects (NCLP) and Sarva Shakshi Abiyan (SSA) Programmes. The children were provided with eggs every week, bus pass, scholarship, note books, etc available for the disadvantaged children. But the common opinion of the members was the poor families of out of school children were unable to get the benefits from government schemes such as land for housing, construction of houses and improvement of business with the support of loans offered by nationalized banks, etc. Normally the poor families manage themselves in some local self-help group activities run by NGOs. The ration card facility, flood relief assistance, bank loan, stipend for antenatal mothers, etc. were given to the families of the children out of school, particularly for the Schedule Caste and Backward Caste families. But there was no survey taken especially to evaluate the benefits that have reached the families of out of school with regard to housing patta, group house, NABARD, Nationalized bank, etc. The other people were receiving old age pension, electricity facilities etc.

194

The National Child Labour Project have been provided Rs.100 stipend for the children attending specials schools regularly.

7. Perception and Participation of Community relating to Children Out of School (West- Corporation division-2)

The members revealed that with the coordination of NGO, the library facilities and computer facilities have been provided by the local leaders. But, the families, who were really suffering, were not fully supported under government assistance by the respective ward leaders. The teaching assistants under SSA scheme and the teachers of NCLP Special Schools have taken efforts to advise the poor parents of out of school children and also the students, who tend to drop out of school to attend the school continuously. The regular school teachers expressed that they have gone for home visits to all the children‘s house to educate them about the importance of education. Though many children at primary level were promoted to secondary level, efforts were taken to sustain the children in schools. The children were motivated to continue education in NCLP School for few days initially. Children, who have been in the mainstreamed with NCLP / non-formal school to Regular school, were again gradually stopped from attending school. Free food, uniform and awareness programme were provided to send back the children to school and also counseling their parents about education

8. Suggestions to make the Children to attend School and prevent the Children becoming Out of School (West- Corporation division-2)

Majority of the members stated that 100 percent enrollment of children in the schools can be possible only with coordination of teacher, parent, community and the government have to work as a team on continuous basis. Teachers should conduct awareness programme by involving parents about importance of education and other government schemes for the benefit of poor. Morning half day work, and afternoon half day school facilities to be provided with vocational educational education. Stipend for the children attending the school can be given on daily basis. The additional number of teachers and new counselors may be employed to provide individual attention for the poor children. Children who were failing in exams should be shortlisted and they should be properly guided on noting their difficulties to make

195 them attend exam and get through at least 10th Std examination. The government assistance for families should be monitored at the school itself with a help of opening a separate wing under various welfare departments. Government should provide adequate benefits for the wellbeing of the families of children out of school in order to save the children from exploitation. There should be effective legal steps for the employers who are engaged in the work of such children.

196

FINDINGS, SUGGESTIONS AND CONCLUSION

In this chapter, the researcher has presented the summary of methodology, the salient findings of the present study emerging from the survey, case studies and focus group discussion. Based on the methodology of the study, the researcher has attempted to triangulate the findings to validate the results relating ―Children Out-of- School in Tiruchirappalli District. Subsequently, the researcher has put forth the suggestions based on the study to the various stakeholders in order to further reduce or nullify this social issue.

I. SUMMARY OF METHODOLOGY

The aim of the study is to analyze and understand the current situation of children out of school in Tiruchirappalli District. The objectives of the study includes to study the socio-demographic and economic profile of ―Children currently out of School‖; to understand the various factors that contributes to ―Children remaining out of School‖; to examine the implications of ―Children not going to School‖ on the child and his (or) her family; to find out the situation of children below 14 years, who are out of school and their parents‘ perception about their status; to obtain feedback on existing government schemes and programmes, and its benefits for ―Out of School Children‖ and their families; to explore the perception and participation of the community (Parents, Teachers, Community leaders, Officials and NGOs) relating to children who are out of school; to suggest suitable measures to prevent the children being out of school and mainstreaming the children, who are currently out of school. The researcher had applied Descriptive Design with Mixed Method (Qualitative and Quantitative method) and exercised the triangulation technique to combine findings from different sources. Proportionate Stratified Random sampling technique under the Probability Sampling Method was used to the draw samples of ―Out of School Children‖.

With regard to data collection, Self prepared interview schedule was used to collect quantitative data from children and their parents. Qualitative tools such as case study and focus group discussions were applied so as to elicit primary data from the children and key informants such as Parents, Teachers (regular government 197 school), Teachers (Special Schools for rescued Childlabourers), Panchayat President (local community), Field Officer (for Childlabour Rehabilitation Project), School Head Master (regular government school), Representatives from Parents-Teacher Association, and Representatives from non-governmental organizations / clubs in the concerned blocks. Earlier, both the interview Schedule and interview guide was also tested with the targeted respondents and group members in 2 localities and necessary modifications were made. The researcher met 208 respondents individually and collected relevant quantitative data from children out of school in Tiruchirappalli district covering fourteen panchayats / blocks in rural area and two divisions in the corporation area. The collected data was entered, coded and analysed using the computer software. Tests such as Correlation, Chi-square, ANOVA were used to draw relevant inferences. In order to collect qualitative data the researcher conducted Case Study with 5 Children, who were out of school and 16 Focus Group Discussions with its respective target members and the same have been analyzed so as to arrive better findings. The qualitative and quantitative data were combined to bring out effective result using triangulation method.

Johnson and Onwuegbuzie (2004), define mixed methods research as ―the class of research where the researcher mixes or combines quantitative and qualitative research techniques, methods, approaches, concepts, or language into a single study‖. One way of overcoming the disadvantages of individual methods and enhancing the accuracy (and depth) of self-report data is through the combination of different methods. There is a growing methodological literature on mixed method research. Mixed methods are used for a variety of reasons:

1. To develop or evaluate study tools and procedures. 2. To examine different aspects of the research question. 3. To broaden the scope of the research. 4. To triangulate results in order to get more accurate data.

The definition of ―mixed methods‖ do not limit to the combination of quantitative and qualitative approaches and it is considered that the use of different quantitative methods together, or different qualitative methods, could also be described as ―mixed method‖ if they are used in the same project to study the same

198 phenomenon or different aspects of the same phenomenon. Padget (2008) defines triangulation as a concept adapted from navigational science involving the use of ―two or more sources to achieve a comprehensive picture of a fixed point of reference‖. By gathering data from multiple sources (data triangulation) or utilizing multiple analysts to review the data (observer triangulation), qualitative researchers are able to achieve what Drisko (1997) refers to as ―completeness‖ or an exhaustive response to the research question. Data triangulation might involve gathering data at multiple points in time or using varied data collection strategies such as interviews, focus groups, or observations (Creswell & Miller, 2000). Triangulation by observer involves having more than one researcher analyze the data to be sure important ideas are not missed and that there is some consistency to how data analysis is linked to the findings. Padgett (2008) suggests that triangulation is particularly relevant with case studies and grounded-theory approaches, including mixed method studies (methodological triangulation).

According to Denzin (1978), three outcomes arise from triangulation: convergence, inconsistency and contradiction. Whichever of these outcomes prevail, the researcher can construct superior explanations of the observed social phenomena. Although acknowledging that triangulation may not be suitable for all research purposes, Jick (1979) noted the following advantages of triangulation: (a) it allows researchers to be more confident of their results; (b) it stimulates the development of creative ways of collecting data; (c) it can lead to thicker, richer data;(d) it can lead to the synthesis or integration of theories; (e) it can uncover contradictions, and (f) by virtue of its comprehensiveness, it may serve as the litmus test for competing theories. While convergence across data sources is important for triangulation, divergence can also play an important role in understanding the phenomenon under study.

Hence, the analyzed data was interpreted accordingly and research findings were drawn.

199

FINDINGS

II. FINDINGS OF THE STUDY

In this section, the researcher has attempted to present the salient findings of the study gathered from all the three methods adopted. They are classified into three parts viz., findings from Interview Schedule, Case Study and Focus Group Discussion. The detailed and major findings from Interview Schedule, Case Studies and Focus Group Discussions are given below.

DETAILED FINDINGS FROM INTERVIEW SCHEDULE

The following are the detailed findings from Interview Schedule (for the Children Out- of- School and their Parents)

1. Socio-demographic and Economic Profile of “Children Out of School”

Socio-demographic Profile

1. A majority (94.7%) of the respondents are in the age group of 11to 14 years while only 5.2% of the respondents are in the age group of 7-10 years. (Table No.1).

2. More than half (54.8%) of the boys were out of school compared to 45.2% of the girls. (Table No.1).

3. With regard to the education of the children, more than half of the respondents (56.3%) have completed their school education between 4th and 6th standard and 2.9% of the respondents were illiterate and have been never enrolled in schools. (Table No.1).

4. A significant percentage (68.8%) of the respondents resides in rural areas, 16.3% of the respondents reside in urban areas, 8.2% of them reside in semi urban and 6.7% resides in slum areas. (Table No.1).

5. More than one third of the respondents (38.9%) belong to the Most Backward Caste (MBC) while 34.1% belong to the Scheduled Caste / Scheduled Tribes 200

community and the remaining 26.9% belong to the Backward Caste (BC). (Table No.1).

6. There is no statistical significance between Migration of Family with regard to respondents‘ Sex is observed. This shows that the Migration of Family do not have any association with the Sex of the respondents (Table 29).

Economic profile

7. More than one third (39.9%) of the respondents earn a family monthly income of Rs. 2001 – Rs. 3000 while 30.8% earn below Rs. 2000 a month. 23.0 % and 6.3 % of the respondents earn a monthly income between Rs. 3001-4000 and above Rs. 4001-5000 respectively. (Table No.2).

8. A majority (80.8%) of the respondents belong to nuclear families while the remaining 19.2% belong to the joint family system. (Table No.2).

9. More than half (58.2%) of the respondents‘ family size consists of 5-6 members, 21.6% of them have 7-8 members in their family and 10.1% have 9 and more members in their family. (Table No.2).

10. More than half (59.1%) of the respondents live with their parents, 15.4% of them live with father only, 21.6% live with mother only and 3.8 % of the respondents do not have parents and hence live with their guardian. (Table No.2).

11. Regarding the parent‘s marital status a significant percentage (61.5%) of the respondents‘ parents are living together, but 20.7% of the parents have been separated and 17.8% of the respondents‘ parents were widowed. (Table No.2).

12. A considerable percentage (73.6%) of the respondents attended Government school before they discontinued their studies, while 9.6% of them attended Government Aided schools. (Table No.3).

13. Regarding the incidence of Out of School, majority of the respondents (89.9%) have dropped out from school and 7.2% have been pushed out from school, while 2.9% of the respondents have not enrolled for education. (Table No.4).

201

2. Various Factors contributing to “Children remaining Out of School” School Related Factors

14. Regarding problems faced at school, more than half of the responses (58.6%) received from the children states that there is inadequate attention to their learning in schools, while 38.9% of the children met failure in exams. Nearly one third (31.3%) of the responses indicate that children were not happy with the infrastructure in the school and 17.3% articulated about irresponsible teachers in school. (Table No.5).

15. More than one third (35.6%) of the respondents have attended school at a distance between 3km and 4km from their home and 29.8% of them have attended school at a distance less than 2km. A significant percentage of the respondents (64.5%) had to travel for a distance of more than 4 km to reach their school. A significant percentage (60%) of the respondents revealed that in the absence of transportation facilities, they had to walk this distance to reach their school. (Table No.5).

16. A sizeable 69.2% of the children said that they enjoyed the experience of going to school, while 27.9% said that they don‘t like the school. (Table No.5).

17. With regard to interest in studies, almost half of the respondents (49.5%) said that they were not interested and 47.6% said they were interested in studies and 2.9% expressed that they don‘t know about studies. (Table No.5).

18. About health issues posed a hindrance for schooling, it is observed that a considerable percentage (78.8%) of the respondents did not have any health issues, while remaining 21.2% of the respondents reported that health issues prevented them from attending school. (Table No.5).

19. With reference to the correlation analysis the School related factors of Out-of- School children such as the problems faced in school, distance between the school and the home, transport facilities to the school from the place of residence, interest in studies, likeness towards school, etc has statistical correlation with the Psychological factors such as Out-of-School Children‘s fear, deprivation, separation from parents, parents‘ motivation, incidence of abuse, etc (Table 23).

202

Psychological Factors

20. A significant percentage (66.3%) of the responses indicates that these children had a fear of examination, while 36% of the responses obtained show that these children feared the teacher. (Table No.6).

21. More than half of the responses (51.4%) signify that these children felt that they were deprived of love and care from parents, while 42.3% of the responses avowed that they were deprived of adequate support for education. More than one fifth (21.6%) of the responses confirm that children out of school were deprived of adequate health care. Consequently, it is evident that a sizeable percentage (above 75%) of the respondents had encountered one or multifaceted deprivation. (Table No.6).

22. More than one fifth (21.6%) of the respondents said they have experienced separation anxiety when their parents were away at work. A considerable percentage (78.4%) of the respondents however was not disturbed about separation from their parents. (Table No.6)

23. Exactly half of the respondents‘ (50%) parents have motivated their children to go to school. While more than one fourth (28.4%) of the parents did not give any encouragement or motivation to their children to attend school, the remaining 21.63% of the respondents‘ parents compelled their children to stop education. (Table No.6).

Social Factors

24. Regarding parental pressure, it is apparent that a sizeable percentage, (76.4%) of the respondents did not experience any coercion from parents to quit school while the remaining 23.6% of them reported that their parents forced them to quit the school. (Table No.7).

25. With regard to activities of children at times of truancy, nearly half (52.4%) of the responses reported that the children were engaged in working for wages, while 33.7% of the responses say that the children have spent their time on playing and

203

having fun with friends. Nearly one fourth (22.1%) of the responses explain that they were assisting their parents at work (Table No.7).

26. In view of the problems faced by the families of the respondents, it was seen that more than half of the responses (56.2%) reported that their family income was insufficient to meet every day expenses. While 21.6% of the replies indicate that the respondents faced problems like parents quarrelling and cruelty and 19.2% of them said their family was disorganised. A little less than one fifth (17.8%) of the responses of the children shows that either father or mother is not alive. 16.7% of the responses confirm that the children have stopped school due to house hold work or to take care of their siblings, whereas 15.3% of the responses received were indicated that children have stopped schooling due to the irresponsibility shown by their family (Table No.7).

27. 21.1% of the respondents reported that they stopped education due to frequent migration of parents due to work, begging, etc. (Table No.7).

28. It is also observed that a considerable majority of the respondents (80.3%) reported that their community was not a discouragement to stop schooling while 19.7% of the respondents stated that the community was discouraging them to stop schooling. (Table No.7).

29. It is also observed that there is a statistical correlation between School related factors of children out of school and Social factors of children out of school such as activities involved while truant, problems faced in family, parents‘ migration affecting education, discouragement from the community, etc. (Table 23)

30. With regard to ANOVA tests applied, there is a significant difference between Monthly Family Income of Children out of school with respect to Social factors responsible for Children out of school and also there is a significant difference between Monthly Family Income of Children out of school with respect to Psychological factors for children out of school (Table 27).

31. With regard to the mean scores obtained between the Factors responsible for children out of school and the Locality of Children out of School, they do have 204

some difference (Table 25) but statistically there is no significance.

Experiences of Abuse

32. More than half of the respondents (51.4%) reported that they have been abused in one or many ways like experienced rude behaviour, scolded and beaten by either, employer / stranger, teachers and family members. About a little less than half (48.6%) of the respondents revealed that they have never faced any incidence of abuse. (Table No.8).

Experience of Bullying

33. A considerable percentage (59.6%) of the responses has not experienced bullying incidents at school. Whereas more than one third (40.3%) of the respondents have been bullied for several reasons such as for not playing, entertainment, commenting on physical appearance and behavior of parents. (Table No.9.

3. Implications of “Children Not Going to School” for the Children and their Family

Implication to Child

34. It is seen that a significant 66.8% of the children experiencing family burden, as they had to bring in additional income to support domestic expenses, 45.7% of them did not have skills of literacy, 42.3% have experienced isolation and poor health, 29.3% have become disobedient and inferior and 20.1% have lost their childhood freedom and self esteem. (Table No.10).

Implication to Family

35. With regard to the family, the majority (89.4%) felt that the families have poor monitoring practice towards development of children and thus a considerable 70.2 % opine that the families are becoming less progressive to manage the cost of living and 63.9 % of the families do not have proper recognition in the society. (Table No.10).

Future Aspiration

36. With regard to the respondents‘ future aspirations, nearly one third (28.8%) of the 205

respondents had not decided anything about their future plan. More than one fourth (25.9%) of the respondents expressed their wish to become drivers, mechanic, etc and nearly one fifth (19.2%) of the respondents aspired to become professionals like teacher, police, doctor, etc. 14.4% of the respondents preferred to get married and settle down as a family. (Table No.11).

37. With regard to Chi-square test analysis there is an association between the Size of the Family and the level of Implications of Children being out of school. As the Size of the Family reduces the level of Implications on Children out of school and their family is found to be increasing. Similarly as the Size of the Family increases the level of Implication on Children out of school and their family is found to be decreasing. This explains that the Size of Family refers to number of the adults and the children existing in a family, so the Implication of being out of school on the Children and their family depends on the number of children existing in the family. Thus the Family Size of 4 and below have 2 to 4 children and when these 2 – 4 children were out of school the level of Implication of being out of school on the Children and their family will be high, as there are 1 or 2 earning persons in the family, the dependency of family members is high compared to other Size of Family, which also have adult earning members and dependency of family members is managed results in variations in the level of Implication of Children being out of school on the Children and their family (Table 28).

4. Situation of Children Out of School and their Parents‟ Perception about their Status

Engagement in unhealthy non-school Activities

38. As per the information obtained on situation of children out of school, a significant percentage of the respondents (65.9%) were engaged in child labour. 14.4% of the respondents were in domestic work, 13.9% of them were living on the streets, and 1.4% of the respondents were engaged in begging. (Table No.12).

39. With regard to the nature of work done by the child labourers, it is seen that 29.3% of the respondents were working for daily wages, while 9.6% of the

206

respondents were engaged in goat or pig rearing, 6.2% of the respondents were working as domestic servants and the remaining 19.7% of the children were engaged in other occupations such as Gem Cutting (2.4%), Quarry work (1.0), Beedi rolling (2.4%), Match box making (1.0), Brick kilns (1.0), Construction work (1.4), Agriculture work (5.3%), Catering and Hotel (3.4%), Rice mill work (1.0%), Automobile (1.4%)and Small scale industry (0.4%). (Table No.12).

