Several recent events seem to have re-focused global attention on educational challenges of our times.

President Obama has been presenting science and technology innovations awards to students and scholars in America; he has been noticing that nearly half of the recipients are born outside the country. Prime Minister Man Mohan Singh has recently asked the research establishment of the country to move towards excellence in research and its applications to societal problems. The forthcoming UNESCO APEID conference is focusing on innovations and creativity in education. The Chinese government has been encouraging its graduates to spend some post-graduate time to study in Europe and North America so that they get global competitive knowledge.

A recent report of a two years long action research project for the Beacons of Public Engagement has concluded that ‘embedding public engagement in higher education’ in UK has created much valuable solutions to the emerging challenges in their societies. The Faculty of Education at Glasgow University has been expanding its adult education programmes to local communities, specially those where life expectancy of men is lower than many poorest countries of the world.

A global dialogue of seven of the largest networks focused on enhancing community engagement of post-secondary educational institutions last week; it began to visualize a future where co-production of knowledge and co-teaching will become an integrated part of such institutions in decades ahead.

A common thread amongst all these is that education for life is critical for social transformation—for individuals, communities and societies alike. The global emphasis on primary education caught the attention of policy-makers during the past two decades; a lot of investment went into making primary education universally accessible. Now, that attention and investment needs to focus on secondary and post-secondary education. The demographic dividend in Asian societies will accrue only where technical-vocational education and secondary/post-secondary educational provisions organically interact and the quality of such provisions is regularly enhanced. In countries like India, youth ‘bulge’ may not get productively engaged in economic development if its educational preparation in vocational/technical skills and competencies is not urgently invested in. The biggest challenge is to promote a diversity of institutional arrangements that can be enabled to provide such educational opportunities. Polytechnics and universities in the public sector alone may not be able to meet this challenge.

Many countries like China and Brazil have embarked upon such extensive vocational/technical education through a variety of public and private (including non-profit) institutions; many municipalities have sponsored such educational provisions in these countries. Even in smaller countries like Ireland, policy instruments enable church-sponsored educational institutions to be legitimate credential-granting ones (Kimmage Development Studies Centre in Dublin is just one case in point). In South Asia, however, the speed at which holistic policy attention and sustained investment in all phases of education—from primary to tertiary—is still to be accelerated. The greatest need is to be able to impart a type of education that corresponds with the nature of social and economic life in countries of this region. In India, informal sectors of economy—in agriculture, rural development, services, social sector support, etc—account for nearly half the GDP and two-thirds of employment. Much of the recent economic growth is taking place in the informal sector, including small scale and social economy types of enterprises. Future employment of youth, which is migrating to urban/suburban areas in larger numbers, will occur only in these informal sectors of Indian economy (the formal sector, in fact, can not absorb even existing educated manpower).

The key question, therefore, is where are those educational provisions which focus on such informal sector employment? Are a diversity of educational providers—non-profits, public universities, polytechnics, etc—equipped to produce knowledge from such sectors of economy? Do they have the capacity to transform such knowledge into curriculum that prepares young people for employment in the informal sectors of Indian economy?

These, and many other, questions are increasingly important for us to answer; are there platforms and forum where such a conversation can take place so that ‘education for life’ is viewed holistically, and not in silos of primary, secondary and tertiary?

Rajesh Tandon
October 23, 2011

Around the world, two phenomena have suddenly gained attention of political, economic and social leaders of our times. The first, of course, is the intensified, vocal, visible and powerful citizens’ movement—from Senegal, Thailand, India, Tunisia, Egypt, UK, Chile—everywhere. At the base of these movements are youth—young people from all strata and spaces of society. The message from these citizen movements is clear—the young citizens want to be engaged in the democratic development of their societies and communities.

The second phenomena is the increasing—rapidly increasing—demand for post-secondary education in all its myriad dimensions, forms and contents. Millions of aspirants are queuing up for enrolment, only constraints being cost, quality and delivery. Educational administrators, planners and policy-makers are yet to figure out how to respond to this surge and diversity of demands from all societies.

Common element in these two phenomena—citizens’ movements and demands for post-secondary education—are the youth today. Irrespective of the percentage of young people in a society’s population, the young are a differently thinking, feeling and acting lot. Most existing institutions in modern societies—governments, businesses, universities & colleges—are not able to understand or cope with the aspirations of the young.

