TTWS REPORT ON 5% SAMPLE CHECKING OF U-DISE
Transcription
TTWS REPORT ON 5% SAMPLE CHECKING OF U-DISE
REPORT ON 5% SAMPLE CHECKING OF U-DISE DATA, 2012-13 Human Resource Development Department Government of Sikkim Conducted by : TTWS BermiokTokal, South Sikkim Pin: 737134 E-mail : [email protected] ACKNOWLEDGEMENT We, the members of the TeestaTendong Welfare Society (NGO) take this opportunity toexpress our deepest sense of Gratitude and our heartfelt thanks to all the members of institutions and personnel who have assisted and contributed in the smooth conduct of this relevant and meaningful exercise. We, at the outset are extremely grateful to, State Project Director, SSA and RMSA Sikkim, for his Co-operation and support in the project.We also acknowledge the co-operation of Schools that we have visited. We placed onrecord of our most sincere thanks to all the coordinator of BRCs and CRCs for their unstinted efforts and cooperation during the fieldwork by the Field investigators.We also thankful to invaluable co-operation extended by the Head Teachers and Teachers of the schools in collection of relevant data are appreciated by the Project Team. We thank all the concerns for their services throughout theProject Work without which the timely completion of the Project would not have beenpossible. Project Team TTWS NGO Agency conducted Survey: TeestaTendong Welfare Society, South Sikkim Name of Investigators: MrMahendraPradhan MrMadhavPsd. Sharma MsManishaGurung Mr. Ganesh Subba Mr. Sanjay Pradhan Year for which the PES is conducted: 2012-13 Survey Month: April - May 2013 No. of District taken as 5% Sample Survey: Four District Name of Districts selected in the sample: North, South, East and West Executive Summary The District Information System for Education (DISE) for SSA is the backbone of integrated educational management information system operating at the District, State and National level since 1995. Similarly, for RMSA Secondary Education Management Information System (SEMIS) is the backbone of Secondary & Senior Secondary School data. The system collects detailed data through Data Capturing Format (DCF) from schools. This format includes information on various parameters like location of the Schools, School Management, Teachers in the Schools, School infrastructure and equipment, enrolment by gender, caste and age, incentives, the number of disabled children in various grades, children of minority classes, etc. There is flexibility for additional state specific variables at all levels as per the local need. Free and compulsory education to all children up to the age of fourteen years is our constitutional commitment. The Government of India has initiated a number of programmes to achieve the goal of Universalization of Elementary Education (UEE). Among the several programmes launched, SarvaShikshaAbhiyan (SSA) is the most recent one in this regard. The SarvaShikshaAbhiyan (SSA) is a historic stride towards achieving the long cherished goal of Universalization of Elementary Education (UEE) through a time bound integrated approach, in partnership with States. SSA, which promises to change the face of the elementary education sector of the country, aims to provide useful and quality elementary education to all children in the 6-14 age groups by 2010. Unlike the previous programmes of this nature, SSA is quite distinct in terms of implementation through mission as well as partnership mode. In the context of implementation of SarvaShikshaAbhiyan (SSA), a massive programme undertaken in the realm of education sector, what assumes greater significance is proper implementation of the programme itself to derive appropriate results. For effective implementation of such large-scale programme, collecting information, analyzing the results, identifying the corrective course, deriving instructions based on the actual situation, the SarvaShikshaAbhiyan (SSA) is implemented throughout the country with the help of project authorities of state government concerned. An elaborate MIS mechanism has been laid to monitor the implementation of the programme, gauge the results and identify course of action from time to time. At the project authority level i.e. State level, the District Information System for Education (DISE) collects data pertaining to various aspects of education system through a structured schedule consisting of information on school education. At district level regular monitoring reports are being prepared and submitted to Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India at periodical intervals. In addition, with a view to establishing the veracity of information provided by the project authorities concerned, an external institution conducts similar survey i.e. DISE, based on a 5% sample survey. Thus, appropriate MIS in essence properly guards the SSA. The Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD) has felt that there is lot of inconsistency while collecting data by more than one agency and more than one source, in the country. The need to evolve a single mechanism to collect school education statistics has long been felt. The Expert Group recommended integration of DISE and SEMIS system of data collection into a Unified System for Collection of School Education Statistics as “Unified District Information System for Education (U-DISE)”. The so developed U-DCF has been introduced to collect data for all the schools at the stages from class I to class XII. Sample checking of U-DISE Data: To ensure the consistency and accuracy of U-DISE data, it has been decided to conduct 5% sample checking of U-DISE data in order to check/avoid discrepancies and to generate recommendations for modification of its mechanism in future. It has been made mandatory for all the states to get the U-DISE data sample checked every year by involving independent agencies or Institutes promoting research facilities. Accordingly, 5% of the