What should I do, What should I be?

These are timeless questions. And I heard them again the other day. Not from a young student, directly. But from one old enough to be his great grandmother.

Patti: "What should he do? What line of engineering should he choose? He is a good boy and has finished school. He will surely get good marks. But he is confused, Which line should he choose? Shall I send him to you? WIll you please speak to him?"

Teacher: "Yes, what shall we say that is something tinged with more than just hope and 'trust me I know'?"

P: "He wants to do well."

T: "I understand that and who would not. But what does 'doing well' that mean to him?"

P: "A god job and a good salary. If the IT boom had not ended he would have gone that way. But now he is unsure."

T: "Yes, what would he like to do? What would he be happy doing?"

P: "Well, that is his confusion. He does not seem to have much that he is sure of."

T: "If I see read the aspirations of most educated young people who I meet, a good job seems to mean sitting in an air conditioned office before a computer, and enough money."

P: "While that seems stark you may have a point. The man who comes to fix my air conditioner is not an engineer, but a tenth passed worker."

T: "Students who do engineering want to go up quickly - up the ladder, into management, or marketing or finance or IT."

P: "Therefore does it matter what branch of engineering, particularly if one is not going to pursue engineering?

T: "Patti, you are not supposed to be saying this - that is my line! In the college atmosphere, with peers bringing new information, this is where students gather aspirations."

P: "It used to be simple some years ago - people could choose an engineering or medical course and then life took care of them"

T: "Unfortunately, or fortunately the rules have changed in the 21C. Recently someone said to me that your degree will take you only 2 years in your career."

P: "At least that!"

T: "But what if you are only clear about 'sitting in an air conditioned office before a computer, and enough money'? The 2 years will not take you far. After that people seem to need an attitude of learning and willingness to learn again. They need stamina and forbearance to try many solutions and work with different sensibilities."

P: "Schools and colleges don't seem to be helping our young people learn this. Years ago in Germany students used to go to industry. And they were not only looking for white collar jobs. 

T: But today in India even people who have passed 12th standard want an office job. No one wants to travel or get their hands dirty, if they can avoid it."

P: "We have to accept this as the popular aspiration. We cannot wish it away."

T: "Yes, therefore the question becomes even more poignant - what do we say to a young person, who asks for advice. What do we say that we feel is authentic and good and has his or her long term interest in mind?"

P: "It is safe to suggest engineering, or MBA or Visual communications."

T: "I would feel very inauthentic saying this to any young person. I may say....

it is ok for you to be confused and not know what to do. It is also perfectly ok to want to earn well and be happy. I wish you this. 

However it is important to ask where you wish to start, particularly when you are unsure what interests you. You must remember that you live in times very different from those we have grown up in. This means every 3 or 5 years you will be learning new things and will be required to learn new things. This will be needed whatever your job or work. So you need to cultivate a discipline of learning. Unlike in the school or college, what you have to learn may not come to you in the form of books. You will have to search for it and go after it. You need to smell out possibilities and take them forward.

Most people seem to go for a college degree because they feel 'incomplete' without it. All will agree that most things they learnt in college and school are not used by them. They would simultaneously tell you that the experience was valuable for all the things outside the classroom.

Now may I raise a few questions, as much to you as to myself? Is there another way of approaching this question? Let us take some facts:

1. Considering that college education does not matter much for what you have to do, if you must, just take any course. It will give you feel a sense of belonging. Further, you don't have any compulsion that you must work in an area that you study. 
2. Three and four year course have a new significance these days. They say knowledge doubles every 2 1/2 years. This means the ground that you cover in college will be 1/2 as relevant by the time you pass out.
3. You have to continue learning even after college and this is unavoidable.
4. You will do most of your learning on the job, in the contexts of your choice.

Now considering that your degree will take you 2 years into your career, and that you would need a discipline of learning continuously, what would be sensible for you to do?

1. Are you sure you wish to be in an air-conditioned room all your working life?
2. Which level do you wish to enter the work life? As an apprentice or as a manager?
3. Is apprenticeship for a year or two, work experience for a year or two followed by a degree an option at all?
4. Your resources now:
• your language abilities
• your close contact with the breadth of school education
• you have dreams
• you have energy and are willing to many things and learn many things
• and you have friends
5. You need to make a choice - will I invest in life long learning? or will I give greater value to 3/4 year college degree learning?

Now, I would suggest to a young person to try and do 2 or 3 short term assignments in a year or work as an apprentice to someone who is doing in an area that he / she likes. One thing this exercise will do - one will find out what is definitely 'no'. I would also advice a young person to enter the world of work 'modestly'. If one is learning, one does not expect to be paid a high salary for it. Colege charge one for the opportunity to learn. So crafting a learning opportunity for oneself with a modest income is like having a stipend for learning, studying, discovering what one enjoys doing and would like to be doing.

One may also discover that the skills one has are already more than what is needed in most jobs! With this confidence if a young person continues to learn then soon he or she can do a degree or earn a qualification. Many of us know people whose organizations are sponsoring them for higher qualifications. Short term courses in the work period are quite common and practical. 

