Education law put on hold following criticism over ‘inconsistencies’ days before election

The Education Act-2026 was slated to be presented at the Advisory Council meeting of the interim government just before the 13th National Parliamentary Elections. However, stakeholders believe the law is being passed in a rush, riddled with various inconsistencies and without providing adequate time for discussion. They argue that although the draft, published on February 1, contains massive discrepancies, feedback was sought within just six days—three of which were public holidays.

This, they claim, is undemocratic and unreasonable. Academics are also questioning the underlying motive of the government in attempting to overhaul such a critical sector as education at the very end of its tenure. However, in the face of intense public backlash and the realization that there is insufficient time for a thorough review before the upcoming national election, the government has ultimately put the approval of the law on hold.

The Advisory Council is set to sit for its final meeting before the elections tomorrow, Monday (February 9) morning, as confirmed by interim government sources. Meanwhile, education insiders suggest the proposal for the Education Act may be raised during this meeting.

Hasty Education Law at the Final Hour

Stakeholders state that the interim government has initiated the formulation of the Education Act suddenly at the very end of their term, which educationists find neither timely nor acceptable. The draft was prepared and published hurriedly without sufficient consultation. Furthermore, seeking opinions within only six days—immediately before the national elections and including three holidays—is cited as an example of illogical and unacceptable haste. Requesting feedback for such an important law in such a short window is deemed undemocratic.

"The government formed many commissions but did not form any reform commission for education. It would have been logical if the government had done these things based on a reform commission from the start. Passing an education law in a hurry while leaving will instead create more problems." — Professor Mohammad Mujibur Rahman, Institute of Education and Research (IER), University of Dhaka.

Experts point out that the draft law was published even before the 10-member high-level committee on secondary education reform, led by Professor Manjur Ahmed of BRAC University, could submit its report. Consequently, there are fears that the committee's recommendations will be difficult to include in the law. Most of the hundreds of recommendations from previous advisory committees remain unimplemented. Educationists believe the law should be formulated in a modern way through adequate scrutiny and stakeholder opinions rather than in haste. They emphasize the need for a strong, effective legal framework for educational reform.

In a statement regarding the proposed Education Act-2026, Professor M. Niaz Asadullah, Convener of the Education Rights Forum (Shikkha Odhikar Sangsad), said that passing a law hurriedly without consultation and consensus will not fulfill the goals of education reform. He expressed concern over the formulation of the draft just before a new government takes office, without public involvement or representation.

He stated, "We believe the approval of this law is not timely while the country is on the brink of national elections and the interim government is serving a limited term."

He warned that an abruptly created draft at the end of the government's tenure would deny democratic rights to universal participation and necessary civil discussion.

Professor Mohammad Mujibur Rahman told The Daily Campus that the government should have aligned the law with the Constitution and the Education Policy. He remarked that this law would create a "hassle" for the next government.

"Whoever comes to power has their own manifesto, philosophy, and plans for education. Once this law is passed, they won't be able to act according to their plans; they will either have to change the law, cancel it, or violate it."

The academic also noted that this government lacks the ‘mandate’ to enact such a law. Education is a long-term process with long-term results. "No one gave this government the mandate to create a law according to their own whims. If the government were elected or had justified it to various political parties through a committee, it would have gained a form of legitimacy; now it won't. I suspect those who come to power next will cancel this law."

Endless Inconsistencies in the Draft

Educationists claim that the draft Education Act-2026, consisting of 11 chapters and 57 articles, is riddled with limitless inconsistencies. It fails to reform issues that have been subjects of long-standing demands and discussions.

• Repetition of Old Laws: The draft keeps primary education mandatory only up to Class 5, repeating the existing 1990 Act, whereas the National Education Policy 2010 stipulated extending it to Class 8.

• Universal Education: Despite long-term demands, the draft fails to include making the entire secondary education universal and tuition-free up to Class 8.

