The Bhutan Education Reform

It is sometimes good to be fairly blunt. If I am wrong, feel free to contradict me. If convinced I am willing to correct/withdraw my views. I sincerely hope I am wrong. But as of now I do not wish to fool myself emulating ostrich with head buried in sand as against facing reality. If everyone loses touch with reality, there is and will be no solution to the problem ever. This is certain. Alternatively we may also pretend and hide from the reality, and whitewash the dilemma, almost a routine outfit now. But then more disastrous outcome will await us. Only those in a state of delusive contentment will not see the distinction.

First and foremost the bold education reform in Bhutan will have to not only address (a) the quality and relevance of education programs, and (b) education framework, governance, management, administration and education financing but also will need to look through as process as a shared responsibility.

Let me take up more important aspect, the education as the process with shared responsibility. In Bhutan, education means different to different persons. First to the parents, it is about school performing miracles to turn their children into future engineers/doctors/lawyers/entrepreneurs and/or worthy citizens while they brat-pamper the kids at home (if the parents are educated) or leave the offspring on their own (if in a village). I was traumatized when I overheard a seven-year-old, student in one of the elite private schools, threatening his school mates that he would come next day with his father’s pistol and shoot them dead. What kind of home education has he had? How do you think he will behave when he turns 15/16 years? To me it reflected characters of his parent. If you think this is an isolated case, look around and tell me the depth of parents’ contribution to their children education and compare it vis-à-vis elsewhere (e.g., in India). Home education is also key aspect of overall education of children.

If the child is in village, I know what-could-poor-illiterate-villagers-do is the normal argument. This is utter nonsense. My parents were villagers, poor, illiterate and parents of 1950s, not of smartphone era. My father was so obstinately firm on my education that nobody dared talk to him about not educating me and later not sending me to Kalimpong (India) on scholarship for higher education, not even my mother. My education for him was an issue non-negotiable. Such was his determination, commitment and appreciation of the value of education. It reflected the character of a person. Those who believe that there is no co-relation between the character of parents and education of their children are the ones who survive fishing in shallow waters. And, the system unfortunately seems to encourage them. So it has become more of trend than rare tendency. The parents are the role models for children. Thus if parents are least concerned about education, their children pay the price!

Education to a student is a question of grades, promotion to next level, and finally coming out with a certificate/degree enabling to do “something” (not sure what) with no aim, no purpose. I may have interviewed 40-50 persons for various positions in last twenty months or so. Frankly I would have preferred sixth grader of 1980s in general to the graduates of today in terms of communication ability and clarity of mind, and moral standards. Their English is extremely poor due to which their basic domain knowledge is very weak. I find their brains blurred and lacking stimulus interface. They float around in obscurity, and carry very low moral values.  I do not believe education has done anything to develop moral character. The old generation had high moral values while there are more educated persons than there were then. Young brains need to be at level to show-off their mental agility, intellectual alertness and high moral character.

And then most importantly to the teachers in (i) the government schools, the education is more about teaching to maintain their imposing status if the teacher is “in the circle" and teaching just for the sake of teaching if “out of circle", and (ii) private schools, teaching to please school management. The “in” and “out of circle" are toxic phenomenon that exist almost all over. The depth and immensity varies. The “out of circle" teachers generally are professional, dedicated and competent but poor education governance do not let them move in. They are senior dedicated teachers but find no motivation in giving their 100 percent, not even in the interest of children. It is not so much about remuneration but more about their values being not appreciated and being buried. They are experienced, capable and can teach children interactively – meaning they also get feedback and learn from the children, analyze and decide where, what and when to focus on for intellectual development of young mind. Teaching is not a physical task that you count in terms of number of lesson-plans and reward accordingly. It deals with development of young mind. It needs outcome based reward and incentive that recognizes their values to motivate teachers. I do not need to tell the qualities of teachers “in the circle": just try talking to few senior teachers and/or senior students.

And, to the principals education is about the figures -- percentages of (i) those who passed for higher education and (ii) failed. The school management and administration for them is about pumping their traditional ego and full dependency on those “in the circle" for their dogmatic imposition of the rules. Isn’t marginalizing good teachers because they refuse to believe in cronyism an offence? The issue is not only about selecting merit-based principals with focus on strong knowledge of school management and administration but also putting in place proper system of independent checks and balances. When you are putting someone in charge of future citizens of the country, you need their appointment process that is state of the art. Without the principle of meritocracy in the appointment of principals, and strong and effective third party monitoring system for school administration, management and finance; improving education standards in schools is just too farfetched.

