backgrder

Education for All by 2000: was the pledge by world leaders and organisations in Jomtien, Thailand in 1990. The World Conference on Education helped move education back to the center of the international development agenda and on the priority lists of governments. Global conferences that followed reaffirmed this commitment. These include the World Summit for Children in 1990, the World Conference on Human Rights in 1993, the World Conference on Special Needs Education in 1994 and the International Conference on Adult Education in 1997.

...1990 is a turning point. It is in this year that the line showing enrolment slopes steeply upward, indicating a sharp increase in the number of children enrolled and a corresponding decline in the number of out-of-school children.

Why 1990? This, it will be recalled, was both the United Nations International Literacy Year and, more especially, the year in which the World Conference on Education for All was held in Jomtien, Thailand. It was this conference that launched the worldwide EFA movement. Most of the nine high-population countries arrived in Jomtien armed with national EFA plans. In the follow-up to the conference, countries refined these plans and began to implement them. The fruits of these efforts are now appearing.By the year 2000, if efforts are sustained, the impact of Jomtien will be clearly evident in all countries. In those countries that in 1990 already enrolled over 90 per cent of children in primary school — eg China, Indonesia and Mexico — the impact of EFA on Education for All is a global challenge.

...In those countries having large numbers of out-of-school children, EFA has already had a significant impact on expanding access and enrolment. In India, for example, EFA efforts since 1990 appear «i) have accounted for the enrolment of over 16 million additional children in primary schools and programmes providing non-formal primary education.- Education for all: A turning point, Link, 30/01/1994, [C.ELDOC.N00.30jan94lnk1.pdf ]

The World Education Forum held in Dakar, Senegal, adopted six major educational goals, two of which were to become Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). The goals included achieving universal primary education and gender equality and improving literacy and educational quality by 2015. That was a long way to go, but the nations agreed at Dakar to realise a more immediate and urgent goal - gender parity in the enrolment of girls and boys at primary and secondary levels by 2005 and full equality at all levels of education by 2015. However, even the immediate goal is far from being realised.

A report of the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO), which monitors the global progress in meeting the Education for All (EFA) targets, paints a dismal picture.

..Increased enrolment does not signify anything substantial as long as the dropout rates continue to be high, sex-ratios are unfavourable (in fact, according to Census 2001 there is little reason to suggest that the lot of the girl child has improved even if enrolment rates per se have gone up) and novel forms of discrimination accompanied with banned customs like dowry continue to be practised.

The report repeatedly underscores the importance of the formal system of education and the role of governments in providing it to all children. The danger is that as nation-states try to meet the quantitative targets by 2015 or 2005, they may make compromises on the qualitative aspect of education. It has been observed - and the report cites some examples - that such measures do not have a lasting impact. While reform is necessary within the existing system of formal education, the answer certainly does not lie in more non-formal and alternative forms of education.- Elusive goals, T.K. RAJALAKSHMI, Frontline, 19/12/2003, [C.ELDOC.N21.19dec03frn8.html]

Progress towards "education for all" will require more than just a levelling up of years of schooling. It will also require increased scope for educational 'choice': contents, methods, delivery systems. How else, and by whom, in a democratic context, are 'the basic learning needs' of all children, youth and adults to be defined? It will mean too agreed standards: those of the community and of civil society, of people learning to live together peacefully while respecting their differences.

Towards Basic Education for All reflects elements of both continuity and change in UNESCO's mission... it is built upon a new concept of partnership among international agencies in the promotion of basic education which emerged from the World Conference on Education for All. This programme is designed to meet two interrelated aims: increasing access to basic education while, at the same time, improving the quality and relevance of such education. Particular attention is given to providing women and girls with increased access to education: over 60 per cent of illiterate adults are women and over 60 per cent of out-of-school children are girls; further, the education of women and girls lowers fertility rates and improves the retention and achievement of their children in school, thereby breaking the cycle of illiteracy. UNESCO's efforts to improve the quality of basic education are multifaceted, dealing, for example, with the training of teachers, the management of schools, the provision of learning materials and the measurement of learning outcomes.- Education and new vision of world, Link, 19/12/1993, [C.ELDOC.N00.19dec93lnk1.pdf]

As India tries to meet the targets of the EFA conferences, we often compromise quality and also disregard our National Policy...

