EdCIL Report of Teachers Absence Study Doc by Vijay Kumar Heer

8/3/2019 EdCIL Report of Teachers Absence Study Doc by Vijay Kumar Heer

1/96

TEACHERS ABSENCE INPRIMARY AND UPPER PRIMARY

SCHOOLS

(Synthesis Report of study conducted in(Synthesis Report of study conducted in(Synthesis Report of study conducted in(Synthesis Report of study conducted in Andhra Pradesh,Andhra Pradesh,Andhra Pradesh,Andhra Pradesh,Madhya Pradesh andMadhya Pradesh andMadhya Pradesh andMadhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh)Uttar Pradesh)Uttar Pradesh)Uttar Pradesh)

Research, Evaluation and Studies UnitTechnical Support GroupEdCil (India) Limited

10-B, I.P. Estate, New Delhi - 110002(A Government of India Enterprise)

2009


2/96

ii

Published by EdCIL (India) Limited

Project Team(a) Consultants

Prof. ABL Srivastava, Chief ConsultantProf. R. R. Saxena, Sr. ConsultantShri O. P. Arora, Sr. ConsultantDr. (Ms) Neeru Bala, Consultant

(b) Support Staff

Ms. Babita Rai, SS

Ms. Nidhi Bali, Exec. Asstt.Ms. Preeti Singh, SS

(c) Synthesis report prepared by Prof. Snehlata Shukla

(d) Principal Investigators in different states

State PrincipalInvestigator

Agency

ndhra Pradesh Ms. Sridevi MARCH MarketConsultancy & Research,Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh Dr. SandeepJoshi

Madhya Pradesh Institute ofSocial Science Research,

Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh

Uttar Pradesh Prof. AnilShukla

Institute of AdvancedStudies in Education (IASE)Faculty of Education,Lucknow University,Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh

Printed at ess arr printers, 267, G.F., Prakash Mohalla, East of Kailash, New Delhi - 65


3/96

iii


4/96

iv

Preface

Availability of learning material and teacher in the classroom is an important minimumrequirement for providing quality education to children. In the recent years a large number of

teachers have been recruited to meet the demand of increasing enrolment and to improve thepupil-teacher ratio in schools. However, there was concern about non-availability of teachers in

classrooms after a study on Teacher Absence in India conducted jointly by the Department of

Economics, Harvard University and Development Economics Research Group, World Bank in2003-04, reported that 25% teachers in government primary schools are found absent from

school on a typical day.

The present study was designed not only to re-check the information on the extent ofteacher absence, but also to find out which factors kept teachers away from schools and

classrooms and what was the impact of their absence on students retention, dropout andlearning. The study included teachers of upper primary schools as well.

Conducted only in three states it does not provide an all India picture, but it does indicate

areas where action needs to be taken by the administration. Absence of a strong relationshipbetween availability of teachers and pupil learning point out the need for better understanding of

conditions that have impact on learning.

Contribution of Research Evaluation & Studies Unit of Technical Support Group forSarva Shiksha Abhiyan in development of tools and data analysis has given depth to the study. I

gratefully acknowledge the help provided by RESU and in particular by Prof. ABL Srivastava

and Prof. R. R. Saxena in bringing the report to its present form.

Snehlata Shukla


5/96

v

Abbreviations used in the report

Abbreviation Full Form

AP Andhra Pradesh

BEO Block Education OfficerBRC Block Resource Coordinator

CRC Cluster Resource Coordinator

CRCC Cluster Resource Centre Coordinator

F FemaleFGD Focused Group Discussion

HLM Hierarchical Linear Model

M MaleMP Madhya Pradesh

OBC Other Backward Classes

P Primary

Para Para TeacherPTR Parent Teacher Ratio

RESU Research Evaluation and Studies UnitR Rural

SC Scheduled Caste

SCR Socio Cultural Region

SD Standard DeviationSMC School Management Committee

ST Scheduled Tribe

TLM Traditional Linear ModelU Urban

U Pr Upper PrimaryUP Uttar PradeshVEC Village Education Committee


6/96

vi

Status of Elementary Education in the Three States

AP MP UP

1. Population (2001)

Total (in 000's) 76210 60348 166198

% Rural 72.7 73.5 79.2%SC 16.2 15.2 21.1

%ST 6.6 20.3 0.1

2. Literacy (2001)

Overall 60.5 63.7 56.3

Female 50.4 50.3 42.2

3. Children between 6- below 14 (2001) (in 000's)

Total 14416 12804 17346

Girls 7034 617 8360

Rural 10740 9704 13276

4. Number of primary schools and upper primary schools(DISE) (2005-06)

Total 79449 100393 124279

Rural 68432 89053 112069

5. Number of Teachers in Primary & Upper PrimarySchools (DISE 2005-06)

Total 306006 291547 410913

Women 133810 93794 144738

6. Enrolment in classes I- V (DISE 2005-06)

Total 7391922 10190213 24342931

Girls 3649224 4977580 11629744

7. Enrolment in classes VI-VIII (DISE 2005-06)

Total 3731018 3345216 5831921

Girls 1782601 1479367 26427158. PTR (DISE 2005-06)

Primary Schools 27 41 60

Upper Primary schools 25 31 63


7/96

vii

Samples at a GlanceNumber of Districts, Schools, Teachers and Pupil in the Study

Districts AP MP UPSchools:

Total 400 390 400

Primary 292 245 312

Upper Primary 108 145 88

Government 392 368 380

Private Aided 8 22 20

Rural 325 318 345

Urban 75 72 55

Teachers:

Total 2166 1136 1385

% Male 58.36 61.44 53.14

% Female 41.64 38.56 46.86

Rural 1680 824 1195

Urban 486 312 190

%SC 16.71 12.85 17.55

%ST 13.53 12.06 1.08

%OBC 39.47 25.7 34.01

%Muslims 4.8 4.49 8.45

%Others 25.48 44.89 38.92

Pupils (Enrolled):

Total 43181 41550 63487

SC 9847 11324 23220

ST 5081 9095 278OBC 22450 18161 32442

Muslims 2457 2206 8541


8/96

viii

ExecutiveSummary

1. The study was conducted to (i) assess percentage of teaching days lost due to teachers

remaining absent from school for different reasons (ii) the factors that contribute to

teacher absence and (iii) to understand the effect of teacher absence on attendance and

achievement of students. The data were studied for different categories of teachers suchas those working in rural or urban area, men or women teachers and regular or para

teachers. The study was conducted in primary and upper primary schools.2. Three states namely Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh participated in

the study, MARCH Market Consultant & Research in Hyderabad, Madhya Pradesh

Institute of Social Science Research, Ujjain and Faculty of Education, Lucknow

University, conducted the study in Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradeshrespectively.

3. Sample design was worked out by Research Evaluation & Studies Unit (RESU). Each

state was divided in Social Cultural Regions (SCRs). A predetermined number of sub-districts to be included in the sample were selected in proportion to the number of sub-

districts in the SCR. For a total target of 400 schools in the state the number of primary

and upper primary schools were pre-decided, so was their distribution over rural and

urban schools. Urban area was divided in two strata, (urban 1 and urban 2) namely, smalltowns and big cities. For each of the three strata, i.e. rural, urban -1 and urban-2 schools

were arranged according to the number of teachers and selected by using simple circular

systematic sampling procedure. Sample size for each sub-district was so fixed that ineach sub-district about 10 schools were selected. The exercise was carried out separately

for primary and upper primary schools. In the final sample division of schools as primary

and upper primary was 288/112 in Andhra Pradesh, 243/167 in Madhya Pradesh, 304/96in Uttar Pradesh. The divide was 336/64 in Andhra Pradesh, 320/80 in Madhya Pradesh

and 345/55 in Uttar Pradesh over rural and urban areas.

Schools were selected by RESU and the lists given to the state coordinators. Any unaided

private school that got included in the sample was to be replaced by a government/private

aided school in the vicinity.Target populations in the study were all primary and upper primary schools managed or

aided by government including local bodies.All teachers teaching in the schools in the sample were included in the study. Twenty

children from class V of all schools and 20 from class VII/VIII

were selected randomlyfor studying impact on achievement.

4. Several Schedules were developed to collect relevant data. Information regardinginfrastructure, physical facilities, enrolment and attendance of pupils, number and type of

teachers i.e. regular or para, absenteeism of teachers, support from administration and

community etc were obtained from the head teachers with the help of School Schedule.The Teacher Schedule was used to collect information about teacherstheir academic and

professional qualifications, number of students/classes taught, time required to travel toschool, number of days the teacher was absent from school on duty outside or forpersonal reasons. The questionnaire also had a section on job satisfaction.

The field staff used a structured and detailed Schedule to observe and record information

about teachers attendance & the activities they were engaged in and enrolment and

attendance of children. Attendance of students and teachers and latters activity wererecorded for both the first and the last period in the school. Each school was visited on

two days, the second visit was made at an interval of approximately 30 days by a

VII in Andhra Pradesh and VIII in Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh


9/96

ix

different team. Both the visits were unannounced. Teachers attendance on the day

school was visited by supervisory staff was also noted.

