Printer Friendly

Higher Education through Open and Distance Education --An Analysis of Democratization and Social Inclusiveness.

'Higher education' and 'Higher Education System' became a popular term in the second half of the 20th century (Teichler, 2001). By 2000 there were approximately 100 million of students representing about 20 percent of the relevant age cohort worldwide, whereas at the start of the 20th century only around 5,00,000 students were enrolled in higher education institutions all over the globe (Schofer and Meyer, 2005). Globally, the percentage of the age cohort enrolled in tertiary education has grown from 19 per cent in 2000 to 26 percent in 2007, with the most dramatic gain in upper middle and upper income countries (Albatch,, 2009).As of now, already a number of countries have achieved admission rates of over 50 percent of the age cohort (Guri-Rosenblit,, 2007). In developing countries, the total number of tertiary students rose from 47 million in 1999 to 85 million in 2006 (UNESCO, 2009). In India the enrolment in higher education institution which was a mere 263000 in 1950-51 rose to 11 million by 2006 (Ved Prakash, 2007).

Massification of higher education is in full force in most of the developing countries (UNESCO, 2000). The massification of higher education triggered off after 1990 in most of the developing countries, and has transformed higher education from an elitist pursuit to a mass activity, both in developed as well as developing countries. Scott (1995) used the term massification in the context of higher education systems to describe the rapid increase in student enrolment in the latter part of the twentieth century. While Trow (1972) provided terms 'elite' 'mass' and 'universal' higher education for better understanding of the term massification: with 'elite' representing a national ratio up to 15 percent; 'mass' representing a ratio up to 50 percent and 'universal' a ratio in excess of 50 percent. According to Trow, a few developed countries such as Australia, Japan, New Zealand and Korea are moving towards universalization of higher education; while quite a number of developing countries such as Indonesia, Iran, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand have been entering the stage of massification of higher education; and while countries like Bangladesh, Pakistan and India are facing a tough challenge of massification of higher education. Gibbons (1998) was of the view that massification has numerous consequences on the higher education system, not just in terms of the increase in student number but the accompanying changes in the composition, character and aspirations of the student population. However, customarily, massification is a process by which academic systems enroll large number and higher proportions of the relevant age-group of students in a range of academic programmes in a number of differentiated higher education institutions. Albatch (1982) said it is the most critical contemporary force pressing on universities.

The proliferation of higher education in India can be categorized in four phases: (i) the 'elite': during the Ancient, Medieval and British period, access to higher education in India was limited to a elite few and was also caste, class, clan and gender biased and can be termed as 'elite' of higher education; (ii) the 'democratization': in this phase, higher education was made accessible to all through government measures. Article 15 of the constitution prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth, while Article 16 of the constitution lays emphasis on equal opportunities, which reads that "no citizens shall on grounds only of religion, race, caste, descent, sex, place of birth, residence or any of them be ineligible or discriminated against, in respect of employment or office of the state". This phase of democratization of higher education started after the independence in 1947; (iii)the 'massification' phase: started after 1991 and vigorously after 2000 when the globalization process got momentum in the country, and (iv) as far the 'universalization' phase is concerned, India has to go a long way to achieve universalization of higher education.

Higher education is increasingly viewed as a major engine of economic development (Albatch,, 2009). The transition of higher education from elite to democratization during the globalized era has been perceived to promote economic growth and development. There is a broad positive co-relation between the GER at the higher education level and the per capita GDP of a nation (Anandakrishnan, 2006). China is one of the few countries that made the decision to increase university student enrolments with the goal of stimulating the country's economy (Yang, 2002). As far as higher education through distance education is concerned, it is argued that if properly conceived, Open and Distance Learning (ODL) could be the long-term strategy for nation renaissance and an engine of development (Pityana, 2009) and an effective means for reducing poverty in developing countries (Khan and Gul, 2006). Therefore, it is remarked that higher education is no longer a luxury; it is essential to national, social and economic development (UNESCO, 2000). Many countries with higher education systems that are at critical development phases have experienced higher rates of expansion and increase in students' enrolment than anticipated (UNESCO, 2004).

I. Democratization of Higher Education through Open Distance Education

Proponents of massification have called upon universities to be responsive to the needs of an economy (Soudien and Corneilse, 2000). Certainly, the limited resources and relatively dense population in developing countries are obstacles for the availability of on-campus education for the whole population; therefore, distance education is relatively a better solution to overcome this problem (Khan, et al, 2001). For the developing world, ODL is a promising and practical strategy to address the challenge of widening access, thus increasing participation in higher education (Pityana, 2009). Distance education reaches a broader students audience and better addresses students needs, saves money and more importantly, uses the principles of modern learning pedagogy (Fitzpatrick, 2001). It uses open learning as education patterns, approaches and strategies that permit people to learn with no barriers in respect of time, space, sex, age and previous educational background - no entry qualification, no age limit, no biases against any gender, race, tribe, state of origin, quota system, etc. (Alaezi, 2005). Croft (1992) noted that the conventional face-to- face universities find its strengths in traditional teaching, research and scholarship while dedicated distance education universities finds its strengths in their contribution to accessibility and equality. According to Juler (1990), distance education means creating educational communities in which teachers, students and others are linked in discourse wherever they may be, through networks appropriate to their circumstances. Globalization and ICT revolution has further invigorated the pace and use of distance education in the developing world. Zondiros (2008) has remarked that online and distance education can be seen as a product and producer of globalization. The number of conventional universities offering distance education and open universities offering distance education through ODL mode are on the increase worldwide. In India, 15 open universities and 76 state universities are offering distance education programmes. There are around 90 open universities in the world. In USA, a few community colleges are also offering distance education. It is not a flight of fancy, but delicately, not only the number of distance education institutions but also enrolment of students in these institutions has gone up astoundingly. To site an example, the enrolment in B.R. Ambedkar Open University, the first Open University in India has been gone up from a meager 6321 in 1983-84 to a staggering number of 1,50,474 by 2004-05. Similarly, the enrolment in Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU), the first Central Open University in India, has gone up from a meager 4857 in 1987 to 2.6 million in 2011. The same massification has been noticed in many open universities worldwide. In the USA, ninety-four percent of all colleges and universities are either currently (63%) or planning to be (31%) engaged in distance and distributed learning (Twigg, 2001).

