Dec 19, 2024 09:11 PM IST
A study reveals that India’s education system lags due to poor primary education, while China thrives with vocational training; reforms are urgently needed.
A study recently published by the World Inequality Lab at the Paris School of Economics says that China’s manufacturing and productivity leap is rooted in more than 40% of its youth pursuing vocational education in the 1980s, as compared to India’s 10%. B Sekhar’s recent analysis for the Public Report on Secondary Education (PROSE) study, based on household data from the National Sample Survey and the National Family Health Survey, also highlights the large gaps in access and quality in secondary/vocational education. The PROSE study is a serious effort to understand how India’s education and skilling system can contribute to higher productivity and higher wages of dignity.
The most damning statistic on the neglect of primary education in India in the first four decades of freedom comes from the 42nd round of the National Sample Survey (1986-87), which found 69.23% of aged six-plus females in rural India never enrolled in a primary school. Surely, a few high-quality higher education institutions can’t make up for India’s neglect of primary education.
Why has India’s schooling system not done better? Lucy Crehan, a British school teacher who wrote about five high-scoring countries in the learning-outcome benchmark Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) test, provides some answers. Crehan says that in Finland, Singapore, Japan, Canada, and Shanghai (China), five principles explain high-performing, equitable schooling.
Principle 1 – Get children ready for formal learning: Despite India’s education policy recognising the need to prepare the country’s children for formal learning, investments have not kept pace. The Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) that engages the anganwadi sevika and helper for children aged zero-six years for four to six hours a day (anganwadi sevikas are paid a monthly honorarium that is less than minimum wage, and therefore longer working hours are virtually ruled out) is seen as the point for readying children for formal learning. Unfortunately, its coverage is not universal, and curricula are often not fully aligned with those of schools. Finland does not teach anything till age seven as children till that age group only play and learn.
The teacher-pupil ratio in Finnish schools is much lower and the teachers are trained to keep academics out as they promote the communication skills of children and learning by doing. ICDS, in India, has ended up as more of a hot-cooked-meal centre. The new National Education Policy (NEP) tries to bring preschool closer to formal school, both physically and pedagogically. We will need to raise a cadre of well-trained nursery teachers who make learning happen without burden.
Principle 2 – Design curricula concepts for mastery (and context for motivation): Crehan, being a teacher herself, identifies the following as a good national/provincial curriculum — minimal (focusing on fewer topics, but in greater depth), high-level (clear on what concepts and skills are required without prescribing context or pedagogy), and ordered (organising concepts in a logical order, based on research into how children learn). An over-defined curriculum framework often takes away the autonomy of the school or the teacher. While there is a case for a common curriculum, it must have opportunities for development of teaching and learning methods that respect local contexts. In India, while there are many assessment boards, there is still a need to have a standardised curriculum that allows large-scale local experimentation.
Principle 3 – Support children in taking on challenges, rather than making concessions: All school systems that perform well in PISA never give up on any student. The system is geared to ensuring a basic level of proficiency. No dilution of standards is ever attempted to improve school results. Singapore is an exception, starting “streaming very early”. In the other high-performing jurisdictions, the vocational and academic pursuits are organically linked, and the progression is smooth. There is enough evidence to suggest that streaming for vocational very early may lead to compromises on skilling and productivity.
Reducing pass marks is clearly not the way to build a successful school system. Children from underprivileged homes need even greater learning and financial support. Lowering standards is only a way of playing with the students’ careers. There must also be a robust system of teacher performance assessment and accountability.
Principle 4 – Treat teachers as professionals: This is where each of the five well-performing regions invests a lot. The professional development of the teacher is central to the schooling process.
India has serious challenges in the governance environment of the teacher development process. Despite efforts of the National Council of Teacher Education, the teachers being readied for the school system are not adequately equipped in most cases. For India to match China, we need to overhaul the teacher development system, improve the service condition of teachers, and make teachers socially respected far more than present.
Principle 5 – Combine school accountability with school support: School inspector raj is no way to improve schools; teachers need support to remove deficits that compromise learning in schools. Decentralised community action with adequate untied resources will empower local initiatives of teachers at the school level. India has a long way to go to develop good quality schooling from below. The PROSE study hopes to provide answers to many of the schooling and skilling challenges from the perspective of households, students, teachers and instructors.
Amarjeet Sinha is senior fellow at Centre for Social and Economic Progress,coordinating the work of the PROSE study.The views expressed are personal.
Get Current Updates on…
See more
