Learning Achievement of Class V Students — Portal
Personal tools
You are here: Home Alternative Schooling Learning Achievement of Class V Students

Learning Achievement of Class V Students

The Education is intended to develop basic learning skills, reading, writing, arithmetic and life skills, necessary for the children to survive and improve the quality of life. During childhood, developments in the domains of literacy and numeracy take place through acquisition of basic learning competencies (BLC). These competencies represent levels of learning in a particular subject comprising basic knowledge, understanding, abilities, interests, attitudes and values. The competencies are essentially to be acquired by the end of a particular stage or standard of education.

Executive Summary

LEARNING ACHIEVEMENT OF STUDENTS

AT THE END OF CLASS V


Department of Educational Measurement and Evaluation
National Council of Educational Research and Training
Sri Aurobindo Marg, New Delhi

 

 Executive Summary
LEARNING ACHIEVEMENT OF STUDENTS

AT THE END OF CLASS V


Introduction

The Education is intended to develop basic learning skills, reading, writing, arithmetic and life skills, necessary for the children to survive and improve the quality of life.  During childhood, developments in the domains of literacy and numeracy take place through acquisition of basic learning competencies (BLC).  These competencies represent levels of learning in a particular subject comprising basic knowledge, understanding, abilities, interests, attitudes and values.  The competencies are essentially to be acquired by the end of a particular stage or standard of education. As far as the primary stage is concerned it is in fact the foundation stage for the development of basic competencies. 

Primary education in particular has remained a serious concern of the nation since independence. A large number of programmes and schemes have been initiated both by the union and state governments to realize the goal of the universalization of primary education.  This has led to the opening of a large number of schools with emphasis on  enrolment and retention coupled with quality of education.   The quantitative expansion seems to have over shadowed the quality of education. Research studies conducted both at national and state levels point out low level of learning in schools and the situation becomes worse as children move to higher classes.  Poor level of achievement at primary level is a big de-motivating factor resulting in repetition and drop out from the schools.  Though there are a number of factors which determine the quality of education, the most vital one that attracts the attention of one and all is the level of achievement.   These levels of achievement for any nation are so important that they need to be known periodically to keep a tab on the general health of the education system.  Such a requirement warrants the conduct of periodical achievement surveys at different stages of school education in order to initiate remedial measures to improve the quality of learning.  National Policy on Education (NPE) - 1986 recommended the conduct of periodical achievement surveys at all stages of school education.  This has also been reiterated in the National Curriculum Framework for School Education-2000.

Since 1990 no major achievement study on all India basis has been undertaken. More than a decade has elapsed and a concern has been expressed both at the state and national level for the need of a large scale achievement survey to know the health of our education system. NCERT has also been thinking of institutionalizing periodic achievement surveys. Therefore this survey undertaken. The objectives of this study were: 

  • To study the level of achievement of children in Language, Mathematics and Environmental Studies at the end of Class V  
  • To study the differences in achievement, categorywise, areawise and genderwise.  
  • To study the influence of intervening variables like home, school and teacher on students achievement.  
This survey was initiated in April, 2000 as a NCERT approved project.

Tools
For capturing the learning attainment of students across the  states,  tests in the three main subjects were developed and standardized. These tests were produced in 17 Indian Languages and used in different states/UTs. Each test used in achievement survey had 40 multiple choice items each. In EVS most  of the test items were based on concepts  related to daily life activities, environment, health, hygiene, food functions. powers of different organs of democracy etc.  In Mathematics the test items broadly covered number system, four fundamental operations, problems involving, HCF, LCM, decimals, fractions, percentage and its simple applications, sale-purchase, average, mensuration, and problems on geometrical figures etc. The Language test had two parts.  The first part contained 20 items testing usage and grammar.  A number of competencies testing  grammatical structures, use of appropriate vocabulary, use of correct spelling and recognition of errors etc. were covering this part.  The second part of the test focused on the reading ability of the students.  It contained three different activities.  The first activity was based on the comprehension of different signs and hoardings that children come across at different places.  In the second reading activity, a school time table has been given and the children have to interpret it.  Then there were two unseen passages which were not only interesting from students point of view but also value oriented.  The questions on these texts were set to evaluate the students ability to locate informations, grasp ideas and the theme of the passage, identify relationships between ideas, events, characters etc. and to interpret ideas and events.  Besides the achievement tests, to study the influence of school and here environment on students achievement, three questionnaires e.g. School Questionnaire, Teacher Questionnaire and Pupil Questionnaire were also developed and used for collection of relevant data. 
Sampling