Three Interview Schedules were used to collect information from CRC coordinators,

VEC chairmen and BEOs on teacher absence and its effect on functioning of the schools.Student related data were collected on Students Record Sheet. Guidelines for moderators

of Focused Group Discussions were also made available to the state level agencies.

5. Achievement tests in language and mathematics, as available in the state were used to

assess learning levels of students of class V. Scores on common tests conducted by thestate/district authorities for the terminal class of elementary level were used in the

analysis at class VII/VIII level.6. On the infrastructure, Uttar Pradesh had higher percentage of pucca school buildings,

facilities like toilets and drinking water too were available in more schools in Uttar

Pradesh than in the two other states. But with large enrolments in the state only 57% ofstudents sat in rooms and 6% had only open space as their classrooms. Over all the three

states 8-9% teachers did not have chairs / tables (it could be tables mostly) and 15% did

not have almirahas to keep their teaching learning material.

Percentage of female teachers varied between 38 (Madhya Pradesh) to 47 (UttarPradesh). Para teachers were a high 42% in Madhya Pradesh and low 23% in Andhra

Pradesh.Percentage of untrained teachers was high (32) in Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh,more women teachers were untrained than men. A very high percentage (87) of para

teachers were untrained in Andhra Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh.

7. Attendance rates of pupils were low varying around 70%, these were lowest in MadhyaPradesh and highest in Andhra Pradesh. Average attendance was lower in primary

classes as compared to upper primary classes differences were small.

In all the three states attendance improved only marginally from grades I to IV but

declined in grade V. Dropout rates were also highest in class V in all the three states. InMadhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh, enrolments too decreased from class IV to V, thus

there were a fair number of pupils who either discontinued or moved to another school in

the terminal class.Approximately 2-5% pupils left school before it ended formally.

In Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh, attendance of girls was higher than that of the

boys both at the beginning of the school and in the last period, in Uttar Pradesh therewere no differences.

8. On the basis of some common examination (may be at the district level) conducted at the

end of class V, Andhra Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh reported close to 75% students scoring

more than 50% marks. In Madhya Pradesh only 30% students achieved this high. Picturewas similar for class VII/VIII. High percentages of pupils getting more than 50% score in

the terminal examinations do not compare well with the low scores in the national

surveys. The state level tests are likely to represent what is taught in the classrooms more

closely.Achievements need to be seen in light of percentage of enroled children who sit for the

examinations. While in Andhra Pradesh more students than were enroled sat for theexamination at the end of class V, in MP and UP, close to 20% did not take the

examination. Low attendance rates too had been recorded, thus, some of the children

might have been on the register but not really attending school.

In Uttar Pradesh, 28% of class VIII students did not appear for the terminal examination,most of these are likely to be frequent absentees or poor achievers. Percentage of 72.4

scoring 50% should be seen in this light. Pupil achievement was better in AndhraPradesh than in the two other states i.e. by the standards set by the states for themselves.


10/96

x

9. Teachers could not teach for a total of 33 days out of 168 in Andhra Pradesh, 28 out of

229 Madhya Pradesh and 22 out of 214 working days in Uttar Pradesh. Some of the non-

teaching days were spent in duty outside school and necessary administrative work and

some were taken off by the teachers for personal needs. For personal reasons teacherswere absent for 17.6 days in Andhra Pradesh, 13.5 in Madhya Pradesh and only 8.3 in

Uttar Pradesh. Andhra Pradesh is also liberal with permissible casual leave as compared

to the other two states.

Head teachers, BEOs, CRCCs and VEC chairmen mentioned family problems andhealth of the teacher as the two main reasons for teachers taking leave. Residence at a

distance and transport not being available were also mentioned by quite a few,particularly in Andhra Pradesh. For Uttar Pradesh political/social activity too was given

as a reason for teachers being absent.

Management Committees made some efforts towards restraining teacher absenteeism bychecking teachers attendance from time to time and by talking to them individually or as

a group. Absenteeism was also reported to authorities by 23% of MCs in Andhra Pradesh

20% in Madhya Pradesh and 33% of them in Uttar Pradesh. In Andhra Pradesh and Uttar

Pradesh more attention was paid by management committees of primary and ruralschools to teacher attendance. Fewer teachers and greater concern of the community

about the education of their children could be contributing to it.Only 3-4% of VEC chairmen reported regularity not good and a slightly higherpercentage commented adversely on punctuality. More teachers of primary schools as

compared to upper primary were reported to be not very punctual in Andhra Pradesh and

Madhya Pradesh, situation was reverse in Uttar Pradesh. The data from VEC chairmencould be based on few observations.

Teachers attendance got more attention in the meetings of VECs in Madhya Pradesh and

Uttar Pradesh; students attendance too was discussed often in these meetings.

10.Out of the total number of days the teachers were not in school, nearly 50% were spenton some work assigned away from school in Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh, this

percentage was higher 61 in Uttar Pradesh. Rest of the time teachers were on leave for

personal reasons.Women teachers spent fewer days on duty away from school but took more leave for

personal reasons. Differences in quantum or reasons for the same were not marked when

seen over rural and urban divide. Only in Uttar Pradesh, a higher percentage of teachersfrom rural areas were absent due to being on school duty. More days were spent in UttarPradesh by primary school teachers on school related duty whereas teachers in upper

primary schools availed more casual leave but total number of days away from

classrooms remained the same.The differences in absenteeism of teachers divided over castes were small. There was a

marked difference between regular and para teachers in respect of absence from school. It

was maximum in Andhra Pradesh (18 days) and minimum in Madhya Pradesh (only 2

days) with para teachers being less absent. Service conditions of para teachers are likelyto be responsible for differences; stringent the contracts, more cautious would be the

employees not to cause any dissatisfaction to the authorities concerned.11.Although about 83% teachers were present on the day the schools were visited, only 72%

were teaching. Thus over the three states 28% teachers were not in the classrooms at least

part of the day; the statistics was highest in Andhra Pradesh (34%) and smallest in

Madhya Pradesh. Close to 4% teachers left school before the formal closing time. Morewomen teachers were in classrooms with men engaged in other activities.

Training took away teachers from schools for 12 days on the average in Madhya Pradesh,

followed by Uttar Pradesh 7 days and Andhra Pradesh for 5 days.


11/96

xi

Six to 15% teachers were seen engaged in administrative work at the beginning of a

working day. Teachers perception was that they spend more than 4 hours per week on

this type of work which amounts to almost one teaching day per week.

12. By and large teachers were satisfied with their working conditions. Maximumdissatisfaction was with assignment of non-teaching duties, and to a lesser extent with

lack of physical facilities in schools and interference by VECs.

13. For studying factors contributing to teacher absenteeism and impact of teacher absence

on attendance and achievement of pupils regression analysis based on Hierarchical LinearModel was used.

The Teacher-absence was defined as percentage of days on which a teacher was notpresent during his/her posting in the school in the academic sessions 2005-06. The

absence could be for any reason being deputed for work outside school, attending some

training or being on leave for personal needs. This variable was taken as the dependentvariable for exploring its relationship with a set of 12 independent variables pertaining to

teachers personal characteristics and six variables pertaining to school conditions.

14 Inadequate facilities in school i.e., congeniality of work place and time taken to

commute contributed to teacher absenteeism in all the states. Both the variables beingrelated to physical comforts would discourage teachers to come to school when there is

mild physical discomfort or the weather is foul. Missing scheduled mode of travel (e.g.regular bus) would also keep a teacher away from school. It may be mentioned that close

to 28% teachers reported a distance of 10 km between their residence and school.

Another 18% lived 5 but less than 10 km away.Supervision or visits by the senior officers or members of the management committees

had a positive impact on teacher attendance. Status of the teacher (whether regular orpara) made substantial difference in Andhra Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh. Contracts are

more unfavourable in Andhra Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh with tenure of service being 10

and 11 months respectively; it is 36 months in Madhya Pradesh. Emoluments wise tooAndhra Pradesh has some para teachers starting at a salary Rs. 1500 per month, the

lowest grade in Madhya Pradesh starts at Rs. 2,500 and in Uttar Pradesh it is Rs. 3000 per

month.The analysis showed that teacher absence was not related to pupil attendance. Weakrelationship was seen between teacher absence and repetition rate. It had some impact on

dropout rate in Uttar Pradesh PTR is very high in Uttar Pradesh, it too could contribute

to drop out rate.15. Students score on tests in language and mathematics were taken as criteria for

achievement. Analysis was carried out separately for two sets of scores. To the 19

independent variables : teacher absence rate, 6 school related and 12 teacher relatedvariables, 5 variables related to pupils namely, gender, caste, fathers education, motherseducation and fathers occupation were added. The analysis revealed that (i) students

achievement, in general did not get affected by teachers absence (ii) caste of the teacher

had some bearing on pupil achievement, (iii) among the school variables, only the privatemanagement made some difference. Except gender, all other pupil related variables used

in this study had on impact on pupil achievement; children of educated parents tended to

do better at grade V level but the impact of home background almost disappeared atgrade VII/VIII.