Is it possible to combine these elements in a manner that the young get opportunities for meaningful engagements in societies? This is where civic engagement by post-secondary educational institutions can make a difference. By creating opportunities for civic participation and engagement during the period of education in such institutions, the young of today—and tomorrow—can become an integral part of democratic development of all societies. Thus, institutions of post-secondary education can find new ways of promoting learning and education of their students—and teachers—through creative forms of civic engagement.

Several interesting developments are happening at this time as I write about it. First, many national governments and policy-makers are beginning to think of devising appropriate supportive policies in this regard. The Planning Commission, Government of India, has just constituted a Task force to make recommendations to ‘strengthen community engagement of Higher Education Institutions’ for the 12th Five Year Plan. Similar initiatives have come lately from Malaysia and Tanzania.

Several globally established educational institutions have also begun to convene dialogues and conferences on this and related theme of civic engagement of universities. Global University Network Innovations (GUNI) is planning its annual conference and book on this theme for 2012; British Council is convening an international conference in March 2012 where this theme is centrally included. Such platforms and forum create opportunities for sharing best practices and workable models.

Most importantly, several networks and alliances have emerged in recent years which are exclusively and largely focused on community-university partnerships. The Talloires Network of university presidents began in 2005 with the intention of promoting civic engagements of universities; it now has more than 200 universities from 60 countries as its members. Its new publication—The Engaged University—is an excellent collection of community-university partnerships from around the world.

Another network is Global Alliance for Community Engaged Research (GACER) which began in 2008 to bring together various networks of academics and practitioners involved in community engaged research efforts from within and outside the universities. GACER has just completed a book entitled ‘Global Knowledge Democracy Movement’ where community-university research partnerships from around the world are analysed. The Science Shop movement in Europe began more than a decade ago where natural science and engineering departments interacted with the community to address practical problems faced by the community; its large European network is very active now—the Living Knowledge Network.

What does it all mean? It poses questions about the manner in which educational institutions connect with the larger society of which they are a part. This connectivity can take several forms. It can promote students’ placement in community projects—like service learning; it can entail joint research projects; it can also imply bringing the community’s knowledge and expertise inside the university; it can promote reforms in the curriculum and pedagogy through community partnerships; students and their teachers can also learn how to work with communities around them as facilitators of new learning and knowledge, not as ‘arrogant intellectuals’.

Leadership from within the universities and other post-secondary education providers is critical in promoting and nurturing such a movement for civic engagement. What can be done to support such leadership?

Rajesh Tandon
September 19, 2011

Citizenship Education in Social Movement

Yesterday was August 15, 2011; it is the 65th anniversary of India’s freedom from the colonial rule. The whole country is celebrating, in angst—angst about the growing malaise of political and official corruption and complete lack of democratic governance. Over the past year, a major social movement is afoot in the country—freedom from corruption! As you read this blog, a respected Gandhian leader—Anna Hazare—is sitting on indefinite fast to force the national government to bring about a forceful legislation—Lokpal Bill—that can punish those who engage in corruption at all tiers and institutions of government. Over the past six months, the national government has unleashed all manners of harassment, humiliation and intimidation on Anna Hazare, his colleagues and all those civil society actors who have actively and publicly supported this major anti-corruption movement in the country today—perhaps the second major nation-wide effort at democratizing accountability of governance in India, the last one being in early 1970s under the leadership of late Jai Prakash Narain, when he gave a call for ‘total revolution’.

Hundreds of thousands of citizens from all walks of life have been participating in this movement on ‘freedom from corruption’ throughout the country; millions more have been reading about it and watching its drama unfold on television. One section of the electronic media—that which is largely non-English speaking—has been whole-heartedly supporting this movement. The issues raised in respect of various forms, types and procedures for corrupt practices, and the sheer apathy and unwillingness of the ruling political and bureaucratic regime to punish anyone associated with it—all this has caught the imagination of Indians throughout the country; they have been ‘educated’ about it even when they have not been actively participating in this movement themselves.

Anna Hazare’s anti-corruption movement is educating Indians about their rights—rights to speak up against corruption and malgovernance; the movement on ‘freedom from corruption’ in India today is contributing significantly more to the education of Indians than the recently enacted Right To Education can ever achieve.

However, the official discourse on educational reforms and improvements in the world of tomorrow typically focuses on formal systems of education carried out in institutional settings—from kindergarten to university. As a consequence, sites of education outside these institutions remain invisible to both educationists and policy-makers. The educational potential of such non-institutional educational sites remains inadequately understood and poorly synergized.

