Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

ShyamSP · Post by **ShyamSP** » 20 Feb 2014 23:03

muraliravi wrote:Sir, with all due respect, what is 25-30 seats, i am seeing all over the place. Please, BJP WAS never going to win any seat in Andhra region anyway. CBN may have won 15/25, now he may win 10. So the loss at best is 5 seats. Next in Telangana, BJP was going to win at best 2-3 seats. I dont think that has changed much. If TRS merges with congress, then maybe we lost 7-8 seats that TRS can give NDA in a post poll scenario. But even that looks bleak at the moment, TRS may not merge after all. So why blow them 5 seat loss in Andhra and a possible 7-8 seat loss in Telangana into a 25-30 blunder. Moreover, what TRS will not do is not in BJP's hands at all.

Next, Sushma can go all over town and claim that it was only because of BJP, telangana bill was passed. Please do me a favour and look into the LS member list in the lok sabha site. BJP has its lowest tally in the last 20 years ( a meager 112 MP's) and congress at 202/206 seats. Do you really think that BJP could have stopped T formation. Just with UPA allies congress has 225-230 seats. If you add their usual B teams, they can easily pass the bill without BJP. Same in Rajya Sabha also.

Of course, BJP can take credit, but it is just a smoke screen. Congress can muster 272 MP's to pass any bill with BJP's support.

Vuccha Dharma - Dharma of Urination (No joke but based on real-life observation)

When there was a sticker on the wall that said, "Vuccha Poyaradu" (Don't urinate here). It was exactly place where more Urination happened. The first person to urinate was the real crook who had no dilemma of Dharma and showed to others that he can do anything. This guy is similar to Congress and no explanation needs to be given by Congress-bots. The second person claims to be Dharmic, upon seeing the first person his dilemma solved and urinated. This guy is similar to BJP. All the explanation by BJP-bots like above is to explain how the dilemma is solved. In real incident, all people followed and the place where sticker was there became area where more urination happened. I can give what that place is similar to but I leave it to your imagination.

Sridhar · Post by **Sridhar** » 20 Feb 2014 23:05

JohneeG:

I am not committing to any position, since I want to keep an open mind and let the data speak for themselves. This is not to say that I don;t have a working hypothesis. The hypothesis is that there may be a few factors on which the numbers support the hype, but not on a significant majority of them. The data will subsequently confirm or disprove this working hypothesis.

On the HDI analysis, your conclusions are a mischaracterization of my post. I will repost here. Plus, there were other numbers on education. One just looking at literacy, where the pre-post analysis compares 2001 to 2011. Three other analysis on education - two focused on outcomes (gross enrollment ratio and net enrollment ratio) and one that is much closer to Government inputs (pupil teacher ratio). Frankly, I didn't do the literacy and enrollment ratio analysis on my own. It was Modi supporters who presented those numbers and tripped on them by themselves. I did look at pupil teacher ratio since it is much closer to what the Government does. Outcomes can be affected by several factors outside the Government's control - though one can argue that they apply to other states too - the situations are not dramatically different at least for a subset of states.

Sridhar · Post by **Sridhar** » 20 Feb 2014 23:11

Reposting from the other thread...this is what started me off on evaluating Modi's record in the other thread.

KaranM:

I would like to believe you on the story that Modi is the best administrator, and that he has done wonders. I don't believe in anecdotal evidence, but empirical evidence. I also try and go to original sources as much as possible since I have learned over time not to trust media reports. Let me tell you what I found.

I looked at the 2011 Human Development Report, that includes a lot of statistics. Here a link to the report.
http://www.iamrindia.gov.in/ihdr_book.pdf

The report is published by the Planning Commission, but the data themselves are collected through the usual means. Census where applicable, National Sample Surveys etc. (the list is in the report).

I focused on Table 2A.5, which is on page 257. This table lists the state wise Human Development Index numbers for the years ending 2000 and 2008 respectively, along with those for these two years for the three components of the HDI - the health index, income index and education index. I keyed in the numbers on my own in an Excel spreadsheet (it was not in a form on the pdf to be able to cut and paste) and did my own analysis. Essentially, I looked at three pieces of analysis. I looked at what Gujarat's rank was on the HDI and each of its components for the two years and how the rank changed. I also computed the % change in the HDI numbers across the states and looked at both the absolute % change, and the rank of Gujarat in the % change as a measure of relative performance. All the comparisons were across the 19 non-special category states (the special category states are essentially Himachal, J&K, Uttarakhand and the north eastern states other than Assam). The analysis was quite revealing.

1. Overall HDI
Gujarat's overall HDI went up from 0.466 to 0.527 between 2000 and 2008. It was ranked 8th in India on this measure in 2000, and remained at 8th in 2008. However in terms of % change in HDI, Gujarat ranked 14th out of 19 states. The only states that were behind Gujarat in HDI improvement during this period were Rajasthan, Punjab, Haryana, Goa and Delhi in that order. Perhaps you want to look at absolute change in HDI and not the % change. An even worse picture, with Gujarat ranking 15th out of 19 states. The only states that were worse were Haryana, Rajasthan, Goa and Delhi in that order. Gujarat's HDI changed by 13.1% during this period vs. an all India average of 20.7%.

2. Health Index
The performance in the Health Index was better than the overall HDI but still nothing stellar. Gujarat increased its Health Index during the period by 12.6% vs. 13.3% for India as a whole. A sub-par performance. It was ranked 9th best on this score in 2000, and moved up to 8th position in 2008. However, the % growth in the health index was 9th best out of 19 states. In order, Goa, Chattisgarh, Assam, Orissa, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Jharkhand and Rajasthan all did better on this index in % terms. In absolute terms, the performance is much better (the one and only redeeming number I saw in the entire analysis). It did 5th best, after Goa, Chattisgarh, UP and Orissa in that order.