The HRD secretary has falsely claimed that the number of out-of-school children has ‘come down from 35 million in 2000 to 23 million this year’. A clue to how the government arrived at this falsehood is provided by the recently released UNESCO’s EFA Global Monitoring Report 2003-04. The report points out that this lowered estimate is a “consequence of a change in the duration of primary schooling”. The government has apparently fudged statistics by reducing the “official length of the primary span” by one year, thereby reducing the “number of children counted as being out-of-school”.

Fudged statistics, rather than effective policy, is now the chief weapon to substantiate India’s capacity to meet the Dakar Goal of universal primary education by 2015. The Dakar Goal is a dilution of India’s policy commitment to elementary education of eight years. Interestingly, the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan boasts of universalising primary education by 2007 and upper primary education by 2010. However, last year’s Unesco report had placed India in a category that is at “serious risk of not achieving any of the three Dakar Goals” even by 2015.

India got carried away with the prestige and glamour of the International conference. We forgot that our policies and provisions are as comprehensive if not more than those framed at the EFA conferences...The issue is that the political will to boost education does not come unless there is pressure from the international community...

Significantly, India's 1986 education policy had made a much clearer commitment on `education for women's equality' than the Jomtien-Dakar Framework.

...the only programme that was designed to reflect this policy insight was the Mahila Samakhya. But the programme remained marginal throughout the 1990s. For every Rs.100 allocated for elementary education in the Union Budget, hardly 25 paise was given to it. In due course of time, even this miniscule programme lost its basic direction.

The Jomtien-Dakar Framework does not even refer to patriarchy as an issue and essentially reduces girls' education to their mere enrolment in school registers and to the provision of literacy skills. This is exactly what happened when the World Bank-sponsored DPEP adopted the Mahila Samakhya. The focus on collective reflection and socio-cultural action by organised women's groups was abandoned. It became a mere enrolment programme for the girl child. Critical issues such as the participation of girls in schools, gender sensitising of learning material and teacher education and other holistic educational aims were ignored.

Unfortunately, the notion of gender parity (ratio of enrolment of girls and boys) in the EFA Global Monitoring Report, 2003-04 released by the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) reinforces this confusion. It is a different matter that the UNESCO report reveals that India will fail to achieve even this diluted objective by 2015. Also, the World Bank diluted the goal of women's education to just raising their literacy levels and productivity (rather than educating or empowering them) and turning them into mere transmitters of messages related to fertility control, health or nutrition. The Dakar Framework has now added the ambiguous notion of Life Skills that seems to be yet another mechanism for social manipulation and market control of the adolescent mindset, particularly girls. India unfortunately gave up its progressive policy on women's education in favour of the international framework that was guided more by the considerations of market than by women's socio-cultural and political rights.

the market agenda and the Structural Adjustment Programme inherent in the Jomtien Declaration had a significant impact on the State's policies, resulting in further attrition of its commitment during the Nineties to fulfill its Constitutional obligation...

Significantly, Tomasevski (2001) noted the following regarding the Jomtien Declaration:

"The language of the final document adopted by the Jomtien Conference merged human needs and market forces, moved education from governmental to social responsibility, made no reference to the international legal requirement that primary education be free-of-charge, introduced the term basic education' which confused conceptual and statistical categories.

The language elaborated at Jomtien was different from the language of international human rights law."

· Dilution of elementary education of 8 years to primary education of 5 or even less years;
· Diverting attention from the central issue of transforming the mainstream school system with respect to issues such as the lack of social relevance of education, inequity inbuilt in school structure, inflexibility and non-contextuality of curriculum teaching-learning process and evaluation parameters founded on erroneous pedagogic principles, ill-planned professional content of teacher education etc:
. Ignoring the policy commitment to the Common School System (Sadgopal, 2002, p. 123; 2004);

· Institutionalization of low-quality low-budget parallel streams of education for the deprived sections of society viz. Alternative Schools, Education Guarantee Scheme etc. (Sadgopal 2002, 2004);

· Reducing the issue of women empowerment and gender discrimination to the so-called gender parity measured in terms of enrollment ratios (Gol, 2001; UNESCO, 2002, pp. 68-79);
Marginalising the issue of social and cultural discrimination of dalits, tribals and the minorities both within and outside the school and its impact on their capacity to participate in and complete elementary education; reducing the entire issue to their enrollment ratios;

· Isolating education from its socio-economic context by ignoring issues such as child labour, wage structure, common property resources (e.g. fodder, fuel and water), patriarchy, caste structure, cultural alienation and discrimination, communalisation of polity, feudal and patriarchal control of Panchayati Raj institutions etc.;