Multistage stratified random sampling design was used for the selection of districts, rural blocks, urban areas, schools, teachers and pupils from each State and Union Territory of the country. It was planned to select 10% districts with a minimum of 4 districts from each state except Goa which had only two districts and one of them was selected. Each Union Territory was considered as one district.  Finally, 116 districts were selected for the survey. In each selected district, four rural blocks and three urban areas were selected. Further, from each district a maximum of 50 schools were selected both from rural blocks and urban areas on proportionate basis. In the sampled school, a maximum of 30 students of class V were selected. Three teachers teaching EVS, Mathematics and Language to these students were selected for filling teacher questionnaire.  


Out of 35 states/UTs, Jharkhand state and three UTs i.e. Lakshadweep, Dadar and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu could not participate in this survey.  Meghalaya state  participated in the survey but could not be included in this report as the data received was incomplete and of very few schools.  Therefore, students, teachers and schools from remaining 27 states and 3 UTs formed the target population for this survey.   The data was collected from 88,271 students, 10,796 teachers, 4787 schools from 105 districts spread over 27 states and 3 UTs.  
 
Keeping in focus the objectives of the achievement survey a detailed ‘Framework for Analysis of Data’ was developed. This framework provided details regarding data entry, data cleaning, data verification, preparation of different files, format of various tables and use of various statistical techniques for getting the answers to the some basic questions often raised about the school education.   The data was analysed to know the profiles of schools, teachers and students. The achievement of students was analysed to study the differences in achievement among social groups areas, genders within and across the states. Besides, the influence of intervening variables such as school, teacher and home on students’ achievement was also analysed. 
Profiles

School Profile  
In rural areas  pre primary classes were attached with about 27% schools whereas in urban areas, it was attached with about 28.5% schools.  Facilities related to teaching-learning process such as  maps were available in approximately 85% schools, children books, globes and charts were available in 77% to 80% schools.  Magazines, journals and newspaper were available only in 35% schools.  Infrastructural facilities i.e. chairs for teachers, school bell, blackboard, chalk and duster were in 91% to 95%, water pitcher, ladel and glasses were in 72% but musical instruments were available in only 36% schools. Ancillary Facilities namely Computer and TV were between 8% to 16%  separate toilet for girls was in 39%,  first-aid-kit and electric connection were in 40%,  safe drinking water was available in about 73%,  toilet facilities and immunization facilities were available in 55% to 58%, annual medical check-up facilities for students was available in 61% schools. Competency Based Teaching Materials such as text books, teacher’s handbook and teaching aids were more available in 2001 as compared with 1998. All incentives were equally availed by both boys and girls. However, mid- day meal and free textbooks were better availed as compared to other incentive schemes. The average number of working days in schools was approximately 213 days. On an average, schools were having 7 periods in a day of approximately of 40 minutes duration.  Overall 65% schools had PTAs,  followed by 56% VECs, 50% SMCs and 20% AECs. VECs were more in rural schools and others in urban schools.  
 

