SPECIAL ARTICLE

Economic & Political Weekly EPW september 20, 2014 vol xlIX no 38 65
Ankur Sarin (asarin@iimahd.ernet.in) and Swati Gupta (swatig.
adhyayan@gmail.com) are research scholars at the Indian Institute of
Management, Ahmedabad.
Quotas under the Right to Education
Not Leading towards an Egalitarian Education System
Ankur Sarin, Swati Gupta
Quotas for the weaker sections in private schools have
been one of the most controversial provisions
introduced by the Right of Children to Free and
Compulsory Education Act, 2009. The quotas have
imposed a debate on issues of social integration and
equity in education that private actors had by and large
escaped so far. However, the idea of an egalitarian
education system with equality of opportunity as its
primary goal appears to be outside the well-meaning
space that private school principals inhabit. Therefore,
the imposition of the quotas has led to resistance,
sometimes justified. But the essential arguments against
it are based on the logic of markets that the leadership in
private schools has imbibed. This leads them to not only
resist the idea of integration, but also devalue the
enormous effort put in by children and parents from the
weaker sections.
A
ny modern society today relies on its schools to level
the playing eld for children born into different cir-
cumstances. More than any other institution, schools
are charged with making equality of opportunity a reality
(Duncan and Murnane 2011: 7). Assuming this to be true of
India as well, these are interesting times to interrogate our
education system on its ability to challenge inequalities of
existing privilege in society. Access to schooling for those
coming of school age (as measured by enrolment at some
point in time) is close to universal (Planning Commission
2011). However, access to quality exhibits a sharp gradient
with socio-economic status (Desai et al 2008). Moreover,
purchasing power increasingly plays the equilibrating role
between the mismatch of aspiration for quality education and
its availability. Majumdar and Mooij (2012: 13) aptly describe
the un folding phenomena as segregation (taking) place along
with massication.
At a time when market actors respond to opportunities that
this disequilibrium provides, the state has prima facie taken
the progressive step of enacting the Right of Children to Free
and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (RTE) (for details and its
association with other government programmes and policies,
see Sarkar 2012). One of the most contentious provisions of the
Act has been Section 12(1)(c), which mandates that unaided
private schools set aside at least 25% of their seats in the rst
standard to students from the weaker sections and disadvan-
taged groups (henceforth WS). Challenged legally, the Su-
preme Court upheld the constitutional validity of the mandate
in April 2012, exempting only unaided minority schools and
boarding/residential schools.
Recent studies (Noronha and Srivastava 2013; Sarangapani
et al 2014) point to the resistance as well indifference of private
schools and the government machinery to implementing the
mandate. Highlighting the expenses that parents still need to
incur, the studies challenge the notion that the mandate allows
a free education. Further, both studies emphasise the exclusion
the very poorest face. In contrast to these, the Centre for Civil
Society (2011) reports few hurdles besides awareness of parents,
and expresses a surprising optimism on the issue of inclusion.
While it may be too early to reach any judgments on the ef-
fect that these quotas have had, we nd that they have opened
up a dialogue that the elite had so far been able to avoid. The
purpose of the dialogue may well be to share strategies to sub-
vert the objectives of the RTE. However, its value has to be
u nderstood in the context of an environment and discourse
SPECIAL ARTICLE
september 20, 2014 vol xlIX no 38 EPW Economic & Political Weekly 66
that have not even confronted the elite and the resourceful in
recent times. We hope to contribute to and extend this dia-
logue by a critical discursive analysis of the debate around the
mandate for inclusion in private schools. In particular, we
juxtapose two important voices that will determine and be
most affected by the success or failure of these quotas. These
are the voices of the beneciaries children and their parents
targeted by the quotas and the voices of those instrumental
in delivering the benets the principals of private schools.
By most accounts, private schools have resisted integration
in myriad ways, with the most egregious responses often the
most highlighted (for example, Khan 2012). However, other ac-
counts take a more empathetic view, highlighting the chal-
lenges that private school principals face.
They must become product minting machines churning out high
achievers, great sportspersons and multifaceted supermen. The prin-
cipals of such schools are often under tremendous pressure, tossed
between the management and parents. No wonder, then they feel that
their autonomy is seriously threatened by the Right to Education char-
ter! How will they ensure quality if their student intake is diluted by
the have-nots? (Bedadur 2011: 61).
Undoubtedly statements such as these raise questions about
the manner in which goals and quality are dened, and to
whom the principals should be accountable. However, a more
empathetic view also perhaps helps us move closer to an un-
derstanding and resolution of the challenges faced in the im-
plementation of the RTE mandate, by helping unpack the pal-
pable hostility of privileged schools to their (the poor) inclu-
sion (Velaskar 2010: 84).
Without disputing Velaskars argument that only a recov-
ery of welfare state and society committed to a democratic
egalitarianism would be able to transform structures towards
attaining higher levels of justice and equality in education and
society (2010: 84), we seek to engage with the question of
where such a state and society shall emerge from. And what
hope can we have from the leadership in private schools on
whom an afrmative burden (Society for Unaided Private
Schools of Rajasthan 2012) has been placed?