As David Orr wrote in 1985 "...the oldest and most comfortable assumption of all that education can take place only in "educational" institutions. Colleges and universities are expensive, slow moving, often unimaginative, and weighted down by the burdens of self-congratulation and tradition. They offer a discipline-centric curriculum that corresponds modestly with reality.  The grip colleges and universities now have on "education" will be broken when young people discover alternatives that are far cheaper, faster and better adapted to economic realities. "

He further goes on to say, "Students ought to be encouraged first to find their calling: that particular thing for which they have a deep passion and which they would like to do above all else. A calling is about the person one wants to make oneself. A career is a coldly calculated plan to achieve security and have a bit of "fun" that turns out, more often than not, to be deeply unsatisfying, whatever the pay."

Without this discovery the young person is at risk of merely looking at the income and lose on vitality and vibrancy. i would ask the young person keep a record, a diary, answering a few simple reflective questions, thus taking charge of his / her life:

1. What have I learn today?
2. How do I say i have learnt this?
3. Have i collaborated with my colleagues today?
4. How do I say this? 
5. What listening did I bring to colleagues today?
6. What is the basis on which `i say that i listened?
7. What initiatives have I taken today, things that no one asked me for?

I would say that, "If in a week running you havent learnt much or listened well, or collaborated or taken initiative, then you need to reorient your attitude. Nothing will improve if that does not change." I would also say, "And if you find good evidence of these same qualities, then nothing can stop you - certainly not the want of a degree."

Ancient Indians spoke about Swadhyaya - being one's own teacher, being a student who is learning irrespective of the circumstances. In reflecting honestly on one's life, free of assumptions and expectations one may discover the ability to educate oneself. In this discovery, one would also find alertness, freedom, humility, joy. And the ingrained belief, that one needs college education, to take oneself ahead, will find its place.

If school is a valuable social institution, it will lose in value if there is an overmuch of emphasis on marks in the exams. The student, grounded in reality, respectful relationship and lifelong learning is not born out of performing for the teacher's approval. In fact those that do too well in school seem to run out of steam early in their work life and also lose verve. One may hazard the guess that parents and teachers should worry about preserving the spirits of students rather than constantly tell them what they need to do and what they should not. Nothing injures the spirit more. And lastly, parents need to hold their anxiety - they need to survey the landscape around them. They need to look at their own classmates, people who went different paths. They need to take courage from the fact that most are reasonably well off. And those that have collapsed have not done so because of the want of a degree. Some of the collapses have been because society could not validate and support an artisitic temparament, a physical intelligence or a musical one. 

And for those who do extremely well academically, may be their real education is being unwittingly neglected.

12 May 2009

Can good education happen in small schools?

or

Can good education happen only in large schools

with small classrooms?

Preamble

Much of educational practice seems to suggest that good education, of a high quality, happens in classrooms where there is the possibility of good relatedness between students and teacher. Relatedness is directly connected to listening to each other, which creates an atmosphere conducive to learning. Classroom sizes have been steadily dwindling. Recommended class sizes in India today are between 25 and 35.

Can schools run with small sizes? Can we conceive of a school with 20 to 30 children? Or does this automatically signify a lack of quality?

Small schools existed all over India before the intervention of British colonial power and thoughts that generated from the Industrial Revolution. School can be looked at educationally, for financial viability and as social institutions.

Educational factors:

It is well-documented now that small classrooms afford a greater opportunity for students of different capacities to be meaningfully engaged in learning situations. The classroom after all requires the moderating influence of teacher. It has been variously suggested that numbers ranging from 20 to 30 are highly suitable for quality interaction between teacher and student.

It is also sufficiently documented that the small school, where everyone knows everyone else is a 'heathier' place than one with a large number of students. There are schools now with 30, 50, 100 children that seem anachronistic, schools with 200 t0 400 students that seem of widely acceptable size and then those with 500 to 5000 students & hundreds of teachers that are the recognized large schools. The small schools are considered to be elite and exclusive, though there are enough examples of small schools for poorer children.

Except for the very small schools, 20 to 50 students, the rest follow the pattern of same age classrooms, ie the school is graded from class 1 to 10 and students largely spend their school time in class groups. The assumption behind the same age classrooms is that all students learn the same thing at the same time or are exposed to the same thing at the same time and this is an efficient manner of transacting academics. All experience points to the limitation of this assumption. A group of human beings is a living social entity. The dynamic is anything but homogeneous. A school or classroom can ignore this fact only if it ignores the well-being of the students and teachers.

Financially:

Teaching is recognized as an aspirational vocation, something that people come to because of a passion or a deep conviction. In the present day context the teacher is an employee, employed by the system, or by a group of people to deliver academic content. The superseding of knowledge over aspiration is one of the important features of the educational system today. We hear everywhere that it is difficult to get good teachers. If we're able to attract enough good teachers the problems in schools would be settled. The inability of schools to draw such individuals from the environment is attributed to poor salaries. To redress the situation salary increases have been periodically brought in. However, these increases still do not move the teacher into the entrepreneurial category.

Let us look at two models of schools from the money angle. Today the salary of a teacher is assured by the employers. Like in the industrial model of a factory or enterprise, there is little relationship between the teachers and the person/people who employ them. this disconnect puts the teacher in the position of a hired hand. Therefore the market decides the price for the teachers' services. If this is truly the best situation then we should be able to accept it wholeheartedly. In India we have found is extremely difficult as also in other parts of the world. Despite the onset of the market economy we have found it extremely difficult to look upon teaching as merely a market commodity. This is reflected in how our country has not given up the hope of blending social aspirations with the educational mission of the nation. Is it possible at all for the teacher to have a different location?

