Education Policy and Sociology

Quicklearn and Smartstudy are two leading schools at Glendale. Their faculty salaries account for thirty percent of the student fee earned. In an attempt to increase enrolments and reduce costing, Quicklearn is considering lowering the school fee (to attract more students) as well as faculty salaries (to rationalize costing).

Which of the following, if true, would make the above proposal counterproductive?

The education ministry recently came up with the idea of abolishing the class 10 Board Exams. According to the experts, it will take needless burden off the minds of the learners and exams conducted at the school level will produce better results. Questioning the move, an expert said, “How do you expect the students to perform better when they have no fear of failing at a national level exam?”

Which of the following statements would best answer the question posed by the expert?

Following can be derived about today's education system from the passage except _______________.

Directions: Answer the question based on the following passage.

The disgracefully low level of education in America today is the predictable result of a State-controlled school system. Schooling, to a marked extent, has become a status symbol and a ritual. More and more people are entering college – and fewer and fewer people are emerging properly educated. Our educational system is like a vast bureaucracy, a vast civil service, in which the trend is towards a policy of considering everything about a teacher’s qualifications (such as the number of his publications) except his teaching ability; and of considering everything about a student’s qualifications (such as his “social adaptability”) except his intellectual competence.
The solution is to bring the field of education into the marketplace.

There is an urgent economic need for education. When educational institutions have to compete with one another in the quality of the training they offer – when they have to compete for the value that will be attached to the diplomas they issue – educational standards will necessarily rise. When they have to compete for the services of the best teachers, the teachers who will attract the greatest number of students, then the caliber of teaching – and of teachers’ salaries – will necessarily rise. (Today, the most talented teachers often abandon their profession and enter private industry, where they know their efforts will be better rewarded.) When the economic principles that have resulted in the superlative efficiency of American industry are permitted to operate in the field of education, the result will be a revolution, in the direction of unprecedented educational development and growth.

Education should be liberated from the control or intervention of government, and turned over to profit-making private enterprise, not because education is unimportant, but because education is so crucially important.

What must be challenged is the prevalent belief that education is some sort of “natural right” – in effect, a free gift of nature. There are no such free gifts. But it is in the interests of statism to foster this delusion – in order to throw a smokescreen over the issue of whose freedom must be sacrificed to pay for such “free gifts.”

As a result of the fact that education has been tax-supported for such a long time, most people find it difficult to project an alternative. Yet there is nothing unique about education that distinguishes it from the many other human needs which are filled by private enterprise.

What does “More and more people are _________ properly educated” represents?

Directions: Answer the question based on the following passage.

The disgracefully low level of education in America today is the predictable result of a State-controlled school system. Schooling, to a marked extent, has become a status symbol and a ritual. More and more people are entering college – and fewer and fewer people are emerging properly educated. Our educational system is like a vast bureaucracy, a vast civil service, in which the trend is towards a policy of considering everything about a teacher’s qualifications (such as the number of his publications) except his teaching ability; and of considering everything about a student’s qualifications (such as his “social adaptability”) except his intellectual competence.
The solution is to bring the field of education into the marketplace.

There is an urgent economic need for education. When educational institutions have to compete with one another in the quality of the training they offer – when they have to compete for the value that will be attached to the diplomas they issue – educational standards will necessarily rise. When they have to compete for the services of the best teachers, the teachers who will attract the greatest number of students, then the caliber of teaching – and of teachers’ salaries – will necessarily rise. (Today, the most talented teachers often abandon their profession and enter private industry, where they know their efforts will be better rewarded.) When the economic principles that have resulted in the superlative efficiency of American industry are permitted to operate in the field of education, the result will be a revolution, in the direction of unprecedented educational development and growth.

Education should be liberated from the control or intervention of government, and turned over to profit-making private enterprise, not because education is unimportant, but because education is so crucially important.

What must be challenged is the prevalent belief that education is some sort of “natural right” – in effect, a free gift of nature. There are no such free gifts. But it is in the interests of statism to foster this delusion – in order to throw a smokescreen over the issue of whose freedom must be sacrificed to pay for such “free gifts.”

As a result of the fact that education has been tax-supported for such a long time, most people find it difficult to project an alternative. Yet there is nothing unique about education that distinguishes it from the many other human needs which are filled by private enterprise.

The passage answers which of the following questions?

Directions: Answer the question based on the following passage.

