A Case for Greater Research on Education Fellowships in India

I was tasked with writing an article to provide a research-based view of fellowship programs in the Indian context. I came up short. Instead, this article presents a case to invest in research on fellowship programs. Before I begin, I must state that I have not participated in any fellowship programs. But, as an education researcher, the influence of fellowship programs cannot be understated. NGOs that run fellowship programs have a tremendous influence on education policy, pedagogy and practice. Yet, as I will explain below, it is difficult to understand this influence, globally and in India.

Fellowship programs in the social sector are flourishing in India. The Indian Development Review (IDR) lists 97 fellowship programs in its social sector database. Eleven are categorized under education. This is not an exhaustive list. It indicates the range of options for those interested in pursuing fellowship programs. The ‘fellowship model’ is an increasingly popular intervention design in the education sector. Fellows constitute a critical mode of action and impact for several organisations. Examples include Asaadharan Foundation in Gujarat, Gramurja Foundation and Apnishala in Maharashtra, and Saksham in New Delhi.

These fellowship models cover a range of issues and geographies, including social-emotional learning, STEM education, education governance and leadership, and foundational literacy and numeracy. Fellows are not the primary mode of intervention for all organizations. There is immense diversity in how education fellowships are operationalized. There is immense diversity in duration, design, geography and domain across fellowship programs. This means, it is quite difficult to define what makes up a fellowship program.

Overall, fellowship programs can be seen as contractual positions aimed at professional development or contributing to a cause within a limited duration. Besides, there is a focus on recruiting talented youth across education fellowship programs. There is a widespread critique of the idea that recruiting ‘the best and the brightest’ is a credible solution for complex social problems. First, is the assumption of energy and commitment to work in low-paying and gruelling circumstances. Second, is the notion that young, smart, talented individuals need to be sensitized toward pervasive social problems. This is done by exposing fellows to ‘low resourced’ and ‘grassroots’ India, which allows them to carry this sensitivity to future endeavours.

It is difficult to think about education fellowships without examining the influence of Teach for India (TFI), Teach for America (TFA) and Teach for All (TFAll). The first is because of their enormous scale. As per TFI, “1 in 10 Indian children is now reached by a Teach for India Alumni”. The TFI program is part of the larger TFAll network; founded by Wendy Kopp, who established TFA in the early 1990s. Currently, TFAll represents a global network operating in 55 regions. The second reason one cannot ignore their influence is because of the existing research focus on this program. For instance, TFA emerged as an alternative teacher certification program in the United States. Research suggests this undermined teacher engagement with socio-cultural and political aspects of teaching In the Indian context, TFI approaches to teacher education contradict the ethos of teacher education policy in India. Scholars critique TFA for promoting deficit-based perspectives of children belonging to marginalized communities. Further, TFA is unable to support fellows to cater to children with disabilities. TFA is charged with promoting standardization and a rigid focus on measurement. It is difficult to make similar claims in the Indian context. But, evidence indicates that NGOs promoting fellowship programs support market-oriented reforms in education.

Market-oriented education reforms exist in tension with equity and social justice. At the same time, the intention is not to present a generalized picture of fellowship programs. Fellowship programs can serve democratic and social justice goals. They can provide crucial access to employment for those at the margins, serve as affinity networks for minoritized communities, and promote engagement and participation in decision-making within one’s own communities and contexts. An example of this is the NCPEDP – Javed Abidi Fellowship on Disability, which is a three-year fellowship for disabled youth to conduct grassroots disability rights advocacy.

As I previously noted, research on fellowship programs, especially on their growth in the Indian context, is scarce. It is difficult to provide an overview of how fellowships influence education. In this vein, I offer more questions than answers. There is a need to examine the influence of fellowship in classrooms and schools, and in the lives of fellows who choose to take part.

