62 SOCIAL SCIENTIST TABLE II DEGREE OF RESPONSE Number Percentage Teachers who responded Not responded Refused to cooperate Total 28 32 4 64 43.75 50.00 6.25 100.00 teachers did enter the name of the district. The re remain absolutely anonymous (Table III). This kind of ^suppression of information" can as a sign of the delicacy of the relationship between political powers that be in the Panchayati Raj set-up. that if any proof were provided for their identificat themselves open to lurking dangers. ;st (20) preferred toincidentally be taken the teachers and the The teachers feared ion, they would lay ^ TABLE III CONCEALMENT OF IDENTITY Entries in Qjiestionnaire Number Percentage Name, place and district entered 2 7.1 Name and district, but not place -r 2 Only district 4 Complete blank 20 Total 28 7.114.3 71.5 100.00 Political Interference The survey aimed at probing into the nature and extent of political interference in education. The first question put to the teachers, therefore, was ^Do you find that there is undue political interference in your work by the elected political leader?" Twenty-six out of twenty-eight respondents answered in the affirmative without any reservation* Only two (although agreeing that there was interference in their work) qualified their statement by saying that it could not be described as undue or ee too much'5. To find out the details of the nature and extent of interference the next question was: ^In what ways do the leaders interfere in your work?" The teachers were requested to put down their own observations. As a result, there were as many different answers as respondents to this one question. The observations reveal that local leaders interfere a great deal in the school examinations and exam results in particular; teachers are under pressure to promote pupils who are relatives of the leaders by