Education News

RTE Bill retreat

The much trumpeted right to Education Bill 2005, drafted after a mountain of labour by several committees, sub-committees, seminars and workshops spread over five years and re-drafted several times to give effect to the Eighty Sixth Constitution (Amendment) Act 2002 which makes it mandatory (under a newly-inserted Article 21-A in the Constitution) for the State to provide free and compulsory elementary education to all children in the age group six-14, has paled into a diluted model Bill for state governments. In a covering letter dated June 16, accompanying a model bill sent to the education ministries of state governments, Champak Chatterji, secretary elementary education and literacy in the Union HRD ministry devolved the responsibility for fulfilling this constitutional obligation upon state governments.

The watered-down model Bill circulated to the state governments is remarkably clear of radical proposals like reservation of 25 percent capacity in private schools for poor neighbourhood children, the proposed National Education Commission, add-on responsibilities of private schools and time frame limits. The Bill was scheduled for presentation in Parliament in the current monsoon session. Instead the prime minister referred it to a panel comprising the finance minister, HRD minister, deputy chairman, Planning Commission and chairman, Finance Commission to study its financial ramifications. That the panel’s findings have not been made public is proffered as the rationale for shelving of the Bill. Government insiders say that the priority accorded to the RTE Bill has been taken by the politically more useful proposal to legislate an additional 27 percent quota for OBCs (other backward castes) in institutions of higher education.

Outraged by the casual burial of the Right to Education Bill by the Centre, several activist groups are up in arms, and street protests demanding full-fledged Central legislation have begun. Under the aegis of People’s Campaign for a Common School System, several leftist groups and individuals including Prof. Muchkund Dubey, former foreign secretary; former naval chief Admiral Vishnu Bhagwat; Prof Anil Sadgopal; Dr. P.M. Bhargava, vice-chairman of the National Knowledge Commission; Dr. V. P. Niranjanaradhya and Ashok Agarwal of the Social Jurists have petitioned the prime minister on the issue.

The group held a protest rally on the first day of the monsoon session of Parliament which was attended among others by Brinda Karat, politburo member of the CPM, D. Raja, secretary of CPI and member, Knowledge Commi-ssion Jayanti Ghosh. "We’re taking this issue to the masses and events like this are planned throughout the country. We’ll make the government bow before the power of the people," vows Ambarish Rai, convener of the forum.

"In our considered view, this move amounts to an abdication of the constitutional obligation of the Central government to provide elementary education, which is in the concurrent list. If the Centre can’t find resources for the fundamental right to education, guaranteed by Article 21-A, how can cash strapped state governments be expected to do so? It is an ill-advised move against more than 200 million children of India," complains Prof. Anil Sadgopal.

Meanwhile the private schools lobby, which has been accused by the media of scuttling the Bill, which had proposed the reservation of 25 percent of primary school intake for poor children in their neighbourhoods, is in hot denial. "We don’t command such influence. Besides this is the outcome of a decision at the highest level of government. We haven’t met with the HRD ministry after March and we haven’t been pursuing it at any level, political or administrative," says S.L. Jain, secretary of the action committee of private unaided schools and principal of Delhi’s Mahavir Model Public School.

Nevertheless most school managements admit to being relieved. Especially since the Delhi high court by its order of July 21, has discharged all but 361 private schools from the ambit of a Delhi state government order that made 25 percent reservations for poor students mandatory in all schools. The court ruled that only the 361 schools allotted land at concessional prices in exchange of a contractual promise to provide reservation for poor children, have to implement the state government’s order.

But while a skirmish for enforcement of contracts has been won in Delhi, the battle to make primary education an effective fundamental right for all children countrywide is quite obviously in retreat.

Autar Nehru (New Delhi)

Maharashtra

Explaining murder and mayhem

The synchronised bomb blasts in Mumbai’s commuter trains which took a deadly toll of 198 fatalities and 700 injured, have received maximum coverage in the press and particularly in the numerous 24x7 television news channels which dominate the media in the new age of economic liberalisation and globalisation. But while the causes and effects of the 7/11 terrorist outrage in Mumbai have been analysed threadbare, the impact of the random murder and mayhem upon school children in the commercial capital, has received scant attention in the media or within the state’s education establishment.

Teachers and educationists are unanimous that images of blood-spattered railway carriages and dismembered limbs have a profoundly disturbing impact upon young children, who are also likely to be easily influenced by loose talk, particularly demonisation of the minority Muslim community at home or in school. Against this backdrop, the role of teachers in explaining and interpreting terrorism for students in a language they can understand, assumes crucial importance.

