3 Chapters Amir Shafiq ejaz

Document Sample
3 Chapters Amir Shafiq ejaz Powered By Docstoc
					                                     Chapter 1



                             INTRODUCTION


1.1    Introduction

Education is progressive development of the individual in all faculties, physical,

intellectual, aesthetic and moral. Every society flourishes and makes progress through

hard work done by talented and learned persons. Education plays a vital role in a

society for maintaining peace and justice, tremendous progress made in scientific field

is all due to education. The developed countries of the world have proved there

supremacy through education and research. It is an educational effort which helps

preserving social values in society (Mohanty 1990).



The developed and many developing countries have attained universal or near

universal access to primary education. Now they are focusing on the quality of student

learning. Public / Government sector in Pakistan is unable to provide the educational

facilities / opportunities to each and every individual of the society due to lack of

resources. The system of national or provincial assessment has yet not been

established. Standardized data on student learning over years or over repeated

measurements is non-existent.



Linguistic and academic achievement is a subject of common concern. It alone draws

the interest of entire educational system.




                                             1
Specially, over the last few years this issue has generated a great deal of interesting

debate. It has led to wave of research to find the impact of language and scientific

approaches on academic achievement.



The change of status of science from an optional to a compulsory subject in the

curriculum of many countries is an attempt to alter this situation. This can only been

effective. However, the avoidance of science can be identified and met. There is a

great deal of knowledge about the differences in attitudes, experiences and

achievements of the society relates to science.



Urdu and science are placed as a compulsory subject in the primary school

curriculum, as well as secondary level. It has now recognized as a compulsory subject

right from the Primary level and one of core subject at higher education. Language is

unique possession of man.



With respect to science achievement there has been relatively less attention paid than

linguistic subjects. Recent analyses indicate that observed differences are more

consistent over time, tend to be strongest in physics and earth sciences than in biology

and life science, or general science (Steinkamp and Maehr, 1984).



The Govt. of the Punjab, decided to give financial as well as expert assistance to the

private registered schools in Punjab through Punjab Education Foundation.

Government decided to give some incentives to some private schools within her

supervision, to enhance the learning of the students at different levels. As the primary




                                           2
education especially of grade 5, provides the foundation for the higher education

therefore primary education is the main focus of the National Education Policy 2009.

Punjab Education Foundation (PEF) has launched a mechanism to register some

schools through out the Punjab with some conditions. 1341 private schools have been

registered by the PEF in the Punjab, where about 5,97,275 students are being taught

under the umbrella of PEF. As a huge amount of funds is being utilized on the private

schools for this purpose, therefore it will be good to get the real picture of the

situation.



To check the performance difference in terms of learning achievement of the students,

it is the need of the time to conduct a comparative study of learning achievement of

the students studying in PEF-registered private-schools and public-schools in Punjab

for 5th grade students.



1.2     Statement of the problem

To achieve the national goals and objectives in education, the Government of Punjab

is giving financial assistance to the selected private schools in Punjab according to her

criteria to enhance the learning achievement of the poor students especially living in

the remote areas of the Punjab.



It will be useful to assess the performance of both the Public- and PEF-Registered

schools that how much they match the objectives of Punjab Education Foundation

system of examination to attain the level of quality education. For this purpose

conducting a comparative study of the learning achievement of the students in the




                                           3
subjects of Urdu and Science, of PEF-registered private-schools and Public-schools in

Punjab for 5th grade.

1.3    Significance of the study

Primary education has not receiving its due share as a large proportion of the funds

were spent on the higher education, but in the near past primary education attains full

intention at national level. According to the World Bank, Islamabad expenditure on

public sector education is only 203 percent of the GDP which is to a great extent

lesser than the South Asian average of 306 per cent and the low-income states average

of 304 percent, National Education Policy 2009, p11



The Government of Punjab decided to give financial as well as expert assistance to

the private registered school in Punjab through Punjab Education Foundation. PEF

has launched a mechanism to register some schools throughout the Punjab with some

conditions. These schools are working under the supervision of PEF. Learning as used

here refers to concerted activity that increases the capacity and willingness of

individuals, groups, organizations and communities to acquire and productively apply

new knowledge and skills, to grow and mature and to adapt successfully changes and

challenges. Such learning empowers individuals and organizations to make wise

choices, solve problems and break new ground.



This study will help to analyze the differences in learning achievements of PEF-

registered and non-registered private. The study will provide guidance to policy

makers and planners concern to plan their activities in the light of the results of this

study and recommendations in it.




                                           4
1.4       Research Objectives

         To examine the role of PEF in enhancing the learning achievements of the

          students.

         To identify the learning problems of the students in PEF-registered schools

          and public-schools.

         To find out the learning achievements of the students of PEF-registered

          schools and public-schools in the subjects of Urdu and Science.

         To analyze the performance of students of PEF-registered schools and public-

          schools.

         To give some recommendations to enhance the learning achievements of the

          students of PEF-registered schools and Public-schools in the subjects of Urdu

          and Science.



1.5       De-Limitations of the study

Considering the constraints, time and finance, the study was delimited to the

following areas:

         Southern Punjab

         District Lodhran and Bahawal Pur and Rahim Yar Khan.

         Three tehsils of each district were selected randomly for the study.

         Study was de-limited to the Tehsil Bahawl Pur, Ahmed Pur East, Mandi

          Yazman, Lodhran, Dunya Pur,Kehror Pacca, Liaqat Pur, Khan Pur and Rahim

          Yar Khan.

         Students those have passed the 5th grade examination in 2010 and now

          studying in 6th grade were randomly selected for study.




                                             5
         QAT and PEC question papers were administered in two subjects, Urdu and

          Science.

1.6       Research Methodology

1.6.1     Research Design

The nature of the study reveals its current situation analysis hence the descriptive

research method was adopted.



1.6.2     Population

PEF-registered private elementary/secondary schools and elementary, secondary and

Higher secondary public-schools in Punjab are the population of the study.



1.6.3     Sample

         Study was conducted in three districts Lodhran, Bahawal Pur and Rahim Yar

          Khan of the southern Punjab.

         Three PEF-registered private-schools and same number of public-schools were

          selected randomly from three Tehsils of the concerned district.

         It made 54 schools in all (27 PEF-registered private-schools and 27 Public-

          schools).

         20 students were selected randomly from each school, which amounts 1080

          students in all.



1.6.4     Research Tool

Quality Assurance Test (QAT) and Punjab Examination Commission (PEC) question

papers were administered in the subjects of Urdu and Science to the students of 6 th

grade (Those have passed the 5th grade examination in 1st annual exam. 2010).



                                             6
7
1.6.5     Pilot test

A pilot study was conducted in five PEF-registered private-schools and five public-

schools in district Bahawal Pur for four subjects, Urdu, English, Science and

Mathematics. Ten students from each school were selected for the test. It made 100

students in all. Results of the pilot study were discussed with the supervisor and than

with his expert opinion the tests were conducted in three districts for the subjects of

Urdu and Science.



1.6.6     Data collection

Data was collected personally after conducting examination/ test on the sample of the

study.



1.6.7     Data analysis

Data was analyzed on percentage basis in both subjects.

Correlation of the results will be checked by using SPSS.



1.7       Explanation of important terms

         PEF: Punjab Education Foundation

         PEC: Punjab Examination Commission

         BOD: Board of Directors

         EFA: Education for All

         Student: Student of 6th grade

         NPA: National Plan of Action

         GDP: Gross Domestic Product

         QAT: Quality Assurance Test


                                          8
       NEAS: National Education Assessment System

       FAS: Foundation Assisted School

       EVS: Education Voucher Scheme

       NSP: New School Programme

       HRD: Human Resource Department

       SACMEQ: South African Consortium for Measuring Educational Quality

       MLA: Monitoring Learning Achievement

       PEPB: Punjab Examination Commission Board Examination of 5th Grade

       2010.

       AvPEF: Average Result of PEF Registered Private Schools.

       AvPEC: Average Result of Public Schools.



In this chapter introduction of the topic, statement of the problem, significance of the

study, objectives of the study, delimitations of the study, research methodology and

explanation of important term has been discussed. In chapter 2 the review of related

literature will be discussed.




                                           9
                                      Chapter 2



              REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE


The intensification of the educational quality at all levels especially at primary level is

now become a worldwide program. Since 80s, the nationwide dedication is

extensively noticeable towards excellence education. The Government has applied a

lot of project and intercession to advance the quality of education by national and

overseas financial support.



The factor of education is projected to extend indispensable learning expertise,

calculation and life proficiency, accomplishment of script,         life. During rearing,

advancement in the field of education and numeracy occur through achievement of

fundamental knowledge in a particular theme encompasses essential awareness,

aptitude, perceptive, approach, wellbeing, and principles.



2.1 Learning

Learning is a natural phenomenon so it is very common. It is a continuous process so

a person can learn through out his life.

   1. Learning is modification of behavior through experience Gates,(1968)

   2. Learning involves the acquisition of habits, knowledge and attitudes. Crow

       and Crow, (1956)

   3. Learning includes both acquisition and retention Skinner, (1969)




                                            10
According to Sharma,(2005) views, knowledge signifies constructing and reinforcing

which has certain associations and declining shifting and other acquaintances. The

exact sort of knowledge makes a union stronger and desirable. The learning

absolutely will not be so simple when the relationship is competent to do something,

but when the attachments come up to into action so as to bring into being.

It has been found by a current result that the learning is in fact a procedure of

acquiring or purchasing or knowledge of a particular theme or expertise through

learning, guidance or familiarity. So we will create a meticulous description of

learning as it is given below:



“Learning is a comparatively everlasting alteration in a behavioral leaning and is a

result of toughened application.”



Hence we can take out field of exploration and inquisition by break down of the

educational mechanism:

   1. Preservation means storage structure, commemoration or cognitive group

   2. Education is safeguarding of proficiency or information

   3. Learning takes on some diversity of performance, to a definite degree as a

       durable application. Education is relatively enduring, but this matter not to be

       kept in mind.

   4. Knowledge is acquirement or receiving of awareness

   5. Knowledge is a modification in demeanor. ‘learning is alteration of conduct

       inspired by the preceding activities. It is such development by which a person

       gets hold of a new form of belief, emotion and keenness.”

       B.F, (1938) Operant conditioning theory 11th Edition, New Delhi,



                                          11
A reasonable or eternal variation in a performance which takes place as a

consequence of resistant follow up.

Taylor, (1961) Definition of learning, Edition 7th New York.



“Education is approximately a stable incremental amendment of conduct which is

produced through action, special guidance or surveillance.”

Munn (1955) Learning techniques, 4th Edition, Oxford University London.



2.2    Concept of Learning

The education is a energetic course of action when a person goes away towards any

objective he faces new state of affairs. In order to face the new conditions he applies

new means for the declaration of such conditions.



The education is a stepwise development and it augments with the time as person gets

older. He expands knowledge and familiarity of unusual works. The mechanism of

learning is a sturdy method everyone discovers it gradually. No one can learn straight

because naturally it is a slow but continuous process.



Education is a purposive development and it is a cognizant process. Every one tries to

learn about all those things about which he knows something, because in the learning

phenomenon every one will get knowledge according to his determination and

devotion to learn. If he is interested to learn, he will get the more knowledge.




                                           12
Actually learning is a developmental process and when a person gets older he

becomes very dour and full-grown. The learning is an intellectual process so it is

adaptable. We have to legalize ourselves according to our social environment. When

any obstruction comes in our path we have to fight against it. It is a quandary

resolving process.



Monk, M & Dillion J. (2000) The nature of learning in Monk & Absorb, J (Eds),

Good practice in teaching, what research has to say, Buckingam: Open university

Press PP-72-87



2.2.1   Hypothesis About Learning

There are two hypothesis of education.

   1. Skinner’s operant training presumption.

   2. Piaget hypothesis



2.2.2   Conditioning Theory for Skinner’s Operant

“Operant training may be defined as any learning which is based on responses

dependent on strengthening and does not engage selection among tentatively defined

options.” Operant are measures which organisms introduce themselves i.e. walking, in

the offing, cheery, verbal communication, intake, and surveillance etc.



2.2.3   Operant Conditioning Constituents

   i) Consequence

   ii) Incentives

   iii) Responses



                                          13
These are the basic constituents in service taming theory of Skinner. Without these

gears hypothesis is worthless.



2.2.4   Concept & Function of Education Estimation

“Estimation is fundamental for the development and the intents and ambition

especially to move forward. One must has to decide that what will considered as

execution for the day and how that the novice teachers will know. One has also to

avoid influence the focus closely upon the trials of the day itself. The valid matters are

to do with what have been well-read, that how this will have an effect on instruction

and what will be premeditated for succeeding teaching.”



Keeping both the process and assessments are vital for triumph and need time. An

assessment in the morning can present view, which answers in adaptation of the after

noon’s designed program. The plan is very important for achievement. The days of

training are all doubtful to be entirely structured and run, and will not be exclusive

events however they must be well designed, controlled and run if not the contributor

will be reasonably infuriated at the wastage of their time.



We have to take it as materialization that review must be constituents of every

training project. This view is not unanimously stretched throughout the education

force. It is important to be clear about some of issues so it is accountable that the case

for an estimate of instructions will have to be argued.



Bob (1990) Evaluation is integral to plan and the aims is advanced, 6th Edition,

Cambridge University Press.



                                           14
2.2.5   Factors Effecting Learning

Learning process is centered on three 3 main points

   1- The learning whose behavior is to be modified or changed.

   2- The men and the material resources needed for providing desired training and

        experiences.

   3- The type of training and experiences are required to modify the learner

        behavior.



2.2.6 Relation to learning theory

The purpose of instructional technology, of course, is the promotion of learning.

Learning theory (education) has influenced Instructional design and Instructional

designers (the practitioners of Instructional Technology). Instructional Technologies

promote communication and interactivity. These two come together under the general

heading of Interaction.



Moore (1989) argues that there are three types of learner interaction (learner-content,

learner-instructor, and learner-learner interactions). In the years since Moore's article,

several philosophical views have surfaced that relate Instructional technology to these

types of interaction.



Most traditional researchers (those subscribing to Cognitivism) argue that learner-

content interaction is perhaps the most important endeavor of Instructional

technology. Some researchers (those subscribing to constructivism) argue that

Moore's social interactions, (learner-instructor and learner-learner interactions), are as

useful as learner-content interaction.



                                           15
2.3    Accomplishment of education

Furth steps have been taken to describe and evaluate education accomplishment in

many countries and through international projects during the nineties. All countries

and states within themselves have their own decisive factor of educational

accomplishment and have diverse ways of assessment and exposure. There is rising

interest in clearer characterization of presentation and realization and in the building

of age -rating model and other classification-extensive feat quantification. These

standards are being used for objective locate and in ruling about the superiority of

presentation of schools and teachers in some countries for example the United

Kingdom. An extensive nation wide system for reviewing, exposure on and

estimation of students’ educational realizations is in practice in France. The Goals

2000 Projects in USA engages principal nationwide and state political figures in

laying down national targets for primary and secondary teaching; it has led to state

values in course outline subject matter for evaluating student learning product. Even

the standards have also been laid down for teachers and there is mounting interest in

defining attainment both for learner and educator according to what they can do, as

well as what they know.



