Whither Indian Education?
By KN Panikkar
Originally presented as the inaugural address to the 'National
Convention Against Communalisation
of Education in India’ organised by SAHMAT (August 4-6, 2001, New Delhi,
India).
The education in India is at a crossroads. Its liberal and secular character
and
content, carefully nourished during the last fifty years, despite several
vicissitudes, is now undergoing fundamental transformation. That this change
rather hurriedly pushed through by the government and its agencies is not
in
consonance with the guiding principles of our republic and would adversely
affect the well being of our plural society is a widely shared concern.
For, the
change is being engineered by a government committed more by its ideological
needs and the entrepreneurial interests of the ruling classes rather than
the
requirements of the society.
Admittedly, in class societies education is an ideological apparatus of
the state
and is designed and used for the perpetuation and furtherance of its interests.
The ideological apparatuses by their very nature function with considerable
finesse, obscuring and universalising partisan interests or imputing cultural
or
national explanations for their initiatives. All these strategies appear
to be at
work in foregrounding a new system of education that uncritically privileges
the
indigenous and celebrates the religious. It seeks to displace whatever
secular
and universal content and outlook the existing system, although with obvious
limitations, has managed to incorporate and preserve.
Character of education in Post-independence India
The system of education evolved during the post ˆindependence period is
essentially liberal and secular in character. It draws upon the historical
experience, both colonial and pre-colonial, and the social, cultural and
intellectual legacy inherited there from. Although an enclavised system,
mainly
serving the interests of the elite, it respected the social plurality and
cultural
diversity of the country. While attempting to construct the nation and
unify the
people, differences were accommodated, even if the class and caste biases
were apparent in policy formulation and implementation. That education
is a
concurrent and not a central subject reflects the respect for diversity.
The influence of colonial rule and western ideas, which filtered through
it, over
the modern system of education in India, is well known. The reconstruction
of
the system of education in post-independent India was undertaken in the
context of the legacy of colonialism, both in policy and infrastructure.
Yet, the
system that came into being, as a result of the deliberations in several
education commissions, chaired by eminent educationists like
Dr.S.Radhakrishnan and Dr.D.S. Kothari, was neither a continuation of the
colonial nor a blind adoption of the western. The main concern was the
formulation of a reformed system that would address the developmental needs
of the nation and create a healthy social consciousness. The national policy
on
education laid down this perspective as follows: "a radical reconstruction
of
education" is essential for economic and cultural development of the country,
for national integration and for realizing the ideal of a socialistic pattern
of
society. This will involve a transformation of a system to relate to more
closely
to the life of the people; a continuous effort to expand educational
opportunity; a sustained and intensive effort to raise the quality of education
at all stages; an emphasis on the development of science and technology;
and
the cultivation of moral and social values. The educational system should
produce young men and women of character and ability committed to national
service and development. Only then will education be able to play its vital
role
in promoting national progress, creating a sense of common citizenship
and
culture, and strengthening national integration. This is necessary if the
country
is to attain its rightful place in the comity of nations in conformity
with its
cultural heritage and its unique potentialities.
The search for an alternate system had a long history, dating back to the
early
colonial times. The nostalgia about the indigenous, as evident from the
writings
of many, including Gandhi who described the pre-colonial system as a beautiful
tree, is a natural response to conditions of subjection. Yet, there was
no
attempt to resurrect the pre-colonial or to adopt the traditional as the
ideal.
Instead the concern of all those involved with educational reform was to
marry
the traditional with the modern. A national system of education which the
colonial intellectuals and nationalist leaders tried to evolve was based
on a
possible synthesis of all that is advanced in the West with all that was
abiding
in the traditional. In other words the national policy was not lodged in
a
dichotomy between the indigenous and the western. The impact of such a
policy was the internalization of a universal outlook and the location
of the
indigenous in the wider matrix of human history. The educational policy
adumbrated by independent India, even if it faltered on many a count, was
informed by an open-ended view.
Recent Departures
The post-colonial system, in the assessment of the present government,
has
an entirely different character. In its view it continues to be colonial
and
western, producing an intellectually and culturally alienated intelligentsia,
derisively called the "children of Macaulay". Given their education and
training
and access to power, it is argued that they were able to exercise an overriding
influence in almost all spheres of society- political, social and intellectual.