Social and cultural:

Does the teacher of music, dance, chanting, yoga or martial arts have a different location? The answer is clear. Yes. These teachers are free to "ply their trade" independently or with institutions. So is a tuition teacher! Around the monolith of the schooling system there are the little schools that flourish. Seeing the economic opportunity here, tuition centers flourish. These are the alternate centers where education in subjects with the sole aim of attaining marks, "sold". Schools however, are expected to do more than merely barter academic exam learning for fees.

If we consider the early 19th century model, the learning institution was the place to which students went. It was either the house of the teacher or a common space given by the village. The teacher received sustenance from the village. The teacher was a valued member of the community supported a learning environment, was the anchor for such an environment. Kings and nobles would send their children to certain teachers, their reputation and capacity having traveled for through the learning displayed by their students. The teacher was much like an artisan, and entrepreneur.

From the accounts of the Gov. Gen. in India it seems that education was a flourishing activity. The account also suggests that every man woman and child knew how to read, write and do basic arithmetic. While the rule of East India Company brought the country under English rule, Sepoy Mutiny required the British Crown to intervene and take over the administration of India. Till then it seemed that thoughtful Governance was not required since the basic need was to subjugate the population of India economically. Cultural subjugation was far more difficult. Here was an intricate, yet extremely simple, action in education which was passing on inherited wisdom, knowledge to the next generation in an empowering manner. This system had nuances built in so that knowledge was not stripped of its cultural moorings. It was from this effective mechanism that the traditions, the knowledge and skills were being effectively communicated and this had been happening from generation to generation, over centuries.

Historical Change of Guard - Traditional to Modern Education

If one puts oneself in the shoes of the British in India, the mission of subjugating the population would be seen as hamstrung by the cultural and social resilience of the population. Power has always had the need to broadcast itself. The artifacts of economic power are large buildings needed to get large numbers of people together. The modern school, with its designed fragmentation, was a scale up from the existing schooling model. It was a part of the 'thoughtful Governance' that was now brought in - difficult to fault, therefore difficult to resist. In fact our own countrymen supported the setting up of such schools. The new schools smelt of fresh paint, had orderly arrangement of furniture and guaranteed belonging into the new order where rule of law and good sense superseded the rule of Kings.

The setting up of schools alone may not have changed the mold effectively enough. After all one of the features of this vast nation has been its capacity to accommodate new insights and practices. But when government power, particularly at the time of the great recession, was used to ensure that only students from recognized schools would be eligible for government jobs, the ascendance of the modern school was guaranteed. In times of economic crisis, all societies lean towards that which will make economic sense, economic survival. If the modern school, despite its strangeness and unsure assumptions, meant economic survival, so be it.

Ruminations:

One or two teachers, educating a group of 10 to 30 students, in a low infrastructure environment, is difficult to beat as a model of education. Only one teacher and his family need to draw sustenance from this work. The learning of the teacher and understanding was considered most valuable. The infrastructural features, beyond the basic, were insignificant. India is replete with stories of students who traveled far to spend years with revered teachers, to try and assimilate the knowledge which these teachers held. Therefore, the small school was an economic model that was extremely difficult to improve in terms of efficacy, delivery, economy and social content.

The modern school broke the backbone of the system by depriving it of economic validity. In one stroke, under British rule, all learning that had remained valid for centuries, became useless for generating income. Once the modern school found purchase, it automatically meant that the small schools faded away or continued in areas that were cultural and on he fringes of the economic mainstream - Dance and Music and Sanskrit. Soon they would merely be a memory, and in the light of current experience,an anachronism. To further establish the superiority of the modern schooling system an epithet was coined - rote learning. This suggested that much of the knowledge imparted in the small schools was merely mechanical in nature. It also meant that since reflection and digestion and assimilation was not part of the process.

In the 20th century:

Through the 20th century and into the 21st century, the old model has survived. It survived in places where the infrastructure demanded by the modern system was not available. It survived in village schools where there was one teacher, it survived in common schools where more teachers could not be appointed. It survived in rural and tribal communities where modern education was not available.

The small school reared its head again in the midst of the large, economy-of-scale schools, as little tuition classes held by individuals. In the 20th century the tuition centres were alternate venues for supplementing and building upon the effort of the main school. The economy of scale is always challenged by little shops around the malls, by the vendor on a cycle or cart or even on foot.

Schools of small fish around the behemoths in the ocean.

Some view this phenomenon as parasitical and therefore with suspicion. But, it is widely accepted that supplementary instruction in the house of a teacher is a way of enhancing the quality of academic transaction. The small group setting with a teacher offers something that the large schools dont.

The difficulties and problems encountered with modern education have been documented only too well. To mention just a few - cultural alienation, invalidation that students experience to failure, studying subjects that are in no way related to the daily experience of the student, the creation of a group whose approval and disapproval becomes shape the identity of children.