Most of the countries reporting on this target have furnished information of chief

development intended to observe and communicate about enhancement in student

accomplishment. Monitoring Learning Achievement (MLA) is the shared UNECO-

UNICEF venture, which has encouraged movement in more than 50 countries, was

founded in 1992 to monitor learning achievement around the globe at the grade 4

levels, and guided to explicit learning of the excellence of children’s education in

Africa, the Arab States, Latin America and Kazakhstan.



                                          16
When structural statements on the principles of education and on core curriculum

goals in a cross-section of countries are searched, it promptly turns out to be apparent

that relatively complex issues for reviewing performance, quality and progress arise.

In addition to a broad range of subject matter knowledge, these purposes and goals

commonly include- --- competencies, personal qualities, moral values, communal

skills, municipal responsibility, substantial development and health.



The educational success is not shrinkable to scores on cognitive tests. In some

countries’ reports, over- dependence on examinations as a determinant of student

knowledge is heavily criticized but is very complicated to change. The identical

pencil and paper tests-usually have a strong cognitive foregone conclusion but long

predictable and comprehensively used estimate measures--- sessional examinations of

subject matter substance mastery for choice rationale, teacher review of pupil

presentation and development in detailed core curriculum subject and education

dexterity. This does not go well with some students and of itself is not enough as a

gauge of education achievement for any student’s potential there is often an unsolved

anxiety between these and formal examination and testing necessities.



There is often an uncertain nervousness between these and formal examination and

testing requirements in addition to the mounting interest in defining minimum

standards of cognitive achievement levels by age and grade, countries are also setting

goals in terms of competencies and propensity which are believed to have a high

labour marketplace worth and broader sets of life skills including education

inclination and potential.




                                          17
The cognitive-oriented tests still lean to govern school evaluation, often dazzling

heavy stress on a narrow range of dexterity in the practice of teaching in several

countries, China and Japan; for example, have expressed great apprehension over the

clutches that assessment and examination have on educator, learner and families. The

calculated levels of success are time and again very high but thought to be too slender

and to depend excessively on rote learning and commit to memory. The nationwide

report from China makes the point fairly simple: how to deal with examinations have

power over the brains of students, teachers and school management. The objectives of

basic education are in this manner seriously vague. It is not enough just to amend the

examinations just to change this situation. New program of study, education

resources, didactic put into practice and evaluation events, are required, together with

the improvement of teacher education. As the writer of the national report on China

says, ‘strenuous everyday jobs indeed, but except reforms of this nature are assumed,

not only in the examination- subjugated countries, the sought-for improvement in the

nature and quality of education will not suffer.



The assorted discretionary procedures are used in assessing education achievement—

levels of speculation in education, continued existence and finishing point rates, gross

enrolment proportion, student-teacher percentage, levels of teacher education and the

supply and quality of text books and other materials. On these pointers, there are big

tribulations in many countries. In South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa, less than three

out of four enrollees reach rating 5. In the slightest industrial countries collectively,

only half make this level and many drop out after the first or second grade. The

student-staff ratios and levels of teacher education are meager in many countries. The

MLA Study reports raise serious questions about students learning inn the results



                                           18
reported in this context. While alternate measures and test scores inform only part of

the story, together with apprehension extensively articulated in the reports, they point

to that most countries are still far from achieving what they themselves identify as

acceptable learning product.



As the National assessment systems are becoming more frequent especially in

reasonably advanced counties, so National policy statements for civilizing educational

outcomes are usual. The new curriculum structure has been constructed during the

90s, setting out extensive sets of common acquaintance in Australia, Norway,

Sweden, Japan, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and Canadian provinces among

many others. Many other countries either have in position or are escalating their

nationwide and local systems to review what students are being imparted in school as

pointed out by the following examples: the National Elementary Achievement Test

(NEAT) in the Philippines and the National Primary School Achievement Test

(PSAT) in Malaysia; the national estimation of basic learning in Brazil (SAEB)

(mathematics, language and the main determinants of school accomplishment and

malfunction): move about towards national principles and state level testing in India:

new and additional devices to measure approved student learning outcomes at the

primary level and minimum proficiency testing in part of the Caribbean;

measurements of children’s learning attainments through the Southern African

Consortium for the Measurement of the Quality of Education (SACMEQ); and the

evaluation of basic education achievements at the grade 4 level in Africa, the Arab

States, and Kazakhstan through contribution in the UNESCO / UNICEF MLA

project.




                                          19
Most of individual countries often have proceedings of tendencies in student

performance including outcome in public examinations and assessment scores, and

they might be pieced together to supply single country or within-country outlines,

Even the full scope and range of what are considered to be core or essential learning.

There is no instant viewpoint of large scale international studies covering the whole

range of student learning. But there is abundance of scope for countries to

advancement of their won measures for monitoring and reviewing student learning,

for model and case studies to locate specific issues like urban-rural differences, and

for an improved international exchange of knowledge. Further progress can be made

in corresponding the relationship between enrolment and superiority of education and

instruction through the national and international efforts, for example, the Latin

American Educational Quality Assessment Laboratory (Laboratorio) and the Southern

African Consortium for Measuring Educational Quality (SACMEQ).



Although there is little encouragement to be drawn from them, but there are several

reports do provide brief and indirect estimation of learning conclusions. The careful

finale drawn in the combination report of the Asia-Pacific region perhaps best

characterize the overall situation wherever involvement and exterior conditions are

adverse: Pupil teacher ratios and survival rates are sometimes used as substitute for

learning quality. In the current case there is almost no dependable tendency figures

relating to education achievement that are based on measurement using similar

implements and measures. To that extent it may be said that the load of the

substantiation proposes that in many countries, there are problems of superiority in

the primary cycle.




                                         20
The educational and specialized know-how of teachers and the conditions under

which they work in many countries note flaws. The projects in Malawi, Sudan and the

Syrian Republic spotlight on improving the quality of education in rural areas; skilled

teachers are being posed from municipal to countryside areas in Guinea, higher entry

necessities are being set in Egypt and the Libyan Arab Republic , most countries in

Latin America and the Caribbean are moving towards motivation to draw and sustain

teachers; in Pakistan the Northern Areas Education Project is bringing in additional

teachers to meet requirements in disadvantaged areas. The pace of improvements in

teacher education are seen as necessary for rapidity in China’s Invigorating Education

Towards the 21st Century’ 1999’ Action Scheme .These are among many proposals

being taken to get better the quality and contribute of teachers.



2.4    Learning outcomes presumption and finale

It is very obvious that very few countries have carried out and set themselves the

Jomtien learning goal, let alone data of measurable gains against it. For many

countries, the conclusion is inevitable; in the words of the Arab Framework for

Action: Quality education is still an advantage for a few. From a global viewpoint,

this means, firstly, too few countries and, secondly, that within all countries there are

dissimilarities between very big ones and teaching of good quality enjoyed by the

minority and a noticeably lower and more variable quality of educational experience

for the mainstream. There should be improved efforts to establish clear, realistic and

relevant targets, so long as serious insufficiency and disparity in provision are

concerned, right to use and education occasion remain, for reasons of both socio-

economic competency and impartiality. Similarly, programmes are also desired to




                                           21
spotlight on specified difficulties. Furthermore the visible reporting devices should be

put in place.



Those countries have at least recognized structures for such evaluations that are

setting age / grade based standards of learning accomplishment. When there is general

contribution in schooling of medium to long interval and systems of monitoring over

time are in place, it will be possible in the next stage of EFA to create and employ

internationally comparable data of much greater expressive and logical value than

exist now. So far many countries are not in a position now to produce such data. For

them a more direct task is to describe achievable excellence intention and ways of

accomplishing them.



2.5    Preamble accomplishment

What is achievement? and, Is achievement something you have to be awarded to by

an official?    Is it that has to be prestigious? Suddenly a consideration, rather

something of these questions came to my mind. For some people, it could be that

achievement is something that is honored to you and is exposed. It could be a very

silent subject for others. Well this is my view on the matter that achievement is

something that accomplishes and it could be a superior or a minor goal. For example

you have your sight set on the top prize in writing and win it, for that would be an

achievement, but winning the soccer match can also be just another triumph. The

achievement often set off hand-in-hand with feelings of arrogance, delight and

release, the same emotions I saw in the students who won the awards. I’ve won my

share of awards in the past. In Grades 4 and 5 I won the academic medals for my time

and in Grade 6 I was graduated as the top student. My feeling was in fact just anxiety.



                                          22
When I had to walk up to the stage, shake the hand and receive the award, I felt

sickening. What made it worse was the speech and decription of what the award was

concerning. I was half- humiliated, standing up there in full uniform, holding my

award firmly. I just desired that I could’ve still be the victor, but by sitting down with

my friends at the same time.



Then another question came to my mind. Does the level of achievement depend on

what you are, or what are your goals? In my opinion, yes it does. If there is a hard

worker and struggling to make ends meet. One gets up early in the morning and sits in

office all day until the late afternoon. Maybe his goal is to just go through the week

without any trouble and problems. If there is a professional basketball player, his goal

would be to win the playoffs, so the point of accomplishment fluctuates and has many

varieties.



Monitoring Learning Achievement (MLA) means evaluating the acquaintance,

proficiency and standards acquired by students.

In UNICEF programmes it has been come to know that what children have learned in

the classroom, how much efficient schools are, whether children are passing external

(public) examinations for promotion and how children balance educationally with

others at nationwide and worldwide levels.



2.6     Languages

Language is the unique possession of man. It is an exceptional gift which man has

received from nature. Without language ,human civilization would have remained an




                                           23
impossibility language is ubiquitous our thoughts, dreams, prayers, Meditation,

relations, communications, virtual, learning etc. are all owed to language.



Encyclopedia Britannica defines language as “A system of convictional spoken or

written by means of which human beings as members of social and participants in its

culture communicate”.



Definition of language is not difficult to find almost all well-known linguists have

tried to define language in their own way.



Jhon Lyon, in his famous book “Language and Linguistics” has discussed five famous

definition of language.



According to E.Sapir (1921)

“Language is a purely human and non-instinctive method of communicating ideas,

emotions and desire by means of voluntarily produced symbols”.

B-Bloch and G.L.Trager (1942) wrote



“A language is system of arbitrary vocal symbols by means of which a Social group

Co-Operates”.

R.A Hall (1968) tells us that language is

“The Institution where by humans communicates and interacts with each other by

means of habitually used oral-audit or arbitrary symbols.

R.H Robins (1979)




                                             24
He does not give formal definition of language but points out certain fact related to

language, saying that “languages are symbol system almost wholly based on pure or

arbitrary conventions”.



According to N.Chomsky a language is

“A set of sentences each finite in length and constructed out of a finite set of

elements”.



The five definition of language quoted above serve to introduce some of the

properties which over essential features as we know them.



2.6.1   Evaluation at the level of school

In some countries test results are used as students’ evaluation as an entity of a

particular school. Sometimes rewards are given to schools with good results and

action plans are developed to streamline problems identified through the tests.



2.6.2   Evaluation on the basis of class-room

Literacy, numeracy and life dexterity can all be evaluated at the classroom level; these

factors take place simultaneously with education and are intended to improve the

student’s aptitude to



2.6.3   Externally public examinations

The external public examinations are used to select students for higher levels of

education. Unfortunately, the quality of such examinations is sometimes questionable.

For many countries this is the only method of assessing learning. This often leads to



                                            25
on the examinations as teachers are often confining themselves only to that part of

curriculum which they consider sufficient for. examinations.



2.6.4   Assessment of achievements at national and international level

What will be proper for higher levels of education systems of the nations rather than

the accomplishment of individual students? UNICEF has worked in partnership with

UNESCO on the Monitoring Learning Achievement project in nearly 50 countries in

areas of Literacy, Numeracy and Life expertise.



The Southern Africa Consortium for Monitoring Educational Quality has helped to

develop national evaluation in 14 countries in east and southern Africa and many

countries, mainly in Latin America, have developed their own national evaluation

systems. In 2002, UNICEF accomplished a study of national structure of didactic

attainment.



UNESCO’s Institute for Statistics is growing with UNICEF and others a new

assessment tool for literacy called LAMP. LAMP will employ a small model group in

each country and, exercising refined numerical mold, will envisage literacy levels

within the countries of the world. We anticipate literacy levels to drop because they

will be evaluate on the basis of an analysis rather than self-reporting, as is normally

the case now.



2.7     Achievement by testing

Testing achievement in Learning Disability Diagnosis




                                          26
2.7.1   Diagnosis of learning problems by testing

Testing of achievements is an important part of evaluation of prospective learning

disabilities. This testing of achievements is characteristically conducted in a one-on-

one assessment meeting using an identical test.



2.7.2   Homogeneous achievement test

The homogeneous achievement tests may review any or all of reading, mathematics,

and written language as well as subject areas such as science and social studies. These

tests are available to assess all grade levels and through maturity. The test measures

are highly planned so that the testing practice is the same for all students who attempt

them.



2.7.3   Score of standardized achievement tests

The students’ answers are analyzed and scored according to specific guidelines

provided by the test publisher. The results are premeditated into an unrefined score.

Afterwards the unconfined scores are converted into standard scores using suitable

chart for a child’s age, and in some cases time of school going is taken under

consideration, the resulting standard scores provide data to compare the student’s

abilities with his age fellows. The scores are interpreted by using terms such as

average, above average, and below average.



2.7.4   Use of achievement test results

The achievement tests are used to determine a student’s academic potency and weak

points. When compared to intelligence test scores, achievement scores notify whether

the child has the severe difference in ability and performance or not, that points out a



                                          27
learning disability diagnosis. These scores also provide important information to help

development in the child’s individual educational program.

The achievement testing can also play an active role in assessing an optional means of

diagnosis called Response to Intervention. (Ann Logsdon, 1998)



2.8    Calculation of basic learning

A growing number of reliable and validated tests are available that measure a child’s

cognitive, language, social and emotional development status, modified to the

particular perspective in which they are being applied. In Chile, for instance, a

locally-developed test has been premeditated to evaluate children’s abilities. These

measures are pointer of learning achievements during the early years. In many

surroundings, however, proper and agreed-upon measures require to be developed.

This is a vital job as the year 2000 approaches.



2.9    Assessmentation

According to Weeden P, Winter J and Broadfoot P (2002) evaluation is the procedure

of certifying, usually in measurable terms, knowledge, expertise, approach and

viewpoint.



According to Tanner H and Jones S appraisal is the method of accumulating,

blending, and understanding information to help in decision making. The assessment

is a general term that comprises all the ways teachers gather and use information in

their classrooms. A test is a formal and systematic, usually paper-and-pencil

procedure used to gather information about pupil’ presentation. The tests are only one

of the many types of assessment of information teachers deal with, and thus, testing is



                                           28
only one approach for evaluation. Other significant assessment policies are

explanation, oral questions, projects and portfolio.



