EDUCATIONAL PROFILE
Literacy
status
The state literacy
presently is 64.11 per cent, which is close to the national literacy
rate 65.35 per cent. While the female literacy has considerably
improved over the last decade, a great disparity persists in the
literacy rates of males and females. Some blocks such as Alirajpur,
Karhal, Jhimiya, Sendhwa, Jobat & Bajna have literacy rates below
35. The female literacy is below 20% in two blocks i.e. Karhal
(15.1) of Sheopur district and Alirajpur (19.9) of Jhabua district.
The district wise details of literacy rate are given at
annexure -1
Literacy Rate over
the decade
2.2
Elementary Education Status
The status of
elementary education in terms of major educational
indicators is described below.
(a)
The school facilities available in M.P. are as follows:
Table no. 2 - School
facilities in Madhya Pradesh
|
S.No
|
School Facilities
|
Numbers
|
|
1.
|
Government Primary
schools
|
82296
|
|
2.
|
Aided Primary
schools
|
961
|
|
|
Private Primary
schools
|
13221
|
|
4.
|
Government Middle
schools
|
24293
|
|
5.
|
Aided Middle
Schools
|
370
|
|
6.
|
Private Middle
schools
|
11236
|
|
7.
|
Ashram Shala
(Elementary level)
|
878
|
The district wise details given at annexure - 2.
(b)
In addition to the formal schools, primary education
facilities have been started to ensure that the children who are out
of the ambit of formal education, also get an opportunity to
education facility that will ultimately lead to their mainstreaming
in the formal education stream. The details and status of these
alternative facilities are given below:
Table no. 3 -
Alternative Educational facilities in M.P.
|
S.No
|
School Facilities
|
Numbers
|
Number of
beneficiaries.
|
|
1.
|
Non
Residential
Bridge
courses
|
6595
|
1,56,260
|
|
2.
|
Residential
Bridge
courses
|
602
|
37,187
|
|
3.
|
Madarsas under 'Modernisation
of Madarsa' scheme.
|
2734
|
1,51,775
|
|
4.
|
Sanskrit Schools
|
96
|
2,846
|
|
5.
|
Human development
centres for Urban Deprived Children.
|
306
|
12,011
|
|
6.
|
Transitional Education Centres (TEC)
under INDUS project.
|
400
|
2000
|
|
7.
|
State
Open
School
centre
|
-
|
17138
|
c) The status of
enrolment in primary and upper primary levels in terms of GER is
as follows:
(f)
The
status of learner achievement is reflected in terms of grades
achieved in the annual exams of class 5lh and 8th
board.
Table no. - 4 - Pass Percentage in
Class-V VIII Board Examination
|
Academic Year 2005
- 2007
|
Boys
|
Girls
|
Total
|
|
V Board
Examination
|
78.8
|
78.0
|
78.4
|
|
Viil Board
Examination
|
60.6
|
62.0
|
61.1
|
(Source - District
Results 2004-05)
Table no. - 5 - Results of Class-V & VIII Board Examination
|
|
A grade Achievers
|
|
Academic Year
2005-06
|
Boys
|
Girls
|
Total
|
|
Vth
Board Examination
|
21.5
|
20.9
|
21.2
|
|
VIIIth
Board Examination
|
12.2
|
13.6
|
12.7
|
The district wise
details given at annexure 9 & 10.
The status of
teacher's availability and their status of professional trainings is
given in the table below:
Table no. 6 -Teacher details
|
|
Teachers
|
Numbers & % of
untrained teachers
|
|
Primary
|
171020
|
82903 (48%)
|
|
Upper Primary
|
72988
|
27995 (38%)
|
|
Total |
244008 |
110898(45%) |
Table no. 7 - Pupil Teacher Ratio
|
PTR in
Govt. Primary
School |
48
|
|
PTR in
Govt. Middle
School |
36.8 |
District wise details
of teachers & PTR is Given at annexnre-11.
1. Administrative Structure of Education
(Directorate of
Public Instruction)
Education System.
Director Public
Instruction (DPI)
DEO (upto –
12)
Director State Project Director
SCERT
BEO (upto
–12)
DIET District Project Coordination
Schools.
BRC, BAC
CRC, CAC.
Tribal Commissioner at
District level for Looking for ward Tribal School Education.
2.
System of
Education.
