Transcription of Interview 1

Transcription of Interview 1
Date: July 13, 2009 (Monday) Time 11: 18 AM to 1:40 PM
Researcher: Sir, Namaste!
Respondent: Namaskar Sir
Researcher: sir, may I have your few minutes today?
Respondent: Definitely sir.
Researcher: Sir, I am going to interview you online! It takes about 30 minute Sir.
Respondent: alright sir. I am ready now.
Researcher: Sir, I think I shouldn't do the briefing of my research as you have guided me many of the times. Actually, the interview guide I have prepared now is based on the quantitative findings that I requested you to fill up two months ago.
Respondent: ok sir
Researcher: Sir, the first question: How can we make people free to acquire knowledge through formal, non-formal and informal means?
Respondent: I did not understand your question: "free to acquire knowledge" means in terms of money or other obligations?
Researcher: I mean, in Nepal people have freedom to learn formally as there are many schools and colleges but due to the less emphasis on non-formal and informal education people have been compelled to either go to school or deprived of education.
Respondent: In my point of view: All the three forms formal, non-formal and informal education are important in our life as ways of educating and no one can complement other...(though people may say them as complementary) and only important thing is how to value the knowledge acquired through those form of education. Only one way will be incomplete. Promoting equal opportunity to learn through all these means will be a maximum benefit to the learners. The charm and value of each of these forms of education cannot be complemented by others. These forms can be used as balancing tool for the total education system to give knowledge to citizens on different areas for life skills and professions depending on what situation the person (educatee) is in.
Researcher: Sir, thank you for your broad perspective to analyze the phenomenon. Sir, can you give some particular strategies to be adopted to emphasize non-formal and informal learning as equally as formal learning in Nepal?
Respondent: Sir, in my opinion, at first the education system as a hole should be focused on target groups of formal, informal, and non-formal education. Then based on mapping of these target groups, the education policy should be made on "how the out of school children, less or non educated adults and olds (senior citizens) be engaged in learning through their daily life activities, motivate them for meaningful learning and bring their skill into account". Their need should be heard, their ideas should be appreciated and their way to learn should be valued. For that first of all non-formal and informal media or methods of learning should be promoted in the society by the national and local government, not totally depending on foreign supported NGOs/INGOs.
Researcher: Sir, thank you very much. Do you think the ones who come from non-formal and informal means will be able to adjust with the people who are from formal education system? If they are not then what should we do to make them able to compete with the one who come from formal means?
Respondent: That's why I am talking about balancing each other by the total education system. The need of the people should be assessed and programs should be intended to develop a complete skill but it should be clear that formal, informal and non-formal are not complement to each other. The one who comes from non-formal and informal education can be equal or even better than the one who come from formal schooling. They can adjust themselves with the people who are from formal education system. I remember one example: my father never went to formal school in his life, but whenever people had to write rajinama, tamasuk, and other applications for local people, they used to come to my father and my father was better valued than those who have done SLC, or I. A or even B.A. with his skill. I have seen many people in society who never went to formal school but have better adjusted in society than those who have formal education in terms of life skill, daily life problem solving and dealing with other people.
Researcher: Thank you very much indeed! You have cited a very good example of informal learning. But sir, these days employment has been more important than it was in the past. If we have to make the non-formal and informal learners equally competitive like the formal learners what should we do? Actually, how can we assess one’s competence while he/she is selected as an employee? How can we provide same degree of employment opportunity to non-formal and informal learners as formal learners?
