Educational Disparity in India Essay Example

should not be any kind of discrimination between individuals based on their caste, religion, region or sex.

In this light, if we observe Indian society we find that, based on caste and ethnicity, it suffers from substantial inequalities in education, employment and income. If the inequalities are arising due to differences in level of efforts made by individuals of different backgrounds then it is morally acceptable but if inequalities are due to circumstances beyond the control of an individual such as caste, religion, region of birth, sex, ethnicity and so on, then it is deemed unethical and unacceptable and also calls for compensation in some form or other, from the society, to those who have suffered due to inferior circumstances.

In the case of India this problem becomes much more relevant since historically the Indian society is severely divided into different caste, religion and other social group structures with several groups enjoying privileges more than other groups just because of their superior social status.

So, as far as India is concerned, it is very important from the point of view of both academic interest as well as policy implication, to estimate the extent of inequality due to different circumstances of people as it will help in going to the root cause of prevailing income or wealth inequality, evaluating the age old government programs aimed at bringing equality in society, developing policies for bridging gaps between different sections of society and thus leading towards a state which is more just and equal.

HISTORY OF EDUCATION IN INDIA

Monastic orders of education under the supervision of a guru were a favoured form

of education for the nobility in ancient India. The knowledge in these orders was often related to the tasks a section of the society had to perform. The priest class, the Brahmins, was imparted knowledge of religion, philosophy, and other ancillary branches while the warrior class, the Kshatriya, was trained in the various aspects of warfare. The business class, the Vaishya, was taught their trade and the working class of the Shudras was generally deprived of educational advantages.

Secular Buddhist institutions cropped up along with monasteries. These institutions imparted practical education, e. g. , medicine. A number of urban learning centers became increasingly visible from the period between 200 BCE to 400 CE. The important urban centers of learning were Taxila (in modern day Pakistan) and Nalanda, among others. These institutions systematically imparted knowledge and attracted a number of foreign students to study topics such as Buddhist literature, logic, grammar, etc.

By the time of the visit of the Islamic scholar Alberuni (973–1048 CE), India already had a sophisticated system of mathematics. With the arrival of the British Raj in India the modern European education came to India. British Raj was reluctant to introduce mass education system as it was not their interest. The colonial educational policy was deliberately one of reducing indigenous culture and religion, an approach which became known as Macaulayism.

With this, the whole education as well as government system went through changes. Educated people failed to get job because the language in which they got education had become redundant. The system soon became solidified in India as a number of primary, secondary, and tertiary centres for education cropped

up during the colonial era. Between 1867 and 1941 the British increased the percentage of the population in Primary and Secondary Education from around 0. 6% of the population in 1867 to over 3. % of the population in 1941. However this was much lower than the equivalent figures for Europe where in 1911 between 8 and 18% of the population were in Primary and Secondary education. Additionally literacy was also improved. In 1901 the literacy rate in India was only about 5% though by Independence it was nearly 20%. Following independence in 1947, Maulana Azad, India's first education minister envisaged strong central government control over education throughout the country, with a uniform educational system.

However, given the cultural and linguistic diversity of India, it was only the higher education dealing with science and technology that came under the jurisdiction of the central government. Hence the disparity existed and deepened. The government also held powers to make national policies for educational development and could regulate selected aspects of education throughout India. The central government of India formulated the National Policy on Education (NPE) in 1986 and also reinforced the Programme of Action (POA) in 1986.

The government initiated several measures like the launching of DPEP (District Primary Education Programme) and SSA (Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, India's Initiative for Education for All) and setting up of Navodaya Vidyalaya and other selective schools in every district, advances in female education, inter-disciplinary research and establishment of open universities. India's NPE also contains the National System of Education, which ensures some uniformity while taking into account regional education needs. The NPE also stresses on higher spending on education,

envisaging a budget of more than 6% of the Gross Domestic Product.

While the need for wider reform in the primary and secondary sectors is recognized as an issue, the emphasis is also on the development of science and technology education infrastructure.

EDUCATION AND THE CONSTITUTION: SHAPING EACH OTHER

Thinking about the interaction between the Constitution and education reveals that they are deeply interconnected, at profound levels of interdependence and complexity. Those connections are often strikingly visible, but are sometimes quite subtle. A fundamental interdependence was formed with the decision to formulate our governmental structure as a democratic republic.

The Constitution created the necessity for adequate public education to prepare the citizenry to exercise the role of self-government. An educated voting public underpins a successful democratic structure, the importance of education to our democratic society. It is required in the performance of our most basic public responsibilities. It is the very foundation of a responsible citizenship. Today it is the principal instrument for awakening the child to cultural values, in preparing him for later professional training, and in helping him to adjust normally to his environment.

