Dr srivastava

Document Sample
Dr srivastava Powered By Docstoc
					LEARNING ACHIEVEMENT AT THE END OF PRIMARY CYCLE IN DPEP STATES


Introduction

Achievement surveys are conducted to provide data on quality of education in terms of scores on
achievement tests administered to students at a given grade level. Such surveys have been conducted
across a number of counties by international organizations such as IEA and OECD in the past. One of the
recent surveys of this type was conducted as a part of the Third International Mathematics and Science
Study (TIMSS) that was carried out by Boston College and IEA in 45 countries in 1994-95. In India a
country -wide achievement survey in Language and Mathematics for the students at the end of their
primary cycle was conducted by NCERT in 1991. Such survey was conducted again by NCERT recently,
but the report has yet to be released.

During the last ten years, the major achievement surveys were those that were conducted in DPEP
districts as a part of the DPEP strategy to focus on quality of education. These were conducted to monitor
the learning achievement of primary school students. The most recent achievement surveys in the series
were the Terminal Assessment Surveys (TAS) that were conducted in DPEP districts to assess the
achievement of students towards the end of the District Primary Education Programme. These surveys
were conducted mainly to find out whether and to what extent the DPEP objective of improving the
quality of education in primary schools was achieved. In DPEP there was considerable emphasis on
enhancing achievement level of pupils at the primary stage of education and hence clear quantitative
targets were set for their average achievement in language and mathematics. The DPEP target was to
“raise the average achievement by at least 25% over the baseline level; to ensure achievement of basic
literacy and numeracy competencies in full and minimum 40% achievement in other competencies by all
the students completing primary level of education.”
In the districts that were covered under DPEP, achievement surveys known as Baseline Assessment
Surveys (BAS) in these two subjects at the end of grade I as well as the penultimate grade of primary
cycle, were conducted at the time of launching the DPEP in order to provide data on the status of
achievement at the beginning of the programme. These surveys were repeated after three years in the
form of Mid-term Assessment Surveys (MAS) and again at the end of the programme in the form
Terminal Assessment Surveys (TAS). These surveys helped in monitoring the progress made in improving
the achievement of students as a result of DPEP interventions.
Terminal assessment Survey (TAS) was conducted in 49 DPEP Phase I districts in 2001 and in 86 DPEP
Phase II districts in 2003. Actually DPEP Phase I started in 42 districts of 7 states (Assam, Haryana,
Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu ) in 1994 as a 7-year programme
terminating in 2001 whereas DPEP Phase II started in 76 districts spread over 12 states as a 5-year
programme in 1997 terminating in 2003. Since some districts were bifurcated and a new state
Chhattisgarh was carved out of Madhya Pradesh, there were 49 Phase I districts belonging to 8 states in
which TAS was conducted in 2001 and 86 Phase II districts belonging to 13 states in which TAS was
conducted in 2003. The states which had Phase I districts had a few Phase II districts also. The states
that had only Phase II districts were Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Orissa, Uttar Pradesh
and West Bengal. In general, the DPEP districts were educationally backward districts as the main
criterion of selection of districts was low female literacy rate. Those with female literacy rate below the
national average qualified for inclusion in the DPEP programme.


National Conference on Enhancing Learning in Elementary Schools , Bangalore, 23-25 July 2004     1
Here in this paper we shall discuss the results of Terminal Assessment Surveys conducted in 49 Phase I
and 86 Phase II districts in 2001 and 2003 respectively. We shall confine our discussion to the
achievement of students at the end of grade III (in the states in which grade IV is the last primary grade)
and at the end of grade IV (in the states in which grade V is the last primary grade), and shall not
discuss the results at the end of grade I although under TAS students at the end of grade I were also
tested. Our main interest is in finding out how much the students had learnt in language and
mathematics subjects by the time they were about to complete their primary education. We shall not
discuss the results district-wise, but shall be concerned with the state level picture that emerges on
aggregating the district –wise results. Further in this paper we shall not compare the results of TAS with
those of BAS and MAS to see whether the expected change in achievement of students has occurred or
not as a result of DPEP interventions, since our interest is only in knowing about the present status of
students‟ learning as indicated by the Terminal Assessment Surveys of 2001 and 2003. Of course, the
findings are not valid for the whole state but only that part of the state in which DPEP was implemented,
but the results of TAS provide a good idea of the current level of learning of students completing their
primary education in the DPEP states. Although initially only the educationally backward districts were
selected for coverage under DPEP, it is expected that after 5 to 7 years of DPEP interventions these
districts would have become at par with other districts, if not better than them in respect of students‟
learning achievement. That is why we feel that the results of TAS would be fairly typical of the entire
state in which TAS was conducted in their DPEP districts. In particular, in Madhya Pradesh and Uttar
Pradesh where the number of DPEP districts is large, the findings should be quite representative of the
whole state.


Sample design

The sampling design for TAS was the same as for BAS and MAS. A stratified two-stage sample of about
50 schools was selected in each district. The schools that qualified for selection were the government and
private aided primary schools, middle, and secondary schools that had primary sections. Rural and urban
area schools constituted the two strata. Although allocation was proportional, it was envisaged that at
least 10 schools in the sample would be urban schools. The first stage unit was „block‟ for selecting rural
schools and „city or town‟ for selecting urban schools. The second stage units were schools. If in any
selected school there were two or more sections in grade III/ IV, one section was selected at random for
testing the students. All the students of that section were tested if their number did not exceed 30, but if
their number was more than 30, a stratified random sample of 30 was drawn for testing, with boys and
girls constituting the two strata. It was thus ensured that boys and girls were proportionately represented
in the sample. In this way the sample size of Grade III/IV students who were tested did not exceed 1500
in any district. Actually, it was much less than 1500 in most of the districts since many schools had less
than 30 students in grade III/IV.


Tests used in TAS

In the states in which grade IV was the highest grade, language and mathematics tests that were
suitable for those completing grade III, were used for testing the students who were at the end of their
grade III. The language test had 65 items, 30 of which tested word knowledge and 35 tested reading
comprehension. In the states in which grade V was the highest grade, the tests aimed at measuring the
competencies of grade IV, as these were administered to the students who were at the end of grade IV.
In this case, the language test had 70 items, of which 35 tested word knowledge and 35 tested reading
comprehension. In both tests the „word knowledge‟ part had items in which a pair of words that were
either synonyms or antonyms, was given and the students were required to indicate whether the two
words had the same meaning or opposite meaning. Thus, every item had two choices of which one was
National Conference on Enhancing Learning in Elementary Schools , Bangalore, 23-25 July 2004      2
the correct response. In the „reading comprehension‟ part of the test, six unseen passages were given
and 5 to 7 questions were asked on each passage to test their comprehension. The questions were all of
Multiple Choice type in this part of the test.
The mathematics tests tested various competencies of grade III and IV. Each mathematics test had 40
items that tested different competencies of grade III or grade mathematics. All the items were of
multiple-choice type in these tests.

All the tests were prepared by Ed.CIL‟s Technical Support Group for DPEP after try out in several states.
The tests were similar to those used in the all India survey of students‟ achievement at the end of
primary level conducted by NCERT in 1991.

In all these tests, every item was scored 0 or 1 (0 for wrong answer and 1 for correct answer). The test
scores were out of the maximum marks, but for discussion of test results these were converted into
percentage scores, that is, scores out of 100. Thus for a student whose test score is 24 out of 40, the
transformed score is 60. In the following sections, the mean scores and other statistics are being
reported for the transformed scores only.


