metadata: authors: 0: author: Azam,Mehtabul
1: author: Blom,Andreas
count: India
docna: 0: docna: Progress in participation in tertiary
            education in India from 1983 to 2004
docty: Policy Research Working Paper
subtopic: Secondary Education,Tertiary Education,Educational Sciences,Gender and Development,Inequality
teratopic: Gender,Education
abstracts: cdata!: Using nationally representative
            household surveys, this paper examines the trends in
            attainment, enrollment, and access to tertiary (higher)
            education in India from 1983 to 2005. The findings suggest
            that there has been considerable progress in attainment and
            participation; however, they remain low. Important gaps
            exist in enrollment between rich and poor, rural and urban
            areas, men and women, disadvantaged groups and the general
            population, and states. Analysis of transition rates from
            secondary education to tertiary education and regression
            analysis indicate that inequality in tertiary education
            between disadvantaged groups and the general population is
            explained by low completion rates of secondary education.
            Inequality in tertiary education related to income, gender,
            rural residence, and between states is explained by: (i)
            differences in completion rates of secondary education, and
            (ii) differences in the probability of transitioning from
            secondary education to tertiary education. In particular,
            the importance of household income has grown markedly.
            Equitable expansion of secondary education is therefore
            critical for improving the equity of tertiary education.
            There is also a need to help qualified youth from low-income
            families and rural backgrounds to attend tertiary education,
            in particular the technical and engineering streams, in
            which participation is lower.
geo_reg_key: 517198,517212,517191
repnme: repnme: Progress in participation in tertiary
            education in India from 1983 to 2004
display_title: Progress in participation in
            tertiary education in India from 1983 to 2004
listing_relative_url: /research/2008/12/10088005/progress-participation-tertiary-education-india-1983-2004
topicv3: Inequality under Law m1326002 925,Tertiary Education m1326349 482,Education m1327048 470,Secondary Education m1327058 481,Gender m1327621 615
publishtoextweb_dt: 2010-07-01T00:00:00Z
historic_topic: Gender,Education
no_of_pages: 47
author_keys: 0: author_key: 663612
1: author_key: 498815
model_extractions: WPS4793 Policy ReseaRch WoRking PaPeR 4793 Progress in Participation in Tertiary Education in India from 1983 to 2004 _Mehtabul Azam Andreas Blom_ The World Bank South Asia Region Human Development Department December 2008
Policy ReseaRch WoRking PaPeR 4793

# **Abstract**

Using nationally representative household surveys, this paper examines the trends in attainment, enrollment, and access to tertiary (higher) education in India from 1983 to 2005. The findings suggest that there has been considerable progress in attainment and participation; however, they remain low. Important gaps exist in enrollment between rich and poor, rural and urban areas, men and women, disadvantaged groups and the general population, and states. Analysis of transition rates from secondary education to tertiary education and regression analysis indicate that inequality in tertiary education between disadvantaged groups and the general population is explained by low completion rates of secondary education. Inequality in tertiary education related to income, gender, rural residence, and between states is explained by: (i) differences in completion rates of secondary education, and (ii) differences in the probability of transitioning from secondary education to tertiary education. In particular, the importance of household income has grown markedly. Equitable expansion of secondary education is therefore critical for improving the equity of tertiary education. There is also a need to help qualified youth from low-income families and rural backgrounds to attend tertiary education, in particular the technical and engineering streams, in which participation is lower.

This paper—a product of the Human Development Department, South Asia Region—is part of a larger effort in the department to analyze progress in education in South Asia to support planned investments in the education sector in the region. Policy Research Working Papers are also posted on the Web at http://econ.worldbank.org. The author may be contacted at ablom@worldbank.org.

_The Policy Research Working Paper Series disseminates the findings of work in progress to encourage the exchange of ideas about development issues. An objective of the series is to get the findings out quickly, even if the presentations are less than fully polished. The papers carry the names of the authors and should be cited accordingly. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper are entirely those of the authors. They do not necessarily represent the views of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/World Bank and its affiliated organizations, or those of the Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments they represent._ Produced by the Research Support Team
# **Progress in Participation in Tertiary Education in India from 1983 to 2004**

Mehtabul Azam<sup>┼</sup> Southern Methodist University Andreas Blom<sup>#</sup> World Bank We thank Amit Dar, Peter Darvas, Puja Dutta, Pawan Agarwal, Shashi Shrivastava, Prof. C. S. Jha, and Dr. S. Alvi for helpful comments. Any remaining errors and omissions remain ours. ┼ Department of Economics, Southern Methodist University, Dallas 75275, TX. Email: mazam@smu.edu . # World Bank, 1818 H St. NW, Washington DC 20433, <u>ablom@worldbank.org, this working paper and other</u> publication on education in South Asia can be found on: <u>www.worldbank.org/sareducation</u> _This Working Paper disseminates the findings of work in progress to encourage the exchange of ideas about development issues. An objective of the series is to get the findings out quickly, even if the presentations are less than fully polished. The papers carry the names of the authors and should be cited accordingly. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper are entirely those of the authors. They do not necessarily represent the view of the World Bank, its Executive Directors, or the countries they represent._
# **1. Introduction**

This paper examines the attainment and access of tertiary (higher) education in India over the past two decades (1983-2004). There has been an intense effort by the Government of India to expand primary education in this period, and, as a result, the number of children participating in primary education has improved, and the improvements are more visible among children from rural areas, educationally lagging states, girls, and those from socially and economically disadvantaged groups (Shankar, 2007).

