vagyakartha

If that sounds like a prolonged ohhhhh, that’s because that is how the response to the recent Supreme Court ruling on the Central Educational Institutions (CEI) Act of 2006 sounded to me. Everyone is either upset by the ruling, or with those who are. TV news channels added to the furor, with talk-shows belching out a miasma of vituperation and acrimony. There was no contribution to an informed debate, not even from the print media. All the discussions were centered around the IITs, the IIMs and AIIMS. These institutions admit fewer that 5,500 students a year, with AIIMS admitting fewer than fifty into their undergraduate programme. We need a national law, sanctified by a supreme court ruling, for 1,500 youngsters? No, the Act covers all CEIs. Twenty NITs are CEIs (another 9,000 seats) and institutions such as the IISc, JNU, etc. are as well, but I can’t find a definitive list, with data on number of entrants, enrollment, etc. So, what number should I multiply by 0.27? Is it closer to 20k, 200k or 2 meg? No one seems to know, but everyone has a strong opinion on the Act! Our governments and the court haven’t helped – after over five decades of discussion (the Kalelkar and Mandal reports were submitted in 1955 and 1980 respectively), no one has laid out the facts and made a case, either way. The fundamental argument is that we Indians discriminate on the basis of caste and that such discrimination leads to the weaker castes being denied their rightful opportunities. Most of us would shamefacedly concede the first point and add creed and complexion. We must also concede the second point as far as SCs and STs are concerned, there are just too many horrific incidents to refute it. The argument on OBCs is murky, however. Most of us don’t even know precisely who they are, but they account for over a third of us, made up of well over a thousand castes. These castes and their prevalence vary widely across our states (see table), suggesting that the issue is better addressed at the state level. What is least clear is the extent of discrimination against them and the impact of such discrimination. The Act presupposes that they are denied their rightful place in society and that granting them reserved seats in CEIs will provide redress. Since CEIs come directly under the HRD ministry, is the government confessing that highly educated government employees discriminate on the basis of caste and that it needs an Act to act?

Table Legend:
Col. 2 - Other backward castes as % state's rural population.
Col. 3 - Monthly per capita expenditure (MPCE) of rural OBC households, rupees
Col. 4 - Col. 3 as % of corresponding average for rural India.
Col. 5 - Average MPCE of all rural households in state, all castes, rupees.
Col. 6 - OBC MPCE as % MPCE of all castes
Col. 7 - % of state's rural and urban adult population with degrees.

State	Col. 2	Col. 3	Col. 4	Col. 5	Col. 6	Col. 7
AP	45.4	439	92.6	454	96.7	4.8
Assam	18.7	436	92.0	426	102.3	3.1
Bihar	51.4	385	81.2	384	100.3	3.3
Gujarat	32.5	530	111.8	551	96.2	6.1
Haryana	25.3	641	135.2	714	89.8	7.1
Karnataka	39.2	507	107.0	500	101.4	5.5
Kerala	51.1	724	152.7	766	94.5	5.8
MP	41.5	418	88.1	401	104.2	5.4
Maharashtra	30.3	490	103.4	497	98.6	7.3
Orissa	31.6	395	83.3	373	105.6	4.3
Punjab	14.7	652	137.6	742	87.9	6.5
Rajasthan	36.3	560	118.1	549	102.0	4.4
Tamil Nadu	63.1	548	115.6	514	106.6	6.6
UP	44.8	442	93.2	466	94.8	5.2
WB	6.8	516	108.9	454	113.7	5.8
India Rural OBC	37.5	474	100.0	486	97.5
India Urban OBC	30.4	735		855	86.0
India OBC	35.7	530		579	91.5

Note: Source – National Sample Survey Organisation reports. MPCE = Monthly per capita expenditure

All data, except those in the bottom two rows and the last column, pertain to rural populations only.

The accompanying table sheds some dim light on the topic. It shows that the disparity in income across states (81% - 157%) is far greater than that between each state’s OBC average and overall average (88% - 114%). It also shows that there is no correlation between each state’s OBC percentage and either its MPCE or its percentage of people with degrees. Other NSSO data show that across both rural and urban India, the distribution of OBCs by MPCE class is clearly skewed more toward the poorer end as compared to non-backward castes, but not relative to the total rural and urban populations; this is less true within each state. The middle third of any of population will obviously be poorer than the richest third, perhaps this is all the data reflect. All of this suggests that being an OBC may not, ipso facto, be an insurmountable bar to college admissions. The table also suggests (confirmed by statistical tests) that the correlation between average income and degrees is higher. Other NSSO data show that the variation across states in the percentage of households with MPCE great than Rs 1,155 explains a major part of the variation in the percentage of adults with degrees. I have no access to the data required to study these issues in greater detail.

