The Education Department has goofed up once again while issuing a new circular pertaining to its “no failure” policy which was issued on Thursday in a bid to make the policy final by issuing guidelines.
It may be recalled that the Goa Headmasters Association had refused to implement the “no failure” policy on grounds that no new guidelines were issued by the Department.
The Education Department issued a new circular providing two guidelines, the first of which asks the institute to record in the report card that the child is promoted to the next class as per section 16 of the Right to Education Act and its circular dated 6th May 2011.
Besides, for students seeking to leave the school, the schools have been asked to certify that they are eligible to pursue education at the next class.
However, academicians pointed out a mistake in the circular which is addressed to “elementary schools” which as per the prevailing rules and guidelines in Goa means primary schools i.e. Class I to Class IV.
In Goa schools are classified as Primary School (Class I to Class IV), Middle School (Class V to Class VII), High School (Class VIII to Class X) and Higher Secondary School (Class XI and Class XII).
The Education Department has blindly used the term “elementary school” which under the Right To Education Act is defined to be from Class I to Class VIII while in Goa elementary school is from Class I to Class IV.
Academicians pointed out that the circular will be implemented only in primary schools leaving students from Class V to Class VIII out of its ambit and therefore create further confusion in implementing the “no failure” policy.
Besides, they pointed out that in view of the fact that schools are closed due to vacations, the “no failure” managements will be able to implement the policy only once the schools re-open as the report cards issued to students who had failed will have to be recalled.
Besides the Goa Headmasters Association, Goa School Managements Association and Nationalist Educational Institutions Management Association have opposed the department’s circular and called for its withdrawal.
The moot question being asked is why the department deemed it fit to implement the policy in May 2011 after the results were declared by the schools, even though the RTE Act was passed in 2009.