Perception of the Value of Education and Parental Involvement Among Microfinance Clients

Empirical Analysis of the Perception of the Value of

Education and Parental Involvement

among Microfinance Clients

Margot QuaegebeurColumbia University

&Srivatsa Marthi

University of Toronto

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

Agenda

Introduction

Methodology

Background

Main findings

Conclusions & Further research


Introduction


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

Microfinance

Income

Assets

Savings

Economic

Empowerment

Health

Education

Social


Microfinance enables parents to send their children to school

Enrolment

Drop out

Afford expenditures outside basic subsistence

Less need for child to support

household income

Ability to smooth income in times

of shocks

Income growth

Household decision makingEmpowerment

Microfinance


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


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


Methodology


For this study we worked together with MFI SwayamKrishi Sangam, in the Medak district of A.P.

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

Andhra Pradesh

Medak


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

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

Children of SKS members

Class 5 or (preferably) higher

Government school

Both boys and girls

Teachers

• Local government school

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

• 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


We conducted 47 interviews in 7 villages

Parents (MF

clients)

22

Total of 35 parents; half of the interviews with mothers onlyAverage age: women 33 years old, men 36 years oldSKS 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 children82% 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)

Children

13

8 individual interviews and 5 group discussions (5 children per group), talking to a total of 33 children19 boys and 15 girls5 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 oldThe majority of these children’s mothers were uneducated (82%), whereas more than half of the fathers had been to school (64%)

Teachers

12

10 male teachers and 2 female teachers8 UPS/Secondary School teachers, 4 Primary School teachersAverage age was 36 years, raging from 24 to 56 years oldAverage of 12 years of teaching experience, ranging from 3 to 34 years9 teachers had a B.Ed. degree, 2 teachers had a M.Ed. degree, one teacher had a TTC


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


Background


Education indicators score low in the Medak District

Literacy rates

(Census India 2001)

Over all Male FemaleIndia 65.2 75.64 54.03Andhra Pradesh 61.11 70.85 51.17 Medak district 53.24 65.52 40.68Karnataka 67.04 76.29 57.45Tamilnadu 73.47 82.33 64.55Kerala 90.92 94.2 87.86

Reading ability in Manor Mandal Present

ClassTotal Nothing Recognize

AlphabetsWords Paragraph Story

Level1st 13 6 5 2

2nd 33 6 13 6 4 4

3rd 38 4 18 7 6 3

4th 35 5 6 9 8 7

5th 46 3 6 9 7 21Total 165 24 48 33 25 35Percentage 100 14.5 29.1 20 15.2 21.2(National Rapid Assessment Study conducted by Pratham – SKS, for the Planning Commission of India, 2004)


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 toschool;

— 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


Main findings


Poor people valued education, because it would enable their children to get a good future job…

87%

9%4%

Nothing

Income

I don't know

Q: What, if anything, is more important for your child than

education?

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

prioritization.”

77%

45%

23%

Q: Why do you send your children to school?

To gain knowledge

To get a good future

job

“Want to get child educated,

because not educated myself”

“Our lives are worthless since

we haven’t studied”


… however, parents didn’t have a clear idea of the kind of future job or of the level of education to be achieved

7%

16%

10%

31%

36%

I don't know

"In thefuture/faith"

12th grade

What childwants

Whatever I canafford

Q: What would you like your child to do occupation-wise?

35%

28%

14%

23%

"Anything big"

Government job

Whatever childwants

I don't know

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


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” YES 91%

“No one with a degree, has

gotten a good job”

NO“People who have studied, didn’t find a

job”

0%

DON’T KNOW

9%“There are no possibilities

in the village”


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


Teachers seemed motivated and involved

Teachers Children

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

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


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 what they themselves should contribute to their child’s

education at home

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

becoming more involved


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


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

Awareness

Involvem

ent

Qu

ality

of

ed

uca

tio

n

Supp

ort a

t hom

eO

rgan

ize

Pare

nt-

teach

er

Sta

keh

old

ers

Acc

ou

nta

bil

ity


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

Educational loans

Invite teacher to centermeeting

Organize parents

Cooperate with

schools

Parental involvement

Implement “further

learning”tools


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?

Perception of the Value of Education and Parental Involvement Among Microfinance Clients

Documents

Transcript of Perception of the Value of Education and Parental Involvement Among Microfinance Clients