present status of infrastructure facilities in schools in...

Draft

Present Status of Infrastructure Facilities

in Schools in India:

From National and State Level

Perspective

Dr. Madhumita Bandhopadhyay

National University of Educational Planning and Administration

17-B, Sri Aurobindo Marg, New Delhi –110016 (INDIA)

CONTENTS

Page No.

Introduction 1

Earlier Researches 1

Availability of Schools and Enrolment 3

Student-Classroom Ratio 6

Availability of Physical Facilities 7-17

All weather roads 7

School Building 8

Water Facility 8

Functional drinking water facility 9

Girls’ Toilet 10

Boys’ Toilet 11

Condition of Classroom 11

Boundary Wall 12

Playground 13

Ramp facility 13

Electricity facility 14

Library Facility 15

Computer Facility 16

CAL Facility 17

Enrolment in schools lacking different infrastructure facilities 17

Conclusion 19

Reference 20

Draft prepared for Sub-Committee of the CABE on Improving Conditions of Government of Schools

1

Present Status of Infrastructure Facilities in Schools in India:

From national and state level perspective

Dr. Madhumita Bandyopadhyay1

NUEPA

Introduction

It is widely known that availability of infrastructure facilities in school has considerable impact

on school environment and it is one of the important indicators for assessing whether the schools

are providing a conducive learning environment for children. During last two decades, a major

emphasis has been given on improving school environment by different educational programmes

like Operation Blackboard, DPEP, SSA, RMSA and so on, as it is a major factor for regular

participation of students and finally resulting in improvement in their learning levels. An attempt

has also been made to provide adequate physical facilities as per the needs of schools, as

recommended by education policy in India, NPE 1986. The policy has recognized that,

‘unattractive school environment, unsatisfactory condition of buildings and insufficiency of

instructional material function as de-motivating factors for children and their parents. The Policy,

therefore, calls for a drive for a substantial improvement of primary schools and provision of

support services’ (NPE, 1986, 15). According to this policy, primary schools have to be provided with at least two rooms for conducting teaching learning process. Further, RTE Act 2009 has

recommended that each school should be equipped with ‘All weather building consisting of at least one classroom for every teacher and an office-cum-store-cum-Head teacher’s room; barrier- free access; separate toilets for boys and girls; safe and adequate drinking water facility to all

children; a kitchen where mid-day meal is cooked in the school; playground; arrangements for

securing the school building by boundary wall or fencing’. In view of above recommendations, using DISE data and recent research reviews, an attempt has been made in this paper to assess

the present status of availability of physical facilities in schools run by different managements,

especially government, private aided and private unaided schools.

Earlier Researches

Several researches (Ajayi, 2002; Hallack, 1990; Kuuskorpi & Gonzalez, 2011) conducted in

different international contexts specifically link availability of infrastructure facilities of school

and school effectiveness. According to Asiabaka (2008, 10) “management of facilities is an

integral part of the overall management of schools. The actualization of the goals and objectives

of education require the provision, maximum utilization and appropriate management of the

facilities.” According to her “the physical environment of a school is a major determining factor in the attainment of its objectives (Asiabaka 2008, 10).” Importance of availability of physical

facilities in schools and its optimum use have been a matter of concern across the globe. Several

studies have already been conducted in context of India to find out different determining factors

of school effectiveness and efficiency and lack of physical facilities has been identified as one of

the major problems across the states. An overview of some of these studies is being given in

1 The author acknowledges the contribution of Ms. Meenakshi Khandari and Ms. Aparna Mookerjee from NUEPA.

We are grateful to Prof. A. C Mehta, Head of EMIS Department for providing DISE and UDISE data some of which

have not been published yet.


2

following paragraphs.

Despite considerable improvement in enrolment, many researches (Govinda & Bandyopadhyay,

2011a, 2011b, 2011c; De et.al. 2011; Pratham, 2012 etc) have constantly raised concerns that

India will have to travel a long way to achieve the goal of Universialisation of Elementary

Education and implement the Right to Education Act, 2009. The Act has not only stressed on

providing access to free and compulsory education for 6-14 years old children, but has also

emphasised on regular and active participation of children in government schools and

improvement in their learning levels.

The active presence of children and their imbibing of knowledge and skills in the classroom

become important issues once they get enrolled in a school. The central characteristic of

meaningful access (Lewin, 2007; Govinda & Bandyopadhyay, 2009; Little, 2008) to school

education is the sustained and active participation of children in teaching learning processes and

classroom activities. It has been found that students who attend school regularly score higher in

their achievement tests than their peers, who remain frequently absent. Although the low

attendance and low learning level of children is rampant across the country, many studies found

these problems are more prominent in case of disadvantaged groups (Govinda &

Bandyopadhyay, 2008; Pratham, 2012; Dreze & Kingdon, 1999). Many researches have also

indicated that effective management of system as well as schools can improve the quality of

educational services that in turn, influences the access and participation of children (Govinda &

Bandyopadhyay, 2011c, Bandyopadhyay & Dey, 2011 Dayaram, 2011, Dayaram, 2013). These

studies have also emphasized on availability of adequate infrastructure facilities and its optimum

use for improving the learning environment of the school which motivates teachers as well as

students for regular participation and getting engaged in teaching learning process of good

quality.

As mentioned in a CREATE policy brief (Bandypadhyay, Das & Zeitlyn, 2011), "absenteeism is

multi- causal phenomenon" involving home -related and school- related factors. While children’s engagement in paid or unpaid work, sibling care etc. reduces their chance of attending school

fully and perform better in classroom, the quality of services provided in the schools, the

infrastructure and the level of teacher’s qualification and training may also act as determining

factors for these. The study further discusses the vicious cycle of absenteeism and repetition.

These characteristics of exclusion are known as ‘silent exclusion’ in the CREATE conceptual model and eventually lead to drop- out (Lewin, 2007). The policy brief also suggests "there is

an urgent need for improving the physical and academic infrastructure, incentives, TLM

(teaching learning material), availability of teachers and their presence in the school and

classroom."

Gender and caste-based stereotyping was visible in the allocation of different tasks to children in

schools covered by the CREATE study as well. Such gender and caste based discrimination

increases in the schools which are resource poor and are grappling with different problems of

managing scarce physical as well as academic resources for example often it is found that girls

are engaged in collecting water in case schools are not provided with a safe drinking water

facility on regular basis. Similarly, absence of boundary wall and playground hamper regular

activities of school as well as can comprise children safety and security.


