THE CHALLENGE OF EDUCATION : ANOTHER PERSPECTIVE

 I

Ever since January 1985, when the Congress Party under the leadership of Rajiv Gandhi won the Parliamentary elections with a massive majority, the Govt. of India has been declaring at periodic intervals that it is determined to make far-reaching changes in the education system obtaining in the country. In this connection, the education ministry (now called the ministry of human resource development) has brought out a document entitled ‘Challenge of education - a policy perspective and followed it up with a more compact ‘National Policy on Education 1986’. In these documents, a detailed survey of the existing education system from primary to higher and professional education has been made. Some broad features of the future education, policy that the government is going to adopt can also be discerned from these documents. After the publication of these documents, a nation-wide debate on education is going on among the educationists intellectuals and others. Centered around these documents a series of seminars and conferences have also been held.

During the past four decades, we seem to have built up a tradition of discussing the education system constantly. One hears stock phrases and rhetoric without any seriousness of purpose. Though the new documents are not entirely different in this regard, there are some features which distinguish them from others. On some issues like the involvement of local bodies in the spread of elementary education, use of high technology in the field of education, restructuring of higher education, etc, stands have been taken which could have far reaching consequence for the future.

The documents contain a detailed analysis of the progress in the education field during the past four decades. In fact, it would be hard to find a more scathing indictment of the existing policies than what is contained in these documents. At all levels, one finds a depressing state of affairs with little hope of any change for thé better in the near future. 

During the past three and a half decades the number of educational institutions has increased from 2.3 lakhs to 6. 9 lakhs, a threefold increase. As regards primary education, the total student population increased from 2.8 crores in 1950-51 to 11.4 crores in 1982-83, the average growth rate being 4.5% per annum. But the growth rate has been going down steadily over the last three decades. The growth rate of primary education was 6.2%, 5.2%, and 2.5% per annum during the fifties, sixties and the seventies respectively. The rate of growth of enrolment during the seventies is still below the age-specific population growth rate. This implies that the backlog of population with no access to education, in absolute terms, keeps on increasing with time. Another alarming feature is that even now, out of every 100 children who enter the first class, only 38 reach the fifth class and only 23 reach the eighth class. The others drop out due to various reasons. Adult education has also not made much headway ; out of a total work force of 244 million, 60% is still not touched by this programme. According to Government estimates, literacy was confined to about 36.25% of the total population in 1981. According to a World Bank estimate if the present trends continue, India will have 54.8% of world’s illiterate population by 2000 A.D. That is why, the document notes that “with slowing down of additional enrolment, the first phase of educational expansion during the post-independence era has come to an end and further expansion would require major structural changes”.

What is the quality of education that is being provided in the primary schools ? It is estimated that 90% of the expenditure in the elementary education sector is on the salaries of teachers and administration. It is no wonder that very little is left for even elementary requirements. Many of the schools don’t have drinking water and toilet facilities. Only quarter of them have some library facilities. About 35% of schools have a single teacher who is expected to handle 4-5 classes at the same time. About 23% of teachers have not passed even the matriculation examination. And 42% of the schools don’t even have a blackboard.

The situation is not different in secondary and higher education sectors, though the average growth rate is slightly higher for these (7.8% per annum and 9.7% per annum respectively for the period 1950-82). However, here also the rate of growth has slowed down considerably during the seventies. It has been universally recognised that the quality of education offered in the majority of our Universities and Colleges is very poor. Even the minimum standards laid down by the University Grants Commission are not adhered to. The percentage of dropouts and failure is a high 59% resulting in a colossal wastage of resources. 

Apart from the decline in the spread of education, it seems that there is no place for a large number of educated persons in our economic system. According to the employment statistics, the educated unemployed were increasing at a faster rate than the uneducated unemployed between 1961-81. Not only this, higher the level of education, higher is the level of unemployment. Every survey after 1957 has found that the percentage of unemployed among the graduates has been higher than the corresponding percentage for the matriculates. Even the higher levels of education seem to lack any purpose. It is noted that 45% of doctorate (Ph.D) degree holders and 69% of masters of engineering are engaged In activities unconnected with research and development. It looks as if the economic system in the country has no place for a large number of educated people.

After so many years of loud talk about universalisation and reform of education, this is what we have achieved, Four decades after the independence less then one third of our children are reaching the minimum literacy level and that too in schools 40% of which don’t even have a blackboard, not to talk of other facilities. This is really a shameful state of affairs. 

II 

The policy-makers appear to be deeply concerned and unhappy about the existing situation and want to do something about it. If not for any other reason, the vast army of illiterates would impede the march of the nation into the twenty-first century. This fear has been expressed again and again in the document. 