3. Income Index
This was a surprise, since a lot has been touted about Gujarat's economic growth. However, at least in this period, this does not get reflected in a stellar performance in the income index. Gujarat was slightly sub-par in terms of % increase in the income index, with a growth of 14.9% vs. 15.3% for India as a whole. It ranked 12th out of 19 states in this statistic, with only Punjab, Chattisgarh, Haryana, UP, Rajasthan, Delhi and Goa trailing it. Its rank on this measure stayed at 6 between 2000 and 2008. In absolute increase in the income index, it ranked 8th, behind Kerala, Assam, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Orissa and Maharashtra.

4. Education Index
This was where Gujarat did miserably. Its growth in education index between 2000 and 2008 was 12.7% vs. 17.5% for India as a whole. Gujarat was ranked 17th out of 19 states in the growth in the education index. It was also ranked 17th out of 19 on the absolute increase in this index. On both these measures, only Goa and Delhi were worse performers, both states with a much higher base figure to begin with. It was ranked 8th out of 19 states in 2000 on this index, but dropped two positions in 2008. Haryana (which had tied with Gujarat for 8th place in 2000) and Karnataka (at 10th place in 2000) both jumped ahead of Gujarat in 2008.

So tell me, where is the evidence of the stellar performance that you talk about repeatedly?

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 20 Feb 2014 23:11

It is quite funny, if not tragic, to see people all riled up because one poster presented counter-points which runs contrary to the grain of accepted wisdom on this forum. I am yet to see a single poster even make an attempt to present coherent counter-argument to what Sridhar has posted. This when data is available only 15-minutes worth of Google search away.

Sridhar chanced upon a 2009-2010 data and used one figure from a whole report to present his case. And here we have people with their knickers in a twist. Because on the face of it, the data is irrefutable. He wants to have a debate on his terms; why don't other posters have debate on their terms. Present some figures and a coherent counter-argument.

Let me state this upfront - I don't agree with Sridhar's assertion derived from couple of data points. In my personal opinion, he represents the same segment which is simply looking for something to counter the growth story in Gujarat. It's like missing the whole forest for the trees.

But the counter argument has to come in form solid arguments and not name-calling. Each time when someone like Rajeev Malhotra counters Wendy Doniger or Witzel or other 'drain inspectors' with well researched ripostes, it brings cheers to many a faces...One needs to take the same approach.

By the way, for starters, one can have the latest education related figures from here:

1. District Information of School Education-http://www.dise.in/ -

2. Elementary Education in India Report - 2009-10: http://www.dise.in/Downloads/Publicatio ... 009-10.pdf

3.Elementary Education in India: Analytical Tables 2011-12 -http://www.dise.in/Downloads/Publicatio ... 011-12.pdf

(A) Coming to the statistic part, it is simply nonsense to take one parameter and build a story around it. Let me present a case:

1. Percentage of only primary school - Gujarat (27.12%) - National Average (59.66%)
2. Percentage of school with primary and Upper primary - Gujarat (71.76%) - National Average ( 19.23%)

So, can I build a case that since second kind of schools are likely to have much larger student base for a given teacher strength per school, the pupil to teacher ratio (PTR) is likely to be higher? Further, since there are more bigger schools, the student to class ratios is also likely to be higher to accommodate larger number of students?

Contrary to above argument, the states which have lower PTR also have smaller schools and more primary only schools.

Let us take another stats - Average number of classrooms per school (2011-12) - Gujarat (5.5) - National Average (3.

Except for Kerala with 8.8 figure, all other big states like Maharashtra, MP, Karnataka, AP and TN have lower number than Gujarat. Another data points tells you that 53.59% of schools are with 4-10 classrooms versus a national average of 45.73%.

So it seems, Gujarat does have larger schools leading to bigger student base and higher PTR and SCR.

(B) Now, let's look at the efficacy of the school system - read figures as that of Gujarat and National Average:

% of Primary Only Schools with less than 200 Working Days (Government & Aided Managements) - 0.29% - 4.96%
% of Upper Primary Schools/Sections with less than 220 Working Days (Government & Aided Managements) - 22.43% - 25.45%
% Distribution of Primary Only Schools having Enrollment 150 & Above and have Head Master/Teacher - 86.53% - 58.46%
%Distribution of Upper Primary Schools/Sections having Enrollment 100 & Above and have Head Master/Teacher - 87.48% - 54.23%

So, wouldn't it be all right to say that Gujarat is delivering the education in an extremely efficient manner? PTR and SCR not-withstanding...

(C) Girls toilet - Gujarat/National average %

Primary - 99.55/65.40
All Schools - 99.66/72.16

And BTW, the average number of teachers per school for Gujarat stands at 6.67 which is higher than national average of 4.74; this again lends credence to the fact that number of children per school in Gujarat is relatively higher.

Pupil to teacher ratio (2011-12) - 30.68 versus national average of 29.76

And percentage of contractual teachers (7.43%) is lesser than national average (12.165) showing more regular staff. Now, compare this with Himachal Pradesh which has low PTR of 15.44 but the contractual staff is double of national average at 25.30%.

One could spend entire night doing this...long story short, one needs to look beyond numbers and quote them in context!

SagarAg · Post by **SagarAg** » 20 Feb 2014 23:12

Sridhar wrote:disha:

If you can provide me the link to the specific set of posts you are referring to, it will speed the process and be helpful. Will be glad to read through them. I have followed the thread even though I have not participated until now. But cannot claim to have read or to remember every single part of it.

Sridhar ji forget about proving/disapproving things about Gujarat and Modi ji for a second. What are your own opinions about GE 2014? Who should win, form government? Who should lead India in 2014? Who can take India to path of Development? Who should India vote for?

Kindly spare some time to answer these zimble questions

Sridhar · Post by **Sridhar** » 20 Feb 2014 23:16

Reposting.....

Let me present one more piece of evidence related to education, since somebody brought up education. An important metric that is tracked worldwide and in India regarding educational infrastructure is pupil teacher ratios (PTRs).

