From: "Uma Kant" uk4in@yahoo.co.in
Sent: Mon, 06 Aug 2012 07:04:20 +0530
To: "Dalits Media Watch" PMARC@dgroups.org
Subject: [pmarc] Re: "Learning from a Controversy"- by Prof. Sukhadeo Thorat, The Hindu, Aug. 03, 2012
Learning from a controversy
Sukhadeo Thorat, Opinion>> Lead
The Hindu, August 03, 2012
The insights in the NCERTcartoon report can help to make the curriculum and the classroom more inclusive
While the NCERT textbooks report has generatedmuch heat, it has also shed positive light on the issue. It is time to reflecton this side of the debate and deal with the questions it raises.
The committee's mandate was to identifyeducationally inappropriate materials in textbooks and suggest alternatives, ifnecessary. The committee used the 2005 National Curriculum Framework (NCF)guidelines to review the text. In the case of the cartoons, due to the absenceof clear guidelines, the committee used the existing literature on cartoonsbesides the 2005 NCF. This literature recognised the value of cartoons inteaching, but also advised caution: cartoons should be made and used forwell-defined educational purposes, they must be tested for their consequences,sensitivities of various groups should be addressed, and the use of animalimages to represent human beings, and the overuse of cartoons be avoided.
Recommendations
The six textbooks reviewed contained 968 pagesof written text, and 490 cartoons — 184 main and 306 mini cartoons. Thecommittee proposed the deletion of only 17 of the main cartoons, andimprovement in the note given below 18 of the mini cartoons. Improvements wereconsidered with care, based on four years teaching experience of these books bya teacher member of the committee. In the written text, only a marginal changeat three places was suggested. Thus 91 per cent of the main cartoons, 94 per centof the mini cartoons and the entire text in the six books are free from anychange. Therefore, claims of drastic change attributed to the committee arebaseless. Let me now turn to the perception and motive.
Unanimous
The recommendations are hardly unanimous andM.S. Pandian's letter is cited as evidence. Mr. Pandian's story is anunfortunate one. Out of eight meetings, he remained absent for five thatdiscussed the textbooks in detail and firmed up the recommendations. In threemeetings to discuss procedure, he openly declared in advance theappropriateness of the material. At the end, he asked for the report of whichhe was not a part, to sit in judgment over the other five members and alsothreatened to give a note of dissent irrespective of the recommendations.Responsibility and morality demand that members participate in the proceedingsand then arrive at their independent views. His role and behaviour have to bejudged not by the old storytelling method of historical research, but byempirical facts.
Some may still argue that after all Mr. Pandianhas made valid points in his so-called note of dissent. However, his letterdoes not give any indication that his views are based on a careful reading ofthe text and the cartoons. It does not spell out the reasons forappropriateness because that would involve the hard work of reading eachcartoon and the text, which the other committee members did. At one place, Mr.Pandian quotes the Advisors: "Our attempt here is not to hand over a definiteopinion for the students, but to enable them to be on their own." He failed tonotice that in some mini cartoons, students receive neither support from thetext nor benefits of alternative views. It is necessary that the text itself beself-contained with alternative views in order to allow students the freedom toform their views. Hence the committee suggested modifications.
Mr. Pandian also uses a phrase that has beencited by many: "what is politically incorrect may not be academicallyinappropriate." One could turn that around and say what is academically correctmay not be necessarily politically correct. Governments, most of the time,settle for the second or third-best solution, while academicians continue toretain their freedom to hold on to the ideal solution. Could it be said thatacademicians are always right because they are in the business of writing? Dowe not know that the scholars in the past have committed massive wrong in bookslike Manu Smruti and similar texts? In fact, political and academic affiliationshould not influence the judging of something as correct or not. As he was anon-participant member, Mr. Pandian's letter to the NCERT director is hardly amember's note of dissent; it is his individual view.
Sensitivities
The committee was required to deal with theviews of various groups, such as Dalits and the political class, who found thatsome cartoons in the textbook hurt their sensibilities. The Dalits also arguedthat Dr. Ambedkar's significant role in the making of the Constitution and onissues such as separate electorates and State reorganisation had beensidelined. Two opposing views emerged on the issue. Some see nothing wrong withthe cartoons/text and support them as part of a larger endeavour to inducecritical thinking. Hurt sentiments among Dalits were seen as narrowly definedimaginary community sensitivities. One writer saw this as the rift between"emotion and reason".