Economic analysis:

The modern schooling system requires 1.5 teachers for each class of students - that is the prevalent calculation. Additional requirements by way of specialist teachers for art, games, administrative head and accountant are needed. Therefore teachers are in the location of one who is supervised and monitored in much the same way that the student is. The teacher is an employee. The infrastructure does not belong to the teacher. The parents are not directly connected to the teacher.

The school is no different from another industrial enterprise that employs people and delivers services or goods. In this setting what is received by the student, are the 'goods', and what is delivered by the teacher are the 'services'. Since the teacher is an employed worker, unless school moves to a position where each teacher has a sense of belonging and ownership, and therefore a sense of responsibility, this tension cannot be defused. On the contrary, every attempt at defining the deliverables in school has only heightened the tension.

The small school model, operating from low infrastructure environment, requires that only the teacher needs to draw sustenance and therefore the cost is lower. The quality of the service offered is higher since the teacher is answerable to the student and needs to maintain his or her position in the society. Further, since in many such teachers exist, if a teacher is not found suitable students would leave. Lastly the teacher is directly accountable to the parent. He/she is in a position to define what he or she can offer -skill in bronze sculpture, growing up is a good human being, archery, astrology or astronomy. Therefore, in a sense, this system existed on the basis of the market economy, and did not ignore economic factors.

Social factors:

An artisan practicing a trade takes responsibility for the quality of his work. He or she takes pride in the work done and also feel responsible for what has been produced. The model of administration that grew in the colonial era was simply not good enough for nurturing a group of artists. The mode of administration that was required in the Army and in the church was not the mode of administration that would work with a team of people who were required to work together, bringing their individual talents and evolve a common basis for educating the young.

School by definition requires that teachers take responsibility. Responsibility also implies that people participate in the upkeep of the structure and its maintenance. They also feel responsible to make changes and suggests modifications when things don't work. Unfortunately looking at the structure of school, and how little it has changed over the years, one feels tempted to observe, that there is little scope for teachers to engage with the system. Therefore the school system has acquired a certain rigidity, and therefore become frozen and lifeless.

The greatest loss in the teacher crossing the threshold from master of the establishment to an employer was responsibility. The belief that responsibility would flow naturally from governance has been disproved time and time again in business analysis and schools of management. Definition of task does not define role. And the role of teacher has not found definition in a feet-on-the-ground manner to this day. A look at the teachers' manuals show the struggle in this articulation. Tasks are easy to define, but the spirit is another matter.

The cultural confusions did not help either. The venerated teacher, finding himself in a school became an object of ridicule, toothless and unsure. The ancient drivers drove him to be dignified and offer what he thought was needed. The system demanded that he teach subjects - himself a subject, to other subjects of the Raj. This conflict has not been resolved to this day. If the teacher teaches subjects, who teaches values? 'Bring in Moral instruction and a sanitized version of it called Value education.' But nevertheless the teacher is expected to 'bury' values in his / her instruction, engagement with the students.

Alternatives:

The rural education model developed by the Krishnamurti Center in Rishi Valley, demonstrated with telling effect the efficacy of the small village school. The possibility of such education as an effective alternative had been all but erased from the cultural memory of our country. The demonstration that several schools of this nature and structure could effectively guide children right up to the class X examination was an eye-opener to the educational community. It also spoke to the cultural consciousness of the land.

The right to education, shortly becoming law in India, chooses to address an unintended consequence of modern schooling - segregation based on economic and social opportunity. It is clear that it matters more who you go to school with rather than which school you go to. Thus some opportunities will open up for the underprivileged, particularly with the loosening of the pass fail categories proposed to be erased.

The modern school has replaced an old system. It has become a conduit for delivering justice. The afternoon lunch system ensures that all children in this country are able to get at least one solid meal. The free school system ensures that nobody has to pay for education. However, the movement of the teacher to the worker location also has made quality questionable and a price difficult to live with.

The small school offers immense possibility in our times. Today, with the availability of materials, knowledge, machines and adequate documentation, the small school is an economical possibility again. If the school, with a group of one to three teachers could educate a group of 25 to 40 students, in a mixed age environment, it is that they would be able to deliver a far higher quality of education than is available now in mainstream schools. Attention to the individual student would be possible. The context and the content would not be separated. With the possibility that class 10 standard examination will soon be abolished, the landscape offers many interesting possibilities. The ubiquitous computer with its vast reach into cyberspace for information, for stored knowledge, lends greater possibility to this model. It offers extraordinary flexibility of use, attention to the individual, and a size and scale that permits humane education, an accountable entrepreneur and a clear relationship between the stakeholders. Legislation however must support this direction if it is to grow. Alternatively this direction could grow despite lack of support from legislation.

For the future...

Usually a system contains within it the seeds of its own destruction, or disintegration. There are some points that everyone will agree are not working. There are absurdities built into each system. In tackling these one finds support from all quarters possible. However, the system survives, not because people don't see the problems, but because people don't converge upon a solution. Therefore, viable alternatives are in the hub of change.

The economy of scale model has built into it the need for large infrastructure. Where is the space needed for large schools in our cities? Can this model truly educate the whole population? The small school model requires low infrastructure. Large schools need administration. Small school needs self-regulation.

An old African saying "it takes a village to grow a child." No village has people of the same age grouped together in distinct spaces. A village is like most things in nature, a cluster of different things and similar things, somehow harmoniously bundled together.