Comments Lata Joshi who teaches social studies to class VIII students at Mumbai’s all girls CISCE affiliated J.B. Petit High School (estb. 1857), which has an aggregate enrollment of 400 class VI- X students: "Given the proliferation of the news media, particularly television, contemporary children are well informed about news and current affairs. Therefore it’s important to discuss critical news events with them, rather than pretend nothing’s happened. The teacher’s role is not to break news as much as to interpret events such as the 7/11 bomb blasts in an intelligent and socially responsible manner. Teachers must encourage children to question and think for themselves and answer questions rationally to provide students a balanced perspective of what’s happening in society."

Unfortunately in most schools — and even in numerous undergrad colleges — there is an informal ban on discussing or debating controversial political and potentially incendiary communal/ religious issues. "Most school managements and teachers are afraid to discuss the cause and effects of issues like the 7/11 bomb blasts lest they be accused of putting communal ideas in students’ heads. But that shouldn’t be an excuse to sweep the issue under the carpet. In my opinion that’s more harmful," says Joshi.

This viewpoint is endorsed by child counsellor Anjla Singh, an alumna of Bombay University who has been counselling students for the past three decades. According to Singh there is a responsibility not only on teachers, but also on parents to discuss and analyse events such as the bomb blasts while taking care not to denigrate any religious or distinctive community.

"At home too, important social issues should be discussed in a rational manner. Only then will a child be able to think for herself and form an educated and well informed opinion. Children have to be reminded that in a plural society like ours they have friends from all communities, who are as likely to be victims as anybody else. Most importantly, parents must stress that violence does not achieve anything and hurts innocent people," says Singh

Generally children in Mumbai, a city which attracts people from all over the country, tend to be more tolerant and accepting than adults. Evidence in support of this proposition is readily available in the city’s schools where children of all religious persuasions and communities co-exist in exemplary harmony. Therefore there’s a heavy responsibility upon the teachers’ — and parent — communities to build on this established secular tradition.

Bharati Thakore (Mumbai)

Stern inclusion order

In a landmark judgement which augurs well for the national movement towards inclusive education, the Bombay high court ruled on July 19 that all schools in Maharashtra (regardless of board affiliation) are duty bound to make available certain concessions and facilities to children with learning disabilities (LDs) such as dyslexia (reading disability), dysgraphia (writing disability) and dyscalculia (mathematical disability).

The order follows a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by Mumbai-based Vincy D’Silva in June 2005. According to D’Silva her son, a student of Mumbai’s well-known St. Mary’s School was not extended the concessions first mandated by the state government in 1993 and was denied promotion to class VII last year, notwithstanding the fact that he had been certified as being learning disabled by Mumbai’s well known child development centre and clinic, Umeed.

After hearing the case, the court appointed an expert committee to draw up a scheme detailing concessions allowed to children with LDs to facilitate their integration into mainstream classes. The committee comprising a panel of psychologists and special educators thus drew and presented to the court a detailed scheme for provision of legislated facilities and concessions to challenged children in Maharashtra’s mainstream schools.

Briefly, the scheme states that an expert committee appointed by the court will devise a standardised checklist for screening students with below par performance at any level to identify LDs. The scheme stresses that it shall be mandatory for schools to apply the checklist to identify class III-VI underperformers. Thereafter students with suspected LDs should — in consultation with their guardians — be examined by an expert and if a learning disability is confirmed, they should be provided facilities such as additional time for writing examinations; the help of a writer or typewriter in certain cases; help of a reader; exemption from spelling errors and numbers reversal and grace marks in certain subjects.

While issuing the order, the bench comprising Justices R.M. Lodha and N.H Patil stated that failure on the part of any school to comply with the formulated scheme would be tantamount to contempt of court. Comments Norina Fernandes principal of Mumbai’s CISCE-affiliated Podar School which has a good reputation for encouragement of students with learning disabilities: "The scheme should not be difficult for any school to implement. We need to look ahead and implement inclusive education in our schools. At Podar we regularly screen and identify children with LDs and promptly grant them concessions stipulated by government. We also recommend their cases to CISCE for concessions to write their board exams."

The court’s stern order has been widely welcomed by liberal educationists because most mainstream schools are unmindful towards children with learning disabilities, and often neglect to extend concessions like extra time, grace marks etc. Unfortunately few parents exhibit the courage to drag a school to court while their child is studying within its walls, even if an injustice is done to her. Hopefully the court’s latest directive will help in changing attitudes of schools and teachers towards children with learning disabilities. Considering that some of the greatest achievers in the world including Bill Gates, Richard Branson and Walt Disney experienced similar handicaps before attaining extraordinary success in their chosen vocations, a change in the mindset of institutional managements — which the court’s stern order will compel — was long overdue.