Dalits, on the other hand, had reasoned outtheir discomfort and hurt and argued that given the continuing caste prejudiceand discrimination in schools, the cartoons have the potential to hurt. It isargued that "reason's" primary job is to "listen" to hurt and improve itself byarguing for people with less or no power to resist the "reason" of thepowerful. The need was to receive Dalit views with growing empathy and feelhumbled towards "the other reason", commented one participant in the debate.
In the same mode is the point about motive. Thecommittee's position on political cartoons has been described as being"excessively establishmentarian and marked by an embarrassing eagerness toplease." It is an ill-conceived argument. The discussion needs to focus onguidelines. Someone like me who has spent more than 35 years in academiadominated by high castes has a different experience to share.
The academic world is not immune to caste,religion, regional and ideological networks, the barriers of which aredifficult to break. I am aware of the pain of the academic exclusion of theDalit academia which has become visible since the 1990s. Historically and inpresent times, it is well known who the controllers and beneficiaries are ofscholarships distributed through political patronage over the last 60 years.Those who live in glass houses normally avoid throwing stones at others.
It will be appropriate to end this issue with aword of wisdom from Dr. Ambedkar. In 1946, when the Constituent Assembly hadbeen boycotted by the Muslim League, and the Congress was not prepared to waitfor it to return, Dr. Ambedkar made an appeal to all members which is relevanteven today:
"Our difficulty is how to make the heterogeneousmass that we have today take a decision in common and march on the way whichleads us to unity. Our difficulty is not with regard to the ultimate, ourdifficulty is with regard to the beginning. Mr. Chairman, therefore, I shouldhave thought that in order to make us willing friends, in order to induce everyparty, every section in this country to take on to the road it would be an actof greatest statesmanship for the majority party even to make a concession tothe prejudices of people who are not prepared to march together and it is forthat, that I propose to make this appeal. Let us leave aside slogans, let usleave aside words which frighten people. Let us even make a concession to theprejudices of our opponents, bring them in, so that they may willingly joinwith us on marching up on that road, which as I said, if we walk long enough,must necessarily lead us to unity."
Learning
A number of insights have emerged from thedebate. A close look is required at NCF 2005, which in many ways is a stepahead of NCF 2000. It is inclusive in representation and provides space topeople and movements that contributed to nation-building. However, there are somenew issues that need consideration. In a country characterised by immensediversities, disparities and exclusion, these features have now begun toreflect in separation and segregation in schools. There is a need to understandthe ways in which diversity, disparities and discrimination are experienced bystudents on the campus and how social cohesion and integration might beachieved.
A curriculum that enhances the understanding ofstudents about these issues is necessary to take them to common goals oftogetherness. More important is a shift in pedagogy to enhance the capacity andskill of students to deal with diversity and exclusion in the class. Countriesthat faced ethnic, religious, race and colour divides have developed curriculumand methods to enhance students' understanding of the need for social cohesionby mainstreaming education for unity and also by introducing separate courses.Changes are necessary in NCF 2005 to deal with diversity, disparities andexclusion in class and on school campus.
(Sukhadeo Thorat is Chairman,Indian Council of Social Science Research, Chairman, NCERT Textbook ReviewCommittee, and Professor, Jawaharlal Nehru University.)
My final words of advice to you are educate, agitate and organize; have faith in yourself. With justice on our side I do not see how we can lose our battle. The battle to me is a matter of joy. The battle is in the fullest sense spiritual. There is nothing material or social in it. For ours is a battle not for wealth or for power. It is battle for freedom. It is the battle of reclamation of human personality.
B.R.Ambedkar
B.R.Ambedkar
You are receiving this message because you are a member of the community Dalits Media Watch.
A reply to this message will be sent to all members of Dalits Media Watch.
Reply to sender | Unsubscribe
| Follow Rediff Deal ho jaye! to get exciting offers in your city everyday. |
No comments:
Post a Comment