2. The case for fundamental right to education
3. The case against fundamental right to education
6. Negative consequences of foreign funding
7. Commercialisation of education
10. What legal recourses are possible?
11. Neglect of Education in Indian by the Government
12. The controversy regarding compulsion
13. No emphasis given to quality of education
14. The proposal for non formal schools will infact worsen the quality of education
15. The problematic age limits
16. Governments monopoly over curriculum
17. Negelect of the disadvantaged sections
18. 'Ingenious' Schemes of the Government
19. Financing of Education in India
After almost 50 years of Independence and countless committees policy
makers realized what it required to make universal elementary education
a reality. It required not just allocation of resources and Centre-State
co-ordination, but also a clear cut mandate. India had failed in what most
other countries had managed to achieve because there was no compulsion
of any on the state machinery to actually effectuate something like elementary
education. Though Centre-State coordination was taking place for years
together, India's masses remained illiterate because no agency could be
hauled up for the dismal state of education. International Declarations
had always stressed on the ‘compulsory’ aspect of education, because they
knew that unless people were forced to act nothing would result out of
policy papers. Therefore, in 1997 the Saikia Committee, consisting of State
Education Ministers, came up with their suggestions of amending the Constitution
to make Elementary education a fundamental right.
- Niranjanaradhya VP, Ch 4 pg. 32, Universalisation of School Education,
Books for Change, 2004 [B. N21. N3]
The idea of free and compulsory education is not a new one in the Indian
context. The earliest national attempt was made by Gokhale in March 1910
when as a non-official member representing the Bombay Presidency in the
Imperial Legislative Council, he moved a resolution for free and compulsory
elementary education in India...his resolution was rejected and the opposition
to it centred on the following: there was no popular demand for it, that
no additional taxes could be levied and that there was still some scope
for the voluntary extension of primary education through the grants-in-aid
system [Sen 1933].
Preceding Gokhale, however, was the compulsory education experiment
that began in Baroda in 1893 [Saiyidain et al 1952]. The Bengal Primary
Education Act 1919 included provisions for compulsory attendance and several
of its provisions are strikingly similar to those that the draft bill contains.
In addition to this several post-independence education commissions
– including the Kothari Commission, the Acharya Ramamurthi Commission to
name a few – have discussed at length the need for, as well as the ways
in which elementary education can be made available for all. A national
seminar on compulsory primary education was held in 1961 and in the Third
Five-Year Plan a nationwide programme for compulsory schooling was launched
which failed to meet with much success (GoI 1961).
- Sarada Balagopalan,
Free and Compulsory Education Bill, 2004, Economic and Political
Weekly August 7, 2004
The case for fundamental right to education
NAFRE
Without education, people are impeded from gaining access to employment.
Lower educational acomplishment prejudices their career advancement. Lower
salaries negatively affect their security in old age. Denial of the right
to education triggers exclusion from the labour market and marginalisation
into some form of informal sector, accompanied by exclusion from social
security schemes because of the prior exclusion from the labour market.
Redressing imbalances in life chances without full recognition of the right
to education is impossible. Moreover, illiterate people in quite a few
countries are precluded from political representation. Thus a large number
of problems cannot be solved unless the right to education is addressed
as the key to unlock other human rights.
- Katarina Tomasevski, Education Denied, pg 32 and 72, Zed Books
2003, [B.N00.T.1]
Notwithstanding the Philosophical doubts and cynical and selective use
of human rights in international relations to further narrow personal and
national interests, the embedding of human rights in international covenants
has merit. They embody a code of ethics for influencing the behaviour of
states. That ethics are often perceived as a set of empty platitudes which
cannot definitively condition human conduct or that they are abused by
the cynical and self-righteous is no argument against ethics. States, no
less than frail human beings, require a set of norms which inflict a certain
self-consciousness before public opinion.
- RV Vaidyanatha Ayyar, Basic Education and Human Rights, Journal
of Educational Planning and Administration, Vol IX No1, January 1997
Dear Respected Member of Parliament:
Currently, the 93rd Amendment is appearing before the Lok Sabha and
Rajya Sabha. While some see this as a positive step in
ensuring ‘Education for All’, others (like the National Alliance for
Fundamental Right to Education-NAFRE) believe it is incomplete.We are writing
to you in order to voice a very different perspective: the 93rd Amendment,
either as currently written or even modified, is actually detrimental to
real learning and empowerment. Indeed, any effort to make School Education
a Fundamental Right will ultimately be counter-productive, wasteful and
destructive...
You are perhaps aware that NAFRE is demanding more from the Amendment
Bill. They want free and compulsory education,
including Early Childhood Care and Education (ECCE), to be made a fundamental
right, ensured by the State, in a definite timeline.They also want the
State to ensure the ‘same’ education for everyone; i.e., there should be
no ‘second-class’ alternatives for poor children and families.
However, on closer look, NAFRE’s seemingly reasonable demands are based on several questionable assumptions: a) pouring more money into the current model of schooling will mean better quality education; b) homogenization and standardization will lead to greater equality and democracy; and c) all children in school will mean healthy families and communities and a better future for India. In light of research evidence and practical experiences from many of the so-called ‘developed’ countries around the world (which have achieved 100% enrollment), these claims are highly suspect.
Furthermore, research and experiences from the grassroots also suggest
that many parents and children do not want education in the form of schools.
Oftentimes, when parents say they want ‘education’ for their children,
they actually mean that they want
‘government jobs’; they send their children to school with these great
expectations. However, we doubt whether the government or NAFRE is prepared
to guarantee that they will meet these expectations of employment...
