According to the Flash Report 2009/2010 of the Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology, 14 lakh 72 thousand 13 students were enrolled in Class 1 that year. Of them, only 10 lakh 13 thousand 5 hundred 5 reached Class 2. Out of those enrolled in Class 2, 8 lakh 93 thousand 1 hundred 68 were enrolled in Class 3. By reaching Class 6, only 6 lakh 39 thousand 5 hundred 50 were left. By the time the same students reached the SEE in 2075, 4 lakh 50 thousand 1 hundred 86 were left. Thus, out of the 14 lakh 72 thousand 13 students enrolled in Class I, the total number of trips to class 10 was 4 lakh 50 thousand 1 hundred 86. In a 10-year academic journey, 10 lakh 21 thousand 8 hundred 27 students lost.
This statistic shows that we have not been able to sustain students in the classroom. This problem seems even more frightening in-floor classes. Why did 57 percent of the students leave school and where did they go? Did the problem happen, which forced them to leave school? Is the cause of personal or family? Is it social or economic? Is it political or educational? Is geographical or cultural? If he can't identify the reason for leaving school, then government policies and budgets cannot make a difference. If the policies and programs alone could bring about change, there would be around 14 million students joining the SEE each year.
The task of the Ministry of Education is to bring students to school, to sustain those who are enrolled, to teach them the necessary knowledge and skills, and to be able to sell them in the job market after being initiated from the school level. Looking at Class I enrollment, the school seems to be somewhat successful in bringing in students. After that, the situation is miserable when it comes to sustaining and selling them in school. The efforts of the Ministry of Education should be focused on sustaining, educating and selling students in the job market at the school. The longer it delays, the more the public and community's trust in the public schools disappear.
Even though the state is trying to make public education accessible to all, it does not seem to trust the general public. As long as the private schools remain in the parents' first choice, the government is not considered to have made the public schools robust and strong. Hunan tiffin does not send their children to public schools. Even the leaders of society are not attracted to the class even when they do not believe in public education.
The government has not yet been able to bring effective programs to keep students in school. As more programs came. The idea that government policies and programs can be made more popular than intended to solve problems! Diva banquet program was organized, the free textbook was arranged, the scholarship program was brought, and a sanitary pad was arranged. However, none of the efforts were helpful.
Person-family background of the student, socio-economic-geographical situation, parental attitude towards the school, learning environment of the school, the behavior of the teachers, teaching methods, additional support provided to the student plays important role in staying or not staying in school.
In order to sustain the students, the school environment should be made readable. There should be a learning-friendly, parent-friendly and child-friendly environment. A recent study by the Educational Manpower Testing Center (ERO) under the Ministry of Education has shown that the model schools in the country are not worth reading.
How do students survive when the school environment is not worth learning and reading?
In our case, when a student leaves school, the parents' financial position and their access to education have a major role. After the children are enrolled in the school, some responsibility is automatically added to the parent. Copybooks, education was free, exams and other excuses had to be paid, uniform clothes had to be provided, food was to be provided. This is not possible because of the income of parents in extreme poverty. When education reaches the point of earning a parent's income, both students and parents have no choice but to flee. The school has no resources to stop the students trying to leave, nor has the government provided the resources. The state provides only a handful of expenses, in addition to the teacher's salary, without which Chuck and Duster cannot afford to buy Other things. The state has the only option to provide students with school, but the same is tied up.
The dropout rate is higher for students from ethnic minority groups and those who are weak in socio-economic status. Students who do not have access to teaching at home, who do not have materials for teaching at home, whose parents are not at home and are less interested in school activities and learning, have higher dropout rates. Students who do not perform or do low work, do not do homework or have low grades of academic achievement and exams may also leave school. Students who are not well-behaved with their peers may leave the classroom in between.
At the elementary level, a student's learning skills, teaching skills, mathematical skills, social skills, personal skills, influence whether to leave school or continue. Whether classroom learning is active or passive, it also plays a role. If classroom teaching is active, there is ample opportunity to learn, communication and interaction with the teacher is high level, then such students leave the classroom too.
The drop out rate may also be due to the poor financial condition of the parent and the burden of work on the students. Immigrants, irregularities in school, repetitive classes etc. are also found pushing them out of the classroom. Physical and mental punishment and acceptance in the school, knowledge building, skill learning and concept understanding cannot be linked to real life and the world, learning focuses only on the textbook, and only on the basis of rating assessment, the students leave the school.
(Source: content and Photo from Kantipur Daily)