1. Schooling System
(A) Primary School – Std. 1 to 5
End of 5th Std. Board Exam Conducted
Examination paper prepared & porovided by Rajya Shiksha Kendra
Bhopal
(B)
Middle School – Std. – 6,7,8 End of 8th Std. Board
Exam Conducted Examination Examination paper prepared and provided
by RSK Bhopal
(C)
Secondary School Std. – 9 to 10
(D)
Higher Secondary –11 to 12
3. Primary & Middle schools located in state as per standard norms
described by national level.
State Team Visited Following District
(15 Dec. 06 to 23 Dec. 06)
|
District
|
Block |
School |
CRC |
BRC/BAC |
DIET |
SCERT |
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
|
Raisen
|
1. Aubadullan Ganj |
1. Berkheda Tola
EGS |
Barkheda
|
BAC |
- |
- |
|
2. Piplani khurd
P.S. |
|
|
|
|
|
2. Udaipura
|
1. M.S. Gorkhpur
|
Gorakhpur |
BAC |
- |
- |
|
2. P.S. Dungaria
Jageer |
|
|
|
|
|
3. Badi |
1 M.S. Janakpur |
Kamtone |
BAC |
|
|
|
2 P.S. Salaiya/ |
|
|
|
|
|
Betul
|
1. Ghoda Dongari |
1. Kanhabadi P.S.
|
Ghoda Dongari
|
BRC |
|
|
|
2. Ghoda Dongari
P.S. |
|
|
|
|
|
1. Shantipur P.S. |
Chopna |
|
|
|
|
2. P.S. Chopna |
|
|
|
|
|
1. P.S. P.S.
Baspur |
Banspur |
|
|
|
|
P.S. Ghodgaon, |
|
|
|
|
|
2. Shahpur |
1 Mayawadi |
1. P.S. Mayabadi |
BRC |
|
|
|
P.S Silpati |
|
|
|
|
2. Maura |
P.S. Maura |
|
|
|
|
P.S.G. Maura |
|
|
|
|
3. Dodhara Maw |
1. P.S.
Doctaramanu. |
|
|
|
|
2. P.S. Romakota.
|
|
|
|
|
|
3. Chicholi |
1. Chicholi |
1. P.S. Chicholi |
BRC |
|
|
|
1. P.S. Gondigola |
|
|
|
|
2. Khaparia
|
1. P.S. Khaparia |
|
|
|
|
2. P.S. Dhadari |
|
|
|
|
3. Kursana
|
P.S. Kursana |
|
|
|
|
P.S. Hardu.
|
|
|
|
|
Hoshangabad.
|
1. Babai. |
1. Babai |
1 New P.S. Babai |
|
|
|
|
2. SBSBabai |
BAC |
|
|
|
2. Sikhad |
1. P.S. Sikhad |
|
|
|
|
3. Bachwada |
2. P.S. Kuhhwada |
|
|
|
|
1. P.S. Bachwada |
|
|
|
|
|
2. P.S.
Panjarakhurd |
|
|
|
|
2.Sohagpur |
1. Semari Harchand |
1. P.S. Kachhipura |
|
|
|
|
2. P.S. Jamunia |
BAC |
|
|
|
2. Gujarkhedi |
1. P.S. Nagtara |
|
|
|
|
2. P.S. Kalameshra |
|
|
|
|
3. Sohagpur |
1. P.S. Sohagpur |
|
|
|
|
2. P.S. Mata pura |
|
|
|
|
3. Kesala |
1. Kesala |
1. P.S. Kesala |
|
|
|
|
2. P.S. Gomtipura |
|
|
|
|
2. Taku |
1. P.S. Taku |
BAC |
|
|
|
2. P.S. Chipapura |
|
|
|
|
3. Teekhad |
1. P.S.
Peepaldhana |
|
|
|
|
2. P.S. Teekhad |
|
|
|
Chapter–
2
Background
The Schools which were
visited some are in tribal area, city area & some of the them are
located in remote areas. Madhya Pradesh has 48 districts, Blocks 313
& Tribal Blocks 8. out of 48 distrcts 3 districts are identified as
sample districts for pilot study. From 3 districts. Betul is a
Tribal District Hoshangabad & Raisen are Non Tribal District.
Hoshangabad ,
Raisen non Tribal districts.
Positive things
1.
It is general observation that enrollment of Children and
retention in schools is satisfactory .
2.
Community Participation through PTA
(i)
Awareness found strong and co-operative .
