Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Arkitect India] Mumbai Shikshan Kampanikaran Virodhi Abhiyan - State-wide Protest Day on 16th March 2013.

Expand Messages
  • Sarwat Ali
    1. We can not generalize that private schools are functioning well and government schools are not, some private schools may be doing well and few government
    Message 1 of 39 , Mar 18, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      1. We can not generalize that private schools are functioning well and government schools are not,  some private schools may be doing well and few government schools may be functioning well as Janaki said earlier. 

      2. We can not compare the two, because you can not compare two unequal,  which can never become equal because of the children's background , teachers qualifications and their background and infrastructure facilities.

      3. What are the parameters for assessing the school functioning well, is a big question. Even if it is classroom discourse, it would be rich in rich schools.Children  achieve more because of tuition's, parental support and culturally enriched environment. travel, books, news paper, TV , computer, interactions and many more
      So we must  stop comparing govt and private schools and making these generalizations about govt and private schools.  we must begin  contesting for better functioning of Govt schools, for which state is responsible. What we need to work on how children in govt schools can do well with out this support.  

      Sarwat Ali 

      On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 5:46 PM, Satish Jha Gmail <satish.jha@...> wrote:
       

      You are looking at the wrong problem! Much like a doctor treating the skin aberrations when the patient has cancer in his/her bloodstream 


      Twitter:@satish_jha +1 301 841 7422
      Sent from my iPhone5

      On Mar 18, 2013, at 10:56 AM, Pankaj Jain <pjain2002@...> wrote:

       

      Sir,

      I have repeatedly said that I have no absolute position about the teacher's salary. All I am saying is that at least one of 4 goals has to be given up, namely, (i) education of ALL, (ii) VIth Pay commission salary to ALL teachers, (iii) compliance to RTE norms, and (iv) not more than 6% GDP as public spending on education.

      The choice is political, as each these four goals is otherwise desirable.

      It is quite likely that VII th Pay Commission too will also make such a political choice that (i) all teachers will not be paid same salary, and (ii) RTE norms need not be implemented, and (iii) ALL children need not be in school. That would be the inevitable outcome of our current political economy that gives last priority to children, and gives preference to existing Government and organized sector employees compared to other equally, or even better qualified, unemployed citizens. It is also clear that you and majority of writer on this forum have this political preference.

      Pankaj

       

      --- On Mon, 3/18/13, rajagopalan ss <ssrajagopalan@...> wrote:

      From: rajagopalan ss <ssrajagopalan@...>
      Subject: RE: [Arkitect India] Re: [highschoolscience] Fw: Mumbai Shikshan Kampanikaran Virodhi Abhiyan - State-wide Protest Day on 16th March 2013.
      To: "arkitectindia@yahoogroups.com" <arkitectindia@yahoogroups.com>
      Date: Monday, March 18, 2013, 1:36 PM

       

      Pay Commission is composed of eminent persons, chaired by a Rtd SC Judge and they arrive at pay scales for different categories of employees. If Mr Pankaj thinks the teachers are overpaid he differs from the criterion followed by the Commission. He has to wait for the Seventh one, expected in a short while and make salutory recommendations to ensure that teachers are  paid less than the living wages. Mr Pankajji, it is the monitoring system that is at fault. Compare Mukesh Ambani's annual remuneration and compare it with teachers.A teachers annual salary is less than one days income of Ambani. Does a teacher get all the attention that is paid to corporate heads? Our concern shd be: The teacher has to deliver. Is he or is he or she not? If not, what shd be done? Let us restrict oyrselves to this basic question.
      ssr


      To: arkitectindia@yahoogroups.com
      CC: highschoolscience@...
      From: pjain2002@...
      Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2013 20:03:26 -0700
      Subject: Re: [Arkitect India] Re: [highschoolscience] Fw: Mumbai Shikshan Kampanikaran Virodhi Abhiyan - State-wide Protest Day on 16th March 2013.

       
      Dear Janaki,

      You use very strong, negatively toned, language, which is not necessary in a civilized discourse, particularly among those who agree with the goals but differ about the means to achieve these goals.

