The recent announcement by a UK college of a scholarship for SC/ST/OBC and first-generation students from India named after Savitribai Phule has put the spotlight on the significant legacy of the educationist and social reformer. Nearly 200 years after Savitribai, along with her husband Jotirao Phule, began the first school for girls in India, the issue of inaccessibility for students from marginalised groups, especially in higher education, remains as relevant as ever.
Savitribai was born to a peasant family on January 3, 1831, in Naigaon. At the age of nine, she was married to Jotirao, who was then 12. Her education started after her marriage when her husband began teaching her at home, having witnessed her eagerness for knowledge. The Phules opened the country’s first school for girls in 1848. Given the strong opposition to the education of girls in society, this led to the couple being severely criticised and even ostracised. Undeterred, Savitribai went on to establish 18 schools, including for marginalised castes, along with her husband. Apart from this, the couple also opened a centre called Balhatya Pratibandhak Griha (Home for the Prevention of Infanticide) to cater to pregnant widows and sexual assault survivors so that they could safely deliver their children.
Despite her enormous contribution to the social and educational reform of women and marginalised castes, Savitribai Phule’s work remains under-recognised. According to scholar-activist Braj Ranjan Mani, this can be attributed to the “Brahminical mindset” that has largely hegemonised knowledge production, reproduction of culture, and historiography.
That the inaccessibility to education remains a stubborn problem is clear even today. The pandemic lockdowns threw the issue of unequal access into sharp relief when the sudden shift to online education made it difficult for those from poorer households to attend class due to a lack of smartphone or mobile data. In many houses, even when technology was available, girl children were less prioritised than boys. The digital divide proved fatal in the case of some, such as Aishwarya Reddy, a second-year student at Delhi’s Lady Sri Ram College who allegedly took her own life in November 2020 because her family could not afford a laptop for her to access online classes.
The state of public education at primary, secondary, and undergraduate levels is disheartening, from the lack of investment and lack of seats to the unwelcome environment created for students from disadvantaged groups. In August last year, Indra Meghwal, a nine-year-old Dalit boy, was beaten to death in Jalore, Rajasthan, for allegedly just touching a water pot belonging to an upper-caste teacher. In higher education, suicides by students from marginalised backgrounds point to a chronic problem, which can only be fixed through a policy approach.
While it is important to honour the legacy of Savitribai, her contribution – as well as that of Jotiba — cannot be remembered through token gestures of naming institutions, scholarships and awards after them. That is the easy way. The harder, but far more impactful way to remember their work and make their vision come true involves active efforts to ensure that education is not just accessible but also emancipatory for all, regardless of their economic or social background.
The writer is a student of Sociology in Delhi