But it is not only our political system that is dependent upon a viable and successful educational system. Our economic system also proclaims its reliance upon well-trained and educated workers. And our social system rests on two largely accepted goals that each requires access to education - the “melting pot” which requires the successful absorption of diverse immigrant populations into a pluralistic social and cultural structure, and “upward mobility” which requires the permeability of class/caste barriers.

Both goals are achieved substantially through the

education system.

LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK

Article 45, of the Constitution of India originally stated: “The State shall endeavour to provide, within a period of ten years from the commencement of this Constitution, for free and compulsory education for all children until they complete the age of fourteen years. ” This article was a directive principle of state policy within India, effectively meaning that t was within a set of rules that were meant to be followed in spirit and the government could not be held to court if the actual letter was not followed. However, the enforcement of this directive principle became a matter of debate since this principle held obvious emotive and practical value, and was legally the only directive principle within the Indian constitution to have a time limit.

According to the 2001 Census, the literacy rate for men, over the entire decade, increased by 11. 8 (percentage) points and that for women by 15 points with the consequence that in 2000, 57% of India's (over 15) population was literate, with a literacy rate of 68% among men and 45% among women. Many of the issues relating to literacy are reflected in school participation, defined as the initial enrolment of a child at school. The net enrolment rate of children, aged 6-14, at school varies across the states of India ranging from 99% for boys and 98% for girls in Kerala, to 91% and 84% in Tamil Nadu, to 69% and 56% in Madhya Pradesh.

All-India school enrolment rates, for boys and for girls, vary considerably between the Hindu, Muslim and the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe (hereafter collectively referred to as

Dalits) communities: the enrolment rates for Hindu boys and girls are, respectively, 84% and 68% while for Muslim boys and girls they are 68% and 57% and for Dalit boys and girls they are 70% and 55%. In keeping more generally with recent research interest into issues of ethnicity and educational attainment in other societies the key question of inter-group differences in school enrolment rate in India also needs further investigation.

The raison d'etre is to examine whether, and to what extent, the enrolment of children at school in India are influenced by the norms, or other socio-economic characteristics, of the communities (Hindus, Muslims and Dalits) to which they belonged. There are two issues embedded in this study. The first is that inter-community differences between communities, in the school enrolment rates of their children, could be due to the fact that the communities differed in terms of their endowment of 'enrolment-friendly' attributes. Call this the 'attribute effect'.

On the other hand, inter-community differences in enrolment rates could exist, even in the absence of inter-community differences in attribute endowments, simply because different communities, by virtue of differences in their norms, translated a given attribute endowment into different enrolment rates. Call this the 'community effect'. The overall enrolment rate is, of course, the outcome of both effects. The average probability of school enrolment is the sum of two (mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive) parts: one that is engendered by the ‘community’ effect and another whose antecedents are in the ‘attribute’ effect.

The equation for the likelihood of being enrolled at school is separate for boys and for girls and, in each of the case,

the variables differ as to whether the children are Hindu, Muslim or Dalit. Thus, the econometric estimates take cognisance of differences between the children both with respect to their gender and their religion or caste. The econometric estimates are based on unit record data from a survey of 33,000 rural households - encompassing 195,000 individuals - which were spread over 1,765 villages, in 195 districts, in 16 states of India.

In many communities there is no tradition of sending children to school; more importantly, these traditions co-exist with well recognised and established social norms that condone child labour and accept out of-school children. Given that ‘the child is the father of the man’, children who do (or do not) go to school will, with a high degree of probability, grow up to be literate (or illiterate) adults. In turn, the life chances of an adult, and his or her children, will be greatly affected by whether or not he or she is literate.

Consequently, if one is concerned with inter-community differences in economic and social outcomes, one should, as a corollary, be concerned with inter-community differences in rates of school enrolment. The determining variables used to specify the equations for the likelihood of boys and of girls being enrolled at school, were grouped as follows: 1. The communities to which the children belonged: Hindu, Muslim or Dalit. The respondents to the Survey were distinguished along caste lines as: Dalits (Scheduled Caste/Tribe) and non-Dalits. They were separately distinguished by religion as: Hindu, Muslim, Christian, etc.

Consequently, membership of the two categories, caste and religion, could overlap: Dalits could be Hindu, Muslim or Christian

and, say, Hindus could either be Dalits or non-Dalits. In this study, the two categories of caste and religion were rendered mutually exclusive by defining Hindus, Muslims, Christians (and persons of ‘other’ religions) as persons professing the relevant faith but who were not Dalits. No distinction was made by religion within Dalits though, parenthetically, it might be noted that over 90% of them gave their religion as Hindu.