For the spread and reform of education, the government finds nothing but obstacles at every stage : ‘there is no tradition of education in the country’, ‘teachers are not enthusiastic in imparting education’, ‘Coordination between the centre and states is very difficult’, etc. Leaving aside these impediments, some of the concrete plans envisaged in the new education policy are the following : (i) ‘operation blackboard’ to provide a building and a blackboard for every school (ii) establishment of a very well equipped model school in every district of the country which will admit the brightest students and which will act as pace-setters for other schools. (iii) use of television and other audio-visual aids for the spread of education both in the formal and non-formal sectors ; spreading computer awareness, (iv) curbing the further growth of higher education and increased emphasis on vocational training from the secondary level onwards. (v) involvement of focal community and voluntary agencies in elementary education. From the repeated emphasis laid on these issues in the documents, it is clear that they constitute the main thrust of the new education policy. Let us briefly discuss what may be expected to emerge under each of these programmes.

Much has been talked about the ‘operation blackboard’ to provide a building and a blackboard for every school and other programmes. A look at the reports of task forces set up after the documents makes one wonder whether the programmes have any basis in physical realities. The total seventh plan allocation for education is about Rs. 6,382 crores, of which Rs. 1,830 crores will be spent on elementary education and Rs. 360 crores on adult education. if the expenditure on all heads is added, Rs. 3,094 crores will be needed for ‘operation blackboard’ alone. This is almost double the total outlay for elementary education. Similarly the funds allocated for non-formal education are far below the funds required for the envisaged three lakhs centres.

It has been proposed that there should be a very well equipped model school in every district of the country in which the brightest students, irrespective of their caste, creed and sex will be admitted and given special training. It is envisaged that about Rs. 1 crore will be spent on establishing each such school. This proposal has been the centre of controversy throughout the country. But this is not exactly a new line of thinking. In the beginning of the nineteenth century itself, Macaulay had decided that efforts to make the masses of India (which was deprived of the beacon-light of Western civilization) literate, was a futile exercise. What one could do was to establish some special educational institutions and educate a small section of the population in English language, manners, customs, and achievements and expect that the knowledge gained by this class would eventually percolate to the masses. Leave alone the problem of this knowledge percolating to the masses, it has not even reached the common educational institutions. The students trained in the privileged institutions never go to the common schools to teach. They are not even interested in the problems facing the country or its ordinary people. Students trained in very privileged institutions like I.I.T.’s, Institutes of Management etc. are more oriented towards the international technology market than towards the country. Even if they do not leave the country, they work for the multinational companies peddling highly sophisticated technology or in research and industrial organisations with the main aim of procuring international-level comforts and facilities. There is no basis to expect anything else from the products of the proposed model schools also. 

The Government is determined to use modern technological aids in the education field. Mass media like radio, television, video have been accorded a very important place in the new education policy. It is also proposed to spread awareness of computers throughout the country and towards that end, 2000 computers will be distributed to selected educational institutions throughout the country. Here again, the idea of importing modern technology to solve the problem of the country is nothing new. A few years back, television was propagated as an unprecedented medium to spread education. Before importing TV machinery on a massive scale, time was sought from foreign communication satellites for an experimental education programme through television. Afterwards a massive import of all machinery connected with television has taken place. Of how much use has all this been in the education field ? After viewing the television programme, one gets an impression that the government has gifted a very potent weapon to the multinational companies to enter the drawing rooms of middle class families and spread unbridled consumerism. The hollow middle class modernism is becoming more common—thanks to the TV screen. This is the gift of the television to the country. There has been talk of providing alternate channels on TV for the spread of education. So, the enthusiasm for importing newer machinery connected with TV to educate the people has not waned. 

Like television, other technologies have been imported on a massive scale in the past also under the pretext of development and progress, and most of the time they turn out to be luxury items or beneficial only to the privileged classes in the society. We do not have a tradition of evaluating the imported technologies and examining whether they are serving the originally intended purposes. There is widespread fascination and awe of the modern technologies. This craze for modern technology is so widespread that even many Gandhians say that they support modern technologies, with the only proviso that they should be pollution free and small scale and ‘relevant’. Even though the dream of small scale, clean, pollution free versions of the Western technologies is so widespread, it is, to say the least, just vulgar. In this dream, one can find neither the lofty ideals of indian Civilization which sees one God in all animate and inanimate objects and organises its society and technology such that human beings are in harmony with the community and nature, nor the vigour of the Western civilization which wants to control all the living and inanimate matter in nature and is developing and applying newer and newer technologies towards that end. 

