Perception of the Value of Education and Parental Involvement Among Microfinance Clients by Centre for Micro Finance

Empirical Analysis of the Perception of the Value of Education and Parental Involvement among Microfinance Clients Margot Quaegebeur Columbia University & Srivatsa Marthi University of Toronto

Agenda

Introduction

Methodology

Background

Main findings

Conclusions & Further research

©Margot Quaegebeur, Columbia University & Srivatsa Marthi, University of Toronto

Introduction

ÂŠMargot Quaegebeur, Columbia University & Srivatsa Marthi, University of Toronto

Studies show a positive effect of microfinance programs on the lives of microfinance clients Economic Assets Income

Savings

Microfinance

Health

Education Empowerment Social

ÂŠMargot Quaegebeur, Columbia University & Srivatsa Marthi, University of Toronto

Microfinance enables parents to send their children to school Afford expenditures outside basic subsistence Income growth Microfinance

Less need for child to support household income Ability to smooth income in times of shocks

Empowerment

Enrolment Ï Drop out Ð

Household decision making

©Margot Quaegebeur, Columbia University & Srivatsa Marthi, University of Toronto

The focus of this exploratory study is on the quality of education

What happens when microfinance clients send their children to school? • What is the perceived value of education among these parents? • How are these parents involved in their children’s schooling?

What is the educational context? • How is the motivation and effectiveness of teachers? • What is the quality of government schools?

Gain an understanding of the educational environment of children, and where it needs interventions

©Margot Quaegebeur, Columbia University & Srivatsa Marthi, University of Toronto

MFIs could play a role in the improvement of the quality of education

Very high supervision and frequent interaction between the MFI and its clients

Large number of clients attached to many MFIs

Current efforts to reach out beyond own client base and include whole community in social grassroots interventions

Ability to affect educational outcomes in ways that top-down development approaches would not

©Margot Quaegebeur, Columbia University & Srivatsa Marthi, University of Toronto

Methodology

ÂŠMargot Quaegebeur, Columbia University & Srivatsa Marthi, University of Toronto

For this study we worked together with MFI Swayam Krishi Sangam, in the Medak district of A.P. Andhra Pradesh Swayam Krishi Sangam (SKS)

An initiative in rural A.P. to empower the poorest of the poor to become self-reliant.

In 1998, SKS began its microfinance program, following the Grameen model •Outstanding loans: $9.2 mln •Nr of clients: 100,000+

In 2000 SKS started its educational program, (pre-schools, tutoring program, residential bridge camp for girls who dropped out from school), reaching about 1100 children so far

Medak

©Margot Quaegebeur, Columbia University & Srivatsa Marthi, University of Toronto

The study was not intended to be an impact evaluation, rather an exploratory study ¾

Data gathering through interviews with 3 respondent groups: microfinance clients with children in school, children of micro finance clients, teachers Selection of respondents (in 7 villages selected by SKS) based on the following relevant observables: Parents

SKS members (and their husbands) Different stages of loan cycles Both educated and uneducated Children in school

Children

Teachers

Children of SKS members

• Local government school

Class 5 or (preferably) higher

• Both male and female (although most schools only had male teachers)

Government school

Both boys and girls

• Different age groups and levels of teaching experience

The results of this study are suggestive, but caution should be taken when drawing statistical conclusions since we did not use a randomized sample of respondents ©Margot Quaegebeur, Columbia University & Srivatsa Marthi, University of Toronto

We conducted 47 interviews in 7 villages

Parents (MF clients)

