Equal Opportunity in Education: A Perspective from Below

Introduction

A lot of debates have taken place on the nature of education from various vantage points across the world. Equal opportunity to all in terms of access to education also lies in the ambit of social justice framework. John Rawls has contextualized justice through the lens of distribution of resources and conceptualized as to how justice can be delivered to make sure of the distribution of fair opportunities and resources regardless of religion, class, gender and caste. In this article, education is seen as one of the ways to access justice, but the fundamental question that comes to our mind is that, does it mean that those who have been denied access to education for a long time because of multiple reasons are not able to access justice? Further, elaborating on the aforesaid argument, it is necessary to know who has monopoly and power to control the production of knowledge and keep the so-called low castes out of the purview of knowledge production and not allow them to gain access to education. There are two issues that need to be looked at while discussing the patterns of educational distribution in order to understand the role of the state in terms of providing education. First, fair opportunities in education. Second, differential treatment for disadvantaged people of society. Equal distribution of resources to all people may or may not reach out to the bottom level because of various reasons including power dynamics and the social system. There should be special provisions and differential treatment to empower the disadvantaged groups of society in order to make a so-called just society, which is called ‘Difference Principle’ according to the Rawlsian term. In the Indian context, there is a strong correlation between caste and education; western societies do not have any such kind of disparity in terms of accessing educational institutions, though disparities do exist in every society. Caste is peculiar to Indian society. In western societies, people are judged based on their merit, whereas in caste-ridden Indian society, because of caste prejudice, people are judged, most of the time, based on their social background rather than merit. Here I introduce Rawls’ idea of ‘original position’ and ‘veil of ignorance’ to justify the notion of justice where he has explained that the principle of justice and fair opportunities of resources should be made behind the veil of ignorance so that there is no chance to be unjust towards people, irrespective of their backgrounds (Rawls, 1971). But in Indian society, his idea is not appropriate and applicable. Here, education and caste have a strong correlation which needs to be addressed in order to know the significant role and its dynamics in accessing educational institutions. Where equality of educational opportunity is concerned, marginal groups need extra provisions, as historical compensation, so as to enable them to develop their capabilities to reach the top levels.

Equality of Educational Opportunity

The concept of equality in the domain of educational opportunities among different social groups is one of the vital aspects for the development of socio-economic and political vantage points in every society. Education is one of the means for eradicating social problems in order to bring the people into the horizontal field of human development. James S. Coleman (1966) formulated some of the principles and concepts of distribution of equal educational opportunities in various ways. In 1966, the USA had constituted an expert committee to study various possibilities of equal distribution of educational resources among people. They defined several ways of promoting equality of education. They stated that, for equal distribution of education to the people, there should be some inputs such as pupil expenditure, physical facilities and source of library; there should also be outputs such as racial composition of students, teacher’s morale and consideration of student’s academic results as seen individually. Equal education for all children means that there should be the same curriculum in the same school. Equality measured by results of schooling and equality defined by racial integration were stressed as effective functions of schools, which bring changes in the students. To achieve the aims of education, which are subject to equal distribution, they have given a dual system of the framework for equal distribution of education; they are effective input mechanisms in schools and external mechanisms such as the influence of social factors. But the problem with Indian society is graded inequality in almost every sphere of society. One may be able to say that ‘caste’ is the base and the rest is superstructure which determines power, possession of resources, authority and of course education. It is a fact that inequality of educational opportunities can only be reduced by first reducing inequality in society as a whole, which can be done through the introduction of quota and special provisions for underprivileged people of the society. The aforesaid arguments are drawn from Ambedkar’s notion of social justice since he considered that society should be based on equality, liberty and fraternity, which can bring about a socially just society. Therefore, education and society share a significant relation with each other.

Education and Society

Social scientists have been giving thought to these important issues ever since education assumed the form and proportion of the large organized sector in society. They have held a distinguished view on the relationship between education and society. The spectrum of education is considered as the most important ‘Ideological state apparatus’ devised by the ruling classes to ensure that society conforms to their ideas and interest (Althusser, 1971, p. 123). Gramsci is even more specific when he says that intellectual, that is, the upper section of the product of the education system, ‘officer of the ruling class for the exercise of the subordinate function of the social hegemony and political government’. Evidently, thinkers of this persuasion hold that education is an instrument forged by the ruling classes to serve and preserve their own interests, and thus conducive to maintain the status quo in the existing economic and political power structure. In the Indian context, the story is complicated since the denial of knowledge was a crucial dimension of maintaining caste-based hegemony and monopoly over knowledge, leading to the dominance of Brahmanical way of understanding the existing social order. Also, the kind the knowledge of the low-caste people and women had made all the productive activities possible; also, the survival of upper castes was not regarded as knowledge. The limited access and immense constraints faced by marginalized sections of India in gaining access to education even today is a reflection of how caste and class operate together to sever the access of millions to the education system at its various stages. The status and location of communities such as ‘untouchable’ in the Hindu caste system was the most serious impediment to their education. While stringent social taboos conscribed their behaviour, a severe structure was laid down to prevent their access to education (Nambissan, 1996, p. 1011). It is not enough to say simply that this group was denied access to education; more importantly, since individuals of these communities were prohibited from walking on the road because even their shadow was considered polluting, how could one expect that people of the ex-untouchable communities would be allowed to sit in a classroom for education? It is a fact that education is one of the factors which can play a significant role in the pursuit of social justice as, according to John Dewey (1976), ‘Education is the progress of all capacities in the person which will permit him to control his environment and accomplish his possibilities’. Education is assumed to be a system of teaching and learning; our forefathers had devised both formal and informal ways of learning and teaching. The aim of such ways was primarily to induct the child and the adolescent into the ways of living. Education is one of the most important means of reducing ignorance and inequality in society. It helps an individual to raise one’s own social status in various ways. Knowledge, skills, values and attitudes acquired through education help one to lead a desired quality of life. Primary education is the first step of an individual in the process of development and social progress. The ability to read, write and count has powerful effects on the quality of our lives. It provides freedom to understand the world, to lead an informed life, communicate and be in touch with others. Therefore, basic education opens the doors to the world.