2.9.1 History of assessmentation

According to Payne (2003), The idea of measurement informing order is

comparatively recent in education. In past decades, teachers would devise a unit of

learning that would characteristically include intention, teaching approach, and

resources. An estimation constituent the test or examination may or may not have

been integrated as parts of this blueprint (Cooper, 2006). The student’s marks in this

test or exam were taken as the marker of his or her perceptive of the topic.



The didactic assessment is the process of documenting, usually in quantifiable terms,

acquaintance, expertise, approach and viewpoint. The assessment can spotlight on the

individual student the learning community (class, workshop, or other organized group

of students), the organization, or the educational system as a whole. According to the

Flangnan (2006), “Studies of an academic or pragmatic character (including case

studies, portfolio studies, investigative, or tentative work) attention to the estimation

of student fitness and contentment in different educational circumstances are all

welcome, as are studies addressing issues of measurable standards and yardstick”.



It is imperative to become aware of that the final principles and assessment practices

in education depends on the notional structure of the practitioners and researchers,

the origin of knowledge and the process of learning with their postulation and values

about the nature of human mind.




                                           29
2.9.2   Assessed

Assessment frequently takes time which could be used for teaching purpose, so there

must be a good ground (opinion) for it. This comes under three subsequent headings:

1-determinant

2-analytic

3- collective.



According to Witt et all (1994), ‘There is one thing to say that perceptive will be

assessed but what will be reckoned as perceptive?’ The students must know it timely

in a lesson because this can shape that how they develop their approach to their

learning process. If a teacher expects an ornately integrated structure, he must be able

to demonstrate that what expectations he has. If application is to be reviewed in close

or distant contexts, or in both will request mean using thoughtful to explain a novel

event, to justify, to evaluate critically, or will advised to solve convenient problems.

Reckons to be a good clarification, validation or resolution needs to be identified.



The powerful valuation makes a teacher to monitor the supremacy of education so a

new action should be taken if the first is not enough to do well. It might also

demonstrate that students must have proficient. Gellman (1995) named it as

intermediary knowledge. When clarifications are rough and indistinct, it must be

shine over some features and others must be leaving out. Simple structures may

present in Solo terms. But overall consistency in the response is not present here.

There could be a suggestion that shows the ways for benefit of student and to support

him by fuller consistency.




                                           30
Estimation may also used to make a diagnosis for the reason of disappointment for a

counteractive action. The analytical estimation must be fairly brief (concise) and may

be in black and white, realistic or spoken. A good teacher may presume the cause of

the failure of a student by seeing error in answer. If set x = 39 and the student may has

forgot to include the 0 (zero), and may he does not know that how to deal with that 3

since it is less than 4, and so on. If teacher presumes that it is the last of these, he may

ask the student to try 696 ÷ 4 and 618 ÷ 4. The result which is concluded by student

may show the way to the teacher to appraise that what is the splitting up mean of the

student answer, gibbet the child’s learning that how to deal with that problem and

show the student that how to make sure the concluded answer.



Summative estimation is used to obtain evidence of a learning point of a student. It is

particularly important to give tasks which either cover a range of levels of

understanding or provide evidence of under standing at different levels.



2.9.3 Occurring of assessment

According to Kathy et all (2003), Any evaluation can occur during a path on more

than one instance, and it can take place at the end of a path. The former leans to be

incessant review, while the latter is terminal assessment which tends to be

comprehensive and is, for the student, a big event. A lot can suspend on it, and it often

sums up to a verdict of personal worth. The constant assessment, on the other hand,

extends the risk. It may be collective and decisive at the same time; since there may

be an occasion for the student and teacher to do something about poor-quality

education.




                                            31
An assessment is, in essence, another task to do with the topic to be understood. The

additional mental engagement in preparing for and doing the assessment may itself

enhance understanding. Usually, this is a good thing. The more learning there is, from

whatever source, the better it is for the student. However, when testing the effect of

some new teaching and learning strategy, this has to be taken into account. Is it the

strategy that produced the gain in understanding or was it the test of understanding

itself? Care has to be taken to use the same test across all strategies and groups of

learners. Even so, at the end of the day, all that can often be claimed is that it is a

particular strategy and test together that produced better results than some other

strategy and the test.



2.9.4   Perceptive judgment

To review knowledge, there is a diversity of traditions. Since the focal point here is to

evaluate perceptive and projects that could without problems be accomplished by

means of memorization alone are liable to be insufficient: they will not distinguish

between those who comprehend and those who do not. Even with an assignment with

the latent to check accepting, when we have the sense of hearing terminology and

observe proceedings we link with indulgent; it does not essentially signify that

understanding subsists. For instance, if a child is shown a jelly and invited to point out

whether it is a firm, a fluid or a gas, the child might say it is a firm. This could be a

speculation, it could be that the child distinguishes the jelly hold its shape, and it

could be that the child actually perceives the jelly’s characteristics closer to those of a

liquid but does not classify between liquids and solids. Nor does the mistaken word

essentially point out the nonexistence of indulgent. Another child may have said that

the jelly is sort of liquid because they see the jelly’s trend to take on the figure of the



                                            32
jug. This, however, may be nonentity more than a prerequisite of a fundamental

understanding that sys, on balance, jelly is a solid. In other words, early reaction,

exact or mistaken, may have to be inquired further.



According to Paul et all (2002), Verbal communication is time and again a rather

organized technique of explaining what we feel, believe, understand and see, and the

same word can mean slightly different things to different people. Children, in

particular, feel the limitations of their vocabulary and often indicate approximation in

their responses (it’s sort of like). The absence of the correct words may not mean an

absence of understanding. Equally, using the right words does not always indicate and

understanding. Non-verbal responses, such as pictures and actions, can also show

understanding. Most of us are also sensitive to non-verbal behaviour. Non-verbal cues

such as prolonged response time, reduced eye contact, body shifting, hand movement

and restlessness can indicate a lack of understanding. Gesture and speech also

normally co-operate in conveying meaning and a mismatch between words and hand

gestures can indicate a misunderstanding, even though the words are as stated by Kay

(2005).



However, like other pointer of perceptive, none of these is perfect and the absence of

evidence does not necessarily indicate the want of understanding. This makes it wiser

to use a range of approaches rather than to rely on only one.




                                          33
2.9.5   Estimational variety

According to John (2002), Although the concept of evaluation is normally more

intricate than the following types recommended, by means of the following

characteristics, estimation is frequently at odds for the sake of expediency:



1. Summative estimation

This type of assessment is carried out at the end of any course or project. In this

estimation the participants are awarded with grades.




2. Educative estimation

This type of assessment is taken out during the project or course through out the

whole session. It is also termed as Formative estimation. It is used to abet the

learning.




3. Subjective estimation

This is the type of assessment in which the answer can be written as more than one or

two forms.



4. Objective estimation

This is the type of assessment in which estimation is taken as in the form of question

which contains only a one correct answer.




                                            34
5. Formal estimation

An assessment in which the assessment made by written documents such as paper,

quiz or test is taken and grades or numerical score is awarded to all the participants.



6. Informal estimation

This an assessment in which the estimation made by observations, rating scales,

portfolio, peer, inventories, self evaluation, check lists, rubrics and by taking part in

several activities.



2.10 PEF Punjab education foundation

An overture:

a.      PEF narration:

PUNJAB EDUCATION FOUNDATION is an autonomous statutory body established

under an ACT of the provincial assembly with its head office at Lahore .The Punjab

Education Foundation has been restructured under the Punjab Education Foundation

Act-XII of 2004 for the promotion of education, specially encouraging and supporting

the efforts of the private sector in providing education to the poor, through public

private partnership on non-commercial/ non-profit basis.



b.      Revelation of PEF:

The promotion of quality education through Public Private Partnership, encouraging

and supporting the efforts of private sector through technical and financial assistance.

To provide free of cost educational opportunities to the poor.




                                           35
c.      Criteria of PEF for Private Schools:

Education up to secondary level in public sector is free now and the students in

government schools are provided free textbooks. But still low income households

prefer to send their children to private schools, which have come to be identified with

a measure of quality education. In urban areas where the social demand for education

is strong, private educational institutions thrive. The Punjab Education Foundation

(PEF) has been restructured as an autonomous organization by an act of parliament in

2004 to support the efforts of the private sector in providing quality education to poor

segment of the society. The PEF has been assigned the statutory responsibility to

promote education through private educational institutions by establishing and

nurturing Public Private Partnership.



2.13.1 Features of PEF Program

PEF—FAS is the flagship program of the Punjab Education Foundation to encourage

and promote the access to and improve the quality of education. PEF has

demonstrated that through public private partnership, better quality education can be

provided at much less cost as compared to the cost by the Government of Punjab to

educate a child in the public schooling system. The target schools under PEF-FAS are

financed up to a maximum of Rs.350 per month per child for Elementary Classes and

Rs.400 for Secondary Classes as tuition fees and related/allied charges.

     a. The financial assistance to the recipient schools is linked with the satisfactory

        performance of the schools in Quality Assurance Test (QAT). Financial

        assistance will be discontinued in case the school does not meet the quality

        standards set by the PEF for QAT amended from time to time by Board Of

        Directors (BOD).



                                           36
       b. Schools are regularly monitored by PEF staff to ensure the basic amenities and

          teaching aids.

       c. Good performance schools are awarded based on the QAT result. Modalities

          are decided by BOD.



2.13.2 Criteria for selection and enrollment of a child to private educational

          institutions

After entering into partnership with PEF under FAS program, the recipient schools

shall not charge anything in any form from the students i.e. fines, recreation, books

fee. Stationery etc.



2.13.3 The subsequent slant is generally adopted for selection of private schools

   i.     An advertisement would be placed in national dailies;

 ii.      Applications will be short listed as per criteria set by BOD.

 iii.     Schools will be evaluated based on their performance in QAT and any other

          criteria set by BOD.

 iv.      The foundation will physically verify the information any time without prior

          notice.

  v.      Selection of schools will be made subject to the availability of funds with

          Government.

 vi.      In response to the advertisement, the private schools may apply to the Punjab

          Education Foundation.



2.13.4 Private schools institution selection criteria

1. Minimum enrollment of 100 students and maximum of 500 students.



                                             37
Preference to private schools located in rural areas.

Physical infrastructure of schools in terms of building, classrooms, library and

laboratories (in case of elementary and secondary schools) should be hygienic,

congenial and conducive.



The school should have qualified faculty.

The students of the short listed schools will be administered a skill-based test in

English, Urdu, Science and Sciencebefore entering into partnership agreement.

Girls’ education is the top priority and partnership with girls’ schools under PEF-FAS

will be encouraged.

Any other criteria set by PEF management.



Schools will be evaluated based upon their performance in Preliminary QAT and

other criteria set by BOD.



2.13.5 Partnership terms

These terms are changeable and PEF-BOD reserves the rights to change these

partnership terms any time with out prior notice to the partner schools.

The Punjab Education Foundation is first party and the school administration is called

second party in this agreement.



That the partnership agreement shall commence on the date on which it is executed

and signed and shall remain in force for five years or terminated by the first party on

violation by the second party of any stipulation of this instrument.




                                            38
o That the second party shall register itself with the District Registration

   Authority within one year after entering into partnership with the first party

   and in default thereof the first party may discontinue financial assistance under

   this partnership agreement.

o That the financial assistance to be provided to the second party will amount to

   Rs. 350/- for elementary and Rs. 400/- for Secondary classes per child enrolled

   per month to cover tuition fees stationary charges, paper money and allied

   charges like lab, library, co-curricular activities etc. At the sole discretion of

   the Board of Directors of the First Party this amount may be increased to

   account for inflation and/or any other consideration.

o That from the date of execution of this agreement of partnership the second

   party shall not charge any tuition fee from enrolled students in whatsoever

   form, including, but not restricted to, fines, recreation, stationery, class/tours,

   admission charges, registration fees, etc. Notified examination fees by the

   concerned Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education may, however, be

   collected from the students against a token of receipt, with the prior approval

   of the First Party.

o That the Second party must ensure that the students of all relevant classes

   appear in the annual tests conducted by the Punjab Examination Commission

   (PEC). The second party will submit whatever information the first party

   requires with respect to PEC examination including results etc. The second

   party will be permitted to collect from the students notified fees required by

   the PEC for participation in the said examination provided written consent has

   been obtained from the first party.




                                         39
o That in case of outstanding performance by the second party in providing

   quality education, determined on the basis of student learning outcomes

   assessed through six monthly Quality Assurance Tests (QAT),administered

   under the auspices of first party, the Board of Directors of the first party may

   give awards to the second party and/or its staff. The rules and the criteria for

   award of such incentives shall be determined by the Board of Directors of the

   first party.

o That if enrolment of the second party has increased or declined during the

   period since the last review and verification of the level of enrolment then

   financial assistance to the second party will be revised for the subsequent

   period on the basis of variance in the enrolment.

o That the physical infrastructure of schools in terms of building, class rooms,

   toilets, library and laboratories (in case of elementary and secondary schools)

   must be hygienic, congenial, conducive and airy according to the standards

   specified by first party.

o That the first party may carry out class-wise random inspections of the second

   party to check/verify the veracity of the first party reported enrolment,

   improvements made in the infrastructure and standards of cleanliness and

   hygiene at any time without notice during working hours of the second party.

   Students and teachers of the school being supported under the PEF-FAS

   program may also be interviewed and must be directly accessible to the

   representatives of the first party without any representative of the school

   administration being present during the conduct of this exercise. In case

   enrollment data has been reported incorrectly or in case of any other false

   statement as verified by observation or by documentation maintained by the



                                      40
   school or based on testimonials of students or teachers of the second party, the

   first party will reserve the right to penalize or to discontinue forthwith any

   financial assistance, without serving any prior notice.

o That the first party will administer bi-annual tests to the students of the second

   party to assess eligibility for continued financial assistance under this

   partnership. The second party is required to maintain quality standards by

   ensuring the students of the school pass the Quality Assurance Tests (QATs),

   as per criteria fixed by BoD of PEF, conducted by, or on behalf of, the first

   party. In case of failure of the second party in these Tests, the first party

   reserves the right to immediately terminate any financial assistance under this

   partnership agreement.

o That the second party must abide by the rules and regulations, timing and

   schedules, format and method prescribed by the first party for the overall

   school educational environment, campus hygiene and bi-annual QATs. This

   agreement will only be extended after satisfactory performance of the second

   party.

o That the second party will display on its main gate or any other prominent

   place a board the format of which the first party will provide stating the

   provision of free education to children enrolled in the educational institution

   being supported under the PEF-FAS Program.

o That by the 5th day of every month, the second party shall communicate

   accurate figures of the enrolment of the institutions, on forms supplied by first

   party, providing class-wise break-up of the enrolment. In case of co-

   educational institutions, gender-wise information of enrolment shall also be

   submitted. In case of late submission of enrolment data, financial assistance



                                      41
   will be provided on the basis of the data communicated and recorded in the

   last available inspection report of the first party. Information regarding

   physical infrastructure if the changes are made in present building

   infrastructure will be provided to the first party on monthly basis along with

   building map.

o That the second party will not conduct any after-hours/second-time classes

   within its premises unless and until the service is being extended to the

   students free of cost. The second party will not conduct tuition academies or

   any other profit making venture within the premises of the institution declared

   as under this partnership agreement.

o That this agreement is non-transferable and, therefore, in case of sale of school

   to a third party this contract will stand cancelled automatically. In case of any

   doubts pertaining to ownership of the school or any disputes/civil litigation

   thereof regarding the second party that develop before or after entering into

   this partnership, the first party may cancel the partnership agreement

   unilaterally without notice or consent of the second party.

o That the teacher student ratio should not exceed 30 students per teacher and no

   single room may host more than one class at one time.

o That the minimum strength of enrolment should not be less than 100 students

   and the maximum number of the students should not be more than 500 unless

   the first party has given prior approval for the increase in enrolment of the

   second party, based on outstanding performance of the second party in QATs.