Although the goal of universal elementary schooling has not yet been achieved, some attention is shifting to secondary and tertiary education levels to absorb the massive increase in the number of students graduating from primary schools and to meet increased labor market demand for qualified workers. The approach paper for the 11<sup>th</sup> five-year plan (2007-2012) emphasizes the need for expansion of tertiary education: _“India has a well-developed and comprehensive higher education system which has served well thus far, but is now inadequate. The extent of access it provides is limited. Only about 10% of the relevant age group goes to universities whereas in many developing countries, the figure is between 20 and 25%. There is an overwhelming need to undertake major expansion to increase access to higher education.”_ (GOI, 2007) In addition, with increasing integration of the Indian economy with the rest of the world and knowledge becoming a vital factor for economic growth, the importance of tertiary education has increased. The returns to tertiary education in urban India increased by almost 20 percentage points (compared with a below primary educated regular worker, a tertiary educated regular worker was paid 82 percent higher wages in 1993 and 101 percent higher wages in 2004) between 1993 and 2004 (Azam, 2008b). The wage premium for tertiary educated workers compared with secondary educated workers or workers with lower levels of education increased sharply in the late 1990s. Although the increase in the wage premium for tertiary educated workers is mostly driven by demand shifts in favor of workers with a tertiary education, the demand shifts occurred in both the 1980s and 1990s. The increase in relative supply of tertiary workers during 1983-1993 offset the demand shift, limiting the wage premium increase. But during 1993-1999, the growth rate of the relative supply of tertiary workers decelerated, while relative supply was virtually stagnant during 1999-2004. Both of these periods saw an increase in the wage premium as the countervailing supply shift was weak (Azam, 2008a).

So there is a growing need to educate more young people to a higher standard to meet the increasing demand. Furthermore, a degree has become a basic qualification for many skilled jobs. The 1
quality of knowledge generated in higher education institutions, and its availability to the wider economy, is becoming increasingly critical for national competitiveness (World Bank, 2000).

Tertiary education in India is comprised of diploma courses and undergraduate, graduate, and PhD degrees. Tertiary education consists of technical and general streams (the technical stream consists of agriculture, medicine, engineering, crafts, and some other courses).<sup>1</sup> There are four types of educational institutions that provide tertiary education in India – government institutions, local institutions, private aided institutions, and private unaided institutions.<sup>2</sup> In 2006-07, there were 369 universities and 18,064 colleges. The total number of students was reported to be 11.03 million – 1.43 million (13 percent) in universities and 9.6 million (87 percent) in affiliated colleges (GOI, 2007). In the spheres of technical education, there were about 1,265 engineering and technology colleges, 320 pharmacies, 107 architecture schools, and 40 hotel management institutes, making a total about 1,749 institutions in 2004.

Other than the general available information stated above, the trends in participation in tertiary education in India are not well described in publicly available documents. This limits information-based policymaking, the ability to measure progress and set targets. In particular, trends in attainment, enrollment, and transition rates across population segments are not available in a consistent manner. Nevertheless, there are frequent and heated debates on the inequality in participation in tertiary education across population segments, such as gender, religious affiliation, Schedule Caste (SC), Schedules Tribes (ST), Other Backward Classes (OBCs), and income quintiles.<sup>3</sup> To reach a more equitable tertiary education system with access to all qualified youth regardless of their background, it is crucial to understand the basic trends in attainment and access over time and how these key indicators differ across social groups, religion, geographical areas, income levels, and gender. This need for basic information motivates this paper. The paper does not seek to evaluate the impact of policies or interventions, or test the factors driving the trends. It merely seeks to present the basic trends.

> 1 Technical courses offered after higher secondary level are traditionally considered part of higher/tertiary education.

> 2 Government institutions include all institutions run by the Central and State Governments, Public Sector Undertakings or Autonomous Organizations, which are predominantly financed by the Government. Institutions run by municipal corporations, municipal committees, notified area committees, zilla parishads, panchayat samitis, cantonment boards, etc. are local body institutions.  Private aided institutions are administered by individuals or private organizations and receive maintenance grant from the Government or local body. Institutions that are managed by individuals or a private organization that do not receive maintenance grant either from a Government or a local body, are private unaided institutions.

> 3 The Indian state recognized the former untouchables or Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) as disadvantage as far back as in the 1950s. Legal safeguards were provided against discrimination in the Constitution. One of the objective of the government since independence is amelioration of the conditions of these disadvantaged groups. Since 1993, the Other Backward Castes - castes presumed to be slightly better positioned than the SCs/STs in terms of caste hierarchy- is also recognized as a disadvantaged group. India has 22.5 percent of tertiary education seats reserved for the SCs and the STs since 1950.

2
The findings of the paper are the following:

- Although considerable progress has been made in the Education Attainment Rate (EAR) and Gross Enrollment Ratio (GER), they both remain below 9 percent and 13 percent, respectively. Large gaps in both attainment and enrollment are between: genders, social groups, religious groups, rural and urban areas, income groups, and states.

- While most of the gaps have diminished over time, at least in relative numbers, the gap between income groups has widened.