State-wise mean scores in grade III tests

The five states in which grade III tests were given to the students who had completed grade III are
Assam, Gujarat, Karnataka, Kerala and Maharashtra. Of these states, except Gujarat, all had both Phase I
and Phase II districts. Tables 1 and 2 show the pooled means and standard deviations of the test scores
in these states for language and mathematics respectively. Also, these tables show the lowest and
highest district means and lowest and highest district standard deviations. The lowest district sd is not
necessarily for the district that has the lowest mean and the same applies to the highest district sd. The
districts in which TAS was conducted in 2003 are covered under Phase II.
Table 1. Pooled mean and standard deviation (sd) of scores in language of grade III
students in DPEP Phase I and Phase II districts in TAS
State            Phase      No. of        Lowest       Highest       Lowest      Highest       Pooled results for all
                            districts     district     district      district    district      districts
                                          mean         mean          sd          sd
                                                                                               Sample   mean        sd
                                                                                               size
Assam            I               3           58.6         70.7         16.6         20.0        2170     65.3       19.4
                 II              6           46.1         48.7          6.0          7.5        3586     47.2       6.6
Gujarat          II              3           50.5         66.2         16.4         18.1        2517     60.5       18.2
Karnataka        I               4           36.5         64.7         10.7         13.1        3479     52.7       17.0
                 II              7           40.3         67.1          4.7         19.8        6658     50.7       19.5
   Kerala             I          3           52.0         52.7         16.9         19.3        4042     52.3       17.8
                      II         3           55.4         56.7         16.6         17.7        3388     55.8       17.1
Maharashtra           I          5           43.7         85.7          7.1         24.2        5291     60.9       23.7
                      II         4           55.7         64.5         17.3         20.2        3971     60.2       18.9
Note: TAS in Phase I districts was conducted in 2001 and in Phase II districts in 2003.
National Conference on Enhancing Learning in Elementary Schools , Bangalore, 23-25 July 2004                    3
Table 2. Pooled mean and standard deviation (sd) of scores in mathematics of grade III
students in DPEP Phase I and Phase II districts in TAS
State            Phase      No. of        Lowest       Highest       Lowest      Highest       Pooled results for all
                            districts     district     district      district    district      districts
                                          mean         mean          sd          sd
                                                                                               Sample   mean        sd
                                                                                               size
   Assam             I           3           66.8         67.5         17.9         21.6        2170     67.1       19.9
                    II           6           45.4         54.9          9.8         21.5        3586     50.7       16.7
   Gujarat          II           3           49.2         61.6         19.2         23.4        2517     56.4       22.5
 Karnataka           I           4           28.1         56.8          6.8          8.8        3443     45.9       14.6
                    II           7           39.1         63.8          4.6          5.0        6655     47.4       11.0
   Kerala            I           3           39.0         44.0         17.1         18.8        4042     40.8       17.9
                    II           3           56.4         58.7         17.7         18.9        3387     57.4       18.3
Maharashtra          I           5           37.6         96.2          8.5         27.0        5397     57.6       30.3
                    II           4           45.1         63.4         19.1         25.4        3959     55.7       24.0
Note: TAS in Phase I districts was conducted in 2001 and in Phase II districts in 2003.
The mean score in language was close to 60 in only Gujarat and Maharashtra and was highest (65.3) in
Phase I districts of Assam. In Karnataka and Kerala, the mean score was in the range of 50 to 56. In
Assam, in Phase II districts it was lowest, only 47.2. The standard deviation was between 17 and 20, but
in Assam Phase II districts and in Karnataka Phase I districts the standard deviations were quite low, 6.3
and 11.7 respectively.
The district- to- district variation in mean scores is quite large in every state except in Kerala and Assam
Phase II. The difference between the mean scores of Phase I districts and Phase II districts is not large
except in Assam where the mean score of Phase II districts is much lower than that of Phase I districts.
The district standard deviations of scores in language vary within a narrow range except in Karnataka
Phase II and Maharashtra Phase I districts, where the sd of one district differs widely from that of
another. The difference between the standard deviations of Phase I and Phase II districts is not large
except in Assam and Maharashtra. In Assam particularly both means and standard deviations of Phase I
districts differ so much from those of Phase II districts that one would like to question the very veracity
of data, if no satisfactory explanation can be found for the large difference between the attainments of
students in the two sets of districts.
The mean scores in mathematics are relatively higher in Maharashtra, Gujarat, Phase II districts of
Kerala and Phase I districts of Assam. The mean score is lowest (40.8) in Phase I districts of Kerala. The
difference between the mean scores of Phase I districts and Phase II districts is quite large in Assam and
Kerala, but not in Karnataka and Maharashtra. In Assam, the pattern is similar to that of mean scores in
language. It is difficult to explain why the mean score is so much lower in Phase II districts compared to
Phase I districts.
The district-to district variation in mean score is large in every state except in Assam and Kerala. In
particular, in Karnataka, one district had as low mean score as 28.1 and in Maharashtra, one district had
the lowest mean score of 37.6. Incidentally, the district of Karnataka that had the lowest mean score in
National Conference on Enhancing Learning in Elementary Schools , Bangalore, 23-25 July 2004                    4
        mathematics had the lowest mean score in language also. Maharashtra has the distinction of having
        unbelievably high mean score of 96.2 in mathematics in one of its districts.
        The standard deviations of scores in mathematics are lowest in Karnataka and highest in Maharashtra.
        The lowest is 11.0 in Phase II districts of Karnataka and the highest is 30.3 in Phase I districts of
        Maharashtra. The district standard deviations vary greatly in Phase II districts of Assam and Phase I
        districts of Maharashtra. In Karnataka, the standard deviations of scores within district are quite low in all
        the districts; the lowest is 4.6 and the highest is just 8.8. On the other hand, in Maharashtra, it is as high
        as 27.0 in one of the Phase I districts.
        Distribution of Scores in the grade III tests of language and mathematics
        Tables showing percentage distribution of scores (out of 100) in language and mathematics for the total
        of all DPEP districts in the different states in which TAS was conducted in 2001 and 2002, are given a
        Table I of Annex I. We find that the distributions vary greatly from state to state. Figures 1 to 2 show the
        distribution of scores for the total of all the districts of Phase I in language and mathematics respectively
        and Figures 1 shows similar distributions for the total of all the 23 districts of Phase I.
        In language, the distribution of scores in Phase I districts differs considerably from that of Phase II
        districts. In Phase I districts the percentage of students having high scores (say, above 60% or 80%)
        was much greater than that in Phase II districts. In Mathematics too, the trend is similar. It is difficult to
        explain the difference in the shape of distribution of Phase I and Phase II districts. It may be due to the
        difference in the nature of districts included in the two phases.
        As indicators of overall performance, let us find out the percentage of students who performed well and
        who performed badly in the tests. Table 3 shows the percentage of students who scored (a) below 30%
        marks, (b) below 50% marks and percentage of those who scored (c) above 60% marks and (d) above
        90% marks. Those achieving below 30% can be considered as poor in achievement who had hardly
        acquired the competencies that were tested. On the other hand, those scoring over 80% can be
        considered as having acquired mastery level learning in the subject. The performance of those who
        scored between 30% and 50% could be considered as fair but not quite satisfactory, while those scoring
        between 60% and 80% could be treated as good in performance, though not excellent with mastery level
        learning.