      I thought I have always responded to the points that you mention below, but these probably escaped your attention. So, let me repeat/summarize.

      1. Teacher Salary.

      1 A. My data & analysis in EPW, not contested by anyone so far, shows that if we pay the VIth pay commission salary to ALL teachers, and also keep all the goals of RTE, alongwith proportionate allocation for secondary and higher college education, as in most developed countries, then we shall need more than 20% of GDP for education, not 6%. Therefore three goals of  (i) 'school education of ALL', (ii) paying 'VIth Pay Commission" salary to ALL teachers, and (iii) proportionate allocation of funds to elementary, seconday and higher education, are impossible to meet. Something has to be given up.    

      1B: There is a lot of evidence that India has large number of educated citizens, potential teachers, who are willing to work at a fraction of VIth pay commission's salary, and these people have shown to be as effective as school teachers as the teachers earning VIth Pay Commission salary, for lower primary classes.

      Given above, and (i) my preference to treat the welfare of all citizens of the country as equal, both already employed as teachers and those seeking job as teachers, and (ii) my committment to educate ALL children, I recommend a school system, at present, with lower teacher salary than prescribed in VIth Pay Commission.

      2. Economics-Budget: Angela and others have given certain numbers, but which do not contest (i) my EPW analysis/data, and that (ii) Indian public spending on elementary education @ 2.2% of GDP, already matches OECD norm, feasible with total public spending of 5.5-6% of GDP on education, and that Indian public+private spending  on elementary education exceeds  OECD norm of public+private spending on elementary (Grade 1-8) education.   

      I personally believe that (i) India can/will not allocate more than 6% of GDP as public education spending, and also (ii) India needs to increase its budget for secondary and higher education in proportion to its budget on elementary education. Therefore, the current-future goal for elementary education policy should be not to seek more funds but the better use of existing spending, both public and private. I also support that the budget for secondary and higher education must be increased substantially, as these indeed are much lower than worldwide norm.

      3. Notions about Society/ Development/ Citizen ship and implication of these on the design of Education Policy; of Surjeet, SSR, Anshumala and many others.

      These issues can and will continue to be debated for ever, were debated by the Constituent Assembly and are debated continuously by our Parliament. The role of Educational Planners is to not to place themselves above these forums of our society/ country, and debate these afresh. Instead, Education planners should simply take as the 'current set of laws and constitution' as the settled outcome of such debates, and ensure that their plans/ recommendations are consistent with the settled position, i.e. current laws. If our constitution-laws allow for private education, there is no point debating its utility outside the Parliament.

      I do not consider myself and members of this forum as more competent than our Constituent Assembly or our Parliament, and therefore consider it meaningless for us to debate this. Insteasd, we should take-accept our constitution and laws as these exist, and plan our education curriculum and policies consistent with the approved laws of the land, which incidentlly include (i) equality of opportunities for all, (ii) RTE for all, (iii) secularism, or Sarv Dharm Sambhav, (iv)  freedom & liberty, (vi) rational-scientific temper. So, what is there to debate about?  If our constitution-laws allow for private education, there is little point in debating its utility outside the Parliament.  

      4. Private vs. public sector: I do not consider public sector or public employees to be inherently superior or committed to public good compared to those citizens who are not currently employed by the Govt., which are more than 90% of our population, including the children and retired or out of job. So, I do not ascribe negative motive to private sector, by definition, and like to examine the performance of both sectors on the basis of available reliable data, not on the basis of pre-conceived notions.

      Just to clarify, the paper forwarded to you about Adam Smith was not written by my friend or reflected my views. It, however, provided an interesting viewpoint, worth considering. 

      Warms.

