Why we still need a women’s education revolution in India

Why we still need a women’s education revolution in India

Sujay Rao Mandavilli

 

Women in ancient India are thought to have enjoyed some rights in education with women scholars such as Gargi Vachaknavi, Maitreyi, Apala, and Lopamudra making some intellectual  contributions. Female sages or poets were called Rishikas in ancient times. Some women were scholars for life (they were known as Brahmavadinis) while others studied until marriage (they were known as Sadyodvahas). During the Buddhist period, some women who were known as bhikshunis were allowed to join monasteries for education. During the Mughal period, princesses and elite women such as Gulbadan Begum, Nur Jahan, Jahan Ara, and Roshan Ara were educated, while others were not. Much changed during the Bengal renaissance. The Bengal Renaissance was a nineteenth century socio-cultural, and intellectual movement centered around Calcutta, and it was driven by noted figures such Raja Rammohan Roy, Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar, Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay, Debendranath Tagore, and Rabindranath Tagore. Many traditional practices were questioned during this period, and science and knowledge greatly emphasized along with education. Later, significant contributions to science were made by Jagadish Chandra Bose, Satyendra Nath Bose, and Meghnad Saha.

Raja Ram Mohan Roy fought for women's education and empowerment to combat the then widely prevalent evils such as Sati, child marriage, and the purdah system. Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar set up many girls’ schools in the Bengal region, which encouraged women’s participation in education greatly. John Elliot Drinkwater Bethune founded the Calcutta Female School in 1849, which became the first women's college in India. Begum Rokeya Sakhawat Hossain promoted women's education among Muslim women in Bengal, and she also established the Sakhawat Memorial Girls' High School in Kolkata in 1911. Jyothiba Phule along with his wife Savitribai Phule actively promoted women's education in India by opening the first girls' school in Pune in 1848. Soon other women such as Fatima Sheikh, Tarabai Modak, Anutai Wagh, and Pandita Ramabai joined the fray in fighting for women’s educational rights. Annie Besant advocated for women's education and also co-founded the Benares Hindu University in 1916. Durgabai Deshmukh founded the Andhra Mahila Sabha to empower women through the mechanism of education.

Women's education in post-independence India has seen remarkable growth in many parts of the country, with female literacy rising from single digit levels in 1947 to over seventy percent today. After independence, the Indian government established several committees such as the national committee on women’s education of 1958 to empower women through the medium of education. Separate schools were also sought to be set up for women in some areas. Other schemes promoted by the Indian government included the Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalaya for rural girls from weaker sections of society and the Mahila Samakhya Program for women’s empowerment. Many of these programs were integrated into the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan program, and other programs. The Mahila Samakhya Program which is also known as the education for women’s equality program was launched in 1989 based on the 1986 national policy of education, to empower rural women through the medium education. Women’s collectives or sanghas were set up by women to solve their own problems collectives, and seek out solutions. Legal, banking and digital literacy of women were also promoted by some state governments.

Despite significant improvements, gender gaps in educational attainment persist, particularly in rural areas and disadvantaged committees with traditional attitudes, and economic constraints posing significant hurdles. School dropout ratios also remain high particularly among women. Female workforce participation also remains low for the most part. While significant progress has been made in achieving near-universal enrollment at the primary level, gaps persist at a secondary level. Only a few Indian states have bridged gender gaps in education more or less completely.  Kerala, Mizoram and Tamil Nadu, have always been strong in women’s empowerment and women’s education, while Rajasthan, West Bengal and Chattisgarh have made impressive progress of late. Rajasthan’s model particularly appears to be worthy of emulation, as gender gaps in education have been bridged significantly. Bihar, on the other hand, continues to face extremely high dropout rates and lower female literacy due to socio-cultural barriers and stigmas such as early marriage. However, some progress has been made by Bihar, particularly since 2011. Schemes such as the Indira Mahila Shakti scheme have sought to boost digital literacy skills of women among other things. Andhra Pradesh, despite its strengths in other fields, continues to be weak in women’s education, particularly in rural and tribal areas.

