Decision making — school dropouts after withdrawal of mid-day meal Statement: The number of dropouts from municipal schools has significantly increased after the withdrawal of the mid-day meal scheme. Which courses of action are appropriate? I. The government should reconsider its decision to withdraw the mid-day meal scheme. II. The government should close down some of the municipal schools. III. The government should conduct a detailed study to determine reasons for school dropouts.

Introduction / Context:
The statement links an uptick in dropouts to the withdrawal of the mid-day meal scheme. We must prescribe actions that are both evidence-informed and learner-centric, discouraging steps that further reduce access to education.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Dropouts increased after mid-day meals were withdrawn.
• Mid-day meals are known to incentivize attendance, especially for low-income students.
• Policy revision and root-cause analysis are within the government’s remit.

Concept / Approach:
Consider immediate remedial action (reinstating proven support) and diagnostic investigation (to confirm causes and refine policy). Reject actions that exacerbate access problems.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Education policies commonly blend immediate safety nets with evaluation to calibrate interventions. Mid-day meals have strong empirical support for attendance/retention.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• Only I: ignores the value of diagnostic evidence.
• Only II and III / All follow: wrongly include harmful school closures.
• None follows: incorrect because I and III are sound.

Common Pitfalls:
Assuming a single lever is sufficient; data-driven follow-through improves policy durability and fairness.

Final Answer:
Only I and III follow