Submission to the MHRD Sub-Committee for Right to Education

By National RTE Forum1

The RTE Act now completes 1.5 years since its notification having crossed the mid-term point of the second set of deadlines under the Act. Despite certain critical provisions, the status of implementation of education on the ground has not been in accordance with one would have expected in general, and certain key provisions of the Act in particular. The Act confers a right to neighborhood school for every child, schools that have to adhere to certain norms and a standard prescribed in the Act, it holds out the promise of a larger financial outlay and offers a critical opportunity for wholesale changes in policies and programmes which is welcomed.

The present submission is, therefore, being prepared with a perspective of strengthening the Act’s implementation and derives from the key processes undertaken by the Forum for the last one year at both national and State levels. Parts of the report are in particular derived from the national stocktaking of the implementation of the first year of the RTE Act prepared by the Forum. The full text of the report may also be made available to the Committee, if requested.

The present document is divided into the following sections derived from the questions sought by the Committee- viz

a. Problems of implementation of various provisions under the Act and suggestions for removal thereofb. Funding Patterns and Constraints for the Act andc. Viability of Rules/Guidelines framed under the Actd. Recommendations for Monitoring of the RTE Acte. Overall Recommedations

I. Problems of Implementation of various provisions and suggestions for removal thereof

State rules for RTE have been notified in only 10 States and Union Territories .The process of drafting of rules has generally not solicited the active participation of key stakeholders, including representatives from disadvantaged groups, civil society organisations. Furthermore, RTE implementation was delayed due to the centre and states taking time to arrive at a funds sharing agreement and there was further constraints when the centre received just 21,000 crore, rather than the 34,000 crore they had requested to fund RTE implementation. States continue to lack resources to be able to spend money and much of it is hurriedly spent in the last quarter of the financial year as we have seen over the years. However, the 12th Five Year Plan had encouraging rhetoric of $100 billion being spent on education; but positive rhetoric must turn into reality.

The NCPCR has been set up as an independent body from the MHRD Ministry to monitor the implementation of the Act which is a good step forward, but it lacks the capacity to do justice to the scale of violations being observed and the ability to reach out and find a solution to the constraints seen. SCPCRs have only been set up in some of the States and where they do exist they are sometimes managed by one or two persons and also not completely independent of the government interventions.

1 The Right to Education Forum is an informal alliance of Education Networks and Civil Society Organizations including, but not limited to, CACL, CRY, NAFRE, NCE, Oxfam-India, PCCSS, Plan-India, Save the Children, UNICEF, UNESCO, AKF, World Vision, Wada Na Todo Abhiyan, Room to Read , AIF, Welthungerhilfe, ActionAid, ChristianAid, VSO, NEG FIRE, Skillshare International and Water Aid as members.

A process of harmonization of SSA and RTE was undertaken, but it is still too early to see the new thinking translate into effective restructuring of the lower rungs of the system. Important measures like the rationalisation of the elementary cycle have taken a lot of time in a number of states.

Recommendations

1. Ensure immediate notification of the State rules in all States, with proper consultation with all stakeholders to minimize probability of dilution of key provisions.

2. Formation of SCPCRs in all States with the positions held by independent and apolitical persons. Enhance the capacities of the SCPCRs and NCPCR with the necessary capacity to play the role expected of them.

3. Issue necessary orders like formation of SMCs without waiting for even the formation of the State Rules. 4. Take a considered view on the proposed amendments in the RTE Act. While the Amendments for Persons

with Disabilities have already been inordinately delayed, the other two require reconsideration. For minority schools, having representation of a majority of representation of parents from the minority community on the SMC would make the SMC’s role non conflictual with their minority character. There is little, to no justification visible for the SMCs being given only an advisory role in aided schools.

5. Prioritize the implementation of essential clauses under the RTE Act like restructuring of the education cycle from Classes 1-8, implementation of the clause pertaining to preschool education in mainstream schools.

6. Enhance the budgetary allocation for the Right to Education Act so as to implement key provisions. Minimum projections made by the government are a starting point, but should be gradually enhanced to ensure schools eventually adhere to the KV norms.

7. An enhanced allocation does not amount to an arbitrary and unplanned investment. Well known barriers to spending need to be addressed to minimize wastage of resources and under-spending.

8. Clear and well understood mechanisms for grievance redressal need to be urgently put into place considering the number of schools that remain not fully RTE compliant. With a detailed Bill for Grievance Redress being planned nationally, it would be essential to understand the mechanisms whereby the existing structures under the RTE Act enmesh with the envisaged new national structures. The Forum’s response to the Grievance Redress Bill is attached as an Appendix.

9. A stronger regulatory framework for private schools is likewise needed in view of the current resistance of the private schools to the implementation of the Act (including issues pertaining to adherence with the minimum norms under the RTE Act, necessity to obtain recognition under the Act and adherence to the 25% quota. A space for parental inputs into the management of unaided schools should also be built in through the formation of school management committees constituted with a majority parental membership.

10. The decision to upgrade RTE to Class 12 and the consideration to include children under six in a legal framework is welcome. However, mechanisms for the implementation of the same would need to be put into place.

11. The provisions for migrant children and how children without a permanent place of residence would take advantage of the provisions of the Act would require some additional clarification in terms of the modalities of implementation.

12. The standards of the government schools themselves need to be eventually be enhanced to bring them at par with the Kendriya Vidyalaya norms.

Role of Community in the RTE ActCommunity participation is an integral part of ensuring that this Act is successfully implemented. The initial challenge is the spreading of awareness with evidence suggesting that only 1 in 6 people were aware that RTE Act exists during the first six months of its existence. While this situation may have since improved, the beneficiaries of the Act are still by and large unclear of the exact provisions. Similarly, administrators and teachers, who are

supposed to translate the provisions of the Act on the ground, also show a lack of knowledge about the new legislations and the methods to implement the act in their schools.

The School Management Committees (SMCs), have been vested with a huge responsibility of ensuring the enrollment, retention and sustaining quality in the schools. SMCs are the first line complaint mechanisms under the RTE Act. These have not been formed in most states. This leaves parents and children without a visible place to go if their educational rights are violated. Where the SMCs have been formed, the current evidence from the ground is that these have by and large not been formed as per the RTE norms. Furthermore, School Development Plans have not been prepared for this year by all states. The process to do so is unclear and needs support from civil society and administration to inculcate this process of planning at the school by the teachers and community. Processes for their appraisal, followed by approval, preferably at the local levels, and putting in place appropriate mechanism for devolution of resources should have been worked out at early stages of implementation, but ostensibly concrete steps and support at various levels are required.

While the SMCs are a key way for communities to engage in the education system, the RTE needs to be looked at in conjunction with other existing legislation including the Panchayati Raj Acts to encompass the overall scope that communities have in the process. Furthermore, the RTE places considerable responsibility on local bodies without giving them any assurance of devolution of funds or controlling authority, or functionaries to handle the responsibility.

Recommendations Government to make provision for systematic awareness building on the Right to Education Act to reach

the community working with civil society organization to ensure wide reach. A systematic and consistent process of awareness building, followed by space for planning to ensure

restructuring of the education system in accordance with the provisions of the Act. This should be geared towards the middle level functionaries in the education system and lead to renewal of the education system in line with the new provisions.

Immediate notification for the formation of the School Management Committees under the Act in all states. Adequate and well thought through mechanisms to be adopted for their capacity building and subsequent scaffolding of their actions. This needs to go beyond training of a couple of position holders for a few days, but move into a systematic process of supporting these structures. The Revised SSA Framework has a budget for the training of only 2-4 members. The entire body will require training and subsequent handholding.

Develop an effective and transparent manner to respond to grievances highlighted by SMCs and ensure timely redressal of the same.

Adequate support to be extended to School Management Committees to enable them to undertake preparation of School Development Plans.

The proposed step to move SMCs to a mere advisory role in private schools is a retrograde step and should be scrapped.

Teachers, parents and children are the three main actors in schools. SMCs provide space for these stakeholders to come together on common issues. However, unless this is handled properly, there is a risk of communities and teachers coming into opposition. Hence, proper relationships between parents and community members need to be maintained.

The process of notification of local authorities and subsequently their capacity building has been sorely neglected so far. This aspect needs to first enter government discourse on the planning process and lead to implementation.

Hold a special Gram Sabha to discuss the issues emerging from the RTE Act is each village.

A key responsibility of the local authority is to ensure education of migrant children and child labourers. Provisions of hostels for migrated children and ensuring admission in age appropriate class should be stressed.

Strong monitoring is necessary to review the status and check whether the provisions are executed. There should be provision for penalty for the officials not taking accountability. Social audit mechanism should be made a vital point for ensuring proper execution of RtE Act.

Transparency in budget allocations and incorporation of issues in cluster, district and state plans.

