logo
Reading between results: Why we must discuss the dropouts

Reading between results: Why we must discuss the dropouts

Deccan Herald10-05-2025

A few days ago, the results of the SSLC exams in Karnataka were announced. Immediately, a rush of coverage by the media followed, focusing on the numbers put out by the government, as well as on some standout performances. There were comparisons between districts, between boys and girls, between last year and this year. But there was one thing quite difficult to find – how many young people of SSLC age did not pass this stage?.The exam results are given in numbers that don't automatically make anyone think of this. What we are told is how many students took the exams, and what percentage of those students passed. But that doesn't tell us one other very important metric: how many young people in Karnataka should have taken the exam but did not because they had already dropped out?.I did some back-of-the-envelope calculations using the state's population and the typical distribution of ages in South Indian states. From what I can tell, at least 15-20% of children of that age were missing from the exam halls altogether. The Education Department tells us that about two-thirds of those who showed up to write the exams did well enough to pass. If we put those two things together, we get a fuller picture – namely, that half the children in the state do not even clear the 10th standard..Of those who do pass SSLC, only about 85% enroll in a PUC programme, and of those who take that exam, typically 70% will pass each year, including those who pass with grace marks. Put all of that together and what we get is that two-thirds of future adults in Karnataka will not have completed 12 full years of learning..Markets shut in Pathankot after explosion-like sounds; air sirens ring out in Punjab districts.This should be the most prominent thing in the minds of our educators and political leadership, but our lens on these exams is designed to look away from this much bigger truth. Public education in Karnataka is a disaster. The system is more likely to fail a child than to help them succeed. But that's not the way it is presented to us. What we are told is that children succeeded or failed, not that the adults in charge of securing their futures failed or succeeded..Now let's consider something else. Education has been a focus of development efforts for a long time. Various philanthropic organisations are working to improve public education in particular. Some have even staked their claim to fame on their contributions to children's education. Additionally, in recent years, big chunks of money from CSR budgets have also been steered towards schools, in the belief that this is a good and safe option for the use of that money..And then there is the Right To Education (RTE). The government has accepted that children have a constitutional right to quality education, and private schools have also been pushed to accommodate some children who they would otherwise not admit..In short, everyone agrees that public education is important, and lots of people are doing something or the other to improve it. But that cannot take our gaze away from the results. In Yes Minister, the famous British TV series about politics in the UK, there is one episode where the minister, Jim Hacker, visits a new hospital. He finds that while the bureaucrats think that it is a splendid institution because it has great modern equipment, is very clean, has hundreds of administrative staff, etc., what it does not have are doctors and patients..This prompts a question from the minister – 'We are talking about a hospital, aren't we?' That's the kind of question that we should be asking. We are talking about the Department of Education, about schools, about learning outcomes, aren't we?.None of this is new. It has been happening for years. All we've done is congratulate ourselves for various inputs along the way – pucca buildings, toilets, running water, midday meals, teachers and administrative staff, enrollment – and decided that these are all signs of great progress. What's missing from this way of looking at things is any meaningful focus on whether we are helping children learn..Many mistakes have contributed to this stark reality. We have terribly misguided notions of the ideal. What is a school? Who is a teacher? How should we measure learning? What is the measure of public education? One can spend a lot of time debating which of these failures is more to blame, and even ponder about things that might be done differently. Before any of that, however, we have to start with an admission of failure. Ours, not the children's.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump administration asks Supreme Court to pause mass layoffs at Education Department
Trump administration asks Supreme Court to pause mass layoffs at Education Department

Hindustan Times

time5 hours ago

  • Hindustan Times

Trump administration asks Supreme Court to pause mass layoffs at Education Department

President Donald Trump's administration on Friday asked the Supreme Court to pause a court order to reinstate Education Department employees who were fired in mass layoffs as part of his plan to dismantle the agency. The Justice Department's emergency appeal to the high court said U.S. District Judge Myong Joun in Boston exceeded his authority last month when he issued a preliminary injunction reversing the layoffs of nearly 1,400 people and putting the broader plan on hold. Joun's order has blocked one of the Republican president's biggest campaign promises and effectively stalled the effort to wind down the department. A federal appeals court refused to put the order on hold while the administration appealed. The judge wrote that the layoffs 'will likely cripple the department.' But Solicitor General D. John Sauer wrote on Friday that Joun was substituting his policy preferences for those of the Trump administration. The layoffs help put in the place the 'policy of streamlining the department and eliminating discretionary functions that, in the administration's view, are better left to the states,' Sauer wrote. He also pointed out that the Supreme Court in April voted 5-4 to block Joun's earlier order seeking to keep in place Education Department teacher-training grants. The current case involves two consolidated lawsuits that said Trump's plan amounted to an illegal closure of the Education Department. One suit was filed by the Somerville and Easthampton school districts in Massachusetts along with the American Federation of Teachers and other education groups. The other suit was filed by a coalition of 21 Democratic attorneys general. The suits argued that layoffs left the department unable to carry out responsibilities required by Congress, including duties to support special education, distribute financial aid and enforce civil rights laws. Trump has made it a priority to shut down the Education Department, though he has acknowledged that only Congress has the authority to do that. In the meantime, Trump issued a March order directing Education Secretary Linda McMahon to wind it down 'to the maximum extent appropriate and permitted by law.' Trump later said the department's functions will be parceled to other agencies, suggesting that federal student loans should be managed by the Small Business Administration and programs involving students with disabilities would be absorbed by the Department of Health and Human Services. Those changes have not yet happened. The president argues that the Education Department has been overtaken by liberals and has failed to spur improvements to the nation's lagging academic scores. He has promised to 'return education to the states.' Opponents note that K-12 education is already mostly overseen by states and cities. Democrats have blasted the Trump administration's Education Department budget, which seeks a 15% budget cut including a $4.5 billion cut in K-12 funding as part of the agency's downsizing.

