Education

AIF Experiences and Learnings
The last three years have demonstrated a number of learnings that AIF proposes to incorporate in its programs going forward:

Program Aspects

1. To ensure universal coverage and continuity, there is need tor work both at sending and receiving ends.
2. There is also a need to have multiple options in place (as mentioned above), so as to reach the maximum possible number of children.
3. Migration destinations often vary from year to year. It is important to have expansive coverage of work sites to ensure that a child finds a school each time, wherever she or he goes. Ultimately, all migration sites should have facilities for care, protection and learning of children, which should be the government’s and employers’ joint responsibility.
4. In the long term, however, preventing migration of children is a goal in itself, and seasonal hostels should be institutionalized in villages, where children can stay and receive proper care and education. Some may object to the idea of separating children and their parents, we advocate this idea because:
   • the harsh living & working conditions at work sites are complete violations of child rights
   • parents have widely endorsed the idea of seasonal hostels
5. Other aspects have emerged like the difficulty of getting the 11-14 year age group to leave work and come to school, and the plight of 0-3 year age group at the work sites. AIF may not address all issues, but needs to connect with people who can address them (the latter group).
6. Database management and program monitoring gain significance as programs upscale.

Governemnt School & Systemic Aspects

7. The system takes no responsibility for migrating children. Government schools retain their names on the rolls round the year, and show attendance. Supervising staff never question this malpractice. When these children return, schools make no efforts to support them.
8. Schools in general functional poorly in these areas. It is essential to improve the village schools, as dysfunctional schools push children into migration, while well functioning schools deter this.
9. Government officials lack awareness of the migration reality. Their surveys are restricted to villages, which give inaccurate conclusions regarding out-of-school children statistics. SSA needs to undertake mapping of migration work sites, and survey children at these work sites to get the correct picture, and plan for it.
10. The central government is committed to funding migration projects, state governments also agree to do it, but there are huge deterrents at district and block levels. It has been impossible to get funds for this work, although there is provision for it under the EGS & AIE schemes.
11. Migrants, as they leave their homes, become external to their home district/state; nor do they get included in the plans of the district/state where they go. In inter-state migrations, it is essential for officials of different states to plan jointly, and several departments need to be represented (Labor, Rural Development, ICDS, Education, etc). Similarly, district officials need to plan together in case of inter-district migrations.
12. The programs, which have received greater government attention, are those that are now working at a larger scale. Smaller programs are not noticed. Scale also demands new capacities from the NGO, and is part of model building. Scale can be reached either by one NGO expanding its work, or by multiple local NGOs taking on this work. AIF is successfully working in both ways.

Community Aspects

13. The role of community – migrant & non migrant – is extremely important for the sustainability of these efforts. Hostels with their evening classes/activities which are open to all children of the village have begun to attract the upper class non migrant families, and we have enlisted their support.
14. At the same time, it is difficult to mobilize migrant communities around issues of their welfare or rights, simply because they spend just a few months in their villages, and at work sites, employers never allow such dialogues to start. This challenge needs to be met in completely new ways.

Rights & Livelihood Issues

15. Because migration is a completely unregulated activity and falls in the realm of the illegal, it is also in the interest of the employers to keep it under wraps. Whereas initially employers denied the presence of children on work sites, with the large number of site schools, they now acknowledge them. In sugar factories, they have also come forward with small support for the sugar schools (sakharshalas). Generally, the employers need to be doing much more for the laborers and children. We are devising ways to make this happen.
16. While education is the focus for AIF, rights & entitlements of migrant workers & alternate livelihood options are other critical issues which need to be addressed. Some of AIF’s partners are engaging with them in small ways.
17. The EGA has now been passed. A field visit to the tribal district Baran in Rajasthan. showed that effective engagement with the Right to Food Scheme by an NGO, Sankalp, reduced distress migration levels by 30-40% in many villages. Although AIF partners have not yet engaged with this issue, this is a clear opportunity to mitigate distress migration.

Research Advocacy

18. In the last year we have uncovered more facts about the extent and spread of migration in the country, about newer types of migrations, their varying patterns and the kind of impact this activity has on the lives of people and children. This has been made through field visits, literature, and interactions with academics and others. Yet it is realized that the research available is localized and quite limited.
19. There is a need to eventually capture the status of migration in the country, which can lead to policy formulation and intervention for this disenfranchised, large, and growing section of the population. However, this can be attempted in stages.
20. Most AIF partners have documented migration scenarios and their interventions in their areas. Bringing these together, AIF will prepare a larger research plan, covering different migrations, to get the larger picture, and to arrive at more effective interventions and advocacy.
21. Since few NGOs and funding agencies are concerned with migration, AIF feels the need to get more NGOs on board, and build their technical capacities. This process was started in 2005 and will be taken forward next year.
22. It is felt that migration being such a complex issue, AIF needs to look into at least 5-year time frames for funding these projects, while ensuring strong advocacy efforts each year.

back