The government continues to treat education for the disabled as something that can be ignored, says Annie Koshi
|
It has been said often enough but let it be said again. The conversion of difference into disability is as much man-made as the consequences of droughts and floods. It is in our attitudes and laws; it is in our thinking and actions that we put up barriers that create disability. Simple example: if I install steps to climb up to the first floor, then a wheelchair-bound person becomes disabled; if there is a ramp then a person in a wheelchair does not become challenged. In fact, he will most probably get there faster than an unfit typical man.
A lift will do very well for all concerned if there is no space for a ramp. In a similar vein, a timed, written, content-based examination — which is what most examinations are in this country — will make most children challenged. But a variety of skill-based test items will make an assessment tool that celebrates a child’s strengths and downplays his weaknesses. It will also help the teacher identify areas that she has to focus on to make every child an achiever.
The Draft Disability Bill concerns itself with the larger area of disability but coming as it does at the tail end of a long string of educational initiatives, the expectation that there will be a focus and clarity of the educational needs of the disabled is great. I’m afraid the Bill and the various documents that precede it continue to set up barriers to inclusion. The objective of the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, 2000, the National Curriculum framework, 2005, and the Right to Education Act, 2009-10 was to give equal access, equity and quality of education to all children. While the word inclusion has been mentioned in the documents, scratch the surface and one finds that children with disability are dropped from the group under consideration.
The government continues to treat education for the disabled as something that can be ignored or as something that will disappear if one does not acknowledge its existence. While interventions are seen for providing remediation to SCs and STs, in the RTE, the disabled are not acknowledged in the chapters dealing with teacher training.
In the 2009 version of the RTE, “a child belonging to disadvantaged group” meant a child belonging to the SC, the ST, the socially and educationally backward class or such other group having disadvantage owing to social, cultural, economical, geographical, linguistic, gender or such other factor, as may be specified by the appropriate government, by notification focussed on many areas to describe disadvantaged children but left out the mentally and physically challenged children in its description.
It was only after the Ministry of Human Resources Development (MHRD) had received representations from disability activists and similar minded organisations that The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education (Amendment) Bill 2010 with the following amendments was introduced in the Rajya Sabha: “Inclusion of children with disabilities in the definition of child belonging to disadvantaged group.”
Invisibility is an extremely strong barrier. It is a moot point why the MHRD continues to show no interest in moving children with disability under its umbrella. So much so that the section on administrative changes in the draft Disability Bill states “The same rights approach requires that the education of persons with disabilities should be the concern of the MHRD.” While the MHRD may feel that inter-sectorial input would benefit all concerned, the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment (MSJE) has not raised its voice on behalf of CSN. In such a scenario, continuation of children with disability under the MSJE ensures that their educational needs continues to be sidestepped.
The basic principles guiding the Bill lists two areas such as equal opportunity and accessibility. These are critical areas in education. The Bill and the RTE lists interventions such as ramps, writers and extra time as the terms of reference to ensure accessibility or equity. I argue that unless state documents show that they are aware of and see the necessity for curriculum and assessment to change, unless teacher-training programmes are required to focus on inclusive classrooms, the chances of a child with disability getting accessibility and equal opportunity is remote. Simple example, most children with disability are forced to drop out of regular school when they pass out of Class VIII.
This is because the CBSE curriculum and assessment practices need to be more disabled friendly. With the advent of the CCE, the CBSE had the golden opportunity to be a trendsetter and influence other examining boards, by issuing an attendance and participation certificate, at the end of Class X, to those children who for various reasons cannot complete the syllabus as laid down by the national board. Thus allowing them not just to continue to attend school and grow with their friends but also allowing a breath of flexibility to enter assessment practice.
The 11th Five Year Plan targets for elementary education states that by 2012, all schools should “achieve standards of Kendriya Vidyalayas under the CBSE”. This after the plan acknowledges the thrust of the 86th constitutional amendment towards children with special needs. Kendriya Vidyalayas take pride in the fact that a student in its schools can walk into a class anywhere in the country and be assured of following the same lesson, in the same way, at the same point. Such homogenisation leaves no room for a rights’ based access or equity to a child with special needs. Put this with the duties of teachers in the RTE to “complete entire curriculum within the specified time” and you will see why it is apparent that a child with no impairments is going to feel a disability very soon. There are schools that offer a bouquet of opportunities so as to give a chance for every child to realise his or her full potential. There is a world of possibilities that exist beyond the Kendriya Vidyalayas or the assessment patterns of the CBSE, we need to seize them now.
Every child is different. A child with special needs has to move at his own pace and cover a syllabus suited to his challenges. Children with disability need the removal of barriers to access, equity and quality. The Disability Bill needs to demand a right- based approach in the area of assessment and curriculum. It needs to insist on pedagogic practices to be updated. That teachers wizen up to the needs of a diverse classroom. It needs to insist that MHRD acknowledge all children of this country as their own. The question is when will we have all this?
Annie Koshi is the principal of St Mary’s School, Safdarjung Enclave.