<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail-col gmail-span_6 gmail-noprint"><div class="gmail-social"><div class="gmail-displayMobileclas"><ul class="gmail-hide-social-delete gmail-hide-social-new"><li><a class="gmail-mail01 envelopesss gmail-sharemailfancy" href="https://www.orfonline.org/expert-speak/42659-focus-beyond-school-detention-policy/#42659sharemailfancy"><i class="gmail-fa gmail-fa-envelope"></i></a></li><li><a class="gmail-rss01" type="application/rss+xml" target="_blank" href="https://www.orfonline.org/expert-speak/42659-focus-beyond-school-detention-policy//feed/?post_type=research&withoutcomments=1"><i class="gmail-fa gmail-fa-rss"></i></a></li><li class="gmail-prst"> </li></ul></div></div></div><div class="gmail-col gmail-span_12"><div id="gmail-contenties"><div class="gmail-figcaption gmail-social_bottom"><h1>Focus beyond school ‘detention’ policy</h1><ul class="gmail-report"><li><a href="https://www.orfonline.org/people-expert/sanchayan-bhattacharjee">Sanchayan Bhattacharjee</a></li></ul></div></div><div id="gmail-contenties" class="gmail-ullilistnumber"><p class="excert-italic">The
implications of States having different policies with regard to
detaining students goes against the principle of having a uniform
elementary education system.</p><div class="gmail-main_image"><div class="gmail-report-full-img" style="background-image:url("https://www.orfonline.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Education_Detention_Policy.jpg")"> <img src="https://www.orfonline.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Education_Detention_Policy.jpg" alt="detention policy, students, detaining students, uniform education system, no-detention, progressive policy, no-assessment, implementation, CCE, education in India, Sanchayan Bhattacharjee, ORF Mumbai" class="gmail-imgopcity"></div><div style="clear:both"></div></div><ul class="gmail-post-tag extraposttag gmail-noprint" style="margin:12px 0px 0px;display:inline-block"><li> <a href="https://www.orfonline.org/tags/detention-policy/" title="Detention Policy">Detention Policy</a></li><li> <a href="https://www.orfonline.org/tags/no-assessment/" title="No Assessment">No Assessment</a></li><li> <a href="https://www.orfonline.org/tags/no-detention/" title="No Detention">No Detention</a></li></ul><p>As per the Central Advisory Board of Education (CABE) <a href="http://mhrd.gov.in/sites/upload_files/mhrd/files/document-reports/AssmntCCE.pdf">sub-committee</a> report, “No detention policy is implementable (only) in an ideal system.” The recent <a href="http://164.100.47.193/lob/16/XV/LOB18.7.2018.pdf">Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education (Second Amendment) Bill, 2017</a>,
passed in the Lok Sabha on 18 July (pending Rajya Sabha approval) is a
tacit and misguided admission of how far India is from that ‘ideal’
place.</p><p>The bill amends Section 16 of the Right to Education (RTE)
Act and gives States the option to mandate examinations at the end of
classes 5 and/or 8. Students unable to clear these exams will receive
additional inputs and be allowed to reappear within two months. If they
still do not pass, the school will be allowed to detain them. However,
it is encouraging that the Centre has left the final decision in this
matter to the respective State Governments. It can only be hoped that
most States will appreciate the soundness of the ‘no-detention’ policy
and not discard it, at least in the long-term. However, the implications
of States having different policies with regard to detaining students
goes against the principle of having a uniform elementary education
system.</p><p>It is a major departure from the original provisions of
the RTE Act that prohibits detention of any student within the
elementary education (class 1 to 8) system. There are several arguments
in its favour, including ‘unconditional promotion reduces incentives to
study,’ ‘high failure rate post class 8,’ ‘declining learning outcomes,’
‘lack of preparedness,’ others. While some part of these arguments
holds credence, it is essential to analyse the issue beyond the myopic
lens of ‘yes/no detention.’</p><hr><h3><div class="gmail-bpq_classic gmail-bpq-full"><p><span style="color:rgb(0,105,166)">It is important to remember the distinction between ‘no-detention’ and ‘no-assessment.’</span></p></div></h3><hr><p>At
the outset, it is essential to state that there are a number studies
that conclusively prove that there is no correlation between detention
and improved learning levels or decrease in dropout rates. On the
contrary, the social stigma faced by detained students from friends and
society at large is well documented. Also, amidst the mainstream and
social media din, it is important to remember the distinction between
‘no-detention’ and ‘no-assessment.’</p><p>Even the RTE in its original form espoused a comprehensive no-detention policy. <a href="http://righttoeducation.in/sites/default/files/Right%20of%20Children%20to%20Free%20and%20Compulsory%20Education%20Act%202009%20%28English%29.pdf">Section 29</a>
of the Act called for assessment mechanisms through Continuous
Comprehensive Evaluation (CCE) that can evaluate a “child's
understanding of knowledge and his or her ability to apply the same.” As
per the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) <a href="http://www.ncert.nic.in/announcements/pdf/CCE-Guidelines.pdf">guidelines</a>,
CCE must include ‘Assessment for Learning,’ ‘Assessment as Learning’
and ‘Assessment of Learning.’ The inclusion of current examination
systems within the ‘Assessment of Learning’ bucket itself is fraught
with issues such as over emphasis on rote learning and meagre testing of
understanding levels. More importantly, in the current debate, the
other two forms of assessments are relegated to the periphery.</p><p>Since
the school education system does not have any robust accountability
framework for teachers, exams become the only measurable yardstick.
