 |
| Suresh Poudel |
In Nepal, the government funded schools are not
performing well as compared to the institutional schools. Success as measured
by pass rate in School Leaving Certificate (SLC) level is low for these schools.
Primary school enrollment may be satisfactory but drop-out rate is high.
Learning resources are lacking and at its worst some remote school children do not
get books till the academic session ends. Many government schools in remote
setting have to run school in open sky as they lack classrooms and furniture. Separate
toilets for girls and boys are far reach cry for such schools. Teacher is the
only vehicle for delivering knowledge to the students studying in these schools
because naturally these schools lack multimedia classrooms, internet,
libraries, learning materials etc which modern schools are supposed to have. In
addition, there are policy and management bottlenecks.
In addition, the government funded schools not
giving enough emphasis on extra-curricular and co-curricular activities. Under
such scenario the entire success of such schools is dependent on how a teacher
performs, what he delivers to the students which in turn depends on the
knowledge, skills, willingness and competitiveness of the teachers working in
such schools.
The success of an individual is closely linked to
the kind of early education he/she has. Nevertheless there is a clear
difference in terms of education between Nepalese government and institutional
schools. Apparently the institutional schools have been seemed to provide
better education than the government schools. Tracing the job placement and
level of earning they have after they join job might verify the claim that the
institutional schools children are more competitive and skillful. It’s a clear
indication that today who get admitted in a government school going to live his
future less affluent, less powerful and with less comfort.
The problem is more pronounced when the student
enters into the job market. Generally in job market, the employers seek more
dynamic and skillful candidates to offer a job. Even if the knowledge of a
government school student is at par the candidates with his counterpart from
institutional schools. But the former may lack dynamism and skills due to the
type of education he had while at school. For instance, most of the
institutional schools mostly in city areas are providing computer education,
art, singing and dancing classes, sports etc to their students. These things
are helping students to develop personality and life skills which in turn help
them to be a dynamic professional when they join a job.
However, Nepal being a country with limited
resources, it may not be possible for the government to increase fund to
achieve all of these goals overnight. Nonetheless the policy makers can make
certain amendments in the policy to make optimum use of resources whatsoever
available. If there is misuse of funds, it should be minimized by taking effective
steps. The school management committee can be empowered to take the right
decisions for the progress of the school and the students. The efforts have been made towards these.
The teachers, particularly working in government
seem to be unsatisfied with the current facilities they are getting from the
government. They are doubtful about the job security. They have been demanding
for the permanency of their job for quite long. In response to their demand,
recently the Secretary, Ministry of Education claimed that it unimportant to
make all teachers working in Government Schools permanent. His claim has got a
mixed response. If it is for the quality of the education I support his view.
It is because the issue to whether to make all the teachers working in government
schools permanent is not much important if the teachers are qualified and competent
because in an open job market the most
competent gets the best. If it is for the job security of the teachers who are
really competent and dedicated, I stand for them.
If job oriented quality education is the today’s
need-there needs a radical change in the policy, management, delivery and
leadership of the school. In my view the Principal who leads the academic
activities of a school has to be selected the way the CEOs of banks are
selected. Then he should be given freedom in selection of teachers from the
pool of qualified and licensed candidates. This will bring competitive
attitudes among the teachers ultimately making them more productive. I disagree
with the idea of making every teacher permanent. I believe security of jobs
makes us lazy and less innovative in the way they perform. Sometimes negative
motivation ( fear of losing) helps.
The writer is the
ex-lecturer of Economics at St. Xavier’s College, Maitighar; Chelsea
International College, Baneshwor and Times International College, Dillibazar,
Kathmandu.
