Why Uttar Pradesh will merge government schools with low enrolment despite opposition
The move has prompted protests from teachers and parents in the state. Since then, the Allahabad High Court has either dismissed petitions against the move or upheld the government decision. Here is what to know.
In June, the UP Basic Education Department asked district-level officials to prepare a database of schools with low enrolment, along with mapping the nearest school where better infrastructure and resources are available, with the intention of 'pairing' the two schools. Officials have been mapping schools with enrolment below 50.
The state's reasoning was the better utilisation of resources and teachers. The infrastructure that remains after the merger will be used to set up Balvatikas, or pre-primary classes.
School mergers, seen as contentious, have been carried out in the past in UP and other states. A NITI Aayog project launched in 2017 in Odisha, MP and Jharkhand sought to introduce reforms in school education in these states. As part of the project, 4,600 schools with low enrolment were merged in Jharkhand, around 36,000 schools were reorganised into 16,000 schools in MP, and 1,800 schools were reorganised in Odisha.
With the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 calling for the setup of school complexes or clusters and sharing resources for their effective utilisation, states have been merging schools with low enrolment in recent years.
Over the past two years, the Education Ministry has also alerted the states about the declining enrolment at the primary and upper-primary levels in government schools.
Consequently, the number of government schools has fallen across several states/UTs. In UP, for instance, data from the Unified District Information System for Education portal UDISE+ shows that the number of government schools fell from 1.63 lakh in 2018-19 to 1.37 lakh in 2023-24. Over this period, the state also saw a rise in private schools from 87,433 to 96,635. Similarly, in MP, government schools fell from 1.22 lakh to 92,439 over this period, while Odisha saw a drop from 55,483 to 48,671.
Why were the government schools set up?
Previous national policies and schemes on education have focused on ensuring universal elementary education (up to class 8). These have drawn on a mention of providing free and compulsory education to all children up to the age of 14 in the Directive Principles of the Constitution, and then Article 21A of the Constitution, which inserted this as a fundamental right in 2002.
The 1986 National Policy on Education said that it gives 'unqualified priority to universalization of elementary education'. The Centre's Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) was launched in 2000-01 with this aim, and SSA funds were used to set up elementary schools. Nearly a decade later, the Right to Education Act (RTE) of 2009 guaranteed the right of 6- to 14-year-old children (class 1 to 8) to free and compulsory education in a 'neighbourhood' school.
The RTE Act specifies that the appropriate government shall establish a school within the limits of each neighbourhood within three years of the Act's commencement. Subsequently, the RTE rules framed by the Centre in 2010, to implement the Act, specified the limits of a neighbourhood within which schools are to be set up – for classes 1 to 5, a school was to be established within 1 km of the neighbourhood, and for classes 6 to 8, a school was to be established within 3 km of the neighbourhood.
In turn, when the states framed their RTE rules, they reiterated this and added specifications in some cases. The RTE rules for UP, for instance, say that for classes 1 to 5, a school shall be established within 1 km of a habitation which has a population of at least 300. For classes 6 to 8, this was a population of at least 800.
In guidelines issued in 2011, the Centre said that the rationale behind establishing neighbourhood schools was to ensure universal access to elementary education, which requires schooling facilities within reasonable reach of all children. If schools are not located in or near the neighbourhood, children may not complete schooling even if they are formally enrolled in school, the Centre had reasoned.
The need for 'neighbourhood' schools was noted by the Kothari Commission in its 1968 report. The Centre set up a commission headed by scientist and former University Grants Commission chairman, DS Kothari, that looked into all aspects of education from 1964 to 1966. Observing that only 85% students transferred from class 4 to 5, the report identified the non-availability of higher primary schools in the neighbourhood as one of the reasons for drop-out at this stage.
The 'neighbourhood' school was also meant to serve another purpose. The commission noted that the neighbourhood school plan should be adopted as a step towards eliminating the segregation that now takes place 'between the schools for the poor and the underprivileged classes, and those for the rich and privileged ones.'
'The neighbourhood school concept implies that each school should be attended by all children in the neighbourhood irrespective of caste, creed, community, religion, economic condition or social status, so that there would be no segregation in schools,' the commission said.
What has changed in the years since?
