The Regulation of Private Schools Serving Low-Income Families in Andhra Pradesh, India

Abstract

This paper sets out some findings of a research project carried out in private unaided schools in low-income areas of Hyderabad, India. The part of the research project documented here was designed to examine the question: ‘Is the regulatory regime conducive to entrepreneurial action and market discovery’ with particular reference to the low-income schools in Hyderabad. This paper is narrowly focused, setting out the results of pattern matching empirical data with the Austrian economic concepts of entrepreneurship, rivalry, and market discovery. The research discovered that two regulatory regimes exist, one that is set out ‘on paper’ in the Education Acts and associated rules, and another that operates ‘in practice’. That is, there is a combination of regulations ‘on paper’ and regulations existing in an ‘extra-legal’ sector. Generally it was found that the regulations ‘in practice’ are consistent with market principles. Conversely the regulations set out ‘on paper’ are not conducive to entrepreneurial innovation and market discovery. Recommendations for potential policy initiatives include the possibility of legitimising the ‘extra-legal’ sector by introducing self-regulation possibly via self-evaluation systems for the private unaided schools. Copyright Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2005competition, entrepreneurship, profit, regulation, private schools, low-income families, developing countries, India,

Private schools and the millennium development goal of universal primary education: a census and comparative survey in Hyderabad, India

“…The majority of government schools reported that they were Urdu medium (72.6%). Observations in classrooms for earlier research suggest that schools describing themselves as English-medium use English only textbooks for all subjects apart from Indian languages, with teachers offering a mixture of English and Urdu/ Telugu to support their use (Dixon & Tooley, 2005;Smith et al, 2005).…”

Dynamics of Low-Fee Private Schools in Kenya: Governmental Legitimation, School-Community Dependence, and Resource Uncertainty

“…James Tooley and his colleagues at the University of Newcastle are widely published advocates of LFPSs. In a proliferation of research publications based on studies in countries including China, Ghana, India, Kenya, and Nigeria, they (Dixon & Tooley, 2005;Tooley, 2013;Tooley & Dixon, 2005a, 2005b, 2005cTooley, Dixon, & Gomathi, 2007;Tooley, Dixon, Shamsan, & Schagen, 2010;Tooley, Dixon, & Stanfield, 2008) make a range of assertions. They describe how low-cost private schools have been serving the needs of the poor for many years and were largely unacknowledged by the education authorities in many countries until the early 2000s (Tooley, 2009).…”

“…India provides an example of the complexities of government regulation of private schools and the limitations in compliance (Dixon & Tooley, 2005). Private schools are prohibited from making a profit from education or from "commercializing" the service.…”

An Exploratory Study to Understand the Scope of Privately Managed Elementary Schools in India

“…Over and above the curriculum, every school board also set guidelines on a school's physical and human infrastructural requirements. Though, in practice these rules on infrastructure are more often followed in breach than in compliance (Dixon & Tooley, 2005 …”