1

Universal Primary Education (UPE) in

Bangladesh
Recent Evidence on Efficiency and Equity

Mahmudul Alam
Bangladesh Development Researchers Forum
(BDREF),
October 05, 2006
BIDS, Dhaka

2
Salients Aspects of the Presentation
Section 1. Major Issues and the Country
Context
Section 2: Recent Evidence on Systemic Efficiency
and Equity
Systemic Efficiency
I nternal Efficiency I ndicator
Participation and Equity by SES Categories
and Regions
Section 3: Factors Behind Low UPE-Performance
School-based Variables
Non-school Variables
Section 4:Challenges and Way Forward






3
Section 1. Major Issues and the Country Context


Analytical issues: How policy decision-
making takes place in a developing
country such as Bangladesh
[e.g. (i) rational problem-solving approach with organizational control
based on adequate information/estimates( Mann, 1975), (ii) Critical
policy approach, a multiplex function of socio-political and economic
contestations among different power-wielders such as politicians,state-
functionaries, civil society activists and donors, (iii) refined critical
approach- the last mentioned approach but significantly influenced by
some specific social actors, their hegemonic and historical roles (Gale,
2001)]
4
More close to the refined critical approach- the historical importance of the
Liberation War of 1971- A mixture of techno-economic
and refined critical approach

Bangladesh has reached a bipartisan consensus (between two
major political parties i..e. AL and BNP) on the envisaged development path
for the country in 1991- a capitalist development strategy
with social justice for the poor/disadvantaged

Naomi Hossains ( 2005) thesis is relevant here to note that the national
(capital Dhaka-based) lite class in general does not
consider the state-interventionist attempts to
alleviate the poverty and other related aspects
of the disadvantaged any more viable and
urgent; the danger of insurrection by the poor is gone (or can be handled)
Section 1. Major Issues ( Contd.)
5
Mechanism for drawing up of state-interventionist primary
educational plan/programmes in Bangladesh (see
Figures 1.1 and Figure 1.2)- multisectoral and
aggregative planning mechanism-top-down-smacks of
Soviet-type centralized planning
Highly centralized implementation mechanism for UPE
with the Directorate ( DPE) headquatered in Dhaka,
district-level ( N=64) and upazila or sub-district level
(N= 491) offices
Section 1. Major Issues .(Contd.)
6
National Economic
Council
Ministry of Finance
(Finance Division, ERD)
ECNEC
Other Line
Ministries (outside MoE/
MoPME)
Ministry of
Planning
Planning
Commission
Planning
Division
MoPME/
MoE
DPE/
DSHE
BNFE

POD NRC NAPE/
NAEM
National-level
(policy making)
National-level
(admin,
research and
training related)
Fig 1.1 Bangladesh: Organisation of Educational Planning
8




Section 2 :Recent Evidence on Systemic Efficiency
and Equity

Systemic Efficiency

GER has gone up from 96.6 percent in 1997 to 104.8 percent in 2003 ; it has fallen to 93.7
percent in 2005; See Table 3.1
NER has grown from 82 percent in 2004 ;it has fallen to 87 percent in 2005; See Table 3.2
Whether we consider GER or NER as the performance indicator (KPI) , Bangladesh has
attained gender-parity in UPE around 2000 ; since then it has been sustained
Overtime, 1997-2005, the male enrollment in absolute term has fallen and the rate of growth is
statistically significant