How do fellowships influence policy and practice in schools and classrooms? How do teachers view their fellow counterparts in schools? The presence of fellows in schools is likely to reshape and reconfigure how teachers view their professional development, how they think about teacher education, and how particular teaching practices are taken up. This is not to say that teachers are not critical of fellows’ teaching practices. Instead, we must examine how fellowship programs influence beliefs, pedagogy and the curriculum.

Further, how do fellows influence the lives of students they interact with? How do young people perceive fellowship programs? What are the trajectories that alumni follow? It is important to note that alumni and fellows do not take up uncritical stances toward fellowships. They develop nuanced perspectives on school reform and educational inequities. Yet, there is likely to be continued influence of the fellowship ‘networks’ in their newly founded organizations. Alumni networks are likely to be important forms of social and network capital. These networks provide access to credibility, funding, knowledge, opportunities, human resources and support.

Crucially, what visions of quality, equity, and inclusion are envisioned within these fellowships? The regions where fellowships operate are marked by poverty and exclusion. But we know little about representation and diversity within fellowship programs. Who is recruited and who can afford to take part? Another set of unanswered questions focuses on the ‘why’. Why are fellowships gaining immense popularity as an intervention design? Is it because of a lack of skilled human resources in the education non-profit sector? Is there systemic support for new founders to develop fellowship programs? For instance, TFIx mentors and incubates TFI alumni to develop their own fellowship programs. It would be helpful to examine how many fellowship programs are founded or supported by alumni of fellowship programs.

Is it attractive to funders as an established model in the education sector? At what point will we saturate the field of fellowships? Why are these programs attractive to young people? What are the socio-cultural and political circumstances that allow for the proliferation of fellowship programs? Is there expansive demand in a time of competitive and inaccessible higher education and labour market precarity? What we currently know is based on reports from established organizations running fellowship programs. The lack of research is not limited to India but is a global concern. Given the rapid growth of fellowships, research is urgently required to promote critical examination of these programs.

References

1. Anderson, A. (2013). Teach For America and the Dangers of Deficit Thinking. Critical Education, 4(11).
2. Ball, S. J. (2016). Following Policy: Networks, education policy mobilities and glocalisation. Journal of Education Policy, 0939(July), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2015.1122232
3. Ball, S. J., & Thawer, S. (2018). Nodes, Pipelines, and Policy Mobility. The Wiley Handbook of Global Educational Reform, 71–86 https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119082316.ch4 India Development Review. (n.d.). Fellowships. Retrieved June 6, 2022, from https://idronline.org/fellowships/ NCPEDP – Javed Abidi Fellowship on Disability. (n.d.). Retrieved June 9, 2022, from https://ncpedp.org/ncpedp-appi-youth-fellowship-on-disability/
4. Rizvi, F., & Lingard, B. (2010). Globalizing education policy. In Globalizing Education Policy. Routledge. https://doi. org/10.4324/9780203867396 Subramanian, V. (2018). From Government to Governance: Teach for India and New Networks of Reform in School Education. Contemporary Education Dialogue, 15(1), 21–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/0973184917742247 Subramanian, V. (2020). Parallel partnerships: Teach for India and new institutional regimes in municipal schools in New Delhi. International Studies in Sociology of Education, 29(4), 409–428. https://doi.org/10. 1080/09620214.2019.1668288 Thomas, M. A. M. (2018). “Good Intentions Can Only Get You So Far”: Critical Reflections From Teach For America Corps Members Placed in Special Education. Education and Urban Society, 50(5), 435–460. https://doi. org/10.1177/0013124517713604 Thomas, M. A. M., Rauschenberger, E., & Crawford-Garrett, K. (Eds.). (2021). Examining Teach for All: International Perspectives on a Growing Global Network. Routledge. https:// doi.org/10.7577/njcie.4189 Vellanki, V. (2014). Teach For India and Education Reform: Some Prelimary Reflections. Contemporary Education Dialogue, 11(1), 137–147. https://doi.org/10.1177/0973184913509759