Then to the private sector, education is about an ideal candidate with perfect combination of behavior, discipline, attitude, qualification, competency and output to serve their business while they are busy taking lead on land, natural resources, and government contracts or licenses that are the predominant sources of their wealth. There is no slightest notion on how best to develop their own institutional and staff capacity. When the capacity development concept does not figure as an important ingredient of corporate governance, public-private sector interface and interaction with an aim to improve the future workforce of the country including shaping the intellectual course of children is out of question. The private resources, even to show some good examples, look non-existent. The private sectors cannot shy away from the responsibility and think only in terms of employment for better cash returns. Everything need not be deposited in cash vaults!

Education is a shared responsibility. The country, society, parent, school, student and employer are all stake-holders of education and have specific roles to play. All stake-holders have to contribute and aim at the final outcome in terms of educated citizens’ ultimate performance in contributing to the socio-economic development of the country. It is a delicate process. A small mistake in taking right step will make huge future difference. It is the life of a person, the course of which takes quick turn depending on direction of every forward step taken. Where do you point your finger if a graduate, holder of distinction certificate issued by the Ministry of Labour & Human Resources, is a drug addict? Do you call that good education? I label them as qualified but poorly educated. I am not talking hypothesis here. It is much more than an exception, but less than generality.

Everyone thinks education is a free handout to be taken for granted. We have forgotten to value education. How can you expect a child to value the education? Who is responsible? Everybody! The value of education is missing because the society and system have influenced the education to be treated so. The combination of (i) attitude of the parents; (ii) education framework and design, policy and program, governance, management, administration and financing; and (iii) perspective of government and private sectors are responsible for it. Education is not a freebie. It is the process of gaining knowledge, improving outlook, broadening base of understanding, awakening the desire for getting better and sharpening the base of curiosity. If human mind is nurtured and cultivated, it will grow on those accounts far beyond expectation. If not and infected, lasting peace of mind and harmonious existence are eluded. So the human mind is open to only two options: Use it or Lose it!!

The Integrated Economic Community

H. Jackson Brown Jr. says “opportunity dances with those already on the dance floor.” True! If you are not on a dance floor how can anybody/anything dance with you. And to be on the floor, one needs to be healthy, not cynically crippled, and know how to dance well. It is not salsa, samba, tango, bharat natyam or Bhutanese “cham” the discussion is about. Let us not go literal, for PM Narendra Modi will push South Asian countries to the dance floor. He told visiting US Secretary of State John Kerry that he wanted to unite South Asia into an integrated economic community (IEC). By coming together, the South Asian economy will be much stronger. If they do, the IEC will be the “dance floor.” So we better do our homework and learn well the “economic dance” steps if we want the opportunities to dance with us. Even if IEC remains just a Modi dream (implausible), we still need to learn the nitty-gritty of South Asian economic affairs if our economy is to move in the right direction. If not, it will take its own course heading to dysfunctional configuration.

     Economic integration is the fusion of economic policies between different countries through partial or full elimination of tariff and non-tariff restrictions on trade between them. This is meant to lead to lower prices of goods and services benefiting distributors and consumers. The goal is to strengthen combined economic vitality and increase productivities of the countries. This is the economic rationale.  In addition to this, there are much more complex reasons, political obviously.

