1. State of Municipal Education in Mumbai December 2014 Supported by FORD FOUNDATION 1

2. 2 Data from RTI

3. 3 Standard Academic Year Total Enrolments Retention Rate (%) Year on Year 12009-1067,477 - 22010-1161,071 90.5 32011-1259,691 88.5 42012-1359,160 87.7 52013-1453,056 78.6 62014-15*47,653 70.6 72015-16*42,901 63.6 Retention Rate in Municipal Schools Class 1 to Class 7 Only 63.6% of students who enrolled in Class I in 2009-10 are likely to make it to Class 7 in 2015-16. * Estimated using time-series regression.

4. 4 Percentage Change in Class I Enrolments 2009-10 to 2013-14 In the last five years, Class I enrolments have gone down by 41%. At this rate, only 23,072 students may enrol in Class I in 2016-17. If 100 students enrolled in Class I in 2009-10, in comparison only 59 students enrolled in Class I in 2013-14. Year2009-102010-112011-122012-132013-142014-15*2015-16*2016-17* No. of students enrolled in Class I 67,47762,58753,72946,91339,66333,16927,75323,072 % Change Year on Year 6.4%-7.2%-14.2%-12.7%-15.5%-16.4%-16.3%-16.9% * Estimated using time-series regression.

5. 5 Total Students in Mumbai’s Municipal Schools 2009 - 2014 Year2009-20102010-20112011-20122012-20132013-14 Total Students455,900437,863439,153434,523404,251 % Change in Enrolments Year on Year 0.9%-4%0.3%-1.1%-7% Medium-wise Change in Enrolments Year on Year Marathi-4.6%-8.1%-6.9%-11.2%-10.8% Hindi5.8%-1.4%3%0.7%-8.9% English37.1%1.2%22.2%18.1%1.2% Urdu-2.9%2.6%2.1%0.5%-3.3% Gujarati-7.4%-7.5%-10.4%-12.9%-19.2% Kannada-8.2%-6.4%-8.1%-9.2%-21.5% Tamil2.7%-17%-12.3%-3.2%-10.6% Telugu-12.1%-15.6%0.2%-8.8%-23.4% 51,649 students have left municipal school system in five years (11.3%). Barring English, enrolments across all other mediums of instruction have declined in 2013-14.

6. 6 Dropouts* in Mumbai’s Municipal Schools 2009 - 2014 Year2009-20102010-20112011-20122012-20132013-14 Dropouts29,46818,70032,58040,01147,218 Dropouts (per 100)6479 12 Medium-wise Dropouts Year on Year Marathi4.5%2.4%5.6%6.7%7.4% Hindi9.6%6.3%9.7%14.1%17% English6.1%4.1%5.4%4.8%5.8% Urdu6%4.6%7.8%8.5%13.1% Gujarati4%1.9%4.6%5.4%4.5% Kannada5.2%3%6.2%8.1%10.5% Tamil4.1%2.3%3.8%4.4%6.6% Telugu8.5%4.7%12.1%11.2%9.7% * Dropouts indicate students who enrolled in the academic year but did not complete it. 12 out of 100 students dropped out in 2013-14, compared to nine out of 100 students in 2012-13. Dropout rates for Hindi and Urdu mediums have increased significantly in the last five years.

7. Indicator : Schools with Infrastructure Facilities Available Govt. and Local bodies Pvt. AidedPvt. Unaided Un-recognised Total Schools1266443653110 Building Number1266443653110 %100.00 Office cum store cum HM room Number1212416620105 %95.7393.9194.9595.45 One class room for every teacher Number100626529578 %79.4659.8245.1870.91 Ramp Number112539450344 %88.8688.9477.0340.00 Separate Toilet for Boys Number1261426614108 %99.6196.1694.0398.18 Separate Toilet for Girls Number1264433635107 %99.8497.7497.2497.27 Drinking Water Facility Number1266443653110 %100.00 Kitchen Shed (Govt. &Aided Schools) Number1071383615106 %84.6086.4694.1896.36 Boundary Wall Number122139459381 %96.4588.9490.8173.64 Playground Number118338653879 %93.4487.1382.3971.82 7 Compliance with Infrastructure and other norms under RTE

