ESTABLISHMENT OF THE PRESENT CENTRAL ADVISORY BOARD OF EDUCATION (1935)
First Central Advisory Board of Education (1921-23) THE Calcutta University Commission recommended "that the Government of India can perform an invaluable function by defining the general aims of educational policy, by giving advice and assistance to local governments and to universities, by acting as an impartial arbiter in cases of dispute, by protecting disregarded interests, by supplying organised information as to the development of educational ideas in the various provinces, and also elsewhere than in India, by helping to obtain the service of scholars from other countries, by coordinating the work of various universities, and by guarding against needless duplication and overlapping in the provision of the more costly forms of education.*"
These recommendations were accepted by the Government of India and it was, therefore, necessary to create some central organisation for purposes of coordinating the educational policies of the different provincial governments and for evolving a common national educational policy in the country. But a complicating factor was introduced by the Government of India Act, 1919, under which education became mostly a provincial and a transferred subject, and a question was raised whether such an organisation would be needed at the Government of India level in the new set-up. This matter was examined closely by the Government of India Secretarial, Procedure Committee which observed that, in future, the executive authority of the Government of India would be mainly exercised through moral persuasion and said : "In place of giving executive orders, it will or should tend more and more to become a centre of the best information, research and advice." The Committee also felt that in the new set-up, the creation of a central organisation for the purpose was absolutely necessary, in fact even more necessary than in the past.
Accordingly the matter was taken up and it was decided to constitute a "Central Advisory Board of Education" (1920). Its constitution and functions were thus described in Government of India letter+ No. 1060, dated August 21, 1920:-
"5. The Government of India desire that it should be clearly understood that this body will possess purely advisory functions. It will be open to the Governor-General, should he desire to make a visitation of any university with reference to which he is empowered by statute to make such visitation to utilize the proposed Board or certain members of the Board for purposes of inspection. But, apart from its use by the Governor-General for such statutory purposes, the Board will have no administrative functions. Nor will it in any sense interfere with the control of education which will be a provincial transferred subject. It is possible that the Government of India may entrust to it the conduct of certain examinations which they will control, but this question has not yet been decided.
6. Apart therefore from its position as an agency for the exercise by the Governor-General of his visitatorial powers mentioned above, the function of the Board will, as regards local governments be restricted to the giving of advice whenever they ask for advice and, as regards the
*Report, Chapter XXVIII, Para 27. +Proceedings of the Department of Education, August, 1920, Nos. 15-16.
CENTRAL ADVISORY BOARD OF EDUCATION
Government of India to the assistance of the Department of Education in such educational questions as will still come within the purview of the Imperial Government and may be referred to the Board, by the Member-in-Charge of Education. The precise duties, which it will be convenient to attach to it, will become clearer after it gets to work. But the following are suggested as among those it may naturally be expected to perform :-
(i) The visitation of universities on behalf of the Governor-General as Visitor.
(ii) The giving of advice regarding the equivalence of examination standards.
(iii) The scrutiny of any points of university legislation which is either subject to Indian legislation or reserved, when the Government of India refer such points to it.
(iv) The giving of advice regarding the management of Imperial institutions.
(v) The production of occasional reports, monographs on special forms of education, etc.
(vi) The conduct of educational surveys whenever required.
(vii) The conduct of such examinations as may be entrusted to it.
For the due performance of most of these functions, it will be necessary to collect a body of authorities who are not merely experts in educational matters but will have knowledge of the conditions in different provinces and whose names will carry weight and influence. The intention of the Board, in fact, is to link the Department of Education more closely with the various official and non-official educational authorities and institutions throughout India.
7. The composition of the Board will be largely non-official. The following constitution has been decided upon :-
(i) The Educational Commissioner with the Government of India as Chairman.
(ii) An expert member from the United Kingdom (whenever required).
(iii) Two Vice-Chancellors of universities in India, one of whom will be a whole-time officer.
(iv) Two Principals of privately-managed colleges.
(v) Four Directors of Public Instruction.
(vi) Four non-officials who, though not immediately engaged in education, are interested in the subject.
With the exception of (i), who is appointed by the Governor- General in Council and will be the ex-officio Chairman of the Board, the appointment of the other members will be made by the Member-in- Charge of Education with the approval of the Governor-General. In addition to the above, departments dealing with technical education in any of its branches will be invited to send representatives to take part in the deliberations regarding any technical matter that may be included in the agenda of a meeting. It is clearly necessary that the Chairmanship of the Board should be held by a permanent official with the Government of India. The Educational Commissioner will also be able to conduct correspondence with members of the Board on questions which have been referred to the Board but cannot conveniently be postponed to the next meeting.