      The economic side alone will demand ambitious and coherent cooperation from the South Asian member countries. So the easy start for India to initiate the economic integration process is through Bhutan and Nepal.  Before the start of his first state visit, Modi has not only assured Bhutan of more funds for economic development but also wanted to speed up economic integration. This  he confirmed with massive increase of Indian grant and loan allocation to Bhutan of Rs 60 billion (US$ 1 billion equivalent) for this year compared with Rs 41 billion last year, an increase of nearly 50%. We do need strong capacity strength this year to uphold increased Indian assistance to the tune of 60% of GDP on our shoulders and stand straight. Prior to his departure to Nepal PM Modi said "I hope my visit will open a new chapter in India-Nepal relations, characterized by more frequent political engagement and closer cooperation across the full spectrum of our extraordinarily broad-based relations, which will serve as a model and catalyst for South Asian partnership for prosperity." He assured Nepalese parliament the availability of Nepali rupees 100 billion (US$ 1 billion) concessional line of credit  proposing “HIT” mantra [H:Highways (roadways), I:I-ways (information highways) and T:Transways (for energy transmission lines)] and encouraged harnessing hydro-power, of which Nepal’s untapped potential is estimated at 42,000 MW  while the installed capacity now is just 600 MW. I have my own analysis of the two one-billion-dollar packages and  "B4B" (Bharat for Bhutan and Bhutan for Bharat) vis-à-vis  "HIT" mantras, short- and long-term including the differences. You may have your own.

And, there are reports that the West Bengal state cabinet has allocated Rs 14 billion for improving North Bengal road connection with Bangladesh, Bhutan and Nepal even though the West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee is proposing  to take her first overseas trip to Singapore to mobilize resources. The congress government in Assam, our other immediate neighbour in the south, may be indifferent to the momentum.

In the South Asian context,  Modi government wants a South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) development bank established early. In July 2014, the 8th South Asian Free Trade Area (SAFTA) Ministerial Council  met in Thimphu and agreed to fast-track the establishment of the SAARC  bank. The proposal is expected to be approved at the 18th SAARC summit scheduled in November this year in Kathmandu, Nepal. Transport and trade financing, the lifelines of economic integration, are expected to be major thrust of SAARC bank.

Within India a massive plan for new financial inclusion is expected to be announced by PM Modi on coming 15 August, independence day of India. There is no sense in talking integration with neighbours if your house is disintegrated. Simple as that. The plan includes providing universal access to banking facilities to the so far uncovered 100 million rural households. The second phase includes financial literacy programme, micro credit availability and creation of credit guarantee funds. All these, and more, on the economic front.

On the complex segment of economic integration, PM Modi sees integrated South Asian economic community through the security angle considering particularly the aggressive Chinese move to bring railways at three border points with Nepal, and at the "chicken's neck" area of Bhutan and India by 2020. The Chinese say the “network will play the role of continental bridge in South Asia and promote economic and cultural exchanges”. I am sure it will, but the complex aspect is silent.

When things move in critical direction in a break-neck speed can anyone afford remaining dysfunctional? It would simply be unfortunate!

The functionality of the government is often determine by the fact that how a healthy organization/society regulates corruption. A person commits a crime. Eventually, the organization/agent/news papers find out about it, and despite the fair amount of blowback, they will get and take a grip on it. The culprit digs in, but more inconsistencies are out. The person resigns. It's an unattractive example, but that's what a functioning system looks like.

And, the dysfunction looks like the following. The functionary identifies a procedural issue which, if messed with,  is almost impossible to take the grip on. That it debilitates the country’s economy is non-issue for those who look through kaleidoscopic procedural loopholes for rent seeking. Then paralysed and ethically deficient governance replaces performance and outcome. The people with passion and commitment sadly vanishes from the look.  There are these in every government. The rules are made with exception to take care of the weaker section of the society. The cunning entity turns itself into a weaker faction to take advantage of the exception, to bypasses the rule. Then there are vicious government-private circles that operate through the channel benefiting everyone at heavy cost to the government. There is a vacuum of ideology, principles, purpose and integrity which money rushes to fill. They do not even perceive the world go by outside their own window.

The reason why the Chinese and Indians are cracking the corruption ring respectively through investigations and severe actions on suspected "serious disciplinary violation" by communist party members and  crackdown by special investigation team on black money stashed abroad. In China the clean–up has reached  unprecedented level that a previous member of the highest 7-member decision-making body,  the Politburo Standing Committee, has taken the direct hit. The method and speed differs: one with communist style and pace and other republican. We are neither of two nor have so much cash to stash in vaults, but not ideally functional. It is just a question of couple of retrofits at the bull’s-eye enabling fresh and passionate empathy circulation into the system. That will bring passion, commitment and even courage in the right place. It is not possible to know how hot the water is without a dip. Not a rocket science, those who have taken a dip know where the bull’s-eye is. Even the termites bring down a beautiful house if their strength is underestimated. For bright and predictable, a spinal strength, it is about!