      Pankaj
       

      --- On Mon, 3/18/13, Janaki Rajan <rajan.janaki@...> wrote:

      From: Janaki Rajan <rajan.janaki@...>
      Subject: Re: [Arkitect India] Re: [highschoolscience] Fw: Mumbai Shikshan Kampanikaran Virodhi Abhiyan - State-wide Protest Day on 16th March 2013.
      To: arkitectindia@yahoogroups.com
      Date: Monday, March 18, 2013, 1:07 AM

       


      I think there are several questions to Pankaj that he has not responded to over several mails over several months. Briefly, this is about refusing to respond to anything uncomfortable, but nevertheless continue his well worn diatribe. At each point he has been addressed factually by several members none of whom he has responded to. Please refer to:
      -my mail to him about his diatribe on teacher salaries
      -Surjit's mail about idea of society, and today's excellent mail, and my own mail that if not idea of society, accept Constitution
      -SSR's succint comments
      -Angela's brilliant note in response to Pankaj's economic/GDP notions.
      -My review on Adam Smith to an article Pankaj sent from his friends from USA
       
      His last mail sent to my personal mail ID was that all that we are saying is alright for children in Rishi Valley kind of school, [because their parents can pay for it] but not for the children of the deprived who have to be paid for by the State-for them, and I believe that Pankaj is voicing this opinion of many many people in power, let us get 'efficient',  with the schooling of children of the marginalised-the same 'efficiency' not required if people can pay for it.
       
      In other words, Pankaj is making it very clear that all the good things in education is for those who can pay for it.
       
      This is so vile that I wish to move a resolution to the group:
       
      Pankaj should respond to the queries posed to his posts which he has been sidelining.
       
      Janaki
       
       

      On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 8:05 AM, <juristashok@...> wrote:
       
      I fully agree with Dr Sarwat Ali.
      Ashok Agarwal
      Sent on my BlackBerry® from Vodafone

      From: Sarwat Ali <ali.sarwat@...>
      Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2013 22:40:50 +0530
      Subject: Re: [Arkitect India] Re: [highschoolscience] Fw: Mumbai Shikshan Kampanikaran Virodhi Abhiyan - State-wide Protest Day on 16th March 2013.

       
      The text is seen as junk in  my mail perhaps the hindi font is not supported by my computer. 


      Private schools are not functioning well, in fact  the parents and the families, children come from, are immense support to private schools, besides the infrastructure is another reason. govt schools will not function well it is by design and not accidental, they will not function well unless private schools or lets say profit making market oriented institutions, are abolished. Private institutions are unable to mange 25% of weaker section  Where as govt schools are managing 100% of weaker section children with limited infrastructure. The mess in admissions in private schools in nursery is unmanageable. There is no way private institutions can achieve universalisation of education. They are violating constitutional norms 

      --
      Dr (Ms) sarwat ali
      pocket A/3C sukhdev Vihar , DDA Flats, 
      New Delhi - 110025

      9810525317












      --
      Dr (Ms) sarwat ali
      pocket A/3C sukhdev Vihar , DDA Flats, 
      New Delhi - 110025

      9810525317


    • Janaki Rajan
      Pankaj, You constantly sidestep when asked questions that threaten your pre-decided ideas-that is not a dialogue-and therefore what you say cannot be
      Message 39 of 39 , Mar 23, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        Pankaj,
         
        You constantly sidestep when asked questions that threaten your pre-decided ideas-that is not a dialogue-and therefore what you say cannot be 'propositions'. your are perhaps more dogmatic yourself than those you claim are. You will have to provide something more substantial than shrugging this off.
         
        Janaki

        On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Pankaj Jain <pjain2002@...> wrote:
         

        Well, May be you could do that campaign, after we have shown it happening at many places, with your active support. I am doing this advocacy since I want this to happen for a million poor children. It is not my concern, and should not be your concern too, if another 10 million relatively rich children pay Rs. 30,000/- or more for that.

        So, will you support this deal/offer? Or there are still other issues of concern, yet not addressed in my proposition?

        Pankaj

        --- On Thu, 3/21/13, Janaki Rajan <rajan.janaki@...> wrote:

        From: Janaki Rajan <rajan.janaki@...>
        Subject: Re: [Arkitect India] Mumbai Shikshan Kampanikaran Virodhi Abhiyan - State-wide Protest Day on 16th March 2013.
        To: arkitectindia@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Thursday, March 21, 2013, 8:42 PM


         

        Answer this first: Since you are such a stickler for efficiency, and since you can do this for 7K, why dont you campaign for eltie schools to also pay 7K? Isn't paying more in elite schools a waste since you claim to perform the same service for less? And save parents fees?

