RTE WATCH

Skip to content

HOME ABOUT US IN DEPTH DOCUMENTS & DOWNLOADS POLICIES & ENACTMENTSSTATE RULESLITIGATION EFFORTSGUIDELINES & R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S R E P O R T S & D O C U M E N T S Older posts

RTE: a master stroke

BY D O L A S H R E E M Y S O O R POSTED ON J U N E 9 , 2 0 1 3

Talk, a Bangalore-based magazine recently featured a story on the RTE entitled Is this a new dawn for kids (Read more). The article consists of interviews of various stakeholders and experts. The article begins with the nature of RTE implementation in the government schools of K. R. Puram which lack basic amenities and the distance from homes. The plight of government schools is leading parents to consider admitting their children in low-cost private schools which may not be the best option. However, parents are driven by factors such as social mobility, good education and Englishmedium to consider low cost private schools for their children. The author explores these sentiments of parents who are opting for the citys low -cost private schools despite the affordability factor. The author quotes Professor Sudhir Krishnaswamy (Azim Premji University) on the 25% reservation mandate. According to him this move is a master stroke as it enables enables children to grow up in a safe environment interacting with each other. He

considers this an imperative to the development of a new social order which breaks away from our traditional hierarchical, feudal and violent society. The article throws light on the corrupt practices which hinder proper implementation of the RTE Act. The lower level bureaucrats have been widely accused of collecting bribes to issue income and caste certificates which are necessary for admitting children under the RTE quota. The author captures the problems with the high income limit in Karnataka which enables the creamy layer to benefit from the reservation scheme under the RTE Act. Some beneficiaries under this scheme revealed that the reservation policy liberates them from the clutches of money -lenders to educate their children. Also, the education officials are not in a position to differentiate between the urban and rural schools when it comes to reimbursements. Mr. Palakshiah, a consultant at the RTE cell in Bangalore describes the need for a reimbursement sum that is statewide. According to him, a system of gradation in the reimbursement scheme will result in another form of inequality and more people flocking to the city instead of accessing schools in their neighbourhood. One of the major criticisms against the RTE Act was the impact of the reservation scheme of children from disadvantaged backgrounds. While schools may be willing to accommodate disadvantaged children, one concern was the impact of such integration on the children so admitted. Some private school administrators believe in the benefits of the reservation scheme. School administrators have also pointed out the need to sensitize parents of fee-paying children in elite schools towards children admitted under the RTE quota. School administrators of the citys elite international schools which admitted children under the RTE quota describe the integration process as smooth. The article raises questions about teachers showing the same commitment towards the intellectual development of children admitted under the quota.

POSTED IN R T E | L E A V E A C O M M E N T

Madras HC frees Pvt. unaided schools from the clutches of fee regulation on cocurricular activities

BY D O L A S H R E E M Y S O O R POSTED ON M A Y 2 4 , 2 0 1 3

Recently, the Madras High Court held that private schools charging fees for extracurricular activities before and after school hours does not fall under the ambit of fee regulation (read more). The Court held that schools are free to charge fees for extracurricular activities which are conducted before or after school hours. A bench comprising Justice R Banumathi and Justice K Ravichandrabaabu held that if these activities are wholly unconnected with academic lives of children, then the space for state regulation of fees cannot exist. In effect, this judgment has restricted the states capacity to regulate fees in private schools to those activities which form a part of the curriculum and study [W.P. 12299 of 2012]. The Bench held that such charges do not constitute Fee under the Tamil Nadu Schools (Regulation of Collection of Fee) Act, 2009 as these activities are outside the activities conducted during regular school hours. The enactment defines fee as any amount, by whatever name called, collected directly or indirectly by a school for admission of a pupil to any standard or course of study [Section 2 (e)]. According to the parents association submitted that the school had not levied any such charges until July 28, 2011. However, after the notification of the fee structure from Fee Regulation Committee, the school made co-curricular activities optional upon charging fees. The counter submitted by the parents association claimed that this was a discriminatory practice. The school (Kavi Bharati Vidyalaya) denied the allegations and submitted that the cost of such activities was reasonable. An inspection report by the CBSE supported the schools claim in this case stating that the charges were proportionate to the facilities provided by the school. Rejecting the Advocate-Generals submission that any charges levied by the school would fall under the purview of fee as defined under the Act, the Bench held that the charges levied by the school were reasonable considering the facilities provided by the school. The Bench observed that the purpose of the Committee was to ensure that schools do not charge exorbitant amounts under the garb of extra-curricular activities. It is interesting to note that the Bench has not made any observations on the effects of its judgment on children admitted under the RTE quota. As per the CBSE affiliation rules, schools must provide at least two extra-curricular activities as a part of the regular course of study. Second, as per the judgment, schools are allowed to charge fees for extra-curricular activities which are conducted before and after school hours. What is

the fate of children admitted under the RTE quota in such a scenario? The Tamil Nadu RTE Rules state that children under the quota shall be provided books, uniforms and writing material and physical access to all school facilities without discrimination. Does the RTE Act allow for fostering talent as an entitlement? **We are unable to upload the judgment due to some technical issues. The judgment is available on the Madras High Court website. Please use the following case number to access the judgement- W.P. No. 12299 of 2012.