Teachers and RTE ActThe overall teacher shortage is estimated to be 14 lakhs; certain States like UP have a huge shortfall of over 1.8 lakh vacancies, which they are not filling due to lack of resources and 8 States entered 2010-11 with less than 50% teachers professionally qualified and trained. Interestingly, the qualifications among teachers in private unaided schools were lower than that of government teachers (68.8%, compared with 89.2%).

Trained teachers are critical to the success of the RTE and consequently the issue of teacher training needs urgent attention if the targets are to met in three years time. However, the number of untrained teachers is much higher than the existing capacity of recognised teacher training institutions in a number of States (especially if one counts government, low fees charging institutions accepting teacher trainees).

District Institutes of Education and Training, where teachers are trained lack qualified and trained trainers and have poor facilities. This leads to these institutions being unable to produce good quality teachers. Quality of private teacher training institutes is also found lacking. However, there are some progressive steps with the National Curriculum Framework for Teacher Education being finalised and States moving towards holding Teacher Eligibility Tests (TET). However, caution would need to be maintained that people conversant with tribal languages are appointed in tribal areas in an effort to promote the usage of mother tongue as far as possible.

With the quality of in-service training which is very poor, more effort is needed to develop a professional cadre of teachers. Existing trainings are frequently top down and fail to address the actual needs of teachers. Teachers who implement the RTE Act are the ones that know the least about it, which means to get rid archaic practices like corporal punishment. Urgent attention must be given to school based training of teachers.

Another positive stemming from the RTE is that teaching hours and days have been fixed because at the moment too many schools across India are not giving enough contact hours to our children. Furthermore, non teaching activities including clerical work must be stopped as teachers are not able to spend their time in school teaching. Progressively, the Act banned private tuition to ensure support to students is a mainstream responsibility of teachers within the school, not something they can be charged additionally for. This is a positive step but hasn’t visibly hit the ground yet.

Recommendations The Act cannot be implemented without ensuring adequate numbers of trained teachers. The situation

needs to be addressed on priority, especially in some of the lagging states like UP and Bihar. The continued hiring of para teachers (qualified and unqualified) is a matter of concern. The capacities of

existing para teachers need to be built to enable them to reach the standards laid down under the RTE Act.

Starting the process of restructuring of the teacher training systems to ensure that all new teacher recruits are trained cannot afford to wait much longer. Hiring large numbers of untrained teachers to meet shortfalls amounts to postponing the resolution of the problem and indeed aggravating it. All teachers would need to have the requisite qualifications in four years and this would need to be completed through in-service training.

While ensuring a transparent system of teacher recruitment through the setting of the State Teacher Eligibility Tests, the modalities of implementation of the same would need to be looked into the ensure recruitment of teachers from nearby areas and placement of teachers conversant with the tribal dialect in schools.

The issue of service conditions of teachers in private schools is not regulated by the RTE model rules. It is being left on the private management. This is likely to lead to several anomalies in future. Contractual teachers are another issue in private institutions.

Involvement of teachers in all forms of non teaching work must end. Secretarial and clerical support must be provided to teachers (perhaps even shared across schools on a daily rotation system in smaller schools to leave them free to undertake teaching.

Availability of onsite supports to teachers is imperative. This includes the appointment of full time head teachers, supporting head teachers to extend the leadership role expected of them, strengthening the existing academic support systems like CRCs and BRCs and also ensuring monitoring systems are strengthened.

Importance of arts, music, culture, sports is completely ignored as they are merely termed as leisure activities, there is need to promote such activities in all schools for the overall development of children.

There is need to provide special arrangements in government schools for children with disability. At the same time, there is an especially grave shortage in the number of teacher educators able to train prospective teachers of children with special needs. There is a dire shortage of able special educators. All teachers need to be trained to meet the educational needs of children with different degrees of ability and disability who are educated in the same classroom. This is the norm across the world and should also be practiced in India.

The government should strengthen existing government teacher training institutions to ensure that prospective teachers from marginalized communities can enter the teaching profession without having to pay fees in private teacher training colleges.

Social InclusionDropout rates of Adivasis, Muslims and Dalits, particularly girls in these communities, is much higher than the national average. There have been estimates of 8.5 million children out of school, however this has been viewed as an underestimation, as school figures generally depict ‘enrollment’ and not ‘attendance’, meaning there are no mutually agreed figures. For instance the official figure for child labour is 12.6 million, and per force, all working children are out of school. Mechanisms of bridging out of school children back into school continue to lag behind the true requirement. A key barrier, despite the push for enhanced infrastructure, is that school closures have happened in the name of ‘rationalization’, pushing children to risk of dropout.

A preventative approach to drop out must be taken with the adaptation of school and classroom settings to child friendly environments, that are inclusive of all children regardless of their caste, gender, religion or disability. Once they get into schools, discrimination against dalit, adivasi, minority, girls and disabled children must be addressed and dealt with. Efforts must be made to make all children feel ‘included’. For instance, for Adivasi children, it is important that teachers speak in the children’s mother tongue and for Muslim children recommendations made by the Sacchar Committee should be implemented. Also, gross discrimination against children living with HIV/ AIDS has been known to happen and needs strong action. To ensure access to education for all, the child labour laws, which currently allow certain forms of labour for children under 14, must be amended in line with the RTE so that all child labour is banned and the distinction between hazardous and non hazardous work is removed. All working children should be mainstreamed into regular schools and appropriate measures taken by states to ensure this happens. Despite 27 States banning corporal punishment, several high profile incidents over the last year have shown that reality has not necessarily changed. Furthermore, large numbers of schools in areas of civil unrest remain under occupation by security forces, despite repeated interventions by the Supreme Court. This places the schools in the frontline of the war between the Naxalites and the State and puts children’s lives at risk as well as denying them access to education.

While RTE Act makes provision of 25% reservation for disadvantaged children at the entry grade to private schools, this has been received with strong opposition by the private schools. Only a few states have attempted to do this systemically so far and while the government has sought to outlaw the levying of school fees, this has been implemented with varying degrees of success across the country.

Recommendations

1. The government must prepare a distinct plan of action to counter social exclusion. Mapping the children excluded from school and the forms of exclusion are essential and specific strategies worked out to resolve long pending issues. Mapping of disaggregated data to identify the pockets of exclusion, especially at the district and block levels, to cull out the geographical locations where exclusion has occurred over the years. At the same time, it would be imperative to identity the various forms of exclusion, beyond the obviously visible ones of enrollment and retention.

2. Closure of schools under the guise of rationalization, especially without ensuring a viable means for children to attend schools, need to stop. Accelerate processes of extension of upper primary school net that has lagged behind the primary schools.

3. Systems of tracking children’s attendance to identify children at risk of dropout to be accelerated. More thought needs to be given to adapting the schools to make them more inclusive and prevent dropout, while also significantly enhancing the bridging system to enable all children to return to school

4. Immediate end of army occupation of schools across the county making them zones of peace.5. Amendment in the Child Labour Prohibition and Regulation Act to prohibit all forms of child labour under

14 years of age, especially in agriculture and bringing it in line with the RTE. Ensure adequate provisions for child labourers to be mainstreamed back into schools

6. Special attention for disabled children is required. In the long run special schools are not an option for education of all children with disability. The last year had seen an increase in awareness about the issues of education of children with disability and the recognition that action needs to be taken to resolve the long pending issues. The lack of trained teachers able to teach children with disability is a major issue. Home based education is not an option from the point of view of breaking inequality in society.

7. Special provision should be made for HIV AIDS affected children. They should not be rejected from getting admission in school because of HIV AIDS

8. There is a need to strengthen compliance with the provisions of the 25% quota in pvt. Schools. Having inclusion of poor and rich children in the same schools would be a prerequisite for truly inclusive growth, social integration. This would also reduce discrimination in society. In reality, however, poor children are ill-treated in private schools.

9. Development of a rational, fair and transparent mechanism of regulation of private providers of education for children under 14 years of age to ensure inclusion of children from marginalised communities in schools and to minimise malpractices of all forms. This would be, in particular, essential to ensure their compliance with the government norms in general and equity for the excluded groups in particular.

10. SMC can play a crucial role to bring about transparency and solve the problem of maladministration in the process of implementation, alteast for the aided schools. Similar structures are also needed for the unaided private schools.

11. All of India’s citizens are equal. While the RTE lays down a set of minimum norms for all schools, these are fairly low and not enough to ensure true equity. What this entails for the government is that is imperative for it to think of enhancing the provisions in all its schools to the KV norms.

12. The government has been promoting Public Private Partnerships (PPP) in Education citing financial constraints. This ignores the poor track record of the private schools on equity. The policy proposed amounts to opening of subsidized private schools or outsourcing some of the school’s critical tasks. There is no real evidence to show that this strategy is being particularly helpful from the point of equity or quality. The lack of transparency and clear regulatory mechanisms of these PPPs is another cause of concern.