We do not seek to critically evaluate the Act or the mandate
itself a task that has been performed by others on different
dimensions (Jain and Dholakia 2010 on nances; Desai and
Thorat 2012 on existing inequalities, Bhatacharjee et al 2014
on the functioning of the RTE grievance redressal mechanism
in Karnataka; Srivastava and Noronha 2014 on the contested
policy process behind the RTE and the Section 12(1)(c)
mandate). However, instead of waiting to write its post-mor-
tem on the basis of ex ante design aws, we acknowledge the
role of street-level (Lipsky 2010) actors in our case, school
leaders in determining policy outcomes. We also seek a
more constructive engagement with its objectives by ac-
knowledging that the Act with all its perversities is a living
reality. Therefore, we share Majumdar and Mooijs (2012: 16)
belief that
when thinking about the possibilities to improve the system in order to
achieve universal quality education, one has to start from the situation
as it is, and to see the main actors involved as part of the solution,
rather than as part of the problem.
To this end, we contribute by bringing the views of the
main actors into the public debate that the mandate hope-
fully generates.
Although the RTE mandate of reserved seats in unaided
private schools became applicable in practice only from 2011,
private (recognised) schools in Delhi have had to implement
EWS (economically weaker sections) quotas called freeship
quota in varying percentages (between 15% and 25%) since
2004, in exchange for obtaining land from the state at conces-
sional rates.
1
Therefore, because of their longer experience
with a policy like Section 12(1)(c), interviews with parents and
children who have availed themselves of freeship seats in
Delhi provided us with the orientation to conduct the study
from the point of view of the supposed beneciaries.
Notwithstanding some exceptions, we nd that the market
logic, with money as a metric of value, is well entrenched in
private schools, and this is expressed by its leaders. By its na-
ture, the logic of markets is exclusionary on the basis of will-
ingness (or, more likely, ability) to pay. Whatever other instru-
mentalities it may serve, it is contradictory to hope that a sys-
tem that is created to discriminate on the basis of economic
resources will lead to educational outcomes that are independ-
ent of a childs economic origins. Our study does not generate
evidence otherwise.
Previous analyses of inequalities in the educational system,
such as Velaskar (2010), leave questions about the agency of
individuals, who inhabit and enact the larger logic that they
are a part of, unanswered. What are the micro foundations
that lead to and sustain the larger logic? If we are allowed to
make the (seemingly reasonable) assumption that individuals
have the ability to make choices and they do, it is important to
examine the values, beliefs, and constraints that underlie
these choices. Without doing so, as researchers, we can have
no hope of inuencing the choices made by those charged with
implementing the policy.
Principals as Leaders of Change
The role of leadership as a critical ingredient second only to
classroom instruction among school related factors that affect
student learning in school in school culture and student out-
comes has recently received greater attention among research
scholars and policymakers (Wallace Foundation 2012). Two
large-scale studies, one from the US (Louis et al 2010) and the
other from the UK (Day et al 2009), provide rich empirical evi-
dence to document the role principals play in determining the
efcacy of schools. Similarly Resh and Dar (1992), who have
chronicled Israels experience with integration, highlight the
role of principals whose ideas and convictions about the ef-
cacy of integration affect the actual practices of class organisa-
tion in the school. This, in turn, has an effect on learning proc-
esses within the class and eventually on students academic
outcomes, especially on those from the weaker group (see
also Resh and Dar 2011).
In contrast to the international emphasis, literature on the
importance and consequences of school leadership in the
I ndian context is as sparse as the attention it has received in
SPECIAL ARTICLE
Economic & Political Weekly EPW september 20, 2014 vol xlIX no 38 67
Therefore, the survey statistics quoted in the paper reect the
attitudes and perceptions of the leadership of 35 schools.
The surveys were followed up with brief open-ended con-
versations on the topic of inclusion of the WS with participants
who were willing to be interviewed. Finally detailed in-depth
interviews, similar to those carried out in Delhi, were con-
ducted with the principals of four schools who had substantial
experience in trying to integrate students from the WS in
their schools.
Brief descriptive statistics from our survey are provided in
Table 1. While the study sample cannot be considered statisti-
cally representative, it does span a reasonable spectrum of
schools and school leaderships. Gujarat, Maharashtra, Odisha,
and Punjab had 47% of the schools in the sample. Besides this,
there were two schools each from West Bengal, Chhattisgarh,
Tamil Nadu, and Delhi, and one each from Rajasthan, Uttar
Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, Karnataka, and Uttarakhand.
Although we refer to summary statistics from a survey con-
ducted as part of the study, the primary sources of informa-
tion, from which we draw meaning, are the interviews that
were used to generate narrative material for a richer and
deeper understanding. Each of the open-ended interviews was
transcribed and, if necessary, translated.
2
Thematic analysis
was used to identify themes that would help understand and
make meaning of the underlying arguments emerging from
the conversations.
