The education system in India is broken. All assessments, public and private, show that a tragically large number of children learn very little at school, and quickly forget what they learn. Everyone agrees that something needs to be done. But, apart from short term or fiscally unsustainable fixes, no one has a solution to offer. Against this background, the union government’s decision to evolve a New Education Policy was welcome. It offered a chance to think afresh to what purpose and how India wants to educate its children.
As the months have passed, even the most optimistic have given up hope of this happening. The human resources development minister’s pronouncement on a New Education Policy are well-rehearsed lines, repeating keywords and data points to suggest something new and very big is taking place.
In Parliament, the minister Smriti Irani said: “Until today a few chosen people would tell us what sort of education we should have.… we said there are 275,000 village education councils… we will ask them what kind of education do you want.… We will go to 6,600 blocks and ask them what kind of education do you want.… we will go to all districts, take along all people’s representatives… sit with the public and ask what kind of education do you want.”
The same keywords and data points – 250,000 villages, 6,600 blocks, 600-plus districts, etc. – are repeated ad nauseam on the ministry's website as well as through its publicly available documents and any official who speaks on the issue. All these words and numbers are suggestive of bureaucratic activity, but what seems absent is application of mind.
While the union ministry is expansive on the scale of its consultations, it is terse when it comes to explaining its reasons for a new education policy. One brief paragraph is all it merits:
We are left to guess what the government believes the “several changes” and “changing dynamics” are.
The government wants to persuade us that it is involved in a real democratic exercise, where “the public” and not a “few chosen people” will direct policy formation. This is, in its own words, what sets it apart from all previous governments. But this attempt at shock and awe by numbers does not succeed.
The HRD ministry, in its “Manual for Grassroots level consultation in New education Policy”, sets out why it believes its consultation process will differ from earlier ones:
By the ministry’s own admission earlier consultations were “extensive”. And so, going by its statement, it seems that the difference between what happened before and what the ministry hopes to do rests on not taking “a top-down approach” and not “depending on limited feedback from field workers and stakeholders on the ground who are responsible (sic) implementing the Education Policy” and not having discussions in “silos”.
To this end, the ministry has decided on 23 themes for discussion (13 for school and 20 for higher education) and has stipulated which themes will be discussed at which level of administration. It has directed state governments on the administrative mechanisms/personnel to be put in place for the consultations. It has also devised a questionnaire, to be filled in by hand by those consulted, and an online space where state governments have to type in and upload the handwritten answers. The union ministry has asked them to hold each level of consultation (answering the questions in the prescribed format) on a single day, and advised them to consult with the Centre on dates for the consultations so that the union minister can attend a few meetings.
In short, this is as top-down an exercise as it comes. Every detail of the consultation has been decided at the top.
Let's look at the claim about the breadth of consultations. The HRD ministry says it is conducting the largest consultation in India – 250,000 gram panchayats, 6,600 blocks and so on. The government's consultation, even if perfectly executed, will start with gram panchayats, process through the layers of administration to state capital and end in “multi-stakeholder thematic roundtables” and an amorphous “national education task force” at the Centre. From the ministry website, interviews in some states and from observing an online meeting between HRD ministry and state government officials, it appears that the government will, in the main, consult itself – different levels of government officials some of whom administer education policy and some of whom don’t.
So, while the numbers may be huge, the breadth of interests – of “field workers and stake-holders on the ground” will be very narrow.
The “grassroots level” consultation is yet to take off, not least because state governments see the exercise for what it is – empty activity by a union government bereft of ideas. But the ministry can claim that its “public consultation” began months ago on the much-advertised mygov.in website – the government’s web portal that lets people enter competitions for slogans, logos, listen to the prime minister’s radio broadcasts and also air views on policy matters. People with internet access can weigh in on a new education policy in theme-based chat rooms.
To date there have been between 500 and 1,400 responses to the various themes for discussion on the new education policy. This self-selected group is a small and unrepresentative sample by any standards, but especially for a country of billion-plus people. The respondents, some whom post multiple times, are largely male. This is no surprise, as less than 25% of Indians have internet access, less than a third of these are women, the majority are urban and English-language users. English and Hindi are the language choices the website offers, further narrowing the sample.
There are perhaps a handful of sharp suggestions among non-institutional posts on this website, but the bulk of them are standard internet chat-room fare – uninformed opinions or assertions or rants. The ministry has assigned officials to collate the posts by theme. This is an unenviable task, but one that will generate bureaucratic activity.
The ministry’s online consultations now also include discussions on real-time presentations by “experts”, simultaneously on mygov.in and the ministry website. So far it has had six consultants, one each from Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (on new pedagogies for teaching science, maths and technology in schools) and Confederation of Indian Industry (school standards, assessments, and management systems), two IIT professors (on developing the best teachers and promoting innovation), one founder of a monthly Twitter discussion on education (on information and communication technology in education) and one expert on inclusive education. A statistically insignificant number of people signed up to each of these presentations. And except in some cases where ICTs and technology were discussed, most questions were bizarrely off topic, and there was nothing at all that amounted to a discussion, informed or otherwise.
The government’s obsession with giving the exercise the appearance of a massive democratic consultation follows the logic of its election campaign where the fiction of popular engagement was created through Google hangouts, chai-pe-charchas, hologram visitations, among other things. In government, however, this obsession seems to suggest a political vacuum and an absence of ideas. The HRD ministry officials have, as bureaucracies do in the absence of political leadership, created a set of activities to give the impression of purposefulness. This on-paper (or rather online) activity is just bureaucratic business as usual or the biggest barrier to change.
We welcome your comments at
letters@scroll.in.
As the months have passed, even the most optimistic have given up hope of this happening. The human resources development minister’s pronouncement on a New Education Policy are well-rehearsed lines, repeating keywords and data points to suggest something new and very big is taking place.