- Once we condition access to tertiary education on successful completion of higher secondary education, most of the gaps in attainment and enrollment are reduced significantly, with the exception of the gap observed between income groups. The transition rate from completion of higher secondary to tertiary education is 70 percent.

- Economic status, gender, and area of residence are key determinants of the transition to tertiary education after completion of higher secondary education.

Thus, the distortions creating unequal representation in tertiary education lie primarily at the lower rungs of the education ladder and secondarily in access to tertiary education.

The findings of the paper suggest that a more equal tertiary education system requires a sustained effort to improve retention and completion at lower stages of the education system. However, there is also a need to focus attention on the transition from secondary to tertiary education. In particular, youth from low-income families and rural areas are statistically less likely to attend tertiary education, even when they have completed higher secondary education. It is therefore important to step up initiatives that support increased access to tertiary education for students in low-income and rural families. Further understanding of the reasons behind low attendance of female students and rural students is equally necessary to design interventions.

The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2 describes the data and methodology, Section 3 presents the simple empirical findings, Section 4 examines and discusses the determinants of access to tertiary education based on regression analysis, and Section 5 concludes. Annex A contains a primer on the education system in India for readers who are unfamiliar with India’s education system, and Annexes I to III present the complete set of indicators and regression results.

3
# **2. Data and Methodology**

## **2a. Data Description**

This paper draws data from the Employment and Unemployment Schedule, administered by the National Sample Survey Organization (NSSO), Government of India. Data from the 38<sup>th</sup> , 43<sup>rd</sup> , 50<sup>th</sup> , 55<sup>th</sup> , and 61<sup>st</sup> rounds – conducted in 1983, 1987-88, 1993-94, 1999-00, and 2004-05, respectively – are used (referred to as 1983, 1987, 1993, 1999, and 2004 in this paper).<sup>4</sup> NSS data provide information about current attendance at different levels of education. In addition, data from the Education Schedule conducted by NSSO in 1995-96 are also used. Each employment survey covers around 120,000 households, and around 600,000 individuals. The samples are based on stratified random sampling and all the analysis in this paper uses survey weights.

In 2000, the states of Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, and Uttaranchal were carved from Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, and Uttar Pradesh, respectively. For the state level analysis, these states are included with the parent states to maintain comparability across time.<sup>5</sup> An individual, who has already completed a higher secondary degree, and is attending diploma (such as polytechnic courses) or degree courses, is considered attending tertiary education.<sup>6</sup>

## **2b. Methodology**

Three indicators measure attainment and participation. Each measure is described below.

## **_2b.1. Educational Attainment Rate_**

Educational Attainment Rate (EAR) measures the percentage of the population that attains a particular educational level. In this paper, EAR for tertiary education is defined as the ratio of number of persons in age group 25-34 years who have completed a tertiary education degree to total population in the same age group.<sup>7</sup> It measures completion of tertiary education prior to the age of 34, regardless of

> 4 NSSO conducts thick round survey at five-year intervals (called ‘Quinquennial Round’). Data before 1983 is not available. 5 Information for all states is given in the Annex.

> 6 Similar approach is adopted by “Working Group on Higher Education, GOI (2006b).” Before 1993 data do not distinguish between lower secondary and higher secondary. In this case secondary completion is taken as criterion. It may increase the tertiary attendance marginally as some students attending diploma courses at higher secondary level are counted as attending tertiary education.

> 7 Approximately 92-94 percent of tertiary attending students (graduate and postgraduate degree) are less than 25 years.

4
<!-- Start of picture text --> GER = = Total number number of students students enretied in tertiary education tertiary education education<br>Total population population in age12 — age12 —12 — — 28<br><!-- End of picture text --> GER = = Total number number of students students enretied in tertiary education tertiary education education Total population population in age12 — age12 —12 — — 28
<!-- Start of picture text --> 25.0<br>20.0 m1983 m1987 TM1993<br>o m1999 m2004<br>15.0<br><<br>$<br>910.0<br>a<br>5.0<br>0.0<br>Male Female All Male Female All Male Female All<br>weve Rural Urban Allindia<br>wy 35 |[osus [a7| 22 (ase62 |026730ez | ma 6a | aa | aa |<br>yoo 6a 36 37 toa |S ars | 0052 |<br>doo 65 | 24 | ad 6) tB3 200Ow<br><!-- End of picture text -->
<!-- Start of picture text --> 18.0<br>16.0<br>14.0 m1983 1987. 1993<br>312.0<br>E100<br>2 8.0 m1999 =m 2004<br>a<br>2 60<br>4.0<br>2.0<br>0.0<br>sT sc Non- oBc<br>1993<br>roo, 26 | 39 | 07 | 6a | 67<br><!-- End of picture text -->

