Issuu

Scholarly Research Journal for Humanity Science & English Language, Online ISSN 2348-3083, SJ IMPACT FACTOR 2016 = 4.44, www.srjis.com UGC Approved Sr. No.48612, FEB-MAR 2018, VOL- 6/26 https://doi.org/10.21922/srjhsel.v6i26.11439

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF ATTITUDE OF PROSPECTIVE TEACHERS TOWARDS PRIVATIZATION OF EDUCATION Pratibha Sharma1, Ph. D. & Ms. Mahe Pecker Khan2 1

Head &Associate Prof, M. Ed. Department, Bareilly College, Bareilly (UP) India

dr.pratibhasharma2010@gmail.com 2

M. Ed. Student, Bareilly College, Bareilly (UP) India

For the purposes of education, privatization implies the withdrawal of the state intervention from this sector. Privatization has other implications too, like the initiation of the process of private ownership in a sector that is controlled by the state. In a broader sense, privatization is the induction of private management and control in the public sector enterprise or a sector controlled by the state as in the case of education. The objective of the present study was to access the significant difference (if any) in attitude of prospective teachers(B.Ed. Students ) of different gender and type of institutions of Bareilly city of Uttar Pradesh towards privatization of education..The descriptive survey method and random sampling technique were used. For data collection self-constructed -“Attitude of Prospective Teachers towards Privatization of Education was used. Investigation revealed that generally, gender and type of institution do not play significant role in reference to teachers’ attitude towards privatization of education Keywords: Privatization, Teachers’ Attitude, Aided Institution, Self- Financed Institution Scholarly Research Journal's is licensed Based on a work at www.srjis.com

Introduction- The term “Privatization” typically refers to shifting the delivery of services performed by public employees to private business. This usually occurs in the form of contracting out whereby a public organization enters into contracts with private companies for the delivery of services. This term has come into widespread use in the 1980s because of the economic reforms. During this period, thousands of state-owned enterprises or public sectors units were privatized in many countries. For the purposes of education, privatization implies the withdrawal of the state intervention from this sector. Privatization has other implications too, like the initiation of the process of private ownership in a sector that is controlled by the state. In a broader sense, privatization is the induction of private management and control in the public sector enterprise or a sector controlled by the state as in the case of education. Higher education in India is gasping for breath, at a time when India is aiming to be an important player in the emerging knowledge world. With about 300 universities and deemed

Dr. Pratibha Sharma & Ms. Mahe Pecker Khan 7330 (Pg. 7329-7336)

universities, over 15,000 colleges and hundreds of national and regional research institutes, Indian higher education and research sector is the third largest in the world, in terms of the number of students it caters to. In the article, titled –“Government and Education, The Changing Role of” published in Encyclopedia of Education (2002), it is mentioned that since 1990 the assumption that the public sector should be responsible for all aspects of education has been increasingly questioned, in both developed and developing countries, for four main reasons 1. There have been doubts about the effectiveness and efficiency of Public Education. 2. There are doubts about the equity and accountability of Public Education, which particularly affect the poor. 3. There is an increasing awareness of initiatives by educational entrepreneurs, and evidence to suggest that competitive pressures can lead to significant education al improvements. 4. There has been a need to restrain public expenditure in order to reduce budget deficits and external debts and consequently, a need to find alternative sources of educational funding. With privatization, education is reduced to a commodity, teachers are reduced to tutors and teaching is reduced to coaching. The consumerist boom and the growing salary differentials between teachers and other professional and the value systems of the emerging free market economy have made teaching one of the least attractive professions that demands more work for less pay. Yet, the society expects teachers not only to be inspired but also to do an inspiring job! ( Kishan, N. Ramnath, 2008 ) Chand, D (2014) has made an effort to explain the factors which are responsible for privatization in teacher education in India such as - : need for competitive efficiency, growth in population, financial problem, for quality education for skilled manpower, desire for more autonomy, need for technological developments. It is very unfortunate that Indian teacher educational institutions suffer from large quality variation; some institutions are creating very good stuff whereas some are busy in creating teachers who are not competent enough for this profession of teaching. It may be because of problem of selection or other faulty procedures. Many private institutions are relying on part time teachers with little commitment to the institutions and sometimes with scant qualifications (Altbach& Levy, 2005); whereas, it is necessary to enhance the quality of teacher education within higher education (Yashpal Committee, 2009:21-22).