   The second party must ensure the provision of proper physical infrastructure

   and all relevant facilities for additional students, the availability of which will




                                       42
   be inspected and approved by a representative of the first party, before the

   second party can enroll more students.

o That the first party will exercise a no-tolerance policy against overcrowding. If

   the second party is discovered to be overcrowded or congested the first party

   will impose heavy penalties upon the second party and/or may cancel this

   partnership agreement and cease all financial support to the second party

   forthwith. The second party will observe all rules and regulations regarding

   school timings and holidays, failing which PEF may charge the penalties or

   what so ever. Provision of furniture, light system ventilation etc will be

   responsibility of the second party, failing which PEF management may impose

   penalties as per their judgment.

o That public money is a sacred trust with the first party and it is the statutory

   responsibility of the first party to ensure that funds are utilized for the

   purposes that they are provided. Therefore, in the event of an educational

   institution violating any of the terms and conditions of this agreement the first

   party reserves the right to withdraw its financial support with immediate

   effect. On complaints of charging fee, fine or any charges whatsoever without

   the prior consent of the first party, or any other violation of this agreement, the

   first party reserves the right to cancel the agreement forthwith without giving

   any prior notice or impose penalty as per judgment.

o That this agreement is being made on provisional basis. The administration of

   the second party is hereby held responsible for ensuring the availability of

   decent quality infrastructure, furniture and hygienic, congenial and conducive

   conditions within 6 months of the date of execution of this partnership

   agreement.



                                       43
   o That the second party shall not spend the financial assistance on any other

       educational institution other than the one named in the agreement. The

       Administration shall devote its whole time diligently to promote the cause of

       education and to comply with, in letter and spirit, the terms and conditions of

       this agreement.

   o That in the case of the demise of the principal/entrepreneur/the signatory of

       the agreement, his/her successor assignee will be deemed to have

       automatically become a party and shall be bound to observe all the terms and

       conditions of this agreement. Second party is required to submit its ‘next of

       kin’ declaration who would assume the responsibilities as per this agreement,

       in case of demise or any event/accident making the original signatory

       incapable of agreement execution.

   o That this document is executed to provide financial assistance under the

       scheme of FAS only to the second party on the recommendation and approval

       of the Board of Directors of the first party. In case of any violation by the

       second party of the above said clause(s), the first party reserves the right to

       take any legal action or to initiate proceedings under the rule including penalty

       or cancellation of the agreement depending upon the nature of the violation.

       The expenses occurred upon the case of any court proceeding shall be borne

       by the second party.



2.13.7 Payment mode

Payments will be made to the schools by PEF through Bank of Punjab online in

respective Tehsil/District.




                                           44
2.13.8 (QAT) Quality Assurance Test

QAT will be the critical chief determinant for continuing financial assistance to an

educational institution. The Academic Development Unit (ADU) will ensure that the

processes of the examination system are secure and transparent. Absolute fairness,

impartiality and professionalism will be the hallmark of QAT.



2.14 PEF departments for Monitoring & Evaluation

Monitoring and Evaluation plays a pivotal role in success of any project. Projects

which have robust Monitoring and Evaluation (M & E) systems are better managed,

more likely to be able to explain the reasons behind project successes and failures.

The benefits of project evaluation can be over-stressed and it is recommended that all

projects under take at least an internal evaluation. Keeping in view the same

philosophy, PEF has established a separate M & E wing, with the intention of

bringing in continuous improvement through rigorous surveillance in all programs

initiated by PEF. One of the substantial accomplishments by M & E wing is

development of Monitoring and Evaluation Information Management System

(MEIMS) for tabulation and timely dissemination of reports to all concerned. Till date

all districts of FAS and TICSS partner schools have been covered, while random

monitoring of CBT partners and EVS children is taking place simultaneously. M & E

intends to meliorate complete process flow with identification of grey areas and their

rectification.



2.15 Functions of PEF

The functions of the Foundation shall be to:-




                                          45
   1. Provide financial assistance for the establishment, expansion, improvement,

       and management of educational institutions and allied projects.

   2. Provide incentives to students, teachers, and Educational Institutions.

   3. Promote public-private partnerships relating to education.

   4. Provide technical assistance to Educational Institutions for testing policy

       interventions and innovative programmes for replication.

   5. Rank private educational institutions based on educational standards.

   6. Raise funds through donations, grants, contributions, subscriptions etc.

   7. Assist Educational Institutions in capacity building, including training of

       teachers.

   8. Undertake any other function as may be assigned to it by the Board with the

       approval of the Government.



2.16 (EVS) Education Voucher Scheme

2.16.1 An Overview

Education Voucher Scheme (EVS) as the name suggests is one of PEF’s unique

programs, which aims to provide quality education to children with weak educational

prospects of marginalized and less affluent areas in urban slums and shanty towns of

Punjab.



It is also considered an appropriate intervention for reducing inequities arising from

disparities in quality and cost between public and private schools. It starts of with a

brief background of EVS evolution, followed by field visit report, voucher

mechanism, schools visited, local office identified, work plan, monitoring and

evaluation, financial aspects and summary of tabulated data. Hence providing a brief



                                          46
but concise overview of all the efforts put in so far for launch of successful program

named Education Voucher Scheme.



2.16.2 Historical Background

EVS evolved as a brain child in one of Board of Directors meeting with the sole

purpose of catering to educational needs of children, dwelling in poor slums/ Kachi

Abadis of Punjab. The initial forays of Dr A.B Malik (Managing Director) and other

colleagues helped to prepare a document for discussion under the able guidance of Mr

Shahid H Kardar, Chairman of the Foundation. PEF entered into an agreement with

The Open Society Institute (OSI) New York for designing of pilot Voucher Scheme

for low income households.



In this regard PEF benefited from the previous surveys conducted by the Local

Government and Rural Development Department, Directorate of Kachi Abadis, Govt

of Punjab and Lahore Development Authority. The Survey was conducted in 1983

and has been used as a bench mark for fresh assortment for EVS.



2.17   Action of PEF

No.PAP-Legis-2(24)/2003/623. The Punjab Education Foundation Bill 2003, having

been passed by the Provincial Assembly of the Punjab on 26 May 2004, and assented

to by the Governor of the Punjab on 5 June 2004, is hereby published as an Act of the

Provincial Assembly of the Punjab.




                                         47
2.17.1 Preface

Whereas it is expedient to restructure the Punjab Education Foundation for the

promotion of education, specifically encouraging and supporting the efforts of the

private sector in providing education to the poor.



2.17.2 Short label, extent and insigation

   a. This Act may be called the Punjab Education Foundation Act, 2004.

   b. It extends to the whole of the Punjab.

   c. It shall come into force at once.



2.17.3 Some important definitions

   o “Act” means the Punjab Education Foundation Act, 2004;

   o a“Board” means the Board of Directors constituted under section 5;.

   o “Chairperson” means the Chairperson of the Board elected under section 5;

   o “Directors” means the Director of the Board;

   o “Educational institution” means a primary, middle, high and higher secondary

       school, teacher training institution, special education institution, and any other

       institution engaged in education-related activities;

   o “Financial assistance” includes grants, loans, scholarships, stipends, and

       rewards;

   o “Foundation” means the Punjab Education Foundation established under

       section 3;

   o “Fund” means the Fund established under section 10;

   o “Government” means the Government of the Punjab;

   o “Grant-in-aid” means monies that are non-refundable;



                                           48
   o “Loan” means a refundable sum of money with or without mark up/service

       charge;

   o “Managing Director” means the Managing Director of the Foundation;

   o “Non-governmental organization (NGO)”             means    a    non-governmental

       organization registered as such under the laws of Pakistan;

   o “Prescribed” means prescribed by rules made under this Act; and

   o “Quorum means” quorum of the meeting of the Board specified in section

       5(6).



2.17.4 Foundation establishment

   o There shall be established a Punjab Education Foundation.

   o It shall be a body corporate having perpetual succession and a common seal

       with power to hold and dispose of moveable property and to acquire, hold, and

       sell immoveable property with the approval of the Government and shall by

       the said name sue and be sued.

   o The Head office of the Foundation shall be at Lahore.



2.17.5 Foundation functions

The functions of the Foundation shall be to-

   o Provide financial assistance for the establishment, expansion, improvement,

       and management of educational institutions and allied projects;

   o Provide incentives to students, teachers, and Educational Institutions;

   o Promote public-private partnerships relating to education;

   o Provide technical assistance to Educational Institutions for testing policy

       interventions and innovative programmes for replication;



                                          49
   o Rank private educational institutions based on educational standards;

   o Raise funds through donations, grants, contributions, subscriptions etc.;

   o Assist Educational Institutions in capacity building, including training of

      teachers; and

   o Undertake any other function as may be assigned to it by the Board with the

      approval of the Government;



2.17.6 Directorate board

   o The executive authority and managing of the Foundation shall vest in the

      Board.

   o The Board shall consist of fifteen Directors including the Chairperson to be

      appointed by the Government in the following manner, namely:-

   o Eight Directors including at least three women from the private sector from

      amongst NGOs, philanthropists, technocrats, and academicians;

   o Secretary to Government of the Punjab, Finance Department, or his nominee

      not below the rank of Additional Secretary;

   o Secretary to Government of the Punjab, Education Department, or his nominee

      not below the rank of Additional Secretary;

   o Secretary to Government of the Punjab, Literacy and Non Formal Basic

      Education Department, or his nominee not below the rank of Additional

      Secretary;

   o Secretary to Government of the Punjab, Social Welfare Department or his

      nominee not below the rank of Deputy Secretary;

   o Secretary to Government of the Punjab, Planning and Development

      Department, or his nominee not below the rank of Chief of Section;



                                         50
   o Vice Chancellor of the University of Education established by Government;

      and

   o Managing Director who shall also be the Secretary of the Board.

   o The Chairperson shall be elected by the Board from amongst the non-official

      Directors for a period of three years..

   o The Directors, other than ex-officio Directors, shall hold office for a term of

      three years and shall be eligible for re-appointment. The retiring Directors

      shall continue to perform their functions till their successors are appointed.

   o No non-official Director, including the Chairperson, shall be eligible to be

      appointed for a third term.

   o Six Directors including at least three Directors from private sector shall

      constitute the quorum.

   o The Board meeting shall be presided over by the Chairperson or, in his

      absence, by a Director duly nominated by the Chairperson.

   o The Board shall appoint the employees and other functionaries of the

      Foundation and determine the terms and conditions of their employment.

   o No act or proceedings of the Board shall be invalid merely on the ground of

      the existence of any vacancy or any defect in the constitution of the Board.

   o The Board may delegate any of its powers to the Managing Director to enable

      him to carry out its functions.



2.17.8 Director of management (M.D)

   o The Board shall appoint a Managing Director who shall be the Chief

      Executive of the Foundation.




                                          51
   o The Managing Director may exercise all such powers and do all acts and

       things as authorized by the Board.

   o Grants made by Government and the Federal Government;.

   o Income from investments made by the Foundation;

   o Donations and endowments;

   o Revolving funds placed by the Government at the disposal of the Foundation;

   o Grants mad by the Local Bodies; and

   o All other sums received by the Foundation and incomes from other sources.

   o The Fund shall be kept in such custody and shall be utilized and regulated in

       such manner as may be prescribed.



2.17.9 Casual vacancy filling

Any vacancy caused due to removal or permanent absence of a Director, other than an

ex-officio member, shall be filled in by a person nominated by the Government and

the person so nominated shall hold office for the unexpired period of the term of his

predecessor.



2.17.10 Director registration

A Director other than an ex-officio Director, may at any time, resign his office by

addressing a letter to the Chairperson; provided that the resignation shall not take

effect until it has been accepted by the Government.



2.17.11 Director removal

A director of a board may remove by Government in any circumstances as prescribed.




                                            52
2.17.12 Account (fund)

There shall be established an account which will invest in the Foundation and to

which will be credited:-

i.      Income from investment made by the foundation.

 ii.    Grants made by the Provincial, Federal, Governments and the local bodies.

 iii.   Revolving funds placed by the Government at the disposal of foundation.

 iv.    Endowments, donations and subscriptions are taken from an individual or

        from an organization.

  v.    Endowments, donations, and grants taken from international organizations are

        required to approve the subject from Government.

 vi.    All other arithmetical sums will be received by the Foundation from any other

        way.

  a.    The Fund must be kept in supervision and must be used and synchronized in

        such a way as may be demostrated by the Board.

  b.    The funds of the Foundation must be maintained in such manner as may be

        prescribed and must be audited by an auditor, to be appointed by the

        Government, being a person who is a Chartered Accountant within the

        meaning of the Chartered Accountants Ordinance, 1961 (X of 1961).

  c.    The Managing Director (M.D) must have to submit the annual audited

        statement funds of the foundation, along with the report of auditor at the close

        of each financial year.

  d.    The Managing Director (M.D) also have to submit the final report of the

        activities to the Board at the end of each financial year.




                                            53
2.18 Committees

Board may constitute different committees such as advisory, technical, financial, and

other committees as it is essential to carry out the purposes of this Act. The Board

may determine the composition and functions of these committees.



2.18.1 Confirmation of decisions

The Chairman and the Managing Director will sign to legitimate all the decisions of

the Board.



2.18.2 Rules and regulations

The Government may by give a notification or it may make rules for carrying out the

purposes of this Act.



Rules framed there under and subject to the provisions of this Act, the Board along

with the previous approval of the Government, make rules and regulations as it may

be essential to carry out the purposes of this Act.



2.18.3 Compensation

Prosecution or other proceedings shall lie against any employee or officer of the

Foundation or any other person who is performing any function under this act or

exercising any power or the rules or regulations are made in good faith to do well.