Though it is passionately committed to the modern technology, the attitude of the new, ‘youthful’ elite seems to be somewhat different. It is not afraid or apprehensive about modern technology. Whatever be the case, it is not talking of bringing any small scale versions of Western technologies but is interested only in the most modern and sophisticated technologies. Now-a-days, there is much less talk of removing poverty using these. The new slogan is the building of a strong, integrated and modern nation. In the document emphasis is laid on this aspect. The introduction of computers in some schools and establishment of model schools in each district are steps in the direction of hastening the pace of this integration and modernisation. 

One can ask whether any nation can become strong on the basis of imported technology. One can also ask what is the essence of the national integration that is being talked about. The English educated sections of our society have always felt that our tradition and the ethos of our civilization are only impediments and obstacles in the road to modernisation. The graduates coming out of the privileged institutions of excellence “integrated’’ through the modern education have nothing but contempt for all regional manifestations of our culture and the aspirations of our peoplé. Their only desire would be to develop and integrate all the regions as a part of the international commodity market so that they can get all the facilities available there. What other kind of unity can one expect from the model schools and other privileged institutions that the new education policy is going to initiate? The traditional concept of unity in the country evolved through the development and interaction of various local cultures based on the Indian civilization values would have no place in the new order of things. 

The policies of restriction of higher education and decentralisation of elementary education are worth serious consideration and debate. It is very clear from the documents that the government does not want any further expansion of the usual higher educational institutions (universities and colleges). New higher level institutions will be opened but their task would consist of training specialists for specific tasks rather than for the spread of higher education. The Government may not allow opening of more arts and general science colleges. One of the ways of curbing admission into colleges and universities would be to enhance the fees. Attempts would also be made to raise a part of the finance from companies and industries employing the graduates coming out of the universities. From the documents it appears that the government definitely wants to reduce its own financial responsibilities and adopt both the methods mentioned above. For restricting higher education, it is essential that even at the secondary level the number of students is restricted and most of the students are prepared for vocational training. The policy makers appear to be very serious about vocational education for a large section of the students. It is proposed that vocational courses cover 10% of higher secondary students by 1990 and 25% by 1995. It Is not very clear how the vocational courses are going to be organised and how students will be chosen for higher education or vocational stream. Vocationalisation is quite an old idea. Except for some selected pockets in the country, vocationalisation has not been taken seriously till now. Now, the aim appears to be to produce a large body of skilled technicians. After all, “the highly sophisticated technologies cannot survive unless the services sector and infrastructural facilities are modernised’’. It has been pointed out that the establishment of vocational courses or institutions will be the responsibility of the government as well as employers in Public and Private Sectors. 

The policy of restricting the higher education and separating the higher education and vocational streams at the school level itself is perhaps a change from the professed socialist ideas of our nation. But it cannot be denied that in all societies higher education is a privilege which is imparted to a small section of the society for fulfilling some specific tasks and requirements. By its very nature, only a small fraction of the population would be in a position to utilize it effectively. The generally professed policy of making higher education universal in principle is just a sham. As the facilities for quality higher education are really limited, only a very small section of the population is able to actually benefit from it. At the same time it absolves the educated people from any special responsibilities to the society. Because, if everybody is equally entitled to higher education, one cannot demand any special competence or creativity or social responsibility from the small minority which actually goes for it. 

In the western concept of equality, everybody is equal because the commodities available in the market are available to all. Apart from extracting the necessities and luxuries available in the market according to one’s riches, nobody has any special rights nor any duties. Under the influence of this concept of equality, the products of our higher education are always evaluating their price in the international market and they evaluate others also using the same yardstick. If one gets over the illusion of equality and considers higher education as a special privilege which places higher responsibilities on the people who go through it, then it should be welcomed. But this should be taken to its logical conclusion of involving the educated people in nation-building activities with all seriousness. 

India is not a sound economic position now. Even now the majority of the population is not in a position to manage two square meals a day. Under these circumstances if a section gets the privilege of higher education, it is totally unjust that they should be allowed to utilize it for their personal luxuries and comforts at the cost of others. It is imperative that they lead a simple life. They should view higher education not as a step to financial prosperity but as an opportunity to assume special responsibility to the society. Moralistic as this may sound, there is no other way which would make them useful to the society at large. Otherwise they will continue to be attracted by the better privileges they get in the Western countries or waste the scarce resources of the country in trying to obtain comparable facilities here itself. 

Unless the desire for prosperity is separated from higher education, the policy of restricting higher education will not even be successful. If the motivation for higher education continues to be material prosperity, everybody irrespective of competence will run after it. That is why vocational education has not made any headway till now and the policy of restricting higher education and delinking of degrees from jobs will meet the same fate. Or undemocratic methods will have to be used to enforce such a policy. 

