1. education
2. school

5% Sample Checking of DISE
data of Gujarat State 2011-12
Principal investigator
D . R. C. Patel
Research Associate
M . Rugi P. A
Sponsored by
Gujarat Council of Elementary Education
Gandhinagar
Centre of Advanced Study in Education
Faculty of Education and Psychology
The Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda
Vadodara
February 2013
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We, the members of DISE project, take this opportunity to express 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 contribution in the field of educational research.
We, at the outset are extremely grateful to Mr. Manoj Agrawal (IAS), State Project Director, DPEP /
SSA, Gujarat Council of Primary Education, for his co-operation and support in the project. It is also a
pleasure to recall the motivation, support and co-operation provided by Mr. V. G. Modi, Officer In Charge,
REMS, Gandhinagar. We also place on record our warm hearted thanks to Mr. Asif Savant and Mr.
Vishal Soni, Officer In-charge MIS, Gandhinagar for providing the technical support during the project.
We also sincerely thank Dr. D. R. Sharma, GCPE, Gandhinagar for attending our queries and guiding us
to facilitate our work.
We are highly obliged with the support provided by Prof. S. C. Panigrahi, Head In-charge, Department of
Education, Faculty of Education and Psychology, the Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda,
Vadodara. We record our sincere acknowledgement to Prof. R. G. Kothari, Dean, Faculty of Education
and Psychology, the Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, Vadodara for rendering guidance whenever
required. We specially acknowledge the invaluable co-operation and timely assistance rendered by
authorities of the Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda in prompt approval of the various procedures
and requirements for the smooth conduct of the project.
We also acknowledge the co-operation of District Project Coordinators. We place on record our most
sincere thanks to Mr. Umesh Patel, MIS, Panchmahal, Mr. Vipul Jogiya, MIS, Porbandar and Mr.
Rashmikant Damor MIS, Surendranagar and all the coordinators of BRC and CRC for their unstinted
efforts and co-operation during the field work by the Field Investigators. Their support enhanced the
efficiency of our Field Investigators in accomplishing data collection timely. The invaluable co-operation
extended by the Head Teacher and Teachers of the schools in collection of relevant data is highly
appreciated by the Project Team.
We are also thankful to Mr. Nareshbhai Shah for providing secretarial assistance.
Finally, we would like to thank Gujarat Council of Elementary Education, Gandhinagar, for providing
the financial support which enabled us to carry out this fruitful academic research.
Dr. R. C. Patel
Principal Investigator
Ms. Rugi P. A
Research Associate
i
CONTENTS
TOPIC
Acknowledgement
Table of Contents
List of Tables
List of Graphs
List of Abbreviations
Executive Summary
Page No.
i
ii
iv
vi
vii
viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter I Introduction
Page No.
1.0.0
Introduction
001
1.1.0
Elementary Education in India
001
1.2.0
Need for an Information System in Education
002
1.3.0
DISE 2001
003
1.4.0
Statement of the Study
004
1.5.0
Objectives of the Study
004
1.6.0
Methodology
004
1.6.1
Sample of the Study
004
1.6.2
Description of Tool
007
1.6.3
Data Collection
008
1.6.4
Data Analysis
010
Chapter 2 Analysis And Interpretation Of Data Of All The Three Districts
2.0.0
Introduction
011
2.1.0
Analysis and Interpretation of the Data
012
2.2.0
Overview of Midday meal Provision in all the three districts
028
2.3.0
Conclusion
031
Chapter 3 Analysis And Interpretation Of Data Of Panchmahal District
3.0.0
Introduction
032
3.1.0
Analysis and Interpretation of the Data
033
3.2.0
Overview of Midday meal Provision in Panchmahal district
046
3.3.0
Conclusion
048
3.3.1
Remarks from Officer-In-Charge, MIS, Panchmahal
049
3.3.2
Suggestions to improve quality of data from MIS In-Charge
050
Chapter 4 Analysis And Interpretation Of Data Of Porbandar District
4.0.0
Introduction
051
4.1.0
Analysis and Interpretation of the Data
052
ii
4.2.0
Overview of Midday meal Provision in Porbandar district
4.3.0
Conclusion
4.3.1
Remarks from Officer-In-Charge, MIS, Porbandar
4.3.2
Suggestions to improve quality of data from MIS In-Charge
Chapter 5 Analysis And Interpretation Of Data Of Surendranagar District
5.0.0
Introduction
5.1.0
Analysis and Interpretation of the Data
5.2.0
Overview of Midday meal Provision in Surendranagar district
5.3.0
Conclusion
5.3.1
Remarks from Officer-In-Charge, MIS, Surendranagar
5.3.2
Suggestions to improve quality of data from MIS In-Charge
Chapter 6 Findings, Conclusion and Suggestions
6.0.0
Introduction
6.1.0
Major Findings
6.1.1
Findings based on comparison of data
6.1.2
Findings regarding the status of midday meal
6.1.3
Findings regarding teacher and student attendance of day of survey
6.1.4
Findings regarding the feedback on record maintenance and school
organisation
6.2.0
Conclusion
6.3.0
Suggestions to improve quality of data
065
067
068
069
References
095
Appendices
096
070
071
084
086
087
088
089
089
089
090
090
091
092
092
Appendix A: A copy of the letter from the GCEE to DPEOs of three selected
Districts
Appendix B: List of Schools in the Sample of the Study
096
097
Appendix C: Letter from CRCC confirming the irregularity of Principal of one
school from Halol, Panchmahal district
106
Appendix D: List of Field Investigators of the Project
107
Appendix E: Tool for Data Collection (DISE DCF for 5% Sample Checking)
in English
108
iii
LIST OF TABLES
Table No.
Title
Chapter 1: Introduction
Sample of the Study
Details of schools dropped from sample from each district with reasons
Initial sample, Panchmahal District
Initial sample, Porbandar District
Initial sample, Surendranagar District
Schedule for the training conducted for project staff
List of Schools visited by Field Investigators during training on 3rd
1.6.7
December, 2012
1.6.7
Schedule for the data collection
Chapter 2: Analysis and Interpretation Of Data Of All The Three Districts
2.1.1
Distribution of Schools by Educational Qualification of Principal
2.1.2
Distribution of the schools by experience of Principal in Present school
2.1.3
Distribution of schools by category
2.1.4
Distribution of schools by type of school
2.1.5
Distribution of schools by management
2.1.6
Distribution of schools by type & situation
2.1.7
Distribution of the Schools with respect to staff
2.1.8
Distribution of schools by Facility
(CASE)Student enrolment and attendance details of children on day of
2.1.9
survey
2.1.10
(CASE) Grade wise examination details for last academic year (2010-11)
2.1.11
CASE: Grade wise examination details for present academic year 2011-12
2.1.12
(CASE)Feedback about record maintenance and school organization
1.6.1
1.6.2
1.6.3
1.6.4
1.6.5
1.6.6
Page
No.
04
05
06
06
07
08
10
12
13
13
13
14
14
15
15
18
19
19
20
2.1.13
(CASE)Attributes pertaining to Principal/Head Teacher towards
Investigation as in Investigator’s feedback schedule
22
2.1.14
(CASE)Comparison of Feedback about record maintenance and school
organization amongst the three districts
23
2.1.15
(CASE) Comparison of Student's enrolment and attendance of the schools
of all the district
26
2.1.16
(CASE) Comparison of Teacher's detail and students attendance of the
schools of all the districts
(CASE)Status of MDM in all three districts
Chapter 3: Analysis and Interpretation Of Data Of Panchmahal
Distribution of Schools by Educational Qualification of Principal
Distribution of the schools by experience of Principals in present schools
Distribution of the schools by category
27
2.2.1
3.1.1
3.1.2
3.1.3
29
33
33
34
iv
Table
No.
3.1.4
3.1.5
3.1.6
3.1.7
3.1.8
3.1.9
3.1.10
3.1.11
3.1.12
3.1.13
3.1.14
3.1.15
3.1.16
3.1.17
3.2.1
4.1.1
4.1.2
4.1.3
4.1.4
4.1.5
4.1.6
4.1.7
4.1.8
4.1.9
4.1.10
4.1.11
4.1.12
4.1.13
4.1.14
4.1.15
4.1.16
4.1.17
4.2.1
Title
Page
No.
Distribution of schools by type of school
Distribution of schools by Management
Distribution of schools by Type and Situation
Distribution of schools by the year of establishment
Distribution of schools by the lowest and highest class in school
Distribution of the Schools with respect to staff
Distribution of the Schools by Facility
Students enrolment in Previous Academic year (2010-11)
Students enrolment in Current Academic year (2011-12)
(CASE)Student enrolment and attendance details of children on day of
survey
(CASE) Grade wise examination details for last academic year (2010-11)
CASE: Grade wise examination details for current academic year 2011-12
(CASE)Attributes pertaining to Principal/Head Teacher towards
Investigation as in Investigator’s feedback schedule
(CASE)Feedback about record maintenance and school organization
(CASE)Status of MDM in Panchmahal District
Chapter 4: Analysis and Interpretation Of Data Of Porbandar District
Distribution of Schools by Educational Qualification of Principal
34
34
35
35
36
36
37
40
41
Distribution of the schools by experience of Principals / Head teacher in
present schools
Distribution of the schools by category
Distribution of schools by type of school
Distribution of schools by Management
Distribution of schools by Type and Situation
Distribution of schools by the year of establishment
Distribution of schools by the lowest and highest class in school
Distribution of the Schools with respect to staff
Distribution of the Schools by Facility
Students enrolment in Previous Academic year (2010-11)
Students enrolment in Current Academic year (2011-12)
(CASE): Student enrolment and attendance details of children on the day
of survey
(CASE) Grade wise examination details for last academic year (2010-11)
CASE: Grade wise examination details for current academic year 2011-12
(CASE) Attributes pertaining to Principal/Head Teacher towards
Investigation as in Investigator’s feedback schedule
(CASE) Feedback about record maintenance and school organization
(CASE) Status of MDM in Porbandar district
53
42
43
43
44
45
47
52
53
53
53
54
54
55
55
56
59
60
61
62
62
63
64
66
v
Table
No.
Title
Chapter 5: Analysis and Interpretation Of Data Of Surendranagar District
5.1.1
Distribution of Schools by Educational Qualification of Principal
Distribution of the schools by experience of Principals / Head teacher in
5.1.2
present schools
5.1.3
Distribution of the schools by category
5.1.4
Distribution of schools by type of school
5.1.5
Distribution of schools by Management
5.1.6
Distribution of schools by Type and Situation
5.1.7
Distribution of schools by the year of establishment
5.1.8
Distribution of schools by the lowest and highest class in school
5.1.9
Distribution of the Schools with respect to staff
5.1.10
Distribution of the Schools by Facility
5.1.11
Students enrolment in Previous Academic year (2010-11)
5.1.12
Students enrolment in Current Academic year (2011-12)
(CASE): Student enrolment and attendance details of children on the day
5.1.13
of survey
5.1.14
(CASE) Grade wise examination details for last academic year (2010-11)
5.1.15
CASE: Grade wise examination details for current academic year 2011-12
(CASE) Attributes pertaining to Principal/Head Teacher towards
5.1.16
Investigation as in Investigator’s feedback schedule
5.1.17
(CASE) Feedback about record maintenance and school organization
5.2.1
(CASE) Status of MDM in Surendranagar district
Page
No.
71
71
72
72
72
73
73
73
74
75
78
79
80
81
81
82
83
85
LIST OF GRAPHS
Graph
No.
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
2.1
2.2
2.3
3.1
4.1
5.1
Title
Sample of the study
Final sample, Panchmahal district
Final Sample, Porbandar district
Final sample, Surendranagar district
Percentage of students present on the day of visit
Comparison of teacher’s in position with teacher’s present on day of visit
Midday meal provision, Gujarat
Midday meal provision, Panchmahal district
Midday meal provision, Porbandar district
Midday meal provision, Surendranagar district
Page
No.
05
06
06
07
26
27
28
46
65
84
vi
LIST OF ABBREVATIONS
ATD
: Art Teacher Diploma
AWP & B
: Annual Work Plan and Budget
B. Ed.
: Bachelors in Education
BRC
: Block Resource Centre
BRCC
: Block Resource Centre Coordinator
CASE
: Centre of Advanced Study in Education
CRC
: Cluster Resource Centre
CRCC
: Cluster Resource Centre Coordinator
DCF
: Data Capture Format
DISE
: District Information System for Education
DPEP
: District Primary Education Programme
GCEE
: Gujarat Council of Elementary Education
HSC
: Higher Secondary School Certificate
M. Ed.
: Masters in Education
MHRD
: Ministry of Human Resource Development
MIS
: Management Information System
MDM
: Midday Meal
No.
: Number
NUEPA
: National University of Educational Planning and Administration
OBC
: Other Backward Classes
PTC
: Primary Teachers Certificate
SC
: Scheduled Caste
SMC
: School Management Committee
SSC
: Secondary School Certificate
SSA
: Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan
ST
: Scheduled Tribe
UNICEF
: United Nations International Children’s Education Fund
UEE
: Universalization of Elementary Education
UP
: Upper Primary
%
: Percentage
vii
INTRODUCTION
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
DISE, is one of the most prestigious projects to create a comprehensive database on
elementary education in India as developed by the National University on Educational
Planning and Administration. The project covers both Primary and Upper Primary Schools
across the districts of the country. The data regarding the elementary schools of the state is
collected, analyzed and made available to all the concerned. This data is utilized for
important planning activities such as fund allocation for achieving the objective of
universalization of the primary education. Since the utilization of the data collected is for an
important purpose, it becomes very important that data be authenticated. The present study is
about the authentication of the collected DISE data.
STATEMENT OF THE STUDY
5% Sample Checking of DISE Data of Gujarat State 2011– 2012
OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The following were the objectives set for the study to be conducted:
1.
To collect the data from the schools regarding school particulars, enrolment, repeaters
and readmission, extra facilities and examination results along with the feedback of
investigators
2.
To compare the data collected by the project team of CASE with the same set of data
collected for the same academic year by Gujarat Council of Elementary Education
3.
To find out the status of midday meal provision in the schools of each district selected
for the study
SAMPLE OF THE STUDY
The sample for the study was 221 schools from three districts viz. Panchmahal, Porbandar
and Surendranagar selected using systematic random sampling method. The sample was later
reduced to 217 due to technical difficulties in data collection.
DESCRIPTION OF THE TOOL
School Information Schedule: A DISE DCF was developed by NUEPA for all the states of
India. It consists of five parts seeking to collect information regarding the following heads:
School location particulars, School particulars, Staff details, Facilities in school and Student
enrolment, attendance and academic achievement details.
viii
Investigator’s Feed-back Schedule: This is a separate form which includes the particulars of
the school, the attributes of the principal and teachers, their efficiency in giving required
information, the maintenance of the data and clarity in providing it, the overall impression of
the school, the report on the availability and quality of mid-day meal as found by the
investigator on the day of visit.
DATA COLLECTION
The principal investigator for the project conducted the interviews for the staff required for
the project at the CASE, Department of Education, Faculty of Education and Psychology,
The Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, Vadodara. The selected team for the project
selected included one research associate and eight field investigators. Three day training [i.e.
01.12.2012, 02.12.2012 and 03.12.2012], of the selected staff for the data collection using
DISE DCF, was conducted by the principal investigator. The training started with the
explanation of the project objectives and importance of DISE. They were explained their role
in providing the authentic data for the study. They were given time to understand the whole
procedure of data collection through the DCF and clarify their doubts. Then each field
investigator (FI) was given real field experience with the schools in Vadodara itself for
practice in DISE DCF filling. These schools were not from the sample of the study. Then
their experience and data collected was discussed thoroughly. Then Role play was conducted
by one FI being the principal and the other FI the person to collect the data. They filled in the
DCFs by the assumed data given by the principal and then there was role reversal and same
activity was conducted. Then the possible difficulties affecting the procedure of data
collection was discussed.
The entire team of FIs visited each district together. The data collection started on 4 th
December, 2012 from Porbandar district and was completed on 29th December, 2012 in
Panchmahal district. The data collection was accomplished before time. The data for the
selected schools as collected by GCEE was also obtained from the state MIS Office for the
comparison.
DATA ANALYSIS
Data analysis was done using categorization, coding, tabulation and statistical analysis.
Content analysis technique was also used for the analysis of the subjective responses. The
two sets of data collected; one by GCEE and the second one by team of field investigators
ix
from CASE were processed in the same manner for the comparative study to identify the
consistency in the data obtained from two different sources.
MAJOR FINDINGS
The major findings of the study conducted are presented in four subparts; one findings based
on comparison of data, second findings based on status of midday meal, third the findings
based on teacher and student attendance on day of survey and lastly findings regarding the
feedback on record maintenance and school organization.
Findings based on comparison of data
On comparing the data obtained from GCEE and CASE for the three districts following were
the findings:

The consistency is observed regarding most of the variables. All the variables showing
consistency were not the same for each district.

The level of consistency was observed to be good with respect to the following
variables in all the districts: distribution of schools by category, distribution of school
by type and situation and distribution of schools by type of school.

Inconsistency was observed in all the districts with respect to the distribution of schools
by management, distribution of schools by the qualification of the principal of the
school, distribution of schools with experience of principal in the same school.

The level of inconsistency differed for different variables within the district and among
the districts.

The data from Surendranagar district showed good consistency, compared to other
districts in the study.
Findings regarding the Status of midday meal
The findings related to the status of midday meal were drawn from the responses obtained in
the investigators feedback Schedule of DISE DCF (CASE). These findings could be
subjective as description of quality of same food for different individuals could be different,
especially when the description is asked and no criterion is mentioned. The following were
the findings regarding the midday meal provision in the schools:

In many schools the quality of food served on the day of visit is described to be good.

Panchmahal district shows highest number of schools with MDM facility but quality of
food and sincerity from the authorities in making it a regular feature is a concern. In
x
Panchmahal district only 41.5% of the schools provided food according to the menu,
even though this district shows highest number of favorable aspects of MDM such as
in-charge for MDM in schools (95.9%), Menu displayed in school (95.1%), food
cooked in the school premises (98.4%), etc. Surendranagar district records highest
percentage of the schools (77.8%) providing the food according to the menu on the day
of visit.

The quality of food was also described to be hygienically cooked in very few cases.
Hygiene becomes secondary consideration when the schools are not ready to take the
responsibility of planning and provide midday meal consistently. The maintenance of
cleanliness during cooking, storing and serving food to the children is also seen in good
number of schools in the state (more than 60.0% of the schools). Porbandar district
showed 87.5% of the schools serving MDM maintaining cleanliness during serving the
food to the children.

The description of the quality of food raises many issues, such as; healthy and
hygienically cooked food, availability of menu for the provision, insufficient stock,
unavailability of the MDM cooking staff, lack of interest from children in availing
MDM, etc. which needs to be looked upon.
Findings regarding teacher and student attendance on day of survey
The findings related to the attendance of teachers and students on the day of survey were
obtained after analysis the data for the same which was available with CASE only. The
following were the findings:

Panchmahal district shows lowest attendance of teachers (75.14%) and students
(61.27%) on the day of visit far below average of the state (all the three districts
combined in this study). This is a serious issue to be addressed with immediacy and if
this is a consistent situation in the district then it has to be taken care of.

Highest attendance of the teachers on the day of survey is shown in Porbandar district
(80.57%). In Porbandar district, teachers have been appointed in all the posts
sanctioned for teachers in school. Highest attendance of students on the day of survey is
shown in Surendranagar district (82.68%).
xi

On an average considering the three districts together, the teacher’s attendance is found
to be 76.09% and student’s attendance 68.99%, on the day of survey for the state.
About 98.04% of seats sanctioned for the teachers are filled in state.
Findings regarding the feedback on record maintenance and school organization
The findings related to the record maintenance and school organization was obtained after
analysis the data for the same which was available with CASE only. The following were the
findings:

In 95.39% schools the complete data was obtained in the first visit itself.

Information pertaining to enrolment and details of pass percentage was obtained easily
in 82.49% while 17.51% of schools still found it difficult to provide information.

Of the total 217 schools in 67(30.88%) schools the details regarding the enrolment
were not compiled in a single register while in 149(68.66%) schools they could be
obtained from single register.

In 184 (84.79%) schools the attendance was maintained while in 32 (14.75%) schools
this was not observed.

Of the total 217 schools in 190 (87.56%) schools principals had year-end summary
details of children for all grades.

The school report card was available in only 44.7% schools. Panchmahal has highest
number of schools having report cards and Porbandar has the least number of school
having report cards on the day of survey.

In 84.79% schools the attendance register was properly maintained and kept in
almirahs. About 94.0% of schools had a display board.

In only 58.06% of the schools teachers came to school on time. In 79.26% schools the
teachers in the school fill up the attendance regularly.

In 67.28% of the cases the investigators did not find any problem in getting the
required information from the school. Only 46.08% of the schools had the copy of
filled in DISE DCF.

