Dear Reader,
Hello and welcome back. In case you missed the last part of this series on merit, then I would encourage you to read it. I’m building a chronological, step-by-step argument in this series. The chronology is: the notion of merit before entering colleges (Cutoff Marks), during college (Academic Performance) and after college (Professional Performance).
So, while you can always read these posts out of order, it might be a better experience to read them in order. For your convenience, here is the link to the last post:
So, without further ado, let’s talk about academic performance.
Academic Performance
How do the reserved category students perform in academic spaces after getting admission? What does the data say? There have been a few studies about reservations. For this post, I’ll be using data from three articles:
Impact of Reservation on Admissions to Higher Education in India (Economic & Political Weekly, September 2004).
Academic Performance of OBC Students in Universities: Findings from Three States (Economic & Political Weekly, February 2014)
SC/ST engineering students learn at faster rate: Study (Hindustan Times, April 2018)
These studies tell a very interesting story. According to them, the academic performance of SC/ST/OBC students lagged behind when reservations were initially implemented, but it has improved considerably since then, becoming equal or better than general category students in the recent years.
The data from late 60’s to early 70’s shows us a bleak picture:
Karlekar (1975) reports on a survey by the University Grants Commission (UGC) of 15 universities in the academic year 1965-66, which found that only 36 per cent of 4,100 SC students (in a variety of undergraduate and postgraduate fields) had passed their examinations. Galanter (1984: 63) cites a Maharashtra Development of Social Welfare study in 1969 that found that only 8 per cent of SC and ST students earned their college degrees in the prescribed four years and altogether only 15 per cent ultimately received their degree. Even those who did so tended on average to receive rather low grades. [1]
Comparing the performance of SC students and a stratified sample of non-SC students enrolled at all levels in the 10 colleges over the three academic years from 1970 to 1973, Aikara found that only 23 per cent of SC students passed their year-end examinations, whereas 52 per cent of non-SC students did so.[1]
But when we come to the late 70’s and early 80’s, we see a remarkable improvement:
But an impressive proportion of SC and ST students do ultimately graduate: among students entering in 1972-76 (and graduating by 1984), the SC graduation rate was 92 per cent and the ST rate was 87 per cent.[1]
When we reach the 80’s and 90’s, a study on IITs shows that the previous improvements were sustained, even in the most competitive environments of IITs:
Kirpal and Gupta found, first of all, that the consolidated average graduation rate for all SC and ST students was 84 per cent, as compared with 94 per cent for general-entry students. The average dropout rate of 16 per cent for reserved-seat students entering in the 1980s compares very favourably with the much higher rates of wastage found among such students in the 1970s by Kirpal et al (1985a) and Chitnis (1986).[1]
In the early 2000’s, we see SC/ST/OBC performance numbers matching or even surpassing general category performance, at least in three major states:
( In Tamil Nadu) At the exit level of professional courses, students from the SC category had a better pass rate than even the general category students. [2]
(In Maharashtra) In 2007, OBCs performed better than general category students in CET for both UG and PG courses in medicine (Maharashtra PGM-CET State Merit List, 2008). Contrary to common perception, in addition to OBCs, most other reserved category students also performed better than general category students in both UG and PG CET entrance. Also, a higher percentage of OBC students (77%) scored in the highest range of 60% to 80% than general category students (68%) in the HSC exam.
The performance of students from all categories, except STs, who passed the final exam of management in Mumbai University, was almost on par. OBCs, SCs and NTs/DTs performed as well as general category students. In 2007, for BTech Agriculture at Marathwada University, the final year performance of OBC students was better than general category ones, almost touching a 100% pass rate.[2]
(In Uttar Pradesh) The performance in the final year degree examinations in six major degree programmes reveals that there was no marked difference among OBCs and general category students. The SCs and STs combined had a higher pass percentage in all the six courses compared to OBCs and general category students. In 2007, in BTech, about 72% of the OBC students passed compared to 80% from general category and 85% from SCs/STs. Only in MCA did OBC students have a marginally higher passing rate than general category (UPTU 2007).[2]
The last study looked at data from 2007. It has been 16 years since then. Barring any extraordinary events, I expect this pattern of improving performance amongst reserved category students to have continued.
The next data point I found was in a news report based on a joint global study conducted by Stanford University, the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) and the World Bank, in 2017. It says:
Engineering students from the Scheduled Tribes (ST) and the Scheduled Castes (SC) learn at a faster rate than those from the general category, according to a study carried out by Stanford University, the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) and the World Bank.
