Kolkata, Dec 24 – The West Bengal government has recently introduced a new concept of a “learning hub” or a “cluster of schools” in the state, with the unique idea of the same teachers catering to the students of a number of schools within the same cluster or hub.
As a pilot project, a total of 60 such learning hubs scattered over six districts of West Bengal have already been set up and the application of the new system has started in some of them.
However, questions are being raised about the real intention of the state government in setting up of these “learning hubs” or “clusters of schools.”
The state education department has its own logic for the creation of such learning hubs, which is to protect the existence of those state-run or state-aided schools whose numerical strength of either the students or the teachers has hit rock bottom by bringing them under a single cluster.
Another logic is to attach such smaller state-run or state-aided schools as satellites of bigger schools, so that the smaller schools can benefit from the teaching imparted by the teachers from the bigger schools.
The only consideration for forming such “learning hubs,” is that the schools within a particular geographical radius will be brought into the same cluster. The school with the best infrastructure and the highest faculty strength will be considered the principal school in a particular cluster.
A section of academicians feel that this concept is a good idea, through which the existence of once-iconic institutions, which have lost their popularity and charm over the years, can be kept alive. Secondly, the students of these schools can be provided with the services of the faculty of the principal schools in that cluster.
This section argues that this system of “learning hubs,” or “cluster of schools” is a time-tested and successful model not only in certain states in India but also in a number of Latin American countries.
Now when it comes to drawing a comparison with the model in the Latin American countries, another section of the academicians feels that the real reason behind encouraging the “learning hubs,” is economical or rather a cost-cutting exercise.
This section points out that in the seventies and eighties, this system was introduced in a number of Latin American countries with a cash-strapped state exchequer, with the intention of cost cutting by bringing the facilities, infrastructure and faculty under one umbrella.
This not only saved the cost of hiring more teachers but also reduced the cost of related infrastructure to a great extent, argue this section of the academicians, aware of the flip side of the “learning hubs” or “clusters of schools,” model.
This section has yet another argument — that considering the lack of infrastructure in the majority of the state-run and state-aided schools in West Bengal, how far will the allied factors in a modern school education be effective in the case of this “learning hub” model from the state’s perspective.
This section also believes that the real intention behind introducing the “cluster of schools” is to drastically cut down the recruitment of teachers in this high employment generating sector, as a single teacher of a particular subject catering to students of multiple schools in the same subject will automatically cut the requirement of recruiting multiple teachers for the same subject.
Another drawback of these “learning hubs” is that, according to this section, the allied sectors in school education like sports, work education, library periods and laboratory practical sessions for individual schools in a cluster can remain neglected to an extent.
At the same time, they feel, with one teacher catering to students of multiple schools in the same cluster, the traditional concept of teacher-student emotional compatibility will also be hampered to a great extent.
src/bg