Trump asks supreme court to halt court order over education department
Trump asks supreme court to halt court order over education department

Indian Express

time5 hours ago

  • Indian Express

Trump asks supreme court to halt court order over education department

The Trump administration on Friday urged the Supreme Court to block a lower court ruling that reinstated nearly 1,400 Education Department employees who were dismissed under President Donald Trump's controversial plan to dismantle the agency. In an emergency appeal, the Justice Department said US District Judge Myong Joun in Boston overstepped his authority when he issued a preliminary injunction last month at the request of several Democratic-led states, school districts, and teachers' unions. The Boston-based First US Circuit Court of Appeals had already rejected the administration's request to pause the injunction while the appeals process played out. The lower court order required the government not only to reverse the mass layoffs but also to halt broader efforts to dissolve the department — one of Trump's headline campaign promises. In March, Trump signed an executive order to eliminate the Department of Education, triggering immediate backlash from opponents who called it a direct attack on public education. Critics have noted that while the Education Department does not directly operate schools, it plays a critical role in dispersing federal funds, enforcing civil rights laws such as Title IX, and supporting low-income students, students with disabilities, and higher education institutions.

NRI Slams Indian Landlords In Canada Over ‘Moronic' Rental Ads: ‘Blatant Exclusion…'
NRI Slams Indian Landlords In Canada Over ‘Moronic' Rental Ads: ‘Blatant Exclusion…'

News18

time6 hours ago

  • News18

NRI Slams Indian Landlords In Canada Over ‘Moronic' Rental Ads: ‘Blatant Exclusion…'

Last Updated: The woman expressed her frustration and embarrassment with the exclusionary nature of rental listings like preferences based on caste, religion, language within Indian communities. An Indian woman in Canada has voiced her frustration over discriminatory rental practices within Indian communities abroad. In a now viral Reddit post, the woman expressed her frustration and embarrassment with the exclusionary nature of rental listings like preferences based on caste, religion, language or dietary choices, frequently seen in South Asian circles. 'I'm an Indian living in Canada and honestly, I'm beyond frustrated and embarrassed by the kind of rental ads I keep seeing," she said. 'It's always something like 'Only Gujarati girl,' or 'Punjabi-speaking vegetarian girl preferred,' or 'South Indian girls only, no boy inquiries please.' Some go as far as saying 'Strictly vegetarian, no non-veg even from outside,' or 'We are looking for someone who speaks our mother tongue only,' 'follow our religion only,'" she described. Questioning the landlords' intentions, the woman accused them of ignoring housing discrimination laws. 'You're not in India anymore, where you can get away with putting up caste, language and dietary restrictions in rental ads like it's normal," she added. 'If you're that picky about language, food, and background, maybe just don't rent the place out? Or live with your family? This isn't a matchmaking service. They're not requesting to marry you. I can eat whatever I want or speak in whatever language I want as long as I'm following the lease agreements and paying you the rent. I also don't have to be an 'Indian only' to rent from you. This is so insanely moronic," she wrote. Netizens React The post has garnered significant support online. 'Been in vancouver for a few years now & from my experience, never rent from desi landlords. No sense of privacy, basic manners like taking permission & minimum 24 hour notice before showing up.. etc. Funniest for me was this one ad went like : Need a sister for 5 brothers currently living in 6 bedroom house. No rent required, only make fresh food daily for her new 5 brothers.. true story!," a user commented. Another wrote, 'When I moved to Vancouver pre Covid, I was looking for an accommodation and some Indian landlord showed me a place where I had to share a room with another person with a screen which divided our bed. From then never went with Indian landlords and am happy with that decision till now." Others, however, argued that since the landlords owned the property, they had the right to choose who lived there according to their preferences. First Published: June 06, 2025, 20:44 IST

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store