According to Schneider and Germann (1999), history of distance learning is divided into three generations given as: (i) first generation "correspondence study" where students and teachers communicate with each other through the mail; (ii) second generation "multi-media distance teaching or broadcast teleconferencing" where television and radio broadcasts are used by students and teachers for communication; and (iii) third generation "interactive, web-based instruction", where resources of the world wide web enhance communication, not only between students and teachers, but among students as well. Daniel (1999) was of the opinion that distance education has evolved by the incorporation of more media into the earlier versions of correspondence tuition and remote classroom teaching. In fact, the open and distance education is a paradigm shift from the conventional face-to-face education and it has transformed the education system from the traditional "teaching paradigm" to a more pragmatic study material and technology driven "learning paradigm". In other words, the novelty of distance education system is that it frugally uses the traditional classroom and lecture method, that too, only for counseling and is largely tilted towards self-learning material based, technology driven "learner-centered" and "open and free" teaching-learning education model. Heydinger (1997) viewed that open learning system stands in contrast to the traditional faculty-driven curriculum model and put the students squarely at the center of the equation in developing their learning plan. As Barr and Tagg (1995) put that the aim of learning paradigm is not so much to improve the quality of instruction (although that is not irrelevant) as it is to improve continuously the quality of learning for students individually and in the aggregate.

Distance education makes use of various forms of individual delivery methods ranging from self-motivated face-to-face contact session, to course materials and technology driven methods such as audio, video, internet, intranet and email to students. Some of the recent enrolment enhancement initiatives in ODL system for the massification of tertiary education are unlimited access of study materials through e-material (for example e-gyankosh of IGNOU), walk in admission, on-line admission, on-demand examination, etc. In the distance education system, students occupy prime place, where self-learning materials are progressive deliverables than the distance learning teachers and trainers. Furthermore, in distance education, counseling, guidance and doubt clearing are more important than lecturing and tutoring. The student enrolment in open universities depends veritably on the quality of self learning materials rather than quality of distance education faculty. Daniel (1999) was of the view that increasing learning productivity implies having students take more responsibility for their own learning, ensuring that curricular and time tables are more focused and purposeful and training faculty are to be mediators of learning rather than better teachers.

II. Distance Education in India and IGNOU ODL System

Approximately 24 percent of all higher education students in India are enrolled in distance education institutions, specifically in the 13 national and state open universities and the 106 institutions, mostly public, which offer both on-campus and correspondence program (Daniel, 2007). While envisaging the growth of ODL (Open and Distance Learning) system in higher education, University Grant Commission of India has noted that the number of dual mode universities and institutions offering programmes through distance mode has increased astoundingly from only one single mode open universities in 1962 to 116 dual mode universities in 2010. Single mode universities offering distance education have gone up from a meager 1 during 1982 to 14 during 2010. With fresh enrolment in ODL programmes at approximately 2.4 million annually, the share of distance education in the GER (Gross Enrolment Ratio) is about 22.23%. 1 A 2007study conducted under the auspices of Common Wealth of Learning regarding the development of the Indian State Open Universities concluded the "ODL has vast potential in a country like India with millions of young aspirants eager to receive higher education and with conventional universities and colleges simply not being in a position to accommodate them. The infrastructure for the expansion of open universities is fairly good in the country, especially the mega OU, Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU) willing to help the SOUs (State Open Universities) (Rajagopalan, 2007).

During the post-independence period, the Government of India inherited the legacy of educational backwardness in addition to many other backwardness (Khajapeer, 1996). The caste-based social disparities in the enrolment rate between the urban and rural sectors, between males and females; among social groups, SC's(Scheduled Castes), STs(Scheduled Tribes), and General Castes and between the poor and non-poor is observed in the stratified Indian society (Sinha and Srivastava, 2008). The GER is the lowest among the poor casual wage laborer households in the rural and urban areas; and the rate is particularly low among the poor from the same group and belonging to the SC/ST/OBCs (Thorat, 2008). Therefore distance education has become one powerful medium of obtaining degrees for large number of students who are staying at far off and remote areas and for whom accessing universities on regular basis is still a dream (ASIHE 2011-12).

The open and distance education is aimed at providing low cost higher education and assisting in the development and democratization of higher education in the highly socioeconomically stratified country like India. Indira Gandhi National Open University popularly known as "IGNOU"(in India and also abroad) is playing an important role in the promotion and proliferation of open and distance education in India and also in many other developing countries of the World. IGNOU aims to democratize higher education in India through a decentralized approach and reaching to the unreached through its regional centres and student support centres established widely across the nation. It has established regional centres in almost all the states and union territories and has study centres invariably present in almost all the districts of India. It is well documented that "the university has been registering impressive vertical and horizontal growth and has cumulative student strength of over 3 million through an impressive network of 64 Regional Centres and 2667 Learner Support Centres across the country (IGNOU, 2014)." Over a period of time, it is trying now to reach to the unreached group of learners belonging to rural areas, women, Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, by offering cost effective and quality tertiary education programmes. It wants to reach to the unreached, and include the excluded groups into its fold.

