Onmanorama Explains | By joining PM SHRI, has CPM allowed saffronisation of Kerala education

Five years after the CPM described the National Education Policy 2020 as an "ideological drive" that seeks to promote among children "irrationality in thought and action" and "obscurantism and unscientific thinking", the CPM-led LDF government has decided to sign an MoU with the Centre for joining PM SHRI, a centrally sponsored scheme devoted to the implementation of NEP 2020.

What is CPM's justification?
In defence, general education minister V Sivankutty said two things. One, he said, the government was only trying to secure the funds Kerala is entitled to under the Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA). 

According to the SSA state project director, Supriya A R, the Centre has linked PM SHRI with SSA. "It has made joining PM SHRI a condition for the release of SSA funds," she told Onmanorama. SSA funds to Kerala have been blocked since the middle of the 2023-24 fiscal. In total, central assistance of ₹1,143 crore has been withheld, particularly affecting the salaries of teachers.

"We should not stand in the way of the benefits that our school children deserve," the minister told reporters in Thiruvananthapuram on Sunday. "The Agriculture, Health and Higher Education departments are already enjoying the benefits of central schemes. The General Education Department is trying to do just that," he added.

The minister's other defence was that Kerala would not deviate from its education policy. Meaning, it will not implement certain aspects in the NEP 2020 that are against the state's education policy.

What is PM SHRI?
PM SHRI is short for Prime Minister's Schools for Rising India, and its objective is to qualitatively strengthen the existing schools and flaunt them as "exemplars" of the National Education Policy, 2020. 

The plan is to upgrade 14,500 schools in India as PM SHRI. Maximum two schools (one Elementary & one Secondary/Senior Secondary) will be selected per block/urban local body across India.

All schools managed by the Centre, states, union territories and local bodies are eligible to be PM SHRI. All Kendriya Vidyalayas and Navodaya Vidyalayas running from permanent buildings, too, are qualified to compete.

As it stands, there are 13,070 PM SHRI schools spread over 8306 local bodies in 670 districts in the country. Now that Kerala has agreed to sign the MoU, Tamil Nadu is the only state in the country that has refused to join PM SHRI. Uttar Pradesh has the highest number of PM SHRI - 1888.

What are basic selection requirements?
In order to compete for PM SHRI status, a school should possess 10 basic requirements. 

One, a sturdy building of its own. Two, barrier-free access ramp. Three, it should be safety-oriented. Four, enrolment of students at all levels should be more than the state average enrolment. Five, at least one separate toilet each for boys and girls. 

Six, potable drinking water facility. Seven, separate handwash facility. Eight, photo ID for all teachers. Nine, proper power connection. Ten, library facilities and sports equipment.

Why is CPM opposed to NEP 2000?
The CPM has argued that NEP is a subtle ideological move to sneak in RSS ideology into the country's curriculum and gradually brainwash the future generation into becoming, in the party's words, "servile conformists".

The CPM has three major differences with NEP. One, it would accelerate privatisation and undermine public education. This fear stems from clause 8.4 for the NEP. Even while terming public education as foundational, it says: "the private/philanthropic school sector must also be encouraged and enabled to play a significant and beneficial role."

Two, it will allow the Sangh Parivar to meddle in education. This concern springs from clauses 3.6 and 4.27 of the NEP. 3.6 wants to make the entry of "alternative models of education" hassle-free. "To make it easier for both governments as well as non-governmental philanthropic organisations to build schools, to encourage local variations on account of culture, geography, and demographics, and to allow alternative models of education, the requirements for schools will be made less restrictive," it says.

The CPM argues that its fears are confirmed when this clause is read with 4.27, which speaks of 'Knowledge of India'. "Knowledge of India will include knowledge from ancient India and its contributions to modern India and its successes and challenges, and a clear sense of India's future aspirations with regard to education, health, environment, etc. These elements will be incorporated in an accurate and scientific manner throughout the school curriculum wherever relevant."

Three, the NEP frees the state from its commitment to provide free education for children between the ages of 6 and 14 under the Right to Education Act. This concern is activated by the mention of "alternative and innovative education centres" in clause 3.2 of the NEP.

"Alternative and innovative education centres will be put in place in cooperation with civil society to ensure that children of migrant labourers, and other children who are dropping out of school due to various circumstances are brought back into mainstream education," the clause says. The CPM views this "alternative centres" as an abdication of the state's responsibility to retain children in mainstream schools.

Can Kerala ignore NEP after signing MoU?
No. A signatory automatically agrees to the first two conditions of the PM SHRI MoU, both of which the LDF had found unacceptable. 

Condition one: States will implement all the provisions of NEP 2020 in entirety within the entire state, as the main objective of this scheme is to showcase the implementation of the policy.

Condition two: The Name of the selected Schools shall be prefixed with PM SHRI schools.

Are CPM fears of saffronisation justified?
Education experts Onmanorama talked to said the signing of an MoU would not force Kerala to abandon its education policy. Already, Kerala has achieved many of the outcomes set out in PM SHRI, particularly in teachers' training, pre-primary education, teacher and student assessments, and infrastructure. 

Moreover, it is pointed out that clause 4.31 speaks of "national textbooks with local content and flavour". "All textbooks shall aim to contain the essential core material deemed important on a national level, but at the same time contain any desired nuances and supplementary material as per local contexts and needs." Meaning, contrary to CPM fears, the NEP allows states to decide the school curriculum.