Universal education in India, along with the challenges in its provision, is at the center of a series of political and social initiatives aimed at socio-economic development. Largely perceived as an effective means of enabling individuals to transcend the position of economic poverty, education is both a valuable opportunity and a costly instrument for the significant portion of Indian society who struggle to meet the basic financial requirements of sending their child or children to a desirable institution. With an estimated national literacy rate of 64.84% (National Portal of India), and with 157.86 million children at or below the age of six, the objective of universal access to education presents an astronomical challenge to the Government of India, whose perceived failure to meet this task is reflected in the rise in enrollment of pupils at private academic institutions at the primary, secondary, and university levels of education. Additionally relevant is the growing disparity in the quality of education between public and private institutions, and rural and urban institutions. Observation of such disparities has lent credibility to the notion of the “dual track” mode or nature of the Indian educational system, which emphasizes the distinction in government provided education and education provided by the private sector (usually targeted at middle to upper class families). The essential question remains whether Indian education is truly pragmatic; in other words, do the students produced under the current educational framework meet the needs of the dynamic and perpetually evolving economic structure of India? Given the widening disparity in education levels, the underemployment and unemployment of a significant number of graduates, and the inaccessibility of large portions of Indian society to high quality education, it is evident that the current system of education does not adequately prepare its students for employment in the Indian economy.
A necessary accompanying question is intrinsic in the debate over whether education can be considered a right, or whether it is a privilege reserved for those who can afford it. Under the current policy, the government has committed itself to providing education for all students up to the age of 14. Such a commitment reflects the ideology that education should be universally accessible, though in practice this task faces no small number of obstacles. Further, the question of education as a right is important due to its association with upward social mobility, a byproduct that should extend equally to all students.
The Indian economist and Nobel laureate Amartya Sen provides a compelling theoretical argument in his advancement of the capabilities approach. According to his theory, which focuses on the expansion of individual “capabilities,” Sen argues that development should focus less on such measures as GDP per capita or GNI and instead more closely examine the amount of freedom of each individual to pursue development through their own free agency. The utility of education, according to Sen’s argument, is not an end in or of itself but rather one of the “constituent components to development” (Sen). Development as it is currently defined is narrow and possibly misleading, but the recognition of free agency offers a more holistic approach that encompasses the capabilities of the individual within the context of the political and socio-economic realities of the Indian economy. “Freedoms,” writes Sen, “are not only the primary ends of development, they are also among its principal means.” Education itself may be viewed as one method of increasing human agency through the eventual outcome of an individual becoming a functioning, contributing member of the formal economy. Sen’s theory, therefore, highlights the validity of defining development as a reflection of an individual’s own capacity to achieve economic sustainability and social engagement within his or her community. Departing from GDP or GNI, such an approach concentrates the lens of development at the microeconomic level and examines an individual’s complete range of options rather than income alone.
Post development theory departs from Sen’s line of thought, considering the intrinsic value of education in lieu of the subsequent benefits with which it is commonly associated. Though its acceptance as an integral part of individual progression in Western society, the puzzle presented by proponents of this theory critically examines whether education truly enhances the pragmatic abilities of individuals in Indian society, or whether (and to what extent) the current system is inapplicable to real life professions. Rejecting the notion that the hallmarks of Western society are possible or even desirable among the populaces of the developing world, Post Development scholars cite alternative approaches based on traditional values as the most sensible trajectory through which developing countries may alleviate domestic poverty and propel their respective economies into the contemporary global system. This theory also introduces the idea that indigenous thought may hold greater legitimacy in structuring economic development than external and alien ideas that have only partially succeeded elsewhere. In certain cases, such transplanted ideas may even be interpreted as a form of cultural imperialism. As a prominent scholar in development theory stated: “It is not the failure of development that has to be feared, but its success,” (Pieterse 2000).
In 1986, the Department of Education of the Government of India released its National Policy on Education. This policy was later modified in 1992. Section II discloses the essence and role of education thusly:
2.2 Education has an acculturating role. It refines sensitivities and perceptions that contribute to national cohesion, a scientific temper and independence of mind and spirit – thus furthering the goals of socialism, secularism and democracy enshrined in our Constitution.
2.3 Education develops manpower for different levels of the economy. It is also the substrate on which research and development flourish, being the ultimate guarantee of national self-reliance.
