Deconstructing the boards

“We have become unable to think of better education except in terms of more complex schools and of teachers trained for ever longer periods.”

 - Ivan Illich[i]

Late last month, both CBSE[ii] and CISCE[iii] declared that they were cancelling all remaining board examinations for classes 10 and 12 due in 2020. While in some cases students had sat for all their examinations, in many others they had been able to take only a few and the rest were yet to be held. Given the current pandemic, it is clear that organising the remaining examinations in the usual manner will be difficult in the foreseeable future.

Both boards have therefore worked out a via media whereby the average scores of examinations already completed or internal assessments (or both) will form the basis for scores in the remaining examinations. Since not everyone may find this a satisfactory solution, they’ve also proposed that a regular examination will be conducted when feasible, to enable students to improve their performance as calculated by these average scores.

Over the years, the conduct of the board examinations, declaration of their results, celebrating the toppers, and commiserating with those who haven’t done as well has become a regular routine. Each year there are inspiring stories of those who worked hard and did exceptionally well, and each year there are the tragic reports of children who took their own lives because the pressure became too much. Each year there is a resolve to do better next time, to improve the system and bring about meaningful change, and each year there is more chaos, heartbreak, and frustration, not just for the students, but also for the teachers, parents, and schools.

When Illich wrote Deschooling Society[iv] in 1971, he spoke of the need to invert the education funnel that channelled students into particular directions, imagining instead an inverted funnel that created an opportunity for a web of learning connections. This vision of education is one that we seem to have lost in our slavish adherence to the annual board examination rituals. In the process, we have ended up limiting ourselves, proving his view that “so persuasive is the power of the institutions we have created that they shape not only our preferences but actually our sense of possibilities”[v]. Surely there should be more to education than this? How then might we ‘invert the funnel’? What can we do to simplify the current system instead of complicating it further?

The age-based system of school classrooms has its origins in the 19^th century, when for various reasons it became acceptable to organise students in a school on this basis. The underlying assumption here is that all students have similar levels of learning and learn at more or less the same pace. But the truth, as anyone who has been in a classroom can tell you, is that there are wide variations between pupils, with the top ten percent of the class often being up to four or even five grade levels ahead of the lowest ten percent. To assume therefore, that a student is ready to take a board examination merely because she’s reached the age of 16 or 18 years and is in class 10 or 12 may not necessarily be appropriate.

Equally, the assumption that every student must have an equal interest in every subject is false; some students enjoy mathematics, others history or psychology or music – why then must we prescribe that there must be mandatory subject groups for such examinations? Why not allow students to study only the subjects that interest them?

An unintended side effect of the cancellations wrought by the pandemic has been to demonstrate yet again that the present system of board examinations actually has little or no relevance in today’s world. If a student’s performance can be assessed on the basis of internal assessments as will be done in several cases now, why can this not be the norm instead of the exception? Why can’t each individual school monitor student progress through the grades and award a certification of completion of class 10 or 12 based on that performance?

The challenge, some will say, would lie in ensuring standardisation – how would we be able to compare the assessment prepared by one school with another in order to decide which student was the more meritorious? How would colleges and universities select students based on merit if they couldn’t compare between assessments from different schools? The simplest way to do that would be for individual colleges and universities to have their own entrance examinations for admission, as indeed some already do. Any student who has received a certificate of completion of class 10 or 12 from their school would be eligible to sit such an entrance test, and based on their performance on the test would be eligible for admission. But since not every college or university has the means to conduct such examinations, how else might we simplify the present system?

A possible way of doing that would be to restructure the current annual board examinations into on-demand subject certification examinations. In other words, when a student feels she’s ready, she can register for and take a standardised examination conducted by the boards that would certify her level of performance in a particular subject. This would allow the boards to offer competency-based assessments in each subject, with students opting to take only those assessments that they require. And it would allow students to opt for such certification when they feel ready, not when they reach a certain age or class.

