Nursery Admission in the Private Schools of Delhi
Report
1. Introduction
The admission Process to nursery classes has been the subject of much controversy in recent years. Private unaided schools, in particular, have come under critical scrutiny for their admission procedures. This issue has been agitating the minds of educationist, parents, jurist and all those concerned with the education of young children as to how the trauma and tension associated with the admission process can be eliminated and a child friendly method evolved.
1.1 The rapidly growing Indian economy has led to accelerated upward mobility of different sections of the populations. This trend , in its turn, has created greater awareness among people about the quality dimension of school education along with higher levels of aspirations. In an educational setup that is divided between a fast growing private sector participation and a much larger public or state sector, the issue of quality assumes great complexity. There is a widely prevalent belief that many of the state run schools are not always as good as several of the private schools, particularly in urban areas. Also the distribution of private schools is very uneven and there has been no systematic school mapping done. All these factors have contributed to a phenomenal increase in the demand for admission to quality schools.
1.2 In this context the craze for admission to private school that are perceived as better options by the parents has created an anomalous situation where the number of applicants far exceeds the number of seats available in these schools. However the demand exceeding the supply is not noticed uniformally in all private schools nor is the pressure for admission of the same magnitude in all such schools. While some very well established and reputed private schools receive, on the average, ten times the applications against the number of seats available, there are also many small and newly established private schools which do not receive even the minimum number of applications for the available seats. Concurrently there are a number of government run schools that command respect from the parents and hence are in great demand also.
1.3 But since such quality institutions in the government sector, both Central and State run, are few in numbers and as their admission norms and procedures do not favour the middle and affluent classes and those in private employment, this category of parents are compelled to seek admission in un-aided private schools for their children. Since children admitted in the nursery class of a private school can continue in the same school till they complete their Sr. Secondary course admission at this entry point becomes crucial for many parents. All these years the private schools of Delhi have been following their own admission procedure for nursery classes.
1.4 The admission procedures for these very young children between the ages of 3.5 and 5 years after consist of written/oral selection test for children, interview of children, and interview of/interaction with parents. Criteria such as siblings, neighbourhood concept, alumni, profession and educational qualifications of parents are also included by some schools in their admission criteria for short listing of candidates. As there is no common admission procedure for all the private schools of Delhi, each school has been using its own discretion in formulating a procedure and implementing it for selecting children for admission to nursery classes. In doing so, there have often been complaints that procedures used are not transparent and equitable and as a result, many parents felt unfairly treated. Since so much of the future of their children was at stake, these feelings have a legitimacy of their own.
The proposal to eliminate interviews/observations of children and interaction with parents is a step in the right direction. The process of interview subjects the tiny tots to a lots of tension and anxiety. Further if they are not selected after attending the interview, they experience a sense of rejection which is contrary to all sound educational principles. There is potential in every child and it is the schools and society s responsibility to draw out this potential and look to the healthy growth and development of every child including those with special needs and the economically or socially deprived sections bearing in mind the value of inclusivity in education.
If children are not to be interviewed, what are the alternative methods of selections? This question received considerable attention of the committee. The obvious alternatives that emerged from different interest groups were First Come First Serve and lottery system. The former may work in small schools where the enrolment as well as demand are small. But it is not feasible in established schools because it creates chaos and confusion with parents queuing up all night to be first in the queue. Further this method may not help in having a good mix of students in the classroom.
The lottery system may, on the face of it, seem the most transparent of the selection methods, giving everyone an equal chance for admission. But the concept of gaining entry into an academic institution, through lottery system, based on gamble and luck, that too at very beginning of a childs school life is quite unacceptable to a vast majority of people. Further selecting children solely on the basis of draw of lots may result in lopsided distribution of seats. However the committee is of the view that the method of draw of lots may become necessary in certain situations for the short listing of students particularly to break the tie at the last stage.
Keeping all these considerations in view the committee came to the conclusion that the alternative method should be based on many relevant and appropriate criteria and it should have sufficient flexibility so that the schools would be able to adapt it according to their context and need.
2. Directive of the Honble Delhi High Court :
It is against this background that the order of the Honble Delhi High Court in LPA No. 196/2004 assumes immense significance. The three important aspects of the above order are as follows:
A committee of experts in education has been constituted by the Honble Delhi
High Court. This committee has been directed to go into the entire gamut of
Issues relating to nursery admission in the private schools of Delhi
comprehensively and submit this report to the court by 17th October 2006.
The committee has been asked by the court to give a hearing to the counsels appearing in this case on behalf of different petitioners and examine their suggestions before drafting its report.
The order of the court has enumerated the following three basic criteria for evolving a common admission procedure:
The entire process leading to the admission of tiny tots should be transparent
The system of interview should be eliminated.