The study was conducted on 45,453 first and third-year students across the country. It covered one Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), seven National Institutes of Technology (NITs) and other engineering institutes under the AICTE. [3]
So what does it all mean? Why has the academic performance of reserved category students improved over the years to the point of matching or surpassing that of the general category students? What does it say about ‘merit’? And what role does reservation play in all of this?
The first paper gives us the an explanation of the initial poor performance and the later improved performance, in terms of social, economic and cultural capital.
First of all, SC and ST students – with relatively few exceptions – come from a distinctly less privileged socio-economic backgrounds than their peers. All of the scholars whose work was cited in the previous section provide evidence of the relatively low socio-economic status of SC and ST students. For example, Aikara (1980: Table 4.2) found that only 5 per cent of the SC students in his sample had at least one college-educated parent, as compared with 32 per cent of non-SC students; 34 per cent of the SC students had two illiterate parents, as compared with 11 per cent in the case of non-SC students. Furthermore, 88 per cent of SC students had at least partial freeships to support them in their studies, and only 4 per cent of them relied largely or fully on parents of relatives for financial support; whereas the corresponding figures for non-SC students were 14 and 64 per cent. Aikara (1980: Table 3) also noted that the primary reason for which SC students dropped out of college was failure at exams; but almost as significant was a need to find employment in order to provide financial support for oneself and one’s family. [1]
The most significant deficit of SC students vis-à-vis general-entry students is in their ‘cultural capital’. The cultural capital deprivation of SC students is evidenced by lower levels of education among family members, lower levels of participation in edifying cultural activities, and in general a home environment less conducive to learning. Most critically, SC students typically lack the most important source of cultural capital in modern India – good command of the English language. General-entry students who are at the same socioeconomic level as SC students are much more likely to have greater cultural capital, including significantly better English language capabilities. [1]
This corresponds to what I stated in my previous post about cut-off marks. If there was no system of reservation, then students from SC/ST/OBC communities, who lack the cultural capital of Savarna/Upper Caste communities, would largely be barred from higher education. Reservation gives them the space to enter.
Once they enter these institutions, then they do face challenges. That’s expected, because their lack of cultural capital still remains. If they didn’t know English or had never seen a computer before admission, that gap doesn’t vanish on the first day of admission.
However, what happens from that point onwards, is that they sit in the same classes, are taught by the same teachers and can access the same facilities as the general category students. They finally have access to the same institutional resources as their more privileged peers. They may still not have access to the out-of-institution resources (family connections, guidance, money, etc.), but it still gives them a real fighting chance to cover their gaps and come up to speed with general category students.
Of course, the road is hard for them. Not only they have the pre-existing gaps and lack of guidance, but they are also harassed and shamed for taking reservations. But those who persist in trying to do better, eventually make it.
The improved performance over decades is likely due to accumulation of cultural capital within communities. The first generation of college entrants from a community may be most deprived of money, resources and cultural capital and will thus perform poorly in college. However, this generation will gain some cultural capital, which will make the next generation’s journey a bit easier, which will show in their academic performance.
Another reason is the support structures that colleges have started to provide for students from marginalized backgrounds. IITs, for instance, have started foundational courses in English for students coming from non-English-medium schools. Similar other initiatives, like preparatory courses, counseling services, SC/ST cells, etc. have provided reserved category students some support on their academic journey, helping them perform better. These institutions still have a long way to go towards becoming nurturing spaces for all students, but every little bit of improvement has helped over the years.
In the more recent years, Ambedkarite student organizations, like APSC (Ambedkar Periyar Study Circle), APPSC (Ambedkar Phule Periyar Study Circle), BAPSA (Birsa Ambedkar Phule Students Association), etc. have also emerged as a support system for SC/ST/OBC students. I expect that their presence will help in making their campuses more egalitarian spaces, in the coming years.
The last study about SC/ST students having a better rate of learning, might simply be because they have the pressure to catch up and perform better. The drive to prove oneself can do wonders to one’s speed of learning.
So, the bottom line is: academic performance has more to do with a student’s social, economic and cultural background than their intelligence, or even their work ethic. But whenever an anti-reservationist says ‘merit’ in the context of academic performance, they don’t talk about any of that. They just claim it’s only about the student’s intelligence and/or work ethic. I reject this definition of ‘merit’, because it’s not grounded in reality.
That’s all for today. I hope this post was useful for you. Please let me know how I am doing in comments. Any follow-up questions are also welcome. I have been exploring the community features of SubStack and would soon use them to make this a more connected experience for you.
Until next time. Jai Bhim.