WP1
Defining education? Is that possible? That’s very subjective, but through this essay, I will analyze the effect of having variable education systems (in terms of an education policy) within the country and across the globe. Well, the argument here would be to have a standard globalized form, but that simply is not a viable option. A global approach may lead to a larger, equal platform for individuals to shine, yet it tends to favour nations with greater accessibility to resources. Therefore, to address this issue in education systems within and across countries, a national approach of adopting a standardised curriculum in a nation is far superior, taking into account the restraints it may have, based on concepts of culture, nationality, history etc.
To delve deeper into this topic, the essay will analyse with a key emphasis on particular countries, to bring out the impact of having a non-standardised education. Let’s take a look at India, a country with a population of 1.3 billion, and the youngest working population. But, what sort of education have these individuals received? There is such a variety- each having its own subject combination (even at an elementary/secondary level), that it leads to conflicting opinions. No one knows what’s right or wrong at such a young age (even from a parents standpoint). The country offers several- major ones being the CISCE, CBSE, IB Diploma, and several state boards. All have an extremely diverse approach to education, not having a concrete, common pathway. Some depend heavily on the rote learning aspect, while others on a more applicative form of questioning. Here, I’m not trying to say one form of learning is better than the other, but rather, the sheer disparity between the all of their content and modes of education. Often, when the same institute offers a multitude of curricula, there seems to be a difference in the thought process of students, conflicts of superiority and several other issues.
Developing on the conflicts of superiority, I have personally observed these status of privilege across several schools in Mumbai (the financial capital of India). School’s that offer both the national and international curriculum tend create a rift between students of their respective boards. No doubt, the way the IB diploma is professed is relatively better off (particularly in terms of developing an all-round student to accept challenges thrown at them), but it does not provide ground for discrimination. A key observation may also be tuition cost between the two. Localised curricula tend to be one-twentieth the cost of IB diploma/ A levels programme. Money power plays a bigger role than the education in fact. It becomes an image of class, which simply defeats the entire purpose of education.
Introduction of international systems have paid heavy on developing nations. For instance, in India, there has been a surplus in demand for Advanced Placement courses, with AP centres quadrupling from 4 (2015) to 18 (2019) in Mumbai. The number of international schools has also skyrocketed, with a near ending demanding from wealthy families- who have a prejudice against the local curriculums. This further creates a greater divide in distribution of opportunities. Statistically, 95% of citizens study the local curricula, but receive a mere 5% of available opportunities. This has economic consequences on issues of greater significance. It creates a wider gap in the already existing income inequality, drives integral workforce out of the country, and undermines the potential of several state curriculums.
Beyond that, having this diaspora in the education system tends to hinder the complete propagation of knowledge. From a country’s point of view, having its population aware of historical issues, geography, political situation, and most importantly culture. Countries like India that have a vibrant past and several ongoing internal issues rather have their population educated through their medium. Especially at a young age, developing the feelings of nationalism and patriotism are integral for the functioning of a country (in the long run).
Some may say that a universal standard for education may be a fitting option in such a case, but it has severe drawbacks. Having a globalised mindset, with everyone studying fixed content will definitely bring the world closer than it is today, but will diminish the reach of culture and nationalism to many. Further, with countries having different pre-school programmes, having children adopting to a standardised global education system may also be a challenge. Maintaining this integrated system globally will also be an administrative nightmare. There would be several loopholes to exploit- for instance, a global standard examination period, conflicting national holidays, etc. While taking into account the disparity between nations, in terms of infrastructure, quality of resources and technology, and its overall environment, it is a tedious task to enforce this uniform curricula. Further, having then everyone studying a standard curriculum will fade away reasoning and questioning. Everyone’s opinions will be extremely like-minded, which may lead to unreasonable decision making on strategic fronts such as climate change and other significant issues!
Moreover, the national approach is a better fit for this situation. Whether it should be governed single-handedly by an organisation is a question of doubt. There may be issues of political pressures if control is solely given to one organisation. Further, having a political enterprise interfering in this system will simply beat its entire purpose. Political intervention will also cause misdistribution of resources between regions within a country, leading to preferential treatment for some. Despite this, navigating through this issue at national issue is equitable.
All in all, the national approach tends to provide a more efficient and conducive method to organisation our distorted education systems. A system that integrates national cultural past, stresses on innovation and change, invokes a spirit of questioning and exerts a student’s mind towards deeper, applicative thinking is the way to move forward.
