i-manager Publications

Research Paper

From Marketplace to Classroom: The Quality of Health Education Lessons on Teachers Pay Teachers

Melissa Haithcox-Dennis* , Mariza James, Derrick Bullard*

Haithcox-Dennis, M., James, M., and Bullard, D. (2025). From Marketplace to Classroom: The Quality of Health Education Lessons on Teachers Pay Teachers. i-manager’s Journal on School Educational Technology, 21(1), 12-20.

Abstract

Teachers Pay Teachers, an online marketplace, is a source of millions of free and paid instructional materials for educators. The site says 85% of US teachers have used it, with over 98% using it monthly. Despite the site's popularity, little is known about the quality of the instructional materials it offers. Given its widespread use, it is critical to evaluate the appropriateness and quality of health education resources to ensure the materials are accurate, standards-aligned, and free from information that could have a negative impact on students. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the quality of free health education lessons. Content analysis, a researcher-developed rubric, and frequency calculations were employed to describe the resources and assess their quality. Over three-fourths of lessons were rated as poor or fair in overall quality. Many failed to align with standards, lacked functional health knowledge, or did not reflect Universal Design for Learning principles. The findings raise concerns about the quality of instructional materials and their potential negatively impact student learning in health education and, ultimately, lifelong health behaviors. Health educators should take the lead in developing appropriate health education resources on these sites. The profession should advocate for stronger review processes and the development of clear quality indicators on online marketplaces. Future research is needed to examine the quality and use of paid resources, as well as the factors that influence educators' purchasing decisions.

References

[1]. Archambault, L., Shelton, C., & Harris, L. M. (2021). Teachers beware and vet with care: Online educational marketplaces. Phi Delta Kappan, 102(8), 40-44.

[2]. Bengtsson, M. (2016). How to plan and perform a qualitative study using content analysis. NursingPlus Open, 2, 8-14.

[3]. Birch, D. A., Goekler, S., Auld, M. E., Lohrmann, D. K., & Lyde, A. (2019). Quality assurance in teaching K–12 health education: Paving a new path forward. Health Promotion Practice, 20(6), 845-857.

[4]. Brown, M., Rodríguez, N. N., & Updegraff, A. (2023). We need a curricular cooperative: Envisioning a future beyond teachers paying teachers. Learning, Media and Technology, 48(2), 310-323.

[5]. Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST). (2018). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines Version 2.2.

[6]. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2019, May 29). Characteristics of an Effective Health Education Curriculum. CDC Archive.

[7]. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2021). Appendix 3: HECAT Healthy Behavior Outcomes for Grades Pre-K–12. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

[8]. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2024). Quality Health Education. Adolescent and School Health.

[9]. Fuchigami, M. (2025). Can TPT Really Replace your Teaching Income in 2025? SEOTpreneur.com.

[10]. Gross, J. M. S. (2018). Document analysis. The SAGE Encyclopedia of Educational Research, Measurement, and Evaluation, 4, 545–548. SAGE Publications.

[11]. Harris, L. M., Archambault, L., & Shelton, C. C. (2023). Issues of quality on Teachers Pay Teachers: An exploration of best-selling US history resources. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 55(4), 608-627.

[12]. Haupt, C. E., & Marks, M. (2023). AI-generated medical advice-GPT and beyond. JAMA, 329(16), 1349-1350.

[13]. International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). (2025). 8 Core Principles for Enhancing Student Success: The Transformational Learning Principles. ISTE+ASCD.

[14]. Kitsantas, A., Cleary, T. J., DiBenedetto, M. K., & Hiller, S. E. (2023). Essentials of Research Methods for Educators. Seniorcare Ageing Growth Engine Publications.

[15]. Kolbe, L. J. (2019). School health is a strategy to improve both public health and education. Annual Review of Public Health, 40, 443–463.

[16]. Kottner, J., & Streiner, D. L. (2011). The difference between reliability and agreement. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 64(6), 701-702.

[17]. Middleton, K. (1981). Back to some basics of health lesson planning. Health Education, 12(1), 4-8.