Monopoly: Knowledge and Resource

In Indian society, it has historically been seen that the hegemony and monopoly of upper castes over resources and education is not a new phenomenon. There is a strong relationship between resources and education. Parental income plays a significant role in ensuring access to, and in enhancing, the education level in various ways including the providing of extra tuition classes. Furthermore, the argument is that in Indian society ‘caste’ is a fundamental problem, which is one of the most peculiar factors responsible for perpetuating the cycle of inequalities and affecting the pattern of distribution of resources. Though we have special provisions for students of the underprivileged sections which are supposed to reduce educational differences, because caste-based discrimination in the domain of education is very much prevalent in society and because of lack of implementation of affirmative policies, the gap still remains wide (Desai & Kulkarni, 2008). Again, it is the so-called upper castes who are responsible for the implementation of affirmative policies and many more programmes pertaining to the educational development of the socially, educationally and economically disadvantaged groups since they (upper castes) hold positions of importance in almost all spheres of the government and private sectors. One may, of course, argue that in the absence of proper implementation of affirmative policy, this can be done by approaching the judiciary. But again, these people have been sheltered by their own caste group because of strong caste networking, always taking favours from their own caste people in order to keep their hegemony and power in each and every governmental position. I am of the opinion that there should be punitive provisions for the lack of execution of affirmative policy so that its effect can reach out to the bottom level in a very efficient manner. These upper caste officials are not only accused of ill implementation of policies pertains to educational empowerment, but they also deny access to education to low-caste children from the very earliest levels. Furthermore, this shows that their intention has been to keep the low castes as mental slaves and maintain monopoly of knowledge; however, this cannot be the epitome of any democratic and egalitarian society. Yet they have been using the idea of democratic education only for their own benefit for a long time, not for low-caste people. Even the British government acknowledged that it was not religious sentiment, unclean and unpolished manner of low-caste boys that drew objection to their education from upper castes, but ‘…also occasionally due to the desire of the upper castes to keep the low castes in state of subjection …’ (Hunter, 1882, p. 514 as cited in Nambissan, 1996).

Pattern of Educational Distribution in India

The Indian education system since independence has taken various measures in order to expand the educational opportunities for people irrespective of their castes, religions, regions, and so on, which aim to provide education to all. To reach out the educational resources to the lowest levels, there were various commissions on education which focussed on the objective of development of educational infrastructure according to the demands of the masses. So far, discourses have focussed primarily on the expansion of educational infrastructure in terms of quantity and availability for the people; lesser attention has been given to the quality and equality of education for all, particularly the socially and economically deprived sections such as the scheduled castes and the scheduled tribes. Since Indian society is highly stratified and divided into groups and subgroups, the social system reveals severe social and economic inequalities which eventually lead to greater educational inequalities within the society. Social stratification in terms of division of labour that is characteristically hierarchical in terms of human relations is already mentioned earlier. In this context, the distribution of equal educational opportunities for all sections of the society is neither possible nor effective without addressing the issues of socio-economical vantage point.

According to the National SC, ST Commission Report, 2000 and 1999–2000, 2000–2001 and the Census 1991, in India, the SC population was 15.93 and literacy rate was 31.59. After a span of a decade, the same SC population’s literacy was 54.70 (Census 2001). Despite the fact that the literacy rate of the Dalits has been gradually increasing in post-independent India, the disparities among the SC and non-SC students are continuing (Chauhan, 2008).

Obstacles for Low-caste Accessibility to Education

To understand the educational accessibility of economically deprived sections of the society, one should understand the existing social system of India. As Coleman (1968) had noted regarding the USA, in the early US society, a father’s traditional occupation would be practised by the child. But after the Industrial Revolution, the traditional occupation has been destroyed by the industries; the children turn to education where the church was seen to provide the education to the children. Similarly, in the Indian context, even though the traditional family-based occupations have been considered as unclean and undignified, such occupations could also disappear following developmental policies of the Indian state.

