Equity in School Water and Sanitation

More documents

Recommendations

Info

EQUITY IN SCHOOL WATER AND SANITATIONget priority; they may extend this privilege todominant caste children, but not to Dalit children.It is also seen that in the list of errands done bythe children in schools, fetching water for teachersis routinely not entrusted to Dalit children. In manyof the villages, when the water sources arecommon, Dalit children have to wait for their waterpots to be filled (UNICEF, 2007:14).In the last five years, the midday meal hasemerged as another area of exclusion. Apart fromnumerous newspaper reports, recent researchpoints out that, ‘In measuring Dalit participatoryempowerment in and ownership of the MiddayMeal Scheme, the IIDS survey data unearthsinteresting patterns both in terms of national trendsand interstate variations. In hiring practices,Rajasthan is consistently the least likely to employDalits, with 8% of respondent villages having aDalit cook, and not a single respondent villagehaving a Dalit Midday Meal Scheme organizer.Tamil Nadu hires proportionally more Dalits, whilestill keeping them firmly in the minority, with 31%of respondent villages having Dalit cooks, and 27%having Dalit organizers’ … ‘One argument againsthiring Dalit cooks is that where the society is notprepared to accept a shared meal cooked by aDalit, it will “create tension”, schools will beparalysed and (dominant caste) children’sattendance will drop, thus defeating the purposeof the midday meal. In terms of treatment of Dalitsin the MDM scheme, research has found severalinstances of segregated seating, or segregatedmeals altogether, and even of being served foodinferior to or in lesser amounts than their dominantcaste classmates’ (Lee and Thorat, 2004).Teachers and school principals have beencommonly found to discriminate against Dalitchildren. Recently, an incident in a schoolsnowballed into a human rights issue. On 18December 2008, six Class 8 Dalit girl students inthe private Jyoti Shiksha Niketan in Tejapur villagein Mau district of UP accused their upper casteschool principal of refusing to taste the food thatthey had cooked for their home science practicalexaminations. It was learnt that the principalrefused to eat the food cooked by the Dalit studentsBox 1 Caste-based exclusion in schoolsWe have an appalling body of evidence thatsuggests that the teacher’s preconceptions, biasand behaviour, subtle or overt, conscious orunconscious, operate to discriminate againstchildren of SC/ST backgrounds. Lowexpectations, condescending and downrightabusive, unstated assumptions of ‘deprived ordeficient’ cultural backgrounds, languages andinherent intellectual deficiencies of SC/STchildren and other discriminatory classificationsare common and routine. Discriminationincluding being made to perform menial jobs likesweeping, and being forced to form their owncircles, results in the feeling of isolation,alienation and discrimination experienced by SC/ST children.Source: UNICEF (2007)when they offered it to him. Nearly 40 studentswere asked to bring cooked food from their homes.The teachers were to taste the food for giving themmarks in the subject (theindian.com, 18 December2008). 8It is important to acknowledge that exclusion couldalso be subtle and not discernible in routineclassroom observations or during school-levelinteractions. For example, the teacher may nottouch or encourage any physical contact withchildren from specific communities and otherchildren may move away and sit at a distance fromthese children. In case a child from an excludedgroup touches the water pot or tap, the otherchildren may either not touch or use it, or maywash it before using it; the teacher may allocateduties (like cleaning the room, washing the toilet,bringing water, etc.) differentially. For instance, aDalit child may be asked to clean the room whilea forward caste 9 child may be asked to fetch water.Such practices affect the self-image and selfesteemof excluded children leading to withdrawalfrom classroom processes, from activeengagement with learning, and gradually droppingout.8The principal has been charged with practising discrimination and the police and education authorities are jointly investigatingthe case.9Forward castes include Brahmins, Thakurs and Vaishs, as well as some minority religious groups such as Jains.8
Overcoming Exclusion and Discrimination in South AsiaIndia Country Report3Methodology3.1 Details of the ResearchSitesThis study was conceived as an in-depthqualitative research in UP, India, covering the twodistricts of Lalitpur and Mirzapur. It was agreedthat the total number of villages or sites that theresearch team would cover would be six perdistrict, with each ‘site’ being so selected so as toprovide an opportunity to study not only a primaryschool, but also an upper primary or secondaryor intermediate ‘college’ in order to enable theteam to interact with adolescent boys and girlswho are in school. It was also envisaged that theteam would meet community members and elicittheir responses from each site so that this wouldresult in a complete summary of each site.3.2 The Selection Process andSelection Criteria3.2.1 Selection of districtsThe two districts Lalitpur and Mirzapur wereselected in consultation with UNICEF ICO (Delhi),UNICEF Lucknow and UNICEF ROSA.In 1999/2000, UNICEF’s Child EnvironmentProject (CEP) was initiated in 12 selectedUNICEF-DFID assisted districts in six Indianstates, one of which was Lalitpur in UP (supportedby UNICEF). CEP aimed to ‘increase the numberof households adopting improved home hygienepractices; encourage safe water handling; improvehygiene practices in schools; and ensure equitableaccess to safe water supply and sanitation in ruralareas’. Under this programme, the Governmentof India devised the Gram Panchayat EnvironmentPlan (GPEP) 10 ‘to converge several Governmentstakeholders, non-governmental organizations(NGOs), and community-based institutions tocreate a bridge between the community and theGovernment’ (KCCI Case Study, 2005 11 ; UNICEF,2005). Lalitpur was chosen as a CEP/GPEP pilotproject site as it was one of the three districts withthe worst human development indicators in UP.The second district was chosen after extensiveconsultations/discussions with UNICEF WES andeducation teams. ERU was advised that inMirzapur district (located in the eastern part ofUP) it would be possible to gather sufficientevidence within schools on issues related to waterand sanitation. It was also felt that since goodpractices could be found in the district these couldhave had a positive impact on social practices inthe community and in the schools. Apparently thedistrict has a good record in school and villagesanitation even though it is among the mostbackward districts in (eastern) UP.3.2.2 The sample districtsLalitpur, a part of Jhansi division, is among the 52most deprived districts in India and has beenidentified as a ‘chronic poverty district’ by thegovernment (Mehta et al., 2004). It is located inthe Bundelkhand region of the state where povertyrates are high with the area essentially depending10CEP/GPEP activities were divided into nine plans to focus the project on a target population, especially women/mothers andschool children who are directly influenced by hygiene and sanitation practices. Activities emphasized key water and sanitationbehaviour and sources, and strived for community mobilization (Fukuda et al., 2005).11KCCI: Knowledge Community on Children in India – a UNICEF initiative that can be accessed at www.kcci.org.in. It has acompendium of case studies.9
Page 1: EQUITY IN SCHOOLWATER AND SANITATIO
Page 4 and 5: Cover Photo: © UNICEF/India/Sanjay
Page 6 and 7: EQUITY IN SCHOOL WATER AND SANITATI
Page 78 and 79:
EQUITY IN SCHOOL WATER AND SANITATI
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96:
show all

Equity in School Water and Sanitation

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?