1. The various processes of schooling (competition, ranks, exams, rote
knowledge, labels, hierarchies, orders, etc.) demean individuals’ full
potential, their diversity, creativities, intelligences, learning styles,
knowledges, languages, etc. To succeed in
this cut-throat and sterile atmosphere, children must give up their
sensitivity, honesty and compassion -- essential qualities for being human.
2. .Schooling degrades and demeans many other knowledge systems, wisdom traditions, ways and spaces of learning. Far from being ‘ignorant’ or ‘uncivilized’, these people form the heart and soul of India, and of the vast majority of your constituents. This amendment will force one way of knowing, one form of communicating and one type of knowledge down everyone’s throats. It will expand the monoculture currently being pushed through globalization and development. This is a serious threat to India’s greatest asset -- its diversity.
3. ‘Schooled’ children and graduates today are doing little to address the growing violence, inequity, environmental catastrophes, and exploitation in India today. If anything, the type of consumerism, fear, selfishness, and alienation cultivated in school are only adding fuel to this dangerous fire.
4. Making schooling compulsory takes power and choices away from children
and families. Compulsion, centralization of authority and force by the
State goes against the spirit of natural learning, community empowerment
and Swaraj. Parents
should have the right to decide what kinds of educational opportunities
they would like to have for their children. This may include opportunities
for non-exploitative and non-hazardous work. This may also involve choosing
not to send their children to school.
Best regards,
Shikshantar Andolan
- Letter to the Members of Parliament- Shikshantar Andolan, November 2001
The government has introduced the Constitution (Ninety-Third) Amendment
Bill, 2001 in parliament to make free and compulsory elementary education
for children of the age of 6-14 years a fundamental right. Earlier the
United Front government had introduced the Constitution (Eighty-Third)
Amendment Bill, 1997, on the same subject. The parliamentary standing committee
had scrutinised the bill and made its recommendations. Unfortunately, it
was not pursued. However, it is a good augury that a new bill has been
introduced on the same subject.
- Madhav
Godbole, Elementary Education as a Fundamental Right: The Issues,
Economic and Political Weekly, December 15 2001
The Amendment (93rd amendment for ‘Education as a basic right') in its
present form was presented in the Lok Sabha on 28th November 2001. It was
earlier discussed several times at various levels. But notes of dissent
remained. Despite this the amendment was passed with 346 members for and
none opposing it...
...Even large number of parents mobilized by NAFRE (National Alliance
for Fundamental Right to Education) who participated in Protest March on
the 28th itself wanted positive changes in the amendment. They urged that
parents should not be vulnerable to exploitation and demanded free education
to be clearly defined. They asked for participation of private schools
and minimum quality of education to be assured.
- Amit Nikore, Right to Education- Implications and Implementation,
Legal News and Views February 2002
My dream always has been to bridge the gap between theory and practice.
I strongly feel that the policies on school education should be drafted
in a remote habitation of a village or a habitation belonging to the most
backward tribal community in the country. Our experts and education lovers
must sit and listen to people and their unprecedented rich experiences
to achieve the goal of universalisation of school education. A bottom-up
process is the need of the hour to correct all our misdeeds and also to
unlearn the class and colonial legacy of school education to respect people’s
views as the bottom line for human development and success of democracy.
- Niranjanaradhya VP, Preface, Universalisation of School Education,
Books for Change 2004 [B. N21. N3]
The Constitution (93rd Amendment Bill)...claiming to make education
a Fundamental Right, was pushed successfully by the Union Government in
the Lok Sabha's winter session despite serious objections raised...Proposals
by individual MPs for amending the Bill in order to remove its various
lacunae and distortions, were brushed aside. The statement made by the
Minister of Human Resource Development while presenting the Bill was replete
with internal contradictions. It revealed how the NDA Government has decided
to extend the Structural Adjustment Programme of the IMF and World Bank
into Indian education.
At the last minute, while the Lok Sabha was still debating the Bill,
the NAFRE leadership withdrew its declared programme of 10,000 people undertaking
'amaran anshan' (fast unto death) for persuading the government to atleast
undertake a review of the Bill. No explanation in public was offered. This
and other available evidence indicates that the government succeeded in
co-opting the middle class leadership of the rally in the powerful agenda
of the Structural Adjustment Programme under the policy of globalisation.
- Anil Sadgopal, Political Economy of the
Ninetythird Amendment Bill, Mainstream December 22, 2001
On the International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights
Article 13. ‘No part of this article shall be construed so as to interfere
with the liberty of individuals and bodies to establish and direct educational
institutions, …and to the requirement that the education given in such
institutions shall conform to such minimum standards as may be laid down
by the State.’
The Convention on the Rights of the child- “ Article28(1) States Parties
recognize the right of the child to education and with a view to achieving
this right progressively and on the basis of equal opportunity, they shall
in particular:
(a) Make primary education compulsory and available free to all;…
- Free and Compulsory Elementary Education for Children in India,
Legal News and Views, August 2004
It would be shortsighted to discuss the contents of this draft legislation
without a brief discussion of the discursive context that
has produced it at this particular historical juncture. One mode would
be to trace the trajectory of the draft bill to Jomtien, and
the resultant international pressure and civil society efforts at raising
the awareness of governments to the rights of the child, the debilitating
effects of child labour, etc, and its amelioration through formal schooling.
The other mode would be to read this increased emphasis on elementary education
as the human face of the neo-liberal state’s more debilitating structural
adjustment
policies and the expanding market’s attendant need for a literate and
commodity-consuming populace.