See the table on page 91 of this report - the data are based on a nationwide survey called DISE.
http://planningcommission.gov.in/aboutu ... ry1708.pdf

The numbers relate to the latter part of Modi's tenure - 2006 vs 2010.

The PTRs at the primary level for Gujarat for both years is marginally better than average at 35 vs. 38 in 2006 and 32 vs. 33 in 2010 (note that the 2010 numbers are much closer to the national average). But averages miss the state to state comparison pictures (since they are lowered by populous, bad-performing states) so let's look at ranks. In 2006, Gujarat was ranked 24th out of 35 states. What happened after 4 more years of Modi's rule? Gujarat dropped down to 26th out of 35 with only 8 states below it since Orissa was tied with it.

On the same metric for the upper primary level, Gujarat was below average in both years. In 2006, it was 26th out of 35, with Maharashtra tied with it so only 8 states were below it. His dropped to 27th in 2010. Note that this was with a below average, bottom quartile base to begin with.

So some people might argue that educational outcomes are not in the Government's control and that they have lags. Fair enough (though that is the case for everybody, so remember that argument when you make a case against somebody else). But what about educational infrastructure. In a key metric of educational infrastructure, Gujarat is one of the worst performers in the country and the trend relative to other states is downward.

So where is that positive evidence everybody is talking about. Provide me some fuel other than state gross domestic product (I will research those in detail as well).

Edited to fix broken link

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 20 Feb 2014 23:17

Sridhar ji, appreciate the need for someone to critically review NMs performances in the state. There may also be lacunae in some sectors etc. Modi was never a professional politician kind when he became a CM. He was made a CM without ever having faced an election. Modi was an ace organizer and a mover. He was sent as CM to help in the quake rehabilitation process where a hard working doer kind of persona was required. As he barely settled down, Godhra hit. But as he settled down he did 2 things which were absolutely stunning:

1. A power deficit state he made power surplus with 24x7x365 quality power.
2. A water deficit state he gave RO piped water to each and every village right upto the Paki borders.

To do that in 8-10 years at a time when a very hostile central govt was trying to desperately nail him is a tremendous feat. But not only that he began focusing on skill development, girl education. The benefits of good water and power will emerge IMO 2013-2019. Every social index in Gujarat will show massive improvement.

Other achievements:
1. Consequential to improved water and power supply agri growth in Guj has been 11% for a decade. Planning commission chalked out 4.5%. India average is even lesser same period.
2. Unemployment figures are the least in India. Means jobs are there.

For me these achievements from a very negative base are good enough that my vote is for NM.

Supratik · Post by **Supratik** » 20 Feb 2014 23:20

News items on Arvind Panagariya

http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 007_1.html

http://articles.economictimes.indiatime ... di-critics

https://www.india272.com/2013/12/03/arv ... rat-model/

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home ... eferral=PM

Sridhar · Post by **Sridhar** » 20 Feb 2014 23:20

Reposting (slightly edited to add links and missing context)....

Let's take the gross enrollment ratio. Gujarat started below average in 2005/06 at 100.3 vs. 103.8. And stayed below average in 2008/09 at 107.7 vs 115.3. In other words, GER increased at a rate below the national average. The net enrollment ratio has a similar picture. It went from 78.9 to 86.0 during this period vs a national average of 84.5 to 98.6.
http://www.dise.in/Downloads/Publicatio ... cators.pdf
(table on page 151 of this document)

Coming to the literacy performance that economist Bibek Debroy talks about here
http://www.india272.com/2013/11/19/dr-b ... e-hangout/

The growth rate in literacy rates between 2001 and 2011 in Gujarat is indeed very marginally higher than the national average (12.87% for Gujarat vs. 12.65% for India). But what he doesn't say is that Gujarat's growth rate is ranked 15th among the states, and this despite a lower than average and lower than potential growth in the previous decade. Its ranking on the absolute literacy levels actually dropped from 16th best out of 35 to 18th best out of 35, i.e. Below the median.

Are these really evidence of stellar performance. Would you even give it a satisfactory grade?

Check the census figures page 46 for the state wise data.

http://www.censusindia.gov.in/2011censu ... pter-3.pdf

Supratik · Post by **Supratik** » 20 Feb 2014 23:25

You are saying nothing new. It has already been discussed on this forum numerous times that Gujrat needs to do more on HDI.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 20 Feb 2014 23:26

X-posting Rohit's post from PAAP thread since the discussion has moved here...

rohitvats wrote:It is quite funny, if not tragic, to see people all riled up because one poster presented counter-points which runs contrary to the grain of accepted wisdom on this forum. I am yet to see a single poster even make an attempt to present coherent counter-argument to what Sridhar has posted. This when data is available only 15-minutes worth of Google search away.

Sridhar chanced upon a 2009-2010 data and used one figure from a whole report to present his case. And here we have people with their knickers in a twist. Because on the face of it, the data is irrefutable. He wants to have a debate on his terms; why don't other posters have debate on their terms. Present some figures and a coherent counter-argument.

Let me state this upfront - I don't agree with Sridhar's assertion derived from couple of data points. In my personal opinion, he represents the same segment which is simply looking for something to counter the growth story in Gujarat. It's like missing the whole forest for the trees.

But the counter argument has to come in form solid arguments and not name-calling. Each time when someone like Rajeev Malhotra counters Wendy Doniger or Witzel or other 'drain inspectors' with well researched ripostes, it brings cheers to many a faces...One needs to take the same approach.