Throughout human history, people’s movements and struggles for enhancing the quality of their lives have been significant sites of learning and education; social movements create spaces for those involved in them to learn about issues the movements focus upon, as well as how to collectively mobilise and act for a shared agenda. Contemporary social movements have made a remarkable impact on human consciousness, learning and education in this century—workers’ movements, women’s movements, indigenous people’s movements, environment movements, peace movements, to illustrate a few.

Dr Budd Hall (University of Victoria, Canada) has been analyzing the impact of social movement learning during the past decade, both in the Canadian and global contexts. His analysis shows that the impact of social movement learning, as he calls it, goes much beyond those who actively participate in those movements; vast sections of the population get ‘educated’ as they hear, read or observe the movement and its leaders. In that sense, social movements impact the consciousness of citizens and provoke them to analyse their realities from a different lens.

As Anna Hazare and his band of committed citizens begin their fast today on August 16, 2011, the whole country will be ‘engaging’ with this movement on ‘freedom from corruption’ in India. Indians will be engaging through their actions, words, observations, reflections and thoughts. The world today witnesses citizen mobilization on issues of corruption and malgovernance in all the regions and countries; citizens are even more fed-up with authoritarianism in the so-called democratic regimes.

The educational and transformative potential of these social movements needs to be harnessed as citizens’ actions gain ascendancy in this decade. Irrespective of the outcomes related to forthcoming Lokpal Bill, Anna’s leadership of this movement on ‘freedom from corruption’ would have contributed most significantly to citizenship education in India, and beyond. As citizens, it is our ‘right to learn’ that prompts us all to engage with this movement on ‘freedom from corruption today, to learn about our rights as citizens, in whatever form of engagement that suits our reality of today.

Rajesh Tandon
August 16, 2011

As 2015 deadline for achievement of Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) approaches, governments and international donors would be counting their progress around the world. Of all the MDGs, the easiest to achieve seemed to be the one related to literacy—at least, that was the hope in 2000. The progress on literacy has been slowest in South Asia, and within the region, in India. It is amazing to see Bangladesh and Nepal accelerating ahead on achievements in literacy levels, specially for women. Essentially, therefore, this MDG on literacy is unlikely to be achieved by 2015 if India doesn’t achieve it.

And, by all accounts, India is unlikely to achieve significant reductions in illiteracy rates that presently officially stand at more than a third of the adult (15 years of age and above) population of the country, estimated at 300 million adults. This doesn’t include another 15% (additional 200 million adults) who are functionally illiterate (and at best know how to sign their names). Why this entrenched illiteracy continues unabated? Who are these illiterates? A vast proportion of these illiterates continue to be tribals (indigenous folks—about 80 million), scheduled caste (about 150 million), muslims (nearly 50 million). These populations have been systematically excluded from access to education; their children do not go to primary schools, and if they do, they drop out after grade one, and lapse into illiteracy. Girls and women from these communities constitute the majority of illiterates.

This structural entrenchment of illiteracy has been the case for the past six decades since independence, and much longer before. Nothing seems to have changed significantly? Why is it so?

The primary reason for this is that literacy and adult education are seen as ‘second-class’ educational path by Indian policy-makers. There has been no serious investment to eradicate illiteracy, nor to ensure complete stoppage of drop-outs from primary schooling. Let’s take a historical view of the literacy programming in India.

During the struggle for independence, Mahatma Gandhi promoted literacy classes; many innovative and effective models of literacy education evolved in different contexts—Gujarat, Bengal, Bihar, Tamilnadu were exemplary. Kerala’s library movement was way ahead anyways.

Despite constitutional commitments, the then Congress government in Delhi didn’t pay much attention to literacy during the first 30 years of independence. It was assumed that demand for literacy in rural areas was rather weak, and the poor can not afford time to study. Then came the ‘revolutionary’ Janata Party government in Delhi in 1977, and it launched the first comprehensive nation-wide literacy programme—National Adult Education Programme (NAEP) in 1978. The programme caught the imagination of adult educators and social activists, and a movement towards conscientisation and functional literacy restarted in the country. However, this programme had hardly run for 18 months when the ‘new’ Congress government under Mrs Indira Gandhi shut down the programme in July 1980 ( a month after it came to power) by sending telegrams to all implementers.