8. The tenure of office of the members of the Board will be, in the case of the two Vice-Chancellors, two years, and in that of nos. (iv), (v) and (vi) three years. But, in order that the whole Board may not change simultaneously, half the first members under each category (iii) to (vi) will retire after two years by ballot or some other arrangement.
9. Meetings of the Board will be held quarterly-the first being held in February next at Delhi-and agenda of each meeting, as approved by the Member-in-Charge of Education, will he circulated sufficiently in advance of the date thereof to enable members to come prepared with their opinions. It will be necessary and desirable to conduct some of the business of the Board by correspondence."
The following is the list of the first members of the Central Advisory Board of Education :-
President
The Hon'ble Mr. J. A. Richey, C.I.E., Educational Commissioner with the Government of India.
2
ESTABLISHMENT OF PRESENT ADVISORY BOARD OF EDUCATION
Members
The Hon'ble Mr. Srinivasa Sastri, Madras, Member of the Council of State.
Rev. E. M. Macphail, C.B.E., Christian College, Madras.
W. B. Patwardhan, Esq., Principal, Fergusson College, Poona.
The Hon'ble Sir Chimanlal Harilal Setalvad, Kt., Member, Executive Council, Bombay.
J. G. Coverton, Esq., C.I.E., Director of Public Instruction, Bombay.
The Hon'ble Sir Surendranath Banerjea, Minister, Bengal Government, Calcutta.
P. J. Hartog, Esq., C.I.E., Vice-Chancellor, Dacca, University, Dacca.*
Dr. Zia-ud-Din Ahmad, C.I.E., Principal, M.A.O. College, Aligarh.
C. F. de la Fosse, Esq', C.I.E., Director of Public Instruction, United Provinces, Allahabad.
The Hon'ble Mian Fazl Hussain, M.A., Bar-at-Law, Minister, Punjab Government, Lahore.
G. Anderson, Esq., C.I.E., Director of Public Instruction, Punjab, Lahore.
A. 1. Mayhew, Esq, C.I.E., Director of Public Instruction, Central Provinces, Nagpur.
The Board was in existence for two years during which it held seven meetings as shown below:-
February 1921 Delhi
June 1921 Simla
October 1921 Lucknow
January 1922 Delhi
May 1922 Simla
October 1922 Poona
February 1923 Lahore
The Indian Retrenchment Committee, 1922-23,recommended against the continuance of the Central Advisory Board of Education (which then consisted of the proverbially ominous thirteen members) on grounds of economy. It said :
"In view of the essential modification of the position of the Central Government vis-a-vis the Provinces under the Reforms Scheme in respect of education and medical administration, which are now transferred subjects over which the Government of India exercise a very limited control, we do not consider that there is any justification for the retention of the Educational Commissioner, the Bureau of Education, or the Central Board, costing about Rs. 1,00,000 or, indeed, for the continuance of the department as a separate entity."
Accordingly, the Board was abolished in 1923.
Revival of the Central Advisory Board of Education (1935) It speaks well of the educational conscience of the country, however, that regrets over this unhappy decision began' to be voiced very soon. As early as 1925, the question of the revival of the Board was discussed in the Government of India,** but no final decision appears to have been arrived at in the matter. These discussions, however, led to the first conference of educational administrators which was held in Delhi in January 1927. "The need of a central agency" was one of the subjects included in the agenda of the Conference of Ministers which was convened in Delhi in January 1928, but the matter was not taken up by the Conference for want of time.
The Hartog Committee, which reported in 1928, dealt with the role of the Government of India in education at some length, and very strongly recommended
**Education Proceedings, B, December 1927, Nos. 210-238.
3
CENTRAL ADVISORY BOARD OF EDUCATION
that the Central Advisory Board of Education should be revived as early as possible,*** and this view was also supported by the Indian Statutory Commission. The Government of India had, therefore, to take note of these proposals and consequently, the whole problem was examined in detail and it was decided that the Central Advisory Board of Education and the Central Bureau of Education should be revived as early as possible.
The financial implications of the proposal were then worked out and it was found that it would cost about Rs. 43,000 in the first year and Rs. 58,800 ultimately. It should not have been really difficult to find this small amount of money; but these were the days of the world financial depression and as the utmost economy was being practised by the Government of India, almost every proposal for additional expenditure was strongly resisted by the Finance Department. When this proposal was referred to it, therefore, the Finance Department opposed it on the ground that, "owing to the present financial stringency, it is unlikely that it will be possible to set up the proposed organization in the near future." The Department of Education, Health and Lands, however, was not prepared to take this refusal and the Member-in-Charge returned the case to the Finance Department with the observation : "We must proceed with the scheme. I wanted to set up the organization in November 1931. That would involve expenditure for 4 months only. If the Finance Department would rather, we did not do so in November 1931, we might put it off till 1st January 1932 thus needing funds for two months only. If the Finance Department insist upon shelving the scheme, I am afraid the case will have to be taken to His Excellency the Governor- General". The Finance Department, however, was still adamant and said : "The Finance Department is concerned with the practical question of the provision of funds to finance the scheme and it certainly cannot commit itself to the expenditure of money which it has not got and sees no prospect of getting. That means that, unless the entirely unexpected happens, there is no chance of financing this scheme for any part of 1931-32". The case was, therefore, taken up to His Excellency the Governor-General who approved the proposal of reviving the Central Advisory Board of Education and the Central Bureau of Education in principle and it was, therefore, decided to address the provincial governments for ascertaining their views on the problem and to discuss the matter again in the light of replies that might be received.