Teacher Profile
Overall  number of female teachers was more than the male teachers. In urban schools female were more than twice than male teachers.  However, the trend was reverse in rural schools. The average number of teachers per school in rural and urban areas was approximately 6 and 9 respectively.  Average pupil teacher ratio was approximately 39:1. Approximately 1% teachers had qualifications below Class X level.  Overall, more than 50% teachers were degree or PG degree holders.    The percentage of female teachers holding PG degree and secondary certificate was more than male teachers.  The percentage of male teachers who studied Mathematics and Science subjects upto degree level was more than female teachers.  But the trend was reverse in case of Language and Social Sciences.  Besides, the percentage of male teachers who had studied Mathematics, Language and Science below Class X was less than female teachers. Approximately 67% teacher had diploma/certificate in Primary/Elementary Education and approximately 33% teachers had B.Ed. degree. Very few teachers were having M.Ed degree.  Majority of teaching aids were available to more than 85% teachers in schools except flash cards, science kit and mathematics kit.  Overall teaching aids were available more to female teachers than male teachers. In-service Training was provided by Block Resource Centres, DIET, School Complexes. Cluster Resource Centre and by SCERT.  But minimum number of teachers were trained by School Complex   Maximum in-service training programmes were conducted on ‘Competency Based Teaching-Learning and it was followed by Content Enrichment, Activity based joyful learning and ‘General Training Programmes’.  But, minimum programmes were conducted on ‘Use of Instructional Material’. Further,  approximately 46% training programmes had average effectiveness in terms of utility of knowledge gained during training programmes.  However, 37% programmes were rated as ‘Highly’ useful.  The impact of these training programmes was rated as average by 48% to 51% teachers in different subjects.  Improvement in teaching-skills in all subjects due to these training programmes was rated ‘High’ by 31% to 35% teachers. Out of total sampled teachers approximately 50% teachers were without any in-service training during last three years (2000-2002).  The percentage of male teachers who have not attended any in-service programme was more than female teachers.  Teachers both in rural and urban areas were getting maximum assistance from Head of the school and sometimes they were also getting assistance from other sources like DIET etc.
Pupil Profile
The medium of instruction for approximately 80% students in the schools was same as the language spoken at home. About 18% fathers and 39% mothers of the students were illiterate.  Only 5% fathers and 2% mothers were having degree or higher educational qualification.  Overall  educational status of mothers was poorer than fathers. In rural areas majority of mothers were housewives and fathers were farmers.  In urban areas also majority of mothers were housewives but fathers were skilled workers.  Only few mothers and approximately 5% fathers were Manager/Senior Officers.    In decreasing order, fathers were working as farmers, skilled workers, agricultural labourer, manual unskilled workers, others managers, senior officers, clerical workers and shopkeepers etc. In decreasing order mothers were working as household/housewives, farmers, agricultural labourer, other domestic servants, manual unskilled workers skilled workers and managers/senior officers etc. Overall, girls were getting better academic assistance than boys in both rural and urban areas from all family members  In urban areas girl’s mothers were more helpful than elder brother/sister and others. Approximately 90% students were attending school for more than 70% of working days. Only 3-4%  boys and girls were attending schools less than 60% of total working days.   
 
Students Achievements

A cursory glance of the achievement of class V students in EVS, Mathematics and Language showed that the distribution of scores covered the entire range from 0 to 100 percent. However the overall average performance of students in EVS, Mathematics and Language was 50.30%, 46.51% and 58.57% respectively. The least number of cases in EVS (523), in mathematics (1176) and in language (250) were in the range 0-10 percent. The maximum number of cases in EVS (16113), in Mathematics (18,123) and in Language (16,489) were in the range 30-40 percent, 30-40 percent and 50-60 percent respectively. The 48.52% students in EVS, 41.26% in Mathematics and 69.75% in Language scored more than 50% marks whereas 34.25% in EVS, 27.69% in Mathematics and 51.07% in Language scored more than 60% marks. Students achievement was better in Language than EVS which in tern was better than in Mathematics.
 
The average achievement in EVS was 50.30% with standard deviation 20.67. The performance of students across the states varied from 34.93% in Himachal Pradesh to 73.60% in Manipur. There were as many as 17 states/UTs who performed below the national average achievement of 50.30%. Himachal Pradesh, J & K and Goa are the three states who performed below 40% level. The average achievement of 4 states i.e. Arunachal Pradesh, Bihar, Manipur and Tamil Nadu was found to be more than 60%. Eleven states displayed achievement  between 50 and 60 percent.  The standard deviation varied from 12.01 in Himachal Pradesh to 23.43 in Madhya Pradesh.