When late Rajiv Gandhi came to power, and his advisor Mr Sam Pitroda led several Missions, a National Literacy Mission was launched in 1989. Centre-based approach to adult education was abandoned in favour of literacy campaigns (based on the successful—from 80 to 93 percentage—Alleppey campaign in Kerala). Volunteer instructors were ‘invited’ to join this mass movement (all of which were led by District Collectors).

In its zest for economic reforms, the next Congress government ignored literacy in particular, and education in general. The Jomtien conference on Education For All in April 1990 had re-galvanised the international community to invest in education. However, Indian policy-makers shifted their priorities to primary education by mid 1990s, partly due to ‘investments’ from such international actors as DFID and World Bank. Once again, literacy was abandoned from the priority of public policies. As a result, by the end of 1990s, almost the entire institutional infrastructure of literacy and adult education in the public sector and voluntary sector had stagnated and somewhat degenerated. State Resource Centres were starved of resources and vision; level of literacy activity at the ground had become invisible.

It took a full first decade of the twenty-first century for the present Congress leadership to ‘recall’ the significance of literacy again. So, amidst much fanfare in the corridors of now famous ‘Vigyan Bhawan’ in posh Delhi, the Hon’ble Prime Minister launched “Sakshara Bharat (literate India)” programme on September 8, 2009. What has been the progress on account of literacy since then? What additional and substantive resources have been invested in this programme?

It took the Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India, six months to appoint an Expert Committee (on March 30, 2010) to draft National Curriculum Framework for Adult Education. The Expert Committee took one year to prepare the Report, which has been only recently discussed. There is no clarity as to when such National Curriculum will be accepted by the government, let alone when it will be implemented on the ground.

It is this callousness and apathy towards literacy that contributes to continued entrenchment of illiteracy in Indian society. The NAEP framework is still fully relevant; there is no further need to set up time-consuming committees; adult education and life-long learning perspectives can inform literacy and post-literacy work; centres for adult education need to be an integral part of India’s educational infrastructure; these centres can focus on literacy and continuing education for all adults in both rural and urban areas; municipalities and panchayats can coordinate and support them; they can be run by other educational institutions and voluntary organisations. But, public funding of such centres has to be ensured in sufficient amount and on a consistent and ongoing basis; vagaries of political fetish should not be allowed to destroy this educational scaffolding. Democratic Germany in Europe and Communist China in Asia have both recognized the critical significance of such centres for literacy and life-long learning.
When will India be ready?

Rajesh Tandon
July 14, 2011

While inaugurating the 13th Adult Education Conference of Germany on May 12, 2011, the German Federal President Hon’ble Christian Wuff called upon the policy-makers in the country, and the European Union, to provide greater visibility, centrality and resources to adult education within the framework of lifelong learning. Calling Adult Education as a public responsibility, the President of DVV (association of adult education in Germany) Dr Rita Sussmuth made a fervent appeal to promote and strengthen adult education centres in every village and city of the country.

This remarkable conference brought together in Berlin nearly 1400 practitioners of adult education from Germany, and another 100 from around the world. The dialogues focused on adult education for cultural and social integration, active citizenship for vibrant democracy, global warming and climate change and emerging trends in globalization.

HRH Princess Laurentien of the Netherlands spoke passionately about the importance of literacy worldwide, specially for women and girls, and including the Netherlands where nearly 25% of the adult population is functionally illiterate. The Education Minister of Germany emphasized the significance of ‘education for all’ in Germany itself, where nearly 14% (7.5 million) adults are functionally illiterate. Dr Rajesh Tandon dwelt on the importance of education for those living and working in informal settlements and sectors of economy, since they constitute nearly half the population in many developing countries.

The most telling conversation that the above conference provoked focused upon the integrative and socializing roles of adult education; it was argued that social inclusion, mutual respect for diversity and values of peaceful co-habitation are best learnt in such adult education centres which bring people together to educate themselves. However, outside the European Union (and some countries like Germany), the national governments in general, and educational ministries in particular, do not necessarily have a comprehensive perspective on the contributions of adult education beyond its narrow functional aspects (literacy, vocational/employable skills, etc.). It can be argued that societal tensions and conflicts can be understood and initially addressed through such educational opportunities. It can further be argued that building and nurturance of social capital can be supported through such community education centres which become a place for encounters of ideas and perspectives. Such education centres can also be the nurturing grounds for democracy and civil society.