- Sarada Balagopalan, Free and Compulsory
Education Bill, 2004, Economic and Political Weekly August 7, 2004
Negative consequences of foreign funding
The World Bank's rationale for school fees in Malawi in 1982-83 became
known as the Thobani rule. It posits that families and individuals ought
to pay fees in order to access nominally available public services, otherwise
these services would not be available or their quality would become unacceptably
low. The importance of education for parents was assessed by through their
willingness to pay for the education of their children. Thus determined,
that willingness translated into the demand for education which was to
be matched by an adequate supply. Education was subjected to the free market.
However no matter how willing the parents, their lack of purchasing power
could not create a demand. That excess demand stemming from those
who might have been willing but were unable to pay, could not be met. Education
was thereby converted from an entitlement into a commodity, and the rule
of law was replaced by the power of the purse.
- Katarina Tomasevski, Education Denied, pg 32 and 72, Zed Books
2003, [B.N00.T.1]
Keeping in mind the present-day thinking of leaving more and more spheres
of economic activity to private...initiative, it would be natural to leave
the matter of universalisation of elementary education also to private
educational bodies and other NGOs. However, the current experience is that
by and large NGOs enter the field of education only when there are prospects
of direct and immediate monetary returns. It is obvious that elementary
education for the masses on the above scale holds no such prospects, so
that if the country and its government are serious about the goal of universalisation
of elementary education most of the necessary funding for it will have
to come from public funds.
- JV Deshpande, Elementary Education as Fundamental Right, Economic
and Political Weekly, September 20 1997
Many send (their children) to private schools...though it means a big
hole in their small budget.This is because of their dissatisfaction with
municipal or government schools nearby...This has led to commercialization
of education, and proliferation of private schools in every neighbourhood.
- Syed Shahabuddin, Right to Education: Real or Farcical?, Mainstream
December 22, 2001
In furtherance of this elitist agenda, private schools in India can
now provide foreign qualifications at school level itself without any regard
for the National Curriculum. This has been permitted by a circular from
the Ministry of Human Resource Development dated January 14th 2001. Several
such schools in Delhi and elsewhere have started providing such education
on payment of fees of several lakhs per year.
- Eduardo Faleiro, Gross Neglect of Education, Mainstream March
29 2003
Provisions in Part IV of the Constitution of India- Directive Principles
of State Policy
“Article 45- Provision for free and compulsory education for children.
The State shall endeavour to provide, within a period of ten years
from the commencement of this Constitution, for free and compulsory education
for all children until they complete the age of fourteen years.”
“Article 46- Promotion of educational and economic interests of Scheduled
Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other weaker sections. The State shall promote
with special care the educational and economic interests of the weaker
sections of the people and in particular, of the Scheduled Castes and the
Scheduled Tribes, and shall protect them from social injustice and all
forms of exploitation.”
It was the duty of the Central Government to implement Article 45 within
10 years of Independence.
5. The Fundamental Human Rights for Free and Compulsory Elementary
Education.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and Children's Rights
have created fundamental human right to free and compulsory education in
India.They are ratified by the Government of India. Now it is upto the
“State” to ensure this human right.
- Free and Compulsory Elementary Education for Children in India,
Legal News and Views, August 2004
The right to education is only a Directive Principle of State Policy
but not a Fundamental Right. As it is not a fundamental right, it remains
virtually a dead letter. Prof KT Shah had, as noted already, anticipated
this development and had called the Directive Principle of State Policy
on free and compulsory primary education a fraud on the Constitution. Now
the situation has changed with the ruling of the Supreme Court in the case
of Unnikrishnan J.P. vs. Andhra Pradesh that the right to elementary education…is
a fundamental right. However, the probability that this ruling may in future
be reviewed and reversed by the Supreme Court cannot be ruled out. Hence,
there is a need to enact a constitutional amendment making the right to
free elementary education a fundamental right. This will enable aggrieved
citizens to approach the court, if the State fails to provide schooling
facilities of reasonable quality at suitable locations. With the end in
view, the previous United Front Government had introduced in the Rajya
Sabha the Constitution (Eighty-Third Amendment) Bill 1997.
- Jayakumar Anagol, Ch 4 pg 43, Compulsory Primary Education- Opportunities
and Challenges, Indian School of Political Economy, [R.N21.20]
Article- 41- Right to work, to education and to public assistance in
certain cases - The State shall, within the limits of its economic capacity
and development, make effective provision for securing the right to work,
to education...
Article 45- Provision for free and compulsory education for children-
The State shall endeavour to provide within a period of 10 years from the
commencement of this Constitution, for free and compulsory education for
all children until they complete the age of fourteen years.
Thus after taking into consideration the various provisions of the
Constitution and the expanding import of Article 21 the SC in Mohini Jain's
case held " the fundamental rights guaranteed under Part iii of the Constitution
of India including the right to freedom of speech and expression and other
rights under Article 19 cannot be appreciated and fully enjoyed unless
a citizen is educated and is conscious of his individualistic dignity.
The 'right to education', therefore, is concomitant to the fundamental
rights enshrined under Part iii of the Constitution. The State is under
a Constitutional mandate to provide educational institutions at all levels
for the benefit of the citizens!"
... If the State's duty to provide education at all levels is not recognised,
then the private entrepreneurs are under no obligation to act either fairly
or in accordance with larger goals of the Constitution and would be quite
justified in having profit as the only motive in running educational institutions.