2.18.4 Revoke and savings

On commencement of this Act:-




                                            54
   o The Punjab Education Foundation established under the Punjab Education

       Foundation Act 1991 (I of 1991), shall stand dissolved.

   o The Punjab Education Foundation Act 1991 (I of 1991), shall repealed;

   o The liabilities and assets that are created under the said repealed Act shall

       stand transferred to the Foundation;

   o All rules which are under the Punjab Education Foundation Act, 1991, shall

       remain in force as far as they are not conflicting with the provisions of this Act

       until the Rules are framed under this Act.

   o Save it as it is otherwise specifically provided, nothing in this Act or any

       repeal effected in this manner it will affect or be deemed to affect anything

       done, commenced proceeding, action taken, rules and regulation, orders,

       mortgages or agreement, appointments, given directions or issued or executed

       instruments, under or in pursuance of any law repealed or amended by this

       Act.

   o Such thing, proceedings, action, orders, rules and regulations, mortgages,

       appointments, agreements, instruments shall or directions. if in force at the

       commencement of this Act and not conflicting with any of the provisions of

       this Act, continue to be in force, and have effect as if it were respectively

       executed or issued, given, directed, made, commenced taken or done, under

       this Act.



2.19 (PEF CBT) Cluster based training

2.19.1 An overview

The poor educational learning outcomes of students have become a matter of great

concern for parents, public and private sector managers of education. The deficient



                                          55
human capital in education sector has a major constraining influence on the quest for

achievement of excellence in the field of quality education.



The lack of qualified manpower in teaching profession at primary, secondary, higher

secondary and tertiary level has impeded the national strategies aimed at optimal

service delivery mechanism for quality education and the umpteen desires of the

stakeholders to have quality premier institutions in public and private sector,

essentially remained unfulfilled, barring a few honorable exceptions.



At the moment, approximately, 40% educational institutions in urban areas and more

than 30% in rural areas in the Province of Punjab are being run and managed in the

private sector. The private educational institutions have a vast and varied range,

starting from the elite school systems, to average schools and low-cost private

educational institutions. The low-cost educational institutions not only lack proper

physical infrastructure but are also deficient in human capital in the shape of qualified

teachers.



The process of human development is time consuming, slow and gradual. The

processes essentially demand patience, dedication, political will and investments. It

always takes an extra mile at the national level in terms of policy-making theatrics, to

build the social capital with assimilated didactic resource base and the right capacity

to exercise the analogical deductions from the knowledge base. If an organization or

institution is unable to generate the requisite social capital to implement the policies

and programs and give them the confidence through continuous capacity building,

then in the final analysis it tantamount to both policy and institutional failure.



                                            56
In case of educational institutions and quality teachers, the teachers and teachers alone

are the agents of change: the real hope for the future of communities and the

repositories of knowledge, expertise, traditions and values. The investment in

professional development of teachers is therefore the right investment for the

formation of human capital and decidedly the most accurate investment in future.



2.19.2 Foundation restructuring

Under the Punjab Education Foundation (PEF) Act-2004, the organization has been

re-structured as an autonomous and independent institution with the clear mandate for

the promotion of education specifically encouraging and supporting the efforts of the

private sector in providing education to the poor and under privileged masses.



The vision of the foundation is, ‘Promote quality education through Public-Private

Partnership, encourage and support the efforts of private sector through technical and

financial assistance, innovate and develop new instruments and enable the private

educational institutions to champion the wider educational opportunities at affordable

cost to the poor’. The Board of Directors of PEF is fully cognizant of the view that the

objective of Cluster Based Training (CBT) in the Province can best be achieved in

Public Private Partnership.



The Board of Directors of the Punjab Education Foundation has emphasized on the

quality of instruction in schools/private educational institutions catering to less

privileged households in urban and rural areas and impact the learning outcomes of

the students. The fact remains that the teachers of schools are generally untrained and




                                           57
paid marginal salaries that would be un-attractive for quality teachers of Mathematics,

Sciences and English.



2.19.3 (ADU) Academic development unit

The core functions of the Punjab Education Foundation include the training of the

teachers and promotion of public-private partnership (PPP) in the field of education.

Capacity building of the teaching staff of the less affluent, underprivileged and

marginalized schools and forging public-private partnerships for the provision of

quality education is the cherished aim of the Strategy Committee constituted by the

Board.



The core functions of the Punjab Education Foundation include the training of the

teachers and promotion of public-private partnership (PPP) in the field of education.

Capacity building of the teaching staff of the less affluent, underprivileged and

marginalized schools and forging public-private partnerships for the provision of

quality education is the cherished aim of the Strategy Committee constituted by the

Board. To actualize the above cited objective, PEF has established an Academic

Development Unit (ADU). It is headed by a Project Officer, has a core team of 5

subject specialists and couple of support staff. As per guidance of Board of Directors,

5 subject Specialists (i.e., English, Mathematics, Biology, Physics and Chemistry)

have also been recruited. ADU has started delivering under the guidance of Board of

Directors (BOD) of Punjab Education Foundation.




                                          58
2.19.4 (CBT) Cluster based training in private-public partnership

According to PEF, "Cluster" may be termed as "selection of a venue for conducting

training, and inviting the teachers of 7-10 private school falling in close proximity

(walking/transportable distance), thus making a group of 35-50 participants having

similar training needs, though diversified educational background".



The CBT is being conducted mainly on the content knowledge of Mathematics,

English, Science, Physics, Chemistry and Biology. The primary thrust is in urban,

semi-urban and rural areas of the province. In addition few sessions are also held to

meet the training needs related to classroom management, teaching slow learners,

lesson planning, group work, use of AV aids, joyful and activity based teaching etc.

The rationale and basic objectives of CBTs' is to:

   1. Create a best learning environment.

   2. To provide more shareable resources for the cluster schools in outlying area.

        Here the school teachers and head meet together and share there ideas,

        resources and different trainings.            It can be easily understand that

        these activities cannot be easily provided I their own schools. Overcoming

        isolation and easily accessible training gives so many advantages to a teacher

        and help him to focus at one point. The value of team work and sharing the

        feedback builds a strong network.

   3.   To introduce new methods of education and to offer the teachers in these

        schools and provide them a chance to share the latest ideas and views being

        explored today. It makes a teaching methodology of a teacher more effective.




                                             59
It is expected that as a result of CBT the:

   4. Teachers will develop pedagogical skills by taking parts in the school

       programs.

   5. The teacher will be more comfortable in the use of that material so as a result

       of this, his training and teaching methodology will improve. And he will

       prepare his lesson and leaning will be more effectively

   6. Indirect beneficiaries would be peers and families of those who have

       participated in the program.



Following is the selection criteria for the schools:

   7. The fee structure of these institutes must be less than Rs.400/-.

   8. The education level is Primary, Elementary or Secondary.

   9. Those who are willing for partnership or collaboration with these institutes.

   10. Geographical contiguity of these institutes in the cluster, with private and

       government institutes.

        Following are some of the salient features of CBT:

   11. The teachers who are taking part and attending the workshops will be awarded

       as a financial incentive of Rs.100 per day.

   12. Payment to Resource persons in the form of cross-cheque, and its fee range is

       Rs. 2000/- and it will enhance in case of outstations.

   13. Those participants that are coming from other schools will make their own

       transport arrangement.

   14. In those schools where the workshop will be held, the participant will be

       entertained with reasonable refreshment at the concluding of the daily session




                                              60
       by PEF in collaboration with the school. Total payment will be made by a

       crossed cheque.

   15. On the completion of cluster training with success, the participant teachers

       will be awarded with PEF Course Completion Certificates.

   16. The host school will provide infrastructural facilities.



The trainees, in CBT, are invited according to 3 categories:

   a. Teaching from 1-5 i.e., primary level.

   b. Teaching from 6-8 i.e., elementary level.

   c. Teaching from 9-10 i.e., secondary level.



It has been learnt that though the teachers are categorized according to the above

mentioned level, majority of the primary level teachers are usually teaching subjects

of elementary and secondary level, too. For example, the teachers teaching at

elementary level may also be teaching at secondary level. It was observed in Kasur

that secondary class teachers were also teaching at higher secondary level. Similarly

majority of the teachers were teaching more than 2 subjects.



Based upon all these observations it is tried to conduct training at primary level by

mixing 2-3 subjects i.e., English, Scienceand Science. While for higher level the

effort is to mix only 2 subjects per 6 days training session.



Learning from its experience of initial workshops, PEF now has standardized its

schedule in terms of at least 4 hrs. per day and at least 6 days for 1 CBT.




                                           61
Before the start of CBT, the leading entrepreneurs and the managers of the private

educational institutions were consulted to explore the possibility of teachers training

by the PEF in Public Private Partnership and the consequent quantifiable impact

assessment in terms of quality education on the learning outcomes of the students,

being the ultimate beneficiaries. The gist of observations and crux of the field survey

has been very encouraging for forging Public Private Partnership:-



A majority of the private educational institutions are enthusiastic for the teachers

training and capacity development of the staff in Public Private Partnership.



The private educational institutions are willing to share their available resources in

terms of infrastructure, laboratories, teaching and ancillary staff etc. for the Cluster

Based Training (CBT) and professional development.



\The private education institutions are willing to enter into Public Private Partnership

with the Punjab Education Foundation and constitute a cluster of private educational

institutions for CBT.



The management of the educational institutions is willing to send their teachers for

training in the clusters established by the Punjab Education Foundation.

Most of the private educational institutions insist on issuance of a certificate at the

completion of the training workshops/CBT.



The history of PEF's experience to conduct trainings for the teachers of private

educational institutions can be divided in 3 phases;



                                          62
2.19.5 Fast track initiative/short term measure

PEsF started its venture by nominating the teachers of the private educational

institutions in leading teachers training institutes. 67 teachers of 10 private schools

were trained at Ali Institute of Education (AIE). AIE imparted training in

communication skills and pedagogy upto elementary level. This however was learnt

that the institution did not have any specific module for the core content subject

knowledge for secondary level.



2.19.6 Engaging mentors/medium term measures/ and resources of a person

PEF also experimented through engaging professionals of impeccable integrity and

eminence to serve as mentors and resource persons for cluster based training

workshops. The selection of these mentors and resource persons was made by a panel

of experts. After the recommendation of the experts, PEF engaged them as visiting

faculty in 2 cluster based training workshops, both held in Lahore.

105 teachers of 7 institutes benefited from these two trainings. The following resource

persons/mentors were engaged for these trainings.



2.20 Partnership with institutes/ organizations

The initiative of public private partnership with the organizations and institutions to

implement the program at larger scale and enhance the outreach of the Foundation

and ensure the monitoring and evaluation of the beneficiaries of the cluster based

training in partnership with the organizations and institutions, took concrete shape

through an advertisement which was made in the esteemed national dailies, ‘The

Jang’ and ‘The News’ appeared on September 27th, 2005.




                                          63
Organizations having demonstrable expertise and experience in teacher training or

those planning to develop this capability and indicating geographical preference of

areas in which they would wish to operate, were encouraged to apply for partnerships.

In response to this advertisement 54 parties responded and submitted their expression

of interest. After careful scrutiny and against set indicators (under the guidance of

chairperson) 24 organizations have been short listed. PEF has already engaged 6

private training organizations like Laurel Institute for Modern Education (LIME,

Lahore based), Association For Academic Quality (AFAQ, Lahore based), Learning

Zone (LZ, Sialkot based), Rawadari Taraqiati Tanzeem (RTT, Multan based), Social

Council for Promoting Education (SCOPE, Lahore based) and Socio-Engineering

Consultants (SEC, Rawalpindi based) in CBTs. With the technical input of these

partners 23 CBTs have been conducted and 1196 teachers of 239 private schools have

benefited.



So far PEF has reached 16 districts/Tehsils of Punjab (i.e., Chichawatni, Sahiwal,

Kamoke, Mianwali, Daska, Quaidabad, Layyah, Faisalabad, Multan, Sialkot, Alipur

Chattha, Mandi Bahauddin, Lahore, Lodhran, Kasur and Sheikhupur).

Negotiations are underway to sign more agreements with few more partner

organizations. All these trainings are mainly focusing CBTs at primary level.



2.21 Monitoring & valuation

Monitoring of CBTs is an integral part of the system for continuous evaluation of the

inputs and the integration of the results of assessment for consistent up gradation and

improvement. ADU adopts following strategy to ensure proper monitoring and

subsequent evaluation:



                                          64
Presence of ADU representatives in each CBT. Comparison of Pre and Post test

results of participants.   Presence of ADU representatives in each CBT. Report

generation of each individual workshop, having one heading of lessons learnt and

describing future course of action. Sharing of each workshop's report with Board

members and PEF's Senior Management.



2.22 Department of human resources

Human Resource department is dedicated to the employees of Punjab Education

Foundation [PEF]. PEF is in favor of flat organizational structure with few levels of

management and having clear levels of responsibility with in the management

structure.



PEF values formation of human capital and invests in the human resource by

identifying the training needs of its employees and arranging the training programs

required. It ensures professional growth and continuous enrichment of human didactic

resource base by providing training, offering a career path and cultivating a shared

culture. We believe that PEF’s most important assets are its human resource.

Therefore, the organization continuously strives to equip its employees with the latest

management tools and training that focus on rebuilding their operational capabilities

and enhancing their competencies.



PEF encourages diversity and it aspires to hire individuals who can contribute to

organization with their diverse experiences, education and background. We are a fast

growing and dynamic organization that is swiftly evolving with the ever changing

environment. To ensure these changes, PEF promotes employees who are change



                                          65
agents and can manage change. It believes passionately in enabling employees to

reach their full potential through development objectives so that they can contribute

fully and progressively to the success of the organization.



In this chapter review of related literature was discussed to understand the different

aspects of the study. In the next chapter research methodology will be discussed in the

way that method of research adopted, population of the study, sampling, research tool,

pilot study de-limitations of the study, data collection and ways of data analysis will

be illustrated.




                                           66
                                      Chapter 3



                    RESEARCH METHODOLOGY


In this chapter Research methodology, population of the study, sample of the study,

research tool, data collection, data analysis and other research aspects are being

discussed.



Methodology is referred to the techniques and procedures adopted by the researcher to

collect data for research purposes. Its main focus is to give some understanding of the

study. The problem under investigation “Comparative study of the learning

achievement of the students in the subjects of Science and Urdu , studying in PEF

registered private schools and public schools in Punjab for 5th grade” is concerned

with the current situation, therefore the study relates to descriptive research.



3.1      Descriptive research

According to Frankel and Wallen (2007) descriptive research depicts a given situation

of interaction as completely and cautiously as possible. It has the capacity to

recapitulate the abilities, inclinations, manners and surroundings in present.

Descriptive research engages a system by which a researcher starts from initial stage

to its end (Singh and Bajpai, 2008). According

“The research which investigates present problems is known as descriptive” Gay

(1997)




                                            67
Descriptive research deals with the associations of variables, testing of hypothesis,

and the improvement of generality, beliefs or speculations that has a widespread

validity. It uses quantitative method that tells what is the relating, recording,

investigating and understanding circumstances that exist. It also engages some kinds

of association, comparison and contrast (Best and Kahn, 2006).



3.2       Population

The students of 6th grade those have passed the 5th grade examination in annual 2010

and now studying in PEF registered private elementary/high schools and

elementary/high/higher secondary public schools in Punjab are the population of the

study.



