Reading policy as a text and policy as a discourse: Before coming to the actual point I would like to speak a bit about reading itself. For every class in M.A. Education we are supposed to come to the class with some prior readings(Though most of the time for some reason or without any reason I don't do so:). The very days when I do come equipped with the prior reading I sense that our professors expected us to read the readings in some particular manner. This again differs with different professors. Amongst ourselves(students), it turns out that we all have read the reading in a very different manner and what we have understood from the reading itself varies significantly with each other. May be if professors try they might identify some general pattern of reading amongst the students.
Another immediate example that strikes my mind with respect to the 'reading' is the way the religious texts are read by the masses. There is some general pattern in the way the masses read the religious texts(My assumption). Religious texts are read without ever considering the context in which those texts were produced, yet the meanings are drawn to the present circumstances of the reader. Texts are actually used to encode the discourses but what if the language that the text represents itself changes over the time? I would simply consider it as a limitation of the textual language just like any other tool.
Now coming to the policies which can be rather considered as a present day religious texts the problems faced by us is the same. There is some general pattern in the way the policies are read by the masses. Especially 'Policy Studies' being a discipline in itself it has the onus just like any other discipline of guiding its new entrants regarding the way the policies have to be read to make a comprehensive understanding. And these guidelines are drawn from the experiences of the scholars with an intention to make the task easier for the coming generation. In Stephen Ball's writing “What is Policy? Texts, Trajectories and Toolboxes” there is an attempt to identify the patterns in which the policies are read, the reasons for being read in such a pattern and the pros and cons of reading policies in such a particular pattern.
Two main patterns discussed in his writings is reading policy as a text and policy as a discourse. As you have said, a close reading and analysis of the specific features of the policy would add up to an analysis of the policy as a text. Reading policy as a text here involves seeing them as texts that intervene to change the practice. It is an attempt to see the effects of policy just from the text and how different actors will act upon that text. It allows us to make the predictions on the effects of the policy. On the other side reading policy as just texts will not help us on many other counts. It hides from us the complex ways in which those policy texts were encoded which encompasses the struggles, compromises, authoritative public interpretations and reinterpretations(Stephen Ball). It also leaves very limited scope for us to understand the way it is decoded which involves actor's interpretations and meanings in relation to their history, experience, skills, resources and context(Stephen Ball). Reading policy as a text also does not take care of the effects that a combination of policies can have. It leaves aside the role of institutional structures that come to play in the implementation of the specific policy.
With regard to reading policy as a discourse I would like to again start with your description that it is the “discussion of the main factors that led to the formulation of the policy. The predominant understanding of what the policy is expected to achieve as well as the widespread and common sense notions about the policy that would add to our understanding”. Discourse itself can be described as follows ‘Discourses are about what can be said and thought, but also about who can speak, when, where and with what authority…. Certain possibilities for thought are constructed. Words are ordered and combined in particular ways, and other combinations are displaced or excluded’ (Ball, 1994: 22). Discourse is a language, values, beliefs and practices. Discourse is meant to capture the nexus between power and knowledge and the meaning that is constructed historically in contested social arenas and also the way power is exercised through a production of truth(As per the Stephen Ball). By and large reading policy as a discourse is meant to overcome the shortcomings of reading policy as a text.
The policy I have chosen for the assignment is the Central Educational Institutions (Reservation in Admission) Act, 2006. This act is to provide for the reservation in admissions for the students belonging to the scheduled castes, the scheduled tribes and the other backward classes of citizens, in certain central educational institutions established, maintained or aided by the central government. As per this act out of the annual permitted strength in each branch of study or under each faculty of the central educational institution 15% of the seats shall be reserved for the scheduled castes, 7.5% of the seats for scheduled tribes and 27% of the seats for the other backward classes.
