One indicator of the above trend is data from a recent draft report (‘Guidelines for Rationalisation of Small Schools across States for Better Efficiency’) by the Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD).
LAST MONTH, the Supreme Court quashed the appointment of 1.32 lakh primary teachers in Uttar Pradesh (UP) whom the previous state government had regularised from being ad hoc Shiksha Mitras. The Court held that they did not fulfil the minimum qualification criteria for passing the Teacher’s Eligibility Test and also weren’t appointed against sanctioned posts.
The judgment has created uncertainty not just for the Shiksha Mitras — people originally hired on contract to assist professional teachers — but also for the primary education system in a state, where almost 52 per cent of elementary-level students are already enrolled with private schools. The recent past has seen large-scale migration of students from government to private schools, even in rural areas.
The key factors responsible for the increased privatisation of primary education – which the latest ruling, if anything, may only further accelerate – are apathetic attitude of teachers (made worse by the abysmal qualifications of new recruits), low and uneven teacher-pupil ratio, and lack of sanitation, classroom infrastructure and other basic amenities in government schools. Private schools, on the other hand, have marketed the claims of committed teachers, focus on English language and computer courses, offering transport facilities, etc. to lure parents. All this received added impetus during the last decade, with rising rural incomes and aspirations as captured by a story in this newspaper (http://bit.ly/28Yd1Jb).
One indicator of the above trend is data from a recent draft report (‘Guidelines for Rationalisation of Small Schools across States for Better Efficiency’) by the Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD). It shows as many as 2.5 lakh government schools at primary (class 1-5) and upper primary (6-8) level in India having less than 30 students. These numbers have, in fact, risen significantly in the last few years. The picture could turn out even grimmer, if an ongoing Aadhaar unique identification number-based enrolment of students were to – most likely – throw up many fictitious/ghost pupils in the government school system.
Given the resultant wastage of resources, the MHRD has proposed merging of small schools. As enrolment levels in these schools are anyway low, the move is unlikely to encounter major public opposition. But while such rationalisation might improve the students-per-school numbers in the short run, the problem of low enrolment would only resurface in the medium/long term if the systemic issues remain unaddressed.
It is often argued that one way to check privatisation – especially of the unhealthy kind – is to simply hire more teachers in government schools. But that, under the prevailing incentive and accountability systems, is unlikely to work, more so in rural areas. The authorities may even ensure that teachers attend schools, but can they be made more accountable? Government schoolteachers are more likely to justify the poor academic performance of students, by citing lack of motivation due to the latter coming mostly from the marginalised sections of society. It would be difficult really to separate the impact of lower teacher commitment from the apparent poor motivation of students in government schools. Even if teachers’ slackness is established, service rules make it virtually impossible to reduce their salary, leave alone terminate employment. On the other hand, the system isn’t equipped to identify and reward committed teachers.
It’s not that the situation in private schools is radically better. The government must not leave the functioning of private schools entirely to market forces for two reasons. First, information about quality of product is key to the functioning of any market. In the absence of any comparable quality indicators at elementary school level, one cannot expect the market to deliver efficient outcomes. Second, left purely to market forces, school fees and teacher salaries would be determined by the average income levels of a region. It follows, then, that low-income regions with lesser ability to pay school fees will also find it difficult to attract quality teachers.
According to National Sample Survey (71st Round) data, the median tuition fee in private rural schools of UP in was just Rs 117 per month in 2014. Governments, including that in UP, are trying to address the burden to families from high school fees – which they, indeed, should. However, there’s no discussion on the ‘low fee’ problem, despite it impacting learning outcomes in private schools, especially in the rural hinterland and mofussil towns.
The UP government should view the apex court’s verdict as an opportunity to look at creative hybrid solutions for improving the functioning of rural primary schools. There is a need, no doubt, to increase government expenditure on education, but in an efficient way.
An incentive structure could be created, wherein the government provides education vouchers/coupons worth, say, Rs 500 per month, to parents. To help them choose the right school — so as to address the information asymmetry problem — the government can involve external agencies to assess the performance of individual schools. These results can be made public in a format comprehensible to laypersons. Based on this information, parents can then present these encashable vouchers to schools of their choice — government or private. The Aadhaar enrolment process would take care of duplicate/fictitious students in schools, making it easier to implement the voucher program.