Q. Are there countries that have successfully ensured that almost all boys and girls get school education?

A: Yes, there are several such countries, including almost all developed countries but also importantly many developing ones. Based on the measures used to assess the Human Development Indicators (HDI), the mean years of schooling of the population of India is 6.6 years whereas in more than 130 countries this is higher. This figure is more than 10 years old for more than 70 countries. It is more than 12 years for 38 countries, which include almost all developed countries.  There is international data on the completion of school education and also learning achievements in different countries. Based on this data, several countries including those in Scandinavia, Singapore, and South Korea are doing exceptionally well.

The gross enrolment ratio in secondary schools in India is 77 percent (in 2023) whereas it is 100 percent in many countries. These include not only developed countries in West Europe, North America, and East Asia but also less developed ones like Argentina, Brazil, Cuba, Thailand, etc. This figure is above 90 percent in comparable countries like China, Indonesia, Vietnam, the Philippines, etc. Although India is not part of PISA, an international assessment of learning outcomes, there is a notable variation among countries in this regard too. Hence, global experience has shown that it is possible to ensure a near-total enrolment in secondary education and improve the learning achievement of children. In another Q&A note on access to education (About Children who do not Complete School Education in India), I have mentioned that there are certain Indian states which could ensure more than 90 percent enrolment in secondary grades but others are lagging behind in this regard. It is important to understand why certain countries/​states are doing well and others not. A comparative picture may provide insights into enabling/​disabling factors. 

Q. How did these countries address the problem of access to education?

A: There are different historical experiences in this regard. We can divide these countries into different categories. The historical and socio-economic reasons for the improvement of educational status can be discussed for each category: 

If we take Western Europe and countries where Europeans have settled (USA, Canada, Australia, etc.), there were different enabling factors, including initial efforts by the Church to spread literacy to facilitate the reading of the Bible. In fact, schools were initially controlled by the Church (and not the state). The industrialisation and reforms in the Church also supported a greater focus on education. For example, there was a higher emphasis on education as part of the emergence of Protestantism. Over time, the middle class, including urban professionals, traders, etc., started controlling the monarchies, and this too encouraged the state to extend education to non-elites (rather than using public resources only for the elites). Economic elites also wanted the spread of education as they required skilled workers for industrial development. These countries also witnessed the early arrival of democratic governments. When these governments saw that there were sections of society which were not getting an education, most of these countries went in for one or the other kind of mandatory schooling policy. Over time, the democracy in these countries became competitive, with the emergence of non-elite parties (like labour or working class). Parties or governments controlled by them had a greater incentive to see that even poorer sections of the population get an education.

The experiences of ex-Socialist countries, like Russia, Eastern-European countries and China were somewhat different. Western Europe’s historical enabling factors (early industrialisation, Protestantism, etc.) were absent here. Moreover, these were less-industrialised societies with limited resources for educational development before the arrival of socialist governments. However, the emergence of socialist movements changed the situation. These movements attempted to provide literacy to the masses as part of their political mobilisation. There were social norms which worked against the education of, say, girls. Attempts were made to change these norms by these movements. When these political parties came to power, education was taken over and expanded by the state. Schooling was made compulsory and parents’ wealth status or interest were not allowed to mediate the education of children. There was a move to impose a somewhat homogenous school education which also emphasised the national language (like Russian) with some space given to local languages. Some of these countries, especially Russia and Eastern-European countries, witnessed industrial development in the twentieth century, and the demand for skilled workers enhanced the demand for school education. The importance of policies followed by ex-socialist countries could be seen even in less developed Central Asian countries which were part of the Former Soviet Union. Though these countries are less developed and face a number of problems related to higher education, access to and the use of school education are not major challenges there. 

Though ex-socialist countries, like China or Vietnam, were less industrialised in the early decades of the twentieth century and their governments did not have enough resources to promote education, the inclination to provide education to all (including girls) and break social norms and other barriers for this purpose was very much there. The interest of the top leaders of the Communist Party in spreading education to rural areas was a driving force behind the so-called ​‘cultural revolution’ in China. 

Q. How do countries which got industrialised in the twentieth century, such as Japan and South Korea, address the problems of access to and quality of education?