3.3       Sample

         Study    was       conducted   in   three   districts   of   southern   Punjab   i.e

          Lodhran,Bahawal Pur and Rahim Yar Khan.

         Three PEF registered private schools and same number of public schools were

          selected randomly from three Tehsils of the concerned district.

         It made 54 schools in all (27 PEF registered private schools and 27 Public

          schools).

         20 students were selected randomly from each school, which amounts 1080

          students in all.




                                               68
3.4       Research tool

Quality Assurance Test (QAT) and Punjab Examination Commission (PEC) question

papers were administered in the subjects of Urduand Scienceto the students of 6th

grade (Those have passed the 5th grade examination in 1st annual exam. 2010).



3.5       Pilot study

A pilot study was conducted in 5PEF registered private schools and 5public schools in

district Bahawal Pur .Ten students from each school were selected for the test. It made

100 students in all. Results of the pilot study were discussed with the supervisor and

than with his expert opinion the tests were conducted in three districts.



3.6       De-Limitations of the study

Considering the constraints, time and finance, the study was delimited to the

following areas:

         Southern Punjab

         District Lodhran and Bahawal Pur and Rahim Yar Khan.

         Three tehsils of each district were selected randomly for the study.

         Study was de-limited to the Tehsil Bahawl Pur, Ahmed Pur East, Mandi

          Yazman, Lodhran, Dunya Pur,Kehror Pacca, Liaqat Pur, Khan Pur and Rahim

          Yar Khan.

         Students those have passed the 5th grade examination in 2010 and now

          studying in 6th grade were selected for study.

         QAT and PEC question papers were administered in the two subjects i.e

          Urduand Mathematics.




                                             69
3.7    Data collection

Data was collected personally after applying the tool on the sample of the study.



3.8    Data analysis

Data was analyzed on computer by SPSS software and statistical analysis was done

by applying T-test according to the requirement of the study. Description of the data

was done in the form of tables and graphs.




                                          70
                                     Chapter 4



                               DATA ANALYSIS


The data collected from the test was analyzed in terms of mean, standard deviation

and grade wise results interpreted as given below.



                                    Table No. 4.1

       4.1 Performance of public and private schools in annual exam 2010



                                                         Std.          Std.   Error

                      type           N          Mean     Deviation     Mean

  Board result of 5th Public
                                     540        44.76    16.937        .729
  grade annual 2010 School

                      Private
                                     540        47.52    16.807        .723
                      School



Table No 4.1 shows that the mean difference between average marks of public

schools and private schools is 44.76 and 47.52 respectively in the board result of 5th

grade annual examination 2010. The above table shows the variation in the standard

deviation of public and private schools is 16.937 and 16.807




                                           71
                                                      Table No. 4.2

                         4.2 Performance of public and private schools in annual exam 2010



                             Levene's Test for
                             Equality       of
                             Variances         t-test for Equality of Means
                                                                                          Std.       95%
                                                                      Sig.      Mean      Error      Confidence
                                                                      (2-       Differe   Differen   Interval of the
                             F         Sig.     t        df           tailed)   nce       ce         Difference
                                                                                                              Low
                             Lower     Upper    Lower    Upper        Lower     Upper     Lower      Upper er
annual 2010
of 5th grade
Board result
assumed
variances
Equal




                             .090      .765     -2.685   1078         .007      -2.757    1.027      -4.772   -.743
             assumed
             variances not
             Equal




                                                         1077.93
                                                -2.685                .007      -2.757    1.027      -4.772   -.743
                                                         6




              Assuming the variance equal than the confidence interval of the upper and lower limit

              shows that the mean lies in the interval from -4.772 to – 0.743, as p-value is 0.000 and

              the value of  =0.01, which shows a highly significant difference in the quality of

              result between public and private schools in the board result 2010.




                                                              72
                                     Table No. 4.3

        4.3 Comparison of PEC urdu between Public and Private Schools

                                 Group Statistics



                                                     Std.         Std.    Error

             type            N           Mean        Deviation    Mean

PEC          Public
                             540         45.33       17.062       .734
URDU         School

             Private
                             540         47.85       16.036       .690
             School



Table 4.3 indicates that the mean score of the students of Public schools is 45.33

while the mean score of the students of Private schools is 47.85 in the subject of PEC

urdu. These shows a difference of about 2marks in average mean score between

public and private schools. Standard deviation of public school students marks with in

their group is 17.062 while in the marks of students of private schools is 16.036.




                                           73
                                                                                     Table No. 4.4

                                                      4.4 Comparison of PEC urdu between Public and Private Schools




                                                       Levene's      Test

                                                       for Equality of

                                                       Variances            t-test for Equality of Means

                                                                                                                         Std.

                                                                                                               Mean      Error     95% Confidence

                                                                                                 Sig.      (2- Differe   Differe   Interval of the

                                                       F          Sig.      t          df        tailed)       nce       nce       Difference

                                                       Lower      Upper     Lower      Upper     Lower         Upper     Lower     Upper    Lower
                 PECURDU

                            Equal variances assumed




                                                       2.230      .136      -2.501     1078      .013          -2.520    1.008     -4.497   -.543




                                                                                       1073.8
assumed

          not

                variances

                            Equal




                                                                            -2.501               .013          -2.520    1.008     -4.497   -.543
                                                                                       79



                 Assuming the variance equal than the confidence interval of the upper and lower limit

                 shows that the mean lies in the interval from -4.497 to – 0.543, as p-value is 0.000 and

                 the value of  =0.01, which shows a highly significant difference in the quality of

                 result between public and private schools in the board result 2010.




                                                                                            74
                                    Table No. 4.5

       4.5 Comparison of PEC Science between Public and Private Schools

                                    Table 4.6



                                                    Std.           Std.     Error

               Type           N          Mean       Deviation      Mean

PEC            Public
                              540        45.47      16.950         .729
Science        School

               Private
                              540        48.62      15.546         .669
               School



Table 4.6 indicates that the mean score of the students of Public schools is 45.47

while the mean score of the students of Private schools is 48.62 in the subject of PEC

Science. These shows a difference of about 3marks in average mean score between

public and private schools. Standard deviation of public school students marks with in

their group is 16.950 while in the marks of students of private schools is 15.546




                                          75
                                           Table No. 4.6

              4.6 Comparison of PEC Science between Public and Private Schools



              Levene's Test for
              Equality       of
              Variances         t-test for Equality of Means
                                                                              Std.      95%
                                                         Sig.      Mean       Error     Confidence
                                                         (2-       Differen   Differe   Interval of the
              F          Sig.     t           df         tailed)   ce         nce       Difference
                                                                              U                   Low
              Lower      Upper    Lower       Upper      Lower     pper       Lower     Upper     er
Science
PEC
assumed
variances
Equal




                                                                                                  -
              3.376      .066     -3.174      1078       .002      -3.141     .990      -5.083    1.19
                                                                                                  9
  assumed
  not
  variances
  Equal




                                                                                                  -
                                              1070.04
                                  -3.174                 .002      -3.141     .990      -5.083    1.19
                                              1
                                                                                                  9



       Assuming the variance equal than the confidence interval of the upper and lower limit

       shows that the mean lies in the interval from -5.083 to - 1.199, as p-value is 0.000

       and the value of  =0.01, which shows a highly significant difference in the quality of

       result between public and private schools in the board result 2010.




                                                   76
                                    Table No. 4.7

       4.7 Comparison of PEF URDU between Public and Private Schools



                                                    Std.          Std.      Error

             type           N           Mean        Deviation     Mean

PEF          Public
                            540         58.82       20.357        .876
URDU         School

             Private
                            540         61.70       20.587        .886
             School



Table 4.8 indicates that the mean score of the students of Public schools is 58.82

while the mean score of the students of Private schools is 61.70 in the subject of PEF

Urdu. These shows a difference of about 3marks in average mean score between

public and private schools. Standard deviation of public school students marks with in

their group is 0.876 while in the marks of students of private schools is o.886




                                          77
                                                Table No. 4.8

                   4.8 Comparison of PEF URDU between Public and Private Schools



                      Levene's Test for
                      Equality       of
                      Variances         t-test for Equality of Means
                                                                                           95%
                                                                                           Confidence
                                                                                           Interval of
                                                            Sig. (2- Mean       Std. Error the
                      F         Sig.     t        df        tailed)  Difference Difference Difference
                                                                                                   Lo
                                         Low                                                       we
                      Lower     Upper    er       Upper     Lower    Upper      Lower      Upper r
PEF    Equal                             -                                                         -
URDU   variances      .073      .786     2.31     1078      .021     -2.883     1.246      -5.328 .43
       assumed                           4                                                         9
       Equal
                                         -                                                           -
       variances                                  1077.86
                                         2.31               .021       -2.883    1.246        -5.328 .43
       not                                        4
                                         4                                                           9
       assumed


        Assuming the variance equal than the confidence interval of the upper and lower limit

        shows that the mean lies in the interval from -5.328 to – 0439, as p-value is 0.000 and

        the value of  =0.01, which shows a highly significant difference in the quality of

        result between public and private schools in the board result 2010.




                                                       78
                                    Table No. 4.9

      4.9 Comparison of PEF SCIENCE between Public and Private Schools

                                 4.12 Group Statistics



                                                    Std.

              type           N           Mean       Deviation      Std. Error Mean

PEF           Public
                             540         61.45      21.449         .923
Science       School

              Private
                             540         65.34      20.883         .899
              School



Table 4.12 indicates that the mean score of the students of Public schools is 61.45

while the mean score of the students of Private schools is 65.34 in the subject of PEF

SCIENCE. These shows a difference of about 4marks in average mean score between

public and private schools. Standard deviation of public school students marks with in

their group is 0.923 while in the marks of students of private schools is o.899




                                          79
                                                Table No. 4.10

                4.10 Comparison of PEF Science between Public and Private Schools

                                    4.14 Independent Samples Test



                         Levene's Test
                         for Equality of
                         Variances          t-test for Equality of Means
                                                                                                  95%
                                                                                        Std.      Confidence
                                                                            Mean        Error     Interval of
                                                                 Sig. (2-   Differenc   Differe   the
                         F        Sig.      t          df        tailed)    e           nce       Difference
                                                                                                  Uppe Low
                         Lower    Upper     Lower      Upper     Lower      Upper       Lower     r       er
PEF       Equal                                                                                   -       -
Science   variances      .184     .668      -3.024     1078      .003       -3.896      1.288     6.42 1.36
          assumed                                                                                 4       9
          Equal                                                                                   -       -
                                                       1077.2
          variances                         -3.024               .003       -3.896      1.288     6.42 1.36
                                                       30
          not assumed                                                                             4       9


          Assuming the variance equal than the confidence interval of the upper and lower limit

          shows that the mean lies in the interval from -6.424 to - 1.369, as p-value is 0.000

          and the value of  =0.01, which shows a highly significant difference in the quality of

          result between public and private schools in the board result 2010.




                                                     80
                                     Table No. 4.11

 4.11 Overall performance of average results of public schools in board annual

                                       exam 2010



                                                       Std.

                 type            N          Mean       Deviation      Std. Error Mean

Overall Public Public
                                 540        43.82      18.616         .801
schools result   School

                 Private
                                 540        48.29      18.282         .787
                 School



Table 4.11 indicates that the mean score of the students of Public schools is 43.82

while the mean score of the students of Private schools is 65.34 in the annual board

exam 2010. These shows a difference of about 5marks in average mean score between

public and private schools. Standard deviation of public school students marks with in

their group is 0.801 while in the marks of students of private schools is o.787




                                          81
                                             Table No. 4.12

           4.12 Overall performance of average results of public schools in board annual

                                               exam 2010



                            Levene's Test
                            for Equality
                            of Variances t-test for Equality of Means
                                                                               Std.       95%
                                                                       Mean Error         Confidence
                                                              Sig. (2- Differe Differe    Interval of the
                            F   Sig.        t        df       tailed)  nce     nce        Difference
                            Low             Lowe                                                   Lowe
                            er  Upper       r        Upper Lower        Upper    Lower    Upper r
Overall      Equal
Public       variances                      -
                            .121 .728                1078     .000      -4.463   1.123    -6.666 -2.260
schools      assumed                        3.975
result
             Equal
                                            -        1077.
             variances                                        .000      -4.463   1.123    -6.666 -2.260
                                            3.975    646
             not assumed


          Assuming the variance equal than the confidence interval of the upper and lower limit

          shows that the mean lies in the interval from -6.666 to - 2.260, as p-value is 0.000

          and the value of  =0.01, which shows a highly significant difference in the quality of

          result between public and private schools in the board result 2010.




                                                    82
                                   Table No. 4.13

 4.13 Overall performance of average results of private schools in board annual

                                      exam 2010

                                   Group Statistics



                                                             Std.        Std. Error
                      type            N           Mean       Deviation   Mean
Overall       Private Public
schools        result School          540         2.91       1.810       .078
grades
                       Private
                                      540         2.19       1.332       .057
                       School


Table 4.11 indicates that the mean score of the students of Public schools is 2.91

while the mean score of the students of Private schools is 2.19 in the annual board

exam 2010. Standard deviation of public school students marks with in their group is

0.801 while in the marks of students of private schools is o.787




                                            83
                                          Table No. 4.14

          4.14 Overall performance of average results of private schools in board annual

                                            exam 2010



                         Levene's Test
                         for Equality of
                         Variances       t-test for Equality of Means
                                                                                       95%
                                                                                       Confiden
                                                                                       ce
                                                                               Std.    Interval
                                                           Sig.      Mean      Error   of    the
                                                           (2-       Differe   Differe Differen
                         F       Sig.t           df        tailed)   nce       nce     ce
                                     Low                                                           Low
                         Lower Upper er          Upper     Lower     Upper     Lower   Upper       er
Overall      Equal
Private      variances
                                         7.44
schools      assumed     60.042 .000             1078      .000      .720      .097    .531        .910
                                         8
result
grades
             Equal
             variances                   7.44    990.44
                                                        .000         .720      .097    .531        .910
             not                         8       6
             assumed


      Assuming the variance equal than the confidence interval of the upper and lower limit

      shows that the mean lies in the interval from 5.31 to - 0.91, as p-value is 0.000 and

      the value of  =0.01, which shows a highly significant difference in the quality of

      result between public and private schools in the board result 2010.




                                                84
                                   Table No. 4.15

 4.15 Comparison of PEC urdu grade wise between Public and Private Schools



                                                           Std.

                     type            N          Mean       Deviation      Std. Error Mean

PEC URDU grade Public
                                     540        4.46       1.955          .084
wise result          School

                     Private
                                     540        3.88       2.021          .087
                     School



Table 4.5 indicates that the mean score of the students of Public schools is 4.46 while

the mean score of the students of Private schools is 3.88 in the subject of PEC urdu

grade wise comparison. Standard deviation of public school students marks with in

their group is 1.955 while in the marks of students of private schools is 2.021.