        Table 3: Percentage of students scoring below 30% and 50% marks and above 60% and
        80% marks in grade III tests of language and mathematics in TAS (2001) conducted in
        Phase districts and in TAS (2003) conducted in Phase II districts
                                        Language                                                  Mathematics
State           Phase       N           Below Below            Above       Above      N           Below Below   Above   Above
                                        30%    50%             60%         80%                    30% 50%       60%     80%
            I (3)           2170        3.18   22.81           57.65       25.53      4268        3.00  22.35   61.52   27.47
Assam
            II (6)          3608        0.08   69.84           1.16        0.03       2781        12.42 15.85   0.64    0.11
Gujarat     II (3)          2517        3.69   32.18           50.18       18.36      4034        15.81 44.54   41.52   15.57
            I (4)           3479        16.84  52.49           36.59       13.48      6979        29.99 54.67   33.94   6.74
Karnataka
            II (7)          6658        19.09  56.19           29.98       9.49       10179       27.63 57.76   31.75   13.63
Kerala      I (3)           4042        10.22  47.72           32.41       5.59       10738       28.50 66.95   13.24   1.62
            I (5)           5374        11.57  34.96           52.68       27.30      5695        24.40 49.14   43.14   24.16
Maharashtra
            II (4)          3971        6.22   29.34           50.39       14.53      4007        18.19 42.06   45.24   15.56
Total       I (15)          15065       11.22  40.68           44.24       18.03      27680       23.80 51.54   35.46   14.62
        National Conference on Enhancing Learning in Elementary Schools , Bangalore, 23-25 July 2004              5
        II (23)     16754       9.63         49.16     31.65       9.98       21001       20.34   43.03   29.70   11.46


Figure 1: Percentage distribution of scores in class III tests in language and mathematics in TAS
conducted in 15 Phase I districts of Assam, Karnataka, Kerala and Maharashtra in 2001 and in 23 Phase
II districts of Assam, Gujarat, Karnataka and Maharashtra in 2003




            Percentage distribution of scores in language Class III in 15 Phase I
                                  districts in TAS (2001)

 20.00

 15.00

 10.00

  5.00

  0.00
             0-10      10-20      20-30      30-40      40-50      50-60      60-70      70-80    80-90 90-100




                Percentage distribution of scores in language Class III in 23
                              Phase II districts in TAS (2003)

   30.00
   25.00
   20.00
   15.00
   10.00
     5.00
     0.00
               0-10     10-20      20-30     30-40     40-50      50-60     60-70      70-80   80-90 90-100
National Conference on Enhancing Learning in Elementary Schools , Bangalore, 23-25 July 2004                  6
        Percentage distribution of scores in mathematics Class III
                  in 23 Phase II districts in TAS (2003)

30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
 5.00
 0.00
         0-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 60-70 70-80 80-90        90-
                                                                     100




                                                                           7
             Percentage distribution of scores in mathematics Class
                     III in 15 Phase I districts in TAS (2001)
                                                                                                   In Phase
                                                                                                         and
     20.00                                                                                         Phase II
                                                                                                     district,
     15.00                                                                                           11.22%
                                                                                                         and
     10.00                                                                                            9.63%
                                                                                                    students
      5.00

      0.00
               0-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 60-70 70-80 80-90                      90-
                                                                                         100

respectively had scored below 30% marks in language. The percentage of those scoring over 80%
marks was, however, much higher in Phase I districts (18.0%) compared to 10.0% in Phase II districts.
While in Assam, very few scored below 30% (only 3.2% in Phase I and less than 1% in Phase II districts,
Karnataka the percentage of those scoring below 30% was highest (over 16%) of all the states in both
Phase I and Phase II. The percentage of students who had scored over 80% was fairly high (over 25%)
in Phase I districts of Assam and Maharashtra and quite low (only 5.6%) in Kerala Phase I. In Phase II
districts, the percentage of those scoring over 80% was fairly large in Gujarat and Maharashtra (18.4%
and 14.5% respectively) but low (below 10%) in other states.
In Mathematics, in Phase I districts, the performance was good only in Assam (only 3.0% scoring below
30% and 27.5% scoring over 80%). In the total of 15 Phase I districts, 23.8% students had scored
below 30% whereas in 23 Phase II districts, 20.3% had scored below 30%. However, the percentage of
those scoring over 80% was a little higher in Phase I districts (14.6%) compared to 11.5% in Phase II
districts. The percentage of those scoring below 30% was between 24 and 30 percent in Karnataka,
Kerala and Maharashtra. In Maharashtra, however, the spread and quite wide as 24."% students scored
over 80%. In Karnataka and Kerala, very few (6.7% and 1.6% respectively) scored over 80%.
To sum up, from the results presented above, can we say that the achievement of students in language
and mathematics at the end of grade III is satisfactory? Although we have no yardstick to decide the cut
off point below which the achievement can be said to be unsatisfactory, it is clear that the performance
of students was not up to the mark in most of the districts where the mean score was, say, below 50.
Even with a high mean if the standard deviation is large, it indicates that there were quite a few students
who had very low achievement scores whereas some had very high scores. If we consider a mean score
of 60 or more as satisfactory performance of the group taking the test, then if we exclude Phase I
districts of Assam, only Gujarat and Maharashtra had satisfactory achievement in language and no state
had satisfactory achievement in mathematics. In Assam (Phase I districts) the mean score is above 65 in
both language and mathematics but on comparing the results of Phase I districts with those of Phase II
districts, we find that either the former are way ahead of not only the Phase II districts but most districts
of other states too or something went wrong with testing of the students in these districts.



                                                                                                   8
  State-wise mean scores in grade IV tests
  Grade IV tests were used in the states in which grade V was the last primary grade. Tables 4 and 5 show
  the pooled mean scores of language and mathematics test respectively in these states. These tables also
  show the lowest and highest district means and standard deviations in the same way as Tables 1 and 2
  do. The districts in which testing for TAS was done in 2001 are Phase I districts whereas all those in
  which testing for TAS was done in 2003 have been designated as Phase II districts.
  Table 4. Pooled mean and standard deviation (sd) of scores in language of grade IV
  students in DPEP Phase I and Phase II districts in TAS
  State            Phase   No. of      Lowest     Highest    Lowest     Highest    Pooled results for all
                           districts   district   district   district   district   districts
                                       mean       mean       sd         sd
                                                                                   Sample    mean         sd
                                                                                   size
    Andhra
                    II         5         66.2       71.3        4.4        5.6       4403     67.9        5.0
    Pradesh
  Chhattisgarh       I         9         27.1       56.0        7.3       21.0       5579     44.0        16.2
                    II         6         45.0       54.7       17.5       37.2       4033     50.1        27.1
    Haryana          I         4         44.6       58.6       14.5       19.9       4268     52.2        19.0
                    II         3         45.1       56.5       16.1       19.3       2781     50.7        18.9
   Himachal
                    II         4         44.0       48.8        8.1        9.2       2333     46.0        8.7
   Pradesh
    Madhya
                     I         17        47.1       77.5       12.7       24.6      11002     59.9        16.4
    Pradesh
                    II         16        41.8       78.4       13.2       19.3      10190     61.6        18.7
        Orissa      II         8         35.6       41.5        9.4       12.3       5067     39.9        10.7
  Tamil Nadu         I         4         67.8       91.9        8.6       19.6       5695     79.0        18.1
                    II         3         59.5       78.5       15.1       17.7       4057     69.1        18.1
     Uttar
                    II         18        55.1       78.9        8.1       19.9      11039     69.5        18.0
    Pradesh
  Note: TAS in Phase I districts was conducted in 2001 and in Phase II districts in 2003.




  Table 5. Pooled mean and standard deviation (sd) of scores in mathematics of grade IV
  students in DPEP Phase I and Phase II districts in TAS
State            Phase   No. of      Lowest     Highest    Lowest     Highest    Pooled results for all
                         districts   district   district   district   district   districts
                                     mean       mean       sd         sd
                                                                                 Sample     mean     sd
                                                                                 size



                                                                                                     9
  Andhra
                II         5         51.2       58.2       5.3        7.9       4384        54.7    7.0
  Pradesh
Chhattisgarh     I         9         29.4       40.1       6.2       22.1       5579        34.8   14.0
                II         6         30.4       39.4       13.2      19.8       4034        36.1   16.9
  Haryana        I         4         44.8       59.9       14.0      19.9       4268        49.8   18.8
                II         3         29.5       49.7       18.8      23.1       2781        40.5   22.2
 Himachal
                II         4         44.2       55.0       16.1      19.5       2338        49.6   17.1
 Pradesh
  Madhya
                 I        17         32.0       70.0       14.0      22.6       10707       52.1   20.5
  Pradesh
                II        16         37.4       75.3       14.7      25.3       10179       54.2   22.6
   Orissa       II         8         32.9       48.3       14.0      21.1       5067        43.2   18.1
Tamil Nadu       I         4         61.3       90.2       13.0      24.7       5695        74.5   22.6
                II         3         47.9       74.3       18.5      21.2       4057        61.1   22.6
   Uttar
                II        18         52.8       75.4       10.4      23.5       11039       64.2   18.7
  Pradesh
  Note: TAS in Phase I districts was conducted in 2001 and in Phase II districts in 2003.