Dr. Pratibha Sharma & Ms. Mahe Pecker Khan 7331 (Pg. 7329-7336)

In their article, Parvez, M. & Shakir, M. (2012, pp 39-48) have raised

many issues to

ponder over the privatization of teacher education, such as : mushrooming of institutes, paucity of physical facilities, crisis of values and morality , commercialization, isolation of teacher education department , regional imbalances, irrelevant and out dated curricula , problem of selection of candidates for training , problem of quality teacher education, market oriented ,lack of transparency in financial arrangements, the frequent movement of teachers. In 2011, Shukla, Akhilesh & Singh, Dilip Kumar revealed that the teachers are in favour of the present concept i.e., privatization of higher education but they want amendments before implementing. They donâ€&#x;t want total privatization. Sarmah, Bidula (2013) revealed that students of Assam seen to have more positive attitude towards privatization of higher education. Chand, Dinesh (2014) concluded that uses and misuses of privatization in the field of teacher education is to be analyzed and care should be taken for effective development in teacher education. In 2015, Chaudhari, Manisha revealed that most of selected student have shown positive attitude towards privatization of teacher education she stated privatization is not a bad option either no doubt private institutions are costly but if more students enroll in these institution there will be competition among these private institution hence fee will fall and more quality student will be passed out. Further, Kumar, Rajesh (2016) studied privatization of teacher education and quality concern He conducted his study at Tohana at Fatehabad District in Haryana. He stated that all deserving youth should get quality of teacher education. For highly populated and developing countries like India, it would be difficult for government alone to provide teacher education as per the demand of society. In 2017,

Goud,S. Somasekhar revealed that many of the private institutions get the

recognition, affiliation and accreditation by doing various manipulations, like political power, money power and community power and they hardly follow the norms and standards of regulating bodies. Some management thing and behave like business houses to enhance their economic returns. (Ahmad, S.Rehan & Nisa, UN Mohammad, (2017) advised that privatization of higher education can be applied to improve the education system in all but with the regular control of some regulating authorities. Objectives of the Study - The objectives of the study were as follows:ď‚ˇ

To access the significant difference (if any) in attitude of prospective teachers of aided and self-financed institution towards privatization of education.

Dr. Pratibha Sharma & Ms. Mahe Pecker Khan 7332 (Pg. 7329-7336)

ď‚ˇ

To find out significant difference (if any) in attitude of prospective male and female teachers towards privatization of education.

Hypotheses of the Study - The researchers formulated the following null hypotheses: ď‚ˇ

There is no significant difference in attitude of prospective teachers of aided and selffinanced institution towards privatization of education.

ď‚ˇ

There is no significant difference in the attitude of male & female prospective teachers towards privatization of education.

Research Method-To achieve the objectives of the presented study, the â€œDescriptive Survey Methodâ€? was applied by the researchers. Population- All the male and female students of aided and self- financed institutions of Bareilly city of Uttar Pradesh enrolled for B. Ed. Course in regular mode constituted the population Sample & Sampling Technique- Through Random Sampling Technique 120 students (60 male 30 from aided institutions and 30 from self-financed institutions and 60 female -30 from aided institutions and 30 from self-financed institutions) were selected for the study. Tool Used-For fulfilling the objective of the study, investigators preferred to use the selfconstructed -â€œAttitude of Prospective Teachers towards Privatization of Education Scale Statistical Techniques-To analyze and interpret the result, to test hypotheses and draw inferences, Mean, Standard Deviation (S.D.) and â€žtâ€&#x; test as statistical measures were employed Analysis of Data & Interpretation Table â€“ 01 Comparison of scores on Attitude of Prospective Teachers of Type of Organization towards Privatization of Education Variable S . N . 1. 2. 3. 4. 5 6

Dimensions

Prospective Teachers of Aided Institutions đ???đ?&#x;? = 60 đ??Œđ??žđ??šđ??§đ?&#x;? đ??’đ??ƒđ?&#x;? of 17.75 4.21

Impact on Quality Education Impact on Teachers Impact on Students Role of Management Role of Government Impact on Physical Facilities Overall Score

11.06 4.78 4.71 10.23 2.91 51.46

1.91 3.82 1.42 1.80 1.38 7.17

Prospective Teachers of Self finance Institutions đ???đ?&#x;? = 60 đ??Œđ??žđ??šđ??§đ?&#x;? đ??’đ??ƒđ?&#x;? 17.88 2.28 10.70 4.06 5.63 9.70 2.30 50.28

1.07 2.20 0.88 1.69 0.96 2.73

â€˜tâ€™ val ue

Level of Significa nce

0.21

1.28 1.27 4.27 1.67 2.81 1.12

ns ns 0.01 ns 0.01 ns

Dr. Pratibha Sharma & Ms. Mahe Pecker Khan 7333 (Pg. 7329-7336)

