Time AP, TS drew lessons from US

As the both Telugu-speaking States are toying with the pernicious idea of closing down schools on grounds of insufficient pupil strength, they ought to take lessons from protests that took place even in developed societies like the US against such moves

Even as Narendra Modi’s disquieting move to allow employment of children below the age of 14 in family businesses or firms has drawn the ire of child rights activists for varied reasons, another move, rather a latent one, by the State governments to close down or ‘rationalise’ government schools on the grounds of insufficient pupil-strength is going unnoticed. Both measures have the potential of resulting in greater numbers of school dropouts, making the much hallowed Right to Education Act infructuous.

On Wednesday, the Union Government proposed some changes (subject to Parliament nod) in the child labour law whereby Under-14 children could work after school hours or during vacations to lend a helping hand to family business. That Modi, himself a former child labourer – a tea seller boy at that – should initiate this move has surprised educationists no end. There is an apprehension that these could be exploited to block education for girls, whose dropout presently is double that of the boys.

The Centre’s proposal comes amidst the State governments’ attempts to cut down on the strength of schools, in turn teachers, in the name of according better education to the pupils. Even as Telangana lost out in the closure of thousands of schools when it was part of the undivided State, the incumbent TRS government is reportedly contemplating to close down as many as 3,000 schools in a phased manner, which effectively sounds the death-knell for contract teachers.

In stark contrast, Chandrababu Naidu subtly denies any move to shut down government schools but is proposing opening ultra-modern cluster schools in each mandal. Thus, both the Telugu States, instead of zealously moving ahead to realise the avowed objectives of the Right to Education are making such moves as would only lead to greater school drop-out rates.

No child, other than a child who has been admitted by his or her parents to a school which is not supported by the appropriate government, shall be liable to pay any kind of fee or charges or expenses which may prevent him or her from pursuing and completing elementary education.

‘Compulsory education’ casts an obligation on the appropriate government and local authorities to provide and ensure admission, attendance and completion of elementary education by all children in the 6-14 years age-group. Not ironically, in the United States, for instance, civil societies and political parties strongly resist any move to shut down public schools. In 2013, a move by Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel to close a mere 47 public schools nearly cost him his job. In the same year, Philadelphia closed 23 schools.

Parents, teachers and activists launched a movement and did not relent till the proposal was withdrawn. “Parents, teachers and activists held rallies and candlelight vigils to protest. Two years on, bad feelings remain. People are attached to their neighbourhood schools. Parents worry that closure could disrupt their children’s education. Children do not want to lose their friends.

Teachers worry about their jobs,” thus The Economist describes the angst of people as well as pupils. In New York too, a move by the government to rationalise public schools was forcibly rescinded. Critics argued that shutting schools destabilises and, in some cases, derails the academic progress of pupils. Most of the closed district schools were in deprived areas. Nearly three-quarters of the children were black and more than 90% were poor, writes The Economist.

While such is the case in developed societies ,which recognise the importance of government-run schools to ensure an all-inclusive system, the Indian system paints a sorry picture. In Rajasthan, the BJP government closed over 17,000 schools and unabashedly claims it to be a reformist measure. The Telugu States are believed to close down primary schools that have less than 20 students.

At this rate, there would be nearly 6,000 schools in both States which face closure, point out teacher unions. The governments’ arguments to substantiate their moves go against the basic premise of the RTE. One wonders why there is no demand for government schools, whereas private schools are not only sprouting across the countryside but also are sure-shot money-spinners.

Lack of facilities like drinking water and toilets, especially for girls, is a well-established reason for the large scale dropout rate. Absence of well-trained and qualified permanent staff is another lacuna the governments are unable to confront. As an instance, it is observed that in Telangana, there is a large dearth of Mandal Education Officers and Deputy District Education Officers, who are vital in enforcing the RTE Act and overseeing well-being of the pupils.

As such, mere closure of schools would only mean dropout of poor children in their neighbourhoods. Cluster school concept in Andhra Pradesh, too, would not meet its objectives if no transport is provided to the affected students. It is regrettable that the governments should even think on such lines of rationalizing or closing down government schools even as they have not met the March 15 deadline of the Right to Education Act.

By Balaram Keelapattu