Voices of the Beneficiaries
The parents of all the children we interviewed were employed
in the informal sector and were daily wagers (except one). Bar-
ring one child whose parents had completed higher secondary,
no parent had studied beyond the fth grade. Admissions to
schools under the quotas had not been easy. Many had to over-
come obstacles ranging from being physically denied entry to
schools and being discouraged from applying, to negotiating
the government bureaucracy for certicates and then being
lucky in a draw. The threat of the state bureaucracy hangs over
parents even after admission. Although the rules prohibit it,
the parents of one of the children we interviewed had received
Table 1: Descriptive Statistics from Survey of Selected School Leaders
Background %
Female 47
Years of experience as school leader
<5 years 36
>5-10 years 33
> 10 years of experience 31
Fees in the 10th Standard
< 10,000 17
10,000 30,000 40
> 30,000 43
Implemented WS mandate 19
Opinion about WS Mandate
Percentage of respondents strongly agreeing/agreeing to the following
statements: Wrong in principle to impose quotas on private schools 59
Government should pay for these children 82
Adds diversity to classroom learning 54
Fee-paying children also have a great deal to learn from the WS children 66
Number of schools 36
policies and programmes a neglect that is often pointed to
(for example, Azim Premji Foundation 2011). Notable excep-
tions exist, like Sister Cyril of Loreto Convent, Kolkata (Juneja
2005). Majumdar and Mooij (2012: 83) come across a number
of inspiring cases of school improvement cases of transition
from a resource-poor, dysfunctional school to a well-endowed,
functional centre for learning, often led by a dynamic head
teacher. Yet, school leadership remains outside their other-
wise detailed and in-depth examination of school processes.
Therefore, as precursors of outcomes likely to follow, we in-
terrogate the belief systems of a small group of private school
principals. In doing so, we try to identify where the challenges
to implementation of the quotas and the achievement of a more
egalitarian education system lie. We purposively pick schools
that would be considered aspirational by the privileged or
afuent. We do so because these schools are the basis for the
superior image of private schools and their desirability. There-
fore, their responses signicantly determine the extent to which
quotas serve to create a more egalitarian schooling system.
Methodology
The paper is part of a larger study that uses mixed methods. In
this, we primarily focus on how the actors of interest to us
principals, parents, and their children see and understand
the quotas. The study sought to not only document views, but
also interpret and attach meaning to them. Therefore, the re-
search strategy of phenomenology concerned with under-
standing social and psychological phenomena from the per-
spectives of people involved (Welman and Kruger 2001: 189)
was adopted for the study.
We conducted interviews and group discussions with par-
ents and children residing in slums in East Delhi, who have
been admitted to private schools under WS quotas for at least
ve years. In-depth interviews were conducted with seven
children (four girls and three boys) as well as their parents.
We then interviewed the principals of two private schools
where the children were studying, and of two elite schools in
Delhi, one that had apprehensions about the mandate and
another that was supportive of the idea. Hearing principals
describe their versions of the same experience inclusion of
children from the WS revealed both different perspectives
and tensions in the perspectives. It also helped us understand
the issues affecting and concerning principals the most. The
perspectives articulated by the principals on the rationale of
the policy, its formulation and implementation, the challenges
they faced, and the alternatives they found often shone a light
on the values and beliefs beneath their opinions.
Following the interviews in Delhi, data were collected from
a survey of school leaders (principals, administrators, and
managers) of 45 schools from all over the country. This was
done at the beginning of a training workshop on leadership and
management skill development that they had chosen to at-
tend. We had no part in the workshop other than being allowed
to conduct this study. Although all participants were invited,
we only received 37 complete responses. Of these, two had to
be dropped since the WS quotas did not apply to these schools.
SPECIAL ARTICLE
september 20, 2014 vol xlIX no 38 EPW Economic & Political Weekly 68
a notice from the school asking them to submit an income cer-
ticate in a week or else face cancellation of the childs admis-
sion under the freeship quota.
Notwithstanding the explicitness of the Act, as several other
accounts have highlighted (Deepika 2013; Noronha and Srivas-
tava 2013), the idea that their children are getting this education
free is a highly contested one. A parent argued, Only the
(tuition) fee is exempted. We have to bear all other expenses,
which is a lot. Our child is denitely not getting this education
for free, in case the government thinks it is. The exclusions
this led to were acknowledged by parents themselves.
Only those who are (slightly) above the poverty line and have a below
the poverty line (BPL) card can afford to send their child under the
freeship quota. Even schools see the parents occupation before dis-
tributing forms because the overhead expenditures are high.
The reference here is not just to charges for extracurricular
activities, but also to expenses estimated to be at least around
Rs 5,000 annually on essentials such as books and uniforms.
That these have to be bought from exclusive vendors at a
premium price adds to the conviction that the education is
not free.
3
Further, with schooling getting increasingly project- and
a ssignment-based, even academic work implies more out-of-
pocket expenditure. For example, internet-based homework
that requires children to refer to the internet and frequently
get printouts is a big source of expenditure. Accessing the
internet in cyber cafes costs Rs 20 for half an hour, and printing
adds up to Rs 2 to Rs 5 a page. Besides this, most parents spend
on transportation to school, and Rs 200 to Rs 400 per month
on tuitions. Sought to be outlawed by the RTE and discouraged
by principals, the tuition expenditure was considered neces-
sary by parents. In many cases, the tuition teacher was not
only rendering academic help, but also helping parents negoti-
ate the formal school system by helping them read and under-
stand notes in diaries and other notices sent by the school.
However, given the difculties in nding capable help in
slums, tuitions often led to additional transportation costs.
Somewhat counter-intuitively, a parental remark explained
the complementary nature of the two, Since the child is going
to a good school, the tuition also has to be an expensive one.
Estimates of annual school-related expenditure range from
Rs 12,000 to Rs 15,000, and we were told that this was despite
not being able to participate in most extracurricular activities
such non-participation being a point of great dissatisfaction
with the children. The optional extracurricular activities
included classes for sports and arts, eld trips, and activities
such as annual days that required spending on supplies, cos-
tumes, travel, and so on. Although children acknowledged
that these activities were not mandatory, they also pointed out
that since all the other children enrolled, they could be consid-
ered non-compulsory. While the children participated in some,
it was clear that there were many activities in which they
could not. Describing the conict created, an elder sister spoke
of her younger siblings reaction, She cries a lot if we say no
(to expenditure on extracurricular activities). She feels embar-
rassed that all will get to participate, but her.