Table-01 shows the dimension wise comparison of scores of prospective teachers of aided and self-financed institutions of Bareilly city about their attitude towards privatization of education in reference to different dimensions i.e. Impact on quality of education, impact on teachers, impact on students, role of management, role of government and

impact on

physical facilities as well as on Overall scores. Table has revealed that the mean values of aided prospective teachers were higher on four dimensions namely –impact on teacher, impact on students, role of government and impact on physical facilities as well as on overall scores (M1= 11.06, 4.78, 10.23, 2.91, and 51.46 , respectively) than their counterpart self-financed prospective teachers (M 2= 10.70, 4.06, 9.70, 2.30 and 50.28 , respectively) But mean value of prospective teachers of aided institutions were lower on two dimensions namely- impact on quality of education and role of management ( M1= 17.75 and 4.71 respectively ) than their counterpart self-financed prospective teachers (M2 = 17.88 & 5.69, respectively ) which shows that aided prospective teachers have more positive attitude toward Privatization of Education on four dimension namely- impact on teacher, impact on students, role of government and impact on physical facilities as well as on overall scores but they have less positive attitude toward Privatization of Education on two dimensions namely- impact on quality of education and role of management than their counterpart self-finance institutions When the scores of these two groups of teachers were tested on the level of significance, the mean difference on only two dimensions namely- role of management and impact on physical facilities was found to be significant as the calculated „t‟ value were greater than the table value at 0.01 level of significance (t= 4.27 and 2.81, p=0.01 ,respectively) at 118 degree of freedom. On the other hand , mean difference between these two groups on rest of the dimensions namely- impact on quality of education, impact on teacher, impact on student and role of government as well as on overall scores were found to be insignificant as the calculated „t‟ value were less than the table value at both level of significance 0.05 and 0.01 (t= 0.21, 1.28, 1.27, 1.67,and 1.12 ns respectively ) at 118 degree of freedom. On the basis of above analysis, the first hypothesis stated “There is no significant difference in attitude of prospective teachers of aided and self- financed institution towards privatization of education” may be partially accepted.

Dr. Pratibha Sharma & Ms. Mahe Pecker Khan 7334 (Pg. 7329-7336)

Table â€“ 02 Comparison of scores on Attitude of Prospective Teachers of Different Gender towards Privatization of Education Variable S. N.

Dimensions

Impact on Quality of Education Impact on Teachers Impact on Students Role of Management Role of Government Impact on Physical Facilities Overall Score

1. 2. 3. 4. 5 6

Prospective Male Teachers đ???đ?&#x;? = 60 đ??Œđ??žđ??šđ??§đ?&#x;? đ??’đ??ƒđ?&#x;? 18.78 3.34

Prospective Female Teachers đ???đ?&#x;? = 60 đ??Œđ??žđ??šđ??§đ?&#x;? đ??’đ??ƒđ?&#x;? 16.85 3.15

10.90 4.31 5.25 9.66 2.50 51.48

10.80 4.53 5.10 10.26 2.56 50.26

1.70 2.11 1.27 1.84 1.24 4.97

1.40 3.90 1.27 1.63 1.21 5.84

â€˜tâ€™ value

Level of Significanc e

3.24

0.01

0.35 0.38 0.69 1.89 0.27 1.23

ns ns ns ns ns ns

Table- 02 shows the dimension wise comparison of scores of prospective male and female teachers of Bareilly city on different dimensions about their attitude towards Privatization of Education i.e. Impact on quality of education, impact on teachers, impact on students, role of management, role of government and impact on physical facilities as well as on overall scores. Table has revealed that mean values of prospective male teachers were higher on three dimensions i.e. impact on quality of education, impact on teacher & role of management as well as overall scores (M1= 18.78, 10.90, 5.25 & 51.48, respectively) than their counter part prospective female teachers (M2=16.85, 10.80, 5.10 & 50.26 ,respectively) which shows that male teachers have more positive attitude toward Privatization of Education on these dimensions mentioned above than their counterpart female teachers. The mean values of male teachers were found lower on rest of three dimensions i.e. impact on student, role of government & impact on physical facilities (M 1 =4.31, 9.66 & 2.50, respectively)than their counterpart female teachers (M2 =4.53, 10.26 & 2.56, respectively ) which shows that prospective female teachers have more positive attitude towards privatization of education on these dimensions than their counterpart male teachers. When the scores of these two groups of teachers were tested on the level of significance, except on first dimension i.e. Impact on Quality of Education (t=3.24, p= 0.01)

the mean

difference on different dimensions as well as overall scores were found to be insignificant as the calculated â€žtâ€&#x; values were found to be less than table value --impact on teachers (t= 0.35, ns

), impact on students(t= 0.38, ns

), role of management(t=

0.69, ns ), role of

government(t= 1.89,ns ), impact on physical facilities(t= 0.27, ns ), as well as overall Copyright ÂŠ 2017, Scholarly Research Journal for Interdisciplinary Studies

