CED - 2005
The Issues and Debates on the Fundamental Right to
Education and the Free and Compulsory Education Bill
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
The case against fundamental right to education
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]
Commercialisation of education
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
Governments monopoly over curriculum
‘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
This Digest is compiled by Tanvi Patel
01/03/2005
Disclaimer: The information in this Digest is aimed at promoting further reading and public debate. The information is compiled and edited for your personal study and reference. Information on this Digest may be copied and reproduced for personal study and reference. The copyright for the original quotes and articles however lie with the first authors/publishers as the case may be.
Copyleft © Centre of Education & Documentation
Last modified on 12 July 2005 webmaster, CED