Almost a year after it failed to meet its deadline in submitting a report on the medium of instruction to the government, the committee that was constituted in July last year to interact with stakeholders in education, including parents, and determine what should be the medium of instruction at the primary level, is now going to take a call on whether it should conduct its last two meetings, or go ahead and compile the report with whatever feedback they have received thus far. The last two consultative meetings that the committee was to undertake were at the district level, and having completed meetings in all 12 talukas, the committee is considering giving this step of the process a miss. The argument is that since the committee has already received suggestions from stakeholders across Goa, whether the need for the district level meetings remains.
Perhaps, the committee is in a hurry to meet its new deadline, after its fifth extension, but it has to be aware that the question of medium of instruction under consideration is one of utmost importance in the State, and has been a polemic-ridden issue with strong views expressed from various groups that have taken it up, not to keep aside the political parties views on the issue.
Take for instance the fact that in the run-up to the 2017 Assembly elections, the Goa Suraksha Manch was formed and entered the electoral battle with the medium of instruction being its main issue. It was firm on the view that if elected to power it would withdraw grants to English medium primary schools. The Goa Suraksha Manch arose from the Bharatiya Bhasha Suraksha Manch, the movement that has been fighting for the mother tongue as the medium of instruction in the primary section. It took on the form of a political party only because it did not agree with the BJPs’s policy on the medium of instruction issue. On the other side Forum for Rights of Children to Education has been consistently demanding that the government legislate the policy on grants to English language primary schools.
What is interesting is that the advisory committee was formed by the then BJP-led government, when it was pushed into taking a decision on the grants by BBSM. The committee is to advise the government not only on grants to English medium schools, but has to also study the entire system of grants, financial support to government aided schools and to improve the overall efficiency for achieving education goals. At that time, the formation of the committee was seen as a ploy to buy time, and it was further strengthened when the committee’s term was extended last November ensuring that the committee’s recommendations would not come before the elections.
Against this backdrop, should it decide not to hold the district level consultative committee meetings, the MoI committee would be opening itself up to criticism of having reached a decision without following the process it was meant to adhere to. One of the two groups will feel that it has been shortchanged and this, the committee cannot afford to let happen.
It has been constituted to advise the government on the issue, and has to therefore reach its conclusions after following all the procedures. It is having second thoughts currently on whether to hold the district consultations, but after having sought five extensions to the term and been granted all, the committee perhaps needs to complete the entire procedure before finalising its report to the government, or else it could be having second thoughts on this after it has presented its report to the government.