I nternal Efficiency I ndicators

Average promotion rate (gr.1-5) for 2005, varies between 77 to 85; GPS fares better than
RNGPS; Madrassas are not far off.
Considering rural and urban divide, as expected urban pupils do a bit better ; when we
compare male-female performance, the female are a few percent-points ahead of the female
promotion rates.
On the flip-side, the average (per grade) repetition rate is 10-11 percent in GPS and RNGPS.
Urban schools are with lower repetition rates. No significant gender-differential in repetition
rate
Dropout rate varies between four percent (for urban female-GPS) to 12 percent ( male rural-
RNGPS); Dropout rates are high with Madrassas
9
Section 2: Recent Evidence( Contd.)
As we move from grade 1 to grade 5, there is a pattern for promotion rate and its
opposites indexes of repetition rate and dropout rate. Let us consider the internal
efficiency estimates for 2005. The highest estimate of promotion rate i.e., 87 percent
is observed for grade 2. And the lowest promotion rates of 74-76 are for grades 4,3
and 2.
As a mirror image, the highest dropout rate is for grade 4 (it is 15 percent), followed
by 13 percent for grade 1; the lower dropout rates are for grades 5,2 and 3.
Considering internal efficiency indicators in mainstream schools overtime, 1997-
2005 : the internal efficiency indicator of dropout rate show some small
improvement. It is observed that in 1997, the average (for grade 1-5) dropout rate
was around 12 percent This level is maintained up to 2003; but in the recent years of
2004 and 2005, the average dropout rate is estimated to be 10 percent. The average
(for grade 1to 5) repetition has risen from five percent in 1997 to around 10 percent
in 2005.
Time trends of survival rates (1997-2005) and coefficient of efficiency (1997-
2005),point to quite serious deficiencies in the mainstream school sub-system;
survival rate has fallen from 60-65 percent in 1997 to 53-55 in 2003-2005; coefficient
of efficiency has fallen from 64 percent in 1998 to around 55 percent in 2006.
Primary school annual scholarship exams reflect the overall performance of the
country; Model GPS and NGO run schools perform the best, followed by PTI-
experimental schools: overtime (1997-20005), both the participation rate and the
pass-rate have gone up.

10
Table 3.1
Bangladesh Primary Education: Overall Gross Enrollment and Gross Enrollment Rates (GERs),
in 1997-2006

Years
(1)
Total population age (6-10) years (2) Gross enrollment in grade I-V (3) (in million)
(a)Both sex (b)Male (c)Female (a)Both sex (b)Male (c)Female
1997 18,861,583 9,675,992 9,185,591 18.031(95.60) 9.364(96.78) 8.666(94.35)
1998 19,079,888 9,760,550 9,319,338 18.337(96.11) 9.564(97.99) 8.772(94.13)
1999 18,307,265 9,294,826 9,012,439 17.621(96.26) 9.065(97,53) 8.556(94.94)
2000 18,296,312 9,351,062 8,945,250 17.667(96.57) 9.032(96.60) 8.635(96.53)
2001 18,114,201 9,236,432 8,877,769 17.659(97.49) 8.989(97.33) 8.669(97.65)
2002 18,040,023 9,154,846 8,885,177 17.561(97.35) 8.841(96.58) 8720(98.14)
2003 17,592,292 9,222,030 8,370,262 18.431(104.77) 9.358(101.48) 9.072(108.39)
2004 17,671,087 9,232,740 8,438,347 17.953(101.60) 9.046(97.98) 8.906(105.55)
2005 17,315,296 8,868,810 8,446,486 16.219(93.67) 8.089(91.21) 8.130(96.25)n


Note : Parentheses show GERs
11
Years
(1)
Total population age (6-10) years (2) Net enrollment in grade I-V (3)( in million)
(a)Both sex (b)Male (c)Female (a)Both sex (b)Male (c)Female
1997 18,861,583 9,675,992 9,185,591 15.485(82.10) 8.035(83.04) 7.567(82.39)
1998 19,079,888 9,760,550 9,319,338 15.836(83.00) 8.196(83.97) 7.678(82.39)
1999 18,307,265 9,294,826 9,012,439 15.213(83.10) 7.809(83.97) 7.530(83.55)
2000 18,296,312 9,351,062 8,945,250 15.368(84.00) 7.765(83.04) 7.682(85.88)
2001 18,114,201 9,236,432 8,877,769 15.397(85.00) 7.670(83.04) 7.727(87.04)
2002 18,040,023 9,154,846 8,885,177 15.334(85.00) 7.602(83.04) 7.733(87.04)
2003 17,592,292 9,222,030 8,370,262 16.255(92.40) 8.001(86.76) 8.259(98.68)
2004 17,671,087 9,232,740 8,438,347 16.257(92.00) 8.096(87.70) 8.130(96.35)
2005 17,315,296 8,868,810 8,446,486 15.098(87.20) 7.505(84.63) 7.610(90.10)
Table-3.2
Bangladesh Primary Education: Net Enrollment in Mainstream and
other*institutions by Gender, 1997-2005

