The new government appointed 2,40,000 school teachers in one year. An important recommendation has a direct bearing upon Punjab and Haryana. Himachal Pradesh is different from the two states. In its chapter on Administration of School Education and Management of Schools, the Report quotes from the 1986 Policy on Education: (a) Management should have a long term perspective and be linked to human resource development objectives; (b) It should promote decentralisation and autonomy of educational institutions; and (c) It should attach priority to people's participation which includes association of non-governmental agencies and voluntary organisations.

The purpose of quoting them is to reiterate the parameters of functioning laid down two decades earlier. They are still valid. The Bihar Commission has recommended, among other things, the majority of the local committee should consist of students' parents; only 2-3 nominated members should be there with no eligibility to be elected as office bearers; 50 per cent of the members will be women; the SC, the ST and OBCs must be well represented on the committees; effective linkage between the management committee and the local panchayats; and clear-cut provisions with regard to dissolution of the management.

The issue in question is that some 200 teachers each in Punjab and Haryana are politically influential. They are intimately involved in local politics and make it difficult, for instance, to ban the system of transfer of teachers. About the time the Bihar Commission was appointed, the state government decided to ban transfers of teachers there. If that could be done in those two states and if the majority in the management are parents, three fourths of the battle would be almost won. Though these proposals have been under discussion in Punjab and Haryana for years, the political parties have refused to implement them. Partly academic, it is basically a political battle.

Not long ago, Punjab was almost leading the country in terms of economic growth. The situation has changed because of the crisis in agriculture growth. Something is being done to resolve it, but it is neither radical nor decisive.Though exactly not similar, agricultural growth in Haryana is somewhat parallel to the situation in Punjab. Owing to proximity of Delhi, the impact of the growth in industry is a notable factor in Haryana. Therefore, its economy is growing in a different way. The neglect of school education in both states is particularly disturbing. While Punjab is more advanced in higher education, the situation is improving in Haryana. Inattention to vocationalisation is one problem. Equally unsatisfactory is the level of performance in the schools.

In contrast, Himachal Pradesh is performing better than both these states. The principal explanation is that school education is not as highly politicised in Himachal Pradesh as it is in Punjab and Haryana. More precisely, it is the unholy alliance between teaching leadership and the professional politicians which is responsible for what is happening today. Absenteeism of teachers is crippling at all levels of education.

Thus, the teachers have a role to play in this task. Can they do it? The answer is both yes and no. They have a role of play though it is not a clearly formulated one. Not only that, the alliance between certain sections of teacher leadership and political management is unholy, downright disruptive and self-destructive.

We have reached a stage of development where politicisation of education is beginning to hinder the process of development. Other states, Bihar for example, suffered grievously from this dimension of civic life. Therefore, there was a reaction to it and it led to a change of government.

In Punjab, there has been a political change. But there is no corresponding change in respect of school education nor a feeling of genuine concern. In Haryana, the change of government meant the replacement of one group by another. No wonder, it has not been accompanied by any significant social or moral changes.
We have to recognise that unless performance in the schools improves, it will adversely affect both higher education and the process of development. The teacher is the root cause of the malaise. Two things have become imperative -- de-politicisation and de-bureaucratisation of school education. Both are important. What we need is more local effort and better teaching as well as improved teacher training.

So many things require to be done but each one of them can wait. The most urgent, however, is that the system of transfers is banned forthwith. That is precisely what Bihar did. It was a public acknowledgement of the fact that while other things will take time to implement, this can be done straightaway.

The ban on teachers' transfer had a telling effect on the overall atmosphere in Bihar. We can expect similar change in Punjab and Haryana too. For one thing, it will change the educational atmosphere. For another, it will break the unholy alliance between politicians and teachers who are not interested in teaching and are actually promoting widespread absenteeism.

It would be naïve to believe that this proposal will be found acceptable by those who wield political power. There will have to be a public discussion over the issue and its pros and cons discussed further. No one should overlook the fact that such a system does not exist in the UK from where we took over our system of education.

It was not a problem even in India for 15-20 years after the British left. Most schools were controlled by District Boards in 1947. When the prices started rising and there was a demand for the absorption of teachers in government service, the question of transfers arose. Among other things, it suited those who did not wish to work. They formed political alliances and, in the bargain, earned money to which they were not entitled.

The real solution to absenteeism is close management by the parents. They have a stake in the kind of education that is imparted. Once they are involved in the local management, things will start changing. That will defang those teachers who have political connections, it goes without saying. There is no point in blaming others. To some extent, the teachers themselves are responsible for what is happening. Thus, breaking this unholy alliance has become imperative.

The Bihar Report has many more things for examination. This writer has chosen to focus on the transfer issue. That is where a beginning can be made. To appoint another committee would only mean postponement of what can be done without anyone being the better for it. No one can say that transferring teachers is an inseparable part of the school system. This is a self-inflicted wound and the sooner we change the system, the better it would be.