12/96

Contents

Project team ii

Foreword iii

Preface v

Abbreviations used in the report vi

Status of Elementary Education in the Three States viiSamples at a Glance viii

ExecutiveSummary ix

Chapter 1: Introduction 1Chapter 2 : Sample Design of the Study 3

Chapter 3: Tools and Collection of Data 7

Chapter 4: Profile of Schools in the Sample 9Chapter 5: Attendance Rate of Pupils and Their Achievement level 15

Chapter 6: Absenteeism of Teachers 19

Chapter 7: Factors Affecting Teachers Absence 39

Chapter 8: Effect of Teachers Absence on Students Attendance, Repeater Rate,

Dropout Rate and Achievement

45

Chapter 9 : Findings and Recommendations 53Appendix A . ... . ...

List of Tables . ... . ...

Additional Tables. ... . .

57 - 66

57

58-66Appendix B

TS- 1 School Schedule .. .. .. ..TS-2 Teacher Schedule . . . ...

TS-3 Schedule for Investigators Visit . ...TS-4 Interview schedule for CRC Coordinator. TS-5 Interview schedule for Chairman of VEC/SMC/SMDC TS-6 Interview schedule for Block Education Officer.

TS-7 Students' Record Sheet. ...

TS-8 Focussed Group Discussions . ... ..

67 - 85

6773

76

7879

81

83

84Summary of FGD . ... . ... .. 85


13/96

1


14/96

1

Chapter 1

Introduction

1.1 Background

Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan aims at good quality education for all children in the age group 6-

14. Efforts made to achieve the objective included increasing number of schools and teachers,improving physical infrastructure of the schools and ensuring availability of teaching-learning

material to teachers. Enrolment drives are conducted at regular intervals to bring to school the

children who do not enrol or leave school prematurely. Enrolment and retention of children inschools was the first necessary step. Due attention was also paid to improve the quality of

education. Improved text books, continuous in-service teacher training and greater support

through supervision and guidance is built into the system. Periodic surveys conducted for

assessing learning levels of children leave administrators and professionals dissatisfied withachievements. Efforts to improve the situation on all fronts are continued.

While more teachers have been deployed in all states, there have been complaintsregarding their absence from schools for a variety of reasons. A study on Teacher Absence in

India conducted jointly by the Department of Economics, Harvard University and Development

Economics Research Group, World Bank in 2003-04, highlighted the issue. They reported that25% of teachers in government primary schools are absent on a typical day. According to the

study absence rates varied from 15% to 42% in different states. There are not many studies on

the factors associated with teachers absence and on how their absence affects children attending

school and their levels of learning. The present study was undertaken to provide more insight on

the problem and its impact.

The study was conducted in three states namely Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh andUttar Pradesh. According to Harvard-World Bank study, the absence rates ranged from medium

to high in these states.

1.2 Objectives

The objectives of the study were

(i) to assess the number and percentage of teacher-days lost due to teachers remaining absentfrom school because of different reasons;

(ii) to find out the difference between absence rate of male and female teachers, regular

teachers and para-teachers, primary and upper primary stage teachers, and teachersbelonging to different social groups in primary and upper primary schools;

(iii) to validate the data on teachers absence collected from schools by checking with Cluster,

Block and District level functionaries and community;(iv) to find out the average number of teachers present on a typical working day in relation to

the number of teachers in position in school according to the norms;


15/96

2

(v) to find out the extent to which the school-related and personal factors contribute to

teacher absence;

(vi) to assess the effect of teachers absence on attendance and achievement of students of

class V in primary schools and of class VII/VIII in upper primary schools as well as ontheir grade repetition and dropping out from school; and

(vii) to find out reasons of absence separately for teachers belonging to different sub-groups

(male/female, rural/urban, primary/upper primary, regular/para-teacher) from the

community, VECs, CRCs, BEOs, etc.


16/96

3

Chapter 2

Sample Design of the Study

2.1 Target Populations

The target populations were all teachers teaching in government, local body, and privateaided primary and upper primary schools in the states of Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and

Uttar Pradesh. For assessing achievements of students, target populations were the students ofclass V and VII/VIII1 of all the schools specified above.

The 7th All India School Education Survey2, with date of reference as 30.09.2002, was

conducted on census basis in all the states and UTs by National Council of Educational Research

and Training, Delhi. The data base of the survey was used as sampling frame for the purpose of

selection of schools.

2.2 Stratification of Schools

Three levels of stratification were used in each state.

(a) Level 1: School category

Primary schools

Upper primary schools(b) Level 2: School location

Urban1: Cities with 1 million or more population

Urban2: Towns/ cities with< 1 million population

Rural.(c) Level 3: Sub-strata Urban-2 and Rural area were further stratified according to the

Socio-Cultural Regions ( SCR) in a state.

2.3 Allocation of Sample Size to Different Strata in a State.

a) In the case of rural schools a sample of sub-districts (for example, 15 sub-districts in

UP) were selected using the selection procedure described below. Allocation of sub-

districts to each SCR was done in proportion to the sub districts in the SCR. Number

of sub-districts and number of primary and upper primary schools selected per sub-district for each state are given in Table 2.1.

b) From each sampled sub-district a fixed sample of primary and upper primary schools

(e.g.,18 primary and 5 upper primary schools in U.P.) were selected.

c) All the schools belonging to the cities in each state having one or more than one

million population form urban-1 stratum. No further stratification was required in thiscase.

1Class VII in Andhra Pradesh and VIII in Madhya Pradesh & Uttar Pradesh.

2Hence forth referred as 7

thSurvey.


17/96

4

d) In the case of Urban-2 stratum, number of schools were allocated to a SCR in

proportion to the number of primary or upper primary schools in the region. It was

ensured that at least one primary and one upper primary school is allocated from each

region. Number of schools allocated to each stratum are given in Table 2.2.

Table 2.2: Number of Schools in the Sample

Primary Upper Primary TotalAP

Rural 240 96 336

Urban-total 48 16 64

Urban-metro 7 2 9

Urban-other than metro 41 14 55

Total 288 112 400

MP

Rural 200 120 320


Urban-metro 8 9 17


Total 43 157 400

UPRural 270 75 345


Urban-metro 9 8 17


Total 304 96 400

2.4. Selection Procedure

(i) The following procedure was adopted in the selection of urban schools

(a) All primary and upper primary schools of Urban-1 stratum were arranged separately

in increasing order of number of teachers and simple circular systematic sampling

was used for selection of required number of schools.

(b) For the Urban-2 stratum all primary and upper primary schools in the urban area ofthose districts, which contained sub-districts selected for sample of rural schools

were arranged in increasing order of teachers in them, and the sample of schools was

selected by using simple circular systematic sampling. The exercise was carried outseparately for primary and upper primary schools.

(ii) As far as sampling of rural schools is concerned, first stage sampling unit was the sub-district;

(a) Amongst those sub-districts in a SCR, which had rural area, a sample of sub-districts

was selected by using probability proportion to number of rural primary schools inthe sub-district.

(b) Selection of primary schools of fixed sample size from each of the sampled sub-

districts was done by using simple circular systematic sampling procedure after

arranging schools according to the number of teachers in them.(c) The selection procedure given at (b) above was used for selection of rural upper

primary schools from already sampled sub-districts.


18/96

5

The private unaided schools, if any in the list were excluded. Such schools were replaced

by a government/private aided school in the vicinity.

The selection of schools was done by RESU, Ed.CILs Technical Support Group and the

list of schools provided to the state level agencies.

Allocation of primary and upper primary (both rural and urban) was proportional to

number of these schools in the SCR. The requisite numbers of schools were as given in the tablebelow.

Table 2.1: State Wise Allocation of Samples

State

No. of Sub-Districts Schools per Sub-District

Total Sample Primary Upper Primary

AP 1125 24 10 4

MP 259 20 10 6

UP 300 15 18 5

Information about teachers was collected from all teachers in the schools in the sample.For testing the students, a sample of 20 students of class V was selected at random from each

primary school. If a school had more than one section in class V, one section was selected at

random and sampling of students was done from that section. If there were 20 or less students in

a class, all of them were tested. The sampling procedure for selecting students in class VII/VIIIwas the same as that for class V.

Table 2.3 shows the number of respondents of different categories (head teachers, teachers, VECmembers) in each state.

Number of respondents in each category are summarized in the following table.

Table 2.2: Number of Respondents

Respondents AP MP UPHead teachers 400 390 400

Teachers 2166 1136 1385

VEC chairmen 400 390 400


19/96

6


20/96

7

Chapter 3

Tools and Collection of Data

3.1 Research Questions and Tools

The study was to address the following questions

(i) What is the teachers' absence rate for different groups, such as men/women, regular and

para-teachers?

(ii) How often do the functionaries from CRC, BRC and BEO visit the school?

(iii) Do the visits by members of CRCs, BRCs, BEO and management affect teachersabsence?

(iv) What is the absence rate of teachers according to the records of BRCs & CRCs?

(v) Which are the personal factors contributing to teachers absence ?(vi) Which are the school level factors contributing to the variation in teachers absence?