  We find that in the language test the mean score was highest (79.0) in Phase I districts of Tamil Nadu.
  Actually one district had unbelievably high mean score of 91.9. Next to Tamil Nadu was Uttar Pradesh, in
  which the mean score was as high as 69.5. Also close to it was Andhra Pradesh with a mean score of
  67.9. The states in which the mean scores were rather low (in the range of 40 to 50 roughly) are
  Chhattisgarh, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh and Orissa. The lowest mean score is 39.9 in Chhattisgarh,
  whereas the mean score of Haryana is close to 50 in both Phase I and Phase II districts. In Madhya
  Pradesh the mean score is close to 60 in both Phase I and Phase II districts. In Haryana and Madhya
  Pradesh there was hardly any difference between the mean scores of Phase I and Phase II districts, but
  in Tamil Nadu the mean score of Phase I districts was much higher than that of Phase II districts. On the
  other hand, in Chhattisgarh the mean score was higher in Phase II districts compared to Phase I districts
  but both were quite low.
  The variation in district mean scores is quite large in every state except in Andhra Pradesh and Orissa.
  But the difference between the two is that while in Andhra Pradesh all the districts have high mean
  scores, in Orissa all have quite low mean scores.
  As regards variability in students‟ scores, we find that the pooled standard deviations were low (between
  5 and 11) in Andhra Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh and Orissa. In Andhra Pradesh, sd was as low as 5.0,
  which shows that most students scored marks within a narrow range about the mean. The highest sd
  was 27.1in Chhattisgarh (Phase II). In all other states the sd ranged between 16 and 19. Among the
  districts, there was one in Chhattisgarh that had as high sd as 37.2. Also, one in Madhya Pradesh had a
  high sd of 24.6. It will be interesting to study why some districts had very low or very high standard
  deviation.




                                                                                                   10
        In mathematics the mean scores are, in general, lower than those of language. The lowest mean score
        is about 35 in Chhattisgarh (both phases) and the highest is 74.5 in Phase I districts of Tamil Nadu. Uttar
        Pradesh is next with a mean score of 64.2. The mean scores are also low (between 40 and 50) in
        Haryana and Orissa. Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh are a little better with mean scores lying
        between 50 and 55. The difference between mean scores of Phase I and Phase II districts is small in
        Chhattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh, but large in Haryana and Tamil Nadu. In both these states, the mean
        score of Phase I districts is much higher than that of Phase II districts.
        The district level mean scores differ greatly in every state but the differences are relatively small in
        Andhra Pradesh and Himachal Pradesh. There are districts in Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh and Orissa in
        which the mean score in mathematics is between 30 and 33, that is, even below the traditional pass
        score of 33, whereas there is a district in Tamil Nadu that has mean score of 90.2. The difference
        between the lowest and highest district means is very large in Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh, which
        is understandable because both had a large number of districts under DPEP. But in Tamil Nadu also the
        districts differ greatly even though very few districts were covered under DPEP in both the phases.
        Coming to variability in scores, we find that the overall standard deviation was lowest (only 7.0) in
        Andhra Pradesh, whereas in all other states it was between 14 and 23. Tamil Nadu, Madhya Pradesh and
        Haryana (Phase II) had high variability in mathematics scores with standard deviation in the range of 22
        to 23. The district level sd was lowest (6.2) in one district of Andhra Pradesh and highest (25.3) in one of
        the Madhya Pradesh districts. The variation between districts in respect of sd was largest in Chhattisgarh
        and Uttar Pradesh as both had districts with very low and very sd.
        Distribution of scores in grade IV tests of language and mathematics
        The distribution of scores in grade IV tests language and mathematics is given in Table II of Annex I for
        the Phase I and Phase II districts of the different states. Figures 2. In language, the distributions are
        negatively skewed, indicating a high percentage of students scoring marks the upper range in both Phase
        I and Phase II districts. In Mathematics the distribution of scores of Phase I districts differs widely from
        that of Phase II districts.
        Table 6 shows the percentage of students who scored marks in different broad ranges of marks as in
        Table 3 for grade III. We find that while 22.8% students were in "over 80%" bracket in Phase I districts,
        only 11.5% were in this bracket in Phase II districts. But in both cases, about 16% students had scored
        less than 30% marks. In Phase I districts of Tamil Nadu, the performance was exceptionally good, as
        over 50% students had scored more than 80% marks and only 5% were in the "below 30%" category.
        The districts in which the performance was worst were Phase II districts of Chhattisgarh, as nearly 40%
        students had scored less than 30% marks and only 0.6% had scored over 80% marks. However, in
        Phase I districts of Chhattisgarh, the picture was different as 31% students had scored over 80% marks.
        Since in Himachal Pradesh and Orissa only 5.9% and 2.8% respectively had scored over 80% marks; the
        overall performance was rather unsatisfactory. In Madhya Pradesh (both phases) the performance was a
        little better as between 18 and 21 percent students scored below 30% and 10 to 12 percent scored over
        80%. In Uttar Pradesh also, the overall performance was rather good as only 5.5% students had scored
        below 30% marks and 20.5% had scored over 80% marks.


        Table 6: Percentage of students scoring below 30% and 50% marks and above 60% and
        80% marks in grade IV tests of language and mathematics in TAS (2001) conducted in
        Phase districts and in TAS (2003) conducted in Phase II districts

State            Phase    N           Language                               N        Mathematics



                                                                                                         11
                                                                 Abov             Belo    Belo    Abov    Abov
                                     Below    Below     Above
                                                                 e                w       w       e       e
                                     30%      50%       60%
                                                                 80%              30%     50%     60%     80%
Andhra
                 II (5)    4403      0.00     0.66      70.18    0.02     4404    0.45    63.81   2.11    0.00
Pradesh
                 I (4)     2170      11.94    51.25     32.06    9.56     4268    16.00   54.24   26.55   5.58
Haryana
                 II (3)    3608      15.43    65.48     18.52    2.19     2781    33.59   68.90   21.32   7.70

                 I (9)     3479      20.38    71.41     12.26    1.77     6979    16.81   45.88   39.15   31.02
Chhattisgarh
                 II (6)    2517      12.72    52.53     26.75    3.25     4034    40.53   79.80   9.32    0.57

Himachal
                 II (4)    2333      4.24     68.24     5.53     0.00     2338    11.42   49.32   29.13   5.90
Pradesh
                 I (17)    4042      5.81     32.80     51.89    16.58    10738   20.53   48.28   36.90   9.48
Madhya
Pradesh          II (16)   6658      4.24     68.24     5.53     0.00     10179   17.84   45.27   40.09   11.72

Orissa           II (8)    5067      17.68    86.62     1.99     0.00     5067    27.59   69.51   16.93   2.80

                 I (9)     5374      0.51     9.83      81.62    56.17    5695    4.95    19.37   71.61   50.64
Tamil Nadu
                 II (3)    3971      3.33     19.05     68.55    38.21    4007    6.79    32.44   53.71   26.23

Uttar Pradesh    II (18)   11339     2.41     16.61     71.66    30.02    11039   5.46    24.57   59.36   20.50

                 I (34)    15065     8.71     38.92     46.79    20.86    27680   15.69   42.64   43.01   22.78
Total
                 II (63)   39896     6.17     35.64     47.62    15.79    43849   15.84   48.44   35.09   11.46




         Figure 2: Percentage distribution of scores in class IV tests in language and mathematics in TAS
         conducted in 34 Phase I districts of Haryana, Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh and Tamil Nadu in 2001 and
         in 63 Phase II districts of these 4 states plus Andhra Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, Orissa and Uttar
         Pradesh in 2003.