The following letter was then addressed to the provincial governments*
I am directed to address the Government of Madras/etc., regarding the revival of the Central Advisory Board of Education and the Bureau of Education in India.
2. A bureau of education was established at the headquarters of the central government under the Educational Commissioner with the Government of India in 1915. Its duties were to collect and collate educational information in India and abroad; to arrange for the publication of occasional and annual reports and of a quinquennial review on the progress of education in India; to supervise the Imperial Secretariat Library, including its own library which consisted of educational books; and to arrange for the conduct of certain examinations. For the constitution of the
*Letter No. 48-Education, dated 8th January, 1931-Proceedings of the Department of Education, Health and Lands, January, 1931, Nos. 79- 82.
4
REVIVAL OF THE CENTRAL ADVISORY BOARD OF EDUCATION
Central Advisory Board of Education and the duties it was expected to perform I am to refer you to the Government of India, Department of Education's circular letter no. 1060, dated the 21st August 1920. The two institutions served a very useful purpose, but as a result of the recommendations of the Indian Retrenchment Committee, which was appointed by the Government of India in 1921, to make recommendations for effecting all possible reductions in the expenditure of the central government, they were abolished in the interests of economy.
3. In Chapter XV, Section I of their Report, the Auxiliary Committee appointed by the Indian Statutory Commission express their regret that these institutions which gave good promise of usefulness were sacrificed in pursuance of a policy of retrenchment. They state that in their opinion and in the opinion of a number of their witnesses, "the advice of a Central Bureau of Education on a subject in which fresh advances are being constantly made India cannot afford to remain behind other countries in educational progress. New and more efficient methods of teaching are constantly being introduced all over the world; there is an important literature of books and periodicals and official educational circulars, etc., which every province cannot be expected to provide, but to which the educational authorities of the provinces should have access. Moreover, it is essential that each province should be kept constantly in touch with the experiences and progress of other provinces." They hold that "the growth of education in India would be materially assisted if an efficient central organisation, which might be termed the Bureau of Education, were re-established with the Government of India, of which the functions would be to give information and advice to the provincial administrations and to keep them in close touch with each other", and "to maintain an educational library properly equipped with educational books and periodicals, Indian, English and foreign, and with official educational circulars of importance, of which a subject catalogue would be kept up-to-date, as was done formerly." As regards the Central Advisory Board of Education, they recommended that this should be reconstituted under the chairmanship of the Educational Commissioner with the Government of India circulated to the provincial governments. and should meet not less than twice a year, and that the proceedings of the Board should be circulated to the provincial governments
4. In paragraph 456 of their Report, Volume I, the Indian Statutory Commission have also expressed the opinion that "education suffered severely from. the recommendations of the Inchcape Retrenchment Committee, as a result of which the Bureau of Education and the Central Advisory Board of Education were abolished and the administration of the subject aced under the Department of Education, Health and Lands." They have accordingly recommended the establishment of "and active Central Bureau of Education which would give information and advice to the provincial administrations and would help to make everywhere available the results of experiments and practice in educational method and organisation" (paragraph 186 of the Report, Volume II). It is obvious that it was the intention of the Statutory Commission that the Central Bureau, the establishment of which they recommended, should combine the functions of an advisory board as well as those of a bureau in the strict sense of that term.
5. The Government of India accept the views of the Statutory Commission and of its Auxiliary Committee in regard to the desirability of establishing a Central Advisory Board of Education and of attaching to it a Bureau of Education. They agree with the Statutory Commission that the main purpose of the Board should be to act as a clearing house for ideas and as a medium for the diffusion throughout India of new and fruitful methods. It is. obviously desirable that the experience of each province should be available to other provinces for all provinces have problems of the same character, which are being attacked in different ways. The usual annual reports on education do not serve this end as they are neither sufficiently detailed nor sufficiently critical. It will be for the Educational Commissioner, working with a central Organisation, to ascertain. what developments in any province are worth critical examination for the benefit of other provinces. The full-and precise duties which it will be convenient to attach to the proposed central organisation will become clearer after it gets to work. But if it is to fulfill the objects
5
CENTRAL ADVISORY BOARD OF EDUCATION