sample checking of U-DISE data (2012‐13) has been entrusted to TTWS (NGO) in Sikkim. In a study of qualitative check and sample analysis of U-DISE data and confirming the results there of, the methodology of the study needs to be precision oriented. Hence, carefully drawn sampling method and appropriate care for other related aspects with regard to methodology were emphasized in this study. Objectives The main objectives of the study are: i. Evaluate the quality check of the U-DISE data ii. Measure the precision levels as well as deviation of U-DISE data iii. Suggest measures for strengthening data base on information pertaining to SSA and RMSA in Sikkim. Sampling The universe of the study is all the schools covered under SSA and RMSA programme in Sikkim. As the U-DISE data consists of information on all the schools covered under SSA and RMSA in Sikkim, five per cent of the schools appropriately representing schools across the state were selected for deriving sample for the study. While confining to the five percent sampling and even care has been taken to emphasis on type of schools as well as management by ensuring the representation of both rural and urban were, different types of management of schools namely Government, Private, Aided and recognized etc. Due representation was also given to the schools located in SC/ST area. The sample selected for the present study was 40 schools and the below table furnishes the information: DISTRIBUTION OF SAMPLE BY SCHOOL CATEGORY AND DISTRICT Categories of Schools District Primary with Primary Upper Primary Primary with Up. Pr. & Sec. / H.Secondary Total East 5 3 4 12 West 5 2 3 10 North 3 3 2 8 South 5 2 3 10 Total 18 10 12 40 Study Area A sample of four districts were randomly selected for the present study. In each district, the schools were randomly selected from all the regions representing urban, rural, SC and tribal and areas. Thus, a total of 40 schools were covered in the present. Instruments for Data Collection A prescribed ‘schedule’ designed by National University of Educational Planning and Administration (NUEPA), New Delhi consisting of information on various aspects of school information was administered for the purpose of the study. It covers the aspects like school enrolment, dropouts, stagnation, physical and teaching facilities and so on. Collection of Data For the purpose of data collection, the study team made physical visit to all the schools for preliminary interaction with teaching staff and appraising themselves with the physical and academic conditions prevailing there of. Since the data collection is to be covered in a span of less time and the task is of gigantic proportion, required number of research investigators were identified and trained thoroughly in terms of appropriate data collection methods. Specific care has been taken to identify the research investigators keeping in view the requirement of exposure to school education. They were in turn given a one-day orientation on data collection and then placed for actual data collection. The school management concerned was informed in advance to keep the records ready for secondary data collection as well. On the day of visit to the schools, the structured schedule was administered for primary data collection under the supervision of research team. Reference period The U-DISE data pertains to the year 2012 with 30th September as reference date. The post enumeration survey was also of the same period. The survey was launched in March 2013 and completed in May 2013. Data Analysis and Presentation Collected data, after scrutiny of both the sets of formats, already filled up DISE formats and 5% Sample DCF, were subjected to comparison by using simple deviation method. The school-wise and category-wise data was analyzed by using the simple deviation analysis tools in reference to all the comparable items of the survey. The present report is deal with the general introduction pertaining to the importance of education, role of MIS for effective discharge of programme activities and the mandate of the report etc. The methodology adopted for the present study, depicts the limitations the study experienced and the reasons there of. The comparative data between the outcome of PES and U-DISE data in reference to various variables where commonality exists. The interpretation of data analyzed pertaining to additional data collected through PES survey format and information on which data is not available through U-DISE format. The summary of report and suggestive measures/recommendations derived through the survey for effective course of action in future for improvement of U-DISE under SSA. Limitations of the Study: The study has drawn carefully keeping in view of all the parameters and confronted the following limitations. Difference in Formats for post enumeration survey and U-DISE Data. Coverage of all types of School Managements Unfilled columns in prescribed formats of U-DISE data. National University of Educational Planning and Administration, Government of India designed the format of DCF and is used for collecting the U-DISE data. The format is too lengthy and most of the items were self-explanatory. It is noticed that there is no point of collecting data on certain items again and again which were already available with concerned department. Some of the information is not available in the school instantly, for which they have to search the old records. Difference in formats for post enumeration survey with additions and with expanded items was made difficult as a result comparison could be under taken. Some of the U-DISE formats were not filled properly, particularly important items like type of management, number of blocks, class rooms, computer facility etc. Consequently, these aspects were kept outside the purview of this survey report presentation. Since the prime objective of Post Enumeration Survey (PES) is to evaluate