Respondent: It is not the degree that judges the skill; it is the skill that judges skill. If a person has skill in his area of work or profession, that should be valued, how he/she learnt is not important in a society that values knowledge. It is a problem to the society where certificate is valued more than actual skill from very beginning. I met a singer who has very good singing skill (art) and he did not have much formal education, but got visa to come to USA and then he applied for permanent resident visa and he got it being talent in singing but not based on his formal degree. Many PhD and Masters Degree holders from Nepal come to USA and they don't get permanent resident visa at a time without getting good job except for DV holders. Next important thing is: skill based employment but not certificate based employment. Do you think any formal school degree holder can be a good climbing guide to the Everest? Do you think any formal degree holder can be good swim master? Do you think any formal degree holder can be a good singer? But one thing: if a person has skill in one area and tries to seek job in other area, it is always problem, no matter what form of education he/she has. Formal degree is valued only when the job needs formal training or education, otherwise skill-based job don't need degrees. Next thing: informal and non-formal education should be valued based on skills the person has or learns or can perform and jobs should be emphasized in those areas. Limitations of each form of education should be understood and therefore, their areas of job market should be developed accordingly.
Researcher: Sir, you gave a nice example on how informal skill is valued in a developed country but the case is different in Nepal. The example like of the musician seems to be idealistic for the people in Nepal. In this case we need to recognize, accredit and certify the non-formal and informal learning outcomes. So, I would like to have your opinion on how can people acquire skills, knowledge and competences relevant to their lives? If they are through non-formal and informal means, can they be recognized or certified as equivalently as formal learning?
Respondent: Radio Nepal takes "voice test" to be a singer. CTEVT takes skill tests to certify the skills learned by an individual in an informal or non-formal ways. A cook gives cooking test in a hotel and can be a good chef (professional cook) without formal degree in cooking, a carpenter can appear in a test to certify his/her skill but more the employer will require is skill at last, not the certificate. Certification is a process of grading the level of skill the person has but it is not to equalize as formal education degree. I mean, formal education degree and non-formal education or informal education certification cannot be same. In terms of value, it depends upon what specialized areas they have and can perform in their areas of skill. But one thing is important: everybody should have fundamental skills of reading, writing, listening, speaking, and performing no matter now they learn. If a cook knows how to cook better but cannot read or write would be problematic. He/she should be able to tell his/her recipe in writing, calculating and analyzing why. These skills are fundamental to all people.
Reading, writing, speaking, listening of a language at fundamental level for daily life should not be counted as skill, they should be guaranteed to all citizens. Other levels of learning should be viewed in terms of formal, non-formal or informal education.
Researcher: Thank you once again for your number of examples and plausible response on the matter. Sir, can we list out non-formal and informal learning skills as you have said and keep them in a framework along with the grades or stages in terms of the complexity of learning these skills? Such practice has been called, so far I know, as the National Qualifications Framework, which encompasses all three forms of learning: formal, non-formal and informal?
Respondent: I don't agree with National Qualification Framework to divide people on different classes based on their skill. I can guarantee that one person’s complete skill can never be understood by others and hence cannot be gauged by a framework. Only, we can do is how to motivate people to perform better in their areas of learning, working or doing (in profession). NQF is a way to deprive people to develop their originality and value their ideas from each other. People will look at each other from the frame of level of qualifications they have acquired and those who perform better in one situation cannot perform better in other situation and how can we develop a single framework to measure the skill of people. However, if some people want to know how much they know and what level they are: there should be close test through which people know their level and try to increase their level of learning and further skill development as per their need.
Researcher: Sir, it's alright. Could you elaborate about the type of 'CLOSE TEST' you have envisaged, please?
Respondent: I mean it should be a test through which the person can judge his or level of learning, or skill through a test that the scores he knows but nobody else otherwise if he/she tells others. There should not be any judge to say you have this level, but the system should display a result to the person without displaying to anybody else unless the person likes to do so. The system itself should be the judge, an impersonal judge.
Researcher: Sir, what type of system do you want to be developed for this?