        On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 5:36 PM, Pankaj Jain <pjain2002@...> wrote:
         

        Janaki,
         
        Sadanandji's use of phrase minimalistic is not appropriate. There are enough agencies, e.g our's, who would guarantee average educational performance of children from poor families @ Rs. 7000/- per year, that would match the average performance of children in 'elite schools'.
         
        So, if the education levels equal to the average of elite schools is guaranted, would you support my set of propositions?
         
        Pankaj   


        --- On Thu, 3/21/13, Janaki Rajan <rajan.janaki@...> wrote:

        From: Janaki Rajan <rajan.janaki@...>
        Subject: Re: [Arkitect India] Mumbai Shikshan Kampanikaran Virodhi Abhiyan - State-wide Protest Day on 16th March 2013.
        To: arkitectindia@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Thursday, March 21, 2013, 9:48 AM


         
        Why minimalistic framework for poor children? Why should maximalist for poor children be always be seen as long term, not doable? Why cop out of the big questions?

        On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 4:42 PM, Sadanand Patwardhan <2Sadanand@...> wrote:
         
        Dear All,

        This debate is looping again and again over familiar positions. Everyone has asked the questions:
        1. What is Education? or what would it mean to be educated at different levels [primary/ secondary/ tertiary]?
        2. How to define quality in education?
        I may have missed, but I have not seen anyone answering it wholly and succinctly.

        Till an agreed framework is in place on above two points, may I suggest to educationists here to have discussion under following MINIMALIST framework.
        1. Given National Education Policy.
        2. Given Funding for the same.
        3. Given institutional framework: Public/ Private/ Joint/ informal.
        4. Given Teacher network and what could be made available quickly from existing resource pool.
        How best the program of education can be carried out so as to have best outcome for maximum learners in our country under above circumstances; especially for children from poor, socially/ educationally deprived backgrounds, and from villages and in remote areas.

        If this is agreed upon, then discussion will be fruitful with Jain and Jha on board. Since, tens of thousands of children are missing out even on education that is dictated by present education framework/policy/funding, however inadequate/ill-conceived/ ill-designed/ with whatever wrong goals it may have; this acquires an unstoppable sense of urgency. Inputs, agreement, and finally a programme to usher in desired change or transformation in the existing framework to deliver above modest objectives are direly needed. Otherwise, those children will miss out even on let say bad education.

        The MAXIMALIST framework others are hinting at or attempting to propound is also important, nay highly desirable. But that is a LONG TERM programme requiring fundamental changes in the way our society works and is organised. But though highly desirable, it is not easily attainable and time horizon is uncertain. How to do that could be discussed, debated, agitated separately.

        But why lose the opportunity to gather ideas/ methods/ strategies that could help attain the MINIMUM programme in the meanwhile? At least, it would make the present discussion more productive.

        regards,
        Sadanand Patwardhan
        +91 99 234 24 661
        =================================

        --- In arkitectindia@yahoogroups.com, Arun Kumar <arunkumar3165@...> wrote:
        >
        > P.J.
        >
        >
        >
        > I agree with you. We will have to give away something if we want education,
        > food, or health care, security, and peace.
        >
        > I mean. a country that has emerged as the largest buyer of arms in the
        > world (see various reports in the last few days) obviously does not have
        > enough money to spend on items that can be bought from the market.
        >
        >
        >
        > One could add to the suggestion-list, see, if it helps:
        >
        >
        >
        > 1. The Parliament is not functioning well � let�s privatize it.
        >
        > 2. The judiciary is not functioning well, let�s privatize it.
        >
        > 3. There are repeated instances of corruption in army, let�s call

