Children need a ‘kinder’garten, it is elementary for education

Right of children to free and compulsory education bill (RTE) has been cleared in Rajya Sabha and is awaiting the nod of Lok Sabha. DNA asks Mumbaikars and experts their view on the proposed law.

The bill seems quite ambiguous

Maharashtra doesn't have board exams for std V and VIII, but I think it is a good move to abolish board exams as at this tender age it would put tremendous pressure on the students. The bill sounds nice but one does not know how it would be implemented or how practical it is.

Sacking of government teachers for providing tuitions does not seem as a feasible option. How will one keep a tab on who are taking tuitions and who are not?  Tuition is conducted outside the school premises, so the matter is between the parent and the teacher. This will only work if there is a regulating body to keep a check on them.

Even the 25% seat reserved for the poor in private schools is a high percentage.
The bill seems quite ambiguous for now. Thorough research should be conducted on the bill. In this discussion, private schools should also be involved. Things need to be cleared as to who is going to pay the fees for the seats reserved in private school? All this is still not cleared. Hopefully, this would be answered in the Lok Sabha.
—Carl Laurie, principal, Christ's Church School

Increase salary to discourage tuition

The abolishing of  boards exams for std V and VIII is a good idea as it would lead to stress among children and further increase  tution and coaching classes at that young age. But then the thought behind this idea was good b cause meritorious  students would have got scholarship that would have helped them in future.

A salary of Rs3000 isn’t sufficient for a young teacher who has freshly graduated and has paid for his/her education.  It is difficult to survive in this city on a measly salary that the government provides. So, if the government increases their salary then they will stop taking these extra coaching classes. Drivers of the corporate giants are also paid more than the teachers. It is good that 25% seats would be reserved for the poor in private schools but then again how does one define poor? What is the barometer? This is very vague and it needs to be discussed and defined.
—Mala Bhattacharya, former principal, Sir JJ Girl’s High School

It will change the education system

One of the major problems that this country faces is lack of education. If we need to change the face of the country then we need education reforms and stern rules to make sure that every child in this country is educated.

A child is mere three to four years old when he enters school, so how can we judge him at such a tender age. Interviews for kindergarten will only add pressure on the child as well as parents. Also, if a child already knows everything at the time of the interview, then what will the school teach him? Therefore, the banning of any screening at the elementary level is a good move.

The bill also says that private and unaided schools will have to reserve at least 25% of their seats for poor children. This will give every child the right to study in a good school. It will generate a sense of equality among children and teach them to adjust with their surroundings no matter what background they come from. But it also has a disadvantage; it might make a child feel left out because of his economic condition among the children from affluent families.

As for expelling a child, be it elementary or high school, it is not a solution.
At school, a child can be moulded but if he is thrown out he will only become a menace to the society. Hence, the proposed law regarding banning schools from expelling children till they complete elementary school (standard VIII) will benefit students.

According to me, it is important to have some kind of age determination or proof for a child because a particular age of child can be admitted in a class as maturity and physical level change with age. For example, a ten year-old cannot be admitted in std II.
—Neha Patel, school counsellor

Kejal Khiraiya, mother of a two-year-old
It is really very difficult for a child to get admission in any of the schools today. The rule of taking admission on the basis of performance of a child in the interview was very discouraging. Parents and innocent children have lot of pressure because of the self-made rules of school. This move is welcome for regulating the schools. When the rule will be passed, many families would be relieved. I support the idea of removing interviews, controlling hefty fees and capitation charge by the schools and making education a fundamental right for everyone.

Pinky Sejpal, mother of a five-year-old
For a middle class family it’s difficult to get admission for their child in a good school. Even my son went through an interview when he was not able to talk freely. Three to four year olds are vulnerable and sometimes even shy. I don’t favour the
procedure to interview young children which will be their first step towards formal
learning. I am happy with the decision to regulate the school system. Now many parents can fulfil their dream of providing quality education through good schools.

Dinesh Chidarkar, father of a one-year-old
The whole concept of interviewing a child at such a young age is unfair. How can we judge a child's intellectual abilities at such a tender age? Also, a child is sometimes judged on his parent's affluence as well as intellect, which is wrong. On moral grounds it should have never started in the first place itself. It only adds pressure on parents and children. Therefore, the move to ban interviews at schools for kindergarten admissions will be welcomed by all parents. Every child has a right to education; it is indeed a fundamental right.