<!-- Start of picture text --> 14<br>m19g3 1987-1993<br>12<br>10 m1999 =m 2004<br>a<br>g,a<br>2 6<br>g<br>4<br>;<br>0<br>1993) 65 3a<br>[200492 | a2 | tog | as | 87 |<br><!-- End of picture text -->
<!-- Start of picture text --> 25.0<br>20.0 = 1983 = 1993 = 2004<br>15.0<br>o<br><<br>g<br>210.0<br>5.0<br>ee<br>0.0 ee ee ee ee<br>5<br>mousa<br>Assam<br>Maharashtr. _12— ~——— Bihar<br>Haryana 4e q4hany fi “Ss~Rajasthan m 2004<br>Vi TALK \ TM 1993<br>Tamil Nadu KS Jammu & Kashmir<br>/I : eehh \A m@ 1983<br>Gujarat / \ \ |<br>;-— \-—— Andhra Pradesh<br>| |<br>||;||<br>i<br>Kerala‘ | y~al,<br>\’ / 7 West Bengal<br>Himachal Pradesh \y Orissa<br>\ / ~~ | \ Eraat<br>Punjab —~_ | \ _-—~"Madhya Pradesh<br>sa if La<br>Karnataka Uttar Pradesh<br><!-- End of picture text -->
<!-- Start of picture text --> Assam m= Male<br>Gujarat_—9-—)—__ Bihar<br>Maharashtra @ - liaeear S TM~ »Kerala m Female<br>West Bengal : € By era EX Orissa<br>Uttar Pradesh i | \— AndhraPradesh<br>| +}<br>Karnataka \~a\ /A]7 Madhya Pradesh<br>. Ne an fi /<br>Himachal Pradesh * \/ a \ “Tamil Nadu<br>ve, | —\<br>Punjab __| \ "Rajasthan<br>Jammu & Kashmir Haryana<br><!-- End of picture text -->

<!-- Start of picture text --> Assam u Male<br>Maharashtra__15— Jammu& Kashmir<br>Tamil Nadu < ae aes —L ~ Rajasthan TM Female<br>Gujarat <_ Ny _>Punjab<br>Uttar Pradesh tH |__| Bihar<br>| = |<br>Madhya Pradesh v+\ Bar7 West Bengal<br>\ xy . / /<br>Orissa \ ‘Kerala<br>a \ et \<br>Haryana | \ "Andhra Pradesh<br>Karnataka Himachal Pradesh<br><!-- End of picture text -->
<!-- Start of picture text --> 25 m1983. 1987<br>20 m1993 1999<br>m 2004<br>15<br>10<br>5<br>0<br>Male Female All Male Female All Male Female All<br>weer Rural Urban All<br>wer 7323/48 [as [38 ma2 | maas2 [a7200 wwess [ a s) | ae76 |<br>vo 7536) 56 | 200 aa) BO tn<br>wo 9737 | 77) «68 | A) 2582) S| 4A) DO<br>Orissa<br>Kerala, — Bihar<br>Himachal Pradesh 6.5— Tsai Pradesh<br>foJ oN on<br>Haryana ~~ / SSf \ \ Assam<br>x ><br>Tamil Nadu [;-——_ ee I\_—} Rajasthan me 2004<br>| m1993<br>Maharashtra | | _ m 1983<br> X Seyif y Uttar Pradesh<br>_. ~ /<br>Jammu & kashY ‘“ \ ‘daY~TMvast Bengal<br>Se a \ ZL<br>Punjab \ ——~ Gujarat<br>Andhra Pradesh Karnataka<br><!-- End of picture text -->
<!-- Start of picture text --> aMal e<br>Kerala__22—Orissa —__ Madhya = Female<br>Maharasht 2 /Pradesh<br>a st Punjab<br>Gujarat y /Xx |—/ ix\ \. \, Uttar<br>iw IN \_- \Pradesh<br>/ |TM ; \ 7 \<br>Haryana La |a % \ \ —\ Andhra<br>+—T ) Pradesh<br>Himachal | |_—4 4 |<br>Pradesh me / ~~] West<br>\ \ 4 yTM / / Bengal<br>Assam | \ _X Karnataka<br>/ ~ \— \ ;<br>Bihar —~ | \ aom/ u&<br>Rajasthan Tamil Kashmir<br>Nadu<br><!-- End of picture text -->

<!-- Start of picture text --> =u Male<br>Orissai @ Female<br>Kerala _25——___Assam<br>Tamil ~~ iL /TM<br>Himachal // M\g t+ /TM ““ \ \ \<br>Pradesh & ff /y YSN Madhya<br>radesn | — \ \- \Pradesh<br>/ / al \ \<br>Haryana t— |} Rajasthan<br>} |<br>Maharash | _L TI |<br>tra i \ ‘/ / ~~) Bihar<br>Andhra \~ fos NY Yo .<br>Pradesh a | \ __< ; ujarat<br>Jammu & Lo y if~ S “Uttar<br>Kashmir West. \—~"_ Pradesh<br>B engal Karnataka<br><!-- End of picture text -->
<!-- Start of picture text --> 25<br>1983 1987 1993<br>20<br>m1999 = 2004<br>15<br>10<br>5<br>0<br>Se aOO<br>197) 300 | ao | toe<br>woos, 34 | as || tof<br><!-- End of picture text -->

<!-- Start of picture text --> 25<br>m1983 m1987 ©1993 ©1999 2004<br>20<br>15<br>10<br>5<br>0<br>iave7) ss |e | ao | ta | te<br>tg93} 9a |e | to | os | ao<br><!-- End of picture text -->