Discretion of the Management/Principal is minimized.
In the discharge of the responsibility entrusted to the committee we situated ourselves to understand fully the context in which the honourable court found it necessary to intervene and set up this committee to go into the details of the issue comprehensively and come up with suitable solutions. So we have divided our presentation in three parts:
The first part deals with the multiple contexts that obtain in Delhi, giving a brief background of the main issues involved in nursery admission. This part also contains the procedure adopted by the committee to collect feedback from different stakeholders.
The second part gives a brief outline of certain policy perspectives that have a bearing on the admission process.
The third part attempts to offer solutions in the face of the diversity of contexts and at the same time keeping in view the basic directives from the honourable court which we have mentioned earlier.
Part I
In our effort to evolve a common, rational admission process that takes into account all parameters, we interviewed those persons whom the court had mentioned and also invited representations from associations of schools. We also invited comments from parents both through website and through other means within a short time span.
The Committee decided to invite representatives to receive their explanatory comments and suggestions. The following people met the committee in this regard:
Mr. Ashok Agarwal, Advocate for parents and Social Jurist.
Mr. Rakesh K. Khanna, Counsel representing National Progressive Schools Council and Action Committee.
Mr. S. K. Bhattacharya representing Action Committee and Bal Bharti Public Schools.
Mr. S. C. Baveja, Joint Secretary, Child Education Society.
Mr. Sunil Salwan, Counsel representing Shriram Foundation and Salwan Education Trust.
Mr. Kuljit Rawal, Counsel representing Montford School.
Mr. Puneet Mittal, Advocate for D. P. S. Society.
Mr. A. S. Pasrich, Counsel for the Nursery Schools.
Mrs. Manju Bharatram, Chairperson, Shriram Group of Schools.
Letters were also sent to the following people who had appeared in the case, inviting their suggestions and comments:
Mr. V. K. Tandon, Counsel for NCT of Delhi.
Mr. Rakesh Aggarwal, Advocate for Mirambika School.
Besides the above persons, we had also sought suggestions from educationists, school associations and parents through website and other modes of communication. The Committee also examined the representations submitted by Mrs. Rajni Kumar, Director, Springdales School and the Independent Schools Federation of India.
The salient points contained in the suggestions and comments of these representatives and stakeholders are summarised below:
By and large, most of the respondents have agreed that interview of children and interaction with parents should be eliminated from the admission procedure. However, a few have argued that informal observation of children in stress-free conditions would be helpful in ascertaining the needs of children as well as their motor development and language skills. Similarly, they have suggested that informal interaction with parents should also be allowed to know their values and what they expect from the school as well as to verify the authenticity of information given in the registration forms.
Neighbourhood concept figures prominently and frequently in the suggestions. Most of the respondents are also in favour of giving staggered weightage to the neighbourhood concept, maximum weightage being given to the children living nearest to the school and moving gradually to farther areas. An outside limit of 10 km has been suggested by many.
Preference to siblings and alumni is also strongly recommended by almost all the persons who have responded.
A majority of the representatives were not in favour of selecting children solely through lottery system though a few have suggested it for breaking ties at the last stage of short listing where there are too many applicants.
That the classroom and school should reflect the diversity in the composition of the society is a recurrent opinion in the suggestions received. It has been recommended by many that to achieve this aim, proportional representation may be given to different sections of society on the basis of certain criteria like parents from different professions, from different socio cultural and economic backgrounds etc. It may be worked out on a pro-rata basis.
Educational qualification of parents has also received considerable attention from the stakeholders. It is argued that by encouraging educational status of parents, the policy directive would send a clear message about the important role that parents play in the education and development of their children. This empowerment and growth support takes place through the educational status of both the father and mother. Many are of the view that weightage under this criterion should be given separately for mother and father. In the case of single parents, weightage could be doubled.
Consideration to children with special needs and girl children has also been recommended by many respondents.
A small percentage of seats has been suggested to be given at the discretion of the school management.
One of the respondents has made a proposal based on a 100 point marking to give weightage to listening skills, motor development, speech etc. A separate marking on the registration form was also proposed giving weightage of 100 points for different criteria like distance, educational qualification of parents, profession of parents, sibling criterion, alumni category etc. Another representative of a group of schools has also suggested a scale of 1 to 100 with weightage points distributed for different criteria with a provision for representation for professionals, business persons, parents working in private sector and parents working in government sector.
Apart from the above suggestions, a good number of ideas were received from parents through e-mail. A summary of these ideas is given below:
The most effective check to curb malpractice by public schools is to follow the neighbourhood system.
Siblings of children who are already studying in a school should be automatically admitted.
Children of the staff of the school should get admission automatically.
Children of alumni should get weightage in the admission process.