III. Objectives

The important objectives of the study are:

(i) To assess the impact of IGNOU on the enrolment of students in tertiary education in rural areas.

(ii) To study the impact of IGNOU programme on the enrolment of women in tertiary education programme; and

(iii)To assess the impact of IGNOU distance learning programme on the tertiary education status of the socio-economically disadvantaged sections such as Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.

In this study an attempt has been made to compare the IGNOU enrolment data of 16 major states of India with that of the tertiary education achieved through various modes including the open and distance education mode. The State having more and Scheduled Tribe population (as per census, 2011) is selected for analysis in order to assess the degree of inclusiveness in the tertiary education. The student enrolment for the year 2011 in various regional centres of IGNOU of these 16 major states have been taken into consideration in order to establish the relationship between the dependent variables and the independent variables. The all India GER has been compared with the IGNOU's enrolment in order to assess the impact of open and distance education offered through IGNOU on inclusiveness. The independent and dependent variables considered for the study are two types of data sources with variables as given in Table-1.

According to UNESCO (2003) in Asia Pacific Region, despite the rapid expansion in the enrollment, equity on access in disadvantaged groups such as women, rural population, minority ethnic groups and students from low socio-economic status group remains a big problem. Equity in higher education is arguably one of the most significant and urgent issues India is facing today, given that it is among the most unequal societies in the world (UN Women, 2012).Higher education in India is found to be urban-biased and pro-rich (Choudhary, 2014). The educational disparities between rural and urban areas are a grave concern in India where 69 percent of population still lives in rural areas. Considering the rural poverty and lack of availability of higher educational institutions in rural areas, it is felt that the open and distance education system will fulfill the higher education aspirations among the rural population. The democratization of tertiary education will be truly materialized only when the rural people are not deprived of the right to higher education because of availability, accessibility and affordability reasons. The table shows that the mean GER in rural areas of these selected States is 8.79, while the IGNOU enrolment is 42.51 percent which is four times higher. It is also seen that there is a positive and high correlation between GER of rural areas and IGNOU enrolment. It is interesting to see that rural poverty has a negative correlation with the IGNOU enrolment which means that IGNOU ODL has largely benefited the economically weaker section of the population. The analysis shows that the States having higher rural literacy rates have taken more advantage of tertiary education offered through ODL system of IGNOU compared to their counterparts. It can also be deduced that open and distance education offered by IGNOU through its decentralized mechanism is fulfilling the higher education aspiration among the rural people.

Historically, the vulnerable groups of the Indian society, namely, the Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward Classes and women have suffered deprivation in all walks of life including education (Choudhry, 2014). Women are the most disadvantaged group across the caste and community in India. However, it is observed from the data that the mean IGNOU women enrolment is 46.42 as against the mean GER of women in this selected State which is 21.12. It is observed from the data that mean GER has a negative correlation with the IGNOU enrolment in tertiary education among women. This implies that those women who are deprived of tertiary education through the formal and private education system have availed ODL system of IGNOU to fulfill their dream of higher education. Thus, like rural enrolment, the IGNOU ODL system is supplementing and complementing the democratization of higher education in India.

The Indian social system suffers from the in flexibilities of a rigid caste system (Choudhry, 2012). In India caste has been the determinant of class position, resulting in acute inequality in the distribution of wealth and income (Mehta and Kapoor, 1994). For centuries, caste has been a determining factor and is still quite evident in education and work distribution for various sections of the society (Choudhary, 2014). The traditional deprivation kept SCs (Scheduled Castes) and STs (Scheduled Tribes) at the lower rung of the caste hierarchy and denied them access to any form of education, with the demands of a knowledge-driven society under globalization which left them out of the mainstream as social misfits and the disposable people of society because of their lack of education (Thorat, 2008). The real victims of inequality including educational inequality in India are the SCs and STs. Because of economic impoverishment and other associated reasons, they are being deprived of the higher education. The analysis of data as given in Table-5 shows that the mean IGNOU enrolment among SCs is 8.5 percent, which is lower than the mean GER of 14.11. It reveals that the SCs have not been adequately benefited from the IGNOU ODL system, one of the main reasons being that IGNOU does not offer any fee concessions to SC students which they usually get when they enroll themselves in formal educational institutions. As far as STs are concerned, the IGNOU mean enrolment is 13.24, which is almost equal to mean GER 13.39. This means SCs disproportionately, STs proportionately and other caste group of population has highly benefited from the ODL system. This means that while IGNOU is helpful in democratizing higher education, is still to be inclusive among the disadvantaged i.e. SCs and STs. It has not become inclusive, not because of caste based obstruction, but because of its constraint of affordability among the disadvantaged. In the conventional education system, they get fee concessions from the government, whereas IGNOU does not have any special fee concessions for SCs and STs. Still a colossal percentage of SC's and ST's, particularly staying in rural areas are economically impoverished to even afford fees for distance education. This particularly hits the education of the girl and disabled children belonging to these disadvantaged families.