The
nature of political institutions and developmental strategies of independent
India were attributed to their influence. The modern system of education,
which they tried to perpetuate, is anathema to the Sangh Parivar, as it
is not
sufficiently "national" in content. The alternative proposed by the Parivar
and
now being implemented by the government is an indigenous system, which
M.S. Golwalkar had earlier conceived as religious in character, with emphasis
on tradition, discipline and military training. Romanticisation of traditional
knowledge, celebration of religious beliefs and emphasis on conformism
are its
chief characteristics.
One of the major compulsions for changing the content of education is the
realization of the communal objective of creating a Hindu national identity
and
national pride. An essay on value education published by the National Council
for Educational Research and Training ( NCERT) suggests as follows: A sense
of
belongingness must be developed in every individual learner by focusing
on
India‚s contribution to world civilization. It is high time that India‚s
contribution
in areas like mathematics, sciences, maritime, medicine, trade, architecture,
sculpture, establishment of institutions of learning is emphasized and
made
known to the learners to develop a sense of belonging to the nation with
respect and an attachment to the past.
In respect of both school and university education the government agencies
like the University Grants Commission (UGC) and the NCERT are currently
engaged in revising the curriculum and bringing about a qualitative change
in
content. A discussion document produced by the NCERT for curriculum
development spells out the main thrust of the contemplated change. The
document dismisses the existing system as colonial and western and in its
place proposes an indigenous curriculum, which would "celebrate the ideas
of
native thinkers\" and "privilege the innovative experiments and experiences
emanated from its own context". The Document elaborates the point as
follows:
… it may also be pointed out that there is a need to bring to notice the
contribution
of India to the world wisdom. Paradoxical as it may sound, while our children
know
about Newton, they do know a computer they do not know the concept of zero.
Mention may also have to be made for instance of Yoga and Yogic practices
as well
as Indian systems of medicine like Ayurvedic and Unani forms which are
being
recognized and practiced all over the world. The curriculum will have to
correct such
imbalances.
The contrast between the western and the indigenous and privileging the
latter is a powerful political slogan capable of arousing nationalist sentiments,
but it hardly has any academic worth. Not because indigenous system of
knowledge need not be integrated into the curriculum- in fact it is necessary
to
do so more than what exists today- but the contrast between the two systems
as the NCERT document purports to do is likely to be counterproductive.
It
would only create a false sense of pride, bordering on chauvinism, which
is
detrimental to the pursuit of knowledge. What is required is not information
gathering which the NCERT is obsessed with, but a creative integration
of
knowledge from different sources.
The system of school education that would emerge out of the suggestions
in
this document is likely to have serious long-term social implications.
It would
foster a generation incapable of critically interrogating the problems
of society
or rationally approach matters of social existence. Instead they will be
more
inclined to accept the received wisdom and in the process miss the significance
of the revolution in knowledge currently taking place in the world. The
most
undesirable consequence, however, would be the creation of an intellectual
and cultural situation conducive for the onset of a conformist society.
Value Education
Considerable importance is attached in the new scheme to value education,
an issue
that had attracted the attention of educational planners from the very
beginning. The
value education was generally perceived as a major input in the process
of character
building of students as well as a means for the inculcation of healthy
social attitudes.
In fact, there can hardly be any system of education without the inculcation
of values.
What should constitute the content of value education is however not easy
to
determine. The different commissions had seriously deliberated upon this
and had
suggested how moral, spiritual and religious ideas could be incorporated
in the
curriculum. The Education Commission of 1964 took a clear view by underlining
the
importance of education about religion and not religious education and
significantly
about the need for the study of comparative religion. The Commission also
emphasized
a universal outlook as the source of value education so that the students
become
capable of comprehending the problems of modern world. In 1970 the NCERT
following
a national conference spelt out the content of value education. The values
enunciated
were primarily secular in character: honesty, kindness, charity, tolerance,
courtesy,
compassion and sympathy. The present policy seems to draw upon this tradition,
but
in actual practice marginalizing the universal and comparative perspective
so integral to
the Indian experience. In fact, the secular values the NCERT itself had
earlier
enunciated do not get adequate attention in recent policy statements. Therefore
there
is considerable apprehension that the much touted value education would
be restricted
in due course to religious instruction, and perhaps to Hindu religious
instruction. The
Director of NCERT, though negatively, has foregrounded the religious dimension:
"The
hesitation in delineating strategies for value inculcation from religions
through its
various sources needs to be given up". In fact, the textbooks prescribed
in several
states ruled by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) had long given up any
such hesitation
and has prepared ample material not only to inculcate a religious but a
communal view
of the world.