• Coaching and Guide Books: The proposed draft allows coaching, private tuition, and note-guides to continue for another three to five years. Previously, note-guides were banned up to Class 8, and teachers were prohibited from coaching students of their own institutions. The draft ignores the spirit of reform by overlooking these prohibitions.

Insiders say the draft merely compiles existing rules, instructions, and circulars. While this may benefit administration, it will not be effective for improving educational quality. The draft contains very few modern or timely directions and lacks the reflection of modern education or revolutionary reform. Most decisions are left to future regulations and executive orders.

Other specific observations include:

• Ambiguity: Language regarding teacher recruitment (NTRCA), upgrading Qawmi Madrasahs, and sensitive issues like physical and mental punishment is not clear enough. While punishment of students is prohibited, specific penalties for offenders are not clearly mentioned.

• Decentralization: There are no clear declarations regarding making school education universal, ensuring decentralization, or increasing the status of teachers.

• Historical Context: Experts say the draft does not sufficiently reflect the spirit of the July 2024 mass uprising or the necessary curriculum reforms following the changed situation.

• Centralization: Most powers remain concentrated in the hands of the Ministry, with no direction for strengthening education administration at the district or local levels.

• Funding: Issues like school tiffins or hiring counselors are kept optional rather than mandatory.

Management and Curriculum Concerns

The fifth chapter covers management from pre-primary to secondary levels. Article 12 mandates the National Curriculum and Textbook Board (NCTB) to determine general textbooks and makes the national curriculum mandatory for all streams. While this promotes equity, it may hinder schools with different curricula (like Qawmi or International Boards). Giving the power to cancel the registration of foreign curriculum schools for non-compliance is seen as one-sided and regulatory rather than constructive.

Furthermore, Article 11 regarding admission policies mentions quotas for those with special needs, which is seen as positive. However, there are no clear special provisions for ethnic, extremist-affected, or economically backward students. The 2010 policy had specific quotas based on gender, economy, and religion, which the draft does not propose.

Negligence of Religion and Madrasah Education

Stakeholders claim religious and moral education have been neglected. The Center for Intellectual Reform and Thoughts (CIRT) published a review highlighting concerns regarding Qawmi Madrasahs:

• Inclusive Terminology: CIRT objected to the word ‘inclusive’ in Article 2, suggesting its boundaries should be defined so as not to contradict the country’s culture and religious values.

• Conflicting Definitions: Article 2(28) defines ‘General Education’ in a contradictory way, including Madrasah and Technical education under it, while later excluding them as ‘other formal education.’

• Qawmi Level: Article 2(20) includes Qawmi Madrasahs under ‘Madrasah Education,’ but Article 8 classifies it as a stream of ‘Secondary Education.’ Since the highest level of Qawmi (Takmil) is recognized as a Master’s equivalent, classifying the entire system under ‘Secondary’ is logically inconsistent.

• Arabic Language: CIRT demanded that Arabic be given importance alongside English in Article 28.

Critical Issues Ignored

Educationists state that many issues that should be under the law have been relegated to the level of ‘rules/regulations.’ Vital issues missing from the law include:

• Banning public exams at any level of primary education.

• Ensuring modern and relevant knowledge in Qawmi Madrasahs.

• Integrating Qawmi education with the national mainstream.

• Expansion of online and digital education.

• Explicit mention of increasing budget allocation for the education sector.

• Mandatory practical moral education through one’s own religion.

Regarding the draft, Education Advisor Professor Dr. C.R. Abrar told the media that this is the first time an Education Act is being made to bring various scattered policies and circulars under one legal framework. This will create a structure for quality improvement and fund allocation.

Later, on Tuesday (February 10), at an event presenting the final report of the Consultation Committee for Secondary Education Reform, he stated,

"We might not be able to implement everything. However, those who take responsibility in the future will take this initiative forward on a larger scale."

He added that he hopes the elected government will do better work regarding education and emphasized the need for students to be mentally and ethically sound, not just prepared for jobs.

The Consultation Committee presented a set of recommendations across six sectors, including the formation of a Permanent Education Commission and a Secondary Education Task Force for the overall governance of secondary education.