One of the features of the Right to Education legislation is the provision to reserve 25% of seats in private schools for children from deprived sections. Is this an admission by the government that its provision of schooling has failed?

Do you think that we have succeeded at the national level to educate people in India? The levels of literacy are 64%. I don?t have to admit anything. There are figures available that tell you we have not been able to achieve 100% literacy. So, the system has failed. Private sector has failed and government has not been able to provide. What is there to admit? This is the stark reality. The reason we are talking about reforms in the education sector today is because we believe that the delivery system hasn?t been able to deliver?public and private sector.

And the government will pay private schools some amount of compensation for this?

That is borne out of a sense of responsibility. There is a compensation element but that element doesn?t truly compensate some schools because some schools spend much more. It compensates some other schools which perhaps spend much less. And you can?t have a formula that depends on the cost of a child in each school, as it?s unworkable. So, it has to be some kind of a uniform system of compensation. Those schools which spend much more on the children have to accept it as social responsibility.

Is it a move towards the voucher system?

No, it?s not a move towards the voucher system. But a voucher system can be considered in certain situations. For voucher systems to succeed, you need to have choice. The element of choice is non-existent if you really come to quality schools. So, how does the voucher system work? We need expansion systems before we talk about voucher systems.

For the first time, the government has recognised that it can compensate the private sector for some things. This hasn?t been tried in any other sector?

There are other forms of compensation that are not part of this Bill. But I think we need to look at those forms of compensation, and in the Rajya Sabha and in the course of the debate, I suggested flexibility when we are looking at these things depending on what the outcomes are. Supposing, for example, there is a municipal school that is not functioning. Then, you can ask private management to build on it because they don?t have to buy the land. So that?s compensatory. They can build two more storeys on it and they can get children by asking them to pay a fee. So, the costs are minimal, basic infrastructure is there; land is there, they don?t have to invest in it and they will impart education to the children who are studying in the school which was not functioning. So, you have a form of compensation that is built into the system and is not monetary. It is a win-win for both and will be through a PPP model. So, there will be elements of compensation depending on what model we have. But in right to education Bill, we can?t have any other model, except this. But there are other models on which we will work through PPP mode, which will also compensate the private sector.

Is there any decision on sharing of this compensatory burden between the Centre and the states?

No, the share of the Central and state governments in Clause 7 of the Bill is not yet decided. For a particular state, we might go to the Finance commission if we believe that it doesn?t have resources. At the moment, for other schemes, the sharing is 65:35. This is as per the planned allocation model. At the end of the 11th plan it will be 50:50.

Will part of the funds of Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan be used for the compensation to private schools?

No, I don?t think so. Part of the funds yes, but it will be up to class 8 now. So we?ll need much more money to go forward with this.

How much more?

The budget package is being planned by National University of Education, Planning and Administration (NUEPA). But whatever it is, it is a commitment.

One of your other proposals is to abolish class 10 boards?

First of all, who said that we will abolish 10th boards? I said we will abolish 10th boards in the CBSE system alone where schools in the CBSE system are till class 12. So, a child in class 10 moving to class 11 need not sit for a board. That?s all I said. I don?t have the power to abolish 10th boards across the country because there are 41 boards in India, over which I don?t have any jurisdiction. No sane man would say that you abolish all boards. And I never said that even at my first press conference.

What about the evaluation system between class 1 and 8?

There will be a continuous and comprehensive process of evaluation. But why should you sit for a board? I am totally against having children to sit for boards from class 5 to 8. But there are some states that have boards for class 5 to 8. But, under the new system, there shall be no boards between class 5 and 8.

The right to education Bill says that no child will be failed till class 8. Will this blunt the competitiveness of the system?

It?s a very good proposal. What is right to education? It?s that even if a student is not up to the mark he still does have a right to be educated. That?s the whole philosophy behind it. So why should you pull back somebody?

Do you foresee, in the absence of board examinations, a growth of private evaluation tests, like SAT, for younger children too?

First of all, we?re talking about till class 8, and hopefully the Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan will come in by that time. Hopefully we?ll move on to class 12. Ideally speaking, at the level of class 10, in the schools, which are only till class 10, there has to be a board. There is no choice as these children will go to pre-universities, polytechnics. But for those schools which are till class 12, ideally, there should be no board for one simple reason. And it?s: what does the board in class 10 do? It just decides what the child will do later in life?whether he becomes a scientist, mathematician or he becomes an economist, a charted accountant, a writer or a historian. Now, do you need a board to decide what the child should do? I don?t think so. What is happening now is just the reverse of what should happen. Now, the examination results decide what the child will do in life. It should be the child who should decide what he should do in life rather than the result in an examination. So, I think it?s a perversion of the very purpose for which you set up the board. So, once the child decides, he can move on to that stream and take his class 12 exams. And then, when you talk of professional courses down the road, say for those who do maths, physics, chemistry, biology, zoology, astronomy etc you should have a common exam (like the GRE) for everybody in this country after class 12. You should have all the diversity you want in geography, history, environment etc. And that should happen hopefully, a few years down the road. We need to take everybody on board for that and have consultation from the states and that?s a long-term plan. It?s not a part of the 100 days that I had talked about. Even the Yashpal Committee has suggested a GRE which is consistent with modern-day thought processes in the field of education.