50% of seats should go to management, siblings, alumni and children of transferable employees of public sector undertakings and government organizations. The remaining 50% of seats should go to the general category including children from the economically and socially weaker sections.
Interview of parents and children should be strictly avoided and irrelevant personal details should not be asked in the registration form.
All schools should follow a common schedule of admission and a common uniform Registration Form.
Schools could have 10% quota at their discretion and admit those whom they choose to.
Lottery system is unfair because it will not ensure a mixed socio-economic group of children in a classroom. (Though a few have made a strong case for draw of lots to decide admissions wherever the number of applicants is more than the seats available.)
First-come-first-served will not be suitable as it will lead to many unhealthy practices. (However some parents have argued that it would eliminate discretion of school management.)
Delineate a fixed number of parameters like sibling, proximity, educational qualification of parents etc. Then schools will define certain percentage for each category and then give admission on the basis of such a categorization.
In addition, many parents have suggested that the criteria for admission, the time schedule starting from distribution of registration form upto final admission and other relevant details about the schools infrastructure, fee structure including various categories of fees payable, faculty, special facilities available, scope for the special needs of challenged children, past performance in different areas, etc., should be put up on the notice board, schools website and printed in the prospectus.
Part II
Some Policy Directives that have a Bearing on Nursery Admission
Chapter XII, Clause 132 of Delhi School Education Act, 1973:
Admission test not be held by aided schools Save as otherwise provided in this chapter, no aided school shall hold any test for admission to any class except with the written approval of the Director. Provided that nothing in this rule shall prevent the holding of tests for the admission to any class higher than Class I of such candidates as have not studied in any recognised school prior to their seeking admission.
Chapter XII Clause 145
Admission to recognized unaided schools
The head of every recognised unaided school shall regulate admissions to a recognised unaided school or to any class thereof either on the basis of admission test or on the basis of result in a particular class or school.
Subject to the provision of sub rule (1), the provisions of this chapter shall, so far as may be, apply to admission to a recognised unaided school as they apply to admission to an aided school.
When read together the above clauses clearly stipulate that admission on the basis of admission test or marks is permitted only to any class higher than class I.
________________________________________________
Circular No. FDE23(98)/School/98-99/8316-8780, dated 28.3.2001 Admission to class I or KG whichever is the initial class in all Government Sarvodaya Vidyalayas Instructions thereof.
Wards of parents residing within a radius of 3 kms. of the school will be eligible for registration of their wards for admission.
________________________________________________
4.1 Neighbourhood Schools
It seems appropriate here to explain the rationale behind neighbourhood school concept because many stakeholders including parents have come out strongly in favour of Common or Neighbourhood Schools while framing a policy for nursery admission. It also has a logic because it will promote heterogeneous school population which will enrich the learning environment. It will also promote social integration. The concept of Neighbourhood Schools was enunciated by the Education Commission (1964-66) which recommended adoption of the Neighbourhood School Concept first at the lower primary stage and then at the higher primary. The National Policy on Education 1986 reiterated this view.
Successive Education Committees have emphasized the need for making the school and the classroom truly reflective of the societys diversity. The National Curriculum Framework 2005 also lays emphasis on the need to deal with the metaphorical triangle of equality, quality and quantity. The neighbourhood school concept can be used as an effective instrument for achieving excellence and equity simultaneously. Children at the tender age of 3+ years should have access to schools in their own localities, so that they are not forced to commute a long distance to attend school.
The committee gave considerable thought to the neighbourhood concept and came to the conclusion that it could be adopted as one of the criteria with some flexibility to provide for the uneven distribution of schools in different localities of Delhi. Further, in the absence of a systematic school mapping in the capital, it is not advisable to establish a very restrictive pattern in terms of distance. So a small beginning can be made in this regard with admission at the nursery class and the committee would like to suggest that a road map for common school system may be developed for implementation over a period of ten years in the entire spectrum of ten years of schooling. It was also decided that, to begin with, there should be at least a 10 km radius as the outer limit with a staggered weightage point scale. The area closest to the school would get maximum weightage and as the distance from the school increases the weightage would decrease. Though no weightage would be given for children who come from beyond 10 km, their registration forms, however, would be accepted by the school for consideration.
4.2 Sibling Category
When siblings go to the same school, there is considerable advantage and convenience to the children as well as to the parents. The elder child can be a source of support, guidance and protection for the younger child. The common schedule of buses, school timings, holidays and school functions also helps parents in planning their routines and outings. Many parents have also suggested that siblings should be admitted automatically. Keeping these aspects in mind the committee has included Sibling Category as an important criterion for awarding weightage.
