Education, the Nation and the State

Context: The National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 underestimates the problem of reconciling the three systems of education in India. 

The three systems of Education in India:

• The Central System: running an exam board that has an all-India reach through a?liation with English medium private schools catering to region al elites. 
• It also runs advanced professional institutes and universities that have greater per capita funding than its counterparts run by States.
• The State System: which features provincial secondary boards a?liating schools teaching in State languages. 
• The Private System: Internationally accredited school boards and globally connected private universities are part of this third system, having a new level of freedom from state norms.

Evolution of the system of education in India:

• Recognition of provincial education: The Central Advisory Board of Education was created to coordinate regional responses to common issues and served mainly as a discussion forum.
• Move towards centralisation: India chose to have a Ministry of Education at the Centre after the independence, with a role to articulate aims and standards towards nation-building and development.
• Central institutions received higher investments than the States could afford.
• Divergence between Centre and States: 42nd Amendment Act (1976) has put the education under Concurrent List and engagement with the States remained a function of the Planning Commission.

• Education after Liberalisation: led to the rise of private-sector education due to the rapidly expanding urban middle class demanding private education.
• The Right to Education (RTE): acted as the bridge between the Centre and State education system and called private schools to provide for social justice via quota route.

Issues with the education systems:

• Unmanageable Coordination: Differences in marking standards and lack of adherence to social responsibilities have led to sharper inequalities (due to caste and economic status).

• For, E.g. The recent attempt by Tamil Nadu to create a modest quota in NEET for students who attended government schools, shows mediation in order to provide equity.

• Issue with the NEP: 

• Functional Uniformity: guaranteed under the policy underestimates the problem of reconciliation between the three systems.
• Difficulty in reconciling the push for equitable education and economic policy which favours private education.
• Interpretation of Autonomy in terms of finances: will remain inadequate.
• Proposes post-RTE structural shift: ignoring the fact that RTE itself has not been fully implemented.
• States are approached for their consultation: rather than continued involvement.

Way Forward:

• Strengthening the Social Vision
• Education must mediate between different social strata: divided by caste and economic status through coordination and in adherence to social responsibilities.
• Recognise States legacy and practices: States have their own social worlds to deal with and prefer legacy systems for e.g. even after the Kothari Commission, many states still continue to have intermediate or junior colleges.
• Continued financial support for the implementation of RTE and policy guidance for its proper use, diminishing regional disparities.
• A systemic vision both for recovery from institutional decay and for future progress is needed.

Conclusion: We must ask what kind of human being and society we want before we draft a policy in education.

- JP Naik, the architect of many national-level institutions