Different States <a href="https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chandigarh/once-again-poor-show-by-class-ix-students-of-chandigarh-government-schools/articleshow/63608553.cms">reported</a> that
a disproportionally large number of students failed class 9
examinations and blamed it squarely on the no-detention policy. To put
it mildly, it’s a flawed correlation. Inadequate and unsuccessful
implementation of CCE is one of the major reasons for the failure of the
‘no-detention’ concept. As mentioned in the CABE report, “the
challenges faced by teachers inside the classroom will increase due to
no-detention and CCE.” This is more of a mindset problem. On ground,
practitioners have consistently maintained that if understood and
implemented correctly, models akin to CCE can actually distribute
assessment responsibilities more effectively and allow teachers to
change their approach to certain topics/subjects based on short term
learning results.</p><hr><h3><div class="gmail-bpq_classic gmail-bpq-full"><p><span style="color:rgb(0,105,166)">Inadequate and unsuccessful implementation of CCE is one of the major reasons for the failure of the ‘no-detention’ concept.</span></p></div></h3><hr><p>For
example, Pratham’s Learning Enhancement Program (LEP), which focuses on
grouping and teaching students of different learning levels, showed <a href="https://www.povertyactionlab.org/sites/default/files/publications/TaRL_Paper_August2016.pdf">tangible results</a>
in government schools of Haryana. However, it is important to note that
the CCE model showed no relative improvement among these students. A
similar study conducted by IIM Ahmedabad found no difference in learning
levels as a result of CCE. Thus, there is a valid argument to be made
against the hasty rollout of CCE across the country. A more nuanced
approached involving pilots in different parts of the country to iron
out the chinks, look at the other assessment models, sustained training
of teachers, inclusion of such models to evaluate teacher training
courses and awareness of such assessment models among parents might have
yielded better results.</p><p>The ‘declining learning outcomes’
argument used in favour of doing away with the no-detention policy is
also misdirected at various levels.</p><p><em>First</em>, the RTE is
applicable only for students in the 6-14 age-group. There is no
sustained policy intervention which focuses on Early Childhood Education
(ECE). The Ministry of Women and Child Development is tasked with the
‘holistic development of women and children’, thus often making it
difficult to give adequate focus to ECE. Since a significant number of
children are first generation learners, lack of ECE leads to
insufficient school preparedness when children enter the formal
education system. Even basic skills like comprehending instructions on a
blackboard becomes a challenge. Thus there is a gap right at the
fundamental level which has a cascading effect in the latter years.</p><p><em>Second</em>,
a large number of school students in their initial years find little/no
familiarity with the medium of instruction. Cosmopolitan urban student
profiles, attraction towards English medium schools and a language
policy that is not in congruence with contemporary needs and aspirations
are some of the challenges the government is grappling with in this
sector. As the struggle with language continues, learning outcomes
suffer.</p><p><em>Third</em>, as mentioned before, there are no
parameters to gauge teacher accountability. So, while the Annual Status
of Education Reports continues to paint a grimmer picture every year
with regards to learning outcomes, there is no mechanism to understand
why teachers have failed to instill basic grade level competencies among
students. All the issues mentioned above have nothing to do with the
existence or absence of the no-detention policy. All of them are
systemic issues that have plagued school education well before the RTE
Act.</p><p>Once again, a well-intentioned policy measure has not even
come close to achieving intended outcomes as a result of flawed
execution. With its reversal, several students will once again have to
bear the brunt and ‘fail’ for systemic lapses. Instead of focusing on
creating outcome based assessment frameworks and implementing them in a
phased manner, it was unfortunately deemed prudent to pass a regressive
legislation. Ultimately, the goal of any progressive school education
system should be to completely do away with the conventional examination
paradigm and replace it with one that follows an integrated assessment
and learning model. No-detention for students is a progressive policy
initiative. Hasty and ineffective implementation should not sound its
