Swadesh Singh:

Namaskar.Today, we will discuss the issues of social churning in our society. We have Professor Badri Narayan Ji with us, the Director of GB Pant Social Science Institute and a member of UGC and ICSSR. Professor Badri Narayan is a well-known scholar, intellectual, thinker, and author. He has especially written about marginalised society and has contributed in various ways to their empowerment. Welcome, Professor Badri Narayan Ji. Thank you for accepting our invitation. Let me begin by asking you about social churning, which we know is a continuous process that manifests in different ways. How do you see this social churning in our society on issues around caste census,reservation in the private sector, or reservations in the name of religion? So many things are going on in our society. Will this affect us negatively, or will something good emerge?

Badri Narayan:

First, I am very thankful to you and the India Foundation for inviting me to this discussion. You are right when you say that social churning is a continuous process. It is happening at two levels. At one level, it occurs within the society without any outside intervention. Within society means the nature of society is itself the society of churning. Any society can’t exist, continue, or sustain itself without churning because fixity is an enemy of any society. Society needs a continuum of development, of change or what we call ‘parivartan.’ But you know, sometimes agencies from the outside intervene to support activists and speed up the process. They facilitate the process because they learn, equip themselves with various kinds of knowledge, skills, different types of thinking and ideas, and try to intervene in the process of social churning, thus making it faster.The direction may be positive or negative.

Swadesh Singh:

Politics is an excellent instrument for social transformation, and for that, we need politics of social justice. For the last 70-75 years, we have seen different manifestations of social justice politics. How do you see the future of social justice politics and the kind of debate and discussion around social justice?

Badri Narayan:

That is a very good question, Swadesh. You know, in society, society itself creates its methods to distribute social justice. Even in our medieval, pre-colonial, and even ancient societies, we had a system of distributing social justice. But it may be unequal. People may have complained. When you become aware, you developand then say, “Oh! We are not getting this. We wanted to get this, but we couldn’t get this.” So now we are turning into a modern society. Everything is redefined in a contemporarymanner. Modern requirements are influenced by modernity. So, in this modernity, new harmonics of social justice emerged with the discussions raised by Ambedkar, Jyotiba Phule, and various social reformers.

Social reformers are also part of society, but they have evolved as an agency that can facilitate the process of change. The politics of social justice came to India in two ways. One is from this kind of agency, and the other is from the state because the state is committed to their social development. British colonial discourses of social justice also sustained these structures. So, we have two kinds of structures of social justice in India, which are part of the Constitution. One is coming from the British legacy of the arguments. Another is by social reformers like Babasaheb Ambedkar. These social justice politics evolved through various kinds of reservations and democratic dissemination of resources. So, the politics of social justice is relevant to society; it’s needed for society. But the politics of social justice is not fixed. It changes continuously. For example, social justice politics may benefit specific communities at specific times.

Swadesh Singh:

I understand there are two ways to ensure social justice, as you have also rightly mentioned in your book, ‘The Making of the Dalit Public in North India’. One is through social reformers like Swami Achuthanandan and how the people from marginalised communities interacted with the British families they worked for. The other is through state intervention, as pushed and ensured by Dr Ambedkar. In the last 70-75 years, this social justice has been ensured for many people.Now, what do we do for those who are at the margins of marginal society? How do we ensure social justice for them? What is the way forward?

Badri Narayan:

I am going to address your question. The British legacy, which, when I say it, also includes the ideas of social justice coming from the West. We have imbibed those ideas with our freedom. Because freedom in India is a kind of hybrid thing, it’s not fully Indian. Various types of ideology influenced it. So, when India became free, and the Constitution came with various factors such as positive discrimination, a community was already ready to benefit from that. That community was prepared because it had evolved with the British colonial Sahibs and British colonial class. They worked with them as subordinates and subaltern classes and were empowered. So, they became ready to take benefit of all these reservations and protective discrimination. And then they got the benefit of that for 60-70 years.

