Number Theory: Unpacking educational disparity among Dalits

To be sure, in this article we use the term caste to refer to broader constitutional categories such as SCs, non-SC/STs

Caste-based inequalities in education are well-documented and often regarded as one of the primary reasons for continued socioeconomic disadvantage of the Scheduled Castes (SC). In theory, all subcastes within the SCs hold the right to reservation, and thus, one may argue, the experience at the subcaste level should not deviate much from the average educational outcomes of SCs as a group. To be sure, in this article we use the term caste to refer to broader constitutional categories such as SCs, non-SC/STs etc., whereas we use subcastes to refer to castes that are listed under the broader constitutional category of Scheduled Castes, such as Mahars, Chamars etc., which in reality may not fit the definition of subcastes. However, there is some anecdotal evidence of disparities within SCs at the level of subcastes. In the State of Working India report (2023), we have utilised 1991 and 2011 census data on to check whether such anecdotal evidence is backed by hard data.

Representative file image

Our analysis is limited to subcastes with greater than 0.5% share within the SC population in 12 large states – Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Gujarat, Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Punjab, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal. These states account for 87.27% of India’s overall and 89.45% of total SC population according to the 2011 census.

Further, we do not club the same subcastes across different states, because the same subcaste, say Mahars in Maharashtra, may experience very different trajectories as compared to the Mahars in Madhya Pradesh due to historical political and social developments.

Our analysis relies on a set of figures where we plot the change in educational status at a given level between 1991 and 2011 (on the Y axis) with 1991 educational levels (on the X axis) on a chart. If the states (and groups) with lowest levels in 1991 have had the highest improvement between 1991 and 2011 (showing convergence) we will get a downward sloping line of best fit. If the best performing states (and groups) have shown the highest improvements during this period (showing divergence) the line of best fit will be upward sloping.

The charts that matter

• 
  Has there been a convergence of in the educational status of SCs and non-SC/STs?

  A comparison of 1991 and 2011 census data shows that up to the level of secondary education there is educational convergence between states among both SCs and non-SC/STs. This trend, however, does not hold for post-secondary education since states with high initial levels experienced faster increases in higher education. While we do not have census data after 2011, a comparison of 2011-12 Employment Unemployment Survey and 2021-22 Periodic Labour Force Survey (PLFS) data shows that such trends continue in the post-2011 period as well.
• 
  What about educational convergence at the SC sub-caste level?

  A cursory look at Chart 2 -- where each point represents a state-subcaste combination, such as, Mahars in Maharashtra, Chamars in Bihar, etc. – might tempt us to conclude that the convergence story holds at all levels except higher secondary and above. A careful reading however suggests that the fitted straight line is not the best approximation of the trend. Rather it resembles an inverted U relationship. Simply speaking, this means that SC subcastes that had either lower or higher share at these educational levels, have not experienced much change whereas those at the middle, have.
• 
  The North-South divide in educational experience of SC sub-castes

  What explains the weaker educational convergence across SC subcastes? Could regional differences, i.e., divergence in some states but convergence in some others, be a factor? Clubbing individual states at the level of regions such as the northern (Punjab, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Bihar) and southern (Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh), we find a stark difference. It is the southern states where we find convergence across sub-castes, and in sharp contrast, we find no evidence of convergence in the northern states for any educational levels. In fact, sub-castes in northern states start diverging from the level of secondary education.
• What explains this regional divide?

  The State of Working India report discusses why income is unlikely to be an explanation of the observed divide. In fact, referring to educational indices from Unified District Information System for Education Plus it argues that even differences in educational infrastructure can at best offer a partial explanation. It is entirely likely that there may not be a unique explanation at all, as such differences are likely to be caused by multiple historical, social and political factors that simultaneously shape the subcaste level experiences. These observations are bound to make one curious -- what has happened to this South-North divide over the past 12 years? Or, is there a similar divide for non-SC/ST subcastes as well? Unfortunately, we will not be able to answer these questions unless the government either publishes the subcaste-level data from the socio-economic caste census (2011) or carries out a fresh one, in addition to the long overdue population census itself. (Tamoghna Halder and Akshit Arora are Assistant Professor and Research Associate in the School of Arts and Sciences at Azim Premji University. The opinions expressed in this article are the view of the authors and do not reflect the views of the University.)