2.4 In sum, Education is a unique investment in the present and the future. This cardinal principle is the key to the National Policy on Education.[1]
There is little doubt that, from the perspective of the Government of India, education is viewed as a nationally viable solution to addressing the current level of poverty. Furthermore, education is also considered a vehicle for ensuring the efficient allocation of workers into economic outlets in which they will have the greatest productivity, as is evident in section 2.3. Concisely but eloquently dictated in the national policy, the objectives of education are to prepare students for practical employment and to strengthen the national identity of India through the motives explicitly stated in the Indian Constitution. It should additionally be noted that, from a theoretical standpoint, the Government of India appears more heavily oriented towards Sen’s capabilities approach to development rather than it’s equally applicable but contrary counterpart of Post Development theory.
The idealism of the Central government’s policy is not reflected in the reality of Indian education. As stated earlier, the literacy rate for India is estimated at 64.84% of the total population (all individuals aged seven or above), with a noteworthy gender based disparity. 75.26% of all males are literate (literacy is defined as the ability to read and write in any language) compared with only 53.67% of the female population (National Portal of India). Literacy rates also fluctuate in terms of geographical spread. The southern state of Kerala boasts a 90.86% literacy rate, compared to the paltry 47.00% of Bihar in the north (National Portal of India).
The disparity in literacy rates is evidence of significant deviation among states in the efficacy of their educational systems and the corresponding amount of educational resources available. Any number of factors can play a role in accounting for the fluctuation; such components as the quality of teachers, the number of teachers, the location of schools, class size, funding, the lack or presence of private institutions, and social identities all exert an effect on the varying levels of education among individuals are regions. Certain factors, however, are more significant than others. The disparity between many public institutions and private services, for example, is at the center of both intensive academic scrutiny and prodigious political debate. This issue was closely examined in two extensive studies.
The distinction between public and private institutions is best illustrated in the founding of the Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS), which was aimed at providing early childhood education to the 157.86 million children in India at or below the age of six. This initiative led to a “dual track” system, in which education was provided by the government for low income, economically disadvantaged families while middle to upper class families had access to educational resources offered by the private sector. The ICDS, initially launched in 1975, was additionally intended to provide a complete package of services which were designed to address health and nutrition as well as education. Two studies, the first occurring in 1990 and the second occurring in 2001, examined the efficacy of the ICDS initiatives with seemingly positive results (Rao 2005). The first study, conducted by the National Institute of Public Cooperation and Child Development (NIPCCD), concluded that children living in areas in which ICDS were functioning had a much higher rate of preschool education. In such areas, 56% of children between the ages of 3-6 received preschool education. In the higher age group from 5-14, 89% of the children who had received a preschool education continued on to the primary level (Rao 2005). In contrast, in areas in which there were no ICDS operations only 8% of the children received a preschool education, and only 52-60% of those children continued onto the primary level (Rao 2005).
In 2001, the National Council of Applied Economic Research (NCAER) conducted a much larger study. Their results estimated that 60% of all children in India receive a preschool education. Though the potential implications of the NIPCCD and NCAER conclusions are hopeful, the figures may be misleading. Of the 56% of the children in the 1990 NIPCCD study who had received a preschool education, only 50% were able to count up to 50. Likewise, in the NCAER study, only 30% of the children who had received a preschool education could count or read basic words (Rao 2005). The success of the ICDS initiatives were further undermined by the assertion that such programs were valued primarily for the food allowance distributed to the students, who would conserve the food items for their families rather than consume them. The efficacy of the programs was also limited by poorly trained teachers and low-level curriculum.
Secondary education in India is divided into the lower secondary and upper secondary level. The overall system in India follows an 8+2+2+3 structure, with the first eight years devoted to primary education, the following four to the secondary level, and the subsequent three years devoted to the university level, a destination that a small but growing percentage of students reach (Stewart 2009). Current estimates indicate that approximately 40% of all students in the appropriate age group are enrolled in secondary education. The Government of India, in partnership with the World Bank aim to increase that figure to 65% by 2012 and achieve universal provision of secondary education by 2017 (Stewart 2009). It should be noted that universal access to education will not ensure universal graduation. A need for a change in curricula in government institutions has also been acknowledged and addressed. The Indian National Curriculum Framework in 2005 was oriented at decreasing reliance on pure memorization and is intended to promote critical thinking and the practical application of knowledge.