The massification process can truly be democratic only when people belonging to both rural and urban areas irrespective of caste, class, sex and ethnicity are registered in large numbers in the distance education system. This can happen when effective coordination between the decentralized centres of Open University such as regional centres, study centres and the decentralized line department functionaries and democratic decentralization institutions such as ULBs and PRIs are established. The study centers of open universities, usually positioned at the cities and semi-urban areas, are not sufficient for the proliferation of higher education, more so in populated developing countries, where students belonging to marginalized communities are unable to attain higher education in spite of the provision of educational subsidies and scholarships by the government. The other direct and indirect costs, such as pocket expenses related to attaining counseling session, preparation of assignments, appearing examination, etc. de-motivate students particularly belonging to marginalized groups such as Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, women and economically weaker sections, from pursuing higher education even though distance education. Albatchetal (1998) study from other counties also has similar views that cost remains an enormous barrier to access. Even where tuition is free, students have to bear indirect costs such as living expenses and often loss of income. Scholarships, grant and/ or loan programme are demonstrating some degree of success, but cannot by themselves remove economic barriers. It is only through decentralized distance education system, along with the active participation of grass-root level democratic institutions, representatives and functionaries that tertiary education can reach to the doorsteps of the disadvantaged and marginalized in the developing countries. The formation of Village Higher Education Committee at the village levels will enhance enrolment of higher education in rural areas and enable the rural society to fight against unemployment, poverty inequality, low level of education and corruption. It will improve quality of life of countryside population. Frequent interaction between Higher Education Committees and academic counselors of the Open University is required for a sustainable higher education system. The decentralized democratic institutions such as ULBs and PRIs would provide support to the higher education in different ways: (i) motivating students for various programmes; (ii) monitoring drop out/ discontinuing rate; (iii) providing space for counseling classes; (iv) providing financial support to poor students from village development fund; (v) monitoring GER at various levels of local self government and; (vi) ensure access to internet facility available at village, block and district panchayat for e-Education. The customary challenge, which massification of higher education through distance education has to face, is the quality. Quality of distance education depends exclusively on quality of study materials and student support services. Greater care has to be taken while designing learner centredself-learning materials (SLMs) and other technology driven learning materials. As the students are away from the classrooms setting, effective quality study materials, quick admission and despatch of enrolment number and study materials, counseling services, supportive student inquiry and grievances redressal system and timely declaration of results and issue of grade cards and certificates are a few student satisfaction indices to be taken into consideration for the enhancement of enrolment through distance education system. It is not a flight of fancy, truly one motivated student will enhance enrolment in an arithmetic proportion while one demotivated or dissatisfied student can affect negative enrolment in a geometric proportion.

Besides institutional mechanism and governance system, the success of massifcation of higher education through distance education depends on community participation and support from civil society organizations. The mobile and satellite study centres of the open university have to be established and work in tandem with the community based organization (CBOs) such as Youth Clubs, MahilaMandals (Women Groups), Self Help Groups (SHGs) and other grass-root level bodies for enhancing enrolment in rural areas. A study conducted by Salaman, Solokolowski and Associates (2003) shows that 64 percent of the work force of Civil Society Organizations is engaged in delivering education services. A National Planning Commission data shows that around 90 percent of NGOs in India are involved in social sector activities including education. Community participation frame work, given in Fig-2, if effectively materialized, would boost distance education in rural areas and enable the system to reach the unreached.

Notwithstanding community participation, inter-sectoral coordination is also another vital aspect for massification of higher education through distance education. Education sector if operate in silos will be less successful and therefore has to coordinate with other related sectors for massification of higher education at the grassroots. The health, rural development, local self government, women and child development, cooperative and banking, agriculture and allied sectors, youth development, etc. are the other related sectors which can offer support to open distance education system at the grassroots. The Sixth Five Year Plan of Government of India has emphasized that education system, in order to achieve its goals and tasks, has to stress on coordination of efforts, resources and programmes of different sectors and agencies. Inter-sectoral coordination encourages government line departments to work together and mobilize communities and involve them in the development process. 4 There are several other successful models of inter-sectoral coordination and public-private partnership in the development arena and open and distance education system has to examine and adopt with suitable modification. One of the examples of inter-sectoral coordination framework is given in Table-4.


The massification of higher education in developing countries is an agenda of globalization and development. Open and Distance education system has significant contribution towards massification of higher education in India and also in many other developing countries. For instance, IGNOU, one of the largest Open and Distance University in India, has not only enhanced enrolment in tertiary education in the country, but is also helping in proliferation of higher education in other developing countries in Asia and Africa. Both vertical as well as horizontal decentralization approach, with the help of decentralized line department and democratic institutions, will go a long way to scale up higher education and help it reach to the unreached. However, other issues like quality SLM's (Self Learning Materials), experienced educational counselors, proactive student support services, grievance redressal, good educational governance and management system are needed to be addressed by the distance education system in order to efficiently and effectively carry forward the agenda of massification with quality. Further monitoring of discontinuation and dropout rate and wastage, cost-effectiveness, general acceptance of distance education in the job market, etc. are other challenges before the distance education system. Despite all these constraints, distance education are playing a vital role in the massification of higher education in both developed as well as in developing countries.

In order to enhance its enrolment and pass-out rate, University needs to open mobile and satellite study centres in remote and far-flung areas.


(1.) The Growth of ODL System in Higher Education for detail see (accessed on 3/03/2004).