Again, we believe that the time has come for the central government to launch a new flagship program to consolidate on previous gains, and close the gaps further down to negligible levels. State wise and district wise assessments required, and states must lead programs and missions with inputs and coordination from the central government. Indian states must learn from each other, and the central government must coordinate the show and focus on backward areas. The NITI Aayog can play a critical role here.  

 

Why the Indian education system may need a radical overhaul in the twenty-first century

 

Why the Indian education system may need a radical overhaul in the twenty-first century  

Sujay Rao Mandavilli

While the roots of India’s education system date back to ancient India, let us begin our review of India’s education system from the times of British India for convenience sake. The formalized education system in British India dates back to the early part of the nineteenth century, and was primarily designed to produce a class of English proficient Indians to assist the British government in its administration. In other words, it aimed to produce a new class of Indians who were Indian in blood, but British in intellect and taste. This essentially began India’s transition from traditional, indigenous education systems to more contemporary and westernized education systems. This process was essentially and effectively set in motion by Thomas Babbington Macaulay’s Minute of 1835 and Wood’s Despatch of 1854. The latter is sometimes called the Magna Carta of India. Not only were English schools set up, but major universities such as universities at Calcutta, Madras, and Bombay were set up during the course of the second half of the nineteenth century. This approach was exemplified by the downward filtration theory, according to which a small class of elite Indians had to be created. Soon, many Indians such as Raja Ram Mohan Roy and Jyothiba Phule supported the British government in their cause, and traditional Patashalas and Madrassas began to decline and wither away in due course. Later, the British established commissions such as the Sadler Commission, and the Sargent Plan to develop the Indian education system further. However, these British endeavours were marked by a disdain and contempt for Indian traditions, and were primarily aimed at consolidating British power in India. By 1947, there were huge gaps in educational attainments of Indians, and the overall literacy rate was abysmally low.

While literacy rates languished somewhat in the early years after India’s independence, there have indeed been very impressive strides since the 1980’s and the 1990’s. The number of schools has also demonstrated an impressive increase from 140,000 schools at the time of independence in 1947, to over one and a half million by the year 2020-21. Likewise, the number of colleges has increased spectacularly from under six hundred to over 42,000. The number of universities has increased impressively too, and of later many private universities are being established, including several eminent foreign ones. Jawaharlal Nehru, India's first Prime Minister, prioritized education as the basic foundation of nation-building, focusing on scientific, technical, and higher education to modernize India, and build a scientific temper among its denizens. Nehru is credited with establishing elite institutions such as the Indian Institutes of technology, and he set up the University Grants Commission as well. In spite of all this, primary education sector was not universalized, and the sector saw extremely slow growth in the early decades of India’s independence. In the mid 1960’s, the Kothari Commission also known as the National Education Commission, was set up by the Government of India to advance India’s educational sector, and it was chaired by Dr. Daulat Singh Kothari, who was the chairman of the University Grants Commission. Its recommendations led to India’s first national policy on education in 1968. This policy aimed to provide free and compulsory education for all children up to the age of fourteen, as mandated by the Indian constitution. There was also some emphasis on science, technology and research, though not much.

Later, in 1986, another education policy was introduced, and this aimed to reduce social and cultural disparities in education.  Navodaya Vidyalayas were launched, and the Operation Blackboard was launched to upgrade India’s infrastructure. A major revision to this policy was attempted by the PV Narasimha Rao government in 1992. Later, performance assessment of education systems and educational outcomes was also emphasized. The Sarva Siksha Abhiyan was launched in 2001 under the leadership of Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee, and it aimed for the universalization of elementary Education. The Right to education act, was enacted in 2009, and it recognized education as a fundamental right for every citizen. Later, the Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan unified three previous schemes: Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan, and Teacher Education into a cogent and coherent framework . In spite of all this, there is plenty of scope for progress and improvement. In 2018, the Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak stated that Indians lacked creativity, arguing that the Indian education system prioritized rote learning over innovative and creative thinking. He may have been right in a way. In spite of enormous progress made over the years, significant challenges remain such as the improvement in the overall quality of the education system.

