By Deepa Majumdar
Of late I have been reading about the many “toppers” in Meghalaya school exams. I have also read about young people dying of suicide upon receiving their high school exam results. This stark contrast spells a troubling portrait of Indian education. The British may have left India a draconian education system, but Indians have added to this by developing a results-oriented authoritarian system.
The Ivory Tower serves two opposite purposes. First, it trains us for professions that fetch a living. But second, it inculcates in us the many traits essential to become good citizens – objectivity, rationality, truthfulness, at least some high moral values, etc. Moreover, the Ivory Tower has a peak that is very different from its base. In America’s best universities, an elect group of professors basically speak to each other internationally, through publications in their chosen fields, their elitism justified on grounds of excellence. Having earned their way to the top, they deserve this acclaim, which they have won through hard work – not nepotism, plagiarism, or favoritism. Given the specialized knowledge they create and the minds and times they influence, their elitism is necessary. While many who reach this pinnacle are humble, others are not. To lose one’s temper over a malformed sentence, or a shoddy argument is a sign of egotism – not the self-discipline that should come with higher education.
But at the base of the Ivory Tower, we see the opposite. Here we enter a world where quality is often sacrificed at the altar of enrollment. Today in America, a major debate concerns the tension between maintaining academic standards and “meeting students where they are.” The former being harder to achieve, tends to be neglected. Slipping standards also have to do with contemporary student types. Whether traditional or non-traditional, students today lack resilience, zeal, thirst for knowledge, and the capacity for hard work. More importantly, they often lack an ethical compass. Young people today are hurt and justifiably angry – but also spoilt and entitled. As a result, they always blame others for their failures. The course was too hard, there were too few exams, the teacher was bad, the testing center staff members were incompetent, the audio tapes were imperfect – the list goes on and on. The mature student who takes responsibility for his performance is rare any longer – even though American students, especially those from the working class, tend to be mature and ethical. Adding to this, over-reliance on technology has caused a cognitive lethargy that defies description. The results show in the quality of graduates we are sending to the work world – youth who need therapy if a teacher has the temerity to cross them and young college graduates who cannot read or write with accuracy or perform the most basic mathematical operations. Rare is the undergraduate who can paraphrase a paragraph with accuracy.
Part of the problem has to do with the student-teacher relationship and pedagogy. This sacred relationship is almost extinct in contemporary America. Although love, affection, and mutual respect should be the foundation stones for successful pedagogy, this is impossible when students see themselves as customers and teachers as sellers. Yet, teachers do not sell grades or knowledge. The class lecture should never be a sales pitch. Grades are not for sale. Customer-minded students get to evaluate teachers at the end of each semester. These evaluations have long lost meaning because they read like hate-filled social media posts. Adding to this, we have a highly litigious academic environment where students or their parents can (and often do) sue the university if they find their grades “unfair.” Under these circumstances it is not possible for teachers to really “love” their students. Moreover, real love has many faces, of which, strictness (not harshness) is a sign of the greatest love. For this level of authentic love to express itself, teachers must reclaim their lost authority and the respect of their students. Exceeding all proportions, the rebellion against authoritarianism has gone too far and in the wrong direction. The opposite of authoritarianism should not be laissez faire, but true leadership, or authoritativeness. Teachers should reclaim their leadership roles in the classroom.
I have always admired the good side of American pedagogy, mainly because it is a relief from the pedagogical authoritarianism we see in many cultures. America has the unique ability of bringing out the best in a person. It is part of American optimism to encourage student success. It is part of American pedagogy to respect the student and encourage his point of view. It is also part of American pedagogy to grade with fairness and transparency. Universities have grade appeal committees. But despite the best rules and processes, institutions fail when the individuals involved lack integrity. I have seen the most facetious and disrespectful grade appeal cases brought against teachers by students. I have also seen teachers coddling undeserving students, at the cost of academic standards.
So, what does all this have to do with high school results in Meghalaya and India? The problems in America and India are stark opposites. Here students are encouraged to think for themselves at the cost of text-mastery and rational thought. Given the overall deprecation of higher education in American culture, grades do not make or break lives. This disdain comes partly from maturity, but partly from materialism. Since grades are irrelevant in the job market, they do not matter. Although unhealthy, this attitude can be very healing to the Indian student traumatized by a draconian results-oriented education system where grades define everything. On the whole, American education and pedagogy can be healing for students from India, despite racism against “third world” students and the tyranny of some professors.
It cannot be healthy for the Indian education system to be so results-oriented. In an increasingly competitive world, where innovation and entrepreneurial skills are of growing importance, students in India should have multiple tracks. Every human being deserves both bread and roses. But not every young person can afford the roses. Not everybody needs to go to college. Those without the financial capacity, aptitude, or interest should not be forced into formal education. America has solved this problem by having training schools in life-skills that range from hair dressing to carpentry. The education system here is flexible enough to allow these same students to return to college when they become intellectually curious and financially solvent. America also has a variety of institutions, from community colleges to fancy liberal arts colleges.
India has a dire need for skill-generating schools that inculcate the entrepreneurial spirit. Centers of higher learning should not feel undue superiority to these vocational schools. This world is run more by those with basic life-skills than by intellectuals. India needs educational flexibility to accommodate a higher education geared towards working adults. The hairdresser, carpenter, and plumber should be able to return to college to read Shakespeare or Tagore, when he or she is ready to.
Above all, India needs an education system that values the learning process more than grades. Young people should be told by parents and teachers alike that they are loved, regardless of their grades. In fact, the education system should focus on the most challenged students, without jeopardizing academic standards. Gifted students should receive ample opportunities for creative outlets – but not at the cost of basic skills. Those who have had more than their fair share of roses, should be encouraged to serve those who can barely afford bread, leave alone roses. The exam system in India could be less rigid and stressful for the youth. Multiple exams through the whole year would help ease some of the tension. Grades should not be the only measure of student success and capabilities. Employers should have multiple instruments (besides grades) to assess prospective employees.
While all toppers are to be congratulated for their excellent performance, as are their parents and mentors, those that did not perform as well, or even failed, should not feel like the world has shut down on them. No young person should feel pressured to commit suicide because of failing grades.
Like organized religion, formal education is not something to dismiss altogether. We may rebel and rage against it. But we cannot do without it. Despite modernity, India remains fortunate enough to have a lingering contemplative culture that provides a rich general education to one and all, regardless of class, caste, or creed. One does not have to be literate to avail of this treasure-trove of spirituality, which imbues various aspects of culture – from the arts (music, literature, poetry, etc.), to ancient traditions and customs – with a rich contemplative hue. But despite this enriching cultural womb, India also needs formal education to give students the tools they need to comprehend the world with objectivity. Increasingly utilitarian, higher education should be purified to bring back its contemplative luster. Education should be a joy – not a results-oriented degree factory.