3

It is mention worthy that the socially disadvantaged children living in remote areas also remain

deprived from various public services, including elementary education. For example, the schools

located in tribal villages in Dindori district of Madhya Pradesh hardly had essential physical and

academic facilities. Let alone other academic facilities, only four out of twenty-four sample

schools had access to drinking water while not a single school had a toilet in it (Govinda &

Bandyopadhyay, 2011b). An earlier study conducted by Jha & Jhingran, (2005, 66) has found

that the condition of physical infrastructure in rural areas was far from satisfactory. In their study

villages as mentioned by authors, “only 6.7% of the primary schools and 12.5% of the upper primary schools have a fully pucca building. About 73% have partially pucca building and rest

have either a kuchcha structure, a dilapidated one or no building at all.” They also found that

many schools did not have basic drinking water and toilet facilities. According to this study,

“only 4% of schools, the infrastructure could be considered average to good, these schools were

located mainly in MP, Karnataka, Gujarat and Maharashtra. School infrastructure was rated as

inadequate in case of 38% schools and the remaining 22 percent was considered to be very

inadequate (Jha & Jhingran, 2005, 67).” Based on an extensive survey carried out in eight states

Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh, Assam and

Tamil Nadu (Mehrotra, 2006) has found that private unaided schools had better facilities than

government and private aided schools in most of the states. As author has mentioned that “in the states where the private-unaided schools account for a significant share of enrolled children –

Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Rajasthan – the proportion of urban unaided schools which are pucca

(in brick buildings) is higher than the proportion of government schools that are pucca. The

problem of one-classroom schools is also largely confined to the government schools. Private-

aided schools do not have this problem. Similarly, most of the private-unaided schools do not

seem to have a space constraint in terms of classrooms (Mehrotra, 2006, 265).” In addition he has also mentioned that the larger share of government schools were found without drinking

water facility and toilets whereas many private-unaided schools (and private-aided ones) in urban

areas had separate toilets for girls than do government schools.

Another study conducted by Srivastava (2006, 63) has pointed out that in Uttar Pradesh “a

greater proportion of government schools had pucca buildings compared to private schools,

though the difference was lower in urban areas. Approach roads to rural schools were mostly

kuchcha or semi-pucca for both private and government schools, although the proportion of

semi-pucca roads for private schools was higher at the primary level (Srivastava, 2006, 64).”

In context of findings of above research studies, an attempt has been made in the following

section to find out the extent to which the schools managed by government as well as private

agencies are equipped with different physical facilities and what are the future challenges that

remain to meet for its further improvement. This status paper not only assess the situation not

only with respect to elementary education but also post elementary school education i.e.

secondary and higher secondary education.

Availability of Schools and Enrolment

Any discussion on school education has to look into the aspect of availability of schooling

facilities to children of eligible age group. According to the DISE data (Table 1), the percentage


4

share of government schools is much higher as compared to private aided and unaided schools at

each level but an increasing trend is found in proportion of private schools as the level of

education increases. While, 19% primary schools across the country is run by private

management and not aided by government, the proportion of such schools is 28% at the upper

primary level. The proportion further increases to 39% for secondary and 42% for higher

secondary level. The proportion of private aided schools is also much higher in case of secondary

and higher secondary levels. It is also noticeable from Figure 1 that the number of government as

well as private schools has shown a gradual increasing trend over the years.

Table 1: Percentage Share of Management wise Schools at different levels of School Education

School

Category Govt.

Private

Aided

Private

Unaided Unrecognized

Madrasa

Recognized

Total

Schools

Primary 75.41 2.88 18.81 2.14 0.76 1207427

Upper Primary 61.45 7.67 28.34 1.80 0.73 598662

Elementary 74.69 4.61 18.13 1.89 0.68 1445807

Secondary 42.78 16.68 38.84 1.26 0.43 233517

Hr. Secondary 39.87 16.72 42.07 0.81 0.53 109318

Source: DISE: 2014-15, NUEPA

Figure 1: Trend in number of Government and Private Elementary Schools in India: 2007-08 to

2014-15

Source: Elementary Education in India: Trends 2005-06 to 2014-15, DISE, New Delhi

The state wise distribution of schools run by different management shows that more than 80%

primary schools are run by government in states like Odisha, Bihar, Tripura, Jharkhand,

Arunachal Pradesh, Dadra & Nagar Haveli, Chhattisgarh, West Bengal, A & N Islands, J&K,

Himachal Pradesh, Assam. Lakshadweep has 100% schools run by government. According to

the DISE data, it has been found that Kerala (30.44%) has the lowest proportion of government

primary schools but this state also has the highest proportion of private aided primary schools. In

case of private unaided primary schools, Delhi ranks first with 52% of schools under private

management and only 2% schools in Jharkhand are managed by private providers.

1002915 1035178 1048046 1064604 1078407 1086720 1093969 1080757

243895 249920 254178 264607 299357 307978 319990 328845

0

200000

400000

600000

800000

1000000

1200000

2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

Government Schools Private Schools


5

In case of upper primary schools, again Kerala has the lowest proportion of government upper

primary schools and Delhi has the highest proportion of private unaided upper primary schools.

However, for private aided schools, Goa ranks first with 67% of upper primary schools. Apart

from Delhi, states like Pondicherry, Telangana, Haryana, Rajasthan, Punjab, Manipur, Andhra

Pradesh, and Madhya Pradesh has more than 40% private unaided upper primary schools. Like

primary, in Lakshadweep 100% upper primary, secondary and higher schools are also managed

by government. It is also noticeable that the states like Tripura, West Bengal, Andaman &

Nicobar Islands, Bihar, Dadra & Nagar Haveli have more than 80% upper primary schools run

by government.

While in case of secondary and higher secondary, only four states such as West Bengal, A & N

Islands, Tripura, Sikkim have more than 80% schools managed by government. It is noticeable

that around 70% schools in Uttar Pradesh have reportedly been private unaided while Goa has

74% private aided schools at the secondary level. At the same time, there are 17 states such as

Manipur, Delhi, Pondicherry, Arunachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Bihar, Chandigarh, Andhra

Pradesh, Punjab, Tripura, Haryana, Telangana, Madhya Pradesh, A & N Islands, Chhattisgarh,

Sikkim and West Bengal have less than 10% private aided secondary schools.

Similarly, 18 states such as Delhi, Jharkhand, Pondicherry, Tripura, Chandigarh, Arunachal

Pradesh, Punjab, Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Bihar, Sikkim, Haryana, A & N Islands,

Chhattisgarh, Manipur, Goa, Telangana and West Bengal have less than 10% schools as private

aided and five states such as A & N Islands, Bihar, West Bengal, Tripura and Goa have less than

10% schools as private unaided at the higher secondary level. On contrary, it is also noticeable

that Maharashtra is the state which has the highest proportion (68%) of secondary schools under

the private aided category followed by Meghalaya and Gujarat. Similarly, Mizoram with 67%

private unaided higher secondary schools rank first followed by Uttar Pradesh, Nagaland,

Telangana and Andhra Pradesh which fall within the category of 60-70% of schools that are

under private management but not receiving any aid from government.

