The story of the National Schools
A page from an unwritten book on Politicization of Education
May 17, 2012, 6:47 pm, the island
by Eric J. de Silva
(This article
first appeared in ‘The Island’ of Oct, 20, 2009. It is reproduced in
view of its relevance to the current debate on an Education Ministry
directive preventing National Schools admitting children from their
counterparts after the GCE O/L examination. – Ed)
The Island
of 13th October 2009 turned the spotlight on the shortcomings of a
National School, namely Aluthgama Maha Vidyalaya in the Kalutara
district. This is not the first time the media has drawn attention to
such scandalous shortcomings in what are called National Schools. In
fact, I have heard or read about much worse cases than this.
The
term National School or ‘Jathika Pasala’, as far as I am aware, came
into usage in the mid eighties, and the criteria laid down by the
Education Ministry for selection of National Schools in 1985 reads as
follows:
(A) The total school enrolment in the school should be 2000 or more.
(B)
The school should have a well-established collegiate section, with a
sufficient number of students in the science, arts and commerce streams.
(C) The A/L results of the school should indicate a reasonable academic standard.
(D) The buildings, furniture, equipment and other facilities should match the student numbers of the school.
(E)
The school should be in a position to obtain adequate financial support
from the school development society, past pupils’ association and
other sources in the community.
(F) The school should be generally accepted by the community as one of the best in the region.
Not
more than 18 schools were identified to be called National Schools at
the time, and these were very well-known schools in the country,
including a few in provincial capitals.
With the enactment
of the 13th Amendment to the Constitution in 1987, the responsibility
for the supervision and management of all schools, other than the
National Schools described above, passed on to the Provincial Councils.
The responsibility for supervising and managing National Schools
remained with the central Ministry of Education.
The
criteria laid down in 1985 seems to have been strictly followed during
the early years, as could be seen from the fact that the number of
National Schools increased by only five over a period of five years,
bringing the total to 23 by 1989. In the meantime, the criteria laid
down in 1985, was revised in 1990 to read as follows:
(A) The school should have 2000 or more students.
(B) The school should have 200 or more students in the GCE A/L science classes.
(C)
Of the number of students appearing for the GCE A/L Examination during
the previous three years, one third should have qualified for admission
to universities each year.
(D) There should be adequate buildings, desks and chairs for all students.
(E) There should be adequate facilities for teaching technology related subjects.
(F) Laboratory facilities should be adequate to meet the requirements of all GCE O/L and A/L students.
(G) The annual income from facilities and services’ fees should exceed Rs.15,000.
(H) Residents should consider the school to be one of the leading schools in the locality.
(I) The school should have an effective School Development Society.
(J) The school should have an active Past Pupils’ Association.
Politicians step in, rationality departs?
It
did not take much time for the term ‘National School’ to become a
status symbol within the school system, and the prospect of being
administered directly from the centre, located at ‘Isurupaya’ in
Battaramulla, became a much sought after privilege! This is where
politicians stepped in to get more and more schools in their
electorates upgraded as National Schools, to gain mileage for
themselves, even if it meant a mere change in the nameboard of the
school, and the Ministry of Education happily granted its approval in
contravention of its own criteria!
Thus, we find the number
of National Schools going up to 37 by 1992 and then skyrocketing to
165 by 1994. With a General Election fast approaching, it was not too
bad an idea for politicians to get a couple of schools upgraded in their
electoral districts, if it could help to net in some votes. The
Badulla district (a district for which I have a special fondness, as I
had the good fortune to cut my teeth as CCS cadet there in 1960),
registered the largest increase from just one in 1992 to 27 in 1994,
for reasons that would not be too difficult to find! It was Sir John
(Kotelawala) who said if you have the spoon in your hand, do serve
yourself well!
When politicians take over micro-level
management decisions, rationality departs, with the result that the
number of National Schools increased in geometric progression (to use a
Malthusian expression), during the period 1994 to 2000, and reached
317 by the latter year. The declaration of a school as a National
School required only a nod of approval from the Minister of Education,
as the officials were there merely to carry out his directives and not
to question why. Tragically, politicisation had by now almost totally
devoured the education system.
This is what the National
Education Commission had to say, commenting on the situation that
existed in 2003: "………the new category of a limited number of National
Schools created in the early 1980s, using strict criteria to identify
schools with very good facilities and offering quality education, has
become meaningless and distorted, with the indiscriminate addition of
schools that do not conform to these criteria. Currently, 40 of the 323
National Schools are 1C schools (without Science education at GCE
Advanced Level) and one National School is a Type 2 school with classes
to GCE Ordinary Level only." (Proposals for a National Policy
Framework on General Education in Sri Lanka, December 2003).
Hardly
had the ink dried on this and a few other home truths, that the above
report said about the way the education system functioned, those who
said so were sent home by the then President, and the commission itself
reconstituted!
What price politicization?
(The writer welcomes comment and the expression of any dissenting views, in particular)