death knell.</p></div><ul class="gmail-post-tag gmail-noprint"><li> <a href="https://www.orfonline.org/topic/development/" title="Development">Development</a></li><li> <a href="https://www.orfonline.org/topic/development/education/" title="Education">Education</a></li><li> <a href="https://www.orfonline.org/geography/india/" title="India">India</a></li></ul><p style="font-style:italic;font-size:13px">The views expressed above belong to the author(s).</p><div class="gmail-disktopenable"><div class="gmail-socialshare gmail-noprint" style="margin-right:6px;clear:both"><ul class="gmail-ORFSocialShareWidget"><li><div class="gmail-fb-share-button gmail-fb_extraclass gmail-fb_iframe_widget"><span style="vertical-align:bottom;width:70px;height:20px"></span></div></li><li> <a target="_blank" href="https://twitter.com/share?text=%23IndiaMatters+%7C Focus+beyond+school+%E2%80%98detention%E2%80%99+policy&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.orfonline.org%2Fexpert-speak%2F42659-focus-beyond-school-detention-policy%2F&via=orfonline" class="gmail-twiter_Extra"><i class="gmail-fa gmail-fa-twitter"></i>Tweet</a></li><li> <span style="line-height:1;vertical-align:baseline;display:inline-block;text-align:center" class="gmail-IN-widget"><span style="padding:0px;margin:0px;text-indent:0px;display:inline-block;vertical-align:baseline;font-size:1px"><span id="gmail-li_ui_li_gen_1532360173478_0"><a id="gmail-li_ui_li_gen_1532360173478_0-link"><span id="gmail-li_ui_li_gen_1532360173478_0-logo">in</span><span id="gmail-li_ui_li_gen_1532360173478_0-title"><span id="gmail-li_ui_li_gen_1532360173478_0-mark"></span><span id="gmail-li_ui_li_gen_1532360173478_0-title-text">Share</span></span></a></span></span></span> </li><li><div style="text-indent:0px;margin:0px;padding:0px;background:transparent none repeat scroll 0% 0%;border-style:none;float:none;line-height:normal;font-size:1px;vertical-align:baseline;display:inline-block;width:57px;height:20px" id="gmail-___plus_0"></div></li><li> </li><li> </li><li class="gmail-SocialWidgetShareBlock"></li></ul></div></div><div class="gmail-noprint"><div class="gmail-wpdiscuz_top_clearing"></div><div id="gmail-comments" class="gmail-comments-area"><div id="gmail-respond" style="width:0px;height:0px;clear:both;margin:0px;padding:0px"></div><h3 id="gmail-wc-comment-header">Comments</h3><div id="gmail-wpcomm" class="gmail-wpdiscuz_unauth"><div class="gmail-wc-comment-bar"><div class="gmail-wpdiscuz_clear"></div></div><div class="gmail-wc_social_plugin_wrapper"></div><div class="gmail-wpdiscuz-subscribe-bar"><form action="https://www.orfonline.org/wp-admin/admin-ajax.php?action=addSubscription" method="post" id="gmail-wpdiscuz-subscribe-form"><div class="gmail-wpdiscuz-subscribe-form-intro"></div><div class="gmail-wpdiscuz-subscribe-form-option" style="width:40%"> </div></form></div></div></div></div></div><div class="gmail-wpdiscuz-item gmail-wpdiscuz-subscribe-form-email"> <input class="email" name="wpdiscuzSubscriptionEmail" value="" type="email"></div><div class="gmail-wpdiscuz-subscribe-form-button"> </div><div class="gmail-wpdiscuz-subscribe-bar"><form action="https://www.orfonline.org/wp-admin/admin-ajax.php?action=addSubscription" method="post" id="gmail-wpdiscuz-subscribe-form"> </form><div class="gmail-wpdiscuz_clear"></div></div><div class="gmail-wc-form-wrapper gmail-wc-main-form-wrapper" id="gmail-wc-main-form-wrapper-0_0"><div class="gmail-wpdiscuz-comment-message" style="display:block"></div><form class="gmail-wc_comm_form gmail-wc_main_comm_form" method="post" enctype="multipart/form-data"><div class="gmail-wc-field-comment"><div class="gmail-wc-field-avatararea"> <img alt="avatar" src="https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/?s=48&d=mm&r=g" class="gmail-avatar gmail-avatar-48 gmail-photo gmail-avatar-default" width="48" height="48"></div><div class="gmail-wpdiscuz-item gmail-wc-field-textarea"><div class="gmail-wpdiscuz-textarea-wrap"><textarea id="gmail-wc-textarea-0_0" name="wc_comment" class="gmail-wc_comment gmail-wpd-field"></textarea></div></div></div></form></div>
<br clear="all"><br>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature">=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+<br><br> Harold F. Schiffman<br><br>Professor Emeritus of <br> Dravidian Linguistics and Culture <br>Dept. of South Asia Studies <br>University of Pennsylvania<br>Philadelphia, PA 19104-6305<br><br>Phone: (215) 898-7475<br>Fax: (215) 573-2138 <br><br>Email: <a href="mailto:haroldfs@gmail.com" target="_blank">haroldfs@gmail.com</a><br><a href="http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~haroldfs/" target="_blank">http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~haroldfs/</a> <br><br>-------------------------------------------------</div>
</div>