the quality check of the U-DISE data and it is an important database for planning and strategy development, improvement of education on the whole, the construction of items in the format should be appropriate and should seek the information on what actually intended for. However, in several aspects, there is no similarity of the items on which PES and U-DISE formats were designed and as a result these aspects were not comparable. A few of the examples are detailed below: The details of the Head Master i.e. Name and educational Qualifications. Experience of Principal Number of years of working as HM in the present school Children enrollment in the last Academic Year Enrollment and Attendance details of children on the date of survey Grade wise Examination details for which Annual Examinations conducted in Last Academic Year. Investigators feedback on certain items like Attributes pertaining to the principal Filling up of attendance registers etc. Apart from these, quite a good number of items on which information usually collected on regular basis under U-DISE data were missing in the DCF i.e. PES format. Such items are indicated below: Particulars of pre primary classes Teacher training activities Academic inspections Visits by the coordinators of different levels School development Maintenance grants Infrastructure availability in the class rooms Library facilities Arrangements for disable students Enrolment details School information on the whole. etc. In some cases, after scrutiny of U-DISE formats it has been noticed that some of the sample schools have not provided the information on certain items, which otherwise could be, compared with the Post Enumerations survey formats. Consequently, some more items could not be compared and the details are as follows: Year of establishment of the school Number of teacher posts sanctioned. Number of Blocks and classrooms in the schools To sum up, the study was confined to 40 schools drawn from four districts across different regions of Sikkim. However, as the U-DISE data did not have the component of private and un-aided schools information, thus data of 40 common schools were used for comparative analysis. The schools selected for the study consists of various category of school education and also different managements. The data were collected for the study through a structured schedule prescribed for the purpose. As the study findings were devoted to establish the comparison with DISE data already collected, a specific prescribed formula was adopted for comparable items of data. The study encountered certain limitations due to differential formats prescribed for DISE and PES survey. However, as most of the items were comparable, a genuine attempt has been made to arrive at confirmation and deviation of survey results. Major Findings: The comparative analysis of DISE data reveals that some of the schools have not properly filled the DISE format. Our findings of 40 schools of four districts are as under The overall deviation of U-DISE data Overall deviation is below 3% exclude fields like year of establishment, No. of Class rooms, Head Teacher and category wise student enrolment. Variation in total enrollment of student is only 0.2% . 10% schools differ in ‘number of class room’. It was observed that in some school the rooms used for store or staff room are also taken as class room. Approx. 5% variation was recorded in data regarding to provide free text books to student. Approx. 5% variation was recorded in data regarding to provide free uniform to student. 0% deviation recorded in ‘Year of establishment’ In 70% schools, no grant information was displayed on board. 1% schools had not received the school report card. In 5% Schools Pupil cumulative record of CCE were not maintained In 100% schools were visited by CRCat least two to three times in year. In 5% schools no SMC meeting was conducted in last three months. 5% teachers were absent on the day of survey. 90% students were present on the day of survey. List of Abbreviation BRC: Block Resource Centre BRCC Block Resource Centre Coordinator CRC Cluster Resource Centre CRCC Cluster Resource Centre Coordinator U-DISE Unified District Information System for Education DSE District Superintendent of Education DOE Department of Education DPEP District Primary Education Programme DCF Data Collection Format DLO District Level Office EMIS Educational Management Information System GOI Government of India HM/HT Head Master / Head Teacher MIS Management Information System MHRD Ministry Of Human Resource Development NUEPA National University Administration NPE National Policy on Education PES Post Enumeration Survey SSA SarvaShikshaAbhiyan RMSA RashtriyaMadhyamikShikshaAbhiyan of Educational Planning and Glossary of Terms Class Size: Average number of students together in a class enrolled. Completion rate: The percentage of pupils/students enrolled at the beginning grade/year of the level of education that finished or graduated from the final grade/year at the end of the required number of years of that level of education. Data: Refers to the smallest unit or item, which represents a fact e.g. name, standard, age etc.