[18]. National Consensus for School Health Education. (2022). National Health Education Standards: Model Guidance for Curriculum and Instruction.

[19]. Newcomb, T. (2020). Meet the Etsy of Education: Online Marketplace Lets Teachers Buy - and Sell - Millions of Classroom Materials and Lessons. The 74.

[20]. Noonoo, S. (2021). What Teachers Pay Teachers is Learning from Bad Lessons and Upset Teachers. EdSurge.

[21]. Polikoff, M. (2019). The Supplemental Curriculum Bazaar: Is What's Online Any Good? Thomas B. Fordham Institute.

[22]. Shelton, C., & Archambault, L. (2018). Discovering how teachers build virtual relationships and develop as professionals through online teacherpreneurship. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 29(4), 579-602.

[23]. Swalwell, K., Rodriguez, N. N., Updegraff, A., & Winters, L. A. (2023). Distracting, erasing, and othering: A critical analysis of the Teachers Pay Teachers' Teach for Justice collection. Harvard Educational Review, 93(1), 104-130.

[24]. Teachers Pay Teachers (TPT). (2022). Frequently Asked Questions: What are TPT's Seller Guidelines?

[25]. Teachers Pay Teachers (TPT). (2025). TPT is the Go-To Place for Absolutely Any Learning Need. IXL Learning.

[26]. Zhang, J., Liu, G., & Ren, M. (2016). Finding a representative subset from large-scale documents. Journal of Informetrics, 10(3), 762-775.

Full Article (HTML)

Pdf

Research Paper

The Impact of ICT Integration on Teaching and Learning in ESL Classrooms in an English Conversation Japanese School: A Case Study

Xavier Aquino Velasco*

Japan Center for Michigan Universities, Japan.

Velasco, X. A. (2025). The Impact of ICT Integration on Teaching and Learning in ESL Classrooms in an English Conversation Japanese School: A Case Study. i-manager’s Journal on School Educational Technology, 21(1), 21-32.

Abstract

This study investigates the integration of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in the teaching-learning process at a Japanese conversation school (Eikaiwa). Recognizing the significance of ICT in educational settings, particularly in language instruction, this research aims to examine the practices, challenges, and impact of ICT implementation on productivity, teacher satisfaction, and student learning outcomes. By assessing the perceived inputs and outputs of ICT integration, this study seeks to offer clues about optimizing its use to enhance the overall teaching- learning experience.

References

[1]. Agbonlahor, R. O. (2006). Motivation for use of information technology by university faculty: A developing countr y perspective. Information Development, 22(4), 263-277.

[2]. Ahuja, S., Kaur, P., & Panda, S. N. (2019). Identification of influencing factors for enhancing online learning usage model: Evidence from an Indian University. International Journal of Education and Management Engineering, 9(2), 15.

[3]. Ajzen, I. (1980). Understanding Attitudes and Predictiing Social Behavior. Englewood Cliffs.

[4]. Alghamdi, I. A., Goodwin, R., & Rampersad, G. (2011). E-government readiness assessment for government organizations in developing countries. Computer and Information Science, 4(3), 3-17.

[5]. Balanskat, A., Blamire, R., & Kefala, S. (2006). The ICT Impact Report: A Review of Studies of ICT Impact on Schools in Europe. European Communities.

[6]. Barrow, L., Markman, L., & Rouse, C. E. (2009). Technology's edge: The educational benefits of computer-aided instruction. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 1(1), 52-74.

[7]. Bass, B. (2021). The effect of technology funding on school-level student proficiency. Economics of Education Review, 84, 102151.

[8]. Billett, S., Harteis, C., & Gruber, H. (2018). Developing occupational expertise through everyday work activities and interactions. The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance, 2, 105-126.

[9]. Bingimlas, K. A. (2009). Barriers to the successful integration of ICT in teaching and learning environments: A review of the literature. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 5(3), 235-245.