Note: Parentheses show NERs
12

Table-3.3
Bangladesh: Average promotion rates** (per grade) in primary education by major
delivery mechanisms, gender and broad regions, 2005

Region (strata) Government Schools
(N=37,672)
Registered Non-
government Schools
(N=19,635)
Ebtedaiye Madrassas
(N=3,488)
Male Female Male Female Male Female
A. Rural Bangladesh (N=56,829)
82 85 77 79 80 81
B. Urban Bangladesh* (N=3,960)
86 89 81 84 88 81
1. Metropolitan Cities (N=538)
86 89 82 86 88 85
2. Municipalities (N= 3422 )
86 89 81 83 80 81
C. All Bangladesh (N=60,705)
82 85 77 80 80 81
Source: DPE, Dhaka, August 12, 2006.
Notes: * Out of 3,966 urban schools, 3,064 are GPS, 840 are RNGPS and 62 are Ebtedaiye Madrashas.
Number promoted from jth class to (j+1) th
** Promotion rate (%) in ith year = ------------------------------------------------------x 100
Total students enrolled in the ith year

13
Table-3.4
Bangladesh: Average repetition** rates (per grade) in primary education by
major delivery mechanisms, gender and broad region, 2005

Region (strata) Government
Schools
(N=37,672)
Registered Non-
government
Schools
(N=19,635)
Ebtedaiye
Madrassas
(N=3,488)
Male Female Male Female Male Female
A. Rural Bangladesh (N=56,829)
11 11 11 10 9 9
B. Urban Bangladesh* (N=3,960)
10 9 9 8 10 10
1. Metropolitan Cities (N=538 )
8 8 9 5 7 6
2.Municipalities (N=3422)
10 9 9 9 9 9
C. All Bangladesh (N=60,705)
11 11 11 10 9 9








Source: personal communications with DPE, Dhaka, August 12,Dhaka
Note: * Out of 3,966 urban schools, 3,064 are GPS, 840 are RNGPS and 62 are Ebtedaiye Madrassas.
Number remained in same grade in (i+1) th year
** Repetition rate (%) in ith year in jth grade = -------------------------------------------------------- x 100
Total students enrolled in the ith year

14
Table-3.5
Bangladesh: Average Dropout** Rates (per grade) in primary education major
delivery mechanisms, gender and broad region, 2005

Region (strata) Government
Schools
(N=37,672)
Registered Non-
government
Schools
(N=19,635)
Ebtedaiye
Madrassas
(N=3,488)
Male Femal
e
Male Female Male Femal
e
A. Rural Bangladesh (N=56,829)
7 4 12 10 12 11
B. Urban Bangladesh* (N=3,960)
4 2 10 8 2 9
1. Metropolitan Cities (N=538 )
6 3 13 9 5 9
2. Municipalities (N= 3422 )
4 2 10 8 11 10
C. All Bangladesh (N=60,705)
6 4 12 10 11 11



























Source: Personal Communications with DPE, Dhaka, August 12, 2006.

Note: * Out of 3,966 urban schools, 3,064 are GPS, 840 are RNGPS and 62 are Ebtedaiye Madrassas.
Number dropping out in jth grade by end of ith year
** Dropout (%) in ith year in jth grade = ------------------------------------------------------------- x 100
Total students enrolled in jth grade in ith year

15
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
year
a
s

%

o
f

t
o
t
a
l

e
n
r
o
l
l
m
e
n
t
Promotion Rates
Repetition Rates
Dropout Rates

Source: DPE, Dhaka; personal communications on August 12, 2006.
Figure-3.1
Bangladesh Primary Mainstream Schools:
Average (grade 1 to 5) Rates (as percent of total) of Promotion, Repetition, and
Dropout, 1997-2005
16
Figure-3.2
Bangladesh: Survival Rates (%) of Student Cohorts in Mainstream
Primary Schools, 1997-2005

Survival rates in Primary Education (1997-2005)
44%
48%
52%
56%
60%
64%
68%
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Year
R
a
t
e