The childrens experiences are surely not uniform, and vary
across and within schools. From our conversations, it appeared
that children performing better academically were also the
ones who were treated better with the direction of causality
not clear. The experience of feeling different because of their
social backgrounds seemed to affect young children less, or
they were unable to articulate it. Besides narrating incidents of
being teased by classmates, the two oldest children in our
group (in the ninth standard) spoke of having to stand in class
and be publicly identied each time lists of freeship students
had to be made or cheques distributed. However, even the
younger children observed that if a child was dressed clumsily,
the teachers often passed remarks like, Are you from a slum?,
and if anyone misbehaved, You must belong to Mandawali
(an unauthorised colony that was later regularised).
The parents of the WS children are clearly unequal partici-
pants in their childs education. They wished that notices and
notes in school diaries were in Hindi and felt hesitant at parent-
teacher meetings since they did not understand English. One
parent had been explicitly warned at the time of admission to
not ght and bring complaints to the principal and teachers.
Some of the children themselves felt shy about taking their
parents to meetings, and one parent complained that her child
had stopped informing her of parent-teacher meetings in time.
Despite complaints and challenges, we heard more voices
acknowledging the opportunity that quotas presented. We
repeatedly heard examples of children in freeship quotas
knowing more and behaving better. Two of the children we
spoke to were toppers in their classes. For many, including the
youngest, there was a strong desire to prove a point.
While getting the admission, the school authorities tried to scare me,
saying that I wont be able to cope, and, therefore, dont take admis-
sion. But I proved them wrong. Now all the teachers love me.
But when asked about the future, one mother responded,
Despite these quotas, none of them can become engineers or doctors.
Parents cannot afford the expensive coaching that is required. Quotas
alone dont assure anything.
Voices of Leadership
Since, it is forced upon us, we have to do it, but our heart is
not completely in it might be one of the more favourable
views on the policy we heard from the principals. One of the
key sources of discontent was the manner in which the quotas
had been implemented, with no proper planning, forced
upon us, almost overnight, without any consultation or noti-
cation, and leaving us struggling for proper information. Dis-
content on being reduced to passive participants was often ac-
companied by expressions of distrust and lack of condence in
the states intentions and the motives behind the policy. Some
felt used by politicians for their vote bank politics. The view
that the government is coming up with experimental policies
without understanding reality and the damage it can cause
children was one we heard often, even among those supportive
of the quotas. They saw it as an attempt by an incompetent state
to pass on its responsibility to private schools by exercising its
authority over them.
SPECIAL ARTICLE
Economic & Political Weekly EPW september 20, 2014 vol xlIX no 38 69
Referring to lack of faith in the governments ability in the
arena of education, one of the principals asked, Why is the
government implementing the WS quota when government
schools are empty despite their teachers being paid the highest
salaries? Another saw quotas as the governments attempt to
dilute the standard of private schools as they have failed to
improve the standard of their own schools. Corruption, which
is typically associated with any government programme, also
serves to discredit the ability of the state to implement policies
to achieve its goals. Explaining the opportunities created, one
said, If you have all the papers, we have to include you in the
draw (for selection under the quota). How difcult is it in India
to get fraudulent papers made? Pay a little bribe and you have
to pay no fees for your child.
The discontent is exacerbated by a perception that the man-
date is not being implemented uniformly, and that the re-
course to bribes always exists. Lack of faith in the institutional
structure leads to cynicism or condence that it is business as
usual, It is as each individual considers right. Some are admit-
ting 10% and some 25%. Its a cycle (of corruption). There is no
hope for India. Let it be the way it is.
Question of Resources: Who Will Pay for These Children?
The Act mandates the government to reimburse private
schools an amount equal to either the expenditure incurred
per child by the state or the actual amount charged by the
school, whichever is less. However, as one principal said, this
is clearly not enough.
Who will pay for these 25% children? Ultimately the parents of the fee-
paying children, and as the number of these 25% children keeps increas-
ing, there will be so much pressure on the parents of the paying children
that it will be impossible to sustain 25% non-fee-paying children.
The costs that schools actually incur in educating children
are usually opaque and estimates at the per child level are sub-
ject to many unveriable assumptions. They get further com-
plicated by the fees schools charge for extracurricular activi-
ties (for example, educational/recreational trips), which are
considered optional. In 14 of the 36 schools, parents usually
had to spend more than Rs 5,000 per year for other activi-
ties, besides the regular fees. In two schools, this cost was
greater than Rs 30,000.
Explaining its constraints, the principal of an elite private
school said, We hire an event management company to organise
students trips and picnics. Why will they not charge WS chil-
dren? Another principal said, Parents are already paying for
the education of these non-paying children, but I cant ask
them to fund their picnics and pleasure trips as well. Ac-
knowledging the implications, he added, Of course, these
children feel left out. Despite studying in the same class, these
children will still be outcasts.
The issue of resources is further compounded by the reluc-
tance of many schools to engage with the government. Of the
16 schools that had already implemented the RTE, only three
had received partial reimbursement from the government.
