An analysis of data and findings from field studies brings forth four factors which seem to significantly influence patterns of exclusion. The first and the most significant factor that continues to limit schooling access is gender, as a girls continue to be excluded at higher rates than boys. The enrolment of girls has been growing at a faster rate than that of boys, and gender disparities in enrolments have reduced substantially in recent years. Gender is a key element to programmes such as NPEGEL and KGBV, and has been at the centre of much educational policy movement. Yet, analysis shows that as girls move up the grades, their retention and transition rates in higher levels of schooling continue to be lower than those of boys.
The trajectory of progress is similar with respect to the educational access of children from traditionally disadvantaged social groups, such as Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. Many programmes have been instituted to bridge these gaps in access for SCs and STs. Positive discrimination measures have been guaranteed by the Constitution, which recognizes the historical legacy that militates against their progress. Several special incentive schemes have been initiated to target children from these communities. Yet available data reveals that educational access and retention remain unsatisfactory. In particular, in recent years (especially after the Sachar Committee findings, see GoI, 2006a) Muslim minority children have been identified as having unusually low levels of educational access.
The third factor that seems to inhibit the participation of children in schooling, particularly girls, is a result of locational factors. In addition to rural-urban disparities, the remoteness of habitations within rural areas seems to affect the participation of children significantly. This issue has attracted the attention of planners, and special measures have been initiated such as EGS and Alternative Schools which aim to bring children in remote or disadvantaged areas into schools. The results of these initiatives show that many children who had been left out of school have now enrolled, but the task is quite complex. While small community-based alternatives help enrolments at the entry level, there is less evidence of meaningful progression through the grades.
There are few well designed studies to understand the long-term impacts of such measures.
The fourth factor affecting schooling access, which is highlighted in much macro level analysis, is poverty. The children of the poor tend to be relegated to the margins of the system, and eventually pushed out altogether. At one level the relationship between the economic situation of the family and schooling participation seems to be quite straight forward. However, a closer analysis shows that economic impoverishment itself is deeply embedded in discriminatory social practices. It is almost difficult to disentangle children’s non-participation in schooling from issues of child labour and poverty. There are, however, many measures initiated by the national and state governments to compensate for the direct and indirect costs involved in sending children to school.
There are a number of studies which correlate each of these factors as decisively influencing access to and participation of children in schooling. These include analyses based on large macro-level databases as well as small scale field-based studies. One significant point emerges. The Indian context is so diverse that issues of social and gender inequity, as well as location and poverty cannot be treated as singular factors which cause educational exclusion (with a single ‘cure’). Rather, the analysis shows that they act together to form a complex nexus of exclusion. In fact, it is necessary to explore the relationships between the four factors in terms of their influence on the process of exclusion, as the crisis seems to deepen as one examines the impact of gender, social and caste affiliations, urban-rural disparities and economic conditions. For example, girls continue to be more likely to be excluded than boys in schooling, but this disadvantage increases as girls move down the social and caste ‘hierarchy’. Vulnerability for girls also increases in rural areas, and the more remote the location, the more probable it is that girls will be excluded from school. Overall, poverty seems to force families into making choices that directly affect the educational access of girls.
This is not to say that boys from socially disadvantaged groups do not suffer and face educational exclusion. Rather it highlights the need to conduct studies that look at these issues in greater depth and analyze these complex relationships. However, macro-level data analysis alone may not capture the complex interactions fully. It is necessary to conduct field-based community studies that delve deeper into the complex relationships between these factors. Studies that help illuminate our understandings of the interactions between such variables should be carried out in multiple contexts, which are carefully selected in terms of demographic, geographical and social characteristics. The studies will also require longitudinal elements that throw light on the varying combinations of influence and process factors which lead families to make certain choices. The focus has to be on understanding processes of exclusion, on how the interactions unfold at the local level and within family decision making. It would be equally important to capture supply side dynamics in terms of what type and quality of schooling is on offer. This could include schooling choices, teaching and learning practices, costs of schooling, curriculum content and certification processes, as well as expected prospects for future life.