                                           85
                                    Table No. 4.16

 4.16 Comparison of PEC urdu grade wise between Public and Private Schools



                             Frequenc                Valid      Cumulative

                             y           Percent     Percent    Percent

    Valid A1 ( > 80% )       142         13.1        13.1       13.1

           A ( 70 - 79 )     123         11.4        11.4       24.5

           B ( 60 - 69 )     160         14.8        14.8       39.4

           C ( 50 - 59 )     160         14.8        14.8       54.2

           D ( 40 - 49 )     179         16.6        16.6       70.7

           E ( 33 - 39 )     114         10.6        10.6       81.3

           F ( < 33% )       202         18.7        18.7       100.0

           Total             1080        100.0       100.0



Table shows that the frequency of students in grade A1 is 142 which make a

percentage of 13.1 both for public private school students. Frequency in grade A is

123 with percentage 11.3, in grade B is 160 with percentage 14.8, in grade C is 160

with percentage 14.8, in grade D is 179 with percentage 16.6, in grade E is 114 with

percentage 10.6 and in grade F is 202 with percentage 18.7.




                                         86
                                   Table No. 4.17

4.17 Comparison of PEC science grade wise between Public and Private Schools



                                                           Std.           Std.     Error

                     type            N          Mean       Deviation      Mean

PEC         Science Public
                                     540        5.55       1.600          .069
grade wise result    School

                     Private
                                     540        5.33       1.549          .067
                     School



Table 4.5 indicates that the mean score of the students of Public schools is 5.55 while

the mean score of the students of Private schools is 5.33 in the subject of PEC science

grade wise comparison. Standard deviation of public school students marks with in

their group is 1.955 while in the marks of students of private schools is 2.021.




                                           87
                                      Table No. 4.18

4.18 Comparison of PEC science grade wise between Public and Private Schools

4.7                     PEC Science grade wise result



                                                        Valid     Cumulative
                               Frequency    Percent     Percent   Percent
Valid A1 ( > 80% )             2            .2          .2        .2
        A ( 70 - 79 )          48           4.4         4.4       4.6
        B ( 60 - 69 )          133          12.3        12.3      16.9
        C ( 50 - 59 )          100          9.3         9.3       26.2
        D ( 40 - 49 )          204          18.9        18.9      45.1
        E ( 33 - 39 )          190          17.6        17.6      62.7
        F ( < 33% )            403          37.3        37.3      100.0
        Total                  1080         100.0       100.0



Table shows that the frequency of students in grade A1 is 2 which make a percentage

of 0.2 both for public private school students. Frequency in grade A is 48 with

percentage 4.4, in grade B 133 is with percentage 12.3, in grade C is 100 with

percentage 9.3, in grade D is 204 with percentage 18.9, in grade E is 190 with

percentage 17.6 and in grade F is 403 with percentage 37.3




                                           88
                                   Table No. 4.19

      4.19 Comparison of PEF URDU between Public and Private Schools



             type           N          Mean        Std. Deviation   Std. Error Mean

PEF          Public
                            540        58.82       20.357           .876
URDU         School

             Private
                            540        61.70       20.587           .886
             School



Table 4.8 indicates that the mean score of the students of Public schools is 58.82

while the mean score of the students of Private schools is 61.70 in the subject of PEF

Urdu. These shows a difference of about 3marks in average mean score between

public and private schools. Standard deviation of public school students marks with in

their group is 0.876 while in the marks of students of private schools is o.886




                                          89
                                   Table No. 4.20

4.20 Comparison of PEF urdu grade wise between Public and Private Schools



                                                          Valid     Cumulative

                            Frequency      Percent        Percent   Percent

Valid A1 ( > 80% )          612            56.7           56.7      56.7

        A ( 70 - 79 )       177            16.4           16.4      73.1

        B ( 60 - 69 )       154            14.3           14.3      87.3

        C ( 50 - 59 )       50             4.6            4.6       91.9

        D ( 40 - 49 )       49             4.5            4.5       96.5

        E ( 33 - 39 )       10             .9             .9        97.4

        F ( < 33% )         28             2.6            2.6       100.0

        Total               1080           100.0          100.0



Table shows that the frequency of students in grade A1 is 612 which make a

percentage of 56.7 both for public private school students. Frequency in grade A is

177 with percentage 16.4, in grade B 154 is with percentage 14.3, in grade C is 50

with percentage 4.6, in grade D is 49 with percentage 4.5, in grade E is 10 with

percentage 0.9 and in grade F is 28 with percentage 2.6




                                         90
                                    Table No. 4.21

   4.21 Comparison of PEF SCIENCE grade wise between Public and Private

                                       Schools



                                                       Std.           Std.   Error

                 type           N           Mean       Deviation      Mean

   PEF           Public
                                540         61.45      21.449         .923
   Science       School

                 Private
                                540         65.34      20.883         .899
                 School



Table 4.12 indicates that the mean score of the students of Public schools is 61.45

while the mean score of the students of Private schools is 65.34 in the subject of PEF

SCIENCE. These shows a difference of about 4marks in average mean score between

public and private schools. Standard deviation of public school students marks with in

their group is 0.923 while in the marks of students of private schools is o.899




                                          91
                                   Table No. 4.22

   4.22 Comparison of PEF SCIENCE grade wise between Public and Private

                                      Schools



                                                     Valid       Cumulative
                            Frequency     Percent    Percent     Percent
Valid A1 ( > 80% )          300          27.8        27.8        27.8
        A ( 70 - 79 )       144          13.3        13.3        41.1
        B ( 60 - 69 )       226          20.9        20.9        62.0
        C ( 50 - 59 )       100          9.3         9.3         71.3
        D ( 40 - 49 )       155          14.4        14.4        85.6
        E ( 33 - 39 )       57           5.3         5.3         90.9
        F ( < 33% )         98           9.1         9.1         100.0
        Total               1080         100.0       100.0



Table shows that the frequency of students in grade A1 is 300 which make a

percentage of 27.8 both for public private school students. Frequency in grade A is

144 with percentage 13.3, in grade B 226 is with percentage 120.9, in grade C is 100

with percentage 9.3, in grade D is 155 with percentage 14.4, in grade E is 57 with

percentage 05.3 and in grade F is 98 with percentage 9.1




                                         92
                                    Table No. 4.23

              4.23 Overall grade wise Comparison of public schools



                                                                Std.              Std.   Error

                         type            N           Mean       Deviation         Mean

Overall          Public Public
                                         540         5.02       1.755             .076
schools result grades    School

                         Private
                                         540         4.64       1.817             .078
                         School



Table 4.5 indicates that the mean score of the students of Public schools is 5.02 while

the mean score of the students of Private schools is 4.64 in the subject of PEC science

grade wise comparison. Standard deviation of public school students marks with in

their group is 0,o76 while in the marks of students of private schools is 0.078




                                           93
                                     Table No. 4.24

              4.24 Overall grade wise Comparison of public schools



                                                         Valid        Cumulative
                              Frequency        Percent   Percent      Percent
   Valid A1 ( > 80% )         30               2.8       2.8          2.8
           A ( 70 - 79 )      119              11.0      11.0         13.8
           B ( 60 - 69 )      121              11.2      11.2         25.0
           C ( 50 - 59 )      180              16.7      16.7         41.7
           D ( 40 - 49 )      208              19.3      19.3         60.9
           E ( 33 - 39 )      131              12.1      12.1         73.1
           F ( < 33% )        291              26.9      26.9         100.0
           Total              1080             100.0     100.0



Table shows that the frequency of students in grade A1 is 30 which make a

percentage of 2.8 both for public private school students. Frequency in grade A is 119

with percentage 11, in grade B is 121 with percentage 11.2, in grade C is 180 with

percentage 16.7, in grade D is 208 with percentage 19.3, in grade E is 131 with

percentage 12.1 and in grade F is 291 with percentage 26.9




                                          94
                                      Table No. 4.25

              4.25 Overall grade wise Comparison of private schools



                                                         Std.           Std.    Error
                   type           N             Mean     Deviation      Mean
   Overall         Public
   Private         School
                                  540           65.32    19.559         .842
   schools
   result
                   Private
                                  540           73.14    14.950         .643
                   School



Table 4.5 indicates that the mean score of the students of Public schools is 65.32

while the mean score of the students of Private schools is 73.14 in the subject of PEC

science grade wise comparison. Standard deviation of public school students marks

with in their group is 0.842 while in the marks of students of private schools is 0.643




                                           95
                                    Table No. 4.26

             4.26 Overall grade wise Comparison of private schools



                                                          Valid     Cumulative
                             Frequency      Percent       Percent   Percent
    Valid A1 ( > 80% )       365            33.8          33.8      33.8
            A ( 70 - 79 )    266            24.6          24.6      58.4
            B ( 60 - 69 )    195            18.1          18.1      76.5
            C ( 50 - 59 )    110            10.2          10.2      86.7
            D ( 40 - 49 )    67             6.2           6.2       92.9
            E ( 33 - 39 )    37             3.4           3.4       96.3
            F ( < 33% )      40             3.7           3.7       100.0
            Total            1080           100.0         100.0



Table shows that the frequency of students in grade A1 is 365 which make a

percentage of 33.8 both for public private school students. Frequency in grade A is

266 with percentage 24.6, in grade B is 195 with percentage 18.1, in grade C is 110

with percentage 10.2, in grade D is 67 with percentage 6.2, in grade E is 37 with

percentage 3.4 and in grade F is 40 with percentage 3.7




                                         96
                                     Chapter 5



        SUMMARY, FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND

                         RECOMMENDATIONS


The analysis of the results was done in the form of tables, which has been presented in

chapter 4. In this chapter summary, findings, conclusions and recommendations will

be presented.



5.1    Summary

The purpose of the study was to get a comparison between the learning achievement

of the students in the subjects of Scienceand English, studying in PEF registered

private schools and public schools in Punjab for 5th grade. For this purpose student,

from PEF registered private schools and public schools in three districts of Punjab i.e

Lodhran, Bahawalpur and Rahim Yar Khan, were randomly selected. The total

sample comprising 1080 students was selected by using stratified random sampling

technique.



Question papers in the subjects of Urduand Sciencewere administered to the sample

for the purpose. The Question papers in the subjects of Urduand Sciencewere taken

from the Punjab Examination Commission (PEC) those have been taken in annual

examination 2010 for 5th grade. Quality assurance test from Punjab Education

Foundation in the subjects of Scienceand Urduwas also administered to the sample.




                                          97
The study was delimited to the three districts of Southern Punjab that is Lodhran,

Bahawalpur and Rahim Yar Khan. Three public schools and three PEF registered

private schools were taken from each Tehsil of the respective district. Three Tehsils

from each district were selected for the data collection. Twenty students, those are

now studying in 6th grade, from each school     were selected as a sample. Fifty four

schools (public and PEF registered) were randomly selected for study. It made 1080

students for sample for the study. The data was collected personally by the researcher.

Data analysis was done by the computer software SPSS on mean, standard deviation

basis.




                                          98
5.2   Findings

  1. In the comparison of public and private schools in board annual examination

      2010 for 5th grade students the mean difference between average marks of

      public schools and private schools is 44.76 and 47.52 respectively. The results

      show the variation in the standard deviation of public and private schools is

      16.937 and 16.807



  2. In the comparison of public and private schools in board annual examination

      2010 for 5th grade students, assuming the variance equal than the confidence

      interval of the upper and lower limit shows that the mean lies in the interval

      from -4.772 to -0.743, as p-value is 0.000 and the value of  =0.01, which

      shows a highly significant difference in the quality of result between public

      and private schools in the board result 2010.



  3. In the comparison of PEC Urdu between public and private schools the mean

      score of the students of Public schools is 45.33 while the mean score of the

      students of Private schools is 47.85 in the subject of PEC urdu. These shows a

      difference of about 2marks in average mean score between public and private

      schools. Standard deviation of public school students marks with in their

      group is 17.062 while in the marks of students of private schools is 16.036.



  4. In the comparison of PEC Urdu between public and private schools assuming

      the variance equal than the confidence interval of the upper and lower limit

      shows that the mean lies in the interval from -4.497 to – 0.543, as p-value is

      0.000 and the value of  =0.01, which shows a highly significant difference in



                                         99
   the quality of result between public and private schools in the board result

   2010.



5. In the comparison of PEC Science between public and private schools the

   mean score of the students of Public schools is 45.47 while the mean score of

   the students of Private schools is 48.62 in the subject of PEC Science. These

   shows a difference of about 3marks in average mean score between public and

   private schools. Standard deviation of public school students marks with in

   their group is   16.950 while in the marks of students of private schools is

   15.546



6. In the comparison of PEC Urdu between public and private schools assuming

   the variance equal than the confidence interval of the upper and lower limit

   shows that the mean lies in the interval from -5.083 to - 1.199, as p-value is

   0.000 and the value of  =0.01, which shows a highly significant difference in

   the quality of result between public and private schools in the board result

   2010.



7. In the comparison of PEF Urdu between public and private schools the mean

   score of the students of Public schools is 58.82 while the mean score of the

   students of Private schools is 61.70 in the subject of PEF Urdu. These shows a

   difference of about 3marks in average mean score between public and private

   schools. Standard deviation of public school students marks with in their

   group is 0.876 while in the marks of students of private schools is o.886




                                    100
8. In the comparison of PEF Urdu between public and private schools assuming

   the variance equal than the confidence interval of the upper and lower limit

   shows that the mean lies in the interval from -5.328 to – 0439, as p-value is

   0.000 and the value of  =0.01, which shows a highly significant difference in

   the quality of result between public and private schools in the board result

   2010.



9. In the comparison of PEF Science between public and private schools the

   mean score of the students of Public schools is 61.45 while the mean score of

   the students of Private schools is 65.34 in the subject of PEF SCIENCE. These

   shows a difference of about 4marks in average mean score between public and

   private schools. Standard deviation of public school students marks with in

   their group is    0.923 while in the marks of students of private schools is

   o.899.



10. In the comparison of PEF Science between public and private schools

   assuming the variance equal than the confidence interval of the upper and

   lower limit shows that the mean lies in the interval from -6.424 to - 1.369, as

   p-value is 0.000 and the value of  =0.01, which shows a highly significant

   difference in the quality of result between public and private schools in the

   board result 2010.



11. In the overall performance of average results of public schools in board annual

   result 2010 the mean score of the students of Public schools is 43.82 while the

   mean score of the students of Private schools is 65.34 in the annual board



                                     101
   exam 2010. These shows a difference of about 5marks in average mean score

   between public and private schools. Standard deviation of public school

   students marks with in their group is 0.801 while in the marks of students of

   private schools is o.787.



12. In the overall performance of average results of public schools in board annual

   result 2010, assuming the variance equal than the confidence interval of the

   upper and lower limit shows that the mean lies in the interval from -6.666 to -

   2.260, as p-value is 0.000 and the value of  =0.01, which shows a highly

   significant difference in the quality of result between public and private

   schools in the board result 2010.