In that process, what we call a group emerged. They are working as a capillary hole, and they are sucking most of the benefits of the reservation for themselves. They are not distributing to their community, and Babasaheb Ambedkar was also critical about that. He was very angry with the Dalit middle class because they were not paying back to their brothers. So, in Uttar Pradesh, you see, we have 66 Dalit communities; in Andhra Pradesh, 55 Dalit communities;and Maharashtra, more than 40 Dalit communities. But if you ask anyone how many Dalit communities you know in Uttar Pradesh, they may mention a few, and in Telangana, they may mention Mala, Madiga, Mahama, or Chamhar. They don’t know much because these communities have not acquired visibility since you need education; you need political value, which comes through numbers.

You need your community leaders.You know your opinion-maker community; this community lacks those kinds of things. So, they need to catch up in taking the interest of the profit of the social justice. Social justice is an ethical domain, so a moral requirement of social justice should be met because they have yet to acquire the capability to compete with this. When one brother takes the benefits, we cannot leave the others behind. Thestate has a responsibility to distribute social justice to them andbring social justice to them. For that, what you can do is the kind of Supreme Court’s recent verdict, which is a very transformative justice verdict. So, in my view, social justice opportunities may be distributed equally, but it is not possible that at one time you can distribute among all. So, you have to do it phase-wise.

Suppose that a few communities become developed, but others are left out. Then, you have to reach out to them. After the other 10, you have to reach another 10, then another ten because they have to acquire the capacity to take. Even if you take the reservation opportunity to them, they are not able to take that because they are not an educated class; they do not have a community that can aspire for that. So, you have to prepare them to take the benefit of this. It is a two-way process: take social justice opportunities to them and prepare them to take benefit. They are a vulnerable class, and you must be very protective of them. It’s a very sensitive process. But here is what we will do: the community, which says it has a huge number, will leave this amount for us, and we will do it ourselves. They are getting all the benefits and are not sensitive towards their community brothers to whom this opportunity may be distributed.

Swadesh Singh:

Reservation is an instrument of social transformation. However, the argument from the dominant, marginalised communities is that though they are getting benefits of reservation in offices and academic institutions where they have entered, they still feel some untouchability. I agree with you that there should be social churning among marginal communities, but what is the way forward? Because there are arguments from dominant communities that they still face that kind of discrimination. So, where is the space to resolve this? That is a big question for the present and also for the future. Issues will continue to arise for reservations in the private sector, imposing a SC creamy layer or increasing reservations by more than 50%.

Badri Narayan:

It would be best if you changed society to resolve the feeling of untouchability at various levels. You have to do a lot of social reform activities and give them dignity. Secondly, this community that feels untouchability, even though they are IAS or IPS officers—they will have to be adopted slowly. This entire discourse of modernity, because modernity in that way creates a condition in which you are progressing on that line, but you know, in that process, it’s fine that we are worried about them. They should feel accommodated, not excluded. But they also have to think about others. And we also have to think about others, their brothers who are left behind. We are just thinking about visible people because they are coming and knocking on our door. Look, we are here.

Swadesh Singh:

You stated that social justice should be achieved at two levels: with the help of social reformers and through the state. We have seen that India has been a land of social reformers like Buddha, Ambedkar, Gandhi, and Hedgewar. We have seen these kinds of social reformers in society. But now, the whole responsibility is on the state only. Is that creating problems?

Badri Narayan:

Yes, that creates problems because we expect the state to do everything. The state will give reservation; the state will reduce untouchability; the state will reduce atrocities. But the state has its limitations. A state is not present everywhere. The state is present through policies but not through police or legal means. In that domain, society is more critical for affecting change as Babasaheb did in his own time, in politics and social politics. Social politics refers to the kind of social reform agencies, and also one way we have to involve social service agencies like RSS is by doing work. Like various kinds of other organisations, those who are strengthening society to resolve this kind of thing. There is another way that you turn entire politics into social politics, as PM Modi suggested many times, and that now, this politics is not only politics of the state. This politics is for social politics. So, we have to turn the politics in a social mode. This means you have to link social issues with politics as Gandhi did. Gandhi, in his national movement struggles, coopted themes on resolutions against untouchability, reduction of untouchability, and widow remarriage. He weaved various more significant social questions with his politics. So now we have to turn our politics towards Delhi, the throne of the power to society, where issues lie, and we have to link our politics through them. For example, we should review the work of Members of Parliament at the social level, whether the MP has tried to change society by organising discourses, meetings, etc, through various social agencies. The MP has to emerge as a social agency more than a political one.