By the way, for starters, one can have the latest education related figures from here:

1. District Information of School Education-http://www.dise.in/ -

2. Elementary Education in India Report - 2009-10: http://www.dise.in/Downloads/Publicatio ... 009-10.pdf

3.Elementary Education in India: Analytical Tables 2011-12 -http://www.dise.in/Downloads/Publicatio ... 011-12.pdf

(A) Coming to the statistic part, it is simply nonsense to take one parameter and build a story around it. Let me present a case:

1. Percentage of only primary school - Gujarat (27.12%) - National Average (59.66%)
2. Percentage of school with primary and Upper primary - Gujarat (71.76%) - National Average ( 19.23%)

So, can I build a case that since second kind of schools are likely to have much larger student base for a given teacher strength per school, the pupil to teacher ratio (PTR) is likely to be higher? Further, since there are more bigger schools, the student to class ratios is also likely to be higher to accommodate larger number of students?

Contrary to above argument, the states which have lower PTR also have smaller schools and more primary only schools.

Let us take another stats - Average number of classrooms per school (2011-12) - Gujarat (5.5) - National Average (3.

Except for Kerala with 8.8 figure, all other big states like Maharashtra, MP, Karnataka, AP and TN have lower number than Gujarat. Another data points tells you that 53.59% of schools are with 4-10 classrooms versus a national average of 45.73%.

So it seems, Gujarat does have larger schools leading to bigger student base and higher PTR and SCR.

(B) Now, let's look at the efficacy of the school system - read figures as that of Gujarat and National Average:

% of Primary Only Schools with less than 200 Working Days (Government & Aided Managements) - 0.29% - 4.96%
% of Upper Primary Schools/Sections with less than 220 Working Days (Government & Aided Managements) - 22.43% - 25.45%
% Distribution of Primary Only Schools having Enrollment 150 & Above and have Head Master/Teacher - 86.53% - 58.46%
%Distribution of Upper Primary Schools/Sections having Enrollment 100 & Above and have Head Master/Teacher - 87.48% - 54.23%

So, wouldn't it be all right to say that Gujarat is delivering the education in an extremely efficient manner? PTR and SCR not-withstanding...

(C) Girls toilet - Gujarat/National average %

Primary - 99.55/65.40
All Schools - 99.66/72.16

And BTW, the average number of teachers per school for Gujarat stands at 6.67 which is higher than national average of 4.74; this again lends credence to the fact that number of children per school in Gujarat is relatively higher.

Pupil to teacher ratio (2011-12) - 30.68 versus national average of 29.76

And percentage of contractual teachers (7.43%) is lesser than national average (12.165) showing more regular staff. Now, compare this with Himachal Pradesh which has low PTR of 15.44 but the contractual staff is double of national average at 25.30%.

One could spend entire night doing this...long story short, one needs to look beyond numbers and quote them in context!

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 20 Feb 2014 23:29

wrong thread, deleted post.

Supratik · Post by **Supratik** » 20 Feb 2014 23:30

It is not about the statistics. It is his assumption that everyone backing Modi has blinkers and don't look for evidence.

Sridhar · Post by **Sridhar** » 20 Feb 2014 23:31

Rohit:

This is the first time anybody has posted anything cogent and backed by facts. My respects to you for that - reminds me of old times.

Will process the long post and respond in the other thread (perhaps not right away since I have to work as well

).

Sridhar · Post by **Sridhar** » 20 Feb 2014 23:40

segment from Rohitvats' post

(A) Coming to the statistic part, it is simply nonsense to take one parameter and build a story around it. Let me present a case:

1. Percentage of only primary school - Gujarat (27.12%) - National Average (59.66%)
2. Percentage of school with primary and Upper primary - Gujarat (71.76%) - National Average ( 19.23%)

So, can I build a case that since second kind of schools are likely to have much larger student base for a given teacher strength per school, the pupil to teacher ratio (PTR) is likely to be higher? Further, since there are more bigger schools, the student to class ratios is also likely to be higher to accommodate larger number of students?

Contrary to above argument, the states which have lower PTR also have smaller schools and more primary only schools.

Let us take another stats - Average number of classrooms per school (2011-12) - Gujarat (5.5) - National Average (3.

Except for Kerala with 8.8 figure, all other big states like Maharashtra, MP, Karnataka, AP and TN have lower number than Gujarat. Another data points tells you that 53.59% of schools are with 4-10 classrooms versus a national average of 45.73%.

So it seems, Gujarat does have larger schools leading to bigger student base and higher PTR and SCR.

Addressing all your points will take some time. But the proportion of primary-only vs. primary + upper-primary schools is not relevant. I am guessing you are referring to the fact that ratios differ across age groups and hence lumping them together makes Gujarat looks worse than it is on this metric.

The comparisons are like to like. Primary with primary and upper-primary with upper-primary. If a school has both, they will split the teachers according to their share of participation in the two parts. In other words, when they compute the PTR for primary schools in Gujarat, they add up all the students in primary schools of all types, and add up the teachers (including the appropriate proportion of shared teachers across primary and upper primary) across all schools and then divide the former by the latter. The same for the other states.

If that was not your argument, I fail to see how a larger student body per school makes it ok to have a higher pupil to teacher ratio. Perhaps you could elaborate.

Supratik · Post by **Supratik** » 20 Feb 2014 23:43

In Bengali we call it "chiddraneshi" i.e. someone searching for a hole.

Sridhar · Post by **Sridhar** » 20 Feb 2014 23:47

Supratik:

Are you referring to Rohit's post or mine? Since your comment could apply to both or equivalently apply to neither (the latter is my position).

hanumadu · Post by **hanumadu** » 21 Feb 2014 00:10

Sridhar wrote:Let me address one specific point that many people make. So by extension you distrust the people of Bihar who elected Laloo thrice? Or the people of India as a whole, who voted the UPA to power twice in a row.? Or the other corollary of your post. People voted Laloo thrice, so his claims should be believed otherwise they would not have voted him? What kind of logic is this?

Lalu got elected on the back of vote bank politics. He had a captive vote in Yadavs and Muslims. NM had no such advantages. He got elected repeatedly on the back of good performance. For that matter Jyothi Basu got elected for 30 years on the back of a cadre that resorted to thuggery and mayhem.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 21 Feb 2014 00:13

Sridhar ji,

just a comment.

