Called “Faces of Budget Private Schools,” the BPS report 2018 is an attempt to explore both the data on the current education challenges and needs and also bring to light individual stories from the stakeholders in the system to set the data in perspective.
The Report consists of 3 main sections, which looks at 'Reach and diversity', 'Solving the problem of quality' and 'Educating children for an uncertain future'.
Different state governments of India have notified through Government Orders (GOs) the amount they will pay out for each RTE child admitted, in reimbursement to private schools. For example, Delhi has fixed the reimbursement amount at Rs 1598, Uttarakhand at Rs 1380 and Uttar Pradesh at Rs 450 per month per child. These amounts are meant to represent the states’ per pupil expenditure in their respective government elementary (primary + upper primary) schools. However, there has been some doubt and dismay about the accuracy of these estimates, and also some research estimating per pupil expenditures in the different states of India in Dongre and Kapur (2016) and Bose et. al. (2017).
Bose et. al. (2017) found that the UP government’s actual per pupil expenditure in 2014-15 on its government and aided schools was Rs. 1529 per month. If this Rs.1529 estimate were to be inflated up to 2018-19 by 10% per annum, the per pupil expenditure today would be equivalent to Rs. 2239 per month on account of the increase in expenditure alone. If the fall in enrolment from 2014-15 to projected enrolment in 2018-19 is taken into consideration, then the average per pupil expenditure as per Bose, et. al. would be Rs.2652 per month in 2018-19. This can be compared with the Rs. 450 pm upper limit of reimbursement set by the Uttar Pradesh government in June 2013, which has remained at the same level until 2018-19.
This note seeks to estimate the per pupil expenditure in government elementary schools in Uttar Pradesh using the government’s own expenditure and enrolment data.
The report brings together research and perspectives from relevant stakeholders with the aim of updating and pushing forward the discourse on BPS in India, by providing a platform for informed and inclusive interactions on the sector.
The Report consists of 17 chapters and is categorised into four themes which represent the different aspects of the BPS sector: demand, supply, ecosystem, and regulation.
The chapters of the Report are authored by experts representing a variety of backgrounds and organisations with a deep understanding and expertise of the BPS sector, representing research, policy and practice.
To mark this day, we launched the Repeal Law Compendium, a rigorously researched repository of obsolete laws across five states - Maharashtra, Karnataka, Chattisgarh, Telangana, and Uttar Pradesh. The launch of the Compendium was followed by a panel discussion on the Need for Institutionalisation of Repeal of Laws. Our esteemed speakers for the panel included Hemant Batra, Founder and Chairman, Kaden Boriss Global; Maneesh Chhibber, Executive Editor, DNA; Justice A P Shah, Former Chief Justice, Delhi High Court; Parth J Shah, Founder President, Centre for Civil Society; KTS Tulsi, Member of Rajya Sabha and Senior Advocate at the Supreme Court of India.
|
Due to a lack of clarity in the judicial decisions, in 2009, the Street Vendors Policy 2004 was revised as the ‘National Policy on Urban Street Vendors 2009’. The revised policy was not legally binding and made little progress on the matter of street vendors. In 2010, the Supreme Court directed the government to enact a law regulating street vending and thus, the Street Vendors Bill 2012 was drafted. The Bill was passed in both houses by February 2014 and became the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014. This Act was drafted with the legislative intent of protecting the livelihood rights of street vendors as well as regulating street vending through demarcation of vending zones, conditions for and restrictions on street vending. The Act now governs over all matters in regards to the rights and duties of the street vendors in India. It also provides for confiscation of goods that are being sold by street vendors to be cataloged properly. It is in this context that Centre for Civil Society – a Delhi-based think tank decided to take up a study of the implementation of 2014 Act across India and come up with a matrix and an index to rank states. We filed applications under the Right to Information Act, 2005 across India, made more than 250 phone calls to expedite the RTI reply process, compiled court judgments and referred to other secondary sources such as news stories. |
This guidebook is based on Centre for Civil Society's pilot programme Patang, which was implemented in two private schools in Delhi. The objective of Patang was to understand the issues arising from one of the provisions of the Right to Education act (RTE). Section 12 (1)(C) of the RTE Act requires aided and unaided private schools to reserve at least 25% of their entry-level seats for children from economically and socially disadvantaged communities (EWDS). The provision has been severely contested and several systemic and classroom level issues have also been raised against this provision. Patang focuses only on the classroom impact of such a reservation. It was designed as an intervention to understand:
The guidebook with details of the programme also highlights the struggles and successes of the intervention. It provides concrete steps to help schools create an inclusive environment for students especially those from the EWDS background. |
NITI Aayog’s effort towards reforming Indian Medical Education is a step long overdue. There is a broad consensus across the Parliament, Executive, Judiciary and State Governments to replace the thoroughly corrupt, utterly inefficient and a decrepit Medical Council of India (MCI) with a new commission that meets the aspirations of 21st century India. MCI has neither fulfilled the objective of improving access to medical education nor setting the high professional and ethical standards that the complex healthcare sector demands from the doctors. It has become a textbook example of ‘regulatory capture’. The age old socialist mindset towards regulatory institutions continues to plague many sectors in India, of which MCI is only one example.