[10]. Blake, R. J. (2013). Brave New Digital Classroom: Technology and Foreign Language Learning. Georgetown University Press.

[11]. Bransford, J. (2000). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. The National Academies Press.

[12]. Bulman, G., & Fairlie, R. W. (2016). Technology and education: Computers, software, and the internet. In Handbook of the Economics of Education, 5, 239-280. Elsevier.

[13]. Chuttur, M. (2009). Overview of the Technology Acceptance Model: Origins, Developments and Future Directions. Indiana University.

[14]. Darling-Hammond, L., Furger, R., Shields, P. M., & Sutcher, L. (2016). Addressing California's Emerging Teacher Shortage: An Analysis of Sources and Solutions. Learning Policy Institute.

[15]. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. Management Information System Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340.

[16]. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003.

[17]. Dincher, M., & Wagner, V. (2021). Teaching in times of COVID-19: Determinants of teachers' educational technology use. Education Economics, 29(5), 461-470.

[18]. Dwivedi, Y. K., Rana, N. P., Chen, H., & Williams, M. D. (2011). A meta-analysis of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT). In IFIP International Working Conference on Governance and Sustainability in Information Systems-Managing the Transfer and Diffusion of IT (pp. 155-170).

[19]. Ertmer, P. A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., Sadik, O., Sendurur, E., & Sendurur, P. (2012). Teacher beliefs and technology integration practices: A critical relationship. Computers & Education, 59(2), 423-435.

[20]. Escueta, M., Quan, V., Nickow, A. J., & Oreopoulos, P. (2017). Education Technology: An Evidence-Based Review. National Bureau of Economic Research.

[21]. Fernando, M. (2012). Enhancement of ICT education through blended learning technologies for secondary education in developing countries: In the Sri Lankan context. In ICERI2012 Proceedings (pp. 169-179). IATED.

[22]. Ghavifekr, S., Afshari, M., & Amla, S. (2012). Management strategies for E-Learning system as the core component of systemic change: A qualitative analysis. Life Science Journal, 9(3), 2190-2196.

[23]. Goolsbee, A., & Guryan, J. (2006). The impact of internet subsidies in public schools. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 88(2), 336-347.

[24]. Grabe, M., & Grabe, C. (2006). Integrating Technology for Meaningful Learning. Cengage Learning.

[25]. Grimus, M. (2000). ICT and multimedia in the primary school. In 16th Conference on Educational Uses of Information and Communication Technologies, Beijing, China (pp. 21-25).

[26]. Hanemann, U. (2015). Lifelong literacy: Some trends and issues in conceptualising and operationalising literacy from a lifelong learning perspective. International Review of Education, 61(3), 295-326.

[27]. Hargittai, E. (2001). Second-level digital divide: Mapping differences in people's online skills. arXiv preprint cs/0109068.

[28]. Hashim, Y. (2007). Value Literacy as Conduit for Managing Change in Higher Education Institutions. UM Publication, Kuala Lumpur.

[29]. Hennessy, S., Ruthven, K., & Brindley, S. U. E. (2005). Teacher perspectives on integrating ICT into subject teaching: Commitment, constraints, caution, and change. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37(2), 155-192.

[30]. Hubbard, P. (2008). CALL and the future of language teacher education. CALICO Journal, 25(2), 175-188.

[31]. Hubbard, P. (2013). Making a case for learner training in technology enhanced language learning environments. CALICO Journal, 30(2), 163-178.

[32]. Hussain, A. J., Morgan, S., & Al-Jumeily, D. (2011). How does ICT affect teachings and learning within school education. In 2011 Developments in E-systems Engineering (pp. 250-254). IEEE.

[33]. Jones, A., & Preece, J. (2006). Online communities for teachers and lifelong learners: A framework for comparing similarities and identifying differences in communities of practice and communities of interest. International Journal of Learning Technology, 2(2-3), 112- 137.

[34]. Kessler, G. (2009). Student-initiated attention to form in wiki-based collaborative writing. Language Learning & Technology, 13 (1), 79-95.

