How far must international schools be steeped in Indian regulations?

In principle, it seems fair that if a school operates in India, it should conform to Indian laws and regulations. Even if it is an international school.

Well, yes and no. There are different regulatory bodies that influence the way schools must operate and each of them have a domain of their own. To have all schools answerable to the laws of India is obvious. But it is not that obvious that all the other aspects of the school should be subject to a single standardised regime, especially if they are international schools. The one area where international schools will obviously have different regulations is the examination board - by definition this is why they are international schools because they assess and are assessed by international boards of examination. When the trustees receive permission to open an international school, this is the permission they receive from the local government - that their curriculum and assessments will be subject to, and according to a board that is outside the country. 

Between these two areas where logic decrees black and white, are various other areas where the school must be answerable to their community. The governance aspects need to be subject to some regulation, especially when self governance has often proved to be a failure in practice. It is sad to acknowledge that schools (not all of course, but many) have not lived up to the high standards expected of them, and in that sense have brought upon themselves a need to be policed. For example, if certain schools had verified their employees properly before hiring them, it might have been possible to avoid the incidents where some children were assaulted, often sexually on the school premises. While current government regulatory systems do not extend so far as to cover every aspect, the need for such oversight has demonstrated harshly that our children need protection. 

A strong private sector in the schooling system is essential to a healthy and diverse system. Yet many private sector school owners are seen by their own constituencies as mercenary. The need for governance and transparency becomes obvious here too, regardless of the examination board of the school. School fee hikes are a matter of concern for parents and must be justified on the basis of additional costs. For most schools, these are audited by the authorities on a cyclical basis. The need for central oversight here is unfortunate - the market should have been able to respond. If the fees rise to high compared to the value addition provided by the school, students should naturally move to another school that provides better value. Here is the interesting twist - they find themselves unable to find enough similar quality schools in their vicinity because government regulation controls the opening of schools. The artificial scarcity of quality schools bars the market from responding in a natural manner, thus causing more regulation to be justified. This is a classic bind that presents itself in over regulated systems. 

The over regulated and under governed school system puts an inordinate amount of expectations on a central government authority. Instead of overloading an already strained system it might be a good idea to invest in better governance systems. Why do all schools have to conform to one set of rules if they serve their community well, are responsive to needs and are subject to laws? Strong community, parent and alumni led school boards and school management committees (SMCS) can make sure that schools deliver. Bigger regulation makes sense if it can be decentralised so that it is responsive to local needs. Under-provided, under-funded, untrained and toothless SMCs seem to be in a stage of nascent failure - so easy to use as an argument for more regulation of all schools including international schools. Local regulation was starved, barely implemented and now we feel compelled to agree that Big Regulation must come in. This is a hard trap to avoid. 

International schools too have chosen their regulators for examinations, but in everything else they are placed in the local context. The line between the two needs to be defined well. In anything they do that affects curriculum, standards, pedagogies etc. they need to be answerable to their examination board. In everything else they remain answerable to the laws of the countries of operation. To ask international schools to also teach NCERT based values is to deny parental and student choice, taking away their freedom of education. To ask students to work on their chosen curriculum and then an additional local one is also to over burden students. In which world can this be fair? 

This is a broad and complex question about whether all schools should be participants in strategic social engineering. Should they join in the nationalistic efforts or should they be allowed to focus serving their communities to the best of their abilities? This is not a question that should be answered in a one shot diktat. This is a question that is as wide as it is deep and needs wider debate. It seeks answers to questions such as: are schools for students, for their communities or for national growth? It asks questions such as what are real Indian identities and values? And so on.

If teaching Indian values is important then this needs to include the diversity that India represents. A single NCERT curriculum cannot suffice. Nor is Central control a healthy solution for a vibrant democracy. The solution again goes back to local SMC oversight to value education in schools not a centralised administrative solution. The centralisation of control seems to stem from a fear of diversity of opinions and perspectives. To use schools to insist on a single set of ‘Indian’ values is a dismal prospect that is likely to be doomed to failure. If the teaching of such values and the NCERT/CBSE based curriculum is so important to the government then they should enable more schools to be started up especially in the private sector to be able to compete away students from the International boards. Parents and students will inevitably go to schools where better education is provided including good values and global mobility. To compete to win is more honourable than to control to win.

Meeta Sengupta is a writer, and an advisor an consultant in education. She tweets at @meetasengupta.