The average achievement in Mathematics was 46.51% with standard deviation 21.30. The score of students across the states varied from 30.48% in Goa to 74.46% in Manipur. There were as many as 17 states/UTs whose average was below the national average of 46.51%. The average achievement in 8 states/UTs was even less than 40%. Only 3 states, Manipur, Bihar and West Bengal demonstrated more than 60% achievement. Four states demonstrated achievement between 50 and 60 percent. The standard deviation varied from 13.49 in Goa to 23.92 in Nagaland.  

The average achievement of students in language was 58.57% with standard deviation 18.30. The performance of students across the states/UTs varied from 44.68% in Goa to 73.39% in Manipur. There were as many as 15 states/UTs who performed below the national average of 58.57%. The average achievement in 12 states was found to be more than 60% and of them 3 demonstrated more than 70% achievement level. The standard deviation varied from 10.38 in Mizoram to 21.91 in Madhya Pradesh.

The level of achievement of students in EVS, Mathematics and Language across the states showed that only Manipur  in EVS and Mathematics and Manipur, Tamil nadu and West Bengal in Language displayed performance above 70% level. Majority of states had average achievement between 40-60% in EVS, 40-50% in Mathematics and 40-60% in Language. Three states in EVS and eight states in Mathematics performed below 40 percent level.

In all the states except in Bihar, Chandigarh, Manipur and West Bengal the achievement in Language was better than EVS followed by Mathematics. In Bihar, achievement in EVS was better than Language followed by Mathematics. In Manipur, achievement in Mathematics was better than EVS  and in all three subjects achievement crossed 70% mark. In West Bengal, achievement in Language was better than Mathematics followed by EVS. In Bihar, the achievement of students crossed 60% mark in all the three subjects. The nation vide average achievement in  decreasing order was language (58.57%), EVS (50.30%) and Mathematics (46.51%). 

Genderwise and Areawise Achievement

In Environmental Studies the  performance of urban students, both boys and girls was significantly better than their counterparts in rural areas. The achievement of boys was significantly better than girls. In rural areas boys performed significantly better than girls.

In Mathematics the performance of urban students, both boys and girls was significantly better than their counterparts in rural areas. The achievement of boys was better than girls both in urban and rural areas.

In Language the achievement of urban students, both boys and girls, was significantly better than the rural students. In rural areas boys performed significantly better than girls whereas in urban areas girls performed better than boys. 

In Grammar & Usage component of Language test the  achievement of urban students, was significantly better than the students from rural areas. In rural areas boys performed significantly better than girls. However, in urban areas there was no significant difference in achievement between boys and girls.

In Reading Comprehension component of Language test the achievement of urban students, both boys and girls, was significantly better than their counterparts in rural areas. In rural areas boys performed significantly better than girls whereas in urban areas girls performed better than boys.
Genderwise and Categorywise Achievement
n Environmental Studies the achievement of students, both boys and girls of Others category was better than their counterparts in ST category followed by SC category and the differences in achievement were significant across the categories. Within categories, boys performed significantly better than girls.

In Mathematics the achievement of students, both boys and girls of Others category was better than their counterparts in SC category followed by ST category and the differences in achievement were significant across the categories except between girls of ST and SC. Within each category, boys performed significantly better than girls.

In Language the achievement of students, both boys and girls of Others category was better than their counterparts in ST category followed by SC category and the differences in achievement were significant across the categories. In SC category, boys performed significantly better than girls.

In Grammar & Usage component of Language test the achievement of students, both boys and girls of Others category was better than their counterparts in ST category followed by SC category and the differences in achievement were significant across the categories except between boys of ST and SC categories. In SC and ST categories, boys performed significantly better than girls.

In Reading Comprehension component of Language test the achievement of students, both boys and girls, of Others category was better than their counterparts in ST followed by SC category and the differences in achievement were significant across the categories. In SC category, boys performed significantly better than girls.                                   