\ Database: Refers to all related filed compiled or put together as one group. Drop-out rate: Refers to the percentage of pupils/students who for any reason leave educational institutions during the school years (in any given grade or level) and did not come back to finish the grade or level during that school year to the total number of pupils/students enrolled during the previous school year. Education Management Information system: Refers to an organized group of information and documentation services that collects stores, processes, and analyses and disseminates information for educational planning and management. It is a collection of component parts that include inputs, process, outputs and feedback that are integrated to achieve a specific objective. Its main purpose is to integrate information related to the management of educational activities, and to make it available in comprehensive yet succinct ways to a variety of uses. Education system: Refers to the entirely organized and sustained process of providing education to groups of people regardless of age according to their learning needs. The activities, structure and hierarchy may differ from one setting to another. The process of delivery to the learners comes in such basic forms as formal and non-formal by either a public/government entity or a private organization. Educational Management: A process of creating conditions or situations necessary for maintaining quality of education. Gross enrollment Ratio: Refers to the total enrolment of students in a grade or level of education, regardless of age, expressed as percentage of the corresponding eligible official agegroup population in a given school year. Net enrollment Ratio: Refers to the number of students enrolled in the official specific age group expressed as a percentage of the total population in that age group. Repetition Rate: Percentage of pupil/Students /who enroll in the same grade/year more than once to the number of pupils/ students enrolled in that grade/year during the previous year. Rural Area: Refers to areas outside of the municipal and city corporation areas. Transition Rate: Percentage of students who graduated from one level of education e.g. primary, secondary, etc. and moved on or enroll to the next higher level. Urban Area: Refers to the area covered by municipalities and city corporations in the country irrespective of locality. METHODOLOGY Main objectives The two key objectives of the sample checking exercise were: 1. To verify the accuracy of U-DISE data being collected in the state. 2. To identify the gaps/weaknesses and suggest appropriate remedial measures for strengthening the system. Sample selection We have been allotted 5% sample checking survey of four districtsi.e. East, West,North, and South in Sikkim.The sample checking survey was carried out for all the district of Sikkim. The method for selection of the number of schools forparticular districts was 5% of the total schools in particular districts,whichever is more. Further, for selection of particular schools in a district,method/formula is given below = total number of school in a district÷ 5 or 5% of the schools (out of total schools in a district) whichever is more. Data Collection Personal visit were made by the field investigators to each of the selected schools. The information collected in the school information schedule was authenticatedand certified by school principal/HT/Acting HT in the form of their signature and the datacollection process was closely supervise, monitored and coordinated by project team. Method of Analysis For analysis purpose, we have computerized all the data collected through surveyformat as well the U-DISE data format given by SSA (HRDD) in SikkimFor reporting purpose we made the comparative analysis of survey fields with onlythose fields which are also given in U-DISE format and the fields which are notgiven in U-DISE format are used for our own analysis . The lists of school are prepared below for the Survey of the four districts: EAST DISTRICT SL NO SL.NO U-DISE CODE BLOCK SCHOOL NAME 1 11040900301 RANKA SAJON THIMPEN PS 2 11040800501 DUGA KUMREK PS 3 11040700101 RAKDONG TINTEK KAMBAL PS 4 11040603202 KHANDONG ANSHU ACADEMY 5 11040500103 RHENOCK TARPIN SAALGHARI 6 11040801103 DUGA PADMA KUMARI PUBLIC 7 11040700201 RAKDONG TINTEK PHALAICHADARA JHS 8 11040500105 RHENOCK RHENOCK JHS 9 11040900801 RANKA LUING SS 10 11041000901 MARTAM SANG SSS 11 11041100101 PARAKHA MACHONG SSS 12 11040301501 GANGTOK NANDOK SS NAME OF SCHO OLS (S WEST DISTRICT SL.NO U-DISE CODE BLOCK SCHOOL NAME 1 11020302101 KALUK TAPHEL PS 2 11020701101 BERMIOK MARTAM PECHREAK PS 3 11020604201 YOKSAM DUBDI MONASTIC SCHOOL 4 11020204701 SORENG JAMBUDARA PS 5 11020201402 SORENG SIKKIM HOMES ACADEMY 6 11020202201 SORENG CHOTA SAMDONG JHS 7 11020100703 GYALSHING VISION ACADEMY DARAP 8 11020400801 DETAM MUKRUNG SS 9 11020700101 BERMIOK MARTAM BERMIOK MARTAM SS 10 11020200702 SORENG SPRINGDALE ACADEMY CHOOLS FOR WHICH NORTH DISTRICT SL.NO BLOCK SCHOOL NAME 1 11010200103 CHUNGTHANG CHATTEN PS 2 11010102009 MANGAN MANGAN PUBLIC SCHOOL 3 11010100101 MANGAN NADAY PS 4 11010300202 KABI GREENVALE ACADEMY 5 11010200207 CHUNGTHANG SARCHOCK JHS 6 11010102003 MANGAN RANGRANG UPS 7 11010301501 KABI PHENSONG SS 8 11010200301 CHUNGTHANG TASA TENGAY SEC. SCHOOL DATA FOU U-DISE CODE ND SOUTH DISTRICT SL.NO U-DISE CODE BLOCK SCHOOL NAME 1 11030701901 YANGANG UPPER NIYA PS 2 11030801101 SUMBUK BILLING PS 3 11030302001 TIMI UPPER TANAK PS 4 11030204101 RAVANGLA LINGDING PS 5 11030104004 NAMCHI MODEL ENGLISH SCHOOL 6 11030701801 YANGANG MANGZING JHS 7 11030103101 NAMCHI TINGRITHANG JHS 8 11030801401 SUMBUK MELLI BAZAAR SS 9 11030702001 YANGANG LINGEE SS 10 11030501201 SIKKIP SANGANATH SS AVA ILABLE) BLOC DETAILS OF REPORTING: 1. School Location: 95% of the Schools are located at ruralarea and almost all the schools in north districts are situated in tribal cluster and in other districts of Sikkim the Majority of schools were in Tribal and OBC area. Major findings/Analysis: Method of Analysis A comparative analysis of the U-DISE and sample checking data pertaining to variousaspects (variables) has been done and presented under three heads- 1) Proportion of schools where in the U-DISE data, the concerned informationis either not at all filled (the field is left blank or zero) or not available. 2) Proportion of schools where although the concerned information is filledin the U-DISE data, it does not match with the information provided to usduring the sample checking survey. 