(ii)
Decisions are made in the field of Schools and academic
progress.
(iii)
Community provides remedial teachers for additional academic
help in schools.
(iv)
In some schools community people help school to develop &
make school environment attractive, like gardening, cleaning campus,
painting and maintenance of school building.
(v)
Mid day Meal School running successfully with the help of
Panchayats.
3.
The state government gave importance to English and
implemented it as compulsory subject from std. 1 To make it easy and
joyful they have started English is fun radio programme for std. 1
to 3.
4.
Head Start centers are running for computer aided learning as
one of the tools of Self Learning and Self Evaluation.
5.
RBC & NRBC are the supporting system for those children who
are droppers or never enrolled due to some of social & economic
reasons.
6.
Ashram Schools runniny under tribal commissioner to decrease
the member of dropout & migrating parents. children.
7.
As per the norms of NPEGEL of SSA Kasturba Gandhi Balika
Vidhyalaya running successfully in all the districts taken for the
pilot study.
8.
In some of the visited school were found running scout and
guide activities. Were found rnning
Teachers –
Background
There are two
types of schools running in Elementary education scctor. Primary
school, onttrained with std 1 to 5 & middle School which consits of
std 6.7.8. Most of the primary classes running & shown MGT.
(i)
Teachers recruitment of contact teachers through entrance
exam conducted by Viyavasaik Pariksha Mandal M.P.
(ii)
Professional Qualification of Teacher is given weight age in
the recruitment.
(iii)
Due to two dimensims Primary & Middle School, teachers
divided in different category like Shiksha Karmi 1,2,3 & Samveenda
Shiksha 1,2,3.
(iv)
In RBC & NRBC & KGBV instructors named as swayam sewak work
as a facilitator.
(v)
Continuation Evaluation trend is being followed for the
quality education.
(vi)
In-service teacher trainings continuously conducted on
various aspects for teachers enrichment.
(1)
Methodology
(2)
Subject wise Hard sports.
(3)
Multigrade teaching.
(4)
Use of teaching learning materials.
(5)
Class room process
(6)
Class room management
(7)
General Areas
(8)
Planning & Management of Schort.
Chapter – 3
State Team Visit
Taken as pilot study core group
members undergone the field visit in different districts Intensive
visit in different Blocks and cluster draws the precious outcomes to
depict the Picture of the area on different performance –
Expectations according
to levels of Complexity –
Scenario of the
Expectations drawn from 42 Schools taken for the Study –
Physical Back ground –
-
Adequate Number of rooms – 39
-
available in 39 schools.
-
Urinals / Toilets are present in
39 schools.
-
Drinking water facility available
in 41 schools.
-
Playground available in 23
schools.
-
Facility of Electricity is in only
8 schools
I.
Physical Dimension of a School –
(Physical
Environment as a enabling factor)
1. The teacher facilitates a clean
environment. On the basis of sample study following outcome explains
the results.
|
Sub Areas Level I |
No. of Schools of
Level –I |
Sub Areas Level II |
No. of Schools of
Level –II |
Sub Areas Level III |
No. of Schools of
Level –III |
Sub Areas Level
IV |
|
|
1.1 |
15-36% |
2.1 |
15 (36%) |
3.1 |
(60%)
25 |
_ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At Level – I
(1) Above result shows that 36%
schools is fulfilling the expectations of Level – I in which teacher
encourages children towards overall maintenance and tidiness of the
class room.
At Level –II
(1) Only 36% of Schools falls in
Level 2 showing the expectations from teacher to create congenial
teaching learning environment with participation of all. Enables
Clealiness, creates hygienic environment, usage of toilets,
availability of safe drinking water for all children in school in
convergence with community.
At Level – III
(1) 60% of
schools are of level 3. which ensures maintenance of basic
infrastructures. And sensitizes children to maintain.
(B) Creates a
Conducive Environment
|
Sub Areas Level I |
No. of
Schools of
Level –I |
Sub Areas
Level II |
No. of
Schools of
Level –II |
Sub Areas
Level III |
No. of
Schools of
Level –III |
Sub Areas
Level
IV |
No. of
Schools of
Level –IV |
|
1.1 |
17 (40%) |
2.1 |
32 (76%) |
3.1 |
33 (79%) |
4.1 |
42 (100%) |
|
|
|
2.2 |
22 (52%) |
3.2 |
22 (52%) |
|
|
|
|
|
2.3 |
42 (100%) |
3.3 |
10 (24%) |
|
|
|
|
|
2.4 |
25 (60%) |
|
|
|
|
At Level – I
(1) According to the results drawn
only 40% of schools denotes the expectations of level I as teacher
displays children work in the class.
