When in doubt, legislate

The government recently introduced the Right to Free and Compulsory Education Bill, 2008.

The government recently introduced the Right to Free and Compulsory Education Bill, 2008. This follows a 1993 judgment of the Supreme Court, which ruled that elementary education is a fundamental right (as part of the right to life), and a subsequent amendment of the Constitution in 2002. The UPA government had drafted a bill in 2005 to implement the right to education, but, it was held up as several ministries, the planning commission and state governments could not agree on financing the costs. The Bill has finally been introduced with provisions for sharing of costs between the centre and the states.

The Bill states that all children between the age of six and fourteen years have the right to free and compulsory education. It mandates the government to set up neighbourhood schools within three years. It has provisions to provide out-of-school children to be given special training and then be admitted to the class appropriate for their age. It bans capitation fees and screening tests at the time of admission, failing or expelling any child till the completion of elementary education, and private tuitions by teachers. The Bill has specific provisions for private schools: a certificate of recognition and admitting at least 25 per cent of students belonging to the “weaker section and disadvantaged group in the neighbourhood and provide free and compulsory education till its completion”. For such children, the government will provide reimbursement to the school to the extent of per-child expenditure for government schools.

The parliamentarians need to think about some core issues while examining the Bill. First, there appears to be lack of clarity on the delivery mechanism to provide elementary education for all children. There are two broad schools of thought: one advocating the common school system and the other embracing both private and government schools. The first group believes that there should be only government schools — if the elite send their children to these schools and have a stake in the system, they would ensure that quality is maintained. The second group believes that parents should send their children to a school of their choice; competition would lead to quality; if required, the poorer sections of the society can be financed through school vouchers. This Bill falls between these two schools. While it permits private schools, it places several conditions — on admissions (including the 25 per cent quota for weaker sections), minimum standards and policies on promoting students among others. Interestingly, 63 per cent of the children in urban areas and 20 per cent in rural areas are enrolled with private schools.

Second, the focus appears to be on infrastructure and enrolment and not to see that the children who go to school actually learn. The ASER survey by Pratham, in 2007, indicated that 33 per cent of the children surveyed from classes three to five could not read text relevant to class 1 while 40 per cent could not subtract numbers. This Bill does mention learning levels. While Section 24(1)(d) requires teachers to assess the learning ability of each child and supplement additional instructions, the rest of this section, on duties of teachers, requires them to “maintain regularity and punctuality in attending school; conduct and complete the curriculum, etc.” The government apparently believes that an Act of the parliament is needed to ensure that teachers attend school regularly and punctually.

Third, the Bill provides for a uniform curriculum and evaluation procedure for elementary education within each state. This would limit the freedom of schools to determining the pedagogical content and methodology. Fourth, this Bill states that “it shall be the duty of every parent to admit his child to a neighbourhood school”. It, however, does not state the consequences of not following this duty. Also, it does not address the issues due to which parents do not admit their children. Fifth, the Bill requires each government and aided school to form a school management committee comprising local elected representatives, parents and teachers. This committee shall monitor the working of the school and the utilisation of grants given to the school. Evidence from Karnataka and several countries in Latin America and Africa on similar committees do not present any conclusive evidence of improvement in quality of schools. While the Bill attempts to lay down some guideposts, it remains an open question whether its provisions are sufficient to achieve this goal.

The writer works with PRS Legislative Research, New Delhi