INTERVIEW: 'Change in education system depends on sustenance of reforms'

In an interview with Eenadu, former NCERT director Krishna Kumar said that for the new National Education Policy to be effective, the reforms will have to be sustained over time, as transformational agendas will not work if a change has to be brought into a system.

New Delhi: With the government claiming that the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 will revamp the education structure, former NCERT director Krishna Kumar said that mere transformational agendas will not be effective, as the reforms will have to be sustained over time.

In an interview with Eenadu, Kumar threw light on what he makes of the NEP, and whether it will be possible for India to realise the goals underlined in the policy.

Here are excerpts from the interview:

Q - The new National Education Policy 2020 is the first education policy of the 21st century. The government is saying that it will revise and revamp all aspects of education structure, including its regulation and governance through this policy. What is your assessment of the New Education Policy? Can it transform our education system?

There is always a continuity in education. It will be a strange idea to create a break. Also, a system of education works in a social context and responds to it. In a country as diverse and complex as India, education performs many different roles. We need to understand these roles when we look for reform and improvement. So, the relevant question is whether the new policy indicates some necessary reforms, especially for making education more responsive to our social needs. We must also remember that any change in education as a system depends on the extent to which reforms are sustained over a period of time. Transformational agendas don't help.

Q - The present 10+2 structure in school education will be modified with a new pedagogical and curricular restructuring of 5+3+3+4, covering ages 3-18. What is your view on it?

In the proposed system, the first 5 years include three years of nursery and the first two grades of the primary. This is worrisome because the pre-school years will be devoted to making children 'school ready' with literacy and numeracy skills. This proposal has deep psychological implications. I have discussed this in a recent article in the Hindu titled 'Perils of Prematurely Imparted Literacy'. Similarly, the last four years in the proposed equation represent a 4-year undergraduate programme. It was tried a few years ago at Delhi University and had to be withdrawn. Unless we study the causes of its failure, a repetition of the experiment may not help.

Read:National Education Policy 2020: Possibilities and pitfalls

Q - New education policy states 'Wherever possible the medium of instruction until at least grade 5, but preferably till grade 8 and beyond will be the home language\mother tongue\local language\regional language.' But after the announcement of the new policy, central education minister Ramesh Pokriyal clarified in an interview that 'the decision regarding the medium of instruction in schools, coming under their jurisdiction to be taken by respective state governments.'

What is your view on the government's stand on the medium of instruction?

'Medium of instruction' is an old familiar term in many colonized societies. It hides the real concerns of language pedagogy in the early period of schooling. During this period, the child's language presents a vast range of possibilities to build on. Our system remains stuck on the 'medium' question. Unless this issue is better understood, the present practices in different States and even in the Kendriya Vidyalayas are unlikely to change.

Q - The school dropouts issue is one of the major problems of our education system. According to the survey by NSSO in 2017-18, the number of out of school children in the age group of 6 to 17 years is 3.22 crore. The NEP-2020 sets a goal to achieve 100% gross enrolment ratio up to secondary level by 2030. Does this policy have that potential to achieve this goal?

The drop-out issue must be analyzed stage-wise and region-wise. At the primary level, there used to be a high drop-out rate which came down as a result of Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan and the promulgation of the Right to Education Act. From the upper primary stage upwards, drop-out gets higher, especially among girls and children from the lower socio-economic strata, and the problem is far greater in the north than in the southern states. The reasons are both economic and educational.

Covid-19 pandemic is likely to make the problem worse. Unfortunately, the policy offers no projection regarding ways in which the corona crisis will affect education and how this effect will be addressed. Some of the effects are already becoming manifest. We urgently need to examine these effects and to find ways to address them. Otherwise, the gains made over recent decades might be lost.

Read:'Students will get 360-degree holistic assessment with National Education Policy'

Q - What is your opinion on the proposed changes in assessment methods and examination systems?

Numerous recommendations made by previous committees exist. The National Focus Group on Examination Reforms (2005) gives a clear strategy for improving the evaluation system in Board exams. Neither the central nor the state boards have moved very far in reforming their approach. Let us see what happens in the future.

Q - According to official data there were 1,08,017 single-teacher schools during the year 2016-17. NEP states that 'The isolation of small schools has a negative effect on education and teaching-learning process'. It also mentioned that these challenges will be addressed by adopting innovative mechanisms to group or rationalize schools. What is your opinion on rationalization of schools​?

Even the 1986 policy had stated that there should be no single-teacher schools. For a while, the situation improved and then the problem came back. Small schools can function well if sufficient allocation is made for teachers and infrastructure required under RTE norms.

Q - There are a lot of changes in higher education. The main thrust of the policy is to transform higher education institutions into multidisciplinary universities, colleges and knowledge hubs. All colleges currently affiliated to a university will become autonomous degree-granting colleges, over a period of fifteen years. The higher education system will be integrated, including professional and vocational education. What will be the impact of these changes on higher education?

The present-day scenario of higher education shows how far the system has decayed. Unacceptable levels of teacher shortage have persisted for many years. A recovery plan is required before any new ideas are tried. Commercialization is also rampant in the private sector. Regulatory steps have failed to control it. Progress cannot be made unless we examine why these steps did not work.

Read:On its 74 th Independence Day, India’s core educational goals still remain distant

Q - The M.Phil programme will be discontinued. What is your opinion on it?

It is strange that a document which emphasizes flexibility has recommended a ban on M.Phil.

Q - The Higher Education Commission of India will be set up to regulate the entire higher education sector. What are the pros and cons of this arrangement?

It was envisaged in the Yash Pal Committee, but not as a regulatory body. If it is treated as a regulatory body, the tendency of centralization will increase.

Q - The NEP-2020 has given a lot of importance to Sanskrit language. Sanskrit will be mainstreamed as one of the language options in the three language formula. What is your opinion on this?

Sanskrit is a very important language and many earlier committees have stressed the need to improve its teaching. Opportunities and funds for research are also required.

Q - As per National education policy 1968 recommendation, India should spend 6% of GDP on education. It was reiterated in the 1986 policy. The current public (state and central) governments expenditure on education has been around 4.43% of GDP. The New policy states that 'The centre and states will increase the investment up to 6% of GDP at the earliest'. Is this increase of an additional 1.57% enough to cater to the needs of our education sector?

The COVID crisis has made all earlier projections on what might be available for investment in education doubtful. The figure of 6 per cent was endorsed by Kothari half a century ago. It continues to be an elusive goal.

Read:NEP 2020 will transform India into knowledge-based superpower, says Education Minister

Q - The new education policy states that 'The matter of commercialization of education has been dealt with by the policy through multiple relevant fronts including the 'light but tight' approach. Can this policy curb the commercialization of education?

Ever since the education sector came under the general policy of liberalization, it has faced the question of commercialization. The tension between the private and public sector in education is left unacknowledged. We must fully acknowledge it if we want to address it.

Q - According to 'The global education development agenda' India should ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all by 2030. How will NEP drive India's education system in this way?

It all depends on whether education becomes a priority. If it does, its social context and role will have to be accepted as a focus if we want to make education inclusive. Currently, like many other nations, we are stuck in a managerial perspective which promotes an outcome-driven minimalist approach to education.