(2.) C P Joshi said this while delivering 16th Prof. G Ram Reddy Memorial Lecture on 2nd of July 2011 in IGNOU, New Delhi for detail see http://

(3.) C P Joshi said this while delivering 16th Prof. G Ram Reddy Memorial Lecture on 2nd of July 2011 in IGNOU, New Delhi for detail see http://

(4.) Roland Anderson, John M Quigley and Mat Wilhelmsson, " High Education, Localization and Innovation: Evidence from a National Experiment", Royal Institute of Technology, Centre for Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies, CESIS Electronic Workers, Paper Series, Paper No.26, also see

(5.) Ardakani, M A and H Rizwan, " Community ownership and inter-sectoral action for health as key principles for achieving 'Health for All'" Eastern MediterrareanHelathJoaurnal, Vol.14,pp57-66 also available online


Alaezi, COA 2005, National Open University Plan, Enhancing Higher Education in Nigeria through Open and Distance Learning (ODL) Delivery System, Lagos, NOUN.

Albatch, P.G. 1982, "Reform and Innovation in Higher Education: Introduction" Education Documentation and Information, Bulletin of International Bureau of Education, No.223

Albatch, Philip G "The logic of Mass Higher Education"

Albatch, Phillip G, Liz Reisberg and Laura E Rumbley (2009), Trends in Global Higher Education: Tracking an Academic Revolution, A Report Prepared for the UNESCO World Conference on Higher Education, UNESCO.

Anandkrishnan, M, 2004, "Higher Education in Regional Development: Some Key Pointers" Indo-UK Seminar on Regional Development Organization by UGC.

Astiz, M F, A W Wiseman and D P Baker, 2002, "Searching towards decentralization: Consequences of globalization for curricular control in National Education System", Comparative Education Review, Vol.1, No.1, pp66-86.

Barr, R B and J Tagg, 1995, "From teaching to learning: A new paradigm of undergraduate education" Change, Vol.26, Issue 6, pp13-25.

Brofferio, S C, 1998, "A University distance lesion system: Experiments services and future development", IEEE Transactions on Education, Vol.41, No.1, pp17-24.

Choudhary, S K (2014): "The Scheduled Castes in Higher Education", Mainstream, Vol.XLV, No.24.

Croft, M, 1992, "Single or Dual Mode: Challenges and Choices for Future Education", Perspectives on Distance Education, Vancouver, COL.

Daniel J J, 1999, Mega-Universities and Knowledge Media, London, KoganPage,EQ Review, September, 2005, Vol.30, No.4, also see http://pdf.usaid.gove/pdf_docs

Fitzpatrick, R, 2001 "Is distance education better than the traditional classroom?", Retrieved July 31st from

Gibbons, M, 1998: "Higher Education Relevance in the 21st Century," Paper prepared for World Bank as part of its Contribution to the UNESCO World conference on Higher Education, Paris, 5-9, October.

Grui-Rosenblit Sarah, Sebkova, H and Teichler, U, 2007: "Massification and Diversity of Higher Education Systems: Interplay of Complex Dimensions" available online .pdf

Hanson, E M, 1998: "Strategies of Education Decentralization: Key Questions and Core Issues", Journal of Educational Administration, Vol.36.No.2, P.111-128.

Juler, M, 1992: "Promoting Interaction: Maintaining Independence: Swallowing the mixture", Open Learning, 5/2, PP 24-33.

Khajapeer, M (1996): "Democratization of higher education in India with special reference to weaker sections minorities and women", Journal of Educational Planning and Administration, Vol.X, No.2.

Khan, J A, S.A.Khan and Reslan H Al-Abaji, 2001: "Prospects of Distance Education in Developing Countries", Paper presented at International Conference on Millennium Driven in training and Continuing Education", 24-26 April 2001, University of Beharin, Beharin.

Khan, N and Gul, R, 2004: "Potential of Distance Learning in Achieving Development Goals: Eradicating Poverty", Presented at the Commonwealth of Learning and Caribbean Consortium, The Fourth Plan Common Wealth Forum on Open Learning.

Mehta, B C and Kapoor, K (1998): "Caste education and class relationship in India", Journal of Higher Education, Vol.21, No.1, pp37-38.

Pityana, N. Barney, 2009: "Open and Distance Learning in the Developing World: Trends, Progress and Challenges", Key note speech delivered on the occasion of the M-2009, 23rd ICDE World Conference on Open Learning and Distance education, Flexible Education for All: Open-Global-Innovation", 7-10, June 2009, Masstricht, the Netherlands.

Salaman, L M, S W Sokolowski and Associates, 2004: Global Civil Society: Dimensions of the Nonprofit Sector, Boomfield, C T Press.

Schneider, SP and C.G. Germenn, 1999: "Technical Communication on the web A Profile of Learners Environments", Technical Communication Quarterly, Vol.8, No.1p 37-48

Schofer, E and Meyer, J, 2005: "The World Expansion of Higher Education in the Twentieth Century", American Sociological Review, 70,898-92.

Scott, P, 1995: The Meaning of Mass Higher Education, Buckingham, SRHE, Open University Press.

Soudien, C and C.Corneilse, 2000: "South African Higher Education in Transition: Global Discourses and National Priorities" in N.P.Stromquist and K Monkman (ed.), Globalization and Education, Lanham, Rowman and Littlefield.

Teichler, U, 2001: 'Higher education" in N.J.Smelser and P.B. Baltes (ed.), International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences, Amsterdan, Elsvier, 6700-6705.

Thorat, S (2008): Dalits in India: Search for a Common Destiny, Sage publication, New Delhi.

Trow, M, 1972: "The Expansion and Transformation of Higher Education" International Review of Education, 18(1): pp 61-84.

