Skip to main content

Schools in the Business of Education

School

Few incidents over the last couple of weeks made me look up the meaning of school in the dictionary. As per Dictionary:

skuːl/
noun: school; plural noun: schools
1. an institution for educating children.
2. any institution at which instruction is given in a particular discipline.

An institution for Education

Finished school about 25 years ago. I may be a little outdated, That’s what even I considered schools to be. Not because the dictionary says so. But we felt so, while we were in school. There was a lot that we learnt at school. From the books, our syllabus and curriculum. We had numerous activities like sports, debates, quiz competitions, cultural and co-curricular activities, apart from academics. Though we didn’t have a lot of facilities and infrastructure, but let's skip them for now.

Talking about knowledge and education. I still remember a lot from my school days- the basic concepts and even its application. Many a times I am amazed, rather shocked at the lack of knowledge and understanding of school kids these days.

Business of education

These days, schools and institutions are mushrooming everywhere. I understand the need for schooling and education. It's the making a business out of it that bothers me. I went to a government school where the fees were subsidized. Even there, my nephew today is paying 26 times the fees. I am sure the inflation hasn’t risen 2600% over the last 25 years. Compare to the fees of some private schools, I feel, is a futile exercise. Sufficient to say, school charge a bomb. Not only the great schools, but every other school.

Return on investment

Since school have become a business, it's better to apply a business matrix. For the kind of investment what is the school providing in return. I have interacted with many parents and children across cities and countries. Most of the schools and teaching are just reproducing the contents of the book on the blackboard/whiteboard/projectors/screens. That too, not very efficiently or effectively. The kids do not understand the very basic concepts and fail to apply anything. They however, can effectively replicate (in most cases) what's fed to them. So, is this return justified for the price we are paying?

There are a few exception, where the child development, skill sets imparted and teaching methods used are par excellence. Like I said, these are exceptions. The administrators are running a profitable factory, but the investors (parents) are not getting a return on their investment (Smart educated children).

School Responsibility

Recently, one of my friends kid was having difficulty following math, and scored low. The class teacher sent a written undertaking with the kid asking the parents to put in specific number of hours revising the curriculum (Parents had to sign it and submit it to school). A particular parent refused to sign it. Similar undertaking was required to be signed by not just this kid's parent, but was applicable to all, irrespective of performance.

Does the school give an undertaking to all the parents that it will do x,y, and z for each student. They will pay attention and work upon to build an understanding of all that they teach (rather claim to teach). What is the school responsible for? Accountable for? What right do they have to ask for a written undertaking of all parents? Aren't they the one who should in fact be signing an undertaking?

An intervention

A fortnight later, the kid had another exam in math, and the parent spent 2-3 hours a day for 3 days before the exam with the kid. The kid got 3rd Highest marks in the class. Reason: the kid never understood anything in class. Like the teachers replicating the book on the board, the kid replicated the same in the notebook. Copying all, understanding nothing. Without any understanding, failure in the test was natural.

If with 6-8 hours or effort, the kids could get 3rd highest, what were the teachers doing in all the hours they are supposed to dedicate to kids and the education.

Teachers Commitment

If this is all it takes to make a kid understand some basic concepts and improve his performance in a test, what was preventing the teacher or the school from doing this? (I question the very premise of assessing based on standardized tests- but will leave it for now). In fact even if this is not adequate, the teacher and school must do whatever required to make sure the kids understand what is being taught.

This is in spite of the fact that regulations exist on the max number of students in each class (so required attention can be given to each child) , the teacher to student ratio, basic qualifications to be a teacher. You can enforce this, and a lot more. What cannot be enforced by the regulations is the motivation of the teachers and the intentions of the schools.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Virtual Greeting, Social Celebration and Real Relations

Facebook greeted me with a message, as the year came to a close.  Do I care?  Obviously Not. My year ended pretty good, even with this note from Facebook.   But, Should you care? Real World Connections. I have close to 2000 friends on Facebook. All of whom I have met, most I fondly interact whenever I meet. (Few are mere acquaintances). The number would have been greater if all my friends were on Facebook and connected. I have made friends in real life and later connected with them on Facebook. The friends on my list are from my School days, College, Band of Brothers from the Armed Forces, Training academies, various courses I've attended, people with whom I've served in various tenures. My batch mates from MBA. Colleagues from the companies I've worked with. Neighbours from places I've stayed at. Friends with whom I've gone on trips. My students, participants and trainers- from the trainings I've attended and imparted. Friends I made on var

Journalism and Activism or Intellectual Terrorism

Sometime back- before the COVID-19 caught everybody's attention, I met an American journalist/activist at one of the premier education institute. Throughout the conversation (where I was on the sidelines- as I had gone to meet some faculty), the active participants - the faculty, research associates and PhD candidates were giving him inputs. Being a journalist, he was taking meticulous notes. He was visiting India and reporting a few things, supporting activists and causes. But what??? There were only 3 topics on which he was asking questions and seeking opinions. Ram Mandir verdict, Citizenship Amendment Act and Rafael deal. This may have been okay- had he been genuinely seeking opinions. He had visited Ayodhya the week before and was narrating his experiences. Within a few minutes, I understood that he was primarily seeking anti views only. He was out rightly rejecting/ignoring any views otherwise. Needless to say, the audience (maybe awed by white skin and accent- lot of us

Suu Kyi, Rohingya, Oxford and Hypocrisy

#Britain (and a lot of other nations are) condemning the Myanmar Army, Administration and the Nations for the Rohingya crisis. Myanmar is Buddhist majority nation. Buddhists are by far the most peace loving religion in the world. What is forcing the most peace-loving religion to take such drastic action?  The world media is showing pictures of miserable families and children of the refugees and writing stories of atrocities on them. The refugees would love playing victims. Narrate stories that may not have even happened. After all they want is sympathy. They would never talk about what they as a community have done to anger the nation and a peaceful community. Oxford University dropped Noble Peace Prize winner Suu Kyi from common room's name ( goo.gl/nbpAi5) as she had not been able to stop (the so called) atrocities on Rohingya community and the blatant Human rights violation. Myanmar is trying to solve their internal problems, forced to take extreme measures by those pl