Old Chinese saying, "specificity destroys harmony". In the search for predicable diction, grammar, numerical skills, all to be precisely calculated, we may be losing something far more important and wholesome.

It may be wise to move the configuration of schools towards the village model, away from the factory model, where membership is more significant than benchmark performance, where participation is more important than achievement. It may be valuable to replace the anxiety of performance with a sense of unconditional, dignified belonging. The thinking in the MHRD seems strangely similar to this, no exams in class 10, Certificate of having completed 10 years of schooling, a dignified threshold into later education or work life...

Can this not be equally achieved by the voucher model of education? Each student carries his voucher to a teacher nearby and is educated. The student and his family decide the scale of school they wish to draw their education from. Only one question remains - the examination. Anyway no student is to be failed. The exam can be approached privately as hundreds of thousands are doing today as in the past 100 years.

Aug 2009

Roads and Pavement - the responsibility for deterioration?

If a 14 year old has enough money to buy a car can he buy the car? Legally he can buy the car, is he allowed to drive it?

He can sit in the car, he can pretend he is driving he can sit by the side of somebody who is driving. But he can't drive the car. Under law he is not eligible to drive the car because he's not an adult and mature enough to make his decisions.

The common road, laid by the local town planning or village planning body, is it really common? Or is it that it can be privatized, legitimately or merely through daily practice? Those of us who live in Indian cities, surely we see that common practice defines right.

If a car is parked on a public road, is it a violation of another person's fundamental right? If a pavement seller occupies the pavement or the owner of a house encroaches onto the pavement, does it not deprive the user of the pavement off his right?

Recently an eminent Indian jurist commented on "limited supplier liability". He said that to say that a nuclear power plant supplier will have a liability capped at $450 million is not right. In the light of accidents that have happened, such as the BHOPAL tragedy. This was brought to my mind, watching the rapid deterioration that is taking place in our cities and small towns, the liability for traffic, congestion, safety.

One morning, waiting at one of the traffic signals if the city of Chennai, like millions of other commuters, I was reminded of the phrase "unleashing the dogs of war" immortalized by Shakespeare in Julius Caesar. Whenever traffic signal changes color, it is almost as if a beast is unleashed. The hurry, the force, the ominous threat are all too palpable. The urgent horning, the racing of engines very close behind, vehicles coming dangerously close, these are being experienced by large numbers of men, women and children.

It is surely a matter of interest that the individuals like you and me, turn into a new species in traffic, intimidating, fearful, aggressive, angry. May be the beast is there in each of us, hidden below the surface. And all it needs is a suitable context, the caged quality of a series of traffic lights, a jostling, cheek by jowl, uncomfortably close, to bring the bloodshot eyes, the rapacious horseman with killing swords or the bloodthirsty conqueror to the fore. Forgotten that the other is like me, with children and family and fallibilities. Brushed aside courtesy, hustled by the false urgency of an inconsequential ritual of office time gathering. (Lest we forget, The Power of the Context in Malcolm Gladwell's The Tipping Point)

The pedestrian, has little space now to walk. The pavements are not flat, they need to accommodate the needs of the residents. They need to accommodate all the things that were unplanned. They need to accommodate the electrical transformers, the telephone distribution boxes and construction material for houses and road repair.

The hapless pedestrian finds the only flat terrain is the one that has been made ready for motorized vehicles. Therefore the pedestrian, the cycle, the motorcycle, the car and truck all have only the road to move on. No wonder we find the pedestrian walkways disappearing! If pedestrian paths are not used or usable, it makes sense to do away with them. That way the widening of the road can be done quite painlessly.

But let me return to the more fundamental question that is on my mind. Do the road and the pavement belong to the public? Does a citizen have a right to park his private vehicle for long periods of time on public property? The answer of the moment seems to be "yes", however illogical this sounds.

If a student cannot be allowed to drive a car because he or she is not yet 18, this means there are conditions that apply. To make an investment it is necessary for me to have a pan card. To get a telephone number it is necessary for me to have a proof of residence. To get a passport one needs a police check to ensure that the information that has been given is accurate.

Similarly should it not be mandatory that if somebody has to own a vehicle, he or she must be able to park it on private property? Would it similarly not make it absolutely necessary for one to be able to purchase a car only if there is private owned space, or rented space for one took park the vehicle? In the absence of this defining principle, particularly with a large number of motorized victims coming into our cities and towns, it will soon become law that public road equals private parking.

In a country like India this is not a trivial problem. We have a population of 1 billion people. With upward mobility and that Tata nano, it is a matter of time before the side roads are choked with privately owned vehicles, illegally or quasi-legally parked on public land.

Should not car companies take this responsibility? Since such the responsibilities are rarely taken up without legislation, should not there be a law that you can't own a vehicle unless you can show private land on which you can park it. Usurping the rights of our children is a far and distant possibility. Grabbing the rights and spaces or fellow human beings, our neighbors and others, is daylight robbery.

20 Dec 2009

THE AGE OF THE SARATHY AND DWARAPLAKAS - RIDERS ON HORSES, CHARIOTS, DRAGONS...

and

THE SENTINELS AT GATES, PROTECTORS, DECIDERS OF ACCESS..