In 88.9% of the schools the provision of midday meal was observed. Still there are
about 11.1% of the schools which do not provide MDM.
xii
Conclusion
The study conducted here reflects that overall the system of DISE is in place at all levels
(School, Cluster, Block, District and State). The staff associated with DISE are provided with
sufficient physical facilities to complete the work in time and effectively. Still some
misunderstanding does exist in certain aspects of the DISE format (e.g. understanding of the
school management especially among ‘educational department’ and ‘local body’ and
experience of head teacher/principal in the school they are serving). The comparison of the
data obtained from GCEE and CASE for the three districts shows consistency with respect to
some variables and minor variations are observed in the remaining variables. The midday
meal provision was found to be present in only about 88.9% of the schools visited. The effort
to facilitate MDM provision in schools was seen but the implementation part still lacks
effectiveness. The quality of food was also described to be good by the investigators in many
of the cases, but there are serious issues which need to be looked upon regarding the way the
provision is made available to the children of the school. The attitude of the authorities
towards the MDM provision in schools needs to be reoriented to make it effective. The
unavailability of school report cards and the awareness of its importance among the school
authorities is a serious concern which has been highlighted in the findings.
xiii
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.0.0 Introduction
District Information System for Education (DISE), is one of the most prestigious projects
to create a comprehensive database on elementary education in India as developed by the
National University on Educational Planning and Administration. The project covers both
Primary and Upper Primary Schools across the districts of the country. The data regarding
the elementary schools of the state is collected, analyzed and made available to all the
concerned. This data is utilized for important planning activities such as fund allocation
for achieving the objective of universalization of the primary education. Since the
utilization of the data collected is for an important purpose, it becomes very important that
data be authenticated. The present study is about the authentication of the collected DISE
data.
1.1.0 Elementary Education in India
Elementary education in India means eight years of Schooling from the age of six. The
government has made elementary education compulsory and free. But, the goal of
universal elementary education in India has been very difficult to achieve till now.
Therefore, innovative ways of universalizing elementary education were introduced. In
order to effectively decentralize the management, it has involved Panchayati Raj
Institutions, School Management Committees, Village and Urban Slum Level Education
Committees, Parent Teacher Associations, Mother Teacher Associations, Tribal
Autonomous Councils and other grassroots level structures. Major interventions to achieve
UEE are Ashram School, Inner-Village School, Operation Blackboard, Lok Jumbish
Project, Strengthening of Teacher Education, National Programme of Nutritional Support
for Primary Education, District Primary Education Programme (DPEP) and Sarva Shiksha
Abhiyan (SSA).
The Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan is an effort to universalize useful and relevant elementary
education by community-ownership of the school system for all children in the age group
of 6 to 14 years by 2010. As it is a response to the demand for quality basic education,
another goal is to bridge social, regional and gender gaps, with the active participation of
the community in the management of school all over the country. The aim of SSA
programme is an attempt to provide an opportunity for improving human capabilities to all
children and master their natural environment in a manner that allows the fullest
1
harnessing of their human potential both spiritually and materially. SSA has also realized
importance of early childhood care and education and looks at 0-14 age as a continuum.
SSA has also established basic objectives such as all children in School, Education
Guarantee Centre, alternate School, ‘Back-to-School’ camp by 2003; all children complete
five years of primary schooling by 2007 and eight years of elementary schooling by 2010.
SSA had set few norms for the interventions to improve and develop the infrastructure of
the school. All possible steps have been taken to achieve the goals.
1.2.0 Need for an Information System in Education
The Indian educational system is one of the largest in the world. Planning as well as
management of school education has primarily been a state subject although the central
government also legislates in this area. The large size and complex educational structures
across Indian states makes the matters of policy making, planning and monitoring highly
complex and complicated.
In order to improve the quality and effectiveness of educational planning and
management, not only variety of data are required but they are also needed at a time and in
a format that conforms to the requirements of the user agencies operating at various
geographical and administrative hierarchies. The complexity of the multilevel decisionmaking process and control mechanism increases due to wide geographical dispersion of
institutional network representing a variety of school locations and endowments. Further,
due to the large variations in school structures, endowments and availability of teaching
learning resources, the matter becomes more complicated.
Design and management of a consistent, efficient and a functional information system for
such a dispersed institution network is a major challenge faced by the educational sector.
Decentralization of educational management requires a very strong and efficient system of
data collection and management. The benefits from improved, consistent and timely
available information are enormous. Apart from providing the right kind of signals to
educational administrators, they also help in sharply focusing on the scarce resources for
areas/activities where these are most needed. The revitalization of data collection,
analysis, reporting and sharing among users’ agencies is an absolute necessity to bring
about educational reforms in an effective, efficient and sustainable manner. The active
involvement of policy planners, decision makers, educational administrators, researchers,
as well as educationists is required.
The first version of this software named District Information System for Education (DISE)
was released during the middle of 1995 and provided the necessary technical and
2
professional support to DPEP districts. The major emphasis was on user orientation in the
use of educational and allied data for planning, management, monitoring as well as
feedback on DPEP interventions.
1.3.0 DISE 2001
The NUEPA has created a comprehensive database on elementary education in India
under one of its most prestigious projects, known, as DISE. The project covers both
Primary and Upper Primary School/sections of all the districts of the country. The
remarkable aspect about DISE is that it has completely eliminated the time-lag in
availability of educational statistics which has come down drastically from 7-8 years to
less than a year at the national level and only a few months at the district and state levels.
DISE is supported by the MHRD and UNICEF.
DISE is conceived as the backbone of an integrated educational management information
system operational at the district, state and the national level. DISE 2001 is the latest
update of the school information system being implemented in the DPEP and other
districts of India. Presently the system covers all school imparting education up to
elementary stage and it collects and computerizes detailed data on school location,
management, teachers, school buildings and equipment, students by gender and age,
incentives and the number of disabled children in various grades. The districts/states have
flexibility of adding additional variables according to their needs.
The software is organized into eight modules and provides for Computerization and
analysis of school data in a variety of ways. It also provides for users specified queries and
statistical analysis and aggregation of data at Cluster, Block and District level. Facilities
for export of data into commonly used formats are included in the software. Decision
makers at various administrative levels can use DISE 2001 in a variety of ways to enhance
their decision making capabilities.
In addition to DISE, many additional mechanisms for data validation and quality control
of school statistics were also introduced. First, a 5-10% validation check is undertaken in
all districts immediately after data collection. Second, the software provides for many
consistency and validation checks. Third, a national survey is conducted every 2-3 years to
establish the quality and reliability of DISE data. Fourth, the reverse flow of data has been
strengthened to ensure transparency and dissemination of data up to the school level.
Every year, once the DISE data of whole state is entered and compiled at state level by
GCEE, 5% sample checking of DISE data is undertaken by an external agency to
authenticate the DISE data collected.
3
1.4.0 Statement of the Study
5% Sample Checking of DISE Data of Gujarat State 2011– 2012
1.5.0 Objectives of the Study
The following were the objectives set for the study to be conducted:
To collect the data from the school, regarding school particulars, enrolment,
1
repeaters and readmission, extra facilities and examination results along with the
feedback of investigators
2
To compare the data collected by the project team of CASE with the same set of data
collected for the same academic year by Gujarat Council of Elementary Education
3
To find out the status of midday meal provision in the schools of each district
selected for the study
1.6.0
Methodology
1.6.1
Sample of the Study
For the present study three districts namely Panchmahal, Porbandhar and Surendranagar
were selected by the office of SPD, Gujarat Council of Elementary Education,
Gandhinagar.
The list of school in the selected districts was procured from the office of SPD. Systematic
random sampling method was used to draw the sample. From each block of the three
selected districts, 5% of schools were selected. In cases where 5% percentage of the total
school were less than five, a minimum of five schools were selected from that particular
block which resulted into total of 221 schools as the sample for study.
Table_1.6.1 Sample for the study
Name of District
No. of Blocks
No. of Schools
Panchmahal
Porbandhar
Surendranagar
Total
11
03
10
24
2613
0441
1189
4243
Number of Schools
Initial Sample Final Sample
133
132
023
023
065
062
221
217
The sample was later reduced to 217 due to technical difficulties in data collection. The
specific reasons with respect each school have been specified in the table_1.6.2.
4
Table_1.6.2 Details of schools dropped from sample from each district with
reasons
Sr.
Reason for being dropped
District name
School details
No.
from the sample
School Name: Rathva F.
The school was visited twice
but the principal was found to
Varg Nani Umarvan
[SchCODE: 24170307403]
be absent and he was not
1 Panchmahal
Block: Halol;
reachable on his cell phone, so
Cluster : Dhinkva;
no information could be
Village: Nani Umarvan
collected regarding the school. *
School Name: Raja
Chhaya Guj. Pri. School
Vacation given in the school
[SchCODE: 24080201021]
2 Surendranagar
from 13th December, 2012 to
Block: Dhrangadhra
25th December, 2012
Cluster and Village:
Dharangadhra Pay Center-3
School Name: Vishwas
School did not function from
Vidhyalay School
the start of this academic year
[SchCODE: 24080106203]
3 Surendranagar
(i.e. since June 2012) but it was
Block: Halvad;
functioning when DISE 2011Cluster: Malaniyad Pay
12 data was collected.
Center ; Village: Ranmalpur
School Name: Chanakya
School did not function from
Primary School
the start of this academic year
[SchCODE: 24080402308]
4 Surendranagar
(i.e. since June 2012) but it was
Block: Lakhtar ;
functioning when DISE 2011Cluster : Lakhtar Pay
12 data was collected.
Center-2; Village: Lakhtar
* The letter form the CRCC confirming the non-cooperative behaviour of
the principal is attached as Appendix C
Graph_1.1: Sample of the study, Gujarat State
5
The number of schools (as in initial sample) in each district, block wise is represented by
the tables and the graphs represent the final sample for the study from each district.
Table_1.6.3: Initial Sample, Panchmahal District
Sr.
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Name of Block
Ghoghamba
Godhra
Halol
Jambughoda
Kadana
Kalol
Khanpur
Lunawda
Morva Hadaf
Santrampur
Shahera
Total
No. of
Schools
Graph_1.2: Final sample, Panchmahal district
012
020
012*
005
010
010
007
019
008
017
013
133
* One school was dropped from the sample due to lack of co-orperation from the principal
and his absentism from the school responsibilities. (The report of CRCC confirming his
behaviour is attached as Appendix C)
Table_1.6.4: Initial Sample, Porbandar District
Graph_1.3: Final sample, Porbandar district
Sr.
No.
1
2
3
Name of
No. of
Block
Schools
Kutiyana
05
Porbandhar
13
Ranavav
05
Total
23
Initial and Final Sample
from Porbandar district
remain the same.
6
Table_1.6.5: Initial Sample, Surendranagar District
Sr.
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
#
Name of the
Block
Chotila
Chuda
Dhrangadhra
Halvad
Lakhtar
Limbdi
Muli
Patdi-Dasada
Sayla
Wadhvan
Total
No. of
School
010
005
007#
007*
005*
005
005
006
006
009
065
Graph_1.6: Final sample, Surendranagar district
One school from Dhrangadhra was found closed on day of visit, as the students were
given holidays from 13th December, 2013 to 25th December, 2013.
*One school each from Halvad and Lakhtar were not functional since the beginning of this
academic year (i.e. June 2012). So, the final sample from district was reduced to 62.
The comparison has been carried out between the 217 sample finalized, visited by field
investigators appointed by the project team, CASE and the data for the same School
visited by GCEE. The list of school is provided in appendix C.
1.6.2 Description of Tool
‘School Information Schedule’: A DISE DCF form was developed by NUEPA for all the
states of India. It consists of eight parts seeking to collect information regarding the
following heads:
1.
School Particulars: This includes information about the School in terms of, the type
of School, year of establishment, category of the School, educational qualifications
of the principals, type of school, total number of teachers, previous academic year
details, staff category, status and type of School building, number of block and
classrooms with their conditions, infrastructural facilities available.
2.
Enrolment: This includes information about students in terms of the total number of
boys and girls caste category-wise in each class, students in terms of total number of
boys and girls in each class on the basis of standard, attendance and attendance of
disabled children.
3.
Repeaters and Re-Admission: This includes information about the students in
terms of total number of boys and girls in each class in the category of failures, long
absentees and re-admissions.
7
4.
Extra facilities: This includes information about the midday meal provided to
students from different age, and category.
5.
Examination Results: This includes information about the results of the previous
academic session.
6.
Feedback of Investigators: This part of the tool consists of feedback of the
investigators regarding response of the school with their attribute, number of visits
made for the data collection and kind of problems faced by the investigators during
data collection in the school.
1.6.3 Data Collection
The principal investigator for the project conducted the interviews for the staff required for
the project at the CASE, Department of Education, Faculty of Education and Psychology,
The Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, Vadodara.
The following staff was recruited: One Research Associate and eight field investigators.
They were given three days training [i.e. 01.12.2012, 02.12.2012 and 03.12.2012] for the
data collection using DISE DCF for the study.
Table_1.6.6 Schedule of the Training Conducted for the Project Staff
Sr.
Date
Time
Content of Training
Place
No.
(Day)
Orientation regarding DISE and
reviewing the similar work done (a) Department of
01.12.12 02:30 pm to earlier.
Education
1
(Saturday)
05:30 pm
Discussion of the objectives of the (CASE), Faculty
study
of Education and
Psychology,
DISE DCFs given for reading
Maharaja
Detail explanation of each item in The
Sayajirao
02.12.12
10.00 am to the DISE DCF (tool ) for the study University
of
2
Discussion and clarification of
(Sunday)
01:30 pm
Baroda,
Vadodara
doubts
regarding
the
data
collection
3
03.12.12
(Monday)
11.00 am to
02:00 pm
Eight schools of
Field Experience of data collection Vadodara City
to each field investigator by (one FI visits one
visiting the schools of Vadodara.
school)
02:30 pm to
05:30 pm
Discussion of the collected data
and their personal experiences
during this visit to the school.
(a)
The training started with the explanation of the project objectives and importance of DISE.
They were explained their role in providing the authentic data for the study. They were
given time to understand the whole procedure of data collection through the DCF and
8
clarify their doubts. Then each Field Investigator (FI) was given real field experience with
the schools in Vadodara itself for practice in DISE DCF filling. These schools were not
from the sample of the study. Each filed investigator was given the name and location of
the school he/she had to visit. They were expected to find the mode to reach the school
and get the DISE DCF filled in by interacting with the school authorities in the time given
to them. The field investigators were given appropriate guidance by the Principal
Investigator, as and when needed by them.
The list of schools visited by the field
investigators during the training is as follows:
Table_1.6.7 Schools visited by Field Investigators during training on 3rd
December, 2012
Sr.
Name of the Field
Name of the school
No.
Investigator
1
Mr. Baldaniya Ajeet R.
Nagar Prathmik Shala No. 11, Akota
Narmadaben Khushalchand Prathmik Shala
2
Mr. Bhagora Ramesh K.
Shaher No. 4
3
Mr. Gondaliya Santosh D.
Parsi AgyariPrathmik Shala, Sayajigung 1
Vir Bhagatsingh Prathmik Shala Fatehpura 2
4
Mr. Makwana Kiran J.
(morning Shift)
Vir Bhagatsingh Prathmik Shala Fatehpura 1
5
Ms. Makwana Minal C.
(afternoon Shift)
Maharana Pratap Kumar Shala, Sayajigung
6
Ms. Purohit Rashmi N.
School No. 6
Kavi Premanad Prathmik Shala, Gajjarawadi-32,
7
Ms. Rajput Deepikabahen J
Panigate
8
Mr. Trivedi Nirmit P.
Balajipura Shala No. 8, Jayratna building
Then their experience and data collected was discussed thoroughly. Then Role play was
conducted by one FI being the principal and the other FI the person to collect the data.
They filled in the DCFs by the assumed data given by the principal and then there was role
reversal and same activity was conducted. Then the possible difficulties affecting the
procedure of data collection was discussed.
The entire team of FIs visited each district together. The collected data was then certified
by the school principal and the respective BRC and CRC coordinators to establish
authenticity. The regular follow-up was maintained by the project team. The data
collection was well planned so there wouldn’t be a delay due to assembly election of
Gujarat State in each district [it was on 13th December, ‘12 in Surendranagar and on 17th
December, ’12 in Panchmahal]. So the data collection in Panchmahal occurred in two
phases.
9
The schedule followed for data collection was as follows:
Sr.
No.
1
2
3
4
Table_1.6.8 Schedule of Data Collection
District
Porbandhar
Panchmahal
Surendranagar
Panchmahal
Schedule for Visit
04th
07th
16th
23rd
December, '12
December, '12
December, '12
December, '12
to
to
to
to
No. of Days
06th December, '12
15th December, '12
22nd December, '12
29th December, '12
3
9
7
7
The data collection occurred smoothly and was completed before expected time. The data
for the selected schools as collected by GCEE was also obtained from the state MIS Office
for the comparison.
1.7.4 Data Analysis
Data analysis was done using categorization, coding, tabulation and statistical analysis.
Content analysis technique was also used for the analysis of the subjective responses. The
two sets of data collected; one by GCEE and the second one by CASE were processed in
the same manner for the comparison to find the consistency of the data obtained.
10
CHAPTER 2
ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA OF ALL
THE THREE DISTRICTS
2.0.0
Introduction
Gujarat is situated in the west coast of India. The state covers an area of 196,024 sq km
(75,685 sq m). It borders Pakistan, and Rajasthan to the north-east, Madhya Pradesh to the
east, Maharashtra and the Union territories of Diu, Daman, Dadra and Nagar Haveli to the
south.
Gandhinagar
is
the
capital
city
and
other
major
cities
are
Ahmedabad, Vadodara , Surat, Rajkot, Bhavnagar and Jamnagar.
The name 'Gujarat' is said to have been derived from the Prakrit Gujjar Ratta or Gujjar
Rashtra - the land of Gujjars - a tribe that entered India with the Huns in ancient time and
wandering through Punjab and Rajasthan, settled in western India. Gujarat had a great
civilization even before the arrival of the Aryans. It had trade links with ancient
civilizations of Sumer, Babylon, Assyria and Egypt. The Port of Lothal which has been
excavated is identified as an important centre of the 4500 years old Aryan civilization.
11
Gujarat is renowned for its temples and monuments associated with momentous historical
periods. The architectural and artistic virtuosity of the people of Gujarat is reflected in the
many buildings both ancient and modern. As much a part of the state are its wildlife
sanctuaries, its hill resorts, its natural grandeur and religious and pilgrim centres.
The state has a flourishing economy. Amul, located at Anand is one of the largest milk
product producer co-operatives in the world while Surat is a hub of diamond trade. The
state is first in nationwide gas based thermal electricity generation. Gujarat is divided into
twenty six districts; namely
Bhavnagar
Narmada,
Ahmedabad,
Dahod, Gandhinagar,
Navsari,
Panchmahal,
Anand, Banaskantha,
Bharuch,
Jamnagar, Junagadh, Kheda, Kachchh
Mehsana,
Patan,
Amreli,
Porbandar,
Rajkot,
Sabarkantha, Surat,
Surendranagar, The Dangs, Tapi, Vadodara and Valsad.
Literacy rate of Gujarat state as per Census 2011 is 79.31%. The literacy rate for males is
87.23% and females is 70.73%
2.1.0
Analysis and Interpretation of the Data
Analysis of data for the Gujarat state (selected districts); with respect to different variables
of the tool administered for data collection is represented in the form of tables. In these
tables data from both GCEE and CASE are compared which is followed by the
interpretation for the same (Table_2.1.1 to Table_2.1.8). There are certain attributes
regarding which only findings of CASE are available, as they are not applicable with
DISE-GCEE (Table_2.1.9 to Table_2.1.16). The data showing high level of consistency is
highlighted in blue colour and those with very less variation / negligible are highlighted in
green colour. The data highlighted in red indicates a serious issue which needs to be
addressed for the betterment of the system.
Table 2.1.1: Distribution of the Schools by Educational Qualification of Principal
GCEE
CASE
Educational Qualification
No.
%
No.
%
SSC/HSC &PTC
166
76.50
151
69.59
Graduation &PTC
012
05.53
016
07.37
Graduation & B.Ed
011
05.07
011
05.07
Post Graduation & B.Ed/M.Ed.
006
02.76
014
06.45
ATD
000
00.00
013
05.99
Any other
022
10.14
012
05.53
Total
217
100.0
217
100.0
The table 2.1.1 shows little variation in the data of CASE and GCEE. More than 69% of
the Schools have principal/head teacher are with qualification SSC/HSC and PTC. About
11% of them are with Graduation and B.Ed. or Pot Graduation & B. Ed. / M.Ed.
12
Table_2.1.2 : Distribution of the schools by experience of Principals / Head
teacher in present school
GCEE
CASE
Number of years
No.
%
No.
%
Up to 4 years
057
26.27
096
44.24
5 – 9 years
043
19.82
058
26.73
10-14 years
062
28.57
043
19.82
15-19 years
017
07.83
009
04.15
20 & more years
037
17.05
011
05.07
No response
001
00.46
000
00.00
Total
217
100.0
217
100.0
The distribution of schools by experience of Principal / Head teacher in Present school
shows inconsistency in all categories. Most of the schools have principals with 0 to 9 years
of experience in the same school. About 28% of the schools have Principal with 10 or
more years of experience in the same school which should be a sign of betterment for the
school. But it is a matter of concern when responses are not obtained in case of GCEE
where the data is said to cross checked at various levels.
Table_2.1.3 : Distribution of the schools by category
GCEE
CASE
School Category
No.
%
No.
%
Primary only
Primary with U P
Primary with UP & Sec. / H. Sec
Upper Primary only
U P with Secondary / H. Sec
Total
073
144
000
000
000
217
33.64
66.36
00.00
00.00
00.00
100.0
074
142
001
000
000
217
34.10
65.44
00.46
00.00
00.00
100.0
The comparison of the data of CASE and GCEE regarding the distribution of schools by
category shows good consistency. Majority of the schools are of the category primary with
upper primary.
Table_2.1.4 : Distribution of schools by type of school
GCEE
CASE
School Category
No.
%
No.
%
Boys only
02.76
02.76
006
006
Girls only
02.76
03.69
006
008
Co-education
94.47
93.55
205
203
Total
217
100.0
217
100.0
The comparison of the data of CASE and GCEE in table_2.1.4, regarding distribution of
schools by type shows very little variation. It can be observed that more than 93 % of the
schools have co-education.
13
Table_2.1.5 : Distribution of schools by Management
GCEE
CASE
School Management
No.
%
No.
%
Education Department
000
00.00
010
04.61
Tribal Welfare Department
005
02.30
005
02.30
Local Body
197
90.78
187
86.18
Private Aided
002
00.92
002
00.92
Private Unaided
012
05.53
013
05.99
Other
001
00.46
000
00.00
Unrecognized
000
00.00
000
00.00
Total
217
100.0
217
100.0
In the above table the comparison of data shows inconsistency with respect to most of the
responses except the places where the managing body is Tribal Welfare Department and
Private Aided. The findings reflect some sort of misunderstanding on the part of the field
investigators or the authorities regarding the managing body of the school especially
between ‘educational department’ and ‘local body’.
Table_2.1.6 : Distribution of schools by Type and Situation
GCPE
CASE
School Category
No.
%
No.
%
Residential School
004
1.84
007
3.23
Non Residential School
213
98.16
210
96.77
Total
217
100.0
217
100.0
Ashram (Govt.)
002
0.92
003
1.38
Non Ashram Type (Govt.)
002
0.92
001
0.46
Private
000
0.00
001
0.46
Others
000
0.00
002
0.92
Not Applicable
213
98.16
210
96.77
Total
217
100.0
217
100.0
School Building used as a part of Shift School
Yes
16
7.37
020
9.22
No
201
92.63
197
90.78
Total
217
100.0
217
100.0
In table_2.1.6 very little variation is observed in the findings of CASE and GCEE. Almost
of the schools (more than 96%) are non residential schools. More clarity regarding the
understanding of school building used as a part of Shift School is required.
14
Table_2.1.7 : Distribution of the Schools with respect to staff
GCEE
CASE
Details of Staff
Primary
Primary
Primary
Primary
with U P
with U P
No. of Teacher (Excluding Principal /
1119
805
338
Head Teacher)
Para Teacher / Shiksha Karmi /
Gujarati / Community teacher
Non-teaching staff
Employed for cooking Mid-day meal
NA
274
231
NA
Employed for cleaning toilets
Teachers present on day of survey
720
308
1343
1378
Teacher posts sanctioned
1119
1351
Teachers in position
% of Teachers present on the day
N.A.
76.09
of Survey
The table_2.1.7 compares the findings regarding the details of staff of the school and it
shows inconsistency. On the day of survey of about 76.09% of teachers were found
present. It is to be noted that 1.96% of teacher positions are vacant as per CASE findings.
Table_2.1.8 : Distribution of the Schools by Facility
GCEE
Sr.
School Category
No.
No.
%
1 Status of School Building
Private
012
5.53
Rented
006
2.76
Government
194
89.40
Govt. In Rent Free
001
0.46
No Building
004
1.84
Total
217
100.0
2 Type of School Building
Pucca
202
93.09
Partially Pucca
008
3.69
Kuccha
003
1.38
Tent
001
0.46
No Building
003
1.38
Total
217
100.0
687
3 Total Number of Blocks in School
4 Class Room conditions
No. of Class rooms
Good Condition
977
88.82
Need Minor Repairs
068
6.18
Need Major Repairs
055
5.00
Unfit for Use
000
0.00
Total 1100
100.0
CASE
No.
%
012
008
194
000
003
217
05.53
03.69
89.40
0.00
1.38
100.0
199
013
003
000
002
217
514
91.71
5.99
1.38
0.00
0.92
100.0
994
108
071
044
1217
81.68
8.87
5.83
3.62
100.0
15
Sr.
No.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Table_2.1.8 (…contd.) : Distribution of the Schools by Facility School
GCEE
CASE
Category
No.
%
No.
%
No. of Other rooms
Good Condition
208
75.09
155
75.98
Need Minor Repairs
021
7.58
022
10.78
Need Major Repairs
048
17.33
012
5.88
Unfit for Use
000
0.00
015
7.35
Total
277
100.0
204
100.0
Electricity
Yes
214
98.62
212
97.70
No
003
1.38
005
2.30
Total
217
100.0
217
100.0
Common toilet available
Yes
009
4.15
072
33.18
No
208
95.85
145
66.82
Total
217
100.0
217
100.0
Separate Toilet available for Girls
Yes
210
96.77
177
81.57
No
007
3.23
039
17.97
No Response
000
0.00
001
0.46
Total
217
100.0
217
100.0
Separate Toilet available for Staff
Yes
052
23.96
N.A. in
DISE(GCEE)
No
165
76.04
Total
217
100.0
Condition of Boundary wall
Pucca
134
61.75
138
63.59
Pucca but Broken
008
3.69
023
10.60
Barbed wire Fencing
004
1.84
005
2.30
Hedges
002
0.92
003
1.38
No Boundary Wall
037
17.05
034
15.67
Other
032
14.75
014
6.45
Total 217
100.0
217
100.0
Source of Drinking water
Hand pump
084
38.71
057
26.27
Well
007
3.23
006
2.76
Tap water
079
36.41
118
54.38
Others
047
21.66
030
13.82
No drinking water facility available
000
0.00
006
2.76
Total 217
100.0
217
100.0
Play Ground
Yes
152
70.05
133
61.29
No
065
29.95
084
38.71
Total 217
100.0
217
100.0
16
Table_2.1.8 (…contd.) : Distribution of the Schools by Facility School
GCEE
CASE
Sr.
Category
No.
No.
%
No.
%
1014
12 No. of Computers in Good Condition N.A.
13 No. of Computers Available in
1358
1170
School
14 Seating arrangement for Children in
School
Furniture for all Student
051
23.50
031
14.29
Furniture for some Student
086
39.63
115
53.00
No Furniture
078
35.94
071
32.72
No Response
002
0.92
000
0.00
Total
217
100.0
217
100.0
The comparison of findings regarding the distribution of school with respect to different
facilities shows degrees of variation. From the findings it could be concluded that:

About 89% of the schools are government facilitated. In the schools visited, more
than 91% of the schools are with ‘pucca’ building. About 61% of the schools have a
‘pucca’ compound wall.

