I travel frequently for work, visiting schools to train teachers, conducting sessions with students, and leading parent orientations. Recently, I started volunteering as a mentor for 10th-grade students. Having spent over 10 years professionally in the education sector and being exposed to the education system for more than 30 years, I have observed and experienced numerous paradoxes in our society. While traveling recently, I listened to the podcast “Puliyabaazi,” hosted by faculty members of the Takshashila Institute of Policy Making. They discussed the theory of the Wickesellian connection in relation to the Bangalore water crisis. It struck me that this theory could also apply to our education system. Let me explain my perspective.
The Wickesellian Connection in Simple Terms
Knut Wicksell, a Swedish economist, introduced the theory of the Wickesellian connection. He explained that the interplay between the “natural rate of interest,” which is the rate at which the economy operates efficiently, and the “market rate of interest,” set by the government, determines the economic health of a society. If these rates align, the economy is balanced; if not, it leads to economic instability.
To simplify, imagine a garden with various plants, each requiring a specific amount of water and sunlight to thrive. If you water them at a fixed rate, some plants will get too much water while others will get too little, causing them to either drown or dry out. The key is to provide each plant with the right amount of water, just as aligning the natural and market rates maintains economic balance.
The Paradox in the Indian Education System
In our education system, three major stakeholders exist: parents, teachers, and students. The primary purpose of education is to create human resources for society’s balanced functioning. However, as we all know, “Change is the only constant.” Therefore, education must be updated continually to address existing or anticipated imbalances in society. The government, experts, and planning institutions, who have access to extensive data and information, are responsible for maintaining this balance.
For example, decades ago, research in electronics was progressing globally. Although the public was unaware of its future impact, the government and experts anticipated its significance and introduced IT and electronics streams in higher education, eventually incorporating them into the school curriculum.
Identifying the Central Stakeholder
While parents, teachers, and students are all crucial, identifying the primary focus for policy-making is essential. Parents have their desires for their children’s education, and they are immediate beneficiaries of government policies. Teachers are the engine of the education system and, along with parents, constitute the government’s vote banks. Students, however, are the ultimate human resource, whose development is the main purpose of the education system. But students often lack a voice in decision-making processes and unfortunately, are taken for granted.
Many parents, unaware of child development principles, demand curricula that can be detrimental to their children’s future. Schools, seeking admissions, often cave to these demands, even if it means compromising on educational quality. Teachers, burdened with documentation and pressure to complete courses and achieve high grades, often find it challenging to implement meaningful changes. Though teacher training is provided, it is seldom followed up to ensure proper implementation.
The government, influenced by vote banks, creates policies that appear student-centered but often include standardized tests to please voters. This approach undermines the curriculum’s intent, similar to the Wickesellian connection theory, where a mismatch between societal needs and provisions leads to ongoing chaos.
Proposed Solution
The solution lies in having educationists, academicians, the government, and experts stand firm against uninformed societal pressures. They must deliver education based on its true purpose, prioritizing the development of students as future human resources. While this might initially provoke harsh reactions, as Robin Sharma aptly puts it, “Change is hard at first, messy in the middle, and gorgeous at the end.”
By adhering to these principles, we can align the needs of students with educational provisions, creating a balanced and effective education system, much like ensuring each plant in our metaphorical garden receives the right amount of water.
Comentários