Status of Municipal Education in MumbaiDecember 2013

Supported by

FORD FOUNDATION

1

2

Data from Household Survey

Praja Foundation had commissioned the household survey to Hansa Research and the survey was conducted in March-April 2013 across the city of Mumbai with a total sample size of 6038 households.

3

Language All SEC A SEC B SEC C SEC D SEC E

English 86% 96% 91% 82% 85% 67%

All SEC A SEC B SEC C SEC D SEC EPrivate 83% 95% 87% 84% 78% 68%

Municipal 17% 5% 13% 16% 22% 32%

Percentage of respondents with their children going to either private or Municipal School:

Respondents whose current medium of education is other than English and would want to change to English medium

17% respondents have children in the household going to Municipal school. While, 78% from SEC D and 68% from SEC E are sending their children to private school.

86% respondents whose children’s current medium of instruction is in Indian Languages would prefer to go English Medium schools.67% from SEC E section and 85% from SEC D of the current would prefer to go to English medium schools.

4

All Private School Municipal School

Yes 75% 80% 51%

No 25% 20% 49%

Respondent taking private tuitions/coaching classes:

Private School Municipal SchoolSchool Class teacher 15% 14%Private tuitions 68% 64%Coaching classes 15% 20%Others 2% 3%

51% students from Municipal Schools take private tuitions / coaching classes

Details on source of Tuitions:

14% students from Municipal schools take tuitions from their own school class teachers.

5

Data from RTI

6

YearNo. of Candidates Appeared Total Pass Pass in (%)

MCGM School

Private School

MCGM School

Private School

MCGM School

Private School

Mar-09 10,269 155,334 5,299 125,727 52% 81%Mar-10 9,401 159,638 5,545 131,332 59% 82%Mar-11 11,515 159,572 6,806 131,230 59% 82%Mar-12 12,466 164,526 7,623 136,187 61% 83%Mar-13 12,856 164,010 7,658 131,785 60% 80%

Comparison between MCGM and Private School SSC Results

Year 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013Total

Students451,810 455,900 437,863 439,153 434,523

Dropout 28,944 29,468 18,700 32,580 40,011

Dropout (per 100)

6 6 4 7 9

SSC Passout 5,299 5,545 6,806 7,623 7,658

in % 52% 59% 59% 61% 60%

Total Number of Students, Dropout and Passout in Municipal Schools in Mumbai during the year 2008 - 2013

7

Middle school Scholarship Examination (4th Standard)

Year

Candidates Appeared Scholarship HoldersScholarship Holders

in %MCGM School

Private School

MCGM School

Private School

MCGM School

Private School

2011-12 9637 21998 43 2044 0.4% 9.3%2012-13 5426 21223 23 1954 0.4% 9.2%

High School Scholarship Examination (7th Standard)2011-12 7160 19227 8 1758 0.1% 9.1%2012-13 4283 20190 6 1611 0.1% 8.0%

Comparison between Private and MCGM School: Scholarship Awarded 4th and 7th Standard

8

YearTotal Annual Budget

(Rs. in crores)Total Students

Per-capita Budget Allocation (in Rs.)

2008-09 911 451,810 20,1652009-10 1255 449,179 27,9502010-11 1,761 437,911 40,2132011-12 1,800 439,108 40,9922012-13 2,388 434,523 54,9612013-14 2,600 434,523 59,828

Annual Municipal Budgets and Per-capita spent on students

9

Account Head

Budget Estimate 2012-13

Actual expenditur

e 2012-2013

Budget Estimate 2013-14

Total Education Budget 2388 1884 2600 Less: Grants to Private Primary aided School (D) 254 200 283Total 2135 1683 2316Total students (2012-2013) 434523 434523 434523Per Capita cost for every student (in actual rupees) 49127 38742 53309

Education Budget (Rs. in Crore)

10

Deliberation by Councillors on Education in the year March’12 to March’13

134 questions have been asked on issues related to Education in year April’12 to March’13. In the last four years, April 2008 to February 2012, on an average 77 questions were asked on education by councillors in the earlier years. Compared to last year averages, 134 questions asked in 2012-13 is very positive sign.