                                                                                                     12
        Percentage distribution of scores in language Class IV in 34
                      Phase I districts in TAS (2001)




20.00
15.00
10.00
 5.00
 0.00
        0-10   10-20   20-30   30-40   40-50   50-60   60-70   70-80   80-90   90-100



                        Percentage distribution of scores in language Class IV in 63
                                      Phase II districts in TAS (2003)

               25.00
               20.00
               15.00
               10.00
                5.00
                0.00
                        0-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 60-70 70-80 80-90                 90-
                                                                                             100




                                                                                        13
                     Percentage distribution of scores in mathematics
                       Class IV in 34 Phase I districts in TAS (2001)

      16.00
      14.00
      12.00
      10.00
       8.00
       6.00
       4.00
       2.00
       0.00
                   0-10       10-20      20-30      30-40      40-50       50-60      60-70    70-80   80-90   90-100




                    Percentage distribution of scores in mathematics Class IV in
                                63 Phase II districts in TAS (2003)

        20.00
        18.00
        16.00
        14.00
        12.00
        10.00
         8.00
         6.00
         4.00
         2.00
         0.00
                     0-10      10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 60-70 70-80 80-90                                 90-
                                                                                                               100



National Conference on Enhancing Learning in Elementary Schools , Bangalore, 23-25 July 2004                            14
To sum up, from the results presented above, we can conclude that the overall achievement level of students
who took the grade IV tests in language and mathematics is not very satisfactory in language in Chhattisgarh,
Haryana, Himachal Pradesh and Orissa but can be considered as satisfactory in Andhra Pradesh, Madhya
Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and Uttar Pradesh where the mean scores exceed 60. The lowest achievement is that of
the students in Orissa, Himachal Pradesh and Chhattisgarh whose mean score is below 50. The best
achievement is that of the students of Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh and Andhra Pradesh, as their mean scores
exceed 67.
In mathematics, only in Tamil Nadu and Uttar Pradesh, the mean score exceeded 60. The next are Andhra
Pradesha and Madhya Pradesh, in which the mean score was between 50 and 55. In the remaining four states
the mean score was below 50. In particular, the achievement was rather poor in Chhattisgarh and Orissa where
the mean score was below 45. These two states were lowest in achievement in language too. It is important to
identify the reasons of low performance in these states.
Test Reliability and competency-wise achievement in language and mathematics in Karnataka and
Haryana
For Karnataka and Haryana, facility values of the different items of the language and mathematics tests of
grades III and IV respectively were available for Phase I districts in which TAS was conducted in 2001. These
enabled us to study the achievement of students on different competencies of language and mathematics.
These two states were average states in respect of achievement since the mean percentage achievement was
52.7 in language and 45.9 in mathematics in Phase I districts of Karnataka; and 52.2 in language and 49.8 in
mathematics in Phase I districts of Haryana. For this study, we used the facility values of items after pooling the
data of all the 4 districts in each state. The variation in the mean percentage scores across the districts was
large in both the states but by pooling the data of the districts, we could get the picture of the DPEP districts as
a whole for the entire state.
To give an idea of the large variation over the districts, the district-wise mean percentage scores are shown in
Table 7.
Table 7: District-wise mean (%) scores in Karantaka and Haryana Phase I districts
       Karnataka                                                    Haryana
       District            Mean % score (class III)                 District            Mean % score (class IV)
                           Language            Mathematics                              Language      Mathematics
          Belgaum                61.8                56.8               Hissar                 58.6       47.8
            Kolar                42.2                37.3                 Jind                 56.4       46.6
           Mandya                64.7                55.6               Kaithal                48.4       44.8
           Raichur               36.5                28.1                Sirsa                 44.6       59.9
            Total                52.7                45.9                Total                 52.2      49.8


The Kuder-Richardson (KR-20) Reliability of the tests was calculated to find out to what extent the tests were
reliable in the different districts. This reliability coefficient measures internal consistency of test items. The
districts in which mean scores and standard deviations were low, the test reliability was poor and hence the
Standard Error of Measurement was large. Table 8 shows the KR-20 Reliability Coefficient of the tests in the
four districts of Karnataka and Haryana as well as the reliability derived from the pooled data of all the districts.




National Conference on Enhancing Learning in Elementary Schools , Bangalore, 23-25 July 2004                        15
Table 8: KR-20 Reliability Coefficients of language and Mathematics tests in Karnataka and

         Karnataka – Class III                                       Haryana – Class IV
         Districts          Language            Mathematics                             Language      Mathematics
            Belgaum               .818                .286               Hissar                .922       .908
              Kolar               .731                .282                 Jind                .927       .886
            Mandya                .773                -.090              Kaithal               .909       .758
            Raichur               .701                .152                Sirsa                .853       .744

Haryana in TAS - 2001
Note – Although negative KR (20) is inadmissible, it occurs sometimes when the reliability is very low.
The mathematics test of class III has very poor reliability in all the districts of Karnataka. Actually, the standard
deviations of the test are quite low in these districts as a result of which the reliability has become very poor.
However, when the data of all the districts are pooled up, then treating the sampled schools as one sample
representative of DPEP-I districts, we find the reliability is fairly high for all the tests. The relatively high
reliability of language tests is due to the number of items in the test being much more than the number of items
in the Mathematics tests.
In the analysis that follows, use was made of the facility values of test items that were available for phase I
districts of Karnataka and Haryana. Since every item was scored 0,1, the Facility Value of an item is simply the
percentage of students who answered it correctly. And since each item (or a set of items) measures some
competency, it was possible to assess competency-wise achievement from the item analysis results of the
pooled data of four districts in each of the two states.
Competency–wise achievement in language tests in Karnataka and Haryana
The language tests differ from state to state depending on the state language but are similar in form. In every
language the grade III test has 30 items of Word Knowledge and 35 of Reading Comprehension and the grade
IV test has 35 items of Word Knowledge and 35 of Reading Comprehension. In the Word Knowledge tests every
item is a two-choice item. Given a pair of words, the student had to indicate whether the two words have the
same meaning or are opposite in meaning. In the Reading Comprehension tests, a few passages are given and
on each passage, a few multiple choice type items are given for answering. Some of the questions test simply
the understanding of the content; others test the ability of deriving inference or making judgment about the title
of the passage or its main theme.
Table 9 shows the distribution of their Facility Values of items and their means and standard deviations in the
Grade III test of Kannada language used in the Phase I districts of Karnataka in TAS conducted in 2001. The
results are for the pooled data of the four Phase I districts. Since the overall mean score is, 51.0 we can
consider the findings to be true for an average state in respect of achievement in language at Grade III level.
However, the mean score of the Word Knowledge test was 57.8 whereas the mean score of the Reading
Comprehension test was only 44.2 (both expressed as percentage of maximum marks). It means the
achievement of students in Reading Comprehension is much lower than their achievement in Word Knowledge
test. On the average, only 44.2% students could answer a Reading Comprehension item correctly, whereas the
corresponding average percentage for Word Knowledge items was 57.8%.