In Australia for instance, a student in class 10 can opt to take advanced classes and do class 11 maths or physics say, and then take the class 12 certification exam when they feel they are ready. The same is the case with the GCSE A levels, where students can choose to do one, two, or more examinations when they are ready. A system of on-demand certification could allow advanced students to stretch themselves by doing higher level subjects if they so chose, while others could seek such certification at their own pace. The flexibility of such a system would allow the boards to address the needs of different types of students at different points in time.

A structure like this would also mean that those who choose to avoid any end-of-cycle examination could do so without pressure or stigma, thus reducing the motivation for some to drop out of school altogether. Many students wish to move into vocational training or the job market at the end of class 12 instead of continuing with higher education – armed with their class 10 or 12 completion certificate from the school, they could take the entrance examinations for vocational courses without needing to complete a board examination of the type offered today. Essentially this would create multiple pathways to exit school after class 10 or 12, allowing students the freedom of choice to pursue subjects of interest in the appropriate setting.

Changes of this nature would require the boards themselves to change, to put in place systems and technologies that would let them offer such on-demand assessments. They would need to develop the capacity for conducting standardised, competency-based assessments, as well as the ability to undertake psychometric analysis to enable comparisons. They would need to create a question bank with items of comparable difficulty, covering various aspects of the curriculum so that students are assessed fairly and equitably, no matter which assessment they take. Most of all, they will need to establish that each assessment provides valid and reliable data from which appropriate conclusions may be drawn. The good news is that none of these changes are particularly difficult, and with India’s participation in PISA 2022[vi], many of these capabilities are already being considered or created.

Instead of complicating education for the learner, we need to simplify it, making the experience as stress-free and enjoyable as possible for those going through the process, supporting the creation of a thirst for lifelong learning. Providing multiple pathways to exit the school system after class 10 or 12, deconstructing the current board examinations and replacing them with a more flexible assessment system would be important first steps in that process.

---

[i] Illich, I. (1969, November 6). Outwitting the “Developed” Countries. The New York Review of Books.

[ii] Central Board of Secondary Education, www.cbse.nic.in.

[iii] Council for the Indian School Certificate Examinations, www.cisce.org.

[iv] Illich, I. (1971). Deschooling society. New York: Harper & Row.

[v] Illich, I. (1969). op cit.

[vi] Previously 2021, now deferred by a year.

Returning to school

In February this year, children and parents across the country were looking forward to the new academic session beginning immediately after the annual exam – new classes, books, uniforms, friends, and perhaps in some cases, even new schools. Then COVID-19 made its unwelcome presence felt, and everything changed. Schools and offices were shut, children and adults confined to home, and life as we knew it became a thing of the past.

More than three months later, the world has come to terms with the fact that the virus is here to stay and is readjusting itself to this changed reality. With economies having suffered due to severe lockdowns, governments are taking steps to reopen everywhere, ensuring suitable precautions. This includes schools too, and plans have been made to gradually restart, bringing in various grades in a phased manner. What might be some of the things to consider as we begin this process?

First, the more obvious – adoption of administrative and logistical measures such as more intensive cleaning and sanitisation processes, the use of masks and hand sanitiser, frequent hand washing for all, monitored social distancing, fewer students in each class to allow physical separation, staggered classes, reduced entry points, and so on. These are self-evident steps, relatively easier to implement with a little care and monitoring, and will help ensure health and safety for all.

Second, most schools will probably begin by bringing back senior students along with the very young, followed in phases by the other grades. While older students can understand the need for various precautions, children in kindergarten or grades 1 and 2 may find that more difficult. It is hard to ensure that such young children follow social distancing norms, nor can they be implemented in any practical sense with 5-8 year olds. For instance, several primary schools in Australia, which opened about a month ago, have had to shut down again as a result of infections among younger children. As we reopen in India too, schools will need to be prepared for the inevitable periodic shutdowns from time to time, as and when cases of infection among young children are detected.

Third, these strategies could – in some cases – be combined with a blended learning model through the use of alternate approaches, to reduce the need to come to school. During the period of lockdown, several schools had adopted online technologies to stay connected with their students; naturally, this has not been possible in all cases since not all children have access to the internet or devices, but even in less well-resourced schools, attempts have been made to use messaging tools to share school work. Even when there is limited access to technology, schools can consider simple solutions like handing out worksheets and varied assignments to children when they come to school, for completion at home; students could then be in school for some days in the week and learning at home on others. Wherever possible, the use of such methods could help reduce the need for children to be physically present in a classroom.

