School Capital Cost Sri Lanka

8/6/2019 School Capital Cost Sri Lanka

1/23

INEER - Vol. [volume no.], No. [Issue no.], pp. [page range], [year]e Institution of Engineers, Sri Lanka

ENGINEER 1

REVIEW OF CAPITAL STOCK INVESTMENTPTIONS IN EDUCATION SECTOR OF SRI LANKA

A.A.D.A.J. Perera, A.H.M.D.R. Dassanayake

stract: Education sector, being a major component of capital investment of Sri Lanka, haswn 10% of the government budget for the past few years. More than 50% of capital expenditure forcation is borne by donor funded projects (World Bank, ADB, UNICEF and others). For the

nning of future funding, it is important find the short, medium and long term capital cost estimatesthe development school infrastructure. This paper addresses this requirement of capital costmates according to the school norms set by the Ministry of Education as well as the policiesposed by the National Education Commission. It begins with a brief description of the objectives ofstudy. The section two reviews the current school infrastructure of the country. It also presents the

dent population variation and enrolment patterns for different types of schools, current schoolms prepar ed by the Ministry and few analyses on infrastructure development. Schoolastructure cost estimates are analysed in section three. Current cost estimating methods and the

hodology used in this study are described.

ywords: School infrastructure, Cost estimates

Introduction

pital expenditure analysis was carried out asart of the sector review held in 2004 and5. The government of Sri Lanka and therld Bank has agreed that the future fundingthe education sector will be based on the

or wide Approach (SWAp). The annualital expenditure of the school education isroximately US $ 70 million and more than of capital expenditure is from donor

ded projects (W orld Bank, ADB, UNICEF others). In the absence of lo ng term cost

mates for capital expenditure it wasortant find the short, medium and long

m capital cost estimates for the developmentchools.

salient objectives of the analysis were to:

establish the total cost estimates for capitalestment as per norms of the Ministry ofcation.

establish the cost estimates for the proposalsed by the National Education commission

establish capital expenditure options for theernment and to establish the cost estimatesthe same.perform an analysis for capital expenditurehe past.

2. Review of school infrastructure

2.1 Introduction

The contours of Sri Lankas present educationsystem were developed in the nineteenthcentury after the establishment of Britishcolonial rule over the island [3]. Up to 1931 theeducation was both under the government andthe missionary organizations. Further this dualstructure had a minority English medium, feelevying schools for the elite and the emergingmiddle class the fre e vernacular schools inSinhalese and Tamil with an attenuatedcurriculum for the masses [3]. GenerallyEnglish medium schools had goodinfrastructure while other schools had a mix ofpermanent, semi permanent and temporarybuildings. The permanent buil dingsconstructed during the early period are stillbeing used in many schools especially in formerEnglish medium schools. The KannangaraReport (1943) put forward policies for universaleducation. This policy changed the educationsystem as a whole and in 1948 , 54 centralschools were established. Initially most schools

This need to be replacedwith a better picture

Eng. (Dr.) A.A.D.A.J. Perera , C. Eng., MIE(SL), B.Sc.Eng (Hons) (Moratuwa), M.Sc. (Lough), PhD. (Lough),Senior Lecturer, Department of Civil Engineering,

University of Moratuwa.Eng. (Mrs.) A.H.M.D.R. Dassanayake , AMIE(SL), B.Sc.Eng (Hons) (Moratuwa), Department of Civil Engineering,University of Moratuwa.


2/23

ENGINEER 2

had temporary buildings or semi permanentbuildings with a few number or nothing ofpermanent buildings. After 1948, within aperiod of less than 40 years the number ofschools in Sri Lanka increased by over 50%, andthe number has increased to more than 9,500 by1970. During the period of 1950s and early part

of 1960s most of the school buildings wereconstructed by the Department of Buildingsand cost optimisation methods had beenimplemented. Therefore most school buildingsconsist of classroom unit of 1.9mX1.9m. Almostall the buildings were of linear collections ofthis basic classroom module. A typical suchbuilding is shown in Figure 1

The infrastructure facilities of schools aredefined in the norms of Ministry of Education.The norms give the requirements of classroom

space, facilities such as water and sanitation,special teaching facilities such as sciencelaboratories, furniture and equipment etc. Theapplication of norms for development of schoolis at a very low level or non -exist. The lack ofapplication of norms for the preparation thesecondary development plan [1] and theprimary development plan [2] is very evident.

Figure 1 - Typical School Building

2.2 Student Enrolment

2.2.1 Enrolment historyIt is important to study the enrolmentprojections before performing cost estimates forschool infrastructure. For example if the school

population is rapidly increasing then it is v eryimportant to make reasonable projections ofstudent enrolment. Otherwise the accuracy ofcost estimates will be very low.

Figure 2 shows the total student population andtotal number of schools in Sri Lanka during theperiod 1972 to 2003. The total studentpopulation has stabilized during the last fiveyears and may not drop dramatically in thenext five years. Therefore planning based onthe current student population will give

satisfactory infrastructure plans for the nextfive years. The Figure shows high number ofschools in 1972 due to emphasis that Sri Lankaput on Education. In fact the number ofstudents per school has increased from 272 in1972 to around 400 by the year 2000. There is adrop in student enrolment after 2000 and this ismainly due to declining growth rate ofpopulation of Sri Lanka. There is a decline inthe number of schools ( Figure 2 right axis) andthat is mainly due to the school rationalizationprogram implemented by the Ministry of

Education. Figure 3 shows the numb er of livebirths and school enrolment. Mallawarchchi [5]has discussed and presented a verycomprehensive analysis and methodology forstudent enrolment projections. He has givengood recommendations for the projections ofstudent enrolment as well as t he use of otherdata such as number of registered live births.There is good relationship between number ofregistered live births and student enrolmentand considering the recommendations ofMallawarchchi [5], it is clear that the student

enrolment will not change significantly withinthe next five years.


3/23

ENGINEER 3

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000

1972

1974

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

Thousands

Year

StudentPopulation

0

1,500

3,000

4,500

6,000

7,500

9,000

10,500

12,000

13,500

15,000

NumberofSchools

Total Student Population

Schools

Figure 2 - Total Student Enrolment and total schools

270,000

280,000

290,000

300,000

310,000

320,000

330,000

340,000

350,000

360,000

370,000

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Year of Birth

No.ofChildre

Live Births in the year shown

Student admissions after 6 years

Figure 3 - Total registered live births and Student enrolment to Grade 1 in Government Schools

2.2.2 Student population in different typesof schoolsTable 1 gives the student populationcomposition based on types of schools, genderand education cycles. The data presented isfrom 2003 school censes data.

Table 2 gives the same student p opulationdistribution in 1996.

Table 1 and Table 2 invite further analysis ofchange of student population in different typesof schools with respect to time.