Swadesh Singh:

There is so much expectation from the state, whether caste or any other identity like religion. We now see demands for religion-based reservations in many non-BJP-ruled states. This issue also came up during election time. How do you see religion-based reservations, and how would that impact us?

Badri Narayan:

The basis of reservation, as described in our Constitution, is inequality, suffering based on untouchability or caste,and historical deprivation. In that framework, religion has no base because every religion has an elite and a subaltern.So you cannot give reservations to the entire religion. You can provide reservations to the subaltern or those who are the deprived of that religion, and I think our Constitution is doing that because, in reservation patterns, there are castes from different religions also, and they get reservations. So, I think if you distribute reservation through religion through various kinds of other primordial identities than caste, it will dilute the purpose of the reservation.Reservationsare transitory and will not always continue. So, you have to resolve the issue on a case-to-case basis. First, you have to resolve the issue of deprivation caused by the caste system. When this is resolved, society will move towards an equal society. Then there will be no need for any reservation. Religion-based reservation may not be a good idea because it will dilute the mission of reservation in India.

Swadesh Singh:

Minority politics and minority appeasement politics have developed in the last 30-40 years. In response, the majority community has mobilised. How do you see the future of this majority-minority politics? In a secular modern state, should we have this kind of debate when we have so many other issues to deal with?

Badri Narayan:

See, today or tomorrow, we have to become a secular society, and to become a secular society, we need to eradicate all kinds of categories based on religion: majority religion, minority religion, majority public, and minority public. That will make us a secular society. To become an equal society, wemust abolish all kinds of versus’—majority versus minority, this versus that and so on. On the one hand, we are aspiring to become equal. On the other hand, we are creating various kinds of versus’. So, we must come out from the multipletypes of majority-minority versus’ and different kinds of even caste versus’, upper caste, and lower caste. Wemust come out from that as Babasaheb Ambedkar also aspired for that. The Buddha aspired for that. One day, we have to become the drop of the ocean. You are a drop, but you have to become the ocean. So that’s the aim of the society. That’s the goal of the society. We must move in that direction, not preserving versus’, making it contesting and conflictual. One versus another, based on caste, religion, sub-religion, etc. I think this will fragment society.

Swadesh Singh:

Another identity where great social churning occurs is women, who also need transformation and empowerment. We have seen that we have moved from women’s development to women empowerment to women-led development. The current government led by Prime Minister Modi has also done a lot for different sections of females, whether it’s a girl child, an uneducated girl child living in the village, or any marginalised section of women residing in any slum or working-class women. The current government has also ensured reservations for women in Parliament. How do you see gender justice taking shape in the coming times?

Badri Narayan:

This is the age that PM Modi leads—the age of aspiration. But this is also the age of ‘Samahar’. So, in the age of development, this is the neoliberal age of development. In this phase, these various kinds of identity should ideally submerge in one. That’s the aspiration. But identity never dies; it will be with us. It will dilute, again it will come, again it will die, again it will come. So, ups and downs will take place. So, women as a gender and as an identity is a good way of Indian governance, and they have given shares based on women as a category and caste as a category.

In the future, the way PM Modi has tried to nurture politics and women’s reservations will produce many women leaders at the grassroots level, provide them with a share in the power, and strengthen them. But what is the strengthening of women for? It is not for making a society where we pit male versus female. It should be a ‘Samahar’ Samaj of the ‘Samahar,’ in that empowered women will live with the empowered male. Both have dignity,so the government is working towards women-led development and giving them a share, which will undoubtedly empower them. Now, you can see women everywhere; you can find women in any office. Earlier, 10 to 20 years ago, there were very few women in public spaces and offices. Now, we can find women everywhere. Slowly, this process is getting faster, and the government is taking itforward in the right way. But society has to think that it’s not only the duty of a state to provide them witha share and dignity. So, we must make society aware ofhuman dignity because even when the government is doing everything,we see what happened in Calcutta. It means society is not responding to the call the state is giving. So, we have to think about recorrecting our society, correcting our society.

Swadesh Singh:

Social churning occurs at the level of caste, religion and gender. In this background, how do you see the possibility of a common Civil Code in our country in a modern secular state?Can we continue to run the affairs of the state with different laws for different sections of society? How should we go forward in the direction of a Uniform Civil Code?