The expansion of private schools has also impacted on trends in enrolment at each level of

school education which is highlighted in the Table 2. It is noticeable that although the proportion

of enrolment in government schools at each level is much higher than the proportion of

enrolment in private aided and unaided schools, but as the level of education increases, a

decreasing trend has been found in the proportion of enrolment in government run schools. It is

noticeable that at the higher secondary level, the percentage share of enrolment is only 39.3% in

government schools while in private unaided schools it becomes more than 48%.

Table 2: Percentage share of Management-wise Enrolment at different levels of School Education

School

levels Govt.

Pvt.

Aided

Private


Recognized

Madrasa Total

Primary 76.3 2.0 6.1 13.1 2.5 2303937

Upper

Primary 66.0 13.6 12.6 5.0 2.9 190936

Secondary 68.2 17.5 13.6 0.8 0.0 31652

Hr.

Secondary 39.3 10.1 48.3 2.3 0.0 6222


6


From above analysis, one can understand that a sizeable proportion of schools are still run by

government though the proportion of such schools varies from one state to other. As it has been

mentioned that there are some states which have very high proportion of private aided and

private unaided schools, however it has been found that despite high proportion of private

schools, the role of government schools still remains important to cater to the needs of children

from socially and economically disadvantaged groups. In the following section, an attempt has

been made to examine how schools run by different management systems such as government,

private aided and private unaided are provided with different infrastructure facilities at different

educational level.

Student-Classroom Ratio

Table 3: Management wise Student Classroom Ratio at different School level

School Category

Govt.

Private

Aided

Private


Madrasa

Recognized

Total

Schools

Elementary 27 36 27 23 36 27

Secondary 54 53 38 33 69 47

Hr. Secondary 49 61 43 45 64 49


Student classroom ratio is another important factor covered under DISE to analyze the average

number of students per classroom in a school. In the Table 3, data indicate that the secondary and

higher secondary government as well as private aided schools have adverse SCR indicating

overcrowded classrooms but for elementary education, the situation seems to be much better for

government and private unaided schools. It may be because of prevalence of small size

elementary schools which are results of recent initiatives taken by government for covering all

habitations by primary and upper primary schools in case those habitations qualify the norm for

opening school.

The state wise data suggests that eight states and UTs have higher proportion of government

schools at elementary level with SCR higher than the national average (27). These are Assam,

Bihar, Chandigarh, Dadra & Nagar Haveli, Daman & Diu, Delhi, Haryana and West Bengal. Out

of these, Bihar has the highest SCR not only for government schools but also for private aided

schools. As far as private unaided is concerned Jharkhand has the highest proportion of schools

with highest SCR (41) followed by Uttar Pradesh.

Bihar, Jharkhand and West Bengal are also the states which have very high SCR at secondary

and higher secondary level particularly in the government and private aided schools. Manipur is

another state which shows highest SCR in case of private aided schools at the higher secondary

level. There are some states which need further attention for reducing SCR in the government

secondary and higher secondary schools are Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Assam, Odisha,

Tripura, etc.


7

Availability of Physical Facilities

All weather roads

Accessibility of schools can be measured by examining whether the schools are approachable by

all weather roads or not. It has been found that although above 90% private aided and unaided

primary and elementary schools are approachable by all weather road, there are at least around

13% primary and elementary government schools are yet to be connected by such road. It is also

noticeable that barring a few most of the secondary and higher secondary schools irrespective of

their management are connected by roads. However, many unrecognized and Madrasas are also

not approachable by all weather roads, as highlighted in the following Table 4.

Table 4: Percentage share of Schools Approachable by all weather Roads

School

Category Govt.

Private

Aided

Private


Madrasa

Recognized

Total

Schools

Primary 86.48 93.98 95.30 82.74 89.91 88.30

Upper Primary 91.05 96.23 95.77 88.83 90.99 92.74

Elementary 87.50 94.76 95.33 82.67 89.79 89.18

Secondary 93.64 97.95 95.43 89.92 89.44 94.99

Higher Secondary 95.39 98.09 95.70 91.79 89.79 95.91


The state wise variation is also found in availability of primary schools that are approachable by

all weather roads. It is found that Jharkhand is the state which has the lowest proportion of

government as well as private schools which are not accessible by all weather roads. Similarly,

there are other states such as Sikkim, Lakshadweep, Nagaland, Himachal Pradesh, Tripura, J&K,

Uttaranchal, Rajasthan, Arunachal Pradesh and Meghalaya where large number of government

schools yet to be linked by all weather roads.

In case of upper primary schools, although Jharkhand has more than 60% government schools

with all weather roads but it has more than 70% of private aided and unaided upper primary

schools with such facility. The states which require immediate attention are Meghalaya,

Lakshadweep, Arunachal Pradesh, Uttaranchal, West Bengal, Bihar, Sikkim, Himachal Pradesh,

Tripura, Rajasthan, Nagaland, J&K that have less than 90% upper primary schools which are not

approachable by all weather roads.

In case of secondary schools, it is found that majority of government, private aided and private

unaided schools are approachable by all weather roads but Jharkhand, Uttaranchal and

Lakshadweep fall within 70-80% as far as availability of government secondary schools which

are approachable by all weather roads. Arunachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Jharkhand are found in

most critical condition with much less proportion of such schools. In Meghalaya, less than 60%

private unaided schools are also not approachable by all weather roads.

In case of higher secondary schools, the most critical situation is found in Lakshadweep where

around 69% government schools have all weather roads but situation is not that satisfactory in

the states like Jharkhand, Nagaland and Uttaranchal. As far as private unaided schools are


8

concerned, Telangana and Assam need more attention whereas for private aided schools the state

like Daman & Diu is at the lowest category with 67%.

School Building

It is heartening to see that around 98-99% government as well private schools have building at

all levels (Table 5). It is also found that the state level variation with respect to school building is

also not wide and majority of states fall in the category of above 90% and even some of the

states have building for all schools. However, attention needs to be paid especially in Bihar and

Uttaranchal where more than 10% schools are still not having building for primary schools

whereas in case of secondary schools attention needs to be paid on state like Madhya Pradesh

which is falling at the lowest category.

Table 5: Percentage Share of Schools with Building

School

Category Govt.

