Heavy burden of government schooling

Heavy burden of government schooling by Sauvik Chakraverti

The children of rich people don’t need government education. The role of government in education is advocated by champions of the poor. “Educate poor children,” they tell the government.

But what do poor parents want their children to learn? Today, the overwhelming response is English. Poor parents have witnessed that good command of the English language enables success. They themselves were denied English learning by chauvinistic politicians who promoted Hindi and other regional languages for 60 years. They don’t want the same fate to befall their children. This demand of poor parents has been translated into political action in West Bengal, Maharashtra and Uttar Pradesh. However, there have been problems in providing English language — particularly English medium education — and there are important lessons to learn from this experience.

In both West Bengal as well as Maharashtra, the major problem confronting state governments is a grave shortage of teachers. There are precious few who know English well enough to teach — and such people shun government employment. How then can this popular demand be met? One answer has emerged from India’s most populous Hindi heartland state of Uttar Pradesh, currently ruled by woman Dalit chief minister Mayawati.

Shortly after she assumed office in May 2007, Mayawati made the grand announce-ment that English would be introduced in all government primary schools from class I; that too, from July 1. But almost as soon as the chief minister had passed this order, her educrats ran into the problem of an acute shortage of trained and competent English teachers. They apprised the chief minister of this problem — and a new solution has emerged.

From August 1, thousands of primary and middle schools across Uttar Pradesh will tune into regular radio lessons in English. Teachers as well as students are expected to use this opportunity to the fullest. The English lessons scheduled to be broadcast statewide, have been produced by specialised English language teaching institutes. With the reach of radio, only one fully qualified teacher can teach English to an entire populace. In such a scenario why do we need government primary schools at all? Can’t an � la carte educational menu be placed before all poor parents and poor children by edupreneurs and educharities? Private initiatives will deliver far better services than government educrats who lack knowledge as well as incentive, and whose only role so far has been in maintaining licence-permit raj in the education sector. And apart from that, educrats have been administering a miserable government educational ‘system’ — actually a vast propaganda machine dispensing suspect socialist economics and knowledge.

Since we are talking specifically about the educational needs of poor children, we must note at the outset, that poor children need to enter the workforce fast. As economist Sudha Shenoy once famously said, “When life ends early, it must begin early.” The children of the poor have lower life expectancy than the rest of the population. Therefore for them, 12 years of school is a waste of time and effort. They need to learn basic skills, including language skills (like English). They don’t need ‘higher education’ of the type high schools are mandated to deliver.

If English can be taught through radio broadcasts, much can also be taught through television and the internet. Music, dance, cookery, and much else can be taught — and learned — through these media. If some poor household cannot afford the televisions and computers required, educharities could step in, and also monitor the quantum and quality of education actually transmitted. If we proceed along these lines, there is abundant hope that very soon the government school system will be closed down. And after their closure, there would be hope of useful knowledge actually reaching children of the poor. They could learn how to operate a calculator (instead of learning math); how to use a mobile phone and send and receive SMS; how to work a computer and send and receive e-mail; the rules of traffic safety and other things that all need to know.

A market economy is based on the social contract of ‘fragmentation of knowledge’. The taxi driver, the receptionist, the bhelpuri wallah, gardener, cook — all operate with distinct fragments of knowledge. Children of the poor, once they have acquired the basic skills outlined above quickly, can then choose what particular fragment of knowledge they wish to learn. They can learn from apprenticeship in for-profit training schools or through educharities. If we examine issues from this perspective, we see that there is no ‘knowledge problem’ as everyone doesn’t need to know everything. The ‘general education’ of the government schools system is irrelevant and counter-productive. It is also pertinent to note that government is not in possession of ‘knowledge’ that poor people need.

The government school system is a burden. It is a colossal waste of time, money and effort and weighs heavily on the shoulders of poor children. They need a short cut to the market, not the long road to a high school diploma.

(Sauvik Chakraverti is a writer involved with India’s liberal movement. www.sauvik-antidote.blogspot.com)

http://educationworldonline.net/index.php/page-article-choice-more-id-1327