schools merging in nepal: does it promote efficiency in education ?

Schools Merging in Nepal: Does it promote efficiency ?

Outlines

•Introduction•Concerns on it• Methodology

•Literature reviewed•General findings

11/4/2014 Laxman Sharma , M. Phil. II ,2014 KUSOED 1

Introduction

• M o E of Nepal had closed more than

300 public schools silently in the last

3 years and formally announced more

200 to close this year.

• Most of them are found either in urban

area or inaccessible remote hills.

• Those schools have less number of

students

• Schools Closed are coined as

‘Merging’.

• It is said to increase ‘Efficiency’ in

education system meaning to increase

Output/Input.

( Source: Personal Communication, MOE)

11/4/2014 2Laxman Sharma , M. Phil. II ,2014 KUSOED

Concerns on it…

• What is happened to the students, teachers and the physical assets of the closed schools ?

• How was the process conducted, was there sufficient efforts made to save them ?

• Is it an initiative to promote ‘Efficiency’ in education as claimed or something else ?


Methodology

• Reviewed some literature• UNCRC declaration

• Chinese example of schools ‘relocating’ etc.

• Observation tour, 3 closed, 3 merged schools

• Conducted 3 Interviews and 2 FGDs with the teachers and the parents

• Reports published (ASPBAE Bulletin - June 2014.pdf)


ASPBAE Bulletin - June 2014.pdf

Literature Review

•UN CRC article 28 says

• You have the right to a good quality education. You should be

encouraged to go to school to the highest level you can.

and…. in your own surrounding…..with parents….culture and

own environments …..your rights are protected by the government.

• Migrate for Education? Primary School Relocation and

Migration of Rural Households.

Chunbing Xing, Beijing Normal University

Found that relocation of the rural schools caused migration of the

primary school aged children’s family, reached urban private

schools, acquired reform in the urban cities.


1. Infrastructure left as it is….

2. Teachers transferred to the neighboring schools

3. Students either left schools or joined neighboring schools or made migrated to the towns by parents

1. Rumors created by the DEO of the ‘merging’

2. In towns private schools lured students, in the villages big HTs took the teachers

3.No supports and options were made to save the school

1. Infrastructure isn’t utilized

2. Expenses on teachers is not saved

3. Students’ expenses by family is increased

4. Supervisory and administrative costs aren’t changed

5. Many students left schools 11/4/2014 6Laxman Sharma , M. Phil. II ,2014 KUSOED

General Findings

Finally !

Stakeholders say ! If efficiency is OUTPUT/INPUT, then how you say its for efficiency ????

11/4/2014 Laxman Sharma , M. Phil. II ,2014 KUSOED 7