NITI Aayog’s radical shift in regulatory philosophy towards liberal and market oriented one can be considered as one of the big bang reforms of the current government. A shift in approach from inputs based norms and standards to the one based on outcomes is definitely going to create a lasting impact in quality of medical education and is expected to set the precedent for other streams of education too.
The National level entrance and exit exams will ensure that merit prevails over discretion and admissions are handled in a transparent manner. Removing entry barriers for private investors by doing away with the infamous ‘non-profit’ tag will address the challenge of access and helps meet the huge demand for medical education in India. Currently, around 11 lakh students chase an odd 55,000 seats and this has given some unscrupulous colleges a free hand in exploiting the artificially induced scarcity.
Largely in consonance with the proposed bill, we would like to bring few specific issues to the Aayog’s notice to help realizing the true spirit of the bill.
A recent study by Azim Premji Foundation (APF) titled “Right to Education Act (RTE), 2009 and Private School Closure in India” has received wide media coverage and ignited debate over the impact of RTE on private schools. The study claims that only five private schools have closed down in seven states and one union territory that it studied—four in Karnataka and one in Uttarakhand. Anurag Behar, CEO of APF, declared that any research reporting otherwise is “false or ludicrously exaggerated.”[1]
The possible impact of RTE on the closure of private schools is a critical policy issue, especially when the parents have deliberately chosen the fee-charging schools over the free government schools. Therefore, the study deserves closer review and analysis, which is the objective of this detailed assessment. Instead of doing a newspaper column, we decided to do a full review of their research processes, methodology and overall soundness of research. The basic purpose is not so much to challenge their conclusions but to assess the research that serves as a basis for arriving at those conclusions.
We embarked on our mission: We read the study once, twice, thrice. We thought we must be missing something—this is a study produced by India’s largest education foundation. After all those readings and discussions, we came to the inescapable conclusion: the quality of the APF study is alarmingly poor. It is hard to believe that the most well-endowed education foundation in the country, which also runs an education university, would consider this study worthy of publication. Moreover, the CEO of the Foundation, who presumably has read the study, would consider it appropriate to ridicule all other research and experiences, and even declare them as almost lies, on the basis of this study. It is really a sad day for research, for the quality of public debate and for the quality standards of APF.
[1]Anurag Behar, ‘Reality of School Closures,’ Mint, 18 February 2016, http://www.livemint.com/Opinion/nd3HbSousJ84BbJtlomlHN/The-reality-of-school-closures.html. See also Rohit Dhankar, ‘A Lesson in Hidden Agendas,’Hindu, 26 March 2016, http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/a-lesson-in-hidden-agendas/article8397088.ece A reply to Dhankar by one of the authors is ‘Ideology Masquerading as Research, 'http://spontaneousorder.in/ideology-masquerading-as-research/
In India, reforms in regulation of private schools have been argued on the basis of universalizing access to education while recognizing the increasing role of private in enabling that access, particularly for the poor. However, the experience so far has been that the regulations create entry and exit barriers in the provision of education by entrepreneurs thereby reducing competition and keeping the cost of education high. It is in this context that regulation of private education is observed in the case studies to better understand how governments in other parts of the world have managed to harness private investment in education for the benefits of the society in general. The study examines three cases of best practices from around the world:
The essence of good governance is good laws. For rule of law to operate, laws must be well-written and well-coded. Laws must be precise, principles-based, and should stand the test of time. Statues that are obsolete, redundant, repetitive, or inconsistent only create chaos for the masses and provide unnecessary powers in the hands of implementing agencies, weakening the social fabric and incentivising corruption.
During the campaigns for the 2014 General Election, BJP candidate Shri Narendra Modi promised the electorate that on being elected, he would make a sincere attempt at statutory legal clean up. The commitment was that for every new law passed, 10 redundant ones would be repealed, and that in his first 100 days in office he would undertake to repeal 100 old, burdensome laws. The Bhartiya Janata Party led National Democratic Alliance Government tabled the Repealing and Amending Bill (Third) Bill, 2015 in the Lok Sabha, recommending revision of about 180 obsolete laws. It was also the commitment of Shri Ravi Shankar Prasad, that this exercise of weeding out antiquated laws would be a continuous process.
After the success of Centre of Civil Society’s Repeal of 100 laws Project (in partnership with NIPFP Macro/Finance Group and Vidhi Legal Policy Centre), wherein 100 Central laws were suggested for repeal, of which 23 were formally included in the Repealing and Amending Bill, Centre for Civil Society has launched its Repeal of laws Project- Phase II, via its report that includes laws that warrant immediate repeal in Delhi, on the grounds of them being redundant, subsumed by newer legislations, or because they pose an impediment to growth, development, good governance and individual freedom.
We believe that while statutory reform is only the beginning of a wider process of legal overhaul, it is perhaps the most important. Without sound laws, India will not provide an enabling environment, neither for citizens, nor for entrepreneurs. Repealing pointless legislation is the first step in this direction.
For the year 2015, a similar report was prepared by us for the state of Delhi.
CCS has consistently campaigned for governmental action to repeal redundant and inconsistent laws that promote red tapism and encumber personal, social and economic freedoms. This year, we reinforced our call for the recognition of 26 November - the Constitution Day of India, as the National Repeal Law Day.