Despite these positive changes, an emphasis on primary education over secondary and post secondary education has credited the former with exerting a greater marginal benefit on economic and social development than the latter. In a recent study, researcher Jandhyala Tilak disputed this notion. Tilak examined education statistics in the states of Haryana, Goa, and Kerala, and concluded that secondary and post secondary levels have positive effects on the reduction of poverty, as well as an increase in life expectancy and a decrease in infant mortality. The most obvious benefit (perceived and actual) of secondary and higher levels of education is the corresponding increase in earnings that directly relates to the amount of schooling of an individual. Tilak wrote:
…It is secondary and higher education that consolidates the gains received from primary education; it is secondary and higher education that provides skills that could be useful in the labor market; it is secondary and higher education that can keep the people above poverty line without such a danger of falling back into the poverty trap…[2]
Tilak’s conclusions reaffirm Sen’s perspective of the capabilities approach. The illustration of the accompanying social empowerment and economic opportunity rendered attainable through the vehicle of formal education is comprehensive proof of the consequential gains of education. Tilak’s argument is that it is the secondary and university levels that most heavily correlate to these gains. The emphasis on the marginal benefits of a secondary education, manifest in the skills that have direct application to the labor market, indicate that Sen’s theory of individual capability may claim validity via its institutionalization in the educational curricula of India.
As stated before, the percentage of graduates at the secondary level relative to the total number of Indian students who begin at the primary level remains shockingly low (90.32% of pupils at the primary level will drop out of the educational system by age 18)[3]. Access to high quality education is beyond the financial capacities of large segments of the Indian population. An additional portion of the student population is unable to access higher education due to poor academic performance in the lower levels. The current solution for this group is the Higher Secondary Vocational Education (HSVE) program, which was launched in 1976. The HSVE program was intended to train a workforce for the intermediate skill level. Aimed at reducing unemployment, HSVE was to accomplish its objective by increasing productivity and indirectly removing pressure on tertiary education. Students enrolled in the program followed a curriculum comprised of 15% language and communication skills, 15% General Foundation Course (which included entrepreneurism, environmental and physical education, rural development, information and communications technology, etc.). HSVE, offering in excess of 150 distinct courses, was based on Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET) models of the economy, which resorted to “manpower planning,” or the usage of economic models to predict future skill requirements on a national level, to integrate students into the formal economy. TVET later altered its policy to accommodate local labor markets, which has proven substantially more efficient. 15% of those enrolled in HSVE found employment after the program’s completion. In addition to the dismal rate of employment, HSVE has been criticized for the percentage of students who enroll in higher educational institutions after graduating from the HSVE program, alleging that that trajectory obscures the true rate of unemployment (Palanivel).
The Government of India has also initiated programs in Non-Formal Education (NFE). The objective for NFE is to deliver primary education to children while simultaneously allowing them to work in order to sustain their families. Classes are held in the afternoon so as not to conflict with the children’s labor tasks in the morning. One such example of this practice lies in the Child Labor Project Schools (CLPS) in Punjab. Aside from the ethical opposition to these practices in their tolerance of child labor, opponents of NFE programs view such initiatives as acknowledgement or resignation to the reality of child labor. The ultimate goal with NFE programs is not to provide a basic education, but to effectively prepare the student for re-entry into the formal educational structure with minimal disparity in their knowledge base relative to that of their peers. While such an initiative illustrates the government’s commitment to education, the ethical debate surrounding the issue merits consideration of the government’s own capacity to provide universal education.
The above initiatives and challenges relating to the provision and quality of education in India have a significant influence on India’s future development. The Swedish economist Gunnar Myrdal introduced the idea of the concentration of wealth, a concept that assumes that wealth transferred to developing countries will become disproportionately distributed around a few “poles,” thereby marginalizing large segments of society. To avoid this phenomenon, India must ensure consistency in the level of education of its workforce. The failure to spread quality education to its entire populace will exacerbate the educational divide, and along with it will lead to greater economic disparity and a larger social divide. Along with this provision, the government must ensure that adequate and capability appropriate employment is available when and where it is sought. An educated workforce without availability in the economy will not lead to prosperity but to social unrest and widespread discontent.
