PL EN


2020 | 11 | 2 | 252-266
Article title

Background Characteristics of the Individuals Attaining Higher Education in India: A Sociological Study of Srinagar City

Content
Title variants
Languages of publication
EN
Abstracts
EN
Aim: Higher education has experienced major changes in last few decades in India in terms of its expansion, content and reach. Massification of higher education has increased access to education and people belonging to different social backgrounds are getting enrolled in higher education. A pertinent question that emerges here is: what kind of relationship exists between the background characteristics of people and the levels and types of higher education they attain? This descriptive study provides a comprehensive answer. Method: This empirical work is conducted in Srinagar city of India. It covered 704 respondents belonging to 245 households. Survey method was used for collecting primary data and structured interviews were conducted by making use of interview-schedule. Results: This study finds that higher education in Srinagar is readily available for many but such availability is embedded within constraints related to gender, age, occupation and education of parents and caste related identities. People coming from different social backgrounds acquire different types and levels of higher education. It creates hierarchy among and within academic courses of higher education and inequalities among the groups. Conclusion: Higher education reflects as well as promotes social inequalities in contemporary context and thus the egalitarian goals of higher education are getting compromised. There is need to bring change in the courses and contents of higher education so that it can address to dynamic needs of people coming from different backgrounds. Education needs to become a vehicle for liberation and social transformation and should not remain a mere agency of social reproduction. Key words: social background; courses within higher education; higher education in different contexts; gender; caste; parent’s background; descriptive study.
Year
Volume
11
Issue
2
Pages
252-266
Physical description
Dates
published
2020-09-11
Contributors
  • Department of Sociology, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh Pin 202002, India
  • Department of Sociology, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh Pin 202002,India
References
  • Ahmed, I. (1978). Caste social stratification among Muslims in India. New Delhi: Manohar Publications.
  • Apple, M. (2001). Comparing neo-liberal projects and inequality in education. Comp Educ, 37(4), 409–423.
  • Bourdieu, P., & Passeron. (1977). Reproduction in education, society and culture. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
  • Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgment of taste. London: Routledge.
  • Bourdieu, P. (Ed.). (1993). The field of cultural reproduction: Essay on art and literature. UK: Columbia University Press.
  • Bourdieu, P. (1996). The State Nobility: Elite School in the Field of Power. translated by Lawrence C. Clough. U.K: Polity Press.
  • Bourdieu, P. (2016). The forms of capital. In: Alan R. Sadovnik and Ryan W. Coughlan (Ed.), Sociology of education: A critical reader (pp. 83-95). New York: Routledge.
  • Blaikie, N. (2000). Designing social research: The logic of anticipation. USA: Blackwell Publishers.
  • Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, S95-S120.
  • Fuller, C. (2011). Sociology, gender and educational aspiration. London: Continuum.
  • Government of India, (2016). All India survey on higher education (2015-16), Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD), New Delhi: Government of India.
  • Government of Jammu and Kashmir, (2015). J&K economic survey (2014-15) Volume-I, Directorate of Economics & Statistics, Jammu and Kashmir: Government of Jammu and Kashmir.
  • Graham, G. (2013). The university: A critical comparison of three ideal types. In: Sugden, Valania & Wilson (Ed.), Leadership and cooperation in academia reflecting on the roles and responsibilities of university faculty and management (pp. 1-5). UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.
  • Gumport, J. (2007). Sociology of higher education: contribution and contexts. US: The Johns Hopkin University Press.
  • Hasan, Z. (2016). Disparities in access to higher education. In: Avinash K Singh (Ed.), Education and empowerment in India (pp. 128-137). New Delhi: Routledge.
  • Hasley. (2006). The European university. In: Launder., Dillabough and Hasley (Ed.), Education globalization and social change (pp. 854-865). New York: Oxford Press
  • Kariwo, M., Gounko, T., & Nungu, M. (2014). Comparative analysis of higher education. Canada: Sense Publishers.
  • Kirby, M. (1999). Stratification and difference. London: Macmillan.
  • Kromydas, T. (2017). Rethinking higher education and its relationship with social inequalities: past knowledge, present state and future potential. Palgrave Communications, 3(1) DOI: 10.1057/s41599-017-0001-8.
  • Lawrence, R. (1891). The valley of Kashmir. London: Oxford University Press.
  • Madan, A. (2013). Does education really change society: Theoretical reflection on a case study. In: Nambissan, & Rao (Ed.), Sociology of education: Changing contours and emerging concern (pp. 136-153). New Delhi: Oxford.
  • Mondal, S. (2003). Social structure, OBCs and Muslims. Economic and Political Weekly, 38(46), 4892-4897.
  • NSDC. (2013). National skill development corporation. District Wise Skill Gap in Jammu & Kashmir.
  • Patgania, G. J., & Tierney, W. G. (2018). An ethnography of caste and class at an indian university: creating capital. Tertiary Education and Management, DOI: 10.1080/13583883.2018.1439998.
  • Perecman, E., & Curran, S. R. (2006). A handbook for social science field work: Essays and bibliographic sources on research design and methods. California: Sage.
  • Robinson, R., Raja, W., Choudhury, H. & Saikia, J.H. (2016). Sociology of education and Indian higher education systems: A university’s institutional research model. Economic & Political Weekly, lI (9), 67-73.
  • Saito, M. (2003). Amartya Sen’s capability approach: A critical exploration.” Journal of Philosophy of Education. 37(1).
  • Sen, A. (1971). The crisis in Indian education. In: Malik (Ed.), Management and organisation of Indian universities (pp, 248-278). Simla: Indian Institute of Advanced Study.
  • Sen A. (1985). Commodities and capabilities. Amsterdam, North Holland: Oxford University Press.
  • Sen, A. (1993). Capability and well-being. In: Nussbaum and Sen (Ed.), The quality of life (pp. 30-50). Clarendon Press: Oxford.
  • Sen, A. (2000). Development as freedom. New Delhi: Oxford.
  • Sinha, K.S. (2003). J&K anthropological survey of India. New Delhi: Monohara Publication.
  • Tilak, J. (2013). Higher education in the BRIC member-countries: comparative patterns and policies. Economic & Political Weekly, xlviii(14), 41-47.
  • Tomlinson, S. (2017). A Sociology of special and inclusive education: exploring the manufacture of inability. New York: Routledge.
  • UNESCO. (1990). Trends and development of technical and vocational education, France: United Nations, Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.
  • Velaskar, P. (1990). Unequal schooling as a factor in the reproduction of inequality in India. Sociological Bulletin, 39(1-2),131-45.
  • Walker, M., & Unterhalter, E. (2007). Amartya Sen capability approach and social justice in education. US: Palgrave.
  • Weber, M. (1946). Class, status, party. In: Gerth and Mill (Ed.), From Weber: essays in Sociology (pp, 180-195). New York: Oxford.
  • Zainuddin, S. (2003). Islam, social stratification and empowerment of Muslims OBCs. Economic and political Weekly, 38(56), 4898-4901.
Document Type
Publication order reference
Identifiers
YADDA identifier
bwmeta1.element.ojs-doi-10_15503_jecs2020_2_252_266
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.