At least 80% of the classrooms are in good condition.

About 98% of the schools have electricity connection.

In only 33% of the schools common toilet observed; approximately 82% of the
schools have separate toilets for girls. However more than three fourth of the schools
(76%) do not have separate toilet facility for the staff.

In approximately 94% of the school drinking water facility is available. More than
50% of the schools have tap water as a source of water in the school premises and
26.27% schools have hand pump as the source of water.

More than 61% of the schools have playground.

About 33% of the schools do not have any kind of furniture while 53% of schools
have furniture for some students seating arrangement.

About 86.6% of the computers from the computers available in the schools visited in
the study were found to be in good condition.

But it is a matter of concern when responses are not obtained in case of GCEE
where the data is said to cross checked at various levels.
17
Table 2.1.9 (CASE): Student enrolment and attendance details of children on the day of survey
Enrolment on the Day of Survey
Attendance on the Day of Survey
Class
Total
SC
ST
Total
SC
ST
Boys
Girls
Boys
Girls
Boys
Girls
Boys
Girls
Boys Girls Boys Girls
Class I
02411
02357
0162
0142
0522
0551
1605
1548
0126
0117 0279 0268
Class II
02837
02634
0190
0201
0588
0546
1898
1783
0142
0157 0295 0295
Class III
02812
02567
0188
0167
0587
0514
1999
1773
0177
0141 0330 0296
Class IV
02716
02543
0199
0201
0570
0472
1943
1809
0166
0169 0318 0250
Class V
02658
02397
0203
0193
0539
0488
1885
1608
0161
0155 0287 0264
Class VI
02410
02272
0204
0181
0420
0391
1672
1586
0158
0153 0239 0230
Class VII
02380
02312
0215
0169
0401
0391
1681
1567
0167
0143 0225 0244
Total
18224
17082
1361
1254
3627
3353
12683
11674
1097
1035 1973 1847
Class I
66.57
65.68
77.78 82.39 53.45 48.64
Class II
66.90
67.69
74.74 78.11 50.17 54.03
Class III
71.09
69.07
94.15 84.43 56.22 57.59
Class IV
71.54
71.14
83.42 84.08 55.79 52.97
Percentage of Attendance on the day of Survey
Class V
70.92
67.08
79.31 80.31 53.25 54.10
Class VI
69.38
69.81
77.45 84.53 56.90 58.82
Class VII
70.63
67.78
77.67 84.62 56.11 62.40
Total
69.60
68.34
80.60 82.54 54.40 55.08
These findings show better performance compared to others categories in each class.
These findings show poor performance compared to others categories in each class
The data as in the above table is the one collected by the field investigators of CASE. So the comparison is out of scope. The overall percentage
of attendance is about 69.0%. In almost all the classes the percentage attendance of SC category much is higher than the average and that of ST
category is much less that the average.
18
Table_2.1.10(CASE) Grade wise examination details for last academic year (2010-11)
Enrolment at the end of year
Appeared for the Examination
Passed in the Examination
Class
Total
SC
ST
Total
SC
ST
Total
SC
ST
Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls
2883 2661 227
176
579
542 2783 2550 222
174
533
506 2702 2452 212
170
513
487
V
2303 2062 196
172
322
323 2234 1985 192
167
303
309 2214 1966 194
167
296
299
VII
95.8 97.8 98.9 92.1 93.4 93.7
92.1 93.4 96.6 88.6 89.9
V 96.5
Percentage of Students in the Class
97.0
96.3
98.0
97.1
94.1
95.7
96.1
95.3 99.0 97.1 91.9 92.6
VII
These findings show better performance compared to others categories in each class.
These findings show poor performance compared to others categories in each class
The findings with respect to grade wise examination detail are available with CASE only. The percentage of ST boys appearing and passing the
examinations is low compared to others.
Table_2.1.11(CASE) Grade wise examination details for present academic year (2011-12)
Enrolment at the end of year
Appeared for the Examination
Passed in the Examination
Class
Total
SC
ST
Total
SC
ST
Total
SC
ST
Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls
2742 2465 190
176
545
770 2715 2437
189
175
536
480 2699 2437 187
172
541
483
V
2279 2138 173
163
343
357 2272 2127
174
159
338
354 2196 2172 164
169
338
354
VII
99.0
98.9 99.5 99.4 98.3 62.3 98.4
98.9 98.4 97.7 99.3 62.7
V
Percentage of Students in the Class
99.7
99.5 100.6 97.5 98.5 99.2 96.4 101.6 94.8 103.7 98.5 99.2
VII
These findings show better performance compared to others categories in each class.
These findings show poor performance compared to others categories in each class
These findings reflect some error in the data obtained
19
The finding with respect to grade wise examination detail of year 2011-2012is available with CASE only, so comparison is out of scope.
In the table_2.1.11, the high percentages of students appearing in examination and students passing the examination are good indicators
reflecting the status of school education but how far we this data with error be relied is a question. The percentage of SC girls in class V
appearing and passing the examinations is less than the average.
Table_2.1.12 (CASE) Feedback about record maintenance and school organization(All Districts Combined)
Responses
No
Yes
No
Attribute
Complete information gathered in first visit
Information pertaining to enrolment and details of pass percentage was obtained easily
Enrolment and other details from single register
Teachers in the school fill up the attendance regularly
Principal have yearend summary details of Children for all grades available with him
The School Report Card was available in the school
Attendance register properly maintained and kept in Almirahs
Teachers come to school on time
School has a copy of filled in DISE DCF
Investigator face any problem in getting the required information from the school
School has display board
Provision of midday meal
No.
207
179
067
172
190
097
184
126
100
070
204
193
%
95.39
82.49
30.88
79.26
87.56
44.70
84.79
58.06
46.08
32.26
94.01
88.94
No.
010
038
149
044
026
117
032
090
116
146
012
024
Response
%
No.
4.61
0
17.51 0
68.66 1
20.28 1
11.98 1
53.92 3
14.75 1
41.47 1
53.46 1
67.28 1
5.53
1
11.06 0
%
0.00
0.00
0.46
0.46
0.46
1.38
0.46
0.46
0.46
0.46
0.46
0.00
Total
No.
217
217
217
217
217
217
217
217
217
217
217
217
%
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
These findings show good performance with respect to the attribute
These findings points to the areas which need immediate attention
20
The data for feedback about record maintenance and School organization as in Investigator’s feedback Schedule is not applicable for DISE
(GCEE). It needs to be observed that we do not a single attribute for which responses of all the schools is obtained. However the following
observations can be made from the above table:

In 95.39% schools the complete data was obtained in the first visit itself.

Information pertaining to enrolment and details of pass percentage was obtained easily in 82.49% while 17.51% of schools still found it
difficult to provide information.

Of the total 217 schools in 67(30.88%) schools the details regarding the enrolment were not compiled in a single register while in
149(68.66%) schools they could be obtained from single register.

In 184 (84.79%) schools the attendance was maintained while in 32 (14.75%) schools this was not observed and in one(0.46%) schools the
investigator did not receive any response.

Of the total 217 schools in 190 (87.56%) schools principals had year-end summary details of children for all grades.

The school report card was available in only 44.7% schools.

In 84.79% schools the attendance register was properly maintained and kept in almirahs.

In only 58.06% of the schools teachers came to school on time. In 79.26% schools the teachers in the school fill up the attendance
regularly.

Only 46.08% of the schools had the copy of filled in DISE DCF.

In 67.28% of the cases the investigators did not find any problem in getting the required information from the school.

About 94.0% of schools had a display board.

In 88.94% of the schools the provision of midday meal was observed. Still there are about 11.06% of the schools which do not provide
MDM.
21
Table_2.1.13 (CASE) Attributes pertaining to Principal/Head Teacher towards Investigation as in Investigator’s feedback schedule
Category of responses from school
Attribute
Very Good
Good
Average
Poor
Very Poor
Total
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
53
24.42 141 64.98
20
9.22
1
0.46
2
0.92
217 100.00
Initial reaction of the principal/ head teacher
Response of the Principal/Head teacher to provide
43
19.82 144 66.36
25
11.52
4
1.84
1
0.46
217 100.00
information
29
13.36 099 45.62
78
35.94
8
3.69
3
1.38
217 100.00
Availability of records
The data for the attributes pertaining to Principal/Head Teacher towards Investigation as in Investigator’s feedback schedule is not applicable for
DISE (GCEE). The following observations can be made from the table above:

In 89.10% of the schools the field investigators rated the initial reaction of the principal / head teacher in the category of very good and
good. This reflects the positive attitude of the authorities towards research and survey.

In 86.18 % of the schools the field investigators described the response of the principal / head teacher to provide information in the
category of very good and good.

In approximately 58.98% of the schools the field investigators found the availability of records in the category of very good and good.
22
Table_2.1.14 (CASE) Feedback about record maintenance and school organization amongst the three districts
Panchmahal*
Porbandar*
Surendranagar*
Total*
Attribute
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
No. % No. % No.
%
No. % No.
%
No. % No. % No. %
Complete information gathered in first
122 92.4 10
0.0
0.0 207 95.4 010 4.6
7.6
23 100.0 00
62 100.0 00
visit
Information pertaining to enrolment and
105 79.5 27 20.5 20
03 13.0 54
08 12.9 179 82.5 038 17.5
87.0
87.1
details of pass percentage was obtained
easily
Enrolment and other details from single
045 34.1 87 65.9 08
15 65.2 14
22.6
34.8
47 75.8 067 30.9 149 68.7
register
Teachers in the school fill up the
102 77.3 30 22.7 20
03 13.0 50
80.6
11 17.7 172 79.3 044 20.3
87.0
attendance regularly
Principal have yearend summary details
115 87.1 17 12.9 21
02
8.7
54
87.1
07 11.3 190 87.6 026 12.0
91.3
of Children for all grades available with
him
The School Report Card was available
8.7
45.2
32 51.6 097 44.7 117 53.9
067 50.8 64 48.5 02
21 91.3 28
in the school
Attendance register properly maintained
115 87.1 17 12.9 21
02
8.7
48
77.4
91.3
13 21.0 184 84.8 032 14.7
and kept in Almirahs
065 49.2 67 50.8 18
05 21.7 43
69.4
18 29.0 126 58.1 090 41.5
78.3
Teachers come to school on time
34.8
38.7
37 59.7 100 46.1 116 53.5
School has a copy of filled in DISE DCF 068 51.5 64 48.5 08
15 65.2 24
Investigator face any problem in getting
30.4
29.0
43 69.4 070 32.3 146 67.3
045 34.1 87 65.9 07
16 69.6 18
the required information from the school
1.5
18
78.3
90.3
05
8.1 204 94.0 012 5.5
School has display board
130 98.5 02
05 21.7 56
6.8
16
69.6
87.1
08 12.9 193 88.9 024 11.1
Provision of midday meal
123 93.2 09
07 30.4 54
Yes of all attributes
No of all attributes
Better performance of each attribute
Poor performance of each attribute
* The total for calculating the percentage is different for each district in the above table. The
total in each case would represent the number of schools in the final sample from that
district (for Panchmahal it is 132, for Porbandar it is 23 for Surendranagar it is 62 and
therefore the total of three districts together is 217).
23
The comparison of data of three districts under study regarding the feedback about record maintenance and school organization as in
Investigator’s feedback Schedule gives us the following views regarding the districts:

Porbandar district shows better response in seven of the twelve attributes described in table when compared to other districts. While
Panchmahal district shows poor performance in the seven of the twelve attributes described in the table but in four attributes it shows
better performance than other districts.

In Porbandar and Surendranagar districts, complete information was obtained in a single visit in all the schools. While in Panchmahal
7.6% of schools required multiple visits to gather complete information.

In Porbandar district, 78.3% schools reported that the teachers came on time. While in Panchmahal district only 50.8% schools did not
have teachers coming on time to school, this response was poor compared to the other districts.

In Porbandar district, in 87.0% schools the teachers filled in the attendance register regularly. It was observed that this attribute had
response 80.0% or more in all the districts except Panchmahal. This reflects organization existing in the schools. While in Panchmahal
district there were 22.7% of schools in which this regularity was not observed.

In Porbandar district, in 91.3% of schools the attendance register was properly maintained and kept in almirahs. While in Surendranagar
district there were 21.0% of schools in which this maintenance was not observed.

In Porbandar district, 69.6% of the field investigators completed their task without any problem which better compared to the remaining
two districts. In the remaining districts also the investigators did not face any problem in more than 66% of cases. But in Panchmahal
District 34.1% investigators have stated to have faced problems in availing the required data.

In Porbandar district, 91.3% school principals had yearend summary details of children for all grades available with him. This reflects
responsibility in principal’s work. While in Panchmahal district there were 12.9% of schools in this responsibility was not observed.

In Porbandar district, the information pertaining to enrolment and details of pass percentage was obtained easily 87.0% better than in any
other district. While in Panchmahal district in 20.5% of schools the same information was not obtained easily.
24

In Panchmahal district, 50.8% schools possessed school report card which was better than the other districts but still it is very low
considering the importance of the document. While in Porbandar district 91.3% schools did not have the same. It was observed that this
attribute had 51.6% in Surendranagar district. The fact that the school report card is an important document of the school is yet to be
accepted by the schools, so the percentage of this response has decreased.

In Porbandar district, the enrolment and other details from single register was obtained in 34.8% of schools which stood better when
compared to the other districts. While Surendranagar district reflected poor response in this attribute with 75.8% schools not having the
enrolment and other details in single register.

In Panchmahal district, 51.5% of the schools had the copy of filled in DISE DCF which is higher among all the three districts studied.
While in Porbandar district 65.2% of the schools did not have the same, the response was poor compared to the other districts. To an
extent the absence of this document with the school also assures that the next investigation regarding the same set of data in the same year
will not be copied from the copy in the school.

In Panchmahal district, 98.5% of schools had display boards which were better amongst all the districts under study. All the other districts
had scored more than 85.0% response in this attribute, which reflects that schools are maintaining the requirements in the way they can.
While in Porbandar district there were 21.7% of schools not having display boards.

In Panchmahal district, 93.2% of the schools had the provision of midday meal, which was better response compared to the other districts.
While in Porbandar district, there were 30.4% of schools not having midday meal provision.
25
Table_2.1.15 (CASE) Comparison of Student's enrolment and attendance of the
schools of all the district
Number of students
Percentage of
students
present
Present on the
Name of the District
Enrolled
on the day of visit
day of visit
(as per the records)
(%)
(head count)
Panchmahal
19260
11801
61.27
Porbandar
03598
02264
62.92
Surendranagar
12448
10292
82.68
Gujarat (Three districts)
35306
24357
68.99
From the above table it can be observed that Panchmahal district shows lowest attendance
and a little below average of the state (all the three districts combined). The data collection
was not conducted during any migrating season or in a time of any seasonal difficulties
(e.g. rainy season, summer with scarcity of drinking water, etc.). Surendranagar district
shows highest attendance compared to other districts. The following graph shows the
above data graphically.
Graph_2.1: Percentage of students present on the day of visit
Percentage of students present on the day of visit
82.68
90
80
70
61.27
68.99
62.92
60
50
40
30
20
10
Panchmahal
0
Panchmahal
Porbandar
Surendranagar
Name of district / state
Gujarat (Three
districts)
Porbandar
Surendranagar
Gujarat (Three districts)
26
Table_2.1.16(CASE) Comparison of Teacher's detail and students attendance of the
schools of all the districts
Number of Teachers
Name of the
District
Panchmahal
Porbandar
Surendranagar
Gujarat
(Three districts)
% of
vacant
positions
Post
Sanctioned
In
Position
Present
on day of
visit
0718
0175
0485
0704
0175
0472
0529
0141
0358
1.95
0.00
2.68
1378
1351
1028
1.96
% of
Attendance
of Teachers
on day of
visit against
in Position
% of
Attendance
of students
on day of
visit
75.14
80.57
75.85
61.27
62.92
82.68
76.09
68.99
The above tabular data can be graphically represented to observe the position of teachers
and their attendance on the day of visit.
Graph_2.2: Comparison of teacher’s in position with teacher’s present on day of visit
From the above table the following observations can be made regarding the attendance of
the teachers in comparison to the number of post sanctioned in each district, the positions
filled and those present on the day of visit:

Highest attendance of the teachers was shown in Porbandar district and highest
attendance of students on the day of visit is shown in Surendranagar district. It is
much above the average value of all sample districts combined (68.99%).

Surendranagar has highest number of vacant teacher’s position.
27

The lowest attendance of teachers and students is shown by Panchmahal district. If
the attendance scenario in case of teachers was same on a regular basis, then it is an
issue to be addressed and the reasons to be worked upon for the improvement of the
performance of the district.

On an average considering the three districts together, the teacher’s attendance is
found to be 76.09% and student’s attendance 68.99%, on the day of visit for the
state. About 1.96% of the seats sanctioned for the teachers in the state are yet to be
filled. This once filled and proper check maintained the overall performance and the
district wise performance is sure to improve educationally.
2.2.0 Overview of Midday meal Provision in all the three districts
When all the findings for the three districts regarding midday meal were combined, it was
observed that of the schools visited most of the schools had midday meal provision. The
graph below represents the availability of midday meal in schools of the sample.
Graph_2.3: Midday meal provision, Gujarat
In the DISE DCF there is a question to describe the quality of midday meal provided at the
school for the schools in which it is provided in the investigator’s feedback schedule. The
responses were obtained for 193 schools of the sample. These responses were subjected to
content analysis and the following table was generated to give a holistic picture of quality
of food given in schools of three districts in the sample of the study.
28
Attribute
MDM facility is a regular feature in the
school (where MDM is there)
Menu for MDM available in school
Food provided according to the menu on
the day of visit
MDM Menu provides variety of food
throughout the week
MDM menu is displayed in school
Every child in the school avails MDM
Food cooked in the school premises
There is an in-charge for MDM in school
Cleanliness is maintained during the
cooking of the food @
Cleanliness is maintained during the
storage of cooked food before and after
MDM is served #
Cleanliness is maintained during the
serving of the food to the children #
Table_2.2.1 : Status of MDM in all the three districts
Panchmahal*
Porbandar*
Surendranagar*
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
No. % No. % No. % No. % No.
%
No. %
122
99.2
01
0.8
14
87.5
2
12.5
51
94.4
03
3.6
187
96.9
06
3.1
120
97.6
03
2.4
14
87.5
2
12.5
47
87.04
07
12.9
181
93.8
12
6.2
051
41.5
72
58.5
08
50.0
8
50.0
42
77.8
12
22.2
101
52.3
92
47.7
121
98.4
02
1.6
14
87.5
2
12.5
51
94.4
03
5.6
186
96.4
07
3.6
117
102
121
122
95.1
82.9
98.4
99.2
06
21
02
01
4.9
17.1
1.6
0.8
13
08
10
11
81.3
50.0
62.5
68.8
3
8
6
5
18.8
50.0
37.5
31.3
42
24
30
52
77.8
44.4
59.3
96.3
12
30
24
02
22.2
55.6
44.4
3.7
172
134
161
185
89.1
69.4
83.4
95.9
21
59
32
08
10.9
30.6
16.6
4.1
081
65.9
37
30.1
08
50.0
2
12.5
27
50.0
12
22.2
116
60.1
51
26.4
093
75.6
25
20.3
09
56.3
1
6.3
38
70.4
10
18.5
140
72.5
36
18.7
096
78.0
24
19.5
14
87.5
0
0.0
40
74.1
09
16.7
150
77.7
33
17.1
Yes of all attributes
No of all attributes
Better performance of each attribute
Poor performance of each attribute
@
Three Districts*
YES
NO
No. % No.
%
* The total for calculating the percentage is different for each district in the above table. The total in
each case would represent the number of schools with MDM facility (for Panchmahal it is 123, for
Porbandar it is 16, for Surendranagar it is 54 and there for the total of the three districts together is
193).
This attribute is only applicable to those schools where the MDM is cooked in the school premises and could be observed by FI on Day of Visit
#
The sum of number of responses may not 193 as these attributes are subjective. They are stated for those schools where the personal observation of the
Field Investigators on the day of visit to each school was possible.
29
The following observations can be made from the above table and the description obtained regarding the status of MDM at the schools of the
state, from the observations made in each district:

In 96.9% of the school of state MDM was found to be a regular feature and menu for MDM was also available in most of the cases but in
about 47.7% of the schools the menu was not followed.

The menu does reflect variety of the food items to be given to the children but it is usually not followed. The reasons stated are
unavailability of stock, unavailability of staff for cooking MDM, the MDM in charge occupied with other tasks, less number of students
having food when menu is not what they like, etc.

In 89.1% of the cases the menu was found displayed in the school.

In 82.4% of the schools the food is cooked in the school premises. The remaining schools have MDM being supplied from neighbouring
schools or MDM being cooked at the in-charge’s/cook’s house. The in-charge for MDM is also available in 95.9% of the schools of state.

Cleanliness is maintained during cooking, serving and storing of the food in more than 65.0% of the schools of the district.

Panchmahal district shows better result compared to other districts regarding the status of MDM, leading in nine of the eleven attributes of
description. But there the menu was not observed to be followed on the day of visit in 58.5% of the schools. The cleanliness and
hygiene was also not as per the basic needs.

In Surendranagar district, about in 77.8% of the schools the menu for MDM is visibly displayed and followed. The maintenance of
cleanliness while cooking of MDM was also better than the other districts in the study.