3) Proportion of schools where the concerned information is filled in theUDISE data and it matches with the information provided to us during theSample checking survey. The team has decided to make a 5% SampleSurvey Project by selecting 40 schools out of 1279 schools of four districts. The selected schools of different categories and levels covered for East,South, North and Westdistricts and which includes schools like Primary, Elementary Level, Secondary Level and SeniorSecondary Level. During the visit of all the 40 Schools we collected information on thefilled prescribed format. We collected information related to School Building and itsStructure, Infrastructure facilities provided to the schools, Staff of the schools,Enrollment of the students their attendance, and Grade wise examination. The detailsof the information collected above are mentioned tabular form below: The information filed in the U-DISE data about various school location and its particularsfurnished were matched with our information found in the period of survey. Thedetails of the schools have been mentioned below on the table accordingly District, Block,Ward, and Rural categories for all four District. Availability of Records As concerned with availability of records for survey checking we found that in 99% of schools, the records was readily available to us. During survey we found that overall physical condition of school records was found satisfactory in 98% school while in 2% schools it was not. We also noticed that in 4% school, record was not up-to- date.. Staff Analysis As per the table below generated from the data collected by TTWS we can come to the conclusion on the following points: EAST DISTRICT SL.NO 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 SCHOOL NAME SAJON THIMPEN PS KUMREK PS POST SANCTIONED 9 5 KAMBAL PS 8 5 PADMA KUMARI PUBLIC PHALAICHADARA JHS RHENOCK JHS LUING SS SANG SSS MACHONG SSS NANDOK SS SL NO NAME OF SCHO 6 9 ANSHU ACADEMY TARPIN SAALGHARI NO. IN POSITION 8 11 10 10 10 14 25 45 38 18 OLS (S WEST DISTRICT SL.NO 1 SCHOOL NAME TAPHEL PS 2 PECHREAK PS 3 DUBDI MONASTIC SCHOOL 4 JAMBUDARA PS 5 SIKKIM HOMES ACADEMY 6 CHOTA SAMDONG JHS 7 VISION ACADEMY DARAP 8 MUKRUNG SS 9 BERMIOK MARTAM SS 10 SPRINGDALE ACADEMY POST SANCTIONED NO. IN POSITION 5 5 5 6 2 5 8 2 8 13 7 19 25 14 CHOOLS FOR WHICH NORTH DISTRICT SL.NO 1 CHATTEN PS 2 MANGAN PUBLIC SCHOOL 3 NADAY PS 4 GREENVALE ACADEMY 5 SARCHOCK JHS 6 RANGRANG UPS 7 PHENSONG SS 8 TASA TENGAY SEC. SCHOOL DATA FOU SCHOOL NAME POST SANCTIONED NO. IN POSITION 5 4 7 5 6 9 8 9 12 20 12 SOUTH DISTRICT SL.NO 1 SCHOOL NAME UPPER NIYA PS 2 BILLING PS 3 UPPER TANAK PS 4 LINGDING PS 5 MODEL ENGLISH SCHOOL 6 MANGZING JHS 7 TINGRITHANG JHS 8 MELLI BAZAAR SS 9 LINGEE SS 10 SANGANATH SS POST SANCTIONED NO. IN POSITION 5 8 5 6 5 7 5 5 4 14 8 7 26 23 18 Comparison of data: Looking at the data collected through U-DISE and the PES survey there is not much deviation in data. Facilities in School There are various facilities provided to the schools which are listed below for thereference and comparison for the current academic session. 1. School Management 2. Status of School Building 3. School Category 4. Type of School 5. Condition of Class Room 6. Availability of Drinking water facility 7. Availability of Electricity in the School 8. Availability of Boys Toilet in the School 9. Availability of Girls Toilet in the School 10. Computer Room facilities 11. Library facilities 3 3 3 3 3 3 9 10 1 3 3 6 3 3 3 20 11 12 1 1 3 3 3 6 3 3 5 10 SANG SSS MACHONG SSS NANDOK SS Availability of Library 1 1 1 2 2 2 5 1 5 1 1 1 Computer Room 3 1 3 1 3 3 ANSHU ACADEMY TARPIN SAALGHARI PADMA KRI PUBLIC PHALAICHADARA JHS RHENOCK JHS LUING SS Availability of Girls Toilet 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 1 1 Availability of Toilet 3 3 SAJON THIMPEN PS KUMREK PS KAMBAL PS Availability of Electricity 1 1 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 3 4 3 3 3 3 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 7 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 5 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 MJ Mi G 1 2 Drinking Water Type of School 3 3 Condition of Class Room School Category Name of School School Management Sl.no Status of School Building EAST DISTRICT (U-DISE Data) 7 8 7 7 5 8 8 7 1 2 3 3 4 5 KAMBAL PS 1 5 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 6 1 3 2 2 3 3 8 8 8 ANSHU ACADEMY TARPIN SAALGHARI PADMA KRI PUBLIC PHALAICHADARA JHS RHENOCK JHS 3 1 3 3 2 3 7 9 LUING SS 1 3 6 3 10 SANG SSS 1 3 3 3 20 11 MACHONG SSS 1 3 3 3 5 12 NANDOK SS 1 3 6 3 10 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 5 3 4 3 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 3 1 1 1 2 2 3 1 1 1 1 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 MJ Mi G 6 7 Availability of Library 3 3 Computer Room 1 1 Availability of Girls Toilet 3 3 Availability of Toilet Type of School 1 1 Availability of Electricity School Category SAJON THIMPEN PS KUMREK PS Name of School Drinking Water Status of School Building 1 2 Sl.no Condition of Class Room School Management EAST DISTRICT (PES Data) 7 8 7 1 3 7 5 Drinking Water Availability of Electricity Availability of Toilet Availability of Girls Toilet Computer Room Availability of Library 3 1 1 1 2 2 3 2 1 1 2 2 6 3 2 1 1 2 1 3 5 3 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 3 3 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 6 3 1 1 1 2 1 3 6 3 6 2 3 1 1 1 1 2 1 3 6 3 6 3 3 1 1 1 2 2 5 1 6 3 12 3 1 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 3 2 PECHREAK PS 1 3 1 3 3 DUBDI MONASTIC SCHOOL 2 3 1 3 4 JAMBUDARA PS 1 3 1 3 5 SIKKIM HOMES ACADEMY 5 1 1 6 CHOTA SAMDONG JHS 1 3 7 VISION ACADEMY DARAP 5 2 8 MUKRUNG SS 1 9 BERMIOK MARTAM SS 10 SPRINGDALE ACADEMY G MJ 2 TAPHEL PS Name of School Mi 2 Type of School 1 School Category 1 Status of School Building 2 School Management 3 1 Sl.no Condition of Class Room WEST DISTRICT (U-DISE data) 6 6 2 4 1 2 Availability of Electricity Availability of Toilet Availability of Girls Toilet Computer