Private

Aided

Private


Madrasa

Recognized

Total

Schools

Primary 98.70 99.68 99.82 99.18 99.13 98.95

Upper Primary 99.71 99.73 99.86 98.80 99.64 99.74

Elementary 98.82 99.69 99.83 99.16 99.15 99.05

Secondary 98.69 99.78 99.85 99.08 99.90 99.34

Higher

Secondary 99.12 99.79 99.88 98.99 99.83 99.55


Water Facility

It is known to all that the essential facility like water needs to be made available in the school for

making school environment hygienic and clean. The data has been provided by DISE to assess

the availability of water facility in every school which can be utilized in different purpose other

than drinking. It has been found that the water facility has been provided in majority of

government as well as private schools. But there is slight variation if we compare the

government schools with private schools for example, while 95.6% primary government schools

have water facility, around 99% private unaided schools have this facility. Similar variation can

be found in case of upper primary level though, the gap has declined at the secondary and higher

secondary level (Table 6).

Table 6: Percentage share of Schools with Water Facility

School

Category Govt.

Private

Aided

Private


Madrasa

Recognized

Total

Schools

Primary 95.68 96.91 98.83 81.27 96.79 96.00

Upper Primary 97.13 97.31 99.40 93.83 98.95 97.74

Elementary 95.72 96.63 98.89 80.91 96.99 96.06

Secondary 97.71 99.20 99.43 91.55 100.00 98.56

Hr. Secondary 98.50 99.76 99.72 96.40 100.00 99.21



9

As far as water facility is concerned, 23 states have more than 95% government primary schools

with water facility in it. But, as data revealed, Arunachal Pradesh, Meghalaya and Nagaland have

less than 80% schools with this facility. According to DISE data, mainly the north-eastern states

are falling into the lower categories as far as availability of upper primary schools with water

facility in it. Only 57% government schools and 66% private unaided schools in Meghalaya have

such facility. Even in Madhya Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, Uttaranchal, Tripura, Mizoram J & K,

Assam, Arunachal Pradesh and Nagaland have many government schools which are yet to be

provided with water facility.

The situation in Nagaland is also a matter of concern in terms of availability of water facility in

secondary and higher secondary government schools. However, in other states more than 90%

schools are equipped with water facility. It is heartening to see that many states have already

achieved universal availability of water facility with 100% schools that are having such facility.

Functional drinking water facility

With the help of DISE data (Table 7), an attempt can be made to see whether the school has been

provided with functional drinking water facility or not. It has been found that as compared to

government schools having functional drinking water facility, the situation is much better in

private unaided schools at each level. It is also noticeable that almost all private schools are

provided with functional drinking water facility whereas more than 15% elementary and around

10%-12% secondary and higher secondary schools run by government are still devoid of such

facility. Since drinking water facility is one of the essential facilities, urgent action is required in

this regard.

Table 7: Percentage Share of Schools having Functional Drinking Water Facility

School

Category Govt.

Private

Aided

Private


Madrasa

Recognized

Total

Schools

Primary 83.58 89.86 91.45 64.30 84.57 84.84

Upper Primary 87.49 89.55 92.41 83.17 88.87 88.97

Elementary 83.60 88.13 90.99 63.79 84.95 84.78

Secondary 88.39 93.98 92.73 77.33 90.03 90.87

Higher

Secondary 90.32 95.83 92.54 82.90 89.97 92.11


In case of state level disparity, it has been found that at least 40% of government primary schools

in north-eastern such as Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland and Meghalaya are yet to have

drinking water facilities. There are 10 states which are falling in the categories of 60-80%of

schools where drinking water facility is available. On contrary, the number of states with higher

proportion of private aided and unaided primary schools without drinking water facility is much

less and these are again mainly from north-eastern states such as Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram,

Assam and Nagaland.


10

As far as availability of drinking water facility at the upper primary level is concerned, the trend

is almost similar to primary level putting north-eastern states such as Nagaland, Meghalaya,

Arunachal Pradesh, Manipur and Assam in the lower category for government as well as private

schools. In addition, there are certain states like Telangana, Sikkim, Madhya Pradesh, Tripura, J

& K, Uttaranchal, Assam, Manipur, Mizoram also have around 30 and more percentage of

government schools without any drinking water facility.

The situation is not very different from that of below level as far as availability of drinking water

facility at the secondary and higher secondary run by government as well as private agencies. In

addition to north-eastern states, other states like Uttar Pradesh, Telangana, Bihar, Odisha,

Andhra Pradesh and Jharkhand are also falling within the lower category of 60-80%.

Girls’ Toilet

According to the DISE data (Table 8), it has been found that more than 90% government and

private unaided schools at primary, upper primary, secondary and higher secondary levels are

providing girls’ toilet facility. However, the situation is slightly better in private unaided schools as compared to government run schools. While in case of private aided schools at the primary

and upper primary levels, the proportion of schools with girls’ toilet facility is around 88% but at

the secondary and higher secondary levels, the proportions of such schools are 97% and 99%

respectively.

Table 8: Percentage Share of Schools with Girls’ Toilet Facility

School

Category Govt.

Private

Aided

Private


Madrasa

Recognized

Total

Schools

Primary 95.26 88.81 95.21 64.53 91.43 86.76

Upper Primary 90.96 88.10 96.48 84.95 92.58 92.23

Elementary 85.70 86.60 95.07 63.71 91.91 87.08

Secondary 94.50 97.09 98.81 84.85 95.19 96.53

Hr. Secondary 95.82 98.89 98.53 86.45 95.40 97.43


It is heartening to see that more than half of the states and UTs have more than 90% government

schools with girls’ toilet facility and it is true for all levels. The situation is also satisfactory in

case of private aided and private unaided schools as majority of such schools are equipped with

girls’ toilet facility. However, further attention needs to be given for the government schools in

the states like Bihar, Meghalaya, Assam, J&K, etc. where a large number of schools at each level

are yet to be provided with girls’ toilet. It is also noticeable that in some of the states a

substantial proportion of private aided and private unaided schools are functioning without girls’ toilet in it. For example while Andhra Pradesh has around 55% private aided schools and

Meghalaya has 56% private unaided schools that are functioning without any girls’ toilet. Similarly, Assam has only 24% private aided schools that have a girls’ toilet in it. In case of

secondary and higher secondary levels, not a single state could be found in the category of below

60% schools without a girls’ toilet.


11

Boys’ Toilet

Provisioning for boys’ toilet facility has been much better as compared to girls’ toilet at every

level and irrespective of the management of schools. It is also noticeable that the proportion is

much better in case of private aided schools (Table 9). Despite this, some of the states require

further attention such as Bihar, Meghalaya, Andhra Pradesh and Assam which fall in the

category of below 80% of government schools with boys’ toilet facility. It has been found that 22 states at primary level, 21 states at upper primary level and 17 states each at secondary and

higher secondary level have more than 90% government schools with boys’ toilet facility in it.