Quality ASER study on the RTE readiness of schools found that only 60% of the 13,000 schools visited had satisfied infrastructure norms specified by the law. Furthermore the annual survey highlighted that the learning outcomes are low and children fail to attain the levels expected for their age. Classroom instruction continues to be chalk and talk with only 30% primary classrooms having some group work.

The RTE outlines the cumulative assessment framework to improve the achievement levels of students, makes provision for no retention and abolishes intermediate board exams at grades 1-8. As in December 2010, 25 States had prohibited detention, expulsion and ended board examinations. However, this is also interpreted as students being promoted without any learning happening, instead of moving towards a system whereby children’s learning is continuously assessed and adequate support is provided to the students and teachers. While Continuous and Comprehensive Evaluation has been launched in several states, considerable confusion continues to prevail about what it entails and the necessary mechanisms necessary for it to work have not been put into place.

The RTE Act mandates a move towards compliance with the National Curriculum Framework but only 14 states have revised their curriculum as per the NCF 2005. The past year saw several states moving towards a restructuring of the curricula as part of the RTE mandate. In many cases, this was accompanied by a revision of the textbooks to bring them in compliance with the new curriculum. However, differences in the various strands of the education system remain which questions the aim of equity. Different standards of quality prevail between elite private schools and rural schools and within the government school system itself - with per child investment in Kendria Vidyalaya schools much higher than in private schools.

Recommendations1. Immediate mapping of school availability to ensure adequate access for all children residing in India,

irrespective of remoteness of habitation or any other accident of birth. This includes a drastic enhancement in the number of upper primary schools (enforcing a ratio of 1:1) and ensuring rationalisation of the timing of transportation facilities with school hours.

2. Ensure conformity with new RTE physical norms in a time bound manner with compensation for the time lost through slow implementation of the Act in the first year. School safety to be considered in new constructions, and retrofitting of old buildings done. Buildings should, furthermore, follow principles of universal design to ensure the access of persons with disability.

3. Availability of adequate teaching learning materials in schools, setting up of school libraries, book banks and ensuring high quality learning for children is essential.

4. Teachers supported (both in terms of creating an enabling environment in schools and sensitisation) to enable them to adopt positive discipline practices.

5. National and regional campaigns on rights of children – spelling out the main tenets of RTE, right against corporal punishment / mental harassment / discrimination. Right of children to be taught in school needs to be made an integral part of the campaign.

6. Ensure the adaptation of the classroom environment to enable continuous and comprehensive evaluation and more child friendly modes of teaching.

7. Activate provisions of after school support to school children from poor and first generation learner families to enable them to catch up with those receiving family based support.

8. Ensure violence and discrimination ends in all schools.9. In the end, quality can only be ensured via trained teachers and these need to be appointed in conformity

with the RTE norms. Systems of onsite monitoring and support would also be required for teachers to enhance their time on task.

II. Funding Patterns and Constraints

The issue of readiness for implementation of the Act cannot be addressed without considering the question of financing. Article 7 of the RTE simply states that the Central Government and the State Governments are responsible for the funding of the RTE. As with other issues, the allocation of budgetary resources to a particular issue is a political process wherein certain issues get relatively de-prioritized whereas resources are found for other issues. It is our submission that given that education investment amounts to a long term investment in the nation’s human resources to enable the country to take advantage of the democratic dividend that it enjoys, funding of education (especially elementary education) system through the government system needs to be prioritized through appropriate investment.

The following section examines the principal issues:

a. The quantum Outlays for SSA in the Union Government from 2007-08 to 2010-11 (in Rs. Crore)2007-08 RE 2008-09 RE 2009-10 RE 2010-11 BE

13171 13100 13100 15000Source: Union Budget document, various years from Centre for Budget and Governance Accountability (CBGA) RE= Revised Estimate, BE= Budget Estimate

The Union government estimates an overall amount of Rs.2, 31,233 crore for a period of five years from 2010. The 13th Finance Commission has allotted 24,068 crores for 5 years. However, the outlays have not shown the commensurate increase. These estimates are very conservative compared to those made prior to the passage of the Act. However, both the budgets that fall in the period of implementation of the Act have committed resources below even these rock bottom estimates. Indeed, the critique of the previous year’s budget as a very low investment manifests the lack of interest in seriously working towards the Act’s implementation. As the implementation of the Act began, additional allotments (8,521.70 crores) were made to several states to fund their implementation of the Act under the SSA. However, several of the States failed to opt for this additional grant.

The pattern of under-budgeting has continued into 2011. The MHRD had asked for Rs 34,000 crore for the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) in the 2011-12 budget to spend on recruiting trained teachers, training untrained teachers, setting up schools and improving basic facilities at schools. However, the ministry only received Rs 21,000 crore for the SSA, just Rs 2,000 crore above last year’s revised allocation.2 This is bound to negatively impact implementation since many of the big ticket expenditures were anticipated to happen in the coming year as the system slowly gears up for implementation. The track record of investments committed by the States in the coming year is also patchy- ranging from an impressive and trend setting 109% increase in Punjab3 to an approximate 10-15% increase in Delhi4

What the low quantum of spending entails is States continuing to rely on low cost alternatives like hiring para-teachers (untrained teachers) or back-ending heavy expenditure until resources become available from somewhere. A frequently cited critique of the RTE Act has been the rather low norms laid down and its failure to ensure equitable quality education for all. In this regard, an alternative exercise of fund estimation by People’s Budget Initiative to arrive at a figure for financing RTE is attempted based on the norms as prescribed for Kendriya Vidyalaya (KV) schools in the country. The rationale to adopt KV norms is to ensure that quality concerns are

2 http://www.telegraphindia.com/1110301/jsp/nation/story_13650847.jsp3http://www.punjabnewsline.com/content/punjab-increases-education-budget-52-percent-emphasis-human-resource-development/295224 http://www.hindustantimes.com/Delhi-may-spend-Rs-1-200-cr-on-education-this-fiscal/Article1-673486.aspx

addressed since KV schools are the most satisfactory model of schools that are financed by the Union government catering only to a small minority of population.

KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA NORMS FOR ALL SCHOOLSA frequently cited critique of the RTE Act has been the rather low norms laid down and its failure to ensure equitable quality education for all. In this regard, an alternative exercise of fund estimation by People’s Budget Initiative to arrive at a figure for financing RTE is attempted based on the norms as prescribed for Kendriya Vidyalaya (KV) schools in the country. The rationale to adopt KV norms is to ensure that quality concerns are addressed since KV schools are the most satisfactory model of schools that are financed by the Union government catering only to a small minority of population.

It is pertinent to look at the existing government outlays towards elementary education, which was Rs.84119 crore (around 1.5 percent of GDP) in 2008-09. Assuming that the government continues to spend the same 1.5 percent of GDP at the elementary level in 2010-11, this would amount to Rs.1.04 lakh crore as existing spending per year. Adding the incremental amount of Rs.36565 crore a year (which is arrived at by taking one-fifth of the proposed amount of Rs. 1.82 lakh crore5) that the government has proposed for spending to implement RTE, the total allocations at the elementary level would be Rs.1.40 lakh crore in 2010-11.There are 981 KV schools in the country with an outlay of Rs.2002 crore in Union Budget 2011-12. The average amount that would accrue to one KV school would be approximately Rs.2.04 crore. The total number of primary and middle schools in the country is known (Statistics of School Education 2007-08); calculating the government spending per school throws up an estimate of Rs.22 lakh per year (Rs.1.40 lakh crore / 640268 schools)..To adopt KV as a norm, assuming that at least half of the Rs.2.04 crore is spent at the elementary level, the government spending at elementary level based on KV norms works out to be Rs.1.02 crore.

Thus, if the government starts implementing its proposal for increasing budget outlay for elementary education by Rs. 36565 crore per year, our analysis shows that while the government spends at least Rs.1 crore per KV (at the elementary level), the comparable amount being spent for implementing RTE would work out to around Rs.22 lakh per average government school. Clearly, it is inadequate if the government is keen to address quality concerns in universalizing the right to education, since this increased amount would be only about one-fifth of what the government is spending on providing quality education to a small percentage of the children in the country.

(Reproduced from CBGA (2010) Education Background Paper for National Convention on Union Budget and analysis of the Union Budget 2011-12)

b. Extent to which resources reach the schools Information for 2010-11 is currently not available. However, going by the government’s own statistics during 2009-10 (DISE Flash Statistics), 84% schools receive the school development grant and 82% received the Teaching and Learning Material (TLM) grant. Thus, 1 out of 5 schools failed to receive any money for enhancement of school infrastructure or development/purchase of teaching learning materials. The present analysis however does not consider the timeliness of the arrival of the money into the schools. There are also dramatic fluctuations – only 40% teachers received funds for TLM development and 54% schools in Meghalaya received money for school development.

In year preceding the implementation of the RTE Act – FY 2009-106

Only 83% of total funds available (opening balance, GOI and state releases) were spent.