Room Availability of Library 2 2 3 1 1 1 2 2 3 2 1 2 2 2 6 3 2 1 1 2 1 3 5 3 1 2 1 1 2 2 3 3 3 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 6 3 1 1 1 2 1 3 6 3 6 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 3 6 3 6 3 3 1 1 1 2 2 1 6 3 12 3 1 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 3 2 PECHREAK PS 1 3 1 3 3 DUBDI MONASTIC SCHOOL 2 3 1 3 4 JAMBUDARA PS 1 3 1 3 5 SIKKIM HOMES ACADEMY 5 1 1 6 CHOTA SAMDONG JHS 1 3 7 VISION ACADEMY DARAP 5 8 MUKRUNG SS 1 9 BERMIOK MARTAM SS 1 10 SPRINGDALE ACADEMY 5 G MJ TAPHEL PS Name of School Mi 1 Sl.no Condition of Class Room 1 Type of School 1 School Category 2 Status of School Building 3 School Management Drinking Water WEST DISTRICT (PES data) 6 6 2 4 1 2 G 5 SARCHOCK JHS 1 RANGRANG UPS PHENSONG SS TASA TENGAY SEC. 8 SCHOOL Availability of Library 3 GREENVALE ACADEMY Availability of Computer Room 6 1 Availability of Girls Toilet 3 NADAY PS Availability of Toilet 1 5 Availability of Electricity 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 MANGAN PUBLIC SCHOOL Availability of Drinking Water 1 1 1 2 2 2 6 CHATTEN PS 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 10 3 2 1 1 1 2 MJ 1 1 3 1 3 1 3 3 3 Condition of Class Room Type of School 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Mi School Category Name of School School Management Sl.no Status of School Building NORTH DISTRICT (U-DISE data) 1 3 1 3 3 9 3 6 7 5 5 6 3 5 GREENVALE ACADEMY 5 SARCHOCK JHS 1 RANGRANG UPS PHENSONG SS TASA TENGAY SEC. 8 SCHOOL 2 3 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 10 2 2 1 1 1 2 MJ 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Mi NADAY PS Availability of Library 3 5 Availability of Computer Room 1 MANGAN PUBLIC SCHOOL Availability of Girls Toilet 3 1 Availability of Toilet 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 CHATTEN PS Availability of Electricity 1 1 1 2 2 2 6 G 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Availability of Drinking Water Type of School 1 1 3 1 3 1 3 3 3 Condition of Class Room School Category Name of School School Management Sl.no Status of School Building NORTH DISTRICT (PES data) 1 3 3 6 7 4 5 1 2 3 7 3 1 Availability of Electricity Availability of Toilet Availability of Girls Toilet Computer Room Availability of Library 2 2 6 3 1 1 1 2 1 3 2 3 2 1 2 2 2 3 3 2 5 2 1 2 2 2 1 3 7 3 1 1 1 2 1 3 2 3 3 2 3 1 1 1 2 2 1 3 2 3 2 6 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 3 6 3 5 5 5 3 1 1 1 2 2 1 3 6 3 6 1 7 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 3 6 3 7 1 3 2 1 1 2 2 1 3 1 3 2 BILLING PS 1 3 1 3 3 UPPER TANAK PS 1 3 1 3 4 LINGDING PS 1 3 1 5 MODEL ENGLISH SCHOOL 5 1 6 MANGZING JHS 1 7 TINGRITHANG JHS 8 MELLI BAZAAR SS 9 LINGEE SS SANGANATH SS G 10 MJ UPPER NIYA PS Name of School Mi 1 Sl.no Condition of Class Room 1 Type of School 1 School Category 1 Status of School Building 3 School Management Drinking Water SOUTH DISTRICT (U-DISE data) 3 5 Availability of Electricity Availability of Toilet Availability of Girls Toilet Computer Room Availability of Library 2 2 1 2 1 3 2 3 2 1 2 2 1 3 3 2 5 2 1 2 2 2 1 3 7 3 1 1 2 2 1 3 2 3 3 2 3 1 1 1 2 2 1 3 2 3 2 6 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 6 3 5 5 5 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 6 3 7 2 6 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 3 6 3 7 1 3 2 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 3 2 BILLING PS 1 3 1 3 3 UPPER TANAK PS 1 3 1 3 4 LINGDING PS 1 3 1 5 MODEL ENGLISH SCHOOL 5 1 6 MANGZING JHS 1 7 TINGRITHANG JHS 8 MELLI BAZAAR SS 9 LINGEE SS SANGANATH SS G 10 MJ UPPER NIYA PS Name of School Mi 1 Sl.no Condition of Class Room 1 1 Type of School 1 1 School Category 1 3 Status of School Building 3 6 School Management Drinking Water SOUTH DISTRICT (PES data) 3 5 Managed by (School Management): [Department of Education = 1, Tribal/Social Welfare Department = 2, Local body = 3, Pvt. Aided = 4, Pvt. Unaided = 5] Status of School Building :[Private =1, Rented=2, Government=3] School category : [Primary=1, Primary with Upper Primary=2, Primary with upper primary and secondary/higher secondary =3, Upper Primary only =4, Upper Primary with secondary/higher secondary =5,Primary with upper primary and secondary =6] Type of school[Boys = 1, Girls = 2, Co-educational = 3] Condition of Class Room: [G=Good condition, Mi=Minor repair, Mj=major repair] Drinking water facility: [Hand pumps =1, Well =2, Tap water =3, others =4, none =5] Electricity connection in school:[Yes = 1, No = 2, Yes but not functional =3] Availability of Toilet: [Yes = 1, No = 2] Availability of Girls Toilet: [ Yes = 1, No = 2,] Computer Room: [ Yes = 1, No = 2] Availability of Library:[Yes = 1, No = 2,] a) Quantitative Value of items as per DISE Data - 40 b) Quantitative Value of items as per PES Data - 40 c) Quantitative Value of deviations ignoring + signs - 05 d) Percentage deviation of DISE Data with PES Data - 3% e) Precision level of DISE data with relation to PES Data - 97% 1) School Management: 100% of School Managementarecorrect as compared to the U-DISE data. 2) Status of School Building: Status of Building also found correct as compared to the U-DISE data. 100% of school building arePucca, and some ofthebuildings are Semi-Pucca and non of the school are kuccha in Secondary and Sr. Sec schools in Sikkim. 3) School Category:100% of School Category are correct as compared to the U-DISE data. 4) Type of School: All the School as the team visited wereCo-educational and that has matched with the U-DISE data also. 5) Condition of Class Room: All the school buildings are Pucca building almost 70% of the Classroom is in good condition as we found in the data and 30% of the school classroom is in need of minor repair and 5% percent needs major repairs. 6) Availability of Drinking water facility: Source of drinking water Facility in school on the selected school for 5% sample survey, we found data of 99% of the schools have tap water as the source but 10% school have not been sufficient water supply and proper connection of water supply. 