At Level –II
In level II on
different percentage of activities conducted by the teacher as –
-
In 76% schools teacher creates
colorful and attractive physical environment.
-
In 52% schools safety. aspects in
the environment is ensured.
-
In 100% schools teacher ensures
management of mid-day meals scheme effectively
-
Only 60% of schools facilitate
beautification of classrooms, conducive for effective teaching
learning situation.
Under the same
expectation oly few schools are enlisted according to the above
results as under
At Level – III
-
Only 79% of schools improves
child friendly elements and barrier free environment.
-
Only 52% of schools make
logistical arrangements as per pedagogical and special needs of
children.
-
Only 24% of schools facilitaties
beautification of schools campus conductive for effective teaching
learning situation.
iv.
24% of schools ensures that sitting arrangement is movable.
As we talk about the level 4 only 100% of
schools ensures safe environment for the children.
Cognitive Dimensions
of A School
|
Sub Areas Level I |
No. of
Schools of
Level –I |
Sub Areas
Level II |
No. of
Schools of
Level –II |
Sub Areas
Level III |
No. of
Schools of
Level –III |
Sub Areas
Level
IV |
No. of
Schools of
Level –IV |
|
1.0 |
27 (64%) |
2.1 |
29 (69%) |
3.1 |
12 (29%) |
4.1 |
7 (17%) |
|
1.2 |
16 (38%) |
2.2 |
19 (45%) |
3.2 |
9 (21%) |
|
|
|
|
|
2.3 |
27 (64%) |
3.3 |
17 (40%) |
|
|
|
|
|
2.4 |
23 (55%) |
3.4 |
10 (24%) |
|
|
1. Understands Children
and relates with them -
According to this expectation the
level of complexity is as under -
At Level – I
i.
Only 64% of schools have under standing of background on
children as well as their different academic levels.
ii.
Only 38% of schools appreciate children’s work and display
them in the classroom.
At Level –II
-
Level II reflects four different
expectations as under-
-
Only 69% of schools identifies
children’s individual strengths, weaknesses and talents for their
quality improvement.
-
45% of schools keeps the record of
family background, socio-economic conditions and the linguistic
background of children to motivate them for their improvement.
-
64% of schools allow children to
ask questions and encourages for the clearance of their queries.
v.
55% of schools do not use the negative comparison and also do
not use the discouraging works.
Under the same
expectation according to the level of complexity results drawn as
follows –
At Level – III
-
29% of schools identifies that how
children have individual differences in bearing.
-
21% of schools maintain profile of
each and every child based on health, attendance, background and
baseline.
-
40% of schools Interact with
students as his own children affectionately.
-
25% of schools acts as participant
in the teaching learning process in the classroom.
-
If we conclude the observation we
can say that only 17% of schools are of level IV because very few
schools motivate or inspire children in their times of difficulty.
2- Understands
curriculum, content and prepares accordingly –
|
Sub Areas Level I |
No. of
Schools of
Level –I |
Sub Areas
Level II |
No. of
Schools of
Level –II |
Sub Areas
Level III |
No. of
Schools of
Level –III |
Sub Areas
Level
IV |
No. of
Schools of
Level –IV |
|
1.1 |
42 (100%) |
2.1 |
27 (64%) |
3.1 |
15 (36%) |
4.1 |
15 (36%) |
|
1.2 |
42 (100%) |
2.2 |
19 (45%) |
3.2 |
15 (36%) |
4.2 |
7 (17%) |
|
1.3 |
|
2.3 |
27 (64%) |
3.3 |
15 (36%) |
4.3 |
0 (0%) |
|
1.4 |
|
2.4 |
23 (55%) |
3.4 |
10 (24%) |
4.4 |
5 (12%) |
In
relation to this expectations the level of complexity is resulted as
under afte the field visit –
At Level – I
i.
It has come to know that in 100% of schools teacher possesses
and utilizes good under- standing of textbook and TLM.
ii.
In 100% of schools teacher incorporates adequate
understanding of content into teaching learning process.