The government and its commissions do, can test all relevant hypotheses and act on the basis of knowledge. The NSSO is exceptionally well equipped to gather the data and conduct the analysis. All the government needs to do is ask. Oh, that would leave no room for political posturing. Stupid me!

Our governments could also have promoted schemes to eliminate entirely the need for reservations. Let me suggest one.

Render Reservations Redundant

The population of 21 and 22-year-olds in India is about 50 million. Yet, the annual number graduating with professional degrees is less than 1% of this. Industry leaders say that over half the 215,000 engineering graduates we produce each year are not employable as engineers. This not because the brightest 1% of our youngsters are dumb. It is because our educational system stinks. If Mr. Arjun Singh would spend his time visiting rural, municipal and corporation schools across the country, he would learn where the problem lies. Our fundamental problem is that hundreds of thousands of children who are not only bright to enough to enter the best institutions on merit alone, but do exceptionally well there, are waylaid by poverty well before they get that far. My father was one such child.

The Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan programme instituted by the central government makes an excellent start. However, it is aimed at quantity and lacks tests of quality. Odds are that most of the funds will slide into unintended pockets. Yet, the programme can provide an excellent base.

The government must first institute tests for quality. Rigorous, standardized national tests must be developed for children completing classes V and VIII. The intent is not to test the children per se, but the schools and the performance of the programme. Based on the results of these tests, states where children have not attained specified educational levels must be taken to task and risk loss of funding.

A new programme, within SSA, called Uttama Shiksha Abhiyan (USA) should be instituted. An educational trust should be established in each state (eligible for deductible donations). Funding for these trusts should come from the centre, the states and private industry – perhaps in a 55-35-10 split. People employed by these trusts ought not to be considered “government” employees. To attract and retain high quality faculty, they must be paid slightly more than their counterparts in the better private schools. In return, they must be held accountable.

The primary object of the USA trusts would be to ensure that the brightest 2% of children from poor and lower middle-income households are provided the best possible education and do not become flowers born to blush unseen, wasting their sweetness in the desert air, to paraphrase Thomas Gray.

USA would build approximately one school per taluk, with a hostel and quarters for some faculty members. These schools shall admit children who have completed Class V and educate them through Class XII. The curriculum from Class X to XII should be on par with the CBSE curriculum and the quality of the teachers, facilities and education must be comparable with those of the country’s better private schools. These schools must be coeducational, with girls representing slightly over 50% of the students. I would suggest that the medium of instruction should move toward being entirely English in Classes X – XII. The student-to-teacher ratio must be well below the Indian norm, especially in Classes VI – VIII.

Admission to these schools ought to be based solely on: performance in the above mentioned Class V tests, annual family income being under Rs 120,000. An overwhelming majority of these children will therefore be from the disadvantaged classes. Annual fees for day-scholars should be set at Rs 3,000 and hostel accommodation should be provided, at an additional Rs 3,000 a year, to children who are from environments inimical to proper development or for whom the daily commute would be infeasible. Free transportation to and from the school should be provided. Donations should be solicited, in India and abroad, to fund need based scholarships.

Cost

I am aware of two wonderful charitable institutions providing free education to poor children. One is run by the George Foundation, founded and funded by Dr. Abraham George, an Indian-American. He is attempting to prove that children from dirt-poor families can compete with the best in the world if they are given proper care and education. His foundation admits selected children at the LKG level and provides free housing and education for them through to Class XII. Their school is comparable to the best schools in developed countries and its annual operating costs are about Rs 40,000 per child. The other programme is run by AIM for Seva, a trust established by Swami Dayananda Saraswati. This trust runs multiple schools providing good education to children from poor families. Their annual cost per resident child is Rs 15,000. Based on these data points and scale economies, it should be possible for USA to provide excellent education at Rs 24,000 ($600) per resident child and Rs 15,000 per day-scholar.

The nationwide annual intake would probably be around 400,000 children. The annual cost per batch of children, net of fees and donations, should be under Rs 600 crores ($150 million). The Centre’s share of this would be under Rs 330 cores, about 1.5% of the 2007-08 budget for education. This is a manageable, but not insignificant cost. We can choose to tackle the issue head-on and bear the necessary cost, or mollify ourselves with meaningless gestures.

Rewards

After seven years of operation, the system will produce 400,000 children a year, predominantly from the disadvantaged classes, who will be able to compete with their cohorts from anywhere in the world. Our USA children will be able to beat children from the USA; with neither reservation nor stigma, they will compete on merit alone. They will be the pride of our nation.