Education for all is a far-fetched dream even today-tracing back the roots of privatization in education

Education for all is a far-fetched dream even today-tracing back the roots of privatization in education “Sit idle no more. Go get education.”- Savitribai Phule The above quote correctly encompasses the initial aim of the Indian education system. The aim was to have a literate population in which every individual had equal opportunity for a better future. The following paper will try to understand the implications of neo-liberalism in the education field in India. Basically what it meant for the masses of the population that still cannot use education as a tool to help them stand on equal footing with the rest of the population in India. Then it tries to focus particularly on how the New Education Policy, 2020 will not help bridge the divide existing in Indian society in terms of education but rather further hinder it.

In the Indian context, neo-liberalism has a significant impact. With liberty, Indian citizens were able to access education easier. When India signed the World Trade Organization (WTO) agreement in 1994, in accordance with the agreement it meant that it should not use public funding for an expansion of higher education. As the WTO recommended against using public funds to expand higher education in their policy recommendation. This deteriorated the quality of higher education in public institutions because of the fiscal constraints upon the state governments. Conjointly, this also led to the increase of privatization in the field of education all over India. Privatization was characterized by a large number of private institutes. All through these institutions did not take any subsidy from the government, it was necessary for them to take recognition from the concerned authority of the government. These schools are affiliated with boards established by the government can be the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE), or the Indian Certificate of Secondary Education (ICSE) or to the state boards. If seen from a myopic perspective, the privatisation of educational institutes might be seen as a tremendous start to helping more people get access to education. However, this acted as the first step towards the social exclusion of people from comparatively underprivileged and disadvantaged sectors of society. Currently, these private institutions are not only providing value-based education but also getting the status of deemed university or autonomous organisation for their academic excellence. The growth privatization of educational institutions can be seen as the result of 1991 Indian economic reforms. The proponents of neo-liberalism like Bhagwati conceptualise reforms and supposedly believe that they are supposed to reduce the poverty in the country as well as increase growth.

Privatization is not the only reason why education for all is a distant dream in India even today, however, it is the primary reason. There are many other reasons as well including gender bias, and low rural expenditure on education by the government. Gender equality is still a problem in Indian society. There is still a significant disparity between the social status of women, and the economic independence given to women. In the other words, miles to go before gender equity can be achieved in terms of education. Higher education is a dream for underprivileged children. According to National Sample Survey Organization data, in the FY 2007-2008, the youth with education up to the secondary level had an unemployment rate of 18.10 % and the unemployment rate for youth with education up to the primary level was only 11. 60 %. The government should take emphasis on allocating resources for higher education in order to provide more opportunities for all students. Overall it is evident that the neoliberal model encourages privatization. Within the Indian context, private institutions maintain quality with the aim of profit maximization. Since it has been proved that the growth of privatization is interlinked with the nation’s economic growth; this has led to less emphasis on public education. Although the government does try to produce the best educational service to prepare the students for the future it is unable to provide international standard qualitative education. This in turn has led to the exclusion of people who do not come from strong financial backgrounds. Neo-liberalism in other words has been particularly ruthless in terms of its impact in India as it has produced enormous spatial unevenness. In a survey, 75% of respondents who had opinions on the subject thought that neo-liberalism or economic reform only benefits the rich.

Taking a deeper look at the New Education Policy 2020 and how it will just breed inequality