At Level –II
-
Only 64% of schools are a ware of
the need to enable children to construct their knowledge,
prepares accordingly and helps them by using textbooks and
material towards this.
-
Level of complexity III is seen as
-
-
Only36% of schools have
understanding of constructivist approach and is aware of age
appropriate learning objectives, levels and milestones,
textbooks and material as well as syllabus. And prepares
accordingly.
-
36% of schools have teachers
with good understanding of curriculum, principles of Learning
and give children enough opportunity of learn from environment
or surrounding.
-
In relation it level IV-only 36%
of schools teacher adapts curriculum to local situations as well
as incorporation of local content.
-
17% of schools teachers plans
for pedagogical processes of school and tune with the aims of
education.
Only 12% of Schools displays accountability regarding ensuring
learning.
3-
Generates effective learning experiences usesoses contemporary
methods with a fous on relationship and diversity.
|
Sub Areas Level I |
No. of
Schools of
Level –I |
Sub Areas
Level II |
No. of
Schools of
Level –II |
Sub Areas
Level III |
No. of
Schools of
Level –III |
Sub Areas
Level
IV |
No. of
Schools of
Level –IV |
|
1.1 |
14 (33%) |
2.1 |
9 (21%) |
3.1 |
4 (10%) |
4.1 |
4 (10%) |
|
1.2 |
18 (43%) |
2.2 |
8 (19%) |
3.2 |
16 (38%) |
4.2 |
8 (19%) |
|
1.3 |
16 (38%) |
2.3 |
13 (31%) |
3.3 |
6 (14%) |
4.3 |
8 (19%) |
|
1.4 |
12 (29%) |
2.4 |
11 (26%) |
3.4 |
8 (19%) |
4.4 |
8 (19%) |
|
1.5 |
17 (40%) |
2.5 |
13 (31%) |
3.5 |
5 (12%) |
4.5 |
13 (31%) |
|
|
|
2.6 |
6 (14%) |
3.6 |
7 (17%) |
4.5 |
11 (26%) |
|
|
|
2.7 |
6 (14%) |
3.7 |
7 (17%( |
|
|
|
|
|
2.8 |
7 (17%) |
3.8 |
18 (43%) |
|
|
|
|
|
2.9 |
8 (19%) |
3.9 |
5 (12%) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.10 |
03 (7%) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.11 |
03 (7%) |
|
|
At Level -I
Under this expectation if we talk about the Level I schools the can
say that-
-
Only 33% of Schools do the interesting and enthusiastic activities
which enables children to construct knowledge by using examples.
given in the textbook.
-
Only 43% of Schools have awareness of different learner oriented
teaching learning practices
-
Only 38% of Schools involves children in work both individually
and groupes.
-
29% of Schools follow the Cchild Centered Approach and
activities.
-
40% of Schools in values the learning out comes during the morning
prayer session.
Level – II Under this expectation.
-
21% of Schools enable children to construct knowledge by asking
simple & appropriate question.
-
19% of Schools understands the ability children already have and
builds on it.
-
31% of Schools enable inter active teaching learning in a planned
manner, ensuring the participation of all.
-
26% of Schools functions as a facilitator ie leads children into
experience & knowledge.
-
31% of Schools aerate opportunity for pear/group learning, self
learning.
-
14% of Schools motivate children by correlating topics with daily
life and cites relevant and in interesting examples from there
experience. And immediate environment.
-
17% of Schools uses the different types of activities with form on
construction of knowledge.
-
19% uses local data/ information for enriching classroom process.
At Level -III
Under the above stated expectation we can ensure about the level III
on the basis of the following out comes-
-
10% of Schools enables children to construct knowledge by using a
range of strategies, including the uses of task & activities.
-
38% of Schools enables children to do it for themselves.
-
14% of schools enables interactive teaching learning process.
-
19% Schools shows that teacher functions as a facilitation.
-
12% of Schools teacher enhances thinking ability of children,
questioning power and discussion capacity
-
17% of Schools have awareness of and actually uses different
learner oriented teaching learning practices on the basis of need.
-
43% of Schools promotes pear learning.
-
12% of Schools provide references and teacher too learns while
teaching.
-
7% of Schools teacher uses reflective Practice and participates in
different types of activities.
-
7% of Schools teachers participate in projects, surveys with a
foam on the construction of knowledge.
At Level –IV
In continuation of the above expectation we can draw the schools
under Level IV It is inferred that –
-
10% of Schools enables children to construct knowledge by using a
mix of thought provoking question and tasks.