Reducing the aim of girl child's education to the narrow view wherein women are envisaged as merely 'useful products', ready receptors or transmitters of demographic and nutritional messages or proficient wage earners or producers, thereby violating girls child's right to education as a human (see World Bank, 1997, pp. 1 & 39);

· Violating the Operation Blackboard's norms prescribed by the National Policy with respect to the number of teachers and classrooms per primary school and then legitimising multi-grade teaching for the poor;

· Overlooking the cumulative gap in resource allocation to education building up for the past three decades due to non-investment of the recommended level of 6% of GDP in education; and
. Refusing to re-prioritise the national economy for the purpose of allocating adequate resources for education of the poor and thereby redistributing social justice; using this reluctance as a rationale for seeking external aid for primary education, promoting privatisation and commercialisation of education at all levels and substituting national concerns with the conditionalities of international aid giving agencies.

Policy formulation and any realistic planning of education calls for reviewing the role of education in social change and re-designing the entire education system to deal with these issues. Curriculum must also begin to take note of the rapidly emerging linkage between globalisation and religious fundamentalism (see Abroad, 2002; BJVJ Document of January 2002 reproduced in Sadgopal, 2003; Sadgopal, 2004). There is no space whatsoever either in the Jomtien Declaration or in the framework of the externally aided programmes for such meaningful policy changes. - RESISTING APPROPRIATION AND DISTORTION OF KNOWLEDGE, ANIL SADGOPAL, THE PEOPLE'S MOVEMENT, 01/05/2004 [C.ELDOC.N00.01may04tpm4.html]

John Daniel's editorial note in UNESCO Education Today Newsletter (Oct. 2002) provokes several serious questions regarding the agenda and vision of the Education for All global initiative. Is UNESCO promoting the commoditization and homogenization of human learning? How could it suggest that the multinational corporation McDonald's is a good model for die world education systems (particularly those in the Global South) to emulate? What is UNESCO and EFA's stance regarding the Global Economy?

"Perhaps most disturbing is Daniel 's inability to recognize that the world has already gone through centuries of dehumanizing institutionalization masquerading as 'educational reform', 'development', or 'liberalization.' Daniel's view, that price reduction as a result of competition is a good thing, might make sense when interrogated through a purely theoretical economistic lens, but is utterly inadequate when this perspective is juxtaposed with the very real exploitative history of state and corporate power...The success of McDonald's (and many such symbols of corporate power) is inextricably entangled with those structures and institutions of modem life that have ordered our social world to 'manufacture consent' and stifle dissent."

"Daniel 's views run in concert with countless elites in governmental and non-governmental circles, who in their benevolence, undemocratically make global development policy, which includes, (mis) education policy, affecting all of us. Their policymaking is dictatorial, and appears not to have space for reflective internal evaluation of its own methodology. In global divide terms, it means that the Global South, with its servitude-style McDonalized education, is yet to stay subservient to the Global North, while the latter cooks up yet more altruistic schemes that keep the former in its dependent position.

"The metaphors we use to understand the world have powerful implications for our actions. McDonalds and the modern school are institutions affiliated with industrial metaphors: assembly line, mass production, hierarchies of control, separation of humanity from nature, etc. Industrial metaphors ignore or devalue human relationships and the unpredictable, non-linear, overlapping, multilevel processes by which the natural world organizes itself...When metaphors change, new possibilities of thinking and action open. If the learning environment is thought of as an eco-system, rather than a factory; if teaching is thought of as nurturing a garden, rather than managing a fast-food restaurant; if learning materials are thought of as flour with which we make bread together, rather than as french fries to be served by a worker to a customer -then we can begin to re-imagine what we mean by education."

- McEducation for All???, Abhivyakti Media for Development, 01/01/2003, [C.ELDOC.N00.01jan03expre5.html ]

Alternative Curriculum Schools Education Philosophies/Alternative Thought

WHILE inaugurating the meeting of the high-level group on Education For All (EFA) on November 10, Prime Minister expressed Atal Bihari Vajpayee deep concern about the lack of funds for elementary education in India.Making a strong bid for additional external aid, he reminded bilateral and multilateral aid agencies, including the World Bank, that in the year 2000 they had made a pledge in Dakar, Senegal, that "no country seriously committed to basic education will be thwarted in the achievement of this goal by lack of resources." He lamented that "the Fast Track Initiative started by the international funding agencies in 2002 has so far been neither fast nor adequate." He seemed to be saying that India will be willing to educate her children only if external aid agencies shell out additional funds. Does this not imply that the recent constitutional amendment, making elementary education a fundamental right, is at the mercy of aid agencies? What implications does this `dependency syndrome' have for national sovereignty?

