THE ‘NO-DETENTION’ POLICY FOR STUDENTS OF CLASSES 5 AND 8, WHY IT HAS BEEN CONTENTIOUS

THE CONTEXT: The Ministry of Education has allowed students in Classes 5 and 8 in approximately 3,000 central schools, including Kendriya Vidyalayas and Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalayas, to be detained if they fail exams, with a re-exam opportunity provided within two months. This decision follows the 2019 amendment to the Right to Education (RTE) Act, which gave states and the Centre the discretion to scrap the no-detention policy, a move aimed at addressing declining learning outcomes but criticized for potentially increasing dropout rates.

INCORPORATION OF NO-DETENTION POLICY IN THE RTE ACT, 2009:

• • The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education (RTE) Act, 2009, was landmark legislation aimed at universalizing elementary education for children aged 6-14. Section 16 of the Act introduced the no-detention policy as a critical provision. It prohibited holding back or expelling children during their elementary education.
  • Continuous and Comprehensive Evaluation (CCE) is brought an alternative to traditional exams, focusing on holistic learning outcomes rather than rote memorization. Exemption from board examinations until the completion of Class 8.
  • This policy aligned with India’s commitment to achieving universal elementary education under international frameworks like the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and later the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly Goal 4: “Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education.”

RATIONALE BEHIND THE POLICY:

• • Reducing Dropout Rates: Studies indicated that detaining students due to poor performance often led to demotivation and dropout. By promoting automatic progression, the policy aimed to retain children in schools.
  • Addressing Systemic Failures: Recognizing that poor academic outcomes often stem from systemic inadequacies—such as lack of infrastructure, untrained teachers, and insufficient resources—the policy shifted student accountability to the education system.
  • Promoting Holistic Learning: Through CCE, the focus was on assessing a child’s overall development, including cognitive, emotional, and social skills, rather than solely academic performance.
  • Inclusivity for Marginalized Groups: The policy sought to protect children from marginalized communities—Scheduled Castes (SCs), Scheduled Tribes (STs), Other Backward Classes (OBCs), and economically weaker sections—from being disproportionately affected by traditional assessment systems.
  • Empirical Evidence Supporting Retention: Data from organizations like Pratham’s Annual Status of Education Report (ASER) showed improved Gross Enrollment Ratios (GER) at elementary levels post-policy implementation. For instance, GER for girls in elementary education increased significantly after 2009.
  • Alignment with Global Practices: Similar policies exist in countries like Finland and Japan, where automatic promotion fosters a stress-free learning environment.

AMENDMENTS TO THE RTE ACT:

• • Rationale: The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education (Second Amendment) Bill, 2017 was introduced in the Lok Sabha on August 11, 2017, to address concerns about declining learning outcomes under the no-detention policy. The government cited data from reports like the Annual Status of Education Report (ASER), which highlighted that many students in Class 5 could not read a Class 2-level text, attributing this to the lack of accountability in the education system.
  • Standing Committee Review: The Bill was referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on August 22, 2017, which submitted its report on February 9, 2018. The committee recommended scrapping the no-detention policy while ensuring remedial measures for weak students.
  • Amended Act: Section 16 was replaced with provisions mandating regular examinations in Classes 5 and 8. States were empowered to prescribe conditions for holding back students after re-examinations. No child could be expelled from school until completing elementary education (Class 8).

DEBATE ON NO-DETENTION POLICY:

ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR

–      Increased Enrollment Rates: The No-Detention Policy (NDP) improved the elementary level’s Gross Enrollment Ratio (GER). For instance, GER for girls rose from 92% in 2005-06 to over 98% by 2015. TSR Subramanian Committee Report (2016) highlighted that the policy kept children in the learning cycle for at least eight years, ensuring universal access to elementary education.

–      Reduction in Dropout Rates: NDP reduced dropout rates, particularly among marginalized groups such as Scheduled Castes (SCs), Scheduled Tribes (STs), and Other Backward Classes (OBCs). Reports like ASER 2013 showed that children from economically weaker sections were more likely to stay in school when detention was removed.