[35]. Kimber, K., & Wyatt-Smith, C. (2010). Secondary students' online use and creation of knowledge: Refocusing priorities for quality assessment and learning. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(5).

[36]. King, W. R., & He, J. (2006). A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model. Information & Management, 43(6), 740-755.

[37]. LeBaron, J., & McDonough, E. (2009). Research Report for GeSCI Meta-Review of ICT in Education. Online Submission.

[38]. Lee, C. F. K., Jor, G., & Lai, E. (2005). Web-Based Teaching and English Language Teaching: A Hong Kong experience. Chinese University Press.

[39]. Levy, M. (2007). Culture, culture learning and new technologies: Towards a pedagogical framework. Language Learning & Technology, 11(2), 104-127.

[40]. Livingstone, S. (2012). Critical reflections on the benefits of ICT in education. In Digital Technologies in the Lives of Young People, 38(1), 9-24. Routledge.

[41]. Lomos, C., Luyten, J. W., & Tieck, S. (2023). Implementing ICT in classroom practice: What else matters besides the ICT infrastructure? Large-Scale Assessments in Education, 11(1), 1.

[42]. Loveless, A. (2007). Preparing to teach with ICT: Subject knowledge, Didaktik and improvisation. The Curriculum Journal, 18(4), 509-522.

[43]. Machin, S., McNally, S., & Silva, O. (2006). New Technologies in Schools: Is There a Pay Off. Institute for the Study of Labour.

[44]. Meskill, C., & Anthony, N. (2005). Foreign language learning with CMC: Forms of online instructional discourse in a hybrid Russian class. System, 33(1), 89-105.

[45]. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.

[46]. Mislevy, R. J., & Levy, R. (2006). 26 bayesian psychometric modeling from an evidence-centered design perspective. Handbook of Statistics, 26, 839-865.

[47]. Moser, F. Z. (2007). The Strategic Management of E- Learning Support. Waxmann Verlag.

[48]. Newhouse, C. P., Trinidad, S., & Clarkson, B. (2002). Quality Pedagogy and Effective Learning with Information and Communications Technologies (ICT): A Review of the Literature. Western Australian Department of Education.

[49]. Ondieki Makori, E. (2012). Bridging the information gap with the patrons in university libraries in Africa: The case for investments in Web 2.0 systems. Library Review, 61(1), 30-40.

[50]. Otieno, O. C., Liyala, S., Odongo, B. C., & Abeka, S. O. (2016). Theory of reasoned action as an underpinning to technological innovation adoption studies. World Journal of Computer Application and Technology, 4(1), 1-7.

[51]. Plomp, T., Anderson, R. E., Law, N., & Quale, A. (Eds.). (2009). Cross-National Information and Communication Technology Policies and Practices in Education: (Revised Second Edition). Integrated Action Plan.

[52]. Rampersad, C. A. (2011). Teachers' Perceptions of the Contribution of Information and Communication Technology to the Teaching of Modern Studies, Using an Integrated System, in an Urban Secondary School (Unpublished Master's Thesis, University of the West Indies).

[53]. Saunders, G., & Klemming, F. (2003). Integrating technology into a traditional learning environment: Reasons for and risks of success. Active Learning in Higher Education, 4(1), 74-86.

[54]. Shelly, G. B., Cashman, T. J., Gunter, G. A., & Gunter, R. E. (2007). Teachers discovering computers: Integrating technology and digital media in the classroom. Course Technology Press, 52 (4), 592-617.

[55]. Sheppard, B. H., Hartwick, J., & Warshaw, P. R. (1988). The theory of reasoned action: A meta-analysis of past research with recommendations for modifications and future research. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(3), 325-343.

[56]. Slaughter, S., & Leslie, L. (1997). Politics, Policies and the Entrepreneurial University. Johns Hopkins University Press.

[57]. Son, J. B. (2018). Teacher Development in Technology-Enhanced Language Teaching. Springer International Publishing.

[58]. Stockwell, G. (2010). Using mobile phones for vocabulary activities: Examining the effect of platform. Language Learning & Technology, 14(2), 9-110.