The disgracefully low level of education in America today is the predictable result of a State-controlled school system. Schooling, to a marked extent, has become a status symbol and a ritual. More and more people are entering college – and fewer and fewer people are emerging properly educated. Our educational system is like a vast bureaucracy, a vast civil service, in which the trend is towards a policy of considering everything about a teacher’s qualifications (such as the number of his publications) except his teaching ability; and of considering everything about a student’s qualifications (such as his “social adaptability”) except his intellectual competence.
The solution is to bring the field of education into the marketplace.

There is an urgent economic need for education. When educational institutions have to compete with one another in the quality of the training they offer – when they have to compete for the value that will be attached to the diplomas they issue – educational standards will necessarily rise. When they have to compete for the services of the best teachers, the teachers who will attract the greatest number of students, then the caliber of teaching – and of teachers’ salaries – will necessarily rise. (Today, the most talented teachers often abandon their profession and enter private industry, where they know their efforts will be better rewarded.) When the economic principles that have resulted in the superlative efficiency of American industry are permitted to operate in the field of education, the result will be a revolution, in the direction of unprecedented educational development and growth.

Education should be liberated from the control or intervention of government, and turned over to profit-making private enterprise, not because education is unimportant, but because education is so crucially important.

What must be challenged is the prevalent belief that education is some sort of “natural right” – in effect, a free gift of nature. There are no such free gifts. But it is in the interests of statism to foster this delusion – in order to throw a smokescreen over the issue of whose freedom must be sacrificed to pay for such “free gifts.”

As a result of the fact that education has been tax-supported for such a long time, most people find it difficult to project an alternative. Yet there is nothing unique about education that distinguishes it from the many other human needs which are filled by private enterprise.

Which of the following suggestions has/have been made by the author to improve the state of education in India?

A. Allowing the corporate organisations to enter the education sector B. Easy availability of loans and scholarships for making education more affordable C. A rating system for all the organisations to ensure quality

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

The education sector in India is in ferment, hit by a storm long waiting to happen. The butterfly that flapped its wings was the much-reiterated statement in a much publicised report that hardly a fourth of graduating engineers, and an even smaller percentage of other graduates, was of employable quality for IT-BPO jobs. This triggered a cyclone when similar views were echoed by other sectors which led to widespread debate. Increased industry-academia interaction, “finishing schools”, and other efforts were initiated as immediate measures to bridge skill deficits. These, however, did not work as some felt that these are but band-aid solutions; instead, radical systemic reform is necessary.
Yet, there will be serious challenges to overdue reforms in the education system. In India, as in many countries, education is treated as a holy cow; sadly, the administrative system that oversees it, has also been deceived. Today, unfortunately, there is no protest against selling drinking water or paying to be cured of illness, or for having to buy food when one is poor and starving; nor is there an outcry that in all these cases there are commercial companies operating on a profit-making basis. Why, then, is there an instinctively adverse reaction to the formal entry of ‘for-profit’ institutes in the realm of education? Is potable water, health or food, less basic a need, less important a right, than higher education?
While there are strong arguments for free or subsidised higher education, we are not writing on a blank page. Some individuals and businessmen had entered this sector long back and found devious ways of making money, though the law stipulates that educational institutes must be ‘not-for-profit’ trusts or societies. Yet, there is opposition to the entry of ‘for-profit’ corporates, which would be more transparent and accountable. As a result, desperately needed investment in promoting the wider reach of quality education has been stagnated at a time when financial figures indicate that the allocation of funds for the purpose is but a fourth of the need.Well-run corporate organisations, within an appropriate regulatory framework, would be far better than the so-called trusts, which barring some noteworthy exceptions, are a blot on education. However, it is not necessarily a question of choosing one over the other; different organisational forms can coexist, as they do in the health sector. A regulatory framework which creates competition, in tandem with a rating system, would automatically ensure the quality and relevance of education. As in sectors like telecom, and packaged goods, organisations will quickly expand into the hinterland to tap the large unmet demand. Easy Loan/Scholarship arrangements would ensure affordability and access.
The only real structural reform in higher education was the creation of the institutes for technology and management. They were also given autonomy and freedom beyond that of the universities. However, in the last few years, determined efforts have been underway to curb their autonomy. These institutes, however, need freedom to decide on recruitment, salaries and admissions, so as to compete globally.
However, such institutes will be few. Therefore, we need a regulatory framework that will enable and encourage States and the Centre; genuine philanthropists and also corporates to set up quality educational institutions. The regulatory system needs only to ensure transparency, accountability, competition and widely-available independent assessments or ratings. It is time for radical thinking, bold experimentation and new structures; it is time for the government to bite the bullet.