Editor,
In the editorial “Teachers in active politics” (ST 30th April, 2024) the editor raised a pertinent point, “If the goal of education is to build minds that are questioning and capable of critical thinking and asking the right questions, would having a teacher with allegiance to a particular political party allow objective discussions in the classroom?”. In the realm of education, the question of whether educators should express their political opinions in the classroom is a nuanced one. Administrators often emphasize the importance of neutrality when discussing politics in the classroom. They expect teachers to maintain a line of impartiality. However, students often advocate for teachers’ right to express their opinions. They argue that as high school students, they should be able to explore diverse viewpoints and form their own conclusions.
The fear among teachers is that any political discussion might be perceived as an attempt to impose their views on students. This concern leads some educators to shy away from discussing current events or national politics. Yet, many educators recognize the necessity of addressing local and national political events. Key issues like race, gender equality, and LGBTQ rights are at the forefront of students’ discussions outside the classroom. This discussion can sometimes lead to misinformation or insensitive discourse. Teachers feel a responsibility to ensure that students understand their rights and protections under the constitution. Engaging in civics-centred discussions can rectify misconceptions and foster respectful dialogues.
Having a teacher with an allegiance to a particular political party does not inherently prevent objective discussions. It depends how teachers navigate their role. Objective discussions can occur if the teacher differentiates between campaign talk (personal opinions) and classroom talk (facilitating learning). What’s important is to design discussions with clear educational goals in mind and regulate the discourse to ensure respectful and constructive dialogues. Students should be empowered to explore diverse perspectives without imposing their own views. While teachers’ political affiliations may exist, their commitment to fostering critical thinking and open dialogue remains paramount. Ultimately, educators must strike a balance between expressing their opinions and creating an environment where students can explore, question, and think critically about complex issues. Educators can contribute to objective discussions even while acknowledging their political leanings, provided they approach classroom conversations with sensitivity.
The 2012 ruling by the Bombay High Court indeed addressed an important issue regarding political association of government servants and individuals employed in government aided educational institutions. While the ruling specifically pertained to foreign lawyers, it highlights a broader principle: government servants and teachers of government aided educational institutions should avoid political associations during their service tenure. The court’s reasoning likely stems from the need to maintain neutrality and impartiality in public service. Some arguments in favour of the judgement are that government servants and educators should remain neutral to serve the public interest without bias. Active political involvement may lead to conflicts of interest, affecting their professional duties.
For educators, political ideas could inadvertently influence their teaching, potentially compromising the quality of education. Political affiliations might create a perception of favouritism or partisanship. Some argue that individuals have the right to political expression and association. Striking a balance between personal rights and professional responsibilities is essential. Restriction could be relaxed post-retirement to allow engagement in political activities. While the judgement aims to maintain professionalism and impartiality, it is essential to strike a balance. Reasonableness depends on context, local norms, and the specific role of the individual. The Bombay High Court’s ruling reflects an attempt to ensure the integrity of public service.
Yours etc;
VK Lyngdoh
Via email
Umiam bridge: Comedy of errors on April 30
Editor,
Well, getting stuck in traffic can feel like being the star in a sitcom called “The Bridge Blockade Chronicles.” Picture this: you’re minding your own business, cruising along Umiam bridge, when suddenly, you’re thrust into a real-life episode of “Car Wars: Traffic Edition.”
There you are, surrounded by a convoy of national heroes on a mission to turn ML 01 into the ultimate traffic-crushing machine. Meanwhile, the rest of us, mere mortals are left scratching our heads, wondering if we missed the memo on the latest traffic rule: “Follow the leaders, even if they’re paving the way to chaos!”
And let’s not forget our friends, the nonsensical drivers, who seem to think traffic rules are as optional as choosing toppings on a pizza. They’re like the loyal minions, blindly following their villainous leaders and wreaking havoc wherever they go.
But fear not, dear citizens! April 30th, 2024, shall forever be known as the day we were April fooled by the traffic police. Locked on the bridge from 5:20 pm to 6:20 pm, we became unwilling participants in the world’s slowest game of “Red Light, Green Light.”
Now, it’s time to play “Whodunit: Traffic Edition.” Who’s responsible for this comedy of errors? Let the investigation begin! We demand answers, and heads shall roll—figuratively, of course. After all, we’re not barbarians; we just want to get home in time for dinner.
So, dear traffic gods, if you’re listening, heed our plea: Deploy more officers, because apparently, we need all the help we can get to prevent illegal overtakes from turning our highways into the Wild Wild West.
And to all the social media warriors and newspaper pundits out there, fear not—I won’t add to the pile. Instead, I’ll sit back, relax, and enjoy the show because, let’s face it, there’s nothing funnier than a traffic jam… unless you’re stuck in it.
Yours etc.,
R Sarki
Shillong