However, expenditure as proportion of planned allocation remained 77% indicating a mismatch between planning, release and expenditure.

In addition, there is a last minute rush to spend funds. In FY 2008-09, only 37% SSA expenditure was incurred in the first two quarters of the financial year.

Rajasthan and UP have spent over 90% of their allocated resources under SSA, contrasted with Bihar at only 61%

5 Minutes of Meeting of State Education Secretaries, 28-30 January 2010, Ministry of Human Resource Development6 http://www.accountabilityindia.in/sites/default/files/budget-education/sarva_shiksha_abhiyan_goi_2010-11.pdf

c. Absorption Capacity and Financial Systems However, the flip side of low overall budgets is the simultaneously low absorption capacity in several places 7. A major reason for insufficient allocation is the consistent backlog of spending on the part of states. With resources remaining under-utilized, the centre factors this amount as already available with the states and reduces the new allocation accordingly. On one hand this means that states never really receive the resources that are needed, but also that a greater effort needs to be made to address the barriers that impede spending at state level.

Late release of resources leading to low quality of spending is a consistent problem. At the same time, previous history of spending under SSA suggests that while expenditure tends to be higher for infrastructural development, some heads like community participation and teacher training consistently lag behind. Hiring of additional accounts staff and expediting the computerisation of fund transfer systems are some of the recommendations made in the recently conducted Joint Review Mission of SSA as being critical to enhance the ability to absorb resources. The financial manual of SSA underwent a change in the present year, bringing it in conformity with the requirements under RTE. There are also issues related to transparency of the budgets – especially at the grassroots level and the extent to which the fund flow matches the planning that is done. More attention would be given to this issue in the chapter on Community Participation. Consequently, heavy influx of additional resources that the issue requires needs to be accompanied by an effort to address the systems through which the funds flow.

Consequently,

Investment in education needs to be prioritized to ensure that India’s children receive an education comparable in quality with what is obtained by children in other countries in our vicinity like Bangladesh and Sri Lanka.

This would entail enhancing the quantum of investment to a minimum of the government’s own estimate of the costs that would need to be incurred for its implementation.

The unit costs and overall standards of the RTE Act need to be enhanced with time and the allocation would need to be increased accordingly.

Remove the barriers for bottom up planning in the system whereby resources flow to the schools based on the actual requirements. This would in turn require a comprehensive process of capacity building of SMCs and Local Authorities in order to enable them to move into this role.

Prioritize steps that require to be taken to expedite fund-flow. This includes the hiring of appropriate numbers of finance and audit staff and computerization of the accounting system.

Enhance the financial transparency of the education system whereby ordinary citizens, especially parents of children studying in the school can access accounts of the school.

III. Viability of Rules/Guidelines framed under the Act

A critical concern under the Act has been the considerable divergence in the provisions under the state rules in the Act. Similar provisions have been understood differently and are, therefore, will be implemented in different ways. Thus, it took the intervention from the NCPCR as late as in November 2011 to stop the Government of West Bengal from levying school fees in its schools. Similarly, the head of the SMC is Delhi has been made the head teacher of the school which negates the very purpose of the Act- parental participation.

7http://ibnlive.in.com/generalnewsfeed/news/50-of-funds-not-implemented-for-ssa-rte-act-parl-panel/601982.html

A related concern being voiced by education activists in the States has been the lack of centralized clearinghouse on the rules and circulars issued by the States in any central location. The SSA website can potentially serve this purpose if updated regularly.

IV. Recommendations for Monitoring of the RTE Act

The present section is divided into sections- viz. a suggestion for strengthening the monitoring system for the RTE Act and b. recommendations for strengthening grievance redress under the Act.

Speaking broadly, as with any other law, the RTE Act’s very existence does not automatically guarantee its implementation. While one may wish for the law to be implemented automatically, it is inevitable that in a large and evolving organism that is the education system instances of less than effective implementation would happen. Reporting of these instances often leads to introspection and eventually the evolution of solutions to problems that strengthen the system. At the same time, given the unequal and highly stratified nature of India’s society, some groups are more likely to face instances of rights violations. A clear mechanism needs to be laid down to report such violations and ensure action. Lastly, the reporting of violations can exert a form of collective pressure towards educational renewal by generating a bottom up demand or improvement of facilities. Thus, a clear and effective grievance redressal systems is required.

However, there is a progression of implementation of rights (Juneja, N 2009 derived from using the conceptual frameworks proposed by Eugeen Verhellen (2000), and the ‘General Measures of Implementation’ of the CRC) namely:1. There must BE a Right 2. There must be AWARENESS of the right 3. There must be CAPABILITY to exercise the Right 4. If necessary there must be ability and means to ENFORCE the Right 5. There must be Community SUPPORT & ADVOCACY for the Right

The implementation of RTE would not be activated unless all the enabling factors are put into place to ensure all five essential steps are taken. Much of the discussion on the Redressal Mechanisms under RTE has until now been centred around the 4th step in this chain- viz the means of enforcement of the law. However, it goes without saying that this would not work without the people whose educational rights are being violated being aware of the specific provisions of the legislation and having the capability to raise their issues. There would also need to be an enabling framework in support of the right’s implementation in the long run.

i. Monitoring System for RTE.

A detailed note listing a possible framework for leveraging technology for the monitoring of the RTE Act implementation has been appended as Appendix II. Broadly speaking, however, the issues of monitoring and redress are closely intertwined and a monitoring system that doesn’t lead to solutions of the problems identified would have limited utility and consequently impact.

Ii. Specific Recommendations for Redress under the Act.

This includes the set of recommendations for strengthening the redressal as part of the Grievance Redress Act that is being proposed (Appendix I) and the overall recommendations. Overall, a mechanism of redress has been laid down as part of the Revised SSA Framework, however, the implementation of the same has not been laid down in practice. Consequently, the present section highlights some of the issues for strengthening monitoring of the RTE Act based on the Forum’s experience in this regard.

a. A critical issue emerging from the SSA Framework is that once such a mechanism is in place it will be possible for the monitoring agencies also to direct complaints to the appropriate levels. Having intra-

departmental requests by teachers and other lower officials also being part of the mechanism whereby redressal happens would accelerate the process of redressal (without relying on a complaint from an outside party) and also empower teachers.

b. Efforts must be made to ensure that a people friendly, independent mode of registering grievances exists, outside the implementation structure through a parallel platform, to facilitate the registration of the grievance, and issue dated receipts. Given the intent to centralize and computerize the filing of complaints, it would be essential to create mechanisms for data compilation. Such centres should be set up at the block level (municipal ward in the urban context). These would be internet connected, mobile phone based centres with people trained to help draft, send, and track complaints that are made by the people. The Block level Centres set for MGNREGA could be used as generic platforms.

c. The mechanism talks about redressal of all complaints within three months (and a shorter period for some other issues). The presence of an outer window of time is a positive feature. However, the processes by which redressal would happen needs to be specified, especially if redressal does not happen at the first step of the process. A mechanism whereby it becomes obligatory for the case to be taken up within atleast one month of the complaint should also be specified. If no verified ‘Action Taken Report’ is received by the Block Level Information Centre within a further stipulated time period, it will automatically trigger the District Grievance Redress mechanisms to start proceedings on the complaint. This district Grievance Redress body should be manned with technical staff and mandatory open on- site hearing procedures would be required to dispose off grievances within a month. They would have the power to compensate the citizen, and penalise the defaulting public official. This would allow most grievances to be sorted out at the District level. It draws upon the advantages gained from giving the powers of penalty and compensation to the Information Commissions and builds upon the practice of Ombudsmen set up in each District under the MGNREGA.

d. Only then would information flow to the State or National Commissions for Protection of Child Rights. Doing so would lessen the load on them and enable them to intervene in the most pressing cases. This would be described in more detail when we return to the role of the appellate authorities in this paper.

e. Enforcing rights under RTE involves interdepartmental links covering schools established by other departments such as Tribal Affairs, Labour or Social Justice. Grievances that arise from these schools will also have to be redressed by the Education Department/ SSA which is the appropriate government under the Act responsible for ensuring provision of elementary education irrespective of who runs the schools. Thus, the grievance redressal mechanism will have to include coordination with these departments as well. These processes have, however, not really been initiated.

f. Similar links will also have to be established for covering Specified Category Schools and Private schools. The current relationship between unaided private schools and the government on the issue of stronger regulation has been far from being cordial, especially when enforcing of the 25% reservation in private schools is concerned. Strong reservations have been expressed by private schools about the current practice of supervision of private schools which it is felt often breeds corruption. A mechanism of realistic and rational regulatory framework for private schools is needed in order to simultaneously ensure RTE compliance of the concerned schools, but also to work towards addressing long pending issues pertaining to transparency and accountability of the sector. This could also enable additional issues to be raised including that of regulation of the fees charged (along the lines of the Tamil Nadu legislation in this regard) that are strictly speaking outside the purview of the RTE Act, but which would make a significant contribution in ensuring that the educational institutions become more inclusive and equitable places. A clear mechanism would also be needed to minimize possibilities of leakages of funds under 25% quota and ensure that this provision is implemented more effectively.