4.3 Alumni Category
Well-established schools that have been in existence for many years have a number of alumni who desire that their children should also study in the same school. Besides the emotional attachment, parents who cherish the value system, ethos and vision of their alma matter would like to give these benefits to their children also. Further, the schools have a special responsibility towards the children of their old students whose life, in a way, was shaped by the schools in which they studied. So the committee has provided for alumni as a separate category with weightage to be given to father and mother individually, if they are alumni of the school.
4.4 Children with Special Needs
This is an age of inclusive education. Every educational institution has to strive to provide appropriate educational service to all types of children. It is no longer valid to argue that children with special needs have to go to special schools. Such children learn better when they are mainstreamed. Other children also cherish the experience of studying with a heterogeneous peer group and such an experience is very enriching for them. However, every school may not have the facilities and the expertise to cater to all children with special needs. Depending on their own contexts and capacities, schools can offer some weightage to children with special needs. For this purpose the committee has proposed a separate criterion of Children with Special Needs without specifying the types of such needs they may include physically challenged, visually challenged, dystexic children, children suffering from autism etc.
4.5 Girl Child
The importance of promoting the education of the girl child needs to be emphasized. Even today there is a widespread gender bias against the girl child. Only preferential option will enable the girl child to take her rightful place in society. Keeping this in mind the committees has decided to keep Girl Child as a criterion for award of weightage. This provision will help in moving towards equal ratio of boys and girls in the classroom and in the school.
4.6 Educational Qualification of Parents
The Committee discussed the issue of allotting weightage to parents according to their educational qualification. The mandate of the Committee to suggest a common procedure for admission to nursery classes is restricted to the unaided private schools of Delhi. Children who seek admission in these schools are mostly from homes of educated parents. Having taken a stand that the admission should, in no case be based on interview of children and interaction with parents, the Committee finds its necessary to look at alternative objective criteria to distinguish between parents, most of whom belong to the educated section of Delhi. A logical solution lies in allocating weightage on a differential scale for the various levels of educational qualification of parents. In proposing this criterion the Committee is not taking an elitist view. Moreover there is already a proposal to provide a separate quota for the economically and socially backward sections of society. This provision would also take care of the needs of the children of educationally deprived parents. Reflecting this concern, the Committee is recommending in the subsequent section that schools could give weightage to the children of disadvantaged groups and underprivileged sections of society under school-specific criteria.
By giving weightage to parental educational qualification, the committee felt that it would send a strong message that educated parents create effective learning environment at home, thereby becoming partners with the school in the task of empowering the children and building their character. Further, educated parents also contribute to the higher motivation of their children in matters of learning and development. Besides providing guidance to their children, educated parents can play a proactive role in helping the school improve qualitatively by their informed opinions and feedback on the policies and programmes of the institution. So weightage has been given for parents educational qualifications.
4.7 School Specific Criteria
The framework for admission process should have a inbuilt mechanism for flexibility to enable each school to adapt it according to its context and local requirements. Without such a provision the admission procedure may end up as a strait jacket, becoming self-defeating and counter productive. Schools, as responsible partners with parents over an extended period of 12 14 years, should have the freedom to specify their own philosophy, value systems, specific needs and then decide on certain parameters for admission. However schools have to fix such parameters and declare them on their website and notice Board and print them in their prospectus and registration form. It will enable parents to fill in the relevant details in the registration forms under this category besides making the process completely transparent. This will also help the parents to make an appropriate choice of school for their children.
It would be advisable for schools to identify one or more criteria under this section and demarcate weightage for each. An illustrative list of examples has been provided in the section dealing with admission procedure. Schools may add to this list of change the criteria according to their needs and requirement. They may also allocate weightage for children of underprivileged section, as mentioned in the preceding section.
There is a wide variety of schools set up in Delhi, each with its own specific characteristics, obligations and client groups. Thus some schools cater to those from the armed forces and have the mandate to provide admission to that category of children. It will not be fair to make these schools change their admission priorities completely since they have specific obligations. These schools can give all the weightage under school specific criteria to children of parents who they have been mandated to serve in the first place. So in the case of this category of schools the weightage need not be further broken down under more than one parameter as has been recommended for other schools.
There are also schools established and run by religious or linguistic minorities under Article 30 (1) of the Constitution. The freedom to administer and , in this instance, to admit children of the minority to the school, remains safeguarded.
4.8 Weightage Points
The Committee thus decided to devise a method and assigned criteria by which each applicant can be assessed on a scale by giving weightage points under different heads as mentioned above. Since weightage points are clearly indicated, the applicant can himself/herself do the marking and count the total, before handing over the form back to the school. The school can then display the entire list along with cut off points, in a descending order of the weightage points. Parents would find the exercise completely transparent, i.e. those who have got admission would know how they have got it and those who are not able to get admission would also know why they have not got it. It will introduce a good deal of both objectivity and transparency. The Committee felt that this transparent way of assessment will also meet the demand of equity as well.
