educational policy – devayani tirthali

Some excerpts as I was reading the NEP
“moving towards a higher educational system consisting of large, multidisciplinary universities and colleges”
“build vibrant communities of scholars and peers, break down harmful silos, enable students to become well-rounded across disciplines including artistic, creative, and analytic subjects as well as sports, develop active research communities across disciplines including cross-disciplinary research, and increase resource efficiency, both material and human, across higher education”
“10.2. Moving to large multidisciplinary universities and HEI clusters is thus the highest recommendation of this policy regarding the structure of higher education”

Thinking out loud about the experience at Columbia University with respect to multidisciplinary coursework and research:
IGERT experience
Some fields do better in interdisciplinary research probably because there are already some pathways for them – Bioengineering, biochemistry for example. The Architecture and Engineering IGERT however struggled.
Different ways of teaching and learning, different value systems (nursing and medicine), unavailability of venues to publish research (Engineering and Architecture) were some of the challenges.

Creating coursework
School of Nursing and School of Medicine when creating an online course could not agree on how to read test reports (therefore how to teach how to read reports) – the basic assumptions about relationship with patients or their positionality with respect to patients differed so drastically that it was almost impossible to decide the ‘right’ course of action as the students walked through the cases presented.

Conversations about JNU student agitation against raised fees were trending on twitter last week. Many commented that the increase is not much. Rs300 per month is pittance. Others pointed out that 40% of JNU students are from families below poverty line who cannot afford even this sum that others think is small so they will be priced out. The oft repeated discourse was:

The students are free loaders.
Government should not be wasting tax payers’ money on subsidising education.
Medicine and technology education should be subsidized than humanities, liberal arts education that earns nothing.
Students should start earning after BA. Should do odd jobs to support themselves.

There are many points to discuss /refute here but I picked up one that is on my mind everytime there is a controversy related to education. The fundamental question: What is education for? Much of the browbeating assumes the primary and only objective of education is to get a well paying job. What about:

Education as a means to develop well rounded citizens in a democracy.
Education as a means of self actualization.
Education as a cognitive, metacoginitive, social, emotional -skill building, over and above the core subject or the degree. What we call Learning to Learn.

Current education might not be fulfilling these objectives but the point is to aspire to it and plan for it rather than getting hung up on just a job at the end of a degree.

From many of the twitter conversations it looks like it is not just the question of what is education for… but also about who can aspire to which motivation/objective for education. As this tone deaf tweet assumes – poor people can only think about education as a means to a job that can earn a quick buck.

Or a youth from Rajasthan whose family is battling agrarian distress want to study Spanish. Will 3 years and a bachelors degree in Spanish land him a job? Or youths from poverty hit families in UP spending 3 years studying Pashto and German
— Smita Prakash (@smitaprakash) November 15, 2019

Free or subsidized education in all disciplines is an investment in the future of the country and not a waste of taxpayer’s money. ‘All disciplines’ needs to be stressed here as “We want engineers in the world but not a world of engineers” (Churchill??). More number of better educated people from diverse backgrounds (education, life experience etc) generate more, better ideas. According to economists that is the only durable source of growth in the long run. The government paying for education is not a handout to the person getting educated. It is not just for personal benefit but a necessity for future of the entire society. Definitely investment with better returns than statues and vain projects with nationalistic fervour.