g. With the government repeatedly entering into Public Private Partnerships with multiple stakeholders for delivery of education in institutions as a whole or for undertaking critical services in schools, there is a need for a clearly defined mechanism for regulation of such structures and processes. This mechanism should contain a simple mechanism for communities to file complaints in case their educational rights are violated and ensure that these partnerships are undertaken in an open and transparent manner to enable citizen scrutiny. One hears an elaborate mechanism for supervision of PPPs is being considered in the 12th

Five Year Plan. One does not sense that a detailed process of consultation has been undertaken around this issue, especially with civil society. Consequently, it is premature to comment on the proposal in the face of paucity of information- besides regretting the heavy emphasis on PPP as a mechanism for delivery of education in the Plan. Another more immediate development is a recent CIC ruling placing PPPs in the jurisdiction of RTI. This should facilitate the flow of information to place it directly in the public domain.

h. Unrealistic workloads on a shrinking cadre of people (often designated as “school inspectors”) expected to combine administrative responsibilities, onsite support and monitoring of both government and private schools creates conditions where supervisory mechanisms are doomed to failure. An enhancement in the cadres of supervisors and a rethink of the mechanisms adopted to ensure that a strong and rational regulatory system is put into place is the need of the hour. Furthermore, their capacities also need to be built to enable them to play the challenging role expected of them. The present system focuses on the actual processes if a complaint is filed. However, prevention is surely better than cure and mechanisms need to be created to ensure that action flows on its own without having to activate this mechanism. The shortage of supervisory cadres is a critical gap in the system.

i. Robust public based monitoring mechanisms like vigilance committees and social audits would be critical in making this mechanisms work. The reports of these exercises would also feed into the grievance redress system and be put up for appropriate disposal. All issues where criminal responsibility can be established should be sent by the District bodies and the SPPCRs/NCPCR for the filing of FIRs.

Broadly speaking, there are two sets of actions that would need to be taken to ensure monitoring and redressal that is successful. Both would need to be taken to ensure success.

Active CitizenshipA broader process of community mobilization is required to ensure that there is a critical mass of people actively concerned and acting towards implementation of the long pending issues of the education sector. This includes action by civil society that would act as a catalyst in triggering this process of change, concerned citizens, lawyers, media and a whole host of concerned groups that could potentially come together to play their role in this regard. The SMCs and Local Authorities that are theoretically vested with considerable powers, but which they are often unable to exercise in the face of inadequate capacity and lack of true devolution of powers need to be supported to play their roles and mobilized into a critical mass of people demanding improvement of the situation on the ground. An active and concerned citizenry would in turn make action towards redressal of the problems in the education system inevitable.

Systematic ReformThis process of mobilization would, however, need to be combined with a process of engagement with the State to activate the existing spaces for redressal. The broad skeletal outline of the redressal system laid down in the SSA Framework needs to be refined and domesticated for each state, while maintaining the common structure. While the lack of a clearly defined mechanism active on the ground is unfortunate, the lack of a clearly defined system also creates the opportunity of making use of the existing fluidity to institutionalize change.

Some of the critical aspects requiring emphasis in the coming years should be around institutionalizing reform conducive for greater accountability and transparency in the government systems. At the same time, greater efforts need to be made towards activating mechanisms of legal redressal. It is imperative to advocate for the immediate setting up of SCPCRs in States that continue to lack them and for those states where these exist, the building of their capacities to enable them to respond to the scale of problems faced for the implementation of the RTE Act. The NCPCR as well, requires a drastic enhancement in its capacity considering the scale of the problems faced. A clear complaint registration and follow-up mechanism should be initiated at the earliest and set deadlines to ensure that complaints do not take too much time.

IV. Overall Recommendations

Implementation of the Act and a focus on ensuring quality access to the socially excluded and quality education for all must be the key priorities in the year ahead. To ensure this, we submit to government the following recommendations:

The process of forming State Rules needs to become more participatory and these rules should be developed at the earliest involving the stakeholders from the disadvantaged groups and civil society.

Formation of SCPCRs with independent and apolitical people with subject expertise so that child rights violations can be identified and dealt with effectively. At the same time, capacity of the NCPCR needs to be enhanced in order to enable them to fully play the role envisaged.

SMCs: Initiate the process of formation through an elected process giving parents space to influence the process and also capacity building of the SMCs.

Map infrastructure/teacher availability against new norms for all schools and ensure needs based supply of infrastructure.

Teacher training system to be reorganized and put in place as per the need in every state Transparency systems need to be strengthened. One clear model is of the Madhya Pradesh education web

portal where all information is publically available, which may be further strengthened by allowing citizens to input their information of the functioning of the schools on the ground.

The overall status of implementation should be available on public platform. Parents and civil society have a right to know what is happening in their states. Civil society organisations and networks may be able to extend support if the actual sticking points are more widely known.

Government must focus adequate resources at central and state level to raising awareness on the Act and should lay down the specifics of what this Act entails not just for the community, but also, and perhaps more critically, for the administrators and teachers.

Training and capacity building on leadership and school management for head teachers and administrators

Developing the training systems (start the process of reviving teacher training institutes - especially in UP, Bihar - not resort to nominal training through a few days of distance education) is going to be a long term process, but it needs to be started and not just discussed. Unless this is done, states will continue to hire unqualified parateachers which is the current situation. Teacher shortages, untrained teachers, poor quality of training, no effective systems for building capacities of head teachers and no effective onsite support is a huge unresolved cluster that needs to be critically addressed.

Budgetary allocation must go towards education based on a systematic analysis of the situation and with the necessary financial checks and balances put into place.

The issue of regulating the private education providers cannot be postponed forever. With the number of private schools growing, it is imperative to put in place a rational, clear and transparent mechanism to cover a range of issues from RTE- specific issues like the 25% quota to larger issues of commercialisation of education and regulation of private schools and school fees.

Contacts for the Submission:

Anjela Taneja, Oxfam India: anjela@oxfamindia.org Mobile: 09958087043

Ambarish Rai, PCCSS amb1857@gmail.com Mobile: 09013412508

APPENDIX I

Citizens Right to Grievance Redress Draft Bill 2011- RTE Forum Response

The RTE Forum, a broad umbrella group of all major education networks and agencies working on the Right to Education in the country, broadly welcomes the introduction of this Bill and feels that it has several positive features that can be tapped into for ensuring streamlining of the implementation of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2011.

However, we suggest some points for your consideration to strengthen this proposed legislation from the perspective of delivery of education in the formal system and in the light of children’s educational rights in general.

Broad Issues.

A critical gap of the proposed Bill is that the word redress has not been defined. This creates the possibility for ambiguity as to whether an issue has been satisfactorily resolved from the perspective of the complainant.

The Bill in the present form does not give adequate focus to quality issues- with weight, size and frequency being under its purview. This needs to be expanded to include quality and other less tangible process centred indicators like discrimination and untouchability. Availability of teachers, functional toilets, instructional hours and eventually learning outcomes are not strictly speaking covered through the existing framework, but form the bread and butter issues for education delivery.

The linkage of this mechanism with existing processes of redressal- viz the existence of the NCPCR and SCPCRs (National and State Commissions for Protection of Child Rights) have not been laid down. This would also hold for other quasi-judicial bodies- like the National Commission for Women, Persons with Disability, STs etc, not to mention the NHRC.

The present document fails to provide for compensation for instances of violation of provisions. Furthermore, even the penalties imposed have been defined as being “lumpsum”. The experience of the RTI Act in making these provisions explicit need to be learned from and the provisions implemented.

A mechanism for facilitating the submission of complaints by children needs to be put into force. One possibility is the designation of a GRO at the level of the school/Panchayat to collect complaint by children. Another is the setting up of a helpline for children to launch their own complaints. Special sensitivity would need to be ensured for the GROs to enable them to solicit complaints from children.

Learning from the experience of pre-existing citizens’ charters, it would be imperative to ensure that there are common standards of quality laid down. Going from the implementation of Section 4 of the RTI Act, there was considerable variation in terms of the quality of information provided from office to office for the same head. At the same time, given the multiplicity of institutions and departments across the State (eg different strands of schooling in a single state- eg. NDMC and MCD schools in Delhi), a process of setting of standards for equivalent level structures to ensure their substantial uniformity would need to be undertaken for each state. The RTE Act lends itself fairly easily to setting up such standards. The Central/State Commissions should have the power to review these and give directions, where required to ensure that the functions of the Public Authority are properly reflected in the charters.

Need to specify that for district and sub-district grievances and complaints, the Heads of Department (HoD) would be designated at the District level.