Note: Live births in 1991 and Student Admissions in 1997 are shown together


4/23

ENGINEER 4

Table 1 - Student population in 2003

Number % ofstudent

populationTotalStudents

3,941,685

Types of

schools

1 AB 1,131,409 28.7%1 C 1,265,488 32.1%

Type 2 1,168,389 29.6%Type 3 376,399 9.5%

GenderMale 1,972,750 50.0%Female 1,968,935 50.0%

CyclePrimary 1,667,994 42.3%Secondary 1,986,912 50.4%Collegiate 286,779 7.3%

Table 2 - Student population in 1996

Number % ofstudent

populationTotalStudents

4,148,426

Types ofschools

1 AB 947,871 22.8%1 C 1,352,173 32.6%Type 2 1,292,290 31.1%Type 3 556,492 13.4%

GenderMale 2,082,073 50.2%Female 2,066,753 49.8%

CyclePrimary 1,818,433 43.8%Secondary 2,103,775 50.7%Collegiate 226,621 5.5%

2.2.3 Trends of Student PopulationMovements in Different Types of SchoolsTable 3 shows distribution of students indifferent types of schools in the years of 1996and 2003 and a clear pattern shows thatstudents have moved to 1AB schools. Themovement could be of step type movement;

i.e. students moving from 1C to 1AB, fromType 2 to 1C and from Type 3 to Type 2. Thismay be due to parents aspiration to putstudents to a good school as possible andavailability of transport facilities such as publictransport facilities, private motor cycles, schoolvan facilities and other modes of transport.

Table 3 - Student Enrolment Patterns ofdifferent types of Schools

Type of

schools

Student Enrolment% of enrolment

Growth1996 20031 AB 22.8% 28.7% 5.9%1 C 32.6% 32.1% -0.5%

Type 2 31.1% 29.6% -1.5%Type 3 13.4% 9.5% -3.9%

y = 0.0105x - 20.663

R2

= 0.9119

y = -0.0064x + 12.995

R2

= 0.8951

y = -0.0022x + 4.7671

R2 = 0.5887

y = -0.0018x + 3.9018

R2 = 0.5418

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Year

Enrolment%

1 AB Schools

1 C Schools

Type 2 Schools

Type 3 Schools

Figure 4 - Trends of Enrolments of School types


5/23

ENGINEER 5

Figure 4 shows trends in percentages ofenrolments of different types of schools. Th eregression analysis of Type 3 schools showsthat unless some intervention is made most ofType 3 schools will not have enrolment byyear 2020. It is important to note the R 2 of theregression analysis of Type 3 schools is around

0.9 thus prediction is r eliable and accurate.Further the more alarming factor is the slopeof the regression line for 1AB schools. By year2020 Type 3 schools enrolments could drops tolow value and enrolment of 1AB schools couldrise to almost 55%. The R 2 value of theregression analysis of 1AB schools is around0.9 thus suggest an accurate prediction.Clearly the development trend of 1AB schoolsand decline trend of Type 3 school needattention and require policy decisions toprevent an undesirable school system.

Regression analysis of 1C School and Type 2schools show flat lines as well as R 2 values

around 0.5. Some of 1C schools and Type 2schools may have got higher grading.

A further analysis of Type 3 schools based onthree local government administrative systemsis shown in Figure 5. It is very clear thatschool in Pradesiya sabba; i.e. rural schools

will loose students in the future. Alarmingfact is the rate of decline is steep andprediction is accurate considering the R2 value(0.92). The enrolment of Type 3 schools inMunicipal councils and Urban councils isremaining constant and no apparent trend isvisible. From this it is possible to concludethat the public believe that even Type 3 Schoolin a city is better and would prefer to sendstudent to schools in the urban areas. Figure 6shows enrolment of Type 3 schools of differentprovinces and all provinces show similar

characteristics.

y = -28778x + 6E+07R

2= 0.9268

y = -226.45x + 475326

R2

= 0.0371

y = 1183.5x - 2E+06

R2

= 0.6556

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Year

StudentEnrolmnet

Municipal Council

Urban Council

Pradesiya Sabba

Figure 5 - Enrolment pattern of Type 3 Schools in local government areas


6/23

ENGINEER 6

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Year

StudentEnrolmentinType3

Western Central

Southern North

East North Western

North Central Uva

Sabaragamuwa

Figure 6 - Enrolment in Type 3 in Pradesiya sabba of different provinces

It is important to analyse the decline of studentpopulation in relation to distance to nearest1AB or 1C or Type 2 School. Figure 7 showsthe student population of Type 3 schools inrelation nearer schools of higher grades. It isvery clear that Type 3 schools near to highergrade schools have not lost the enrolment. Themost probable reason is these schools could bein urban areas. The Type 3 schools withindistances of 3km, 5km and 9km to higher

grades of schools have lost enrolment quitesignificantly. In fact the regression line slopeis stee p and R 2 is more than 0.9 suggestingvery high accuracy for prediction. The curvessuggest that most of these schools will nothave significant enrolment after 10 years. The

Type 3 schools around 15km distance to anearest higher grade school have not lo stenrolment to a significant level. However thenumber of schools of this category is around40 and total enrolment is around 4000. Theclear pattern is that students are moving fromType 3 schools to higher grades of schools.Further people have lost the confidence inmore remote schools and parents are puttingchildren to either Type 3 urban school or to

higher grade school which are also generally inan urban area. This clearly calls for a policyintervention. If not a lot of vacancies will becreated in Type 3 schools particularly in therange 3km to 9km distance form urban centres.

y = -6412.8x + 1E+07

R2

= 0.9167

y = -8624.9x + 2E+07

R2

= 0.8711

y = -8770x + 2E+07

R2 = 0.9005

y = -1391.9x + 3E+06

R2

= 0.6334

y = -254.75x + 514028

R2

= 0.7986

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

180,000

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Year

StudentEnrolment

Within 3km

Within 5km

Within 6km

Within 8km

Within 15km

Figure 7 - Enrolment of Type 3 schools with respect to distance to higher grade schools


7/23

ENGINEER 7

2.2.4 Popularity index of schoolsPopularity of a s chool could be measured bythe ratio of number of students entered tograde 1 and number of vacancies in grade 1.Further the ratio of number of studentsentered to grade 1 and number of studentsapplied to grade 1 gives yet another

measurement. If the r atio is high the school ispopular and if the ratio is low school is notpopular. It is very clear from Table 4 a largenumber of parents want to put their childrento 1AB or 1C schools. Capacity filling factor of1AB is 110% while in 1C is 91%. From theparents those who applied for Type 3 schools asignificant number must have applied tohigher grades as well. Further capacity fillingfactors of Type 2 and Type 3 are 60% and 53%respectively. Here the capacity of grade 1 wascalculated by multiplying the number of grade

1 classes by 35 (number of students per class).

Table 4 - Grade 1 admission details 2003

TypeNumberApplied

NumberEntered

Capacityof

school

FillingFactor

1AB 144,708 58,048 52,815 110%

1C 123,782 89,384 98,315 91%

Type 2 121,463 100,230 166,985 60%

Type 3 89,928 67,944 128,905 53%

Total 479,881 315,606 447,020 71%

2.3 Norms and School Infrastructure

2.3.1 Review of Norms for SchoolInfrastructureThe present norms of Ministry of Educationhave evolve d through many studies. Acomprehensive study on school buildingdesigns Asia had been carried out by AsianRegional Institute for School Building Research(1972). The study was mainly based onschools of Sri Lanka but the application of

recommendations is not evident from thebuildings constructed after 1972. In factclassrooms, furniture, etc. has not changed

much from the pictures of 1970. Simmonds[4] has given a comprehensive comparison ofstandards used in Asia for the provision ofschool buildings. The structures of standardsdo vary and in many situations, it is based onenrolment while some specify the overall sizeof the school based on different levels of

enrolment. According to norms of classroomspace of Bangladesh, India, Nepal is aroun d0.9m2 per child while Singapore and Thailandis around 1.5m2 per child [4]. In Sri Lanka thenorm is 1.05m2 per child for the Secondaryand Collegiate cycle and 1.29m2 per child forthe Primary cycle.

