Search

This paper challenges (inter)national development narratives that propose schooling as a way out of poverty in the global South by interrogating poor children's experience of pedagogic and disciplinary processes in an Indian classroom. It also develops a theoretical framework to interrogate the relationship between urban poverty and classroom processes which attends to wider class and caste relations in the contemporary context of economic liberalism and 'political and social illiberalism'. Drawing upon parent interviews and ethnographic fieldnotes from a classroom in a state school it unpacks the term, 'labour class', used by teachers to refer to pupils' social background. Further, deploying the notion of 'deficit view' it shows how pedagogic practice, physical and verbal aggression experienced by pupils and pupils' struggles to engage with classroom teaching are shaped by realities of deeply stratified schooling, inadequate infrastructure in state schools and the relationship between 'labour class' communities and middle-class teachers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Grass roots initiatives like the brickfield schools and the Barefoot Teacher Training program described in this article, led by non-governmental organizations in eastern India, highlight the slow but steady strides taken toward universalizing primary education—a key development goal for the new millennium. The present article showcases the positive effects of early education in addressing child labor and poverty issues and the role of local initiatives in ensuring the right to primary education for the historically disadvantaged. Such interventions have significant implications for other developing nations as well. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background: Millennium Development Goal (MDG) 5 is focused on reducing maternal mortality and achieving universal access to reproductive health care. India has made extensive efforts to achieve MDG 5 and in some regions much progress has been achieved. Progress has been uneven and inequitable however, and many women still lack access to maternal and reproductive health care. Objective: In this review, a framework developed by the Commission on Social Determinants of Health (CSDH) is used to categorize and explain determinants of inequity in maternal and reproductive health in India. Design: A review of peer-reviewed, published literature was conducted using the electronic databases PubMed and Popline. The search was performed using a carefully developed list of search terms designed to capture published papers from India on: 1) maternal and reproductive health, and 2) equity, including disadvantaged populations. A matrix was developed to sort the relevant information, which was extracted and categorized based on the CSDH framework. In this way, the main sources of inequity in maternal and reproductive health in India and their inter-relationships were determined. Results: Five main structural determinants emerged from the analysis as important in understanding equity in India: economic status, gender, education, social status (registered caste or tribe), and age (adolescents). These five determinants were found to be closely interrelated, a feature which was reflected in the literature. Conclusion: In India, economic status, gender, and social status are all closely interrelated when influencing use of and access to maternal and reproductive health care. Appropriate attention should be given to how these social determinants interplay in generating and sustaining inequity when designing policies and programs to reach equitable progress toward improved maternal and reproductive health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines whether the recent growth in 'low-fee private' (LFP) schools is able to promote Education for All by being accessible to the poor. Based primarily on a 13-village survey of 250 households and visits to 26 private and government schools in rural Uttar Pradesh, India, this paper explores who 'chooses' private schooling, in the light of the well-documented failure of the government school system. In particular, the paper explores the issue of whether private provision is affordable and accessible to poor rural parents. It finds that LFP school costs are unaffordable for over half of the sampled children, including the majority of low caste and Muslim families. It also finds that while LFPs are greatly preferred under current conditions, what parents actually want is a well-functioning government school system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]