There is a clear danger of backlash against children in case complaints of malpractice in educational institutions are filed. A mechanism for protection of whistleblowers needs to be laid down and protection of minor children in the process taken especially into account.

The present document does not look at the mechanisms for ensuring synergy between concerned bodies for inter-departmental delivery in case a complaint pertains to more than one department. An example can be the delivery of water or sanitation in a school- something that may pertaining to both the education and water and santiation departments. Given the multiple departments involved in education delivery, the omission of a clear mechanism whereby synergy between departments is built is a major omission. Another related issue would be in terms of inter-state delivery in the form of provisions for migrant populations of children. Thus, a school may function within one State (source State) while majority of time it actually functions in another (destination state in case of migration of parents). Similarly, it would be essential to set these protocols in case of admission for migrant children. Consequently, a protocol for this needs to be looked at in the bill.

An Independent block (or at least district) level grievance redress authority is required to ensure that complaints are addressed without all of them being taken up on the State level. Failure to do so, is likely to limit the number of cases filed, create an excessive backlog of cases and overall unnecessarily prolong processes

The current Bill gives a month for redress. However, waiting for a month may be too late since the child would have dropped out of school in this time. A clear breakup of deadlines would be required to make sure that urgent cases are indeed handled with the urgency that they deserve.

Special enabling provisions for persons with sensorial disability would, likewise be required. This includes availability of the Citizens’ Charters in alternative means, facilitation of submission of complaints in alterative forms. While the present Bill speaks about special efforts needing to be made for persons that are functionally illiterate, the need for special support for complainants versed in Braille and other alternative modes has not been incorporated.

Specific Issues

2.a. Action Taken Report. The present definition should be made more specific to say what the ATR would contain in specific- viz. the orders given by concerned body for eventual implementation or the actual action undertaken. It is recommended that this clause should furthermore be expanded to include a signed statement from the complainant that the conclusion reached was satisfactory and this submission be independently verified.

2.k. It is recommended that pure private schools be likewise be included in the purview of the present provision. They should be considered covered under the section k-c of the present legislation. The reason for the same is two fold- while the delivery of education by private schools is largely in lieu of fees (if one ignores the considerable subsidy in terms of land and other forms given to private schools) and because 25% of their intakes consists of children from marginalized communities under the RTE Act.

5.Obligation of HoD for updating and verifying the Citizens’ Charter. 4. Add “and ensure that a hard copy of the charter is displayed in the premises of the institution”

6. At what level of the Public Authority would this be established has not been specified. Furthermore, the minimum norms, standards and framework of functioning of the same would require to be laid down.

6. 2. In addition to the adoption of electronic modes, it would be imperative to retain the systems whereby paper submissions are equally facilitated.

9. a. and b. The difference between remediation of a complaint (to be done in 15 days) and redress (within 1 month) is unclear. This needs to be clarified and clear definitions laid down for both terms.

c. This should also enter into the service record of the officer concerned. Where a GRO finds that there has been deficiency, negligence or malfeasance on the part of the concerned persons, the same should be mandatorily be reported to the HoD who is empowered to recommend penalties.

10. The clause should be expanded to state that failure to Act on a complaint by the concerned authority based on the GRO’s orders within the stipulated period should be considered as amounting to refusing the request .

Chapter V. In case a grievance has been rejected, the bill should lay down a clear protocol to ensure that the complainant is informed about the same. The reason for the rejection, the period within which a complaint can be filed and the details of the appellate authority need to be given to the response.

The limitation for making an appeal of 30 days needs to be expanded.

14. 31. The number of commissioners needs be determined based on the workload and work norms and cannot really be laid down for all times to come.

25. A clear definition of what amounts to “urgency” in the lines of the RTI’s definition of life and liberty needs to be specified. Even in the case of the life and liberty wording, this has lead to multiple interpretations. Instances of child abuse, corporal punishment or discrimination (to just name a few), cannot wait for a month. A clear breakup of deadlines would be required. Furthermore, a similar life and liberty style clause would be required at the lower levels of the machinery- and not just appearing at the level of the commission.

State and Central Commissions fail to specify a time frame for resolution of complaints.

27, 40. The intent under these clauses is commendable. However, the wording can be misinterpreted. Suggest using experience of the RTI Act to state that the “burden of proof to establish that non redress of complaint was justified by the GRO” instead of the original text. In the present form, the sentence reads that the GRO that denied a request would be expected to prove that he failed to act on a complaint. This opens the possibilities of malpractice in case of malafide action by the concerned GRO.

45. It is unclear why the present sentence states that a penalty “may” be imposed. Stringent clearly laid down penalties need to be imposed.

46.2. These records need to be maintained not just on a website, but also on the walls of the institutions delivering the same at the grassroots level- right down to the level of the school.

Section 51. The power to make rules should be specified in the Act, with the Central Government making model rules for the States to modify based on their experience and context.

APPENDIX II.

SCHOOL REPORT CARDS – A PROPOSAL FOR LEVERAGING PRIMARY INDICATORS TO UNIVERSALIZE EDUCATION AND REFORM THE EDUCATION SYSTEM.

The Background:The government has taken significant steps to universalize primary education and there is growing recognition of the value of education amongst all sections of the population. However, there are problems ensuring efficiency between the government supply of education and community demand in many areas. Experience has shown that there is widespread potential for communities to mobilize around the common good of ensuring education for all children in the community and support the formal system to achieve universal education. At the same time, there is increased media attention to the issues of quality. This proposal seeks to pilot a framework that leverages information pertaining to the functioning of the schools reported by communities (and complementing and not replacing the existing government databases on the functioning of the schools) leading to action based on discrepancies between the state and national norms and other legal provisions pertaining to the functioning of the schools.

What is being proposed?The present proposal seeks to build a community based report card system paralleling the DISE school report cards already available online (that are teacher generated, do not include aspects pertaining to the functioning of infrastructure available, and lacks certain key indicators). It would include the government data and information on the ground reported by activists/parents/concerned citizens about the functioning of the said schools. This information is not intended to remain an online database alone, but rather feed into action whereby these complaints are taken up- both in the normal course of advocacy and may be used by the administration itself as an alterative source of information. In view of the responsibility assigned to NCPCR in the Right to Education Act, a close interaction would need to be maintained with the Commission in this regard.

The purpose of the shadow report cardThe present set of report cards offers scope to fulfill some of the functions given below. However, just like the original report cards (live on the NUEPA website), we must be careful not to set up the shadow report cards with assumed benefits without thinking through a purpose to which these would be put. Consequently, a series of consultations with the potential stakeholders need to be held to come up with a methodology that is usable by them. This would need to be further fine tuned leading to the creation of a workable reporting system for advocacy and action.

1. As a tool to trigger ownership of the educational system by the community. a. Democratize access to knowledge, taking the power out of the hands of the

village elites and notionally create the space /access for everyone to the education system.

b. Empower the individual or community to take action. The data becomes available to everyone- including the media and the education administration, bypassing existing hierarchies of power and authority. It would ensure that the element of voice and agency is brought into the mainstream system whereby the information about the school is available in real time with the education department machinery.

c. Trigger debate. Clear visible gaps between the quantitative data uploaded by the government on the internet and the actual prevailing reality in the school

may trigger debate and hence action around it. Thus, knowing that a latrine is available in the school but is not in a usable condition due to lack of water supply, would trigger action to get the same activated. At the same time, if only 70 of the 150 children enrolled attend school regularly would trigger action.

2. As a grievance redressal mechanism. This would make information about the actual functioning of the school, especially any problems in dire need of redressal of the educational gaps, available online for everyone to view and would serve as an incentive for the government officials to intervene to avoid the situation where the evidence of their failure is available online.

3. As an aide in planning. Planning and resource allocation is often mechanistic in nature and fails to truly tap into user perceptions. Some of the specific issues that could be addressed in this regard would include

a. Infrastructure planning – which school need additional infrastructure/resources?

b. Teacher rationalization – how do we optimize the distribution of teachers?c. Track action on Village Education Plans prepared by the communityd. Planning for UPS / High school transition by having a clear picture of the

volume of students coming through the primary system.4. As an information base to be used for research and advocacy by others. As such, it

could (with supplementary information that is qualitative in nature) could serve as an initial framework for regular reporting system on the functioning of the schools.

In addition, it would Publicize the attainments of the schools. In addition to the critique of the gaps in the

school system, the availability of qualitative feedback may enable truly functional schools to be recognized.

Provide a more detailed description of the reality on the ground that may assist the administrators centrally to make decisions about the school, especially if supplemented through user (Parent, child, PRI) feedback.

DISE School Report Cards as a Starting Point:The government has made a considerable investment in an education management information system (EMIS). Starting in a few districts under the DPEP in the 1990’s, the EMIS has grown to the point that there are now a million school report cards accessible on the web. School report cards contain a proportion of a more detailed information set that is available to education administrators. Their appearance in the public domain represents a commitment to maintain transparent data on the education system, accessible to all with internet connectivity. This proposal looks at the steps to work with the school report card system to enable it to create a depository of information to mobilize the community around education.