Several commentators have expressed concerns about the loss of learning that is likely to have taken place during this time and the need to ensure that children get back to regular school work as quickly as possible. The truth is however, that both the students and teachers will need time to ease back into a more or less regular routine. The biggest mistake we might make therefore, would be to immediately start focusing on trying to make up for lost time and pushing to get back to learning as usual.

Consider what they have dealt with in the last few months. An overarching sense of fear about an unknown virus and its effects. Insecurity about jobs and livelihoods. Financial distress as jobs have been lost or savings have dwindled. Worries about providing for the family. The burden of obtaining provisions and necessities for daily needs. Loneliness and isolation from extended families or friends. The stress of seeing parents and loved ones worry about all of these – in other words, life in a pressure cooker environment with multiple sources of anxiety. Most people have faced these and other uncertainties, and school students and teachers are no exceptions. To expect them to come back to school and pick up from where they left three months ago is unrealistic and insensitive.

Children will come back to school with many apprehensions and misgivings. The first thing they need is reassurance and pastoral care, not a regime that expects them to start rigorous swotting for annual examinations as if the intervening months had never happened. Their mental and emotional well-being needs to be ensured before we can reasonably expect them to start routine schoolwork again. They will need counselling, story-telling, handholding, and validation. This means extra effort on the part of the school and teachers, many of whom would be in need of such reassurance themselves.

We often assume that teachers are superhuman, expecting them to be able to manage everything from teaching to supervising mid-day meals, collecting vast quantities of data, or undertaking census or revision of electoral rolls, but that is not really the case. Schools will need to plan for and put in place programmes that address teachers’ requirements for support and reassurance also, ensuring that they are ready to deal with their students before reopening. Teachers can only provide support to their students if they themselves have had their concerns allayed.

For years now, the big challenge in India's school sector has been the improvement of learning outcomes. This period marks a brief break from that all-consuming narrative – if we get the task of supporting our students and teachers right, we can go back to making progress in improving learning, albeit with some delays. If we get it wrong though, we will be looking at lower learning levels in the near future and that much more additional work to get them back on track.

COVID19 and school education

The COVID-19 pandemic has changed our world in ways that we are only just beginning to understand, and many of those changes seem likely to continue for a long time to come. At no time in our history have human beings been as technologically advanced as we are today, nor more helpless in the face of this illness which spreads like wildfire and appears invincible.

Like so many others, the school sector is also re-examining long held beliefs and existing systems. The more fortunate and better provisioned schools are in the position of being able to move many of their teaching and learning activities online, using a variety of tools such as video conferencing, social media, and the internet, but such schools in our country represent a microscopic minority. The reality for those who attend other schools is often inadequate infrastructure, missing teachers, an incomplete education, and an inability of the system to adapt to even routine changes.

Several commentators have in recent days extolled the benefits of educational technology, including various online platforms, video classes, and the like, but their focus is clearly the privately managed, fee-charging schools beloved of the middle class. Even in these schools however, bandwidth limitations and equipment failures are likely to pose a challenge to uninterrupted delivery, while the efficacy of education in this form for younger children is yet to be established. It is also safe to say that such facilities are unlikely to be available to children who attend government schools, or even those who attend low-cost budget private schools, which provide an essential service to so many despite multiple regulatory hurdles.

Many state governments, such as Himachal Pradesh, have announced that they would record lessons on video and send them out to children in state schools using WhatsApp. Most of the methods under discussion however, seem to require internet-based solutions, which would at least call for the use of a smartphone. The reality is that too many children in our country have access to neither. Even if a few were able to make use of such lessons, there is no clarity if and how they would address those with special needs, such as children with visual or aural disabilities.

