Rastriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan (RMSA)
Universalisation of Secondary Education: Secondary Education-MIS
Like Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA), the Department of School Education and Literacy of the Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD), Government of India is in the process of launching Rastriya Madhyamic Shiksha Abhiyan (RMSA) with an aim to achieve Universal Access and Quality Secondary Education. This section of Education for all in India presents details of activities that have been launched recently in this direction. Under RMSA, the responsibility to develop Secondary-Education Management Information system (SE-MIS) is given to the Department of Educational Planning, National University of Educational Planning and Administration (NUEPA), New Delhi. In 2006, a CABE sub-committee on Secondary Education was constituted. This part of site presents all about recent developments with regard to Secondary Education in India.
APPROVAL IN PAB
(project approval Board) meeting 12-11-2009
and parameters
Minutes of the meeting of the Project Approval Board (PAB) to consider proposals
under Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan held on 12.11.2009
The first meeting of the Project Approval Board (PAB) for Rashtriya Madhyamik
Shiksha Abhiyan to consider the project proposals of Chhattisgarh, Kerala, Mizoram, Punjab,
Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu and Uttar Pradesh was held on 12.11.2009. Secretary (SE&L) chaired
the meeting. A list of participants is at Annexure –I.
2. Strategy suggested by Appraisal Team
2.1. This being the first meeting of the PAB for RMSA, Secretary (SE&L) enquired about
the general strategy adopted for appraisal of the proposals. Director (SE) clarified that since
the appraising body, i.e., Technical Support Group (TSG) for RMSA is not yet in place, the
appraisal has been attempted by the Ministry officials in consultation with the officials of
Educational Planning Department of NUEPA. It was pointed out that the scheme is
effectively at an inception stage and the State Governments need to build up capacities for a
detailed District Level Planning based on school mapping. Besides, most of the states are not
yet ready with state specific norms and parameters for diagnosis of secondary education.
Therefore the appraisal team has recommended only those components for which clear norms
and unit costs have been provided in the RMSA framework for implementation.
2.2. The appraisal team had recommended the following components for consideration of
PAB:
(i) Annual Maintenance Grant for all existing schools (restricted to 30% of the
admissible amount).
(ii) Grant for major and minor repair
(iii) Sanctioning of new schools with two classrooms per schools to begin with
(iv) In-service training of teachers
(v) Residential quarter for teachers in remote areas
(vi) Activities aimed at Special Focus Groups, Enrolment drive etc.
(vii) Management cost @ 1.5% of the approved cost.
2.3. Additional facilities in existing schools are need-based and can be decided only after a
detailed analysis of existing facilities. Posts for additional teachers have not been
recommended in the current year as the requirement will depend on existing norms of state
governments.
3. General decisions of PAB for the year 2009-10
3.1. No. of classrooms in new schools: JS(SE) suggested that new schools should
generally have 4 sections at the rate of 2 sections in each class so that the school will be
viable in terms of pupil-teacher ratio. It is important to plan on the basis of the whole school
concept and State governments should set up these schools in areas where sufficient number
of class VIII graduates to fill up two sections in each class is available. This was supported
by the State Secretaries present. Secretary (SE&L) also felt that the whole school concept has
considerable merit. PAB therefore decided to recommend new/ upgraded schools with 4
classrooms (two sections each in class IX and X), subject to having adequate no. of
students passing out of class VIII from the catchment area.
3.2. Additional teachers:
(i) New Schools: Secretary (SE&L) stated that posts of teachers as per State norms
should be sanctioned while approving the new schools. While it is true that no
teacher would be appointed in the current financial year and no grant may be
required during the current year, the posts should be sanctioned along with the
civil component of the school, as the framework clearly envisages additional
teachers for newly sanctioned schools. Besides, this would also enable the State
governments to start the recruitment process. PAB therefore decided to sanction
teachers’ posts as per State norms while sanctioning of new schools.
(ii) Existing Schools: State government representatives, particularly from Punjab and
Mizoram, vehemently requested for sanctioning of the additional posts in existing
schools to improve pupil teacher ratio. Secretary (SE&L) felt that this should be
done after the State norms and the existing sanctioned strength are carefully
examined.
3.3. Annual School Grant: Annual school grant is provided for the following three
activities,
(i) Rs.25,000 for repair/ replacement of laboratory equipments and
purchase of lab consumables.
(ii) Rs.10,000 for purchase of books, periodicals, newspapers etc.