Areawise and Categorywise Achievement

In Environmental Studies the achievement of both rural and urban students of Others category was better than their counterparts in ST followed by SC category and differences in achievement were significant across the categories. Within each category, urban students performed significantly better than rural students.

In Mathematics the achievement of both rural and urban students of Others category was better than students of SC and ST categories and differences in achievement were significant across the categories except between rural ST and rural SC. Within SC and Others categories, urban students performed significantly better than rural students.

            In Language in rural areas, Others performed significantly better than both SC and ST students. In urban areas, ST performed better than Others followed by SC students and the differences in achievement were significant across the categories. Within each category, urban students performed significantly better than rural students.

In Grammar & Usage component of Language test in rural areas, Others performed significantly better than both SC and ST students. In urban areas, differences in achievement were significant between others vs SC and ST vs SC favouring Others and ST respectively. Within each category, urban students performed significantly better than rural students.

In Reading Comprehension component of Language test, in rural areas achievement of Others was better than ST followed by SC students and differences in achievement were significant across the categories. In urban areas, ST performed better than Others followed by SC students and differences in achievement across the categories were significant. Within each category, urban students performed significantly better than rural students.

Classification of Test Items 

            Majority of items had facility value between 25 and 75. Majority of items in all the three subjects were of average discrimination index.  The reliability  of tests varied between 0.75 to 0.89. 

Contribution of  Intervening Variables

            Multiple regression analysis and analysis of variance was employed  to study the influence of intervening variables like home, school and teacher on student’s achievement.  The outcomes are as follow:  

School Related Variables

The availability of competency based teaching  learning materials like workbook, textbook, handbook and teaching aids, number of working days in a year, instructional time, pupil-teacher ratio, community participation, physical facilities in the school influenced the learning achievement of students.  The positive association of teaching aids, community participation, no. working days in a year instructional time, physical and ancillary facilities with three subjects indicated that these variables helped students in improving their learning achievement in EVS, Mathematics and Language.

However, the positive association of competency based teaching learning material like textbook, workbook, handbook etc. indicated that this variable helped students in improving their learning achievements in Mathematics and EVS only.  Further, the negative association of pupil teacher ratio, indicated that more number of pupils in a classroom hinders the performance of the students` achievement in all the subjects.
 

Teachers Related Variables  

The  use of teaching aids and teachers giving home assignments to students and teachers  receiving help from school organizations had positive association with the learning achievements of students  in all three subjects.  It indicated that these variables help students` achievement in all three subjects.  However, teachers, educational and professional qualification significantly helped  students learning achievement in both Mathematics and Language.  Likewise, teachers, experience, employment status and training significantly helped in students` achievement in EVS only.

Pupil Related Variables  

Educational  status and occupation of parents, tearning-learning  factors like regularity of teaching giving home assignment to students, teacher giving frequent class tests, regular attendance of the students and help from family members had positive association with three subjects meaning thereby  that all these variables helped  students in their achievement.  However, students’  age and detention in earlier classes had negative impact on students learning achievement in all three subjects.  This may be due to repeaters in class V or earlier classes.   
      

Major Findings  
  • School bell, black board, chalk & duster and chairs for teachers were available in more than 90% schools.  

  • Safe drinking water facility was available in approximately 73% schools.  

  • Separate toilet for girls were available in less than 50% schools.  

  • Competency based textbooks, workbooks, teachers’ and books and teaching aids  were available in less than 25% schools.  

  • More students were getting the benefit of midday meal scheme as compared to rest of the schemes implemented in the states.  

  • Average number of working days in schools in states/UTs were approximately 213 with seven periods of 40 minutes each.  

  • In rural areas more than 67% schools were having Village Education Committee whereas the PTAs were functioning 65%schools in the country.  

  • Percentage of female teachers  was more than twice than male teachers in urban schools.  

  • Average number of teachers per school in urban schools was higher than in rural schools.  

  • The number of boys and girls in the sampled schools are nearly equal.  

  • The number of boys and girls in the sampled schools are nearly equal.  

