District Primary Education Programme (D.P.E.P.)

  1. About D.P.E.P.
  2. Background
  3. DPEP Approach/Strategies
  4. Objectives
  5. Selection Criteria
  6. Coverage
  7. Impact/Major Achievements
  1. About D.P.E.P

    The updated NPE of 1992 provides for key strategies of Decentralization with the district as the unit of planning for implementation of elementary education and increasing reliance on social mobilization to promote basic education.

    The Bihar Education Project was the first major new initiative taken in the direction of operationalizing this new approach to primary education. The District Primary Education Project (DPEP) which was approved as a Centrally sponsored scheme was another major initiative designed to promote a challenging, holistic planning and management approach to Universalisation of Elementary Education (UEE).

    In a State like Bihar which had low enrolment and very high dropout rate, especially among the disadvantaged groups and girls in particular, DPEP was intended as a gender sensitive project which can address the problems of access, retention and above all quality in primary education. DPEP was characterized by an area specific approach, which was contextual and sensitive to local conditions. It was committed to reducing gender and social disparities with regard to enrolment, retention and achievement of all children in the primary school level.

  2. Background

    Bihar is one of the most educationally backward states in India. The state has the lowest female literacy rate in the country. A major education program, known as Bihar Education Project (BEP) was launched in the 7 districts in undivided Bihar in 1991. Although the BEP was operational in only selected blocks of these 7 districts, the experienced provided a base for DPEP III launch. However, there were significant differences between the two, the most critical being that of scale. The scale of operations was much larger in DPEP III as compared to BEP. Moreover, majority of the districts in DPEP III was new ones with no exposure to implement such project. A number of factors impacting educational participation have social overtones and require a longer time frame for achieving any substantial change. DPEP III was conceived as a five-year project. The project was formally launched in October 1997 and completed its terms in September 2003. The project was further extended for two ears and finally came to an end in March, 2006. This does not contained any request for additional fund support as the state proposed to utilize the unspent project funds for the extension period and price escalation due to change in Dollar exchange rate.

  3.  The DPEP Approach/Strategies

    The emphasis and philosophy of DPEP is on Education, Empowerment and Equity for a more educated, skilled and empowered generation of women and men in the country. Hence DPEP seeks to augment the UEE efforts by:

    Holistic planning and management: Planning and implementation of UEE was perceived in its totality, integrating all the measures needed for achieving quality elementary education in the specific context of the project area.

    Decentralized, Participatory Planning Processes: People’s participation in the planning and implementation processes was emphasized to ensure that the diversities that exist in the local area in terms of strengths, problems and needs are sufficiently addressed in the project and that local community facilitates participation, achievement and school effectiveness.

    Focus on Disadvantaged Groups and Gender Issues: Greatest source of disparity in access was gender. Other factors include geographic remoteness, poverty, socio-economic backwardness, disabilities, working children and various other aspects, which have a direct bearing on education. DPEP focused specifically on these groups to ensure Universalisation of quality elementary education for all. Integration of a gender perspective in all aspects of planning and implementation processes was ensured in DPEP.

    Improving School Effectiveness: Making schools as well as learning more attractive and child-centered was a key issue in DPEP. This issue was addressed through a series of interventions such as toning up teacher competence, training and motivating teachers, building their morale and competence as well as substantial improvement in the quality of school facilities and improved teaching-learning materials, stressing learning competence and achievement.

    Providing Alternative Systems of Quality Education: DPEP strategies for UEE goes beyond the Primary Formal Educational efforts to ensure that elementary education is accessed by all children between the age of 6-14 years according to their need, taking into account the innumerable reasons which keep children out of formal schooling.

    Coordination and Convergence of Services: Convergence between DPEP efforts and other services like ICDS, School Health, and related departments like Tribal Welfare, Mass Education etc. was a major concern in DPEP. Activities and processes, which would promote these convergences at various levels, form part of the DPEP interventions.

    Contextuality: In the plan preparation at the State and district level, DPEP pre-supposes contextually as the watchword. The plans have to incorporate local objective factors concerning primary education and effective strategies to address the local problems and issues. Contextuality entails local area planning with desegregated targets and decentralized planning and management. There is need of streamlining of planning and management in respect of both routine and innovative areas.

