Three Parameters of Urban K-8 Education During Pre- and Post-Covid-19 Restrictions: Comparison of Students of Slums, Tin-Sheds, and Flats in Bangladesh

Abstract

According to a proverb often referring to the misery that prevails in restricted if enlightened surroundings, “It is dark under the lamp.” Urban areas have emerged as centers of excellence as far as economic development is concerned. People coming from diverse cultural, professional, and economic backgrounds live in cities. Gaps their economic conditions have led to various clusters of people much different from their rural counterparts. Comparing between urban and rural areas, studies often argued that urban education is exceptionally better. Adopting “descriptive analysis” of both secondary and primary data, this study notes that students living in urban slums suffer in terms of three parameters (access, attendance, and academic performance) of K-8 education. Government-run education neglects students living in the slums and this enabled NGOs to step in. Students living in tin-sheds receive education mainly through the government’s initiatives, while those living in flats attend private, international, and elite-public schools. Students who live in tin-sheds cannot compete with those who live in flats, let alone the slums. The Covid-19 pandemic has further aggravated this crisis. Substantial policy intervention by the government may be the only viable way to ensure developing nations’ K-8 urban education is safe from criticism.

Has Secondary Science Education Become an Elite Product in Emerging Nations?—A Perspective of Sustainable Education in the Era of MDGs and SDGs

“…This approach was upheld by arguing that this would subside the burden placed upon governments [6]. Although students from privileged SESs would obviously go to the private sector, poor pupils could receive education both from NGOs and their public counterparts [41]. This strategy was further prescribed, suggesting that public anarchy in education must be driven out [6,7].…”

“…This strategy was further prescribed, suggesting that public anarchy in education must be driven out [6,7]. With the support of this approach, multiple providers were welcomed to compete, and education became a "commercial commodity" [41]. The concept of "unified education" for national interest was challenged in many ways [41,42].…”

“…With the support of this approach, multiple providers were welcomed to compete, and education became a "commercial commodity" [41]. The concept of "unified education" for national interest was challenged in many ways [41,42]. The strategy was at least largely successful in allowing access to universal education for everyone.…”

“…Enrolment in education was dramatically increased because of a collective force working to ensure EFA [41,42]. This sudden increased enrolment also created enormous pressure for secondary and tertiary provisions (6,7).…”

“…Private schools, which are funded by the students' parents, are in the elite/affluent areas of an urban geography [42]. NGO schools funded by development partners are in poor areas of both urban and rural geographies [41,42]. This approach was considered to ensure extensive coverage so that students from all economic backgrounds can be covered [42].…”