This policy was introduced at a time when students all over India were struggling to access education because they did not have the basic facilities to attend classes digitally. The government can be accused of taking advantage of the lockdown to bypass the Parliament from having much say in this new policy. The backdrop of how this policy was introduced is not the best atmosphere for something which is supposedly going to help India build a global education system. The proposed policy document mentions the United States, Germany, Israel, South Korea and Japan as societies which represent the idea of model knowledge. The influence the American education system had is clearly evident, through the document India welcomes foreign universities to feel free to set up branches in India. The New Education Policy
acknowledges that many students drop out of the education system and that the lack of universal access to quality education is missing. It tries to address the problem and claims that the implementation of the
policy will help two crore students be reintegrated into the education system. How this will be achieved is
not clearly mentioned. While it acknowledges so many students dropping out of the education system, it
institutionalizes the dropout phenomenon by giving the option of multiple exit routes with certificates at
each dropout point. It fails to recognize that the people who will drop out will be the ones from the
weaker sections who will drop out: it is also these people that will stand underprivileged when it comes to
getting jobs. It is clearly visible that the students, who choose to take the certificate, will not stand on
equal par with students who stay for the entire duration and get complete degrees. Complete degrees will get the best jobs.

When it comes to tackling childhood care and education (ECCE), NCERT initially said it would provide a
curricular and pedagogical framework for ECCE children up to age 8 alongside a different framework for
0-3-year-olds. It has also been mentioned that the mother tongue will be used whenever possible as a
medium of instruction not only till Grade 5 but till Grade 8. What was problematic about this was that
higher education was not going to be provided in the mother tongue. So those students would not be at
equal footing when they would come for higher education. However, recently Amit Shah launched Hindi
textbooks for medical studies in order to make higher education more accessible to people who are not
comfortable with the English language. Although this is a positive change, this kind of reform should
have been made much sooner.

In July 2020, the Union Cabinet approved the National Education Policy (NEP), and prior to this, the
Prime Minister of India Mr Modi had declared that online education would play a pivotal role in education policy as in his opinion the quality of education would be approved by online education. He
advocated that this new policy would help India achieve global standards. Many skeptics and critics ask
for any credible evidence to credit Mr. Modi’s views and opinions. On the contrary, social scientists and
psychologists are of the opinion that when there is no teacher and student interaction the learning levels
tend to deteriorate. Another interesting question is whether reaching global standards of education and
being ranked among the top 100 institutes of higher education. This ranking is clouded by the influence of
the corporate world that applies standards with deep roots in market capitalism. There is no social purpose of education or the instrumental role that education plays visible in these rankings. To the surprise of many, the Prime Minister’s call for a new Education policy was followed by Reliance Industries receiving a major investment from Google and market studies reporting the worth of online education in India to be around $15 billion in the next four years. On June 24, 2020, the Human Resource Development Ministry entered into an agreement with the World Bank and invited the intervention of the World Bank in school education in six states of India. However, it is pertinent to mention here that historically the World Bank’s district primary education programme (1993-2002) in major districts in India led to the failure of the primary education system and created a vast market for private schools which to many seems to have
been the primary motive of the World Bank. So extending the invitation to the World Bank for its
intervention does not seem to be a prudent idea, especially considering that the loan granted by the World Bank would comprise only 1.4% of the total expenditure earmarked by the Government of India on
education. As there are about 2 million elementary education-seeking children in India, this decision of
inviting international players seems to be motivated by capitalistic forces who want to create space for
non-state private players. The ruling Bharatiya Janata party’s ideological orientation of right-wing
Brahmanical tilt is quite evident in the New Education Policies misperceived notion of the “rich heritage
of ancient and eternal Indian knowledge and thought” throwing shades of historical prejudices.
Non-brahmanical contribution to knowledge even by Lord Mahavira and Gautam Budha and their
challenge to the social order of those times stands ignored. Not only this, regional contributions like the
Tamil literature or the work of Syrian Christians in Kerala are not given their fair share. Many tribal
communities and minorities are also left out of the so called “mainstream Indian heritage”

The National Education Policy’s failures include not recognising the role of caste and patriarchy in circumscribing access to education. It also fails to recognise socio-economic mobility by the instrument of higher education. By putting emphasis on “merit” and “gender sensitisation” the National Education
Policy seems to ignore the hegemonic role that caste and patriarchy have played in Indian history and culture. Achievements made through reservation and all the gains made constitutionally by protective discrimination since independence seem to go ignored in this new policy which is in direct violation of Article 16 of the Indian Constitution.