A significant challenge to any form of remote learning is the fact that too few children have learning support at home, since many may be first generation learners. The fallout of the ongoing pandemic has thus the potential to widen the already existing learning gap between educationally and socio-economically advantaged and disadvantaged students and communities. Those who were already marginalised run the risk of being further discriminated against, with gender, poverty, digital, and disability gaps set to grow exponentially. Additionally, a continued lockdown with a focus on remote learning raises questions of safety for many, given the risk of increasing frustration among adults at home and possible domestic violence.

The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, places on the government the responsibility for ensuring that all children receive elementary education as a matter of right. Over the last 20-25 years, the government has invested, among other things, in school infrastructure, teachers, professional development, curricular reform, and management improvements. But all of these were predicated on children physically attending a class, with a teacher to support them; suddenly, everything has changed. Our new circumstances do not dilute the responsibility of government to ensure the education of all children, but with schools shut and social distancing norms in place, new ways of reaching students will need to be found.

One immediate solution is the redeployment of mass media channels to carry age and grade appropriate lessons in a structured manner, something that India has substantial experience of earlier. Both Doordarshan and All India Radio (AIR) have been used for widespread dissemination of social messaging and learning, including for the National Literacy Mission. The use of television for education in India peaked between 2004-2010, when we were one of the few countries in the world to have a satellite (EduSat) dedicated exclusively to broadcasting educational TV content for students.

While Doordarshan reaches most parts of the country, the penetration of radio to the remotest areas in India has few equals anywhere in the world. The use of radio for education, particularly at times of crisis, is well known globally. International agencies and national governments have run radio-based education programmes in countries affected by crises all over the world, as for instance in Chad in 2017 when school education was impacted by Boko Haram terrorism. In India, we have a long history of learning programmes delivered by radio, by government as well as NGOs; one of the earliest examples was the school broadcast project of AIR of 1937 that operated in Delhi, Chennai, Kolkata, and Mumbai. Government began using radio for literacy programmes in 1956, while IGNOU has used it for university students since the early nineties.

The Gyan Vani FM channel, which briefly went off air, was restarted in 2017 and is currently being used by IGNOU from 8 am to 8 pm daily to provide lessons to students, who can phone in with any questions they might have. However, Gyan Vani only reaches a limited number of locations, being an FM channel. What we need is to explore ways by which the reach of Gyan Vani can be expanded to cover more parts of the country using the AIR network, providing content that is relevant to school children as well as those at higher levels. At a time when physical attendance in school is a challenge, both TV and radio can play a critical role in ensuring that learning does not suffer.

Some states and examination boards have announced that they will automatically promote all students in grades 1 to 8 this year which means that there will be no formal assessment of learning. Given that there were already concerns around the relatively low levels of learning in the country despite the many interventions that have taken place over the years, this step, while unavoidable in the present circumstances, is likely to have an impact on student progress in succeeding years. We will have to consider how best to address this situation in the form of remedial measures when the next academic session begins, as well as simple methods of quick formative assessment, aimed at supporting the learning process.

We also need to start planning for the reality that school education for many children is likely to be interrupted, at least in the short run, no matter what strategies are used in the interim. To ensure children do not lose time for no fault of their own, we might wish to consider accelerated learning programmes, as have been used successfully in other crisis-hit countries, allowing students to combine and complete two or possibly three school years in a shorter time frame so that they can complete the relevant educational stage on time. This will require planning for associated reviews of the curriculum and its compression, and teacher and leadership training for implementation.

It is important though, to remember that these are all short-term solutions. In the long run, no matter what strategy is adopted, the quality of remote learning can never compare well with regular schooling. Some skills, like teamwork and character building, can only take place when there is an opportunity to work in collaboration with other students and teachers in a physical school setting. Most importantly, schools remain institutions of socialisation for the young, something that cannot be imparted remotely through radio or TV programmes. Unless we wish to see a very different society in future, we will need to find ways to make schools functional again.

This pandemic is in many ways an opportunity to reimagine how school education is delivered, not only in India, but also worldwide. Even after the lockdown restrictions are lifted, it seems likely that the nature of teaching and learning will change significantly. How we handle these changes over the next few months, and how we creatively find solutions to allow schools to reopen, will determine the future we leave to our children.