It is widely accepted that one of the prime objectives of public education
is
to strengthen
social cohesion and promote national integration. In this respect, Indian education system has faced (and is facing) unprecedented challenges. Let me explain:
In the
early
20th century it
was widely
accepted that a nation should be highly
homogeneous for social stability. Therefore, when the new world order was created by the
westerners following the
World
War-II, the international borders were drawn mainly, based on linguistic,
ethnic, religious
or
regional
divides.
A
country,
having
all sorts
of diversity and differences, was simply considered unnatural and destined to be a failure. Following this logic, when the question was raised about ‘an independent India’ the British intellectuals had severe
doubts.
Sir John Strachey, who was a member of Governor General’s Counsel
of
British Raj, said – “‘India’ is merely a label of convenience, a name which we give to a great region including multitude of different countries. The differences between the countries of Europe are much smaller
than
those between ‘countries’
of India. Scotland is more like Spain than Bengal is like the Punjab.
The most essential thing to learn about India – that there is not, and never was an India, or even
any country of India possessing, according to any European ideas, any sort of unity, physical, political, social or religious”.
While addressing his Cambridge audience, he
added – “It is conceivable that national sympathies may
arise
in particular Indian ‘countries’, but that they should
ever extend to India
generally, that men of Punjab, Bengal, Bombay and Madras, should ever feel that they belong to one Indian nation, is impossible”.
“…to abandon India to the rule of the Brahmins (his reference to
the
Congress Party) would be an act of cruel and wicked negligence.
If we leave, the entire gamut of public services created by us – the judicial, medical, railway and public works departments – would perish, and India will fall back quite rapidly through the centuries into the barbarism
and privations of the Middle Ages”.
Though the above comments seem arrogant (and
full of ignorance) today, the
hopelessness about ‘one big India’
was
common among Europeans. The idea of India was challenging the conventional idea of a
nation in
Europe. Even today, there are many axes of conflicts in India:
Religion: Today a vast majority
of
the billion-plus Indians are Hindus (approx. 83%). But, India also has the second largest population of Muslims in the
world – about 140 million (only after
Indonesia; though Pakistan is likely to overtake due to its
high population growth-rate). Also, Christians, Sikhs, Buddhists, and
Jains are in substantial numbers.
Caste: In
four
varnas (place that jati occupies in social stratification) fit 3000 and more jatis (group one is born into), each challenging those, in the same region, that are ranked above it, and
being in turn challenged by those below.
Language: The constitution of India recognizes 22 languages as ‘official’. According to
Census of India of 2001, 29 languages are spoken by more than a million native speakers and 122
languages (234 mother tongues) by more than 10,000 speakers. 1962
Census recognized 1961
mother tongues. In the past, people speaking one language have
fought with those speaking another. Also, many Indian states are created on linguistic bases. Therefore, linguistic conflicts often translate to regional
prejudices.
Regionalism: Some regions
of
India
have still not being
integrated completely in
the national narrative. Feeling of alienation can be found in Kashmir valley and parts of Northeast.
Also, conflicts have sparked between people of northern and southern states; and more recently,
between Marathis and people of Uttar Pradesh
/ Bihar.
In addition, most of the
times, the conflicts are confusingly convoluted, where a group of people of particular region, speaking particular language, object practices of a particular religion to target the other side. Currently, one of the biggest internal security
treats
for India is Naxalism, which transcends many axes of conflicts.
A complicated mixture of exploitation of labour and rights of native people in mineral rich states, classism and casteism triggered Left-wing extremists to wage war against the
Indian state. According to
an estimate (Sahni & Singh, 2010), one third of India can be described as a conflict- zone at present.
Yes, India has seen its darkest days – the
bleeding partition
and the greatest human migration,
the
wars with its neighbours, horrifying droughts and natural disasters, numerous
communal riots
and
secession
movements,
deadliest
terrorist strikes, financial collapses
and
international sanctions, and heavily armed insurgencies. However, India has remained intact. Its
pluralist and tolerant
social-fabric has absorbed all blows.
