<p>In 2012, the PISA test results were announced by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. More than seventy nations had participated in this regular assessment to ascertain the level of school education. India was ranked below all nations except Kyrgyzstan. This is a telling comment on the state of school education in India. Have things improved since then? It is safe to presume that not much has changed because after India chose to drop out of the PISA tests, post-2012, it has chosen to not rejoin. </p>.<p>There are other compelling anecdotal reasons that tell us that our education system is not doing well. Very recently, I asked a group of school teachers engaged in teaching statistics to school children if they could assess the probability of an individual in Delhi falling prey to the <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tag/coronavirus" target="_blank">coronavirus</a>. I realised, to the embarrassment of everyone, that these good folk were clueless on how to go about the problem. And let me assure all concerned that the problem and its solution is well within the grasp of a Class 9 student. </p>.<p>The silence of these teachers reminded me of what Tagore had said more than a hundred years ago that we, in India, had reduced education to the confines of the blackboard without caring for its connections to the world around us. The tragedy is that what Tagore had said then is far more valid today. </p>.<p>My intention in pointing out these lacunae that beset our education system is not to demoralise but to demonstrate that nothing much is being done in a serious manner to tackle the issue. If any of us harbour the notion that perhaps higher education is in better shape than school education let me dispel such impressions quickly. </p>.<p>The University of Delhi was ranked fairly high in 2014 in almost all global rankings. Since that time, it has continuously slid to the backwaters of all ranking systems. The state of higher education can also be inferred by other means. I was deeply disappointed to discover in a group of about eighty postgraduate students of the University of Delhi that they were unaware of Wardha. My concern was compounded by the fact that almost all of these students were aspiring for government jobs through the UPSC examination processes. </p>.<p><strong>National Education Policy 2020 </strong></p>.<p>Perhaps then, that is why we needed a policy on education. It is a welcome step since it carries many progressive ideas. For instance, if India really wishes to bring about improvements in school education, it will have to make a concerted national effort to improve the quality of school teachers. I am heartened to note that this policy document has given very clear and deep insights on how to go about this problem. For instance, as things stand, a school teacher picks up a near fraudulent or meaningless teaching qualification – such as the B.Ed. – from the innumerable and dubious institutions that dot the nation. Under the new policy, these institutions shall have to shut shop or transform themselves to levels of true competence. They shall no longer be able to offer standalone B.Ed. degrees. </p>.<p>There are other very worthy features in the document. The policy calls for a significant reduction in the overwhelming amount of near meaningless teaching content that is currently being inflicted on school students. It also requires that the barriers that have been created between the so-called regular disciplines from the sciences and humanities and the so-called extracurricular, co-curricular and sporting realms be dissolved. It also calls for giving students more than one chance to improve their examination scores at the level of the board examinations.</p>.<p><strong>Positives at the first-degree level</strong></p>.<p>When it comes to higher education, I once again welcome the suggestions and directions given by this policy. I can say with much confidence that the many recommendations related to the platform of a first-degree offering are really marvellous. I say this with a great deal of confidence since most of these features are a reproduction of what had taken place in 2013-14 at the University of Delhi. </p>.<p>At that time, when I was the Vice Chancellor, we had had much success with these ideas. The surest ways are to look at student feedback from those days and what they actually produced. Undergraduates began to become entrepreneurs and they also began to produce research and patents. They had enormous freedom and flexibility in determining the course of their studies. If for some reason a student had to drop out, she could leave with a diploma and return within a span of ten years to complete her degree. A student could obtain a three-year undergraduate degree with specialisation in a subject called the major subject and also obtain a minor specialisation if she so wished. The student could also stay on and complete a fourth year which would give her an honours degree with greater specialisation towards research or even entrepreneurship. This would then lead to an automatic reduction in the postgraduate programme. The M.Phil degree would then die a natural and welcome death. These things worked very well for us so much so that the global ranking of the University of Delhi shot up.</p>.<p>All of these features are incorporated in the New Education Policy document and since they worked so well for us I welcome them heartily. The other noteworthy feature is the decision to abolish agencies such as the UGC and the AICTE and create a single overarching agency to foster higher education. </p>.<p>The commitment to support education with more than six percent of our GDP is a very bold and much-needed step. If implemented in the manner that the policy has asked this shall also lead to much good. Of course, the real challenge and test now lies in the manner in which we choose to implement all of the above.</p>.<p><br /><em>(Dinesh Singh is former Vice Chancellor, Delhi University)</em></p>.<p><br />Disclaimer: The views expressed above are the author’s own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of DH.</p>
