Corruption

by Nidhi Sharma

Corruption in a section of the government personnel is a lopsided exchange of finances between a section of the government personnel and the citizen in favour of a section of the government personnel; corruption is measured financially alone where one group, namely, the citizen pays more to a section of the government personnel than receiving payment from the latter. Corruption exists in a section of the government personnel when financial and economic benefit from a section of the government personnel to the citizen is lower than taxes, gifts, fines etc. paid by the citizen. When this definition is applied to education it means that corruption exists if the individual student pays tuition and other remuneration in excess of the quality of education which is received. The teaching staff is expected to provide services, namely, a well-rounded education which enables the student to earn in the society.

However, the exam results of the child taking the 10th and 12th board and a cursory informal examination of the child, in schools particularly those in Hindi-medium private schools in urban areas in Uttarakhand, reveals that the child has become inept. The child’s learning is bookish in that the child is not assisted by the teacher in understanding the applicability of their education in schools to the reality around them. For example, this may occur not only with regard to concepts but also in the pronunciation of certain words of the official language of India, namely, the English language, by the child.

Concepts such as Fundamental Rights may be difficult to understand for the child if the child is not treated with dignity by the teacher. Similarly examples from the real world may not be given thereby restricting education to mere ideas in a book. Further, the pronunciation of words in the English language by the child may be frequently wrong. In Hindi-medium schools in Uttarakhand the English language is likely to be one of the disciplines taught to the child. The pronunciation is frequently wrong to a large extent because the child has learnt to educate herself/himself without assistance from their teacher. Therefore in a major aspect of her/his schooling the student has shortcomings. The teacher tends to complain that educating the child is mainly the preserve of parents even while she/he is likely to readily give tuitions to the students. Tuitions are given to students already being taught in the school by the teacher. Tuitions may be a chief source of income for the teacher. The teacher may teach approximately seventeen children together for minimum of one hour every day for which she/he charges minimally Rs 300 from each student. Those who do not take tuitions from teachers are likely to be insulted and castigated by the teacher as “stupid” who “likes to eat rather than study”. It has been observed that as soon as the child takes tuitions from their school teacher this reprisal is likely to reduce substantially.

Since corruption is an exchange of goods and services in return for remuneration, the teacher is likely therefore not fulfil her/his obligation to the child and the latter’s parents; the teacher is likely to be corrupt. This is particularly so among teachers who expect the child to bring donations in various forms from their respective families. Donations for the teacher may take the form of fete or “mela” held every month as well. The child is likely to be scared of not taking uncooked food from their homes since she/he will be publicly reprimanded for it by the teacher. The child is likely to take food surrepti-tiously from home which the parents have stored for the month. Thus without taking the parent’s permission, the child may take uncooked food from home to the teacher in school. This may include half kg each of chick peas, flour, potato, peas, brinjol, garlic, green chilli, etc. and 250 gm each of spice such as coriander, turmeric etc. each month. The child also insists on taking Rs 50 each for the teacher in the school and the latter then uses these resources provided by the child to cook bread pakora, samosa and chowmein among other goods. The child is expected to buy these cooked goods in the fete for which the children have likely already provided the ingredients. The money gained by this activity is not accounted for in the school in that neither the child nor their parents know of the destination of this money.

The preparation for the fete takes place every month leading to the question of the child’s education since the preparation each month begins well in advance of the fete. This is apparent, among other sources, from the child surreptitiously taking uncooked food to school for a minimum of one week before the fete is held. Parents also complain that the child has become impertinent and will not inform them of the lessons learnt in school. This was not so in the village where the child received prior education. The child reports that she/he feels that the parents are “weak” compared to the school teacher since the parents have tacitly accepted certain terms and conditions imposed upon the family. Consequently the child feels compelled to perform the work which the teacher has insisted her/him to carry out.

If some kind of friction is developing between parents and the child with regard to the teacher, the question arises: is the teacher building skills of the child that will enable the latter to earn for her/his family in the near future? Is the teacher establishment not a corrupt entity in that the child is not learning the true ethos of the family? The teacher is not paid by the parents to develop friction in the family.