Abstract
Although major progress has been made with regard to school education in India in the last two decades, access to quality education is still highly uneven. Hence, it can not be assumed a priori that school education is capability-enhancing. It certainly is for some children, but for many others it remains a dispiriting experience. This article discusses two examples of educational activism: forms of public action that seek to turn the vision that education can be liberating and capability-enhancing for all children into a reality. On the basis of fieldwork in two Indian states, the article documents the objectives, activities and modes of mobilizing people, as developed and employed by the MamidipudiVenkatarangaiya Foundation in Andhra Pradesh and the Pratichi (India) Trust in West Bengal. What these movements illustrate is that education can, indeed, be empowering and capability-enhancing – also for the poorest and most marginalized sections of society – but that, in a context of entrenched social inequalities, collective social and political action are required in order to develop this potential.
Abstract
Bien que des progrès ont été accomplis en matière de scolarité en Inde, l’accès à une éducation de qualité est encore très inégale. Par conséquent, il ne faut pas partir du principe que la scolarité est forcément une expérience qui améliore le potentiel. C’est sans aucun doute le cas pour certains enfants, mais pour beaucoup d’autres, la scolarité reste une expérience décourageante. Cet article traite de deux exemples d’activisme éducatif, ces formes d’action publique qui cherchent à faire en sorte que le potentiel de la scolarité pour l’amélioration des capacités devienne une réalité. Basé sur le travail de terrain dans deux Etats indiens, cet article documente les objectifs et les modes de mobilisation des personnes employées par la Fondation MV dans l’Andhra Pradesh et de la Fondation Pratichi (Inde) dans le Bengale-Occidental. Ces mouvements illustrent le fait que la scolarité peut être un atout majeur – y compris pour les couches les plus marginalisées de la société – mais que, dans un contexte d’inégalités sociales bien enracinées, elle exige une action sociale et politique collective afin de développer ce potentiel.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
See PROBE TEAM (1999) for a classical study on the many problems facing primary education in India, Kumar et al (2009) for a restudy and Mehrotra et al (2005) for several of the challenges ahead.
See Majumdar and Mooij (2011) for a comprehensive multi-level analysis of this reproduction and also for an earlier version of several of the arguments presented in this article.
For some of the seminal contributions on the capability/capabilities approach, see Sen (1985, 1999), Nussbaum (2002) and Nussbaum and Sen (1993).
We realize that there are possibilities for conservative activism too, initiated by governmental or non-governmental organizations. An example of this is political indoctrination through education, as has happened (and still exists) in many countries. This article does not deal with this form of activism. In addition, Illich (1970) and Freire (1972) make seminal contributions towards developing the idea of activism for the education of the oppressed. However, in our understanding, for them the site of activism should lie outside the space of formal schools. This analysis does not claim to be exhaustive since it does not include such broader visions of society-wide activism.
Our vision about the necessity of a transformed professional practice has implications for our interpretation of other forms of political or social engagement that educators are often involved in, such as career-oriented activism (for example, union activities for betterment of work conditions and benefits) or their engagement in local politics. These forms of activism often have little to do with efforts to realize equity and social justice within the classroom. It is for this reason that these kinds of political activities are not part of our interpretation of educational activism.
A historical analogy from West Bengal is that land reforms and tenancy reforms initiatives undertaken in the 1970s created a social and economic condition which helped weaken the feudal structure of production and correspondingly the practice of bonded labour.
In public meetings regularly organized by the Trust, there are approximately 150 to 250 participants who use this common platform for public deliberation and debate.
At the same time, Sen also founded the Pratichi (Bangladesh) Trust.
The parents and the teachers signed a contract, and the MVF supported the schools involved in creating a more conducive learning environment. Such public pledges are important for securing local ownership; they also help in increasing accountability.
Their own link with the 33-year long Left Front regime in the state (defeated in the elections in 2011) or their long-standing relationship with the educational bureaucracy makes them defensive and less open to accepting criticism – legitimate as that may be.
See Reddy and Bhavani (2013) for a similar analysis in Andhra Pradesh.