India is seeing a rapid transformation of its cities, towns, roads, buildings and the morphology of things. One key element of this transformation is access. In simple terms the rules of access have been always direct and raw. Power, strength, money can one get more money, speed and more power. In short privileges continue to gather more privileges. An outsourcing industry has rapidly grown to deliver privacy, quick movement and simultaneously, restrict access. The age of Sarathys and Dwaraplalaks has been quietly ushered in.

Thanks to the growth of industry and commerce, mobility is now possible for a vast population, possibly for too many, if we think of our planet, the earth. Our cities are simply not ready for this. Mobility. The rag tag crowds, the roads wherever human beings congregate, and access has unleashed an industry of privileges.

In the 21st century the independent individual has come of age, one who can offer his services to the person who needs it on an hourly basis, on contract basis and in the most formal or informal of manners. This also means service without the trappings of any bothersome aspects of relationship such as loyalty, continuity or such other old world attributes.

Human society has always relegated chores of tedium to slaves, servants and those who can be employed. But then common jobs have now become expert jobs. The expertise and the value added to the service has elevated the service provider. He or she is no longer a servant. Identified through the uniform, a symbol of a location and respectability, he or she has found the power of being independent of 'one' employer.

One has to move around, it is an ancient right. The celebration of this right has become a complicated matter in the cities - it needs knowhow, and therefore the expert - the Sarathy, one who steers us through the difficult, congested, treacherous lanes of our cities and towns. Many of us have realized with growing anxiety that we are strangers in our own cities. we know the daily beat, but beyond lies unpredictability, one way streets, no entry signs and unfamiliar parking areas.

In cities we hear how difficult it is to find a driver. The costs have gone up quickly. And there is no assurance that the person employed will stay. The Sarathy has come of age.. much sought after, much in demand, one who knows how to navigate the protons and neutrons through the mazes of the human communities. Ubiquitous, in white, recognizable at multi story business complexes, weddings, shopping malls, hotels everywhere, and function as the valet who will relieve you of the tedium of finding a parking slot, reversing and breathing the stale air of a dingy parking basement. A reliable Sarathy also provides other services - such as opening of doors, cleaning of the vehicles and a bodyguard, clearing the way or avoiding the unpleasantness, the exposure to filth, dirt and the rabble.

People, organizations and institutions need the space to do their work, continue their business and have their privacy. There are those who are welcome in and those who are not. It is important functionally and for security reasons to keep unwanted, disturbing elements at bay . Rather than live the life of a watchful animal, is it not better to relegate security and watchfulness to another? The Dwarapalaka, the gateman, the guard, the security provider stands by entrances, doorways, no longer shy and lowly but proud, uniformed, equipped with tools of assault and subtler tools of instant communication. The mafia don, Godfather had his ring, now ministers and tycoons have theirs. Dwarapalaka is the definer of the space of security and order, away from the rabble, one who will manage the boundaries and has a distinct and powerful space. He is the one who service is to ooze distrust and disapproval. He can ask to see your identity and know your business. He can permit you in or refuse. He has matured as a screen, a public relation agent for the employers. With each additional capacity, speaking English, tact, discretion, alertness, he grows larger, more employable and more valuable. The dwarapalaka stands tall and straight, almost as fierce as the Yaalis at temple doorways.

And none too soon, the terror strikes in Mumbai 1993, New Delhi, Hyderabad, Bangalore and now again in Mumbai... one needs only listen to the responses of responsible people. Greater security in hotels and public spaces, armed guards, greater intelligence gathering, more controls, more blocks and more people. Dwarapalakas who will stop, check and let through... who will suspiciously read your nervous body language and make decisions about whether you need a closer look or if you deserve the privilege of entry and access. Of course all this is for the proletariat.. whenever there is a barrier, there are 2 sides to it. The protected side and the 'out'side.

For the protected there will be burglar alarms, remote cameras, high tech equipment, dogs and security advisers... highly secure and sanitised.. To live in peace and not be tormented by thoughts of assault or kidnapping or ransom, you need a private army and of course, getting to the beginning, you need a lot of money.

Diana's bodyguard driver was an epitome of the combination - dwarapalaka and sarathy rolled into one. Mercenaries take life because they are paid to assassinate, to kill. The protectors, are paid to protect, and if needed, to kill when needed. Both dont ask - :Why?"

"Ours is a service for hire!"

Departures and change - The Empire strikes back!

The Empire strikes back! This is an often heard statement. It signifies that when small chieftains rebel and disobey the dictates of the empire, the larger ruling body, sooner or later, strikes back. This is an act of revenge, of punishment and of re-establishing who has the power.

What significance is the statement to our present times? We live in an era of change, continuous change. We have recognized that change does not come easily and often with much heartburn. While we speak about the need for change and how fighting change is not a wise position to take, it is equally true that we are not able to support change, or participate in it in an intelligent manner.

Why is this so? Welcoming change on the one hand, however shakily, why do we find it difficult to accept the new? 

When we build a castle on the beach, a sand castle, very soon the wind and the waves reduce it, make it one with the background. 

Practices which are unsustainable by reason are sustained by people, almost despite all reason and opposition. To bring about change in these practices has been often the work of centuries. Slavery was not abolished in a day. Untouchability to this day can be seen in India. Legislative action has not been able to change much. Attitudes change with difficulty, if at all.