- D Nagasaila and V Suresh, Can Right to Education be a Fundamental
Right?, Economic and Political Weekly, November 7 1992
The Supreme Court observed in Mohini Jain case in 1992 that the directive
principles which are fundamental in the governance of the country cannot
be isolated from the fundamental rights guaranteed under Part III of the
Constitution.1 These principles have to be read into the fundamental rights.
The two are supplementary to each other.The court further held that ‘right
to life’ is the compendious expression for all rights which the courts
must enforce “because they are basic to the dignifiedenjoyment of life...The
right to education flows directly from right to life. The right to life
under Article 21 and the dignity of an individual are not being assured
unless it is accompanied by the right to education.
- Madhav Godbole, Elementary Education as a Fundamental Right: The
Issues, Economic and Political Weekly, December 15 2001
The danger of declaring even right to primary education as a fundamental
right is the same as that involved in declaring the right to shelter or
the right to health care as fundamental rights. Unless the state pursues
social and economic policies under which such rights could be secured,
their mere judicial articulation would only widen the gap between the normative
order and the social reality. This would cause erosion of the credibility
of the court as an institution and ultimately adversely affect its social
legitimacy. However, there cannot be any right to education at all levels.
- SP Sathe, Supreme Court on Right to Education, Economic and
Political Weekly, August 29, 1992
In 1992 the Supreme Court in the case of Mohini Jain vs State of Karnataka
held that right to professional education is a fundamental right. This
was followed by a series of cases filed by private and state-aided medical
and engineering colleges seeking review of this decision. Obviously their
main source of Income, capitation fees were being threatened. The Supreme
Court was constrained to constitute a special bench to hear the case of
the private colleges. After four weeks of arguments, the apex court passed
the judgement in Unnikrishnan and others vs State of Andhra Pradesh and
others.
- Aparna Bhat- Human rights law network, Supreme Court on Children,
A Combat Law Publication 2004
What legal recourses are possible?
5. What legal action can a person take if the
state does not provide educational facilities to children below fourteen
years of age?
If a child is not receiving education due to
the inability of the State to provide educational facilities, the following
courses of legal action are possible. These actions are possible in the
light of Supreme Court upholding education up to 14 years as a fundamental
right in Unnikrishnan case.
i. A person can file a writ petition in the High
Court or the Supreme Court in the case of violation of any fundamental
right. This petition can be filed by the aggrieved person or any other
person on behalf of the larger interests of the society. Such a petition
which is filed by a person who had no locus standi in the case, and which
is in the interest of public at large, is called a Public Interest Litigation
(PIL). Thus a writ can be filed in the High Court against violation of
the Fundamental Right (Article226)
- FAQs on the Fundamental Right to Education,Ch
4 Pg. 9, National Alliance for the Fundamental Right to Education, August
1998 [R.N21.11]
Neglect of Education in Indian by the Government
Our founding fathers- the constitution makers played politics
with the right to education and free compulsory basic education. They did
not give any importance to the right to education, and did not accept it
as a social welfare programme.It may be recalled that originally, the sub-committee
on Fundamental Rights of the Constituent Assembly proposed that basic education
be included in the list of fundamental rights, subsequently it was rejected
by the constitution makers.
- RM Pal, Denial of the Right to Education: A Human Right's Violation,
Social Action Vol 51 April-June 2001
In view of the challenges posed by the policies of modernisation and
globalisation, the Union Government and State governments need to formulate
with a sense of urgency a comprehensive policy to improve the quality of
education and to achieve an equal or similar level of educational facilities
and standards in all the different States and regions. However, the Conference
of the State Education Ministers, which is the mechanism for Centre-State
consultations on this subject, has not been convened since 1998 nor has
the Central Advisory Board of Education (CABE) where all the State governments
are represented, been reconstituted in spite of repeated demands within
and outside Parliament.
At present...the expenditure on education is less than four per cent
of the GDP. Downward revision and non-utilisation of even the reduced amounts
are abiding features of our budgetary performance.
- Eduardo Faleiro, The Right to Education, Mainstream, April
20 2002
Sponsored by the World Bank the Jomtien Conference laid the groundwork
for intervention by the international funding agencies in national educational
structures and processes of the developing nations... The Jomtien Conference
marked the beginning of the phase of increasing abdication by the Indian
state of its constitutional obligation towards education of the nation's
children in favour of the forces of the global market.
- Anil Sadgopal, Political Economy of the Ninetythird Amendment
Bill, Mainstream December 22, 2001
The controversy regarding compulsion
8. Duty of parents and guardians
1) It shall be the duty of every citizen who is a parent or guardian
of a child, unless prevented by a valid reason specified in sub-section
(2), to:
(i) enrol his child, or as the case may be, ward in a recognized school,
(ii) cause the child to attend such school with at least such minimum
regularity as may be prescribed; and
(iii) provide the child full opportunity
to complete elementary education.
-
The Free and Compulsory Education Bill 2004
In this draft bill the two-tier schooling structure compels parents
to send their children to schools at the risk of being penalised
rather than because they desire this particular type of school for
their children. The ‘compulsory’ provisions in the draft bill thus serves
to institutionalise a parallel system that poor parents have no recourse
to reject. The reason that this idea of ‘compulsion’does not provoke more
outrage is because the middle class strongly believes, and this is reflected
in the draft bill, that the primary reason that children are not in school
is because of parental encouragement of child labour. Within this point
of view it is quite natural that ‘compulsion’ takes precedence over quality
of schooling issues.