Part III
RECOMMENDATIONS
5. After holding wide spread consultations with different stakeholders and critically examining the suggestions and proposals that have been received, the Committee deliberated on the points raised in order to arrive at specific recommendations. The Committee has kept in mind the need to find ways and means to establish a fair and equitable way of conducting the admission procedures, maintaining transparency and not subjecting the young child or the parents to unfair pressure or coercive practices. The Committee makes the following recommendations:
General
Schools shall completely eliminate interview of/interaction with children and parents. Similarly there shall be no observation of children either in formal or informal conditions to decide their admission.
There would be no overall lottery system adopted to select/shortlist children for admission. However, in the calculation of overall weightage points, as has been enumerated subsequently in this part, if at any stage the number of applicants exceeds the number of available seats, limited use of lottery system would be adopted from within the applicants at this stage to select children for admission.
Pre Admission Procedure
In order to ensure complete transparency in the admission process schools should declare the following particulars in the very beginning through website, schools notice Board and prospectus:
Number of seats available for admission
Number of seats to be filled through general category, from disadvantaged/underprivileged groups, if applicable and number of seats available under management quota, if any
Dates, location and mode of distribution and receipt of registration forms.
Age group of children who are eligible to apply for the current academic session.
Information about the schools infrastructural facilities, faculty, facilities available for children with special needs, fee structure, past performance of the school in different fields etc.
Schools may also declare, at least two weeks in advance, the dates from which the registration forms for nursery classes will be distributed. Forms should be given to all those who wish to apply.
Registration Form
A standardized Registration Form is recommended for all the schools and the form may be suitably adapted as per the particular needs of each school. The form has to be designed to elicit pertinent answers from the parents but without asking irrelevant questions. No question should be asked regarding social status or income or any other factor that might hurt the sentiments of parents. A suggested Registration Form for Admission is given in Anneuxure 1.
In order to ensure that parents provide true and authentic information in the registration form, schools may ask all the parents seeking admission for their children to give an undertaking declaring that the information provided by them to the school in the registration form is based on facts and authentic records and that in the event of the school discovering any discrepancy in the particulars provided by the parents, the admission of their children would be summarily rejected and the school would have the freedom to legally proceed against such parents. (A clause can also be added in the admission form that the parents understand and accept that providing false information will result in cancellation of admission).
Schools would scrutinize the registration forms to verify the details and other particulars filled up by parents. No documents need to be submitted at the time of submission of forms. However the documents have to be furnished at the time of admission. The list of supporting documents to be produced by the parents at the time of admission is given in Annexure 2.
Admission Committee
In order to make the admission process transparent and participatory, it is necessary that an Admission Committee under the Chairmanship of the Principal of the school is constituted in each school. Since parents are partners in providing good education, it is recommended that representatives of Parents who are in the School Managing Committee, should be included in this committee. Accordingly the committee will have the following members:
Two Parent representatives in the School Managing Committee
Headmaster of the School/Incharge of the primary section
Functions of the Admission Committee
Overall monitoring of the admission process
Conducting the draw of lots, wherever it is required , in a transparent manner in front of parents and all the members of the admission committee
Ensuring that the norms and criteria specified for the admission are objectively applied to determine the admission.
Ensuring that the time schedule and other stipulation in the admission procedure are faithfully adhered to.
Attending to complaints, if any in an impartial manner and taking remedial/corrective measures.
Time Schedule for Admission
There is a tendency among schools to start the registration process as early as possible to gain a head start over other schools in the area. This practice is unhealthy. Hence the committee recommends that there should be a uniform time schedule for nursery admission. The admission process shall be time bound and all private schools of Delhi should abide by it.
The committee expects that the entire process of admission beginning with the issue of registration forms upto payment of fees and completing the admission formalities should be done within a period of three to four months. It is recommended that the admission process may commence on 1st December. A suggested time schedule is given below:
|
Issue and submission of Registration Forms |
1st to 20th December |
|
Screening of Forms |
21st December to 25th January |
|
Display of the entire list of registered candidates with the cut-off point as well as the list of candidates short-listed for admission and candidates in the waiting list |
31st Jaunary |
|
Payment of fees and completing Admission Formalities |
1st February to 20th February |
|
Second List (If any) |
26th February |
|
Withdrawal of admission, refund of fees and operating waiting list wherever all the seats have not been filled |
Upto 28th / 29th February (This date can remain flexible and can be extended upto 15th March |
|
Opening of the School |
1st April |
Admission Process
The school would assess the applicants on a scale of 1 to 100 in the following manner:
Under the neighbourhood head, an applicant staying within a radius of 3 kms will get the maximum of 20 points. Less weightage has been proportionately assigned to those living farther off, upto the distance of 10 km, from the school and no weightage be given for those living beyond that distance.