Source: DPE, Dhaka; personal communications on August 12, 2006.
Note: No. of students from the cohort surviving upto grade 5
Survival rate (%) of a cohort of students = ----------------------------------------------------------------- x 100
No. of students enrolling in grade 1 in ith year

17
Figure-3.3
Bangladesh: Coefficient of Efficiency (in percent) in Mainstream Primary
Schools (GPS and RNGPS), 1997-2005

Coefficient of efficient in Primary Education (1997-2005)
56%
58%
60%
62%
64%
66%
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Year
R
a
t
e




Source: DPE, Dhaka; personal communications on August 12, 2006.
Note: Total of ideal-years for a pupil to complete
Coefficient of efficiency (%) for primary education cycle = --------------------------------------------------- x 100
Total of pupil-years actually required
18
Table-3.6
Bangladesh: Primary Scholarship Examination Results
by Different Types of Mainstream Schools, 2005

Sl.
No.
School Type
(1)
No. Appeared
(2)
Pass-rate (%)
(3)
A. GPS
1
(i) Govt. Model Primary School (N=463) 12,200 (89.0)
2
(ii) PTI experimental (N=53) 1,274 (83.7)
3
(iii) Government Primary School
(N=37,339)
363,066 (69.2)
4
(iv) Community (N=2056) 10,445 (44.7)
B. Non-government
5
(i) RNGPS (N=19,890) 120,853 (53.9)
6
(ii) BRAC Schools (N=2695) 11,230 (89.1)
7
(iii) Other (N=1386) 28,924 (89.0)
Source: DPE, Dhaka; personal communications on August 12, 2006.
Note: Parentheses give percentages.
19
Table-3.7
Bangladesh: Primary Scholarship Examination Results for Mainstream
School (GPS and RNGPS) Participation Rates, Pas-rates by Gender, 2002-05

1) Year (2) Participants ( (3) Pass-rate (%)
(a)Number (b)
As % of
enrolment in
class 5
(A) Both sexes (b) Girls
2002 451,033 (21.57) (44.19) (41.19)
2003 452,415 (21.89) (51.94) (48.83)
2004 487,400 (23.53) (54.21) (51.02)
2005 604,359 (31.57) (67.25) (65.05)
Source: DPE, Dhaka; personal communications on August 12, 2006.
Note: Parentheses give percentages.
20
Table-3.8
Bangladesh Mainstream Primary Schools: Distribution (Percent-share) Of
Institutions with Basic Physical Facilities, 2005

Major Aspect Distribution by School-types
(a) GPS (N=37672) (b) RNGPS (N=19682)
1. Useable classroom Pucca**,
Semi-pucca
(58) [38] (92) [04]
2. Potable water (91) (89)
3. Separate Toilets
(a) Girls
(b) Boys
(37)
(32)
(35)
(29)
(c) Teacher (49) (35)





Source: DPE, Dhaka; personal communications on August 12, 2006.
Note: * Parentheses give percentages.
** [ ] show classroom which are in semi-pucca structures.

21
Section 2: Recent Evidence (contd.)

Participation and Equity by SES -Categories and Regions


See Table 3.10- enrollment rate is positively related with better SES,
dropout rate is inversely related with higher SES.
Similar situation in terms of NER, see Annex 3.5 ( of Education Watch-
2000 Report).


22
Table 3.10 Bangladesh: Children (age 6-10) by Enrollment Status and
Socio-economic Status
1
(SES), 2004
Source:
CAMPE, Quality with Equity:
The Primary Education
Agenda, Education Watch
Report 2003/4, Dhaka 2005


SES category

Enrollment Status (%)

No. of total
children
(6-10 yrs)



(a) Enrolled


(b) Dropout


Never enrolled

1. Always in
deficit


67.6


7.1

25.2

100 (210)

2. Sometimes in
deficit


87.4

3.1

9.4

100 (1178)

3. Break even


90.8

2.8

6.4

100 (2299)

4. Surplus


95.3

1.3

3.5

100 (1506)

5. All types







100 (5193)

Notes: 1, Here SES-categories are defined following the World Food Programme (WFP) categories,
where the degree of food insecurity (or otherwise) has been taken as the determining criterion.
2. The estimates presented here are based on non-random sample survey of 10 upazilas (sub-districts) of
Bangladesh by CAMPEs research team (2005). Purposively, the survey covered 4 upazilas of high food
insecurity areas, 3 each from moderately food insecure and low food insecure areas. The estimates are
based on household surveyor (N = 8212); covered all the administrative divisions, mainly rural areas (with
some urban areas), proportionately more of food-deficit areas
23
24

Section 2: Recent Evidence..(contd.)