Many countries have introduced educationreforms in the recent past particularly movingfrom teacher centre teaching to student centreteaching. Sri Lanka introduced major

education reform in 1996 and the introductionof student centre teaching is a key feature ofreforms. Many countries have changed no rmsfor infrastructure together with educationreforms but in Sri Lanka norms have notchanged with education reforms. It may beuseful to review the change of norms withtime and education reforms and the USA maybe one of the best examples. In the case ofUSA, Elementary schools have shown anaverage increase of 70 square feet (6.5m2) perchild to 120 square feet (11.2m2) per child.

Middle schools have shown an averageincrease of 110 square feet to 140 square feet(13.0m2), and high schools have shown anincrease of 120 square feet to 160 square feet(14.9m2) per child [7]. The trend of the USAnorm is to have larger space for secondary andcollegiate cycle than for the primary cyclewhile in Sri Lanka the trend is in the oppositedirection and values too being very muchlower than USA.

2.3.2 Current Norms in Sri Lanka

The current norms on Ministry of Educationare given in Table 5

Table 5 - Norms for Ministry of Education for School infrastructureNorm Description Norm ValueClassroom 1.29m2 per Primary Child, 1.05m2 per Secondary/ Collegiate Child

Science room /Multipurpose room

36m2 up to 50 students (6-9 Enrolment)60m2 51 -120 students (6-9 Enrolment)96m2 Above 120 students (6-9 Enrolment)60m2 up to 90 students (6-11 Enrolment)

72m2 91 to 180 students (6-11 Enrolment)120m2 Above 181students (6-11 Enrolment)Technical 60m2 Up to 120 Collegiate technical stream enrolment


8/23

ENGINEER 8

Workshop 120m2 120 to 180 Collegiate technical stream enrolment

Additional 60m2 per additional 120 students enrolmentAL Sciencelaboratory

60m2 31 to 180 Collegiate science studentsAdditional 60m2 per additional 160 Collegiate science students enrolment

AL Geography 60m2 for more than 50 AL geography students

Aesthetic Unit96m2 over 140 students, 6-9 enrolment

96m2 over 200 students, 6-11 enrolment

Libraries18m2 up to 90 Students, 1-11 enrolment36m2 over 90 Students, 1-11 enrolmentAdditional 60m2 for over 100 Collegiate students

Social Studies 36m2 Over 180 students OrEnglish Resourceroom

Over 120 students (3 5) orOver 200 students (3 to 9) orOver 250 students (3 to 11) or

Latrines(Boys) 1 per 200 Students (boys)Latrines(Girls) 1 per up to 100 Students (Girls), Additional 1 per every 150 students (Girls)Urinals (Boys) 1 set of 3 Urinals per 150 studentsTeachers Toilets 1 up to 10 teachers, 2 for 11-40 teachers, 3 for more than 40 teachers

Water supply Tap water/Well water

Office Space36m2 up to 750 students, 95m2 750 to 2000 students, 185m2 above 2000students

Store room 18m2 up to 500 students, 36m2 above 500 students

Staff Room18m2 for 11 to 20 teachers36m2 for 21 to 40 teachers60m2 for above 41 teachers

Principals quarters 1 per school

Teachers quarters

1 single room unit up to 4 teachers2 single room unit 5-8 teachers1 single room unit and one double room unit 9-12 teachers

2 double room unit 9-12 teachers

There are no norms for new facilities such asIT rooms and services such electricity.

The NEC [3] in the proposals for NationalPolicy framework has given proposals forinfrastructure development (section 4.4.8pages 110 to 112). The proposals are in theareas of size of school, class size, minimumrequirement for a school and school facilitiesin the co nflict affected areas. The details are

given below.

(i) Size of schoolThe maximum number of students inschool should be3500 in Senior secondary schools2500 in Secondary schools1000 in Primary schools

(ii) Class sizeClass size should not exceed35 students in each class in grades 1-1130 students in each class in grades 12-13

(iii) Minimum requirements for a school

(a) All schools Sufficient classrooms and separate

classrooms partitioned by wall/screenwith solid walls and roof.

Classroom space to make it possiblefor students to move freely to engageinactivity based learning.

Classroom furniture for each studentand each teacher and a blackboard,display board, teaching aids and a

cupboard in each classroom. Principal office and staff room A library reading / reading room with

adequate space, books and otherresources.

Playground space, play/sportsequipment, garden, wall aroundschool and gate.

Adequate provision of safe drinkingwater.

Sanitary facilities Electricity and telephone facilities as

early as possible. Store room Principals quarters


9/23

ENGINEER 9

Teachers quarters where necessary(b) Primary Grades [in addition to (iii)(a)]

Book corners Work bench Sand (grades 1 and 2) Water basin Play area

(c) Secondary grades [in addition to (iii) (a)] Multi purpose activity room Computer room Science laboratory adequate for

Grades 6-11 Grades 12-13

Aesthetic unit Technical workshop (one or more

units) including Agriculture unit.

(iv) School facilities in the conflict affectedareasThe rehabilitation programme in the conflictaffected areas should be given high priority.

2.3.3 Required Norms for the Future

Norms are not available for new schoolfacilities such as Information Technology (IT).It is not evident from publications of othercountries the existence of norms for IT. In factIT is a rapidly changing area even themethodology of such central computer rooms

have changed to class based computer facilitiesin developed countries.

Some exiting norms such Teachers quartersare not precisely defin ed. Quantification ofsome norms is required.

2.4 Conditions of School Infrastructure

The school infrastructure has receivedcontinuous funding from the government. It isimportant to analyse the current status of

school infrastructure as per standards

specified by the Norms of Ministry ofEducation. The analysis presented here isbased on data of 2003 and 2002 school censes.

2.4 .1 Building Conditions

The poor building conditions of schools seem acommon factor in many countries including

developed coun tries such as USA [7]. In SriLanka there are large number of undividedbuildings, a few temporary and semipermanent buildings. Further even in the caseof permanent buildings the maintenance beingvery low thus damaged floors and dirty wallsare common. Statistics show that childrenwho learn in schools with poor buildingconditions score lower on achievement teststhan children who learn in schools with fair orexcellent conditions. Numerous studies haveaffirmed that children learn better in a bette rphysical environment. Therefore, mandatingbetter test scores is an exercise in futility unlessthe facility, program and teachers supportbetter leaning [7].

2.4.2 Classroom Facilities

Classroom is the main facility of school andalmost all the stakeh olders put the classroomas the main required facility. Different analysisof school classroom facility is presented here .First the overall classroom facility of Sri Lanka

is given . The classroom need was calculatedcomparing the available permanent classroomsand the classroom that should be in the schoolaccording to the norms.

