OBJECTIVES AND ORGANISATION OF THE THIRD ALL-INDIA EDUCATIONAL SURVEY
Unlike the two earlier surveys which were confined only to school education in the recognised schools, the scope of the Third All India Educational Survey was considerably widened to cover all stages of education right from pre-primary through university as also deemed university, both recognised as well as unrecognised, technical and vocational education, cultural education and educational administration and inspection. While the Education Minister's speech set the broad guidelines for the survey, the group set up by the Advisory Committee to look into the area of the school survey laid down the objectives in this area as follows.
The main objective of the Survey was to collect data and information which may be helpful for planning and policy making during the Fifth Five Year Plan and for taking administrative decisions scientifically on important educational issues. These data should also be useful in determining trends and relationships, gaps and imbalances and for making comparisons. Keeping this in view, the specific objectives were defined as follows :
1. To up-date the data of the earlier surveys in terms of the distribution and size of habitations and delimitation of school areas of existing primary, middle and secondary schools and to collect data needed for developing district development plans.
2. To study intensively the existing facilities on certain significant variables such as library, audio- visual aids, laboratories, age distribution, attrition rates and other qualitative aspects of education.
In order to achieve these objectives, the Committee suggested that the following information be collected.
Category A (a) Village Information : Number of habitations with sex-wise distribution of population, total population, population of S.C. and S.T., number of children of age below 17+, distance of each habitation from the nearest school, other educational facilities available in the village including special educational programmes, if any.
(b) City/Town Information : Sex-wise distribution of population, population of S.C. and S.T., number of children of age below 17+, number of schools of various types including special institutions. Sources for (a) and (b) : Local revenue or educational official/officer.
(c) Institutional Information : Location, management, class-wise and sex-wise enrolment including that of S.C. and S.T. timings, teachers with tenure and qualifications, catchment area, in case of special institutions courses run with duration of each.
Source : Head of the institution.
Category B Institutional Information : School buildings; hostels; playgrounds; equipment; library; laboratories; workshops; stipends- scholarships; free supply of textbooks; clothing; mid-day meals; other incentives, if any; programme of work experience; crafts; teachers- sex, age, qualifications (academic and professional), experience; finances; admission procedures; intake and out-turn in case of special institutions.
Source : Head of the institution/individual teacher/ concerned administrative head.
Category C Institutional Information : Detailed information on the aspect under study.
10 THIRD ALL-INDIA EDUCATIONAL SURVEY
It was pointed out that the distribution of S.C. and S.T. population of children below 17+, should also be collected. In respect of school buildings, it was emphasized that the information on costs should be obtained. This may be necessary in respect of hostels and playgrounds as well. Information on stipends and other incentives to attract the students may be collected directly from the State Headquarters and items on this may not be included in the school pro- forma. Rates of fees charged and other collections by schools, may also be included. A separate form may be issued to teachers both at the primary and secondary stage. Efforts should be made to collect detailed information about the subjects that individual teachers teach and the subjects for which they are qualified. Teacher education at the secondary stage may also be covered. Minimum essential data on adult education should also be obtained.
The items listed for intensive survey were approved with the addition of the following :
(i) An intensive study of school buildings.
(ii) An intensive study of use of textbooks.
(iii) An intensive study of the flow statistics on enrolement over a period of 5 years.
(iv) An intensive study of schools finances.
(v) An intensive study of unrecognized institutions.
(vi) An intensive study of facilities for education of the handicapped children as against their existing population.
It was agreed that the information under categories A and B may be collected on census basis while information on category C, i.e., special items may be collec- on sample basis.
Organisation Structural : At the Centre, the Survey and Data Processing Unit in the National Council of Educational Research and Training was responsible for organising this survey. To start with, the staff included Head, one Reader, four Lecturers, three senior Research Assistants and five Technical Assistants from the Survey Wing and one Senior Research Assistant and one PGT along with the other staff from Data Processing wing. The guidance of the Member-Secretary for the Third survey was available to the Survey Unit all through the survey.
At the state level, the Director of Education/ Director of Public Instruction was the Ex-Officio Director of the survey. Other staff at the state level included a State Survey Officer assisted by one Assistant State Survey Officer for every 10 revenue districts or part thereof, two statistical assistants, one steno-typist and a typist for a period of 18 months. At the district level, there was a District Survey Officer for every revenue district for a period of six months.
Functional : A training course was organised for all the State Survey Officers between November 20-30, 1973 in the NCERT, New Delhi, where the various schedules to be canvassed in connection with the survey were discussed thoroughly. The Officers were oriented for two days in the collection of data in rural areas in Gurgaon district in Haryana. At the end of this training programme, a time schedule was drawn up for the States for starting and for the completion of the survey. Later, the staff visited all the States and Union Territories to train the District level as well as other State level staff involved in conducting the survey.