The scheme of value education is inextricably linked with the communal
cultural and
political project. By its very nature it would promote religiosity and
religious
consciousness in society and help in redefining the nation in religious
terms. The
Hindu religion oriented courses sponsored by the government agencies and
the
religious interpretation of history serve the same purpose. More so because
they
create a wedge in social consciousness.
Redefinition of the Nation
The restructuring of the education system undertaken by the present government
and
the agencies under its control is primarily oriented towards the redefinition
of the nation
in religious terms. Using the logic of majoritarianism the nation is being
conceptualized
as Hindu and a system of education to legitimize this notion is being put
in place. In
this attempt the interpretation of the past and the social consciousness
emerging out
of it are of crucial importance, which explains the promotion of a hinduised
history by
the Sangh Parivar. The soul of hinduisation, however, is not the distortion
of facts,
which at any rate are aplenty, but a religious interpretation of the past,
which
establishes the right of the nation to the Hindus. Reminiscent of the colonial
view of the
past, the communal history, which is now being propagated by government
institutions
like the Indian Council for Historical Research and increasingly finding
place in school
textbooks, depicts Indian history as a record of continuous strife between
religious
communities. In this interpretation all communities other than the Hindus
are identified
as foreigners and therefore the enemies of the nation. What is implied
thereby is that
Hindus alone has a right to the nation. The recent attempts to prove the
indigenous
origins of the Aryans and their vegetarianism are a part of establishing
historical
legitimacy for Hindu nationhood. This however is only the tip of the iceberg.
A very
concerted and well-planned attempt is being made to create an alternate
historical
consciousness. The channels of dissemination of this consciousness are
not the
textbooks or the research projects sponsored by the ICHR alone, but more
so the
vernacular pamphlets extensively distributed through religious and social
networks.
They do not make any distinction between myth and history; in fact they
parade myth
as history, which in a way makes their reception easier. The history of
Ramjanmabhoomi circulated during the temple campaign is a good example.
The emphasis on the religious interpretation of history is a reflection
of a general shift
from a secular perspective to a religious orientation in education. The
recent initiatives
taken by the Ministry of Human Resource Development, implemented through
the
NCERT and the UGC, seek to impart a Hindu religious character to the education
system by incorporating in the curricula areas of interest traditionally
associated with
religious practices. The most glaring example of this tendency is the promotion
of a
course in Karmakanda that would produce certified priests for conducting
rituals. Along
with that attempts are afoot to open new areas of study where, according
to the
NCERT, "scientific evidence is not so far available to sustain some popular
faith and
which have been rejected outright because of impatient and motivated criticism".
In
pursuit of this Jyotir Vigyan, Jyotish in popular parlance, is being introduced
in
Universities with generous financial assistance from the UGC. The best
of Indian
scientists have decried the wisdom behind this move, as the promotion of
such an
unscientific field of study will only contribute to obscurantism and superstition.
This initiative of the government raises an important academic issue regarding
the
teaching of the traditional systems of knowledge. That India like many
other countries
have an accumulated wealth of knowledge needs no reiteration. In several
fields like
medicine, plastic surgery, rhenoplasty, astronomy, town planning, alchemy
and so on
Indians had attained a high level of excellence at different points of
time. They deserve
to be studied and is being studied as a part of the historical evolution
of knowledge in
the field. But privileging them over the others, particularly those without
proper scientific
foundation like Jyotish and Karmakanda, is unaccademic and undesirable
and is likely
to encourage inward looking and closed minds, particularly because the
government
documents while emphasizing the contribution of Indian civilization to
other societies
do not take notice of the impact of other civilisations on India. Studying
the state of
knowledge in the past is one thing; uncritically adopting it in the present
curriculum is
another. The knowledge in each field has advanced so much, a return to
the past,
however glorious it had been, is unrealistic and only would drag the society
into
intellectual backwardness.