There are still wide variations in quality of education between socioeconomic groups and sociocultural groups. There is uneven progress among Indian states, and some states still lag behind in education. There are differences in quality of education between government schools and private schools, and the infrastructure in government schools in India leaves a lot to be desired despite some improvement in recent decades. There is still a wide difference between level of education for men and women, and gender disparities in education still need to addressed by most states, including the problem of school drop outs. There is still too much emphasis or rote learning and memorization. Rote learning may not longer be required in this age of internet and artificial intelligence apart from foundational knowledge, and more innovative and creative thinking would certainly be required, which many Indian students lack. Likewise, critical thinking skills, out of the box thinking skills, and lateral thinking skills would also be required, along with adaptive intelligence and creative intelligence. While proficiency in STEM subjects is important, there has to be an emphasis on scientific method, and the philosophy of science itself must improve. Students must develop the ability to distinguish science form pseudoscience, and logic and reasoning are also extremely important along with problem solving skills.

There has to be a process for the continuous mainstreaming of knowledge, and syllabuses must be updated from time to time. Educational researchers and planners must therefore be up-to-date with the latest developments in different parts of the world, not only in different subjects, but in the field of education and pedagogy itself. Artificial intelligence is being increasingly used in different parts of the world in education, and India’s education planners must be well-versed and fully aware of the latest developments in the field. Full automation of education may be some way off, but this is bound to happen at some point beginning with higher education. Again, there will be challenges involved such as infrastructure gaps, but the government must sort them out proactively. We must also shift from a follower mindset to a leader mindset, and India and other developing countries can be trendsetters in the field of education. This may be required because there may be several vested interests in western countries. In addition to quantity, we must also emphasize quality of education, and aim to produce high quality human resources. Data driven planning is of paramount importance, and ethnography driven approaches and techniques are extremely important, with data drawn from many subgroups of the population. This has largely not been followed till date, and we would like to see a change in this department over the next couple of years and decades.

We also need functionalism in education, and what is taught to students must be relevant for the purpose and fully justified. Therefore, medieval poetry for example, can be left off completely from the menu, and even in the case of English, mostly functional and technical English would be required. No one size fits all bill is possible in the realm of the medium of education, and a flexible approach would be required here. Many students learn best in their mother tongue, and many teachers are ill-trained for teaching in English too. We had also argued for the lexical development of Indian languages particularly in the arena of technical vocabulary, and we have also proposed several guidelines in this regard. Along with proficiency in the mother tongue, a strong foundation in English would be required, along with knowledge of another Indian or foreign language if possible. Along with a strong emphasis on STEM - science, technology, mathematics, and language students need to be strong in numerical skills. Students must be made technologically savvy, and students hunger and thirst for knowledge must be kindled. We need market aligned skills, and practical and useful language must be taught, along with essential life skills and interpersonal skills. Foundational concepts and foundational competencies must be taught along with practical application of knowledge

Developing countries can take the lead in pedagogical theory, and developing countries can learn from each other more. Developing countries can help each other more, through what we may call horizontal collaboration. NITI Aayog can act as a facilitator, and it must prepare and examine case studies continuously, not only from India, but also abroad.  Indian states can take the lead in design of education systems, and everything need not be left to the centre; this will foster a spirit of competitive federalism. We also need concepts of educational psychology and learner psychology to be applied in the practical domain, and this can be allowed to drive and determine learner outcomes. We need to bridge social, cultural and economic gaps, as this remains a major area of concern. Scaffolding and support for weak students can be provided, teacher training can be provided based on raw data as well. We have completed the first stage of our education journey as most Indians now possess basic literacy. It is now time to move education to the next level, and focus on the quality of education and higher order education in due course.