Table 9: Percentage Share of Schools with Boys’ Toilet Facility

School

Category Govt.

Private

Aided

Private


Madrasa

Recognized

Total

Schools

Primary 95.24 95.26 98.20 72.30 95.17 95.31

Upper Primary 97.49 93.11 99.01 90.48 95.36 97.46

Elementary 95.48 93.02 98.26 71.77 95.47 95.43

Secondary 90.32 95.57 96.59 80.28 95.69 93.63

Higher

Secondary 94.09 98.78 98.09 83.01 95.89 96.55


In case of primary level, Jharkhand and Meghalaya have the lowest proportion of private aided

schools with boys’ toilet facility whereas Meghalaya (47.22%) is the only state which has been

found with the lowest proportion of private unaided schools with such facility. As far as the

availability of toilet facility for boys is concerned, Assam is the state which ranks lowest for

privately managed upper primary, secondary and higher secondary with the lowest percentage

share of schools with this facility. While only 39% private aided upper primary schools in Assam

have toilet facility for boys, 50% private aided schools at secondary and 66% at higher secondary

are having such facility. The state ranks lowest for government secondary (58%) and higher

secondary (73%) schools as well.

Condition of Classroom

DISE has also provided data on physical condition of classrooms at the elementary, secondary

and higher secondary levels. It has been found that classrooms in private aided and unaided

schools are in much better condition than government schools at all levels. It is also noticeable

that higher proportion of government schools require major repair than minor repair. Despite

receiving school grant for last many years, around 14% of government elementary schools

require major repair and 11% elementary schools require minor repair (Table 10).


12

Table 10: Percentage share of Classrooms as per their Condition at different education levels

School

levels

Govt. Pvt. Aided Pvt. Unaided Unrecognized Madrasa

Recognized

Go

od

Ma

jor

Min

or

Go

od

Ma

jor

Min

or

Go

od

Ma

jor

Min

or

Go

od

Ma

jor

Min

or

Go

od

Ma

jor

Min

or

Elementary 75.20 13.93 10.86 86.60 8.67 4.73 95.33 3.62 1.04 85.60 7.12 7.28 87.65 8.40 3.95

Secondary 76.98 12.67 10.35 86.18 8.90 4.92 89.15 6.01 4.84 79.37 10.62 10.01 83.65 11.86 4.48

Hr.

Secondary 81.63 11.85 6.52 94.28 4.05 1.67 95.22 3.61 1.17 85.46 8.22 6.32 84.33 9.79 5.89

*Data on primary and upper primary are not available separately


Boundary Wall

It is also noteworthy that although most of the schools are running functioning in a building but

many of these schools are found without any boundary wall. It is disheartening that around 43%

primary schools, 32% upper primary schools, 25% secondary schools and 18% higher secondary

schools which are run by government do not have any boundary wall as per the estimation of

DISE (Table 11). The situation is much better in the private schools though around 10-15%

schools at the different levels still require boundary wall.

Table 11: Percentage Share of School with Boundary Walls

School

Category Govt.

Private

Aided

Private


Madrasa

Recognized

Total

Schools

Primary 56.67 72.90 86.48 54.48 77.78 62.86

Upper Primary 68.22 77.36 89.77 74.18 76.33 75.19

Elementary 57.10 73.62 86.64 53.39 77.19 63.29

Secondary 75.81 84.37 92.88 69.05 75.22 83.78

Hr. Secondary 81.59 92.84 95.53 83.35 76.30 89.32


The state level analysis shows that in Manipur, Tripura and Meghalaya less than 20%

government primary schools have the facility of boundary wall in it whereas in case of upper

primary level only Meghalaya with 18% government schools have boundary wall. In comparison

to government schools, private aided and unaided schools are in better situation except only in

Assam where 15% private aided upper primary schools found with boundary wall.

The situation is slightly better in government secondary and higher secondary schools. The states

which are in the lowest category are Manipur, Sikkim and Mizoram and out of these three states

Mizoram (25%) has the lowest proportion of schools with boundary wall. All other states are

having more than 40% schools which have boundary wall. For higher secondary schools except

Uttaranchal, Sikkim all other states are having more than 60% schools which have boundary

wall. There are certain states which have achieved 100% schools with boundary wall and it is


13

noteworthy that Chandigarh is the state which has all primary, upper primary, secondary and

higher secondary schools which have boundary wall.

Playground

The situation regarding availability of playground in the school is far from satisfactory

particularly in government schools (Table 12). It is to be noted that only 52% government

primary schools have playground within it whereas 78% private aided and 79% private unaided

primary schools are equipped with playground. It is understandable that lack of availability of

playground hampers engagement of children in different games and physical activities making

schooling monotonous and unattractive. The situation has slightly improved in case of upper

primary, secondary and higher secondary level.

Table 12: Percentage Share of Schools with playground

School

Category Govt.

Private

Aided

Private


Madrasa

Recognized

Total

Schools

Primary 51.64 78.50 79.36 52.25 43.43 57.58

Upper Primary 60.68 85.18 82.77 63.40 49.69 68.79

Elementary 54.08 81.33 79.21 52.18 43.80 59.79

Secondary 68.35 88.72 83.12 67.36 48.96 77.39

Hr. Secondary 73.06 88.11 83.04 69.97 50.17 79.63


The state level data show that in Lakshadweep less than 20% government primary schools are

yet to be provided with playground facility whereas 11 states such as Andhra Pradesh, Daman &

Diu, West Bengal, Dadra & Nagar Haveli, Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Meghalaya, Bihar,

Goa, Jharkhand, Jammu And Kashmir have less than 40% schools with playground. In case of

upper primary level, six states such as Lakshadweep, Nagaland, J&K, Meghalaya, Odisha and

Jharkhand fall in the category of 20-40% government schools that have playground facility.

Around 70% schools in Jharkhand do not have such facilities.

The situation is little better in government secondary and higher secondary schools in most of the

states except Mizoram where 30% secondary and 37% higher secondary schools are found with

playground. The private schools are found in much better situation because as compared to the

government schools, higher proportions of private schools whether aided or unaided are having

playground facility.

Ramp facility

One of the major objectives of all education programmes that have been implemented at present

is to develop an inclusive education system by providing access to children with disabilities.

Provisioning of ramp facility is one of the indicators in this regard. It has been found in DISE

2014-15 (Table 13) that around 20% schools are not providing any ramp facility at the primary

and upper primary level. The proportion of schools without ramp facility is much higher in case

of secondary and higher secondary level though there has been considerable decline of such

schools during last two years of all levels.