In Porbandar district, the cleanliness in serving food was observed better than the rest of the districts. The concept of praying before having
food was also a regular feature in many of the schools. But in half of the schools all children in the school did not have food from school.
30
2.3.0 Conclusion
Overall the data collection occurred smoothly as planned in all the districts and was
completed before time. The responses from the school authorities have been supportive
regarding the investigation. The level of consistency observed between the findings of
GCEE and CASE varied with different variables.
Consistency is observed in comparison of the following variables: distribution of schools
by the year of establishment and distribution of schools by type of school.
Inconsistency is observed in the following variables: Distribution of schools by experience
of principal/head teacher in the same school, some variables in physical facility, details of
staff and student enrolment of present and previous year.
The overall percentage of attendance of students on the day of visit was about 68.99%.
On an average considering the three districts together, the teacher’s attendance was
found to be 76.09% on the day of visit for the state. Only 1.96% of the seats sanctioned
for the teachers in the state are yet to be filled, for the remaining the teachers have been
recruited and are working in schools. In Porbandar district, student attendance on the day
of visit was found to be highest (80.57%) and Surendranagar district teacher attendance
was highest (82.68%). The lowest student and teacher attendance on the day of visit
was shown in Panchmahal district (75.14% and 61.27% respectively). Overall the
regularity in teachers was observed in about 75.0% of the cases. But only about 44.7% of
schools are reported to have the School report cards, which is a serious issue to be
addressed. The midday meal provision was found in 88.9% of the schools. The MDM
feature is stated to be regular in 96.9% of the schools having MDM facility and in 93.8%
of the cases Menu for MDM was available in the school. The menu was found displayed
in 89.1% schools but only in 52.3% of the schools the food was provided as per the menu
on the day of visit. Cleanliness maintained during cooking, storing and serving of the food
given to children is not observed everywhere, in spite of the presence of MDM-in-charge
in 95.9% of the schools. In only 69.4% of the schools all the children have food from the
schools. Overall, the data could be collected timely from almost all the schools in the
sample from the state and authorities have supported the investigation process.
31
CHAPTER 3
ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
OF PANCHMAHAL DISTRICT
3.0.0 About Panchmahal District
The Panchmahal district is located in the eastern part of Gujarat. It covers an area of 8866
sq.km. Thirteen percent of the population is urban. Major occupations in the district are
dairy farming and agriculture.
Some places of interest in Panchmahal are the temple of Mata Kalika in Pavagarh, the Jain
pilgrimage center at Pavoli and the World Heritage Site at Champaner, which includes the
32
ruins of a medieval Hindu kingdom. The fairs of Chaitri Atham and Math Kotal are also
popular among tourists.
Literacy rate of the district as per Census 2011 is 72.32%. Literacy rate for males is
84.07% and females is 59.95%
3.1.0 Analysis and Interpretation of the Data
The analysis of data for the Panchmahal district with respect to different variables of the
tool administered for data collection is represented in the form of tables in which both
GCEE and CASE findings (Table_3.1.1. to Table_3.1.12) are included. These tables are
followed by the interpretation for the same. There are certain attributes regarding which
only findings of CASE are available, as they are applicable with DISE-GCEE
(Table_3.1.13 to Table_3.1.17). Those findings which show consistency are highlighted in
blue colour and ones with very little variation are reflected in green colour. The data
highlighted in red indicates a serious issue which needs to be looked into.
Table_3.1.1 : Distribution of the Schools by Educational Qualification of Principal
GCEE
CASE
Educational Qualification
No.
%
No.
%
SSC/HSC & PTC
108
81.82
100
75.76
Graduation & PTC
009
6.82
009
6.82
Graduation & B.Ed
006
4.55
006
4.55
Post Graduation & B.Ed/M.Ed.
002
1.52
003
2.27
ATD
000
0.00
011
8.33
Any other
007
5.30
003
2.27
Total
132
100.0
132
100.0
The data in above table shows consistency in most of the categories. It is observed that
Educational Qualification of the Principal in more than 75% of the schools is only
SSC/HSC &PTC. About 7% of them have Graduation/Post graduation and B. Ed. / M.Ed.
Table_3.1.2 : Distribution of the schools by experience of Principals / Head
teacher in present school
GCEE
CASE
Number of years
No.
%
No.
%
Up to 4 years
031
23.48
043
32.58
5 – 9 years
024
18.18
039
29.55
10-14 years
043
32.58
036
27.27
15-19 years
010
7.58
005
3.79
20 & more years
024
18.18
009
6.82
Total
132
100.0
132
100.0
The comparison of the findings of GCEE and CASE in Table_4.1.2 does not consistency
in any aspect. It needs to be observed that most of the schools have principal with at least
33
four years experience as the principal in the same school. There are more than 27% of the
schools which have principal with experience of 10-14 years in the sane school. It is a
good sign because this experience would be very beneficial for the development of that
particular school.
Table_3.1.3 : Distribution of the schools by category
GCEE
CASE
School Category
No.
%
No.
%
Primary only
063
47.73
064
48.48
Primary with Upper Primary
069
52.27
068
51.52
Primary with Upper Primary & Sec./H. Sec
000
0.00
000
0.00
Upper Primary only
000
0.00
000
0.00
Upper Primary with Secondary / H. Sec
000
0.00
000
0.00
Total
132
100.0
132
100.0
The comparisons of findings of GCEE and CASE regarding school category show good
consistency. It can be observed that 51.52% of schools had primary with upper primary.
Table_ 3.1.4 : Distribution of schools by type of school
GCEE
CASE
School Category
No.
%
No.
%
Boys only
001
0.76
001
0.76
Girls only
000
0.00
002
1.52
Co-education
131
99.24
129
97.73
Total
132
100.0
132
100.0
From the above table it can be observed that the findings of GCEE and CASE show good
consistency. Most of the schools visited have co-education (more than 97.0%).
Table_3.1.5 : Distribution of schools by Management
GCEE
CASE
School Management
No.
%
No.
%
Education Department
000
0.00
004
3.03
Tribal Welfare Department
004
3.03
004
3.03
Local Body
122
92.42
118
89.39
Private Aided
002
1.52
002
1.52
Private Unaided
004
3.03
004
3.03
Other
000
0.00
000
0.00
Unrecognized
000
0.00
000
0.00
Total
132
100.0
132
100.0
Consistency is observed in the findings of CASE and GCEE regarding the distribution of
schools by management. The variation observed is due to some misunderstanding existing
between the options educational department and local body, with the authorities who
respond during the data collection.
34
Table_3.1.6 : Distribution of schools by Type and Situation
GCEE
CASE
School Category
No.
%
No.
%
Residential School
003
2.27
005
3.79
Non Residential School
129
97.73
127
96.21
Total
132
100.0
132
100.0
Ashram (Govt.)
001
0.76
02
1.52
Non Ashram Type (Govt.)
002
1.52
001
0.76
Private
000
0.00
001
0.76
Others
000
0.00
001
0.76
Not Applicable
129
97.73
127
96.21
Total
132
100.0
132
100.0
School Building used as a part of Shift School
Yes
003
2.27
006
4.55
No
129
97.73
126
95.45
Total
132
100.0
132
100.0
The above table reflects that the findings of GCEE and CASE show very little variation in
most of the cases. It is observed that most of the schools are non-residential schools and
very few have the school building being used as a part of the shift school.
Table_3.1.7 : Distribution of schools by the year of establishment
GCEE
CASE
Year of Establishment
No.
%
No.
%
Before 1947
015
11.36
018
13.64
1947 – 1956
020
15.15
021
15.91
1957 – 1966
024
18.18
020
15.15
1967 – 1976
009
6.82
010
7.58
1977 – 1986
025
18.94
022
16.67
1987 – 1996
018
13.64
020
15.15
1997 - 2006
018
13.64
018
13.64
2007 – 2008
003
2.27
003
2.27
Total
132
100.0
132
100.0
Consistency is observed in the data, regarding the year of establishment of schools,
obtained from both the agencies.
35
Table_3.1.8 : Distribution of schools by the lowest and highest class in school
GCEE
CASE
Class
No.
%
No.
%
LOWEST
Preprimary
000
0.0
000
0.0
100.0
100.0
I
132
132
Total
132
100.0
132
100.0
HIGHEST
II
000
0.00
000
0.00
III
000
0.00
000
0.00
IV
005
3.79
003
2.27
V
058
43.94
060
45.45
VI
003
2.27
002
1.52
VII
043
32.58
042
31.82
VIII
023
17.42
025
18.94
Total
132
100.0
132
100.0
From the above table it can be observed that the findings of CASE and GCEE when
compared show consistency in the data related to the lowest class but with respect to the
highest class little variation is observed. It can be observed that all of them have the lowest
class to be class I, about 50% of the schools the highest class is class VII or Class VIII.
Table_3.1.9 : Distribution of the Schools with respect to staff
GCEE
CASE
Details of Staff
Primary
Primary
Primary with UP Primary with U P
No. of Teacher (Excluding Principal/
705
428
161
Head Teacher)
Para Teacher / Shiksha Karmi / Gujarati
/ Community Teacher
Non-teaching staff
NA in DISE (GCEE)
Employed for cooking Mid-day meal
206
132
Employed for cleaning toilets
NA in DISE
Teachers present on the day of survey
392
137
(GCEE)
709
718
Teacher posts sanctioned
Teachers in position
705
704
NA in DISE
% of Teachers present on day of
75.14
(GCEE)
Survey( against in Position)
When findings from table_3.1.9 regarding distribution of the Schools with respect to staff
are considered, consistency was not observed. Moreover, the attendance of the teachers on
the day of survey is found to be 75.14%.
36
Table_3.1.10 : Distribution of the Schools by Facility
GCEE
CASE
Sr.
School Category
No.
No.
%
No.
%
1 Status of School Building
Private
006
4.55
005
3.79
Rented
002
1.52
005
3.79
Government
124
93.94
122
92.42
Government In Rent Free
000
0.00
000
0.00
No Building
000
0.00
000
0.00
Total
132
100.0
132
100.0
2 Type of School Building
Pucca
126
95.45
121
91.67
Partially Pucca
006
4.55
011
8.33
Kuccha
000
0.00
000
0.00
Tent
000
0.00
000
0.00
No Building
000
0.00
000
0.00
Total
132
100.0
132
100.0
452
318
3 Total Number of Blocks in School
4 Class Room conditions
No. of Class rooms
Good Condition
520
86.67
512
78.41
Need Minor Repairs
037
6.17
074
11.33
Need Major Repairs
043
7.17
050
7.66
Unfit for Use
000
0.00
017
2.60
Total
600
100.0
653
100.0
No. of Other rooms
Good Condition
064
71.91
56
59.57
Need Minor Repairs
011
12.36
22
23.40
Need Major Repairs
014
15.73
07
7.45
Unfit for Use
000
0.00
09
9.57
Total
89
100.0
94
100.0
5 Electricity
Yes
131
99.24
132
100.00
No
001
0.76
000
0.00
Total
132
100.0
132
100.0
6 Common toilet available
Yes
004
3.03
042
31.82
No
128
96.97
90
68.18
Total
132
100.0
132
100.0
7 Separate Toilet available for Girls
Yes
131
99.24
108
81.82
No
001
0.76
024
18.18
Total
132
100.0
132
100.0
8 Separate Toilet available for Staff
Yes
022
16.67
NA in DISE
(GCEE)
No
110
83.33
Total
132
100.0
37
Table_3.1.10 (…contd.) : Distribution of the Schools by Facility
GCEE
CASE
Sr.
School Category
No.
No.
%
No.
%
9 Condition of Boundary wall
Pucca
066
50.00
074
56.06
Pucca but Broken
006
4.55
020
15.15
Barbed wire Fencing
002
1.52
002
1.52
Hedges
002
1.52
003
2.27
No Boundary Wall
028
21.21
022
16.67
Other
028
21.21
011
8.33
Total
132
100.0
132
100.0
10 Source of Drinking water
Hand pump
067
50.76
047
35.61
Well
002
1.52
001
0.76
Tap water
034
25.76
066
50.00
Others
029
21.97
015
11.36
No drinking water facility available
000
0.00
003
2.27
Total
132
100.0
132
100.0
11 Play Ground
Yes
096
72.73
077
58.33
No
036
27.27
055
41.67
Total
132
100.0
132
100.0
NA in DISE
Number of Computers in Good
517
12
(GCEE)
Condition
Number of Computers Available in
769
593
13
School
Seating arrangement for Children in
14
School
Furniture for all Student
027
20.45
015
11.36
Furniture for some Student
049
37.12
069
52.27
No Furniture
054
40.91
048
36.36
No Response
002
1.52
000
0.00
Total
132
100.0
132
100.0
The comparison of findings regarding the distribution of School with respect to facilities
shows different degrees of variation with respect to different variables. From the findings
in the above table conclude that:

Of the schools visited more than 92.0% of the school buildings are government
facilitated and more than 91.0% of them have ‘pucca’ building.

At least 78.41% of the classrooms are in good condition and 59.57% of the other
rooms are in good condition.

All the schools according CASE data has electricity connection but GCEE data
shows one school not having electricity connection. (This difference might have
occurred due to the long gap between the data collection by both the agencies.)
38

The response regarding the common toilets in the schools shows inconsistency to a
great extent. Approximately 82.0% of schools have separate toilets for girls, but only
about 17% of schools have it separate for staff.

In more than half of schools condition of the compound wall of the School is
‘pucca’.

About 84% of the schools have either hand pump or tap water as a source of water in
the school premises. There are only a few schools (2.27%) with no drinking water
facility in the school.

In more than 55% of the schools playground is there in the school premises. But
inconsistency is observed in the data from both the agencies, as the concept of
playground is subjective.

More than half of the schools have furniture for some students in the school. 36.36%
of the schools do not have any kind of furniture for the children to sit.

In the Panchmahal district about 87.18% of the computers available in the schools of
the sample are found to be in good condition.
39
Table_3.1.11 : Students enrolment in Previous Academic year (2010-11)
GCEE
CASE
Enrolment
Classes
Total
Classes
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII I-IV V-VII
I
II
III
IV
V
Boys 1702 1524 1547 1588 1497 1400 1212 6361 4109 1713 1539 1541 1596 1507
Total
Enrolment Girls 1461 1342 1301 1308 1315 1232 1012 5412 3559 1464 1348 1344 1341 1360
241 204 172 169 116
58
949 343 207 164 133 123 130
Boys 332
Repeaters
217 192 147 122 121
59
811 302 166 140 126
96
87
Girls 255
72
67
84
98
68
67
66
321 201
69
66
72
91
61
Boys
SC
Children
68
49
64
47
49
64
46
228 159
49
50
62
49
52
Girls
590 595 561 525 391 319 2363 1235 621 585 580 558 518
Boys 617
ST
Children
506 534 523 496 423 298 2143 1217 570 498 517 521 496
Girls 580
849
699 686 753 717 731 627 2987 2075 841 706 712 765 731
Boys
OBC
Children
641 591 613 637 571 528 2526 1736 693 666 623 634 677
Girls 681
19
11
15
18
24
22
10
63
56
17
10
21
17
17
Boys
Disable
Children
10
12
17
15
15
20
13
54
48
9
11
17
13
9
Girls
9
9
11
8
21
Boys
Children
N.A.
with
DISE
(GCPE)
left school Girls
5
7
8
10
15
Total
VI
VII I-IV V-VII
1423 1267 6389 4197
1266 1073 5497 3699
86
37
627
253
69
41
528
197
66
68
298
195
60
52
210
164
409 328 2344 1255
427 311 2106 1234
753 646 3024 2130
621 543 2616 1841
22
8
65
47
19
13
50
41
9
37
37
67
17
15
30
47
When the data from GCEE and CASE are compared consistency is observed to some extent in the data. Over all it can be observed that for the
total enrolment boys exceeds girls. The number of children leaving the school is more in class V to VII than in class I to IV.
40
Table_3.1.12: Students enrolment in Current Academic year (2011-12)
GCEE
CASE
Enrolment
Classes
Total
Classes
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII I-IV V-VII
I
II
III
IV
V
Boys 1687 1582 1470 1494 1453 1397 1274 6233 4124 1680 1590 1507 1508 1456
Total
Enrolment Girls 1490 1334 1301 1267 1255 1265 1165 5392 3685 1493 1330 1304 1263 1244
Boys 302 219 167 141
99
66
44
829
209 136
92
84
66
59
Repeaters
Girls 236 154 150 122
90
61
40
662
191 114
77
72
47
57
Boys 77
63
53
68
71
54
58
261
183
87
70
67
70
74
SC
Children
Girls 54
46
42
51
42
44
51
193
137
66
47
47
54
48
Boys 607 584 576 540 521 451 328 2307 1300 560 588 558 529 516
ST
Children
Girls 582 504 472 500 486 445 394 2058 1325 557 486 457 489 470
Boys 796 758 658 676 674 697 680 2888 2051 840 779 696 689 691
OBC
Children
Girls 703 630 643 583 600 619 553 2559 1772 731 635 673 589 599
Boys 19
20
17
16
15
20
26
72
61
18
22
10
19
16
Disable
Children
Girls 11
8
13
16
13
8
16
48
37
12
7
8
24
19
Boys
6
5
8
7
21
Children
N.A. with DISE (GCEE)
left school Girls
2
6
3
4
12
VI
VII
1431 1324
1272 1176
42
19
33
18
61
66
49
61
425 317
412 377
743 715
641 587
19
17
9
18
11
0
9
0
Total
I-IV V-VII
6285 4211
5390 3692
378
120
310
108
294
201
214
158
2235 1258
1989 1259
3004 2149
2628 1827
69
52
51
46
26
32
15
21
When the data from GCEE and CASE are compared consistency is observed to some extent in the data. Over all it can be observed that for the
total enrolment boys exceeds girls. Number of children leaving school has reduced compared to last year but still the number of students leaving
in class I-IV is less than those leaving in Class V -VII.
41
Table_3.1.13(CASE): Student enrolment and attendance details of children on the day of survey
Enrolment on the Day of Survey
Attendance on the Day of Survey
Class
Total
SC
ST
Total
SC
ST
Boys
Girls Boys Girls Boys
Girls
Boys
Girls
Boys
Girls
Boys
Girls
Class I
01315 1252
072
040
0503
0545
0788
0709
055
035
0265
0262
Class II
01590 1465
077
066
0559
0538
0933
0865
049
034
0283
0288
Class III
01548 1326
063
050
0571
0503
0976
0824
047
039
0319
0291
Class IV
01497 1338
067
049
0556
0468
0942
0847
046
041
0307
0249
Class V
01471 1227
067
052
0526
0485
0925
0725
047
034
0282
0262
Class VI
01340 1236
082
055
0412
0388
0826
0786
056
046
0230
0229
Class VII 01384 1271
068
045
0396
0390
0842
0813
053
040
0224
0243
Total 10145 9115
496
357
3523
3317
6232
5569
353
269
1910
1824
59.92 56.63 76.39 87.50 52.68 48.07
Class I
58.68 59.04 63.64 51.52 50.63 53.53
Class II
63.05 62.14 74.60 78.00 55.87 57.85
Class III
62.93 63.30 68.66 83.67 55.22 53.21
Class IV
Percentage of Attendance on the day of Survey
62.88 59.09 70.15 65.38 53.61 54.02
Class V
61.64 63.59 68.29 83.64 55.83 59.02
Class VI
Class VII 60.84 63.97 77.94 88.89 56.57 62.31
Total 61.43 61.10 71.17 75.35 54.22 54.99
These findings show better performance compared to others categories in each class.
These findings show poor performance compared to others categories in each class
The data as in the above table is available only CASE findings. So comparison is out of scope. Overall the attendance for ST children is less
compared to the average and very less if SC children are considered.
42
Table 3.1.14 (CASE) Grade wise examination details for last academic year (2010-11)
Enrolment at the end of year
Appeared for the Examination
Passed in the Examination
Class
Total
SC
ST
Total
SC
ST
Total
SC
ST
Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls
1649 1469
67
58
573
539 1581 1407
66
58
527
503 1542 1354
63
56
508
484
V
1197 1055
52
45
321
321 1157 1015
51
44
302
307 1151 1003
51
44
295
297
VII
95.9 95.8 98.5 100.0 92.0 93.3 93.5 92.2 94.0 96.6 88.7 89.8
V
Percentage of Students in the Class
96.7 96.2 98.1 97.8 94.1 95.6 96.2 95.1 98.1 97.8 91.9 92.5
VII
These findings show better performance compared to others categories in each class.
These findings show poor performance compared to others categories in each class
The findings with respect to grade wise examination detail are available with CASE only. So there is no scope of comparison. Overall the SC
children seem to doing well in academics.
Table 3.1.15 (CASE) Grade wise examination details for present academic year (2011-12)
Enrolment at the end of year
Appeared for the Examination
Passed in the Examination
Class
Total
SC
ST
Total
SC
ST
Total
SC
ST
Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls
1558 1353
65
48
540
766 1547 1333
65
48
531
476 1549 1334
65
48
536 479
V
1347 1154
67
56
341
354 1339 1150
67
56
335
352 1354 1121
67
56
335 352
VII
99.3 98.5 100.0 100.0 98.3 62.1 99.4 98.6 100.0 100.0 99.3 62.5
V
Percentage of Students in the Class
99.4 99.7 100.0 100.0 98.2 99.4 100.5 97.1 100.0 100.0 98.2 99.4
VII
These findings show better performance compared to others categories in each class.
These findings show poor performance compared to others categories in each class
These findings reflect some error in the data obtained.
43
The data as in the table_3.1.15 is available only CASE findings. There is some error in the above data which results in the percentages exceeding
hundred. No reliable conclusion can be drawn from such a data. It has to be noted that such errors should be checked upon at the first stage of
data collection. Still the low percentage of ST girls appearing and passing the exams is a serious issue.
Table_3.1.16 (CASE) Attributes pertaining to Principal/Head Teacher towards Investigation as in Investigator’s feedback schedule
Category of responses from school
Very Good
Good
Average
Poor
Very Poor
Total
Attribute
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
No. % No.
%
No.
%
Initial reaction of the principal/ head teacher
34 25.76 86 65.15 09 6.82
1
0.76
2
1.52 132 100.0
Response of the Principal/Head teacher to provide
26 19.70 90 68.18 12 9.09
3
2.27
1
0.76 132 100.0
information
Availability of records
22 16.67 56 42.42 48 36.36
4
3.03
2
1.52 132 100.0
The data for the attributes pertaining to Principal/Head Teacher towards Investigation as in Investigator’s feedback Schedule is not applicable for
DISE (GCEE). However the following observations can be made from the table:

In 90.81% of the schools the field investigators found initial reaction of the principal/ head teacher to be very good or good.

In 87.88% of the schools the field investigators described the response of the Principal/Head teacher to provide information good.

Only in 59.09% of the schools the field investigators found the availability of records to be very good or good. In more than four percent
of the schools the availability of records is found to be poor or very poor.
44
Table_3.1.17 (CASE) Feedback about record maintenance and school organization
Responses
No Response
Attribute
YES
NO
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
Complete information gathered in first visit
122
92.42
10
7.58
0
0.00
Information pertaining to enrolment and details of pass
105
79.55
27
20.45
0
0.00
percentage was obtained easily
Enrolment and other details from single register
045
34.09
87
65.91
0
0.00
Teachers in the school fill up the attendance regularly
102
77.27
30
22.73
0
0.00
Principal have yearend summary details of Children for all grades
115
87.12
17
12.88
0
0.00
available with him
The School Report Card was available in the school
067
50.76
1
0.76
64
48.48
Attendance register properly maintained and kept in Almirahs
115
87.12
17
12.88
0
0.00
Teachers come to school on time
065
49.24
0
0.00
67
50.76
School has a copy of filled in DISE DCF
068
51.52
64
48.48
0
0.00
Investigator face any problem in getting the required information
045
34.09
87
65.91
0
0.00
from the school
School has display board
02
1.52
0
0.00
130
98.48
Provision of midday meal
09
6.82
0
0.00
123
93.18
Total
No.
%
132
100.0
132
100.0
132
132
100.0
100.0
132
100.0
132
132
132
132
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
132
100.0
132
132
100.0
100.0
These findings show good performance with respect to the attribute
These findings points to the areas which need immediate attention
The data for feedback about record maintenance and School organization as in Investigator’s feedback Schedule is not applicable for DISE
(GCEE). However the following observations can be made from the above table:

In 92.42% schools the complete data was obtained in the first visit itself.

Information pertaining to enrolment and details of pass percentage was obtained easily in 79.55% of schools.

Principal have yearend summary details of children for all grades available with him in 87.12% schools.
45

The School report card was available only half of the schools visited.

In 87.12% schools the attendance register was properly maintained and kept in
almirahs. But the enrolment and other details from single register was obtained in
only 34.09% of schools.

In only 49.24% schools the teachers came to school on time and the teachers in the
school fill up the attendance regularly in about 77.0% of the schools.

In about 51.52% of the schools, copy of filled in DISE DCF was found present.

In 69.91% of the cases the investigators did not find any problem in getting the
required information from the school.

About 98.48% of the schools had display board in the school.

In about 93.2% schools the midday meal provision was found to be present.
3.2.0 Overview of Midday meal Provision in Panchmahal District
In Panchmahal district, it was observed that of the schools visited most of schools had
midday meal provision. The graph below represents availability of midday meal provision
in schools of the districts.
Graph_3.1: Midday meal provision in Panchmahal district
In the DISE DCF there is a question to describe the quality of midday meal provided at
school for the schools in which it is provided. The following table is generated from
information obtained regarding the quality of the MDM served at the schools on day of
visit.
46
Table_3.1.1 Status of MDM in Panchmahal District
Attribute
MDM facility is a regular feature in the school
Menu for MDM available in the school
Food provided according to the menu on the day of visit
MDM Menu provides variety of food throughout the week
MDM menu is displayed in the school
Every child in the school avails MDM facility
Food cooked in the school premises
There is a person in-charge for MDM in the school
Cleanliness is maintained during the cooking of the food (only where MDM is cooked) #
Cleanliness is maintained during the storage of cooked food before and after MDM is served #
Cleanliness is maintained during the serving of the food to the children #
These findings show good performance with respect to the attribute
These findings points to the areas which need immediate attention
#
The sum of number of responses may not be 123 as these attributes are subjective. They are stated as observed
personally by the Field Investigators on the day of visit to each school.
Yes
No
No.
%
No.
%
122 99.19 01
0.81
120 97.56 03
2.44
051 41.46 72 58.54
121 98.37 02 1.63
117 95.12 06 4.88
102 82.93 21 17.07
121 98.37 02 1.63
122 99.19 01
0.81
081 65.85 37 30.08
093 75.61 25 20.33
096 78.05 24 19.51
*Percentage
is
calculated keeping
123 (no. of schools
availing MDM)
The following observations can be made from the above table and the description obtained regarding the status of MDM at the schools of
Panchmahal district:

In 99.19% of the school of Panchmahal district MDM was found to be a regular feature and menu for MDM was also available in most of
the cases but in about 58.54% of the schools the menu was not followed.
47

The menu does reflect variety of the food items to be given to the children but it is
not followed. The reasons stated are unavailability of stock, unavailability of staff for
cooking MDM, the MDM in charge occupied with other tasks, the preferences of the
students with respect to food provided (they eat when menu is what they like), etc.