 

 

 

Universalizing social science for the benefit of the whole world: An interview with Sujay Rao Mandavilli

 

Universalizing social science for the benefit of the whole world: An interview with Sujay Rao Mandavilli

This interview was recorded with Sujay Rao Mandavilli on the 10^th of March, 2026

Can you tell us a little bit about your background and a little bit about your mission?

My family hails more or less from an intellectual background. My father was a professor at the Indian institute of technology, Madras. Growing up, I was surrounded by a large number of professors’ children. This naturally kindled my intellectual passion. I was also fascinated with mechanics and mechanical objects. This inspired me to design a fully working and functional telescope when I was just ten or eleven years old. Unfortunately, I made a mistake by getting into commerce which did not suit me at all. However, I eventually got back on track and tried to combine the best of both worlds, by getting into information technology, and later social science. That is why I completed by Masters in Anthropology from the Indira Gandhi National Open University much later, in 2020.

What is the sum and essence of your mission?

Contrary to popular perception, science is very ancient. Anything that follows a scientific method, precision, rigour and scholarly objectivity is called science. Science in a way began way back in the Stone Age when humans accidentally discovered fire, and developed their first stone age tools. Prehistoric science developed independently in different parts of the world, not just in the West. Science in a much more formal sense of the terms began in the Old World civilizations, namely Mesopotamia, Egypt, and the Indus Valley civilization, which were not western in the traditional sense of the term. Even Ancient India and Ancient China contributed to science, and later, the Islamic world. It was only with Ancient Greece that western science really took off. Of course, the West pulled off strongly and impressively with the Renaissance and the Enlightenment, and scientific endeavour has really become lopsided ever since. Asian countries have taken off impressively since the 1970’s, but this is mostly in technology, not in pure and theoretical science. We must distinguish between the two concepts and the two streams foundationally and crucially are quite different.  Without a solid foundation of theoretical science, applied science and technology will be weak, and their full potential will never be realized. We also believe scientific method and the philosophy of science needs a foundational reboot, and we therefore have published over fifth papers on these two topics. All these papers are available on researchgate and elsewhere.

The very format of many fields in the social sciences, we believe is outdated. Fields such as social and cultural anthropology still largely deal with white Europeans exploring primitive and so-called other peoples inhabiting distant and far away exotic lands. The entire format of many fields of the social sciences is therefore in dire need of a radical overhaul. Even Indian anthropologists and sociologists have slavishly and blindly followed the outdated western format given the fact that there is relatively very little new or original thinking in an Indian and Asian context. Very few scientists and researchers have chosen or decided to take up social sciences in Asia and other developing countries. All this must change within the next couple for decades. Even psychologists and psychiatrists in India and elsewhere base their treatment and counseling on outdated western paradigms regardless of contest. For example, the outdated Rorschach inkblot test is still widely used in research institutions in India blindly and aimlessly without further ado or consideration.

Unlike natural sciences, social sciences are very much culture driven and context driven. For example, the law of gravity or Avogadro’s law, apply equally all over the world without any variation. Thover- is is however not obviously true of the social sciences which are contest-specific and data-driven. We do not however, have much by way of data-driven research or data-driven theorization in the social sciences.  This makes social sciences automatically weak, and less practically aligned with societies needs and expectations, particularly in the non-western world. There is also too much rampant theorization, and too much emphasis on esoteric pursuits. This is because of a publish and perish culture in the west, and too much emphasis of careerism in science. There is also too much emphasis on academic freedom in the scientific realm, and too little emphasis on the social responsibility of scientists and researchers. Science still continues to be largely value-free, but all this must change over the next couple of decades or so.  We must also build up a strong scientific foundation elsewhere in the nn-western world, particularly in developing countries. The west can continue to lead too, based on the merits of the science it produces.