Badri Narayan:

If we are to have a secular society, we have to come out from religion-based specific legal procedures or legal provisions. We have to make a secular Civil Code which applies to all. In any society, we can give them positive discrimination at different levels, such as social and policy support. But for religion, as we are living in a secular society, we need a kind of uniformity. So, we must make a Uniform Civil Code, which PM Modi called a secular civil code. That is an excellent term; we should use it in our discourses. So, to make a secular society, we must have a Secular Civil Code. Without a Secular Civil Code, how can we have a secular society? Otherwise, we are dodging the people. On one hand,some people talk about having a secular society. On the other hand, they oppose the laws that can lead to society becoming secular.

Swadesh Singh:

Sir, you are a social scientist, author, columnist and public intellectual. But we also know that you are a great poet of our time, and recently,you have received an award from the Sahitya Akademi.Poets are generally very sensitive about their surroundings; you are both a poet and a social scientist. How do you perceive the social churning or the social problems of our times as a poet, and how do you translate that into your social scientist thing?

Badri Narayan:

This question is very close to my heart, and you have raised it. I used to say that if I had not become a poet, it would have been impossible for me to become a social scientist like this. I am that social scientist because I see society as an emotion, an aspiration, a society of desires. Today, I talked with students in a workshop, and now we are talking about an aspirational society. However, 6-10 years ago, this term was not used in governance. Aspiration was not part of our discourse because social science, which comes from positivism, always tries to stop us from thinking in terms of aspiration, emotion, feelings, and all. Now, the government has also started thinking in that direction, and these devices, as a social scientist, I get from poetry because I used to write social science, the social science of emotion, the social science of aspiration, the social science of desires of the public. After all, social science is not only about understanding the structure of society but also about the feelings and emotions of society, and that is what I get from poetry. So, poetry has helped me become a different social scientist.

Swadesh Singh:

You have discussed the politics of aspiration and many other issues in detail. These will help us find a solution to our society’s social churning and better understand the social problems of our time. Thank you very much, Badri Narayan Ji, for joining us in this conversation.

Badri Narayan:

Thank you, Swadesh, for this conversation. Thank you so much, and thank you, India Foundation, for providing me with this opportunity.

Brief Bios:

1. Badri Narayan Tiwari is a Social Historian and Cultural Anthropologist and currently Director and Professor at the G.B. Pant Social Science Institute, Allahabad. His wide-ranging interests cover culture, memory and politics, contemporary histories, Ethnography of marginalized politics, social and anthropological history, Dalit and subaltern issues and Identity formation and the question of power. He has been a fellow at the Indian Institute of Advanced Study, Shimla (1998-99), and Visiting Fellow at the International Institute of Asian Studies, University of Leiden, The Netherlands (2002) and HGIS Fellow at the Royal Tropical Institute, Amsterdam (2001). He was a recipient of the Fulbright Senior Fellowship (September 2005-April 2006) and the Smuts Fellowship, University of Cambridge (February 2007 – October 2007).
2. Swadesh Singh is an author, columnist, teacher and activist. He holds a PhD degree from Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi and PG Diploma in Mass Communications from Indian Institute of Mass Communication (IIMC), New Delhi. He has 4 books to his credits – ‘Modian Consensus, The Rediscovery of Bharat’, ‘Ayodhya Ram Mandir, Bharat’s Quest for Ram-Rajya’, ‘Aatmanribharta: Revisiting the Idea and Practices’, and ‘Electoral Reforms: Ushering a Just Political Regime’. Dr. Swadesh Singh runs an academic forum named ‘Academics For Nation’. He teaches Political Science at Satyawati College, University of Delhi.

