Positive outcomes have been registered in the education sector but the need is to bridge the class divide which reflects in the quality of education
Public education in every nation has a pivotal role as the cost of education is completely or in some cases, mostly borne by the Government. On the other hand, the cost of private education is borne by the learners or their parents. In public education, the State creates infrastructure, supplies consumables and also pays for the salary of the teachers and other employees.
The beneficiaries ie, the learners, get the services for free, on the taxpayers’ money, as the Government considers providing education as a public good and in the interest of the State. Pandit Deendayal Upadhyay, in his seminal lecture, Integral Humanism, mentioned that we plant saplings and nurture them till they grow to become a tree and give back many times more than they were served. We never ask for payment from the trees as we know they will grow up and give in return in the form of fruits back to the society. Similarly, why should we ask the children or their parents to pay for the education of the children if we expect them to grow up and serve the nation in the futureIJ Ideally, education until the age of 18 should be completely free and compulsory.
Education incorporates within its definition ‘quality', which ensures a certain level of learning which must be of ‘good’ quality. Education bereft of ‘quality’ is no education. So, every learner, after years of spending time in a school, must learn what he/she is expected to learn. For this, it is important that we first define the expected ‘learning outcomes' after every year of schooling. If the child does not learn what is expected of him, then the loss is irreparable. Children who come from less privileged families contribute towards the family income by either helping their parents in their work or by taking care of their siblings, which allows the parents to work by generating income for the family.
By doing so, the child is contributing towards family income. If the child, at the end of schooling, fails to attend the expected levels of learning then he/she will lag behind. If education decides our future, then education bereft of quality will be tantamount to no education. The loss is two-fold: The child loses time and income too. It is the primary concern of the state to ensure that every child, who ‘donates' his/her time in school, must learn as much as possible, failing which, the state must compensate for the loss of time and opportunity.
Until the 1980's, children, who could get admission in a Government school, felt proud of themselves. Those who had to go to a private school felt they were not good enough to get admission to a Government school. However, towards the beginning of this century, the scenario changed completely. By and large, children, who get admission in Government schools, do not feel proud of their alma mater, except the Kendriya Vidyalayas, the Navodaya Vidyalayas and a few other schools under Government management.
Similarly, children, till a few decades back, felt ashamed of going for a private tuition. But now, it has become a matter of social pride for them to go for a private tuition. Both the developments — the slipping of Government schools to subservient position and also the promotion of private tuition — go against the interest of the less privileged children who cannot afford expensive education. As most Government schools do not provide quality education, it becomes fait accompli for those who go to Government schools to come out with a sub-acceptable quality of education and settle for a second rate life.
A revealing and disturbing indication is that teachers want to get employed in Government schools but send their children to private schools. The indication is clear. Service condition of Government school teachers is much better when compared to private school teachers. The quality of teaching in Government schools is generally below acceptable level. The loss is of the economically less privileged learners. The question which must be asked is: Who is responsible for this state of affairsIJ
The National Council for Educational Research and Training (NCERT), on insistence of the Minister for Human Resource Development Prakash Javadekar, recently came out with a document defining “learning outcomes” after every year of schooling. Javadekar, while assuming charge of the Ministry, had announced that one of his priority is to declare learning outcomes so that schools can be assessed on a transparent scale. This is commendable.
Based on the scale, a nation-wide survey was conducted and the outcome is awaited. This is the largest survey ever done anywhere in the world. All other surveys done by agencies in the country or abroad are much smaller in terms of sample size when compared to this survey. The methodology adopted too is scientific and meticulous.
However, the question all want the Human Resource Development Ministry to answer is: What is the Government going to do about private tuition and also about the exorbitant fee charged by some institutionsIJ Unless and until we create a level-playing field, no norm can give the less privileged the required support to compete with affluent societies.
(The writer is Professor of Education at the Indira Gandhi National Open University, New Delhi. Views expressed are personal)