(vii) Does teachers absence affect students attendance?

(viii) Is repetition rate in schools affected by teachers' absence?(ix) Is variation in dropout rates explained by variation in teachers' absence?

(x) Does teachers' absence affect students' achievement in mathematics and language?

(xi) What is the opinion of SMCs, VECs, BEOs, CRCCs, about reasons and effect ofteachers' absence on students learning?

(xii) What are the activities of teachers in school when they are present?

Details of tools designed/ used to collect relevant information are given below.

(i) School Schedule: It was meant for collecting information on infrastructure, physical

facilities, enrolment and attendance of pupils, number and type of teachers i.e. regular

or para, absence of teachers, support from administration and community etc. The

head teacher of the school provided the information.

(ii) Teacher Schedule: The questionnaire was used to collect information about teachers

their academic and professional qualifications, in-service training, time required to

travel to school, number of classes/students taught, number of days the teacher was

absent for personal reasons or was on duty away from school. The questionnaire also

included a section on job satisfaction. All teachers in the sampled schools had to

respond to the questionnaire.

(iii) Schedule for the Investigators: The field staff was to observe and record

information on a structured schedule during their two visits to the school. They

recorded teachers attendance during first and the last hour of the school, type of

activity the teachers were engaged in, enrolment and attendance of students during


21/96

8

the first and last hour of the school. They also checked teacher-attendance on the day

school was visited by CRCC or BEO from school records.

(iv) Three interview schedules were prepared to collect information from (a) CRC

Coordinator, (b) VEC (President/Chairman), (c) BEO or equivalent, regarding teacher

absence and punctuality. Some of it could be based on their perceptions.

(v) Achievement tests in language and mathematics as available in the state for class V

and annual examination results for class VII/VIII students were used for evaluating

pupil learning.

(vi) Focus Group Discussions with community members were conducted to get their views onand estimates of teacher absence.

Except the achievement tests, all the tools of data collection were developed centrally at

RESU; the same were tried out and some modifications were made before using them to collect

data. The tools were translated in Hindi at RESU and in Telugu by the concerned agency withoutchanging the format. English version of tools (except achievement tests) can be seen in

Appendix- B.

3.2 Data Collection

The sampled schools were visited twice without prior intimation by a team of twoinvestigators. Second visit was made at an interval of about one month. Both the visits were

unannounced. The teams were different in the two visits to maintain high degree of data

reliability. Both the teams collected data on attendance of students and teachers and recorded

activities of teachers who were present in the school. The second team administered the tests in

mathematics and language to students of class V and scored the same. In the case of upperprimary schools, the results of common state level examination at the end of class VII/VIII were

taken into account. All the filled-in schedules were scrutinised by the investigators forcompleteness and consistency of information.


22/96

9

Chapter 4

Profile of Schools in the Sample

4.1 Facilities in Schools

Data regarding infrastructural facilities were collected from the head teacher of theschools in the sample. Absence of minimum facilities is likely to add to absenteeism of both

teachers and pupils; it would also have an impact on teaching-learning. Figure 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3show availability of physical facilities in schools.

Fig. 4.1 School Building

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Open space 1.3 2.1 1.3

Partly pucca9.0 11.3 4.3

Pucca 87.0 85.4 94.5

AP MP UP


23/96

10

Fig. 4.2 Availability of Physical Facilities

0

20

40

60

80

100

Usable toilet 55.3 52.3 65.5

Drinking water 56.8 74.9 85.0

Tables & chairs for

teachers

91.3 90.8 91.8

Almirahs & cupboards 85.8 81.3 82.5

AP MP UP

Fig. 4.3 Space Where Students Sit

0

20

40

60

80

100

Open space 2.5 3.2 5.9

Veranda 17.5 16.0 36.9

Rooms 80.0 80.8 57.2

AP MP UP

Nearly 95% of schools in Uttar Pradesh had pucca buildings, Andhra Pradesh andMadhya Pradesh lagged behind by 7 to 9%. Buildings were inadequate even in Uttar Pradesh

with only 57% pupils finding place in rooms and approximately 6% having to sit in the open.


24/96

11

Uttar Pradesh had provision of toilets and drinking water in higher percentage of schools. In

all the three states 8-9% schools did not have chairs/tables3 for the teachers and 13 to 18% had

no almirahas to keep their teaching -learning aids.

Uttar Pradesh had more classrooms (4.2 including verandas per school) for primary

grades as compared to Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh. But enrolments were also verylarge in Uttar Pradesh.

3It may be mainly tables


25/96

12

4.2 Enrolments

Table 4.1 shows the position of enrolment in different classes in the sampled schools of

the three states.

Table 4.1: Class-wise Average Enrolment of Social Groups

Social Group Class Andhra Pradesh Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh

All Pupils

I 21.1 26.9 39.7

II 17.9 23.5 38.7

III 17.8 21.5 35.0

IV 18.8 18.7 33.4

V 20.4 17.5 27.5

VI 32.3 36.2 36.9

VII 25.9 30.6 35.9

VIII - 32.8 34.8

%SC

I 23.2 26.8 31.2

II 23.5 27.6 34.3

III 23.7 26.4 36.6

IV 22.6 26.2 36.6V 23.3 29.1 36.2

VI 18.7 28.3 49.0

VII 21.9 26.0 49.2

VIII 27.8 41.8

%ST

I 13.4 27.7 0.6

II 11.8 26.3 0.5

III 12.2 22.8 0.4

IV 10.2 21.8 0.3

V 10.8 17.8 0.2

VI 13.4 21.0 1.1

VII 10.3 16.5 0.4

VIII - 16.9 0.3

%OBC

I 50.8 41.5 52.8

II 51.9 43.7 52.3

III 51.9 43.5 51.8

IV 53.7 44.4 47.7

V 52.0 47.6 44.2

VI 50.3 41.2 55.5

VII 54.1 43.3 58.7

VIII - 46.1 55.3

% Muslim

I 5.9 3.6 11.6

II 6.2 4.8 13.3

III 5.2 5.4 14.4

IV 5.6 5.6 12.9

V 5.8 5.3 11.7VI 5.1 6.3 18.3

VII 5.5 6.3 17.0

VIII - 6.0 15.9

Enrolments decreased from class I to V in all the three states but more sharply-by 35% in

Madhya Pradesh followed by Uttar Pradesh (31%). Percentage of ST students from class I to Vdropped by 10 percentage points in Madhya Pradesh. The same were more stable over classes VIto VIII in Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh but the decrease in Andhra Pradesh was high 20%


26/96

13

from VI to VII. This was so because upper primary stage ends in class VII in Andhra Pradesh.

In addition there may be students not joining the first year of upper primary class.

4.3 TeachersDistribution of teachers by gender, status, academic and professional qualifications in the

three states is given in figures 4.4 to 4.6.

Fig 4.4 Teachers by Gender And Employment Status

0

10

20

30

40

50

Female 41.6 38.5 42.5

Para 23.4 42.0 31.2

AP MP UP

Percentage of para teachers in Madhya Pradesh was highest among the three states but

they had the highest percentage of graduates (76%) too. Only a small percentage of all teachershad studied upto class X or less but in Andhra Pradesh the percentage was high for para teachers.

Percentage of para teachers being untrained was also high in Andhra Pradesh. It may mean that

persons having studied upto class X without any pre-service training were employed to meet thedemands generated by increased enrolments. In Uttar Pradesh too, most of the para teachers were

untrained.


27/96

14

Fig. 4.5 : Academic Qualifications of Teachers

0

20

40

60

80

100

Post graduate 20.7 2.6 34.1 33.8 26.7 23.1

Graduate 47.8 30.4 40.0 42.4 34.7 40.0

Higher secondary 24.9 49.2 23.2 22.7 32.4 35.4

High school 6.6 17.8 2.6 1.0 6.1 1.4

All Para All Para All Para

UPAP MP

In Madhya Pradesh, teachers recruited initially as para-teachers have been given pay scale which

is different from that of regular teachers. They are no longer treated as para teachers by the state.

Fig 4.6 Professional Qualifications of Teachers

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

B.Ed/M.Ed 49.0 48.7 5.9 2.4 23.8 28.8 17.4 21.6 18.0 21.6 6.2 3.1

JBT 27.6 23.7 5.7 5.7 43.0 35.6 35.9 36.5 45.4 36.5 3.2 3.9

Nursery 1.8 1.4 1.8 0.4 0.6 1.1 0.4 4.8 4.6 4.8 3.7 5.8

Untrained 21.6 26.2 86.6 91.5 32.6 34.5 46.2 37.1 32.0 37.1 86.8 87.2

All F All F All F All F All F All F

All Para All Para All Para

AP MP UP

Percentage of untrained teachers was high in Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh, more

women teachers were untrained than men. There is need to understand effect of absence of

training on pupil learning. In the most common 2-year pre service teacher training for primaryteachers, knowledge of subject matter is built upon that attained at senior secondary level and

critical spots/concepts of the primary curriculum are specifically dealt with for appropriate

pedagogy.