40. With regard to children‘s engagement in unhealthy activities, a significant percentage (67.8%) of the respondents was first engaged in these unhealthy activities at the age of 12 to 14 years while 29.8% of the respondents started these activities between 9 to 11 years and the remaining 2.4% of them at a very early age of 6 to 8 years.

41. More than half (53.4%) of the respondents worked for 8 to 12 hours, while 28.8% of them worked for 6-8 hours a day and only 5.3 % of the respondents said they worked for less than 2 hours. (Table No.12).

Impact of unhealthy non-school activities

42. A significant percentage (60.1%) of the responses indicate that these children experience adult behaviour even from their early childhood, while 52.4% of the responses show that they were exposed to unprotected work environment. It was also observed that more than one fourth (29%) of the respondents experienced starvation or hunger which could impact their health, while 25% of the responses report that they were being exploited by others. (Table No.12).

Opinion on unhealthy non-school activities

43. More than half (52.4%) of the respondents opined that they themselves were responsible for their activities when out of school. More than one fourth (26.4%) of the respondents, held their parents to be responsible for their activities. Nearly one fifth (19.7%) of the respondents responded that their friends had influenced them to involve in these activities. (Table No.13).

44. A considerable percentage (75%) of the respondents had started engaging in these activities after discontinuing school and 22.1% of the respondents were first 207

engaged in them even before stopping school. (Table No.13).

45. On questioning the respondents about whether the present activities were acceptable to them, more than half (53%) of them said it was not acceptable to them and that they were struggling every day. The Remaining 47% of the respondents said that it was acceptable, as there was no other alternative for them to lead their daily life. (Table No.13).

Opinion on Children engaged in Work / other activities

46. About the respondents‘ parents‘ opinion regarding the activities of their children, a little less than one third of the respondents (30.8%) were forcing their child to work. Majority (69.2%) of the respondents revealed that they did not force their child to work but that their children were influenced by other factors for going to work. (Table No.14).

47. Regarding benefits received by the parents from their child‘s work, it is seen that a significant percentage (62.5%) of the parents confirmed that their family had benefitted by their child‘s earning and the remaining 37.5% of the parents said that they did not receive any benefit from their child‘s activities. (Table No.14).

48. More than one third (38.9%) of the respondents opined that their children had developed bad habits. (Table No.14).

Perception on Children‟s un-schooling

49. More than half (50.4%) of the responses show that the parents need their children to generate income for the family and so their children have dropped schooling. Slightly less than half (49.5%) of the responses reveal that parents feel that their children lacked interest in education, and more than one third (35%) of the responses seems to indicate parents‘ inability to be a mentor for their children as a reason for the non-schooling of their children. (Table No.15).

50. When asked about the active steps taken for children‘s education, almost one third (32.2 %) of the parents expressed that they haven‘t bothered about their child‘s education and 23.5% said that they expected their child to sit and study

208

even if they were playful. (Table No.15).

51. More than one third (40.9%) of the parents said that they cannot provide full support for their children to continue education. A little more than one fourth (28.4%) of the responses received from parents reveals that children were adamant to discontinue school. 35.5% of the responses obtained from parents show that their children could not continue school education due to inadequate resources in the family and 6.3% of the responses reveal that parents perceived chronic illness / disability as an obstacle for their children to attend school. (Table No.15).

Perception of Children‟s Worries

52. Concerning the children‘s worries in their life, a majority (85.5 %) of the responses obtained from parents show that their children are worried about their parents‘ incapability, which affects them to struggle for their daily life. Nearly half (49%) of the responses of parents confirm that their children are worried due to their self inability to cope up with life situation. Remaining percentage of the responses i.e. 21.6% of the parents revealed that their children are worried about family conflict, 11.5% said that the teachers‘ neglect led their children to face painful state, 9.1% of the parents‘ felt that their children are worried about their father or mother‘s anti-social behaviour, 8.7% parents revealed that their children are worried of ailing parents and 5.2% of the responses disclosed that death of father or mother or siblings have made the children to be too worried. (Table No.16).

Perception of Scholastic difficulties

53. With regard to parents‘ perception of scholastic difficulties, 61% of the parents responded that their children found it difficult to get along with others while 15.4% of them stated that their children were lethargic and slow learners. Other difficulties were fear of subjects, speech and writing problems. (Table No.17).

Perception on Monitoring Child‟s Achievement

54. On viewing the Parents‘ perception on monitoring their Out of School Children‘s

209

Achievement, it was noticed that more than half (50.9%) of the parents were unaware about their child‘s achievement, as these children have missed the opportunities provided at school. More than one fifth (22.6%) of the parents felt that they had acquired certain work skills. Likewise some 15.4% of the parents said that their children were good in carrying out household work, and had acquired skills relating to family life. 11.0% of the parents felt that their children were performing well in cultural and fine arts at the community level and that they were able to see their child‘s talents. 1.4% of parents felt that their children were very responsive and obedient towards them at home and was a good sign of development. (Table No.18).

Person Responsible for Child‟s education

55. With respect to persons responsible for children‘s education, a significant percentage (63%) of the responses feel that either parents or family is responsible for their children to continue education in school, while 61.1% of the responses say that the child itself is being responsible and a little less than half (43.2%) of the responses state that the school is responsible. More than one fourth of the responses (28.3%) say that the Society / Local Community are responsible for the children to continue school education. (Table No.19).

56. The Incidence of Out of School have significant correlation with the Perception of Parents about the status of Children of out of school, who were engaged in child labour, beggary, stealing and other unsociable behaviour (Table 24).

57. There is statistical association between the level of Incidence of out of School and their Parents Perception about the status of the Children out of school (Chi-square test Table 30).

5. Feedback on Government programme, and its benefits for “Out of School Children” and their Families

Awareness on Government welfare measures

58. Regarding parents‘ knowledge on government schemes for children out of school and their family, a significant percentage (62.7%) of the parents had awareness

210

about Scholarship programmes and Self-Help Groups. More than one third of the parents (39.9%) were aware about National child Labour Project Schools, 33.2% were aware about Sarva Shiksha Abiyan and 23.1% had knowledge of Housing Patta scheme. A little less than one fourth (22%) of the responses of parents indicate that they had knowledge about Government Schemes such as Swarna Jayanti Shahari Rozgar Yojana (SJSRY) (0.96 %), Tamilnadu Adi Dravidar Housing and Development Corporation (THADCO) (3.8%), Prime Minister Rozgar Yojna (PMRY) (5.7%), Group house (8.6%), and National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD) (2.9%). Less than one third (29.8%) of the parents are unaware of the government programmes. (Table No.20).

Accessibility of Government welfare measures

59. With regard to availing government schemes it is observed that more than half (53.3%) of the responses indicate that these families had availed scholarship / stipend programme for education, while more than one fourth (34.6%) of the families had benefitted from Self Help Group schemes. Other families had benefitted from schemes like SSA – ―Education for all scheme‖ Schools (1.9%), NCLP Child Labour Special Schools (2.4%), Housing patta (4.8%), Group house / katcha house (2.4%), Cooperative department and Nationalized Bank loans (1.9%), Self Help Group activities (34.6%), Flood relief assistance and Accident relief assistance (12.5%). More than one third (44.7%) of the parents have not benefitted under major government programmes. (Table No.21).

60. There is a significant correlation between Incidence of Out of School and Government Schemes accessibility among children out of school and their family. This indicates that poor Reachability of Government Schemes such as SGSY, SGSRY, THADCO, PMRY, Housing Patta, Group house, Nationalized Bank loans, etc has an impact on Incidence of Out of School. (Table 24).

61. With regard to ANOVA tests applied, there is a significant difference observed between Castes with respect to Reachability of Government Schemes. Based on Duncan Multiple Range test, the respondents belonging to the Backward Caste (BC) have significantly higher level of Reachability to Government Schemes than 211

the respondents belonging to SC / ST and MBC Castes. Also there is no significant difference between MBC and SC/ST Castes (Table 26)

6. Perception and Participation of Community relating to Children Out- of-School

62. A significant percentage (69.2%) of them has never received any help from the community for their children to attend school continuously. A little less than one third (30.8%) of the respondents said that they have received help from the community in order to make their children attend school regularly. (Table No.22).

7. Suggestions to make the Children to attend School and prevent the Children becoming Out of School

63. More than half (59.1) of the members suggested that the scholarship and stipend amount can be given to all the socio-economically backward students in order to motivate the children at all levels of village / municipal administration irrespective of the community they belonged.

64. While few (16.8%) of the parents felt that the services / schools for the differently abled (disabled) children to be available in their local areas.

65. More than half (75.4%) of the members said that in order to know the student‘s insight on subject, approach of teachers to each individual (children) is mandatory.

66. Majority (81.2%) of the members stated that all the families of out of school children to be provided with necessary assistance under the government programmes, which has to be strictly and closely monitored by local community leaders.

212

A. FINDINGS BASED ON QUANTITATIVE DATA

1. MAJOR FINDINGS FROM INTERVIEW SCHEDULE (IS)

The following are the major findings from Interview Schedule (IS)[conducted for Children out of School and their Parents].

1. Socio-demographic and Economic Profile of “Children Out of School”- [IS]

1. Vast majority of the children out of school were in the age group of 11-14 years among which sizeable (more than half) number of out of school children reside in rural areas

2. The size of the families of more than half of the out of school children consists of members between 5 and 6 numbers. More than half of the boys were out of school compared to the girls.

3. Majority of the children have dropped or pulled out due to personal and family reasons, and pushed out due to reasons pertaining to their teachers and schools.

4. More than one third of the children, who are out of school, belong to the Most Backward Caste (MBC) followed by Scheduled Caste / Scheduled Tribes and Backward Caste (BC).

5. Majority of the children who were out of school belong to nuclear families

6. Majority of the of the respondents earn a family monthly income of below Rs. 3000 per month

2. Various Factors contributing to “Children remaining Out of School” - [IS]

7. More than half of the children faced inadequate care to their learning in schools

8. Sizeable number of children said that they enjoyed the experience of going to school. This shows that though children have interest in school, there are other factors which contribute for remaining out of school.

213

9. Almost half of the children who were out of school were not interested in studies

10. More than half of the children have inadequate transport facility to reach their school, which are located at least 2 - 4 km away from their residence.

11. Majority of the children have reported that their health conditions were not hindrance for them to attend schools.

12. Sizeable (more than half) number of children, who were out of school, had dropped out due to fear of examination and followed by more than one third of these children feared the teacher

13. More than half of the children, who were out of school were deprived of love and care from parents

14. More than half of the children, who were abused by either their parents or teacher or stranger / employer did not continue their school education.

15. More than half of the children had not experienced any bullying incidents at school while more than one third of the children, who had been bullied in school, did not continue their school education.

16. Migration of parents had affected the child‘s continuity of schooling. One fifth of the children have stopped education due to frequent migration of parents

17. Exactly half of the parents of out of school children have not motivated their wards to attend school.

18. Majority of the children did not experience any coercion from the parents to quit their schooling

19. Little more than half of the children who were truant had engaged in part time work.

20. More than half of the children reported that they have dropped school due to extreme poverty.

214

21. One fifth of the children had stopped schooling due to the discouragement from their community members.

3. Implications of “Children Not Going to School” for the Children and their Family - [IS]

22. More than half of the children, who were out of school had faced burden of their families

23. Nearly half of these children did not have literacy skills.

24. Vast majority of the parents of out-of-school children have poor monitoring practice towards development of children

25. Nearly one third of the children, who were out of school, had not decided anything about their future plan and one fourth of the children wish to become drivers, mechanic, etc.

26. Majority of the families of out of school children had become less progressive to manage the cost of living

4. Situation of Children Out of School and their Parents‟ Perception about their Status - [IS]

27. More than half of the children, who were out of school had engaged in unhealthy activities like child labour, begging, steeling, etc. A small percentage of them were engaged in domestic work, living in the streets begging.

28. More than half of the children were exposed to long working hours (8 to 12 hours a day) and were at various work places which were unsafe and hazardous.

29. More than half of the children opined that the unhealthy activities carried out by them at present were not acceptable to them.

30. More than one third of the parents of the out of school children opined that their wards had developed bad habits due to unhealthy activities and work

215

31. Half of the parents of out of school children opined that their children generating income for the family and they lacked interest in education and more than one third of the responses seems to indicate parents‘ inability to mentor their children as a reason for the non-schooling of their children

32. Nearly one third of the parents had not bothered about the education of their wards.

33. More than one third of the parents of out of school children stated that they cannot provide complete support for their children‘s education.

34. Vast majority of the parents perceived that their children were worried about their parents‘ incapability.

35. Majority of the parents responded that their children found it difficult to get along with others.

36. More than half of the parents were unaware about their child‘s achievement

37. Majority of the parents of out of school children felt that both parents and the children themselves are responsible for their children to continue education in school.

5. Feedback on Government Programme and its benefits for “Out Of School Children” and their Families - [IS]

38. More than half of the parents were aware of the two or three welfare measures provided by the government while nearly one third of the parents stated that they are unaware of the major welfare measures offered by government for poor families.

39. More than half of the parents had availed at least one or two of the assistance provided through the government programmes. More than one third of the respondents‘ parents revealed that they had not availed any assistance under major Government schemes for their family except schooling, stipend and scholarship. 216

6. Perception and Participation of Community relating to Children Out of School - [IS]

40. One fifth of the children had stopped schooling because of poor encouragement from their community members.

41. More than half of the parents have never received any assistance from the community for their children to attend school continuously.

7. Suggestions to make the Children to attend School and prevent the Children becoming Out of School - [IS]

42. More than half of the members suggested that the scholarship and stipend amount can be given to all the socio-economically backward students in order to motivate the children at all levels of village / municipal administration irrespective of the community they belonged. While few of the parents felt that the services / schools for the differently abled (disabled) children to be available in their local areas.

43. More than half of the members said that in order to know the student‘s insight on subject, approach of teachers to each individual (children) is mandatory.

44. Majority of the members stated that all the families of out of school children to be provided with necessary assistance under the government programmes, which has to be strictly and closely monitored by local community leaders.

B. FINDINGS BASED ON QUALITATIVE DATA

2. MAJOR FINDINGS FROM CASE STUDIES (CS)

The following are the major findings from the Case Studies (CS) conducted for five children, who were out of school.

1. Socio-demographic and Economic Profile of “Children Out of School” - [CS]

1. A child, who had not enrolled in school, resided in the rural area for many years.

217

2. Male child dropped out school while studying 6th std in Government School

3. Nuclear family had led to lack of attention by the parents on the schooling of the child.

4. The child was taken care by guardian in the absence of parents

5. The parents were fortune tellers and earn a very little income that they are unable to meet the demands of the family

2. Various Factors contributing to “Children remaining Out of School” - [CS]

6. Out of school child was not having interest in studies. While truant the child engaged in playing with friends, watching movie, etc.

7. Child avoided schooling due to long school hours and the long time taken to travel, since her home was not close by.

8. Poor health condition of the child was a barrier for the child to continue schooling.

9. Teacher was partial towards the children, who were performing well. Child got offended, when the teacher compared their performance with their other fellow class mates. Fear of exams forced the child to remain out of school

10. First born female stopped schooling at the age of 13 years in order to take of their siblings.

11. Girl child felt insecure and was scared to be alone in the absence of parents during migration. Child with his mother migrated from Kerala found difficulty to get admission in regular school due to non availability of migration certificate, ration identity card, etc. Even the mother was unable to get welfare assistance from government without ration identity card and without her father, who had left the family due to extra marital relationship.

218

12. Migration of parents had affected the child‘s continuity of schooling

13. One of the respondents said that there was no one to provide assistance for her to continue her education.

14. Extreme poverty was seen high in the child‘s family, which consists of more than 4 children.

15. Head Master and Teacher need to advise their poor illiterate parents and guardian for retaining her and also her friends in school to play and study in school.

16. A child responded that her guardian used to beat her to do the household work properly on full time basis.

17. Though the school environment was not conducive to study, the child used to play with friends and sometimes the teacher used to tell stories songs, which was interesting for the child to attend school.

18. Students were teasing the child by comparing with media personalities, which led the child to avoid schooling

3. Implications of “Children Not Going to School” for the Children and their Family” - [CS]

19. As the parents had availed loan, the child had to work daily to pay back the loan availed. Idleness of the parent resulted in the child shouldering the family responsibilities.

20. The child faced difficulty to read, write and concentrate.

21. The child felt lonely at home and used to fight with parents frequently, to get the attention of the parents towards the child‘s needs.

22. Influence of adults resulted in developing unhealthy and immature habits of adults. Child also tends to develop no high expectations in life

219

23. The child had become anemic, since there is no nutritious food available regularly at home like that of the food provided in school. Then, the child was taken to hospital by the parent to improve the child‘s health condition.

4. Situation of Children Out of School and their Parents‟ Perception about their Status ” - [CS]

24. Life was engrossed in child labour practices once the child was out of school. Child was attending school for 3 days in a week and next three days she was taking care of siblings in the absence of parents. After dropping out from school, the begging practices were motivated in child by the parents, who are traditional beggars.

25. Child, who had practiced unskilled labour, met with an accident and got injured a finger while working.

26. Family circumstance has driven the child to practice unhealthy activities in their young age.

27. The child plays with friends, who were elder than him and have discontinued school earlier. This results in adapting negative behaviour.

28. Parent need the child to earn a living and was found to be inefficient to mentor the child and sort out difficulties

29. Guardian was not concerned towards the child‘s education and did not purchase study material for the child.

30. Child‘s lackadaisical attitude was a hurdle to join school and the parent unable to deal with the child.

31. Sudden death of a child‘s mother had made the child to be fretted of life

32. Child was a slow learner, when she was studying in school.

33. Engaged in household work and sibling care on full time basis

220

34. Lack of a child friendly attitude among the teachers and the community.

35. Parents and teachers when asked the child to attend school, the child had threatened that he will attempt suicide if any one forces the child to go to school

36. Though there was play area in the school, the child was not allowed to play. Since the school was on the road side and sports materials were not available. So the role of government and local body to fulfill the expectation of the child is a must to make the child attend school

5. Feedback on Government and Programme and its benefits for “Out of School Children” and their Families” - [CS]

37. Inadequate support of government schemes to the child‘s family and in turn poor support of parents to the child had made the child to be never enrolled in school.