<!-- Start of picture text --> 35<br>30<br>m1983 m1993 = 2004<br>25<br>20<br>15<br>10<br>5<br>0<br> Ee eeeeee<br><!-- End of picture text -->
<!-- Start of picture text --> 80<br>70<br>60<br>50<br>40<br>30<br>20<br>10<br>0<br>Male Female All Male Female All Male Female All<br>vom ca | sie [ser 742 [792 | 42 | ora | ono | ora<br>vos ssa 583 S86 Ma Sa oa |<br>root) 649 59a | 6 | wT 786 9B TAT BO TAD<br>m 1993 m 1999 m 2004<br><!-- End of picture text -->
<!-- Start of picture text --> m2004<br>Punjab<br>19 tie<br>38 West Bengal _100- Rajasthan<br>Andhra. \ al |<br>Pradesh °F ea ou latiatls<br>Karnataka£ “ \S. Himachal<br>[4 \. | pradesh<br>i/ /j ys\ |\<br>\ 4<br>Kerala a[ l _|——}\ | Assam<br>\ [ |<br>\<br>i |<br>Bihar \ ~~] Madhya<br>\ \ / / Pradesh<br>Tamil Nadu a, oe Sse<br>fi PAS \ ia<br>Pradesh ~~ | \_-—~ Gujarat<br>MahaGshtas<br>Kashmir<br><!-- End of picture text -->

<!-- Start of picture text --> Punjab B Male<br>pradeshAndhra ee——_ Assam<br>west -~ \ gq | /ioTM mu Female<br>Bengal. . A > Rajasthan<br>Karnataka < \\,a \Himachal<br>/ ; \, \ Pradesh<br>/| i] \ \ \ \ Madhya<br>—_|<br>Kerala |—|—_/| \\\ 4 madh<br>\\ | [ | Pradesh<br>«| it |<br>Tamil | |<br>Nadu \ \ / / Haryana<br>Gujarat X \ A “S/Maharash<br>Sp ' _X “ tra<br>pradesh pe | ee\ allee Kd a shmirmmu &<br>Bihar Orissa<br><!-- End of picture text -->
<!-- Start of picture text --> 80 a1 m2 a3 a4 m5<br>60<br>40<br>20<br>0<br>Male Female All Male Female All<br>1993 2004<br>Ee ee<br>ES<br>yen eros ase<br>sme me280<br><!-- End of picture text -->
<!-- Start of picture text --> 80<br>m1993 1999 2004<br>70<br>60<br>50<br>40<br>30<br>20<br>10<br>1993, od 585 BA<br><!-- End of picture text --> <!-- Start of picture text --> 90 m1993 m1999 m 2004<br>80<br>70<br>60<br>50<br>40<br>30<br>20<br>10<br>0 ints [tt [cain | es | a<br>899<br><!-- End of picture text -->
<!-- Start of picture text --> 100<br>90<br>80<br>70<br>60<br>50 @ Technical<br>40<br>30 @ General<br>20<br>10<br>0<br>1983 1987 1993 1999 2004<br><!-- End of picture text --> <!-- Start of picture text --> 1800<br>1600<br>1400<br>» 1200<br>ZG<br>c<br>5 1000<br>re)<br>~ 800<br>c<br>— 600<br>200on<br>0<br>1983 1987 1993 1999 2004<br><!-- End of picture text --> <!-- Start of picture text --> 80 —— % of Eng. in<br>technical<br>70<br>60<br>—— % of Eng. In<br>total higher<br>50 :<br>%, education<br>= a0 attending<br>$<br>a —— Linear<br>30 . (% of<br>Eng. in<br>technical}<br>10; _ZN\= —— Linear(% of<br>Eng. In total<br>° higher<br>1983 1987 1993 1999 2004 education<br>attending)<br><!-- End of picture text -->
<!-- Start of picture text --> 100%<br>90% 1<br>80%<br>70%<br>60%<br>50% @ Technical<br>40% TM General<br>30%<br>20%<br>10%<br>0%<br>ST Sc OBC General Rural Urban All<br><!-- End of picture text -->
<!-- Start of picture text --> 100%<br>90%<br>80%<br>70%<br>60% ms<br>50% m4<br>40% m3<br>30% m2<br>20%0, m1<br>10%<br>0% . 5 :<br>General Technical Engineering Tertiary Population<br>Share<br><!-- End of picture text --> <!-- Start of picture text --> 30<br>25 a1 m2 a3 m4 a5<br>20<br>15<br>10<br>5<br>0<br>woe<br>a<br>CE<br><!-- End of picture text -->
<!-- Start of picture text --> 4.0<br>3.5 m1983 m1987 =1993 m1999 m2004<br>3.0<br>2.5<br>2.0<br>1.5<br>1.0<br>0.5<br>0.0<br>Male Female All Male Female All<br>wi903aa7 [owe [awe |<br>e9e7) 2697s aa ||eta | oat |<br>say 260 aa] nota<br>Ee<br><!-- End of picture text -->