Iit is a vicious cycle when a debt ridden country has to structurally adjust to re-allocate money from education to more profitable sector and therefore needs to seek funds to combat illiteracy...

INDIA ON Tuesday made a strong plea that countries which have initiated structural economic reforms should get priority in obtaining external assistance in eradicating illiteracy. The demand was made by Dr Arjun Sen Gupta, Member-Secretary of the Planning Com-mission of India, in the ongoing conference on Education For All in the Capital. Dr Gupta, who participated in the discussion on "External and Internal Financial Resources for EFA (Education For All) ", said that an understanding should be arrived at between donors and the countries which have accept-ed structural reforms. Donor agencies should take upon them-selves the task of providing addi-tional resources, especially in promoting primary education, he said...He stated that his intention was not to create any controversy but it was a reality that countries going for structural adjustment had to first control the fiscal defi-cit. Controlling the fiscal deficit leads to a cut in allocation for edu-cation, he added. He said that Budgetary con-straints were largely responsible for deciding the funding for education.

...Human Resource Development Minister Arjun Singh, while refus-ing to solicit funds from interna-tional agencies, alluded to the fact that international funding had a role to play in eradicating illiteracy. For instance he main-tained that while it was the responsibility of each nation to mobi-lise funds for the basic education of its citizens, there are exceptio-nal situations where internal resourcse are not enough and consequently concessional assist-ance is unavoidable to eradicate illiteracy.

The second new parameter — that of external assistance to India's basic education projects — is arguably temporary.

But its sheer dimension both in absolute terms and in terms of the proportion of contribution it provides to a project should not go unnoticed. The total estimated outlay on the seven new projects in the basic education sector is Rs 29.26 billion for the eighth plan period. The expect ed flow of external resources for the support of this outlay is Rs 24.51 billion, which is about 84 per cent of the total. The DPEP alone claims Rs 19.50 billion...

Surely such a degree of dependence on foreign aid for providing the basic educational needs of the masses would have been quite unthinkable even a few years back. While one need not be hysterical about the possible danger of such dependence in a vital sector of society, there can be no doubt that there should be only humiliation in store for us if we are unable to use this money in a way that makes the outcomes both desirable and transparent to all.

The DPEP is rightly seen by the international funding agencies as the flagship of India's new education policy. But they have put some of their eggs in other baskets too. The DPEP is,of course, the major response to Jomtien 1990 but at least some of the other six projects are not only more compact but also more directly targetted in terms of the Jomtien call for education for all. One example is Mahila Sama-khya, a project on education for women's equality through organisation of women's collectives. It covers 20 districts andhas a total outlay of Rs 513 million, the whole of which is being covered by external assistance.

- Learning by degrees from below, Tapas Majumdar, Telegraph, 17/10/1994, [C.ELDOC.N00.17oct94tel1.pdf ]

The EFA conferences rationalised a paralell and inferior system of schooling, exacerbating inequalities...

The most critical dilution, however, was conceptual (and even moral and ethical), rather than quantitative. The government decided to replace the regular formal schools with low-quality, low-budget parallel streams of primary education for the educationally deprived children, two-thirds of whom are girls. This policy stance is apparently the result of the structural adjustment programme of the International Monetary Fund (IMF)-World Bank, which imposes drastic cuts in expenditures on education, health and other social welfare sectors as a condition for the grant of additional loans or aid.

The parallel streams included Alternative Schools, Education Guarantee Scheme (EGS) centres and Multi-Grade Teaching - the so-called `innovations' designed under the canvass of the World Bank-sponsored District Primary Education Programme (DPEP), during the 1990s. In violation of our National Policy on Education, 1986, upper primary education (Grades VI to VIII) was essentially forgotten, presumably to please external aid agencies committed to the Dakar Framework of primary education of only five years. Also, the regular teacher was replaced by a para-teacher who is an under-qualified, untrained and under-paid local youth appointed on the basis of a short-term contract.

The government was not perturbed that its policy stance was tantamount to institutionalising discrimination against the poor, a majority of whom would be Dalits, the tribal people and religious or cultural minorities, two-thirds of each segment being girls. Most of the disabled children will also fall in this category, earmarked for discrimination.

