Skip to main content

Direct cash transfer to poor students? Private interest 'masked' as policy critique

By Sandeep Pandey, Praveen Srivastava*
Geeta Gandhi Kingdon, Professor of Education Economics at University College London and President of City Montessori School Lucknow, in a critique of the draft New Education Policy (NEP) has identified poor school and teacher accountability as the main cause of learning crisis in public schools. She has advocated Direct Benefit Transfer (DBT) to parents to enable them to have the purchasing power to hold the schools accountable.
She is against increase in education budget citing a lavish pupil teacher ratio of 12 and expenditure of Rs 51,917 per pupil on teacher salary in elementary public schools. She is obviously promoting the interest of private, so-called unaided schools, over public schools which is understandable as she heads the largest chain of private school CMS in Lucknow. However, this is clearly in conflict with her role as an academic who is supposed to be working for public interest.
The narrative around DBT is easy to sell as the ruling government claims to have transferred benefits with reduced corruption in many of the centrally sponsored schemes. But is the same model applicable in the field of education? At least research disagrees with this logic.
A study conducted in 2018 in East Delhi with 800 households in low-income neighbourhoods finds no or negative impact of such transfers/vouchers in the learning level of the students. The results of the study are consistent with the studies conducted prior to this study.
Suggestion by the author is feeble as it ignores the socio-political realities surrounding the education system. The problem of our primary schooling is because of the different type of schools for children from different types of backgrounds, thus differentiating childhood based on their socio-economic backgrounds.
Geeta Gandhi repeats the gross mistake of not keeping the child at the centre of education policy and misses out on the importance of equity, accessibility, quality and affordability to let children have equal opportunity.
She fails to mention, and so does NEP, that the only model which has succeeded in achieving universalisation of primary education around the world is the Common School System, which is run, funded and regulated by government, and in India is a 1968 Kothari Commission recommendation.
Geeta Gandhi thinks government cannot play all the roles of policy maker, operator, assessor and regulator of schools. However, it is the same government which runs good quality Kendriya and Navodaya Vidyalayas and world class higher educational institutions like Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs), Indian Institutes of Management (IIMs), All-India Institutes of Medical Sciences (AIIMSs), Indian Institutes of Science Education and Research (IISERs) and various National Law Universities (NLUs).
Hence by advancing a flawed logic she is trying to belittle the public schools. Around 65 percent children still attend public schools and to propose a solution which only focuses on the population which is ready to make a shift to private schools will be naive at multiple levels.
Deeper look at her suggestion also raises fundamental questions about the author's interest in pushing the interest of the private schools and catering to the interest of only privileged children. In fact, the private schools can be directly held responsible for the deterioration in quality of government schools as slowly the children of ruling elites made a switch from government to private schools.
Another important piece of information missing from Geeta Gandhi's article and NEP is the 2015 Allahabad High Court judgement of Justice Sudhir Agrawal, which sought to make it mandatory for everyone receiving a government salary to send their children to government schools.
Implementation of this judgement, to which the Uttar Pradesh government has turned a blind eye so far, could be a step in the direction of moving towards common school system and an effective remedy to the learning crisis that Geeta Gandhi is alluding to in her article. But this will wean away significant section of her clients.
Geeta Gandhi Kingdon
Except for some elite urban schools, most private schools, especially in rural areas, are known to run mass copying rackets. Students can pass their Board examinations in exchange for a certain sum of money which is divided between the school management and the education department officials. The NEP too ignores this widespread phenomenon, especially in north India, and avoids making any suggestion for elimination of this aberration.
Geeta Gandhi is an advocate of DBT. Then why is her school not admitting children under section 12(1)(c) of the Right to Education (RTE) Act 2009 which offers at least 25% seats for free education from classes I to VIII to children of disadvantaged groups and weaker sections with their fees to be paid by the government directly to the school?
Segregation in the current schooling system is conspicuous. To deal with same, abovementioned section was provided for in the RTE Act at the entry-level. Even a simple Google search on violation of the RTE Act brings it to the notice that her own school has not been admitting children under this provision.
CMS has admitted 13 children because of a court order in 2015-16 and two on its own in 2018-19 out of 31, 55, 296 and 270 admissions ordered by the basic education department in 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19, respectively, implying a compliance of only 2.3% of the admission orders. And these number of admissions ordered are nowhere near the standard 25% prescribed by the law. Curiously Geeta Gandhi talks about unaccountability of the public schools in her article!
If CMS would have honoured all the abovementioned admissions it would have gained Rs 35,20,800 as direct transfer from the government in the academic year 2018-19 towards the fees of these children. Hence it is clear that it is not really the DBT that CMS is interested in. It simply doesn't want underprivileged children to sit beside the children from elite class. It is crass discrimination against the poor.
There are other egregious examples of alleged unaccountability behaviour of CMS. Some of its branches are said to be running without certificates of land from revenue department and no objection certificates from education department on encroached lands. There are pending demolition orders against its Indira Nagar and Mahanagar branches and a court case pending against its Jopling Road branch for the last over 25 years.
CMS authorities were charged for reportedly running a "bank" from its Chowk branch offering 12-13% interest on deposits. While the public schools may be laggards when it comes to quality of teaching-learning, competitive schools like CMS create undue pressure on students leading to suicides at times. A student of class IX of Gomti Nagar branch committed suicide because of "unreasonable" academic demands of CMS.
One reason for abrasive competitiveness in private schools is the infiltration of these schools by coaching institutions and CMS is no exception to this. The NEP doesn't offer any convincing solution to the menace of coaching institutions. There is probably no government school which is run with so many violations of rules and laws as CMS branches.
The only model which has succeeded in achieving universalisation of primary education around the world is the Common School System
India spends only 4.6% of its Gross Domestic Product on education, whereas Kothari Commission recommendation and a global standard spent by other countries is 6%. To argue to not increase India's expenditure on education is a prescription to deny large number of underprivileged children especially from rural areas any decent quality of education or any education at all.
By quoting average figures of pupil-teacher ratio or the expenditure per pupil Geeta Gandhi is masking the large number of schools where a single teacher may be handling more than one class simultaneously in her classroom in complete violation of norms of pupil-teacher ratio under the RTE Act.
Geeta Gandhi's attempt to defend the indefensible in the garb of an academic have come a cropper. She cannot be in London and Lucknow at the same time, ideologically speaking.
---
*Sandeep Pandey is Magsasay Award winning academic and activist, Praveen Srivastava teaches at Queen's College, Lucknow. Ishu Gupta, researcher at IIM-Ahmedabad has providing useful feedback. Contacts: ashaashram@yahoo.com, pks123rs@yahoo.com