With most schools preferring not to implement it, the
reasons cited included dealing with additional paperwork
and fear of coming under the purview of the Right to Infor-
mation Act, 2005.
Perceptions of Low Academic Competency
and Motivation
Although exceptions were often mentioned, during inter-
views, the principals often referred to the WS children as
slow learners 37% (13 of 35) said that the WS children
were very often or always weak in studies, and 43% (15 of 35)
believed that they lacked interest in studies. Since almost all
schools used English as the medium of instruction, compe-
tence in language was another signicant area of concern,
with 77% (27 of 35) believing that the WS children had dif-
culty in learning English, always or very often. The school
leaders were consistent in echoing oft-repeated beliefs such as
that marginalised groups have lower intrinsic abilities and mo-
tivation for education (Balagopalan and Subrahmanian 2003;
Ramachandran and Naorem 2013).
These perceptions often served as explanations for the
increased burden on teachers teachers are very troubled
because the WS children are slow learners as well as the most
mischievous in the class. Some of the principals (11%) stated
that teachers feeling overburdened because of quotas was not
a problem they had anticipated. This increased burden was
also often attributed to lack of proper support at home.
Twenty-seven of the 35 principals (77%) said that the WS
children lacked parental involvement, and a similar number
believed that their family atmosphere was very often or al-
ways not conducive to studies. Some principals said, How will
the child cope (with the academic requirements)? We cannot
take care of this child when he is at home.
Academic concerns were often juxtaposed with the effect
quota students had on good children. One principal said,
At present, our good children are suffering because the WS
children are slow. As a result, the teacher has to slow down the
pace, which means she is unable to nish the syllabus on
time. This was a feeling echoed in our survey, where 61% of
principals felt that slowing down because of inclusion was a
major problem.
Unbridgeable Social Distances
Social integration is the biggest challenge that these children face.
They just cannot adjust. What they wear, how they speak, what they
get for lunch, where they go for vacation, which car comes to drop
them, all this makes an impact on a childs psychology. We dont
understand how signicant these things are for children. We can keep
the child here only for six hours, the remaining 18 hours the child is
back at home (slum environment). Despite studying in the same class,
this child will still be an outcast. We should not make the child go
through this emotional trauma.
The social distance that separates children belonging to the
WS from their privileged counterparts is unbridgeable, according
to principals like the one quoted above. While some attributed
this largely to the social backgrounds of the children being
integrated, others, more reectively, said, Neither can they
connect with us, nor can we. Some spoke about the problems
it created for the class as a whole, asking, What if other children
SPECIAL ARTICLE
september 20, 2014 vol xlIX no 38 EPW Economic & Political Weekly 70
dont want to sit with them? It brings disharmony to the class.
Others, like the principal quoted above, represented it as pro-
tecting the interests of the children being integrated.
Fifteen of the 35 principals (43%) said that the WS children
very often or always had problems relating to their classmates,
and a similar proportion felt discipline-related issues were a
major problem from inclusion of the WS children. Eleven of
the 35 principals (31%) felt that the EWS children used abusive
language very often or always. While some principals blamed
the behaviour on integration itself, others ended by rationalis-
ing it along the lines of It is their habit. This is what they learn
from their environment.
Most principals in schools that had quotas for the WS chil-
dren claimed that nobody explicitly identied these children,
but the other children were able to gure out. Others r eferred
to practices in their schools that accentuated the differences,
without necessarily seeing them as problematic. For example,
the principal quoted above on social integration, e xplained,
It is compulsory that children having birthdays invite everyone from
his/her class for his/her birthday party so that everyone gets invited.
But the difference is so apparent at such events that this affects the
child drastically.
She added,
These children dont even have a computer at home. We have decided
to save paper and send all circulars and notes by email to parents.
How will the parents of these children read emails?
Another principal was willing to attribute the problems more
to usual children, but given her inability to do anything
about it, felt that children from the WS would be better off by
not being integrated into private schools.
Even my own children dont want to come to my school because they
feel that our school children are very snobbish. Yes, they are. What do
I do? Their parents prefer them that way. I can only do small things,
like I told them not to bring tetra pak juices to school, which all cant
afford. But otherwise you cant do much.
Consistent with the idea of lack of autonomy (Bedadur 2011),
the principals explained that it is not necessarily about what
they want, but what parents (of fee-paying children) allow or
want. Of them, 40% felt that resistance from parents of fee-
paying children was a major problem in the ofng. The par-
ents of fee-paying children will retaliate. We will have to work
on that front as well.
Devaluing Quality Education
As in the case of any afrmative action, a large number of prin-
cipals felt that the WS quota was devaluing school admissions
(referred to as lowering of quality by them) by giving away
seats to the undeserving and ungrateful. The devaluation
that they speak of has two dimensions. The rst is the effect
that integration has on the image of the school, and the second
is the diminishing value attached to the perceived privilege of
being a part of the school. A typical characterisation of the
issue of the adverse effect on the schools image was,
First, these (WS) children cant adjust with our good (fee-paying) chil-
dren. They use foul language, look dirty, and as a result, the schools
reputation gets spoilt. Parents (fee-paying) say that slum children
come to this school. The school environment is spoiled. The schools
reputation is at stake.