The policy was pushed forward ruthlessly in spite of wide public criticism and the principle of equality enshrined in the Constitution. The government's refrain of `something is better than nothing' seemed to justify, instead of questioning, the collapse of education policies during the past 56 years. The concept of a parallel stream was first institutionalised by the 1986 policy in the form of non-formal education for the poor, especially child workers.

- Education for too few, ANIL SADGOPAL, 05/12/2003 [C.ELDOC.N00.05dec03frn6.htm]

It appears that the EFA document emphasises providing universal facilities of education for the age-group 6-14 and upgradation of facilities. The problems of non-participation in the existing system of education which are considered to be crucial by many scholars, however, have not re-ceived due attention. It states: "Given the large number of children who do not partici-pate in schools, non-formal education (NFE) assumes significance". It is doubtful if non-formal education as has been devised for the age group 9-14 is of much use. There is strong suspicion among many that the NFE has been devised to get away with the failure of ensuring universal elementary schooling for all the children in the age-group 6-14. There may be no doubt that NFE is less accountable than formal system on the one hand, and on the other, it makes the system further segregative. It is quite some time NFE is in operation but the outcome is surely not up to the expectation. It is interesting to note that the National Policy on Education 1986, in a way, ac-knowledged the failure of universal elemen-tary schooling for all children up to the age of 14 and legitimised non-formal education for out-of-school children so as to fulfil the constitutional directives. The NPE states: "It shall be ensured that all children who attain the age of about 11 years by 1990 will have had 5 years of schooling or its equiva-lent in the non-formal stream.

It may be that for the convenience of the working children the non-formal education has been devised. It is likely to reduce the opportunity cost for education. Yet it may not attract a large majority of out-of-school children unless they find the sort of educa-tion offered beneficial for them. It is obvi-ous that much will depend on the relevance and quality of the type of education likely to be offered through the non-formal stream. EFA document does not say how it will be different from the existing formal system in terms of content and how the quality would be ensured when even the quality of formal elementary education is not beyond ques-tion.

- Universal Elementary Education Receding Goal, Poromesh Acharya, Economic & Political Weekly, 14/01/1994, [J.ELDOC.N00.14jan94EPW.pdf ]

To counter its past failures in literacy and mass education, the government in May 1998 launched a 'total campaign' approach for the adult education programme under the non-formal sector, alongwith the general goal of 'Education for All' (EFA) in the

formal sector. The EFA has nothing new in it. It is a new slogan for the earlier 'Universalisation of Elementary Education' (UEE) scheme, and has been adopted under the auspices of the World Bank and the UNESCO's mass literacy initiative. In case of India, it has simply combined the (1) p re-school and (2) adult education dimensions to the earlier existing (3) UEE scheme. These dimensions include:

1. 'Expansion of early childhood care and development activities especially for poor, disadvantaged and disabled children'; 2. 'Drastic reduction in illiteracy, particularly in the 15-35 age-group,... ensuring that the levels of the three R-s are relevant to the living and working conditions of the people'; and the existing
3. 'Universalisation of Elementary Education (UEE), viewed as a composite programme of:
* access to elementary education for all children upto 14 years of age;
* universal participation till...elementary stage through formal or non-formal education programmes;
* 'universal achievement at least of minimum levels of learning'.
* The initial target group of EFA in India constituted 'about 19 to 24 million children in the age-group 6-14 of whom 60 per cent are girls, and about 122 million adult illiterates in the age group 15-35, of whom 62 per cent are women'. Until March 1998, the National Literacy Mission (NLM) had sanctioned 434 TLC projects covering 442 districts, some having failed to take-off properly About 96.57 million 'illiterates' were enrolled by this time, and experience shows that official figures are generally overstated. After a decade of TLC launch in May 1988, the number of learners who had completed Primer III by the end of March 1988, is 52.47 million, which is 41.53 per cent of the target. Among these only nine States reported more than 50 per cent achievement.

- Total Literacy Campaign: A Failed Development Discourse, AJAY KUMAR, Mainstream, 07/09/2002, [J.ELDOC.N00,07sep02MNS.pdf]

THE most important thing about the scaled-down Education for All (EFA) sum-mit is that it is taking place at all.