As economic development pushes ahead in the Asian region, governments have been largely ‘ignoring’ adult education from their investment plans. On the other hand, private sector is investing in in-service and continuing education of workers and employees in order to enhance productivity. In this sense, lifelong learning is taking place, primarily driven by the needs of the economy, not the demands of the society. Vocational education programmes are mushrooming (even in Cambodia and Afghanistan) in trades (plumbing, electrician, carpentry, machining, masonry, etc) and professions (IT, accountancy, business, hospitality, etc). But, attention to such competencies as social inclusion and development, gender justice, youth leadership, community education, personal care, child protection, etc is largely lacking in these privately funded adult education programmes and courses.

This is precisely the responsibility for public investment in adult education; municipalities and governments can create frameworks for resources while civil society (non-profit) entities can design and conduct such programmes and centres. This used to be the vision of community education centres in many Asian societies; but that vision has become blurred and investment has dried up these days.

As dramatic socio-economic shifts are taking place in Asia these days, may be time is opportune to renew those commitments and to revitalise such community education centres throughout the region. This may require courage from adult educators, which may generate appetite for risk-taking amongst our policy-makers.

Rajesh Tandon
May 20, 2011

CUExpo2011 is around the corner now—May 10-14, 2011 in the Waterloo region of Ontario, Canada. Its theme is ‘Community University Partnerships—Bringing Global Knowledge to Local Action’. CUExpos have now become a global platform to share innovations in community-university partnerships in knowledge production, mobilization, education and social transformation. Started out as Canadian events at the beginning of this century, CUExpo has now become a global platform, bringing together practitioners and scholars from around the world.

What is unique about the event is its co-hosting by a community-based research centre and a university—CCBR (Centre for Community Based Research) and Wilfrid Laurier University. The CCBR has been promoting knowledge production and mobilization by the community for its own mobilization and transformation for nearly three decades. Its journey during this period has been significantly parallel to that of PRIA (Society for Participatory Research in Asia) in India and South Asia. CCBR is able to pull together such a unique partnership to co-host CUExpo 2011 is indeed exceptionally gratifying to all of us practitioners of participatory research. It also signifies the progress that has been made in identifying complementarities between a community-based research centre like CCBR and an established university of the region.

CUExpo therefore now beacons similar partnerships around other regions of the world; here in India and South Asia, how can such events be systematized and institutionalized, so that community-university partnerships are not one-sided or sporadic, do not merely depend on well-meaning individual scholars or activists, and can mobilise knowledge and financial resources for the long haul? Is it conceivable that new post-secondary reforms in countries like India would promote principles and policies that institutionalize such partnerships? Is it possible in other South Asian contexts? Should the university and other post-secondary educational providers in the region not find a mutually beneficial manner of harvesting vast practical knowledge from civil society within their countries?

The thematic elaboration of CUExpo 2011 illustrates well:

“Complex social issues require global perspectives to inform local action. Community- University Partnerships can be an effective way to stimulate innovative solutions for the pressing concerns within our communities. The potential for such solutions is maximized when diverse partners come together to re-imagine the relationship between the academy and the community, and in the process create new possibilities”. http://www.cuexpo2011.ca

This thematic elaboration can itself be relevant in South Asia, West Africa, Southern Americas—everywhere the demand for new knowledge that transforms, not merely informs, has grown considerably; yet, the supply of the same continues to remain inadequate. The critical reason for it remains our inability to forge meaningful partnerships between communities (and their civil society mobilisers) and institutions of post-secondary education (universities and research institutes). If we can address this deficit, we may be able to transform hearts, minds, institutions and societies!

Rajesh Tandon
April 25, 2011

You may wonder about the title of this reflection; what does it imply? I have recently been to Afghanistan and Laos, two present/past conflict zones in the Asian region. I am comparing these with the context of eastern India—the tribal ‘war’ zones of Orissa, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, and the surrounding districts. I notice one common pattern in these conflict zones—there is no systematic investment in education, specially adult, life-long and post-secondary education.

Afghanistan has no programme for education of community development, social development or human development professionals; there are several educational ‘shops’ for accountancy, business, IT, engineering, etc; several bilateral donors (including India) support some of these technical educational programmes. But, there is no focus on preparing professionals who can understand and work on issues of conflict, gender, social discrimination, community organization, social work, environment and governance. A few international experts and a handful of internationally educated Afghans are in high demand in the conflict zones of Afghanistan. Since the demand (from international donors) far exceeds supply, these handful of trained professionals are constantly changing jobs and getting paid at locally unsustainable levels. Billions of dollars are being spent on guns and security (the two seem to be synonymous?) every year, but not even millions on lifelong learning and post-secondary education for social development.