Several principals strongly believed that the parents of the
WS children did not value the opportunity, and they saw a
place in their school as a right and not a privilege. The same
principals who complained of the background of the WS chil-
dren complained that parents come and pick ghts with them,
instead of feeling obligated to them. For example,
The parents of WS children are hardheaded. They come to us as if it is
their right to get admission in our school. As if the school is obliged to
serve them and impress them. We are doing so much for them and even
then they are hardly thankful. But we still dont want to harm the child.
Along similar lines, a principal complained, Those who used to
come pleading to us earlier now demand a place in our school as
a right. This nishes the value of a place in our school.
The idea that parents who did not pay fees did not value ed-
ucation was brought up in different ways. In a school that
starts from the second year of kindergarten, the principal com-
plained about the lack of preparedness among students from
the WS. The suggestion of some parents that their children be
made to repeat a year to make up for this was taken as a sign of
their callous attitude to education, and that they did not have
to bear the costs of attending school.
Despite being contradictory to the goals of the RTE Act, al-
most all the principals we interviewed proposed a separate af-
ternoon/parallel shift for only disadvantaged children as an
alternative and better solution, A separate school where
teachers belonging to their background will be appointed, and
then they will ourish. Most principals also argued that 25%
is a very high number and it must be lowered, the lower the
better. Some principals argued that the government should
allow them to integrate students from the WS in accordance
with their own norms and regulations.
Discussion
Principals in private schools in India face an extremely challeng-
ing environment. The rapidity and scale of socio-economic
changes sweeping the country have been well documented. Un-
doubtedly, these changes have signicant implications not only
for purchasing power, but also for insecurities, aspirations, and
markers of social status. In a historically hierarchical society,
with a fundamentally inegalitarian educational system, educa-
tion becomes a marker of social status, and schools an impor-
tant venue of contestation. It seems that quotas under the RTE
have brought to the fore, if not exacerbated, many of these is-
sues. There is a lot more diversity in the voices of the elite than
much of the popular media and scholarly work acknowledges.
And any attempt to summarise ignores this diversity. However,
there are important undercurrents that emerge, which charac-
terise the Indian schooling system and have implications for the
potential impact of quotas and other instruments.
Embedded in Markets

It would be easy to dismiss the oppositional views of the prin-
cipals as the hostility of the elite, but this hostility needs to
be examined further. Any attempt to characterise the source
SPECIAL ARTICLE
Economic & Political Weekly EPW september 20, 2014 vol xlIX no 38 71
of normative beliefs in principals does disservice to the diver-
sity of the views and explanations we heard. However, our
reading of the information we collected suggests that the roots
lie in deeply imbibed values of the market and the role of prin-
cipals as market players. Albeit in varying degrees, principals
are quite aware and conscious of the market value of their
schools, and see people with differential abilities to pay differ-
ently. Evidence of this is seen in the objectives and constituen-
cies they privilege normatively, the explanations they offer to
justify their positions, and the means they use to value costs
and benets.
Many principals see benets that may accrue to those in the
WS quota coming at the expense of those from their natural
constituency the fee-paying parents. They are quite sensitive
and even protective about the concerns of this section. There-
fore, they oppose the quotas because it is perceived to be unfair
to fee-paying children. The preferential position of the fee-paying
constituency may well stem from its socio-economic back-
ground, which it often shares with principals. But it is justied
on the ground that the fee-paying constituency values school
offerings more (as seen in their willingness to pay for them).
The differential status accorded to students by their ability to
pay is most clearly evident in discussions on extracurricular
activities, and how the privileges of the advantaged are evalu-
ated vis--vis the hurt it might cause the disadvantaged. While
private schools constantly emphasise the need of these activities
for overall development of their children, principals, at the same
time, seem to believe that these pleasure trips are optional for
the WS children. The hurt that the WS children may feel from
being excluded is recognised, but the activity or practices that
lead to the exclusion are evaluated primarily by the extent to
which they meet the needs and demands of fee-paying parents.
Therefore, the use of communication via e-mail, trips to multi-
plexes, and lavish birthday parties are non-negotiable practices,
despite that the divides they create are evident and known.
The location of the problem, that principals (paternalistically)
believe may damage the WS child, is thus transferred from the
activity that creates the divide to the divide itself.
Further, their role as gatekeepers to prized positions per-
haps blinds principals to the sacrices and efforts made by the
parents of the WS children. The aspiration for quality school-
ing among the weaker sections has been well documented,
and our conversations with children and parents in Delhi only
added to the evidence. It is clear that many parents see these
schools as bridges to overcome divides, and the WS quotas as
an instrument to use for this. They are willing to make sacri-
ces and additional investments so that their children can
avail themselves of the opportunities that these quotas pro-
vide. They do so with fairly limited ability to negotiate a sys-
tem that they have little or no experience with, limited re-
sources, and no safety nets. However, the risks and invest-
ments that these parents make are ignored. Instead, assertions
of their right are perceived as devaluing schools.
Evidence of resistance to the idea of a rights-based approach
and embeddedness in the logic of markets is also seen in the
alternatives offered to quotas. Private schools would like to do
it on their own terms, as charity, or as some describe, corpo-
rate social responsibility.
Implications and Conclusion
No matter how faulty, existing structures cannot be simply
wished away. They have to be understood. By interrogating
them on several dimensions, quotas provide a window to under-
standing the values and beliefs of signicant actors in the Indian
education structure. To ignore the agency that actors such as
school principals have would not only condemn the quotas to im-
mediate failure, but also absolve them of all responsibility.