<p>In 2012, the PISA test results were announced by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. More than seventy nations had participated in this regular assessment to ascertain the level of school education. India was ranked below all nations except Kyrgyzstan. This is a telling comment on the state of school education in India. Have things improved since then? It is safe to presume that not much has changed because after India chose to drop out of the PISA tests, post-2012, it has chosen to not rejoin. </p>.<p>There are other compelling anecdotal reasons that tell us that our education system is not doing well. Very recently, I asked a group of school teachers engaged in teaching statistics to school children if they could assess the probability of an individual in Delhi falling prey to the <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tag/coronavirus" target="_blank">coronavirus</a>. I realised, to the embarrassment of everyone, that these good folk were clueless on how to go about the problem. And let me assure all concerned that the problem and its solution is well within the grasp of a Class 9 student. </p>.<p>The silence of these teachers reminded me of what Tagore had said more than a hundred years ago that we, in India, had reduced education to the confines of the blackboard without caring for its connections to the world around us. The tragedy is that what Tagore had said then is far more valid today. </p>.<p>My intention in pointing out these lacunae that beset our education system is not to demoralise but to demonstrate that nothing much is being done in a serious manner to tackle the issue. If any of us harbour the notion that perhaps higher education is in better shape than school education let me dispel such impressions quickly. </p>.<p>The University of Delhi was ranked fairly high in 2014 in almost all global rankings. Since that time, it has continuously slid to the backwaters of all ranking systems. The state of higher education can also be inferred by other means. I was deeply disappointed to discover in a group of about eighty postgraduate students of the University of Delhi that they were unaware of Wardha. My concern was compounded by the fact that almost all of these students were aspiring for government jobs through the UPSC examination processes. </p>.<p><strong>National Education Policy 2020 </strong></p>.<p>Perhaps then, that is why we needed a policy on education. It is a welcome step since it carries many progressive ideas. For instance, if India really wishes to bring about improvements in school education, it will have to make a concerted national effort to improve the quality of school teachers. I am heartened to note that this policy document has given very clear and deep insights on how to go about this problem. For instance, as things stand, a school teacher picks up a near fraudulent or meaningless teaching qualification – such as the B.Ed. – from the innumerable and dubious institutions that dot the nation. Under the new policy, these institutions shall have to shut shop or transform themselves to levels of true competence. They shall no longer be able to offer standalone B.Ed. degrees. </p>.<p>There are other very worthy features in the document. The policy calls for a significant reduction in the overwhelming amount of near meaningless teaching content that is currently being inflicted on school students. It also requires that the barriers that have been created between the so-called regular disciplines from the sciences and humanities and the so-called extracurricular, co-curricular and sporting realms be dissolved. It also calls for giving students more than one chance to improve their examination scores at the level of the board examinations.</p>.<p><strong>Positives at the first-degree level</strong></p>.<p>When it comes to higher education, I once again welcome the suggestions and directions given by this policy. I can say with much confidence that the many recommendations related to the platform of a first-degree offering are really marvellous. I say this with a great deal of confidence since most of these features are a reproduction of what had taken place in 2013-14 at the University of Delhi. </p>.<p>At that time, when I was the Vice Chancellor, we had had much success with these ideas. The surest ways are to look at student feedback from those days and what they actually produced. Undergraduates began to become entrepreneurs and they also began to produce research and patents. They had enormous freedom and flexibility in determining the course of their studies. If for some reason a student had to drop out, she could leave with a diploma and return within a span of ten years to complete her degree. A student could obtain a three-year undergraduate degree with specialisation in a subject called the major subject and also obtain a minor specialisation if she so wished. The student could also stay on and complete a fourth year which would give her an honours degree with greater specialisation towards research or even entrepreneurship. This would then lead to an automatic reduction in the postgraduate programme. The M.Phil degree would then die a natural and welcome death. These things worked very well for us so much so that the global ranking of the University of Delhi shot up.</p>.<p>All of these features are incorporated in the New Education Policy document and since they worked so well for us I welcome them heartily. The other noteworthy feature is the decision to abolish agencies such as the UGC and the AICTE and create a single overarching agency to foster higher education. </p>.<p>The commitment to support education with more than six percent of our GDP is a very bold and much-needed step. If implemented in the manner that the policy has asked this shall also lead to much good. Of course, the real challenge and test now lies in the manner in which we choose to implement all of the above.</p>.<p><br /><em>(Dinesh Singh is former Vice Chancellor, Delhi University)</em></p>.<p><br />Disclaimer: The views expressed above are the author’s own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of DH.</p>