POSTED IN R T E | L E A V E A C O M M E N T

Putting Ratios Into Practice

BY M I H I K A T E W A R I POSTED ON M A Y 2 4 , 2 0 1 3

The schedule at the end of the RTE specifies rules regarding issues such as pupil-teacher ratio (PTR) and classroom- teacher ratio (CTR) which are crucial given the problem of overcrowded classrooms and the lack of teachers. The general debate around this issue has focused on the issues of implementation of the PTR and how it affects teachers. As reported, teachers feel threatened by this feature of the RTE as many fear losing their jobs. However, what is often not talked about is the lack of clarity in the schedule. The norms and standards are not looked at holistically, but as separate issues. This leads to some of the requirements clashing and makes monitoring difficult. What do the rules regarding PTR and CTR state? Firstly there are a different set of rules for classes 1 to 5 and another for classes 6 to 8. For the former, PTR doesnt apply unless there are more than 200 children. However, if you have 60 children in a class you must have 2 teachers, for 90 you must have 3 and so on. The rules for class 6 to class 8 state there should be at least one teacher for every 35 children. It also states that there should be at least one teacher each for i) science and

mathematics, ii) social studies iii) languages. Where schools have more than 100 students they must also have part-time teachers for Art and Sports etc. The rules for the school building declare that there should be at least one class room for every teacher making CTR 1:1. At first glance these rules seem simple and clear enough, however, when looking at a potential monitoring framework or implementation guidelines, the formulation of these rules raise some questions: For classes 1 to 5, who have less than 200 students, how are the students distributed among classes? The schedule does not address this. So in reality, there could be a class of 60 with two teachers, but one class could have 45 students and the other 15 and would still qualify as compliant. For classes 6 to 8, if the pupil-teacher ratio is supposed to be 1:35, then where do you factor in the extra subject teachers and part-time teachers in the ratio? This is not a problem in itself, but the issue of CTR makes this problematic and is discussed below. A school, could, in fact have a 1:35 teacher-student ratio and could also have extra teachers for subjects. This would make the school PTR compliant. However, this same school may not have a classroom for these extra-subject teachers and would therefore not live up to the every teacher must have a classroom rule making it CTR non compliant. When creating a simple compliance monitoring framework this discrepancy might make the school appear to be non-compliant. The reverse could happen in a second scenario. Schools that meet the classroom per teacher rule could get away from having to provide extra-subject teachers because they meet the required CTR and PTR. In effect, the only way a school could meet both PTR and CTR (for classes 6 to 8) is if it had a 1:35 teacher-student ratio and if every extra-subject teacher had his/her own

classroom. While this is something that schools might aspire to, its unlikely that the majority of schools would have these resources. A basic PTR or CTR check (dividing number of students by number of teachers and dividing number of classrooms by number of teachers) is not enough to assess if the school is compliant in these respects. These shades of grey are not just present in the CTR and PTR issue but with most of the schedule attached to the RTE; for example the number of working days and hours of teachers (also detailed in the schedule). In the effort to make schools accountable, the over complication of rules has inadvertently created loopholes.

POSTED IN R T E | L E A V E A C O M M E N T

Independence of the NCPCR- A fallacy?

BY D O L A S H R E E M Y S O O R POSTED ON M A Y 3 , 2 0 1 3

A recent interview by Dhir Jhingran (former national coordinator of the RTE Division, NCPCR) in Governance Now reveals that the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) set up under the Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005 (CPCR Act) and the monitoring authority under the RTE Act, 2009 is a rather toothless establishment. This independent authority was established under a separate statute to monitor the implementation of child rights in India. He criticized the stronghold that the Ministry of Women and Child Development has over the NCPCR. The fact that this statutory authority was established to perform a particular role, but is treated like a subordinate office of a ministry makes one wonder about the necessity of such an authority. However, the fact that the HRD ministry funds and supervises RTE work in the NCPCR does not seem to be of much help to those working in the RTE Division. Dhir Jhingran expresses his frustration over internal politics and plans to sabotage work taken up by some; he calls to question the commitment of the organisation to work towards achieving the targets set forth under the RTE Act. The trend of spending less on children and programmes related to children is not new to India (read more). Much like the Indian judiciary, the funds to the NCPCR is controlled by our ruling elite. Financially speaking, neither of these institutions are free from

