PADMAVATI PRABHU
PANAJI
It seems highly irregular, that 16 men with no connection to primary education, have been called upon to advise the government on the medium of instruction for primary schools, that too when 90 per cent of the teachers in primary schools are women.
It is no wonder the 17-member Academic Authority constituted to advise the government on Medium of Instruction (MoI) has drawn criticism from various quarters.
Only one member in the academic authority is a woman, despite the fact that over 90 per cent of the teaching community comprises women.
While most of the members, termed as educationists, have experience of teaching in institutes of higher education, apparently none are associated with primary education.
Speaking to The Goan, a primary teacher having an experience of over 22 years in a Marathi-medium school said, “The problems that teachers at primary level and those at college level face are totally different. With no representation from stakeholders in primary education, especially teachers, I don’t think the Academic Authority will take the correct decision as only those associated with primary education will understand the importance of mother tongue,” she said.
Another senior teacher who has an experience of 19 years said the Academic Authority has been appointed to further mess up the issue of MoI.
“Earlier too, the expert committee had only one woman member. The issue shouldn’t have been given to the men, especially in higher education as they don’t understand the real problems as far as primary education is concerned. They are bound to complicate it further,” she stated.
Spokesperson for Bailancho Saad, Sabina Martins stated that more women ought to be on the Academic Authority.
“Mothers play a very big role and if you see the teaching community, it is dominated by women. But they don’t find a voice. Though the government talks about including women in decision making nothing is done when it comes to implementation,” she said.
“And if you look at the skills, in the education sector, there are enough women who possess the expertise so I don’t think we should even restrict their presence to 50 per cent,” she added.
The two groups “ Bharatiya Bhasha Suraksha Manch (BBSM) and Forum of Rights to Childrens’ Education (FORCE) “ have already voiced their doubts over the advisory panel.
Calling the appointment of panel illegal, BBSM leader Uday Bhembre stated, “There should have been more emphasis on including stakeholders from primary education as the issue revolves around primary education only. No thought was given to this issue at all. The academic authority lays down curriculum and evaluation process from I to VIII so experienced teachers or headmasters of primary and high schools and maybe one or two educationists should be included.”
“There are ample of women in the teaching community and child psychology is an important issue which women understand better than men,” said Bhembre.
FORCE Leader Savio Lopes asked, “Are any of these members associated with primary education or do they have any experience in teaching at primary level? How do you define an educationist and how can they say that they are the experts on the issue.”
“According to me none of the committee members are competent enough to understand the problems faced by parents and teachers as they are in any way not associated with primary education,” said Lopes.