Comments

TRENDING

Mystery around Gujarat PSU 'transfer' of Rs 250 crore to Canadian firm Karnalyte

By AK Luke, IAS (Retd)*
While returning from a Board meeting of the Oil India Limited (OIL) in Ahmedabad some time in 2012, two officers of the Gujarat State Fertilizers and Chemicals Ltd (GSFC), Nanavaty and Patel,  saw me off at the airport. They said they were proceeding to Canada in connection with a project GSFC had entered into with a company there. As we were running late, I hastily wished them the best.

Savarkar in Ahmedabad 'declared' two-nation theory in 1937, Jinnah followed 3 years later

By Our Representative
One of the top freedom fighters whom BJP and Prime Minister Narendra Modi revere the most, Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, was also a great supporter of the two nation theory for India, one for Hindus another for Muslims, claims a new expose on the man who is also known to be the original proponent of the concept of Hindutva.

J&K continues to be haunted, as parts of India 'degenerate' into quasi-Kashmir situation

By Rajendran Narayanan*, Sandeep Pandey**
“Jab har saans mein bandook dikhe toh baccha kaise bekhauf rahe?” (How can a child be fearless when she sees a gun in every breath?) remarked Anwar, a gardener from Srinagar, when asked about the situation in Kashmir. On November 30, 2019, a walk through an iron gate in a quiet neighbourhood of Srinagar took us inside a public school. It was 11 am when typically every school is abuzz with activity. Not here though.

Indians have made 119 nations their ‘karma bhumi’: US-based Hindu NGO tells Rupani

Counterview Desk
In a stinging letter to Gujarat chief minister Vijay Rupani, the US-based Hindus for Human Rights (HfHR), referring to the report citing his justification for the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) – that “while Muslims can choose any one of the 150 Islamic countries in the world (for residence), India is the only country for Hindus" – has said, he should remember, Hindus have made several countries, including USA, their home.

Dalits rights meet planned on how citizenship law 'negates' Ambedkar's equality focus

By Our Representative
A Dalit rights meet has been planned at the Dalit Shakti Kendra (DSK), Sanand, Ahmedabad district, to discuss implications of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), passed by Parliament on December 10-11, for Dalits, Adivasis and other marginalized sections. Announcing the decision, DSK director Martin Macwan said, the meet would take place on December 25, 2019, at 11.00 am, to commemorate the anniversary of burning of copies of Manusmriti by Dr BR Ambedkar.

What about religious persecution of Dalits, Adivasis, asks anti-CAA meet off Ahmedabad

By Rajiv Shah
A well-attended Dalit rights meet under the banner “14 Pe Charcha” (discussion on Article 14 of the Indian Constitution), alluding to Prime Minister Narendra Modi well-known campaign phrase of the 2014 Parliamentary elections, “chai pe charcha” (discussion over cup of tea), organized off Ahmedabad, has resolved on Wednesday to hold a 14 kilometres-long rally on April 14 to oppose the controversial Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), enacted on December 10-11.

'Allow critical thinking': SAARC-sponsored varsity teachers support protesting students

By Our Representative
Teachers of the high-profile South Asian University (SAU), a New Delhi-based international institute sponsored by eight member states of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) – Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka – have supported “peacefully protesting students and other citizens” against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA), 2019 and the National Register of Citizens (NRC).

Upendra Baxi on foolish excellence, Indian judges and Consitutional cockroaches

By Rajiv Shah
In a controversial assertion, top legal expert Upendra Baxi has sought to question India's Constitution makers for neglecting human rights and social justice. Addressing an elite audience in Ahmedabad, Prof Baxi said, the constitutional idea of India enunciated by the Constituent Assembly tried to resolve four key conflicting concepts: governance, development, rights and justice.

Kerala governor turned History Congress into political arena, 'insulted' Prof Irfan Habib

Counterview Desk
In a signed statement, office bearers of the Aligarh Society of History and Archaeology (ASHA), Prof Syed Ali Nadeem Rezavi (president), Prof Jabir Raza (vice-president), Prof Manvendra Kumar Pundhir (secretary) and Prof Farhat Hasan (joint secretary), have said that Kerala governor Arif Mohammad Khan had sought to insult veteran historian Prof Irfan Habib, 88, at the 80th session of the Indian History Congress, even as turning it into his “political arena”.