  4. Objectives

    The broad goal of the project was to contribute to reconstruction of primary education as a whole in selected districts with emphasis on decentralized planning and management, reduction of disparities in educational participation and improvement in education quality. The specific program objectives were:

    1. To reduce differences in enrolment, drop-out and learning achievement among gender and social groups to less than 5 percent,

    2. To reduce overall primary drop-out rates for all students to less than 10 percent,

    3. To raise the achievement levels by 25 percent above measured baseline levels,

    4. To provide access to all children to primary (grades 1 to 5) schooling or its equivalent non-formal education and

    5. Capacity building in planning, management and evaluation at all levels.

  5. Selection Criteria

    The criteria for selection of districts under DPEP were:

    • Educationally backward districts with female literacy below the national average (39.29 percent), and;
    • Districts where Total Literacy Campaign (TLC) have generated demand for elementary education. (Out of 536 districts in the Country TLC covers 450 districts as on March 31,1999).
  6. Coverage

    The District Primary Education Project (DPEP) was being implemented in 11 educational districts (which have now become 20 as educational districts were made co-terminus with revenue districts) in Bihar. The project was identified for IDA credit under DPEP III, this being the third phase of the program at national level. Total number of districts under DPEP III was 17 but 6 districts became part of the newly carved state, Jharkhand, after Bihar was bifurcated in 2001. DPEP covered educational districts include Bhagalpur, Bhojpur, Darbhanga, Gaya, Munger, Muzaffarpur, Purnea, Rohtas, Sitamarhi, Vaishali & West Champaran.   

  7.  Impact /Major Achievements

    Access:

    In order to enhance availability of schooling facilities to children, the project adopted an approach of opening formal as well as alternative schools. 1743 formal schools were opened in project districts. A large number of habitations do not fulfill the population norm and hence do not qualify for opening of a formal school. A good proportion of girl’s crosses the entry ages of school and remain outside the schooling system. Alternative schools were opened in small school-less habitations as well as in the areas where the number of out-of-school girls in the 9+ age group was high demanding such an intervention. The number of alternative schools opened in the project is 7,184 and enrolling about 2,48,720 children, almost four times ahead of the number of formal schools opened.

    Enrolment, Retention, Completion and Equity:

    Based on DISE data available as of September 2004, the enrollment in DPEP districts was 5351290. This represents an increase of over 15 lakh or a 41 percent increase in students over the life of the project. Similar increases are evident for girls and SC. With regard to the percent of 6-11 population enrolled (based on the recently released age-wise Census), at project commencement, 72 percent were enrolled and towards the end of the project 81 percent are enrolled. The increase in enrollment for girls is 14 percents and for SC, 12 percent.

    The Census data available age-wise allows for reliable calculation of the Net Enrollment Ratio (NER). The NER for all students increased from 70 to 77 percents, for girls, 60 to 70 percent and for SC from 70 to 82 percent. 134481 girls and 44791 boys are enrolled in AIE schools. 240678 boys and 198378 girls are enrolled in EGS schools.

    The reduction in gender gap to 5 percent is still to be achieved by the project, it is about 11 percent. The reduction of the social gap to less than 5 percent has been achieved. If the enrollment in AIES and EGS centers is included the gender gap remains the same while the social gap is further reduced.

    The completion rate increased from 48 in 2003 to 54 percent in 2004. For girls the increase was from 46 to 54 percent and for SC 39 to 41 percent. Similarly, average grade transition has also increased by about 5 percent in the last two years. The repetition rate in Grade 1 is high (22 percent) reducing in Grades 2 and 3 to 10 percent and in Grades 4 and 5 to about 5 percent. A reconstructive cohort analysis, using five years of data, to understand the extent of dropout taking into consideration the repetition rate reveals that the cohort dropout rate is 20 percent. According to the analysis, on internal efficiency, it takes about six years to complete five years of primary school.

    All children with disabilities have been identified through the Household Survey and aid and appliances are being supplied with the assistance of NGOs. The Panchayat Shiksha Mita (PSMs) appointed for formal schools, the Lok Shiksha Mitra (LSMs) for Alternative and Education Guarantee Schools (EGS) and CRCCs have been trained in IED. Community awareness has also been carried out. Schools are also now provided with ramps and handrails. Attention will now need to be given to the inclusion of children with disabilities within the school and classroom.

    Learning and Quality:

    The need for additional teachers was very critical with very large classes in the early years of the project. With the hiring of over 25,000 para teachers in project districts in 2002, the class sizes became more manageable.

     MLL based learner’s evaluation were conducted for each grade this year in all DPEP districts. The results of the Terminal Achievement tests reveals that the results for Grade II indicate that the project has surpassed its targets for achievement in both language and mathematics. The project target was to increase achievement by 25 percent over baseline. Achievement has increased over baseline by 33 percent for language and 31 percent for mathematics. For Grade V, the increase for language is 15 percent and for mathematics 12 percent. Similar increases are evident for both boys and girls. Baselines are not available for SC and ST achievement for Grade II. When compared to the mid-term assessments SC and ST achievements for this grade, in language the increase is about 11 percent and for mathematics about 8 percent. For Grade V, the increase over baseline in language is 16 percent for SC and 22 percent for ST. For mathematics it is 12 percent for SC and 17 percent for ST.

    Institutional capacity building and program implementation:

    The project also aimed at strengthening planning and management capacities at decentralized levels of primary education sector. There are ample evidences to reveal that it succeeded in building/enhancing capacities at different levels of implementation. Capacity building can be viewed in three ways:  (i) training and support inputs to individual personnel at different levels,  (ii) building / strengthening institutions at different levels, and (iii) transfer of power and responsibilities to decentralized levels.

