|
2.
Rationale of the EGS & AIE Scheme:
2.1 The Education Guarantee Scheme and Alternative and Innovative
Education (EGS & AIE) has evolved out of the following major concerns
and learning experiences:
-
The shortcomings of the existing NFE scheme in
terms of very low investments; poor community involvement; problems in
release of funds; several quality issues including training of instructors
number of hours of teaching per day etc had to be addressed.
-
The objectives and measures identified in the NPE
(especially the POA-1992) for strengthening the NFE programme needed to be
incorporated in the new scheme.
-
The experience of programmes like Lok Jumbish and
DPEP and innovative schemes implemented by NGOs across states where
flexible strategies of alternative schooling have been implemented in the
past few years, has shown that programmes for ‘out of school’ children
could be implemented with considerable community participation and
reasonable quality. The significant learning experience of these
programmes are as follows:
-
Use of community based micro-planning to assess the
need for alternative schooling and also the nature of problems of `out of
school’ children.
-
Since the nature of `out of school’ children is
diverse, a variety of strategies would be required to ensure their
participation in elementary education. Need for flexibility to introduce
changes as per local requirements.
-
Close linkages between the community and the
alternative school is a prerequisite for its satisfactory functioning.
-
Considerable emphasis needs to be given to quality
aspects including the number of hours of teaching, teacher preparation,
teaching-learning materials (TLM), regular academic support through school
visits and frequent planning meetings with resource persons and use of
appropriate TLM and pedagogy for the multi-age, multi-level situation
prevalent in NFE/Alternative Schooling centres.
(iv) The need for provision of educational facilities in
the habitations presently unserved by formal schools. In 1993, the Sixth All India Educational Survey had indicated
that there were 1.8 lakh habitations without primary schools in the
country. Over the past 6 years a large number of these habitations have
been provided an educational facility through setting up of new primary
schools, alternative schools under DPEP and state specific initiatives
like the Education Guarantee Scheme (EGS) in Madhya Pradesh, the Rajiv
Gandhi Swarna Jayanti Pathshalas in Rajasthan, Shishu Shiksha Karmasuchi
in West Bengal, Community/Maabadi Schools in Andhra Pradesh etc. However,
the coverage of the remaining school-less habitations has to be completed
on a priority basis
(v) The Supreme Court has recognised the education of
children in the 6 - 14 years age group as a Fundamental Right which cannot
wait. The centrally sponsored scheme of Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) has
set time-bound targets for achievements of UEE.
-
all children
in school/EGS school/alternative school or `Back to School’ camp by
2003.
-
All children
complete primary level education by 2007.
-
All children
complete elementary level education by 2010.
The NFE scheme till now has functioned largely as a
separate intervention for ‘out of school’ children resulting in poor
linkages with the formal system, inadequate emphasis on mainstreaming of
children from the NFE system and duplication of enrolment between the
formal and alternative systems.
Thus a reorientation was necessary.
The effort to provide access to ‘out of school’
children and ensure their regular participation and completion of
primary/elementary level of education with satisfactory levels of learning
has to form a part of the overall effort for achievement of UEE. The
planning for UEE for a geographic unit, say district would need to be done
in a comprehensive manner to cover all children through schools or
alternative arrangements.
2.2 Formal and Alternative
Systems: The Ideological debate
Alternative
school systems (including the NFE scheme) have always been questioned on
several grounds. This
ideological debate has its relevance and will perhaps continue. The EGS & AIE is informed by a few assumptions on some of
these issues which are
outlined below:
|
Issues
raised about alternative systems |
Some
assumptions under EGS & AIE. |
| Do
alternative systems advocate
Alternate/innovative pedagogies that address the problems
of the rigid, unattractive formal system which does not allow any
scope for multilevel/flexible teaching learning process? Or are
alternative arrangements introduced only to address the issue of
access for children who are currently `out of school ?
|
The
focus of this scheme would be on
ensuring participation of all `out of school’ children including
children living in small, unserved habitations and other
categories of children like working children, migrating children,
street children, adolescent girls etc who are out of school. Thus
the `raison-d’etre’ of the scheme is to provide access to
schooling for such children. However, as the following sections
would clearly indicate, there would be considerable stress on
quality issues and introduction of appropriate child-centred,
multi-level teaching strategies through intensive teacher
training, development of appropriate TLM and pupil evaluation
practices, regular academic support to Education Volunteers
etc.