- Sarada Balagopalan, Free and Compulsory Education Bill, 2004,
Economic and Political Weekly August 7, 2004
The next question is whether the word ‘compulsory’ in the wording ‘free
and compulsory education’ should remain in the proposed amendment. As brought
out earlier, the word ‘compulsory’ appears in Article 45 of the Constitution
as also in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. It is imperative
that the word is retained to clearly indicate the ambit of the responsibility
of the government and that of the society at large in the matter. It should
not, however, be interpreted to cast penal liability on parents to send
their children to schools as has been provided in certain state legislations
which has led to prosecution of parents, particularly of low income and
deprived sections of society. For the same reasons and based on the same
logic, the proposal to amend Article 51 of the Constitution, pertaining
to fundamental duties of the citizens, so as to cast the duty on the parent
or guardian to provide opportunities for education to a child is sound
and will go a long way to create a proper climate and mindset in the society
for universalisation of elementary education. Over the last 50 years since
independence, we, as a society, have got used to talking of the responsibilities
of the government. It is time we talk equally eloquently of the responsibilities
and duties of the citizens...Wherever a parent or a guardian is financially
in a position to send his ward to a private school and bear the burden
thereof, there is no reason why the state should subsidise such expenditure
out of its own meagre and already over-stretched resources.
The Constitution (Eighty-Third) Amendment Bill, 1997, inter alia, referred
to a clause as follows: “The right to free and compulsory education referred
to in clause (1) shall be enforced in such manner as the state may, by
law, determine” (emphasis added). The word ‘enforced’ is likely to be misconstrued
and misinterpreted. It is also not appropriate in the context of the fundamental
rights of citizens. As brought out by the parliamentary standing committee
in its report on the Constitution (Eighty Third) Amendment Bill, 1997,
“A right is not given in a spirit of enforcement”. It is proposed that
the word ‘enforcement’ may be substituted by the words ‘given effect to’.
- Madhav Godbole, Elementary Education as a Fundamental Right: The
Issues, Economic and Political Weekly, December 15 2001
No emphasis given to quality of education
...The quality of education does not find any mention in the bill making
it illusory as to the nature of the right to be enjoyed in the future.
The most draconian provision is article 21A which is an open-ended provision
providing the government full discretion as to the manner of imparting
education.
- Anindita Pujari, Right to Education: A Reflection, Legal News
and Views November 2002
With what justification can one ask that the State provide all necessary
finance for school infrastructure as is being demanded complete with one
room per teacher per class, toilets, drinking water, free mid-day meal,
uniforms, books, stationery, transport and now incentives and yet leave
it to parents to decide whether or not they wish to make use of these facilities?
Such investment if provided, without any guarantee that the child is going
to be really sent to school will cause enormous wastage of resources.
- Kathyayini Chamaraj, Education: rights and wrongs, Humanscape
December 2002
Campaigning for Education to be a Fundamental
Right is problematic for several reasons...it presumes that all Indians
...require a system of schooling in order to live with dignity. This assumption
negates informal modes of learning, demeans contextually- sensitive conceptualizations
of organising life, and binds freedoms and choices. The aggressive nature
of campaigning ...restricts meaningful dialogue around the issue in question.
Opportunities for deeply and critically inquiring into the rationale or
implications of the demand are denied...Using propaganda to promote one
vision as the only answer, it thus prevents the emergence of any other
perspective on or understanding of the issue.
By focussing on the 'rights' aspect, the ...campaign
effectively diverts attention away from more foundational questions around
schooling, education and society. When analyzing and discussing the problems
of education, there is very little exploration of what purposes education
serves and very little reflection on what has been achieved in these many
decades. For example, it does not question the rising incidences of suicide
and depression in Kerala, despite its esteemed status of having achieved
a literary status of 93%. Nor is there any discussion about why prevalent
notions of education have failed; how education is connected to dominant
notions of Development, Progress, Science/Technology, the Nation State
; who benefits from education and why; or any other seriously meaningful
question. Not only is the landscape being ignored, but one wonders what
lies at the end of the road.
- Selena
George and Shilpa Jain, Exposing the Illusion of the Campaign for Fundamental
Right to Education, Ch2 Pg.23-25, Resisting the Culture of Schooling
Series -1, Shikshantar, December 2000, [R.N00.36]
The task of providing access to school, enrolling all the children of
school going age and retaining them till they attain a reasonable level
of literacy is a daunting one. The oft repeated claim that there is a school
now for every child in the country is exploded by the Report of the Fifth
All-India Educational Survey conducted by NCERT . Nearly three lakh habitats
comprising 50 million people have no access to primary education is the
shocking finding of the Survey...
...Of those who enrol, sixty per cent drop-out of school before completing
five years of education. Various are the reasons for this high drop out
rate and consequent waste. More than economic reasons the institutional
and curricular inadequacies are said to be a major factor, according to
some significant studies on this chronic problem. Here comes the question
of not only what is being taught but also the way in which children are
taught. Very poor physical environment of a large number of schools with
no buildings, equipment, qualified teachers urinals and even drinking water...
- NA Karim, Education For All- A summit with high drop-out rate,
Mainstream, December 25 1993
A specific provision in respect of the quality of education in the proposed
Constitution amendment will makes it obligatory for the state to provide
properly qualified manpower and adequate financial resources in terms of
infrastructure, equipment, scientific aids, textbooks and so on. Thus,
for example, considerable further work needs to be done to rewrite the
textbooks which will make elementary education a rewarding and enjoyable
experience for children. The large social, economic and cultural gap in
the urban and rural settings from which the students hail must be suitably
taken into account in the preparation of the textbooks. A categorical mention
of quality in the proposed amendment will also, to some extent, deter the
states from implementing low cost schemes for primary education.