It is clear that the classroom usage factor inpopular schools is over 125%; i.e. overcrowdedby 25%. 67.6% student population study inovercrowded schools while 3.5% study inclassrooms where th e usage factor is less than40% (Figure 8). Many of these schools haveempty classrooms or abandon buildings.


10/23

ENGINEER 10

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

SriLanka

1

-15

16

-30

31

-50

51-100

101-250

251-50

0

501-1000

1001-2

000

2001-3

000

3001-4

000

Over4

000

Students per School

UsageFactor

0.0%

20.0%

40.0%

60.0%

80.0%

100.0%

120.0%

140.0%

Total Students

% of Schools

Usage Factor %

Figure 8 - Classroom usage in Schools

Figure 9 shows the values of usage factor indifferent geographical areas. The averageusage factor is more than 80% for anygeographical division suggesting thatimprovement to classroom usage can be madeif proper policies are implemented in

admitting students to sch ools. NEC [3] hasrecommended that the small schools should beorganized as feeder schools to nearest largesecondary school in order to limit the exodus

to larger schools (recommendation 15, [3]).The current trend is to build more classroomsin schools especially in more popular schoolsbut actual need is for a more distributedadmittance to schools. The number ofstudents in a class of a popular school is

around 40 while the common classroom unit is37m2 adequate for 30 primary students or 35secondary or collegiate students.

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

MunicipalC

ouncils

Urba

nCouncils

Pradesiya

Saba

Division

alSecretary

Education

Division

Education

Zone

District

Provinc

e

Geograhpical Areas

USage

Factor

0%

200%

400%

600%

800%

1000%

1200%Average

Standard Diviation

Minimum

Maximum

Figure 9 - Classroom Usage in Geographical Areas


11/23

ENGINEER 11

2.4.3 Classrooms stockMany classes are being conducted inundivided buildings. These buildings arecapable of accommodating to different classsizes but generally the disturbance to learningis high. Table 6 gives the distribution ofundivided and divided classrooms. The values

presented are based on 2002 censes data.Further some schools have semi permanent ortemporary buildings. The total per manentbuildings are more than 95% of the stock whilesemi permanent and temporary buildingsaccount for less than 5% of the stock. This is asatisfactory situation. Further a large numberof semi permanent and temporary buildingsare in the conflict aff ected areas and need aspecial attention in development programs.However it is important to note that 42.5%classrooms are being conducted in undivided

halls. To improve the quality of learning thesebuildings need to be divided.

Table 6 - Classroom building Stock

Classroom Type Total area m2% of the total

classroomarea

Permanentdivided

2,735,936 53.0%

Permanentundivided

2,197,633 42.5%

Semi Permanentdivided 28,127 0.5%Semi Permanentundivided

55,910 1.1%

TemporaryDivided

38,372 0.7%

TemporaryUndivided

110,422 2.1%

Total 5,166,401 100.0%

2.4.4 Water, Sanitation and ElectricityFacilitiesNext to classroom facility services aregenerally considered as the next importantfacility. Service facilities depend on school as awhole it is more logical to analyse theavailability factor in different types of school.

At present schools in Sri Lanka is categorizedas 1AB, 1C, Type 2 and Type 3. The toiletfacilities are the most needed among thefacilities. Generally the popular schools wheremost of them fall into the category of 1ABshow the lowest availability factor. This is dueto the fact that these schools have toilets butnot according the norms. 30% schoolpopulation study in 1AB schools andavailability factor of toilets is around 53%. Thecurrent norms whether they are properlyapplicable to large schools need to be studied.

Teacher toilets also show a similar pattern.

Most schools do have some water supply butin some cases it is not treated water.Availability of Electricity is more than 97% in1AB schools and more than 90% in 1C schools.Considering the fact that quite number ofschools in conflict affected areas (North andEast province and adjacent areas) theavailability of electricity can be consi dered assatisfactory.

Overall facilities in schools are satisfactory.However, facilities, particularly toilets, willrequire maintenance and improving.


12/23

ENGINEER 12

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

1 AB Schools 1 C Schools Type 2 Schools Type 3 Schools

School Types

AvailabilityFact

or%

0%

100%

200%

300%

400%

500%

600%

700%

% Students

Water

Electricity

Teacher Toilet

Student Toilet

Figure 10 - Availability of School Facilities

2.4.5 Science laboratory FacilitiesTable 7 shows the availability of sciencelaboratories in the system. 1AB schools show asatisfactory level of availability of laboratories.Availability of Chemistry/Physics is around78% while zoology /Botany is around 45%.Not al l schools of 1AB offer both sciencestreams. Availability of OL science

laboratories are 84% for 1AB schools and 78%for 1C schools could be considered assatisfactory. However availability of sciencelaboratories in Type 2 schools is around 40%and avai lability of mini labs (a steel cupboardwith minimum science apparatus) is around22% cannot be considered as satisfactory.According to the current norms all Type 2schools should have at least a mini lab. A total30% ( Table 7 ) student population study inType 2 schools and satisfactory sciencefacilities should be maintained in Type 2

schools.

Table 7 - Availability of Science Laboratories

TypeOL

LabsMiniLabs

ALChe/Phy

ALZoo/

BotAgri

1 AB 83.6% 8.8% 77.7% 44.9% 20.1%

1 C 78.3% 21.1% 2.9% 0.5% 1.0%

Type2

39.8% 21.5% N/A N/A 0.0%

Type

3 1.0% 1.4% N/A N/A N/A

The analysis shown in Table 7 is theavailability of science laboratories and doesnot show the quality of facility. The normsspecify the area of the science l aboratories thatthe schools should have according to theenrolment. An analysis showed that whenlaboratories are available in schools those aremore than the norms requirement. This maybe due to the fact that most laboratories were

built before norms were introduced.

2.4.6 LibrariesThe availability of libraries in different types ofschools is shown in Table 8. Some 1AB schoolsand some 1C schools have two libraries, onepermanent and one temporary. Thetemporary library could be either the library inthe primary section or a reading room. 2% of1AB schools and 8% of 1C schools do not havelibrary facilities and needs attention in thefuture development. These low percentages

particularly related to 1AB sch ools could bepartly due to censes errors. Library facilitiesshould be available in all schools. Theprovision of library facilities to Type 2 schoolsneeds attention.

Table 8 - Availability of Libraries

TypePermanent

Temporary

BothNo

Library

1 AB 75.4% 31.7% 8.9% 1.82%

1 C 60.7% 34.6% 3.0% 7.65%

Type 2 26.2% 29.9% 0.9% 44.90%

Type 3 3.5% 13.2% 0.3% 83.54%


13/23

ENGINEER 13

2.4.7 Play ground FacilitiesThe availability of playgrounds in schools isshown in Table 9. Information presented inTable 9 is based on 1999 school censes data(the latest data where availability ofplaygrounds has been collected). Table 10gives the details of schools which do not own a

playground but the availability of a publicplayground in the vicinity. The access andavailability of a playground for 1AB or 1Cschools at a satisfactory levels but playgroundfacilities for Type 2 and Type 3 schools needlarge scale improvement.