-
19% of Schools teacher ensures the participation of all by taking
into account of individual differences.
-
19% of Schools promote peer learning.
-
19% of Schools use the chiliad’s context and culture while
teaching.
-
31% of Schools teacher ensures the involvement of all by
incorporating an element of challenge.
-
26% of Schools teacher ensures that children provide reference
from local situation.
Effective Use of Materials
|
Sub Areas Level I |
No. of Schools of
Level –I |
Sub Areas Level II |
No. of Schools of
Level –II |
Sub Areas Level III |
No. of Schools of
Level –III |
Sub Areas Level
IV |
No. of Schools of
Level –IV |
|
1.1 |
23 (55%) |
2.1 |
11 (26%) |
3.1 |
3 (7%) |
4.1 |
2(5%) |
|
|
|
2.2 |
12 (29%) |
3.2 |
3(7%) |
4.2 |
_ |
|
1.2 |
11 (26%) |
2.3 |
39(93%) |
3.3 |
38(90%) |
4.3 |
_ |
|
|
|
2.4 |
01(2%) |
|
|
4.4 |
_ |
To ensure the effective use of materials following results highlight
the levels of complexity
At Level – I
i.
55% of schools develop and identifies appropriate TLM.
Displays initial use of TLM ie. at least uses it himself, as
demonstration.
ii.
26% Schools maintains the School library and teacher motivate
children to read.
At Level – II
i.
26% of Schools uses TLM in a purposive way and ensures that
students handle it.
ii.
29% Schools makes groups, understand the need for group
learning and works with them.
iii.
93% of Schools motivates children by correlating topics with
daily.
iv.
2% of Schools uses local date/ information for enriching
classroom processes.
At Level – III
Under the expectation of Effective Use of Materials some Schools are
found in Level III under different conditions
i.
Only 7% Schools use well identified TLM from environment.
ii.
Only in 7% Schools Teacher prepares and utilizes TLM as SLM’S
effectively.
iii.
In 90% Schools Audi Video material (Radio, tape recorder are
available & teachers use them wlike teaching.
At Level – IV
In this area only 5% of schools found in level IV because only few
teachers incorporate technology into teaching. Learning process
effectively, Through self created material.
Ensures Learning for All/Creates a Classroom for All-
|
Sub Areas Level I |
No. of Schools of
Level –I |
Sub Areas Level II |
No. of Schools of
Level –II |
Sub Areas Level III |
No. of Schools of
Level –III |
Sub Areas Level
IV |
No. of Schools of
Level –IV |
|
1.1 |
15 (36%) |
_ |
_ |
3.1 |
8 (19%) |
4.1 |
4(10%) |
|
|
|
|
|
3.2 |
13(31%) |
4.2 |
4 (10%) |
|
|
|
|
|
3.3 |
13(31%) |
4.3 |
2 (5%) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.4) |
2 (5%) |
In this Expectation different percentage of Schools found in
different levels of complexity or implementation –
At Level – I
i.
In level I only 36% of Schools revealed that it is ensuring
for each child to get ample learning opportunities.
At Level – II
If we discus about the level – II following results show the schools
in different situation –
(i)
Only 19% of Schools give attention to those who need greater/
Specific support and enable them to optimize/maximize their
learning.
(ii)
Only in 29% of Schools help the children to achieve desired
comprehension and provide appropriate opportunities to develop
child’s potential.
(iii)
93% of Schools involve all the students in process of
learning irrespective of level, ability social background and
gender.
At Level – IV
In Continuation of this expectation it results that.
(i)
Only 19% of Schools provide opportunities to all during
interaction.
(ii)
In 10% Schools inclusion of Children with disc ability /
multi lingual other contexts.
(iii)
Only 5% of Schools identifies individual differences, gives
differential opportunities to each child according to their need.
(iv)
Only 5% of schools give specific attention to each & every
child.
Effective Communication
|
Sub Areas Level I |
No. of Schools of
Level –I |
Sub Areas Level II |
No. of Schools of
Level –II |
Sub Areas Level III |
No. of Schools of
Level –III |
Sub Areas Level
IV |
No. of Schools of
Level –IV |
|
1.1 |
26 (62%) |
2.1 |
16 (38%) |
3.1 |
6 (14%) |
4.1 |
|
|
1.2 |
23 (55%) |
2.2 |
9 (21%) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.2 |
3 (7%) |
|
|
|
|
At Level – I 62% schools are found
(i) Teacher Communicates in simple language and interact in the
language of children.
