Back to Basics: CABE Examines Social, Cultural Basis of Education (Anil Sadgopal)

THE TIMES OF INDIA - AUGUST 18, 2004| EDITORIAL

Back to Basics: CABE Examines Social, Cultural Basis of Education
ANIL SADGOPAL

The Central Advisory Board of Education (CABE), now reconstituted, met recently after a gap of more than 10 years. The recent meeting was completely dissimilar in tenor and content to the previous one, the only commonality being HRD minister Arjun Singh's presence on both occasions. The reasons for this dissimilarity are not far to seek: In the intervening decade, Indian education had to struggle against two major assaults, one from the global market forces and the other from communal and divisive forces. While market ideology considerably diluted the notion of social justice and equality guaranteed by the Constitution, the communal forces challenged the multi-ethnic, multilinguistic and multicultural foundation of Indian nationhood.

The two-day CABE meet squarely confronted these challenges. It not only took up the education policies of the previous government, but also delved into perennial problems pertaining to universal access and quality of instruction. The minister, among other things, said the time had come to review the 1986 policy. He announced the formation of seven committees, each focusing on a key issue.

The first would take a fresh look at the Free and Compul-sory Education Bill drafted by the NDA government which came under criticism from several quarters. The Bill is a political declaration of state's retreat from its constitutional obligation towards education. It also promotes control through extra-constitutional authorities. Yet, the decision for its review was least expected from a minister who had stated in a recent television interview that he did not find anything particularly objectionable about the Bill.

Still more unexpected was the subject of the second committee, viz common school system (CSS). The last time this subject was uttered at CABE was in 1988 when it constituted a committee under the leadership of Prof D S Kothari, former chairperson of the Education Commission (1964-66). But its report was so threatening that it was put on the back burner. The concept of the common school system was, however, incorporated thrice in education policy — in 1968, 1986 and 1992. Yet, the past decade played havoc with the idea by instituting a variety of parallel, low quality educational streams, such as non-formal centres, alternative schools and EGS centres, essentially through World Bank-sponsored school interventions.

The regular teacher was replaced by an under-qualified, untrained and underpaid para-teacher. The Operation Blackboard norms approved by the Parliament for the number of teachers, classrooms and educational aids were diluted. These policy dilutions were dictated by the structural adjustment programme of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. The committee will review this thrust.

The subject of the third committee surpasses even the second in its departure from established policy stance. It will deliberate upon universalisation of secondary (not elementary) education. It has been argued that the constitutional goal of providing eight years of elementary education is not adequate anymore. The new goal must, instead, be to guarantee education at least up to the high school stage, if not the plus-two stage, without which most opportunities for technical education and employment, including reservations for SCs and STs, would remain inaccessible.

The fourth committee will dwell on the autonomy of institutes of higher education. The NDA government attempted to undermine their autonomy in more ways than one. The UGC Model Act for universities was designed to this end. This issue, of course, came into the limelight when Murli Manohar Joshi tried to dictate the fee structure of the IIMs.

The fifth committee will look at ways and means of integrating cultural education in the school curriculum, with a critical focus on the Hindutva thrust. As opposed to Hindutva, the introduction of issues relating to the pluralist character of Indian nationhood will be examined by this committee.

The sixth committee will explore regulatory mechanisms for what is taught by parallel textbooks outside the government system, e.g., in Saraswati Shishu Mandirs and madrassas. This is in response to a growing concern that certain bodies use schools to propagate communal prejudice.

The seventh committee will deal with the issue of financing of higher and technical education. This task includes the challenge of privatisation and commercialisation, which cannot be delinked from the state's role in regulating global market forces. The committee may also have to deal with India's stance vis-a-vis the General Agreement on Trade in Services.

What does all this mean? We must recall that at least three of the seven subjects — Free and Compulsory Education Bill, Common School System and universalisation of secondary education — do not find a mention in the UPA government's common minimum programme. The inclusion of these issues in the CABE agenda is indicative of the pressure created by educationists and social activists on the government and the impact of the electoral mandate against neo-liberal and communal politics. The intelligentsia will have none other than itself to blame if it fails to widen the political space that CABE has created after a decade.

(The author is Professor of Education, Delhi University.)