This project focused on children who are enrolled in school but attend irregularly, so their learning is interrupted in ways that negatively affect their learning outcomes. This form of 'learning poverty' is prevalent across government schools in southern Rajasthan’s Adivasi (tribal) belt where the project was located. The project was a small, qualitative research study that addressed evidence gaps about the patterns and causes of interrupted learning and fragile attendance (ILFA), and about actors’ perceptions of accountability for children's learning in this context. It comprised three school sites purposively selected to include a primary school and elementary sections of a secondary and higher secondary school. The study focused on grades 2, 4 and 7. The study asked why, in any one school, some children are more or less regular in attendance, and what explains a child's pattern of presence and absence. It adopted a 'process tracing' approach anchored in analysis of daily attendance statistics to identify children’s attendance patterns, and how stakeholders understand and explain irregular attendance and its effects on learning progression. Using available school level quantitative data, the project generated a typology of learner attendance patterns that were more complex than actors had recognised. Using participant observation of classroom interactions and interviews with teachers, the project found that teachers’ pedagogical responses lacked the necessary nuance to be effective in response to differing attendance patterns. Observations and interviews also revealed that systemic monitoring of attendance was highly performative and focused on incentive schemes rather than learning progression. Profiles of households were generated using semi-structured interviews, and analysed to understand household priorities and factors positively or negatively associated with regular school attendance at the household level.Global development policy is concerned with equitable learner participation and achievement, yet low learning outcomes and stark learning inequalities are persistent. Marketisation of provisioning is a growing trend in education that has complicated relations of accountability and regulation. This study aims to advance an understanding of accountability for improved learning outcomes for disadvantaged children by departing from the established approach of isolating specific variables for reform. Instead, it conceptualises accountability as systemic and relational. It is designed to show how multiple actors across the home, community, school and bureaucratic scales have particular norms and interests, modes of participation and regulatory roles that shape learning outcomes for disadvantaged children. It examines both the formal rule-based relations of these system actors, and the informal, everyday practices of accountability - all of which bear significantly on progress towards policy goals, yet are so far poorly understood. This project focuses on learning outcomes for 'disadvantaged learners' in India: children of primary school age who are disadvantaged by a range of structural inequalities, which are often cross-cutting, such as gender, location, caste, and class. It takes key quality and equity provisions in India's Right to Education Act (RTE) and examines how these are taken up in different ways, and with respect to differing understandings of education quality and equity held by actors across the four system scales of home, community, school, and bureaucracy. Empirical work takes place in two States, Chhattisgarh and Maharashtra, focusing on two districts and within each, two blocks which are purposively selected to enable intra-block, inter-district and inter-state comparisons. In each block, we sample ten schools, which include government, private and large scale 'alternative' provision to examine the accountability relations that surround differently positioned learners. The study design follows a sequential mixed methods approach, beginning with qualitative investigation and then using a quantitative survey to validate and extend the qualitative analysis. We will use an innovative process tracing approach, anchored in the sample schools, to track how specific policy initiatives stemming from RTE directives are understood by multiple actors across system scales. This enables the study to identify how their practical actions converge and diverge with goals for learning - as understood both by the RTE and these actors - and the impact on children's learning outcomes. Our partner NGO, CSEI will co-deliver our impact strategy. We will co-facilitate workshops for bureaucratic actors that promote discussion of relational accountability and its implications for improving learning outcomes for disadvantaged learners. Co-produced outputs will include: a new Education Equity, Quality, and Accountability Audit (EEQAA) tool which community-led organisations will administer with CSEI support; a professional development module for Cluster Co-ordinators (who lead teacher meetings and have monitoring roles); a draft multidimensional framework for 'quality of education' which CSEI will disseminate nationally via its civil society networks. The project's approach to analysing multi-scalar accountability relations will challenge existing understandings of systemic reform, and provide empirical knowledge and tools with direct application for improving quality and equity in elementary education in India. Beyond this, its conceptual advances, outputs, and innovative process-tracing methodology will deliver analyses with international significance for state and non-state actors concerned with improving learning outcomes for disadvantaged learners.

Field researchers collected statistical data on attendance from three sample schools. Field researchers carried out semi-structured interviews with the relevant teachers in the selected schools (n=14) and three Principals. Field researchers carried out open-ended classroom observations focusing on purposively selected children in grades 2,4 and 7 (grade 7 not present in one school) and interactions in the classroom between those children and the teacher, children and their peers, and pedagogical approaches in the classroom. Field researchers carried out semi-structured interviews at the household level. Field researchers carried out open-ended interviews with monitoring officials and state representatives which elicited responses to school level findings.