I find it encouraging that they have chosen my remarks on public education in Nepal as the subject of their response. Whereas they seem to basically agree that "the policy of privatizing education in Nepal cannot be reversed", they also view positively my suggestion that "major efforts should be made to improve Nepal's public education system". They have also confirmed that Nordic financial support to education at present, and in the future, will be directed at 'public educational revolution'.
I am not an education expert and I have not been following public education sector closely. Education in Nepal has long been recognized as a 'basic right' and subsequent governments have been allocating required budget—15 percent of total budget, but with a declining trend—to achieve complete literacy. From the dark days of Rana oligarchy, when access to formal education was extremely limited, Nepal has achieved a lot in education sector. Yet the most important achievement has been the level of awareness among parents and guardians regarding the necessity of their children's education. Every parent or guardian willingly spends fortunes on the education of their children by making great sacrifices. Many parents send their children to best missionary schools in India and others spend a lot in best boarding schools in Nepal.The New Education Plan of early 1970s proved to be a regressive step in more than one way: a) Nepali language was made a medium of instruction at all levels, b) well-running private schools were all nationalized which effectively turned teachers from 'service providers' to 'bureaucrats', c) new semester system in colleges and university meant that teachers were physically intimidated by rowdy students for higher grades in internal assessments, d) non-Nepali speaking students suddenly were at a disadvantageous position, and so on.
The biggest beneficiaries were the teachers who were being paid regular salary by the government and who also started receiving social security benefits, almost at par with bureaucrats. Although the government move was well-intentioned, the anomalies in education started surfacing soon. Teachers started using their popularity and position in society for politicking and it was no surprise that many teachers managed to get elected in free democratic elections. Quite soon it was realized that the Plan did not work and that it gave rise to many anomalies, which continue till today, e.g. emergence of 'absentee schools' (or, Jhole schools), 'absentee teachers' (or, khetala teachers), and teachers with fake certificates. The government's investment and donor support were being misused by crooks and only now the CIAA has started taking action against such anomalies.
Finally, the policy was reversed and many well-resourced private schools started emerging. From here the clear division between 'public' and 'private' schools started becoming visible and the gap between the two steadily widened. Since then the government, with the help of grants from bilateral donors and loans from multilateral lending agencies, has made huge investments in public education, but the gap with private schools seems to be ever widening. The government has been trying various ways to reinvigorate public education, e.g. by getting the stakeholders, such as the local authorities, parents and students involved in School Management Committees and in Parent Teacher Associations, and also in designing and subsequent implementation of school improvement plans.
Yet the situation is dismal. Schools are becoming arenas for politicking. There are great irregularities in the management of government funds set aside for various schemes such as scholarships for disadvantaged children, day meal schemes, free textbook distribution, and physical improvement of schools.
Education is often thought of as a great 'equalizer' between rural and urban areas, rich and poor people, high mountains and Tarai areas, or in short between "haves" and "haves not". All countries try to allocate as much resources as possible to attain universal education. But government of poor countries cannot invest enough and they allow private sector to invest. Here the education starts becoming a great "divider". The private schools become endowed with better facilities and better teachers, and parents willingly make sacrifices to send their children to these schools.
So the divide continues to widen and often we find that even teachers from public schools send their children to private schools. This unfortunately is the reality of public education in Nepal which makes me think that the situation is "impossible" to reverse. Yet Their Excellencies seem to feel strongly that with the "public educational revolution" to be initiated by their respective countries it is still possible.
Without sounding like too much of a skeptic, I would, however, like to enlist some points to make the revolution successful. Let there be a proper mapping of the locations of schools in relation to the location of human settlements. Let these locations be analyzed from the viewpoint of accessibility: how far is it from human settlement? Do major rivers need to be crossed on inflated tubes or rope pulleys (tuin)? Do children have to walk through thick forests? Also, the government has to immediately categorize schools: the nomenclatures of schools from Class one to eight and from class nine to 12, as well as their locations.
This will entail massive physical improvement of many schools in the shortest possible time. At the same time, there must be massive recruitment of teachers in various disciplines and a program to train them. Here comes the question of gender and social inclusion in their recruitment. The other important aspect is medium of instruction which has to be English if the students of public schools are to have any chance of competing with students of private schools.
Then there is the issue of textbooks: their timely revision, printing and distribution to all public schools. The important thing then is to institute a system of monitoring and evaluating school performance on a regular basis.
Having said that, I feel the price tag for the package would be quite high and the support needs to be continued for at least 10-15 years. What will happen to the program if the policy of these countries suddenly changes and development assistance to Nepal is no more a priority?
The author was with the Department of Housing, Building and Physical Planning under the Ministry of Urban Development
am49.tuladhar@gmail.com
Related story
New revolution possible: Baidya
-1776353206.webp)