A: There are several countries (in East and South-East Asia) which got industrialised during the second half of the twentieth century. It started with Japan which was shattered by its defeat in the Second World War. However, Japan’s success in industrial development afterwards and its capital encouraged industrialisation in many countries, including Taiwan and South Korea, also Malaysia and Thailand, and to some extent Indonesia. Those factors which enabled education development in Western capitalist countries (including the long-term process of industrialisation, the role of the Church, and even the historical development of democracy) were absent in these countries. Also, the ideological interest of communist parties to extend education to the masses did not exist here. However, these newly industrialised countries also caught up with the West in terms of education development within a few decades. In fact, these countries did not only make school education accessible to all youngsters, some of them, like South Korea, Singapore and Taiwan, are doing as well as the Scandinavian countries in terms of the quality of education as evident from the results of PISA. It is interesting to look at the experience of these countries in this regard. 

Researchers who looked at the economic development of these countries noted the role of land reforms in enabling the rural population to participate in the modern economy. The rulers of these countries (some of them were dictators) were interested in making education accessible to all. These leaders were close to the industrialists, and the interest of industrialists to get a continuous stream of skilled workers might have played an important role in the expansion of their education system. Even in relatively less developed economies in the region, such as Indonesia, the non-democratic regimes, such as that headed by Suharto were keen on spreading school education and encouraging both boys and girls to acquire it. When capitalists from Japan looked for locations outside the country to manufacture due to the increasing cost of domestic production, South Korea, Taiwan, Malaysia, Thailand, etc, used the availability of cheaper skilled workers as a way to attract this foreign capital. There were also policies which enabled women to take up manufacturing work (and the provision of education was part of these policies). 

The experience of these newly industrialised countries shows that not only economic development but also educational development can be achieved within a relatively short historical period. Their experience counters the argument that capitalism is against the provision of education to the masses. In fact, rulers who are interested in capitalist development can have an interest in creating skilled workers and that can be an incentive for spreading education among the population as a whole. 

Q. What about other developing countries?

A: One can see that even developing countries could expand education to the majority. Sri Lanka is an example in South Asia. Some of these countries were colonies until the first half of the twentieth century. The lack of education for native people (especially in the local language) became an important concern of pro-independence movements. Hence, post-independent governments took effective steps in this regard. There were also early political transitions in these countries which led to the mobilisation of non-elites and their increased influence in governments. This also encouraged governments in these countries to take care of the education needs of the majority. 

Q: What could be the reasons for the relatively better situation in terms of access to school education in a few Indian states?

 A: Yes, the situation with respect to the access to and use of school education is better in Kerala, Himachal Pradesh, Goa, Mizoram and a few other hill states. The situation in Tamil Nadu has improved notably during the last couple of decades. However, one may not see that much difference between Indian states in terms of the quality of school education. (This can be partly because almost all students attend schools in these relatively better-performing states whereas there is a significant number of dropouts in others. Hence, the base for comparing the learning levels is different for these two categories of states.)

What may have enabled better access to school education in some states in India? The historical role played by Christian missionaries was important in the case of Kerala, Goa, and Mizoram. This may have enabled the creation of an education system even before the arrival of post-independent governments in these states. There was less reluctance to educate girls in Kerala and hills states, such as Himachal Pradesh, Mizoram, etc. Migration and the use of employment opportunities elsewhere were important drivers in both Kerala and Goa, and this may have enhanced the interest in acquiring education among non-elites. Himachal Pradesh witnessed a higher level of recruitment to the Indian army in the 1960s mainly due to the war with China. Those who entered the army without much education might have interacted with educated ones, and this interaction could have enhanced the demand for education. Kerala, Goa, Himachal Pradesh and other hill states did not have a higher level of inequality in terms of land ownership. This too may have led to a faster spread of ideas (including those which facilitate the use of formal education) across economic classes/​social groups. Kerala could see the early mobilisation of non-elites (including the landless labour) and this led to not only an improvement in the provision of public services (including education) to these people but also to an increase in their demand for and willingness to use education. Tamil Nadu also saw such a mobilisation of non-elites from the 1960s and 1970s, which also started controlling the state government afterwards. Kerala and Tamil Nadu both witnessed intense competition in politics and democracy, and competing parties/​coalitions offered a variety of highly subsidised public services, including education, and this too improved the situation in terms of access to education in these states. 

Q: What could be the probable reasons for the relatively poor performance of major Indian states in terms of education?

