The Students’ Federation of India (SFI) submitted its remarks and recommendations at the Draft New Education Policy to Ramesh Pokhriyal Nishank, Union Minister of Human Resources Development, at his workplace within the Parliament on July 29. Rajya Sabha MP Elamaram Kareem also joined the SFI delegation to help their function on the Draft NEP.
“We have also cited how specific proposals in the document are exclusionary in nature for the disadvantaged sections and will have an unfavorable impact on many states. We demand to forestall implementing the NEP and initiate a larger democratic manner of study and consultation with one-of-a-kind sections in the society, including the pupil organizations and democratically elected pupil unions,” said Mayukh Biswas, General Secretary of the SFI.
Why they do not like NEP
The SFI stated that they have acknowledged that the “vital democratic procedures, constitutional outlooks, and progressive technique” had been missing in the making of the policy draft, which has made it not anything but sick-organized. Moreover, they claimed that the term — much less than two months — was given for the public to take a look at the 484 page-long (in English) document (and in Hindi, approximately 650 pages) for submitting their remarks turned into inadequate. “In fact, the record has now not been made to be had in specific nearby languages which itself makes big participation of humans impossible,” study a document launched by using the student employer to explain their stand. The SFI has recommended six predominant reasons why they concept the NEP turned into not sufficient:
Attack on Federal Character of the united states of America and education
The NEP proposes to create an “India-focused” training machine with a purpose to cause the creation of an “equitable and vibrant information society”. But the pupil leaders think that many of the proposed structural adjustments are contradictory to the actual feel of this. The NEP does not consist of talented hints to acquire this, instead is going truly towards the spirit of ‘Indianness’ in the training area.
“The idea of ‘Indian-Centred’ training need no longer be absolutely remoted from all different orientations emerged in foreign lands. Alternatively, it ought to amalgamate the deferral characters, democratic ethos, and colorful range of the country in every factor. But the NEP has copied a number of the failed neo-liberal experiments from the worldwide reviews and heavily unnoticed the divergent plans and programs the humans of India want in keeping with the particular conditions of their societies,” stated the SFI.
They welcomed the recommendation of renaming the HRD Ministry because of the Ministry of Education. But brought that just a renaming will result in no modern alternate except a concrete plan is made to ensure the entire machine’s fruitful functioning. The proposed National Education Commission headed by Prime Minister will form the entire education machine into a tool inside the hands of the splendid political leadership of u. S. A ., they stated.
School System
The NEP proposed that self-sustaining faculty boards may be accountable for the decentralized control of faculty clusters. This includes teacher appointments, faculty shape, instructional calendar and time desk, curriculum, requirements, tests, etc. At any factor, the SFI claimed, this cannot be managed beneath one centralized device thanks to the diversity in one-of-a-kind regions. “The draft proposes a formal education system from the age of 3. This contradicts the globally ordinary norm that formal education ought to be after the age of five. ‘Early childhood training and pre-schooling is only a preparative segment before real education. Integrating it with the formal training could now not deliver any fine outcome, as an alternative, it would reverse the welfare position played through the Anganwadi within the healthy development of children. The draft ignores the contribution made by way of the Anganwadi device in enhancing the fitness and nutrients of kids,” the SFI added.
Providing a “go out” point from Class VIII itself without demanding a complete ban on baby labor is difficult because the cutting-edge toddler labor legal guidelines permit kids to paintings in “family” businesses from 10 years onwards, reinforcing caste-primarily based occupations and financial exploitation. This can have a huge social implication and violation of infant rights.