- Madhav Godbole, Elementary Education as a Fundamental Right: The
Issues, Economic and Political Weekly, December 15 2001
There is a fear that the much heralded Right to Education may prove to be a mirage, politically only a populist gesture. The constitutional amendment will then amount to throwing dust in the eyes of the masses who will have to remain content with third rate education, irrelevant to their needs and even to their rising goals in life.
The governments invented 'proxy education' - one teacher school, one
room school, no room-school, ...existing only on paper, aided school run
by NGOs to line private pockets. On the other hand first rate schools came
up for the elite, comparable to the best in the world...Of course the elite
paid for them but whether the government will provide primary and secondary
education of minimum quality under the new dispensation is the big question.
Article 21 A already provides a backdoor for the state by subjecting the
fundamental right to determine the manner of implementation to the States.
This may well lower the level of education to the point of a formal irrelevance.
- Syed Shahabuddin, Right to Education: Real or Farcical?, Mainstream
December 22, 2001
The proposal for non formal schools will infact worsen the quality of education
On examination of the provisions of this Bill (Draft Free and Compulsory
Education for Children Bill, 2003) the following drawback(s) have been
noted:
It provides for two types of school, one is formal school and another
is non-formal school...The non-formal school is totally a sub-standard
school where unqualified teacher with no physical infrastructure may teach
the children for few hours. The children of the marginalized sections of
society can conveniently be asked to receive education in non-formal schools
which is bereft of quality education. Why should there be two sets of schools?
- Ashok Agarwal, Free and Compulsory Education for Children Bill,
2003: Needs to be redrafted on the basis of good quality Common School
System, Legal News and Views December 2003
The legitimation of a two-tier schooling system is perhaps the most
glaring provision in the draft bill. The bill recognises two different
grades of schools, namely, ‘approved schools’ and ‘transitional schools’.
The schedule of the bill clearly delineates the hierarchy within which
these two types of schools are being set up. The norms for the approved
schools include at least two
teachers in primary school, one room per teacher, 200 working days
in the academic year, and four hours of teaching per working day in primary
schools. In comparison to this the transitional schools get ‘instructors’
who have passed the 10th grade and have been trained for 30 days. There
is no discussion within the transitional schools of the minimum hours of
instruction per day, nor minimum number of days per year and nothing at
all of the space within which this instruction will take place. To compound
this farce of ‘norms’ is another listing of what is ‘desirable’ for each
type of school. The common sense understanding of desirable, highlights
its wishful elasticity and its constitutive ability to accommodate what
‘norms’ cannot. But even here the legislation reveals its underlying sense
of panic in making available, even with this hyper-real ‘desirable’, equal
amenities for both types of schools. As a result even toilet and water
facilities while desirable for approved schools do not find any mention
in the equivalent list for transitional schools!
Given this existing state of affairs, how then would the state’s efforts
to create new transitional schools with even lower infrastructural facilities
and less-qualified teachers lure in the poor? The answer lies less in the
transitional schools than it does in the sinisterness that underlies the
‘compulsory’ provisions of the draft bill.
- Sarada Balagopalan, Free and Compulsory Education Bill, 2004,
Economic and Political Weekly August 7, 2004
The Bill in fact makes a regressive reference to the issue of equity
and quality. The new Article 21A promises the right to free and compulsory
education for the 6-14 age group 'in such manner as the State may, by
law, determine'
Instead of articulating a policy focus on ways of improving both the
access and quality of the government school system, the policy declared
that a non formal stream, parallel to the school mainstream, will be established
for the out-of-school children. More than three lakh non-formal centres
were started during the next four years. However, as the non-formal stream
was rejected by the poor children and their parents alike...The policy
of promoting the non-formal stream...is part of the globalisation agenda
of gradual withdrawal of the state from from its constitutional obligation
of providing education of equitable quality to all children. It is also
an evidence of the State's willingness to co-exist with child labour.A
Non formal centre, an adult literacy class, the so called 'alternative'
school, a multigrade class...replacing the regular teacher with a para-teacher
and now the NCERT's 'innovation' of replacing even the para teacher with
a post man- all have been accepted as 'adequate' substitutes as long as
the substitute concerns the education of the poor.
The CSS was a policy imperative in the first NPE 1968. Ironically however
this commitment was violated twice by the 1986 policy itself...
It may be contended that the basic guiding principle for building up
a Common School System is the commitment to promote and savour education
of equitable (not uniform) quality in the entire school system.... Yet,
the successive Union Governments, despite the Constitution's commitment
to equality of all citizens continued to violate the Constitution and ignore
the policy commitment to the Common School System.
- Anil Sadgopal, Political Economy of the Ninetythird Amendment
Bill, Mainstream December 22, 2001
The age of compulsory schooling should coincide
with the age of permitted employment. Child labour below 14 years is prohibited
in certain occupations and processes under The Child Labour (Prohibition
and Regulation) Act, 1986. However the years of compulsory schooling terminate
years before the child is 14 years old. If compulsory education laws have
to be a strategy to eradicate child labour, the compulsory years of schooling
necessarily coincide with the age at which employment is permitted, irrespective
of the level of education achieved during that period.