The focus on elementary school enrolment, with the RTE Act and Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, meant that several primary and upper primary schools have been set up with the aim of universal enrolment at that level.
NEP 2020, however, also points to a resultant problem. While these efforts have 'helped to ensure near-universal access to primary schools, it has also led to the development of numerous very small schools,' it says.
It referred to UDISE 2016-17 data, which showed that 28% of government primary schools and 14.8% of upper primary schools have less than 30 students. In 2023-24, UDISE+ data showed that 12,954 schools had zero enrolment, while 1,10,971 schools had only a single teacher. In 2016-17, a lower number of 1,08,017 schools had a single teacher.
'These small school sizes have rendered it economically suboptimal and operationally complex to run good schools, in terms of deployment of teachers as well as the provision of critical physical resources. Teachers often teach multiple grades at a time, and teach multiple subjects, including subjects in which they may have no prior background; key areas such as music, arts, and sports are too often simply not taught; and physical resources, such as lab and sports equipment and library books, are simply not available across schools,' the NEP states.
Pointing out that the 'isolation' of small schools affects education, the NEP called for states/UTs to address these challenges by 2025 by grouping or rationalising schools, along with setting up school complexes or clusters to share resources. The concept of a 'school complex' was also part of the Kothari Commission Report of 1968.
Why is the merger of schools contentious?
Teachers' groups, politicians in the Opposition, and petitions in the Allahabad HC have opposed the mergers, saying students would have to go longer distances to get to school if the neighbourhood one is merged with another, making access more difficult, particularly for girls, and increasing the likelihood of drop-outs.
A petition in the HC by parents of students in UP's Sitapur refers to the merger as a violation of the UP RTE Rules, which state that schools shall be within a distance of 1 km for children in classes 1-5. The HC dismissed the petition after pointing out that a literal interpretation of the Rules would result in absurdity since there are limitations on land and resources.
Elementary school enrolment, meanwhile, is not yet universal. UDISE+ 2023-24 shows that the gross enrolment ratio (GER — enrolment at a level of education compared to the population of the age-group which is appropriate for that level of education), at the elementary level (classes 1 to 8) is 91.7%.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
9 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Today in Politics: Govt calls all-party meeting ahead of Monsoon Session of Parliament
Ahead of the Monsoon Session of Parliament, set to run from July 21 to August 21, the government has called for an all-party meeting on Sunday. The all-party meeting comes a day after the Opposition INDIA bloc held a virtual meeting on Saturday to discuss its strategy for the Monsoon Session and the issues it intends to raise to corner the government. Notably, the Arvind Kejriwal-led Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) was absent from the meeting after it declared it was only part of the INDIA bloc for the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. After the Saturday meeting, the INDIA bloc said there was a consensus among the allies on eight major issues to be raised in Parliament. While the BJP-led NDA government seems to be keen to make the Monsoon Session heavy with its legislative agenda, the Opposition is set to corner the government over multiple issues, ranging from the Pahalgam terror attack and Operation Sindoor to US President Donald Trump's claim of brokering the India-Pakistan ceasefire, to the Election Commission (EC)'s ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in poll-bound Bihar, as reported by Liz Mathew. 'The government has a heavy legislative agenda, but the session will be dominated by the SIR exercise in Bihar, Operation Sindoor and Ahmedabad air crash probe,' admitted a source from the Treasury benches. Parliament is also expected to take up the issue of impeachment of Justice Yashwant Varma, from whose Delhi residence stacks of currency notes were allegedly recovered. An inquiry committee will be set up by the presiding officer of the House concerned to probe charges against Justice Varma, whose timeline for submitting its report will be crunched from three months, sources said. The Pattali Makkal Katchi (PMK) is set to hold a protest on Sunday in Villupuram district against the DMK-led Tamil Nadu government over its 'failure' to implement a 10.5% reservation for Vanniyars within the reservation for Most Backward Communities (MBCs). However, the protest comes at a tumultuous time for the party, which is in the midst of a dispute between PMK founder S Ramadoss and his son, party president Anbumani over the leadership of the regional outfit. But recent reports suggest the two are heading towards rapprochement after the alleged discovery of a tapping device at the senior Ramadoss's home, as reported by Arun Janardhanan. According to two senior PMK sources and a confidant close to the family, a complaint filed on behalf of Ramadoss about the discovery of a sophisticated audio-tapping device