38. A 13 year old girl child, who was in the 8th standard in the government aided middle school, with the help of stipend amount received from government, had to discontinue her studies the next year, as she had not received stipend amount.

6. Perception and Participation of Community relating to Children Out of School” - [CS]

39. Caste system and cultural issues like girl attaining puberty prevented the child to attend school.

40. Child was not covered in school health programmes since he was out of school. This has made the family to fully depend on government assistance.

7. Suggestions to make the Children to attend School and prevent the Children becoming Out of School” - [CS]

41. Breakfast should be given in the morning in the schools since the children were malnourished and often remained without any food in the morning.

221

42. Two uniforms should be provided per year. The quality of the uniforms at present is not good.

43. Stipend can be given to all the poor children till the completion of 12th standard.

44. The child expects the teacher to understand the condition of the child and be friendly in teaching the lessons.

45. The child wanted the parents to be economically balanced with the support of government.

3. MAJOR FINDNGS FROM FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSIONS (FGD)

The following are the major findings from Focus Group Discussion (FGD) conducted at 16 blocks in the district (for Parents, Teachers, Community leaders, Officials and NGOs).

1. Socio-demographic and Economic Profile of “Children Out of School” - [FGD]

1. Majority of the members across the district opined that number of boys and girls between 10 and 150 were out of school at block level and this varied from one place to another. Members of Musiri block revealed that the rate of children out of school was very low in their block.

2. Majority of the members (in urban and rural blocks) confirmed that the boys between the ages of 11-14 years remained dropped out from schools since they go out for places of work to earn a living.

3. If the elder girl child goes to school it prevents the parents from going for work outside villages, since there was no one to look after younger siblings at home.

4. Members of Marugapuri block stated that the dropout rate of girls was very high in number than boys.

222

5. Mostly there were 3 to 5 children in one family and the parents believed that education will be useful for boys only and not for girls.

6. Most of the families of out of school children were from social-economically backward community, who has uneven monthly income starting from Rs. 500. This monthly income of the family depends on either the earnings of father or mother or both or guardian, who works on daily basis

2. Various Factors contributing to “Children remaining Out Of School” - [FGD]

7. Majority of members opined that the children studying in private schools were talented but children studying in Government schools were careless and not interested in their studies.

8. Majority of the members viewed that the out of school children have fear to go by road to school in the absence of a transport facility

9. Children with chronic ill health and severe disability seemed to be dropped out and had not enrolled in schools due to inadequate special school facilities in their village. Children out of school in Thathiangarpet block were found to be mentally retarded hence they were not enrolled in regular schools.

10. Though few of the out of school children were to be with health problems they were interested to study

11. Majority of the members stated that the out of school children had fear for exams. They found to have no recognition among their peer group and they felt ashamed when their teacher beat him/her in front of others

12. Majority of the members felt that parents failed to be responsible and caring for their children to continue schooling.

13. Parents were uneducated and they do not watch whether their children were going to school

223

14. Majority of the members viewed that the parents had to face difficulty in admitting their children in school during migration to other places and they were also unable to get welfare assistance from government without the ration card identity.

15. There were out of school children, whose parents were bed ridden or ran away due to illegal affairs or not alive, were deprived support of their parents. Ignorance of parents and villagers about child rights is found to be a key factor leading children to be out school.

16. In spite of advising the parents to send their children to school regularly, absenteeism was found in schools.

17. Majority of the members recorded that children remained out of school due to very poor income in the family and lack of awareness on education.

18. Addiction to alcohol and drug used by parents was reported as a reason for their children to be out of school. Addicted fathers used to beat and prevent their children from going to school and forced them to earn. Majority of Members reported that there were lots of wine shops, which had been opened in recent years.

19. Functioning of the schools was imperfect, children did not understand Tamil language, which was one of the subjects but children had the skills of questioning in the class room. For more number of children there are few teachers only. Student – teacher ratio is inappropriate.

20. Members of Thuraiyur block stating that when there is no proper building, toilet facility, mats or chair in the school how the parents will send their children to the school.

21. Poor sanitation and hygiene in the school environment has made children to be out of school. This is also reflected in the decline in the enrollment rate of the school in Thuriayur block. Teachers were not available in schools located in remote village areas in order to cover the tribal children who were out of school.

224

22. Due to absence of counseling facilities at school the teacher was unable to deal with children‘s problem. In few schools at Thathaigarpet block, children parliament was functioning with 5 representatives from five classes, who were well performing students, fixed with the responsibility to meet the out of school children and make them to rejoin the mainstream education.

3. Implications of “Children Not Going to School” for the Children and their Family - [FGD]

23. Majority of the members stated that the parents were working for particular season of six months to 8 months and remained idle for the rest of the days and they depend on children‘s wages, as they have discontinued schools.

24. Out of school children found difficult to continue their studies after a long gap with the students, who were younger than them.

25. Majority of the out of school children were malnourished

26. As parents had to leave for their job early in the morning, they do not monitor whether their children were going to school. These children often went to work in places or to play other than to school. Members revealed that majority of the family members did not involve in helping the child to exercise their rights.

27. Children were found to be with low self- esteem and motivation, resulting in no positive goals in life.

28. Majority of the out of school children were not covered under health checkup regularly. This had resulted in parents to look after their unhealthy children, which in turn affected them to attend the work for daily living.

4. Situation of Children Out of School and their Parents‟ Perception about their Status - [FGD]

29. Members recorded that though the rate of child labour was reduced to an extent, majority of the children, who were out of school were engaged in child labour practices with poor wages (Rs.10 to 75 rupees per day) and had to work for long

225

hours (more than 10 hours per day) than adults. Majority of the children, who were out of school were engaged in unskilled labour like beedi rolling, brick kilns, hotels, grocery shops, goat rearing, etc. Some children are wandering or going for fishing and girl children are engaged in household work in their own house. Beggary among children was prominent in Thathaigarpet block.

30. Members witnessed that local employers at industries and other work places exploited children by engaging them to work for low wages in their work places.

31. Majority of the members‘ perception was children, who were not clever become easily dropped out and engage in unhealthy activities due to inadequate monitoring mechanism by the parents as well as the school at rural areas.

32. Children who were out of school learnt and adapted unhealthy practices like watching movie, moving with bad friends and developing bad habits.

33. Members reported of that the parents had received supplementary income through their child's work. Members of Manikandam block reported that children were less interested to study and going for fishing and other works to earn money in order to meet their own expenses.

34. Negative attitude towards education is found among parents and exercised on children. The majority of the members stated that the parents were very keen enough to preserve the lands, which they own but they don‘t have good opinion about their child‘s learning. They feel that education is a long term process to settle in life and employment opportunities are too little.

35. Parents were unaware about child rearing and the rights of the children, since they were struggling for their day to day living.

36. Children, who were out of school, faced crisis situation like death of their parents, broken family, uncared guardian, etc. The support rendered to recover these children was found to be inadequate.

37. Majority of the members stated that children left their schools, when they faced adjacent difficulties in their school. 226

38. Members reported lack of skill among parents to support their children, who were out of school, to accomplish good education instead they were becoming unskilled labour.

39. Child marriages have been controlled to a great extent in various panchayats of Tiruchirappalli district.

40. Majority of the parents did not contribute to their child‘s education

41. Parents were found to be inefficient to mentor the child and sort out difficulties.

42. Majority of the members‘ perception was children who were not clever become easily dropped out due to inadequate monitoring mechanism by the parents as well as the school at rural areas.

5. Feedback on Government Programme and its benefits for “Out of School Children” and their Families - [FGD]

43. Majority of members reported that family members of children out of school availed benefits such as ration card, assistance for flood / accident compensation, assistants for antenatal mothers, government hospital assistance, exemption from bank loan, etc. However, the equal preferences were not given for all families of out of school children in major welfare programmes such as Tamilnadu Adhi Dravidar Housing and Development Corporation Limited, Group house, Swarnjayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojana (SGSY), etc. As a result of this, the people who are below poverty line and also families of out of school children. did not receive the required welfare packages and were unaware about the details of government programmes.

44. The scholarship programmes were not common for all students, who belong to socio-economically backward, schedule caste / tribe, most backward and other backward community irrespective of the locations like Town Panchayats, Municipality and Corporation. Adhi dravida welfare department has provided stipend (ooka thogai) for all girl students in elementary school during 2005, 2006

227

but now the stipend is given to only limited number of children in a particular category and in some schools.

6. Perception and Participation of Community relating to Children Out of School - [FGD]

45. Members revealed that in some of their villages, the village leaders along with the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) school teacher and the Block Resource Teacher Educator (BRTE) of SSA and Teachers of NCLP were advising the parents of the out of school children about the importance of schooling, and the assistance they could receive from them. Majority of members revealed that for the past two years they had taken effort to identify children, who were out of school and admitted at least 20 of them in schools.

46. In Block Resource centre, they were spending more money for school development and there was close monitoring in the village to indentify and mainstream the out of school children. Members of Musiri and Thathiangarpet (T. Pet) recorded that in one or two villages, there was remarkable reduction in out of school children prevalence due to continuous monitoring of school authorities and community.

47. Majority of members stated that imperfect functioning of the Village Education Committee (VEC) was often reported. For the last three years, students enrolment in school was found to be decreasing in Thotiam block.

48. Members recorded that the Government was responsible for the children to stay out of school and lose their career prospects because of loopholes in existing welfare measures and thereby prevented the children from studying and attaining personal development.

49. Awareness done in Grama Shaba Meeting (village administration meeting) and Village Education Committee meeting about preventing children engaged in work, who were below 14 years.

228

50. Village leader told that they along with the SSA teacher and the BRTE, were advising the parents of the out of school children about the importance of schooling, and the assistance they could receive from them. 51. Parents – Teachers Association (PTA) meeting in schools were conducted to improve the schooling, which have to be reinforced in all places.

52. Majority of the members stated that the Grievance day meet is not being conducted in all Panchayats, hence it was unable to look into the problems of the out of school children

53. Local donors were encouraged to supply free note books, uniform, etc.

54. Parents need to be responsible and caring for children to continue schooling.

7. Suggestions to make the Children to attend School and prevent the Children becoming Out of School - [FGD]

55. Counseling in school may be introduced to help children to effectively deal with their problems.

56. Adequate assistance for the education and rehabilitation of differently abled children in villages should be given

57. Scholarship amount can be given to all the community students in the entire district.

58. Government may give the aid to the schools or village education committee to purchase the uniform in a good quality.

59. Based on the child's interest in nature of work, vocational training can be given as a motivation to gain skillful training and education

60. Teachers require special training to handle the children with problems and problematic children.

229

61. Individual child learning supervision to be done at schools and Individual child monitoring to be done at micro level by the village level leaders at the community

62. Basic facilities and good ambiance should be available in schools. Adequate transport from their home to school and back to homes is needed. This can be monitored by the village level leaders at the community

63. Cooperation to be given for school activities like conduct of awareness program for parents, motivating children for vocational education.

64. Initiating tuition centres by utilizing the service of educated adults at the village level is needed.

65. Capacity building of Parents to mend their children to study through Self Help Group

66. Counseling to parents on child rearing, child rights and education should be done.

67. De-addiction Centre at panchayat / ward level was needed for treating addicted Parents

68. One stable earning adult in a poor family should be monitored by government

69. Members revealed that the community needs to be made aware of the child rights and education through awareness generation programmes such as camps, cultural activities, etc.

70. Village leaders, important persons should meet once to discuss the out of school children issue and plan to send all the children who remain out of school to schools.

71. Members revealed that the community needs to be made more employment opportunity with the help of government assistance.

72. Members stated that the accountability to be fixed with School Management in order to meet the basic needs of parents, who were below the poverty line and the

230

transparent measuring scale to be applied to track whether the government schemes reach the poor parents in need.

73. Restrict the provision of ration cards to the parents, who send their children to school regularly.

74. Parents, who are economically rich and stable, need to be punished for not sending their children to school regularly.

III. TRIANGULATION – CONVERGENT AND DIVERGENT

The use of ‗triangulation‘ can be traced back to Campbell and Fiske (1959) and Webb et al. (1966), who argued that the use of more than one method is necessary to confirm that the variance reflected is that of the phenomenon being tested and not that of the method being used. Denzin (1978, 1989) and Miles and Huberman (1994) have taken the work of Campbell and Fiske and Webb and colleagues as his starting point and have shared their concern with bias and validity. They distinguish four kinds of triangulation in qualitative research: 1) triangulation by data source (data collected from different persons or at different times, or from different places); 2) triangulation by method (interviews, survey, case study, observations, focus group discussion); 3) triangulation by researcher (the involvement of two or more researchers in the analysis) and 4) triangulation by theory, which implies that hypotheses are informed by more than one theoretical perspective or that different theories are used to interpret the researcher‘s data. Miles and Huberman (1994) also add to their list triangulation by data type, meaning combining quantitative and qualitative data; this is also referred to as ‗mixed- methods approach‘ (Creswell, 2003; Tashakkori & Teddlie 2003). Mathison (1988) suggests that all the outcomes of triangulation, convergent, inconsistent and contradictory need to be explained, the process is not a technical fix, but rather a means of providing the researcher with a holistic understanding of the phenomenon being researched.

231

CONVERGENT AND DIVERGENT FINDINGS

The importance of this research lay within the kind of ‗triangulation by method‘. It presents the combination of survey, case study and focus group discussion, which provides a relatively probable means of assessing the degree of convergence and complementary findings as well as elucidating on divergences between findings obtained. This methodology was adapted for this study in order to analyse and gain as much comprehensive and insightful information as possible about the current situation of Children out of school in Tiruchirappali district. In this study, there is more information available concerning to convergence and only little information exist relating to divergence. Hence, the findings which are reciprocally supportive and contradictive of one another emerge from all the quantitative (Interviews) and qualitative methods (case study and focus group discussion) used in this research are emphasized in this section.

A. CONVERGENT FINDINGS

1. CONVERGENT FINDINGS FROM INTERVIEW SCHEDULE (CIS)

The following are the convergent findings drawn from Interview Schedule (conducted for Children out of school and their Parents).

1. Socio-demographic and Economic Profile of “Children Out of School” - [CIS]

1. Vast majority of the children out of school were in the age group of 11-14 years among which sizeable (more than half) number of out of school children reside in rural areas

2. The size of the families of more than half of the out of school children consists of members between 5 and 6 numbers. More than half of the boys were out of school compared to the girls.

3. Majority of the children who were out of school belong to nuclear families

232

4. Majority of the of the respondents earn a family monthly income of below Rs. 3000 per month

2. Various Factors contributing to “Children remaining Out of School” - [CIS]

5. Almost half of the children who were out of school were not interested in studies

6. More than half of the children have inadequate transport facility to reach their school, which are located at least 2 - 4 km away from their residence.

7. Sizeable (more than half) number of children, who were out of school, had dropped out due to fear of examination and followed by more than one third of these children feared the teacher

8. More than half of the children, who were out of school were deprived of love and care from parents

9. Migration of parents had affected the child‘s continuity of schooling. One fifth of the children have stopped education due to frequent migration of parents

10. Exactly half of the parents of out of school children have not motivated their wards to attend school.

11. Majority of the children did not experience any coercion from the parents to quit their schooling

12. More than half of the children reported that they have dropped school due to extreme poverty.

13. More than half of the children faced inadequate care to their learning in schools

14. More than half of the children, who were abused by either their parents or teacher or stranger / employer did not continue their school education.

233

3. Implications of “Children Not Going to School” for the Children and their Family - [CIS]

15. More than half of the children, who were out of school had faced burden of their families

16. Nearly half of these children did not have literacy skills.

17. Vast majority of the parents of out-of-school children have poor monitoring practice towards development of children

18. Nearly one third of the children, who were out of school, had not decided anything about their future plan and one fourth of the children wish to become drivers, mechanic, etc.

19. Majority of the families of out of school children are becoming less productive to manage the cost of living

4. Situation of Children Out of School and their Parents‟ Perception about their Status - [CIS]

20. More than half of the children, who were out of school had engaged in unhealthy activities like child labour, begging, steeling, etc. A small percentage of them were engaged in domestic work, living on the streets begging.

21. More than half of the children were exposed to long working hours (8 to 12 hours a day) and were at various work places which were unsafe and hazardous.

22. More than half of the children opined that the unhealthy activities carried out by them at present were not acceptable to them.

23. More than one third of the parents of the out of school children opined that their wards had developed bad habits due to unhealthy activities and work

24. Half of the parents of out of school children opined that their children generating income for the family and they lacked interest in education and more than one third of the responses seems to indicate parents‘ inability to mentor their children

234

as a reason for the non-schooling of their children

25. More than one third of the parents of out of school children stated that they cannot provide complete support for their children‘s education.

26. Vast majority of the parents perceived that their children were worried about their parents‘ incapability.

27. Majority of the parents responded that their children found it difficult to get along with others.

28. More than half of the parents were unaware about their child‘s achievement

5. Feedback on Government Programme and its benefits for “Out of School Children” and their Families - [CIS]

29. More than half of the parents were aware of the welfare measures provided by the government while nearly one third of the parents stated that they are unaware of the welfare measures offered by government for poor families.

30. More than half of the parents had availed at least one or two of the assistance provided through the government programmes. More than one third of the respondents‘ parents revealed that they had not availed any assistance under Government schemes for their family except schooling, stipend and scholarship.

6. Perception and Participation of Community relating to Children Out of School - [CIS]

31. One fifth of the children had stopped schooling because of poor encouragement from their community members.

32. More than half of the parents have never received any assistance from the community for their children to attend school continuously.

235

7. Suggestions to make the Children to attend School and prevent the Children becoming Out of School - [CIS]

33. Majority of the member stated that the families of out of school children should be provided with necessary assistance under the government programmes, which has to be strictly monitored by local community leaders.

2. CONVERGENT FINDINGS FROM CASE STUDIES (CCS)

The following are convergent findings drawn from the Case Studies (conducted for Children, who are out of school).

1. Socio-demographic and Economic Profile of “Children Out of School” - [CCS]

1. A child, who had not enrolled in school, resided in the rural area for many years.

2. Male child dropped out school while studying 6th std in Government School

3. Nuclear family had led to lack of attention by the parents on the schooling of the child.

4. The parents were fortune tellers and earn a very little income that they are unable to meet the demands of the family

2. Various Factors contributing to “Children remaining Out of School” - [CCS]

5. Out of school child was not having interest in studies. While truant the child engaged in playing with friends, watching movie, etc.