(ii) 55% Schools have teachers with friendly attitude to the
children.
In Level – II
(i)
In 38% of Schools teachers give prior information / hints
aboutment learning.
(ii)
In 21% Schools teachers shares experience and views with
about what is happening at various levels as children teachers /
parent.
(iii)
In 07% of Schools teachers use hum our to make complex
content to simple.
At Level – III
(i)
Only in 14% of Schools teachers are found who link present
teaching with next learning.
7. Collaboration with children -
|
Sub Areas Level I |
No. of Schools of
Level –I |
Sub Areas Level II |
No. of Schools of
Level –II |
Sub Areas Level III |
No. of Schools of
Level –III |
Sub Areas Level
IV |
No. of Schools of
Level –IV |
|
1.1 |
20 (48%) |
2.1 |
15 (36%) |
3.1 |
5 (12%) |
|
|
|
|
|
2.2 |
12 (29%) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.3 |
6 (14%) |
|
|
|
|
Under this expectation different levels of complexity found as –
(i)
In 48% of Schools teachers work with children as teachers
team mates and also conduct the activities require teachers and
children to work to gether.
At Level – II results are as under –
(i)
Only in 36% of Schools teachers work with children as
teachers team mates & also conduct the activities reuired by the
children to help each other in learning with shows that teacher is
not the sole source of knowledge.
(ii)
Only in 14% of Schools teachers use talent of children to
support process.
At level – III results are as –
(i)
Only 12% of Schools teachers work with children as teachers’s
team mate and are able to establish common goods with children which
make them one team.
Creation of Conducive learning environment / relates with children
|
Sub Areas Level I |
No. of Schools of
Level –I |
Sub Areas Level II |
No. of Schools of
Level –II |
Sub Areas Level III |
No. of Schools of
Level –III |
Sub Areas Level
IV |
No. of Schools of
Level –IV |
|
1.2 |
31 (74%) |
2.1 |
5 (12%) |
3.1 |
10 (24%) |
- |
- |
|
1.2 |
7 (17%) |
2.2 |
6 (14%) |
3.2 |
10 (24% |
- |
- |
|
1.3 |
17 (40%) |
2.3 |
14 (34%) |
3.3 |
7 (17%) |
- |
- |
|
|
|
|
|
3.4 |
2 (5%) |
- |
- |
With reference to this expectation results found as –
At Level. –I
(i)
In 74% of Schools teacher recognizes children and calls them
by name.
(ii)
Only in 17% of Schools teachers display positive attitude
towards children.
(iii)
In 40% of Schools teacher ensures cleanliness and personal
hygiene of children.
At Level – II
(i)
Only 12% of Schools teachers establishes rapport with
children to create cordial environment & make all children feel
welcome.
(ii)
In 14 % of Schools teachers enables children to both ask and
answer the questions in an environment where asking questions is
safe and children have a right to ask any kind of question.
(iii)
In 34% of Schools teachers encourage children directly to ask
and answer each other doubts. And also get children to work in
groups with positive interaction.
At Level – III
(i)
Only in 24% of Schools teachers create encouraging conditions
and space for all children to express themselves.
(ii)
In 24% of Schools teachers keenly observe, motivates children
for participation and asking questions and appreciate them.
(iii)
17% of schools teachers empathizes with children, see this
world view.
(iv)
In 5% of Schools teachers display innovation in class room
and outside and also uses hum our in teaching, contextually and
appropriately.
Management and organization of classroom to optimize learning –
In relation to this expectation the levels of implementation are
found as -
|
Sub Areas Level I |
No. of Schools of
Level –I |
Sub Areas Level II |
No. of Schools of
Level –II |
Sub Areas Level III |
No. of Schools of
Level –III |
Sub Areas Level
IV |
No. of Schools of
Level –IV |
|
1.1 |
27 (64%) |
2.1 |
11 (26%) |
3.1 |
7 (7%) |
4.1 |
4 (10%) |
|
1.2 |
13. (31%) |
2.2 |
9 (21%) |
3.2 |
8 (19%) |
|
|
|
|
|
2.3 |
9 (21%) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.4 |
10 (24%) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.5 |
10(24%) |
|
