The No Detention Policy, under theRight to Education (RTE) Act, where no child can be held back orexpelled from school until class VIII, is causing a crises amongstthe heads of schools in our state, urging them to make importantdecisions of rejecting it entirely. The unanimous vote is tosegregate the winners from the losers. Not surprising since ourentire system relies only on exams as a bench mark of being educated.Every school wants a good result, every jobs needs a basicqualification, and every entrance exam needs a good score. What aboutlearning? What good is such an Act in a country that equateseducation to the fear of failing?
The No Detention Policy was putinto force to bring about a change in the profile of young childrenattending school in India. With a large majority of children hailingfrom the rural districts of India, where the discrepancies betweenchildren who go to school as a luxury and those that drop out ofschool because of the lack of such luxuries, is wide, this Act isinstituted. The ‘No Detention Policy’ was meant to ensurecompulsory education up to the age of 14 years, and prevent dropoutrate in schools. The purpose is not so much pedagogical than it issocial, where the focus is prevention of child labor and juveniledelinquency. The hope is to ensure every child gets an opportunity toenter the system through education.
However, the No Detention Policy hasother benefits besides keeping children in the classroom and awayfrom trouble. Such an Act truly work wonders in a country whereeducation is not about exams but more about knowledge anddevelopment. Where the government considers their children aninvestment and thus prioritizes policies in education. So why are wefighting this Right to Education Act?
In Goa, the No Detention Policy is seenmore as a hindrance than an aid to the existing education system.Teachers feel that children are not motivated enough to study ifthere are no exams to answer. The argument being that if there are notest per se then what measures do they have that the students havetruly learned?
Their fears are not unfounded. InStandard IX, the education systems falls back on the earlier patternof evaluation where the shift is on rote learning and testinginformation that the student has managed to mug up and store in theirmemory for later retrieval. Students have to suddenly focus on a newskill of memorizing data. This new skill requires considerableefforts and is a guaranteed stressor and if students had no previousexperience with it. In turn, their scores in standard X, which is thebench mark for higher education are affected.
Given the present system of education,what the teacher feels is justified, but the obvious needs to bequestioned. If the onus on performance lies with the student and notthe teachers per se, what is the role of pedagogy in our state?
Everything from the basic policies of educationthat dictates the number of students assigned per teacher, to theprescribed syllabus needs an appraisal.
If the accountability of performancewas depended on the teacher’s ability to identify the strengths oftheir students and tailor to their individual needs, wouldperformance increase? Does the student teacher ratio allow for thisto happen?
If the choice of subjects were notrestricted to the basics of language, math, science, geography andhistory but included vocational subjects like agriculture, fishing,mechanics, tailoring and carpentry from which the student could bothbenefit and relate to would it make a difference in theirperformance. Would such changes in turn change the overallexpectations of being educated and bring about a much needed changein job search? Are we passing the buck so as to reject an act thatseems to work in many developed countries but not ours?
In the UK for example, a student has toget promoted to the next grade irrespective of their level ofprogress. If students under perform, the system makes sure the teachertakes responsibility. The assessment grades of under performingstudents are compared with national data of progress levels and a‘targeted intervention' has to be formulated. The teachers analysesthe reason for poor performance and find solutions to help thestudent perform better in the future. For such personal attention thenumber of students assigned per division is limited.
By voting against the No Detention Policy are we in denial of the changes our education system has toundergo. If we do want to give an excellent education to thestudents, then the efforts have to come from the state and theteachers. Having or not having a No Detention Policy doesn’treally matter. What matters is revamping the present educationsystem.
Dr Aldina Braganza e Gomes is a clinical psychologist, psychotherapist and associate professor, HOD, Dept of Psychology Carmel College
