JOIN USSchool education and curriculum are in the news again. Human Resource Development Minister Prakash Javadekar has said the curriculum for classes I to XII will be reduced by half from academic session 2019-20. The reduction in curriculum will allow students more time for co-curricular activities, ensuring their all-round development.
To begin with, MHRD has sought suggestions from all interested and informed citizens. Though it appears to be a welcome move to make the learning experience less burdensome, it needs to be seen whether the motive behind such a move will really be attained. This concern is fair and objective, as India's school education system is struggling with unachieved targets. There is also talk of reintroduction of exams at elementary level and CBSE board exams at secondary level.
School education in the country has awaited an effective child-friendly system for long. The proposal to reduce curriculum burden on children comes amid growing incidents of violence involving children under pressure from the system. The quality of education provided and the level of learning is questioned every year with the release of assessment reports by NCERT and NGO Pratham.
The underlying rationale behind such a move is that too much energy and time is consumed in comprehending and retaining the current information-loaded curriculum. This leaves no time for students to engage or take part in other activities that are vital for their all-round development. Co-curricular activities such as sports and physical education, education pertaining to values and ethics, art and aesthetics, life skills, etc., have been treated as additional but not an integral part of school education.
The intent to reduce the curriculum burden is therefore to be appreciated. Such an exercise, however, requires care and adequate measures to only remove the irrelevant or burdensome content and replace it by subjects and activities more relevant in the changing socio-economic circumstances and making them an essential part of the school curriculum. Besides, this exercise should strengthen the quality of the learning module, making it more effective.
At the same time, the 'rationalisation' of curriculum should be carried out systematically, considering the diverse roles that education plays in making a child a 'good human being'. It should be based on the comprehensive view of the social, economic and cultural objectives of education as stated in the currently applicable National Education Policy of 1986.
Likewise, the reduction or change in curriculum cannot be limited to the content alone, that is the topics or concepts currently being taught. The tweaking of content has to be accompanied by consequent change in teaching methodologies, supportive teaching materials or aids and the assessment procedure.
Without appropriate means to attain the goals of education and sound evaluation techniques focusing on assessment for learning, the entire exercise of rationalising school curriculum will be inefficacious. In short, the guiding principles of the National Curriculum Framework, 2005, must not be compromised in the process. Needless to say, this requires innovative thinking and proper implementation at all levels, from class I to XII.
The rationalisation of curriculum also needs to be seen through the lens of children's right to equality in education and quality education. The academic authority under RTE Act, 2009, the National Council for Education Research and Training (NCERT) is mandated to frame curriculum for classes I to VIII and all schools falling under the Act have to follow that curriculum.
The non-NCERT books in private schools and assessment system by CBSE for elementary classes is a violation of the Act. This has its share of adverse effects on the physical health of children and financial burden on parents. These are important determinants in girls' education and education of children from disadvantaged and economically weaker sections under the RTE Act. However, it would be important to ensure and monitor that reduced content and modified methodologies, books, assessment procedures should not lead to violation of the educational rights of children.
Modified teaching strategy
Unlike specific observations on the logistics of this detailed exercise and its implementation, the effects and consequences can only be predicted. However, since curriculum and teachers are important components of the teaching-learning process, any change in curriculum will require a modified teaching strategy.
To acquaint teachers with the changes, proper training mechanisms need to be put in place and training should roll-out as soon as the curriculum is revised. To train close to one crore in-service teachers requires pre-planning and huge resources so that the curriculum can be implemented in its true sense without loss of precious time.
Also, rationalising curriculum at school level will have implications for pre-primary and post-secondary education. The reduction in curriculum from class I should be taken as an opportunity to define the expected outcomes of pre-primary education, which is currently unregulated and is devoid of a uniform curriculum structure. Similarly, school education lays foundation for higher education and hence the effects of this move on higher education are more explicit.
The focus on quality, rather than quantity of content in curriculum, will help in identifying the interests and measure the aptitude of children towards different subjects. This will help children and their parents to make informed choices towards pursuing higher education. Also, the cut-down in syllabus at school level should be accompanied by appropriate modification in the syllabus in higher education and centralised competitive exams such as NEET and IIT-JEE.
Clearly, this significant but humongous exercise taken up by MHRD cannot be undertaken in isolation from other levels of education nor will it bear results without a comprehensive revision of all aspects of school curriculum. If done with conviction and in an institutionalised manner, the exercise will not only reduce burden on children, but can change the face of school education in India. Though one has to wait and watch how the exercise unfolds, its implementation will surely determine its consequences.
(The writer is with the Education Division of National Commission for the Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR), New Delhi)