14

Table 13: Percentage share of Schools with Ramp Facility

School Category 2013-14 2014-15

Primary 84.09 78.53

Upper Primary 82.60 81.01

Elementary 82.33 77.40

Secondary 75.42 69.44

Hr. Secondary 79.10 70.36

Source: Flash Statistics: 2014-15, DISE, NUEPA

State level analysis indicates that seven states fall in the category where above 90% elementary

schools have ramp facility. Delhi has been found with 100% schools with the facility of ramp

while Sikkim (26.4%) has been found with lowest proportion of schools with ramp facility and

J&K has only 32.5% schools with such facility. It is also found that Mizoram, Telangana, A& N

Islands and Andhra Pradesh have around 50-55% schools without any ramp facility. Further

attention is needed for these states.

At the secondary level, Dadra & Nagar Haveli (22.2%) has the lowest proportion of schools with

ramp facility and it is also found that states like Assam, Goa, Meghalaya and Sikkim have below

40% schools with such facility. While at the higher secondary level, Mizoram has been found

with only 8% schools with ramp facility, the data also indicate that states such as Andhra

Pradesh, Goa, Sikkim and Telangana have around 20-30% higher secondary schools with such

facility.

Electricity facility

Electricity facility is one of the important initiatives that require collective decision of at least

two departments such as electricity and school department in the state. It has been found that

despite having electricity in the village many schools are still devoid of electricity facility.

However, it is heartening to see that very high proportion of government secondary and higher

secondary schools are equipped with electricity facilities but only 50% primary and 65% upper

primary government schools could have electricity facility. However, much higher proportion of

private aided and unaided schools have received the electricity connection (Table 14).

Table 14: Percentage Share of Schools with Electricity Facility

School

Category Govt.

Private

Aided

Private


Madrasa

Recognized

Total

Schools

Primary 50.84 81.30 82.62 50.96 60.77 57.77

Upper Primary 65.03 77.23 86.29 71.73 62.87 72.10

Elementary 52.59 76.16 81.51 49.63 62.51 58.93

Secondary 84.52 89.58 91.21 66.92 75.72 87.70

Hr. Secondary 91.07 94.87 93.38 85.60 77.16 92.56



15

State wise distribution of primary schools with electricity connection shows that 12 states still

have less than 40% government schools that have electricity connection. Two states like

Jharkhand and Madhya Pradesh have only less than 10% government schools with electricity

connection. The situation is far better in case of private aided and unaided schools for example

Madhya Pradesh which has only 8.5% government schools with electricity facility, it has more

than 80% private unaided schools that have been provided with electricity facility. The lowest

proportion of private aided schools with electricity facility has been recorded in Manipur (13%)

and for private unaided schools it is Meghalaya which has the lowest proportion of schools

(26%) with electricity connection.

In case of upper primary schools, five states have been identified which have less than 40%

government schools with electricity facility. Out of these, the state like Jharkhand has the lowest

proportion of government schools (18%) with electricity facility. On contrary only two states

have less than 40% private aided schools with electricity facility and there is no such state could

be found in this category where less than 40% private unaided schools without electricity

facility.

In case of secondary schools, only Bihar has been found with less than 40% government schools

with electricity connection but for private unaided schools, Bihar has around 48% schools

without electricity connection. Assam has the lowest proportion of aided private schools (31%)

with electricity connection. In case of higher secondary schools, except Bihar all other states

have more than 70% government as well as private schools that have electricity connection. It

has been found that around half of the government and 44% private aided schools have not been

provided with electricity facility. In case of private unaided schools Assam has recorded the

lowest proportion of schools with electricity facility and around 30% schools in Assam are yet to

be provided with this facility.

Library Facility

It is heartening to see that the proportion of government as well as private schools with library

facility is quite high at each level of education (Table 15). It is noteworthy that in case of

government schools, around 84% primary, 89% upper primary, 91% secondary and 94% higher

secondary schools have library. The situation is slightly poor in case of private unaided schools,

where only 77% primary, 83% upper primary, 89% secondary and 91% higher secondary

schools have library. Thus, indicating availability of better library facility in the government

schools, the proportion of schools with library facility is also higher in private aided schools as

compared to private unaided at each level of education.

Table 15: Percentage Share of Schools with Library

School

Category Govt.

Private

Aided

Private


Madrasa

Recognized

Total

Schools

Primary 84.33 85.90 76.85 43.61 43.83 81.79

Upper Primary 88.83 87.17 83.09 68.07 59.46 86.48

Elementary 84.36 85.20 77.15 43.26 46.69 82.06

Secondary 91.14 92.24 89.58 67.53 77.10 90.36

Hr. Secondary 93.80 93.27 91.05 79.08 82.18 92.37



16

It is the north-eastern states like Manipur and Meghalaya are placed at the lowest rank with

around 7 – 8% primary schools, whether private or government, that have been provided with

library. Similarly Meghalaya also has the lowest proportion of upper primary government,

private aided and unaided schools with library facility and the situation is not that satisfactory in

other north-eastern states as well. Although, the proportion of schools with library facility is

much higher in case of secondary and higher secondary level but north-eastern states such as

Mizoram in case of higher secondary and Nagaland, Mizoram and Meghalaya in case of

secondary need more attention for making schools equipped with library facility. It is

understandable that even primary schools need library facility for providing conducive learning

environment to its students and also for improving teaching learning process.

Computer Facility

It has been found that only 13% government primary and 37% government upper primary

schools have computer facility in it whereas more than 60% secondary and around 70% higher

secondary schools run by government are having computer facility (Table 16). However, much

higher proportion of private aided and unaided schools are found equipped with computers and

even 32% unrecognized schools are provided with computer facility. It is to be noted that

substantial proportion of recognized Madrasa are having computer facility. Thus, it is

understandable that a long way has to be covered to make computer aided learning a reality in

government schools particularly at the primary and upper primary level to deal with the problem

of digital divide in India.

Table 16: Percentage Share of Schools with Computer facility

School

Category Govt.

Private

Aided

Private


Madrasa

Recognized

Total

Schools

Primary 13.13 45.80 54.73 31.84 18.56 22.34

Upper Primary 37.43 60.15 62.00 51.90 28.91 46.33

Elementary 16.63 52.08 53.44 30.88 20.71 25.23

Secondary 60.26 76.85 70.50 50.73 44.72 66.82

Hr. Secondary 68.99 84.84 68.76 62.32 49.65 71.39


As many as 17 states were recorded where not even 10% government primary schools could be

provided with computer facility. Bihar has only around 2% of government primary schools with

computer facility. For private aided schools, four states could be found with below 10% schools

with computer facility and out of these four states, Manipur with 3% schools with computer

secured the lowest position. Meghalaya is the only state where the lowest proportions of private

unaided schools (11%) were found with computer facility.