To its credit, the Indian education system has done a
fair job
so far, especially in
accommodating religious, linguistic, and cultural diversities. This was mainly
achieved by the decentralization
of the educational system to the state level. However, as we
discussed
above, there are substantial threats to stability. A lot can be and should be done through mass-education
to
strengthen India’s social
fabric and make the experience of formal
education relevant for
all kids. In the following paragraphs, I present my take on the same.
History and Geography
Education: One of the
finest educationists of the 20th century, John
Dewey had
famously stated
–
“History is not the
story of
heroes,
but
an
account
of social
development; it provides us with knowledge of the past which contributes to the solution of social
problems of the present
and the future”
(as
quoted in Bartlett, 2008).
I
personally think the kings and
politicians are highly overrated
in
our history books. Similarly, ‘geography’ requires a makeover and needs to aim at conveying how geographical
factors affect human lives, culture, economic investments, developmental plans of governments and respective environmental issues; and how the interlink of all factors in different parts of the nation and the world are
different from (and similar to) the learner’s geographic region. Post world-
war while exploring factors contributing to mass-madness,
Dewey suggested that
the
history curriculum was
used to inculcate strong nationalistic values even
at the cost of antagonizing other countries across participating nations. Misinterpretation of history may lead to sentiments of
victimhood and desire for revenge or illusion of superiority or inferiority with respect to people of
other culture and region. We have to be highly cautious in preventing these subjects biasing child’s mind against certain groups of society.
It is worth mentioning that some of the geographical areas of India are not well include in the social science textbooks. More specifically, the chapters of Indian history
hardly
cover anything on the seven north-eastern states. This trend continues even at the university
level as reported by
Tyagi (2013). As a result of this negligence,
people of other regions often have very little
understanding of the northeast.
Gender Equality &
Sexual Orientation: Though
there has been an emphasis on gender
equality in school-curriculum in recent decades, schools can do a lot more in this direction. The
social struggle and suffering because of ones gender (e.g., being a woman, or a transgender) is
hardly conveyed to the younger generation.
It is fairly possible that a formally educated young male (or female) has absolutely no idea of the difference between
flirting, eve-teasing
and
sexual-harassment
and
their legal consequences. Furthermore, the education system
keeps
a blind-eye toward homosexual, bisexual
and transgender community.
Note that the World Health Organization (WHO), Medical Council of India (MCI), Indian
Psychiatric Association
(IPA), Indian Medical Association (IMA), American Medical
Association
(AMA), the American Psychiatric Association, and numerous other authoritative
institutions across
the
world have stated that homosexuality
is
not a disease and sexual orientation is not a choice. However, the religious
figures like
Baba Ramdev
or Zakir Naik publicly condemn homosexuality,
while the educators and policy makers remain silent spectators.
Being aware of
Hidden Curriculum: Even when the stated curriculum and educational objectives are egalitarian, children’s educational experiences may not necessarily be the same because
of the biased behaviour pattern of the
teachers, peers, and the social-structure of the
school in-general. Educational theorists
term these prejudiced practices of schools as
“hidden
curriculum”. Unfortunately, the hidden curriculum of various Indian
social contexts has not
been systematically studied. Nonetheless, my
personal experiences suggest that, overall, the schools tend to reinforce the inequalities of the Indian society.
Creating Places
(and occasions) where Children/ Youth
of Diverse
Background Interacts: In
most
cities, the Hindus and Muslims are increasingly living in separate areas with passage of time.
People from
different castes still
live in
different
streets in
most
villages throughout
India. Moreover, privatization of education has segregated children along class-lines. Considering all
these factors, our schools have hardly
remained diverse. As a consequence, the younger Hindus are losing contact with their Muslim counterparts and vice-versa. It is fairly possible that an upper
middle class child
has never interacted with
a child who does not speak English
or does not have
a computer at home. Needless to mention that it is a likely scenario where a rich kid feels closer to
the kids of developed nations and perceives other Indian
kids
from
lower class as “worth staying away”.