The challenges of the Indian Education system are varied. On the one hand, there is a need for quality teachers, improved infrastructure, appropriate curriculum, and efficient governance structures. Conversely, an assortment of actors is also supposed to make sense of this mesh. Mudaliar Commission¹ was established in 1952 regarding secondary education and suggested diversifying the school curriculum, making vocational education part of the course. Kothari Commission², or the National Education Commission in 1966, was the first policy initiative by the Government of India to streamline school education in the country. An important recommendation was to standardise the education system into the 10+2+3 format in India. Education became part of the concurrent list from the state list under the Forty Second Amendment Act, 1976, brought in during the emergency³. National Policy of Education (NPE) was brought under the Rajiv Gandhi Administration in 1986 (later modified in 1992).⁴ It launched ‘Operation Blackboard’ to improve the primary education status across the country.Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan under the Atal Bihari Vajpayee government made universalising primary education a mission, and the Right to Education was made into a fundamental right. National Education Policy (NEP) 2020⁵ is the latest policy intervention brought by the Narendra Modi government after a gap of almost three decades. The Union Cabinet adopted the National Education Policy 2020 on July 29, 2021. The focus of NEP 2020 is different from previous policies in that it puts a lot of weight on the quality of education.

The vision of the policy aspires to ‘provide high-quality education to all and thereby make India a global knowledge superpower’⁶. Some of the commitments in the policy include:⁷

 

1. Changing the school structure from the current 10+2 to 5+3+3+4 model to make learning more holistic.

   

 

2. Focus on Early Childhood Care and Education (ECCE).
3. Achieve the goal of universal foundational literacy and numeracy in primary schools by 2025.
4. Expose at least half the school and higher education students to vocational training by 2025.
5. Adopt innovative mechanisms to group or rationalise schools by 2025.
6. Ensure all students are school-ready when they enter school in first grade by 2030.
7. Prioritise bringing out-of-school children back into the educational fold. Aim to stop further drop out from schools and achieve 100% enrolment from preschool to grade 12 by 2030.
8. Making teacher education multidisciplinary by 2030.

These commitments are ambitious and an uphill task given the current state of schools in India⁸. 1.5 million schools, 265.2 million children, and 9.5 million teachers⁹ are at stake, and the economic cost of failing this demographic will be enormous.

Peter Drucker is attributed to the quote, ‘What can’t be measured, can’t be improved.’ India doesn’t have the challenge of measurement per se, but it is ineffective at using the data collected for improvement. Some multiple datasets and indexes fail to guide policymakers in making informed choices—for instance, the challenge of zero-enrolment schools. Several state governments like West Bengal¹⁰ and Arunachal Pradesh¹¹ have shut down zero-enrolment schools, which were opened to comply with the Right to Education policy but hadn’t seen any admission for a long time. It is also important to define objectives towards which performance is being measured. Currently, whatever measure happens is used to rank states and districts, and the expectation is that a sense of competition will motivate lagging regions to perform better. Ideally, this exercise should be able to define factors causing a particular set of schools to outperform other schools in the same area.

This essay examines methods currently used to generate data and measure performance in India and explores the feasibility of employing sixteen equity indicators12 prepared by the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in the United States.

Existing performance measuring mechanisms:

Unified District Information System For Education Plus (UDISE+)¹³

The District Information System for Education (DISE) was piloted in 1995 to measure and monitor the implementation of the government scheme for primary grades. A similar management system, SEMIS, was launched for grades 9-12 in 2008-09. A ‘Unified District Information System for Education’ (UDISE) was prepared by integrating DISE and SEMIS in 2012-13. An updated version of UDISE called UDISE+ was introduced in 2018-19 with improved mapping, capture and verification of data.

UDISE+ isn’t an index but an elaborate collection of data on school management, student enrolment in different categories, the number of teachers, etc. It also measures data on various infrastructure developments, such as toilets for girls and boys, libraries, computer labs, the Internet, etc. UDISE+ then presents specific findings that are basic representations of cumulative data without analysis.

National Achievement Survey (NAS)¹⁴

NAS is a national-level survey that identifies learning level outcomes for students in classes three, five, eight, and ten. The purpose of the survey is to identify continuous learning and skill gaps. The first NAS survey was conducted in 2017; the latest was in 2021. It measured students in classes three and five on language, math, and environmental science; class eight kids on language, math, science, and social science; and class ten students on language, math, science, social science, and English.

Performance Grading Index (PGI)¹⁵

Introduced in 2017-18, PGI was developed to provide insights into the status of school education across India. PGI collects data from the Department of School Education and Literacy, MoE and the following sources:

1. Unified District Information System for Education (UDISE+)
2. National Achievement Survey (NAS) of NCERT
3. Mid-Day Meal website (MDM portal)
4. Public Financial Management System (PFMS)
5. Shagun PortalEL (This portal was launched in 2019 to integrate .23 million education websites across India.)