There is no indication of the aforementioned ideas in the new education policy. On the other hand, it appears that the government wants to pay international level wages for persons qualified in specialised tasks. Listing the various obstacles to the new education policy, the first document mentions that because of the bureaucratic red tapism, it has been found difficult to pay salaries commen-surate with international market rates to people specialised in TV and computer technology, because of which their services are not being available for the spread of education in the country. Can we build the nation with the help of people who sell their services to the highest bidder in the international market ? If the policy of restricting higher education is to be meaningful it is imperative that true patriotic feelings are inculcated in our educated people. In the final analysis, being patriotic today can only mean being moved by the depressing state of affairs surrounding one and involving oneself in efforts to alleviate the situation. Technology may be helpful in this venture but it should be in the interests of the majority and for fulfilling certain desired goals, not for taking the country to the higher stage of ‘development’ ignoring the interests of the majority. 

The talk of patriotism is not fashionable in the country today. Even when one talks of pride in our traditions and heritage, it is in the context of some remote past. Any mention of the relevance of these traditions to the present and for building the future appears strange to us. To remove the colonial prejudices and to instil patriotic feelings among the educated, it is indeed necessary that education is imparted according to our traditional educational system. If the educated are not aware of our traditions in education and knowledge, how can they have respect towards the country and represent the country in the community of nations? In view of the present international situation, it may be necessary for us to have some students acquainted with the Western traditions. For example it may be necessary to train some students in the Western medical science and its research methods. But in a functional education system, education and research will be predominantly in India’s traditional medical system. Even the students acquiring expertise in the Western methods must have their basic training in our medical system. The same kind of arrangement must be there in other fields also. There is need for debate on the issue of deciding what expertise we need and in which fields. But in an education system meant for national reconstruction there will be no place for the present tendency of importing the whole structure including the syllabi, books and equipments. 

Another idea which has been discussed in the documents is the decentralisation of primary education. The government seems to have realised that it cannot achieve the goal of universal elementary education. It has been repeatedly stressed in the documents that elementary education has to be decentralised and that the local community has to be involved and has to assume responsibility for maintaining school buildings, and for arranging mid-day meals, uniforms and books etc. It expects the voluntary agencies and the local Panchayats to participate enthusiastically in this endeavour. If this is attempted merely to get rid of government's responsibilities it will not be useful. tf the local community is to be made really responsible for the primary education, it should have the right to organise the education also according to its needs and ethos. It should have the right and of course the resources to open schools, appoint teachers, decide the curriculum according to local needs and necessities and conduct examinations. There is no clear mention of the long-term financial commitment of the government towards elementary education. In the present situation when a large number of parents cannot send their children to schools because of the resulting loss of income earned by them, the government has to provide the necessary financial grants. Libraries have to be organised at the district level. It may be necessary to think of involving the youth going for higher education in teaching at the elementary schools. The bureaucracy connected with the education has to be drastically reduced. Apart from a district education officer for the disbursal of grants and maintaining contact with the government, there is indeed no need for any other officialdom if the plan to leave the responsibility of primary and secondary education with local bodies is going to be seriously implemented. Only then will the decentralisation of education mentioned in the documents have any meaning. The local communities [Not Visible] feel responsible and enthusiastic about education only in such a decentralised system. Only then can the product of the education system be self dependent, conscious of the local needs and problems and have the confidence to tackle them. Only such confident literates can demand legitimately, the services of specialists and higher educated persons for their community-needs without being brow-beaten by them. 

III 

A decentralized education system is nothing new in our country. Before the arrival of the British in India, we had a flourishing indigenous education system. Some relevant historical material on the indigenous education is available in the records compiled by the British administrators and educationists in the nineteenth century based on extensive surveys. Recently in 1983, Dharampal has compiled the relevant documents in his book ‘The Beautiful Tree’. Extracts from this book and other related material have appeared in articles published in the PPST Bulletin. In the content of the ongoing debate on the new education policy, it is worthwhile to recapitulate the essential features of our indigenous education system. 

