Similarly, local politics can have an influence in controlling ground-level
operations of education. The powerful effects of ‘who knows who’ were certainly visible
to me during the course of this project. At the school level, this was mainly reflected in
the availability of infrastructural facilities and the special recognition being enjoyed by
some schools. Among the five schools I visited, only one had impeccable infrastructure
facilities ranging from good furniture, water and sanitation facilities to well-maintained
classrooms and a library. They also have tie-ups with a non-governmental organization
(Ngo) in order to promote extra curricular activities for children and support students
who require extra one-on-one time with teachers. None of the other schools had a library
or support from ngos. It is evident that maintaining close links with superiors and
influential local politicians can increase a school’s chances of meriting quality facilities,
praise and recognition for the principal and teachers. This kind of favoritism creates an
unfair environment where professional appreciation is not necessarily based on sincerity,
hard work or merit.
On the other hand, it is also true that political support, when extended sincerely,
can also create a positive environment for the betterment of education. For instance,
Govinda (2002) presents a case study of primary schools in Himachal Pradesh, a small
mountainous state in northern India. Himachal Pradesh has achieved high rates of success
in education since independence, when it had the lowest literacy levels. Its success is
mainly attributed to the dedication of the state government in promoting education.
Education has always been a priority regardless of whichever political party came to
power (Govinda, 2002, Pg. 299). The state government’s interest in education led it to
make sound financial investments and expenditures. As education consistently remained