at his house, and the hint that the son's side may be implicated in it, had prompted a flurry of damage-control efforts by the family. G Viswanathan, who runs the VIT Group of Institutions and is a long-time friend of the family, is reportedly the chief mediator. However, the PMK and Ramadoss family later got apprehensive that the complaint provided a reason to the DMK government to send in state police into Ramadoss's house, as well as go after Anbumani. The PMK is an ally of the BJP-led NDA in the state. This added an urgency to the mediation efforts between the father and son, and as per sources, a breakthrough is near. A PMK leader said what contributed to the thaw was Anbumani's meeting last week with mother Saraswathi at a family wedding in Chennai. Anbumani and his wife Sowmya touched Saraswathi's feet and sought her blessings, as senior party members watched. The two sides reportedly went on to hold talks for nearly two hours, though Ramadoss and Anbumani made sure that they were not present together at the venue. The signs of a truce before the protest on Sunday, which is expected to attract more than 5,000 party cadres, could provide a symbolic boost to the party. – With PTI inputs
Mint
9 minutes ago
- Mint
Srinath Raghavan unpacks Indira Gandhi's controversial legacy during the Emergency years
I am a child of the Indira Gandhi era. Through my formative years, she was Prime Minister. Until 1977, it never occurred to me that men could aspire to this position. Consider what an amazing reversal this is in a patriarchal, misogynistic society—that a little girl thought that only women could lead her country. Of course, this was always with the chorus of Indian male voices saying derisively, 'That woman (this or that) …" Even back then, I knew that tone was reserved for women—women drivers, women managers, women entrepreneurs and, of course, women Prime Ministers. No matter, as that little girl, I still wanted to be 'that woman." This book is not about 'that woman." The title, Indira Gandhi and the Years that Transformed India, is misleading. What it is, is a history of India from 1966-84. Also read: Let women reclaim the right to rage The prologue sets the stage, moving between Indira Gandhi's biography and a potted history of the first one-and-a-half decades after independence. In the first chapter, Srinath Raghavan traces the simultaneous decline of the Congress party's dominance and Gandhi's attempt to consolidate her position. It accounts for the economic crises of the mid-1960s and narrates the backstage machinations within the Congress, when Gandhi proved to be not such a 'gungi gudiya" (or 'dumb doll," as the socialist leader, Ram Manohar Lohia, called her) after all. The fractured mandate of 1967, the split in the Congress party and the 1972 election move the story forward. The detailed reconstruction of all of the attendant intrigue and controversy is quite remarkable. The outstanding chapter in the book—no surprise, given that Raghavan is a military historian—is the one on the 1971 war. The chapter weaves together the emerging story from East Pakistan, the international context and Gandhi's domestic challenges. If you had not read about this critical year in Indian history, these pages would be the place to start. It segues from the end of the war to the growing power of the Prime Minister and the way the argument began to build for the important constitutional amendment that was passed in 1977—the 42nd Amendment—and remains contentious. This Amendment added the words 'Socialist" and 'Secular" to the Preamble; added a part on Fundamental Duties of citizens; strengthened the Concurrent List at the expense of the State List; limited judicial review of laws; extended the duration of President's Rule to one year and that of the Lok Sabha to six years. Some of this was rolled back in subsequent amendments. Raghavan pays a great deal of attention to economic policy in this period, including bank nationalisation and the constitutional debates on property rights. It is interesting that the only mention of India's first nuclear tests in Pokharan in 1974 is this: '…the prime minister even burnished her Caesarist credentials by testing a nuclear device to rapturous applause." Given the way in which Raghavan reconstructs policy debates and decision-making, it would have been interesting to read more but perhaps, he chose to leave this out because others, such as Itty Abraham, George Perkovich, Kanti Bajpai and Bharat Karnad, have written extensively on this. The next chapter is devoted to Jayaprakash Narayan's movement that culminated in the Janata Party experiment. What came to be known as the JP movement was a mobilisation of student protests with the support of some opposition parties. They gained enough momentum to give the government pause and this became the pretext for the imposition of Emergency. Raghavan reserves his most colourful descriptions for this period—'The polar night of the emergency" and 'The dark and gnarled stretches that led to this decision"—almost as if we might miss the point that these were bad times. To use Indian newspaper headline language, there is virtually no one that Raghavan does not 'slam" in the Emergency chapter—from Indira Gandhi to Nani Palkhivala ('Such are the vagaries of the liberal conscience that Palkhivala not only agreed to appear for Indira Gandhi…") to Justices Y.V. Chandrachud and P.N. Bhagwati. The chapter on the Emergency recounts in parallel the programmes