If Modi was not Modi but Kalyan Singh, many here would still have given him 100% support. The good HDI or development matrics only increase the respect for Modi, but for many respect for him is based on his Hindutva.

There are basically only two models in India - Nehruvian and Hindutva! And Nehruvian has brought about our civilizational collapse, and the hope is that Modi saves Bharatiyas from that. Development and Governance record shows that he is capable of doing so, but more important for many here is that he has the "Niyat".

No other party in India has really shown the right "Niyat", not even Dilli-Billis of BJP. In case of Modi, for many here there is no doubt, that his heart is in the right place. Something one cannot say for most others. About AAP one can the same the least.

So you are free to nibble at his record, but what matters is his "Niyat", his intentions, his love for Bharat!

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 21 Feb 2014 00:18

Sridhar wrote:
segment from Rohitvats' post

(A) Coming to the statistic part, it is simply nonsense to take one parameter and build a story around it. Let me present a case:

1. Percentage of only primary school - Gujarat (27.12%) - National Average (59.66%)
2. Percentage of school with primary and Upper primary - Gujarat (71.76%) - National Average ( 19.23%)

So, can I build a case that since second kind of schools are likely to have much larger student base for a given teacher strength per school, the pupil to teacher ratio (PTR) is likely to be higher? Further, since there are more bigger schools, the student to class ratios is also likely to be higher to accommodate larger number of students?

Contrary to above argument, the states which have lower PTR also have smaller schools and more primary only schools.

Let us take another stats - Average number of classrooms per school (2011-12) - Gujarat (5.5) - National Average (3.

Except for Kerala with 8.8 figure, all other big states like Maharashtra, MP, Karnataka, AP and TN have lower number than Gujarat. Another data points tells you that 53.59% of schools are with 4-10 classrooms versus a national average of 45.73%.

So it seems, Gujarat does have larger schools leading to bigger student base and higher PTR and SCR.
Addressing all your points will take some time. But the proportion of primary-only vs. primary + upper-primary schools is not relevant. I am guessing you are referring to the fact that ratios differ across age groups and hence lumping them together makes Gujarat looks worse than it is on this metric.

The comparisons are like to like. Primary with primary and upper-primary with upper-primary. If a school has both, they will split the teachers according to their share of participation in the two parts. In other words, when they compute the PTR for primary schools in Gujarat, they add up all the students in primary schools of all types, and add up the teachers (including the appropriate proportion of shared teachers across primary and upper primary) across all schools and then divide the former by the latter. The same for the other states.

If that was not your argument, I fail to see how a larger student body per school makes it ok to have a higher pupil to teacher ratio. Perhaps you could elaborate.

The argument is something like this - traditional model is to have more primary only schools rather than primary + upper primary schools. Now, more primary schools are likely to be spread out over a larger geographical area and be smaller in size. This leads to lower SCR and PTR. As compared to this, a larger numbers primary + upper primary school (and low number of primary schools) will attract students from a larger area and have higher student strength.

This leads to higher PTR; for example, the PTR for 2011-12 for Upper+Primary school is 31.46 which is slightly lower than national average of 32.87. But for the same year, the average number of teachers per school for same segment was 8.10 which was HIGHER than national average of 6.91.

If you check, you'll see that while SCR almost inline with national average, schools with high SCR is large leading to my assumption that Gujarat has more bigger schools as opposed to hub and spoke model of primary and upper primary+primary schools. Even the per school enrollment for upper primary+primary school is higher as compared to national average.

Coming to ranking part - I would advise against it; for the simple reason that smaller states and island territories skew the ranking and average considerably.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 21 Feb 2014 00:19

The best way is to confront data with data. Otherwise, it will just seem like avoiding the issue all together. There are many from Gujarat here who have provided anecdotal evidence on improvements in that state. And the industrialists are happy because of pro-active government. I believe Gujarat also was the first in providing 100% electricity throughout the state, reduced judiciary backlog by having courts working through the night etc.

It would be good if someone can pull up the data which is available on the web. Just making personal attacks or skirting around it saying so and so also supports modi might not be very productive. Not just Sridhar, but as the elections draw closer, many others in the media and other parties will start pulling up the data to show how Gujarat is doing. So it is pointless to blame the messenger. If the data is available to prove that Gujarat is doing well, it can also be put in the first post of the thread so that it is there for reference.

Sridhar · Post by **Sridhar** » 21 Feb 2014 00:37

RajeshA:

Thanks for being straight. I have no argument with any of what you have said since it is an emotional rather than a rational argument. So no question of hard data there.

Let me be honest about my own biases and emotional responses to him (and these would not be totally new for anybody who remembers me from the old days). I dislike the family and the Congress, but I liked ABV (and voted for him). I think the Hindutva plank of the BJP is wrong for India, even though it may be rationally the right thing for them. I don't doubt the patriotism of the people in the right, and also share many of the same objectives (though many here don't seem to believe that anybody in the opposite camp can be a good person with good intentions). But there are some objectives that I just don't share, both for ethical reasons and for practical reasons since I think it will be bad for India in the long run. In Modi's case, I do also fear the adverse effects of over-centralization (which may ironically neutralize some of the more extreme elements of the Parivar) and its effects on our long-term development and nation-building prospects.

That said, I am open to look past these issues if I get convinced that he will be good for India's development in the short as well as long term and with some assurances that he will not pander to the extreme elements (the Gujarat experience especially in his second term suggests that he will not if he gets enough power from the voters to not have to be dependent on anybody else within the party and the larger parivar, but that is a big if). The only basis to judge what he will be in the future is by looking at his record in Gujarat. I am biased, as we all are. But I am open to getting convinced by good data. Not anecdotal evidence, but empirical evidence.

Sridhar · Post by **Sridhar** » 21 Feb 2014 00:42

Rohit:

Thanks for the response. Bear with me as I will take some time before getting back to you.

