There were more than 500 comments on Times of India webpage that described Allahabad High Court's verdict that forces government officials to send their children to government schools. Almost all comments welcomed this landmark judgement. And why not, this seems to be a quick way of improving the quality of education in government schools. This is an easy solution and most likely to result in exactly opposite outcome.
The decision is primarily meant to ensure that children, who are not able to afford private education and are studying in government schools, should get better education. I admire the intention, but I seriously question the verdict for its impact.
Let me back my opinion by some facts and clarifications. First, there is an inherent assumption that all the government schools are bad. We know that this is not true. Navodaya Schools, Sainik Schools and several other government run schools are imparting high quality education and these schools are primarily catering to poor, common middle-class households. The moment this verdict will be enforced, there would be a rush among the government officials to get their kids admitted in these schools. There will be less number of seats available for the rural, middle-class students, as government officials will migrate their kids from the private schools to these better run government schools. So the expectation that the government officials kids studying in government schools will improve the quality of education is not going to be met. The government officials are not going to send their kids to the remote, rural schools which require the attention and quality enhancement measures.
Furthermore, it is a common fact that the most of the government officials are concentrated in district headquarters or urban/peri-urban areas. So this is not going to have much impact on the rural schools anyway.
I feel that instead of this poorly thought decision, High Court could have insisted on creating a mechanism that gives incentives (positive or negative) the teachers and education department officials on the basis of learning outcomes. A third party randomized assessment of learning outcomes of kids and teaching efforts put by the teachers can be the basis.
The decision is primarily meant to ensure that children, who are not able to afford private education and are studying in government schools, should get better education. I admire the intention, but I seriously question the verdict for its impact.
Let me back my opinion by some facts and clarifications. First, there is an inherent assumption that all the government schools are bad. We know that this is not true. Navodaya Schools, Sainik Schools and several other government run schools are imparting high quality education and these schools are primarily catering to poor, common middle-class households. The moment this verdict will be enforced, there would be a rush among the government officials to get their kids admitted in these schools. There will be less number of seats available for the rural, middle-class students, as government officials will migrate their kids from the private schools to these better run government schools. So the expectation that the government officials kids studying in government schools will improve the quality of education is not going to be met. The government officials are not going to send their kids to the remote, rural schools which require the attention and quality enhancement measures.
Furthermore, it is a common fact that the most of the government officials are concentrated in district headquarters or urban/peri-urban areas. So this is not going to have much impact on the rural schools anyway.
I feel that instead of this poorly thought decision, High Court could have insisted on creating a mechanism that gives incentives (positive or negative) the teachers and education department officials on the basis of learning outcomes. A third party randomized assessment of learning outcomes of kids and teaching efforts put by the teachers can be the basis.
No comments:
Post a Comment