that the government promoted vigorously, the manoeuvres of an imprisoned and underground but coalescing opposition and, also, what came to be called the 'excesses" of Sanjay Gandhi's Youth Congress. Raghavan writes about the one-and-a-half years of the Janata Party government under Morarji Desai and Charan Singh just as unsparingly, making note of every intransigence, foible and egotistical assertion. The final chapter takes us from Gandhi's return to power in January 1980 to her assassination in October 1984. This is a period in which India was witness to growing unrest in three regions—Assam, over citizenship; Punjab, over the demand for a separate Sikh state; and Kashmir, where the push-pull of Centre-State relations was fomenting the conditions for the militancy that would come. Describing the world in which Gandhi came of age politically, the author writes, '…a wilfully cultivated aura of ruthlessness—as distinct from a highly developed instinct for power—was apparently her shield in an arena of politics shot through with gendered mores: one in which a woman prime minister could casually be called a 'gungi gudiya'... or a 'chokri' (derisive term for girl)." For all this gender sensitivity, in a nod to other writings on these years, he mentions five male authors but misses Nayantara Sahgal and Sagarika Ghose's work. When one later reads sexist phrases (most likely inadvertently used) like '…she did succeed in molesting the constitution" and 'More pregnant was her claim" (about the Congress mandate in 1971), it is hard to overlook them. That Raghavan is not a fan of Gandhi is made abundantly clear in the book, not just because the calculus of her political actions leads us to a critical appraisal but because his use of adjectives and adjectival clauses makes sure we know this. Writing about her first assumption of Prime Ministerial office, we are told about 'her shallow puddle of experience" and then the word 'Caesarist" appears over and over, sometimes as description and sometimes as explanation of other things. I would have enjoyed coming to a conclusion on my own based on the very detailed narrative he constructs, but then these were my formative years and perhaps unfamiliar readers need the signposts. Raghavan writes in his Prologue, '…this book was written in a time when a new political configuration was crystallizing in Indian democracy. It would be idle to suggest that my political views on this recent turn have not shaded this historical account… I have sought to write a history that 'supplies the antidote to every generation's illusion that its own problems are uniquely oppressive.'" He is also writing at a time when chunks of Indian history are literally being erased from our textbooks. This is a good book for those trying to fill in the blanks about a period to which everyone now refers but ever-fewer people remember first-hand. What we hear on official channels is a version where successive Indira Gandhi governments accomplished nothing but the oppression of today's rulers whose role in resisting the Emergency is lionised. Was Gandhi good or bad, the best or the worst? In our fact-free, nuance-free times, Raghavan's book makes an important contribution by writing in detail about the decision-making process on a number of policies—from the first stirrings of an idea or a crisis to the various points of view as they emerged and crystallised to the implementation and consequences of that idea. This lets us see that nothing about government is easy, even for 'Caesarist" Prime Ministers! On economic and foreign policy, and even on the question of constitutional amendment, despite his own disapproval, Raghavan lets us see someone who asks for opinions and considers them thoughtfully even though she ultimately follows her instinct. In fact, one of the strengths of the book is the dispassionate reconstruction of policy processes and outcomes. On bank nationalisation, for example, Raghavan says that while later writing has judged this as a politically expedient decision by Indira Gandhi, he also writes about its actual impact in giving the state access to more funds and taking the reach of the banking sector into rural India. Overall, I am not sure how accessible this book is for the general reader. Within the chapters, the narrative sometimes jumps around, almost requiring you to know this era to follow. The language is sometimes difficult and sometimes chatty. Reading about these years always feels personal to me. To encounter the years of one's life in another person's words is a strange experience because you want to jump in and say, 'I don't remember it like that" or 'I also remember this". Despite this personal connection, this book did not draw me in. What I missed was more quotations from Gandhi's own letters and notes. In a book titled 'Indira Gandhi," I missed her voice. The writing has a personal quality because the author has such a strong opinion of the protagonist-who-isn't and yet, it is impersonal (not dispassionate) as a textbook would be. This may be to your reading taste or not. That diminishes neither the solid historical research nor the astounding detail in which historical events are described in the book. Swarna Rajagopalan is a political scientist and peace educator. Also read: Writer Gideon Haigh on the foremost rivalry in cricket today
India.com
39 minutes ago
- India.com
From Pahalgam Terror Attack To Bihars Voter Roll Revision: What's On INDIA Bloc's Monsoon Session Agenda?
The Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance (INDIA) held a virtual meeting on Saturday to discuss the key issues that would be raised in the Monsoon session of the parliament, which is scheduled to begin from Monday (July 21). The meeting was attended by leaders and representatives of the bloc parties. INDIA Bloc Virtual Meeting The attendees of the INDIA bloc virtual meet included Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge, Congress Senior Leader Sonia Gandhi, Leader of Opposition (LoP) in Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi, RJD leader Tejashwi Yadav, Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah, NCP (SP) leader Sharad Pawar, Jharkhand CM Hemant Soren, Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Uddhav Thackeray. Other leaders who attended the meeting were: Abhishek Banerjee (TMC), Ramgopal Yadav (Samajwadi Party), D Raja (CPI), and Tiruchi Siva (DMK). Briefing reporters on the meeting, Congress leader and Deputy LoP in Rajya Sabha, Pramod Tiwari said, 'The meeting discussed issues related to the people of the country that we will raise during the monsoon session.' Here are the key points the INDIA bloc intends to raise in Parliament's Monsoon Session: 1- Pahalgam And Operation Sindoor He said Prime Minister Narendra Modi should respond to the concerns of members about the Pahalgam terror attack and their queries concerning Operation Sindoor. The Indian Armed Forces had launched precision strikes on terror infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir (PoJK) during the wee hours of May 7 to avenge the Pahalgam terror attack. India subsequently repelled subsequent Pakistani aggression and pounded its airbases. New Delhi and Islamabad had agreed to a ceasefire after Pakistan's Director General of Military Operations (DGMO) called his Indian counterpart. 2- Trump's Ceasefire Mediation Claims Tiwari also referred to repeated remarks of US President Donald Trump about brokering a ceasefire between India and Pakistan. He emphasised that the members expressed concern over the repeated claims made by US President Donald Trump that he mediated the ceasefire between India and Pakistan. He said Trump has so far made the claims 24 times. 3- Bihar Voter Roll Revision The Congress leader also said that the INDIA parties expressed their concern over the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise in Bihar. He said it was felt that there was an undeclared Emergency during which voters' names were being removed from the list. 4- Centre's Foreign Policy He said that the government's foreign policy stances require a lot of answers, and there was concern over the humanitarian situation in Gaza. 'Where is the Prime Minister's leadership on Pakistan, China, and Gaza? If we treat these as key national issues, the PM must answer in Parliament,' he said, as per IANS. 5- Air India Ahmedabad Plane Crash "We will also seek answers on many other important issues, including the Ahmedabad plane accident," Tiwari added. 6- According to the Congress Leader, other issues that the INDIA bloc plans to raise in the Monsoon session include delimitation, atrocities on Dalits, STs, and women. He added that a physical meeting of the INDIA group will also be held shortly. Tiwari said opposition parties want the Parliament to work smoothly, and the government should answer their concerns. Bills On Mosoon Session's Agenda As per ANI, the bills on the agenda of the government include: Manipur Goods and Services Tax (Amendment) Bill of 2025, Taxation Laws (Amendment) Bill of 2025, Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Bill 2025, the Indian Institutes of Management (Amendment) Bill 2025, the Geoheritage Sites and Geo-relics (Preservation and Maintenance) Bill 2025, the Mines and Mines (Development and Regulation) Amendment Bill 2025, the National Sports Governance Bill 2025 and the National Anti-Doping (Amendment) Bill 2025. The agenda of the government also includes the Readjustment of Representation of Scheduled Tribes in Assembly Constituencies of the State of Goa Bill, 2024, the Merchant Shipping Bill, 2024, the Indian Ports Bill, 2025, and the Income Tax Bill, 2025.
