Presentation on theme: "Socio-Economic Empowerment through IT Education K. Narayanan Associate Professor, Department of Humanities & Social Sciences, IIT Bombay"— Presentation transcript:
Socio-Economic Empowerment through IT Education K. Narayanan Associate Professor, Department of Humanities & Social Sciences, IIT Bombay E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org@hss.iitb.ac.in
Presentation IT Education Public Support to IT Education Developed and Developing Countries Indian Experience Role of State, Business Houses & NGOs IT Education and Socio-Economic Development
Role of Formal Education Formal Education is necessary but not sufficient for efficiently using technologies. Technology specific skills and learning are as much important as formal education is. Increasing the skill content of the potential workforce opens up a wide range of opportunities.
IT Education Better capabilities, especially in micro- electronic applications and use of information technology, for job-seeking brings about a change in the socio- economic structure of the society. The focus is more on the socially and economically underprivileged in developing countries.
Whose Responsibility is it? Can the skill formation be the responsibility of the govt. alone? Role of Market? Developed countries appear to worry about it more than the developing countries.
Reasons for Market Failure (a) information gaps and uncertainty where the individuals may not know of the future value of investments in education and training or of particular skills, and they may not know what skills are needed in future (b) even if the individuals can forecast the probability of getting returns on skill investments, they may prefer more certain short-term returns to available jobs (c) individuals may not be able to finance their learning costs and foregone earning, especially with their inability to afford two square meals a day and (d) high costs of educational services provided, especially in the case of private institutions and (e) danger of bureaucratic and rigid management especially in a publicly funded training institution.
Consensus There is a broad consensus of appreciation on the role of Non- Governmental Organizations, Private Charitable Trusts and Educational Investment of Business Houses in fostering the growth of supply in computer educated and qualified personnel.
Objectives (1) takes up the case of subsidized computer education programme of a particular Trust Organization, and aims to analyse the socio economic impact of such subsidized computer education programme, especially among the socially and economically under-privileged. (2) analysis carried out on the basis of information given in the enrolment form available with the training centres as well as the response of the beneficiaries. (3) compares the socio economic impact of this programme in select centres in two States of India: namely Maharastra and Rajasthan
Three Major Studies ILO (1998) observed that the demand for professionals and technicians has increased in all countries, as their analytical, cognitive and behavioural skills equip them better to adapt to more sophisticated technology. Tomlinson (1999) shows how these skills are enabling skilled workers in the UK to move into knowledge- intensive sectors more readily than worker without such skills. Skilled and experienced individuals can provide an economy with greater technological capabilities for fostering growth in output and social welfare [Bhalla, 1996].
Methodology Several questions pertaining to the socio- economic profile of the beneficiary households, the educational and vocational backgrounds, assessments of the training and infrastructure facilities available at the respective centres, course content and overall rating of the training received are recorded with the help of a questionnaire designed for the beneficiary level information acquisition.
Methodology..cont.. To establish the socio-economic context that the beneficiaries of the computer training courses being taught by the Sterlite foundation, several items of household level information are incorporate within the questionnaire for beneficiary feedback including household size, head of household education and occupation, household income, residence locality and housing status, consumer durables ownership: television, refrigerator, two wheeler, car, personal computer, and telephone connection. A total of 264 beneficiaries have been incorporated as the respondents of the data acquisition exercise after having scrutinised and weeding out of incomplete and mutual inconsistencies.
Socio-economic impact The specific socio-economic impact of such computer training is viewed in terms of: a) The increased skill set available to the beneficiary and b) Gainful employment and educational opportunities resulting from the training.
Other attributes Perceptions of the benefit acquired by the beneficiaries is contrasted with the personal attributes such as educational attainment, communication skill and Socio- Economic status in order to analyse the observed variability within the socio- economic attributes as also the variability between Maharashtra and Rajasthan.