See Robeyns (2006b) for a discussion of these approaches.
References
Crocker, D.A. and Robeyns, I. (2010) Capability and agency. In: C. Morris (ed.) The Philosophy of Amartya Sen. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 60–90.
Deneulin, S. (2006) The Capability Approach and the Praxis of Development. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Freire, P. (1972) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Middlesex, UK: Penguin Books.
Gaventa, J. (2006) Finding the spaces for change: A power analysis. IDS Bulletin 37(6): 23–33.
Illich, I. (1970) De-Schooling Society. New York: Harper & Row.
Jeffrey, C., Jeffery, P. and Jeffery, R. (2008) Degrees without Freedom? Education, Masculinities and Unemployment in North India. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Kumar, S.A.K., De, A., Dreze, J., Samson, M. and Dasgupta, S. (2009) ‘Education for all’ is the policy, but what is the reality? Frontline 26(6): 88–92, 14–27 March.
Majumdar, M. and Mooij, J. (2009) Interview with S. Sinha. 10 July 2009.
Majumdar, M. and Mooij, J. (2011) Education and Inequality in India: A Classroom View. London: Routledge.
Mehrotra, S., Panchamukhi, P.R., Srivastava, R. and Srivastava, R. (2005) Universalizing Elementary Education in India: Uncaging the ‘Tiger’ Economy. New Delhi, India: Oxford University Press.
Nussbaum, M. and Sen, A. (eds.) (1993) The Quality of Life. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Nussbaum, M. (2002) Women and Human Development: The Capabilities Approach. New Delhi, India: Kali for Women.
Pratichi (India) Trust (2009) The Pratichi Education Report II: Primary Education in West Bengal: Changes and Challenges. Kolkata, India: Pratichi (India) Trust.
PROBE TEAM (1999) Public report on basic education in India. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Rana, K. (2007) AksharerKshamata, KshamatarAkshar (in Bengali) Kolkata, India: Camp.
Reddy, G.M. and Bhavani, G. (2013) Community participation in educational administration in Andhra Pradesh- Rhetoric or Real? Journal of Educational Planning and Administration 26(3): 427–444.
Robeyns, I. (2006a) The capability approach in practice. The Journal of Political Philosophy 14(3): 351–376.
Robeyns, I. (2006b) Three models of education: Rights, capabilities and human capital. Theory and Research in Education 4(1): 69–84.
Roy, D. and Banerjee, P. (2012) Decentralised governance reforms in primary education: Some reflections on West Bengal. Economic and Political Weekly 47(24): 67–74.
Sandel, M.J. (2012) What Money Can’t Buy: The Moral Limits of Markets. London: Allen Lane, Penguin Books.
Sen, A. (1981) Poverty and Famine: An Essay on Entitlement and Deprivation. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Sen, A. (1985) Commodities and Capabilities. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: North-Holland.
Sen, A. (1999) Development as Freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sinha, S. (2005) Emphasising universal principles towards deepening democracy: Actualising children’s right to education. Economic and Political Weekly 40(25): 2569–2576.
UNESCO (2005) Education for All Global Monitoring Report: The Quality Imperative. Paris: UNESCO.
Walker, M. (2003) Framing social justice in education: What does the ‘capabilities’ approach offer? British Journal of Educational Studies 51(2): 168–187.
Wankhede, G.G. and Sengupta, A. (2005) Village education committees in West Bengal, India: Planned vision and beyond. International Journal of Educational Development 25(5): 569–579.
Wazir, R. (2002) ‘No to child labour, yes to education’: Unfolding of a grassroots movement in Andhra Pradesh. Economic and Political Weekly 37(52): 5225–5229.
Acknowledgements
This article is dedicated to the fond memory of Jos Mooij, who collaborated with me for a substantial part of this article until her sad demise on 28 February 2013. I am very grateful to three anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments and suggestions, several of which have been incorporated here.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Majumdar, M., Mooij, J. Cultivating Capabilities through Activism: Examples from India. Eur J Dev Res 28, 646–659 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1057/ejdr.2015.31
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/ejdr.2015.31