|
The
room is packed with students frowning in concentration
as they try to understand the problem being worked out
by the teacher on the blackboard. There appear to be
no shirkers or pupils mooning around and looking out
of the window – everyone is full of attention and focussed
on the task at hand. Is this a model school? No, it
is a private tuition centre, located in three small
rooms cramped in the middle of busy shopping complex
in one of our big metros. It has poor ventilation and
limited facilities, and the teaching is of uncertain
quality, but no matter. The parents of these students
have paid significant sums for the privilege of this
tuition, and they are acutely conscious of the need
to take advantage of it as best they can.
Elsewhere, in all our other cities and towns across
the country, children of school-going age regularly
sit down with private tutors, either in their own homes
or in the teachers’ homes. They typically pay much more
for such tuition than they do for the regular school
fees. The practice is now so widespread that, among
the elites and middle classes, not going in for private
tuition is seen as something abnormal. Even among poorer
families, there are tremendous pressures on parents
to engage in private tuition once the child starts doing
not so well in school.
One of the more remarkable features of our school education
system is the way it has allowed and even encouraged
the proliferation of private tuition outside the regular
school system. This is something relatively unique to
India, as it is not found to this extent even in countries
where education is completely commercialised and privatised,
like Singapore. Newspapers and handbills in urban areas
regularly advertise the merits of different tutorial
colleges; those who succeed in competitive examinations
as well as in school board examinations proudly thank
these teaching shops or their individual tutors when
they are interviewed by the media.
In less privileged circumstances the pressures for private
tuition are just as great. There are numerous cases
where the school teachers themselves egg on students
and parents to take separate and paid tuitions. Where
these classes are conducted by the teachers themselves,
there is obviously direct conflict of interest; but
the incentives to encourage students to take on additional
tuition are great anyway because that obviously relieves
the pressure of teaching on the teachers in school.
This is something which is very clearly evident in urban
India, especially among middle class households, whose
children are geared from an early age to take part in
very competitive national examinations for admission
into professional courses and much else. But the urge
to invest in private tuitions, and the growing dependence
of pupils upon it, seems to have spread even to rural
areas.
Thus, the Annual Survey of Education Report 2007, brought
out by the Pratham Foundation, found that at least one-quarter
of all elementary school students in rural India rely
on private tuitions in addition to attending classes
at school. The problem is apparently most acute in West
Bengal, where the survey found more than 80 per cent
of middle school children in rural West Bengal taking
private tuition.
It is sometimes argued that this reflects the poor quality
of education in government schools, such that children
are forced to take on private tuition because they do
not learn anything otherwise. But this cannot be the
main reason because the same survey found that private
tuition is just as prevalent among children attending
private schools. Indeed, in rural West Bengal the survey
found that the incidence of private tuition it is slightly
higher among private school children in the lower grades
as well as in Class VIII.
While it is not as well documented, the problem is probably
even more intense in urban areas. For example, a study
by the Pratichi Trust (2006) of only government-run
primary schools in Kolkata found even higher incidence
of private tuition among children than the ASER 2007
survey. It was found to be 73 per cent in schools run
by the KDPSC, 41 per cent in schools run by the KMC
and 50 per cent in the SSKs of Kolkata. It is likely
that the ratios are similar if not higher for urban
children attending private schools.
The dominance of private tuition may reflect a peculiar
academic culture, whereby competitive pressure and high
aspirations combine to create a milieu in which it is
seen as not only the norm, but even as a minimal requirement
for any kind of academic achievement. It is true that
primary school children without such tuition have been
found to perform slightly worse by several surveys,
but the differences in performance are apparently not
very large. And at higher grades, the problem is self-reinforcing
because school teachers tend to assume that their pupils
are going in for such additional tuition, and change
their teaching methods accordingly.
This practice is likely to be difficult to uproot simply
because of the widespread acceptance, and even complicity,
of all those involved. As a professor in a reputed college
in Kolkata is reported to have remarked, "We are all
like the characters of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. As a
teacher I am against those colleagues of mine who indulge
in private tuition. But as a parent I send my son to
private tutors. I think all of us teachers and parents
have to rectify ourselves first." (quoted in Times of
India 21 June 2001)
Yet it is a problem that must be addressed, because
it has so many negative effects. As Amartya Sen has
noted, a dependence on private tuitions is one of the
most important features militating against better quality
in the school system, causing parents to expect and
demand less in terms of actual teaching in school and
reducing the incentives for teachers within the school
as well.
In addition, private tuition is obviously deeply inequalising,
because better-off parents are able to afford "better"
tuition, or even to afford it at all. And it places
a significant additional financial burden on parents
even when the actual school education is ostensibly
free. The Pratichi Trust (2006a) study of government
schools in Kolkata found that there were average additional
costs of more than Rs. 1000 per annum for private tuition
for school children even at the primary level. Even
in the Education Centres (Shishu Shikha Kendras) that
cater to less privileged groups, the average annual
expenditure per child on tuition was more than Rs. 850.
Significantly, even poor households in slum areas were
found to be making resources available for such tuition
for their children, often by restricting the consumption
of necessities. As a result, education is effectively
no longer free even for poor families in backward rural
areas or urban slums
There have been public interventions designed to combat
this tendency. For example, in West Bengal where the
problem is especially acute, the state government in
2001 officially banned private tuition by permanent
whole-time teachers in government and government-aided
educational institutions from the primary to the university
level. It also promised to take the necessary legal
action to ensure the ban.
This ban was also supported by the teachers’ associations.
However, obviously the ban has not been implemented
effectively, as even the most recent survey evidence
indicates the persistence of widespread dependence on
private tuitions.
Obviously, if this is to change, we need more than legal
measures. We need a complete overhaul of not just the
school system, but even more importantly, the examination
systems of School Boards as well as competitive examinations.
And, as the professor in Kolkata noted, we first have
to change ourselves.
|