Table 9 - Availability of playgrounds inschools

TypeTotal

SchoolsSchools withPlaygrounds

% schoolswith

playgrounds

1 AB 531 344 65%

1 C 1799 1206 67%

Type 2 4126 2160 52%

Type 3 3864 1069 28%

Table 10 - Availability of school and publicplaygrounds

TypeAvailability

of schoolplayground

Access to publicplayground

Less than3km

More than3km

1 AB 65% 20% 15%1 C 67% 11% 22%

Type 2 52% 12% 36%

Type 3 28% 16% 57%

2.4.8 Residential FacilitiesResidential facilities are difficult to assess sincethe need vary from school to school,geographical areas, type of school etc. There isno norm for student hostels but each schoolshould have quarters for the pr incipal andquarters for teachers according to the size ofthe school. Considering the normsrequirement the facilities for principalsquarters and teacher quarters are notsatisfactory.

Table 11 - Availability of ResidentialFacilities

TypePrincipal'sQuarters

StudentHostels

TeacherQuarters

1 AB 44.7% 21.8% 30.0%

1 C 33.9% 1.2% 35.9%

Type 2 24.8% 0.3% 32.1%Type 3 18.0% 0.2% 21.0%

2.4 .9 Special FacilitiesThe special facilities of Telephone, Dental andStudent Counselling rooms are shown in Table12. It may be good to provide dental facilitiesin the school system covering 6km radius andthis need to be checked. Application such asGIS for school mapping will be very useful.

Student counselling facility is a relatively newfacility in the school system.

Table 12 - Availability of special Facilities

Type Telephone DentalStudent

Counselling

1 AB 86.6% 40.3% 37.3%

1 C 31.4% 8.5% 11.6%

Type 2 6.0% 0.6% 2.6%

Type 3 3.2% 0.5% 0.6%

2.4.10 School Furniture and EquipmentA reliable data of student furniture, teacherfurniture and equipment is not available.These data have been collected in 2003 schoolcenses and seems to be not reliable. This m aybe due the fact that the principals of schoolmay have put lower values for furnitureaiming to get new furniture in the future.However school visits generally give theassessment that adequate furniture is availablein classrooms. However equipment such asduplicating (Roneo) machines photocopies,

type writers, office computers are notadequate.

The current student furniture is made with asteel frame and wooden top. Generallyfurniture is not painted or polished and has aunattractive appearance. Further table topsare not level for proper writing. Animprovement to student furniture is required.This could be painting, attaching thin plywoodsheet or attaching plastic or fibreglass top etc.

2.5 Trends in School InfrastructureDevelopment

It is important to analyse the trends in schoolinfrastructure with time. The school censescollects data related area of school buildingsapproximately every three years and otherfacilities such as water and sanitation,laboratories, telephone facilities etc. everyyear. However the accuracy of some data setsparticularly 1999 data set related to classroomspaces is in doubt. The main problem with

1999 data set is that building areas have beencollected using square feet as the unit andthere seem to be a lo t of data entry errors.


14/23

ENGINEER 14

However the 1996 data set and the 2002 datasets are of high accuracy and free of such dataerrors.

2.5.1 Classroom FacilitiesThe analysis given below for classroomfacilities is based on data sets of 1996 and 1999.

Table 13 - Expansion of Classroom Facility:Permanent Divided

Type ofschool

Classroom Facility (Permanent)Area in m2 Area

Growth %1996 20021 AB 650,352 895,906 37.8%

1 C 696,130 818,599 17.6%

Type 2 679,914 839,095 23.4%

Type 3 272,614 329,224 20.8%

Total 2,299,010 2,882,823 25.4%

Table 13 shows that the government hasinvested a lot for classroom facility and thedistribution is fair, i.e. investment is notconcentrated on a type. However during thisperiod student enrolment did not increase infact got reduced. The details of studentenrolment patterns were discussed in section2.2.

2.5.2 Availability of Libraries

Table 14 gives the deta ils of availability ofpermanent libraries in different types ofschools. According to 2002 school censes datathe total number of libraries is 2223 out of totalschools of 9829 covered by the survey. Thereis an increasing trend in all categories and maybe due to the intensive library programimplemented by the General Education ProjectII (GEPII).

Table 14 - Availability of permanent librariesYear 1AB 1C Type 2 Type 3

1996 57% 26% 7% 1%

1999 61% 29% 8% 2%

2000 66% 34% 9% 2%

2002 73% 50% 20% 3%

2003 75% 61% 26% 4%

2.5.3 Residential FacilitiesThere is no trend of increasing the residentialfacilities of schools (Table 15 ).

Table 15 - Trends of Providing ResidentialFacilities

ResidentialFacilities

StudentHostels

Principal'sQuarters

TeacherQuarters

1996 1% 24% 27%

1999 2% 24% 27%

2000 N/A N/A N/A2002 2% N/A N/A

2003 2% 25% 28%

Note: % were calculated using total number ofschools of 1996

2.6 Sources Funding for SchoolInfrastructure

Schools receive funds for capital stockdevelopment from following sources.

1. Direct funding from the centralMinistry of Education.2. Through Ministries of Education of

Provincial Councils.3. Funds raised by school dev elopment

societies such as large grants given bymembers of parliament throughmoney allocated to electoratesdevelopment.

4. Funds raised by schools from parents,past pupils and other well wishes.

The school censes collects data related fundsraised by sc hool approximately every threeyears. Two good data sets of 2001 and 1996are available on the funds raised by schools.The funds allocated for infrastructuredevelopment by the central ministry ofeducation and education ministries ofprovincial council are available on annualbasis. However all the data related to oneparticular year is difficult to obtain. Table 16shows the expenditure pattern for schoolinfrastructure for the year 2002. Data of Table

16 presented is based on actual expenditure of2002 of estimated expenditure of fundsgenerated by schools based on 2001 censesdata. The funding from central ministry goesto infrastructure needs of national schools(mostly 1AB schools) and for special projectsmainly funded by donor agencies. A majorportion of funding from schools and provincialministries goes for classroom construction,services such as water and sanitation. A majorcomponent of funds generated by sc hool maybe from members of parliament, past pupils

associations etc. Generally a school has thefreedom to spend the money generated by theschool even though they need to get theapproval from the zonal directors, which has


15/23

ENGINEER 15

generally not declined. Furth er school maycommence the ground floor of a new buildingfrom funds school and may request provincialministry to complete the next floor/s. Thiscould be one main reason for high growth ofclassrooms in 1AB schools where fundsgenerated by schools at the highest.

Table 16 - Expenditure of schoolinfrastructure

Source offunding

Construction

Repair Furniture

Total

CentralMinistry

1,119.0 N/A N/A 1,119.0

ProvincialMinistries

667.1 57.6 147.0 871.7

Schools* 428.4 297.6 N/A 726.0

Total 2,214.5 355.2 147.0 2,716.7

TotalUS$

21.5 3.5 1.4 26.4

* School development society and past pupilassociations, based on 2001 data

Central

Ministry

38%

Schools

24%

Provincial

Ministries

38%

Figure 11 - Funding distribution for schoolinfrastructure

2.7 Policy options for infrastructuredevelopment

The most recent national policy framework ongeneral education is Sri Lanka is stated in theNEC (2004) report. The policy framework isorganised in the following areas.

Education Opportunity Equity andExcellence;Professional Development of Teachers andPrincipals;Education Governance/Management;Allocation of Resources for Education; and

Education Legislation.