Regarding ranking - your argument would perhaps have some weight if one were to merely compare rankings (particularly at a snap-shot in time) without looking at other statistics. Hopefully you can see that this is not what I am doing. The rankings are compared across time periods, and are used to evaluate things in conjunction with other measures. Agreed this is simplistic, but then at the extreme, one could argue that no comparisons are possible across states since factors differ so much. We have to start somewhere, and in digging deeper address other qualitative issues.

Furthermore, if the distribution is skewed, as you rightly point out, averages are less meaningful than quantiles - such as medians, percentiles. The skew resulting from small states and UTs is not that important for the average, since their population contribution is small enough that it does not affect the (weighted) average very much. The bigger impact is from the very populous states, which skew the averages towards them due to high population weights. Rankings (which allow us to get to those quantiles, e.g. medians as I have pointed to in a couple of places) allow us to get away from some of these issues.

Neela · Post by **Neela** » 21 Feb 2014 00:56

Several people have already mentioned that taking one statistic alone without looking at the context isnt the right approach.
Sridhar's claim that his arguments remain unchallenged is quite patently false. What Sridhar is doing now has been attempted by COngress already. So he quite late to the party. Google uncle is your friend.
There have been quite a few articles over the last few years which compared poverty levels, health and in general,common social indicators.. Overall , it shows an upward trend.

From the first link:

With a high and rapidly rising per-capita income, it should come as no surprise that Gujarat has a significantly lower poverty ratio than India as a whole and it is fast declining. Based on the Tendulkar poverty lines and methodology, overall poverty in Gujarat fell by only six percentage points during 11 years between 1993-94 and 2004-05. But during just five years between 2004-05 and 2009-10, it fell an impressive nine percentage points. In 2009-10, the poverty ratio in Gujarat at 23% was almost seven percentage points below the national average.

The decline in poverty has been observed across all major social groups. My ongoing rese-arch with Megha Mukim finds the poverty ratio for the scheduled castes tumbling from 40.1% in 2004-05 to 21.8% in 2009-10. The decline has been less sharp for the more numerous scheduled tribes (ST) - from 54.7% in 2004-05 to 47.6% in 2009-10. Given the continued high absolute level of ST poverty, the state must think of imaginative ways to bring the fruits of growth to the tribal belts.

Well, this one seems to have been written especially for Sridhar

Critics frequently deride the exceptional growth in Gujarat by pointing to its lack of achievement in the social sectors. But they often do so by focussing on selective indicators. A consideration of a broad set of indicators hardly offers an indictment of the state even in social sectors.

The critics' case is particularly weak in education. Gujarat added 10 percentage points to the literacy rate during 2001-11, more than any other comparator state. At 79.3%, the literacy rate now stands one percentage point behind Tamil Nadu and three percentage points behind Maharashtra. Indeed, once we take into account the low literacy level of Gujarat at Independence, its progress looks more impressive than that of even Kerala.

If the levels of these statistics compare unfavourably, it is because it began the race with a disadvantage.In life expectancy, it began a year below the national ave-rage during 1970-75 and remained exactly there in 2006-09. Infant mortality rate per thousand live births in Gujarat exceeded the national average by 15 in 1971 but fell below it by two in 2009. Under-five mortality and maternal mortality rates in 2006-09 were, likewise, well below the national average

.

While one can selectively poke holes in nearly every success story, taken as a whole, it is difficult to remain unimpressed by what Gujarat has achieved. I would be only too happy if its economic success spread next door to my home state, Rajasthan.

Oh read it all please. I mean all 3 links above.
Of course, one can always say that the news source is not credible. Too bad - most people are not bothered because the decision has been made.

Atri · Post by **Atri** » 21 Feb 2014 01:27

Narendra Modi Army - Andhra Pradesh wrote:A statue which was found while searching for harappan culture it is similar to SHREE NARENDRA DAMODAR DAS MODI
SWAMI VIVEKANANDA said in 21st century a leader who has ability ro change the country will raise dont you think its our MODI??

Gus · Post by **Gus** » 21 Feb 2014 02:20

Sridhar wrote: I do also fear the adverse effects of over-centralization.

that is not a modi specific issue. any leader with a large/massive mandate tends to be 'over centralised'. indira, jayalalitha etc..

even those have not made any institutional changes to the post and its powers that make the post itself 'over centralised'.

i see it as a cycle of stronger party led by one person to several smaller party coalitions to back to a stronger party led by one person.

the usual suspects paint this to the extreme as 'modi = hitler' and blah blah..

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 21 Feb 2014 02:43

Sridhar wrote:RajeshA:

Thanks for being straight. I have no argument with any of what you have said since it is an emotional rather than a rational argument. So no question of hard data there.

Let me be honest about my own biases and emotional responses to him (and these would not be totally new for anybody who remembers me from the old days). I dislike the family and the Congress, but I liked ABV (and voted for him). I think the Hindutva plank of the BJP is wrong for India, even though it may be rationally the right thing for them. I don't doubt the patriotism of the people in the right, and also share many of the same objectives (though many here don't seem to believe that anybody in the opposite camp can be a good person with good intentions). But there are some objectives that I just don't share, both for ethical reasons and for practical reasons since I think it will be bad for India in the long run.

On the contrary, it is not an emotional argument at all. It is the most rational argument based on the model one envisions for India - Nehruvian or Bharatiya!

Hindutva is basically a framework for realizing the Bharatiya model.

And if I may be direct, I do believe, that there may be patriots outside the Bharatiya model, but their patriotism is skewed in that it aligns with an idea of India, which even though people have been programmed by the secular elite to believe in, is not Indo-centric. This non-Hindutva patriotism is about protecting some Indian core, which unknown to them, is owned by non-Indian ideologies and powers.

Of course non-Hindutva and Hindutva patriotism does coincide in protecting the structure of Republic of India, ensuring external and internal security.