The Context
The change in the character of education from the secular to the communal
is taking
place at a historical juncture when transnational capital is tightening
its stranglehold
over the Indian economy and society. The impact of this new phase of imperialism,
euphemistically called globalisation, thereby masking its real nature and
intent, is well
pronounced. That the privatization of education, particularly the withdrawal
of the state
from higher education, occurring at a brisk pace in recent times is at
the instance of
the World Bank is now well known. Not only steps are afoot to set up private
universities, but also several foreign universities are vying with each
other to set up
their "extension counters" in India. Given that the best of Indian universities
are starved
of funds these institutions are likely to have a field day. As for Indian
universities they
function today without even the basic minimum facilities and with teachers
who have no
access to the latest advances in their disciplines. These institutions
churn out
students who complete their education as outcastes even in their own chosen
area of
knowledge. What these institutions offer is unacceptable to the fast growing
affluent
Indian middle class. The situation is likely to aggravate in coming days
with the UGC
reportedly being deprived of its funding functions and the introduction
of an
accreditation system which would stamp many an institution as academic
slums
without ever the possibility of a honourable redemption. Understandably
education is a
fertile land for investment, particularly if it comes with a foreign tag.
The response of the ruling classes and the present government to this crisis
is
encoded in a report prepared by industrialists, Mukesh Ambani and Kumaramangalam
Birla, entitled A Policy Framework for Reforms in Education, and submitted
to the
Prime Minister‚s council on trade and industry. The brief of this young
team of
industrialists is to formulate a policy framework for private investment
in education,
health and rural development, which they appear to have done with alacrity
and
enthusiasm. The proposals, which they claim would usher in a revolution
in education,
in fact, provide a blue print for the unconditional surrender to the interests
of advanced
capitalist countries and for the preservation of the existing privileges
of the ruling
classes. The revolution proposed is the creation of a "competitive, yet
co-operative,
knowledge based society". The prescription is as follows:
As the world moves on to forging an information society founded on education,
India
cannot remain behind as a non-competitive knowledge economy. India has
to create an
environment that does not produce industrial workers and labourers but
fosters
knowledge workers. Such people must be at the cutting edge of knowledge
workers
and, in turn, placing India in the vanguard in the information age.
This grand design is to be implemented through direct foreign investment
and
privatization. It advocates "a full cost recovery in higher education and
encouraging the
emergence of a largely self-financing private sector". The rest, be it
the primary and
secondary education or the liberal and performing arts or "disciplines
whose scholars
do not command a market", may be left to the patronage of the state. The
unstated
implication of the scheme is that it would generate two streams: one for
the poor and
the other for the elite. The education of the former would be limited to
literacy while the
latter would be the receivers of knowledge. But then the nature of the
information
society of countries like India, as subordinate partners of advanced capitalist
countries,
would be nothing better than that of a service sector. Far from being competitive
and
innovative they are likely to be destined to perform innumerable labour
saving works for
the benefit of transnational capital. The most glaring example is the medical
transcription in which a large number of Indians, some of them with high
technical
qualifications, are currently engaged in performing the clerical work for
American
hospitals. Several other labour saving "opportunities" are on the way.
This is not to
argue that the opportunities opened up by information technology are to
be shunned,
but to suggest its creative incorporation in the system of education. At
the same time
it is necessary to recognize the fact that the educational conditions created
by
information technology are pregnant with the possibilities of intellectual
colonization.
The breaking of the geographical barriers and communication restrictions
are indeed
healthy attributes of knowledge dissemination, but it cannot be divorced
from the
economic and political contexts of knowledge production. The Ambani report,
trapped
in platitudes and rhetoric, appears to be insensitive to these larger issues
inherent in
the new information regime.
The over emphasis on information technology raises yet another issue vital
to the well
being of society. The report not only privileges technology education but
also isolates
and marginalizes other areas. This is likely to affect adversely the holistic
character of
education, so necessary for the creation of a healthy society. An important
attribute of
knowledge production is specialisation, but the absence of a liberal content
in it
devalues education into mere training. The early educational planners were
quite
conscious of this danger and therefore took care to integrate liberal and
social science
education with science and technology. The humanity and social science
faculties of
the Indian Institutes of Technology emerged out of this perspective. It
is for the same
reason that universities devoted to the pursuit of science and technology
took care to
nurture social science faculties. Interestingly a vice-chancellor who made
major
contribution to the planning and development of a university for science
and technology
in Kerala was a social scientist.