National Conference on Enhancing Learning in Elementary Schools , Bangalore, 23-25 July 2004                        16
Table 9. Distribution of item Facility Values and their means and sd's in Word Knolwedge and
Reading Comprehension tests of grade III Kannada in Terminal Assessment Survey conducted in
Karnataka, 2001


       Word Knowledge                                              Reading Comprehension
       Facility Value                Number of items               Facility Value              Number of items
              Below 50.0                          4                       below 20.0                   1
              50.0 – 59.9                        16                       20.0 - 29.9                  4
              60.0 – 69.9                         8                       30.0 - 39.9                 10
            70.0 - or more                        2                       40.0 - 49.9                  5
                                                                          50.0 - 59.9                 10
                                                                        60.0 - or more                 2
                 Total                           30                           Total                   35
                Mean FV                         57.8                        Mean FV                   44.2
               Lowest FV                        45.7                       Lowest FV                  5.9
              Highest FV                        80.2                       Highest FV                 69.9
               sd. of FVs                        8.0                        sd of FVs                 14.6


Although the items of both World Knowledge and Reading comprehension tests vary considerably in Facility
Value, the variation is greater in the case of Reading Comprehension test. The Word Knowledge item are more
homogeneous (sd of Facility Values being only 8.0 compared to 14.6 of Reading Comprehension test). In the
Word Knowledge test, whereas there was an item which only 45.7% students could answer correctly, there was
another which 80.2% answered correctly. In the case of Reading Comprehension test, the gap between easiest
and most difficult item was much wider; there was an item which only 5.9% students could answer correctly,
there was another which 69.9% students answered correctly. Also we find that in the Word Knowledge test,
there were only 4 items out of 30 which were answered correctly by less than 50% students, in the Reading
Comprehensions test, there were 20 items out of 35 that were answered correctly by less than 50% students.
For grade IV Table 10 gives the distribution of item Facility Values, mean scores and standard deviation of item
means of the two parts of the Hindi test used in the four Phase I districts of Haryana, as a part of TAS
conducted in 2001. The results are for the pooled data of the four districts. The table gives the means and
standard deviations of the item facility values (after converting them into scores out of 100). As the mean scores
are close to 50, we can consider the results as those of an average state.




National Conference on Enhancing Learning in Elementary Schools , Bangalore, 23-25 July 2004                     17
Table 10. Distribution and their means and standard deviations of item Facility Values WK and RC
tests of grade IV Hindi in Terminal Assessment Survey conducted in Haryana in 2001.


       Word Knowledge                                              Reading Comprehension
       Facility Value                Number of items               Facility Value              Number of items
       45 – 50                                   12                         30 – 40                    4
       50 – 55                                   13                         40 – 50                   12
       55 – 60                                    7                         50 – 60                   11
       60 - 65                                    3                          60 - 70                   8
       Total                                     35                           Total                   35
       Mean FV                                  52.7                        Mean FV                   51.4
       Lowest FV                                45.6                       Lowest FV                  31.2
       Highest FV                               31.2                       Highest FV                 69.9
       sd. of FVs                                4.7                        sd of FVs                 10.2


We find that in both the competencies (Word Knowledge and Reading Comprehension) the average
achievement is of the same level in terms of mean score. However, the range of facility values of items is wider
in the case of Reading Comprehension test. The low sd of the Word Knowledge test indicates that the items are
more homogeneous and fewer items would have served the purpose.
In the Word Knowledge test, about 35 percent students could not answer even the easiest question correctly. It
does not mean that these students failed to give correct answer to other items; some of them would have
correctly answered the items with higher difficulty value. There were 23 out 35 questions that were answered
correctly by over 50 percent students. It may, however, be noted that even if the students selected the answer
at random in each case, about 50 percent would have got the answer correct since each item had only two
choices. The mean score of 52.7 is only slightly higher them 50.0.
So far as Reading Comprehension is concerned, it is a matter of concern that about 30 percent students could
not answer correctly even the simplest question on Reading Comprehension and there were as many as 16 out
of 35 questions that could be answered correctly only by less than 50 percent students. Some of the questions
that required inference about the theme and judgment based on understanding of the text proved to be more
difficult.
The sum up, we may conclude that if the Kannada test was appropriate for grade III in Karnataka the students
there was had better knowledge of the meanings of words but had difficulty in reading and understanding the
content of a written text. On the other hand, in grade IV in Haryana, the students did equally well in both parts
of the test, but their overall performance was close to the typical average of 50% achievement level. Also we
find that items of World Knowledge test were more homogeneous than those of Reading Comprehension test in
both grades III and IV.
Competency –wise achievement in Mathematics tests in Karnataka and Haryana
The mathematics tests were designed to test several competencies of Grade III and IV. Here we shall discuss
the achievement of students on different competencies of Grade III mathematics in Phase I districts of
National Conference on Enhancing Learning in Elementary Schools , Bangalore, 23-25 July 2004                     18
Karnataka and of Grade IV mathematics in Phase I districts of Haryana on the basis of TAS conducted in 2001.
In each case, the results are derived by pooling up the data of four districts that were covered in DPEP Phase I.
Both tests had 40 items. The mean scores were 47.8 and 49.7 and standard deviations of item means (Facility
Values) were 15.0 and 16.5 respectively for the Grade III test (in Karnataka) and Grade IV test (in Haryana).
The results are thus for an average state in both cases so far as achievement in mathematics at the end of
Grade III and Grade IV is concerned. In the case of Grade III test, the easiest item had 67.7 as the Facility
Value and the most difficult item had only 6.5 as the Facility Value. In Grade IV test, the Facility Values of the
easiest and most difficult items were 87.1 and 17.9 respectively.
Grade III Mathematics test in Karnataka, 2001
There was no item in the test which was answered correctly by more than 67.7%, that is, two-third students.
There were only 8 out of 40 items which were answered, correctly by over 60% students. In other words, one-
third students failed to answer the item correctly that was easiest item of the test. On the other hand, there
were 3 items in the test which were answered correctly by less than 10% students.
Given below are some results on the performance of students on the different competencies of Mathematics that
were tested.
(1) Number (10 items)
Competencies tested - Finding the place value of a digit in a 4-digit number; identifying the numeral
corresponding to written in words; writing a number in expanded form.
Finding the smallest of a given set of numbers; or a number that is next to a given number; arranging a set of
numbers in ascending order or descending. (Only maximum 4-digit numbers to be used in all these
competencies).
Findings - Average FV = 52.5


    -    About 40% students could not identify the numeral for a given number written in words;
    -    Nearly 40% students could not find the place value of a digit in a 4-digit number;
    -    48% students did not know which number comes next to a given 4-digit number;
    -    39% did not know which is the smallest of a given set of 4-digit numbers;
    -    72% did not know whether in a set of four 4-digit numbers, the numbers are in ascending order or not;
    -    Surprisingly 92% students could not write a number like 'six thousand and sixty' correctly in figures,
         perhaps due to there being no figure in 'hundreds'.
    -
(2) Addition and subtraction (8 items)
Competencies tested - Adding two 3 or 4 digit numbers; subtracting a number from a 3 or 4 digit number.
Findings - Average FV = 43.5
    -    About 39% students could not add two 4-digit numbers in which 'carrying' was required ;
    -    32% could not solve even the simplest questions on addition and substraction, in which 'carrying' or
         'borrowing' was not require;
    -    59% could not answer a more difficult question in which double borrowing was required, such as 600-
         58;
    -    50% could not tell by how much a given 4-digit number is greater than anoher 4-digit number.


(3) Multiplication and Division (8 items)
Competencies tested - Multiplication of a 3 or 3 digit number by a 1-digit number; division of a 3-digit number
by a 1-digit number without remainder; problem sums on the same.
National Conference on Enhancing Learning in Elementary Schools , Bangalore, 23-25 July 2004                    19
Findings - Average FV = 47.9
    -    About 55% students could not multiply a simple 3-digit number like 103 by a 1-digit number;
    -    59% could not multiply correctly a simple number like 30 by a given 1-digit number;
    -    Nearly 40% students could not divide an even 3-digit number by 2;
    -    52% failed to get correct answer on dividing a 3-digit number with last digit 5 by 5.
    -    About 52% could solve a problem sum in which division of a 2-digit number 1 digit number (without
         remainder) was required (e.g. 20 by 4 or 60 by 3)


(4) Fractions (3 items)
Competencies tested - Identifying the fraction representing the shaded part in a figure; adding fractions that
have same denominator; knowing how to write a certain part of a given number as fraction.
Findings - Average FV = 47.5
    - 53% students did not know how to write 7th part of a given 1-digit number in the form of a fraction;
    - 58% students did not know what fraction a given rectangular figure is shaded;
    - 38% could not add simple fractions in which the denominator was the same 1-digit number.
    -
(5) Money related problem (5 items)
Competencies tested - Finding the value of a given set of coins of different denomination; problem sums
requiring addition or subtraction of amounts given in rupees and paisas; finding the price of several objects
when the price of one object is given in paise.
Findings - Average FV = 43.3
    -    About 52% students could not find the total value of a given set of coins of different denominations,
         while their value did not exceed one rupee.
    -    About 44% students could not solve a problem sum in which two amounts expressed in rupees and
         paise had to be added ;
    -    about 68% students donot solve a problem requiring subtraction of n amount in rupees and paise from
         another similar amount.
    -    About 94% could not the price of 12 objects when the price of one was 50 paise. The question became
         very difficult because of it involved multiplication and conversion of paise into rupees.