Table 17 gives the impact of therecommendations related to infrastructure

development.

Table 17 - Infrastructure related NEC Policy Recommendations

NECRecomme-ndationNumber

Area of the recommendation Impact to infrastructure development

8, 15, 17 School structure andClassification

Primary schools should be organised as feederschools one or more secondary schools within5km

9, 12 One school per division should be developedwith all facilities.

10, 11 30-50 National schools with excellent facilities.13 A primary school within 2km and secondary

school within 5km

18 Specify minimum requirement of schools19 Conflict affected areas (CAA) Infrastructure of development o f CAA should be

considered as special.


16/23

ENGINEER 16

40, 41, 42 Education for children withdisability

Special infrastructure development will berequired.

48 , 49, 50, 51 Curriculum structure Additional learning space will be required.59 Education Technology Additional space for computer rooms, computers

and software115 Allocation of resources for

educationNorm based resource allocation should be made

Policy options can be derived by consideringthe trends in infrastructure development in thepast, trends in student enrolment andproposals given by NEC (2004). Policy optionsare given below.

2.7.1 Priority orders and availablefinancingIt is important to prepare a priority order listconsidering the policies, the need andavailable finance. For this it is important tocalculate facilities required by all schoolsaccording the norms and student enrolment.The priority order of different provinces,education zones can be different consideringthe available finance.

2.7.2 Classroom facilitiesApart from the conflict affected areas manyother areas do not need additional classroomspaces. Therefore a policy can be stated not tobuild new classroom facili ties. Classroomsneeding improvement especially undividedhalls need to be divided with permanent walls,semi permanent and temporary building needto be upgraded or replaced with permanentbuildings.

1AB or 1C schools where the studentenrolment is more than 3000 new classroomfacilities should not be allowed.

Approval of new classroom facilities to bebuilt by ministry allocations, provincialgovernment money, money raised by schoolsshould be subjected to a properly documentedplanning approval procedure.

The overcrowding of 1AB schools and 1Cschools by utilising facilities of near by smallschool by making them feeder schools tobigger schools.

To convert excess classroom in some schools toother needy facilities such as sciencelaboratories, activ ity rooms, aesthetic rooms,etc.

To prepare priority order schools needingclassroom facilities considering gap between

the classroom facilities required according tothe norms and enrolment and existingclassroom facilities on per student basis. Thisway most needy schools will get the classroomfacilities.

To treat classroom needs of conflict affectedareas as a special urgent need.

2.7.3 Infrastructure facilitiesFacilities such as water, sanitary facilitiesshould be treated equally among schools an dshould be given a high priority. The priorityorder should be computed on the basis of perstudent need considering the need accordingto norms and available facilities.

2.7.4 Technical facilitiesAs per policy proposals of NEC (2004) all thefacilities such laboratories should be availablein at least one school per education division.

All Navodaya schools should get all thefacilities according to norms.

An attempt should be made depending on theavailable finances to provide sciencelaboratories to all schools.

2.7.5 IT facilitiesIT relatively new facility and one possibleoption for policy is to provide at least onecomputer room to 1AB and 1C schools.

2.7.6 Residential facilitiesTo derive a policy on student hostel a studywill be required.

Teachers quarters are required in remote ruralschools to address the teacher deploymentissues. Remote schools should be providedwith teacher quarters based on strict criteria.


17/23

ENGINEER 17

3. School Infrastructure CostEstimates

3.1 Introduction

The Primary Education Plan [2] and Secondary

Education Plan [1] have given cost estimatesfor School Infrastructure development. Thesedevelopment plans have been produced usingthe methodology of compiling therequirements stated by school principals, zonaldirectors and planning officials of provincialeducation ministries and the Planning branchof Ministry of Education. A clear largevariations are present for facilities such asInformation Technology, science laboratories,Water and Sanitation etc. amon g differentdistricts and provinces. The school

development plans should be according to thenorms set by the Ministry of Education. Thiswill ensure the following.

1 Provision of school infrastructurefacilities according to a standard.

2 The incorporation of existing facilitiesand the requirement according to schoolstudent enrolment.

Therefore in this study a methodology wasdeveloped to calculate the schoolinfrastructure requirements according to the

norms of Ministry of education, currentstudent enrolment and available capital stock.This was achieved by developing MS Accessdatabase of school census data and norms.Details of this development are given later.

Development plans should confirm to policiesof education for Sri Lanka. Proposed poli ciesfor the future are stated by NEC ( 2004).Further new policies may be required to set upfor school infrastructure considering theinformation presented in Section 2 of this

document. The objective of this study is not toform policies but to present different optionsavailable for the development of schoolinfrastructure. Finalization of developmentplans or adoption of new policies is theresponsibility of the Ministry of Education andrequire wider participation from ministryofficials, provincial officials, principals,teachers, parents and the general public.

3.2 Current Cost Estimating Methods

In the preparation of Primary education planand secondary education plan, the Ministry ofEducation has used a bottom upward planningand cost estimatin g method. The zonal

director has prepared the zonal plan through ateam. Training programs had been conductedfor the preparation of the zonal plan. Thezonal plans were used to prepare theprovincial plan. The plans were adjusted byMinistry planning team and consultants [1].

Chapter 9 of the secondary education plan [1]provides an assessment of the Infrastructureneeds of secondary education system for thenext five years. The secondary education planinitially states the preparation including thefollowing:

i. A situation analysis; policies and policygoals;

ii. Objectives to be realized within next fiveyears; and

iii. Activities leading to realizationinfrastructure objectives.

However plans had not been prepared in thesaid sequence instead it covers four statementson the current infrastructure situation. Thereport states that infrastructure deficits ofconsiderable magnitude still persist in all theprovinces and probable reasons are:

1 The resources are not providedaccording to a priority order on log icalcriteria.

2 The large out flow of pupils form ruralschools to urban thus creating shortage

in urban schools and excess in ruralschools.

3 Construction of buildings withoutproviding required furniture.

The secondary education plan provides a listof infrastructure needs of 109 items. Annex 9.1of the secondary education plan report givesthe details of the same list on provincial basis.A situation analysis, policies and/or policygoals or objectives to be achieved are notstated. The report is critic al of provision of

infrastructure without priority order or logicalcriteria and the secondary education plan [1]too inherits the same weakness.

The secondary education plan does not show aclear estimation for infrastructure needs.Table B (cost of oth er activities) of chapter 10states a cost of Rs. 8,481 (US$ 82 Million) ascapital estimate which is the most probablecost estimate for infrastructure needs for thenext five years.


18/23

ENGINEER 18

3.3 Cost Estimating methodology of thestudyThe methodology of estima ting the cost ofschool infrastructure needs is depicted in

Figure 12.

Figure 12 - School Infrastructure costestimating methodology

3.4 Cost Estimates

The co st estimate for the entire schoolinfrastructure based on the methodologydepicted in Figure 12 is given in Table 18. Allestimates are in US$ and the exchange rate ofSri Lankan Rupee was taken as 1US$ = 103.The estimates presented in the report are pre -design estimates and generally the accuracy isin the range of 10% to 15%. The detail costestimates of each school in different districtsare given in the accompanied CD in an Excelworksheet. The details given in the CD can beused to produce each school development

plan, zonal development plan and provincialdevelopment plan.