Table 1 Structure of Computer Training Centers: Maharastra Centre Year of Establishment Number of Instructors Number of Female InstructorsNumber of PCs Number of Working PCs Akola19954166 Alibagh20014454 Amravati, Gadge Nagar20003155 Amravati, Rukmini Nagar19974210 Aurangabad19962055 Dhule20002055 Gargoti20003044 Kolhapur19983265 Latur20012054 Nagpur20022099 Pune20001166 Ratnagiri, (Hostel)20002242 Ratnagiri, Tambat Ari19975310 Sangli20003155 Satara20013155 Solapur20003177 Yavatmal20002099
Table 2 Location of and Infrastructure Facilities in the Training Centres: Maharastra CentreLocation Infrastructure Index (On a 10 Points Scale) Percentage of Students In Contact With The Faculty AkolaM6.252% AlibaghM6.2520% Amravati, Gadge Nagar.R6.2510% Amravati,Rukmini NagarM6.25 0 AurangabadR6.2515% DhuleR7.55% GargotiM3.7510% KolhapurM510% LaturM3.7520% NagpurR6.255% PuneO6.2515% Ratnagiri, (Hostel)R2.570% Ratnagiri, Tambat AriM6.2530% SangliR6.2540% SataraM6.255% SolapurM6.2510% YavatmalR7.520%
Table 3 Dropouts and Placement: Maharastra Centre Enrolment Rate (%) Drop Out Rate (%) Number of Students Placed By The Centre Students In Contact With The Faculty (%) Akola531.6702 Alibagh18.7750.96520 Amravati, Gadge Nagar.2016.67910 Amravati, Rukmini Nagar34.8829.07020 Aurangabad17.4439.532715 Dhule72005 Gargoti8.7511.95210 Kolhapur14.6518.62010 Latur26.8822.58020 Nagpur69.01005 Pune6.8255.11115 Ratnagiri, (Hostel)12.426.4570 Ratnagiri, Tambat Ari6.8812.571530 Sangli13.9158.612540 Satara16.2245.0515 Solapur11.1125.99510 Yavatmal3.697.691520
Table 5 Structure of Computer Training Centers: Rajasthan Centre Year of Establish ment Number of Instructor s Number of Female Instructor sNumber of PCs Number of Working PCs Alwar20012076 Beawar20021033 Bharatpur, Kotwali20012053 Bharatpur, Mandi19972177 Bikaner19982088 Chirawa20021032 Chomu20001022 Jaipur, Bajajnagar19962012 Jaipur, Murlipura20012044 Jaipur, Shastrinagar20002055 Jhunjhunu20012054 Jodhpur19981154 Kishangarh19991053 Mukundgarh20021132 Reengus19961033 Sri Ganganagar19991087 Udaipur19972143
Table 6 Location of and Infrastructure Facilities in the Training Centers: Rajasthan CentreLocation Infrastructure Index on a 10 Points Scale Percentage of Students In Contact With The Faculty AlwarR7.530% BeawarM3.750 Bharatpur, KotwaliM52% Bharatpur, MandiM7.510% BikanerR6.2530% ChirawaM2.50 ChomuR2.540% Jaipur, BajajnagarR7.520% Jaipur, MurlipuraR580% Jaipur, ShastrinagarR6.2595% JhunjhunuM6.2530% JodhpurR6.2550% KishangarhR6.2525% MukundgarhR2.50 ReengusR520% Sri GanganagarR6.2510%
Table 7: Dropouts and Placement: Rajasthan Centre Enrolment Rate (%) Drop Out Rate (%) Number of Students Placed By The Centre Students In Contact With The Faculty (%) Alwar 27.43 17.712730% Beawar 80 000 Bharatpur, Kotwali 19.46 28.6512% Bharatpur, Mandi 19.42 33.662510% Bikaner 15.5 9.566030% Chirawa 333.33 000 Chomu 22.54 36.62440% Jaipur, Bajajnagar 17.14 11.79320% Jaipur, Murlipura 79.75 11.39280% Jaipur, Shastrinagar 23.44 33.59095% Jhunjhunu 45.45 12.12130% Jodhpur 9.34 48.64450% Kishangarh 8.2 57.86025% Mukundgarh 120 000 Reengus 20 82.22020% Sri Ganganagar 31.58 45.39010% Udaipur 6.98 48.375050%
Table 9.1 Centres in Maharastra Name of CentreFrequencyShare in the State (%)Share in Total Sample (%) Alibagh2606.84.3 Pune1764.62.9 Aurangabad1724.52.9 Nagpur711.91.2 Amravati, Gadge Nagar.1203.22.0 Akola1383.62.3 Amravati,Rukmini Nagar2596.84.3 Yavatmal3258.65.4 Dhule250.70.4 Ratnagiri, Tambat Ari80721.213.5 Ratnagiri, ( Hostel )1514.02.5 Kolhapur1794.73.0 Gargoti1483.92.5 Sangli3038.05.1 Satara1373.62.3 Solapur43611.57.3 Latur932.41.6 Total3800100.063.4