(6) Measures of length / distance, weight, capacity (3 items)
Competencies tested - Adding two lengths given in kms and meters; conversion of units of weight and capacity.
Findings -
    -    About 47% students could not add two distances given in kms and meters;
    -    49% students could not convert kgms into gms.;
    -    45% students did not know how many millilitres make a litre.


(7) Time (1 item)
Competency tested - Reading time in a clock.
Findings -


National Conference on Enhancing Learning in Elementary Schools , Bangalore, 23-25 July 2004                 20
    -    Surprisingly 91% students could not need time from a clock in which hours were marked but not
         numbered. Either very few knew how to read a clock or the clock shown in the picture was not clearly
         marked.


(8) Geometry (1 item)
Competency tested - Identifying the line segments in a figure.
Findings -
    -    Nearly 44% could not tell the number of line segments in a given pentagon. Probably they did not know
         what 'line segment' meant.
   -
Grade IV Mathematics test (Haryana, 2001)
Out of 40 items in the test, there were three which were answered correctly by over 80% students. There were
another 9 items which between 60 and 80 percent students attempted correctly. The most difficult items was
the one that only 18% students answered correctly.
The competencies that were tested and the performance of students on the items testing these competencies
are described below.
(1) Number (5 items)
Competencies tested - Finding place value of a digit in a 6-digit number; writing 6-digit numbers in words and in
numeral form; writing numbers in expanded form;
Findings - Average FV = 65.5
    -    45% students did not know the place value of a particular digit in a 6-digit number (surprisingly only
         35% could not answer another similar question correctly).
    -    While 85% students could identify the numeral corresponding to a 6-digit number written in words, only
         69% could write a give number in words correctly.
    -    About 53% students did not know the correct expanded form of a given 6-digit number.

(2) Addition and subtraction (6 items)

Competencies tested - Adding two 4-digit numbers; subtracting a number from a 4-digit number; problem sums
on addition and subtraction.
Findings - Average FV = 64.9
    -    Only 13% students could not add two 4-digit numbers correctly.
    -    Only 19% students could not subtract a 4-digit number from another 5-digit number that did not require
         borrowing, but 30% could not do a similar subtraction sum in which borrowing was required.
    -    Problem on subtraction sums such as 'what to add to a given number to make it equal to another given
         number' or 'how much larger is one number compared to another' could not be solved by about 55%
         students.
    -    37% could not solve a simple problem in which addition of 3 numbers and subtraction of their sum from
         50 was required.
    -
(3) Multiplication and Division (10 items)
Competencies tested - Multiplying 3 to 4 digit numbers by a 2-digit number; problems sums on multiplication
and division including problems solvable by unitary method.
Findings - Average FV = 53.4
National Conference on Enhancing Learning in Elementary Schools , Bangalore, 23-25 July 2004                   21
    -    37% students did not know that multiplication of any number by zero gives zero.
    -    36% students could not multiply a 4-digit number by a 2-digit number.
    -    51% students did not know that in the process of multiplication by a two digit number, of which two
         numbers, is the product in the first row. Apparently, there are some students who multiply mechanically
         without understanding the process.
    -    43% students could not divide a number in thousands (e.g. 40,000) by a number in hundreds (e.g.
         200). Apparently, they got confused by the number of zeros in the dividend and divisor.
    -    62% students could not divide an even 4-digit number with the second digit as zero, by 2.
    -    31% students could not solve a problem sum in which a number was to be divided by 50 without
         remainder.
    -    38% students could not solve a problem in which both division and multiplication by 1-digit number had
         to be done; another similar problem could not be solved by 50% students, perhaps because of more
         plausible distractors.
    -    61% students did not appear to have understanding of terms like divisor, divident, quotient, probably
         due to lack of clarity in the question.
    -    57% students could not find the price of 10 object when the price of one was given in rupees and paise.


(4) Factors, LCM (3 items)
Competencies tested - Knowledge of a prime number and prime factors of a number finding LCM of two
numbers, each below 20.
Findings - Average FV = 48.3
    -    53%    students could not identify a prime number out of given numbers all below 20.
    -    47%    students could not find LCM of two numbers, both below 20.
    -    55%    students did not know the prime factors of a given number that was less than 100. Obviously over
         50%    students had no concept f prime number or prime factors of a number.


(5) Fractions and Decimals (7 items)
Competencies tested - Understanding fraction and knowledge of simple fraction and equivalent fractions,
conversion of simple fractions into decimals.
Findings - Average FV = 36.9
    -    49% students had no understanding of decimal; they did not know how 1/10 is written in decimals.
         59% students could not convert a simple fraction (with 5 as denominator) into decimals.
    -    About 60% students could not identify equivalent fractions or know how to convert a given fraction into
         a simple fraction.
    -    .76% students could not identify a simple fraction out of a given set of fractions (with denominators not
         exceeding 10).
    -    75% students could not identify the fraction representing the shaded part of a figure.
    -    It is clear that very few students acquired understanding fractions and decimals and what equivalent
         fractions or simple fraction meant.
    -
(6) Measures of length, weight and capacity (6 items)
Competencies tested - Problem sums on length, weight and capacity involving addition, subtraction,
multiplication or division in which knowledge of units is required.
Findings - Average FV = 33.2
    -    52% students could not add lengths expressed in kms and meters.
National Conference on Enhancing Learning in Elementary Schools , Bangalore, 23-25 July 2004                    22
    -    70% students could not calculate the length in which multiplication of 2.5 meters by a 2-digit number
         was required.
    -    67% students could not subtract weight expressed in kgms and gms from 10 kgms.
    -    66% students could not solve a problem in which division a certain weight in kgms by 50 gms was
         required.
    -    64% students could not solve a similar problem in which division of a certain quantity in litres by 250 ml
         was required.
    -    82% students could not multiply a quantity given in ml. by 10 and express it in litres.


(7) Calendar (1 item)
Competency tested - Finding the number of days between two dates.
Findings -
    -    73% students could not calculate the number of days between two dates separated by more than 1
         month.


(8) Geometry (2 items)
Competency tested - Knowledge of the name of a geometrical figure; identifying the geometrical figure from its
shape.
Findings - Average FV = 53.6
    -    54% students did not know the name of the closed figure made by three line segments.
    -    39% students could not identify a square in a given set of four-sided figures.