6. Child avoided schooling due to long school hours and the long time taken to travel, since her home was not close by.

236

7. Teacher was partial towards the children, who were performing are well. Child got offended, when the teacher compared their performance with their other fellow class mates. Fear of exams forced the child to remain out of school

8. First born female stopped schooling at the age of 13 years in order to take of their siblings.

9. Girl child felt insecure and was scared to be alone in the absence of parents during migration. Child with her mother migrated from Kerala found difficulty to get admission in regular school due to non availability of migration certificate, ration identity card, etc. Even the mother was unable to get welfare assistance from government without ration identity card and without her father, who had left the family due to extra marital relationship.

10. One of the respondents said that there was no one to provide support for her to continue her education.

11. Parents and teachers when asked the child to attend school, the child had threatened that he will attempt suicide if any one forces the child to go to school

12. Extreme poverty was seen high in the child‘s family, which consists of more than 4 children.

13. Head Master and Teacher need to advise their poor illiterate parents and guardian for retaining her and also her friends in school to play and study in school.

14. A child responded that her guardian used to beat her to do the household work properly on full time basis.

3. Implications of “Children Not Going to School” for the Children and their Family - [CCS]

15. As the parents had availed loan, the child had to work daily to pay back the loan availed. Idleness of the parent resulted in the child shouldering the family responsibilities.

237

16. The child faced difficulty to read, write and concentrate.

17. The child felt lonely at home and used to fight with parents frequently, to get the attention of the parents towards the child‘s needs.

18. Influence of adults resulted in developing unhealthy and immature habits of adults. Child also tends to develop no high expectations in life

19. The child had become anemic, since there is no nutritious food available regularly at home like that of the food provided in school. Then, the child was taken to hospital by the parent to improve the child‘s health condition.

4. Situation of Children Out of School and their Parents‟ Perception about their Status - [CCS]

20. Life was engrossed in child labour practices once the child was out of school. Child was attending school for 3 days in a week and next three days she was taking care of siblings in the absence of parents. After dropping out from school, the begging practices were motivated in child by the parents, who are traditional beggars.

21. Child, who had practiced unskilled labour, met with an accident and got injured a finger while working.

22. Family circumstance has driven the child to practice unhealthy activities in their young age.

23. The child plays with friends, who were elder than him and have discontinued school earlier. This results in adapting negative behaviour.

24. Parent need the child to earn a living and was found to be inefficient to mentor the child and sort out difficulties

25. Child‘s lackadaisical attitude was a hurdle to join school and the parent unable to deal with the child.

238

26. Sudden death of a child‘s mother had made the child to be fretted of life

27. Child was a slow learner, when she was studying in school.

28. Engaged in household work and sibling care on full time basis

5. Feedback on Government Programme and its benefits for “Out Of School Children” and their Families - [CCS]

29. Inadequate support of government schemes to the child‘s family and in turn poor support of parents to the child had made the child to be never enrolled in school.

30. A 13 year old girl child, who was in the 8th standard in the government aided middle school, with the help of stipend amount received from government, had to discontinue her studies the next year, as she had not received stipend amount.

6. Perception and Participation of Community relating to Children Out of School - [CCS]

31. Caste system and cultural issues like girl attaining puberty prevented the child to attend school.

32. Child was not covered in school health programmes since he was out of school. This has made the family to fully depend on government assistance.

7. Suggestions to make the Children to attend School and prevent the Children becoming Out of School - [CCS]

33. The child wanted the parents to be economically balanced with the support of government.

239

3. CONVERGENT FINDINGS FROM FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSIONS (CFGD)

The following are convergent findings drawn from the Focus Group Discussions conducted for the tertiary group consisting of parents, teachers, local community leaders, officials and NGOs.

1. Socio-demographic and Economic Profile of “Children Out of School” - [CFGD]

1. Majority of the members across the district opined that number of boys and girls between 10 and 150 were out of school at block level particularly high in rural areas and this varied from one place to another. Members of Musiri block revealed that the rate of children out of school was very low in their block.

2. Majority of the members (in urban and rural blocks) confirmed that the boys between the ages of 11-14 years remained dropped out from schools since they go out for places of work to earn a living. If the elder girl child goes to school it prevents the parents from going for work outside villages, since there was no one to look after younger siblings at home. Members of Marugapuri block stated that the dropout rate of girls was very high in number than boys.

3. Mostly there were 3 to 5 children in nuclear family and the parents believed that education will be useful for boys only and not for girls.

4. Most of the families of out of school children were from social-economically backward community, who has uneven monthly income starting from Rs. 500. This monthly income of the family depends on either the earnings of father or mother or both or guardian, who works on daily basis.

2. Various Factors contributing to “Children remaining Out of School” - [CFGD]

5. Majority of members opined that the children studying in private schools were talented but children studying in Government schools were careless and not interested in their studies.

240

6. Majority of the members viewed that out of school children have fear to go by road to school in the absence of a transport facility

7. Majority members stated that the out of Children had fear for exams. They found to have no recognition among their peer group and they felt ashamed when their teacher beat him/her in front of others

8. Majority of the members felt that parents failed to be responsible and caring for their children to continue schooling.

9. Majority of the members viewed that the parents had to face difficulty in admitting their children in school during migration to other places and they were also unable to get welfare assistance from government without the ration card identity.

10. There were out of school children, whose parents were bed ridden or ran away due to illegal affairs or not alive, were deprived support of their parents. Ignorance of parents and villagers about child rights is found to be a key factor leading children to be out school.

11. In spite of advising the parents to send their children to school regularly, absenteeism was found in schools.

12. Majority of the members recorded that children remained out of school due to very poor income in the family and lack of awareness on education.

13. Functioning of the schools was imperfect, even children did not understand Tamil language, which was one of the subjects but children had the skills of questioning in the class room. For more number of children there are few teachers only. Student – teacher ratio is inappropriate.

14. Addiction to alcohol and drug used by parents was reported as a reason for their children to be out of school. Addicted fathers used to beat and prevent their children from going to school and forced them to earn. Majority of Members

241

reported that there were lots of wine shops, which had been opened in recent years.

3. Implications of “Children Not Going to School” for the Children and their Family - [CFGD]

15. Majority of the members stated that the parents were working for particular season of six months to 8 months and remained idle for the rest of the days and they depend on children‘s wages, as they have discontinued schools.

16. Out of school children found difficult to continue their studies after a long gap with the students, who were younger than them.

17. As parents had to leave for their job early in the morning, they do not monitor whether their children were going to school. These children often went to work or to play other than to school. Members revealed that majority of the family members did not involve in helping the child to exercise their rights.

18. Children were found to be with low self- esteem and motivation, resulting in no positive goals in life.

19. Majority of the out of school children were not covered under health checkup regularly. This had resulted in parents to look after their unhealthy children and this in turn prevented them from attending work for their daily living.

4. Situation of Children Out of School and their Parents‟ Perception about their Status - [CFGD]

20. Members recorded that though the rate of child labour was reduced to an extent, majority of the children, who were out of school were engaged in child labour practices with poor wages (Rs.10 to 75 rupees per day) and had to work for long hours (more than 10 hours per day) than adults. Majority of the children, who were out of school were engaged in unskilled labour like beedi rolling, brick kilns, hotels, grocery shops, goat rearing, etc. Some children are wandering or

242

going for fishing and girl children are engaged in household work in their own house. Beggary among children was prominent in Thathaingarpet block.

21. Members witnessed that local employers at industries and other work places exploited children by engaging them to work in their work places.

22. Majority of the members‘ perception was children, who were not clever become easily dropped out and engaged in unhealthy activities due to inadequate monitoring mechanism by the parents as well as the school at rural areas.

23. Children who were out of school learnt and adapted unhealthy practices like watching movie, moving with bad friends and developing bad habits.

24. Members reported of that the parents had received supplementary income through their child's work. Members of Manikandam block reported that children were less interested to study and going for fishing and other works to earn money in order to meet their own expenses.

25. Parents were unaware about child rearing and the rights of the children, since they were struggling for their day to day living.

26. Children, who were out of school, faced crisis situation like death of their parents, broken family, uncared guardian, etc. The support rendered to recover these children was found to be inadequate.

27. Majority of the members stated that the children left their schools, when they faced adjustment difficulties in their school.

28. Members reported lack of skill among parents to support their children, who were out of school, to accomplish good education instead they were becoming unskilled labour.

243

5. Feedback on Government Programme and its benefits for “Out of School Children” and their Families - [CFGD]

29. Majority of members reported that family members of children out of school availed benefits such as ration card, assistance for flood / accident compensation, assistants for antenatal mothers, government hospital assistance, exemption from bank loan, etc. However, the equal preferences were not given for all families of out of school children in major welfare programmes such as Tamilnadu Adhi Dravidar Housing and Development Corporation Limited, Group house, Swarnjayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojana (SGSY), etc. As a result of this, majority of the families of out of school children did not receive the required welfare packages and they were unaware about the details of Government programmes.

30. The scholarship programmes were not common for all students, who belong to socio-economically backward, schedule caste / tribe, most backward and other backward community irrespective of the locations like Town Panchayats, Municipality and Corporation. Adhi dravida welfare department has provided stipend (ooka thogai) for all girl students in elementary school during 2005, 2006 but now the stipend is given to only limited number of children in a particular category and in some schools.

6. Perception and Participation of Community relating to Children Out of School - [CFGD]

31. Members revealed that in some of their villages, the village leaders along with the SSA teacher, the BRTE and NCLP Teacher were advising the parents of the out of school children about the importance of schooling, and the assistance they could receive from them. Majority of members revealed that for the past two years they had taken effort to identify children, who were out of school and admitted at least 20 of them in schools.

32. Majority of members stated that imperfect functioning of the Village Education Committee (VEC) was often reported. For the last few years, students‘ enrolment in Government school was found to be decreasing in Thotiam block

244

7. Suggestions to make the Children to attend School and prevent the Children becoming Out of School - [CFGD]

33. Members stated that the accountability to be fixed with School Management in order to meet the basic needs of parents, who were below the poverty line and the transparent measuring scale to be applied to track whether the government schemes reach the poor parents in need.

B. DIVERGENT FINDINGS

1. DIVERGENT FINDINGS FROM INTERVIEW SCHEDULE (DIS)

The following are divergent findings drawn from Interview Schedule (conducted for the children out of school and their parents). Sizeable number of children said that they enjoyed the experience of going to school but at the same time they were not interested in studies. This shows that though children liked the school and not liked the studies, there are other factors which contribute for them for remaining out of school. Majority of the children have reported that their health conditions were not hindrance for them to attend schools. More than half of the children had not experienced any bullying incidents at school, while more than one third of the children, who had been bullied in school, did not continue their school education.

2. DIVERGENT FINDINGS FROM CASE STUDIES (DCS)

The following are divergent findings drawn from the individuals of Case Studies of five Children, who are out of school.

Though the school environment was not conducive to study, the child used to play with friends and sometimes the teacher used to tell stories or sings songs, which was interesting for the child to attend school. Poor health condition of the child was a barrier for children to continue their schooling. Students were teasing the child by comparing with media personalities, which led the child to avoid schooling.

245

3. DIVERGENT FINDINGS FROM FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION (DFGD)

The following are divergent findings drawn from the members of Focus Group Discussions conducted at 16 blocks.

Poor sanitation and hygiene in the school environment has made the children to be out of school. This was also reflected in the decline in the enrollment rate of the school in Thuriayur block. Teachers were not available in schools located in remote village areas to cover the tribal children who were out of school. Children with chronic ill health and severe disability seemed to be dropped out and had not enrolled in schools due to inadequate special school facilities in their areas. Children out of school in Thathiangarpet block are found to be mentally retarded hence they are not enrolled in regular schools. Due to absence of counseling facilities at school the teacher was unable to deal with children‘s problem. In few schools at Thathiangarpet block, children parliament was functioning with 5 representatives from five classes, who were well performing students, fixed with the responsibility to meet the out of school children in a friendly manner and make them to rejoin the mainstream education.

C. CONCLUSION OF TRIANGULATION METHOD

In conclusion, the above described findings of the study by using triangulation method has enabled the researcher to discover that there were majority of similarities and a very few discrepancies between quantitative (interview schedule) and qualitative data (case study and focus group discussion). This strongly proves that the quantitative data was positively supported by the qualitative data. Therefore, this exhaustive study about the situation of Children out of school in Tiruchirappalli district shows that it is highly reliable one to proceed further with the suitable interventions, suggestions and conclusion in this regard. The highlights of the convergent and divergent findings (triangulated) are also presented in a diagrammatic form based on the objectives of the study.

246

(1) SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC PROFILE OF “CHILDREN OUT OF SCHOOL

INTERVIEW SCHEDULE CASE STUDY Vast majority of the children out of school were in the age group of 11-14 A child, who had not enrolled in school, years among which sizeable (more than resided in the rural area for many years. half) number of out of school children reside in rural areas Male child dropped out school while th studying 6 std in Government School More than half of the boys were out of school compared to the girls. Nuclear families had led to lack of attention by the parents on the Majority of the children who were out of schooling of the child. school belong to nuclear families The parents were fortune tellers and Majority of the of the respondents earn earn a very little income that they are a family monthly income of below Rs. unable to meet the demands of the 3000 per month family

CONVERGENT FINDINGS

FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION Majority of the members across the district opined that number of boys and girls between 10 and 150 were out of school at block level particularly high in rural areas and this varied from one place to another. Members of Musiri block revealed that the rate of children out of school was very low in their block.

Majority of the members (in urban and rural blocks) confirmed that the boys between the ages of 11-14 years remained dropped out from schools since they go out for places of work to earn a living. If the elder girl child goes to school it prevents the parents from going for work, since there was no one to look after younger siblings at home.

Mostly there were 4 to 5 children in nuclear family and the parents believed that education will be useful for boys only and not for girls.

Most of the families of out of school children were from social-economically backward community, who has uneven monthly income starting from Rs. 500

Figure no.11113 - 246 (a)

(2 a) VARIOUS FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO “CHILDREN REMAINING OUT OF SCHOOL”

INTERVIEW SCHEDULE CASE STUDY Out of school child was not having interest in studies. While truant the child engaged in Almost half of the children who were out of school were not interested in studies playing with friends, watching movie, etc.

More than half of the children have Child avoided schooling due to long school inadequate transport facility to reach their hours and the long time taken to travel, since school, which are located at least 2 - 4 km her home was not close by. away from their residence. Teacher was partial towards the children,

Sizeable (more than half) number of who were performing are well. Child got children, who were out of school, had offended, when the teacher compared their dropped out due to fear of examination and performance with their other fellow class mates. Fear of exams forced the child to followed by more than one third of these children feared the teacher remain out of school

More than half of the children, who were First born female stopped schooling at the out of school were deprived of love and care age of 13 years in order to take of their from parents siblings.

Girl child felt insecure and was scared to be Migration of parents had affected the child’s continuity of schooling. One fifth of the alone in the absence of parents during children have stopped education due to migration. The Child with her mother frequent migration of parents migrated from Kerala found difficulty to get admission in regular school due to non

availability of migration certificate, ration identity card, etc. Even the mother was unable to get welfare assistance from government without ration identity card and without her father, who had left the family due to extra marital relationship

CONVERGENT

FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION Majority of members opined that the children studying in private schools were talented but children studying in Government schools were careless and not interested in their studies.

Majority of the members viewed that out of school children have fear to go by road to school in the absence of a transport facility

Majority members stated that the out of Children had fear for exams. They found to have no recognition among their peer group and they felt ashamed when their teacher beat him/her in front of others

Majority of the members felt that parents failed to be responsible and caring for their children to continue schooling.

Majority of the members viewed that the parents had to face difficulty in admitting their children in school during migration to other places and they were also unable to get welfare assistance from government without the ration card identity.

Figure no.12114 a - 246 (b)

(2 b) VARIOUS FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO “CHILDREN REMAINING OUT OF SCHOOL”

INTERVIEW SCHEDULE CASE STUDY Exactly half of the parents of out of One of the respondents said that there school children have not motivated was no one to provide support for her to their wards to attend school. continue her education.

Majority of the children did not Parents and teachers when asked the experience any coercion from the child to attend school, the child had parents to quit their schooling threatened that he/she will attempt suicide if any one forces the child to go More than half of the children to school reported that they have dropped school due to extreme poverty. Extreme poverty was seen high in the child’s family, which consists of more More than half of the children faced than 4 children. inadequate care to their learning in schools Head Master and Teacher need to advise their poor illiterate parents and guardian More than half of the children, who for retaining her and also her friends in were abused by either their parents or school to play and study in school. teacher or stranger / employer did not continue their school education. A child responded that her guardian used to beat her to do the household work properly on full time basis.

CONVERGENT FINDINGS

FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION There were out of school children, whose parents were bed ridden or ran away due to illegal affairs or not alive, were deprived support of their parents. Ignorance of parents and villagers about child rights is found to be a key factor leading children to be out school.

In spite of advising the parents to send their children to school regularly, absenteeism was found in schools.

Majority of the members recorded that children remained out of school due to very poor income in the family and lack of awareness on education.

Functioning of the schools was imperfect, even children did not understand Tamil language, which was one of the subjects but children had the skills of questioning in the class room. For more number of children there are few teachers only. Student – teacher ratio is inappropriate.

Addiction to alcohol and drug used by parents was reported as a reason for their children to be out of school. Addicted fathers used to beat and prevent their children from going to school and forced them to earn. Majority of Members reported that there were lots of wine shops, which had been opened in recent years. 115 Figure no.12 b - 246 (c)

(3) IMPLICATIONS OF “CHILDREN NOT GOING TO SCHOOL” FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILY

INTERVIEW SCHEDULE CASE STUDY More than half of the children, who As the parents had availed loan, the child were out of school had faced burden of had to work daily to pay back the loan their families availed. Idleness of the parent resulted in the child shouldering the family Nearly half of these children did not responsibilities. have literacy skills. The child faced difficulty to read, write and Vast majority of the parents of out-of- concentrate. school children have poor monitoring practice towards development of The child felt lonely at home and used to children fight with parents frequently, to get the attention of the parents towards the child’s Nearly one third of the children, who needs. were out of school, had not decided anything about their future plan and one Influence of adults resulted in developing fourth of the children wish to become unhealthy and immature habits of adults. drivers, mechanic, etc. Child also tends to develop no high expectations in life Majority of the families of out of school children are becoming less productive to The child had become anemic, since there is manage the cost of living no nutritious food available regularly at home like that of the food provided in school. Child was taken to hospital by the parent to improve the child’s health condition.