In case of upper primary, two states such as Jharkhand and Bihar (lowest with 3.8% schools)

were found with lowest proportion of government schools with computer facility and only

Assam is the state where only 2.5% private aided schools could be provided with computer

facility. The situation is much better in case of private unaided schools and Uttar Pradesh ranks

lowest with 27% schools that have been provided with computer facility.


17

In case of secondary and higher secondary schools, Madhya Pradesh has been identified as the

most deprived state in terms of computer facility in government schools. While around 18%

government secondary schools in the state have computer facility, this percentage is 28% in case

of higher secondary schools. In case of private aided secondary schools, the proportion of

schools with computer facility has been recorded merely less than 20% in Assam and Odisha but

in case of private unaided schools, further improvement has been found in availability of

computer facility in schools and the lowest proportion of schools with computer facility could be

found in Mizoram only, where the proportion of such school is 22%. The proportion of private

aided and unaided higher secondary schools with computer facility is nearly 20% in two states

such as Assam and Mizoram.

CAL Facility

It is noticeable that, despite having computers, the percentage share of schools with CAL facility

is very low at different levels including secondary and higher secondary levels and except

primary, much difference could not be found between government and private schools at other

levels (Table 17).

Table 17: Percentage Share of Schools with CAL

School

Category Govt.

Private

Aided

Private


Madrasa

Recognized

Total

Schools

Primary 7.72 13.63 22.08 20.39 10.34 10.88

Upper Primary 22.51 19.04 25.22 36.15 16.57 23.21

Elementary 9.42 15.88 21.25 19.58 11.54 12.07

Secondary 27.56 27.01 30.60 27.99 21.92 28.63

Hr. Secondary 34.00 38.74 36.03 36.22 27.68 35.63


The state wise variation indicates that the majority of states (25) have less than 10% government

primary schools with CAL facility. The number of states gradually decreases along with increase

in the level of education such as 7 states at the upper primary level, 4 at the secondary and 2 at

the higher secondary level were found with less than 10% government schools with CAL

facility. The situation is not that satisfactory in case of private aided and unaided schools as 14

states have been recorded with less than 10% primary aided schools with CAL whereas in case

of unaided the number of such states is 8. The number of states with 10% schools having CAL

facility becomes 10 each for aided upper primary and secondary schools; 7 for higher secondary

schools whereas 5 each for unaided upper primary, secondary and higher secondary schools.

Enrolment in schools lacking different infrastructure facilities

In the above section it has been discussed how different schools are equipped with different

facilities. In this present section, an attempt has been made to look into the enrolment pattern in

government schools which lack some of the important physical facilities as given in the

following Table 18. It is found that around 2% of total enrolment has been recorded in the

government primary schools which have only one classroom. This proportion has declined to


18

0.03% at higher secondary level. It is disheartening to see that around 45-46% of enrolment has

been recorded in primary schools without electricity and playground facilities in it whereas more

than 80% enrolment in primary schools without computer (81%) and CAL (88%) facilities

despite having an ongoing program on computer aided learning at this stage. The proportion of

enrolment is also high in the schools without electricity, playground, computer etc. at the upper

primary, secondary and higher secondary level though it has shown a declining trend as the level

of education increases.

Table 18: Percentage share of enrolment in government schools according to different facilities at

different school levels

Facilities Primary

Upper

Primary Secondary

Higher

Secondary

One Classroom 2.20 0.32 0.13 0.03

Without Building 1.41 0.13 1.09 0.56

Without Boundary

Wall 37.9 27.72 21.39 13.30

Without Water 3.18 1.73 1.50 1.21

Without Toilet 4.66 1.85 4.08 2.60

Without Electricity 46.42 30.25 15.71 7.21

Without Playground 45.76 35.74 26.67 22.31

Without Computer 81.33 53.82 35.90 26.74

Without CAL 87.97 71.91 67.58 58.39


The EDI for infrastructure at primary and upper primary levels indicate that Karnataka is the state which

has improved its infrastructure facilities substantially as it rank first for both levels (Table 19). It is

noticeable that Madhya Pradesh and Meghalaya have also same rank at both levels but the situation is

quite alarming in both states particularly Meghalaya which holds lowest rank. There are few states which

have ranked higher in case of primary but hold lower rank in case of upper primary whereas some states

have shown reverse trend as well for example while Himachal Pradesh rank 2 for primary with 0.90

index, it has gone down to 3 rank in case of upper primary with 0.85 index. Similarly Gujarat ranking 5

for primary has improved to rank 2 in case of upper primary with a higher index (0.93).

Table 19: Educational Development Index for ‘Infrastructure’ at Primary and Upper Primary

Level in 2013-14

State/UT Primary level Upper Primary

State/UT Rank Index Index Rank

Karnataka 1 0.91 0.932 1 Karnataka

Himachal Pradesh 2 0.903 0.929 2 Gujarat

Puducherry 3 0.889 0.851 3 Himachal Pradesh

Maharashtra 4 0.88 0.849 4 Daman & Diu

Gujarat 5 0.878 0.841 5 Punjab

Tamil Nadu 6 0.87 0.834 6 Puducherry


19

Kerala 7 0.869 0.829 7 Maharashtra

Punjab 8 0.863 0.823 8 Kerala

Lakshadweep 9 0.86 0.82 9 Tamil Nadu

Uttarakhand 10 0.858 0.818 10 Uttar Pradesh

Sikkim 11 0.849 0.815 11 Uttarakhand

Daman & Diu 12 0.832 0.81 12 Rajasthan

Uttar Pradesh 13 0.82 0.802 13 Haryana

Haryana 14 0.813 0.784 14 Lakshadweep

Rajasthan 15 0.801 0.759 15 Chhattisgarh

Madhya Pradesh 16 0.779 0.75 16 Madhya Pradesh

Chhattisgarh 17 0.763 0.745 17 Sikkim

A & N Islands 18 0.738 0.736 18 D & N Haveli

D & N Haveli 19 0.729 0.715 19 Odisha

Goa 20 0.723 0.686 20 Manipur

Delhi 21 0.722 0.685 21 Mizoram

West Bengal 22 0.717 0.682 22 A & N Islands

Manipur 23 0.712 0.677 23 Jammu & Kashmir

Odisha 24 0.701 0.672 24 Jharkhand

Chandigarh 25 0.69 0.667 25 Delhi

Nagaland 26 0.686 0.66 26 Arunachal Pradesh

Mizoram 27 0.665 0.66 27 West Bengal

Jharkhand 28 0.653 0.657 28 Nagaland

Tripura 29 0.623 0.656 29 Chandigarh

Jammu & Kashmir 30 0.581 0.646 30 Bihar

Andhra Pradesh 31 0.567 0.616 31 Tripura

Assam 32 0.523 0.595 32 Andhra Pradesh

Bihar 33 0.516 0.546 33 Goa

Arunachal Pradesh 34 0.5 0.41 34 Assam

Meghalaya 35 0.317 0.358 35 Meghalaya

Total

25.8 25.315 Total

Source: Flash Statistics: 2013-14, DISE, NUEPA

Conclusion

The above discussion reveals that there has been gradual increase in number of private schools