28/96

15

Chapter 5

Attendance Rate of Pupils and Their Achievement Level

5.1 Attendance of Pupils

Enrolment figures are frequently seen with suspicion. Teachers are expected to enrol all

children of age group 6-14 in the schools. It is also said that poorer families send their children toschool for the mid-day meal and the children often go away after the meals. Data with regard to

attendance were collected on two different days through unannounced visits by the research

teams.

Attendance was noted both for the first and the last period of the school. Following table

gives average attendance for each case.

Table 5.1: Percentage of Students Present in the Class

GradeFirst period Last period

AP MP UP AP MP UP

I 67.5 61.4 68.5 66.1 58.5 66.9

II 70.0 63.7 72.3 68.5 60.9 70.5

III 73.6 64.6 72.5 69.7 61.6 71.3

IV 74.6 64.7 71.7 73.5 61.9 70.7

V 72.8 60.7 67.8 71.0 58.8 67.0

VI 76.5 69.6 71.5 82.5 68.7 71.0

VII 79.7 71.3 73.2 76.9 69.8 72.5

VIII - 70.8 68.3 - 69.5 67.4

Attendance rates, in general, were quite low varying around 70%. These were lowest inMadhya Pradesh and highest in Andhra Pradesh. Average attendance was lower in primary

classes as compared to upper primary classes.

In all the three states attendance improved only marginally-from grades I to IV butdeclined in grade V. It could be due to fear of the examination at the end of class V. Dropout

rates were also highest in class V in all the three states. Older children could be withdrawn by the

parents for use of their help at home including family occupation or engagement in incomegenerating activities. Attendance also declined from grade VII to VIII in Uttar Pradesh (by 5%)

In Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh enrolment too decreased from class IV to V. Thus

there were a fair number of pupils who either discontinued or moved to another school in theterminal class. It cannot be concluded that they left the system.

Approximately 2 to 5% pupils left school before its closing time. They might have leftafter the mid-day meal.

Was there any difference between boys and girls, so far as attendance in general, cominglate or leaving early was concerned? Data were seen separately for boys and girls.


29/96

16

Table 5.2 Percentage of Boys and Girls Present in the Class

GradeFirst period Last period

AP MP UP AP MP UP

Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys GirlsI 66.9 68.2 60.9 61.8 67.9 69.1 65.4 66.7 57.5 59.3 66.9 66.8

II 69.3 70.5 61.6 65.8 73.1 71.6 68.0 68.9 58.9 62.9 71.9 69.2

III 70.2 76.8 62.2 66.9 72.9 72.1 68.4 71.0 59.5 63.8 72.7 70.9

IV 73.2 75.9 63.4 66.1 71.8 71.6 72.4 74.5 60.6 63.4 71.3 70.1V 72.2 73.4 59.9 61.5 68.1 67.8 70.5 71.4 58.3 59.4 67.3 66.7

VI 75.2 77.8 70.15 69.0 70.0 73.1 73.8 76.2 69.1 68.2 69.6 72.3

VII 78.9 79.7 71.3 71.2 71.5 74.7 77.4 79.0 69.6 70.1 71.1 73.8

VIII - - 70.2 71.5 67.1 69.3 - - 68.8 70.4 66.3 68.3

In Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh, attendance of girls was higher than that of the

boys both at the beginning of the school and in the last period. In Uttar Pradesh, there were no

differences. A small percentage of both boys and girls left school early4.

Once the girls join school, the families do not seem to discriminate between boys and

girls in sending them to school. It is also likely, that some boys even when sent to school by theparents wander away while the girls do not play truant.

5.2 Achievement Level

When 30% of students miss school on an average how are their achievements affected?

Some kind of common examination is conducted in most states at the end of primary and upper

primary level.

Table 5.3 A Percentage of Students Who Scored 50% or More Marks in the TerminalExamination of Primary and Upper Primary Stage

TerminalClass of

StudentsAP MP UP

Rural Urban All Rural Urban All Rural Urban All

P

No. appeared 4736 2419 7155 2905 923 3828 7135 688 7823

% scoring 50%

or more76.1 73.5 75.2 29.6 30.6 29.8 76.9 82.0 77.3

U. Pr

No. appeared 1952 588 2540 3323 1013 4336 2477 583 3060

% scoring 50%

or more79.5 85.0 80.7 26.9 29.2 27.4 74.5 76.2 74.8

Table 5.3 B Percentage of Students Who Scored 50% or More Marks in the Examination ofTerminal Class of Primary and Upper Primary Stage

TerminalClass of

StudentsAndhra Pradesh Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh

PrimaryUpper

primaryPrimary

Upperprimary

PrimaryUpper

primary

PNo. appeared 4590 2565 3743 85 7818 5

% scoring 50% or more 74.2 77.1 29.7 38.8 77.3 100.0

U. Pr.No. appeared 2540 4336 2990

% scoring 50% or more 80.8 27.5 74.2

4The difference between attendance in the last and the first period could have got affected because of the presence

of an outside observer.


30/96

17

High percentage of pupils getting more than 50% score in the terminal examinations does

not compare well with the low scores in national surveys. These tests are likely to represent

more closely what is taught in the classrooms. Help from the teachers may also be interferingwith the true picture. By its own standards children were not learning at the expected levels in

Madhya Pradesh.

Only Andhra Pradesh had a sizable sample of grade V children from upper primaryschools. More children in these schools scored more than 50% marks. The trend is supported in

Madhya Pradesh. Upper primary schools are likely to have more teachers and better facilities.

Achievement of children also needs to be looked at in light of the percentage of enrolled

children who sit for the examinations. While some students may not face the examination ontheir own, some may be prevented by the schools to show higher pass percentages or higher

average score. The practice in not unknown.

Table 5.4 Percentage of Enrolled Children Who Appeared for Terminal Examination

AP MP UPV VII V VIII V VIII

Total enrolment 6778 2660 4685 4947 9777 4228

No appeared 7155 2540 3828 4336 7823 3060

Percent appeared 105.6 95.5 81.7 87.6 80.0 72.4

Percent scoring 50% 75.2 80.7 29.8 27.4 77.3 74.8

In Andhra Pradesh, more children than the ones enrolled at the time of data collection sat

for the terminal examination at the end of class V. Children could be shifting from unrecognized

private schools to be able to take the examination. Both in Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh,close to 20% did not sit for the examination at the end of class V. Low attendance rates have also

been recorded, thus, some of the children might have been on the register but not really attending

school. In Uttar Pradesh, 28% of class VIII students did not appear for the terminal examination,most of them were either poor achievers or their attendance was low. Pupil achievement in

Andhra Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh is better than that in Madhya Pradesh, assuming that the

examinations at the end of class V or VII/ VIII are of same standard in the three states.


31/96

18


32/96

19

Chapter 6

Absence Rate of Teachers

6.1 Absence Rate of Teachers during 2005-06

Teachers could not teach for a total of 33 days out of 168 in Andhra Pradesh, 28 days outof 229 in Madhya Pradesh and 22 days out of 214 working days in Uttar Pradesh. Average

number of working days in Andhra Pradesh are low as the statistics is derived from teachersworking days in the schools in the sample and a fairly large number of new teachers were

recruited during the academic year. The statistics of 33 days that they could not teach may also

be high due to new appointees being required to visit various offices before setting down.Number of working days in Uttar Pradesh are fewer than in Madhya Pradesh.

Fig. 6.1 Teaching Days Lost

0

50

100

150

200

250

Total working days 168 228.8 213.9

No. of teaching days lost 33 28.2 21.5

AP MP UP

As per data made available by the state studies, Andhra Pradesh had maximum non-

teaching days reducing instructional days to 135 as compared to 168 days of teacher presence inthe state. Comparable statistics in Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh were 200 and 191 days

respectively. Out of the total number of days the teachers were not in school, nearly 50% were

spent on some work assigned away from school in Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh;percentage was still higher (61%) in Uttar Pradesh. Rest of the time teachers were on leave for

personal reasons.


33/96

20

Fig. 6.2 Reasons for Teaching Days Lost

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Medical leave 3.5 4.9 2.2

Casual leave 14.0 8.6 6.2

Duty outside school not

related to education

10.2 8.8 7.3

Education related duty out

of school

5.2 5.8 5.9

A.P. M.P. U.P.

Some of the non-teaching days were spent on duty outside school and attending to some

administrative work but few days were taken off by the teachers for personal reasons, such assickness of self or a member of the family, special occasions, etc. In Andhra Pradesh, teachers

took leave for 17.6 days, in Madhya Pradesh for 13.5 days and only for 8.3 days in Uttar Pradesh

for personal needs. In government schools in Andhra Pradesh, 15 days of casual leave ispermissible with another 7 days as special leave. Women teachers are allowed 5 more days. In

Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh 13 and 14 days respectively are permissible as casual leave.

The system allows teachers to remain off duty for close to 15 days in general for their personal

needs.

6.2 Accounting Teacher Time for Different Categories of Teachers

It is important to understand why teachers remain absent from classrooms so that the

issue may be addressed appropriately.