8. 8 Particulars of Inspection FormLG/NP/South Dropout (Per 100) 2012-1314.1%9.3%12.2% Pass out (In %) 2012-1345%50%58% No. Of Teachers896623430 No. Of Teachers whose inspection reports provided368369119 %41%59%28% Usage of examples, case study while teachingUsage98%86%100% Teaching Aids UseYes87%79%94% Student InvolvementGood73%66%82% Formative Evaluation Technique UsedYes96%83%100% Teacher Student InteractionProper76%63%87% Entries in the daily lesson plan and actual teachingComplete96%84%97% Self evaluation by the teacherGood53%9%50% Prepared test papered or question paperPrepared91%85%94% Teacher’s PortfolioGood55%48%66% Subject wise student’s responseGood56%45%66% Teacher Inspection Reports

9. 9 Continuous and Comprehensive Evaluation (CCE) refers to a system of school-based assessment of students that covers all aspects of students' development introduced under Right to Education Act. Continuous and Comprehensive Evaluation (CCE) Wards 4 th Standard (No. of students in %)7 th Standard (No. of students in %) Above 60% (A1, A2, B1, B2 grades) 60% to 40% (C1, C2 grades) Less than 40% (D, E1, grade) E2 (continu ously absent) Above 60% (A1, A2, B1, B2 grades) 60% to 40% (C1, C2 grade) Less than 40% (D, E1, grade) E2 (contin uously absent) G/N, L, P/S, C, D, T 62%16%2%20%69%20%1%10% E2 grade is given by MCGM to students who are continuously absent i.e. dropouts as earlier maintained. Note: Above data has been compiled from two datasets, data on CCE reports and continuous absent students.

10. 10 Comparison between Students of MCGM and Other Schools IndicatorsMCGMOther Schools* SSC Passout67%83% Middle School Scholarship (Std. 4 th ) 1.3%9.4% High School Scholarship (Std. 7 th ) 0.1%8.1% *Other Schools- Private aided, Private Unaided and Unrecognised Schools

11. 11 Annual Municipal Budgets 2009-2015 Year Total Annual Budget (In Rs.Crore) Total Students 2009-101,255449,179 2010-111,761437,911 2011-121,800439,108 2012-132,388434,523 2013-142,534404,251 2014-152,870404,251 Between 2009-10 and 2014-15, MCGM budget for Education has more than doubled.

12. 12 Account Head Budget Estimates 2013-14 Actual expenditure 2013-2014 Budget Estimates 2014-15 Total Education Budget (Primary and Secondary) 2,5341,5402,870 Less: Grants to Private Primary aided School (D) 283242415 Total2,2511,2982,455 Total students (2013-2014)404,251 Per Child Allocation (in rupees) 55,67632,11860,729 Per-child allocation (In Rs.Crore) Per-child Allocation under the Municipal Budget has increased to Rs.60,729, as per Budget Estimates 2014-15.

13. 13 Data from Household Survey Praja Foundation had commissioned a household survey to Hansa Research. The survey was conducted in March-April 2014 across the city of Mumbai with a total sample size of 22,580 households. Of these, 4,276 households had children going to school. Hence, the education questionnaire was administered further with those (4,276) households only.

14. 14 Reasons for not being happy with Municipal School (%) Quality of education, teachers and infrastructure form the three big reasons cited by parents for not being happy with municipal schools.

15. 15 Respondent taking private tuitions/coaching classes: 42% students from Municipal Schools take private tuitions / coaching classes Details on source of Tuitions: 9% students from Municipal schools take tuitions from their own school class teachers. AllPrivate SchoolMunicipal School Yes66%71%42% No34%29%58% AllPrivate SchoolMunicipal School School Class teacher 12% 13%9% Private tuitions 80% 79%83% Coaching classes 7% 5% Others 1% 3%

16. 16 Deliberation by Councillors on Education in the year April’13 to March’14 133 questions were asked on issues related to Education in 2013-14, as compared to 134 questions in the previous year. 55 questions were asked by Education Committee members in 2013- 14, as compared to 66 questions in 2012-13. 157 (of 227) councillors have not asked a single question on Education this year. 43 councillors have asked only one question on education. Only six councillors have asked more than four questions. Only four questions have been asked on Drop out rates.

17. What Needs to be Done 17  More transparency and accountability in Education Department.  Appoint independent, third party, to monitor and evaluate learning outcomes of students.  Empower and Strengthen School Management Committees (SMCs) to improve accountability at the school level.  Focus on teacher trainings, SMC trainings and capacity building; free teachers from unnecessary administrative duties  Rigorous filling out of Continuous Comprehensive Evaluation (CCE) reports and Inspection reports. Link reports with performance appraisal of respective teachers.  Strengthen Data management systems especially the Research Officer’s wing, for better planning and implementation. Providing quality education is the duty of the Corporation. Quality of education should be the only paramount focus of the Corporation.

18. THANK YOU. 18