  • Average pupil teacher ratio was 39:1 which was almost same in both urban and rural areas.  

  • Approximately 58% teachers had diploma/certificate in primary/elementary education.  

  • Majority of teaching aids were available to more than 85% teachers.  

  • Maximum in-service training programmes  were conducted on ‘Competency Based Teaching-learning and minimum on ‘Use of Instructional Material’ during last three years.  

  • Majority of training programmes were conducted by DIETs.  

  • Approximately 50% of teachers had not attended any in-service training progarmme during last three years.  

  • In most of cases teachers were getting assistance for ‘Head of the School’.  

  • The educational qualification of fathers was higher than mothers.  

  • Both boys and girls were getting more academic assistance from father/guardian than other family members.  

  • Approximately 90% students were attending schools more than 70% of working days and less than 4% students were attending schools less than 60% of the total working days.  

  • In rural areas, boys performed significantly better than girls in all the three subjects whereas in urban areas, girls performed significantly better than boys.  

  • In all the three subjects, students of others category performed significantly better than both SC and ST students.  

  • Within each category, boys performed significantly better than girls in EVS and Mathematics. However, in Language, only SC boys performed significantly better than girls.  

  • In all the three subjects, in each  category, except in Mathematics in ST category, the urban students performed significantly better than rural students. In Mathematics, there was no significant difference in achievement between rural and urban students.  

  • Within Language the achievement in Grammer and Usage was higher than reading Comprehension.  

  • In EVS and Language, ST students performed significantly better than SC students and in Mathematics SC performed better than ST students.  

  • The Manipur students scored the highest by toped the list by crossing 73% mark all the three subjects.  

  • Four states crossed 60% mark in achievement and three states had average achievement below 40% in EVS.  

  • Three states crossed 60% mark in achievement in Mathematics.

  • In eight states, the average score was less than 40% in Mathematics.  

  • Twelve states crossed 60% mark and three states  i.e.  Manipur, Tamil Nadu and West Bengal crossed 70% mark in achievement in languages. 

  • The performance of half the states/UTs was below the all India average.  

  • The availability of competency based workbooks, teaching aids, participation of community, physical facilities in schools helped the children in improving their achievement in the three subjects.  

  • Use of teaching aids and teaching styles of teachers, academic held from senior colleagues of schools organization  and teacher’s qualification also helped the children in improving their skills in the three subjects.   

  • Active involvement of teachers in schools and that of family members at home and the regularity in attending the  school helped the children in enhancing their achievement in the three subjects.  

  • Mid-day meal scheme  made positive contribution toward   achievement  

  • Regular assessment through monthly tests also enhanced learning.  

  • Children whose parents  educational background  was better also performed better than others.

Mean Percent of Achievement of Class V students in EVS, Mathematics and Language

S.No.