Optimistically, this means that unglamorous subjects like literacy and education have fi-nally "arrived". If the event provokes critical thinking on why India has done so badly in a vital area, it will have served a purpose. Education is India's most ne-glected (non-) priority. Its poor quality is one of the greatest barriers to her growth and progress.

EFA-9 has been long over-due. The world is actually gen-erating illiteracy. In 1960, there were 875 million illiter-ates in the world — about the same number as India's entire population today. By 2000, there will be 935 million.

...Three-fourths of them live in just nine countries which are home to half the globe's popu-lation. It is significant that seven of the nine countries were colon-ised for over a century; and the other two suffered various forms of foreign domination.

The people are not consciously oriented to the comprehensive concept of Education For All which is rooted in the universalis-tic principles of equity and social justice. It is a revolu-tionary concept because in the socio-historical and cul-tural context of Indian society which is still predomi-nantly rural, hierarchic and authoritarian, Education For All is not yet an integrated part of the internalised belief system of the people and hence does not readily evokes commitment for it. Further, the concept of Basic Learning Needs, as expounded in the World Declara-tion on EFA (1990), is also a radical departure from the official curricular meaning of it in India. The official curricular meaning of basic learning needs is essen-tially limited to literacy skills and some functional knowledge. The World Declaration on EFA's scope goes much beyond, covering the liberation and conscientization and improvement aspects which are essentially people and non-governmental organisation.

- Advocacy Forum for Education For All, G. Narsimulu B. Prabhaker Reddy, 19/06/1995, [C.ELDOC.N00.19jun95un1.pdf]

The NLM was bound to face problems in any case because presumably some persons in charge did not do their home-work in 1992. It was in that year itself that India had also adopt-\ the programme of educa- tion for all as part of its nation-al education policy. EFA, of course, is more holistic, logical and in line with the mandate of the Constitution. Plain economics suggests that there may not be enough money in the kitty for both the NLM and the EFA. Ever since the Jomtien world conference of 1990, United Nations Educa-tional Scientific and Cultural Organisation and other international aid agencies have begun to favour education for all programmes. Thus it no longer makes sense, either ideologi-cally or pragmatically, to think in terms of investment in educa-tion for literacy alone. It seems that in the battle of ideas between the total lite-racy and the EFA programmes it is the philosophy of the latter that is going to prevail. The NLM might even change to make it indistinguishable from the wider EFA movement. This will however not necessarily end the inconsistency syndrome in the national education policy.

Background to Education for All conference , Chapter 1 of " The Cosmos of Education Tracking the Indian Experience" by Mamta Kohil. Asian South Pacific Bureau of Adult Education, 2003.[R.N00.24]

“Education For All of Education for Wisdom” ( ACritique of EFA) by Jennifer Gidley. pg 177-189. in Unfolding Learning Societies: Deepening the Dialogues by Manish Jain, Manish. Shikshantar, April 2001, [B.N00.S17]

Providing Education For All in India- An Overview (Pg. 1 - 20) in India Education Report, by R Govinda. Oxford University Press, 2002. , [R.N21.G.1..R]

McEducation For All? Opening a Dialogue Around UNESCO's Vision for Commoditizing Learning, Shikshantar, August 2003, [R.N00.39]

Critique of EFA: (Pg 37-40) in Exposing the illusion of the FRE by Shikshantar, [R. N00.36]

Third High-Level Group Meeting on Education for All, UNESCO, 01/01/2004, R.N20.12

Education for all - Summit of Nine High-Population Countries - New Delhi, 12-16 December 1993: Panel Proceedings, Naik, Chitra (Dr) (Ed), UNESCO, 01/01/1994, R.N00.11, R.N00.12

Multichannel Learning: Connecting All to Education, Ed Anzalone, Steve, Education Development Center, Washington, 01/01/1995, B.N24.A1

Education for the Third Millennium, Alengaden, Varghese, Dharma Bharathi, 01/01/2000, B.N00.A61, 3. UEE
- “Universalizing Elementary Education in India” Dr Manu Kulkarni Ch 7 pg. 79-91,

UEE International Declarations
- Universalisation of School Education: The Road Ahead..., Niranjanaradhya V P, Books for Change, 2004. [B.N21.N3]

DPEP UEE
School Effectiveness and Learner's Achievement at the Primary Stage (A Baseline Beneficiary Study in 43 DPEP Districts), Saxena, R R & Singh, Satvir, Vikas Publishing House Pvt.Ltd, 01/01/1996, B.N21.S3