• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Report of the Kerala Education Commission Report of the Kerala Education Commission Dr. Ashok Mitra ( Chairman ) Prof. S. Anandalakshmy Prof. N. Balakrishnan Nair Dr. K. Gopalan Shri. T.N. Jayachandran Dr. C.T. Kurien Prof. K.N. Panikkar Shri. RK. Umashanker Prof. M. Vijayan NIEPA DC ■111(111D10877 0 Constituted b y : Kerala Sastra Sahitya Parishad Report o f the Kerala Education Commission • Constituted by: Kerala Sastra Sahitya Parishad • First Edition: January 1999 • Published & Distributed by: Kerala Sastra Sahitya Parishad, Kochi - 24 • Typesetting: KSSP Systems Thiruvananthapuram - 35 & Macwell Graphics, Kochi - 35 • Printed a t: Anaswara Printing & Publishing Co., Kochi -18 • Price Rs. 250/- • US $ 25 KSSP 0896 IE Jan99 Dyl/4 2K 25000 FT 571/99 Preface uring November 1995, Kerala Sasthra Sahitya Parishad organised a Vidyabhyasa Jatha, Dwhich toured the length and the breadth of the state highlighting the problems facing the Kerala Education Scene. As a culmination of the Jatha, a Vidyabhyasa Janasabha (people's assembly for education) was held in Thrissur on November 18,1995. According to the consensus evolved during the Janasabha it was decided to appoint a people's commission to go into the details of the various issues and to submit a comprehensive report. The Kerala Education Commission thus came into being. The Commission began to function formally from March 1996. Background to the Commission The concept of a people’s education commission has been in the making for about two decades. During 1981, KSSP constituted a group to investigate in detail the problems of Kerala’s education system. The group put forward its proposals in the form of a document in 1982. In 1986 KSSP appointed a ‘Commission’ to study the problem of rampant corruption in education. The need for a comprehensive study of Kerala’s education was again raised within KSSP several times, particularly in the context of the literacy campaigns of 1987-88 and 1989-90. During the mid-nineties a major shift was taking place in the form and content of education system in Kerala. The support for government control and democratic norms in education system began to make way for large scale commercialisation and liberalisation. A parallel network of commercially oriented educational institutions began to thrive, with government support in both school and higher education, posing danger to the sustenance of general education itself. General education suffered from lack of facilities and fundings compounded by consistently poor performance. The pathetic state of affairs in the common schools became a stick to beat general education with, while espousing the cause for commercial ‘unaided’ sector. KSSR as an organisation committed to take science to the people, found that it is the downtrodden sections who are adversely affected by this shift in education. It was also clear that any proposal for peoples’ education has to be preceded by detailed study and deliberations, which have to be undertaken by a team with commitment and innovativeness, who understand Kerala education very well. Kerala Education Commission has been the result of the efforts to find such a group of eminent persons. The Commission is headed by the eminent economist and educationist De Ashok Mitra. The members are Prof. S. Anandalakshmy, Former Professor of Education in Delhi University and an expert in children's education Padmashri Dr. N. Balakrishnan Nair, wellknown Scientist, former University Professor and Former Chairman of Science Technology and Environmental Committee, Government of Kerala. Dr. K. Gopalan, former Vice Chancellor and Former Director, NCERT Shri. T.N. Jayachandran I.A.S., formerly Vice Chancellor as also Commissioner and Secretary for Higher Education, Government of Kerala Dr. C.T. Kurien, renowned Economist and Former Director, MIDS Chennai Prof. K.N. Panikkar, well known Historian, Professor and Chairman, Archives on Contemporary History, Jawaharlal Nehru University Shri. EK. Umashankar I.A.S., Former Senior Education Administrator both in the Kerala and Central Governments Prof. M. Vijayan, well known Scientist, Head of the Department, Molecular Bio-Physics, Indian Institute of Sciences, Bangalore KSSP is grateful to everyone of them for the whole-hearted co-operation extended by them. The commission is assisted by a secretarial team consisting of Dr. M.P Parameswaran, Shri. C.R Narayanan, Dr. R.VG. Menon, Shri. O.M. Shankaran, Shri. C. Ramakrishnan and Dr. K.N. Ganesh. The task given to the Commission was extremely complex, as entire education system from pre-school to higher education and research, and every type of institution and agency had to be brought under its purview. It required two sittings for the commission to finalise its Terms of Reference and fix its work schedule. It required several days of intensive tour and consultations to collect evidence from people from every walk of life, besides requesting for and receiving detailed responses to the queries of the commission from numerous individuals and organisations. It also required months of intensive data collection done by several voluntary activists. Issues before the Commission Numerous knotty issues had to be tackled by the Commission in the process of finalising the Report. While all the members of the Commission were in general agreement that general education, in particular the common schools where the children of downtrodden people study, should get the priority in any alternative framework, it was not so easy to conclude how could one hope to reconcile the drive for social justice and egalitarianism with the pursuit of excellence. ‘Excellence’ has been used as an elitist concept, designed for the privileged few who attain the pinnacles of academic performance. Hence, an element of social segregation has always existed in any attempt to introduce excellence. However, it should be possible for any socially responsible education system to maximise the educational achievement of any individual irrespective of differentiation in class, caste, or gender, though not necessarily in the same direction. In order to achieve this, a totally different curricular perspective will have to be developed, with necessary changes in the school concept. Another question was that of the language of learning and language of instruction. While majority of the children still study in the mothertongue, there appears to be a growing sentiment in favour of English. More than any linguistic or pedagogical argument, it is the feeling that English has become necessary for higher education that is behind this trend. Attraction towards ‘decent’ middle class employment within India and opportunities abroad has resulted in this preference. Despite this preference, English continues to be poorly taught, and majority of the students find the language one of the biggest hurdles. This also raises the issue of teaching a language and using it as the medium of instruction. In the public mind, learning a language effectively means using it as the medium of instruction. This question figured prominently in the deliberations of the Commission also, and there was no unanimity of opinion regarding this matter in the responses received by the Commission. However, there was near unanimity in the view that mothertongue should be the main language taught as well as the medium of instruction and that there is a distinction between proficiency in language teaching/learning and using it as the medium of instruction. A third question was that of vocationalisation of education. This figured prominently in all discussions, particularly in the background of the moves to establish job oriented vocational courses by the government as well as by the universities. Question was posed whether it will be possible to vocationalise education at all. Vocational education can only be at the level of training for certain trades. However, responses to the commission showed that the present ‘academic’ education does not create an aptitude for manual labour and acquisition of technical skills nor even a healthy respect for the dignity of labour. It only helps to add to the number of unskilled unemployed. Hence transformation of the present education system to develop an aptitude for manual labour and acquisition of practical skills becomes necessary. System of evaluation was another matter of concern. The respondents pointed out that the examination system was one of the major reasons for the deplorable state of education. However, severe and often relevant criticisms were made against alternate methods of evaluation, such as internal assessment. How to develop an evaluation system that would truly facilitate the process of learning was another matter of serious discussion. Forms of management and financing figured substantially in the deliberations of the Commission. In a structure where plurality of managements is recognised, setting common standards becomes an arduous task. This becomes even more so as the constitutional protection to minorities has been used as a shield by managements to ensure their operative freedom, particularly regarding their mode of appointments, admissions, accounts etc. The historical experience of Kerala has also shown that efforts to ensure common standards have not fully succeeded. However, there was near unanimity in accepting that some common standards were necessary, without violating the principles of social justice and due protection for the minorities. This problem became more important with reference to the current trends

Load more

  160

Copy Link