Trow, M, 2000: "From Mass Higher Education to Universal Access: The American Advantage", Research and Occasional Paper Series, Centre for Studies in Higher Education, UC Berkelgy.

Twigg, C, 2001: Quality Assurance for whom? Providers and consumers in Today's Distributed Learning Environment, available online

UNESCO, 2000: World Communication and Information Report 1999-2000, UNESCO.

UNESCO, 2009: EFA Global Monitoring, Department of Education, UNESCO, Oxford University Press, London.

UNESCO, 2003: Higher Education in Asia and the Pacific 1998-2003, Technical Paper, UNESCO, Asia and Pacific Regional Bureau for Education, Paris

UNESCO, 2004: Recent Developments and Future Prospects of Higher Education in Sub Saharan African, UNESCO, Paris.

UN Women (2012): Equity in Higher Education: Identifying Critical Gender Concerns, South Asia Sub Regional Office, India.

VedPrakash, (2007): "Trends in Growth and Finance of Higher Education in India", Economic & Political Weekly, August 4, pp3249-58.

Yang, R (2002): Lost Opportunities in Massification of Higher Education in China, International Higher Education, 2002, reviewed in 2007 from

Zondiros, D, 2008: "Online, Distance Education and Globalization: Its Impact on Education Access, Inequality And Exclusions", EURODL, Technological Education Institute (TEI) of Athens, Hellos, Greece.

Caption: Figure-1: Percentage of GER among different Groups, All India and IGNOU

Caption: Figure 3: Community Participation Framework

Caption: Figure 4: Inter-Sectoral Coordination Framework
Table 1: Dual Mode Universities and Open Universities in India

Year   Dual Mode Universities /   Single Mode OUs    Total Distance
              Institutes                                Education
1962              1                      --                 1
1975              22                     --                22
1982              34                     1                 35
1985              38                     2                 40
1990              46                     5                 51
2000              70                     9                 79
2005             106                     13                119
2010             242                     14                256

Source: "Growth of ODL System in Higher Education"
deb(accessed on 3/03/2014)

Table 2: Enrolment in Conventional and Open Education System in India

  Year      Conventional    CCIs / DEIs     Percentage       Total
            Universities       / Open       share of DE
              /Colleges     Universities

1962-1963     7,52,095         1,112           0.147         753207
1975-1976     24,26,109        64,210          2.578        2490319
1980-1981     27,52,437       1,66,428         5.701        2918865
1985-1986     36,06,029       3,55,091         8.964        3961120
1990-1991     49,24,868       5,92,814        10.744        5517682
1994-1995     61,13,929       8,03,176        11.611        6917105
1995-1996     65,74,005      10,03,000        13.237        7577005
2000-2001     83,99,443      13,78,000        14.094        9777443
2005-2006    110,28,020      18,33,524        14.256        12861544
2009-2010    124,68,560      37,36,744         23.35        16000000

Table 3: Enrolment in Different categories of
Tertiary Education

Level              Distance Education Enrolment
                   Male         Female    Total

Post Graduate      772328       531536    1303864
Under Graduate     1213524      785429    1998953
P G Diploma        44661        18003     62664
Diploma            70580        45595     116175
Certificate        37231        38671     75902
Integrated         1523         478       2001
All                2139847      1419712   3559559

Source: "Growth of ODL System in Higher Education"
http://www/ugc/ac/in/deb (accessed on 3/03/2014)

Table 4: Types of Dependent and Independent Variables

Dependent Variables: IGNOU Enrolment  Independent Variables

[X.sub.1] = % of Enrolment of SC      I--Scheduled Castes (SC)
[X.sub.2] = % of Enrolment of ST      [Y.sub.1] = SC Literacy rate (%)
[X.sub.3] = % of Enrolment of Women   [Y.sub.2] = GER of SC (%)
[X.sub.4] = % of Enrolment of         [Y.sub.3] = % of Poverty in SC
 Rural Areas Students
[X.sub.5] = % of Enrolment            [Y.sub.4] = % of SC Population
 of Rural Women
                                      II--Scheduled Tribes (ST)

                                      [Y.sub.5] = SC Literacy rate (%)
                                      [Y.sub.6] = GER of ST (%)
                                      [Y.sub.7] = % of Poverty in ST
                                      [Y.sub.8] = % of ST Population


                                      [Y.sub.9] = Women Literacy
                                        rate (%)
                                      [Y.sub.10] = Gender Gap of
                                         Literacy (%)
                                      [Y.sub.11] = Women GER


                                      [Y.sub.12] = % of Rural Poverty
                                      [Y.sub.13] = Rural
                                        Literacy Rate (%)
                                      [Y.sub.14] = Rural Population (%)
                                      [Y.sub.15] = GER of Rural (%)

Table 5: Relationship between Dependent and Independent Variables

Categories                     Enrolment Status in Tertiary Education

                               X"                    r
I Rural Area

(i) Rural Poverty (%)          23.39        11.69    -0.37    0.32
(ii) Rural Literacy (%)        70.67        8.47     0.404    0.202
(iii) Rural Population (%)     70.08        11.57    0.302    0.207
(iv) GER Rural Area            8.79         4.26     0.63     0.209

II Women

(i) Literacy Rate (%)          66.87        9.66     0.28     0.223
(ii) Gender Gap in             16.94        5.19     -0.19    0.24
Literacy (%)
(iii) Women GER                21.123       11.204   -0.418   0.52

III Scheduled Castes (SC)