Children 13

Teachers

Total of 35 parents; half of the interviews with mothers only Average age: women 33 years old, men 36 years old SKS member for an average of about 3 years (less than 1 year to 8 years) Households had an average of 3.4 children, ranging from 1 to 7 children 82% of the 22 mothers hadn’t been to school (only one mother who had finished 10th grade); 86% of the fathers had been educated (more than 40% of them having finished 10th grade or higher level) 8 individual interviews and 5 group discussions (5 children per group), talking to a total of 33 children 19 boys and 15 girls 5 children in primary school, 4 children in UPS (standard 6 and 7), and 25 children in secondary school (standard 8 to 10) The youngest child was 9 years old, the oldest child was 16 years old The majority of these children’s mothers were uneducated (82%), whereas more than half of the fathers had been to school (64%) 10 male teachers and 2 female teachers 8 UPS/Secondary School teachers, 4 Primary School teachers Average age was 36 years, raging from 24 to 56 years old Average of 12 years of teaching experience, ranging from 3 to 34 years 9 teachers had a B.Ed. degree, 2 teachers had a M.Ed. degree, one teacher had a TTC ©Margot Quaegebeur, Columbia University & Srivatsa Marthi, University of Toronto

Though we to took the best precautions in order to get the most accurate data, some limitations were present

Interpreter Influence of others

Age of children

Private schools

Ideal answer

Risk of not getting the exact answer and its subtleties Respondents’ opinions might have been influenced by views of others present, who sometimes spoke up during interviews Mainly focused on secondary school children Only focus on government schools Tendency to give “best” or ideal answer

©Margot Quaegebeur, Columbia University & Srivatsa Marthi, University of Toronto

Background

ÂŠMargot Quaegebeur, Columbia University & Srivatsa Marthi, University of Toronto

Education indicators score low in the Medak District Literacy rates India Andhra Pradesh Medak district Karnataka Tamilnadu Kerala

Over all 65.2 61.11 53.24 67.04 73.47 90.92

Male 75.64 70.85 65.52 76.29 82.33 94.2

Female 54.03 51.17 40.68 57.45 64.55 87.86

(Census India 2001)

Reading ability in Manor Mandal Present Class 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th Total Percentage

Total 13 33 38 35 46 165 100

Nothing 6 6 4 5 3 24 14.5

Recognize Alphabets

5 13 18 6 6 48 29.1

Words 2 6 7 9 9 33 20

Paragraph

4 6 8 7 25 15.2

Story Level 4 3 7 21 35 21.2

(National Rapid Assessment Study conducted by Pratham â&#x20AC;&#x201C; SKS, for the Planning Commission of India, 2004) ÂŠMargot Quaegebeur, Columbia University & Srivatsa Marthi, University of Toronto

In Andhra Pradesh the government has been establishing School Committees in every school

The School Committee (or Vidya Committee) consists of 4 elected parents and the head master or a senior teacher • At least two women • At least one person belonging to a scheduled cast

Main functions: • Ensure enrolment, retention and attendance of children by: — holding meetings with parents who fail to send their children to school; — assisting teachers in their efforts; — conducting parent day celebrations periodically to involve all parents in the management of the school and to motivate them to send their children regularly to schools • Ensure excellence in the overall performance of the school and the children • Help and augment infrastructure facilities needed by the school and review and monitor the school health program • Ensure effective use of educational equipment in the school

©Margot Quaegebeur, Columbia University & Srivatsa Marthi, University of Toronto

Main findings

ÂŠMargot Quaegebeur, Columbia University & Srivatsa Marthi, University of Toronto

Poor people valued education, because it would enable their children to get a good future job… Q: What, if anything, is more important for your child than education? 9%

Q: Why do you send your children to school? 77%

“Our lives are worthless since we haven’t studied”

45%

23% Nothing Income

87%

I don't know

26% made reservation: “Now education is most important, but future events could change this prioritization.”

To get a To gain good knowledge future job

“Want to get child educated, because not educated myself”

©Margot Quaegebeur, Columbia University & Srivatsa Marthi, University of Toronto

… however, parents didn’t have a clear idea of the kind of future job or of the level of education to be achieved Q: What would you like your child to do occupation-wise?

Q: How high do you want your children to study? 7%

14%

16%

31%

35% 23%

I don't know

"Anything big"

"In the future/faith"

Government job

12th grade

Whatever child wants

What child wants

I don't know

10%

36%

Whatever I can afford

28%

©Margot Quaegebeur, Columbia University & Srivatsa Marthi, University of Toronto

Despite lack of examples, parents were sure of the positive future effect of education Q: Do you think that with a good education your child will find a good job?

