I would like to thank CK Lal for his column 'How about those who didn't pass?' (#252). He has made a really outstanding point about why it is unfair to lump hundreds of thousands of youth as failures every year. One of my friends failed SLC three times just because he failed in English. He was very smart otherwise. He was very good in mathematics and could fix radios, tvs and cameras just like that. When more than 60 percent of the students fail, there is certainly something wrong with the way we teach and carry out this exam. This situation of 62 percent of children 'failing' has to be fixed.
Tara P Dhakal,
University of Florida
I completely disagree with the letter (Nepali Times, #253) to CK Lal's column 'How about those who didn't pass? Achievers should be rewarded, it's their reward for diligence and brilliance. But no one deserves to be labelled failed. Failed in what? There are so many Nepalis who have to walk hours to go to school, have to help in household chores, have to work. How many of these students pass? SLC is not only about personal commitment, can you compare teachers of schools in remote villages with the ones in cities. What about learning materials? The 'failed' label sticks to children for life causing serious psychological damage and denting the self-esteem of students (and even their families).
Avani Dixit,
email