(i) SC Poverty (%)             26.11        11.307   -0.074   0.545
(ii) SC Literacy (%)           52.9         10.64    0.389    0.255
(iii) SC Population (%)        14.82        5.49     0.013    0.10
(iv) SC GER (%)                14.11        6.69     0.359    0.343

IV Scheduled Tribes (ST)

(i) ST Poverty (%)             36.029       15.877   0.159    0.193
(ii) ST Literacy (%)           61.28        13.14    -0.167   0.83
(iii) ST Population (%)        11.58        9.349    0.055    0.039
(iv) ST GER (%)                13.329       8.518    0.045    0.029

Categories                     IGNOU
I Rural Area

(i) Rural Poverty (%)          42.51       16.87
(ii) Rural Literacy (%)
(iii) Rural Population (%)
(iv) GER Rural Area

II Women

(i) Literacy Rate (%)          46.42       11.98
(ii) Gender Gap in
Literacy (%)
(iii) Women GER

III Scheduled Castes (SC)

(i) SC Poverty (%)             8.35        6.98
(ii) SC Literacy (%)
(iii) SC Population (%)
(iv) SC GER (%)

IV Scheduled Tribes (ST)

(i) ST Poverty (%)             13.249      13.08
(ii) ST Literacy (%)
(iii) ST Population (%)
(iv) ST GER (%)

Table 1: ST, SC & General Student enrolment in 2011 and
Proportion of ST, SC & General population according to
2011 Census

Sl.    State              Total        Total
No.                       Number of    percentage
                          student in   of ST
                          2011         student
                                       enrolled in

1      Assam              4537         21.29
2      Andhra Pradesh     9944         2.61
3      Chhattisgarh       2127         10.67
4      Gujarat            14566        35.76
5      Himachal Pradesh   4682         4.63
6      Jammu & Kashmir    9885         4.62
7      Jharkhand          14968        21.67
8      Karnataka          6670         4.54
9      Kerala             7211         1.40
10     Madhya Pradesh     9166         21.14
11     Maharashtra        24487        39.26
12     Odisha             12538        3.02
13     Rajasthan          6057         0.33
14     Tamilnadu          7884         18.82
15     Uttar Pradesh      22563        31.17
16     Uttaranchal        8508         3.10
17     West Bengal        24486        1.21

        Total           Total
No.    percentage of   percentage of
       SC student      General
       enrolled in     student
       (Jan-June=      enrolled in
       2011)           (Jan-June=

1      8.35            70.35
2      14.63           82.75
3      14.06           75.27
4      0.31            63.93
5      15.31           80.05
6      11.86           83.52
7      13.40           64.94
8      10.64           84.81
9      7.42            91.18
10     14.77           64.08
11     23.04           37.71
12     12.79           84.18
13     7.97            91.70
14     16.13           65.04
15     3.63            65.20
16     29.27           67.63
17     4.68            94.11

Table 3: Percentage of Female Literacy, IGNOU Enrolment,
Gross Enrolment Ratio and Gender Gap in Literacy

                          Percentage     Total
Sl.    State              of enrolment   Percentage
No                        of Female in   of Female
                          IGNOU          Literacy in
                          (2011 year)    (2011,

1      Andhra Pradesh     49.62          59.7
2      Assam              42.43          67.3
3      Chhattisgarh       34.10          60.6
4      Gujarat            61.54          70.7
5      Himachal Pradesh   47.28          76.6
6      Jammu & Kashmir    42.85          58.0
7      Jharkhand          39.30          56.2
8      Karnataka          43.24          68.1
9      Kerala             47.58          92.0
10     Madhya Pradesh     45.24          60.0
11     Maharashtra        85.20          75.5
12     Odisha             36.98          64.4
13     Rajasthan          42.62          52.7
14     Tamil Nadu         34.64          73.9
15     Uttar Pradesh      51.97          59.3
16     Uttaranchal        40.89          70.7
17     West Bengal        43.69          71.2

       Total        Total
Sl.    Percentage   Percentage
No     of Gender    of Female
       gap in       Gross
       Literacy     Enrolment
       (2011,       Ratio (GER,
       Census)      2011-12)

1      16.7         23.4
2      15.8         14.2
3      20.9         53.8
4      16.5         9.9
5      14.2         15.7
6      20.3         24.2
7      22.2         24.9
8      14.7         7.6
9      4.0          22.8
10     20.5         26.9
11     14.3         14.6
12     18.0         14.3
13     27.9         14.9
14     13.0         35.2
15     20.0         18.1
16     17.6         27.9
17     11.5         10.7

Table 4: Percentage of Rural Literacy, IGNOU Enrolment,
Gross Enrolment Ratio and Gender Gap in Literacy

Sl.    State          Total         Total        Total
No                    Percentage    Percentage   percentage
                      of Rural      of Rural     of Rural
                      Poverty       literacy     population
                      (2011-12) *   rate         in (2011) **
                                    (2011) **

1      Andhra         11.0          61.14        85.92
2      Assam          33.9          61.59        66.51
3      Chhattisgarh   44.6          66.76        76.76
4      Gujarat        21.5          73.00        57.42
5      Himachal       8.5           82.91        89.96
6      Jammu &        11.5          64.97        72.79
7      Jharkhand      40.8          62.40        75.95
8      Karnataka      24.5          68.86        61.43
9      Kerala         9.2           92.92        52.28
10     Madhya         35.7          65.29        72.37

11     Maharashtra    24.2          77.09        54.77
12     Odisha         35.7          70.78        83.32
13     Rajasthan      16.1          62.34        75.11
14     Tamil Nadu     15.8          73.80        51.55
15     Uttar          30.4          67.55        77.72
16     Uttaranchal    11.7          77.11        69.45
17     West Bengal    22.5          72.97        68.11