A: Based on the discussion in this note on certain enabling conditions which helped other countries to enhance access to education for the majority, one can identify certain factors which may have worked against the spread of education in major parts of India. These laggard states did not have a notable presence of Christianity that helped the Western developed countries; India did not have top-down policies that helped ex-socialist countries expand education. India also did not see industrial development (or governments interested in facilitating industrial development by inviting foreign capital until the 1980s) as in the case of newly industrialised countries of East Asia. 

If we compare states such as Kerala with those in Northern India (like UP, and Rajasthan), one may see that the latter have not benefitted from the presence of religions which are interested in spreading literacy. Most parts of India were intensely patriarchal to the extent that this prevented the schooling of girls until recently. These states could see the mobilisation of the lower castes only from the 1990s, and until then, the governance was controlled by economic and social elites. They did not have a strong interest in extending education to lower caste groups and the underclass. The land ownership was unequal with a sizeable section of landless workers and the absence of an effective implementation of land reforms discouraged them from aspiring and using education for their children. The majority of the population continued to eke out a living from agriculture, and they did not see the importance of educating their children. 

There were no major efforts by post-independent governments in India until the 1990s to ensure that all children get schooling. There is no mandatory schooling policy in India. Even if we consider the Right to Education Act as a policy of this kind, it does not have enforcement mechanisms if parents do not send their children to school. In states like Kerala, HP, etc., parents voluntarily send their children to school. When such voluntary willingness is absent, a mandatory schooling policy would have helped but it was not attempted. The internal migration of people in India is mainly for taking up less skilled employment. Hence, sections of people are not aware of the need to acquire education as a means to get jobs through migration. Poverty continued at higher levels until recently, which also discouraged many parents from having their children pursue education. Since there was no major social engineering or behavioural change to address discriminatory gender norms and poverty, these together worked against the completion of school education of girls in a majority of states of India. 

Q: There has been an improvement in the education situation in India after the 1990s, isn’t it? 

A: Yes, there have been certain changes after the 1980s. On the education front, there was a national literacy programme, and there are indications that it has enhanced the interest of poorer parents in the education of their children. The economic reforms starting from the late 1980s, the increase in economic growth, the availability of more public resources, the intervention of international organisations, and the overall political change also encouraged successive governments of India to take steps to expand the school system and its facilities. Programmes like DPEP and SSA have focussed on improving access to school education. One can see a certain improvement in the availability of schools, their infrastructure, and also the availability of teachers in all states of India. A few programmes, such as mid-day meals, aimed at enhancing the demand for school education. There were small scholarships aimed at students from Scheduled Castes and Tribes. These could help increase their enrolment in primary grades. The opening up of the Indian economy in the 1990s increased the employment opportunities of those with higher education in the service sector. Due to all these reasons, there is an increase in the demand for school education in India, but it is yet to cover all sections of society. Moreover, the stagnation in the manufacturing sector has dampened the non-agricultural employment opportunities for those who complete school education but do not go for higher education. It may have dampened the need for education by certain socioeconomic groups and in certain states/​locations in India. We may discuss the possible connection between the kind of economic growth and education development of India in another Q&A. 

Q: Are there other countries like India which face serious challenges in ensuring access to and quality of school education?

A: Pakistan and Afghanistan (and not Bangladesh) face far more serious challenges. Intensely patriarchal norms work against the secondary education of the majority of girls in these countries. The historical deprivation of education among the lower castes continues to have a role in their differential use of education in Nepal. Poverty and underdevelopment (and ineffective governance) work against the education of a sizeable section of children in sub-Saharan Africa. However, India’s situation may be somewhat unique. It has people who have achieved success through education on the one hand and millions of less educated people on the other. It is also an emerging economy, aspiring to become a developed country. There is no other country in the world with such a poor rate of completion of schooling. If we compare it with the BRICS countries (which are all emerging economies), basic indicators of education achievement are the lowest in India.

Santhakumar V is a former professor, Azim Premji University, Bengaluru.  
 

Primary reading material

Santhakumar, V., Gupta, N., & Sripada, R. 2016. What may dampen the demand for schooling; and Chapter 6: Experiences from India and Abroad. Schooling for All in India: Can We Neglect the Demand? Oxford University Press.

Lee, J and Shute, V. J. 2010. Personal and Social-Contextual Factors in K‑12 Academic Performance: An Integrative Perspective on Student Learning. Educational Psychologist, 45(3): 185 – 202.

V Santhakumar. Education and Development Linkages in South Asia (Part II)

V Santhakumar. Education and Development Linkages in South Asia (Part I)

Featured photo by note thanun on Unsplash