- Archana Mehendale, Compulsory Primary Education
in India: The Legal Framework, The Lawyers Collective April 1998
Though it is well established that the development of a child in the
age-group of 0-6 is crucial to its further development and growth, this
aspect has been totally neglected in our planning process so far. The record
of work of aanganwadis is dismal. The Integrated Child Development Scheme
(ICDS) has not even touched the fringe of the problem. It is therefore
necessary that the education, nutrition and development of children below
the age of six years is explicitly brought within the purview of the proposed
amendment. It will be an empty gesture to cover the elementary education
of children only in the age group of 6-14 years in the list of fundamental
rights and to leave the education and development of children below the
age of six years for mention in the directive principles of state policy.
- Madhav Godbole, Elementary Education as a Fundamental Right: The
Issues, Economic and Political Weekly, December 15 2001
The Bill restricts the Fundamental Right to to the children in the 6-14 age group and thus 16 crore children in the 0-6 age group (including the disabled) lose the right given to them by the Supreme Court. The significance of early childhood care...nursery and pre-school education for the children upto six years of age cannot be overemphasized as its criticality for child for child development as well as the child's readiness for elementary education is fully recognised by the National Policy on Education 1986. By withdrawing this right the government is essentially disciminating between the rich and the poor since the former will be able to afford early childhood care and education for their children while the poor children will suffer throughout their education due to this handicap in early childhood.
In its lack of commitment to the children under six years of age, the
Bill also reflects its inherent bias against the education of the girl
child in the 6-14 age group as well. It is well established that a majority
of the girls in the families dependent on daily wages are deprived of school
education since they are invariably required to take care of their younger
siblings...
The Acharya Ramamurthi Committee therefore recommended in 1990 that
early childhood care and education ...must be made a Fundamental Right.A
rough estimate of the financial requirement for this purpose was also given,
again probably for the first time in the country. The government of the
day got cold feet on seeing this and several other such recommendations
of the Acharya Ramamurthi committee to give a truly egalitarian character
to Indian education. The Narasimha Rao Government, within a week of announcing
its New Economic Policy in July 1991, set up yet another Committee called
the Janardhana Reddy Committee under the auspices of CABE...The CABE committee
report (1992) went to great lengths to reject all those recommendations
which would increase equity in education. This included the rejection of
the recommendation to make early childhood care and education a fundamental
right for the 0-6 age group.
It is being contended that education upto class VIII, as implied by
Article 45, made sense when the Constitution was drafted. No more Without
a Class X or XII certificate today, a young person stands little chance
for either employment or admission in professional courses.
For the SCs and STs too, the benefits of reservation become available
only after Class X and XII. It is further noted that India is a signatory
to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child which defines a child as
a person upto the age. Hence the demand for making Fundamental Right to
education available to all children upto 18 years. This demand was not
even referred to by the Minister of Human Resource Development in his Lok
Sabha speech.
- Anil Sadgopal, Political Economy of the Ninetythird Amendment
Bill, Mainstream December 22, 2001
‘The Free and Compulsory Education Bill 2004’
Some of the fundamental problems with regard to the present Bill are
highlighted below:
… The Bill, authorizes the ‘competent authority’ recognized by the
government for recognition of schools and prescription of syllabus. This
means that the State accords to itself the power to interfere in the syllabus
of curriculum preparation and medium of instruction. The whole attempt
will further marginalize the minorities from participating in school related
issues…
- Jeebanlata Salam, Education policies and praxis: A reference to
the Free and Compulsory Education Bill, 2004, Legal News and Views,
August 2004
The National Human Rights Commission’s (NHRC) resolution of 9 January,
2002 on a complaint… submitted by a group of educationists has added new
dimensions to the on-going debate over text books and school education
curriculum that the NCERT is all set to introduce from the next academic
year beginning April 2002.
The resolution states, inter alia, that ‘Education is the most effective
tool and medium for human development. Right to education has been judicially
construed to fall within the guarantee of right to life in Article 21 and
now it is being expressly included in Part iii of the Constitution as a
fundamental right’.
The right to education of every child is clearly a human right and
its proper direction a human rights issue, The revision of text books if
not carried out in scientific manner is bound to adversely affect the development
of children distorting their personality. Therefore, even though the formulation
of policies remains within the domain of government, the NHRC states, when
it is alleged that a policy or state action would adversely affect the
development of children it becomes a human rights issue…
… Education is a medium of exposure for a child to different points
of view based on depiction of established facts. Education changes the
mindset through a continuing process involving research, experiment and
innovation. Without such practices a nation cannot expect the future citizens
of this country to be informed and creative.
- Somen Chakraborty, Education- A Child’s Human Right, Legal
News and Views March 2002
Article 13 (2) (c) Acceptability- the form and substance of education,
including curricula amd teaching methods, have to be acceptable (e.g. relevant,
culturally appropriate and of good quality) to students and, in appropriate
cases, parents; this is subject to the educational objectives required
by article 13 (1)...
(d) Adaptability - education has to be flexible so it can adapt
to the needs of changing societies and communities and respond to the needs
of students within their diverse social and cultural settings.
Article 13(2) (9) The Committee obtains guidance on the proper interpretation
of the term "primary education" from the World Declaration on Education
for All which states: " The main delivery system for the basic education
of children outside the family is primary schooling. Primary education
must be universal, ensure that the basic learning needs of all children
are satisfied, and take into account the culture, needs and opportunities
of the community" (art.5)
(9) As formulated in article 13(2) (a), primary education has two distinctive
features: it is "compulsory" and "available free to all"...