Respondent: For example: If we want to develop a system to motivate carpenters for learning: Then list the skills of a carpenter in an order of complexity and invite people for training what level they want to join or what level they want to improve their skill without training but by self learning. A carpenter can make very good design but what are good designs should be availed to them and they can increase their skill either by attending training or by trying themselves in their workshop without going out for any training. Just provide them the quality of good furniture: like A class furniture, B class furniture, C class furniture...and they try to go for higher level furniture to make in their workshop/job rather than labeling them as A Grade Carpenter, B grade Carpenter...every carpenter has potential to build A grade furniture if they are given resources and skill development opportunities. Just labeling them will not be positive motivation to them. So NQF will label people but not the object. Let’s develop a framework to classify objects or products...not the people. Then people will try for better product then there will be better learning. Our system of education labels people based on their qualification, not the product.
Researcher: Thank you sir. We are nearly at the end of the conversation. Sir, in your opinion what type of mechanism should we develop to do so? Can a single authority at national level and their branches to the district, and VDC/Municipality level function for managing and monitoring in the Test Centers (at the workshop as you said)?
Respondent: Mr. A deserves first division, not the essay Mr. A wrote. Ms. B deserves distinction, but not the teaching of B in the classroom. I mean we are classifying people based on NQF but not their works. I think the national education system should clearly define the skills not the tests scores. Tests, if need should be conducted as per need to evaluate performance but not to certify it but to guarantee that person has that skill. Testing should be a responsibility of an agency which needs it, not the educating agency. Is any TV program on family planning tested on general people and certified? A radiobroadcasting program educates people about how to speak with confidence with others and is it required by the same radio station to evaluate whether people learnt it or not...I think educating agencies especially non-formal and informal are not for grading but motivating people to perform better. Therefore, if any organization needs a person with that quality, it should conduct a test, but not by the educating agency. The educating agency should motive people to learn more, perform better and improve their life quality. Informal or non-formal education are not within scope of certification, as they are very broad, more general but in case of specific skills, concerned organization can conduct practical test for job seekers.
Researcher: I am happy that you made me see the phenomenon through a broader perspective. Sir, besides the things we shared what should we do to enhance lifelong learning and continuing education, especially in Nepal?
Respondent: Sir, in my opinion we are much focused on tests but not the product. Test is not a good way to measure product or quality of a person.
Researcher: Yes sir, really. Hitherto existing concept of 'quality education' focused on test scores rather than the quality itself.
Respondent: For informal and non-formal learning, there should not be any tests, rather there should be opportunity for performance, value and appreciation to performance and NQF will be only testing tool, measuring people from their grades but it is actually not a true representation of person’s skill acquired in informal setting. Informal or non-formal learning environment makes a great differences and national level to local level education agencies should develop such framework through which people learn skills they need and perform better in their life. Next thing we are trying to equalize informal and non-formal education with formal education, which is never possible. Concentration and diversification are the great differences in them. Concave and convex learning with respect to time and skills can't be equalized.
Researcher: Sir, if a person wishes to join to a higher level in the formal education system, let’s say to BA level without studying up to IA, can he/she be allowed for admission if he/she deserves the intended skills and knowledge? Because of the development in the field of ICTs it has been possible to acquire knowledge and skills informally, hasn't it sir?
Respondent: Definitely, if the person can do it, it is his/her responsibility to decide and judge him/herself...and finally bears the consequences...as per his/her choice. To join a BA program, IA should not be a barrier if the person wants. Even if a BA majoring in English wants to join physics in M Sc should be allowed because it is the person himself/herself to judge his/her ability not the tests in a level. If the person cannot perform well, he/she will drop out of it or do very hard work to succeed or even can do better than others from the same area. If a singer, never joined formal education, wants to join MA in singing, should be allowed to do it if she takes responsibility to fit into the program with her skills in singing.
Researcher: Sir, thank you very much for your valuable viewpoints. Sir, anything you want to say....?
Respondent: Thank you so much Kapil Sir for this opportunity to talk to you about various issues of informal and non-formal education. Again, I would like to remind you that I am not an expert in these areas and these are my opinions at the present context, may be different from past and also may differ in future.
Researcher: It's alright sir. Thank you very much for giving me time. Thank you sir! Bye sir!!!