Dr. Pratibha Sharma & Ms. Mahe Pecker Khan 7335 (Pg. 7329-7336)

scores (t= 1.23,ns ) at both levels of significance 0.05 & 0.01 at 118 degree of freedom. On the basis of above analysis, the hypothesis stated “There is no significant difference in the attitude of prospective male & female teachers towards privatization of education” may be partially rejected Major Findings The findings of the current investigation may be summarized as follows – 

Prospective teachers of aided institutions have shown more positive attitude than their counterparts of self-finance institutions toward Privatization of Education on four dimension namely- impact on teacher, impact on students, role of government and impact on physical facilities as well as on overall scores but they have less positive attitude than their counterparts of self-finance institutions toward Privatization of Education on two dimensions namely- - impact on quality of education and role of management than their counterpart self-finance institutions



Between two groups- Prospective teachers of aided institutions and self-finance institutions, the mean difference on only two dimensions namely- role of management and impact on physical facilities was found to be significant



Values of Mean difference between these two groups - on rest of the dimensions namely- impact on quality of education, impact on teacher, impact on student and role of government as well as on overall scores were found to be insignificant



Prospective male teachers have shown more positive attitude than their counter part prospective female teachers toward Privatization of Education on three dimensions i.e. impact on quality of education, impact on teacher & role of management as well as overall scores but they have shown less positive attitude on rest of three dimensions i.e. impact on student, role of government & impact on physical facilities than their counterpart female teachers which shows that prospective female teachers have more positive attitude towards privatization of education on these dimensions than their counterpart male teachers.



Except on first dimension i.e. Impact on Quality of Education, the mean difference on different dimensions - impact on teachers , impact on students, role of management, role of government , impact on physical facilities as well as overall scores were found to be insignificant at both levels of significance.

Dr. Pratibha Sharma & Ms. Mahe Pecker Khan 7336 (Pg. 7329-7336)

References Ahmad, S. Rehan & Nisa, Un Mohammad. (2017). Privatisation of Higher Education In India: A Positive Step. International Journal of Yoga And Allied Sciences. Vol. 6, Issue. 2. 2017, JulyDec .Http://Indianyoga.Org/Wp-Content/Uploads/2017/04/V6-Issue2-Article5.Pdf Altbach, P.G., & Levy, D.C. (2005). Private Higher Education: A Global Revolution. Netherlands: Sense Publishers. Bhandarkar, K.M. (2009). Statistics in Education (3rd Edition). New Delhi: Neelkamal Publication Pvt. Ltd., Best, J. W., & Khan, J.V. (2006). Research in Education (10th Edition). New Delhi: Anmol Publication Pvt. Ltd. Chand, Dinesh. (2014). Privatization, Globalization And Autonomy In Teacher Education. International Journal of Applied Research Vol 1(1), Page 90 to 93 , 2014. Chaudhari, Manisha . (2015).The Attitudes of B.Ed. Trainees towards Privatization in Teacher Education , IJRE Vol. 4, Issue 1 2015, Jan . Goud,S. Somasekhar. (2017). Privatization And Quality Concerns In Teacher Education ,International Journal of Advanced Education And Research Vol. 2, Issue 4, 2017. Encyclopedia of Education, (2002). Government and Education, The Changing Role of. The Gale Group Inc. http://www.encyclopedia.com/education/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-andmaps/government-and-education-changing-role Kishan, N. Ramnath, (2008 ). Privatization of Education. New Delhi: A. P. H. Publishing Corporation. Kumar, Rajesh. (2016). Privatization of Teacher Education And Quality Concern. Chetana: International Educational Journal Vol. 1/2 Page 48 to 54. 2016, Aug-Nov. Http://Echetana.Com/Wp-Content/Uploads/2016/12/7.-Dr-Rajesh-Kumar.Pdf Parvez , Mohammad & Shakir Mohd. (2012). Privatization of Teacher Education in India: Some Issues to Ponder Over. SOSIOHUMANIKA. 5(1) www.mindamasjournals.com/index.php/sosiohumanika/article/viewFile/457/455 Sarmah, Bidula. (2013). Attitude of University Students, Towards Privatisation of Higher Education A Study. Indian Journal of Applied Research, Vol 3, Issue 2, 2013, Feb http://www.theglobaljournals.com/ijar/file.php?val=February_2013_1359812011_55158_28. pdf Shukla, Akhilesh & Singh, Dilip Kumar. (2011). Attitude of Teachers towards Privatization of Higher Education. International Refereed Research Journal. RNI RAJBIL 2009/30097, Vol-II Issue 19 2011, April. https://idocslide.com/the-philosophy-of-money.html?utm_source=attitude-ofteachers-towards-privatization-of-higher-education Yashpal Committee. (2009). Report of the Committee to Advise on Renovation and Rejuvenation of Higher Education. New Delhi, India: Human Resource Development. https://www.ourbyte.org/privatization-of-professional-education-in-india/