7) Availability of Electricity in the School: When we visited in 40 schools andquery for the electrification we found 90% of schools have been fully electrified and 10% of the school is yet to be electrified. Simultaneously, comparison ofthe rural and urban schools of the four districts we found that some of the rural schools are leftout for electrification especially in West District. 8) Availability of Boys Toilet in the School : During the survey we found thatalmost all the Schools have Boys toilet and 15% of the school have still common toilet in all the districts. Theconditions of the toilet are not good due to a shortage of water facilities. We have also observed during survey, 70% of schools have their separate toilet for Teachers 9) Separate Toilet available for Girls: 99% of the school have separate toiletfor girls. 10) Computer Room Facilities: We collected the data that the most of the Schools do not have a proper computer lab. They are using some room on make or shift basis for computer classes. Only Secondary has exclusive Computer room. 90% of the schoolshave computer facilities from 1 set of computer to 18 sets of computer but 60% of the computers are not in working condition. 11) Library Facilities: When we visited in 45 schools andquery regarding library we found 60 % of schools have library and others do not have library facility due to school lake of space in school.Simultaneously, comparison of the rural and urban schools of the state we found rural schools are left out for Library. Enrolment of student by social categories: Given table below provide us the details of total enrolment and category enrollment of the school. The enrolment is categorized into Scheduled Tribe, Schedule Caste and Other Backward Class of the four districts in Sikkim Student Enrollment \EAST District KAMBAL PS 89 ANSHU ACADEMY 37 TARPIN SAALGHARI 44 PADMA KUMARI PUBLIC 64 PHALAICHADARA JHS 112 RHENOCK JHS 256 LUING SS 278 SANG SSS 526 MACHONG SSS 397 NANDOK SS 201 69 70 89 37 46 64 112 250 278 526 397 201 2 43 23 5 28 29 9 37 43 7 16 9 1 3 43 6 8 42 11 31 70 43 25 98 10 60 211 55 215 220 23 154 215 16 76 51 0 1 0 1 0 0 4 2 1 1 5 8 ST 0 1 0 0 0 0 4 2 1 1 6 12 SC 23 29 43 9 43 42 70 98 211 225 215 51 Total Enrolment 43 28 37 16 0 8 31 25 58 221 154 76 CWSN 73 2 5 9 7 1 6 11 43 8 55 23 16 OBC KUMREK PS CWSN 68 OBC SAJON THIMPEN PS ST 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Name of School PES Data SC Sl.no Total Enrolment U-DISE Data WEST District DUBDI MONASTIC SCHOOL 21 JAMBUDARA PS 38 SIKKIM HOMES ACADEMY 32 CHOTA SAMDONG JHS VISION ACADEMY DARAP 218 83 MUKRUNG SS 271 BERMIOK MARTAM SS 453 SPRINGDALE ACADEMY 228 40 25 21 37 32 216 83 271 460 228 38 2 18 5 21 0 26 11 0 32 146 67 60 19 143 134 190 225 85 111 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 ST 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 SC 2 5 0 11 32 67 19 134 225 111 Total Enrolment 38 18 21 26 0 148 60 143 185 85 CWSN 25 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 4 43 0 OBC PECHREAK PS CWSN 40 OBC TAPHEL PS ST 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Name of School PES Data SC Sl.no Total Enrolment U-DISE Data 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 4 43 0 NORTH District 2 72 GREENVALE ACADEMY 52 SARCHOCK JHS 78 83 CWSN 123 NADAY PS OBC 29 79 275 153 0 7 4 2 2 22 6 11 4 23 18 53 5 48 2 30 0 150 105 126 20 0 0 0 0 0 3 4 249 29 123 2 79 72 52 78 ST 249 MANGAN PUBLIC SCHOOL 15 SC 0 0 0 0 0 3 4 Total Enrolment CWSN 11 4 23 18 53 5 48 2 30 0 150 100 126 20 15 ST 279 153 0 7 4 2 2 22 6 CHATTEN PS RANGRANG UPS PHENSONG SS TASA TENGAY SEC. 8 SCHOOL PES Data OBC 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Name of School SC Sl.no Total Enrolment U-DISE Data 83 SOUTH District 24 UPPER TANAK PS 44 LINGDING PS MODEL ENGLISH SCHOOL MANGZING JHS TINGRITHANG JHS MELLI BAZAAR SS LINGEE SS SANGANATH SS 33 19 228 54 634 361 258 82 24 44 33 19 228 54 635 361 255 1 0 2 0 0 11 0 2 6 2 ST 2 50 30 0 4 19 6 15 21 0 10 23 1 0 17 9 48 171 0 13 41 88 102 312 5 172 88 11 101 120 SC Total Enrolment 1 0 2 0 0 11 0 2 6 2 ST 50 30 4 19 15 21 10 23 0 17 48 171 13 41 100 312 172 88 101 123 CWSN BILLING PS 2 0 6 0 1 9 0 88 5 11 OBC 82 CWSN UPPER NIYA PS PES Data OBC 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Name of School SC Sl.no Total Enrolment U-DISE Data As it is evident from the above table that overall variations are negligible, however it is noted that in some cases enrolment in DCFs are not clear( i.eoverwrited or rubbed and enrolment data mismatched same DCF) .As concerned the school wise comparative analysis of data in primary level enrolment deviation was ranging between 0% to 1.5%. It was found during survey that in some schools the DCF were not properly filled by the teachers. However deviation in total enrollment is negligible. Disabled Students We began by examining the internal consistency of the U-DISE data regarding disable students. In 100% school data regarding disabled student matches with survey data as a result no variation was reported in disabled student data. a) Quantitative Value of items as per DISE Data - 40 b) Quantitative Value of items as per PES Data - 40 c) Quantitative Value of deviations ignoring + signs - 02 d) Percentage deviation of DISE Data with PES Data - 2% e) Precision level of DISE data with relation to PES Data - 98% CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS Like previous year, this year too visiting the schools under 5% sample survey has been a learning experience for all of us (involved in this survey project). It’s been like adventurous trip with full of learning and practical experiences. We went every school with open mind and did share all of the concerns, problems and obviously required data of the school. Frankly we went beyond our schedule