This is a dangerous trend. Most of the biases and bigotry have roots in ignorance and lack
of
empathy for the other
group. If an individual is well aware of the way of living, set of beliefs, and the hardships and day to day challenges of the other set of people, s/he will be more likely to see the commonalities and respect
the
differences. Therefore, we need to create places where children
of
all diverse backgrounds (religion, caste, &
class) can connect with each other on
regular basis.
That will be a social-investment
which
will prevent
further compartmentalization
and
segregation and ensure social cohesion. Coming back to where we began – On the 15th of August
Note: the quotations in the article are from Ramachandra Guha's classic book 'India After Gandhi: A brief history of the world's largest democracy'.
References
Bartlett, L. (2008). John Dewey and Peace Education. In Bajaj M. (Eds.) Encyclopaedia of peace education. Teachers College, Columbia University. Retrieved from: http://www.tc.edu/centers/epe/entries.html
Guha, R. (2007). India after Gandhi. Pan.
Sahni, A., Singh, A. (07/24/2010). Posturing won't help in fight against Naxals. Retrieved from: http://news.rediff.com/report/2010/apr/07/posturing-wont-help-in-fight-against-naxals.htm
Tyagi, A. (05/13/ 2013). ‘I Studied History For 5 Years, But There Was Not A Single Chapter On The History Of The Northeast’. Retrieved from: http://tehelka.com/i-studied-history-for-5- years-but-there-was-not-a-single-chapter-on-the-history-of-the-northeast/
.Youtube videos:
1) IndianExpressOnline. Idea Exchange: Homosexuality is a disease, explains Ramdev. Retrieved
from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBx6h5UoazU
It is widely accepted that one of the prime objectives of public education
is
to strengthen
social cohesion and promote national integration. In this respect, Indian education system has faced (and is facing) unprecedented challenges. Let me explain:
In the
early
20th century it
was widely
accepted that a nation should be highly
homogeneous for social stability. Therefore, when the new world order was created by the
westerners following the
World
War-II, the international borders were drawn mainly, based on linguistic,
ethnic, religious
or
regional
divides.
A
country,
having
all sorts
of diversity and differences, was simply considered unnatural and destined to be a failure. Following this logic, when the question was raised about ‘an independent India’ the British intellectuals had severe
doubts.
Sir John Strachey, who was a member of Governor General’s Counsel
of
British Raj, said – “‘India’ is merely a label of convenience, a name which we give to a great region including multitude of different countries. The differences between the countries of Europe are much smaller
than
those between ‘countries’
of India. Scotland is more like Spain than Bengal is like the Punjab.
The most essential thing to learn about India – that there is not, and never was an India, or even
any country of India possessing, according to any European ideas, any sort of unity, physical, political, social or religious”.
While addressing his Cambridge audience, he
added – “It is conceivable that national sympathies may
arise
in particular Indian ‘countries’, but that they should
ever extend to India
generally, that men of Punjab, Bengal, Bombay and Madras, should ever feel that they belong to one Indian nation, is impossible”.
Views such as these were widely prevalent among the British. And politically the most important of these was undoubtedly Winston Churchill. In 1930-31, while speaking at the Albert
Hall
on ‘Our Duty to India’, he said –
“…to abandon India to the rule of the Brahmins (his reference to
the
Congress Party) would be an act of cruel and wicked negligence.
If we leave, the entire gamut of public services created by us – the judicial, medical, railway and public works departments – would perish, and India will fall back quite rapidly through the centuries into the barbarism
and privations of the Middle Ages”.
