Getting them back to school

A survey commissioned by the Ministry of Human Resource Development simplistically records poverty and academic disinterest as major reasons for children dropping out of school.

A survey commissioned by the Ministry of Human Resource Development, in September shows that out of the estimated 20.41 crore children in the age group of 6-13 in India, an estimated 60.41 lakh (2.97 per cent) are out of school. This proportion of out-of-school children is lower than the figure of 4.28 per cent in 2009 and 6.94 per cent in 2006, a fact worthy of cheer. This study is indicative of the fact that government-sponsored retention schemes and policies have had some positive impact. Methodologically, the report conducts household surveys and broadly defines ‘out-of-school’ as including all children who do not attend school for more than 45 days in an academic year. Had the report conducted a survey based on administrative records and defined ‘out-of-school children’ more narrowly, the results may have been significantly different, perhaps far less optimistic. But the picture is gloomy if we look more closely at the status of marginal groups in this study. The survey reveals that a higher percentage of female children (3.23 per cent) are out of school than males (2.77 per cent); more children from rural areas (3.13 per cent) are out of school than from urban (2.54 per cent) areas. A staggering 4.43 per cent of Muslim children, 4.7 per cent of Scheduled Tribes and 28.07 per cent of children with special needs are estimated to be out of school. Other surveys in the recent past also concur with this data of identifying Scheduled Castes, ST and Muslim children as constituting a major chunk of the out-of-school children, and record a very disproportionate progress in terms of bridging regional, gender and rural/urban divides.

The report simplistically records poverty and academic disinterest as major reasons for dropping out of school. Such analysis is where such studies fall short. As the MHRD report “Education for All” of August 2014 shows, too much emphasis is given to infrastructural reform, providing transportation, books, uniforms, etc. Although this is significant, the overarching insights from such a study require policymakers to officially acknowledge the prevalence of exclusionary practices in schools, so as to address them directly. In such complex conditions, deploying an intersectional analysis can be a useful methodological tool of study, such as noting the discrimination faced by a ‘lower caste-rural-girl child’ in school as against an ‘upper caste-urban-boy child’. The school cannot be perceived as an instrumental sphere for the potential labour force of a growing economy. Rather, it is a space for community development, a learning process that can potentially undermine caste and gender prejudices by the mere fact of children sitting together and sharing a common meal, increasing their self-worth.