[59]. Tamim, R. M., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Abrami, P. C., & Schmid, R. F. (2011). What forty years of research says about the impact of technology on learning: A second-order meta-analysis and validation study. Review of Educational Research, 81(1), 4-28.

[60]. Thorne, K. (2003). Blended Learning: How to Integrate Online & Traditional Learning. Kogan Page Publishers.

[61]. Thorne, S., & Payne, J. (2005). Evolutionary trajectories, Internet-mediated expression, and language education. CALICO Journal, 22(3), 371-397.

[62]. Tondeur, J., Van Keer, H., Van Braak, J., & Valcke, M. (2008). ICT integration in the classroom: Challenging the potential of a school policy. Computers & Education, 51(1), 212-223.

[63]. Tornatzky, L. G., & Fleischer, M. (1990). The Processes of Technological Innovation Lexington. Lexington Books.

[64]. UNESCO. (2002). Information and Communication Technology in Education: A Curriculum Guide for Schools and Programs of Teacher Development.

[65]. UNESCO. (2006). Using ICT to Develop Literacy. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. Retrieved fro.

[66]. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. Management Information System Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478.

[67]. Voogt, J., & Knezek, G. (Eds.). (2008). International Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education. Springer Science & Business Media.

[68]. Warschauer, M. (2004). Of Digital Divides and Social Multipliers: Combining Language and Technology for Human Development. Analytical Survey.

[69]. Warschauer, M., & Healey, D. (1998). Computers and language learning: An overview. Language Teaching, 31(2), 57-71.

[70]. Warschauer, M., & Matuchniak, T. (2010). New technology and digital worlds: Analyzing evidence of equity in access, use, and outcomes. Review of Research in Education, 34(1), 179-225.

[71]. Wu, Y. T. (2013). Research trends in technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) research: A review of empirical studies published in selected journals from 2002 to 2011. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(3).

Full Article (HTML)

Pdf

Research Paper

Exploring Awareness and Impact of NCERT's DIKSHA Platform in Indian Schools

Karthikeyan P.*

Amity University Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India.

Karthikeyan, P. (2025). Exploring Awareness and Impact of NCERT's DIKSHA Platform in Indian Schools. i-manager’s Journal on School Educational Technology, 21(1), 33-47.

Abstract

The DIKSHA platform, developed by NCERT, is a national digital repository aimed at enhancing teacher professional development and classroom instruction. This study examined patterns of DIKSHA usage, its perceived relevance, and its impact on lesson planning, curriculum alignment, and career advancement. A total of 180 participants from Delhi NCR- comprising 149 student teachers and 31 schoolteachers—were surveyed. Using a quantitative research design, the study employed one-way ANOVA and exploratory factor analysis to explore variations based on teaching experience and school level. Results revealed that 35.8% accessed DIKSHA weekly and 14.0% daily, while 24.6% used it rarely and 15.1% never used it. Teachers with 1–3 years of experience found professional development content most useful, whereas engagement varied among others. Middle school teachers showed the highest alignment with DIKSHA resources. Factor analysis identified key dimensions such as support for classroom teaching, resource integration, and professional growth. However, gaps remain in training, accessibility, and curriculum fit. The study recommends structured training, differentiated content by grade level, and improved integration into school practice. Findings offer actionable insights for educational policymakers, platform developers, and teacher educators navigating India's digital education reforms.

References

[1]. Akhan, J. A., Nahar, N., Dey, A., & Saha, H. N. (2023). Digital initiatives in higher education in India. International Journal of Engineering and Science Invention, 12(8), 26–32.

[2]. Altaf, D., Anees, D., & Azad, M. (2025). DIKSHA: Shaping the school education ecosystem in India assistant professors 1 & 2. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Educational Research (IJMER), 4 (2[1]), 37–42.

[3]. Banerjee, A., & Biswas, R. (2025). Empowering educators, bridging divides: Evaluating DIKSHA and SWAYAM for digital teacher training and economic inclusion in India. International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts, 13(7), e710–e726.

