It is no longer enough for us to talk about providing for universal access to education. Making available schooling facilities is an essential prerequisite, but is- insufficient to ensure that all children attend school and participate in the learning process. The school may be there, but children may not attend or they may drop out after a few months. Through school and social mapping, we must address the entire gamut of social, economic, cultural and indeed linguistic and pedagogic issues, factors that prevent children from weaker sections and disadvantaged groups, as also girls, from regularly attending and complementing elementary education. The focus must be on the poorest and most vulnerable since these groups are the most disempowered and at the greatest risk of violation or denial of their right to education. The right to education goes beyond free and compulsory education to include quality education for all. Quality is an integral part of the right to education. If the education process lacks quality, children are being denied their right. The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act lays down that the curriculum should provide for learning through activities, exploration and discovery. This places an obligation on us to change our perception of children as passive receivers of knowledge, and to move beyond the convention of using textbooks as the basis of examinations. The teaching-learning process must become stress-free; and a massive programme for curricular reform should be initiated to provide fora child-friendly learning system, that is more relevant and empowering. Teacher accountability systems and processes must ensure that children are learning, and that their right to learn in a child-friendly environment is not violated. Testing and assessment systems must be re-examined and redesigned to ensure that these do - not force children to struggle between school and tuition centres, and bypass childhood.
With reference to the above passage, the following assumptions have been made:
Which of the above assumptions is/are valid?
Assumption 1 is valid. The passage explicitly states, "Teacher accountability systems and processes must ensure that children are learning, and that their right to learn in a child-friendly environment is not violated." This directly supports the inference that the Right to Education, as discussed, guarantees teachers' accountability for the learning process of children.
Assumption 2 is not valid. The passage notes that providing schooling facilities is insufficient and that efforts must address factors preventing children from attending or dropping out. It advocates for ensuring children attend and complete elementary education but does not claim that the Right to Education guarantees 100% enrolment. The emphasis is on overcoming barriers to participation and ensuring quality, not on a guaranteed enrolment figure.
Assumption 3 is not valid. The passage focuses on the challenges and requirements for achieving universal, quality education, including issues of access, participation, curriculum, and teacher accountability. There is no discussion or implication within the text regarding the concept of a "demographic dividend" or its utilization. This assumption introduces a concept not addressed by the passage.