Gaver Chatterjee (Mumbai)

Forced cooperation

The prolonged legal battle between deemed (aka deemed-to-be) universities offering technical education in Tamil Nadu and the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) over the relative primacy of jurisdiction of AICTE and the Delhi-based University Grants Commission (UGC) ended on July 13. The Madras high court ruled that the UGC has primacy over AICTE in maintaining standards and enforcing regulations in all deemed universities (privately promoted colleges granted independent varsity status).

The jurisdiction dispute between deemed varsities and AICTE surfaced in March this year, when deemed universities in Chennai witnessed unprece-dented student demonstrations and violence sparked off by an AICTE notification of February 16. The notification stated that deemed universities should not conduct any technical education programme contrary to the norms and standards of AICTE, and cannot admit students into technical courses not approved by the council. As agitating students demanded clarification about the legal status of their study programmes, managements of several deemed universities filed petitions in the Madras high court arguing for a ruling that given their university status, they are governed only by UGC and are not answerable to AICTE.

The first bench of the Madras high court comprising Chief Justice A.P. Shah and Justice Prabha Sridevan, heard a batch of petitions filed by 22 deemed universities, and ruled that AICTE can inspect deemed universities but it does not have the authority to take direct action against them in the event of any shortcomings, which it (AICTE) should report to UGC for further action. The judges directed AICTE and UGC to undertake joint inspection of all deemed universities in Tamil Nadu within three months. Meanwhile the bench quashed AICTE’s February 16 notification, allaying student fears.

Following the Madras high court order, UGC, which had just a few days before the court order, written to 103 deemed universities countrywide directing them to give an undertaking that they would not start any new programme or vary student intake without its approval, completely reversed its stand. In a communication dated July 15, UGC clarified that deemed universities don’t require the prior or post facto approval of either AICTE or UGC to introduce new courses. However, it stated that deemed universities will be required to maintain the norms and standards laid down by the statutory councils (such as AICTE and the Medical and Dental Councils of India) and follow UGC regulations issued from time to time.

Now with the regulatory roles of the AICTE and UGC having been clearly defined by the Madras high court, educationists believe that errant deemed universities which have been taking advantage of their special status ignoring minimum eligibility and intake norms, can be brought to book. "The AICTE and UGC have been directed to work cohesively for the integrated development of technical education. Now joint committees of UGC and AICTE officials can inspect deemed universities and direct them to discontinue programmes that are sub-standard. The UGC can exercise its powers to grant approval and recommend cancellation of deemed university status, if AICTE norms are flouted. Moreover now on the recommendation of AICTE, the UGC can impose conditions on deemed universities to maintain norms and standards," says V.C. Kulandaiswamy, former director of technical education in Tamil Nadu and former vice-chancellor of Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU), Anna and Madurai universities.

Following the high court judgement which has compelled AICTE and UGC to cooperate in regulating deemed universities providing professional education (medical, engineering, business management etc), the divide et impera (divide and rule) era is over for their managements.

Hemalatha Raghupathi (Chennai)

Symbiosis solution

Against the backdrop of the raging controversy of carving out an additional 27 percent quota in Central government institutions of higher education for OBCs (other backward castes), and in anticipation of state governments following suit, the private sector Symbiosis International Education Centre, Pune (a deemed university), proposes to start a separate batch for OBCs in its Master of business administration (MBA) degree programme.

"To upgrade the skills and knowledge of OBC students from weaker scholastic backgrounds, we propose to start a separate batch for the first year MBA degree. After one year of intensive tuition and coaching, they will join ‘merit category’ students in the second year," says Dr. S.B. Mujumdar, chancellor of the Symbiosis International Education Centre, the umbrella organisation of 33 education institutions with an aggregate enrollment of 45,000 students. In a proposal letter dated June 7 to the University Grants Commission, Mujumdar says OBC students need "special grooming and training" in the first year, so that in the second they will be able to compete with open category students on a level playing field.

A strong supporter of quotas for the socially and educationally backward, Dr. Mujumdar stresses that although segregated, the first year special batches will follow the same syllabus, write the same examination, and earn the same credits as open category students. However their English language, mathematics, statistics, general knowledge competencies will be brushed up to bridge the historical learning disparity between forward and backward castes.