Table 9.2 Centres in Rajasthan Name of CentreFrequency Share in the State (%) Share in Total Sample (%) Udaipur32815.05.5 Bajajnagar, Jaipur2189.93.6 Shastrinagar, Jaipur522.40.9 Murlipura, Jaipur813.71.4 Chomu502.30.8 Reengus693.11.2 Kishangarh31614.45.3 Beawar110.50.2 Bharatpur, Kotwali472.10.8 Bharatpur, Mandi863.91.4 Alwar1808.23.0 Jhunjhunu713.21.2 Chirawa70.30.1 Mukundgarh311.40.5 Sri Ganganagar1115.11.9 Bikaner38717.76.5 Jodhpur1466.72.4 Total2191100.036.6
Table 10: Age Structure: Maharastra (All Figures are in Percentages) Centre Age Groups (In Years) 15 to 2020 to 2525 to 3030 to 6060 and Above Akola38.64 15.157.580.00 Alibag25.3116.608.7148.960.41 Amravati, Gadge Nagar.29.9148.7214.536.840.00 Amravati, Rukmini Nagar35.8040.4715.957.780.00 Aurangabad18.0244.1921.5116.280.00 Dhule52.0040.008.00 0.00 Gargoti27.2163.953.404.081.36 Kolhapur59.7721.849.206.902.30 Latur49.4437.088.994.490.00 Nagpur18.3150.7015.49 0.00 Pune21.1446.8624.007.430.57 Ratnagiri, (Hostel)24.0050.6713.3311.330.67 Ratnagiri, Tambat Ari25.3149.0015.848.980.87 Sangli27.0654.7911.226.930.00 Satara48.0636.4310.854.650.00 Solapur34.6442.0316.406.930.00 Yavatmal41.5635.9415.636.250.63
Table 11: Age Structure: Rajasthan (All Figures are in Percentages) Centre Age Groups (In Years) 15 to 2020 to 2525 to 3030 to 6060 and Above Alwar6.6757.7830.005.560.00 Beawar42.8657.140.00 Bharatpur, Kotwali58.5436.590.004.880.00 Bharatpur, Mandi67.1430.001.43 0.00 Bikaner53.1730.039.925.791.10 Chirawa71.4328.570.00 Chomu32.0052.0012.004.000.00 Jaipur, Bajajnagar23.2648.8413.027.44 Jaipur, Murlipura51.3243.425.260.00 Jaipur, Shastrinagar30.7746.1515.387.690.00 Jhunjhunu55.7132.865.71 0.00 Jodhpur29.8645.8315.287.641.39 Kishangarh38.3138.9613.317.142.27 Mukundgarh62.0734.483.450.00 Reengus79.3115.521.72 Sri Ganganagar46.7337.3810.284.670.93 Udaipur29.9449.6913.277.100.00
Table 14: Income Groups: Maharashtra (All Figures are in Percentages) Centre Income Groups Less Than Rs.30,000 Rs.30,000 to Rs.60,000 Rs.60,000 to Rs.1,50,000Above Rs.1,50,000 Akola19.5765.9414.490.00 Alibag13.7523.3347.5015.42 Amravati, Gadge Nagar.67.5030.002.500.00 Amravati, Rukmini Nagar33.1229.8730.526.49 Aurangabad57.5638.953.490.00 Dhule94.445.560.00 Gargoti79.0316.134.030.81 Kolhapur46.5435.2217.610.63 Latur48.9145.654.351.09 Nagpur60.9814.6321.952.44 Pune68.7125.175.440.68 Ratnagiri, (Hostel)49.6024.80 0.80 Ratnagiri, Tambat Ari44.6332.9921.341.04 Sangli56.9525.1717.550.33 Satara54.4628.5716.070.89 Solapur82.1113.304.130.46 Yavatmal23.6944.3129.542.46
Table 15: Income Groups: Rajasthan (All Figures are in Percentages) Centre Income Groups Less Than Rs.30,000 Rs.30,000 to Rs.60,000 Rs.60,000 to Rs.1,50,000Above Rs.1,50,000 Alwar0.565.5637.2256.67 Beawar9.0990.910.00 Bharatpur, Kotwali19.1523.4055.322.13 Bharatpur, Mandi20.2444.0533.332.38 BikanerN.A Chirawa42.8657.140.00 Chomu40.0044.4413.332.22 Jaipur, Bajajnagar18.3839.4637.844.32 Jaipur, Murlipura8.6464.2025.931.23 Jaipur, Shastrinagar17.6564.7117.650.00 Jhunjhunu39.4459.151.410.00 Jodhpur10.3260.3228.570.79 Kishangarh11.6552.6330.834.89 Mukundgarh12.9087.100.00 Reengus72.3123.084.620.00 Sri Ganganagar11.2145.7940.192.80 Udaipur26.2640.4033.330.00
