Inequality

Income-based definitions of poverty are insufficient to capture the range of other disadvantages that compound material inequalities to produce vicious cycles of ‘marginality’. Issues facing marginalised learners cut across the family, encompassing the community, wider society and the policies of the state. Out-of-school and over-age learners also identified school-based barriers in terms of uniforms and school fee policies, language policies that only reflect ‘dominant’ cultures and social groups and the lack of space in schools, amongst others, as preventing them from progressing.

- Class struggles: the challenges of achieving schooling for all, Ramya Subrahmanian, N00 /eldoc/n00_/class-struggle.html

To make matters worse the duality in the educational system has been a mockery. The rich and the wealthy manage to have the best of education in quality English medium schools which help them towards social mobility and to climb the ladder of success. The poor have to frequent single teacher schools with dilapidated school buildings where the teachers rarely make their way to the schools. It is no different at the level of higher education. The masses enrol in government colleges which im-part hardly any education and the elite class rushes to private institutions of repute. There is a wide gap between the two types of education. In a recent survey by "India Today" all the ten colleges considered as the best in the country have been in the private sector. The poor not only can't avail quality institutions, they are not affordable to them. A poor quality education is provided to the masses to tell them that they have equal opportunities when in reality that access to education provides no opportunities in life at all.

Gail Omvedt is quite clear that forces of capitalism have established nexus with the casteist forces. Caste assigns definite roles and occupa-tions to specific social groups. While in the vedic period, knowledge along with ritual practices were the preserve of the brahmins, the char-acter of the beneficiaries did not drastically change during the British period. In theory colonial schools were open to all. But given the limitedness of funding, it was the Brahmins and few other upper castes who monopolized the system. Others did not have both the money and the means to enter the gates of education. The story has repeated itself in the post colonial project of education. That is why in spite of a professed ideology of working towards an egalitarian social order, the capitalist and casteist forces have been determined to keep the unjust social order intact. Even in 1999 there is no major political party or a social movement attempting to win public support by taking radical steps to universalise primary education and provide greater access to higher education. The fact that only 6% of the relevant age group is in higher education and they do hail from the top 20% of India's socio-economic groups is a clear proof education in general and higher educa-tion in particular continues to be the preserve of upper castes and classes.

- Globalization and the Changing Ideology of Indian Higher Education, Ambrose Pinto, Social Action, 01/10/2000, /eldoc/n00_/01oct00SOA.pdf

The nationalist promise of equality of opportunities for all Indians ex-pressed itself in education as an irresistible demand for the expansion of the system, which was fuelled by the class/caste bias of vested interests, "who exploited the code for missionary purposes, profit, communal advantage or political gain" (Heredia 1981: 24). The social commitment to equitable access for weaker sections through reserved admissions for them is still being resisted on the grounds of ' merit', which is still defined by an examination system that in any case favours those, who already have a privileged access to the means to excel in it, with even further access and privileges. So "what really began as the dream of social transformation became a demand for avenues of upward mobility of individuals" (Kumar 1991: 194).

- Persistence and Crisis in Indian Education, Rudolf C.Heredia, Social Action, 01/10/2000, /eldoc/n00_/01oct00SOA3.pdf

First-generation learners in government schools lack this social capital. There are no official structures in place to offer guidance to this group of students. "Preparation for post-secondary education requires a certain kind of training but for my classmates and me, even information about options at the higher secondary level is scarce", a 10th grade student in Chennai laments. "Do we have the skills and the knowledge base to cope with the various specialisations offered in a higher secondary course? If we don't, how do we acquire them? Where do we go for information on the possibilities for scholarships or educational loans? We need to pester our parents or their friends for such information. Many of us have parents who are menial labourers who barely read.
A 13-year old labourer argued that he preferred adult literacy classes to going to school, since such classes combined meaningful activities with instruction on reading and writing. According to him, his work as a child labourer in a match factory gives him skills that cannot be learnt in any school, and this training plus adult education would open more doors for him."When I am 16 1 am going to be in a better position to start my own unit than any school graduate. I know where to go to get loans, who to hire and what to invest in. You show me one school graduate who can match this." In this folk theory of possibility, school-based education has no firm place.
This ambiguous attitude towards public education is made sharper by the common perception of a middle class flight from it. To many parents, the public education we as a society have planned and built is a luxurious accessory. "Literacy without a sense of empowerment is what is on offer in schools, and we cannot afford it", said a parent. Obtaining this education in a meaningful and empowering way is deterred by the very system - its pyramidal structure. The socio-economic conditions of the majority of families make the incline of this pyramid steeper. We need to rethink primary education in the context of parental aspirations as well as children's propensity to learn. Very sensitive localised adaptations to accommodate the socio-cultural milieus of the marginalised groups are called for.

...towards the end of the 1960's, the renowned economist Amartya Sen gave a series of lectures on the inequities of Indian education. One of them, the Lai Bahadur Shastri Me-morial lecture, titled The Crisis of Indian Education, was published around 1970. In it, Sen complained of the fact that far more resources were spent on higher education than on primary education. Yet, today, 27 years later, the situation has not improved but worsened. This is the "inversion of priori-ties" mentioned by the Supreme Court. Higher education has expanded dramatically, and India has one of the largest edu-cated populations in the world. According to Sen, for every, .student that China sends to the University, we send as many six. Yet, while China is now close to universal literacy, half the Indian adult population is still illiterate and two-thirds of them women.

And here's the most pathetic part in the paradox played out through our lopsided education policy. While so keen to give equal chance to less affluent students to get a crack manage - routine of government schools. And now, yet more inequity for the poorest among the poor-a second track system of government schooling under the euphemisti-cally titled Alternative and Innovative Education (AIE) and Education Guarantee Schemes (EGS)...
Those huge ads from the HRD ministry proclaiming that "Quality elementary education is the Fundamental Bight of every child" tell you little about this sys-tem. Yet, the truth is it's one qual-ity for the rich who can afford pri-vate schooling, and another for the poor whose wards have little option than the dull pedagogic ing in "small and access less habi-tations" as in Uba Paan and the stated target of the government is to enrol 1.22 crore children in such 'alternative' schools.

These inferior schools can now be found in the poorest pockets of semi-rural and urban India. Needless to say, they will help scale up the country's education statistics. But to what intent? In some states, all it takes to qualify as a teacher is a pass in Class VII. Once hired on short-term contracts, and variously called para-teachers, shiksha karmis, shiksha bandhus, shiksha mitrs, lok shikshak or guruji, they are paid much lower wages than their counterparts in mainstream government schools, and barely trained in teaching, if at all. They then take Classes I-V, typically with all the students huddled in a single classroom. If there is any room. Since infrastructural support from the government is min-imal, there are few or no buildings or toilet facilities, and meagre teaching devices. "Our education policy is legit-imizing social discrimination," fulminates Anil Sadgopal ..."The EGS and ATE are designed to promote inequity.

Growing segmentation of society because of dual schooling system catering differently to the needs of the rich and the poor has become a cause of serious concern for education planners, educationists and social activists here. Experts feel that the system hardly allows equalisation of educa-tional opportunities and something needs to be done to provide the same quality of education to all students up to the age of 14 years. To seek expert opinion on equalisation of educa-tional opportunities, the UP State Council of Educa-tion Research and Training recently organised a seminar where participants expressed themselves strongly against the multiple system of schooling. Having different categories of schools for the rich and the poor could never bridge the psychological gap between the two and this would be the cause of social disunity, they warned. It was pointed out that the education policy, for-mulated after the Education Commission (1964-66) submitted its recommendations, had stressed the concept of equalisation of opportunities for all.
The Commission had recommended development of a common school system which should cover ev-ery part of the country, education at all levels and for all categories of children. In this context, it was rec-ommended that neighbourhood schooling was the only means to bridge the gap between education provided to the rich and the poor.

- Neighbourhood school system suggested to end rich-poor divide, Hindu, 04/04/2001, /eldoc/n22_/4apr01h1.pdf

**********************************************************************************************************

1. National Policy on Education 1986 (As modified in 1992) National Policy on Education, 1968, Government of India, 01/01/1998, R.N00.34 - Part 4 Equalisation of Educational Opportunity- pg 40-42 (scan)

2. Report of the 2nd Open House on ‘Fundamental Right to Education: Whose Responsibility?’, Avehi Abacus, 12/03/2004 R. N21- Put CED Code Equity in Education, Vikramshila Education society, avehi abacus, Inequity, good article

******************************************************************************************************

2. Image, Ideology and Inequality: Cultural Domination, Hegemony and Schooling in India, Scrase, Timothy J., Sage Publications, 01/01/1993, B.N00.S16

3. Education For Social Change, Desrochers, John, Centre for Social Action, 01/01/1987, B.N00.D2

4. Social Exclusion and Education, Salam, Jeebanlata, Indian Social Institute, 01/01/2004, B.N21.S4, Education of SC Tribal Education Education of Girls
- “Education in and Unequal Social Order” Ch 3 pg. 74-101

5. Pivotal Issues in Indian Education, Kochhar, S.K., Sterling Publishers Pvt.Ltd., 01/01/1981, B.N20.K1

6. Caste, Class and Education: Politics of the Capitation Fee Phenomena in Karnataka, Kaul, Rekha, Sage Publication, 01/01/1993, B.N10.K2

7. Education and Democracy in India, Ch 11 The Meaning of the Old School Tie: Private Schools, Admission Procedures and Class Segementation in New Delhi, Anne Waldorp pg 203 ,Manohar, 2004, B.N00.V1