CHARGES THAT CHILDREN FROM poor families admitted into upscale private unaided schools under s.12 (1) (c) of the Right to Free & Compulsory Education Act, 2009, are being maltreated and discriminated against, have generated a stir among academics and NGOs in the industrial city of Pune (pop.4.5 million), which prides itself as the cultural and education capital of Maharashtra, India™s most industrialised state. S.12 (1) (c) obliges private schools to reserve a 25 percent quota in class I for œchildren belonging to the weaker sections and disadvantaged groups in the neighbourhood and provide free and compulsory education till its completion.
According to a report in the Pune Mirror (February 14), 40 RTE quota students admitted into the St. Ramanand Chidakashi English Medium School, Pimpri, affiliated with the Maharashtra State Secondary Certificate exam board, were barred from the school™s annual day function held on January 26. Parents also complain that s.12 children are relegated to the backbenches in classrooms and are disproportionately subjected to corporal punishment.
œWe have registered a complaint. But we need to check with higher authorities on what besides tuition, has been made free for children admitted into private schools under the RTE Act, comments Usha Ubale, education officer of the Pimpri-Chinchwad Municipal Corporation (PCMC). This is not the first complaint of discrimination against s.12 children. Last September, Tree House High School, Karve Nagar (affiliated with the Delhi-based Council for the Indian School Certificate Examinations) was charged with schooling s.12 children in an altogether separate section.
Eminent educationists in the city say that discrimination is inevitable given the deep fissures within the education system and society. œPrivate schools have resisted inclusion of children from economically and socially disadvantaged sections of society ever since the RTE Act became law on grounds of ambiguity, lack of funds, etc. However, the major impediment to inclusive education is the class-obsessed mindset of India™s middle and upper classes, says Dr. John Kurrien, director emeritus at the Centre For Learning Resources, Pune and a member of Action for the Rights of Children (ARC).
That s.12 children suffer humiliation and discrimination in private schools which accept them resentfully, is confirmed by Human Rights Watch (HRW, estb. 1978), a New York-based international NGO. In a 77-page report titled They Say We™re Dirty: Denying Education to India™s Marginalised (April 2014), HRW says that instead of being brought into the education mainstream as stipulated by the RTE Act, students from disadvantaged sections œface discrimination, get segregated in class and are insulted in public.
Far from being embarrassed by media expos©s, a rising number of private school managements justify partial exclusion of s.12 children, arguing that the tuition fees reimbursed by government for educating them doesn™t cover the cost of co-curricular and extra-curricular activities. œThe reimbursement we get is very low compared to the expense incurred by us per student. The government has promised to reimburse Rs.14,000 per RTE quota student per annum. But schools which provide excellent infrastructure and holistic education charge non-s.12 children Rs.30,000-40,000 per annum. Therefore, the reimbursement amount should be revised and aligned with every school™s per student expenditure, says Rajendra Singh, president of the Pune division of Maharashtra English School Trustees Association (MESTA), which has a membership of 8,000 private unaided and aided schools across the state.
Although he agrees that state and municipal government schools need to increase their per child expenditure to deliver half decent education to government school children, Kurrien advises private school managements against practising any exclusion or discrimination against s.12 children. œOnce quota children are admitted, schools have to create an inclusive environment of learning even if they need to cross-subsidise, organise fundraising events, etc. Inclusion is beneficial not only for socially disadvantaged children, but also for children from economically better backgrounds, as all children need to learn how to live and build a more tolerant and egalitarian society, says Kurrien.
Meanwhile, as this awareness spreads, the state government would be well-advised to promote education egalitarianism by improving the pathetic condition of government and municipal schools.
Swati Roy (Pune)