Policy as a text: This act defines other backward class as class or classes of citizens who are socially and educationally backward, as determined by the central government and leaves enough scope for debate on the economic aspect of the other backward classes. Does the central government consider the economic aspect to determine the social and educational backwardness of these classes and if so to what extent? The answer to this lies in the Mandal commission Report. The criteria for identifying the other backward classes is as follows
Social aspects
1.Castes/classes considered as socially backward by others,
2.Castes/classes which mainly depend on manual labour for their livelihood,
3.Castes/classes where at least 25 per cent females and 10 per cent males above the state average get married at an age below 17 years in rural areas and at least 10 per cent females and 5 per cent males do so in urban areas.
4.Castes/classes where participation of females in work is at least 2 per cent above the state average,
Educational aspects
1.Castes/classes where the number of children in the age group of 5–15 years who never attended school is at least 25 per cent above the state average.
2.Castes/classes when the rate of student drop-out in the age group of 5 15 years is at least 25 per cent above the state average,
3.Castes/classes amongst whom the proportion of matriculates is at least 25 per cent below the state average,
Economic aspects
1.Castes/classes where the average value of family assets is at least 25 per cent below the state average,
2.Castes/classes where the number of families living in kuccha houses is at least 25 per cent above the state average,
3.Castes/classes where the source of drinking water is beyond half a kilometre for more than 50 per cent of the households,
4.Castes/classes where the number of households having taken consumption loans is at least 25 per cent above the' state average.
Amongst the three, social aspects were given more weight-age to the extent of 54.54% while for educational aspects it was 27.27% and for economic aspects it was 18%. On the whole the castes or classes which scored more than 50% in all three aspects together is considered as other backward class. So determining the backwardness of the class/caste depends more on the social aspects and relatively less on the educational aspects and even lesser on the economic aspect. Contrary to its very assumption the above act is meant to alleviate the social status of the backward classes by making a provision reserved for them in educational institutions. The Sattanathan commission of 1971 has declared that creamy layer within the OBC to be excluded from the reservation. Creamy layer here refers to the economic well being. Hence students belonging to the other backward classes yet coming under the creamy layer will avail no reservation. It is apparent that this whole exercise is a zero sum game.
Policy as a discourse: Just like scheduled castes and scheduled tribes the other backward classes too are culturally handicapped. They lack in the community resources for venturing into occupations other than which they have traditionally inherited. In today’s knowledge based society most of the occupations are dependent on the education. Just the economic well being does not make the educational endeavor of a child belonging to a backward class a smooth ride. Community resources like traditional hostels, libraries, schools and colleges are mostly run by the upper caste and students from backward castes cannot afford to utilize those resources nor do they have of their own. A student of backward class coming with the same economic status as the student of upper caste still finds the environment very crippling for his/her educational endeavor. Neither the student receives the right orientation from their parents or guardians because most of them are first or second generation learners nor do their community is equipped to offer any help.
Mandal commission noted that backward castes make up 52% of the population yet representing only 12.5% in the civil service posts. Caste based politics which derives a lot from numbers succeeded in gaining in the political power for the backward classes. Yet the administrative and institutional structures like judiciary, media, and academic research which are mostly populated by the upper castes rendered the political gain useless. Most of the political enterprise towards the up liftment of the backward classes were rendered inefficient. One such example is the reservation in education and government employment. Even though the Mandal commission makes it clear that the social backwardness is not solely dependent on the economic status the counter pressures from the upper castes through legal instruments now excludes the creamy layer of backward classes from availing the reservation. The pressure to maintain the status quo and the way it works is obvious in this case.
Policy as a text: The provision of reservation for SC/ST/OBCs of the act does not apply to the minority educational institutions aided by the central government. Muslims, Sikhs, Christians, Buddhists, Parsis and Jains are minorities in India. Institutions run by these minorities have the autonomy to prioritize the admission of students belonging to their own community over others. These rights are safeguarded constitutionally. Yet within each minority there are members belonging to SC/ST/OBCs. The act has nothing to say about this section of minorities who are at disadvantage even more for two reasons. One for being a minority and another for being backward class within this minority.
