Abstract
Yamini Aiyar, Lessons in State Capacity from Delhi’s Schools, 2024, 240 pp., Oxford University Press. ISBN: 9780198922636.
Yamini Aiyar in this book offers incisive ethnographic insights into the workings of India’s public education systems and its administration. The book offers an empirical analysis of Delhi’s public schools, taking a step further than the policy prescriptions and the metrics of performance, and asks a very fundamental question: What does it actually take to build state capacity in a system that has for decades been considered broken? The author, on the basis of the 3 years of fieldwork in Delhi’s government schools, not just chronicles the reform in these schools but also delves into the contemporary debates about the nature of the performance of the public sector and institutional change in India.
The spatial and temporal extent of the study is Delhi’s public education system during the first term of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) government led by Arvind Kejriwal, a system that was in bad shape in 2015, when the AAP formed the government. The National Achievement Survey 2017 found steep failure rates, higher dropouts in Class 9, dismal infrastructure and poor learning outcomes. The Delhi government launched a three-pronged agenda of reform that focused on improving infrastructure, improving the learning outcomes through foundational literacy and numeracy, and enhancing accountability through the involvement of the parents.
What sets apart this study is its methodology and its ethnographic depth. Many analytical studies similar to Aiyar’s rely on macro-level data and offer solutions that are technocratic in nature, but this study focuses more on the lived experiences of the teachers, educational administrators and bureaucrats. This study is the product of 3 years of in-depth ethnography by the author and her team in a cluster of eight schools, where they conducted classroom observations, interviews, focus group discussions and surveys. This methodology made it possible for the author to understand the complex and often incongruous ways in which the reform is perceived, resisted and finally accepted at the ground level.
Aiyar describes the Delhi government’s approach to the reform by making use of the metaphor of ‘steadying the ship’, signifying that the government did not try to make something new; rather, it tried to salvage the dysfunctional and fragile system that it inherited from previous governments. The programmes kick-started by the government, such as Mission Buniyaad and Chunauti, were the steps in the direction of plugging the leaks in the previous system. They targeted foundational literacy and numeracy and tried to reorient the classroom away from traditional rote-learning towards a more conceptual understanding. However, this process of reforming the system was not smooth. The government soon realized that it had to face some major challenges carried over from the previous system, including the rigid and hierarchical bureaucratic culture, referred to as ‘Route X management’, which preferred rule-following, surveillance and punishments over collaboration and problem-solving. The author distinguishes ‘Route X management’ from ‘Route Y management’, which emphasizes decentralized leadership, peer learning and problem solving. Though in the initial period, the reforms carried out by the Delhi government were top-down, they soon adopted Route Y, by involving the teachers as partners rather than subordinates.
This engagement of teachers as key partners and the complex role they play in the process of reform is the key insight that this book offers. Rather than being considered as the passive recipients of policy, the teachers are in reality the essential pillars who interpret, resist or accept reforms, and on whose role the success or failure of the reforms depends. The earlier attempts at teacher training failed because they treated teachers not as professionals, but as mere implementers. Over time, the reforms incorporated a more participatory approach that led to a shift in the classroom dynamics. However, the earlier ways of teaching–learning that were deeply embedded in the psyche of the teachers generated resistance among the teachers. The teachers who were accustomed to rote-learning and syllabus completion perceived the reforms as impractical. The so-called ‘classroom consensus’ in Indian education—the belief of teachers, parents and students that education measurable by examination success is best achieved by rote-learning—had to be confronted and broken.
This was not merely a pedagogical challenge, but also one at the political front. The role that politics plays in sustaining the reforms is another theme that this book deals with. In many Indian states, the reforms mainly are clouded by the lack of political will, but the case of Delhi was marked by consistent backing from political leadership. The AAP crafted its political identity on the basis of education. It helped insulate the reforms from unnecessary bureaucratic hassles or sabotage. This support, over time, became institutionalized, which allowed for longer term planning and stability. This is not a romanticization of the Delhi government’s efforts of reform. The book constantly recognizes the limitation of the pilot programmes the mixed evidence of learning outcomes and the persistent tussle between the central and the state government. The book must not be seen as the glorification of the Delhi model, but as a guide to understand how the capacity of state institutions can be built, even when the conditions are not entirely favourable.
The most important contribution of the book, indeed, lies in its theoretical reframing of state capacity. The author speaks about and critiques two dominant frameworks—the ‘political economy model’ and the ‘disciplining-plumbing model’. While the former focuses on elite capture and rent-seeking, the latter emphasizes a top-down approach. Instead of these, the author offers a relational, dynamic model of state capacity. In this model, the state capacity is seen emerging from the intersection of institutional norms, professional identities and management practices. The vision based on this model is quite a democratic one. Instead of bypassing the state, the author argues in favour of investing in it, specifically at the frontline. Any meaningful change, the author argues, can take place only when the teachers are heard, empowered and their incentives aligned with the broader goals of learning and equity.
The book in its final chapters focusses on the policy implications of this framework. The author warns about the technical blueprints and national missions which she argues will fail if these do not take into consideration the organizational realities of the frontline service delivery. The investments must be not only in the infrastructure and data systems but also in the development of leadership, management and frontline engagement. Importantly, she also argues against bypassing the state in favour of private service providers or centralized tech-based solutions. The bypassing of the state, she argues, not only hollows out the state but also goes against the ideals of democratic governance. The case of Delhi demonstrates that howsoever weak or low capacity the bureaucracy might be, it can always be nudged towards transformation.
In conclusion, the book, though it does not offer ready-made and instant solutions, is a work of landmark significance. It is a guide to patient engagement or, as Aiyar puts it, a ‘voyage of discovery’, echoing the words of Albert Hirschman in Development Projects Observed. The book stands out for offering a diagnosis of the state machinery of India and the prognosis of what it takes to reform it. By putting at the forefront the importance of the voices of the teachers as well as the intricate realities of the implementation, Aiyar not only deepens our understanding of state capacity but also dignifies those who are at the forefront. This work is not just empirical but also a contribution to democracy, for its intellectually robust examination of optimizing the Indian state and its institution for the benefit of people.