The lack of faith in institutions to protect them in case of
motivated allegations and the fear of a trial by media makes
the leadership feel insecure in trying to work with a vulnera-
ble population that it admittedly has little experience of work-
ing with. Therefore, there is reason to be empathetic to their
positions. However, the dominant discourse that seems to be
developing around the issue of integration among private
school principals is one that not only emphasises differences
between children of different economic backgrounds, but
also normative privileges, keeping children from different
economic backgrounds separate. The discourse supports
practices that differentiate students based on economic back-
ground, or take it as beyond its control. Accompanying this
prioritisation of economic resources is a fundamental dislike
for a rights-based approach, especially one that tries to
include private schools.
This may be the natural consequence of leading a private
organisation, but arguably it should not be so for institutions
committed to a public purpose by law. Where this leads a society
that is increasingly dependent on private schooling should be
of concern to those aspiring for a just and stable society. The
complexities are exacerbated by a state that is engaged in sig-
nicant social engineering, with little capacity to do so (Pritchett
2009). For example, the governments perceived failure to
include private schools, or keep them informed, and the lack of
a proper plan of action becomes justiable reasons to resist
the policy. Coupled with increasing evidence of its failure to
provide quality schooling, any legitimacy that the state has to
direct education in Indian society is fast eroding. If education
has the task of promoting a common widely shared perspec-
tive of social values and society at large and a sense of equity
(Tilak 2012), it is unclear where the initiative will come from.
Our study suggests it is unrealistic to hope that private actors
will perform this task on their own accord.
Our study also raises questions for proponents of other insti-
tutional arrangements for schooling. For example, an unstated
but implicit assumption underlying arguments in favour of a
voucher system (Shah 2009) is that schools (and the people
who run them) are indifferent to the source of nancial re-
sources a child uses and therefore the childs experience in
school is independent of whether the funds for her education
are from the public exchequer or her household. This would be
a questionable assumption in any hierarchical, class-based
s ociety. But it is a particularly questionable one where educa-
tional outcomes continue to have a very rigid relationship with
SPECIAL ARTICLE
september 20, 2014 vol xlIX no 38 EPW Economic & Political Weekly 72
social origins (for example, on caste and religion, see Desai
et al 2010). With some principals even referring to fee-paying
children and the households they come from as acche log
(good people), there are underlying clashes in values and
visions of education that need to be resolved if schooling expe-
riences have to become truly independent of socio-economic
backgrounds.
While we have empathy for several arguments made by the
principals, the one that we have least empathy for is the pater-
nalistic view that children from weaker sections should be
kept separate for their own good, to protect them from being
emotionally scarred. It would be naive to believe that children
do not encounter and learn to live with worse differences on a
daily basis. To argue that disadvantaged children be kept in
separate schools means protecting privileges that have so far
remained unchallenged.
Although limited, we do nd some evidence that some edu-
cators perhaps see quotas as an opportunity to bring in social
change. Therefore, by questioning the rationality of systems
they inhabit, quotas potentially open up a space for educators
to act on values and commitments that they otherwise would
not have been able to. Further, quotas potentially create an
instrument around which to organise democratic action, as
civil society organisations such as Social Jurist, the RTE Task
Force, Institute of Social Studies Trust, and the IIM-A RTE
Resource Centre, among others have done. As Apple (2011: 27)
points out,
Struggles over schooling over what should be taught, over the rela-
tionship between schools and local communities, over the very ends
and means of the institution itself have provided a crucible for the
formation of larger social movements toward equality.
The danger, of course, is that grossly inadequate policy responses
such as the quotas, which at best cater for the needs of a few,
can also serve to create divisions and diffuse any mobilisation
around the much larger necessity of high-quality public education
that serves the needs of a democratic society.
Notes
1 This was the outcome of a public interest litiga-
tion, Social Jurist vs Government of National
Capital Territory of Delhi and Ors (CW No 3156
of 2002), in Delhi High Court on implementa-
tion of quotas in January 2004; Supreme Court
judgment for fee cap (Modern School vs Union
of India and Ors), 27 April 2004 (Juneja 2005).
2 The translation was done independently by the
two authors and subsequently reconciled.
3 We were told that although there is a provision
to be reimbursed Rs 500-Rs 600 every year
for books, they obtain it only if schools send lists
of EWS students. With little in it for them, more
often than not schools avoid the additional
p aperwork.
References
Apple, M W (2011): Democratic Education in Neo-
liberal and Neoconservative Times, Inter-
national Studies in Sociology of Education,
21 (1), pp 21-31.
Azim Premji Foundation (2011): Special Issue:
School Leadership (Newsletter No XVI).
Balagopalan, S and R Subrahmanian (2003): Dalit
and Adivasi Children in Schools, IDS Bulletin,
34 (1), pp 43-54.
Bedadur, N (2011): Autonomy and Accountability
of the School Head: How Much Is Too Much?
Learning Curve, XVI, pp 59-62.
Bhatacharjee, Malini, Mysoor Dolashree and A Siva-
ramakrishnan (2014): RTE Grievance Redress
in Karnataka, Economic & Political Weekly,
49 (23).