At the same time, it provides an opportunity for individuals to put up actual information in the public domain and seek redressal through a system that is transparent and open to all. This opens up opportunities for individuals facing an infringement to their right to education to complaint, receive suggestions and support for how to proceed towards a solution of the same and expect a solution in real time.

The proposed system seeks to simultaneously act as a tool for both the community and the individual while also providing information to the administration. The role of NCPCR is especially important in this regard since the Right to Education Act 2009 makes it the ombudsman body for addressing complaints about the denial of education rights. The administration

While the DISE report cards are available online, they have traditionally found limited use from education activists for a range of reasons (discussed later in the document). However, one reason is simply that they have not been created with any specific action in mind. The present proposal seeks to evolve the final framework through consultation with the concerned end users to maximize their utilization.

Whilst it is inevitable that a database of this size will contain inaccuracies due to inputting mistakes, confusion over the format and so forth, there is also the possibility that reporting is distorted because it is provided by teachers who may have a vested interest in presenting a certain situation– their jobs depend on a volume of children being enrolled, MDM disbursement is determined by enrollment, construction and teacher allotment is determined by other factors etc. Likewise, the system as a whole may have an interest in maintaining the status quo. Given these facts, one can conclude that real change will only come when the wider community, including teachers and administrators are mobilized around the functioning of the schools as an integral part of the process.

However, simply challenging the system based on the current report cards may elicit either a flight (refusal to acknowledge issues/discrepancies) or a fight response (taking away teachers, challenging community for not fulfilling their role). The resulting system would need to provide a framework for demanding resources from the system while also working to strengthen the professional ethos of the education system and developing norms in the community that protect child rights. The risk with the use of the report card as is they may lead to conflictual advocacy where victories are implemented in a mean spirit and robbed of positive outcomes. The intention is not to create a league table of schools- a way of identifying schools that function exceptionally well, or shame schools that function badly, but rather to be supportive in nature.

DISE vs Shadow Report Cards? DISE has been developed through a process of research and after consultation with a series of experts. Consequently, any new system would need to meet the challenge of being equally credible and thorough methodologically. However, there are gaps in both systems which creates the scope for another set of report cards. The alternative system would need to be methodologically sound, inclusive, and accessible to a popular reader. This framework will leverage existing government data and broad-base existing established indicators and build upon what is already available, using the DISE database as a starting point.

Advantages DisadvantagesDISE Intended to cover the entire universe of

recognized schools Takes the inputs in schools into

consideration- not just outputs Highly transparent. Raw data available

online. Willing to make immediate changes if errors found.

Government lead system, data feeds into the action.

Teacher Generated, government data

Leaves out many private schools Does not take into consideration

qualitative functioning of the infrastructure, assets described

Takes school as unit online. Does not include children out of schools/child labour

Once a year exercise, data is a year old. Not a continuous analysis of situation.

Shadow Report Cards

Cover all schools- recognized & unrecognized.

Leverage civil society to make it a civil society report card system, while also bringing in the government

Would include panchayat as another

Fact that the focus is not only on a single aspect- ie achievement, means it has more content and therefore is more complex.

Would be a new entity. Would need work to establish credibility.

layer. Would include out of school children, issues of school governance

Includes qualitative aspects pertaining to functioning of the schools

Continuous updation of data would ensure that it is a correct snapshot of the reality at any given point of time.

Alternative Models:Our understanding is that an alternative simple tool is being piloted by NCPCR as part of its role on monitoring of the implementation of the Right to Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act 2009. It is our understanding that this draws directly on the indicators of the Act, instead of using the DISE data capture tool (which is likewise being adapted in light of the new legislation). While it is our belief that it would be beneficial if a single database is maintained by the government, the critical feature of what is being proposed is having a publically available database into which community can input, the use of this data for strengthening the government schools as part of an official government process (rather than making it a small scale parallel NGO initiative) and ensuring that a complaint mechanism is built around the information of violation of rights. If these criteria can be fulfilled without throwing a link to the DISE database, it would be something we are open to exploring.

ASSESSING HOW THE SHADOW REPORT CARDS COULD BE DIFFERENT FROM DISE

1. Shadow cards to be bilingual: English and the State Language. This would enable better understanding by the residents of the state.

2. Introduction of atleast another layer of data- the Panchayat. This would include two main sets of data- viz.

a. Out of School/Working Children. Any analysis that fails to include out of school children (be they dropouts or never enrolled) fails to do justice to child rights and leaves the system exposed to allegations of exclusion.

b. Local Self Governance- Panchayat/VEC Functioning. This would include bothi. Functioning of the Panchayat/VEC/Education Subcommittee

ii. Plans and resolutions made by the same, especially those that are yet pending.

3. Include qualitative Data to provide an indication of actual services delivered to children: a. Explore the functionality of the infrastructure listed in the quantitative section. b. Contain a section for open ended statements: anecdotes, success stories,

complaints, etc.c. A space for the school/system to respond to the issue raised would need to be

provided to decrease the element of inter-subjectivity. 4. Address inaccuracies

a. Inclusion of qualitative and quantitative data that is directly linked to professional expectations would mean that data is the focus of discussions between managers and teachers.

b. Triangulation of data introduced- mobilizing community to ensure statistics reflect reality

c. Effort to include private unrecognized schools. While there is a space for reporting of the same in the DISE, this is scarcely ever used.

While setting up the system, a process of negotiation with the education department would be needed. An amnesty for all false data at the moment is needed.

5. Introduce Additional Indicators in the schoolSome of the information gaps have been discussed previously. It would be necessary to ensure that we limit information to key strategic fields that we are clear how it will be of benefit. Eventually, the emphasis in a decentralized system must be on decentralized

benefit.

Who Would Be Involved:The overall objective would be to strengthen the functioning of the school system, therefore, all people concerned with the improvement of the schools in a geographical area would be involved. These may include:

PRI Representatives Parents NGOs working on the Right to

Education Teachers Teacher Associations, if possible

CRCR/BRC officials Senior Officials at District and State

Levels NUEPA NCPCR SSA

The Steps to be Adopted:The present project may be undertaken in the following four steps:

Step 1: Develop and trial a shadow report cardStep 2: Adopt the shadow report card systemStep 3. Promote Usage

Step One: Develop and trial a SHADOW REPORT CARD Understand shortcomings of school report card format (both in terms of the frequent errors and gaps in the same) and design a new format that includes the necessary information for education activism whilst retaining optimum linkage with official data so as to maximize synergy between activism and system. This would be done in a limited geographical location (at best one or two locations) to enable focused engagement with the area.

From a rights based perspective, there are some obvious shortcomings of the existing school report cards:

Out of school ChildrenThe first problem is that school report card data does not monitor the universe of children but is restricted to reporting on children in specific schools (omitting drop out, never enrolled and working children). Data on out of school children is meant to be collected in the EMIS but is not published alongside school report cards or used by SSA project documents. The reality on the ground is that it is a dynamic situation with children slipping in and out of school and it becomes essential for community and institutions to maintain a constant watch on this at all levels. Rather than periodic snapshots that cause a stir a constantly updated area specific information that leads to practical action is needed. Keeping track of this factor would also minimize knee jerk response from the system – ie) withdrawing teachers because actual enrollment is low despite there being many out of school children- to some of the findings of the report cards.

The data fields are solely quantitative rather than qualitativeSchool report cards present data on existence of infrastructure, facilities and materials – buildings and latrines. There is no assessment made of whether the infrastructure is serving its purpose and delivering benefit to children. In this way all 42 schools in a Block could be listed as having latrines whereas in reality, in not one school are the latrines actually being used by children (eg. Penhpahad Mandal, MVF Data). Thus, it means that whilst SSA may claim that 53% of schools have latrines, it cannot claim to have provided effective sanitation to 53% of children. There is government recognition of the issue:

“As infrastructure provisioning is reaching saturation, it would be useful to expand DISE coverage to include information on functionality and maintenance of infrastructure, especially in relation to drinking water and sanitation facilities”. (SSA2 Project Appraisal Document World Bank 2008)

Of course, this information is more subjective – harder to define and get consistent assessment (but developing understanding of assessment and definition can be part of the training process) and it allows for discretionary assessment.

Additional data could be includedThere is no data on a range of indicators including dropouts or attendance rates, functioning of the midday meal and availability of teaching learning materials. At the same time, there are no indicators on community participation – eg. numbers of SMC meetings. Qualitative measures on presence of positive discipline or experiential learning could start to assess the quality of education being imparted. There is also no space for reporting instances like extreme corporal punishment, violence against girls, or caste based discrimination.