One can understand that human beings who have been practicing a way of living, get accustomed to it. The pain of change is understandable. It is one thing to say "Sorry, I find it difficult to change. I see that this is the sensible direction. But, please pardon me, in my lifetime I am unable to change."

However it is quite another thing to say, "Why do you say slavery is wrong, or untouchability?" This is almost like saying "There is nothing wrong. People have been practicing this for centuries. Why are you coming along now and wanting to make a change?"

The first position does not obstruct movement and change. The second one actively engages in sustaining the status quo. The second one raises philosophical questions. Is it really wrong to do what our forefathers have been doing? What makes us think that the experience of centuries is to be ignored? And often in an unstated undertones, "What about my privileges - won't  change makes my life more difficult? Nobody wants to lose privileges - neither do I."

The Empire strikes back in interesting ways. But the process followed is the same as with civilizational ruins. A big building or a temple first has to be abandoned. People stopped coming to it because a River changes course, there is a famine, a conquest or a pestilence. Under these circumstances people leave and the building, the artifacts of their living, are left empty. Therefore this use is the first criteria.

Once disuse has been brought about, geographical and natural processes do the rest. The building settles, and dust settles. Dust and moisture, if available to the rest -- it decays either by  sand or by sand and plant life.

It is also a paradox that when we want to improve something, we find that the improved practice, actually strengthens the older practice. It is almost a way of saying "Thank you, but no thank you". Therefore it seems that when change takes place it is not due to the support of interventions all human beings, but despite all the opposition that the idea has received. It is extremely difficult to support a new idea. All actions of support, use, modification bring about greater and greater resistance.

Therefore a new idea seems to grow, much like the sprouting of the seed -- it bursts to plant when it is time has come.

Tolerance is considered a virtue

Tolerance is considered a virtue. But is there such a thing as tolerating too much? One needs to distinguish between tolerance of human beings and their traits and tolerance of concerted collective action.

Mannerisms of human beings must be tolerated, these are individual. Policies of the government, actions of individuals in the public domain must be questioned and searched for hidden motives. The history of mankind, is an enormous list of follies. It shows us that with the best of intentions people and Governments can make big mistakes. The tragedy is that these mistakes of policy happen despite alarm calls from people who speak, protest and dissent.

India has been a very tolerant land. Our history shows we can that we have accepted the unfair taxes and draconian laws of rulers somewhat easily. This does not mean that people did not find ways of protesting.

There have been many examples of nonviolent protests.

The Chipko movement took its inspiration from a much earlier protest by ordinary people against the might of a king - hugging trees to prevent them from being cut down, even if it meant losing one's life. Fasting, refusing to eat, as a way of drawing attention to disagreement is ancient, but also extremely common. Very small children express their protest in this manner. Children protest using three main devices - they sulk, fast and refuse to move,

Concerted protest, based on principles is rare. The salt March, the act of walking many miles to pick up a handful of salt, was a powerful symbolic act. It shook the foundations of the British Empire. It showed how nonviolent action could stand up and be counted.

For the youth of this land, there is a crisis brewing. Information knocks at every door and we all know about the shortcomings of our nation. The government makes policies that harm the environment, that harm people, that favor large corporations, that takes this nation down a path of no return. Nuclear energy, excessive deforestation, parceling land off to private corporations are examples of such action. What can a young person to do when witnessing all this?

Bearing witness is a sacred act, which implies looking with clear eyes and not glassine over the details - of environmental degradation, of laws beige broken, of injustice, of corruption and vested inerests. Baba Amte once made a profound statement when speaking to young students. "Look at the world through tear washed eyes and not tear dimmed eyes".

For a young person, one who has still not been co-opted into the circle of corruption and vested interests, there is a vital opportunity. India has a large number of young people. With the information available today each one must know that the decision-makers of today are making decisions that will have significant impact on your future. Many of the definitions are irreversible in their impact. The mountains being strip mined cannot be reconstructed. Nuclear waste buried underground cannot be suddenly neutralized. Land which has been parceled off and chemically poisoned cannot be reclaimed easily. Genetically modified crops once unleashed will bring to an end an ancient cycle of natural farming. Your future and that of your children is on the block. Fortunately you have information which no other generation before you have had.

Each of us is a small human being, but like many have shown it is the ordinary human being who can make the big difference. Participating in Government is a responsibility that we all share. When we see something happening around us that is unfair and unjust we can speak up, stand and be counted.

We can also disobey an unfair law.. openly. if the salt law was seen as unfair Gandhi was determined to break the law. This is very different form jumping a light for going dasher, or avoiding taxes - these are for personal benefit. Disobedience of a law that is unfair is a way of participation in a democratic process, challenging the Government by drawing empathy and reconsideration from the very people who are in the Government.

30 Nov 2009

Class X exams - Schooling in India - an experience or a certificate

Class X exams - Schooling in India - an experience or a certificate

"Specificity destorys Harmony" said a Chinese Sage. 

This piece considers the much talked of attempt to do away with "pass - fail" in CBSE schools. Probably nowhere is this truer than in our assessments of each other. Fallible as we are, our assessments of each other are incomplete, poor and inadequate. We are prone to see what we wish to see and tie these perceptions to facts whcih we notice. 

Probably no where is Specificity destrutive of Harmony than in the handing down of marks to young citizens called students in school - yes handing down, make no mistake, from lofty heights by human beings who are as fallible as you and I. A small story illustrates this point extremely well.

A hard working villager found a new master. He was a qucik worker and did all jobs with astonishing speed. He could chop wood, dig pits for planting trees reapir the fencing, carry huge sacks and stack them. The master was pleased at having found such a worker. One day a few sacks of potatoes from the field were given to the worker. He was instructed to sort them, separating the good ones from the bad. He was sure that this would be an easy job for his capable worker. In the evening he found the worker still just halfway through the sack. On seeing the landowner he folded his hands and said, "Sir, give me as much manual work as you wish to. I will be happy to do it. But please do not give me this job of deciding which potato is good and which bad. This work has been very stressful for me. Any work but this!" 

If it is so difficult to see the inside of a potato, how much more difficult to see inside a human being!                

Schools offer experience and opportunities. We need to know what this endeavour means. We try to know what students have learnt to find out if the teaching has been effective. And if it has not, then we fail children in school! If the child's circumstances are such that he or she cannot study well at home, then we fail the child! We regiment the children with uniforms and are sure that this will make them feel better and do better! How are we sure that this is the right thing to do? We are sure because this what we were handed down and this is what we accept. 

Our memories are short and dont go before 3 generations, certainly not 150 years. It is almost as if that time did not exist. We dont remember for a moment that early schools in all parts of the world did not have pass or fail. People learnt and then went on to use whatever they had learnt in their lives. The church schools, the pathashaalas, the madarassas and gurukulas were all like this. And every studio and artisan's workshop. And suddenly, the magic hand of industrial revolution, drove most of these into oblivion to be replaced by the 'graded, school, the 'uniformed' school, the 'pass - fail" school, the "specific" school - the 'factory' school.

The age wise segregated classroom is a creation of very poor imagination. Nowhere in the world do we find living things of the same age clustered together naturally, except for the brief moments - like when turtle hatchlings head for the ocean. Human society has managed this accomplishment - to convince all thinking human beings that this is the ONE right way to educate children. We do this knowing that never again, after school, will people of the same age cluster, except at brief reunions. We have to accept that the school, as we know it, is a flawed design, however nostalgic we feel. In fact the present structure survives on nostagia and has defied any attempt at reordering.

Learning is a magical thing, a potent and mysterious happening. Blaming, particularly the young, punishing them for not learning what we wish to teach them is such a limited action. Saying "pass or fail" is bad enough. Tearing a student away from the social fabric of the classroom is an even worse act of aggression. If we accept the mystery that is man, the magic that is learning and that the future is something we dont know, we must reconsider the choices we have made as a nation, as a diverse group of 1 billion, as humanity.

Life is an examination, a test of one's understanding, skill and inner fibre. Each situation we  challenges us with an inner conversation.  We each have a watchful eye, our own eye, observing the responses we bring forth. Our watchful eye knows where we made an error of judgement, where we were not alert and where we were full of fear ... Each situation educates us. This was called swadhayaya. 

The school and its processes subsumes swadhayaya, the teaching of the self by the self, and hands this authority outside. The authority outside can instruct, can create oportunity and design experiences but cannot ensure learning. The authority outside can punish and castigate but not ensure a well learnt lesson.

It is wih this background we must consider the much talked of attempt to do away with "pass - fail" in CBSE schools. Society and human beings move in strange ways. One of the best ways to move and change is to recognize that a system is not working because it does not pass the standards we wish to see. Today in search for social and institutional mechanisms that do justice to all, not most or majority, we need to discontinue some handed down practices or to modify them. Further, the restraining of one approach creates room for other approaches to express themselves. 

If the exam as a fearful threshold sheds its terrifying mask, then students may breathe easy. On the other hand they may also feel a bit disoriented, as will their parents. This uncertainty, or break in procedure, is sure to raise anxieties about college admissions and higher education, and also foster conversations about meaning and purpose of school education. 

School Education has begun the slow and definite redefinition towards 'schooling an experience', for each student by right, containing within it a choiceless dignity at entry and exit and during schooling, for each and every student. It is important that the process of schooling empowers and does not disempower, invalidate a single student. The present conversation about school exams is underscoring the fact that a large number of children experience disempowerment through schooling, particularly through examination assessment.

Is this the only solution? Are there not ways of improving our examinations? Do we have to abandon them altogether? Will we be able to distinguish between students who are capable and those who do not? The answer to these questions, at the moment seems to be -- 

"There are surely better ways of conducting an examination. However, for a nation such as ours with 1 billion people and the diversity that is seen in only one other nation, with a bursting population of youth, the last thing we can afford is rampant in validation of our youth. It is important to leave each student with his or her dignity intact. Since we have entered the zone of lifelong learning, the value of the 10 standard examination, in fact all examinations, has definitely diminished. The daily life of any worker will test what learning the worker has, more important, how open is the worker to new learning."

Looking back on this situation from 10 years hence, I'm sure we will think it's commendable that our nation could even conceive of such a far-reaching step. It is also true that no real change happens without some discomfort and realignment in our thinking.

Aug 2009

Game of life India Edition 2009