The 2016-17 Economic Survey of India puts the crux of the problem of education in a succinct manner in their report. The summary below points towards the two primary problems of the education sector and suggests a few remedies to improve the system.
Problem 1: Low learning outcomes
We often hear of people having a matriculation or graduation degree, yet unable to deal with basic problems presented to them. This is a consequence of low learning outcomes. This is a pertinent concern that is often heard in the discourse of school education. The Annual Status of Education Report (ASER), 2014, and several other studies have repeatedly pointed this out. While improvements in access to education and retention in school have been mapped in these reports, the learning outcomes for a majority of children are still very low.
Problem 2: Teacher absenteeism and poor quality of teachers
It is understood that the main cause of this low learning outcomes is disinterested and absent teachers. This sizable contributes to the extremely poor quality of education in several schools across the nation. Coupled with the shortage of professionally qualified teachers, the situation assumes a grimness that India needs to address urgently.
It is seen that the share of teacher component in total Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) budget has been increasing over the years from 35 per cent in 2011-12 to 59 per cent in 2014-15, the problem of teacher absenteeism and the shortage of professionally qualified teachers continues to plague the education scenario.
Solution 1: Biometric attendance
Often used in the private and corporate sectors, and in the contemporary situation in all governmental premises as well, biometric attendance system provides a good solution. It can be hoped that teacher absenteeism can be curtailed through the placement of this system. The system can be tweaked to explore to capture the daily activities as well – especially in primary schools, where teachers must press their attendance for each scheduled class, lecture, session etc, making it unique from the present system – where only coming and going of the personnel is monitored without any control on the activities during working hours. This record may be shared with the parents, and put in the public domain as well – to help everyone become more vigilant of the teachers’ activities.
The report suggests that “a pilot project in one district of every state may be commenced for six months to be expanded to all districts in three years”.
Solution 2: Adequate teaching aid and recorded lectures
The primary schools should be backed with adequate teaching aids, recorded lectures, etc. to fill in for absentee teachers and at the same time raise the quality of information available to the students. The report also warns that the “the scope of implementation should leave room for flexibility at the local level so the same do not end up as top driven ‘Model Schools’”.
Solution 3: Revised evaluation tool
It would be pertinent to set an evaluation method in schools where the biometric devices are made available. This will help understand how useful the interventions are and how the children are being benefited. It would also help build learning outcomes, which would assist in further dissemination of this methodology and strengthening of the education system, ensuring education for all.
Receive Daily Updates
Recent Posts
Steve Ovett, the famous British middle-distance athlete, won the 800-metres gold medal at the Moscow Olympics of 1980. Just a few days later, he was about to win a 5,000-metres race at London’s Crystal Palace. Known for his burst of acceleration on the home stretch, he had supreme confidence in his ability to out-sprint rivals. With the final 100 metres remaining,
[wptelegram-join-channel link=”https://t.me/s/upsctree” text=”Join @upsctree on Telegram”]Ovett waved to the crowd and raised a hand in triumph. But he had celebrated a bit too early. At the finishing line, Ireland’s John Treacy edged past Ovett. For those few moments, Ovett had lost his sense of reality and ignored the possibility of a negative event.
This analogy works well for the India story and our policy failures , including during the ongoing covid pandemic. While we have never been as well prepared or had significant successes in terms of growth stability as Ovett did in his illustrious running career, we tend to celebrate too early. Indeed, we have done so many times before.
It is as if we’re convinced that India is destined for greater heights, come what may, and so we never run through the finish line. Do we and our policymakers suffer from a collective optimism bias, which, as the Nobel Prize winner Daniel Kahneman once wrote, “may well be the most significant of the cognitive biases”? The optimism bias arises from mistaken beliefs which form expectations that are better than the reality. It makes us underestimate chances of a negative outcome and ignore warnings repeatedly.
The Indian economy had a dream run for five years from 2003-04 to 2007-08, with an average annual growth rate of around 9%. Many believed that India was on its way to clocking consistent double-digit growth and comparisons with China were rife. It was conveniently overlooked that this output expansion had come mainly came from a few sectors: automobiles, telecom and business services.
Indians were made to believe that we could sprint without high-quality education, healthcare, infrastructure or banking sectors, which form the backbone of any stable economy. The plan was to build them as we went along, but then in the euphoria of short-term success, it got lost.
India’s exports of goods grew from $20 billion in 1990-91 to over $310 billion in 2019-20. Looking at these absolute figures it would seem as if India has arrived on the world stage. However, India’s share of global trade has moved up only marginally. Even now, the country accounts for less than 2% of the world’s goods exports.
More importantly, hidden behind this performance was the role played by one sector that should have never made it to India’s list of exports—refined petroleum. The share of refined petroleum exports in India’s goods exports increased from 1.4% in 1996-97 to over 18% in 2011-12.
An import-intensive sector with low labour intensity, exports of refined petroleum zoomed because of the then policy regime of a retail price ceiling on petroleum products in the domestic market. While we have done well in the export of services, our share is still less than 4% of world exports.
India seemed to emerge from the 2008 global financial crisis relatively unscathed. But, a temporary demand push had played a role in the revival—the incomes of many households, both rural and urban, had shot up. Fiscal stimulus to the rural economy and implementation of the Sixth Pay Commission scales had led to the salaries of around 20% of organized-sector employees jumping up. We celebrated, but once again, neither did we resolve the crisis brewing elsewhere in India’s banking sector, nor did we improve our capacity for healthcare or quality education.
Employment saw little economy-wide growth in our boom years. Manufacturing jobs, if anything, shrank. But we continued to celebrate. Youth flocked to low-productivity service-sector jobs, such as those in hotels and restaurants, security and other services. The dependence on such jobs on one hand and high-skilled services on the other was bound to make Indian society more unequal.
And then, there is agriculture, an elephant in the room. If and when farm-sector reforms get implemented, celebrations would once again be premature. The vast majority of India’s farmers have small plots of land, and though these farms are at least as productive as larger ones, net absolute incomes from small plots can only be meagre.
A further rise in farm productivity and consequent increase in supply, if not matched by a demand rise, especially with access to export markets, would result in downward pressure on market prices for farm produce and a further decline in the net incomes of small farmers.
We should learn from what John Treacy did right. He didn’t give up, and pushed for the finish line like it was his only chance at winning. Treacy had years of long-distance practice. The same goes for our economy. A long grind is required to build up its base before we can win and celebrate. And Ovett did not blame anyone for his loss. We play the blame game. Everyone else, right from China and the US to ‘greedy corporates’, seems to be responsible for our failures.
We have lowered absolute poverty levels and had technology-based successes like Aadhaar and digital access to public services. But there are no short cuts to good quality and adequate healthcare and education services. We must remain optimistic but stay firmly away from the optimism bias.
In the end, it is not about how we start, but how we finish. The disastrous second wave of covid and our inability to manage it is a ghastly reminder of this fact.