“The Pessimist Sees Difficulty In Every Opportunity. The Optimist Sees Opportunity In Every Difficulty.”

The case of mathematical skills is even worse. Whereas only 36.30 percent of students in the 8th class could divide a three-digit number by a single-digit number, 23.50 percent could subtract a two-digit number from a two-digit number. About one percent of students possessed no number recognition at all.

The report is replete with such surprising revelations. This is a matter of concern but the issue has been kept on the backburner almost all over India. Maharashtra being the leading state, its gravity is considered much more.

The report shows that though academic standards are poor, 94 percent of the students between 14 and 16 years of age own smartphones or can access them at home. Of these students, 63 percent use smartphones for academic purposes while 72 percent use smartphones to stay active on social media.

This survey by Pratham is taken as a serious matter in the education sector in India. Pratham has been conducting such surveys over the years. After its reports are released, they become a topic of discussion among acedemicans and intellectual circles. However, this year, some dignitaries in the education sector have raised questions about these findings.

While the ASER report has been considered a warning bell, the experts are divided about the survey findings and its methodology. For example, according to a sample in survey in 60 villages in Nanded district of Maharashtra, 1374 students from 1200 families were interviewed and the survey questions were asked to them. The findings are based on this survey. Those disagreeing with the inferences point out that Nanded district is just three percent of the total population of Maharashtra. Moreover, this survey was conducted by talking to 1374 students there. But the findings based on this survey are presented as the situation in Maharashtra, they feel.

Educationists who are not ready to accept the findings say that it is always better to draw conclusions based on specific statistics than depending upon just zero figures. But we certainly cannot generalise about educational picture of the entire state based on this report. They contend that if we draw a picture of the whole state by relying only on this report, it will present a grim scenario. In fact, there is always some kind of misgivings about statistical reports, but the statistics in the ASER survey report are so low that we cannot draw a true picture of the state based on these numbers. If we try to decide on some policy or form an opinion from this set of numbers, it will be misleading, they warn.  Backing this line of thinking, experimental teachers explain that we have a misleading definition of literacy. The conclusions and the statistics in this report are a good example of that.

According to one such expert, the sample size is very important in such a survey. Moreover, it is important to know which school is selected for asking questions. It also matters whether the student is from CBSE or State Board or some other body, because it reveals his educational background.

Maharashtra is geographically and socially a much diverse state. Therefore, there is a large imbalance in academic standards regionally. In such a situation, not just one district in Maharashtra, it is necessary to conduct a district-wise sample, not even region-wise.

The report is based on the responses to the selected questions. The report has accepted this contention. Hence, the question remains whether the academic quality of students can be understood from only these questions. Also, experts feel that these questions are from the students’ side, and the questions do not reflect the consideration of other complementary factors in education.

The report has mentioned that students do not understand certain things. Experts respond that why children do not understand is that they are not taught properly in schools. Why not the difficulties in learning considered? From the empowerment of teachers to the involvement in non-academic work, the system does not allow them to fully devote to their assigned work. There are many reasons for this. Is it mentioned anywhere in the report, they demand to know. If not brought on record, does this not give a lopsided  picture, they ask.

Those adopting this line of analysis say that through such reports, the credibility of the government education system is questioned and the image of the teacher community is sullied. The reality is that good quality education is being provided in Zilla Parishad schools and aided schools. The fact that students from ZPs and aided schools are more in number in the scholarship list cannot be overlooked. But reports like ASER paint a picture whereby only government schools and their teachers are targetted. Similarly, an impression is created that the money spent on government schools is wasted.

Pratham co-founder Farida Lambe, who was presented when the report was released, does not agree with these observations. She says that Pratham has not said anywhere in the report that this is a picture of the country or the state. As far as Maharashtra is concerned, the report has also mentioned the statistics of how many students were spoke to,  by selecting villages in Nanded. So the question of creating confusion does not arise. Lambe reminds the report’s critics that for the last 15 years, Pratham has been conducting surveys in the education sector and publishing reports. The aim is to show what the trends are in this sector.

Replying to the criticism that teachers were not included during the survey, Lambe has countered that Pratham has conducted the surveys so far in a student-centric manner. She accepts that there are other relevant factors, too. But more institutions and individuals should come forward and work on these aspects, she says. The findings presented are useful for positive intervention in educational policies, for making positive changes.

Significantly, the education sector in Maharashtra has witnessed a notable 9.80 percent increase in budget allocation for the interim period of 2024-25 over the previous year. However, despite this surge, concerns have emerged over the distribution of allocations and cutbacks in flagship schemes.

While both school and higher education departments have experienced a boost in funding, a substantial portion of the funding is attributed to routine expenditures, particularly salaries for teachers and the non-teaching staff.

Experts feel that more attention needs to be paid on improving the quality of teachers and of course, of the students. The impending budget, to be presented during the coming session, is expected to pay attention to this lacuna.