Methodology

PGI measures seventy indicators under two main categories: outcomes and governance & management. Under the outcomes category, there are four domains:

1. Learning Outcomes And Quality (measures nine indicators obtained from Shagun and NAS)
2. Access (measures eight indicators obtained from UDISE+ and Shagun)
3. Infrastructure & Facilities (measures 11 indicators obtained from UDISE+, Shagun and MDM portal)
4. Equity (measures 16 indicators obtained from NAS, UDISE+ and Shagun)

The governance and Management category measures one domain: governance processes (it measures 26 indicators obtained from UDISE+ and Shagun).

 

School Education Quality Index (SEQI)¹⁶

NITI Aayog developed the School Education Quality Index (SEQI) to evaluate the performance of schools in states and UTs. The index focuses on outcomes, strengths, and weaknesses and helps with policy interventions. The first report was launched in 2019.

SEQI measures two categories under outcomes and governance processes. Outcomes are further divided into four domains.

Category 1: Outcomes

• Domain 1: Learning Outcomes
• Domain 2: Access Outcomes
• Domain 3: Infrastructure & Facilities for Outcomes
• Domain 4: Equity Outcomes

Category 2: Governance Processes Aiding Outcomes

 

Challenges with current measurements:

1. The Performance Grading Index is a very elaborate exercise, given its reliance on 70 varied indicators that source information from multiple portals. The data used by PGI is challenging to access, and the platform for interacting with the index isn’t very user-friendly.
2. The National Achievement Survey interface is interactive but has too many data points in one window. Also, the averages are compared among districts and states; there can be a more efficient way to compare data instead of averages, which hides information on inequality.
3. The National Achievement Survey isn’t an annual feature. The first survey was in 2017, and the second was in 2021. To see year-on-year growth, this survey has to be a yearly feature. No other national survey happens at such a scale.
4. The National Achievement Survey should be used to identify skill gaps in language, math, and science, which will help policymakers plan and allocate resources more efficiently.
5. The equity indicators under the PGI and NAS measure the difference in math and language performance between scheduled caste and general category students, rural and urban students & minorities and general category students. Some indicators measure infrastructure facilities for children with special needs and boy and girl toilets. However, more than these data points are needed to understand or measure performance and learning outcomes gap
6. UDISE+ data is elaborate regarding physical and social infrastructure, but the interface needs to become more user-friendly, allowing comparisons across years. It also needs to depict the growth trajectory of the factors it measures.
7. Data on Midday Meals isn’t centrally available. Different states provide this information differently without a uniform format.
8. Shagun Portal needs to be reworked entirely as the interface could be better.
   
9. The School Education Quality Index hasn’t been published since 2019. Data management methods need to be overhauled and made more scientific. In 2016, a group of scientists and organisations published an article in Scientific Data that presented guiding principles on scientific data management. These are called the FAIR principle, which means data should be Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable¹⁷.

Building Equity Indicators for India

The National Academy of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine, US, set up a committee which came out with a report in 2019 titled ‘Monitoring Educational Equity’¹⁸.  The report identifies 16 key indicators that may affect students’ education, such as ‘differences in the conditions and structures in the education system’. These indicators have been chosen to highlight gaps and their potential causes and look for interventions to fill them. The report proposes to measure inequities under two categories:

1. ‘Disparities in Outcomes’: to assess disparity in academic performance
2. ‘Equitable Access to Resource and Opportunities’

The attributes of such indicators, as per the report, are:

1. Able to measure academic outcomes over time.
2. Bring out disparity among subgroups within populations.
3. Indicators should be helpful across different geographies and at different times.
4. Grade level appropriateness.
5. Factor in a context that impacts education.
6. Frequently produce an easy-to-understand summary of statistics.
7. Use scientifically sound methods.
8. Include continuous inputs from relevant research or other developments.

Disparities in Outcomes

Domain A: Kindergarten Readiness

Various studies in neuroscience suggest that around 85% of a child’s brain development happens by the age of 6¹⁹. The early years of education are critical in a child’s overall development. Proper interventions at this stage can help bridge gaps among children from disadvantaged backgrounds. The report suggests measuring disparity in two skills under this domain.