In 95.12% of the cases the menu was displayed in the school.

In 98.37% of the schools the food is cooked in the school premises. The remaining
schools have MDM being supplied from neighboring schools or MDM being cooked
at the in-charge’s/cook’s house.

In the schools with MDM facility, the schools where in all the children avail MDM
is 82.9%.

Cleanliness is maintained during cooking, serving and storing of the food in more
than 65.0% of the schools of the district. But health and hygiene are a concern with
respect to the attitude of the authorities especially the person in charge for MDM.
3.3.0 Conclusion
The data collection for Panchmahal was completed in two phases as there were assembly
elections in the district on 17th December, 2012. The data collection was accomplished in
time but the field investigators did face problems in getting the required information from
the school. The problems like unavailability of head teachers and teaching staff due to
election duties on the day of visit, improper management of the records, unawareness
regarding DISE work, etc. were faced by the field investigators.
The level of consistency observed between the findings of GCEE and CASE varied with
different variables.
Consistency has been observed with the variables: Distribution of school by category,
distribution of schools with respect to the management Distribution of the school with
respect to the lowest class in the school.
Little variation is observed with the following variables: Distribution of Schools by the
type and situation, Distribution of schools by type of School, distribution of schools by
year of establishment, Distribution of the Schools by Educational Qualification of the
Principal, Distribution of schools by highest class in school, Distribution of schools by
facility (For consistency varied throughout the table for different facilities) and Student
enrolment in Previous and current year.
Inconsistency has been observed with the following variables: Distribution of the schools
by experience of Principals / Head teacher in present School and Distribution of the
Schools with respect to staff.
48
The attendance of the teacher on the day of visit was found to be 75.14%. The attendance
of students was found to be 61.27%. Both teacher’s and student’s attendance is lowest
among all the districts studied and much below the state average in this study. This arises
serious concern if it is the regular feature of the schools in the district. In Panchmahal
district all the schools visited had some building structure for the school and had only
9.22% of the schools which used the school building in shifts. School report card was
available with about 50.76% of the schools. The midday meal provision was there in most
of the schools (93.18%) but the quality of food and the concern for following the menu
found in the school was not as it must have been. The MDM feature is stated to be regular
in 99.2% of the schools having MDM facility and in 97.6% of the cases Menu for MDM
was available in the school. The menu was found displayed in 95.1% schools but only in
41.5% of the schools the food was provided as per the menu on the day of visit.
Cleanliness maintained during cooking, storing and serving of the food given to children is
not observed everywhere, in spite of the presence of MDM-in-charge in 99.2% of the
schools. But there were many schools wherein the variety in menu was not provided; use
of green vegetables was not observed. There is a MDM in charge in almost all the schools
but sincerity towards the responsibilities is not observed.
3.3.1 Remarks from Officer-In-Charge, MIS, Panchmahal

The training for filling in of DISE format is not directly given to headmasters but it
is given to BRCC’s and the CRCC’s. These CRCC’s conduct the training for the
head teachers of the schools and the School Management Committee (SMC)
members in their respective clusters. The each question in the form is explained in
detail with respect to the response expected from the question. The importance of
DISE data and the school report card is explained to them.

The infrastructure at the MIS Unit is sufficient for the work requirement of the
office. The hard ware and soft ware at the MIS units and BRCC office are updated
on a regular basis and can support the DISE work. The facilities for printing,
scanning, photocopying and internet connectivity are available at the unit.

Feedback in terms of school report cards is distributed timely to the schools. The
importance of school report card is explained to them in the letter from DPEO
yearly. This year the social audit (Jan Vanchan) of the school report card has been
focused and the documentation of this activity with photographic evidence is being
maintained.
49

The school authorities are well informed regarding the key indicators to be displayed
on the display board. But how much is practically observed on the boards depends
on the sincerity of the school authorities. Usually the important documents end up in
the display board in principal’s office or below the glass top of the principal’s desk.

Availability of DISE data is at block level and district level.

DISE data is used for AWP & B, making research proposals and schemes for the
upliftment of the existing situation.
3.3.2 Suggestions to improve quality of DISE data from Officer-In-Charge, MIS,
Panchmahal

The planning and instructions from the government are proper. They should be
implemented with sincerity and commitment at all levels.

The filling in the information in DISE DCFs must be done with due care to avoid
any error and increase the authenticity of the data.
50
CHAPTER 4
ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
OF PORBANDAR DISTRICT
4.0.0 About Porbandar District
Porbandar is a port city of Gujarat situated on the Arabian Sea. It has been an important
trading center since ancient times. It was under the rule of the Jetwa Rajputs for 2000
years. Porbandar was often referred to as Puravelakul in the past. Presently it is famous as
the birthplace of Mahatma Gandhi. It is a fully developed urban district and a port of
international standard. Porbandar had a population of 586,062 (2011 census). A number of
educational institutions have been established here. These are both government affiliated
and private institutes. Porbandar is well connected by roads railways and domestic air
service to the rest of the country.
51
Porbandar is a place worth visiting. Its gurgling rivers, hills and grasslands make it
picturesque and rich in natural resources. Birds such as flamingos are found here. It
experiences a moderate climate.
Porbandar is certainly a place for pilgrims and tourists. The most visited places here are
Kirti Mandir, the birth place of Gandhiji. Bharat Mandir houses an exhibition of pictures,
sculptures and symbols and showcases the rich heritage of India. There are a number of
temples dedicated to Lord Krishna like the Sudama Mandir which glorifies the friendship
of Krishna and Sudama, Satyanarayan Temple Mahadev Temple and seven mosques.
Dwarka, the city of Lord Krishna is very close to Porbandar and is a pilgrimage center.
Literacy rate of the district as per census 2011 is 76.63%. The literacy rate of the males is
84.56% and that of females is 68.32%.
4.1.0 Analysis and Interpretation of the Data
The analysis of data for the Porbandar district with respect to different variables of the tool
administered for data collection is represented in the form of tables in which both GCEE
and CASE findings (Table_4.1.1. to Table_4.1.12) are included. These tables are followed
by the interpretation for the same. There are certain attributes regarding which only
findings of CASE are available, as they are not applicable with DISE in GCEE
(Table_4.1.13 to Table_4.1.17). Those findings which show consistency are highlighted in
blue colour and ones with very little variation are reflected in green colour. The data
highlighted in red indicates a serious issue which needs to be looked into.
Table_4.1.1 : Distribution of the Schools by Educational Qualification of the
Principal
GCEE
CASE
Educational Qualification
No.
%
No.
%
SSC/HSC &PTC
15
65.22
13
56.52
Graduation & PTC
01
4.35
01
4.35
Graduation & B.Ed
02
8.70
02
8.70
Post Graduation & B.Ed/M.Ed.
02
8.70
03
13.04
ATD
00
0.00
00
0.00
Any other
03
13.04
00
17.39
Total
23
100.0
23
100.0
The comparisons of the findings of GCEE and CASE, regarding the distribution of
Schools by Educational Qualification of the Principal, reflect very little variation. It is
observed that Educational Qualification of the Principal in about 56% of the Schools is
only SSC/HSC &PTC. There are 13.04% principals with post-graduation and B.Ed/M. Ed.
52
Table_4.1.2 : Distribution of the schools by experience of Principals / Head
teacher in present school
GCEE
CASE
Number of years
No.
%
No.
%
Up to 4 years
05
21.74
13
56.52
5 – 9 years
03
13.04
07
30.43
10-14 years
07
30.43
02
8.70
15-19 years
02
8.70
01
4.35
20 & more years
06
26.09
00
0.00
Total
23
100.0
23
100.0
The above comparison shows little variation except in two cases. Majority of the
principals have up to four years of experience in same school as head teachers.
Table_4.1.3 : Distribution of the schools by category
GCEE
CASE
School Category
No.
%
No.
%
Primary only
Primary with Upper Primary
Primary with Upper P & Sec. / H. Sec
Upper Primary only
Upper Primary with Sec. / H. Sec
Total
03
20
00
00
00
23
13.04
86.96
0.00
0.00
0.00
100.0
03
19
01
00
00
23
13.04
82.61
4.35
0.00
0.00
100.0
The comparison of the findings regarding the school category shows good consistency. It
can be observed that most of the schools had primary with upper primary in the school.
Table_ 4.1.4 : Distribution of schools by type of school
GCEE
CASE
School Category
No.
%
No.
%
Boys only
01
04.35
01
4.35
Girls only
03
13.04
03
13.04
Co-education
19
82.61
19
82.61
Total
23
100.0
23
100.0
The data from the above table shows consistency and 82.61% schools have co-education.
Table_4.1.5 : Distribution of schools by Management
GCEE
CASE
School Management
Number
%
Number
%
Education Department
00
0.0
06
26.09
Tribal Welfare Department
01
4.35
01
4.35
Local Body
18
78.26
12
52.17
Private Aided
00
0.00
00
0.00
Private Unaided
03
13.04
04
17.39
Other
01
4.35
00
0.00
Unrecognized
00
0.00
00
0.00
Total
23
100.0
23
100.0
53
In the comparison shown in table_4.1.5, only in one case consistency is observed and the
remaining cases show inconsistency in the findings of CASE and GCEE regarding the
distribution
of
schools
by
management.
This
inconsistency
reflects
some
misunderstanding or incapability in conveying the information regarding the managing
body of the school either on the side of the school authorities or the field investigators.
Table_4.1.6 : Distribution of schools by Type and Situation
GCEE
CASE
School Category
No.
%
No.
%
00
0.00
02
8.70
Residential School
Non Residential School
23
100.0
21
91.30
Total
23
100.0
23
100.0
Ashram (Govt.)
00
0.00
01
4.35
Non Ashram Type (Govt.)
00
0.00
00
0.00
Private
00
0.00
00
0.00
Others
00
0.00
01
4.35
Not Applicable
23
100.0
21
91.30
Total
23
100.0
23
100.0
School Building used as a part of Shift School
Yes
02
8.70
03
13.04
No
21
91.30
20
86.96
Total
23
100.0
23
100.0
The above table reflects that the findings of GCEE and CASE are consistent to some
extent and in case of school building being used as a part of Shift School good level of
consistency is observed. It is observed that more than 91.0% of schools are non-residential
schools. 86.96% of the schools do not use school building as a part of shift school.
Table_4.1.7 : Distribution of schools by the year of establishment
GCEE
CASE
Year of Establishment
No.
%
No.
%
Before 1947
1947 – 1956
1957 – 1966
1967 – 1976
1977 – 1986
1987 – 1996
1997 - 2006
2007 – 2008
Total
06
04
00
01
03
02
05
02
23
26.09
17.39
0.0
4.35
13.04
8.70
21.74
8.70
100.0
07
05
00
01
02
01
05
02
23
30.43
21.74
0.0
4.35
8.70
4.35
21.74
8.70
100.0
The table_4.1.7 shows the comparison of data collected by both agencies regarding the
year of establishment of the schools in the sample. Consistency is observed in the findings
of CASE and GCEE regarding the year of establishment of schools. There are about
30.43% of the schools which have been functional before independence.
54
Table_4.1.8 : Distribution of schools by the lowest and highest class in school
GCEE
CASE
Class
No.
%
No.
%
LOWEST
Preprimary
00
0.0
00
0.0
I
23
100.0
23
100.0
Total
23
100.0
23
100.0
HIGHEST
II
00
0.0
00
0.0
III
00
0.0
00
0.0
IV
02
8.70
01
4.35
V
01
4.35
02
8.70
VI
02
8.70
01
4.35
VII
09
39.13
07
30.43
VIII
09
39.13
11
47.83
Total
23
100.0
23
100.0
From the above table it can be observed that the findings of CASE and GCEE when
compared show very little variation in case of highest class in the school and consistency
is observed in the category of lowest class. It can be observed that all the schools have the
lowest class to be class I and in about 78.0% schools highest class is VII or VIII.
Table_4.1.9 : Distribution of the Schools with respect to staff
GCEE
CASE
Details of Staff
Primary
Primary
Primary
Primary
with UP
with UP
No. of Teacher (Excluding Principal /
99
106
41
head teacher)
Para Teacher/ Shiksha Karmi/ Gujarati /
community teacher
Non-teaching staff
N.A. in DISE(GCEE)
Employed for cooking Mid-day meal
Employed for cleaning toilets
N.A. in DISE(GCEE)
Teachers present on the day of survey
91
50
155
175
Teacher posts sanctioned
99
175
Teachers in position
% of Teachers present on day of Survey N.A. in DISE(GCEE)
80.57
When findings regarding distribution of the schools with respect to staff from table_4.1.9
are considered, no consistency is observed. The attendance of teachers on the day of
survey is found to be about 87.15%. In the schools visited from Porbandar district, all of
positions of teachers in schools are found to be filled.
55
Table_4.1.10 : Distribution of the Schools by Facility
GCEE
Sr.
School Facility
No.
No.
%
1 Status of School Building
Private
02
8.70
Rented
02
8.70
Government
17
73.91
Govt. In Rent Free
01
4.35
No Building
01
4.35
Total
23
100.0
2 Type of School Building
Pucca
19
82.61
Partially Pucca
02
8.70
Kuccha
02
8.70
Tent
00
0.00
No Building
00
0.00
Total
23
100.0
3 Total Number of Blocks in School
56
4 Class Room conditions
No. of Class rooms
Good Condition
133
95.00
Need Minor Repairs
006
4.29
Need Major Repairs
001
0.71
Unfit for Use
000
0
Total
140
100.0
No. of Other rooms
Good Condition
50
81.97
Need Minor Repairs
02
3.28
Need Major Repairs
09
14.75
Unfit for Use
00
0.00
Total
61
100.0
5 Electricity
Yes
22
95.65
No
01
4.35
Total
23
100.0
6 Common toilet available
Yes
02
8.70
No
21
91.30
Total
23
100.0
7 Separate Toilet available for Girls
Yes
21
91.30
No
02
8.70
No Response
00
0.00
Total
23
100.0
CASE
No.
%
03
01
18
00
01
23
13.04
4.35
78.26
0.00
4.35
100.0
19
02
02
00
00
23
56
82.61
8.70
8.70
0.00
0.00
100.00
141
008
004
004
157
89.81
5.10
2.55
2.55
100.0
30
00
02
01
33
90.91
0.00
6.06
3.03
100.0
21
02
23
91.30
8.70
100.0
11
12
23
47.83
52.17
100.0
17
05
01
23
73.91
21.74
4.35
100.0
56
Sr.
No.
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Table_4.1.10 (…contd.) : Distribution of the Schools by Facility
GCEE
CASE
School Facility
No.
%
No.
%
Separate Toilet available for Staff
Yes
08
34.78
N.A. with
DISE(GCEE)
No
15
65.22
Total
23
100.0
Condition of Boundary wall
Pucca
18
78.26
16
69.57
Pucca but Broken
02
8.70
01
4.35
Barbed wire Fencing
00
0.00
01
4.35
Hedges
00
0.00
00
0.00
No Boundary Wall
03
13.04
05
21.74
Other
00
0.00
00
0.00
Total
23
100.0
23
100.0
Source of Drinking water
Hand pump
08
34.78
02
8.70
Well
00
0.00
00
0.00
Tap water
09
39.13
12
52.17
Others
06
26.09
08
34.78
No drinking water facility available
00
0.00
01
4.35
Total
23
100.0
23
100.0
Play Ground
Yes
12
52.17
12
52.17
No
11
47.83
11
47.83
Total
23
100.0
23
100.0
Number of Computers in Good
N.A.
64
Condition
Number of Computers Available in
42
100
School
Seating arrangement for Children in
School
Furniture for all Student
07
30.43
08
34.78
Furniture for some Student
06
26.09
07
30.43
No Furniture
10
43.48
08
34.78
Total
23
100.0
23
100.0
The comparison of findings regarding the distribution of School with respect to facilities
shows different degrees of variation. From the findings in the above table conclude that:

More than 78.26% of the school buildings are government facilitated, 82.61% of the
schools have ‘pucca’ building and 69.0% have ‘pucca’ compound wall.

At least 90.0% of the classrooms and other rooms are in good condition.

About 91.30% of the schools have electricity connection.
57

More than 48.0% of the schools have common toilet facility and in 74.0% of the
schools have separate toilets for girls. But most of the schools (65.0%) do not have
separate toilets for the staff.

About 52.17% of the schools have tap water as a source of water in the school
premises and about 4.35% of the schools do not have any drinking water facility.

About 52.17% of schools have playground.

About 34.74% of schools no furniture is available for children to sit.

In Porbandar district, 64.0% of the computers available in the schools were found to
be in good condition.
58
Enrolment
Total
Enrolment
Repeaters
SC Children
ST Children
OBC
Children
Disable
Children
Children left
School
Boys
Girls
Boys
Girls
Boys
Girls
Boys
Girls
Boys
Girls
Boys
Girls
Boys
Girls
I
235
290
24
22
26
16
1
8
194
241
0
1
Table_4.1.11 : Students enrolment in Previous Academic year (2010-11)
GCEE
CASE
Classes
Total
Classes
II III IV V VI VII I-IV V-VII I
II III IV V VI
711 293 244 274 261 241 253
249 247 263 249 235 227 994
272 305 259 305 297 252 1126 854 319 273 309 303 321 310
29 18 23 19 13
1
94
33
0
1
0
3
1
0
13 16 14 15 15 13
65
43
0
0
1
4
2
0
87
30 23 38 37 40 37
24 30 31 36 29 22 111
13 24 12 11 16 14
65
41
26 25 38 21 22 28
2
1
0
3
0
1
0
0
0
2
4
5
2
1
8
7
6
7
4
27
17
0
1
0
0
1
4
1
206 196 205 187 176 180 801
543 235 191 201 196 186 178
227 249 216 252 235 203 933
690 265 225 237 254 258 234
1
1
1
3
0
0
0
1
1
6
3
8
1
2
1
12
7
5
11
24
0
0
1
3
6
1
1
3
7
8
10 10 10 11
N.A. with DISE (GCPE)
10
7
18 16 19 14
VII
286
270
0
0
31
33
1
0
216
201
3
1
47
28
Total
I-IV
V-VII
1072
780
1204
901
4
1
5
2
128
108
110
83
3
2
2
1
823
580
981
693
6
3
5
2
35
68
51
61
In the table 4.1.11 comparison shows consistency to some extent in some of the data. Over all it can be observed that for the total enrolment girls
exceeds boys in number in each class. In children leaving the school the number of boys exceeds girls in every class except class II and class
VII. Also the number of students leaving is more in class V to VII than in class I to IV.
59
Enrolment
I
Boys 229
Total
Enrolment Girls 234
Boys 15
Repeaters
Girls 10
Boys 36
SC
Children
Girls 18
Boys 7
ST
Children
Girls
3
Boys 167
OBC
Children
Girls 192
Boys 3
Disable
Children
Girls
0
Boys
Children
left school Girls
Table_4.1.12(CASE) Students enrolment in Current Academic year (2011-12)
GCEE
CASE
Classes
Total
Classes
II
III IV
V
VI VII I-IV V-VII
I
II
III IV
V
VI
238 244 233 252 229 228 944
709
234 294 250 249 260
237
273 277 288 265 301 273 1072
839
262 299 290 293 308
311
21
12
4
53
9
0
0
0
0
5
3
2
3
1
1
5
1
6
5
4
17
15
0
0
0
0
0
0
18
24
29
28
39
44
37
28 121
109
25
34
47
34
14
17
20
13
14
11
69
38
27
24
26
39
23
22
5
2
1
18
3
0
1
3
3
1
4
3
2
2
0
1
1
1
1
2
4
1
10
2
2
5
1
1
194 183 186 187 160 173 730
520
178 253 189 200 185
167
754
209 244 235 229 247
239
248 245 258 237 273 244 943
2
3
0
2
3
1
2
1
0
9
2
2
1
0
1
4
0
2
1
2
0
1
4
2
0
9
1
3
8
16
18
10
16
18
N.A. with DISE (GCPE)
20
25
25
13
27
16
VII
244
283
1
0
28
27
0
0
180
220
0
0
20
11
Total
I-IV V-VII
1027
741
1144
902
3
2
0
0
112
109
116
72
8
3
9
2
820
532
917
706
7
2
4
4
52
54
83
54
In the table 4.1.12 comparison shows consistency to some extent. Over all it can be observed that for the total enrolment girls exceeds boys in
number in each class. In children leaving the school, the number of girls exceeds boys except in class VI and class VII.
60
Table_4.1.13(CASE): Student enrolment and attendance details of children on the day of survey
Enrolment on the Day of Survey
Attendance on the Day of Survey
Class
Total
SC
ST
Total
SC
ST
Boys
Girls
Boys
Girls Boys
Girls
Boys
Girls
Boys
Girls
Boys
Girls
Class I
0239
0247
018
028
07
1
0141
0151
013
022
3
1
Class II
0219
0228
026
023
06
0
0130
0148
012
020
0
0
Class III
0235
0292
023
026
01
1
0159
0194
016
023
0
0
Class IV
0220
0276
025
027
02
0
0143
0178
017
016
0
0
Class V
0250
0315
036
038
01
0
0167
0175
021
030
0
0
Class VI
0262
0278
036
025
01
0
0167
0173
025
024
0
0
Class VII 0223
0314
039
022
00
0
0153
0185
015
018
0
0
1648
1950
203
189
18
2
1060
1204
119
153
3
1
Total
59.00
61.13
72.22
78.57
42.86 100.00
Class I
59.36
64.91
46.15
86.96
N. A.
N. A.
Class II
67.66
66.44
69.57
88.46
0.00
0.00
Class III
65.00
64.49
68.00
59.26
N. A.
N. A.
Class IV
Percentage of Attendance on the day of Survey
66.80
55.56
58.33
78.95
N. A.
N. A.
Class V
63.74
62.23
69.44
96.00
N. A.
N. A.
Class VI
68.61
58.92
38.46
81.82
N. A.
N. A.
Class VII
Total
64.32
61.74
58.62
80.95
16.67
50.00
These findings show better performance compared to others categories in each class.
These findings show poor performance compared to others categories in each class
The data as in the above table is available only CASE findings. So the comparison is out of scope. The overall percentage of attendance is about
63.0%. But in case of ST category the attendance is low with boys of class I. The low attendance in each class reflects area of concern if it is
same every day in the schools.
61
Table_4.1.14 (CASE) Grade wise examination details for last academic year (2010-11)
Enrolment at the end of year
Appeared for the Examination
Passed in the Examination
Total
SC
ST
Total
SC
ST
Total
SC
ST
Class Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls
263
329
43
22
0
1
262
328
43
22
0
1
260
320
42
23
0
1
V
293
266
39
29
0
0
291
266
37
28
0
0
290
262
38
29
0
0
VII
99.62 99.70 100.0 100.0 N. A. 100.0 98.86 97.26 97.67 104.5 N. A. 100.0
V
Percentage of Students in the Class
99.32 100.0 94.87 96.55 N. A. N. A. 98.98 98.50 97.44 100.0 N. A. N. A.
VII
These findings show better performance compared to others categories in each class.
These findings show poor performance compared to others categories in each class
These findings reflect some error in the data obtained
The findings with respect to grade wise examination detail are available with CASE only, so comparison is out of scope. But there is some error
in the data so much cannot be concluded about the status of enrolment of examination results.
Table 4.1.15 (CASE) Grade wise examination details for present academic year (2011-12)
Enrolment at the end of year
Appeared for the Examination
Passed in the Examination
Class
Total
SC
ST
Total
SC
ST
Total
SC
ST
Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls
260
303
36
24
0
0
259
303
36
24
0
0
239
303
36
24
0
0
V
242
259
32
22
0
1
248
259
33
22
1
0
155
352
23
32
1
0
VII
99.6 100.0 100.0 100.0 N. A. N. A. 91.92 100.0 100.0 100.0 N. A. N. A.
V
Percentage of Students in the Class
102.5 100.0 103.1 100.0
71.9 145.5
VII
N. A.
N. A. 64.05 135.9
These findings show better performance compared to others categories in each class.
These findings show poor performance compared to others categories in each class
These finding reflect some error in the data obtained
62
The findings with respect to grade wise examination detail of present (table_4.1.15) are available with CASE only. The high percentages of
students appearing in examination and students passing the examination are good indicators reflecting the status of school education just in case
the data is authentic, as in some date in the above table the error is obtained.
Table_4.1.16 (CASE) Attributes pertaining to Principal/Head Teacher towards Investigation as in Investigator’s feedback schedule
Category of responses from school
Very
Very
Attribute
Good
Average
Poor
Total
Good
Poor
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
No. % No. % No.
%
Initial reaction of the principal/ head teacher
4 17.39 16 69.57 3 13.04 0 0.0 0
0.0 23 100.0
Response of the Principal/Head teacher to provide information
5 21.74 15 65.22 3 13.04 0 0.0 0
0.0 23 100.0
Availability of records
2
8.70 14 60.87 7 30.43 0 0.0 0
0.0 23 100.0
The data for the attributes pertaining to Principal/Head Teacher towards Investigation as in Investigator’s feedback Schedule is not applicable for
DISE (GCEE). However the following observations can be made from the table:

In about 85.96% of the schools the field investigators found initial reaction of the principal/ head teacher to be very good and good.