Women teachers spent fewer days on duty away from school but took more leave for

personal reasons. It may be noticed that number of days of medical leave taken by women were

more than double than that of men. It is not clear whether maternity leave has got included in themedical leave. Women are likely to take more leave to look after the young children, Andhra

Pradesh allows 5 days of extra leave for women teachers.


34/96

21

Fig. 6.3 Teaching Days Lost by Reasons for Male & Female

Teachers

0

5

1015

20

25

30

35

40

Medical leave 2.2 5.4 3.4 7.4 1.2 3.4

Casual leave 12.7 16 8 9.7 5.8 6.7

Duty outside school

not related to education

11.3 8.6 10 6.9 8.6 5.6

Education related duty

out of school

5.6 4.6 5.9 5.6 5.9 5.8

M F M F M F

UPAP MP

Teachers reported more working days in urban areas (Andhra Pradesh-16 days more,Uttar Pradesh-10 days more). Differences were not marked when seen over rural and urban

areas. Only in Uttar Pradesh, a higher percentage of teachers from rural areas were absent due to

being on duty elsewhere.

Fig.6.4 Reasons for Teachers' Absence in Urban and Rural Areas

0

10

20

30

40

Leave 18.4 17.4 16.3 12.4 12.0 7.8

Days on non-school duty 10.5 10.1 6.8 9.7 6.0 7.5

Days on school duty 5.2 5.2 6.1 5.7 3.2 6.4

Urban Rural Urban Rural Urban RuralUPMPAP

Some differences were seen between teachers of primary and upper primary schools.

More days were spent in Uttar Pradesh by primary school teachers on school related duty

whereas teachers in upper primary schools availed more casual leave but total number of days


35/96

22

teachers were absent from school remained the same for both primary and upper primary

schools in Uttar Pradesh. The absence rate was a little higher in upper primary schools in Andhra

Pradesh and lower in Madhya Pradesh, compared to that in primary schools.

Fig 6.5 Reasons for Teachers' Absence at Primary and Upper

Primary Levels

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Leave 17.5 17.7 12.8 14.1 11.7 7.4

Days on non-school

duty

11.2 9.4 7.8 9.6 6.4 7.6

Days on school duty 5.4 5.0 5.9 5.7 3.9 6.5

U.Pr P U.Pr. P U.Pr P

UPAP MPMP

Absence rate of teachers was also studied for differences if any among teachers

belonging to different castes and their status as teachers i.e. regular or contract teachers.

Fig 6.6 Percentage of Teaching Days Lost by Social Groups of

Teachers

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

SC 31.1 21.2 17.2

ST 29.8 19.3 18.3

OBC 29.8 19.3 18.3

Muslims 27.9 19.7 20.5

Others 32.9 23.0 19.1

AP MP UP


36/96

23

The differences were small with maximum of 5 days between Others and Muslims

in Andhra Pradesh, 3.8 days between Others and STs in Madhya Pradesh and 3.3 days

between Muslims and SCs in Uttar Pradesh. It may have some relationship with social or

political power of the group in general.

Fig 6.7 Percentage of Teaching Days Lost for Regular

and Para Teachers

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Regular 34.3 22.6 21.2

Para 16.4 20.4 11.9

AP MP UP

There was a marked difference between regular and para teachers on the extents of

being absent from school. It was maximum in Andhra Pradesh (18 days) and minimum inMadhya Pradesh (only 2 days). Service conditions of para teachers are likely to contribute to the

difference; the more stringent the contracts, the more cautious would be the employees not tocause any dissatisfaction to the authorities concerned.

6.3 Teacher Engagement in School

What were the teachers engaged in when present in school? Whereas about 85% of the teacherswere present in school in Madhya Pradesh 76% in Andhra Pradesh and 89% in Uttar Pradesh.

Thus, the percentage of those found to be engaged in teaching was only 72% in UP, 76.4% inMP and 65.6% in AP. Thus over the three states, about 28% teachers were not in the classroomsat least part of the day (It may be only one period). Thus out of the total teachers posted in

schools, the percentage of those who were absent or not engaged in teaching even when present

was as high as 34.4% in AP, 23.6% in MP and 27.6% in UP.


37/96

24

Fig 6.8 Teacher Engagement in School in Percentages

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Percentage of teachers

present

76.0 84.6 89

Present & teaching 65.6 76.4 72.4

Present but doing other

work

10.4 8.2 16.6

AP MP UP

The investigators observed teachers attendance during the first hour of starting and last

hour of the closing of the school during their two unannounced visits to each school. About 7%to their 10% teachers came late to school in the three states. Incidence of teacher leaving early i.e

before the school time ended varied between 1.5% and 5.9%.

Fig. 6.9 Percentage of Teachers Who Came Late or Left Early

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

All Teachers 7.2 1.5 8.6 5.9 9.4 4.1

Male 6.9 1.5 10.1 6.5 8.5 4.1

Female 7.5 1.4 6.8 5.4 11.2 4.1

Late Early Late Early Late Early

UPAP MP


38/96

25

Fig 6.10 (A) Teacher Engagement in School by Gender During First Hour(in percentages)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Present as per register 75.9 77.0 87.5 88.7 94.5 94.0

Teaching 62.1 69.1 77.6 81.5 70.7 74.6

M F M F M F

AP MP UP

Fig 6.10 (B) Teacher Engagement in School by Gender During Last

Hour (in percentages)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100


Teaching 64.8 68.2 78.6 81.6 77.5 86.6

M F M F M F

AP MP UP

More women teachers were present during the first period difference being small but

more of those present were teaching, while men teachers were engaged in other work. The

picture remained the same in the last period; relatively more women teachers were found to be

present and teaching compared to men teachers in all the three states.


39/96

26

Fig 6.11 (A) Engagement of Primary and Upper Primary

Teachers During Ist Hour (in percentage)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100


Teaching 65.6 64.6 77.7 74.1 70.2 65.4

P UP P UP P UPAP MP UP

Fig 6.11 (B) Engagement of Primary and Upper Primary Teachers During

Last Hour(in percentages)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100


Teaching 67.6 64.7 78.3 74.8 76.6 72.2

P UP P UP P UP

AP MP UP

More teachers were present during the first period in primary schools than in upperprimary schools with difference ranging from 1.3% in Madhya Pradesh to 4.8% in Andhra

Pradesh and more of them were teaching too. The picture was similar at the end of the school

day.


40/96

27

The Investigators noted the percentage of teachers present reported by the head teacher

and the visiting member on the last such visit. Percentage of teachers present as observed was

lower by 6% (Uttar Pradesh) to 11% (Andhra Pradesh) when compared to those recorded on a

day when a member of supervisory staff visited the school.

Fig 6.12 Percentage of Teachers Present on the Day of Visit by CRC

and BEO

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

School record 87.3 88.1 95.1 88.8 94.8 94.5

Inspection report. 87.9 86.5 94.6 93.5 94.7 93.2

CRC BEO CRC BEO CRC BEO

AP MP UP

Where teachers attendance recorded in school register was compared with that reported by

CRC/ BRC Coordinator on the day of his/ her visit to school, not much difference is formed

between the two. But the attendance rate of teachers during such visits is much higher than thatfound by the investigator in his/ her visit to schools (see fir 6.8).

6.4 Teacher Time in Training

All teachers are expected to attend monthly meetings at CRCs and other training

programmes as organized by BRCs or DIET. Teachers provided information about the totalnumber of days spent in these meetings/training programmes.


41/96

28

Fig 6.13 Average Number of Days Spent in Meetings/

Training by School Location

0

5

10

15

All Teachers 4.7 4.7 12.0 10.9 7.8 4.3

Male 5.2 4.9 12.4 9.9 7.5 5.0

Female 3.9 4.5 10.8 11.3 8.1 3.9

R U R U R U

AP MP UP

In Andhra Pradesh, teachers spent less than 5 days attending meetings. Teachers in urban

schools in Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh spent fewer days in these programmes, difference

in Uttar Pradesh was large. Fewer women teachers in Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradeshattended such meetings, the difference was small one percent.

Fig 6.14 Average Number of Days Spent in Meetings/ Training by

School Category

0

2

4

6

810

12

14

All Teachers 4.7 4.8 12.4 10.8 8 4.8

Male 5.1 5.2 12.6 11.4 8 5.2

Female 4.1 4.1 12 9.8 8 3.9

P UP P UP P UP

AP MP UP

Teachers of primary schools in Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh attended moremeetings probably at CRCs than the teachers of upper primary schools. The difference was close

to 3 days, on the average, in Uttar Pradesh. Women teachers from upper primary schools in Uttar

Pradesh spent least number of days (3.9) in attending such meetings. Teachers in MadhyaPradesh spent maximum number of days (11 to 12) in attending meetings/training programmes.