However there are still 164 (out of 227) councillors who have not asked a single question this year and another 35 councillors who have asked only one question on education.

11

Evaluation of teachers, students & schools as per RTE

Ward Data

12

D Ward M/East WardP/South

WardNo. of Students 3269 53510 16165Dropout (Per 100) 14 9 12Pass out (In %) 62% 38% 58%No. of teachers 113 1147 422No. of whom inspection report available 80 543 85In 2012-13, just 0.4% (23 students) of those who appeared for 4th standard scholarship exams and 0.1% (6 students) of 7th standard from MCGM schools were awarded scholarships.

Teacher Evaluation Data

13

D Ward M/East WardP/South

WardUsage of examples, case study while teaching Usage 96% 95% 98%Teaching Aids Use Yes 95% 87% 93%Student Involvement Good 78% 76% 64%

Formative Evaluation Technique Used Yes 93% 96% 95%

Teacher Student Interaction Proper 81% 80% 62%Entries in the daily lesson plan and actual teaching Complete 94% 92% 92%

Self evaluation by the teacher Good 54% 65% 48%Prepared test papered or question paper Prepared 96% 97% 99%Teacher’s Portfolio Good 41% 52% 66%Subject wise students response Good 61% 71% 35%

14

Continuous and Comprehensive Evaluation (CCE) refers to a system of school-based assessment of students that covers all aspects of students' development introduced under Right to Education Act.

Continuous and Comprehensive Evaluation (CCE)

Wards 4th Standard (No. of students in %) 7th Standard (No. of students in %)

Above 60% (A1, A2, B1, B2 grades)

60% to 40% (C1, C2 grade)

40% to 20% (D, E1 grades)

Below 20% (E2 grade)

Above 60% (A1, A2, B1, B2 grades)

60% to 40% (C grade)

40% to 20% (D, E1 grades)

Below 20% (E2 grade)

D 47% 14% 16% 8% 58% 26% 9% 6%

M East 44% 15% 12% 13% 64% 18% 9% 8%

P South 41% 11% 20% 11% 58% 24% 15% 3%

E2 grade is given by MCGM to students who are continuously absent i.e. dropouts as earlier maintained.Note: From the CCE forms for few subject have not been filed. For details check the next slides.

15

4th Standard CCE forms data for 3 worst performing wards

16

7th Standard CCE forms data for 3 worst performing wards

Compliance of infrastructure norms under RTE

17

Indicator : Schools with Infrastructure Facilities Available

Govt. and Local bodies Pvt. Aided Pvt. UnaidedRailway School (2)

& Social Welfare (1)

Total Schools 1291 439 689 3

BuildingNo. 1291 439 689 3% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Office cum store cum HM roomNo. 1291 385 644 3% 100% 87.7% 93.5% 100%

One class room for every teacherNo. 1232 239 318 3% 95.4% 54.4% 46.2% 100%

RampNo. 1291 427 651 3% 100% 97.3% 94.5% 100%

Separate Toilet for BoysNo. 1291 439 689 3% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Separate Toilet for Girls TNo. 1284 439 689 3% 99.5% 100% 100% 100%

Drinking Water FacilityNo. 1291 439 689 3% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Kitchen ShedNo. 1291 439 689 3% 100% 100% 100% 100%

boundary wallNo. 1238 383 604 3% 95.9% 87.2% 87.7% 100%

PlaygroundNo. 1291 355 547 3% 100% 80.9% 79.4% 100%

Mar-13 SSC PassoutMCGM 7,658

Pass in (%)60%

Private 131,785 80%

MCGM 4th StandardScholarship Holders

23Scholarship Holders in %

0.4%

MCGM 7th Standard 6 0.1%

What needs to be done

18

Learning outcomes need to be monitored.

Continuous Comprehensive Evaluation (CCE) reports and Inspection

reports need to be filled rigorously. These reports should be audited by

third party and linked to performance appraisal of respective teachers.

Providing quality education is the duty of the Corporation. Quality of

education should be the only paramount focus of the Corporation. And

hence the measurement index should be comparative student

performance.

THANK YOU !!!

19