[4]. Barman, P., & Kumar, M. (2024). A critical study of different policy perspectives on ICT in teacher education. National Journal of Education, XXII (2), 243-256.

[5]. Bhalla, D. (2020). Digital empowerment-A need for strengthening teachers' role. International Journal Engineering Research and Technology (IJERT), 9(6), 840- 851.

[6]. Das, P. P. (2025). Perspective Chapter: MOOCs in India: Evolution, Innovation, Impact, and Roadmap. arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.14780.

[7]. Dey, T. (2023). MOOCs (Massive open online courses) on SWAYAM: Challenges and support for higher education. The Impression: A Journal on Multidisciplinary Studies, 10(Annual Issue), 19–33.

[8]. Dutta, N. (2023). Open Educational Resource (OER) for lifelong learning: digital initiatives of India. International Journal of Business and Administrative Studies, 9(1), 46.

[9]. El-Hamamsy, L., Monnier, E. C., Avry, S., Chessel- Lazzarotto, F., Liégeois, G., Bruno, B., & Mondada, F. (2024). An adapted cascade model to scale primary school digital education curricular reforms and teacher professional development programs. Education and Information Technologies, 29(9), 10391-10436.

[10]. Galimov, A., Sheymardanov, S., Nasibullov, R., & Yarullin, I. (2023). Digital platform for teachers' professional development. In International Congress on Information and Communication Technology (pp. 883- 890). Springer Nature Singapore.

[11]. Gupta, D. K. (2022). Online education system during COVID-19: Challenges and opportunities. International Journal of Economic Perspectives, 16(3), 189–196.

[12]. Kanvaria, V. K., & Dubey, V. (2022). DIKSHA, NISHTHA and CPD: Experiences and perceptions of school learning-facilitators. Indian Journal of Educational Technology, 4(II), 144-151.

[13]. Kar, S. (2023). Digital infrastructure for knowledge sharing–DIKSHA: A review. Journal of Data Science, Informetrics, and Citation Studies, 2(2), 143-145.

[14]. Kundu, A., & Bej, T. (2020). Perceptions of MOOCs among Indian State University students and teachers. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 12(5), 1095–1115.

[15]. Mandala, P., & Pradhan, P. (2024). Innovative Strategies on DIKSHA Portal: An Experimental Study of Impact on Inclusive Student Engagement. International Journal of Religion, 5(10), 1068–1075.

[16]. Mohanty, S. B. (2023). A Comparative Analysis of NPE 1986/92 and NEP 2020. ResearchGate.

[17]. Mohapatra, T., & Singh, D. (2024). Revolutionizing Education: Unveiling the Impact of Foundational Literacy and Numeracy Training through Diksha on Teachers. State Institute of Education, Allahabad.

[18]. Mondal, K., & Parhi, R. K. (2024). Awareness of SWAYAM MOOCS among students of teacher education. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 30(1), 1252-1263.

[19]. Natavarlal, J. I. (2023). Evaluating teacher training and professional development in the New Education Policy (NEP) 2020. Vidhyayana - An International Multidisciplinary Peer-Reviewed E-Journal, 8 (4), 1-16.

[20]. Ocansey, T. S, & Sharma, A. (2019). DIKSHA in Maharashtra Needs Assessment Report. ICT India Working Paper.

[21]. OECD. (2023). Preparing Teachers for Digital Education : Policy Brief. OECD Publishing.

[22]. Öztürk, M., & Özcan, M. (2022). Evaluation of prospective teachers' digital literacy and mobile learning attitudes. Journal of Education and Technology Online Learning, 5(2), 367–378.

[23]. Patil, R. D., & Karad, S. (2020). NEP 2020: National professional standards for teachers in India and their significance in 21st century education. International Research Journal of Education and Technology, 4(8), 209-225.

[24]. Romero, C., & Ventura, S. (2020). Educational data mining and learning analytics: An updated survey. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 10(3), e1355.