(iii) Rs.15,000 for water, electricity charges etc.
It was decided to sanction the first two sub-items in full as these are not in the nature
of payment, while restricting item (iii) to Rs 5000 as only 4 months of the year would be left.
PAB therefore, decided to approve Rs. 40,000/- (water & electricity charges restricted to
Rs. 5,000/- and amount for purchase of periodicals etc. restricted to Rs. 5000/-) per
school as annual school grant during the current year.
3.4. Major and minor repair:
(i) Major Repair: The appraisal team submitted that there was lack of clarity among the
State governments regarding the nature of major repair. While the framework envisages this
as an one time grant amounting up to Rs.2 lakh per school for two section schools and up to
Rs.4.00 lakh per school for four section schools, most of the State governments have
proposed the grant on ‘per classroom basis’. Besides requirement for such activity will
obliviously vary from one school to another. However, it is observed that most State
governments have proposed a uniform amount for all schools, which only indicates that the
projection is based without any assessment of school specific requirement. State governments
also need to develop well defined criteria for selecting schools for major renovation as
relatively older schools should be given preference for this. PAB therefore decided not to
approve this component unless a very clear cut proposal with school specific assessment
has been submitted by the State government.
(ii) Minor Repair: As regards grant for minor repair, PAB felt that most government
schools are in dire need of such grant, as State governments are hardly spending any money
except for teachers’ salary in existing schools. As a result even essential activities requiring
little expenditure like white washing, repair of toilet, water tank and fittings, electrical fittings
etc often remain unattended. PAB therefore recommended grant for minor repair @
Rs.25,000 for all government schools having existing building.
3.5. In service training of teachers: PAB decided to approve the number of teachers
based on the preparedness and capacity of State governments to train teachers during the
remaining part of the year.
3.6. Strengthening of existing secondary schools: The appraisal team suggested that
requirement for additional classrooms, laboratories, computer room, drinking water facilities
etc. can be worked out only after district level planning after assessing the existing and
required facilities at school level. Most State governments have not come up with such
proposal. PAB agreed that it would be difficult to approve this component unless the
proposal is prepared after taking into account existing facilities in the school as part of district
level planning. Secretary (SE&L) stated that if the State governments are able to furnish
details quickly, the same may be considered in the next PAB. She desired that a suitable
proforma may be developed and circulated to the State governments quickly.
3.7. Relaxation of limit for civil work:
(i) Para 7.2 and 7.3 of the framework for implementation provides as under,
‘7.2 Programme funds on Civil Work should not exceed the ceiling of 33% of the
entire project cost approved by the PAAC. The allocation for civil works will not
exceed 33% of the approved Perspective Plan. The ceiling of 33% would apply on
the entire project cost based on the Perspective Plan prepared for the period till
2011-12. However, in a particular year’s Annual Plan, provision for civil works can
be considered up to 40% of the Annual Plan expenditure depending upon the
priorities assigned to various components of the scheme in that year within the
overall project ceiling of 33%.
7.3 Each State must formulate a strategy for repair. This expenditure will not be
included for calculation of the 33% ceiling on civil works.’
(ii) The appraisal team submitted that given the need for creating the enabling
conditions for take-off of the RMSA, and keeping in view the need for
expansion and quality improvement facilities of existing secondary
schools/sections, a conscious suggestion has been made that the budget
allocation for meeting non-recurring expenditure, particularly, civil works
proposed in the State annual Plans, may be permitted to exceed the specified
ceiling mentioned in the RMSA Framework for Implementation. Considering
that no teachers’ salary is going to be released during the current year, the major
project cost is bound to be non recurring in nature.
(iii) Secretary (SE&L) agreed with the need to relax the limit in the first year, and
suggested an appropriate proposal for requisite relaxation may be moved for
approval of HRM subject to ratification in National Mission later.
General Issues
(i) JS(SE) advised all State governments to put in serious thought in perspective planning
process. He clarified that the perspective plan document has to indicate at least three clear
timelines for achieving important targets,
o For 2011-12 - end of 11th Five Year Plan,
o For 2013-14 - end of 5 years from the scheme commencement
Total Proposal Approved:
A summary of proposals approved for 7 States is at
Annexure –II. As may be seen total proposals worth Rs 652.70 crore including 1.5% for
MMER activities has been approved for 7 States. The estimated Central share is Rs 489.53
crore
|
posted by anil.manali@gmail.com
9816159581
