Indian Education System: Reforms Failure
[Previous post in the series]
Goldman Sachs factors education one among the other 10 impediments to the rapid development of India. India's working force of around 400 million has 40% illiterates and 40% school drop outs. So, the reasonable advantage of the demographic dividend which we often argue when comparing the development scenarios in India and China in 2020s and 2030s, is just a laughable paradox given that we have only 20% of the whole working population is engaging into some or the other economic activity. The illiterates and the drop out levels can be distinctively mapped to the failure of Indian education system as the prime reason. Given the pledge of achieving literacy that the administrators of the independent India swore to, we still don't have a lot of medals to flip over for our accomplishments.
The main reasons that attributed to and still caste the gross inefficiency in the sector - strict government regiment, austere illusion of self-competence and shifting priorities based on political contingencies and adminitrative needs - are still being carried over as the pivots for the policy reflexes. These reflexes, which are faulty to the core, will continue to strangle our inclusive education dream until and unless a fundamental modification is performed. After adhering to the same policy frameworks for more than half a century, failing drastically, there still doesn't seem to be any intent of making a deliberate leap towards a more conducive framework.
The Government is in fact channeling resources towards the upliftment of the system - given the fact that India already has the highest number of colleges and universities in the world and the government has plans to more than double the higher education capacity within a decade. The problem, although is of the reliability and the efficiency at the enforcement side. It is a chain of highly integrated events that need ultra potency at every single link to make an impact. For example in this case, the lack of availability of adequately qualifies faculty members is a major constraint. India has one of the worst student to faculty ratios of any nation (26:1), almost double that of China. So even after having close to 26000 colleges across the country, the missing link of enough well-qualified faculty renders that physical infrastructure pointless. Why do we lack the faculty is altogether a different topic for discussion.
Sam Pitroda, currently involved in formulating a road map for India’s education sector as chairman of the National Knowledge Commission (NKC), states the undue red tape that we see in the education sector -
Our systems are always resisting change. That’s the nature of (our) system. Organizations have become old...and we really need to think if we should restructure.
The structure and the psychology of the system needs some profound alterations to generate a tangible change in the policies spinning out of the system thereof. The osmotic relationship between the system behaviourism and the policy frameworks it resorts to makes it cardinal to brutally refine the former first to inflict the latter. The key untapered fringes that the current system has created are discussed below. These fringes are delaying our claim on the visible impact in the sector.
The Right to Education Act
On April 1, 2010 India joined the league of 135 nations by making education a fundamental right. The primary goals of the RTE Actare -
bringing children of marginalized sections of our society into the ambit of school education,
ensuring that all schools and their teachers meet certain specified norms, and
ensuring that all children receive education of reasonable quality, free from any discrimination.
The intent of the Act is noble and deserves lauding, but the Act in itself is just another legal instrument; a coercive mandate which at its best can bring in students who are out of the system back to the schools. The meaningful learning and implementation is far fetched issue and is more or less circumvented by the Act. The Act comes out as a mere rhetoric with the total oblivion to the fundamentally nuanced and deeper order consequences of a policy based approach.
For example, there are norms introduced in the Act concerned with the minimum requirements on school infrastructure, teacher student ratio etc. and deems the school as "unrecognized" if it doesnt qualify the criteria. This would lead to the closing of around 300,000 low-budget schools in the cities responsible for secondary level education of around 90 million middle class children. "These schools are mostly the entrepreneurial response of the parental choices - the antibiotic response to dysfunctional government schools", and undeserved hindrances in their functioning will be a major set back in the already dire situation. In regard to the teachers' qualifications, it specifies that the primary teachers must have a 2 year education diploma; meaning that 33% of the teachers have to be fired. So following the terms of the Act stringently will lead to lowering of schools by around 25% and teachers by 33%; an ironical mist around the Act's concerns of school infrastructure and teacher student ratios.
The Act compromises in the capacity building, induces higher cost, and opens Pandora's box for corruption prone acts. A bunch of statistics and details adversely skewing the quotient of reliability of the RTE, with its current mode of action, are here, here and here.
RTE just illustrates the breadth to which government wants to spread its wings in the management of the sector. Before this enactment also, the administration has been quite liberal in twisting and turning the sectarian policies to suit its will. The government's extended regulation of fees and interference with enforced guidelines take the price competition away; which prevents the explosion of education entrepreneurship by private players. The maximum uplift this kind of environment can catalyse is the entry of NGOs which has an extremely low upper limit in its impact scope and value creation. And given the amplitude of the scale required in India's context, fundamental business measures should be given a chance, especially when the odds are lined up favoring them. But it is an infuriating thought for the government to open the education sector for the businesses to make a foray into. It is an outrage to suggest the autonomy and decentralization of education institutions. As Pitroda says,
All I am saying is that in this globalized world, we need to welcome anybody who wants to come and educate our children. Japanese, Chinese, Koreans—it doesn’t really matter. Let there be more openness. We definitely need private players in education. Some will misuse it, some will make money but that’s all part of the package. We know the government alone can’t meet the needs of the society. We have a huge gap between supply and demand. So we must increase supply substantially. Inefficient, corrupt people will fall by the wayside over time. In between, there will be problems so one has to accept that.
It is shocking to see that there have been cases when teachers in government schools were ordered to compromise their prime responsibilities to provide assistance in election duties (evaluating, updating, printing voters' lists). In rural and semi-rural areas they are also saddled with paper work related to panchayat and other development agencies. These gross defiances induce spill-over effects in the functioning of the sector.
We are done playing with the old rule book, especially in matters as critical as education and human resource development. With the limited range of natural favors upon us in terms of the resource base within our geographical limit and the rat-race for the ones beyond it, human capital is the only absolute advantage we have against the others on the global map. And looking at the status-quo regarding the attention type to that resource, I don't think we are doing enough to exploit it to our benefit.