[25]. Sharma. (2021). Guide for DIKSHA Implementation in Schools. Center for Sustainable Development, Columbia University.

[26]. Shokeen, A., & Kaur, B. (2025). Evaluating perception of Delhi government school teachers towards the DIKSHA Platform: A TAM-Based analysis. Indian Journal of Educational Technology, 7(1), 243-255.

[27]. Wagh, G. (2023). Role of the Indian government in shaping the culture of digital education. Journal of Management Research, 15(2), 28-34.

[28]. Waris, N., & Shaheen, S. S. (2024). An analysis of teacher education in NEP 2020. International Journal of Social Science and Education Research, 6(1), 34–38.

Full Article (HTML)

Pdf

Review Paper

Learning beyond Enrollment: A Critical Analysis of ASER Reports and Educational Challenges in India

Ismail Thamarasseri* , Sreelekshmi M.**

* School of Distance and Online Education, Mahatma Gandhi University, Kottayam, Kerala, India.

** School of Pedagogical Sciences, Mahatma Gandhi University, Kottayam, Kerala, India.

Thamarasseri, I., and Sreelekshmi, M. (2025). Learning beyond Enrollment: A Critical Analysis of ASER Reports and Educational Challenges in India. i-manager’s Journal on School Educational Technology, 21(1), 48-57.

Abstract

The Annual Status of Education Report (ASER) is a nationwide, citizen-led household survey that assesses children's schooling status and basic learning levels in rural India. Conducted annually by the NGO Pratham, ASER has emerged as a pivotal source of independent data on elementary education in the country. This study analyzes ASER findings over the past several years, focusing on literacy and numeracy outcomes, the gender gap, regional disparities, and school infrastructure indicators. Through secondary data analysis, the study highlights persistent challenges that significantly affect educational reforms and policy implementation. The research reveals that, although enrollment rates remain high, learning outcomes in reading and math are worryingly low across most states. Factors such as teacher absenteeism, lack of remedial instruction, and socio-economic disparities contribute to poor outcomes. ASER's methodology and data also raise important discussions about the role of community participation in educational assessments and the need for localized interventions. The findings underscore the urgent need to shift focus from inputs and infrastructure to learning outcomes and foundational competencies.

References

[1]. ASER Centre. (2020). Annual Status of Education Report (Rural) 2020 – Wave 1 (Phone Survey). Pratham.

[2]. ASER Centre. (2022). Annual Status of Education Report (Rural) 2022. Pratham.

[3]. ASER Centre. (2023). Annual Status of Education Report (Rural) 2023. Pratham.

[4]. Bagga, R., & Banerji, R. (2021). Evidence-Based Decision-Making for Policy and Practice. Ensuring All Children Learn: Lessons from the South on What Works in Equity and Inclusion.

[5]. Banerjee, A. V., Banerji, R., Duflo, E., Glennerster, R., & Khemani, S. (2010). Pitfalls of participatory programs: Evidence from a randomized evaluation in education in India. American Economic Journal Economic Policy, 2(1), 1-30.

[6]. Chavan, M. (2011). The Unseen Change. Annual Status of Education Report.

[7]. Kaffenberger, M., & Pritchett, L. (2021). A structured model of the dynamics of student learning in developing countries, with applications to policy. International Journal of Educational Development, 82, 102371.

[8]. Kingdon, G. G. (2020). The private schooling phenomenon in India: A review. The Journal of Development Studies, 56(10), 1795-1817.

[9]. Muralidharan, K., & Zieleniak, Y. (2013). Measuring Learning Trajectories in Developing Countries with Longitudinal Data and Item Response Theory. UC San Diego.

[10]. Pratham, P. (2008). Annual Status of Education Report (Rural) 2007.

[11]. Pritchett, L., & Beatty, A. (2012). The Negative Consequences of Overambitious Curricula in Developing Countries. Center for Global Development Working Paper.

[12]. Singh, A. (2020). Learning more with every year: School year productivity and international learning divergence. Journal of the European Economic Association, 18(4), 1770-1813.

