India’s elementary priority

Development economists have long argued that universal primary education has tangible benefits on economic growth. Not surprisingly, successive Indian governments have toed this line in the recent past. Yet, a quick look at the Indian budget for 2015 reveals an interesting strategic shift in Indian polity. The Indian government has reduced its planned allocation to school education by about 10 per cent, while increasing the higher education budget by about 22 per cent. Budget cuts to the tune of 22.14 per cent have also been made to Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, the government’s flagship programme for facilitating access to universal elementary education. But at a time when a substantial part of India’s population is poised to become part of its elementary education system, access to education is a measure India cannot afford to shortchange. Building an inclusive elementary education system must be at the core of the Narendra Modi government’s agenda.

There are two prominent narratives on universal elementary education in India. Some argue that India has achieved substantial progress towards increasing the enrolment of children in primary schools. Others claim that tremendous strides have been made towards increasing access, and focus instead on the learning crisis in schools. Statistics suggest that there is significant merit in both these narratives — for instance, according to the government school education in India report for 2014 to 2015, the total enrolment in primary education (gross enrolment ratio, or GER) in primary education in those years stood at an impressive 100 per cent. At the same time, only 7 per cent of primary school children enrolled in third grade in 2014 had basic arithmetic capabilities. This does not mean, however, that access to elementary education is no longer a challenge. This is primarily for three different reasons.

First, the current GER of 100 per cent is, at best, misleading. GER includes within its ambit over-aged and under-aged students who are in primary school as a result of either early or late school entrance and grade repetition. A more meaningful statistic is the net enrolment ratio (NER), which only includes children of official primary school age.

Second, attendance rates present an even bleaker picture. Attendance of stud-ents within government schools is low, with some states recording less than 70 per cent of enrolled children present. Additionally, India also registers some of the highest drop-out rates at the primary and upper primary level at 20 per cent and 36 per cent, respectively.

Third, and perhaps most importantly, these aggregated figures mask deep structural inequalities inherent in access to education. In states like Uttar Pradesh and Bihar for example, only 55 per cent and 58 per cent of enrolled children attend primary school, respectively, as opposed to 91 per cent in Kerala.

Political disempowerment

Finally, compared to the national primary level drop-out rates of 20 per cent, the average drop-out rates for the socio-economically backward scheduled tribes is as high as 31 per cent. Studies indicate that low levels of participation are also prevalent especially among children of migrant populations, low-income groups and first-generation learners.

One view, advocated by Amartya Sen and Jean Dreze in their seminal scholarly monograph, India: Economic Development and Social Opportunity, is the problem of political action. Sen and Dreze argue that political disempowerment coupled with an underestimation of the socio-economic value of primary education by India’s political elites has resulted in a lopsided primary education policy.

There are a number of measures the Modi government can take to redress the poor access to education that India continues to suffer from.

First, the government must focus on building inclusive models of access to elementary education, which specifically target groups most likely either to be excluded altogether or to drop out of the formal educational system. Children from several marginalised groups, such as scheduled castes and scheduled tribes, are often first-generational learners, for instance. For them, it is crucial to facilitate greater parental engagement to drive home the long-term benefits of education vis-a-vis the immediate benefits that employment presents.

Second, the government needs to limit the participation of children in wage labour or domestic work so that they are allowed to attend school instead. Unfortunately, the Indian Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2012 makes this an uphill task by allowing children aged six to 14 to work in family enterprises after school hours or during holidays, leaving a significant loophole to be exploited by the burgeoning child labour industry.

Third, the central government must review its strategy of offering little to no support to states in matters of infrastructure under the new budget. Sustained investments in infrastructure, whether that entails developing model schools in backward districts or expanding access via prominent existing schemes is crucial to address low levels of access. A recent Human Resources Development Ministry initiative to seek budgetary approval for setting up additional Kendriya Vidyalayas in parliamentary constituencies is a welcome step.

At a time when India seems poised to become the world’s fastest-growing economy, crafting a prudent education policy is critical. Only by investing wisely in its primary education will India the country be able to create a citizenry that can become a productive workforce. The government’s push for economic reforms holds little value if it is not matched in intent and action by socio-economic reform. Revisiting its flawed assumption on the education policy should figure at the top of that list.