Because of the small number of Christians and persons of ‘other’ religions in the Survey, the analysis reported in this paper was confined to Hindus, Muslims and Dalits. 2. The regions in which the children lived: North; South; Centre; East; West. The Central region comprised Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh; the South comprised Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu; the West comprised Maharashtra and Gujarat; the East comprised Assam, Bengal and Orissa; and the North comprised Haryana, Himachal Pradesh and Punjab. The educational levels of the mothers and fathers of the children.

These were classified as: illiterate; low, if the person was literate but had not completed primary school; medium, if the person was educated to primary level or above but had not passed the school-leaving examination (the matriculation examination, abbreviated, in India, to matric) administered at the end of ten years of schooling; high, if the person was educated to matric level or above. 4. The occupations of the fathers and the mothers. The mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive occupational categories were: cultivator, labourer, non-manual workers, and 'unoccupied'. . Personal and household variables such as an index of the value of productive assets. 6. Village level variables relating to the general

level of development of the village and, in particular, the provision of schools within the village. In terms of educational infrastructure, only 11% of the children in the sample lived in villages which did not have a primary school, though 50% lived in villages without anganwadi schools, and 30% lived in villages without a middle school within a distance of 2 kilometres.

Of the children in the sample, 77% of boys and 64% of girls were enrolled at school. However, underlying the aggregate figures, there was considerable variation in enrolment rates by: region; community; parental occupation; and parental literacy status. In terms of region, enrolment rates were lowest in the Central region and highest in the South, the West and the North. However, in every region, except the South, enrolment rates for Hindu boys and girls were considerably higher than those for their Muslim and Dalit counterparts.

In terms, of parental literacy, enrolment rates for children (both boys and girls) were substantially higher for children with literate parents relative to children whose parents were illiterate. When both parents were illiterate the gap between the enrolment rate of Hindu children, on the one hand, and Muslim and Dalit children, on the other, was considerable; however, when both parents were literate, the intercommunity gap in enrolment rates was almost non-existent. Lastly, in terms of ccupation, children whose fathers were labourers had the lowest rate of enrolment and children with fathers in non-manual occupations had the highest enrolment rate. These show that, with a handful of exceptions, the means of the factors were significantly different between the groups. In particular, a significantly larger proportion of Hindu

children had parents who were both literate – and a significantly smaller proportion of Hindu children had parents who were both illiterate – compared to Muslim and Dalit children.

In addition, a significantly higher proportion of Hindu children had fathers who were cultivators and a significantly higher proportion of Dalit children had fathers who were labourers: over half the Hindu children, in the relevant age-group, had fathers who were cultivators while, in contrast, well over one-third of Dalit children had fathers who were labourers. One reason that enrolment rates differed by community is that the distribution of the ‘enrolment-determining factors’ – region, parental occupation and literacy, availability of educational facilities – were unequally distributed between the communities.

The other is that there were significant inter-community differences in ‘attitudes’ to education, both with respect to children in their entirety and with respect to boys and girls separately. The ‘Community Effect’: Religion and Caste as Influences on School Participation The NCAER Survey provides qualitative information on the reasons that parents gave for not enrolling their children at school. Factors like ‘school too far’ or ‘school dysfunctional’ (‘demand-side’) did not play an significant role in non-enrolment; nor did their incidence vary across the communities.

The incidence of demand-side factors - whereby family financial constraints or the fact that a child was engaged in non-school activity involving work either within or outside the home - was particularly marked for Dalit children: 34% of Dalit parents, compared with 29% of Hindu and 22% of Muslim parents, gave this as their reason for non-enrolment. These inter-group differences in the mean values of the 'demand-side' reasons were significantly different

between the communities.

Another significant difference between Hindus and Dalits on the one hand and Muslims on the other, was in terms of the percentage of children who were not enrolled at school because their parents did not think education was important. This was 16% for Hindus and 17% for Dalits, but, at 23%, significantly higher for Muslims. The fact that some proportion of religious and caste groups consider education ‘unimportant’ suggests that Muslim religious and Dalit caste norms might matter for school participation.

But, there are also several other explanations that might account for the lower enrolment figures for Muslims and Dalits which need to be located within the historical context of educational policy in India towards minorities. 3. 1. 1. Muslim Education in India In recent times the question of Muslims educational backwardness has been an important element of political and social rhetoric in India. Although Muslims are not alone in reflecting educational backwardness yet recent statistic shows they are one of the most backward communities in the field of education and literacy in the country.

This fact is, no doubt, astonishing for those who know that the very first declaration of the Qur’an- ‘IQRA’ (to read) is about ‘education’. And the Prophet of Islam, Mohammad (pbuh) termed education as basic obligation for every individual - male and female, the very first time in the history of mankind, in 610 (AD). However, this write-up endeavours to locate the educational problems of the post colonial Muslims in India and invites sincere review by the present academia to help practical enforcement of all educational plans to get Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) mission

a success story by 2010.

