Educational sociologists have argued that it is not content, but
structure which forms the mind of a student. An education that glorifies
authoritarian class environments, rote learning, and streamlined courses
denies the growth of young people into analytical, creative, and
well-rounded citizens. Limiting the next generation to an educational
system bent on producing economically efficient human capital only
capable of conforming to authoritarian institutions, such as the growing
number of multinational corporations, is an injustice. It merely propels
the already aggressive, self-interested societal mentality steadily
emerging among the middle and upper classes in Kerala, India, and across
the world. Moreover, it precipitates the oppression of the lower classes
by injecting a conformist attitude that crushes any spirit of
resistance.
In 1976, Samuel Bowles and Herbert Gintis wrote extensively about the
situation of education in capitalist America. They found that, while the
higher education utilized a liberal arts structure, the primary and
secondary level education remained under a strict and authoritarian
configuration. Unfortunately, most higher education in Kerala ascribes
to the latter. Instead of a holistic education, students’ knowledge is
compartmentalized. Rather than critical thinking, rote learning is
encouraged. Instead of being an active agent in the class, the student
is treated as a vessel for collecting information. Finally, particular
to the situation in Kerala, financial assets prove tantamount to
intellectual merit. These facets of Kerala’s higher education result in
workers trained to blindly obey their superiors.
The liberal arts oriented structure that fosters student dialogue,
analytical thinking, and a wide range of course work from multiple
subjects is essential in forming socially concerned human beings who
endeavor to bring peace and justice to the world.
While the United States is considered the bastion of capitalistic
ideology, the higher education system is one that increasingly values
the liberal arts above focused business, medical, and engineering
courses. Harvard and Stanford, the top-ranked universities in the world,
require coursework in the subject areas of natural sciences, social
sciences, mathematics, art, and language for all students. This leads to
greater flexibility in choosing classes and a course of study; students
can discover their unique strengths and explore where their passions
lie.
This is the first contrast with the education system in Kerala.
Even in “liberal arts” education streams, students are limited to one
course; the only digression is one or two language classes. This is a
replication of the “specialization of skills” which emerged with the age
of capitalism. Bowles and Gintis assert, “The fragmented nature of jobs
is reflected in the institutionalized and rarely constructive
competition among students and in the specialization and
compartmentalization of academic knowledge.” 2 Furthermore, in Kerala, the
affiliating University dictates the curriculum within these already
confined courses and regulates it by issuing exams once a year.
Consequently, there is no flexibility for professors to experiment with
curriculum, practical application, or alternative teaching strategies.
In theory, the University system is a democratic and unbiased means of
evaluating students. However, under close scrutiny, the system is not
only biased, but also debilitating for students, faculty, and the
individual colleges. Because of the “standardized” curriculum and
examinations required by the affiliated University, great importance is
given to test taking within the classroom. Time-consuming internal
examinations as well as “model examinations” are conducted in order to
prepare students for these University exams. This bolsters a
motivational system based on “ . . . grades and other external rewards
and the threat of failure rather than the intrinsic social benefits of
the process of education (learning) or its tangible outcome
(knowledge).” 3 Furthermore, comprehensive examinations emphasize rote
learning, mere memorization of facts rather than critical thinking.
Therefore, a student’s success is based on the ability to follow
instructions, rather than question or challenge them.
This evaluation system proves a burden from the institutional level to
the student level. The emphasis on standard testing constitutes the
second contrast between the Keralite and the American liberal arts
education. Liberal arts colleges in the United States have turned away
from an emphasis on examinations and now stress essays, research, and
long-term coursework. This form of evaluation gives students
flexibility, practical experience, and encourages continual study rather
than short-term memorization. Moreover, professors are not bound to a
particular curriculum by affiliated University examinations. They are
allowed almost free-reign in assigning coursework, which is all
evaluated internally. Finally, colleges are managed as separate
entities, granting them freedom to approve innovative syllabi and
courses. They also remain unburdened by the inefficiency of
indeterminate examination schedules and results caused by an affiliated
University.
In the past few years, there has also been a shift in the American
liberal arts colleges to smaller class sizes, which foster discussion
between professors and students. Students are encouraged to give their
comments and criticisms, as well as gain insights from other students.
The intimate class setting also promotes less formal relationships
between students and faculty; relationships based on respect rather than
fear, which create a comfortable atmosphere for expression. However,
most Indian classrooms have adhered to the traditional teaching method:
the professor stands at the head of the class lecturing while students
tediously take notes to later be memorized. Rarely are students given an
opportunity for input, and any contradicting idea is easily usurped by
the professor’s unquestioned omnipotence. The result is a young
generation of complacent workers, whose primary function is to obey the
authority, whether teacher, government official, or corporate employer.
Surprisingly, within the otherwise conservative structure of Kerala’s
higher education system, a corporate mentality has seeped into many of
its facets, including the admissions process. While government funded
colleges are bound to admitting students based on merit and
socio-economic standing, privatized and self-financing courses’ criteria
are increasingly purely economical. Students are charged exorbitant
amounts for their education, with no hope of scholarships, grants, or
loans. There can be no other motivation for offering these courses than
the possibility of financial stability. However, the students of these
programs are streamed directly into corporate careers, making the
courses very enticing, especially for middle-class families trapped in
the illusion that material wealth is the harbinger of happiness.
This is a stark contrast to the concept of “need-blind” admissions
adopted by the elite universities in America. Applications are
considered strictly by merit, without consideration of the students’
financial status. These universities, some privately and some publicly
funded, grant financial aid in accordance to a student’s need through
scholarships, work-study programs, or student loans. Funding for these
schools comes largely from endowments and alumni donations, not student
tuition fees. Even in America, the country most censured for its
capitalist and corporate system, quality education is considered a
service that should be made available to all.
In the ever-increasing corporate world, the traditional education
structure in Kerala’s institutions of higher learning becomes all the
more frightening. Students at universities streamlined for employment in
transnational corporations as engineers, technicians, and managers
express little or no interest in the role they play in upholding
institutions which inflict injustice and suffering upon others. Their
education has dictated that life’s values are economical, and success
means obeying the source of income. Unfortunately, a growing number of
middle-class families driven by what has been termed “The American
Dream,” are opting for this type of corporate streamed education for
their children, and Kerala’s Universities have consequently invested in
self-financing and off-campus courses. Even those institutions that
originally offered liberal arts and sciences as main courses are now
ignoring those streams that emphasize development of the entire person.
Instead, they have turned their heads to the more lucrative courses that
squeeze funding from students and their families.
Of course, the American educational system also contains flaws due to
the circumstances of its own culture. Issues of race, class, and gender
are continually being addressed and challenged by activists. While a
number of the younger generation fight against the corporate
self-seeking mentality, many Americans still uphold monetary success and
prestige as the ultimate goals for an individual. Unfortunately, that
outlook has infiltrated perforce into the collective conscience of
Kerala. It is this mentality that perpetuates a streamlined,
self-serving educational system now on the rise.
The combination of traditional course structure and a new market
mentality threatens the democracy so treasured by the state once deemed
a “model for development through social reform.” Instead, young people
need to be educated in ways that exceed basic memorization and
regurgitation of facts. They should be taught to question, discuss, and
challenge the world and its values. They should not be inhibited by
course structure, inane examinations, or faculty authoritarianism.
Despite what the Indian government dictates, students are not merely
“human capital,” to be traded in the market. They are creative
individuals with the ability to change the world, for better or worse,
and education should lead them in the path to social enlightenment and
advocacy, not ignorance and conformity.
|