State/U.T

No.of Students

EVS

Diff. in Mean with National Average

Mathematics

Diff. in Mean with National Average

Language

Diff. in Mean with National Average

M%

SD

M%

SD

M%

SD

1

Andhra Pradesh

2333

44.58

20.23

-5.72

43.53

20.98

-2.98

54.83

17.11

-3.74

2

Ar. Pradesh

1,571

60.40

20.08

10.10

53.47

18.61

6.96

61.33

16.36

2.76

3

Assam

3689

42.90

16.31

-7.40

40.03

16.84

-6.48

49.16

12.61

9.41

4

Bihar

2239

65.97

22.02

15.67

62.62

23.25

16.11

65.22

18.95

6.65

5

Chattisgarh

2,597

43.15

18.11

-7.15

38.36

17.26

-8.15

49.69

16.08

-8.88

6

Delhi

5876

49.96

19.57

-0.34

48.20

19.75

1.69

63.15

16.88

4.58

7

Goa

1231

35.60

15.47

-14.70

30.48

13.49

-16.03

44.68

14.31

-13.89

8

Gujarat

2,453

52.38

19.55

2.08

48.36

19.12

1.85

56.18

18.09

-2.39

9

Harayana

4604

53.21

20.00

2.91

53.33

18.52

6.82

60.45

17.33

1.88

10

Himachal Pradesh

4553

34.93

12.01

-15.37

34.41

13.55

-12.1

49.99

14.3

8.58

11

Jammu & Kashmir

1247

39.14

17.37

-11.16

36.30

16.48

-10.21

49.59

16.38

-8.98

13

Karnataka

3853

51.46

20.39

1.16

46.03

21.27

-0.48

58.63

18.97

0.06

14

Kerala

4342

41.36

13.64

-8.94

35.90

14.64

-10.61

54.99

14.46

-3.58

15

Madhya Pradesh

3791

54.09

23.43

3.79

49.03

22.68

2.52

58.25

21.91

-0.32

16

Maharashtra

4981

52.82

20.27

2.52

44.32

20.73

-2.19

62.12

20.10

3.55

17

Manipur

2140

73.60

15.98

23.30

74.46

19.71

27.95

73.39

13.60

14.82

18

Mizoram

2392

49.93

14.77

-0.37

41.07

14.68

-5.44

66.91

10.38

8.34

19

Nagaland

1038

50.05

21.86

-0.25

45.71

23.92

-0.80

59.55

17.91

0.98

20

Orissa

2979

56.03

19.31

5.73

46.95

20.75

0.44

60.73

17.89

2.16

21

Punjab

3143

50.18

20.70

-0.12

49.62

21.34

3.11

58.05

15.77

-0.52

22

Rajasthan

2357

50.77

21.43

0.47

49.37

20.82

2.86

60.65

17.44

2.08

23

Sikkim

2451

48.16

16.11

-2.14

40.66

14.95

-5.85

50.26

13.13

-8.31

24

Tamil Nadu

4768

66.01

18.71

15.71

58.37

22.81

11.86

71.09

17.50

12.52

25

Tripura

1,587

54.50

22.63

4.20

52.71

22.58

6.20

63.79

15.95

5.22

26

U.Pradesh

5098

41.45

19.10

-8.85

37.81

19.74

-8.70

50.20

19.24

-8.37

27

Uttranchal

2741

43.27

17.46

-7.03

38.83

16.82

-7.68

56.35

17.62

-2.22

28

West Bengal

4,739

58.65

20.68

8.35

60.11

21.94

13.60

70.67

15.31

12.10

29

And. & Nic. Island

811

44.80

16.48

-5.50

40.69

16.96

-5.82

54.49

15.95

-4.08

30

Chandigarh

1405

41.81

13.12

-8.49

44.98

13.81

-1.53

55.99

15.33

-2.58

31

Pondicherry

1262

49.59

16.19

-0.71

36.59

17.91

-9.92

59.23

17.87

0.66

 

Total

88271

50.30

20.67

 

46.51

21.30

 

58.57

18.30

 



Selected Districts and Number of Schools, Teachers and Students


S.No.

State

No.of Districts

Names of Sampled Districts

No. of Sampled Schools   

No. of Sampled Teachers  

No. of Sampled Students 



R                     U

M                        F

B                           G


1

Andhra Pradesh

22

Hyderabad, Medak, Cuddapah, Nellore

156

329

2333


(  77+79 )

( 181+ 1226)

(1107+1226)


2

Arunachal Pradesh

13

Tirap, Papumparea*, Changlang, West Kameng

124

279

1571


(111+13)

(212+67)

(847+724)


3

Assam

23

Nalbari, Dibrugarh,Karbi Anglong, Kamrup

169

501

3689


(133+36)

(353+148)

(1784+1905)


4

Bihar

37

Gaya, Jamui*, Bhagalpur*, Raipur

84

248

2239


(09+15)

(182+6)

(1311+928)


5

Chattisgarh

16

Sarguja, Rajbabdgaon, Bastar, Raipur

188

271

2597


(157+31)

(198+73)

(1434+1163)


6

Delhi

9

New Delhi, West Delhi, North-West, North East

200

423

5,876


(56+144)

(109+314)

(2876+3000)


7

Goa

2

South Goa

44

130

1,231


(33+11)