Policy as a Discourse: In comparison to the whole population of the nation minorities fit exactly to the way their name suggests. Yet the geographical distribution of each minority gives us a different account. Minorities are a majority in particular areas. Within those areas caste system is alive like in most other parts of India. For instance very recently Jats of sikhs fought for the OBC status and now are considered backward class. The partition and the subsequent events dealt a severe blow to the security of the minorities in the nation. The ones suffered most among the minorities were the backward classes within those minorities. This forced them to seek refuge under the upper caste of those minorities who had the resources to help them. This led them to keep aside their differences within and project themselves at national level with one single identity for political reasons. Over the years with improved assurance about their security and increased trust in the democracy backward classes of the minorities are coming out to ascertain their rights in public. Their voices are yet to reach the attention of the ones who hold power at the centre. Even the ones with power at the centre are yet to recognize the differences within a minority and to exploit these differences for political gains. This very act excluding the minority institutions from the provision of reservation just mirrors the not yet concretely developed political identity of the backward classes within the minorities.
Policy as a text: The provisions of this act shall not apply for the institutions of excellence, research institutions, institutions of national and strategic importance. Immediate understanding of the exclusion of these institutions is the residual effect of the quality debate. It showcases the lingering dilemma of the state with regard to employing reservations as an affirmative action. The high stakes involved with these institutions of excellence concerning the security of the nation makes even the dominant political will to become apprehensive to bring about any changes.
Policy as a discourse: The main ideological opposition for this Act was the issue of quality being compromised due to reservation in many elite educational institutions like IITs, IIMs, AIIMs etc. The argument why many universities and institutions coming under the state were lacking in quality was because they all had implemented the reservations in their respective states long back. Admissions based on caste instead of merit led to the poor quality of these institutes and universities. The recent study for the Rashtriya Uchchattar Shiksha Abhiyan (RUSA) clears shows the relationship between quality and the funding. The major portion of the central government funding went to these elite institutes which only served a minority of the elite students. The majority of the students of the nation who were getting enrolled in the state universities and institutions affiliated to those universities were poorly funded by the central government. While elite institutions enjoyed the teacher pupil ratio between 1:5 and 1:9 the state universities and institutions had to cope with very large teacher pupil ratio. In such a case anyone can imagine the state of research that these universities can handle. Can we expect the argument for quality and equality in funding for the government run universities and institutions across central and state from the ones who argue for quality and equality in the few elite institutes? Given the provisions for required resources and infrastructure and institutional practices and regulations any student of the backward class can live up to the intellectual quality demanded by the nation.
Further the opposition had to be pacified by the mandatory increase in the seats which is stipulated by the act. As per the act every Central Educational Institution shall, with the prior approval of the appropriate authority, increase the number of seats in a branch of study or faculty over and above its annual permitted strength so that the number of seats, excluding those reserved for the persons belonging to the Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes and the Other Backward Classes, is not less than the number of such seats available for the academic session immediately preceding the date of the coming into force of this Act. The compromise is further made by giving a time frame of three years to implement from the date of enactment of this act.
One major argument against this act is the fact that the Mandal commission report on which this act draws upon is based on the data of the 1931 census. It is a valid argument that we are in a need of recent and reliable data on the other backward classes. Though their were lot of demands by the politicians representing the OBCs themselves for the collection data in 2011 census it was later dropped because of the apprehensions of people being motivated to give wrong data. National Commission for Backward Classes now has the onus on this. It is also true that politicians already have the crude data of the OBCs on which the fate of their political career is dependent.
Apart from this National Commission for Backward Classes is not entertaining or not empowered yet to consider the complaints and grievances from the OBC students though supreme court had suggested its formation for the same. Along with National Educational Tribunal Bill and Prohibition of Unfair Practices in Technical Educational Institutions, Medical Educational Institutions and Universities Bill, 2010 have not yet been enacted which would have helped monitor and regulate the implementation of the welfare schemes in universities and Institutions. Overall we can see the opposing forces working against each other in every step of the policy implementation.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.