Also the Innovative Education component would continue to support
initiatives of VAs to develop and experiment with innovative
pedagogical practice |
| Most
non-formal systems stress low-
cost’ solutions and advocate low-investments that provide
the receipe for poor quality.
|
To
maintain the quality of any educational programme certain basic
essentials needs to be ensured eg. Minimum infrastructure,
equipment, reasonable
honorarium of the Education Volunteers, proper investment in their
professional preparation and regular academic support etc. These
essential elements or non-negotiables necessitate appropriate
financial investments. Mere insistence on `low-cost’ would
result in dilution in quality. Therefore, the investments under
the revised EGS & AIE are much higher than the current NFE
scheme. However, they are still less than the per-pupil investment
in the formal system, largely on account of the considerably lower
honorarium to the Education Volunteers compared to salaries of
regular government teachers.
|
| By
emphasising part-time education at convenient timings, non-formal
programmes accommodate and even support child labour.
|
The
issue of child-work is a vexed one. Opinions on this issue range
from considering every child who is not in school as a child
labourer or a potential child labourer to a resigned acceptance of
child-work as a corollary of poverty in the country.
Generally, recent educational programmes and projects have
taken the stand that any work that comes in the way of a child
regularly participating in school education upto the age of 14
years should be considered as `child labour’ and therefore
opposed.
It
is difficult to make a clear, ideological statement on the issue
of child labour in the context of EGS & AIE. However, by
stressing time-bound achievement of UEE, i.e. enrolment and
completion of elementary education by all children, the SSA does
imply that all children should be in school and not at work. The
duration of part-time alternative schools under EGS & AIE will
now be a minimum of four hours a day in the daytime (except in
rare cases where evening/night centres maybe allowed) This would
also address the quality issue of inadequate instruction time and
also help in ensuring that children are away from work for a
significant part of the day. |
| Currently
there are about 5.6 crore children in the age group 6-14 years who
are out of school. Is it possible to establish alternative schools
for such a large number of children? How large can the non
formal/alternative system be? Any large system would tend to
become rigid and acquire the ills of the very system for which it
is trying to provide an alternative.
|
A
significant proportion of the children currently `out of school’
(at the primary level) do not have physical access to
a schooling facility within 1 km of the habitation.
Alternative, EGS–like schools set up in these habitations would
be full-time day schools and would continue to exist in these
habitations as Education Guarantee Centres or become upgraded to
regular schools once certain conditions are fulfilled.
For
the rest of the children (not living in small, unserved
habitations), the focus should be on their enrolment into formal
schools. Wherever ‘mainstreaming’ can be planned for such
children, there would be a need for specific interventions prior
to and even after their enrolment into regular schools. These
could include residential camps, drop-in centres, bridge &
transitional courses, vacation or condensed courses and remedial
teaching through Community Volunteers etc.
But
the experience has been that certain children who are in extremely
difficult circumstances e.g. street children, children who migrate
with their families,
wage earning child labourers, adolescent girls (11-14 years of
age) cannot be easily enrolled into formal schools directly. Some
of these groups of children would require specific, flexible
strategies based on their situation to ensure that they complete
primary/elementary education. |
| A
significant proportion of children who are out of school including
the dropouts are push-outs from the formal system. The problems
afflicting the functioning of regular primary and upper primary
schools require priority attention.
Initiation of alternative systems is likely to detract from
the major effort that is required to ensure that the formal system
become accountable for delivering quality education for all
children including those from the most disadvantaged groups. |
This
EGS & AIE would not be the substitute for a dysfunctional
school but actually provide flexible strategies for specific
groups of children. For children in the age group of 6-8 years,
the thrust almost in all states is on ensuring their enrolment in
regular schools. If necessary, a motivational, school readiness /
bridging summer camp could be provided under EGS & AIE to
ensure all eligible children in a habitation actually enroll in
the regular schools.
With
this basic thrust, the EGS & AIE would not detract from
strengthening and improvement of regular schools. Mainstreaming,
which is stressed under EGS & AIE would not be possible unless
regular schools are strengthened, have adequate teachers and
infrastructure and are made accountable to the community to ensure
that the most disadvantaged children are able to continue and
‘learn’.
|
|