A sibling will get 20 points.
Under alumni category, if the father or mother is an alumni, 5 points each will be given and if both are alumni, 10 points will be given.
Any child who is physically disabled or any child with special needs will get 5 points.
Under educational qualification, a maximum of 20 points will be awarded depending on the parents level of qualification. In the case of single parent weightage given for educational qualification will be doubled.
A girl child will get 5 points.
Under school specific parameters which the school will decide, 20 points will be given. The weightage under school specific parameters, should in no case, be used for any sort of interview or interactive session with parents/children.
Thus fully taking into consideration the several weightage points that deserved inclusion, the committee is recommending the following specific matrix for calculation of weightage points:
|
Sl. No. |
Criteria |
Specification |
Range of Points |
Put a tick mark at the appropriate place |
||
|
|
|
|
|
For Parents |
For the school |
|
|
1. |
Neighbourhood |
0-3 km Above 3 and below 5 km Above 5 and below 8 km Above 8 and below 10 km Above 10 km |
20 16 12 08 No weightage |
|
|
|
|
2. |
Sibling |
|
20 |
|
|
|
|
3. |
Alumni |
Father Mother |
05 05 |
|
|
|
|
4. |
Any child with special needs |
Child with special needs who can be mainstreamed under inclusive education |
05 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mother |
Father |
|
|
|
5. |
Educational Qualifications |
Postgraduation which includes professional qualifications Graduation Sr. Secondary Class X |
10 08 06 04 |
10 08 06 04 |
|
|
|
6. |
Girl Child |
|
05 |
|
|
|
|
7. |
Any other parameters which the school may like to fix as per their needs/ requirements |
|
20 |
|
|
|
Total Points :
Before moving further, it was felt that an actual application, in field condition, would give more credibility to the proposed recommendation. So, from the list of applicants to one of the unaided private schools of Delhi, a random sample of thousand applications for the 2005-06 academic year were taken out and the proposed matrix was applied to make the selection of students. The Committee came up with the detailed results for 100 available seats in the school, the details of which are given in Annexure 3.
On the basis of the total number of seats available, the school would denote the cut off point by preparing the list of all registered children in a descending order of points secured and display the entire list. The admission would be done purely on the basis of the merit list prepared by the above predetermined points. In doing so, there is a possibility that in some schools there may be more children than the seats still remaining at the last stage/last cut off point. In order to decide the admission at this stage, a draw of lots on a limited scale has to be conducted in the presence of the admission committee and the parents. As the lottery would be between a small number of students and as it would be for children having the same weightage point, there would be both fairness and justice. The date, time and place for the draw of lots should be put up on the notice board and the Schools website for the information of parents.
In order to decide the points to be given under neighbourhood concept, every school should identify clearly demarcated areas in the schools neighbourhood and indicate them in the Registration Form according to the distance specifications with weightage points for each distance zone. An example is given below:
|
0-3 km |
XYZ Colony, KYZ Nagar 20 points |
|
Above 3 upto 5 km |
SDS Enclave, RLT colony 16 points |
|
Above 5 upto 8 km |
ABC Nagar, EFG Road 12 points |
|
Above 8 upto 10 km |
JKL Colony, MNO Vihar 08 points |
School Specific Parameters
Under the 20 points earmarked for Any other parameters which the school may like to fix as per their needs/requirement, the school should decide these parameters before hand and include them in the registration form. It will enable parents to denote the appropriate weightage points under this category. The school may set aside these 20 points under one or more than one parameter. One of these parameters could be for parents profession also. It is for the school to decide about the profession they may like to give weightage. An illustrative list of examples of such parameters is given below:
Illustrative list of parameters for 20 Points:
|
Single Parent |
5 points |
|
Parents Profession |
5 points |
|
Children belonging to disadvantaged groups |
5 points |
|
Children of transferable Government employees Or Children of personnel of Defence and paramilitary forces |
5 points |
Besides the above categories, schools can also consider children of regional and linguistic groups, children of under privileged segments of society etc. Schools may decide on such definite and objective parameters and announce them clearly for the sake of transparency.
Special Category Schools
There are schools that are catering mainly to the educational needs of the children of armed forces and paramilitary forces. Such schools will follow the policy norms criteria laid down for admission of the children of the personnel whom they are serving now. For the remaining general category, they will follow the above-mentioned point system. For minority schools established under Article 30(1) of the Constitution, the freedom to administer and admit children remains safeguarded.
Payment of Fees and Refund
Sufficient time should be given for the parents to pay the fees.
Admission and other fees should be collected only from parents whose children have been given admission. In case any fee is collected from a parent whose child is denied admission subsequently on valid grounds, the entire fee except the registration fee collected from the parent should be refunded and receipt obtained.