42/96

29

Fig 6.15 Percentage of Teachers Engaged in Admn. And

Other Work During First Hour

0

5

10

15

20

25

Other work 4.4 5.0 3.6 1.2 1.0 1.6 4.6 4.9 4.7

Adm. Work 6.7 8.5 4.2 7.4 8.9 5.6 15.4 18.0 14.1

All M F All M F All M F

AP MP UP

Between 6 to 15% teachers were seen engaged in administrative work at the beginning ofa working day; teachers were asked to estimate the amount of time spent by them per week onadministrative work. Maximum hours (4.4 hours) were reported from Uttar Pradesh which is

equivalent to almost a day per week, Madhya Pradesh came very close to it. Men spent more

time on it than women, so did the upper primary teachers in Uttar Pradesh than the primaryteachers.

Fig 6.16 Average Number of Hours in a Week Spent on Attending

Administrative Work

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

All teachers 1.8 1.6 1.7 4.4 3.8 4.1 4.2 5.2 4.4

Male 1.9 1.8 1.9 4.6 3.8 4.2 4.8 5.7 5.0

Female 1.6 1.3 1.5 4.0 3.8 3.9 3.7 4.0 3.8

P U.Pr All P U.Pr All P U.Pr All

AP MP UP UP ALL


43/96

30

6.5 Reasons of Absence

What are the main reasons for teachers taking occasional leave? Head masters, BEOs,CRCCs and VEC chairmen were asked to choose 3 reasons in order of importance out of 8 listed.

Responses for the most frequent reason are recorded in the following figure.

Family problems and health of the teacher were the two most common reasons for

teachers being absent. Family problems have been reported very prominently in Uttar Pradesh.Distance of residence from school and non availability of transport or unsuitable timing of the

same also contributed to the problem. Only in Andhra Pradesh, participation in festivals and

religious functions has been mentioned as a reason for teachers taking leave. Political/ socialactivities take some toll in Uttar Pradesh.

Fig 6.17 Prominent Reasons of Teachers' Absence according to Head teachers, BEOs

and CRCCs

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

7080

90

Family problems 39.3 17.2 34.3 43.4 28.4 36.8 78.6 78.0 75.9

Health of the teacher 45.3 37.2 41.2 41.6 63 52.1 7.8 12.7 14.2

Residence at a distance 3.4 9.2 4.5 8.5 2.4 5.0 4.3 4.7 2.9

Transport not available 11.1 26.1 9.7 5.0 3.1 4.7 2.5 0.8 0.5

Head BEO CRCC Head BEO CRCC Head BEO CRCC

AP MP UP

Absenteeism due to sickness or family problems would be common for all employees. It

is being noticed because of the nature of the job and shortage of teachers in the system.

6.6 Managing Teacher Absence in Schools

How do head teachers cope with teacher absenteeism? They were asked to respond to twocategories of absence a short period of 1-3 days which could occur in several cases without

prior information to the authority or a period of 4 or more days which, in most cases, could be

known in advance. Six alternatives that could be adopted to manage the class for the two types

of absence of absent teacher were presented. The head teachers pointed the one practiced bythem most frequently. The data have been analysed separately for schools divided as rural/urban

and primary/upper primary. The tables for rural/urban schools are given here. The data

segregated for primary and upper primary schools can be seen in Appendix A.


44/96

31

Fig.6.18 Strategies Adopted by Schools when a Teacher is Absent for 1-3 Days

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Students play or go home 1.2 0.0 4.1 0.0 1.4 5.6

Class monitor handles the class 2.2 1.3 9.1 5.6 18.3 20.4

Students study on their own 3.4 1.3 6.0 0.0 6.1 7.4

Community member takes the

class

4.0 2.7 6.3 4.2 3.2 3.7

Teacher looks after the class in

addition to own class

36.9 52.0 37.4 46.5 56.8 40.7

Other teacher is assigned the

class

52.0 42.7 36.5 42.2 14.2 22.2

.

UPAP M P

R U R U R U

Interestingly, in Andhra Pradesh, in the case of rural schools the maximum response was

on another teacher is assigned to the class. How it is managed is not clear. This response has

maximum frequency for primary schools which had only 3.1 teachers per school in 2005-06,5

80% schools in the sample are primary schools. Could it be what should be done response?

Respondents from Uttar Pradesh were more candid with 57% opting for another teacher looksafter the class in addition to his/her own class.

Another practice adopted by schools for brief absence (1-3 days) of teachers was use of

class monitor. More than 18% of classes in Uttar Pradesh were looked after by the classmonitors followed by 9% in Madhya Pradesh. Young monitors, particularly in primary classes

may be able to make the children sit in the class room and make less noise. Help from the

community was higher in rural areas in Madhya Pradesh and in urban area in Uttar Pradesh. In

Madhya Pradesh, 10% schools in rural area let the children study on their own or go home. InUttar Pradesh too 7.2% (rural) to 13% (urban) of the schools left the students alone. In teacher

starved schools, teacher absenteeism is hard to manage.

When teachers were absent for 4 or more days, the situation was managed more

efficiently by deploying another teacher for the class. Percentage of respondents reporting thisvaried from 54% (Madhya Pradesh) to 65.5% (Uttar Pradesh) in rural area. Percentages were

even higher for urban area. It is possible that help can be sought from CRPs or the DEO when

the time to manage the situation is available.

5DISE 2005-06


45/96

32

Fig.6.19 Strategies Adopted by Schools When a Teacher is Absent for More

than 4 Days

0

10

20

3040

50

60

70

80

90

100

Students play or go home 1.0 0.0 3.1 0.0 1.4 5.6

Class monitor handles the class 2.2 1.3 4.4 0.0 3.2 1.8

Students study of their own 2.2 0.0 4.1 2.8 1.4 3.7

Community member takes the

class

5.0 4.0 7.2 4.2 1.4 3.7

Teacher looks after the class in

addition to own class

28.6 28.0 25.5 29.6 27.0 11.1

Other teacher is assigned the 61.2 66.7 54.1 62.0 65.5 74.1

R U R U R U

UPAP MP

6.7 Efforts to Contain AbsenteeismManagement committees are expected to supervise teachers attendance. Headmasters

were asked to report efforts made by the management committees to contain teacher absence;

their responses are summarized in fig 6.20.

Fig 6.20 Efforts of Management Committees in Respect of Teachers' Absence

0

20

40

60

80

100

Checking of Attendance from time to

time

63.2 64.3 64.4 93.8 94.6 95.5 71.3 71.9 71.5

Discussion with individual teachers

who were not regular

48.0 47.7 47.9 54.6 54.4 53.7 50.8 51.9 53.5

Convening meetings to discuss

teacher's regularity / punctuality

46.2 45.8 47.6 76.7 78.0 74.2 57.2 58.8 58.0

Reporting to authorities about

irregular teachers

23.0 22.5 25.3 20.5 20.1 20.9 33.2 35.4 34.6

No activity related to teachers

attendance was undertaken

31.5 32.0 31.2 4.4 3.5 2.9 25.0 24.1 24.7

All R P All R P All R P

AP MP UP

R- rural; P- primary


46/96

33

The most popular practice followed by the management committees (MCs) was to

check the attendance from time to time. MCs were most active in Madhya Pradesh 94% head

teachers reporting checking of attendance by MC members. Meetings with teachers to discuss

the issue were also more frequent in Madhya Pradesh. Percent of cases where no action wastaken was highest in Andhra Pradesh followed by Uttar Pradesh; these were negligible in

Madhya Pradesh. It can be said that Madhya Pradesh has involved the community in a big way to

ensure that teachers come to school.

In Andhra Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh, more attention was paid by the managementcommittees of primary and rural schools to ensure teacher attendance. It is likely that rural

primary schools with fewer teachers were paid more attention. Communities may be getting

more concerned about the education of their children.

Frequent supervision and guidance from the seniors would not only improve teaching, it

would motivate teachers and improve their commitment towards their work. Number of visitsmade by CRCCs, BRCCs and BEOs were obtained from the school records for the year 2005-06.

Schools were visited by supervisory group for a maximum of 14 days in Uttar Pradesh.

Teacher attendance rates were highest in Uttar Pradesh. Such visits were lowest 7.5 days only

in Andhra Pradesh. Both in Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh, maximum number of visits weremade by CRC Coordinators, but in Andhra Pradesh, BRCCs visited schools more often. BEOs

too supervised schools more frequently in Andhra Pradesh than in the other two states. In Uttar

Pradesh rural and primary schools were supervised/guided more frequently than schools in urban

area or upper primary schools. The differences could probably be as per the needs in the system.

6.8 Regularity and Punctuality in Attendance

VEC chairmen were asked to rate teachers regularity and punctuality as very good,good and not good.

Non-response by VEC chairmen was high in Andhra Pradesh, nil in Madhya Pradesh andvery small in Uttar Pradesh, that too was concentrated in urban (55 schools) or upper primary

schools (88 schools). It reflects successful involvement of the community in universalisation of

elementary education in these states.


47/96

34

Fig 6.21 Rating About Teachers' Regularity by VEC

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Not good 4.0 4.3 4.1 3.1 3.5 3.3 2.7 3.2 2.2

Good 35.0 37.8 35.6 72.8 73.3 74.2 68.7 73.3 69.5

Very good 36.0 33.8 37.7 24.1 23.3 22.5 23.5 22.9 24.4

No reply 25.0 24.0 22.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 0.6 3.8

.