Social science must become a force for social good, but alas, and unfortunately, we do not see any signs of this happening. Western interests and cabals are involved, and all these vested interests and cabals might even want to ensure this does not happen.  We need practical and pragmatic social sciences, but that does not appear to be happening. That is why we launched the Institute for the study of the globalization of science and other initiatives to set right this anomaly. We have also published over one hundred and fifty papers in the furtherance and advancement of our ideal. Developing countries are still weak in science. This is because education systems in India and elsewhere were developed during the British era to produce clerks for the British East India company. There is almost no innovation and creativity, and Indian intellectualism is as feeble as ever, and is often ideology-driven or agenda driven.  For example, we have Marxists, Dravidian nationalists and Hindutva groups all engaged in a ding dong battle for India’s soul. Few, if any Indian thinkers are able to think completely independently for themselves. Even seventy-five years after decolonization, colonialism still persists in many forms, particularly in the intellectual domain. Many are still stuck in the hand me down era of technological transfer to “third world” countries to think for themselves. Much has changed since 2000, however, but we must accelerate the process of change. We also need horizontal collaboration between developing countries in addition to vertical collaboration. This is because the problems faced by developing countries are often quite different from that of developed countries.  All my one hundred and fifty papers and fifteen books deal with this fundamental challenge. Many of these books have been published by Eliva press Google books, and Amazon books.

What exactly inspired you to take up this mission?

As I told you, I have been interested in research since my childhood. From around 1993, I have been deeply interested in the Aryan problem. I explored various layers and various perspectives of the Aryan problem over the next couple of years, and it was obvious to me that the problem and the issue at hand was far more complex than what met the eye. Many different scholars exploring the issue had different perspectives and points of view, but none of them were willing to listen to each other. All these experiences taught me the importance of critical thinking, non-ideology, non-dogma, and the dangers of oversimplification. However, I actively entered research only on the 14^th of November 2005. On this day, I contacted Michael Witzel, Steve Farmer, David Frawley, Richard Sproat and others, and began to discuss the Aryan problem with them. This led to my first papers and publications a couple of years later. 

What are the challenges you faced?

There are many vested interests, and many conflicts of interests everywhere. For example, many western researchers and scientists want to maintain  their control, power and hegemony over science and scientific institutions, and thwart the emergence of the developing world. Some are worried about the effects of globalization too, just as Marxists are in India. I observed this during my brief interaction with Dr Gregory Possehl in 2007. Indians too are divided into too many camps. But we must always see the bigger picture, and aim to get the bigger picture always. Humanity is one, and science is also one. Dr Michael Witzel of Harvard University told me in 2010 that I was on a quixotic quest. But this is a trifle and a bagatelle; this has been said about virtually any new idea or mission. The dust should settle automatically with the passage of time. One of the problems is that many researchers are too naïve to understand vested interests and conflicts our interests. Perhaps, education systems do not prepare students that way.

Why do you say Intellectual revolutions and enlightenments are required in the developing world?

Yes. This is because Indian are still steeped in superstition and blind faith. Few Indians have been able to develop any historical models worth their salt. People talk about internet in the Mahabharata era. Some educated people say evolution is a myth. Even highly educated people we interviewed said the earth was two thousand years old. Clearly, something is wrong. The entire field of pedagogy we believe is obsolete, and requires reform. That is why We have written extensively on the need for pedagogical reform. Science communication too is weak.. Both must change. We do not need a great deal of rote learning any more in this era of the internet, except for basic concepts perhaps. We need rational thinking, we need innovative thinking, we need creative thinking. We need to emphasize scientific method, which must also change with the times, and be updated suitably. The philosophy of science must also mature and evolve with the times. Even researchers and scientists often are taught not how to think, but what to think. We have interviewed many scientists and researchers informally over the years, and most of them were very weak in critical thinking. Researchers must also be taught the importance of objectivity in science along with ideology-free science and dogma free science. We also need cross-cultural research design, along with interdisciplinary and cross cultural research, and this must be emphasized for the social sciences. Likewise, the process of mainstreaming new knowledge is tardy in science, and this must be remediated.      

