Boycotting Schools is Not the Answer

Suraj Nandrekar
The recent mass class boycotts in two schools in Calangute have raised serious concerns about the implications of such actions on students’ education. As protests entered their third day, attendance dwindled significantly, with only a handful of students present for classes. The issue at the heart of this unrest is the decision to start the academic year on April 7, a change that many parents and students are evidently unhappy with.
While the frustrations of parents are valid, leading a boycott is not a solution.
In Calangute, only eight students attended classes in one school, while the other grades remained devoid of any students.
Parents have taken to the streets, backed by a Parent-Teacher Association (PTA), demanding a revision of the school schedule. However, school authorities say they have remained committed to discussions, aiming for a resolution that could benefit the students.
It is crucial to understand that a classroom boycott—while seemingly a powerful act of protest—places the burden squarely on the students. The implications are dire: when students fail to attend, they jeopardize their chances of meeting the minimum attendance requirement needed to appear for their final exams.
This can have long-lasting repercussions on their academic journey and future prospects. Indeed, it is the students who will ultimately suffer if this stalemate continues.
The High Court of Bombay at Goa has already weighed in on the matter, refusing to grant any respite to the parents involved. This legal stance underscores the importance of upholding established rules and regulations.
Education should not be compromised because of dissent; rather, it should be a platform for constructive dialogue between parents, educators, and the administration.
Moreover, the timing of this protest raises questions about the underlying motives.
While many criticize the government’s efforts to improve the standard of education, it is disheartening to witness that when steps are finally taken to implement changes—such as transitioning to a new academic calendar aligned with the National Education Policy (NEP)—the immediate response is to resort to anarchy rather than engage in a meaningful conversation.
Parents expressing their grievances is a fundamental right, but it must be exercised in a way that does not negatively impact the students. The issues faced by families—be it financial instability or scheduling conflicts—are real and should be addressed. However, boycotting school is not the way to resolve these issues. Open channels of communication between parents and educational institutions can lead to viable solutions that consider the needs of everyone involved.
Instead of promoting a culture of protest that ignores the consequences, it is imperative that parents and school authorities collaborate to foster a supportive environment for the students. Education is a shared responsibility, and adherence to established protocols is essential for progress. Let’s not teach our children that boycotting is a viable substitute for legitimate dialogue.
Instead, let’s guide them towards productive conversations that uphold their educational rights while addressing the concerns of parents. The future of our students depends on it.