There is a clear regional pattern in UPE-performance-
Metropolitan areas of Dhaka,Chittagong ,Khulna and other district-towns doing
better when compared with the rural areas.



Administrative divisions of Sylhet,Rajshahi and Chittagong (in that order)
lag behind in terms of quatitative and qualitative indicators of performance;
the leading adminstrative areas are Khulna,Barisal and Dhaka. Per capita GDP-
wise Chittagong and Sylhet do so well but it is not reflected in UPE-
performance.On the contrary, Barisal in general a deficit area, does perform
significantly better in UPE
25
26



Section 2: Recent Evidence..(contd.)

Figure-3.4
Bangladesh Rural Enrollment Rate of 6-10 years old by Poverty-Status
and Regions
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Barisal Chittagong Dhaka Khulna Rajshahi
Rural Area
G
E
R

(
%

o
f

e
l
i
g
i
b
l
e

c
h
i
l
d
r
e
n

)
Poor Male
Poor Female
Non-Poor Male
Non-Poor
Female














Source: BBS 2005, Household Income and Expenditure Survey (HIES), 2000

27
Figure-3.5

Bangladesh Urban Enrollment Rate of 6-10 years old by Poverty-Status
and Regions
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Barisal Chittagong Dhaka Khulna Rajshahi
Urban Area
G
E
R

(
%

o
f

e
l
i
g
i
b
l
e

c
h
i
l
d
r
e
n
)
Poor Male
Poor
Female
Non-Poor
Male
Non-Poor
Female



Source: BBS 2005, Household Income and Expenditure Survey (HIES), 2000

28
Section 3: Factors Behind Low UPE Performance
School-based variables


Inadequate contact hours and in optimal teaching-learning materials. See
Table 3.11

Unattractive school environment (little games/music/art-works; dull
pedagogy, low teacher-student ratio; lack of subject-based and class-
room-based teacher training; lack of academic supervision. See Table 3.13
29
Table 3.11
Bangladesh Mainstream Primary Schools: Contact Hours Availability of Free Textbooks and
Instructional Materials, 2005
Major Aspect Distribution by School-types
(a) GPS (N= 37672 ) (b) RNGPS (N= 19682)
1. Yearly contact hours 600 600
Double shift** (88) (91)
2. Timely availability of free textbooks (98) (98)
3. Availability of teaching aid and
learning materials
(51) (48)










Source: DPE, Dhaka; August 12, 2006.
Note: * Parentheses give percentages.
** Single shift schools are 12 percent of the total GPS-type and nine percent of the RNGPS-type.
The single shift-school runs on average (yearly) for about 900 hours.
30
Table-3.12
Bangladesh Mainstream Primary Schools: Distribution of Teachers
by Some Salient Features, 2005

Major Aspects Distribution by School-types
(a) GPS (N= ) (b) RNGPS (N=
)
1. Teacher-student ratio 1:58 1:46
2. Initial Teacher-training**
[C-in-Ed] (in %)
(73) (73)
3. Subject-based training*** (27) (30)
4. Sub-cluster training (80) (80)
5. Class-room-based training (35) (35)
6. Head-teacher training in
teacher support & academic
supervision
(34) (38)



Source: DPE, Dhaka; August 12, 2006.
Note: * Parentheses give percentages.
** 76 percent of the male-teachers got trained and 69 percent of the female-teachers got trained.
*** Subject-based trained teachers are lower by one percent point among GPS-female teachers and
by four percent points among RNGPS-female teachers.
31
Non-school variables

Low income, poor households not interested to send their
children to even free primary school- questions of direct costs
(about US S 19/year) plus opportunity costs e.g. at home helping
the family in farming,other income-generating activities