Though the above comments seem arrogant (and
full of ignorance) today, the
hopelessness about ‘one big India’
was
common among Europeans. The idea of India was challenging the conventional idea of a
nation in
Europe. Even today, there are many axes of conflicts in India:
Religion: Today a vast majority
of
the billion-plus Indians are Hindus (approx. 83%). But, India also has the second largest population of Muslims in the
world – about 140 million (only after
Indonesia; though Pakistan is likely to overtake due to its
high population growth-rate). Also, Christians, Sikhs, Buddhists, and
Jains are in substantial numbers.
Caste: In
four
varnas (place that jati occupies in social stratification) fit 3000 and more jatis (group one is born into), each challenging those, in the same region, that are ranked above it, and
being in turn challenged by those below.
Language: The constitution of India recognizes 22 languages as ‘official’. According to
Census of India of 2001, 29 languages are spoken by more than a million native speakers and 122
languages (234 mother tongues) by more than 10,000 speakers. 1962
Census recognized 1961
mother tongues. In the past, people speaking one language have
fought with those speaking another. Also, many Indian states are created on linguistic bases. Therefore, linguistic conflicts often translate to regional
prejudices.
Regionalism: Some regions
of
India
have still not being
integrated completely in
the national narrative. Feeling of alienation can be found in Kashmir valley and parts of Northeast.
Also, conflicts have sparked between people of northern and southern states; and more recently,
between Marathis and people of Uttar Pradesh
/ Bihar.
Class: India has massive disparities. Although, the number of people
coming out of poverty is rapidly
increasing (poor population under 22% by
2015); still the economic divide has only
increased
(if
not unchanged)
over the period
of time. The percentage share of
India’s 55
billionaires is about 15% of its GDP. On one hand India has about 1.3
lac millionaires, and on the
other hand the number of poor people living in eight states of India (about 420million) is higher than the total number of
poor in 26 poorest African countries (410 million). These asymmetries have
fuelled many movements of opposition.
In addition, most of the
times, the conflicts are confusingly convoluted, where a group of people of particular region, speaking particular language, object practices of a particular religion to target the other side. Currently, one of the biggest internal security
treats
for India is Naxalism, which transcends many axes of conflicts.
A complicated mixture of exploitation of labour and rights of native people in mineral rich states, classism and casteism triggered Left-wing extremists to wage war against the
Indian state. According to
an estimate (Sahni & Singh, 2010), one third of India can be described as a conflict- zone at present.
Yes, India has seen its darkest days – the
bleeding partition
and the greatest human migration,
the
wars with its neighbours, horrifying droughts and natural disasters, numerous
communal riots
and
secession
movements,
deadliest
terrorist strikes, financial collapses
and
international sanctions, and heavily armed insurgencies. However, India has remained intact. Its
pluralist and tolerant
social-fabric has absorbed all blows.
A country, which was considered extremely
poor, illiterate, and
too
diverse to self-govern
and was predicted to result into a chaos within months, has emerged as
one of the global powers today. Since independence, India has grown strength to strength. Its political and social stability
has repeatedly
surprised political/social scientists. Though the overall social stability
and conflict resolution may have political, economic, security and cultural dimensions, education has certainly played a significant
role.
To its credit, the Indian education system has done a
fair job
so far, especially in
accommodating religious, linguistic, and cultural diversities. This was mainly
achieved by the decentralization
of the educational system to the state level. However, as we
discussed
above, there are substantial threats to stability. A lot can be and should be done through mass-education
to
strengthen India’s social
fabric and make the experience of formal
education relevant for
all kids. In the following paragraphs, I present my take on the same.
History and Geography
Education: One of the
finest educationists of the 20th century, John
Dewey had
famously stated
–
“History is not the
story of
heroes,
but
an
account
of social
development; it provides us with knowledge of the past which contributes to the solution of social
problems of the present
and the future”
(as
quoted in Bartlett, 2008).