Where these diverge is that Hindutvavadis believe that under the dominion of Nehruvianism, Bharatiya Sabhyata, Indian Civilization, Bharatiya Rashtra, the Indian Nation, has been set up for boiling the frog on low heat.

The metrics of Nehruvianism are not HDI, though even there Nehruvianism too has nothing to boast about, the metrics of Nehruvianism are

Demographic and Geographic Expansion of Islam within India (in fact over the whole of Subcontinent)
Increase in Rape-Jihad, bullying of Hindus, violence by Islamics
Increase in Missionary activity, number of Christians in India and their spread, their tools and strategies
Ownership of Indian economy by foreigners
Level of indigenization of military production
Willingness of Indian leadership to hit back against terrorists in India and abroad
Willingness of Indian media to highlight Islamic onslaught on India, missionary activity, etc.

Sridhar wrote:In Modi's case, I do also fear the adverse effects of over-centralization (which may ironically neutralize some of the more extreme elements of the Parivar) and its effects on our long-term development and nation-building prospects.

That said, I am open to look past these issues if I get convinced that he will be good for India's development in the short as well as long term and with some assurances that he will not pander to the extreme elements (the Gujarat experience especially in his second term suggests that he will not if he gets enough power from the voters to not have to be dependent on anybody else within the party and the larger parivar, but that is a big if). The only basis to judge what he will be in the future is by looking at his record in Gujarat. I am biased, as we all are. But I am open to getting convinced by good data. Not anecdotal evidence, but empirical evidence.

Problem of Parivar is that it is neither radical enough nor tactically strong nor intellectually vibrant. Some elements exhaust themselves in chasing after useless cultural brownie points after which most receive bad publicity.

The iron fist in the velvet glove may not be strong iron!

JohnTitor · Post by **JohnTitor** » 21 Feb 2014 03:02

There seems to be way too much noise on this thread. Anyhow, does anyone else think this telangana issue is a bad thing? I mean BJP supported it (without or without NM.. I dont know).. so BJP seems to be getting all the blame but won't win much of the telangana vote (or so some people are saying)..

Anyone care to comment?

Victor · Post by **Victor** » 21 Feb 2014 04:15

I get the back and forth with statistics and negatives about Gujarat and Modi but its almost time to vote and we need to focus on the choices on the table. What are our alternatives--Lallu? Pappu? Nitish? Kejri? Didi? Amma? Man! Just repeating these names gave me a headache.

Shanmukh · Post by **Shanmukh** » 21 Feb 2014 04:26

Shonu wrote:There seems to be way too much noise on this thread. Anyhow, does anyone else think this telangana issue is a bad thing? I mean BJP supported it (without or without NM.. I dont know).. so BJP seems to be getting all the blame but won't win much of the telangana vote (or so some people are saying)..

Anyone care to comment?

See AP politics thread.

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 21 Feb 2014 04:48

Sridhar wrote:
segment from Rohitvats' post

(A) Coming to the statistic part, it is simply nonsense to take one parameter and build a story around it. Let me present a case:

1. Percentage of only primary school - Gujarat (27.12%) - National Average (59.66%)
2. Percentage of school with primary and Upper primary - Gujarat (71.76%) - National Average ( 19.23%)

So, can I build a case that since second kind of schools are likely to have much larger student base for a given teacher strength per school, the pupil to teacher ratio (PTR) is likely to be higher? Further, since there are more bigger schools, the student to class ratios is also likely to be higher to accommodate larger number of students?

Contrary to above argument, the states which have lower PTR also have smaller schools and more primary only schools.

Let us take another stats - Average number of classrooms per school (2011-12) - Gujarat (5.5) - National Average (3.

Except for Kerala with 8.8 figure, all other big states like Maharashtra, MP, Karnataka, AP and TN have lower number than Gujarat. Another data points tells you that 53.59% of schools are with 4-10 classrooms versus a national average of 45.73%.

So it seems, Gujarat does have larger schools leading to bigger student base and higher PTR and SCR.
Addressing all your points will take some time. But the proportion of primary-only vs. primary + upper-primary schools is not relevant. I am guessing you are referring to the fact that ratios differ across age groups and hence lumping them together makes Gujarat looks worse than it is on this metric.

The comparisons are like to like. Primary with primary and upper-primary with upper-primary. If a school has both, they will split the teachers according to their share of participation in the two parts. In other words, when they compute the PTR for primary schools in Gujarat, they add up all the students in primary schools of all types, and add up the teachers (including the appropriate proportion of shared teachers across primary and upper primary) across all schools and then divide the former by the latter. The same for the other states.

If that was not your argument, I fail to see how a larger student body per school makes it ok to have a higher pupil to teacher ratio. Perhaps you could elaborate.

If student body size is high, and/or grows fast, it makes sense that there will be a lag in recruiting and training qualified teachers and administrators , accounting for the ratio.

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 21 Feb 2014 05:09

Choosing a top political leader cannot be done in the way one decides on promoting a mid-level executive, based mainly on performance metrics.

I am one of those who thought in 2002 that Modi was a mass murderer and probably a crook aswell. Over the next decade, Modi has survived the most intensive scrutiny of any politician anywhere, from some very powerful entities. As more evidence came out, I was forced to admit that I was wrong; Modi did do his sincere best to control the riots, probably rising above his own personal biases, and despite his inexperience.

Then I watched a couple of his speeches of his and was impressed by the clarity of his thinking. He is a man with a good head on his shoulders and displays a sound ethical base. None of the other contenders comes anywhere close in this regard. And obviously he knows how to connect with and inspire people, which is a key element of political leadership.

KLP Dubey · Post by **KLP Dubey** » 21 Feb 2014 05:52

Sridhar wrote:That said, I am open to look past these issues if I get convinced that he will be good for India's development in the short as well as long term and with some assurances that he will not pander to the extreme elements (the Gujarat experience especially in his second term suggests that he will not if he gets enough power from the voters to not have to be dependent on anybody else within the party and the larger parivar, but that is a big if). The only basis to judge what he will be in the future is by looking at his record in Gujarat. I am biased, as we all are. But I am open to getting convinced by good data. Not anecdotal evidence, but empirical evidence.