political control. Further, the funding, expenditure and recruitment patterns of the NCPCR are subject to political will. An example of such pervasive state control may be found in the Comptroller and Auditor General Reports on the NCPCR. From 2006 to 2008 the NCPCR was barely allowed to spend up to Rs 5.4 Crores on its activities (read more). In 2008-2009 the NCPCR was granted a sum of Rs 5.4 Crores. The recruitment pattern also seems strange. The fact that many members of the commission are recruited as consultants and not permanent staff makes one wonder if this a system that is bound to fail even on the human resource front. A close examination of the powers and functions of the NCPCR reveals that the establishment has insufficient powers to influence any change in the way the issue of child rights is dealt with in India. The CPCR Act vests in the NCPCR the powers of making recommendation on implementation of child rights, making recommendation of compensation to victims, conducting inquiry into violations of child rights and approaching the courts for justice. The RTE Act states that the NCPCR at the national level and the SCPCRs at the state level shall be the monitoring and grievance redressal bodies. It is important to note that the functions of the NCPCR under the RTE Act and the CPCR Act are not very different. If any complaints are taken up by the child rights commissions, they may merely make recommendations (which may or may not be considered by the ruling elite) or approach courts (which people are apprehensive about) on how to resolve the grievance. Clearly, they do not have the power to act upon such complaints. Another example of the toothless nature of its establishment is the NCPCRs guidelines on elimination of corporal punishment. Although the RTE Act prohibits the use of corporal punishment, mental harassment or discrimination in schools, the fact that the child rights commissions cannot do much about violation of these guidelines describes the limitations placed upon these institutions. The guidelines are not binding on states, provided states specifically adopt them. There are only about 16 states which have adopted the guidelines, therefore the guidelines are binding only on these 16 states (read more). This is despite the fact the guidelines provide for a comprehensive grievance redressal mechanism for children and parents on the issue of corporal punishment and mental harassment. If implemented properly, they would call to question every authority including the magistrates and the police officers who will need to be involved if corporal punishment and mental harassment are recognized as child abuse.

There have been instances to show that state or private person accountability is not brought to question when they ignore the Commissions interventions (read more). A close examination of the workings of the child rights commissions would make one wonder if Dhir Jhingran is right when he says we create institutions and do not invest in them and weaken them on purpose. Where is the independence of this independent child rights protection authority? More importantly, what do we mean by an independent monitoring authority?

POSTED IN R T E | L E A V E A C O M M E N T

Govt. school children buy their own answer scripts: RTE? CCE?
BY D O L A S H R E E M Y S O O R POSTED ON A P R I L 2 3 , 2 0 1 3

A states apathy towards basic education is evident when it fails to provide answer scripts to students to take their annual examination staring May 7 because it has not budgeted for it (read more)! Inadequate budgeting has lead to a paucity of funds for government schools to carry out examinations. While children bring their own answer scripts, teachers are expected write questions on the blackboard. Some teachers are spending out of their own pockets to conduct the annual examinations. As per the provisions of the RTE Act all government schools are supposed to provide free and compulsory education to all children between the ages of 6 and 14 years. Free education would include the provision of educational material such as text-books, workbooks, stationery and the like which would include materials required for conducting examinations. The intention behind providing free education is to ensure that the financial barriers which prevent children from accessing education such as school fees and costs of books and stationery are removed. It is difficult to decide whether the failure to budget for examinations in the state education budget or the statements of education officers is more baffling. As per the RTE Act, children are supposed to be evaluated in a continuous manner so as to assure learning outcomes. This is known as the Continuous and Comprehensive Evaluation (CCE) framework. Therefore, expecting children to answer an entire years syllab us in one single annual examination would not necessarily fall within the purview of the CCE

framework of assessment. In this regard, the Basic Education Secretary has denied that examinations are conducted in the state because of the CCE. However, the Basic Education Director has confirmed the conduct of annual examinations in the state in order to help teachers make plans for children. With no clear uniform response from the government officials, it is difficult to gauge what is happening in the name of RTE implementation in Uttar Pradesh.

POSTED IN R T E | TAGGED R T E B U D G E T S , R T E I M P L E M E N T A T I O N , U T T A R P R A D E S H | L E A V E A C O M M E N T

Older posts

Search

Search for:

RE CENT POSTS RTE: a master stroke Madras HC frees Pvt. unaided schools from the clutches of fee regulation on co-curricular activities

Putting Ratios Into Practice Independence of the NCPCR- A fallacy? Govt. school children buy their own answer scripts: RTE? CCE?

ARCHIVES June 2013 May 2013

April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 July 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011

BLOGROLL AI Blog

Critical Twenties Law and other things LGDI Blog RTE India

SUBSCRIBE TO THIS BL OG

Your email:
Enter email address...

Subscribe

Unsubscribe

TAGS

25% 25% Admission 25% rule Admissions Admission tests Amendments CCE Child Labour corporal punishment CWSN disadvantaged groups EWS Girl Child Education Inclusive Education Income Limit judgment Karnataka Karnataka High Court learning outcomes Maharashtra mental harassment Minorities NCPCR out-of-school children PISA PWD Act reservation rights awareness right to

education RTE RTE Compliance

Implementation problems

RTE Implementation RTE

RTE Problems RTE Rules RTE violations Rules School

Infrastructure SCPCR special education Special Report SSA supreme court syllabus teacher training
RE CE NT COM ME NTS HEMANT on Kerala makes Aadhar card mandatory for RTE admissions

Agency education on RTE deadline passes with no extension Agency education on Government admits failure to meet RTE deadline: what next? Dolashree Mysoor on Karnataka HC takes up a suo motu RTE PIL Prema Suhla on Karnataka HC takes up a suo motu RTE PIL

META Log in

Entries RSS Comments RSS WordPress.org

R T E WA T C H
Proudly powered by WordPress.
Powered By Indic IME