Sustainable development goals-4 (STD 4) of the United Nations which is sponsored by the World Bank
has eclipsed the directive principles of state policy and the defining framework of the Constitution of
India. In my opinion, relying on constitutional goals and directive principles would have been more
empowering for educational rights than Sustainable Development Goals-4. More emphasis is put on
fundamental duties whereas, there is inconspicuous silence on fundamental rights. Surprisingly, many
terms like scheduled caste (SC), scheduled tribe (ST), other backward classes (OBCs) and other religious
and linguistic minorities which were clearly defined and legitimised by the Constitution of India are very
vaguely substituted by “socio-economic disadvantaged groups” (SEDGs) thus minimising the exploits of
the lower class people over the centuries.

The National Education Policy threatens the very federal character of the Indian Constitution by
proposing to centralise all key decision-making powers regarding education to the Union Government.
The biggest fear amongst the critics is the proposal in the National Education Policy for the role of
“trained volunteers from both the local community and beyond social workers counsellors and community involvement in the school system” it is feared that right-wing religious groups might exploit this provision and send their volunteers to take advantage of the subconscious mind of 3-6 year age group and might influence their thinking and social behaviour. The education policy is quite ambiguous and confusing on its proposal on the mother tongue. This also overburdens the young children by emphasising learning a classical language which adds to their already complex and detailed syllabus. The National Education Policy provides for the mother tongue to be the medium of instruction till grade 5. It also imposes Hindi and Sanskrit to be taught in all Indian states. Many minority languages which are already on the verge of extinction will be further threatened as their usage will be put at risk by this new proposal. This is also in direct contravention of the Supreme Court judgment in the State of Karnataka vs.
Associated Management of (Government Recognised- unaided- English Medium) Primary and Secondary
Schools & Ors. Civil appeal nos. 5166-5190 of 2013. Furthermore, the option of English being a
non-mandatory subject till grade 8 will amplify inequality of the marginalized sections as English has
become an asset for employment in high-paying jobs. Not knowing this language will put the
marginalized sections in a vicious cycle of alienation and exclusion.

Higher Education
The National Education Policy may lead to the closure of government degree colleges and state
universities as they will become indebted to the market eventually and higher education might be shifted
to private hands in the garb of philanthropy, under the modified PPP (Public Philanthropic Partnership)
Thereby exacerbation in the rate of exclusion of historically and socially disadvantaged people (scheduled
caste and scheduled tribe) will increase from the institutes of higher education as it is feared that the
private higher education institutes will get the freedom to increase their fees making them out of reach for the people from the lower strata of society. Presently, universities follow a system of affiliation with the government thus limiting their autonomy in their day-to-day activities. The National Education Policy
targets to eliminate the system of affiliation over a period of 15 years. The institutes of higher education
would become free to make their decisions regarding fee structure and other activities. It may encourage
them to become privatized which would adversely impact access to higher education, especially to people
from rural and backward areas. Most students from scheduled castes, scheduled tribes and other backward classes will face the double whammy of belonging to not only rural areas but also socially disadvantaged groups. Education might become a privilege available to the selected few or we might have situations similar to American and European universities where students end up with astronomical loans and spend their initial years of employment aiming to pay off their massive debt. Equally, there are great barriers that exist for the scheduled caste and scheduled tribes in getting access to such educational loans, which will place them at a great disadvantage. The reservation under the new policy seems to be based on “merit” which implies that the Constitutional guarantees provided to scheduled caste and scheduled tribes and other backward classes stand practically of no use, it is a futile attempt at appeasement. Another glaring flaw is reducing the “knowledge” and “skills” under the pretense of “vocational education” which will push the students from disadvantaged social positions to opt for parental caste-based occupations and other low-wage skills and drop out from academics altogether.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply