The private musings of a troubled teacher
Activism has always been a niggling issue for me. ‘To be or not to be’ an aggressive, uncompromising activist is a question I have had to contend with many a time while faced with matters that call for radical change, much to the unease of my conscience. Of course, I know that activism is inevitable to some extent. In spite of the natural kinship of boiling blood, all this slogan-shouting solidarity, demonstrations and deliberate violation of the law during the teachers’ strike was for me a new learning experience. Nonetheless, even within the limited extent of my participation, I could sense some of the contagious exhilaration that accompanies any mass movement driven by a sense of justice.
For a few hours, outside the confines of our classrooms, we teachers seemed to have lost our self-conscious need for sobriety and decorum. That it was not easy to be uninhibited sloganeers in public places was evident at last week’s meeting and even today’s gathering at the university campus. Initially, voices responded rather feebly in answer to the lead of those in charge of the meeting. Occasionally, some of us stole glances at each other and exchanged embarrassed smiles. But in the police van, we were in the full gust and flow of our teacherly voices. People on the streets looked at us with curiosity. There certainly was no surprise on those faces, and if we think we awoke a few pedestrians to the gravity of the issue we are fighting for, we must be simpletons indeed.
Morchas have their unique brand of humour too. I cannot but admire the union leaders’ ability to speak at length to large gatherings (with or without a microphone), keeping both interest and morale high all along. “The police have requested that only 15 of us court arrest or they will run out of vans and diesel” or “The Maharashtra government has failed to give us anything at all in writing. As teachers, we know that sometimes it is necessary to take down notes…” The imprint of changed times and attitudes is evident among the teachers, but these veteran idealists are unfazed.
It is relatively easy to be part of a mass protest and let someone else take the important decisions. There was after all a feeling of security in being amidst a unanimous crowd this afternoon. But what if I am called upon to take risks and assume complete responsibility for my actions in the public sphere? My field of work – education – itself presents before me numerous challenges. Changes are rapid in higher education and the debates of today will prove crucial in deciding what shape and direction this sector will take in the near future. The measures adopted now will have lasting consequences on the quality of education, educational values, practices that prevail in the academia and service conditions for teachers, as well as teacher-student relationships and the goals of education in society.
There is an increasing demand for privatisation of higher education in India. Arguments in favour are many and certainly have much merit. Privatisation is seen as a means to ensure quality and bring about accountability. It is also viewed as an efficacious means of strengthening the links between education and the industry. Moreover, it is hoped that the freedom to make autonomous decisions in academic matters at the ‘grassroot’ level – i.e., by institutions rather than universities, boards or other governing bodies – will considerably reduce the constraints of umbrella policies that do not meet specific needs, and introduce flexibility and context-sensitivity in the system.
Rahul Bajaj puts forth his views in favour of a more liberalised educational sector here.
I commend the author for stating clearly that what is called for at the moment is a ‘third way’ – neither low-quality subsidised education, nor high-quality, but expensive, private education. However, my fear is that much (and many) might be irredeemably sacrificed by the time we reach the long-term goal of having institutions that function on the strength of endowments. Industry, says Bajaj, has to step forward and create a market for the vocationally trained. I do not want to sound unduly sceptical, but the call for greater involvement (read 'interference') of corporates does indicate a strong possibility of an education-industry nexus wherein the educational sector will be increasingly manipulated to suit the needs of industries (thereby becoming merely a supply line that feeds custom-made candidates to industries) and might lose its independence in deciding what constitutes wholesome education for a student. No course that does not cultivate critical thinking, deep insight, sensitivity and responsibility to society and life values can be termed as education in its true sense as described by visionary educationists like Tagore, whom Bajaj refers to in his article.
That there is real cause for alarm at the way unaided courses are being taught is evident from our experience to date. To take a single example, there has recently been a ruckus over one of the papers prescribed for the Bachelor of Mass Media (BMM) course, where the teacher is expected to teach Communication Skills in Hindi, Marathi and English (and perhaps any number of other Indian languages) in a single paper. Besides the challenge of finding a teacher competent enough to teach all these languages or running the risk of fragmenting it among many, there is also the question of what constitutes ‘communication skills’ going by the rather nebulous aims of this paper. Even as students are to be taught grammar and pronunciation, they are only expected to be able to communicate (i.e. ‘get by’) in the languages included. Effectively, the students’ level of competence remains unchanged at the end of the semester.