        > uncle Sam.
        >
        >
        >
        > And, since, only market seems to be working well, damn it, why not embrace
        > it. Let�s nationalize the market!
        >
        >
        > Cheers!
        >
        > Arun Kumar
        >
        > On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 5:46 PM, Satish Jha Gmail <satish.jha@...>wrote:
        >
        > > **

        > >
        > >
        > > You are looking at the wrong problem! Much like a doctor treating the skin
        > > aberrations when the patient has cancer in his/her bloodstream
        > >
        > >
        > > Twitter:@satish_jha
        > > www.olpcindia.net
        > > +1 301 841 7422
        > > Sent from my iPhone5
        > >
        > > On Mar 18, 2013, at 10:56 AM, Pankaj Jain <pjain2002@...> wrote:
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > Sir,
        > >
        > > I have repeatedly said that I have no absolute position about the
        > > teacher's salary. All I am saying is that at least one of 4 goals has to be
        > > given up, namely, (i) education of ALL, (ii) VIth Pay commission salary to
        > > ALL teachers, (iii) compliance to RTE norms, and (iv) not more than 6% GDP
        > > as public spending on education.
        > >
        > > The choice is political, as each these four goals is otherwise desirable.
        > >
        > > It is quite likely that VII th Pay Commission too will also make such a
        > > political choice that (i) all teachers will not be paid same salary, and
        > > (ii) RTE norms need not be implemented, and (iii) ALL children need not be
        > > in school. That would be the inevitable outcome of our current political
        > > economy that gives last priority to children, and gives preference to
        > > existing Government and organized sector employees compared to other
        > > equally, or even better qualified, unemployed citizens. It is also clear
        > > that you and majority of writer on this forum have this political
        > > preference.
        > >
        > > Pankaj
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > --- On *Mon, 3/18/13, rajagopalan ss <ssrajagopalan@...>* wrote:
        > >
        > >
        > > From: rajagopalan ss <ssrajagopalan@...>

        > > Subject: RE: [Arkitect India] Re: [highschoolscience] Fw: Mumbai Shikshan
        > > Kampanikaran Virodhi Abhiyan - State-wide Protest Day on 16th March 2013.
        > > To: "arkitectindia@yahoogroups.comarkitectindia@yahoogroups.com>
        > > Date: Monday, March 18, 2013, 1:36 PM
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > Pay Commission is composed of eminent persons, chaired by a Rtd SC Judge
        > > and they arrive at pay scales for different categories of employees. If Mr
        > > Pankaj thinks the teachers are overpaid he differs from the criterion
        > > followed by the Commission. He has to wait for the Seventh one, expected in
        > > a short while and make salutory recommendations to ensure that teachers
        > > are paid less than the living wages. Mr Pankajji, it is the monitoring
        > > system that is at fault. Compare Mukesh Ambani's annual remuneration and
        > > compare it with teachers.A teachers annual salary is less than one days
        > > income of Ambani. Does a teacher get all the attention that is paid to
        > > corporate heads? Our concern shd be: The teacher has to deliver. Is he or
        > > is he or she not? If not, what shd be done? Let us restrict oyrselves to
        > > this basic question.
        > > ssr
        > >
        > > ------------------------------
        > > To: arkitectindia@yahoogroups.com
        > > CC: highschoolscience@...
        > > From: pjain2002@...

        > > Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2013 20:03:26 -0700
        > > Subject: Re: [Arkitect India] Re: [highschoolscience] Fw: Mumbai Shikshan
        > > Kampanikaran Virodhi Abhiyan - State-wide Protest Day on 16th March 2013.
        > >
        > >
        > > Dear Janaki,
        > >
        > > You use very strong, negatively toned, language, which is not necessary in
        > > a civilized discourse, particularly among those who agree with the goals
        > > but differ about the means to achieve these goals.
        > >
        > > I thought I have always responded to the points that you mention below,
        > > but these probably escaped your attention. So, let me repeat/summarize.
        > >
        > > 1. *Teacher Salary*.