<!-- Start of picture text --> 6.0<br>5.0 m1983 1987 m1993 m1999 m2004<br>4.0<br>3.0<br>2.0<br>1.0<br>0.0<br>Hindu Muslim | Christian | Others All Hindu Muslim | Christian | Others All<br>soe} a6 | 090 [298 [as [awe ast | 037 | an | om | ow<br>1967 178088 | 322) 182-1706 | 0a | ast | 068 | ot<br><!-- End of picture text -->
<!-- Start of picture text --> 5.0<br>45<br>i m1983 m1987 TM1993 m1999 2004<br>3.0<br>2.5<br>2.0<br>1.5<br>1.0<br>0.5<br>0.0<br>sT | SC Sust OBC Others) All | ST | SC Sust OBC [Others All<br>so)wa7 o ats [ ov072207[amtechnical || [ a wT o nsm [was025 [om077Eng|)| [aa<br>vam aay aa) aos weaa<br>v9| 067 os 238 151 486 90 0x4 0a 44s Wa 248 oat<br>vood 137/163 358/249 508 (300 [013 077/80 208 278/248<br><!-- End of picture text -->
<!-- Start of picture text --> 100%<br>90%<br>30%<br>70%<br>60%<br>50%<br>40%<br>30%<br>20%<br>10%<br>o%°<br>1995 2004<br>& Not Known @ Pvt. Unaided m@ Pvt. Aided<br>@ Local Body @ Government<br><!-- End of picture text --> <!-- Start of picture text --> 100%<br>90% O@ Not<br>80% Known<br>70% m@ Pvt.<br>60% nade<br>50% m Pvt.<br>40% Aided<br>30% B Local<br>Body<br>20%<br>10% = Govern<br>ment<br>0%<br>1 2 3 4 5<br><!-- End of picture text -->
<!-- Start of picture text --> 100%<br>90%<br>80%<br>70%<br>60%<br>50%<br>40%<br>30%<br>20%<br>10%<br>0%<br>General Technical Engineering<br>@ Private Unaided @ Private Aided<br>@ Local Body m@ Government<br><!-- End of picture text --> <!-- Start of picture text --> 100% ' 0.8<br>90%<br>80%<br>70%<br>60%<br>50%<br>40%<br>30%<br>20%<br>10%<br>0%<br>General Technical Engineering<br>m= Not Known mw Private Unaided<br>m Private Aided w Local Body<br>= Government<br><!-- End of picture text -->
tertiary degree. In column (2), the sample is restricted to persons (in age group 18-23) who already have completed the higher secondary level, and the dependent variable is an indicator for attending tertiary education or having already completed a tertiary degree. In column (3), the dependent variable is an indicator for having completed the higher secondary level or above (in age group 18-23). So column (1) explains participation in tertiary education, column (2) explains participation conditional on completion of a higher secondary degree, and column (3) explains completion of at least the higher secondary level.

Table 1: Determinants of tertiary education access for age group 18-23

||(|1)|(|2)||(3)|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
||Attending o<br>tert|r completed<br>iary|Attending o<br>tertiary co<br>complet<br>seco|r completed<br>nditional on<br>ed higher<br>ndary|At least com<br>seco|pleted higher<br>ndary|
||**2004**|**1993**|**2004**|**1993**|**2004**|**1993**|
|sc*|‐0.205***|‐0.403***|0.052|‐0.103|‐0.248***|‐0.413***|
|st*|0.008|‐0.371***|0.407***|‐0.089|‐0.151**|‐0.391***|
|muslim*|‐0.364***|‐0.533***|‐0.033|‐0.157*|‐0.406***|‐0.548***|
|female*|0.057|‐0.019|‐0.138*|0.016|0.110***|‐0.029|
|rural*|‐0.780***|‐0.755***|‐0.593***|‐0.420***|‐0.650***|‐0.686***|
|female*Rural*|‐0.328***|‐0.547***|‐0.089|‐0.331***|‐0.346***|‐0.517***|
|quintile 2*|0.332***|0.227***|0.177|0.005|0.294***|0.232***|
|quintile 3*|0.644***|0.530***|0.346***|0.221**|0.585***|0.485***|
|quintile 4*|0.955***|0.759***|0.518***|0.278***|0.860***|0.716***|
|quintile 5*|1.565***|1.214***|0.957***|0.572***|1.394***|1.128***|
|Number of|||||||
|Observations|68,894|65,722|14,956|11,699|68,894|65,722|

Notes: (1) * p<0.05; ** p<0.01; *** p<0.001 (2) The coefficients are marginal effects.

(3) * denote dummy variable and marginal impact is for discrete change of dummy variable from 0 to 1. . (4) Non-SC/ST is the social group of reference.

(5) The model also includes state dummies (full results in Annex III) Most of the explanatory variables considered are statistically significant at the 1 percent level. In general, the results confirm the descriptive statistics from the previous section. The estimations suggest that: `o` <u>Income seems to be a decisive factor for participation in tertiary education. There is a strong positive association between expenditure quintile and participation in tertiary education. Income is strongly and statistically significantly associated with both completion of secondary education, and</u> 24
<u>transitioning from secondary to tertiary education. Further, both coefficients increased from 1993 to 2004.18</u>

- <u>Rural youth is statistically associated with a strong negative impact on the probability of attending tertiary education. This is as a result of both a negative impact from lower completion rates of</u> secondary education and a lower probability of transitioning from secondary school to a tertiary education institution. This effect did not decreased from 1993 to 2004.

- <u>An urban female was not statistically significantly less likely to attend tertiary education in 2004 compared with a male with the same characteristics. This seems to be a combination of a higher</u> likelihood of completing secondary education, but a lower tendency to transition to tertiary education.

- <u>Rural females are associated with a significantly lower propensity to attend tertiary education, but this decreased between 1993 and 2004. The lower probability of completing secondary education</u> compared with their urban peers seems to account for the difference. Rural women appeared to be as likely to transition to tertiary education from secondary school in 2004 (this was not the case in 1993).

- <u>The under-participation of Scheduled Castes is seemingly mostly driven by a lower completion rate of secondary education among SCs (and other overlapping factors, such as poverty). There is no</u> statistically significant lower transition rate for SCs. Importantly, this may (or may not) be a result of the positive discrimination from the reservation policies.