Centre for Civil Society (2011): A Perception Study
on the Implementation and Impact of Clause
12, http://righttoeducation.in/sites/default/
les/Perception%20study%20on%20the%20
implementation%20and%20impact%20of%20
Clause%2012.pdf
Day, Christopher, Pam Sammons, David Hopkins,
Alma Harris, Ken Leithwood, Qing Gu and Ali-
son Kington (2009): The Impact of School
Leadership on Pupil Outcomes, Research Re-
port DCSF-RR108, National College for School
Leadership, Dept of Children, Schools and
Families, http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/11329/1/DCSF-
RR108.pdf
Deepika, K (2013): The Challenge Begins Now for
RTE Children, The Hindu, 4 January, http://
www.thehindu.com/news/cities/bangalore/
the-challenge-begins-now-for-rte-children/ar-
ticle4567558.ece
Desai, S, C Adams and A Dubey (2010): Segmented
Schooling: Inequalities in Primary Education
in S Thorat and K Newman (ed.), Blocked by
Caste: Economic Discrimination and Social
E xclusion in Modern India (New Delhi: Oxford
University Press).
Desai, S, A Dubey, R Vanneman and R Banerji
(2008): Private Schooling in India: A New
Educational Landscape, India Policy Forum, 5
(1), pp 1-58.
Desai, S and A Thorat (2012): Social Inequalities
in Education in India Infrastructure Report,
2012: Private Sector in Education (New Delhi:
Routledge), pp 44-51.
Duncan, Greg J and Richard J Murnane (2011):
Introduction in Greg J Duncan and Richard J
Murnane (ed.), Whither Opportunity? Rising
Inequality, Schools, and Childrens Life Chances
(New York: Russel Sage Foundation).
Jain, P S and R H Dholakia (2010): Right to Educa-
tion Act and Public-Private Partnership, Eco-
nomic & Political Weekly, http://www.epw.in/
discussion/right-education-act-and-public-pri-
vate-partnership.html
Juneja, Nalini (2005): Exclusive Schools in Delhi:
Their Land and the Law, Economic & Political
Weekly, 40 (33).
Khan, Imran (2012): No Way to Teach a Lesson in
Class, Tehelka, 8 April, http://tehelka.com/
no-way-to-teach-a-lesson-in-class/
Louis, K S, L Kenneth, K L Wahlstrom, S E Ander-
son, M Michlin, B Mascal and S Moore (2010):
Learning from Leadership: Investigating the
Links to Improved Student Learning: Final Re-
port of Research to the Wallace Foundation,
University of Minnesota and University of
T oronto, http://www.wallacefoundation.org/
knowledge-center/school-leadership/key-re-
search/Documents/Investigating-the-Links-
to-Improved-Student-Learning.pdf
Lipsky, M (2010): Street-Level Bureaucracy: Dilem-
mas of the Individual in Public Services (30th
Anniversary Edition), Russell Sage Foundation.
Majumdar, M and J Mooij (2012): Education and In-
equality in India: A Classroom View, Routledge.
Noronha, C and P Srivastava (2013): Indias Right
to Education Act: Household Experiences and
Private School Responses, Education Support
Program Working Paper Series 2013, No 53,
PERI, Open Societies Foundations.
Padma, M, A M Sarangapani, R Mukhopadhyay and
A Namala (2014): Inclusion of Marginalised
Children in Private Unaided Schools under the
Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Edu-
cation Act, 2009, Oxfam India.
Planning Commission (2011): Approach Paper to
Twelfth Five-Year Plan, http://planningcommis-
sion.gov.in/plans/planrel/12appdrft/appraoch_
12plan.pdf
Pritchett, L (2009): Is India a Flailing State? Detours
on the Four Lane Highway to Modernization,
HKS Faculty Research Working Paper Series
No RWP09-013, Harvard, https://research.hks.
harvard.edu/publications/workingpapers/cita-
tion.aspx?PubId=6599&type=FN&PersonId=88
Ramachandran, V and T Naorem (2013): What It
Means To Be a Dalit or Tribal Child in Our
Schools, Economic & Political Weekly, 48 (44).
Resh, N and Y Dar (1992): Learning Segregation in
Junior High Schools in Israel: Causes and Con-
sequences, School Effectiveness and School
Improvement, 3(4), pp 272-92.
(2011): The Rise and Fall of School Integration
in Israel: Research and Policy Analysis, British
Educational Research Journal, 38 (6), pp 929-51.
Sarkar, C C (2012): Right of Children to Free and
Compulsory Education Act, 2009 and Its Im-
plementation in Private Sector in Education,
Routledge, pp 33-43.
Shah, P (2009): School Choice: Assuring Quality
Education to All, Vikalpa, 34(2), pp 70-77.
Society for Unaided Private Schools of Rajasthan
(2012): No WP No 95 of 2010, Supreme Court of
India, 4 December, http://courtnic.nic.in/su-
premecourt/temp/95201031242012p.txt
Srivastava, P and C Noronha (2014): Institutional
Framing of the Right to Education Act: Contes-
tation, Controversy and Concessions, Eco nomic
& Political Weekly, 49 (18), pp 51-58.
Tilak, J B G (2012): Right to Homeschooling vs
Right to Education, Economic & Political Weekly,
47 (41), pp 19-20.
Velaskar, P (2010): Quality and Inequality in
I ndian Education: Some Critical Policy Con-
cerns, Contemporary Education Dialogue,
7 (1), pp 58-93.
Wallace Foundation (2012): The School Principal
as Leader: Guiding Schools to Better Teaching
and Learning.
Welman, J C and F Kruger (2001): Research Method-
ology: For the Business and Administrative
Sciences, Oxford University Press.