Q: Who in the village has had a good education? What kind of job do they have? “Some have a degree, but no job” “No one with a degree, has gotten a good job”

YES

“People who have studied, didn’t find a job”

“There are no possibilities in the village”

91%

DON’T KNOW

©Margot Quaegebeur, Columbia University & Srivatsa Marthi, University of Toronto

Parental involvement in child’s education was limited to encouragement

87% of parents didn’t know what subjects their children were learning in school

Both parents and children said that they didn’t discuss school much

Parents weren’t involved in their children’s homework • Although they made sure that their children were doing their homework • Only 9% of the mothers and 18% of the fathers sometimes helped their children

60% of the parents had never been to the school • Partly because of the distance: children were going to school in another village • Also half of the parents with children in the local school had never been to the school

Only 9% of the parents knew (some of) the names of the teachers, and only 9% talked to teachers on a regular basis

Parents didn’t discuss education among each other and were not “organized”

More than 30% of the parents didn’t know anything about parent-teacher meetings and 27% of them said that these meetings never took place

59% of the parents had never heard of the Vidya Committee and 5% said that there wasn’t such a committee ©Margot Quaegebeur, Columbia University & Srivatsa Marthi, University of Toronto

Teachers seemed motivated and involved Teachers

Teachers chose profession because they liked teaching, they liked children, or because it’s a respectful job Teachers liked their job, though 58% wasn’t satisfied with salary Teachers claimed they would praise the children regularly, and punish them sometimes 75% of the teachers pay extra attention to weak students; 50% pay extra attention to talented students

Children

Teachers treated boys and girl equally Teachers were patient, and very open and responsive to questions Children claimed teachers would punish them regularly, and praise them sometimes Teachers gave homework every day

Teacher attendance remained ambiguous though Teachers

Children

Parents

Observations

All (except one) were able to come to school on time Only absent because of vacation

38% claimed teachers were late once a week 63% claimed that teachers missed school once a month or more

36% didn’t know about teacher attendance 50% claimed teachers were never late and never missed school

Teachers being outside of class room, not teaching Teachers leaving early Teacher having lunch at local market during school hours

Conclusions & Further research

ÂŠMargot Quaegebeur, Columbia University & Srivatsa Marthi, University of Toronto

From our findings we can make the following conclusions

Microfinance clients valued education, because of positive effect on future lives of children

Microfinance clients were not involved in their children’s schooling

There was little parent-parent interaction regarding education

There was little parents-teacher interaction

Teachers seemed motivated

Teacher attendance is ambiguous

As long as parents are unaware of what the education system is lacking, they won’t do something about it

Not aware of the educational situations of their children

Aware of what the education system is supposed to deliver?

Unaware of the gap

Unaware of the impact they could have on these situations, by becoming more involved

Unaware of what they themselves should contribute to their child’s education at home ©Margot Quaegebeur, Columbia University & Srivatsa Marthi, University of Toronto

As long as parents are not involved, schools won’t be accountable

Without parental involvement: • Schools and teachers are not hold accountable by the community • Teachers don’t have any incentive to do a good job • Teachers miss the support and input of parents

Quality of education

Accountability

t-t ea che r Stake holde rs

Pa ren

an iz e

Or g

at or t

Su pp

nt s e es n em e v r a ol v w A In

ho m

Awareness is a first step to mobilize a grassroots movement to affect educational outcomes

ÂŠMargot Quaegebeur, Columbia University & Srivatsa Marthi, University of Toronto

Microfinance institutions could play a role in this Because of their direct and frequent contact with their clients, and their efforts to include the whole community in social programs, MFIs could serve as a channel to educational grassroots interventions

Create awareness Implement “further learning” tools

Organize parents

Parental involvement

Cooperate with schools

Invite teacher Educational to center loans meeting

Further research

Is it possible to make uneducated parents aware of the gap in the deliveries of the education system?

Does awareness about what parents can expect from the education system, increase parental involvement?

Will parental involvement have an impact on the accountability of the schools and teachers? How significant will this be?

Will this accountability improve the quality of education?

Could MFIs leverage their direct relationship with their clients in the way proposed?