6. Discretion
The committee recommends that 10% of the total seats available in a school may be left to the discretion of the management. The number of seats to be filled under management quota must also be made public before the admission process commences. Even for the management quota, the children have to be registered with the school in the stipulated period.
The children of the staff also have a claim for admission to the school. Hence, in deciding on the total number, this should also be kept in sight or they can be given admission automatically as supernumerary seats.
7. Review
The common admission procedure as recommended by the committee may be adopted initially for a period of three years. During this period, feedback from different stakeholders may be examined to review and refine the procedure.
8. Suggestions
The above recommendations apply to the nursery admission procedures. However, since there are larger issues involved in the area of educational provision by government and private agencies, which are directly connected with the issue of regulation of nursery admissions, the Committee feels that there is a necessity for a long-term equitable solution to the problem of quality educational provision in the Delhi NCT. It can be said with a fair degree of assurance that several Delhi schools provide education of very high quality. Side by side, there are also a very large number of schools which do not provide even a basic minimum of worthwhile education. The National Education Policy of 1986 stressed the need to focus on those at the top and at the same time to cater to the needs of those at the base of pyramid. Hence the Committee would like to place the following suggestions for the consideration of appropriate authorities:
(i) The concept of neighbourhood schools will succeed only if all the schools including government-run schools provide education of comparable quality. In this knowledge-intensive society and where competence is a non-negotiable requirement, this long-neglected sector needs urgent remedial measures. The committee suggests that efforts should be made by authorities and schools in a short time frame to improve the quality of education provided by the government schools in Delhi. This will help in changing the popular perception that government schools are not as good as some private schools and thereby putting great pressure on the private schools.
(ii) We have put a good deal of stress to promote the policy of neighbourhood schooling. But it will not work on its own, unless and until the average school in the neighbourhood is a good school, a school of quality. That is why it is essential that a major effort is made to improve the quality of the Government Schools. There is also uneven distribution of schools in different localities of Delhi at present and this calls for a rational approach to implement the neighbourhood approach. Systematic and accurate school mapping of different educational zones of Delhi and the establishment of new schools in zones where there are only a few would immensely help in supporting the operationalization of the neighbourhood policy. Further, private initiatives with affordable cost should be encouraged to establish quality schools in areas that have low concentration of schools or which are unserved. This will then ensure quality school education in all parts of Delhi.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Dr. (Mrs.) Shyama Chona) (Shri Ashok Ganguly)
Principal Chairman, CBSE and
Delhi Public School Chairman of the
R.K. Puram, New Delhi Committee
and Convener of the
Committee
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
(Fr. T.V. Kunnunkal) (Shri Ved Vyas) (Dr. Anil Wilson)
Former Chairman, CBSE Retd. Principal, Modern Principal
and Former Chairman School and Advisor, St. Stephens College,
National Institute of Open Vasant Valley School, Delhi and Member of the
Schooling and Member of Delhi and Member of the Committee
the Committee Committee
DATE : 16.10.2006
Annexure 1
Use only black ball pen to fill the form
Do not enter registration number yourself
Do not fill anything in the last column of the form
Use appropriate tick mark as in the relevant box given in the sections 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6.
Use the codes given below to fill in the section 1 (Locality Code) and section 7 (Occupation Code)
Residence Locality Code
|
Code |
Distance Range Locality |
|
A |
(0-3) XYZ Colony, KYZ Nagar |
|
B |
Above 3 upto 5 km SDS Enclave, RLT colony |
|
C |
Above 5 upto 8 km ABC Nagar, EFG Road |
|
D |
Above 8 upto 10 km JKL Colony, MNO Vihar |
Occupation Code
|
Code |
Occupation |
|
ADV |
Advocate |
|
AWS |
Airways |
|
ARC |
Architect |
|
DEF |
Army/Navy/Air Force Defence Services |
|
BNK |
Bank Employee |
|
BUS |
Business |
|
CAC |
Charted Accountant |
|
DOC |
Doctor |
|
EDU |
Educationist |
|
EMB |
Embassy Employee |
|
FIN |
Financial Organisation Employee |
|
HTL |
Hotel |
|
CIV |
Civil Service |
|
INT |
International Organisation |
|
NWS |
Journalist/AIR/Print Media |
|
MER |
Merchant Navy |
|
OTH |
Others |
|
PVT |
Private Sector Employee |
|
PUB |
Public Sector Employee |
|
RWS |
Railway Employee |
|
SCT |
Scientist |
*Any other occupation may be added
CERTIFICATE FROM THE PARENT
I/We hereby certify that the above information provided by me/us is correct and I/we understand that if the information is found to be incorrect or false, the ward shall be automatically debarred from selection/admission process without any correspondence in this regard. I/we also understand that the application/registration/short listing does not guarantee admission to my ward. I/we accept the process of admission undertaken by the school and I/we will abide by the decision taken by the school authorities.