One of the criticisms of the Yashpal Committee report is that it propounds centralisation: one super regulator decides everything. Will the new regulator just become another UGC?

What does the super regulator decide? It is going to decide whether the present university system needs reform. What kind of reforms does it need? You need to move to the semester system or multiplicity of courses; you can earn credits for courses, get a degree, possibility of disciplines, movement from one course to another etc. That?s all it?s going to decide. What is the centralisation in this? What else does the state board decide which is any different from this? It will not decide about the entry and the Yashpal Committee has also said this that it should not be done by the regulator, and should be done by a separate accreditation body, which should be independent. The regulator is an overall constitutional authority with five separate disciplines functioning entirely independent of that authority.

Will the regulatory authority grant complete autonomy to universities?

It provides complete autonomy to the universities in terms of courses, content, fund raising.

What about the autonomy to raise funds?

We have, of course, given enormous resources. It?s an ongoing process. And, if you want world-class institutions, world-class equipment, world-class hardware/ software, world-class infrastructure, world-class faculty, the demand for such resources will

rise further and it can?t be provided by the government alone. So, we need that kind of autonomy to move forward.

What about autonomy to universities to set their own salary levels for faculty?

Down the line, it may happen. If a university says that it will achieve a certain target, then I may link targets to greater autonomy. So we may have performance-based processes.

Similar to the public sector as in the case of Navratnas?

Yes, if a university can promise to achieve the targets in five years then it will lead it to greater budget allocations, greater freedom, greater access to other sources of finance, as it?s not a five-year plan. Why not? There is nothing wrong with it. We may be able to give differential salaries, why not? But these are all debatable issues and not supposed to be implemented tomorrow. Not within 100 days.

What are your immediate priorities?

The right to education Bill will be passed this session. Besides that, we have the malpractices bill to deal with?the malpractices within the sector like capitation fees, to catch out institutes who claim something in the prospectus and then turn out as something else, ragging, etc. The anti-ragging thing is already in place and has succeeded already. Deemed university issue will also be reviewed in 90 days and restructuring in higher education will also take place and has already been initiated and the structure for this will be put up in 100 days. It will take some time to pass in Cabinet and to become a law.

Will UGC and AICTE be abolished?

Well, it?s something I can?t talk about right now. I can?t make policy decisions while Parliament is on.

What went wrong with UGC and AICTE?

I have a simple way of viewing these things. I don?t want to figure out what went wrong because I know that they didn?t deliver. You see, the GER is only12.4% and your universities are not like those we want. Then why should I figure out what went wrong etc? I would rather prefer to restructure the system. I don?t really want to play any blame games here and talk about these things.

There are so many second rate universities in the country. What are your plans for them?

We need accreditation agencies. We have NAAC in place, and now it is mandatory for all institutions to get an approval. We have also passed an order that all the deemed universities should provide all their information (in terms of infrastructure, students, faculty, courses, permanent staff, etc) on their web sites within 90 days otherwise they may not get grants. So, I?m making the whole system transparent, you see.

What about universities under the control of state governments?

Even though they are regulated by UGC in terms of quality, we?ll take action to bring them up to par. They are, as it is, given huge incentives including central funding of around Rs 31,000 crore.

What about central universities?

All the new universities being setup under the Central universities act will have to follow the form of semester system, and the existing universities are being told to move to semester system, else they?ll not get their funds.

What about quality of faculty?

I have formed a task force which will provide for a benchmark for faculty in every discipline. These systems will be in place.

Critics of the foreign universities Bill say that instead of creating a level playing field, you are giving foreign universities an advantage over Indian universities?

Those who say so have not read the Bill properly. It?s quite the contrary. We are in fact deregulating the scenario for Indian universities and setting up a regulatory framework for foreign universities.

You have asked the IITs to expand to other disciplines? Are they on board?

Yes, I have. If you look at the US, MIT and Caltech, they have departments in fields well outside the realm of engineering. So I don?t see why the IITs should not expand scope. I have spoken with them and they are entirely on board with this suggestion.