documentation to observe the ground reality. This trip did provide us a broad picture about the whole system, implementation of different schemes, teacher’s training and its impact on daily school schedule and other aspects concerning with the schools administration. This visit also provided us the opportunity to watch the whole proceeding and documentation of the school. So certainly we have something to share with the funding agency about the average observations and problems to the SSA officials. The U-DISE format for collecting the data is well structured fulfilling all the features of good schedule. It consists of simple and straight forward points using verySimple language. The objectives of the survey/enquiry, the questions/items are put and arranged in logical order.However, there are some methodological confusion still exists with teachers. Therefore, training on U-DISE Data Collection Format should be long enough to discuss all the issues.. It is found that there is no significant deviation except in few cases, between UDISE& Sample Survey Data relating to almost all the indicators of education for the 4 sampleDistricts. The overall deviation of U-DISE data from sample data taking into consideration all the items and sub items for all the 4 districts is very much acceptable except in fewexceptional cases where the deviation is possible. This indicates that the collection & maintenance of data in U-DISE. There is no manipulation of data anywhere for any of the indicators as there is no significant difference in data between the two surveys. The major objective of the study was to assess the degree of deviation and get the precision level of U-DISE data vis‐à‐vis Post Enumeration Survey (PES) data, so as to suggest appropriate remedial measure for strengthening the U-DISEsystem in Sikkim. As such the number of total schools were covered under sample checking are 40 schools of four districts namely, North and South, East and West Sikkim. While observing whole process of data collection under U-DISE, particularly on the basis of scrutiny of U-DISE formats of sample schools the following suggestions are offered to make the data collection process more effective, reliable and error free. Some of our findings/suggestions are as under 1. The purpose and object of the data collection should always be precise and clear not only in the minds of those who plan for these surveys and studies but must be disseminated to the respondent data collectors well before the launch of the study. The Principals/Head-teachers of the school must be given orientations on the purpose of U-DISE data collection. 2. During survey it was observed that major deviation are due to conceptual error made during filling up few needed information in U-DISE format by the concerned school head master/ teacher. It is suggested that proper training should be given for conceptual clarity. 3. In most of the schools we observed that Head Teachers/Principals were not aware about the purpose and importance of the information for which that was provided. So it is strongly recommended again that they should be informed about the need, importance and utility of the U-DISE data which would definitely motivate them to respond precisely and reliably. It would certainly be more appropriate to outsource the entire U-DISE training to any wellexperienced professional agency, rather than present system. 4. During survey we found that in most of schools SMC playing a good role in school management. Schools conditions and status had improved after the formation of SMC. But in few cases people in SMC are not aware. They should be motivated about their duties. 5. Financial aspect like School Grant & TLM grant should be covered in 5% sample checking format. It was observed that in some schools even the aid received from SSA not utilized. 6. U-DISE format filled by the teacher in schools further should be properly checked by concerned CRC/BRC so that inconsistency of data can be reduced. We have analyzed that in U-DISE DCF some aspects have been left blank and the format has been counter signed by concerned authority we also analyzed that many DCF were not signed by Teacher (in-charge) and BRCC. So DCF should be properly checked by higher authority also and care should be taken future. 7. It was found that overall enrolment of school does not vary too much, but some variation was found in enrolment of boys and girls separately. 8. It was found that in some schools record was not up-to date. We also observed that there is not proper monitoring in some schools. During the survey we found in some schools BRCC/CRCC had not visited the school from last long time. So proper monitoring of school should be conducted time to time for quality work and quality education. 9. We have observed that no teaching learning aid material (TLM) available in many schools . There is no column in PES format for TLM. 10. Specified time for 5% sample checking of U-DISE particularly for Data analysis is not sufficient. So it should be increased to get best results. 11. Social Aspects of this survey: - It’s general concept that the quality of primary education have improved a lot under the implementation of SSA. It has a greater impact on infrastructure but now it’s time to focus more on quality of education on ground level. We did talk to some of the parents and some of the members of school management committee (SMC) in almost all the schools. What we found that people are not happy with grading system and at some extent with continuous comprehensive evaluation (CCE). We found enough voices against these two aspects. We also found that teachers are not sure about the parameters as far as CCE is concerned. So certainly its matter of great concern that parents are not satisfied with the level of education that is being provided in the school. 12. DISE data should be declared as official data to get maximum accuracy.