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!!