        > >
        > > 1 A. My data & analysis in EPW, not contested by anyone so far, shows that
        > > if we pay the VIth pay commission salary to ALL teachers, *and also keep

        > > all the goals of RTE, alongwith proportionate allocation for secondary and
        > > higher college education*, as in most developed countries, then we shall

        > > need more than 20% of GDP for education, not 6%. Therefore three goals of
        > > (i) 'school education of ALL', (ii) paying 'VIth Pay Commission" salary to
        > > ALL teachers, and (iii) proportionate allocation of funds to elementary,
        > > seconday and higher education, are impossible to meet. Something has to be
        > > given up.
        > >
        > > 1B: There is a lot of evidence that India has large number of educated
        > > citizens, potential teachers, who are willing to work at a fraction of VIth
        > > pay commission's salary, and these people have shown to be as effective as
        > > school teachers as the teachers earning VIth Pay Commission salary, for
        > > lower primary classes.
        > >
        > > Given above, and (i) my preference to treat the welfare of all citizens of
        > > the country as equal, both already employed as teachers and those seeking
        > > job as teachers, and (ii) my committment to educate ALL children, I
        > > recommend a school system, at present, with lower teacher salary than
        > > prescribed in VIth Pay Commission.
        > >
        > > *2. Economics-Budge*t: Angela and others have given certain numbers, but
        > > which do not contest (i) my EPW analysis/data, and that (ii) Indian *public
        > > spending* on elementary education @ 2.2% of GDP, *already matches OECD
        > > norm*, feasible with total public spending of 5.5-6% of GDP on education,
        > > and that Indian *public+private spending* on elementary education *
        > > exceeds* OECD norm of *public+private spending* on elementary (Grade

        > > 1-8) education.
        > >
        > > I personally believe that (i) India can/will not allocate more than 6% of
        > > GDP as public education spending, and also (ii) India needs to increase its
        > > budget for secondary and higher education in proportion to its budget on
        > > elementary education.* Therefore*, the current-future goal *for
        > > elementary education policy* should be not to seek more funds but the

        > > better use of existing spending, both public and private. I also support
        > > that the budget for secondary and higher education must be increased
        > > substantially, as these indeed are much lower than worldwide norm.
        > >
        > > 3. *Notions about Society/ Development/ Citizen ship and implication of
        > > these on the design of Education* *Policy*; of Surjeet, SSR, Anshumala
        > > and many others.
        > >
        > > These issues can and will continue to be debated for ever, *were debated

        > > by the Constituent Assembly and are debated continuously by our Parliament
        > > *. The role of Educational Planners is to* not to place themselves above
        > > these forums of our society/ country*, and debate these afresh. Instead,

        > > Education planners should simply take as the 'current set of laws and
        > > constitution' as* the settled outcome of such debates*, and ensure that

        > > their plans/ recommendations are consistent with the settled position, i.e.
        > > current laws. If our constitution-laws allow for private education, there
        > > is no point debating its utility outside the Parliament.
        > >
        > > I do not consider myself and members of this forum as more competent than
        > > our Constituent Assembly or our Parliament, and *therefore consider it
        > > meaningless for us to debate this*. Insteasd, we should take-accept our
        > > constitution and laws as these exist, and *plan our education curriculum
        > > and policies consistent with the approved laws of the land*, which

        > > incidentlly include (i) equality of opportunities for all, (ii) RTE for
        > > all, (iii) secularism, or Sarv Dharm Sambhav, (iv) freedom & liberty, (vi)
        > > rational-scientific temper. *So, what is there to debate about? * If our

        > > constitution-laws allow for private education, there is little point in
        > > debating its utility outside the Parliament.
        > >
        > > 4. *Private vs. public sector*: I do not consider public sector or public

        > > employees to be inherently superior or committed to public good compared to
        > > those citizens who are not currently employed by the Govt., which are more
        > > than 90% of our population, including the children and retired or out of
        > > job. So, I do not ascribe negative motive to private sector, by definition,
        > > and like to examine the performance of both sectors on the basis of
        > > available reliable data, not on the basis of pre-conceived notions.
        > >
        > > Just to clarify, the paper forwarded to you about Adam Smith was not
        > > written by my friend or reflected my views. It, however, provided an
        > > interesting viewpoint, worth considering.
        > >
        > > Warms.
        > >
        > > Pankaj
        > >
        > >
        > > --- On *Mon, 3/18/13, Janaki Rajan <rajan.janaki@...>* wrote:
        > >
        > >
        > > From: Janaki Rajan <rajan.janaki@...>