resulting in an increasing trend in enrolment in these schools as well. This indicates that

increasingly parents are willing to spend money to send their children to private schools as it is

believed that private schools function much better as compared to government schools. However,

the above data analysis indicate that due to many initiatives taken by government at the national

and state level, some improvement has taken place in the government schools as well. It has been

found that most of the government schools across the country are now accessible by all weather

roads and these have its own building. Similarly improvement has also been made in terms of

availability of drinking water facility, toilets, classrooms, etc. However the situation is not that


20

satisfactory if we look at availability of some other facilities such as boundary wall, playground,

electricity and it is more challenging in case of availability of computer facility and CAL. It is

heartening to see that majority of schools government as well as private have library facility in it.

However, it is difficult to understand to what extent this library facility is being utilized by

learners and their teachers. It is also a matter of concern that schools without electricity,

playground, boundary wall, computer and CAL constitute a large proportion of enrolment at the

primary as well as other levels indicating that a substantial proportion of learners are not

accessing these facilities and that may have impact on their learning level. It is in this context

further challenge still remains to provide a conducive learning environment to all students by

equipping all government schools with essential infrastructure facilities and to reduce the

dichotomy between public and private education system.

Reference

Ajayi, I. A. (2002). Resource factors as correlates of secondary schools effectiveness in Ekiti

State, Nigerian Journal of Counseling and Applied Psychology, 1(1): 109-115.

Asiabaka, Ihumoa P. (2008). The Need for Effective Facility Management in Schools in Nigeria,

New York Science Journal, 2008; 1 (2): 10-21.

Bandyopadhyay, M. (2012a). Social Disparity in Elementary Education. Seminar, October, pp.

21–25.

Bandyopadhyay, M. (2012b). Gender equity in educational access in India. Southern African

Review of Education (SARE), Volume 18, Number 2: 9-24.

Bandyopadhyay, M. & Dey, M. (2010). Hierarchy in Access to Elementary School in Rajasthan

and Haryana: A Report, NUEPA, New Delhi (Memo).

Bandyopadhyay, M. & Dey, M. (2011). Effective School Management Committees, CREATE

India Policy Brief No. 4, NUEPA, New Delhi.

Bandyopadhyay, M., Das, D. & Zeitlyn, B. (2011). Absenteeism, Repetition and Silent Exclusion

in India, CREATE India Policy Brief No. 3, NUEPA, New Delhi.

Dayaram (2011). School Management Commitee and the Right to Education Act 2009 Resource

Material for SMC Training. America India Foundation, New Delhi.

Dayaram (2013). School Development Plan Under RTE Act 2009: School Mapping and Micro-

planning - Participatory Tool for School Development Plan. America India Foundation, New

Delhi.

De, A., Khera, R., Samson, M. & Kumar, A. K. Shiva (2011). Probe Revisited, A Report on

Elementary Education in India. Oxford University Press, New Delhi.

Dreze & Kingdon (1999). School Participation in Rural India, The Development Economics

Discussion Paper Series, The Suntory Centre The Suntory and Toyota International Centres for

Economics and Related Disciplines London School of Economics, Houghton Street, London.


21

Govinda, R. & Bandyopadhyay, M., (2009). Educational Access in India, Country Policy Brief,

2008, Delhi/Brighton: NUEPA/University of Sussex.

Govinda, R. & Bandyopadhyay, M. (2011a). Access to Elementary Education: Analytical

Overview. In Govinda, R (ed.). Who Goes to School? Exploring Exclusion in Indian Education.

New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1–86.

Govinda, R. & Bandyopadhyay, M. (2011b). Overcoming Exclusion Through Quality Schooling.

CREATE, University of Sussex, U.K. Available at www.create-rpc.org [accessed 6 June 2013].

Govinda, R. & Bandyopadhyay, M. (2011c). Changing Framework of Local governance and

Community Participation in Elementary Education in India in Govinda, R (ed.). Who Goes to

School? Exploring Exclusion in Indian Education. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, P: 248-

285.

Hallack, J. (1990). Investing in the future: setting educational priorities in the developing world,

Paris: IIEP and Pergamon Press.

Jha, Jyotsna & Jhingran, Dhir (2005). Elementary Education for the poorest and other deprived

groups: The real challenge of universalization, Manohar Publishers, New Delhi

Kuuskropi, Marko & Gonzalez, Nuria Cabellos (2011). The future of the physical learning

environment: school facilities that support the user, CELE Exchange, OECD 2011

Lewin, K. M., (2007). Reconceptualising Access to Education, CREATE, Brighton, University

of Sussex. www.create-rpc.org.

Lewin, K. M., (2011). Making Rights Realities: Researching Educational Access, Transitions

and Equity, CREATE, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK. www.create-rpc.org

Little, A. (2008). EFA Politics, policies and Progress, CREATE, Research Monograph, 13, Path

ways to Access. www.create-rpc.org

Mehrotra, Santosh (2006). Reforming elementary education in India: A menu of options,

International Journal of Educational Development 26 (2006) 261-277.

NUEPA (2013). Elementary Education in India: Progress Towards UEE, Flash Statistics, DISE,

2011–12, Provisional; NUEPA, New Delhi.

NUEPA (2015) Elementary Education in India: Trends 2005-06 to 2014-15, DISE, New Delhi

NUEPA, DISE and U-DISE Data, 2014-15, unpublished, New Delhi Pratham (2013). Annual Status of Education Report, Rural, 2012 ASER Centre, New Delhi.

Accesed in http://www.pratham.org/file/ASER-2012report.pdf on 28June, 2013.

Srivastava, Ravi S. (2006). The Impase Broken: Mapping Change in Elementary Education in

Uttar Pradesh in Santosh Mehrotra (ed.), The Economics of Elementary Education in India: The

Challenge of Public Finance, Private Provision and Household Costs, SAGE Publications, New

Delhi.

http://www.pratham.org/file/ASER-2012report.pdf

present status of infrastructure facilities in schools in...

Documents