Summary and Conclusion
This paper presents the results of further analysis of achievement test data of Terminal Assessment Survey
conducted in Phase I and Phase II districts in 2001 and 2003 respectively. The findings show that the
achievement is far below the so called mastery level performance in most of the states. If we consider mean
achievement score of over 60% as satisfactory, then in grade III overall for DPEP I, Assam, Gujarat and
Maharashtra have shown satisfactory performance in language, while in mathematics only in Assam overall
mean exceeded 60%. In Kerala and Karnataka, the mean score remained below 60% in language and below
50% in mathematics. In the case of DPEP II districts of these states, only in Gujarat and Maharashtra the mean
scores in language exceeded 60% in all other states, it was below 60%. In mathematics, the mean score was
below 60% in all the states so far as DPEP II is concerned.
In grade IV, overall in Phase I districts, the language mean score exceeded 60% only in Tamil Nadu and was
below 60% in Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh and Haryana. In Phase II districts, the language mean score
exceeded 60% in Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and Uttar Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh, and
remained much below 60% in Chhattisgarh, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh and Orissa. In mathematics, the mean
achievement was much below 60% in all the states for both Phase I and Phase II districts, except Tamil Nadu
and Uttar Pradesh where the mean score exceeded 60%.
The percentage of students scoring over 80% marks in the language tests of grade III was very low (below
10%) in Karnataka (Phase II), Assam (Phase II) and Kerala. In grade IV, less than 10% students scored marks
over 80% in language tests in Haryana (both phases), Andhra Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh
(Phase II), Chhattisgarh (both phases), and Orissa. In mathematics, less than 10% students scored marks over
80% in Haryana (both Phases), Madhya Pradesh (Phase I), Andhra Pradesh, Chhattisgarh (Phase II), Himachal
Pradesh and Orissa. Only in Tamil Nadu, over 50% students scored over 80% marks in both language and
mathematics tests.
National Conference on Enhancing Learning in Elementary Schools , Bangalore, 23-25 July 2004                     23
Overall, among the total students of grade III in Phase I districts tested in 2001, 18.0% students scored over
80% marks in language and 14.6% scored over 80% marks in mathematics whereas the corresponding
percentages were 10.0% and 11.5% respectively in Phase II districts where testing was done in 2003. The
findings are similar for grade IV, where in Phase I districts, 20.9% students scored over 80% marks in language
and 22.8% scored over 80% in mathematics. The corresponding percentages were less in Phase II districts
where testing was done in 2003, as 15.8% students scored marks above 80% in language and 11.5% scored
marks above 80% in mathematics.
It will be of interest to analyse the factors responsible for good performance of students in Gujarat,
Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh and Tamil Nadu and for relatively poor performance in Haryana, Orissa, Himachal
Pradesh, Karnataka, Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh and Kerala. In Assam, the wide difference between the
results of Phase I and Phase II districts need to be investigated. The exceptionally good performance of
students in Tamil Nadu also requires study of factors responsible for such performance.
Analysis of competency-wise achievement scores in language and mathematics tests in Karnataka and Haryana
shows the competencies in these subjects in which the performance is good or poor. In mathematics
particularly, the competencies in which the performance is poor are clearly identified. Such analysis needs to be
done for other states too in order to identify the hard spots in Mathematics that require special attention in
teaching.




National Conference on Enhancing Learning in Elementary Schools , Bangalore, 23-25 July 2004                   24
  Annex I


  Table I: Percentage distribution of scores in different states Phase II (TAS, 2002)

  (A) Percentage distribution of scores in language of grade III students

                      No. of No.     of                                                                                     90-
State                 district students 0-10          10-20    20-30     30-40    40-50     50-60   60-70   70-80   80-90   100
Assam                 6        3608     0.00          0.00     0.08      14.83    54.93     28.99   0.91    0.22    0.03    0.00
Gujarat               3        2517     0.16          0.91     2.62      9.81     18.67     17.64   18.83   12.99   13.75   4.61
Karnataka             7        6658     3.77          4.24     11.08     17.27    19.83     13.83   12.80   7.69    7.10    2.39
Maharashtra           4        3971     0.86          1.89     3.48      9.27     13.85     20.27   17.12   18.74   10.07   4.46
Total                 20       16754    1.72          2.27     5.64      13.73    25.80     19.20   12.17   9.50    7.28    2.70

  (B) Percentage distribution of scores in mathematics of grade III students

                      No. of No.     of                                                                                     90-
State                 district students 0-10          10-20    20-30     30-40    40-50     50-60   60-70   70-80   80-90   100
Assam                 6        3608     12.42         0.00     0.00      1.19     2.25      83.51   0.50    0.03    0.03    0.08
Gujarat               3        2517     2.74          3.38     9.69      12.44    16.29     13.95   12.51   13.43   10.57   5.01
Karnataka             7        6655     5.03          7.71     14.89     15.76    14.37     10.49   9.17    8.96    9.32    4.31
Maharashtra           4        3959     3.81          4.93     9.45      11.01    12.86     12.71   14.37   15.31   10.05   5.51
Total                 20       16739    5.99          4.74     9.61      11.00    11.69     27.27   9.03    9.21    7.68    3.79


  Table II: Percentage distribution of scores in different states Phase I (TAS, 2001)

  (A) Percentage distribution of scores in language of grade III students

                       No. of No.     of                                                                                    90-
State                  district students 0-10         10-20     20-30    30-40     40-50    50-60   60-70   70-80   80-90   100
Assam                  3        2170     0.51         0.32      2.35     7.47      12.17    19.54   16.13   15.99   13.96   11.57
Karnataka              4        3479     2.10         3.13      11.61    16.96     18.68    10.92   13.22   9.89    11.61   1.87
Kerala                 3        4042     1.24         2.33      6.66     12.49     25.01    19.87   18.13   8.68    5.00    0.59
Maharashtra            5        5374     1.15         4.06      6.36     11.98     11.41    12.36   11.50   13.88   16.65   10.64
Total                  15       15065    1.30         2.84      7.08     12.62     16.85    15.07   14.34   11.87   11.97   6.05
  (B) Percentage distribution of scores in mathematics of grade III students

                      No. of No.     of                                                               90-
State                 district students 0-10          10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 60-70 70-80 80-90 100
Assam                 3        2170     0.55          0.55  1.89  6.59  12.76 16.13 16.59 17.47 15.81 11.66
Karnataka             4        3444     7.81          8.54  13.65 13.24 11.44 11.38 14.17 13.04 6.71  0.03
Kerala                3        4312     3.62          8.21  16.67 20.18 18.27 19.81 8.46  3.15  1.35  0.28
Maharashtra           5        5398     5.74          7.60  11.02 11.80 9.21  8.30  9.11  11.26 17.01 8.95
Total                 15       15324    4.87          6.98  11.91 13.74 12.76 13.34 11.13 10.26 10.11 4.89

  National Conference on Enhancing Learning in Elementary Schools , Bangalore, 23-25 July 2004                                 25
 (A) Percentage distribution of scores in language of grade IV students

                      No. of No.     of                                                                                    90-
State                 district students 0-10         10-20     20-30    30-40     40-50    50-60   60-70   70-80   80-90   100
Haryana               4        4268     0.40         2.13      9.23     19.31     20.90    16.45   13.36   8.81    6.35    3.07
Chhattisgarh          9        5579     1.09         7.55      11.74    15.54     35.49    16.33   6.76    3.73    1.67    0.11
Madhya Pradesh        17       10736    0.35         1.54      4.08     11.54     16.21    15.73   17.79   15.71   12.25   4.80
Tamil Nadu            9        5695     0.14         0.09      0.28     2.60      6.73     8.55    11.19   14.26   21.47   34.70
Total                 39       26278    0.47         2.60      5.72     11.71     19.01    14.42   13.30   11.73   11.04   10.00

 (B) Percentage distribution of scores in mathematics of grade IV students

                     No. of No.     of                                                                                     90-
State                district students 0-10          10-20    20-30     30-40    40-50     50-60   60-70   70-80   80-90   100
Haryana              4        4268     1.59          4.83     9.58      18.11    20.13     19.21   12.51   8.46    4.12    1.45
Chhattisgarh         9        6979     1.15          5.77     9.89      12.57    16.51     14.97   5.69    2.44    10.75   20.28
Madhya Pradesh       17       10738    1.37          5.57     13.60     13.82    13.92     14.83   14.59   12.82   7.66    1.82
Tamil Nadu           9        5695     0.39          1.12     3.44      5.44     8.97      9.03    8.81    12.15   19.77   30.87
Total                39       27680    1.15          4.59     9.95      12.44    14.51     14.35   10.84   9.39    10.39   12.39




 National Conference on Enhancing Learning in Elementary Schools , Bangalore, 23-25 July 2004                                 26

				
DOCUMENT INFO