After learning economics in A levels, there’s one thing that has struck me, nothing is ever truly free. It’s an unavoidable and bitter truth but that made me wonder, is free education really a reality then?
The idea of free education is indeed vague and unclear in Nepal despite all the promises made by the authorities. Article 31 (2) of the constitution clearly states that every citizen shall have the right to get compulsory and free education up to the basic and the secondary level from the State. To implement this constitutional provision, Nepal’s parliament enacted the Right to Free and Compulsory Education Act in 2018. This Act focused on providing primary and secondary education to children aged 5 to 13 years old to eliminate child labor and provide free education.
On the surface level, these efforts might seem to solve the problem of illiteracy and student absenteeism. However, even though the results show an increase in the enrollment rate of the students, the efforts were not effective as the dropout rate also rose drastically. According to the World Bank, 83.92 % of the students were enrolled in secondary education in Nepal in the year 2022. However, out of them, only 73 % ended up graduating lower secondary and 27 percent graduated upper secondary according to UNICEF’s Nepal Education Fact Sheets 2022. Despite the government's ‘free education to all’ offer, why did this happen?
Is the curriculum so difficult that the students have to drop out? Or are students themselves unwilling to study?
The high cost of ‘free education’
It’s all because free education isn’t really free as it is depicted to be. The cost of textbooks, school dress, shoes, and stationery aren’t taken into account. It might seem like a small cost but for the poorest parts of Nepal, such items are almost like luxury goods. It’s what determines whether the parents send their children to school or not.
Furthermore, the public schools also charge extra fees in the name of admission, examination, stationary, and other extracurricular activities. Public schools aren’t supposed to charge fees in the first place, but with such miscellaneous expenses, even public schools can be considered moderately-expensive compared with the quality of education they provide. Due to this, as the school year begins, both marginalized and middle-class families exert themselves financially to enroll their children in “public schools”. This itself puts the term “public education” into question. Why are even public schools charging money when they should be provided “free” as indicated by the Constitution?
Though the constitution ensured every citizen with free and compulsory education, the current government has not been able to implement it sincerely. The government schools are unable to operate with the little funds provided by the municipalities, resulting in them asking for fees from the families of the students. This way “non-fee paying public schools” have ended up becoming fee-paying schools.
For instance, Shree Bhanodaya Basic School, a government school situated at Sanagaon, has around 250 students belonging to underprivileged backgrounds. Despite it being a government school funded by Mahalaxmi municipality, families there pay Rs. 6000 a year as the municipality only provides funds for the salary of government teachers. The salary for the remaining private teachers is to be managed by the school itself, for which the school demands a certain amount of fee from the students. This leaves financially struggling families in a difficult position. This truly exemplifies the paradox of ‘free education’. It’s ironic that the government while using appealing language in the constitution, struggles to even fund the salaries of teachers in public schools. No wonder free education has become a myth in Nepal.
It’s all due to the lack of proper budget allocation for education in the previous years. After spending less than 11 percent on education in 2020, Nepal committed to scaling up its budget up to 20 percent by 2021 at the International Funding Conference of the Global Partnership for Education (GPE). Contrary to the optimistic rhetoric by the government, According to the National Educational Center (NEC), Nepal only allocated 11.27 % of its budget in 2023. Impacted by the budget, the public schools could barely afford the salaries of the teachers forbidding them from investing more capital in extracurriculars, ultimately decreasing the quality of education and learning experience they provide.
Parents always dream of sending their children to the best schools with the expectation of getting good jobs in the future. It’s also a desire to give their children what their parents couldn’t provide them with. But there is also this perspective that studying in a “good school” helps get “good jobs”. By good jobs, they mean jobs that help earn a decent salary every month to regulate the monthly expenses of the family. This perspective compels them to take the burden of loans, and mortgage their houses and lands just to provide their children “good education” in English-medium private schools. As public schools lack funding, their quality of education is always compromised, convincing the parents to enroll their children in private schools no matter what.
Private schools indeed have an exceptional reputation of their own which assures the parents of their children’s unknown future. However, the risk they take by taking out loans without the guarantee of return is grave; especially for low-income families that struggle to even go along with their daily lives financially. For them, if the child doesn’t learn something and succeed in life, the only thing they gain is a huge debt that passes on from generation to generation, never leaving the family in peace.
Opportunity cost: the hidden cost of ‘free education’ in Nepal
As a student studying economics, I can’t help but relate everything to economic theories and models. The value of the next best alternative that must be given up while making a decision is opportunity cost.
In the rural areas of Nepal, children’s involvement in household activities is the opportunity cost of investing in their education. For instance, as said before, the quality of education is always compromised due to the lack of funding in public schools. In that case, families from extremely low-income backgrounds start weighing the pros and cons. For them, if by going to school the children aren’t gaining any quality education, then it’s better for them to stay at home instead.