13. In the overall performance of average results of public schools in board annual

   result 2010, the mean score of the students of Public schools is 2.91 while the

   mean score of the students of Private schools is 2.19 in the annual board exam

   2010. Standard deviation of public school students marks with in their group is

   0.801 while in the marks of students of private schools is o.787



14. In the overall performance of average results of public schools in board annual

   result 2010, assuming the variance equal than the confidence interval of the

   upper and lower limit shows that the mean lies in the interval from 5.31 to -

   0.91, as p-value is 0.000 and the value of  =0.01, which shows a highly

   significant difference in the quality of result between public and private

   schools in the board result 2010.




                                       102
15. In the comparison of PEC Urdu grade wise results between public and private

   schools, the mean score of the students of Public schools is 4.46 while the

   mean score of the students of Private schools is 3.88 in the subject of PEC

   Urdu grade wise comparison. Standard deviation of public school students

   marks with in their group is 1.955 while in the marks of students of private

   schools is 2.021.



16. In the comparison of PEC Urdu grade wise results between public and private

   schools, the frequency of students in grade A1 is 142 which make a percentage

   of 13.1 both for public private school students. Frequency in grade A is 123

   with percentage 11.3, in grade B is 160 with percentage 14.8, in grade C is

   160 with percentage 14.8, in grade D is 179 with percentage 16.6, in grade E

   is 114 with percentage 10.6 and in grade F is 202 with percentage 18.7.



17. In the comparison of PEC Science grade wise results between public and

   private school,s the mean score of the students of Public schools is 5.55 while

   the mean score of the students of Private schools is 5.33 in the subject of PEC

   science grade wise comparison. Standard deviation of public school students

   marks with in their group is 1.955 while in the marks of students of private

   schools is 2.021.



18. In the comparison of PEC Science grade wise results between public and

   private schools, the frequency of students in grade A1 is 2 which make a

   percentage of 0.2 both for public private school students. Frequency in grade

   A is 48 with percentage 4.4, in grade B 133 is with percentage 12.3, in grade



                                    103
   C is 100 with percentage 9.3, in grade D is 204 with percentage 18.9, in grade

   E is 190 with percentage 17.6 and in grade F is 403 with percentage 37.3



19. In the comparison of PEF Urdu grade wise results between public and private

   school,s the mean score of the students of Public schools is 58.82 while the

   mean score of the students of Private schools is 61.70 in the subject of PEF

   Urdu. These shows a difference of about 3marks in average mean score

   between public and private schools. Standard deviation of public school

   students marks with in their group is 0.876 while in the marks of students of

   private schools is o.886.



20. In the comparison of PEF Urdu grade wise results between public and private

   schools, the frequency of students in grade A1 is 612 which make a percentage

   of 56.7 both for public private school students. Frequency in grade A is 177

   with percentage 16.4, in grade B 154 is with percentage 14.3, in grade C is 50

   with percentage 4.6, in grade D is 49 with percentage 4.5, in grade E is 10

   with percentage 0.9 and in grade F is 28 with percentage 2.6



21. In the comparison of PEF science grade wise results between public and

   private school,s the mean score of the students of Public schools is 61.45

   while the mean score of the students of Private schools is 65.34 in the subject

   of PEF SCIENCE. These shows a difference of about 4marks in average mean

   score between public and private schools. Standard deviation of public school

   students marks with in their group is 0.923 while in the marks of students of

   private schools is o.899



                                    104
22. In the comparison of PEF Science grade wise results between public and

   private schools, the frequency of students in grade A1 is 300 which make a

   percentage of 27.8 both for public private school students. Frequency in grade

   A is 144 with percentage 13.3, in grade B 226 is with percentage 120.9, in

   grade C is 100 with percentage 9.3, in grade D is 155 with percentage 14.4, in

   grade E is 57 with percentage 05.3 and in grade F is 98 with percentage 9.1



23. In the overall grade wise comparison between the students of public schools,

   the mean score of the students of Public schools is 5.02 while the mean score

   of the students of Private schools is 4.64 in the subject of PEC science grade

   wise comparison. Standard deviation of public school students marks with in

   their group is 0,o76 while in the marks of students of private schools is 0.078



24. In the overall grade wise comparison between the students of public schools,

   the frequency of students in grade A1 is 30 which make a percentage of 2.8

   both for public private school students. Frequency in grade A is 119 with

   percentage 11, in grade B is 121 with percentage 11.2, in grade C is 180 with

   percentage 16.7, in grade D is 208 with percentage 19.3, in grade E is 131

   with percentage 12.1 and in grade F is 291 with percentage 26.9



25. In the overall grade wise comparison between the students of private schools,

   the mean score of the students of Public schools is 65.32 while the mean score

   of the students of Private schools is 73.14 in the subject of PEC science grade

   wise comparison. Standard deviation of public school students marks with in

   their group is 0.842 while in the marks of students of private schools is 0.643



                                     105
26. In the overall grade wise comparison between the students of private schools,

   the frequency of students in grade A1 is 365 which make a percentage of 33.8

   both for public private school students. Frequency in grade A is 266 with

   percentage 24.6, in grade B is 195 with percentage 18.1, in grade C is 110

   with percentage 10.2, in grade D is 67 with percentage 6.2, in grade E is 37

   with percentage 3.4 and in grade F is 40 with percentage 3.7




                                    106
5.3      Conclusions

      1. In overall comparison between the achievements of students of private schools

         is better in the given test than the achievement of the students in Board

         examination held in 2010 by Punjab Education Commission for 5th Grade.



      2. In overall comparison between the achievements of students of public schools

         is not better in the given test than the achievement of the students in Board

         examination held in 2010 by Punjab Education Commission for 5th Grade.



      3. In overall comparison between PEC Urduand PEF Urduof private schools is

         much better in PEF Urduthan in PEC Urdutest.



      4. In overall comparison between PEC Math and PEF Math of private schools is

         much better in PEF Math than in PEC Math test.



      5. In overall comparison in the subject of PEC Urduand PEF Urdubetween the

         public and private schools the achievement of private schools is much batter

         than the public schools.



      6. In the comparison of PEC Urdubetween public and private schools the

         achievement of private schools is better than the public schools.



      7. In the comparison of PEF Urdubetween public and private schools the

         achievement of private schools is better than the public schools.




                                           107
8. In the comparison of PEC Math between public and private schools the

   achievement of private schools is nearly equal to the public schools.



9. In the comparison of PEF Math between public and private schools the

   achievement of private schools is nearly equal to the public schools.



10. In overall comparison between the achievements of students of private schools

   is nearly equal to the performance in Board examination held in 2010 by

   Punjab Education Commission for 5th Grade.



11. In the comparison between PEC Urduand PEF Urduof public schools the

   achievement of the students in PEF Urduis much better than in the PEC

   English.



12. In the comparison between PEC Urduand PEF Urduof private schools the

   achievement of the students in PEF Urduis much better than in the PEC

   English.



13. In the comparison between PEC Math and PEF Math of public schools the

   achievement of the students in PEF Math is much better than in the PEC Math.



14. In the comparison between PEC Math and PEF Math of private schools the

   achievement of the students in PEF Math is much better than in the PEC Math.




                                     108
15. In grade wise performance of the students of public and private schools in

   PEC Board annual examination 2010 is nearly equal for both public and

   private schools but the failing rate of students of public schools is greater than

   the students of private schools.



16. In grade wise performance of the students of public and private schools in the

   subject of PEC English, the performance of the students of private schools is

   much better than the public schools. Also the failing rate of students of public

   schools is much high than the private schools.



17. In grade wise performance of the students of public and private schools in the

   subject of PEC Math, the performance of the students of private schools is

   much better than the public schools. Also the failing rate of students of public

   schools is much high than the private schools.



18. In grade wise performance of the students of public and private schools in the

   subject of PEF English, the performance of the students of private schools is

   much better than the public schools. Also the failing rate of students of public

   schools is much high than the private schools.



19. In grade wise performance of the students of public and private schools in the

   subject of PEF Math, the performance of the students of private schools is

   much better than the public schools. Also the failing rate of students of public

   schools is much high than the private schools.




                                      109
20. In the overall grade wise performance of the students of private schools is

   much better than the students of public schools. Also the failing rate of public

   schools is much higher than the private schools.



21. In the overall grade wise performance of the students of private schools in the

   PEC Board examination 2010 is nearly equal to the students of public schools.

   Also the failing rate of public schools is much higher than the private schools.




                                     110
5.4       Recommendations

         More attention should be given on the teaching learning methodology of

          teachers in the subject of Science both in public and private schools.

         Language teachers should be appointed to teach the subject of Urdu because of

          the fear and threat of the use of English language through mass and media

          communication the generation apart away from the importance of National

          language Urdu.

         Training programmes should be arranged to train teachers in appropriate

          methodology.

         Shortage of teachers should be minimized.

         Monitoring and evaluation of examination system especially in public schools

          should be upgraded and modified.

         Another evaluation system for Grade 4th, District Wide Large Scale System of

          Assessment is introduced for selective public and private schools should be

          extended to whole system of education to standardize evaluation sestem.

         Student oriented and need base curriculum should be developed.

         Quality assurance test in all the subjects of 5th grade syllabus should be taken

          both in public and private schools.

         Term wise internal examination in both the public and private schools should

          be arranged like the PEC and QAT standard Examination.

         Comprehension type of questions like application writing and sentence

          formation shows that a large number of students have poor hand-writing;

          teachers should take steps to improve writing skill of learner.

         Majority of teachers use lecture method instead they are suggested to adopt

          activity base teaching.


                                            111
     QAT in all subjects for the admission in public schools for 5th grade students

      should be made compulsory.

     At least one month in-service training should be made compulsory for all the

      teachers after every three years.

     To make in-service training or refresher courses fruitful, there should be

      follow-up of these programs.



Suggestions may be considered for further research.

     The present study has limited scope, specially PEF- Registered school system

      is not only newly introduced but due to uncertainty situation of political

      governments the objective of such task are left behind.



     The reading material is not in sufficient amount to enhance the area of

      research in this field.

     It is a challengeable task to recover this area of study, there are a lot of levels

      of academic assessments to study, and need to detect a comprehensive way out

      to develop a standard system of evaluation and assessment for both public and

      private sector in education.

     This was delimited to southern area of Punjab the further study can be

      extended to whole Punjab level.

     The first present study in this area of research comprised of sample of 1080

      students of PEF-registered schools where examined, in further studies sample

      sizes can be extended.




                                          112
   The future studies can be conducted on other areas of achievement and

    subjects.vii the reflection of achievements and real picture of enhancement of

    quality education should be come into vision through such kind of researches




                                     113
                              BIILIOGRAPHY

Abbas N. (2005). Standardization of an Achievement Test in the Subject of Statistics

       through Rasch Model. An unpublished M.Phil Thesis, Malfan, Department of

       Education.



Aggerwal J.C. (1995). Essentials of Educational Technology. New Delhi: Vikas

       Publishing House Limited.



Ainscow M. and Muney J. (2003). Small Steps; A Workshop Guide About Teaching

       Children with Learning Difficulties. Coventry: LEA publication



Ainscow, M. and Tweddle, D. (2002), Early Learning Skills Analysis. Chichester:

       Wiley



Aveni, V.A.P., (2005). Study Abroad and Second Language Use. Syndicate of the

       University of Cambridge. United Kingdom.



B.F (1938). operant conditioning theory, 11th Edition. New Dehli



Biggs, J. and Collis, K. (2001). Evaluating the Quality of Learning. New York:

       Academic Press.



Blyth, W.A.L. (2001) Development Experience and Curriculum in primary Education.

       Sydney: Croom Helm




                                        114
Booth T. (2002). Preventing Difficulties in Learning. Oxford: Blackewll.



Dean, J. (2000). Improving Children Learning. New York: Rout Ledge.



Embel R.L. and Frisbie D.A (1986). Psychological Testing and Assessment. Boston:

       Allyn and Bacon



Hoodbhoy P. (1998). Education and the State. Delhi: University Press.



http://www.pef.edu.pk/about-pef-history.html

http://www.pef.edu.pk/advertisements-newsletters.html

http://www.pef.edu.pk/downloads-model-papers.html

http://www.pef.edu.pk/downloads-Results-fas.html

http://www.pef.edu.pk/downloads-Results-nsp.html

http://www.pef.edu.pk/pef-departments-fas-partners.html

http://www.pef.edu.pk/pdf/downloads/TheHope11.pdf

http”//site.ebrary.com/lib/iubahawalpur/doc?id=2004707&ppg=13



Illeries,K.(2007). How we learn: learning and non-learning in school and beyond.

       New York: Rutledge, 270 Madison Avenue.



John V. (2000). Assessing Students with special needs. New Jersey: Prentice Hell



Karnal L.J. and Karmal M.O. (1978). Measurement and Evaluations in the Schools.

       New York: Macmillan Publishing Co



                                        115
Kathy H. Winifred B. (2003). Making formative assessmat work, Effective Practice

       in Primary Classroom. England: Open University Press



Kay. B. (2005). How to assess Authentic learning. California: Crowin Press.



Khalid, 1. (2001). Kaumi Taleemi Masail. Islamabad: Pakistan Education

       Foundation.



Khan, Habib et all (2000). Measuring Learning Achievement at Primary level in

       Pakistan. Academy of Educational Planning and Management, Ministry of

       Education, Islamabad.



Kumari S., Srivastava D.S. (2005). Education; Understating the Learner. India: Isha

       Books



Linn R.L. Mill M.D and Gronlund N.E. (2005). Measurement and Assessment in

       Teaching. New Jersey: Pearson Merill Prentice Hall.



Mangal, S.K (2000). Advanced Educational



Ministry of Education, (1992). National Education Policy 1992. Islamabad:

       Government of Pakistan Printing Corporation of Pakistan.



Ministry of Education, (2003).National plan of action education for all Pakistan.

       Islamabad: Govt. of Pakistan



                                        116
Ministry of Education, (2010). National Education Policy. Islamabad: Government of

       Pakistan



Paul W., Jan W., Patricia B, (2002). Assessment; What’s in it for school? New York:

       Routledge Falmer



Peter K. Mant Z.Y. (2003). Assessment, Learning and employability. London: Open

       University Press



Proctor,A. et all (2003). Learning to teach in the Primary Classroom Great Britain: St

       Edmundsbury Press Limited, Bury st Edmunds.



Sujathamalini j. (2007). Learning Difficulties in Children: Teacher Competencies.

       New Dehli: Discovery Publishing House



UNESCO (2000). Education for All 2000 Assessment, country report Pakistan,

       Bangkok, Thailand.



Vashistn S.R. (1992). Teacher Education in Third World Countries. Delhi: Anmol

       Publishers



Venn J.J. (2000). Assessing Students with Special Needs. New Jersy: Prentice Hell



Walsh W.B. and Betz N.E. (1985). Test and Assessment. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.




                                         117
Weeden P., Winter J., Broad Foot P. (2005). Assessment: What in it for Schools?

      New York: Rutledge Falmer



Wiersna W. and Jurs S.G. (1985). Educational Measurement and Testing. Boston:

      Allyn Bacon Inn




                                     118

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:15
posted:8/24/2012
language:English
pages:118