Replacing the control of the government over education with control of the industry is no pathway to reform. Where time is money, as in the competitive market, it is feared that there may simply be no place for values or critical skills in education. These ‘ideals’ (itself a somewhat-derogatory term in common parlance nowadays) will become irrelevant because they don’t make pockets jingle. I know this point will draw much criticism -- after all, are we implying that there is respect for these ideals in the present system? However, I do feel we are headed in the direction of a more and more market-driven world where people are seen as customers or service providers alone and education as a mere commodity or at best, an assortment of skills, without the accompaniment of moral debate and intelligent appraisal.
That there is real cause for alarm at the way unaided courses are being taught is evident from our experience to date. To take a single example, there has recently been a ruckus over one of the papers prescribed for the Bachelor of Mass Media (BMM) course, where the teacher is expected to teach Communication Skills in Hindi, Marathi and English (and perhaps any number of other Indian languages) in a single paper. Besides the challenge of finding a teacher competent enough to teach all these languages or running the risk of fragmenting it among many, there is also the question of what constitutes ‘communication skills’ going by the rather nebulous aims of this paper. Even as students are to be taught grammar and pronunciation, they are only expected to be able to communicate (i.e. ‘get by’) in the languages included. Effectively, the students’ level of competence remains unchanged at the end of the semester.
Replacing the control of the government over education with control of the industry is no pathway to reform. Where time is money, as in the competitive market, it is feared that there may simply be no place for values or critical skills in education. These ‘ideals’ (itself a somewhat-derogatory term in common parlance nowadays) will become irrelevant because they don’t make pockets jingle. I know this point will draw much criticism -- after all, are we implying that there is respect for these ideals in the present system? However, I do feel we are headed in the direction of a more and more market-driven world where people are seen as customers or service providers alone and education as a mere commodity or at best, an assortment of skills, without the accompaniment of moral debate and intelligent appraisal.
The rapidity with which concepts from management studies are taking over every sector of human activity is alarming to me. These ideas seem to be created solely for the purpose of increasing competency and are tellingly devoid of anything humane or emotional. Not only that, even as they emphasise difference and innovation as crucial to 'value addition', the results inevitably show a kind of innovation that occurs in a programmed, patterned way, much in the manner of packaged commodities that are found in different colourful wrappers but are nevertheless the same. To replace even the hodge-podge mixture of aims that exists in the current educational scenario with such a new culture is, for me, to seal permanently the doors to discovery and creativity.
Let me try to imagine in concrete terms a future in which these fears of mine have materialised. Would people want to study Shakespeare, for instance? Perhaps, for survival's sake, we might re-package the Shakespeare course as 'A study of personalities through Shakespeare's plays'. During the course, we classify some characters from Shakespeare into 'types' and try to identify these with the kind of people we find in everyday life. Or perhaps we include Mark Antony's speech in a study of leadership and oratory. So much cleverness put to mercenary ends. The layered, multi-dimensional world of Shakespeare would be lost in such classes. Philosophy, to survive, might become nothing but 'yoga at the workplace', intended to 'manage' other individuals and periodically release stress gathered at all other times of the day. Perhaps research will flourish for its own sake, with more and more books being published with fancy terminology and endless theorising.
All in all, education in this scenario I dread might lose its marvellous ability to open one's eyes in all-encompassing and empathetic observation of the world -- an ability cherished and lauded by scientists and philosophers alike as a path to a humble and ever-growing understanding of ourselves and the universe. Higher education, if it merely cultivates certain skills that are in demand and makes adaptable finished products of our personalities, is reduced to a light bulb that illumines only a narrow path in our treasure hunts. Is that learning? To learn is to let sunlight flood all about us and to gratefully absorb this light all life -- a light that reveals new shapes and colours each day, and leaves nothing shrouded in the dark.
(to be continued...)