In recent times two tendencies counter to this liberal spirit has been
gaining ground in
the organization of higher education. The first is the establishment of
single subject
oriented universities and second, the marginalisation, if not the elimination,
of liberal
subjects from the curriculum. The former leads to an extremely lopsided
university
system in which the possibilities of academic enrichment through interdisciplinary
teaching and research become minimal. Such universities do not rise above
the level of
institutes. The latter is more unfortunate. With the onset of cyber age
education and
privatization social sciences and such other "unproductive disciplines"
appears to be
on their way out. In some states like Andhra Pradesh and Tamilnadu liberal
education
is at a discount and the time and money allotted for social science subjects
are being
diverted for training in information technology. The NCERT, it is reported,
is in the
process of eliminating history from the school curriculum as a distinct
subject of study.
The Ambani report locates this shift in the context of globalisation and
the imperatives
of a market-led, knowledge- based economy. The report puts forward the
logic as
follows:
"It is important that skills, as a result of education, have economic value
beyond their
intrinsic merit. Equally it is important that there is diversity in order
to avoid abundance
in any one skill and consequent poor rewards. To illustrate, although computer
skills
are valuable, if too many computer specialists are produced, rewards for
them will be
weak".
Lacking a philosophy of education the Report is not able to see beyond
this pragmatic
problem and recognize that the system it is advocating will not only widen
the
educational disparities in society but also would undermine the basic quality
of
education. If Ambani‚s scheme is implemented the fundamental purpose of
education,
namely, the refinement of mind is going to be the main casualty.
Yet another dimension of liberal education is its ability to sensitise
the social and
political rights. This was understood and recognized even by the Education
Commission set up by the British government under the chairmanship of W.W.Hunter
in 1882. The Commission had then advocated the desirability of a shift
in policy in
favour of technical education, interestingly, at a time when there was
hardly any
industry in India. The rationale for the change was that the liberal education
was
making the Indians conscious of their political rights leading to their
participation in
public movement. The Commission foretold the oppositional role the educated
intelligentsia would play even before the storm broke out. Similarly the
educational
thinking and planning of the ruling classes today is to undermine the liberal
education
in order to rule out any possible dissent and protest. This is an interest
equally shared
by the forces of fundamentalism and globalisation.
The Ambani Report reflects this interest in ample measure. Apparently it
aims to
create "a new information society, resplendent with knowledge, research,
creativity and
innovation". But in reality it is concerned with the creation of necessary
conditions for
the operation of the national and trans-national capital. The Indian social
scene has
been rather turbulent during the last two decades when protest movements
from
different social groups have become quite pronounced. The educational campuses
have
been particularly vulnerable. The Report therefore suggests steps to ensure
peaceful
campuses without agitations and protests. Towards that end all educational
institutions
are to be made apolitical by preventing the "advertent or inadvertent creeping
in of
various isms" and by banning through legislation "any form of political
activity on the
campuses of universities and educational institutions". The aim of such
a move is to
usher in a conformist society in which alone fundamentalism can thrive
and
transnational capital can operate successfully. Thus in the new educational
initiatives
of the government there is a convergence of interests of both communalism
and
globalisation.
Except in certain pockets like Kerala and West Bengal there is hardly any
awareness,
let alone initiatives, for organising resistance against the onslaught
of these two forces
in the field of education. Most of the struggles for democratic rights
in educational
institutions are not sensitive to the imminent threat to the liberal and
secular education.
Given the rather dismal democratic climate in our institutions, they are
more concerned
with collective bargaining for improved conditions of work and better career
opportunities. A search for an alternative has not yet begun in our society.
A large
section of the Indian intelligentsia are either lost in the ideological
delusion of
globalisation or scared by the aggressive posturing of communalism. The
solution
perhaps lies in the organization of a counter cultural movement- counter
both to
communalism and globalisation- since the cultural domain as a whole is
under siege.
The movement has to posit an alternative as well as counter the initiatives.
Education
is an area in which both these can be creatively attempted, drawing upon
the earlier
efforts to formulate a national and modern system of education.
©2002 Akhbar: A Window on South Asia