The current norms of Ministry and otherrequirements such as computers account to alist of 7 1 items. It is logical to group similaritems such as items related to classroom to one

group, ICT education in one group, scienceeducation in one group etc. Therefore the 71items are grouped to 8 groups in thepreparation of estimates. The total list of itemsin different groups is given in Appendix A.

Table 1 6 shows that current investment forschool infrastructure is around US$ 26 Millionper year, forecasting a total investment of US$130 Million (including donor funding) for theperiod of 2005 -2009. This will provide 23% ofthe required and a major improvement of the

school infrastructure cannot be expected.However the trends of infrastructurepresented in this report and policy proposalgiven by NEC (2004) suggested that ifappropriate policies are implementedreasonable improvement to the schoolinfrastructure can be achieved even at thecurrent rate of investment.

Table 18 - Total cost estimate of schoolinfrastructure requirements

Norm Category

Total Estimate

US$ M illion

Classroom Teaching 77

ICT Education 62

Teaching Science 53

Non-Classroom Teaching 131

Services 10

Residential Facilities 141

Extra curricular Activities 28

School Management 72

Total 574

3.4.1 Cost Estimates of Types of SchoolsThe breakdo wn of the total cost estimate fordifferent types of schools is given in Table 19.

Create a MS Access database related to :1. Student enrolment by grade, gender, medium

of instruction.2. Available school infrastructure facilities3. Current norms

Start

Calculate each school infrastructure needsaccording to norms and student enrolment

Calculate each school each new facility requirementby calculating gap between facility need and its

availability

Calculate the cost estimates of new facilityrequirements by considering the current rates.

Stop


19/23

ENGINEER 19

Table 19 - Cost estimates of different types ofschools

Norm Category

Cost Estimates US$ MillionsTypes of Schools

1AB 1CType

2Type

3Classroom

Teaching

26.7 20.8 18.7 11.0

ICT Education 18.4 42.8 0.8 0.0

TeachingScience

4.1 12.9 36.0 0.0

Non-ClassroomTeaching

26.7 55.4 47.4 1.8

Services 2.4 3.5 3.3 0.5


18.0 28.0 57.5 37.5

Extra curricularActivities

16.7 11.2 0.0 0.0

SchoolManagement 10.3 19.6 26.5 15.6

Total 123.3 194.0 190.2 66.4

Enrolment 000s 1,148 1,260 1,167 376

Investment perstudent US$

1,073 1,540 1,629 1,766

The total classroom cost is US$ 77 Million andTable 19 shows that large component is for1AB and 1C schools due to overcrowdingfactor. This investment is not required if apolicy is implemented to reduce theovercrowding by utilising the space availablein Ty pe 3 schools using Type 3 schools asfeeder schools. Further analysis showed thatclassroom cost of 1AB, 1C and Type 2 schoolswhere enrolment is less than 1000 is only US$1.0 Million, US$11.0 Million and US$ 16Million respectively. Further the population ofType 3 schools where enrolment is low aredeclining. Therefore the further analyses showthat the actual requirement of Type 3 schools isaround US$ 6.0 Million. This suggest that ifappropriate policy is implemented for theconstruction new classr ooms the cost ofclassroom development is around US$34.0Million, nearly 50% saving (from US$ 77.0Million).

The cost of ICT education was calculated usingthe basis of at least one fully equippedcomputer room for all 1AB and 1C schools.The norm for com puters was taken as 10 perprimary cycle, 20 for secondary cycle and 20for collegiate cycle. Further this includes 1DVD player and TV or Multimedia projectorfor Types 1AB, 1C and Type 2 schools.Considering the funding from donors and

central governme nt especially for ICTeducation it is possible to achieverequirements within the period of 2005 to 2009.The science education is probably moreimportant than ICT education. The costestimate for science education in 1AB and 1Cschools should receive pri ority. Most 1AB

school may have at least one laboratory but itdoes not satisfy the requirements of the norms.The requirements of Type 2 schools needfurther study. Probably at least US$ 20 Millionmay need to be invested to improve thescience educati on in the school system.Further it may be possible to achieve this in theperiod of 2005-2009.

Non-Classroom teaching which includesLibrary, aesthetic rooms, etc. is the secondlargest cost estimate. The estimate is US$ 131

Million which is more than possibleinvestment within the period 2005 -2009. Itmay be not possible to provide more than 20%of the requirement in this category (US$ 25Million). A priority such as a top priority forlibrary may need to be taken. Further analysisshows that total cost of libraries and furniturefor library is US$47 Million.

The highest cost estimate is for residentialfacilities which include student hostels,teachers quarters and principals quarters.

The total cost estimate is US$ 141 and it morethan the tot al investment for the period of2005-2009. Further it may be waste ofinvestment to provide residential facilities asgiven in the norms. Probably the teachersquarters in the very remote school should getthe priority. Further analysis shows that veryremote rural (more than 5km away from urbanschool) schools need US $ 1 .0 Million forteachers quarters. This need may require ahigh priority.

Extra curricular activities cost estimateincludes auditoriums, playgrounds etc.Auditoriums can be consider ed as not urgentwhile playground may be considered asurgent. The cost estimate for playground isUS$2.5Million (for 1AB, 1C and Type 3). Anallocation of US$ 5.0Million may beappropriate for extra curricular activitiesinfrastructure development.

School management includes principalsrooms, equipment such as computers for

offices, furniture such chairs and tables,cupboards etc. It will not be possible toprovide the total estimate of US$ 72 Million in


20/23

ENGINEER 20

the period of 2004 -2009. Probably 20%requirement, US$ 14 Million may be feasiblefor the period of 2005-2009.

Table 20 - An Infrastructure investment optionfor 2005-2009

NormCategory

Investment in US$ M illion

Type of SchoolTotal

1AB 1CType

2Type

3ClassroomTeaching

1.0 11.0 16.0 0.0 28.0

ICTEducation

13.1 30.3 0.6 0.0 44.0

TeachingScience

1.6 4.9 13.6 0.0 20.0


8.1 16.9 14.4 0.5 40.0

Services 1.2 1.8 1.7 0.2 5.0


0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0

ExtracurricularActivities

2.4 1.6 0.0 0.0 4.0

SchoolManagement

1.3 2.5 3.3 2.0 9.0

Total 28.7 68.9 49.6 3.7 150.0

3.5 Provincial Cost Estimates

The cost estimates for different provinces areshown in Table 21. Table 21 further shows theestimate per student. The allocations made byfinance commission are more or less sameamount for different provinces. Probably this

could be changed according to the need sodifferences among provinces can be eliminatedas well a much fair distribution. This needdiscussions and acceptance. The highestprovincial need per student is recorded by theNorth and East province mainly due to thereasons lack of investment within last 20 years.The North & East province requ ire a urgentinvestment of US$ 15.0 Million to bring to theaverage position of school infrastructure in thecountry or US$ 26.8 Million to bring to thelevel of the Western province (the best). The

investment made after June 2003 (data used forestimation) by special programs is around US$8.0 Million. The other two provinces which arebelow the average facilities are North Westernprovince and Sabaragamuwa province. Thesetwo provinces require investments of US$ 6.1Million and US$ 3.5Million respective ly. Toaddress the issue of equity the above threeprovinces need special investments