Contrary to the current and popular belief, education was quite widespread in the country in early 19th century. Many of the British administrators had an impression that every village had a school. This was true of all the three majorpresidencies namely Madras, Bombay and Bengal-Bihar. Roughly one third of the boys belonging to the school-going age group were being educated. It should be remembered the proportion of children attending school in England around that time was much smaller. Even today it is widely believed that education in India was limited to Brahmins and the twice-born or dwija castes and the nobility among the Muslims. But the records tell an entirely different story. For example, according to the Madras data, out of 1,88,000 students 22.5% were Brahmins, 10.2% Vaishyas 45.3% Shudras and 14.3% belonged to castes considered lower than Shudras and 7.2% Muslims. In other presidencies also, a similar pattern prevailed. Teachers also came from various castes. According to the Bengal Presidency survey, though a greater proportion of the teachers came from Kayasthas, Brahmins, Sadgop and Aguri castes, quite a number came from 30 other caste groups also and even the Chandala had 6 teachers. The major shortcoming was that there was not much emphasis on the education of girls except in some selected pockets in the country. 

Boys were usually admitted to the schools at the age of 5 years. The duration of the study varied from a minimum of 5 to a maximum of 15 years. Indian method of education adopted what is called the ‘monitorial system’ by which a large number of students were taught to read and write. It is now generally accepted that this method was borrowed from here and introduced into England in early 19th century. Apart from reading, writing and simple accounts, children in schools were introduced to a lot of mythology, Kavya etc. The most important feature of our indigenous education system was that instruction was always in the local (regional) language. 

Apart from the schools there was a large network of institutes of higher learning called ‘colleges’ in the survey. There must have been 100 colleges in each district. The subject matters pursued were varied and many : grammar, lexicology, law, literature, mythology, astrology, medicine, logic, tantra, mimamsa, sankhya, etc. Unlike the elementary education, which was conducted everywhere in the local vernacular, the higher education was mainly based on Sanskrit texts in the Hindu centres of learning and on Persian or Arabic texts in the case of Muhammadan centres. Though a large proportion of students were Brahmins among Hindus, it was in no sense exclusive to Brahmins. In particular the disciplines of astronomy and medical science seem to have been studied by scholars from a variety of backgrounds and castes. One very important feature of these centres of higher learning was that they drew scholars from all over India. Scholars came from really far-oft places to study in centres such as Mithila, Navadweep, Benares, etc. 

How was this elaborate education system maintained? Surely, it couldn't have run merely on voluntary donations and charity. In fact, today it is clear that there was a sophisticated economic arrangement using revenue assignments, share of produce etc., all at the local level for the purpose of maintaining the education centres. Such assignments were made to the Pandits who imparted education, as well as for the expenses of each student. In Madras Presidency, as late as 1801 over 35%, of the total cultivated land in the ceded-districts came under the category of revenue-free assignments. Apart from this, a share of crops was given to the village school master to maintain the school. It is not surprising that in such a situation, the education suited the local needs and the products of such an education system were answerable to the local community. According to a British educationist who conducted a survey in Punjab as late as 1882, even in those troubled days, it was difficult to find a peasant who did not give at least a part of his produce to some scholar-teacher. The British destroyed this self-supporting system by resuming all the revenues at the slightest pretext and reducing the Pandits to penury. The same educationist observes that because of the policy of the British administrators, the education system in Punjab got crippled, started, decaying and was almost extinct by the time he conducted his survey. 

All this is old story now. When Mahatma Gandhi was in London to attend the Round Table Conference in 1931, he was invited to deliver a lecture under the auspices of the Royal Institute of International Affairs. In the course of his speech. Gandhiji said: “l say without fear of my figures being challenged successfully that today India is more illiterate than it was fifty or a hundred years ago .. because the British administrators when they came to India, instead of taking hold of things as they were began to root them out. They scratched the soil .. and left the root like that and the beautiful tree perished. This statement of Gandhi was challenged, but can be more clearly substantiated from the available data to day. But the more important point that Gandhiji made was that the British education system was not only alien to our people, but also too expensive and was sapping the resources of the country. Our country could not sustain such an expensive method of education. He talked of reviving the old village school master and dot every village with a school both for boys and girls. Of course, for this, he also envisaged a return to our traditional decentralised economic arrangement. A similar debate took place in 1945 after the Sargent commission report which envisaged that India will achieve universal literacy in 40 years. Gandhiji challenged this saying that the British model will not achieve any such goal. Further, 40 years was too long a period according to him. He again emphasized that by the traditional Indian model, universal literacy can be achieved in a much shorter time.

Well independent India did not pay much heed to the traditional Indian model, because we seemed to be confident that the modern methods will achieve spectacular results in a short while. Now that even the new education policy shows very little hope of providing meaningful education to most of our people in the conceivable future, it is indeed time that we pay more serious attention to our indigenous system of education and reorganise the present non-functional system into a functioning system of education which best suits India’s requirements and the ethos of its people. This is indeed the challenge of education to-day.

-Jatinder K. Bajai

Jansatta, New Delhi