CONVERGENT FINDINGS

FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION Majority of the members stated that the parents were working for particular season of six months to 8 months and remained idle for the rest of the days and they depend on children’s wages, as they have discontinued schools.

Out of school children found difficult to continue their studies after a long gap with the students, who were younger than them.

As parents had to leave for their job early in the morning, they do not monitor whether their children were going to school. These children often went to work or to play other than to school. Members revealed that majority of the family members did not involve in helping the child to exercise their rights.

Children were found to be with low self- esteem and motivation, resulting in no positive goals in life.

Majority of the out of school children were not covered under health checkup regularly. This had resulted in parents to look after their unhealthy children and this in turn prevented them from attending work for their daily living.

Figure no.13116 - 246 (d)

(4 a) SITUATION OF CHILDREN OUT OF SCHOOL AND THEIR PARENTS’ PERCEPTION ABOUT THEIR STATUS”

INTERVIEW SCHEDULE CASE STUDY More than half of the children, who Life was engrossed in child labour were out of school had engaged in practices once the child was out of unhealthy activities like child labour, school. Child was attending school for 3 begging, steeling, etc. A small days in a week and next three days she percentage of them were engaged in was taking care of siblings in the absence domestic work, living on the streets of parents. After dropping out from begging. school, the begging practices were motivated in child by the parents, who More than half of the children were are traditional beggars. exposed to long working hours (8 to 12 hours a day) and were at various work Child, who had practiced unskilled places which were unsafe and labour, met with an accident and got hazardous. injured a finger while working.

More than half of the children opined Family circumstance has driven the child that the unhealthy activities carried out to practice unhealthy activities in their by them at present were not acceptable young age. to them.

CONVERGENT FINDINGS

FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION Members recorded that though the rate of child labour was reduced to an extent, majority of the children, who were out of school were engaged in child labour practices with poor wages (Rs.10 to 75 rupees per day) and had to work for long hours (more than 10 hours per day) than adults. Majority of the children, who were out of school were engaged in unskilled labour like beedi rolling, brick kilns, hotels, grocery shops, goat rearing, etc. Some children are wandering or going for fishing and girl children are engaged in household work in their own house. Beggary among children was prominent in Thathaingarpet block.

Members witnessed that local employers at industries and other work places exploited children by engaging them to work in their work places.

Majority of the members’ perception was children, who were not clever become easily dropped out and engaged in unhealthy activities due to inadequate monitoring mechanism by the parents as well as the school at rural areas.

Figure no.14117 a - 246 (e)

(4 b) SITUATION OF CHILDREN OUT OF SCHOOL AND THEIR PARENTS’ PERCEPTION ABOUT THEIR STATUS”

INTERVIEW SCHEDULE CASE STUDY Half of the parents of out of school children Parent need the child to earn a living opined that their children generating income and was found to be inefficient to for the family and they lacked interest in mentor the child and sort out education and more than one third of the difficulties responses seem to indicate parents’ inability to mentor their children as a reason for the Child’s lackadaisical attitude was a non-schooling of their children hurdle to join school and the parent unable to deal with the child. Vast majority of the parents perceived that their children were worried about their Child was a slow learner, when she parents’ incapability. was studying in school.

Majority of the parents responded that their Engaged in household work and sibling children found it difficult to get along with care on full time basis others.

More than half of the parents were unaware about their child’s achievement

CONVERGENT FINDINGS

FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION

Members reported of that the parents had received supplementary income through their child's work. Members of Manikandam block reported that children were less interested to study and going for fishing and other works to earn money in order to meet their own expenses.

Parents were unaware about child rearing and the rights of the children, since they were struggling for their day to day living.

Majority of the members stated that the children left their schools, when they faced adjustment difficulties in their school.

Members reported lack of skill among parents to support their children, who were out of school, to accomplish good education instead they were becoming unskilled labour.

Figure no.14 b - 246 (f) 118

(5) FEEDBACK ON EXISTING GOVERNMENT SCHEMES / PROGRAMME AND ITS BENEFITS FOR “OUT OF SCHOOL CHILDREN” AND THEIR FAMILIES

INTERVIEW SCHEDULE CASE STUDY More than half of the parents were Inadequate support of government aware of the welfare measures provided schemes to the child’s family and in turn by the government while nearly one poor support of parents to the child had third of the parents stated that they are made the child to be never enrolled in unaware of the welfare measures school. offered by government for poor families. A 13 year old girl child, who was in the More than half of the parents had 8th standard in the government aided availed at least one or two of the middle school, with the help of stipend assistance provided through the amount received from government, had government programmes. More than to discontinue her studies the next year, one third of the respondents’ parents as she had not received stipend amount. revealed that they had not availed any assistance under Government schemes for their family except schooling, stipend and scholarship.

CONVERGENT FINDINGS

FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION Majority of members reported that family members of children out of school availed benefits such as ration card, assistance for flood / accident compensation, assistants for antenatal mothers, government hospital assistance, exemption from bank loan, etc. However, the equal preferences were not given for all families of out of school children in major welfare programmes such as Tamilnadu Adhi Dravidar Housing and Development Corporation Limited, Group house, Swarnjayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojana (SGSY), etc. As a result of this, majority of the families of out of school children did not receive the required welfare packages and were unaware about the details of government programmes.

The scholarship programmes were not common for all students, who belong to socio- economically backward, schedule caste / tribe, most backward and other backward community irrespective of the locations like Town Panchayats, Municipality and Corporation. Adhi dravida welfare department has provided stipend (ooka thogai) for all girl students in elementary school during 2005, 2006 but now the stipend is given to only limited number of children in a particular category and in some schools.

Figure no.15119 - 246 (g)

(6) PERCEPTION AND PARTICIPATION OF COMMUNITY AND SUGGESTIONS RELATING TO CHILDREN OUT OF SCHOOL

INTERVIEW SCHEDULE CASE STUDY Perception and Participation of Perception and Participation of Community Community

One fifth of the children had stopped Caste system and cultural issues like girl schooling because of poor attaining puberty prevented the child to encouragement from their community attend school. members.

Child was not covered in school health More than half of the parents have never programmes since he was out of school. received any assistance from the This has made the family to fully depend community for their children to attend on government assistance. school continuously.

Suggestions Suggestions

The child wanted the parents to be Majority of the member stated that the economically balanced with the support families of out of school children should of government. be provided with necessary assistance under the government programmes, which has to be strictly monitored by local community leaders.

CONVERGENT FINDINGS

FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION Perception and Participation of Community

Members revealed that in some of their villages, the village leaders along with the SSA teacher, the BRTE and NCLP teacher were advising the parents of the out of school children about the importance of schooling, and the assistance they could receive from them. Majority of members revealed that for the past two years they had taken effort to identify children, who were out of school and admitted at least 20 of them in schools.

Majority of members stated that imperfect functioning of the Village Education Committee (VEC) was often reported. For the last few years, students’ enrolment in Government school was found to be decreasing in Thotiam block

Suggestions

Members stated that the accountability to be fixed with School Management in order to meet the basic needs of parents, who were below the poverty line and the transparent measuring scale to be applied to track whether the government schemes reach the poor parents in need.

Figure no.16120 - 246 (h)

(7) FEW ASPECTS OBSERVED AS DIVERGENT FINDINGS BASED ON THE ENTIRE OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

INTERVIEW SCHEDULE CASE STUDY

Sizeable number of children said Though the school environment that they enjoyed the experience of going was not conducive to study, the child to school but at the same time they were used to play with friends and sometimes not interested in studies. This shows that the teacher used to tell stories or sings though children liked the school and not songs, which was interesting for the child liked the studies, there are other factors to attend school. Poor health condition which contribute for them for remaining of the child was a barrier for children to out of school. Majority of the children continue their schooling. Students were have reported that their health conditions teasing the child by comparing with were not hindrance for them to attend media personalities, which led the child schools. More than half of the children to avoid schooling. had not experienced any bullying incidents at school, while more than one third of the children, who had been bullied in school, did not continue their school education.

DIVERGENT FINDINGS

FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION

Poor sanitation and hygiene in the school environment has made the children to be out of school. This was also reflected in the decline in the enrollment rate of the school in Thuriayur block. Teachers were not available in schools located in remote village areas to cover the tribal children who were out of school. Children with chronic ill health and severe disability seemed to be dropped out and had not enrolled in schools due to inadequate special school facilities in their areas. Children out of school in Thathiangarpet block are found to be mentally retarded hence they are not enrolled in regular schools. Due to absence of counseling facilities at school the teacher was unable to deal with children’s problem. In few schools at Thathiangarpet block, children parliament was functioning with 5 representatives from five classes, who were well performing students, fixed with the responsibility to meet the out of school children in a friendly manner and make them to rejoin the mainstream education.

Figure no.17121 - 246 (i)

SUGGESTIONS

Children out of school are unique and they differ from each other in terms of their origin, socio-economic situation and their current living condition. This present study has projected the situation of children out of school in Tiruchirappalli District. However, the commonalities shared by children out of school are as same as the experience of any other child out of school. Needless to say that presently, enormous effort has been taken to strengthen the school and education systems whereas the families of children out of school are in the dark state. This shows that whatever effort is taken to mould the children in school all goes in vain due to poor base at home, where the children need to spend their ‗after school time‘ for learning. Based on the findings of the study about demographic characteristics, factors responsible, implications, parents‘ perception, access of government schemes and community participation relating to children out of school and their family, the following intervention and suggestions have been framed out in order to ensure that all the children out of school and their family are escalated towards better quality of life systematically.

SOCIAL WORK INTERVENTION

School Counseling Services

The children who are at school or tend to become out of school or presently out of school have many personal problems. These problems need to be handled by a professionally qualified Social Worker (as School Counselor) for the betterment of the children to continue school. For this purpose, School Counselors may be posted for all schools and there should be one School Counselor for each of the 50 students. The role of a counselor will help in sorting out the issues relating to children that affects them from continuing education. The counselor will put emphasis on the child centered friendly approach between teachers and students as well as teachers and parents with special reference to children who come under first generation education group or disadvantaged section.

247

Family Counseling Services

Parents centered friendly approach need to be introduced in order to make the parents, who have negative perception about the education, to understand the importance of education and child rights. The Government schools may extend their tie up with the existing Family Counseling Centres in different places in the district, (which are run by Central Social Welfare Board of Government of India) in order to provide counseling to the poor parents of children out of school. The professional Family Counselor will facilitate for healthy interaction between (tough) parents and teachers in the areas where the prevalence of children out of school is high. Sensitizing and educating the fathers and mothers is necessary since their illiteracy and ignorance increase the probability of their child being out of school. In the study, it was found that most of the fathers of children out of school were addicted to alcohol / drug and they were not bothered about their children‘s schooling. This issue seems to be increasing for the recent years both in rural and urban areas, as the growing number of liquor shops show the way for the ignorant fathers to have easy access to alcohol consumption. The children, who performed well in education, were forced to become dropouts from school because of the drunkard fathers, who were directly or indirectly putting their children in distress in early childhood period itself. Further, in most of the families, both the parents were going for work in early morning and they do not mind about whether their children were getting ready to attend school. Thus, the Group counseling to the parents of disadvantaged children may be introduced in order to make the ignorant parents to understand about child rearing and child rights, to enliven their skill towards child care and to facilitate them to bring their family involvement in the education and schooling of their children.

Family Welfare Services

There are lots of government welfare measures available for the down trodden families but the major schemes have not reached the families of all the disadvantaged children due to the ignorance of the parents, which can be harmonized by the professionally trained Social Worker (as Family Welfare Coordinator), as a liaison officer. For this purpose, there should be one Family Welfare Coordinator placed at

248 each Panchayat Union or Block to look after the critical needs of the families of disadvantaged children. The role of coordinator is to assess and set right the issues relating to the well being of the families of children out of school. Handhold support or referral services can also be provided to the parents of disadvantaged children in order to orient them for healthy living standard. Proper guidance at the right time to be given to the families of children, who are tend to become out of school due to sudden crisis situation in the family, in turn to access the government welfare measures available for them without any hurdle or delay or mishandle. The available government welfare measures should reach the distressed families in time so that the major consequences to the family as well as to the children can be avoided.

Community Welfare Services

At community level, the general public and the local leaders are less concerned towards the problems of out of school and their families and they are unaware that it affects the whole community in the long run. In order to deal and coordinate with community people relating to out of school children consistently, a professional Social Worker (Community Welfare Coordinator) is to be placed at regional wise in every district. The role of Community Welfare Coordinator, in practical, will facilitate for achieving the target fixed by the government for the welfare of poor families by sensitizing the local village leaders, who are keen in dispersing the welfare assistance to the known and same caste people and leaving the poorest families as unattended. Further, the caste system and cultural belief in rural areas have restricted the children particularly girls to continue their school or even to enroll in school. These gaps can be addressed by the Community Welfare Coordinator sequentially to make the community people including local leaders to realize the issues and to play a vital role to settle the issues relating to schooling, children out of school and their families and thereby to prevent the children becoming out of school.

249

GENERAL SUGGESTIONS

This study has provided evidence that the aim of universal elementary education continues to be escaped and under achieved. There remains an incomplete agenda of universal education at the upper primary stage. In general the number of children from socio-economically disadvantaged sections, who drop out of school before completing upper primary education, remains high. The standard of education attainment is not always completely satisfactory even in the case of children who complete elementary education, which are evidenced in the present study. The absence of adequate attention to improve the wellbeing of the family of children out of school, parents involvement in children‘s education and individual attention for children‘s learning improvement have resulted in not yet achieved the goal of universal education for the children below 14 years at all levels. Therefore, to take effective steps for ―Sustainable Inclusive Education and Provision of Welfare Measures for all Children out of School‖ the following suggestions are given.

Standard Operating Procedure

Assess the needs not addressed till now for children who are out of school combined with existing education service at all the schools and benefits of welfare packages to reach the children out of school and their family. Review the secondary data available like number of schools, students‘ attendance, number of discontinued education, average length of stay, number of children‘s family benefitted by all welfare measures, etc. In sequence, identify the strengths and gaps from the bottom to the top level of line departments‘ services as well as in terms of civil structure, manpower, transportation, teaching aids, learning materials, etc at schools in order to put forward the required facility and accessibility of welfare programmes at community level particularly for child disability, child poverty, child migration, etc. Sketch out the Standard Operating Procedures for various activities of mainstreaming and preventing the out of school children at school and community level.

250

Convergence of Services

Conduct a sensitization workshop amongst the policy makers of the department of Health, Education, Factories, Social Welfare, Rural Development, Municipal Administration, Labour, Public Works and Highways, Police, Information and Public Relations, Adi-dravida Welfare, Revenue, Social Defence, NGOs‘ and other organizations in order to make them understand the basic support required at grass-root level and to provide necessary inputs to achieve the objectives framed. Give attention simultaneously on providing education as well as family welfare for all the children out of school according to their diversified nature of survival. Converge the services of related departments and bring the welfare measures available for disadvantaged families of children out of school under a single roof so as to avoid the exclusion and duplication of rehabilitating children out of school and their family.

Social Work Intervention Cell

Establish a Social Work Intervention Cell at the Directorate of School Education to bridge the gap at all levels between the stake holders of School Education Department and other line Departments that offers welfare measure for socio-economically backward families. To begin, identify the requirement for the establishment of social work interventions like case work, group work, community orgnanisation, counselling services, child guidance clinic, etc. For which qualified school based counsellors, qualified community based family welfare officer, etc. can be employed in order to deal with the issues of the children who are out of school and their families in rural and urban pockets.

Individual Tracking System

Prepare a comprehensive computerised school management information system combined with welfare management information system covering the details of all categories of children below 14 years and their family particularly the weaker sections. This should be a single line monitoring system for all the children particularly socio-economically backward group irrespective of disabled, migrant, orphan, etc. In order to address this, a country / state wide web based tracking can be 251 developed, which helps to track the records of access to education and family welfare measures to each and every child and backlog existing in implementation can be found and corrected through corrective action by the department concerned then and there for better results. This facilitates for tracking the status of all the children (individually) even if they are migrated to other districts / states and it also helps to spot out the children, who are hidden for a long time.

Legal Action

The Government should take more effective steps for proper and stringent implementation of the existing laws relating to children rights and protection in all aspects in order to save the children, who are hidden and at risk.

Training need Assessment

Find out senior and potential trainers from within the school and local community. To carry out training needs assessment of the workforce of various categories at all schools and local community in relation to achieving the mainstream education for all the children out of school and utilisation of welfare packages by all their family. Develop training module based on the training need assessment and to conduct training of trainers for the workforce. Later, the effectiveness and impact of such training can be analysed through student (mainstreamed out of school children) satisfaction surveys, their family satisfaction survey and school utilization rates coupled with analysing the welfare packages availed by the families of out of school children.

Information, Education and Communication (IEC)

Create signage, work instructions, manuals etc. necessary for the schools and local body for optimum utilisation of all the education and welfare services available. It is necessary to perform internal audit, social audit and self-evaluation of the system in operation as per standard operating protocols and procedures on a regular basis for sustainability.

252

Life Skill and Soft Skill Education

The life skill education as a subject to be included in the curriculum at all levels of education. This will in turn build up an individual efficiency to excel well in studies and survival. Likewise, the soft skill education at Government School and Government aided School should be effective on par with private schools. This enables the poor children to come out from the uneasiness in reading tough subjects like English language.

Special Coaching Centres

Since, more children are out of school in rural than urban areas, the establishment of special coaching centre with the help of educated youngsters with the qualification of 12th standard and above will pave way to coach the slow learners as well as the children who are deprived of coaching at their homes. On the other hand, the children who tend to drop out because of inadequate learning atmosphere at home and incapable mothers may be facilitated to continue education without interruption. Further, the children who are severely disabled need to be protected with special care by providing required / basic services adequately in the remote villages. The parents should be sensitized properly to make use of the existing services for the differently challenged children (disabled).