Laos has been hiding behind the shadows of Vietnam and Combodia all these years. Now that the country is embarking on a path to socio-economic development, it is facing acute shortage of trained professionals, especially in the fields of education, human and social development. Nearly 80 million bombs were dropped on Laos and its citizens during the Vietnam War (1964-75), highest per capita in the world; nearly a third of these bombs remain unexploded; millions were slaughtered during the conflicts in the 1980s/90s. Today, there is no educational preparation of professionals to work on issues of reconciliation, discrimination, violence and social capital in Laos. Without such professional capacity, ground -level much- needed interventions and projects on reconciliation, building social capital and strengthening local institutions will not be launched. Such educational preparation may take more than a generation, but the beginning has to be made now?

The tribal regions of India have similarly been deprived of education—from basic primary education to post-secondary professional development. Decades of exclusion and exploitation have turned thousands of tribal youths into gun-carrying ‘warriors’ today. India is recognized as a world leader in IT; its IT companies and professionals have been ‘making waves’ around the world. But, tribal youth have no access to internet connectivity, laptops or other new modes of knowledge production and access. In the colonial period, missionaries ran educational institutions which benefitted a few thousand tribals; since independence, the gap between educational levels of tribals in these regions and the rest of society has only widened. New investments in security apparatus are being made by the government at a formidable scale; there is no comparable investment on education—basic, adult, vocational or post-secondary. As a consequence, professional development of educators, facilitators, researchers, teachers, public officials etc is lagging way behind from within the tribal communities.

Therefore, guns are being preferred over laptops; military security over human security; short-term ‘externally designed’ development as opposed to slow, long-term evolution of local human and institutional capacities. The conflict zones of Afghanistan, Laos and eastern India can not be transformed into ‘peace gardens’ without a long-term investment in preparing indigenous professionals capable of addressing the challenges of human and social development in these societies.

Unfortunately, current ‘dogmas’ of short-term log-frames and ‘tangible, measurable’ impacts do not encourage international or national investments in long-term professional education within these societies. Whatever investment is made, it is focused on business, accountancy and IT/engineering kinds of professions. There is no recognition of, or investment in, the profession of social development in such conflict zones. Ironically, educational preparation of such social development professionals would be more critically needed in these contexts, if progress is to become ‘peaceful, equitable and just’.

Rajesh Tandon
March 29,2011

Two recent advertisements in India’s newspapers have caught my attention lately. One is an ad by a well-known American university inviting Indian students to consider applying for post-secondary education. Another is an ad by an upcoming private Indian university doing the same. The first ad is couched in the language of the game of cricket; the second is presenting a well-known Bollywood star as an iconic host.

These ads have puzzled me somewhat. It is clear that the Indian market for post-secondary education is an important attraction for this prestigious American university to consider putting big ads for attracting applications; it is an expensive proposition to do undergraduate studies in such a University, costing nearly $250,000 ( a sum of Rs 1 crore). Clearly, the university thinks that there is a large market in India— the number of families who can afford such an expensive education must be running into thousands or more? Even more curious is the message being communicated that somehow an American university ‘understands’ the passion of India’s youth for the game of cricket, notwithstanding the fact that the game of cricket is not a common sport in America, as yet. The promotion of second university with iconic support of a Bollywood star is based on the assumption that the youth in India hold Bollywood celebrities in such high esteem.

What are the underlying assumptions behind such high profile advertising? How come neither university has chosen any educationist or scholar or Nobel laureate to profile in their advertisements? Does it imply that the cricket and cinema stars are future role models of India’s youth? Does it assume that academic excellence is closely linked to playing cricket and watching films, somehow?

These are puzzling questions; these questions raise concerns about the value of post-secondary education as a passport to certain life-styles which are distinctively high profile. This trend seems to indicate that the intrinsic value of post-secondary education for promotion of a critical understanding of society and a liberal outlook is somehow declining. It further suggests that economic value of post-secondary education for achieving a certain status in society is gaining ascendancy. Learning and knowledge for the holistic development of citizens is loosing its appeal; instead, instrumental use of knowledge is being promoted.