To encourage the poor children to enrol and sustain in the school
in rural areas the state has started ( from July,2002) demand-side
financing (Tk.100/month per child) under Primary Education
Stipend Project (PESP); significant leakages (faulty targeting,
asking for premium) of PESP-money have been reported
(CAMPE,2004)

First generation learners (about 45 percent of the total students)
do not get optimal support from the school/teachers; teacher-
student ratio is one of the highest in the world (1:60)
Section 3. Factors Behind Low UPE Performance
(contd)
32
Table-3.14
Bangladesh: Yearly Public Recurrent Expenditure of Primary
Education by Delivery Mechanisms, Rural-Urban Locations, 2000

Areas Yearly Public Expenditure Per Pupil (in current Taka)
GPS (N= ) RNGPS (N= ) Ebtedaiye (N= )
(a) Rural (N= ) 828 535 1173
(b) Urban (N= ) 1144 1548 1863
All Bangladesh
















Note: 1 US$ = 53.65 Taka in 2000.
Source: CAMPE-UPL, Renewed Hope-Daunting Challenges Education Watch-2001, Chapter 7, Dhaka 2002.

33
Table-3.15
Bangladesh: Yearly Private Cost of Primary Education by Rural-
urban Locations, Socio-economic (Food-consumption) Status and
Gender, 2000
Areas Annual Private Cost of Primary Education of household/Socio-economic
Status
(A) Always
Deficit
(b) Sometime in
deficit
(c) Balance (d) Surplus
(a) Rural
(i) Male
514 600 769 1066
(ii) Female 510 517 674 924
(b) Urban
(i) Male 1280 1902 2557 5699
(ii) Female 1184 1302 2310 5397







Note: 1 US$ = Tk. 53.65 in 2000.
Source: CAMPE-UPL, op.cit. Education on Watch-2001, Chapter 6.
34
Section 3 : Factor Behind. (contd.)

BIDS-World Bank study (2004) finds a positive relationship between (in a
household) adult male educational level and childrens primary enrolment,
also primary completion rate; for first generation learners the school has
to supply the complete answer (no home-work, domestic support/private
tutor)

Last but not the least, lack of community involvement [ School
Management Committee (SMC),Parent Teacher Association (PTA), are not
given due roles]; highly centralised primary education system in the
country. From the capital Dhaka, the Directorate of Primary Education(
DPE) virtually regulates about 70,000 schools and about 300,000 teachers
in the country.The Upazila (Sub-district) and District level DPE-
functionaries are it seems mere post-boxes passing on any major
decision-making to DPE,Dhaka.
35
Challenges

Way Forward

1. How to increase
overall enrolment ( in
relative and absolute
terms)

Make the mainstream schools ( GPS+ RNGPS) more attractive in
terms of teaching learning transactions, better ( interactive)
pedagogy; improved academic supervision by AUEOs and Head
teachers

2. How to enrol and
sustain the poor children
in the school

(a)Effective enforcement of Compulsory Primary Education Act of
1990; School Management Committee( SMC) and the local
government body of Union Parishad( UP) must be made
answerable for non-enrolment of the poor( or any) children in its
catchments area, and for not sustaining in the school
(b) SMC/concerned teachers will be involved in the social
mobilization and follow-up activities for enrolment/sustaining the
poor children in the school

3. How to devolve
activities related to
planning,
implementation,M&E to
local groups/ultimate
beneficiaries (
participatory
development)

Without causing any major headache/alarm to the national ( well-
entrenched) elite, it may be possible to empower the local elite (
e.g. UP-members), District-level educationists, technocrats, CPE-
committees ( in line the autocratic Ershad s attempt) may be
formed for social mobilization, M&E and so on.

4. More resources
required for quality
education

State decision-makers ( whether political, technocratic or
administrative) should know that US $ 19/pupil per year is not
adequate for quality primary education in the country; parents are
willing to pay money for quality education. Some innovative ways [
e.g. tax-exempt endowment funds at the local levels ( UP, District)]
to mobilize resources may be tried. Public recognition of these
philanthropies should encourage potential donors.

Section 4: Challenges and Way Forward