Education and Empowerment in India - Taylor & Francis eBooks

This book explores the critical linkages between education and empow-erment of women, marginalised groups and other disadvantaged sections of society. It:

• provides an overview of educational policies and practices from India’s independence to the present day and tracks relevant changes and amendments;

• examines a range of issues connected with education such as the Right to Education Act, empowerment and community mobilisation, higher education challenges and other emerging topics; and

• brings together both theoretical postulates and empirical findings.

Avinash Kumar Singh is currently Professor and Head at the Department of Educational Policy, National University of Educational Planning and Administration, New Delhi. He previously served as Associate Professor at the Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai. He has been a Government of India National Scholar for Study Abroad awardee and received his PhD (Education) from the University of London and Master of Studies (Social Anthropology) from the University of Oxford. He has consulted for the European Commission, Save the Children (UK) and other inter-national organisations. He specialises in education of the disadvantaged, decentralised educational management, tribal education, policy analysis and programme evaluation.

Education and Empowerment in India

‘This volume makes an important contribution to the international literature on education and development and should be read by policymakers, practitioners and scholars alike.’

Angela W. Little, Professor Emerita, University College London Institute of Education

‘[A] rich and diverse collection of scholarly papers drawing upon a wide array of educational projects and innovations across India . . . [A] must-read for those who are engaged in transforming education in rural areas for girls and the disadvantaged.’

Abhimanyu Singh, Former Director, UNESCO/People’s Republic of China

‘[This volume’s] broad sweep is a timely and critical addition to educational policy and practice which will be of immense value to students, researchers and teachers.’

Karuna Chanana, Former Professor, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi

Education and Empowerment in India

Policies and practices

Edited by Avinash Kumar Singh

First published 2016 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN

and by Routledge 711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017

Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business

© 2016 National University of Educational Planning and Administration (NUEPA), New Delhi, India

The right of Avinash Kumar Singh to be identified as the author of the editorial material, and of the authors for their individual chapters, has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.

Trademark notice : Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A catalog record has been requested for this book

ISBN: 978-1-138-96038-1 (hbk) ISBN: 978-1-315-66036-3 (ebk)

Typeset in Galliard by Apex CoVantage, LLC

Dedicated to Late Sri Anil K Bordia, IAS

Ex-Education Secretary who devoted a major part of his professional life and career to the cause of education of the disadvantaged

This page intentionally left blank

List of illustrations xi Foreword by R. Govinda xii Acknowledgements xiv List of abbreviations xv Notes on contributors xxi

Introduction : education and empowerment in India: policies and practices 1 AVINASH KUMAR SINGH

PART IEducation and empowerment: perspectives and overviews 21

1 Education and citizenship: beyond the rights-based approach 23 DIPANKAR GUPTA

2 Perspectives on education and social empowerment: the Indian context 34 K. L. SHARMA

3 Conscientização , everyday struggle and transformative education: towards a framework for effective community–education linkage 54 RAVI KUMAR

Contents

viii Contents

PART IIEducation of the disadvantaged: SCs, STs, minorities and girls 71

4 Education and emancipation: the saga and ideology of Dr B. R. Ambedkar 73 N. JAYARAM

5 State policy, education and tribes 91 VIRGINIUS XAXA

6 Faltering steps to modern education: the Ho adivasis of colonial Singhbhum 104 ASOKA KUMAR SEN

7 Disparities in access to higher education: persistent deficit of Muslims 126 ZOYA HASAN

8 Enabling equality: girls’ education, social norms and community interventions 140 RATNA M. SUDARSHAN

PART IIIEducational policies and programmes 157

9 Policy reform and educational development in a federal context: reflections on the uneven process of change in Bihar 159 MANISHA PRIYAM

10 Exploring the legacy of three innovative programmes: lessons learnt from Lok Jumbish, Shiksha Karmi and Mahila Samakhya 179 VIMALA RAMACHANDRAN

Contents ix

11 Making policies work for education and social empowerment: reflections on the Shiksha Karmi project in Rajasthan 205 SHOBHITA RAJAGOPAL

12 Adult education and social empowerment: Indian experience 224 A. MATHEW

PART IVSchool education and empowerment 249

13 Neo-liberal policy and the crisis of state schooling 251 PADMA VELASKAR

14 Shaping everyday educational vocabulary: state policy and a slum school 275 GUNJAN SHARMA

15 Retention of children in schools in the states of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh: challenges for RTE 293 SHANTHA SINHA

16 Adolescent education: issues and challenges 306 SHARADA JAIN

PART VHigher education and empowerment 319

17 Justice framework of public policy in higher education 321 SUDHANSHU BHUSHAN

x Contents

18 Affirmative action and ‘parity of participation’ in higher education: policy perspective and institutional response 345 KUMAR SURESH

19 Community colleges: an alternative system of education for social empowerment 363 ABRAHAM GEORGE

20 Education, inequality and neo-liberalism 375 RANABIR SAMADDAR

Glossary 393 Index 397

Figures

9.1 Percentage share of elementary education in total education expenditure of the centre, 1990–1 to 2007–8 170

16.1 Adolescence: situational analysis 308 16.2 Sandhan’s approach to adolescent learning 313

Tables

4.1 Ambedkar: educational milestones 79 6.1 Schools and scholars in terms of management and stage 111 6.2 School funding (agency and quantum) (in Rs) 112 6.3 Stage-wise schools and scholars 113 6.4 Class-wise levels of knowledge 119 9.1 Educational achievement and deficits in fifteen states,

1990–1 165 9.2 Literacy rates, Bihar and all India, 1991–2011 168 9.3 School participation rates of children aged six to

ten years, 1993–4 and 2011–12 173 15.1 Out-of-school children in five mandals 297 15.2 Dropout rate 298 15.3 Enrolment in classes I, V and VIII 300 15.4 District-wise dropout rates 302 16.1 Tentative core curriculum 314

Boxes

11.1 Institutional structure in Shiksha Karmi Project 209 16.1 Learning strategies 310 16.2 Life skills 311

Illustrations

Education has always been described as a major driver of development, empowering people and the society for personal and social progress. This is of special importance for those from the margins of the society traditionally deprived of access to education and development resources. Viewed from this angle, the current upsurge in the enrolment figures across the spectrum of education signifies heightened aspirations of the poor hitherto left out. While this relationship between education and empowerment is axiomatic in theoretical sense, the relationship at the empirical level is not straightforward. Several questions arise. What kind of education leads to empowerment? Should education be different for different people in order to be truly empowering? Is gender a factor in determining the contours of empowering people through education? To what extent is self-determination by the disempowered critical in educational decision-making process? There are no definitive answers to these questions. We have to examine and explore them in a contextual fashion. This is what has been attempted in this volume on education and empowerment exploring the Indian context in various dimensions. The volume is undoubtedly a very valuable contribution to the literature on education in India.

The volume acquires special significance as the chapters were initially prepared for and presented as papers in a seminar named after Shri Anil Bordia. In fact, this has now become an annual feature in National University of Educational Planning and Administration’s calendar of activities. Bordia’s work and life symbolised a continuous struggle for empowering the marginalised through education. Pioneering contribu-tions were done by him in conceptualising and implementing several innovative programmes such as Shiksha Karmi Project, Lok Jumbish, Mahila Samakhya and Doosra Dashak, some of which have been illus-trated in this volume. These programmes stand out as unique efforts for

Foreword

Foreword xiii

making use of education as a means of empowering people. In all these initiatives, two themes occupied centre stage, namely, gender equal-ity and empowerment of the socially marginalised. These two themes, indeed, are at the heart of the discourse on education and empowerment in India captured in this volume.

I congratulate professor Avinash Kumar Singh for putting together this unique volume. I am quite confident that scholars and practitioners alike will find this volume very useful.

R. Govinda 28 April 2015

Vice Chancellor, NUEPA

This volume is an outcome of a seminar on the theme ‘Education and Social Empowerment: Policies and Practices’ conducted by the National University of Educational Planning and Administration (NUEPA), New Delhi, during December 2013. The seminar was held in the memory of Late Sri Anil Bordia who devoted a major part of his professional career to the cause of designing policies and programmes based on the theme of education and empowerment. The chapters in the volume are reflective of different dimensions of the relationship between education and empowerment in terms of policies and practices. We thank all the contributing authors who took interest in the theme and presented their ideas in the form of chapters. The chapters which were presented in the seminar as papers were further developed based on the feedback received in the seminar.

The volume could not have been possible without the encourage-ment, support and guidance of professor R. Govinda, vice chancellor, NUEPA. We thank Routledge India editorial staff for their patience and cooperation.

Avinash Kumar Singh

Acknowledgements

ABL activity-based learning AEP adult education programme AICTE All India Council of Technical Education AIIMS All India Institute of Medical Sciences AL accelerated learning AP Andhra Pradesh API academic performance indicator APPEP Andhra Pradesh Primary Education Programme BDO block development officer BEP Bihar Education Project BGVS Bharat Gyan Vigyan Samiti BIMARU Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh BITS Birla Institute of Technology and Science BNS Bhavan Nirman Samiti BO Beat officer BPL below poverty line BRC block resource centre BSA Bihar state archives BSG block steering group BSS Balika Shikshan Shivir CABE Central Advisory Board of Education CARRHE Committee to Advise on Renovation and Rejuvenation

of Higher Education CBU capacity-building organisation CEC cluster education centre CEP Continuing Education Programme CIET Central Institute of Educational Technology CO corporate organisation CRC cluster resource centre

Abbreviations

xvi Abbreviations

DC deputy commissioner DCOS Deputy Commissioner’s Office Singhbhum DFID Department for International Development DIET District Institute of Education and Training D Lit Doctor of Literature DM district magistrate DPEP district Primary Education Programme DRDA district rural development authorities EB environment-building EBB educationally backward block ECCE early childhood care and education EE elementary education EGS education guarantee scheme EO education officer EP education programme EWS economically weaker section FICCI Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and

Industry GATS general agreement for trade in services GD General Department GDP gross domestic product GER gross enrolment ratio GOB Government of Bihar GOI Government of India GOR Government of Rajasthan GP Gram Panchayat GSDP Gross State Domestic Product HDI Human Development Index HEI Higher Education Index HM headmaster/headmistress HP Himachal Pradesh HRD human resource development IAS Indian Administrative Service ICDS Integrated Child Development Services ICRDCE Indian Centre for Research Development of Community

Education ICT information and communication technology IDS Institute of Development Studies IDSJ Institute of Development Studies, Jaipur IGP Income-Generator Programme

Abbreviations xvii

IIEP International Institute of Educational Planning IIT Indian Institute of Technology IT information technology JJK Jag Jagi Kendra JRM joint review mission JSS Jan Shikshan Sansthan KGBV Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalaya KK Kishori Kendra KSSPS Khand Stariya Shiksha Prabandhan Samiti LACs Latin American countries LJ Lok Jumbish LJP Lok Jumbish Parishad LRAR Land Revenue Administration Report LSE London School of Economics MA Master of Arts MALAR Mahalir Association for Literacy Awareness and Rights MCD Municipal Corporation of Delhi MCGM Municipal Corporation Government of Mumbai MDG Millennium Development Goal MDM mid-day meal MEP Marxist Educational Praxis MHRD Ministry of Human Resource Development MLA Member of Legislative Assembly MLL minimum levels of learning MoMA Ministry of Minority Affairs MOU memorandum of understanding MP Madhya Pradesh MP Member of Parliament MS Mahila Samakhya MS Mahila Samooh MSK Mahila Shikshan Kendra MSP Mahila Samakhya Programme MSV Mahila Shikshan Vihar MT master trainers MTA mother–teacher association MVF Mamidipudi Venkatarangaiya Foundation NAEP National Adult Education Programme NASSCOM National Association of Software and Services

Companies NCERT National Council of Educational Research and Training

xviii Abbreviations

NCHER National Commission for Higher Education and Research

NCMEI National Commission for Minority Educational Institutions

NCPCR National Commission for Protection of Child Rights NEFA North-Eastern Frontier Agency NET National Eligibility Test NFE non-formal education NGO non-governmental organisation NIOS National Institute of Open Schooling NKC National Knowledge Commission NLM National Literacy Mission NLMA National Literacy Mission Authority NPE National Policy on Education NPEGEL National Programme for Education of Girls at

Elementary Level NREGS National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme NRHM National Rural Health Mission NSDC National Skill Development Corporation NSS National Sample Survey NSSO National Sample Survey Organisation NUEPA National University of Educational Planning and

Administration NVEQF National Vocational Education Qualification Framework NYK Nehru Yuva Kendra OBC other backward class PAB Project Approval Board PHC primary health centre PhD Doctor of Philosophy PLC post-literacy campaign PLP post-literacy programme PO project officer POA Programme of Action PPP public–private partnership PPPC public–private partnership cell PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal PRAT Participatory Rural Appraisal Technique PRI panchayati raj institution PTA parent–teacher association PTR Pupil–teacher ratio QLIP Quality of Life Improvement Programme

Abbreviations xix

R&D research and development RB revenue branch RFLP Rural Functional Literacy Programme RP resource person RPM review planning meeting RTE right to education SC scheduled Caste SCPCR State Commission for Protection of Child Rights SCR Sachar Committee Report SEP School Education Programme SHG self-help group SIDA Swedish International Development Agency SIERT State Institute of Educational Research and Training SK Shiksha Karmi SKB Shiksha Karmi Board SKP Shiksha Karmi Project SKS Shiksha Karmi Sahyogi SLET State-Level Eligibility Test SLMA State Literacy Mission Authority SM Shiksha Mitra SMC school management committee SPD state project director SRC state resource centre SSA Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan SSC Sector Skill Council SSK Sahaj Shiksha Kendra ST scheduled Tribe SWFPDR South-West Frontier Political Dispatch Register SWRC Social Work and Research Centre TLC Total Literacy Campaign TSG Technical support group TSKP Tuckey Settlement Khuntkatti Papers UEE universalisation of elementary education UGC University Grants Commission UNDP United Nations Development Programme UNICEF United Nations Children’s Emergency Funds UP Uttar Pradesh UPA United Progressive Alliance UPBEP Uttar Pradesh Basic Education Project UPE universal primary education USNPSS Uttarakhand Seva Nidhi Paryavaran Shiksha Sansthan

xx Abbreviations

VA voluntary agency VEC village education committee VT volunteer teacher WDP Women Development Programme ZP Zila Parishad ZSS Zilla Saksharata Samiti

Sudhanshu Bhushan is c urrently working as professor and head of the Department of Higher and Professional Education in NUEPA. He specialises in Internationalisation of Higher Education, Policy Issues in Higher Education and Educational Planning. His recent contribu-tions include Quality Assurance of Transnational Higher Education: Australia and India Experiences , Public Financing and Deregulated Fees in Indian Higher Education and Restructuring Higher Education in India . He is the recipient of Amartya Sen Award 2012 for distin-guished Social Scientist, an award instituted by the Indian Council of Social Science Research, New Delhi.

Abraham George is presently working as director at Institute for Sus-tainable Development and Governance (ISDG), Trivandrum, Kerala. He has been acting as assessor, National Assessment & Accreditation Council (NAAC). He had served as principal of Mar Thoma Col-lege, Tiruvalla, Mahatma Gandhi University, Kerala. He has several publications in the areas of higher education and skill development. His recent works include the edited volume, Higher Education in India: Emerging Issues and Future Prospects (2013, New Delhi, Authorspress).

Dipankar Gupta is currently working as professor and director at the Centre for Public Affairs and Critical Theory, Shiv Nadar Univer-sity, Noida. He taught for nearly three decades at the Department of Sociology in Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU), New Delhi, and has held various appointments at universities in Europe, Canada, the United Kingdom and the United States. He has written and edited several books. His most recent books include The Caged Phoenix: Can India Fly (2010) and Revolution from above: India’s Future and the Citizen Elite (2013).

Contributors

xxii Contributors

Zoya Hasan is formerly Professor of Political Science at the Jawaha-rlal Nehru University, is currently National Fellow, Indian Council of Social Science Research affiliated to the Council for Social Devel-opment. She has been the Dean of the School of Social Sciences, Jawaharlal Nehru University. She was a member of the National Com-mission for Minorities, Central Advisory Board of Education (CABE), National Book Trust, and Chairperson of the Eleventh Five-Year Plan Working Group on ‘Empowering the Minorities (2007–2012)’. She has authored and edited several books. Her recent books include Con-gress After Indira: Policy, Power, and Political Change (1984–2009), Politics of Inclusion: Castes, Minorities and Affirmative Action, Democ-racy and the Crisis of Inequality and Equalizing Access: Affirmative Action in Higher Education in India, United States and South Africa (co-ededited).

Sharada Jain is currently working as the secretary and director of Sand-han, Jaipur. She has been working for more than three decades in the area of education and has been instrumental in initiating several educational programmes related to adolescent education. She has been actively involved in providing technical support and guidance in implementing various central and state educational schemes, focus-ing on marginalised groups.

N. Jayaram is visiting professor at the National Law School of India Uni-versity, Bengaluru. He specialises in sociology of education, theory and methods, political sociology and sociology of diasporas. His latest books include Sociology of Education in India ; Higher Education and Equality of Opportunities: Cross-National Perspectives (co-edited with Fred Lazin and Matt Evans); Diversities in the Indian Diaspora (ed., two editions); Vulnerability and Globalisation: Perspectives and Anal-yses from India (co-edited with D. Rajasekhar); Routeing Democracy in the Himalayas: Experiments and Experiences (co-edited with Vibha Arora) and Ideas, Institutions, Processes: Essays in Memory of Satish Saberwal (ed.). He is editor of Sociological Bulletin: Journal of the Indian Sociological Society.

Ravi Kumar is associate professor at the Department of Sociology, South Asian University, New Delhi. His works include Education, State and Market: Anatomy of Neoliberal Impact (2014, New Delhi: Aakar Books); Education and the Reproduction of Capital: Neoliberal Knowl-edge and Counterstrategies (2012, New York: Palgrave Macmillan) The Heart of the Matter: Development, Identity and Violence: Reconfiguring

Contributors xxiii

the Debate (2010, New Delhi: Aakar Books); Global Neoliberalism and Education and Its Consequences (2009, New York and London: Rout-ledge); and The Crisis of Elementary Education in India (2006, New Delhi: Sage Publications). He is co-editor of a book series on Social Movements, Dissent and Transformative Action (2014, New Delhi: Routledge).

A. Mathew is currently working as national fellow at NUEPA. His areas of specialisation include study of educational development in histori-cal perspective, adult education and lifelong learning. He has been actively involved in providing technical support to the Government of India in implementing adult education programmes. He has pub-lished books and articles in the areas of adult, primary and higher education, history of education and educational policies.

Manisha Priyam is currently working as associate professor at the Depart-ment of Educational Policy, NUEPA. She has previously served as faculty of Political Science, Delhi University. Priyam received her doc-torate from the London School of Economics and Political Science, and has wide research experience – as ICSSR fellow at the Nehru Memorial Museum, and Library, New Delhi, and with the World Bank, UNDP and UNICEF. She has published articles on educa-tional policy, decentralised educational governance and urban social policy and politics, in national and international journals. Her latest book is Contested Politics of Educational Reform in India: Aligning Opportunities with Interests (OUP, 2015).

Shobhita Rajagopal is currently working as associate professor at Insti-tute of Development Studies, Jaipur. She has over twenty-five years of experience in social development research, training and policy advice on issues related to women in development and mainstream-ing gender concerns in policy planning and implementation. Her area of specialisation is gender and education with special emphasis on elementary, secondary education and tertiary education. She has also been actively involved in the women’s movement, NGOs and civil society movements in Rajasthan. She has published several articles on women’s empowerment and gender and education in national and international journals.

Vimala Ramachandran is currently the director of ERU Consultants Pvt. Ltd. Formerly she worked as professor and chair at Teacher Man-agement and Development at NUEPA, New Delhi. She was the first National Project Director of Mahila Samakhya and was involved in

xxiv Contributors

conceptualising the programme in 1987–9. She has conducted sev-eral large-scale multi-state qualitative research studies in the field of elementary education. She has published extensively in national and international journals on education policies and practices, teacher-related issues and women’s empowerment. She has published five books on education – the most recent co-authored with Kameshwari Jandhyala titled Cartographies of Empowerment – Tracing the Jour-ney of Mahila Samakhya (Zubaan, 2012), and with Rashmu Sharma titled Elementary Education System in India – Exploring Institutional Structures, Processes and Dynamics (Routledge, 2009).

Ranabir Samaddar is a former director of the Calcutta Research Group; he is currently holding a distinguished chair in Migration and Forced Migration Studies in the CRG. He has written extensively on the theory and practices of dialogue, nationalism and postcolonial state-hood in South Asia. The much-acclaimed The Politics of Dialogue was a culmination of his long work on justice, rights and peace. His recent political writings published in the form of a two-volume account, The Materiality of Politics (2007) and The Emergence of the Political Sub-ject (2009) have challenged some of the prevailing accounts of the birth of nationalism and the nation-state, and have signalled a new turn in critical postcolonial thinking. His co-authored work on new town and new forms of accumulation Beyond Kolkata: Rajarhat and the Dystopia of Urban Imagination (Routledge, 2013) takes forward urban studies in the context of postcolonial capitalism.

Asoka Kumar Sen is a distinguished scholar on tribal history and cul-ture and is currently working as an independent researcher. He has served as faculty of the Department of History, Tata College, Chai-basa (Ranchi University), and has published books and articles on tribal history and culture. His latest is From Village Elder to British Judge: Custom, Customary Law and Tribal Society (2012).

Gunjan Sharma is presently working as assistant professor at the School of Education Studies, Ambedkar University Delhi, she teaches courses at the postgraduate level in the areas of sociology of education; poli-cies, systems and structures of education; curriculum policy, theory and practice and qualitative research. She did her PhD in education from the University of Delhi. Her thesis examined how the state policy on education is played out in the margins of a metropolitan context in India. She has worked intensively as a committee member and member secretary on the national-level teacher education policy

Contributors xxv

framing process during 2013–15. Her professional focus is on educa-tion policy and politics in India, particularly at the school and teacher education levels.

K. L. Sharma is currently working as the pro-chancellor (Hon.) of Jaipur National University, Jaipur, and national fellow, ICSSR. He taught as professor of Sociology at JNU, New Delhi, for over three decades and was rector (pro-VC). He was also vice chancellor of Rajasthan University, Jaipur. His main areas of study and research are social stratification, tribal and peasant movements and sociology of legal profession. He has published twenty-five books and nearby eighty articles on the themes of his interests.

Shantha Sinha is presently involved in advocacy on children’s rights. She has worked as professor at University of Hyderabad in the Department of Political Science. She has been activist of international reputation dedicated to the cause of abolition of child labour. Recog-nising her work, the Government of India appointed her as the first chairperson of the newly formed National Commission for Protec-tion of Child Rights. She is the founder of Mamidipudi Venkata-rangaiya Foundation. Has been awarded with Padma Shri (1998), Albert Shanker Education International Award (1998) and Ramon Magsaysay Award (2003).

Ratna M. Sudarshan is a National Fellow at NUEPA; also served as the Director of the Institute of Social Studies Trust, New Delhi and as Principal Economist at the National Council of Applied Economic Research (NCEAR), New Delhi. She has published extensively in the area of gender and women’s empowerment.

Kumar Suresh is professor in the Department of Educational Admin-istration, NUEPA. He has been engaged in studies and research on inclusive policies and practices in education. He has published research papers, monographs and books on the theme of policy response to diversity, multiculturalism and inclusion, federalism and multilevel governance, human rights, education etc. Served as co-editor and as a member of the editorial committee of Indian Journal of Federal Studies; has been associated with a number of national and interna-tional projects.

Padma Velaskar is professor, Tata Institute of Social Science, Mumbai, where she is affiliated with the Centre for Studies in Sociology of Edu-cation. She has developed and taught courses in sociology, women’s

xxvi Contributors

studies and the sociology of education. She has researched and pub-lished on the intersection of caste and gender, educational inequality, social movements and education, Dalit education and the state and education. Recipient of the Times Research Fellowship, she is cur-rently working on manuscripts based on her research on Dalit women and on the municipal school system of Mumbai.

Virginius Xaxa is presently working as professor and deputy director of Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Guwahati Campus. He taught Sociology at the Delhi School of Economics in Delhi University. Prof. Xaxa has extensively worked on the areas like – agrarian social structure, development Studies and tribal studies. His books include Economic Dualism and Structure of Class: A Study in Plantation and Peasant Settings in North Bengal (1997); State, Society and Tribes: Issues in Post Colonial India, (2008); Social Exclusion and Adverse Inclusion: Adivasis in India (Co-edited, 2012).

While empowerment without education is an illusion, education without empowerment is a myth.

E ducation is one of the most effective means of empowerment. It helps a person realise his or her potential, a social group to achieve higher social mobility and the state to maintain social order. This concept has been used in academic and public discourses mainly from the point of view of educationally deprived groups as compared to the privileged ones. Relat-ing empowerment with the education of the disadvantaged brings forth the issue of the role that education can play in reducing or removing social inequalities. Education can have the impact of releasing the disadvantaged from the bondage of serfdom and inequality; as a change agent, educa-tion also serves as an emancipatory vehicle of empowerment. Education for empowerment therefore refers to providing education to individuals or groups who have remained deprived or disprivileged. 1 It is also argued that education maintains the status quo by reinforcing and reproducing social inequalities (Bourdieu and Passeron 1977). In a stratified society, the educational system and institutions also become further stratified whereby social differences are reproduced. This is the reason why social inequalities have persisted despite the expansion of educational facilities.

One may further argue that education is not a neutral process. It often plays a bipartisan role. While, for particular sections of the people, education may appear to be a means of social change and transforma-tion, for other sections, it does not make significant breakthroughs in the deep-rooted hierarchical social systems. Rather education is used as a means for enhanced consolidation of inequality and hierarchy (Hasan, Jayaram, Sharma and Xaxa in this volume).

The relation between education and empowerment therefore can be viewed from different perspectives. One predominant perspective which

Introduction Education and empowerment in India: policies and practices

Avinash Kumar Singh

2 Avinash Kumar Singh

foregrounds the idea of empowerment being used for achieving equality through class struggles attributes a catalytic role to education in gen-erating consciousness and propelling for action to achieve control over resources and the decision-making process. Another perspective pro-pounds that the power of education lies in maintaining harmony and stability by transmitting culture from one generation to the next. By doing this, education helps individuals to achieve goals and maintain social order. Shades of both these perspectives are reflected in the chap-ters of this volume.

The concept of empowerment

With a deepening of the democratic process and a heightening pub-lic atmosphere of a rights-based approach to development, the term ‘empowerment’ has gained currency in academic and political dis-course in recent years. The term is often used to invoke and reinforce the rights-based approach either to formulate a new set of rights or for reinforcing those rights which have not been realised. However, the academic discourse of empowerment has been mainly context-driven and not theory-driven 2 (Beteille 1999). Due to its varied usage, the term ‘empowerment’ is subjected to multiple interpretations and analyses. The term is also increasingly used for addressing the developmental and educational problems of the disadvantaged and marginalised. Further, empowerment has also been under focus due to capacity-building ini-tiatives undertaken by the state and civil society among individuals and different social groups for their participation in development activities. Capacity-building through orientation and training among the disad-vantaged may be seen as policy initiatives towards empowerment from the rights point of view, as only the capable and skilled can exercise their rights effectively. From the citizenship point of view, empowerment may be seen as the capability enhancement of citizenship rights, that is, civil, political and social rights. In fact, the evolution of citizenship in the European and Western contexts has been linked with citizenship-based political mobilisation (Gupta 2013; Marshall 1957). So as democracy has a close relationship with citizenship, citizenship too has a close rela-tionship with education. The success of a democracy therefore depends on the quality of citizenship in a sociopolitical set-up. And the quality of citizenship can be promoted through quality education only. This point was also emphasised by Max Adler in his remark, ‘the future of democ-racy does not lie in politics, but in pedagogy’ (Cartright et al . 1996: 57; also see Gupta in this volume: 23).

Introduction 3

The idea of ‘empowerment’ implies the process of handing over power to the powerless or the unempowered which further implies distribu-tion of powers and privileges. At times, it also refers to the theory of change – from hierarchical to egalitarian, from autocratic to democratic and from a centralised to a decentralised system of social life and gov-ernance. ‘Empowerment’ is the process by which the powerless gain greater control over the circumstances of their lives. It includes both control over resources and their ideology (Sen and Batliwala 2000). So empowerment as a capacity-building exercise should be seen as resourc-ing from within.

Empowerment through education can also be dealt with by following a capabilities approach. Being an important component of developing capabilities education has an intrinsic role to play in developing freedom and leaving the rest to be attained through institutional and legal means. This approach provides a framework of public policy action for building capabilities within individuals. The term ‘capabilities’ means ‘the abili-ties to do and to be’. Sen (2009) calls it ‘substantial freedoms’, that is, a set of opportunities to choose from and to act on. Capabilities are thus abilities that a person has which are to be developed through educa-tion and training and the freedom created by a combination of personal abilities and the political, social and economic environment (Nussbaum 2011: 21). Also called the human development approach, this helps in understanding the rationale of public action for expanding educational opportunities, development and social empowerment (Sen 2009; Nuss-baum 2011). In this volume, 3 this approach has been used to explain issues related to students’ participation and performance in higher edu-cation in terms of capabilities. The volume therefore presents evaluative accounts of policies and programmes implemented in recent decades and reviews them in terms of their implications for social empowerment. The chapters in the volume are organised in terms of perspectives and issues relating to education and empowerment at all levels of education.

Education and empowerment: issues and perspectives

One may view the relationship between education and empowerment from different theoretical perspectives. One perspective may be from the point of view of a class struggle whereby the lower class wrests power from the upper class. Although this perspective of empower-ment through a class struggle seems grand and tempting, it does not help much in explaining the current micro-ground reality. To Beteille


(1999: 597), ‘the story has been played out and it hardly offers any new prospect’. Another perspective emerges from a scrutiny of development policies and practices under which concerned groups are treated as the main stakeholders whose participation is sought in the implementation of development programmes (Mohanty 1995). While in the first case empowerment is viewed in terms of one group exercising power over others, in the second case, empowerment is used in relation to achieving particular goals or objectives. Though the chapters in this volume touch both the perspectives, they deal more with the perspective of viewing empowerment in relation to achieving particular goals and objectives than on viewing empowerment in terms of one group exercising power over the others.

The current discourse on empowerment through education in terms of rights centres around the expansion of different forms of rights for citizens of a democratic nation and for members of an egalitarian soci-ety. Gupta ( Chapter 1 ) explains and illustrates the concept and role of citizenship in conferring equal status in availing equal opportunities for development, including education. According to him, the Right to Edu-cation (RTE) Act which promises empowerment through education falls short of expectations as it is target-specific and does not guarantee qual-ity education to all. Targets based on felt needs deal only with the past and they do not cater to people’s aspirations. Aspirations can be realised only through achieving equality of status and opportunity. Following Marshall (1957), Gupta reiterates that through citizenship the state must confer equality of status, upon which structures of equality may be built. According to Gupta, education is not about being equal in the end, but it is about providing equality of status through imparting skills so that people can go ahead and realise their aspirations. Empowerment, like education, should therefore deal with the future. Hence the RTE will not be complete unless people become fully aware of the benefits of education, whereby they do not merely receive it but also demand it.

In Chapter 2 , K. L. Sharma gives an overview of the theoretical per-spectives which can be used in understanding current problems and issues in higher education. He explains how the theoretical ideas of Karl Marx, Emile Durkheim, John Dewey and Pierre Bourdieu are still relevant in understanding different dimensions of education as a social process, but these theories and concepts need to be seen in their own contexts. In the backdrop of these perspectives, he reviews the progress of higher education in India. According to him, despite the recent emphasis on quantitative expansion of higher education in the country, social opportunities which can help get access to higher education have been limited and unequal.

Introduction 5

He blames the state for having lopsided educational development; this is also reflective of a nexus between state, society and education.

Education for empowerment calls for a different type of pedagogy which conscientises the oppressed towards the ongoing state of affairs. Following Paulo Freire, Kumar ( Chapter 3 ) highlights the relevance of the concept of conscientisation in understanding empowerment through education. He argues that education leads to empowerment only when it is embedded within a pedagogic process. Freire’s remark holds good when he says, ‘A pedagogy which must be forged with, not for, the oppressed in the incessant struggle to regain their humanity. This pedagogy makes oppression and its causes as objects of reflection by the oppressed, and from that will come their necessary engagement in the struggle for their liberation. And in this process, the pedagogy will be made and remade’ (Freire 1996: 30). So empowerment through edu-cation is a pedagogic process. While examining the policy and practice of community participation in education, Kumar criticises the recent policy initiatives of converting the community as an agency to forge linkages with schools making community participation a mechanical process. He contends that democratisation of the functioning of schools has worked in favour of vested interests of dominant classes and against the margin-alised. There is a need to take a critical view of the policy processes in education in the country for developing a proper understanding.

Education of the disadvantaged: scheduled castes, scheduled tribes and minorities

As pointed out in an earlier section, the issue of empowerment is often related to the problem of educational deprivation. Social groups in India are at different stages of educational development. A large section of the Indian population has been deprived of formal education for a long time and this section is still lagging behind. Formal or institutional educa-tion has been the privilege of a selected few in society. This is evident in the uneven educational development among social groups in India. An overview of educational development in the country indicates that its spread has been far from even. Major segments of the population which seem to have lagged behind in terms of educational development in India include dalits, tribals and minorities.

The groups which have remained disadvantaged and discriminated have also been devoid of education. One of the main reasons for their educational backwardness is that they suffer from apathy and indiffer-ence towards education. The scheduled castes (SCs), also referred to as


dalits, suffer from both economic deprivation and social discrimination. Education for them is not merely the learning of 3 R’s, but mastering the pedagogy of the discriminated. Although SCs have been recognised as a main target beneficiary group in all the educational policies and pro-grammes, their educational condition is far from satisfactory. The policy of affirmative action/reservation in education has had limited impact. Jayaram ( Chapter 4 ) highlights the emancipatory role that education can play for dalits by focusing on the ideology and praxis of Dr B. R. Ambedkar. While highlighting the relations between education, leader-ship and emancipation, he illustrates the educational saga of Ambedkar by examining his ideology about education and emancipation. Drawing from Ambedkar’s life and ideas, Jayaram argues that although education leads to emancipation, empowerment is no more axiomatic as in the case of chronically exploited and inhumanly oppressed sections of society like the depressed classes, now described as ‘dalits’ in India. He takes a critical view of the protective discrimination policy and other policies for education of the dalits, as they are not in conformity with the path adopted by Ambedkar. According to him, the empowering role of edu-cation for dalits is illustrated in the life and work of Ambedkar. While designing educational policies and programmes for the disadvantaged, there is need to draw inspiration and insights from his life and works.

As far as the tribals are concerned, they are at the bottom of all devel-opment indicators including education. The largest number of people living below the poverty line is from among tribal communities. As one glances at the educational status of tribes from one stage to the next, one is faced with the same issue: low enrolment ratios and more impor-tantly high dropout rates. Xaxa ( Chapter 5 ) scrutinises the overall state policy towards tribes in general and explains how educational policies and programmes for tribals are guided by the larger policies of the state. These policies go against the developmental and educational interests of the tribals. According to him, it is the policy pursued by the state that has turned out to be detrimental to educational attainment and development of the tribal population in India. The policy of integration followed by the state has gone against the ingenuity and creativity of the tribal people. The higher literacy rates among the tribals in the north-east as compared to those in other parts of India prove the case that the tribes which have been less integrated with the mainstream culture and education system have done better in educational terms than those who are integrated more with the mainstream culture and education system.

Extending this logic and argument further, in his diachronic study of the Ho tribe in Jharkhand, Sen ( Chapter 6 ) presents a socio-historical

Introduction 7

account of the situation. He discusses the reasons behind the orally dependent tribals’ hesitant entry into literate culture and their slower and lower participation in modern formal education. According to him, there is a high degree of discordance between the adivasi oral and the mainstream literate cultures. He argues that the adivasi culture, knowledge system and modes of transmission were always at variance with the mainstream culture even during the colonial period. The pur-pose of colonial rule in the tribal areas was to homogenise and educate the adivasis to serve their material welfare, rather than to empower them. Sen reconstructs the ideological and institutional basis of the Ho tribe’s knowledge structure to highlight its distance from the Brit-ish literate educational culture and compares it with the lived present to underline how an unsound educational base has adversely impacted the community’s smooth and confident assimilation into the modern educational culture and how empowerment through education for the tribals has been uncertain. Empowerment and education are closely linked, as empowerment comes as a sequel to the consciousness of rights which modern education is capable of disseminating. One may contend that empowerment of the disadvantaged has been delayed because of want of consciousness due to lack of literacy and early school education.

Hasan ( Chapter 7 ) outlines the structure of educational inequalities in higher education and the reasons for the persisting disparities with regard to access to higher education. She draws attention to Muslim under representation in education and employment by looking at inter-group differences in higher education. According to Hasan, it is impor-tant to re-examine government policies and the extent to which they have been successful in dealing with this problem if we have to tackle the educational backwardness of Muslims. She contends that India’s strat-egy of affirmative action in dealing with the educational backwardness of deprived groups primarily centres on groups that have suffered caste discrimination. Hence, much of government intervention is aimed at ending past discrimination. The issue of tackling current deprivation, on the other hand, is not considered and is still fraught with controversy. She further argues that this is one of the reasons why the under repre-sentation of Muslims has not been satisfactorily examined and effectively redressed. To put the educational inequalities in context, the issue of Muslim under representation is part of the larger debate on the domi-nant modes of thinking on affirmative action which does not acknowl-edge current discrimination and the claims of minorities to any form of affirmative action. She stresses the need to examine the rationale for


affirmative action for Muslims in India and whether it can be justified on grounds of persistent disparities and inequalities.

While highlighting gender issues in education, Sudarshan ( Chapter 8 ) points out that girls’ participation in education is related to issues of women’s empowerment. In her review of policies and programmes, she explains how gender equality has been interpreted in educational policy documents since independence and draws attention to the ways in which programmatic interventions for gender-specific norms have changed over the years. She also discusses the role of community in bringing sustainable change in gendered social norms. Policy documents have set an ambitious goal of shifting attitudes and perspectives of boys and girls away from those that might be acquired through familial or community processes towards different and more egalitarian gender norms. The National Pol-icy on Education (NPE) 1986 and Programme of Action 1992 expected that education would lead the process of women’s empowerment in soci-ety. The Central Advisory Board of Education has said that ‘the approach to education should be such that it develops girls’ capabilities to claim their rights and enables boys and girls to critique unequal gender rela-tions and roles.’ The implementation of these objectives has largely been attempted through a focus on within-school processes, with multiple interventions in place for equality in access and educational experience within schools. However, there is little evidence so far that the experience of formal schooling allows questioning of, and change in, unequal roles outside school. Sudarshan argues that to achieve such a transformative goal, a broader vision of education that encompasses structured learning within schools as well as experiential learning in daily living is needed. She emphasises that community initiatives to change everyday normative practices through processes of negotiation and community learning need to be equally valued and supported as an intrinsic part of education.

Educational policies and programmes

The concern for empowerment of disadvantaged groups such as SCs, scheduled tribes (STs) and girls through education stems from consti-tutional commitments and policy directives and programme practices. Article 46 of the Constitution of India clearly outlines that the state shall ‘promote with special care the education and economic interests of the weaker sections of the society, and in particular of SC, ST and girls’. The NPE (1986) calls for strenuous efforts to correct regional imbalances and intergroup disparities in education. Reinforcing the 1968 resolutions, the National Policy of Education and Programme of Action (1986/1992) lays

Introduction 9

emphasis on removing disparities and equalisation of educational oppor-tunities by addressing the specific needs of those who have been denied equality so far. Both the policies have dealt with the educational needs of SCs, STs and minorities in great detail with a special concern for neglected groups like nomadic and semi-nomadic tribes and denotified tribes. Based on constitutional commitments and policy directives, planned efforts have been made since independence to promote educational development in an equitable manner. Although there have been considerable improve-ment in expansion of educational facilities in the country, the progress has been less than planned and desired. A large number of social groups are behind in educational and socio-economic terms.

The government, being the main provider of education and other welfare inputs for SCs, STs, minorities and girls, has identified these as special focus groups in centrally sponsored educational programmes. The programmes provide for development of context-specific strate-gies and interventions for the education of these target groups. Some of the programmes such as Mahila Samakhya (MS) and the Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalaya (KGBV) are in fact based on the educational needs of these specific groups. The Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) has identified and targeted geographical areas in districts and blocks with predominance of SC, ST and minority populations for allocating funds and school infrastructure to promote education among these groups. Moreover, the latest policy initiative, the RTE Act, has made special pro-visions for 25 per cent reservation for children from disadvantaged and economically weaker sections in admissions in private unaided schools. With the implementation of the RTE Act, the education system in India has entered into a distinctive phase of educational development, which is a departure from the other educational policies followed so far.

Some of the chapters in this volume are specifically concerned with educational policies and programmes which have made some perceptible impact on the process and outcome of educational development in the country, especially in the post-1990s period (Priyam, Ramachandran, Rajagopal and Mathew in this volume).

For education policy and practice in India the period since the early 1990s has been one of deep deliberations and immense ferment leading to contested and diverse action by national and international actors. In Chapter 9 , Priyam presents an evaluative account of the Bihar Education Project 4 (BEP), initiated in the early 1990s which laid the foundation of federal action not just in Bihar but also of a second generation of exter-nally aided school reform programmes in Indian states. Reflecting on the two decades of change since the BEP was launched, she analyses the


rather uneven process of narrowing down social and gender inequities in school participation. While doing a critical analysis of what worked and what did not, she also reflects on some larger issues. For instance, to what extent did BEP serve as a model for a holistic educational pro-gramme to be replicated in other states? How helpful was a transition to a new format of federal policy in making a dent? And in a more contem-porary sense, when Bihar records notable progress, is there evidence of policy and institutional embeddedness?

Ramachandran ( Chapter 10 ) presents an overview of three signifi-cant educational projects 5 – Shiksha Karmi (Rajasthan), Lok Jumbish (Rajasthan) and MS with a view to understand their impact on the main-stream education system, processes and practices in India. According to her, each of these three projects introduced specific innovations that were adapted by the main system. For example, the concept of a Shiksha Karmi (a locally recruited teacher), a strategy successfully implemented in the Shiksha Karmi Project 6 in Rajasthan was adopted by several other state governments. Similarly, the Lok Jumbish 7 experiment of block-level planning and subdistrict-level resourcing led to the institutionalisation of block resource centres (BRCs) and cluster resource centres (CRCs) under District Primary Education Programme (DPEP) and SSA. Further, the MS initiative of Mahila Shikshan Kendras (MSKs) (residential education centres for out-of-school girls) gave birth to the KGBV scheme and the nationwide experience of MSKs fed into the design of KGBV.

These examples demonstrate how specific ideas that were first tried out as innovations in these three projects were later adopted in bits and pieces by the larger education system. Ramachandran points out that Mr Anil Bordia’s experience of the three innovations was instrumental in developing new policies and programme practices. Some of the main features of these innovations were: (a) decentralisation of educational governance, (b) community mobilisation and environment-building, (c) special focus on disadvantaged groups and (d) women’s empow-erment. However, though innovative in nature, these strategies were geared towards improving the efficiency of the delivery of supply of programme inputs and had little impact on the empowerment process, except the MS programme.

In continuation of this analysis by Ramachandran, Rajagopal ( Chap-ter 11 ) points out how programmes like the Shiksha Karmi Project helped in improving and extending primary education to remote rural areas in Rajasthan by focusing on long-standing problems affecting primary education – teacher absenteeism and low enrolment and high dropout rates, especially among girls. The programme was unique as it focused on

Introduction 11

a qualitative improvement of primary education by adapting the form and content of education to local needs and conditions. Rajagopal recognises the contribution of Shiksha Karmi Project in making headway in planned educational development in Rajasthan and in providing insights for policy and planning both nationally and regionally. The innovative programme 8 distilled out the fundamental propositions from a specific experience to inform policies on education and social empowerment. According to her, the Shiksha Karmi Project experience demonstrated how a dysfunctional education system could be revived and made to work through appropriate institutional responses which were sensitive to the needs of the children.

Through a longitudinal account of the implementation of various adult educational programmes in the country, Mathew ( Chapter 12 ) explores the nature and extent to which adult education in India has served the purpose of social empowerment and also its limitations by way of issues and challenges faced in its pursuit. He narrates the tra-jectory of the adolescence education programmes in different phases and their undulating focus on critical pedagogy-oriented contents and processes on social empowerment. According to him, the social equity thrust was built into adult education when the National Literacy Mission was established in 1988 with special focus on the socially disadvantaged such as SCs, STs and women in rural areas. The approach and implemen-tation strategy with reference to literacy often covered broader dimen-sions of critical awareness and improvement in conditions of exploitation and poverty with implications for social empowerment through educa-tion. He also points out that it was the non-revolutionary character of the literacy campaigns 9 launched in India which was responsible for their limited impact. Although Total Literacy Campaigns launched impressive mobilisation campaigns and environment-building exercises, different approaches and methods adopted by them had varying impacts on the status of literacy among SCs, STs and women. He points out the weak-ness of the adult education programmes in the short-lived character of the literacy campaigns with respect to social empowerment and regress-ing back to the character of a routine government programme indicating the marginality of inclusive dimensions. According to him, there is need to learn from the experiences of other countries which achieved social empowerment through adult education.

Schooling, participation and empowerment

As discussed in the last section, school education has been at the forefront of policy reforms in education since the 1990s. Consequently, schooling


provisions have increased manifold, leading to a substantial increase in children’s enrolments. However despite a substantial increase in enrol-ments, the goal of universal elementary education remains elusive as a large number of enrolled children drop out without completing their schooling. The low retention capacity of schools is linked to inadequacy in terms of availability and quality of teachers. One may argue that the recent waves of economic and educational reforms have adversely affected the teaching profession by pushing administrative and economic reform agenda, hampering quality concerns. The appointment of underqualified and untrained teachers and burdening the teachers with managerial load at the cost of their teaching responsibility are some of the symptoms of recent reforms. Teachers’ involvement in non-teaching activities has increased in government schools in recent years. Velaskar ( Chapter 13 ) brings out the crisis of public schooling in the post-reform era by high-lighting the plight of teachers and the eroding base of the teaching pro-fession. For her, the spate of neo-liberal reforms in state education policy has led to some major changes in the structure and functioning of the education system in India. The reforms have compounded the neglect and decline of education as a social institution in post-independent India. Drawing examples from the municipal school system in Mumbai, Velas-kar illustrates the case of the current crisis in public education and argues for the need to contextualise it in the wider erosion of the institutional framework of a democratic polity. The over-bureaucratisation of the educational process has adversely affected the day-to-day functioning of schools, undermining the power and authority of teachers. According to her, the new policy initiatives in education seem set to deprive the poor of legitimate access to a crucial tool of individual and social empowerment yet again. 10 One may say that empowerment through education is not possible without teachers’ empowerment or capacity-building.

The functioning of a school also depends on the context in which it operates, as very often the context determines the outcome of school-ing. In other words, the intake and neighbourhood of the school have a major influence on the participation and performance of children. Draw-ing from her ethnographic study of a state-run primary school in a slum neighbourhood in Delhi, Gunjan Sharma ( Chapter 14 ) presents a pic-ture of how everyday educational discourse among schoolteachers, other educational functionaries and the community was constituted in an interaction with each other and in relation to state policy in a post-RTE context. She points out how the vocabulary and concept of ‘schemes’ were very central in (re)structuring or shaping the discourse and in a way

Introduction 13

aspirations as well. While exploring the narrative of educational func-tionaries, she finds community perceptions to be non-responsive despite several government schemes as reflected in the community’s everyday narratives concerning the schemes, school and schooling. 11 She brings out the disjunctions in the everyday conception of ‘rights’ and entitle-ments in the school and in slum communities in general.

Besides the weakened teaching profession and inadequate incen-tives, schooling in India has been severely affected by children’s lower school participation in terms of attendance and retention. Despite SSA and RTE, a large number of children are reported to be out of school. In Chapter 15 , Sinha examines the problem of enrolment and reten-tion of out-of-school children in the light of the RTE Act. The Right of Children for Free and Compulsory Education Act 2009 has sev-eral entitlements guaranteed to children as a fundamental right. Each of the entitlements is to be enjoyed unfailingly by every child in the 6–14 years age group in the country. More importantly, every child has to be enrolled in school and retained until completion of Class 8 or elementary education. According to Sinha, the claim of even 98 per cent enrolment becomes irrelevant if children are not attending schools regularly or if they drop out. She highlights the nature and magnitude of the problem of retention of children in schools across districts. She also points out the linkage between the problem of retention of children in schools and the schooling provision and functioning by highlighting the strong linkage between a low pupil–teacher ratio and the problem of children’s retention in schools. For her, children’s empowerment is linked to the realisation of their entitlements of schooling.

But the role of schooling in meeting the educational developmen-tal needs of children during different phases of their lives cannot be overestimated. Being an important phase of student life, adolescence throws several challenges for schooling in terms of preparing students as confident youth for an uncertain adult world. Viewing adolescents as a distinct group which has special learning needs, Jain ( Chapter 16 ) focuses on adolescents who were never enrolled or who dropped out from school due to extreme conditions of deprivation. According to her, educational planning for these out-of-school adolescents has to be seen not in terms of making available to them what they missed out in childhood but in terms of what they need to learn now. Their learning needs should be identified in a holistic 12 manner. She recommends that interventions need to be designed for addressing the processes of mar-ginalisation which reinforce their deprived status in society.


Higher education and social empowerment

Empowerment issues become critical at the level of higher education as the outcomes are decisive in terms of securing livelihoods. Higher education is also an arena where policies are much contested as they determine the resource benefits in some way or the other to some group or the other. Like school education, in higher education too policies are in place for improving access and participation among groups that have remained deprived of opportunities. In recent years, further emphasis has been laid on access by adding a significant number of educational institutions (universities, IITs, Indian Institutes of Management, poly-technics, etc.) in different parts of the country. Consequently, enrolment of students at different levels has also increased substantially. However, in spite of governmental efforts, the issues of access and equity still remain major areas of concern. The quantitative expansion of institutions has not been accompanied by a corresponding improvement in the quality of the education that is imparted. Higher education in India suffers from problems of inadequacies in terms of access, equity and quality.

In Chapter 17 , Bhushan contends that policies in higher education are riddled with injustices 13 to the students and teachers based on strict rules and regulations following the principles of bounded rationality. According to him, the ongoing problems of higher education need to be understood through the justice framework and need to be cor-rected by enhancing the capabilities of the persons concerned. He uses Amartya Sen’s (2009) ‘Idea of Justice’ and capability approach to examine and address the injustices in policies in higher education which have had a direct and indirect bearing on accountability and control in higher education institutions. He cites various examples of control and accountability such as accreditation, semesterisation, learner centered-ness and outcome-based evaluation. Bhushan argues that the capabilities approach aimed at delivering justice through a public policy calls for an impartial, objective and critical scrutiny of public policy by stakehold-ers in education. He advocates the use of the justice framework based on a comprehensive outcome approach that aims at developing capa-bilities of students and teachers. According to him, empowerment can be achieved only through enhancing capabilities based on justice and comprehensive outcomes. Policies guided by comprehensive rational-ity cannot serve the cause of social empowerment as policies guided by technical efficiency provide no guarantees of effectively addressing the injustices inflicted on an individual or a group. Building on the justice framework of public policy in education, it is necessary to enhance the

Introduction 15

capabilities of individuals/groups for a public policy to have a social empowerment effect. 14

Besides access and quality, ‘equity’ in higher education is a major con-cern. The policy of affirmative action 15 is considered one of the most important means of creating equal access to the institutions of higher education. Recognising the importance and necessity of an affirmative action policy in promoting participation in higher education, 16 Suresh ( Chapter 18 ) examines the policy of affirmative action in the institutional context. He highlights a variety of responses to the issue of affirmative action in higher education, ranging from interrogation of the very logic of the affirmative action policy to uncritical acceptance of its opera-tional context and implications. According to him, since institutions are the actual sites for promoting or impeding parity of participation, it is important to understand the response of the institutions in imple-menting inclusive policies and programmes at the institutional level. He explains and illustrates how the institutions respond to the requisite of creating an enabling environment for students coming from a disadvan-taged background. He argues that although institutions help in over-coming the initial disadvantages of the sociocultural location through their inclusive practices, they ultimately reinforce the link between insti-tutional practices and exclusionary experiences of social location.

Highlighting the need for skill-based education for weaker sections, George ( Chapter 19 ) explains and illustrates how community colleges could be a useful educational scheme for imparting vocational skills and empowering students from marginalised sections to secure gainful employment and to become economically independent. According to him, community colleges are experiments in higher education aimed at the empowerment of the disadvantaged and the underprivileged like urban and rural poor, tribals and women through appropriate skill development leading to gainful employment. 17 They operate in col-laboration with local industries and the community and enable students to achieve skills for employment/self-employment. These colleges pro-vide opportunities for socially and economically backward students, girls and school dropouts to pursue their studies. These institutions can play a major role in the social empowerment of marginalised sec-tions by enabling them to become employable through skills training. Educated people feel empowered when they have functional skills to secure livelihoods.

However, skill-based higher and professional education today is guided largely by neo-liberal philosophy and agenda of public–private part-nership and corporate socialism. The neo-liberal milieu has created a


paradoxical situation in which public concerns of education as a social enterprise are coexisting with profit motives of private organisations, undermining the emancipatory role of education for the disadvantaged and marginalised. Samaddar ( Chapter 20 ) explains and illustrates how current popular practice of debt financing in higher education, that is, offering educational bank loans to students for higher studies, is helping mainly the privileged, rich and powerful and marginalising the poor and disadvantaged. Furthermore, the recent clamour and craze of acquiring ranks in international ratings is creating a notion of hierarchy among educational institutions undermining the logic of social governance and social investments. Thus the neo-liberal era and milieu are fraught with a tendency of accentuating educational and social inequalities whereby privileged classes and groups enhance their superiority over others.

Concluding remarks

Education and empowerment are two sides of the same coin. One pre-supposes the other. The nature of the relationship between the two depends on the context in which it is discussed and the perspective which is used. Empowerment through education can be judged on the axis of principles, policies and practices. Depending on the agency factor, education can perform both static and dynamic roles. The relationship between the two can be viewed from different theoretical perspectives. While from one point of view education maintains social order by sys-tematising role allocations as per knowledge, skill norms and values, the other perspective argues that education plays an emancipatory role by releasing the disadvantaged and discriminated from oppression and exploitation and placing them on the path of development implying freedom and autonomy. The two theoretical perspectives present two contrary viewpoints of the same social reality. The current use of the idea of empowerment through education belies any such theoretical import and calls for a scrutiny of educational policies and programmes.

When it comes to policies, although several educational policies and programmes have been implemented since independence to universalise literacy and school education, and more specifically to meet the educa-tional needs of the disadvantaged groups, these policies and programmes have been overburdened with quantitative stress rather than having a qualitative focus. With the RTE Act, the focus has now shifted towards groups which have been outside the functional ambit of the school. RTE wants to ensure education for the socially disadvantaged sections in rural and urban areas such as SCs, STs, disabled and girls. Initial trends

Introduction 17

in implementing the RTE Act indicate that there is need to change the approach and strategy for making it effective in terms of outcomes. The hierarchies of social and gender iniquities in participation and quality of learning achievements continue to be a critical challenge in achieving social empowerment through education. Policy-level challenges need a paradigm shift in terms of theoretical insights for prioritising issues and formulating appropriate strategies to ensure social equality and empow-erment. Empowerment through education is more about pedagogy than participation in education.

Notes 1 Empowerment through education cannot be understood without address-

ing the problem of asymmetry in the distribution of ‘privilege’ that is, ‘special claim to obtain access to education in consequence of being part of a generic category’ (in terms of class/gender/caste regardless of specific individual potential or attainments) as recipients of education. Attribution of such claims creates the ‘privileged’ and denial of educa-tion creates the ‘disprivileged’ in the area of education (Bhattacharya 2002: 2).

2 The context is the contradiction between a hierarchical social order and a democratic political system (Beteille 1999: 589).

3 See Chapter 17, in this volume. 4 It is often remarked that BEP was also a handcrafted piece of Bordia’s

vivid and distinct thinking on what should be the distinct elements of a reform agenda for Bihar education (Chapter 9, in this volume).

5 Shiksha Karmi (Rajasthan), Lok Jumbish (Rajasthan) and MS (all-India) were educational programmes envisioned and designed by Anil Bordia and were based on the idea of empowerment.

6 Shiksha Karmi Project was the first Government of India–donor part-nership programme in primary education that created an autonomous project implementation structure that was registered under the Societies Registration Act with the express purpose of ensuring funds flow directly from Government of India to the project bypassing the state treasury.

7 Lok Jumbish introduced block-level planning and a periodic review-planning cycle at the block level. This was at a time when the District Primary Education Programme (DPEP) had just started using district planning. This was a unique contribution and the idea was adapted in the form of CRC and Block Resource Centre concepts, the first in the later phase of DPEP and then in SSA. But the original idea of a block-level planning and review cycle was reduced to training and data gathering.

8 See Chapter 11, in this volume. 9 The Total Literacy Campaigns took place in a non-revolutionary milieu,

unlike the mass literacy campaigns which came in the wake of revolu-tionary changes in other countries (Chapter 12, in this volume).


10 See Chapter 13, in this volume. 11 See Chapter 14, in this volume. 12 See Chapter 16, in this volume. 13 The present state of education policy is a picture characterised by injus-

tices, whether viewed from students’ or teachers’ perspectives – the two important stakeholders of education (Chapter 17, in this volume).

14 Policies guided by comprehensive rationality could not serve the cause of social empowerment as policies guided by technical efficiency are no guarantee of addressing the injustices inflicted on an individual or a group. Building on the justice framework of public policy in educa-tion, it is necessary to enhance the capabilities of individuals/groups for public policy to have a social empowerment effect (Chapter 17, in this volume).

15 Affirmative action in the form of quotas has become the most popular government strategy to deal with rising aspirations of the disadvantaged and weaker sections in the country (Beteille 1999).

16 Affirmative action aims at correcting the mismatch that exists between the requisite of equal access to the institutions of higher education and the unequal sociocultural location of individuals. In a diverse and unequal society the goal of creating equal access to public institutions cannot be pursued without the intervention of the state through an array of public policies and programmes. The logic of formal equality cannot address the issue of unequal access in society which is characterised by a deep-rooted sociocultural inequality. Social and cultural location in such cases impinges on equal access to formal institutions and impedes parity of participation (Chapter 18, in this volume).

17 See Chapter 19, in this volume.

References

Beteille, Andre. 1999. ‘Empowerment’, Economic and Political Weekly 34(10/11): 589–97.

Bhattacharya, Sabyasachi (ed.). 2002. Education and the Disprivileged: Nineteenth and Twentieth Century India . New Delhi: Orient Longman.

Bourdieu, Pierre and Jean-Claude Passeron. 1977. Reproduction in Educa-tion, Society and Culture . California: Sage Publications.

Cartright, Nancy, Jordi Cat, Lola Fleck and Thomas E. Uebel. 1996. Otto Neurath: Philosophy between Science and Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Freire, Paulo. 1996. Pedagogy of the Oppressed (translated by Myra Bergman Ramos). London: Penguin Books.

Gupta, Dipankar. 2013. Revolution from above: India’s Future and Citizen Elite. New Delhi: Rupa Publications India Private Ltd.

Marshall, T. H. 1957. Citizenship and Social Class and Other Essays . London: Syndics of Cambridge University Press.

Mohanty, Manoranjan. 1995. ‘On the Concept of Empowerment’, Eco-nomic and Political Weekly 30(24): 1434–6.

Introduction 19

Nussbaum, C. Martha. 2011. Creating Capabilities: The Human Develop-ment Approach. Ranikhet, India: Permanent Black.

Sen, A. K. 2009. The Idea of Justice. London: Allen Lane. Sen, G. and Srilatha Batliwala. 2000. ‘Empowering Women for Reproduc-

tive Rights’ in Harriet B. Presser and Gita Sen (eds), Women’s Empower-ment and Demographic Processes: Moving beyond Cairo. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 15–36.

This page intentionally left blank

References

Introduction: education and empowermentin India: policies and practices

Beteille, Andre. 1999. ‘Empowerment’, Economic andPolitical Weekly 34 (10/11): 589–97. Bhattacharya,Sabyasachi (ed.). 2002. Education and the Disprivileged:Nineteenth and Twentieth Century India . New Delhi: OrientLongman. Bourdieu, Pierre and Jean-Claude Passeron. 1977.Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture .California: Sage Publications. Cartright, Nancy, JordiCat, Lola Fleck and Thomas E. Uebel. 1996. Otto Neurath:Philosophy between Science and Politics. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press. Freire, Paulo. 1996.Pedagogy of the Oppressed (translated by Myra BergmanRamos). London: Penguin Books. Gupta, Dipankar. 2013.Revolution from above: India’s Future and Citizen Elite.New Delhi: Rupa Publications India Private Ltd. Marshall,T. H. 1957. Citizenship and Social Class and Other Essays. London: Syndics of Cambridge University Press.Mohanty, Manoranjan. 1995. ‘On the Concept of Empowerment’,Economic and Political Weekly 30(24): 1434–6. Nussbaum,C. Martha. 2011. Creating Capabilities: The HumanDevelopment Approach. Ranikhet, India: Permanent Black.Sen, A. K. 2009. The Idea of Justice. London: Allen Lane.Sen, G. and Srilatha Batliwala. 2000. ‘Empowering Women forReproductive Rights’ in Harriet B. Presser and Gita Sen(eds), Women’s Empowerment and Demographic Processes:Moving beyond Cairo. New York: Oxford University Press.pp. 15–36. This page intentionally left blank

1 Education and citizenship: beyond therights-based approach

Cartright, Nancy, Jordi Cat, Lola Fleck and Thomas E.Uebel. 1996. Otto Neurath: Philosophy between Science andPolitics . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Desai, Sonalde B. Amaresh Dubey, Brij Lal Joshi, MitaliSen, Abusaleh Shariff and Reeve Vanneman. 2010. HumanDevelopment in India. Delhi: Oxford University Press.

Gupta, Dipankar. 2013. Revolution from above: India’sFuture and Citizen Elite. New Delhi: Rupa PublicationsIndia Private Ltd.

Gupta, S. P. 2002. Report on the Committee on India Vision2020. New Delhi: Planning Commission.

Marshall, T. H. 1957. Citizenship and Social Class andOther Essays . London: Syndics of Cambridge UniversityPress.

Panchmukhi, P. R. and Santosh Mehrotra. 2005. ‘AssessingPublic and Private Provision of Elementary Education inIndia’ in Santosh Mehrotra and P. R. Panchmukhi (eds),Universalizing Elementary Education in India: Uncaging theTiger . New Delhi: Oxford University Press. pp. 229–90.

Sinha, Koutelya. 2011. ‘Indians Pay 78% of Their MedicalExpenses from Their Own Pocket’, Times of India . 13January, available at http://

2 Perspectives on education and socialempowerment: the Indian context

Chitnis, Suma. 1972. ‘Education for Equality: The Case ofScheduled Caste in Higher Education’, Economic andPolitical Weekly VII(31–33): 1675–82.

Deshpande, Satish. 2006. ‘Exclusive Inequalities: Merit,Caste and Discrimination in Indian Higher Education Today’,Economic and Political Weekly 41(24): 2438–44.

Dewey, John. 2011. Democracy and Education: AnIntroduction to the Philosophy of Education (2nd IndianReprint). Delhi: Aakar Books.

Dreze, Jean and Amartya Sen. 2013. An Uncertain Glory:India and Its Contradictions . London: Allen Lane (animprint of Penguin Books), Chapter 5, pp. 107–42.

Durkheim, Emile. 1956. Education and Sociology (translatedwith an introduction by S. D. Fax). New York: The FreePress.

———. 1977. The Evolution of Educational Thought: Lectureson the Formation and Development of Secondary Education inFrance (translated by Peter Collins). London: Routledge &Kegan Paul.

Entwistle, Horold. 1979. Antoni Gramsci: ConservativeSchooling for Radical Politics . London: Routledge & KeganPaul.

Frenz, Margret and Georg Berkemer. 2006. ‘Colleges andKings: Higher Education under Direct and Indirect Rule’,Economic and Political Weekly XLI(13): 1261–8.

Gore, M.S. 1982. Education and Modernization in India.Jaipur: Rawat Publications.

——— . 1994. Indian Education: Structure and Process.Jaipur and New Delhi: Rawat Publications.

Habermas, Jurgen. 1991. The Structural Transformation ofthe Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of BourgeoisSociety , The MIT Press, quoted from Chaudhuri, Maitrayee.2013. ‘Higher Education in “Global” India: The Need forCritical Sociology’ in Ishwar Modi (ed.), Education,Religion and Creativity . Jaipur: Rawat Publications.

Hohendahl, Peter Uwe. 2005. ‘The Transnational University

and the Global Public Sphere’ in Max Pensky (ed.),Globalising Critical Theory. Lanham: Rowman & LittlefieldPublications, pp. 89–112.

Jayaram, N. 1990. Sociology of Education in India .Jaipur: Rawat Publications. ——— . 2013. ‘The Decline ofthe University as a Public Institution in India’ in IshwarModi (ed.), Education, Religion and Creativity . Jaipur:Rawat Publications, pp. 23–40. Kothari, D. S. 1966.Report of the Education Commission, 1964 – 66 , under theChairmanship of D. S. Kothari. New Delhi: Government ofIndia.

Marx, Karl. 1964. The German Ideology . Moscow: ProgressPublishers.

Nayyar, Deepak. 2013. ‘Globalization: What Does It Mean forHigher Education’? in J.B.G. Tilak (ed.), Higher Educationin India: In Search of Equality, Quality and Quantity . NewDelhi: Orient Blackswan, pp. 461–71.

Rao, P.H.S. and M. N. Palsane. 1994. Training for HigherEducation. Jaipur and New Delhi: Rawat Publications.Rudolph, Susanne Hoeber and Llyod I Rudolph (eds). 1972.Education and Politics in India. Delhi: Oxford UniversityPress. Sen, Amartya. 2013. ‘The Crisis in IndianEducation’ in R. K. Mishra (ed.), India: Leading Issuesin Economic Development . New Delhi: Academic Foundation,pp. 129–62. Shah, A. M. 2013. ‘Higher Education andResearch: Roots of Mediocrity’ in J.B.G. Tilak (ed.),Higher Education in India: In Search of Equality, Qualityand Quantity . New Delhi: Orient Blackswan, pp. 184–203.Earlier published in Economic and Political Weekly40(22–23): 2234–42, 28 May 2005. Shah, B. V. and K. B.Shah. 2006. Sociology of Education (reprint). Jaipur andNew Delhi: Rawat Publications. Sharma, Kavita, A. 2013.Sixty Years of the University Grants Commission,Establishment, Growth and Evolution . New Delhi: UniversityGrants Commission. Sharma, K. L. 2011. Culture,Stratification and Development (see chapter 9 on SomeReflections on Higher Education, State and Social Hierarchyin India). Jaipur and New Delhi: Rawat Publications, pp.199–214. ———. 2013. ‘Education and Social Stratificationin India: Systematic Inequality’ in Handbook on SocialStratification in the BRIC Countries: Change andPerspective , co-authored by Li Peilin, M. K. Gorshkov,Celi Scalon and K. L. Sharma. Singapore: World Scientific,pp. 549–68. Singh, R. P. (ed.). 1998. IndianUniversities: Towards Nation Building . New Delhi:University Grants Commission. Singhi, N. K. 1979.

Education and Social Change. Jaipur: Rawat Publications.Tilak, J.B.G. 2004. ‘Absence of Policy and Perspective inHigher Education’, Economic and Political WeeklyXXXIV(21): 2159–64. ——— . 2013. ‘Introduction’ in J.B.G.Tilak (ed.), Higher Education in India: In Search ofEquality, Quality and Quantity . New Delhi: OrientBlackswan, pp. 1–18. The Times Higher EducationalSupplement , 2011, 2012, 2013. UNESCO Institute ofStatistics 2013. Inbound Internationally Mobile Students yCountry of Origin,Data.uis.unesco.org/Indian.asprc?queryld=120 Verma, PawanK. 2010. Becoming Indian. New Delhi: Penguin Books, pp.64–87, on ‘Macaulay’s Legacy’.

3 Conscientização, everyday struggle andtransformative education: towards aframework for effectivecommunity–education linkage

Krimshire, Angela. 1981. ‘Community Schools and theEducation of the “Social Individual” ’, Oxford Review ofEducation 7(1): 53–65. Marcuse, Herbert. 1972. OneDimensional Man . London: Abacus. Marx, Karl. 1968. TheGerman Ideology . Moscow: Progress Publishers. McLaren,Peter. 1999. ‘A Pedagogy of Possibility: Reflecting uponPaulo Freire’s Politics of Education’, EducationalResearcher 28(2) (March): 49–56 . ———. 2001. ‘CheGuevara, Paulo Freire, and the Politics of Hope: ReclaimingCritical Pedagogy, Cultural Studies’, CriticalMethodologies 1(1): 108–31. ———. 2005. Capitalists andConquerors: A Critical Pedagogy against Empire . Lanham:Rowman & Littlefield Publications. Noronha, Anjali. 2003.‘The Community in Charge: Shades of Experience from MadhyaPradesh’ in R. Govinda and Rashmi Diwan (eds), CommunityParticipation and Empowerment in Primary Education . NewDelhi: Sage Publications, pp. 99–121. Puri, Ellora.2004. ‘Understanding Participation: Theoretical Foundationsand Practical Implications’, Economic and PoliticalWeekly 39(24) (12 June): 2511–17 . Ramachandran, Vimala.2001. ‘Community Participation in Primary Education:Innovations in Rajasthan’, Economic and Political Weekly36(25) (23 June): 2244–50 . Ramachandran, Vimala,Kameshwari Jandhyala, Aarti Saihjee. 2003. ‘Through theLife Cycle of Children Factors That Facilitate/ImpedeSuccessful Primary School Completion’, Economic andPolitical Weekly 38(47) (22 November): 4994–5002 . Raman,Anuradha. 2008. ‘The Basic Math’, Outlook . 18 February,pp. 14–16. Rana, Kumar, Samantak Das. 13 March 2004.‘Primary Education in Jharkhand’, Economic and PoliticalWeekly 39(11): 1172–8. Rikowski, Glenn. 2002. ‘Methodsfor Researching the Social Production of Labour Power inCapitalism’, available at http://www.ieps.org.uk.cwc.net/rikowski2002b.pdf (accessed on 17 October 2007), 7March. Saxena, Sadhna. 2003. ‘Community Participation andLiteracy: Beyond Semantics’ in R. Govinda and Rashmi Diwan(eds), Community Participation and Empowerment in PrimaryEducation . New Delhi: Sage Publications, pp. 75–98.Uemura, Mitsue. 1999. ‘Community Participation inEducation: What Do We Know?’ Prepared by for EffectiveSchools and Teachers and the Knowledge Management SystemHDNED, The World Bank, available at www1.

4 Education and emancipation: the sagaand ideology of Dr B. R. Ambedkar

Mendelsohn, Oliver and Marika Vicziany. 1990. ‘TheUntouchables Today’ in Jim Masselos (ed.), India:Creating a Modern Nation . New Delhi: Sterling Publishers,pp. 254–86.

Rodrigues, Valerian (ed.). 2002. The Essential Writings ofB.R. Ambedkar. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.

Shah, Ghanshyam, Harsh Mander, Sukhadeo Thorat, SatishDeshpande and Amita Baviskar. 2006. Untouchability inRural India. New Delhi: Sage Publications.

Thorat, Sukhadeo. 2009. Dalits in India: Search for aCommon Destiny. New Delhi: Sage Publications.

Zelliot, Eleanor. 1972. ‘Gandhi and Ambedkar: A Study inLeadership’ in J. Michael Mahar (ed.), The Untouchablesin Contemporary India . Tucson, AZ: The University ofArizona Press, pp. 69–95.

5 State policy, education and tribes

Elwin, Verrier. 1943. The Aboriginals. London: OxfordUniversity Press.

———. 1959. A Philosophy for NEFA . Shillong: The Advisorto the Governor of Assam.

Ghurye, G. S. 1943. The Aborigines So-Called and TheirFuture. Bombay: Popular Prakashan.

Government of India (Planning Commission). 2007. Report ofthe Working Group on Empowerment of Scheduled Tribes forthe Eleventh Five Year Plan (2007–12) .

———MHRD. Annual Reports, 2008–09 .

Mathur, Ashok. 2008. An Overview of the Jharkhand Economyand Perspectives for Human Development , National Seminaron Growth and Human Development, Jharkhand, 4–5 July 2008.

Verma, R. C. 1990. Tribes through the Ages . Delhi:Government of India Publication Department.

Xaxa, Virginius. 2008. State, Society and Tribes. Issuesin Post Colonial India . Delhi. Pearson.

6 Faltering steps to modern education:the Ho adivasis of colonial Singhbhum

Books

Bara, J. 2005. ‘Seeds of Mistrust: Tribal and ColonialPerspectives on Education in Chhotanagpur, 1834c. 1850’,History of Education 34(6) (November): 617–37.

Baskey, D. N. 1982. Saontal Ganasangramer Itihas .Calcutta: Pearl Publishers.

Bodding, P. O. (tr.). 1994. Traditions and Institutions ofthe Santals/Horkoren Mare Hapramko Raek Katha. New Delhi:Bahumukhi Prakashan.

Burrows, L. B. 1915. Ho Grammar . Calcutta: CatholicOrphan Press.

Dalton, E. T. 1973. Tribal History of Eastern India(original title Descriptive Ethnology of Bengal ). Delhi:Cosmo Publication. Datta, K. K. (ed.). 1957. Unrestagainst British Rule in Bihar 1831–1859. Patna, India:Superintendent, Secretariat Press. Devalle, S.B.C. 1992.Discourse of Ethnicity, Culture and Protest in Jharkhand .New Delhi: Sage Publications. Hallpike, C. R. 1979. TheFoundations of Primitive Thought. Oxford: Clarendon. Jha,J. C. 1987. The Tribal Revolt of Chotanagpur (1831–32) .Patna, India: K. P. Jayaswal Research Institute.MacDougall, J. 1985. Land or Religion? The Sardar andKherwar Movements in Bihar 1858–95 . Delhi: Manohar.Majumdar, D. N. 1937. A Tribe in Transition: Study inCultural Pattern . Calcutta: Longmans Green & Co., Ltd.Majuumdar, R. C. 1962. History of the Freedom Movement inIndia , Vol. I. Calcutta: Firma KLM. Mohapatra, P. P.1985. ‘Coolies and Colliers: A Study of the AgrarianContext of Labour Migration from Chotanagpur, 1880–1920’,Studies in History 1 (new series): 2. New Oxford AdvancedLearner’s Dictionary . 2005. Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress. O’Malley, L.S.S. 1910. Bengal District GazetteersSinghbhum, Seraikela and Kharsawan . Calcutta: The BengalSecretariat Book Depot. Roy Choudhury, P. C. 1958. BiharDistrict Gazetteers: Singhbhum . Patna, India:Superintendent Secretariat Press. Roy, S. C. 1970. TheMundas and Their Country . Calcutta: Asia PublishingHouse. ———. 1972. Oraon Religion and Customs . Calcutta:Editions Indian. ———. 1984. The Oraons of Chotanagpur .Ranchi, India: Man in India Office. Sahu M. 1985. TheKolhan under the British Rule . Calcutta: No publisher.

Sen, A. K. 1988. The Educated Middle Class and IndianNationalism . Calcutta: Progressive Publishers.

———. (ed.). 1999. W ilkinson’s Rules: Context, Content andRamifications . Chaibasa, India: Tata College. ———.2004. ‘The Process of Social Stratification in the LineageSociety of Kolhan in Singhbhum’, South Asia: Journal ofSouth Asian Studies XXVII (new series): 27–38. ———.2008. ‘Gleaning Historical Materials from a Myth: KoleHistory of the Creation of the World’, Folklore andEnvironment, Indian Folklife , A Quarterly Newsletterfrom National Folklore Support Centre, Serial No. 28.———. 2010. ‘Peasantization and the Changing Socio-Economyof the Ho Adivasis of Singhbhum’, paper presented at theNational Seminar on Environment, State and Societyorganised by Department of History, Jadavpur University.———. 2011a. ‘Collaboration and Conflict: EnvironmentalLegacies of the Ho of Kolhan (1700–1918)’ in Deepak Kumar,Vinita Damodaran and Rohan D’Souza (eds), The BritishEmpire and the Natural World: Environmental Encounters inSouth Asia. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, pp.202–27. ———. 2011b. Representing Tribe: The Ho ofSinghbhum during Colonial Rule , New Delhi: ConceptPublishing Co. ———. 2012. From Village Elder to BritishJudge: Custom, Customary Law and Tribal Society .Hyderabad, India: Orient Blackswan. Sen, S. K. 2008.Tribal Struggle for Freedom: Singhbhum 1820 –1858 . NewDelhi: Concept Publishing Co. Singer, W. 1997. CreatingHistories: Oral Narratives and the Politics ofHistory-Making. Delhi: Oxford University Press. Singh, A.K. 1995. ‘The Cultural Construction of Home and SchoolKnowledge in Tribal India’, Prospects XXV (4): 735–47.Singh, C. P. 1978. The Ho Tribe of Singhbhum. New Delhi:Classical Publications. Singh, K. S. 1966. TheDust-Storm and the Hanging Mist . Calcutta: Firma K. L.Mukhopadhyay. ———. 2006. ‘Tribal Autonomy Movements inChotanagpur’, in K. S. Singh (ed.), Tribal Movements inIndia , Vol. 2, New Delhi: Manohar, pp. 1–30. Tickell,Lt. S.R. 1840a. ‘Memoir on the Hodesum (Improperly CalledKolehan)’, Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal XI(PtII): 694–709, 783–808. ———. 1840b. ‘Vocabulary of the Holanguage’, Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal IX(PtII) (new series): 997–1090, Calcutta, July to December.Vansina, Jan. 1985. Oral Tradition as history. London:James Currey Ltd. Vidyarthi, L. P. and K. N. Sahay. 1978.Dynamics of Tribal Leadership in Bihar . Allahabad, India:Kitab Mahal.

8 Enabling equality: girls’ education,social norms and community interventions

Aikman, S., and N. Rao. 2012. ‘Gender Equality and GirlsEducation: Investigating Frameworks, Disjunctures andMeanings of Quality Education’, Theory and Research inEducation 10(3): 211–28.

Aikman, S., and E. Unterhalter. 2005. ‘Introduction’ in S.Aikman and E. Unterhalter (eds), Beyond Access:Transforming Policy and Practice for Gender Equality inEducation . Oxford: Oxfam GB, pp. 1–12.

Bandyopadhyay, M., and R. Subramanian. 2008. ‘Gender Equityin Education: A Review of Trends and Factors’, Consortiumfor Research on Educational Access, Transitions andEquity, Pathways to Access. Research Monograph No 18. NewDelhi: National University of Educational Planning andAdministration.

Basu, Aparna. ‘Indian Women’s Movement’, available athttp://www.du.ac.

Brint, Steven. 2013. ‘The “Collective Mind” at Work: ADecade in the Life of US Sociology of Education’,Sociology of Education 86(4): 273–9. Calder, Rebecca andKarishma Huda. 2013. ‘Adolescent Girls and Education:Challenges, Evidence and Gaps’. Pathways Perspectives onSocial Policy in International Development, Issue no. 13,November 2013, available at

Mazumdar, Vina (ed.). 2012. Education, Equality andDevelopment: Persistent Paradoxes in Indian Women’s History. New Delhi: Centre for Women’s Development Studies andPearson.

Mukherjee, Sucharita Sinha. 2013. ‘Women’s Empowerment andGender Bias in the Birth and Survival of Girls in UrbanIndia’, Feminist Economics 19(1): 1–28.

Niven, James, Alessandria Faggian and Kanchana N.Ruwanpura. 2013. ‘Exploring “Underachievement” amongHighly Educated Young BritishBangladeshi Women’, FeministEconomics 19(1): 111–36.

Pande, Anuradha. 2001. ‘Education of Rural Children in UPHimalayas’ in A. Vaidyanathan and P. R. Gopinathan Nair(eds), Elementary Education in Rural India . New Delhi:Sage Publications, pp. 86–130.

———. 2013. ‘Organising for Life and Livelihoods in theMountains of Uttarakhand: The Experience of UttarakhandMahila Parishad’ in Naila Kabeer, Ratna Sudarshan andKirsty Milward (eds), Organising Women Workers in theInformal Economy . London: ZED Books, pp. 100–27.

Pathways of Women’s Empowerment. n.d. ‘Empowerment: AJourney Not a Destination’. Brighton: Institute ofDevelopment Studies, available athttp://www.ids.ac.uk/files/dmfile/SynthesisReport12DecR.pdf(accessed on 18 September 2014).

Rajagopal, Shobhita. 2013. ‘Engendering the EducationLandscape: Insights from Policy and Practice’, IDSJWorking Paper 164. Jaipur: Institute of DevelopmentStudies.

Ramachandran, Vimala. 2012. ‘Evaluating Gender and Equityin Elementary Education: Reflections on Methodologies,Processes and Outcomes’, Indian Journal of Gender Studies19(2): 233–58.

Rao, N. 2012. ‘Breadwinners and Homemakers: Migration andChanging Conjugal Expectations in Rural Bangladesh’,Journal of Development Studies 48(1): 26–40.

Santhya, K. G., Shireen J. Jejeebhoy, Iram Saeed andArchana Sarkar. 2013. Growing Up in Rural India: AnExploration into the Lives of Younger and OlderAdolescents in Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh . NewDelhi: Population Council.

Schultz, Theodore W. 1961. ‘Investment in Human Capital’,The American Economic Review 51(1): 1–17.

Srinivas, M. N. 1962. Caste in Modern India and Otheressays. Bombay: Asia Publishing House.

Vijayakumar, Gowri. 2013. ‘ “I’ll Be Like Water”: Gender,Class, and Flexible Aspirations at the Edge of India’sKnowledge Economy’, Gender and Society 27(6): 777–98.

Watts, Ruth. 2013. ‘Society, Education and the State:Gender Perspectives on an Old Debate’, PaedagogicaHistorica: International Journal of the History ofEducation 49(1): 17–33.

9 Policy reform and educationaldevelopment in a federal context:reflections on the uneven process ofchange in Bihar

———. 2013a. ‘Surviving Gandaman’, The Hindu , August 10,available at http://

———. 2013b. ‘Political Economy of a Tragedy: Why DeathsFollowed Mid-Day Meals in Bihar’ (Pts 1 and 2), 19 and 21August, India at LSE website, available athttp://blogs.lse.ac.uk/indiaatlse/2013/08/19/

———. 2015. The Contested Politics of Educational Reform inIndia: Aligning Opportunities and Interests . New Delhi:Oxford University Press.

Ramachandran, Vimala and Kameshwari Jandhyala (eds). 2012.Cartographies of Empowerment: The Story of Mahila Samakhya. New Delhi: Zubaan Books.

Singh, N. K. and Nicholas Stern (eds). 2013. The NewBihar: Rekindling Development and Governance . New Delhi:Harper Collins.

Tendulkar, Suresh D., R. Radha Krishna and SuranjanSengupta. 2009. Report of the Expert Group to Review theMethodology for the Estimation of Poverty . New Delhi:Planning Commission, Government of India.

Weiner, Myron. 1991. The Child and the State in India :Child Labour and Education Policy in ComparativePerspective . Delhi, Bombay, Calcutta, Madras: OxfordUniversity Press. World Bank. 1997. Primary Education inIndia, Development in Practice . Washington, DC:International Bank for Reconstruction and Development.

10 Exploring the legacy of threeinnovative programmes: lessons learntfrom Lok Jumbish, Shiksha Karmi andMahila Samakhya

Jayaram, Manya, Amita Prasher and Uno Winblad. 1991a.‘Rajasthan: The Shiksha Karmi Project’, Report to the 7thJoint Biannual Review, SIDA, New Delhi, December.

———. 1991b. ‘Report of the 11th Joint Biannual Review’,SIDA, New Delhi, December.

Jayaram, Manya, Renu Khanna, Amita Prasher, Anita Rampal,Rukmini Rao, Chandrika Sharma and Uno Winblad. 1992.‘Rajasthan: The Shiksha Karmi Project’, Report to the 9thJoint Biannual Review, SIDA, New Delhi, December.

Kingdon, Geeta Gandhi, and Vandana Sipahimalini-Rao. 2010.‘Parateachers in India: Status and Impact’, Economic andPolitical Weekly XLV(2): 59–67.

Lok Jumbish Parishad. Various years. Yearly Reports.Jaipur: Lok Jumbish Parishad.

Management Services Group. 1997. Report on ManagementReview of Shiksha Karmi Project. New Delhi: SIDA.

MHRD. 1989. Mahila Samakhya – Education for Women’sEquality . New Delhi: GOI. ——— . 2013. Second NationalEvaluation of the KGBV Programme. November–December 2013 .New Delhi: MHRD. Nayana Tara, S., N. S. Sampath Kumar andS. Ramaswamy. 2010. Study of Effectiveness of BRC and CRCin Providing Academic Support to Elementary Schools – AStudy in 14 States . New Delhi: EdCIL Technical SupportGroup of SSA and MHRD. NUEPA. 2013a. EE in India–RuralIndia. Where Do We Stand? Analytical Report 2012–13. NewDelhi: NUEPA. ———. 2013b. Flash Statistics: EE in IndiaProgress towards UEE . New Delhi: NUEPA. OperationsResearch Group. 1996. Evaluation of Non-Formal EducationProgramme in Lok Jumbish Project . New Delhi: ORG. ORGCentre for Social Research. 2001. ‘Impact Assessment andCostEffectiveness of Lok Jumbish Project’, Report submittedto Embassy of Sweden. New Delhi, December. Pal,Swarajya. 1994. Study of Prehar Pathshalas . Jaipur:Department of Adult Education, Rajasthan. PlanningCommission. 2012. ‘Working Group Report on Education andLiteracy’, 12th Five-Year Plan 2012–17. New Delhi: GoI.Rajagopal, Shobhita and Radhey Shyam Sharma. 1995. MahilaShiksha Karmis in the Shiksha Karmi Programme: A Study .Jaipur: IDS. Rajagopal, Shobhita, Radhey Shyam Sharma,

Sumitra Gupta and Devendra Goyal. 1997. AcademicAchievement of Children in Angan Pathshalas . Jaipur:Institute of Development Studies. ——— . 1998. FromRhetoric to Reality: Community Participation in theShiksha Karmi Programme . Jaipur: IDS. Ramachandran,Vimala. 1995. ‘Engendering Development: Lessons Learntfrom Some Efforts to Address Gender Concerns in MainstreamProgrammes and Institutions in India’. New Delhi: ERUConsultants Pvt Ltd, mimeo. ———. 1998. ‘EngenderingDevelopment: Lessons from Social Sector Programmes inIndia’, Indian Journal of Gender Studies 5(1): 49–63.———. 1999. ‘External Aid in Education – A Double-EdgedSword’, Economic and Political Weekly XXXIV(50): 3492–3.———. 2001. ‘Community Participation in Primary Education –Innovations in Rajasthan’, Economic and Political WeeklyXXXVI(25): 2244–50. ———. 2003a. ‘Community Participationin Primary Education – The Rajasthan Experience’ in R.Govinda (ed.), Community Participation and Empowerment inPrimary Education. New Delhi: Sage Publications, pp. 54–74.———. 2003b. Management Case Study: Lok Jumbish – RajasthanPeople’s Movement for Education for All . New Delhi: TheWorld Bank. ———. 2004. Fostering Opportunities to Leanat an Accelerated Pace: Why Do Girls Benefit Enormously?New Delhi: UNICEF. Ramachandran, Vimala and Prerna GoelChatterjee. June 2014. ‘Evaluation of Gender and EquityIssues in Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan’, Indian Journal ofGender Studies 21(2): 157–78. Ramachandran, Vimala andKameshwari Jandhyala. 2012. Cartographies of Empowerment– Tracing the Journey of Mahila Samakhya . New Delhi:Zubaan Books. Ramachandran, Vimala and Harsh Sethi. 2001.Shiksha Karmi Project of Rajasthan – An Overall Appraisal;New Education Division Document No 7 . Stockholm: SwedishInternational Development Cooperation Agency. SandhanResearch Centre. 1994. Training of School Mapping – LokJumbish Project . Jaipur: Sandhan. Sharma, Arvind. 1997.VicharManch: Ek Addhyayan (Hindi). Jaipur: Sandhan ResearchCentre. Sharma, Arvind and Gauri Shankar Sharma. 1999.Varishtha Shiksha Karmis: Ak Addhyayan (Hindi). Jaipur:Sandhan Research Centre. Sheel, B. S. 1993. Study of theWorking of Aangan Pathshalas . Jaipur: Department of AdultEducation, Rajasthan. Shiksha Karmi Board. Undated.Gender Issues in the SKP at All Levels . Jaipur: SKB.———. Undated. Prehar Pathshalas – A Note . Jaipur: SKB.———. 1991. ‘Agreed Minutes of the Joint 7th Annual reviewmission of the Shiksha Karmi Project of Rajasthan’, 5–9December. ———. 1993. Promise and Performance: AnAchievement Study . Jaipur: SKB. ———. 1994. ‘IntegratingSpecial Children in the Shiksha Karmi Programme’. Mimeo.———. 1995. 13th Report, 1 July 1994–30 June 1995 . Jaipur:SKB.

———. 1996a. 14th to 31 December 1995, Jaipur, January 1996.

———. 1996b. 15th Report January 1996-June 1996 and sinceInception . Jaipur: SKB.

———. 1997. 16th Report up to February 1997 . Jaipur: SKB.

———. 1998. 17th Report on the Progress of Shiksha KarmiProject up to March 1998 . Jaipur.

———. 1999. ‘Comments on Terms of Reference for the JointAppraisal of SKP Phase III’, 11–14 January.

SIDA. 1990. ‘Rajasthan: The Shiksha Karmi Project’, Reportto the Joint Mid-term Review by a team of consultants,December.

——— . 1996a. ‘Summary of the Preliminary Findings of theMonitoring Mission on the Shiksha Karmi Project’,February.

———. 1996b. ‘Towards Education for All in Rajasthan: LokJumbish and Shiksha Karmi Projects’. Report from aMonitoring Mission, 22 January 2011; Stockholm, July.Department for Democracy and Social Development, EducationDivision, SIDA.

SIDA and Government of India (1993). Lok Jumbish –Learning Together. A Joint Assessment of Lok Jumbish . NewDelhi: GoI and Stockholm: SIDA.

Singh, Avinash Kumar. 2011. Study of the Role ofVECs/PTAs/SDMCs and Urban Local Bodies in SchoolManagement and Supervision in the Context of SSA . NewDelhi: NUEPA.

Singh, Manju. 1999. ‘Confluence of Research and Policy inDevelopment Programmes: A Case of Shiksha Karmi Project’.Mimeo.

Srivastava, A.B.L. and Neeru Bala. 2010. Study ofEffectiveness of BRCs and CRCs in Providing AcademicSupport to Elementary Schools (Abridged Version). NewDelhi: EdCIL Technical Support Group of SSA and MHRD.

Srivastava, A.B.L. and Sharada Jain. 1995. Study ofRetention and Achievement in Shiksha Karmi Schools .Jaipur: Sandhan Research Centre.

11 Making policies work for education andsocial empowerment: reflections on theShiksha Karmi project in Rajasthan

Government of India. 1992. Background Report for the 9thJoint Biannual Review of the Shikshakarmi Project . NewDelhi: GoI.

Government of Rajasthan. 1987. Shiksha Karmi Project ,Rajasthan, Draft Project Document, Phase I. Jaipur:Government of Rajasthan.

Institute of Development Studies. 1991. ShikshakarmiProject: Assessment of Childrens Achievement . Jaipur:Institute of Development Studies.

Rajagopal, S. 1999. ‘Closing the Gender Gap in Education:The Shikshakarmi Programme’ in N. Kabeer and R. Subramanian(eds), Institution, Relations and Outcomes: A Frameworkand Case Studies for Gender-Aware Planning . New Delhi,Kali for Women, pp. 266–87.

———. 2000. ‘Designing Interventions for Girls Education: ACase from Rajasthan’. Unpublished PhD dissertation.Jaipur: University of Rajasthan.

Rajan, S. 1996. ‘Gender, Education and Development: A Casefrom Rajasthan’, IDSJ, Working Paper, 066.

Rajan, S. and R. S. Sharma. 1995. ‘Mahila Shikshakarmis inShikshakarmi Programme’ IDS, Research Report 061. Jaipur:Institute of Development Studies.

Ramachandran, V. and H. Sethi. 2000. RajasthanShikshakarmi Project: An Overall Appraisal , Desk studyCommissioned by SIDA. New Delhi. Sandhan Research Centre.1995. Study of Retention and Achievement in ShikshakarmiSchools . Jaipur: Sandhan. ———. 1997. Shikshakarmi: AParadigm Shift in the Delivery of Primary Education .Jaipur: Sandhan Research Centre. Srinivasan, S. 1987.‘The Kumbalgarh Experience’ Working Paper 028. Jaipur:Institute of Development Studies. Thakur, P. and S. N.Methi. 1999. Shiksha Karmi Project – Rajasthan (India) .Washington, DC: The World Bank, p. 12.

12 Adult education and socialempowerment: Indian experience

Athreya, Venkatesh and Sheela Rani Chunkat. 1996. Literacyand Empowerment . New Delhi: Sage Publications.

Bhola, H. S. 1988a. World Trends and Issues in AdultEducation (Prepared for the International Bureau ofEducation), Jessica Kingsley Publishers in associationwith UNESCO. Paris.

———. 1988b. ‘A Policy Analysis of Adult Literacy Educationin India: Across the Two National Policy Reviews of 1968and 1986’, Perspectives in Education 4(4): 213–28.

Bordia, Anil. 1980. ‘The National Adult EducationProgramme: Background and Prospects’ in A. B. Shah andSusheela Bhan (eds), Non-Formal Education and the NAEP .Delhi: Oxford University Press, pp. 57–84.

———. 1982. Planning and Administration of NationalLiteracy Programmes: The Indian Experience (IIEP ResearchReport – No. 47). Paris: UNESCO.

Chakrabarti, Vandana. 2012. ‘Planning and Management ofContinuing Education Programme’ in Government of India(ed.), Two Decades of National Literacy Mission: SomePerspectives – A Study Sponsored by NLM . New Delhi:Indian Adult Education Association, pp. 57–84.

Chaudhary, Rajinder. 2000. ‘An Insider View of TotalLiteracy Campaigns’, Mainstream 38(22).

Dighe, Anita. 2012. ‘Women, Literacy and Empowerment’ inGovernment of India (ed.), Two Decades of NationalLiteracy Mission: Some Perspectives – A Study Sponsored byNLM . New Delhi: Indian Adult Education Association, pp.136–57.

Farooq, Nishat. 2012. ‘Indian Adult Education Association,Recognizing Excellence through Awards’ in Government ofIndia (ed.), Two Decades of National Literacy Mission:Some Perspectives – A Study Sponsored by NLM . New Delhi:Indian Adult Education Association, pp. 298–318.

Freire, Paulo. 1972a. Pedagogy of the Oppressed .Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.

———. 1972b. Education: The Practice of Freedom. London:Writers and Readers Publishing Cooperative.

Government of India. ( n.d .). Draft Five Year Plan 1978 –83, Vol. I , Planning Commission (mimeo). ———. 1980.Report of the Review Committee on the National AdultEducation Programme. New Delhi: Government of India. ———.1983. Adult Education Programme: Policy Perspective andStrategy for Implementation. New Delhi: Government ofIndia. ———. 1996. National Policy on Education, 1992:Programme of Action, 1992 . New Delhi: MHRD. Lind,Agneta and Anton Johnston. 1990. Adult Education in theThird World: A Review of Objectives and Strategies .Stockholm: SIDA. MHRD. 1986a. National Policy onEducation, 1986. New Delhi: Government of India. ———.1986b. National Policy on Education, 1986: Programme ofAction. New Delhi: Government of India. ——— . 1988.National Literacy Mission. New Delhi: Department ofEducation, Government of India. ———. 1996. Strategiesfor Post-Literacy . New Delhi: Directorate of AdultEducation, Government of India. Ministry of Education andCulture. 1979. National Adult Education Programme: TheFirst Year . Faridabad: Government of India. ——— . 1983.Adult Education Programme: Policy Perspective andStrategies for Implementation . New Delhi: Government ofIndia. Mishra, Lakshmidhar. 2012. ‘National LiteracyMission: Genesis and the First Decade’ in Government ofIndia (ed.), Two Decades of National Literacy Mission:Some Perspectives – A Study Sponsored by NLM . New Delhi:Indian Adult Education Association, pp. 22–66. Naik, J.P. 1980. ‘Non-Formal Education in India: A Retrospect and aProspect’ in A. B. Shah and Susheela Bhat (eds),Non-Formal Education and the NAEP . Delhi: OxfordUniversity Press, pp. 223–40. National CurriculumFramework for Adult Education: Report of the ExpertCommittee , 2011. New Delhi, available athttp://www.jkeducation.gov.in/download/Report%20of%20the%20Expert%20Committee%20on%20

Saldanha, Denzil. 2010. Civil Society Processes and theState: The BGVS and the Literacy Campaigns . Jaipur: RawatPublications.

Shah, A. B. and Susheela Bhan. 1980. Non-Formal Educationand the NAEP. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.

Srivastava, Komal and Ila Patel. 2006. ‘CommunityMobilisation, Gender Equality and Resource Mobilisation inAdult Education’, International Journal of EducationalDevelopment 26(2) (March): 153–65.

Sundararaman, Sudha. 1996. ‘Literacy Campaigns: Lessons for

Women’s Movement’, Economic and Political Weekly XXXI(20)(18 May): 1193–7.

13 Neo-liberal policy and the crisis ofstate schooling

Althusser, L. 1971. ‘Ideological State Apparatuses, Notestowards an Investigation’ in Lenin and Philosophy andOther Essays . New York Monthly Review Press : 127–86.

Apple, M. (ed.). 1982. Cultural and Economic Reproductionin Education . London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, pp. 1–31.

Aronowitz, S. and H. Giroux. 1986. Education under Siege:The Conservative, Liberal and Radical Debate over Schooling. London: Routledge.

Banerjee-Guha, S. n.d. Ideology of Urban Restructuring inMumbai: Serving the International Capitalist Agenda ,unpublished paper.

———. 1995. ‘Urban Development Process in Bombay: Planningfor Whom?’ in S. Patel and A. Thorner (eds), BombayMetaphor for Modern India . New York: Oxford UniversityPress, pp. 100–20. ———. (ed.). 2010. Accumulation byDispossession: Transformative Cities in the New GlobalOrder . New Delhi: Sage Publications. Bardhan, Pranab.1984. The Political Economy of Development in India . NewDelhi: Oxford University Press. Baud, I.S.A. and J. DeWit(eds). 2008. New Forms of Urban Governance in India:Shift, Models, Networks and Contestations . Los Angeles:Sage Publications. Chatterjee, P. (ed.). 1997. Stateand Politics in India . Oxford: Oxford University Press.Chitnis, S. 1982. Drop-Outs and Low Pupil Achievementamong the Urban Poor in Mumbai. Report for ILO. Mumbai,TISS. Chitnis, S. and P. Velaskar. 1988. Education inMaharashtra – Strengths and Weaknesses . Report Preparedfor the World Bank. Mumbai, TISS. Dale, R. 1989. TheState and Educational Policy . Milton Keynes: OpenUniversity Press. Deshmukh. 2013. ‘Conditions of SlumPopulation of Major Sub-Urban Wards of Mumbai inMaharashtra’, Voice of Research 2(2) (September): 34–40.Dhuru, S. n.d. ‘Right to Education Act 2009: Rhetoric andScenario’, Unpublished paper. Dobbin, Christine. 1972.Urban Leadership in Western India. Politics andCommunities in Bombay City 1840–1885 . London: OxfordUniversity Press. Fuller, C. J. and J. Harriss. 2000.‘For an Anthropology of the Modern Indian State’ in C. J.Fuller and V. Benei (eds), The Everyday State and Societyin Modern India . New Delhi: Social Science Press, pp.1–30. Ghosh, Arun. 1998. ‘Bureaucracy and Bureaucrats ofa Bygone Era’, Economic and Political Weekly 33(8) (21February): 378–80. Giroux, H. 1983. ‘Theories of

Reproduction and Resistance in the New Sociology ofEducation: A Critical Analysis’, Harvard EducationalReview 53(3) (August): 257–93. Government of India.2009. Right of Children to Free and Compulsory EducationACT, 2009, No 35 of 2009 . New Delhi: The Gazette of India.Government of Maharashtra. 2010. Maharashtra Right ofChildren to Free and Compulsory Education Rules-2010(draft). Maharashtra: Directorate of Primary Education.Hansen, T. B. 2000. ‘Governance and Myths of State inMumbai’ in C. J. Fuller and V. Benei (eds), The EverydayState and Society in Modern India . New Delhi: SocialScience Press, pp. 31–67. Harris-White, Barbara. 2003.India – Working Essays on Society and Economy . Cambridge:Cambridge University Press. Hasan, Z. 2000.‘Introduction: The Political Career of the State inIndependent India’ in Z. Hasan (ed.), Political and theState in India . New Delhi: Sage Publications, pp. 11–34.IPT. 2008. Public Education in Mumbai: Rhetoric or Right?Report of the Indian People’s Tribunal on Environment andHuman Rights. Mumbai: Indian People’s Tribunal onEnvironment and Human Rights. Jayal, Nirja Gopal. 2001.‘The State and Democracy in India or What Happened toWelfare, Secularism and Development’ in Niraja Gopal Jayal(ed.), Democracy in India . New Delhi: Oxford UniversityPress, pp. 193–224. Juneja, N. 2001. Primary Educationfor All in the City of Mumbai, India: The Challenge Set byLocal Actors. Paris: International Institute forEducational Planning/UNESCO. Kamat, A. R. 1985.Education and Social Change in India . Bombay: SomaiyaPublications. Kapur, D. and P. B. Mehta. 2005.‘Introduction’ in D. Kapur and P. B. Mehta (eds), PublicInstitutions in India . New Delhi: Oxford UniversityPress, pp. 1–27.

Karabel, J. and A. H. Halsey (eds). 1977. Power andIdeology in Education . New York: Oxford University Press.

Katz, M. B. 1975. Class, Bureaucracy and Schools: TheIllusion of Educational Change in America . New York:Praeger.

———. 1976. ‘The Origins of Public Education: AReassessment’, History of Education Quarterly 16(4)(Winter): 381–407.

Kaviraj, S. 1997. ‘The Modern State in India’ in Martin R.Doornbos and S. Kaviraj (eds), Dynamics of StateFormation . New Delhi: Sage Publications, pp. 225–50.

Kohli, Atul. 1990. Democracy and Discontent . Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Kothari, Rajni. 2001. ‘The Crisis of the Moderate State andDecline of Democracy’ in Niraja Gopal Jayal (ed.),Democracy in India ., New Delhi: Oxford University Press,pp. 101–27.

Krishnan, K. P. and T. V. Somanathan. 2005. ‘Civil Service:As Institutional Perspective’ in D. Kapur and P. B. Mehta(eds), Public Institutions in India . New Delhi: OxfordUniversity Press, pp. 258–319.

Leclercq, F. 2003. ‘Education Guarantee Scheme and PrimarySchooling in Madhya Pradesh’, Economic and PoliticalWeekly XXXVIII(19): 1855–69.

Lele, J. 1990. ‘Caste, Class and Dominance: PoliticalMobilization in Maharashtra’ in Francine Frankel and M.S.A.Rao (eds), Dominance and State Power in Modern India:Decline of a Social Order , vol 2. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press, pp. 115–212.

———. 1995. ‘Saffronization of the Shiv Sena: The PoliticalEconomy of City, State and Nation’ in S. Patel and A.Thorner (eds), Bombay Metaphor for Modern India . NewYork: Oxford University Press, pp. 185–212.

MCGM. 2005. Mumbai City Development Plan 2005–2025 .Bombay: MCGM.

———. 2010. Mumbai Human Development Report 2009. NewDelhi: Oxford University Press.

Mohanty, M. 1990. ‘Duality of the State Process in India’in G. Shah (ed.), Capitalist Development Critical Essays .Bombay: Popular Prakashan, pp. 149–61.

Palumbo, Antonino. 2001. ‘Administration, Civil services,and Bureaucracy’ in Kate Nash and Alan Scott (eds), TheBlackwell Companion to Political Sociology . Oxford:Blackwell Publications, pp. 127–38.

Panwalkar, P. 1995. ‘Upgradation of Slums: A World BankProgramme’ in S. Patel and A. Thorner (eds), BombayMetaphor for Modern India . New York: Oxford UniversityPress, pp. 100–20.

Patnaik, P. (n.d.). The State under Neo-Liberalism ,available at http://www.macroscan.org/fet/oct06/pdf/Neo_liberalism.pdf (accessed on

9 October 2014).

———. 1994. ‘Notes on the Political Economy of StructuralAdjustment’, Social Scientist 22(9/12)(September–December): 4–17.

Pinto, M. R. 2000. Metropolitan City Governance in India .New Delhi: Sage Publications. Rosenthal, D. B. 1977.The Expansive Elite District Politics and StatePolicyMaking in India . California: University ofCalifornia Press. Rudolph L. I. and Susanne HoeberRudolph (eds). 1972. Education and Politics in India:Studies in Organization, Society and Policy . Cambridge,MA: Harvard University Press, pp. 121–47. Sen, Asok.1972. ‘Marx, Weber and India To-Day’, Economic andPolitical Weekly 7 (Annual Number) (February): 307–16.Sharma, R. 2009. ‘The Internal Dynamic’ in R. Sharma and V.Ramachandran (eds), The Elementary Education System inIndia: Exploring Institutional Structures, Processes andDynamics . New Delhi: Routledge, pp. 140–94. Thakkar, U.1995. ‘The Commissioner and the Corporators: Power Politicsat Municipal Level’ in S. Patel and A. Thorner (eds),Bombay Metaphor for Modern India . New York: OxfordUniversity Press, pp. 213–47. Tinker, H. 1967.Foundation of Local Self-government in India, Pakistan andBurma . Bombay: Lalwani Publishing House. Tonkiss, Fran.2001. ‘Markets against States: Neo-liberalism’ in Kate Nashand Alan Scott (eds), The Blackwell Companion to PoliticalSociology . Oxford: Blackwell Publication, pp. 250–60.Torres, C. A. and A. Puiggros. 1995. ‘The State and PublicEducation in Latin America’, Comparative Education Review39(1) (February): 1–27. Vanaik, A. 2000. ‘The SocialCharacter of the Indian State’ in Z. Hasan (ed.),Political and the State in India. New Delhi: SagePublications, pp. 89–112. Velaskar, P. 1990. ‘UnequalSchooling as a Factor in the Reproduction of SocialInequality in India’, Sociological Bulletin 39 (1 and 2):131–46. ———. 1998. ‘Ideology, Education and the PoliticalStruggle for Liberation: Change and Challenge amongMaharashtra’s Dalit’ in S. Shukla and R. Kaul (eds),Education, Development, Underdevelopment . Delhi: SagePublications, pp. 210–40. ———. 2010. ‘Quality andInequality in Indian Education: Some Critical PolicyConcerns in Contemporary Education’, Dialogue 7(1): 58–93.———. 2012. ‘The Sociology of Educational Inequality inIndia : A Critique and an Agenda for Research’ in G.Nambissan and S. Rao (eds), The Sociology of Education inIndia . Delhi: Oxford University Press, pp. 103–35. ———.2013. Schooling Mumbai’s Poor :Changing Education Policyand Its Impact on the School System . Mumbai: Tata

Institute of Social Sciences (mimeo). Vision Mumbai.2003. Transforming Mumbai into a World-Class City.Mumbai: Bombay First and McKinsey. Vithal, B.P.R. 1997.‘Evolving Trends in the Bureaucracy’ in P. Chatterjee(ed.), State and Politics in India . Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press, pp. 208–31. Weiner, M. 1991. TheChild and the State In India: Child Labour and EducationPolicy in a Comparative Perspective . Princeton: PrincetonUniversity Press.

Zerah, M. H. 2007. ‘Urban Governance in Mumbai’. Paperpresented at the Seminar on ‘Urban Actors, Policies andGovernance in Four Indian Metropolitan Cities, the Centrede Sciences, Humaines de New Delhi (CSH) and the IndiaInternational Centre, Delhi, 23–24 January.

———. 2010. ‘Reconfiguring Power Relationships: Policiestowards Urban Services in Mumbai’ in S. Banerjee-Guha(ed.), Accumulation by Dispossession: TransformativeCities in the New Global Order . New Delhi: SagePublications, pp. 151–68.

14 Shaping everyday educationalvocabulary: state policy and a slumschool

Apple, M. W. 2001. Educating the ‘Right’ Way: Markets,Standards, God, and Inequality . New York and London:Routledge/Falmer.

———. 2012. ‘Why Should We Be Worried about CurrentEducational Reforms’, The Dean’s Lecture Series ,University of Melbourne, Australia. Banerjee, Rukmini.2011. ‘Challenging Bihar on Primary Education’, Economicand Political Weekly 46(11): 33–9. Beteille, Andre. 2005.‘The School as an Institution’ in Rajni Kumar, Anil Sethiand Shalini Sikka (eds), School, Society, Nation: PopularEssays in Education . Hyderabad: Orient Longman, pp.166–78. Children’s Right to Free and Compulsory EducationAct, 2009, available at

Sharma, Gunjan and V. S. Varma (eds). 2014. Teachers inConversation . Delhi: Ambedkar University Delhi.

Singh, A. K. 2009. ‘In Lieu of Political Rights HowFundamental Is Fundamental Right to Education?’ in AlokKumar and A. P. Singh (eds), Elementary Education inIndia: Issues and Challenges . New Delhi: Uppal PublishingHouse, pp. 256–71.

Sood, Vineeta. 2012. ‘Foreword’ in John Taylor Gatto,Weapons of Mass Instruction: A School Teacher’s Journeythrough the Dark World of Compulsory Schooling . Indore:Banyan Tree, pp. vii–xiv.

Subrahmanian, Ramya. 2005. ‘Education, Exclusion and theDevelopmental State’ in Patricia Jeffery and RadhikaChopra (eds), Educational Regimes in Contemporary India .Delhi: Sage Publications, pp. 62–81.

Tooley, James. 2009. The Beautiful Tree: A PersonalJourney into How the World’s Poorest People Are EducatingThemselves . Massachusetts: Cato Institute.

Velaskar, Padma. 2012. ‘Education for Liberation:Ambedkar’s Thought and Dalit Women’s Perspectives’,Contemporary Education Dialogue 9(2): 245–71.

15 Retention of children in schools inthe states of Telangana and AndhraPradesh: challenges for RTE

(+7.31 per cent), Medak (+6.11 per cent) and Kurnool (+5.31per cent).

16 Adolescent education: issues andchallenges

Sandhan. 2002. Counselling Needs of Adolescents: EmergingPatterns through Action Research. A Workshop Report,Sandhan, Jaipur.

———. 2005a. Curriculum for Education and Development ofAdolescents and Young Adults: A Report , Sandhan, Jaipur(Unpublished).

——— . 2005b. Life Skills Education: Training Module .Jaipur: Sandhan. This page intentionally left blank

17 Justice framework of public policy inhigher education

——— . 1995. ‘Rationality in Political Behavior’, PoliticalPsychology 16: 45–61.

UGC. 2009. ‘UGC Regulation on Minimum Standard on MinimumStandards and Practices for the Award of M Phil and PhD’,available at http:// www.ugc.ac.in (accessed on 21September 2015).

Unbounded Rationality. 2005. ‘Critically Examine HerbertSimon’s concept of Bounded Rationality’, available athttp://rationalyspeaking.blogspot.in/2005/01/critically-examine-herbert-simons.html (accessed on 25 January 2005).

18 Affirmative action and ‘parity ofparticipation’ in higher education:policy perspective and institutionalresponse

Khan, Khalid and Nidhi S. Sabharwal. 2012. ‘Access andEquity in Higher Education: Aspects of Gender, Caste,Ethnicity, Religion, Occupation and Economic Groups inRural and Urban Areas during Pre and Post Reform Periods’,IIDS Working Papers Series , Vol. VI, No. 4.

Kymlicka, Will. 1995. Multicultural Citizenship: A LiberalTheory of Minority Rights . Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress.

———. 2001. Politics in the Vernacular: Nationalism,Multiculturalism and Citizenship . Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press.

Mahajan, Gurpreet (ed.). 1998. Democracy, Difference &Social Justice . New Delhi: Oxford University Press.

Ministry of Human Resource Development. 2013. RashtriyaUchchatar Shiksha Abhiyan . Delhi: MHRD and TISS.

Parekh, Bhikhu C. 2000. ‘The Future of Multi-EthnicBritain’, Report of Commission on the Future ofMulti-Ethnic Britain, Profile Books, ISBN 1–86197–227-X.

Parthasarthy, D. 2012. ‘After Reservation: Caste,Institutional Isomorphism, and Affirmative Action in theIITS’ in Zoya Hasan and Martha C. Nussbaum (eds),Equalising Access . New Delhi: Oxford University Press,pp. 262–64.

Phillips, Anne. 1995. The Politics of Presence . Oxford:Clarendon Press.

———. 1999. Which Equalities Matter? London: Polity.

Rawls, John. 1971. A Theory of Justice . Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press.

Sukumar, N. 2008. ‘Living a Concept: Semiotics of EverydayExclusion’, Economic and Political Weekly XLIII(46) (15November): 14–17.

Taylor, C. 1994. Multiculturalism: Examining the Politicsof Recognition . Princeton, NJ: Princeton UniversityPress.

Thorat, Sukhadeo. 26 December 2013. ‘UnlearningUndemocratic Values’, The Hindu , available athttp://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/unlearning-undemocratic-values/article5501454.ece.

Thorat, Sukhadeo and Nidhi S. Sabharwal. 2010. ‘Caste andSocial Exclusion Issues Related to Concept, Indicators andMeasurement’, IIDS and UNICEF Working Paper Series, 2(1).

Thorat, Sukhadeo, N. S. Sabharwal, Balasubrahmanyam and D.G. Diwakar. 2014. ‘Diversity, Academic Performance andDiscrimination: A Case Study of a Higher EducationalInstitution’, Working Paper Series , Volume VIII, No. 04,Indian Institute of Dalit Studies.

Tully, J. 1995. Strange Multiplicity: Constitutionalism inan Age of Diversity . Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.

Young, Iris Marion. 1990. Justice and Politics ofDifference . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

University Grants Commission. 2013a. Nurturing SocialEquity in Higher Education . New Delhi: University GrantsCommission.

———. 2013b . Inclusive and Qualitative Expansion of HigherEducation . New Delhi: University Grants Commission.

19 Community colleges: an alternativesystem of education for socialempowerment

Ministry of Human Resource Development. 2012. Report ofthe Committee on the Concept of the Community CollegeScheme. New Delhi: Government of India.

——— . 2013. Status on Implementation of the CommunityCollege SchemeReport. New Delhi: Government of India.

National Knowledge Commission. 2009. Report to the Nation2006–2009 . New Delhi: Government of India.

National Statistical Commission. 2012. Report of theCommittee on Unorganised Sector Statistics. New Delhi:Government of India.

Nimse, S. B. 12–18 November 2012. ‘Vocationalizing Arts,Commerce and Science Education in Indian Universities’,University News .

Planning Commission. 2011. An Approach to the Twelfth FiveYear Plan (2012–17 ). New Delhi: Government of India.

Sen Gupta, M. 20–26 August 2012. ‘NKC Recommendations onVocational Education: Need for Implementation’, UniversityNews .

University Grants Commission. 2012. Annual Report 2011–12.New Delhi: UGC.

Valeau, Edward J. 2013. ‘The Indian Community College inIndia: An Evolving Model’ in IIE White Paper ‘The USCommunity College Model: Potential for Applications inIndia’. New Delhi: IIE.

Education and Empowerment in India - Taylor & Francis eBooks

Documents

Transcript of Education and Empowerment in India - Taylor & Francis eBooks