People who are financially struggling regard everything as an investment, expecting some kind of return. That return is known as Return on Investment (ROI) in economics. In a similar way, the ROI in children through household activities is greater than the ROI in education in the short run. For them, when children are at school, they are economically inactive and just wasting the little resources (finances) they have in the house. They cannot afford to look at the long-run benefits when the quality of education is not guaranteed by the public schools. Even if education was actually free, the result would be the same considering the poor quality of education provided. By poor quality of education, I mean the existence of rote learning, lack of extracurriculars that hones the creativity in students and lack of proper materials and resources that can guide students towards endless opportunities available worldwide. Hence, since the opportunity cost of going to school is considered higher, the dropout rate of students is higher in Nepal.
This ‘free education’ system also indirectly promotes gender discrimination. Since the quality of education in public schools is generally poor, parents intend to send their children to private schools hoping for higher ROI. But considering the high cost of education there, they would prefer sending their sons instead of their daughters. Since girls will be marrying anyway, ROI in their education is considered relatively low. In that case, some parents believe educating them to a higher level is pointless since they will not be getting any returns whatsoever. Statistically, dropout rates of girls are higher considering such factors. Another factor that increases the dropout rate of girls is the lack of infrastructure development. Public schools lack proper infrastructure (proper toilets, sick rooms) affecting the safety, hygiene, and sanitary needs of the girls. That’s why out of 73 percent of students who don’t graduate upper secondary, 57 percent are females according to the report published by UNICEF.
On the other hand, what boys experience is tricky and depends on the family background. As they are expected to be the breadwinners of the house, boys in some families are expected to leave school and earn from a very young age doing fieldwork. While, some consider the ROI on boys’ education higher and try to enroll them in expensive private schools by taking loans.
Regardless, the future of students in Nepal seems gloomy and the blame goes to the claimed “free education” system of Nepal. Due to the irresponsible execution of the constitutional provisions, Nepali students suffer huge losses affecting their lives severely every day. As long as the government doesn’t focus on increasing the quality of education in public schools, the development of Nepal will not be possible. With almost 25% of the population living below the poverty line, and an unemployment rate of 46% (CIA World Factbook), providing free and quality education should be the government’s main focus.
Grey areas
Nepal has indeed put in efforts for free education that cannot be ignored or disregarded. The 2018 Education Act provisions that people who have not acquired basic level education would not be able to hold any posts in government or non-governmental institutions. Similarly, such people would be prohibited from holding membership in any company, firm, or cooperative or acquiring their shares. This would block their way of having any income source if they have not completed basic level education. Thinking of the consequences, people would ultimately study no matter what. But considering how disorganized the government has been, such efforts seem like a facade that is just meant to create support for the government and respective political parties.
At least in legal terms, the government has been serious about the education system of Nepal. However, without planned and serious implementation, there is no point in such constitutional provisions and laws. The government has not been far-sighted regarding this matter. Though they enacted the 2018 Compulsory Education Act, they overlooked the direct and indirect costs (enrolment and exam fees, uniforms, and learning materials) created during the process.
The government has also failed to monitor and regulate the private schools of Nepal, testing whether their services, fees, and teacher requirements meet the current education standards. Their transparency, accountability, and quality of education are not evaluated to the point that speculations of corruption and bribery have arisen. Bidya Nath Koirala, a professor at the Tribhuvan University (TU) raised concerns on how even capitalist countries like Norway, and Denmark have made education free while Nepal, claiming to be on the path of socialism, supports the private sector instead.
Moving Forward
Moving Forward, the government should first guarantee the Right to Free and Compulsory Education Act itself rather than passing the responsibility to the private sector like it has been doing for years. To improve the overall quality of education in public schools, the budget must be increased by a further 5-10 percent next year considering the current year’s budget of 17 percent. The current year’s budget for education has increased by around 6% than the previous year which gives Nepali students, a hope for change. Now that the budget has increased, ensuring that it is utilized properly is also an important step that the government has always failed to follow through. Research on whether the budget was utilized properly and what must be further improved to obtain a fruitful result in public schools must be done.
Regarding how to make education free, compulsory direct and indirect costs must be abolished completely by ensuring that the government’s budget covers the entire cost of studying in a public school. This way, public schools won’t need funds and donations from parents. After tackling the problem of finance, improving the quality of education is the next step. To do so, extra resources must be allocated to training and retaining an adequate number of qualified teachers. This also indirectly solves the issue of the low student-teacher ratio government schools have been experiencing over the years. Also, the infrastructure of the school (toilets, classrooms, sick room) must be developed as per the health standards for the students to lead a productive student life. It helps decrease the female student dropout rate as this promotes the sanitary needs of the girls as well.
Finally, the last thing to do is to take firm action against gender discrimination such that the dropout rate of female students decreases. According to UNICEF, investing in a girl’s education is one of the most transformative development strategies. If girls themselves are educated, the early/child marriage rate would drop, making them live productive lives, ultimately contributing to the country’s economy. Uplifting girls, promoting equality, and developing the infrastructure of public schools: going forward with the above actions, free education in Nepal would ultimately become a reality instead of the false ray of hope it has been all these years.