Analysis of PPP models in education and Gunotsav

Abstract

The governments globally are looking to improve their education processes via a variety of mechanisms. The governments are trying to veer off from the traditional mechanisms trying to improve the processes by tying up with private players. Multiple private players are trying to venture into the industry via multiple channels like schools, curriculum development and supplementary features.PPP models in the education industry are highly undocumented and hence there is very little analysis available on the field. This paper tries to analyse the data available and also collates data on existing undocumented PPP projects in India.With the help of the data collected, the paper develops a framework to analyse the PPP models in education. The major factors that affect the success of the projects are financial constraints, adaptability to local context, communication between the partners, experience of the private partner, availability of resources, difficulty of the task and the political climate in the region.Primary research was conducted on the Akanksha ‘whole school adoption’ model which is been conducted in Mumbai and Pune. Analysis done using the framework developed gives out a result that the partnership is not scalable or sustainable, however fares well on increment of learning outcomes and innovation in the process.Gunotsav is school accountability system started by the Government of Gujarat with the objective of improving quality of education in primary schools. The process after 6 years of its introduction is yet to make the impact it set out to do. There exists still a huge gap in the perception of this program by the different stakeholders affected by it. As a result the lack of impact is often blamed from one party to another (mainly administrators and teachers). The paper aims at analyzing this process from a design as well as implementation point of view. The results projected have a huge variation from the actual results due to the self-evaluation criterion. In addition, auditors and test results prove to be the sole inputs for feedbacks. The process of keeping other stakeholders involve is missing from the design of this initiative.