Article 13 (3) and (4): The right to educational freedom
(29) The second element of article 13(3) is the liberty of parents
and guardians to choose other than public schools for their children, provided
the schools conform to "such minimum educational standards as may be laid
down or approved by the State.
- Right to Education- Scope and Implementation, General Comment
13 on the right to education (Art 13 of the International Covenant
on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights), Economic and Social Council and
UNESCO
Negelect of the disadvantaged sections
… The Bill does not provide for special provision for homeless and destitute
children, girl children, children of migratory population, children of
sex workers, children in situations of emergency and armed conflict and
those facing genuine problems of attending formal systems of schooling.
Further various sections, sub-sections, clauses and sub-clauses of
the Bill clearly oppose basic premises of the Education Commission 1964-66,
the Education Policies 1968/1986, Programme of Action, 1992 etc. on which
the main foundation of the national school system is formulated.
These policies emphasize need based considerations on the education of
rural populations with special focus on the deprived masses. The government
has proposed the Bill without referring to state level school committees,
CABE, National Policies on Education, Constitution of India and UN Convention
on the Rights of Child to which India is a party.
- Jeebanlata Salam, Education policies and praxis: A reference to
the Free and Compulsory Education Bill, 2004, Legal News and Views,
August 2004
'Ingenious' Schemes of the Government
Dr. Joshi and his ministry seem to have evolved a new scheme (reminiscent
of former Prime Minister IK Gujral's scheme of making it mandatory for
all fresh graduates to teach at least five children before conferring the
Bachelors degree). It is called the National Reconstruction Corps...Girls
and boys having +2 certificate are not equipped to teach students ...upto
the age of 14. So that the NRC cannot be a substitute for compulsory basic
education as a fundamental right. NRC can be introduced in addition to
regular schooling with full-time teachers, proper class rooms and other
educational equipments.
- RM Pal, Language of Deceit and Arrogance-Compulsory Basic Education,
Legal News and Views September 1998
The Prime Minister has gone on record proposing that every aspirant
of the HS certificate (after the 12th standard) should be required to teach
five students. A proposal such as this only shows two things: 1) The PM
and his advisors are not aware of the trauma which the 12th standard students
are already undergoing while preparing for their examinations...2) The
PM and his advisers are evidently not aware of the ease with which a determined
person can procure a certificate...
- JV Deshpande, Elementary Education as Fundamental Right, Economic
and Political Weekly, September 20 1997
Financing of Education in India
The Government of India's Department of Elementary Education and literacy
has assessed that Rs. 60,000 crore will be required from the budget of
central and state Governments from 2000 to 2010.
The Indian government must invest the required amount of money for
meaningful and full scale realization of universal free elementary education
by at least 2010 AD. It is only then India can stand as a completely educated
nation and realize the Fundamental Right to Education.
- Free and Compulsory Elementary Education for Children in India,
Legal News and Views, August 2004
For many years now the educational planners are proposing that atleast
6 per cent of the GNP should be earmarked for education every year and
of that at least half should be reserved for elementary education...Two
budgets of the UF government have come and gone and yet the actual figure
still hovers around 3.7 per cent...
- JV Deshpande, Elementary Education as Fundamental Right, Economic
and Political Weekly, September 20 1997
We may now decipher the meaning of the Financial Memorandum attached
to the 93rd amendment Bill according to which an additional sum of Rs.
9800 crores per year will be provided for the next ten years in order to
implement the Bill. Since the Union Budget allocation for the current financial
year for Elementary Education is Rs 3800 crores, the Bill actually provides
for an additional allocation of only Rs 6000 crores per year which is merely
0.35% of GDP. This is in contrast to the estimate made by the Tapas Majumdar
Committee, constituted by the Central Government, whose report in 1999
stated that an additionality of about Rs 14,000 crores per year on an average
will have to be spent for the next ten years to provide school education...This
additional investment works out to be 0.78 per cent of the GDP merely 78
additional paise out of every out of every hundred rupees of the GDP- merely
78 additional paise out of every hundred rupees of the GDP. What the new
Bill is willing to provide is less than half of what is required to be
spent at the existing level of the quality of education.
- Anil Sadgopal, Political Economy of the Ninetythird Amendment
Bill, Mainstream December 22, 2001
The Union Government is already pleading paucity of financial resources
to meet the cost of implementation which is estimated at Rs 9800 crores
every year. This is not an unmanageable amount, if one considers the total
budget of the Union and the States and sees the outlay on education as
an essential investment in the future of the nation with long tern multiplier
effects.
- Syed Shahabuddin, Right to Education: Real or Farcical?, Mainstream
December 22, 2001
The Budget has allocated to Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan for universalisation of elementary education the same amount as last year. The increase from Rs 1512 crores to Rs. 1951.25 crores is fictitious and has been obtained by cancelling very important schemes such as Operation Blackboard (Rs. 58.50 crores), Central Plan for the North Eastern areas (Rs 388 crores) etc. It is most regrettable that these important projects should have been cancelled.
The Tapas Majumdar Committee appointed by the government in 1999 had
assessed the additional requirement of Rs 13,700 crores per year for universalisation
of elementary education. The financial memorandum of the 93rd Constitutional
Amendment scaled down the requirement to Rs 9008 crores. The government
never explained on what basis this was done. Now the budget allocates for
universalisation of elementary education (SSA) the grossly inadequate amount
of Rs 1951 crores only.
- Eduardo Faleiro, Gross Neglect of Education, Mainstream March
29 2003
Copyleft © Centre of Education & Documentation
Last modified on 12 July 2005e webmaster, CED