The word ‘school’ appears in the Constitution only once, with reference to the qualification of candidates to contest in state legislative council elections. The word ‘education’ appears 28 times with reference to the development of educationally backward communities, right to education and management of educational institutions by minorities, etc. The powers and functions of the Union and state governments in the Seventh Schedule do not specify anything about school education.
Most states have legislated on school education. The most common is the School Education Act. These provide regulations relating to schools, particularly private schools. Some Acts mention the constitution of the school board. But rarely do we come across information about the rules framed under these Acts relating to school boards.
Certifying students based on a school curriculum was a colonial practice. Universities in India set up by the colonial government conducted matriculation examinations. After 1947, state governments and the Union did not realise the need for a law to set up school boards; rather, they used the ‘resolution’ route to establish the boards.
A school board is usually an institution that creates syllabuses, textbooks and conducts assessments to certify students in the secondary and higher secondary levels. Some educationists argue that the school board should be separate from the school examination bard, because if there is a single board for curriculum design and assessment, the opportunity for critical evaluation of curriculum design will be lost
In states, the Department of Examination in the Department of School Education functions as the school examination board. The other functions of a school board are carried out by other organs of the department. However, a point to note is that most states have neither clear acts and rules to constitute school boards nor transparent executive orders instituting such boards.
So far, the Centre has not legislated anything about the institution of school boards. The Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE), and National Institute of Open Schooling (NIOS) are autonomous bodies instituted by the education ministry. The government set up CBSE through various resolutions since 1947. It was established as a registered society mainly for schools run for children of central government employees. The NIOS was carved out of it in 1988.
The government also recognised the Council for the Indian School Certificate Examinations, a private registered society instituted to design curriculum, affiliate schools and certify students for secondary and higher secondary education.
These three boards could be considered school education boards as they function as a single entity offering all educational services. The CBSE adopts the curriculum designed by NCERT, another autonomous organisation under the department of school education and literacy.
In 1993, the Yashpal Committee recommended that apart from Kendriya and Navodaya Vidyalayas, other schools should be affiliated to state boards, not CBSE. The T N Chaturvedi Committee set up to study the feasibility of Yashpal Committee stated if affiliation to CBSE is good for KVs and NVs, it cannot be bad for others. Based on this argument, private schools were allowed to get affiliation from CBSE.
Strangely, the Department of Higher Education recognises two school boards—Maharshi Sandipani Rashtriya Veda Sanskrit Shiksha Board, Ujjain and Bhartiya Shiksha Board, Haridwar. They are private registered societies.
Many questions arise. Can two departments of the same ministry approve and recognise school boards? If the Centre recognises such school boards, can they affiliate schools across the country? What control and regulatory systems are in place to check the activities of such boards?
The Kothari Commission (1966-68) and the National Education Policy 1968 recommended the current format of 10+2+3 years of education, but it took another decade to implement this. The present school system of 10+2 years was enforced indirectly through UGC regulations for enrolment in higher education and recruitment rules of the Union and state governments.
The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act 2009 is the only central legislation in India that lays down various standards not only for infrastructure but also on curriculum and evaluation, but it is confined to classes 1-8 only. We can consider amending this law for classes 9 to 12, in which the general guidelines for setting up administrative aspects of board examinations could be included as additional clauses. When we do not have enforceable standards of school education, the curriculums across the non-statutory school boards will differ and affect the minimum standards of foundational education in the country. There is no way to compare the curriculum contents across the boards in states and the Centre, including the private boards. Less said the better about the assessment systems of the school exam boards, which are black boxes for the most informed in the country.
The proliferation of school boards, particularly private ones, without enforceable standards and institutions for oversight is dangerous. They take a heavy toll on children, leaving society impoverished of education and development. Educationists and policymakers should reflect on the importance of providing a legal basis for setting up school boards that enforce standards in teaching, learning and assessment. Transparency and participative administration are the needs of the hour.
R Srinivasan
Member, State Planning Commission, Tamil Nadu
M V Srinivasan
Professor of Economics, NCERT, New Delhi
(Views are personal)