Aggregated report cards are not available on the websiteWhilst district level report cards are published in print as a separate document, it is cumbersome to manually collate data to achieve an overview of schools at a Panchayat, Cluster and Block levels. It must, therefore, be difficult for administrators to use the system at their respective level as it is for advocates to discuss the situation above school level.

Lack of Access to the DataSchool report cards aren’t translated into the local language (limiting their usability drastically). Neither are they printed and displayed at school level which further reduces their access for communities Access to the internet remains an issue in rural India.

The backbone of the shadow report card: Some of the indicators that we see as central to bringing out teacher professionalism are: Status of children in catchment area – enrollment, children out of school Status of children in catchment area - attendance Maintenance and utilization of facilities Positive Discipline Experiential learning

However, the specific issues would need to be decided in consultation with the key stakeholders- viz. NGOs, education officials, teachers and community by piloting the framework in joint consultation with them.

Level Major Components

DISE Shadow Report Card (? 1 Year)

Voices(? Ongoing)

Possible issues

What this is

Informant

Content Informant

1 School Level

School Parallels DISE data

Children, SMC

Infrastructure, teachers, teaching learning materials, inclusion,

Anyone concerned

1. Follow-up system after filing of complaint N/SCPCR, DEO responsibility

other basic data

, Legal Recourse

2. Orientation of SMCs/PRI for use

3. Duplication. NCPCR complaint mechanism/website

4. ? Backlash at local level

2 Panchayat

Out of School

Additional Layer of Information on same lines

Ongoing tracking of retention

Governance Aspects

Resolutions Passed, Plans submitted and their status, etc

3 District Teacher Training

Aggregation of Report Cards, plus a couple of additional layers of data

DIET More thought needs to be given to this level of work!

4 State Macro Issues

- Policies- Reports

on macro issues

- Overall discussion on developments

5 National

Not in Place Yet- Pilot (format design through bottom up process, trying to make it work in practice)- Lawyers for legal recourse- Complaint Mechanism- response to status of schools by education department- Links with the RTI movement to be established- Media fellowships to support use of data- media interest

The extent to which school report cards are currently used by teachers, administrators and community stakeholders could be explored by this project. To date, there are official concerns about the level of use made of school report cards.

“One concern has been the limited use of DISE by stakeholders in States, Districts, Blocks, Clusters, schools and communities for planning and monitoring” (SSA2 Project Appraisal Document-World Bank8.

Several factors that could be contributing to the low monitoring of report cards by activists, include:

Lack of awareness – activists don’t know about them Lack of access – internet connectivity is a problem in many areas Many organizations are principally concerned with getting children into school

and the report cards don’t have “out of school” numbers in them. The fact that activists don’t use existing information could be a sign of data

insularity- the unwillingness to leverage existing data. Activists are drilled to collect their own data rather than working with external data and challenging system on this basis.

Relevance of report cards is not appreciated. Technical literacy on the definition of the report card statistics is absent

HOW THE SHADOW REPORT CARDS WOULD LOOK

8 http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2008/04/23/000333038_20080423010937/Rendered/PDF/411140PAD0P1021ly10IDA1R20081008611.pdf

Direct

Website

By Mail Phone In

Lacking Internet Access

The major components of the system would be the website where the information about the school would be contained and a mechanism whereby the information is fed into it.

The Website:A single report card would consist of a URL link to the page from the NUEPA school report cards on their website and the community report card proper. This would contain all the information necessary. There would also be higher levels of data aggregation. Anyone logging into the website (and having an authorized account) may be able to update the information. The rationale of having an authorized account is to avoid uploading of irrelevant content (eg advertisement and other spam) and ensure that the data is indeed authentic. In addition, in case the information to be uploaded to the website is to be provided by people without internet access, other means of ensuring access may be required. This role may be eventually played by the Panchayat (in instances where the same has an internet connection under one of the government ICT schemes), or an NGO or a dedicated individual with a postal address (for those ready to send in their information eg a complaint through mail) and a telephone line (who receives calls over phone). Information obtained by the second and third means would be updated by the dedicated person who would need to be trained on the maintenance of the website. In view of the need for sustainability, it is advisable that the responsibility of the same be borne by the PRI body.

The HelplineAs previously mentioned, a phone line would be maintained to login the complaints received from those without internet access. Once that has been set up, however, it may be double as a general rights-based help line on education. It would need to be extensively advertised in the coverage area of the database. This would need to be a dedicated phone line to ensure that the phone line is available for use at all times.

Follow-up ActionThis would happen at two levels- firstly there would be follow-up action (both in terms of specific advice to be given to the family lodging the complaint and the follow-up action with the government authorities concerned) that would ensure action is taken based on the issues raised. This ensures that the element of voice and agency of parents is strengthened. At the second level, the information collated can be used for formulation of regular reports about the actual situation of the schools that makes use of both the DISE data and the community perceptions.

FIRST STEP ACTIONS

- Hold discussion with other stakeholders in the processo Laying down a common understanding of the processo Initiate process of cross-learning between all the players

- Understanding a real case/so Share the relevant school report cards with teams in locations and provide

technical capacity building on how the different indicators are assessed. Answer questions of clarification and ask team to assess the situation of the schools currently and for year against the exact same indicators.

o Collate pilot NGO data against Report card datao Analyze differenceso Extrapolate impact of differences ie) system thinks 50% of schools have useable

latrines / reality is 10%- Define the alternative draft framework- both at the Panchayat and the School level

o Developing a draft structure- which fields to include and whyo Defining the fields- new and changedo Discussing which boundaries to use- Panchayat or school. Look at possibility of

using google maps etc for catchment areas.o Consult IT expert to acquire pointers to keep in mind for the same.

- Identify Pilot Location/so Dialogue in locations on the processes to be adoptedo Training/Orientation of the team on the processes to be adopted, o Development of Final state tools, in consultation with the ICT person/so Liasion with the state (District and Block level officials around format to ensure

that issues of concern to them are addressed)o Development of the website, setting up mechanisms in the sample locations for

the tools (Pre-requisites: dedicated phone, internet access, human resources to handle the helpline, training on website maintenance for the person concerned)

o Publicize the existence of the helpline. - Testing Formats

o Micro-test the indicators- how do teachers respond, do they achieve the purposeo Test for the whole Block/Mandal to see if the indicators can be consistently

collected and assess the range of reactions from teachers. o Fine tune the format and guidelines for each data field.o Collate for the Block to understand the overall picture.

- Use of the Databaseo Test the advocacy potentialo Explore possibilities of merger with the planning process

Macro Level IssuesIf school level data is being compiled, an idea is being floated is to also have a civil society dialogue around the macro level issues around the issues at the State level on issues not directly covered at the school level. Thus, the entire teacher training component is one issue that would not find inclusion in the present format. However, this is an idea that remains at the concept stage since a direct link between the school level data cannot be established. It would, consequently, be perhaps advisable to take this out as a separate process altogether or move towards this component at a later point in time.

Step TWO: ADOPTION OF THE SHADOW REPORT CARD SYSTEMIf successful, the pilot would be used to adopt the methodology on scale. The continued use of such a large scale government owned shadow report card system could result in the development of a body of evidence about the actual situation on the ground is with respect to right to education. This is likely to be of use by education administrators who can tap into the actual reality on the ground, the media for highlighting the actual issues and a whole range of players with a stake in strengthening the government school system.

Step THREE: Promote AS IS USAGE Assess the existing school report card format and accurately define the benefits of it for parents and activists. Disseminate / publicize benefits to activists / encourage use

alongside other formats for education activism – surveys etc. The existing report cards could provide access for anyone with internet access to a proportion of the information held on each school by the education department. More specifically,

Any member of the community or system can challenge misrepresentation of a school and insist on an accurate profile is used in the planning process.

Debate can be triggered on gaps that are shown up by the report card and by reflecting on the use that has been made of the resources provided in relation to need.

School report cards create the potential for establishing an objective, transparent analysis of the situation in schools. This can then be used to improve the transparency of the planning and resource allocation process.

Access to knowledge can be democratized, grievances can be backed by official information, community and institutional stakeholders can work together towards a common goal.

With improved dissemination, it is possible to see community groups using school report cards to have conversations with Headteachers, Panchayat Raj members and Education authorities on planning, headteachers discussing resource allocation at block level, district planners using the data to proportion resources etc. On the surface, the logical first step is, therefore, a capacity building programme that addresses the above issues and encourages the use of report cards. Data could be compared with the actual situation and system petitioned to make it accurate so that planning etc is done on a needs basis. This would be done under the Roll out Training.

STEP THREE ACTIONS1. Share information about the school report cards with teams in locations and

provide technical capacity building on how the different indicators are assessed. Answer questions of clarification and ask team to assess the situation of the schools currently and for year against the exact same indicators.

2. Identify any discrepancies between the DISE School Report Cards and the reality on the ground.

3. Undertake steps for remedying errors/correcting discrepancies in the data (eg missing schools, incorrect information etc).