Sl.    Total          Total
No     Percentage     percentage of
       of Rural       student
       Gross          Enrolment in
       Enrolment      IGNOU in
       Ratio          Rural areas:
       [GER] in       (Jan-
       (2011-12)(#)   June=2011) (##)

1                     37.59
2      7.1            17.06
3      6              34.55
4      9.1            35.84
5                     74.81
6                     65.70
7      4.5            56.61
8      6.6            24.37
9      19.55          63.93
10                    34.94

11     9.1            28.25
12     4.5            28.59
13     5.75           49.37
14     8.15           24.33
15                    38.69
16     12.75          60.87
17     6.75           47.16

Sources: * Panagariya, A and More V "Poverty by social, religious
and economic groups in India an d its largest states", Working
Paper No.2013-02, School of International and Public Affairs,
Programme on Indian Economic Policies, Columbia University.

** Census of India 2011

(#) Government of India (provisional), AISHE 2011-12, MHRD,
Department of Education New Delhi, 2013.

(##) IGNOU (2013): Status Report of Regional Centers,
September 2013, IGNOU, New

Table 5: Scheduled Castes

Sl.    State          Scheduled Castes
                      Total              Total        Total
                      Percentage         Percentage   Percentage
                      of SC              of SC        of SC
                      student            Literacy     Poverty
                      enrolled in        Rate         Rate (2011-
                      IGNOU(Jan-         (2009-10)    12)

1      Andhra         8.35                            12.7
       Pradesh                           52.9
2      Assam          14.63              83.0         28.6
3      Chhattisgarh   14.06              80.9         46.7
4      Gujarat        0.31               63.5         18.4
5      Himachal       15.31                           15.9
       Pradesh                           77.9
6      Jammu &        11.86                           18.7
       Kashmir                           71.7
7      Jharkhand      13.40              56.0         40.4
8      Karnataka      10.64              56.1         33.2
9      Kerala         7.42               87.6         16.0
10     Madhya         14.77                           39.6
       Pradesh                           67.3
11     Maharashtra    23.04              78.8         19.7
12     Odisha         12.79              64.8         39.0
13     Rajasthan      7.97               56.8         18.7
14     Tamil Nadu     16.13              66.6         19.0
15     Uttar          3.63                            40.9
       Pradesh                           60.0
16     Uttaranchal    29.27              76.8         14.9
17     West Bengal    4.68               70.9         21.5

Sl.    Scheduled Castes
       Total         Proportion
       Percentage    of SC
       of SC         Population
       Gross         (2011,
       Enrolment     Census)
       Ratio [GER]
       in (2011-
1      23.1          16.2
2      11.7          6.9
3      19.2          11.6
4      8.8           7.1
5      13.5          24.7
6      2.8           7.6
7      5.4           11.8
8      15.4          16.2
9      17.5          9.8
10     11.6          15.2
11     24.9          10.2
12     9.1           16.5
13     12.0          17.2
14     27.1          19.0
15     12.5          21.1
16     16.5          17.9
17     8.6           23.0

Table 6: Scheduled Tribe

Sl.    State          Scheduled Tribe
                      Total             Total         Total
                      Percentage        Percentage    Percentage
                      of ST             of ST         of ST
                      student           Literacy      Poverty
                      enrolled in       Rate (2009-   Rate
                      IGNOU             10)           (2011-12)
1      Andhra         21.29                           23.1
       Pradesh                          72.1
2      Assam          2.61              80.5          32.4
3      Chhattisgarh   10.67             66.9          51.1
4      Gujarat        35.76             63.5          35.9
5      Himachal       4.63                            9.2
       Pradesh                          71.7
6      Jammu &        4.62                            15.3
       Kashmir                          36.5
7      Jharkhand      21.67             54.6          49.7
8      Karnataka      4.54              52.8          31.5
9      Kerala         1.40              87.0          39.4
10     Madhya         21.14                           53.4
       Pradesh                          56.9
11     Maharashtra    39.26             66.1          54.4
12     Odisha         3.02              52.2          62.5
13     Rajasthan      0.33              52.4          40.3
14     Tamil Nadu     18.82             48.8          25.8
15     Uttar          31.17                           25.6
       Pradesh                          44.3
16     Uttaranchal    3.10              69.7          13.5
17     West Bengal    1.21              65.8          49.4

Sl.    Scheduled Tribe
       Total          Proportion
       Percentage     of ST
       of ST          Population
       Gross          (2011,
       Enrolment      Census)
       Ratio [GER]
       in (2011-12)

1      21.0           6.6
2      13.6           12.4
3      5.1            31.8
4      9.7            14.8
5      20.4           4.0
6      2.0            10.9
7      3.9            26.3
8      12.7           6.6
9      12.3           1.1
10     6.9            20.3
11     12.5           8.9
12     7.5            22.1
13     13.2           12.6
14     31.0           1.0
15     18.9           0.1
16     30.0           3.0
17     5.9            5.5
COPYRIGHT 2018 Centre for Indian Development Studies
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2018 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Pattanaik, B.K.
Publication:Political Economy Journal of India
Geographic Code:9INDI
Date:Jul 1, 2018
Previous Article:Role of Services Exports from India on Human Capital Formation in Kenya (Africa).
Next Article:Contributions of Binayak Acharya to Education and Development of Odisha: An Empirical Perspective.

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2019 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters