INTERIM RESEARCH PAPER
Introduction
This study intends to map the involvement of Civil Society Organizations
in primary and secondary education with a particular focus on the implications
such involvement has for educational policy. Civil Society Organizations
is being conceptualized for the purposes of this study, as including private
enterprises and organizations, religious or caste based associations, co-operatives,
unions and the vast field of NGOs.
Statement of the Problem
This study will seek to engage with three related problems: (1) the problematique
of the multiplicity of interests represented by civil society organizations,
(2) the participation of civil society may merely replace the constraints
of the State with constraints of the market, (3) the gap between the educational
reform policy and implementation due to internal contradictions.
Firstly, Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) have come to be seen as essential
to the construction of what are assumed to be the social pre-conditions for
more accountable, public and representative form of governance in education.
As commonly understood today, these are institutions that may usefully guide
and influence strategies designed to accomplish 'transitions'. Can the category
of civil society serve-as Ralf Dahrendorf claimed-as the conceptual and practical
'key' to such 'transitions' (Dahrendorf, 1990 & J. Cohen and A. Arato,
1992)? It is important to note that CSOs are not homogenous both in terms
of the interests they represent and in terms of their structures.
As Sami Zubaida shows in his discussion of Egypt, for instance, two drastically
opposed conceptions of the civil society in critical intellectual discourse,
a 'secular-liberal' and an Islamic-communal one: and they do not stand in
a symmetrical relation to democratic politics. The first presses the case
for legal recognition of voluntary civil associations (political parties,
unions, pressure groups). The second delimits as ‘civil society’ a space
of practices and activities unregulated by the legal-constitutional state,
but which conforms to interpretations of Islamic tenets. Similar phenomenon
is evident in India too. There it is problematique to argue that CSOs involvement
is intrinsically democratic. This poses a challenge for policy to expand
the scope of democratic activism within the educational sector.
Secondly, a study of the educational component of the National Plans in
India shows that education appears as a mere instrument in a technicist
oriented development 'vision'. Such a perspective on education takes the
state's requirements as the base line of needs which education should fulfill:
it fails to consider the very different myriad of community level cultures
and needs, or the importance of education in an individuals life. The utilitarian
view of education espoused by national planners does not admit a discussion
of the potential worth of education as a means of empowering individuals
to change aspects of their own lives, even within constricting socio-economic
circumstances. To narrow education to the primary role of turning out 'human
capital' is to deflect from the values reiterated in those same plans and
policies: and, as later years have proved, investment in human capital is
not a simple economic equation.
The new education policies foster the idea that responsibility for education
and welfare, beyond a minimum required for public safety, is to be defined
as a matter for individuals and families. A recent report on policy reforms
argued that "decentralizing the management of public education and encouraging
the expansion of private and community educational institutions must be given
thrust"(Birla-Ambani Report, 2000). In such cases the civil society becomes
increasingly defined in terms of market, thereby reducing the primary role
of education as turning out 'human capital'. A preliminary comparison of
Plan documents and literature from CSOs shows that there is no significant
differences in their stated objectives of primary and secondary education,
except that the state's needs are replaced by the interests of the market
and the revivalist communal groups. In such a context can educational policy
play a role not only to moderate the state, but also the market, while protecting
secular citizenship in the country.
Thirdly, analysts of Indian public policy and its outcomes make four common
criticisms:
a. A weak nexus between policy and instruments
b. The large degree to which administrative discretion
has been retained and used to dilute or defeat policy objectives.
c. The use of a single or small set of instruments
to promote a large number of objectives, not all of which may be capable
of consistent pursuit. -
d. And internal intra-policy inconsistencies and inter-face
inconsistencies in allied policies. (Guhan 1985:259)
This study will analyse these issues with reference to CSO participation
in educational policy reforms. For example, recent policy has set the following
objectives for the coming decade:
To reduce drop-out rate at the primary level by 50% from the present levels
of 7.58% in classes 1-4, and 37.19 in classes 1-7; to improve the teacher's
learning and teaching standard resulting in effective teaching competence;
to improve the results at the SSLC level (10th Standard); To bring about
qualitative change and thereby incorporate education reforms; to ensure progressive
community involvement; Removal of Gender, Social and Regional discrimination
at senior primary level. However the instruments and systems needed to achieve
these objectives have not been developed. The need for tighter causal thinking
between policy, implementation and outcomes in the existing context, cannot
be overemphasized.
Research Questions
o What are the contextual factors responsible for (a)
the reconfiguration of State- Civil Society relations in primary and secondary
education, and (b) the evolution of the policy vis-a-vis participation of
civil society organisations in primary and secondary education.
o How does current educational policy conceptualize
CSO participation in primary and secondary education? Do such conceptualization
take into account the multiple interests represented by the CSOs and if so,
how?
o To what extent does the involvement of CSOs in primary
and secondary education (through policy advocacy and other educational reform
activities) expand the scope of democratic citizenship in India?
o To what extent does the participation of CSOs promote
effective policy formulation and efficient implementation in primary and
secondary education sector.
Methodology
The effort is to make an argument for changes in the current policy framework
so as to facilitate greater participation of CSOs in education. It would
be further argued that CSOs are not homogenous in their structure, ideology,
objectives, resource capability and technical capacity to undertake education
programs. Therefore it is imperative that the suggested policy changes incorporate
within it adequate checks and balances to ensure their accountable and democratic
participation in education.
Case Study
The case studies, which are the core of the overall methodology, have
been conducted in three of the eight projects to be studied. Though it was
intended to be a multi-site one time case study, all the projects studied
required multiple visits especially since the programme sites of these organizations
were spread across number of districts. The focus of the case studies were
primarily on the educational projects undertaken by them. Both MAYA and MV
Foundation, two of the selected cases, were involved in other
development programmes apart from education. Interview were conducted with:
• The Project Head
• The Project Coordinators
• The Field Staff
• Members of Local Panchayat
Except in MVF, interview were conducted with project heads of MAYA and
APF. Interview were completed with 2 project co-ordinators, 3 field staff,
2 panchayat members in each of the organization. Apart from the interviews,
project documents, concept papers,publicity material and press clippings
were collected from the organizations.
Educational Policy in India – An Overview
Indian policy and planning literature for education draws its value base
from the 'synthetic ideology' [Guhan 1985:256] of the Constitution. In the
sector of elementary education 'policy' derives from three types of policy
instruments: the education sector of national development Plans; National
Education Policy; and the Constitution [Guhan 1985]. Each of these fits into
a broad definition of social policy as 'assuming responsibility for people's
needs and creating the means by which resources and services are allocated
to meet those needs for the amelioration of individual and social problems'[Outram
1989: 13].
India inherited a very small education system in 1947. The literacy rates
for the country were just 14 percent, and enrollment even at the elementary
level covered only one-third of children in the relevant age group. The education
system was not only small but was also highly disparate, with inequalities
seen along caste, class and gender lines. Therefore one of the most important
goals for democracy and development in independent India was equity and
access of education for all. Policies, plans and programmes formulated by
the country from time to time focused on these tasks.
The Constitution of India, adopted on 26th January 1950, provided the
basic framework within which the policies were formulated in education.
Being committed to the principles of democracy, secularism and equality,
the Constitution prefers to secure to all its citizens: Justice – social,
economic and political; liberty of thought expression, belief, faith and
worship; Equality of status and opportunity; and to promote among them all
fraternity, assuring dignity of the individual and unity and integrity of
the country. Fundamental Rights, given in the Constitution, confers on the
citizens equal rights and opportunity in political, economic and social
sphere (Article 14); caste and sex (Article 15); provide equal opportunity
in the matter of public appointment for all (Article 16); protect the interests
and rights of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions
(Articles 29 and 30) and empower the State to use Affirmative Discrimination
in favour of certain historically disadvantaged sections of the society
(Article 15(3)). Besides, Article 45 of the Directive Principles of State
Policy directs the State, “to endeavour to provide free and compulsory education
to all the children up to the age of 14 within ten years of the adoption
of the Constitution”, while Article 46 further directs the State to “promote
with special care the educational and economic interests of the weaker sections
o the society, in particular, the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes,
and to protect them from all forms of exploitation.”
Policy Formulation
While the Constitution provided the basic framework, policies and programmes
in education are also formulated on the recommendations of the various commissions
and committees set up for the purpose. All the three major commissions set
up by the central government, namely on higher education in 1949; on secondary
education in 1951; and on the entire education system in 1964 endorsed the
constitutional commitment of equality of opportunity to all groups of the
society.
Based on the recommendations of the Education Commission 1964-66, the
first National Policy Resolution on Education was passed by the Parliament
in 1968. In respect of equalization of educational opportunities it suggested,
“more strenuous efforts be made to equalize educational opportunities. Regional
imbalances in the provision of educational facilities should be corrected
and good educational facilities be provided in rural and other backward areas……the
common school system as recommended by the Education Commission be adopted…..all
public schools be required to admit students on the basis of merit and also
provide a prescribed proportion o free studentship to prevent segregation
of social groups.”
The 1968 Policy Resolution could not be implemented by all the states
because education was on the State List. In 1976, education was brought
on the Concurrent List. The Policy was reviewed by the Government in 1985
and after a countrywide debate on the Draft prepared by the government,
the National Policy of Education was passed by the parliament in 1986, ensuring
access and equity to all in education.
The National Policy 1986 gave unqualified priority to universal primary
education to all children with the resolve that ‘all the children who attain
the age of 11 years will have five years of schooling or its equivalent
through formal or non-formal stream by 1990, and likewise it will be ensured
that free and compulsory education to all children up to 14 years of age
is provided by 1995’. The thrust in the Policy was not only on universal
provision and universal enrolment but also on retention of all children
up to 14 years of age; and substantial improvement of quality.
The policy was reviewed in 1992 and the target date was revised to 2000,
which was further revised as 2007 for primary level and 2010 for elementary
level.
The Central Advisory Board on Education reviewed the 1986 policy in 1991.
It noted that while very little of National Policy on Education required
reformulation, the Programme of Action, 1986 needed considerable revision.
Accordingly it was revised into the Programme of Action, 1992. The POA 1992
highlighted among other things, ‘education for women’s equality as a vital
component of overall strategy of securing equity and justice in education
as also for education of SCs/STs, minorities, and the physically and mentally
handicapped. Programme of Action, 1992 states that voluntary effort should
be encouraged to promote Universalisation of Elementary Education.
The content, or rhetoric of Indian educational policies and plans is consistent
with a liberal, humanitarian approach: education as a force for the good,
contributing towards the realization of equal access, reduction of gender
inequality and thus a move towards greater equality and national integration.
However, despite the constant reiteration over 50 years of these guiding
principles-upon which the 'ideal society' is predicated- the picture of the
India of this century is one of a society beset, albeit to different degrees
in different places, by inequality, factionalism and other tensions which
appear to be worsening rather than stabilizing and diminishing.
The development of the elementary sector of education has been characterized
by an approach that has attempted to ensure physical access to a school for
all children but neglected qualitative aspects of the education provided
in those schools. Table 1 shows the scale of quantitative growth of primary
education in post-independent India. Explanations for this were seen to include
the lack of capacity to plan for quality, as well as the estrangement between
planners and local environments; and the discrepancy between the importance
Plan documents attribute to elementary education and the low proportion of
financial allocation that actually goes to that sector. A further factor
is that plans and policies are implemented through government bureaucracy,
which is hierarchical in nature and oriented towards systems maintenance.
Its norms discourage innovation and are ill-suited to the role of development
administration. Information tends not to flow upwards from 'grassroots' to
higher levels of bureaucracy where key decisions are made, contributing to
the gap between policy and practice.
Table 1: Literacy Rate and Number of Schools (1951 – 1991)
Year Literacy Rate (%) Number of Schools
Persons Males Females
Primary Upper Primary
1951 18.33 27.16 8.86
215036 14576
1961 28.31 40.40 15.34
351530 55915
1971 34.45 45.95 21.97
417473 93665
1981 43.56 56.37 29.75
503763 122377
1991 52.21 64.13 39.29
566744 155926
Source: Year 2000 Assessment- Education For All, Ministry of Human Resource
Development, Government of India, 2000.
At the school level, civil society participation is now accepted as a
significant component of any policy to improve educational performance in
the country. Increased partnerships between the school and the community
leads to autonomy and flexibility in decision making, which in turn lead
to higher levels of productivity and accountability. In this effort of incorporating
new initiatives, non-governmental and voluntary effort has begun to play
a significant role. NGOs are providing missing facilities in areas not reached
by the government. Many educational innovations are emanating from voluntary
action and from those who are dedicated and committed to bring about educational
change.
Civil Society Organizations in Elementary Education
The term NGO got official recognition when it was used in the resolution
288 (x) of the United Nations Economic and Social Council on 27th February,
1950 and referred to those officially recognized organizations with no governmental
affiliation that had consultative status with the United Nations. However,
today the meaning incorporates an enormous variety of associations, organizations
and institutions with variations in structure, purpose, strategies, scale
of operation and ideologies.
Social Movements or more precisely social reform movements have been the
forerunner of modern day NGOs in India. One of the earliest of examples from
colonial India would be the Arya Samaj of Raja Ram Mohan Roy and the Ramakrishna
Mission of Swami Vivekananda in
the early 19th Century. Subsequently a legislation, The Societies Registration
Act of 1860 was passed that began to grant official recognition for these
institutions and also regulate their operations. The Indian Freedom Movement
led by Mahatma Gandhi had a sound voluntary dimension and in the post independent
period ideologically inspired a number of ‘NGOs’ involved in national reconstruction
and development. The 1960s and 70s saw a disillusionment with government
welfare programmes and this led to the emergence of number of people’s campaigns
at the grassroots level and consequently more formal community based
organizations.
In the 1990s, linked to liberalization has been the withdrawal of the
State, which some feel should make way for the voluntary on the one hand
and the free market forces one other. In fact the shift to NGOs has been
frequently justified as an expression of the emphasis on popular participation
or participatory development and has been much favoured by multilateral
agencies (Tandon, 1996).
The central argument of this paper is that since NGOs are not a homogenous
group, and there are innumerable differences found among them, for their
work to be understood in its proper context, one must make sense of the differences
and understand their work and the principles which guide their strategies.
What is it that the NGOs mean by education? Does education have a meaning
that is common to all? It is important to understand the manner in which
NGOs really look at education. For that to a large extent will explain the
type of work they are engaged in doing. As has been seen, there are varying
perspectives in this regard. There are some NGOs who regard education as an
important end in itself. In this case their objectives are specific as well.
Like teaching literacy, numeracy skills to people, establishing educational
structures like schools or creating non-formal education centres as there
are others for whom education is a means to and end i.e. they
emphasize on the ‘empowering’ effects of education, enabling people to
develop a critical questioning attitude, be it towards the unequal distribution
of resources in society or towards the existing gender or cultural stereotypes
towards the classroom processes/learning per se.
Education also assumes a different meaning when it is given to groups
of people who have special needs, or when it caters to people who are in
a disadvantageous position in society or reside in a particular area which
is either geographically isolated or poorly developed. So these NGOs try
to give an education which is relevant to those people in their context and
is in accordance with their needs. For example, education for NGOs working
with children with special needs might mean imparting self-help and functional
skills to them Education for NGOs who are working with the deprived sections
of the community would mean empowering people and enhancing their self confidence
and self esteem and fight against the in equitable structures in society.
Table 2 shows how NGOs cater to the educational needs of a range of
target groups. The data is drawn from a study undertaken by the National
Institute of Educational Planning and Administration.
Table 2: NGOs Catering to Specific Target Groups
Population
Number of NGOs
Percentage
Children
63
84
Girls/Women
57
76
Adults
50
66.7
Socio-Economically Deprived 46
61.3
Street Children
39
52
Tribals
32
42.7
Handicapped/Special Needs 25
33.3
Source: Nawani, Disha, Role and Contribution of NGOs to Basic Education.
New Delhi:National Institute of Educational Planning and Administration,
2000.
The aim of some NGOs is not simply to enroll children in schools, but
to see that the education they get in school is something that makes sense
to them, something to which they can relate and something to which gives
them joy. Therefore there are NGOs that are concentrating their efforts on
re-defining school curriculum, redesigning textbooks and also training teachers
in progressive and child centred pedagogy. For some NGOs education also
means providing vocational training with on the instrumental aspect of education,
preparing people to get gainfully employed in the economy.
Table 3: Focus Areas of NGOs in Basic Education
Focus Area
Number of NGOs
Percentage
Mobilizing Community
60
80
Imparting Literacy
54
72
Enhancing quality
49
65
Training Teachers
34
45
Providing additional facilities
33
44
Providing Teaching Learning material 24
32
Source: Nawani, Disha, Role and Contribution of NGOs to Basic Education.
New Delhi:National Institute of Educational Planning and Administration,
2000.
Does the role of NGOs become important because the government is not being
able to meet its obligation or can their work also be studied independently
from that of the government. There is no doubt about the fact that NGOs have
come to occupy an increasingly important role due to government’s failure
to provide education to its people. Some NGOs have indeed come up in reaction
to the governmental way to doing things or to strengthen and support the
government. Does it therefore, mean that NGOs can be studied only with respect
to the government? There might be a vast difference in the objectives of the
government and the non-government sector and the manner in which they achieve
them but it is this difference which forces one to study the role of NGOs
in their own light. Moreover it is this differences or lack of it that has
to be assessed in the process of educational policy analysis vis-à-vis
civil society participation in education.
NGOs Perception of Their Role vis-à-vis The Government
Perceived Role
Number of NGOs Percentage
Assist
47
62.7
Intervene
47
62.7
Innovate
42
56
Neglected areas
38
50.7
Source: Nawani, Disha, Role and Contribution of NGOs to Basic Education.
New Delhi:National Institute of Educational Planning and Administration,
2000.
There are various layers of meanings hidden beneath the broad spectrum
of education. It becomes vital to understand all of them in order to get
a holistic picture of the working of these organizations, placed as they
are in a heterogenous society with its multifarious complexities at the socio-economic
and cultural level. Only on the basis of such an understanding can one comment
on the need for and the nature of policy changes that are required.
Case Studies
I. Movement For Alternatives and Youth Awareness (MAYA),
Bangalore
MAYA is a Karnataka based development and training organization working
since 1989 to address the rights and responsibilities of children and youth.
Over the last decade, MAYA has grown from a small local group of volunteers
to a state-wide organization of 150 full time staff.
MAYA's perspective on reform in elementary education is located in the
framework of constitutional rights where every child has a right to quality
education. From its experiences, MAYA recognizes the strong correlation between
poor quality education and the increasing incidence of child labour. In
the light of this understanding, MAYA views the education reform process
as the key result area to achieve widespread impact on the issue of child
labour, therefore addressing not only working children but also children
who are out of school and children who are in school and are at risk of dropping
out. Thus, in MAYA's view, only enrolling children to school away from work,
does not account for eradication of child labour; all possible issues within
the framework of children's rights also need to be addressed.
MAYA's interventions to address the right of every child to quality education
include:
Community Run Pre-Schools:
These are facilities for early childhood care and education (ECCE) for
children aged 2-6 yrs in MAYA's working areas. The facilities are initiated
and managed by the local women's institutions with periodic training and
monitoring inputs from MAYA. Since the initiation of the first community
run pre-school in 1998, MAYA's community run pre-schools are proving to be
an effective strategy for the prevention of child labour and for ensuring
quality ECCE for children in slums, villages and low-income areas.
Direct Intervention With Child Labour:
MAYA works directly with child labourers in the age group of 7-14 yrs
to ensure their release from work and enrolment to a quality educational
programme. This includes working with children engaged in full-time work,
those out of school and not in full-time work and those in school but at
risk of dropping out. Short term interventions include non-formal education
(NFE) sessions, camps for working children, and community campaigns. Long-term
interventions such as learning centres are initiated in a cluster of areas
to reach out to working children and prepare them for formal school or for
a vocational training programme. MAYA also works specifically towards the
eradication of child labour in the sericulture sector.
PRAJAYATNA
Through its years of working closely with working children to prepare
and enrol them to formal government school, MAYA learned that it was the
way the schooling system was designed that systematically alienated and pushed
out children; that parents did not see the advantage of their children attending
school the way it presently functioned nor did they see any role for themselves
to engage with the school or effect its improvement. There was also a complete
lack of accountability and transparency in the system that ensured little
to make the learning process relevant to children"s needs.
Recognising the need for a large-scale reform process that involved the
different stakeholders, MAYA began working with communities, school committees,
teachers, bureaucracy, elected representatives and officers of the Education
Dept across 6 districts of the State of Karnataka, towards community ownership
of educational processes, through Prajayatna (meaning 'Citizens' Initiative'
in Kannada, the regional language).
Community-run pre-schools form a significant aspect of MAYA's work with
communities in its working areas to explore possibilities of community initiated
services for children with the broader objective of enrolling communities
to address the rights of children.
The pre-schools were initiated in response to the organisation's initial
experiences of observing a large number of older children forced to stay
at home to look after their younger siblings or in some cases, younger children
accompanying their parents and older siblings to work, rather than going
to school. Further analysis also revealed several studies demonstrating the
direct impact of early childhood care and education on the schooling opportunities
of children, especially from socially disadvantaged communities.
The strategic approach
MAYA views community-run pre-schools both as a strategy for the prevention
of child labour and as a process towards building institutional capacity
of the local communities. Thus, MAYA's approach to addressing this issue involves
on the one hand, working with parents to create the need for such a facility
in the area and on the other, working with prospective teachers (locally
identified) to train and orient them to work with children. A significant
part of the effort focuses on enabling local women's co-operatives facilitated
by MAYA, to assume responsibility for the effective management and functioning
of these facilities.
The process
It is the women's cooperative members who identify the need for a pre-school
in an area through a survey, find a teacher from the locality, find the space
and assume responsibility for on-going communication with parents and for
the overall supervision of the school. Every child pays a monthly fee of
Rs. 25/- that forms the honorarium of the teacher. Materials that can be
created locally for learning activities are created by parents and also by
the teachers through regular parents' workshops. The local women's group
also raises certain additional resources by approaching the local elected
representatives, and other individuals in their locality.
MAYA provides supplementary nutrition thrice a week that is prepared by
the women's group locally. MAYA is mainly responsible for on-the-job and
special training of the teachers and community representatives. MAYA and
the women's group jointly ensure monitoring of the quality of the pre-schools.
Within the pre-schools, particular attention is paid to ensure that there
are availability of adequate resources to stimulate the overall development
of every child. An activity based curriculum, based on Howard Gardner's Multiple
Intelligence Theory and Jean Piaget's work is utilised. Particular care and
attention is paid by the teacher towards ensuring emotional support to the
children.
II. The MV Foundation, Secunderabad
The Mamidipudi Venkatarangaiya Foundation established in 1981 in Secunderabad
is a non government organization working for the development of rural community
with special emphasis on the elimination of child labour and universalization
of basic education.
The two primary objectives of MVF is the abolition of child labour and
enrolment of all the children in schools. In the process of achieving these
objectives, MVF seeks to create awareness among the disadvantages sections
regarding their social economic and political predicament. Further, it aims
at facilitating processes towards builing of a civil society through collective
action, participation and community based initiatives.
MVF believes that all non-school going children are either potential child
labourers or hard core working children. Formal education, especially in
the formative years of a child’s life in the age group of 6-14 years, is recognized
to have an intrinsic value that cannot be under any circumstances be provided
or replaced by any other means be it the non-formal or vocational education.
It believes that any child out of school is considered to be child labour,
all work/labour is hazardous and harms the overall growth of the child, there
must be total abolition of child labour and any justification perpetuating
the existence of child labour must be condemned.
For providing basic education, MVF emphasizes the strengthening of government
schools rather than creating parallel institutions. According to MVF, poverty
is not the crucial limiting factor but there are other non-economic factors
which play a major role in influencing the parents in sending children to
either school or work.
Therefore, contrary to the popular perception, MVF believes that there
is a demand for education of the children on part of their parents. For the
purpose of elimination of child labour and universalization of elementary
education, all children are classified into three groups:
1. those in school, which constitute the children of
dominant sections-who are already educated, the children of the backward
classes who do not have the tradition of going to school but whose parents
are motivated and finally whose children who are themselves highly motivated.
2. idle children i.e those children who have dropped
out of school, children whose parents do not have the perseverance or skill
to send then to school and children of the lower castes who do not have the
tradition of literacy. These children are potential child labourers.
3. working children who are ‘soft drop-outs’, children
who have never been enrolled in schools and those children whose parents
feel that children must be out to work as a natural course of life.
MVF futher classifies the children into three age groups in accordance
with their needs. They are 5-8 years, 9-11 years and 12-14 years. Since the
first group is not as yet hardcore working children who would earn a wage
income, MVF works for their enrolment into government schools. For this
intensive motivation and awareness programmes are conducted to encourage
parents to send their children to school. The the local government schools
are also strengthened to accommodate the large influx of students due to the
enrolment drive. Most of MVF’s activities are centred around the 9-11 age
group which according to them is the most difficult age group to deal with.
These children are already involved in hardcore child labour and many of
them have been bonded labourers. It is here that the question of child labour
is really addressed- the child first needs to be withdrawn from work and
then brought into mainstream by enrolling him in regular schools. For this
MVF first convinces the parents that their attitude needs change, then to
give the child worker the confidence that it is possible for him to study
and get away from the drudgery of work and finally take the children away
from their home and away from their work and bridge the gap between these
children and the school – going children in terms of their academic abilities.
For this the MVF organizes bridge course where children withdrawn from
work are brought to stay in camps for about four months of intensive training.
The teachers also stay in these camps with the children for the entire duration
of the programme. The training given to children ensures that at the end
of the camp period, these children are equipped to join the class corresponding
to their age. Following the camp, the children are admitted into government
schools and hostels. Thus the bridge course is the essence of the MVF’s strategy
of withdrawing children from work and putting them into formal schools.
These courses play a crucial role in transforming the child from a worker
to a student. They are also instrumental in facilitating the conversion of
parents from parents of child labourers to parents of a student. MVF encourages
the starting of bridge courses in regular government schools as many of the
enrolled children were quite old and required special attention.
MVF takes special initiative in the education of adolescent girls in the
Ranga Reddy district. To break the traditional and deep rooted norms and
attitudes which discriminate against their advancement. MVF conducts short
and ling term camps for them. The teachers in MVF progammes are drawn from
the community and are often first generation literates themselves.
MVF strongly believes that without community participation and support
no programme is successful. It has strengthened the community through Parent
Teacher Association , the Village Education Committees and the Mandal Education
Committees.
MVF feels that all these actions need to be put in an ideological framework
for emancipation of child labour and shows the necessity and even the possibility
of abolition of child labour through education. The crux of the problem according
to it lies in changing the established social norms which would see every
child in school as an acceptable social norm, and express outrage at the
existence of child labour.
III. The Azim Premji Foundation, Gulbarga
Azim Premji Foundation is an organization which seeks to contribute to
the universalization of primary education in six districts of Karnataka covering
more than 3600 schools. The Foundation aims at making a tangible impact
on identified social issues by working in active partnership with the Government
and other related sections of the society. The Foundation, set up with financial
resources contributed by Azim Premji, Chairman, Wipro Corporation, believes
that education is the vital element in the development and progress of our
nation. The programmes, initiatives and efforts of the Azim Premji Foundation
will revolve around creating effective and scalable models that significantly
improve the quality of learning in the school and ensure satisfactory ownership
by the community in the management of the school.
The organization believes that “we have to think of the economic scenario
that awaits us 50 years hence and the kind of talent we require to meet that
scenario successfully. We need to visualize the qualities and attributes
of the person we want at the end of education. If we have to achieve human
development on a continuous basis, what we need is a continuously learning
individual, a continuously learning nation and a continuously learning world."
(Azim Premji, 2003)
Learning Guarantee Program
With a view to achieve the goal of "universalization of elementary education",
the Azim Premji Foundation has, in collaboration with the Government of Karnataka,
laid stress on enrollment, attendance , learning levels of children in rural
government schools. To make this endeavor a success, an initiative called
the "Learning Guarantee Programme" is being implemented.
As part of the Learning Guarantee Program, the schools that successfully
implement this program will be identified and more schools and teachers will
be motivated to strive towards the "universalization of elementary education"
by seeking participation of the entire community.
In a habitation, it is expected that all children in the age group 6-14
years are enrolled in school. All these children should have regular attendance
in the school as well as achieve the expected learning outcomes. The schools
achieving the same will be encouraged with the provision of a cash incentive
to the extent of a maximum of Rs. 60,000/- (Rupees Sixty Thousand)
What the Program envisages:
• To motivate schools to augment their abilities by developing processes
in a self-reliant manner to achieve the goals of the Learning Guarantee Program.
• To identify schools, teachers, and communities that ensure universal
enrollment, attendance and enable children to achieve expected learning outcomes.
• To disseminate information on the methods adopted by successful schools
under the Learning
Guarantee Program and to motivate other schools, communities and teachers
to accept these as role models.
• To identify the factors responsible for the achievement of schools under
the Learning Guarantee Program and citing these examples, to exert influence
on the present "educational policy".
Preliminary Findings/ Recommendations
Important Role of NGOs in Non-Formal Education
To make schools accessible to those who cannot go to formal schools, the
central scheme of non-formal school was conceived in 1979-80. It was scaled
up in 1986 and revised in 1993. The scheme covers educationally backward
states as well as slums, hilly, desert and tribal areas with concentration
of working children in other states.
A unique feature of the NFE programme is its emphasis on implementation
through local and national NGOs/Voluntary Agencies. Government of India
has given grants to support such activities by NGOs. Participation of the
NGOs has increased phenomenally in the 1990s.
1997, there were 279,000 Non Formal Education centres with a total
coverage of about 7 million children in 21 states. Of these, 240,747 were
being run by the state governments and 37,808 by NGOs and voluntary agencies.
The total number of NGOs participating in the organization of centres increased
from 363 in 1992 to 816 in 1998-99. (Premi). By 1998-99 the NGOs were running
58,788 Non Formal Centres.(NIEPA)
Increased Role of NGOs
Over the last decade the government has come round to the view that NGOs
are partners in the process of moving towards the goal of education for all.
As a broad policy, the country proposes to promote the role of NGOs at all
levels in the social sector with a view to achieving participatory development
and unburdening the administration which is unduly loaded with implementation
of development programmes. However number of NGOs e.g. MAYA resist the attempts
of the government to abrogate themselves of the responsibility to implement
educational programmes. “The relationship between the government and the
non-governmental sector is also not necessarily only ‘cooperative’ or ‘confrontationist’
for there have been times when a particular organization enjoying support
of the government suddenly turns hostile on charges of evoking public sentiment
against the government structures” (Nawani, 2000).
At present, the involvement of the NGOs is generally limited to running
the NFE programmes and implanting small scale innovative experiments in
schooling. However, it is recognized that the NGOs have tremendous creative
potential to contribute in innovating and implementing education programmes.
While continuing with existing programmes of NGO involvement, effort will
have to be made to identify technically competent NGOs and enable them to
assume a larger role by functioning alongside government agencies in a significant
manner.
The preliminary data analysis of the three study organizations brings
out the variations not only in the structure of the organizations but also
in ideology, programme design and implementation strategies. At the same
time however, one can observe the innovative ways in which these organizations
supplement the governmental efforts in educational advancement.
Partnership between Public and Private Sectors
The task of implementing educational programmes in the country is so stupendous
that it is difficult to expect the public sector to meet the burgeoning needs
of the society effectively. Even though private initiative has always been
part of the school education endeavour, it is often felt that the country
has not been able to fully exploit the potential of the private sector. Possibilities
in this regard will have to be actively explored. It should be noted that
private sector can contribute nor only in monetary terms but also in the
forms of expertise for quality improvement through effective management of
the system and development of the locally relevant teaching-learning material.
More collaborative efforts at institutional level as well as programme implementation
level will have to be designed in order to expand the profile of private
initiative in the elementary education. Enactment of the 73rd and 74th Constitutional
Amendments have set the stage for greater decentralization and a significantly
enhanced role for local bodies, community organizations as well as voluntary
agencies in the efforts towards UEE. Hence the need to amendments to the
existing policy frameworks that hamper civil society participation in formal
primary education.
REFERENCES:
1. Brock-Utne, Birgit. Education and Development: A
Developing Theme, International Review of Education 48 (1/2):45 – 65. 2002.
Kluwer
2. Roy, Indrajit. Community, Organization and Representation:
Implications for Development. Economic and Political Weekly, August 31, 2002
3. Harber, Clive. Education, Democracy and Poverty Reduction
in Africa. Comparative Education, 38 (3): 267 – 276, 2002. Carfax
4. Jones, Phillip W. On World Bank Education Financing.
Comparative Education, 33 (1): 117 – 129, 1997. Carfax
5. Lauglo, Jon. Forms of Decentralisation and Their
Implications for Education. Comparative Education, 31 (1): 5 - 29, 1995.
Carfax
6. Bhatty, Kiran. Educational Deprivation in India:
A Survey of Field Investigations. Economic and Political Weekly, July 4,
1998.
7. Shariff, Abusaleh et.al. State-Adjusted Public Expenditure
on Social Sector and Poverty Alleviation Programmes. Economic and Political
Weekly, February 23, 2002.
8. Acharya, Poromesh. Education: Panchayat and Decentralization:
Myths and Reality. Economic and Political Weekly, February 23, 2002.
9. Juneja, Nalini. Constitutional Commitments. SEMINAR
464, 1998 (Issue on Right to Education).
10. Juneja, Nalini. Compulsory Education in India: The
Policy in Practice. National Institute of Educational Planning and
Administration (mimeo).
11. World Bank, The. Primary Education in India. Washington:
The World Bank, 1997
12. Kumar, Krishna
13. Saikia Committee, Report of the Committee of State
Education Ministers on Implications of the Proposal to Make Elementary Education
a Fundamental Right. New Delhi: Ministry of Human Resources Development,
Department of Education (Chairman: Muhi Ram Saikia), 1997.
14. Supreme Court of India. Judgement on Miss Mohini
Jain v. State of Karnataka and Others. New Delhi (30 July 1992). Reproduced
in Journal of Higher Education 16 (1), Autumn, 1992
15. Supreme Court of India. Judgement on J.P Unnikrishnan
v. State of Andhra Pradesh, New Delhi (1993), Reproduced in Journal of Higher
Education 16 (2), Spring, 1993
16. University Grants Commission. Report on ‘National
Colloquium on Right to Education as a Fundamental Right’. Journal of Higher
Education 16 (1), Autumn, 1992
17. Naik J P. The Education Commission and After. New
Delhi: Allied, 1982.
18. Tilak, Jandhyala B.G. A Fundamental Right. SEMINAR
464, 1998 (Issue on Right to Education).
19. Salamon, Lester and Helmut Anheier. Defining the
Non-profit Sector: A Cross-national Analysis, Manchester: Manchester University
Press,
20. Vaidyanathan A. and P R Gopinathan Nair (eds.).
Elementary Education in Rural India- A Grassroots View. New Delhi: Sage,
2001
21. Hall, John A. (ed.). Civil Society: Theory, History,
Comparison. Cambridge: Polity, 1995
22. Jenkins, Rob.Mistaking ‘governance’ for ‘politics’:
foreign aid, democracy, and the construction of civil society in Sudipta
Kaviraj and Sunil Khilnani (ed.). Civil Society: History and Possibilities,
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.
23. Mouzelis, Nicos. Modernity, Late Development and
Civil Society in John Hall (ed.) Civil Society: Theory, History, Comparison.
Cambridge: Polity, 1995
24. Eberly, Don. E (ed.). The Essential Civil Society
Reader: The Classic Essays in the American Civil Society Debate. Lanham:
Rowman and Littlefield, 2000.
25. Berger, Peter and Richard John Neuhaus. To Empower
People: From State to Civil Society. In Eberly, Don. E (ed.). The Essential
Civil Society Reader: The Classic Essays in the American Civil Society Debate.
Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, 2000.
26. Ehrenberg, John. Civil Society: The Critical History
of an Idea. New York: New York University Press, 1999.
27. Davies, Lynn. Possibilities and Limits for Democratisation
in Education. Comparative Education, 38 (3): 251 – 266, 2002. Carfax
28. Held, David. Political Theory and the Modern State.
Delhi: Maya Polity, 1984
29. Kaviraj, Sudipta and Sunil Khilnani. Civil Society:
History and Possibilities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.
30. Chabbott, Colette. Development INGOs. In John Boli
and George Thomas (ed.). Constructing World Culture: International Nongovernmental
Organizations since 1875. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1999.
31. Vasavi, A R. Schooling for a New Society? The Social
and Political Bases of Education Deprivation in India. IDS Bulletin, 34 (1),
January, 2003
32. Govinda R. Making Basic Education Work for the Poor:
Experiences from the South. IDS Bulletin, 34 (1), January, 2003
33. Vasavi, A R. Marginalised Communities and Dysfunctional
Schools, Local Education Report – Khategaon. Bangalore: National Institute
of Advanced Studies, 2002.
34. Project Documents and Publicity material from MAYA,
MVF and APF.
Back to Home Page