Table 21 - Infrastructure cost estimates of provinces

Norm CategoryProvince

Sri LankaWP CP SP N&EP NWP NCP UP SBP

ClassroomTeaching

17.3 9.00 10.1 19.1 8.1 3.8 3.7 6.4 77.3

ICT Education 11.6 8.85 8.3 10.0 8.0 4.4 4.9 5.9 62.0

Teaching Science 8.9 7.41 6.7 8.8 7.3 4.0 3.8 5.9 53.0


22.7 18.50 16.5 22.5 17.7 9.2 10.8 13.4 131.2

Services 1.8 1.31 1.3 1.6 1.2 0.7 0.8 1.0 9.6ResidentialFacilities

27.5 16.21 19.2 27.7 19.5 7.2 7.8 15.8 140.9


7.4 3.38 4.0 3.5 3.5 1.7 2.0 2.5 27.8

SchoolManagement

11.8 10.44 8.7 12.6 9.0 5.5 6.0 7.9 72.0

Total 109.0 75.1 74.7 105.8 74.4 36.4 39.7 58.8 573.9

StudentEnrolment 000's

867 531 522 624 471 262 291 383 3,951

Estimate perStudent US$ 126 142 143 169 158 139 136 154 145

WP Western; CP Central; SP Southern; N&EP North & Eastern; NWP North Western; NCP North Central; SBP Sabaragamuwa


21/23

ENGINEER 21

3.5.1 Special Cost EstimatesThe Ministry of education has commenced thedevelopment of Navodaya schools. Navodaya

scheme consists of at least one school perdivision to be developed with all the facilities.Further there are National schools with goodfacilities and managed by the central Ministry ofEducation. There is an overlap of 25 schools inthe two categories of National schools andNavodaya schools.

Table 22 gives the details of cost estimates ofNational and Navodaya schools. The 25 schoolscommon to both categories are included in thecategory of Navodaya schools.

The total cost estimate for the full developmentof Navodaya and National schools is US$ 11 8

Million. This could be not possible consideringthe current investment in infrastruc turedevelopment. There are 39 National schools

where the enrolment is more than 3500. Theestimate for infrastructure cost development ofthese schools is US$ 66Million. Therefore apolicy decision is required on the developmentof these schools conside ring the proposals forpolicy development by NEC (2004). Further itcan be noted that residential facilities requireUS$ 17 Million. Hence an investment in theregion of US$ 50.0 Million could provide all thefacilities required by National and Navodayaschools. This could fulfil the proposals given byNEC for centres of excellence and at least one

fully developed school per education division.

Table 22 - Infrastructure cost estimates for National and Navodaya schools

Norm Category National SchoolsNavodaya

schoolsTotal for National and

Navodaya schoolsCountry Total

Classroom Teaching 15.3 6.6 21.9 76.8

ICT Education 9.1 10.4 19.5 61.7

Teaching Science 1.7 2.9 4.5 52.5

Non-Classroom Teaching 14.1 13.5 27.6 130.6Services 1.1 1.1 2.3 9.5

Residential Facilities 9.1 8.0 17.1 138.8

Extra curricular Activities 9.8 4.0 13.8 27.8

School Management 5.5 5.5 11.0 71.7

Total 65.6 52.0 117.6 569.4

Student Enrolment 000's 657,761 387,800 1,045,561 3,951,212

Estimate per Student US$ 100 134 21.9 144


22/23

ENGINEER 22

3.6 Repair and Maintenance costestimates

Repair and maintenance are important areas ofinfrastructure development. Unless areasonable funding is made for repair andmaintenance the school infrastructure can

deteriorate with tim e. Repair maintenance isvery important for services such as water andsanitation, short life equipment such ascomputers and photocopiers. The repair andmaintenance cost of school infrastructure isgiven in

Table 23 based on school cens us data of 2002and 2003. The repair cost estimatedconsidering the maximum 50% cost of a newitem and 5% of the building cost. The currentmaintenance cost is US$ 10 Million and

expenditure may not exceed US$ 1 Million andthe total capital allocation for schoolinfrastructure by the Finance Commission isapproximately US$ 10 Million. Adequateallocations should be made for repair andmaintenance and in no time the schoolinfrastructure could be in extremely badcondition. The rates used for the calculation ofrepair and maintenance cost of norms aregiven in Appendix A.2.

Table 23 - Repair and Maintenance cost of

school Infrastructure

4. Conclusions

The analysis of student population shows adramatic increment in total student populationin the period of 1970 -1990 but after 1990, itshows a stable condition followe d by a slightreduction. When different types of schools are

considered, student enrolments in 1AB schoolsare increasing while the enrolment in othertypes of schools declining. Although the totalstudent enrolment of type 3 schools shows areduction, it defers from school to schoolaccording to its location. For example, type 3schools in Pradeshiya Sabbas show rapidreduction in the enrolment while that is notcommon to schools in Municipal and Urbancouncils.

These variations result some schools to beovercrowded which in turn exceeds the schoolnorms. Therefore school infrastructureinvestment decisions must be takenconsidering the following two importantfactors;

1. Provision of infrastructure facilitiesaccording to norms.

2. The incorporation of existing facilitiesand the requirement according toschool student enrolments.

Correct information on existing facilities andschool requirements must be considered wheninvestment decisions are made. For example,when it is necessary to study the importance ofproviding an O/L science lab to Type 2 Schoolother than providing a classroom block toovercrowded 1AB school , very accurateinformation on the student enrolment forseveral years, actual requirement of the schooland the student population variation for theperiod are needed.

The work carried out clearly indicates ifcorrect information is available, more efficientinvestments in school infrastructuredevelopment is possible.

Norm CategoryCost in US$ Million

Repair Maintenance

ClassroomTeaching

0.61 7.44

ICT Education 0.18 0.19

Teaching Science 0.00 0.39


0.00 0.83

Services 0.33 0.71


0.00 0.18


0.00 0.00

SchoolManagement

0.07 0.10

Total 1.19 9.83

Student Enrolment000's

3,941,685 3,941,685

Estimate perStudent US$ 0.30 2.49


23/23

References

1. Ministry of Education (2004), Five YearNational Plan for The Development ofSecondary Education 2004 -2008, Ministryof Education, Battaramulla, Sri Lanka

2. Ministry of Human ResourceDevelopment, Education and CulturalAffairs(2003), Five Year National Plan forThe Development of Primary Education2004-2008, Ministry of Human ResourceDevelopment, Education and CulturalAffairs, Battaramulla, Sri Lanka

3. National Education Commission (2003),Proposals for a National Policy Framework

on General Education in Sri Lanka,National Education Commission,Colombo, Sri Lanka.

4. Simmonds M.F., (1977), AccommodationStandards for Educational Buildings,Building Research Establishment, Watford,England.

5. Mallawarachchi, S. (2004) The Importanceof Estimating Teacher Requirements inEducational Planning.

6 . Moddy, Stephanie a nd Edgell, (2000)David. Planning Delawares school needs :Issues of Location, Design, andInfrastructure, Institute for PublicAdministration, College of HumanServices, Education and Public Policy,University of Delware, Delware, USA

Documents

School Capital Cost Sri Lanka