One of the most glaring bases of inequality in India, and other emerging economies, is the inequality in access and quality of education. While income inequality has increased substantially as rapid economic growth has taken place in many of these countries, policy-makers in India still seem to consider Gini coefficient as the sole indicator of inequality (which in case of India is still lower than China and Brasil, for instance). But, income inequality today is a mere reflection of differentials in access to and control over economic assets of the past; the past differentials in educational levels are further getting reinforced in the present. It is this dynamics that is likely to create further inequalities in the future as well, unless substantial investments in education, specially at post-secondary levels, are made in such societies.
Given the nature of messages emanating from above types of advertisements, which strata of society can actually make such substantial investments? It begs the question if post-secondary education is a public good or not, worthy of public investments or not?

Neither of the two universities mentioned above are accessible to nearly 300 million youth of India who would be ready to enter post-secondary education in the coming decade; what about other options? Will those options also be attracting India’s youth to pursue post-secondary education through the calling of cricket and film stars?

The above trends are symptomatic of the current consensus among policy-makers that market-driven mechanisms are most appropriate to enhancing the supply of post-secondary education; it is this approach that has been driving PPP (public-private-partnership) models in countries like India today. It is unclear if such approaches would arrest the trends towards growing educational inequality in society.

There is an urgent need to open a public debate on the value of post-secondary education for all; as service sector becomes the dominant part of GDP, it is even more urgent that the next generation is better ‘educated’ in knowledge, attitudes and skills to be able to gain productive livelihoods. The provision of multiple forms and channels of post-secondary education, responsive to the diverse needs of learners and their aspirations in the country, needs to be the focus of public policy. Such policies can then ‘steer’ the market mechanisms to generate more inclusive options and provisions; without such policies, we will be witnessing more advertisements of the variety mentioned at the beginning of this article.

Rajesh Tandon
February 23, 2011

What is a profession? Traditionally, most people would refer to engineering, medicine, law, accountancy and architecture as a profession. Is teaching a profession? What about music or sports? Professional musicians and sportspersons are supposed to be those who earn money through music and sports (unlike amateurs); does it mean that those musicians who are not mercenaries (ask for and get paid for their music) are less competent or behave in less professional manner?

And, how did management or IT become a profession? If history of professions is studied, it may be found that demand for certain types of services creates availability of a set of competencies; when these competencies are built through regular training and education, and certified as such, that area of expertise gets labeled as a profession. That is how IT and management became a profession in the past 3-4 decades. If market demands a set of skills, and pays for them well, does it acquire the status of a profession? These are troubling questions, more so in today’s context where professional education seems to imply education in a profession.

Does it mean that those who acquire competencies in farming, water harvesting, plumbing, masonry, cooking etc through experience—learning by doing— are not professionals? Is certification from an educational institution necessary to be called a professional?

Most post-secondary educational provisions in different professions are recognized to be technical/professional if a government agency so certifies them. The All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) in India is such a government agency. Its list of professions is the ‘usual suspects’—engineering, IT, accountancy, management, architecture, etc. Similar bodies exist for medicine and law. (It is another matter that such certifying bodies have all been mired with corruption and their CEOs are in prison for the same). AICTE doesn’t acknowledge social development, environment, human rights and nutrition as professions. Therefore, educational provisions in fields of social development, environment, human rights and nutrition, for example, do not qualify for certification as professional education.

Unlike IT and management professions, the present economic development model in the country doesn’t generate huge employment potential at well-paying jobs in such fields of expertise as social development, environment, human rights or nutrition. This can be best demonstrated from the fact that competent professionals required for working at the grass-roots level among rural and urban poor are not available for government programmes or NGO projects; the continued degradation of environment and persistent escalation of occupational and environmental health problems in the country have become accepted by the market as a cost for economic growth; violations of human rights of citizens is rampant by government’s security agencies as well as by corporate institutions; more than half the children below the age of five in India today are malnourished. It is unlikely that this model of economic growth will create demands for such expertise and decent jobs in the near future.

The present focus of policy reforms in the country are being entirely driven by market-led demand for engineers, computer-experts, managers, accountants, and the likes. The proposed Bill for establishing a Commission on Higher Education and Research in the country also emphasizes higher education in science, engineering, information technology, management and the like. National seminars on the reform of higher education (like those convened annually by FICCI) primarily discuss opening of new institutions, public-private partnerships and foreign collaboration in these technical/managerial disciplines alone. Why?