The objective for ‘history’ should not be to glorify certain kings and describing wars, but to understand how wars are devastating for societies and why and how that must be avoided. History
curriculum should
put
higher
emphasis on the
lives
and
struggles
of the ordinary people of
respective times,
the
challenges that
they
faced and the solutions they obtained. Class discussions should explore the lessons that we can learn from our predecessors as a society.
I
personally think the kings and
politicians are highly overrated
in
our history books. Similarly, ‘geography’ requires a makeover and needs to aim at conveying how geographical
factors affect human lives, culture, economic investments, developmental plans of governments and respective environmental issues; and how the interlink of all factors in different parts of the nation and the world are
different from (and similar to) the learner’s geographic region. Post world-
war while exploring factors contributing to mass-madness,
Dewey suggested that
the
history curriculum was
used to inculcate strong nationalistic values even
at the cost of antagonizing other countries across participating nations. Misinterpretation of history may lead to sentiments of
victimhood and desire for revenge or illusion of superiority or inferiority with respect to people of
other culture and region. We have to be highly cautious in preventing these subjects biasing child’s mind against certain groups of society.
It is worth mentioning that some of the geographical areas of India are not well include in the social science textbooks. More specifically, the chapters of Indian history
hardly
cover anything on the seven north-eastern states. This trend continues even at the university
level as reported by
Tyagi (2013). As a result of this negligence,
people of other regions often have very little
understanding of the northeast.
Gender Equality &
Sexual Orientation: Though
there has been an emphasis on gender
equality in school-curriculum in recent decades, schools can do a lot more in this direction. The
social struggle and suffering because of ones gender (e.g., being a woman, or a transgender) is
hardly conveyed to the younger generation.
It is fairly possible that a formally educated young male (or female) has absolutely no idea of the difference between
flirting, eve-teasing
and
sexual-harassment
and
their legal consequences. Furthermore, the education system
keeps
a blind-eye toward homosexual, bisexual
and transgender community.
Note that the World Health Organization (WHO), Medical Council of India (MCI), Indian
Psychiatric Association
(IPA), Indian Medical Association (IMA), American Medical
Association
(AMA), the American Psychiatric Association, and numerous other authoritative
institutions across
the
world have stated that homosexuality
is
not a disease and sexual orientation is not a choice. However, the religious
figures like
Baba Ramdev
or Zakir Naik publicly condemn homosexuality,
while the educators and policy makers remain silent spectators.
Being aware of
Hidden Curriculum: Even when the stated curriculum and educational objectives are egalitarian, children’s educational experiences may not necessarily be the same because
of the biased behaviour pattern of the
teachers, peers, and the social-structure of the
school in-general. Educational theorists
term these prejudiced practices of schools as
“hidden
curriculum”. Unfortunately, the hidden curriculum of various Indian
social contexts has not
been systematically studied. Nonetheless, my
personal experiences suggest that, overall, the schools tend to reinforce the inequalities of the Indian society.
Creating Places
(and occasions) where Children/ Youth
of Diverse
Background Interacts: In
most
cities, the Hindus and Muslims are increasingly living in separate areas with passage of time.
People from
different castes still
live in
different
streets in
most
villages throughout
India. Moreover, privatization of education has segregated children along class-lines. Considering all
these factors, our schools have hardly
remained diverse. As a consequence, the younger Hindus are losing contact with their Muslim counterparts and vice-versa. It is fairly possible that an upper
middle class child
has never interacted with
a child who does not speak English
or does not have
a computer at home. Needless to mention that it is a likely scenario where a rich kid feels closer to
the kids of developed nations and perceives other Indian
kids
from
lower class as “worth staying away”.
This is a dangerous trend. Most of the biases and bigotry have roots in ignorance and lack
of
empathy for the other
group. If an individual is well aware of the way of living, set of beliefs, and the hardships and day to day challenges of the other set of people, s/he will be more likely to see the commonalities and respect
the
differences. Therefore, we need to create places where children
of
all diverse backgrounds (religion, caste, &
class) can connect with each other on
regular basis.
I welcome your comments.