In about 86.69 % of the schools the field investigators described the response of the Principal/Head teacher to provide information to be
very good and good.

In 69.57% of the schools the field investigators found the availability of records to be very good and good. In 30.43% of the schools the
availability of records was found to be average.

None of the schools was rated poor or very poor by in any of the attributes of the above table, by the field investigators. This reflects the
positive approach and support of the authorities, especially the principal for the collection work. This was distinctly observed in Porbandar
district, throughout the data collection process.
63
Table_4.1.17 (CASE) Feedback about record maintenance and school organization
Responses
Attribute
Yes
No
No.
%
No.
%
Complete information gathered in first visit
0
0.00
23
100.0
Information pertaining to enrolment and details of pass percentage was obtained easily
20
86.96
3
13.04
Enrolment and other details from single register
8
34.78
15
65.22
Teachers in the school fill up the attendance regularly
20
86.96
3
13.04
Principal have yearend summary details of Children for all grades available with him
21
91.30
2
8.70
The School Report Card was available in the school
2
8.70
21
91.30
Attendance register properly maintained and kept in Almirahs
21
91.30
2
8.70
Teachers come to school on time
18
78.26
5
21.74
School has a copy of filled in DISE DCF
8
34.78
15
65.22
Investigator face any problem in getting the required information from the school
7
30.43
16
69.57
School has display board
18
78.26
5
21.74
Provision of midday meal
16
69.57
7
30.43
Total
No.
%
23
100.0
23
100.0
23
100.0
23
100.0
23
100.0
23
100.0
23
100.0
23
100.0
23
100.0
23
100.0
23
100.0
23
100.0
These findings show good performance with respect to the attribute
These findings points to the areas which need immediate attention
The data for feedback about record maintenance and School organization as in Investigator’s feedback Schedule is not applicable for DISE
(GCEE). However the following observations can be made from the above table:
 In all the schools complete data was obtained in the first visit itself.
 In about 91.30% of the schools, Principal had yearend summary details of children for all grades available with him and attendance registers
were maintained properly.
 In 86.96% schools teachers filled in the attendance register regularly.
64
 In 78.26% of the schools teachers came to school on time.
 Information pertaining to enrolment and details of pass percentage was obtained
easily in 86.96% of schools.
 The School report card was available in only about 8.7% schools. This reflects
negligence on the part of the school authorities.
 The enrolment and other details from single register were obtained in only about
34.78% of schools.
 About 34.78% the schools had the copy of filled in DISE DCF.
 In 69.57% of the cases the investigators did not find any problem in getting the
required information from the school.
 In approximately 78.26% of schools had display board.
 In about 69.57% schools had the provision of midday meal in their schools.
4.2.0 Overview of Midday meal Provision in Porbandar District
In Porbandar district, it was observed that in most of the schools visited midday meal
provision was there. It is reflected in the graph below.
Graph_4.1: Midday meal provision in Porbandar district
In the DISE DCF (as described in the investigator’s feedback Schedule) there is a question
to describe quality of midday meal provided at the school for schools in which it is
provided. The responses were obtained for 16 schools in which the midday meal provision
was there. These responses were subjected to content analysis and following table was
generated to give a holistic picture of quality of food given in schools.
65
Table_4.2.1 Status of MDM in Porbandar District
Attribute
MDM facility is a regular feature in the school
Menu for MDM available in the school
Food provided according to the menu on the day of visit
MDM Menu provides variety of food throughout the week
MDM menu is displayed in the school
Every child in the school avails MDM facility
Food cooked in the school premises
There is a person in-charge for MDM in the school
Cleanliness is maintained during the cooking of the food (only where it is cooked)
Cleanliness is maintained during the storage of cooked food before and/ after MDM is served
Cleanliness is maintained during the serving of the food to the children (where observed)
These findings show good performance with respect to the attribute
These findings points to the areas which need immediate attention
No.
14
14
8
14
13
8
10
11
8
9
14
YES
%
87.50
87.50
50.00
87.50
81.25
50.00
62.50
68.75
50.00
56.25
87.50
No.
2
2
8
2
3
8
6
5
2
1
0
NO
%
12.50
12.50
50.00
12.50
18.75
50.00
37.50
31.25
12.50
6.25
0.00
*Percentage is calculated keeping 16
(no. of schools availing MDM)
The following observations can be made from the above table and the description obtained regarding the status of MDM at the schools of
Porbandar district:

In 87.50% of the school of Porbandar district MDM was found to be a regular feature and menu for MDM was also available in the school.
But on the day of visit in only 50% of the schools food was provided according to the menu. It is to be noted that in only 68.75% of the
schools visited had an MDM in-charge in the school.
66

The menu does reflect variety of the food items to be given to the children. The
reasons stated for not providing the variety in some cases observed are unavailability
of stock, unavailability of staff for cooking MDM, the MDM in charge occupied
with other tasks, the preferences of the students with respect to food provided (they
eat when menu is what they like), etc.

In 81.25% of the cases the menu was found displayed in the school.

In 62.50% of the schools the food is cooked in the school premises. The remaining
schools have MDM being supplied from neighboring schools or MDM being cooked
at the in-charge’s/cook’s house.

Cleanliness is maintained during cooking and storing of the food in more than 50.0%
of the schools of the district but cleanliness with respect to serving food was
observed in 87.50% of the schools.

In only 50.0% of the schools, all the children were observed having food from the
school. The attitude of the children and authorities towards this provision was not
observed to be very positive. There is some discrimination among the children
regarding the caste. They are reluctant to sit together and have food. At times the
caste of the cook and the children having MDM determines who will eat the food
from the school. MDM facility is looked down as a facility for poor children of the
village by the authorities and many students of the school.
4.3.0 Conclusion
The data collection in Porbandar district was completed smoothly in all the schools. In all
the schools data could be obtained in the very first visit without any problem being faced
by the field investigators, the response from the school authorities was supportive in most
of the cases.
The level of consistency observed between the findings of GCEE and CASE varied with
different variables.
Consistency has been observed with the following variables: Distribution of the Schools
by Educational Qualification of the Principal, Distribution of Schools by type of School,
Distribution of Schools by category, Distribution of Schools with respect to staff,
Distribution of Schools by lowest class in the School and type of school building and
availability of playground.
Minor variation in the findings has been observed with the following variables:
Distribution of Schools by the year of establishment, Distribution of the Schools by
67
experience of the Principal/Head Teacher in present school, distribution of schools by
management, Distribution of Schools by situation and type, distribution of schools by
management, distribution of schools by highest class in the school and Distribution of the
schools by facility.
Inconsistency has been observed in Students enrolment and grade wise examination results
of previous year and current year and staff details.
The attendance of the teachers on the day of survey was found to be 80.57%. In the
schools visited it was found that 6.3% of the position of teachers was vacant. It was
observed that the overall attendance of students on the day of visit was about 62.92%. The
preparation and maintenance of daily records is also observed in most of the schools and
availability of records is stated to be good in and very good in many schools but there was
delay observed in getting the recorded data by the school authorities in some schools.
School report card were available in only 8.7% of the schools. The midday meal
provision was observed in 69.57% of the schools visited in the district. The MDM feature
is stated to be regular in 87.5% of the schools having MDM facility and in 87.5% of the
cases Menu for MDM was available in the school. The menu was found displayed in
81.3% schools but only in 50.0% of the schools the food was provided as per the menu on
the day of visit. Cleanliness maintained during cooking, storing and serving of the food
given to children is not observed everywhere, in spite of the presence of MDM-in-charge
in 68.8% of the schools. The maintenance of cleanliness while serving food to the children
was observed highest in this district among the districts under the study. The level of
support and co-operation of all kind received in Porbandar district during the data
collection process was remarkable.
4.3.1 Remarks from Officer-In-Charge, MIS, Porbandar

DISE training is required for the new people in the system. Those who are working
in this field since sometime only need to be updated regarding the changes in the
DISE DCF. Every year prior to the filling of DISE forms a training of BRCC and
CRCC is conducted for this purpose. The CRCC’s train the head masters of the
schools in their cluster for it.

The infrastructure in the MIS Unit of Porbandar district is appropriate to meet the
requirements of the work undertaken. It includes computer systems, networking,
broadband internet connection, printers (HP Laser Jet), Fax machine, Xerox
machine, etc. Hardware and software are as per the need at the MIS unit. They are
properly maintained and regularly updated.
68

Once the DISE survey and compilation is completed, the school report cards are
given to Block MIS who passes it on to CRCCs. The CRCCs distribute it to the
headmaster’s of the schools in their cluster. The importance of this report card is
known to the school authorities. It is instructed to them to display the school report
card on the school notice board. But still the awareness regarding the importance of
this document is not observed in principals of many schools.

Key indicators regarding school are displayed on boards in almost all the schools.

At block levels, DISE data is available for any query to be answered. For any other
query it can be accessed through internet.

DISE data is used for AWP and B to assure appropriate allocation of funds, research
works, comparison of data at different times and with multiple indicators and for
strategy planning for improving the existing system.
4.3.2 Suggestions to improve quality of data from Officer-In-Charge, MIS Porbandar

DISE is a very good system, and doing excellent work in the field of education. In
our district the work is done with sincerity and commitment.

If the software for data feeding needs to be updated, it needs to be done well before
the actual data entry has to occur and it needs to be checked thoroughly for any
internal faults. The updating of the software for data feeding of DISE is done very
frequently. There is no scope of pilot run of this updated software. Many times it
happens that by the time the error is identified the whole data entry process has been
completed and the loss of data that happens here cannot be rectified.

The software should be made online, so that the installation problems are minimized.

The awareness regarding the school report card and its utility needs to be focused
with the Head teachers of the schools in the district.
69
CHAPTER 5
ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
OF SURENDRANAGAR DISTRICT
5.0.0 About Surendranagar District
Surendranagar district, located in the Saurashtra peninsula is a major hub for cotton and
ginning activities. It is one of world’s largest producers of "Shankar cotton" and home to
the first cotton trading exchange in India.
Surendranagar situated between 22° 43'N Latitude and 71° 43'E Longitude can be rightly
termed as gateway to Saurashtra. Also called the Wadhwan city, it is now a major trade
and processing centre for agricultural products, soap, glass, cotton, salt, pharmaceuticals,
chemicals and plastics, textile bearings, ceramics and sanitary ware. Some of the most
visited places in Surendranagar are: Nalsarovar Bird Sanctuary, Rankdevi temple, Wild
70
Ass Sanctuary, Tarnetar [famed for Trinetreshwar Mahadev Mela (Fair)], Chotila Hill and
Zharia Mahadev.
Literacy rate of the district as per census 2011 is 73.11%. The literacy rate among males of
the district is 83.47% and among females is 62.20%
5.1.0 Analysis and Interpretation of the Data
The analysis of data for the district Surendranagar with respect to different variables of the
tool administered for data collection is represented in the form of tables in which both
GCEE and CASE findings (Table_5.1.1 to Table_5.1.12) are included. These tables are
followed by the interpretation for the same. There are certain attributes regarding which
only findings of CASE are available, as they are applicable with DISE-GCEE
(Table_5.1.13 to Table_5.1.17). Those findings which show consistency are highlighted in
blue colour and ones with very little variation are reflected in green colour. The data
highlighted in red indicates a serious issue which needs to be looked into.
Table_5.1.1 : Distribution of the Schools by Educational Qualification of Principal
GCEE
CASE
Educational Qualification
No.
%
No.
%
SSC/HSC &PTC
43
69.35
38
61.29
Graduation &PTC
02
3.23
06
9.68
Graduation & B.Ed
03
4.84
03
4.84
Post Graduation & B.Ed./M.Ed.
02
3.23
08
12.90
ATD
00
0.0
02
3.23
Any other
12
19.35
05
8.06
Total
62
100.0
62
100.0
The comparison of data regarding the educational qualification of the principal of the
schools shows consistency to some extent. More than 60% have qualification SSC/HSC
and PTC. About 12.9% of school principals had Post graduation with B. Ed or M. Ed.
Table_5.1.2 : Distribution of the schools by experience of Principals / Head teacher
in present school
GCEE
CASE
No. of years
No.
%
No.
%
Up to 4 years
21
33.87
40
64.52
5 – 9 years
16
25.81
12
19.35
10-14 years
12
19.35
05
8.06
15-19 years
05
8.06
03
4.84
20 & more years
07
11.29
02
3.23
No response
01
1.61
00
0.00
Total
62
100.0
62
100.0
The comparison of findings regarding the experience of the principal of the schools under
study by CASE and GCEE shows inconsistency except in two cases. Proper care needs to
71
be taken at the grass root level itself; to see that not even a single question asked in the
DCF should remains unanswered.
Table_5.1.3 : Distribution of the schools by category
GCEE
CASE
School Category
No.
%
No.
%
Primary only
07
11.29
07
11.29
Primary with U P
55
88.71
55
88.71
Primary with U P & Sec. H. Sec
00
0.00
00
0.00
Upper Primary only
00
0.00
00
0.00
Upper Primary with Secondary / H. Sec
00
0.00
00
0.00
Total
62
100.0
62
100.0
The comparison of findings regarding the category of the Schools under study by CASE
and GCEE shows consistency. Most of the schools visited are having Primary with Upper
Primary (i.e. 88.71%).
Table_5.1.4 : Distribution of schools by type of school
GCEE
CASE
School Category
No.
%
No.
%
Boys only
04
6.45
04
6.45
Girls only
03
4.84
03
4.84
Co-education
55
88.71
55
88.71
Total
62
100.0
62
100.0
The comparison of findings regarding the type of the Schools under study by CASE and
GCEE show consistency. Most of the schools (i.e. 88.71%) are having co-education.
Table_5.1.5 : Distribution of schools by Management
GCEE
CASE
School Management
No.
%
No.
%
Education Department
00
0.00
00
0.00
Tribal Welfare Department
00
0.00
00
0.00
Local Body
57
91.94
57
91.94
Private Aided
00
0.00
00
0.00
Private Unaided
05
8.06
05
8.06
Other
00
0.00
00
0.00
Unrecognized
00
0.00
00
0.00
Total
62
100.0
62
100.0
The comparisons of findings regarding the management of the schools under study by
CASE and GCEE in table_7.1.5 show consistency. About 91.94% of schools are managed
by the local body. This is the only district which shows consistency with regard to this
attribute.
72
Table_5.1.6 : Distribution of schools by Type and Situation
GCEE
CASE
School Category
No.
%
No.
%
01
1.61
00
0.00
Residential School
Non Residential School
61
98.39
62
100.00
Total
62
100.0
62
100.00
Ashram (Govt.)
01
1.61
00
0.00
Non Ashram Type (Govt.)
00
0.00
00
0.00
Private
00
0.00
00
0.00
Others
00
0.00
00
0.00
Not Applicable
61
98.39
62
100.00
Total
62
100.0
62
100.00
School Building used as a part of
Shift School
Yes
11
17.74
11
17.74
No
51
82.26
51
82.26
Total
62
100.0
62
100.00
The comparison of findings regarding the type and situation of the schools under study by
CASE and GCEE shows good consistency. Most of the schools are non-residential types
(more than 98.0%) and the schools using the school building as part of shift school is also
less (i.e. 17.74%).
Table_5.1.7 : Distribution of schools by the year of establishment
GCEE
CASE
Year of Establishment
No.
%
No.
%
Before 1947
16
25.81
17
27.42
1947 – 1956
15
24.19
15
24.19
1957 – 1966
00
0.00
00
0.00
1967 – 1976
06
9.68
06
9.68
1977 – 1986
04
6.45
04
6.45
1987 – 1996
04
6.45
04
6.45
1997 - 2006
10
16.13
09
14.52
2007 – 2008
07
11.29
07
11.29
Total
62
100.0
62
100.00
The comparison in the above table shows consistency to a great extent. More than 25.0%
of the schools are functional before independence.
Table_5.1.8 : Distribution of schools by the lowest and highest class in school
Class
No.
LOWEST
Preprimary
I
Total
00
62
62
GCEE
%
No.
0.0
100.0
100.0
00
62
62
CASE
%
0.0
100.0
100.0
73
Table_5.1.8(…contd.):Distribution of schools by the lowest and highest class in school
Class
No.
HIGHEST
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
Total
GCEE
01
00
03
03
02
28
25
62
%
No.
1.61
0.00
4.84
4.84
3.23
45.16
40.32
100.0
01
00
03
03
02
23
30
62
CASE
%
1.61
0.00
4.84
4.84
3.23
37.10
48.39
100.0
The comparison of findings regarding the distribution of schools by the lowest and highest
class in the Schools under study by CASE and GCEE show consistency in the result that
all the schools under study have lowest class I but the number of schools having class VII
and VIII as highest class shows variation to some extent.
Table_5.1.9 : Distribution of the Schools with respect to staff
GCEE
CASE
Details of Staff
Primary
Primary
Primary
Primary
with UP
with UP
No. of Teacher (Excluding principal /
315
271
136
head teacher)
Para Teacher / Shiksha karmi/ Gujarati/
community teacher
Non-teaching staff
NA in DISE(GCEE)
Employed for cooking Mid-day meal
068
099
Employed for cleaning toilets
NA in DISE(GCEE)
Teachers present on the day of survey
237
121
479
485
Teacher posts sanctioned
315
472
Teachers in position
% of Teachers present on day of Survey
NA
75.85
The comparison of findings regarding the details of the staff of the Schools under study by
CASE and GCEE shows very little variation. The percentage of attendance of teachers on
the day of survey is found to be 75.85%. In the schools visited in the district 2.68% of
positions of teachers are vacant.
74
Sr.
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Table_5.1.10 : Distribution of the Schools by Facility
GCEE
School Category
No.
%
Status of School Building
Private
04
6.45
02
3.23
Rented
Government
53
85.48
Govt. In Rent Free
00
0.00
No Building
03
4.84
Total 62
100.0
Type of School Building
Pucca
57
91.94
Partially Pucca
00
0.00
Kuccha
01
1.61
Tent
01
1.61
No Building
03
4.84
Total 62
100.0
179
Total Number of Blocks in School
Class Room conditions
No. of Class rooms
Good Condition
324
90.00
Need Minor Repairs
025
6.94
Need Major Repairs
011
3.06
Unfit for Use
000
0.00
Total 360
100.0
No. of Other rooms
Good Condition
094
74.02
Need Minor Repairs
008
6.30
Need Major Repairs
025
19.69
Unfit for Use
000
0.00
100.0
Total 127
Electricity
Yes
61
98.39
No
01
1.61
Total 62
100.0
Common toilet available
Yes
03
4.84
No
59
95.16
Total 62
100.0
Separate Toilet available for Girls
Yes
58
93.55
No
04
6.45
Total 62
100.0
CASE
No.
%
04
02
54
00
02
62
6.45
3.23
87.10
0.00
3.23
100.0
59
00
1
00
02
62
140
95.16
0.00
1.61
0.00
3.23
100.0
341
026
017
023
407
83.78
6.39
4.18
5.65
100.0
69
00
03
05
77
89.61
0.00
3.90
6.49
100.0
59
03
62
95.16
4.84
100.0
19
43
62
30.65
69.35
100.0
52
10
62
83.87
16.13
100.0
75
Sr.
No.
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Table_5.1.10 (…contd.) : Distribution of the Schools by Facility
GCEE
CASE
School Category
No.
%
No.
%
Separate Toilet available for Staff
Yes
22
35.48
NA in DISE
(GCEE)
No
40
64.52
Total
62
100.0
Condition of Boundary wall
Pucca
50
80.65
48
77.42
Pucca but Broken
00
0.00
02
3.23
Barbed wire Fencing
02
3.23
02
3.23
Hedges
00
0.00
00
0.00
No Boundary Wall
06
9.68
07
11.29
Other
04
6.45
03
4.84
Total 62
100.0
62
100.0
Source of Drinking water
Hand pump
09
14.52
08
12.90
Well
05
8.06
05
8.06
Tap water
36
58.06
40
64.32
Others
12
19.35
07
11.29
No drinking water facility available
00
0.00
02
3.23
Total 62
100.0
62
100.0
Play Ground
Yes
44
70.97
44
70.97
No
18
29.03
18
29.03
Total 62
100.0
62
100.0
Number of Computers in Good
NA
433
Condition
Number of Computers Available in
547
477
School
Seating arrangement for Children in
School
Furniture for all Student
17
27.42
08
12.90
Furniture for some Student
31
50.00
39
62.90
No Furniture
14
22.58
15
24.19
Total 62
100.0
62
100.0
The level of consistency among the data obtained by GCEE and CASE varies for different
facilities. From the findings in the above table conclude that:
 Most of the schools visited had a building. Approximately 87.0% of school buildings
are government facilitated. More than 90.00% of school buildings are pucca.
 At least 84.0% of classrooms and about 90.0% of other rooms are in good condition.
 About 95.0% of the schools have electricity connection.
76
 There is high level of inconsistency with respect to the data of availability of the toilet
in the school. More than 83.0% of the schools have separate toilets for girls. But most
of the schools (64.5%) do not have separate toilets for the staff.
 In more than 75.0% schools, condition of the compound wall of school is ‘pucca’. The
findings regarding the condition of the compound wall show very little variation.
 About 60.0% of the schools have tap water as a source of water in the school
premises. It should be noted that there are still some schools (3.23%) with no facility
of drinking water in it as reported by CASE team.
 In 70.97% of schools have playground is available.
 About 24.0% of schools do not have any kind of furniture for children to sit and in
more than 60.0% of the schools furniture is available for some students.
 Of the computers available in the schools visited, 90.77% of them were found to be in
the good condition.
77
Table_5.1.11 : Students enrolment in Previous Academic year (2010-11)
GCEE
CASE
Enrolment
Classes
Total
Classes
I
II
III
IV
V
VI VII I-IV V-VII
I
II
III
IV
V
Boys 1206 1098 1091 988 936 825 744 4383 2505 1204 1081 1113 979 982
Total
Enrolment Girls 1043 1002 975 837 835 837 688 3857 2360 1072 1029 989 863 808
Boys 151 149 138 124 87 46 28 562
161
128 100
97
83 56
Repeaters
Girls 145 133 126 109 107 73 56 513
236
123 116 102 81 70
Boys 125 117
93
74 103 97 81 409
281
125 106 103 68 103
SC
Children
Girls 98
114
97
83 97 74 88 392
259
98
106 101 82 98
Boys 20
19
11
11
5
7
1
61
13
22
28
18
21
9
ST
Children
Girls
7
6
4
6
2
5
2
23
9
9
9
7
6
6
Boys 966 857 893 814 744 641 567 3530 1952 1001 879 927 824 745
OBC
Children
Girls 868 823 806 674 667 644 505 3171 1816 912 867 826 719 706
Boys 15
13
17
11 20 13 18
56
51
14
12
13
11 15
Disable
Children
Girls
9
12
9
7
10 11 17
37
38
12
12
9
9
11
Boys
1
0
0
1
3
Children
N.A. with DISE (GCEE)
left school
Girls
3
1
0
1
0
VI
895
784
38
45
98
76
14
9
652
657
15
6
2
0
VII
820
697
19
31
78
89
9
12
604
575
8
7
1
0
Total
I-IV V-VII
4377 2697
3953 2289
408
113
422
146
402
279
387
263
89
32
31
27
3631 2001
3324 1938
50
38
42
24
2
6
5
0
The level of consistency among the data obtained by GCEE and CASE varies for different categories in the enrollment of children of the school.
The numerical data appearing in bold reflects consistency to some extent. Consistency is observed in the enrolment figures of boys and girls of
in disabled category and girls of classes I to VI.
78
Enrolment
I
Boys 1116
Total
Enrolment Girls 1036
Boys 176
Repeaters
Girls 159
Boys 96
SC
Children
Girls 114
Boys 26
ST
Children
Girls
24
Boys 925
OBC
Children
Girls 846
Boys 13
Disable
Children
Girls
11
Children Boys
left school Girls
II
1080
1011
138
151
111
95
21
15
891
849
16
21
Table_5.1.12: Students enrolment in Current Academic year (2011-12)
GCEE
CASE
Classes
Total
Classes
III
IV
V
VI VII I-IV V-VII
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
1070 977 852 888 729 4243 2469 1134 1132 1074 993 899 875
974 898 812 786 774 3919 2372 1028 1022 993 900 824 784
161 108 61
65
31
583
157
139
100
126
79
44
44
149
83
74
46
542
152
113
119
110
56
65
32
32
136
99
442
322
90
123
105
89
93 135 94
95 118
98 100 116 73
426
289
97
119
114
99
117 104 97
28
23
15
8
98
38
19
12
18
16
10
15
12
22
11
15
14
72
36
13
10
8
5
6
7
5
842 791 687 681 573 3449 1941 912
921
864 799 721 686
739
597
587
3229
1837
828
795
653
851
796 733 649 608
9
19
44
7
16
16
16
17
8
54
17
16
12
59
28
13
17
10
8
9
11
10
15
13
7
5
1
2
1
0
0
0
N.A. with DISE (GCEE)
3
1
1
0
1
0
VII
745
770
22
31
89
81
6
5
578
573
10
9
0
2
Total
I-IV V-VII
4333 2519
3943 2378
444
110
398
128
407
302
434
275
65
28
36
16
3496 1985
3208 1830
38
56
51
21
4
0
5
3
The data obtained by GCEE and CASE is consistent in at least one of the classes in each category. The data of disabled children Class V shows
better consistency when compared to the other categories.
79
Table_5.1.13(CASE): Student enrolment and attendance details of children on the day of survey
Enrolment on the Day of Survey
Attendance on the Day of Survey
Total
SC
ST
Total
SC
ST
Class
Boys
Girls
Boys
Girls
Boys
Girls
Boys
Girls
Boys
Girls
Boys
Girls
Class I
857
858
72
74
12
5
676
688
58
60
11
5
Class II
1028
941
87
112
23
8
835
770
81
103
12
7
Class III
1029
949
102
91
15
10
864
755
114
79
11
5
Class IV
999
929
107
125
12
4
858
784
103
112
11
1
Class V
937
855
100
103
12
3
793
708
93
91
5
2
Class VI
808
758
86
101
7
3
679
627
77
83
9
1
Class VII
773
727
108
102
5
1
686
569
99
85
1
1
Total
6431
6017
662
708
86
34
5391
4901
625
613
60
22
78.88
80.19
80.56
81.08
91.67
100.0
Class I
81.23
81.83
93.10
91.96
52.17
87.50
Class II
83.97
79.56
111.76
86.81
73.33
50.00
Class III
85.89
84.39
96.26
89.60
91.67
25.00
Class IV
Percentage of Attendance on the day of Survey
84.63
82.81
93.00
88.35
41.67
66.67
Class V
84.03
82.72
89.53
82.18
128.57
33.33
Class VI
78.27
91.67
83.33
20.00
100.0
Class VII 88.75
Total 83.83
81.45
94.41
86.58
69.77
64.71
These findings show better performance compared to others categories in each class.
These findings show poor performance compared to others categories in each class
These finding reflect some error in the data obtained
The data for the student enrolment and attendance details of children on the day of survey was not available with DISE (GCEE). The overall
percentage of attendance is about 82.68% but in case of ST girls’ category the attendance was lowest. The low attendance in each class with ST
children reflects area of concern if it is same every day in the schools. The error in the data obtained reduces the authenticity of the whole
enrolment data for the district.
80
Table_5.1.14 (CASE) Grade wise examination details for last academic year (2010-11)
Enrolment at the end of year
Appeared for the Examination
Passed in the Examination
Class
Total
SC
ST
Total
SC
ST
Total
SC
ST
Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls
971 863 117
96
6
2
940 815 113
94
6
2
900 778
107
91
5
2
V
813 741 105
98
1
2
786 704 104
95
1
2
773 701
105
94
1
2
VII
96.8 94.4 96.6 97.9 100.0 100.0 92.7 90.2 91.5 94.8 83.3 100.0
V
Percentage of Students in the Class
96.7 95.0 99.0 96.9 100.0 100.0 95.1 94.6 100.0 95.9 100.0 100.0
VII
These findings show better performance compared to others categories in each class.
These findings show poor performance compared to others categories in each class
The findings with respect to grade wise examination detail are available with CASE only. The high percentages of students appearing in
examination and students passing the examination are good indicators reflecting the status of school education. The low percentages of ST boys
of class V is of concern.
Table_5.1.15 (CASE) Grade wise examination details for present academic year (2011-12)
Enrolment at the end of year
Appeared for the Examination
Passed in the Examination
Class
Total
SC
ST
Total
SC
ST
Total
SC
ST
Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls
924 809
89
104
5
4
909 801
88
103
5
4
911 800
86
100
5
4
V
690 725
74
85
2
2
685 718
74
81
2
2
687 699
74
81
2
2
VII
98.4
99.0
98.9
99.0
98.6
98.9
96.6
96.2
V
100.0 100.0
100.0 100.0
Percentage of Students in the Class
99.3 99.0 100.0 95.3 100.0 100.0 99.6 96.4 100.0 95.3 100.0 100.0
VII
These findings show better performance compared to others categories in each class.
These findings show poor performance compared to others categories in each class
81
The table_5.1.15 gives the Grade wise examination details for present academic year (2011-12) which is available with CASE only. The high
percentages of students appearing in examination and students passing the examination are good indicators reflecting the status of School
education. The lowest percentage is of girls from SC category appearing in exams and passing the exam.
Table_5.1.16 (CASE) Attributes pertaining to Principal/Head Teacher towards Investigation as in Investigator’s feedback schedule
Category of responses from school
Very Good
Good
Average
Poor
Very Poor
Total
Attribute
No.
%
No. %
No.
%
No. %
No. %
No.
%
Initial reaction of the principal/ head teacher
15
24.2 39 62.9
8
12.9
0
0.0
0
0.0
62 100.0
Response of the Principal/Head teacher to provide
12
19.4 39 62.9 10 16.1
1
1.6
0
0.0
62 100.0
information
Availability of records
5
8.1
29
46.8
23
37.1
4
6.5
1
1.6
62
100.0
The above data is not applicable in DISE (GCEE). From the findings of CASE we can conclude that:

The initial reaction towards the investigation is described to be very good and good in about 87.1% of schools, which reflects the positive
attitude of school authorities towards such studies.

It is once again confirmed by their response to provide the information which was described to be very good and good in the investigators
feedback schedule in about 82.3% of the schools.

Availability of records with the school authorities was described to be good and very good in only 54.9% schools. It was stated to be poor
or very poor in about 9.0% of the cases which needs immediate attention.
82
Table_5.1.17 (CASE) Feedback about record maintenance and school organization
Responses
No Response
Attribute
Yes
No
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
Complete information gathered in first visit
0
0.0
0
0.0
62
100.0
Information pertaining to enrolment and details of pass
54
87.1
8
12.9
0
0.0
percentage was obtained easily
Enrolment and other details from single register
14
22.6
47
75.8
1
1.6
Teachers in the school fill up the attendance regularly
50
80.6
11
17.7
1
1.6
Principal have year end summary details of Children for
54
87.1
7
11.3
1
1.6
all grades available with him
The School Report Card was available in the school
28
45.2
2
3.2
32
51.6
Attendance register properly maintained and kept in
48
77.4
13
21.0
1
1.6
Almirahs
Teachers come to school on time
43
69.4
18
29.0
1
1.6
School has a copy of filled in DISE DCF
24
38.7
37
59.7
1
1.6
Investigator face any problem in getting the required
18
29.0
43
69.4
1
1.6
information from the school
School has display board
56
90.3
5
8.1
1
1.6
Provision of midday meal
54
87.1
8
12.9
0
0.0
No.
62
Total
%
100.0
62
100.0
62
62
100.0
100.0
62
100.0
62
100.0
62
100.0
62
62
100.0
100.0
62
100.0
62
62
100.0
100.0
These findings show good performance with respect to the attribute
These findings points to the areas which need immediate attention
The above data is not applicable in DISE (GCEE). From the findings of CASE we can conclude some of the features of the schools in the district
Surendranagar. They are:

In Surendranagar district, in all the schools complete information was obtained on the first visit itself.

About 90.3% schools had display board in their schools.
83

Complete information was gathered in first visit itself from all the selected schools
except one.

In approximately 87.1% of the schools, information pertaining to enrolment and
details of pass percentage was obtained easily and the principal had the year end
summary details of children for all grades available with him.

In 87.5% of the schools visited teachers filled up the attendance regularly.

The provision for midday meal was found to be present in 87.1% of the schools.

In about 77.4% schools visited, the attendance register was properly maintained and
kept in almirahs. But only in 22.6% of Schools the enrolment and other details was
obtained from a single register.

A copy of filled in DISE DCF was found available in 38.7% of the schools.

But the sad part is that almost 51.6% of the schools did not have the school report
card available in the school.
5.2.0 Overview of Midday meal Provision in Surendranagar District
In Surendranagar district, it was observed that most of the schools visited had mid day
meal provision. The graph below represents the availability of midday meal in schools.
Graph_5.1: Midday meal provision in Surendranagar district
In the DISE DCF there is a question to describe the quality of midday meal provided at the
school for the schools in which it is provided. The responses were obtained for 54 schools
having midday meal provision. These responses were subjected to content analysis and the
following table_5.2.1 was generated to give a holistic picture the status of MDM.
84
Table_5.1.1 Status of MDM in Surendranagar District
Attribute
MDM facility is a regular feature in the school
Menu for MDM available in the school
Food provided according to the menu on the day of visit
MDM Menu provides variety of food throughout the week
MDM menu is displayed in the school
Every child in the school avails MDM facility
Food cooked in the school premises
There is a person in-charge for MDM in the school
Cleanliness is maintained during the cooking of the food (only where MDM is cooked) #
Cleanliness is maintained during the storage of cooked food before and after MDM is served #
Cleanliness is maintained during the serving of the food to the children #
These findings show good performance with respect to the attribute
These findings points to the areas which need immediate attention
The sum of number of responses may not make 54 as these attributes are subjective. They are
stated in those schools where in it was observed by FIs personally on the day of visit to each school.
No.
51
47
42
51
42
24
30
52
27
38
40
Yes*
%
94.44
87.04
77.78
94.44
77.78
44.44
55.56
96.30
50.00
70.37
74.07
No*
No.
%
3
5.56
7
12.96
12
22.22
3
5.56
12
22.22
30
55.56
24
44.44
2
3.70
12
22.22
10
18.52
9
16.67
*Percentage is calculated keeping 54
(no. of schools availing MDM)
#
The following observations can be made from the above table and the description obtained regarding the status of MDM at the schools of
Surendranagar district:

In 94.44% of the school of Surendranagar district MDM was found to be a regular feature and menu for MDM was also available in most
of the cases and in about 77.78% of the schools the menu was also followed. It is to be noted that in 96.30% of the schools visited had an
MDM in-charge in the school.
85

The menu does reflect variety of the food items to be given to the children. The
reasons stated for not providing the variety in some cases observed are unavailability
of stock, unavailability of staff for cooking MDM, the MDM in charge occupied
with other tasks, the preferences of the students with respect to food provided (they
eat when menu is what they like), it was Thithi bhojan or Van bhojan on the day of
visit, etc.

In 77.78% of the cases the menu was found displayed in the school.

In 59.26% of the schools the food is cooked in the school premises. The remaining
schools have MDM being supplied from neighboring schools or MDM being cooked
at the in-charge’s/cook’s house.

Cleanliness is maintained during cooking, serving and storing of the food in more
than 65.0% of the schools of the district.
5.3.0 Conclusion
The data collection went on smoothly in Surendranagar and was completed timely and in
all the schools data could be obtained in the very first visit. The response from the school
authorities was supportive in most of the cases except a few. The problems faced by the
field investigators were: delay in providing information as the principal alone could not
respond instantly to the questions and locate the files where the data was recorded. The
district shows good consistency amongst most of the variables when compared to other
districts.
The level of consistency observed between the findings of GCEE and CASE varied with
different variables. But it needs to be noted that in Surendranagar district the level of
consistency among the data is much better compared to the other districts.
Consistency has been observed with the variables: Distribution of schools by category,
Distribution of Schools by type of School, Distribution of Schools by type and situation,
Distribution of Schools by the lowest class and Distribution of Schools by facility.
Minor Variation is observed with the following variables: Distribution of the Schools by
Educational Qualification of the Principal, Distribution of the school by experience of the
principal or head teacher in the present school, Distribution of schools with the highest
class in school and Distribution of Schools by the year of establishment.
Inconsistency is observed in Distribution of Schools with respect to staff and total
enrolment in previous academic year and current academic year and number of repeaters.
The percentage of attendance of the teachers on the day of survey was found to be
75.85%. The total students’ attendance was about 82.68%.The preparation and
86
maintenance of daily records and its availability was observed in the schools but during
the data collection difficulty was obtained in locating the data recorded. The school report
cards were available with only 45.2% of the schools visited in the district. The midday
meal provision was found to be available in 87.1% of the schools in the sample from the
district. The MDM feature is stated to be regular in 94.4% of the schools having MDM
facility and in 87.04% of the cases Menu for MDM was available in the school. In 77.8%
of the schools, menu was found displayed and the food was provided as per the menu on
the day of visit. Cleanliness maintained during cooking, storing and serving of the food
given to children is not observed everywhere, in spite of the presence of MDM-in-charge
in 96.3% of the schools. But the issue of hygiene, lack of responsibility from the school
authorities and following the menu still prevails where the MDM provision is not taken
seriously. The schools of the district have cooperated in a positive way towards providing
data during the data collection.
5.3.1 Remarks from Officer-In-Charge, MIS, Surendranagar

The training is given to MIS (Block) & BRC for filing of DISE DCF. They give the
training to CRC’s who are responsible to give the training to the head masters.

The infrastructure at MIS unit is as per the requirement.

School report cards are given to the BRCs who give them to the CRCs. The CRCs
give them to the head masters. They are instructed to put the School report card on
the display board. This gives an idea (to any observer) about the school.

DISE data is available at district level only. This is due to the frequent problems
occurring in ORACLE database & its maintenance. At district level since it is
continuously used, data can be procured anytime.

Meeting is conducted with Block MIS and BRCs regarding the information gathered
in DISE. The report is made and given to DPO, DDO, DTS, and DPEO.

DISE data is used in AWP&B.

One workshop is conducted to give training regarding the filling up of DISE DCFs
(just before DISE starts).
This year ‘DISE week’ was celebrated at cluster and block level involving the
teachers, head teachers, CRCC’s, BRCC’s and SMC members. This workshop was
intended to create awareness regarding DISE and sensitize the importance of their
role in the whole system. The seriousness regarding the DISE work is being
observed at the data entry level but it is yet to be seen in the aspect of School report
cards at school level.
87

Data feeding is done by Block MIS along with respective CRCs. The query &
confusion regarding any data is clarified then and there itself after consulting the
respective principal.

HW & SW are updated. The number of systems is not sufficient when there are
multiple work / projects going on in the unit.
5.3.2 Suggestions to improve quality of data from the Officer-In-Charge, MIS,
Surendranagar

The training should be of Head Master and one Assistant Teacher from each school
for filling up the DISE DCFs. This would help in more clarity and distribution of the
task in proper manner. Many a times you do not get the head master to clarify your
queries.

There should be uniform system of training regarding filling up of DISE DCFs in all
districts and there by states of the country to enhance the reliability of the data.

Awareness workshops regarding DISE needs to be conducted for the teachers and
SMC members prior to the filling up of the DISE DCF for that year. The utility and
importance of school report card must be emphasized, so that it is preserved in the
school appropriately.
88
CHAPTER 6
FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS
6.0.0 Introduction
The research conducted by the CASE project team reflected was successfully completed
and many significant findings have surfaced on the basis of the data obtained, analyzed
and interpreted. The comparison of the data collected for the 217 schools of Gujarat state
from the three districts namely; Panchmahal, Porbandar and Surendranagar by Gujarat
Council of Elementary Education, Gandhinagar and Project Team of CASE, revealed
insignificant discrepancies. The inconsistencies observed varied for different variables,
and there were cases wherein the data from both GCEE and CASE showed consistency
(e.g. Distribution of schools by year of establishment, Distribution by type of school, etc.)
6.1.0 Major Findings
The major findings of the study conducted are presented in four subparts; one findings
based on comparison of data, second findings based on status of midday meal, third the
findings based on teacher and student attendance on day of survey and lastly findings
regarding the feedback on record maintenance and school organisation.
6.1.1 Findings based on comparison of data
On comparing the data obtained from GCEE and CASE for the three districts following
were the findings:

The consistency is observed regarding most of the variables. All the variables
showing consistency were not the same for each district.

The level of consistency was observed to be good with respect to the following
variables in all the districts: distribution of schools by category, distribution of
school by type and situation and distribution of schools by type of school.

Inconsistency was observed in all the districts with respect to the distribution of
schools by management, distribution of schools by the qualification of the principal
of the school, distribution of schools with experience of principal in the same school.

The level of inconsistency differed for different variables within the district and
among the districts.

The data from Surendranagar district showed good consistency, compared to other
districts in the study.
89
6.1.2 Findings regarding the Status of midday meal
The findings related to the status of midday meal were drawn from the responses obtained
in the investigators feedback Schedule of DISE DCF (CASE). These findings could be
subjective as description of quality of same food for different individuals could be
different, especially when the description is asked and no criterion is mentioned. The
following were the findings regarding the midday meal provision in the schools:

In many schools the quality of food served on the day of visit is described to be
good.

Panchmahal district shows highest number of schools with MDM facility but quality
of food and sincerity from the authorities in making it a regular feature is a concern.
In Panchmahal district only 41.5% of the schools provided food according to the
menu, even though this district shows highest number of favorable aspects of MDM
such as in-charge for MDM in schools (95.9%), Menu displayed in school (95.1%),
food cooked in the school premises (98.4%), etc. Surendranagar district records
highest percentage of the schools (77.8%) providing the food according to the menu
on the day of visit.

The quality of food was also described to be hygienically cooked in very few cases.
Hygiene becomes secondary consideration when the schools are not ready to take the
responsibility of planning and provide midday meal consistently. The maintenance
of cleanliness during cooking, storing and serving food to the children is also seen in
good number of schools in the state (more than 60.0% of the schools). Porbandar
district showed 87.5% of the schools serving MDM maintaining cleanliness during
serving the food to the children.

The description of the quality of food raises many issues, such as; healthy and
hygienically cooked food, availability of menu for the provision, insufficient stock,
unavailability of the MDM cooking staff, etc. which needs to be looked upon.
6.1.3 Findings regarding teacher and student attendance on day of survey
The findings related to the attendance of teachers and students on the day of survey were
obtained after analysis the data for the same which was available with CASE only. The
following were the findings:

Panchmahal district shows lowest attendance of teachers (75.14%) and students
(61.27%) on the day of visit far below average of the state (all the three districts
combined in this study). This is a serious issue to be addressed with immediacy and
if this is a consistent situation in the district then it has to be taken care of.
90

Highest attendance of the teachers on the day of survey is shown in Porbandar
district (80.57%). In Porbandar district, teachers have been appointed in all the posts
sanctioned for teachers in school. Highest attendance of students on the day of
survey is shown in Surendranagar district (82.68%).

On an average considering the three districts together, the teacher’s attendance is
found to be 76.09% and student’s attendance 68.99%, on the day of survey for the
state. About 98.04% of seats sanctioned for the teachers are filled in state.
6.1.4 Findings regarding the feedback on record maintenance and school
organisation
The findings related to the record maintenance and school organisation was obtained after
analysis the data for the same which was available with CASE only. The following were
the findings:

In 95.39% schools the complete data was obtained in the first visit itself.

Information pertaining to enrolment and details of pass percentage was obtained
easily in 82.49% while 17.51% of schools still found it difficult to provide
information.

Of the total 217 schools in 67(30.88%) schools the details regarding the enrolment
were not compiled in a single register while in 149(68.66%) schools they could be
obtained from single register.

In 184 (84.79%) schools the attendance was maintained while in 32 (14.75%)
schools this was not observed.

Of the total 217 schools in 190 (87.56%) schools principals had year-end summary
details of children for all grades.

The school report card was available in only 44.7% schools. Panchmahal has highest
number of schools having report cards and Porbandar has the least number of school
having report cards on the day of survey.

In 84.79% schools the attendance register was properly maintained and kept in
almirahs.

In only 58.06% of the schools teachers came to school on time. In 79.26% schools
the teachers in the school fill up the attendance regularly.

Only 46.08% of the schools had the copy of filled in DISE DCF.

In 67.28% of the cases the investigators did not find any problem in getting the
required information from the school.

About 94.0% of schools had a display board.
91

In 88.48% of the schools the provision of midday meal was observed. Still there are
about 11% of the schools which do not provide MDM.
6.2.0 Conclusion
The study conducted here reflects that overall the system of DISE is in place at all levels
(School, Cluster, Block, District and State). The staff associated with DISE are provided
with sufficient physical facilities to complete the work in time and effectively. Still some
misunderstanding does exist in certain aspects of the DISE format (e.g. understanding of
the school management especially among ‘educational department’ and ‘local body’ and
experience of head teacher/principal in the school they are serving). The comparison of the
data obtained from GCEE and CASE for the three districts shows consistency with respect
to some variables and minor variations are observed in the remaining variables The
midday meal provision was found to be present in only about 88.9% of the schools visited.
The effort to facilitate MDM provision in schools was seen but the implementation part
still lacks effectiveness. The quality of food was also described to be good by the
investigators in many of the cases, but there are serious issues which need to be looked
upon regarding the way the provision is made available to the children of the school. The
attitude of the authorities towards the MDM provision in schools needs to be reoriented to
make it effective. The unavailability of school report cards and the awareness of its
importance among the school authorities is a serious concern which has been highlighted
in the findings.
6.3.0 Suggestions to improve quality of DISE data
During the interactions with the authorities at different levels, the kind of response from
the school authorities and from the inconsistency observed in the findings; some
significant suggestions to improve the quality of DISE data emerged out.
The suggestions are as follows:

During the training of BRCC’s, CRCC’s and Head Teachers regarding the filling in
of the DISE formats every year, clarification regarding what is intended by the
‘School Management Body’ in the format has to be made. It has been observed that
in findings of all the districts inconsistency is found in the response reported by
CASE and GCEE. Confusion seems to exist between ‘Educational Department’ and
‘Local Body’ in the response for the same. This could be due to the school authorities
being unaware regarding the managing body of the school. The data from GCEE is
close to the original records, it could be so as the CRCCs are present during the
DISE DCF filling. But when the sample checking is being done CRCCs are not
92
present with the principal to fill up the requirements. During training of head
teacher/principal of the schools more emphasis needs to be given to their awareness
about the basic details/information regarding the school they are serving.

In the variable Grade wise examination results for present and previous academic
year, it is observed that in many cases the number of students appearing in the
examination exceeds the total number of students enrolled and the number of
students passing the examination exceeds the number of students appearing the
examination and at times it also exceeds the number of students enrolled. At most
care needs to be taken for filling up such details, so that the data can be
representative of the actual situation existing and can be appropriately used.

The training should be of Head Master and one Assistant Teacher from each school
for filling up the DISE DCFs. This would help in more clarity and distribution of
the task in proper manner. Many a times the head master is not available to clarify
the queries during data feeding and crosschecking.

Some workshops or trainings should be conducted including all block MIS, BRCCs
and CRCCs. This will enhance sharing and knowing each other more effectively
than the teleconferencing conducted at present.

