4.1 Dis/ability in the classroom and the school
4.1.2 The “weak” and the “slow” in Mumbai
79
while trying to fulfill its mission of including class and ability diversity across the Muslim community. This motivates the school to hire the NGO to undertake teacher professional development that can improve the rigor of the school, the teachers, and the students.
80
Interviewer: Okay so like…(laughter) what are you thinking?
No no, almost there are a little same. Not similar but you know to some extent they are the same.
Interviewer: I guess I’m not understanding the difference, if you could…
See you said that slow learners and weak. Slow learners are like you know they little by little by little they get there. And the weak…their base is weak. Like I said that they don’t even know A to Z. The slow learners know but they are slow or they take understand a little later.
Interviewer: So, for…like if I were to give an example, is the situation that slow learners are like a building that will be made but it will take time?
Yes, it will build slowly yes.
Interviewer: And the weak learners their foundation…
Foundation yes right their foundation is a bit broken I’ll say. (Bushra, Mumbai) Bushra tries to explain the difference between weak and slow learners. According to her, slow learners are like turtles, slow but will eventually reach the finish line in a race; “they get there.”
As prompted by me in the interview, weak learners are likened to a building whose base is faulty from the start. I probe further, trying to understand why Bushra believes this distinction exists,
Interviewer: And so why is it that some children are weak learners, and some are slow learners?
You mean why are they different right?
Interviewer: No generally like I mean why is it that some children are slow learners, and some are weak learners?
81
Maybe because I know that they’re slow learners because there have been so many sessions, workshops…so I know what the difference between slow and weak learners is…maybe that.
Interviewer: Like if you could give me an example? I’m not understanding…
How do I explain? (laughter) Like, how do I explain it to you? Like suppose I give some topic I will know...like suppose I give myself topic as an example. Now maybe the ones who know from the starting like from 2019 if I’m right…maybe they did myself in class,
“I am a blank” So the weak and the slow learner they were together then, there was no differentiation at the start. But the slow learners know this was done, at some point it was done. So, they can remember and do it. But the weak people don’t even remember
because they didn’t pay attention and they forgot whatever was there. So maybe that’s how I’ll find out. (Bushra, Mumbai)
This is not easy for Bushra, “how do I explain?” She references knowledge from teacher
professional development programs she participated in where she learned the distinction between the two. The example she provides explains how the distinction between the weak and the slow comes down to the characteristics of the child. The slow learner labors to remember. The weak cannot recall concepts because “they didn’t pay attention” and “forgot” – it is the failure of the child.
There appears to be a lack of consensus on the difference between the two categories. On the whole, weak learners are understood as those who don't know, don't perform, lack practice, and forget – it is a failure to follow the age-grade patterns of development. In the Indian context, the term ‘weak’ is often used to reference socio-economic disadvantage. Slow learners will eventually, over time, reach their destination. Slow learners and weak learners can both benefit
82
from their smarter peers, often securing help in copying from the board. Slow learners also forget, possess a reduced capacity to grasp things, and lack interest in studies - often because parents do not pay attention at home. Because they are slow, they cannot keep up and fall behind the "other children" and don't complete their writing work, “they are not fast like the other children.”
Children who are considered smart or scholars answer and understand quickly, write quickly, get high grades, learn directly from the board (that is, don't require "creative methods"), and easily understand concepts. These children are seen as perfect, without any "issue" that the other students have, who have to be explained things repeatedly. There is also a belief that parental attention makes a difference – it is believed that children whose parents ensure
homework is completed, and make sure children revise learning at home are smarter and operate with greater speed. In addition to the child’s ability to perform tasks in the classroom, tests and exams are important identifiers of ability.
School leadership requires teachers to identify slow and weak learners. Crucially, student performance is seen as a reflection of teacher ability, “authorities tell us that good marks mean good teachers, that their report card is our report card. There is a comparison between
teachers…no one will personally say anything to you, but the comparison is there.” Another teacher echoed that the school leader emphasizes that “low grades are not the child’s fault but the teachers’ fault” and that student performance reflects “the effort and hard work of teachers over the year.” Thus, while teachers hold children and parents responsible for failure, school leaders hold teachers responsible. As one teacher said, she would do “whatever is in my hands” to improve student grades, including reminders to submit their work, more time to prepare for oral examinations, reminders to complete their notebook. By “whatever is in my hands” she is
83
referring to how grades are divided between final examinations and formative assessments – teachers have more control over the grades they give students in formative assessments.
It is important to note that the emphasis on student performance does not reflect an idiosyncratic view of the school. Instead, it reflects the priorities of the state. The teachers understand this system, “Ma'am (the school leader) gets the order from the government, she gives orders to us" (Yasmin, Mumbai). The orders in question refer to ensuring that “only 4-5 students” can get grades below a B, or else it has consequences for the school. This creates pressure on teachers to reflect student performance beyond “whatever is in my hands.” When I asked a teacher why she alters student grades, she shrugs,
We have to do; we have to help. But there are only few (below B) because they get good marks in formative.
Interviewer: What do you mean you have to help?
Make easy papers, give them answers to examination questions personally, not to the entire class.
Interviewer: (laughs) The invigilator is encouraging cheating?
We have to do it. (Bushra, Mumbai)
In addition to grades on final examinations, teachers provide the state with information about student performance by completing a monthly “25 competencies chart.” The sheet tracks the performance of all students in the school across 25 buckets, each assigned 5 points: “on roll, RTE admissions, cleanliness, teaching aid, number reading, addition, subtraction, tables, division, word problems, sentence reading, dictation, comprehension, word chain, poem recitation, picture reading, sentence formation, confidence, story formation, dramatization.
Another column lists ‘bonus 25 marks’ on the following criteria: “time reading, poem formation,
84
syllabus questions, drawing, extempore.” However, teachers reported that the school leader asked them to inflate student performance, “to give mostly fives” and instead of accurately assessing student performance, teachers were asked to rate students either 0 or 5. Similar to the process of completing student report cards for the state, which required painstakingly
handwriting student information and grades for 50 children across 5 different files, much of teachers’ time goes into completing this competency sheet. Teachers find this an exercise in futility – the scores they assign do not reflect student performance, “I know each student better”;
the uniform list of competencies across grades does not match grade-level curriculum; the monthly process does not make sense to them, “students do not progress every month in this way”; they know that no one looks at these sheets, but they are required to complete this because of the ever-looming threat of school inspection. Yet, the teachers complete these sheets with utmost care – the sheets need to tell a story of student progress because “(school leader) is held responsible for them.”
Lastly, the state requires the identification of slow and weak learners to organize remediation. This was a particular concern as schools re-opened after the pandemic, to identify those who had ‘fallen behind’ and ensure they were ‘caught up,’
The bridge course had children who are well I won’t call them slow learners but those who don’t know basic studies like reading and writing. So for them, I did basic things like 2 letter words and addition… I send them homework daily. (Zoya, Mumbai) Activities for this remedial program were sent by the state, which teachers found “absolutely useless” and “nonsense.” After consulting with the school leader, the teachers modified the activities that they did not find to be age or grade-appropriate, “ma’am (school leader) told us to make the syllabus and content based on what we think is not proper with the kids.” The bridge
85
course was not only conducted via WhatsApp and Zoom. Once schools opened in person, teachers were required to set aside 30 minutes each day with the identified set of students.
Thus, teachers in Mumbai identify slow and weak learners for a variety of reasons – teacher accountability, school performance, and state-led remediation programs. For the school leader then, the purpose of the NGO-appointed Hope Fellows in the school is “to work with the slow, weaker, differently-abled children.”