Extracurricular Activities

Adequate space and facility for playing is very essential for the children to attend school regularly. A variety of games and sports in schools will serve as a means to attract the children to be inside the school premises and prevent them from going outside during school hours. ‗Play time‘ should be allotted in the daily schedule of the schools, so that the children, who are less interested in studies may engage their concentration in games or sports and show their talent in extracurricular activities instead of dropping out of school. Further, there should be a special screening test to identify the talents of poor children in various sports / games / cultural / art activities and the selected children may be provided with required training by the government. This helps the poor children, who are disinterested in

253 studies, to take up the other interested field and to become expertise in other extracurricular activities for a healthy living condition.

Vocation training

The children out of school, who are identified as over age and not in touch with school life for many years, may not be willing to continue education at the age of 13 - 14 years with the little children. They require either special coaching individually or vocational training to improve their skill according to their interest. Initially, these children can be taught separately to improve their reading and writing skill and to clear the 10th Standard examinations. Later, they may be motivated to undergo vocational training. This type of vocational training should be a professional one, for which the schools can have a tie up with the existing vocational training institutes in order to rehabilitate them as well as to make them eligible for placements in companies concerned or to start their self-employment.

Rewards to Parents

In all Government Programmes there should be a clause for the parents, who seek assistance, to provide the proof of their child who is enrolled and studying in school. Government should stop assistance temporarily for the families of children not going to school. The welfare measures such as ration cards, etc. should be provided only to the restricted families, who send their children to school continuously, with the proof of their children‘s current educational attainment up to the age of 14 years. The underprivileged parents, who have contributed to their children to complete atleast 10th Standard education until 14 years or above, can be rewarded with cash assistance of Rs. 50,000/- for improvement of their self employment or business.

Community Competency

The community should be capable enough to sort out the issues relating to cultural bias (such as caste systems, etc.), which are the reasons for the children remaining out of school. The Village Education Committee (VEC) and Parents Teachers Association (PTA) need to be reinforced to work for the universal

254 education. Special cash award can be given to the Community Leaders every year for the contribution towards 100% enrollment as well as changing their Panchayats as ―out of school children free zone‖ by preventing the children dropping out from schools, improving school activities and providing maximum assistance given to the families of disadvantaged children under major government welfare programmes.

Monitoring and Evaluation

Monitoring improves and follows up the sustainability of every activity and outcome through web based tracking system for all the children and their family especially socio-economically backward groups in order to prevent the children being out of school. This evaluation confirms an appropriate level of performance or it discovers disparity in implementation / results. If there is any discrepancy, it paves way for the opportunities to improve service.

Therefore, the output of ―Sustainable Inclusive Education and Provision of Welfare Programme for Children out of School‖ is to assess, sort out and follow up that whether each child out of school receives such a mix of education and remedial welfare services based on the need of their own self and their family. As an outcome, it gives the best possible achievements in the holistic development of the children out of school and also prevention of children becoming out of school.

SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

The following aspects in the line of universal education and wellbeing of children out of school are recommended for further research in future.

1. It will be useful to study the delivering mechanism related to management gaps at various levels for effective use of limited time, budget and human resources for universal education and prevention of children becoming out of school. 2. To address the migrated children‘s continuity of schooling, the quality of education in terms of relevance and language to migrated children, who are out of school can be analysed.

255

3. The research on the role of Non-Government Organisations in extending access to learning to the most vulnerable, hidden and unreached children at risk can be undertaken to reinforce the services available for vulnerable children. 4. It is essential to explore the conditions which influence non attendance of the hidden children, who are at risk. 5. The impact of village education committee in terms of teacher motivation and performance, child friendly approach, relations with village level committees, relations with the parents and the broader community can be examined. 6. A study can be done on the input relating to family welfare packages for children out of school at micro level for enhancing progress towards Universal Primary Education 7. The research on high proportions of children who complete primary education without having acquired basic literacy results in the non-continuity of secondary education can also be undertaken.

CONCLUSION

The present study brings to light the current portrayal of out of school children, their problems, needs, situation of life, their parents‘ perception, community participation and accessibility of welfare measures relating to children out of school.

With regard to findings, the convergent between quantitative (interview) and qualitative methods (case study and focus group discussion), most of the answers were similar to one another based on the objectives of the study. On viewing the divergent findings between quantitative (interview) and qualitative methods (case study and focus group discussion), only very few aspects were dissimilar. Therefore, the study on the situation of Children out of school in Tiruchirappali district proves its reliability to present the following conclusion of the study.

Greater part of the out of school children were between 11and14 years, reside in rural areas, dropped or pulled out due to personal and family reasons and only few were pushed out due to reasons pertaining to their teachers and schools. To some extent there were more boys than girls and most of them were from nuclear families.

256

Children were more or less from the category of Most Backward Caste, Scheduled Caste / Scheduled Tribe and Backward Caste group of people.

Regarding the factors contributed for children remaining out of school, more than half of them have expressed multiple answers. Basically, the out of school children were not interested in studies, they had faced inadequate transport facility between school and home, scared of examinations that followed feared of teachers, deprived of love and care from parents and abused by parents or teachers or strangers / employers. They also do not have adequate care to their learning in schools, experienced extreme poverty and their parents have not motivated them to attend schools regularly were reasons stated by the out of school children.

About the implications of children not going to school on the child and family, the results says that the predominant one was parents‘ poor monitoring practice towards development of children and followed by families are becoming less progressive to manage the cost of living and also they do not have proper recognition in the society. Majority of the children (out of school) have faced burden of their families and do not even have literacy skills. Consequently, the children out of school do not have healthy future plans. Their exposure to work reflected in their aspiration to become workers like driver, mechanic, self employer, etc and not to learn further.

Pertaining to situation of children out of school, high proportion of the out of school children engaged in unhealthy activities like child labour, begging, stealing, domestic work, living on the streets, etc. for 8 to 12 hours at unsafe environment and which were not acceptable to them according to their outlook. Parents also confirmed that their wards were exposed to bad habits and they were unable to provide complete support for their ward‘s education. Parents opined that generating income for the family, lack of interest in education and parents‘ inability to be a mentor for their children were the dominating reasons for non-schooling. As a result, the parents were unaware about their child‘s achievement. To a larger extent, parents perceived that their children (out of school) faced difficulty in getting along with others in school (when they attended school) and worried about their parents‘ incapability, In addition, the parents‘ felt that both the parents as well as the children themselves are responsible for the children‘s education.

257

In relation to the awareness and access towards government initiatives on welfare activities, though the parents were aware of few welfare schemes of government like natural calamity relief package, self help group activities, etc. they were not conscious about the many other major programmes like Prime Minister Rozgar Yojna (PMRY), National Bank for agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD), Tamilnadu Adi Dravidar Housing and Development Corporation (THADCO), which are available exclusively for the disadvantaged section. Likewise, even though the parents have availed at least one or two of the assistance such as ration card facilities, stipend and scholarships for their children while studying, etc. the benefits of government‘s major welfare programmes for poor parents have not reached majority.

With respect to community participation in schooling, fairly the parents expressed that they have by no means received any assistance from the local community for their children to attend school continuously and the encouragement from local community for the children‘s education seems to be irregular.

Practically, the parents suggest that, scholarship and stipend amount can be given to all the socio economically backward children. Child centered approach to be in effect for the student‘s insight on subject and the approach of staff members to sort out each and every individual issue is mandatory. Further, the families to be provided with necessary assistance under the government programmes and it has to be strictly and closely monitored by local community leaders along with school authorities in a transparent manner.

In order to exercise the child rights in respect to all disadvantage children, the programmes and interventions need to be planned along with its stakeholders at the grass-root level giving major thrust not only to school system but also to family welfare packages. It is important that the efforts to widen access to primary education must recognise the different types of out-of-school children such as children who are never enrolled in school, admitted late in school (may be over aged) and potential dropouts (may leave school gradually or abruptly).

258

Based on the analysis of quantitative and qualitative data of this research, the findings shows different contexts, proximate determinants of out-of-school situation and the remedy important to plan policies aimed at stopping the number of children being excluded from education and basic rights. Further, the researcher has suggested the need for Social Work Intervention and the Sustainable Inclusive Education with Welfare Measures (for the children out of school) and also recommended the areas for further research. Thus, the research provides clear understanding about the situation of children out of school in a comprehensive manner. Besides, it provokes the thought for strengthening the concurrent initiatives with different strategy in a single roof by the Government covering both the preventive and protective actions with special reference to the children of disadvantaged section including child labour, differently challenged (disabled), deprived of parents support, etc. As a result, the entire approach of the Government may be planned in such a way to reach the expected outcome, a holistic healthy progress of all the children (out of school), who belongs to weaker sections in the society.

259

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aditya Dev (2009). ―City Schools Slip from Top Five Education Index‖, The Times of India, 20 / January.

Ahmed, M and Ahmed K.S, Khan, N.I, Ahmed R (2007). ―Access to Education in Bangladesh‖, Country Analytic Review of Primary and Secondary Education, CREATE, United Kingdom

Akshaya Mukul (2009). ―Out of School Children in India‖, A survey done by Social Research Institute of Indian Market Research Bureau, The Times of India, 13 / September.

Alecia Marie Russell (2009). ―An Effective Dropout Prevention Program For Urban Students‖, A Dissertation, Doctor of Education in Educational Leadership Ashland University

Alika, I.H. and Egbochuku, E.O (2009). ―Drop Out From School Among Girls In Edo State: Implications For Counselling‖,Edo Journal Of Counselling Vol.2,( 2).

Alika, I.H and Egbochuku, E.O.(2009). ―Vocational Interest, Counselling, Socio- economic Status and Age as Correlates of Re-entry of Girls into School in Edo State‖, Edo Journal of Counselling, Vol. 2 (1).

Aline Bauwens and Vrije Universiteit Brussel (2010), ―The use of method triangulation in probation research‖, European Journal of Probation, University of Bucharest, www.ejprob.ro, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp 39 –52

Aloysius Xavier Lopez (2011). ―Survey Finds over 3,000 Children Out of School in Chennai City‖, The Hindu, 12 / June, p 2.

Amit Choudhury (2006). ―Revisiting Dropouts, Old Issues, Fresh Perspectives‖, Economic and Political Weekly, 23 / December.

Anand Kumar (2008). ―Enrolment rate of elementary education not on expected lines‖, newindpress.com, 23 / January.

Anker, Richard (2000). ―The economics of child labour: a framework for measurement‖, International Labour Review, Vol. 139 (2000), No.3, (ILO, Geneva).

Annababette Wils, et. al, (2006). ―Reaching Out-Of-School Children, Sub-Regional Disparities‖, Journal of Education for International Development 2:2

260

Antonyraj, C. (2003). ―Child Labour in India: ‗Visible School-less-ness‘ and ‗Invisible Work‘‖, Ph.D Thesis, submitted to the University of Madras.

Arun C. Mehta (2005). ―Elementary Education In India‖, Where Do We Stand? District Report Cards 2005, National Institute of Educational Planning and Administration, India.

Atasi Nanda Goswami (2009). Study on ―reasons of dropping out from schools‖ published by Tomorrow‘s Foundation.

Azzam, Amy M (2007). ―Why Students Drop out.‖ (2007): ERIC. EBSCOhost. Iowa State of U., Ames, Iowa. 11 / September, www.lib.iastate.edu

Basant Kumar Mohanty (2011). ―Allocation short of right-to-school needs‖, The Telegraph, Calcutta, India, 28 / February.

Becker G.S. (1964). ―Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis with Special References to Education.‖ Columbia University Express, New York.

Bhalotra (2001), ―Rural Public School Dropouts: Finding From High School And Beyond.‖ Research in Rural Education.

Blunch, Niels-Hugo & Canagarajah, Sudharshan & Goyal, Sangeeta (2002). "Short- and long-term impacts of economic policies on child labor and schooling in Ghana," Social Protection Discussion Papers 25527, The World Bank.

Burke Johnson R and Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie (2004), ―Mixed Methods Research‖, A Research Paradigm Whose Time Has Come, Educational Researcher, Vol. 33, No. 7, pp. 14–26

Burke Johnson R and Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie (2007). ―Toward a Definition of Mixed Methods Research‖, Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Sage Publications, Volume 1 Number 2 / April pp112-133,

Chandra Gunawardane and Swarna Jayaweera (2004), ―National Survey on Non- Schooling and Absenteeism‖, Report of the Study submitted to Save the Children (Sri Lanka), Colombo

Charles Desforges, Alberto Abouchaar (2003), ―The Impact Of Parental Involvement, Parental Support And Family Education On pupil Achievement and Adjustment‖, Queen‘s Printer.

261

CREAT (2011). ―Parental Participation and Meaningful Access In South African Schools, Create South Africa Policy Brief, Consortium For Research On Educational Access, Transitions And Equity (Create) 4 / May

Christle Christine, A. (2005). ―Breaking The School To Prison Pipeline. Identifying School Risk and Protective Factors for Youth Delinquency‖, Exceptionality, Vol 13 (2), pp.69 – 88

Cynthia A. Lietz and Luis E. Zayas (2010), ―Evaluating Qualitative Research for Social Work Practitioners‖, Advances in Social Work, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp 188- 202.

Dassi. A. & Khan. M.Z. (2000). ―Family and the Emergence of Deviant Behaviour among Children and Adolescents‖, The Indian Journal of Social Work, Vol.61(3),July,pp.420-434.

DISE (2006 - 2007). ―Elementary Education in India Progress towards UEE National University of Educational Planning and Administration‖ Department of Information System for Education (DISE), Department of School Education and Literacy, Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD), Government of India, NUEPA (National University of Educational Planning and Administration), New Delhi.

Doraiswamy P. K. (2011), ‗Insights into educational access‘, The Hindu, 26 / July.

ECLT Foundation (2006), A base line suvery ―to measure the incidence of child labour in small-scale tobacco-growing in various districts of Mozambique‖ published by Eliminating Child Labour in Tobacco - Growing Foundation.

Edward McCaul, ED.D (1989). ―Rural Public School Dropouts‖, Findings from High School and Beyond, Research in Rural Education, Institute for Research and Policy.

El Daw A. Suliman and Safaa E. El-Kogali (2002). ―Why Are The Children Out Of School?‖, Factors Affecting Children‘s Education in Egypt A Paper for the ERF 9th annual conference, Economic Research Forum, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates

Elizabeth Stearns and Elizabeth J. Glennie (2008). ―When and Why Dropouts Leave High School‖, Youth & Society, SAGE Publications, 29 / September.

Endya B. Stewart (2008). ―School Structural Characteristics, Student Effort, Peer Associations, and Parental Involvement‖, The Influence of School- and 262

Individual-Level Factors on Academic Achievement, Education and Urban Society, Volume 40 No.2, January/ pp 179-204

Ennew Judith (2003), ―Difficult Circumstances: Some Reflections on ‗Street Children‘ in Africa‖, Children, Youth and Environments 13(1), Spring retrieved from http://cye.colorado.edu.

Ermisch John and Francesconi Marco (2001). ―Family Matters: Impacts of Family Background on Educational Attainments‖, Economica, New Series, Vol. 68, No. 270, pp. 137-156.

Fentiman, A. (2004) Strengthening Basic Education through Open and Distance Learning: How Open Schooling Contributes (Bangladesh, India, Botswana and Namibia) DFID funded research project.

Fentiman, A. (2004) EFA Global Monitoring Report on the Role of Learning for Out- of-School Children and Marginalised Communities. Background paper.

Fulcher, J., & Scott, J. (1999). Sociology. Oxford University Press: UK.

Frick, Paul, J. (2002). ―Understanding The Association Between Parent And Child Antisocial Behaviour. Effects Of Parental Dysfunction On Children‖. Mc. Mahon, Robert J. (Ed); Peters, Ray Dev. (Ed); New York, NY, US: Kluwer Academic / Plenum Publishers, XIV, pp.105-126,

Friedrich Huebler (2009), ―Population Structure and Children out of School‖, International Education Statistics,

Friedrich Huebler (2007), ―India has 21 million children out of school‖, International Education Statistics.

Govinda. R (2011), ―Who Goes To School? Explaining Exclusion in Indian Education‖, Oxford University Press.

Global Monitoring Report (2005). ―Education for all. The hidden crisis: Armed conflict and education‖, UNESCO, Paris.

Global Monitoring Report (2008). ―Education for all. The hidden crisis: Armed conflict and education‖, UNESCO, Paris.

Global Monitoring Report (2010). ―Education for all. The hidden crisis: Armed conflict and education‖, UNESCO, Paris.

263

Global Monitoring Report (2011). ―Education for all. The hidden crisis: Armed conflict and education‖, UNESCO, Paris.

Gulati, Leela (1986). Profiles in Female Poverty,― A Study of Five Poor Working Women in Kerala‖, Child Labour in Kerala‘s Coir Industry, Hindustan Publishing Corporation.

Hanson, William E.; Creswell, John W.; Clark, Vicki L. Plano; Petska, Kelly S.; Creswell, J. David, (2005), ―Mixed Methods Research Designs in Counseling Psychology‖, Journal of Counseling Psychology, April, Vol 52(2), pp 224-235.

Hanushek, Eric A; Lavy, Victor; Hitomi, Kohtaro (2006). ―Do Students Care about School Quality? Determinants of Dropout Behavior in Developing Countries.‖ National Bureau of Economic Research.

Hoover-Dempsey, K.V., Battiato, A.C., Walker, J.M., Reed, R.P., Dejong, J.M., And Jones, K.P. (2004) Parental Involvement In Homework. Educational Psychologist, 36, 3, 195-209

ILO (2006). ―Out of Work and in to School‖, International Labour Office and International Programme on the Elimination of Child Labour (ILO-IPEC) – Asia Pacific Ecnonomic Cooperation (APEC).

Jaisee Suvetha.V. (2004). ―Students Studying at Child Labour Special Schools in Tiruchirappalli Corporation‖- A Study, Social Problems in India - Perspectives for Interventions, Allied Publishers Pvt Ltd., Ed. Selwyn Stanley.

Jaisee Suvetha. V., Swaroop Rani B.S. and Sundar B. (2004). ―Developing Reading Habits in Children of Child Labour Special Schools‖, Social Problems in India - Perspectives for Interventions, Allied Publishers Pvt Ltd., Ed. Selwyn Stanley.

Jayaraj, D. (2002). ―Labour Force Participation of Women and Children in Rural India:An Analysis of the Inter-State Variability‖, Indian Journal of Labour Economics, 38:339-48.