1. Indicator 1: Disparity in Reading and Numeracy skills
2. Indicator 2: Disparity in Self-regulation and Attention skills

Reading and numeracy skills can be measured using the National Achievement Survey. While the National Curriculum Framework, 2005²⁰ focuses on skills like discipline, attention, etc., they must be incorporated into early childhood educators’ training.

Domain B: K–12 Learning and Engagement

Attendance and performance in school tests are directly and positively relevant to learning and attainment. Measuring group differences can help narrow down the gaps.

3. Indicator 3: Disparity in attendance
4. Indicator 4: Disparity in overall performance and being on track to finishing schools
5. Indicator 5: Disparity in reading, math and science scores.

Shagun portal provides attendance data and indicators the National Achievement Survey can cover 4 & 5.

Domain C: Educational Attainment

Education is a means to better opportunities and an improved lifestyle. Ideally, education in schools should be able to prepare students for college and financial opportunities.

6. Indicator 6: Disparity in graduating on time
7. Indicator 7: Disparity in readiness for after-school opportunities like college, employment opportunities, or armed forces.

Annual board results will be used to identify gaps in on-time graduation. Currently, there is no mechanism to capture post-secondary education avenues for children.

Equitable Access to Resources and Opportunities

Domain D: Extent of Racial, Ethnic, and Economic Segregation

A child’s exposure depends on the peers they study along and grow with. Schools in low-income areas or with most students from low-income or disadvantaged groups tend to perform poorly, leading to poor opportunities later.

8. Indicator 8: Disparity in the concentration of poverty or the presence of diverse groups of students in the school.

The UDISE + surveys can capture this data. Section 12 1(c) of the Right to Education²¹ promises admission to up to twenty-five percent of the maximum capacity of seats in class 1 to economically weaker and disadvantaged children. It provides them with free and compulsory education until school completion. Effective implementation of this section will increase the diversity within schools.

Domain E: Equitable Access to High-Quality Early Learning Programs

Pre-elementary schools play a vital role in kindergarten readiness and the child’s overall development. Geography, economic conditions, and family background influence access to pre-elementary education. Access to high-quality early learning programs can lead a child to different life paths.

9. Indicator 9: Disparities in access to and participation in high-quality pre-elementary programs.

The National Education Policy has focused on early childhood education and care (ECCE). It suggests delivering high-quality pre-elementary education by building well-ventilated, well-designed, child-friendly, and well-constructed infrastructure. Also, ECCE centres should be co-located with Anganwadi (rural childhood care centre) or existing primary schools wherever possible. This can be incorporated and measured through the UDISE+.

Domain F: Equitable Access to High-Quality Curricula and Instruction

Access to a rigorous curriculum and quality teachers play a critical role in a child’s learning process. Exposure to a diverse curriculum, including science, geography, economics, technology, laboratories, languages, art, and history, makes students well-rounded. A single teacher can inspire an entire classroom, but there needs to be conclusive evidence on what teacher traits contribute to student achievement and outcomes. Experienced and more qualified teachers should be distributed equitably rather than in a concentrated manner.

10. Indicator 10: Disparities in access to experienced and qualified teachers in diverse subjects.
11. Indicator 11: Disparities in access to and enrolment in rigorous coursework like programs and international baccalaureate.
12. Indicator 12: Disparities in curricular breadth with absence in availability of subjects like economics, geography, etc.
13. Indicator 13: Disparities in access to high-quality academic support like tutoring.

Indicators 10, 12, and 13 can be easily measured using the UDISE+ and database. For Indicator 11, state governments or CBSE can take the initiative to adapt to rigorous curricula phase by phase.

Domain G: Equitable Access to Supportive School and Classroom Environments

Physical and emotionally safe environments address a child’s socio-emotional and academic requirements. While there is a focus on building safer infrastructure, more emphasis has to be placed on supportive environments by providing access to counselling staff, social services, etc.

14. Indicator 14: Disparities in school climate regarding perception of safety, support, trust, etc.
15. Indicator 15: Disparities in non-exclusionary discipline practices like suspensions and expulsions
16. Indicator 16: Disparities in non-academic support for student success

Indicator 14 can be measured by adding it to the National Achievement Survey. It can also be measured by involving school management committees. Indicator 16 can be measured through the UDISE+. However, the available data sources have no mechanism to measure indicator 15.