Is there anything else you would like to tell us?

Yes. Different have different problems. We do not need copy paste scholarship. Developing counties have still not developed their own intellectual frameworks, and tend to slavishly copy and imitate the west. This is particularly true of the social sciences. For example, some say, there is a population implosion. Once, there was population explosion, now there is population implosion. There is sometimes too much sensationalism, and too less robust scholarship.  Again, why are people not worried about the population explosion in Africa? This is because scholarship is too western centric Different countries have different problems. What works in Iceland will not work in Bangladesh. I thing we are seeing a dangerous pronatalist trend among some quarters in India. This is absolutely dangerous. India will be one of the worst involved in global warming. The Himalayan glaciers are thought to be melting. All these factors need to be taken into account and consideration. Even countries with relatively low fertility rates are doing well, while countries in Sub-Saharan Africa with high fertility rates have not done very well for themselves. It all depends on the quality of human resources. We need to move beyond binary thinking and embrace complexity. Obviously, pronatalist poliices in India will beget dangerous counter-reactions such a boosting the supply of unskilled resources. Developing countires need to conduct their own research on all vital issues.

Thank you Sujay Rao Mandavilli for talking to us and sharing your views with us, have a nice day.

Interview links

https://theentrepreneurpost.com/sujay-rao-mandavilli-on-reforming-social-sciences-and-building-scientific-foundations-in-developing-nations/

copies at

 

https://mumbaiexclusive.com/sujay-rao-mandavilli-discusses-the-need-to-universalize-social-science-for-global-progress/

https://tedxmagazine.com/universalizing-social-science-for-the-benefit-of-the-whole-world-an-interview-with-sujay-rao-mandavilli/

https://forbesamerica.com/interview-with-sujay-rao-mandavilli-rethinking-social-science-for-a-changing-world/

https://hindustanreporter.com/sujay-rao-mandavilli-on-intellectual-revolutions-scientific-reform-and-the-future-of-social-sciences/

 

 

 

 

 

Sujay Rao Mandavilli's globalization of science mission - Mission and six pillars

 

Mission statement

To democratize and universalize frameworks and paradigms particularly in, though not necessarily limited to, various fields in the social sciences, and free them from the shackles or limitations of Eurocentrism and other ideologies, while at the same time laying the groundwork for science, intellectualism and pedagogy particularly in developing countries with the view to maximizing self-fulfillment and social, cultural and economic productivity.

The six pillars of his mission

01

Revitalizing various fields of the social sciences for the twenty-first century and beyond by moving them beyond colonialism and imperialism: This is the reason why we had published over one hundred core papers, and eight books all of which are online.

02

Creating intellectual revolutions in various parts of the developing world on the lines of the renaissance and enlightenment that took place in Europe a couple of centuries ago. We had published a paper on twenty-first century intellectualism in 2023. In addition refer to our various other papers which contribute to this mission.

03

Rearming pedagogy and education systems for the twenty-first century and beyond. We had published papers on anthropological pedagogy, and the sociology of science, besides a book on rebooting and revitalizing pedagogy for the twenty-first century pedagogy.

04

Modulating the role of religion in the twenty-first century and beyond through better education, social sciences research techniques, and a concerted effort among governments. Refer to our book on the role played by religion in the twenty-first century and beyond.

05

Developing bottom up developing models for the developing world which would contribute to our other objectives as well. Refer to our papers on anthropological economics, and our book on economic development models.

06

Environmental movements must be integrated, holistic, and must also take into account and consideration, the needs and requirements of people in developing countries. We also need to launch the “Low populations for the environment” movement (LOPE movement) as relatively low birth rates can lead to an “Evergreen demographic boon”. We also simultaneously need to launch a “High-quality human resources movement” for better quality human resources.