Mujumdar says permission for such experiments could be given on a case-to-case basis depending on the reputation, standing and capability of institutions seeking permission to innovate. "Unless OBC students are intensively educated and specially trained to benefit from higher education, merely providing reservation will fail to achieve the objectives of introducing reservation," the chancellor asserts.

The Symbiosis management believes this special induction and streaming programme is a workable idea because it has been tried, tested and has proved successful. The Symbiosis International Student Centre has been following a similar system of intensive first year coaching of African and Middle East students in English language, communications and humanities to enable them to acclimatise to Indian education and to prepare them to compete with Indian students in their second and third years and at the postgrad level as well.

Even as the curiously named Oversight Committee chaired by former Karnataka chief minister Dr. Veerappa Moily draws a road map for reserving an additional 27 percent (i.e in addition to the 22.5 percent quota decreed in 1950 for SCs and STs) for OBCs without cutting back the merit quota, Mujumdar sounds a note of caution. "Reservations are merely an enabling provision for stratas of society which for centuries have been forced to remain backward. Forced reservation will not ipso facto enable socially and educationally backward students to effectively compete with open category students. To avail reservation and benefit from it, they require special help and preparation," says Mujumdar.

Michael Gonsalves (Pune)

Tenuous compromise

For the 91,297 students from across the country who wrote the common entrance exams for admission into Karnataka’s 187 professional education (medical, engineering and dental) institutions in May, uncertainty over the tuition fee structure lingers, despite the admission process having begun. After weeks of discussions, arguments and negotiations between the ruling JD(S)-BJP coalition government represented by higher education minister D.H. Shankaramurthy and private unaided college managements under umbrella bodies Comed-K (Consortium of medical, engineering and dental colleges-Karnataka) and the Karnataka Religious and Linguistic Minority Professional Colleges Association (KRLMPA), an interim agreement was concluded in early July on seat-sharing and fee structure. But the confusion has been renewed by an out-of-the-blue announcement by Shankaramurthy on July 16, stating that the state government will subsidise the tuition fees of government chosen (CET) merit students by 30-50 percent.

Under the interim agreement, government chosen students (who top the state government conducted common entrance test) are allotted 40-50 percent of capacity in the state’s 171 private medical, dental and engineering colleges. This complex seat sharing formula has a long history.

Until 2002 when in a landmark judgement in the TMA Pai Foundation Case a full bench of the Supreme Court reversed its own ruling in Unnikrishnan’s Case (1993) and freed private, unaided institutions of professional education from all quota and tuition fee restrictions (provided they are "reasonable"), the state government(s) dictated 85 percent of admissions at prescribed fees. The verdict of the apex court modified in the Islamic Academy Case (2003) and confirmed by P.A. Inamdar vs State of Maharashtra (Appeal (civil) 5041 of 2006) has been fiercely disputed by the state government wary of upsetting the influential middle class, which patronises institutions of professional education.

Meanwhile in December 2005, Parliament unanimously approved the Ninety Third Constitution (Amendment) Act, 2005. This broadly worded constitutional amendment which expressly overrules the Supreme Court’s judgements in TMA Pai Foundation and P.A. Inamdar empowers the State (i.e. Central and state governments) to decree admission quotas for socially and educationally backward classes or castes in all education institutions "whether aided or unaided by the State". Although the 93rd Amendment can be challenged in the Supreme Court, the managements of private professional colleges grouped under Comed-K and KRLMPA have thought it prudent to hammer out a compromise formula with the state government.

Under the pact, the first 50 percent of merit students who top the government’s common entrance test (CET) and enroll in private unaided colleges, will pay an annual tuition fee of a mere Rs.42,500, 18,090 and 32,500 for medical, engineering and dental courses respectively. The next 30 percent of CET/ Comed-K toppers will pay substantially higher tuition of Rs.2.9 lakh, 88,090 and 2.3 lakh respectively. From the remaining 20 percent, 15 percent seats will be allotted to NRI students and 5 percent at the management’s discretion. NRI and management quota students pay much higher tuition fees of Rs.5 lakh for medical, Rs.3 lakh for dental and Rs.2 lakh for engineering.

"We will table a new Bill which will repeal all the old CET-related legislation and provide legal sanctity for the state to implement the compromise formula we have worked out with private colleges. I’m confident it will be a smooth process," says Shankaramurthy, adding that the new Bill will abolish the fee committee hitherto headed by Justice H. Rangavittalachar.