Jayaraj. D and Subramanian. S, (2005). ―Out of School and (probably) in Work‖, Child Labour and Capability Deprivation in India, UNU – WIDER (United Nations University – World Institute for Development Economics Research), research Paper No. 2005/55.

Joanna Wainwright (2005). ―Children out of School‖, Cabinet Member for Education Standards and Pupil Services (20 / July) Decision number: 05/00633

264

John Cockburn and Benoit Dostie (2004). ―Child Work and Schooling‖, The Role of Household Asset Profiles and Poverty in Rural Ethiopia, Department of Economics and Institute of Applied Economics, University of Laval and University of Montreal.

John Ermisch and Macro Francesconi (2000). ―Family Matter – Impacts of Family Background on Educational Attainments‖, University of Essex, Economic (2001) 68, pp 137 to 156

Jon Moon and Suzie Moon (2004). ―The Case for Mixed Methodology Research‖, A review of literature and methods, A Working Paper.

Julia Modern et. al. (2010). ―DFID, disability and education: bridging the implementation gap‖, RESULTS UK

Katarina Tomasevski (2003). ―School fees as hindrance to universalizing primary education‖, Gender and Education for All: The Leap to Equality, Education for All Global Monitoring Report.

Kaushik Basu (2005). ―Globalization, Poverty and Inequality‖, What Is the Relationship? What Can Be Done? UNU – WIDER (United Nations University – World Institute for Development Economics Research), Research Paper No. 2005/32

Khalid Massa et. al (2008). ―The effect of the community-directed treatment approach versus the school-based treatment approach on the prevalence and intensity of schistosomiasis and soil-transmitted helminthiasis among schoolchildren in Tanzania‖, journal homepage: www.elsevierhealth.com/journals/trst, Elsevier, Tanzania.

Khoai Matete (2004). ―Report of a Case Study on Children Missing Out on Education in Selected Areas in the Districts of Maseru, Mokhotlong, and Mohales Hoek‖, A Global Campaign For Education Week Of Action, Non- Governmental Organizations Coalition On The Rights Of A Child, CMDPS, Maseru

Lewin, M. Keith (2007). ―Improving Access, Equity and Transition in Education‖, Creating a Research Agenda, Create Pathways to Access, Research Monograph No.1. CREATE, United Kingdom

Li,D., Tsang.M.C (2002). ―Household education decisions and implication for gender inequality in education in rural China.‖ Columbia University, An International Journal, China. 265

Liu Jianye (2004) ―School dropout in rural Vietnam: Does gender matter?‖, Population study center – Sociology Department of UWO.

SSA (2007). ―Universal Elementary Campaign‖, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA), Ministry of Human Resource Development, India.

Margaret Caspe et. al. (2007). ―Family Involvement Makes a Difference‖, Evidence That Family Involvement Promotes School Success For Every Child Of Every Age, Harvard Family Research Project No. 2 In A Series Winter 2006/2007 Harvard Graduate School of Education Cambridge

Mbatha Mathooko (2009). ―Actualizing Free Primary Education in Kenya for Sustainable Development‖, The Journal of Pan African Studies, vol.2, no.8,

Meera Srinivasan (2007). ―Student retention in schools a challenge‖, The Hindu, 16 / June, ePaper.

Mike de la Rama (2011), ―Albay is pilot site of UNICEF study on out of school children‖, http://positivenewsmedia.net/am2/publish/Cities_And_Towns_23/Albay_is_pilot _site_of_UNICEF_study_on_out_of_school_children.shtml

Musafir Singh (1980), Study On ―Working Children In Bombay‖, published by National Institute of Public Cooperation and Child Development, Govt. of India.

Mutanyatta (2004). ―Research Initiative for Achieving Education for All‖, Zanzibar Case Study, Department of Adult Education and Extension Service of the University of Dar es Salaam.

Neeti Mehanti (1993). ―Towards child labour free zones in Calcutta‖, An Urban Project of Child in Need Institute, CINI– Asha, Report on National Child Labour Policy in India.

Neera Burra (2003). ―Born To Work, Child Labour In India‖, Oxford University Press. (pp195-196) and pp. 211-212)

Nelson Acquilano (2009), An Article on ―Dropping Out Of School Affects Entire Community‖ Http://Www.Suite101.Com/Content/Dropping-Out-Of-School- Affects-Entire-Community- accessed on 14.8.11

Nick Moon and Claire Ivins (2004). ―Parental Involvement in Children‘s Education‖, Department for Education and Skills, Research report No. 589, NOP Social and Political 266

Njuki Eria Paul et. al. (2008), ―Parents‘ Perception of the Goal of Education for their Children with Learning Difficulties‖, Community Action Research on Disability in Uganda, Kyambogo University.

Patil, B.R, (1986). ―The Working Children in Bangalore City‖, Indian Institute of Management, Bangalore.

Prashant K. (2011), ―Nanda Enrolment in govt-run schools on the decline‖, Economy and Politics, February 1, www.livemint.com.

Pratham (2006). ―Investigate the status of education in rural India‖, Annual Status of Education Report (ASER ), New Delhi, DCWC Research Bulletin, , National Institute of Public Coopertion and Child Development (NIPCCD), Siri Institutional Area, Hauz khas, Vol. X Issue 1 January – March.

Rajagopalan S.S. (2006). ―Is education for all a chimera?, The Hindu, 09 / May.

Ranjeet S Jamwal (2011). ―16 per cent children drop out after Class V‖, The Statesman, 31 / January.

Russell W. Rumberger and Tomas, S.L (2000). ―The distribution of dropout and turnover rates among urban and suburban high schools‖. Sociology of Education.

Russell W Rumberger (2001). ―Who Drops Out Of School And Why‖, Paper Prepared For The National Research Council, Committee On Educational Excellence And Testing Equity Workshop, (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press,).

Russell W. Rumberger and Sun Ah Lim (2008). ―Why Students Drop Out of School: A Review of 25 Years of Research‖, California Dropout Research Project Report #15, University of California, Santa Barbara

Sadgopal, Anil (2010), ―Right to Education vs. Right to Education Act‖, Social Scientist, Vol 38 / Nos 9-12 September–December.

Saeed-Ul-Hasan Chishti et al (2010). A Study of ―Drop-Out Of Children In Schools Due To Managerial Flaws In Public Sector‖, Allama Iqbal Open University Islamabad, Pakistan.

Santosh Singh (2011). ―In a first, Bihar‘s 70,000 govt schools go online‖, The Indian Express, 08 / February.

267

Shanta Sinha (1998). 'The Gender Gap In Basic Education – NGOs As Change Agents‖, Study Conducted In 23 States By National Council Of Education Research -(Ed) Rekha Wazir, SAGE, New Delhi, pp. 151

Savita Bhakhry (2006). ―Children in India and their Rights‖, National Human Rights Commission, India.

Singh, A. (1984). The Girls Who Run Away From Home. Child Psychiatry Quarterly, XVII (1 And 2), pp.1-8

Singh, O.P., and Agrawal, P. (1986). ―Family Environment and Delinquency‖, Indian Journal of Criminology, 14(2), pp. 144-151.

Sonja Giese, Helen Meintjes, Rhian Croke, Ross Chamberlain (2003). ―The Role Of Schools In Addressing The Needs Of Children Made Vulnerable In The Context Of HIV/AIDS‖, Children‘s Institute, University of Cape Town, Document distributed in preparation for the Education Policy Round Table 28th & 29th July.

Steve Bradley and Pam Lenton (2007). ―Dropping out of post-compulsory education in the UK: an analysis of determinants and outcomes.‖ Journal of Population Economics.

Subodh Verma (2008). ―India faces a drought of teachers‖, The Times of India, 5 / July.

Sujata Reddy (2004). ―The Social context of Elementary Education in Rural India‖, Azim Premji foundation, India.

Swaha Sahoo (2010). ―Schools flunk infrastructure test, yet again‖, Hindustan Times, ePaper, 23 / January.

The Gazette of India (2009). ―The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act 2009‖, Ministry of Law and Justice, Legislative Department, No:39.

Thi Nhat Phuong Le (2008). ―Determinants of Dropping Out of Schhol‖, A Case of Vietnam – Unpublished Thesis –Kansas State University Manhattan, Kansas.

Trina R. Williams Shanks et. al. (2010), ―Assets and child well-being in developed countries‖, Children and Youth Services Review, journal homepage: www. e lsevi e r.com/locate/chi ldyouth

268

UNESCO (2000). ―A Situational Analysis of Education for Street and Working Children in India‖, U N D P Conference Hall, (New Delhi)

UNESCO Institute of Statistics (2001). ―Educational For All Monitoring Report‖, Implications of the Current EFA (Education For All) Status for Realization of the Dakar Goals by 2015. UNESCO, Paris.

UNESCO (2001). ―Educational For All Monitoring Report‖, Implications of the Current EFA (Education For All) Status for Realization of the Dakar Goals by 2015, Paris, UNESCO, Institute of Statistics

UNICEF (2001), ―Corporal Punishment In Schools In South Asia‖, Submit to the Committee on the Rights of the Child, Day of General Discussion on Violence Against Children, UNICEF Regional Office for South Asia, 28 /September

UNESCO (2002). ―Education For All (EFA), Global Monitoring Report": Is the World on Track?‖, Paris, UNESCO.

UNESCO (2004). ―EFA Global Monitoring Report: The Leap to Equality‖. Paris, UNESCO.

UNESCO (2005). ―Children out of school, Measuring the exclusion from primary education‖, UNESCO Institute of Statistics and UNICEF.

UNESCO (2005). ―EFA Global Monitoring Report: The Quality Imperative‖. Paris, UNESCO.

UNICEF, UNESCO and MOET (2005). ―The transition of ethnic minority girls in Vietnam from Primary to secondary education.‖ Ministry of Education and Training (MOET), the United Nations Children‘s Fund (UNICEF), and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).

UN Country Team Viet Nam (2005). ―The MDGs and Viet Nam's Socio-Economic Development Plan 2006-2010‖. Publications Department, Ministry of Culture and Information of S.R. Vietnam.

UNESCO (2007). ―Out of school children: how manyare there and who are they?‖, Institute for Statistics

UNICEF (2008). ―Out of School Children of Sierra Leone‖, UNICEF (United Nation‘s Children‘s Emergency Fund ), Sierra Leone..

UNESCO (2009). ―Policy Guidelines on Inclusion in Education‖, Paris, UNESCO 269

UNICEF (2009), ―Promoting Quality Education for Orphans and Vulnerable Children‖, A Sourcebook of Programme Experiences in Eastern and Southern Africa, UNICEF.

UNICEF and CDEC (2009). ―Distance Learning For Basic Education In South Asia‖, Its Potential For Hard-To-Reach Children And Children In Conflict And Disaster Areas, Cambridge Distance Education Consultancy (CDEC) and UNICEF.

UNICEF- UIS (2011), ―All children in school by 2015‖, Global initiative on out-of- school children. p-1

Urvashi Dev Rawal (2010). ―Lack of Teachers hits primary education, claims report‖, Hindustan Times, [email protected].

Vimala Ramachandran (2009), ―Put Them Back On Track, Explore Other Avenues: Create Opportunities For Personal Growth‖, The Hindu

Vishal D.Pajankar et. al, (2010). ―Statistical measurement of educational development of school education at state level‖, Educational Research and Reviews Vol. 5 (7), pp. 362-365, July, Academic Journals, http://www.academicjournals.org/ERR2

Wang Zilin (2010). ―Self-globalisation -- a new concept in the push-and-pull theory‖, a study on Chinese self-funded master students, Department of Education and International Development, Institute of Education, University of London

Websites www.childprotection.org.ph www.juvenilejusticepanel.org www.schoolreportcards.in/media.html www.digitalLEARNING on Issuu.com www.schoolreportcards.in www.ssa.tn.nic.in/Schemes-E.htm www.indiatogether.org/2009/jun/hlt-malnutr2.htm www.elsevier.com/locate/childyouth www.sadashivan.com/childlabourblog/ www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-social_behaviour www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panchayati_raj

270

www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gram_panchayat www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panchayat_Union www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District www.childinfo.org/educationoutofschool.php. www.childlineindia.org.in/Child-Rights-in-the-Five-Year-Plans.htm www.huebler.blogspot.com/2009/02/coos.html ources.htm www.eprevco.com/policydocuments/Model%20Truancy%20Policy.pdf www.wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_physical_factor www.westburnpublishers.com/marketing.../s/social-factors.aspx www.ukdissertations.com www.okstate.edu/ag/agedcm4h/academic/aged5980a/5980/newpage21.htm www.gslis.utexas.edu/~ssoy/usesusers/l391d1b.htm www.ag.arizona.edu/sfcs/cyfernet/cyfar/focus.htm www.ppa.aces.uiuc.edu/pdf_files/Focus.pdf www.unstats.un.org/unsd/demographic/products/Worldswomen/Gender%20st atistics%20s

www.direct.gov.uk/en/Parents/Schoolslearninganddevelopment/YourChildsW elfareAtSchool/DG_066966

www.infochangeindia.org/children/backgrounder/children-background- perspective.html

Wendy Olsen (2004), ―Triangulation in Social Research‖,Qualitative and Quantitative Methods can Really be mixed, Causeway Press.

WHO (2000), ―Determining the Needs and Problems of Street Children‖, A Training Package on Substance Use, Sexual and Reproductive Health including HIV/AIDS and STDs, World Health Organisation.

Wu Zeng et al. (2007). ―Sib composition and child educational attainment: Theory and evidence from native Amazonians in Bolivia‖, Tsimane' Amazonian Panel Study Working Paper Series # 60.

Zhang, Y. G. Kao And E. Hannum (2007). ―Do Mothers In China Practice Gender Equality In Educational Aspirations For Their Children?‖ Comparative Education Review.

271

CHILDREN OUT-OF-SCHOOL IN THIRUCHIRAPPALLI DISTRICT – A SITUATIONAL ANALYSIS

INTERVIEW SCHEDULE

INTERVIEW GIVEN BY CHILD

I. SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC & ECONOMIC STATUS:

A) Child‟s Personal Details:

1) Name of the Child & Address: Name and Address :

2) Date of Birth Proof: Day Month Year Birth Certificate, Ration Card, school record, none, guess

3) Age: 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

4) Sex: 1. Male 2. Female

5 a) Locality: 1. Urban: 1 2. Semi-Urban: 2 3. Slum: 3 4. Rural: 4

5 b) where do you live? where do you live 1 1. On the street 2 2. Temple/Church/Mosque 3 3. In a Slum 4 4. Employer Provided accommodation / with broker 5 6. At home 6

6 a) Religion 1. Hindu: 1 2. Christian: 2 3. Muslim: 3 4. Any other Religion - specify: 6 b) Mother tongue 1. Tamil 1 2. Telugu 2 3. Hindi 3 4. Other specify:

272

7) Caste 1. ST 2. SC 3. MBC 4. BC 5. OC

8) a) Does your family own 1. Yes – a. Permanent House ------1. b. Farm Land ------2. 2. No

8) b) Are your parents alive? 1. Both Father & Mother alive: 1 2. Father only: 2 3. Mother only: 3 4. Both Father & Mother dead: 4

9) Parents‟ health status 1. Both Father & Mother are healthy: 1 2. Father is not well: 2 3. Mother is not well: 3 4. Both Father & Mother are not well: 4

10) With whom are you living? 1. Both Parents 1 2. Father only: 2 3. Mother only: 3 4. Guardian: 4

11) If living with 1. Father only / 2. Mother only / 3. Sibling / 4. Guardian, then state reason: 1. Both Father & Mother working out of station: 1 2. Father run away/ left the family: 2 3. Mother run away/ left the family: 3 4. Both Father & Mother run away: 4 5. Don‘t know where the parents are living: 5 6. State the reason – specify:

B) Family and Economic Background:

12) Size of your family? Specify actual number:

13) Specify the total number of family members living with you:

14) Type of family:

1. Joint 1 2. Nuclear 2

15) Specify total Monthly Income of your family:

273

II. FACTORS INFLUENCING CHILDREN OUT OF SCHOOL

A) School related Factors (Physical):

16) a) Have you ever attended School? 1. Yes 1 2. No 2 16) b) Can you read? Yes good - 1 moderate - 2 poor - 3 16) c) Can you write? Yes good - 1 moderate - 2 poor - 3

17) If attended school, how many years of Schooling(level) have you completed? Nil 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

18) What is your present status of schooling? 1. Dropped / Pulled out – Child in itself and Family reasons 1 2. Pushed out: – School and Teacher reasons 2 3. Never Enrolled: 3

19) If never enrolled, please specify the reason:

20) a) What type of school you attended first before you dropped / pushed out? 1. Government School 1 2. Government Aided School 2 3. Private School 3 4. SSA mainstreaming school 4 5. NCLP – CHEERS School 5 6. Never enrolled 6

20) b) If you studied in NCLP school or Non-formal school, what type of school you attended before going to NCLP school or Non-formal school?

21) What is the level of standard available in the school where you have studied?

22) a) What was the distance from home to school?

22) b) Was there any transport facility between your school (which you have attended) and home?

22) c) If yes what type of facility?

23) What benefits you receive when you were attending school? a) Fees Exemption 1 b) Text Books 2 c) Note Books 3 d) School Bag 4 e) Bus Pass 5 f) School Uniform 6 g) Stipend 7 h) Good education 8 i) others 274

24) How was your performance in education while you attended the school? 1. Outstanding Performance 1 2. Good 2 3. Moderate 3 4. Fair 4 5. Poor 5 6. Very Poor 6

25) a) Did you like the school, which you have attended? 1. Yes: 2. No: 3. Don‘t know 25) b) If yes please specify why? 25) c) If no please specify why?

26) a) Do you have interest in studies / education? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2 3. Don‘t know

26) b) If yes please specify why? 26) c) If no please specify why?

27) How many hours did your school provide opportunity for you to engage in games and sports? 1. 1 hour per day 1 2. 2 hours per day 2 4. 1 hour per week 4 5. No place to play 5 6. No play materials available 6 7. Others

28) Did you participate in extracurricular activities in school and community level? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2 3. Don‘t know

29) Did your school, which you have attended, possess the quality of services? a) Technical Competence 1 b) Effectiveness & Efficiency 2 c) Access 3 d) Interpersonal Relationship 4 e) Continuity 5 f) Safety 6 g) Amenities 7 h) No quality of services in school 8

275

30) Did you face any hindrance in your continuing your schooling?

