For a child-inspired education system
by Yash Pal
Children's questions do not respect the insularity of disciplines
normally taught in our schools and colleges. Creativity often resides at
the boundaries of disciplines.
Besides several other points of difference, I would like to give some
examples of the wonder and curiosity children can bring to the attention
of teachers and schools in general that is not covered by our courses.
Giving respect to children's questions does not mean blindly accepting
what they say.
They do bring some knowledge that after critical examination can
enrich the curriculum. But more often they bring questions. The mere
existence of questions among the young is a precious thing. They often
reflect independent perception and exploration.
Many a time children discover these questions themselves. The
occurrence of these questions is more important than a densely packed
slate full of answers given by grownups and scholars. At least for the
children they represent important footsteps towards a creative life. And
if such questions are often discussed in class they would benefit all
the children and, I dare to say, also their teachers.
Children's questions serve another important function. They do not
respect the insularity of disciplines normally taught in our schools and
colleges.
That might be the reason for many discipline-imprisoned scholars
feeling uncomfortable with them. Life is seldom, if ever, contained
within any one discipline. Surely we cannot stay within a culture where
life as it is lived is considered to lie completely outside the hallowed
grounds of schools and universities. This is not to imply that we do not
get into the depths of various disciplines. But it has been found that
creativity often resides at the boundaries of disciplines.
You do end up worrying about geology, archaeology, sociology,
biology, chemistry, physics and cosmology. But such connections are
seldom made in organised disciplinary courses. Children's questions keep
reminding us that interconnections are necessary for the human mind. To
the extent we deal with these questions we end up enriching the ecology
of knowledge in our brains. That is often the real source of creativity.
I take it for granted that one of the major objectives of education
should be to encourage the emergence of creative individuals.
When one talks of individual creativity, one might be accused of
"neo-liberal" tendencies. I do not know what sort of abuse that implies,
but I cannot accept that any society should feel threatened by the
encouragement of individual passion to understand in preference to
voluminous short-term memorisation.
Long sermons to avoid communalism do not go very far; a deep
understanding of the inevitability and value of cultural diversity is
far more effective. It is no one's case that there should be complete
absence of information. But information and misinformation without
understanding is best used for advertising or brainwashing - or for
filling up the limited storage space of the brain with junk in which
every new idea gets stuck. I fail to understand why I should be deprived
of marks if I do not remember the name of Mussolini's mother.
One is thrilled by several examples of engagement of students with
the land and cultural life around them. An effort to understand local
history should not be ridiculed. Scientific exploration of flora and
fauna around otherwise familiar environs surely cannot work against a
similar understanding at the State and national level.
A National Framework should not try to erase your knowing
relationship with the sands of Rajasthan, or the vibrant beaches of
Kerala, or the snowy hills of the North, or the majestic fury of the
Brahmaputra. Everyone has a right to feel that they live on top of the
globe; what we need to foster is the understanding that you have that
right only if you grant it to every one else. This is a requirement for
us and for the world as a whole. This is global consciousness and not
globalisation.
A comment has been made questioning that knowledge can be provided by
children because we do not have it encapsulated in our genes!
Yes, our genes have no knowledge of our culture, our religion or
caste, no subjects such as physics or algebra, no history or geography.
But there is immense capacity to experiment, to learn skills - sitting
down, crawling, standing, walking and talking. We learn more during the
years before we enter school than through the rest of our lives. Such
capabilities of observation, perception and urge to experiment dim with
age. Some of this dimming is the result of how we try to educate our
young!
I have received thousands of questions from the children of this
country. While answering them I have made it clear that I am not a data
bank, that I would entertain only those questions they have themselves
discovered.
Furthermore I also state that I would like to share my way of
addressing their queries but there might be other ways of doing the
same. I have not been overwhelmed by bigotry, though there are questions
about astrology, vastushastra, and modes of worship. But they are all
questions and none of them is useless or insulting.
Quite often they come because they are not captured in any single
discipline. These questions come to me because they are usually not
entertained in school. I wish they were and I wish we would learn not to
avoid them. We should not only learn from children what to teach them
but our education should also become child-inspired.
AFP |