Confronted with the prospect of new legislation under the 93rd Amendment, private college managements have accepted the compromise formula which waters down the full freedom (conferred on private unaided colleges by the TMA Pai and P.A. Inamdar cases), as the lesser evil. "We don’t have a choice but to accept the compromise formula because we have witnessed how successive state governments have flouted Supreme Court judgements of the past three years," says Dr. S. Kumar, executive secretary of Comed-K and principal of Bangalore’s top-rated MS Ramaiah Medical College.

Meanwhile the major worry of private professional colleges is recovery of past dues from the state government. According to Kumar, the state administration already owes Comed-K constituent colleges sums varying from Rs.50 lakh to Rs.6 crore for SC/ ST students whose fees remain unpaid by the government. "The Karnataka state government hasn’t remitted SC/ ST and in-service students’ fees for the past three-four years. We hope that under the compromise formula the government will pay the agreed fees directly to students to pay to colleges," says Kumar who voices fears that private education institutions will soon face a major financial crisis if the state government doesn’t clear its dues.

And if the government’s past payment record is so bad, little wonder private college managements which under the pact still have to be reimbursed by government, are apprehensive about payment schedules and cash flows inherent in the new compromise formula.

Srinidhi Raghavendra (Bangalore)

Character certificate rumpus

Against the backdrop of politicisation and criminalisation — two sides of a coin — of campuses in Uttar Pradesh, India’s most populous (166 million) and arguably most illiterate state, it was only a matter of time before the step was taken. On July 24, Lucknow University’s vice-chancellor R.P. Singh, announced that henceforth all students applying for admission to the university (12,000 in 2006-07) will have to submit a character verification certificate from their local police station.

Expectedly there’s been a howl of protests from student leaders already fighting the VC over suspension of counselling for admission into the university’s business administration courses. Student union president Bajrangi Singh Bajju (38) who vowed to take the fight to its logical end, expostulates: "Even in the country’s top services, police verification is required only after selection. The university is branding the entire student community as petty criminals," glossing over the fact that LU’s student leaders have the murkiest reputations. These aspiring politicians have taken to burning effigies of the VC and organising dharnas on campus, protesting the proposal.

Ordinary students object to the proposal for more practical reasons. Ahmed Hussain, a student seeking admission into LU’s arts faculty says this requirement will compound admission hassles. "In the absence of a common admission policy, we already have enough forms to fill for the university and other colleges. Moreover we routinely submit a character certificate from our schools. Is that of no use? The police will only harass us," says Hussain.

The police verification requirement is also opposed by higher education minister Ram Asrey Vishwakarma, who suggests that the proposal be postponed until the next academic year, by which time a smooth procedure for obtaining police verification will have been worked out. "Let the admissions go through this year. If there are students who arouse suspicion, only their characters should be verified," he suggests.

Meanwhile vice-chancellor Singh, who has borne the brunt of student indiscipline in shouting matches with LU’s infamous leaders, says the university has become a haven for anti-social elements including outsiders who enter the campus just to play student politics. "We have analysed recent incidents of campus rowdyism, and invariably students involved in unsavoury incidents are from first or second year. Police verification will improve the campus atmosphere for students who wish to concentrate on their studies. Those with criminal antecedents also spoil our hostels and provide shelter to petty criminals," says Singh. To the LUSU (Lucknow University Students Union) charge that the measure is "undemocratic", Singh retorts that it is in keeping with the "unique character" of LU.

This unique character is displayed with alarming regularity. On July 18, a group of students stormed the vice-chancellor’s house, mouthing filthy abuses. Two days later, postgraduate aspirants tore up question papers of the entrance test. Earlier, on July 14, university professor G.S. Bhadauria was shot at, near the campus in Hasanganj.

Pro vice-chancellor Radhey Shayam Yadav who has been trying to soften the criticism, says LUSU leaders have jumped the gun on the issue. "The management is fully aware of the problems students will face in getting character verifications from the police. This is just one of the many suggestions to curb anti-social elements on campus. A decision on the issue is yet to be taken. Moreover just one step is not enough; there has to be a well thought-out, multi-pronged strategy. Women students have been kept out if its purview, as have students who come from good colleges," says Yadav. He prefers to leave ‘good’ undefined.

Inevitably politicians who are hyper-active in UP’s campus politics have been quick to get involved in this pre-election year. The first reaction has come from the Bhartiya Janata Party’s state unit president Kehri Nath Tripathi. According to him the proposal will add to the corruption in the admission process, and that his party will support the students in their "just fight".

It’s a fight unlikely to end in the foreseeable future.

Vidya Pandit (Lucknow)