Need, education data that engages poor parents

When the children of the poor cannot read and write, when they do not play and dance in school, can the poor speak up and demand change? We collect data on enrollment, retention, learning, infrastructure and teacher training to understand the state of our public school system. But is the data enough to inspire transformational change?

case of rajasthan

The case of Rajasthan is astonishing. Media writing in recent years has highlighted a significant decline or improvement in learning outcomes, depending on the dataset being referenced – the Annual Status Report of Education (ASER), led by the non-governmental organisation, Pratham, or national achievement. Survey (NAS) which is led by National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT). As per ASER 2019 data, Rajasthan was among the lowest five states in learning level, while in NAS 2017, Rajasthan was among the top performers. As valid as this debate is, it has limited resonance for the end user of a government school, the parent. Like the 1999 Public Report on Basic Education in India (PROBE), which exposed the very poor state of government school infrastructure – shocking the education community in India – these debates do not involve school users.

Data on school education is collected at the state and national level to measure and monitor, correct gaps and reward achievements. Its end users are school administrators, government agencies, researchers and civil society workers. Despite the consensus among policymakers and those producing the data, that parents are one of the major constituencies of school data, and despite intensive efforts to disseminate data among them, it may be used by poor parents. Only ever done. For them, schooling is about test results, an opportunity for learning, English language skills, and secondary and graduate level degrees. Data on school infrastructure at the district level, or learning levels at the state level may not motivate the public; Even worse it can come across as a descriptor of the way things are in a government system – irreversible, and hopeless.

a form of philosophy

To inspire change, data must be linked to a vision of school education that addresses the concerns and aspirations of parents, and is actionable at the level of governance closest to them, i.e. the local administrative and political system. When information speaks to them, the poor will speak up and can talk to the authorities authorized to take action.

A national level policy is just one form of a motivational education vision. Ideally, it should contain the essence of people’s vision. And this vision will manifest itself differently at the national, state, district and local levels and be present in both policy and non-policy forms – for example, in the functioning of panchayat schools, when it comes to learning and personality development among migrant children. Focuses on development. , or non-governmental organization programs that strengthen teacher capacity for multilingual classrooms. At present, there is no vision of education below the national level, at least for those who are marginalised.

The district and school development plans introduced in national-level programs such as the District Primary Education Program (DPEP) and the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) remain largely administrative practices. They were not representative of the parent-school consensus on what schooling meant. Community based advisory bodies such as school management committees and parent-teacher committees could not become the forum to facilitate this.

balance goals

A locally rooted education vision is one that emerges from the social and political consensus as to why a child needs schooling. Want to reach college? Want to get a job after school? Is it for personality development? Is it to be an active citizen? What is meant by an upper grade government primary school? This vision should be led by local political actors and become a central part of local politics which includes both formal actors such as political party workers and non-formal ones such as community leaders. This does not mean that ideas, practices and policies from the national level are dismissed as irrelevant and elitist. Elite views are not necessarily elitist. On the one hand, the vision of school education would balance relevant skills and knowledge with immediate, tangible, popularly understandable objectives such as reading, writing as well as livelihoods. On the other hand, it would include long-term and intangible objectives such as peer relationships, dialogue on social diversity, and curiosity for new knowledge and experiences.

There is nothing about the poor that suggests that they cannot imagine schooling beyond a basic livelihood to include art and culture. The skill and dynamism of local politicians and polity respectively to perpetuate such a vision and ensure its implementation through competition.

Presently, our school education has not been politicized, except for a few aspects like history curriculum, language of instruction etc. They activate national politics. Not local level competitions where some issues are settled, parents want English language proficiency for their children, and what they learn in history is not math worthy.

correct data

It is only when the data is linked to a locally developed and politically owned vision of schooling that it will move beyond the administrator and the activist. Social welfare is about people, and their participation should be simple, spontaneous and energetic. If the right systems of governance and authority are put in place and the tools are provided to connect them, the poor will speak up. What we lack and need is data that can hold local approaches to education and local actors as accountable as we have now, focused on national ones. Why should the parent of a 30-year-old in Rajasthan’s Bundi district care if her district had opposite results from ASER and NAS learning surveys? The data we collect assumes that it is not needed. It’s not his business.

Priyadarshini Singh, Research Fellow, Center for Policy Research, New Delhi