AP MP UP



Although Regularity not good was reported by only 3-4% of the VEC chairmen, highnon-response in Andhra Pradesh6 may be affecting the value for the state. There were small

differences in rural and urban schools in all the three states with teachers in rural area being less

regular. Elsewhere in the report it is pointed out that absenteeism is related to distance betweenresidence and school as also with availability of transport. Reaching school may be more

difficult in rural area for some teachers i.e. for those posted at a distance from their residence.

Fig 6.22 Rating About Teachers' Punctuality By VEC

0

20

40

60

80

100

Not good 6.2 6.5 7.2 4.4 4.7 4.9 3.0 3.5 2.2

Good 42.7 44.9 42.5 73.8 74.8 73.4 69.7 73.6 70.8

Very good 26.0 24.6 27.7 21.8 20.4 21.7 22.2 22.3 23.1

No reply 25.0 24.0 22.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 0.6 3.8


AP MP UP


6High non-response can be genuine or due to slackness in data collection.


48/96

35

Punctuality was rated in about the same manner as regularity. Adverse percentages varied

between 3.5 to 6.5 for rural schools and 0 to 5.3% in urban schools; zero percent was recorded in

Uttar Pradesh which also had the highest no response for this category of schools. Moreteachers in primary schools, as compared to upper primary were reported to be not very punctual

in Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh, situation was reverse in Uttar Pradesh. In Madhya

Pradesh the difference on punctuality between the two categories of schools was small and

favourable to upper primary schools. It may be added that data from VEC chairmen could bebased on few observations and may also be biased because of other variables.

6.9 Teacher Absenteeism and Non-Punctuality as Seen by the Community.

In addition to the information sought form the VEC Chairman, views of the communityat large were sought about teachers attending to their main duty i.e. teaching regularly. Each of

the three states organized Focus Group Discussions at a few places-close to 20 in each state in

various districts in the sample. The groups generally had six to ten members and an appropriate

mix of parents whose children were in school, men, women and different social groups of thecommunity. It has been pointed out in the state studies that several members were not literate and

the education level of the participants was quite low.

The discussions were conducted by the supervisors or some experienced persons who

explained the objectives of SSA briefly and guided the discussions toward the main objective,

namely, teacher absence from the classrooms.

The discussions seemed to have remained focused in Uttar Pradesh but wavered over

general issues in Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh. In all the three states distance of

residence form school was pointed out as a major factor contributing to teachers not coming toschool on time, leaving early or even missing school. It was also expressed as transport not being

available at appropriate timings or teachers not staying in the villages where they were posted.

Another reason for teachers not being in the classrooms, reported by the communities in

all the three states was non-teaching duties assigned to the teachers.

None of the states mentioned caste/ social group as a variable related to absenteeism buthigher incidence of absence of women teachers was pointed out in Uttar Pradesh. As per the data

available in the study, there was not much difference between men and women teachers being

absent from class rooms but the reasons were different. Women were absent more often forpersonal or family related problems and men for being on duty outside schools. The latter will

not be considered absenteeism by the administration or may be even by the community.

Some other reasons mentioned in Uttar Pradesh where the discussion seemed to haveremained more focused were: time spent in other income generating activities including private

tuition, pursuance of higher studies for improving academic qualifications and participation inpolitical activities.

The groups made some suggestions to improve the situation such as better emoluments,

improved infrastructural facilities and more teachers in the schools.


49/96

36

6.10 Role Played by VECs

VECs meet from time to time to discuss issues/problems related to successful functioning

of schools. Attendance of teachers was to be supervised by the VECs as were the enrolment,attendance and achievements of children. How much attention did this particular aspect got from

the VECs? The chairmen were asked to identify the issues that were discussed frequently during

the previous year. In all seven issues were presented. The responses are summarised in fig 6.23.

Fig. 6.23 School Problems Discussed in VEC Meetings

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Financial 45.5 90.0 77.7

Inadequate facilities 38.2 76.4 68.0

Student attendance 34.7 87.7 71.5

Non-enrolment 32.2 44.4 67.2

Low achievement 30.0 77.2 64.0

Teacher attendance 28.7 76.7 73.2

Dropout 27.5 46.7 50.2

AP MP UP

After Finance teachers attendance received most attention of VECs in Uttar Pradesh; inthis study teacher attendance rate was highest in Uttar Pradesh. It could be due to support fromthe community.

Finance and students attendance are the two problems discussed most frequently in allthe three states. Finance in the questionnaire may mean looking into accounts rather than

problems of insufficiency of funds etc. It is heartening to note that students attendance (non-

attendance) gets attention of the community. Across the states, dropout i.e. students giving upstudies is not paid the attention that it deserves. Low achievements of students were discussed in

the VEC meetings more frequently in Madhya Pradesh - low percentage of students score 50%

or more marks in the terminal examinations. Although statistics reported in Uttar Pradesh for

50% marks were high, achievement of pupils was still a matter of discussions in the VECcommittees.

Over all the managing committees seemed less involved in Andhra Pradesh and mostactive in Madhya Pradesh. Nature of problems getting attention of VECs in rural and urban areas

in a state were not different. Non enrolment and dropout in primary classes was discussed more

frequently than with reference to upper primary classes in all the three states. It could be due to

earlier emphasis on univeralisation of primary education.


50/96

37

6.11 Satisfaction with Working Conditions

Unsatisfactory working conditions can also contribute to absenteeism. Teachers were

asked to indicate extent of their satisfaction with the situation in which they work. Variousaspects were covered such as facilities in schools, support from groups concerned, working

conditions, etc. The data were obtained on a five point scale from very satisfied to very dis-

satisfied, it is summarized in the table below where in positive and negative responses have

been collapsed and the middle one i.e. somewhat satisfied is not shown.

Table 6.1: Teacher Satisfaction Percentage of TeachersAndhra Pradesh Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh

Dis-sat. Sat. Dis-sat. Sat. Dis-sat. Sat.1. Physical facilities for trs. 19.9 59.2 12.3 69.3 10.4 77.1

2. Relationship with colleagues 1.0 95.7 1.2 94.1 2.4 88.9

3. Support from parents 14.3 59.8 12.7 61.6 7.4 72.2

4. Support from head teacher 2.1 92.9 1.0 88.7 2.9 74.9

5. Support from CRC 13.4 69.3 3.6 84.2 4.0 71.9

6. Students regularity in attendance 6.2 71.3 8.4 62.4 6.6 65.8

7. Students learning capability 4.1 63.7 7.4 54.2 7.4 65.8

8. Progress of students in class 3.8 67.1 3.8 61.2 7.4 64.3

9. Participation by VEC/SMC 18.5 56.9 6.0 68.9 6.9 71.6

10. Involvement of students in co-curricular activities 6.1 74.5 2.8 72.7 3.7 77.1

11. Posting in the present school 6.3 85.0 5.7 84.7 3.7 83.2

12. Emoluments 13.3 70.9 5.0 51.4 5.3 54.7

13. Number of students in your class 11.3 70.8 5.7 78.3 5.8 77.4

14. Class(es) assigned to you 5.7 83.2 5.0 87.8 3.6 82.7

15. Teaching work-load 8.2 74.5 6.9 82.4 5.5 77.4

16. Redressal of grievances 8.6 70.1 10.9 69.3 12.5 68.0

17. School timetable 2.6 91.8 2.2 93.8 7.1 77.9

18. Non teaching work / duties 34.9 47.4 5.8 30.1 29.1 57.5

Average 10.0 72.4 7.5 71.9 11.6 72.7

There was fair amount of similarity in teachers responses in all the three states. Teachershave good interpersonal relationships, approximately 85% were satisfied with their postings and

classes allotted to them. In Uttar Pradesh a larger percentage of teachers were only somewhat

satisfied with support from head teachers.

Only a small percentage of teachers in Madhya Pradesh were dissatisfied with non-

teaching duties but in Andhra Pradesh, more than a third did not like them. Close to 68%

teachers were happy with infrastructural facilities with only 14% remaining dissatisfied whichcould be due to poorer facilities in some schools. A much higher percentage of teachers (35%) in

Madhya Pradesh were not happy with the emoluments that they receive. Percentage of para

teachers among respondent teachers was highest in Madhya Pradesh (40.1%) it was more than

30% in Uttar Pradesh too but the differences in emoluments of two categories of teachers may beresponsible for greater dis-satisfaction in Madhya Pradesh.

In Andhra Pradesh, more teachers were dissatisfied with contribution of VEC/SMC and

CRC. Lack of support from parents was also reported by more teachers in Andhra Pradesh and

Madhya Pradesh; more of them found physical facilities unsatisfactory. More teachers in Uttar

Pradesh expressed their unhappiness with Redressal of teachers grievances.

Overall, teachers in all the three states were reasonably satisfied with their working

conditions. An overall score was worked out for the teachers and used in analyses.


51/96

38

Chap

EdCIL Report of Teachers Absence Study Doc by Vijay Kumar Heer

Documents