The election is not about commenting on individual leaders' record in isolation ("he could have done better in this or that"). It is about choosing between the available alternatives come election day which is 8-10 weeks away.

The question on your ballot will be "Which party ? BJP/Congress/other XYZ local party/none of the above", and not "In your opinion are all of Modi's claims correct?". On election day if you still haven't compared the candidates' records and made up your mind, then all these long postings will be a waste of your time and effort.

Shri Modi and the BJP are by far the best alternative on your ballot. If you don't like any of the parties, choose "none of the above". Make up your mind.

If you are commenting on Shri Modi's record, make sure you also compare the record of the other alternatives you have in mind. You will find your own answers by doing that. All this drama about "empirical evidence" will go away on its own. If you find a wonderful candidate who is scoring better than Shri Modi on your criteria, then go vote for that candidate's party. Nobody is stopping you.

KLP Dubey · Post by **KLP Dubey** » 21 Feb 2014 06:23

All these theoretical discussions on candidates irritates me. Some people behave as though they are supreme court judges who will finally select the PM based upon detailed examination and deliberation of their record.

In fact, we are all just prospective voters, who basically have four choices come election day:

1) Vote for the NDA candidate in your constituency. This will help bring the BJP to power and Shri Modi as the PM. He will determine the cabinet, who are likely to be capable and honest individuals qualified to handle national security, defense, economy, etc etc. The country will have a strong and effective Central government.

2) Vote for the UPA candidate in your constituency. This will help keep the Congress in power and bring Rahul Gandhi (or a puppet like Chidambaram or some other joker) as PM. These people will be controlled by Sonia and Rahul, and continue screwing the country on all fronts.

3) Vote for some local party. You then are assisting the possible formation of some "third front" patchwork of small parties, which will form a ramshackle cabinet filled with all kinds of monkeys with differing agendas and no cohesion. Country screwed again for next five years.

4) Don't vote for any of the above.

If your option isn't crystal-clear to you from all the election rallies, speeches, news, and the state of the country after a decade of UPA/Congress rule at the center and "third-front" party rule in various states, then no amount of postings dissecting Shri Modi's record will be of any use to you or anyone else.

It's as simple as that. Make up your mind.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 21 Feb 2014 06:54

My 9-yr old born and brought up in maasa, wants Modi to become India's PM. He does the typical things a kid does in any country, but he watches a few desi English channels when I watch. His reasons for BJP and Modi for winning is because I like Modi and want him to become the PM. He likes "Modi's speech". He does not watch/listen to them. Neither does he watch to Rajiv Malhotra's videos. But he will name Rajiv Malhotra, Rahul Gandhi and MMS. He thinks BJP is winning, and likes winners.

Why am I saying this? Human behavior. India, like any other country, is filled with humans who will like or vote because someone dear to them like/vote for a particular leader. And more Modi stays in people's mind - with a positive message - the greater is his chance of winning. There is a fine balance of getting too much air time causing boredom vs being in screens/media all the time. He still requires more recognition across the country.

As of now there is not enough of him, he has very little time on his hands. Modi needs to continue spreading his message/image across to common people, while Amit Shah and other trusted lieutenants have to strike alliances with regional parties.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 21 Feb 2014 07:00

+1 KLP Dubey, unlike NRIs , locals like me do not have the luxury of urbane debates and wealth and kids nicely settled abroad and immune from the failure and chaos that is the routine here. they can indulge in intellectual support for socialist zealots of the AAP stripe based on books, IIT brand or whatever is the fad of the day.

I need jobs for myself and jobs for my kids as well. everything else like health and wealth flow from there. the UPA has presided over the longest periods of job and economic stagnation in our modern history. and what they have NOT DONE in the last 10 yrs will take another ten years to recover from due to long lead time in big projects and reforms that were halted and not started on time.

subhamoy.das · Post by **subhamoy.das** » 21 Feb 2014 07:48

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/news ... wsid=20832
Effect of UPA....

niran · Post by **niran** » 21 Feb 2014 09:00

Singha wrote:+1 KLP Dubey,
I need jobs for myself and jobs for my kids as well. everything else like health and wealth flow from there.

+100 have been asked even by me family members why do me volunteer for bjp, what do moi
is going to get bjp do not pay me a dime? the answer is me swarth(self interest) will be served best
all others have a negative record WRT fulfilling me swarth.

disha · Post by **disha** » 21 Feb 2014 09:08

Singha wrote:failure and chaos that is the routine here. they can indulge in intellectual support for socialist zealots of the AAP stripe based on books, IIT brand or whatever is the fad of the day.

I need jobs for myself and jobs for my kids as well. everything else like health and wealth flow from there. the UPA has presided over the longest periods of job and economic stagnation in our modern history. and what they have NOT DONE in the last 10 yrs will take another ten years to recover from due to long lead time in big projects and reforms that were halted and not started on time.

+1 to the above.

Forget "literacy", I want

1. Clean drinking water - May the tribe of #aaptards suffer from skeletal fluorisis
2. Better access to health care - May the tribe of #aaptards suffer when the electricity goes out and an X-Ray cannot be taken to determine persistent cough or a multiple-compound fracture
3. Better infrastructure - May the tribe of #aaptards suffer the groping of their privates and molestations and assaults on crowded buses!
4. Better Opportunities - May the tribe of #aaptards suffer the long lines to get to even put their useless degrees in the employment exchange.

Any body who has passed Grade 8, can read and write and can communicate their thoughts and feelings is literate enough.

I want *educated* folks - not useless degree literate folks. Useless degree literate folks are #AAPtards (now that could be me!!!

)

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 21 Feb 2014 09:32

Only NaMo has the karishma.