In this context, educational accessibility is important. But the downtrodden mass pushed to a state of chronic poverty and are unable to access free and compulsory education for their children as part of public welfare. Various barriers exclude these children from schooling. There are problems in terms of physical distance from scheduled caste hamlets to school locations, severe poverty of families, lack of motivation from schools and parents, caste-based discrimination from the teachers. More than 20.8 per cent of the scheduled caste students in rural India are never got to attend schools; only 67.7 per cent of the scheduled caste students are able to attend school as compared to 81.3 per cent of other non-SC students. However, the quantum of educational growth of the scheduled caste students has been higher from the last decade in India, but there is no quality of education being provided to these students (Sedwal & Kamat, 2008).

The number of educated people has increased, but the question is to what extent these lower strata people have been able to access professional courses such as engineering, agriculture, B. Pharmacy and medical education, and so on are debatable. Dalit students’ participation in higher education is less as compared to other social categories; graduates were 1 per cent and above in the age group between 20 and 24; 0.6 per cent in 24 years age group, whereas they were 1.4 per cent and 1.24 per cent in the respective age groups in non-Dalits. In the same period, the total technical or professional male and female graduates were 7.4 per cent and 7.5 per cent, respectively, whereas rural graduates were just 1.2 per cent against general category who were 5.3 per cent. Therefore, the magnitude of variations in accessing higher education in terms of professional and other technical education in graduate level remains significant.

According to various researchers, severe educational disparities were created in society by the public and private educational institutions, which aim at promoting profit-based education and entrepreneurship. The educational inequalities were leading to accumulation of social inequalities (Jenkins & Barr, 2006).

After Independence, in India, private educational institutions were established faster than public educational institutions (Gould, 1972). But these private educational institutions influenced opportunities for the people by providing unequal educational opportunities to the masses. On the whole, the public education system was neglected by the State.

State’s Ideology and Education

The state is a powerful entity which predominantly works to secure the social structure by means of its dominant ideology. As Althusser (2006) argued, education has a reproductive function which maintains and reinforces the capitalist relations of production, which of course is another mode of exploitation. He also argued that education is part of the capitalist society that works as state apparatus. As Ivan Illich argued, schools are repressive institutions which indoctrinate pupils, smother creativity and imagination, induce conformity and stupefy students into accepting the interest of the powerful (Illich, 1971).

As the philosopher John Dewey emphasized, education can enable social democracy. But it does not work out in the Indian context, since the Hindu social order, right from its inception, never allowed low-caste people to access education. It was Ambedkar who constantly spoke for and fought for social democracy which is based on equality, liberty and fraternity. As a result, the underprivileged were able to get education; otherwise, these communities would not have been allowed to gain access to education in the modern era. Even then, these communities are still facing exclusion and discrimination in educational and other spheres.

Education can work as one of the vehicles for transformation and liberation of the oppressed masses from the socio-economic and political hurdles to enable them to attain upward social mobility. By providing different standards of education on the basis of caste, class, gender, and so on, education of the people at large gets barely addressed, and society is hardly transformed where the state fails to produce the potential manpower for social well-being. The ideological state apparatus and its institutions such as school, religion, church, court, political parties, trade union and culture themselves produce inequalities; these institutions, in the Indian context, reflect and create various types of stratifications in society in terms of class, caste, gender, religion and ethnic minorities. A section of the dominating social group holding state power, through upper caste political forces and in collaboration with private forces, establishes educational institutions with the help of state to secure their social-political and economic positions in society. So, it is not only the state but also the upper caste and class that predominantly promotes their ideology with the help of the ideological state apparatus (Velaskar, 2005). The history of Indian education is dominated by both British Indian government and Indian nationalists (Basu, 1982). These institutions served the interests of upper caste students. The modern state utterly failed in carrying forward the social reforms and various transformations which were aimed at the reconstruction of the Indian modern state (Asha & Hasan 2002). As said by Coleman (1968), the effective functions of schooling could be one vital step in achieving equality and promoting quality education for the people. More importantly, in a caste-ridden society like India, social, economic and political power are significant tools to keep low castes out of the educational sphere. As the state nurtures dual type of educational policies, how can it be possible for it to develop the majority of the mass as potential human resources in Indian society (Velaskar, 2005). As such, a system of educational policy should be formulated so as to fill the gaps between educational poor and educational rich in order to have an equilibrium in the social order (Althusser, 2006).

Conclusion

In a hierarchical social order, there should be special provisions for so-called low castes because it is the low castes who have been victims of the caste system since its inception. Without this, one cannot claim and argue about bringing equality in the domain of educational opportunities, since victims of the caste system were never allowed to attend classes, and, in worst cases, they were even never allowed to enter classrooms. We need to understand the nature of existing social inequalities. Though constitutional measures are provided to secure the rights of the marginalized groups, because of the absence of proper implementation of these arrangements, Dalits are still facing structural problems in getting education on par with others. Indian society, in particular, implicitly maintains inequality in the domain of educational opportunities, which can only be reduced by reducing social inequalities that have fractured the very fabric and essence of society. Without this, one cannot expect to construct a just society and envision societal development. ‘Equalizing opportunity is almost impossible without reducing the absolute level of inequality from its roots, from its very basis.’

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.