     (i) Training and support inputs to individual personnel at different levels

    The project supported different types of training and support activities to strengthen teaching-learning process in formal/alternative schools on the one hand and to strengthen other linked activities on the other. While almost all primary school teachers in the project districts received two rounds of 10 day training and a few of them also received subject specific training depending upon the need assessed or expressed. In addition to these the teachers attend one day monthly meeting at CRC. CRC coordinators were trained in their responsibilities and skills that they require. They also attended monthly reflection meetings at BRCs to discuss their problems and issues while the BRC coordinators met in monthly reflection meetings at district headquarters. The State prepared a team of trainers in all districts to act as resource persons at district and BRC levels. The state opened a number of AS and ECE centres under the project and imparted induction as well as recurrent training's to instructors and other personnel. In order to strengthen pre-school component of existing Anganwadis run by ICDS, the instructors and helpers were provided training by the project. Pre-school education is said to have positive linkages with participation and achievement levels at primary school level and hence investment is in this area is considered desirable. Running of AS and ECE centres were made responsibilities of Mothers’ groups and they were imparted orientation for the purpose. Capacity building of village level bodies was an important aspect of the project in order to facilitate greater community involvement and role in the functioning of school and other such facilities. General orientation of a large number and training of selected number of VEC members has been part of this strategy.

    In addition, considering the low level of female literacy and girls’ participation in schools, the project supported women’s empowerment programme which focused on activities related to generating commitment to education among women and running centres/programmes for education of adolescent girls. A significant number of women’s groups were trained during this process. In lowest female literacy blocks, special Girls’ Education Programme is being implemented with an objective to create awareness about the issue and women are being trained for the purpose. Thus, it can be seen clearly that the project did invest substantially in building individual capacities in various knowledge and skill areas at ground level.

    (ii) Building / strengthening Institutions at Different Levels

    The project supported establishment as well as rejuvenation of existing institutions at various levels (state, district and block). At block level, very few teacher-support institutions existed in the pre-project period. The concept of Cluster Resource Centre (CRC) as a readily available and accessible institution for discussion and problem solving among teachers was introduced in selected blocks during Bihar Education Project (BEP) phase. Teachers of 10-12 primary schools (35-40 in numbers) together formed one CRC with this being located in one of the member schools. The concept was institutionalized in DPEP III by establishing and operationalising CRCs in the entire project area. In order to make regular training of teachers a reality it was important to decentralize the organization of training programmes for which institutional capacities at sub-district levels were required to be built. 152 Block Resource Centres (BRCs) were established to serve all blocks for this purpose in 20 revenue districts. 

    As mentioned earlier, the project also aimed at strengthening community support by various means including that of constituting / rejuvenating Village Education Committees (VECs). Under the project the VECs were reconstituted with greater representation from disadvantaged groups and were rejuvenated to participate and take interest in the activities / issues related to school functioning. Total number of VECs in the project districts was 25,460. VECs played very active role in various activities, especially in those related to construction and community mobilization. In this context, it may be mentioned that the role of community in construction activities in DPEP III has been hailed by various evaluations. At district level, the project had proposed to strengthen District Institute of Education and Training (DIETs). At state level, the project had proposed strengthening of SCERT through their involvement in a number of activities and by granting them certain responsibilities. The state had also proposed strengthening of Bihar State Textbook Publishing Corporation (BSTBC) by providing them computers and supporting training activities. The state proposed to establish State Institute of Educational Management and Training (SIEMAT) as an organization functioning within SCERT. Although the organization could not function to its full potential for variety of reasons, it undertook a number of significant tasks related to research, training and technical support in the area of planning and management. The Project, has also succeeded in operationalising EMIS (DISE) in all districts.

    (iii) Transfer of Power and Responsibilities to Decentralized Levels

    Starting from 2000, the Government of Bihar (GOB) has taken certain important decisions regarding transfer of powers and responsibilities relating to primary schools to PRIs and other representative community groups. These decisions have largely, although definitely not solely, been guided by DPEP experiences in Bihar and elsewhere in the country and reflect the impact of the programme on the larger educational management system. Three important decisions in this context are (i) constitution of Vidyalaya Shiksha Samiti (VSS) through an Act with a well-defined role in school related decisions, (ii) provision of one Panchayat Shiksha Mitra (PSM), a para teacher, in every primary/upper primary school in rural areas and (iii) adoption of Education Guarantee Scheme (EGS) with a clear role for PRIs at different levels in its management. Vidyalaya Shisksha Samiti (VSS) Act was passed in 2000.

    Literacy:

    An average decadal growth of 10.90% in DPEP & 9.88% in  Non-DPEP districts has been noticed while comparing the literacy data of 1991 & 2001 census. Although, the DPEP districts are better by an average 1% point, the change can be seen substantial, keeping in view that these districts were selected on the criteria of being backward districts.