–      Inclusiveness in Education: The policy promoted inclusive education by allowing students with different learning speeds and styles to progress without fear of stigma or failure. Detention policies would disproportionately harm children from disadvantaged backgrounds who already face significant barriers to education.

–      Psychological Benefits: The NDP created a stress-free learning environment by removing exam-related anxiety and fostering a positive attitude toward education. Focusing on holistic development through Continuous and Comprehensive Evaluation (CCE) nurtures cognitive, emotional, and social skills.

ARGUMENTS AGAINST

–      Declining Learning Levels: Reports like ASER 2023 revealed that foundational reading and arithmetic skills declined during the NDP implementation. For instance, only 50% of Class 8 students could read a basic text, and over 40% struggled with basic arithmetic. The National Achievement Survey (NAS) 2024 showed that only 32% of Class 5 students met proficiency levels in reading comprehension, a drop from earlier years.

–      Lack of Student Motivation: The absence of consequences for poor academic performance led to complacency among students. The general perception that “performance does not matter” reduced their seriousness toward studies. The CABE Sub-Committee Report (2012) noted that low student motivation was a key factor contributing to declining learning outcomes.

–      Reduced Teacher Accountability: Under the NDP framework, teachers often lacked incentives to improve teaching quality, as there was no direct correlation between student performance and accountability. Teachers often resorted to rote learning techniques or neglected remedial interventions for weaker students due to systemic inefficiencies.

–      Misinterpretation as “No Assessments”: Schools often misunderstood the NDP as eliminating assessments, leading to poor tracking of student progress. The failure to implement CCE effectively resulted in students being promoted without mastering foundational skills, creating significant learning gaps by the time they reached higher grades.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS ACROSS REPORTS:

THE WAY FORWARD:

• • Strengthening the Continuous and Comprehensive Evaluation (CCE) System: Conduct regular workshops to train teachers in implementing CCE effectively. For instance, NCERT’s CCE guidelines (2019) emphasized capacity-building for teachers to align assessments with learning outcomes.
  • Addressing Infrastructure Deficiencies: Expand initiatives like Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan to ensure equitable resource distribution across states. Prioritize facilities for children with special needs (CWSN). For example, 3.8 lakh schools now cater to CWSN students, but further efforts are needed to bridge gaps.
  • Balancing Assessment with Inclusive Education Goals: Introduce regular exams from Class 5 onwards with provisions for re-examinations and remedial teaching for weak students (as per the RTE Amendment Act, 2019). Provide extra classes or bridge courses for lagging students to prevent detentions from becoming punitive. Tamil Nadu retained the no-detention policy while strengthening remedial frameworks to balance inclusivity with accountability.
  • Policy Reforms and Monitoring Mechanisms: Establish state-level bodies to monitor learning outcomes periodically using tools like NAS (National Achievement Survey). Empower local authorities to adopt policies based on regional needs while adhering to national guidelines. Involve parents and civil society organizations in monitoring educational progress through School Management Committees (SMCs), as mandated by the RTE Act.

THE CONCLUSION:

This is evidenced by the contrasting experiences of states like Delhi (where 20% of Class 8 students failed after scrapping NDP) and Kerala (which maintained NDP while strengthening CCE). The focus should be on strengthening foundational learning through enhanced teacher training, robust CCE implementation, and targeted remedial support while ensuring that assessment reforms don’t disproportionately affect marginalized students, as demonstrated by the successful models in states that have retained the policy while improving learning outcomes.

UPSC PAST YEAR QUESTION:

Q. The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, remains inadequate in promoting an incentive-based system for children’s education without generating awareness about the importance of schooling. Analyse. 2022

MAINS PRACTICE QUESTION:

Q. The no-detention policy was a well-intentioned step towards promoting inclusive education and reducing dropouts. However, its implementation has faced challenges and criticisms. Comment

SOURCE:

https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/no-detention-policy-debate-schools-9745208/