- <u>The under-participation of Scheduled Tribes is equally driven by the smaller share of graduates of secondary education (and other overlapping factors, such as poverty). In fact, compared with the</u> general population, an ST student is statistically 41 percent more likely to enroll in tertiary education than a peer with the same observable characteristics. This effect was not present in 1993. Again, this may (or may not) be a result of the positive discrimination from the reservation policies.

- <u>The under-participation of Muslims also appears to be caused by lower completion rates of secondary education (and other overlapping factors, such as poverty). There was no statistically</u> significant effect in 2004 on the probability of transition to tertiary education (a small effect was statistically significant in 1993).

The results in Table 1 suggest that the marginal impact of economic status seems most important in determining participation in tertiary education and its importance has increased during the past decade.

> 18 The findings remain unaffected when we use per capita expenditure in place of quintiles (see Annex III Table 3).

25
The importance of social group, religion, and gender has decreased during the same period. The expansion of primary and secondary education to these groups is highly likely to have contributed substantially to the decline in importance. However, there are still important gaps in participation for these groups. The results indicate that the primary distortions continuing the unequal representation in tertiary education lie mostly at the lower rungs of the education ladder. Therefore, the continued inequality of completion of primary and secondary education is perpetuated in much lower and more unequal access to tertiary education. Equitable expansion of secondary education is therefore a cornerstone in a policy to increase equal access to tertiary education.

Table 2 presents the determinants of access to technical/engineering courses conditional on completion of higher secondary education and attending tertiary education.<sup>19</sup> Again, the regression results confirm the descriptive statistics from Section 3. The general, but rough, interpretation is that once a student is attending tertiary education, the demographic factors do not matter for choice of stream. However, there are four caveats to this result: (i) students belonging to the top quintile have a higher probability of taking technical/engineering courses, and this tendency has increased over time; (ii) female students are less likely to attend technical/engineering courses; (iii) youth in rural areas are less likely, and strongly so, to enroll in technical/engineering courses, an effect that intensified between 1993 and 2004; and (iv) ST students have statistically significantly lower probability to attend engineering courses.

> 19 Annex III, Table 2 presents the complete model.

26
Table 2: Determinants of technical/engineering access for age group 18-23

||Attending<br>|or complete<br>conditi<br>|d Technical<br>onal on<br>|education<br>|Attending o<br>|r completed<br>o<br>|Engineering<br>n<br>|conditional<br>|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
||complet<br>seco|ed higher<br>ndary|atten<br>complete|ing or<br>d tertiary|complet<br>seco|ed higher<br>ndary|atten<br>complete|ding or<br>d tertiary|
||**2004**|**1993**|**2004**|**1993**|**2004**|**1993**|**2004**|**1993**|
|sc*|0.037|0.161*|0.015|0.218*|0.044|0.102|0.023|0.138|
|st*|0.116|0.169|0.013|0.211|‐0.490***|0.038|‐0.591***|0.044|
|muslim*|0.013|0.087|0.028|0.159|‐0.041|0.101|‐0.027|0.173|
|female|‐0.295***|‐0.385***|‐0.285***|‐0.437***|‐0.482***|‐0.411***|‐0.477***|‐0.462***|
|Rural|‐0.458***|‐0.371***|‐0.317***|‐0.264***|‐0.689***|‐0.360***|‐0.579***|‐0.261***|
|female*rural|‐0.066|0.071|‐0.067|0.183|‐0.127|0.079|‐0.152|0.192|
|quintile 2*|‐0.051|0.114|‐0.138|0.156|‐0.109|0.013|‐0.194|0.037|
|quintile 3*|0.18|0.099|0.056|0.044|0.023|0.077|‐0.103|0.023|
|quintile 4*|0.158|0.157|‐0.035|0.093|0.267|0.085|0.093|0.018|
|quintile 5*|0.561***|0.388***|0.293*|0.248*|0.794***|0.279**|0.583**|0.133|
|Number of|||||||||
|Observations|14,953|11,699|10,274|8,018|14,785|11,699|10,177|8,018|

Notes: (1) * p<0.05; ** p<0.01; *** p<0.001 (2) The coefficients are marginal effects.

(3) * denote dummy variable and marginal impact is for discrete change of dummy variable from 0 to 1.

(4) Non-SC/ST is the social group of reference.

(5) The model also includes state dummies (full results in Annex III).

# **5. Conclusion**

This paper has reviewed participation in tertiary education in India from 1983 to 2004 by computing the attainment, enrollment, and transition rates from secondary education by population groups. It is motivated by a need to establish a consensus on the basic trends in participation and contribute to more fact-driven and targeted policy-making for tertiary education.

**The findings show that Indian tertiary education progressed significantly between 1983 and 2004.** Attainment of tertiary education in the age group 25-34 doubled from 4.4 percent in 1983 to 8.8 percent in 2004. Enrollment increased by 5 percentage points, from 7.6 to 12.6 percent (a 60 percent increase).

**Nevertheless, there exist large gaps in enrollment** between:

- <u>Rich and poor households. In 2004, a young person from the top expenditure quintile was 14.5</u> times more likely to enroll in tertiary education than a young person from the bottom quintile. This is a considerable increase from 8 times in 1983.

