Re-examining Education and Peace on the Urban Margins: Psychosocial Drivers of Dropout in a Delhi Resettlement Area

• In Event: Critical themes in peace education

Proposal

Re-examining Education and Peace on the Urban Margins: Psychosocial Drivers of Dropout in a Delhi Resettlement Area
Introduction & Literature Review
In India, the term slum refers to diverse urban informal settlements such as Jhuggi Jhopri (JJ) clusters, bastis, unauthorised colonies, and resettlement areas (Bhan, 2009). While international research has highlighted the role of family background in shaping academic outcomes (Coleman et al., 1966). Studies in the Global South (Jeffrey et al., 2008) reveal how informal work, unsafe environments, and institutional neglect compound barriers to schooling. Early school leaving carries steep lifetime penalties (Rumberger, 1987), while maltreatment and chronic stress predict academic decline (Barker et al., 2015; Deng et al., 2022). Structural and spatial analyses show how caste/class hierarchies, insecure tenure, evictions, and weak services in slums fracture educational continuity (Subramanian, 2024).
Despite these insights, there is a significant gap in existing studies. This study addresses that gap by situating urban poor children’s schooling experiences within the Person-in-Environment (PIE) framework.
Research Questions
1. How do learner’s describe psychosocial and environmental factors leading to school disengagement and dropout?
2. How do family, peer, neighbourhood, and school relationships interact to shape aspirations and decisions?
3. What policy/practice shifts could strengthen belonging and re-engagement?
Theoretical Framework
The study employs the Person-in-Environment (PIE) theory to analyse how children’s educational experiences are embedded within ecological systems. PIE highlights the interplay of micro-level factors (emotions, family support), meso-level interactions (school and peer relations), and macro-level conditions (poverty, displacement, exclusionary policies). This lens moves beyond deficit views of slum children, explore individual and contextual factors influencing educational disengagement.
Methodology
The research was conducted in Dallupura, a resettlement slum in East Delhi. Twelve Participants were purposively selected (ages 12–15), they were dropped out of mainstream schooling but remained connected to alternative learning spaces.
Data Collection: Semi-structured interviews in Hindi (15–25 minutes each) were conducted in homes or informal learning centres, depending on participant comfort. Themes explored included school experiences, parental and sibling support, peer dynamics, neighbourhood attitude, displacement, aspirations, and future goals.
Data Analysis: Following Braun & Clarke’s (2006) six-phase thematic analysis, transcripts were coded inductively, grouped into categories (emotional well-being, institutional relationships, structural disadvantage, academic aspirations), and refined into themes aligned with PIE’s ecological framework. Iterative coding and literature triangulation enhanced rigor.
Findings & Discussion
The findings demonstrate that dropout is not an outcome of disinterest or weak family background alone, but emerges from the compounding effect of psychosocial and structural barriers. Researcher found that Children frequently prioritised work over studies due to household poverty. This reflects Becker’s (1964) argument on constrained educational investment but, through PIE, reveals active negotiation of survival imperatives rather than passive withdrawal. While mothers’ emotional support provided crucial resilience (Hill & Tyson, 2009), schools often failed to offer relational care. Limited teacher engagement and peer exclusion aligned with Wentzel’s (1997) observation that institutional support is weakest for marginalised youth. Displacement, community stigma, and academic discrimination generated stress, anxiety, and low self-worth. These outcomes align with Deng et al. (2022), who link chronic stress to academic disengagement. PIE underscores how emotional burdens are not individual deficits but products of systemic dysfunction. Open schooling options (e.g., NIOS) provided flexibility but lacked embedded academic and emotional support. As Jeffrey et al. (2008) argue, without structural reform, such alternatives risk becoming holding zones rather than pathways to inclusion.
Conclusion
This study underscores that the school drop out of slum children is not only a pedagogical issue but also a matter of social justice. By highlighting the psychosocial struggles and resilience of dropout students, it calls for education systems that nurture peace, equity, and inclusion. Addressing structural barriers, fostering supportive school cultures, and expanding compassionate alternatives like open schooling are essential steps towards building peaceful, and cohesive societies where every child’s aspirations are valued.
Contribution
This study contributes to comparative and international education by:
1. Theoretical – advancing PIE as a framework to analyse dropout beyond family background, capturing psychosocial-environmental interactions.
2. Empirical – providing qualitative evidence from an under-researched context of Indian slums.
3. Scholarly contribution. Advances child-centered account that integrates psychosocial experience with spatial and institutional dynamics in resettlement contexts moving beyond enrolment/attendance metrics to analyse belonging as a peace-promoting mechanism.
Policy/practice implications.
Extend RTE upward to cover lower-secondary transitions, Teacher development for affirming pedagogies, feasible parent–teacher–community partnerships recognizing time/skill constraints. complement attendance/test scores with indicators of belonging, safety, and supportive relationships.


References
Barker, B., Kerr, T., Nguyen, P., Wood, E., & DeBeck, K. (2015). High school incompletion and childhood maltreatment among street-involved young people in Vancouver, Canada. Health & Social Care in the Community, 23(6), 532–540. https://doi.org/10.1111/hsc.12174
Becker, G. (1964). Human capital: A theoretical and empirical analysis. University of Chicago Press.
Bhan, G. (2009). “This is no longer the city I once knew”: Evictions, the urban poor and the right to the city in millennial Delhi. Environment and Urbanization, 21(1), 127–142. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956247809103009
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
Coleman, J. S., Campbell, E. Q., Hobson, C. J., McPartland, J., Mood, A. M., Weinfeld, F. D., & York, R. L. (1966). Equality of educational opportunity. U.S. Government Printing Office.
Deng, Z., Fang, L., & Wu, Y. (2022). Adverse childhood experiences, school connectedness, and educational outcomes: A multilevel mediation model. Child Abuse & Neglect, 129, 105661. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2022.105661
Hill, N. E., & Tyson, D. F. (2009). Parental involvement in middle school: A meta-analytic assessment. Developmental Psychology, 45(3), 740–763.
Jeffrey, C., Jeffery, P., & Jeffery, R. (2008). Degrees without freedom? Education, masculinities and unemployment in North India. Stanford University Press.
Rumberger, R. W. (1987). High school dropouts: A review of issues and evidence. Review of Educational Research, 57(2), 101–121. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543057002101
Subramanian, B. (2024). Beyond enrolment: How urban poverty affects educational experiences. Review of Development and Change, 29(2), 242–260. https://doi.org/10.1177/09722661241291164
Wentzel, K. R. (1997). Student motivation in middle school: The role of perceived pedagogical caring. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(3), 411–419.

Author

• Sangita Samal, Department of education, University of Delhi, India