Table 17: Occupational Structure: Rajasthan (All Figures are in Percentages) Centre Occupational Structure EmployedUnemployedStudent Student And Employed Alwar18.8913.4467.670.00 Beawar0.00 100.000.00 Bharatpur, Kotwali21.280.0078.720.00 Bharatpur, Mandi2.33 95.350.00 Bikaner2.072.5895.350.00 Chirawa14.290.0085.710.00 Chomu14.2910.2073.472.04 Jaipur, Bajajnagar9.0518.5772.380.00 Jaipur, Murlipura18.521.2380.250.00 Jaipur, Shastrinagar7.6913.4676.921.92 Jhunjhunu1.410.0098.590.00 Jodhpur13.019.5975.342.05 Kishangarh5.5417.9275.900.65 Mukundgarh6.459.6883.870.00 Reengus7.254.3588.410.00 Sri Ganganagar6.3120.7272.970.00 Udaipur13.5631.5553.940.95
Table 18: Profile of Sample Beneficiarys Personal Attributes BENF. EDU ATTAINMENT EMPLOYMENT STATUS YESNO MALEFEMALEMALEFEMALE SSC COMM. SKILL184.108.40.2064.91 AGE33.00.16.5516.91 HSC COMM. SKILL4.925.174.954.76 AGE24.6220.8318.6719.39 GRADUATE COMM. SKILL4.754.945.165.17 AGE26.2523.3922.1622.86 POSTGRADUATE COMM. SKILL5.295.805.004.00 AGE29.7123.8022.629 DIPLOMA COMM. SKILL3.00.5. AGE52.00.15.
Table 19: Beneficiary Educational Attainment and Socio Economic Attributes STATE BENF. EDU ATTAINMENT SSCHSC GRADU- ATE POST GRADUATE DIPLOMA MAHARASHTRA PCAPINC6921.839297.9011218.3016816.67 S-E STATUS28.9634.5639.6238.3350.00 COMM. SKILL4.694.945.035.666.00 RAJASTHAN PCAPINC 12712.8 2 9487.0510892.2914896.3010000.00 S-E STATUS46.6156.1164.1061.07150.00 COMM. SKILL5.174.855.105.003.50
Summary and Conclusions To sum up, it could be stated that on the whole computer education appears to have tremendous scope to enhance poor peoples opportunities. These opportunities are usually translated in the form of access to markets, and market access could be a part of the development initiatives in a world of information technology and could make the development initiatives inclusive. Provision of subsidised computer education could, therefore, be a major source of empowerment of people – especially those belonging to the socially and economically backward in a developing country like India. However, the models specified and tested in these research studies could not be directly applied in this study.
Cont. The real issue that emerges from studies on developing countries is that efforts should be made to close the digital gap through incorporating ICT directly in development work – not just include ICT in other projects. The holistic view makes it necessary to expand focus from macro-economic dynamics to include locally embedded approaches.
conclusion A perusal of the Socio Economic Index constructed for the beneficiaries of subsidized IT education offered by a business house in India indicates a rising trend in communication skills, socio economic status and per capita income for the State of Maharashtra as the educational [especially, IT] attainment increases, while there are mixed trends for Rajasthan. The results of the analysis could be of considerable use to the foundation and the policy makers and also provide directions for future research.
Initiatives in IIT B IRCC and Cell for Human Values Creation of NSVK Involving IIT B Students Community Outreach Tangible Economic Benefits Social Empowerment Social Responsibility
Study of Impact of IT Education among Muslims Hindrances: 1. Limited access 2. Familial pressure in career and academic decisions 3. Low competency in English and lack of information 4. Perceived discrimination 5. Lack of funds and space for a home PC
Policy implications Indisputable role of ICT Need to create a win-win situation for all IT literates Reduce rural-urban divide, as well as the digital-divide Public – private partnership as the best solution Public investment crowds in private investment.