Signature of the mother Signature of the father
Name of the mother _____________________ Name of the father ______________
Date : ____________________
Annexure – 1
Suggested Registration
Form for Admission Class: Registration No.:
Name of the school
Address of the school
Name of the applicant :
Date of Birth DD MM YY
Fathers Name :
Mothers Name :
1. Residential Address : Locality Code
(See Locality Code Overleaf)
Pin Code :
Contact Phone No(s) :
Email Address :
2. Sibling Real brother/sister only
Tick the appropriate Yes No
If sibling in the same school, Sibling Name:
Give details of sibling Class-Section:
3. School Alumni
(Tick the appropriate)
(A) Father Yes No
(B) Mother Yes No
4. Child with Special Needs
(Enclose, authenticated documents) Yes No
5. Educational Qualification Post Graduation Graduation Sr. Secondary Secondary school
(Tick Highest qualification only) OR OR school examination Examination
Professional Degree Equivalent 10+2 OR 10th OR
Equivalent Equivalent
Father
Mother
6. Gender Boy Girl
7. Parents Occupation
Father Occupation Code:
Designation:
Organisation:
Name:
Organisation Add:
Mother Occupation Code:
Designation:
Organisation:
Name:
Organisation Add:
Single Parent Father Mother
(Tick one, only if applicable)
*Schools may indicate their own criteria for allocation of weightage points under this head.
Annexure 2
List of Supporting Documents to be Produced by the Parents at the Time of
Admission
Date of Birth Certificate of the Child
Medical Certificate of the Child (for children with special needs)
Pass Out Certificate of Father/Mother (School, Graduation, Postgraduation etc.)
Proof of Residence
Proof for sibling (wherever applicable)
Proof of Alumni (wherever applicable)
Proof for any other criteria that the school may decide for the allocation of 20 points under School Specific Parameters.
Annexure 3
Trial Run Data
Criteria Applied On Sample Data Based on 2005-2006 Nursery Admission of a Delhi School
(Sample Draw From Random 1000 Forms)
Seats 100
General 90
Management 10
|
POINTS |
NO. OF APPLICANTS |
CUMMULATIVE TOTAL |
|
|
80 |
1 |
1 |
|
|
75 |
3 |
4 |
|
|
71 |
2 |
6 |
|
|
70 |
2 |
8 |
|
|
68 |
3 |
11 |
|
|
66 |
7 |
18 |
|
|
65 |
1 |
19 |
|
|
63 |
2 |
21 |
|
|
61 |
7 |
28 |
|
|
60 |
6 |
34 |
|
|
58 |
2 |
36 |
|
|
56 |
9 |
45 |
|
|
55 |
8 |
53 |
|
|
53 |
6 |
59 |
|
|
51 |
10 |
69 |
|
|
50 |
17 |
86 |
|
|
49 |
2 |
88 |
Cut off point up to which all applicants will get admission |
|
48 |
23 |
111 |
Here lies a limited lottery system for two available seats amongst 23 applicants having equal weightage point |
|
46 |
42 |
153 |
|
|
45 |
25 |
178 |
|
|
43 |
50 |
228 |
|
|
42 |
1 |
229 |
|
|
41 |
92 |
321 |
|
|
40 |
29 |
350 |
|
|
39 |
3 |
353 |
|
|
38 |
81 |
434 |
|
|
37 |
2 |
436 |
|
|
36 |
107 |
543 |
|
|
35 |
28 |
571 |
|
|
34 |
4 |
575 |
|
|
33 |
50 |
625 |
|
|
32 |
2 |
627 |
|
|
31 |
73 |
700 |
|
|
30 |
21 |
721 |
|
|
29 |
3 |
724 |
|
|
28 |
46 |
770 |
|
|
26 |
62 |
832 |
|
|
25 |
15 |
847 |
|
|
24 |
3 |
850 |
|
|
23 |
26 |
876 |
|
|
22 |
1 |
877 |
|
|
21 |
59 |
936 |
|
|
20 |
10 |
946 |
|
|
18 |
18 |
964 |
|
|
16 |
25 |
989 |
|
|
15 |
7 |
996 |
|
|
14 |
1 |
997 |
|
|
13 |
1 |
998 |
|
|
10 |
1 |
999 |
|
|
8 |
1 |
1000 |
|
The above trail run showed that 88 children had qualified for admission at the stage of 49 weightage points. For the remaining 02 seats there were 23 applicants, all getting 48 points. It meant that a limited lottery at this stage would resolve the tie i.e. selection of 02 out of 23 applicants.
Email – socialjurist@bol.net.in