In Parliament, the minister Smriti Irani said: “Until today a few chosen people would tell us what sort of education we should have.… we said there are 275,000 village education councils… we will ask them what kind of education do you want.… We will go to 6,600 blocks and ask them what kind of education do you want.… we will go to all districts, take along all people’s representatives… sit with the public and ask what kind of education do you want.”
The same keywords and data points – 250,000 villages, 6,600 blocks, 600-plus districts, etc. – are repeated ad nauseam on the ministry's website as well as through its publicly available documents and any official who speaks on the issue. All these words and numbers are suggestive of bureaucratic activity, but what seems absent is application of mind.
While the union ministry is expansive on the scale of its consultations, it is terse when it comes to explaining its reasons for a new education policy. One brief paragraph is all it merits:
“The National Policy on Education was framed in 1986 and modified in 1992. Since then several changes have taken place that calls for a revision of the Policy. The Government of India would like to bring out a National Education Policy to meet the changing dynamics of the population’s requirement with regards to quality education, innovation and research, aiming to make India a knowledge superpower by equipping its students with the necessary skills and knowledge and to eliminate the shortage of manpower in science, technology, academics and industry.”
We are left to guess what the government believes the “several changes” and “changing dynamics” are.
The government wants to persuade us that it is involved in a real democratic exercise, where “the public” and not a “few chosen people” will direct policy formation. This is, in its own words, what sets it apart from all previous governments. But this attempt at shock and awe by numbers does not succeed.
Suggestions on government sites for school standards, school assessment and school Management systems.
The HRD ministry, in its “Manual for Grassroots level consultation in New education Policy”, sets out why it believes its consultation process will differ from earlier ones:
“…While past consultative processes have been extensive, they have taken a top-down approach, depending on limited feedback from field workers and stakeholders on the ground who are responsible implementing the Education Policy. Further, they have been thematic based, with discussions being held in silos.”
By the ministry’s own admission earlier consultations were “extensive”. And so, going by its statement, it seems that the difference between what happened before and what the ministry hopes to do rests on not taking “a top-down approach” and not “depending on limited feedback from field workers and stakeholders on the ground who are responsible (sic) implementing the Education Policy” and not having discussions in “silos”.
To this end, the ministry has decided on 23 themes for discussion (13 for school and 20 for higher education) and has stipulated which themes will be discussed at which level of administration. It has directed state governments on the administrative mechanisms/personnel to be put in place for the consultations. It has also devised a questionnaire, to be filled in by hand by those consulted, and an online space where state governments have to type in and upload the handwritten answers. The union ministry has asked them to hold each level of consultation (answering the questions in the prescribed format) on a single day, and advised them to consult with the Centre on dates for the consultations so that the union minister can attend a few meetings.
In short, this is as top-down an exercise as it comes. Every detail of the consultation has been decided at the top.
Let's look at the claim about the breadth of consultations. The HRD ministry says it is conducting the largest consultation in India – 250,000 gram panchayats, 6,600 blocks and so on. The government's consultation, even if perfectly executed, will start with gram panchayats, process through the layers of administration to state capital and end in “multi-stakeholder thematic roundtables” and an amorphous “national education task force” at the Centre. From the ministry website, interviews in some states and from observing an online meeting between HRD ministry and state government officials, it appears that the government will, in the main, consult itself – different levels of government officials some of whom administer education policy and some of whom don’t.
So, while the numbers may be huge, the breadth of interests – of “field workers and stake-holders on the ground” will be very narrow.
The “grassroots level” consultation is yet to take off, not least because state governments see the exercise for what it is – empty activity by a union government bereft of ideas. But the ministry can claim that its “public consultation” began months ago on the much-advertised mygov.in website – the government’s web portal that lets people enter competitions for slogans, logos, listen to the prime minister’s radio broadcasts and also air views on policy matters. People with internet access can weigh in on a new education policy in theme-based chat rooms.
To date there have been between 500 and 1,400 responses to the various themes for discussion on the new education policy. This self-selected group is a small and unrepresentative sample by any standards, but especially for a country of billion-plus people. The respondents, some whom post multiple times, are largely male. This is no surprise, as less than 25% of Indians have internet access, less than a third of these are women, the majority are urban and English-language users. English and Hindi are the language choices the website offers, further narrowing the sample.
There are perhaps a handful of sharp suggestions among non-institutional posts on this website, but the bulk of them are standard internet chat-room fare – uninformed opinions or assertions or rants. The ministry has assigned officials to collate the posts by theme. This is an unenviable task, but one that will generate bureaucratic activity.
The ministry’s online consultations now also include discussions on real-time presentations by “experts”, simultaneously on mygov.in and the ministry website. So far it has had six consultants, one each from Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (on new pedagogies for teaching science, maths and technology in schools) and Confederation of Indian Industry (school standards, assessments, and management systems), two IIT professors (on developing the best teachers and promoting innovation), one founder of a monthly Twitter discussion on education (on information and communication technology in education) and one expert on inclusive education. A statistically insignificant number of people signed up to each of these presentations. And except in some cases where ICTs and technology were discussed, most questions were bizarrely off topic, and there was nothing at all that amounted to a discussion, informed or otherwise.
The government’s obsession with giving the exercise the appearance of a massive democratic consultation follows the logic of its election campaign where the fiction of popular engagement was created through Google hangouts, chai-pe-charchas, hologram visitations, among other things. In government, however, this obsession seems to suggest a political vacuum and an absence of ideas. The HRD ministry officials have, as bureaucracies do in the absence of political leadership, created a set of activities to give the impression of purposefulness. This on-paper (or rather online) activity is just bureaucratic business as usual or the biggest barrier to change.
Suggestions on government sites for ensuring learning outcomes in elementary education.