        > > Subject: Re: [Arkitect India] Re: [highschoolscience] Fw: Mumbai Shikshan
        > > Kampanikaran Virodhi Abhiyan - State-wide Protest Day on 16th March 2013.
        > > To: arkitectindia@yahoogroups.com
        > > Date: Monday, March 18, 2013, 1:07 AM
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > I think there are several questions to Pankaj that he has not responded to
        > > over several mails over several months. Briefly, this is about refusing to
        > > respond to anything uncomfortable, but nevertheless continue his well worn
        > > diatribe. At each point he has been addressed factually by several members
        > > none of whom he has responded to. Please refer to:
        > > -my mail to him about his diatribe on teacher salaries
        > > -Surjit's mail about idea of society, and today's excellent mail, and my
        > > own mail that if not idea of society, accept Constitution
        > > -SSR's succint comments
        > > -Angela's brilliant note in response to Pankaj's economic/GDP notions.
        > > -My review on Adam Smith to an article Pankaj sent from his friends
        > > from USA
        > >
        > > His last mail sent to my personal mail ID was that all that we are saying
        > > is alright for children in Rishi Valley kind of school, [because their
        > > parents can pay for it] but not for the children of the deprived who have
        > > to be paid for by the State-for them, and I believe that Pankaj is voicing
        > > this opinion of many many people in power, let us get 'efficient', with
        > > the schooling of children of the marginalised-the same 'efficiency' not
        > > required if people can pay for it.
        > >
        > > In other words, Pankaj is making it very clear that all the good things in
        > > education is for those who can pay for it.
        > >
        > > This is so vile that I wish to move a resolution to the group:
        > >
        > > Pankaj should respond to the queries posed to his posts which he has been
        > > sidelining.
        > >
        > > Janaki
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 8:05 AM, <juristashok@...> wrote:
        > >
        > > **
        > >
        > > ** I fully agree with Dr Sarwat Ali.
        > > Ashok Agarwal
        > > Sent on my BlackBerry� from Vodafone
        > > ------------------------------
        > > *From: * Sarwat Ali <ali.sarwat@...>
        > > *Sender: * arkitectindia@yahoogroups.com
        > > *Date: *Sat, 16 Mar 2013 22:40:50 +0530
        > > *To: *<arkitectindia@yahoogroups.com>
        > > *ReplyTo: * arkitectindia@yahoogroups.com
        > > *Subject: *Re: [Arkitect India] Re: [highschoolscience] Fw: Mumbai

        > > Shikshan Kampanikaran Virodhi Abhiyan - State-wide Protest Day on 16th
        > > March 2013.
        > >
        > >
        > > The text is seen as junk in my mail perhaps the hindi font is not
        > > supported by my computer.
        > >
        > >
        > > Private schools are not functioning well, in fact the parents and the
        > > families, children come from, are immense support to private schools,
        > > besides the infrastructure is another reason. govt schools will not
        > > function well it is by design and not accidental, they will not function
        > > well unless private schools or lets say profit making market oriented
        > > institutions, are abolished. Private institutions are unable to mange 25%
        > > of weaker section Where as govt schools are managing 100% of weaker
        > > section children with limited infrastructure. The mess in admissions in
        > > private schools in nursery is unmanageable. There is no way private
        > > institutions can achieve universalisation of education. They are
        > > violating constitutional norms
        > >
        > > --
        > > Dr (Ms) sarwat ali
        > > pocket A/3C sukhdev Vihar , DDA Flats,
        > > New Delhi - 110025
        > >
        > > 9810525317
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        >
        >
        >
        > --
        > And may you be blessed with the foolishness to think that you can make a
        > difference in the world, so that you will do things which others tell you
        > cannot be done!
        >




      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.