4.2Quality Concerns in Elementary Education4.2.1Under SSA, most states have included a variety of interventions for quality improvement. These include pilot programmes within the Learning Enhancement Programme (LEP), teacher training, material development, specific subject-oriented programmes, etc. However, these interventions have sometimes taken the form of add-ons to the existing learning systems and practices, and have not adequately influenced the mainstream system, largely for the following reasons:(i)The education system follows a disjointed approach to curriculum formulation, viewing it score components of curriculum , syllabus formulation, textbook development, teacher training, learner assessment, classroom processes and school management as discrete, fragmented or isolated interventions, rather than inter-connected and synthesised.(ii)There is a tendency for the system, while formulating the curriculum, to ignore the ground realities of children, and to espouse 'deficit' theories of learning which assume that children from disadvantaged backgrounds are also lacking in ability or interest'. For example, the child may speak a different language at home, may be a first generation school-goer, may continue to help with domestic chores of the family, but the design and transaction of the curriculum fails to recognise this and build on it. It is common for the system to claim that children who come to school at an older age of say 8 or 9 years 'know nothing' - just because they do not know how to read and write. This again is a failure of the system to recognise that children are natural learners and that they bring with them sophisticated structures of learning and constructing knowledge. Any attempt to improve the quality of education will succeed only if it goes hand in hand with steps to promote equality and social justice. This can only be achieved when the knowledge and experience of children from all backgrounds and particularly those from disadvantaged groups are fore- fronted in school learning with primacy to their socio-cultural context.(iii)The education system has adopted a subject based approach to the organisation of curriculum, focusing on areas which readily lend themselves to being formulated as 'subjects'. These subject boundaries have become rigid, are determined more by the disciplines they are associated with at higher stages of learning, and have little connection with how children actually develop their conceptual understanding. Moreover, areas which do not lend themselves to being organised in text books, for example visual and performing arts or work education, are relegated to 'extra' or 'co-curricular' activities. Any 'new' concern or problem, such as environmental awareness, human rights, value education or disaster management, is addressed piecemeal or as an add-on, without incorporating it cohesively in the curriculum. The NCF-2005 has called for breaking of these rigid compartments of conventional subjects to redefine learning areas in line with children's experiences and learning strategies.(iv)There is an emphasis on reproduction of 'information' learnt by rote, rather than on 'constructing knowledge' from experience, which is the natural process for a child's development and learning.Our schools usually 'transmit information' through lessons 'delivered', where children are expected to passively listen, write or respond to evaluation tasks on an individual basis. However, children construct knowledge through collaboration with others, not alone, and the curriculum design and classroom transaction must ensure this, through the choice of suitable themes which build on interaction, discussion and group work.(v)Work on the core components of curriculum is not accompanied by improvement in the enabling components, which include teacher recruitment and deployment systems, re-orientation of educational administrators, BRC and CRC faculty.