Social Audit of the school report cards has to be encouraged and made a
compulsory feature of the school activities. This will ensure the document being
preserved and utilized properly. The school report card is a document of multiple
utility. It helps to get all the information of the school at a glance. The previous
school report cards of the school can be compared to find the progress of the school
and to channelise the efforts needed to improve the attributes in which the school is
lacking. Reading of the school report with the village of community creates
awareness regarding the school in the community, they would be aware of the funds
allocated to the school and so they can question the utilization of the same from the
authorities (This can also help in assuring the proper utilization of funds for school.)
But all this utility is not possible in absence of the school report card.

The midday meal provision is found to be present in most of the schools but the
quality with which it is done in the schools has to be improved. There needs to be an
ownership feeling from the side of the authorities and it has to be transferred to the
children in terms of values, manners, etc. The attitude of the principal and the
children regarding the midday meal facility needs to be reviewed and given a
positive approach of thinking.
93

Awareness needs to be created regarding DISE amongst everyone who is in direct
contact with the work. This will ensure more commitment and ownership towards
ones duty.

Workshops and information sharing meetings should be conducted on regular basis
including people at different levels, so that all the concerned authorities are updated
with the latest information.

There needs to be continuous supervision and cross checking of the data when it is
entered at the block level and any query or confusion needs to be clarified with the
principal of the respective school then and there itself. This would minimize the
chances of wrong data being fed at the very first level to make data more reliable.

Close check needs to be kept to trace down the errors to the School level and get it
rectified. Some penalty needs to be imposed on the authorities for providing
incorrect / partial information. Information regarding any aspect has to be complete
and true to increase the authenticity of the work done.

The units performing up to the mark or more in providing data and supporting the
investigation must be appreciated for their work and encouraged to continue in the
same manner in future also. They should be recognition given for their work in the
field of education in the village/cluster/block. They should be provided sufficient
technical support to grow more and improve to the optimum level.
94
REFERENCES
Patel R. C. et. al. (2011), “Sample Checking of DISE data of Gujarat State”, A Research
Report, The Maharaja University of Baroda: Vadodara
Patel R. C. et. al. (2010), “Sample Checking of DISE data of Gujarat State”, A Research
Report, The Maharaja University of Baroda: Vadodara
Patel R. C. et. al. (2009), “Sample Checking of DISE data of Gujarat State”, A Research
Report, The Maharaja University of Baroda: Vadodara
Patel R. C. et. al. (2008), “Sample Checking of DISE data of Gujarat State”, A Research
Report, The Maharaja University of Baroda: Vadodara
http://www.indiaedu.com/education-india/elementaryeducation.html
http://www.educationforallindia.com/ssa.htm
http://www.dise.in/
http://www.nuepa.org/
http://www.education.nic.in/plan/niepa.asp
http://www.mapsofindia.com/maps/gujarat/districts/porbandar.htm
http://www.mapsofindia.com/maps/gujarat/districts/panchmahal.htm
http://www.mapsofindia.com/maps/gujarat/districts/surrendranagar.htm
http://www.census.gov.in/2011-prov-results/data_files/gujarat/table-5.x
95
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: A copy of the letter from the GCEE to DPEOs of three selected districts
96
APPENDIX B: List Of Schools in the Sample for the study
PROJECT: 5% SAMPLE CHECKING OF DISE DATA OF GUJARAT STATE FOR 2011-12
Sr.
No.
SCHCD
CLUNAME
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
24170107403
24170104503
24170108602
24170102502
24170101002
24170102908
24170107004
24170102702
24170106302
24170102801
24170103201
24170101201
Adepur
Rinchvani
Zabkuva
Gamani
Chathi
Ghoghamba
Rinchvani
Khuntvadiya varg(vankod)
Padhora
Gundi
Ruparel
Chandranagar
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
24170207902
24170204511
24170201603
24170208701
24170206303
24170208502
24170206401
24170203122
24170207501
24170206001
24170203103
24170203148
24170200903
24170207402
Rampur jodka
Kankanpur
Chhabanpur
Mor dungara
Bhamaiya
Bagidol
Dhanitra
Dalunivadi
Vanakpur
Bhamaiya
Dalunivadi
Dalunivadi
Ambali chhatralay
Chhavad
District : PANCHMAHAL (133)
VILNAME
Block: GHOGHAMBA
Shamalkuva
Khanpatla
Vavkulli
Gamani
Bor
Ghoghamba
Rinchhavani
Garmotiya
Padhora
Ghogha
Goyasundal
Chandranagar
Block: GODHRA
Ratanpur
Kakanpur
Chhabanpur
Sampa
Mota bhamaiya
Rupanpura
Motal
Godhra
Popatpura
Merap
Godhra
Godhra
Betiya
Pipaliya
SCHNAME
Uttar f. Varg shamalkuva
Kharedi f. Khanpatla
Dungar f. Vavkulli
Tadvi f. Gamani
Bor p.shala
Nalanda vidhyalay
Rinchhvani varg
Garmotiya p.shala
Padhora p.shala
Ghogha p.shala
Goyasundal p.shala
Chandranagar p.shala
Ratanpur (manipur) p.shala
Timbani muvadi p.shala
Chhabanpur n.v.
Chora faliya (sampa) p.shala
Nayak f. Bhamaiya p.shala
Rupanpura p.shala
Ghamirna muvada p.shala
Mama fadke ashram shala
Kankarikhan p.shala
Luhar f. Varg merap
Anaj mahajan p.shala
Sharda mandir school
Khant na muvada p.shala
Pipaliya (east) p.shala
97
Sr.
No.
SCHCD
CLUNAME
27
28
29
30
31
32
24170205601
24170207101
24170203602
24170209501
24170204503
24170203401
Sankali
Orwada
Tuva
Gadukpur
Kakanpur kanya
Gothda
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44#
24170307902
24170301502
24170301401
24170309302
24170300301
24170301902
24170307402
24170310203
24170308302
24170309604
24170300602
24170307403
Palanpur
Pavagadh
Vagbord
Shivrajpur
Ramajikhant na muvada
Navakuva
Dhinkva
Talavadi
Halol kanya shala
Ramajikhant na muvada
Arad
Dhinkva
45
46
47
48
49
24170400901
24170403201
24170401001
24170400501
24170401401
Duma
Nizran dilgam
Jambughoda
Nizran dilgam
Haveli
50
51
52
53
54
24170504501
24170500709
24170503701
24170507101
24170507202
Juni godhar
Rathadakotal
Juni godhar
Motiranth
Munpur
District : PANCHMAHAL (133)
VILNAME
Block: GODHRA (…contd.)
Ladpur
Orwada
Gusar
Thana garjan
Kakanpur
Gothda
Block: HALOL
Palanpur
Champaner
Bhinda
Shivrajpur
Amarapuri
Chhatardivav
Nani umarvan
Talavadi
Pratappura
Sonipur
Arad
Nani umarvan
Block: JAMBUGHODA
Duma
Nizran faliya
Fulpuri
Chalvad
Haveli
Block: KADANA
Karvai
Bachkariya uttar
Jogan
Moti ranth
Munpur
SCHNAME
Ladpur p.shala
Balupura varg p.shala
Gusar n.v. p.shala
Thana garjan p.shala
Dasar p.shala
Gothda timba road p.shala
Rayankhand p.shala
Chhasiya talav p.shala
Bhinda p.shala
Junibhat p.shala
Amrapuri p.shala
Chhatardi vav ashramshala
Nani umarvan p.shala
Tadhodiya p.shala
Pratappura p.shala
Sonipur ashramshala
Pingali muvadi p.shala
Rathva f.varg nani umarvan
Dhelar f. Varg
Nizran faliya p.shala
Fulpari p. Shala
Chalvad p.shala
Haveli p.shala
Karvai p.shala
Vada faliya bachkariya uttar
Jogan p.shala
Bhugapada f. Varg
Dharva p. Shala
98
Sr.
No.
SCHCD
CLUNAME
55
56
57
58
59
24170502309
24170503901
24170508501
24170509601
24170505301
Dintvas
Kajali
Ghasvada
Motiranth
Shiyal
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
24170601607
24170606003
24170602713
24170604803
24170603210
24170602402
24170605701
24170605503
24170603202
24170601602
Delol
Eral
Kalol
Derol gam
Karoli
Jantral
Derol station
Sansoli
Chalali
Delol
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
24170705304
24170705102
24170703001
24170706901
24170700805
24170701501
24170706401
Khutelav
Muda vadekh
Padedi
Vadagam
Mota khanpur
Bakor
Bedvalli
77
78
79
80
81
82
24170816901
24170806302
24170817401
24170813001
24170810002
24170817802
Dr. Polan school
Thanasavali
Ranpur
Charangam (nam)
Kharol
Thanasavali
District : PANCHMAHAL (133)
VILNAME
Block: KADANA (…contd.)
Dintvas
Kajali
Nindka uttar
Rathada bet
Lapaniya
Block: KALOL
Delol
Varvada
Kalol
Pingali
Karoli
Jantral
Shamaldevi
Sansoli
Karoli
Delol
Block: KHANPUR
Naroda
Mudavadekh
Kanod
Vadagam
Bhadrod
Dalelpura
Tankna bhevada
Block: LUNAWDA
Shero
Guvariya
Taktajina palla
Motipura
Kharol
Thanasavali
SCHNAME
Kheda f. Varg dintwas
Kajali p.shala
Nindka uttar p.shala
Rathada bet p.shala
Lapaniya p.shala
Sarsvati p. Shala
Vanta p.shala varvada
Shree bhagini seva mandal
Rajpur p.shala
Sultanpura p.shala
Jantral kumar shala
Moti shamaldevi p.shala
Sonsoli kumar shala
Dhunader p.shala
Delol kumar shala
Umariya p.shala
Bariyana timba varg
Chanashero p.shala
Jetpur p.shala
Bamaniya f.varg mena
Dalelpura p.shala
Tankna bhevada p.shala
Shero p.shala
Navi vasahat guvariya
Nayak f. Varg p.shala
Motipura p.shala
Paniya p.shala
Mal talavadi p.shala
99
Sr.
No.
SCHCD
CLUNAME
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
24170800701
24170812003
24170818601
24170812701
24170801201
24170810802
24170800103
24170813202
24170815002
24170803101
24170811201
24170802301
24170803903
Zara
Jufarali
Ranpur
Branch shala no.1
Hardaspur
Napaniya
Agarwada
Charangam (nam)
Kharol
Shamna
Madhvas
Champeli
Agarwada
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
24170900201
24170904610
24170900105
24170901901
24170903001
24170901401
24170903702
24170903604
Metral
Vandeli
Vadodar
Bhagat faliya kadadra
Mora
Mekhar
Dangariya
Rajayata
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
24171011601
24171004504
24171010302
24171007701
24171000202
24171006901
24171006202
24171000102
Timla
Moti sarsan
Parthampur
Batakwada
Amaliyat
Simaliya
Pratapgadh
Doli
District : PANCHMAHAL (133)
VILNAME
Block: LUNAWDA (…contd.)
Bamanvad
Mochivadiya
Vadi
Moti ghoda
Bhathijini muvadi
Ladvel
Agarwada
Namnar
Rabadiya
Chavadibaina muvada
Madhvas
Champeli
Dalvai savali
Block: MORWA HADAF
Alu
Vandeli
Agarvada
Kelod
Mora
Gajipur
Rampur (ka)
Rajayata
Block: SANTRAMPUR
Sagvadiya
Gothibada
Parthampur
Molara
Ambaliyat
Kunda
Khedapa
Amba
SCHNAME
Bamanvad p. Shala
Vatvatiya p.shala
Vadi p.shala
Moti ghoda p.shala
Bhathijini muvadi p.shala
Ladvel p.shala
Maruti krupa lakshi ashram sha
Todiya p.shala
Juna rabadiya p.shala
Chavadibarina muvada p.shala
Madhvas p.shala
Champeli p.shala
Pagiyani savali p.shala
Alu p.shala
Zalaiya tandi f. Vandeli
Bedhiya f. Varg
Kelod p.shala
Mora p.shala
Gajipur p.shala
Rampura p.shala
Rajayat n.v. kyar p.shala
Sagvadiya p.shala
Patel f. Varg gothibada
Bariya f. Varg parthampur
Mal f. Varg molara
Ghati faliya varg
Mahadev f. Varg
Khedapa p.shala
Garadiya v. Varg amba
100
Sr.
No.
SCHCD
CLUNAME
24171004505
24171005603
24171006401
24171004301
24171008901
24171010203
24171000704
24171006209
24171006602
Moti sarsan
Nava kalibel
Kenpur
Nani sarsan
Nani bhugedi
Nasikpur
Babrol
Pratapgadh
Gamdi
133
24171102605
24171102504
24171105101
24171107902
24171101604
24171108111
24171101402
24171108402
24171106502
24171106302
24171108601
24171106503
24171107002
Bahi
Dalvada
Boriya
Hanselav
Bodidra khurd
Shahera
Bhurkhal
Tadva
Narsana
Dhamnod
Navivadi
Narsana
Navivadi
Sr.
No.
SCHCD
1
2
3
4
5
24110300103
24110301301
24110304001
24110300201
24110300305
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
CLUNAME
Devada pay cen shala
Gokran
Mahiyari
Devada pay cen shala
Khageshri
District : PANCHMAHAL (133)
VILNAME
SCHNAME
Block: SANTRAMPUR (…contd.)
Gothibada
Sukidevi varg gothibada
Kalibel
Juna kalibel p.shala
Khodadhara
Khod dhara p.shala
Godhar (p)
Godhar paschim p.shala
Nani bhugedi
Lilvasar p.shala
Panchkuva
Mayalapur p.shala
Babrol
Patel faliya varg
Khedapa
Pratapgadh p.shala
Kothina muvada
Kothina muvada p.shala
Block: SHAHERA
Demali
Nayak f. Varg
Dalwada
Krishna faliya arg
Khuntkhar
Khuntkhar p.shala
Sambhali
Uttarediya f. Vagr sambhali
Bodidra khurd
Upaliya p.shala
Shahera
R.s. prajapati. Shala
Bhurkhal
Rathva f. Varg bhurkhal
Tadava
Tadva p. Shala
Narsana
Narsana p.shala
Nada
Nada mukhya p.shala
Ujada
Ujada p. Shala
Narsana
Rayjina muvada p.shala
Navivadi
Navivadi p.shala
Sample from District :PORBANDHAR(23)
VILNAME
SCHNAME
BLOCK : KUTIYANA
Devda
Devda ashram shala
Sindhpur
Sindhpur pra shala
Tarkhai
Tarkhai pra shala
Ramnagar
Ramnagar pra shala
Khageshri
Gadgadiya nesh shala
101
Sr.
No.
SCHCD
CLUNAME
24110100602
24110104502
24110102901
24110101201
24110100802
24110103801
24110107726
24110107001
24110100403
24110107774
24110107735
24110107402
24110104902
Simar pay cen shala
Bakhrala pay cen shala
Bharvada
Shishli pay cen shala
Kunvadar
Bharvada
Sharda mandir pay cen sha
Mander pay cen shala
Sodhana pay cen shala
Tanapad kanyashala
Chhaya kumar pay cen chal
Mander pay cen shala
Kuchhdi pay cen shala
22
23
24110206521
24110203502
24110204302
24110206501
24110203601
Station plot pay cen shal
Khirasara pay cen shala
Rana kandorana pay cen sh
Ranavav kumar pay cen sha
Ranavav kanya pay cen sha
Sr.
No.
SCHCD
CLUNAME
24080706202
24080710002
24080710302
24080707701
24080700901
24080704402
24080700403
24080700405
Bamnbor pay center - 1
Thangadh pay center - 2
Sanosara pay center
Chotila pay center - 2
Chotila pay center - 1
Rajpara center - 1
Anandpur(bha)pay center-1
Anandpur(bha)pay center-1
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Sample from District :PORBANDHAR(23)
VILNAME
SCHNAME
BLOCK :PORBANDHAR
Rana rojivada
Rana rojivada sim shala-1
Bakhrala
Bakhrala kanya shala
Bharvada
Bharvada pra shala
Shingda
Shingada pra shala
Paravada
Sarasvati pra shala (pvt)
Beran
Beran pra shala
Porbandar
V.j.madressa girls school(pvt)
Mocha
Mocha pra shala
Bhomiyavadar
Bhomiyavadar sim shala -2
Porbandar
Me and mother eng.med.- pvt
Porbandar
Sarasvati sisumandir pvt
Chingriya
Chingariya sim shala
Kuchhdi
Kuchhdi sim shala no 1
BLOCK : RANAVAV
Ranavav
Fuvara nes pra shala
Aniyari
Aniyari sim shala
Kandorna
Kandorna kanya pra shala
Ranavav
Kumar pay cen shala
Bhod
Bhod pra shala
District :SURRENDRANAGAR (65)
VILNAME
SCHNAME
Block: CHOTILA
Mevasa (she)
Mevasa (she) sim
Sarsana
Sarsana pri school - 2
Shukhsar
Shukhsar vadivistar pri.school
Navagam (chotila)
Navagam (chotila) pri. School
Bhimgadh
Bhimgadh primary school
Kabran
Kabran primary school - 2
Anandpur (bhadla)
Anandpur(bha) primary.school-3
Anandpur (bhadla)
Govinpara (a) primary school
102
Sr.
No.
SCHCD
9
10
24080711401 Thangadh pay center - 3
24080706001 Vijaliya pay center
11
12
13
14
15
24080901214
24080901204
24080901801
24080901701
24080900801
Chuda pay center - 1
Chuda pay center - 2
Bhrugupur pay center
Kanthariya pay center
Rangpur pay center
16
17@
18
19
20
21
22
24080207102
24080201021
24080205302
24080200401
24080202801
24080206602
24080201007
Malvan kumar pay center
Dhrangadhra pay center-3
Ganjela pay center
Bharada pay center
Kankavati pay center
Chuli pay center
Dhrangadhra pay center-2
23*
24
25
26
27
28
29
24080106203
24080102134
24080105001
24080107001
24080103901
24080105201
24080101501
Malaniyad pay center
Halvad pay center - 4
Halvad pay center - 4
Merupar pay center
Tikar-ran pay center - 1
Mayurnagar pay center
Sapkada pay center
30*
31
32
33
34
24080402308
24080402401
24080402501
24080402301
24080401701
Lakhtar pay center - 2
Lakhtar pay center - 2
Lilapur pay center
Lakhtar pay center - 1
Vitthalgadh pay center
CLUNAME
District :SURRENDRANAGAR (65)
VILNAME
Block: CHOTILA (…contd.)
Vavdi
Mandasar
Block: CHUDA
Chuda
Chuda
Karmad
Kanthariya
Chamardi
Block: DHRANGADHRA
Vavdi
Dhrangadhra
Rajcharadi
Bharada
Juna ghanshyamgadh
Soladi
Dhrangadhra
Block: HALVAD
Ranmalpur
Halvad
Nava ghanshyamgadh
Shiroi
Mangadh
Navaraysangpur(gandhi)
Dighdiya
Block: LAKHTAR
Lakhtar
Larkhadiya
Lilapur
Lakhtar
Jyotipara
SCHNAME
Vavdi primary school
Mandasar primary school
M j jesadiya primary
Chuda pay center school - 2
Karmad primary school
Kanthariya pay center school
Chamardi primary school
Vavdi primary school -2
Raja chhaya guj. Pri. School
Rajcharadi kanya pri.school
Bharada pay center school
Juna ghanshyamgadh pri.school
Soladi kumar primary school
Dhrangadhra pay center shala-2
Vishwas vidhyalay school
Saraswati primary school
Nava ghanshyamgadhkumar sch
Shiroi primary school
Mangadh primary school
Navaraysangpurgandhiprischool
Dighdiya primary school
Chanakya primary
Larkhadiya primary school
Lilapur pay center school
Lakhtar pay center school - 1
Jyotipara primary school
103
District :SURRENDRANAGAR (65)
VILNAME
Block: LIMBDI
Limbdi
Limbdi
Bhoika
Jambu
Jasmatpar
Block: MULI
Muli
Karshangadh
Naliyeri
Sara
Pandvara
Block: PATDI DASADA
Patdi
Chikasar
Zezra
Rajpar
Porda
Kherva
Sr.
No.
SCHCD
CLUNAME
35
36
37
38
39
24081003707
24081003710
24081000701
24081002801
24081003101
Limbdi4 paycenter
Limbdi9 pay center
Bhoika pay center
Jambu pay center
Ralol pay center
40
41
42
43
44
24080603305
24080602201
24080603501
24080604503
24080604001
Muli pay center - 1
Sara pay center - 3
Sara pay center - 1
Sara pay center - 3
Tikar( parmar) pay center
45
46
47
48
49
50
24080306604
24080301401
24080309001
24080306901
24080306801
24080304102
Patdi pay center - 1
Jainabad pay center
Vadgam pay center
Kamalpur pay center
Upariyala pay center
Kherva pay center
51
52
53
54
55
56
24080804306
24080804305
24080800801
24080802101
24080805201
24080806501
Nadala pay center
Nadala pay center
Chorvira(than)pay center
Sayla pay center - 3
Ninama pay center
Sudamda pay center-2
Nadala
Nadala
Chorvira (than)
Gosal
Ninama
Shirvaniya
Khavadiya vistar
Nadala kumar primary
Chorvira(than) primary school
Gosal primary school
Ninama primary school
Shirvaniya primary school
57
58
59
60
61
24080503886
24080502202
24080504803
24080504624
24080503873
S'nagar nagar palika -12
Rajpar pay center
Joravarnagar pay center11
Wadhvan pay center - 3
Wadhvan pay center - 3
Surendranagar
Kothariya
Ratanpar
Wadhvan
Surendranagar
Arya samaj gurukul primary sch
Shri matruchhaya primary school
Primay school -10, ratanpar
Wadhvan primary school - 15
Vandemataram primary school
Block: SAYLA
Block: WADHVAN
SCHNAME
Limbdi nagar palika school-5
Limbdi nagar palika school-8
Bhoika primary school
Jambu pay center school
Jasmatpar primary school
Muli pay center - 2
Karshangadh primary school
Naliyeri primary school
Sara pay center school - 3
Pandvara primary school
Motibai kanya pri.school - 4
Chikasar primary school
Zezra primary school
Rajpar primary school
Porda primary school
Kherva kanya primary school
104
Sr.
No.
SCHCD
CLUNAME
62
63
64
65
24080503861
24080501001
24080501601
24080503850
Joravarnagar pay center11
Rampara pay center
Dedadara pay center
S'nagar nagar palika - 2
District :SURRENDRANAGAR (65)
VILNAME
Block: WADHVAN (…contd.)
Surendranagar
Fulgram
Khajeli
Surendranagar
SCHNAME
Puja primary school
Fulgram primary school
Khajeli primary school
Dudhrej na.pa.pri.school - 6
The schools highlighted in red are the schools which have been dropped from the sample for this study. The reasons for dropping them are as
stated below:
#
The school was visited twice but the principal was found to be absent and he was not reachable on his cell phone, so no information could be
collected regarding the school. [Scanned copy of letter from CRCC confirming the non cooperative behaviour of the principal from Halol,
Panchmahal is attached as Appendix C]
@
Vacation given in the school from 13th December, 2012 to 25th December, 2012, from Dhrangadhra, Surendranagar.
* Schools did not function from the start of this academic year (i.e. since June 2012) [one each from Halvad and Lakhtar blocks of
Surendranagar district] but it was functioning when DISE 2011-12 data was collected.
105
APPENDIX C: Scanned copy of letter from CRCC confirming the non-cooperative
behaviour of the principal from Halol, Panchmahal
106
APPENDIX D: List Of Field Investigators
The team of field investigators who successfully completed the data collection for the
project “5% Sample Checking of DISE Data of Gujarat State 2011-12” consisted of eight
members (five males and three females). Their names are as follows:
1. Mr. Baldaniya Ajeet R.
2. Mr. Bhagora Ramesh K.
3. Mr. Gondaliya Santosh D.
4. Mr. Makwana Kiran J.
5. Ms. Makwana Minal C.
6. Ms. Purohit Rashmi N.
7. Ms. Rajput Deepikabahen J.
8. Mr. Trivedi Nirmit P.
Team of field investigators: (Top: from left to right) Santosh, Ramesh, Ajeet and Nirmit
(Bottom: from left to right) Deepika, Minal, Rashmi and Kiran
107
APPENDIX E: Tool For Data Collection ( DISE DCF for 5% Sample Checking)
108
109
110
111
112
113
114