31) Did you have any health problems which were a hindrance to continue your schooling? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

32) If yes, can you specify your health problem?

33) Can you specify the incidents that made you feel uncomfortable with your school?

34) How do you feel about your school environment? 1. I liked school 1 2. I never liked school 2 3. I joined because of my parents‘ force 3 4. I enjoyed, but discontinued because of family situation 4 5. I hate my teachers 5

35) According to you, what circumstance made you leave the school? Explain (Open Ended Question)

B) Psychological Factors:

36) a) Do you have fear of anything in your life? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

36) b) If yes specify a Fear of school 1 b Fear of exam 2 c Fear of teacher 3 d Fear of friends 4 e Fear of the path way to school 5 f No fear 6

37) a) Do you feel that you are deprived of any thing in life? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

37) b) If yes specify a Deprived of love and care 1 b Deprived of food 2 c Deprived of shelter 3 d Deprived of health 4 e Deprived of education support 5 f No deprivation 6

276

38) Do you remember of any adjustment problem at school that forced you to be out of school? a Lack of interest in school & avoiding it 1 b Being a slow learner of failing in exam 2 c Fear of violence on the way or at school 3 d Lack of parental supervision 4 e Lack of parental support for education 5 f Drug & alcohol use 6 g Long hours 7

39) Do you have problem of separating yourself from parents (separation anxiety)? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

40) How did your parents motivate you at the time when you left the school? 1. Continue education 1 2. No care for schooling 2 3. To stop education 3

C) Social Factors:

41) a) Do you have friends? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

41 b) If yes, specify the actual age group of friends Age…………

42) Do your friends go to school? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

43) Can you specify your experience of not attending class?

44) Can you say the reason why you cut class?

45) In what activities you have involved when you cut class?

46) What encouraged you to remain out of school?

47) Did your parents force you to quit the school? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

48) Did your parents prevent you from going to school after you attended puberty? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2 277

49) What responsibilities do you have at home?

50) Why did your parents encourage you to stop studies?

51) Does your family have the practice of Migration? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

52) Do you feel that migration of your family forced you to stop going to school? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

53) Did your parent‟ attitude prevents you to go to school? 1. Yes: 1. 2. No: 2. 54) Did your parents‟ idleness prevent you to go to school? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

55) a) Have you ever been abused by anyone? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

55) b) If yes, can you specify the incidents of abuse?

56) Have your ever been bullied by any one, If yes, can you specify an incident of being bullied by older boys / Girls?

57) Do you have any other problem in the family or society that prevents you to attend the school?

58) a) Do your friends or neighbours / community discourage you to stop studies? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

58 b) If yes, please specify? a Friends 1 b Neighbours 2 c Community people 3

278

III. IMPLICATIONS OF NOT GOING TO SCHOOL FOR THE CHILD AND HIS / HER FAMILY.

59) How you have spent time when you remained out of school?

60) What are the various domestic responsibilities expected from you?

61) How often are you influenced by your friends for being out of school? 1. Regularly 1 2. Occasionally 2 3. Never 3

62) Do you have attraction towards your friends for playing? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

63) Do you like to remain idle throughout the day without any productive work? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

64) Do you engage in any of the following type of activities to earn a living off the school campus 1. Earning – Specify what type of Child Labour 1 2. Begging 2 3. Wandering or street child 3 4. Juvenile delinquent 4 5. Domestic Servitude at own house 5 6. Idle and Inactive 6

65) Have you engaged in any other activity or not - specify

66) How old were you when you first engaged in these types of activities?

67) Who put you in these types of activities (person responsible for the child‟s out of school status)?

68) Have you engaged in these types of activities after stopping school or before stopping school?

69) Why did you engage in these types of activities?

279

70) How many hours a day do you engage in these activities?

71) Did you feel the present activities are acceptable one? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

72) Do you think that you will continue doing these job/activities for very long? Why do you think so? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

73) How do people here treat you? Are they nice and kind? How do they show it?

74) How do people here treat you in your residing area? Are you happy? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

75) Please tell me the happiest moment you can remember since the time you engage in these activities here.

76) Did you face any sort of ill health / abuse in this type of activities? If yes specify the impact of your childhood work?

77) a) Do you know where you could seek help if you have been abused in the activities? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

77) b) If yes specify to whom or where you will contact for help?

78) Do you know anyone who has stopped school in your surrounding and started going to school with somebody‟s help? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

79) Do you know that you should be in school? 1. I know that I should be in school 1 2. I don‘t know that I should be in school 2 3. I will go to school if arranged 3 4. I will not go to school even if arranged 4

280

80) What would you like to become when you grow up (future aspiraton)?

81) Does anybody (relative, NGO, government, etc.) helped you to attend the school? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

82) Are you currently a beneficiary of any govt. programs? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

83) Can you specify the implications of being out of school for you and the family because of your absence in the school? 1.Implication to the Child 2. Implication to the Family

84) Can you differentiate the changes occurred in you when you are in school and out of school? And what you have attained now by remaining out of school? a) Changes- 1. in school: ------2. ------3. b) Changes- 1. out of ------school: 2. ------3. c) Attained 1. now- out ------of school: 2. ------3.

85) How people identify and communicate you in the Society?

281

INTERVIEW GIVEN BY CHILD‟S PARENT / GUARDIAN

IV. SITUATION OF CHILDREN OUT OF SCHOOL AND THEIR PARENTS / GUARDIAN‟S PERCEPTION ABOUR THEIR STATUS

A) Personal Details of the Child‟s Parents / Guardian and their Family background

86) Name: Father Mother Guardian – specify relation

87) Interview given by: Father Mother Guardia Fathers‘ Fathers‘ Mother‘s Mother‘s n Grand Grand Grand(MG Grand (FG) (FG) ) (MG) Father Mother Father Mother

88) Elders‟ Status: Child Living Literate Education Living in Work Don‘t Relationship age one roof type and know Yes No Yes No monthly income 1. Father 1. 2. 1. 2. 1. 2. 1. 2. 2. Mother 1. 2. 1. 2. 3. Guardian 1. 2. 1. 2. 4. FG.Father 5. FG.Mother 1. 2. 1. 2. 6. MG.Father 1. 2. 1. 2. 7. MG.Mother 1. 2. 1. 2.

89) Total No. of children‟s status (Respondents‟ Siblings): Name Age Sex Literate Education Married Living in Remarks one roof Yes No Yes No 1. 1. 2. 1. 2. 2. 1. 2. 1. 2. 3. 1. 2. 1. 2. 4. 1. 2. 1. 2. 5. 1. 2. 1. 2. 6. 1. 2. 1. 2. 7. 1. 2. 1. 2.

282

90) Details of House: Particular Category 1 Category 2 Category 3 1. Type of House Hut Tiled Cement roof 2. Ownership of House / Value Owned Rented Encroached 3. Condition of House Good Moderate Bad 4. Source of drinking water Tap Tank Bore - well

5. Well inside house Yes No Out side 6. Electricity facility Yes No No continuous supply 7. Toilet facility Yes No Common toilet 8. Access to medical centers Yes No Outside village

91) Land Holding: Particular In acres Value 1. Wet: 2. Garden: 3. Dry: 4. Waste Land:

92) House hold assets: Name of Assets No. of item Value Income 1. Bullock: 2. Buffalo: 3. Cow: 4. Sheep: 5. Goat: 6. Poultry: 7. Bicycle: 8. Two-Wheeler: 9. Three-Wheeler: 10. Four-Wheeler: 11. Grinder: 12. Maxi: 13. Any other Specify:

93) Family Expenditure: Particulars Expenditure Item Quantity Amount Spent in Rs 1. Daily Purchased: 2. Monthly: 3. Occasionally:

94) Savings: Type of Source of Amount saved per Outstanding of Savings Savings month Saving

283

95) Debt: deleted Purpose Amount Borrowed Rate of Interest Outstanding

96) Parents‟ Marital status: 1. Living together 1 2. Separated 2 3. Widow / widower 3

B) Situation of the Children (Respondent) and their Parents / Guardians‟ Perception:

97) a) Do you think that you cannot support your child to continue school- explain 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

97) b) If yes specify the reason:

98) What steps you took to make your child attend school?

99) What was your child‟s reaction to it?

100) Did you ever told him to stop school because of some reasons in your family? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

101) Is there any barrier for parental support to the child‟s education? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

102) Can you narrate life situations of your child in brief?

103)Is there any situation that made your son / daughter worry too much 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

104) If yes or no give details:

105) Do you love your child and does your child love you? 1. I love my child 1 2. I do no have love towards my child 2 3. My child love me 3 4. My child doest love me 4

284

106) Do your child have any mental health problem?

107) Do your child have any scholastic difficulties that forced him/her to be out of school? 1. Speech problem 1 2. Writing difficulty 2 3. Lethargic and slow learner 3 4. Disappear from school 4 5. Restless between work and study 5 6. Difficulty in getting along with others 6 7. Never Enrolled 7

108) Do you feel your family circumstances have affected his /her study life? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

109) a) Are you a migrant family? b) Yes give details of place and reason for migration:

110) Do you feel migration has affected his/her study life?

111) According to you who is responsible for your child to be out of school?

112) Do you think that not going to school can affect your child in any of the ways, If yes how? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

113) What does the child do when he is not in school?

114) Does your child help in the house? In what ways does she / he helps?

115) What kind of difficulties do you face in educating your children?

116) How do you monitor the achievements of your child when he is not in School?

117) Who is responsible for your child education?

118) Do you think your child has any bad habits? - Specify. 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

285

119) Does your child engage in any of the following type of activities to earn a living off the school campus 1. Earning – 1 Specify what type of Child Labour 2. Begging 2 3. Wandering or street child 3 4. Juvenile delinquent 4 5. Domestic Servitude at own house 5 6. Idle and Inactive 6

120) How old was your child, when he / she first engaged in these types of activities?

121) Who is responsible for your child‟s engagement in these types of activities?

122) Did your child has engaged in these types of activities after stopping school or before stopping school?

123) Why did your child engage in these types of activities?

124) How many hours a day do your child engage in these activities and at what times specify?

125) Are you benefited by the wages earned by your child? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

126) How tired is your child and what sort of ill health / abuse / danger if any, does your child face in this type of activities?

127) Did you force your child to work? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2 3. If yes, then why

128) Are you happy with your child working? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

129) How much he/she earns per day? 1. No income 1 2. Below Rs.50 2 3. Rs.50 - 100 3 4. above Rs.101 4

286

130) What does he/she do with the wages he gets?

131) How much would you lose in income per week if your child did not work? 1. No loss 1 2. Below Rs.500 2 3. Rs. 501 - 1000 3 4. Above Rs.1001 4

132) What is your opinion about the working conditions of your child? (Exposure to heat / fire / chemical / toxics / dust / foul smell / no rest time)

133) Explain the employer‟s treatment towards your child and health risks faced by your child – explain

134) Do you never mind your child being engaged in the anti-social activities? (Earning, wandering, living in street, begging, juvenile delinquent, etc) 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

135) Do you think that your child will continue doing these jobs/anti social activities for very long? Why do you think so? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

136) How do people here treat you and your child? Are they nice and kind? How do they show it?

137) Are you happy with the way they treat you and your child? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

138) Please tell me the happiest moment you can remember since the time your child engage in these activities here.

139) How many times a day does you take food? One time Two time Three time

140) Has your Child ever shared his/her difficulty with you? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

141) Does your child face any of the following problems outside the school? (Hyperactive, disobedient, depressed, addicted for anti social behaviour)

287

142) What is the present status of your Child in the family and society?

143) Do you think that the current situation is acceptable for the child? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

144) Are you and your child satisfied with it t? 1. I am satisfied with it 1 2. My child is satisfied with it 2 3. I am not satisfied with it 3 4. My child is not satisfied with it 4

145) In your opinion how will the child be affected if he / she is not going to school?

V. EXISTING GOVERNMENT SCHEMES / PROGRAMMES REACHED THE CHILDREN OUT OF SCHOOL AND THEIR FAMILIES

146) a) Are you aware of any assistance provided by the government or welfare measures of government? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

147) b) If you have been accessed or benefited by the government programmes Please specify in what way? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

VI. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION AND SUGGESTIONS RELATING TO CHILDREN OUT OF SCHOOL

148) Has anybody in your community contributed or helped you to make your child attend school and have any NGO / INGO approached you earlier? 1. Yes: 1 2. No: 2

149) What are the rights of children and your opinion about education?

150) What conditions would allow the children to stop being out of school and to go to school regularly? - (given suggestions)

^^^

288

CHILDREN OUT-OF-SCHOOL IN THIRUCHIRAPPALLI DISTRICT – A SITUATIONAL ANALYSIS

INTERVIEW GUIDE

Focus Group Discussion (FGD) Guideline for Tertiary Target Groups

A. About Focus Group Discussion:

A focus group discussion is ideally conducted with a group of 8 to 12 participants gathered at particular location. The moderator will try to conduct the FGDs with a group associated with the particular community as per the objectives of the Study. A trained moderator generates a discussion in the group on relevant issues. Discussion guidelines are used to ensure that all the important issues are covered. The discussion should be free flowing and aim at bringing out the perspective of each participant on the key issues discussed as well as the group dynamics. The role of the moderator is to ensure that each participant gets a chance to speak and that the discussion does not stray away from the main issues. The moderator should also ensure that the clarity of what they want to say. The group should be asked not to repeat the issues or subject that has already been told by others in a group. The moderator should not give her/his own opinion on any issues and should only guide the discussion. The proceedings should be documented and recorded.

B. Purpose of Focus Group Discussion:

Lead to insights, which will help in designing appropriate interventions for the benefit of children below 14 years, who are out of school and at risk of various problems. This situation assessment exercise is to determine and refine the planned strategies and interventions relying on the need of the community.

C. Advantages of FGD:

Data validation through cross checking, multi-pronged approach, participatory, specific group responses needed.

D. Purpose of Recording:

To prevent data loss enable better analysis at a later date, free-flowing discussions facilitating probing into critical and sensitive issues that may have a bearing on intervention needed.

E. Location / Place of FGD: …………………………………….. F. Date of the FGD: …………………………………….. G. Time of the Conduct of FGD: ……………………………………..

289

1. Name of the Panchayat Union / Block / Corporation /Ward:

2. Total Number of Members in the FGD:

3. Introduction:

Pleasant Day! Welcome with thanks for the presence of all members in this discussion. My name is V. Jaisee Suvetha, a research scholar in the Department of Social Work, Bishop Heber College, Tiruchirappalli District. I am conducting a research study titled ―Children Out-Of-School in Thiruchirappalli District – A Situational Analysis‖, for the Ph. D award from the Bharathidasan University, Tiruchirappalli District. As part of my study, I would like to know about certain issues concerned with the Children out of School in your area and hence I call few persons at one place and find out from them what they think and feel about the issue. Now I am here to discuss with you all members about the Children Out-Of-School in your panchayat union / ward, their problems, needs, situation of life, their parents perception, community participation and accessibility of welfare measures relating to children out of school. I would like to listen to your perception and opinion. Please be open about your views. There are not right answers or wrong answers. I would like each one of you to share your thoughts freely that will help us to understand the issue better. Our conversation will be recorded so that I do not forget what you have told and discussed. Apart from this, the recorded details will not be shared with anyone. It is only to help me in my research. While speaking, please remember to speak only one time if it is same matter and little audible.

4. Ice breaking Session:  Participants Introduction.  Present the purpose of the meeting to the beneficiaries.  Interact casually and establish good rapport.

I. Socio-demographic particulars of Focus Group Members: (Parents, Teachers (regular government school), Teachers (Special Schools for rescued Childlabourers), Panchayat President (local community), Field Officer (for Childlaour Rehabilitation Project), School Head Master (regular government school), Representatives from Parents-Teacher Association, and non-governmental organizations / clubs in the concerned blocks) S. Name Sex Age Qualification Designation No. of years Signature No. Organization / associated with Department village/ ward 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12.

290

II. Socio-demographic and family background of Children out of School in the Panchayat Union / Corporation /Ward:

1. In your village / place / ward, do you have children below 14 years not attending school?

2. If yes approximately how many children are there?

3. What‘s the background of these out of school children?

III. Various Factors contributing to “Children Remaining Out of School”

4. What is the reason for these children to become out of school?

5. What are the issues faced by the parents of out of school children in your area?

6. Why do you think the above reasons contribute for the children to remain out of school? Or any other reason

VI. Implications of “Children Not Going to School” for the Children and their Family

7. If these children were not going to school what are they doing?

8. Who are the people who provide job for these children?

9. Have you seen the working condition, health hazards /difficulties of children in the work spot?

10. What are their wages & what they do with the wages?

11. If these children, who are out of school, are not working, what do they do?

12. What are the major implications of the children being out of school for the child and his / her family?

13. What are the expectations of these children, who are out of school?

V. Situation of Children Out of School and their Parents‟ Perception about their Status

14. What is the present situation of children out of school?

15. Do you know about how the parents‘ perceive about their children being out of school?

16. What is the involvement of the parents and steps taken by them to make their children to study in your area?

291

VI. Feedback on Government Programme and its benefits for “Out of School Children” and their Families.

17. Children, who have been mainstreamed from NCLP / non-formal school to Regular school, have they again stopped themselves from going to school - Why? give details

18. Are you aware of any assistance provided by the government for the benefit of these poor children and their family for the recent years?

19. Do the children out of school and their family have received any assistance from Government?

20. If they have been benefited by the government programmes, Please specify how many children (out of school) and their family are benefited and in what way?

21. If not benefited by government assistance, Please specify the reason.

22. Have you provided any support to them in getting Government assistance?

VII. Perception and Participation of Community relating to Children Out of School

23. What are the rights of children?

24. What effort you have taken to make the children (out of school) to attend the school regularly?

25. What effort is taken by the local community / NGOs to make their children out of school to attend the school regularly?

VIII. Suggestions to make the Children to attend School and prevent the Children becoming Out of School

26. What you expect from the Government for providing assistance for the out of school children‘s education and family?

27. How and what kind of assistance can be provided by the Panchayat Union / Block / Ward for the rehabilitation of Children out of school? Give details.

28. What can be done to successfully stop this issue of this children being out of school?

^^^

292