27
- <u>Rural and urban areas. Rural youth were 3.2 times less likely to attend tertiary education</u> compared with their urban peers. This gap had been narrowing over time (from 4.5 times in 1983).

- <u>Disadvantaged groups (SCs, STs, OBCs, and Muslims) and the general population. For example,</u> the non-SC/ST population is 1.9 times more likely to attend tertiary than an ST student. The gap halved from 3.8 times in 1983.

- <u>Women and men. In 2004, males were 1.4 times more likely to enroll than females. This gap has</u> been reduced from 2.4 times in 1983.

- <u>Between states. For instance, a youngster from Maharashtra is 1.7 times more likely attend</u> tertiary education than a peer from Madhya Pradesh.

Overall, the (relative) gaps in enrollment remain sizable, but they have diminished over time, with the notable exception of the gap between rich and poor, which has widened substantially.

To start narrowing down on the specific bottlenecks, the paper analyzed transition rates from secondary education to tertiary education and estimated regressions explaining who enrolls in tertiary education. The results suggest the following:

- <u>The enrollment gap between rich and poor stems both from a lower probability of completing secondary education, and from a substantially lower chance of transition from secondary education to tertiary education. Further, the importance of income in this transition seems to have strengthened over time. The transition rate among young people from the poorest</u> expenditure quintile was 52 percent in 2004 (compared with 54 percent in 1983), while the transition rate in the richest quintile was 79 percent (compared with 71 percent in 1983). The regression results confirm the importance of household income as a key factor for entry in tertiary education, even after controlling for completion of secondary education.

- <u>Rural youth have both a lower chance of completing secondary education and a lower chance of transitioning from secondary education to tertiary education. This is even more</u> pronounced for rural females.

- <u>The gaps in transition rate between genders, between social groups, and between religious communities are much smaller than compared with the gaps observed in enrollment. This</u> indicates that completion of secondary education remains the main barrier to tertiary education for these groups.

- <u>The primary distortions creating unequal representation in tertiary education for SC, ST, OBC, and Muslim youth seemingly lie mostly at the lower rungs of the education ladder.</u>

28
Only economic status, gender, and rural residence remain statistically significant for the transition from secondary school to tertiary education. Hence, for SCs, STs, OBCs, and Muslims, the gaps in enrollment in tertiary education are statistically explained by the difference in completion rates of higher secondary education.

`o` <u>Transition rates differ less between states than enrollment rates. This indicates that</u> completion of secondary education is a fundamental factor behind the state differences in enrollment in tertiary education. In certain states/UTs, notably Chandigarh, Delhi, West Bengal, and Andhra Pradesh, the transition rate exceeds 80 percent, indicating that expansion of tertiary education will predominantly require expansion in the share of the cohort that completes higher secondary education. In contrast, the transition rate in the states of Arunachal Pradesh, Manipur, Meghalaya, and Mizoram is below 60 percent, signifying that a large proportion of seemingly qualified youngsters exit the education system in the transition from secondary to tertiary education.

Lastly, we examined whether participation in the technical education stream and in particular engineering courses differed from general participation in tertiary education. The enrollment inequalities between income groups, rural-urban residence, and gender are larger in the technical stream, and especially so for the engineering courses. We speculate that this may be a result of fierce competition to enter the engineering field and the higher share of private, self-financed education in engineering. Government institutions educated around 30 percent of the student body in 2004, compared with 49 percent in 1995. Importantly, the gender gap in the engineering field has been narrowing. The female enrollment ratio in engineering courses increased ten-fold from 1983 to 2004.

The policy challenge for India is to expand tertiary education, while at the same time making it more inclusive. This is not likely to happen by itself; it will require targeted and focused polices to help disadvantaged youth qualify for, enroll in, and complete tertiary education.

**An equitable expansion of secondary education is necessary for fundamental improvement in equity in tertiary education; in particular for low-income families, girls, Muslims, disadvantaged groups (SCs, STs, and OBCs), and rural areas.**

**There is a clear need to improve the transition to tertiary education for students belonging to low and middle-income families, and thus bring more low and middle-income students to universities and colleges.** The inequality of participation in tertiary education risks jeopardizing a more

29
inclusive Indian society. There is a need to better understand why and how family income translates to unequal access. Such an analysis should encompass consideration of financial, social, academic, and information obstacles to tertiary education. A major reason is expected to be lack of financing to sustain another four years of investment in education in terms of foregone income, living costs, and education costs. The policy implication of such a finding would be to scale up financial assistance to low and middle-income families through education loan programs, and perhaps a highly targeted scholarship program exclusively for poor families.

Lack of information regarding tertiary education, low expectations of attending tertiary education, and inadequate preparation are equally expected to be behind the unequal access to tertiary education. This could be a barrier for young women, in particular those from rural and disadvantaged communities. Therefore, compensatory programs could assist poor families and young women in overcoming these barriers.

In addition, the gap in enrollment and transition into tertiary education for rural youth requires special attention and initiatives. Again, more analysis is called for. A key driver could be a shortage of seats in rural areas, which is likely to require smart expansion of public, private, or public-private partnerships. Alternative policy implications could be greater relevance of tertiary education for the rural labor market and industry, and probably also increased quality of primary and secondary education in rural schools.

India has tremendous potential to make tertiary education an engine for equal social and economic progress, but it requires concerted and targeted efforts based on facts.

30