(37+93)

(650+581)


8

Gujarat

26

Gandhi Nagar, Bhavnagar, Panchmahal, Junagarh*

137

152

2453


(114+23)

(103+49)

(1379+1074)


9

Haryana

19

Kaithal, Rohtak, Hissar, Panchkula

192

433

4604


(155+37)

(201+232)

(2407+2197)


10

Himachal Pradesh

12

Chamba, Kangra, Kinaur, Shimla

200

599

4,553


(176+24)

(404+195)

(2227+2326)


11

Jammu & Kashmir

14

Budgam*, Srinagar*,  Leh, Jammu

100

2,286

1,247.0


((82+18)

(119+167)

(558+689)


12

Karnataka

32

Gulbarga South, Dharwad, Kodagu, Bangalore South

200

489

3,853


(144+56)

(161+328)

(2001+1852)


13

Kerala

14

Malappuram, Ernakulam, Thirunathapuram, Trichur

187

537

4,342


(139+48)

(172+365)

(2521+2460)


14

Madhya Pradesh

45

Mandour, Shivpuri, Damoh, Rewa, Bhopal

250

356

3,791


(191+59)

(223+133)

(2082+1709)


15

Maharashtra

34

Mumbai, Beed, Amaravati, Satara

195

520

4,981


(129+66)

(329+191)

(2521+2460)


16

Manipur

9

Thoubal, Chandel*, Churachandpur, Imphal East

145

428

2,140


(119+26)

(320+108)

(1083+1057)


17

Meghalya

7

Jainta Hills*,  South Garo Hills*, East Garo Hills*,  East Garo Hills*

 

 

 



      18

Mizoram

8

Champhai, Aizawal, Kolasib, Lawngthai

169

459

2,392

(83+86)

(345+112)

(1220+1172)

19

Nagaland

8

Kohima, Tuensang, Dimapur, Workha

72

77

1,038

(63+9)

(57+20)

(491+547)

20

Orissa

 

Sambalpur, Khurda, Raygarh, Balasore,

200

395

2,979

(161+39)

(278+117)

(1551+1422)

21

Punjab

17

Hosiarpur, Ludhiana, Amritsar, Sangrur

185

311

3,143

(147+38)

(92+219)

(1589+1554)

22

Rajasthan

32

Jaipur, Udaipur, Jalore, Jhunjuna

193

480

2,357

(159+34)

(324+156)

(1312+1045)

23

Sikkim

4

East Sikkim, North Sikkim, South Sikkim, West Sikkim

158

469

2,451

(150+8)

(326+143)

(1143+1308)

24

Tamil Nadu

30

Tiruvanamalai, Karur, Tirundveli, Chennai

197

341

4768

(128+69)

(136+205)

(2396+2372)

25

Tripura

4

West Tripura, South Tripura, North-Tripura, Dhalai Tripura

163

479

1587

(139+24)

(367+112)

(792+795)

26

Uttar Pradesh

70

Bijnor, Agra, Lakhimpurkhiri, Gorakhpur, Pratargarh, Chitrakoot, Lucknow

349

560

5098

(281+68)

(380+180)

(2699+2399)

27

Uttranchal

13

Chamoli, Almora, Dehradun, Udhamsinghnagar

197

345

2741

(149+48)

(153+192)

(1348+1393)

28

West Bengal

18

Jalpaiguri, Kolkata, Purulia, North 24 Parganas

196

577

4739

(120+76)

(360+217)

(2431+2308)

 

Total

561

113

 

 

 

29

A. & N. Island

1

A. & N. Island

43

115

811

(34+9)

(49+66)

(420+391)

30

Chandigarh

1

Chandigarh

50

93

1405

(20+30)

(5+88)

(657+748)

31

Pondicherry

1

Pondicherry

44

116

1262

(26+18)

(48+68)

(649+613)

 

Grand Total

564

116

4787

10796

88271

* These 11 Districts were selected in the sample but survey could not be completed due to one or the other reason.




Document Actions
 Search Contents

 Calender