[13]. UNESCO. (2021). Global Education Monitoring Report, 2021/2: Non-state Actors in Education: Who Chooses? Who Loses? UNESCO Publishing.

[14]. World Bank. (2018). World Development Report 2018: Learning to Realize Education's Promise. World Bank.

i-manager's Journal on School Educational Technology (JSCH)

Current Issue Vol. 21 Issue 1

Most Read

Most Cited

Volume 21 Issue 1 July - September 2025

Empowering Learning: ICT Assistive Technologies for Students with Learning Disabilities in India

Anjna Kumari* , Jaya Gautam**, Vipul Kumar Gautam***

* Department of Education, Central University of Punjab, Bathinda, Punjab, India. ** Department of Education, University of Lucknow, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh. *** Department of Tour and Travels, Govt. College Una(HP), Himachal Pradesh, India.

Kumari, A., Gautam, J., and Gautam, V. K. (2025). Empowering Learning: ICT Assistive Technologies for Students with Learning Disabilities in India. i-manager’s Journal on School Educational Technology, 21(1), 1-11.

Abstract

References

Full Article (HTML)

Pdf

From Marketplace to Classroom: The Quality of Health Education Lessons on Teachers Pay Teachers

Melissa Haithcox-Dennis* , Mariza James**, Derrick Bullard***

Haithcox-Dennis, M., James, M., and Bullard, D. (2025). From Marketplace to Classroom: The Quality of Health Education Lessons on Teachers Pay Teachers. i-manager’s Journal on School Educational Technology, 21(1), 12-20.

Haithcox-Dennis, M., James, M., and Bullard, D. (2025). From Marketplace to Classroom: The Quality of Health Education Lessons on Teachers Pay Teachers. i-manager’s Journal on School Educational Technology, 21(1), 12-20.

Abstract

References

Full Article (HTML)

Pdf

The Impact of ICT Integration on Teaching and Learning in ESL Classrooms in an English Conversation Japanese School: A Case Study

Xavier Aquino Velasco*

Japan Center for Michigan Universities, Japan.

Velasco, X. A. (2025). The Impact of ICT Integration on Teaching and Learning in ESL Classrooms in an English Conversation Japanese School: A Case Study. i-manager’s Journal on School Educational Technology, 21(1), 21-32.

Abstract

References

Full Article (HTML)

Pdf

Exploring Awareness and Impact of NCERT's DIKSHA Platform in Indian Schools

Karthikeyan P.*

Amity University Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India.

Karthikeyan, P. (2025). Exploring Awareness and Impact of NCERT's DIKSHA Platform in Indian Schools. i-manager’s Journal on School Educational Technology, 21(1), 33-47.

Abstract

References

Full Article (HTML)

Pdf

Learning beyond Enrollment: A Critical Analysis of ASER Reports and Educational Challenges in India

Ismail Thamarasseri* , Sreelekshmi M.**

* School of Distance and Online Education, Mahatma Gandhi University, Kottayam, Kerala, India. ** School of Pedagogical Sciences, Mahatma Gandhi University, Kottayam, Kerala, India.

Thamarasseri, I., and Sreelekshmi, M. (2025). Learning beyond Enrollment: A Critical Analysis of ASER Reports and Educational Challenges in India. i-manager’s Journal on School Educational Technology, 21(1), 48-57.

Abstract

References

Full Article (HTML)

Pdf

Anjna Kumari* , Jaya Gautam, Vipul Kumar Gautam*

* Department of Education, Central University of Punjab, Bathinda, Punjab, India.

Department of Education, University of Lucknow, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh.

* Department of Tour and Travels, Govt. College Una(HP), Himachal Pradesh, India.

Melissa Haithcox-Dennis* , Mariza James, Derrick Bullard*

* School of Distance and Online Education, Mahatma Gandhi University, Kottayam, Kerala, India.

** School of Pedagogical Sciences, Mahatma Gandhi University, Kottayam, Kerala, India.