So, the question is, should policy reform be entirely driven by market considerations? What do we do about preparing professionals in social development? If market doesn’t demand such professionals, should professional education for social development not be encouraged in India? This is the missing agenda for reforming post-secondary education in the country today. Policy and funding support are required to develop, continue and upgrade high quality professional education for social development. Professional education for social development has to be considered as a public good, and public support and funding is needed to expand its access and to improve its quality.

*****

It is, therefore, important that educationists, development activists, environmentalists and others concerned with the upgradation of professional expertise in these areas of competencies find ways to collectively influence policy-makers to include such professional education in the present reforms urgently.

Rajesh Tandon
January 21, 2011

As a new revolution in post-secondary education unfolds in Asian countries, the most critical constraint will be the preparation of teachers in numbers hitherto unimaginable. In countries like India, the greatest constraint in rapid expansion of post-secondary education is the non-availability of teachers in numbers (and quality, hopefully) that such an expansion warrants.

Policy-makers in India, as elsewhere, are coming up with several measures to deal with such a crucial constraint. In several universities and professional institutions, the government has already allowed extension of retirement age for teachers (beyond sixty?). In some international partnerships, faculty development is being targeted, though largely limited to teachers of management, engineering and bio-technology (a recent news item suggested that Harvard Business School wants to develop this special focus in India).

Other options being explored range from ‘recall’ of faculty of Indian origin from abroad, specially designed new arrangements for ‘fast-tracking’ teacher development, revision of compensation system for teaching community, etc to the possibility of attracting short-term teachers from other sectors of the economy (business and government in particular).

Given the magnitude of the constraint in countries like India, many such solutions may need to be simultaneously implemented.

However, at the core of the problematique in supply of large numbers of high quality teachers in countries like India is the decline of teaching profession in the public perception and national schema of priorities. We all remember our good teachers (all the way from primary school to post-secondary levels) because they had an important influence on us; they taught us some new knowledge, but perhaps more importantly, shaped our mind-sets and value systems too. Many of them were people of modest means, limited exposure and mild manners; yet, their ‘students’ remembered them for years after teaching was over. Coming from a family of teachers over the past 4 generations, I know how modest means we had in our family, yet how much respect society (not just their own students) gave to my mother, grandfather and uncle who were teachers. Last week, while moving around in a shopping district of old Delhi, I was struck by how many shopkeepers asked about the well-being of my 86 years old mother-in-law who had taught them or someone in their families.

Today, teachers in colleges and universities are spat on, beaten up, abused and humiliated in all manners; in the system of the ‘pecking order’ in post-secondary educational institutions today, teachers are at the bottom of the pole. Hence, for the new generation, teaching is no longer an ‘honourable’ profession. Many reasons can be attributed to this rapid decline in less than 3 decades in India. Stagnant financial packages, poor career growth prospects and no opportunities for research have been commonly sited as causes for such a decline. In addition, political interference in post-secondary educational system has grown far and wide—from appointments of vice-chancellors to faculty to staff. Rapid unionization of teachers themselves, and their factionalism in different political alignments, have further accentuated this problem.

Perhaps, the biggest bane of this malaise is democracy itself. Students of post-secondary institutions around the country have been used as cannon and fodder for political mobilization by all political parties in the country. Look at what is happening in West Bengal today—students affiliated with left and Trinamool parties are fighting with each other. Institutions of post-secondary education (barring a few professional ones) in countries like India have thus become ‘battlegrounds’ for political power in cities and provinces around the country. Does any one care for teaching? Or teachers?

The profession of teaching has also stagnated over time, specially at post-secondary levels. New pedagogical methods of interactive learning and teaching, experiential and adult learning, use of new technologies etc have not been embraced in the profession in countries like India; in many cases, very knowledgeable experts do not have any training in pedagogy at post-secondary levels, and thus make lousy teachers. You become a teacher if you have the degrees, no one assesses your competencies in teaching? Finally, the internal regulation, standard-setting and upgradation of and by the teaching profession has been largely missing in India; there has been a general decline in passion and commitment to teach among teachers themselves.

So, the challenge of reforming post-secondary education in countries like India can not be addressed adequately unless the ‘dignity in teaching’ is restored in the society’s perceptions. This requires present leadership in society—political, business, educational, social—- to speak to this challenge in a coherent and vocal manner. How will that happen? Any ideas?

Rajesh Tandon
December 23, 2010