Education aspires to create individuals who can think for themselves and solve problems independently using their critical acumen. Whether in schools, colleges or the university, this objective of education remains a constant. This is endorsed in vision statements and policy documents.
However, merely stating this repeatedly does not mean it has been achieved. As an educationist, over the last three decades, one has noticed a few impediments. In schools, many teachers promote what they call “model” answers. Students are encouraged to reproduce the “model” answer and the carrot of “high marks” is dangled before them. True enough for when results are declared, such “model” answers fare well and those that are not quite “model” enough, but are possibly filled with brilliant insights, score lower marks. The bogey of grades/marks makes teachers and parents insist that the student suppress her/his perceptions and merely regurgitate what is available! These are the beginnings of a lifelong habit of seeking shortcuts. It is also another form of plagiarism to which all stakeholders turn a blind eye.
The burgeoning of tuition centres is another symptom of this easy remedy. In old times, family members or a schoolteacher helped the child handle academic challenges and learn to fend for themselves. They have now been replaced by the “tuition teacher” regarded as nothing short of a jinni who can open the golden gateway to heaven of A pluses. While some exceptional tutors exist, by and large, tutors focus only on ensuring that the “client” scores well. One can also call it the nanny syndrome, for nannies are now the need of the hour as our tutors.
So, the systemic failure of education to create out-of-the-box thinkers begins at the school level. The single most important factor that weighs down heavily upon the system is the evaluation method; undoubtedly, there is a need to bring urgent reforms.
In higher educational institutions, there is some attempt to encourage critical and “different” thinking in the class discussions, assignments and presentations by students. But at the university level examinations, students often write almost identical answers. Obviously, they are advised that answering questions a certain way will fetch higher marks. And thus, the cycle continues; the student remains just a vessel (vassal?) who processes the information received prescriptively. And the outcome? Perpetuating suppression of ingenuity and stalling creativity. Again, another chance for an individual to be original, inventive and imaginative, is sacrificed at the altar of the evaluation system.
Further pursuit of education can be limiting. I recall a time when I was doing my PhD on British Agit prop Theatre and was told incessantly by all in the academic circle that the “topic” was not current enough. Also, to my bewilderment, that it was fraught with dangers. I continued to research the topic as it held her genuine interest and faced the “danger” of being marginalised/stereotyped with equanimity. Ironic that while education seeks to break stereotypes, the intellectual community creates its own.
Another more insidious danger is using the classroom as a site for cloning. And here, the cloning occurs in that some teachers see the classroom as an opportunity to propagate a faith, an ideology and a way of thinking that they are followers of as the only right way. Given the effective communication skills of teachers, students often fall prey to the rhetoric and, with scanty or no knowledge of the whole picture, make ill-informed choices. So, while educational institutions exhort holistic education, and interactive teaching-learning and are expected to engage students through dialogue and discussion, the question arises as to whether that happens. Is it not true that some teachers jeopardise this mission by colouring the lens through which students view the world?
The teacher is influential and even Spiderman said that with great power comes great responsibility. It is the responsibility of a good teacher to remember this cardinal principle that educational institutions must be multi-hued. Then only will there be true inclusivity and independent thinking.
We live in fragile times, and it is important that we live it well. The guru leads the way from darkness to light, from chaos to harmony. However tough the times are for teachers, they cannot compromise on the aims of education to create thinking and self-reliant individuals. The principles documented by institutions must be transformed from paper to actual practice. Then only will teachers be deserving of the wishes they are greeted with on September 5 in India, “Happy Teacher’s Day”.
Prof. Swati Pal is principal, Janki Devi Memorial College, University of Delhi.
The views expressed are personal