An important cause that may well affect Muslim education is the role of religious institutions and, in particular, the local clergy. It is conventionally argued that the status of women in Islam implies that Muslim parents may invest less in the human capital of their daughters than of their sons. Muslim parents may also be reluctant to send their children to government funded schools owing to the existence of alternatives in community based schooling (in the form of madrasas) and most particularly on account of the lack of Urdu and Arabic language teaching in the formal system.

Islam first came to India as early as 650 AD with the Arab traders, but it was only under Mughal rule, between the 12th and 17th centuries, that education was encouraged. The very first madrasa in India was established in 1781 by Warren Hastings and was called the ‘Calcutta Madrasah College for Muhammedans’. Madrasas were greatly encouraged under colonial rule in the 18th century and, in the second half of the 19th century, they were set up all over India by the Deobandis – a group of Muslims who were trained in the most orthodox madrasa in India, Darul-uloom in Deoband, founded in 1866.

It was in this phase of their expansion that madrasas were funded primarily by individual contributions rather than by princely patronage and when they developed a formal institutional structure similar to western educational institutions, including their own presses for publishing in Urdu. In post-independence India, madrasas were allowed to be set up in India under Articles 30(1) and 30(2), which allows all minorities to establish educational

institutions, and which also protects the property of minority educational institutions.

In the 1990s, many madrasas have been set up, largely through funds from the Middle East, on the western coast of India and in the border regions of north-eastern India. Today, madrasas mainly teach the principles of the Islamic religion, including an elementary level of the reading of the Qur’an. The Indian government has tried at various times to encourage some madrasas to combine religious education with ‘modern’ subjects such as mathematics.

For example, a programme was launched to modernise education in the madrasas in 1993, and some prominent madrasas such as the Darul-uloom in Deoband introduced reforms into their curriculum as a consequence. The Jamia Mohammadia Mansura in Malegaon, Maharashtra is reputed for its teaching of medical science, and the Darul-uloom Nadwar-ul-ulema in Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh even teaches the English language and English literature as core subjects. However, although in some states such as Karnataka and Kerala, madrasas are a useful complement to the formal schooling sector, such efforts have not, in general, been successful.

Urdu (which is spoken in only 3 countries of the world - India, Pakistan and Mauritius) is widely regarded by Muslims in India as 'their' language. However, in post-independence India, Urdu was not given the status of a ‘modern Indian language’, despite the fact that a substantial proportion of Muslims and non-Muslims particularly in northern India use it as their primary language of communication; in schools Sanskrit was taught as the preferred alternative in the three-language (Hindi-English-Sanskrit) formula.

This has had important implications for Muslim education in India particularly as it has tied the

issue of education-provision with considerations of religious and political identity, and cultural autonomy. Dalit Education in India In their analysis of school enrolment, Dreze and Kingdon found that Dalit children had what they term an ‘intrinsic disadvantage’ – they had a lower probability of going to school, even after controlling for other non-caste factors such as household wealth, parents’ education etc. Dalits - who, generally speaking, constitute the ‘untouchables’ of India comprise, approximately, 17. % of India’s population. Although, the practice of ‘untouchability’ is illegal in India, the reality of life is very different. Often, Dalits live in segregated colonies on the outskirts of villages, usually in the southern fringes because that is where the Hindu god of death, Yama, is supposed to dwell. Dalits are not allowed to use common crematoria. Sharecropping, a dominant form of agriculture in most parts of India is not common among Dalit households due to the concepts of ‘ritual purity’ observed by those within the caste system.

More significantly, the practice of untouchability cuts right across religious boundaries, and is observed in day to day interactions not only by Hindus, but by Muslims, Christians, and other religious groups in India as well. Studies of education and caste in India show that the Dalits are less likely to send children to school. Acharya and Acharya [1995] report that the differences between Dalits and non-Dalits in dropout rates are very large: the dropout rates for Dalits are 17% higher than for others in Classes I-V, and 13% greater for those in Class I-VIII.

The historical origins of inequality in the access to education by caste lie in colonial policy

towards education. After 1835, education policy in the sub-continent was altered considerably by Macaulay’s Minute on Education which changed the dominant language of the curriculum to English, giving rise to what Nehru cynically termed an ‘education for clerks’. Western education both resulted in greater social prestige for the upper castes and greater inequality between castes.

The success of the non-Brahmin movement in southern India meant that this inequality was addressed there by positive discrimination in favour of the non- Brahmins, in education and in jobs; however, this was not the case in other parts of India. The influence of religion and caste on school enrolment encompasses both sociological factors such as the role of cultural norms, and historical influences such as colonial and post-colonial policy towards education in India. Collectively, these non-economic factors might exert an important role on current schooling decisions, even after controlling for the economic factors that affect them.