In May 1974, two training programmes were organised in Delhi where the state level Officers were trained in the analysis of the data at block, district and state levels. Again, the staff of the Survey Unit visited all the States and Union Territorries to train the district and other personnel in analysing the data. Apart from these, the staff of the Survey Unit visited the States and Union Territories from time to time to scrutinise the data, check the tables and provide necessary academic and technical guidance.
Limitations Unlike the preceding two surveys, the present survey had wide objectives with lot of coverage in various areas under school education itself. Hence, the number of schedules to be canvassed and information to be collected was also large. The strength of staff in the States was the same as in the previous surveys. Further the analysis was to be both manual as well as through computer. As the survey was a national one, any deviation or delay by any one State could vitiate the results and delay the whole programme. During the present survey, there were several administrative bottlenecks and academic shortcomings at the state level. It is worthwhile to consider these aspects.
Administrative bottlenecks 1. The Ministry of Education and Social Welfare had requested the States well in advance to be in readiness with the staff for launching the survey. This was followed by the time schedule drawn up during the State Survey Officers' training held in Delhi in November 1973. But still in many States, the other staff at the state level and those at the district level were not appointed in time.
2. Although the posts were full-time in some states, the officers appointed were looking after other
OBJECTIVES AND ORGANISATION OF THE THIRD ALL-INDIA EDUCATIONAL SURVEY 11
work in addition to survey work on account of which the survey work suffered.
3. In some states, officers on the verge of retirement were posted and hence after their retirement there was no officer in the state to take up the responsibility of the survey.
4. In some states, there were transfers of the staff of the Survey Unit due to promotion or otherwise which dislocated the work.
5. In some states due to poor planning, the staff were appointed without adequate preparation which resulted in maintaining them at the district level even when there was actually no work and disbanding them when the work started as they had outlived their dura- tion of assignment.
6. In some states, the State Survey Officers were assigned other duties even though the authorities were fully aware that neither the survey work had been completed nor the State Survey Officer had completed his Stipulated duration of assignment.
7. Due to the procedures followed in getting the schedules printed, there was considerable delay in starting the work in some states.
8. Above all, even nature was not very kind. In Bihar, floods entered the places where the data were stored and took their toll.
Academic In a census type of survey, only basic essential information is sought which does not tax much of the respondents' time, or demands reference to old records or several records. Items seeking subjective responses which do not have scope for verification are avoided. Information sought is brief and precise. In the present survey, as the content coverage was extensive, all the above points could not be adhered to. Apart from the content coverage and many areas which were being covered, the staff at the state level could not devote the requisite time needed to collect the filled-in schedules from the respondents, to scrutinise them to seek clarifications and to rectify the inconsistent information.
Such scrutiny was lacking particularly in respect of those schedules which were to be computer processed. In fact in some states the survey staff at the state level had not even opened the bundles of returns received from the District Survey Units to verify whether all the respondent institutions or individuals had returned the schedules duly filled in and it was left to Directorates of Census Operations/Registrar General's Office to bring to the notice of the state authorities about the missing/non-responding institutions and to get the filled in schedules.
In manual processing of the data which was done by the Block Education Officer/District Survey Officer/ State Survey Unit staff, the shortcomings could be rectified by referring back to the original source. But in case of data to be computer processed, which was to be handled by altogether a different agency quite alien to educational problems and the educational statistics, the data could not be punched or processed unless it was complete and perfect in all respects. Hence the states were requested to provide help in deputing persons to punching centres to check the schedules and correct the inconsistencies, if any. But the personnel deputed for the purpose in some cases were not acquainted with the survey data. Moreover, when this was done it was left only to the best knowledge and the ability of the individual concerned in the absence of original documents.
There were some common items between the manually processed data and the computer processed, like the number of institutions and enrolement. The manually processed data had undergone scrutiny at block, district and state levels under the direct supervision of the Central Survey Unit staff and hence ensured accuracy. As pointed out earlier, the computer, data could fall short in terms of coverage of the number of institutions and consequently of enrolment. Hence the computer data which have been presented in the report involving the number of institutions and enrolment have been adjusted accordingly keeping the manually processed data, which had undergone checking at different levels for complete, correct and consistent information, as base.
The Ministry of Education and Social Welfare collects annual statistics for which the date of reference is September 30, of each year while for the survey the date of reference was December 31, 1973. Although the statistics compiled for submission to the Ministry in some cases are often an estimate, these figures are accepted for issuing financial sanctions by the Planning Commission. Due to the change in reference dates, there were obviously variations in the figures submitted by the States to the Ministry and those collected for the survey. Some states offered explanations for these variations which have been reproduced [in Appendix I] along with the figures submitted by the States. However, the report is confined to the data collected for the Third Survey.