Conclusion

National Education Policy 2020 talks of Socio-Economically Disadvantaged Groups (SEDGs) like the scheduled castes, tribes, minorities, children with special needs and women as underrepresented, cutting across all inequities. It mentions the disparity due to lack of access, quality of good schools, teachers and poor infrastructure. As the Indian economy grows, these disparities have to be reduced. The current education system will provide the bedrock that India requires for the skilled workforce; if attention is not paid to building an equitable landscape, India might face unintended consequences. Hence, it must improve performance measurement in school education and build indicators enabling policymakers to make informed decisions.

Author Brief Bio: Aaditya Tiwari is a governance and sustainable development professional who graduated from SIPA, ColumbiaUniversity. He has a decade of experience in India’s development sector, including roles at think tanks,political administration, and the UN.

References

1. “75th Independence day, education policies in India, New education policy, NEP, education post-independence education news | Education News.” India TV News. Accessed December 16, 2022. https://www.indiatvnews.com/education/news-75th-independence-day-nep-2020-and-other-major-education-policies-post-independence-726285.
2. “National Policy on Education 1968.” n.d. Government of India, Ministry of Education. Accessed December 16, 2022. https://www.education.gov.in/sites/upload_files/mhrd/files/document-reports/NPE-1968.pdf.
3. The Hindu. 2022. “Transfer of ‘education’ to concurrent list during the Emergency has upset India’s federal structure, T.N. govt tells HC.” October 17, 2022. https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/tamil-nadu/transfer-of-education-to-concurrent-list-during-the-emergency-has-upset-indias-federal-structure-tn-govt-tells-hc/article66022410.ece.
4. “npe86-mod92.pdf.” n.d. Ministry of Human Resource Development. Accessed December 16, 2022. http://www.education.nic.in/policy/npe86-mod92.pdf.
5. “National Education Policy 2020.” n.d. Ministry of Education. Accessed December 12, 2022. https://www.education.gov.in/sites/upload_files/mhrd/files/NEP_Final_English_0.pdf.
6. Ibid.
7. Ibid.
8. “ASER 2021.” n.d. ASER Centre. Accessed December 12, 2022. http://www.asercentre.org/Keywords/p/394.html.
9. d. UDISE+ Dashboard. Accessed December 12, 2022. https://dashboard.udiseplus.gov.in/#/home.
10. 2021. “West Bengal shuts schools with zero enrolment.” December 8, 2021. https://www.educationworld.in/west-bengal-shuts-schools-with-zero-enrolment/.
11. The Indian Express. 2020. “Arunachal govt to close down zero enrolment schools: Education Minister.” March 2, 2020. https://indianexpress.com/article/education/arunachal-govt-to-close-down-zero-enrolment-schools-education-minister-6295945/.
12. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Monitoring Educational Equity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25389.
13. d. UDISE+. Accessed December 16, 2022. https://udiseplus.gov.in/#/page/publications.
14. NAS Gov. https://nas.gov.in/.
15. d. Performance Grading Index (PGI). Accessed December 16, 2022. https://pgi.udiseplus.gov.in/#/home.
16. Ahmad, Junaid K., and Cristian Aedo. n.d. “” | NITI Aayog. Accessed December 16, 2022. https://www.niti.gov.in/sites/default/files/2019-09/seqi_document_0.pdf.
17. “What are the FAIR Data Principles? | Augustus C. Long Health Sciences Library.” 2022. Augustus C. Long Health Sciences Library. https://library.cumc.columbia.edu/insight/what-are-fair-data-principles.
18. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Monitoring Educational Equity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25389.
19. The Hindu. 2019. “Focussing on the critical years of a child’s life.” July 31, 2019. https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/focussing-on-the-critical-years-of-a-childs-life/article28762478.ece.
20. “NATIONAL CURRICULUM FRAMEWORK.” NCERT. https://ncert.nic.in/pdf/nc-framework/nf2005-english.pdf.
21. “Right to Education | Ministry of Education, GoI.” n.d. School Education. Accessed December 16, 2022. https://dsel.education.gov.in/rte.