2. EDUCATION UNDER DYARCHY AFTER
MONTAGU CHELMSFORD REFORMS
Education under the dyarchy refers to the development of education after the Montagu Chelmsford reforms. In 1919, the Government
of India Act 1919, or Montagu Chelmsford reforms was passed by the government. It introduced a system of dyarchy or double
government in the provinces. Under this act, the provincial executive was divided into two parts, the Councilors (under provincial
governors) and Indian Ministers. Under this system, the different subjects of governance were divided into transferred subjects and
reserved subjects. The reserved subjects were administered by the provincial governors and the transferred subjects were under the
Indian Ministers who were elected by a limited franchise. Education was transferred subject and thus it came under the responsibility
of Indian Ministers. However, the finance required for the development of education was under reserved Subject. The Indian Ministers
were unable to take any important decision which could have improved the development of education. This was because the English
Councilors were reluctant to give sufficient amount of money to the Indian Ministers for the development of education. Thus the
ministers were not able to bring any major change in the field of education. This was one of the reasons for the launch of civil
disobedience movement by the Indian National Congress.
3. CONTINUE
After the Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms of 1919, the department of education was transferred to the ministries controlled by
Indian ministers in the various provinces. Now the central government stopped taking interest in matters of educational
development. The department of education at the center was amalgamated with other departments. After the Education Under
Dyarchy the central special grants for education which were liberally sanctioned since 1902 was discontinued. The Montagu
Chelmsford Reforms introduced the first step towards provincial autonomy in matters of education. But the financial problems
prevented the Indian Ministers of provincial governments to take up ambitious schemes for the expansion and improvement of
education. They were not able to obtain funds for qualitative improvement and reorganisation of education. During this period
the improvement and expansion of education were mostly made through philanthropic efforts. But the European education was
kept as reserve subject to be administered by the British.
4. IMPACTS ON EDUCATION UNDER
DYARCHY
1. Though there was a deficiency of funds there was some significant development in the field of Mass education.
2. The provincial governments passed compulsory Education Acts in most of the provinces. However, its real objectives were
not realized due to deficiency of funds.
3. The transfer of control of education to the provincial governments isolated them from the central government and also
from other provinces.
4. It deprived the central government of the power of guiding and formulating the educational policies for the whole of India.
The Central Government could no longer act as an advisory and coordinating agency on problems on the matters of
education.
5. CENTRALADVISORY BOARD OF
EDUCATION (CABE)
The need for coordination among the different provinces in the matter of education was felt by the central
Government and the provincial governments. Therefore, the central advisory board of education (CABE) was
established in 1921. It was felt that the central government can perform the function of defining the general aims
of education by giving advice and assistance to the local governments and universities. The CABE could supply
organized information for the development of educational ideas to the different provinces of India. The main
function of the advisory board was to offer expert advice on important educational matters referred to it. The
advisory board under the central government had a chairman and the board also included eminent educationists
from provinces. However, this board was abolished in 1923, at a time of financial stress without even a reference
to provincial governments.