A secondary analysis focuses on the dilemma of the growing divide over public and private education. Private education is associated with more qualified instructors and better overall performance, while public education is viewed as undesirable due to low levels of training for teachers and high rates of absenteeism (both for students and teachers). That private education exists makes evident the inability of the government to provide high quality universal education; that private education is spreading should be taken as an indication that government initiatives have either thus far proven unsuccessful or are needed on a broader scale.
Lastly, though quantitative measurements of utility have yet to be formulated, the concept of education should be fundamentally re-examined. There is awareness that classes and schoolwork are only one narrow component of education, that the true learning experience encompasses far more than what is covered in the classroom. In this sense, internships, externships, and other forms of practical outlets constitute a significant and valuable part of a student’s education. Additionally, such extracurricular activities as student organizations, athletic teams, and fine arts clubs offer students the capacity to discover new interests and to network with their peers as teammates or club associates as well as simply classroom pupils. Though such activities are yet to be realized in current initiatives, such programs ultimately enhance the students’ experience and contribute toward the advancement of their social maturity as well as academic achievement.
Education in India is not a perfect system, and the current challenges that the government faces are numerous and complex. While the system may be effectively utilized by students in the middle to upper classes, those same direct benefits have not been observed in poorer communities where families lack the financial means to afford academic services. A growing gap between the quality of public and private education is slowly leading to greater socio-economic disparity, which can be directly observed in the economic structure of India, in which highly skilled professionals move into white collar jobs that are unattainable for the majority of working class Indians. Competing theories, such as Sen’s theory of capabilities and the field of Post Development Theory, have each examined the pragmatism of education in India, with Sen’s theory viewing education as a means of enhancing capabilities and Post Development Theory questioning the sensibility of the educational system and whether or not it provides adequate preparation for India’s economic structure. Given the increasing socio-economic divide and the failures of government initiatives to provide high quality universal education, it is evident that the current system does not achieve its objectives. In order to ensure that all individuals have equal opportunity to achieve their full potential, current initiatives will need to be expanded, or new initiatives must be introduced.
Bibliography
Chitnis, Suma. "Higher Education in India." Diverse Issues in Higher Education. ProQuest Education Journals, n.d. Web. 7 Mar. 2011. <search.proquest.com.proxyau.wrlc.org/education/docview/194193481/12DF5D50C9373CBA873/12?accountid=8285>
"Literacy - Profile - Know India: National Portal of India." Home: National Portal of India. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Mar. 2011. <http://india.gov.in/knowindia/
"National Policy on Education." Ministry of HRD. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Mar. 2011. http://www.education.nic.in/natpol.asp#pol
Palanivel, A. , Urwin, Peter and Murphy, Richard 'A comparison of business graduates’ labour force destinations following post-secondary vocational education and training in three Indian states', Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 58:3, 271 – 282
Pieterse, Jan Nederveen. “After Post Development.” Third World Quarterly.
Vol. 21, No. 2 (Apr., 2000), pp. 175-191
Rao, Nirmala . "CHILDREN'S RIGHTS TO SURVIVAL, DEVELOPMENT, AND EARLY EDUCATION IN INDIA: THE CRITICAL ROLE OF THE INTEGRATED CHILD DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PROGRAM." Proquest Education Journals. International Journal of Early Childhood, n.d. Web. 7 Mar. 2011. <search.proquest.com.proxyau.wrlc.org/education/docview/194792572/12DF5D50C9373CBA873/7?accountid=8285>
STEWART, VIVIEN. "Expanding Secondary Education in India." Phi Delta Kappan 91.1 (2009): 97-98. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 8 Mar. 2011.
Sud, Pamela. "Can non-formal education keep working children in school? A case study from Punjab, India." Journal of Education & Work 23.1 (2010): 1-26. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 8 Mar. 2011.
http://web.ebscohost.com.proxyau.wrlc.org/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=74fe1ec4-644e-46f9-90b8-6dadf9b4b056%40sessionmgr12&vid=1&hid=19
Tilak, Jandhyala B.G. Post-elementary education, poverty and development in India, International Journal of Educational Development, Volume 27, Issue 4, Beyond Basic Education and Towards an Expanded Vision of Education - for Poverty Reduction and Growth?, July 2007, Pages 435-445, ISSN 0738-0593, DOI: 10.1016/j.ijedudev.2006.09.018.
(http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6VD7-4MCW9SS-3/2/49aed62fbd164df25245a3ffc75b6912)
No comments:
Post a Comment