Think this through

No debate inspires as much confused emotion as the debate over reservations. The Supreme Court8217;s remarks in its recent judgment only add to the confusion. While the Court8217;s overall attempt to deregulate the admissions process is welcome, it makes two sets of associations that are conceptually unwarranted. There may be an independent argument against reservations, but it is too facile to suggest that reservations are, by definition an anti-merit principle. The fact that reservations entail a compromise with strict indices of merit, does not automatically entail that they are anti-meritocratic.

Merit should not be judged only by the criteria used for admission; merit can be judged also on the output side. And, indeed, while the concept of merit should not be ridiculed, we ought to admit more complex criteria for determining merit than are currently allowed. And there is nothing in reservations that is per se incompatible with producing meritocratic students. Second, the Court also seems to think that merit as an issue applies particularly to professional colleges and not to other institutions like undergraduate colleges. This assumption that merit, whatever it is, applies only to a particular class of degrees is also untenable. A principle for facilitating access must not be confused with a claim about the merit of individual students who benefit from that access.

But it is equally important to think more imaginatively beyond reservations as a policy to promote access. We ought to all agree towards building an education system that promotes both excellence and access. An ideal system would be completely needs blind: anyone would be able to get the education appropriate to them, regardless of their financial circumstances. But we ought to reflect on the fact that our current investment, pricing and admissions policies in education have not enabled us to achieve this goal. Reservations has been an easy way to assuage our conscience that we are doing something to promote access, when in reality it confines more students from marginalised communities to third-rate institutions. Empowering students from marginalised communities with real choice will require a much more creative effort than reinstituting controls over private education. Rather than rush headlong into giving a cliched response to the Supreme Court, the government must carefully weigh new options and come up with a better plan.